And so it's John 18, verses 1 through 9. Let's stand together for the reading of God's word. John 18, verses 1 through 9. When Jesus had spoken these things, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Chidron, where was a garden into the which he entered and his disciples. And Judas, which betrayed him, knew also the place. For Jesus oft times resorted tither with his disciples. Judas then, after he had received a band of men and officers of the high priests and of the Pharisees, came tither with lanterns and torches and weapons. Then Jesus, knowing all things that should come unto him, went forth and said unto them, Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus said unto them, I am he. Now Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. And as soon as he had said unto them, I am he, they went away backwards and fell to the ground. Then he asked them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus answered, I said unto you that I am he. If therefore ye seek me, let these go their way. This was that the word of God might be fulfilled which he spake, of them which thou gavest me have I lost none. And that ends the reading of God's word and let's pray. Father be with us now as we turn here we pray. You would help us and instruct us, give us wisdom in Jesus' name. Amen. And please be seated. Well, I'm interested this morning in a comparison between John's account and the Synoptic Gospel accounts that are correlative of this same time, beginning with Matthew 26 at verse 30. And here we'll read 30 to 35, and then 56. So Matthew 26, verse 30. And when they had sung a psalm, they went out into the Mount of Olives. Then said Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended by me this night, for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered. But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee. But Peter answered and said unto him, though all men should be offended by thee, yet will I never be offended. Jesus said unto him, verily I say unto thee, that this night before the cock crow thou shalt deny me thrice. Peter said unto him, though I should die with thee, I will in no case deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples. And then verse 56. But all this was done that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him and fled." Okay, and we can add to that Mark 14, this parallel account, Mark 14. beginning at verse 26, 26-27 here. And when they had sung a psalm, they went out to the Mount of Olives. Then Jesus said unto them, All ye shall be offended by me this night. For it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. But after I am risen, I will go into Galilee before you. And Peter said unto him, Although all men should be offended at thee, yet would not I. Then Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, This day, even in this night, before the cock crowed twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. But he said more earnestly, If I should die with thee, I will not deny thee. Likewise also said they all. And then here, verse 50, then they all forsook him and fled." Of course, Luke does not make characterization about the disciples at this point, and so there's nothing really to add to those things. The contrast here that's particularly interesting is the warning about being offended, along with the event-related, how the disciples, quote-unquote, forsook him and fled. and contrasted that with Jesus' words in John 18 and verse 8, if you seek me, let these go their way. So on the one hand, we have the gospel writers saying they forsook him and fled, and in John's account, we have Jesus making requests for them, saying if you seek me, let these go their way, and that's sort of curious. Were the disciples guilty of a form of cowardice in saving their own necks? And again, remember Jesus' words and his teaching on this, Matthew 10 and verse 32. Matthew 10 and verse 32. Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." Okay, so again, here it is, let these go their way. Of course, Peter later at the campfire with the maid says, I'm not one of them, I don't know him. Remember also Paul's account of his appearance before Nero, that is 2 Timothy 4 at verse 16. At my first answering, no man assisted me, but all forsook me. I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge. And again, that's his inspired words. That's Paul's inspired characterization of men as forsaking him. Now, it's interesting that the circumstances of Paul's appearing before Nero are quite different. Paul was a prisoner. Paul had appealed to Nero. I appeal to Caesar. He wouldn't be delivered into the hands of the Jews. So he was at Rome on appeal by his own request He was assigned a day in court or assigned a day to appear before Nero, and yet the fact that no one joined in with him and voluntarily came with him into Nero's presence is characterized as forsaking him at his first appearance. They forsook him. And so very interesting when you said that over and against now the disciples who were in the garden with Jesus and the soldiers came and they were there already and Jesus is taken at that point. And so it's quite interesting. So was their fleeing the scene merely a compliance with Jesus' will, which they could surmise from the request or order, if we want to call it that, that he gave the company? In other words, it's unclear exactly the procedure or who was exactly in what posture at the time, but it's quite possible that these men were still on the ground when Jesus said, let these go their way. It's quite possible that these men were on the ground when Peter took the sword and struck the servant's ear, cut it off, and Jesus healed them. It's possible. When he said, I am he, they fell backwards to the ground. And that's the circumstance. So anyway, that aspect of things is possible. And again, so it may be that When they're on the ground, Jesus said, Whom seek ye? Jesus of Nazareth. I am he, I told you, and if you seek me, let these go their way. They may have been on the ground when that was being said. So again, the question is, shall we characterize, is it legitimate to characterize the apostles as forsaking him, which the gospel writers do? and at the same time recognize that Jesus made this request, which was sort of a request or sort of an order to the ones who were arresting him. So were they merely complying with Jesus' will, which they could surmise from the request or order he gave the company? So again, and again, both texts are inspired, okay, the Gospel writers are characterizing the disciples through the Holy Spirit who gave them utterance, as well as John. But doesn't it seem problematic to request their departure and then to blame them for departing? And to add to that, the disciples' own sense of the things had already been revealed, again, with Peter's insistence. We had that in Matthew. Well, though all men forsake thee, yet will not I forsake thee. No, I'm ready to die with you. You know, Peter's insistence. So the apostles' sense of this thing already is laid out for us before the event, before Judas comes with the band of men. Peter insisted that he would not depart. And that's interesting because that is apart from the immediate circumstances. They're not thrown into the fear of men. seeing a company of officers coming to arrest him. It's just, apart from that situation, it's a discussion and it's their own sense of what's right and wrong that they've already communicated to him. So again, you bring all these things together and It raises questions. It's also interesting here, the application of scripture by John in verse 9. That the word might be fulfilled which he spake, of them which thou gavest me have I lost none. Now that was the prayer back in the high priestly prayer in the last chapter. And here it seems to be applied to the physical lives of men as opposed to the sense of it you get in John 17 verses 9 to 15. I pray for them, I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me, for they are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine, and I am glorified in them. And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee, Holy Father. Keep them in thy name, even them whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we are. While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name, those that thou gavest me have I kept, and none of them is lost but the child of perdition that the scripture might be fulfilled. And now come I to thee, and these things speak I in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves. I have given them thy word. The world hath hated them, because they are not of the world as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. And so there again you have the words evident in the high priestly prayer. So the question is, when you put all this together, how should we look at it? Is there anything we can learn from this? And I think there's a lot we can learn from it. In the first place, not every instance of permission granted comprises a man's duty. And one of the outstanding examples, I think, of this is Naomi's counsel to her daughter's-in-law. That's Ruth 1, and we'll look at verses 1 to 18. Ruth 1, verses 1 to 18. In the time that the judges ruled, there was a dearth in the land, and a man of Bethlehem, Judah, went forth to sojourn in the country of Moab, he and his wife and his two sons. The name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife, Naomi, and the names of his two sons, Malon and Kylion, Ephrathites of Bethlehem, Judah. And when they came into the land of Moab, they continued there. Then Elimelech, the husband of Naomi, died, and she remained with her two sons, which took them wives of the Moabites. The one's name was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth, and they dwelt there about ten years. And Mahlon and Kylion died, also both Twain. So the woman was left destitute of her two sons and of her husband. Then she rose with her daughters-in-law and returned from the country of Moab. For she had heard say in the country of Moab that the Lord had visited his people and given them bread. Wherefore, she departed out of the place where she was and her two daughters-in-law with her, and they went on their way to return unto the land of Judah. Then Naomi said unto her two daughters-in-law, Go, return each of you unto her own mother's house. The Lord show favor unto you as ye have done with the dead and with me. The Lord grant you that ye may find rest, either of you, in the house of her husband. When she kissed them, they lift up their voice and wept. And they said unto her, Surely we will return with thee unto thy people. But Naomi said, turn again, my daughters, for what cause will you go with me? Are there any more sons in my womb that they may be your husbands? Turn again, my daughters, go your way, for I am too old to have a husband. If I should say I have hope, if I had a husband this night, yea, and if I had born sons, would ye tarry for them till they were of age? Would ye be deferred for them from taking husbands? Nay, my daughters, for it grieveth me much for your sakes that the hand of the Lord is gone out against me.' Then they lift up their voice and wept again, and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth abode still with her. Naomi said, Behold, thy sister-in-law has gone back unto her people and unto her gods. Return thou after thy sister-in-law, And Ruth answered, entreat me not to leave thee, nor to depart from thee. For whither thou goest, I will go, and whither thou dwellest, I will dwell. Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God. Where thou diest will I die, and there will I be buried. The Lord do so to me, and more also, if ought but death depart thee and me. When she saw that she was steadfastly minded to go with her, she left speaking unto her." Now, that is an example, I think, of the same kind of thing, that permission doesn't constitute duty, and that the permission, the advice, the counsel of Naomi in this circumstance is indicative of the circumstances that they're about to enter into of toil and hardship. You have three widowed women living together, and they have to shift for themselves and provide for themselves. The possession of her husband had been given away, sold when they left, which means that they're not going to get that back until the jubilee unless it's redeemed. And so they're going, they're traveling with the clothes on their back to a place where they're going to have to make a living for themselves in hardship and in toil. That's the reality that they're faced with. And so that's the implication. That's what Naomi is dealing with when she has these two daughters-in-law with her, both of whom have families at home that they can return to. Now, it's also the name and the faith of the true God which is at stake here. So what do you say about her counsel? She's saying, let these go their way. That's basically the idea. Let these go their way. Return to your house. Return to your family. That's the counsel Naomi is giving to her daughter's-in-law. And it's like saying, I want you to come, but don't do it for me. Don't come to Israel for me. Let it be something else that motivates you to come back to Israel, because we're going into hardship here. We're going into a place of suffering. We've had suffering already in Moab, but you have a better place to go. You can go home to your family. You can go home to your father's house. and await a new husband there. Why do you want to come with me?" And so again, it's like saying to them, I don't want you to come for me, don't do it for me. If you come, come because of a different reason. So the permission that Naomi gives makes for in these daughters-in-law a steadfastness in committing themselves to be with her. And I think likewise the permission event in Jesus' words do not define what their duty is. They simply place the decision wholly upon the grounds of the disciple's commitment. It's like saying, when he says to the band of men, let these go their way, that's like saying, look, you had the opportunity, you know, based on what I said to the band of men, you had the opportunity. Now if you want to stay, if you want to die with me, let that be your decision. So, again, the permission evident in Jesus' words. don't define their duty, they only place the decision wholly on the grounds of the disciples' commitment, and a commitment in the disciples that we know was immature until the Spirit of God was poured out. And so, as a result, permission can go hand in hand with neglect of duty. You see the point? So even though you have permission, it can mean a neglect of duty if you follow through with the thing that you have permission for. And so it's possible at once to request the disciples' departure and also to blame them as the Gospel writers do. taking their characterization as an assessment of duty. And so I would say that about Matthew and Mark's gospel, they forsook him and fled. Yes, forsaking him. That's what it meant. That's what it was to flee away. It was to forsake Jesus. It was to take that resolution that we're ready to die with you that they had made beforehand. that to them was symbolic of a commitment to him, and actually when you were faced with a circumstance, to reject it and to flee away. And so again, the Gospel writers can characterize them in terms of an assessment of duty, even as John makes clear that Jesus actually requested that of the ones who had come to arrest him. requested it or commanded it, depending on how we evaluate the circumstance of that statement. Okay, so that's the first point. Permission doesn't always, doesn't define for us duty. Okay, secondly, the application of John 17 and verse 12, and let's go back there for a minute. While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name. Those that thou gave me have I kept, and none of them is lost but the child of perdition that the scripture might be fulfilled." So I have kept them in thy name, and none of them is lost. Now what is Jesus talking about? I don't believe we can say he's talking about the physical lives of his disciples. I think we're talking about the faith, the spiritual life. And so, when in Matthew 18, that the word might be fulfilled which he spake of them which thou gavest me, have I lost none? It does seem to be a difference. There seems to be a spiritual reality here, and yet John seems to be applying it to their lives, their physical beings. It doesn't seem to match up, and yet the application may be more subtle than it appears. Jesus can speak and understand with perfect clarity, and one can only speculate as to what might have happened at the arraignment of Jesus with his eleven remaining disciples. If these disciples had been arrested at this time, There would have been an inquisition, an inquisition with the goal of getting them to deny him and save themselves, and what their great spokesman Peter did at the campfire with the maid may have been repeated many times over in an official setting. So, do you see what they were saved from? These men indeed were willing to die for the testimony of Jesus, but the steadfastness in that kind of a resolution came afterward. Again, many of them did, you know, the St. Andrew's Cross. is how St. Andrew was crucified, history tells us. Peter was crucified upside down. James was slain by Herod. You know, there were many deaths of the apostles at the hands of men. They were steadfast unto the death, even as the commandment is. But that ability, the ability to fulfill their prior resolution of what they knew was right, is what they said they were committed to, The ability to do that came by the Spirit of God after his passion, after Pentecost. So we're reminded here of what is a practical reality in 1 Corinthians 10 verses 1-14. Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, that all our fathers were under that cloud, and all passed through that sea, and were all baptized unto Moses in that cloud and in that sea. And all did eat the same spiritual meat, and all did drink the same spiritual drink, for they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock was Christ. But with many of them God was not well pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things are our examples to the intent that we should not lust after evil things as they also lusted. Neither be ye idolaters as were some of them, as it is written, the people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play. Neither let us commit fornication as some of them committed fornication and fell in one day three and twenty thousand. Neither let us tempt Christ as some of them also tempted him and were destroyed of serpents. Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer. Now all these things came unto them for examples, and were written to admonish us upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. There hath no temptation taken you, but as such as appertaineth to man. And God is faithful, which will not suffer you to be tempted, above that you be able, but will even give the issue with the temptation, that ye may be able to bear it." Now, there's a reality here, a practical reality that God has men fall into temptation at times, and men are lost in temptation, but he never tempts men above that they are able to stand, and that's a practical thing. And so these disciples are kept from the practical implications of what is in them at that time, when Jesus says, let these go their way. They're kept from a trial too difficult for their present condition. And again, the permission doesn't define the duty, but it is an aspect of God's merciful dealing with them in terms of who they are and what they are, and their own ability to keep their resolutions at this time. And that, I think, is the answer to the question. Now, to apply these things, we ought to remember that opportunity does not constitute duty. Opportunity doesn't constitute duty. Duty is an interesting word. I turned to Webster's 1828 Dictionary. It's a noun. It means that which a person owes to another, that which a person is bound by any natural, moral, or legal obligation to pay, do, or perform. Obedience to princes, magistrates, and the laws is the duty of every citizen and subject. Obedience, respect, and kindness to parents are duties of children. Fidelity to friends is a duty. Reverence, obedience, and prayer to God are indispensable duties. The government and religious instruction of children are duties of parents which they cannot neglect without guilt. That's number one. Okay, two, forbearance of that which is forbid by morality, law, justice, or propriety. It is our duty to refrain from lewdness, intemperance, profaneness, and injustice. And number three, obedience, submission. Number four, act of reverence or respect. Number five, the business of a soldier or marine on guard as the company is on duty It is applied also to other services or labor. Six, the business of war, military service, as the regiment did duty in Flanders. And seven, tax, toll, impose, or customs exercise any sum of money required by government to be paid on the importation, exportation, or consumption of goods. An impost on land or other real estate and on the stock of farmers is not called a duty, but a direct tax. Okay, and that's how Webster, again, defines duty. So duty is what you owe. And men are apt to interpret opportunities they have as things that they, quote, unquote, ought to do. And that's especially true of immature Christians. who can defer to the, you know, it's interesting how Christians can take biblical doctrines and misapply them in certain circumstances. You know, for instance, the doctrine of providence. I mean, you can interpret all that comes to you as in the providence of God. So in the providence of God, this thing, this opportunity came to me. But interpreting opportunity as the will of God is a mistake. So yes, opportunity comes in the providence of God, all that happens comes in the providence of God, but opportunity doesn't define duty, just like permission doesn't define duty. And so we have to We have to be clear on that in our understanding. So let's take a father with four children who has a job opportunity for advancement, a 30% pay increase and a job which will take him away from home five nights in the week. He'll be away all week and at home on the weekends. Now, you can readily see how providence can be set against duty. And he can tell himself many things, you know, well, this will be good for the family or this, I can be, I'm called to be a provider for my family, this will be a better provision for them, a 30% pay increase, you see. And he can say, look, and it's only for a while, plus the money that I'll get we can spend on the kids. I mean, you see how a man wants to justify the opportunity, the permission as duty. There's all kinds of mental gymnastics a man can use to justify what ultimately is his enticement, his own will in the matter. And again, bring a veneer of Christianity into the justification. It's in the providence of God that I'm doing these things. I'm doing it for the blessing of my family, and so on. But stop and say, well, what's his duty? What's the husband's duty? Well, it's to be a husband and to be a father in person. to actually do the work of leading a home spiritually and physically, to take his part in the care of the children and in their instruction, not to leave his wife alone with them all week to do the work. And so it's to actually be a husband in the presence of his wife who is his helper and not the other way around. Now, many a man will couch his own will and his own desires in Christian garb at this point, but it's a question of duty and deference to do my duty, not to seize every opportunity that's set before me, but rather to evaluate opportunities. By this test, are they consistent with my duty? Are they consistent with the duties that I already have? What are the duties? I am a wife. I am a husband. I am a father. I am a mother. I have these responsibilities. I have financial obligations. They become duties. You made the obligation, you got a duty to pay it, you see. So are these things consistent with the duties that I already have, particularly the moral duties husband, wife, father, mother, and so on. And so that's how we judge providential opportunities that are set before us. Now, again, the disciples were kept from this. Jesus gave them permission to leave. We can call that forsaking him. That's what it is. But nevertheless, they were not morally prepared to die with him, even though objectively in resolution before the actual temptation, that's what they would have claimed. So again, you can see the difference between the two things. A second error common in Christian circles, then, is to blame God for our own failures. And again, we ought to recognize that 1 Corinthians 10 tells us, no, God doesn't do that. If we have temptation to something, then we also have the power to resist the thing because God does not suffer us to be tempted above what we are able to hear or handle. So the man who sins being tempted cannot blame God. He must blame himself, and he must seek reformation by the power of God, yes, but not as if he is not the one who has failed to use what power he already has. And so the decision-making in the previous illustration furnishes us an example for this. See, how many times in decision-making do men baptize their own wills? It becomes a process of wrangling out this circumstance, the opportunity, the thing, you twist it in a way to wring out all of the positive virtues of what you want while depreciating all that can go wrong. You know, I think I should spend $35,000 and buy a new car. Why? Well, why? Why would you? Do you have $35,000 to spend on it? No, but, you know, well, Well, because I have to factor in the repair costs for the car that I have already. And so I have these repair costs. If I buy a new car, I won't have repair costs for any period of time. And then this new car gets better gas mileage. See what people do. They're baptizing their wills with all the positive virtues that they can wring out of this thing and ignoring the fact that the borrower is servant to the lender. Ignoring the question of, well, what is your budget? And aren't you really taking on debt that's completely unnecessary to the detriment of your family? Do you know what Unexpected expenses are ready to come down the road to you tomorrow. Well, no. Do you have savings? Well, no. But you bring out all these positive virtues to baptize your will in a thing. And men are prone to this. They do this many times. And it becomes a process. depreciating all that can go wrong instead of applying the word of God in wisdom. So take that back now to this job opportunity and a 30% pay increase if you're away from home five days a week. You're only home on weekends with your wife and your four kids. The 127th Psalm is a good example of an application that we can make to this. Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. Except the Lord keep the city, the keeper watcheth in vain. It is vain for you to rise early and to lie down late and to eat the bread of sorrow. he will surely give rest to his beloved. Behold, children are the inheritance of the Lord, and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows in the hand of a strong man, so are the children of youth. Blessed is the man that hath his quiver full of them, for they shall not be ashamed when they speak with their enemies in the gate." Now, again, what's set out rising early and going to bed late and eating the bread of sorrows is said to be vain. It's vain to work yourself to death. You know, turn your focus upon your children. They are your inheritance. And that's the counsel of God in Psalm 127. So again, is this decision-making process an application of the Word of God in the total picture that we're given in Scripture, or are we baptizing our own desires in the decisions that we make? That's what we have to ask ourselves here. And so, ultimately, we're in that position of the disciples, virtually in everything that is set before us in life, providentially. Are we, in our thinking, applying the Word of God to the questions of life, to the decisions that we have to do in life? And again, what about our decision-making? So you can see how it works. And you and I are prone to this unless we are studied at applying the Scripture. We're prone to this. See, we're prone to do what the disciples do. were prone to say, well, I got the opportunity. Let me get out of here, you know, instead of asking, well, what is, what is my duty with respect to Jesus here? What should I do? What is my duty with respect to the apostle Paul appearing before Nero? Okay. You know, Paul needs a second witness. He'd say the gospel doesn't, uh, teach rebellion against Caesar or any such thing, any of these things the Jews would claim that it does, he needs at least a second witness, second witness, third witness. What's my duty in this circumstance? Nobody asks that. I don't want to be the one to have to do that. So again, you and I are prone to this unless we're studied at applying the scripture. And ultimately, you have to pray that God would show you, that God Himself would show you both the Scripture and how to do that. Now, I'm thinking of Proverbs 1, verses 28 to 33. Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer. They shall seek me early, but they shall not find me, because they hated knowledge and did not choose the fear of the Lord. They would none of my counsel, but despised all my correction. Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way and be filled with their own devices. For ease slayeth the foolish, and prosperity of fools destroyeth them. but he that obeyeth me shall dwell safely and be quiet from fear of evil." Again, the prosperity of the fools slays them. Men don't understand that. They think that, well, okay, I pray, but God says, I'm not going to hear their prayers. But they are encouraged that they pray. And number two, they're encouraged with the prosperity. They think that, you know, that 30% pay increase, you know, that would be a good thing, you know, and God has given me providentially blessing that I have this pay increase, not considering the destruction that it brings to their household. And again, that's a practical application of the Proverbs here, the prosperity of fools slays them. It's prosperous. You made more money. You made a 30% pay increase, but look at what it's doing to your family. See, and again, that's where opportunity and duty meet in this collision. You know, it's not just the opportunity. So somebody said, I think Jeff Black said, Pastor Black said, he said, you know, open doors are no indication of the will of God. Closed doors are an indication of the will of God. And that's truly the way, but that's only trying to read Providence. The will of God, the indication of the will of God is in the Word of God, and that's what we should be studied at applying. And so when we are faced with an idea, evaluate it by the Word of God. When we're faced with an opportunity, evaluate it by the Word of God. Let's apply the Word of God in our thinking and in our lives. in a way that keeps us from falling into these errors. Let's pray. And Father, we do ask you would bless us in these things, that we would judge all that is in life by your word, and that we would understand our duty, our calling before you, and place what is our responsibility at the highest position, our responsibility to you, our responsibility to our neighbor, to our family. And we pray that you would work those things in us, give us wisdom in applying these things. We pray in Jesus' name, amen.