The Believer in the World

By S. Lewis Johnson, Jr. [1]

An Exposition of John 15:18–16:4

Introduction

The outflow of fruitbearing comes before the reader now, since the subject of abiding in Christ for the bearing of fruit has just been traversed (cf. John 15:1–17). The new relationship to Christ means a new relationship to the world (cf. 15:1, 18). The facts of the matter are that union with Christ results in both fruit and hate! That is startling, but true.

As Leon Morris says, “It is not without its significance that the disciples are to be known by their love, the world by its hatred.” [2]

Two purposes seem to be in the mind of the Lord in telling His disciples of the world’s hostility. In the first place, He wishes to warn them of what will happen in the future, in order that they may remember that He predicted the world’s hatred. That would encourage them in the midst of the hostility, giving them a measure of assurance by this manifestation of His divine foreknowledge (cf. 16:1, 4). It is common for disciples, when they are experiencing difficulties in the Christian life, to wonder if they really are in harmony with the will of God in their experience. And the Lord desired to encourage the disciples when they faced the inevitable enmity of the unbelieving world.

Thus, the second purpose is simply to support them by this knowledge of His ability to predict that which is to come. To know that the omniscient divine Son is with them in their difficulties will be of inestimable benefit to them in the warfare of the Christian campaign for the souls of men.

The Antagonism of the Foe

The Reasons (John 15:18-21).

If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep your’s also. But all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not him that sent me.

The section begins with the words, “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you” (v. 18). [3] In another context Jesus had already said much the same thing. In sending forth the twelve on one of their missions He had said, “It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household?” (Matt. 10:25).

The Disciples’ Election by Christ

The reasons for the hatred of the world are given in verses eighteen through twenty-one. And the first of them is their election by Christ. “But because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you” (15:19). They have been chosen by Him and, therefore, are not of the world. Because of their different nature and disposition from the world, the world cannot get along with them.

It is natural to ask the question here, “Is the election that Jesus speaks of an election to eternal salvation, or an election to apostleship?” Now a solid exegesis of the passage must conclude that election to the apostolate is foremost in the mind of our Lord. But is that all that one can find in this text? Probably not. In the first place, the same principle of distinguishing grace would be exhibited, even if it could be shown that apostleship was only referred to here. In the second place, all the results of this electing work belong to all the saints, for they all are subject to the antagonism of the world. Finally, the rest of the New Testament makes it quite plain that there is manifested this same distinguishing grace in the election to salvation of all believers. One cannot evade the doctrine of sovereign election by saying that our Lord’s words have to do here with the apostolate only and can have no bearing on the question, “Is there a doctrine of sovereign, distinguishing grace in the Bible?” One only has to turn to 2 Thessalonians 2:13–14 and Romans 8:29–30 to see the truth of that blessed and comforting doctrine.

One notices in the original text that there is a bit of emphasis placed upon the personal pronoun “I” in the words, “I have chosen you out of the world” (cf. vv. 16, 19). One might raise the question, “Why does our Lord trace the election to Himself, while in the prayer of John seventeen He seems to trace the gift of them to Him to the Father’s initiative (cf. John 17:6). Augustine wrote in answer to the question:

The Son says that the men were given Him by the Father out of the world, to whom He says elsewhere, “I have chosen you out of the world.” Those whom God the Son chose along with the Father out of the world, the very same Son as man received out of the world from the Father; for the Father had not given them to the Son had He not chosen them. And in this way, as the Son did not thereby set the Father aside, when He said, “I have chosen you out of the world,” seeing that they were simultaneously chosen by the Father also: as little did He thereby exclude Himself, when He said, “Thine they were,” for they were equally also the property of the Son. But now that same Son as man received those who belonged not to Himself, because He also as God received a servant-form which was not originally His own. [4]

Occasionally one will comment in this connection that one reason for the world’s hatred of the believer is the weakness and inconsistencies of the Christian. There may be something to that, but Ryle is closer to the mark when he contends, “It is not the weaknesses and inconsistencies of Christians that the world hates, but their grace.” [5] And the world’s displeasure cannot always be attributed to the faults of those who are the objects of it. As Barclay points out, the world even in unspiritual matters, such as daily work, often persecutes men for working too hard or too long at their duties. It is a convicting thing to practice a higher standard in one’s physical work habits than that practiced by the common everyday laboring man. [6]

“The world complains loudly of the odium theologicum [the hatred of theologians],” Swete says, “but the odium seculare [the hatred of the world], the bitterness with which the church is assailed by the world, far exceeds it.” [7] And he is perfectly right in affirming, “The quarrel of the world with the Church, so far as it is not provoked by the faults of Christians, is merely a continuation of its quarrel with Christ.” [8]

It is a rather interesting thing, perhaps a testimony to the insight that Plato had into human nature, although not a Christian, that he wrote centuries before John’s Gospel that if a truly righteous man ever appeared on earth, he would be scourged, imprisoned, and hanged!

The Disciples’ Relationship to Christ

In the twentieth verse is the second of the reasons for the world’s antagonism. It is found in their relationship to Him. Jesus says, “Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep your’s also.” Sharing in His life by union with Him means sharing in His fate, too. Perhaps the world’s antagonism, then, should be of little concern to us. Perhaps we should just get on with the business of being persecuted, confident that in it we share with our Lord His life and fate. [9]

The World’s Ignorance of the Father

The third reason given for the world’s antagonism is the world’s ignorance of the Father (cf. v. 21). In fact, the world’s ignorance of the Father is evidence of their lack of love for Him. If they loved Him, they would find out about Him. The world’s ignorance of the Father may be contrasted with the believer’s knowledge of Him and of the life that He gives. We differ from the world in our views of God, for we believe in a trinitarian God. We differ in our views of man, for we know that we are sinners. We differ in our views of life, and duty, and the future, and death (cf. 1 Cor. 2:11–14; Acts 5:40–41). It is no wonder that the world is hostile to Christ and the Christian.

The Results (John 15:22-25).

If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin. He that hateth me hateth my Father also. If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.

The principal result of the antagonism of the world to the Lord Jesus Christ is the fact that now, since He has come into the world and ministered here, the world has sin (cf. vv. 22, 24). The clause, “they had not had sin,” which occurs twice here (cf. vv. 22, 24), is not easy to understand. It certainly does not mean that, had He not come and spoken to them, the Jews would not have had sin, for all men since Adam have had sin. It could mean that they would not have had the sin of rejecting God as He really is, as He is seen so perfectly, in the life of Christ. As Morris explains it,

But He does mean that the sin of rejecting God as He really is would not have been imputed to them had they not had the revelation of God that was made through Him. But now, as things are, they have no excuse. There is no way of covering up their sin. [10]

Or perhaps He refers to the particular sin of unbelief, the sin that the present age is so guilty of, the sin of not believing in the Son, the climax of the revelation of God (cf. 16:9).

One of the most wonderful things about this difficult to interpret clause is the reflection that, since by God’s effectual grace believers today have responded to the revelation in Christ, it follows that they do not have sin! Marvelous, indeed, is His love and mercy.

Of course, the world is unwilling to recognize its sinfulness and to seek for a resolution of it in the redemption offered through the blood of the divine Savior. In one of the American Broadcasting Company’s Viewpoint programs, November 20, 1983, the panel discussion, including such well-known and important figures as Henry Kissinger, William Buckley, Elie Wiesel, General Brent Stowcroft, Carl Sagan, Robert McNamara, and Ted Koppel, focused on the peril of nuclear war. The panel followed the showing of the highly publicized film, The Day After. After airing a number of stale alternatives, the path to the ultimate solution was spotlighted for a fraction of a second when Carl Sagan, obviously offering up the idea as a “throwaway” in the conversation’s lull, said perhaps “we should change human nature,” or very similar words. Of course, it is “we” who are to do that, not a supernatural being. The evolutionary scientist could not be expected to even allow such an idea to enter the lists. But no one bothered even to reply to such a preposterous notion, a commentary itself on the spiritual and psychological bent of the panel. The discussion ended on a note of false hope, a kind of whistling in the dark hope based upon nothing realistic, substantial, or logical. Such is the plight of modern man, evil, wicked, unbelieving, and blissfully unaware of its unawareness. The solution to the world’s problems will be given by God in a great cataclysmic climactic war, in which the Lamb of God shall prevail over the wild Beast of the Wicked One. Believers have the sure hope of that day.

There is an old story of an African chiefess, who many years ago visited a mission station. The missionary had a little mirror hung up on a tree outside his cabin. The chiefess happened to look into the mirror and saw herself reflected there in all her own ugly, painted, grotesque countenance. She started back in horror and said, “Who is that horrible-looking person inside that tree?” “Oh,” he said, “it is not in the tree; the glass is reflecting your own face.” She could not believe it until she held the mirror in her hand. She said, “I must have the glass. How much will you sell it for?” “Oh,” he said, “I don’t want to sell it.” But she insisted, and begged, till finally he thought it might be best to sell it to her to avoid trouble. So he named the price, and she paid it. Then as she said, “I will never have it making faces at me again,” she threw it down and broke it in pieces. Such is the world’s common response to the biblical analysis of its spiritual condition.

The section ends with our Lord’s statement, “But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause” (v. 25). The citation is from Psalm 69:4 (cf. 35:19). The word rendered, “without a cause,” is a Greek adverb δωρεάν (dōrean). It is built upon the noun δῶρον (dōron) which means a gift. Thus, the word means something like gift-wise, gratuitously, or without payment. This is John’s only use of the term, but it is found in Paul in several suggestive places, particularly in Romans 3:24, where the apostle is discussing the doctrine of justification by faith. There he writes that believers are “justified freely,” the word found in John 15:25, rendered there by “without a cause.” Thus, what Paul is saying simply is that believers are justified “without a cause,” that is, without a cause in themselves, since the fundamental cause lies in the merits of the redemption of Christ.

The Antidote to the Foe

The Spirit’s witness (John 15:26).

The antidote to the antagonism of the world is found in the witness of the Spirit, that testimony that He will give of Christ through the apostles and disciples. Jesus says, “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me.” As we have noted elsewhere the word that refers to the Holy Spirit, παράκλητος (paraklētos, AV, “Comforter”), is a word with legal associations, suggesting our lawyer, or advocate. [11] In other words, the Spirit has as His task the conduct of the case of Christ before the world. And we might add: We may safely leave the ultimate defense of Christ to His powerful pleading and argument.

The Disciples’ Witness (John 15:27).

The final words of the chapter have importance. Jesus says, “And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” In the original text the word rendered, “shall bear witness” (AV), μαρτυρεῖτε (martureite), is a present tense. It may, however, have a futuristic sense, as the Authorized Version has it. A point of significance is found in the use of the emphatic “ye” (the Greek pronoun ὑμεῖς, hymeis bears some stress here). While it is the Spirit’s witness that is the important testimony, their witness is also necessary. They cannot leave the work to the Spirit entirely. In other words, we have another instance of the biblical harmony of the divine sovereignty and human responsibility. We must work, realizing that it is He who works in our work (cf. Phil. 2:12–13). In fact, one might even say that it is one witness, His primarily, but it is a witness done through our necessary instrumentality, our dependent instrumentality (cf. Acts 4:33; 5:32).

We should not leave this brief section without commenting upon the fact that the testimony of the Spirit and of the disciples is, to use Christ’s own words, “of me.” That underlines again the fundamental message of Christianity. It is of Christ. Any message that fails to set forth truly and triumphantly the sovereign and saving Messiah, Jesus Christ, but majors in the minors, can hardly claim to be the witness that pleases Him, or the witness of the Spirit of God.

The Acts of the Foe

The Reasons for the Revelation (John 16:1).

These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended.

That the disciples should not be caused to stumble by opposition, such as excommunication for their faith, is the first of the reasons for the prophetic foreview of their future. The verb to be offended (σκανδαλισθῆτε, skandalisthēte) is formed from a word that referred to the bait-stick of a trap (σκάνδαλον, skandalon), and it often, therefore, connotes an element of surprise. Jesus is preparing them for sudden rejection of their persons and message. “As Temple reminds us,” Morris says, “‘it is hard to believe that a cause is truly God’s when it seems to meet with no success, and all power is on the other side.’ But Jesus prepares them so that they will not be taken by surprise and overcome in the collapse of a starry-eyed optimism.” [12]

The Recounting of the Acts (John 16:2).

They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.

The rejection of their message will take the form of both mental and physical rebuffs. There will be religious excommunication, the loss of the fellowship of their nation’s faith, or Judaism as it was practiced in the days of the apostles. Our Lord will experience that pre-eminently at His crucifixion. Of course, in a religious state, such as Israel, that means more than in a secular state such as the United States. There it means the loss of family, friends, and all social intercourse. That has persisted in the Jewish practice of having a “funeral” for one who embraces Christianity, something still done in religiously strict areas.

What is also striking about this is the fact that the ones who perpetrate the crime of murder for a religious cause will think that they are thereby doing God a service. The preaching of a sermon at the burning of Archbishop Thomas Cranmer illustrates the matter.

The historical illustrations of the fulfillment of Jesus’ words abound, from the earliest days of the church in the persecutions of men such as Athanasius and Chrysostom, through the Middle Ages and the treatment of Gottschalk and his followers, the Jansenists later, and then in the struggles of Luther and the Reformers with Rome. And the condition has continued to the present day, as missionary history clearly shows (cf. Prov. 29:27).

The scorn and ridicule that present-day believers know in so many ways is simply a modern continuation of the quarrel that the world has with Christ. I have a friend, brought up in a main-line denomination, whose sister is an unbelieving church member. The sister, by calling the believing sister by the mocking designation of “Jesus freak,” was able for a lengthy period of time to cause her sister to break into tears. It was my privilege to indicate to her that she was only experiencing what Jesus has said that we all would.

The Reason for the Acts (John 16:3-4).

And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me. But these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them. And these things I said not unto you at the beginning, because I was with you.

The reason for the response of the world includes the world’s failure to know the Father or the Son. The word rendered by “have known” (ἔγνωσαν, egnōsan) is one that refers to experiential knowledge, suggesting the knowledge of personal faith. While the world may have a lot of knowledge about Christ, it does not have this personal experiential knowledge. In John 15:21, “but all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not him that sent me,” the verb know (οἴδασιν, oidasin) refers to a more objective knowledge, probably that of the fact of His incarnation and mission.

Jesus concludes with an explanation for giving the warnings at this particular time. Had the trials come while He was with them then He would have been able to give them help at the time. But now His leaving them brings about a definite change in the situation, and He does not want them to be surprised by the hatred of the world. Thus, the trials, when they come, will not be a detriment to faith, but an aid, since He has already anticipated them for them.

“There is a dramatic fitness in the use of ‘their hour’ (NIV, “the time”). Just as Jesus’ ‘hour’ would certainly come (see on 2:4), so would his enemies’ ‘hour’ certainly come. But in how different a sense!” [13]

Conclusion

One might wonder at the fact that the world does not seem so angry with the church today, as one might expect from these words of our Lord. One reason the church is simply ignored by the world is that its message is not the message of our Lord, the message of sin, guilt, and condemnation, the condemnation of hell-fire. The church is often ignored because its message is innocuous. In fact, there is nothing about the visible professing church that suggests that she ought to be crucified! The church’s message is the same social gospel of man-centered salvation that the world believes. That is a far cry from Paul’s message of Jesus Christ and Him crucified (cf. 1 Cor. 2:1–2). Cf. Gal. 3:1.

If to escape the world’s hostility, we drop our flags of divine truth and redemption by blood and hide our badges of the necessity of personal trust in Christ’s saving work alone for our eternal safety and welfare, then we, the true church of Christ, become like a tiger without claws. With His message we shall have hostility, but we have the confidence that we shall meet it with the love of Christ and the support of the Holy Spirit, and the end of that conflict is life.

Notes

1. Lewis Johnson is a Bible teacher at Believer’s Chapel in Dallas, Texas. He is Professor Emeritus of New Testament Exegesis at Dallas Theological Seminary and also served as Professor of Biblical and Systematic Theology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. This is the ninth in a series of expositions on The Upper Room Discourse.
2. Leon Morris, The Gospel according to John, NICNT (rev. ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 602.
3. The first class condition introduces an assumption of the reality of the hatred for the sake of argument. Incidentally, in the “ye know” of the AV, the indicative is probably better translated by “know,” the imperative (cf. C. K. Barrett, The Gospel according to St. John, 2d ed., (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978), 480.
4. Augustine, Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel according to St. John: Tractate CVI, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: First Series, vol. 7, ed. Philip Schaff, trans. John Gibb and James Innes (reprint ed., Edinburgh and Grand Rapids: T & T Clark and Eerdmans, 1991 [1888], 7:401.
5. J. C Ryle, Expository Thoughts on the Gospels, 4 vols. (reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977 [1856-1873]), 4:119.
6. Cf. William Barclay, The Gospel of John, DSB, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1955), 2:216–17. Jonas Hanway, trying to introduce the umbrella into England, was pelted with stones and mud as he walked down the street! Barclay writes, “The classic instance of that is the fate which befell Aristides in Athens. He was called Aristides the Just; and yet he was banished. When one of the citizens was asked why he had voted for the banishment of Aristides, he answered: ‘Because I am tired of hearing him always called the Just.’”
7. Henry Barclay Swete, The Last Discourse and Prayer of our Lord: A Study of St. John XIV-XVII (London: Macmillan and Co., 1914), 98.
8. Swete, The Last Discourse and Prayer of our Lord, 97–98
9. Cf. Morris, The Gospel according to John, 603.
10. Morris, The Gospel according to John, 604. The expression to have sin is found in 9:41; 15:22, 24; 19:11; 1 John 1:8. Nowhere else is it found in the NT.
11. See S. Lewis Johnson, “The Promise of the Paraclete,” EmJ 3(Summer, 1994): 54-55.
12. Morris, The Gospel according to John, 614.
13. Morris, The Gospel according to John, 616.