Upper Room Discourse — Promised Spirit

John 15:26 “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of Truth who proceedeth from the Father, He shall testify of Me. 27 And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with Me from the beginning.

John 16:4 But these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them. “And these things I said not unto you at the beginning, because I was with you. 5 But now I go My way to Him that sent Me, and none of you asketh Me, ‘Whither goest Thou?’ 6 But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart. 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is expedient for you that I go away, for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send Him unto you. 8 And when He is come, He will reprove the world concerning sin, and concerning righteousness, and concerning judgment: 9 concerning sin, because they believe not in Me; 10 concerning righteousness, because I go to My Father and ye see Me no more; 11 concerning judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. 12 “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 However when He, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth; for He shall not speak from Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak; and He will show you things to come. 14 He shall glorify Me, for He shall receive of Mine, and shall show it unto you.

15 All things that the Father hath are Mine; therefore I said that He shall take of Mine, and shall show it unto you.

“The term “collect” is traceable to the word in Gallican sacramentaries collecta, and even earlier to the Latin word collectio.  Some have suggested that the term reflects the function of the prayer it described, namely that of gathering the people together for worship.  In the Roman Use, the collecta is called the oratio.  The Roman Use appears to be the source of the collect, as its style is Roman in its conciseness and clarity. ”

Introduction

Jesus speaks these words concerning the coming “Spirit of Truth” who is also designated as the “Comforter. ” to his disciples just prior to His looming Crucifixion. He is seeking to console their sense of abandonment and fear, while at the same time suggesting that the Holy Spirit will sustain them in the context of fierce opposition.

The outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost is often expressed by the English Word Whitsunday or White Sunday. This has reference to the White garments worn by the newly baptized or to the gift of Wisdom by the Holy Spirit. This feast was a popular time for baptism especially in the Northern European Churches where climate led them to prefer Pentecost to Easter as the season for baptism. The liturgical color is Red as a reminder of the tongues of fire and the blood of the martyrs, the seed of the church. So this Sunday: Happy White Sunday!!

As we come to the text we are reminded of the greatness of the Holy Spirit. A 17th century Theologian once offered,

“The work of the Holy Spirit for the elect is as great as those of the Father or the Son. Why? Because all that Christ did would have profited us nothing, if the Holy Ghost did not come into our hearts and bring all home to us…. Christ leads us to the Father (as it were) with one hand, the Holy Ghost with the other. Christ showed His love for the elect by dying for them; the Spirit shows His love for the same people by indwelling them.”

Thomas Goodwin
17th Century Puritan

I.) The Outward Work Of The Spirit — To The World

He is the Primary Witness to Christ. One might say He is “God, the Evangelist.”

The context here in which the Spirit is spoken about is one of opposition by the world to the Disciples of Christ.

1.) So we might say that one of the outward works of the Spirit to the World is to sustain the Disciples as they bear up under the hatred of the World.

In vs. 26 we get the sense that they would be able to endure the world’s despite because the Holy Spirit testifies with us. Those first Disciples were not alone in their bearing witness work (27) but were sustained and strengthened by the Witness of the Holy Spirit in the Evangelism project.

Indeed the word here translated as “Comforter,” is the Greek Word “Parakletos.”  It is often translated as “Advocate.” When used of the Holy Spirit the word is defined  in the widest sense, as a helper, one who gives succor, and aide. The Spirit is One who has been summoned or called to the side of another–literally,  as an “advocate,” or, by extension, a helper or legal representative in a trial or other arena of judgment.

As the Holy Spirit was ordained to take the place of Christ with the apostles (after his ascension to the Father), it was His work to lead them to a deeper knowledge of the gospel truth, and give them divine strength needed to enable them to undergo trials and persecutions on behalf of the divine kingdom.

As you read the book of Acts it is clear to see the opposition to the Disciples witness to Christ and yet the word of the Kingdom of God and the Resurrection of Christ went forward because of the witness of the Holy Spirit.

This reminds us that the Holy Spirit is the person of the Trinity associated with the successful spread of the Good News of Christ providing reconciliation for all those who would surrender to God’s love, dominion, and authority as placarded by Christ.

We need to take comfort when we are opposed by men, both within and outside the Church, that the Holy Spirit is greater than opposition arrayed against us. Because of His witness we can witness and we can be confident that the Spirit of God will triumph. We needs remember when we are opposed by the most vicious of men that if the Holy Spirit could turn the heart of Saul who loved to breathe out threats against the Church and persecute the Church, that the same Holy Spirit can overcome all opposition today.

On this Whitsunday we esteem the Spirit of Christ for the Holy Spirit is why you have an interest in Christ (Eph. 1:14).

He is the One who gives you confidence concerning being approved by God (Romans 8:15-16).

He is why you have an interest in bearing witness of and to Christ.

He is the reason that you have not folded to the opposition of the World.

He is the One who gives you understanding and fits you with resolve to press on so as to be always abounding in the work of the Lord.

Were it not for the Spirit of Christ you would have no interest in esteeming God’s commands. No interest in marrying in the Faith. No interest in staying in Christian marriages.

He will be the one who will sustain your faith in your dying moments, thus preparing you to meet the Lord Christ whom He is the Spirit of.

2.) Another outward works of the Spirit to the World is to do the work of Evangelism

According to the text, the promised Spirit will bring the world to the recognition of the meaning and reality of sin, righteousness, and judgment.  Another way of saying this is that the Spirit will expose to the outsiders, to those who do not believe, the error of their unbelief.

Not to believe is the greatest sin according to John’s Gospel, and that sin keeps one outside the community. The Spirit, thus, has the function of continuing to confront the world (outsiders) with the presence of Jesus after his ascension.

(a.)In pursuit of making Christ known to the world the Spirit of Christ is said in the text to be one who convicts the world of sin (8).

The verb here in the Greek means to literally ‘to show someone his sin and summon him to repentance’ (TDNT). The English word “expose” captures some of what is intended here. The Spirit will expose the world’s sin.

Of course moderns don’t like the notion of “sin.” It is considered one of those “cringe” words that we try to avoid. Sin reminds us that there is a standard. It reminds us that truth is not person or cultural variable.  And yet we hear our Lord Christ saying that the Holy Spirit will convict the world of Sin.

We see this activity operating immediately upon the consequence of the Holy Spirit’s arrival at Pentecost.

Peter begins to speak of, “Jesus of Nazareth, a Man approved of God … as you yourselves know. Peter tells them his Jewish audience that they, via the Romans had crucified the Messiah. Acts then tells us that the listeners,  “were cut to the heart.”

The Holy Spirit as witness, empowered Peter’s witness, and convicted Peter’s listeners of their sin.

We should note already at this point that it is only the Holy Spirit who can open blinded eyes. He alone can convict of sin.

Ours is to bear witness to the Truth, but it is the Spirit of Christ’s work to cause men to see that of which we are witnessing.

Those outside of Christ are like blind men sitting in a darkened room. We can and must shine the word of God’s light but a light turned on, while dispelling the darkness of a dark room will not help blind men to see. Only the Spirit of the living Christ can open blind eyes to see the light of our witness and yet His opening of blind eyes normatively happens in the context of the light be flicked on.

This reminds us, in the context of his Johannine passage, that if our witness is to be to successful to the end of moving people towards Christ it is dependent upon the Spirit’s witness.

Too often in the Church today we have forgotten this. We have thought it our job to do the converting. But that is a job only the Spirit of Christ is qualified to do.

We have employed techniques to convict. Lowered lights. Psychological pressure. Raised hands. When those didn’t have the desired results we began to dumb the message down in order to make it easier for people to accept.

Puritan Wm. Gurnall reminds us

“God never laid it on thee to convert those he sends thee to. No; to publish the Gospel is thy duty.”

Likewise Puritan Joseph Alleine,

“Ministers knock at the door of men’s hearts, the Spirit comes with the Key and opens the door.”

We do serious and long lasting harm when we see it as our role to convict of sin. We cannot convict of Sin. Only the Spirit of Christ can do that. Ours is to, like the sower in the parable, to cast the seed. The Spirit’s job it to convict the world of sin.

We can not force people to convert. This is readily seen when after an Evangelism effort with Mormons Anthony was told, “Yeah, we see the contradictions in what we are saying but we don’t care.”

(b.) The Spirit will do the work of convicting regarding righteousness

This conviction regarding righteousness is in relation to Christ going to the Father (10)

The Jews had insisted that Jesus was unrighteous. A criminal worthy of death. The work of the Spirit is to convince men that the Lord Christ was, not only the righteous one, but also that He was the essence of the righteousness of the Father.

Again, men will not be convinced of this outside of the work of the Spirit.

I was viewing a documentary yesterday titled “Marching to Zion.” In it there were several Rabbis interviewed and the hostility towards Christ remains palpable. Clearly they remain unconvinced of Christ’s righteousness.

But not only is it the Spirit’s work to convict demonstrate that Christ was the righteous one but also the Spirit works to convince men that it is the Righteousness of Christ that they need for their righteousness. The Spirit alone shows men that their righteousness before God depends not on their own efforts but on Christ’s atoning work for them.

This conviction of sin and righteousness then go together. What good would it do to be convicted of sin if there was not an answer for that sin one is convicted of? No, not only does the Spirit convict the world of sin but He convicts it also of the answer to sin … the righteousness of Jesus Christ.

(c.) the spirit will do the work of convicting of judgment

The judgment has to do with the triumph of Christ over Satan. Satan, as the prince of this world, has been judged and condemned. The Spirit in testifying to the Gospel reveals that the one judged on the cross was Satan. This is significant in the Gospel presentation because inasmuch as Satan has been judged and condemned so it is the case that all those who belong to “their Father, the devil” are judged along with the prince of this world.

Conclusion

It is significant that all three of these (sin, righteousness, and judgment) are all to be understood because of they relate to the finished work of Christ. This is why we must preach Christ when we speak of these matters.  When we speak of sin we must emphasize that its greatest (though not only) expression is in the refusal to believe on Christ. When we speak of righteousness we must speak of the Righteousness that can only be given by the Christ who was vindicated as righteous before the Father. When we speak of a judgment to come we must speak of the judgement of Christ that will land on all men if they remain in the one who has been already judged.

II.) The Inward Work of The Spirit — In The Church (13-15)

R. J. Rushdoony Contra Fredrich Engles on the Dissolving of Nationalities

“Q22. What will be the attitude of communism to existing nationalities?

The nationalities of the peoples associating themselves in accordance with the principle of community will be ~~compelled to mingle~~ with each other as a result of this association and ~~thereby to dissolve themselves~~, just as the various estate and class distinctions must disappear through the abolition of their basis, private property.”

Engels,
“Principles of Communism” (1847) – https://goo.gl/pL9VqT

“For him [Freudian writer Dr. J.L. Moreno] mankind is “a social and organic unity,” and mental health is harmonious integration into that unity. But what of those who deny that mankind is the standard, and who hold that biblical faith requires separation and division? The prophets of mental health of this religion of humanity know the answer: they are mentally sick. God’s hell is outlawed, but a new hell has opened up for apostates: mental sickness, with its many mansions.”

Rousas John Rushdoony,
“Freud”

RJR speaking against proposed reparations in 1967. He is protesting in this statement and is being sarcastic.

“In other words, white America must pay a heavy tax for some time to come because of its initiative and superiority.”

R. J. Rushdoony
Roots of Reconstruction — pg. 615

“In any case, the goal is, whether directly or slowly, total destruction of Christian civilization.Some have called for … a long period of chaos and revolution, of anarchy, racial amalgamation, and the total destruction of civilization.

R. J. Rushdoony
Roots of Reconstruction — pg, 618

“The demand of humanism (and of its child, socialism) is for a universal ethics. In universal ethics we are told that, even as the family gave way to the tribe, and the tribe to the nation,so the nation must give way to a one-world order. All men must treat all other men equally. Partiality to our family, nation, or race, represents a lower morality, we are told, and must be replaced by a ‘higher’ morality of a universal ethics.”

Rousas John Rushdoony
Roots of Reconstruction — pg. 574

“The only logical conclusion of the present concept of civil rights is communism. It demands ‘full equality.’ And where does equality stop? Economic, political, cultural, racial, personal, and every other kind of equality is demanded….

‘Full equality’ means that no differences can be tolerated with respect to race, color, creed, economics and all things else. This means the planned destruction of the very elements of society who have made our civilization.” 

R. J. Rushdoony
Roots of Reconstruction — pg. 581
____________________________

Note here that in this quote RJR’s Kinism contra Cultural Marxist theory comes shining through in white hot intensity. One simply can not deny that RJR was, at the very least,  proto familialist.

True, he may have been inconsistent at times but these quotes contra the Marxist Engels puts him squarely in the familialist camp. Those who deny this have the burden of proof that he wasn’t and must find a way to somehow make RJR unsay what is said repeatedly above.

 

Random Thoughts On Escondido Republication

“… the doctrine of Republication cannot be harmonized with the teaching of the Westminster Standards.”

Robert B. Strimple
President emeritus & Professor emeritus of Systematic Theology, Westminster Seminary California, Escondido, CA

Recently a prominent Reformed Lawyer, on a social media cite, posted a hypothetical in order to continue the conversation with the Escondido Republicationists.  Our Lawyer friend posited this hypothetical proposition,

“the Passover was in some sense a Republication of the Covenant of Works. Israel’s obedience to the command (“put blood on the doorpost and live — fail to to do this and you die”) congruently merited the reward of deliverance from Egypt.”

Of course this hypothetical could arises due to Escondido’s insistence that the Mosaic covenant was at the same time both a covenant of Grace and a covenant of Works. This is accomplished by introducing language of “upper” and “lower” register into the Mosaic covenant while insisting that the idea of typology sustains that “in some sense” the Mosaic covenant was a covenant of works for Israel.

Of course, one can use this reasoning not only in the Mosaic covenant but also in any of the other covenants which represent the continual maturing and flowering of the one covenant of grace.  For example, one could go back to Genesis 17 and say much the same thing about God’s command/stipulation to Abraham to “walk before Me and be blameless” (Genesis 17:1 ). Given that stipulation language in Genesis 17 one can’t help but wonder, given Escondido predilections for a hyphenated Mosaic covenant,  how is it that the Abrahamic covenant also is not an example of a mixed (hyphenated) covenant? In point of fact Dr. Meredith Kline taught that that Noah and Abraham were themselves under a legal-works covenant?   One thus wonders, if, according to Escondido, whether the covenant of works was republished to Abraham and Noah as well?

In all this I wonder if there isn’t some covenant confusion that was articulated by a Baptist named Philip Cary in 1640 in a debate with John Flavel and other Reformed luminaries. This debate surrounded the issue of the validity of infant Baptism but some of Cary “reasoning” sounds a great deal like Escondido reasoning on covenant republication.  Cary treated Genesis 17 (Abrahamic), Exodus 20 (Mosaic) and Deuteronomy 29 (Mosaic) together under a covenant of works. In doing so, the Baptist, Cary, could treat all these passages as discontinuous in nature, purpose and extent with the covenant of Grace. For the Baptist Cary, no commands from the covenant of works could affect the covenant of grace. For the Baptist, Philip Cary, this meant that Abraham, as well as all the elect in the Old Testament were in both covenants at the same time. This sounds strangely familiar to some of the writings of Escondido adherents.

Keep in mind though that if covenant are both law and gracious at the same time, it is also the case that people living under those hyphenated covenant arrangements lived and moved  by both law and Gospel at the same time. Escondido would have us believe that the Mosaic saints earned, via congruent merit, their stay in the land while at the same time those same saints were saved by unmerited grace. This seems to me to be a “Glawspel” arrangement. If so, it is ironic that the very people (Klinean republicationists) who complain that those who don’t accept their republicationist paradigm are guilty of not distinguishing properly “Law and Gospel,” with the consequence that “Glawspel” obtains are themselves guilty of not properly distinguishing “Law and Gospel” so that “Glawspel” obtains.

Think about it. If you’re living under the Mosaic covenant how do you determine if your obedience to God’s law is motivated by earning congruent merit in order to stay in the land as opposed to an obedience that is motivated by gratitude for God delivering your from your enemies and putting you in the land?

Second, in light of the constant disobedience of Israel under the Mosaic, how can we speak of going back under a covenant of works in the Mosaic when the covenant of works required absolute perfect obedience? If the Old Testament saints under the Mosaic covenant were put back under a covenant of works it was a very different covenant of works then what Adam was under in the Garden where one violation was all that was required to be cast out of the garden. Are we to believe, per Escondido, that the covenant of works was more gracious in the Mosaic covenant then it was in the garden?

________________

For some reading that might kick start thinking on this matter I recommend chapter 45 of Beeke and Jones, “A Puritan Theology; Doctrine for Life.”

FDR Administration Responsible For US Entry into WW II … An American Tradition

In his book “Freedom Betrayed,” former US President Herbert Hoover collects sources that reinforce his contention that the FDR administration manipulated Japan into providing casus belli so that the US could enter the War both in Europe and in the Orient. Put directly, Hoover contends that the FDR administration wanted the Japs to give the US justification in plunging the Nation into a war, that up till the time of Pearl Harbor, American had been vociferously opposed to. These sources are taken from pages 306-310 of Hoovers work. I will also give the sources that Hoover quotes from.

Source #1 — Minority Report from the 1945 Congressional Pearl Harbor investigation established in 1945.

[Investigation of the Pearl Harbor Attack:] Report of the Joint Committee on the Investigation of the Pearl Harbor attack, 79th Congress, 2d Session, Senate Document No. 244 [United States Government Printing Office, Washington: 1946].

The minority report of the committee was filed by Senators Homer Ferguson (R) of Michigan, and Owen Brewster (R) of Maine.

“In the diplomatic documents, exhibits, and testimony before the Committee there is a wealth of evidence which underwrites the statement that the tactics of maneuvering the Japanese into ‘the position of firing the first shot’ were followed by high authorities in Washington after November 25, 1941….”

Source #2 — Admiral Robert A. Theobald — Commander of the Destroyer Division at Pearl Harbor

“Diplomatically, President Roosevelt’s strategy of forcing Japan to war by unremitting and ever increasing diplomatic-economic sanctions pressure, and by simultaneously holding our Fleet in Hawaii as an invitation to a surprise attack, was a complete success … One is forced to conclude that the anxiety to have Japan, beyond all possibility of dispute, commit the first act of war, caused the President and his civilian advisers to disregard the military advice which would somewhat have cushioned the blow.”

Rear Admiral Robert A. Theobold, U.S.N. (ret). The Final Secret of Pearl Harbor (The Devin Adair Company, New York: 1954), p. 5.

Source #3 — Admiral William H. Standley — Member Owen J. Roberts Commission

“The ‘incident’ (Pearl Harbor) which certain high officials in Washington had sought so assiduously in order to condition the American public for war with the Axis powers had been found….

Admiral William H. Standley, U.S.N. Ret., “More About Pearl Harbor,” in U.S. News and World Report, April 16, 1954.

Source #4 — “Pearl Harbor: The Story of the Secret War.” An exhaustive study of the Pearl Harbor attack by George Morgenstern

“… given the benefit of  every doubt … all of these men [the high authorities in Washington] still must answer for much. With absolute knowledge of war they refused to communicate that knowledge, clearly, unequivocally, and in time, to the men in the field upon whom the blow would fall ….

Pearl Harbor provided the American war party with the means of escaping dependence on a hesitant Congress in taking a reluctant people into war ….

Pearl Harbor was the first action of the acknowledged war, and the last battle of a secret war upon which the administration had long since embarked. The secret war upon which the administration had long since embarked. The secret war was waged against nations which the leadership of this country had chosen as enemies months before they became formal enemies by a declaration of war. It was waged also, by psychological means, by propaganda, and deception against the American people…. The people were told that acts which were equivalent to war were intended to keep the nation out of war. Constitutional processes existed only to be circumvented, until finally, the war making power of Congress was reduced to the act of ratifying an accomplished fact.”

George Morgenstern, Pearl Harbor: The Story of the Secret War (The Devin-Adair Company, New York: 1947), pp. 328-330.

Source #5 — William Henry Chamberlin, “America’s Second Crusade.”

“It is scarcely possible, in light of this [Admiral Stark’s testimony regarding President Roosevelt’s October 8, 1941 order to American warships in the Atlantic to fire on German ships] and many other known facts, to avoid the conclusion that the Roosevelt Administration sought the war which began at Pearl Harbor. The steps which made armed conflict inevitable were taken months before the conflict broke out.”

William Henry Chamberlin, America’s Second Crusade (Henry Regnery Company, Chicago: 1950), p. 353. 

Source #6 — George F. Kenann –Distinguished Diplomat of note

“… a policy carefully and realistically aimed at the avoidance of war with Japan … would certainly have produced a line of action considerably different from that which we actually pursued and would presumably have led to quite different results.”

George F. Kenann, American Diplomacy, 1900-1950 (The University of Chicago press, Chicago: 1951), p. 82.

Source #7 — Captain Russell Grenfell — British Historian

“No reasonably informed person can now believe that Japan made a villainous, unexpected attack on the United States. An attack was not only fully expected but was actually desired. It is beyond doubt that President Roosevelt wanted to get his country into the war, but for political reasons was most anxious to ensure that the first act of hostility came from the other side; for which reason he caused increasing pressure to be put on the Japanese, to a point that no self respecting nation could endure without resort to arms. Japan was meant by the American President to attack the United States. As Mr. Oliver Lyttelton, then British Minister of Production, said in 1944, ‘Japan was provoked into attacking America at Pearl Harbor. It is a travesty of history to say that America was forced into the war.”

Captain Russell Grenfell, R. N., Main Fleet to Singapore (The Macmillan Company, New York: 1952), pp. 107-108.

All of this strikes me as important to note on this Memorial day 2015. American have been lied to over and over again about our involvement in Wars. This same type of story could be told about how Lincoln manipulated the South in providing Causus belli in a war he desperately desired. This same type of story could be told about how Woodrow Wilson manipulated us into WW I. This same type of story could be told about how Lyndon Johnson false flagged us into the Vietnam War. Over and over again through the centuries our leadership has lied to us in order to propagandize us into war. “Weapons of Mass Destruction” anyone? Memorial day is a day to grieve that our sons have been spent in support of these liars and mass murderers. Our nations warrior dead believed in the ideals of fighting for liberty and home. They are not to be faulted. The fault lies upon those who deceived an all too often willingly gullible American public in joining in a war lust that should have never been.

John 17:9-26 — Christ’s Long Prayer

Text — John 17:9-26
Subject — The Lord Christ
Theme — The Lord Christ’s Long Prayer
Proposition —  Consideration of the Lord Christ and His requests in His long prayer will reveal to us the heart of Christ for His people.

Purpose — Therefore having considered the Lord Christ and the requests of His long prayer let us  take comfort and rejoice in the great salvation by which we have been saved.

Action — Therefore having considered the requests

Introduction —

Upper Room Discourse
Preparing His legates for their task
As we shall see His departure and looming  ascension is upon His mind I13)
Longest recorded prayer we have of Christ
Unspeakably shame, dishonor, and cruelty lies before Him and yet the Lord Christ’s time is spent asking for His company.

Great Johannine themes here — “Word,” “World,” “Truth,” “Joy,”

Background / Context

“World” — used 13 times in this text.

The word “world” here is used of mankind as it lies in Adam … as it is in opposition to the Lord Christ.

Herman Sasse rightly spoke of the word “world” here as

“the sum of divine creation which has been shattered by the fall, which stands under the judgment of God, and in which Jesus Christ appears as the Redeemer… The “world then is in some is in some sense personified as the great opponent of the Redeemer in Salvation History.”

World then does not have to do with locale or geographic setting but rather it has to do with opposition to God’s saving work. The “world” is a realm that is activated and motivated by the intent to cast God off and to arise to god’s place. Christ will speak, in John, of the evil one as “the prince of this world.” (12:31, 14:30, 16:11). This does not mean that Satan is over planet earth but only that Satan is the one who rules over that aspect of fallen creation that opposes God.

When Christ says, “My Kingdom is not of this world,” He is NOT saying that His Kingdom does not impinge upon planet earth or the affairs of men outside the Church walls. What He is saying instead is that His Kingdom does not find its source of origin in this fallen world.

Having said that we know that John’s Gospel does not leave us with a picture of ceaseless enmity between God and “the world.” John makes it clear that the world is not interested in God’s agenda but it is not true that God therefore has no interest in “the world.”

God loves the world (3:16)
Christ takes away the sins of the world (1:29)
Christ is the savior of the world (4:42)
Christ gives life to the world (6:51)
This is at cost for Christ gives His flesh for the life of the World (6:51)

So, we see here that while the world hates God, there is, in the depths of God’s intent, the purpose of reconciling the world unto Himself.

So, as we deal with the world we deal with it as ones who were ourselves part of that world. A world that seeks to create itself by its own fiat word independent of God. We know that this world is opposed to us as disciples of Christ (John 17:14. cmp. 15:18-19) and yet for the sake of Christ we take that Hatred the world has for God’s people and hold out to to the world the command for all men everywhere to repent.

I.) The Work of Christ mentioned in this Prayer

A.) He exegeted the Father (vs.6,8)

The Son came to make the Father known. Much as a minister is required to break open the meaning of a text so that the text might be understood, so the Son was the one who opened the meaning of the Father that the Father might be understood. To say that the Son was the interpretation of the Father is much akin to saying that the Son is the the brightness of God’s glory or to say that the Son is the express image of the Father.

It remains even so today. If we want to know the Father we must needs see the Father in the character of the Son. And the only place that can be known is as found in the Scripture. It is only in the Scripture that we see the Son as the exegesis of the Father.  Apart from the Son no one ever gets to know the Father. The Father’s name … that is the Father Himself is not apprehended apart from the words and works of the Son. This explains why Biblical Christians have always held that there is no salvation apart from a known Son… no intimacy with the Father apart from the Son making the Father known.

We get in significant trouble today in the Church because we don’t spend time understanding the exegesis of the Father by the Son as communicated by Scripture. Instead we envision what we think the Father must be like.

“My God doesn’t haven’t wrath…”
“My God wouldn’t do that…”
“My God indiscriminately loves everyone … ”

The “God” the Church serves today is more often then not a god of their imagination. It is not the God as exegeted and made manifest by the Son.

In His work of manifesting the Father the Son was doing the work of someone who restores old paintings. Meticulously and with great care the restorationist cleans the original painting of all that has worked to mar it over the years, with the result that the painting is now seen again for what it originally was.

In the same way, the Son stripped off the accretions of dirt and filth put upon the character of God by the Pharisees and made the Father known in keeping with His original splendor and beauty.

Christ as Image of the Father’s face,
Bore the flesh of Adam’s race,
Yet, in that Flesh was manifest
The Character of God confessed

B.) He Kept and Guarded His people (12)

Here we must note the explicit language that belongs to the Biblical Christian… to the one called “The Calvinist.”

Note when He speaks of His men here he distinguishes them very clearly from those who are not His own. Christ makes a clear distinction between those who are His and those who are not His. Here is that stout Biblical doctrine of Election.

Article 7. Election is the unchangeable purpose of God, whereby, before the foundation of the world, he hath out of mere grace, according to the sovereign good pleasure of his own will, chosen, from the whole human race, which had fallen through their own fault, from their primitive state of rectitude, into sin and destruction, a certain number of persons to redemption in Christ, whom he from eternity appointed the Mediator and Head of the elect, and the foundation of Salvation.

Now the context here may have more to do with the idea of these disciples being elected to their office as disciples but the larger matter of election to salvation is not far removed when we consider the language when used as applied to Judas, as the Son of perdition.

In Christ insisting that He is only praying for His people we find the same impulse that we heard in John 10 when Christ could speak of “His sheep” and speak of those who do not believe, because they were not of My sheep.

Christ prays for His particular disciples just as He will die for a particular people.  There is particularity all over the Gospel. A Christianity that lack particularity is a different Christianity then the one expressed from Genesis to Revelation.

This particularity though is not only unto privilege but also unto mission (18).

The keeping and guarding that our Lord Christ

C.) He is One with the Father (10, 11)

Purpose and Essence

When the Lord Christ prays, “All thine are mine,” and “All mine are thine,” there is a clear expression of ontological unity being expressed. When the Lord Christ asks that His disciples would be kept by the Father and prays that they were kept by Him we see a “unity of purpose.” When the idea is communicated that just as the Father sent the Son so now the Son was sending His Disciples (Disciples who were given to Him by the Father) (cmp. vs. 18) there is the clear idea of this trinitarian perichoresis intimated in the text.

D.) He Consecrates Himself (19)

The Consecration (set-apartness) spoken of here is certainly a reference to His looming death. Christ sets Himself apart by His death so that they may be set apart for the purpose of being heralds of that death.

In His consecration we see the work of

propitiation, expiation, atonement, reconciliation, active & passive obedience, redemption, ransom,  substitution,

II.) The Requests of the Lord Christ For His Company In this Prayer

A.) Request #1 — The Lord Christ asks that His and the Father’s Disciples will be Kept (Protected) (11-12, 15)

B.) Request #2 — The Lord Christ asks that His and the Father’s Disciples might be One (11)

C.) Requests #3 — The Lord Christ asks that His and the Father’s Disciples May Have Joy (13)

Christ here speaks of the Disciples having His joy made full in themselves.

This idea of joy becomes a sub-theme in the upper room discourse. It is mentioned in 15:11, 16:20, 21, 22, 24 and here. Obviously our Lord Christ is concerned with His people knowing His joy.

It is interesting that our Lord Christ is on the cusp of the Cross work and yet He can ask that the Disciples might have His joy made full in themselves. Obviously, the kind of joy that He is speaking of has the ability to not be extinguished by either sorrow or trauma.

It is to be expected that the Lord Christ might ask for this joy for the Disciples since, per the OT, joy was to be characteristic of life in the Kingdom. In the Kingdom even,  the desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose and those dwelling in the Kingdom shall go out with joy.

In contrast to the old Covenant that was characterized by fasting the presence of Christ now is the time of celebration (Mk. 2:19). There is joy unspeakable and the Lord Christ’s prays for His little company that they may have His joy in them.

Well, how might we assess this joy our Lord Christ speaks of? I think when we look at this joy our Lord Christ speaks of we needs to go out of our way to distinguish it from pleasure. This joy is not equal to giddiness or a lack of seriousness. Rather, we might say that this joy that the Lord Christ repeatedly speaks of arises out of the satisfaction that comes from a finished work. This is why, in the shadow of the Cross, the Lord Christ can speak of His joy being made full in His disciples. His joy is driven by His satisfaction in the completeness of His work.

In his commentary on John R. H. Strachan put it this way,

“The joy of Jesus is the joy that rises from the sense of a finished work. It is creative joy, like the joy of the artist. It produces a sense of un-exhausted power for fresh creation. This joy, in the heart of Jesus, is both the joy of victory (15:11) and the sense of having brought His Church into being.”

If this is accurate then the joy that the Lord Christ is interested in having is the joy that comes from a job well done.

It is the joy a parent finds in letting go of well trained children.
It is the joy that comes in the last few breaths of a life well lived.
It is the joy of a battle well fought.

D.) Request # 4 — The Lord Christ asks that His and the Father’s Disciples might be Consecrated (17-19)

Conclusion – recap