The Eleventh Commandment

By S. Lewis Johnson, Jr. [1]

An Exposition of John 13:31–35

Introduction

The problem of the summum bonum, that is, What is the greatest good?, has intrigued theologians, philosophers, and others. Just what is the pre-eminent goal in life? And what is the pre-eminent goal in the Christian life?

Our Lord’s gift of the new commandment to the apostles and to the church bears in an important way upon the answer to the question. In fact, a good case could be made for the new commandment, the commandment that the Christian major in Christian love, being that summum bonum.

Listen to the testimonies of some of the apostles, which they gave later in their ministries of writing. John wrote in his First Epistle,

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us. Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love (1 John 4:7–18).

John certainly accords the highest place to Christian love.

Peter writes more simply and concisely, but with equal emphasis, “And above all things have fervent charity (lit., love) among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins” (1 Pet. 4:8).

And Paul, who was a man stained with blood, and who was not, as we often do, recommending his own strong point, wrote, “And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity (lit., love), I am nothing” (1 Cor. 13:2; cf. Acts 8:1–3; 9:13). He also wrote, “And above all these things put on charity (lit., love), which is the bond of perfectness” (Col. 3:14). He accords love the highest of places.

It seems from these words that the apostles agreed upon the supreme importance of love, and, if it cannot be called the summum bonum, it is a contender for the accolade.

The section on the new commandment is a prologue to the actual instruction that will be given in the upper room. The teaching part of the Upper Room discourse has its beginning here according to many interpreters, although there is a sense in which His actions and interpretation in the washing of the disciples’ feet are also instructive. The express statement in some detail of the meaning of the footwashing act is given here in the new commandment. That incident is the acting out of the content of the new commandment. Cf. 1 John 3:16, “Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.”

One notices a contrast between the Upper Room discourse and the Olivet Discourse, which is found in the Synoptic Gospels. Both occur near the end of our Lord’s earthly ministry, but they differ quite radically. In the Olivet Discourse He speaks in the full view of the temple, thus giving prophecies which relate to the outward consummation of His earthly kingdom, centered as it is in Israel, the theocratic nation. In the Upper Room Discourse He speaks to a little flock of eleven believers, giving prophecies which relate to their individual lives on earth following His departure. There is little trace of national coloring here, except a few allusions to their unbelief and one to the manifestation of Himself to the world (cf. 14:22–24).

The sections which follow and contain the instruction are distinguished by a seven-fold repetition of the words, “these things have I spoken,” and according to some interpreters they mark off the divisions of the discourse, explaining the instruction that immediately precedes their occurrence, and perhaps also the motive behind the spoken words. [2]

His Glorification

The Savior’s glorification (John 13:31).

With the thirty-first verse we sense the relief that our Lord felt now that Judas was gone. The barrier between the disciples and the Lord was the barrier of immaturity (cf. 16:12). The barrier between Judas and the Lord was unbelief. Thus, the opening clause is more than a note of time. As Tenney says, “It indicated a change of atmosphere.” [3] One notices the active voice in the verb, “he was gone out” (ἐξῆλθεν, exēlthen), and it underscores the fact that Judas left of his own desire. The words of John 9:34 pertaining to the blind man’s expulsion from the synagogue, “And they cast him out,” do not describe Judas’ departure from the presence of Christ.

Since Judas is gone, the Lord is now able to instruct them in the light of the future and His departure from them, so far as His bodily presence is concerned. They are just a group of eleven simple believing men, although we know them as apostles now, and they are on the verge of panic. That very fact, coupled with their survival of the chaotic events lying just before them of cross, burial, and resurrection, gives us reason for hope, too. He is sufficient for the experiences of our lives as well.

Jesus’ first words are of the Savior’s glorification, or as He puts it, of the glorification of the Son of man, “Now is the Son of man glorified.” What is meant by “glorified” (ἐδοξάσθη, edoxasthē)?

Some, since the verb is in the aorist tense, a past tense, take the strictest sense and refer the glorification to the whole past life of Jesus down to the present time. The interpreters who hold this view contend that the future tense of the verb is unexplainable otherwise (cf. v. 32). [4]

Others refer the word to the future, contending that it is written from the standpoint of the completion of the crosswork of our Lord. This, it seems to me, is supported by several considerations. First, when Judas left, the betrayal and the crucifixion were essentially accomplished. And, second, in other passages in the book the word is related to the cross (cf. 7:39; 12:16, 23; 17:1). It is not uncommon for Him to speak proleptically (cf. 17:4). And, finally, the word for “now” (νῦν, nun) that is used here is one of more general reference than the one that is used in verse thirty-three (ἄρτι, arti). The latter word means something like “at the moment,” while the former is the general “now.” [5] We began the discourse section with a general reference to the arrival of Jesus’ “hour” (cf. v. 1), although strictly speaking it will come only with the cross. Therefore, it would not be contrary to His style to refer to the future consummation of the covenantal ministry of cross and resurrection by the word, “glorified.”

A more significant question, perhaps, is this one, “In what way was the Savior glorified in His cross?” Well, first, He was glorified in His person. By His death His grace was declared (cf. 2 Cor. 8:9). And by His death His love was declared and manifested (cf. Gal. 2:20; Eph. 5:2). And by His death His holiness was made manifest (cf. Luke 23:41, 47). “Certainly,” as the Roman centurion said, “this was a righteous man.”

Our Lord was also glorified in His work. By His death a number of things were done. For example, He destroyed, or annulled, the devil (cf. John 12:23, 31; Heb. 2:14). Second, He obtained a release for the sinners for whom He died (cf. 1 Pet. 2:24; Heb. 2:15; 9:26, etc.). Thirdly, He also obtained a judgment against our inherited sin nature (cf. Rom. 8:3). Finally, the world was judged by His work (cf. John 12:31). And many other things might be noted, if there were space to do so. Truly, we can affirm the certainty of Paul’s claim that God has given us in Christ “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God” (cf. 2 Cor. 4:6). And our own proper response is that of Paul, too, “But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world” (cf. Gal. 6:14).

The Father’s glorification (John 12:31-32).

We probably should accept the longer reading which begins verse thirty-two. “If God is glorified in him, then God will glorify him in himself, and immediately he will glorify him.” Although it is a bit weaker externally, internally it is stronger for several reasons. [6] At any rate, I take it that our Lord said, “If God is glorified in him, then God will glorify him in himself, and immediately he will glorify him.” This verse, then, clearly speaks of the Father’s glorification in the work of the Son. The expression, “then God will glorify him in himself,” probably refers to the exaltation of the Son there, cf. what is said in John 17:1, 5. The glorification of the Son, accomplished by the work of the Father is also then a glorification of the Father, who has done the work. The future tense in the last two clauses of the verse refers to the Father’s future work of raising the Son and exalting Him to His right hand. And by this marvelous work every one of the glorious attributes of deity are superlatively magnified. Ah! glorious God that we have! Cf. Psalm 21:5.

His Going

Our Lord again speaks of His coming departure from His own and of their inability to accompany Him. “Little children,” he affectionately addresses them, “yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you” (John 13:33).

The words, “little children,” are the rendering of one Greek word τεκνία (teknia), a diminutive that was used by rabbis, when they addressed their pupils. [7] It conveys the thought of care and carefulness for them. The word evidently left an indelible impression upon John, for he uses it seven times in his First Epistle. It is used elsewhere only here, although some manuscripts have it in Galatians 4:19. The word, like τέκνον (teknon, lit., “born one,” or “child”), which is found in 1:12, emphasizes the relationship by birth between the Lord and His own (cf. 1:13; 20:17).

It is rather significant that the word is not used until Judas is gone. The Lord could never address the apostate by such a title.

In the latter part of the verse the Lord refers to a previous statement of His in 7:34, but an important part of that verse is omitted here. He told the Jews that they would seek Him “and not find Him” (cf. 7:34). That is omitted here, for the eleven will find Him (cf. 16:22).

His Gift

The precept (John 13:34).

And now follows His precious “gift” of the new commandment, “A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.” One notices that He calls it a gift, and many of us might say in reply, “A gift? It seems more like a yoke, for who can fulfill the new commandment?” But it does come with a glorious promise and is accompanied with the greatest power. It has potentialities that make it a gift of grace beyond measure.

Now let us look at some of its features. The significance of the word “new” is confusing to many, if we remember that the Old Testament inculcated the practice of love most strongly (cf. Lev. 19:18, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”). It can be said, first of all, that the word “new” (καινός, kainos), which means “fresh” in contrast to another common Greek word, νέος (neos), which means “recent” and is not used here, is a studied contrast with the Mosaic Covenant, the legal covenant. It is a new commandment that is suited to the new creation of the present time and to the new covenant ratified in the Messiah’s blood.

There are also factors that make the new commandment quite different from the Old Testament love imperatives, such as Leviticus 19:18. The new commandment is directed to members of the same family. It is “one another” that we are to love, the oneness of the body being in view. And it is a measureless love. It is not, “love thy neighbor as thyself,” but “love one another as I have loved you.” Who can measure that love? As Barrett says, There is now “a new basis” for love. [8] It is sacrificial and not prudential. And it is not a fleshly love, as Leviticus 19:18 has sometimes suggested, but a spiritual love. The basic stimulation of the new commandment, as announced first by Jeremiah (cf. Jer. 31:31–34), was the interiorization of love. [9] This is a love that flows out of the conviction that we have been first loved by Him (cf. 1 John 4:19).

Andrew Bonar writes,

There is a tradition that Archbishop Usher, passing through Galloway, turned aside on a Saturday to enjoy the congenial society of Rutherford. He came, however, in disguise; and being welcomed as a guest, took his place with the rest of the family when they were catechised, as was usual that evening. The stranger was asked, “How many commandments are there?” His reply was, “Eleven.” The pastor corrected him; but the stranger retained his position, quoting our Lord’s words, “A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another.” They retired to rest, all interested in the stranger. Sabbath morning dawned. Rutherford arose and repaired, as was his custom, for meditation to a walk that bordered on a thicket, but was startled by hearing the voice of prayer—prayer, too, from the heart, and in behalf of the souls of the people that day to assemble. It was no other than the holy Archbishop Usher; and soon they came to an explanation, for Rutherford had begun to suspect he had “entertained angels unawares.” With great mutual love they conversed together; and at the request of Rutherford, the Archbishop went up to the pulpit, conducted the usual service of the Presbyterian pastor, and preached on ‘The New Commandment.’” [10]

It is a charming story, and I hope it represents a true tradition.

A few words should be said over the word “love.” It is the Greek word ἀγαπάω (agapaō), which is the strongest New Testament word for love, and involves usually a purposefully sacrificial love. It is most suitable for the love of the cross. Further, it is in the present tense in the clause, “that ye love one another,” pointing to a continual practice of loving. In its second occurrence, in the clause referring to His love for us, “as I have loved you,” it is in the aorist tense, suggesting the love manifested in the event of the cross. Thus, the love of the brethren for one another is to be a continual practice of the kind of love (sans atoning benefits) that He manifested in His dying love that was atoning in its results.

One can see the differences between Christianity and its competitors in the ancient world. The Epicureans and the Stoics emphasized undisturbedness and freedom from emotion, both essentially selfish positions, although the Stoic views were softened a bit. “Still,” Gossip writes, ‘Freedom from emotion?’ The Greek word was, and is, letter for letter, apathy. ‘I do not hold,’ wrote the gentle Plutarch, ‘with those who hymn the savage and hard Apathy.’ It was no ideal of Christ’s. Like the Master, the Christian must expose himself ‘to feel what wretches feel.’” [11] Nor can Christianity be compared to the holiness of Hinduism, an anxious, jealous, self-absorbed keeping of oneself from evil. [12] Our Lord would have His followers avoid neutrality, which makes Him sick (cf. Rev. 3:16), and do good, which is defined here as a continual exercise of love like His in quality, His that was manifested on Calvary.

A final comment on “one another.” One can see from this that our Lord was no believer in the doctrine of the universal fatherhood of God (except in the sense of creation) and brotherhood of man. Cf. 1 John 3:14.

The promise (John 13:35).

In the final verse of the section comes the promise of the new commandment. “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” The practice of the commandment will give to the man and woman of the world the conviction that believers are the disciples of Christ. The word “know” should be noted. It is not by love that we become His disciples. It is by love that men recognize us as such. The “my” represents an emphatic pronoun in the Greek (ἐμοὶ μαθηταί, emoi mathētai, cf. 15:8; 4:34). Love is the distinguishing mark of the true followers of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is not knowledge, although that is necessary, of course, but love which is the evangelizing virtue.

Moses’ followers were known by their circumcision. The Pharisees were known by their phylacteries; the disciples of John the Baptist by their baptism. Today’s Baptists are known by their immersion. Presbyterians are known by their predestination and their sprinkling. Episcopalians are known by their dignity and their bishops. Romanists are known by their Mass, and by their pope. Christ’s disciples are known by their love for one another, a love—is it necessary to say it?—that must be in harmony with the doctrines of the Word of God; that is, it is not only affection, but a holy love and a righteous love.

How would others see us? It is a fair question. Do they recognize that we Christians naming the name of Christ love one another? Many testimonies have been left us of the love of the early church. Godet writes, “This promise of Jesus was realized in the history of the primitive church: ‘They love before they know each other,’ said Minutius Felix of the Christians; and the railing Lucian declared: ‘Their Master makes them believe that they are all brothers.’” [13]

Tertullian wrote, “The heathen are wont to exclaim with wonder, See how these Christians love one another? For they (the heathen) hate one another; and how they (Christians) are ready to die for one another! for they (the heathen) are more ready to kill one another …” [14]

We cannot ignore the challenge of the new commandment, and may we ponder it seriously and prayerfully as individuals and as a church. As Morgan says, “It is the final test of discipleship, according to Jesus.” [15]

Notes

1. Lewis Johnson is a Bible teacher at Believer’s Chapel in Dallas, Texas. He is Professor Emeritus of New Testament Exegesis at Dallas Theological Seminary and also has taught at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. This is the third in a series of expositions on The Upper Room Discourse.
2. Merrill C. Tenney, John: The Gospel of Belief (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948), 203–204.
3. Ibid., 205.
4. Cf. Frederick Louis Godet, Commentary on the Gospel of John, translated with a preface, introductory suggestions, and additional notes by Timothy Dwight, 2 vols., reprint ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1969 [1893]), 2: 264.
5. The adverb νῦν marks a point of time absolutely, without any reference to other times. Thus it is now in a more general sense. The other adverb αρτι, found in verse 33, marks a point of time relative to the past, or to the future. It is, therefore, something like at this moment. Cf. B. F. Westcott, The Gospel according to St. John, reprint ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964 [1881]), 197.
6. The longer reading has less manuscript support in age and quality of witnesses, but it is internally stronger. The omission of the clause, “if the Father is glorified in him,” may have been caused by an oversight resulting from homoeoteleuton (the same ending; notice the phrases that are similar, “in him”), or perhaps by a deliberate deletion, because the clause seemed redundant to the scribe.
7. R. H. Strachan, The Fourth Gospel: Its Significance and Environment, 3rd ed. revised and rewritten (London: SCM, 1941), 277.
8. C. K. Barrett, The Gospel according to St. John, 2nd ed., (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978), 452.
9. Raymond Brown, The Gospel according to John: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible, 2 vols., (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1966-1970) 2: 614.
10. Andrew A. Bonar, Letters of the Rev. Samuel Rutherford with a Sketch of his Life (New York: Carter, 1850), 9–11.
11. Arthur John Gossip, “Exposition: The Gospel according to St. John,” The Interpreter’s Bible, ed. George Arthur Buttrick, 12 vols., (Nashville: Abingdon, 1952), 8: 693–94.
12. Ibid., 8: 693.
13. Godet, 2:266.
14. Cf. Westcott, 198.
15. G. Campbell Morgan, The Gospel according to John (Westwood, N.J.: Fleming H. Revell, n.d.), 241.