Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 13:34 - 13:34
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_13:34. Commandment now of the departing Lord for those who, according to Joh_13:33, are to be left behind, which He calls a new one, i.e. one not yet given either in the Decalogue or otherwise, in order the more deeply to impress it upon them as the specific rule of their conduct. The novelty lies not in the commandment of love in itself (for see Lev_19:18, comp. Mat_5:43 ff; Mat_19:19; Mat_22:37-38), nor yet in the higher degree of love found in καθὼς ἠγάπ . ὑμ ., so that the requirement would be, that one should love one’s neighbour not merely ὡς ἑαυτόν , but ὑπὲρ ἑαυτόν (Cyril, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theophylact, Euth. Zigabenus, and many, including especially Knapp, Scr. var. arg. p. 369 ff.), since καθώς does not indicate the degree or the type (see below), and since, moreover, the O. T. ὡς ἑαυτόν does not exclude, but includes the self-sacrifice of love. The novelty lies rather in the motive power of the love, which must be the love of Christ which one has experienced. Comp. 1Jn_3:16. Thereby the commandment, in itself old, receives the new definiteness ( αὐτὸς αὐτὴν ἐποίησε καινὴν τῷ τρόπῳ , Chrysostom), the definiteness of loving ἐν Χριστῷ , and therewith the new moral absolute character and contents, and is given forth with this specifically N. T. definition, founded on faith in Christ, a new commandment. Comp. Luthardt, Ebrard, Brückner; also Baeumlein, Hengstenberg, and Godet, who, however, take along with this the circle of Christian love ( ἀλλήλους ) as a point of novelty. Grotius treats this in a similar way to these last-named commentators, when he, as also Kölbing (in the Stud. u. Krit. 1845, p. 685 ff.), regards Christian brotherly love, in its distinction from the general love of one’s neighbours, as the new commandment which is prescribed. Nevertheless, this distinction rests simply upon the fact that Christian brotherly love must be mutually determined and sustained by the personal experience of the love of Christ, or else it is destitute of its peculiarly Christian character; hence it is always this point alone which forms the substantial contents and the distinguishing moment of the new commandment as such, as none could be more intensely and truly conscious of it than John himself, especially whilst he wrote the καίνην and the καθὼς ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς . Opposed to the sense of the word are the interpretations: a commandment which contains all laws of the N. T., in opposition to the many laws of the O. T. (Luther); praeceptum illustre (Hackspan, Hammond, Wolf), mandatum ultimum = Testament (Heumann); further: ὁπλοτέρην ἐν ἅπασιν , a youngest commandment (Nonnus); further: a commandment that never grows old, with ever youthful freshness, as though ἀεὶ καινήν were expressed (Olshausen[134]); further, a renewed commandment (Calvin, Jansen, Maldonatus, Schoettgen, Raphel, and already Irenaeus), or even one that renews the old man (Augustine); further: a commandment unexpected by you (Semler, on the presumption of the dispute about precedence which had just taken place, Luk_22:24 ff.). According to De Wette, καινήν refers to the fact, that in the commandment lies the principle of the new life brought by Christ. Thus, therefore, καινὴ ἐντολή would be here a new moral principle (comp. Gal_6:2), opposed to the O. T. principle of righteousness. That that is the new ἐντολή (comp. already Melanchthon) is, however, not expressed by these simple words. Against the sense, finally, and without any indication in the text, is Lange’s view: a new διαθήκη which is the institution of the Supper which Christ here founded. This, besides, is opposed to the obvious parallel passages, 1Jn_2:8.
ἵνα ἀγαπ . ἀλλ .] The contents of the commandment are set forth as the purpose of the ἐντ . καιν . διδ . ὑμ .
καθὼς ἠγάπ . ὑμ .] is to be separated only by a comma from ἀλλήλ ., containing the agens[135] of the ἀγαπ . ἀλλ ., and then, by means of ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς , κ . τ . λ ., the ethical purpose of the ἠγάπ . ὑμ . which belongs here is added; the emphasis, however, lies on ἀγαπᾶτε ὑμᾶς , καὶ ὑμεῖς . Hence: that ye may love one another, in conformity with the fact that I have loved you, and, indeed, have loved you with the design that you also, on your part, etc. That here καθώς , however, does not express the degree, but the corresponding relation, which constrains to the ἀγαπ . ἀλλ ., appears with logical necessity from the subjoined sentence denoting purpose ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς κ . τ . λ . (without an οὕτως , which Ewald interpolates in his explanation). It is similar to our wie denn (as then) (comp. on Joh_12:35; 1Co_1:6; Eph_1:4; Mat_6:12), stating the ground, as ὡς also is very frequently used in the classics (Klotz, ad Devar. p. 766; Ast, Lex. Plat. iii. p. 584). To take the sentence καθὼς … ἀλλήλους as a parallel to the preceding ἵνα ἀγαπ . ἀλλ ., whereby καθὼς ἠγ . ὑμ . is emphatically placed first (so many commentators, from Beza to Hengstenberg and Godet), would cause no difficulty in the case of Paul, but does not correspond to the simple style of John elsewhere.
ἠγάπησα ] Aorist; for Jesus sees Himself already at the end of the work of His loving self-devotion. Comp. Joh_13:1. Further, Joh_13:34 is not to be explained in such a manner that Christ imparts a new legislation, in opposition to the Mosaic (Hilgenfeld, comp. above, Luther). He, indeed, does not say νόμον καινόν . The ἐντολὴ καινή belongs rather to His πλήρωσις of the law (Mat_5:17), especially in respect of Lev_19:18, and does not exclude, but includes, the other moral precepts of the law.[136]
[134] So also Calovius, who, however, mingles together many other interpretations of various kinds.
[135] This agens can be the love evinced by Christ only on the ground of faith; hence John fully accords with the Pauline view of faith, which is operative through love, but does not (against Baur, N. T. Theol. p. 397) place love immediately in the position which faith holds with Paul.
[136] Comp. in Paul love as the fulfilment of the law; see also Weiss, Joh. Lehrbegr. p. 166.