14:6 The way. The image of a path or way in the Hebrew Bible often stood for keeping the commandments or teachings of God (see Ps 1:1; 16:11; 86:11). This was a common ancient metaphor for active participation in a set of beliefs, teachings or practices. The Dead Sea Scrolls community called themselves followers of “the way,” by which they meant they were followers of their own interpretation of the path that pleased God. Paul and the first Christians also called themselves “follower[s] of the Way” (Ac 24:14).

14:1–31 Assurances and commands to the disciples

The words of Jesus in v 14 were uttered against the background of foreboding which had gripped the disciples following the revelation of the betrayal. The comforting words had a particular value in this context, but they have nevertheless provided comfort in many quite different situations. There is some question about how the verbs in the second half of the verse should be understood: ‘Trust in God, trust also in me’ (both imperative); ‘You trust in God’ (indicative), ‘trust also in me’ (imperative); ‘You trust in God; you trust also in me’ (both indicative). The first fits best into the present context. The reference to many rooms in the Father’s house (2) is clearly intended to bring encouragement. This is a vivid way of saying there is ample provision in heaven for the disciples of Jesus.

The preparing of the place is through the passion and resurrection of Jesus. I will come back (3) seems to be a clear reference to the second coming, although some have interpreted it of Pentecost or even of the visitation of Jesus at the believer’s death. Although the disciples’ subsequent questionings would not give the impression of much spiritual understanding, nevertheless Jesus’ words in v 4 show that they ought to have known the way to the Father. Thomas was too literal in his questioning (5). He did not expect the way to be identified with Jesus. Jesus is the way because he is also the truth and the life. That is to say the second and third words throw light on the first. The way, as personalized in Jesus, was a way of suffering and of triumph through humiliation.

The niv’s If you really knew me (7) suggests that the disciples did not know Jesus. It is better to take the words to mean ‘You know me; you will know my Father also’. There is profound truth here—knowledge of Jesus leads to knowledge of the Father. Philip’s lack of understanding is easy to imagine. He wanted a direct revelation of God as the only satisfactory way (8), but this earned a rebuke from Jesus. None of the disciples had grasped the profound truth that God had made himself known in Jesus. There are two grounds on which Jesus appealed to Philip; on the basis of what he said and on the basis of what he did. At least the disciples should have realized that the miracles of Jesus showed that they could only be the works of God (10–11).

The statement of Jesus in v 12 is surprising. The believer would do greater things than these. Jesus had made clear that the believer would continue what he had been doing. But greater than that can be understood only in the light of the post-resurrection period during which the gospel would be proclaimed. It is clear that the greater things can be done only because Jesus is going to the Father. The book of Acts is evidence of the fulfilment of this prediction, and the worldwide spread of Christianity today a further sign of these ‘greater things’. The close link between the promise and the attitude of prayer needed for its fulfilment is seen in vs 13–14.

The connection between love and obedience is twice stressed in this section (15, 21). The obedience is, therefore, no slavish attitude but a willing conformity. It is in fact a revolutionary advance over the Jewish approach to the Mosaic law. Jesus knew that they would need help to fulfil their task, and the promise of the Counsellor must be seen in this context. The word in the Greek is paraklete which literally means one called alongside to help, and was used of a legal advocate. The title contains the idea of strong encouragement. The fact that another Counsellor is promised suggests that the Spirit would do what Jesus himself had done during his ministry, by bringing the words of Jesus to their minds (cf. v 26).

The identification of the Paraclete as the Spirit of Truth follows from Jesus’ own declaration to be the truth (6). The contrast between the world and the disciples is summarized in v 17 and further developed in the next paragraph. The disciples were assured of Jesus’ presence even when the world could no longer see him (18–19). The word orphans suggests those with no caring support. Again, as in v 3, there is some ambiguity about the coming (I will come to you). Although it is possible to see this as a reference to Pentecost (the Spirit is mentioned), it is more natural to understand the coming as the coming of the resurrected Lord. Since the Spirit was given when Jesus was glorified, it is clear that there is a close relation between the two interpretations. This is supported by the reference to life in v 19. A further consequence is the mutual indwelling mentioned in v 20, which can come about only through the work of the Spirit. For the connection between love and obedience, cf. v 15. The revelation of the Father is channelled through Christ’s love for us (21).

At this point Judas (not Iscariot) saw a problem. Why was Jesus’ love not extended to the world? In answer Jesus again drew attention to the love motive (23–24), as if declining to be deflected by Judas’s question. But it was nevertheless a true answer, for wherever there are believers, the Father and Son dwell with them, whereas this does not happen with those who refuse to obey the teaching (24). The next statement about the Holy Spirit (26) explains how the disciples would later recall that teaching. They had heard the teaching while Jesus had been with them; they would be aided in remembering that teaching when Jesus had departed from them. This saying is important for the preservation of the tradition of the teaching of Jesus. Any view of gospel origins which does not take into account the promised aid of the Holy Spirit in preserving and bringing to the mind of the writer what he, the Spirit, willed to be recorded must be considered unsatisfactory. The promise of peace (27) is in line with the opening verse of Jn. 14, but must here be considered as a farewell greeting which would acquire new meaning subsequent to the resurrection (cf. Jn 20:19, 21, 26). There is a strong possessive aspect in this context—Jesus spoke of ‘the peace that is mine’ (27). It is a peace which has been put to the test. It is fundamentally different from the peace offered by the world. Paul echoes this concept when he refers to ‘the peace of God which transcends all understanding’ (Phil. 4:7).

The concluding paragraph (28–31) contains a mild rebuke. If the disciples really loved Jesus they would rejoice that his mission was on the point of being accomplished. The words because I go to my Father supply the key. Had they realized this they would not have been troubled, for the return to the Father meant the completion of the mission. But why in this context did Jesus say the Father is greater than I? It must not be isolated from its context, but seen in the light of Jesus’ return to the Father. His present position on earth was less than the Father’s glorified position in heaven. It was part of the mission of Jesus to accept an inferior position. But the words must also be understood in the light of the repeated assertions by Jesus that he did the Father’s will. This verse should be compared with 10:30. V 29 is closely paralleled in 13:19, where once again the end in view was to encourage the disciples to faith.

The prince of the world (30) is seen as the active agent in the coming passion (although cf. 12:31 for his predicted defeat). Jesus was deeply conscious of the powerful forces arrayed against him. Yet he knew the devil had no hold on him; he could not alter the Father’s plans. Part of the aim of the mission of Jesus was to teach the world of his love for the Father (31). It was difficult for the disciples to grasp that this could be accomplished through the cross. The concluding verse (31) is somewhat enigmatic, for it seems to be the end of the discourse in the upper room. It is possible to regard the remainder of the discourse as taking place in the open air, although in 18:1 Jesus is said to have ‘left’ with his disciples, and it would be necessary to suppose that chs. 15–17 were uttered on the way to the Kidron Valley. Some have supposed that ch. 14 should follow ch. 17, but there is no evidence for such rearrangement. The only other alternative is to suppose that 14:31 implied an intention which was fulfilled some time later. On the whole the first suggestion is fraught with the least difficulties.

The Case for Faith: John 3:16
What’s the Meaning of Life?

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” —John 3:16

Christianity’s greatest contribution to humankind is the sharing of the good news summarized in John 3:16. This central message of the Bible portrays Jesus and our redemption through his blood. Finally, once and for all, he dealt with the issues of our guilt, our loneliness and our alienation from God. Through his atoning death and resurrection, he opened up heaven for everyone who follows him.

With this truth, Christianity provides a revelation as to the meaning of life and the existence of universal morality. Without that revelation, it’s very difficult to have any sense of life’s meaning. You end up like Albert Camus, who said in the opening paragraph of The Myth of Sisyphus, “Why should I or anyone not commit suicide?” In short, Christianity explains why not. Because of God’s profound love for us, we are able to relate to him and others in a healthy and deeply meaningful way.

—Adapted from interview with Dr. John D. Woodbridge