Here I cannot but take notice of a very jejune and empty sense which some give of this text, to evade the force of the argument taken from it, to prove the doctrine we are maintaining. How plausible soever it may seem to be to those who conclude that this must be the true sense, because it favours their own cause: by _his own_ they mean no other than Christ’s disciples, whom he was at that time conversant with; and indeed, they apply whatever Christ says, in some following chapters, to them, exclusive of all others; as when he says, _Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world_, chap. xv. 19. and _because I live, ye shall live also_, chap. xiv. 19. This, they suppose, respects them in particular; and so in the text before us, _having loved his own which were in the world_; that is, his own disciples; as though he had a propriety in none but them; _he loved them to the end_; that is, not to the end of their lives; for that would prove the doctrine we are maintaining, but to the end of his life, which was now at hand; and his love to them, they suppose to be expressed in this, that he condescended to wash their feet. But if this were the sense of the words, his love to them would not be so extraordinary a privilege as it really is; for it would be only an instance of human and not divine love. And indeed, our happiness consists, not only in Christ’s loving us to the end of his life; but in his continuing to express his love in his going into heaven to prepare a place, and there making continual intercession for us; and in the end, in his coming again to receive us to himself, that where he is, we may be also; which leads us to consider,