John 17:12-13

“ When I was with them, I kept them in thy name; those whom thou hast given me, I have watched over; and none of them is lost, except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. 13. But now, I come to thee; and I say these things while I am in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves. ”

Joh 17:12-15 justify the petition: Keep them, by developing the ground of it, as it had been briefly indicated in John 17:11 a: They have need of thy protection. “ When I was with them,” resumes the idea of: I am no more...(John 17:11). The words of the T. R.: in the world, are probably a gloss.

The ἐγώ, I, contrasts Him who has kept them hitherto with Him who is to do it for the future. The ἐτήρουν, I kept them, indicates the result obtained (conservabam); the ἐφύλαξα, I have guarded, relates to the action put forth for this end (custodivi).

The reading ᾧ is still more inadmissible in this verse than in the preceding. It has only three Mjj. in its favor, instead of sixteen in John 17:11. The reading ὅ is also abandoned by the three Mjj. which supported it, and has here in its favor only the Egyptian Versions. It only remains to read οὕς (those whom), with the T. R. and the majority of the Mjj., which suits the meaning of John 17:11.

By the word son of perdition and the citation of the prophecy, Jesus discharges Himself from responsibility, without lessening that of Judas. As to the latter, he has freely yielded himself to play the part traced out beforehand by the prophecy.

We may compare here what is foretold concerning Antichrist. We know through prophecy that this person will exist, and yet this fact will not prevent the man who shall accept this part from freely doing so. Comp. p. 235, the remarks on the relation between the divine foreknowledge and human freedom. In the Hebraistic phrase son of the abstract complement indicates the moral principle which determines the tendency of the individual thus designated. The passage of which Jesus is thinking is Psalms 41:10, cited in John 13:18. Must we conclude from the expression εἰ μή, if it is not, that Jesus counted Judas also in the number of those whom the Father had previously given Him? I do not think that this form of expression obliges us to draw this conclusion; comp. Matthew 12:4; Luke 4:26-27, etc.

This remark was a parenthesis intended to justify, with regard to the loss of Judas, the watchfulness of the Lord. After this Jesus returns (John 17:13) to the idea of His approaching departure; this is the fact which gives the ground for His petition. And He adds that, if He utters aloud (this is the meaning of λαλῶ) these words in presence of His disciples, before leaving them, it is that He may associate them in the joy which He Himself enjoys. This joy is that which is inspired in Him by the certainty of the protection with which the Father shelters Him at all times, a certainty which is also to become theirs.

The need which they have of being kept is set forth in the following words in a still more pressing way than before. They are not only going to remain alone in the world, but as objects of its hatred.