GEBible — Godless Engineer's Bible App
One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was at the table, leaning against Jesus’ breast. Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, and said to him, “Tell us who it is of whom he speaks.”
He, leaning back, as he was, on Jesus’ breast, asked him, “Lord, who is it?”
Jesus therefore answered, “It is he to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it.” So when he had dipped the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot.
John 13:23-26 sits inside this longer paragraph.
The disciples looked at one another, perplexed about whom he spoke. One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was at the table, leaning against Jesus’ breast. Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, and said to him, “Tell us who it is of whom he speaks.”
He, leaning back, as he was, on Jesus’ breast, asked him, “Lord, who is it?”
Jesus therefore answered, “It is he to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it.” So when he had dipped the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. After the piece of bread, then Satan entered into him. Then Jesus said to him, “What you do, do quickly.”
One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was at the table, leaning against Jesus’ breast.
Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, and said to him, “Tell us who it is of whom he speaks.”
He, leaning back, as he was, on Jesus’ breast, asked him, “Lord, who is it?”
Jesus therefore answered, “It is he to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it.” So when he had dipped the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot.
Ther was one of his disciples which leaned on Iesus bosome whom Iesus loved.
To him beckened Simon Peter that he shuld axe who it was of whom he spake.
He then as he leaned on Iesus brest sayde vnto him: Lorde who ys it?
Iesus answered he that ys to whom I geve a soppe when I have dept it. And he wet a soppe and gave it to Iudas Iscarioth Simons sonne.
Nowe there was one of his disciples, which leaned on Iesus bosome, whom Iesus loued.
To him beckened therefore Simon Peter, that he should aske who it was of whom he spake.
He then, as he leaned on Iesus breast, saide vnto him, Lord, who is it?
Iesus answered, He it is, to whome I shall giue a soppe, when I haue dipt it: and hee wet a soppe, and gaue it to Iudas Iscariot, Simons sonne.
25 distinct cross-references across this passage (26 total citations).
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv23, 26 23. Whom Jesus loved. The peculiar love with which…
23. Whom Jesus loved. The peculiar love with which Christ loved John plainly testifies that, if we love some more than others, this is not always inconsistent with brotherly love; but all lies in this, that our love shall be directed towards God, and that every man, in proportion as he excels in the gifts of God, shall share in it the more largely. From this end Christ never turned aside in the smallest degree; but with us the case is widely different, for such is the vanity of our mind, that there are few who, in loving men, approach more nearly to God. And yet the love of men towards each other will never be properly regulated, unless it be directed to God.
Lay at table in Jesus’ bosom. What is here related by John might be regarded in the present day as indecorous; but such was, at that time, the manner of being placed at table; for they did not sit, as we do, at table, but, after having put off their shoes, lay half-stretched out, reclining on small cushions.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On v23 John’s leaning was such, that sitting down in his…
John’s leaning was such, that sitting down in his bed, his head was toward Jesus’ head: so that it was an easy matter for him to touch Jesus’ bosom: for it is certain that in old time men used not to sit at the table, but to lie down: on the one side.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv23–26 23 Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one…
23 Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.
Ver. 23. Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom] So must we do at the sacrament, by the actuation of our faith, ascending up into heaven, and fetching down Christ into the heart, that we may have intimate and entire communion with him. {a} By the force of our faith at the Lord’s table, cruci haeremus, sanguinem fugimus, et intra ipsa redemptoris nostri vulnera figimus linguam, saith St Cyprian (de Coena Dom.). We adhere to the cross, we flee to the blood.
Read full note →
{a} Calceis exuti, et pulvinis innixi, in lectulis semisupini iacebant. Calvin. in loc.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv23–26 This leaning on Jesus’ bosom, and the laying on…
This leaning on Jesus’ bosom, and the laying on Jesus’ breast, mentioned Joh 13:25, cannot be understood without the understanding of the usual posture the Jews used at their meals, and particularly at the paschal supper; of which we have spoken largely; See Poole on "Mat 26:20": see the annotations there. Their posture seemeth to have been kneeling, and resting their bodies back upon their legs, with a leaning upon their left elbow; and this seemeth not to have been so close, but that he that so sat might use his other hand to take his meat; hence he who sat before any, sat with his back towards him, but leaning towards the bosom of the other, which is here called a leaning on (that is, towards) his bosom, and laying on his breast; for it cannot be understood of such a sitting, or leaning, as to touch the other’s breast or bosom, for that would have hindered him upon whom the person so leaned from any use of his right hand to take his meat or drink. It is apparent from hence, first, that at this supper there was none but Christ and his disciples. Secondly, that they sat in this posture of leaning. These two things make it very probable, if not certain, that the supper here mentioned was either the paschal supper, or a common supper, which immediately went before, or followed after, the passover supper. For,
1. We have no record of any other supper, at which were only Christ and the twelve disciples; and:
Read full note →
2. If we may believe the Jewish writers, though their ordinary posture at their common meals was discumbency, that is a kneeling on their knees, with a resting their bodies backward upon their legs; yet this posture of leaning was constantly added only upon the passover night, as a further testimony of their liberty, that they were not now servants, as in the land of Egypt. The person who sat next to our Saviour, with his back next our Saviour’s bosom, was John, often in Scripture dignified with the title of the beloved disciple, and him whom Jesus loved, Joh 19:26; Joh 20:2; 21:7,20.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
William Burkitt 1703 · Public Domain On v23 Observe here, 1. The character given of St. John…
Observe here, 1. The character given of St. John the beloved disciple: he leaned on Christ’s bosom; that is, he had most intimate converse with Christ, one whom Christ treated with greater freedom and familiarity than the rest, and one that knew more of his heart than most of his disciples. We commonly call a very near friend a bosom friend.
Learn, That although Christ had an endeared love for all his disciples and followers, yet there were degrees in Christ’s own love, and he had a familiarity with some disciples beyond others, whilst he was here upon earth, even as now in heaven, though his heart be towards all his children here on earth, yet he is pleased to let out more kind manifestations of himself, and more sensible evidences of his love towards some than towards others. John was the disciple that lay in Jesus’s bosom.
Read full note →
Observe, 2. The way which our Saviour took to discover Judas to the rest of his disciples, not by naming him, but by giving him a sop; partly because he would not give Judas any provocation by mentioning his name, and partly because the sign of eating the sop was most agreeable to the prophetical prediction, My own familiar friend, who did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me Psa 41:9.
Observe, 3. The time when Judas received the sop, and the consequence that followed upon his receiving of it; it was at that time when he had, with an unbelieving heart, and an unthankful spirit, been eating the passover, which was a type of Christ. Now Satan enters into him; that is, takes fuller possession of him, and he gives himself up more freely and fully to the devil’s conduct and suggestion. Satan gets possession of wicked men gradually and by degrees; not all at once; the only way to be safe is to resist the beginnings of sin; for, when Satan once gets footing, it is hard to prevent a more full possession.
Observe, 4. The place where Judas now was, namely, at Bethany, some miles form Jerusalem, and it was now night; yet so intent he was upon the devil’s work, that away he trudges to Jerusalem, and at that time of night repairs to the high priests, and sells his Saviour into their hands. O what a warmth and zeal was here in the devil’s cause! Men given over by God, and possessed by Satan, are so restless and unwearied in sin, that neither by day nor by night can they cease from the contrivance and execution of it.
William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv23–26 Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom,.... Not pressing…
Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom,.... Not pressing upon that part of Christ's body, which would have been irreverent in John, and troublesome to Christ; but leaning at table upon his bed or couch, on which he lay; and which was next to, and just before Christ; so that he was very near unto, and seemed to lie in the bosom of Christ; as such are said to do, who sit next at table to another. The posture of the Jews at table, was either "sitting" or "lying", and a difference they make between these two;
"if, say they (d), , "they sat" to eat everyone asked a blessing for himself; but if "they lay down", one asked a blessing for them all.''
Read full note →
This lying down was not on their backs, nor on their right side, but on their left; for they say (e), that
"lying down on the back, is not called "lying down"; and lying on the right side, is not called lying down.''
And the reason given is (f), because they have need of the right hand to eat with; but as they elsewhere (g) observe,
"they used to eat lying along, leaning on the left side, their feet to the ground, and every man on a single couch.''
Would you know the order in which they, lay, take the account as they have given it (h);
"when there were but two couches, the principal person lay first, and the second to him above him; and when there were three, the principal person lay in the middle, the second to him above him, and the third below him; and if he would talk with him, he raised himself upright, and sitting upright he talked with him; that is, as the gloss explains it, if the principal person was desirous to talk with him that was second to him, he must raise himself up from his lying down, and sit upright; for all the white he is leaning, he cannot talk with him, because he that is second to him, is behind the head of the principal person, and the face of the principal person is turned to the other side; and it is better for the second to sit below him, that he may hear his words, whilst he is leaning.''
The form in which Christ and his disciples sat or lay at table, we may conceive was this (i); a table was placed in the middle and as many beds or couches round it, as there were persons; Christ the principal and most worthy person lay first, with his head toward the table, his face somewhat turned from it, leaning on his left elbow upon the couch; in this posture lay Jesus, upon the first couch; in the same posture lay John, in the next to him, and just before him; the hinder part of his head being towards, and near the breast and bosom of Jesus; whence he is said to lean upon it: now to lie next to the principal person, was a very great honour, as well as a mark of great affection; and for John to lie next to Jesus, and as it were to lean on his bosom, showed how much he was respected and honoured by him; and therefore John modestly conceals his name, and only says,
one of his disciples whom Jesus loved; Christ, as the Son of God, and surety of his people, loved his true disciples, as he does all his elect, alike; not one more than the other; but as man, he had a particular affection for this disciple, and therefore admitted him near his person, and was very familiar with him.
(d) Misn. Beracot, c. 6. sect. 6. (e) T. Bab. Pesachim, fol. 108. 1. (f) Gloss in ib. (g) Gloss in T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 46. 2. & Bartenora in Misn. Beracot, c. 6. sect. 6. (h) T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 46. 2. (i) Vid. Alstorphium delectis veterum, p. 109, 110.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv23–26 There was lying in the bosom of Jesus --…
There was lying in the bosom of Jesus -- that is, sitting next to him at table. This phrase only expresses the then customary posture at meals, where the guests all leaned sidewise on couches. And each was said to lie in the bosom of him who was placed next above him. One of the disciples whom Jesus loved - St. John avoids with great care the expressly naming himself. Perhaps our Lord now gave him the first proof of his peculiar love, by disclosing this secret to him.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv23, 25, 26 Verse 23. Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom]…
Verse 23. Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom] The Jews of those days, at their suppers, reclined, supported by their left arm, on couches placed round the table, as the Greeks and Romans did. On each couch there were two or three persons; and the head of one of them came near to the bosom of him who reclined above him on the same couch. The person here mentioned was John, the writer of this history, who, being more tenderly loved by Christ than the rest, had always that place at table which was nearest to his Lord.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On v23 Joh 13:23-26. There was leaning on Jesus’s bosom —…
Joh 13:23-26. There was leaning on Jesus’s bosom — That is, sitting next to him at table. This phrase only expresses the then customary posture at meals, where the guests all leaned sideways on couches, and each was said to lie in the bosom of him who was placed next above him; one of the disciples whom Jesus loved — This was John, the memory of whose sweet disposition, and other amiable qualities, is perpetuated in the peculiar love which Jesus bare to him. He always avoids with great care the expressly naming himself. Perhaps our Lord now gave him the first proof of his peculiar love, by disclosing this secret to him. Simon Peter, therefore — Not daring to ask Jesus himself; beckoned to him — The word νευει, thus rendered, might be more exactly translated, nodded, namely, he intimated his desire by a motion of his head; that he should ask him privately who it should be — Peter was probably desirous to know, not only that he might be sure it was not himself, but that, knowing who it was, he and the other disciples might withdraw from him, and guard against him, as also, if possible, prevent his design. It may appear to us a desirable thing to know who, in the church, will deceive us, yet let this suffice: Christ knows, though we do not. He then, lying on Jesus’s breast — That is, leaning backward, and secretly whispering; saith, Lord, who is it? Jesus answered — In his ear: so careful was he not to offend (if it had been possible) even Judas himself; He it is to whom I shall give a sop — Το ψωμιον, the sop, which he took up while he was speaking; and when he had dipped the sop — In a thick kind of sauce made of dates, raisins, and other ingredients beaten together and properly diluted; he gave it to Judas Iscariot — Who took it readily enough, not suspecting the design of Christ’s giving it to him. See note on Mat 26:20-25. The Jews still retain the use of such a sauce, which they call haroseth, made of such kind of ingredients, about the consistence of mortar, to represent the clay in which their forefathers wrought while they were under bondage to the Egyptians.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv23, 25, 26 Leaning on Jesus’ bosom - This does not mean…
Leaning on Jesus’ bosom - This does not mean that he was at that time actually lying on his bosom, but that he occupied a situation next to him at the table, so that his head naturally fell back on his bosom when he spoke to him. See the notes at Mat 23:6.
Whom Jesus loved - This was doubtless John himself. The evangelists are not accustomed to mention their own names when any mark of favor or any good deed is recorded. They did not seek publicity or notoriety. In this case the appellation is more tender and honorable than any mere name. John was admitted to special friendship, perhaps, because the natural disposition of our Saviour was more nearly like the amiableness and mildness of John than any of the other disciples (Robert Hall). The highest honor that can be conferred on any man is to say that Jesus loved him. Yet this is an honor which all may possess, but which none can inherit without his spirit and without loving him. It is an honor which cannot be won by wealth or learning, by beauty or accomplishments, by rank or earthly honors, but only by the possession of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price, 1Pe 3:4; compare Rom 8:9.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv23, 25 One of his disciples. St. John himself was lying…
One of his disciples. St. John himself was lying at table in (or towards) the bosom of Jesus.[1] These words seem to express the manner that the Jews were place at table. They had couches about a table, to lean or lie upon; and three for example upon each couch. The master, or head of the company, was placed in the midst; so that we may suppose, that Christ was placed on one of these couches in the midst, St. Peter on one side of him, and St. John on the other; and that St. John, in that resting and leaning posture, had his head all the time turned, and inclined towards Christ’s bosom: yet it can scarce be imagined, that his head laid continually upon our Saviour’s breast or bosom; for this posture would have been very uneasy to Jesus, or to any one. St. John then leaned all supper time towards Jesus’s bosom or breast, but not upon it. (Witham) --- Whilst all were fearing for themselves, and Peter, the very head of the apostles, was trembling, St. John rests; reposing on the bosom of Jesus. (St. John Chrysostom, hom. lxxi. in Joan.)
===============================
Read full note →
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
Erat recumbens in sinu Jesu, ver. 23. And cum recubuisset super pectus Jesu, ver. 25. In the Greek, ver. 23, Greek: anakeimenos epi to kolpo tou Iesou; and ver. 25, Greek: epipeson epi to stethos tou Iesou. The word Greek: anakeimenos from Greek: anakeisthai, seems to express no more than the manner in those days of leaning, or lying at table: as in the Latin, accumbere, or discumbere; but Greek: epipeson, from Greek: epipiptein epi to stethos, signifies a bowing or falling down on Christ’s breast, as it were in a fit of trouble or grief. See the author of the Analysis, diss. xxxvi. St. John Chrysostom, (hom. xllii. p. 423, tom. 8, Nov. Ed. Ben.) seems to make a difference betwixt these two expressions, when he says: Joannes ... in sinu Jesu recubat, nec recubat solum, sed in pectus incidit: neque hoc solum quæsitu dignum est, &c. Greek: o Ioannes anakeitai eis ton kolpon tou Iesou, kai ouk anakeitai monon, alla kai to stethei epipiptei, kai ou touto monon axion zeteseos, &c.
====================
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv23, 25, 26 there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his…
there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved--Thus modestly does our Evangelist denote himself, as reclining next to Jesus at the table.
Peter . . . beckoned to him to ask who it should be of whom he spake--reclining probably at the corresponding place on the other side of Jesus.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv23, 26 23. Leaning on Jesus’s bosom—Reclining next to him on…
23. Leaning on Jesus’s bosom—Reclining next to him on the couch at table, whereby he could in a low voice address Jesus by turning back his head.
Whom Jesus loved—By this expression, used by John some five times, he doubtless designates himself, (Joh_19:26; Joh_20:2; Joh_21:7; Joh_21:20.) Twice he also mentions that he reclined on Jesus’s bosom, (Joh_21:20.) John was the youngest of the disciples; and without claiming any proud pre-eminence, or setting up for rival to Peter for the primacy, he tenderly remembers that Jesus had for him a peculiar love. He was the youngest, tenderest, feeblest lamb of the flock.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv23–26 23. there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom] Better, there…
23. there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom] Better, there was reclining on Jesus’ lap. It is important to mark the distinction between this and the words rendered ‘lying on Jesus’ breast’ in Joh_13:25. The Jews had adopted the Persian, Greek, and Roman custom of reclining at meals, and had long since exchanged the original practice of standing at the Passover first for sitting and then for reclining. They reclined on the left arm and ate with the right. This is the posture of the beloved disciple indicated here, which continued throughout the meal: in Joh_13:25 we have a momentary change of posture.
whom Jesus loved] This explains how S. John came to be nearest (see Introduction ii. iii. 3 b), and “out of the recollection of that sacred, never-to-be-forgotten moment, there breaks from him for the first time this nameless, yet so expressive designation of himself” (Meyer). Comp. Joh_19:26, Joh_21:7; Joh_21:20; not Joh_20:2. S. John was on our Lord’s right. Who was next to Him on the left? Some think Judas, who must have been very close for Christ to answer him without the others hearing.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv23–26 (23) Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom.—Leonardo’s picture…
(23) Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom.—Leonardo’s picture is in one respect misleading, and, like most paintings of the Lord’s Supper, has not represented the method in which the guests reclined rather than sat at table. Each leaned on his left arm, leaving the right arm free. The feet were stretched out behind the guest on his right hand, and the back of the head reached near to the bosom of the guest on the left. (Comp. Note on Joh_13:25.) The Jews followed this Persian method of reclining on couches at meals from the time of the Captivity, and this method of eating the Passover had the special significance of security and possession of the Promised Land, as opposed to the attitude of one undertaking a journey, which was part of the original institution (Exo_12:11).
One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved—i.e., John himself. (Comp. Joh_21:2; Joh_21:7; Joh_21:20-23, and Introduction, p. 375.) The same designation occurs also in Joh_19:26.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv24–26 Simon Peter therefore beckoned to this (disciple), and saith…
Simon Peter therefore beckoned to this (disciple), and saith to him. Wherefore he must have been far enough off to beckon, and near enough to speak. Westcott imagines that Peter was on the left side, in the place of real honor(?), though not in such proximity as, unobserved, to ask the question. Edersheim also speaks of the left side as the place of honor, but assigns no adequate reason for such a violation of universal usage and metaphor. The natural impetuosity of Peter would have induced him, if he had been so near, to have asked the question himself. It is more probable that Judas himself was there, judging from the language of Mat_26:23, and from the act which follows. Either with T.R., He spake to him, to ask who it might be; or, saith, Tell (us) who it is concerning whom he speaks; as though Peter had rushed to the conclusion that John knew. This is singularly like Peter, and John may tacitly have been supposed to be better acquainted than the rest with the mind of Jesus.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Alexander MacLaren 1905 · Public Domain On v25 Mat 26:22, Mat 26:25. - Joh 13:25.
Matthew
‘IS IT I?’
Read full note →
Mat 26:22, Mat 26:25. - Joh 13:25.
The genius of many great painters has portrayed the Lord’s Supper, but the reality of it was very different from their imaginings. We have to picture to ourselves some low table, probably a mere tray spread upon the ground, round which our Lord and the twelve reclined, in such a fashion as that the head of each guest came against the bosom of him that reclined above him; the place of honour being at the Lord’s left hand, or higher up the table than Himself, and the second place being at His right, or below Himself.
So there would be no eager gesticulations of disciples starting to their feet when our Lord uttered the sad announcement, ‘One of you shall betray Me!’ but only horror-struck amazement settled down upon the group. These verses, which we have put together, show us three stages in the conversation which followed the sad announcement. The three evangelists give us two of these; John alone omits these two, and only gives us the third.
First, we have their question, born of a glimpse into the possibilities of evil in their hearts, ‘Lord, is it I?’ The form of that question in the original suggests that they expected a negative answer, and might be reproduced in English: ‘Surely it is not I?’ None of them could think that he was the traitor, yet none of them could be sure that he was not. Their Master knew better than they did; and so, from a humble knowledge of what lay in them, coiled and slumbering, but there, they would not meet His words with a contradiction, but with a question. His answer spares the betrayer, and lets the dread work in their consciences for a little longer, for their good. For many hands dipped in the dish together, to moisten their morsels; and to say, ‘He that dippeth with Me in the dish, the same shall betray Me,’ was to say nothing more than ‘One of you at the table.’
Then comes the second stage. Judas, reassured that he has escaped detection for the moment, and perhaps doubting whether the Master had anything more than a vague suspicion of treachery, or knew who was the traitor, shapes his lying lips with loathsome audacity into the same question, but yet not quite the same, The others had said, ‘Is it I, Lord?’ he falters when he comes to that name, and dare not say ‘Lord!’ That sticks in his throat. ‘Rabbi!’ is as far as he can get. ‘Is it I, Rabbi?’ Christ’s answer to him, ‘Thou hast said,’ is another instance of patient longsuffering. It was evidently a whisper that did not reach the ears of any of the others, for he leaves the room without suspicion. Our Lord still tries to save him from himself by showing Judas that his purpose is known, and by still concealing his name.
Then comes the third stage, which we owe to John’s Gospel. Here again he is true to his task of supplementing the narrative of the three synoptic Gospels. Remembering what I have said about the attitude of the disciples at the table, we can understand that Peter, if he occupied the principal place at the Lord’s left, was less favourably situated for speaking to Christ than John, who reclined in the second seat at His right, and so he beckoned over the Master’s head to John. The Revised Version gives the force of the original more vividly than the Authorised does: ‘He, leaning back, as he was, on Jesus’ breast, saith unto Him, Lord! who is it?’ John, with a natural movement, bends back his head on his Master’s breast, so as to ask and be answered, in a whisper. His question is not, ‘Is it I?’ He that leaned on Christ’s bosom, and was compassed about by Christ’s love, did not need to ask that. The question now is, ‘Who is it?’ Not a question of presumption, nor of curiosity, but of affection; and therefore answered: ‘He it is to whom I shall give the sop, when I have dipped it.’
The morsel dipped in the dish and passed by the host’s hand to a guest, was a token of favour, of unity and confidence. It was one more attempt to save Judas, one more token of all-forgiving patience. No wonder that that last sign of friendship embittered his hatred and sharpened his purpose to an unalterable decision, or, as John says: ‘After the sop, Satan entered into him.’ For then, as ever, the heart which is not melted by Christ’s offered love is hardened by it.
Now, if we take these three stages of this conversation we may learn some valuable lessons from them. I take the first form of the question as an example of that wholesome self-distrust which a glimpse into the slumbering possibilities of evil in our hearts ought to give us all. I take the second on the lips of Judas, as an example of the very opposite of that self-distrust, the fixed determination to do a wrong thing, however clearly we know it to be wrong. And I take the last form of the question, as asked by John, as an illustration of the peaceful confidence which comes from the consciousness of Christ’s love, and of communion with Him. Now a word or two about each of these.
I. First, we have an example of that wholesome self-distrust, which a glimpse into the possibilities of evil that lie slumbering in all our hearts ought to teach every one of us.
Every man is a mystery to himself. In every soul there lie, coiled and dormant, like hibernating snakes, evils that a very slight rise in the temperature will wake up into poisonous activity. And let no man say, in foolish self-confidence, that any form of sin which his brother has ever committed is impossible for him. Temperament shields us from much, no doubt. There are sins that ‘we are inclined to,’ and there are sins that ‘we have no mind to.’ But the identity of human nature is deeper than the diversity of temperament, and there are two or three considerations that should abate a man’s confidence that anything which one man has done it is impossible that he should do. Let me enumerate them very briefly. Remember, to begin with, that all sins are at bottom but varying forms of one root. The essence of every evil is selfishness, and when you have that, it is exactly as with cooks who have the ‘stock’ by the fireside. They can make any kind of soup out of it, with the right flavouring. We have got the mother tincture of all wickedness in each of our hearts; and therefore do not let us be so sure that it cannot be manipulated and flavoured into any form of sin. All sin is one at bottom, and this is the definition of it-living to myself instead of living to God. So it may easily pass from one form of evil into another, just as light and heat, motion and electricity, are all-they tell us-various forms and phases of one force. Just as doctors will tell you that there are types of disease which slip from one form of sickness into another, so if we have got the infection about us it is a matter very much of accidental circumstances what shape it takes. And no man with a human heart is safe in pointing to any sin, and saying, ‘That form of transgression I reckon alien to myself.’
And then let me remind you, too, that the same consideration is reinforced by this other fact, that all sin is, if I may so say, gregarious; is apt not only to slip from one form into another, but that any evil is apt to draw another after it. The tangled mass of sin is like one of those great fields of seaweed that you some times come across upon the ocean, all hanging together by a thousand slimy growths; which, if lifted from the wave at any point, drags up yards of it inextricably grown together. No man commits only one kind of transgression. All sins hunt in couples. According to the grim picture of the Old Testament, about another matter, ‘None of them shall want his mate. The wild beasts of the desert shall meet with the wild beasts of the islands.’ One sin opens the door for another, ‘and seven other spirits worse than himself’ come and make holiday in the man’s heart.
Again, any evil is possible to us, seeing that all sin is but yielding to tendencies common to us all. The greatest transgressions have resulted from yielding to such tendencies. Cain killed his brother from jealousy; David besmirched his name and his reign by animal passion; Judas betrayed Christ because he was fond of money. Many a man has murdered another one simply because he had a hot temper. And you have got a temper, and you have got the love of money, and you have got animal passions, and you have got that which may stir you up into jealousy. Your neighbour’s house has caught fire and been blown up. Your house, too, is built of wood, and thatched with straw, and you have as much dynamite in your cellars as he had in his. Do not be too sure that you are safe from the danger of explosion.
And, again, remember that this same wholesome self-distrust is needful for us all, because all transgression is yielding to temptations that assail all men. Here are one hundred men in a plague-stricken city; they have all got to draw their water from the same well. If five or six of them died of cholera it would be very foolish of the other ninety-five to say, ‘There is no chance of our being touched.’ We all live in the same atmosphere; and the temptations that have overcome the men that have headed the count of crimes appeal to you. So the lesson is, ‘Be not high-minded, but fear.’
And remember, still further, that the same solemn consideration is enforced upon us by the thought that men will gradually drop down to the level which, before they began the descent, seemed to be impossible to them. ‘Is thy servant a dog that he should do this thing?’ said Hazael when the crime of murdering his master first floated before him. Yes, but he did it. By degrees he came down to the level to which he thought that he would never sink. First the imagination is inflamed, then the wish begins to draw the soul to the sin, then conscience pulls it back, then the fatal decision is made, and the deed is done. Sometimes all the stages are hurried quickly through, and a man spins downhill as cheerily and fast as a diligence down the Alps. Sometimes, as the coast of a country may sink an inch in a century until long miles of the flat seabeach are under water, and towers and cities are buried beneath the barren waves, so our lives may be gradually lowered, with a motion imperceptible but most real, bringing us down within high-water mark, and at last the tide may wash over what was solid land.
So, dear friends, there is nothing more foolish than for any man to stand, self-confident that any form of evil that has conquered his brother has no temptation for him. It may not have for you, under present circumstances; it may not have for you to-day; but, oh! we have all of us one human heart, and ‘he that trusteth in his own heart is a fool.’ ‘Blessed is the man that feareth always.’ Humble self-distrust, consciousness of sleeping sin in my heart that may very quickly be stirred into stinging and striking; rigid self-control over all these possibilities of evil, are duties dictated by the plainest common-sense.
Do not say, ‘I know when to stop.’ Do not say, ‘I can go so far; it will not do me any harm.’ Many a man has said that, and many a man has been ruined by it. Do not say, ‘It is natural to me to have these inclinations and tastes, and there can be no harm in yielding to them.’ It is perfectly natural for a man to stoop down over the edge of a precipice to gather the flowers that are growing in some cranny in the cliff; and it is as natural for him to topple over, and be smashed to a mummy at the bottom. God gave you your dispositions and your whole nature ‘under lock and key,’-keep them so. And when you hear of, or see, great criminals and great crimes, say to yourself, as the good old Puritan divine said, looking at a man going to the scaffold, ‘But for the grace of God there go I!’ And in the contemplation of sins and apostasies, let us each look humbly at our own weakness, and pray Him to keep us from our brother’s evils which may easily become ours.
II. Secondly, we have here an example of precisely the opposite sort, namely, of that fixed determination to do evil which is unshaken by the clearest knowledge that it is evil.
Judas heard his crime described in its own ugly reality. He heard his fate proclaimed by lips of absolute love and truth; and notwithstanding both, he comes unmoved and unshaken with his question. The dogged determination in his heart, that dares to see his evil stripped naked and is ‘not ashamed,’ is even more dreadful than the hypocrisy and sleek simulation of friendship in his face.
Now most men turn away with horror from even the sins that they are willing to do, when they are put plainly and bluntly before them. As an old mediaeval preacher once said, ‘There is nothing that is weaker than the devil stripped naked.’ By which he meant exactly this-that we have to dress wrong in some fantastic costume or other, so as to hide its native ugliness, in order to tempt men to do it. So we have two sets of names for wrong things, one of which we apply to our brethren’s sins, and the other to the same sins in ourselves. What I do is ‘prudence,’ what you do of the same sort is ‘covetousness’; what I do is ‘sowing my wild oats,’ what you do is ‘immorality’ and ‘dissipation’; what I do is ‘generous living,’ what you do is ‘drunkenness’ and ‘gluttony’; what I do is ‘righteous indignation,’ what you do is ‘passionate anger.’ And so you may go the whole round of evil. Very bad are the men who can look at their deed, described in Its own inherent deformity, and yet say, ‘Yes; that is it, and I am going to do it.’ ‘One of you shall betray Me.’ ‘Yes; I will betray you!’ It must have taken something to look into the Master’s face, and keep the fixed purpose steady.
Now I ask you to think, dear friends, of this, that that obstinate condition of dogged determination to do a wrong thing, knowing it to be a wrong thing, is a condition to which all evil steadily tends. We may not come to it in this world-I do not know that men ever do so wholly; but we are all getting towards it in regard to the special wrong deeds and desires which we cherish and commit. And when a man has once reached the point of saying to evil, ‘Be thou my good,’ then he is a ‘devil’ in the true meaning of the word; and wherever he is, he is in hell! And the one unpardonable sin is the sin of clear recognition that a given thing is contrary to God’s will, and unfaltering determination, notwithstanding, to do it. That is the only sin that cannot be pardoned, ‘either in this world or in the world to come.’
And so, my brother, seeing that such a condition is possible, and that all the paths of evil, however tentative and timorous they may be at first, and however much the sin may be wrapped up with excuses and forms and masks, tend to that condition, let us take that old prayer upon our lips, which befits both those who distrust themselves because of slumbering sins, and those who dread being conquered by manifest iniquity:-’Who can understand his errors? Cleanse Thou me from secret faults. Keep back Thy servant also from presumptuous sins. Let them not have dominion over me.’
III. Now, lastly, we have in the last question an example of the peaceful confidence that comes from communion with Jesus Christ.
John leaned on the Master’s bosom. ‘He was the disciple whom Jesus loved.’ And so compassed with that great love, and feeling absolute security within the enclosure of that strong hand, his question is not, ‘Is it I?’ but ‘Who is it?’ From which I think we may fairly draw the conclusion that to feel that Christ loves me, and that I am compassed about by Him, is the true security against my falling into any sin.
It was not John’s love to Christ, but Christ’s to John that made his safety. He did not say: ‘I love Thee so much that I cannot betray Thee.’ For all our feelings and emotions are but variable, and to build confidence upon them is to build a heavy building upon quicksand; the very weight of it drives out the foundations. But he thought to himself-or he felt rather than he thought-that all about him lay the sweet, warm, rich atmosphere of his Master’s love; and to a man who was encompassed by that, treachery was impossible.
Sin has no temptation so long as we actually enjoy the greater sweetness of Christ’s felt love. Would thirty pieces of silver have been a bribe to John? Would anything that could have terrified others have frightened him from his Master’s side whilst he felt His love? Will a handful of imitation jewellery, made out of coloured glass and paste, be any temptation to a man who bears a rich diamond on his finger? And will any of earth’s sweetness be a temptation to a man who lives in the continual consciousness of the great rich love of Christ wrapping him round about? Brethren, not ourselves, not our faith, not our emotion, not our religious experience; nothing that is in us, is any security that we may not be tempted, and yield to the temptation, and deny or betray our Lord. There is only one thing that is a security, and that is that we be folded to the heart, and held by the hand, of that loving Lord. Then-then we may be confident that we shall not fall; for ‘the Lord is able to make us stand.’
Such confidence is but the other side of our self-distrust; is the constant accompaniment of it, must have that self-distrust for its condition and prerequisite, and leads to a yet deeper and more blessed form of that self-distrust. Faith in Him and ‘no confidence in the flesh’ are but the two sides of the same coin, the obverse and the reverse. The seed, planted in the ground, sends a little rootlet down, and a little spikelet up, by the same vital act. And so in our hearts, as it were, the downward rootlet is self-despair, and the upward shoot is faith in Christ. The two emotions go together-the more we distrust ourselves the more we shall rest upon Him, and the more we rest upon Him, and feel that all our strength comes, not from our foot, but from the Rock on which it stands, the more we shall distrust our own ability and our own faithfulness.
Therefore, dear brethren, looking upon all the evil that is around us, and conscious in some measure of the weakness of our own hearts, let us do as a man would do who stands upon the narrow ledge of a cliff, and look sheer down into the depth below, and feels his head begin to reel and turn giddy; let us lay hold of the Guide’s hand, and if we cleave by Him, He will hold up our goings that our footsteps slip not. Nothing else will. No length of obedient service is any guarantee against treachery and rebellion. As John Bunyan saw, there was a backdoor to hell from the gate of the Celestial City. Men have lived for years consistent professing Christians, and have fallen at last. Many a ship has come across half the world, and gone to pieces on the harbour bar. Many an army, victorious in a hundred fights, has been annihilated at last. No depths of religious experience, no heights of religious blessedness, no attainments of past virtue and self-sacrifice, are any guarantees for to-morrow. Trust in nothing and in nobody, least of all in yourselves and your own past. Trust only in Jesus Christ.
‘Now unto Him that is able to keep us from falling, and to present us faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy; to the only wise God our Saviour be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and for ever.’ Amen.
Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv23, 26 One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved
One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved
This refers to John.
Read full note →
lying down at the table
During the time of Christ, Jews would often dine together in the Greek style, in which they lay on their sides on low couches. (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
Jesus' side
Lying with one's head against the side of another diner in the Greek style was considered to be the place of greatest friendship with him.
loved
This kind of love comes from God and focuses on the good of others, even when it does not benefit oneself. This kind of love cares for others, no matter what they do.
translationWords
disciple
love
Peter
lord
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv23, 25, 26 13:23 The disciple Jesus loved appears at the cross…
13:23 The disciple Jesus loved appears at the cross (19:26-27), at the tomb (20:2-9), and at the resurrection (21:1, 20-23). He is the author of this Gospel (21:24-25). Some scholars believe that Lazarus was in fact the disciple whom Jesus loved (see 11:3, 5, 36), but the person referred to here was among the twelve apostles and is usually identified as the apostle John. • was sitting next to Jesus at the table: Literally was reclining on Jesus’ bosom. They were probably reclining at a triclinium, a U-shaped table with couches. Guests reclined on the couches, while the center provided access to servers. The diners supported their bodies by their left elbows while using their right hands for eating. Feet were extended away from the table (cp. Luke 7:38).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.