Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 13:28
Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him.
28. no man knew ] Even S. John, who now knew that Judas was the traitor, did not know that he would act at once, and that it was to this Jesus alluded.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
No man at the table knew – This shows that Jesus had signified to John only who it was that should betray him.
The bag – The traveling-bag in which they put their common property. See the notes at Joh 12:6.
Have need of against the feast – The feast of the Passover. This feast continued seven days, and they supposed that Jesus had directed him to make preparation for their needs on those days.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
How innocent are honest hearts! Charity thinketh no evil, saith the apostle. Although our Saviour had plainly enough deciphered him as the traitor, by telling John that he to whom he should give the sop was he, and then by giving it to Judas; yet whether they all did not hear what our Saviour said to John, or did not think of so sudden a tragedy, they do not suspect that the hour was at hand when Judas should perfect his intended villany: though they heard our Saviour bid him get him out, and do quickly what he had to do; yet Judas being he who carried that little stock of money which Christ had, Joh 12:6, they thought that that which our Saviour bid him do, as a work he had undertaken to do, was laying out some money, either to buy some things which were necessary for them, for the seven days of the feast of unleavened bread; either for food for them to eat, or for sacrifices for them to offer; or that it was our Saviours mind, that he should out of this little stock distribute something to the poor: they little thought that our Saviours words argued a giving him over to perfect the treacherous designs which he had conceived in his heart.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
28, 29. no man . . . knew for whatintent he spake this unto him . . . some thought . . . Jesus . . .said . . . But what we need . . . or, . . . give . . . to the pooravery important statement, as showing how carefully. Jesus had keptthe secret, and Judas his hypocrisy, to the last.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Now no man at the table,…. Not one of those who lay upon the couches at the table, excepting John, to whom the signal was given:
knew for what intent he spake this unto him; and perhaps he might not know the meaning of his last words, that he spoke concerning the act of betraying him; nor did not imagine that the thing was so near and so speedily to be done, as it was.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
No one knew ( ). Second aorist active indicative of . The disciples had not yet perceived the treacherous heart of Judas.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “Now no man at the table knew,” (touto de oudeis egno ton anakeimenon) “Yet none of those reclining at the table knew this;-John had asked the question quietly, and perhaps did not himself know or expect Judas to go for the betrayal contract that very night.
2) “For what intent he spake unto him.” (pros ti eipen auto) “For what purpose he spoke to him,” that Jesus spoke to Judas, after giving him the morsel, dipped in the sop, Joh 13:26-27.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
28. Not one of those who were at table. Either John had not yet related to others what Christ had told him, or they were so much struck by it, that they lost their presence of mind; and, indeed, ill is probable, that John himself was almost out of his senses. But what then happened to the disciples, we frequently see: taking place in the Church, that few of the believers discern the hypocrites whom the Lord loudly condemns.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(28) Now no man at the table knew.This is a comment of the Apostles, as he writes in remembrance of the impression made at the time upon all who were present. They heard our Lord say to Judas, What thou doest, do quickly; but none of them knew until afterwards that these words referred to the betrayal.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
28. No man at the table knew Not even John knew until the traitor, as mentioned in the following verse, and as is mentioned by anticipation in Joh 13:27, received the sop.
‘Now no one at the table knew the reason why he said this to him, for some thought that, because he held the communal purse, Jesus was saying to him, “Buy what we need for the feast”, or else that he should distribute something to the poor’.
This confirms the fact that none of them knew the significance of what had happened. The others merely assumed he had duties to perform. (‘No one’, of course, excludes Jesus, and it may exclude the writer. He is speaking of the others). Buying ‘for the feast’ refers to the purchases that will need to be made for the remaining days of the feast of Unleavened Bread, and especially for the next day. The 15th of Nisan was always a ‘sabbath’ but special concessions were made with regard to preparations for meals on that day. That Judas was thought to be able to purchase at night after the Passover meal demonstrates that food sellers made special provision for providing such goods at that time. In the hot weather food could no be stored for long, especially by visitors. Even John probably saw Jesus as laying a trap for Judas.
Joh 13:28-29 . ] Even John not excepted (against Bengel, Kuinoel, Lange, Hengstenberg, Godet), from whom the thought was remote, that now already was the treason to be accomplished.
] for behoof of what .
Joh 13:29 . ] Proof, by way of example, of this non-comprehension. Some of the disciples had taken those words as an order, to hasten a matter of business known to Judas , the bearer of the chest. They had therefore two more definite suppositions between which they wavered, both produced by a helpless state of mind, but not irrational, since it is not said that they meant instantaneous attention to the command, even in the course of the night.
. .] belongs to . . There was therefore as yet no matter needful for the feast purchased. This, following as it does the statement of time already adduced in Joh 13:1 , presupposes that the present meal was not the festal meal, for the latter belonged to the feast itself , which, according to Joh 13:1 , was still impending (against Wieseler, pp. 366, 381, Tholuck, Lange, Luthardt, Baeumlein, Hengstenberg, Paul in the Stud. u. Krit . 1866, p. 366 f., and several others). See also Bleek, p. 129 f.; Rckert, Abendm . p. 27 f.; Hilgenfeld, Paschastr . p. 147; Isenberg, p. 10 f.
] placed first as the other subject referred to in this second supposition. Comp. Gal 2:10 . This giving to the poor is likewise thought of as designed for the approaching celebration , because they attempted thereby to explain the present order to the purveyor.
In the transition into the indirect form of speech, , . . . must be supplied; or that He said that to him, in order that he , etc.
28 Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him.
Ver. 28. Now no man at the table knew, &c. ] For John had not told Peter the secret committed to him by Christ, though he were very desirous to have known it;
” Si sapis, arcano vina reconde cado. “
A friend that can both keep counsel and give counsel, is worth his weight in gold. When one desired to see Alexander’s treasure, he bade one of his servants show him, not his talents of silver, but his trusty friends, , .
28. ] Not even John: who knew he was the traitor, but had no idea the deed was so soon to be done (Lcke, De Wette). Stier supposes John to exclude himself in saying . ., and that he knew.
Joh 13:28 . . All heard the command given to Judas, but none of them knew its object, not even John; for although he was now aware that Judas was the traitor he did not connect the command “Do it quickly” with the actual work of betrayal.
no man at the table = no one (Greek. oudeis) of those reclining (Greek. anakeimai). See Joh 13:23.
for what intent = with a view to (Greek. pros. App-104.) what.
spake this unto him = spake to him.
28.] Not even John: who knew he was the traitor, but had no idea the deed was so soon to be done (Lcke, De Wette). Stier supposes John to exclude himself in saying . ., and that he knew.
Joh 13:28. , no man) except Jesus and John, and also Judas himself.
Joh 13:28
Joh 13:28
Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him.-Those at the table did not understand the significance of the language.
9
Need of against the feast. Not the passover feast, for that was a one-day affair, and it was about over at this time. But that day was followed immediately with seven more days of unleavened bread which was also called a feast (Lev 23:5-6). The apostles thought that possibly Jesus meant for Judas to go and attend to that matter, since he was their treasurer and handled the money. They had just learned that Judas was going to betray Jesus, but they did not connect that with the suggestion of Jesus about the promptness to be exercised by Judas.
Joh 13:28. No one of those reclining at meat perceived for what intent he said it unto him. From these words the inference is generally drawn that the conversation between Jesus and John must have been in an undertone; otherwise the disciples would have known the meaning of what had been said. The inference is hardly warranted. Even although they now knew that he was to betray his Master, they might be so ignorant of all the steps he was to take for that end, that they could not attach a correct idea to the words addressed to him. And they did not.
No one present knew what Jesus meant when He told Judas to do what he had to do quickly. John must have known that Judas was the betrayer, but even he did not know that Jesus was referring here to Judas’ arrangements to betray Him.
"There is nothing in the narrative to show that Jesus meant that betrayal was imminent. From all that has been said so far it may well have been far in the future." [Note: Morris, p. 558.]
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)