Chap. 14:1-31.] This first division of the great discourse (see above on ch. 13:31) is spent in more directly comforting the disciples for their Lord’s departure, by the assurance of His going to the Father, and its consequences.

1-10.] He, in his union with the Father, will take His own to Him.

1.] A pause has intervened; “Peter is humbled and silent” (Lücke); the rest are ταρασσόμενοι τῇ καρδίᾳ on account of the sad things of which they had been hearing;—Judas’s treachery,—Peter’s denial,—the Lord’s departure from them.

πιστεύετε both times is imperative. So , Nonn., Thl., Euth., , ,—Lampe, Lücke, De Wette, Stier, Tholuck (edn. 6), and A.V.R. Many (Erasmus, Beza, Grot., Olsh., also E. V.) take the first as indic., the second as imper., ‘Ye believe in God: believe also in me.’ But this is inconsistent with the whole tenour of the discourse, which presupposes a want of belief in God in its full and true sense, as begetting trust in Him. Luther takes both as indicative. The command is intimately connected with ch. 13:31, 32—faith in the glorification of Christ in the Father, and of the Father in Him.

2.] This comfort—of being reunited to their Lord—is administered to them as τεκνία, in forms of speech simple, and adapted to their powers of apprehension of spiritual things. The οἰκία is Heaven: Psalm 33:13, Psalm 33:14: Isaiah 63:15. In it are many (in number—not in degree of dignity, as , Basil., Theod., Chrys., Theophylact, , Hil., Aug., &c., at least no such meaning is here conveyed) abiding-places; room enough for them all;—ἱκαναὶ δέξασθαι καὶ ὑμᾶς συνεσομένους ἡμῖν ἀεί. If not,—if they could not follow Him thither, He would not have concealed this from them. This latter assurance is one calculated to beget entire trust and confidence; He would not in any matter hold out vain hopes to them;—His word to them would plainly state all difficulties and discouragements,—as indeed He does, ch. 15:18; 16:1, 4; which last verse ἵνα μνημ … ὅτι ἐγὼ εἶπον ὑμῖν, is decisive for the above interpretation here, against those who would join ὅτι πορεύομαι … with εἷπον ἂν ὑμῖν (Euthym., Aug., Erasm., Luther, Bengel):—which besides does violence to the next verse, where the ‘going to prepare a place’ is stated as a fact. The ὅτι may, it is true, have been inserted as a ὅτι recitantis, to favour the view just controverted: but it is much more probably genuine, signifying because, and belongs to the whole sense of vv. 1, 2, as a reason why their heart should not be troubled.

The sense confidently proposed for the many mansions by a correspondent,—that He was going to one part of His Father’s house, while they would remain in another, that house being not Heaven, but the Universe,—is entirely put out of the question, as being frigid in the extreme under the solemn circumstances,—as being contrary to all Scripture analogy of expression,—and as inconsistent with the πορεὑομαι ἑτοιμάσαι τόπον ὑμῖν, where the τόπος is of necessity correlative with the μοναί, which are in that οἰκία whither He is going. Besides, their earthly μικρὸς χρόνος could in no sense be called a μονή. The ἑτοιμάσαι τόπον is that of which we sing,—“When Thou hadst overcome the sharpness of death, Thou didst open the Kingdom of Heaven to all believers:” see note on Luke 23:43. And thus it is τόπον, not τὰς μονάς:—the place as a whole, not each man’s place in it.

3.] On ἐάν (not ‘when,’ here or any where), see note, ch. 12:32. Here there is no translation of feeling: only in the extract from Hermann there, we may read ‘experientiâ (vestrâ) cognoscetur.’

In order to understand this, we must bear in mind what Stier well calls the ‘perspective’ of prophecy. The coming again of the Lord is not one single act,—as His resurrection, or the descent of the Spirit, or His second personal advent, or the final coming to judgment; but the great complex of all these, the result of which shall be, His taking His people to Himself to be where He is. This ἔρχομαι, is begun (ver. 18) in His Resurrection—carried on (ver. 23) in the spiritual life (see also ch. 16:22 f.), the making them ready for the place prepared;—-further advanced when each by death is fetched away to be with Him (Philippians 1:23); fully completed at His coming in glory, when they shall for ever be with Him (1Thessalonians 4:17) in the perfected resurrection state.

4.] And where (whither) I go ye know the way. They might have known, and doubtless did know in some sense; but, as Lampe remarks, “interdum quis laudatur ut officii sui moneatur.” We use thus ‘you know,’—leaving to be supplied, ‘if you would give the matter thought.’

ὅπου, to the Father; τὴν ὁδόν (in our Lord’s own case, of which this verse treats), His death.

5.] Thomas is slow of belief and apprehension. The answer to ποῦ ὑπάγεις; ch. 13:37, which Peter seems to have apprehended, was not sufficient for him: see ch. 20:25: ᾤετο γάρ, says Euthym., αἰσθητὸν εἶναί τινα τόπον ὅπου ὑπάγει, καὶ ὁδὸν ὁμοίως τοιαύτην.

6.] Our Lord, as Lücke (after Bengel) remarks (ii. 596), inverts the order of Thomas’s question, and in answering it practically, for them, speaks of ‘the Way’ first. He is the Way; not merely the Forerunner; which would imply on our part only an outward connexion with Him as His followers:—but the way, in and on which we must go, having an inner union with and in Him (De Wette): see Hebrews 10:20.

ἡ ἀλήθεια—more than ὅτι ἀληθεύω κ. πάντως ἔσται ταῦτα, Euth. It is another side of the same idea of the Way;—God being true, and only approached by and in truth. Christ is the Truth, in Whom only (Colossians 2:3 that Knowledge of Him is gained, which (ch. 17:3) is eternal life.

ἡ ζωή—not merely because οὐδὲ ὁ θάνατος διαστήσει ὑμᾶς ἐμοῦ, Euthym.,—but as being the Life (see ver. 19: Galatians 2:20) of all His, in Whom only they who live can come to the living Father (ch. 6:57).

οὐδεὶς ἔρχ.…] This plainly states the ποῦ ὑπάγω, and the way also.

διʼ ἐμοῦ—as τῆς ὁδοῦ.

7.] See ch. 8:19.

ἀπʼ ἄρτι] There is no difficulty, if we bear in mind the νῦν of ch. 13:31. The henceforth is the future time, beginning with our Lord’s glorification, which was now at hand. Lücke remarks: “ἀπʼ ἄρτι is not entirely future nor entirely present, but the moment of transition, the identification of the present and future. Christ speaks here proleptically, in reference to the hour of His glorification being come” (ii. 598).

8.] Philip misunderstands ἑωρ. to mean ‘seeing in a vision,’—and intimates that one such sight of God would set at rest all their fears, and give them perfect confidence.

9.] The Son is the only Exponent of the Father to men: see ch. 12:44, 45: Colossians 1:15: Hebrews 1:3: 1Timothy 6:16. This seeing of the Father in Him, is not only seeing His bodily presence, but knowing Him (οὐκ ἔγνωκάς με).

10.] See ch. 10:30, 38, and for the latter clause ch. 8:28, where the contrast is, as here, purposely inexact in diction,—words being placed in one member and works in the other: and, as there, ἔργα and ῥήματα are taken as correlative and co-extensive;—all the working of the Lord Jesus being a λαλιά, a revelation of the Father. De Wette supposes both ἔργα and ῥήμ. to be understood in both places. Without the [ὁ], the sense will be, of course, the Father, abiding in Me.…

ποιεῖ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ] doeth His works: they are not Mine, but His, done in and by Me: but ἐν ἐμοί, present and abiding, so that ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακεν τὸν πατέρα.

11-24.] Jesus will make proof of His abiding union with the Father, in His union with His own: and this, vv. 12-14, in answering prayer: vv. 15-17, in the sending of the Spirit: vv. 18 ff., as a pledge of the completion of this union in His personal return. The Lord now unfolds out of this ποιεῖ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, the great promise of the Paraclete.

διὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτά] See ch. 10:38. The object here seems to be, to fix their attention on the works as a plain testimony even to such as could not simply believe so deep a thing on His assertion (πιστ. μοι), and one which (ver. 12) should become subjective in themselves hereafter,—by virtue of their living union with Him who is gone to the Father, and become the dispenser and channel of the Spirit. “Qui Christo de se loquenti credit, in Christum credit.” Bengel.

μείζ. τούτων] This word μείζ. is not to be evaded (so as to = πλείονα, Lampe), but taken in its full strict sense. And the keys to its meaning will be found ch. 1:51; 5:20. The works which Jesus did, His Apostles also did,—scil., raising the dead, &c.;—greater works than those, they did,—not in degree, but in kind: spiritual works, under the dispensation of the Spirit, which had not yet come in. But they did them, not as separate from Him: but in Him, and by Him; and so (ch. 5:21) He is said to do them. The work which He did by Peter’s sermon, Act_2, was one of these μείζονα τούτων,—the first-fruits of the unspeakable gift.

This union of them with and in Him is expressed here by τὰ ἔρ. ἃ ἐγὼ ποιῶ, κἀκεῖνος ποιήσει.

“He has sown, we reap; and the harvest is greater than the seed-time,” Stier. v. 189, edn. 2.

13.] I have retained the period after πορεύομαι (Grot., Griesb., Lachm., Knapp, Lücke, Meyer, Stier place a comma only and connect this verse with the ὅτι), because the sense remains much the same, and the style is better preserved.

αἰτήσητε, scil. τὸν πατέρα: so ch. 15:16; 16:23. But this does not exclude, but distinctly includes, prayer to Christ; so blended are these two (as the ὁρᾶν, ver. 9), that we have not ποιήσει, but ποιήσω, and, ver. 14, emphatically ἐγὼ ποιήσω. He who prays to the Father, prays to the Son.

This ποιήσω answers to the ποιήσει in ver. 12; the reason why you shall do these greater works, is, on account of the all-powerful Spirit of grace and supplication which My going to the Father shall bring down upon the Church; in answer to which Spirit, I will do by you whatever in My Name (i.e. in union with Me, as being Mine, manifesting forth Jesus as the Son of God) ye shall ask. And the end of this is, that by these μείζονα τούτων, the wonders of grace and triumphs of the Spirit, the Father may be glorified (His glory shewn forth) in and by the Son.

Ver. 14 solemnly repeats as a promise, what was incidentally asserted before: ‘For this is a truth, that whatever’ &c. And besides, adds the ἐγώ: it is I that will do it: shewing that the use of the first person before was emphatic. “ἐγώ hoc jam indicat gloriam.”—Bengel.

Ver. 15 is a following out of the ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου: ‘That way of prayer is the way of loving obedience, in which the Spirit is ever found, and which is only trodden by His help:’—and also of ἵνα δοξ. ὁ π. ἐν τῷ νἱ., ‘As the Father is honoured in the Son, so must the Son be honoured in you:’ see ch. 15:10.

16.] And then the Spirit shall proceed forth upon you. Not αἰτήσω, but ἐρωτήσω—“familiaris petendi modus,” Bengel:—rather perhaps, a manner of asking implying actual presence and nearness,—and here used of the mediatorial office in Christ’s ascended state.

παράκλητον] Olshausen remarks that the interpretations of this word range themselves in two classes, which again by no means exclude one another:—those of ‘Comforter,’ and those of ‘Advocate.’ (“Teacher” (Theodore of Mopsuest. and Ernesti) is out of the question.)

The etymology of the word requires the latter as its strict meaning, and in this strict meaning it satisfies 1John 2:1, παράκλητον ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα Ἰησοῦν χριστόν: but not so all the places where it is used of the Holy Spirit,—nor this verse, where of the Son and Spirit both. And therefore the other meaning,—Comforter, including as it does in its fulness (see Romans 8:26, where both, the συναντιλαμβάνεσθαι and the ὑπερεντυγχάνειν, are united) the Advocate also, has been both here and in Germany (Troster, Luther) sanctioned by Christian usage as the most adequate rendering. See Archdeacon Hare’s Mission of the Comforter, vol. ii. note J a. He shews that Wicliff, from whom we have our Comforter, often used “comfort” for the Latin comfortari, as e.g. Luke 22:43: Acts 9:19 . Thus the idea of help and strength is conveyed by it, as well as of consolation.

It was this office (comfortari) which Jesus had filled to His disciples while with them:—and which the Holy Spirit was to fill even more abundantly (and in a higher sense, because their state would be higher) on the removal of Jesus from them.

17.] τὸ πν. τ. ἀλ., not ‘the true Spirit,’—but ‘the Spirit of truth;’—the Spirit Who is truth, 1John 5:6,—of Whom all truth comes, and who alone leads into the whole truth, the truth of God, ch. 16:13.

ὁ κόσμος = οἱ ψυχικοί, 1Corinthians 2:14, those who live according to the desires of the flesh and the mind, and have no receptivity of the things of God.

θεωρεῖ sometimes = γινώσκει, but not here, as being separated from it by οὐδέ: ‘recognizes not in His operations (obj.) nor knows (subj.);’—has neither sight nor knowledge of.

γινώσκετε—present, but spoken of their state as disciples opposed to the world,—and proleptically, as before. They were even now not of the world (ch. 15:19), and are therefore viewed in the completion of their state as opposed to it.

μένει (not μενεῖ as Vulg. and some other vss.) is rightly explained by De Wette to be future in signification, as any present predication of permanence must necessarily be; abideth, as μένει, ch. 8:35. Euthym. understands παρʼ ὑμ. μένει of the Spirit abiding in Jesus, Who was among them: but wrongly.

ἐστίν] This was perhaps corrected to the future, because, though their knowledge of the Spirit proper to their complete state, and His dwelling, remaining, among them, had in some inferior sense begun,—His dwelling in them had not. See Hare, Mission of the Comforter, ii. note I. With the reading ἐστίν, the prolepsis is still stronger.

18.] ὀρφ. should be orphans, as in the E. V. .

The office of the παράκλ. is to connect the disciples with the Father: if therefore they had Him not, they would be fatherless. The expression connects with τεκνία ch. 13:33, and as Euthym., springs from πατρικὴ εὐσπλαγχνία. This makes ἔρχομαι, I am coming, plain, as applying to the coming by the Spirit, who is one with Christ;—not only the ultimate personal coming, which is but the last step of the ἔρχομαι, nor only the bodily coming again to them and not to the world at the Resurrection, which was but a pledge of His lasting presence in the Spirit: see on ver. 3. ἔρχομαι is (as there) the complex of these—the great Revisitation, in all its blessed progress. The absence of any connecting particle as γάρ, with ἔρχομαι, arises (Meyer) from the depth of affection in the Lord’s heart.

19-21.] This ἔρχομαι is explained to consist in His presence among them by the life of His Resurrection, which is theirs; by (ver. 20) the witness of the Spirit in their hearts; and (ver. 21) their sanctification by the Spirit in love, and the consequent manifestation of Jesus to them.

Luthardt (ii. p. 309 f.) attempts to confine ἔρχομαι (and this whole passage) to the παρουσία, in spite of the plain sense of vv. 19, 20, relying on the analogy of Revelation 22:17, and saying that on the common interpretation, the Church would have no cause to long for her Lord: and so Aug., Maldon., Hofm., al. But manifestly the context is against him: and he must thus explain away many other passages (e.g. Matthew 18:20). The presence of Christ by the Spirit is none the less real, for being incomplete.

19.] The immediate reference of this θεωρεῖτε is to the forty days (see Acts 10:41)—but only as leading on to its wider and deeper reference to the spiritual life.

ζῶ, not ζήσω—the principle of Life being immanent in Him.

ζήσετε, in all its fulness, including the most blessed sense of ζωή,—the Life of the Spirit,—here and hereafter. See Meyer’s note.

20.] ἐκ. τῇ ἡμ., no particular day: but ‘each of these periods, as its continually increasing light breaks upon you, shall bring increased knowledge of your unity in Me with the Father, and my dwelling in you by the Spirit.’ If any particular day is to be thought of, it would naturally be the Pentecost.

21.] ἔχων κ. τηρῶν, “qui habet in memoria et servat in vita.” Aug. in loc. Or perhaps more accurately (with Stier). “He who has my commandments, as being my disciple by outward profession (not thus only: but holds them, by the inner possession of a living faith. So Meyer), and keeps them:” see Luke 11:28. And τηρ. is more of the inner will to keep them, than the absolute observance, which can only follow on high degrees of spiritual advancement.

ἐμφ. αὐτ. ἐμ., by the Holy Spirit: see ch. 16:14. This (as Stier observes) is the highest promise which can be made to man (see ver. 23), and yet it is made to every man who ἔχει κ. τηρεῖ the commandments of the Lord Jesus. Cf. Exod. in reff.

22.] Ἰούδας, οὐχ ὁ Ἰσκ. = Ἰούδας Ἰακώβου of Luke 6:16: see note on Matthew 10:2 ff. Meyer remarks that the οὐχ ὁ Ἰσκαριώτης is pragmatically superfluous, after ch. 13:30, but is added by St. John from his deep horror of the Traitor who bore the same name.

The question seems to be put with the Jewish idea, that the Messiah, the King and Judge of the nations, must necessarily manifest himself to the world.

[καί preceding an interrogation, expresses astonishment at what has just been said, and, assuming it, connects to it a conclusion which appears to refute or cast doubt on it. So Eur. Med. 1388,—ὦ τέκνα φίλτατα! “μητρί γε, σοὶ δʼ οὔ.” κἄπειτʼ ἔκτας; See more examples in Hartung, i. p. 146, and cf. Kühner on Xen. Mem. p. 117.]

τί γέγ. ὅτι] What has happened, that …? i.e. how is it, that …?

23, 24.] These verses contain the answer to the question in both its parts:—ἡμῖν, because love to Christ, leading to the keeping of His word, is the necessary condition of the indwelling and manifestation in man of the Father and the Son;—οὐχὶ τῷ κόσμῳ, because want of love to Christ, leading to neglect of His words, necessarily excludes from communion with the Father and the Son, and the Spirit, who reveals the Son in man. “The addition πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐλευσ. κ. μονὴν παρʼ αὐτῷ ποιησ. makes this incapacity still plainer and more deeply felt.” Meyer. For (καί, and hence you may infer what I am setting forth) the word which ye hear (and which the world οὐ τηρεῖ = ἀθετεῖ),—is not Mine, but the Father’s (not, ‘non tam … quam’). On the gracious and wonderful promise of ver. 23, see Romans 8:15.

25-31.] His farewell, and the parting bequest of His Love.

25.] λελάληκα is proleptic, referring, as εἶπον (ver. 26), to the futures, διδάξει and ὑπομνήσει. Meyer supposes that a pause took place here, and the Lord looks back on what He had said to them. But this does not seem so natural.

26.] q. d. ‘I know that ye do not understand them yet: but’ &c.

τὸ πν. τὸ ἅγ.] The Paraclete is now more closely defined by this well-known Name,—and, by ὃ πέμψει ὁ πατήρ, and ἐκεῖνος …, designated personally, as One sent, and One acting on them.

ἐν τῷ ὀν. μου, not, ‘in My stead,’ but in regard of Me—‘in answer to My prayer, and prayers in My name,—to those who bear My name,—and as a means of manifesting Me.’

διδάξ. πάντα stands by itself, not with ἃ εἶπον:—shall teach you all things;—‘all that can and may be learnt by you, all that belongs to your work and life in Me.’

ὑπομνήσει] What is not understood is liable to be forgotten;—and therefore in this word is implied the giving them a right understanding of, as well as recalling, what Jesus had said to them: see ch. 2:22; 12:16.

It is on the fulfilment of this promise to the Apostles, that their sufficiency as Witnesses of all that the Lord did and taught, and consequently the authenticity of the gospel narrative, is grounded.

27.] This is introduced by ver. 25, which suggests the speedy close of the discourse. It was customary to take leave with wishes of peace:—so 1Samuel 1:17: Luke 7:50: Acts 16:36: 1Peter 5:14: 3 John 15. Also, to reassure by such words, see Genesis 43:23: Judges 6:23. But our Lord distinguishes His peace, true peace, ‘the peace which I have and give’ (see ch. 15:11), from the mere empty word used in the world’s form of greeting. Peace (in general) He leaves with them;—His peace He gives to them, over and above that other. The καθὼς ὁ κ. δίδ. must refer, I think (with Lampe, Lücke, and Stier), to the world’s manner of giving,—not to the unreality of the world’s peace, of which, however true, there is no direct mention here. The world can only give peace in empty formulæ, saying ‘Peace, peace,’ when there is no peace: Jeremiah 6:14. al.

Ver. 28 as far as ὑμᾶς is a reason why their heart should not be troubled;—then the rest of the verse removes all ground of δειλία, since it is an exaltation of Him whom they loved, which is about to happen; and therefore a ground of joy, and not of fear.

μείζων] And therefore the going of Jesus to the Father is an advancement. This word greater, as Luther well remarks (Stier, v. 228, edn. 2), is not here used as referring to the Nature or Essence of the Son as related to the Father,—but as indicating that particular subordination to the Father in which the Lord Jesus then was,—and the cessation of the state of humiliation, and entering into His glory, which would take place on His being received up to the Father. So also Calvin: “Non confert hic Christus Patris Divinitatem cum sua, nec humanam suam naturam divinæ Patris essentiæ comparat, sed potius statum præsentem cœlesti gloriæ ad quam mox recipiendus erat.” And Cocceius: “Non intelligitur hic minoritas secundum naturam humanam,—quia intelligitur minoritas quæ per profectionem ad Patrem deponitur” (Stier, ibid. Similarly, De Wette, Tholuck). And this removes all reason for fear, as they will be exalted in Him.

The whole doctrinal controversy which has been raised on these words (especially by the Fathers against the Arians, see Suicer, Thes. ii. pp. 1368-9), seems not to belong to the sense of the passage. That there is a sense in which the Father is greater than even the glorified Son, is beyond doubt (see especially 1Corinthians 15:27 f.); but as on the one hand that concession is no concession to Arianism, because it is not in the essential being of the Son, but in His Mediatorial office that this minoritas consists,—so on the other hand this verse implies in itself no such minoritas, the discourse being of another kind.

29.] εἴρηκα—viz. ‘the prophecies of My Resurrection and Ascension,’ &c.

πιστεύσητε] See ch. 13:19, where ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι is supplied. That ye may believe, in the fullest sense of the word. “Neque enim Eum Dei Filium non et ante credebant: sed cum in Illo factum esset quod ante prædixit, fides illa quæ tunc quando illis loquebatur fuit parva, et cum moreretur pæne jam nulla, et revixit et crevit.” Aug. in Joann. Tract. lxxix. 1.

30.] οὐκ ἔτι πολλὰ λαλ.:—then, as Stier remarks, He had some words more to say, and was not about to break off at ver. 31, as some have supposed: cf. Grotius: “q. d., temporis angustiæ abripiunt verba.”

ὁ τ. κόσ. ἄρχων] i.e. Satan:—not, Satan in Judas, but Satan himself, with whom the Lord was in conflict during His passion: see Luke 4:13 (and note), and 22:53.

ἐν ἐμοὶ οὐκ ἔχ οὐδ.] “Nullum scilicet omnino peccatum.” Aug. ibid. 2. This is the only true interpretation: has nothing in Me—no point of appliance whereon to fasten his attack. But Meyer well observes, that this is rather the fact to be assumed as the ground of what is here said, than the thing itself which is said. De Wette, Lücke, Tholuck, and many others render it, “has no power over me,”—οὐδὲν αἴτιον θανάτου, Euthym.

31.] ‘But my Death is an act of voluntary obedience, that it may be known that I love and obey the Father—that the glory of the Father in and by Me may be manifested.’

The construction is elliptic: supply, ‘But (his power over Me for death will be permitted by Me) that,’ &c. And set a period at ποιῶ, as usually done.

Meyer, al., and Luthardt, would carry on the sense from ποιῶ, “But that the world may know that I love the Father, and as the Father commanded me, thus I do, arise, let us go hence.” I need only put it to the inner feeling of any who have learned to appreciate the majesty and calmness of our Lord’s discourses, whether a sentence so savouring of theatrical effect is likely to have been spoken by Him. We may notwithstanding safely believe that the ἐγ. ἄγ. ἐντ., without this connexion, does undoubtedly express the holy boldness of the Lord in going to meet that which was to come upon Him, and is for that reason inserted by St. John.

ἐγείρ., ἄγ. ἐντ.] These words imply a movement from the table to depart. Probably the rest of the discourse, and the prayer, ch. 17, were delivered when now all were standing ready to depart. There would be some little pause, in which the preparations for departure would be made. But the place is clearly the same, see ch. 18:1, ταῦτα εἰπὼν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἐξῆλθεν:—besides which, we can hardly suppose (Grot., &c.) discourses of a character like those in ch. 15, 16 to have been delivered to as many as eleven persons, while walking by the way, and in a time of such publicity as that of the Paschal Feast. Still less is the supposition of Bengel and Beausobre probable,—that ch. 13, 14 happened outside the city, and that between ch. 14 and 15 the paschal meal takes place. Compare also ch. 13:30, which is decisive against this idea.