BIBLES NET. COM
Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary
on the Whole Bible
Back to Biblesnet.com Home Page
|
[Previous] [Next] |
Matthew Henry |
J O H N.
CHAP. XVIII.
Hitherto this evangelist has recorded little of the history of Christ,
only so far as was requisite to introduce his discourses; but now that
the time drew nigh that Jesus must die he is very particular in
relating the circumstances of his sufferings, and some which the others
had omitted, especially his sayings. So far were his followers from
being ashamed of his cross, or endeavouring to conceal it, that this
was what, both by word and writing, they were most industrious to
proclaim, and gloried in it. This chapter relates,
I. How Christ was arrested in the garden and surrendered himself a
prisoner,
II. How he was abused in the high priest’s court, and how Peter, in the
meantime, denied him,
III. How he was prosecuted before Pilate, and examined by him, and put
in election with Barabbas for the favour of the people, and lost it,
| Christ in the Garden; The Treachery of Judas; The Ear of Malachus Cut Off; Christ Yields Himself a Prisoner. |
|
|
1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his
disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the
which he entered, and his disciples.
2 And Judas also, which betrayed him, knew the place: for Jesus
ofttimes resorted thither with his disciples.
3 Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from
the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and
torches and weapons.
4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon
him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?
5 They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them,
I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them.
6 As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went
backward, and fell to the ground.
7 Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus
of Nazareth.
8 Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: if therefore
ye seek me, let these go their way:
9 That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them
which thou gavest me have I lost none.
10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high
priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name
was Malchus.
11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the
sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink
it?
12 Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took
Jesus, and bound him,
The hour was now come that the captain of our salvation, who was
to be made perfect by sufferings, should engage the enemy. We
have here his entrance upon the encounter. The day of recompence is in
his heart, and the year of his redeemed is come, and his own arm
works the salvation, for he has no second. Let us turn aside
now, and see this great sight.
I. Our Lord Jesus, like a bold champion, takes the field first
(v. 1, 2):
When he had spoken these words, preached the sermon, prayed his
prayer, and so finished his testimony, he would lose no time, but
went forth immediately out of the house, out of the city, by
moon-light, for the passover was observed at the full moon, with his
disciples (the eleven, for Judas was otherwise employed), and he
went over the brook Cedron, which runs between Jerusalem and the
mount of Olives, where was a garden, not his own, but some
friend’s, who allowed him the liberty of it. Observe,
1. That our Lord Jesus entered upon his sufferings when he had
spoken these words, as
When he had finished all these sayings. Here it is intimated,
(1.) That our Lord Jesus took his work before him. The office of the
priest was to teach, and pray, and offer sacrifice. Christ, after
teaching and praying, applies himself to make atonement. Christ had
said all he had to say as a prophet, and now he addresses himself to
the discharge of his office as a priest, to make his soul an
offering for sin; and, when he had gone through this, he entered
upon his kingly office.
(2.) That having by his sermon prepared his disciples for this hour of
trial, and by his prayer prepared himself for it, he then courageously
went out to meet it. When he had put on his armour, he entered the
lists, and not till then. Let those that suffer according to the will
of God, in a good cause, with a good conscience, and having a clear
call to it, comfort themselves with this, that Christ will not engage
those that are his in any conflict, but he will first do that for them
which is necessary to prepare them for it; and if we receive Christ’s
instructions and comforts, and be interested in his intercession, we
may, with an unshaken resolution, venture through the greatest
hardships in the way of duty.
2. That he went forth with his disciples. Judas knew what house
he was in in the city, and he could have staid and met his sufferings
there; but,
(1.) He would do as he was wont to do, and not alter his method, either
to meet the cross or to miss it, when his hour was come. It was his
custom when he was at Jerusalem, after he had spent the day in public
work, to retire at night to the mount of Olives; there his
quarters were, in the skirts of the city, for they would not make room
for him in the palaces, in the heart of the town. This being his
custom, he could not be put out of his method by the foresight of his
sufferings, but, as Daniel, did then just as he did aforetime,
Dan. vi. 10.
(2.) He was as unwilling that there should be an uproar among the
people as his enemies were, for it was not his way to strive or
cry. If he had been seized in the city, and a tumult raised
thereby, mischief might have been done, and a great deal of blood shed,
and therefore he withdrew. Note, When we find ourselves involved in
trouble, we should be afraid of involving others with us. It is no
disgrace to the followers of Christ to fall tamely. Those who aim at
honour from men value themselves upon a resolution to sell their lives
as dearly as they can; but those who know that their blood is precious
to Christ, and that not a drop of it shall be shed but upon a valuable
consideration, need not stand upon such terms.
(3.) He would set us an example in the beginning of his passion, as he
did at the end of it, of retirement from the world. Let us go forth
to him, without the camp, bearing his reproach,
Heb. xiii. 13.
We must lay aside, and leave behind, the crowds, and cares, and
comforts, of cities, even holy cities, if we would cheerfully take up
our cross, and keep up our communion with God therein.
3. That he went over the brook Cedron. He must go over this to
go to the mount of Olives, but the notice taken of it intimates
that there was something in it significant; and it points,
(1.) At David’s prophecy concerning the Messiah
(Ps. cx. 7),
that he shall drink of the brook in the way; the brook of
suffering in the way to his glory and our salvation, signified by
the brook Cedron, the black brook, so called either from the
darkness of the valley it ran through or the colour of the water,
tainted with the dirt of the city; such a brook Christ drank of, when
it lay in the way of our redemption, and therefore shall he lift up
the head, his own and ours.
(2.) At David’s pattern, as a type of the Messiah. In his flight from
Absalom, particular notice is taken of his passing over the brook
Cedron, and going up by the ascent of mount Olivet, weeping, and
all that were with him in tears too,
The Son of David, being driven out by the rebellious Jews, who
would not have him to reign over them (and Judas, like
Ahithophel, being in the plot against him), passed over the brook in
meanness and humiliation, attended by a company of true mourners. The
godly kings of Judah had burnt and destroyed the idols they found at
the brook Cedron; Asa,
Hezekiah,
Josiah,
Into that brook the abominable things were cast. Christ, being now
made sin for us, that he might abolish it and take it away, began
his passion by the same brook. Mount Olivet, where Christ began his
sufferings, lay on the east side of Jerusalem; mount Calvary, where he
finished them, on the west; for in them he had an eye to such as should
come from the east and the west.
4. That he entered into a garden. This circumstance is taken notice of
only by this evangelist, that Christ’s sufferings began in a garden. In
the garden of Eden sin began; there the curse was pronounced, there the
Redeemer was promised, and therefore in a garden that promised seed
entered the lists with the old serpent. Christ was buried also in a
garden.
(1.) Let us, when we walk in our gardens, take occasion thence to
meditate on Christ’s sufferings in a garden, to which we owe all the
pleasure we have in our gardens, for by them the curse upon the ground
for man’s sake was removed.
(2.) When we are in the midst of our possessions and enjoyments, we
must keep up an expectation of troubles, for our gardens of delight are
in a vale of tears.
5. That he had his disciples with him,
(1.) Because he used to take them with him when he retired for prayer.
(2.) They must be witnesses of his sufferings, and his patience under
them, that they might with the more assurance and affection preach them
to the world
and be themselves prepared to suffer.
(3.) He would take them into the danger to show them their weakness,
notwithstanding the promises they had made of fidelity. Christ
sometimes brings his people into difficulties, that he may magnify
himself in their deliverance.
6. That Judas the traitor knew the place, knew it to be the
place of his usual retirement, and probably, by some word Christ had
dropped, knew that he intended to be there that night, for want of a
better closet. A solitary garden is a proper place for meditation and
prayer, and after a passover is a proper time to retire for private
devotion, that we may pray over the impressions made and the vows
renewed, and clench the nail. Mention is made of Judas’s knowing the
place,
(1.) To aggravate the sin of Judas, that he would betray his Master,
notwithstanding the intimate acquaintance he had with him; nay, and
that he would make use of his familiarity with Christ, as giving him an
opportunity of betraying him; a generous mind would have scorned to do
so base a thing. Thus has Christ’s holy religion been wounded in the
house of its friends, as it could not have been wounded any where
else. Many an apostate could not have been so profane, if he had not
been a professor; could not have ridiculed scriptures and ordinances,
if he had not known them.
(2.) To magnify the love of Christ, that, though he knew where the
traitor would seek him, thither he went to be found of him, now that he
knew his hour was come. Thus he showed himself willing to suffer
and die for us. What he did was not by constraint, but by consent;
though as man he said, Let this cup pass away, as Mediator he
said, “Lo, I come, I come with a good will.” It was late in the
night (we may suppose eight or nine o’clock) when Christ went out to
the garden; for it was not only his meat and drink, but his rest
and sleep, to do the will of him that sent him. When others were
going to bed, he was going to prayer, going to suffer.
II. The captain of our salvation having taken the field, the
enemy presently comes upon the spot, and attacks him
(v. 3):
Judas with his men comes thither, commissioned by the chief priests,
especially those among them that were Pharisees, who were the most
bitter enemies to Christ. This evangelist passes over Christ’s agony,
because the other three had fully related it, and presently introduces
Judas and his company that came to seize him. Observe,
1. The persons employed in this action–a band of men and officers
from the chief priests, with Judas.
(1.) Here is a multitude engaged against Christ–a band of men,
speira—cohors, a regiment, a Roman band, which
some think was five hundred men, others a thousand. Christ’s friends
were few, his enemies many. Let us therefore not follow a multitude
to do evil, nor fear a multitude designing evil to us, if God be
for us.
(2.) Here is a mixed multitude; the band of men were Gentiles, Roman
soldiers, a detachment out of the guards that were posted in the tower
of Antonia, to be a curb upon the city; the officers of the chief
priests, hyperetas. Either their domestic servants,
or the officers of their courts, were Jews; these had an enmity to each
other, but were united against Christ, who came to reconcile both to
God in one body.
(3.) It is a commissioned multitude, not a popular tumult; no, they
have received orders from the chief priests, upon whose
suggestion to the governor that this Jesus was a dangerous man, it is
likely they had a warrant from him too to take him up, for they
feared the people. See what enemies Christ and his gospel have had,
and are likely to have, numerous and potent, and therefore formidable:
ecclesiastical and civil powers combined against them,
Christ said it would be so
(Matt. x. 18),
and found it so.
(4.) All under the direction of Judas. He received this band
of men; it is probable that he requested it, alleging that it was
necessary to send a good force, being as ambitious of the honour of
commanding in chief in this expedition as he was covetous of the
wages of this unrighteousness. He thought himself
wonderfully preferred from coming in the rear of the contemptible
twelve to be placed at the head of these formidable hundreds; he never
made such a figure before, and promised himself, perhaps, that this
should not be the last time, but he should be rewarded with a captain’s
commission, or better, if he succeeded well in this enterprise.
2. The preparation they had made for an attack: They came with
lanterns, and torches, and weapons.
(1.) If Christ should abscond, though they had moonlight, they would
have occasion for their lights; but they might have spared these; the
second Adam was not driven, as the first was, to hide himself, either
for fear or shame, among the trees of the garden. It was folly
to light a candle to seek the Sun by.
(2.) If he should resist, they would have occasion for their arms.
The weapons of his warfare were spiritual, and at these
weapons he had often beaten them, and put them to
silence, and therefore they have now recourse to other weapons,
swords and staves.
III. Our Lord Jesus gloriously repulsed the first onset of the enemy,
where observe,
1. How he received them, with all the mildness imaginable towards them,
and all the calmness imaginable in himself.
(1.) He met them with a very soft and mild question
(v. 4):
Knowing all things that should come upon him, and therefore not
at all surprised with this alarm, with a wonderful intrepidity and
presence of mind, undisturbed and undaunted, he went forth to
meet them, and, as if he had been unconcerned, softly asked, “Whom
seek you? What is the matter? What means this bustle at this time
of night?” See here,
[1.] Christ’s foresight of his sufferings; He knew all those things
that should come upon him, for he had bound himself to suffer them.
Unless we had strength, as Christ had, to bear the discovery, we should
not covet to know what shall come upon us; it would but anticipate our
pain; sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof: yet it will
do us good to expect sufferings in general, so that when they come we
may say, “It is but what we looked for, the cost we sat down and
counted upon.”
[2.] Christ’s forwardness to his sufferings; he did not run away from
them, but went out to meet them, and reached forth his hand to take the
bitter cup. When the people would have forced him to a crown, and
offered to make him a king in Galilee, but he withdrew, and hid himself
(ch. vi. 15);
but, when they came to force him to a cross, he offered himself; for he
came to this world to suffer and went to the other world to reign. This
will not warrant us needlessly to expose ourselves to trouble, for we
know not when our hour is come; but we are called to suffering when we
have no way to avoid it but by sin; and, when it comes to this, let
none of these things move us, for they cannot hurt us.
(2.) He met them with a very calm and mild answer when they told him
whom they were in quest of,
v. 5.
They said, Jesus of Nazareth; and he said, I am he.
[1.] It should seem, their eyes were held, that they could not know
him. It is highly probable that many of the Roman band, at least
the officers of the temple, had often seen him, if only to satisfy
their curiosity; Judas, however, to be sure, knew him well enough, and
yet none of them could pretend to say, Thou art the man we seek.
Thus he showed them the folly of bringing lights to see for him, for he
could make them not to know him when they saw him; and he has herein
shown us how easily he can infatuate the counsels of his enemies, and
make them lose themselves, when they are seeking mischief.
[2.] In their enquiries for him they called him Jesus of
Nazareth, which was the only title they knew him by, and probably
he was so called in their warrant. It was a name of reproach given him,
to darken the evidence of his being the Messiah. By this it appears
that they knew him not, whence he was; for, if they had known him,
surely they would not have persecuted him.
[3.] He fairly answers them: I am he. He did not improve the
advantage he had against them by their blindness, as Elisha did against
the Syrians, telling them, This is not the way, neither is this the
city; but improves it as an opportunity of showing his willingness
to suffer. Though they called him Jesus of Nazareth, he answered to the
name, for he despised the reproach; he might have said, I am not
he, for he was Jesus of Bethlehem; but he would by no means
allow equivocations. He has hereby taught us to own him, whatever it
cost us; not to be ashamed of him or his words; but even in
difficult times to confess Christ crucified, and manfully to fight
under his banner. I am he, Ego eimi—I am he,
is the glorious name of the blessed God
and the honour of that name is justly challenged by the blessed Jesus.
[4.] Particular notice is taken, in a parenthesis, that Judas stood
with them. He that used to stand with those that followed Christ
now stood with those that fought against him. This describes an
apostate; he is one that changes sides. He herds himself with those
with whom his heart always was, and with whom he shall have his lot in
the judgment-day. This is mentioned, First, To show the
impudence of Judas. One would wonder where he got the confidence with
which he now faced his Master, and was not ashamed, neither could he
blush; Satan in his heart gave him a whore’s forehead.
Secondly, To show that Judas was particularly aimed at in the
power which went along with that word, I am he, to foil the
aggressors. It was an arrow levelled at the traitor’s conscience, and
pierced him to the quick; for Christ’s coming and his voice will be
more terrible to apostates and betrayers than to sinners of any other
class.
2. See how he terrified them, and obliged them to retire
(v. 6):
They went backward, and, like men thunder-struck, fell to the
ground. It should seem, they did not fall forward, as humbling
themselves before him, and yielding to him, but backward, as standing
it out to the utmost. Thus Christ was declared to be more than a man,
even when he was trampled upon as a worm, and no man. This word,
I am he, had revived his disciples, and raised them up
but the same word strikes his enemies down. Hereby he showed
plainly,
(1.) What he could have done with them. When he struck them down, he
could have struck them dead; when he spoke them to the ground,
he could have spoken them to hell, and have sent them, like Korah’s
company, the next way thither; but he would not do so,
[1.] Because the hour of his suffering was come, and he would not put
it by; he would only show that his life was not forced from him, but
he laid it down of himself, as he had said.
[2.] Because he would give an instance of his patience and forbearance
with the worst of men, and his compassionate love to his very enemies.
In striking them down, and no more, he gave them both a call to repent
and space to repent; but their hearts were hardened, and all was
in vain.
(2.) What he will do at last with all his implacable enemies, that
will not repent to give him glory; they shall flee, they shall fall,
before him. Now the scripture was accomplished
(Ps. xxi. 12),
Thou shalt make them turn their back, and
And it will be accomplished more and more; with the breath of his
mouth he will slay the wicked,
2 Thess. ii. 8; Rev. xix. 21.
Quid judicaturus faciet, qui judicandus hoc facit?—What will
he do when he shall come to judge, seeing he did this when he came to
be judged?–Augustine.
IV. Having given his enemies a repulse, he gives his friends a
protection, and that by his word too,
where we may observe,
1. How he continued to expose himself to their rage,
v. 7.
They did not lie long where they fell, but, by divine permission, got
up again; it is only in the other world that God’s judgments are
everlasting. When they were down, one would have thought Christ should
have made his escape; when they were up again, one would have thought
they should have let fall their pursuit; but still we find,
(1.) They are as eager as ever to seize him. It is in some confusion
and disorder that they recover themselves; they cannot imagine what
ailed them, that they could not keep their ground, but will impute it
to any thing rather than Christ’s power. Note, There are hearts so very
hard in sin that nothing will work upon them to reduce and reclaim
them.
(2.) He is as willing as ever to be seized. When they were fallen
before him, he did not insult over them, but seeing them at a loss,
asked them the same question, Whom seek you? And they gave him
the same answer, Jesus of Nazareth. In his repeating the
question, he seems to come yet closer to their consciences: “Do you not
know whom you seek? Are you not aware that you are in error, and
will you meddle with your match? Have you not had enough of it, but
will you try the other struggle? Did ever any harden his heart
against God and prosper?” In their repeating the same answer, they
showed an obstinacy in their wicked way; they still call him Jesus
of Nazareth, with as much disdain as ever, and Judas is as
unrelenting as any of them. Let us therefore fear lest, by a
few bold steps at first in a sinful way, our hearts be
hardened.
2. How he contrived to secure his disciples from their rage. He
improved this advantage against them for the protection of his
followers. When he shows his courage with reference to himself, I
have told you that I am he, he shows his care for his disciples,
Let these go their way. He speaks this as a command to them,
rather than a contract with them; for they lay at his mercy, not he at
theirs. He charges them therefore as one having authority: “Let
these go their way; it is at your peril if you meddle with them”
This aggravated the sin of the disciples in forsaking him, and
particularly Peter’s in denying him, that Christ had given them this
pass, or warrant of protection, and yet they had not faith and courage
enough to rely upon it, but betook themselves to such base and sorry
shifts for their security. When Christ said, Let these go their
way, he intended,
(1.) To manifest his affectionate concern for his disciples. When he
exposed himself, he excused them, because they were not as yet fit to
suffer; their faith was weak, and their spirits were low, and it would
have been as much as their souls, and the lives of their souls, were
worth, to bring them into sufferings now. New wine must not be
put into old bottles. And, besides, they had other work to do;
they must go their way, for they are to go into all the world, to
preach the gospel. Destroy them not, for a blessing is in them.
Now herein,
[1.] Christ gives us a great encouragement to follow him; for, though
he has allotted us sufferings, yet he considers our frame, will wisely
time the cross, and proportion it to our strength, and will deliver
the godly out of temptation, either from it, or through it.
[2.] He gives us a good example of love to our brethren and concern for
their welfare. We must not consult our own ease and safety only, but
others, as well as our own, and in some cases more than our own. There
is a generous and heroic love, which will enable us to lay down our
lives for the brethren,
1 John iii. 16.
(2.) He intended to give a specimen of his undertaking as Mediator.
When he offered himself to suffer and die, it was that we might escape.
He was our antipsychos—a sufferer in our stead;
when he said, Lo, I come, he said also, Let these go their
way; like the ram offered instead of Isaac.
3. Now herein he confirmed the word which he had spoken a little before
(ch. xvii. 12),
Of those whom thou gavest me, I have lost none. Christ, by
fulfilling that word in this particular, gave an assurance that it
should be accomplished in the full extent of it, not only for those
that were now with him, but for all that should believe on him through
their word. Though Christ’s keeping them was meant especially of the
preservation of their souls from sin and apostasy, yet it is here
applied to the preservation of their natural lives, and very fitly, for
even the body was a part of Christ’s charge and care; he is to raise
it up at the last day, and therefore to preserve it as well as
the spirit and soul,
1 Thess. v. 23; 2 Tim. iv. 17, 18.
Christ will preserve the natural life for the service to which it is
designed; it is given to him to be used for him, and he will not lose
the service of it, but will be magnified in it, whether by life or
death; it shall be held in life as long as any use is to be made of
it. Christ’s witnesses shall not die till they have given in their
evidence. But this is not all; this preservation of the disciples was,
in the tendency of it, a spiritual preservation. They were now so weak
in faith and resolution that in all probability, if they had been
called out to suffer at this time, they would have shamed themselves
and their Master, and some of them, at least the weaker of them, would
have been lost; and therefore, that he might lose none, he would
not expose them. The safety and preservation of the saints are owing,
not only to the divine grace in proportioning the strength to the
trial, but to the divine providence in proportioning the trial to the
strength.
V. Having provided for the safety of his disciples, he rebukes the
rashness of one of them, and represses the violence of his followers,
as he had repulsed the violence of his persecutors,
where we have,
1. Peter’s rashness. He had a sword; it is not likely that he wore one
constantly as a gentleman, but they had two swords among them all
and Peter, being entrusted with one, drew it; for now, if ever, he
thought it was his time to use it; and he smote one of the high
priest’s servants, who was probably one of the forwardest, and
aiming, it is likely, to cleave him down the head, missed his blow, and
only cut off his right ear. The servant’s name, for the greater
certainty of the narrative, is recorded; it was Malchus, or
Malluch,
Neh. x. 4.
(1.) We must here acknowledge Peter’s good-will; he had an honest zeal
for his Master, though now misguided. He had lately promised to venture
his life for him, and would now make his words good. Probably it
exasperated Peter to see Judas at the head of this gang; his baseness
excited Peter’s boldness, and I wonder that when he did draw his sword
he did not aim at the traitor’s head.
(2.) Yet we must acknowledge Peter’s ill conduct; and, though his good
intention did excuse, yet it would not justify him.
[1.] He had no warrant from his Master for what he did. Christ’s
soldiers must wait the word of command, and not outrun it; before they
expose themselves to sufferings, they must see to it, not only that
their cause be good, but their call clear.
[2.] He transgressed the duty of his place, and resisted the powers
that were, which Christ had never countenanced, but forbidden
(Matt. v. 39):
that you resist not evil
[3.] He opposed his Master’s sufferings, and, notwithstanding the
rebuke he had for it once, is ready to repeat, Master, spare
thyself; suffering be far from thee; though Christ had told
him that he must and would suffer, and that his hour was now come.
Thus, while he seemed to fight for Christ, he fought against him.
[4.] He broke the capitulation his Master had lately made with the
enemy. When he said, Let these go their way, he not only
indented for their safety, but in effect passed his word for their good
behaviour, that they should go away peaceably; this Peter heard, and
yet would not be bound by it. As we may be guilty of a sinful cowardice
when we are called to appear, so we may be of a sinful forwardness when
we are called to retire.
[5.] He foolishly exposed himself and his fellow disciples to the fury
of this enraged multitude. If he had cut off Malchus’s head when he cut
off his ear, we may suppose the soldiers would have fallen upon all the
disciples, and have hewn them to pieces, and would have represented
Christ as not better than Barabbas. Thus many have been guilty of
self-destruction, in their zeal for self-preservation.
[6.] Peter played the coward so soon after this (denying his Master)
that we have reason to think he would not have done this but that he
saw his Master cause them to fall on the ground, and then he could deal
with them; but, when he saw him surrender himself notwithstanding, his
courage failed him; whereas the true Christian hero will appear in the
cause of Christ, not only when it is prevailing, but when it seems to
be declining; will be on the right side, though it be not the rising
side.
(3.) We must acknowledge God’s over-ruling providence in directing the
stroke (so that it should do no more execution, but only cut off his
ear, which was rather marking him than maiming him), as also in giving
Christ an opportunity to manifest his power and goodness in healing the
hurt,
Thus what was in danger of turning to Christ’s reproach proved an
occasion of that which redounded much to his honour, even among his
adversaries.
2. The rebuke his Master gave him
(v. 11):
Put up thy sword into the sheath, or scabbard; it is a gentle
reproof, because it was his zeal that carried him beyond the bounds of
discretion. Christ did not aggravate the matter, only bade him do so
no more. Many think their being in grief and distress will excuse
them if they be hot and hasty with those about them; but Christ has
here set us an example of meekness in sufferings. Peter must put up his
sword, for it was the sword of the Spirit that was to be
committed to him–weapons of warfare not carnal, yet
mighty. When Christ with a word felled the aggressors, he showed
Peter how he should be armed with a word, quick and powerful, and
sharper than any two-edged sword, and with that, not long after
this, he laid Ananias and Sapphira dead at his feet.
3. The reason for this rebuke: The cup which my Father has given me,
shall I not drink it? Matthew relates another reason which Christ
gave for this rebuke, but John preserves this, which he had omitted; in
which Christ gives us,
(1.) A full proof of his own submission to his Father’s will. Of all
that was amiss in what Peter did, he seems to resent nothing so much as
that he would have hindered his sufferings now that his hour was
come: “What, Peter, wilt thou step in between the cup and
the lip? Get thee hence, Satan.” If Christ be determined to
suffer and die, it is presumption for Peter in word or deed to oppose
it: Shall I not drink it? The manner of expression bespeaks a
settled resolution, and that he would not entertain a thought to the
contrary. He was willing to drink of this cup, though it was a bitter
cup, an infusion of the wormwood and the gall, the cup of trembling, a
bloody cup, the dregs of the cup of the Lord’s wrath,
Isa. li. 22.
He drank it, that he might put into our hands the cup of salvation, the
cup of consolation, the cup of blessing; and therefore he is
willing to drink it, because his Father put it into his hand. If
his Father will have it so, it is for the best, and be it so.
(2.) A fair pattern to us of submission to God’s will in every thing
that concerns us. We must pledge Christ in the cup that he drank
of
(Matt. xx. 23),
and must argue ourselves into a compliance.
[1.] It is but a cup; a small matter comparatively, be it what
it will. It is not a sea, a red sea, a dead sea, for it is not hell; it
is light, and but for a moment.
[2.] It is a cup that is given us; sufferings are gifts.
[3.] It is given us by a Father, who has a Father’s authority, and does
us no wrong; a Father’s affection, and means us no hurt.
VI. Having entirely reconciled himself to the dispensation, he calmly
surrendered, and yielded himself a prisoner, not because he could not
have made his escape, but because he would not. One would have thought
the cure of Malchus’s ear should have made them relent, but nothing
would win upon them. Maledictus furor, quem nec majestast miraculi
nec pietas beneficii confringere potuit—Accursed rage, which
the grandeur of the miracle could not appease, nor the tenderness of
the favour conciliate.–Anselm. Observe here,
1. How they seized him: They took Jesus. Only some few of them
could lay hands on him, but it is charged upon them all, for they were
all aiding and abetting. In treason there are not accessaries; all are
principals. Now the scripture was fulfilled, Bulls have compassed
me
(Ps. xxii. 12),
compassed me like bees,
Ps. cxviii. 12.
The breath of our nostrils is taken in their pit,
Lam. iv. 20.
They had so often been frustrated in their attempts to seize him that
now, having got him into their hands, we may suppose they flew upon him
with so much the more violence.
2. How they secured him: They bound him. This particular of his
sufferings is taken notice of only by this evangelist, that, as soon as
ever he was taken, he was bound, pinioned, handcuffed; tradition says,
“They bound him with such cruelty that the blood started out at his
fingers’ ends; and, having bound his hands behind him, they clapped an
iron chain about his neck, and with that dragged him along.” See
Gerhard. Harm. cap. 5.
(1.) This shows the spite of his persecutors. They bound him,
[1.] That they might torment him, and put him in pain, as they bound
Samson to afflict him.
[2.] That they might disgrace him, and put him to shame; slaves were
bound, so was Christ, though free-born.
[3.] That they might prevent his escape, Judas having told them to hold
him fast. See their folly, that they should think to fetter that power
which had but just now proved itself omnipotent.
[4.] They bound him as one already condemned, for they were resolved to
prosecute him to the death, and that he should die as a fool dieth,
that is, as a malefactor, with his hands bound,
Christ had bound the consciences of his persecutors with the power of
his word, which galled them; and, to be revenged on him, they laid
these bonds on him.
| Christ before Annas and Caiaphas; The Fall of Peter; Christ Arraigned; Peter Again Denies Christ. |
|
|
13 And led him away to Annas first; for he was father in law to
Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year.
14 Now Caiaphas was he, which gave counsel to the Jews, that it
was expedient that one man should die for the people.
15 And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another
disciple: that disciple was known unto the high priest, and went
in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest.
16 But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that
other disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake
unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter.
17 Then saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not
thou also one of this man’s disciples? He saith, I am not.
18 And the servants and officers stood there, who had made a
fire of coals; for it was cold: and they warmed themselves: and
Peter stood with them, and warmed himself.
19 The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of
his doctrine.
20 Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever
taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews
always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.
21 Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have
said unto them: behold, they know what I said.
22 And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood
by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou
the high priest so?
23 Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of
the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?
24 Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest.
25 And Simon Peter stood and warmed himself. They said
therefore unto him, Art not thou also one of his disciples? He
denied it, and said, I am not.
26 One of the servants of the high priest, being his kinsman
whose ear Peter cut off, saith, Did not I see thee in the garden
with him?
27 Peter then denied again: and immediately the cock crew.
We have here an account of Christ’s arraignment before the high priest,
and some circumstances that occurred therein which were omitted by the
other evangelists; and Peter’s denying him, which the other evangelists
had given the story of entire by itself, is interwoven with the other
passages. The crime laid to his charge having relation to religion, the
judges of the spiritual court took it to fall directly under their
cognizance. Both Jews and Gentiles seized him, and so both Jews and
Gentiles tried and condemned him, for he died for the sins of both. Let
us go over the story in order.
I. Having seized him, they led him away to Annas first, before
they brought him to the court that was sat, expecting him, in the house
of Caiaphas,
1. They led him away, led him in triumph, as a trophy of their
victory; led him as a lamb to the slaughter, and they led him
through the sheep-gate spoken of
For through that they went from the mount of Olives into Jerusalem.
They hurried him away with violence, as if he had been the worst and
vilest of malefactors. We had been led away of our own impetuous lusts,
and led captive by Satan at his will, and, that we might be rescued,
Christ was led away, led captive by Satan’s agents and instruments.
2. They led him away to their masters that sent them. It was now about
midnight, and one would think they should have put him in ward
should have led him to some prison, till it was a proper time to call a
court; but he is hurried away immediately, not to the justices of
peace, to be committed, but to the judges to be condemned; so extremely
violent was the prosecution, partly because they feared a rescue, which
they would thus not only leave no time for, but give a terror to;
partly because they greedily thirsted after Christ’s blood, as the
eagle that hasteth to the prey.
3. They led him to Annas first. Probably his house lay in the way, and
was convenient for them to call at to refresh themselves, and, as some
think, to be paid for their service. I suppose Annas was old and
infirm, and could not be present in council with the rest at that time
of night, and yet earnestly desired to see the prey. To gratify him
therefore with the assurance of their success, that the old man might
sleep the better, and to receive his blessing for it, they produce
their prisoner before him. It is sad to see those that are old and
sickly, when they cannot commit sin as formerly, taking pleasure in
those that do. Dr. Lightfoot thinks Annas was not present, because he
had to attend early that morning in the temple, to examine the
sacrifices which were that day to be offered, whether they were without
blemish; if so, there was a significancy in it, that Christ, the great
sacrifice, was presented to him, and sent away bound, as approved and
ready for the altar.
4. This Annas was father-in-law to Caiaphas the high priest; this
kindred by marriage between them comes in as a reason either why
Caiaphas ordered that this piece of respect should be done to Annas, to
favour him with the first sight of the prisoner, or why Annas was
willing to countenance Caiaphas in a matter his heart was so much upon.
Note, Acquaintance and alliance with wicked people are a great
confirmation to many in their wicked ways.
II. Annas did not long detain them, being as willing as any of them to
have the prosecution pushed on, and therefore sent him bound to
Caiaphas, to his house, which was appointed for the rendezvous of the
sanhedrim upon this occasion, or to the usual place in the temple where
the high priest kept his court; this is mentioned,
But our translators intimate in the margin that it should come in here,
and, accordingly, read it there, Annas had sent him. Observe
here,
1. The power of Caiaphas intimated
(v. 13).
He was high priest that same year. The high priest’s commission
was during life; but there were now such frequent changes, by the
Simoniacal artifices of aspiring men with the government, that it was
become almost an annual office, a presage of its final period
approaching; while they were undermining one another. God was
overturning them all, that he might come whose right it was. Caiaphas
was high priest that same year when Messiah was to be cut off, which
intimates,
(1.) That when a bad thing was to be done by a high priest, according
to the foreknowledge of God, Providence so ordered it that a bad man
should be in the chair to do it.
(2.) That, when God would make it to appear what corruption there was
in the heart of a bad man, he put him into a place of power, where he
had temptation and opportunity to exert it. It was the ruin of Caiaphas
that he was high priest that year, and so became a ringleader in the
putting of Christ to death. Many a man’s advancement has lost him his
reputation, and he had not been dishonoured if he had not been
preferred.
2. The malice of Caiaphas, which is intimated
(v. 14)
by the repeating of what he had said some time before, that, right or
wrong, guilty or innocent, it was expedient that one man should die
for the people, which refers to the story
This comes in here to show,
(1.) What a bad man he was; this was that Caiaphas that governed
himself and the church by rules of policy, in defiance of the rules of
equity.
(2.) What ill usage Christ was likely to meet with in his court, when
his case was adjudged before it was heard, and they were already
resolved what to do with him; he must die; so that his trial was
a jest. Thus the enemies of Christ’s gospel are resolved, true or
false, to run it down.
(3.) It is a testimony to the innocency of our Lord Jesus, from the
mouth of one of his worst enemies, who owned that he fell a sacrifice
to the public good, and that it was not just he should die, but
expedient only.
3. The concurrence of Annas in the prosecution of Christ. He made
himself a partaker in guilt,
(1.) With the captain and officers, that without law or mercy had bound
him; for he approved it by continuing him bound when he should have
loosed him, he not being convicted of any crime, nor having attempted
an escape. If we do not what we can to undo what others have ill done,
we are accessaries ex post facto–after the fact. It was more
excusable in the rude soldiers to bind him than in Annas, who should
have known better, to continue him bound.
(2.) With the chief priest and council that condemned him, and
prosecuted him to death. This Annas was not present with them, yet thus
he wished them good speed, and became a partaker of their
evil deeds.
III. In the house of Caiaphas, Simon Peter began to deny his Master,
1. It was with much ado that Peter got into the hall where the court
was sitting, an account of which we have
Here we may observe,
(1.) Peter’s kindness to Christ, which (though it proved no kindness)
appeared in two things:–
[1.] That he followed Jesus when he was led away; though
at first he fled with the rest, yet afterwards he took heart a little,
and followed at some distance, calling to mind the promises he had made
to adhere to him, whatever it should cost him. Those that had followed
Christ in the midst of his honours, and shared with him in those
honours, when the people cried Hosanna to him, ought to have followed
him now in the midst of his reproaches, and to have shared with him in
these. Those that truly love and value Christ will follow him all
weathers and all ways.
[2.] When he could not get in where Jesus was in the midst of his
enemies, he stood at the door without, willing to be as near him
as he could, and waiting for an opportunity to get nearer. Thus when we
meet with opposition in following Christ we must show our good-will.
But yet this kindness of Peter’s was no kindness, because he had not
strength and courage enough to persevere in it, and so, as it proved,
he did but run himself into a snare: and even his following Christ,
considering all things, was to be blamed, because Christ, who knew him
better than he knew himself, had expressly told him
(ch. xiii. 36),
Whither I go thou canst not follow me now, and had told him
again and again that he would deny him; and he had lately had
experience of his own weakness in forsaking him. Note, We must take
heed of tempting God by running upon difficulties beyond our strength,
and venturing too far in a way of suffering. If our call be clear to
expose ourselves, we may hope that God will enable us to honour him;
but, if it be not, we may fear that God will leave us to shame
ourselves.
(2.) The other disciple’s kindness to Peter, which yet, as it proved,
was no kindness neither. St. John several times in this gospel speaking
of himself as another disciple, many interpreters have been led by this
to fancy that this other disciple here was John; and many conjectures
they have how he should come to be known to the high-priest; propter
generis nobilitatem–being of superior birth, saith Jerome,
Epitaph. Marcel., as if he were a better gentleman born than his
brother James, when they were both the sons of Zebedee the fisherman;
some will tell you that he had sold his estate to the high priest,
others that he supplied his family with fish, both which are very
improbable. But I see no reason to think that this other disciple was
John, or one of the twelve; other sheep Christ had, which were not of
the fold; and this might be, as the Syriac read it, unus ex
discipulis aliis–one of those other disciples that believe in
Christ, but resided at Jerusalem, and kept their places there; perhaps
Joseph of Arimathea, or Nicodemus, known to the high priest, but not
known to him to be disciples of Christ. Note, As there are many who
seem disciples and are not so, so there are many who are disciples and
seem not so. There are good people hid in courts, even in Nero’s, as
well as hid in crowds. We must not conclude a man to be no friend to
Christ merely because he has acquaintance and conversation with those
that were his known enemies. Now,
[1.] This other disciple, whoever he was, showed a respect to Peter, in
introducing him, not only to gratify his curiosity and affection, but
to give him an opportunity of being serviceable to his Master upon his
trial, if there were occasion. Those that have a real kindness for
Christ and his ways, though their temper may be reserved and their
circumstances may lead them to be cautious and retired, yet, if their
faith be sincere, they will discover, when they are called to it, which
way their inclination lies, by being ready to do a professed disciple a
good turn. Peter perhaps had formerly introduced this disciple into
conversation with Christ, and now he requites his kindness, and is not
ashamed to own him, though, it should seem, he had at this time but a
poor downcast appearance.
[2.] But this kindness proved no kindness, nay a great diskindness; by
letting him into the high priest’s hall, he let him into temptation,
and the consequence was bad. Note, The courtesies of our friends often
prove a snare to us, through a misguided affection.
2. Peter, having got in, was immediately assaulted with the temptation,
and foiled by it,
Observe here,
(1.) How slight the attack was. It was but a silly maid, of so small
account that she was set to keep the door, that challenged him, and she
only asked him carelessly, Art not thou one of this man’s
disciples? probably suspecting it by his sheepish look, and coming
in timorously. We should many a time better maintain a good cause if we
had a good heart on it, and could put a good face on it.
Peter would have had some reason to take the alarm if Malchus had set
upon him, and had said, “This is he that cut off my ear, and I will
have his head for it;” but when a maid only asked him, Art not thou
one of them? he might without danger have answered, And what if
I am? Suppose the servants had ridiculed him, and insulted over
him, upon it, those can bear but little for Christ that cannot bear
this; this is but running with the footmen.
(2.) How speedy the surrender was. Without taking time to recollect
himself, he suddenly answered, I am not. If he had had the
boldness of the lion, he would have said, “It is my honour that I am
so;” or, if he had had the wisdom of the serpent, he would have kept
silence at this time, for it was an evil time. But, all his care being
for his own safety, he thought he could not secure this but by a
peremptory denial: I am not; he not only denies it, but even
disdains it, and scorns her words.
(3.) Yet he goes further into the temptation: And the servants and
officers stood there, and Peter with them
v. 18.
[1.] See how the servants made much of themselves; the night being
cold, they made a fire in the hall, not for their masters (they were so
eager in persecuting Christ that they forgot cold), but for themselves
to refresh themselves. They cared not what became of Christ; all their
care was to sit and warm themselves,
[2.] See how Peter herded himself with them, and made one among them.
He sat and warmed himself. First, It was a fault bad enough that
he did not attend his Master, and appear for him at the upper end of
the hall, where he was now under examination. He might have been a
witness for him, and have confronted the false witnesses that swore
against him, if his Master had called him; at least, he might have been
a witness to him, might have taken an exact notice of what passed, that
he might relate it to the other disciples, who could none of them get
in to hear the trial; he might have learned by his Master’s example how
to carry himself when it should come to his turn to suffer thus; yet
neither his conscience nor his curiosity could bring him into the
court, but he sits by, as if, like Gallio, he cared for none of these
things. And yet at the same time we have reason to think his heart was
as full of grief and concern as it could hold, but he had not the
courage to own it. Lord, lead us not into temptation. Secondly,
It was much worse that he joined himself with those that were his
Master’s enemies: He stood with them, and warmed himself; this
was a poor excuse for joining with them. A little thing will draw those
into bad company that will be drawn to it by the love of a good fire.
If Peter’s zeal for his Master had not frozen, but had continued in the
heat it seemed to be of but a few hours before, he had not had occasion
to warm himself now. Peter was much to be blamed,
1. Because he associated with these wicked men, and kept company with
them. Doubtless they were diverting themselves with this night’s
expedition, scoffing at Christ, at what he had said, at what he had
done, and triumphing in their victory over him; and what sort of
entertainment would this give to Peter? If he said as they said, or by
silence gave consent, he involved himself in sin; if not, he exposed
himself to danger. If Peter had not so much courage as to appear
publicly for his Master, yet he might have had so much devotion as to
retire into a corner, and weep in secret for his Master’s sufferings,
and his own sin in forsaking him; if he could not have done good, he
might have kept out of the way of doing hurt. It is better to abscond
than appear to no purpose, or bad purpose.
2. Because he desired to be thought one of them, that he might
not be suspected to be a disciple of Christ. Is this Peter? What a
contradiction is this to the prayer of every good man, Gather not my
soul with sinners! Saul among the prophets is not so absurd as
David among the Philistines. Those that deprecate the lot of the
scornful hereafter should dread the seat of the scornful now. It
is ill warming ourselves with those with whom we are in danger of
burning ourselves,
IV. Peter, Christ’s friend, having begun to deny him, the high priest,
his enemy, begins to accuse him, or rather urges him to accuse himself,
It should seem, the first attempt was to prove him a seducer, and a
teacher of false doctrine, which this evangelist relates; and, when
they failed in the proof of this, then they charged him with blasphemy,
which is related by the other evangelists, and therefore omitted here.
Observe,
1. The articles or heads upon which Christ was examined
(v. 19):
concerning his disciples and his doctrine. Observe,
(1.) The irregularity of the process; it was against all law and
equity. They seize him as a criminal, and now that he is their prisoner
they have nothing to lay to his charge; no libel, no prosecutor;
but the judge himself must be the prosecutor, and the prisoner himself
the witness, and, against all reason and justice, he is put on to be
his own accuser.
(2.) The intention. The high priest then
(oun—therefore, which seems to refer to
v. 14),
because he had resolved that Christ must be sacrificed to their private
malice under colour of the public good, examined him upon those
interrogatories which would touch his life. He examined him,
[1.] Concerning his disciples, that he might charge him with sedition,
and represent him as dangerous to the Roman government, as well as to
the Jewish church. He asked him who were his disciples–what number
they were–of what country–what were their names and characters,
insinuating that his scholars were designed for soldiers, and would in
time become a formidable body. Some think his question concerning his
disciples was, “What is now become of them all? Where are they? Why do
they not appear?” upbraiding him with their cowardice in deserting him,
and thus adding to the affliction of it. There was something
significant in this, that Christ’s calling and owning his disciples was
the first thing laid to his charge, for it was for their sakes
that he sanctified himself and suffered.
[2.] Concerning his doctrine, that they might charge him with heresy,
and bring him under the penalty of the law against false prophets,
This was a matter properly cognizable in that court
therefore a prophet could not perish but at Jerusalem, where that court
sat. They could not prove any false doctrine upon him; but they hoped
to extort something from him which they might distort to his prejudice,
and to make him an offender for some word or other,
They said nothing to him concerning his miracles, by which he had done
so much good, and proved his doctrine beyond contradiction, because of
these they were sure they could take no hold. Thus the adversaries of
Christ while they are industriously quarrelling with his truth,
willfully shut their eyes against the evidences of it, and take no
notice of them.
2. The appeal Christ made, in answer to these interrogatories.
(1.) As to his disciples, he said nothing, because it was an
impertinent question; if his doctrine was sound and good, his having
disciples to whom to communicate it was no more than what was practised
and allowed by their own doctors. If Caiaphas, in asking him concerning
his disciples, designed to ensnare them, and bring them into trouble,
it was in kindness to them that Christ said nothing of them, for he had
said, Let these go their way. If he meant to upbraid him with
their cowardice, no wonder that he said nothing, for
| Rudet hæc opprobria nobis,
Et dici potuisse, et non potuisse refelli– Shame attaches when charges are exhibited that cannot be refuted: |
he would say nothing to condemn them, and could say nothing to justify
them.
(2.) As to his doctrine, he said nothing in particular, but in general
referred himself to those that heard him, being not only made manifest
to God, but made manifest also in their consciences,
[1.] He tacitly charges his judges with illegal proceedings. He does
not indeed speak evil of the rulers of the people, nor say now to these
princes, You are wicked; but he appeals to the settled rules of
their own court, whether they dealt fairly by him. Do you indeed
judge righteously?
Ps. lviii. 1.
So here, Why ask you me? Which implies two absurdities in
judgment: First, “Why ask you me now concerning my doctrine,
when you have already condemned it?” They had made an order of court
for excommunicating all that owned him
(ch. ix. 22),
had issued out a proclamation for apprehending him; and now they come
to ask what his doctrine is! Thus was he condemned, as his doctrine and
cause commonly are, unheard. Secondly, “Why ask you me? Must I
accuse myself, when you have no evidence against me?”
[2.] He insists upon his fair and open dealing with them in the
publication of his doctrine, and justifies himself with this. The crime
which the sanhedrim by the law was to enquire after was the clandestine
spreading of dangerous doctrines, enticing secretly,
As to this, therefore, Christ clears himself very fully. First,
As to the manner of his preaching. He spoke openly,
parresia—with freedom and plainness of speech; he
did not deliver things ambiguously, as Apollo did his oracles. Those
that would undermine the truth, and spread corrupt notions, seek to
accomplish their purpose by sly insinuation, putting queries, starting
difficulties, and asserting nothing; but Christ explained himself
fully, with, Verily, verily, I say unto you; his reproofs were
free and bold, and his testimonies express against the corruptions of
the age. Secondly, As to the persons he preached to: He spoke
to the world, to all that had ears to hear, and were willing
to hear him, high or low, learned or unlearned, Jew or Gentile, friend
or foe. His doctrine feared not the censure of a mixed multitude; nor
did he grudge the knowledge of it to any (as the masters of some rare
invention commonly do), but freely communicated it, as the sun does his
beams. Thirdly, As to the places he preached in. When he was in
the country, he preached ordinarily in the synagogues–the places of
meeting for worship, and on the sabbath-day-the time of meeting; when
he came up to Jerusalem, he preached the same doctrine in the temple at
the time of the solemn feasts, when the Jews from all parts assembled
there; and though he often preached in private houses, and on
mountains, and by the sea-side, to show that his word and worship were
not to be confined to temples and synagogues, yet what he preached in
private was the very same with what he delivered publicly. Note, The
doctrine of Christ, purely and plainly preached, needs not be ashamed
to appear in the most numerous assembly, for it carries its own
strength and beauty along with it. What Christ’s faithful ministers say
they would be willing all the world should hear. Wisdom cries in the
places of concourse,
Fourthly, As to the doctrine itself. He said nothing in
secret contrary to what he said in public, but only by way of
repetition and explication: In secret have I said nothing; as if
he had been either suspicious of the truth of it, or conscious of any
ill design in it. He sought no corners, for he feared no colours, nor
said any thing that he needed to be ashamed of; what he did speak in
private to his disciples he ordered them to proclaim on the house-tops,
God saith of himself
(Isa. xlv. 19),
I have not spoken in secret; his commandment is not hidden,
And the righteousness of faith speaks in like manner,
Veritas nihil metuit nisi abscondi–truth fears nothing but
concealment.–Tertullian.
[3.] He appeals to those that had heard him, and desires that they
might be examined what doctrine he had preached, and whether it had
that dangerous tendency that was surmised: “Ask those that heard me
what I said unto them; some of them may be in court, or may be sent
for out of their beds.” He means not his friends and followers, who
might be presumed to speak in his favour, but, Ask any impartial
hearer; ask your own officers. Some think he pointed to them, when he
said, Behold, they know what I said, referring to the report
which they had made of his preaching
(ch. vii. 46),
Never man spoke like this man. Nay, you may ask some upon the
bench; for it is probable that some of them had heard him, and had been
put to silence by him. Note, The doctrine of Christ may safely appeal
to all that know it, and has so much right and reason on its side that
those who will judge impartially cannot but witness to it.
V. While the judges were examining him, the servants that stood by were
abusing him,
1. It was a base affront which one of the officers gave him; though he
spoke with so much calmness and convincing evidence, this insolent
fellow struck him with the palm of his hand, probably on the
side of his head or face, saying, Answerest thou the high priest
so? as if he had behaved himself rudely to the court.
(1.) He struck him, edoke rhapisma—he gave him
a blow. Some think it signifies a blow with a rod or wand, from
rhabdos, or with the staff which was the badge of his
office. Now the scripture was fulfilled
(Isa. l. 6),
I gave my cheeks, eis rhapismata (so the LXX.)
to blows, the word here used. And
They shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek;
and the type answered
(Job xvi. 10),
They have smitten me upon the cheek reproachfully. It was unjust
to strike one that neither said nor did amiss; it was insolent for a
mean servant to strike one that was confessedly a person of account; it
was cowardly to strike one that had his hands tied; and barbarous to
strike a prisoner at the bar. Here was a breach of the peace in the
face of the court, and yet the judges countenanced it. Confusion of
face was our due; but Christ here took it to himself: “Upon me be the
curse, the shame.”
(2.) He checked him in a haughty imperious manner: Answerest thou
the high priest so? As if the blessed Jesus were not good enough to
speak to his master, or not wise enough to know how to speak to him,
but, like a rude and ignorant prisoner, must be controlled by the
jailor, and taught how to behave. Some of the ancients suggest that
this officer was Malchus, who owed to Christ the healing of his ear,
and the saving of his head, and yet made him this ill return. But,
whoever it was, it was done to please the high priest, and to curry
favour with him; for what he said implied a jealousy for the dignity of
the high priest. Wicked rulers will not want wicked servants, who will
help forward the affliction of those whom their masters
persecute. There was a successor of this high priest that commanded the
bystanders to smite Paul thus on the mouth,
Acts xxiii. 2.
Some think this officer took himself to be affronted by Christ’s appeal
to those about him concerning his doctrine, as if he would have vouched
him to be a witness; and perhaps he was one of those officers that had
spoken honourably of him
(ch. vii. 46),
and, lest he should now be thought a secret friend to him, he thus
appears a bitter enemy.
2. Christ bore this affront with wonderful meekness and patience
(v. 23):
“If I have spoken evil, in what I have now said, bear witness
of the evil. Observe it to the court, and let them judge of it, who
are the proper judges; but if well, and as it did become me, why
smitest thou me?” Christ could have answered him with a miracle of
wrath, could have struck him dumb or dead, or have withered the hand
that was lifted up against him. But this was the day of his patience
and suffering, and he answered him with the meekness of wisdom,
to teach us not to avenge ourselves, not to render railing for
railing, but with the innocency of the dove to bear
injuries, even when with the wisdom of the serpent, as our
Saviour, we show the injustice of them, and appeal to the magistrate
concerning them. Christ did not here turn the other cheek, by
which it appears that that rule,
is not to be understood literally; a man may possibly turn the other
cheek, and yet have his heart full of malice; but, comparing
Christ’s precept with his pattern, we learn,
(1.) That in such cases we must not be our own avengers, nor judges in
our own cause. We must rather receive than give the second blow, which
makes the quarrel; we are allowed to defend ourselves, but not to
avenge ourselves: the magistrate (if it be necessary for the preserving
of the public peace, and the restraining and terrifying of evil-doers)
is to be the avenger,
(2.) Our resentment of injuries done us must always be rational, and
never passionate; such Christ’s here was; when he suffered, he
reasoned, but threatened not. He fairly expostulated with him
that did him the injury, and so may we.
(3.) When we are called out to suffering, we must accommodate
ourselves to the inconveniences of a suffering state, with
patience, and by one indignity done us be prepared to receive another,
and to make the best of it.
VI. While the servants were thus abusing him, Peter was proceeding to
deny him,
It is a sad story, and none of the least of Christ’s sufferings.
1. He repeated the sin the second time,
While he was warming himself with the servants, as one of them, they
asked him, Art not thou one of his disciples? What dost thou
here among us? He, perhaps, hearing that Christ was examined about his
disciples, and fearing he should be seized, or at least smitten, as his
Master was, if he should own it, flatly denied it, and said, I am
not.
(1.) It was his great folly to thrust himself into the temptation, by
continuing in the company of those that were unsuitable for him, and
that he had nothing to do with. He staid to warm himself; but those
that warm themselves with evil doers grow cold towards good people and
good things, and those that are fond of the devil’s fire-side are in
danger of the devil’s fire. Peter might have stood by his Master at the
bar, and have warmed himself better than here, at the fire of his
Master’s love, which many waters could not quench,
Cant. viii. 6, 7.
He might there have warmed himself with zeal for his Master, and
indignation at his persecutors; but he chose rather to warm with them
than to warm against them. But how could one (one disciple) be warm
alone?
(2.) It was his great unhappiness that he was again assaulted by the
temptation; and no other could be expected, for this was a place, this
an hour, of temptation. When the judge asked Christ about his
disciples, probably the servants took the hint, and challenged Peter
for one of them, “Answer to thy name.” See here,
[1.] The subtlety of the tempter in running down one whom he saw
falling, and mustering a greater force against him; not a maid now, but
all the servants. Note, Yielding to one temptation invites another, and
perhaps a stronger. Satan redoubles his attacks when we give ground.
[2.] The danger of bad company. We commonly study to approve ourselves
to those with whom we choose to associate; we value ourselves upon
their good word and covet to stand right in their opinion. As we choose
our people we choose our praise, and govern ourselves accordingly; we
are therefore concerned to make the first choice well, and not to
mingle with those whom we cannot please without displeasing God.
(3.) It was his great weakness, nay, it was his great wickedness, to
yield to the temptation, and to say, I am not one of his
disciples, as one ashamed of that which was his honour, and afraid of
suffering for it, which would have been yet more his honour. See how
the fear of man brings a snare. When Christ was admired, and
caressed, and treated with respect, Peter pleased himself, and perhaps
prided himself, in this, that he was a disciple of Christ, and so put
in for a share in the honours done to his Master. Thus many who seem
fond of the reputation of religion when it is in fashion are ashamed of
the reproach of it; but we must take it for better and
worse.
2. He repeated the sin the third time,
Here he was attacked by one of the servants, who was kinsman to
Malchus, who, when he heard Peter deny himself to be a disciple of
Christ, gave him the lie with great assurance: “Did not I see thee
in the garden with him? Witness my kinsman’s ear.” Peter then
denied again, as if he knew nothing of Christ, nothing of the garden,
nothing of all this matter.
(1.) This third assault of the temptation was more close than the
former: before his relation to Christ was only suspected, here it is
proved upon him by one that saw him with Jesus, and saw him draw his
sword in his defence. Note, Those who by sin think to help themselves
out of trouble do but entangle and embarrass themselves the more. Dare
to be brave, for truth will out. A bird of the air may perhaps
tell the matter which we seek to conceal with a lie. Notice is
taken of this servant’s being akin to Malchus, because this
circumstance would make it the more a terror to Peter. “Now,” thinks
he, “I am gone, my business is done, there needs no other witness nor
prosecutor.” We should not make any man in particular our enemy if we
can help it, because the time may come when either he or some of his
relations may have us at their mercy. He that may need a friend should
not make a foe. But observe, though here was sufficient evidence
against Peter, and sufficient provocation given by his denial to have
prosecuted him, yet he escapes, has no harm done him nor attempted to
be done. Note, We are often drawn into sin by groundless causeless
fears, which there is no occasion for, and which a small degree of
wisdom and resolution would make nothing of.
(2.) His yielding to it was no less base than the former: He denied
again. See here,
[1.] The nature of sin in general: the heart is hardened by the
deceitfulness of it,
Heb. iii. 13.
It was a strange degree of effrontery that Peter had arrived to on a
sudden, that he could with such assurance stand in a lie against so
clear a disproof; but the beginning of sin is as the letting forth
of water, when once the fence is broken men easily go from bad to
worse.
[2.] Of the sin of lying in particular; it is a fruitful sin, and upon
this account exceedingly sinful: one lie needs another to
support it, and that another. It is a rule in the devil’s politics
Male facta male factis tegere, ne perpluant—To cover sin
with sin, in order to escape detection.
| Christ in the Judgment-Hall; Christ Arraigned before Pilate. |
|
|
28 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment:
and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment
hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the
passover.
29 Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation
bring ye against this man?
30 They answered and said unto him, If he were not a
malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee.
31 Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him
according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is
not lawful for us to put any man to death:
32 That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake,
signifying what death he should die.
33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called
Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or
did others tell it thee of me?
35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief
priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?
36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my
kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I
should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not
from hence.
37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus
answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born,
and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear
witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my
voice.
38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said
this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I
find in him no fault at all.
39 But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at
the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King
of the Jews?
40 Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but
Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.
We have here an account of Christ’s arraignment before Pilate, the
Roman governor, in the prætorium (a Latin word made
Greek), the prætor’s house, or hall of judgment; thither
they hurried him, to get him condemned in the Roman court, and executed
by the Roman power. Being resolved on his death, they took this course,
1. That he might be put to death the more legally and regularly,
according to the present constitution of their government, since they
became a province of the empire; not stoned in a popular tumult, as
Stephen, but put to death with the present formalities of justice. Thus
he was treated as a malefactor, being made sin for us.
2. That he might be put to death the more safely. If they could engage
the Roman government in the matter, which the people stood in awe of,
there would be little danger of an uproar.
3. That he might be put to death with more reproach to himself. The
death of the cross, which the Romans commonly used, being of all
deaths the most ignominious, they were desirous by it to put an
indelible mark of infamy upon him, and so to sink his reputation for
ever. This therefore they harped upon, Crucify him.
4. That he might be put to death with less reproach to them. It was an
invidious thing to put one to death that had done so much good in the
world, and therefore they were willing to throw the odium upon the
Roman government, to make that the less acceptable to the people, and
save themselves from the reproach. Thus many are more afraid of the
scandal of a bad action than of the sin of it. See
Two things are here observed concerning the prosecution:–
(1.) Their policy and industry in the prosecution: It was early;
some think about two or three in the morning, others about five or six,
when most people were in their beds; and so there would be the less
danger of opposition from the people that were for Christ; while, at
the same time, they had their agents about, to call those together whom
they could influence to cry out against him. See how much their heart
was upon it, and how violent they were in the prosecution. Now that
they had him in their hands, they would lose no time till they had him
upon the cross, but denied themselves their natural rest, to push on
this matter. See
(2.) Their superstition and vile hypocrisy: The chief priests and
elders, though they came along with the prisoner, that the thing
might be done effectually, went not into the judgment-hall,
because it was the house of an uncircumcised Gentile, lest they
should be defiled, but kept out of doors, that they might eat
the passover, not the paschal lamb (that was eaten the night
before) but the passover-feast, upon the sacrifices which were offered
on the fifteenth day, the Chagigah, as they called it, the
passover-bullocks spoken of
2 Chron. xxx. 24; xxxv. 8, 9.
These they were to eat of, and therefore would not go into the court,
for fear of touching a Gentile, and thereby contracting, not a legal,
but only a traditional pollution. This they scrupled, but made no
scruple of breaking through all the laws of equity to persecute Christ
to the death. They strained at a gnat, and swallowed a camel.
Let us now see what passed at the judgment-hall. Here is,
I. Pilate’s conference with the prosecutors. They were called first,
and stated what they had to say against the prisoner, as was very fit,
1. The judge calls for the indictment. Because they would not come into
the hall, he went out to them into the court before the house,
to talk with them. Looking upon Pilate as a magistrate, that we may
give every one his due, here are three things commendable in him:–
(1.) His diligent and close application to business. If it had been
upon a good occasion, it had been very well that he was willing to be
called up early to the judgment-seat. Men in public trusts must not
love their ease.
(2.) His condescending to the humour of the people, and receding from
the honour of his place to gratify their scruples. He might have said,
“If they be so nice as not to come in to me, let them go home as they
came;” by the same rule as we might say, “If the complainant scruple to
take off his hat to the magistrate, let not his complaint be heard;”
but Pilate insists not upon it, bears with them, and goes out to them;
for, when it is for good, we should become all things to all
men.
(3.) His adherence to the rule of justice, in demanding the accusation,
suspecting the prosecution to be malicious: “What accusation bring
you against this man?” What is the crime you charge him with, and
what proof have you of it? It was a law of nature, before Valerius
Publicola made it a Roman law, Ne quis indicta causa condemnetur–No
man should be condemned unheard. See
It is unreasonable to commit a man, without alleging some cause in the
warrant, and much more to arraign a man when there is no bill of
indictment found against him.
2. The prosecutors demand judgment against him upon a general surmise
that he was a criminal, not alleging, much less proving, any thing in
particular worthy of death or of bonds
(v. 30):
If he were not a malefactor, or evildoer, we would not have
delivered him to thee to be condemned. This bespeaks them,
(1.) Very rude and uncivil to Pilate, a company of ill-natured men,
that affected to despise dominion. When Pilate was so complaisant to
them as to come out to treat with them, yet they were to the highest
degree out of humour with him. He put the most reasonable question to
them that could be; but, if it had been the most absurd, they could not
have answered him with more disdain.
(2.) Very spiteful and malicious towards our Lord Jesus: right or
wrong, they will have him to be a malefactor, and treated as one. We
are to presume a man innocent till he is proved guilty, but they will
presume him guilty who could prove himself innocent. They cannot say,
“He is a traitor, a murderer, a felon, a breaker of the peace,” but
they say, “He is an evil-doer.” He an evil-doer who went about doing
good! Let those be called whom he had cured, and fed, and taught;
whom he has rescued from devils, and raised from death; and let them be
asked whether he be an evil-doer or no. Note, It is no new thing for
the best of benefactors to be branded and run down as the worst of
malefactors.
(3.) Very proud and conceited of themselves, and their own judgment and
justice, as if their delivering a man up, under the general character
of a malefactor, were sufficient for the civil magistrate to ground a
judicial sentence upon, than which what could be more haughty?
3. The judge remands him to their own court
(v. 31):
“Take you him, and judge him according to your own law,
and do not trouble me with him.” Now,
(1.) Some think Pilate herein complimented them, acknowledging the
remains of their power, and allowing them to exert it. Corporal
punishment they might inflict, as scourging in their synagogues;
whether capital or no is uncertain. “But,” saith Pilate, “go as far as
your law will allow you, and, if you go further, it shall be connived
at.” This he said, willing to do the Jews a pleasure, but unwilling to
do them the service they required.
(2.) Others think he bantered them, and upbraided them with their
present state of weakness and subjection. They would be the sole
judges of the guilt. “Pray,” saith Pilate, “if you will be so, go on as
you have begun; you have found him guilty by your own law, condemn him,
if you dare, by your own law, to carry on the humour.” Nothing is more
absurd, nor more deserves to be exposed, than for those to pretend to
dictate, and boast of their wisdom, who are weak and in subordinate
stations, and whose lot it is to be dictated to. Some think Pilate here
reflects upon the law of Moses, as if it allowed them what the Roman
law would by no means allow–the judging of a man unheard. “It may be
your law will suffer such a thing, but ours will not.” Thus, through
their corruptions, the law of God was blasphemed; and so is his gospel
too.
4. They disown any authority as judges, and (since it must be so) are
content to be prosecutors. They now grow less insolent and more
submissive, and own, “It is not lawful for us to put any man to
death, whatever less punishment we may inflict, and this is a
malefactor whom we would have the blood of.”
(1.) Some think they had lost their power to give judgment in matters
of life and death only by their own carelessness, and cowardly yielding
to the darling iniquities of the age; so Dr. Lightfoot ouk
exesti—It is not in our power to pass sentence of death
upon any, if we do, we shall have the mob about us
immediately.
(2.) Others think their power was taken from them by the Romans,
because they had not used it well, or because it was thought too great
a trust to be lodged in the hands of a conquered and yet an unsubdued
people. Their acknowledgement of this they designed for a compliment to
Pilate, and to atone for their rudeness
(v. 30),
but it amounts to a full evidence that the sceptre was departed from
Judah, and therefore that now the Messiah was come,
If the Jews have no power to put any man to death, where is the
sceptre? Yet they ask not, Where is the Shiloh?
(3.) However, there was a providence in it, that either they should
have not power to put any man to death, or should decline the exercise
of it upon this occasion, That the saying of Jesus might be
fulfilled, which he spoke, signifying what death he should die,
v. 32.
Observe,
[1.] In general, that even those who designed the defeating of Christ’s
sayings were, beyond their intention, made serviceable to the
fulfilling of them by an overruling hand of God. No word of Christ
shall fall to the ground; he can never either deceive or be
deceived. Even the chief priests, while they persecuted him as
a deceiver, had their spirit so directed as to help to prove him
true, when we should think that by taking other measures they might
have defeated his predictions. Howbeit, they meant not so,
Isa. x. 7.
[2.] Those sayings of Christ in particular were fulfilled which he had
spoken concerning his own death. Two sayings of Christ concerning his
death were fulfilled, by the Jews declining to judge him according
to their law. First, He had said that he should be delivered to
the Gentiles, and that they should put him to death
Mark x. 33; Luke xviii. 32, 33),
and hereby that saying was fulfilled. Secondly, He had said
that he should be crucified
lifted up,
ch. iii. 14; xii. 32.
Now, if they had judged him by their law, he had been stoned;
burning, strangling, and beheading, were in some cases used among the
Jews, but never crucifying. It was therefore necessary that Christ
should be put to death by the Romans, that, being hanged upon a
tree, he might be made a curse for us
(Gal. iii. 13),
and his hands and feet might be pierced. As the Roman
power had brought him to be born at Bethlehem, so now to die upon a
cross, and both according to the scriptures. It is likewise determined
concerning us, though not discovered to us, what death we shall
die, which should free us from all disquieting cares about that
matter. “Lord, what, and when, and how thou hast appointed.”
II. Here is Pilate’s conference with the prisoner,
&c., where we have,
1. The prisoner set to the bar. Pilate, after he had conferred with the
chief priests at his door, entered into the hall, and called for Jesus
to be brought in. He would not examine him in the crowd, where he might
be disturbed by the noise, but ordered him to be brought into the
hall; for he made no difficulty of going in among the Gentiles. We
by sin were become liable to the judgment of God, and were to be
brought before his bar; therefore Christ, being made sin and a curse
for us, was arraigned as a criminal. Pilate entered into judgment
with him, that God might not enter into judgment with us.
2. His examination. The other evangelists tell us that his accusers had
laid it to his charge that he perverted the nation, forbidding to
give tribute to Cæsar, and upon this he is examined.
(1.) Here is a question put to him, with a design to ensnare him and to
find out something upon which to ground an accusation: “Art thou the
king of the Jews? ho basileus —that king of the
Jews who has been so much talked of and so long expected–Messiah
the prince, art thou he? Dost thou pretend to be he? Dost thou call
thyself, and wouldest thou be thought so?” For he was far from
imagining that really he was so, or making a question of that. Some
think Pilate asked this with an air of scorn and contempt: “What!
art thou a king, who makest so mean a figure? Art thou the
king of the Jews, by whom thou art thus hated and persecuted?
Art thou king de jure–of right, while the emperor is only king
de facto–in fact?” Since it could not be proved he ever said
it, he would constrain him to say it now, that he might proceed upon
his own confession.
(2.) Christ answers this question with another; not for evasion, but as
an intimation to Pilate to consider what he did, and upon what grounds
he went
(v. 34):
“Sayest thou this thing of thyself, from a suspicion arising in
thy own breast, or did others tell it thee of me, and dost thou
ask it only to oblige them?”
[1.] “It is plain that thou hast no reason to say this of
thyself.” Pilate was bound by his office to take care of the
interests of the Roman government, but he could not say that this was
in any danger, or suffered any damage, from any thing our Lord Jesus
had ever said or done. He never appeared in worldly pomp, never assumed
any secular power, never acted as a judge or divider; never were any
traitorous principles or practices objected to him, nor any thing that
might give the least shadow of suspicion.
[2.] “If others tell it thee of me, to incense thee against me,
thou oughtest to consider who they are, and upon what principles they
go, and whether those who represent me as an enemy to
Cæsar are not really such themselves, and therefore use this
only as a pretence to cover their malice, for, if so, the matter ought
to be well weighed by a judge that would do justice.” Nay, if Pilate
had been as inquisitive as he ought to have been in this matter, he
would have found that the true reason why the chief priests were
outrageous against Jesus was because he did not set up a temporal
kingdom in opposition to the Roman power; if he would have done this,
and would have wrought miracles to bring the Jews out of the Roman
bondage, as Moses did to bring them out of the Egyptian, they would
have been so far from siding with the Romans against him that they
would have made him their king, and have fought under him against the
Romans; but, not answering this expectation of theirs, they charged
that upon him of which they were themselves most notoriously
guilty-disaffection to and design against the present government; and
was such an information as this fit to be countenanced?
(3.) Pilate resents Christ’s answer, and takes it very ill,
This is a direct answer to Christ’s question,
[1.] Christ had asked him whether he spoke of himself. “No,” says he;
“am I a Jew, that thou suspectest me to be in the plot against
thee? I know nothing of the Messiah, nor desire to know, and therefore
interest not myself in the dispute who is the Messiah and who not; the
dispute who is the Messiah and who not; it is all alike to me.” Observe
with what disdain Pilate asks, Am I a Jew? The Jews were, upon
many accounts, an honourable people; but, having corrupted the covenant
of their God, he made them contemptible and base before all the
people
so that a man of sense and honour reckoned it a scandal to be counted a
Jew. Thus good names often suffer for the sake of the bad men that wear
them. It is sad that when a Turk is suspected of dishonesty he should
ask, “What! do you take me for a Christian?”
[2.] Christ had asked him whether others told him. “Yes,” says he, “and
those thine own people, who, one would think would be biased in
favour of thee, and the priests, whose testimony, in verbum
sacerdotis–on the word of a priest, ought to be regarded; and
therefore I have nothing to do but to proceed upon their information.”
Thus Christ, in his religion, still suffers by those that are of his
own nation, even the priests, that profess relation to him, but do not
live up to their profession.
[3.] Christ had declined answering that question, Art thou the king
of the Jews? And therefore Pilate puts another question to him more
general, “What hast thou done? What provocation hast thou given
to thy own nation, and particularly the priests, to be so violent
against thee? Surely there cannot be all this smoke without some fire,
what is it?”
(4.) Christ, in his next reply, gives a more full and direct answer to
Pilate’s former question, Art thou a king? explaining in what
sense he was a king, but not such a king as was any ways dangerous to
the Roman government, not a secular king, for his interest was not
supported by secular methods,
Observe,
[1.] An account of the nature and constitution of Christ’s kingdom: It
is not of this world. It is expressed negatively to rectify the
present mistakes concerning it; but the positive is implied, it is
the kingdom of heaven, and belongs to another world. Christ is a
king, and has a kingdom, but not of this world. First Its rise
is not from this world; the kingdoms of men arise out of the sea and
the earth
(Dan. vii. 3; Rev. xiii. 1, 11);
but the holy city comes from God out of heaven,
Rev. xxii. 2.
His kingdom is not by succession, election, or conquest, but by the
immediate and special designation of the divine will and counsel.
Secondly, Its nature is not worldly; it is a kingdom within men
(Luke xvi. 21),
set up in their hearts and consciences
(Rom. xiv. 17),
its riches spiritual, its powers spiritual, and all its glory
within. The ministers of state in Christ’s kingdom have not the
spirit of the world,
1 Cor. ii. 12.
Thirdly, Its guards and supports are not worldly; its weapons
are spiritual. It neither needed nor used secular force to maintain and
advance it, nor was it carried on in a way hurtful to kings or
provinces; it did not in the least interfere with the prerogatives
of princes nor the property of their subjects; it tended not to alter
any national establishment in secular things, nor opposed any kingdom
but that of sin and Satan. Fourthly, Its tendency and design
are not worldly. Christ neither aimed nor would allow his disciples to
aim at the pomp and power of the great men of the earth.
Fifthly, Its subjects, though they are in the world, yet are not
of the world; they are called and chosen out of the world,
are born from, and bound for, another world; they are neither the
world’s pupils nor its darlings, neither governed by its wisdom nor
enriched with its wealth.
[2.] An evidence of the spiritual nature of Christ’s kingdom produced.
If he had designed an opposition to the government, he would have
fought them at their own weapons, and would have repelled force with
force of the same nature; but he did not take this course: If my
kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should
not be delivered to the Jews, and my kingdom be ruined by them.
But, First, His followers did not offer to fight; there was no
uproar, no attempt to rescue him, though the town was now full of
Galileans, his friends and countrymen, and they were generally armed;
but the peaceable behaviour of his disciples on this occasion was
enough to put to silence the ignorance of foolish men. Secondly,
He did not order them to fight; nay, he forbade them, which was an
evidence both that he did not depend upon worldly aids (for he could
have summoned legions of angels into his service, which showed
that his kingdom was from above), and also that he did not dread
worldly opposition, for he was very willing to be delivered to the
Jews, as knowing that what would have been the destruction of any
worldly kingdom would be the advancement and establishment of his;
justly therefore does he conclude, Now you may see my kingdom
is not from hence; in the world but not of it.
(5.) In answer to Pilate’s further query, he replies yet more directly,
where we have,
[1.] Pilate’s plain question: “Art thou a king then? Thou
speakest of a kingdom thou hast; art thou then, in any sense, a king?
And what colour hast thou for such a claim? Explain thyself.”
[2.] The good confession which our Lord Jesus witnessed before Pontius
Pilate, in answer to this
Thou sayest that I am a king, that is, It is as thou sayest, I
am a king; for I came to bear witness of the truth. First, He
grants himself to be a king, though not in the sense that Pilate meant.
The Messiah was expected under the character of a king, Messiah the
prince; and therefore, having owned to Caiaphas that he was the
Christ, he would not disown to Pilate that he was king, lest he should
seem inconsistent with himself. Note, Though Christ took upon him
the form of a servant, yet even then he justly claimed the honour
and authority of a king. Secondly, He explains himself, and
shows how he is a king, as he came to bear witness of the truth;
he rules in the minds of men by the power of truth. If he had meant to
declare himself a temporal prince, he would have said, For this end
was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, to rule the
nations, to conquer kings, and to take possession of kingdoms; no,
he came to be a witness, a witness for the God that made the
world, and against sin that ruins the world, and by this word of his
testimony he sets up, and keeps up, his kingdom. It was foretold
that he should be a witness to the people, and, as such, a
leader and commander to the people,
Isa. lv. 4.
Christ’s kingdom was not of this world, in which truth faileth
Qui nescit dissimulare, nescit regnare–He that cannot dissemble
knows not how to reign), but of that world in which truth reigns
eternally. Christ’s errand into the world, and his business in the
world, were to bear witness to the truth.
1. To reveal it, to discover to the world that which otherwise could
not have been known concerning God and his will and good-will to
men,
ch. i. 18; xvii. 26.
2. To confirm it,
By his miracles he bore witness to the truth of religion, the
truth of divine revelation, and of God’s perfections and providence,
and the truth of his promise and covenant, that all men through him
might believe. Now by doing this he is a king, and sets up a
kingdom.
(1.) The foundation and power, the spirit and genius, of Christ’s
kingdom, is truth, divine truth. When he said, I am the truth,
he said, in effect, I am a king. He conquers by the convincing evidence
of truth; he rules by the commanding power of truth, and in his
majesty rides prosperously, because of truth,
Ps. xlv. 4.
It is with his truth that he shall judge the people,
It is the sceptre of his kingdom; he draws with the cords of a
man, with truth revealed to us, and received by us in the love
of it; and thus he brings thoughts into obedience. He came
a light into the world, and rules as the sun by day.
(2.) The subjects of this kingdom are those that are of the
truth. All that by the grace of God are rescued from under the
power of the father of lies, and are disposed to receive the
truth and submit to the power and influence of it, will hear Christ’s
voice, will become his subjects, and will bear faith and true
allegiance to him. Every one that has any real sense of true religion
will entertain the Christian religion, and they belong to his kingdom;
by the power of truth he makes them willing,
All that are in love with truth will hear the voice of Christ, for
greater, better, surer, sweeter truths can nowhere be found than are
found in Christ, by whom grace and truth came; so that, by
hearing Christ’s voice, we know that we are of the truth,
1 John iii. 19.
(6.) Pilate, hereupon, puts a good question to him, but does not stay
for an answer,
He said, What is truth? and immediately went out
again.
[1.] It is certain that this was a good question, and could not be put
to one that was better able to answer it. Truth is that pearl of
great price which the human understanding has a desire for and is
in quest of; for it cannot rest but in that which is, or at least is
apprehended to be, truth. When we search the scriptures, and
attend the ministry of the word, it must be with this enquiry, What
is truth? and with this prayer, Lead me in thy truth, into all
truth. But many put this question that have not patience and
constancy enough to persevere in their search after truth, or not
humility and sincerity enough to receive it when they have found it,
Thus many deal with their own consciences; they ask them those needful
questions, “What am I?” “What have I done?” but will not take time for
an answer.
[2.] It is uncertain with what design Pilate asked this question.
First, Perhaps he spoke it as a learner, as one that began to
think well of Christ, and to look upon him with some respect, and
desired to be informed what new notions he advanced and what
improvements he pretended to in religion and learning. But while he
desired to hear some new truth from him, as Herod to see some miracle,
the clamour and outrage of the priests’ mob at his gate obliged him
abruptly to let fall the discourse. Secondly, Some think he
spoke it as a judge, enquiring further into the cause now brought
before him: “Let me into this mystery, and tell me what the truth of it
is, the true state of this matter.” Thirdly, Others think he
spoke it as a scoffer, in a jeering way: “Thou talkest of truth; canst
thou tell what truth is, or give me a definition of it?” Thus he makes
a jest of the everlasting gospel, that great truth which the chief
priests hated and persecuted, and which Christ was now witnessing to
and suffering for; and like men of no religion, who take a pleasure in
bantering all religions, he ridicules both sides; and therefore Christ
made him no reply. Answer not a fool according to his folly; cast
not pearls before swine. But, though Christ would not tell Pilate
what is truth, he has told his disciples, and by them has told us,
III. The result of both these conferences with the prosecutors and the
prisoner
(v. 38-40),
in two things:–
1. The judge appeared his friend, and favourable to him, for,
(1.) He publicly declared him innocent,
Upon the whole matter, I find in him no fault at all. He
supposes there might be some controversy in religion between him and
them, wherein he was as likely to be in the right as they; but nothing
criminal appears against him. This solemn declaration of Christ’s
innocency was,
[1.] For the justification and honour of the Lord Jesus. By this it
appears that though he was treated as the worst of malefactors he had
never merited such treatment.
[2.] For explaining the design and intention of his death, that he did
not die for any sin of his own, even in the judgement of the judge
himself, and therefore he died as a sacrifice for our sins, and that,
even in the judgment of the prosecutors themselves, one man should
die for the people,
ch. xi. 50.
This is he that did no violence, neither was any deceit in his
mouth
(Isa. liii. 9),
who was to be cut off, but not for himself,
Dan. ix. 26.
[3.] For aggravating the sin of the Jews that prosecuted him with so
much violence. If a prisoner has had a fair trial, and has been
acquitted by those that are proper judges of the crime, especially if
there be no cause to suspect them partial in his favour, he must be
believed innocent, and his accusers are bound to acquiesce. But our
Lord Jesus, though brought in not guilty, is still run down as a
malefactor, and his blood thirsted for.
(2.) He proposed an expedient for his discharge
(v. 39):
You have a custom, that I should release to you a prisoner at the
passover; shall it be this king of the Jews? He proposed this, not
to the chief priests (he knew they would never agree to it), but to the
multitude; it was an appeal to the people, as appears,
Probably he had heard how this Jesus had been attended but the other
day with the hosannas of the common people; he therefore looked upon
him to be the darling of the multitude, and the envy only of the
rulers, and therefore he made no doubt but they would demand the
release of Jesus, and this would stop the mouth of the prosecutors, and
all would be well.
[1.] He allows their custom, for which, perhaps, they had had a long
prescription, in honour of the passover, which was a memorial of their
release. But it was adding to God’s words, as if he had not instituted
enough for the due commemoration of that deliverance, and, though an
act of mercy, might be injustice to the public,
[2.] He offers to release Jesus to them, according to the custom. If
Pilate had had the honesty and courage that became a judge, he would
not have named an innocent person to be competitor with a notorious
criminal for this favour; if he found no fault in him, he was
bound in conscience to discharge him. But he was willing to trim the
matter, and please all sides, being governed more by worldly wisdom
than by the rules of equity.
2. The people appeared his enemies, and implacable against him
(v. 40):
They cried all again and again, Not this man, let not him
be released, but Barabbas. Observe,
(1.) How fierce and outrageous they were. Pilate proposed the thing to
them calmly, as worthy their mature consideration, but they resolved it
in a heat, and gave in their resolution with clamour and noise, and in
the utmost confusion. Note, The enemies of Christ’s holy religion cry
it down, and so hope to run it down; witness the outcry at Ephesus,
But those who think the worse of things or persons merely for their
being thus exclaimed against have a very small share of constancy and
consideration. Nay, there is cause to suspect a deficiency of reason
and justice on that side which calls in the assistance of popular
tumult.
(2.) How foolish and absurd they were, as is intimated in the short
account here given of the other candidate: Now Barabbas was a
robber, and therefore,
[1.] A breaker of the law of God; and yet he shall be spared, rather
than one who reproved the pride, avarice, and tyranny of the priests
and elders. Though Barabbas be a robber, he will not rob them of
Moses’s seat, nor of their traditions, and then no matter.
[2.] He was an enemy to the public safety and personal property. The
clamour of the town is wont to be against robbers
Men cried after them as after a thief), yet here it is for one.
Thus those do who prefer their sins before Christ. Sin is a robber,
every base lust is a robber, and yet foolishly chosen rather than
Christ, who would truly enrich us.
|
[Previous] [Next] |
Matthew Henry |
|
Back to Bibles Net . Com – Online Christian Library Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary – Free Download |
Copyright 2008. Bibles Net. Com. All Rights Reserved.