Ezekiel 18:1-4, 25-32

18:1 The word of the LORD came to me: 2 What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, "The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge"? 3 As I live, says the Lord GOD, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. 4 Know that all lives are mine; the life of the parent as well as the life of the child is mine: it is only the person who sins that shall die. (Ezekiel 18:1-4, NRSV)

25 Yet you say, "The way of the Lord is unfair." Hear now, O house of Israel: Is my way unfair? Is it not your ways that are unfair? 26 When the righteous turn away from their righteousness and commit iniquity, they shall die for it; for the iniquity that they have committed they shall die. 27 Again, when the wicked turn away from the wickedness they have committed and do what is lawful and right, they shall save their life. 28 Because they considered and turned away from all the transgressions that they had committed, they shall surely live; they shall not die. 29 Yet the house of Israel says, "The way of the Lord is unfair." O house of Israel, are my ways unfair? Is it not your ways that are unfair?

30 Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, all of you according to your ways, says the Lord GOD. Repent and turn from all your transgressions; otherwise iniquity will be your ruin. 31 Cast away from you all the transgressions that you have committed against me, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! Why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, says the Lord GOD. Turn, then, and live. (Ezekiel 18:25-32, NRSV)

The following comments are based on those of May 28, 2009 (Thursday in the week of the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Year One), when the reading was Ezekiel 18:1-4, 19-32, comments that were repeated with editing from February 8, 2008 (Friday in the week of the Last Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two), when comments on Ezekiel 18:1-4, 25-32 were repeated from May 24, 2007 (Thursday in the week of the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Year One), when comments were combined with revision and supplement from May 12, 2005 (Thursday in the week of the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Year One) and from March 3, 2006 (Friday in the week of the Last Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two).

“The word of the LORD came to me,” says Ezekiel: “What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, ‘The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’?” (Ezek. 18:1-2; cf. Jer. 31:29). This proverb, apparently commonplace at the time as its appearance in Jeremiah as well as Ezekiel indicates, suggests that the Judeans, whether in exile with Ezekiel or back home with Jeremiah in the days of the siege, used it to question the justice of their situation. When prophets blamed the Babylonian captivity on the sins of Manasseh (Jer. 15:4; 2 Kgs. 21:10-16), who died some fifty or more years earlier (642 B.C.), it is understandable that some would say, We are being punished for the sins of our ancestors. But Jeremiah and Ezekiel both point to continuing idolatry. Ezekiel (chap. 18) emphasizes individual responsibility for one’s own sins and the consequences that follow, and does so by contrast to what Stephen L. Cook calls the emphasis on “long-term consequences for the corporate community, as [Ezek.] 16:44; Ex. 20:5 recognize” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Ezek. 18:14). The proverb, “The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge” (Ezek. 18:2b) implies bad consequences, teeth “set on edge,” for the children of parents who “have eaten sour grapes.” The Book of 2 Kings, which recognizes Josiah as a very good king (2 Kgs. 22:1-23:30)–“Before him there was no king like him, who turned to the LORD with all his heart, with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; nor did any like him arise after him” (2 Kgs 23::25)–blames Manasseh for the fall of Jerusalem (21:10-16; cf 17:19-20). But, as noted above, Manasseh died in 642 B.C., some 56 years before the fall of Jerusalem. Marvin A. Sweeney puts it this way: “Ch. 18 states the principle of individual moral responsibility. Ch. 19 would therefore indicate that the House of David fell, not because of the sins of past kings (Josiah was righteous), but because of the sins of the kings (the sons and grandson of Josiah) during the current period leading up to the exile” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, p. 1073 on Ezek. 18:1-19:14). To the contrary, “As I live, says the Lord GOD (hv97hy4 yn!8dox3, ’ ^adōnāy YHWH), this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel” (18:3). With examples drawn from three generations, grandfather, father and son (cf. “punishing . . . to the third and the fourth generation,” Ex. 20:5) Ezekiel, speaking for God, says, “Know that all lives are mine; tghe life of the parent as well as the live of the child is mine: it is only the person who sins that shall die” (Ezek. 18:4), by which he means that each person will be punished for his or her own sin (cf. vv. 10-13, 18) or rewarded for his or her own righteousness (vv. 5-9, 14-17). Cook says:

Sins and their punishments may involve long-term consequences for the corporate community, as [Ezek.] 16:44; Ex. 20:5 recognize. In the exiles’ current situation, however, it is not appropriate for them to blame their ancestors for their misfortunes, as they were doing (Jer. 31:29-30). Nevertheless, individuals within the community can take responsibility, turn from sin, and choose life amidst the coming corporate (communal) punishment. (loc. cit.)

Katheryn Pfisterer Darr notes that

The belief that, according to the rules of a deity’s reign, the penalty for sin was suffered not only by the perpetrator, but also by his contemporary family and subsequent generations, was not Israel’s alone. It surfaces in the Hittite Instructions for Temple Officials: . . . This belief appears also in the fourteenth-century BCE complaint by the Hittite king Mursilis II to the storm God.

Within the Hebrew Bible, the principle of transgenerational retrubution is applied to Achan and his family (Josh. 7:22-26 [and other refs. listed by Darr]). (The New Interpreter’s Bible, VI, 2001, p. 1257, on Ezek. 18:1-20)

In the omitted portion of today’s reading (vv. 5-24), Ezekiel presents a series of hypothetical cases: (1) “If a man is righteous and does what is lawful and right” (18:5, cf. vv. 6-9), “he shall surely live, says the Lord GOD” (v. 9). (2) “If he has a son who is violent, a shedder of blood” (v. 10, cf. vv. 11-13), “he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon himself (v. 13). (3) “But if this man has a son who sees all the sins that his father has done, considers, and does not do likewise” (v. 14, cf. vv. 15-17), “he shall not die for his father’s iniquity; he shall surely live” (v. 17). “As for his father [back to no. (2)], because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother, and did what is not good among his people, he dies for his iniquity” (v. 18).

Then Ezekiel says, “Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is lawful and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. The person who sins shall die. A child shall not suffer for the iniquity of a parent, nor a parent suffer for the iniquity of a child; the righteousness of the righteous shall be his own, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be his own” (vv. 19-20). Cook summarizes, saying, “Neither the righteousness nor the wickedness of a previous generation is transferable to the next. See Deut 24:16” (op. cit., on vv. 19-20). Moreover, within one’s own lifetime, one can turn from wickedness to righteousness and live (vv. 21-23), but if one turns from righteousness to wickedness, he will die (v. 24). According to Sweeney,

A new principle enters the debate. Ezekiel contends that a wicked person who repents shall be saved, but a righteous person who sins shall be condemned. Even a person’s own past actions do not determine his fate, if he changes his course of action. This concluding section of the ch. in a sense takes the previous part metaphorically, understanding the father and children as the actions of single individuals at different times of their lives. (The Jewish Study Bible, p. 1074, on Ezek. 18:21-24)

As the reading resumes, Ezekiel deals with an objection (potential, perhaps, or real). “Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is unfair.’ Hear now, O house of Israel: Is my way unfair? Is it not your ways that are unfair?” (v. 25). David L. Petersen says of “the way of the Lord is unfair (repeated in v. 29; 33:17),” that “it is not clear to which of the numerous foregoing cases this saying might refer. The prophet responds by citing the cases developed in vv. 21-24. If an individual is treated according to what she or he does, then, Ezekiel claims, God is fair” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Ezek. 18:25-29). “When the righteous turn away from their righteousness and commit iniquity,” says Ezekiel, “they shall die for it; for the iniquity that they have committed they shall die” (v. 26). On the other hand, “when the wicked turn away from the wickedness they have committed and do what is lawful and right, they shall save their life.” (v 27). This principle is explained. “Because they considered and turned away from all the transgressions that they had committed, they shall surely live; they shall not die” (v. 28). And the earlier objection is repeated and rejected. “Yet the house of Israel says, ‘The way of the Lord is unfair.’ O House of Israel, are my ways unfair? Is it not your ways that are unfair?” (v. 29). According to Cook, “To object is to misunderstand God’s justice” (ibid., on vv. 25-29, with ref. to 33:17). Sweeney says, “Ezekiel restates the preceding principle about repentance, to answer those living in Babylonia who think that all is lost and who might object, thinking that they are now being punished for sins of past generations” (op. cit., on vv. 25-29).

“Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, all of you according to your ways, says the Lord GOD” (v. 30a). He calls for repentance: “Repent and turn from all your transgressions; otherwise iniquity will be your ruin” (v. 30b). “Cast away from you all the transgressions that you have committed against me,” says God, “and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit!” (v. 31a, b; cf. 11:19; 36:26). “Why,” he asks, “will you die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, says the Lord God. Turn, then, and live” (vv. 31c, 32, cf. v. 23; 33:11). “The invitation to repentance is open,” says Cook. And for “new heart and a new spirit,” he refers to 11:19; 36:26n; cf. Jer. 32:39)” (op. cit., on vv. 30-32). In the note to which Cook refers, he says,

Ezekiel’s calls to repentance have failed (see especially 18:31). A radical, new creation (see 11:19; 18:31; cf. Deut. 30:1-6; Jer. 31:31-34) will be needed to break the people’s bondage to the cycles of sin and retribution of Israel’s pastr (ch. 20). The concept of engrafting a new heart goes beyond Jer. 31:33 and Deut. 30:1-6 and is in keeping with Ezekiel’s focus on God’s sovereignty in effecting salvation (20:33-34).” (ibid., on Ezek. 36:26)

To the view “that Israel’s punishment is due to the sins of past generations,” which he sees as taught “in the Decalogue (Exod. 20:5; Deut. 5:9),” Sweeney says “the prophet disputes it here” (op. cit., on vv. 1-32). In reference to the “new heart” and “new spirit” (v. 31), he says, “A new heart and a new spirit (11:19; Jer. 31:31-34; 32:36-41): When considered in relation to the principle stated in the ten commandments above, Ezekiel’s proposal is innovative. V. 32 has come to play a significant part in the high holiday liturgy, which under rabbinic influence is understood as a period of retrospection and personal repentance” (ibid., on vv.32-34).

Philippians 4:1-9

4:1 Therefore, my brothers and sisters, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm in the Lord in this way, my beloved.

2 I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to be of the same mind in the Lord. 3 Yes, and I ask you also, my loyal companion, help these women, for they have struggled beside me in the work of the gospel, together with Clement and the rest of my co-workers, whose names are in the book of life.

4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your gentleness be known to everyone. The Lord is near. 6 Do not worry about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. 7 And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

8 Finally, beloved, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. 9 Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you. (Philippians 4:1-9, NRSV)

The following comments are based on relevant comments from April 8, 2009 (Wednesday of Holy Week, Year One), when the reading was Philippians 4:1-13, and on earlier comments. On February 8 and 9, 2008 (Friday and Saturday in the week of the Last Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two), comments on Philippians 4:1-9 and 10-20 were used from earlier as noted there. Comments relevant for tomorrow, when the reading is Philippians 4:10-20, will be used then.

As the concluding chapter of Philippians begins, Paul reinforces the exhortation of chapter 3 to “join in imitating me, and observe those who live according to the example you have in us” (Col. 3:17). He now says, “therefore,” referring to the admonition and the example of his journey of faith “toward the goal for the prize of the heavenly call of God in Christ Jesus” (3:14), and, for these reasons, he says, “my brothers and sisters, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm in the Lord in this way, my beloved” (4:1). But then he turns to specific instructions for certain persons. “I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to be of the same mind (to; aujto; fronei:n, to auto phronein) in the Lord” (v. 2). This instruction for these women echoes Paul’s instruction for the church that leads into the Christological passage sometimes called the “Christ Hymn” (Phil 2:5-11), where he says, “make my joy complete: be of the same mind ( i{na to; aujto; fronh:te, hina to auto phronēte), having the same love, being in full accord (suvmyucoi, sympsychoi) and of one mind (to; e}n [v.l. aujtov] fronou:nteV , to hen [v.l. auto] phronountes)” (2:2). “Let the same mind be (tou:to fronei:te, touto phroneite) in you,” he says, “that was in Christ Jesus” (2:5). (v. 5). Paul’s instruction is that Euodia and Syntyche “be of the same mind in the Lord” (4:2). Paul praises Euodia and Syntyche as he asks a fellow worker to help them. “Yes, and I ask you (se, se, 2^nd person singular pronoun) also, my loyal companion (suvzugoV, syzygos), help these women, for they have struggled beside me in the work of the gospel, together with Clement and the rest of my co-workers, whose names are in the book of life” (v. 3). For “the book of life,” Ronald F. Hock refers to Exod. 32:32; Ps. 69:28; Dan. 12:1 (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Phil. 4:3). Euodia and Syntyche were leaders in the Philippian church, perhaps ministers, like Phoebe at Cenchreae. “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon (diavkonoV, diakonos [NRSV text note c “Or minister]) of the church at Cenchreae” (Rom. 16:1).*

          *Phoebe is called a “benefactor (prostavtiV, prostatis) of many and of myself as well” (Rom 16:3). The word prostavtiV (prostatis) occurs only once in the New Testament (Rom. 16:3). It is the feminine form of (prostavthV, prostatēs), which literally means “one who stands before, front-rank man” and is specifically used of “leader, chief, esp. of a democracy,” “ruler,” “president or presiding officer” (Liddell-Scott-Jones [LSJ], A Greek English Lexicon, 9^th ed., 1940, reprinted 1966, s.v. prostavthV, prostatēs; the Lexicon is also on the Internet at http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/resolveform?redirect=true, accessed Feb. 18, 2010). Another meaning is “one who stands before and protects, guardian, champion,” for example, the “patron who took charge of the interests of the metoikoi [settlers from abroad, resident aliens]” at Athens. The feminine form (prostatis) does not occur in the Septuagint, but the masculine form (prostatēs) frequently translates rwa (sar), “official,” as in 1 Chronicles 29.6, “and the officers over the king’s work” and in 2 Chronicles 8:10, “These were the chief officers of King Solomon, two hundred fifty of them, who exercised authority over the people.” In 1 Esdras 2:12 (written in Greek, not translated from Hebrew; cf. Sir. 45:24 of Phineas, and 2 Mac. 3:4 of Simon), “the holy vessels” of the Jerusalem temple that had been carried away by Nebuchadnezzar (v. 10) were returned and “given to Sheshbazzar, the governor (prostavthV, prostatēs) of Judea. If a Queen such as Elizabeth the First can rule like a King–and who would dare to say otherwise–can a prostavtiV (prostatis) not function in roles of leadership like a prostavthV (prostatēs)? Why then is Phoebe’s role reduced to that of “a woman in a supportive role, patron, benefactor” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. prostavtiV, prostatis)?

But their differences need to be resolved, and Paul turns to “my loyal companion,” “an unknown but influential figure who could serve as mediator between the two” (Carolyn Osiek, NOAB, 3^rd ed.). “Less likely,” says Osiek, “the Greek word for companion may be understood as a proper name, Syzygus.”

“Rejoice (Caivrete, Chairete) in the Lord always,” says Paul; “again I will say, Rejoice (caivrete, chairete)” (Phil. 4:4). The NRSV text note l says “Or Farewell” of the word translated “Rejoice”(Caivrete, Chairete). Many have noticed the emphasis upon rejoicing in Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians. The verb “rejoice” (caivrw, chairō, or the compound sugcaivrw, sugchairō) occurs about eleven times in Philippians–almost as often as in all the rest of Paul’s Epistles. The simple and compound forms both appear in Philippians 2:17, and again in verse 18, “But even if I am being poured out as a libation over the sacrifice and the offering of your faith, I am glad (caivrw, chairō) and rejoice with (sugcaivrw, sugchairō) all of you–and in the same way you also must be glad (caivrete, chairete) and rejoice with (sugcaivrete, sugchairete) me.” And that while he was in prison and facing an uncertain future, possibly execution! (Cf. 1:20-26.) Paul continues to exhort. “Let your gentleness be known to everyone. The Lord is near” (Phil. 4:5). “Do not worry about anything,” he says, “but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God” (v. 6). This admonition not to worry is followed by reassurance. “And the peace (eijrhvnh, eirēnē) of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus” (v. 7). This reminds us of the price of peace (eijrhvnh, eirēnē) and of what the Epistle to the Romans spells out as necessary before Paul can say, “Therefore, since we are justified by faith, we have peace (eijrhvnh, eirēnē) with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 5:1).

Before Paul acknowledges financial assistance given to him by the Philippians (4:10-20)–tomorrow’s reading– and his closing greetings and benediction (4:21-23), Paul presents a general admonition. “Finally, beloved, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you” (4:8-9). G. R. Beasley-Murray, commenting on “whatever is true . . . think about,” says,

despite the endeavor of [Ernst] Lohmeyer to divorce these ideals from non-Jewish religious and philosophical thought and to keep them wholly within the OT horizon, on the ground that every term occurs in the LXX, it would seem that Paul here maintains a positive attitude to the world and exhorts that all that is noble in it be pondered. In the last analysis, the differentia of Christian ethics is not its unique content but its motive and power–it is the ethics of gratitude and of grace. The distinctiveness of the Christian way is not forgotten: ‘What you have learned and received’ indicates the passing on of a Christian tradition; ‘What you have heard and seen in me’ indicates an exemplification characteristic of apostolic but not of pagan pedagogy. (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1962, reprint 1972, sec. 863 a, p. 988, on Phil. 4:2-9, esp. v. 8)

John 17:9-19

9 I am asking on their behalf; I am not asking on behalf of the world, but on behalf of those whom you gave me, because they are yours. 10 All mine are yours, and yours are mine; and I have been glorified in them. 11 And now I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one, as we are one. 12 While I was with them, I protected them in your name that you have given me. I guarded them, and not one of them was lost except the one destined to be lost, so that the scripture might be fulfilled. 13 But now I am coming to you, and I speak these things in the world so that they may have my joy made complete in themselves. 14 I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world. 15 I am not asking you to take them out of the world, but I ask you to protect them from the evil one. 16 They do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world. 17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. 18 As you have sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. 19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, so that they also may be sanctified in truth. (John 17:9-19, NRSV)

The following comments are based on relevant comments from April 20 and 21, 2009 (Monday and Tuesday in the week of the Second Sunday of Easter, Year One), when the readings were John 17:1-11 and 12-19. The comments then were based on those of April 9, 2009 (Maundy Thursday, eleven days earlier), and earlier comments as indicated there.

Jesus’ prayer continues from yesterday, when the reading was John 17:1-8, and will continue tomorrow with John 17:20-26. As yesterday’s part closed, Jesus reported, “Now they [i.e., those given to Jesus by the Father, v. 6] know that everything you have given me is from you; for the words that you gave to me I have given to them, and they have received them and know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me” (Jn. 17:7-8). So today’s reading focuses on these disciples. “I am asking on their behalf,” prays Jesus; “I am not asking on behalf of the world, but on behalf of those whom you gave me, because they are yours” (v. 9). “It would be wrong to conclude from this phrase that Jesus had no care for the world,” says John Marsh,

or that he never prayed for others than his own friends. The synoptists treasure a tradition that he both taught prayer for one’s enemies (Matt. 5:44) and practised it at the most tragic moment of his life (Luke 23:34). In this gospel it is made quite clear that, though the wold is hostile to God (1:10, etc.), yet God loved it (3:16), and that through the mission of the Son passed on to the disciples, the world was to be reconciled to the Father at the last ([17:] 21). (Saint John, Westminster Pelican Commentaries, 1968, 1977, p. 564, on Jn. 17:9)

Raymond E. Brown comments on “those whom you have given me,” saying, “In the context of the Last Supper this is a reference to the immediate disciples of Jesus, presumably the Twelve . . . Later on (v. 20) the prayer will switch from these disciples to future converts. Nevertheless, since the historical disciples are a model for all Christians, both in in 9:19 and 20-26 the Christians of a future time are envisaged” (The Gospel according to John, XIII-XXI, Anchor Bible, vol. 29A, 1966, 2^nd ed., 19^th printing, p. 758, on Jn. 17:9).

“All mine are yours (ta; ejma; pavnta sav ejstin, ta ema panta sa estin), and yours are mine (ta; sa; ejmav, ta sa ema),” says Jesus; “and I have been glorified in them (aujtoi:V, autois)” (Jn. 17:10). David K. Rensberger, revised by Harold W. Attridge, refers for “yours are mine” to 16:15 (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Jn. 17:10), “All (pavnta, panta) that the father has is mine ( ejmav, ema). For this reason I said that he will take what is mine ( ejk tou: ejmou:, ek tou emou) and declare it to you (Jn. 16:15). From the English translation one might think that “all mine are yours [i.e., the Father’s], and yours are mine” (17:10) refers to the disciples, but in Greek the words are neuter gender and plural. Marsh says, “All mine is neuter plural . . . more than the area of human life is meant to be included here, even though it is through the response of men that the glorification of the Father in creation can become manifest” (op. cit., on v. 10). Brown notes the neuter pronouns, but says “the neuter has the effect of broadening the already remarkable claim. The equivalence between those who belong to Jesus and those who belong to the Father means that in Johannine though it is not the creation of a man that makes him belong to God but his reaction to Jesus. A man cannot accept Jesus unless he belongs to God, and a man cannot belong to God unless he accepts Jesus” (op. cit., on v. 10). The final pronoun in verse 10, “I have been glorified in them (aujtoi:V, autois), could be masculine plural or neuter plural, and so, could refer to the disciples, as Brown understands it. For “in them . . . I have been glorified,” he says, “In reference to his immediate disciples, Jesus’ glory was first revealed at Cana (ii 11). However, from the author’s standpoint in time, Jesus has been glorified in the Christian believers who came to faith after the resurrection” (ibid.).

In the continuation, Jesus clearly refers to the disciples. “And now I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you” (17:11a). Marsh says, “‘I am no more in the world’ [is] the future state as a present fact, as so often in Hebrew thinking. This is the basis of the intercession for the disciples; he will no longer be with them to shield them from the attacks of the evil one” (op. cit. on v. 11). “Holy Father,” prays Jesus, “protect (thvrhson, tērēson) them in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one, as we are one” (v. 11b). According to Frederick William Danker, the verb translated “protect” (‘keep . . . safe,’ Brown, op. cit., p. 757) has a complex etymology and means “ ‘maintain in a secure state’–a. with focus on personal interest or obligation keep” (The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 2009, s.v. threvw, tēreō). “Keeping them safe,” says Brown, “means keeping them from the contamination of the world (I John ii 15-17)” (op. cit., on v. 11). “While I was with them,” says Jesus, “I protected ( ejthvroun, etēroun) them in your name that you have given me. I guarded ( ejfuvlaxa, ephylaxa) them, and not one of them was lost except the one destined to be lost ( oJ uiJo;V th:V ajpwleivaV, ho huios tēs apōleias) so that the scripture might be fulfilled” (v. 12). According to Marsh, “ ‘I have guarded [ejfuvlaxa, ephylaxa] them’[is] a figure with a somewhat stronger flavour. It comes from the area of war, and suggests that Jesus was the effective guard who watched for and warded off, by his own prowess, the threatened attacks of the enemy” (op. cit., on v. 12). “The one destined to be lost” is, of course, Judas. Brown says, “the one destined to perish [his translation; ‘be lost’ NRSV]” is “literally ‘the son of perdition’; the word ‘perdition’ is of the same Greek root as ‘perish’ [ajpovllumi, apollymi]. In the NT ‘perdition’ frequently means damnation (Matt. vii 13; Rev. xvii 8); and so ‘the son of perdition’ refers to one who belongs to the realm of damnation and is destined to final destruction” (op. cit. on v. 12).

“But now,” says Jesus, “I am coming to you [i.e., to the Father], and I speak these things in the world so that they may have my joy made complete in themselves” (v. 13). Brown cites parallels. “xv 11: ‘I have said this to you that my joy may be yours and your joy may be fulfilled’; xvi 24: ‘Ask and you shall receive that your joy may be full.’ Currently their hearts are filled with sorrow (xvi 6). Full joy is an eschatological concept in the rabbinic writings (Bultmann, p. 388)” (ibid., on v. 13). “I have given them your word (lovgoV, logos),” says Jesus, “and the world has hated ( ejmivshsen, emisēsen) them because they do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world” (Jn. 17:14). Earlier, Brown commented on “words” (17:8): “This is the plural rēmata [rJhvmata], as contrasted with the singular logos [lovgoV] in 6 and 14. Barrett, p. 421, thinks that the singular refers to the divine message as a whole, while the plural more nearly means ‘precepts.’ The distinction is tenuous when we compare 8 and 14” (ibid., p. 743, on 17:8). Of “the world has hated them,” Brown says, “We have softened the awkward aorist tense [in his translation]; this statement is certainly written from the author’s standpoint in time. Almost the same thought and expression is found in xv 18-19; notice the present tense there” (ibid., p. 761, on 17:14).

“I am not asking you to take them out of the world,” says Jesus, “but I ask you to protect ( i”na thrhvsh/V, hina tērēsē(i)s) them from the evil one” (v. 15). To “Protect . . . from the evil one,” Rensberger and Attridge compare “the Lord’s Prayer, Mt. 6:13” (op. cit., on v. 15). “They do not belong to the world,” says Jesus, “just as I do not belong to the world” (v. 16). “except for a slight change in word order,” says Brown, this verse is the same as the last two lines of 14. Along with a few other witnesses P⁶⁶ (corrector) expunges the whole verse” (op. cit., on v. 16).

This brings us to what is likely the key point of Jesus’ prayer. Although today’s concluding petition is focused on the mission of the first group of disciples, by implication, as noted in the similar terminology, prayer that “may they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me,” later disciples–even we–are included when Jesus prays: “Sanctify (aJgivason, hagiason) them in the truth ( ejn th:/ ajlhqei:a/, en tē(i) alētheia); your word (lovgoV, logos) is truth (ajlhqei:a, alētheia). As you have sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify (aJgiavzw, hagiazō ) myself, so that they also may be sanctified ( i”na w\sin . . . hJgiasmevnoi, hina ōsin . . . hēgiasmenoi) in truth ( ejn ajlhqei:a/, en alētheia(i) )” (vv. 17-19). The word translated “sanctify” means, according to Danker, “ ‘set apart into the realm of the sacred,’ in our literature with focus on elimination of that which jeopardizes access to God. . . . of persons purify, set apart, dedicate” . . . of Christ given priority in one’s inner life . . .” (op. cit., s.v. aJgiavzw, hagiazō ). According to Rensberger and Attridge, “Sanctify [is] the same term as ‘hallow’ in the Lord’s Prayer (Mt. 6:9; Lk. 11:2); see also [Jn.] 10:36” (op. cit., on v. 17). Marsh says,

The word sanctify [aJgiavzw, hagiazō ] in these verses can hardly be different in meaning from that which it has in v. 19, where the R.S.V. translates with the word ‘consecrate’ [‘sanctify’ NRSV]. In 10:36 God is said to have consecrated [‘sanctified’ NRSV] the son and sent him into the world. That is, the sanctification or consecration is almost identified with the commissioning of the agent to do a specific task. This must at least be the meaning here, that Jesus prays that the Father should sanctify the disciples as he has already consecrated the Son, and as the Son now commissions himself for the task set him–to give his life for his friends. (op. cit., pp. 567-568, on Jn. 17:17)

The NRSV (1989) was, of course, not available to Marsh (1968); perhaps he rather influenced the NRSV committee. Brown comments on “In the truth”: “The article (missing when the phrase is repeated in 19) means that the expression is not simply adverbial: ‘truly consecrated them.’ ‘Truth’ has power to act; cf. viii 32: ‘Truth will set you free.’ Here ‘truth’ is both the agency of the consecration and the realm into which they are consecrated; the ‘in’ means both ‘by’ and ‘for’ (op. cit., on v. 17). Jesus has commissioned his disciples to carry out his mission in the world. Rensberger and Attridge refer to Jn. 20:21 (op. cit., on v. 18). Commenting on “And for their sake I consecrate [‘sanctify’ NRSV] myself ,” Marsh says, “For their sake is a phrase which lends a very sacrificial colour to this phrase. It comes in the phrase quoted in Mark from Isaiah when Jesus speaks of ‘giving his life as a ransom for the sake of many’ (Mark 10:34). The idea behind the phrase is that of the figure of the suffering servant in 2 Isaiah” (op. cit., on v. 19).

Brown finds something a little strange in Jesus’ “attitude toward the world,” but explains as follows:

This attitude toward the world strikes many modern Christians as strange and even as a distortion of the true Christian apostolate. In an age of involvement where men are considering the role of the Church in the modern world, the refusal of the Johannine Jesus to pray for the world is a scandal. And yet hostility to the world is not peculiar in the NT to John. James iv 4 tells the Christian: ‘To be a friend of the world is to be an enemy of God.’. . . Distrust for a world that is looked on as evil is, of course, not the whole NT message, and there are many passages that inculcate involvement in the world. But if Christians believe that Scripture has a certain power to judge and correct, then the latter passages are more meaningful in eras when the Church tends to be sequestered from the world, while passages such as those we have found in John have a message for an era that becomes naively optimistic about changing the world or even about affirming its values without change” (op. cit., p. 764, on Jn. 17:9-19).

In the First Epistle of John, there is a warning about the possibility of a “liar” within the church itself (1 Jn. 2:4)

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net