John 18:1

The hour was now come that the captain of our salvation, who was to be made perfect by sufferings, should engage the enemy. We have here his entrance upon the encounter. The day of recompence is in his heart, and the year of his redeemed is come, and his own arm works the salvation, for he has no second. Let us turn aside now, and see this great sight.

I. Our Lord Jesus, like a bold champion, takes the field first (Joh 18:1, Joh 18:2): When he had spoken these words, preached the sermon, prayed his prayer, and so finished his testimony, he would lose no time, but went forth immediately out of the house, out of the city, by moon-light, for the passover was observed at the full moon, with his disciples (the eleven, for Judas was otherwise employed), and he went over the brook Cedron, which runs between Jerusalem and the mount of Olives, where was a garden, not his own, but some friend's, who allowed him the liberty of it. Observe,

1. That our Lord Jesus entered upon his sufferings when he had spoken these words, as Mat 26:1, When he had finished all these sayings. Here it is intimated, (1.) That our Lord Jesus took his work before him. The office of the priest was to teach, and pray, and offer sacrifice. Christ, after teaching and praying, applies himself to make atonement. Christ had said all he had to say as a prophet, and now he addresses himself to the discharge of his office as a priest, to make his soul an offering for sin; and, when he had gone through this, he entered upon his kingly office. (2.) That having by his sermon prepared his disciples for this hour of trial, and by his prayer prepared himself for it, he then courageously went out to meet it. When he had put on his armour, he entered the lists, and not till then. Let those that suffer according to the will of God, in a good cause, with a good conscience, and having a clear call to it, comfort themselves with this, that Christ will not engage those that are his in any conflict, but he will first do that for them which is necessary to prepare them for it; and if we receive Christ's instructions and comforts, and be interested in his intercession, we may, with an unshaken resolution, venture through the greatest hardships in the way of duty.

2. That he went forth with his disciples. Judas knew what house he was in in the city, and he could have staid and met his sufferings there; but, (1.) He would do as he was wont to do, and not alter his method, either to meet the cross or to miss it, when his hour was come. It was his custom when he was at Jerusalem, after he had spent the day in public work, to retire at night to the mount of Olives; there his quarters were, in the skirts of the city, for they would not make room for him in the palaces, in the heart of the town. This being his custom, he could not be put out of his method by the foresight of his sufferings, but, as Daniel, did then just as he did aforetime, Dan 6:10. (2.) He was as unwilling that there should be an uproar among the people as his enemies were, for it was not his way to strive or cry. If he had been seized in the city, and a tumult raised thereby, mischief might have been done, and a great deal of blood shed, and therefore he withdrew. Note, When we find ourselves involved in trouble, we should be afraid of involving others with us. It is no disgrace to the followers of Christ to fall tamely. Those who aim at honour from men value themselves upon a resolution to sell their lives as dearly as they can; but those who know that their blood is precious to Christ, and that not a drop of it shall be shed but upon a valuable consideration, need not stand upon such terms. (3.) He would set us an example in the beginning of his passion, as he did at the end of it, of retirement from the world. Let us go forth to him, without the camp, bearing his reproach, Heb 13:13. We must lay aside, and leave behind, the crowds, and cares, and comforts, of cities, even holy cities, if we would cheerfully take up our cross, and keep up our communion with God therein.

3. That he went over the brook Cedron. He must go over this to go to the mount of Olives, but the notice taken of it intimates that there was something in it significant; and it points, (1.) At David's prophecy concerning the Messiah (Psa 110:7), that he shall drink of the brook in the way; the brook of suffering in the way to his glory and our salvation, signified by the brook Cedron, the black brook, so called either from the darkness of the valley it ran through or the colour of the water, tainted with the dirt of the city; such a brook Christ drank of, when it lay in the way of our redemption, and therefore shall he lift up the head, his own and ours. (2.) At David's pattern, as a type of the Messiah. In his flight from Absalom, particular notice is taken of his passing over the brook Cedron, and going up by the ascent of mount Olivet, weeping, and all that were with him in tears too, Sa2 15:23, Sa2 15:30. The Son of David, being driven out by the rebellious Jews, who would not have him to reign over them (and Judas, like Ahithophel, being in the plot against him), passed over the brook in meanness and humiliation, attended by a company of true mourners. The godly kings of Judah had burnt and destroyed the idols they found at the brook Cedron; Asa, Ch2 15:16; Hezekiah, Ch2 30:14; Josiah, Kg2 23:4, Kg2 23:6. Into that brook the abominable things were cast. Christ, being now made sin for us, that he might abolish it and take it away, began his passion by the same brook. Mount Olivet, where Christ began his sufferings, lay on the east side of Jerusalem; mount Calvary, where he finished them, on the west; for in them he had an eye to such as should come from the east and the west.

4. That he entered into a garden. This circumstance is taken notice of only by this evangelist, that Christ's sufferings began in a garden. In the garden of Eden sin began; there the curse was pronounced, there the Redeemer was promised, and therefore in a garden that promised seed entered the lists with the old serpent. Christ was buried also in a garden. (1.) Let us, when we walk in our gardens, take occasion thence to meditate on Christ's sufferings in a garden, to which we owe all the pleasure we have in our gardens, for by them the curse upon the ground for man's sake was removed. (2.) When we are in the midst of our possessions and enjoyments, we must keep up an expectation of troubles, for our gardens of delight are in a vale of tears.

5. That he had his disciples with him, (1.) Because he used to take them with him when he retired for prayer. (2.) They must be witnesses of his sufferings, and his patience under them, that they might with the more assurance and affection preach them to the world (Luk 24:48), and be themselves prepared to suffer. (3.) He would take them into the danger to show them their weakness, notwithstanding the promises they had made of fidelity. Christ sometimes brings his people into difficulties, that he may magnify himself in their deliverance.

6. That Judas the traitor knew the place, knew it to be the place of his usual retirement, and probably, by some word Christ had dropped, knew that he intended to be there that night, for want of a better closet. A solitary garden is a proper place for meditation and prayer, and after a passover is a proper time to retire for private devotion, that we may pray over the impressions made and the vows renewed, and clench the nail. Mention is made of Judas's knowing the place, (1.) To aggravate the sin of Judas, that he would betray his Master, notwithstanding the intimate acquaintance he had with him; nay, and that he would make use of his familiarity with Christ, as giving him an opportunity of betraying him; a generous mind would have scorned to do so base a thing. Thus has Christ's holy religion been wounded in the house of its friends, as it could not have been wounded any where else. Many an apostate could not have been so profane, if he had not been a professor; could not have ridiculed scriptures and ordinances, if he had not known them. (2.) To magnify the love of Christ, that, though he knew where the traitor would seek him, thither he went to be found of him, now that he knew his hour was come. Thus he showed himself willing to suffer and die for us. What he did was not by constraint, but by consent; though as man he said, Let this cup pass away, as Mediator he said, "Lo, I come, I come with a good will." It was late in the night (we may suppose eight or nine o'clock) when Christ went out to the garden; for it was not only his meat and drink, but his rest and sleep, to do the will of him that sent him. When others were going to bed, he was going to prayer, going to suffer.

II. The captain of our salvation having taken the field, the enemy presently comes upon the spot, and attacks him (Joh 18:3): Judas with his men comes thither, commissioned by the chief priests, especially those among them that were Pharisees, who were the most bitter enemies to Christ. This evangelist passes over Christ's agony, because the other three had fully related it, and presently introduces Judas and his company that came to seize him. Observe,

1. The persons employed in this action - a band of men and officers from the chief priests, with Judas. (1.) Here is a multitude engaged against Christ - a band of men, speira - cohors, a regiment, a Roman band, which some think was five hundred men, others a thousand. Christ's friends were few, his enemies many. Let us therefore not follow a multitude to do evil, nor fear a multitude designing evil to us, if God be for us. (2.) Here is a mixed multitude; the band of men were Gentiles, Roman soldiers, a detachment out of the guards that were posted in the tower of Antonia, to be a curb upon the city; the officers of the chief priests, hupēretas. Either their domestic servants, or the officers of their courts, were Jews; these had an enmity to each other, but were united against Christ, who came to reconcile both to God in one body. (3.) It is a commissioned multitude, not a popular tumult; no, they have received orders from the chief priests, upon whose suggestion to the governor that this Jesus was a dangerous man, it is likely they had a warrant from him too to take him up, for they feared the people. See what enemies Christ and his gospel have had, and are likely to have, numerous and potent, and therefore formidable: ecclesiastical and civil powers combined against them, Psa 2:1, Psa 2:2. Christ said it would be so (Mat 10:18), and found it so. (4.) All under the direction of Judas. He received this band of men; it is probable that he requested it, alleging that it was necessary to send a good force, being as ambitious of the honour of commanding in chief in this expedition as he was covetous of the wages of this unrighteousness. He thought himself wonderfully preferred from coming in the rear of the contemptible twelve to be placed at the head of these formidable hundreds; he never made such a figure before, and promised himself, perhaps, that this should not be the last time, but he should be rewarded with a captain's commission, or better, if he succeeded well in this enterprise.

2. The preparation they had made for an attack: They came with lanterns, and torches, and weapons. (1.) If Christ should abscond, though they had moonlight, they would have occasion for their lights; but they might have spared these; the second Adam was not driven, as the first was, to hide himself, either for fear or shame, among the trees of the garden. It was folly to light a candle to seek the Sun by. (2.) If he should resist, they would have occasion for their arms. The weapons of his warfare were spiritual, and at these weapons he had often beaten them, and put them to silence, and therefore they have now recourse to other weapons, swords and staves.

III. Our Lord Jesus gloriously repulsed the first onset of the enemy, Joh 18:4-6, where observe,

1. How he received them, with all the mildness imaginable towards them, and all the calmness imaginable in himself.

(1.) He met them with a very soft and mild question (Joh 18:4): Knowing all things that should come upon him, and therefore not at all surprised with this alarm, with a wonderful intrepidity and presence of mind, undisturbed and undaunted, he went forth to meet them, and, as if he had been unconcerned, softly asked, "Whom seek you? What is the matter? What means this bustle at this time of night?" See here, [1.] Christ's foresight of his sufferings; He knew all those things that should come upon him, for he had bound himself to suffer them. Unless we had strength, as Christ had, to bear the discovery, we should not covet to know what shall come upon us; it would but anticipate our pain; sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof: yet it will do us good to expect sufferings in general, so that when they come we may say, "It is but what we looked for, the cost we sat down and counted upon." [2.] Christ's forwardness to his sufferings; he did not run away from them, but went out to meet them, and reached forth his hand to take the bitter cup. When the people would have forced him to a crown, and offered to make him a king in Galilee, but he withdrew, and hid himself (Joh 6:15); but, when they came to force him to a cross, he offered himself; for he came to this world to suffer and went to the other world to reign. This will not warrant us needlessly to expose ourselves to trouble, for we know not when our hour is come; but we are called to suffering when we have no way to avoid it but by sin; and, when it comes to this, let none of these things move us, for they cannot hurt us.

(2.) He met them with a very calm and mild answer when they told him whom they were in quest of, Joh 18:5. They said, Jesus of Nazareth; and he said, I am he. [1.] It should seem, their eyes were held, that they could not know him. It is highly probable that many of the Roman band, at least the officers of the temple, had often seen him, if only to satisfy their curiosity; Judas, however, to be sure, knew him well enough, and yet none of them could pretend to say, Thou art the man we seek. Thus he showed them the folly of bringing lights to see for him, for he could make them not to know him when they saw him; and he has herein shown us how easily he can infatuate the counsels of his enemies, and make them lose themselves, when they are seeking mischief. [2.] In their enquiries for him they called him Jesus of Nazareth, which was the only title they knew him by, and probably he was so called in their warrant. It was a name of reproach given him, to darken the evidence of his being the Messiah. By this it appears that they knew him not, whence he was; for, if they had known him, surely they would not have persecuted him. [3.] He fairly answers them: I am he. He did not improve the advantage he had against them by their blindness, as Elisha did against the Syrians, telling them, This is not the way, neither is this the city; but improves it as an opportunity of showing his willingness to suffer. Though they called him Jesus of Nazareth, he answered to the name, for he despised the reproach; he might have said, I am not he, for he was Jesus of Bethlehem; but he would by no means allow equivocations. He has hereby taught us to own him, whatever it cost us; not to be ashamed of him or his words; but even in difficult times to confess Christ crucified, and manfully to fight under his banner. I am he, Egō eimi - I am he, is the glorious name of the blessed God (Exo 3:14), and the honour of that name is justly challenged by the blessed Jesus. [4.] Particular notice is taken, in a parenthesis, that Judas stood with them. He that used to stand with those that followed Christ now stood with those that fought against him. This describes an apostate; he is one that changes sides. He herds himself with those with whom his heart always was, and with whom he shall have his lot in the judgment-day. This is mentioned, First, To show the impudence of Judas. One would wonder where he got the confidence with which he now faced his Master, and was not ashamed, neither could he blush; Satan in his heart gave him a whore's forehead. Secondly, To show that Judas was particularly aimed at in the power which went along with that word, I am he, to foil the aggressors. It was an arrow levelled at the traitor's conscience, and pierced him to the quick; for Christ's coming and his voice will be more terrible to apostates and betrayers than to sinners of any other class.

2. See how he terrified them, and obliged them to retire (Joh 18:6): They went backward, and, like men thunder-struck, fell to the ground. It should seem, they did not fall forward, as humbling themselves before him, and yielding to him, but backward, as standing it out to the utmost. Thus Christ was declared to be more than a man, even when he was trampled upon as a worm, and no man. This word, I am he, had revived his disciples, and raised them up (Mat 14:27); but the same word strikes his enemies down. Hereby he showed plainly,

(1.) What he could have done with them. When he struck them down, he could have struck them dead; when he spoke them to the ground, he could have spoken them to hell, and have sent them, like Korah's company, the next way thither; but he would not do so, [1.] Because the hour of his suffering was come, and he would not put it by; he would only show that his life was not forced from him, but he laid it down of himself, as he had said. [2.] Because he would give an instance of his patience and forbearance with the worst of men, and his compassionate love to his very enemies. In striking them down, and no more, he gave them both a call to repent and space to repent; but their hearts were hardened, and all was in vain.

(2.) What he will do at last with all his implacable enemies, that will not repent to give him glory; they shall flee, they shall fall, before him. Now the scripture was accomplished (Psa 21:12), Thou shalt make them turn their back, and Psa 20:8. And it will be accomplished more and more; with the breath of his mouth he will slay the wicked, Th2 2:8; Rev 19:21. Quid judicaturus faciet, qui judicandus hoc facit? - What will he do when he shall come to judge, seeing he did this when he came to be judged? - Augustine.

IV. Having given his enemies a repulse, he gives his friends a protection, and that by his word too, Joh 18:7-9, where we may observe,

1. How he continued to expose himself to their rage, Joh 18:7. They did not lie long where they fell, but, by divine permission, got up again; it is only in the other world that God's judgments are everlasting. When they were down, one would have thought Christ should have made his escape; when they were up again, one would have thought they should have let fall their pursuit; but still we find, (1.) They are as eager as ever to seize him. It is in some confusion and disorder that they recover themselves; they cannot imagine what ailed them, that they could not keep their ground, but will impute it to any thing rather than Christ's power. Note, There are hearts so very hard in sin that nothing will work upon them to reduce and reclaim them. (2.) He is as willing as ever to be seized. When they were fallen before him, he did not insult over them, but seeing them at a loss, asked them the same question, Whom seek you? And they gave him the same answer, Jesus of Nazareth. In his repeating the question, he seems to come yet closer to their consciences: "Do you not know whom you seek? Are you not aware that you are in error, and will you meddle with your match? Have you not had enough of it, but will you try the other struggle? Did ever any harden his heart against God and prosper?" In their repeating the same answer, they showed an obstinacy in their wicked way; they still call him Jesus of Nazareth, with as much disdain as ever, and Judas is as unrelenting as any of them. Let us therefore fear lest, by a few bold steps at first in a sinful way, our hearts be hardened.

2. How he contrived to secure his disciples from their rage. He improved this advantage against them for the protection of his followers. When he shows his courage with reference to himself, I have told you that I am he, he shows his care for his disciples, Let these go their way. He speaks this as a command to them, rather than a contract with them; for they lay at his mercy, not he at theirs. He charges them therefore as one having authority: "Let these go their way; it is at your peril if you meddle with them" This aggravated the sin of the disciples in forsaking him, and particularly Peter's in denying him, that Christ had given them this pass, or warrant of protection, and yet they had not faith and courage enough to rely upon it, but betook themselves to such base and sorry shifts for their security. When Christ said, Let these go their way, he intended,

(1.) To manifest his affectionate concern for his disciples. When he exposed himself, he excused them, because they were not as yet fit to suffer; their faith was weak, and their spirits were low, and it would have been as much as their souls, and the lives of their souls, were worth, to bring them into sufferings now. New wine must not be put into old bottles. And, besides, they had other work to do; they must go their way, for they are to go into all the world, to preach the gospel. Destroy them not, for a blessing is in them. Now herein, [1.] Christ gives us a great encouragement to follow him; for, though he has allotted us sufferings, yet he considers our frame, will wisely time the cross, and proportion it to our strength, and will deliver the godly out of temptation, either from it, or through it. [2.] He gives us a good example of love to our brethren and concern for their welfare. We must not consult our own ease and safety only, but others, as well as our own, and in some cases more than our own. There is a generous and heroic love, which will enable us to lay down our lives for the brethren, Jo1 3:16.

(2.) He intended to give a specimen of his undertaking as Mediator. When he offered himself to suffer and die, it was that we might escape. He was our antipsuchos - a sufferer in our stead; when he said, Lo, I come, he said also, Let these go their way; like the ram offered instead of Isaac.

3. Now herein he confirmed the word which he had spoken a little before (Joh 17:12), Of those whom thou gavest me, I have lost none. Christ, by fulfilling that word in this particular, gave an assurance that it should be accomplished in the full extent of it, not only for those that were now with him, but for all that should believe on him through their word. Though Christ's keeping them was meant especially of the preservation of their souls from sin and apostasy, yet it is here applied to the preservation of their natural lives, and very fitly, for even the body was a part of Christ's charge and care; he is to raise it up at the last day, and therefore to preserve it as well as the spirit and soul, Th1 5:23; Ti2 4:17, Ti2 4:18. Christ will preserve the natural life for the service to which it is designed; it is given to him to be used for him, and he will not lose the service of it, but will be magnified in it, whether by life or death; it shall be held in life as long as any use is to be made of it. Christ's witnesses shall not die till they have given in their evidence. But this is not all; this preservation of the disciples was, in the tendency of it, a spiritual preservation. They were now so weak in faith and resolution that in all probability, if they had been called out to suffer at this time, they would have shamed themselves and their Master, and some of them, at least the weaker of them, would have been lost; and therefore, that he might lose none, he would not expose them. The safety and preservation of the saints are owing, not only to the divine grace in proportioning the strength to the trial, but to the divine providence in proportioning the trial to the strength.

V. Having provided for the safety of his disciples, he rebukes the rashness of one of them, and represses the violence of his followers, as he had repulsed the violence of his persecutors, Joh 18:10, Joh 18:11, where we have,

1. Peter's rashness. He had a sword; it is not likely that he wore one constantly as a gentleman, but they had two swords among them all (Luk 22:38), and Peter, being entrusted with one, drew it; for now, if ever, he thought it was his time to use it; and he smote one of the high priest's servants, who was probably one of the forwardest, and aiming, it is likely, to cleave him down the head, missed his blow, and only cut off his right ear. The servant's name, for the greater certainty of the narrative, is recorded; it was Malchus, or Malluch, Neh 10:4.

(1.) We must here acknowledge Peter's good-will; he had an honest zeal for his Master, though now misguided. He had lately promised to venture his life for him, and would now make his words good. Probably it exasperated Peter to see Judas at the head of this gang; his baseness excited Peter's boldness, and I wonder that when he did draw his sword he did not aim at the traitor's head.

(2.) Yet we must acknowledge Peter's ill conduct; and, though his good intention did excuse, yet it would not justify him. [1.] He had no warrant from his Master for what he did. Christ's soldiers must wait the word of command, and not outrun it; before they expose themselves to sufferings, they must see to it, not only that their cause be good, but their call clear. [2.] He transgressed the duty of his place, and resisted the powers that were, which Christ had never countenanced, but forbidden (Mat 5:39): that you resist not evil [3.] He opposed his Master's sufferings, and, notwithstanding the rebuke he had for it once, is ready to repeat, Master, spare thyself; suffering be far from thee; though Christ had told him that he must and would suffer, and that his hour was now come. Thus, while he seemed to fight for Christ, he fought against him. [4.] He broke the capitulation his Master had lately made with the enemy. When he said, Let these go their way, he not only indented for their safety, but in effect passed his word for their good behaviour, that they should go away peaceably; this Peter heard, and yet would not be bound by it. As we may be guilty of a sinful cowardice when we are called to appear, so we may be of a sinful forwardness when we are called to retire. [5.] He foolishly exposed himself and his fellow disciples to the fury of this enraged multitude. If he had cut off Malchus's head when he cut off his ear, we may suppose the soldiers would have fallen upon all the disciples, and have hewn them to pieces, and would have represented Christ as not better than Barabbas. Thus many have been guilty of self-destruction, in their zeal for self-preservation. [6.] Peter played the coward so soon after this (denying his Master) that we have reason to think he would not have done this but that he saw his Master cause them to fall on the ground, and then he could deal with them; but, when he saw him surrender himself notwithstanding, his courage failed him; whereas the true Christian hero will appear in the cause of Christ, not only when it is prevailing, but when it seems to be declining; will be on the right side, though it be not the rising side.

(3.) We must acknowledge God's over-ruling providence in directing the stroke (so that it should do no more execution, but only cut off his ear, which was rather marking him than maiming him), as also in giving Christ an opportunity to manifest his power and goodness in healing the hurt, Luk 22:51. Thus what was in danger of turning to Christ's reproach proved an occasion of that which redounded much to his honour, even among his adversaries.

2. The rebuke his Master gave him (Joh 18:11): Put up thy sword into the sheath, or scabbard; it is a gentle reproof, because it was his zeal that carried him beyond the bounds of discretion. Christ did not aggravate the matter, only bade him do so no more. Many think their being in grief and distress will excuse them if they be hot and hasty with those about them; but Christ has here set us an example of meekness in sufferings. Peter must put up his sword, for it was the sword of the Spirit that was to be committed to him - weapons of warfare not carnal, yet mighty. When Christ with a word felled the aggressors, he showed Peter how he should be armed with a word, quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and with that, not long after this, he laid Ananias and Sapphira dead at his feet.

3. The reason for this rebuke: The cup which my Father has given me, shall I not drink it? Matthew relates another reason which Christ gave for this rebuke, but John preserves this, which he had omitted; in which Christ gives us, (1.) A full proof of his own submission to his Father's will. Of all that was amiss in what Peter did, he seems to resent nothing so much as that he would have hindered his sufferings now that his hour was come: "What, Peter, wilt thou step in between the cup and the lip? Get thee hence, Satan." If Christ be determined to suffer and die, it is presumption for Peter in word or deed to oppose it: Shall I not drink it? The manner of expression bespeaks a settled resolution, and that he would not entertain a thought to the contrary. He was willing to drink of this cup, though it was a bitter cup, an infusion of the wormwood and the gall, the cup of trembling, a bloody cup, the dregs of the cup of the Lord's wrath, Isa 51:22. He drank it, that he might put into our hands the cup of salvation, the cup of consolation, the cup of blessing; and therefore he is willing to drink it, because his Father put it into his hand. If his Father will have it so, it is for the best, and be it so. (2.) A fair pattern to us of submission to God's will in every thing that concerns us. We must pledge Christ in the cup that he drank of (Mat 20:23), and must argue ourselves into a compliance. [1.] It is but a cup; a small matter comparatively, be it what it will. It is not a sea, a red sea, a dead sea, for it is not hell; it is light, and but for a moment. [2.] It is a cup that is given us; sufferings are gifts. [3.] It is given us by a Father, who has a Father's authority, and does us no wrong; a Father's affection, and means us no hurt.

VI. Having entirely reconciled himself to the dispensation, he calmly surrendered, and yielded himself a prisoner, not because he could not have made his escape, but because he would not. One would have thought the cure of Malchus's ear should have made them relent, but nothing would win upon them. Maledictus furor, quem nec majestast miraculi nec pietas beneficii confringere potuit - Accursed rage, which the grandeur of the miracle could not appease, nor the tenderness of the favour conciliate. - Anselm. Observe here,

1. How they seized him: They took Jesus. Only some few of them could lay hands on him, but it is charged upon them all, for they were all aiding and abetting. In treason there are not accessories; all are principals. Now the scripture was fulfilled, Bulls have compassed me (Psa 22:12), compassed me like bees, Psa 118:12. The breath of our nostrils is taken in their pit, Lam 4:20. They had so often been frustrated in their attempts to seize him that now, having got him into their hands, we may suppose they flew upon him with so much the more violence.

2. How they secured him: They bound him. This particular of his sufferings is taken notice of only by this evangelist, that, as soon as ever he was taken, he was bound, pinioned, handcuffed; tradition says, "They bound him with such cruelty that the blood started out at his fingers' ends; and, having bound his hands behind him, they clapped an iron chain about his neck, and with that dragged him along." See Gerhard. Harm. cap. 5.

(1.) This shows the spite of his persecutors. They bound him, [1.] That they might torment him, and put him in pain, as they bound Samson to afflict him. [2.] That they might disgrace him, and put him to shame; slaves were bound, so was Christ, though free-born. [3.] That they might prevent his escape, Judas having told them to hold him fast. See their folly, that they should think to fetter that power which had but just now proved itself omnipotent. [4.] They bound him as one already condemned, for they were resolved to prosecute him to the death, and that he should die as a fool dieth, that is, as a malefactor, with his hands bound, Sa2 3:33, Sa2 3:34. Christ had bound the c

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

(1) THE BETRAYAL AND APPREHENSION (Joh_18:1-11).

(2) THE TRIALS BEFORE THE JEWISH AUTHORITIES (Joh_18:12-27);

(a) Before Annas (Joh_18:12-23);

(b) Before Caiaphas (Joh_18:24).

(c) Denied by St. Peter (Joh_18:17; Joh_18:25; Joh_18:27).

(3) THE TRIALS BEFORE THE ROMAN PRO CONSUL (Joh_18:28 to Joh_19:16);

(a) The first examination. The kingdom of truth (Joh_18:28-40);

(b) The second examination. The scourging and mock royalty (Joh_19:1-6);

(c) The third examination. The power from above (Joh_18:7-11);

(d) The public trial and committal (Joh_18:12-16).

(4) JESUS SUBMITS TO DEATH (Joh_19:17-42);

(a) The Crucifixion (Joh_18:17-24);

(b) The sayings on the Cross (Joh_18:25-30);

(c) The proof of physical death (Joh_18:31-37);

(d) The body in the Sepulchre (Joh_18:38-40).]

In this chapter we again come upon ground which is common to St. John and the earlier Gospels. Each of the Evangelists has given us a narrative of the trial and death of our Lord. The narrative of each naturally differs by greater or less fulness, or as each regarded the events from his own point of view, from that of all the others. It is only with that which is special to St. John that the notes on his narrative have to deal. The general facts and questions arising from them have already been treated in the notes on the parallel passages.

(1) He went forth with his disciples—i.e., He went forth from the city. (Comp. Joh_14:31.)

The brook Cedron.—The Greek words mean exactly “the winter torrent Kedron,” and occur again in the LXX. of 2Sa_15:23, and 2Ki_15:13. The name is formed from a Hebrew word which means “black.” The torrent was the “Niger” of Judæa, and was so called from the colour of its turbid waters, or from the darkness of the chasm through which they flowed. The name seems to have been properly applied not so much to the torrent itself as to the ravine through which it flowed, on the east of Jerusalem, between the city and the Mount of Olives. Its sides are for the most part precipitous, but here and there paths cross it, and at the bottom are cultivated strips of land. Its depth varies, but in some places it is not less than 100 feet. (Comp. article, “Kidron,” in Kitto’s Biblical Cyclopœdia, vol. ii., p. 731; and for the reading see Excursus B: Some Variations in the Text of St. John’s Gospel.)

Where was a garden.—Comp. Mat_26:36. St. John does not record the passion of Gethsemane, but this verse indicates its place in the narrative. (Comp. Note on Joh_12:27.)

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh_18:1

Then Pilate, therefore, took Jesus and scourged Him.

--

Pilates second attempt to rescue Christ

I. A SHAMEFUL INFLICTION on Jesus. Scourging and mockery (Joh_19:1-3).

1. The character of it.

(1) Severe.

(2) Insulting.

(3) Illegal--because Christ had been pronounced innocent.

2. The object of it

(1) As preliminary to execution.

(2) As a method of examination. Pilate may have hoped that this would elicit from Christ something which would either secure His release or justify His crucifixion.

(3) As a means of appeasing the Jews.

II. AN EARNEST APPEAL (Joh_19:4-5) to the Jews. Setting Christ before them, clothed in purple, crowned with thorns, a mocking king of woe, he appeals to

1. Their sense of justice.

2. Their feelings of compassion--Behold the Man!--have you no pity?

3. Their perception of truth. Was it reasonable that that meek Prisoner should be a rival to Caesar?

III. A HOPEFUL DECISION by Pilate (Joh_19:6).

1. The fierce demand Crucify Him! A week ago they cried Hosannah.

2. The firm reply Take ye Him. Pilate again refuses to incarnadine his hands. Only, Pilate, having put thy foot down, pray heaven for strength to keep it fast.

3. The forceful reason I find no crime in Him. If those blood-thirsty ruffians will have Him crucified they must do it themselves.

Learn

1. The certainty that Christs words will be fulfilled. Six months before He had predicted this (Mat_20:19).

2. The depth of humiliation to which Christ stooped for men.

3. The difficulty felt by even wicked men in doing crimes. Conscience makes a man a coward … fills one full of obstacles … beggars any [wicked] man that keeps it (Richard III. Act_1:1-26. scene 4).

4. The moral insensibility which men professing religion may at times exhibit. (T. Whitelaw, D. D.)

A wonderful picture

Like every great historical picture, this one contains special points for special attention. It contains three lifelike portraits.

I. THAT OF OUR LORD HIMSELF. We see the Saviour scourged, crowned with thorns, &c. Yet this was He whom angels delighted to honour, and who spent His time in going about doing good. Surely the sun never shone on a more wondrous sight.

1. Let us admire that love of Christ which passeth knowledge. There is no earthly love with which it can be compared, and no standard by which to measure it.

2. Never let us forget, when we ponder this tale of suffering, that Jesus suffered for our sins, and that with His stripes we are healed.

3. Let us diligently follow the example of His patience in all the trials and afflictions of life, and especially in those which may be brought upon us by religion. When He was reviled, He reviled not again.

II. THAT OF THE UNBELIEVING JEWS. We see them for three or four long hours obstinately rejecting Pilates offer to release our Lord--fiercely demanding His crucifixion--declaring that they had no king but Caesar--and finally accumulating on their own heads the greater part of the guilt of His murder. Yet these were the children of Israel and the seed of Abraham, to whom pertained the promises, &c. These were men who professed to look for a Prophet like unto Moses, and a Son of David, who was to set up a kingdom as Messiah. Never, surely, was there such an exhibition of the depth of human wickedness. Let us mark the danger of long-continued rejection of light and knowledge. There is such a thing as judicial blindness; and it is the last and sorest judgment which God can send upon men. He who, like Pharaoh and Ahab, is often reproved but refuses to receive reproof, will finally have a heart harder than the nether millstone, and a conscience past feeling, and seared as with a hot iron (Pro_1:24-26; 2Th_2:11).

III. THAT OF PONTIUS PILATE. We see the Roman governor--a man of rank and high position--halting between two opinions in a case as clear as the sun at noon-day, sanctioning from sheer cowardice an enormous crime--and finally countenancing, from love of mans good opinion, the murder of an innocent person. Never perhaps did human nature make such a contemptible exhibition. Never was there a name so justly handed down to a worlds scorn as the name which is embalmed in all our creeds.

1. Let us learn what miserable creatures great men are, when they have no high principles within them, and no faith in the reality of a God above them. The meanest labourer who fears God is a nobler being than the king, ruler, or statesman, whose first aim is to please the people.

2. Let us pray that our own country may never be without men in high places who have grace to think right, and courage to act up to their knowledge, without truckling to the opinion of men. (Bp. Ryle.)

A threefold type of sinners

I. THOSE WHO SIN AGAINST CONVICTION. To this class Pilate belonged. To do this is

1. Hard work. How difficult did Pilate find it!

2. Fiendish work. Satan and his legions do it.

II. THOSE WHO SIN FROM CONVICTION. Such were the chief priests and officers, &c. Innumerable heathen, heretics, persecutors believe they are doing right whilst they are perpetrating the greatest enormities. There are no crimes blacker than those enacted from religious convictions.

III. THOSE WHO SIN WITHOUT CONVICTION--the soldiers and the thoughtless rabble. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

Pilate taking Jesus

1. The surrender of innocence.

2. The triumph of malice.

3. The abuse of authority. (S. S. Times.)

Took Jesus

1. From whose custody?

2. For what purpose?

3. On what grounds?

4. With what results? (S. S. Times.)

Jesus delivered to be crucified

Shows

I. THE PERPLEXITY AND SHAME LIKELY TO BE EXPERIENCED BY ONE WHO ACTS FROM SELFISH EXPEDIENCY INSTEAD OF HIS CONVICTIONS OF RIGHT. Poor mockery of a ruler! Set by the Eternal to do right upon earth, and afraid to do it; told so by his own bosom; strong enough in his legions and in the truth itself to have saved the Innocent One and kept his own soul, he could only think of the apparently expedient! Type of the politician in all ages, who forgets that only the right is the strong or the wise.

II. THE POWER OF POPULAR CLAMOUR, AND THE NECESSITY AT TIMES OF RESISTING IT. Very impressive is the voice of a multitude. Its applause is intoxicating, its condemnation dreadful, its strenuous demand most difficult to deny. When this voice represents the ripe moral sentiment of an intelligent people, or when it is the swift, honest judgment of that people in regard to wrong, then Vox populi est vox Dei. But the clamour by which Pilate was swayed was a different thing. It was the voice of a mob inflamed by passion, worked upon by wicked and crafty leaders--the voice of Satan. Whenever a crowd is foolish or mad, has a cumulative force, and reaches a colossal magnitude. Hence the horrors of the French revolution, and the toleration and support given now and then by the people of a nation to great wrongs. In such cases public opinion is not to be heeded. Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil. It is well then to stand up like Luther at Worms and say, To act against conscience is unsafe and unholy. Here stand I, God help me. Amen. This was the spirit of the apostles, martyrs, and reformers.

III. THAT CHRISTS CLAIM TO KINGSHIP, WHICH EXCITED SUCH RIDICULE, WAS A TRUE AND VALID CLAIM. Some of the most precious doctrines were first uttered in derision. The grace of Christ to sinners was the subject of a sneer--He receiveth sinners, &c. The necessity which constrained Him to die for the salvation of man was set forth in the jeer, He saved others, Himself He cannot save. Here before Pilate His claim of Kingship was made the occasion of brutal merriment. But Jesus was indeed a King! As such He came attended by a retinue of angels, and inquired for by the wise men. Through all the centuries since His kingly dignity has been owned. When the Crusaders proposed to crown Geoffrey of Bouillon king of Jerusalem, Geoffrey said, I will not wear a crown of gold in the city where my Saviour had a crown of thorns! He is

1. A beneficent King. He rules in the interests of His subjects. Woe to the conquered was the old cry. But Christs conquests bring good to the conquered. The more perfect their submission, the more perfect their felicity.

2. A perpetual King. His throne is established for ever. Conceive of Caesar, said Napoleon, the eternal emperor watching over the destinies of Rome. Such is the power of Christ.

3. His kingdom is constantly advancing. Because the tide ebbs, no intelligent man, viewing the naked sand, would say, The sea is losing its dominion. He would answer, Wait awhile, confident that it would reoccupy its lost ground. So with Christianity. In Damascus there is a mosque which was once a Church. Over its portal the Christian inscription still stands--Thy kingdom, O Christ, is an everlasting kingdom, and Thy dominion endureth through all generations. For twelve centuries that writing has been contradicted, seemingly, and probably the Moslem has suffered it to remain to convict Christianity of a vain boast. But that inscription may be regarded as a solemn prophecy that the Moslem sway is but temporary, and that the faith which has been driven from its sanctuary will return. Even now the signs of its return appear.

IV. THE SPIRITUAL CHARACTER OF CHRISTS KINGDOM. He explicitly said to Pilate, My kingdom is not of this world, &c. But He did not leave His cause impotent and defenceless. There are other forces besides armed battalions. The Word of God, the Spirit of truth, the religious faculties on which they act, faith, hope, love, duty, sacrifice, and prayer; by means of these Christ sent forth His apostles to conquer the world. Christs patience, self-restraint, and forgiving Spirit were potent even at His trial and crucifixion. They invested Him with that majesty which could not be obscured by indignities, which awed the scoffing Pilate into respect, and moved him to an unwonted desire to do justly; which brought the thief on the cross to repentance, and led the centurion to exclaim, Truly, this was the Son of God. And in proportion as the followers of Christ have trusted these forces, they have been successful. Alliance with secular power, or reliance on physical force, has proved disastrous. (Sermons by the Monday Club.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 18:1-3. When Jesus had spoken these words — Had delivered the discourse recorded above, and concluded his intercessory prayer; he went with his disciples over the brook Cedron — On the other side of which was a garden, known by the name of the garden of Gethsemane; (see notes on Mat 26:36;) and probably belonging to one of his friends. He might retire to this private place, not only for the advantage of secret devotion, but also that the people might not be alarmed at his apprehension, nor attempt, in the first sallies of their zeal, to rescue him in a tumultuous manner. Cedron, or Kedron, was (as the name signifies) a dark, shady valley, on the east side of Jerusalem, between the city and the mount of Olives, through which a little brook ran, which took its name from it. It was this brook which David, a type of Christ, went over with his people, weeping, in his flight from Absalom. Judas, which betrayed him, knew the place: for Jesus oft-times resorted thither, &c. — Namely, for the sake of retirement and devotion. Judas, having received a band of men — Greek, την σπειραν, a cohort of Roman foot-soldiers, as the word signifies, and the title of its commander (χιλιαρχος, a chiliarch, answering to our colonel) implies; and officers — Some Jewish officers, sent for that purpose; from the chief priests and other Pharisees — Belonging to the sanhedrim, who were chiefly concerned in this affair; cometh thither with lanterns and torches, &c. — Which they brought with them, though it was now full moon, to discover him if he should endeavour to hide himself; and weapons — To use if they should meet with any opposition, which they foolishly imagined they might.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

§ 132-3.—THE AGONY IN GETHSEMANE, vv. AND THE BETRAYAL, Joh_18:1-12.

1. He went forth—That is, as we understand it, from the supper-room on the eastern part of Mount Zion. As no other going forth is unequivocally indicated from the beginning of chapter xiii to this present clause, we are obliged to conclude that the discourse, stretching probably into midnight, was entirely uttered in the same room. The route now taken by Jesus to Gethsemane the reader will find described in our note on Mat_26:36.

The brook Cedron—The brook Cedron, Kedron, or Kidron, (the name being derived from a Hebrew word signifying turbid,) is a winter or rain torrent, formed by the waters occasionally running from the sides of Olivet and Moriah, into what is now called the Valley of Jehoshaphat. The ravine or valley takes its origin above a mile to the northwest of the city, and, deepening as it proceeds, makes an angular turn opposite the temple. Thence southeastwardly, it passes between Siloam and the city, and thence goes toward the Dead Sea through a deep and singularly wild gorge. During the summer season, in the absence of rains, the channel is perfectly dry, so that in reality its occasional turbid stream formed a sort of gutter for the eastern margin of the city. By a bridge over the ravine the traveller still passes from St. Stephen’s gate to Gethsemane.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

EXPLANATORY AND CRITICAL NOTES

Joh_18:1. Went forth.—From the part of the suburbs where the discourse from Joh_14:31 had been spoken, and the intercessory prayer offered. The brook Cedron (τοῦ Κεδρών, Kidron, Heb. קִדְרוֹן, the dark stream: 2Sa_15:23, etc.).—It was a winter torrent, χείμαῤῥος. The wady is dry after the winter and spring rains. It separates Jerusalem on the East from the Mount of Olives and Scopus, flows South-East by Mar-Saba, and enters the Dead Sea. A garden (see Mat_26:36, etc.).—Josephus mentions that such gardens were numerous in his time near Jerusalem. There is no reason for doubting that the site now pointed out as corresponding with Gethsemane is at or near it. The present enclosure has been held sacred since Constantine’s time. It was called (Heb.) נַּת־שְׁמָנֵי (Gath-Shimanai) = an oil-press. It was an olive garden. In the garden of delights (Eden) the first Adam, through listening to the foe of God and man, and through disobedience to the divine will, brought misery on himself and all men. In Gethsemane the Second Adam, by His willing obedience to His Father, became perfected through sufferings, and conquered the subtle foe.

Joh_18:3. A band of soldiers and officers.—The band (τὴν σπεῖραν)—i.e. part of the Roman garrison. Probably it was a detachment, but under one of the chief officers of the legion. The officers (ὑπηρέται), members of the Jewish temple guard. Jews and Gentiles alike were gathered against the Lord and His Christ. But how impotent their endeavours to hinder the eternal purpose (Mat_26:53; Act_4:26-28)!

Joh_18:4. Knowing, etc.—Conscious of the purpose and end of His mission, which was even in these untoward events being accomplished. Whom seek ye?—Probably the officers did not recognise Jesus in the uncertain light; or both they and the soldiers were not sufficiently acquainted with His appearance to be certain. It was now most likely that Judas gave the preconcerted signal and betrayed His Master with a kiss (Mar_14:45).

Joh_18:9. That the saying, etc. (Joh_17:12).—This was one of many ways in which the prayer of our Lord was to be fulfilled in the experience of the disciples. The Lord guards His people in their temporal as in their spiritual life.

Joh_18:10. Then Simon Peter, etc.—Here we have a touch of the eye-witness. Not only does St. John know that it was Peter who thus rashly but boldly used his sword—one against many—to defend his Master, but also who was the temporary victim of his onslaught. The Synoptists, in regard to this part of the narrative, show their independence as historians. They seem to place the binding of Jesus before Peter’s onslaught. But there is no contradiction. It would be the laying hold of, and beginning to bind Jesus that excited Peter to draw his sword. This onslaught deterred the civilian “soldiers”; and then the band and the high officer, who accompanied the soldiers, completed the operation.

Joh_18:13. To Annas first.—Although not the actual high priest, he had great power with the priestly party and Sanhedrin. He probably occupied part of the high priest’s palace with his son-in-law Caiaphas, or at least a contiguous dwelling. John here mentions a preliminary investigation which took place apparently before both Annas and Caiaphas in the palace of the latter. This is not the trial before the Sanhedrin recorded by the Synoptists. The preliminary examination could effect nothing definite, but it might have led, Annas and Caiaphas to endeavour to formulate some definite accusation against Jesus before the Sanhedrin; for as yet they had nothing to lay to His charge. Moreover it seems from the high priest’s question in Joh_18:19, about Christ’s disciples, that they were endeavouring to find out how many of the chief rulers, etc. (Joh_12:42), believed in Jesus. In this they were disappointed by His silence on that point.

Joh_18:15. Another disciple.—St. John (see Joh_20:2; Mat_26:58). Known unto the high priest, etc.—What this connection was is not recorded. This is one of those incidental notes which show how John was perhaps best fitted to record the Judæan ministry of our Lord. The name John occurs among the names of the kindred of Annas, who in Act_4:6 is called high priest. But this proves little. It is thought by some that John’s brother James is referred to. John calls himself “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Joh_13:23; Joh_19:26). But John’s proximity to the Lord all through the scene of the Crucifixion seems to indicate him as the disciple spoken of here. The other disciple (i.e. the well-known disciple) is another reading. Palace.—Courtyard: αὐλή, a paved enclosure, open to the sky. This explains why

Joh_18:18. A fire of coals was needed. The air of the spring nights at the altitude of Jerusalem is cold. ἀνθρακιάν, a charcoal fire, glowing in a brazier, such as is in use in Palestine at the present day. Peter evidently wished to pass as an unconcerned spectator among the soldiers and servants, and was even thus also denying his Lord.

Joh_18:20. I spake openly in the world, etc.—He was the Truth, and did not need to hide His thoughts. Nor did He speak to a select few—a school. He was no mere Rabbi; He came to declare those spiritual and moral truths which bring blessedness to men. Sometimes He had to speak in parables (Joh_13:10); but those who were of the truth would understand them. His teaching was ever before men.

Joh_18:21. Why askest? etc.—The Lord claims a just hearing before a just tribunal.

Joh_18:22. One of the officers, etc.—Was he one of those sent to entrap Jesus in his words (Joh_7:32; Joh_7:46)? And was he thus seeking to regain favour which had been lost (Joh_7:47)? If so, the greater his sin. These very “officers” should have testified in Christ’s favour. It shows that a remnant of conscience was left them when they would not testify against Him, so that the judges had to suborn false witnesses.

Joh_18:24. Now Annas had sent, etc.—Rather Therefore Annas sent. This semi-official interrogation had taken place before both Annas and Caiaphas. But they evidently now agreed to lay the case before the council (Sanhedrin); therefore Jesus was officially delivered to Caiaphas to be brought before the Sanhedrin, the trial before which is that narrated by the Synoptists. The verb ἀπέστειλεν is an aorist, and should not be translated as a perfect.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Joh_18:1-27

Joh_18:1-2. Gethsemane.—When Jesus was in Jerusalem there was a spot retired from the city (yet not far from its walls) where He could retire for prayer and meditation, undisturbed by the city crowd. The owner of the place was probably friendly to our Lord and the disciples, so that they would have entry at all times. The spot called the Garden of Gethsemane, situated on the slope of Olivet, not far from the Kidron Wady, is a sacred place now to all Christian travellers. Under the ancient olive trees the reverent pilgrim can think over the sacred memories that haunt the spot, and recall the events which transpired at, or near, the place which is named Gethsemane to-day.

I. The reasons why John does not mention the conflict of Jesus in Gethsemane.—It seems strange that John should not mention the bitter anguish of our Lord as He prayed that the cup might pass from Him. Not that he knew not of it, for in Joh_18:11 the words of Jesus imply it; not that he did not feel in his heart the awfulness of that struggle.

2. He may have shrunk from writing about this mysterious agony, but yet he writes of the humiliation of the cross.

3. The most likely cause is that men already knew from the other Evangelists the history of that agony. And John’s purpose in his Gospel, guided by the Spirit, was to show how the eternal divine Logos manifested forth His glory. He therefore omitted the scenes already recorded by his fellow-Evangelists, and put down that which they had omitted (Joh_18:6), showing his Lord calmly triumphant over all foes—ready to meet the “prince of this world” and wrestle with him, even to the death of the cross, for the redemption of humanity.

II. Gethsemane was a place consecrated to prayer and holy meditation.—

1. “Jesus oftentimes resorted thither with His disciples.” Here, after the heat and turmoil of the city during the day, in the quiet eventide a restful solitude might be found, in which the body would be refreshed, and the mind strengthened and tranquillised, for future thought and labour.

2. There in peaceful intercourse with the Father He passed the moments, and in training His disciples for their future work. And many a similar hour did the disciples remember. But on this occasion there was something different. As they entered the moonbeam-flecked shade the presentiment of something awful impending, coupled with the words of Jesus about His going away, fell on their minds and hearts. And, as is the case with sorrow often, they fell asleep. Yet not so unbrokenly as not to hear snatches of that bitter cry, “If it be possible—if Thou be willing, let this cup pass from Me.”

3. But now this was past. The Saviour came to them calm and resolved, arousing them with the announcement that “the betrayer was at hand.”

III. The place of prayer becomes a place of conflict with evil.—

1. It is so even with the house of God on earth. Into our holiest hours come our heaviest temptations. When the thoughts are nearest God the efforts of the adversary will be redoubled.

2. So it was with Jesus in this hour in Gethsemane. It was the place chosen for the final trial of strength between the Second Adam and our cruel foe. In Eden the serpent had easily prevailed through his lies; but in Gethsemane he meets the Second Adam—the promised seed of the woman, who “strives and shall prevail.” Fearful was the contest, as the sweat like great drops of blood fell to the ground. But in the Second Adam “the prince of darkness found nothing,” and returned baffled from the fray, to send his evil tools to accomplish his work on the body of Jesus—not knowing clearly that the end would be the bruising of his head, his utter overthrow.

3. It was also a place of conflict for the disciples. But, unheeding the Saviour’s warning to “watch and pray,” they slept, and were confused and amazed when the traitor came to betray the Lord “with a kiss” to the band he had brought with him. But though Satan had desired to have one of them—nay, all—to sift them as wheat, yet Christ had prayed for them and Satan would not prevail.

IV. The place of prayer is near to heaven.—

1. To Jesus in His agony “an angel appeared strengthening Him” (Luk_22:43). This too must have reminded the disciples of the nearness of God to His people, and that nothing could happen without His divine and loving purpose being fulfilled.

2. This strengthened Jesus in His conflict; and this is reflected in His calm majestic mien as, in the history of St. John, we see Him coming forth to meet the traitor and his bands. The victory was won. “Jesus knowing all things,” etc. (Joh_18:4).

3. The forces of light and darkness are here once again arrayed. The prince of this world has retired baffled; now his chief instrument in this business of the pit, Judas, stealthily creeps in with his instruments, and Jesus is speedily led off to conquer for men through His deepest humiliation.

Lessons.—

1. The need of a place of prayer and meditation apart from the bustle and hurry of life. Especially is this needed in these days of rush and hurry in our modern world, where too much is done without thought, and men thus are laid open to and rush into temptation.

2. Remember that the place of prayer will most likely become the place of spiritual conflict, so that we should give heed to the Lord’s words to watch as well as pray.

3. But the place of prayer is also near to heaven. Heaven is near to it. It is the house of God, the gate of heaven (Gen_28:17). And there God will strengthen to do and bear for Him.

Joh_18:3-12. Jesus in the hands of His enemies.—The Saviour’s agony in Gethsemane was past, and He was now ready to drink the cup which the Father had given into His hand. The traitor and the bands of soldiers and others who were guided by him drew near. His care even in this hour of betrayal was for His disciples; and whilst He freely delivered up Himself to His enemies, He mercifully and lovingly said to His captors, of His disciples, “If therefore ye seek Me, let these go their way.” And in this we see a beautiful example of the Redeemer’s self-sacrificing love. Notice here—

I. The power of Jesus in face of His enemies.—

1. The angel that appeared to strengthen Jesus (Luk_22:43) in His agony had scarce gone when Satan drew near to carry out his final assault on the Saviour (Joh_18:3). Why such a crowd of officials was supposed to be necessary does not appear. They may have remembered the power of Jesus in healing, stilling the storm, etc.; or they might think that the eleven apostles would make a desperate resistance. If Jesus gave Himself up willingly one messenger would have sufficed. If He did not intend to do so, the armies of the world would not have been enough (Mat_26:53).

2. An evil conscience, the sense of their wrong-doing—for as officers of the chief priests and Pharisees they should have been protectors of the defenceless and innocent—led to the necessity of such a band. Judas especially would, in his dark heart, feel that he had need of all the protection which could be afforded. And thus the forces of light and darkness stood opposed to each other (Joh_1:5).

3. Jesus was aware of the presence of these myrmidons of the prince of this world ere they appeared (Mat_26:45-46), and had warned the disciples. And now He stepped in front and asked, “Whom seek ye?”—not that He needed to know, but that He might bring to their minds a clear consciousness of what they were about to do, and draw their attention mainly to Himself.

4. “Jesus of Nazareth,” is their reply. They do not say “Thee.” Either they did not know Him, or saw imperfectly in the dim light, and did not recognise Him; and Judas had not yet given his preconcerted sign. Perhaps now the traitor did so, and this, and Jesus’ reply, “I am He,” removed all doubt.

5. The result was unexpected. Some sudden flash of that glory which the disciples witnessed “on the holy mount” (2Pe_1:17-18) radiated from Christ’s person; and the band of men and officers went backward, startled as if by an apparition, “and fell to the ground” (Act_9:3-9). There was a divine purpose in this. It would bring home to those conscience-stricken men the fact that it was with Heaven they were warring; and it would show to them, to the disciples, and all men that the Redeemer voluntarily surrendered Himself into their power. They were compelled to do involuntarily what millions of believers will do voluntarily (Php_2:10), and to take the position His enemies at the last must assume (Act_2:33-36).

II. The Lord’s care for His disciples.—

1. Our Lord showed He had power which His enemies must acknowledge. But after the flashing out of His divine majesty, He showed that He did not intend to resist their will. Beside Him, however, stood His disciples, and them He would protect.

2. Since, however, Jesus had declined to use His heavenly power to protect Himself, He would not use it, at least through physical means, to save the disciples. “Let these go,” He said to the leaders of the band. He knew that He alone was their quarry; but in order to secure His disciples from attacks, which might be caused by any foolish movement on their part, He issued this order. And it was needful (Joh_18:10). And doubtless, too, the power which they had felt resided in the Saviour would keep these men in mind of this limitation of their duty.

3. There were reasons also why the disciples should go unharmed. They could not, were not prepared to, follow Him through suffering to death, until He had suffered for them and redeemed them. They were not strong to follow Him, nor would be, until the Spirit quickened them to a higher life. Then they would be prepared for the divine purpose for which they were kept in the world (Joh_17:15), to proclaim His gospel to the glory of God the Father and His own glory. But now He alone must drink the bitter cup.

4. Afterward they would be strengthened, some of them to follow Him in yielding up their lives for His kingdom. Now His word of promise in His intercessory prayer must receive in part its fulfilment (Joh_17:12); and that other word would also come home to the hearts of the disciples in these hours of perplexity and sorrow, “I lay down My life for the sheep” (Joh_10:15).

5. Thus in the hour when “the prince of this world” had come to the Saviour, and the powers of darkness were mustering about the Son of man, “He stood unmoved by all their machinations, elevated above the passions of men, caring for His own, and giving blessings to those who would receive them.”

III. Peter’s rash act, and our Lord’s disavowal of material force.—I. It would have been strange had Jesus’ disciples, now that the hour so long foretold had come, stood by unmoved during this scene. Not long awakened from slumber, they would be surprised and confused for the moment. But as the shock passed they would anxiously ask in their hearts what could be done.

2. In the upper chamber our Lord had counselled the disciples to provide themselves with “swords,” even to sell their garments to buy them. And on Peter stating they had two, Jesus said, “It is enough” (Luk_22:38). Did He mean the disciples to defend Him and themselves? Yes; but not against a lawful authority like that presented by the captain of the band. Probably the swords were for the purpose of defending themselves against the robbers and lawless men who swarmed about the city and its environs at the passovertide.

3. But now in the garden they asked Jesus if they should use their weapons (Luk_22:49). And, without waiting for a reply apparently, head-strong Peter smote wildly, and cut off the right ear of the high priest’s servant.

4. It was a foolish act, contrary to the will of the Redeemer, to which Peter had not yet become wholly submissive. The disciple had not yet fully realised that Christ must suffer, etc. It was an action also that might have led to reprisals had not Jesus displayed His power and healed the stricken man. Thus the wrath of the band would be arrested (Luk_22:51).

5. Then He taught the apostle by a word that not by the sword—by physical force—should His kingdom be extended, that all that was happening was in the line of a divine purpose (Mat_26:54), and that this bitter experience was also a draught of that cup the Father had given Him to drink (Joh_18:11). Then Jesus was delivered to His enemies.

Lessons.—

1. “Whom seek ye?” said Jesus to the myrmidons who came to take Him. The question is repeated in every age to every individual. Men are seeking many things, but under all is the desire for satisfaction and peace. And to all such seekers Christ answers, “I am He.” He is the living water, the bread of life, etc. The men sent to take Him answered, “Jesus of Nazareth.” That name is “The name of our salvation.” Let us seek Him, not as they sought, and we shall find Him and in Him our all and in all.

2. “Let these go their way.” Christ’s care of His disciples is ever the same. If they seek His kingdom and righteousness, no hair of their head shall fall. Christ came to deliver men from the hatred of the prince of this world by conquering him on the cross. And now, when Satan still threatens to bring them into bondage, He can say with power for those who are His own, “Let these men go”; sin shall have no more dominion.

3. Christ’s kingdom is not advanced by the sword. How often have men forgotten this! How has the Church defaced her annals by seeking to suppress by force, as the Jews in our Lord’s day, what seemed contrary to her! The spiritual kingdom can only be propagated spiritually. Nor are men in the name of Christ’s religion to resist duly constituted authority with the sword (1Pe_2:12-14). Only against lawlessness and cruel injustice may Christ’s people defend themselves.

Joh_18:10-11. “The sword in the garden.”—

I. The circumstances which led to its use.—It is interesting to group together from the different Evangelists all that is told about this sword. Before they left the supper-room things which the Lord was saying as to the approaching crisis were misunderstood by the disciples, or at least by some of them. Strange to say, He was thinking and speaking more of what awaited them than of His own fate. He was telling them that in future they would have to face a hostile world in their apostolic work. It would not be as in the happy, peaceful disciple days. He had sent them forth in those days unarmed, peaceful missionaries, and they were kindly welcomed everywhere, and felt not the need of sword or scrip. But now, said the Master, speaking to them metaphorically and proverbially, “He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.” It was very natural that the disciples—that Peter, of all men, most—should think of some approaching personal struggle (nor was Peter so very far wrong), in which his beloved Lord would be in peril and need defence. And the strong and bold Galilean fisherman looked round him instinctively for a weapon. In a corner of the chamber stood, or there were hung from the wall, a pair of swords, just as might have been seen in any house in our country two hundred years ago (just, as now, might be seen in our houses umbrellas or walking-sticks). There were only the two swords. Peter girt himself with one, some other hand seized the other weapon; and when there was regret expressed by some of the disciples that there were but the two, one can imagine the smile of sad gravity with which the Lord, intimating that they had mistaken His meaning, said that the two swords were quite “enough.”

II. The sword leaves the scabbard.—In the garden, when the band of the traitor, after the betrayal kiss was given, laid hands on Jesus and began to bind Him as a prisoner, it was more than Simon Peter could stand; and that sword of his left its scabbard, flashed a moment in the moonlight, and descended like lightning on the foremost assailant. A chance movement at the very moment saved the man’s life; but his ear was all but shorn from his head. In the hurried and disturbing confusion of a night-fray like that, where men were struggling, lights glancing, swords flashing, voices raised excitedly, a man struck down and bleeding would in ordinary circumstances have been left lying. But think! In this case, who is it that takes the matter in hand? The Man around whom the whole struggle centred, the Man who might, indeed, be thought to have had enough of His own to think of. It is the bound Prisoner Himself who notices the wounded man and the severed bleeding ear; and in these simple words that are well worth treasuring in all our hearts, “Suffer ye thus far,” He requests His stern, ruthless captors to let Him move His thong-bound hands so far as that His fingers may touch the wounded ear. The men heard the strange request. They “suffered Him thus far.” He touched the ear (of Malchus), and it was whole!

III. Christ’s kingdom comes not by the sword.—Then there were two little words spoken—for Peter, with his sword, and of course also for the other disciples. And we may be very sure these men—the apostles—to the latest day they served their Lord never forgot these words. The first was about the twelve legions of angels, which one word of His to His Father would have brought to earth to rescue Him. He needed not that His twelve earthly followers should arm themselves with earthly swords in His defence! The second word was for His apostles in their day, for His Church in all its days, for us all now, in all our Christian work. “Put up thy sword.” They who try to use the sword in that work will find their work will not prosper, but perish thereby. Rivalry amongst Churches, bitterness of spirit, narrow sectarianism, Pharisaic exclusiveness, and all such things, are swords, daggers, pistols, and will harm and hinder true Church work. “The fruits of righteousness are sown in peace by those who make peace.”—Rev. Thomas Hardy.

Joh_18:11. The cup given to the Saviour to drink.—Although St. John does not record the mysterious agony of the Son of man in Gethsemane, it is evident he implies it in his narrative by this mention of “the cup.” Readers of the other Gospels could not fail to see the connection. But the beloved disciple’s purpose is to show the incarnate Son triumphant, “manifesting forth His glory.” Therefore, in this Gospel, we do not hear Jesus praying that the cup may pass, but firmly resolved to drink it, since it hath been given Him by the Father.

I. The cup was divinely appointed.—

1. Jesus even then might have availed Himself of the aid of the heavenly hosts, but He turned aside from all thought of self to carry out the divine plan.

2. But it was a bitter cup He had to drain. The cup had its appointed measure; but the ingredients of which it was composed were most bitter, and even loathsome.

3. For what were those ingredients? To understand their bitterness it will be necessary, for a moment, to consider Him who had to drink this cup.

(1) He was the Son of man—none more truly human—with human feelings, affections, etc., yet untainted with sin.

(2) He was also Emmanuel—God with us—the Prince of life, the Light of men, etc. And one of the most bitter ingredients of that cup was the sense of the burden of the world’s sin, borne by Him who was holy, harmless, undefiled. He was to become the substitute for sinful man, and the shadow and burden of that mighty load were already felt by Him. Another ingredient was doubtless the conflict with the dark power of evil, abhorrent to the pure soul of the Saviour. And yet another was the near presence of death. Not that the Saviour feared, but He contemplated the dark foe with aversion and horror. He, the divine Son, the Prince of life, the Light of men, must submit to be for a time in the power of this enemy, and shut up in the darkness of the tomb!

4. But it was all divinely appointed. Although the ingredients of the cup were mixed by His foes, it was given by the Father for the redemption of men. Each bitter drop men should have drained; but Jesus drained them instead. “God spared not His own Son,” “Christ hath redeemed us” (Rom_8:32; Gal_3:13).

II. The resolve of the Saviour to drink the cup.—

1. Our Lord would not shrink from the awful experience which lay before Him. “He became obedient unto death.” His will and the Father’s for men’s redemption were in complete concord.

2. Therefore, though with bruised heel—for even in the garden the conflict had begun—it was with firm resolve He went forth. “Lo, I come; in the volume of the book,” etc. (Heb_10:7). He was made perfect as the incarnate Son through suffering (Heb_2:10; Heb_5:9), and thus became “the author of eternal salvation to all them who obey Him,” and an example that we should follow in His steps.

Lessons.—

1. To Christian men as to the Saviour, for a divine purpose, oftentimes a bitter cup is given to drink. Let them not doubt the divine love, but be willingly submissive like the Saviour.

2. How shall believers praise the Reedeemer for all He endured? Let the old Adam be crucified; let them struggle against sin; consecrate themselves, body and soul, to the Lord’s service; and rejoicing in hope of the divine glory, let them walk as God’s redeemed children. So shall the Saviour see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied.

Joh_18:13-14; Joh_18:19-24. Jesus before Annas and Caiaphas.—Jesus had been taken. What the rulers of the Jews had long wished for had now been accomplished, by the help of the traitorous disciple. We can imagine the grim satisfaction with which the news was received in the palace of the high priest, but also the perplexity. For having now seized their victim, they had to consider what should be done with Him, and that speedily; for they had still a salutary fear “of the people,” not knowing how many adhered to the Redeemer (Mat_26:5; Mar_14:2). Hence the necessity of this hurried midnight trial. They that do evil and walk in darkness, fear to come to the light (Joh_3:20). Hence Jesus was hurried away to the palace of the high priest and the head of the Sanhedrin, so that they might see whether He could be condemned on religious grounds. There are two chief points to be considered here.

I. The first declaration of Jesus in answer to the accusations brought against Him.—

1. The narrative tells us that Jesus was led away to Annas (Hanas or Ananias). He was not actually the high priest (Joh_11:49-52); but he had held that office, and had been succeeded in it by his sons and sons-in-law, and no doubt exercised a prevailing influence in their counsels.

2. He himself also appears to have held high office at this time—most likely the presidency of the Sanhedrin. He was a most unscrupulous man, a great intriguer, and managed to keep much power in his own hands. By many he was still regarded as the high priest—at least he kept hold of the reins of power (Luk_3:2; Act_4:6).

3. The houses of Annas and Caiaphas appear to have been contiguous. John only mentions the relationship between the two men, and thus explains why, although Caiaphas was legally high priest, Annas exercised so much influence.

4. Before Annas Jesus was first led, a concession to the position of the aged ex-high priest; but he preferred to act in concert with Caiaphas in the matter. Indeed these evil men, though they knew it not, would require all their skill in taking up arms “against the Lord’s anointed” (Psa_2:2-3). And the character of these judges is well sketched in one word regarding the principal agent in this unjust trial, though Annas and not he might be the inspiring spirit (Joh_18:14 : comp. Joh_11:49-52). Probably keeping the fear of the people in view, and thinking it would be better in case of any emeute to have the blame lie on Caiaphas’ shoulders rather than his own, he left the latter to conduct the trial. But behind them both was a greater power than they imagined.

5. This first trial turned mainly on two points—the disciples of Jesus and His teaching. This was according to Jewish law. It was proper for the religious head and the religious council of the nation to make inquiry as to new teachers—their doctrines, disciples, and so forth. Then it was matter of common report that even in the council—the Sanhedrin—were His secret disciples. Thus this question would serve a double purpose. They would learn about Christ, and about those in their own ranks who were suspected of having a leaning toward Christ, and would know how to deal with them (Joh_9:22).

6. The high priest was seeking to extract from Jesus such information as would lead the council to condemn Him as a sectary, and implicate those who held with Him. But Jesus did not answer this question regarding His disciples. The disciples were not there standing as accused. The question was beyond the province of His interrogators.

7. As to His doctrine He answered freely. They had a right to ask that question; and He, as “made under the law,” would answer it. But the answer was virtually a condemnation of His accusers. Christ had not taught secretly, but openly. If they did not know what His teaching was, it argued culpable ignorance on their part; they should have known. The people who heard him, even their own messengers (Joh_7:46), could tell them what He had said. And had there been anything that could have clearly been laid hold of, no doubt they would have made use of it to His harm long ago. It was an insincere question—one that needed formally to be put, as the Prisoner was nominally before a court of justice.

8. Jesus spoke not of His works. These His accusers did not speak of: the mere mention of them would have condemned their proceedings, and compelled them to ask rather whether He who wrought such mighty works was not in reality sent of God. And they could not deny the miracles (Joh_11:47, etc.). But there was no use in Jesus reminding them of His works; they were determined on His destruction, and any mention of those wonderful works would only have intensified their bitterness.

II. The beginning of the deeper humiliation of our Lord’s passion.—

1. All the accessories of this trial, or examination, showed that it was merely a form to cover a foregone conclusion and a sentence already framed. The secret apprehension, the midnight meeting of the high functionaries, the insincere questions, were all in keeping with the intriguing character of those unscrupulous rulers, acting as tools of the “prince of this world.”

2. If further proof were needed of the unjust nature of the whole proceeding, it was soon forthcoming. A servant of the high priest—one of his creatures—struck the Saviour with the palm of his hand (still used in the East in striking, in place of the fist, as with us), and said, “Answerest Thou the high priest so?” (Isa_50:6-7).

3. It was a most unrighteous act. Here stood a Prisoner, uncondemned, in no way opposing Himself to the action of the religious tribunal before which He stood—nay rather, recognising its validity. And on His answering in His defence, one of the creatures of the judge smote Him, simply because He ventured to defend Himself.

4. There is no doubt the servants had heard, or knew sufficiently well, what had been determined on in the hearts of these unjust men, and knew that they could act thus with impunity, if not with a hope of actual favour. To the just men—Nicodemus, Gamaliel, and others—how must such actions, when they came to their knowledge, have come home to conscience, making them ashamed rather than proud of their high position. But fear seems to have restrained them (Joh_12:42-43), and they participated, tacitly at least, in these events, which must afterward have caused them many a bitter thought (1Co_15:9; Gal_1:13). By St. John the more formal trial before the Sanhedrin is omitted. It was merely the registration of a foregone conclusion.

Lessons.—

1. Shall men be able to stand as serenely before the righteous Judge as Jesus before the unrighteous? No, we are all sinful. And it needed that the Saviour should undergo all this humiliation ere we should be able to stand before the great white throne. For we must come before it trusting in His righteousness, which He wrought out for us.

2. By our unrighteous deeds we may lead men to “blaspheme that worthy name by the which we are called” (Jas_2:7), and thus wound the Saviour more than the insolent servant of the unjust high priest. Let us beware lest we come under the same condemnation (Heb_6:6).

Joh_18:15-18; Joh_18:25-27. Peter’s fall.—The disciples forsook Jesus and fled, according to His word (Mat_26:31). Two of them, however, would not forsake Him even in that hour. John, who was known to the high priest, accompanied Jesus into the palace; but Peter, all his boldness gone, followed afar off, and stood at the gate, not being permitted entrance until John spoke with the gatekeeper. The disciple’s heart was full of affection and sorrow. But with the rash and bold stroke of the sword in the garden all his boldness had fled. He was confused and dispirited. His hopes and aspirations had vanished like a beautiful dream, and the stern reality stared him in the face. Notice—

I. His forgetfulness of the warning of Jesus.—

1. He had boldly averred in the upper chamber his readiness to go with Jesus to death. But in all this turmoil the warning voice sounded no more in his ears, else he would not have ventured heedlessly into the place of danger.

2. But Satan had desired to have him that he might sift him as wheat (Luk_22:31). The prince of this world found nothing in the Master he could lay hold of, but he found much in the disciple.

3. Peter entering timorously, striving probably to keep up an appearance of unconcern, was warned even at the very door that the time of sifting was near. “The maid that kept the door,” seeing that he was befriended by John, and probably knowing that John was a disciple, said, “Art thou not also of this man’s disciples?” What would he answer? he who had declared he was willing to go to the death even with Jesus? he who said, “Though I should die with Thee,” etc. (Mat_26:35)?

II. Peter’s timorous denials and shameful fall.—

1. All his asseverations were forgotten, and to the “damsel” who questioned him as to his connexion with the Lord he denied his discipleship, and then accusing conscience made him stammer out, “I know not what thou sayest.”

2. But in place of being warned by this incident and fleeing in shame from the place of his denial, tortured between love for his Master and fear for himself, he joined the company of guards and servants gathered round the fire in the courtyard in the chillness of the night, to hear, probably, what was designed against his Master. He evidently wished to pass himself off as one of the company. But what did he among that rude and mocking crew? He had placed himself in the very place where temptation was likely to meet him. Another of the bystanders, and again another, charged him with discipleship; and again he weakly denied.

3. John does not tell the full story with its abrupt termination, as, after denying the Lord with rude oaths (Mar_14:71), Peter was startled at hearing the divinely given sign; and, at the reproachful, pitying look of Jesus, went out to weep bitterly, overwhelmed with shame and sorrow.

4. For was it not he who had been loudest in his asseverations that though all should be offended yet would he not be (Mar_14:29)? Was it not he who had confessed, as spokesman of the rest, that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God? Had he not seen His glory, experienced His love? And this was how he had requited his dear Lord! The sifting was accomplished—the chaff was rudely driven away. Peter now saw himself in a true light; henceforth he renounced trust in self, and learned to warn others, so that they might be kept from falling as he fell (1Pe_5:7-9).

Lessons.—

1. Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. Remember the Lord’s injunction: “Watch and pray,” etc. (Mat_26:41).

2. Do not rush needlessly into temptation; but when it does assail meet it bravely in the divine strength (Jas_4:7). The evil one will be permitted only to drive away the chaff.

HOMILETIC NOTES

Joh_18:1-5. Christ and His foes in Gethsemane.—On the one hand we see the little band coming from the city in deep silence, and passing into the olive garden, where the tremulous shadows of the leaves somewhat obscured the paschal moon; and, on the other, we see the armed soldiers of the Roman garrison and the temple police, headed by Judas, and carrying useless swords which had no power against Jesus, and superfluous “lanterns and torches” which were absurd in that clear moonlight. The contrast of the two groups is striking as they pass through the silent midnight to meet between the olives. One starts from heaven, the other from hell, and they touch there. Infinite love and the mystery of divine endurance for man stream from the one, like the encircling moonbeams; diabolic hate and treachery flame in the other, like the smoky torches with which they affronted the moon. How many opposing paths met in that meeting! John has no record of the solemn scene in the depths of the garden. He takes the readers’ knowledge of it for granted; but he fixes our attention on these two groups, and wishes us to feel the impressiveness of the contrast, as well as the voluntary surrender of Jesus to His captors, implied in His choice of the place.—Dr. A. Maclaren.

Joh_18:6. Lowliness and glory in Gethsemane.—We need not ask if this was a miracle. However produced, a strange awe and terror smote the rude soldiers. His calm dignity impressed them, as that of virgin martyrs and grey-headed confessors has often done. But that will not explain the fact, which seems most worthily attributed to a momentary shining forth of Christ’s indwelling divinity, somewhat like that which shone through His corporeal frame at the transfiguration. It may not have been the work of His will at all; but the elevation of spirit attendant on the solemn scene in Gethsemane may have transfigured for a moment His lowly manhood, and let some beams of His glory through. But however that may be, we can scarcely fail to see here a revelation of His majesty, which is all the more eloquent as coming at the hour of deepest humiliation. John delights to bring into juxtaposition instances of both, as indeed do all the Evangelists. The interweaving of lowliness and glory makes the very differentia of the character pourtrayed by them all. He is a weak infant, but angels hover round the manger, and a star leads worshippers to it. He bows His head to John’s baptism, but heaven opens and the dove descends. He falls asleep in the boat, but wakes to still the storm with a word. He weeps by a grave, but He raises its tenant. He all but faints in His agony in the garden, but angels strengthen Him. The same union of opposites is in this incident. He is to be led, bound by rude hands, before an unjust judge. But as He passes into their power, one flash of brightness “above that of the noonday sun” tells of the hidden glory. “What will He do when He shall come as judge, if He did this when giving Himself up as a prisoner?” (Augustine).—Dr. A. Maclaren.

ILLUSTRATIONS

Joh_18:6. Christ’s enemies must acknowledge His power.—I here call to mind a well-known learned man of Saxony, who, after having all his life long attacked Jesus and His gospel with all the weapons of sophistry, was in his old age partially deprived of his reason, chiefly through the fear of death, and frequently fell into religious paroxysms of a peculiar nature. He was almost daily observed conversing with himself whilst pacing to and fro in his chamber, on one of the walls of which, between other pictures, hung one of the Saviour. Repeatedly he halted before the latter and said to it, in a horrifying tone of voice, “After all, Thou wast only a man!” Then, after a short pause, he would continue, “What wast Thou more than a man? Ought I to worship Thee? No, I will not worship Thee; for Thou art only Rabbi Jesus, Joseph’s son of Nazareth.” Uttering these words, he would turn his back upon the picture; but immediately afterwards he would return with a deeply affected countenance, and exclaim, “What dost Thou say? that Thou comest from above? How terribly Thou eyest me! Oh, Thou art dreadful! But—Thou art only a man after all.” Then he would again rush away, but soon return with faltering step, crying out, “What, art Thou in reality the Son of God?” In this way the same scenes were daily renewed till the unhappy man, struck by paralysis, dropped down dead, and then really stood before his Judge, who, even in his picture, had so strikingly and overpoweringly judged him.—F. W. Krummacher, “Suffering Saviour.”

Joh_18:14-15; Joh_18:19-24. Christ’s patience.—Do you not marvel at the loftiness of character of your incomparable Lord? Have you ever heard of a meekness and patience like His? of a peace so tranquil which bore with one of the sorts of bodily indignity which causes most resentment, an open insult; which mildly punished the servant and his chief who permitted the insult; and at the same time so earnestly sought to awaken their consciences in so majestically protesting its innocence? Behold, so does He act toward you; His patience toward you is day by day unspeakably great. You can never prove that He hath spoken evil, for all His words are righteousness and truth, words of eternal life. And yet you have often stricken Him with your unbelief and insincerity. Still less can you prove that He has ever done evil toward you, for all His acts and dealings toward you are mercy and love; and yet you have often stricken Him with your discontent and murmuring. And He ever bears with you, and will forgive all when in faith and repentance you come to His feet and return from your crooked ways to Him. Come, then, and seek Him and remain with Him, and then follow and learn of Him, because He is meek and lowly of heart. Not as though you should seek to make yourself well pleasing to your foes and the world. No; do as Jesus did. What you can say and do for your justification that say and do. You owe that not only to the truth and to love, you owe it also to your fellow-man. For many vexations and insults in the world arise from a misunderstanding, and may frequently through quiet and simple explanations be removed and adjusted. To remain silent in all circumstances, to agree to everything, not to consider it worth one’s while to open one’s mouth to defend one’s self before the world, is more the result of pride and arrogance, which are an abomination to the Lord. If, however, you have justified yourself quietly and with dignity, then proceed no further; leave the rest to the Lord, who says, “Vengeance is Mine; I will repay.” Say not an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Do not repay the evildoer with evil, but overcome evil with good. Learn from your Lord, as good learners in the school of His passion, meekness, placability, and Christian forgiveness. Learn of Him to bear bonds, indignity, smiting, for His glory. Thus the apostles copied their Lord. “Being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it” (1Co_4:12). They have said and have themselves followed the precepts they gave to others for similar circumstances: “Be always ready to give an answer,” etc. (1Pe_3:15-18). Do as did that negro lad whose master would not permit him to go to hear the missionary preach. His tyrannical master threatened to whip him to death if he did not give up going; but the lad went in spite of this. He came back and received three times twenty-five lashes, which the barbarian accompanied with the mocking question, “What can your Jesus do for you now?” “He strengthens me to bear all this,” answered the poor lad the first time; “He helps me to believe in a future reward,” the second time. And when he was beaten the third time and was nigh expiring, and the mocking question must yet once more be heard by him, he said with his last breath, “Jesus helps me to pray for you.” What was possible to a negro lad, a beginner in the Christian life, were possible, should be more possible, to you grown-up Christians! You can attain to it if, like David, you do not look to the man who injures you, but to the Lord who has permitted him to do it (2Sa_16:10).—Translated from F. Arndt.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

SIXTH SECTION

The Lord in the circle of His foes, as the Light overtaken by the Darkness; the lofty Judge or the personal Judgment, whilst He is judged; victorious in His outward succumbing; how He carries out His judgment, to the victory of Light and Salvation

(John 18, 19)

I

CHRIST AS THE JUDGMENT OF LIGHT UPON THE CONFUSED NOCTURNAL CONFLICT OF THE WORLD AGAINST AND OVER HIS PERSON; OVER AGAINST HIS BETRAYER, HIS APPREHENDERS, HIS VIOLENT HELPER. THE MAJESTY OF THE BETRAYED, IN CONTRAST TO THE NOTHINGNESS OF THE BETRAYER; THE VOLUNTARINESS OF THE SUFFERING, IN CONTRAST TO THE IMPOTENCE OF THE SEIZERS; THE REFERENCE TO THE DECREE OF THE FATHER, IN CONTRAST TO THE UNLAWFUL AID OF PETER. THE REPUDIATION OF PETER’S DEED OF VIOLENCE, AND THE VANITY AND INSIGNIFICANCE OF EMPLOYING VIOLENT MEANS FOR THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF SPIRITUAL ENDS

Joh_18:1-11

(Mat_26:36-56; Mar_14:32-52 Luk_22:39-53.)

1     When Jesus had spoken these words, he [Having spoken these words, Jesus] went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, [the torrent Kidron]1 where 2was a garden, into the which [into which] he entered, and his disciples. And [But] Judas also, which2 [who] betrayed him, knew the place; for Jesus oft-times resorted thither with his disciples. 3Judas then, having received a band of men [the band of soldiers, i.e., the garrison of the fort,3] and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.4

4Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come [were coming, τὰ ἐρχόμενα upon him, went forth, and said5 unto them, Whom seek ye [do ye seek]? 5They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth [the Nazarene, τὸν Ναζωραῖον]. Jesus saith unto them, I am he [Ἐγώ εἰμι]. And [Now] Judas also, which [who] betrayed him, stood with them. 6As soon then as he had said [he said, εἶπεν] unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. 7Then asked he them again [Again therefore he asked them], Whom seek ye [do ye seek]? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth [the Nazarene]. 8Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: if therefore ye seek [are seeking] me, let these go their way: 9That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which [those whom] thou gavest [hast given, δέδωχας] me have I lost none [I lost none, or, not a single one of them, οὐχ ἀπώλεσα ἐζ αὐτῶν οὐδένα].

10Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear.6 [And] The servant’s name was Malchus. 11Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy [the]7 sword into the sheath: the cup which my [the]8 Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

[Now follows the history of the Passion, chaps. 18 and 19, and the Resurrection of our Lord, chaps. 20 and 21, where we have the parallel accounts of the Synoptists. Yet John omits several items (as the agony in Gethsemane, anticipated in 12:27, and 13:21; but he mentions the garden, 18:1), and supplies other interesting facts (as the commending of the mother of Jesus to John), and in the parallel accounts a number of minute, circumstantial details (18:2, 10, 13, 24, 28; 19:14, 20, 41, etc.) which betray the eye-witness of the scenes described. But it is wrong to say with Hengstenberg that John merely meant to give supplements to the Synoptic history of the Passion with such common traits as are necessary to show the connection, comp. the remarks of Godet, 2p. 5, 69 f.—P. S.]

Joh_18:1. Jesus went forth [ἐξῆλθεν]. Not precisely forth from the city (Meyer), but forth from the city precincts, which extended to the brook Kedron. Ἐξῆλθεν πέραν. Leben Jesu, 2 p. 1347 ff. [David, betrayed by Ahithophel, one of his body-guard, took the same course over Kedron in his flight from the rebellious Absalom, 2Sa_15:23, and thus furnished a type to which Jesus Himself pointed, Joh_13:18.—P. S.]

Beyond the brook [or rather torrent] Kidron [or Kedron. See Text. Note]. Kidron, the name of a brook or torrent, χέμαῤῥος, [from χεῖμα and ῥέω, winter-flowing, winter-torrent, formed by the winter-rains, but dry in the summer.—P. S.]; also a wady, Joseph. Antiq. VIII. 1, 5. קִדְרוֹך [from קָדַר, to be black, dirty], the Black, the Black Brook [from its color.] We must distinguish between the valley of Kedron and the Kedron itself, as well as between the Kedron as a torrent, and as a spring brook. “The vale of Kedron is the most important valley in the northern portion of the plateau of the wilderness of Judah. It takes its rise on the north side of the city of Jerusalem, upon the great water-shed between the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea, at an elevation of about 2,500 feet above the ocean; it surrounds the north and east sides of the city, turning by the well of Rogel, at a sharp angle to the southeast, toward the Dead Sea. Forming, at first, but a shallow, trough-shaped depression, it burrows deeper, and deeper and, from the point where it turns to the southeast, becomes a wild, untrodden, narrow chasm, opening south of the Ras el Feshka, towards the Dead Sea. No traveller has ever yet traversed its whole extent. In the middle of its course, between Jerusalem and the Dead Sea, there is a much-visited point, the cloister of St. Saba.9—The brook Kedron, which flows through the valley, has no regular water-course; it is only a winter-torrent [formed by the water which flows into the valley from the hills north and east of Jerusalem], Over and above this, the valley does not lack perennial springs; on the eastern declivity of southern Moriah there is the well of Mary, etc., and at the junction of Hinnom with the valley of the Kedron we find the well of Rogel” (L. Völter). According to Robinson, the Kedron does not flow unceasingly even in winter; one may stay several years in Jerusalem without seeing any water in this deep bed.10 As the dividing brook between Jerusalem or Moriah, Zion and the Mount of Olives, the brook, like the valley, possesses some significancy. Upwards from the well of Rogel near Jerusalem, the valley is called the valley of Jehoshaphat (“the Lord judgeth”). According to the Jews (with reference to Joe_3:2), as also according to the Mohammedans, the last judgment will be held in this valley. Simultaneously with Christ’s passage of the Kedron, a passage infinitely more momentous than that of Cæsar over the Rubicon, doubtless the last judgment was principially decided, together with the redemption. Passages in which the Kedron is mentioned: 2Sa_15:23; 1Ki_15:13; 2Ki_23:4; 2Ki_23:6; 2Ki_23:12; Neh_2:15; 1Ma_12:37; Joseph. Antiq. XVIII. 1, 5; IX. 7, 3; De Bello Jud. V. 6, 1. Comp. the article Kedron in Winer and that in Zeller’s Wörterbuch für das christliche Volk; books of travel, particularly Robinson 2 p. 35 [Am. ed. vol. I. 268–273; (Valley of K.), and I. 232, 273 (Brook of K.). Also art. Kidron, in Smith’s Dict. of the B., II. 1533 ff., Hackett & Abbot’s ed., where Robinson’s accurate description is quoted.—P. S.] As a torrent alone, the Kedron’s waves were dark and turbid; and in the time of the temple-worship the blood of the sacrifices likewise flowed into it and darkened it; hence, doubtless, the name. It was probably the Stephen Gate or Mary Gate of the present day, through which Jesus had descended into the valley for the purpose of crossing the Kedron (Leben Jesu, ii. p. 1427).

There was a garden. On Gethsemane [i. e., Olive-Press, from gath, press, and schamna, oil] see Comm. on Matthew [pp. 478, 482, Am. ed.].11 The different designations are worth noting. Matthew: Jesus cometh unto a country-place called Gethsemane similarly Mark; Luke: to the mount of Olives; John: there was a garden.

[This notice of John to every reader of the Synoptic Gospels would at once suggest the scene of Gethsemane. On the doubtful typological reference to the garden of Eden, where the first Adam was tempted by the serpent and fell, while in Gethsemane the second Adam bruised the serpent’s head, see the fathers, Lampe, Hengstenberg, and Wordsworth.”12—P. S.]

Himself and His disciples.—The more minute account in Matthew and Mark.

Joh_18:2. But Judas also, His betrayer, knew the place.—Thus John passes over the conflict in Gethsemane. It is his intention to exhibit it in its glorious issue, the majestic repose of Christ.—For Jesus often resorted thither with His disciples.—According to Luke, it was a habit of Jesus to go thither. The Synoptists jointly say that He there collected His thoughts in prayer. According to John, the place also served as a meeting-ground for Jesus and His disciples; probably He was wont to be met there by His adherents generally. The remark “refers to previous festal visits.” Meyer. Comp. Comm. on Mark [p. 5, Am. ed. Dr. Lange conjectures there that Mark, whose mother had a house in Jerusalem, owned a country seat at the foot of the Mount of Olives, perhaps even the garden of Gethsemane.—P. S.] Instrumental in throwing light upon the base character of Judas is the fact of his reckoning that Jesus, in His divine strength of character and fidelity to prayer, would assuredly be found, even on this occasion, in Gethsemane.

Joh_18:3. Having received the band of soldiers and officers, etc. [Ὁ οὖν Ἰούδας λαβὼν τὴν σπεῖραν—see Text. Notes—καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἀρχιερέων κ. φαρισαίων ὑπηρέτας ἔρχεται ἔρχεται ἐκεῖ, κ. τ. λ..]—See Comm. on Matthew. “According to Josephus, XX. 3, 4, the city governors were accustomed, at the feast, tostation a τάξις στρατιωτῶν (in the Castle Antonia) near the avenues to the temple, in case of an insurrection; and for this reason—for fear, namely, that the adherents of Jesus might free Him by force—a detachment is here permitted to accompany the Jews. The Levitic ὕπηρέται of the Sanhedrin accomplish the arrest itself; they were sent out for a similar purpose, Joh_7:45. Under these circumstances, it is not at all probable that the detachment of soldiers also pressed into the garden.” (According to Joh_18:12, the thing is very probable, since they at once co-operate in the arrest.) “The strength of the cohorts conformed to circumstances. Some of those under Titus contained 1000 men, others 613 foot-soldiers and 120 horsemen. Moreover, in the usage of Polybius, σπεῖρα is equivalent to manipulus, the third of a cohort.” Tholuck.

[There were ten cohorts or companies in every Roman legion, but varying in number according to circumstances. According to Josephus (De Bello Jud., III. 4, 2) five of eighteen σπεῖραι contained 1000 men each, and the others 600. Robinson (sub σπεῖρα), with Kuinoel, understands here and Joh_18:12 the temple guard of Levites who performed the menial offices of the temple and kept watch by night. So also Baumgarten-Crusius and Bäumlein. But the σπεῖρα is here and Joh_18:6 expressly distinguished from the ὑπηρέται ἐκ τῶν ἀρχιερέων κ. φαρισαίων, furnished by the Sanhedrin. The objection that Roman soldiers would have led Jesus to their own officers, not to the chief priests, does not hold; for Jesus was to be condemned first by the ecclesiastical authorities. It is not necessary to suppose that the whole garrison of the fortress Antonia, whether it consisted of 1000 or only of 300 men, was present; a small detachment with the captain (χιλίαρχος, Joh_18:12) was sufficient. Comp. note on Mat_27:27, p. 513. The combined power of the Romans and the Jews was brought into requisition against the one unarmed gentle Jesus. The military preparation (μετὰ φανῶν καὶ. λαμπάδων—mark the accumulative καί) indicates the bad conscience of Judas 1456and the Sanhedrin.—P. S.]

Joh_18:4. Jesus, therefore, stepped forth.—Not out of the garden (Lampe, Meyer),—Mark pretty plainly decides against such an interpretation—nor out of the depths of the garden merely (De Wette, Tholuck [Alford: from the shade of the trees into the moonlight] and others), but, agreeably to His purpose, out of the circle of disciples, in advance of it, in order to protect it (Leben Jesu, II., p. 1456, Schweizer). This is indicated also by the design of the question: Whom do ye seek? Joh_18:8. [Stier: “When men sought Jesus to make Him a King, He fled: now that they seek Him to put Him to death, He goes forth to meet them.”—P. S.]—Whom do ye seek?—According to Hug, He put this question to the end that the temple-officers also might learn His name and that it might consequently be rendered impossible for Him to be put out of the way anonymously; the design, however, manifestly presents itself in what follows. They are to be dismayed at the distinct consciousness of their intention to seize Jesus, and, their commission being thus narrowly defined, they shall be in duty bound to let the disciples go.

Joh_18:5. But Judas also, etc.—The band of disciples was stationed within the garden in two divisions, like a watch. The three intimates of Jesus were in the back-ground, the eight others near the entrance. From the stand-point of these latter, to whom Matthew belonged, the most striking occurrence was the pressing of the troop, with Judas at their head, into the garden; from the stand-point of the three, Jesus’ hastening to meet the throng. To these external circumstances of position, supervenes a diversity of mental view; the Synoptic tradition and Mark, the disciple of Peter, regarding primarily the impudent boldness of the traitor, whilst it was the design of John to throw into relief the majestic preparedness of Christ and His fidelity to the disciples. Jesus, then, anticipated Judas’ plot of betraying Him with a kiss, inasmuch as He rendered that plot entirely superfluous; this fact, however, forms no reason for supposing that Judas did not carry out the agreement and that the Judas-kiss is a tradition. It did but become a meaningless farce through Jesus’ declaration of Himself. Hence, it is this that John wishes to indicate, viz., that the Judas-kiss was frustrated in its design by the magnanimous self-presentation of Jesus, and at the same time, that Judas, together with the enemies, was felled to the ground through Christ’s word. As the two brushed past each other, the kiss became an abortive, scarce-accomplished signal, and the traitor was cast back upon the line of the foes.

[Ἐγώ εἰμι, I am He. Words of cheer and comfort to the trembling disciples on the stormy lake, Mar_6:50, and after the resurrection, Luk_24:39; words of terror here to His enemies, overpowering the armed military and priestly band. So His rebuke, with the majesty of His presence, silenced the profane traffickers in the temple. Comp. also the impression made upon the ὑπηρέ ται, 7:46. What will be the effect of the same I am, when spoken by the Lord of glory on the day of judgment! Augustine: Quid judicaturus faciet, qui judicandus hoc fecit? Bengel (on Joh_18:8): Bis dicit: Ego sum; si tertio dixisset, non cepissent illum. Tertio dicet olim.—P. S.]

Joh_18:6. And fell to the ground [ἀπῆλθαν εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω—started back in dismay—καὶ ἔπεσαν χαμαί13χαμᾶζε].—Explanation of this fact:

1. A miracle of Jesus; by which He meant to prove the freedom of His self-surrender (ancient exposition).14

2. The fact is to be referred to the disciples who had retired and cast themselves upon the ground with a view to concealing themselves (Paulus)!

3. Mythical (Strauss).15

4. Psychological: there is no question of a prostration of all. The foremost ones were confounded at finding Jesus so suddenly—not sleeping, but waking—, presenting Himself so composedly; even before this, they were paralyzed, as it were, with awe of Him; now, when they would fain seize Him, a horror of awe over-powers them and, recoiling, they fall, one upon another (Lücke, Tholuck and others).16

5. Here, also, it is an unjustifiable antithesis that causes the clashing of the miracle and its natural instrumentality, or of the objective, conscious agency of Christ and the subjective element of awe and fear (as, for instance, Meyer). The effect of the self-presentation of Christ could not arrive unexpectedly to Him, nor, hence, be undesigned. That is the miracle. Neither, however, can Jesus’ miracle be regarded as a magical operation upon the bodies of them that fell; its channel was terror of conscience, as was the case in the death of Ananias, Acts 5 (see Leben Jesu, p. 1457 ff.).17 Tholuck cites kindred instances, when before Mark Antony, Marius, Coligny, the murderers recoiled, panicstruck (p. 408; see, too, Heubner on this passage).18 On New Testament ground the following belong here: Luk_4:30; Joh_8:59; Joh_7:44-46; Joh_10:39; Mat_28:4; Act_5:5; Act_5:10 in reference to a bad conscience; analogous phenomena occurred even in the circle of Jesus’ friends, according to Luk_5:8; Mat_28:9; Mat_28:17, etc.—Analogous effects of the manifestation of Jehovah, of the Angel of the Lord, or Christ, see in the Old Testament in the history of Balaam, Manoah, Isaiah, Daniel, as also in the New Testament at the commencement of Revelation.

Joh_18:7. Then asked He them again.—This second question, in conjunction with the self-surrender of Jesus, has an effect upon the troop as elevating as that of the first question and the self-presentation of Jesus was depressing. This, also, is in analogy with the convulsing and reanimating effects, as experienced by the Apocalyptists, of a divine revelation, Dan_10:10; Rev_1:17. These men (Daniel and John) were prostrated by the holiness of the Lord, in the consciousness of their sinfulness, lifted up again by His grace, in the element of their faith. Our case is somewhat similar,—the temple-officers being, on the one hand, the instruments of a godless, devilish plot, but also, on the other hand, the ministers of an existing order of things and the instruments of Divine Providence.

Joh_18:8. If, therefore, ye seek Me.—The saying of Jesus is directly declarative of the security of the disciples, partly by way of logical deduction, partly as a command; it is, at the same time, indirectly the disciples’ discharge from the present outward alliance of suffering. But the great utterance has also a deeper background. See Isa_63:3. Bengel and others assume, without foundation, that some had already laid hands on the disciples. That there did exist an inclination for such a step, however, is evinced by the episode of the fleeing youth in Mark and by the maid who denounced Peter, in the history of the latter’s denial.

Joh_18:9. That the saying might be fulfilled.—Christ’s declaration, Joh_17:12. The keeping of the disciples from being lost consisted finally in their preservation from captivity in the present situation, since the over-mighty temptation might have been the ruin of the souls of some among them. (This connection not recognized by Schweizer). [Alford: “An unquestionable proof, if any were wanted, that the words of John 17 are no mere description of the mind of our Lord Jesus at the time, but His very words themselves. This is recognized even by De Wette. On the application of the saying, we may remark that the words unquestionably had a deeper meaning than any belonging to this occasion; but the remarks so often made in this commentary on the fulfillment of prophecies must be borne in mind;—that to ‘fulfil’ a prophecy is not to exhaust its capability of being again and again fulfilled:—that the words of the Lord have many stages of unfolding;—and that the temporal deliverance of the Apostles now, doubtless was but a part in the great spiritual safe-keeping which the Lord asserted by anticipation in these words.” See also a good note of Webster and Wilkinson in loc.—P. S.]

Joh_18:10. Simon, then—Peter. [Σίμων οὖν Πέτρος. Lange: Simon now—Peter].—We bring out in the translation the trait that John inserts his οὖν of manifold import between the names Simon and Peter, thus emphasizing the Simon. To Simon it was natural to act in the way related. Comp. Comm. on Matthew, on this place; Joh_21:15. An explanation of the circumstance that John alone mentions the name of the disciple who was the author of the sword-blow, see in the Comm. on Matthew on this passage [p. 486, Am. ed.]. Similarly, John alone mentions the name of Malchus. [One of the circumstantial details so frequent in John’s account of the history of the passion, which confirm his authorship. John knew the high-priest, Joh_18:15, and so probably also his servant Malchus (=King). The Synoptists who wrote earlier may have had prudential reasons for not mentioning the name.—P. S.] Peter wished, by this blow, to prove his readiness to risk his life for his Lord and to fulfil his vow, recorded Joh_13:37; in all probability it was also his design to give a signal to the friends of Jesus and the Lord Himself to rise in arms against the foe. Upon the particular circumstances comp. the Synoptists. [Peter’s zeal was honest and well-meaning, but impulsive, hasty, imprudent, and mistaken in the selection of means. Hence the rebuke of our Lord, who here condemns for all time to come the use of carnal weapons and physical force in the defence of truth and promotion of His kingdom. The Romish church has imitated Peter in his weakness rather than his strength, and often invoked the arm of the secular power in the bloody persecution of heretics; thus making herself responsible for it in spite of her professed principle: ecclesia non sitit sanguinem. Comp. my Hist. of the Apost. Church, p. 677.—P. S.]

Joh_18:11. Jesus unto Peter.—It is again significant that John here makes use only of the name Peter (without Simon). Christ’s deliverance against the action of Peter, as given by John, does not exclude the words related by Matthew from conforming the more closely to the original expressions. The words of Jesus, as recorded by John, are expressive of the voluntary surrender of Jesus to the will of the Father, and they most decidedly look away from the doing of men. Mark passes over the direct disapproval awarded to Peter, his guide; Luke relates how Christ remedied the offense; Matthew brings out the theocratical points of Jesus’ saying.—The cup which My Father, etc. Comp. Mat_20:22; Mat_26:39 [Comm., p. 479, Am. Ed.]. In His prayer He has sacredly bound Himself to drink the cup. [“The cup is a striking allusion to the prayer in Gethsemane; for the image does not elsewhere occur in our Evangelist.” Alford. So also Paley, (Evidences, B, H., c. 4), Bengel, Webster and Wilkinson (comp. their note in loc.), Wordsworth, and others.—P. S.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The arrest of Jesus in Gethsemane. John omits the directions of Jesus to His disciples as to their conduct in Gethsemane; the Passion of His soul; the reproof to His sleeping disciples; the kiss of Judas; the reference of Peter to the twelve legions of angels; the protest of Jesus against His seizers; the healing of Malchus recorded by Luke; the episode of the fugitive youth related by Mark. On the other hand, he gives prominence to the fact that Jesus went voluntarily to meet His apprehenders; that the multitude fell to the ground at the sight of His majesty; that He surrendered Himself prisoner, while securing a free exode to the disciples. He names Peter as the one who drew the sword, mentions the name of the servant, Malchus, who was wounded by him, and, with the words, “who drew the sword,” refers the saying of Jesus, “shall I not drink the cup?” etc., to His psychical passion. On Gethsemane, see Comm. on Matthew, p. 478, Am. Ed.

2. Gethsemane, as John paints it, presupposes the Gethsemane according to the Synoptists, and from the latter it is possible to deduce the former. I.e., in the kingdom of God, a mighty assurance of victory admits the inference of a mighty conflict, and a mighty conflict that of a mighty assurance of victory.

3. The passage of Jesus over the brook Kedron, a step of the highest, world-historic import. An expression of His constrainedness in spirit, His freedom of will, His decision of heart.

4. Paradise and the Garden. The first and the second Adam. The serpent and the traitor. The defeat and the victory (attaching, in a greater degree, to the Synoptical version). The ancient typology, constituting the Garden of Gethsemane an antithesis of Paradise, is fully warranted here, so long as it does not, by enlarging upon minute, degenerate into trifling.

5. The sudden attack upon the Lord in the sanctuary of prayer, a speaking sign: 1. That the hatred of the world was levelled at the praying heart of Christ and His flock,—that they fell upon Him on account of His piety; 2. that in this respect, also, He was to form the central point of the experience of the faithful: of the experience of Daniel (Joh_6:7), of the first Christians, the Huguenots [Puritans, Covenanters], etc.

6. Judas knew the place also. How the spiritual experiences of false men and hypocrites redound to their ruin. He knew the place. But in what a base and imperfect way he knew the Lord, is proved by his equipment and march with the whole multitude.

7. In all religious persecutions, cohorts, legions and armies are transformed into gens-d’armes, police soldiers, myrmidons and executioners’ assistants.

8. The drawing up of the world against Christ, and the sword stroke of Peter for Him: Symbols of the impotence of His fleshly opposers, as of His fleshly defenders.

9. The majesty whereby the self presentation of Christ casts His foes to the ground. A divine operation (see the Introduction), yet with a human instrumentality. See Note to Joh_18:6. At the same time an expression of His freedom in His surrender, which freedom, according to the Synoptists, He also declared by a decided protest.

10. Christ’s submitting to be taken captive by His enemies, in order to the protection and deliverance of His people, a symbolic individual type, in which His faithfulness as a Redeemer is reflected.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

1. See Commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke.—Gethsemane in profoundest gloom and brightest light, (comparison of the Johannean version with the Synoptical).—Gethsemane as a place of victory: 1. Revelation of past victory, a. over inward temptation, b. over Judas (chap. 13). 2. Consummation of present victory, a. over the slanderous array and over treason (in that He voluntarily presents Himself to His enemies); b. over the haughtiness of the foe (by levelling them to the earth and ensuring the safety of the disciples); c. over the carnal zeal of the disciple. 3. A foretoken and life picture of all the future victories of Christ (free advance of the strong, secure shelterment of the weak, glorious correction of the passionate, dissipation of falsehood and treachery, disarming of violence, overcoming of the world through voluntary suffering).—The brook and the garden: 1. How insignificant! 2. How memorable!—Judas and Peter in the Gethsemane of the Lord.—But Judas also knew the place. How even this knowledge and recollection of his disciple life becomes his ruin. The fearful judgment in the misuse of spiritual experiences.—The equipment of Judas, or how well and yet how poorly he knew his betrayed Lord: 1. His place of prayer and fidelity to prayer, but not the blessing of His prayer; 2. His power, but not His superiority and omnipotence: 3. His innocence, yet not His holiness; 4. His clemency, yet not His love and earnestness; 5. His human dignity, but not His divine majesty.—The betrayer of Christ a traitor out and out: 1. To the sanctuary, 2. to his fellow disciples, 3. to his nation, 4. to humanity, 6. to himself.—Treason toward the sanctuary: 1. How all the secrets of the church of Christ are, by means of apostate members, betrayed to the world; 2. how all the plots of treason are brought to nought and transformed to a judgment upon the traitors.—The array of myrmidons against Jesus: 1. Called out by mendacious and vain fear; 2. terrible in its weapons and lamps, over against the Defenceless One; 3. made a laughing-stock through the light of truth with which Christ goes to meet it; 4. shown up in its impotence; 5. limited in its operation; 6. given free course in its plot, but only in order to the carrying out of the counsel of God.—How Christ baffles the plots of His foes by freely meeting and anticipating them [the plots 1. of craft (slander, falsehood), 2. of violence].—The majesty which Christ manifests in treading the way of His deepest humiliation.—The sublime freedom of spirit with which He resigns His outward freedom.—Why so calm, so grand in His surrender? Because He is conscious that He is not abandoning Himself to the impotence of His enemies, but confiding Himself to the omnipotence of His God.—The dignity of the pious in suffering, the foretoken of his triumph.—The terrors of Christ: 1. Origin: a. Terrors of divine holiness, b. terrors of human dignity. 2. Effect: In the conscience, in the psychical life, in the marrow and bone. 3. Signs: Tokens of inner judgment, foretokens of future judgment.—Whom seek ye?—If ye, then, seek Me, let these go.—Fulfilment of Scripture: 1. In the most universal sense, 2. in the most special sense.—The upshot of things in Gethsemane: Betrayed, surprised, made captive: 1. Christ seems betrayed, but the kingdom of darkness has betrayed itself; 2. He seems surprised, but henceforth He stands sovereign in the midst of the camp of the foe; 3. He seems a captive, but the adversary is the captive.—The sword of Simon and the cup of Christ.—Simon took the sword, Peter received the reprimand.—Christ’s defence the defence of His people.

Starke: Zeisius: That which the first Adam marred in the garden by the fall, the second Adam, Jesus Christ, regained and set in order in the garden by His guiltless passion.—The iniquity of the traitor was made all the more discernible by his betraying Christ to death in the very place where he had seen His deeds and heard the words of life.—The wicked man oft-times misuses his knowledge of the ingoings and outgoings of the righteous; let a man take care in whom he confides, Psa_57:6.—The Lord Jesus has hallowed even the kind of suffering that His children endure when they must allow unfaithful souls a knowledge of their circumstances, Psa_41:6; Psa_41:9.—No one hates Christ and His party more bitterly than a hypocrite who has thrown off the mask.—Zeisius: When Jesus, in His suffering, hath so oft evinced His stout heartedness and advanced to meet His foes, why, O Christian mine, art thou in fear of the world and the devil, even whilst this conquering Lion of the Tribe of Judah is by thy side and fighteth for thee?—The first Adam, falling into the hands of divine justice, fled and hid himself, and God must needs call, saying: Adam, where art thou? but here the second Adam, being about to be delivered into the hands of His enemies, crieth out: Here am I.—What is more common now than Joab’s greeting and Judas kiss, Jacob’s voice and Esau’s hands?

Joh_18:8 : 1. Because He wished them preserved for a greater work; 2. to the end that men might not imagine that His death would not suffice for the redemption of mankind; 3. because they were not yet strong enough to withstand the like temptation; 4. He desired to prove that He had power and authority over His enemies.—Our fate does not depend upon the might or numbers of the enemy, but upon the permission which they receive from God, to injure us, 2Ch_32:7.—Lord Jesus, when the world, death and the devil would fain swallow us up, speak Thou the word of command: Let these go, Psa_105:15.—Osiander: God setteth a bound to persecutions.—Zeisius: When Peter should have watched, he slept, and when he should have been quiet, he made resistance through carnal zeal; thus we always have by nature a sufficient leaning towards evil.—God overrules even the errors of His children, so that no greater harm shall result from them than He has resolved to permit, Gen_20:2; Gen_20:6.

Gossner: In the garden of Eden man fell through lust and pride, in the garden of Gethsemane he was to be raised up again through mourning, anguish and humiliation.—What time their glory flashes in upon children of God and glimpses so heart-ravishing are theirs, they should not misuse this their blessedness, nor vaunt themselves of it.—When the Saviour saith: Let my people go, their sorest enemies must suffer this word to stand, and His people to go.—Thus, in the midst of the press, Christ looketh on the Father and taketh the suffering that men inflict upon Him, as coming, not from them, but out of the hand of the Father, without whose counsel and consent not a hair of our heads can be harmed.

Heubner: Over the brook Kedron, as David once fled before Absalom.

Joh_18:4. This question attests (therefore) His innocence and undismayedness.—The morally good man will never deny his own identity, even though he be in mortal peril; conscious of his dignity he will freely say who he is, trusting in God. There is something debasing and dishonoring in a denial of one’s identity.—These words, Let these go, are important to us also. “Jesus procures His disciples entire freedom and security; the power of this authoritative word shows itself even at the present day. The enemy had not left a disciple on earth if this word was not still in force. This word is the cause of the continued existence of disciples,—faithful ones, whom the world, against its will, must behold passing to and fro, and yet must let go.” Burk, Fingerzeig II., p. 393.—Shall I not, etc. Violently to hold the righteous back from his suffering for duty’s sake, is to hold him back from his glory and salvation.

Joh_18:12. Bound as to the hands was Jesus; unbound in spirit.

[Craven: From Augustine: Chap. 18. Joh_18:1-2. There the wolf in Sheep’s clothing, permitted by the deep counsel of the Master of the flock to go among the sheep, learned in what way to disperse the flock, and ensnare the Shepherd.

Joh_18:6. Where now is the band of soldiers, where the terror and defence of arms? Without a blow, one word struck, drove back, prostrated a crowd fierce with hatred, terrible with arms. What shall He do when He cometh to judge, who did thus when He was going to be judged?

Joh_18:8. So now having shown His power to them when they wished to take Him and could not, He lets them seize Him, that they might be unconscious agents of His will.—He commands His enemies, and they do what He commands; they permit them to go away, whom He would not have perish.

Joh_18:11. Peter was to be admonished to have patience: and this was written for our learning.——From Chrysostom: Joh_18:1. Why does not John say, When He had prayed, He entered? Because His prayer was a speaking for His disciples, sake.—He goes to the place which was known to the traitor; thus giving no trouble to those who were lying in wait for Him, and showing His disciples that He went voluntarily to die.—That it might not be thought that He went into a garden to hide Himself, it is added, But Judas who betrayed Him knew the place: for Jesus often resorted thither with His disciples.

Joh_18:3-9. They had often sent elsewhere to take Him, but had not been able; whence it is evident that He gave Himself up voluntarily; as it follows, Jesus, therefore, knowing all things—,went forth, etc.

Joh_18:8. Even to the last hour does He show His love for His own.——From Alcuin: Joh_18:1. Where there was a garden, that the sin which was committed in a garden, He might blot out in a garden.——From Herbert: Joh_18:5.

Judas, dost thou betray Me with a kiss?

Canst thou find hell about My lips and miss

Of life, just at the gates of life and bliss?

[From Burkitt: Joh_18:3. How active was Judas, and how watchful was His bloody crew, even at that time when Christ’s disciples could not keep their eyes open.

Joh_18:4. Lord, how endearing are our obligations to Thyself, that when Thou knewest beforehand the bitterness of that cup which the justice of God was about to put into Thy hand, Thou didst not decline to drink it for our sakes.

Joh_18:7. Obstinate and obdurate sinners will not be reclaimed by the most evident and convincing, by the most miraculous and surprising, appearances of God against them.

Joh_18:8. Christ is so tender of His followers, that He will not put them upon trials, or call them forth to sufferings, till they are ripe and prepared for them.

Joh_18:10. How doth a pious breast swell with indignation at the sight of an open insult offered unto the Saviour!

Joh_18:11. The rebuke which Christ gave St. Peter for what he did; though his heart was sincere, yet his hand was rash; good intentions are no warrant for irregular actions.—The cup which My Father hath given Me, shall I not drink it? Learn 1. That oft-times the wisdom of God is pleased to put a very bitter cup of affliction into the hand of those to drink, whom He doth most sincerely love; 2. That when God doth so, it is their duty to drink it with submission.

[From M. Henry: Joh_18:1. Our Lord Jesus took His work before Him: the office of the priest was to teach, and pray, and offer sacrifice; Christ, after teaching and praying, applies Himself to make atonement.—Having by His sermon [and prayer] prepared His disciples for this hour of trial, and by His prayer prepared Himself for it, He then courageously went out to meet it: when He had put on His armor, He entered the lists, and not till then.

Joh_18:2. Jesus oft times resorted thither: He would do as He was wont to do, and not alter His method, either to meet the cross or to miss it, when His hour was come.

Joh_18:1. Where there was a garden: He would set us an example in the beginning of His passion, of retirement from the world.—He went over the brook Cedron; the notice taken of it intimates that there was something in it significant; and it points at 1. David’s prophecy concerning the Messiah (Psa_110:7), that He shall drink of the brook in the way; 2. David’s pattern, as a type of the Messiah; in his flight from Absalom, particular notice is taken of his passing over the brook Cedron.—He had His disciples with Him, 1. Because He used to take them with Him when He retired for prayer; 2. They must be witnesses of His sufferings, and His patience under them; 3. To show them their weakness: Christ sometimes brings His people into difficulties, that He may magnify Himself in their deliverance.

Joh_18:2. Mention is made of Judas’ knowing the place, 1. To aggravate his sin, that he would betray his Master notwithstanding his intimate acquaintance with Him: thus has Christ’s holy religion been wounded in the house of its friends, as it could not have been anywhere else; many an apostate could not have been so profane as he is, if he had not been a professor; he could not have ridiculed Scriptures and ordinances, if he had not known them; 2. To magnify the love of Christ, that, though He knew where the traitor would seek Him, thither He went to be found of him; what He did, was not by constraint, but by consent. When others were going to bed, He was going to prayer, going to suffer.

Joh_18:4-6. He received His enemies with all the mildness imaginable toward them, and all the calmness imaginable in Himself.

Joh_18:5. I am He; He has hereby taught us to own Him, whatever it cost us; not to be ashamed of Him or His words; but even in difficult times, to confess Christ crucified.

Joh_18:6. They went backward; they did not fall forward, as humbling themselves before Him, but backward, as standing it out to the utmost.—.When He struck them down, He could have struck them dead, but He would not; because 1. The hour of His suffering was come; 2. He would give an instance of His patience and forbearance with the worst of men, and His compassionate love to His very enemies—in striking them down, and no more. He gave them both a call and space to repent.

Joh_18:7-9. Having given His enemies a repulse, He gives His friends protection.

Joh_18:7. There are hearts so very hard in sin, that nothing will work upon them to reduce and reclaim.

Joh_18:8. When Christ exposed Himself, He excused His disciples, because they were not, as yet, fit to suffer.—Herein Christ gives us 1. A great encouragement to follow Him; for though He has allotted us sufferings, yet He considers our frame; 2. A good example of love to our brethren and concern for their welfare.

Joh_18:8. Let these go their way; He intended to give a specimen of His undertaking as Mediator; when He offered Himself to suffer and die, it was that we might escape.

Joh_18:9. The safety and preservation of the saints are owing, not only to the divine grace in proportioning the strength to the trial, but to the divine providence in proportioning the trial to the strength.

Joh_18:10. Peter’s 1. Rashness; 2. Good-will; 3. Ill-conduct; He 1. had no warrant from His Master for what he did; 2. transgressed the duty of his place, and resisted the powers that were; 3. opposed His Master’s suffering, notwithstanding the rebuke he had for it once; 4. broke the capitulation His master had lately made with the enemy; 5. foolishly exposed himself and his fellow disciples to the fury of this enraged multitude; 6. he played the coward so soon after this (denying his Master), that we have reason to think that he would not have done this, but that he saw his Master cause them to fall on the ground.—God’s over-ruling providence in the direction of the stroke, that it should do no more execution than cut off his car.

Joh_18:11. We must pledge Christ in the cup that He drank of; It Isaiah 1. but a cup; a small matter comparatively, be it what it will; 2. a cup that is given us; 3. given us by a Father.——From Scott: Joh_18:1-9. Even the malice of our Lord’s enemies did not render them more ready to crucify Him, than His love to sinners made Him ready to meet those sufferings.

Joh_18:6. “The day of His wrath” will come, when all who oppose, yea, when all who do not obey, His Gospel, shall be driven backward and perish for ever. In the meantime He spares and warns His adversaries; yet neither His terror, nor His forbearance, will deter [sinful] men in general from their purpose.——From A Plain Commentary, (Oxford): Joh_18:6. He lifts up for an instant the mantle which screened His Divinity, and lo, they are unable even to stand in His presence!

Joh_18:8. This was because He must needs tread the winepress alone, and of the people there must be none with Him (Isa_63:3); lest it should even enter into the dreams of any that the price of Man’s Salvation was paid by some other Sacrifice besides that of Christ only.

Joh_18:9. This is [at the first glance] a somewhat surprising statement: for our Saviour, when He uttered the words referred to, was speaking of eternal, not temporal death; [but] what might have been the conduct, what would have been the fate, of the others, if they had now been separated from their Lord, and dragged away to a terrible death.

[From Krummacher: Joh_18:3. The superfluous torches and lanterns, in the light of the full moon, manifest their conscience-smitten fears.—Officers from the chief priests and Pharisees; It becomes, indeed, people of this class unconditionally [?] to obey the command of those who are set over them. Yet they are not mere machines, incapable of guilt in so doing, but answerable, as well as all other men, to God the final judge, for their moral conduct; their obedience ought to be limited by the well-known maxim—“We must obey God rather than man;” and their duty it therefore was, in the present case, to prefer dying by the hand of the executioner, to the doubtful praise of having done their duty in the perpetration of the most heinous of crimes.

Joh_18:5-6. “I am He !” Great and significant expression! It was never uttered by the Saviour without being accompanied with the most powerful effects. “It is I!” exclaimed He to His astonished disciples, when walking on the waves of the sea; and as, at the sound, the raging storm immediately subsided, so a flood of peace and joy poured itself into the hearts of His followers. “I that speak unto thee am He!” said He to the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well; and immediately she left her water-pot and hastened back Sychar, as the first evangelist to the borders of Samaria. “I am He!” was His testimony at the bar of the Sanhedrin; and the conviction that He was really the Messiah smote the minds of His judges so powerfully that it was only by means of the stage-trick of rending his clothes, that the high priest was able to save himself from the most painful embarrassment: and here, on hearing these words, the whole band of officials start, give way, stagger backward, and fall to the ground as if struck by an invisible flash of lightning, or blown upon by the breath of Omnipotence.—Their prostration in the dust before Him, points out to unbelievers the situation in which they will one day be found.

Joh_18:8. If ye seek me, let these go their way; how well the Lord was able to preserve the most perfect self-possession in every situation, however terrible; and, with His anxiety to complete the work of redemption, to mingle the minute and inconsiderable with the stupendous and sublime, while girding Himself for His mysterious passage to the cross, He does not forget, in His adorable faithfulness, to rescue His disciples from the approaching storm.

Joh_18:10. “Well done, Simon!” we are ready to exclaim, “only go on as thou hast be-gun.” But that which appears to us as such an amiable trait in Peter, is only a confused mixture of self-love, arrogance, and folly; while the fire of our natural enthusiasm for Simon’s act proceeds likewise from only short-sightedness and blindness.

Joh_18:11. The cup which My Father hath given Me, shall I not drink it? In the cup was the entire curse of the inviolable law; all the horrors of conscious guilt, all the terrors of Satan’s fiercest temptations, and all the sufferings which can befall both soul and body. It contained likewise the dreadful ingredients of abandonment by God, infernal agony, and a bloody death, to which the curse was attached. Christ has emptied it, and not a drop remains for His people. The satisfaction He rendered was complete, the reconciliation effected. “There is now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus.”

[From Barnes: Joh_18:8. The wisdom, caution, and prudence of Jesus forsook Him in no peril, however sudden, and in no circumstances, however difficult or trying.——From Jacobus: Joh_18:8-9. Nothing can occur contrary to His eternal plan; not even the mad fury of His foes can overreach His wisdom, or overmatch His provision.——From Owen: Joh_18:7. If it be asked how they could proceed to arrest and maltreat a person, before whom they had fallen prostrate as before a superior being, the answer is to be found in the transient influence which fear exerts upon the mind, and the probable fact, that this sudden repulse was represented by the leaders as effected by demoniacal agency at the instance of Jesus.

[Joh_18:11. (Mat_26:52-54). The cause of Christ is not to be defended by carnal weapons.]

_____________

II

christ over against annas and calaphas. the clarity and serenity of the lord over against the inquisition of the high priest and maltreatment on the part of the servant. the two disciplines in the high priestly palace, and the tottering and falling peter

18:12–27

(Comp. Mat_26:57-75; Mar_14:53-72; Luk_22:54-65.)

12Then the band and the captain [,] and [the] officers19 of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him. 13And led him away [led him]20 to Annas first; for he was father-in-law to [of, τοῦ] Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year [who was high priest that year]. 14Now Caiaphas was he, which [But it was Caiaphas who] gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die21 for the people. 15And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple [And Simon Peter and (the)22 other disciple followed Jesus]: that disciple was known unto the high-priest, and went in with Jesus into the palace [court-yard, αὐλήν] of the high priest. 16But Peter stood at the door without [was standing outside at the door]. Then went out that [the] other disciple, which [who] was known unto the high-priest, and spake unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter. 17Then saith the damsel [maid-servant] that kept the door unto Peter, Art not [omit not]23 thou also one of this man’s disciples? He saith, I am not. 18And the servants and [the] officers stood [were standing] there, who had made [having made, πεποιηχότες] a fire of coals, for it was cold; and they warmed [were warming] themselves: and Peter stood [was standing] with them, and warmed [warming] himself.

19The high-priest then asked Jesus of [about, or, concerning, περί] his disciples, and of [about] his doctrine. 20Jesus answered him, I spake [have spoken, λελάληχα24 openly to the world; I ever [always] taught in the [a]25 synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort [whore all the Jews come together, assemble];26 and in secret have I said [I spoke, ἐλἀλησα] nothing. 21Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me [Ask those who have heard, τους ἀχηχοότας], what I have said [I spoke, ἐλάλησα] unto them: behold, they [these, οὗτοι] know what I said 22[εἶπον]. And when he had thus spoken [said this], one of the officers which stood by [who was standing by, παρεστηχώς] struck Jesus with the palm of his hand [or, struck Jesus on the face, ἔδωχεν ῥάπισμα τῷ Ἰησ],27 saying, Answerest thou the high-priest so? 23Jesus answered him, If I have spoken [spoke, ἐλάλησα] evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?

24Now Annas had sent him [Annas therefore sent him, ἀπέστειλεν οὖν28 bound unto Caiaphas the high-priest. 25And Simon Peter stood and warmed [was standing and warming] himself. They said therefore unto him, Art not [omit not] thou also one of his disciples? He denied it [omit it],29 and said, I am not. 26One of the servants of the high-priest, being his kinsman [being a kinsman of him] whose ear Peter cut off, saith, Did not I see thee in the garden with him? 27Peter then denied again; and immediately the [a] cock crew.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Joh_18:12. Then the band and the captain, etc. Manifestly, the Jewish guard and the Roman soldiers take Jesus prisoner in concert; the soldiers under their chiliarch even have the precedence on the occasion. Hence an incorrect distinction is made in saying; “not until this moment, when the prisoner must be led through the city, does the military troop rejoin the Jewish watch” (Tholuck). [Luthardt (II., 383): “He before whose aspect and ἐγώ εἰμι, the whole band had been terrified and cast to the ground, now suffers Himself to be taken, bound, and led away…. To apprehend and bind One, all gave their help, the cohort, the chiliarch, and the Jewish officers…. Only by the help of all did they feel themselves secure. And thus it was ordered, that the disciples might escape with the more safety. Jesus suffered Himself to be bound, to show thereby the complete surrender of His will, and also in this form of suffering to be our example (Gen_22:9; Psa_105:18).”—P. S.]

Joh_18:13. Led him to Annas first.—See Comm. on Matthew. On Annas see Coram, on Luk_3:2 [p. 55, Am. Ed.], and the article Annas in Winer (at Josephus Ananos). [Annas (Ἄνανος) was appointed high-priest in his 37th year, A. D. 7, by Quirinus, the governor of Syria, but was obliged to give way to Ismael, A. D. 14. After two more changes, Joseph Caiaphas, the son in law of Annas (Joh_18:13; Joseph. Antiqu. XVIII. 2, 1), was appointed to the office, and continued till A. D. 37. Annas seems to have retained the title and part of the power of that office. In Luk_3:2, he is mentioned before Caiaphas, and in Act_4:5, he is called high-priest. Some hold that he was high-priest dejure, Caiaphas de facto. Wieseler maintains that both were at the head of the Jewish hierarchy, Caiaphas as actual high-priest, Annas as president of the Sanhedrin.—P. S.] The preliminary leading of Jesus to Annas recorded by John alone. Different suppositions: The house of Annas was situated near the gate, or they led Jesus, as in triumph, to Annas; Annas was the examiner (Ewald); he was president of the Sanhedrin (Lichtenstein and others). All destitute of evidence, confronted with the supposition suggested by John himself, viz., that the Jews still regarded Annas as the true high-priest in a legitimistic sense, even after Caiaphas had been forced upon them as his successor (Leben Jesu II., p. 1468). The expression relative to Caiaphas: “high-priest of that year” (see Joh_11:49), appearing here for the second time, it would seem that the Evangelist had adopted it as an ironical characterization, current in the popular mouth, of the high-priesthood as desecrated by the Romans. With this observation, as well as with the very obvious notion that the high priestly-father-in-law and son-in-law occupied the same house as well as navigated the same boat, and that, accordingly, their common palace had a common aula or court-yard, in which Peter perpetrated the denial,30 the difficulties that here present themselves are removed.

Meyer justly asserts (in company with Olshausen, Ebrard, Bleek, Baumg.-Crusius, Neander, Luthardt [Wieseler, Stier, Alford, also Chrysostom and Augustine]), that, according to John, the denial of Peter Joh_18:16-18, the examination Joh_18:19-21, and the maltreatment Joh_18:22-23, took place in the dwelling of Annas; likewise justly, that it is impossible to follow the older harmonistics in assuming the leading to Caiaphas to be pre-supposed in Joh_18:15. Tholuck, on the other hand, persists in the assumption that the presentation before Annas receives nothing but a passing mention, as is discernible from the πρῶτον; the Aorist Joh_18:24 having therefore to be read as a Pluperfect (in accordance with Calvin, Lücke, De Wette, Hase and others),31 in spite of Meyer’s characterization of this as “violent” and Ebrard’s and Bleek’s as “neck-breaking.” Luther takes for granted a blunder of the transcriber, who, as he thinks, should have made Joh_18:24 immediately follow Joh_18:14. Manifestly, however, the examination before Annas, as described by John, is an entirely different one from that before Caiaphas, as given by the Synoptists. For John the greatest weight attached to the pre-examination by Annas, for Matthew and Mark to the official chief examination by Caiaphas, for Luke to the legalizing final examination in the morning. See Comm. on Matthew. After the above remarks, the assumption of a discrepancy, entertained by Meyer, Baur and others, falls to the ground; such an assumption is also to be found in Euthym. Zigab., Casaubonus, Stier, Ebrard, p. 541. “It has been fabricated (says Meyer) that Annas and Caiaphas resided in one and the same house.” But an extremely obvious, probable conjecture which, in the simplest manner, solves a difficulty, is something very different from a fabrication. [Augustine, Theophylact, Euthymius, Alford, Hengstenberg, Godet adopt the same easy conjecture. Annas and Caiaphas would naturally occupy different departments of the same (official) palace; and hence the sending from one to the other was quite possible and probable.—P. S.]

Joh_18:14. Now it was Caiaphas who gave counsel to the Jews.—Wherefore this notice? The Evangelist, in relating that Jesus was led to Annas first, already announced that He would be brought before Caiaphas also. He, however, designs forthwith to intimate what fate impended over Jesus at the hands of both of them. It was an evil omen that the people intended taking Him before Caiaphas, him who had already pronounced sentence of death upon Him. But it is also characteristic of the enmity of old Annas that Jesus was led to him even before He was brought to Caiaphas; the announcement of this fact is appropriately accompanied by the statement that he was the father-in-law of that murderous Caiaphas.

Joh_18:15. And the other [another] disciple.—Modest self-designation of John, as chap, 20:2, 3, 4, 8, comp. Joh_1:40. The article is wanting only in A. D., etc. [also in B. א* See Text. Notes.—P. S.]. On the omission of the article several untenable hypotheses are founded: 1. That it was an unknown disciple (Augustine, Calov., Gurlitt); 2. a citizen of Jerusalem (Grotius); 3. Judas Iscariot (Heumann). [Absurd. 4. James, the brother of John (P. Cassel, 1871).—P. S.] The notice that all the disciples had fled, does not conflict with the fact that they subsequently took heart again and that some of them returned. It is characteristic of the friendship of the two, Peter and John, that they here go voluntarily together, not on an official mission. Peter at first takes the lead. But at the street-door of the court (the αὐλεία θύρα),32 their relative positions change. John is admitted into the court yard, being known to the high-priest, while Peter remains without. See Comm. on Matthew [p. 491, Am. Ed.]. “John’s acquaintance with the high-priest gains in probability if we may suppose, from Joh_19:27, that he owned a house in Jerusalem. That the Jews had portresses instead of porters is shown also by Act_12:13.” Tholuck. Joseph. Antiq. VII. 2, 1.

Joh_18:16. And brought in Peter.—That is, John did this, not she who kept the door (as Grotius and others have it).

Joh_18:17. Art thou also? [Μὴ καὶ σύ, as well as the ἄλλος, Joh_18:16].—“The καί contains the pre-supposition that John, whom she nevertheless had, for acquaintance’ sake, admitted along with the rest, is a disciple of Jesus.” Meyer. According to Mark, the girl does not say this until she has fixed her eyes upon Peter, according to Luke, not until she has examined him by the light. Hence it appears to result that she now grows doubtful as to whether she should have let him in, or whether she ought not to denounce him. This circumstance would, however, cast doubt on the supposition of Meyer, who holds the question of the maid to have been put in a totally unsuspecting mood. At all events she does not seem to have inferred the discipleship of Peter from the mere fact alone of his connection with John.—(One) of the disciples of this man [ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τούτου.]—Contemptuously [Meyer]. Not compassionately (Chrysostom and others). Meyer conjectures that John went, together with Jesus and those who were about Him, into the interior of the house, i.e. out of the hall into the chamber of examination. This is improbable, though he occupied a position which enabled him to perceive what was going on in the chamber as well as what passed in the hall.

I am not [οὐκ εἰμί].—On the three different denials of Peter, see Comm. on Matthew, at the history in question, [p. 498, Am. ed.] “It may surprise us that John remains unmolested while Peter’s temptations are repeated: but the reason of this should be sought less in the timorous embarrassment of this latter disciple than in the boldness with which he stepped in amongst the menials.” Tholuck. Nevertheless, an assumed boldness is a characteristic symptom of fear.

Joh_18:18. Now Peter was standing with them [?)ἦν… μετ’ αὐτῶν ἐστώς]. The fact of his now standing, now sitting, seems to testify to his inward disquiet, equally with the temerity of his mingling in the crowd of servants and myrmidons and warming himself at their coal-fire.

Joh_18:19. The high priest then. Annas. The examination of Annas, in shrewd calculation, starts from the most general point. The Lord’s disciples or adherents first form the subject of interrogation. Then follows inquiry as to the doctrine by which Jesus gained them. He desires to ascertain what is to be thought of, or, perchance, feared from, the followers of Jesus, hoping, from the answers of the latter, to gain foothold for an accusation. He, however, manifestly uses, as a stand-point, the malevolent assumption that Jesus has founded a secret association by means of secret teachings; this the answer of Jesus demonstrates. The distinction between this examination and the subsequent one by Caiaphas is obvious. At the latter, they sought to prove that He was a public blasphemer against the sanctuary, etc.

Joh_18:20. I have spoken frankly to the world. [ἐγὼ—emphatic, some one who—παῤῥησίᾳ λελάληκα τῷ κόσμῳ. Meyer. παῤῥησίᾳ is to be apprehended subjectively: without reserve, plainly—not publicly, openly, which it does not mean. When accompanied, however, by to the world, the quality of publicity is, in an indirect manner, most, strongly expressed. The term: To the world, means, in the first place, the Jewish world, and characterizes it in respect of the two central points of publicity: in the synagogues and in the temple. In a synagogue [ἐν συναγωγῇ—without the article—there being many synagogues] is modified by πάντοτε, at all times; in the temple [ἐν τῷ ἰερῷ, the one temple at Jerusalem]; by the addition, where all the Jews assemble [ὅπου πάντες οἵ Ἰουδαῖοι συνέρχονται]. Both clauses signify: in complete connection with synagogue and temple; and so the assumption is made that the mountain, field, and lake sermons of Jesus have likewise preserved this connection.—And in secret I spoke nothing [καὶ ἐν κρυπτῷ ἐλάλησα οὐδέν]. These words do not conflict with Mat_10:27, or with the fact that Jesus taught the disciples in confidential conversations. The warnings against the Pharisees in the sermon on the mount, for instance, He Himself publicly repeated in the temple, and, Mat_10:27, characterized every confidential saying as destined for publicity. That which is here disaffirmed by Jesus is the assumption of mischievous sectarian or seditious secrecy; at the same time, the Lord characterizes the design of the old inquisitor’s question and rends the web of his insinuation. The synagogue is spoken of collectively, as a unitous institution; hence, neither the synagogues in Jerusalem, nor the provincial synagogues, as Tholuck maintains, are exclusively referred to.

Joh_18:21. Why askest thou Me? [τί με ἐρωτᾷς;]—The high-priest had deserved this sharp and thorough setting-down; it, however, also served to render his intention evident, to unmask and rebuke his craftiness: [The question seems to approve the principle of our judicature that the accused person should not be interrogated, but the proof of the charge be substantiated from the testimony of witnesses.]

Joh_18:22. One of the officers who was Standing by. [εἶς παρεστηκὼς τῶν ὑπηρετῶν ἔδωκεν ῥάπισμα τῷ Ἰησοῦ. On ρ̀άπισμα (a blow on the cheek with the hand, or with the staff; only in later Greek) see Text. Note.—P. S.] This maltreatment of Jesus must be distinguished from that which He experienced on His examination before Caiaphas, subsequently to His condemnation (Mat_26:37); as, similarly, this last must in its turn be distinguished from the maltreatment narrated by Luke. Luk_22:63-64; although Matthew has summed up in one the two latter acts. The maltreatments recorded by Luke occurred whilst- Jesus, after His condemnation before Caiaphas in the night, was retained under arrest until the final examination which must, in accordance with the law, be held by day-time, on the following morning.

Is it thus that Thou answerest the high-priest?—The prohibition, Exo_22:28, had been by the Jews extended into an ordinance instilling a bigoted veneration for superiors, and for the high-priest especially. In the present instance, the officer makes an application of this prohibition, with indiscretion, hypocritical eye-service, and brutality. Rupert: fortis percussor, mollis adulator. Comp. Act_23:2.

Joh_18:23. If I spoke evil. [εἰ κακῶδ ἐλάλησα].—In clear presence of mind, the answer of Christ corresponds to the situation. He is on trial. If He, therefore, here make an improper remark, the person who disapproves of it is at liberty to appear against Him as accuser and witness. Hence the μαρτύρησον does not mean simply: prove it [as Luther’s version has it], but—come forward as a witness against it. Accusing and testifying are here thy business; not so judging, still less punishing before sentence is passed. With this admonition Christ awards him the right of accusation; with the following words, He reprimands him for the wrong of maltreatment. The entire deliverance shows how the saying Mat_5:39 is to be interpreted and applied in spirit.33 His reprimand indirectly touches the high-priest also, who allows the maltreatment.

Joh_18:24. Annas, therefore, despatched Him, bound [ἀπέστειλεν οὖν αὐτὸν Ἀ. δεδεμένον πρὸς K.].—The pre-examination was at an end,—its result being the confounding of Annas, with his crafty inquisition. This, however, had made so little impression on him that he now sent the Lord bound (the signification is, doubtless: after he had caused the chains to be put upon Him again) to His formal examination before Caiaphas. In the fact of his forwarding Him chained, there lay a speaking sign of his desire for His death. Also the circumstance that it had been found impossible to stamp Jesus as a secret conspiratoi”, by reason of His appeal to the publicity of His ministry, was made use of as a ground for summoning false witnesses against Him, who accused Him on account of a public declaration. It was a declaration made by Him in the ears of the rulers (John ii.), one which they had not forgotten and which they could easily pervert. [The pluperfect rendering of ἀπέστειλεν, miserat, had sent (E. V.) is ungrammatical (see Meyer, p. 599), inconsistent with οὖν (which for this reason was omitted by some MSS.), and owes its origin to the desire to harmonize John with the Synoptists. The apparent discrepancy disappears if we assume that Annas and his son-in-law Caiaphas occupied different departments in one and the same official palace, which is intrinsically all the more probable as they in some way shared the high-priestly dignity, the one perhaps as high priest de jure, the other de facto. Comp. the notes on Joh_18:13.—P. S.]

Unto Caiaphas the high-priest.—On the now following official examination before Caiaphas, see Comm. on Matthew at this passage. On the third formal examination in the morning, see Comm. on Luke, p. 359, Am. Ed.

Joh_18:25. Now Simon Peter was still standing there and warming himself—The hall for both examination rooms must therefore have been the same. See note on Joh_18:13. Similarly Luk_22:54. Luke knows only of a house of the high-priest. Perhaps it was an official residence, of which Caiaphas had given up a part to his father-in-law.

They said therefore unto him.—This the second denial. According to Matthew it was at the moment when Peter wished to withdraw from the coal-fire in order to approach the entrance-hall; and the men questioned him at the instigation of another maid. See Mat_26:71; Mar_14:68; Luk_22:58.

Joh_18:26. One of the servants of the high-priest, being a kinsman.—See Matthew, Mat_26:73; Mark, Mar_14:70; Luke, Luk_22:59. Meyer groundlessly affirms this servant to have stood outside of the garden awhile ago. Why may he not have been one of the seizors? Peter excited his notice in the garden; he does not seem to have observed—at all events not with precision—that it was Peter who dealt the sword-blow. John distinctly brings out the increase of danger in the charges. First it is a single maid who does but doubtingly question him. Then it is the officers around the coal-fire who more decidedly interrogate him. Finally a kinsman of Malchus whose ear he cut off, pretends to recognize him as one whom he has already seen in the garden with Jesus.—While John plainly depicts the intensifications of the temptations, he, in common with Luke, permits the intensifications of Peter’s guilt, most vividly portrayed by Matthew (simple denial, abjuration, self imprecation) and rendered prominent by Mark likewise, to recede from view. This gives a picture of the relation of Paul and John to Peter totally different from that invented by the Tübingen School. Matthew, the Apostle of the Jews, and Mark, the disciple of Peter, represent the magnitude of Peter’s denial in a manner the most regardless; John and Luke manifest the greatest clemency; the Paulinist (Luke) is especially tender.

And immediately a cock crew.—Mark alone, Mar_14:68, has recorded the first cock crow after the first denial. That crow also involved an aggravation of Peter’s ease which John passes over. Similarly he passes over Peter’s ineffectual attempt to withdraw—an attempt which exhibits him in a condition of such utter perplexity and helplessness.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. From John we learn the more minute particulars of the denial of Peter; especially its cause and the gradualness of its progress. As also the exceedingly important pre-examination by Annas, in which that sly old hierarch sought to ensnare the Lord in the reproach of secret conspiracy. On the other hand, our Evangelist passes over the principal examination by Caiaphas, and likewise the formal final session in the morning, which latter is intimated by Matthew and detailed by Luke. His narrative of the denial of Peter is very definite as to chronology and also locality; that denial runs through the lengthy period of Christ’s examination before Annas and Caiaphas; the place is always the same (see the Exegetical note). By the Synoptists, on the contrary, the denial is summed up in respect of its end and issue, and in this form suitably follows, in Matthew and Mark, the principal examination before Caiaphas, while Luke, with equal correctness, makes it precede the morning examination.

2. The Examination of Jesus by annas, whom the Romans had deposed, affords us a profound glimpse into the character and conduct of a legitimistic partyism. The Jews are forced to accept Caiaphas as the legal high-priest; but they do not cease to regard Annas as their legitimate head; Annas and Caiaphas, however, have accommodated themselves to this, the popular mind, and arranged their household affairs in a manner in keeping with the situation. And this old legitimistic secret-leaguer would stamp Christ as a revolutionary secret-leaguer!

3. The conjunction of the Roman soldiers with the temple-guard on the occasion of Christ’s being taken prisoner, a symbol of the common share of the Gentile and the Jewish world in the crucifixion of Christ. See Luk_23:12 and Act_4:26.

4. A stroke of John’s greatness—his not thinking it necessary to justify himself in regard to his singular acquaintanceship in the house of the high-priest.

5. Peter and John in the high-priest’s house. Or, si duo faciunt idem, non est idem. Peter was burdened with the consciousness of a civil offence against Malchus. This rendered his condition insecure. John, though meaning well, was at fault in not sufficiently entering into the dangerous situation of Peter.

6. The examination before Annas is a type of the ever-recurring plot of hierarchical governments to tax, first, Christianity generally, then Protestantism, further all decidedly evangelical social life with conspiracy, revolution, secret crimes and criminal complots. But as Christ defended Himself against this insinuation by appealing to His public ministry, so the like has been done and may be done by all His true confessors. Here we also have it demonstrated how decidedly Christianity has renounced all the impure, secret machinations of fanatical spirits and sects.

7. The saying called forth from Christ by the blow on the cheek, given Him by the eye-servant in the garb of a servant of justice, possesses not only a Christological but also a hermeneutical import. It indicates how His words, particularly Mat_5:39, are in spirit to be interpreted. His remark, replete with composure, mental clearness and mild reproof, is like the offering of the other check.

8. The intensifications of Peter’s temptation are thrown into bold relief by John, his guilt being thus exhibited in a milder light. The first denial took place during the examination by Annas, the second and third during the examination before Caiaphas, after Christ had been led, bound, to the latter and when His prospects were, consequently, already very gloomy. Add to this that the third question exposed Peter to being recognized as the offender who had wounded Malchus. The repentance of Peter is set forth by John with sufficient distinctness in the later signs of his conversion. It is remarkable that John seems to have done nothing to warn Peter. Whether he was not near enough to him, or whether he entertained too high an opinion of his practical abilities, we will not venture to assert; at all events he appears to have been unwilling to exalt himself at Peter’s expense in the version which he gives of the transaction.

9. The denial of Peter does not mean that he intended to renounce Jesus inwardly, but that he designed to escape a mortal peril by means of a so called white lie. Thus, from a vocation to the morality of Christ, to apostolic faithfulness in confession, he momentarily sank to the level of ordinary, popular morality, which holds such evasions to be admissible, nay, clever. If we judge of David’s trespasses by the absolute arbitrariness of oriental despots, they appear in a milder light than when exposed to the full rays of the Theocracy. So it is with the transgression of Peter, when judged according to popular and worldly conceptions. But in the light of Christ it was a deep fall.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The capture of Jesus: 1. A consequence of His free surrender. 2. A sin of the united Roman and Jewish authorities of the ancient world. 3. A judgment, in which the glory of the ancient world does itself appear captive and bound.—The cord or bonds of Christ an indication of the bonds of the world.—The unanimity of Annas and Caiaphas.—The secret inquisitional trial by Annas, aiming at the ascertainment of secret transgressions on Christ’s part: a picture of life.—The sufferings of Christ under hierarchic partyism.—How the worldly-wise State loves to shut one eye to the machinations of illegal, illustrious parties.—On the denial of Peter”, see Comm. on Matthew, Mark, Luke.—Peter and John in the high-priest’s house.—The measure of freedom of entrance into worldly circles, is diverse for Christians: 1. Not the same for every one; 2. not the same in all moods; 3. not the same in all external temptations.—Peter warmed himself: 1. Fact: He warmed himself and grew all the while colder. 2. Doctrine: We may not seek to grow warm by the fires of the Lord’s enemies.—The examination before Annas, see Doctrinal Note, No. 6.—Comparison of the examination before Annas and that before Caiaphas. See Exeg. Note to first clause of Joh_18:25.—In the one examination He was assumed to be a secret sneak, in the other a public blasphemer.—The Lord’s appeal to the publicity of His labors.—The Lord’s intimation that the court of Annas was no authorized tribunal.—Annas found no pretext for accusing Jesus, and yet passed Him on bound to Caiaphas.—He sent Him bound for a sign: 1. The bad sign; 2. the sign-language of the bad.—The three spiritual examinations wherein Christ stood.—The first an unauthorized private examination, the second an examination with false witnesses, the third a mere mock examination.—How the world has warped justice in all forms over the head of Christ.—Christ in human judicatures; 1. As the Spirit’s judgment upon them. 2. As the regeneration and sanctification of them. 3. As the final judgment upon them.—How Jesus confessed His disciples, whilst Peter denied Him.

Starke: Hands so powerful, so beneficent, are bound.—Our love of an unbound liberty has had to be atoned for by the bonds of the Son of God, Psa_2:3.—Connection and alliance by marriage is oft-times an occasion of damnation, because thereby men entangle themselves with people who do only evil, 2Ki_8:18.—It is Christ’s presentation before the tribunal of men that we must thank for our liberation from the strict tribunal of God.—Stay away from that place where thou hast nothing to do; mere curiosity can readily get thee into danger and misfortune.—Let a man but step out of the way of God, and every step brings him nearer to his fall.—Quesnel: It is one of Satan’s traps to smooth our way sometimes to such places as he would keep us in for his advantage.—Lange: It can easily happen that a man may act indiscreetly out of pure good will, and only injure another by his services.—Quesnel: Many a one thinks he stands fast as any column, and yet he is more easily shaken than a reed. O be not proud, but fear thee!—Osiander: We should avoid preachers who shun the light and teach secretly in corners what they may not publicly confess.—It does not conflict with modesty and humility to meet disguised enemies of the truth with undaunted frankness. Joh_18:22. We witness the same spectacle here that occurred, 1Ki_22:24.—An earnest presentation of a subject is a thorn in the eye to some people; they construe such presentation as immodesty, as a want of respect, because they are biased by prejudices.—Wicked masters have wicked servants; birds of a feather flock together.—Zeisius: Those who speak the truth, especially faithful preachers, are to this day smitten with Christ, covered with all manner of insult, derision, revilement, tribulation—and, withal, well-nigh forced to hold their peace, 2Ti_4:3.—Ibid.: Though it is true that a Christian should, with a good conscience, suffer wrong, yet need he not extend to the world his approbation of her wrong, as she would gladly have him do; on the contrary, he should defend himself against it, yet with fitting meekness and modesty; therefore says Luther: he must divorce mouth and hand; he must not surrender his mouth to the enemy, so as to approve the wrong; but yet he must keep his hand quiet and not avenge himself, Act_26:25.—Christ, for the good of His members, has had to burst through the masks of false politeness.—The desire to shade away a fault committed, may become an occasion of fresh and greater sins.—Many a man, if he were not found in places where he hath nought to do, would keep out of numerous difficulties. Stay at home and do thine own business in the fear of God, trusting in Him, Pro_7:11 ff.—When Christ and His people are to be opposed, the slaves of Satan exert all their strength in unison, to the end that they may overwhelm and crush them, Psa_10:2. [The appositeness of the passage cited not being apparent on reference to the English Bible, we subjoin a translation of the German rendering, which here, as in many other instances, differs considerably from the English. “Because the wicked exerciseth himself in pride, the miserable—afflicted—wretched—man must suffer. They cleave one to another and imagine maliciousness.”]—We have cause to beware that we do not, by curious questions, plunge our neighbor into temptation to all kinds of lies and dissimulations.—What a faint-hearted wretch is man when conscience awakes. Every rustling leaf strikes him with fear and dismay.—If thou confess Jesus and deny thyself, together with the world, thou art blessed, but if thou deny Christ, the whole world cannot help thee to bliss—no, not if thou confess it a thousand times over.—Let him that standeth, take heed lest he fall, 1Co_10:12.—If thou get not the start of sin, thou fallest from one sin into another, from a small one into a greater one, nay, even from the state of grace into the unblessed state of damnation.—Even the meanest creature, if it be God’s will to use it as His instrument, may become a means of arousing the sinner.

Braune: John expressly remarks that Jesus was led first to Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, high-priest under Augustus from the year 12 a. d. to 23, when Valerius Gratus, governor of Syria, deposed him; he was uncommonly crafty, and his secret acts were full of violence. In 24, his son Eleazar became high-priest for one year; at the end of the year 25 his son-in-law Joseph, called Caiaphas, received the office through the self-same governor who had deposed Annas. Caiaphas remained high-priest until 36—not, of a certainty, without the helpful influence of Annas—while the remaining high-priests followed one another like the shadows of clouds driven by the wind; for in the last 420 years of the temple, there ruled more than 300 high priests. It is owing to the powerful influence of Annas that he is mentioned previous to Caiaphas, the ruling high-priest, and that Jesus is here led first to him. Ananus, the last of Annas’ sons, having the same name as his father, had the apostle James put to death. This circumstance harmonizes with the family history. It was calculated that before this High Council—the sons of Aaron, the dignitaries of the temple—Jesus would answer with intimidation, and be caught in what He said. And how undaunted He stood there, how sublime! He would not cast pearls before swine. The legitimate answer was accounted disrespectful by the officers; one said: Oughtest Thou to answer the high-priest thus? It was in the form, then, that the error was thought to lie—in the mode of procedure. Great stress is put upon outward formality; a man may be permitted to speak the truth, but he must do it with grace and good breeding; behind these, however, so much untruth is concealed, that the truth itself becomes tainted and loses its virtue.—He is a betrayer of mankind, like Judas the betrayer of Christ, who desires a public office without possessing the necessary moral and mental qualifications therefore; nothing is so indispensable for such an office as humility and a respect for the dignity of men.—If it be a question of truth, proof is what is required. Only tyrants employ torture; even a police officer may be a tyrant, leaping over proofs in false official zeal.

Gossner: Peter, doubtless, thought it a piece of good fortune, and it was his misfortune. Thou art more fortunate in having a friend who preventeth thee from going in to men of the world than in possessing one who procureth thee access to them and introduceth thee into their dwellings.—This fire in the court of the high-priest could not impart fresh warmth to Peter’s zeal and his fidelity to Jesus. If he had warmed himself by God in prayer, he would not have fallen.—Jesus was expected to deliver up a list of His disciples. Because disciples or pupils readily fall into some inadvertence, it was hoped that an accusation might thus be brought against Him. But the Saviour had already provided for the security of His disciples: Let these go! He said on the Mount of Olives. And what He says, does and must come to pass.—The Saviour saw through all this. He knew their hearts; and this clear glance into such fearfully perverted hearts—how it must have cut through and wounded His pure, holy, loving heart. Let him who experiences something similar, think of his Saviour and gather strength from Him to suffer after Him.—The enemies of the truth lie in wait. Christ acts openly.—Alas, what must He. what must the fairest visage in this world endure!—and yet He still maketh His face to shine upon us, and we are healed.—Officers of justice are never permitted to intermeddle in a case; here, however, against. Jesus, they were free to do anything; they well knew how far they might go.—His answer was regarded as a sin and a violation of the priestly dignity; and Christ must suffer Himself to be treated as one who did not understand the laws of politeness; He must bear the blame of immodesty, just as the primitive Christians were always treated as unmannered boors when they frankly confessed the truth.—Am I not permitted to answer for Myself? Is it not demanded of Me? Why dost thou thus abuse Me for doing it?—The Saviour weareth the bonds and useth not His strength to burst them, as He easily could have done. Why not? Because it was not really the bonds that bound Him, but love and the impulse to free us from bonds, designing, by means of those very bonds of His, to break our chains from which we else should never have got free.—On Malchus: Thus God bringeth us again into the company of those we fain would never see more. Suddenly and unexpectedly we run into their hands: Therefore do thou cut off no person’s ear, if thou wouldst never be dismayed at the sight of him.—Jesus shows that the cock, even, does not crow at hap-hazard, but that God is able, in His economy, to make use of his outcry as a good domestic medicine,—as at this time, when he had to preach repentance to the first Apostle.

Heubner: It was an unblest relationship betwixt Annas and Caiaphas; the ties were cords of sin. John mentions this in order to indicate that the sentence of such judges might be divined in advance. Caiaphas has enforced his wicked counsel. What a joy was that, that he might now feel?—Peter’s following was the more presumptuous, since Jesus had said Joh_18:8 : Let them go. It was a wrong following, entered upon in presumption and human strength.—Great houses of the world bring many dangers.—Against his will, John was instrumental to Peter’s hurt. Introduction to the presence of the great often becomes an occasion of our sin. God put delays in Peter’s way, in order to give him time for reflection.—The repairing to mixed companies in the homes of the great is to the weak generally a cause of their falling; intercourse with unsanctified men oft-times seduces Christians from the right path.—The accusations against Jesus were twofold: 1. To the effect that He had gathered Himself partizans,—He, who did but found a holy union, the kingdom of God; 2. that He had disseminated suspicious doctrines,—He, who taught heavenly truth.—Publicity was the character of Jesus’ life and it is the character of Christianity. Christianity knows nothing of secret-mongery, mysteries of an order; it would be entirely public, because it diffuses the truth which is common property of all.—The conduct of the officer, conduct arising from malice and a desire to flatter, redounds to the accusation of the high-priest himself. That the officer dared indulge in such mutinous conduct before the eyes of the spiritual magistracy, betrays the spirit of that magistracy.

Joh_18:23. This is a commentary upon Mat_5:39. Christ shows how, even towards those who offer us the most bitter insult and wrong, we can unite earnest patience and love and make answer for ourselves.—Those hands, by Jesus extended only for the conferring of benefits, were bound.—John describes the waxing of the peril. The higher this mounts, the lower sinks the courage of Peter. First it was a maid, then men, now relatives of the wounded servant [who question him].

[Craven: From Augustine: Joh_18:17. Christ is not only denied by him who denies that He is Christ, but by him also who denies himself to be a Christian.

Joh_18:23. What can be truer, gentler, kinder, than this answer?—Some one will ask here, why He did not do what He Himself commanded, i.e., not make this answer, but give the other cheek to the smiter. But what if He did both, both answered gently, and gave, not His cheek only to the smiter, but His whole body to be nailed to the Cross? And herein He shows, that those precepts of patience are to be performed not by posture of the body, but by preparation of the heart; for it is possible that a man might give his cheek outwardly, and yet be angry at the same time.

Joh_18:27. Lo! the prophecy of the Physician is fulfilled, the presumption of the sick man demonstrated.—From Chrysostom: Joh_18:16. But Peter stood at the door without; Peter’s love took him as far as the palace, but his fear prevented him entering in.

Joh_18:17. What sayest thou, O Peter? Didst thou not say before, I will lay down my life for Thy sake? What then had happened, that thou givest way even when the damsel asks thee? It was not a soldier who asked thee, but a mean porteress.—Therefore did Divine Providence permit Peter first to fall, in order that he might be less severe to sinners from the remembrance of his own fall. Peter sinned, and obtained pardon, that judges might thereafter have that rule to go by in dispensing pardon.

Joh_18:25. And Simon Peter stood and warmed himself; The Evangelist means that the once fervid disciple was now too torpid to move even when our Lord was carried away; showing how weak man’s nature is when God forsakes him.

Joh_18:15-18; Joh_18:25-27. How hurtful it is to trust in self, and not to ascribe all is God.——From Gregory: Joh_18:18. The fire of love was smothered in Peter’s breast, and he was warming himself before the coals of the persecutors, i.e., with the love of this present life, whereby his weakness was increased.——From Alcuin: Joh_18:15. Peter followed his Master out of devotion, though afar off, on account of fear.

Joh_18:19. He does not ask in order to know the truth, but to find out some charge against Him, on which to deliver Him to the Roman Governor to be condemned; but our Lord so tempers His answer, as neither to conceal the truth, nor yet to appear to defend Himself.

[From Burkitt: Joh_18:12-14. How impossible it is for the greatest innocence and virtue to protect from slander and false accusation! And no person can be so innocent or good, whom false witness may not condemn.

Joh_18:15-18; Joh_18:25-27. How may the slavish fear of suffering drive the holiest and best of men to commit the foulest and worst of sins!—The occasion of Peter’s fall: 1. His presumptuous confidence of his own strength and standing; Though all men forsake Thee, yet will not I; 2. His being in bad company.—He denied Him first with a lie, then with an oath and curse. Oh, how dangerous is it, not to resist the beginnings of sin! If we yield to one temptation, Satan will assault us with more and stronger.—The heinous and aggravating circumstances of Peter’s sin: From 1. The character of his person; 2. The person whom he denies, his Master, his Saviour; 3. The time when he denied Him; soon after Christ had washed his feet; yea, soon after he had received the sacrament from Christ’s own hand.—How unreasonable is their objection against coming to the Lord’s table, that some who go to it dishonor Christ as soon as they come from it! Such examples ought not to discourage us from coming to the ordinance, but should excite and increase our watchfulness after we have been there.

Joh_18:19-21. Christ never willingly affected corners; He taught openly, and propounded His doctrine publicly and plainly in the world.—Learn hence, That 1. It is not unusual for the best of doctrines to pass under the odious name of error and heresy; 2. The ministers of Christ who have truth on their side, may and ought to speak boldly and openly.—“Truth blushes at nothing, except at its being concealed.”

Joh_18:22. Christ did endure ignominious and contemptuous usage, giving His cheek to the smiters, to testify that shame and reproachful usage which was deserved by us, and to sanctify that condition to us, whenever it is allotted for us.

Joh_18:23. Though our Saviour doth not revenge Himself, yet He vindicates Himself, and defends Himself both with law and reason; to stand up in defence of our own innocency, is not contrary to the duties of patience and forgiveness, or to the practice and example of our Lord Jesus.

Joh_18:24. His condescending to go bound from one high-priest to another, and from one tribunal to another, teaches His people what delinquents they were before the tribunal of God, and what they deserved by reason of sin.—From M. Henry: Joh_18:12. To Christ’s bonds we owe our liberty, His confinement was our enlargement. He was bound that 1. The types and prophecies of the Old Testament might herein be accomplished; 2. He might bind us to duty and obedience; His bond’s for us are bonds upon us; 3. His bonds for us were designed to make our bonds for Him easy to us, if at any time we be so called out to suffer for Him.

Joh_18:13. We had been led away of our own impetuous lusts, and led captive by Satan at his will, and, that we might be rescued, Christ was led away, led captive by Satan’s agents and instruments.—Caiaphas was high-priest that same year; 1. When a bad thing was to be done by a high-priest, according to the fore-knowledge of God, Providence so ordered it that a bad man should be in the chair to do it; 2. When God would make it to appear what corruption there was in the heart of a bad man, He put him into a place of power; Many a man’s advancement has lost him his reputation.

Joh_18:15. We must take heed of tempting God by running upon difficulties beyond our strength, and venturing too far in the way of suffering: If our call be clear to expose ourselves, we may hope that God will enable us to honor Him; but if it be not, we may fear that God will leave us to shame ourselves.—That disciple was known unto the high-priest; as there are many who seem disciples, and are not so, so there are many who are disciples, and seem not so [at a casual glance]; we must not conclude a man to be no friend to Christ, merely because he has acquaintance and conversation with those that are His known enemies.

Joh_18:16. The courtesies of our friends often prove a snare to us, through a misguided affection.

Joh_18:17. Observe here 1. How slight the attack was; it was a silly maid, of no account, that challenged him; 2. How speedy the surrender was; without taking time to recollect himself, he suddenly answered, I am not; 3. Yet he goes further into the temptation, Joh_18:18.—Peter stood and warmed himself; 1. It was a, fault bad enough, that he did not attend his Master, and appear for Him at the upper end of the hall, where He was now under examination; he might have been (1) a witness for Him, (2) a witness to Him; 2. It was much worse, that he joined himself with those that were His Master’s enemies; he stood with them, etc.—Peter was much to be blamed, because 1. He associated himself with these wicked men; 2. He desired to be thought one of them, that he might not be suspected to be a disciple of Christ.

Joh_18:20. Christ sought no corners, for He feared no colors, nor said anything that He needed to be ashamed of.

Joh_18:22. Wicked rulers will not want wicked servants, who will help forward the affliction of those whom their masters persecute.

Joh_18:23. We learn 1. That in such cases we must not be our own avengers, nor judges in our own cause; 2. Our resentment of injuries done us must be always rational, and never passionate; 3. When called out to suffering, we must accommodate ourselves to the inconveniences of a suffering state, with patience, and by one indignity done us be prepared to receive another, and make the best of it.

Joh_18:25. Peter staid to warm himself; but they that warm themselves with evil-doers, grow cold toward good people and good things; and they that are fond of the devil’s fire-side, are in danger of the devil’s fire.—Yielding to one temptation invites another, and perhaps a stronger; Satan redoubles his attacks when we give ground.

Joh_18:26. They who by sin think to help themselves out of trouble, do but entangle and embarrass themselves the more: Dare to be brave, for truth will out—a bird of the air may perhaps tell the matter which we seek to conceal with a lie.—Notice is taken of this servant’s being akin to Malchus; he that may need a friend, should not make a foe.

Joh_18:27. He denied again; see here 1. The nature of sin in general; the heart is hardened by the deceitfulness of it; 2. Of the sin of lying in particular; it is a fruitful sin, and upon that account exceeding sinful.—Immediately the cock crew; see 1. The care Christ has of those that are His, notwithstanding their follies; though they fall, they are not utterly cast down, not utterly cast off; 2. The advantage of having faithful remembrancers near us, who, though they cannot tell us more than we know already, yet may remind us of that which we know, but have forgotten.—The crowing of the cock to others was an accidental thing, and had no significancy; but to Peter it was the voice of God, and had a blessed tendency to awaken his conscience, by putting him in mind of the word of Christ.—From Scott: Joh_18:15-18; Joh_18:25-27. Self-confident rashness differs from steady courage and patience of faith; and they who most readily venture into temptation, are often most easily overcome by it.—As Christ suffered every insult for the sake of Peter, even when Peter was denying Him; so He foresaw all our unfaithfulness and ingratitude, at the time when He shed His blood for our sins; this consideration should not only encourage our hope in His mercy, but also shame us out of our base requitals of such a Benefactor.—The meekness, patience and wisdom of the Son of God only served to increase the enmity of His persecutors; and their base usage illustrated His consummate excellency: This should teach us what to expect from the wicked, and how to behave towards them.

[From Krummacher: Joh_18:12. Behold Christ yonder bears your fetters. Jesus bound! What a spectacle! How many a prophetic type of the Old Testament finds its fulfilment in this fact! Isaac; the ram on Mount Moriah; the sacred ark of the covenant, when it had fallen into the hands of the Philistines; Joseph; the paschal lambs; Samson.—Jesus bound! Omnipotence in fetters! the Creator bound by the creature! the Lord of the world, the Captive of His mortal subjects!

Joh_18:19. The world still acts like Annas; because it will not acknowledge that we possess the real and eternal truth of God, it stamps the latter as heretical, and brands us as a sect.

Joh_18:20. “We may discern in Jesus all the marks of a true teacher—confidence, which delivers its testimony before the whole world; persevering continuance in that testimony at all times; and a siding with existing divine and human ordinances.”

Joh_18:22. The feeling of the family reflected itself in the soul of the menial who wore its livery.—How often are we treated in a similar manner, when the truth which we proclaim to the men of the world can no longer be assailed: how does hypocritical zeal for the preservation of the honor of authority start up against us, and how pompously it calls out to us, “Answerest thou the high-priest so?”

Joh_18:15-18; Joh_18:25-27. Peter reminds us of that class of our brethren, of whom we are wont to say that though they possess the burning heart, yet they are still in want of the light of the Holy Spirit; the new life is implanted in its germ, but the development itself is still far behind.—He did not yet know how much the noblest human feelings depend upon the change of circumstances, situations, and seasons; he was ignorant that one who could be enthusiastic for Jesus transfigured on Mount Tabor, possessed no pledge, from this feeling, that he would be equally zealous for Jesus ignominiously crucified on Mount Calvary.—It is only the Lord’s gracious inspiration which produces true heroism. The simple disciple, in the armor of his own feeling of affection for his Master, thought himself abundantly able to cope with Satan and his crafty devices.—O what a disgrace for the disciple, morally to have convinced the troop that he could not be Jesus’ friend, but had sworn fealty to the banner of his adversaries.—Simon Peter vowed and promised, certainly with the purest intentions, but neglected to watch and pray. Let him, therefore, that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall. In the kingdom of God, indeed, a defeat may bring more blessings than a victory; and more costly fruits often spring from stumblings than from the most apparently successful strivings after holiness. But woe unto him whom this truth would render reckless!

[From Barnes: Joh_18:21. Jesus here insisted on His rights: Learn 1. That though Jesus was willing to be reviled and persecuted, yet He also insisted that justice should be done Him; 2. He was conscious of innocence, and had been so open in His conduct, that He could appeal to the vast multitudes which had heard Him, as witnesses in His favor; 3. It is proper for us, when persecuted and reviled, meekly, but firmly, to insist on our rights, and to demand that justice should be done us; 4. Christians, like their Saviour, should so live that they may confidently appeal to all who have known them, as witnesses of the sincerity, purity, and rectitude of their lives.]

III

christ confronted with pilate. 1. conduct of pilate upon the first charge that jesus is a malefactor; 2. upon the accusation that jesus pretendeth to be the king of the jews; 3. upon the accusation that jesus hath made himself the son of god.—decided fall of pilate at the charge that jesus is a rebel against the emperor.—the kingdom of jesus in antithesis to the kingdom of this world. symbolism of romanism. jesus the king in the kingdom of truth. the verdict of guitlessness pronounced upon jesus. choice of the murderer barabbas. jesus in the crown of thorns and purple robe. verdict of jesus upon pilate. pilate disguises his discomfiture in the garb of derision. the sentence of death

Chaps. 18:28–19:16

(Matthew 26 (57) Mat_26:1 to Mat_27:31; Mar_14:55 to Mar_15:20; Luk_22:63 to Luk_23:25)

¶ 28Then led they [they lead, ἄγουσιν] Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment [to the prætorium, or the palace of the governor]: and it was early;34 and they themselves went not into the judgment hall [the palace] lest they should be defiled; but that they [that they might not be defiled, but] might eat the passoJohn 18:29Pilate then [therefore] went out35 unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man? 30They answered and said unto him, If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee. 31Then said Pilate [Pilate therefore said] unto them, Take ye him [take him yourselves], and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for36 us to put any man [any one] to death: [.] 32That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what [kind of] death he should die.

33Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall [the palace] again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? 34Jesus answered him [omit him], Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me [tell thee concerning me]? 35Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have [omit have] delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? 36Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. 37Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that [Thou sayest it. For] I am a king.37 To this end was I38 [have I been] born, and for this cause came I [have I come] into the world, that I should [may] bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. 38Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all [no fault in him]. 39But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews? 40Then cried they all [they all cried out]39 again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.

Chap. XIX. 1Then Pilate therefore took Jesus and scourged him. And the Song of Solomon 2 diers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him a 3purple robe, And [they approached him and, ἤρχοντο πρὸς αὐτὸν χαὶ]40 said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands [smote him on the face].41

4Pilate therefore [And Pilate]42 went forth again and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth unto you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him. 5Then came Jesus forth [Jesus therefore came forth], wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate [he]43 saith unto them, Behold the man!44 6When the chief priests therefore and [the] officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him [Crucify! crucify!]45 Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him [Take him yourselves], and crucify him: for I find no fault in him. 7The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our46 law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.

8When Pilate therefore heard that [this] saying, he was the more afraid; And 9went again into the judgment hall [the palace], and saith unto Jesus, Whence art 10thou? But Jesus gave him no answer. Then47 saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify [release] thee, and have power to release [crucify] thee?48 11Jesus answered, Thou couldest [wouldest] have no power at all [omit at all] against me, except it were [had been] given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. 12And from thenceforth [Upon this, or, for the sake of this, ἐχ τούτου] Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out,49 saying, If thou let this man go [release this man] thou art not Cæsar’s friend: whosoever [every one that] maketh himself a king speaketh [declareth] against Cæsar. 13When Pilate therefore heard that saying, [these words],50 he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment 14seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. And [Now] it was the preparation [day] of the passover, and [omit and, and insert it was]51 about52 the sixth53 hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! 15But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Cæsar. 16Then delivered he him therefore [Then therefore he delivered him up] unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away.54

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

[On the relation of John to the Synoptists in this passage see the clear statements in Doctrinal and Ethical, no. 1.—P. S.]

Joh_18:28. They, therefore, lead [ἄγουσινοὖν] Jesus from Caiaphas.—Since Joh_18:28 refers to Joh_18:24, the οὖν is here very expressive; it means that with the fact of Annas’ sending the Lord bound to Caiaphas, everything further, even to the leading of Him into the heathen Prætorium, was decided. On the final session of the Sanhedrin in the morning see Comm. on Matt. at our passage.

To the Prætorium.—On the Prætorium see Comm. on Matt., Note to Joh_18:27 [p. 513, Am. Ed.]. Not “before the morning twilight” as Tholuck supposes. See the Notes to Matthew. [The πραιτώριον (originally the tent of the general in the Roman camp) is the governor’s mansion, whether it was the palace of Herod (the usual opinion), or more probably a building in the castle Antonia (Meyer, Ewald, Lange).—And it was early [ἦν δὲ πρωΐ], in the fourth night watch, towards the break of day.—P. S.]

Not into the Prætorium, that they might not be defiled but might eat the Passover [ἴνα μὴ μιανθῶσιν άλλὰ φάγωσιν τὸ πάσχα. The entrance of a Jew into the house of a Gentile made him levitically unclean till the close of that day (sunset). As the passover was not eaten before six o’clock, i.e. at the beginning of the next day, the defilement incurred in the morning would have ceased before the regular passover. This is a hint that φαγεῖν τὸ πάσχα must be taken here in a wider sense. See Matt., p. 455, and Lange below.—P. S.] This was a motive, but scarcely the only one; they, however, hypocritically took cover under it as the only one. If Pilate tried Jesus’ cause in the palace, the Sanhedrists would lack the aid of the popular faction which they had driven together, and upon which they could securely count outside, in front of the palace.

Respecting John’s pretended inconsistency with the Synoptists, sec Comm. on Matthew [pp. 454 ff. 468]. Meyer again pleads at length in favor of the view which makes it result from our passage that there is a difference between John and the Synoptists; that according to John the paschal meal was still impendent on the evening after the crucifixion of Christ, while according to the Synoptists it had taken place the evening before. It is claimed that the feast began, according to the Synoptists, on Thursday evening, according to John, on Friday evening.

In order to a survey of the debates on this subject, we have first to ascertain the historical aspect of the case: a. the declarations of the New Testament, b. the controversies maintained by the ancient Church in regard to the Passover, c. the modern debates on the question of difference, d. the application of the discussion to the criticism of the New Testament Scriptures, particularly against the genuineness of John in the Tübingen School.

In respect to the different modern views we must consider

I. The assertion of the difference (Lücke, Neander, Krabbe, Theile, etc., see Meyer [p. 601, 5th ed.]); and that generally in favor of John, it being assumed, in such case, that traces of the opposite view are also to be found in the Synoptists (Lücke, Bleek, Meyer, etc.); sometimes the side of the synoptical tradition is espoused (Baur, Schwegler).

II. Conceptions adverse to the difference.

First: Assumption of a double passover or banquet:

(a) The Jews deferred the passover; Jesus celebrated it at the legal time. The dominant view at the time of the Reformation [older Prot. divines], of late represented by Philippi [Glaubenslehre, I. p. 266 f. 2d ed.].

(b) Jesus kept the passover a day in advance of its time as μνημονευτικόν, Grotius, Hammond and others. (Casaubonus, Scaliger; placed by Meyer in the foregoing rubric.)

(c) The Caræans and Rabbinists did not agree concerning the time of the new moon (Iken).

(d) The δεῖπνον, John 13, was not the paschal meal (Bengel, Wichelhaus).

Secondly: The Synoptists are to be explained in accordance with John:

(a) It is sought to obliterate the pretended difference in the Synoptists as much as possible by reference to Mat_26:5 (not on the feast; as if the Evangelist did not mean to say that this plan was frustrated), Mar_15:21; Luk_23:26.

(b) As a day of unleavened bread, the 14th Nisan also was celebrated as a feast by the Galileans; hence the Passover occurred on the evening of the 13th Nisan (Frisch, Rauch, Movers, Krafft, Maier [R. C] ).

Thirdly: John must be explained in accordance with the Synoptists: John speaks of another repast (Bengel, Wichelhaus). The eating of the passover denotes the eating of the Khagiga; the παρασκευή in John denotes the day of preparation for the Sabbath, the regular Friday as Sabbath-eve,—not the preparation-day previous to the first day of the passover (Wieseler, Tholuck and others). [The same view is maintained by Bynæus, Lightfoot, Reland, Olshausen, Hengstenberg, Luthardt, Hofmann, Riggenbach, Ebrard, Bäumlein, Robinson, Lange and myself. The most learned defence is given by Wieseler in his Chronol. Synops., pp. 333 ff. and in Herzog’s Encycl., art. Zeitrechnung, vol. xxi. pp. 550 ff. Comp. also Lange on Matthew, pp. 454 ff. and Robinson’s Harmony, pp. 216 ff., especially p. 218 where he fully discusses the phrase φαγεῖν τὸ πάσχα which ordinarily, but by no means necessarily means to eat the paschal lamb on the 14th of Nisan, but may mean also to keep the passover (2Ch_30:22, they did eat the festival seven days), or to eat the paschal sacrifices, called the Khagigha.—P. S.]

We hold to the assumption that φαγεῖν τὸ πάσχα, as an expression whose primitive force has been weakened by constant use, means: to observe or carry out the eating of the passover; the like specific terms for a more general procedure grow into use everywhere in the ritual sphere. As early as Exo_12:48 the terms: to eat the passover, and to make or keep the passover are used as reciprocal ideas. The expression: to eat unleavened bread, denotes the whole paschal celebration, Lev_23:6. To appear before the Lord, means: to perform divine service (Isa_1:12). To spread forth the hands, means: to pray (Joh_18:15). To wash one’s self, means: to go through religious purification (Joh_18:16; Joh_13:10). The expressions: to draw water (see Isa_12:3), to light candles, to dwell in tents, etc., might become liturgical abbreviations with the Jews, as the terms: to fast, to confess, to read mass, and similar ones have done with the Roman Catholics.—It has been remarked that if the Jews had defiled themselves in the house of Pilate in the morning of the 14th Nisan (by entering a Gentile habitation, or a house where was leavened bread), they would still have been clean again after 6 o’clock in the evening. In opposition to this view, Lücke remarks: it is not proved, as Bynäus assumes, that entrance into a Gentile house defiled for the one day only. The contrary, however, is still less proved, and it is not supposable that contact with a Gentile house rendered unclean for a longer time than did contact with the carcass of a beast, which polluted only until the evening (Lev_11:40). We can suppose in general that all ordinary, merely levitical defilements continued only for one day; in cases of lengthier defilements, real sanitary considerations and the like were had in view. The plea that they were obliged to kill the Passover that afternoon, has been refuted by the observation that they could perform that duty by proxy. Lücke, indeed, mentions that in the case of a defilement in mass, substitution would be difficult to effect. It may be asked, however: when was the danger of defilement greater; if in the morning some few went into the Gentile house, or if the mass of the people, with the priests among them, ran bustling about upon Golgotha, the place of a skull, in the afternoon, at the very time when they are said to have slain the Passover? The case takes a much simpler aspect if we suppose that they were still mindful, in the morning, of the passover whereof they had partaken the evening before, and consequently desirous to keep themselves clean in order not to neutralize the benefit of the passover; whereas in the course of the day and toward its close, the passion attendant upon a turbulent execution rendered them more lax in their conduct.

In regard to the discussions upon this subject, see Meyer [p. 603 ff., 5th ed.]; Tholuck, p. 38 ff., and the account of the literature upon this topic in Lücke, p. 716.—On the paschal meal, see Comm. on Matthew.

[The critical and careful Dr. Robinson states his conclusion on this vexed question as follows (Harmony, p. 222): “After repeated and calm consideration, there rests upon my own mind a clear conviction, that there is nothing in the language of John, or in the attendant circumstances, which upon fair interpretation requires or permits us to believe, that the beloved disciple either intended to correct, or has in fact corrected or contradicted, the explicit and unquestionable testimony of Matthew, Mark and Luke.” To this may be added a chronological consideration. According to Wieseler (to whom Lichtenstein, in Herzog’s Encycl., Vol. VI.,595 assents), Christ died Friday the 15th of Nisan A. U. C. 783, or A. D. 30. This was the 7th of April, and chronological calculations show that in the year 30, the 15th Nisan actually fell on a Friday, which was the case only once more (perhaps A. D. 34) between the years 28–36. See Wieseler’s Chron. Synapse, p. 446, and in Herzog’s Encycl. XXI., p. 550.—P. S.]

Joh_18:29. Pilate, therefore, went out unto them.—On Pilate, see Comm. on Matthew, and that on Luke. “Bound to respect the Jewish customs (Joseph. Antiq., XVI. 2, 3; De Bello Jud., VI. 6, 2), the Procurator steps forth to them.” Tholuck.

[Pontius Pilate was the sixth Roman governor (ἡγεμών), or, speaking more accurately, procurator (ἐπίτροπος, procurator) of Judæa, and held this office for ten years during the reign of Tiberius (A. D. 25 to 35). He is also mentioned by Tacitus in the famous passage: “The author of that name (Christiani) or sect was Christ, who was capitally punished under Tiberius by Pontius Pilate the procurator” (Annal. XV.44). Josephus describes his administration as tyrannical and cruel: he insulted the Jews by introducing the images of Cæsar, gilt shields with the names of heathen deities, and misapplying the temple revenue to the construction of an aqueduct. He provoked several seditions and suppressed them by bloody violence. He was accused of maladministration, sent to Rome by Vitellius, President of Syria, and probably deposed. The latter accounts of an official report by Pilate of Christ’s death to Tiberius and his suicide, are unreliable. The description of Josephus quite agrees with that of the Gospels, as has been satisfactorily shown in detail by the learned Lardner. Pilate had momentary impulses of justice and mercy; he openly pronounced the innocence of Christ, and made an attempt to rescue Him from the fanaticism of the Jews, whom he despised; but he was a selfish, unprincipled, worldly, Roman politician, skeptical or rather utterly indifferent to truth, cruel, weak and mean; and so he sacrificed innocence itself to the fear of losing his place and power, and, contrary to his better conviction, took part in the greatest crime ever committed. Yet after all his guilt was less than that of the Jewish priesthood who deliberately and malignantly delivered Christ into his hands and made him an instrument in the execution of their malignant hatred of their own Messiah (Joh_19:11). The introduction of his name in the Apostles’ and Nicene Creed, is intended not so much to single him out as specially guilty, as to mark the date of Christ’s death under the hostile Roman world-power.—P. S.]

What accusation [τίνα κατηγορίαν φέρετε].—Though Pilate might have a general knowledge of the accusation, it was their place formally to present it here. Besides this, however, Pilate immediately observed, doubtless, that they came to him purposing, by a pompous and boisterous procession, to move him to confirm their sentence of death without more ado. His inquiry aims at thwarting this design from the beginning. Meyer.—“Against this man [κατὰ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τούτου].—Spoken with indifference; not: against such a pious, celebrated man (Luther).”

Joh_18:30. If this person were not a male-factor [εἰ μὴ ἦν οὐτος κακοποιόδ].—Here is contained the impetuous demand that Pilate should assent to their sentence of death without delay. Under the dominion of the Romans, the Jews had lost the jus vitæ et necis (according to the Talmud, forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem. Lightfoot). This they declared themselves, Joh_18:31. Consequently, the stoning of Stephen was a tumultuously illegal proceeding; as also the execution of James, according to Josephus, (Antiq. XX. 9, 1). What still remained in the power of the Sanhedrin was 1: Disciplinary punishment pushed to the verge of capital punishment; 2. proposal for capital punishment. It made a difference whether their spiritual sentence of death was confirmed without further ceremony, or whether the governor, in accordance with Roman law, reserved to himself the right of cognizance and sentence. In the former case they could stone the condemned, according to Jewish custom; in the second case he was executed according to Roman custom, or if extreme punishment was resorted to, crucified. The purpose of the Jews, therefore, is to obtain, by means of the impetuosity of their procession and demand, the ratification of their sentence. They had a twofold motive for this. In the first place, they were, no doubt, sensible of the difficulty of making the false accusation—charging Jesus with being a political criminal—good before Pilate, while they might guess that the latter would not recognize death as a punishment for merely religious or apparent transgressions. In the second place, their demand was at the same time intended to carry the right of a greater independence. He, therefore, is blindly to agree to their sentence. They seek, however, to make compensation for their bold demand by saying: we have delivered Him unto thee. One good turn deserves another. If we come before thy tribunal, that is an honor for thee, in return for which thou surely canst do us the honor to recognize our sentence without further ceremony. There was thus a close prospect of Christ’s being stoned. But He had in spirit foreseen the turn affairs were now taking, and had announced His sufferings on the cross, Joh_3:14; Joh_8:28; Mat_10:33, etc. The cross was also included in the counsel of God, as the form of suffering in which Christ could manifest His glory quite otherwise than if subjected to a stoning (see Tholuck, p. 415).

Joh_18:31. Then take Him yourselves, etc [λάβετε αὐτὸν ὑμεῖς , καὶ κατὰ τὸν νόμον ὑμῶν κρἰνατε αὐτόν].—I.e. if He is to pass for a criminal simply in accordance with your sentence, then execute Him also according to your law. According to Meyer, he means that they should try Him. But Pilate saw well that they had already done this. The κρίνειν, therefore, here denotes judicial proceedings in general, inclusive of punishment, but according to their law and right. The words certainly point derisively to the fact that they are not permitted to proceed to capital punishment (Lücke and others). Pilate meets fanatical presumption with frigid sarcasm.

The Jews therefore said unto him.—The οὖν denotes that Judaism must now come out openly. See note to Joh_18:30.—It is not permitted us [ἡμῖν οὐκ ἐζεστιν ἀποκτεῖναι οὐδένα].—Untenable limitations of this deliverance: 1. To execute capital punishment in the form of crucifixion (Chrysost.); 2. to execute a man on the feast-day (Semler); 3. to punish crimes of state (Krebs). That they now, in connection with this declaration of their death-sentence, brought forward the accusation against Jesus of political offences warranting death, results from the subsequent examination by Pilate Joh_18:34. Comp. Luk_23:2. Meyer disallows the assumption of such an accusation, from a fear of “harmonistics.” Pilate, he thinks, must have gathered this charge from the preceding demand for the guard. But a measure of police requires to be judicially formulated, and that by the accuser himself. Agreeably to the political accusation, a formal trial must now begin.

[Joh_18:32. That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, etc.—See Joh_12:32-33; Mat_20:19, where Christ foretold His crucifixion. Had the Jews executed Him according to their law against false prophets and blasphemers, they would have stoned Him, as they repeatedly attempted to do (comp. Joh_8:59; Joh_10:31), and as they actually, in a tumultuary way, stoned Stephen (Acts 7). Crucifixion was a Roman mode of punishment—the most cruel and disgraceful—for slaves, rebels and low criminals, such as pirates, assassins, deserters, but not for Roman citizens. Jesus on account of His Messianic claims must have appeared to the Roman governor as a rebel.—P. S.]

Joh_18:33. Art Thou the King of the Jews?—The boundless perfidy of the Jewish accusation is distinctly reflected in Pilate’s presentation of it. It is an ambiguous charge, forged out of Jesus’ avowal that He is the Messiah; a charge embracing falsehood (since Jesus had no intention of being a political character), treason against their Messianic hope (which they abandoned in this case), and self-condemnation (since they hope for a political Messiah).—Art Thou? asks Pilate; not: sayest Thou that Thou art? The question need not necessarily be apprehended as purely derisive. Pilate might think thus: if His only offence was one of the tongue, He will deny that He is such a personage: but if He is a dangerous enthusiast, He will acknowledge the allegation. There is also, beyond a doubt, an incidental play of sarcasm.

Joh_18:34. Dost Thou say this of Thyself, or, etc. [Ἀπὸ σεαυτοῦ συ τοῦτο λέγεις ἤ ἄλλοι εἶπόν σοι περὶ ἐμοῦ].—Design of the question. According to Olshausen, Neander (and my Leben Jesu, p. 1058) Jesus desires to ascertain in what sense Pilate puts the question: whether in a Gentile-political or a Jewish-theocratical sense.55 Meyer combats this assumption: 1. By the assertion that Jesus wished only to know the author of the accusation. The author, however, stood officially at the door. 2. By the declaration that it is not supposable that Pilate would thus separate the Messianic conceptions. He might, however, be taught thus to separate them. By the term: “King of the Jews,” Pilate could understand nothing but a political seditionary urged by fanatical motives. The Sanhedrists knew this; but they also knew that Jesus claimed the Messiahship in another sense, and they now made use of the Messianic name to fit out a false accusation. Jesus could not acknowledge the Messianic conception of Pilate, but neither could He disown the theocratical Messianic conception. Hence, this distinction was to be made thoroughly clear. Like Meyer, Tholuck mistakes the decisive weight of Christ’s distinotion. It was necessary for Pilate to see that they were trying to humbug him by means of a perfidiously interpreted religious conception. And thus in the middle ages and in the time of the Reformation,—even down to the present day—the Hierarchs have, with evil consciousness, stamped reformation as revolution.

Joh_18:35. Am I a Jew? [μήτι—looking to a negative answer—ὲγώ—a Roman governor—Ἰουδαῖόδ εἰμι].—With Roman pride he declares that he is not a Jew, i.e. that it is hence impossible that he should put the question in the Jewish sense;56 he has but framed it in accordance with the statement made to him by the Prisoner’s nation (τὸ ἔθνος τὸ σόν, sneeringly) and the high-priests. Compelled, however, to surmise the lurking of an ambiguity in this statement, he inquires, in a genuine Roman sense: What hast Thou done? [τί ἐποίησας].—Pilate’s answer was manifestly inapplicable to the question: Art thou Mine accuser, or do the Jews accuse Me? It is appropriate, however, to the question: Hast thou, or have the Jews, formulated the accusation?

Joh_18:36. My kingdom is not of this world [ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμὴ οὐκ ὲστιν ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου τούτου. Ἐκ relates to origin and nature; yet Christ’s kingdom, though not of this world, is yet in this world and over this world. Mark the emphatic repetition of My, and this world, as also the demonstrative ἐντεῦθεν in opposition to cælitus.—P. S.].—This answer, the distinction between the purely theocratic and the purely political idea of a kingdom was manifestly contemplated from the very beginning, in the question of Jesus [Joh_18:34] and introduced by that question. First He acknowledges that He has a kingdom (My kingdom); passes on immediately, however, for Pilate’s pacification, to the negative definition of His kingdom. It is not of this world as to its principle; it lays, therefore, in respect of its tendency, no claims to this world and does not, in respect of its character, come into collision with the existent secular empire of the Romans. Proof: If it were of this world, I should have fighters after the manner of the kingdoms of the world, and the very least that they could do would be, as worldly combatants, to prevent the base and contemptible resurrender of My person to the spiritual forum of the Jews.—My servants [οἱ ὑπηρέται οἱ ἐμοί]—Interpretations: 1. The servants that I have, disciples, angels (Lampe, Luthardt).57 2. The servants that I then should have (Meyer,58 Tholuck [Lücke, Hengstenberg, Alford]). He, however, really has a kingdom, and He also really has servants. With such a fancy sketch: had I a worldly kingdom, and legions, My servants would liberate Me,—the innocence of Jesus would be poorly proved. But when He says: I have servants, but not one makes the slightest attempt at My liberation—this, to Pilate, who was acquainted with the nature of the disturbance, contains a striking proof of Jesus’ innocence. The kingdom of which Christ speaks, however, does not wait for its beginning until the cessation of the kingdoms of the world (as Meyer asserts); neither does it itself become a world-kingdom (comp. Tholuck, p. 416). It conquers the world and makes the kingdoms of the world subject unto itself, in order to abolish and absorb the entire old form of the world in the kingdom of heaven.

But now is My kingdom not from hence, ἐντεῦθεν. Had Christ’s kingdom been destined to be a worldly kingdom, it would have taken its rise at that very point in the crisis of the sufferings of the cross.

[This solemn declaration of Christ concerning the heavenly origin and unworldly character of His kingdom, settles in principle the question of Church and State in favor of separation and against penal laws for the punishment of heresy. Comp. Mat_22:21, the wisest answer ever given to a question. Alford: “The word now (νῦν) has been absurdly pressed by the Romanist interpreters, to mean that at some time His kingdom would be ἐντεῦθεν—i.e., ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου τούτου—as if its essential character could ever be changed: νῦν implies, ‘as the case now stands,’—a demonstratio ad oculos from the fact that no servants of His had contended or were contending in His behalf; see similar usages of νῦν, Joh_8:40; Joh_9:41; Joh_15:22,” etc.—P. S.]

Joh_18:37. So, then, [οὐκοῦν] Thou art a king [βασιλεὺς εἶ σύ]?—Pilate asks, we doubt not, more out of curiosity and with the attention of an inquisitor, than with any mocking designs (Tholuck).

Yea, a king am I [σὺ λέγεις ὄτι βασιλεύς εἰμι ἐγώ. See Text. Note].—“So Thou art a king?” questions Pilate with ironical emphasis. “Thou sayest it,” answers Jesus, with the accent of sublime self-assurance. And in face of the σύ He emphasizes the ἐγώ. Not only, however, does ὅτι recognize the utterance of Pilate—it likewise acknowledges the correctness of his deduction; from the kingdom of Jesus thou rightly inferrest His kingly dignity, says Jesus. Hence we represent ὄτι by yea (Ja).—Proof: Thereunto have I been born and thereunto have I come into the world [ἐγὼ εἰς τοῦτο γεγέννημαι καὶ εἰς τοῦτο ἐλήλυθα εἰς τὸν κόσμον].—According to, Lücke and De Wette, Christ distinguishes His birth, and His official appearance. According to Meyer and Tholuck, the latter part of the sentence denotes the Divine Ambassador. Since, however, the birth also, as the birth of the Witness of the Truth, denotes a divine or divine-human birth, we likewise distinguish the expression of His ideal kingly nature (born), and of His historic Messianic mission (office). [Comp. here Alford].—That I may bear witness unto the truth [ἵνα μαρτυρήσω τῆ ἀληθείᾳ]—He is the faithful Witness, 2Co_1:20; Rev_3:14.—Every one that is of the truth [πᾶς ὁ ὤν ἐκ τῆς ἀληθείας].—See Joh_3:21. Joh_6:44; Joh_8:47; Rom_2:29.—Heareth My voice [ἀκούει μου τῆς φωνῆς].—Joh_10:27. Why does He say this to Pilate? Calvin: He designs explaining why He finds so few adherents. Chrysost and others: He is appealing to the Roman’s consciousness, which is more susceptible than that of a Caiaphas. Bengel: provocat a cæcitate pilati ad captum fidelium.—But manifestly He marks the moment in which Pilate is confronted with salvation, and the form under which salvation advances towards him. It is the form in which He is able to preach the Gospel to this man in this position. If thou art of the truth, if the impulse of truth is the vital impulse that influenceth thee, thou wilt know Me, and thou art saved.

Joh_18:38. “What is truth? [τί ἐστιν ἀλήθεια];—The Evangelist plainly characterizes the meaning of the query by remarking that Pilate turned about upon uttering these words, and went out [καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν πάλιν ἐξῆλθεν]. No pause, no waiting for a reply, is spoken of. The word is thrown out; immediately he wheeled around upon his heel to tell the Jews without that he found no fault in Him. Thus is the patristic exposition, which makes him an eager inquirer after the truth (Chrysostom, Theodoret, Aretius and others) confuted, as also the assumption that he gave utterance to a feeling of disconsolateness (Olshausen). He has evidently no suspicion of subjective vital truth, and he understands, by truth, merely an objective school problem about which a practical man of business need not puzzle his wits. Not so much as a philosophizing skeptic is delineated—such an one as Pliny the elder (ut solum certum sit, nihil esse certi).59 On the other hand, neither do we find that flight from truth, that was manifested in the case of the governor Felix, Act_24:25. The narrow, practical Roman mind that takes exception to every free investigation of truth, accounting such a fantasticalness from which it saves itself by observance of traditional ordinance, here expresses itself, as does, in measure, a Cicero as an Acataleptic [probabilist], the heathen Cæcilius in the Octavius of Minutius Felix, the Romish spirit continually, not only in its attitude toward the Reformation but also in modern times, as it stands confronted with Catholic philosophy.60

The question as to whence the Evangelist obtained his knowledge of this conversation, is difficult only when we forget that Christ’s every step was watched by men who were of the truth; Strauss and Baur [and Scholten] alone have found the moment sufficiently obscure, in the light of the world’s history, to induce them to assert this account to be a composition of the Evangelist, traceable to his peculiar tendency.

“Pilate’s end corresponds with a life devoid of all foundation of objective [first of all, subjective] truth; according to classic authorities, he dies by suicide, in consequence of heavy misfortunes (Eusebius, Hist. Ecc_2:7).” Tholuck.

I find no fault in Him [ἐγώ.—opposed to ὑμεῖς.—οὐδεμίαν εὑρίσκω εν αὐτῷ αἰτίαν]. The total result of the irrecoverable moment was his taking Jesus to be a good-natured but guiltless, perhaps rather tiresome, fanatic. With all this, his practical sense of justice finds clear utterance for an instant more—to be soon after caught in the net of a wretched policy. Soon after—for here, according to Luke, follows the sending of Jesus to the tribunal of Herod Antipas, Luk_23:12. [“Pilate mocks both—the Witness of the Truth and the haters of the Truth. His conduct presents a pitiable specimen of the moral weakness of that spirit of worldly power, which reached its culminating point in the Roman empire.” Alford.—P. S.]

Joh_18:39. But it is a custom of yours, etc. [ἔστιν δὲ συνήθεια ὑμῖν, ἴνα ἔνα ἀπολύσω ὑμῖν ἐν τῷπάσχα]—Pilate thinks to catch the Jews, and they catch him. Instead of simply administering justice and pronouncing the release of Jesus, he proposes to concede to them the ability of releasing Him themselves in right of a privilege obtained by them. The consequence of this half-measure is ruinous to the judge. It is, therefore, no good-natured love of justice that makes him resort to this expedient (Tholuck), but a preponderant consideration of policy. According to Matthew, he places Barabbas beside Jesus and bids the people choose, designing thus to make the acquittal of Jesus the more sure. The combination was probably first originated by the Jews, as John reports, and then formulated by Pilate (comp. Comm. on Luke). The Jewish custom of releasing a criminal was probably not an emanation from the paschal feast as a feast of reconciliation (Tholuck), but rather a dramatic Easter play, intended, perhaps, to illustrate the sparing of the Jewish first-born (see Comm. on Matt. at this passage).

At the passover [ἐν τῷ πάσχα. Ἐν is wanting in some MSS.].—“Pilate might thus express himself on the 14th as well as on the 15th.” Meyer. But according to the literal expression, the feast of the passover had really commenced.

The king of the Jews [τὸν βασιλέα τῶν Ἰουδ].—Meyer: “Unwise mocking bitterness.” Perchance abortive cunning likewise. The sing of the Jews He was considered by many among the people whose business it was to decide.

Joh_18:40. Then they cried out all again.—The Evangelist’s meaning seems to be either: they have cried, and cry again now; or: now that they again gave utterance to their sentiments, for the first time after the accusation, they did it with clamorous outcry. We apprehend the passage thus: they cried this time, and that en masse or with one voice.—Saying: not this One but Barabbas [μὴ τοῦτον, ἀλλὰ τὸν Βαραββᾶν. ἦν δὲ ὁ Βαπαββᾶς λῃστής].—On Barabbas see Comm. on Matthew. It is the first practical fault of the Roman spirit to set criminals side by side with putative idealists, and to release the former rather than the latter. [Ewald suggests that Barabbas was the son of a Rabbi (Abba was a Rabbinic title of honor), and a leader in the insurrection (Mar_15:7) against Pilate, arising out of his misappropriation of a part of the temple revenue to the construction of an aqueduct (Joseph. De Bello Jud. II. 9, § 4); and thus explains the eagerness with which the Sanhedrin and the people demanded his release. On the significance of the name Barabbas (Son of the Father, with or without Jesus in the Synoptists) and the unconsciously representative character and release of this rebel and robber, as contrasted with the character and condemnation of the obedient and holy Jesus, see notes on Mat_27:16, p. 511, and the Hom. and Pract. below. Ludit in humanis divina potentia rebus.—P. S.]

See Joh_19:1 ff for DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL and HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Footnotes:

[1]Joh_18:1.—[The Recepta and Tischendorf read τῶν Κέδρων, in accordance with B. C. E. and many others; Griesbach, Lachmann in accordance with Codd. A, S. Δ., Jerome, Ambrose, etc. (conf. Joseph. Antiq., VIII. 1, 5) τοῦ Κεδρών. The plural seems to have originated in a misapprehension on the part of the transcribers: Cedar Brook instead of Black Brook. [In ed. 8 Tischendorf reads τοῦ κέδρου, on the authority of א*. D. a. b. Sah. cop. æth.; Lachm. τοῦ Κεδρών with A. S. Δ.; hut Tregelles, Alford, Westcott and Hort give the preference to the plural τῶν κέδρων אc. B. C L. X. Orig. Chrys. Cyr., etc. Josephus favors the singular, Antiq. , VIII. 1, 5: τὸν χείμαῤῥον κεδρῶνος, Bell. Jud., V. 2, ἢ κεδρὼν ὠνόμασται. The plural form, τῶν κέδρων, brook of cedars, Cedar Brook, is found already in the Sept. version of 2Sa_15:23, but the Alex. Cod. and the Zurich ed. read there: ἐν τῷ χειμάῤῥῳ τοῦ κέδρων. It is evidently a Greek corruption of the Hebrew קִּדְרוֹן (niger, Black Brook; comp. the frequent Greek river-name Μέλας), under the impression that it means cedars. There is no evidence that cedars grew on the brook. John can hardly have sanctioned such a mistake, and therefore I would decide here from internal probability against the authority of MSS. The error may have been made by the first Greek copyist, who was ignorant of Hebrew.—P. S.]

[2]Joh_18:2.—[Noyes and Am. B. U. render ὅ παραδιδοὺς αὐτόν, his betrayer. Alford retains the A. V., including which.—P. S.]

[3]Joh_18:3.—[τὴν σπεῖραν refers to the well-known troop of soldiers or Roman cohort which was stationed in Jerusalem as garrison of Fort Antonia, Mat_27:27; Act_21:31.—P. S.]

[4]Joh_18:3.—[Probably more correct: with torches (μετὰ φανῶν), and lamps (λαμπάδων, lights fed with oil in lanterns) and weapons (ὅπλεν, swords and staves),—the utensils of the military on a night march. λαμπάς, however, means also torch and lantern. The repetition of the καί is not superfluous, but rhetorical.—P. S.]

[5]Joh_18:4.—B. C.*D. etc. ἐξῆλθεν καὶ λέγει (Lachmann, Tischendorf) instead of ἐξελθὼν εἶπεν.

[6]Joh_18:10.—Tischendorf ὠτάριον, in accordance with B. C* L. etc. (see Mar_14:47). [Cod. Sin. also sustains ὠτάριον, auriculam, versus ὠτίον, aurem probably a correction from Matt.—P. S.]

[7]Joh_18:11.—The Recepta: μάχαιράν σου. Σου is omitted in accordance with the decisive Codd. [N. A. B. C. D., Alf. Tischend., etc.]

[8]Joh_18:11.—[ὁ πατήρ, without μου, is the proper reading.—P. S.]

[9][Dean Stanley says that the Valley of the Kedron, especially in its greatest depth where it joins the Valley of Hinnom, gives full effect to the great peculiarity of Jerusalem, as seen from its eastern side—its situation as of a city rising out of a deep abyss. Sinai & Pal., p. 188.—P. S.]

[10][Since the time of Robinson, however, more copious torrents have been witnessed, probably in consequence of the numerous enclosures of mulberry and olive groves recently made by the Greek convent^ For there is no doubt that the destruction of the forests which once covered the mountains and hills has diminished the rains in Palestine. The Kedron must have been once a much larger stream, or it would not have worked out such a chasm. Dr. Barclay and Lieutenant Warren express the opinion that the Kedron flows below the present surface of the ground. Warren discovered about 500 yards below the En-Rogel a flight of steps leading down to an ancient aqueduct now choked with silt, which he believes to have been connected with that well and the ancient system of water supply.—P. S.]

[11][To the descriptions there given or referred to, I add that of Dean Stanley, Sinai & Pal., p. 450. “Close beside the Church of the Virgin is a spot which, as it is omitted in Abba Michon’s catalogue of Holy Places, might perhaps have boon passed over; yet a few words, and perhaps the fewer the better, must be devoted to the garden of Gethsemane. That the tradition reaches back to the age of Constantine is certain. How far it agrees with the slight indications of its position in the Gospel narrative will be judged by the impressions of each individual traveller. Some will think it too public; others will see an argument in its favor from its close proximity to the brook Kedron; none probably will be disposed to receive the traditional sites which surround it, the grotto of the Agony, the rocky bank of the three Apostles, the “terra damnata” of the Betrayal. But in spite of all the doubts that can be raised against their antiquity or the genuineness of their site, the eight aged olive-trees, if only by their manifest difference from all others in the mountain, have always struck even the most indifferent observer. They are now indeed less striking in the modern garden enclosure built round them by the Franciscan monks, than when they stood free and unprotected on the rough hill side; but they will remain, so long as their already protracted life is spared, the most venerable of their race on the surface of the earth; their gnarled trunks and scanty foliage will always be regarded as the most affecting of the sacred memorials in or about Jerusalem; the most nearly approaching to the everlasting hills themselves in the force with which they carry us back to the events of the Gospel History.” Comp. also Hackett’s supplementary notes of art. Gethsemane in Smith’s Dict. II. 908.—P. S.]

[12][Cyril: “Ut in paradiso malorum initium est factum, sic in horto Christi passio incepit, per quam a malts liberati in pristinum reslituti sumus. ” Wordsworth; “Here is a striking contrast between the quest in the Garden of Eden for the first Adam, and this search In the garden of Gethsemane for the Second. The first Adam hides himself amongst the trees of the garden (Gen_3:8). He trembles before Him who seeks for him. The Second Adam comes forth and says I am. And, at the sound of His Voice, they who came to take Him, go back and fall to the ground. The first Adam inculpates Eve: the Second Adam pleads for His disciples. The first Adam is overcome by the Tempter and loses Paradise; the Second Adam overcomes Satan, and restores his Spouse, the Church, to Paradise and raises her to Heaven.”—P. S.]

[13][ἀπῆλθ αν and ἔπεσ αν is the reading of א. B. C., Tisch-end., Tregelles, Alf., Westcott and Hort. On this Alexandrian form see Winer, p. 71,71 h ed. The text. rec. has ἀτῆλθ ον and έπεσ ον.—P. S.]

[14][So also Ebrard, Maier, Hengstenberg, Godet, Meyer, Luthardt, Brückner, Webster and Wilkinson, Wordsworth; some adding as another object: to prove His divine character. Luthardt, however, assumes that the miracle was psychologically mediated, and approaches the view of Lange (no. 5); Godet also (II. 575) lays the chief stress on the moral force, the same which in the temple made the enemies recoil. It was not a physical, but a moral miracle.—P. S.]

[15][Strauss regards the scene as miraculous in the intention of the author, but as unhistorical. So also Scholten.—P. S.]

[16][So also Olshausen, De Wette, Ebrard, Bäumlein, Barnes, Owen (not decided). Barnes thinks that the supposition of a miraculous power detracts greatly from the moral sublimity of the scene.—P. S.]

[17][Similarly Alford: The miracle was not specially intended by our Lord (?), but a result of the superhuman dignity of His person and the majestic calmness of His reply.— P.S.]

[18][On the case of Mark Antony see Valerius Max., VIII. 9, 2; on Marins, Vellejus Pat. II. 19, 3; on Coligny, Serranus, Com., de statu rel. in Gallia, t. III. p. 32—as quoted by Tholuck (p. 380 of Krauth’s translation), and by Meyer(p. 592). But these are at best very remote analogies from a different sphere.—P. S.]

[19]Joh_18:12.—[ἡ σπεῖρα καὶ ὁ χιλίαρχος are the detachment of the Roman garrison, οἱ ὑπηρέται, the levitical temple guard. See notes on Joh_18:3. The omission of a comma and of the article before “officers” in the A. V., makes the impression that ὁ χιλιαρχος is alike dependent on τῶν Ἰουδαίων is οἱ ὑπηρέται.—P. S.]

[20]Ver. l3.—[ἀπήγαγον (A. C. אc. Vulg.) is not so well supported as ἤγαγον(א.* B. D., Tischend.).—P. S.]

[21]Joh_18:14.—Tischendorf [in former edd.] ἀπολέσθαι. [perish] in accordance with A. C,** and others; Lachmann ἀποθανεῖν in accordance with B. C.* and others (Sin.). Meyer: ἀποθ comes from Joh_11:50. [In ed. 8. Tischendorf reads ἀποθανεῖν, with א. B. C.* D., and aids: “ἀποθανεῖν potest ad 11:50 accommodatum credi. At quum testimoniorwn antiquissimorum pondere prsestet. nec incredibile est ex illo ἀπόληται 11:50 hoe loco ἀπολέσθαι ortum esse. Est iste locus ex eis ubi præstat probatissimos testes sequi quam. conjectures fidere.” Tregelles, Alford, Westcott and Hort, likewise agree on ἀποθανεῖν.—P. S.]

[22]Joh_18:15.—The Recepta, Griesbach, Scholz, Tischendorf [formerly]: ὁ ἄλλος. The article is omitted by A. D., etc;, but attested by a majority of authorities. [Tischendorf, ed. 8., Westcott and Hort omit, Alford brackets the article. Lange retains it. The insertion is more readily accounted for than the omission, and may have been conformed to 20:2, 3, 4, 8, where, the article occurs. There is no doubt, however, that no other than John is meant. In using this self designation for the first time, he may have omitted the article.—P. S.]

[23]Joh_18:17.—[Μή and μήτε, in interrogative sentences, imply (like the German dock nicht?) a negative answer, the English not, like the Greek οὐ and the Latin nonne, an affirmative answer. The παιδίσκη was apprehensive of an affirmative answer and wished politely to anticipate Peter’s denial; or the negative form of the question reveals the feeling that she ought not to have admitted John as a disciple of Jesus except for his being an acquaintance of the high priest.—P. S.]

[24]Joh_18:20.—λελάληκα (Lachmann, Tischendorf) is most strongly attested, against ἐλάλησα.

[25]Joh_18:20.—[The best authorities omit the article τῇ (text, rec.) before συναγωγῇ, very properly: for there are many synagogues, and but one temple.—P. S.)

[26]Joh_18:20.—The reading πάντες (Griesbach, Lachmann) is established by A. B.C.* Sin., etc., in opposition to a second πάντοτε (Tischendorf in accordance with E. G. H., etc.) and to παντοθεν. In ed. 8., Tischend. reads likewise πάντες οἱ Ἰουδ. without πάντοτε.—P. S.]

[27]Joh_18:22.—[Uncertain whether with the hand (Backenstreich, Luther, Lange, Meyer) or with a rod (Ruthenschlag, Beza, Bengel, Godet). The former is more probable, as it was intended to be a punishment for saucy speech. Comp. Mat_26:67; Act_23:2. ῥάπισμα, from ῥάβδος, ῥαπίς, originally meant a blow from a rod or stick.—P. S.]

[28]Joh_18:24.—The omission of οὖν (attested Codd. B. C* L. X. Δ., Lachmann) appears to be exegetical. The Johannean οὖν, however, is quite characteristic here. Other exegetical apprehensions of the passage substituted δέ and καί. [Tischend., Alf., etc., retain οὖν. The pluperf. rendering of ἀπέστειλεν is ungrammatical and in the interest of harmonistics. See p. 552 —P. S.]

[29]Joh_18:25.—The οὖν [after ἠρνήσατο] is here not sufficiently attested (E. G. M., etc.); neither is it suitable.

[30][Robinson, Harmony, p. 225: “An oriental house is usually built around a quadrangular interior court; into which there is a passage (sometimes arched) through the front part of the house, closed next the street by a heavy folding gate, with a smaller wicket for single persons, kept by a porter. In the text, the interior court, often paved or flagged, and open to the sky, is the αὐλή, where the attendants made a fire; and the passage beneath the front of the house, from the street to this court, is the προαύλιον or πυλών in Mat_26:71; Mar_14:68. The place where Jesus stood before the high priest, may have been an open room or place of audience on the ground floor, in the rear or on one side of the court; such rooms, open in front, being customary. It was close upon the court; for Jesus heard all that was going on around the fire, and turned and. looked upon Peter: Luk_22:61.”—P. S.]

[31][Also E. V., Wordsworth, and even Robinson, Harmony, p. 226.—P.S.]

[32][Also ἡ αὔλειος with or without θύρα. The αὐλή,—atrium, is the court yard, around which an oriental house was built, a rectangular area in the open air, connected with the street by a προαύλιον, or vestibule (Mar_14:68), and πυλών or portal (Mat_26:71), in which was a ούρα, or wicket.— P. S.]

[33][Augustine: Christ shows that His precept Mat_5:39 is to be followed non ostentatione corporis, sed preparatione, cordis. An angry man may turn, in sullenness, the other cheek visibly to the smiter; better is he who makes a true answer with mildness, and prepares his heart in peace to endure greater sufferings. Luther: Christ forbids self defence with the hand (violence), not with the tongue. See quotation in Meyer, p.598). Godet: Jesus did not here fulfil literally His precept (Mat_5:39); He owed to His innocence this answer full of sweetness and dignity. Alford: “It has been often and well observed, that our Lord here gives us the best interpretation of Mat_5:39—that it does not exclude the remonstrating against unjust oppression, provided it be done calmly and patiently.”—P. S.]

[34]Chap. 18. Joh_18:28.—Πρωΐ not πρωΐα. [The former is sustained by א. A. B. C., etc., against the text. rec.—P. S.]

[35]Joh_18:29.—After Πιλᾶτος an ἔξω according to B. C. * L. X. sin. etc. Others give it after αὐτούς.

[36]Joh_18:34.—Most Codd. are without αύτᾦ

[37]Joh_18:37.—[It is best to regard σὺ λέγεις as an affirmation (comp. σὺ εἶπας Mat_26:25], and ὄτι as the reason for it. Lange: Du sagst es. Ja ein könig bin ich. Noyes: Thou sayest what is true; for I am a King. So also Meyer, Alford, etc.—P. S.]

[38]Joh_18:37.—The second ἐγώ is omitted by B. D. L. etc. Probably because the transcribers considered it superfluous.

[39]Joh_18:40.—[πάντες is omitted by א. B. L. X., Tischend., Westcott and Hort, but retained by Lange, Alford, with A. and Verss.—P. S.]

[40]Joh_19:3.—Codd [א] B. L. X., etc., most versions, Augustine, etc., instead of καὶ ἔλεγον, read: καὶ ἤρχοντο πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ ἔλεγον (Lachmann, Tischendorf). [It was a mock-reverential approach as to a crowned monarch. Not understood by transcribers.—P. S.]

[41]Joh_19:3. ἐδίδοσαν αὐτῷ ῥαπίσματα—uncertain whether with the hand or a rod or staff, probably the former. Lange: Backenstreiche. See Text. Notes on Joh_18:22.—P. S.]

[42]Joh_19:4.—Instead of ἐξῆλθεν Lachmann reads καὶ ἐξῆλθεν in accordance with A. B. K. L., etc.,

[43]Joh_19:5.—[pilate is omitted in the MSS. and inserted by the E. V. for clearness’ sake.—P. S.]

[44]Joh_19:5.—[Ἰδοὺ ὁ ἄνθρπος א. B. L., versus ἴδε of text. rec., which is supported by A. D., but not by B., as Lachmann states. Comp. Tischend. ed. 8.—P. S.]

[45]Joh_19:6.—Most Codd., B. L. excepted, append αὐτόν (Lachmann) to the σταύρωσον of the Recepta. The passionate and characteristic exclamation was readily thus supplemented, however. [Alford, Tischend., Westcott and Hort omit αὐτόν which was probably inserted from Joh_19:15, and from Mark and Luke.—P. S.]

[46]Joh_19:7.—Cod. B. and some others omit ἡμῶν (Lachmann). The context is in favor of its retention.

[47]Joh_19:10.—Οὖν is wanting in A. X. and in several translations (Tischendorf). Probably the form of the consequence presented by οὖν was considered remarkable here.

[48]Joh_19:10.—Codd. A. B., Lachmann, Tischendorf [Tregelles, Alford, Wescott and Hort] give the ἀπολῦσαι first. Probably a putative correction.

[49]Joh_19:12.—The stronger form ἐκραύγαζον instead of ἒκραζον in accordance with Codd. A. B. L. M. Lachmann, Tischendorf.

[50]Joh_19:13.—λόγων τούτων according to Codd. A. B. L. Sin. etc. [instead of τοῦτον τὸν λόγον text. rec.]

[51]Joh_19:14.—The reading ὥρα ἦν instead of ὥρα δέ received by Lachmann and Tischendorf in accordance with A. B. D., etc. [So also the English critical edd.]

[52]Joh_19:14.—Ὡς is more strongly attested than ὡσεί.

[53]Joh_19:14.—Most Codd., A. B. E. K., etc., and the translations read ἕκτη Codd. D. L. X., etc., and the Alexandrian Chronicle differ from these; the Chronicle assures us that accurate conies and the authentic MS. preserved at Ephesus—τὸ ἰδιόχειρον give τρίτη. A conformation to Mar_15:25. due to the too literal apprehension of the Johannean expression. [See the full apparatus in Tischend. and the exegesis below.—P. S.]

[54]Joh_19:16.—Cod. A. etc. and the Recepta read: καὶ ἀπήγαγον Codd. D. E. H., etc. read ἤγαγον. Codd. B. L. X. etc. the Itala and other translations, Lachmann, Tischendorf [Alford, Westcott and Hort] omit καὶ ἤγαγον. Omitted probably on account of the exegetical consideration that the word here refers to the Jews, while in Mat_27:31, it has reference to the soldiers.

[55]So also Godet, Ewald, Alford. This is no doubt the proper view, and not set aside by the objections of Meyer (p. 610), who regards the question simply as intended to know the real author of the charge. Christ did not ask for information, which He did not need, but to bring out the distinction in the mind of Pilate, who seems to have suspected that Jesus was really what He was charged with being. This may be inferred also from the question, “Whence art Thou?” (19:8), his increasing desire to release Jesus (12), and his refusal to alter the inscription on the cross (22).— P. S.]

[56][Meyer just reversely: The answer of Pilate…indirectly denies the first, and consequently affirms the second question. But, Lange is right. Pilate proudly and indignantly repudiates all connection with Jewish expectations, which he despised as sheer fanaticism.—P. S.]

[57][Lampe: Angels and disciples; Luthardt and Stier: angels; Meyer: disciples only (Joh_12:26; 1Co_4:1; 1Ti_4:6), who are themselves not of this world, though in this world, Joh_17:16.—P. S.]

[58][In the 6th ed., p. 611, Meyer rejects this view and understands by ὑπηρέται the disciples. See preceding footnote.—P. S.]

[59][Meyer and Alford likewise derive the question of Pilate from indifferentism rather than skepticism. “It expresses, not without scoff and irony, that truth can never be found: and is an apt representative of the state of the polite Gentile mind at the time of the Lord’s coming. It was rather an inability than an unwillingness to find the truth.” Comp. the saying of Felix to Paul, Act_24:25.—P. S.]

[60][Dr. Lange has in view Lammenais, Hermes, Günther, and other recent Roman Catholic philosophers, whose speculations have been condemned by the pope.—P. S.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

III. “I Lay Down My Life, That I Might Take it Again.”

Chapters 18-21

CHAPTER 18

1. The Arrest in the Garden. (Joh 18:1-11.)

2. Before Annas and Caiaphas; Peter’s Denial. (Joh 18:12-27.)

3. Before Pilate. (Joh 18:28-38.)

4. Not this Man, But Barabbas. (Joh 18:39-40.)

The hour of His suffering had now come. With His disciples He went across the brook Cedron into the garden. It is the Kidron mentioned frequently in Old Testament history. When David fled from his own son Absalom, he passed weeping over this brook. (2Sa 15:23.) See also 2Ch 15:16 and 2Ki 23:12. It is claimed that the way by which our Lord left the city was the way by which the scapegoat was yearly, on the great Day of Atonement, sent into the wilderness. The garden, though not named here, is Gethsemane. Judas knew the place, and the Lord knowing that Judas would betray Him, went deliberately there to be delivered into the hands of man. Nothing is said at all by John about the agony, the deep soul-exercise, through which our Lord passed in that night; nor is there a word about His sweat, as it were great drops of blood. All these things are recorded in the Synoptic Gospels, in which His perfect humanity is described, they are passed over in the Gospel of His Deity. But John describes a scene which the other Gospels omit. He manifests His power. When the band of men said that they sought Jesus of Nazareth, He said unto them, “I am He.” Then the whole company went backward and fell to the ground. What a scene that must have been! Several hundred men with their lanterns, torches and weapons all prostrate on the ground before the One Man. They stood in the presence of Jehovah and His power and majesty was present so that the one word was sufficient to prostrate them all. It was a striking evidence that neither the treachery of Judas, nor the wicked hatred of the Jews, nor the power of Rome, could touch our Lord. But the hour had now arrived when He was ready to give Himself up. Augustine made the following comment: “What shall He do when He comes to judge, Who did this when He was about to be judged? What shall be His might when He comes to reign, Who had this might when He was about to die?” Then after His second answer He said, “If therefore ye seek me, let these go their way.” Willingly He allows Himself bound, on the condition that His own must be free. It is a blessed illustration of the Gospel. The Good Shepherd gives His life for the sheep. Substitution is fully revealed in this gracious statement. He gives Himself up that His people might be free.

Then Simon Peter drew the sword and cut off the right ear of Malchus. Peter had slept; had he been watching and praying it would not have occurred. And how beautiful the words of the Lord: “The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” Perfect willingness and readiness to drink the bitter cup were thus expressed in the presence of His disciples and His enemies.

Then follows the account of Peter’s denial, the questioning before Annas, which is only reported by John, and finally He was taken into the judgment hall before Pilate. The miserable character of the Roman Governor is brought fully to light in this Gospel. He was destitute of all moral courage; he acted against better knowledge; he knew the Lord was innocent, yet he dared not to acquit Him for fear of displeasing the Jews. Joh 18:32 refers to the Lord’s death by crucifixion, from the hands of the Gentiles. Note the four questions of Pilate. “Art Thou the King of the Jews?”--”What hast Thou done?”--”Art Thou a King then?”--”What is truth?” The Roman historian Suetonius states that many rumors were then prevalent that a King was about to rise among the Jews who would have dominion over the whole world. No doubt Pilate knew of these rumors and therefore asked the Lord about His Kingship. The answer of our Lord, “My Kingdom is not of this world,” has often been misconstrued to mean that the Lord never will have a Kingdom in this world in the sense of a literal Kingdom. Our post-millennial friends use it against a literal interpretation of the prophecies relating to the coming of an earthly Kingdom of Christ. What our Lord meant by saying “My Kingdom is not of this world” is, that His Kingdom has not its origin or nature from the world. He will receive the Kingdom promised unto Him from the Father’s hands. (Dan 7:14.)

Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

GETHSEMANE

Mat 26:30-46; Mar 14:26-42; Luk 22:39-46;Joh 18:1. “Jesus speaking these things, went out with His disciples beyond the brook Kidron, where was a garden, into which He and His disciples went.” This is the Garden of Gethsemane, which means “oil- press,” as evidently it had some celebrity for the manufacture of olive-oil, corroborative of which the olive-trees there still abound. They look very venerable. Since the olive-tree ordinarily lives five hundred to a thousand years, there is a degree of plausibility in the tradition that the identical trees under which Jesus and His disciples frequently sat still survive, as several trunks from the same root are still green and flourishing, some looking old and others young, favoring the conclusion that as the old die, others grow up, thus perpetuating the tree from the same root. “Garden,” in the Old World, is: frequently synonymous with “park” in this country; e. g., “the Garden of Eden.”

Mat 26:30; Mat 26:36-37. “And having sung a hymn, they went out into the Mount of Olives. Then Jesus comes with them into a place called Gethsemane, and says to His disciples, Sit here, until, having gone, I shall pray yonder. And taking Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, He began to give way to sorrow and dejection.” You see how He compliments Peter, James, and John by taking them with Him to the exclusion of the rest. He did the same on the Mount of Transfiguration, and also at the resurrection of Jairus’s daughter — evidencing a deeper insight into spiritual things on the part of the apostolic trio. The unfallen humanity of Jesus, never callused by sin, is intensely emotional, feeling infinitely more acutely than we are likely to apprehend.

Luk 22:41-44. “And He departed from them about a stone’s cast, and putting down His knees, continued to pray, saying, Father, if this cup wishes to pass from Me.” This was spoken proleptically, implying a desire on the part of His humanity to retreat from the terrible ordeals of blood, insult, treason, abuse, and death which His Divinity saw in diabolical panorama moving before His eyes. “Moreover, not My will, but Thine be done.” Here you see He prefers the Divine will to his own human will, giving us an exceedingly profitable example. The human will of Jesus recoiled from the horrific tragedy coming to meet Him. So will ours under all circumstances. Hence we are to sink away into the Divine will, always keeping the human meekly acquiescent.

“And an angel appeared unto Him from heaven, strengthening Him.” While there was no retreat from the appalling and horrific maelstrom which opened its in hellish malice, yet the loving Father sends awful crisis. Hence you see the pertinency of prayer amid all of our temptations and trials; not that we will always be delivered from them, but that our Heavenly Father will send an angel to strengthen us, giving us the needed patience, resignation, forbearance, and perseverance adequate to the conflict. “And being in agony, He continued to pray the more fervently. And His perspiration was like drops of blood falling down upon the ground.” All efforts to explain this agony of His human soul are utterly vain. Millions of martyrs have gone singing to the burning stake, and shouted triumphantly amid the wreathing flames. Then why did Jesus agonize so intensely in contemplation of His martyrdom? You must remember that all comparison is really impertinent and utterly out of place as to any attempted exegesis, from the simple fact that none of the martyrs atoned for the sins of the world. The Divinity could neither suffer nor die, but only served as the altar on which the humanity was immolated to atone for the sins of a guilty world. Hence the innocent Man Jesus carried upon His spotless soul all the mountains of sin committed by the guilty; race in all ages, from Adam to the latest generation. Consequently, we are utterly incompetent to know or to realize the agony which He endured in the garden. There the battle was fought between the human and the Divine will, the latter triumphing. Gethsemane was the consecration and Calvary the sanctification. In the case of the latter, we see Him nailed to the cross, and pouring out His blood, and hear nothing of humanity’s recoil from the appalling tragedy, the battle having been fought and the victory won in Gethsemane. Hence the soul seeking sanctification must first pass the Gethsemane of consecration, where the human utterly and eternally submits to the Divine will. Then you are prepared cheerfully to let the Holy Ghost nail Adam the First to the cross, and let him bleed and die. The followers of Jesus must all pass through Gethsemane on their way to Calvary. This bloody sweat is unparalleled in all the history of human suffering, illustrative of the fact that the world has never seen but the one Savior, who actually carried upon His spotless soul all of its guilt and crime.

Mar 14:38-39. “And He comes and finds them sleeping, and says to Peter, Simon , do you sleep? Were you not able to watch with Me one hour? Watch and pray, lest ye may enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” They had been constantly on foot and their attention engaged so long that drowsiness and nervous relaxation proved irresistible. “And again having gone away; He prayed, speaking the same word. And returning, He found them again sleeping; for their eyes were heavy, and they knew not what they respond to Him.”

It is about midnight. The apostles were stout, muscular men who, in case of nervous collapse, found drowsiness irresistible. “He comes the third time, and says to them, Do you sleep on and take your rest. It is over: the hour has come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Arise, let us be going; behold; the one having betrayed Me draweth nigh.” Jesus having seen all the maneuvers of His enemies, who, under the escort of Judas, have tracked them — making inquiry of the people on the streets

— from the upper room where they had taken the supper on Mount Zion, through the long way of the city to the east wall, and out across the Valley of Jehoshaphat and the brook Kidron to this garden, where Jesus had so often resorted with His disciples while Judas was with them, and who consequently kept His track, leading the mob, and also having seen all the hurry and bustle of His enemies, parading the temple guards and hiring the street rabble to accompany them, now, that they are coming right into the park, and knowing they are going to arrest Him, He commands the Eleven all to wake up, and goes to meet them.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Section 1. (Joh 18:1-11.)

Obedient to the Father’s will.

The first section beautifully exhibits both characters. He goes over the "black" winter-torrent Kedron, so significant of the "brook in the way" of which He had to drink, in order that He might with His work accomplished "lift up the head." For the refreshment that He procured for others was that which was His own; and it broke out of the dark abyss of suffering which was now before Him. Over Kedron, then, He passes to the garden, carrying with Him His disciples; He was carrying them indeed, though by a way they knew not, to the paradise of God.

But He is clearly going forward with perfect knowledge of all, on His own part: Judas, we are significantly told here, knew the place as one of frequent resort by the Lord with His disciples. He is not shunning but seeking now the "oil-press" of sorrow. Eternal joy is to be the sure result.

How pitiful, in view of this, the array mustered to take the One who comes forward to meet it! "Whom seek ye?" He asks; and when He tells them, He is the One they are seeking, as if fulfilling the divine decree as to that supreme Name of Jesus, they all go backward and fall to the ground. Then, being warned, He gives them leave, if still they will, to take Him; but with the stipulation (blessed Shepherd of the sheep!) that they must let His followers go. And they let them go! even though Peter, out of harmony with His Lord’s mind as so frequently he is, uses his sword against them! What of them all? Alas, the poor tools of their own enemy! will He contend with souls that He has made? No, all is settled for Him entirely apart from any thought of them or of their master: He does not speak in John of the twelve legions of angels ready to take the place of the twelve, -twelve now no more! -who are soon to forsake Him. The. Son is in the presence of the Father only; and "The cup which My Father hath given Me, shall I not drink it?" is His unanswerable, all-sufficient argument.

F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

18:1-40 After completing his farewell in the upper room (13:31–17:26), Jesus left the city and entered a garden just east of Jerusalem to pray. Here he was arrested, taken under guard into the city, and interrogated by the Jewish leaders. The climactic “time” that Jesus referred to repeatedly throughout the Gospel (see 2:4; see also study note on 12:23) was now at hand.

18:1-2 Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley, a dry river valley (a wadi ) outside Jerusalem’s walls on the city’s east edge. • The Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:32) was a grove of olive trees that grew along the west shoulder of the Mount of Olives (gath shemaney means “olive press” in Aramaic). Jesus liked this place and frequently prayed there (see John 8:1; Luke 21:37; 22:39).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Joh 18:1. Ἐξῆλθε, He went forth) straightway. Therefore He had spoken in the city the words which have been written in the preceding chapters.—τῶν Κέδρων) It is called by the Hebrews קדרון. The Latin Vulgate has Cedron, not Cedrorum. Therefore we regard the τῶν as inserted by transcribers.[376] The Greeks inflected several Hebrew nouns so as to accord with the sounds of their own language, as Hiller shows in the Onom., p. 715: therefore in this way ΤῶΝ ΚΈΔΡΩΝ might have place. But the LXX. never have it so, save at 1Ki 15:13, where however the Tigurine Edition,[377] and moreover the Cod. Alex., have ἐν τῷ χειμάῤῥῳ τοῦ Κέδρων. In other cases the LXX. are wont to say, without an article, ἐν τῷ χειμάῤῥῳ Χοῤῥάθ, εἰς τὸν χειμάῤῥουν Κεισῶν, κ.τ.λ. Also, during the times of the LXX. translators and of John, the phrase, τῶν κέδρων, does not seem to have been in use.

[376] BCLX Orig. read τῶν Κέδρων, and so Tisch.; but A Δ, τοῦ Κέδρων, and so Lachm. Dabd Memph. Theb. read τοῦ Κέδρου. Τοῦ Κέδρων, being the most difficult reading, is least likely to be the work of transcribers. D, not understanding how τοῦ could be joined with what seemed to it a Greek Plural (but which is really a Hebrew Singular form), changed it into τοῦ Κέδρου: BC, etc., into τῶν Κέδρων.—E. and T.

[377] So also Grabe in his Edition. This confirms the reading of τοῦ here.—E. and T.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh_18:1-2. ʼΕξῆλθε] from Jerusalem, where the meal, Joh_13:2, had been held. The ἄγωμεν ἐντεῦθεν, Joh_16:31, was now first carried out; see in loc.: πέραν νοῦ χειμ,. then expresses: whither He went; see on Joh_6:1.

τοῦ Κεδρών] Genit. of apposition (2Pe_2:6, comp. πόλις ʼΑθηνῶν and the like). On this torrent dry in summer (χείμαῤῥος, Hom. Il. xi. 493; Soph. Ant. 708; Plat. Legg. v. p. 736 A; Joseph. Antt. viii. 1. 5), קִדְרוֹן, i.e. niger, black stream, flowing eastward from the city through the valley of the same name, see Robinson, II. p. 31 ff.; Ritter, Erdk. XV. 1, p. 598 ff. As to the name, comp. the very frequent Greek name of rivers Μέλας (Herod. vii. 58. 198; Strabo, viii. p. 386, et al.).

κῆπος] According to Mat_26:36, a garden of the estate of Gethsemane. The owner must be conceived as being friendly to Jesus.

ὅτι πολλάκις, κ.τ.λ.] points back to earlier festal visits, and is a more exact statement of detail, of which John has many in the history of the passion. We see from the contents that Jesus offered Himself with conscious freedom to the final crisis. Comp. Joh_18:4.

Typological references (Luthardt, after older expositors: to David, who, when betrayed by Ahithophel, had gone the same way, 2Sa_15:23; Lampe, Hengstenberg, following the Fathers: to Adam, who in the garden incurred the penalty of death) are without any indication in the text.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 18:1-12 . The arrest of Jesus .

Joh 18:1 . Having finished His prayer and His discourse, Jesus ἐξῆλθε , “went out” from the city, as is suggested by πέραν τοῦ χειμάρρου , “to the other side of the torrent,” cf. Joh 6:1 . χείμαρρος sc. χειμάρροος ποταμός , a stream that flows in winter, a torrent; of Jabbok, Gen 32:22 ; of Kidron, 2Sa 15:23 . τῶν Κέδρων , “the Kidron,” described in Henderson’s Palestine , 90. ὅπου ἦν κῆπος “where was a garden,” in Mar 14:32 , described as χωρίον (a country place, or estate), and called Γεθσημανῆ . The owner was probably a friend of Jesus. Into this garden He went with His disciples.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chap.

18:1-19:16.] His voluntary submission of Himself to His enemies and to the unbelief of Israel.

1-11.] His betrayal and apprehension.

1-3.] Mat 26:30-47. Mar 14:26-43.Luk 22:39-53Luk 22:39-53. On the omission by John of the conflict of the Redeemer’s soul in Gethsemane, I would remind the reader of what has been said in the Prolegomena on the character of this Gospel. The attempt to find in this omission a discrepancy between the setting forth of the Redeemer by John and the synoptic Gospels, is, as usual, unsuccessful. John presents us with most striking instances of the troubling of the human soul of Christ by the suffering which was before Him: see ch. 12:23-27; 13:21. Compare notes on Matt. ver. 36, and throughout the section.

1. τῶν κέδρων] This is evidently a Greek corruption of the Hebrew (קִדְרוֹן); and coincides with the LXX in ref. and 3 Kings 15:13, where however (not ) has τοῦ κέδρων. If there were cedars in the ravine, the corruption would be easily accounted for. Suidas, under Ἰαβίν, quotes Ps. 82:9 thus, Ἰαβὶν ἐν τῷ χειμάῤῥῳ τῶν κισσῶν. Instances of the practice of changing foreign names into other words bearing sense in the new language are common in all countries. This being so, it is perhaps safer to follow the best mss., even against our own conviction, that St. John can hardly have written τῶν κέδρων. Josephus calls it χειμ. κεδρῶνος, or φάραγξ κεδρῶνος. Antt. viii. 1. 5; ix. 7. 3: see 2Ki 23:6, 2Ki 23:12.

The ravine in the bottom of which flows the Kidron, is to the East of Jerusalem, between the city and the Mount of Olives.

κῆπος] Lücke suggests that the owner of this garden may have been friendly to (or a disciple of?) Jesus. It was called Gethsemane,—Matt., Mark.

Traditions as to its site are, as usual, various. A square plot of ground in the depth of the ravine is now usually pointed out, and seems to have been fixed on at the time when the empress Helena visited Jerusalem, a.d. 326. Euseb. says Gethsemane was at the Mount of Olives: Jerome, at the foot of the mount. The language of Luk 21:37 leads to a belief that it may have been higher up the mount. Robinson, i. 346.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The Arrest of Jesus in the Garden (18:1-11)

18:1. ταῦτα εἰπών. As soon as the Prayer of Consecration was ended (see Introd., p. xx), Jesus and His disciples left the upper room, and went out, ἐξῆλθεν perhaps implying (as was in fact the case) that they went outside the city.

σὺν τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, sc. with the faithful Eleven (see on 2:2). This is one of the very rare occurrences of σύν in Jn. (see on 12:2), and it is exchanged for μετά within a couple of lines, μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ (v. 2).

πέραν τοῦ χειμάρρου τοῦ Κέδρων. The Kedron gorge between Jerusalem and the Mount of Olives rarely has any water in it. It is called χείμαρρος by Josephus as well as in the LXX (Neh 2:15, Neh 2:1 Macc. 12:37), but it is nearly always dry, except after very heavy Rev_1 The modern name is Wādy Sitti Maryam.

The majority of texts (א*BCLNΘ) give τῶν κέδρων; א*DW have τοῦ κέδρου; and AΔ c e f g q vg. give τοῦ κέδρων This last, despite the weakness of the MS. support, we take to be the true reading (as the Syriac vss. suggest), and that from which both the others have originated, owing to misunderstanding on the part of scribes. For κέδρων is the transliteration of the Hebrew קִדְרוֹן, dark, the name as applied to a torrent being perhaps equivalent to our Blackwater. Josephus treats it as a declinable noun in the nom. case. Twice in the LXX (2Sa 15:23, 1Ki 15:13) we find τῶν κέδρων after χείμαρρος, the word being taken as a gen. pl., and the rendering of the phrase being “the ravine (or torrent) of the cedar trees.” It is said that at the time cedars grew on the Mount of Olives, and some may have been as low as the wādy at its base. But it is not likely that the ravine was called Kidron on that account. A Greek scribe, finding τοῦ κέδρων in his exemplar, would naturally take κέδρων as the gen. pl. of κέδρος, and would correct it either to τοῦ κέδρου or to τῶν κέδρων.2

The reading has been much discussed, because assuming τῶν κέδρων to have been the original reading, it has been argued that the evangelist was but ill acquainted with Hebrew names, if he supposed that Kidron meant “of the cedars.” But, as the LXX shows in the passages cited above, χείμαρρος τῶν κέδρων was treated as a correct rendering of נחל קדרון, and it might have been adopted by Jn. as the title familiar to Greek ears. We hold, however, that it is not the original reading in this verse, so that the argument based on it is worthless.

ὅπου ἦν κῆπος. Jn. does not give the name Gethsemane,3 nor does Lk.; Mar 14:32, Mat 26:36 have χωρίον (i.e. a farm or small property) οὗ τὸ ὄνομα Γεθσημανεί. Jn. alone speaks of it as κῆπος, i.e. it was one of the private gardens in the eastern outskirts of Jerusalem (cf. 19:41 for the garden of Joseph). The word κῆπος is common in the LXX, but in the N.T. is found only here, at v. 26, 19:41 (cf. 20:15), and Luk 13:19. For ἦν, see on 11:18.

εἰς ὃν εἰσῆλθεν, the verb showing that it was an enclosed place. The site that is now shown was recognised as the Garden of the Agony in the fourth century at any rate, and it is quite possible that tradition accurately preserved its position from the beginning.

Jn. does not insert at this point any account of the Agony in Gethsemane, as the Synoptists do (Mar 14:32f., Mat 26:36f., Luk 22:39f.); but the allusion to “the cup which the Father gave” (v. 11, where see note) indicates that the omission was not due to ignorance. We have seen (on 12:27) that the prayer there recorded is virtually the prayer of anguish at Gethsemane.

It has been suggested, indeed, that the Prayer of the Agony, if it followed here, would be inconsistent with the Prayer of Consecration and Farewell that Jn. has just placed on record; so different are the sublime calm and dignity of c. 17 from the sadness and shrinking of “remove this cup from me—yet not what I will, but what Thou wilt” (Mar 14:36). But such a criticism would be at variance with the facts of human experience, in which the moments of greatest spiritual depression and trial often follow close on moods of the highest spiritual exaltation. And it may have been so with the Son of Man Himself.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

FOURTH PART: THE PASSION. 18:1-19:42.

The intention of the evangelist, in the following narrative, is certainly not to give a narration as complete as possible of the Passion, as if no narrative of this event existed side by side with his own. The most pronounced adversaries of the authenticity of our Gospel, Baur and Strauss, are at the present day in accord with the orthodox interpreters, Lange and Hengstenberg, on the point that the narrative of the fourth evangelist stands in constant relation to those of his three predecessors. The difference is only on the question of the end which the author proposes to himself in composing this fourth narrative. According to Baur and Strauss, the pseudo-John borrows from the Synoptics the materials which are indispensable to the end of giving some probability to his romance of Jesus-Logos. According to the commentators of the opposite side, John endeavors simply to fill up the vacancies in the earlier narrations, or to present the facts, already previously related, in their true light.

We are convinced that, as the latter writers think, the choice of materials is frequently determined by the intention of completing the accounts already current in the church. Thus, when John relates the examination of Jesus in the house of Annas, which the Synoptics omit, and omits the appearance before the Sanhedrim, which the first Gospels relate with detail, this intention seems evident. It will appear also from a multitude of other examples. But, on the other hand, the narrative of John has presented, up to this point, a too serious meditative character and too profound elaboration to allow the possibility of holding that, in the part which is to follow, it is not governed by any higher thought, and is obedient only to chance, as would be the case in a narrative which confined itself to relating that which others had not related.

In the narrative of the Passion in John, we shall find, as throughout his whole work, the triple point of view indicated in the introduction (Vol. I., p. 228f.). Jesus causes His glory to shine forth through the vail of ignominy by which it was covered, and this especially through the freedom with which He surrenders Himself to the fate which awaits Him; this is here, as always, the luminous foundation of the whole narrative. On this foundation there stands out in relief, as a dark figure, the Jewish unbelief unmasking its moral perversity by a series of odious acts and disloyal words, and, after having thus pronounced its own condemnation, reaching its consummation in the murder of the Messiah. Finally, in contrast with it, we discern the faith which is hidden in the person of the disciples gathering up the scattered rays of the glory of Jesus, and growing in silence, as plants during a storm. The second of these three features is that which prevails in the following narrative.

Three principal scenes:

1. The arrest of Jesus: Joh 18:1-11.

2. His double trial, ecclesiastical and civil: Joh 18:12 to Joh 19:16.

3. His punishment: Joh 19:17-42.

First Section: 18:1-11. The Arrest of Jesus.

John omits here the account of the agony of Jesus in Gethsemane; but he clearly assigns to this fact its place by these words of Joh 18:1 : where there was a garden into which he entered. In reading these words, no Christian, in possession of the first three Gospels, could fail to think of that narrative. The reason of this omission, as well as of the omission of the accounts of the transfiguration, the institution of the Holy Supper, and so many others, is that John knew that this scene was sufficiently well known in the church, and that it had no special relation to the end which he set before himself. There cannot be a dogmatic design in this omission; this is proved by the story in Joh 12:24-27, which belongs exclusively to John, and in which he has preserved for us the moral essence of the scene in Gethsemane.

Strauss exclaims: “Every attempt to insert in John’s narrative, between chs. 17 and 18 the agony of Gethsemane is an attack upon the moral elevation and even the manly character of Jesus.” According to this, John would have been the first to commit an outrage of this kind (Joh 12:27). Strauss concludes from this that the Synoptic narrative is “a more naive poetic fiction” than that of John, which presents to us “a more well-considered and carefully contrived poetic fiction.” Thus those who relate, lie in relating; he who omits, lies in omitting! This is the point at which criticism arrives by pursuing its course even to the end. It destroys itself.

ADDITIONAL NOTES BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR.

Vv. 1-11.

1. The word ἐξῆλθεν, for the reasons suggested in Note 38.7, above, is to be understood as referring to the departure from the room. There can be no doubt that the place here indicated is the garden of Gethsemane, and thus that this Gospel represents Jesus and the apostles as going after the supper to this spot, which belonged probably to one of the friends of Jesus.—

2. The σπεῖρα or detachment from the Roman cohort was called upon to accompany the officers of the Sanhedrim for the purpose, apparently, of intimidation, and of assistance in case of any attempt at rescue. They were thus a secondary and attendant body, and, after Joh 18:13, where Jesus was led to the house of Annas, they disappear. When Jesus was thus securely in the possession of the Jewish authorities, these Roman soldiers had accomplished their work, and they then returned, doubtless, to the place where they were stationed by the civil government. The body which went forth for the arrest took the lanterns and torches, as well as their arms, for the purpose of impression. The fact that the full moon was shining would make no difference in such a case.

3. Godet, Meyer and others think that ἐξῆλθεν of Joh 18:4 means that Jesus went out of the garden. This may be the meaning, but it cannot be regarded as certainly so. Weiss holds, and this is not improbably the right view, that He came forth from the depth of the garden, or, with perhaps less probability, from the circle of the disciples. Westcott thinks that the ἐξῆλθεν is opposed to the εἰσῆλθεν of Joh 18:1; this, however, is questionable.

4. There is a certain difficulty in bringing John’s narrative in Joh 18:5 f. into accordance with Mat 26:49 f., but it may probably be due to the brevity of the narrative in the latter case, or even in both cases. The approach of Judas to Jesus with a kiss and the words of Jesus in answer must be placed before the allusion to Judas in Joh 18:5 of this chapter.

5. The “falling to the ground” which is mentioned in Joh 18:6 can scarcely be explained, except by some special influence exerted by Jesus’ supernatural power. Roman soldiers would hardly have been thus prostrated by the mere dignified or innocent bearing of an ordinary man, or by the unexpected calmness of Jesus’ demeanor.

6. The words of the 9th verse, when connected with those to which they refer in Joh 17:12, must include more than the idea of a loss occasioned by arrest or death. The result of the arrest of the disciples, or any of them, He feared might be a danger to their faith and thus to their salvation, and so His mind turns again here to what had been His thought in the latter part of ch. 15 and elsewhere.

7. The last words of Joh 18:11 present a similar thought to that of the prayer in Gethsemane as recorded in the other Gospels. It seems not unnatural that the mind of Jesus should have been full of this thought on this last night.

Vv. 1-3. The arrival of the band. “After having said these things, Jesus went out with his disciples beyond the brook Cedron, where there was a garden, into which he entered as well as his disciples. 2. Now Judas, who betrayed him, also knew this place, because Jesus had often met there with his disciples. 3. Judas, then, having taken the cohort, with officers sent by the chief priests and Pharisees, comes thither with lanterns, torches and weapons.”

The verb ἐξῆλθε, he went out, is ordinarily referred to the departure from the supper room See on Joh 14:31. In our view, this verb, being directly connected, as it is, with the limiting phrase πέραν τοῦ χειμάῤῥου, beyond the brook, designates a time farther removed, and signifies rather: “He went out from the city to pass across the brook.” This is acknowledged by de Wette, even though he holds, with so many others, that the discourses of chs. 13-17 were pronounced in the supper room.

The received reading, which is that of the Vatican MS. and of most of the Mjj. and Mnn., and of Origen, is τῶν Κέδρων, and would signify “the brook of the cedars;” there would be evidently an error of John here, for the name Cedron comes from א (Kidron), black (black water). In Josephus also the name Κέδρων is a nominative singular (for example,χείμαῤῥος Κεδρῶνος, Antiq. 8.1, 5).

The reading of the Sinaitic and Cambridge MSS. is τοῦ Κέδρου, of the cedar. It is evident that these two readings are the work of copyists, some of whom conformed the substantive to the article (by substituting Κέδρου for Κέδρων), others the article to the substantive (substituting τῶν for τοῦ), and that the true reading—apparently very improbable—is that of the Alexandrian MS. and of the Sangallensis, τοῦ Κέδρων, which alone easily explains the two others. Westcott, in honor of the Vatican, maintains the reading τῶν Κέδρων, by appealing to a legend of the Jerusalem Talmud, according to which there were some cedars on the Mount of Olives;Tischendorf, out of regard for the Sinaitic MS., reads τοῦ Κέδρου. Behold what prepossession can effect! The same variety of readings is found again in several MSS. of the Old Testament (LXX); see 2Sa 15:23 and 1Ki 15:13.

The brook Cedron has its source half a league to the north of Jerusalem, and falls into the Dead Sea at the southward after a course of six or seven leagues. It is ordinarily dry during nine months of the year; for more than twenty years, as we were told in Jerusalem, not a sign of water had been seen in it. Its bed is at the bottom of the valley of Jehoshaphat, between the temple hill and the Mount of Olives. After having passed the little bridge by which this dried-up bed is crossed, one finds on the right a plot of ground planted with ancient olive trees, which is asserted to be the garden of Gethsemane. There is no valid reason, whatever Keim may say, against the truth of this tradition. The word πολλάκις, often, in Joh 18:2, might apply only to the preceding days; but it is more probable that it refers also to the earlier sojourns of Jesus in Jerusalem. This garden undoubtedly belonged to friends of Jesus. It ordinarily served as a place of meeting for the Lord and His disciples (συνήχθη, the aorist: he met with), when they returned from Jerusalem to the Mount of Olives and to Bethany, and wished to avoid passing all together through the streets of the city. Comp. Luk 21:37; Luk 22:39.

The term σπεῖρα always designates, in the New Testament (Mat 27:27, Act 21:31), and in Josephus, the Roman legion or a part of the legion which occupied the citadel of Antonia, at the north-eastern angle of the temple. A detachment of Roman soldiers had seemed necessary to support the servants of the Sanhedrim. For Mar 14:2 proves that a rising in favor of Jesus was feared; and for this reason it had been necessary to ask for orders from the governor. This detachment was commanded by the tribune himself, thechiliarch, mentioned in Joh 18:12. The article ἡ, “the cohort,” designates the well-known cohort; and, if it seems to indicate the presence of this entire body of soldiers (600 men), we must find here either a popular expression or a manner of speaking which is justified by the presence of the commander-in-chief.

The Synoptics do not speak of this escort. The message of Pilate’s wife, however, which is related by Matthew, proves that, since the preceding evening, the governor had been occupied with this matter; and this circumstance confirms the fact of the participation of the Roman soldiery in the arrest. Keim turns this narrative into ridicule, by speaking ironically of “half an army;” this wretched piece of pleasantry is quite gratuitous. Baumlein and others have contended against the application of the term σπεῖρα to the Roman garrison, and have thought that the question was only of the guard of the temple. But the constant meaning of this word does not allow this explanation.

The ὑπηρέται, officers, are, as in Joh 7:32; Joh 7:45, the sergeants of the temple. They were the persons who had properly the task of arresting Jesus. The Roman cohort was only to give them aid in case of resistance. Joh 18:10 shows that servants belonging to the houses of the chief priests had also joined the band.

The meaning of the words φανοί and λαμπάδες is questionable. The first seems to us rather to designate lanterns; the second, resin torches. All this apparatus: “Lanterns and torches and weapons” (the two καί, and, are to be noticed), by its very uselessness casts a kind of ridicule upon this scene. It is feared that Jesus may hide Himself, and yet He surrenders Himself voluntarily (Joh 18:4), or that He may defend Himself;...but what purpose would these weapons have served, if He had wished to make use of His power (Joh 18:6)?

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Christ goeth of his own accord into a garden, which his betrayer knew, to be taken: that by his obedience he might take away the sin that entered into the world by one man’s rebellion, and that in a garden.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

CHAPTER XVIII.

Jesus passes the brook Cedron, and goes to the garden of

Gethsemane, 1.

Judas, having betrayed him, comes to the place with a troop of

men to take him, 2, 3.

Jesus addresses them, and they fall to the ground, 4-6.

He addresses them again, and Peter smites Malchus, 7-11.

They seize him and lead him away to Caiaphas, 12-14.

Peter follows to the palace of the high priest, 15-18.

The high priest questions Christ concerning his doctrine, and

Jesus answers, and is smitten, 19-23.

Peter denies his Lord twice, 24-27.

Jesus is led to the judgment hall, and Pilate and the Jews

converse about him, 28-32.

Pilate converses with Jesus, who informs him of the spiritual

nature of his kingdom, 33-37.

Pilate returns to the Jews, and declares Christ to be innocent,

38.

He seeks to discharge him, and the Jews clamour for his

condemnation, 39. 40.

NOTES ON CHAP. XVIII.

Verse 1. Over the brook Cedron] Having finished the prayer related in the preceding chapter, our Lord went straight to the garden of Gethsemane, Mt 26:36, which was in the mount of Olives, eastward of Jerusalem. This mount was separated from the city by a very narrow valley, through the midst of which the brook Cedron ran: see 1 Macc. 12:37; Joseph. War, b. v. c. 2, s. 3. xii. 2. Cedron is a very small rivulet, about six or seven feet broad, nor is it constantly supplied with water, being dry all the year, except during the rains. It is mentioned in the Old Testament: 2Sa 15:23; 1Kg 15:13; 2Kg 23:4. And it appears the evangelist only mentions it here to call to remembrance what happened to David, when he was driven from Jerusalem by his son Absalom, and he and his followers obliged to pass the brook Cedron on foot: see 2Sa 15:23. All this was a very expressive figure of what happened now to this second David, by the treachery of one of his own disciples. This brook had its name probably from קדר Kadar, he was black; it being the place into which the blood of the sacrifices, and other filth of the city, ran. It was rather, says Lightfoot, the sink, or the common sewer, of the city, than a brook. Some copyists, mistaking Κεδρων for Greek, have changed του into των, and thus have written των Κεδρων, of cedars, instead of του Κεδρων, the brook of Cedron: but this last is undoubtedly the genuine reading.

A garden] Gethsemane: See Clarke on Mt 26:36.

The Jewish grandees had their gardens and pleasure grounds without the city even in the mount of Olives. This is still a common custom among the Asiatics.

St. John mentions nothing of the agony in the garden; probably because he found it so amply related by all the other evangelists. As that account should come in here, the reader is desired to consult the notes on Mt 26:36-47. See also Mr 14:30-36, and Lu 22:40-44.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

1. When Jesus bad spoken these words. In this narrative John passes by many things which the other three Evangelists relate, and he does so on purposej as his intention was to collect many things worthy of being recorded, about which they say nothing; and, therefore, let the reader go to the other Evangelists to find what is wanting here.

Over the brook Kedron. In the Greek original there is an article prefixed to Kedron, which would seem to intimate that the brook takes its name from the cedars; but this is probably an error which has crept into the text; for the valley or brook Kedron is often mentioned in Scripture. The place was so called from its being dark or gloomy, because, being a hollow valley, it was shady, on that point, however, I do not dispute: I only state what is more probable.

The chief thing to be considered is, the intention of the Evangelist in pointing out the place; for his object was, to show that Christ went to death willingly. He came into a place which, he knew, was well known to Judas. Why did he do this but to present himself, of his own accord, to the traitor and to the enemies? Nor was he led astray by inadvertency, for he knew beforehand all that was to happen. John afterwards mentions also that he went forward to meet them. He therefore suffered death, not by constraint, but willingly, that he might be a voluntary sacrifice; for without obedience atonement would not have been obtained for us. Besides, he entered into the garden, not for the purpose of seeking a place of concealment, but that he might have a better opportunity, and greater leisure, for prayer. That he prayed three times to be delivered from death, (Matthew 26:44,) is not inconsistent with that voluntary obedience of which we have spoken; for it was necessary that he should contend with difficulties, that he might be victorious. Now, having subdued the dread of death, he advances to death freely and willingly.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

1–11. The Betrayal

1. he went forth] From the upper room. The same word is used of leaving the room, Mat_26:30; Mar_14:26; Luk_22:39. Those who suppose that the room is left at Joh_14:31 (perhaps for the Temple), interpret this of the departure from the city, which of course it may mean in any case.

the brook Cedron] Literally, the ravine of the Kedron, or of the cedars, according to the reading, the differences of which are here exceedingly interesting. Of the cedars (τῶν Κέδρων) is the reading of the great majority of the authorities; but of the Kedron (τοῦ κεδροῦ or τοῦ κεδρών) is well supported. Of the cedars is the reading of the LXX. in 1Ki_15:13 and occurs as a various reading 2Sa_15:23; 1Ki_2:37; 2Ki_23:6; 2Ki_23:12. The inference is that both names were current, the Hebrew having given birth to a Greek name of different meaning but very similar sound. Kedron or Kidron = ‘black,’ and is commonly supposed to refer to the dark colour of the water or the gloom of the ravine. But it might possibly refer to the black green of cedar trees, and thus the two names would be united. This detail of their crossing the ‘Wady’ of the Kidron is given by S. John alone; but he gives no indication of a “reference to the history of the flight of David from Absalom and Ahitophel” (2Sa_15:23). ‘Brook’ is misleading; the Greek word means ‘winter-torrent,’ but even in winter there is little water in the Kidron. Neither this word nor the name Kedron occurs elsewhere in N.T.

a garden] Or, orchard. S. Matthew and S. Mark give us the name of the enclosure or ‘parcel of ground’ (Joh_4:5) rather than ‘place,’ of which this ‘garden’ formed the whole or part. Gethsemane = oil-press, and no doubt olives abounded there. The very ancient olive-trees still existing on the traditional site were probably put there by pilgrims who replanted the spot after its devastation at the siege of Jerusalem. S. John gives no hint of a comparison between the two gardens, Eden and Gethsemane, which commentators from Cyril to Isaac Williams have traced. See on Mar_1:13 for another comparison.

and his disciples] Literally, Himself and His disciples, Judas excepted.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the which he entered, and his disciples.

Ver. 1. Over the brook Cedron] This was the town ditch, 2Ch 30:14, and had its name from its darkness or muddiness; for it received the baggage, as a common sink. Not far from hence was the valley of Hinnom, wherein there was kept a continual fire for the burning of dead carcases and other garbage, as Kimchi notes upon Psal. 27. Hence hell is called Gehenna.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The brook Cedron - This was a small stream that flowed to the east of Jerusalem, through the valley of Jehoshaphat, and divided the city from the Mount of Olives. It was also called Kidron and Kedron. In summer it is almost dry. The word used here by the evangelist - χειμάῤῥου cheimarrou - denotes properly a water-stream (from χεῖρμα cheimōn, shower or water, and ῥέω reō, ῥόος roos, to flow, flowing), and the idea is that of a stream that was swollen by rain or by the melting of the snow (Passow, Lexicon). This small rivulet runs along on the east of Jerusalem until it is joined by the water of the pool of Siloam, and the water that flows down on the west side of the city through the valley of Jehoshaphat, and then goes off in a southeast direction to the Dead Sea. (See the map of the environs of Jerusalem.) Over this brook David passed when he fled from Absalom, 2Sa 15:23. It is often mentioned in the Old Testament, 1Ki 15:13; 2Ch 15:16; 2Ch 30:14; 2Ki 23:6, 2Ki 23:12.

Where was a garden - On the west side of the Mount of Olives. This was called Gethsemane. See the notes at Mat 26:36. It is probable that this was the property of some wealthy man in Jerusalem - perhaps some friend of the Saviour. It was customary for the rich in great cities to have country-seats in the vicinity. This, it seems, was so accessible that Jesus was accustomed to visit it, and yet so retired as to be a suitable place for devotion.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Over the torrent, or brook Cedron,[1] which ran betwixt Jerusalem and Mount Olivet, in the valley of Cedron, or of Hennon, or of Josaphat, not of Cedars, as in many Greek copies. See the history of Christ’s Passion. (Matthew xxvi. and xxvii.) (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Cedron, not Cedrorum. In most Greek copies, Greek: ton Kedron. In some manuscripts Greek: tou Kedron. So the Protestant translation, the brook Cedron.

====================

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Chapter Introduction

Having so largely discoursed the history of our Saviour’s passion, See Poole on "Mat 26:1", and following verses to Mat 26:71, See Poole on "Mat 27:1", and following verses to Mat 27:66, where (to make the history entire) we compared what the other evangelists also have about it; I shall refer the reader to the notes upon those two chapters, and be the shorter in the notes upon this and the following chapters.

Matthew hath nothing of those discourses, and prayer, which we have had in the four last chapters; no more have any of the other evangelists, who yet all mention his going into the mount of Olives, after his celebration of his last supper, Mat 26:30; Mar 14:26; Luk 22:39. Our evangelist saith, he went over the brook Cedron into a garden. The others say nothing of a garden, but mention his coming to a place called Gethsemane. It is probable that this village was at the foot of Mount Olivet; and the garden mentioned was a garden near that village, and belonging to it (for they had not their gardens within their towns, but without): now the way to this was over the brook Cedron; of which brook we read, 2Sa 15:23; David passed over it when he fled from Absalom; and 1Ki 2:37, where it is mentioned as Shimei’s limit, which he might not pass. This brook was in the way towards the mount of Olives; which being passed, he with his disciples went into a garden belonging to the town Gethsemane.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Christ Before Annas, Caiaphas, and Pilate

1-14. Christ's arrest and trial before Annas (cp. Mat_26:30 = Mar_14:26 = Luk_22:39). The narrative is now parallel with the synoptic account, with which, though obviously independent, it closely agrees. Our Lord's agony in the garden is omitted as well known, but it is alluded to (Joh_18:11), and the evangelist elsewhere uses language quite as definite as that of the synoptists in speaking of His agony of mind at the prospect of death (Joh_12:27; Joh_13:21). In this Gospel, as in the others, the sufferer, though divine, is 'a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.'

1. The brook Cedron] RV 'Kidron,' a deep, precipitous ravine to the E. of Jerusalem, dividing it from the Mount of Olives, and now called the Valley of Jehoshaphat. Both Jews and Moslems hold that the Last Judgment will take place there (see Joe_3:2, Joe_3:12). It is mentioned several times in the OT. (2Sa_15:23; 1Ki_2:37; Jer_31:40, etc.), but in the NT. only here. 'Brook' should be 'valley' or 'ravine,' lit. 'winter-torrent' (RM). A garden] i.e. Gethsemane: see on Mat_26:36.

2. Ofttimes resorted] cp. Luk_22:39. A statement like this must rest on apostolic testimony.

3. A band of men] RV 'the band of soldiers,' viz. the Roman garrison which was always stationed in the fortress Antonia, near the Temple. A 'band' or 'cohort' numbered about 600 men. And officers] These were either officers of the Sanhedrin, or the band of Levitical police who kept order in the Temple.

6. Fell to the ground] To show that He could not be arrested against His will (see Joh_10:18), Jesus, before giving Himself up, showed His preternatural power; or perhaps the falling was an effect of superstitious fear.

9. That the saying might be fulfilled] see Joh_17:2. St. John here gives the sense, not the exact words.

Have I lost none] The original saying referred to spiritual loss; and, perhaps, the meaning is not different here. Jesus desired the Apostles to escape, lest, if they were arrested, they might be tempted to apostasy, which would involve the loss of their souls.

10. Simon Peter] Peter's and Malchus's names are mentioned only by St. John. Right ear] This detail, a mark of intimate knowledge, is also in Lk, who further mentions that our Lord healed the servant's ear.

11. The cup] This is proof that St. John knew of the agony in the garden: see Mat_26:39; Mar_14:36; Luk_22:42.

12. The band] i.e. the Roman cohort. The captain] i.e. the military tribune (Gk. chiliarch), was the officer in chief command of the Roman garrison: see Act_21:31. His presence in person marks the importance and probable danger of the arrest.

13. To Annas first] i.e. before He was taken to Caiaphas. This, though not mentioned in the other Gospels, is intrinsically probable. The authority of Annas was so great that it over shadowed that of the actual high priest Caiaphas. He is mentioned before Caiaphas, Luk_3:2; Act_4:6. He absolutely controlled the Sanhedrin, which at this period, according to the Talmud, transferred its place of meeting from 'the Hall of Hewn Stones' in the Temple to the head-quarters of his party,' the Bazaars of the sons of Annas.' He was high priest from 7 to 14 a.d., and even after his deposition by the Romans, retained the office in his family, no less than five of his sons being appointed high priests. For his character see on Mat_21:12. Father in law] This fact, in itself probable, is known only from St. John.

14. Caiaphas] see Joh_11:49-52.

15-18. St. John introduces St Peter into the Palace. First denial. For the interesting but unimportant variations of the four accounts of St. Peter's denials, see on Mat_26:58; Mar_14:54; Luk_22:54.

15. Another disciple] clearly the same as the unnamed disciple of Joh_13:23, who is the apostle John. Known unto the high priest] a fact by no means improbable, considering the comparatively good position occupied by St. John's family (Mar_1:20 see on Joh_19:27). The high priest is Annas: see on Joh_18:19. The palace] RV 'the court,' i.e. the inner quadrangle: see on Mat_26:3, Mat_26:58. Of the high priest] viz. Annas. Probably Annas and his son-in-law lived in the same large building.

18. Coals] i.e. charcoal.

19-24. Preliminary examination before Annas (peculiar to this Gospel). The object of Annas's examination, which was irregular and informal, was obviously to induce Jesus to incriminate Himself in view of the approaching trial, the available evidence against Him being weak (Mat_26:59). It is passed over by the synoptists, because it achieved no result; but the narrative of St. Luke allows ample time for it before the formal trial (Luk_22:54-65).

19. The high priest] i.e. Annas: see Joh_18:24.

20, 21. Annas tried to entrap Jesus into the admission that He had founded a secret society. Jesus repudiated the suggestion, and refused to be drawn into making any statements likely to incriminate His disciples (cp. Joh_18:8).

22. Struck Jesus] This is corroborated by Luk_22:63, which agrees chronologically with St. John.

24. Now Annas had sent him] The correct translation is, 'Annas, therefore, sent Him bound unto Caiaphas.' Our Lord was led out into the courtyard, and there, as he passed by on His way to the apartments of Caiaphas, which probably lay on the other side of the quadrangular court,' He turned and looked upon Peter' (Luk_22:61). The subsequent trial before Caiaphas is omitted, as being well known.

25-27. St. Peter's second and third denials.

26. The knowledge that the servant was a kinsman of Malchus bears out the statement (Joh_18:15) that 'the disciple' was known to the high priest.

27. Crew] This fixes the time as about 3 a.m.

28-32. Jesus is led to Pilate (Mat_27:1; Mar_15:1; Luk_23:1). See especially on St. Matthew. The pathos of this tragic spectacle of the rulers of the chosen people leading their promised Messiah to a Gentile ruler to be put to death, and thereby forfeiting their place in the Kingdom of God and their national existence, is by no evangelist so touchingly portrayed as by St. John. Yet even this great sin did not frustrate the divine purpose, but rather was the means of effecting it (Joh_11:49-53). While St. John's account of the civil trial is by far the fullest and the most informing, he omits several important incidents; the dream of Pilate's wife (Mt), the washing of Pilate's hands (Mt), the trial before Herod (Lk), and the prophetic cry of the people, 'His blood be on us and on our children' (Mt).

28. The hall of judgment] RV 'the palace,' lit. 'the prætorium,' here indicates the official residence of Pilate, which was either the castle of Antonia or a palace built by Herod on the W. hill of Jerusalem: see Mat_27:27. Pilate's judgment-seat was in the open air, but he more than once entered the building to confer with Jesus privately (Joh_18:33; Joh_19:9).

That they might not be defiled (RV)] A Gentile house would not have been purged from the presence of leaven in prospect of the Passover, and therefore by entering it they would have defiled themselves. St. John, who had already eaten the Passover with Jesus, was apparently not so scrupulous: he entered, and hence was able to report the conversations between our Lord and Pilate (Joh_18:33-38 chapter Joh_19:9-11).

But.. might eat the passover] It is obvious that St. John places the Jewish Passover, not on Thursday evening, as the synoptists seem to do, but on Friday evening, and regards the Last Supper on Thursday night as an anticipated Passover—a Passover eaten before the legal date, because Jesus knew that He was to suffer on the morrow. Some critics, however, following the primâ facie meaning of the synoptists, date the Jewish Passover on Thursday evening, and understand the expression here ('but might eat the Passover') to refer not to the Passover proper, but to the 'chagigah,' a sacrifice offered on the morning after the paschal meal: see on Mat_26:17.

30. According to Luk_23:2, they accused Him of sedition, of withholding tribute from Cæsar, and of assuming the royal title. The charge of blasphemy, on which the Sanhedrin condemned Him, would have no weight with Pilate.

31. It is not lawful, etc.] This apparently conflicts with Joh_8:5, Joh_8:59; Act_5:33; Act_7:57; Act_21:27. It would seem, (1) that the Sanhedrin could sentence to death, (2) but could not execute the sentence without permission, and (3) that the governor sometimes permitted them to exceed their powers. The Talmud says that the power of life and death was lost 40 years before the destruction of Jerusalem.

32. Jesus had prophesied not only His death, but His crucifixion, and this could only be fulfilled by His being delivered to the Romans, for the Jewish penalty for blasphemy was stoning (Joh_8:59; Joh_10:31; Act_7:59).

33- 38a. Within the Prætorium. Pilate and Christ. With the exception of Pilate's first question, all is peculiar to St. John. With Roman directness Pilate goes straight to the point: Has Jesus any political designs? His words, 'Am I a Jew?' show his contempt for the Jews, and his question, 'What is truth?' echoes the flippant (but perhaps only superficial) scepticism of polite circles in Rome.

37. Thou sayest that I am a king] RM 'Thou sayest it, because I am a king.' Probably the words are a surprised question: 'Dost thou, a heathen, say that I am a king!' Pilate was impressed with our Lord's personality, and was willing to confess that there was something kingly about Him. To this end] The only kingdom which Christ claims for Himself is absolute empire over 'the Truth' (Joh_14:6, etc.). Every one, etc.] All who are earnestly doing their duty according to the light vouchsafed to them, are ready to receive Christ's Gospel, when it is presented to them.

38. What is truth?] Rome was infested with a horde of Greek sophists and juggling Oriental theosophists, who all claimed a monopoly of 'the truth,' and hence Pilate had learned to scoff at all mention of the search for it.

38b-40. Outside the Prætorium. Barabbas is preferred to Jesus (see Mat_27:15-26; Mar_15:6-15; Luk_23:18-25). All is in essential agreement with the synoptists.

J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

B. THE HOUR HAS COME.

Ver. 1 Joh_19:42. 1. The outer glorification of Christ in his Passion.

Vers. 1-11. (1) The betrayal, the majesty of his bearing, accompanied by hints of the bitter cup.

When Jesus had spoken these wordsi.e. had offered the prayer, and communed with his Father touching himself, his disciples, and his whole Churchhe went forth with his disciples; i.e. from the resting-place chosen by him on his way from the "guest-chamber" to the Valley of Kedron; it may have been from some corner of the vast temple area, or some sheltered spot under the shadow of its walls, where he uttered his wondrous discourse and intercession. He went over the ravine or, strictly speaking, winter-torrentof Kedron. The stream rises north of Jerusalem, and separates the city on its eastern side from Scopas and the Mount of Olives. It reaches its deepest depression at the point where it joins the Valley of Hinnom near the well of Rogel, contributing to the peculiar physical conformation of the city. The stream is in summer dry to its bed, and Robinson, Grove, and Warren conjecture, in agreement with an old tradition, that there is, below the present surface of its bed, a subterraneous watercourse, whose waters may be heard flowing. The stream takes a sudden bend to the southeast at En-Rogel, and makes its way, by the convent of Saba, to the Dead Sea. It is not without interest that this note of place given by St. John alone for the three other evangelists simply speak of "the Mount of Olives" brings the narrative into relation with the story of David"s flight from Absalom by the same route, and also the Jewish expectation, (Joe_3:2) and Mohammedan prediction, that here will take place the final judgment (Smith"s "Dictionary," art. Kedron," by Grove; "Pictorial Palestine," vol. 1.; Robinson, "Bib. Res.," 1:269: Winer"s "B. Realworterbuch," art. "Kedron;" Dean Stanley"s "Sinai and Palestine;" "The Recovery of Jerusalem," by Capt. Warren and Capt. Wilson, John 1. and 5.). Where was a garden. This reference is in agreement (Mat_26:36 Mar_14:32) with the synoptic description of the cwrion , "parcel of ground," small farm, or olive yard, enclosed from the rest of the hillside, and called "Gethsemane" (gath-shammi, press for oil). The traditional site of the garden dates back to the time of Constantine, and may be the true scene of the agony described by the synoptists. There are still remaining "the eight aged olive trees," which carry back the associations to the hour of the great travail. It is certain that the general features of the scene still closely correspond with what was visible on the awful night ("Pictorial Palestine," 1:86, 98). Patristic and mediaeval writers, with Hengstenberg and Wordsworth, see parallels between the garden of Eden lost by man"s sin, and the garden of Gethsemane where the second Adam met the prince of this world, and bore the weight of human transgression and shame, and regained for man the paradise which Adam lost. It is still more interesting to notice a further touch recorded by John: Into which into the quiet retreat and partial concealment of whichhe (Jesus) entered himself, and his disciples. We know from the other Gospels that they were separated eight remained on watch near the entrance, and Peter and James and John went further into the recesses of the garden, and again, "about a stone"s cast," in the depth of the olive-shade, our blessed Lord retired to "pray.

Vers. 1-11. The apprehension of Jesus.

The crisis has come at last.

I THE SCENE OF THE ARREST. "He went forth with his disciples over the brook Kedron, where was a garden, into which he entered, and his disciples.

1. The garden was on the slope of Mount Olivet, and therefore outside Jerusalem.

2. He did not resort to it for the purpose of hiding himself from his enemies; for Judas, the traitor, knew the place. It was to be the scene of his prayers and his agonies. Its name was Gethsemane.

3. It belonged, evidently, to some friend or disciple of Jesus; for it was a frequent meeting-place for Jesus and the disciples.

4. The thought of the garden, as the beginning of the Lords Passion, links itself by natural association with the garden of Eden, the scene of the Fall of man, which made the Passion necessary.

II THE ARRIVAL OF THE BAND. "Judas then, having received the band, with officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and arms.

1. Judas is the leading actor in this scene.

2. The combination of the Roman soldiers with the police of the Sanhedrin marks the share of Jew and Gentile in the transaction which culminated in the scene of Calvary.

3. The use of lights at a time when the full moon was in the sky suggested the fear that Jesus might try to escape arrest in the dark corners of the garden.

III THE MEETING OF JESUS WITH THE BAND. "Jesus therefore, knowing all that should happen to him, went forth, and said to them, Whom seek ye?

1. There was a Divine necessity recognized in our Lords action; for he foresaw all the events of the Passion as occurring, not through the mere malice of men, but by the foreordination of God.

2. He does not allow this foreknowledge to paralyze his action or disturb the quietude of his soul.

3. His question, "Whom seek ye? implies that it was not man"s power, but his own permission, which brought his sufferings upon him.

4. The effect of his statement, "I am he" (Jesus the Nazarene), is astounding.

(1) Whether it was due to natural or to supernatural causes, his presence had an overwhelming effect upon the band. "They went backward, and fell to the ground.

(2) His word was not an angry word; but Judas may have led the band to suppose that Jesus might make a marvelous display of his power.

(3) The scene suggests fear, awe, veneration, and not the display of force.

(4) It suggested to the disciples that the band fulfilled its commission by Christ"s own consent.

5. Jesus pleads for his disciples. "I have told you that I am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way.

(1) It was necessary for the purposes of his kingdom that the apostles should be spared.

(2) They were not yet in a condition spiritually to die with their Lord. They all deserted Christ at last.

(3) It was needful that he should suffer alone. He was to "tread the winepress alone.

(4) His care for the disciples was in fulfillment of prophecy. That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none." Their temporal preservation was to involve a great and more blessed realization of spiritual deliverance.

IV PETER"S ATTEMPT AT DEFENSE. "Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest"s servant, and cut off his right ear.

1. The action of the apostle, so characteristic of his impulsive nature, was the proof of love, zeal, faith, and sincerity.

2. Our Lord condemns his action.

(1) He healed the ear of Malchus, and thus saved Peter from arrest.

(2) He shows that there is no warrant for irregular actions or for rash zeal.

(3) Peter"s conduct threatened to compromise our Lord, who was in a few hours to assure Pilate, "If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight.

(4) Our Lord recognized in his coming Passion the bitter cup that his Father designed for him. "The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" He drank it willingly.

HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON Vers. 1, 2. Gethsemane.

The mind of man is naturally interested in places, not so much for their own sake, as for the sake of associations connected with them. Religions have their sacred places: the Jew cannot forget Jerusalem; the Mohammedan venerates the holy Mecca; and the Christian regards Gethsemane with a tender and pathetic interest.

I THE GARDEN WAS TO THE MINDS OF THE TWELVE A PLACE OF HOLY INTERCOURSE WITH THEIR LORD. "Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with his disciples." Doubtless they learned much from Jesus as he taught in the temple and in the synagogues, in the highways, and in the dwellings of the people. But there was much he wished to say to them which could be said better in private. He took them aside into a desert place, and in seclusion and quiet communicated to them tidings which were not for the multitude. He gathered them together in an upper room, and discoursed to them with such profundity and spirituality, that it needed the illumination of events that were yet to happen to make plain his wonderful sayings. He led them away from the thronged streets and temple-courts of the city, crossed the Kedron ravine, and took them into the retired garden, that he might, without interruption, reveal to them whatever truth they were able to bear. Gethsemane thus became a symbol for the "quiet resting-places," where the Savior meets congenial souls, and unfolds to them the volume of his truth, the mystery of his love. Such intercourse binds the heart of the scholar to his Master. Such fellowship makes its lasting mark upon the character. "Did not I see thee in the garden with him?

II THE GARDEN WAS TO THE LORD JESUS THE SCENE OF BITTEREST MENTAL ANGUISH. It seems strange that John, who, we know, was one of the chosen three who were near Jesus in his agony and bloody sweat, says nothing of his Master"s conflict in Gethsemane. This silence cannot be attributed to want of sympathy, for the beloved disciple felt keenly with and for his Lord. He was content that his fellow-evangelists should tell the awful sorrows of the Redeemer. The unexampled pains which Christ endured, when with strong crying and tears he made supplication, constituted a phase of his mediatorial ministry, not only deeply affecting to the sensitive mind that contemplates the scene of woe, but doubtless ever memorable to our Divine Representative himself. "Our Fellow-Sufferer yet retains A fellow-feeling of our pains; And still remembers, in the skies, His tears, his agonies, and cries.

"Perfect through suffering," the Captain of our salvation looks back to the hour when he drank the bitter cup in our stead; and to him Gethsemane is for ever linked with his sacred undertaking of our cause, with the price he raid for our redemption.

III THE GARDEN WAS TO JUDAS THE SPOT WHERE HE HEARTLESSLY BETRAYED HIS LORD. To the mind of the traitor the one point of interest in Gethsemane was this it was a place where Jesus might be apprehended by the officers of the priests and Pharisees, with no fear of disturbance or opposition. The garden, though near Jerusalem, was secluded and solitary; no admiring and sympathizing crowd would there protect or rescue the honored and beloved Teacher and Healer. After the capture, during the few hours of life remaining to him, Judas could not think of Gethsemane without distress of mind, which deepened, not into repentance, but into remorse. The thought of his own sin and of his Master"s innocence must have oppressed his guilty soul, until he was driven to confession and to suicide. Terrible is the state of that man before whose memory there constantly arises the scene of crime from which he sees no deliverance, for which he sees no expiation, the scene of violence and cruelty, of debauchery, or of profanity. "Better had it been for that man that he had never been born.

IV THE GARDEN IS TO CHRIST"S CHURCH FOR EVER ASSOCIATED WITH DIVINE SACRIFICE AND REDEMPTION. The same place, the imagination of which awoke the guilty conscience of Judas to misery and despair, is associated in all Christians" minds with the ransom which was paid for the deliverance of many from sin and death. There the anguish was endured, the cry was uttered, the cup was drunk, the perfect submission was rendered, the death on Calvary was anticipated. Very dear to the heart, very present to the memory, of Christendom is the garden whither Jesus oft resorted, where Jesus suffered himself to be betrayed, where Jesus took upon his heart the burden of human sin, where Jesus cried, "Not my will, O my Father, but thine, be done! T.

HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG Vers. 1, 2. A hallowed spot.

There are depths and unique things in this Gospel which make it easily to be accounted for that some should reckon it the choicest of the Gospels. It has what the others have not; but when we compare the others with it, to look for their peculiar excellences, then we find how the others have what this Gospel lacks. One would have thought beforehand that John would have enlarged on the mysteries and sorrows of Gethsemane, but, strangely enough, he passes them over without a word. Here is one of the illustrations of how real a thing inspiration is, these Gospels being not written after the fashion of human books, though they came through human minds. If John had been asked why he omitted to enlarge on the Passion, he could hardly have told. But though John says nothing of how Jesus began to be sorrowful and very heavy even unto death, though he says nothing of that sweat which was like great drops of blood falling to the ground, yet we are sure all these dreadful experiences must have been often in his grateful recollection. Gethsemane was the last place where Jesus and his disciples had free speech before his death, and it was well that they should have the recollection of it as a place where they had often been. Many things at many times Jesus must have told them there, and the remembrance of the place would bring up the remembrance of the words. We must not make too much of this mere locality, even if we were quite certain of it. Every Christian must have his own hallowed places. Every Christian must have places, the recollection of which is sweeter far to him than ever the mere sight of traditional spots in Palestine can be. We must have holy, memorable places in our own experience, and then perhaps we may get some good from considering the so-called holy places of the so-called Holy Land. Y.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

A garden - Probably belonging to one of his friends. He might retire to this private place, not only for the advantage of secret devotion, but also that the people might not be alarmed at his apprehension, nor attempt, in the first sallies of their zeal, to rescue him in a tumultuous manner. Kedron was (as the name signifies) a dark shady valley, on the east side of Jerusalem, between the city and the Mount of Olives, through which a little brook ran, which took its name from it. It was this brook, which David, a type of Christ, went over with the people, weeping in his flight from Absalom. Matt. xxvi, 30; Mark xiv, 26; Luke xxii, 39.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

The Arrest of Jesus.

Across the Kidron to Gethsemane:

v. 1. When Jesus had spoken these words, He went forth with His disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the which He entered and His disciples.

v. 2. And Judas also, which betrayed Him, knew the place; for Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with His disciples.

v. 3. Judas, then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.

Whether Jesus addressed His last discourses to His disciples and spoke His great sacerdotal prayer in the courtyard of the house where He had celebrated the Passover or on the way out of the city is immaterial. But now it is expressly stated that He went out, He left the city, with His disciples; He took the way which His ancestor David had once taken in his flight from Jerusalem, through the deep and dark ravine of the brook Kidron, which was a winter-torrent, flowing only in winter or during the rainy season. "Kidron we call in our language a black or dark brook; and the brook Kidron is situated near the city of Jerusalem; is not large, but flows only when it rains; has the name Kidron for this reason, because it is located so deep and dark, is lined with bushes and hedges, that. the water can hardly be seen because of them. The evangelist means to say Christ went over the true dark brook, yea, in my opinion He went over the black brook. He says nothing of the Mount of Olives and of the beautiful pleasant place, but refers only to this dark brook, as the one that fits best to this matter of the arrest and death of Christ. " On the eastern side of this ravine, on the lower slopes of the Mount of Olives, there was a garden, Gethsemane, into which Jesus entered with His disciples. The evangelist expressly states that Judas, the traitor, was well acquainted with the location of this garden, as well as with the habit of Jesus of frequenting this secluded spot, where He might, at least in a measure, enjoy few hours’ rest and respite occasionally. Note that Jesus, as Luther remarks, neither sought the cross, nor did He flee from it; He entered into His Passion willingly, but He did not challenge martyrdom. Here at Gethsemane it was that the Lord was seized with the terror of death, that He battled with His Father in prayer, that His very blood was driven through His pores by the intensity of His suffering, but that He also gained the strength and courage bravely to face further suffering. Meanwhile Judas, who surmised that Jesus might choose this place of retirement, had made arrangements for His capture. There was a part of the Roman band, of the cohort, or garrison, of the Castle Antonia: they represented the government. In addition to these men, whom the Sadducees had probably obtained to prevent the risk of a popular uprising, there were men of the Temple-guard and servants of the Sanhedrin. This whole band, composed of such manifold and diverse elements, was led by Judas, and was well supplied with torches, both such as were made of resinous wood and such as burned oil and were more like lanterns. They wanted to be equipped for every emergency, even this, that Jesus might try to hide in the thickets of the ravine. Judas here appears as an enemy of Christ. He is the traitor that has betrayed to the Jews the place where Jesus might be found. He himself is the leader of the band, a despicable creature even in the eyes of his temporary cronies.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 18:4-9

Consider this incident:—

I. As a remarkable momentary manifestation of our Lord’s glory.

II. As a manifestation of the voluntariness of our Lord’s suffering.

III. An instance, on a small scale, of Christ’s self-sacrificing care for us.

A. Maclaren, A Year’s Ministry, 2nd series, p. 197.

References: Joh 18:4-9.—Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ix., p. 240; Homiletic Magazine, vol. xiv., p. 218.

Joh 18:6

Judas and His Bond

I. In the occurrence before us, we have a remarkable proof that, whilst Christ would not thwart the purposes of His enemies who thirsted for His blood, He was resolved to do enough to render them inexcusable in putting Him to death. The foreknowledge of the Redeemer quite informed Him of all that was to happen—of the obstinacy with which His death would be sought, of the cruelty with which it would be compassed; but His foreknowledge did not interfere any more than it does in regard to any amongst ourselves, with the making every endeavour, consistent with human accountableness, to deter from wickedness, and to take away every excuse from those who persevered in its commission. The miracle actually wrought was exactly adapted to this. It went so far as to make those miserable who laid hands on Christ, but not so far as to frustrate their impious design.

II. It hardly ever happens that you commit any great sin without experiencing great resistance. I can promise the sinner that he will be withstood in his career; ay, so fearfully withstood that, as though it came on him as a voice mingling with the thunder in the heavens, he shall be prostrated to the ground, and there lie for a moment terror-stricken and confounded. And this moment will be just the turning-point in life for him. The man must not look to be kept on the ground; the mastery of conviction will release its stronghold, and he will again feel himself at liberty to rise—and what will he do then? Saul was struck to the ground, but he rose not from the earth without first foregoing his persecuting purpose, saying unto Jesus, "Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do?" And Judas was struck to the earth, but he rose but to renew his traitorous attack, to make fresh quest after Jesus, whom he was determined to seize. The man in question may imitate Saul, or He may imitate Judas. He must not look for further opposition. If he rise from the earth to take another step towards crime, the likelihood is, that his path will be smooth, and he will be suffered to proceed without molestation. Be fearful of nothing so much as the being left to sin undisturbed. Come anything rather than the power of wrong-doing with ease.

H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 1868 (see also Voices of the Year, vol. i., p. 311).

References: Joh 18:6.—Homilist, vol. v., p. 28; Parker, Cavendish Pulpit, vol. i., p. 141; W. F. Hook, Sermons on the Miracles, vol. ii., p. 227; J. M. Neale, Sermons in a Religious House, vol. ii., p. 583. Joh 18:8.—Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 86. Joh 18:8, Joh 18:9.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xii., No. 722. Joh 18:10, Joh 18:11.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 72. Joh 18:11.—A. P. Peabody, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 341; Homiletic Magazine, vol. xix., p. 118. Joh 18:11.—Homiletic Magazine, vol. xiv., p. 243. Joh 18:11-14.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 73. Joh 18:12-14.—Homilist, 2nd series, vol. iv., p. 169. Joh 18:15.—Preacher’s Monthly, vol. x., p. 72. Joh 18:15-18.—A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, pp. 469, 485. Joh 18:15-27.—W. Milligan, Expositor, 2nd series, vol. iv., p. 372. Joh 18:17.—W. M. Taylor, Christian World Pulpit, vol. x., p. 72, (see also Three Hundred Outlines on the New Testament, p. 98). Joh 18:19-24.—W. Hanna, Last Days of our Lord’s Passion, p. 50.

Joh 18:28

(with Joh 19:16)

The Spirit of God striving with Man—Pontius Pilate judging the Lord Christ

I. At first Pilate will scarcely attend to the accusers of Christ. He takes Jesus into the inner judgment hall of his palace, thinking probably that a very short inquiry will suffice. From the very beginning of this strange trial and all throughout, more and more, the pertinacity of the Jews tends to deepen the impression made on Pilate’s mind, increases his concern, and makes him the more impatient for an adjustment.

II. Pilate thought he might evade the necessity of coming to a decision about Jesus and His claims. Let Herod be the judge; send the case, by all means, to Herod; he is on all accounts the proper person to dispose of it. But this expedient will not stand Pilate in stead; Jesus comes back to him, scourged indeed and buffeted, but not judged; neither absolved nor condemned. Herod mocks Him and sets Him at nought. Pilate attempts to make a compromise with the Jews. But though he selects one of the worst and most atrocious criminals then in custody, to be offered to them along with Jesus, and though, as Luke tells us, he three times most earnestly and pathetically beseeches the people to choose Jesus; he has the deep mortification of hearing their reiterated and impatient cry: "Not this man, but Barabbas," although Barabbas was a robber.

III. The struggle becomes more desperate as it draws near its close. The claim of Jesus, His claim of sovereignty, of truth, and now even of Divinity, is pressing closer and closer on Pilate’s conscience. But alas! the loud cry prevails. "If thou let this man go, thou art not Cæsar’s friend." It is a solemn reflection to think how near the vacillating judge, the despairing suicide, may once have been to a believer. It is a most emphatic warning to all, to trifle with no convictions of their own, to yield to no solicitations of others, to let the Word of God have free course in their hearts, and to give no resistance to the strivings of His Good Spirit.

R. S. Candlish, Scripture Characters and Miscellanies, p. 75.

Joh 18:36

I. Consider the nature of Christ’s kingdom, "My kingdom is not of this world." It is spiritual. In other words, the emphatic mark of the rule of Christ which He was about to set up seems to be that of its perfect spirituality, of its utter unlikeness to those shifting earthly sovereignties which are founded in arms, which are maintained by policy, which are passed by death from one hand to another; or to that rude and turbulent anarchy which has often cast down and destroyed nations. He goes on to say, "If My kingdom were of this world, then would My servants fight." The points at issue between us would have to be decided by the broad tests of earthly warfare, strength measured against strength, and skill against skill, till one of the opposing forces should give way. But, as we see throughout our Lord’s ministrations, He never would employ force at all. From the first, the Saviour was careful to impress on all who should come after Him that the weapons of the Christian warfare are not carnal, that the wrath of man could never work the righteousness of God, and that, when undertaking any work for Him, if we could not accomplish it by the power of loving suasion, gentleness and meekness, we should never accomplish it in any other way.

II. Consider how Christ establishes and maintains His dominion in our own hearts: (1) The means by which His subjects are brought into the kingdom are not of this world. He uses no force, employs no bribes, has recourse to no deceit or guile. The agency which works in the heart is the power of love; the hidden strength of Gospel bonds; the remnants of a better nature appealed to to say whether such a Saviour should be slighted by anybody with a heart at all. (2) There are laws and statutes by which the spiritual government is carried on. These are not like those which belong to a kingdom of this world, not like them in regard to the seat and limits of their jurisdiction. The empire of Christ is over the heart, and is satisfied with nothing but the casting down of heart-pride, and the rooting out of heart-sin, and the maintaining in all its subjects of heart-allegiance and duty. (3) The chastisements and the rewards of Christ’s kingdom are not of the world. The attribute of spirituality marks all His dealings. Not of this world is our kingdom, not of this world is our hope. We look for a kingdom which shall not be moved, and whose King is both the first-begotten from the dead and the Prince of the kings of the earth.

D. Moore, Penny Pulpit, No. 3122.

References: Joh 18:36.—A. Mursell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. iv., p. 225; E. de Pressensé, Ibid., vol. xvi., p. 122; Homiletic Magazine, vol. xii., p. 193; Parker, Cavendish Pulpit, vol. ii., p. 205; S. A. Brooke, Sermons, p. 180; J. H. Evans, Thursday Penny Pulpit, vol. xv., pp. 249, 261, 273, 285; D. Swing, American Pulpit of the Day, p. 241. Joh 18:36-38.—Homilist, 3rd series, vol. i., p. 206.

Joh 18:37

It was not as the Son of God that Jesus said this, but as the Son of man. It would have been nothing that the second Person in the Blessed Trinity should have been a King; of course He was, and much more than a King. But that poor, weak, despised man, that was standing there before Pontius Pilate, that was a King; and all Scripture confirms it. It was the manhood of Christ that was there. This is the marvel, and here is, the comfort.

I. The subjugation of the universe to the King Christ is now going on, and it is very gradual; we see not yet all things put under Him. Little by little it is extending itself: "One of a city, ten of a family." The increase will grow rapid and immense. When He comes again, at once to Him every knee shall bow and every tongue shall swear: "For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." Grand and awful! rather to be felt, than understood; where our little thoughts drift and drift for ever, on an ocean without a shore.

II. We pray: "Thy kingdom come." How much of that rich prayer is yet answered? how much are we waiting for? Three things it means: Thy kingdom in my heart; Thy kingdom over all the nations; Thy kingdom in the Second Advent. (1) The throne of God is set up in me. Sin is there, but now sin is only a rebel. It does not reign as it once did. (2) The second; it is being accomplished, and God bless the missions. (3) The third; we long and look for it with outstretched neck, and hail each gleam on the horizon.

III. When you go to this King in prayer, do not stint yourselves before His throne. Seek regal bounties. Ask for largesses worthy of a king. Not after your own little measure, but after His, according to that great name, which is above every name that is named in earth or heaven; and prove Him, on His heavenly throne, whether He will not open now the windows of heaven, and pour a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 4th series, p. 156.

One man, so obscure that scarcely one historian thinks it worth while to mention His name—one man achieved an empire such as the world has never seen over the hearts and spirits of men. Such an empire, I suppose, rested on some principle. As the history of a worldly kingdom is the history of arms, of laws, or art, so must this kingdom have some secret spring of power through which it subjugates so many souls. The explanation is this. It is the mystery of Christ’s suffering, working with the mystery of our conscience, from which His power proceeds.

I. The evangelists do not, it is clear, mean to represent the death of Christ as a mere termination of life. The storm that girdled round him is no new, unlooked-for thing. About to ascend to the throne above, He is a king still—I ought to have said He is therefore a king. To this end was He born. But for His assent the powers that slew Him could have had no power at all against Him; and, putting aside for a moment all consideration of effects resulting to others, I think we cannot, as men, be insensible to the greatness of this spectacle of a man, able to wield great influence over others by word and act, renouncing all this that He may die in a certain way because the duty has been laid upon Him by His Father so to die. He is more fit to reign as a king in men’s hearts than if we had seen Him ride forth in majesty, amid the clang of martial music and the glittering of helmets, and the cheers of those who, in the flush of past successes, counted for certain the victory yet unachieved.

II. And yet there is something wanting. This devotion to God’s will, this love to man, this beautiful calm and constancy, make Him admirable; they do not make Him mine. The mystery of Divine suffering requires the mystery of human conscience to explain it. Now, that mystery of human consciousness is simply this. Man attaches to his own actions the sense of responsibility. Out of the fact that man does praise and blame his own conduct, comes, if you will consider it, this surest evidence for God’s existence and for your own immortality. A deep appreciation of what Jesus actually did for the sinful is the cause of our admitting Him to our hearts and minds to be our Friend, King, Saviour, Redeemer, Lord, and God.

Archbishop Thomson, Penny Pulpit, No. 427 (new series).

References: Joh 18:37.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xviii., No. 1086; L. Campbell, Some Aspects of the Christian Ideal, p. 236; Homiletic Magazine, vol. vii., p. 1; vol. xvii., p. 302; A. P. Peabody, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 296; E. W. Shalders, Ibid., vol. xiv., p. 406; J. Keble, Sermons for Holy Week, p. 57; E. Bersier, Sermons, 1st series, p. 198; T. Birkett Dover, A Lent Manual, p. 120; J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 1874, p. 156.

Joh 18:37-38

Consider the Duty of being "true and just in all our dealings,"

I. As peculiarly a duty towards our neighbours. The whole frame of society stands by mutual confidence. Knaves sometimes seem to prosper in the world; but it is only because they are supposed to be honest, and because on the whole we are obliged to trust in each other as being honest. If the belief in truthfulness and honesty as the general characteristics of mankind were entirely done away with, the earth would scarcely be habitable; the bonds of society would be broken. There is therefore no duty, perhaps, towards our neighbour which it is more important to enforce than this, and the more so because it is one of the breach of which human laws can frequently take no cognisance.

II. One way in which we should take good heed to be true and just is that of estimating liberally, fairly, and in a Christian spirit the conduct of our neighbour. It is not just to suppose that people always act from bad motives, except when we can prove the contrary. Christian charity hopes all things; and, though Christian charity will consequently in this wicked world be often deceived, still it is better to be deceived than not to hope the best. If we are thoroughly penetrated by the spirit of Christ’s religion, it will show itself in such ways as this; it is by descending to the affairs of common life, by hallowing our smallest and simplest actions, that the religion of Christ really shows its power, and that it is proved that we are new creatures—that the old things have passed away, and all things become new.

Bishop Harvey Goodwin, Parish Sermons, 4th series, p. 287.

References: Joh 18:38.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxviii., No. 1644; Bishop Lightfoot, Christian World Pulpit, vol. vii., p. 337; Three Hundred Outlines on the New Testament, p. 99; E. Thring, Church of England Pulpit, vol. x., p. 577; R. Winterbotham, Sermons and Expositions, p. 290.

Joh 18:40

The narrative of Jesus’ arraignment before the civil power in Jerusalem affords the most vivid illustration in the New Testament of just two great moral lessons. Pilate’s behaviour shows the wicked wrong of indecision; and the chief priests’ choice of Barabbas’ release shows the utter ruin of a wrong decision.

I. The moral of this scene turns upon the wilful choice made between these two leaders—the real and the pretended Christ. The whole history is often repeated even in these modern times. It will be well to bear in mind that the decision is offered and made between Jesus and Barabbas whenever the Lord of Glory is represented in a principle, in an institution, in a truth, in a person. The secret of the absurd choice published that day so vociferously, when the miscreant impostor came to the front, is found in the fact that the people did not choose for Him at all, but chose against Christ. They would not have this Man to reign over them. It is not true always that men love the evil they seem to clamour for; in many instances the explanation of their apparent preference is found in simple hatred of the truth which confronts them.

II. Our two lessons now appear plainly. (1) We see the wicked wrong of indecision. We are agreed that Pilate wished to let Jesus go. But when he gave Him up to the spite of His murderers he himself shared the crime. His name is put in the Apostles’ Creed that all Christendom might hold it in "everlasting fame" of infamy; wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this that this man hath done be told for a memorial of him. (2) We see, finally, the utter ruin of a wrong decision. Goethe commences the fifth book of his autobiography with these somewhat discouraging words: "Every bird has its decoy, and every man is led and misled in a way peculiar to himself." We need not pause to discuss here the width of application such a statement might have. It was true of Pontius Pilate; it was true of that infuriated crowd clamouring for Barabbas before Christ.

C. S. Robinson, Sermons on Neglected Texts, p. 11.

References: Joh 18:40.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. x., No. 595; Homiletic Magazine, vol. xvii., p. 100; C. Stanford, The Evening of our Lord’s Ministry, p. 273; Contemporary Pulpit, vol. vi., p. 145. John 18, John 19—W. Sanday, The Fourth Gospel, p. 239. Joh 19:1.—Contemporary Pulpit, vol. viii., p. 103; Parker, Christian Commonwealth, vol. vi., p. 623. Joh 19:1-6.—Homiletic Magazine, vol. xiv., p. 149. Joh 19:1-37.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. ii., p. 208. Joh 19:2.—Ibid., vol. ix., p. 190. Joh 19:4.—Parker, Hidden Springs, p. 350. Joh 19:5.—Parsons, Thursday Penny Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 269; C. Stanford, Evening of our Lord’s Ministry, p. 289; H. Batchelor, The Incarnation of God, p. 319; Homiletic Magazine, vol. ix., p. 140; vol. x., p. 208; R. Davey, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 222; F. Wagstaff, Ibid., vol. xv., p. 371; R. Balgarnie, Ibid., vol. xxviii.; E. Paxton Hood, Catholic Sermons, pp. 99, 172; Bishop Magee, Sermons at Bath, p. 136; H. I. Wilmot-Buxton, Literary Churchman Sermons, p. 102.; F. King, Church of England Pulpit, vol. xiii., p. 193.

The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

No sooner had our dear Lord ended his divine prayer, recorded in the foregoing chapter, but he goes forth to meet his sufferings with a willing cheerfulness. He retires with his disciples into a garden, not to hide and shelter himself from his enemies; for, if so, it had been the most improper place he could have chosen; it being the accustomed place where he was wont to pray, and a place well known to Judas, who was now coming to seek him. Judas which betrayed him knew the place; for Jesus oft-times resorted thither with his disciples; so that Christ repaired to this garden, not to shun but to meet the enemy, to offer himself a prey to the wolves, which in the garden hunted him, and laid hold upon him; he also resorted to this garden now for privacy, that he might freely pour out his soul to God.

Learn hence, that the Lord Jesus Christ was praying to his Father in the garden, when Judas with his black guard came to apprehend him.

As the sin of the first Adam, which brought destruction upon his posterity, was committed in a garden, so the salutary passion of the second Adam, which was to rescue us from that destruction, did begin in a garden also.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [CXXIII. Going to Gethsemane].

CXXIII. GOING TO GETHSEMANE, AND AGONY THEREIN. (A garden between the brook Kidron and the Mount of Olives. Late Thursday night.) aMATT. XXVI. 30, 36-46; bMARK XIV. 26, 32-42; cLUKE XXII. 39-46; dJOHN XVIII. 1.

d1 When Jesus had spoken these words [the words contained in Joh_1-17:26], a30 And when they had sung a hymn [the shadow of the cross did not quench the spirit of praise in Christ], they went out c39 And he came out, and dhe went forth with his disciples cas his custom was, dover the brook Kidron, ainto bunto the mount of Olives. dwhere was a garden, into which he entered, himself and his disciples. cand the disciples also followed him. a36 Then cometh Jesus with them b32 And they come unto a place which was named acalled Gethsemane [The name Gethsemane means a place of oil-presses, and hence it accords well with the name of the mountain at whose base it was situated. But the place was now a garden. It was about half a mile from the city, and from what Luke says here and elsewhere ( Luk_21:37), it seems that Jesus often resorted to it while in Jerusalem at the festivals. Compare also Joh_18:2], c40 And when he was at the place, he said asaith unto his disciples, Sit ye here, while I pray. cPray that ye enter not into temptation. [As the hour of trial and temptation came upon Jesus he fortified himself against it by prayer. And he bade his disciples do likewise, for his arrest would involve them also in temptations which he [685] foresaw that they would not be able to withstand.] a37 And he took btaketh with him Peter aand the two sons of Zebedee, bJames and John, and began to be greatly amazed, asorrowful and sore troubled. [While seeking heavenly aid in this hour of extremity, our Lord also manifested his desire for human sympathy. All the eleven apostles were with him in the garden, and the three most capable of sympathizing with him were stationed nearer to him than the rest.] c41 And he was parted from them about a stone's cast [one hundred fifty to two hundred feet]; b34 And a38 Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: babide ye here, and watch. awith me. [The sequel shows that the phrase "even unto death" was no figure of rhetoric. The nervous prostration of Jesus was such as to endanger his life, and the watching of the apostles may have been doubly needful. Not only did he require their sympathy, but he may also have looked to them to render him assistance in the case of a physical collapse.] 39 And he went forward a little, cand he kneeled down band fell on the face, aand fell on his face, and prayed, bthat, if it were possible, the hour might pass away from him. [This posture was expressive of the most intense supplication.] 36 And he said, { asaying, bAbba, aMy Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass away from me: ball things are possible unto thee; cif thou be willing, remove this cup from me: bhowbeit anevertheless, not as bwhat I will, abut as bwhat thou wilt. cnot my will, but thine, be done. [Much of mystery is found in all life, so it is small wonder if the dual nature of Jesus presents insoluble problems. It perplexes many to find that the divine in Jesus did not sustain him better during his trial in the garden. But we must remember that it was appointed unto Jesus to die, and that the divine in him was not to interfere with this appointment, or the approaches to it. For want, therefore, of a better expression, we may say that from the time Jesus entered the garden until he expired on the cross, the human in him was in the [686] ascendant; and "being found in fashion as a man," he endured these trials is if wholly human. His prayer, therefore, is the cry of his humanity for deliverance. The words "if it is possible" with which it opens breathe the same spirit of submissive obedience which is found in the closing words. Reminding the Father of the limitless range of his power, he petitions him to change his counsel as to the crucifixion of the Son, if his gracious purposes can be in any other way carried out. Jesus uses the words "cup" and "hour" interchangeably. They are both words of broad compass, intended to include all that he would undergo from that time until his resurrection. They embrace all his mental, moral, physical, and spiritual suffering which we can discover, together with an infinite volume of a propitiatory and vicarious nature which lies beyond the reach of our understanding. The submission of Jesus was no new fruitage of his character; the prayer of the garden had been the inner purpose of his entire life-- Joh_5:30, Joh_6:38.] 43 And there appeared unto him an angel from heaven, strengthening him. 44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat became as it were great drops of blood falling down upon the ground. [Commentators give instances of bloody sweat under abnormal pathological conditions.] 45 And when he rose up from his prayer, he came { acometh unto the disciples, and findeth cfound them sleeping for sorrow, 46 and said unto them, Why sleep ye? rise and pray, that ye enter not into temptation. [The admonition which had at first been addressed to all the eleven is now spoken to the chosen three] aand saith unto Peter, bSimon, sleepest thou? couldest thou not watch one hour? aWhat, could ye not watch with me one hour? 41 Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. [Peter, having boasted of his loyalty, has his weakness pointed out and is further warned to be on his guard, since the weakness of his nature will not stand the coming strain. The slumber of the disciples was not through indifference; but was [687] caused by the prostration of grief. When we remember the excitement which they had endured that night, the tender words spoken by Jesus, the sadness of which was intensified by the atmosphere of mystery which pervaded them, the beautiful and touching prayer, and lastly this agony in the garden, it is not to be wondered at that the apostles, spurred by no sense of danger, should succumb to the long-borne tension and fall asleep. Had they comprehended how much the Lord needed their wakeful sympathy as he came again and again seeking for it, they would probably have kept awake.] b39 And again aa second time he went away, and prayed, bsaying the same words. asaying, My Father, if this cannot pass away, except I drink it, thy will be done. [Jesus here speaks of draining the cup. The "cup" was a common Hebrew figure used to denote one's divinely appointed lot or fortune-- Psa_23:5, Psa_75:8, Isa_51:17, Isa_51:22, Eze_23:31-33.] 43 And he came again and found them sleeping, for their eyes were bvery heavy; and they knew not what to answer him. [They were ashamed of the stupor which had come upon them and knew not what apology to make for it.] a44 And he left them again, and went away, and prayed a third time, saying again the same words. b41 And a45 Then cometh he to the disciples, bthe third time, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and that your rest: it is enough; abehold, the hour is at hand, bthe hour is come; aand bbehold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 42 Arise, let us be going: behold, he that betrayeth me is at hand. [Our Lord's words are paradoxical. In our judgment the saying is best understood by regarding the first part of it as spoken from the Lord's viewpoint, while the latter part is spoken from the disciple's viewpoint. It is as if he said, "So far as I am concerned, you may sleep on and take your rest, for the time to be of comfort or assistance to me has wholly passed. But so far as you yourselves are concerned, you must arise and be going, because Judas with his band of temple police is upon us."] [688]

[FFG 685-693]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

John Chapter 18

The history of our Lord’s last moments begins after the words that He addressed to His Father. We shall find even in this part of it, the general character of that which is related in this Gospel (according to all that we have seen in it), that the events bring out the personal glory of the Lord. We have, indeed, the malice of man strongly characterised; but the principal object in the picture is the Son of God, not the Son of man suffering under the weight of that which is come upon Him. We have not the agony in the garden. We have not the expression of His feeling Himself forsaken by God. The Jews too are put in the place of utter rejection.

The iniquity of Judas is as strongly marked here as in chapter 13. He well knew the place; for Jesus was in the habit of resorting thither with His disciples. What a thought-to choose such a place for His betrayal! What inconceivable hardness of heart! But alas! he had, as it were, given himself up to Satan, the tool of the enemy, the manifestation of his power and of his true character.

How many things had taken place in that garden! What communications from a heart filled with God’s own love, and seeking to make it penetrate into the narrow and too insensible hearts of His beloved disciples! But all was lost upon Judas. He comes, with the agents employed by the malice of the priests and Pharisees, to seize the Person of Jesus. But Jesus anticipates them. It is He who presents Himself to them. Knowing all things that should come upon Him, He goes forth, inquiring, “Whom seek ye?” It is the Saviour, the Son of God, who offers Himself. They reply, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus says unto them, “I am he.” Judas, also, was there, who knew Him well, and knew that voice, so long familiar to his ears. No one laid hands on Him: but as soon as His word echoes in their hearts, as soon as that divine “I am” is heard within them, they go backward, and fall to the ground. Who will take Him? He had but to go away and leave them there. But He came not for this; and the time to offer Himself up was come. He asks them again, therefore, “Whom seek ye?” They say, as before, “Jesus of Nazareth.” The first time, the divine glory of the Person of Christ must needs display itself; and now His care for the redeemed ones. “If ye seek me,” said the Lord, “let these go their way”-that the word might be fulfilled, “Of those whom thou hast given me, I have lost none.” He presents Himself as the good Shepherd, giving His life for the sheep. He puts Himself before them, that they may escape the danger that threatens them, and that all may come upon Himself. He yields Himself up. All is His own free offering here.

Nevertheless, whatever might be the divine glory that He manifested, and the grace of a Saviour who was faithful to His own, He acts in obedience, and in the perfect calmness of an obedience that had counted the whole cost with God, and that received it all from His Father’s hand. When the carnal and unintelligent energy of Peter employs force to defend Him, who, if He would, had only needed to have gone away when a word from His lips had cast down to the ground all those who came to take Him, and the word that revealed to them the object of their search deprived them of all power to seize it. When Peter smites the servant Malchus, Jesus takes the place of obedience. “The cup that my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” The divine Person of Christ had been manifested; the voluntary offering of Himself had been made, and that, in order to protect His own; and now His perfect obedience is at the same time displayed.

The malice of a hardened heart, and the want of intelligence of a carnal though sincere heart, have been brought to view. Jesus has His place alone and apart. He is the Saviour. Submitting thus to man, in order to accomplish the counsels and the will of God, He allows them to take Him whither they would. Little of all that took place is related here. Jesus, although questioned, says scarcely anything of Himself. There is, before both the high priest and Pontius Pilate, the calm though meek superiority of One who was giving Himself: yet He is condemned only for the testimony He gave of Himself. Every one had already heard that which He taught. He challenges the authority which pursues the inquiry, not officially, but peacefully and morally; and when unjustly struck, He remonstrates with dignity and perfect calmness, while submitting to the insult. But He does not acknowledge the high priest in any way; while at the same time He does not at all oppose him. He leaves him in his moral incapacity.

The carnal weakness of Peter is manifested; as before his carnal energy.

When brought before Pilate (although because of truth, confessing that He was king), the Lord acts with the same calmness and the same submission; but He questions Pilate and instructs him in such a manner that Pilate can find no fault in Him. Morally incapable, however, of standing at the height of that which was before him, and embarrassed in presence of the divine prisoner, Pilate would have delivered Him by availing himself of a custom, then practised by the government, of releasing a culprit to the Jews at the passover. But the uneasy indifference of a conscience which, hardened as it was, bowed before the presence of One who (even while thus humbled) could not but reach it, did not thus escape the active malice of those who were doing the enemy’s work. The Jews exclaim against the proposal which the governor’s disquietude suggested, and chose a robber instead of Jesus.

John Nelson Darby — Synopsis of the Books of the Bible: the New Testament (c. 1857–1862) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1. He went … over the brook Cedron. It flows through the valley east of Jerusalem between the city and the Mount of Olives. They went to Gethsemane.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

General Information:

Verses 1-2 give background information for the events that follow. Verse 1 tells where they took place, and verse 2 gives background information about Judas. (See: Background Information)

After Jesus spoke these words

The author uses these words to mark the beginning of a new event. (See: Introduction of a New Event)

Kidron Valley

a valley in Jerusalem separating the Temple Mount from the Mount of Olives (See: How to Translate Names)

where there was a garden

This was a grove of olive trees. AT: "where there was a grove of olive trees" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

translationWords

disciple

Kidron Valley

Judas Iscariot

betray

Pharisee

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

1–11. THE BETRAYAL

1. τῶν Κέδρων (א3BCLX Origen) is to be preferred to τοῦ Κέδρου (א1D) or Κεδρών (ASΔ). Both τῶν Κέδρων and τοῦ Κεδρών occur in LXX. as various readings (2Sa 15:23; 1Ki 2:37; 1Ki 15:13; 2Ki 23:6; 2Ki 23:12): Josephus uses Κεδρῶνος as the genitive of Κεδρών (A. J. VIII. i. 5). We infer that both names were current, the Hebrew having given birth to a Greek name of different meaning but similar sound.

1. ἐξῆλθεν. From the upper room. The word is used of leaving the room, Mat 22:39; Mar 14:26; Luk 22:39. Those who suppose that the room is left at Joh 14:31 (perhaps for the Temple), interpret this of the departure from the city.

τῶν Κέδρων. Of the Cedars, rather than τοῦ Κεδρών, of the Kedron. Kedron or Kidron=‘black,’ and is commonly referred to the dark colour of the water or to the gloom of the ravine. But it might refer to the black green of the cedars, and thus both names would be united. χειμαρροῦς or φάραγξ (Josephus uses both words) indicates the ravine rather than the water: even in winter the stream is small. This detail of Jesus crossing the ‘Wady’ of the Kidron is given by S. John only; but he gives no hint of a reference to the flight of David from Absalom and Ahithophel (2Sa 15:23). If we are to seek a reason for his noting the fact, we may find it in his characteristic symbolism: ἐκ χειμάρρου ἐν ὁδῷ πίεται (Psa 110:7); χείμαρρου διῆλθεν ἡ ψυχή (Psa 124:4). This gloomy ravine with its dusky waters is a figure of the affliction through which the Messiah is passing. See on Joh 3:2, Joh 10:22, Joh 13:30.

κῆπος. Garden or orchard. Gethsemane means ‘oil-press,’ and olives probably abounded there. The very ancient olive-trees still existing on the traditional site were probably put there by pilgrims who replanted the spot after its devastation at the siege of Jerusalem. S. John gives no hint of a comparison between the two gardens, Eden and Gethsemane, which commentators from Cyril to Isaac Williams have traced. See on Mar 1:13 for another comparison.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Brook [χειμαρρου] . From ceima, winter, and rJew, to flow. Properly, a winter torrent. Only here in the New Testament. Rev., in margin, ravine. In classical Greek it occurs in Demosthenes in the sense of a drain or conduit. It may be taken as equivalent to the Arabic wady, which means a stream and its bed, or properly, the valley of a stream even when the stream is dry.

Kidron [κεδρων] . Which might also be rendered of the cedars, which some editors prefer. There is some uncertainty as to the exact meaning of the word cedar, which occurs frequently, some supposing it to be a general name for the pine family. A tree of dark foliage is mentioned in the Talmud by the name of cedrum. The ravine of Kidron separated the Mount of Olives from the Temple - Mount. Westcott cites from Derenbourg (" On the History and Geography of Palestine ") a passage of the Talmud to the effect that on the Mount of Olives there were two cedars, under one of which were four shops for the sale of objects legally pure; and that in one of them pigeons enough were sold for the sacrifices of all Israel. He adds : "Even the mention of Kidron by the secondary and popular name of 'the ravine of the cedars' may contain an allusion to a scandal felt as a grievous burden at the time when the priests gained wealth by the sale of victims by the two cedars." The Kidron is the brook over which David passed, barefoot and weeping, when fleeing from Absalom (2Sa 14:23 - 30). There King Asa burned the obscene idol of his mother (1Ki 14:13). It was the receptacle for the impurities and abominations of idol - worship, when removed from the temple by the adherents of Jehovah (2Ch 29:16); and, in the time of Josiah, was the common cemetery of the city (2Ki 23:6). In the vision of Ezekiel (xlvii. 5, 6, 7) he goes round to the eastern gate of the temple, overhanging the defile of Kidron, and sees the waters rushing down into the valley until the stream becomes a mighty river.

A garden. Neither John nor Luke give the name Gethsemane.

2 - 12. Compare Mt 26:47 - 56; Mr 16:43 - 52; Luk 22:47 - 53.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.