SECTION II. THE CHILDREN'S QUESTION, AND THE ADIEU
John xiii. 36-38, xiv. 5-7, 8-14, 22-31.
The questions put successively by four of the
little ones to their dying Parent now invite our attention.
The first of these was asked by the disciple who
was ever the most forward to speak his mind--Simon Peter. His question had
reference to the intimation made by Jesus about His going away. Peter had noted
and been alarmed by that intimation. It seemed to hint at danger; it plainly
spoke of separation. Tormented with uncertainty, terrified by the vague
presentiment of hidden peril, grieved at the thought of being parted from his
beloved Master, he could not rest till he had penetrated the mystery; and at
the very first pause in the discourse he abruptly inquired, "Lord, whither
goest Thou?" thinking, though he did not say, "Where Thou goest, I will go."
It was to this unexpressed thought that Jesus
directed His reply. He did not say where He was going; but, leaving that to be
inferred from His studied reserve, and from the tone in which He spoke, He
Simply told Peter: "Whither I go, thou cast not follow me now, but thou shalt
follow me afterwards." By this answer He showed He had not forgotten that it
was with children He had to deal. He does not look for heroic behavior on the
part of Peter and his brother disciples at the approaching crisis. He does
indeed expect that they shall play the hero by and by, and follow Him on the
martyr's path bearing their cross, in accordance with the law of discipleship
proclaimed by Himself in connection with the first announcement of His own
death. But meantime He expects them to behave simply as little children,
running away in terror when the moment of danger arrives.
While this was the idea Jesus had of Peter, it
was not the idea which Peter had of himself. He thought himself no child, but a
man every inch. Dimly apprehending what following his Master meant, he deemed
himself perfectly competent to the task now, and felt almost aggrieved by the
poor opinion entertained of his courage. "Why," he therefore asked in a tone of
injured virtue, "Lord, why cannot I follow Thee now?" Is it because there is
danger, imprisonment, death, in the path? If that be all, it is no good reason,
for "I will lay down my life for Thy sake." Ah, that "why," how like a child;
that self-confidence, what an infallible mark of spiritual weakness!
If the answer of Jesus to Peter's fist question
was indirect and evasive, that which He gave to his second was too plain to be
mistaken. "Wilt thou," He said, taking up the disciple's words,--" Wilt thou
lay down thy life for my sake? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall
not crow till thou hast denied me thrice."[24.20] Better for Peter had he been
content with the first reply! Yet no: not better, only pleasanter for the
moment. It was good for Peter to be thus bluntly told what his Lord thought of
him, and to be shown once for all his own picture drawn by an unerring hand. It
was just what was needed to lead him to self-knowledge, and to bring on a
salutary crisis in his spiritual history. Already more than once he had been
faithfully dealt with for faults springing from his characteristic vices of
forwardness and self-confidence. But such correction in detail had produced no
deep impression, no decisive lasting effect on his mind. He was still ignorant
of himself, still as forward, self-confident, and self-willed as ever, as the
declaration he had just made most clearly showed. There was urgent need,
therefore, for a lesson that would never be forgotten; for a word of correction
that would print itself indelibly on the erring disciple's memory, and bear
fruit throughout his whole after life. And here it is at last, and in good
season. The Lord tells His brave disciple that he will forthwith play the
coward; He tells His attached disciple, to whom separation from his Master
seems more dreadful than death, that he will, ere many hours are past, deny all
acquaintance or connection with Him whom he so fondly loves. He tells him all
this at a time when the prophecy must be followed by its fulfilment almost as
fast as a flash of lightning is followed by its peal of thunder. The prediction
of Jesus, so minutely circumstantial, and the denial of Peter, so exactly
corresponding, both by themselves so remarkable, and coming so close together,
will surely help to make each other impressive; and it will be strange indeed
if the two combined do not, by the blessing of God, in answer to the Master's
intercessory prayer, make of the fallen disciple quite another man. The result
will doubtless prove the truth of another prophetic word reported by Luke as
having been spoken by the Lord to His disciple on the same occasion.[24.21] The
chaff will be separated from the wheat in Peter's character; he will undergo a
great change of spirit; and being converted from self-confidence and self-will
to meekness and modesty, he will be fit at length to strengthen others, to be a
shepherd to the weak, and, if needful, to bear his cross, and so follow his
Master through death to glory.
The second question proceeded from Thomas, the
melancholy disciple, slow to believe, and prone to take sombre views of things.
The mind of this disciple fastened on the statement wherewith Jesus concluded
His second word of consolation: "Whither I go, the way ye know." That statement
seemed to Thomas not only untrue, but unreasonable. For himself, he was utterly
unconscious of possessing the knowledge for which the speaker had given His
hearers credit; and, moreover, he did not see how it was possible for any of
them to possess it. For Jesus had never yet distinctly told them whither He was
going; and not knowing the terminus ad quem, how could any one know the road
which led thereto? Therefore, in a dry, matter-of-fact, almost cynical tone,
this second interlocutor remarked: "Lord, we know not whither Thou goest, and
how can we know the way?"[24.22
This utterance was thoroughly characteristic of
the man, as we know him from John's portraiture.[24.23] While the
practical-minded Peter asks Jesus where He is going, determined if possible to
follow Him, Thomas does not think it worth his while to make any such inquiry.
Not that he is unconcerned about the matter. He would like well to know whither
his Lord is bound; and, if it were possible, he would be as ready as his
brother disciple to keep Him company. Danger would not deter him. He had said
once before, "Let us go, that we may die with Him," and he could say the same
thing honestly again; for though he is gloomy, he is not selfish or cowardly.
But just as on that earlier occasion, when Jesus, disregarding the warnings of
His disciples, resolved to go from Persia to Judea on a visit to the afflicted
family of Bethany, Thomas took the darkest view of the situation, and looked on
death as the certain fate awaiting them all, so now he resigns himself to a
hopeless, desponding mood. The thought of the Master's departure makes him so
sad that he has no heart to ask questions concerning the why or the
whitherward. He resigns himself to ignorance on these matters as an inevitable
doom. Whither? whither? I know not; who can tell? The future is dark. The
Father's house you spoke of, where in the universe can it be? Is there really
such a place at all?
Even the question put by Thomas, "How can we know
the way?" is not so much a question as an apology for not asking questions. It
is not a demand for information, but a gentle complaint against Jesus for
expecting His disciples to be informed. It is not the expression of a desire
for knowledge, but an excuse for ignorance. The melancholy disciple is for the
present hopeless of knowing either end or way, and therefore he is incurious
and listless. Far from seeking light, he is rather in the humor to exaggerate
the darkness. As Jonah in his angry mood indulged in querulousness, so Thomas
in his sadness delights in gloom. He waits not eagerly for the dawn of day; he
rather takes pleasure in the night, as congenial to his present frame of mind.
Good men of melancholic temperament are, at the best, like men walking amid the
solemn gloom of a forest. Sadness is the prevailing feeling in their souls, and
they are content to have occasional broken glimpses of heaven, like peeps of
the sky through the leafy roof of the wood. But Thomas is so heavy-hearted that
he hardly cares even for a glimpse of the celestial world; he looks not up, but
walks through the dark forest at a slow pace, with his eyes fixed upon the
ground.
The argumentative proclivities[24.24] of this
disciple appear in his words as well as his proneness to despondency. Another
man in despairing mood might have said: We know neither end nor way; we are
utterly in the dark both as to whither you are going, and as to the road by
which you are to go thither. But Thomas must needs reason; his mental habit
leads him to represent one piece of ignorance as the necessary consequence of
another: We know not the terminus ad quem, and therefore it is impossible that
we can know the way. This man is afflicted with the malady of thought; he gives
reasons for every thing, and he will demand reasons for every thing. Here he
demonstrates the impossibility of a certain kind of knowledge; at another
crisis we shall find him insisting on palpable demonstration that his Lord is
indeed risen from the dead.
How does Jesus reply to the lugubrious speech of
Thomas? Most compassionately and sympathetically, now as at another time. To
the curious question of Peter He returned an evasive answer; to the sad-hearted
Thomas, on the other hand, He vouchsafes information which had not been asked.
And the information given is full even to redundancy. The disciple had
complained of ignorance concerning the end, and especially concerning the way;
and it would have been a sufficient reply to have said, The Father is the end,
and I am the way. But the Master, out of the fulness of His heart, said more
than this. With firm, emphatic tones He uttered this oracular response, meant
for the ear not of Thomas alone, but of all the world: "I am the way, and the
truth, and the life. No man cometh unto the Father but by me."
Comparing this momentous declaration with the
preceding word of consolation, we observe a change in the mode of presenting
the truth. The Father Himself takes the place of the Father's house with its
many mansions, as the end; and Jesus, instead of being the guide who shall one
day lead His children to the common home, becomes Himself the way. The kind
Master alters His language, in gracious accommodation to childish capacities.
Of Christians at the best it may be said, in the words of Paul, that now, in
this present time-life, they see the heavenly and the eternal as through a
glass, in enigmas.[24.25] But the disciples at this crisis in their history
were not able to do even so much. Jesus had held up before their eyes the
brightly-polished mirror of a beautiful parable concerning a house of many
mansions, and they had seen nothing there; no image, but only an opaque
surface. The future remained dark and hidden as before. What, then, was to be
done? Just what Jesus did. Persons must be substituted for places. Disciples
weak in faith must be addressed in this fashion: Can ye not comprehend whither
I am going? Think, then, to whom I go. If ye know nothing of the place called
heaven, know at least that ye have a Father there. And as for the way to
heaven, let that for you mean me. Knowing me, ye need no further knowledge;
believing in me, ye may look forward to the future, even to death itself,
without fear or concern.
On looking more narrowly into the response given
by Jesus to Thomas, we find it by no means easy to satisfy ourselves as to how
precisely it should be expounded. The very fulness of this saying perplexes us;
it is dark with excess of light. Interpreters differ as to how the Way, the
Truth, and the Life are to be distinguished, and how they are related to each
other. One offers, as a paraphrase of the text: I am the beginning, the middle,
and the end of the ladder which leads to heaven; another: I am the example, the
teacher, the giver of eternal life; while a third subordinates the two last
attributes to the first, and reads: I am the true way of life.[24.26] Each view
is true in itself, yet one hesitates to accept either of them as exhausting the
meaning of the Saviours words.
Whatever be the preferable method of interpreting
these words of our Lord, two things at least are clear from them. Jesus sets
Himself forth here as all that man needs for eternal salvation, and as the only
Saviour. He is way, truth, life, every thing; and He alone conducts to the
Father. He says to men in effect: "What is it you want? Is it light? I am the
light of the world, the revealer of the Father: for this end I came, that I
might declare Him. Or is it reconciliation you want? I by that very death which
I am about to endure am the Reconciler. My very end in dying is to bring you
who are for off nigh to God, as to a forgiving, gracious Father. Or is it life,
spiritual, never-ending life, you seek? Believe in me, and ye shall never die;
or though ye die, I will raise you again to enter on an inheritance that is
incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away, eternal in the heavens. Let
all who seek these things look to me. Look to me for light, not to rabbis or
philosophers; not even to nature and providence. These last do indeed reveal
God, but they do so dimly. The light of creation is but the starlight of
theology, and the light of providence is but its moonlight, while I am the
sunlight. My Father's Name is written in hieroglyphics in the works of
creation; in providence and history it is written in plain letters, but so far
apart that it takes much study to put them together, and so spell out the
divine Name: in me the divine Name is written so that he may read who runs, and
the wisdom of God is become milk for babes.[24.27] Look to me also for
reconciliation, not to legal sacrifices. That way of approaching God is
antiquated now. I am the new, the living, the eternal way into the holy of
holies, through which all may draw near to the divine presence with a true
heart, in full assurance of faith. Look to me, finally, for eternal
blessedness. I am He who, having died, shall rise again, and live forevermore,
and shall hold in my hands the keys of Hades and of death, and shall open the
kingdom of heaven to all believers."
The doctrine that in Christ is the fulness of
grace and truth is very comforting to those who know Him; but what of those who
know Him not, or who possess only such an implicit, unconscious knowledge as
hardly merits the name? Does the statement we have been considering exclude
such from the possibility of salvation? It does not. It declares that no man
cometh to the Father but by Christ, but it does not say how much knowledge is
required for salvation.[24.28] It is possible that some may be saved by Christ,
and for His sake, who know very little about Him indeed. This we may infer from
the case of the disciples themselves. What did they know about the way of
salvation at this period? Jesus addresses them as persons yet in ignorance
concerning Himself, saying: "If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father
also." Nevertheless, He has no hesitation in speaking to them as persons who
should be with Him in the Father's house. And what shall we say of Job, and the
Syro-Phoenician woman, and the Ethiopian eunuch, and Cornelius, and we may add,
after Calvin, the Syrian courtier Naaman? We cannot say more than the great
theologian of Geneva has himself said concerning such cases: "I confess," he
writes, "that in a certain respect their faith was implicit, not only as to the
person of Christ, but as to His virtue and grace, and the office assigned Him
by the Father. Meanwhile it is certain that they were imbued with principles
which gave some taste of Christ, however slight."[24.29] It is doubtful whether
even so much can be said of Naaman; though Calvin, without evidence, and merely
to meet the exigencies of a theory, argues that it would have been too absurd,
when Elisha had spoken to him of little matters, to have been silent on the
most important subject. Or if we grant to Naaman the slight taste contended
for, must we not grant it also, with Justin Martyr[24.30] and Zwingli, to
Socrates and Plato and others, on the principle that all true knowledge of God,
by whomsoever possessed and however obtained, whether it be sunlight,
moonlight, or starlight, is virtually Christian; in other words, that Christ,
just because He is the only light, is the light of every man who hath any light
in him?
This principle, while it has its truth, may very
easily be preverted into an argument against a supernatural revelation. Hence
in its very first chapter, Of the Holy Scripture, the Westminster Confession
broadly asserts that the light of nature and the works of creation and
providence are not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and of His will
which is necessary unto salvation. While strongly maintaining this truth,
however, we must beware of being drawn into a tone of disparagement in speaking
of what way be learnt of God from those lower sources. While walking in the
sunlight, we rust not despise the dimmer luminaries of the night, or forget
their existence, as in the day-time men forget the moon and the stars. By so
doing we should be virtually disparaging the Scriptures themselves. For much
that is in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, is but a record of what
inspired men had learned from observation of God's works in creation, and of
His ways in providence. All cannot, indeed, see as much there as they saw. On
the contrary, a revelation was needed not only to make known truths Iying
beyond the teachings of natural religion, but even to direct men's dim eyes to
truths which, though visible in nature, were in fact for the most part not
seen. The Bible, in the quaint language of Calvin, is a pair of spectacles,
through which our weak eyes see the glory of God in the world.[24.31] Yet what
is seen through the spectacles by weak eyes is in many passages just what might
be seen by strong eyes without their aid,--"nothing being placed there which is
not visible in the creation."[24.32]
These observations may help us to cherish hope
for those whose opportunities of knowing Him who is "the way, the truth, and
the life" are small. They do not, however, justify those who, having abundant
facilities for knowing Christ, are content with the minimum of knowledge. There
is more hope for the heathen than for such men. To their number no true
Christian can belong. A genuine disciple may know little to begin with: this
was the case even with the apostles themselves; but he will not be satisfied to
be in the dark. He will desire to be enlightened in the knowledge of Christ,
and will pray, "Lord, show us the Father."
Such was the prayer of Philip, the third disciple
who took part in the dialogue at the supper-table. Philip's request, like
Thomas's question, was a virtual denial of a statement previously made by
Jesus. "If ye had known me," Jesus had said to Thomas, "ye should have known my
Father also;" and then He had added, "and from henceforth ye know Him, and have
seen Him." This last statement Philip felt himself unable to homologate. "Seen
the Father! would it were so! nothing would gratify us more: Lord, show us the
Father, and it sufficeth us."
In itself, the prayer of this disciple was most
devout and praiseworthy. There can be no loftier aspiration than that which
seeks the knowledge of God the Father, no better index of a spiritual mind than
to account such knowledge the summum bonum, no more hopeful symptom of ultimate
arrival at the goal than the candor which honestly confesses present ignorance.
In these respects the sentiments uttered by Philip were fitted to gratify his
Master. In other respects, however, they were not so satisfactory. The
ingenuous inquirer had evidently a very crude notion of what seeing the Father
amounted to. He fancied it possible, and he appears to have wished, to see the
Father as he then saw Jesus--as an outward object of vision to the eye of the
body. Then, supposing that to be his wish, how foolish the reflection, "and it
sufflceth us"! What good could a mere external vision of the Father do any one?
And finally that same reflection painfully showed how little the disciples had
gained hitherto from intercourse with Jesus. They had been with Him for years,
yet had not found rest and satisfaction in Him, but had still a craving for
something beyond Him; while what they craved they had, without knowing it, been
getting from Him all along.
Such ignorance and spiritual incapacity so late
in the day were very disappointing. And Jesus was disappointed, but, with
characteristic patience, not irritated. He took not offence either at Philip's
stupidity, or at the contradiction he had given to His own statement (for He
would rather be contradicted than have disciples pretend to know when they do
not), but endeavored to enlighten the little ones somewhat in the knowledge of
the Father. For this end He gave great prominence to the truth that the
knowledge of the Father and of Himself, the Son, were one; that He that hath
seen the Son hath seen the Father. The better to fix this great principle in
the minds of His hearers, He put it in the strongest possible manner, by
treating their ignorance of the Father as a virtual ignorance of Himself. "Have
I," He asked, "been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me,
Philip?" Then He went on to reason, as if to be ignorant of the Father was to
be so far ignorant of Himself as in effect to deny His divinity. "Believest
thou not," He again asked, "that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?" and
then He followed up the question with a reference to those things which went to
prove the asserted identity--His words and His works.[24.33] Nor did He stop
even here, but proceeded next to speak of still more convincing proofs of His
identity with the Father, to be supplied in the marvellous works which should
afterwards be done by the apostles themselves in His Name, and through powers
granted to them
by Himself in answer to their prayers.[24.34]
The first question put by Jesus to Philip, "Hast
thou not known me?" was something more than a logical artifice to make stupid
disciples reflect on the contents of the knowledge they already possessed. It
hinted at a real fact. The disciples had really not yet seen Jesus, for as long
as they had been with Him. They knew Him, and they did not know Him: they knew
not that they knew, nor what they knew. They were like children, who can repeat
the Catechism without understanding its sense, or who possess a treasure
without being capable of estimating its value. They were like men looking at an
object through a telescope without adjusting the focus, or like an ignorant
peasant gazing up at the sky on a winter night, and seeing the stars which
compose a constellation, such as the Bear or Orion, yet not recognizing the
constellation itself. The disciples were familiar with the words, parables,
discourses, etc., spoken, and with the miraculous works done, by their Master,
but they knew these only as isolated particulars; the separate rays of light
emanating from the fountain of divine wisdom, power, and love in Jesus, had
never been gathered into a focus, so as to form a distinct image of Him who
came in the flesh to reveal the invisible God. They had seen many a star shine
out in the spiritual heavens while in Christ's company; but the stars had not
yet assumed to their eye the aspect of a constellation. They had no clear,
full, consistent, spiritual conception of the mind, heart, and character of the
man Christ Jesus, in whom dwelt all the fulness of Godhead bodily. Nor would
they possess such a conception till the Spirit of Truth, the promised
Comforter, came. The very thing He was to do for them was to show them Christ;
not merely to recall to their memories the details of His life, but to show
them the one mind and spirit which dwelt amid the details, as the soul dwells
in the body, and made them an organic whole, and which once perceived, would of
itself recall to recollection all the isolated particulars at present Iying
latent in their consciousness. When the apostles had got that conception, they
would know Christ indeed, the same Christ whom they had known before, yet
different, a new Christ, because a Christ comprehended,--seen with the eye of
the spirit, as the former had been seen with the eye of the flesh. And when
they had thus seen Christ, they would feel that they had also seen the Father.
The knowledge of Christ would satisfy them, because in Him they should see with
unveiled face the glory of the Lord.
The soul-satisfying vision of God being a future
good to be attained after the advent of the Comforter, it could not have been
the intention of Jesus to assure the disciples that they possessed it already,
still less to force it on them by a process of reasoning. When He said, "From
henceforth ye know Him (the Father), and have seen Him," He evidently meant:
"Ye now know how to see Him, viz. by reflecting on your intercourse with me.
And the sole object of the statements made to Philip concerning the close
relations between the Father and the speaker evidently was to impress upon the
disciples the great truth that the solution of all religious difficulties, the
satisfaction of all longings, was to be found in the knowledge of Himself.
"Know me," Jesus would say, "trust me, pray to me, and all shall be well with
you. Your mind shall be filled with light, your heart shall be at rest; you
shall have every thing you want; your joy shall be full."
A most important lesson this; but also one which,
like Philip and the other disciples, all are slow to learn. How few, even of
those who confess Christ's divinity, do see in Him the true perfect Revealer of
God! To many Jesus is one Being, and God is another and quite a different
Being; though the truth that Jesus is divine is all the while honestly
acknowledged. That great truth lies in the mind like an unfructifying seed
buried deep in the soil, and we may say of it what has been said of the
doctrine of the soul's immortality: "One may believe it for twenty years, and
only in the twenty-first, in some great moment, discover with astonishment the
rich contents of this belief, the warmth of this naphtha spring.''[24.35]
Impressions of God have been received from one quarter, impressions of Christ
from another; and the two sets of impressions lie side by side in the mind,
incompatible, yet both receiving house-room. Hence, when a Christian begins to
carry out consistently the principle that, Jesus being God, to know Jesus is to
know God, he is apt to experience a painful conflict between a new and an old
class of ideas about the Divine Being. Two Gods--a christianize God, and a sort
of pagan divinity--struggle for the place of sovereignty; and when at last the
conflict ends in the enthronement in the mind and heart of the God whom Jesus
revealed, the day-dawn of a new spiritual life has arrived.
One most prominent idea in the conception of God
as revealed by Jesus Christ is that expressed by the name Father. According to
the doctrine of our Lord and Saviour, God is not truly known till He is thought
of and heartly believed in as a Father; neither can any God who is not regarded
as a Father satisfy the human heart. Hence His own mode of speaking concerning
God was in entire accordance with this doctrine. He did not speak to men about
the Deity, or the Almighty. Those epithets which philosophers are so fond of
applying to the Divine Being, the Infinite, the Absolute, etc., never crossed
His lips. No words ever uttered by Him could suggest the idea of the gloomy
arbitrary tyrant before whom the guilty conscience of superstitious heathenism
cowers. He spake evermore, in sermon, parable, model prayer, and private
conversation, of a Father. Such expressions as "the Father," "my Father," "your
Father," were constantly on His tongue; and all He taught concerning God
harmonized perfectly with the feelings these expressions were fitted to call
forth.
Yet notwithstanding all His pains, and all the
beauty of His utterances concerning the Being whom no man hath seen, Jesus, it
is to be feared, has only imperfectly succeeded in establishing the worship of
the Father. From ignorance or from preference, men still extensively worship
God under other names and categories. Some deem the paternal appellation too
homely, and prefer a name expressive of more distant and ceremonious relations.
The Deity, or the Almighty, suffices them. Philosophers dislike the appellation
Father, because it makes the personality of God too prominent. They prefer to
think of the Uncreated as an Infinite, Eternal Abstraction--an object of
speculation rather than of faith and love. Legal-minded professors of religion
take fright at the word Father. They are not sure what they have a right to use
it, and they deem it safer to speak of God in general terms, which take nothing
for granted, as the Judge, the Taskmaster, or the Lawgiver. The worldly, the
learned, and the religious, from different motives, thus agree in allowing to
fall into desuetude the name into which they have been baptized, and only a
small minority worship the Father in spirit and in truth.
Superficial readers of the gospel may cherish the
idea that the name Father, applied to God by Jesus, is simply or mainly a
sentimental poetic expression, whose loss were no great matter for regret.
There could not be a greater mistake. The name, in Christ's lips, always
represents a definite thought, and teaches a great truth. When He uses the term
to express the relation of the Invisible One to Himself, He gives us a glimpse
into the mystery of the Divine Being, telling us that God is not abstract
being, as Platonists and Arians conceived Him; not the absolute, incapable of
relations; not a passionless being, without affections; but one who eternally
loves, and is loved, in whose infinite nature the family affections find scope
for ceaseless play--One in three: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three persons in
one divine substance. Then again, when He calls God Father, in reference to
mankind in general, as He does repeatedly, He proclaims to men sunk in
ignorance and sin this blessed truth: "God, my Father, is your Father too;
cherishes a paternal feeling towards you, though ye be so marred in moral
vision that He might well not know you, and so degenerate that He might well be
ashamed to own you; and I His Son am come, your elder brother, to bring you
back to your Father's house. Ye are not worthy to be called His sons, for ye
have ceased to bear His image, and ye have not yielded Him filial obedience and
reverence; nevertheless, He is willing to be a Father unto you, and receive you
graciously in His arms. Believe this, and become in heart and conduct sons of
God, that ye may enjoy the full, the spiritual and eternal, benefit of God's
paternal love." When, finally, He calls God Father, with special reference to
His own disciples, He assures them that they are the objects of God's constant,
tender, and effective care; that all His power, wisdom, and love are engaged
for their protection, preservation, guidance, and final eternal salvation; that
their Father in heaven will see that they lack no good, and will make all
things minister to their interest, and in the end secure to them their
inheritance in the everlasting kingdom. "Fear not," is His comforting message
to His little chosen flock, "it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the
kingdom."
We have now to notice the fourth and last of the
children's questions, which was put by Judas, "not Iscariot" (he is otherwise
occupied), but the other disciple of that name, also called Lebbaeus and
Thaddaeus.[24.36]
In His third word of consolation Jesus had spoken
of a re-appearance (after His departure) specially and exclusively to "His
own." "The world," He had said, "seeth me no more; but ye see me," that is,
shall see after a little while. Now two questions might naturally be asked
concerning this exclusive manifestation: How was it possible? and what was the
reason of it? How could Jesus make Himself visible to His disciples, and yet
remain invisible to all others? and granting the possibility, why not show
Himself to the world at large? It is not easy to decide which of these two
difficulties Judas had in his mind, for his question might be interpreted
either way. Literally translated, it was to this effect: "Lord, what has
happened, that Thou art about to manifest Thyself unto us, and not unto the
world?" The disciple might mean, like Nicodemus, to ask, "How can these things
be?" or he might mean, "We have been hoping for the coming of Thy kingdom in
power and glory, visible to the eyes of all men: what has led Thee to change
Thy plans?"
In either case the question of Judas was founded
on a misapprehension of the nature of the promised manifestation. He imagined
that Jesus was to reappear corporeally, after His departure to the Father,
therefore so as to be visible to the outward eye, and not of this one or that
one, but of all, unless He took pains to hide Himself from some while revealing
Himself to others.[24.37] Neither Judas nor any of his brethern was capable as
yet of conceiving a spiritual manifestation, not to speak of finding therein a
full compensation, for the loss of the corporeal presence. Had they grasped the
thought of a spiritual presence, they could have had no difficulty in
reconciling visibility to one with invisibility to another; for they would have
understood that the vision could be enjoyed only by those who possessed the
inward sense of sight.
How was a question dictated by incapacity to
understand the subject to which it referred to be answered? Just as you would
explain the working of the electric telegraph to a child. If your child asked
you, Father, how is it that you can send a message by the telegraph to my uncle
or aunt in America, so far, far away? you would not think of attempting to
explain to him the mysteries of electricity. You would take him to a telegraph
office, and bid him look at the man actually engaged in sending a message, and
tell him, that as the man moved the handle, a needle in America pointed at
letters of the alphabet, which, when put together, made up words which said
just what you wished to say.
In this way it was that Jesus answered the
question of Judas. He did not attempt to explain the difference between a
spiritual and a corporeal manifestation, but simply said in effect: Do you so
and so, and what I have promised will come true. "If a man love me, he will
keep my words; and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make
our abode with him." It is just the former statement repeated, in a slightly
altered, more pointed form. Nothing new is said, because nothing new can be
said intelligibly. The old promise is simply so put as to arrest attention on
the condition of its fulfilment. "if a man love me, he will keep my words:
"attend to that, my children, and the rest will follow. The divine
Trinity--Father, Son, and Spirit--will verily dwell with the faithful disciple,
who with trembling solicitude strives to observe my Commandments. As for those
who love me not, and keep not my sayings, and believe not on me, it is simply
impossible for them to enjoy such august company. The pure in heart alone shall
see God.
Jesus had now spoken all He meant to say to His
disciples in the capacity of a dying parent addressing his sorrowing children.
It remained now only to wind up the discourse, and bid the little ones
adieu.
In drawing to a close, Jesus does not imagine
that He has removed all difficulties and dispelled all gloom from the minds of
the disciples. On the contrary, He is conscious that all He has said has made
but a slight impression. Nevertheless, He will say no more in the way of
comfort. There is, in the first place, no time. Judas and his band, the prince
of this world, whose servants Judas and all his associates are, may now be
expected at any moment, and He must hold Himself in readiness to go and meet
the enemy.[24.38] Then, secondly, to add any thing further would be useless. It
is not possible to make things any clearer to the disciples in their present
state by any amount of speech. Therefore He does not attempt it, but refers
them for all other explanations to the promised Comforter,[24.39] and proceeds
to utter the words of farewell: "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto
you,"[24.40--words touching at all times, unspeakably affecting in the
circumstances of the Speaker and hearers. We know not but they did more to
comfort the dispirited little ones than all that had been said before. There is
a pathos and a music in the very sound of them, apart from their sense, which
are wonderfully soothing. We can imagine, indeed, that as they were spoken, the
poor disciples were overtaken with a fit of tenderness, and burst into tears.
That, however, would do them good. Sorrow is healed by weeping: the sympathy
which melts the heart at the same time comforts it.
This touching sympathetic farewell is more than a
good wish: it is a promise--a promise made by One who knows that the blessing
promised is within reach. It is like the cheering word spoken by David to
brothers in affliction: "Wait on the Lord: be of good courage, and He shall
strengthen twine heart: wait, I say, on the Lord." David spoke that word from
experience, and even so does Jesus speak here. The peace He offers His
disciples is His own peace--"my peace:" not merely peace of His procuring, but
peace of His experiencing. He has had peace in the world, in spite of sorrow
and temptation,--perfect peace through faith. Therefore He can assure them that
such a thing is possible. They, too, can have peace of mind and heart in the
midst of untoward tribulation. The world can neither understand nor impart such
peace, the only peace it knows any thing about being that connected with
prosperity, which trouble can destroy as easily as a breath of wind agitates
the calm surface of the sea. But there is a peace which is independent of
outward circumstances, whose sovereign virtue and blessed function it is to
keep the heart against fear and care. Such peace Jesus had Himself enjoyed; and
He gives His disciples to understand that through faith and singleness of mind
they may enjoy it also.
The farewell word is not only a promise made by
One who knows whereof He speaks, but the promise of One who can bestow the
blessing promised. Jesus does not merely say: Be of good cheer; ye may have
peace, even as I have had peace, in spite of tribulation. He says moreover, and
more particularly, Such peace as I have had I bequeath to you as a dying
legacy, I bestow on you as a parting gift. The inheritance of peace is made
over to the little ones by a last will and testament, though, being minors,
they do not presently enter into actual possession. When they arrive at their
majority they shall inherit the promise, and delight themselves in the
abundance of peace. The after-experience of the disciples proved that the
promise made to them by their Lord had not been false and vain. The apostles,
as Jesus foretold, found in the world much tribulation; but in the midst of all
they enjoyed perfect peace. Trusting in the Lord, and doing good, they were
without fear and without care. In every thing, by prayer and supplication, with
thanksgiving, they made their requests known unto God; and the peace of God,
which passeth understanding, did verily keep their hearts and minds in Christ
Jesus.
Jesus had not yet said His last word to the
little ones. Seeing in their faces the signs of grief, in spite of all that He
had spoken to comfort them, He abruptly threw out an additional remark, which
gave to the whole subject of His departure quite a new turn. He had been
telling them, all through His farewell address, that though He was going away,
He would come again to them, either personally or by deputy, in the body at
last, in the Spirit meanwhile. He now told them, that apart from His return,
His departure itself should be an occasion of joy rather than of sorrow,
because of what it signified for Himself. "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I
go away, and come again unto you:" extract comfort from that promise by all
means. But "if ye loved me (as ye ought), ye would rejoice because I said, I go
unto the Father,"[24.41] forgetting yourselves, and thinking what a happy
change it would be for me. Then he added: "For my Father is greater than I."
The connection between this clause and the foregoing part of the sentence is
somewhat obscure, as is also its theological import. Our idea, however, is,
that when Jesus spake these words He was thinking of His death, and meeting an
objection thence arising to the idea of rejoicing in His departure. "You are
going to the Father," one might have said--"yes; but by what a way!" Jesus
replies: The way is rough, and abhorrent to flesh and blood; but it is the way
my Father has appointed, and that is enough for me; for my Father is greater
than I. So interpreting the words, we only make the speaker hint therein at a
thought which we find Him plainly expressing immediately after in His
concluding sentence, where He represents His voluntary endurance of death as a
manifestation to the world of His love to the Father, and as an act of
obedience to His commandment.
And now, finally, by word and act, Jesus strives
to impress on the little children the solemn reality of their situation. First,
He bids them mark what He has told them of His departure, that when the
separation takes place they may not be taken by surprise. "Now I have told you
before it come to pass, that when it is come to pass ye might believe."[24.42]
Then He gives them to understand that the parting hour is at hand. Hereafter He
will not talk much with them; there will not be opportunity; for the prince of
this world cometh. Then He adds words to this effect: "Let him come; I am ready
for him. He has indeed nothing in me; no claim upon me; no power over me; no
fault which he can charge against me. Nevertheless, I yield myself up into his
hands, that all men may see that I love the Father, and am loyal to His will:
that I am ready to die for truth, for righteousness, for the
unrighteous."[24.43] Then, lastly, with firm, resolute voice, He gives the word
of command to all to rise up from the couches on which they have been
reclining, doubtless suiting His own action to the word: "Arise, let us go
hence."[24.44]
From the continuation of the discourse, as
recorded by John, as well as from the statement made by him at the commencement
of the eighteenth chapter of his Gospel ("When Jesus had spoken these words, He
went forth," etc.), we infer that the company did not at this point leave the
supper-chamber. They merely assumed a new attitude, and exchanged the recumbent
for a standing posture, as if in readiness to depart. This movement was, in the
circumstances, thoroughly natural. It fitly expressed the resolute temper of
Jesus; and it corresponded to the altered tone in which He proceeded to address
His disciples. The action of rising formed, in fact, the transition from the
first part of His discourse to the second. Better than words could have done,
it altered the mood of mind, and prepared the disciples for listening to
language not soft, tender, and familiar as heretofore, but stern, dignified,
impassioned. It struck the keynote, if we may so express it, by which the
speaker passed from the lyric to the heroic style. It said, in effect: Let us
have done with the nursery dialect, which, continued longer, would but
enervate: let me speak to you now for a brief space as men who have got to play
an important part in the world. Arise; shake off languor, and listen, while I
utter words fitted to fire you with enthusiasm, to inspire you with courage,
and to impress you with a sense of the responsibilities and the honors
connected with your future position.
So understanding the rising from the table, we
shall be prepared to listen along with the disciples, and to enter on the study
of the remaining portion of Christ's farewell discourse, without any feeling of
abruptness.
This document (last modifiedSeptember 17, 1997) from Believerscafe.com
Home | Bible versions | Bible Dictionary | Christian Classics | Christian Articles | Daily Devotions
Sister Projects: Wikichristian | WikiMD
BelieversCafe is a large collection of christian articles with over 40,000 pages
Our sponsors: 
