Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - John 17:18 - 17:19
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Joh_17:18-19. In support of the prayer for the ἁγιάζειν of the disciples, there now follow further two motives for its being granted, deduced, (1) from the mission of the disciples into the world, on which account they need consecration; and (2) from Christ’s own personal consecration for the purpose of their ἁγιασμός , which purpose God will not be willing to leave unattained.
καθὼς ἐμὲ , κ . τ . λ .] Placed first with pragmatic weight; for as He could not execute His mission without the divine consecration (Joh_10:36), so neither could they who were sent by Him.
κἀγώ ] Not instead of οὕτως ἐγώ (De Wette), but simply: I also have sent. Comp. Joh_15:9, Joh_20:21, et al.
ἀπέστειλα ] The mission was indeed not yet objectively a fact (Joh_20:21; Mat_28:19), but already conceived of in its idea in the appointment and instruction for the apostolic office (Mat_10:5 ff.). Comp. on Joh_4:38.
Joh_17:19. Note the emphatic correlation of αὐτῶν … ἐγὼ ἐμαυτόν … καὶ αὐτοί .
The ἁγιάζω ἐμαυτόν , not including in it the whole life of the Lord (Calvin, Hengstenberg, Godet), but now, when the hour is come, to be carried out, is the actual consecration, which Christ, in offering Himself through His death as a sacrifice to God, accomplishes on Himself,[194] so that ἁγιάζω is substantially equivalent to προσφέρω σοὶ θυσίαν (Chrysostom), comp. 4Ma_17:19; ἁγιάζειν , äÄ÷ÀãÌÄéùÑ , is a sacred word for sacrifices in the O. T., see Exo_13:2; Deu_15:19 ff.; 2Sa_8:11; Esr. 5:52; Rom_15:16; comp. also Soph. Oed. Col. 1491; Dion. H. vii. 2. Christ is at once the Priest and the Sacrifice (Epistle to the Hebrews); and for ( ὙΠΈΡ , in commodum, xv. 13) the disciples He performs this sacrifice,—although it is offered for all,[195]—so far as it has, in respect of the disciples, the special purpose: that they also may be consecrated in truth, namely, in virtue of the reception of the Paraclete ( πνευματικῷ πυρὶ γυῖα λελουμένοι , Nonnus), which reception was conditioned by the death of Jesus, Joh_16:7. The καί has its logical justification in the idea of consecration common to both clauses, although its special sense is different in each; for the disciples are, through the sacrifice of Jesus, to be consecrated to God in the sense of holy purity, endowment, and equipment for their calling. On the other hand, the self-consecration of Christ is sacrificial,—the former, however, like the latter, the consecration in the service of God and of His kingdom. Comp. on the self-consecration of Christ, who yields Himself voluntarily to be a sacrifice (Joh_10:18, Joh_15:13), Eph_5:2 : παρέδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν προσφορὰν , κ . τ . λ .; that is the idea of the present passage, not that He renounced the mortal σάρξ , and entered fully into the divine mode of existence and fellowship (Luthardt). See also Heb_9:14.
ἐν ἀληθείᾳ ] Modal definition of ἡγιασμένοι : truly consecrated, Mat_22:16; 2Co_7:14; Col_1:6; 1Jn_3:18; 2Jn_1:1; 3Jn_1:1. See on 2 Cor. loc. cit.; LXX. 2 Reg. Joh_19:17 (where, however, ἐν is doubtful); Sir_7:20; Pind. Ol. vii. 126. In the classics the mere dative and ἐπʼ ἀληθείας are frequent. The true consecration is not exactly an antithesis to the Jewish sanctimonia ceremonialis (Godet and older expositors), to which nothing in the context leads, but simply sets forth the eminent character of the relation generally. As contrasted with every other ἁγιότης in human relations, that wrought through the Paraclete is the true consecration. Comp. Luther: “against all worldly and human holiness.” So substantially,[196] Chrysostom, Euth. Zigabenus, Beza, Calvin, Bengel, and several others, including Hengstenberg, Godet. The interpretation which has recently, after Erasmus, Bucer, and several others, become current, viz. of Lücke, Tholuck (?), Olshausen, De Wette, B. Crusius, Luthardt, Lange, Brückner, Ewald, that ἐν ἀληθ . is not different from ἘΝ Τῇ ἈΛΗΘΕΊᾼ , Joh_17:17, is erroneous, because the article is wanting which here, in the retrospective reference to the truth already articulated and defined, was thoroughly necessary; for of an antithesis “to the state of being in which the disciples would be found over and above” (Luthardt), the text suggests nothing, even leaving out of sight the fact that a state of sanctification in such an opposite condition would be inconceivable. Without any ground, appeal is made, in respect of the absence of the article, to Joh_1:14, Joh_4:24, where truth is expressed as a general conception (comp. Joh_8:44) (Sir_37:15; Tob_3:5; 2Ti_2:25; 2Ti_3:7), and to 3Jn_1:3 (Joh_17:4 is with Lachm. and Tisch. to be read ἐν τῇ ἀληθ .), where ἘΝ ἈΛΗΘ . must be taken as equivalent to ἈΛΗΘῶς ,[197] and consequently as in the present passage and as in 3Jn_1:1.
[194] Comp. generally, Ritschl in the Jahrb. f. D. Theol. 1863, p. 240 f.
[195] Already this solemn ὑπέρ (Joh_6:51, Joh_10:11, Joh_11:50, Joh_15:13, Joh_18:14; 1Jn_3:16) should have prevented ἁγιάζω ἐμ . from being understood in the ethical sense of the ripening to moral perfection through faithful, loving obedience towards the Father (so Wörner, Verhältn. d. Geistes z. Sohne Gottes, p. 41 f.). Simply correct is Euth. Zigabenus, ἐγὼ ἑκουσίως θυσιάζω ἐμαυτόν .
[196] In so far as they understand ἐν ἀληθ . of the true ἁγιάζεσθαι , in which, however, they find an antithesis to the typical holiness of the O. T. sacrifice, as e.g. Euth. Zigabenus: ἵνα καὶ αὐτοὶ ὦσι τεθυμένοι ἐν ἀληθινῇ θυσίᾳ · ἡ γὰρ νομικὴ θυσία τύπος ἦν , οὐκ ἀλήθεια . Comp. Theophylact; also Holtzmann, Judenth. u. Christenth. p. 421.
[197] The passage means: “I rejoiced when brethren came and gave witness for Thy truth (i.e. for Thy morally true Christian constitution of life), as Thou truly (in deed) walkest.” καθώς , κ . τ . λ ., that is, not forming a part of that testimony of the brethren, gives to this testimony the confirmation of John himself. As the brothers have testified for Gaius, so he actually walks. This John knows, and the brethren have told him nothing new by that testimony, however greatly he has rejoiced in the fact of receiving such a testimony concerning his Gaius. Therefore he adds, with loving recognition, as thou truly walkest. That testimony therefore only corresponds to the reality.