One of the most consistent patterns in Scripture is the way God speaks about future realities as if they already exist. This is not accidental language, and it is not poetic fluff. It is covenantal, decretive, promise-language. Once you see this pattern clearly, a number of long-standing theological assumptions—especially around John 17:5—begin to loosen, not because of speculation, but because the Bible itself teaches us how to read these statements.
A key text that opens this door is Numbers 20:24. God says to Moses concerning Aaron, “Aaron shall be gathered to his people; for he shall not enter the land which I have given to the people of Israel.” The striking thing is not Aaron’s punishment—that part is well known—but the way God refers to the land. Israel has not entered it. Aaron has never stepped foot in it. Moses will never enter it either. The generation standing before God will die in the wilderness. And yet God speaks of the land as already given.
This is not careless wording. It reveals something fundamental about how divine speech works in Scripture. When God says “I have given,” he is not describing physical possession in time. He is describing a settled decision in his will. The promise is fixed. The decree is irreversible. The experience, however, is still future—and for some, it will never be realised. In biblical terms, the land is already theirs by promise, even though it is not yet theirs by possession.
This distinction between promise and possession is crucial. Scripture repeatedly maintains it. God’s promises are not dependent on human timing, but human participation in them is. The land belongs to Israel in decree, but entry into it depends on faithfulness. Promise does not cancel process. Calling does not override obedience. Aaron’s priestly office does not grant him immunity from consequence. He dies with the promise intact, but unrealised.
This way of speaking—treating future realities as already given because they are settled in God’s purpose—runs throughout the Bible. It is not limited to land. It applies to life, inheritance, glory, and salvation itself. Paul says believers are already glorified in Romans 8:30, even though their bodies are still subject to decay. Eternal life is said to be already given, even though believers still die. The kingdom is prepared, even though it is not yet fully revealed. The inheritance is already ours, even though we have not yet received it. The consistent pattern is this: what is decreed by God is spoken of as present, even when it remains future in experience.
When we carry this biblical pattern into John 17:5, the passage begins to read very differently. Jesus prays, “Father, glorify me with the glory I had with you before the world existed.” Traditionally, this line has been treated as a straightforward statement of literal pre-existence: Jesus once possessed glory alongside the Father in a metaphysical, pre-temporal realm, lost it at incarnation, and is now asking for it back. But this reading assumes a category the text itself does not require. It imports a metaphysical framework rather than letting Scripture interpret Scripture.
The questions we asked of Numbers 20 should be asked here as well. At the moment Jesus speaks, has he been glorified? No. Has the resurrection happened? No. Has immortality been realised? No. Has exaltation occurred? No. So what exactly is being referenced? Just as in Numbers, the language does not describe present experience but settled promise. Jesus is not describing a state he is currently enjoying or one he has lost. He is invoking a glory that belongs to him by divine decree, one that exists in God’s purpose before the world, but which has not yet entered history.
This kind of language is not unusual for Jesus. Throughout the Gospels, he speaks of future realities as already secured. He tells his disciples that the kingdom has been prepared for them from the foundation of the world. He speaks of authority that will be given to him after obedience. He frames his mission in terms of fulfilment rather than retrieval. John’s Gospel, in particular, is saturated with this “already/not yet” tension, where realities are declared in advance because their outcome is guaranteed.
Seen this way, John 17:5 is not a metaphysical flashback but a covenantal appeal. Jesus is asking the Father to actualise what has already been decided. The glory is not something remembered; it is something promised. It is not something reclaimed; it is something brought forward. The prayer is not about returning to a prior mode of existence but about the faithful completion of a mission that leads to vindication.
This interpretation fits perfectly with the broader New Testament narrative, especially the way resurrection functions as the true fulfilment of Old Testament hope. In the Hebrew Scriptures, the Promised Land represents rest, inheritance, permanence, and security under God’s rule. In the New Testament, these categories are not discarded; they are transformed. Resurrection life becomes the true inheritance. Immortality becomes the ultimate rest. Participation in the age to come becomes the real “land” promised to God’s people.
The letter to the Hebrews makes this connection explicit. It says there remains a rest for the people of God, even after Joshua led Israel into Canaan. That means the land itself was never the final fulfilment. It was a type. Many saw the promise. Many believed it. Some entered it. Others died in faith without receiving it. Hebrews 11 repeatedly emphasises this pattern: promises seen, trusted, but not yet received. Faith does not guarantee immediate fulfilment; it trusts the decree even when experience lags behind.
This framework casts Jesus as the faithful Israelite who succeeds where others failed. Aaron dies outside the land because of disobedience. Moses sees it but does not enter. Jesus, by contrast, obeys fully and enters the promised glory. The difference is not ontological status but faithfulness. The glory Jesus receives is not automatic; it is the result of obedience unto death. This is exactly how the New Testament frames exaltation: “Therefore God highly exalted him.” The “therefore” matters. It grounds exaltation in obedience, not in a return to a prior state.
When Jesus speaks of glory “before the world existed,” he is speaking the same language Scripture uses elsewhere when it says believers were chosen before the foundation of the world, or that grace was given before the ages began. No one assumes believers literally existed before creation. Everyone understands this as God’s eternal purpose. The glory belongs to Jesus in the same way salvation belongs to believers: by divine intent prior to historical realisation.
This reading avoids forcing metaphysical assumptions onto the text. It respects the Bible’s own way of speaking. It aligns with resurrection theology. It fits the obedience narrative of the Gospels. It harmonises with Hebrews and Paul. And it preserves Jesus’ full humanity and dependence on God without diminishing his unique role. Jesus is not less exalted in this view; he is more coherent within the biblical story.
In plain terms, Jesus is praying, “Father, you have already decided my vindication, my resurrection, my exaltation. I have completed the work you gave me. Now bring into reality what you have already promised.” That is exactly how Numbers 20:24 works. The land is given, but not yet entered. The glory is assigned, but not yet realised.
This matters because it reframes how we read Scripture as a whole. It reminds us that God’s speech operates on the level of decree, not merely chronology. It teaches us to distinguish between what is settled in God’s will and what is experienced in time. And it prevents us from turning covenantal language into metaphysical speculation.
Ultimately, John 17:5 is not about Jesus asking to reclaim an old glory. It is about Jesus asking for the fulfilment of a promised one. Just like the land. Just like the resurrection. Just like the inheritance prepared before the foundation of the world. Once that pattern is seen, the text stops being mysterious and starts being consistent.
Leave a Reply