Verses 1-26. -

4. The high-priestly intercession. .Audible communion of the Son with the Father. The prayer which now follows reveals, in the loftiest and sublimest form, the Divine humanity of the Son of man, and the fact that, in the consciousness of Jesus as the veritable Christ of God, there was actually blended the union of the Divine and human, and a perfect exercise of the prerogatives of both. The illimitable task which writers of the second century must have set themselves to accomplish, if they had by some unknown process conceived such a stupendous idea without any historical basis to support it, has actually been so effected, that a representation is given which adequately conveys such a synthesis. The author of the Gospel does, however, draw rather upon his memory of that night than upon his philosophical imagination for a passage which surpasses all literature in its setting forth the identity of being and power and love in the twofold personality of the God-Man. We are brought by it to the mercy-seat, into the heaven of heavens, to the very heart of God; and we find there a presentation of the most mysterious and incomprehensible love to the human race, embodied in the Person, enshrined in the words, of the only begotten Son. It need not perplex those who believe that we have the words of Jesus, that this prayer of sublime victory and glorious promise should be followed by the agony and the bloody sweat of Gethsemane, where the glorification of the Son of man passed into the advanced stage of his willing and perfect surrender to the Supreme Will. Hengstenberg finds explanation of John's silence touching that agony in the supplemental character of the Gospel, which does not repeat a description of a scene already familiar to all readers of the synoptic narrative. This may account for the mere form of the record, but does it meet the perplexity that arises as to whether the scene of Gethsemane could possibly follow John's narrative? Is not such a conception incompatible altogether with the cry, "If it be possible, let this cup pass from me"? Our answer is a reference to John 12:27, where there is the exact counterpart of the scene in the garden. Nor is a mysterious troubling of the Redeemer's soul elsewhere absent from the Johannine narrative. At the grave of Lazarus, as well as when the Greeks wrung from his lips the cry, "Father, save me from this hour," followed by "Father, glorify thy Name," we have the blending of an utterly indescribable affliction with a triumphant acceptance by him of the Divine purpose of his mission and the will of his Father. Throughout these discourses he is meditating his departure with all its accompanying grief and agony. He describes the way he is about to take as one which would be like the travail-pang of a new humanity; but in his capacity of living in the light of the Father's will, he treats the whole mystery of the cross, the grave, the resurrection, the ascension, as already achieved. Throughout this prayer he regards the work as finished, and the new order of things as already existent. Thus he had prayed for Lazarus and for his restoration from the grave, and he knew then that God heard him; but still he wept, and, groaning within himself, came to the sepulcher. It should also be remembered that (John 14:30) he had expressly said that he was then about to encounter the prince of this world. The perfect humanity of Jesus, on which John continually insists, does entirely justify the rapid changes of mood and the vehemence of the emotions which were in their conflict issuing in sublime courage and perfect peace. The school of Renan, Strauss, and others, following the lead of Bret-schneider, see insuperable difficulties, because they have an idea of Christ's Person which would render it inconceivable and incredible (see Introduction, p. 106.). Verses 1-5. -

(1) With reference to himself. Verse 1. - Jesus spake these things; i.e. the discourse which precedes, and then turned from his disciples to the Father. The place where the prayer was offered is comparatively unimportant, yet it must have been uttered somewhere. It has been well suggested that the Lord, with the disciples, sought the comparative quiet of the Father's house, and in some of the courts of the temple, within sight of the golden gate with its mighty vine, had enacted all that is recorded in John 15-17. This does not interfere with the idea that the starry sky was visible to them, and that from some portion of the temple-courts our Lord should have lifted his eyes to heaven; for the heavens are the perpetual symbol of the majesty of God, and show that side on which, by instinctive recognition of the fact, men may and do look out upon the infinite and the eternal. And having lifted up his eyes to heaven - or, lifting (Revised Version) up his eyes to heaven - he said, in a voice which the wondering, believing, and troubled disciples might hear (see Ver. 13), and from which they were intended to learn much of the relation between their Lord and the eternal Father. There is a twofold division of the prayer: From Vers. 1-5 he offers prayer for himself, but in special relation to his own power over and his own grace to the children of men; from Vers. 6-19 he contemplates the special interests of his disciples, in their present forlorn condition, in their work, conflict, and ultimate triumph; from Vers. 19-26 he prays for the whole Church,

(a) for its unity,

(b) for its expansion,

(c) its glory. For himself he has little to ask (Vers. 1-5), but as soon as his word takes the form of intercession for his own (Vers. 6-26), it becomes an irresistible stream of the most fervent love. Sentence rushes upon sentence with wonderful power, yet the repose is never disturbed (Ewald). Father; not "my Father," nor "our Father," the prayer given to his disciples, nor "my God" as afterwards upon the cross; nor was it the customary address to "God" of either Pharisee or publican; but it recalls the "Abba, Father" of the garden, which passed thence into the experience of the Church (Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6). The hour which has so often presented itself as inevitable, but which so often has receded, and which even now delays its full realization (John 2, 7, 12, 13.) as part of a Divine plan concerning him, the hour of the fiery baptism, of the solemn departure, of the conflict with the prince of this world, and of complete acceptance of the Father's will, has come; glorify thy Son, that (thy) the Son may (also) glorify thee. Lift thy Son into the glory which thou hast prepared, that the Son whom thou hast sanctified and sent into the world may glorify thee. It is very noticeable that he speaks of himself in the third person. This is justified by the fact that he here conspicuously rises out of himself into the consciousness of God, and loses himself in the Father. The glorification of the Son is first of all by death issuing in life. He was crowned with glory in order that he might taste death for every man. The conflict, the victorious combat with death, was the beginning of his glory. In taking upon himself all the burden of human sorrow, and exhausting the poison of the sting of death, he would "glorify God" (cf. John 21:19). This does not exhaust the meaning, but the further forms and elements of his glory are referred to afterwards.

Verse 2. - Even as thou gavest him authority - an indefeasible claim of influence and intimate organic relations with humanity - over all flesh. [This phrase answers to (col bosor) the Old Testament term for the whole of humanity, the entire race, and is one adopted by New Testament writers (Matthew 24:22; Luke 3:6; 1 Corinthians 1:29; Galatians 2:16).] This authority was implied in his incarnation and sacrifice, and in the recapitulation of all things in him. St. Paul says, "Because he tasted death for every man, God has highly exalted him, and given him the Name that is above every name," etc. These opening words reveal the universality and world-wide aspects of the mission and authority and saving power of the Son of God. He holds the keys of the kingdom and city of God. The government is upon his shoulder. Through him all the nations on earth are to be blessed. But the dependence of "all flesh" upon a Divine gift of eternal life through him is no less conspicuous; hence the hopelessness of human nature as it is and apart from grace. The end of this glorification of the Son in the Father is that, in the exercise of this authority, he may give eternal life to all whom thou hast given him. The construction is unusual, and literally rendered would be, that with reference to the whole of that which thou hast given him, to them he should give eternal life. The clause, πᾶν ὅ δέδωκας, may be a nominative or accusative absolute, which, by the defining αὐτοῖς, is subsequently resolved into individual elements. The redeemed humanity of all time has been given to the incarnate Son, and is undoubtedly different from the (πάσα σάρξ) "all flesh" of the previous clause, but it is further explained to mean the individual men and women who receive from him eternal life. The bestowment of eternal life on those thus given to him is the method in which he will glorify the Father (see notes on John 6:37, where the Father is said to draw men to himself by means of the unveiling of his own true character in the Son, and where this drawing is seen to be another way of describing the Father's gift to the Son). Those who are given to Christ are those who are drawn by the Father's grace to see his perfect self-revelation in the face of Jesus Christ, of whom Jesus says, "I will by no means cast them out" (John 6:37), and concerning whom he avers, "No one cometh unto the Father but by me" (John 14:6). Ζώη αἰώνιος, life eternal, is frequently described as his gift. From the first the evangelist has regarded ξώη as the inherent and inalienable prerogative of the "Logos," and the source of all the "light" which has lighted men. This "life," which is "light," came into the world in his birth, and became the head of a new humanity. It is clearly more than, and profoundly different from, the principle of unending existence. Life is more than perpetuity of being, and eternity is not endlessness, nor is "eternal life" a mere prolongation of duration; it refers rather to state and quality than to one condition of that state; it is the negation of time rather than indefinite or infinite prolongation of time. That which Christ gives to those who believe in him, receive him, is the life of God himself. It is strongly urged by many that this eternal life is a present realizable possession, that he that hath the Son hath life, and that we are to disregard the future in the conscious enjoyment of this blessedness; but we must not forget that our Lord obviously refers the life eternal to the future in Matthew 19:29; Mark 10:30; Luke 18:30; Matthew 25:46. Nor are these statements, as some have said, incompatible with the representations of this Gospel (see John 6:40, 54; John 11:25; John 12:25). The aionian blessedness may have a partial realization here and now, but not fill our vision is less clouded and our perils are less severe shall we fully apprehend it. Nor is this inconsistent with Ver. 3.

Verse 3. - The life eternal, of which Jesus has just spoken, is this (cf. for construction, John 15:12; 1 John 3:11, 23; 1 John 5:3), that they might know - should come to know - thee, the only veritable God. All ideas of God which deviate from or fall short of "the Father" revealed to us by Christ, are not the veritable God, and the knowledge of them is not life eternal. The Father is here set forth as the fens Deitatis. This does not exclude "the Son," but is inconceivable without him. The Fatherhood expresses an eternal relation. The one element involves the ether as integral to itself: "I am in the Father, and the Father in me." There is a knowledge of the Father possible even now. "Henceforth, he has said, ye have seen him, and known him;" yet not till the veil is lifted, and we see face to face, shall we know as we are known (1 Corinthians 13:12; 1 John 3:2), shall we see him as he is. And him whom thou didst send, Jesus the Christ (not Jesus to be, or as Christ, but rather "Jesus the Christ," as the expansion and explanation of the more indefinite term, "him whom thou didst scud"). Why does our Lord add to this expression one that at first sight seems so incompatible with the idea of this prayer? It has led so careful and reverential a commentator as Westcott to remove the difficulty by supposing that the whole verse is a gloss of the evangelist, expressing the sense of what our Lord may have uttered at greater length. We are loath to admit this method of exegesis, especially as the sole reasons for it are the supposed strangeness of our Lord's here using a phrase so unaccustomed, and thus giving himself not only his Personal Name, but his own official title. It is unusual. The phrase does undoubtedly belong to a later period for its current and constant use. Yet it must not be forgotten

(1) that this is a unique moment in his career, and unique expressions may be anticipated;

(2) that it was calculated to strengthen his disciples, to allow them to hear once from his own lips the solemn claim to Messiahship (see Godet);

(3) that John himself at once adopted it as his own (Acts 3:6, 20; 1 John 1:3; 1 John 2:1, 22; 1 John 3:22; 1 John 4:2, 3; 1 John 5:1-20; Revelation 1:1, 2, 5); moreover,

(4) in 1 John 5:20 Jesus Christ is, himself lifted up into the region of the ἀληθίνος, and the apostle adds, "This is the true God, and eternal life" (Hengstenberg). It is from these very words that some critics imagine that the evangelist, rather than the Lord himself, framed the clause;

(5) yet it is quite as rational to suppose that the words uttered by Jesus dwelt like a strain of sacred music in the memory of the apostle. Moreover,

(6) the knowledge of the only true God is really conditioned by the knowledge of him who was indeed the great Revelation, Organ, and Effluence of the Father's glory. The fullness of this knowledge is the end of all Christian striving. Paul said, "I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus... and that I may know him" (Philippians 3:10). How much is there yet to know!

(7) Finally, as our Lord is rising more and more into the glory of an utter self-abandonment, and into the glory which he had with the Father from eternity, the human nature which he still inhabits becomes almost an appendage of his Divine Personality, and he might with awful significance, when referring to the object of human faith and knowledge, say, "Him whom thou hast sent - Jesus the Christ." Moreover, on any hypothesis of the composition or framing of an intercessory prayer for the Logos Christos to utter, there is an equal difficulty in the insertion into such prayer by St. John of this reference to himself as the Christ. The knowledge of the Father as the only true God, in opposition to the heathen traditions and philosophical speculations of the world, coupled with a corresponding knowledge of the only adequate expression of the Father's heart and nature, sent forth from him, as One promised, consecrated, and empowered to represent him, is life - ere half life.

Verse 4. - He continues the prayer which he is offering for himself: I glorified thee on the earth, having finished the work which thou hast given me to do. Many expositors urge a proleptical or anticipatory assertion of the completion of his earthly work, as though the Passion were already over, and he were now uttering the consummatum est of the cross. This is, however, included in the next clause. The night has come when the earthly ministry is at an end. The Jesus Christ, whom the Father has sent, has completed his task. The whole work of the earthly manifestation of the Word was at an. end. Suffering remains, the issues of the conflict with evil have to be encountered; but the die is cast - the thing is done. The godly life, as well as the atoning death, are correlative parts of the merits and work of Christ, and have glorified the Father. But what a self-consciousness beams forth in these simple words! St. Paul, on the verge of his martyrdom, in the midst of the horrors of the Neronian persecution, exclaimed, "I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course." But our Lord is unconscious of any coming short of the glory of God; and he even counts on higher power to glorify God by returning to a position which he had for a while vacated.

Verse 5. - And now (νῦν) - the very point of time has come - glorify thou me, O Father, explaining the opening of the prayer, "Glorify thy Son." He identifies his own Personality - "me" -with that of "the Son," and "thy Son." With thy own self (παρὰ σεαυτῷ); in closest connection and fellowship with thy-self - a relation which has been arrested or suspended since have been "Jesus Christ," and glorifying thee amid the toil and sorrow of this earthly pilgrimage. This immediate glorification of the Son embraces the glory of vicarious death, the triumphant resurrection, the mystery of ascension in the strength of his human memories to the right hand of God (John 13:31, 32). He still further defines this wondrous prospect, as with the glory which I had with thee before the world was - before the being of the κόσμος παρὰ σεαυτῷ... παρὰ σοι Παρὰ in John represents local relationships (see John 1:40; John 4:40; John 14:25; Revelation 2:13) or intimate spiritual associations (John 14: ). So our Lord remembers and anticipates a "glory with the Father." That which he refers to as before the existence of the world has been softened down by Grotius, Wettstein, Schleiermacher, and some moderns to mean the glory of the Divine thought and destination concerning him; but the expression παρὰ σοι ισ far from being exhausted by such a rendering. He who wrote the prologue (John 1:2, 18) meant that, as the Logos had been πρὸς τὸν Θέον and εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ Πατρός, and at a special epoch "became flesh," the beamings forth of his glory on earth were those which belonged to human life, to the form of a servant, and were profoundly different from that μορφὴ Θεοῦ in which his innermost self-consciousness, the center of his Personality, originally dwelt. And now he seeks to carry this new appanage of his Sonship, this God-glorifying humanity, up into the glory of the pre-existent majesty (cf. Philippians 2:9; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 1:8, 13). The δόξα which was visible to the disciples on earth (John 1:14) was glory limited, colored, conditioned, by human life and death; but so complete was the Lord's union with the Logos, that it did not quench his memory of the glory of his omnipresent, eternal Being, nor his remembrance of absolute coexistence with the Father before all worlds. He would lift humanity to the very throne of God by its union with his Person. This stupendous claim both as to the past and future would be utterly bewildering if it stood alone; but the Old Testament has prepared the mind of the disciples for this great mystery (Proverbs 8; Isaiah 6.). The theophanies generally, and John 8:25 and Hebrews 1, with numerous other passages, sustain and corroborate the conception that the Logos of God was throughout all human history on the verge of manifestation in the flesh. The record of the extraordinary God-consciousness of Jesus does transcend all human experience, and baffles us at every turn; but the human consciousness of Jesus appears gradually to have come into such communion with the Logos who had become flesh in him, that he thought the veritable thoughts and felt the emotions of the eternal God as though they were absolutely his own. In addition to this idea of his resumption of his own eternal state, Lange and Moulton, in opposition to Meyer, lay emphasis on the answer to this prayer, consisting in such a manifestation of the premundane glory in his flesh, that it should perfectly establish the relation between the glory of the Father before all worlds, -rod the glory of utter and complete self-sacrifice for the redemption of the world. The glory of omnipotence and omnipresence is lost in the greater glory of infinite love. Thus the glory which he had with the Father would be best seen in the completion of his agony, the τετέλεσται of the cross.

Verses 6-19. -

(2) The prayer for his disciples. Verses 6-8. - Here the Divine Intercessor turns from himself, and from the approaching glory of his own mediatorial Person and position, to meditate, for the advantage of his disciples, on what had already been done for them, in them, to them. He clothes these meditations in the form of a direct address to the eternal God, and makes the series of facts on which he dwells the groundwork of the prayer which follows for his disciples, as representative of all who, like them, have come into relations with the Father through him. I manifested thy Name (ἐφανέρωσα here corresponds to ἐδόξασα τελειώσας of Ver. 4. The force of φανέροω is different from ἀποκάλυπτω or ἐμφάνιζω; see on John 14:21). "I poured light upon, and thus made appreciable, apprehensible, thy Name." This Name was but partially and imperfectly understood before. The Name of God, the compendium of all his excellences, the essential features of his substantial Being which Christ has thus illuminated, is "the Father." "Whatsoever is made manifest is light." This light is the effulgence of the glory of the Father. By being and living on earth as Son of the Father, the Father was revealed. A full revelation of the Father involves and is involved in a manifestation of his own Sonship. The relation between the Father and the Son is one of infinite complacency and mutual affection, and the revelation of it demonstrates the fact of the eternal and essential love of the Divine Being. Thus the fact that "God is love" is manifested in the life of the Son of man, who was in himself a revelation of the Son - the Son of God. "I manifested thy Name," said Jesus - showing that he regarded his work of self-manifestation and God-revelation as virtually complete - to the men whom thou gavest me (cf. here John 6:44 and John 10:29). The Father's "giving" of the sons of men to Christ refers primarily to the men that were made susceptible of his special grace and revelations, who in seeing, saw, in hearing, heard, who, being drawn by inward monitions and Divine grace, and verily taught of God, came to Christ. Thus the Father gave them to Christ. The first monitions, susceptibilities of soul for Christ, which are found throughout the world and the Church, are God's way of giving men to Christ. The supremacy and monergy of grace is involved in the whole of this representation. Out of the world. They were in the world, but have been drawn out of it by the re-relation of the Father. Thine they were, and thou gavest them me. So that the approach even to the Lord Jesus, the drawing to Christ and to the blessed revelation of the Father, was preceded by a previous condition - "Thine they were." Before the process of giving and drawing was begun, there was a sense in which they bore this great designation. Their position as creatures, or as Israelites, or as believers in the Old Testament manifestation of the Name, seems to fall short of the solemn assertion, "Thine they were." There were in every case spiritual predispositions. They were "of God" (John 8:47); "doers of the truth" (John 3:21); "willing to do the will of God" (John 7:17); they were of the truth (John 18:37; John 6:37, 44). All these expressions reveal an extraordinary relation of human souls to the Father, which is presupposed, and precedes the power over them and advantage to them of the grace of Christ. This may throw light on the work of grace in pre-Christian and non-Christian times and places. Thine they were, and thou gavest them me, and they have kept thy Λόγον - the sum total of thy revelation or Word to them. They, these men, these special representative men, have been true to their light, and know of the doctrine whether it be of God. Their own quickened conscience has been strong enough to justify all my διδαχή, my ῤήματα, as Divine assurances. To Christ's eyes they have already come out of their fiery trial faithful and true. Now, at this point in their training, they have known, by a strong experience, by tasting, handling, seeing, trusting, by vivid flashes of light, by keen, clear intuition of the reality, that all things whatsoever which thou hast given me, are from thee. There is no tautology here; the ὥσα are the truths, the fresh revelations, the glorious communion of the Son of man with the Father, which he made known to the disciples - truths which have a worldwide bearing, and also a direct bearing upon themselves - are from thee (παρὰ σοῦ, not παρὰ σοι). This obscure utterance, in its mystic vagueness, is clearly expounded in the next sentence, which is the echo of the grand assertion of John 16:30, which drew from the breaking heart its loud and sublime note of triumph. Because the words, the various sayings, utterances of Divine reality, which thou gavest to me, I have given to them. This blessed recital and exposition of his previous ministry is followed by the record of the effect, without which the whole Christian dispensation would that very night have come to an abrupt end. They believed that all Christ's words, works, energies, revelations, warnings, promises, like Christ himself, came from the eternal Father, therefore represented the supreme reality, more certain than demonstration, more vivid than intuition. They have rendered invincible assent to them as the Divine, absolute, unchangeable, irrevocable, eternal truth. In this overwhelming and satisfying conviction was laid the foundation of the Church of Christ. And they received them. This was a direct consequence of the Divine giving and of the Divine drawing. And they came to know - discerned, i.e. by personal experience - and truly that I came out from thee, and believed that thou didst send me. This knowledge and belief is the germ of the communication to others of the Divine manifestation; it is the Lord's reward for all the toil and sacrifice and Divine humiliation of his earthly ministry (John 16:30). The incarnate Word is recognized as such, the only begotten Son of the Father is known to be the Brightness of his glory. We see in this great utterance the true origin of the evangelist's own words (John 1:14-18; 1 John 1:1-5). This thought of Christ's has now become their voluntary, spontaneous, assured conviction. The inward reason corresponds with the objective facts.

Verse 9. - I - very emphatic - am praying for them (for this use of ἐρωτῶ see note, John 16:23). We must remember that this is perfectly consistent with the fact that, in the day of the spiritual manifestation to the disciples, when both the Father and Son came to them, the disciples would ask the Father for the gifts which his love to them was waiting to supply; and he, Christ himself, would hear them if they asked in his Name; and that then there would be no need that he should pray the Father for them. That time had not yet come, though it was coming. Both statements are also perfectly consistent with his "intercession" for us. Not concerning - or, not for - the world am I praying. Surely this is not an assertion that he would never pray, or that he had not already prayed, for the world. Nay, his entire ministry is the expression of the Father's love to the whole world (John 3:16). He came as Jehovah's Lamb to take away its sin (John 1:29), he bade his disciples (Matthew 5:44) pray for their enemies, and he cried at the last for a blessing on his murderers. He "came to seek and save the lost," to "call sinners to repentance," "not to condemn, but to save the world." Moreover, in this prayer (Ver. 21) he does pray for those who should ultimately, though they do not now, believe on him through the word of the disciples; therefore it is inconceivable that he should here dogmatically limit the range of his gracious desire. Calvin here observes, "We are commanded to pray for all (l Timothy 2:1)," and quotes Luke 23:34 that Christ prayed for his murderers. "We ought to pray that this man and that man and every man may be saved, and thus include the whole human race, because we cannot distinguish the elect from the reprobate." Calvin implies that Christ is here within the sanctuary, and places before his eyes the secret judgments of the Father. Lampe goes much further. Luther says, "In the same sense in which he prays for the disciples, he does not pray for the world." But the best explanation is that the high-priestly intercession at this supreme moment is concerned with those who were already given to him, and who have come to believe in his Divine Person and commission. He expressly and divinely commends to the Father those whom thou hast given me - the burden of the thought is contained in the motive he suggests for this commendation, viz. - because they are thine; i.e. though thou hast given them to me, though they have "come to me," through thy drawing, they are more than ever "thine." This most fervent yielding to the attraction of Jesus, and utter moral surrender to his control, do not alienate the heart from the Father, but make it more than ever his.

Verse 10. - And all things that are mine are thine; whether they be these souls, or these powers that I wield, or these words that I utter, or these works that I do, - all are thine. This statement is in perfect harmony with all his teaching, and is not incompatible with the reverential sentiment that any servant of God might utter; but he adds words to show that the union between him and the Father is much closer than this, and quite unique. And thine are mine. Luther observed, "No creature could say this." Perhaps he went too far, because we are taught to believe that "all things are ours," etc., and the πάντα covers much (see 1 Corinthians 3:21). In the full confidence of filial relation we can believe it true that the heavenly Father says to every one of his veritable children, "All that I have is thine." Here the words must not be drawn out of their connection; it is human souls who are of God, and are therefore Christ's. The dogmatic lesson is that every one who has heard and learned of the Father does come to him. Such an assurance gives a sublime hope to the world, and I (have been and) am glorified in them. Once more the Divine Savior rejoices in the victory he has won in securing the faith of the disciples. How much he loved and trusted them!

Verse 11. - And I am no more (no longer) in the world (cf. John 16:28). The earthly ministry is over; for a while he must leave them in the pitiless storm, bereft of his care and counsel, exposed to infinite peril and temptation. Headless, scattered, tempted to believe that all he had said to them was one huge delusion. And these are in the world, without me, without visible sight of the mirror in which thy glory has been reflected, and I come - I return - to thee. These are the conditions on their part and on mine, which justify this prayer for them; and my prayer is, Holy Father, keep - or, guard - them. This grand title stands here in solitary grandeur (though let Ver. 25, πάτερ δίκαιε, be noticed, and the fact that Revelation 6:10 speaks of "the Holy and True," and 1 John 2:20 of "the Holy One"). The very holiness of the Father is appealed to as the surest basis of the petition. They have already been taught to pray, "Hallowed [made holy] be thy Name." The eternal holiness and righteousness of God is involved in the saving and sanctification of the believer in Jesus. "Keep them, holy Father" (says our Lord), in and by thy Name, those whom thou hast given me. Οὕς δέδωκάς μοι is the reading of the T.R., on the very feeble authority from the codices, simply D2, 69, and some versions. It is also thus quoted by Epiphanius twice; but the reading of all the best uncial manuscripts, א, A, B, C, L, Y, Γ, Δ, Π, etc., numerous versions and quotations, is ῷ δέδωκάς κοι. Some very unimportant manuscripts read ο{, which Godet prefers as practically equivalent to ου{ς, regarded as a unity, "that which," and as calculated to explain the ῷ of the uncials, and the reading οὕς. Lachmann, Tischendorf (8th edit.), Tregelles, Meyer, Westcott and Herr, and R.T. all read ῷ, which is thrown by attraction to ὀνόματί into the dative, and requires the translation, Keep them (in or by) in the power of thy Name which thou hast given me. And since ο{ is a resolution of the attraction, it is quite as likely that it is a correction of ῷ as that the reverse process should have taken place. The expression is very peculiar, but not inexplicable. Philippians 2:9 is the best illustration of the clause. It reads, according to the true text, "He hath bestowed on him the Name (τὸ ὄνομα) which is above every name," i.e. the eternal Name, the incommunicable Name (cf. Revelation 2:17; Revelation 19:12) of Jehovah. Meyer objects to this that the Father's Name was simply given him as an ambassador or for purposes of revelation and manifestation. This may be a partial limitation of the thought. He has already said, "I have manifested thy Name, thy fatherhood to the men," etc. And now he adds, "Keep them in the power and grace of this glorious Name, of which my Person and message have been the full expression." That they may be one, united, formed into a unity of being, even as we are, not losing their personality, but blending and interchanging their interests and their affections after the Divine pattern of the Father and Son. The relations between Christians, which constitute the essential unity of their corporate being, are of the same kind as those which pertain to Christ and God, and prevail between them, therefore lying far behind the shifting phases of organization and human order, in the essence and substance of spiritual life. Some writers have found in this analogy between the union of believers and the hypostatic union of the Persons of the Godhead, either a species of tritheism in the Godhead, or a minimizing of the entire conception to what is called moral union between the Father-God and his Son Jesus Christ. But the effect of the utterance is rather to lift the idea of the unity of the body of Christ to a superlative height, and to interpret still further the nature of its oneness with the Father and Son (see Ver. 23).

Verse 12. - While I was with them (in the world). He speaks of the earthly ministry as completed, and reviews the whole of his influence over them. I kept them in thy Name which thou hast given me. The very process that I can no longer pursue, and the cessation of which becomes the ground of the plea for the Father's τηρήσις. This an earthly father might say, without irreverence, of children whom he was about to leave, but the quality of the keeping is characterized by the Divine Name which was given him, and that manifested the Sonship which carried with it all the revelation of the Father. And I guarded (them) - ἐτήρουν signifies watchful observation; ἐφύλαξα, guardianship as behind the walls of a fortress - and not one perished - went to destruction - except that the son of perdition (has perished). Christ does not say that the son of perdition was given him by the Father and guarded from the evil one, and yet had gone to his own place; the exception refers simply to the "not one perished." Αἰ μὴ has occasionally a meaning not exactly equal to ἀλλὰ, but expresses an exception which does not cover the whole of the ideas involved in the previous clause (see Matthew 12:4; Luke 4:26, 27; Galatians 1:19, etc.). This awful Hebraistic phrase is used by St. Paul (2 Thessalonians 2:3; cf. 2 Samuel 12:5) for antichrist, and numerous phrases of the kind show how a genitive following υἱὸς or τέκνον expresses the full characteristic or the chief feature of certain persons (thus cf. υἱὸς γεένης τέκνα φῶτος κατάρας, etc.). This victim of perdition, this child of hell, has completed his course; even now he has laid his plans for my destruction and his own. He has so perished in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled. Even if the full telic force of ἵνα is preserved here, he does not free the "son of perdition" from the responsibility of his own destruction. The Scripture portraiture of Messiah has been realized. Psalm 41:9, which has already been quoted by our Lord in John 13:18, is probably still in his mind (cf. also Isaiah 57:12, 13). Some commentators - Arch-deacon Watkins, Dean Alford - press the fact that the "son of perdition" must have been among those who were given to Christ by the Father, who were watched, guarded, taught by God; but that Judas nevertheless took his own way and went to his own place. Thoma compares the lost disciple with the lost sheep of the synoptists, as though we had a reference to a true reprobate, a son of Belial, Apollyon, and the like. Moulton justly protests against any countenance being found here for the irrevocable decree. But if the interpretation of the εἰ μὴ given above is sound, there is no inclusion of the traitor among those who are "of the truth," etc.; but he was one who, notwithstanding boundless opportunity, went to his own place in the perversity of his own will.

Verse 13. - But now come I to thee. So that the condition, the shielding protection of my love is removed, thou, O my Father, must be their Sun and Shield. And these things I am uttering in the world; uttering, i.e. in their hearing before my last step is taken, and perhaps in the very midst of the machinations which are going on against me. That they might have the joy that is mine fulfilled, fully unfolded and completed, in themselves. By overhearing the high-priestly prayer, they would be assured of the Divine guardianship, and would receive the transfer of even his joy as well as of his peace. They would find the higher joy also of the return of their Lord to the bosom of the Father. Christ has taught his disciples to desire such joy and peace as he found on the night of the Passion.

Verse 14. - I have given them thy word (δέδωκα, a permanent endowment); and the implication is that they have received it (Ver. 8). The phrase is rather more condensed than before, and carries all the consequences previously mentioned, and others as well to which the Lord had referred (John 16:1-5). As a matter of fact, the world hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. This constant contrast between the mind of Christ and the spirit of the world pervades the New Testament. Christ had exposed its hypocrisies, and denounced its idols, and inverted its standards, and repudiated its smile, and condemned its prince, and was now indifferent to its curse. His disciples, as far as they shared his sentiments, came in also for its malediction and hatred (cf. the conflict with the Pharisees in the synoptic narrative).

Verse 15. - The prayer of Jesus based on this. I pray (ἐρωτῶ, not αἰτεω; see Ver. 9; the ἵνα here defines the contents of the prayer) not that thou shouldest take them away - lift them up and out - out of the world, as thou art taking me by death. This natural desire on the part of some of them is not in harmony with the highest interests of the kingdom. Those interests it would henceforth be their high function to subserve. There is much testimony for them to bear, there are many great facts for them completely to grasp, many aspects of truth which they must put into words for the life and salvation of souls, individuals for them to teach and train, victories for them to win, examples which they must set before the world. If they are all to vanish from the eyes of men as Christ will do, the end of the manifestation will be sacrificed. The Lord prays, not that they should be taken out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them (τηρήσῃς, not φυλάξῃς) from the evil. The ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ is different from Matthew 6:13, ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ, and may possibly mean "from the evil one." Reuss, Meyer, and Revised Version accept the same translation here in virtue of 1 John 2:13; 1 John 3:12; 1 John 5:18; Revelation 3:10, where the devil is regarded as dominating, the realm, the atmosphere, the spirit, and the kingdom of this world. Over against this kingdom the Lord Christ, as the devil's great Rival, rules in the kingdom of grace. Luther, Calvin, Hengstenberg. Godet, Authorized Version, and numerous other commentators, have regarded τοῦ πονηροῦ as neuter, as referring to the great characteristic and all-subduing temper, the far-reaching glamour and the godless disposition of the world. Τὸ πονήρον includes ὁ πονήρος.

Verse 16. - They are not of the world, even as of the world I am not. This verse simply repeats, with alteration of order, the clause of Ver. 14 as the basis of the next great petition. Ver. 14 draws the comparison between Christ and the disciples; Ver. 16 lays, by a transposition of words, the greater emphasis on "the world." Alas that this great utterance should so often be utterly ignored! How often in our own days, is other-worldliness and unworldliness derided as a pestilent heresy, and "a man of the world," instinct with its purpose and saturated with its spirit, lauded as the true man and ideal leader of a Christian state!

Verse 17. - Sanctify them; consecrate them (cf. John 10:36, of the sanctification of the Son by the Father to the work of effecting human redemption), separate them from the evil of the world, as for holy purposes. Devote them to the glorious cause. Let them be sacrifices on the altar. The ἁγιάζω, to sanctify, is not synonymous with καθαρίζω, to purify; α{γιος ισ not a contradiction of the defiled so much as of the purely natural, and involves the higher ends of grace (Exodus 29:1, 36; Exodus 40:13). The sanctification of the Old Testament is a ritual process effected by ceremonial observance; the sanctification of the New Testament is a spiritual process passing over heart and conscience and will, and is the work of the Divine Spirit. Meyer, Westcott, and others translate the next clause, in the truth, as the atmosphere in which the disciples dwell; but a large number of commentators, with Godet, take ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ as equivalent to" by the aid of," with the instrumentality of, "the truth:" consecrate them, by revealing to them the reality, making known to them the truth. If they see the truth they will be discharged from the illusions of the world, the flesh, and the devil. (Luther takes ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ adverbially, and as equivalent to "verily and indeed; but this cannot well be, seeing the article is present, and taking account of the subsequent definition of ἀληθεία, it becomes improbable.) But what is "truth"? what is the full expression of reality? how are we to know where to find it? Thy Logos (thy Word), the utterance of thy thought, is truth. If we can ever cognize what is the Divine thought about anything, we shall reach the absolute truth. What God troweth is truth per se. The Logos of God, the full, God-chosen utterance of the reality of truth, is the nearest approach to truth that we possess. This revelation of God is the closest correspondence with the reality. God sanctifies his children, consecrates them to the service of his kingdom by revealing the truth, by making known the otherwise transcendental facts of his kingdom. A long controversy has prevailed in the Church as to whether the Spirit's gracious operations are or are not limited by the operation of truth on the mind. Numerous assurances of the New Testament seem thus to limit the grace of God, or to measure it by the ordinary effect produced on the understanding by Divine truth; e.g. "Of his own will begat he us by the Word of truth;" the parable of the sower, and other Scriptures. But seeing that the regeneration, the conference of new and supernatural life, is set forth by images of resurrection and new creation, and as a purification of taste, bias, and desire, the gift of a new heart and right spirit, the voice of a heavenly sonship crying within us, "Abba, Father," and seeing that the ministration of the Spirit is variously directed and operative, and that there is shadowed forth an immediate work on the heart," back of consciousness" itself, and that the witness of the Spirit and the teaching and indwelling of the Holy Ghost are continually referred to, - we are loath to accept the dogma. The Spirit of God is not limited to the normal operations of the Word.

Verse 18. - As thou didst send me into the world from the glory which I had with thee before the world was - a primal fact in the earthly consciousness of the Lord Christ, and one on which he repeatedly laid emphasis (John 10:36; John 17:8) - even so I sent them into the world; i.e. from that higher sphere of thought above the world to which I had called them. "They are not of the world," but I sent them from the unworldly home and from the high place of my intimate friendship, from the ground of elevated sympathy with myself, into the world, with my message and the power to claim obedience. Christ gave this apostolic commission near the commencement of his ministry (see Matthew 10:5, etc., and Mark 3:14, Ἵνα ω΅σι μετ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἵνα ἀποστέλλῃ αὐτοὺς κηρύσσειν), and that first act, the type of the whole apostolic commission, which was finally confirmed (Matthew 28:19, 20; John 20:21, 22), is here described in the timeless force of the aorist, so that the word embraces the entire ministerial function of all who believe in the mission of the Son.

Verse 19. - And for their sakes - on their behalf - I sanctify, consecrate, myself. The Father had consecrated him and sent him into the world, but over and above all this there were special and sacrificial acts of love and devotion which he made on behalf of his own. He went up voluntarily into the wilderness to be tempted for them; he wrought for them while it was yet day. He now was ready to commend himself to the supreme will of the Father, and to offer himself through the Spirit in his perfected humanity without spot of sin to God. Ἁγιάζω is equivalent προσφέρω σοὶ θυσίαν, as Chrysostom says, and it is used for הִקְדִּישׁ (Exodus 13:2; Deuteronomy 15:19). Christ is the Priest and the Victim, and the dedication of himself to this climax of his consecrated life is for the sake of the disciples (so Lange, Meyer, Godet, and Westcott). That they also may be sanctified indeed - truly or veritably.

(1) We have to notice that the passive form of the second clause shows that that which the Lord, in its highest form, effects for himself, they receive as a work wrought in them by another.

(2) Using the word ἁγιάζειν in the same sense in both clauses, the consecration effected in the disciples must correspond with Christ's consecration in self-sacrificial love, in abandonment to the power of the Word which has revolutionized their whole being, in entire equipment for their calling, even to the point of hatred and antagonism from the world, and death for his sake. They are indeed to drink of his cup, and be baptized with his baptism. They must be crucified with him and buried with him, and rise again with him, in the activity of their faith.

(3) Ἐν ἀληθείᾳ, without the article, has the sense of "verily and indeed" (Matthew 22:16; 2 Corinthians 7:14; 1 John 3:18, etc.). It is not certain that 2 John I or 3 John I can be thus translated, but the classical usage of this phrase, and also of ἐπ ἀληθείας, leaves little doubt about its use here.

Verses 20-26. -

(3) Prayer for the Church Catholic in all time. Verse 20. - Neither do I pray (ἐρωτῶ) for - concerning these alone, but also for those who believe on me through their word. The Lord summons the future into the present. He speaks of having once for all sent them, and he sees rising before his eye the multitudes in all ages who would believe their testimony as if already doing so. The universal Church rejoices in the fullness of his love and the greatness of his wish concerning the individuals who believe. The prayer is an eternal intercession.

Verse 21. - That they all may be one. My prayer is that the many may become one, form one living glorious unity; - every part of which spiritual organism, while living a separate and differentiated life, is yet a part of a whole. In the natural sphere, as the parts of a whole organism are mere and more developed, and increasingly resemble individualities in their separation, they are in the same proportion dependent on the whole for the life that is in them. Even in a highly organized community, as the separate individuals have more and more personal consciousness of special function, they become the more dependent on the whole, and in one sense lost in the unity to which they belong. The branches in the vine form together one vine; the members of a body, being many, are one body and members of one another. It is open to discussion whether the καθὼς clause, which here follows, characterizes the above statement, as Meyer and many others urge, or whether, with Godet, the sentence, "That they all may be one," should not be taken as a general statement, to be followed by the καθὼς clause, which characterizes the following words. The first method is a more rational interpretation, nor does the sentence drag. According as thou, Father, (art) in me, and I (am) in thee; i.e. the relation between the Father and Son, the manner in which the Father lives in the Son, as in his organ or instrument of manifestation and object of supreme affection, and as the Son is in the Father, abiding ever in the light of his glory, in the power of his Name, and as these two are thus One in being, so, or similarly, the believers are to live in and for each other, becoming a unity, just as the Father and Son are unity. In order that they themselves also may be [one] in us. This ἵνα does not offer a parallel sentence in apposition with the former, nor is the "that" to be inverted, with Godet, who translates, "that according as thou.., they also may be one in us;" but it is the climax of the whole unifying process, after the likeness of the union between the Father and the Son, viz. that they themselves may be included in this unity. Though they are thus to be lost in God, yet they do not lose their own individuality. Nay, in proportion to their organic relation to the fullness of the Godhead and the completeness of their own spiritual fellowship with one another, will this personal consciousness of theirs become more and more pronounced. There is yet a further process contemplated, viz. in order that the world may believe (πιστεύῃ, as in the next verse; γινώσκῃ, in the present subjunctive, rather than the aorist) that thou didst send me. The spiritual life and unity of the Church will produce an impression on the world which now rejects the Christ and does not appreciate his Divine commission. The union which springs from the blended life of the various and even contradictory elements in the Church will prove the reality of its origin. The world will believe, - this is the final purpose of the intercession concerning the disciples; so though above he did not pray for the world as the then immediate object of his intercession, the poor world is in his heart, and the saving of the world the end of his incarnation. If the union between the Father and the Son is the sublime type of the union between those who shall believe, it is not the union of a great society in accordance with certain invincible rules of affiliation and government. The union between the Father and Son is not a visible manifestation, but a spiritual inference. The common indwelling in the Father and Son, the identity of the spiritual emotion and purpose in all who have one Lord, one faith, one baptism, will convince the world by producing a similar inference. Alford: "This unity is not mere outward uniformity, nor can such uniformity produce it. At the same time, its effects are to be real and visible, such that the world may see them."

Verse 22. - Our Lord now proceeds to record how he has already contributed to produce this result. I also - very emphatic - have given to them - that is, to my disciples - the glory which thou gavest me. Numerous interpretations of this "glory" have been suggested, as e.g., the glory into which he is about to enter in his glorified body; but the emphatic perfect δέδωκα, in connection with the ἐδωκάς, viz.: "I have given and am now and still giving," renders this improbable. Meyer, who does not accept Baumgarten-Crusius's view that διδόναι here means "to destine," yet comes very much to the same thought, and regards it as the heavenly glory of which he had eternal experience, and would ultimately share with his people. But the view variously set forth by Oldhausen, Hengstenberg, Maldonatus, Bengel, Tholuck, Moulton, and Godet appears to be in full harmony with the context, viz. the glory of the supernatural life of Divine Sonship and self-sacrificing love as of the very essence of God. This glory that he should taste death for every man, this glory of nature and character as the incarnate Head of a new humanity, I have given to them, in order that they may be one, living in and for each other, even as we are one. The contrast between his own relation to the Father and theirs is most wonderfully maintained. The union between the Father and Son is once more made the type, in his own unique consciousness, of the union among men who have received as his gift the eternal life and glory of a supernatural love. This is more evident from what follows.

Verse 23. - I in them, and thou in me. He does not say, "Thou in them, as thou in me," nor "They in thee, and I in thee;" but he includes in the ἡμεῖς of the previous verse, Ἐγὼ καὶ Σύ, and distinctly regards himself as the mediating link of relation between the Father and the disciples. The Ἐγὼ is that of the Son of God, manifested in Christ's consciousness of the God-man-hood; the Σύ is the eternal and non-incarnate God. God is in him, as he is in them. They are in him, as he is in the Father. That they may be perfected, completely realizing the end of their being and the meaning of the gift of eternal life, fully ripened in their graces until they reach up into one, into the fullness of the stature of the perfect Man, until they become the one new and immortal body of the living Christ, (εἰς ε{ν indicates the sublime result so far as they are concerned). Each individual believer reaching the highest perfection of his being, as according to his own capacity and function he fills his place in the one living body of the Lord The end is not here, however, so far as others are concerned; for this unity, when consummated, is to bring about a yet further result on this earth, and in order that the world may come to know (γινώσκῃ.) that thou didst send me, and lovedst them as thou lovedst me. Our Lord has advanced upon the assertion of Ver. 21,

(1) by discriminating between "believing" and "coming to know" by personal experiences, overwhelming conviction, and processes which lead to invincible assent. Faith in its highest form melts into knowledge, full assurance, complete certitude.

(2) There is superadded to the conviction concerning the Divine mission of the Christ yet another, viz. a conviction of the wonderful love which thou hast shown to them in thus lifting them out of the world into the unity of the spiritual life, into the fellowship of the Son of God. This has twofold bearing. So far as the world is concerned they will see that the love shown to the believers in Christ will be compatible with the same kind of treatment as Christ himself received, and so far as the Divine reality is concerned, it will be seen that they are so closely identified with Christ that the infinite love of God to Christ flows over in its Divine superabundance upon those who are gathered together into him. It is impossible to exclude from these verses the idea of the visibility of the union and life of the Church, and of the Divine love to it. Nothing is said or hinted, however, about the nature of that visibility. Christians are not, by reason of their differences, to exclude from this passage the promise that the whole assembly of the Firstborn would make this gracious and convincing impression on the world. They are far enough, in days of mutual recrimination, from realizing the Divine ideal, and should set themselves to remedy the crying evil; but they have no right to import into the words, by reason of their predilection for particular forms of Church organization, an identification of the body of Christ with any specific form. The spiritual union of Christendom in its one faith, hope, and character, is, notwithstanding the divergence of some of its forms of expression, the most stupendous fact in the history of the world. The elite of all Churches are drawing more and more into a visible unity.

Verse 24. - Now passing from this glorification of his people in the convictions and knowledge of the world, our Lord offers "as a Son to a Father," and therefore with profound naturalness, the prayer of the incarnate Logos to the eternal Father, and therefore an address indubitably supernatural and lifted above all human consciousness. It is a prayer, too, which rises from the high and unique term ἐρωτῶ (one which he never puts into the lips of his disciples) to a yet higher one, θέλω, as one who speaks with ἐξουσία which God had given him over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to those whom God had given him. Θέλω means less than "I will," and more than "I desire," and is destitute of that element of "counsel" or deliberation that is involved in βουλόμαι. Very soon after this, when the full force of his human consciousness pressed upon him, he said (Mark 14:36), "Not what (ἐγὼ θέλω) I will, but what thou wiliest." But here he is so conscious of the Father's will concerning others that he cries, Father, as for them whom - or, as some ancient codices read, that which - thou hast given me, regarded as a mystic unity, as the Bride which he has redeemed, I will that they also be with me where I am. Κἀκεῖνοι resolves the ὅν into the elements of which it is composed. This is the first part of the final petition, and it embraces everything. "With Christ;" "Forever with the Lord;" in his glory and part of it, in the place which he is going to localize and prepare for them, is heaven. The glory which he had already given to his disciples (Ver. 22) falls far short of this fellowship with him where his undimmed radiance shines, is only a preparation for sharing with him in his ultimate triumph over the world and death, and also for sitting down with him on his throne (Revelation 3:21). In this world fellowship with him in his suffering humanity did not finally reveal the transcendent glory (though in John 1:14 the apostle says, "We beheld his glory," etc.) of his Person. To realize this he prays, And that they may also behold the glory which is mine, which thou hast given me. The glory given cannot be the glory of the λόγος ἀσάρκος, according to Meyer, for that is not given, but belongs to him by eternal right; yet Meyer admits that the Father gave the Son to have life in himself; and that even the eternal Sonship itself may be regarded as the eternal bestowment of an infinite love. Seeing that the Lord goes on to give a reason of his θέλημα founded on an eternal or at least pre-mundane manifestation of a conscious love, surely he is thinking of the exaltation of humanity into the eternal glory, which he distinctly relinquished and veiled in the days of his flesh. That which they had hitherto seen they only partially apprehended, though he had even given it to them (ver. 22), and though they had been drawn out of the world to high places of transfiguration, that they might behold it and learn how it coexisted with and was compatible with a perfect resignation to the will of God in human redemption. Our Lord prays, nay, wills, that they should hereafter see it in its fullness of grace and beauty, see it when relieved from obstructive hindrances due to the flesh and to the world, see it on the grandest scale, see it as it really is, see the full capacity and infinite momentum of the glory which he had already bestowed upon them. For thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. This, say Meyer and Luthardt, is given as a reason of the prayer for his disciples, not as an explanation of the glory which he had with the Father before the world was. It is often said that the exaltation of the Son of man is a reward for his self-humiliation, and the crown of his sacrificial death (Philippians 2:9; Revelation 3:21; Hebrews 1:1, 2), but these very passages couple that exaltation with the premundane glory of him who was, to begin with, and before his work of redemption, the "Effulgence of the Father's glory," who was "in the form of God," and regarded the being equal with God as no ἁρπαγμός ( νοτ as a thing to be seized, prized, and held in its integrity. And in Hebrews 2:9, "He was by reason of his intended passion crowned with glory and honor, in order that he might taste death for every man." So that the glory which he had with the Father before the world was, and therefore before his incarnation, was that very glory of self-devoting and unutterable love into which he would come again with all the trophies of his redemptive work. The new and higher embodiment of his humanity would prove of such a kind that his essential glory would shine through it in undimmed luster. If this be the meaning, we cannot dilute this pregnant saying, one of the most mysterious of all his words, one which leads us up to the highest possible conception of the relations between the Father and the Son. The eternal love of which the Godhead itself is the SOURCE and the OBJECT is that to which we shall be introduced, and which our Lord would have us see and share (cf. 1 John 3:1-3).

Verse 25. - The prayer is thus over, and once more the great High Priest and Victim declares concerning himself some of the mysteries of his Person and of his relation with his disciples and with the world. O righteous Father (cf. Vers. 1, 5, Πάτερ simply; Ver. 11, πάτερ α{γιε; Ver. 24, Πάτερ without any characterization). The righteousness of God is a more exalted perfection than his holiness, one that might seem more at variance with the exercise of his paternal compassion; yet this righteousness is conspicuously displayed in the redemptive love which Christ had thus manifested, and the beloved disciple (1 John 1:9) declares that God is faithful and "righteous" in forgiving the repentant sinner. The blending of the idea of righteousness with Fatherhood is the sublime revelation made by the Lord Jesus, and he gathers the two ideas together into an indissoluble unity. Justice and mercy are seen by the whole work of the Son of God to have been the outflow and effulgence of the one all-comprehending and infinite love. The καὶ that here follows has created some difficulty, though some manuscripts emit it (D and Vulgate), probably in consequence of its inappropriateness; but it is received on strong ancient authority. Meyer and Hengstenberg take it thus: Righteous Father (yea, such thou art), and (yet) the world knew thee not. But would our Lord have hesitated, as it were, to express this truth, without justifying it against the unbelief of the world? Moulton tries to explain the simple adversative force of the καὶ and δὲ by "both the world learned not to know thee, but I learned to know thee." Godet has expressed the καὶ more effectively by translating, The world, it is true, knew thee not, but I knew thee. The Revised Version has, with the Authorized Version, simply omitted the καὶ. It is one of the most solemn of the Lord's condemnations of the κόσμος. The Apostle Paul said (1 Corinthians 1:21), "The world through its wisdom knew not God;" and in Romans 1:18-23 he shows that this ignorance was willful and practical and without excuse. The history of the struggling of the world after God has shown how dense the human darkness is. There have been signs that men groped after the idea of a Father who should be blind to their faults and indifferent to their follies, and utter a righteous Lord who has exalted righteousness and hated iniquity; but it was left for Christ to blend these apparently discordant beams into the radiance of a perfect glory. How many illustrations do the sad and shameless perversions of human intelligence supply! But I knew thee, because of the eternity of that ineffable love wherewith thou hast loved me, and because of the depth of that righteous love which thou hast manifested to the world in sending me upon my mission. And these knew - came to know by personal intuition - that thou didst send me (cf. John 16:27, and Vers. 8, 23) on the mission of redeeming the world. They have learned that I have come with all thy authority and in all thy power; that I have come out from thee; that I entered into the world; that I have glorified thee among men; that my thoughts are thy thoughts, and my "words" (ῤημάτα) are thy (Logos) "Word;" that my works of love are the works of the Father; and that my promises are the manifestation of thy Name to the men whom thou hast given me.

Verse 26. - Since they have "learned that thou sourest me," our Lord, to complete the awful monologue, adds, And I made known thy Name to them, pointing back to the ἐφανερωσάσου τὸ ὅνομα of Ver. 6. "To make manifest" is not equal in potency with "to make known, to cause them to know;" there is more direct work done in them and to them in order to effect knowledge. Our Lord also declares that he has done this already, but his work of manifestation and teaching are not complete. There is more and more for these to learn. And (γνωρίσω) I will make them to know it. A promise of Divine expansion reaching onward and outward forevermore. By the power of his Spirit, by his return to them in his resurrection-life, by the ministry of the Paraclete, he would prolong and complete the convincing process. In order that the love wherewith thou hast loved me (notice the unusual expression, ἡ ἀγάπη η{ν ἠγαπησάς; and cf. Ephesians 2:4) - the eternal love of the Father to the well-beloved Son - the love which has flowed forth upon him as the perfect Son of man, and Representative of man, upon him who laid down his life that he might take it again (cf. John 10:17) - may be in them; may alight on them as knowing, receiving, loving me (cf. John 16:27, "The Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me"). However much was involved in the utterance just quoted, in this closing utterance still more is conveyed. The waves on this boundless ocean of love pour in, one behind the other, each nobler and freighted with richer blessing than that which preceded; and the motive of this infinite fullness of eternal love being thus lavished upon them is added: I in them. On this profound suggestion he has already said much, but not until we reach these last words do they flash forth in all their mystic grandeur. His life will be so identified with their life, his abode so blended with their being, his life so repeated in their experience, his personality so much entwined and blended with theirs, that he in them, and because he is in them, prolongs and repeats himself as the Object of an eternal love. We see the same ideas in the Pauline teaching, and can only explain Galatians 1:16; Galatians 2:20; Galatians 4:6; Romans 8:9, 10, 11; Ephesians 2:18; Ephesians 3:19; Colossians 2:7; Colossians 3:4, as echoes of the class of teaching which, long before John had recorded the prayer in this form, had yet become the seed and life-principle of the Church. This is not only true of the closing verses, but of the whole prayer and preceding discourse.

5. Review of the difficulties attending the preservation and characteristics of this discourse and prayer. The sublime comprehensiveness of the prayer; its augmenting swell of thought; the awful depth of its self-consciousness; the limpid simplicity of its style; the movement from himself to his disciples, to the entire Church, to the outlying world; the ground on which he bases every prayer; the imperial dignity of the Pleader; the total absence of any sense of personal weakness or sinfulness; the revelation and insight thus granted into the heart of the God-man; its naturalness, if we concede the foregoing character; its profound humility, if we bear in mind his unique claims; - constitute this page a supernatural phenomenon. Christ himself is the greatest of his miracles. The supposition that some unknown writer of the second century excogitated such a conception out of the synoptic narrative, the Pauline Epistles, and the Alexandrine philosophy, refutes itself. We admit, with F. W. Newman, with Reuss, and with all the rationalist critics, that it is difficult to understand how the apostle could have reproduced so accurately this wondrous discourse and the prayer; but the author practically admits that it was a supernatural process of memory (John 14:25, 26). Still, there are facts enough in the natural sphere and within the knowledge of all, that such extraordinary efforts of memory are by no means uncommon. John was the contemporary of men whose surprising memory held the whole 'Mishna' and thousands of illustrative comments, 'Halacha,' and 'Hagada' ready for constant reference and application. The rishis of India, the Greek rhapsodists, mediaeval minnesingers, and wandering bards, have had imprinted indelibly and verbally on their recollection ten or twenty times the bulk of this wondrous discourse. John was young, impressionable, intimately acquainted with his Lord, though needing many things to complete his apprehension of his glory; and, even apart from Divine or spiritual aid, there is no reason to dispute its accuracy. The impression that this discourse and prayer have produced on the general consciousness of the Church, is, that none but Christ could have uttered these words, and he only at such a conjuncture. Keim insists that John, if it were he, by this narrative annihilates the synoptic tradition of the agony in the garden. And we do not deny that the intercalation of that agony between this prayer and the sublime manner in which Jesus meets the band of soldiers, renders a harmony of the Gospels at this point very difficult. The difficulty does not so much arise from the fact that the profound and awful strife should follow upon this sublime and lofty calm, upon this imperial and Divine prerogative, but that throughout the Johannine recital of the events which occurred on the night of betrayal and Passion, the same exalted demeanor is preserved, and numerous incidents and sayings are recorded which appear discrepant with the utter prostration and overwhelming affliction revealed in the synoptic narrative. This contrast must not be minimized, and cannot be disputed. The question to be decided is whether the twofold aspect of the scene can possibly represent the truth, or whether it proceeds from the theological prepossessions of a later writer, who imagined the behavior of the incarnate Logos under these conditions without any real and deep foundation in reality. By way of preface to an expository treatment, it is desirable to observe that John throughout received impressions from his Lord of a profoundly different character from that of the other observers, and throughout he saw the Divine manifestation which, while they witnessed it, they did not penetrate as he had done. The veil of the human phenomena concealed much from their spiritual apprehension. The different manner in which the same event is described by two witnesses, and the different constructions put upon the same action when viewed with diverse presuppositions, is of too common occurrence to need illustration. Luke represents the tradition concerning the Son of man in the hour of his deepest dejection. John represents what he saw of the ineffably Divine element which triumphed over the human. The angle of vision was different, the sensitive brooding and susceptible nature of John was unlike the impetuous human passion of Peter's soul, and the resultant impression on them both of the whole cycle of events was correspondingly different. Then let it be noticed that John, who knew the synoptic narrative, deliberately omitted what had passed into universal credence, such as the Transfiguration, the Holy Supper, and the Ascension: why was he not at liberty to omit the agony in the garden and the traitor's kiss? He takes up his story after the surprise was over, and when the Lord had resumed the tone of the voluntary Sufferer and Divine Savior; and if we compare the two descriptions of that scene, they supplement and explain one another. Numerous incidents throughout the closing scenes, which are omitted by John, are recorded by one or more of the evangelists, and some facts and words are peculiar to the Johannine narrative. These omissions from and additions to the synoptic narrative have been supposed to reveal the purpose of the theologian rather than the record of the eyewitness. It is rashly asserted that John omits the symptoms of human weakness and shame, and exaggerates the signs of Divine indwelling and of lofty prerogative. This, however, is by no means true. He does omit the agony in the garden, but he gives in John 12. the analogue of that awful scene, and the same Divine spirit with which it was consummated. He omits the "traitor's kiss," but he hints the occurrence of that crowning treachery. He does omit the record of the desertion by the disciples, but (John 16:32) he records the prediction of it. He omits the incident of the false witness and the adjuration, but it should in all fairness be remembered that he also omitted the great confession of the Lord's Messiah-ship and exaltation; and while he passes by the incidents of the mockery of the Lord, he records other matters and methods of mockery which are equally humiliating (John 19:12). If he omits the examinations before Caiaphas and Herod, he gives that which the synoptic tradition had lest sight of in the first examination before Annas and in the private interview with Pilate. The hand-washing of Pilate and the dream of his wife are passed over, but the conduct of Pilate is made far more intelligible by that private interview. The evangelists Luke and Matthew both record features of sorrow and words from the cross and pot-tents attending the Crucifixion, which confer a royal prerogative and a Divine significance on his death. The rending of the veil, the confession of the centurion, the great earthquake, the supernatural darkness, the repentance and acceptance of the dying brigand, - all these we might reasonably expect, on the theory of theological prepossession, to have been found in the Fourth Gospel; and what is more remarkable still on that hypothesis is that the most peculiar and pathetic feature of the last hours is an exhibition of Christ's perfect humanity and filial love, which the other narrators fail to touch (John 19:25-27). We conclude, therefore, that the matters in which the narratives agree are abundant and remarkable, and their divergences cannot be accounted for on the ground of theological bias. The exposition of the following chapters will bring the several lacunae, correspondences, and peculiarities into yet fuller prominence.