wardness and zeal of Peter come out strikingly in this verse. None seem so excited by our Lord's announcement as lie is. None is so anxious to know of wliom our Lord can be speaking. He cannot wait silently like the others. He makes a sign to John to ask privately who it can be. A fisherman by early training, like John, he was probably intimate with him, and could make himself understood by signs.
Let us note that the whole transaction seems to show that Peter did not sit next our Lord in the post of honor and favor. That place was given to John.
Rollock here observes, that so far from Peter having any pri- macy among the Apostles, he here uses the intercession of John 1
25. — [Jle then lying on Jesus' breast, etc.'] The Greek words here would be more literally rendered, " He having fallen upon." It is so translated in eleven out of twelve other places where it occurs in the New Testament. The idea is evidently of one moving and leaning towards another, so as to get closer to him and whisper a question, so as not to be heard or observed. That this is what John did is evident. It is plain that he did not say out aloud, " Lord, who is it ? "
26. — [Jesus answered... He... sop... dipped it.'] The action by which our Lord told John He would indicate the traitor to him, was probably so common at an Eastern banquet, that no one at the table would remark anything about it. That it was a common way of eating is shown by Ruth ii. 14, " Dip thy morsel in the vinegar.'*' The word " sop," the marginal reading tells us, might be translated " morsel." To give a morsel, as our Lord did, was probably a mark of favor or compliment.
That our Lord's answer was whispered, is evident. No one seems to have noticed it, except John.
Hengstenberg observes, that by this act of kindness and at- tention Jesus " would touch the heart of Judas once more, if haply he might be susceptible of better emotions."
[And when. ..dipjjed... gave. ..Judas. ..Simon.] The word " gave " is literally ." gives," in the present tense, showing the immedi- ate action which followed our Lord's reply to John's question.
Here, as elsewhere, it is noteworthy that John specially calls Judas " the son of Simon," in order to make it quite clear what Judas it was who did this foul deed.
Bengel remarks, " How very near to Jesus was Judas on this occasion ! But in a short time after, by what a wide gulf did glory separate Jesus from Judas, and destruction separate Ju- das from Jesus."
27. — [And after the sop...Satan entered...him.] Of course this does not mean that now for the first time Satan entered, but