The problem of Judas.

Judas is contrasted with the union of disciples. This contrast is sharpened as the contrast between Judas and the disciple whom Jesus loved. He alone can ask Jesus who we are talking about. The special love that the Lord has for him presupposes a great love for Jesus on his part. His boldness is the boldness of love. The special emphasis of the Beloved against the background of the union of the disciples with the new power emphasizes the importance of their union as a union of love. Judas's opposition to the union of love, and in the union of love to the one whom Jesus loved, is the opposition of love.

The problem of Judas in this context reaches the utmost acuteness. We see with what gradualness the Evangelist prepared his readers for the understanding of this terrible mystery. For Matthew (cf. XXVI. 14-16) and Mark (cf. XIV. 10-11), Judas's betrayal was fully explained by his greed. Luke was also aware of his avarice, but he also saw the direct influence of Satan (cf. XXII. 3-6). John's text was indicated in due time. But even within the limits of chapter XIII, v. 2 says that the devil planted in his heart the intention of betraying Jesus, and in v. 27 it is said that "Satan entered into him" when Jesus gave him a piece. Much speculation has been made about this piece. Some thought that it was a piece that the head of the meal gave to the guest of honor. In that case, it would have been Jesus' last attempt to keep Judas from betraying. There is no indication of this in the Gospel. There is still less reason to regard this piece as a Eucharistic piece, in John which does not speak of the institution of the Eucharist! Another thing is striking. After giving him a piece, Jesus said to Judas: "... what you do, do quickly" (Matt. 27), and "taking a morsel, he went out immediately" (v. 30a). We cannot get rid of the impression that Judas is sent to the work of betrayal by the Lord Himself. The problem of Judas reaches its utmost acuteness at this point.

Ways to solve it must be sought in context. In Chapter XIII, the union of the disciples around the Teacher is presented to us as a union of love. And the opposition of Judas to the union of love and in the union of love to the disciple whom Jesus loved, is an opposition on the basis of love. It can be said that in absolute Christian monotheism, all human activity has its beginning in God. But she must follow the path of love. If it deviates from this path, a kink occurs and good turns into evil. Such a break in evil is the path of Judas. It is understandable only in comparison with the covenant of the disciples as a union of love and in union with the one whom Jesus loved.

In the context of Chapter XIII, the fate of Judas reveals by contrast the essence of the Church as a union of love.

XIII. 30b.

When Judah went out, it was night: ήν δε νύξ (v. 30b). For the Evangelist John, this was not only a night in the physical sense, but also a night of the world epoch — the night of the Son's ascent to the Father, which replaced the day of the previous zone, after which the day of the new zone was to come.

XIII. 31 — XVI. 33.

Farewell conversation. Upon Judas's departure, Jesus began His Last, Farewell Discourse with His disciples (XIII. 31-XVI. 33). Its content is predetermined by the symbolic act of washing the feet, the interpretation given by Jesus, and the indication of the betrayer. We have the right to expect in the Farewell Discourse an understanding of the Passion – for Jesus himself and for the disciples – and a call to love. As we have seen, Jesus' ministry in washing His feet was an image of His Passion, and the disciples' consent to washing was an expression of their participation in the Passion of Jesus. We find both in the Farewell Discourse, and moreover from its first words. The Lord speaks to the disciples about the manifestation of Glory and about separation, and gives them a new commandment of love. These topics will be developed further, throughout the conversation. But, as always, starting from the symbolic act, the speeches of Jesus do not limit themselves to the revelation of the symbol, but also introduce new themes, in the symbolic act only barely or at all intended. Such a new theme is the promise of the sending down of the Spirit of the Comforter and the teaching about Him, to which the Lord turns again and again – four times during the Farewell Discourse and with increasing clarity. In the symbolic introduction XIII. 1-30 we find no reference to the Spirit. But we stopped with bewilderment on the question: why did the Evangelist need the image of water? Of course, he borrowed it from personal experience, but the personal experience experienced by the disciples at the Last Supper was also imprinted in other images that could express the path of the Passion of Jesus himself and the disciples' communion with it. Why did he stop at the image of ablution? Is it not because water, in the mind of the evangelist, was not only an image of the Old Testament, but also an instrument of the Spirit, and living water was a symbol of the Spirit? The image of water could have been needed by the evangelist as a symbolic starting point for the teaching about the Holy Spirit, which is given such a large place in the revelation of the Farewell Discourse. It might be imprudent to insist on this connection, but the question must be raised.

Building a conversation.

The structure of the Farewell Discourse attracted the attention of many interpreters. Some of the repetitions that are observed in Chapter XVI in comparison with Chapter XIV suggested a corruption of the text, and some interpreters, not only radical ones like Bultmann but also conservative ones like Bernard and even Temple, suggested reshaping the overlapping parts. This reshaping could not lead to positive results, because it was not based on objective data. And Dodd showed his strength this time again by suggesting that we be satisfied with the understanding of the Farewell Discourse, starting from the generally accepted order of the text. The division of conversation proposed below will take into account the logical development of thought and the psychology of conversation.

In this division in the Farewell Discourse, four parts will be distinguished: the introduction (XIII. 31-38), in which the main topics of the discourse are posed; Part One (Chapter XIV), Consolation in Separation; Part Two (XV. 1-XVI. 4), on abiding in love; and Part Three (XVI. 5-33), overcoming sorrow.

XIII. 31-38.

A well-known critical problem is connected with XIII. 32a. The words rendered in English, "if God is glorified in Him," are found in ancient manuscripts only in codices A and θ, and were known to Origen. They are absent in the P66. N[71], Β, Δ, and W, and yet most of the editors and interpreters of the Gospel retain them, believing that their omission is due to a copyist's error, which is often observed where at close range two sentences end with the repetition of the same words.