Luke 22:21

We have here Christ's discourse with his disciples after supper, much of which is new here; and in St. John's gospel we shall find other additions. We should take example from him to entertain and edify our family and friends with such discourse at table as is good and to the use of edifying, which may minister grace to the hearers; but especially after we have been at the Lord's table, by Christian conference to keep one another in a suitable frame. The matters Christ here discoursed of were of weight, and to the present purpose.

I. He discoursed with them concerning him that should betray him, who was now present. 1. He signifies to them that the traitor was now among them, and one of them, Luk 22:21. By placing this after the institution of the Lord's supper, though in Matthew and Mark it is placed before it, it seems plain that Judas did receive the Lord's supper, did eat of that bread and drink of that cup; for, after the solemnity was over, Christ said, Behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. There have been those that have eaten bread with Christ and yet have betrayed him. 2. He foretels that the treason would take effect (Luk 22:22): Truly the Son of man goes as it was determined, goes to the place where he will be betrayed; for he is delivered up by the counsel and foreknowledge of God, else Judas could not have delivered him up. Christ was not driven to his sufferings, but cheerfully went to them. He said, Lo, I come. 3. He threatens the traitor: Woe to that man by whom he is betrayed. Note, Neither the patience of the saints under their sufferings, nor the counsel of God concerning their sufferings, will be any excuse for those that have any hand in their sufferings, or that persecute them. Though God has determined that Christ shall be betrayed and he himself has cheerfully submitted to it, yet Judas's sin or punishment is not at all the less. 4. He frightens the rest of the disciples into a suspicion of themselves, by saying that it was one of them, and not naming which (Luk 22:23): They began to enquire among themselves, to interrogate themselves, to put the question to themselves, who it was that should do this thing, that could be so base to so good a Master. The enquiry was not, Is it you? or, Is it such a one? but, Is it I?

II. Concerning the strife that was among them for precedency or supremacy.

1. See what the dispute was: Which of them should be accounted the greatest. Such and so many contests among the disciples for dignity and dominion, before the Spirit was poured upon them, were a sad presage of the like strifes for, and affections of, supremacy in the churches, after the Spirit should be provoked to depart from them. How inconsistent is this with that in the verse before! There they were enquiring which would be the traitor, and here which should be the prince. Could such an instance of humility, and such an instance of pride and vanity, be found in the same men, so near together? This is like sweet waters and bitter proceeding at the same time out of the same fountain. What a self-contradiction is the deceitful heart of man!

2. See what Christ said to this dispute. He was not sharp upon them, as might have been expected (he having so often reproved them for this very thing), but mildly showed them the sin and folly of it.

(1.) This was to make themselves like the kings of the Gentiles, who affect worldly pomp, and worldly power, Luk 22:25. They exercise lordship over their subjects, and are ever and anon striving to exercise lordship too over the princes that are about them, though as good as themselves, if they think them not so strong as themselves. Note, The exercising of lordship better becomes the kings of the Gentiles than the ministers of Christ. But observe, They that exercise authority, and take upon themselves to bear sway, and give law, they are called Benefactors - Euergetas, they call themselves so, and so their flatterers call them, and those that set themselves to serve their interests. It is pretended that they have been benefactors, and upon that account they should be admitted to have rule; nay, that in exercising authority they are benefactors. However they may really serve themselves, they would be thought to serve their country. One of the Ptolemies was surnamed Euergetes - The Benefactor. Now our Saviour, by taking notice of this, intimates, [1.] That to do good is much more honourable than to look great; for these princes that were the terror of the mighty would not be called so, but rather the benefactors of the needy; so that, by their own confession, a benefactor to his country is much more valued than a ruler of his country. [2.] That to do good is the surest way to be great, else they that aimed to be rulers would not have been so solicitous to be called Benefactors. This therefore he would have his disciples believe, that their greatest honour would be to do all the good they could in the world. They would indeed be benefactors to the world, by bringing the gospel to it. Let them value themselves upon that title, which they would indeed be entitled to, and then they need not strive which should be the greatest, for they would all be greater - greater blessings to mankind than the kings of the earth, that exercise lordship over them. If they have that which is confessedly the greater honour, of being benefactors, let them despise the less, of being rulers.

(2.) It was to make themselves unlike the disciples of Christ, and unlike Christ himself: "You shall not be so," Luk 22:26, Luk 22:27. "It was never intended that you should rule any otherwise than by the power of truth and grace, but that you should serve." When church-rulers affect external pomp and power, and bear up themselves by secular interests and influences, they debase their office, and it is an instance of degeneracy like that of Israel when they would have a king like the nations that were round about them, whereas the Lord was their King. See here, [1.] What is the rule Christ gave to his disciples: He that is greater among you, that is senior, to whom precedency is due upon the account of his age, let him be as the younger, both in point of lowness of place (let him condescend to sit with the younger, and be free and familiar with them) and in point of labour and work. We say, Juniores ad labores, seniores ad honores - Let the young work, and the aged receive their honours. But let the elder take pains as well as the younger; their age and honour, instead of warranting them to take their ease, bind them to double work. And he that is chief, ho hēgoumenos - the president of the college or assembly, let him be as he that serves, hōs ho diakonōn - as the deacon; let him stoop to the meanest and most toilsome services for the public good, if there be occasion. [2.] What was the example which he himself gave to this rule: Whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat or he that serveth? he that attendeth or he that is attended on? Now Christ was among his disciples just like one that waited at table. He was so far from taking state, or taking his ease, by commanding their attendance upon him, that he was ready to do any office of kindness and service for them; witness his washing their feet. Shall those take upon them the form of princes who call themselves followers of him that took upon him the form of a servant?

(3.) They ought not to strive for worldly honour and grandeur, because he had better honours in reserve for them, of another nature, a kingdom, a feast, a throne, for each of them, wherein they should all share alike, and should have no occasion to strive for precedency, Luk 22:28-30. Where observe,

[1.] Christ's commendation of his disciples for their faithfulness to him; and this was honour enough for them, they needed not to strive for any greater. It is spoken with an air of encomium and applause: "You are they who have continued with me in my temptations, you are they who have stood by me and stuck to me when others have deserted me and turned their backs upon me." Christ had his temptations; he was despised and rejected of men, reproached and reviled, and endured the contradiction of sinners. But his disciples continued with him, and were afflicted in all his afflictions. It was but little help that they could give him, or service that they could do him; nevertheless, he took it kindly that they continued with him, and he here owns their kindness, though it was by the assistance of his own grace that they did continue. Christ's disciples had been very defective in their duty. We find them guilty of many mistakes and weaknesses: they were very dull and very forgetful, and often blundered, yet their Master passes all by and forgets it; he does not upbraid them with their infirmities, but gives them this memorable testimonial, You are they who have continued with me. Thus does he praise at parting, to show how willing he is to make the best of those whose hearts he knows to be upright with him.

[2.] The recompence he designed them for their fidelity: I appoint, diatithemai, I bequeath, unto you a kingdom. Or thus, I appoint to you, as my Father has appointed a kingdom to me, that you may eat and drink at my table. Understand it, First, Of what should be done for them in this world. God gave his Son a kingdom among men, the gospel church, of which he is the living, quickening, ruling, Head. This kingdom he appointed to his apostles and their successors in the ministry of the gospel, that they should enjoy the comforts and privileges of the gospel, help to communicate them to others by gospel ordinances, sit on thrones as officers of the church, not only declaratively, but exhortatively judging the tribes of Israel that persist in their infidelity, and denouncing the wrath of God against them, and ruling the gospel Israel, the spiritual Israel, by the instituted discipline of the church, administered with gentleness and love. This is the honour reserved for you. Or, Secondly, Of what should be done for them in the other world, which I take to be chiefly meant. Let them go on in their services in this world; their preferments shall be in the other world. God will give them the kingdom, in which they shall be sure to have, 1. The richest dainties; for they shall eat and drink at Christ's table in his kingdom, of which he had spoken, Luk 22:16, Luk 22:18. They shall partake of those joys and pleasures which were the recompence of his services and sufferings. They shall have a full satisfaction of soul in the vision and fruition of God; and herein they shall have the best society, as at a feast, in the perfection of love. 2. The highest dignities: "You shall not only be provided for at the royal table, as Mephibosheth at David's, but you shall be preferred to the royal throne; shall sit down with me on my throne, Rev 3:21. In the great day you shall sit on thrones, as assessors with Christ, to approve of and applaud his judgment of the twelve tribes of Israel." If the saints shall judge the world (Co1 6:2), much more the church.

III. Concerning Peter's denying him. And in this part of the discourse we may observe,

1. The general notice Christ gives to Peter of the devil's design upon him and the rest of the apostles (Luk 22:31): The Lord said, Simon, Simon, observe what I say; Satan hath desired to have you, to have you all in his hands, that he may sift you as wheat. Peter, who used to be the mouth of the rest in speaking to Christ, is here made the ear of the rest; and what is designed for warning to them all (all you shall be offended, because of me) is directed to Peter, because he was principally concerned, being in particular manner struck at by the tempter: Satan has desired to have you. Probably Satan had accused the disciples to God as mercenary in following Christ, and aiming at nothing else therein but enriching and advancing themselves in this world, as he accused Job. "No," saith God, "they are honest men, and men of integrity." "Give me leave to try them," saith Satan, "and Peter particularly." He desired to have them, that he might sift them, that he might show them to be chaff, and not wheat. The troubles that were now coming upon them were sifting, would try what there was in them: but this was not all; Satan desired to sift them by his temptations, and endeavoured by those troubles to draw them into sin, to put them into a loss and hurry, as corn when it is sifted to bring the chaff uppermost, or rather to shake out the wheat and leave nothing but the chaff. Observe, Satan could not sift them unless God gave him leave: He desired to have them, as he begged of God a permission to try and tempt Job. Exētēsato - "He has challenged you, has undertaken to prove you a company of hypocrites, and Peter especially, the forwardest of you." Some suggest that Satan demanded leave to sift them as their punishment for striving who should be greatest, in which contest Peter perhaps was very warm: "Leave them to me, to sift them for it."

2. The particular encouragement he gave to Peter, in reference to this trial: "I have prayed for thee, because, though he desires to have them all, he is permitted to make his strongest onset upon thee only: thou wilt be most violently assaulted, but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not, that it may not totally and finally fail." Note, (1.) If faith be kept up in an hour of temptation, though we may fall, yet we shall not be utterly cast down. Faith will quench Satan's fiery darts. (2.) Though there may be many failings in the faith of true believers, yet there shall not be a total and final failure of their faith. It is their seed, their root, remaining in them. (3.) It is owing to the mediation and intercession of Jesus Christ that the faith of his disciples, though sometimes sadly shaken, yet is not sunk. If they were left to themselves, they would fail; but they are kept by the power of God and the prayer of Christ. The intercession of Christ is not only general, for all that believe, but for particular believers (I have prayed for thee), which is an encouragement for us to pray for ourselves, and an engagement upon us to pray for others too.

3. The charge he gives to Peter to help others as he should himself be helped of God: "When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren; when thou art recovered by the grace of God, and brought to repentance, do what thou canst to recover others; when thou hast found they faith kept from failing, labour to confirm the faith of others, and to establish them; when thou hast found mercy with God thyself, encourage others to hope that they also shall find mercy." Note, (1.) Those that have fallen into sin must be converted from it; those that have turned aside must return; those that have left their first love must do their first works. (2.) Those that through grace are converted from sin must do what they can to strengthen their brethren that stand, and to prevent their falling; see Psa 51:11-13; Ti1 1:13.

4. Peter's declared resolution to cleave to Christ, whatever it cost him (Luk 22:33): Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison and to death. This was a great word, and yet I believe no more than he meant at this time, and thought he should make good too. Judas never protested thus against denying Christ, though often warned of it; for his heart was as fully set in him to the evil as Peter's was against it. Note, All the true disciples of Christ sincerely desire and design to follow him, whithersoever he goes, and whithersoever he leads them, though into a prison, though out of the world.

5. Christ's express prediction of his denying him thrice (Luk 22:34): "I tell thee, Peter (thou dost not know thine own heart, but must be left to thyself a little, that thou mayest know it, and mayest never trust to it again), the cock shall not crow this day before thou even deny that thou knowest me." Note, Christ knows us better than we know ourselves, and knows the evil that is in us, and will be done by us, which we ourselves do not suspect. It is well for us that Christ knows where we are weak better than we do, and therefore where to come in with grace sufficient; that he knows how far a temptation will prevail, and therefore when to say, Hitherto shall it come, and no further.

IV. Concerning the condition of all the disciples.

1. He appeals to them concerning what had been, Luk 22:35. He had owned that they had been faithful servants to him, Luk 22:28. Now he expects, at parting, that they should acknowledge that he had been a kind and careful Master to them ever since they left all to follow him: When I sent you without purse, lacked you any thing? (1.) He owns that he had sent them out in a very poor and bare condition, barefoot, and with no money in their purses, because they were not to go far, nor be out long; and he would thus teach them to depend upon the providence of God, and, under that, upon the kindness of their friends. If God thus send us out into the world, let us remember that better than we have thus begun low. (2.) Yet ye will have them own that, notwithstanding this, they had lacked nothing; they then lived as plentifully and comfortably as ever; and they readily acknowledged it: "Nothing, Lord; I have all, and abound." Note, [1.] It is good for us often to review the providences of God that have been concerning us all our days, and to observe how we have got through the straits and difficulties we have met with. [2.] Christ is a good Master, and his service a good service; for though his servants may sometimes be brought low, yet he will help them; and though he try them, yet will he not leave them. Jehovah-jireh. [3.] We must reckon ourselves well done by, and must not complain, but be thankful, if we have had the necessary supports of life, though we have had neither dainties nor superfluities, though we have lived from hand to mouth, and lived upon the kindness of our friends. The disciples lived upon contribution, and yet did not complain that their maintenance was precarious, but owned, to their Master's honour, that it was sufficient; they had wanted nothing.

2. He gives them notice of a very great change of their circumstances now approaching. For, (1.) He that was their Master was now entering upon his sufferings, which he had often foretold (Luk 22:37): "Now that which is written must be fulfilled in me, and this among the rest, He was numbered among the transgressors - he must suffer and die as a malefactor, and in company with some of the vilest of malefactors. This is that which is yet to be accomplished, after all the rest, and then the things concerning me, the things written concerning me, will have an end; then I shall say, It is finished." Note, It may be the comfort of suffering Christians, as it was of a suffering Christ, that their sufferings were foretold, and determined in the counsels of heaven, and will shortly determine in the joys of heaven. They were written concerning them, and they will have an end, and will end well, everlastingly well. (2.) They must therefore expect troubles, and must not think now to have such an easy and comfortable life as they had had; no, the scene will alter. They must now in some degree suffer with their Master; and, when he is gone, they must expect to suffer like him. The servant is not better than his Lord. [1.] They must not now expect that their friends would be so kind and generous to them as they had been; and therefore, He that has a purse, let him take it, for he may have occasion for it, and for all the good husbandry he can use. [2.] They must now expect that their enemies would be more fierce upon them than they had been, and they would need magazines as well as stores: He that has no sword wherewith to defend himself against robbers and assassins (Co2 11:26) will find a great want of it, and will be ready to wish, some time or other, that he had sold his garment and bought one. This is intended only to show that the times would be very perilous, so that no man would think himself safe if he had not a sword by his side. But the sword of the Spirit is the sword which the disciples of Christ must furnish themselves with. Christ having suffered for us, we must arm ourselves with the same mind (Pe1 4:1), arm ourselves with an expectation of trouble, that it may not be a surprise to us, and with a holy resignation to the will of God in it, that there may be no opposition in us to it: and then we are better prepared than if we had sold a coat to buy a sword. The disciples hereupon enquire what strength they had, and find they had among them two swords (Luk 22:38), of which one was Peter's. The Galileans generally travelled with swords. Christ wore none himself, but he was not against his disciples' wearing them. But he intimates how little he would have them depend upon this when he saith, It is enough, which some think is spoken ironically: "Two swords among twelve men! you are bravely armed indeed when our enemies are now coming out against us in great multitudes, and every one with a sword!" Yet two swords are sufficient for those who need none, having God himself to be the shield of their help and the sword of their excellency, Deu 33:29.

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

Luk_22:21-23

The Son of Man goeth

The Son of Man, and His going

I.

THE SON OF MAN.

1. Reference of the appellation. Nothing is more certain than that the appellation, the Son of Man, belongs to Jesus Christ, and is peculiar to Him.

2. Origin of the appellation (see Psa_18:17).

3. Meaning of the appellation. When the Messiah is termed the Son of Man, the term fixes the mind both on the reality of His manhood, and on the circumstances which distinguish Him among men. It marks Him as truly a man, a descendant of man; but it as really marks Him as standing out from the rest of men. The leading thoughts suggested by the designation, the Son of Man, as given to our Lord Jesus Christ, are these: that He is a real man, truly a partaker of human nature; that He is a perfect man, the normal man, man as he should be; that He is the representative man, the second Adam, charged with the responsibilities of the race; that He is the God-man, a true man in union with the true God; finally, that He is the predicted man, the great subject of New Testament prophecy; a man, a son of man--the man, the son of man.

II. THE GOING OF THE SON OF MAN. The predestined, predicted going of this Son of Man comes now to be considered. The Son of Man, said the Son of Man Himself, goeth, goeth as was determined, goeth as it is written. Heaven was His original abode--earth was His present residence; but it was not intended to be His permanent dwelling-place. He had come from heaven to earth, and was to go from earth to heaven. When He came, He came not unsent. He was commissioned to do a great work, and, when that work was accomplished, He was to return to Him that sent Him.

1. He went to the grave.

2. He went to the grave as it is written. Before proceeding farther in tracing the Son of Mans amazing journey, it may be well for us here to stop and inquire how, when He went thus to the grave, He went as it is written? Here, there are three remarks which deserve our attention--

(1) He went in the character in which it was written He should go;

(2)He went in the disposition in which it was written He should go; and

(3) In many of the particular and even minute details of His progress, He went as it was written.

(1) He suffered and died as a public person, the representative of His people, the victim of sin. He suffered for us, the just in the room of the unjust; and this is as it was written.

(2) He went, as we have seen, in the spirit of the most entire self-devotedness, cheerful resignation, magnanimous fortitude. No man took His life from Him; He laid it down of Himself. And all this was written of Him.

(3) The agony in Gethsemane was as it was written; also His betrayal, the particular insults and injuries done Him, the manner in which His death was accomplished the circumstances of His funeral, etc.

3. He went to heaven.

4. He went to heaven as it is written. (D. Brown, D. D.)

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

Luk 22:21-23. But behold — Πλην ιδου. This particle (πλην, verumtamen, nevertheless, or notwithstanding) “is a proof,” says Bengelius, “that Judas was present at the Lord’s supper;” for it shows that Christ’s discourse is continued without interruption; and it appears, from Luk 22:14, that when he sat down to the supper and begun the discourse, the twelve were with him: Dr. Lightfoot was of the same opinion, who says, “What can be desired more, as a demonstration that Judas was present at the eucharist?” Thus also Henry: “By the placing this after the institution of the Lord’s supper, it seems plain that Judas did receive that supper, did eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.” On which he observes, “There have been those who have eaten bread with Christ, and yet have betrayed him.” According to Matthew and Mark, however, Jesus pointed out Judas, as the traitor, to the disciples at this supper, before the institution of the sacrament, as at a prior supper (see Joh 13:23, &c.) he had done to John. Perhaps he did it both before and after he instituted the eucharist. So Dr. Macknight thought. “Our Lord,” says he, “was now deeply affected with his own thoughts, for he uttered some of the things twice that lay heaviest upon his spirit, as persons in great concern are wont to do; particularly after delivering the sacramental cup, and telling them that his blood was shed for them, he mentioned the treachery of Judas a second time. And this second declaration came in very properly after the institution of the sacrament, which exhibits the highest instance of his love to mankind; his dying to obtain the remission of their sins. For it showed that the person who could deliberately do so great an injury to so kind a friend, must have been a monster, the foulness of whose ingratitude cannot be reached by the force of language.” The hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table — “Manus quæ sacram cænam sumpsit, quæque hostibus perfidam fidem dedit.” The hand which took the sacred supper, and which gave a perfidious promise to enemies. So Bengelius. And truly the Son of man goeth — That is, dieth; as it was determined — See on Mat 26:24-25.

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

§ 124. JESUS INDICATES HIS BETRAYER, Luk_22:21-24.

See notes on Mat_26:21-25; Mar_14:18-21; Joh_13:21-35.

21. Behold—How terrible the transition from the words of dying love which have just preceded.

The hand of him that betrayeth me… on the table—Violating with its treacherous pressure the board of common love and unity.

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

CRITICAL NOTES

Luk_22:21. Him that betrayeth.—If the order of events be here given, it is clear that Judas partook of the last supper.

Luk_22:22. Determined.—Fixed by the counsel of God (cf. Act_2:23; Act_4:27-28; Rev_13:8).

Luk_22:24. A strife among them.—Perhaps this is related out of its order, and is to be understood as having occurred at the beginning of the supper, when Christ practically rebuked it by washing the disciples’ feet (Joh_13:4 ff.), to which action He here alludes in Luk_22:27.

Luk_22:25. Gentiles.—A hint that the spirit animating the disciples was heathenish in its character. Benefactors.—A title taken by some kings—e.g., Ptolemy Euergetes (the word here used).

Luk_22:26. Greatest.—R.V. “the greater.”

Luk_22:28. Have continued.—Words specially appropriate to the present time, when the end of the time of trial was at hand. Temptations.—Or “trials” (cf. Jas_1:2-3).

Luk_22:30. Sit on thrones.—Perhaps the word “twelve” used in Mat_19:28 is here purposely omitted.

Luk_22:31. Simon, Simon!—The repetition of the name gave combined solemnity and tenderness to the appeal. Desired.—R.V. “asked to have you,” or (margin) “obtained you by asking.” “Not content with Judas” (Bengel). Have you.—Plural—i.e., the apostles.

Luk_22:32. I.—Emphatic. Fail.—Implies total extinction. Strengthen.—The use of this word and the cognate substantive thrice by Peter in his two epistles (1Pe_5:10; 2Pe_1:12; 2Pe_3:17), and in the first passage in a connection with the mention of Satan’s temptations, is remarkable.

Luk_22:33. I am ready.—Rather, “Lord, with thee I am ready,” etc. (R.V.). The “with thee” is emphatic.

Luk_22:34. Peter.—“The only occasion on which Jesus is recorded to have used to him the name He gave him. It is used to remind him of his strength as well as his weakness” (Farrar). Shall not crow.—St. Mark alone says “twice.”

Luk_22:35. When I sent you, etc.—The kindness and hospitality with which they were met on the former occasion are contrasted with the enmity to which they will now be exposed—against which they will need to guard.

Luk_22:36. A sword.—For self-defence. The strong figure makes the warning all the more memorable.

Luk_22:37. For the things, etc.—I.e., either the prophecies, one of which is quoted, are to be accomplished, or the things which befall me are approaching their termination. Probably the former is to be preferred.

Luk_22:38. It is enough.—Not “they are sufficient,” but “that will do.” It seems to be an ironical reply, indicating that in taking His words literally they had misunderstood Him, and simply dismissing the matter.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Luk_22:21-38

Words of Warning and Counsel.—In the words which Christ spoke after the institution of the Supper, and before He went forth to meet suffering and death, we have another proof of His unselfish and disinterested spirit. His thoughts are not absorbed in His own concerns, but He has leisure to think of His disciples—to utter words of warning and reproof, and to give them counsels for the time when they will be deprived of His presence and be brought face to face with new conditions of life, for which their previous experience would not have prepared them.

I. He reveals the fact that one of the twelve is to betray Him (Luk_22:21-23).—Both sorrow and indignation appear in the exclamation, “But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth Me is with Me on the table.” As He sees the cup pass from hand to hand, His attention fastens upon Judas, and He cannot refrain from disclosing the fact that one of those who are now His guests will deliver Him into the hand of His enemies. For long He had kept silence concerning the true character of Judas: why does He now break that silence? Surely it was in mercy to the traitor, who might, even at the eleventh hour, have repented of his sin and found forgiveness. Death would still have come to Christ, but his guilt would have been averted. For Christ makes it quite clear that the traitor’s power over Him is but slight. He does not lament that He is doomed to death, for He knows that a Divine decree has prescribed death for Him. But He shudders at the fate of the man who deliberately and wilfully betrays Him. So skilfully had Judas disguised his real feelings towards Christ, that he averts from himself the suspicions of his fellow-apostles. Yet, after all, there was nothing very wonderful in his escaping observation, for those of innocent mind are much more inclined to suspect themselves of faults and shortcomings than to discern them in others.

II. He allays the strife for supremacy that had again risen among them (Luk_22:24-30).—The question as to who should be the greatest among them had more than once, before this, raised disputes and contests among the apostles. But it surprises us to read that on this solemn occasion it should again have been raised. Perhaps the origin of the present dispute was in rival claims being put forward to occupy the place of honour by the side of Jesus at the supper-table. Yet, though the disciples were so far out of sympathy with their Lord as to indulge in selfish strife for precedence or for supremacy at this moment, when the thought of His coming sufferings and death was pressing upon His mind, we discern no trace of anger or of disappointment in His words. He is neither irritated nor discouraged by the fact that, in spite of His example and teaching, His disciples still manifest a spirit of carnal ambition, for He knows that the leaven which is to change their characters has been deposited in their hearts, and He is fully convinced that in due time the transformation which He has sought to effect will be wrought.

1. He contrasts the ideal of greatness which prevails in ordinary human society with that in the new society of which He is the founder: there strength or ability gives precedence, here he is greatest who is most eager to be of service to his fellows. And He brings forward His own example as an illustration of the spirit that should prevail among them: He had abdicated the honour He might have insisted upon and had been among them as one that served.

2. He promises due satisfaction of the aspirations after glory and honour which it is lawful for even the humblest believer to cherish (Rom_2:7), though the way to have them realised is not by seeking lordship over others. He acknowledges the fidelity of the apostles to Himself in the time of His humiliation, and He assures them that they shall be associated with Him in His exaltation. As they are His guests at this paschal supper, so shall they sit down with Him at the heavenly banquet; as they have recognised Him as their King, and sought to extend His kingdom, so shall they be partakers of His royal authority.

III. The warning against self-confidence (Luk_22:31-34).—Christ discloses the fact that a serious trial is at hand for all the apostles—that he who was chiefest among them in faith and devotion would be exposed to greatest danger; but He also promises help in the time of need, and anticipates a victorious issue from the trial.

1. The imminent danger. The enemy of God and man was to assail the apostles and to attempt to overthrow their faith. His desire to have them, that he might sift them as wheat, was to be gratified; and, as in the case of Job, he was to be allowed to try every device for shaking their loyalty to their Master. He would choose an opportune time for his attempt, when they were separated from their Master, and left dependent upon their own strength and resources. Yet his power was but limited; it was by God’s permission that he was allowed to sift them; and though he might desire that the wheat might be found to be but chaff, he could do no more than shake the sieve.

2. The intervention of the Intercessor. Christ presents Himself as more than a match for the enemy. He has already foreseen the danger, and has already provided against it (“I have prayed”). One apostle is, though he is unconscious of it, in more danger of utter overthrow than any of his fellows; and for him the prayer of intercession has been offered with special fervency. The prayer is not that he may escape the trial, nor even that he may escape from it unscathed, but that his faith may not fail—that, however low he may fall, he may still not be utterly cast down.

3. A happy issue from the trial. Christ anticipates a change being wrought in the character of the apostle that would make him helpful to others in time to come. By his fall and restoration his rashness and self-confidence would be purged away, and the experience through which he had passed would make him sympathetic towards the weak, and able to understand the trials and difficulties that beset them. Those who have themselves fallen and been truly penitent are more likely to be helpful to their brethren than others, whose experience has been more happy and uneventful. The reply of Peter shows how unconscious he was of the danger in which he stood.

IV. A new order of things at hand, requiring special foresight and courage (Luk_22:35-38).—After preparing the disciples for the special trial which is to befall them in the course of a few hours, He forewarns them that in the days and years to come they will be confronted with a very different condition of matters from that which had been familiar to them in the time of His earthly ministry. They had enjoyed a measure of comfort in consequence of the popularity which He had won in many sections of Jewish society. But now the final conflict between Him and the authorities of the Jewish people would entail upon them also a measure of hardship and persecution.

1. He recalls the past. When He had sent them on their mission through the land, they had found friends everywhere; though they had gone out without money or provisions, they had suffered no lack of anything they needed.

2. He foretells the future. He is to suffer, and they are, to some extent, to suffer with Him. Instead of trusting to the generosity of others they will need to make provision for themselves; instead of friends they will find enemies, against whom they will need to use all legitimate means of self-defence. He would no longer be with them to protect them, and therefore they would need to use every precaution for guarding themselves from harm. The disciples, for the moment, took the precept literally, and pointed out that they were prepared; for they had two swords in their possession. The Lord does not correct the error, except by implication; two swords are enough for protecting the twelve, since literal swords are not to be used—since their most efficient weapon would be an all-suffering patience like His.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Luk_22:21-38

Luk_22:21-23. Treachery Unveiled. Note—

I. That the traitor was an apostle.

II. That he would be successful in accomplishing his evil work.

III. That he would bring down upon himself a terrible doom.

Luk_22:21. “But, behold.”—Though I am about to shed My blood for you, and for all men.

“The hand.”—The hand which had received the bread and the cup—the hand which had pledged a covenant with the enemies of Christ.

Luk_22:22. “As it hath been determined.”—Cf. Psa_41:9.

Luk_22:23. “Began to enquire.”—In their guilelessness they were

(1) distrustful of themselves, and

(2) unsuspicious of others.

Luk_22:23-24. “Which should do this thing!… which should be accounted the greatest.”—In the one question their humility, in the other their pride, are manifested. A strange contrast!

Luk_22:24-25. True Greatness.

I. What did the apostles, at this time in their lives, mean by “the greatest”?—The most influential, the most capable, the most considered. To some men greatness consists in physical prowess; to others, the possession of wealth; to others, the power of intelligence. In our times, we often mean by greatness a combination of all these forms of power—force, wealth, intelligence.

II. Our Lord’s ideal of greatness.—Very unlike that of the natural man. An entire contrast. Is it an unpractical ideal? No. For

(1) man’s true greatness must be the greatness of his true self;

(2) must be in harmony with the true law of his being.

3. Love is the gift, the expenditure of self—“God is love.” And He permits man to share in the most glorious of the Divine attributes, and his sharo in this attribute is the measure of his greatness. The apostles became really great men after Pentecost, simply because they followed their Master. Note, in conclusion

(1) the importance of a true ideal in life.

(2) The true ideal of life—service—is within the reach of all of us. We can all of us be really great if we will. The possibilities of service are manifold and inexhaustible. They lie around us on every side; they grow under our feet; they outnumber our capacities for meeting them. To be like our Lord, we must unlearn the world’s current ideas of greatness.—Liddon.

Luk_22:24. “Also a strife among them.”—One apostle was a traitor; the others though faithful, manifest a spirit of selfish rivalry which could not fail to grieve their Master.

“Should be accounted the greatest.”—Christ is neither irritated nor discouraged by the unseemly contest; He gently bears with the weakness of the disciples, and He lays down the principle which should animate them, in the full consciousness that, in due time, it would influence and govern their conduct.

Luk_22:25-30. To Strive for Pre-eminence was Unbecoming.

I. Because it manifested a spirit like that of the heathen (Luk_22:25-26).

II. Because it was inconsistent with the example of Christ Himself (Luk_22:27).

III. Because a high and princely recompense was reserved for all who had been faithful to Him.—A kingdom, a throne, and a place at His table, for each (28–30).

Luk_22:25. “Benefactors.”—Our Lord draws a marked contrast between princes who had assumed the title because of their beneficent rule, and Himself, who deserved it, not for exercising authority over His followers, but for “serving” them.

Luk_22:25-27.—

I. The worldly ideal of greatness.

II. The Divine ideal which Christ introduced and exemplified.

Luk_22:26. “As he doth that serve.”—Let all the strife of men be—who shall do best; who shall be least.—Whichcote.

Humility and Greatness.—

1. Humility a way to greatness.

2. Doing good the object to be kept in view, rather than being great.

Luk_22:27. “I am among you,” etc.—

1. A summary of His earthly life of humiliation.

2. A fit introduction to His passion.

3. The watchword, even now, of His heavenly life.

Luk_22:28-29. “Continued with Me:” Fidelity and Its Reward.

I. Christ’s grateful acknowledgment of the fidelity of His disciples.—They had done nobly. Their behaviour had been heroic. Persistence in spiritual life, throughout a curriculum of trial, is not easy.

II. Christ’s promise of a great reward.—Noble shall be your reward—such is the import of the pathetic utterance. I shall do this in turn to you who have persisted in fidelity to Me. Are not the apostles the true rulers of the world to-day?—Bruce.

Luk_22:28. “My temptations.”—

1. The privations of His lot.

2. The absence from His life of the elements of worldly greatness.

3. The calumnies and plots of His enemies.

4. His rejection by so large a section of the people, and by their rulers.

I. The loneliness of Christ’s life.

II. The temptations that had beset Him.

III. His gratitude for the fidelity of the apostles.

Christ’s Temptations.—We must not forget that the Saviour described the space between the wilderness temptation and the temptation at the end as “My temptations.” Not “My sorrows,” “My difficulties,” “My pains,” but “My temptations.” His virtue was not cloistered and untried. It was subjected to the hottest fires.

I. He was tempted all His life by bodily pain and privation.

II. He was constantly tempted to use His supernatural power.

III. He resisted the temptation to adopt a false Messiahship, accordant with the worldly spirit of Judaism, in favour of an inward kingdom to be developed by the power of the Divine Spirit. He would not please His disciples by taking a temporal kingship. How significant, then, it is, that when He describes His life it should come before His memory as “My temptations”!—Nicoll.

Luk_22:29-30. “I appoint unto you a kingdom.”—The words virtually signify: “I will give you a royal dignity, which will be associated with that which I myself have received, so that you, who are now My guests at this Paschal supper, will also sit down with Me at the heavenly banquet, and will, in My name, judge the tribes of Israel.”—Godet.

Luk_22:29. “I appoint.”—Lit. “I bequeath”; a word appropriate for one so near death.

Luk_22:30. “That ye may eat,” etc.—It is their association with Christ that is the source of the honour and power which the apostles enjoy.

I. As they are faithful to Christ in His temptations, and now sit beside Him at the last Passover, He promises them a place at the heavenly feast.

II. As they share in His humiliation, they are assured of participation in His exaltation—they occupy the highest places of honour and authority, even now, in His Church.

Luk_22:31-32. The Sifting of Peter.

I. Such a character obviously needed sifting.—He was full of self-confidence. Self-confidence is the enemy of true faith. The process is severe, is fiery; but if Peter is to be cured of his tendencies, he must suffer. However hard the trial, let us pray for sifting, if only we can thereby learn Peter’s lesson—if only we can be saved from the failure and regret which follow confidence in self.

II. But his fall is only half his story.—The restoration is the completion of the sifting process. Christ’s look was the turning point in Peter’s life. No words were needed to break his heart.

III. Christ’s further dealing completed his restoration.—Three open and shameful denials were followed by three searching questions, reminders of his threefold fall. But he bears the trying ordeal patiently. No more boastfulness. The old self-confidence is gone for ever. At last he is fit to lead, to counsel others. He has become “Rock.”

IV. Two lessons.—

1. Look how the Divine order runs through his life, and makes its unity impressive.

2. Peter did not lose strength when he surrendered self-confidence. He became stronger than ever, but not in himself. His confidence is now in his Master.—Eyton.

The Prayer and the Counter-Prayer.—The setting and framework give significance and solemnity to the words.

I. A revelation of danger.—The Old-Testament imagery of the scene in heaven, in the first chapter of Job, gives the key to the expression of the text. Satan has again petitioned for the apostles—to explore and search. Christ has his fan, Satan has his sieve. Body, mind, soul—each has its own danger and temptation. But there is a dignity, an elevation, and a trembling anxiety in the battle and in the victory.

II. The special personal assurance.—The transition is from the many to the one, from the company to the individual. Was it only for Peter that the prayer was offered? Then it was the one prayed for who fell—who, when trial came, thrice denied his Lord. But from the fall arose the conqueror. Christ’s prayer was answered.

III. The responsibility and privilege of the restored.—There are many conversions in one life, there is need of many turnings. Whenever we forget God we need to be turned. And the privilege, as it is the responsibility of the converted, is to strengthen others. Peter did so. By his ministry, by his epistles, by his life and example. This is the work to which all converted men are summoned. Pray to be made acceptable to and potent for good over other lives.—Vaughan.

A Dangerous Crisis.—

1. Jesus regards the crisis as a sifting time for the disciples.

2. As, though perilous, one which shall not prove deadly to their faith.

3. As one which shall not only end happily, but result in spiritual benefit to themselves, and qualify them for being helpful to others.—Bruce.

I. The warning to Peter of coming danger.

II. The encouragement given him.

III. The charge laid upon him.

Unconsciousness of Danger.—

1. Satan eager to destroy Peter.

2. Christ eager to deliver Peter.

3. Peter unconscious of the danger in which he stood.

Luk_22:31. “Desired.”—He cannot act except with God’s permission. Cf. Job_1:12; Job_2:6.

“That he may sift you.”—“Whose fan is in his hand,” but with the purpose of gathering the chaff for himself. Judas had been separated from the apostolic band: Peter now stood in danger.

“Sift.”—The word has not been preserved to us elsewhere, but the signification is not doubtful. The tertium comparationis is the testing agitation: as the wheat is shaken in the sieve, that the chaff may thereby separate itself from the wheat and fall out, so will Satan also disquiet and terrify you through persecutions, dangers, tribulations, in order to bring your faithfulness towards Me to apostasy.—Meyer.

Luk_22:32. “But I have prayed.”—

1. The power of the Intercessor greater than that of the enemy.

2. It is through this power alone that the faith, even of an apostle, is sustained.

“Strengthen thy brethren.”—Those who have themselves been tempted, and who have learned their own weakness, should be all the more helpful to their weaker brethren; they should be all the more compassionate in feeling, and charitable in the judgments they form, and hopeful in temperament.

Luk_22:33-34.

I. Peter’s ignorance of himself.

II. Christ’s knowledge of him.

Willingness and Weakness.

I. His sincere desire to share his Master’s sufferings.

II. The weakness that would betray him into denying his Master.

Luk_22:33. “Ready to go with Thee.”—The words indicate

(1) a measure of self-confidence, as though there were little ground for the warning just given; yet also

(2) a conviction that the Lord was the source of his strength. The phrase, “with Thee,” is specially emphatic. When the trial came, Peter was following “afar off.”

Luk_22:34-38. The Conversation after Supper.

I. Relative to the dispute for superiority (Luk_22:24-30).

II. To the denial of Peter (Luk_22:31-34).

III. To the hour of danger now at hand (Luk_22:35-38).

Luk_22:34. “Peter.”—This is the only place in the Gospels where Christ is said to have addressed the apostle by his name, Peter. “Doubtless there is a reference to his good confession (Mat_16:18). Thou, when uttering the revelation from My Father, and confessing Me to be the Christ, the Son of the Living God, wast a true Petros, or stone, built on Me, the living Rock; but now thou wilt deny Me thrice, because thou speakest thine own words and reliest on thine own strength, instead of on Me” (Wordsworth).

“The cock shall not crow,” etc.—The fact that Peter would succumb before the approaching trial might have been guessed by a shrewd observer of character. Christ, however, shows Divine foreknowledge in predicting the particulars of his fall: the time when (cock-crowing), the threefold assertion, and the form, in which the denial would be made.

Luk_22:35-36. The Past and The Future.

I. The ample provision which had been made for them whilst they had been in His service.

II. The troubles they would now have to face. Then they had been, in a measure, independent of earthly resources; now they would need to make use of them. Then their safety had been assured; now their enemies would be more embittered, and self-defence be necessary.

Principles, not Rules.—The Lord Jesus Christ came, not to give men exact and binding rules of conduct, but large general principles, capable of the most flexible and various application. Rules of conduct are to be found among His sayings, indeed, as, e.g., when He bade His disciples, if smitten on the one cheek, turn the other also; or when He bade them, if any man took their coat, to let him also rob them of their cloak; or when He bade them give to every one that asked an alms of them, or go out on a journey unprovided with any change of clothing and with an empty purse. But these rules were not meant for a literal, and still less for a universal, obedience, since our Lord Himself did not in all cases obey them, nor His apostles; nay, more, these rules were thrown into a paradoxical form, in order that we might see that they were not mere rules, and be compelled to search for the principles which underlie them. The rules He gave were passing illustrations of great principles of justice, compassion, trust in God, and brotherly kindness. Observe what our Lord is here doing. He is repealing a rule which He Himself had given to His disciples only a few months ago, although, as they confess, that rule had worked very well. He is replacing it by a new rule, a rule the very opposite of that which He had previously given them; a rule which no sane and reflective man can possibly suppose He intended them to obey as a rule, since it is alien to the very spirit, to the whole drift, of His teaching. Here, then, we have a clear proof that the rules given by Christ were not intended to become ordinances of perpetual observance; that He did not mean men to render them a literal, and still less a perpetual and universal, obedience; that we must interpret them, as all other of His utterances, by aid of our own common-sense and spiritual insight; that what we are to obey in Him is the sacred and eternal principles which they illustrate. Formerly the twelve were to go forth penniless, unprovided with aught but a staff, and to bear with meekness whatever wrongs or insults the world might inflict on them. Now they are to put money in their purse, to pack their scrip with provisions and conveniences, to exchange their staff for a sword—not to submit to, but to defy and conquer, the hostility of the world. It is impossible to render literal obedience to both these rules, and we have no evidence that the twelve ever attempted to obey the latter rule literally. Only a few hours after these words were spoken, St. Peter struck Malchus with his sword, and only received a rebuke from Christ for his pains. The fact is, that when Christ threw His teaching into the form of rules He did not intend us to take them as rules, but as picturesque and paradoxical illustrations of principles. Here is the proof. Christ Himself repeals a rule which He Himself had given, and replaces it with a rule the very opposite of that which He had given—nay, replaces it with a rule which never was, and never will be, literally obeyed; and thus He drives us to look for the principles which underlie His word. He teaches us that as there are times when we are to win upon the world by unselfishness and an unresisting, uncomplaining submission to wrong—in short, by not resisting evil—so also there are times in which we are to resist, to strive against it manfully, to arm and nerve ourselves for the defence and furtherance of the faith. If, at times, we are to be meek for the truth, at other times we are to be valiant for the truth. Rules breed customs, and customs breed corruption. Whereas, if we have principles instead of rules, we are obliged to use our commonsense in applying and in varying our application of them; we are compelled to observe and reflect, to let our thoughts play freely round them, to learn and grow wiser by experience. And all these—observation, reflection, the use of good sense and experience—are educational influences of the highest value. It is by these we live, and keep our principles alive, and help to give life to the world around us.—Cox.

Luk_22:35-38. Sword and Garment.

I. In the letter these counsels seem to point to a policy the opposite of non-resistance.—Jesus seems to say that the great business and duty of the hour for all who are on His side is to furnish themselves with swords. So urgent is the need that he who wants a weapon must sell his garment to buy one.

II. But the very emphasis with which He speaks shows that His words are not to be taken in the literal, prosaic sense.—It is very easy to see what He means. His object is, by graphic language, to convey to His disciples an idea of the gravity of the situation. “Now,” He would say, “now is the day, yea, the hour, of battle. If My kingdom be one of this world, now is the time for fighting, not for dreaming. Now matters have come to extremities, and ye have need of all your resources. Equip yourselves with shoes, and purse, and knapsack, and, above all, with swords and war-like courage.” The disciples did not understand His meaning. They put a stupid, prosaic interpretation on Christ’s parable. “It is enough,’ said Jesus, with a melancholy smile. “Two swords.” What were two swords for twelve men and against a hundred weapons? Enough only for one who does not mean to fight at all. They were not called on to fight literally, against flesh and blood, but in the bloodless spiritual conflict.—Bruce.

Luk_22:35. “And He said unto them.”—Not without reason have I spoken of what is so momentous (Luk_22:31-34); for now, when I am no longer with you, your situation will be quite otherwise than before. There now comes for you a time of care for yourselves and of conflict.—Meyer.

Luk_22:36. “But now.”—Once the least care was superfluous; now the most anxious care was not too much.

“A sword.”—I.e., they would now be reduced to such a condition, in which the men of this world would resort to such means of defence.

Parable of the Sword and the Garment.—No saying like this is to be found in any of the other gospels. It is a parable. Let us enforce it.

I. It is uttered with solemn emphasis.

II. It teaches that there is a conflict in the Christian life.—A sword is needed. Better lack a garment than lack a sword. But it is a battle in, and not of, this world that Christ speaks of.

III. Marvel not at the vehemence of the words.—There are two reasons for it.

1. They contradict flesh and blood. It is painful to be always armed. It makes life a perpetual effort. Nature would let us be indolent and self-sparing.

2. In this conflict deception and self-deception are ever busily working, and he who might gird himself for more difficulty is in danger of relaxing effort under illusion. It is Satan’s master-art to persuade us that there is no battle—that all are agreed. But no! one must fight either against the world or for it. He cannot be neutral. So delay not the purchase of the sword. Sell your very garment now, and buy it. The garment of pride, of slothfulness, of carelessness, of worldliness, of besetting sin—sell it, discard it, fling it away, and buy of Christ the sword of grace and faith, of love, and the Spirit, which whosoever hath must be more than conqueror. Thus, in this world, in all courage and in all strength, you shall be Christ’s soldiers.—Vaughan.

Luk_22:37. “Reckoned among the transgressors.”—The connection is this: “Your situation among men will be one of neglect, and even of danger; for I Myself am about to be reckoned among transgressors.”

Luk_22:38. “Here are two swords.”—Note

(1) the slavish, literal interpretation which the disciples gave to the words of Christ—how different from that spiritual enlightenment which they manifested after the day of Pentecost! and

(2) the patience and gentleness of our Lord in dealing with them.

“It is enough.”—Perhaps the words are slightly ironical. “Two swords are enough for all the fighting that you will be called upon to engage in.”

The Conversation Broken off.—If it were possible for us to imagine our Lord for a moment in the Paschal night with a melancholy smile on His heavenly countenance, it would be at the affair of the two swords. Two swords over against the whole might of the world, of hell, and of death, which were to engage in the assault upon Him! He accounts it impossible to make the whole preposterousness of this thought as visible to them as it is to Himself, and therefore breaks off the conversation on the subject, in the tone of one who is conscious that others would not understand Him, and who therefore holds all further speech impossible.—Van Oosterzee.

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.

DESIGNATION AND WITHDRAWAL OF JUDAS

Mat 26:21-25; Mar 14:18-21; Luk 22:21-23; Joh 13:21-35. “Jesus, saying these things, was troubled in spirit, and witnessed and said, Truly I say unto you, that one of you shall betray Me. Then the disciples began to look toward one another, being at a loss concerning whom He speaks. [Mark says, “They began to be in great trouble.”] And one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved, was leaning on the bosom of Jesus.” This is John himself, too modest to call his own name, and so beloved of the Lord that he always sat next to Him, frequently reclining on His bosom. “Therefore Simon Peter beckons to him, to ask Him who might be the one concerning whom He speaks.” They were all sitting round the table, Peter being off at the other end, and requested John, who was next to Him, to ask Him which one of them He means. This utter uncertainty of the eleven illustrates the duplicity of Judas, who had been so faithful and dutiful, and outwardly all right every way, that even his comrades had not suspected him. After the fiery baptism of Pentecost they became wonderful readers of human character.

“And he, reclining on the breast of Jesus, says to Him, Lord, who is he? [Speaking in an undertone.] Jesus responds, He to whom I shall give the morsel, having dipped it.” Mar 14:20 : “And responding, He said to them, One of the twelve who dippeth with Me in the dish.” The Orientals, even now, have one large dish, in the center of the table, into whose gravy they dip their bread.

Mar 14:21. “The Son of man goeth, as has been written concerning Him; but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It were good for him if that man had not been born.” Mat 26:25 : “Judas, the one betraying Him, said, Master, whether am I the one? He says to him, Thou sayest it.” A familiar Oriental affirmation, which evidently Jesus spoke to Judas in an undertone, as the others did not understand it. How awfully Satan-manacled must Judas have been to survive all this! It furnishes a striking illustration of diabolical infatuation.

Joh 13:26. “Having dipped the morsel He gives it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.” Among the Orientals this selection of a choice bit of some edible on the table, dipping it in the gravy, honey, or vinegar in the dish used in common, and handing it to some one — i. e., putting it in his mouth with your own hand — is significant of especial affection, kindness, and courtesy. You see, in this way, Jesus definitely pointed out Judas before he betrayed Him — a clear confirmation of His Divinity, as no human being could have done it.

“And after the morsel, then Satan entered into him.” So he is now completely under the bidding of Satan, who knew Jesus, and that He had come into the world to take it out of his hands, and who had been doing his best all those years to stir them up to kill Him, spiritually blind to the prophecies, and believing that the death of Jesus would end the war in his favor, and give him this world as a grand addition to hell, and the desired enlargement of his contracted dominions.

“Then Jesus says to him, What you are doing, do more quickly [i. e., “You have now for some time been plotting, maneuvering, and contemplating My betrayal; so now hurry up this matter; do not be so tardy; but what you are doing, consummate speedily”]. And no one of those sitting by knew this, for what He said to him. For some thought that, since Judas had the purse, Jesus says to him, Purchase some of those things of which we have need for the feast, or something which he may give to the poor.” There is no doubt but Jesus spoke to him in an undertone, so the eleven did not understand what He said, except John, who was next to Him, and the only one of the four who has written this.

“Then, taking the morsel, he immediately went out; and it was night.” So Judas is gone off to perpetrate the bloody treachery and sell his Lord for filthy lucre. O what a tremendous following Judas has this day — preachers and members selling out Jesus for paltry pelf The dark night is a vivid symbol of the black darkness of the deed.

“But when he went out, Jesus says, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in Him.” This is spoken proleptically, as the glorification took place the next day, when He died on the cross. “If God is glorified in Him, truly God will glorify Him in Himself and He will glorify Him immediately.” When Jesus died to redeem a guilty world, God was glorified in Him, because He had perfected the stupendous work of human redemption for which God sent Him into the world. Then when He ascended up to heaven, the Father received Him with perfect and glorious approval, enthroning Him at His right hand, and assuring Him that He will make His enemies His footstool.

“Children, yet a little while I am with you. You shall seek Me, and as I said to the Jews, that whither I go you are not able to come, I now say it unto you. I give unto you a new commandment, that you must love one another with Divine love; as I loved you with Divine love, in order that you may also love one another with Divine love. In this shall all know that you are My disciples, if you may have Divine love among one another.” This new commandment is an addition to and completion of the Decalogue. The law says, “Do and live;” the gospel says, “Love and live.” “Love is the fulfilling of the law.” (Rom 13:10) So the crowning glory of the gospel dispensation is perfect love. We are all fallible and full of infirmities, so we can do no perfect work; but, praise the Lord! He is ready to give us all perfect love. So when our will is lost in God’s will, and we want to do everything just right, but fail through ignorance or mistake or physical inability, in condescending love He takes the will for the deed, giving us credit, not simply for what we do, but what we want to do for Him; as He rewarded David for building the temple, though he never struck a lick at it. Remember, this new commandment does not specify the human philia, but agape, Divine love. There is but one way to get it. “The Divine love of God is poured out in our hearts by the Holy Ghost given unto us.” (Rom 5:5) This we receive in regeneration, realizing an inward conflict between this Divine love and the malevolent affections till the latter are consumed by the sanctifying fires of the Holy Ghost. Here you see our Savior specifies this love for one another as the differentia of His people in all ages and nations, regardless of race, color, sect, or creed.

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

22:21-22 it has been determined: Though wicked men betrayed and killed Jesus, it was part of God’s sovereign plan to accomplish salvation (see Acts 2:23).

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

Luk 22:21. Πλὴν, but nevertheless) The antithesis is between τὸ—διδόμενον, which is given (for you) in Luk 22:19, and παραδιδόντος, who betrayeth (Me) in this passage. Πλὴν is used to intimate, that the very delightful converse of Jesus with His disciples [Luk 22:15-20] is going to be presently brought to an abrupt close. [And, at the same time, He tacitly implies, that, as He is about immediately to be withdrawn from them, through the agency of a betrayer, for this reason the remembrance (ἀνάμνησιν) of Himself should be for the future celebrated by His disciples—V. g.] This particle serves as an argument that Judas was present, and took part in the Lord’s Supper. Comp. Luk 22:14 (“The twelve apostles sat with Him”). That this discourse is one continued one, is evident from this, that Luke has not even employed here that formula which he often uses, And He saith.—ἠ χεὶρ) the hand, which has taken the Holy Supper, and which has yet pledged its treacherous faith to the Lord’s enemies. [After having taken the thirty pieces of silver.—V. g.] So Ambrose (Bishop of Milan) said to Theodosius (repelling him from the Communion), “Wilt thou extend those hands of thine, which are yet reeking with the blood of unrighteously-perpetrated murder, and wilt thou with them take the most holy body of the Lord?” [μετʼ ἐμοῦ, with me) He does not say, with you. Therefore He separates the traitor as one to be distinguished from the rest of the disciples, and shows that now He Himself alone has to do with that wretched man, as with one who is an equivocal enemy.—V. g.]

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

Luk_22:21-23. Luke has this reference to the traitor (which, according to Luke, diverges from all the rest, without any more precise statement) in a wrong position, where it probably has been placed by way of transition to the following dispute about precedence. According to Mat_26:21 ff., Mar_14:18 ff., it is to be placed at the beginning of the meal, and that in such a manner that the departure of Judas[252] ensued before the institution of the Lords Supper; comp. on Mat_26:25, and see the remark after Joh_13:38.

πλήν] notwithstanding, although my blood is shed for you. Not a limitation of the ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν (Hofmann), but, without such a reflection, a contrast to that love which is on the point of offering its own life. In spite of this ̔πλήν, which carries on the Lords discourse, to place the departure of the traitor, even according to Luke, before the Lords Supper, is only possible to the greatest harmonistic arbitrariness, in respect of which, indeed, the statement that Luke does not relate according to the order of time (Ebrard, p. 522; Lichtenstein, p. 401) is the most convenient and ready resource.

ἡ χεὶρ κ.τ.λ. The hand of my betrayer, etc. It was still on the table (ἐπὶ τῆς τραπέζης), after the eating of the bread, for the sake of partaking of the cup (Luk_22:20), and Jesus mentions the hand as the correlative of the idea παραδιδόναι. There is contained therein a tragic feature.

Luk_22:22. ὅτι ὁ υἱὸς μὲν (see the critical remarks) κ.τ.λ. discloses the objective ground of this mournful experience, Luk_22:21to wit, the divine appointment of the death of the Messiah, which none the less (πλὴν οὐαὶ κ.τ.λ.) leaves the person concerned under the imputation (of the subjectively free action).

Luk_22:23. συζητεῖν, to confer, disputare, and πρὸς ἑαυτούς, among themselves, as Mar_1:27.

τοῦτο] i.e. the παραδιδόναι. With the emphasis of horror τοῦτο is placed before the governing verb. On πράσσειν of traitorous transactions, comp. Thucyd. iv. 89. 3, 110. 2.

[252] According to Schenkel, Jesus allowed Judas to take part in the Lords Supper, which (he thinks) is a convincing proof against all external ecclesiastical discipline (even against confession)!

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.

Luk 22:21-23 . The traitor (Mat 26:21-25 , Mar 14:18-21 ), placed after the Supper, instead of before, as in parallels. πλὴν : making a transition to an incident presenting a strong moral contrast to the preceding. ἡ χεὶρ , the hand, graphic and tragic; the hand which is to perform such opposite acts, now touching the Master’s on the table, ere long to be the instrument of betrayal.

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

3 d. Luk 22:21-23. “Only, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. 22. And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: But woe unto that man by whom He is betrayed! 23. And they began to inquire among themselves which of them it was that should do this thing.”

As He follows the cup circulating among the disciples, the attention of Jesus is fixed on Judas. In the midst of those hearts, henceforth united by so close a bond, there is one who remains outside of the common salvation, and rushes upon destruction. This contrast wounds the heart of Jesus. Πλήν, excepting, announces precisely the exception Judas forms in this circle; ἰδού, behold, points to the surprise which so unexpected a disclosure must produce in the disciples. If this form used by Luke is historically trustworthy, there can be no doubt that Judas took part in celebrating the Holy Supper. No doubt the narratives of Matthew and Mark do not favour this view; but they do not expressly contradict it, and we have already shown that the order in which Luke gives the three facts composing the narrative of the feast, is much more natural than theirs. Besides, John’s order confirms that of Luke, if, as we think we have demonstrated (Comment. sur Jean, t. ii. p. 540 et seq.), the Holy Supper was instituted at the time indicated in Luk 13:1-2. Moreover, John’s narrative shows that Jesus returned again and again during the feast to the treachery of Judas. As usual, tradition had combined those sayings uttered on the same subject at different points of time, and it is in this summary form that they have passed into our Syn.

The expression of Matthew: “dipping the hand into the dish with me,” signifies in a general way (like that of Luke: “being with me on the table,” and the parallels): “being my guest.” Jesus does not distress Himself about what is in store for Him; He is not the sport of this traitor; everything, so far as He is concerned, is divinely decreed (Luk 22:22). His life is not in the hands of a Judas. The Messiah ought to die. But He grieves over the crime and lot of him who uses his liberty to betray Him.

The reading ὅτι is less simple than καί, and is hardly compatible with the μέν. The πλήν, only (Luk 22:21), is contrasted with the idea of the divine decree in ὡρισμένον. It serves the end of reserving the liberty and responsibility of Judas.

The fact that every disciple, on hearing this saying, turned his thoughts upon himself, proves the consummate ability with which Judas had succeeded in concealing his feelings and plans. The μήτι ἐγώ, Is it I? of the disciples in Matthew and Mark, finds its natural place here. It has been thought improbable that Judas also put the question (Mat 5:25). But when all the others were doing it, could he have avoided it without betraying himself? The thou hast said of Jesus denotes absolutely the same fact as Joh 13:26: “And when He had dipped the sop, He gave it to Judas Iscariot.” This act itself was the reply which Matthew translates into the words: Thou hast said.

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 showeth again that he goeth to death willingly, although he be not ignorant of Judas’s treason.

That is, his practice , so use the Hebrews to speak, 2 Kings 14:19.Is not the hand of Joab in this matter?

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

(See on Joh 13:21, &c.).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 21. The hand of him that betrayeth me, c.] What can be desired more, says Dr. Lightfoot, as a demonstration that Judas was present at the eucharist? And, whereas the contrary is endeavoured to be proved out of John 13, nothing is made out of nothing for there is not one syllable throughout that whole chapter of the paschal supper, but of a supper before the feast of the passover.

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

(21-23) But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me . . .—See Notes on Mat_26:21; Mat_26:25; Mar_14:18; Mar_14:21; Joh_13:21; Joh_13:35. St. Luke’s account is here the briefest, St. John’s by far the fullest. There is again a slight discrepancy in the order of facts, St. Luke placing the mention of the Betrayal after, St. Matthew and St. Mark before, the institution of the memorial. St. John, who makes no mention of the institution, leaves the question open. On the whole, the order of the first two Gospels seems here the most probable. and agrees better with the fourth. The date before us do not enable us to say with certainty whether Judas partook of the memorial; but, if we follow the first two Gospels, it would seem probable that he did not.

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

21. the hand of him that betrayeth me] For fuller details of this last awful warning to Judas, and of the intimation of the person intended to His nearest disciples, see Mat_26:21-25; Mar_14:18-21; Joh_13:21-26. Whether Judas actually partook of the Holy Communion has always been uncertain. Bengel quotes the language of St Ambrose to Theodosius, “Will you hold forth those hands still dripping with the blood of unjust slaughter, and with them take the most holy body of the Lord?”

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.

And truly the son of man goeth,.... That is, dies, which is going the way of all the earth, Jos 23:14

as it was determined; in the counsels and purposes of God, and agreed to by Christ in the covenant of grace; see Act 2:23 the death of Christ, the manner of it, and the means by which it was brought about, were all predetermined by God; yet this did not, in the least, excuse the sin of those concerned in it, nor exempt them from punishment:

but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed; who not only came to an untimely end, and died an infamous death by his own hands, but went to his own place, the place of everlasting torments allotted him: wherefore in Mat 26:24 it is added, "it had been good for that man if he had not been born"; See Gill on Mat 26:24.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

See the notes at Mat 26:21-25.

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

Vers. 21-23. The Lord"s sorrowful allusion to Judas the traitor.

But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. This is the second mention of the traitor in St. Luke"s account of the Last Supper. From St. John"s recital, we gather that Jesus returned several times in the course of that solemn evening to this sad topic. That one of his own little inner circle, so closely associated with him, should so basely betray him, was evidently a very bitter drop in the Lord"s cup of suffering. In his dread experience of human sorrow it was needful that the Christ should fulfill in his own experience what even the noblest of the children of men David, for instance had felt of the falseness of friends. What suffering can be inflicted on a generous heart comparable to it? Surely he of whom it was written, "Whose sorrows are like unto my sorrows?" must make trial of this bitterness. Chrysostom thinks that the Master, in some of these repeated allusions during the "Supper," tried to win Judas over to a better mind.

Vers. 21, 22. Jesus and Judas; our Lord and ourselves.

The ordinance of the Lord"s Supper was closely connected, not only in time but in apostolic thought, with the act of the betrayal (see 1Co_11:23) the institution of the greatest privilege with the commission of the darkest crime. Oar Lord"s demeanour on this occasion is well worthy of our most reverent thought.

I JESUS AND JUDAS.

1. His length of sufferance. After knowing that Judas was seeking to betray him (ver. 6), Jesus might well have expelled him from his society. He might have done so, acting judicially, as being no longer worthy to be classed among his apostles. He might have done so, acting prudentially, as one

(1) whom it was not wise to admit to his counsels and his plans; and as one

(2) whose association with the eleven would be a source of evil. He might very appropriately have declined to acknowledge him as an officer and a friend. But Jesus did not press his right. On the contrary, he let him continue as one of the twelve, he let him come under the same roof with himself, he permitted him to share the Paschal feast: the hand of him that was betraying him was "with him on the table." To such a length as that his longsuffering went.

2. His dignity in rebuke. He did not break forth into passionate invective; he did not use words of natural and permissible vehemence; he quietly said, "Woe unto that man," etc.! Matthew tells us that he added, "It had been good for that man if he had not been born." What a transcendent calmness and serenity of spirit we have here! What a contrast between two children of men! One man preparing to betray his Teacher, his Friend, his Master; the other compassionating his betrayer for the depth of his fall and the sadness of his doom. Jesus went on to his sacrificial death and to his throne; Judas went out into the night (Joh_13:30) into the dark night of guilt, of shame, of despair, of death.

II ONE LORD AND OURSELVES.

The wrong against our Lord it is still open to us to commit. We cannot betray him as Judas did; yet may we do that which answers to, and is almost if not quite as deplorable as that sad and shameful act. Let us consider that:

1. We know more about Jesus than Judas then did; for we have all the light of his resurrection and of the teaching of his apostles.

2. He has granted to us mercies as many and as great in intrinsic value as those he bestowed on Judas.

3. Owing him as much as Judas did, we may do even greater injury to his cause than the traitor did. The act of Iscariot ultimately issued in the all-sufficient sacrifice; this did not extenuate or lessen his guiltiness by a simple grain; but it nullified the mischief of the crime. We may do incalculable and irreparable mischief to the cause of our Master by our unfaithfulness, our infidelity, our disobedience, our criminal negligence.

4. By such disloyalty we may wound and grieve his Spirit almost as severely as his betrayer did. Wherefore let us:

(1) Be humble-minded. "Let him that thinketh he standeth," etc. If we could find the man who has smitten Christ and his cause the severest blow that was ever struck, it is probable that we might easily find an hour in that man"s history when he would have shrunk with holy horror from such a guilty act.

(2) Be prayerful; ever looking heavenward with the supplication, "Hold thou me up," etc.

(3) Be diligent in the field of earnest Christian work. It is the idler in the vineyard whom the tempter will assail. It is the faithful workman who is in a position to say, after his Lord and Leader, "The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me". C. (Joh_14:30)

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

The hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table - It is evident Christ spake these words before he instituted the Lord's Supper: for all the other evangelists mention the sop, immediately after receiving which he went out: John xiii, 30. Nor did he return any more, till he came into the garden to betray his Master. Now this could not be dipped or given, but while the meat was on the table. But this was all removed before that bread and cup were brought.

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

The traitor at the table:

v. 21. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth Me is with Me on the table.

v. 22. And truly the Son of Man goeth as it was determined; but woe unto the man by whom He is betrayed!

v. 23. And they began to enquire among themselves which of them it was that should do this thing.

See Mat 26:1-25; Mar 14:18-21. Jesus had just established and instituted the meal of His grace and kindness and salvation. But during all this time His betrayer also had his hand on the same table, the traitor had the effrontery to keep his position in the midst of the Twelve, known, in his boundless depravity, to the Lord alone. Even now the Lord gives him a warning; solemn, searching. The course of the Son of Man, the way in which He should fulfill the eternal counsel of God, had been arranged in all details: He must carry out this plan to its fulfillment. But it would be a sorry day and hour for him that was guilty of the terrible sin of the betrayal, of this basest, most heinous sin. Judas had better take another thought before it would be too late! The other disciples, indeed, were now filled with consternation and horror. They began earnestly to inquire and to search for him in their midst that would commit, that had determined within himself to perpetrate this unholy deed. Only Judas was so filled with Satan’s wiles and power that it made little or no impression upon him. He may have thought that the Lord would have no difficulty in gaining His liberty, even if He should be in the hands of His enemies. That is a blindness, a hardening of the heart that plunges into everlasting damnation.

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

J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [CXIX. Judas' Betrayal Foretold].

CXIX. JUDAS' BETRAYAL AND PETER'S DENIAL FORETOLD. (Jerusalem. Evening before the crucifixion.) aMATT. XXVI. 21-25, 31-35; bMARK XIV. 18-21, 27-31; cLUKE XXII. 21-23, 31-38; dJOHN XIII. 21-38.

b18 And d21 When Jesus had thus said, bas they sat and were eating, dhe was troubled in the spirit, and bJesus dtestified, and said, Verily, verily, I say [651] unto you, that one of you shall betray me. beven he that eateth with me. c21 But behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. [The foreknowledge of Judas' crime did not relieve the Lord from the sting of it. By the use of the word "betray" Jesus revealed to Judas that he had perfect knowledge of the peculiar crime which he was about to commit. To induce repentance the enormity of the crime is pointed out in two ways: 1. It was the act of one, an act in which no other could be found willing to have a part. 2. It was the act of one whose hand rested on the table, who was admitted to the closest intercourse and fellowship.] d22 The disciples looked one on another [in startled amazement], doubting of whom he spake. a22 And they bbegan to be awere exceeding sorrowful [that the Lord should be betrayed was sorrow enough, but that one of the twelve should do the deed was an added grief], c23 And they began to question among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing. band abegan bto say unto him one by one, aevery one, Is it I, Lord? [The form of the question in the Greek indicates that it expects "No" for an answer, so that it may be rendered, "Surely it is not I?"] 23 And he answered and said, bunto them, It is one of the twelve, aHe that dipped bdippeth ahis hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me. [According to Oriental custom, knives and forks were not used. One dish served to hold the sop for several people, that they might dip their bread into it. In so large a company, two or three bowls would be used for convenience' sake. The words of Jesus, therefore, limited the circle of accused ones from twelve to four or five, and also further emphasized the tender and close intimacy between the traitor and the Master.] b21 For the Son of man goeth, cas it hath been determined: beven as it is written of him: but woe unto that man through whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had not been born. [Jesus was following with unfaltering step the path of suffering marked out by the prophets. [652] But this fact in no way exculpated the authors of his death. The prophecies referred to are many. As examples, see Psa_22:1, Isa_53:1-12. The woe pronounced upon Judas was no vindictive or vengeful wish; it is the solemn announcement of the divine judgment. The words of Jesus stop the mouths of the apologists for Judas. When the judge thus speaks in condemnation, who shall presume to argue in extenuation?] d23 There was at the table reclining in Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved. [John thus speaks of himself. His couch was in front of that of the Lord, so that when he laid his head back it rested upon Jesus' bosom. See Luk_22:53). Alford says, "I feel, with Meyer, that there is something awful in this termination--'it was night.'"] 31 When therefore he was gone out, Jesus saith, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him; 32 and God shall glorify him in himself, and straightway shall he glorify him. [The departure of Judas was the first step in the progress of the Lord's Passion, and in this moment of its beginning Jesus exults in the prospect of its end. Having just condemned the false pride and glory of men by washing his disciples' feet, Jesus rejoices that the true glory of God is about to be immediately manifested in himself--the glory of humility, charity, service, and self-sacrifice, which was realized to the utmost in the person of Jesus.] 33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews [see Joh_13:1). It is found nowhere else in the Gospels. In the light of his near separation Jesus looked upon his apostles as about to be made orphan children. As to this new commandment, love had been commanded before ( Lev_19:18), but the Christian love here commanded is different from that which the Jew was bade to feel for the Jew, just as the affection of a loving family differs from the mere broad and kindly spirit of neighborliness. A love which had Christ's heart as the standard would of necessity be new, and would distinguish those who possessed it from all men.] b27 And a31 Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended in me this night: for it is written [ Zec_13:7], I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad. 32 But b28 Howbeit, after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee. [The scattering would take place after the return of the apostles to Galilee, and there after his resurrection, Jesus would gather them together as their shepherd.] d36 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered, Whither I go, thou canst not follow now; but thou shalt follow afterwards. 37 Peter saith unto him, Lord, why cannot I follow thee even now? I will lay down my life for thee. [Peter, grieved at the prospect of separation, can see no reason why he should not follow, since he is willing to pass even through the portal of the grave that he may do so. Though perhaps prevented by no moral inability, he was prevented by the plan of life which God had designed for him. It was not in accordance with the divine will that he should die at this time.] 38 Jesus answereth, Wilt thou lay down thy life for me? c31 Simon, Simon, behold, Satan asked to have you, that he might sift you as wheat: 32 but I made supplication for thee, that thy faith fail not [The language here suggests a repetition, in some degree, of Satan's conduct in the case of Job. See Job_1-2:10 Jesus, having insight into what was going on in the spirit world, made supplication that Peter [655] might be enabled to endure the trial]; and do thou, when once thou hast turned again, establish thy brethren. [The language sadly intimates that Satan's test would leave him in need of repentance. As the one who perhaps exercised the strongest influence over the other ten apostles, Peter is exhorted to use his own bitter experience for their benefit and strengthening.] 33 And he said unto him, Lord, with thee I am ready to go both to prison and to death. a33 But Peter answered and said unto him, bAlthough, aIf all shall be offended in thee, byet will not I. aI will never be offended. [Thus Peter repudiates the idea that he could not stand the test.] b30 And Jesus saith asaid unto him, Verily I say unto thee, cI tell thee, Peter, bthat thou to-day, even this night, before the cock crow twice, cthou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me. dVerily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, cthis day, dtill cuntil dthou hast denied me thrice. [Mark speaks of two cock-crowings and shows that the denial of Peter occurred between them ( Mar_14:68-72). But Matthew, Luke, and John speak of but one cock-crowing and place the denial before it. The discrepancy is not an important one. Luke and John look upon the night in its entirety and speak of the cock-crowing at three in the morning, the signal of the dawning day. Mark looks at the night in its details, and shows that the denials of Peter began at midnight, the time of the first cock-crowing, and were finished before the last, or about three in the morning. Peter appears to have been thunderstruck at this prediction, which showed the nature, the details, and the nearness of his sin. He lapsed into silence, and we hear no more from him during the discourses which followed. But he did not yield without one final protest, as the sequel shows.] b31 But aPeter bspake exceedingly vehemently, asaith unto him, Even bIf I must die with thee, I will not deny thee. And in like manner aLikewise also said all the disciples. [According to Matthew's account these accusations of our Lord and protestations of Peter were taken up again after [656] Jesus left the upper room and was on his way to Gethsemane. The reader may therefore conceive of them as occurring again in the opening lines of Isa_53:12] must be fulfilled in me, And he was reckoned with transgressors: for that which concerneth me hath fulfilment. 38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough. [In this passage our Lord draws a contrast between the favor with which his messengers had been received on their former mission and the trials and persecutions which awaited them in their future course. If they had prepared then to be received with joy, they were to prepare now to be opposed with bitterness; for the utter rejection of the Master would be followed by the violent persecution of the servants. The apostles took the words of Jesus literally, and showed two swords, and the Lord, for their future enlightenment, said, "It is enough," thus intimating that he did not mean a literal arming with carnal weapons, for had he done so, two swords would not have sufficed for twelve men.]

[FFG 651-655]

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.

21–23. The incident concerning the betrayal mentioned in these verses occurred before the Lord's Supper was eaten (Matt. 26:21). It seems probable, from John 13:21–35, that Judas left before the supper. On this passage, see notes on Matt. 26:21–25.

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.

Connecting Statement:

Jesus continues speaking to his apostles.

The one who betrays me

"The one who will betray me"

For the Son of Man indeed goes

"For, indeed, the Son of Man will go" or "For the Son of Man will die"

the Son of Man indeed goes

Jesus is speaking about himself in the third person. AT: "I, the Son of Man, indeed go" (See: First, Second, or Third Person)

as it has been determined

This can be stated in active form. AT: "as God has determined" or "as God has planned" (See: Active or Passive)

But woe to that man through whom he is betrayed

This can be stated in active form. AT: "But woe to the man who betrays the Son of Man" or "But how terrible it will be for that man who betrays the Son of Man" (See: Active or Passive)

translationWords

betray

Son of Man

woe

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

21. ἡ χεὶρ τοῦ παραδιδόντος με. For fuller details of this last awful warning to Judas, see Mat 26:21-25; Mar 14:18-21; Joh 13:21-26. Whether Judas actually partook of the Holy Communion has always been uncertain. Bengel quotes the language of St Ambrose to Theodosius, “Will you hold forth those hands still dripping with the blood of unjust slaughter, and with them take the most holy body of the Lord?”

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.

21-23.] Announcement of a betrayer. See notes on Mat 26:20-25. I would not venture absolutely to maintain that this announcement is identical with that one; but I own the arguments of Stier and others to prove them distinct, fail to convince me. The expression πλὴν ἰδού bears marks of verbal accuracy, and inclines us to believe that this announcement was made after the institution of the cup, as here related. ‘Notwithstanding this My declaration of love, in giving My Body and Blood for you, there is one here present who shall betray Me.’

ἐπὶ τ. τρ., viz. in dipping into the dish with the Lord.

πορεύεται] A somewhat similar πορεύεσθαι to this occurs ch. 13:33; but that is used of our Lord’s ministerial progress; this of His progress through suffering to glory.

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

21-23. The Declaration about the Traitor. Comp. Mat 26:21-25; Mar 14:18-21; Joh 13:21-30.

If Lk. places this incident in its proper place, Judas did partake of the eucharist. But the question cannot be decided. See Schanz, ad loc. pp. 509, 510.

21. πλὴν ἰδοὺ ἡ χεὶρ … ἐπὶ τῆς τραπέζης. The expression is peculiar to Lk. The πλήν here indicates a transition; an expansion or change of subject. From the meaning of His death He passes to the manner of it. Others take it as a restriction of ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν; others again as marking a contrast between Christ’s conduct and that of the traitor. See on 6:24, 35, 10:11, 14. The verse may be understood literally, but probably means no more than that the traitor was sharing the same meal with Him: comp. Mat 26:23.

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

Betrayeth [παραδιδοντος] . The present participle : is now engaged in betraying.

With me. "He does not say with you : thus separating the traitor from the rest of the disciples, and showing that now he alone has to do with that wretch, as with an enemy" (Bengel).

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