The single theme of the first block of teaching material is developed in dialogue form, with a series of questions and answers (13:36–14:24) ending with a postscript in the form of a monologue (14:25–31). Each question is occasioned by a previous statement of Jesus, so that each interchange has three parts: Jesus’ initial statement, the question that it occasions, and Jesus’ answer to the question. In all, four disciples take their turn as inquirers: Peter, Thomas, Philip, and Judas (not “the son of Simon Iscariot,” but another disciple named Judas).
The Question of Peter
Peter’s question, Lord, where are you going? builds on Jesus’ statement in verse 33, “Where I am going, you cannot come.” It is a natural question, because Jesus’ destination has not yet been established, but it is not a mere request for information. Behind it is the plaintive cry, Why are you going? or Why must you go? The discourse that follows (13:36–14:31) is Jesus’ response to that cry as well as his formal answer to the question explicitly asked.
Jesus’ initial assertion that he was going away had pointed back explicitly to similar statements made earlier to the Jewish authorities (7:33–36; 8:21). It is the common NT scandal of the cross (cf. 1 Cor. 1:23), but it is seen here as an offense even to Christian believers. For them it is the scandal of an absent Lord.
Instead of answering Peter’s question directly by saying that he is going to the Father, Jesus begins by qualifying his initial statement, “Where I am going, you cannot come.” In verse 36b he says, Where I am going, you cannot follow now, but you will follow later. The experience of the disciples is not entirely parallel to that of Jewish authorities, for the disciples’ separation from Jesus will be only temporary. Jesus’ response is directed first to Peter personally; he will follow later, presumably in death (cf. 21:18–19). Embedded within this part of Jesus’ response to the scandal of his departure is a reference to Peter’s own personal “scandal” (using the word in a somewhat different sense). Peter professes his willingness to follow Jesus even to death (and he will), but in the more immediate future he will deny his Lord three times (vv. 37–38). This prediction, though a fixed part of the tradition (cf. Mark 14:27–31 and parallels) is not elaborated. The thread of it is picked up in 18:15–18, 25–27, and probably 21:15–17, but it plays no real part in the argument here.
In 14:1 Jesus widens the application of his words to all the disciples as the pronouns change from singular to plural. The recurrence of the words where I am (14:3) and where I am going (14:4), however, indicate that the statement in 13:33, which occasioned the whole series of questions, is still in mind. The scandal of Jesus’ absence is alleviated by an emphasis on hope. Jesus’ assurance to the disciples is that their separation from him will be only for a limited time. The purpose of his departure is to make room for them all in the Father’s house. He will return for them, and they will join him there forever (vv. 2–3; cf. 12:26). The reference is to Jesus’ future coming (cf. 1 John 2:28) and to the resurrection of those who believe in Jesus (cf. 6:39–40, 44, 54). In principle both Peter’s question and his plaintive cry, both the “where” and the “why,” have now been answered. Yet the dialogue goes on.
The Question of Thomas
The statement prompting Thomas’ question is part of the answer to Peter: You know the way to the place where I am going (v. 4). The words where I am going still echo 13:33 and 36. Jesus’ answer to Thomas’ question, How can we know the way? (v. 5), introduces the new thought that Jesus himself is the way (v. 6). Jesus’ answer centers on himself; it is neither necessary to know where he is going, in the sense of Jewish apocalyptic speculations about the structure of the heavens, nor the way, in the sense of a formula for escaping this world and attaining salvation (as in Gnosticism and the Hellenistic mystery religions). What is necessary is simply to know Jesus in personal faith and to trust him as the only one who can lead the searching disciple to the Father. Thomas’ question changes the focus of discussion from the destination to the way to reach it, while at the same time underscoring that Jesus has not yet answered Peter’s question in so many words (Lord, we don’t know where you are going, v. 5). Even though it is occasioned by Jesus’ mention of the way, it is still basically a rephrasing of Peter’s Where are you going? in 13:36 (now with particular reference to the implied corollary, “Where are we going when we follow you later?”). Jesus has implied that he is going to the Father’s house (v. 2), but he has not said what this really means. He speaks more explicitly in v. 6: No one comes to the Father except through me. The simultaneous stress is on Jesus as the Way and on the Father as the Destination. The center of interest is no longer time (you will follow later) but persons (Jesus and the Father).
The Question of Philip
The Father now becomes the subject of the third interchange. The terms where I am going and the way have now been replaced by “the Father” and “the Son” respectively. Thus Jesus’ introductory statement, If you really knew me you would know my Father as well (v. 7), echoes Thomas’ complaint, Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way? (v. 5). So when Philip asks Jesus to show us the Father (v. 8), he is actually raising for a third time the question, Where are you going? The problem is still what it was in 13:33: If Jesus is going away, the disciple is no better off than the Jewish authorities who rejected Jesus.
The parallels between this exchange and Jesus’ debate with “the Jews” in 8:12–20 are especially instructive. There, in the context of a debate over the credibility of Jesus’ testimony to himself, the expression “where I came from and where I am going” (8:14) was used as an indirect way of referring to the Father. Jesus’ real indictment of his hearers was that they did not know his Father (8:19), but to say that they did not know the Father was the same as saying they did not know where Jesus came from or where he was going. This passage sheds light on chapter 14 both in its similarities and its differences. Its major theme is the validation of legal testimony by two witnesses, Jesus and the Father (8:17–18), with Jesus’ departure from the world as a subsidiary minor note (though it comes to the fore in 8:21). In chapter 14, the departure is the major theme, with the question of the validity of Jesus’ testimony as a side issue (Trust in God; trust also in me, v. 1; cf. vv. 10–11). Thomas’ acknowledgment that we don’t know where you are going (v. 5) corresponds to Jesus’ claim in 8:14 that his questioners do not know “where I come from or where I am going.” Philip’s request in verse 8 to show us the Father is formally similar to the question, “Where is your Father?” in 8:19a, but in substance there is a world of difference. The Jewish leaders in their sarcasm were challenging Jesus to produce his second witness, while Philip is restating in personal terms the question of Peter and Thomas, Where are you going? The immediately preceding comment to Philip and the others, “If you really have known me, you will know my Father as well” (v. 7a, NIV margin) corresponds closely to what he said to the Jewish authorities in 8:19b (“If you knew me, you would know my Father also”) but with a crucial difference in the tenses (the contrary-to-fact condition has become a condition assuming reality, like “now that you know these things” in 13:17), and with the added assurance that from now on, you do know him and have seen him (v. 7b).
These words shift the thrust of the argument decisively from the future to the present. To Jesus’ disciples, the fact that he will be with them only a little while longer (13:33) makes it imperative to realize what his presence on earth has already meant (I have been among you such a long time, v. 9), and to respond in faith to his revelation in words and works (vv. 9–11). The way to the Father is more than the resurrection at the last day (cf. vv. 2–3). It is a way accessible right now to any disciple who hears Jesus’ words in faith as the Father’s words and sees Jesus’ works as the works of the Father. This is what the disciples at the table have not yet done (v. 9), and what the readers of the Gospel are expected to do.
Though the emphasis here is on the Son’s historical revelation on earth, there is no sharp distinction between this period and the impending time of Jesus’ absence. The shift from the one to the other in verse 12 is easy and natural, in contrast to Jesus’ earlier warning about the night “when no one can work” (9:4; cf. 11:9–10). The public ministry as a whole drew its urgency from the warning with which it concluded: “You are going to have the light just a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, before darkness overtakes you.… Put your trust in the light while you have it, so that you may become sons of light” (12:35–36). But in chapter 14, Jesus’ departure to the Father means not an end to the works of God but greater things (v. 12) accomplished by the disciples, with the assurance that Jesus, now with the Father, will answer their prayers (vv. 13–14). The situation of the public ministry has been transcended; what is true for the disciples is not at all the same as what is true for the world. Despite their failure thus far to understand or believe that Jesus is in the Father and the Father in Jesus (v. 10), the opportunity exists from now on to recognize exactly that (vv. 7b, 11).
After each of the four questions that punctuate this first farewell discourse, Jesus, in addressing the disciples, shifts at some point from singular to plural (cf. vv. 1–3, 7, 11–21, 24b). These plurals suggest that generalized discourse material has been worked into the question-and-answer framework. The longest block of pure discourse consists of verses 11–21, where the content almost (but not quite) submerges the question-and-answer form. This content consists of a series of promises held out to those who “see” (vv. 7, 9) and believe (v. 11) Jesus and his revelation. Jesus promises them the power to do greater things than even he has done (v. 12) and, closely associated with this, the privilege of having their prayers answered (vv. 13–14). But the most important promise is the one on which the first two depend: Jesus’ own continuing presence with them (vv. 15–21).
The brief monologue introducing the last disciple’s question (v. 22) is constructed according to a simple pattern repeated in verses 15–20 and verse 21. In answer to the last question, Jesus does not carry the thought further, but simply repeats the pattern for a third time, only now with a negative corollary (vv. 23–24). The section as a whole yields the following picture:
If you love me, you will obey what I command (v. 15).
Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him (v. 21).
If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him (v. 23).
I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor.… I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.… On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you (vv. 16–20).
He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me (v. 24).
The framework for the love command is somewhat different here from the triangular framework of chapter 13: Love moves first of all in an upward direction; the disciples are to love Jesus, and in turn they will receive the divine love. The sequence is as follows:
(a) The disciple is to love Jesus and keep his commandments.
(b) Consequently the Father (and Jesus) will love the disciple and grant the disciple a revelation.
The only reference in this first discourse to the love between the Father and the Son has the love moving in the same upward direction: Jesus loves the Father and does what the Father commands him (v. 31; contrast 15:9–10). This simple pattern is best described as “covenantal.” In Judaism, the core of God’s demand was summed up in the daily prayer known as the Shema, taken from Deuteronomy 6:4–6: “Hear O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts.” Loving God and keeping his commandments became a common way of describing the duty of Israel (e.g., Exod. 20:6; Deut. 5:10; 7:9; 11:1). The emphasis was on love as a demand and, consequently, more on people’s love for God than on God’s love for them. Jesus’ language at this point recalls his answer in the synoptic Gospels to the scribe who asked, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?” (Mark 12:28–34/Matt. 22:34–40/Luke 10:25–28), except that in John it is love for Jesus rather than love for God that stands at the center (cf. 21:15–17). In a manner typical of this Gospel, Jesus identifies himself so closely with the Father that as far as the disciple is concerned, the two are virtually equivalent (cf. 10:30; vv. 9, 23).
The Question of Judah
The name Judah can be used to distinguish this disciple (cf. Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13) both from Judas the traitor and from Jude the brother of Jesus (cf. Mark 6:3/Matt. 13:55; Jude 1). Judah’s question, which at first glance seems overshadowed by the preceding discourse material, is actually a key to understanding the whole, for it picks up details from Jesus’ promises in verses 16–20 that might otherwise have passed unnoticed. Judah asks, But, Lord, why do you intend to show yourself to us and not to the world? (v. 22). Jesus had spoken in verses 16–17 of another Counselor (Gr.: paraklētos) whom he called the Spirit of truth. Of this Counselor, Jesus said, The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him or knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you (v. 17). Again in verse 19 he had picked up the language of his opening pronouncement in 13:33, but now with a crucial qualification: Before long [Gr.: eti mikron; cf. 13:33], the world will not see me any more, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. This was what called forth Judah’s question. The world will not see Jesus after he departs. As far as the world is concerned, he is absent; a real (and permanent) separation has taken place. But for the believer, the separation is not real. Even though Jesus goes away in the sense of departing from human view, the disciple continues to see him (v. 19; cf. vv. 7b, 9) by sharing his life and by knowing the other Counselor, the Spirit of truth who takes his place. Jesus departs from the world only to be closer to his disciples than ever before. Because he goes to the Father, he says, his disciples will one day know that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you (v. 20; cf. 10:38). Paradoxically, it is in departing that he returns, for in his reunion with the Father he unites himself (and his Father) with the disciples as well (cf. 20:19–23).
Here most decisively the scandal of Jesus absence is overcome. At the beginning (13:33) the disciples seemed to have no advantage over the world, for they could not follow where Jesus went. In answer to Peter’s question, this was qualified: They would follow, but only later, when Jesus had prepared a place for them (13:36; 14:3). Now the full truth comes out: For those who have faith there is no real separation from Jesus. His departure means that he and the Father will be together again and that in the Spirit both will be present, and accessible, to the believing disciple. Judah’s question is a natural one, for Jesus’ words seem to resist the claims of sense experience. What the eyes see—Jesus’ departure from the world by death—is an illusion. What is real—the presence of the Spirit, and Jesus’ union with the Father and with his disciples—cannot be seen in the usual (i.e., the world’s) sense of the term. Judah is simply asking why the disciples and the world see things so differently. Jesus’ answer (vv. 23–24) sounds at first as if he has not heard the question, but the negative corollary that he adds in verse 24 speaks to the issue that Judah raises by defining (in a way characteristic of John’s Gospel) the difference between the church and the world: He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. The “world” consists of those who do not love Jesus, while the “church” (a term never used in this Gospel) consists of those who love and obey him (vv. 15, 21). The Spirit will come only to those who know the Spirit (v. 17; cf. 1 Cor. 2:11–14); Jesus and the Father are present only to those who have the eyes to see them (v. 19). Judah’s question is based on the common early Christian expectation that Jesus will return to earth with “splendor” (2 Thess. 2:8) so that “every eye will see him” (Rev. 1:7). This outlook responds to Jesus’ absence by affirming his visible presence—but in the future. John’s Gospel responds instead by affirming his invisible presence here and now, with those who love him. Even when the coming is future, as in verse 3, it is a coming specifically to the believer, to take you to be with me, not a public epiphany of the Son of God upon the earth. For John, that epiphany has already taken place in the ministry of Jesus. The world has made its decision and shown itself to be blind. John therefore feels no necessity to submit his assertions of Jesus’ coming to the tests of ordinary sense experience. Outward appearances to the contrary, Jesus and the Father will come to make their home with the disciples (v. 23), in and through the Counselor (v. 16) who will be with them forever. Thus, the heart of chapter 14 is the reinterpretation of the eti mikron (“only a little longer”) of 13:33 with a corresponding eti mikron (before long) in 14:19. The former has to do only with sense experience; the latter introduces what is for John the core of Christian existence—new life in the Father and the Son.
Conclusion
Only in the last few verses of the chapter does the question-and-answer framework give way to monologue. The concluding summary, marked off by the formula All this I have spoken … (v. 25; cf. 15:11; 16:1, 4, 25, 33; 17:1), continues to speak of the Counselor (v. 26) and of Jesus’ departure and return (v. 28), with some indications that the disciples’ anxiety about their impending separation from Jesus has not been entirely relieved. Jesus describes more concretely than before the ministry of the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name—he will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you (v. 26)—with the particular purpose of calming their fears (cf. 16:4b; also Mark 13:11; Matt. 10:19–20; Luke 12:11–12). It is not surprising that at this point Jesus repeats his earlier reassurance, Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid (v. 27; cf. v. 1). More surprising is his use of a contrary-to-fact condition, If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father (v. 28), especially in view of the fact that he has just defined the world as those who do not love Jesus (v. 24). Until the disciples have overcome their grief and fear, they cannot be said to love Jesus perfectly (cf. 1 John 4:18), and to that degree they are still on the same footing as the world.
Here for the first time in the discourse is the implicit recognition of a crisis to come that will test the faith and love of the disciples. It is a crisis of separation, and even though Jesus has gone to great lengths to show that the separation is not ultimately real, he tacitly admits that it will be real to them, at least for a time. It is a temptation, a cause for anxiety, and though it has already been overcome in the words of Jesus, it must still be overcome in the disciples’ experience. To this end Jesus leaves with them his wish of peace, given not … as the world gives (v. 27). It is not a peace to be measured by outward circumstances but a peace within the disciples themselves, not the kind that depends on freedom from conflict, but the kind that remains constant when trouble comes.
There is a certain tension between the four questions and answers that comprise most of the farewell discourse and the summary with which it concludes. If 13:36–14:31 is viewed as a farewell discourse complete in itself, verses 25–31 can be regarded as John’s way of making a transition from the idealism of the discourse to the realism of the Passion narrative. The crisis will come in the person of Satan, the prince of this world (v. 30), and Jesus calls the disciples to join in confronting this their greatest foe (Come now; let us leave, v. 31). It is significant that a discourse built on the announcement that Jesus was going where the disciples could not follow should end with a summons for them to go out with Jesus to meet the adversary. This final call to immediate action (used differently in the synoptic Gospels, Mark 14:42/Matt. 26:46) preserves here the distinctly Johannine emphasis on Jesus’ unity with his disciples as he turns his face toward the cross.
Additional Notes
13:37 I will lay down my life for you. The idiom is the same as that used by Jesus in 10:11, 15, 17.
14:1 Do not let your hearts be troubled: The same verb was used of Jesus in 11:33; 12:27; and 13:21. Having quieted his own heart in preparation for the Passion, Jesus now begins to prepare his disciples for what lies ahead.
Trust in God; trust also in me. The two verbs can be read either as imperatives (as here) or indicatives (i.e., “You do trust in God, and you trust in me”); or one can be read as indicative and the other as imperative (i.e., “You do trust in God; therefore trust in me”). But consistency favors translating the two verbs in parallel fashion, and the double indicative would be trite and redundant at this point. The NIV rendering is therefore preferable; Jesus is not speaking of belief in God (or himself) in a generalized sense but in relation to a specific hope for the future: “Trust God and trust me; this is what will happen, and there is no cause for fear.”
14:2 In my Father’s house are many rooms: The “many mansions” of the AV has been changed in most modern versions because of the incongruity of “mansions” within a house. Rooms is literally “dwelling places” (Gr.: monai), the original meaning of “mansion” (from the Latin manere, “to dwell”); cf. Jesus’ promise in v. 23 that he and the Father will come and “make our home” (lit., “dwelling” [monē]) with the person who loves and obeys Jesus.
The phrase my Father’s house recalls 2:16–17, where similar terminology was used of the temple in Jerusalem. Here it refers metaphorically to heaven. The metaphor, however, is probably that of an actual house or household (cf. 8:35–36), not the “heavenly temple” of Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature (as, e.g., in Rev. 4). The emphasis is not on individual “compartments” in heaven but simply on the assurance that there is plenty of room for all who belong to Jesus.
If it were not so, I would have told you. It is better to follow the GNB margin in taking the sentence as a question: “If it were not so, would I tell you that I am going [lit., ‘going away’] to prepare a place for you?” Grammatically, this translation is preferable because it takes account of the conjunction “that” (Gr.: hoti), which otherwise has to be ignored. The difficulty it presents is its implication that Jesus had said on a previous occasion that he was going away to prepare a place for his disciples. Nowhere else in the Gospel did he say this in so many words, but he did state clearly that he was going away (e.g., 7:33; 8:21), and it may be that the preparing of a place for believers was regarded as implicit in such passages as 6:39; 10:16; and 12:32.
14:6 I am the way and the truth and the life. The main thrust of the context is carried by Jesus’ claim that he is the way; the other two self-designations are corollaries of this (cf. NEB: “I am the way; I am the truth and I am life”; but Moffatt’s “I am the real and living way” goes too far in this direction).
14:7 If you really knew me you would know. The NIV makes the condition contrary-to-fact, but the stronger manuscript evidence favors the NIV margin: “If you really have known me, you will know” (cf. GNB). Jesus’ immediate positive statement that from now on, you do know him and have seen him (i.e., the Father, v. 7b) and his surprised question, “Don’t you know me, Philip?” (v. 9), further support the notion that Jesus is assuming knowledge—not the lack of it—on the part of his disciples. In this respect their situation stands in contrast to that of the Pharisees in 8:19.
14:11 Believe on the evidence of the miracles (lit., “believe because of the works”). Jesus’ “works” or “deeds” are not confined to his miracles. The NIV tacitly acknowledges this with its translation “greater things” (not “greater miracles”) in v. 12.
14:12 Greater things: lit., “greater works.” The works the disciples will perform after Jesus’ departure are greater than Jesus’ works not in intrinsic value or glory but in scope: The disciples will do the works of God on a much wider scale as they bring the message of eternal life to the whole world, Gentiles as well as Jews (cf. 10:16; 11:52; 12:32).
14:14 You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it. A characteristic of this first farewell discourse is its terminology of prayer: Prayer is made not only in Jesus’ name, but to Jesus (rather than to the Father), and Jesus himself is the one who answers prayer (some early manuscripts omit me, perhaps because it seemed awkward with in my name, but it is retained in the most important of the ancient textual witnesses). Jesus’ assumption here is that because he is “going to the Father” (v. 12b), he shares in the Father’s work of answering prayer, and in fact guarantees the answer. The phrase in my name means “on my authority”; the prayer is answered when the petitioner and the One being petitioned are united in faith and love, i.e., when the conditions described in verses 15–21 are in effect.
14:16 Another Counselor: Another implies that Jesus too is a Counselor (Gr.: paraklētos; cf. 1 John 2:1, which speaks of the risen Jesus helping believers by serving as their advocate before God). The Spirit is here characterized as continuing to do for believers all that Jesus did for them while he was on earth—especially teaching and encouraging them. The Spirit’s function is a revelatory and a pastoral one. He (or she; the term paraklētos in any case accents the personality of the Spirit) is a Counselor in the specific sense of illuminating the revelation from God that Jesus brought and applying it to the ever-changing needs of Jesus’ followers.
14:17 “He lives with you and is in you”: (NIV margin). The tenses are present, but Jesus is referring to the future: when the Spirit comes, he will come to stay and will live in the disciples’ hearts. Some manuscripts make the second verb a future (NIV text: will be in you) as if Jesus were distinguishing between the Spirit’s presence with the disciples even then and in them after his departure. But such a distinction is foreign to the text; in NT references to union with God, in by no means implies greater intimacy than with (cf. Phil. 1:23; 1 Thess. 4:17), and here the two are virtually interchangeable.
14:18 As orphans: Gr.: orphanous (literally this means “orphaned” or “abandoned”).
14:19 Because I live, you also will live. The words because I live refer to Jesus’ resurrection; the promise that you also will live probably points both to the disciples’ hope of future resurrection and to their present possession of spiritual life through the risen Jesus (cf. 6:57).
14:26 Will remind you of everything I have said to you: Such language was used especially of warnings about trouble and persecution (cf. 13:18; 16:4; and perhaps 14:29), but memory also played an important part in the interpretation of Jesus’ deeds (cf. 2:17, 22; 12:16). The writer of this Gospel probably saw himself as one to whom the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, had given special insight and perspective, after the fact, on the words and deeds of Jesus as he wrote them down.
14:28 The Father is greater than I. Even though Jesus and the Father are “one” (10:30), Jesus can still characterize the Father as greater because there are certain aspects of their relationship that are not reciprocal or reversible: The Father sent Jesus, Jesus did not send the Father; Jesus goes away to rejoin the Father, the Father does not come to him. Functionally, the Father is greater. The disciples should be glad that the human being who eats with them as friend and teacher is not the end in himself, but the Way to God, who is the Beginning and the End of all things.
14:29 Before it happens, so that … you will believe: Before what happens? The only answer possible from the context is Jesus’ departure, i.e., all the events associated with his Passion. When did they believe? One possible answer is 20:28–29; another (assuming that the specific belief was that Jesus had gone to the Father) is 20:8, where the beloved disciple “saw and believed” simply on the basis of the empty tomb.
14:30 He has no hold on me: lit., “in me he has nothing.” It may be that even though the devil is ultimately in view here, Jesus has in mind first of all the devil’s embodiment in Judas, who because of 13:21–30 now “has nothing” in Jesus (cf. also 13:8, “no part with me”). As the farewell discourse draws to a close (v. 31), Judas is indeed coming (cf. 18:2–3); he and the Roman soldiers he will bring are the immediate enemy to be faced.