THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE UPPER-ROOM DISCOURSE (Jn 14: - 16:1)

This is the most significant Johannine passage on the Holy Spirit. As
lengthy as it is, it is still only part of a larger context. At the
last supper Jesus washed the apostles' feet, dismissed Judas Iscariot
to do his work, and began to prepare his apostles for his departure
(ch.l3). Ch.14 opens with Jesus comforting his apostles with words
about the coming kingdom. Jesus' going would be necessary for him to
prepare that kingdom (14.1-6).

The disciple Philip interrupted with a request to see the Father. This
led Jesus to mention his works, apparently the miracles (14.8-11). Not
only had Jesus done great works, but his disciples would do even
greater things. And whatever they would ask the Father to do in
glorifying Jesus, Jesus would do it (14.12-14).

Jesus was concerned about their being left alone, so he promised them
another Counselor. Other translations have Helper, Comforter, and
Paraclete (from the Greek parakletos). Vs. 26 identifies this
Counselor with the Holy Spirit. In vs. 17 he is called the Spirit of
truth. The term 'paraclete' is notoriously obscure. It comes from
classical Greek, where it means 'legal assistant, advocate. From there
it is a short step to 'intercessor.' The rabbis simply transliterated
the word into Hebrew and Aramaic. But even though the Holy Spirit is
set in a legal setting at least once (Mk. 13.11) and is said to be an
intercessor (Ro. 8.26), this sense is not the one found in John. One
line of investigation which has promised some insight is that of
rabbinic literature. For the rabbis, paracletes were guides,
witnesses, intercessors, and mediators. For example, in Lev. R. 6.1,
the Holy Spirit intercedes for Israel. But it is important to note
that 1) John is not using 'paraclete' in the sense of an intercessor,
2) nowhere in the Talmud is the Holy Spirit even called a Paraclete,
and 3) nowhere in Judaism do the paracletes convict the world of sin
(Jn. 16.7-11). Barrett thinks the material from the rabbis fails to
illuminate John's concept of the Paraclete. [C. K. Barrett, \"The Holy
Spirit in the Fourth Gospel,\" Journal of Theological Studies, n.s.,
1(1950), pp. 8-15.] He thinks that NT writers offer the best insight,
that they appropriated the term to describe a new christian
phenomenon, namely the prophetic proclamation (exhortation) that Jesus
is the messianic consolation (cf. Is. 40.1, Ac. 2.40, and I Co. 14.3).
These two senses, exhortation and consolation, made 'Paraclete'
readily accessible. The receipt of the Holy Spirit would be contingent
upon the apostles continuing to love Jesus, which essentially means
obedience. Their faithfulness would not be enough in itself, but
without their steadfast loyalty the gift of the Holy Spirit would be
meaningless. So, Jesus promised that they would be given the Spirit to
help them carry on. Apparently, there is a connection between the
greater works of 14.12-14 and the gift of the Spirit. I suggest that
Jesus was not talking about the Holy Spirit helping the apostles to
live faithful lives, but rather that if they remained faithful they
would receive the additional help needed to do works \"in Jesus' name,\"
even greater works than he did. [Raymond Brown sees the Jesus/Holy
Spirit/apostles relationship as a tandem relationship much like that
of Moses/Joshua and Elijah/Elisha. Cf. \"The Paraclete in the Fourth
Gospel,\" New Testament Studies, XIII (1966-7), p. 120.]

In the writings of John, 'the world' refers to human beings with their
human nature. This nature is at least different from, and nearly
always opposed to, God's nature. 'The world' is very close in meaning
to 'the flesh.' All of the particular nuances of the word which occur
in John's writings happen to appear in the passage just excerpted.
Jesus stated that the world cannot receive the Holy Spirit, but that
his apostles will (14.17). Judas understands him to say that he will
manifest himself to his apostles, but not to the world (14.22). The
world will see him no more(14.19). The reason for this is that Jesus
has taken them out of the world (15.19). Hence, the world and, let us
say Jesus, represent two very different spheres. The world has one
kind of peace, Jesus another (14.27). Satan is prince of the world
(14.30, 16.11). The world tends to hate those of Jesus' sphere
(15.18-9). So, therefore, the world, Jesus said, cannot receive the
Holy Spirit because of their evil, or at least materialistic, mindset.
This again shows how morality/spirituality are antecedent to one's
receiving the Spirit. This, of course, is very much in accordance with
rabbinic doctrine.

How is it that the Holy Spirit dwelt WITH the apostles, but would soon
dwell IN them (14. 17)? [The RSV translators have chosen the future
tense (\"will be in you\"), where the present is also a very possible
reading. Given the context, I agree with their choices.] This is
probably to be explained by Jesus' comments in the ensuing verses. In
14.18-24 Jesus seemingly identified himself with the Holy Spirit. He
was with them physically at that moment, but he would soon be in them
as the Holy Spirit. That is how he would manifest himself to them.
That is also why the world would not be able to see either the Spirit
or Jesus. He would not be with them in physical form. Furthermore, the
Father Himself would dwell in the believer. In Acts we saw how Luke
equated the Holy Spirit with the spirit of Jesus, and Peter too. John
conflates the indwelling of all three, the Father, Jesus, and the Holy
Spirit. [Brown thinks this is why the Holy Spirit was called \"another
Comforter,\" viz., the ministries of Jesus and the Holy Spirit are too
exactly parallel to be coincidental; op. cit., p. 128. It would follow
from this, of course, that just as Jesus' earthly ministry was
temporary, so also was the Holy Spirit's.]

How would the Holy Spirit function in the apostles' lives? Jesus gives
two ways. The Spirit would teach them all things and give them a
remembrance of everything which he had said to them (14.25-26). That
is, they would be prophetically inspired. It is easy to see why these
gifts would be important. Jesus is physically leaving, but they would
not be left to their own raw abilities and devices to carry on the
work. In fact, Jesus immediately returned to the main theme of this
passage, namely, that he must prepare them for his departure to the
Father and all of the tribulation surrounding that event (14.27-31).

It was of great concern to Jesus that his apostles remain faithful to
his teachings. He returned to that point several times (14.15, 21,
23-24, 15.14, and 16.1-4). His warnings were designed to encourage
such faithfulness. The parable of the true vine shows that their
obedience was essential to Jesus' abiding in them and their bearing
fruit (l5.1-11).

A second sub-theme was his commandment to love one another(14.12-17).
This would not only promote unity in the days after his death, but it
would also show the world in a dramatic way whose apostles they were
(cf 13.34-35).

A third way that Jesus prepared his apostles was his warnings of
persecution. He did not want the shock of it to devastate them (15.
18-25).

The references to the Holy Spirit were a fourth way that Jesus
prepared them for his departure. Again, Jesus tried to encourage them
with the promise of the Spirit(15.26-27). In doing so, he introduced
the notion of witnessing. The Spirit would come from the Father and
bear witness to Jesus. The apostles also would be witnesses (to Jesus)
because they had been with him from the beginning. These remarks are
reminiscent of Lk. 24-Ac. 2. There the apostles were told that they
would receive power from on high, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, to
enable them to testify effectively with regard to the resurrection of
Jesus. One of the qualifications for Judas' replacement was that he
had been with Jesus from the beginning, that is, that he had seen all
the miracles and heard all the teachings. Jesus used the same language
here in Jn. 15.26-27. [Bruce quotes Lofthouse's conclusion
approvingly, namely, that the emphasis of the upper room discourse of
Jn. 14-16 \"is precisely that which underlies the conception of the
Spirit in Acts 1-15.\" Bruce, op. cit., p. 178, and W. F. Lofthouse,
\"The Holy Spirit in the Acts and the Fourth Gospel,\" Expository Times,
LII (1940-41), pp. 334ff. Cf. Raymond, op. cit., pp. 124-5.]

Jesus then continued by reiterating his concern that they remain
steadfast through the upcoming persecution (16.1-4a). He felt it
necessary to prepare them at that time, because he was going away
(16.4b-6). But they should understand that his departure was necessary
to the Counselor's coming to them. Why this is the case is not clear,
but it is the same as John said in 7.37-40. When the Counselor comes
to them, his job would be too convince (convict) the world of sin,
righteousness, and judgment (16.7-1 1). In T. Jud. 20.5 one of the two
spirits which abide in man's conscience is the spirit of truth. The
spirit of truth testifies to and accuses the heart of the sinner. Of
course, this was not God's Spirit, but there is this parallel. Jesus
does not say how the Counselor would carry out his work, but
presumably it would be through the apostles' inspired preaching. [For
an excellent interpretation of these very difficult verses see D. A.
Carson, \"The Function of the Paraclete in John 16.7-11,\" Journal of
Biblical Literature, XCVIII (1979), pp. 547-66.]

The final paragraph in our excerpt is also instructive (16.12-15). The
Spirit would guide the apostles into all the truth. Now, this promise
must be understood in light of its preface. Jesus was aware that the
apostles were unable to hear the whole story. It was not until they
saw the empty tomb that they were able to grasp fully Jesus'
predictions of his resurrection (20.8-9). Still less would they be
able to grasp such things at this point. [In Jn. 12.12-6 John
describes Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He then quotesZec.
9.9, a passage which originally had nothing to do with Jesus. John
says that the apostles did not understand this (neither Jesus' actions
or the meaning of Zec. 9.9), but after Jesus was glorified they
\"remembered that this had been written of him and had been done to
him.\" If this is to be understood as an example of how the Spirit
brought things to the apostles' remembrance after Jesus' glorification
(John 14.26), then we might take \",remembrance\" to mean, not only
recalling past events, but also coming to understand them in light of
OT passages. The Holy Spirit was therefore providing +raz esher+ of OT
scriptures. Franz Mussner says 'remembrance' was more than
remembering; it involves insight and understanding as well. See his
'Die johanneischen Parabelspruche und die apostolishche Tradition,\"
Biblische Zeitschrifi, V (1961), P. 60. Gary M. Burge says something
very similar in his book, The Anointed Community, Grand Rapids:
William B. Eardmans, 1987, p. 213. Martin Hengel compares the gospels
to the biographical reminiscenses of the great philosophers by their
pupils. Cf Acts and the History of Earliest Christianify,
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979, p. 27.] The Spirit then would
complete Jesus' message to them after Jesus' resurrection. This
message would also involve future events, Even after witnessing the
resurrection the apostles would be ill-equipped to deal with the many
ramifications of the new age without special help.

Before summarizing the above considerations, two more remarks are in
order, One is that John uses 'the Spirit of truth' as an appellation
for the Holy Spirit. This phrase occurs in the Dead Sea Scrolls, but
not as a name for an entity. The synoptic writers do not use this
phrase. John might have been influenced by channels of Persian thought
in his time period.
Another remark has to do with the word 'forever' in Jn. 14.16. We have
to be careful not to require Jesus' promise to extend beyond the
apostles. He promised them the Spirit forever. This is not an unusual
way of talking. In Dt. 15.12-18 a freed slave might ask to remain a
slave in his master's house. The master would then bore a hole in the
slave's ear, and the slave would belong to the master forever. So,
unlike Jesus in the flesh, the Holy Spirit would never leave the
apostles.

Jn. 14-16 is a significant Holy Spirit passage. The following will
serve to summarize the considerations above.

1) The apostles' possession of the Holy Spirit is probably to be
understood as a temporary phenomenon.
    a. The context is that of the period of persecution following the
birth of the Christian movement.
    b. The Spirit would give the apostles a remembrance of the things
Jesus said to them.
    c. The Spirit would fill in those gaps in Jesus' teachings left
there by their inability to grasp the whole story .
    d. The Spirit would be a witness alongside the apostles to the
life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
2) The Spirit is referred to variously:
    a. the Counselor (Comforter, Helper, Paraclete).
    b. The Spirit of Truth, and
    c. the Holy Spirit.
3) The Spirit would be sent them from the Father.
4) The Spirit would empower the apostles to do even greater works than
Jesus did.
5) The receipt of the Spirit was contingent upon their continued
faithfulness and obedience.
6) The Spirit evidently was seen as a replacement for Jesus.
7) The Spirit would dwell in the apostles.
8) The functions of the Spirit include the following:
    a. He would teach the apostles everything they would need to know.
    b. He would give them a remembrance of Jesus' teachings.
    c. He would bear witness to Jesus (apparently through miraculous
works).
    d. He would convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment.
    e. He would reveal future events.

I agree with M. E. Boring's assessment of the Paraclete section of
John's gospel. He believes that the Paraclete's function was the
particularized work of the prophet, that it should not be understood
in a mystical sense as an individual gift to every believer. Rather,
the Paraclete was the spirit of prophecy, bestowed on a select group
of apostles. Among his reasons are the following. (1) In most Jewish
and Christian circles 'the Holy Spirit' was understood as the spirit
of prophecy. (2) The emphatic work of the Paraclete was a speech
function. (3) The Holy Spirit was to guide, teach, and direct, hence
indicating external influence, rather than internal. (4) The work of
the Paraclete compares favorably with the role of the angel of
prophecy in the Book of Revelation. (5) The Paraclete would expand
upon Jesus' teachings. (6) The convicting effect of the Paraclete
(John 16.8-11) compares to the same in the +charismata+ in I Co. 14.
22-5. (7) The Paraclete would predict the future. (8) And, inasmuch as
the Holy Spirit is \"another Paraclete\", Jesus is the first Paraclete;
and Jesus was a miracle-working prophet. [M. E. Boring, \"The Influence
of Christian Prophecy on the Johannine Portrayal of the Paraclete and
Jesus,\" New Testament Studies, XXV (Oct. 1978), pp. 113-23.]

[close quote]