BRIEF SUMMARY
In the article, “The High Priestly Prayer of Jesus” Bob Deffinbaugh examines Jesus’ prayer documented in John 17. The article’s thesis may be articulated as follows: the priestly prayer of Jesus has a primary theme of glory with an emphasis on unity while providing practical lessons for prayer. The author’s goal appears to be the practical application of the glory, unity, and prayer motifs directly to the life of believer. This post provides an exploration of the author’s presuppositions, evidence, Scriptural exegesis, and logic.
Holman Concise Bible Commentary
PRESUPPOSITIONS
Deffinbaugh assumes an evangelical perspective likely supported by his educational background from Dallas Theological Seminary. In fact, in many ways the entire article appears to simply expand on Walvoord and Zuck’s exposition in The Bible Knowledge Commentary.[1] The author’s exposition of prayer, glory, and unity show a pattern of intimate relational connections with God revealing a strong evangelical foundation. Specifically, prayer is conversational, glory is connected to personal suffering, and the significant emphasis on unity burgeons from an interpersonal, relational perspective as opposed to organizational unity. Accordingly, the author’s evangelical presuppositions that drive the article’s conclusions regarding unity diverge significantly from potential alternative perspectives such as the Modern Ecumenical Movement and the historical constructs of the Roman Catholic Church.
EVIDENCE
The evidence provided to support the article’s arguments includes history, scholarship, and Scripture. Historically, Deffinbaugh references Clement of Alexandria to support the overarching purpose of John 17 and integrates Jewish thought regarding the Law in order to highlight the glory of Christ. The primary scholarly works utilized by the author are Leon Morris’s Reflections on the Gospel of John and D. A. Carson’s The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14-17. The author leans on Morris for linguistic support and integrates Carson’s more practical wisdom, while employing both authors’ insights into thesis development. Finally, although further analysis of Scripture is provided below, it is important to note that one of the strongest overarching attributes of the work is the author’s expansive integration of both New and Old Testament Scripture outside the confines of John 17 to support the arguments.
SCRIPTURE
Deffinbaugh utilizes strong Old and New Testament Scriptural support to clearly illuminate the primary theme of glory and provide appropriate emphasis on Christian unity while carefully avoiding the pitfalls of ecumenism. Furthermore, the author is reliable in applying a proper interpretation of intimacy, warfare, unity, and glory across the spectrum of Christ’s prayer. Finally, and perhaps more importantly, the author utilizes Scripture to examine the practical application of glory, unity, and prayer.
The author’s depth is specifically revealed in the exploration of two glories. Although glory is often focused primarily on the future, it is also appropriate to paradoxically apply its precepts to the present sufferings of believers as “the sufferings themselves can be viewed as glorification.”[2] The practical application of glory that suggests personal difficulties represent God’s process of honoring believers is splendid. Alternatively, although not completely ignored, an area of exegesis that lacked breadth was Deffinbaugh’s exploration of sanctification in John 17:18-19. Consistent with Woolvard and Zuck, the author appropriately recognizes the missional aspects of the two verses. However, the Greek word used for sanctification within the context of John 17 can also mean the process of God molding individuals “according to His holiness.”[3] In addition to the missional aspects of the prayer, it appears significant that Christ may have also been praying for the continual revelation of God’s truth to liberate the disciples from the power of the worldly forces.[4]
LOGIC AND CLARITY
The author’s overall logic and clarity of the practical application of prayer, glory, and unity is solid. The tripartite structure based on the chronology of the prayer is prudent and the identified categories are reasonable. However, the intended audience and bible study format of the article caused thesis development at times to appear discontinuous, especially when attempting to integrate entertaining tangents such as the reference to impeaching the President. Furthermore, the blog style format caused unnecessary duplication of content regarding certain topics including the past tense used by Jesus and the connection between Jesus’ priestly prayer and the prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane. Finally, potential logic gaps exist regarding the goal of all Christians. Although the glory of God is without question the primary purpose of history, suggesting humanity can decide in a living room conversation what is going to ultimately glorify God could potentially risk usurping the glory that is being promoted. It is God that demonstrates his power in humanity and God that makes humanity worthy in order for God to be glorified.[5] Accordingly, if man’s decisions are made based on God’s power then the risk subsides, but if man attempts to exclusively determine what will glorify God – the glory of God is undermined.
CONCLUSION
Deffinbaugh’s article provides excellent support for the theme of glory, emphasis on unity, and practical lessons of prayer. Although the minor weaknesses identified did detract, the author’s presuppositions are supported by strong evidence, sound biblical exegesis, and steady logic. Accordingly, the goal of practically applying the concepts of glory, unity, and prayer to everyday life was accomplished. Finally, the author’s insights provide a significant contribution to the exposition and practicality of the priestly prayer of Jesus in John 17.
________________________________________
[1]John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, eds., The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament: An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty (Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 1983).
[2]W. A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology: Glory, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 485.
[3]J. E. White, Holman Concise Bible Commentary: Simple, Straightforward Commentary of Every Book of the Bible, ed. D. S. Dockery (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1998), 485.
[4]The Pulpit Commentary: St. John Vol. II, ed. H. D. M. Spence-Jones (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, 2004), 348-49.
[5]Romans 9:17; I Thess. 1:11-12.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Elwell, W. A., ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology: Ecumenism. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.
- The Pulpit Commentary: St. John Vol. II. Edited by H. D. M. Spence-Jones. Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, 2004.
- Walvoord, John F., and Roy B. Zuck, eds. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament: An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty, 330-34. Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 1983.
- White, J. E. Holman Concise Bible Commentary: Simple, Straightforward Commentary of Every Book of the Bible. Edited by D. S. Dockery. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1998.
