The Two Feasts

Two Days Before The Passover

As has been noted already Jesus public preaching to the religious leaders is over. His focus is now on the needs of his disciples. Against this background the way in which the records tell us about this day is interesting.

The next two days have one thing in common. We know very little about what took place during the day. The focus is on the vents in the evening. This is rather like the fifth day before the Passover which was the day on which there was the 'triumphal entry' into Jerusalem. On that day we learn about the entry into Jerusalem. which was but one small fragment of the day.

The main focus of this day two days before the Passover is the meal in Bethany which we will return to in due course. The only other event recorded is that the Sanhedrin plotted to kill Jesus. Thus, even though this event is recorded, it actually tells us nothing about what Jesus did. It just sets the scene for Judas' actions in the evening when he goes to the chief priests.

The anointing of Jesus

We have already considered 'Then Jesus six days before the Passover came to Bethany ... There they made him a supper ...' [John 12:1-2]. Whilst it might appear that John is telling us that the meal in Bethany was, in fact, six days before the Passover, we have to conclude that the meal was. in fact two days before the Passover.

Both Matthew [26:2 and 6] and Mark [14:1 and 3] place the meal in Bethany two days before the Passover. If we say that John is speaking of a meal six days before the Passover we have to accept one of the following conclusions.

1] There were two meals in Bethany in the last week of Jesus' life and that Jesus was anointed with precious ointment by a woman on both occasions.

or

2] Either John or Matthew and Mark are mistaken about which day on which the one meal took place.

Actually, the logical conclusion that should be drawn is that all the gospel writers are speaking about the same event which took place two days before the Passover. The differences between the accounts are a consequence of the objectives of each inspired writer.

It is possible to develop a detailed table which show similarities between the meal in Bethany as recorded in John and the one recorded in Matthew and Mark. The object being to 'prove' from the similarities that one event is spoken of. On the other hand it is possible to develop a detailed table which highlights the differences between John on the one hand and Matthew and Mark on the other. The object here is to 'prove' that the meal spoken of by John is a different meal from the one spoken of by Matthew and Mark. Again it is possible to compare the record in Matthew with the one in Mark and show differences or similarities, depending on one's persuasion to 'prove' that they speak of one or two meals.

This approach is futile. It presumes that similarities or differences between different accounts can, of themselves, 'prove' whether two accounts speak of the same event. This approach is futile because it is possible to compare two or more accounts of the same event and yet notice differences. Further an approach which seeks to use similarities or differences runs the risk of missing the fact that each writer, by the Spirit, has clear objectives in mind. The reader should be looking for themes in the gospels which explain why each record is as it is. This is supremely relevant when considering the meal at Bethany.

The meal at Bethany was to commemorate the raising of Lazarus. This point has already been made when considering John 12:1 before we looked at '5 Days Before The Passover' We should read John 12 with this in mind. John 12:1 fixes the day of Jesus arrival in Bethany and therefore enables us to draw the conclusions we have been making about timing throughout the rest of the week. However John 12:2-11 is an account of events which took place two days before the Passover. They are placed here, in parenthesis, because they link thematically with the events recorded in John 11 before Jesus went to 'a city called Ephraim' [John 11:54].

That the meal was held two days before the Passover even though Jesus arrived in Bethany six days before the Passover may relate to Jesus' workload during the week. Consider:-

Jesus' arrival in Bethany six days before the Passover would not be heralded by a phone call to the family there. Jesus' arrival would be, probably, an unexpected and pleasant surprise. The raising of their brother Lazarus would still be very much in the minds of Mary and Martha and his father Simon. Jesus left Bethany in rather a hurry after the raising of Lazarus because of the plot to kill him [John 11:53]. Now, the family might have thought that it would be a good time to have a meal together to celebrate this event. After all it was a joyous time of the year. The Passover was to be celebrated in six days. The family in Bethany were totally unaware of what was going to happen during the week and the work that Jesus had to do before his crucifixion.

Jesus, on the other hand, knew that he had much to do, but that he would finish the work with the religious leaders part way through the week, thereafter he would focus on the needs of his disciples specifically. Knowing this he responded to the enthusiastic and loving offer of the meal with the suggestion that it be postponed until two days before the Passover.

When the alabaster box is broken 'the house was filled with the odour of the ointment' [John 12:3] Whilst we do not see a house being filled with an odour elsewhere in Scripture the concept of a house being filled is seen in a number of places in Scripture. 1 Kings 8:10,11 and 2 Chronicles 5:13,14 speak of the glory of God filling Solomon's temple. It was seen in the cloud which filled the temple. When Solomon, at the dedication of the temple finished praying, the glory of God filled the temple [2 Chronicles 7:1,2]. When Ezekiel, in vision, saw the destruction of Solomon's temple by the Babylonians he saw the glory of God as it filled the house of God before it departed from the city [Ezekiel 10:3,4]. When Haggai [2:7] says 'I will fill this house with glory' he is looking to the time when the temple which Ezekiel describes is built when he says 'So the spirit took me up, and brought me into the inner court; and, behold, the glory of the LORD filled the house' [Ezekiel 43:5]

So when the New Testament introduces the idea of the house being filled [John 12:3] in the context of the burial of Jesus the link between Jesus' death and the manifestation of the glory of God in the house can be seen. The 'house' of which we speak is, in fact, the ecclesia 'for ye are the temple of the living God' [2 Corinthians 6:16] So it is fitting that 'there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house' [Acts 2:2] .

This contrasts horribly with the mentality of the sinner who would entice the son to 'fill his house with spoil'. [Proverbs 1:13] This is rather like Judas who, when the house in Bethany was filled with the odour of the ointment, went to the high priests greedy for 'the rewards of iniquity.' [Acts 1:18] We must ask 'What motivated Judas to behave in the way that he did?' Whilst we cannot be sure about the motives which caused Judas to go to the chief priests when Jesus was anointed by Mary the gospel records give clues which present a startling picture.

Judas's Family.

Consider the following passages:-

Matthew 26:6 "Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper. ... "

John 12:4 "... then one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son ..."

Matthew 26 mentions "two days before the Passover" [v2]. Jesus was in the house of Simon the leper when a woman comes with a box of ointment and poured it on his head.

John 12 records events commencing "six days before the Passover ..." [v 1]. He is having a meal which "they" made for him. The context is that of being in a house at Bethany where Martha served. [v1-2]. If Martha was making the meal it would seem reasonable that she was in her own home. We know that she lived in Bethany because Lazarus was her brother and he lived in Bethany. [John 11:1-2].

Matthew 26 and John 12 speak of the same event. Both records are recounting events just prior to Jesus' death and have Jesus in the same place. Matthew 26 speaks of "two days before the Passover" whilst John 12 has "six days". This is because Matthew is presenting a chronological account whilst John's record is thematic. The association with 'six days before the Passover' the meal and the anointing of Jesus is linked thematically with the raising of Lazarus which is recorded in the previous chapter [John 11]. John's record aims to link the raising of Lazarus with the meal to show that the meal was a celebration of Lazarus being raised from the dead.

Additionally Matthew deals more with the history of events in the last week before introducing "two days before the Passover", whilst John gives little information about events before "six days before the Passover", rather than concentrating on specific events in detail then spends a lot of time dealing with events in the upper room [John 13-17].

Who Is Related To Whom?

1] We see that Lazarus was the brother of Mary and Martha.

2] Judas' father was Simon.

3] Mary and Martha's father was Simon the leper. Simon and Simon the leper are the same person.

4] Mary, Martha and Lazarus lived in Bethany

5] Simon the Leper is Simon (Judas' father)

6] Therefore Mary, Martha, were sisters to Lazarus and Judas Iscariot.

Developing a family tree we see the following:-

Judas was the brother of Lazarus! This suggestion provides a possible explanation for his behaviour. For three and a half years Judas had 'companied' [Acts 1:21] with Jesus. There is no record that Jesus made any special provision or had any celebration for him. On the other hand Lazarus, who appears on the scene from nowhere, received a great deal of attention from Jesus at this time. Judas, it is suggested, felt pushed out by his brother who was getting all the attention. Even his sisters Mary and Martha, were paying more attention to Jesus and probably Lazarus than they were to him.

We know that he was a thief [John 12:6] and it may be this, coupled with his sulleness at being ousted, in his own eyes, by his brother Lazarus which prompted his action.. Judas was jealous. Maybe also he was upset at having been so openly rebuked by Jesus for it was Judas who said 'Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?' [John 12:5] and was therefore rebuked before the disciples and his family.

It has already been suggested that the unique section in Luke which includes the parable of the prodigal son was spoken by Jesus whilst he was in 'a city called Ephraim' [John 11:54]. This places that parable between the raising of Lazarus which took place before the time spent in the city of Ephraim and the meal in Bethany two days before the Passover.

We have demonstrated that the gospel records indicate that Judas Iscariot and Lazarus were brothers. In the parable of the prodigal son [Luke 15:11-32] Jesus develops his lesson by contrasting the behaviour of two brothers. The prodigal son wasted his share of the inheritance and then was welcomed home by the father whereas the elder son, had remained with his father all the time the younger son was away squandering his share of the inheritance. The setting, and the language that Jesus puts into the mouth of the father echo the details of the raising of Lazarus and are picked up in the details of the way in which Judas behaved at the meal in Bethany.

The parable of the prodigal son was spoken after the raising of Lazarus and before the meal in Bethany by the man that 'needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man. [John 2:25] . Jesus 'knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.' [ John 6:64]. Therefore we can see the parable of the prodigal son as an exhortation to Judas, against the background of the raising of Lazarus. Jesus, anticipating what was in Judas' mind, attempted to instruct Judas about his own thought patterns. Jesus was seeking for repentance in Judas and a change in the way he thought about himself. The meal in Bethany demonstrated how Judas was so like the elder brother who would not go into the feast.

The Timing of The Anointing Of Jesus And The Meal In Bethany

We have noticed that John spoke of the raising of Lazarus - indeed he is the only writer who does. Also he is the only writer to tell us that Lazarus was at the meal in Bethany saying [John 12:2] "... but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him." Another link between the raising of Lazarus in John 11 and John's account of the meal in Bethany is the mention by name of "Martha" and "Mary" [John 12:2,3]. By contrast neither woman is named in Matthew 26 or Mark 14.

So John places the account of the meal at the point of entry into Bethany because of the thematic link with the raising of Lazarus in the previous chapter.

With this in mind a consideration of John 12:1-12 will enable us to conclude that the reference to "six days before the Passover" is a comment upon when Jesus arrived in Bethany. The account of the meal in placed in parenthesis because of its thematic link with the previous chapter. Matthew and Mark, on the other hand, place the event where, chronologically, it occurred as they had no reason to recount it elsewhere. So if we wish to 'harmonise' John 12 with Matthew 26 and Mark 14 we would realise that John 12:2-11 is inserted as a digression. The 'chronological' way to read John would be John 12:1 then continue at John 12:12.

John has already digressed in a similar way when speaking of the raising of Lazarus for [John 11:1-2] "Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, the town of Mary and her sister Martha. It was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick". The section in italics is the section which is the digression here. Now whichever gospel record we review it is clear that the raising of Lazarus occurred before Jesus' was anointed in Bethany. Therefore we have evidence to support the suggestion that John does digress in his gospel. This lends weight to the suggestion that the comment about the meal in Bethany recorded in John 12 is a digression.

We should realise that we have not arrived at the conclusion that John 12:2-11 is a digression in order to allow us to read John in a way which makes it consistent with Matthew 26 and Mark 14. The realisation that John is structured differently because of the thematic link with the raising of Lazarus is just the outcome of the study we have undertaken so far. Now we have to probe a little further to try to understand this thematic approach which John takes.

Parallels Between The Meal In Bethany And The Meal In The Upper Room

We have demonstrated that the meal in Bethany and the meal in the upper room, which we call "The Last Supper' took place on consecutive evenings. The meal in Bethany was to celebrate the raising of Lazarus. The meal in the upper room was to memorialise Jesus' death. There are striking parallels between the two meals.

The similarities are interesting - but we must be able to benefit from what we see.

The raising of Lazarus incited many to believe on Jesus [John 12:11]. This 'belief' extended to the 'chief rulers' of whom 'many believed' [John 12:42] though on both occasions the leaders wanted to kill Lazarus [John 12:10] and Jesus [John 11:53]. We have already noticed that the leaders did not act because 'they feared the people' [Mark 12:12]. This behaviour is the behaviour of one who is unwilling to live a life consistent with his beliefs. We can be just the same. We can see a situation in ecclesial life about which we should speak. However we keep silent because we are concerned how others will react to what we say.

The two meals were both intimate events. On both occasions Jesus and his friends and some family members were together. We can imagine the warmth at the meal in Bethany. Jesus and the disciples had endured a tiring three days in Jerusalem. The friendship and warmth of that family in Bethany would have been a pleasant respite from the barbs and deceit of Jesus' opponents . Jesus was amongst friends. One would envisage that there would be no threat there.

The following night, in the upper room, he was with his friends - the disciples. Whilst there was rivalry amongst them as to who was to be the greatest [Luke 22:24] there was not open hostility against Jesus as there had been in the city during the days leading up to the meal in Bethany. Even though the disciples did not know what was going to happen to their Lord and were puzzled about some of the things he had said, they bore him no animosity. However at both intimate meals a betrayer was there [In Bethany John 12:4 / Matthew 26:14]

[in the upper room Matthew 26:21-25]

Judas behaviour on both occasions demonstrated that he did not want to be with Jesus. His mind and heart were elsewhere. When he left the meal in Bethany to go to the chief priest in Jerusalem he walked some three miles, in the dark, into the city. So unhappy was he about the 'waste'.

We will return to the issue of Judas' departure from the meals when we consider the events of the 'Last Supper'.

By contrast to Judas, who presented his concern as being 'for the poor' [John 12:5], the woman anointed Jesus feet because of her love for him. The cost of the ointment was not an issue to her. Her response, by contrast to Judas, focused on Jesus rather than on herself. We learn of Judas' motives when we read 'This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.' [John 12:6]. Mary's thoughts were totally different for Jesus tells us that 'against the day of my burying hath she kept this ointment'. [John 12:7]

Summary Of The Second Day Before The Passover

We learn little of the events of the daytime activities of Jesus. The record focuses on the meal in Bethany which was to celebrate the raising of Lazarus from the dead..

The anointing of Jesus in Bethany and the washing of the disciples feet in the upper room have striking similarities. Likewise the behaviour of Judas on both occasions is a powerful warning. During both meals he 'went out' because he preferred his own plans to the fellowship of Jesus and his fellow disciples. Lesson about ourselves are clear to be seen. We can be like Judas and Peter in our life in Christ

One Day Before the Passover

This day, like the previous day, is one on which we are told very little about what Jesus and the disciples did during the daylight hours. All we learn about the events of the day time is that the disciples went to make ready for the evening meal. Rather like yesterday the emphasis is on the events which took place in the evening

John does not detail these events. We have already noticed that John makes little mention of the intervening days between the triumphal entry five days before the Passover and the meal in Bethany two days before the Passover. After talking about the triumphal entry and the time Jesus was in the temple John moves to the end of the week. Leaving aside any mention of the preparation for the 'Last Supper' he takes us straight into the meal.

Matthew Mark and Luke indicate that the disciples question 'Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the Passover?'. The initiative came from the disciples. This may be an indication of how Jesus is concerned for his followers to think for themselves. It would be easy for the disciples to wait for Jesus to make decision on every matter. Jesus, knowing that the Passover was drawing very close, waited for the disciples' question to make them take the initiative for themselves.

The lesson is clear for us today. We might be inclined to leave decisions to others whom we think are more capable of dealing with the issues. However the lesson is that we should rely on our own initiative when we know something needs to be done rather than leaving the decision to others.

All three records demonstrate an air of secrecy about the place where the meal was to be prepared. Doubtless all the disciples heard the instructions given to Peter and John but the instructions, in themselves, were not sufficient for any of the disciples to know the location. Peter and John, when they entered the city, were provided with signs which Jesus had told them they would encounter. Therefore they were the only two of the disciples who knew, before the meal, where it was to be held.

We know that Judas had already agreed to betray Jesus. The secrecy of the location for the Last Supper could well have been designed by Jesus in order that Judas would not be able to interfere with the Last Supper. This meal was of supreme importance to Jesus. He did not want any disturbance during the meal. In fact, by organising the meal in a secret location, he was planning the way in which he would be taken by the chief priest. Even in this matter his concern was for the welfare of his disciples.

Once they were in the upper room Jesus told his disciples 'with desire I have desired to eat this Passover before I suffer' [Luke 22:15] and he 'sat down with the twelve' [Luke 22:14] and instructed the disciples about the bread and the cup. We will return to that aspect of the meal later. It was during the meal that Jesus told his disciples 'one of you will betray me' [Matthew 26:21, Mark 14:18, Luke 22:31 and John 13:21]. This announcement produces a seemingly strange response from the disciples. 'And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest.' [Luke 22:24]. It was this event which prompted Jesus to wash the disciples feet. [John 13:1-20].

The strife 'which of them should be accounted the greatest' is a feature of the disciples thought patterns right through the ministry of Jesus. In Mark 9:34 the disciples had been arguing 'in the way' on this matter. On the way to Jerusalem this issue raises it's ugly head again. Peter had asked 'what shall we have ...' [Matthew 19:27] because the disciples had 'left all' [Mark 10:28]. Jesus promises all of them that 'ye which have followed me ... shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.' [Matthew 19:28]. This promise prompted the 'mother of Zebedee's children' [Matthew 20:20], probably encouraged by her two sons James and John [see Mark 10:35] to ask that the two most important thrones of judgment be reserved for them. 'And when the ten heard it, they began to be much displeased with James and John.' [Mark 10:41].

It might seem strange that the disciples responded like this in the upper room. However we should realise that the disciples still did not know what was going to happen. They had no idea that Jesus was going to be betrayed that night and crucified the next day. The disciples were consumed with self interest.

We should be able to see ourselves in the disciples at this point in time. So often we do not respond to the needs of others because we are so wrapped up in our own plans and expectations. We can be oblivious to the needs of others even though the words and signs show that there is something to be concerned about.

Whilst the argument continued amongst the disciples 'Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God; He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.' [John 13:2-6]. The record could easily have simply told us that Jesus washed the disciples feet. However the record makes extensive comment about how Jesus prepared himself and how he washed the disciples feet.

When considering the meal in Bethany parallels can be seen between the actions of Mary when she anointed Jesus' and the way in which Jesus washed the disciples feet in the upper room. Those similarities are reproduced again for convenience.

We should conclude that the way in which the two events are recorded are designed to cause us to see similarities between the two events.

One issue which has exercised Bible students for a long time is 'did Mary anoint Jesus head, his feet, or both his head and his feet?' This question is raised because of the way in which the gospel records present data about the event.

Consider the three accounts of the anointing of Jesus in Bethany and where Jesus was anointed

Matthew 26:7 'poured it on his head'

Mark 14:3 'poured it on his head.'

John 12:3 'anointed the feet of Jesus '

As we have already seen, that we should consider the theme which each writer is developing through the Spirit. We should not make our focus the differences between the records as if this is the major issue. We should appreciate that each writer was moved by the Holy Spirit to develop his record in the way that he did. It is naive in the extreme to conclude that the differences indicate problems with inspiration. Differences in Scripture between parallel accounts require careful examination as the very differences often indicate detailed themes.

Looking at John's gospel we note that it is John who alone tells us that Jesus' feet were anointed. It is John who alone speaks of the washing of the disciples' feet. We must recognise that John, by the Spirit, is wishing us to see this link between the two events. When considering the reaction of individuals at the anointing of Jesus at Bethany and the washing of the disciples' feet in the upper room some interesting features are seen.

These details invite us to compare Judas and Peter. Both Judas and Peter are indignant at the anointing. Both were reproved by Jesus. Judas was invited to consider that the poor were always with them. Peter had to realise that he had to learn humility and accept the consequences of his unwillingness to be the servant. Judas did not learn the lesson. Peter was of a totally different make up. He was willing to accept the rebuke of the Lord. This marks the difference between Judas and Peter. They both figure prominently in the last two meals that Jesus shared, and both miss the point of what is happening. Judas could not respond to the Lord. Peter did.

Judas demonstrated that he was not at one with Jesus and the disciples during the meal in Bethany or the meal in the upper room. Judas left the meal in Bethany to go and arrange the betrayal with the chief priest. [Mark 14:10]. As the meal would be in the evening we have to conclude that Judas left 'at night' even though the record does not say as much. Likewise he also left the upper room to go to the chief priests 'and it was night' [John 13:30]

On two occasions, during intimate meals, Judas demonstrated that his mind was elsewhere. He was more concerned to receive the 'reward of iniquity' [Acts 1:18] than have fellowship with his Lord and the other disciples.

The Same Night In Which He Was Betrayed …

When Paul introduces the breaking of bread in 1 Corinthians 11 he reminds us of Judas' behaviour saying 'For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: ...' [1 Corinthians 11:23]. This is a clear reference to the behaviour of Judas Iscariot in the upper room. Our familiarity with the record probably means that we do not notice that this is a rather discordant way to introduce the breaking of bread. The reason for this discordant aspect to his introduction is because there was a discordant spirit in the ecclesia at Corinth. Thus the Apostle is concerned to focus the believer's mind on the potential for going through the ritual of the breaking of bread without having a mind which has been affected by what it entails.

We have already seen that Judas had planned to absent himself from the meal in the upper room in order to conclude his evil deal with the chief priests. Last night he had made the arrangement to deliver Jesus to them [Matthew 26:14-15]. Now he sought an opportunity. This evening, when the disciples and Jesus were on there own would provide the ideal opportunity. Doubtless this is the reason why Jesus had kept the location of the meal secret from the majority of the disciples. Now Judas knew where they were he would be able to advise the chief priests who would be able to come and capture him without the knowledge of the common people. All through the meal Judas would be seeking an opportunity to leave and make his way to the chief priests. His mind would not be on the matters taking place in the upper room. He had another agenda.

This matches the mental state of some in the ecclesia in Corinth for ‘When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.’ [1 Corinthians 11:20]. Some were viewing the memorial service as an opportunity to have a good feed and to get drunk. Consequently others came hungry and were not satisfied. Some, like Judas’, had another agenda. They, like Judas, had their minds on other things. Consequently the purpose of their meeting together was lost on them. There was, therefore, in Corinth, a great need for self examination. Each brother and sister had to examine their own motives and thoughts when they came to the ‘Lord’s supper.’ It is for this reason that Paul concludes his argument 'But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup....' [1 Corinthians 11:28]. They had to review their own hearts and decide whether they were at the ‘Lord’s supper’ to gratify their own fleshly desires or whether they wanted to remember the Lord’s death.

Likewise we must be sure of our own motives when we attend the memorial service. We must make sure that we do not have a hidden agenda

Questions, Questions ...

What follows is a series of questions by different disciples showing that they still did not understand what Jesus is saying. Against the background of the questions Jesus still has much to say and only a short time to say it. However he never cuts the disciples' questions short, nor does he ignore the question in order to tell them the things that are on his mind. He always leaves off the point he is making to deal with the question before continuing with the instruction.

Thus we see the patience of the Master, who, knowing that his time was come [John 13:1], still has time to address the anxieties of his disciples.

We must ask how our patience matches up to that of the Lord. We know that Jesus 'learnt obedience by the things which he suffered'. [Hebrews 5:8] and that 'tribulation worketh patience' [Romans 5:3]. Do we see our tribulation developing or shortening our patience?

The Questions

John 13:36 Peter 'Whither goest thou?'

John 14:5 Thomas 'How can we know the way?'

John 14:8 Philip 'Shew us the Father'

John 14:22 Judas (not Iscariot) 'How wilt thou manifest thyself to us and not unto the world?'

Unless we appreciate that individual questions are asked and unless we consider the questions themselves we will not be able to make sense of the rest of the words Jesus spoke in the 'upper room' precisely because they were answers to specific questions raised by the disciples.

Peter's question 'whither goest thou?' [John 13:36] and 'why cannot I follow thee now?' [John 13:37] prompts the discourse about 'many mansions' [John 14:1]. The chapter division is most unhelpful. We see from the table of occurrences of the Greek word translated 'mansions' and its related word, that the matter of abiding becomes a major topic both in the upper room and on the way towards the Garden of Gethsemane.

The number of times that Jesus uses the word 'abide' in the upper room and on the way to the Garden of Gethsemane should cause us to ponder what he was teaching his disciples and what we should be learning from this.

Here is a list of all uses of the word in John 14 and John 15.

The use of 3438 / 3306 'mansions' 'Abide' on the last night of Jesus' life.

John 14:2 mansions 3438

John 14:23 abode 3438

John 14:10 dwelleth 3306

John 14:16 abide 3306

John 14:17 dwelleth 3306

John 14:25 present 3306

John 15:4 Abide 3306 abide 3306 abide 3306

John 15:5 abideth 3306

John 15:6 abide 3306

John 15:7 abide 3306 abide 3306

John 15:9 continue ye 3306

John 15:10 abide 3306 abide 3306

John 15:11 remain 3306

John 15:16 remain 3306

So, as can be seen from the use of this Greek word from the upper room towards the Garden of Gethsemane, a major topic is being introduced. The information was firstly given to Peter in response to his need to be comforted after being told that he will betray Jesus [John 13:38]. But the abiding of Jesus after his resurrection and ascension is of paramount importance to all the disciples.

The explanation to Peter and the rest is that his death and resurrection is an essential part of the plan that the Father has set in motion that Jesus and the disciples can be together forever. [John 14:3]. The abiding of Jesus is to match the way that the Father abides in Jesus [John 14:10]. This abiding of the Father was the means whereby Jesus was able to perform the works that he did [John 14:10] and the evidence that Jesus and the Father were abiding in believers would enable them to perform their works. [John 14:12 - 14].

The way that this abiding would be achieved is to be seen in the way in which Jesus and his Father both come and make their abode [John 14:23] with the disciples.

Notice that the record stresses 'we will come ... and make our abode with him' [John 14:23]. This contrasts sharply with the erroneous view that Jesus enters our heart at baptism. Jesus is speaking of the fellowship that is to exist between the believer and the Father and their saviour, the risen Lord.

By the time that we begin considering John 15 we have left the upper room for 'arise let us go hence' [John 14:31] marks the departure from the upper room. However the theme of abiding continues during the walk towards the Brook Cedron which is not encountered until John 18:1.

Jesus now begins to expand how the disciple is to abide in him and also why he must continue to abide in him. What follows is crucial for us today. Whilst we do not have the power of the holy spirit, nor can we perform miracles we must appreciate why we must allow Jesus and the Father to 'come ... and make [their] abode with [us] ' [John 14:23]

By developing the parable of the vine in John 15 Jesus is showing the importance of the abiding of the Father and son in the believer.

Israel were a 'noble vine' [Jeremiah 2:21] but because they did not abide in the commandment they became 'degenerate [Jeremiah 2:21]. Likewise the believer today who does not 'abide' in Jesus [John 15:4, 5, 6 & 7] will not bear fruit and consequently will be 'taken away' [John 15: 2] The first century believers - and we - have the example of Israel, 'God spared not the natural branches [Romans 11:21] of the Olive tree 'because of unbelief' [Romans 11:20] We must take heed.

The way in which the believer was to bring forth fruit was to 'keep my commandments' [John 15:10] for in so doing he will 'abide in my love' [John 15:10.] In explaining this to his disciples Jesus was creating the environment whereby they, by remembering, after his departure, that in keeping his commandments his 'joy might remain' [John 15:11] in them.

In fact an Old Testament teaching is being developed by Jesus when he speaks to His disciples about 'abiding'. It relates to the way that the Father wishes to dwell with men.

He told Moses:- [Exodus 25:8] 'And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them'. or again:- [Exodus 29:45 - 46] 'And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God. And they shall know that I am the LORD their God, that brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, that I may dwell among them: I am the LORD their God.' Showing that He had a plan which involved Him being with His people.

When David had a desire to build an house for his God he was reminded that God had walked with His people through the wilderness [2 Samuel 7:5 - 7] and that whilst David was not to build an house for God an house would be built for David [2 Samuel 7:27]. This continued the teaching that God wanted to dwell with man. The promise that David would have an house built for him showed that the dwelling was to be in people, which is something which David clearly saw when he penned:- [Psalms 127:1-3] 'Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain. It is vain for you to rise up early, to sit up late, to eat the bread of sorrows: for so he giveth his beloved sleep. Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.' So he made a promise concerning the birth of the Messiah [Isaiah 7:14] 'Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.' Now we know what Immanuel means because the New Testament tells us clearly. [Matthew 1:23] 'Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.'

Thus we can see that the Father always had the plan that he would 'abide' with His people. The mechanism through which this was to be achieved can now be seen to be the raising up of His own son, who is the son of David and the seed of the woman. Through his death and resurrection he was to be the 'firstborn' [Colossians 1:15] of a new creation which was to be the 'temple of the living God' [2 Corinthians 6:16].

Indeed Jesus had already hinted at this plan very early on in his ministry, significantly recorded in John's gospel when he said 'Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body.' [John 2:19-21]

Returning to the questions in the upper room we must examine the questions raised by the disciples whilst Jesus was speaking to them in the upper room. Peter was not able to 'go' with Jesus John 13:36 because Jesus was going to do something by his going away which only he could do. Jesus was to go away to obtain 'eternal salvation' [Hebrews 5:9] through his death and resurrection. Peter clearly did not understand this for if he had he would never have rashly said 'I will lay down my life for thy sake'. [John 13:37]. His allegiance to Jesus was never in question. Jesus knew what was in the heart of man [John 2:25] and so did not even need to hear any words from Peter. Peter's problem was that he was offering to do what his Lord was about to do. Whereas the Lord was sinless Peter clearly was not. He did not yet understand the redemptive work of Jesus nor his own need for a sinless man to die. The rebuke of the Lord, therefore, was absolutely essential. Peter had to understand his own weakness in contrast with the confidence of the Master in the Father. We might concur with Thomas when he said 'we know not wither thou goest; and how can we know the way' [John 14:5] However Jesus did say that Thomas knew the way. How was it that Thomas did not realise that he knew the way?

A number of times we find recorded in John's gospel Jesus making claims about who he is.

1] John 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

2] John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

3] John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

4] John 10:9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

5] John 10:11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

6] John 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

7] John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

The disciples, and in particular Thomas at this point, did not comprehend what they had been told but they did know what they had heard. It is important to appreciate that Jesus expects them to accept what he has said. Thomas was to appreciate that the way to fellowship with the Father was only through Jesus [John 14:6] and that was going to be effected by Jesus going away. The Bold type in the above quotations presents a composite picture of what Thomas, and the others, had been told. If one were to piece together each of the points that are made a very comprehensive picture of the Lord is seen. Of course Jesus said even more than this, telling them plainly that he was to be crucified and rise again [Matthew 16:21, 17:23, 20:19, Mark 9:31, 10:34, and Luke 9:22, 18:33]. The disciples did not understand what they had been told because they were 'slow of heart to believe' [Luke 24:25]. However we do well to remember that Jesus 'upbraided them with their unbelief' [Mark 16:14] lest we attempt to excuse our slowness in understanding and, consequently, believing what we read in Scripture.

For example how firmly do we believe this assurance 'I will never leave thee nor forsake thee' which is a promise made to us a number of times [Deuteronomy 31:6 Joshua 1:5 1 Chronicles 28:20 Isaiah 41:13 Hebrews 13:5] and does relate to the promise 'we will come and make our abode with you' [John 14:23] .

Jesus concludes his comments to Thomas with the words 'from henceforth ye have seen the Father' [John 14:7]. This comment causes the perplexed Philip to ask 'Show us the father' [John 14:8]

This highlights another, related, gap in the understanding of the disciples. Philip, and probably the others, had failed to grasp that Jesus 'declared' the Father [John 1:18]. Whilst Philip is told 'he that hath seen me hath seen the Father' [John 14:9] Jesus is not wishing Philip or anyone else to focus on physical appearance. Philip would know well the Old Testament teaching that 'no man can see me and live' [Exodus 33:20]. Philip, schooled in the way of thinking of the Jews, would appreciate that when Moses requested to see God he was shown his qualities [Exodus 33:18 - 20].

Now Judas (not Iscariot) is perplexed. He wants to know how Jesus will manifest himself to the disciples but not to the world. [John 14:22] He was clearly locked into the idea of seeing the physical Jesus. Jesus, in his explanation to Judas, continues to develop the concept of the 'abiding' of the Father and son with the believer. Jesus was to be manifest to the disciples through the way in which the disciples 'keep my words' [John 14:23]. The teaching was presented by Jesus when he was with them but the comforter was to come and 'teach them all things' [John 14:26]. This assurance to Thomas - and the other disciples - is then presented as 'Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you.' [John 14:27].

Jesus forces the point that he is still speaking about the abode that he introduced to Peter by using the same words of comfort as he used earlier.

John 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled

John 14:27 Let not your heart be troubled

Remember, we are still in the upper room at this point.

Having got so far in the education of the disciples Jesus and the eleven remaining disciples 'sing and hymn' [Matthew 26:30] and leave the upper room. John marks the departure from the upper room with the words of Jesus 'Arise, let us go hence' [John 14:31]

On the way to the Kidron

So they now leave the upper room to make their way through the city to the Garden of Gethsemane, across the Brook Kidron.

Whilst we cannot be sure what time in the evening it was when they left the upper room we can make an educated guess. If we assume that the meal in the upper room began at sunset - 6.30 p.m. we might conjecture that the meal, the washing of the disciples feet, the discussions that took place and the singing of the hymn [Matthew 26:30 Mark 14:26] took about two to three hours. Thus we can imagine that when they left the upper room it would be 9.00 p.m. at the earliest. However we should not assume that they were groping round the city and across the Kidron Valley in pitch darkness even though they did not have modern electric street lighting. Passover was the 14th day of the first month [Leviticus 23:5] and the new moon marked the beginning of the month [Numbers 10:10] therefore the feast of the Passover was held half way through a Lunar month thus it would have been full moon when Jesus and the disciples left the upper room. We do not know exactly where the upper room was in the city, nor do we know the direction that the group took as they walked through the city and across the Kidron Valley to the Garden of Gethsemane. Indeed we cannot be sure even of the precise location of the Garden of Gethsemane. However if we can form a picture of the journey and the circumstances of the journey our appreciation will be enhanced.

Leaving the upper room Jesus begins to tell the eleven 'I am the true vine' [John 15:1] This is not a new topic unrelated to the discussion concerning abiding. As we have already seen the word 'abide' in John 15 is the same word as seen in the discussions in John 14. Rather Jesus is extending the theme of abiding' in order that he can discuss the consequences of not manifesting his love.

He now introduces the concept that the Father chastens His children that the complete vine might 'bring forth more fruit' [John 15:2]. However the chastening is here presented in terms of an husbandman tending a vine. Just as the husbandman cuts off unfruitful, dead and dying branches so not to diminish the vine's strength he carefully prunes and cuts fruitful boughs so that the potential might be maximized, so does the Father work with His sons and daughters. This process of purging has a cleansing effect. Consider the two verses below.

John 15:2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

John 15:3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.

The italic words are translated from the same Greek word.

Now we know that the way for a 'young man to cleanse his way is by taking heed thereto according to thy word' [Psalm 119:9] which is clearly where Jesus is drawing his idea from, for he has already said 'if any man love me he will keep my words and we will come unto him and make our abode with him' [John 14:23]. The converse of keeping his words is very distressing. For Jesus says 'if any man abide not in me he is cast forth as a branch and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned' [John 15:6] 

[Note that this is NOT to say that unfaithful believers end up in the Lake of Fire ]

However if we do abide in Him we will actually glorify God [John 15:8]. To abide in him we must bear fruit by keeping his commandments and by so doing the Father is glorified. This, actually, is how Jesus manifest God to the people during his ministry. By doing the will of the Father Jesus both retained the fellowship of his Father and pleased him for we read 'The father hath not left me alone; for I do always the things which please him' [John 8:29]. We must ask ourselves how we see our lives as both glorifying the Father and maintaining our fellowship with Him. This is the thrust of what Jesus, who is about to depart out of this world, is saying to his disciples.

Jesus passes on to present the ultimate manifestation of love by telling his disciples 'Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends' [John 15:13]. We notice that, whilst clearly speaking of his own impending death to redeem his brethren he utilises the words of Peter 'I will lay down my life ...' [John 13:37]. The impact of Jesus' use of those words would doubtless have startled Peter, and possibly the others who had heard Peter's affirmation in the upper room. However such commitment is actually required of Jesus' disciples. Of course we should realise that this is not the first time that Jesus has spoken of giving his life for his followers. We have already noted that he spoke of his crucifixion a number of times directly. Additionally he had told them in less obvious ways. 'God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son' [John 3:16] 'I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep' [John 10:11.] Jesus says 'ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you' [John 15:14]. Some of Jesus' disciples did in fact lay down their lives for him. A consideration of the Acts of the Apostles provides us with names of some who did manifest that they were Jesus friends in the way that they showed their commitment to him.

However, like Moses, a willingness to give one's life for the errors of the people would not achieve the desired end that the Father had in mind unless the one who was to lay down his life were sinless. Therefore neither Moses' [Exodus 32:32] nor Peter's [John 13:27] expression of willingness would have sufficed for the task in hand, namely the redemption of mankind. We have not had to make this supreme sacrifice yet. However we are presented with an equally important sacrifice that we are to make. 'Present your bodies a living sacrifice ... which is your reasonable service'. [Romans 12:1].

Jesus now reminds the disciples of their high calling. Whilst they had continued with him during his three and a half year ministry they needed to be reminded; 'Ye have not chosen me but I have chosen you' [John 15:16]. Whilst the call of the disciples is unique it patterns the relationship that we have with the Father through him, for it is those who are 'ordained to eternal life' [Acts 13:48] who believe the gospel, being those who are 'called of Jesus Christ' [Romans 1:6]. Therefore, just as the disciples were called that they 'should go and bring forth fruit' [John 15:16] we must do likewise.

Jesus' cruel death is now close at hand and the disciples still do not understand. They must be prepared for this evil act so Jesus now proceeds to explain why it is that he is hated and how that will be reflected in their lives. [John 15:17 - 19]. The disciples were to experience first hand this hatred not many days hence when they began to preach the risen Christ. However they anticipated that hatred at the time of the death of Jesus and when he was in the tomb for they all 'forsook him and fled' [Matthew 26:56 Mark 14:50] and when he was in the tomb they were in hiding 'for fear of the Jews' [John 20:19].

He now brings to their mind previous comments that he has made to remind them that because 'the servant is not greater than his lord' [John 15:20] they as servants will suffer the same things as their master. If they were to reflect on what they had seen during the last three and a half years they would see what was in store for them. In reality there were those who persecuted Jesus and those who loved him. Those who loved him could easily be identified. They kept Jesus sayings and would keep the same sayings when presented by the disciples [John 15:20].

Jesus warned the disciples that they should avoid those who do not the works of the Father, Jesus continues by telling the disciples that those who hate him also hate the Father [John 15:23]. Now it is evident that the disciples avoided those who hated the Father. We must ask ourselves how discerning are we about the company that we keep? We are not persecuted as the first century brethren. We, therefore, do not have difficulties spending time with those who hate the Father. So we ask, with whom do we prefer to spend our time?

We sense a change in the mood of the disciples as they, walking through the city to the Brook Kidron, listen to Jesus. Whereas they have been asking questions and seeking for clarification in the upper room Jesus draws their attention to the fact that they are not asking questions. 'none of you asketh me whither goest thou?' [John 16:5] and then later when the record informs us 'Now Jesus knew that they were desirous to ask him ...' [John 16:19] we learn that Jesus was aware of a discussion amongst themselves which they felt could not involve Jesus. It may be that they felt rebuked by Jesus' responses to their earlier questions. Though it is more probable that they felt ashamed because they did not understand what he was saying to them so they preferred to keep silent. However silence was not the solution. They were learning earth moving principles. If they did not understand them now they would have greater difficulties dealing with the trauma of the next three days. Jesus, therefore, addresses the problem; saying 'do ye enquire among yourselves of that I said ...' [John 16:19] and speaks to the disciples as if they have actually expressed their confusion to him. There is no hint of criticism in his words, just a desire that they understand what he is saying.

We can learn an immense amount from this approach. We often say things which are not understood, either because the person listening has difficulty grasping the point that we are making or because we are not making the point clearly enough. The natural reaction is to simply assume that the hearer either is not really interested or not bright enough to see the point that we are making. Against this background we either do not even bother to try to get our point understood or we represent our point in a tone of voice which shows that we think that the hearer is the one with the problem. Such an approach does not engender unity and love. The speaker feels superior and the hearer is made to feel inferior. This was not our Lord's approach and should not be ours either. For 'The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle to all men, be apt to teach, patient' [2 Timothy 2:24]

Jesus' approach clearly worked, he gained the confidence of his disciples who, with a change of heart, were willing to acknowledge that they now understood saying 'Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb' [John 16:29]. Notice that the disciples think that the change has been in the way that Jesus spoke to them, not in their own state of mind.

Jesus is concerned, in John 16, to warn the disciples that their word will not be heeded just as his has not. It was important that they understood that point because there was coming a time when ye 'shall weep and lament but the world will rejoice , and ye shall be sorrowful but your sorrow shall be turned into joy' [John 16:20] . They still did not understand that he was going to be crucified the next day and that they would be devastated but that three days later he would be alive for evermore and they would be elated.

They had to understand that despite their joy at the resurrection of Jesus they should not expect those who had been Jesus' enemies during his ministry to have a change of heart and turn to him. Jesus had already warned them 'They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service'. [John 16:2] which was a most natural thing to warn them of as he knew that they, fired with the knowledge that he was alive, would wish to tell others and would expect that they would be believed. Of course they had, during the ministry of Jesus, been carried along by his commitment and the enthusiasm of the common people who 'heard him gladly' [Mark 12:37].

Because he was going away he was concerned that they knew that he was not going to leave them 'comfortless' [John 14:18.] He was also concerned that they would 'remember that I told you of these things' [John 16:4]. Furthermore they were assured that the joy that would be theirs on the resurrection morning would not be able to be taken away from them [John 16:22].

We remember our own experience when we were babes in Christ. We were going to tell the world and we discovered that the world did not want to know. Such experiences may have dulled our enthusiasm for speaking of those things. If we develop that state of mind we should take note of the words of warning from Jesus and look at the example of the disciples who, amidst great persecution preached the word and lived the gospel.

Jesus assures his disciples 'Whatsoever ye ask the father in my name he will give it you' [John 16:23]. We must reflect on what it is to ask in my name, for Jesus is not providing a simple code that we should use in order that our prayers will be heard. He is, by using 'in my name' highlighting a relationship that the disciples shared with the Father through the son. This is true of ourselves also. The relationship of being 'in` ... is familiar to us already. We understand the phrases:-

in Christ

in Adam

in the flesh

They all speak of relationships. If we are 'in Christ' we are related to Jesus Christ and thus the Father. We were all 'in Adam' being related to him by birth, and thus inherited his nature. 'In the flesh' [Romans 8:8] is a subset of being 'in Adam' and describes a way of thinking which is prevalent amongst those who are 'in Adam'. Therefore when we ask for anything 'in my name' Jesus is telling us that we have a special relationship with the Father that means that He hears us. Of course we cannot ask for 'anything' in an unqualified way. We know that we must 'ask ... according to his will' if we expect him to hear us [1 John 5:14]. Which is tantamount to saying that we keep his commandments, thus manifesting his love. Thus, when we address the Father in prayer, we must appreciate our relationship with Him and also our responsibilities. We can make prayer work for us if we reflect on how we should pray. If we are careless in our prayers we might well be expecting that we will be heard for our 'much speaking' [Matthew 6:7].

[(1 Jn 5:13-15) CHILDREN OF GOD, BORN OF GOD MAY HAVE ASSURANCE THAT GOD HEARS AND ANSWERS THEIR PRAYERS AS THEY (1) CONTINUE TO BELIEVE IN THE NAME OF THE SON OF GOD FOR ETERNAL LIFE AND (2) AS THEY ARE IN FELLOWSHIP WITH GOD ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE, AND (3) AS THEY PRAY TO GOD IN THE NAME OF HIS SON IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOD'S WILL BELIEVING THAT HE WILL ANSWER THEIR PRAYERS AS IT IS RECORDED IN SCRIPTURE PROPERLY INTERPRETED

(1 Jn 5:13 KJV) "These things [I wrote to] you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that [you] may know that [you] have eternal life, [unto believing] on the name of the Son of God. (1 Jn 5:14 NASB) This is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. (1 Jn 5:15 NASB) And if we [have known] that He hears us.in whatever we ask, we [have known] that we have the requests which we have asked from Him." =

From 1 Jn 5:13 we have, "These things [I wrote to] you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that [you] may know that [you] have eternal life, [unto believing] on the name of the Son of God," which the last phrase indicates that children of God, born of God are encouraged by their assurance of having eternal to continue believing in the name of the Son of God for the purpose of being better enabled to choose the means available to them to have fellowship with God and with one another according to Scripture - the subject of John's epistle, (1 Jn 1:1-4). And then verses 14 & 15 which follow, continue the context of children of God, born of God continuing to believe in the name of the Son of God for eternal life that they may be better enabled to choose the means to have fellowship with God and with one another resulting in their confidence before God when they pray: "This is the confidence which we [children of God, born of God] have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. And if we [have known] that He hears us in whatever we ask, we [have known] that we have the requests which we have asked from Him." The Greek phrase "ean ti aitOmetha" in 1 Jn 3:14 rendered "if we ask anything according to His will" is in the subjunctive mood: maybe children of God, born of God will and maybe they won't ask according to God's will. It depends upon their faithfulness to Scripture and their being in fellowship with God. And the Greek phrase "ean oidamen" in 1 Jn 5:15 rendered "if we have known," is in the indicative mood: if we suppose it is true that He hears us.in whatever we ask, then we have known that we have the requests which we have asked from Him.

So Children of God, born of God may have assurance that God hears and answers their prayers as they (1) continue to believe in the name of the Son of God for eternal life and (2) as they are in fellowship with God according to Scripture, and (3) as they ask [pray to] God in the name of His Son in accordance with God's will believing that He will answer their prayers as it is recorded in Scripture properly interpreted, . So when children of God, born of God pray according to God's will, they may know that God hears them, and that those requests will be fulfilled, albeit according to His will. Some answers to prayer will be fulfilled immediately, others later, and some will not be fulfilled in the lifetime of the child of God, born of God.

1 John 1:8-9 (NASB)
⁸  If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
⁹  If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness]

Having been perplexed by Jesus' words the disciples now take comfort from the fact that they now think that they understand him and his purpose clearly [John 16:30]. Jesus now brings them down to earth again, lest they be overconfident in their partial understanding, telling them 'Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone' [John 16:32]. However Jesus was not alone and he did 'overcome the world' [John 16:33] through his faith.

The Apostle John draws on this confidence, and other elements of Jesus' words to the disciples on the way to the Brook Kidron, when he reminds us 'whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?' [1 John 5:4 - 5] We should use the same experiences in the life of our Lord to give us confidence in our Father's willingness to bless us.

Having spent the whole of John 13, 14 and 15 speaking to the disciples Jesus turns to his Father in prayer. However the subject matter does not change. So far in the upper room, and on the way to the Brook Kedron, Jesus has been concerned to educate the disciples in the matter of abiding. His prayer to the Father concentrates on unity. That unity is between the Father and the son, and between the disciples and the Father and son.

This unity was to be achieved by the work of the Father. Just as he had kept the son; Jesus asks that they be kept by the Father. The mechanism that the Father is expected to use is worthy of consideration.

Jesus says 'keep through thy own name' [John 17:11] which harks back to the matter of asking anything in my name stressing that being kept by the father requires that we have a relationship with Him. We might wonder how the Father will keep the disciples, but we need not be left in doubt because Jesus, in his prayer, asks the Father to continue the work that he started during his ministry saying 'While I was with them I kept them in thy name' [John 17:12]. We can see from the gospel records that Jesus cared for the disciples by his attention to them as a shepherd cares for the flock. Jesus instructed them and corrected their errors. This will be achieved in our lives by the living word of God and the chastening hand of the Father - if we are willing to 'endure chastening' [Hebrews 12:7].

[And by the indwelling Holy Spirit Eph 1:13-14]

We should not, however, assume that being 'kept' by the Father ensures that we will not fall. Jesus 'kept' the disciples but he lost 'the son of perdition' [John 17:12]. Judas was lost because he did not 'endure chastening' [Hebrews 12:7] 

[No. Judas was lost because he never believed in Jesus' propitiation / payment for his sins ]

and so was eventually given up 'to a reprobate mind' [Romans 1:28]. The reason is clear. Judas did not 'retain God in his knowledge' [Romans 1:28].

The exhortation is clear for us too and Scripture abounds with examples of men falling away after being first delivered. [Jude 5 Hebrews 3:16 -17].

[not so. once saved always saved eternal security ]

Being 'kept' by the Father involves our 'sanctification' [John 17:17] We are made holy by the work of the Father. Of course this must be so, as we cannot make ourselves holy. The law teaches that corruption and uncleanness is passed on but holiness is not [Haggai 2:12-13]. Sanctification comes through 'thy word' [John 17:17]. This is why the Psalmist ask us 'Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? and goes on to provide the answer by taking heed thereto according to thy word'. [Psalms 119:9]. Thus we can see that holiness is not an innate quality that we posses but is a quality that we can acquire through our diligent application to the word of God and the teaching of the Master.

[But do not forget 1 Jn 1:9 confession of sins

1 John 1:8-9 (NASB)
⁸  If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
⁹  If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness]

The whole of the teaching of the Master during his three and a half years ministry is encapsulated in the things that he says to his disciples in the upper room and on the way to the Brook Kidron. If we wish to 'see God' we must manifest that 'holiness' in our lives [Matthew 5:8] Therefore we do well to take heed to the exhortation given 'as unto children' [Hebrews 12:5] for without 'holiness ... no man shall see the Lord' [Hebrews 12:14].

[Believers are sanctified unto eternal life when the believed. Thereby we shall be transformed into resurrection bodies in perfect righteousness / blameless  / without sin whereby we shall see the Lord. This blamelessness cannot be achieved in our temporal lives - only when we are resurrected]

Jesus and the disciples now 'went forth over the Brook Kidron' [John 18:1] to his final last trial. We watch them crossing the Kidron and walking up the hillside into the garden, wondering at the love of that man who 'lay down his life for his friends' [John 15:13].

[and for the whole world, 1 Jn 2:2]

They arrive in Gethsemane

Echoes of the time when David fled from Absalom are clearly seen in the departure from Jerusalem, the crossing of the Kidron. and the prayer in the garden of Gethsemane.

The way in which the gospel records present Jesus as following in the steps of his father David is designed to make us realise that Jesus used the events of the Old Testament to help him to decide how he should behave.

Considering David at the time of the uprising of Absalom his own son had risen up against him. His 'familiar friend' Ahithophel, his trusted counsellor had turned against him. David did not know how his God would deal with the issue so he fled Jerusalem. When he left the city he did not know whether God would restore the kingdom to him or not. Zadok brought the ark out of the city to David. However David showed his willingness to accept the will of his God saying 'Carry back the ark of God into the city: if I shall find favour in the eyes of the LORD, he will bring me again, and shew me both it, and his habitation: But if he thus say, I have no delight in thee; behold, here am I, let him do to me as seemeth good unto him'. [2 Samuel 15:25 -26]. This response is so close to the way in which Jesus responded in his three prayers in the garden.

Jesus did not want to be crucified. He told his disciples 'my soul is exceeding sorrowful' [Matthew 26:38]. It is against this background that Jesus prays 'O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.' [Matthew 26:39]. This is the first prayer recorded in the garden. It was followed by two more. The second time he prays for strength that he might be able to fulfil his Father's will saying, 'O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done.' [Matthew 26:42] and finally 'he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words' [Matthew 26:44].

There comes a time when we know the Father's will but struggle to keep it. We have said all we can in prayer. We have done all that it is possible for us to do. In such a circumstance we like Jesus, might do well to pray 'saying the same words'. We know that the Father heard his son's groanings for 'there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.' [Luke 22:43]. Whilst we cannot see the angel we have the same confidence that 'if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:' [1 John 5:14]

Jesus knew the outcome of the events in David's life when he fled from before Absalom. David indeed was brought again into the city. Being able to identify with his father David provided Jesus, in this time of great stress, with a role model to copy.

We do well to identify with faithful men and women in Scripture.

Friend

These are the only uses of the word 'friend' 2083 in the New Testament. [Matthew 20:13 22:12 26:50] The first two are in parables towards the end of Jesus' life whereas the third is Jesus response to Judas' kiss in the garden of Gethsemane.

In the two parables the 'friend' is one who has been involved in the work [Matthew 20:13] and one who has been bidden to the marriage [Matthew 22:12]. However neither of the friends lives up to the expectations of the one calling them 'friend'. In Matthew 20 the labourer is not satisfied with what he has agreed to and in Matthew 22 the 'friend' had not prepared himself for the feast he had been called to.

In using this word in speaking to Judas [Matthew 26] Jesus is drawing the attention of Judas to the two parables and highlighting that he shares the characteristics of the individuals singled out for reproof in them.

Summary Of The Day Before The Passover

Like yesterday we are given little information about the events of the daytime activities of Jesus. We learn about the planning of the Passover meal in a location known to Jesus but kept secret from all the other disciples except Peter and John.

The meal in the upper room provides an insight into the way in which the disciples had not learnt humility. They were still striving about who was to be the greatest after three and a half years with Jesus. Jesus' object lesson of washing their feet shows that actions can speak very powerfully.

[John 13:5-15 (NASB)
⁵  Then He *poured water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded.
⁶  So He *came to Simon Peter. He *said to Him, "Lord, do You wash my feet?"
⁷  Jesus answered and said to him, "What I do you do not realize now, but you will understand hereafter."
⁸  Peter *said to Him, "Never shall You wash my feet!" Jesus answered him, "If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me."
⁹  Simon Peter *said to Him, "Lord, then wash not only my feet, but also my hands and my head."
¹⁰  Jesus *said to him, "He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you."
¹¹  For He knew the one who was betraying Him; for this reason He said, "Not all of you are clean."
¹²  So when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments and reclined at the table again, He said to them, "Do you know what I have done to you?
¹³  "You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am.
¹⁴  "If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet.
¹⁵  "For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you.]

Judas' behaviour matches his behaviour last night.

Jesus knew that this was to be the last time he would have opportunity to instruct his disciples before his death. He used that time to finish the instruction he had been giving all through his ministry. The disciples showed their inability to understand what Jesus was saying in the many questions they asked. Jesus manifested his patience in the way that he took time out to answer each and every question he was asked

He prayed for Peter and all the disciples because he knew what was to come and how they would respond.

In the garden of Gethsemane he turned to address his own needs. He took comfort from the way that David had been delivered from the evil intentions of Absalom so many years earlier.

Click here for the last part of this Study