In John’s Gospel, he selectively omits Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane, Matthew 26:36-46, reference to ‘twelve legions of angels’, Matthew 26:53, etc. John isn’t giving a full account, but as much as is necessary for his purpose, John 20:30-31 / John 21:25. Also, the Gospels have been in circulation for a long time, and so, when John writes his account, the narrative is well-known.
A full narrative of all that happened in Gethsemane would require a careful study of Matthew 26:36-56 / Mark 14:32-51 / Luke 22:39-53 / John 18:1-12. John makes it clear that, despite the arrest, Jesus is completely in control of the situation. What His enemies do is by permission; His death is a voluntary sacrifice, John 10:17-18.
Jesus crossed the Kidron Valley and went into a garden, John 18:1. The Kidron valley east of Jerusalem, separating the Mount of Olives from the Temple Mount, was the route taken by David when he fled from the city because of Absalom, 2 Samuel 15:23.
It has a significant place in the history of the nation, it’s where Asa burned the ‘abominable image’, in 1 Kings 15:13 / 2 Chronicles 15:16, it’s where Josiah burned the idolatrous vessels out of the temple, in 2 Kings 23:4, it’s where it involved in the cleansing of the temple by Hezekiah, 2 Chronicles 29:15-17.
From the altar of sacrifice in the temple, there was a channel down to the brook Kidron, and through that channel, the blood of the lambs drained away. When Jesus crossed the brook Kidron, it would still be red with the blood of the lambs which had been sacrificed.
The ‘valley’, ‘cheimorrhos’, literally means ‘winter-flowing’, a stream that flowed only in winter or after heavy rain. A ‘garden’, ‘Gethsemane’, means ‘oil press’, Luke 22:39.
It was a private garden, Mark 14:32. ‘Place’, ‘chorion’, an enclosed piece of ground, so the owner must have given permission for Jesus and the disciples to use it. The owner was probably a friend of Jesus, as Jesus often went there.
Located on the slopes of Mount of Olives, precise location unknown, the present ‘Garden of Gethsemane’ is very old, and the original garden must have been close by, but nobody can say with certainty exactly where it was located. It seems as if the disciples and Jesus had stopped for Jesus’ prayer somewhere in Jerusalem.
Now that the prayer was completed, they continued to the edge of the city, out one of the gates on the Western side of the city and towards the Kidron valley, which runs to the West of the city along the length of the temple.
They crossed the valley and entered the garden of Gethsemane, which was on the Mount of Olives; this Mount was so-called because of the olives grown on it. Some of these olive trees still exist today, and they are believed to be the same as those mentioned in Jesus’ time. It seems that Jesus slept here on the Mount of Olives each night of the last week of His life.
We see that this was commonplace for Jesus and the disciples to go for prayer and meditation. As a result, Judas the traitor knew where to find Jesus, and it was common for them to go there after the evening meal, John 18:2-3.
Judas brought an entire detachment of soldiers with him to capture Jesus. Judas brought with him ‘a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and the Pharisees’.
The word ‘detachment’ of soldiers is ‘speira’, and was the term used for a Roman Cohort, a body of six-hundred men. However, it’s also sometimes used to describe a group of two-hundred soldiers. It’s impossible to say how many on this occasion, but it’s certainly used for a large number, Luke 27:47 / Matthew 26:47 / Mark 14:43.
Imagine two-six hundred Roman soldiers and all the religious leaders, armed with torches, lanterns, clubs and swords, Luke 22:52 / Matthew 26:47 / Mark 14:48.
‘Their officers’, ‘chiliarchos’, the Roman commander of a cohort, Luke 22:52-53, and the temple guard were carrying ‘lanterns and torches’, perhaps expecting that Jesus and disciples would hide, Luke 22:52. The chief priests and elders were also present, Luke 22:52.
The chief priests had no jurisdiction over Roman soldiers and would need Pilate’s permission to use them; however, he later doesn’t seem keen on the whole event, so it isn’t likely that he would give his permission to use his men to capture Jesus.
The torches were sticks tied together, wrapped in cloth, dipped in pitch or oil; the lantern was an open dish or oil lamp. This seems likely because of their reaction when Jesus uses the term ‘I AM’, John 18:5.
The religious leaders didn’t need Judas to recognise Jesus. They didn’t need Judas to find out where Jesus was. Three times in the Gospel of John, they sent guards to arrest Jesus, and all three times the guards couldn’t do it. I think they were beginning to fear that Jesus was un-arrestable.
And they said, ‘We need someone on the inside, someone that can catch Him when his guard is down, someone that won’t surprise Him so that we can get Him before He knows what’s going on.’ And Judas said, ‘I’m your man.’
Under normal circumstances, the kiss was a brotherly kiss of affection, Romans 16:16 / 1 Corinthians 16:20 / 2 Corinthians 13:12 / 1 Thessalonians 5:26 / 1 Peter 5:14, but it seems like Judas had other plans; his kiss was more like a kiss of betrayal.
His kiss signalled to the mob who Jesus was; remember the religious leaders who were in attendance knew exactly who Jesus was, Matthew 26:48-49 / Mark 14:44-45, as they had many dealings with Him up to this point.
This shows us the extent Satan had been working on His heart, he even had the audacity to greet Jesus first, Matthew 26:49 / Mark 14:45. Jesus tells Judas to do what he came today and even calls him friend, Matthew 26:50. This is similar to the last time they spoke when Jesus tells him what he is about to do, to it quickly, John 13:27.
When Jesus asked him the question about betraying the Son of man with a kiss, Luke 22:48, this tells us that Jesus knew Judas’s motives. I’m sure Judas once again would have been taken aback by Jesus’ question.
Remember these are the final days of Jesus, and He was well aware of everything which was about to happen, Revelation 13:8, and Judas coming to Him was no surprise either, Psalm 41:9 / Luke 9:44 / Matthew 20:18 / Acts 1:16-17.
Jesus was well aware of His eventual destination. He knew that His time had now come, but still He asked, ‘Who is it you want?’ They specify Jesus, John 18:5. He replies, ‘I am he’, John 18:5; this is the old statement used as a reference to God. Jesus knew everything that was about to happen, John 2:24 / John 5:6 / John 6:64 / John 13:1 / John 13:3.
Notice it was when Jesus said, ‘I am he,’ ‘they drew back and fell to the ground,’ John 18:6, why? The word ‘he’ is merely supplied in the text, Jesus said ‘Ego Eimi’, ‘I AM,’ John 8:58 / Exodus 3:14, which is the Greek equivalent of YHWH, Exodus 3:13-14 / John 5:18.
He is Eternal, Psalm 135:13, and self-existent, Psalm 88:6-7. The expression ‘Ego Eimi’ also occurs in John 6:35 / John 8:12 / John 8:58 / John 10:9 / John 10:11 / John 11:25 / John 14:6 / John 15:1. The Jews understood perfectly well what was alluded to by the term ‘I AM’ used by Jesus, Leviticus 24:16 / John 5:18.
Just as a side note, I remember studying with the Jehovah’s Witnesses and bringing this text to their attention. At first, they said, ‘oh you guys are always making a big deal out of the ‘I AM’ statements’, and then they went on to explain that everyone present ‘drew back and fell to the ground’, simply because Jesus openly admitted that He was Jesus, and everyone was surprised when He did!
Imagine two-six hundred Roman soldiers and all the religious leaders, armed with torches, lanterns, clubs and swords, Luke 22:52 / Matthew 26:47 / Mark 14:48, and who knows what else, coming to Jesus, and Jesus asks, ‘Who are you looking for?’ John 18:4 / John 18:7, and they reply, ‘Jesus of Nazareth’, John 18:5 / John 18:7.
Imagine, Jesus replies, ‘Yep, I’m your man’, and because He said, He is the one they are looking for, two-six hundred soldiers and everyone else in their company, not only ‘drew back’ but they also ‘fell to the ground.’ That simply doesn’t make any sense unless there was something about the words Jesus used.
The ‘I AM’ statements are a big deal, but they fail to see the significance of them because if they did, they wouldn’t come out with such dribble to explain passages like this.
After declaring to the mob that He is the ‘I AM’, for the second time, Jesus pleads for His disciples to be released, John 18:8. This was to fulfil a prophecy He previously made, which prevented any from being captured with Him, John 18:9 / John 6:39 / John 18:8.
When the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him, Matthew 26:50, Peter’s reaction isn’t surprising. He was always the impulsive one, who often said things without thinking first, John 13:37 / Matthew 26:33. He drew his sword and cut off the ear of Malchus, who was the high priest’s servant, John 18:10 / Luke 22:50 / Matthew 26:51 / Mark 14:47.
The fact that Peter is carrying a sword, possibly for protection, tells me that maybe He still didn’t understand the nature of God’s kingdom; he was still thinking in terms of a physical kingdom. We know that Jesus never wanted or never intended physical force to establish His kingdom, John 18:36 / Revelation 13:10.
Before Jesus restores Malchus’ ear, Jesus rebukes Peter; this isn’t the first time he has rebuked him, John 18:11 / Mark 8:33, and it certainly won’t be the last time he’s rebuked, Galatians 2:11-21.
The cup, John 18:11, which Jesus refers to is the cup of agony, Matthew 26:39. He reminds Peter if he’s going to fight with a sword, then he will certainly die by the sword, Matthew 26:52 / Romans 13:4.
We must wonder what those who were present were thinking when Jesus restored Malchus’ ear back to normal, Luke 22:51. Surely after Jesus claimed to be the ‘I AM’, and then performed this ‘sign’, John 20:30-31, those present would have noticed what He just did!
I often wonder if Malchus himself ever went on to believe that Jesus was indeed the Christ, the Son of God. If no one else believed within the mob who Christ was on that day, I’m sure Malchus would have believed, and who knows, maybe later He went on to become a Christian. At the very least, it was certainly one of those moments in his life that he would never forget.
Peter, still thinking in human terms, thought Jesus needed help, but little did he know how much help Jesus had at His disposal. If it wasn’t for the love of Christ for mankind, He could have easily brought all this to an end, but He wasn’t about to play into the devil’s hands; He wasn’t about to blow His whole mission this close to the end, John 18:11 / John 10:17-18.
Matthew tells us that Jesus could have called numerous angels to rescue Him, Matthew 26:53, but He knew by doing that, He wouldn’t fulfil Scripture, Matthew 26:54 / Isaiah 50:6 / Isaiah 53:2-11.
Twelve legions of angels are estimated to be around seventy-two thousand angels, but notice Jesus says He has ‘more than’ that number at His disposal, Matthew 26:53.
Remember the angel of the LORD, wiped out one-hundred and eighty-five thousand of God’s enemies in one moment, 2 Kings 19:35, how much more would these many angels affect those who were present?
The mob were armed with swords and clubs, Luke 22:52 / Matthew 26:47 / Matthew 26:55 / Mark 14:48. This tells us that both Roman soldiers and the temple police were present to arrest Jesus.
Luke is the only account which tells us the chief priests were present too, Luke 22:52. You have to wonder, how many people does it take to arrest one man? John 18:12.
Jesus tells them they’ve had ample opportunity over the past three and a half years to arrest Him, but they didn’t, Luke 22:52-53 / Matthew 26:55 / Mark 14:51. Now was the time because it was God’s timetable they were working under, not theirs.
The commander was usually in charge of a thousand men, but on this occasion, he didn’t have a thousand men with him. John simply tells us about him to help us understand that he was a man of high ranking, John 18:12.
It was now time to carry out the death sentence on Jesus, John 18:12 / Luke 22:53. Satan has been working through these people because He wanted Jesus out of the picture but little did he know that the cross was a part of God’s plan from the beginning, Genesis 3:15 / Romans 8:28. The devil had no idea what God’s plan was, he had no idea that he was actually putting God’s plan into effect, 1 Peter 1:10-12 / Acts 2:23.
Christ knew the Scriptures. He knew moment by moment they were to be fulfilled, Matthew 26:56 / Mark 14:49. Jesus is saying that He must die, but He is also saying all these things must happen to fulfil prophecy, Matthew 18:7 / John 10:35 / 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. He knew His sheep would be scattered, Matthew 26:56 / Mark 14:49 / Zechariah 13:7.
Why the disciples deserted Jesus and fled, Matthew 26:56 / Mark 14:50-52, is uncertain. Probably because they were afraid, John 20:19, and didn’t want to be arrested along with Jesus.
Notice that Jesus didn’t try to run away. He surrenders Himself to the authorities, and no attempt is made to capture the disciples. He voluntarily handed Himself over to them, John 18:12.
I don’t believe there was any need to bind Him, John 18:12, but such is the nature of Satan and the people he was using to rid the world of Jesus. There was no escaping for Jesus, but Jesus had no intention of even trying to escape.
He only had one thing on His mind, to lovingly fulfil the will of His Father, Luke 22:42. Jesus was in full control of everything which was happening around Him, and He has always been in control of everything going on around Him and will continue to be in control of everything, even to His resurrection and beyond.
As Christians, it’s so important to remember that as long as we remain under His control, He will protect us from harm, John 10:28-29. We must also remember that it’s so easy to abandon Him, especially when people criticise us for being Christians and abuse us for the faith we hold onto so dearly, 1 Timothy 6:12.
We know that Peter and John stayed kind of close to Jesus during His trial, John 18:15, but we don’t know why the others fled. One thing to notice is that Matthew includes himself as one of those deserting and fleeing from the scene, Matthew 26:56.
The young man who was left naked could have possibly been John Mark, Mark 14:51-52. Mark makes this brief statement here in order to identify himself as the writer of the document. I can imagine this event being both sad for the disciples later, but also humorous as they remember Mark running away naked.
From this time on, things begin to happen quickly in reference to the trials, crucifixion, burial and resurrection. Throughout the next three days, the disciples would experience the greatest trauma of their lives.
Expectations would be crushed, and their hopes in Jesus would be dashed. They would be in a state of disillusionment until Jesus redirected them through several appearances that would take place after the resurrection. After the trauma of all these events, they would be prepared to go forth for Jesus.
Coffman, in his commentary, says the following.
‘We should note that if Jesus was arrested on the night of Passover, as some suggest, then none of the chief priests or the temple guards would have been permitted to carry weapons after sundown of Nisan fourteenth. And so, this must have happened the night before, on Nisan thirteenth, technically the fourteenth, that Jesus was arrested. If it had been Nisan fourteenth after sundown, it would have been technically Nisan fifteenth, the night of the Passover meal, Luke 22:2.’
Jesus went through six trials before His execution. There were six parts to Jesus’ trial, three stages in a religious court and three stages before a Roman court. On the night of His arrest, Jesus was brought before Annas, John 18:12-14 / John 18:19-23, Caiaphas, Matthew 26:57-75, and the Sanhedrin, John 18:12-24 / Mark 14:53-65 / Matthew 26:57-68 / Luke 22:66-71, a group of religious leaders. In these trials He was charged with blasphemy, claiming to be the Son of God.
He was imprisoned at Caiaphas’ palace, and the Jewish High Priest and the Jewish High Court, the Sanhedrin, effectively asked Jesus two questions: ‘Are you the Messiah? And are you the Son of God?’
To both of these, Jesus answered, ‘I AM’, John 14:61 / Mark 14:60-64 / Matthew 26:63. This was enough to condemn Jesus for blaspheming God by claiming to be God. The Jews understood perfectly well what was alluded to by the term ‘I AM’ used by Jesus, Leviticus 24:16 / John 5:18.
Matthew, Mark and Luke don’t mention the preliminary hearing, only John.
Jesus was first taken before the powerful Annas, the ex-high priest and the power behind the current one, John 18:12-14 / John 18:19-23. These verses remind us of the important prophecy made by the current high priest, John 11:49-51, which he had said without realising the truth behind his statement. Perhaps he’s also underlining the fact that with two such scoundrels involved, Jesus had no hope of a fair trial.
While Jesus is on trial, we find Peter is about to deny Jesus three times just as Jesus said he would, John 13:37-38 / Luke 22:34 / Matthew 26:33-35 / Mark 14:29-31. Here we read about Peter’s first denial, but who is the ‘other disciple’ mentioned in John 18:15?
Traditionally, this has been accepted as John himself; this would be consistent with John’s habit of not naming himself, John 1:40 / John 13:23-25 / John 19:26 / John 20:2-8 / John 21:20-24. Also, Peter and John appear to have been constant companions, Luke 22:8 / Acts 3:1 / Acts 4:13 / Acts 8:14.
This unnamed disciple ‘was known to the high priest,’ John 18:15, which means he was well enough known for the servant girl to admit him. Peter and it appears John follow the group, including the Lord, to the house of the high priest, Matthew 26:58 / John 8:15.
It’s most likely that Annas and Caiaphas lived at the same address. John is known at the gate and allowed into the courtyard, and seeks permission for Peter to come in also, John 18:15-16.
Peter and John both enter and find a fire with people around and go to it to keep warm, John 18:17-18 / Luke 22:55 / Mark 14:54. It appears as if the other disciples had fled back to ‘his own’, in accordance with Jesus prophecy of John 16:32.
The girl at the gate sees Peter and recognises him as one of Jesus followers, Matthew 26:69 / Mark 14:66-67, she asks him about this and Peter makes that first terrible denial, John 18:17 / Luke 22:57 / Matthew 26:30 / Mark 14:68.
In John 18:17, we see the question asked by the maid is phrased to anticipate a negative answer, ‘you aren’t one of this man’s disciples, too, are you? Remember that the ‘other disciple’ was known to be one of Jesus’ followers; he had openly entered along with Jesus, John 18:15.
Questioned by a maid, ‘paidiske’, girl, he said, ‘I am not,’ John 18:17 / Luke 26:69-70. The other disciple was apparently in no danger, but why didn’t Peter own up? Perhaps he was taken by surprise when a mere girl challenged him; maybe he was afraid he would be recognised as the one who wounded Malchus.
We know that nearby are the ‘officers,’ John 18:18, who had been involved in the arrest of Jesus, John 18:13-14. A few hours ago, he had said he would die for Jesus, John 13:37, but now, a frightened man, he denies his Master.
When we compare this with Matthew 26:57-58, and with John 18:13 / John 18:15 / John 18:24, it suggests that the same court or courtyard is in view in each case. It’s probable that Annas lived in a part of the official palace of his son in law. The sending of Jesus to Caiaphas would be merely sending him across the courtyard.
As Peter is denying the Lord, the Lord is making His first defence. He’s being questioned by the high priest, either Annas or Caiaphas, about His teaching and His apostles, John 18:19.
It may have been that the authorities wanted the apostles as well to make sure that this sect was completely crushed; this would further explain Peter’s denials.
It wasn’t a judicial trial but rather a preliminary investigation; it would be in character for Annas to try to pin something on Jesus. Jesus is questioned ‘about His disciples and His teaching’, John 18:19, surely the questioner was well informed about both!
Jesus’ answer shows that the high priest’s questions were evilly motivated, John 18:20. What Jesus means is that He didn’t have two kinds of teaching, a harmless one for the general public and a very different one for the secret revolutionaries. The essence of His teaching was public property, John 18:21.
Jesus defends Himself by explaining the openness of all His actions; He never hid behind someone or conspired in a closed room. His entire statement had been in the open, for all to hear, John 18:21. Because of this answer, one of the officials struck Jesus, who then sought the reason why He was struck, John 18:22.
Annas was acting illegally because Jewish law required that evidence be heard from witnesses and that their testimony be shown to be in agreement, then a prisoner might be cross-examined.
The official who slapped Jesus was a member of the temple guard. Jesus is saying, ‘if I have said anything wrong, let it be revealed by proper legal procedures. If not, why hit me?’ John 18:23.
Notice that Jesus was bound, John 18:24. Jewish custom was for a prisoner’s hands to be tied behind their back. After being bound, Jesus is sent by Annas to Caiaphas as the official high priest, John 18:24. Evidently, the preliminary hearing before Annas has allowed the Sanhedrin time to assemble.
This was for the official ‘trial’ narrated by the Gospels, Mark 14:53-65 / Matthew 26:57-67. If Annas and Caiaphas lived in the same palace and the Sanhedrin met there for this ‘trial’, then John 18:24 would merely involve Jesus being led across a courtyard. Jesus is sent to Caiaphas’s quarters, where the entire council of the Sanhedrin had gathered to seek cause to have Jesus put to death, Luke 22:66.
Matthew, Mark and Luke record the account of Jesus before the Sanhedrin, but John doesn’t.
Though it was very late at night, Jesus was brought before the Jewish supreme court and tried Mark 14:53 / Matthew 26:57. Peter was following Jesus from a safe distance; he went into the courtyard and sat down beside some guards next to a fire, to see what was going to happen, Matthew 26:58 / Mark 14:54.
The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for any excuse to put Jesus to death, Matthew 26:59 / Mark 14:55. They bribed false witnesses who told contradictory stories about Him, Matthew 26:60 / Mark 14:56.
For a time, it appeared that the court would be unable to find consistent testimony by which to convict Jesus. Another group stood and gave false testimony, Mark 14:57. They accused Jesus of plotting to destroy the temple and in three days He would build another one, Matthew 26:61 / Mark 14:58.
Their testimony was untruthful because Jesus actually said, ‘You’ destroy this temple, referring to His body, and in three days I will raise it up, that is, rise from the dead, John 2:19.
In context, Jesus’ words were a prediction that the religious leaders would take His life and that He would rise from the dead three days later. There was no suggestion whatever of such a thing as the false witnesses alleged.
Even such a misrepresentative and malicious garbling of Jesus’ words, however, was useless to the chief priests, because there was no coherent account of such an alleged statement. One said one thing, and another declared something else, Mark 14:59.
All night long, the preliminary investigation had gone forward, and nothing had come of it. In desperation, Caiaphas, who was beginning to find the judge’s bench a very uncomfortable place, forsook the judicial status, usurped the role of a prosecutor, placed Jesus under oath, and demanded an answer, Mark 14:60, but he would ask a question first. Jesus remained silent, Matthew 26:63 / Mark 14:61.
Finally, the high priest asked Him if He were the Christ, Matthew 26:63 / Mark 14:61. When Jesus said, ‘I AM,’ they used this statement as evidence of blasphemy and convicted Him, Mark 14:61. Christ’s, ‘I AM’ claim here speaks of His Deity, John 6:35 / John 8:12 / John 8:58 / John 10:9 / John 10:11 / John 11:25 / John 14:6 / John 15:1.
Each of His ‘I AM’ claims is a claim that He is God, EGO EIMI, which is the Greek equivalent of YHWH, Exodus 3:13-14 / John 5:18. He is Eternal, Psalm 135:13, and self-existent, Psalm 88:6-7. The Jews certainly understood that Jesus was claiming to be God, John 8:57-59.
I used to think that sitting at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven refers to the final judgment when all men shall stand before the throne of God for sentencing, Matthew 26:64 / Mark 14:62. However, notice it says, ‘He’s sitting at the right hand.’ It doesn’t say He’s standing or He’s riding a horse; it says, He’s sitting.
I think what Jesus is saying there is, ‘Caiaphas, this day you are my judge, you and your people are judging me, but the day is coming and you’re going to see it when I’m sitting at the right hand of God, and I’m sending my judgement to you.’ And Caiaphas’s generation saw that prophecy come true.
In this text, Jesus is bringing the news of the passing of one era and the establishment of another in which the glory of God isn’t going to be in the temple made by hands anymore.
The high priest had heard enough; he tore his clothes in anger and didn’t need any more witnesses and accused Him of blasphemy, Matthew 26:65-66 / Mark 14:63-64.
They spat on Jesus, they blindfolded him, punched him, and mocked him and beat Him up, Matthew 26:67-68 / Mark 14:65 / Luke 22:63-65. There were six mockeries of Jesus in all, all of which were designed to totally humiliate Christ.
We would expect this kind of behaviour from the Romans, but since this took place in the court of the high priests of Israel, this tells us just how far from God they had come. The religious leaders allowed this to happen right in front of their very eyes.
This was the second of Jesus’ six trials, the first having been the arraignment before Annas, perhaps in the same palace where apartments for both Annas and Caiaphas were located around the courtyard.
The meeting of the Sanhedrin was probably not at full strength, its more noble members, such as Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, having already withdrawn. It may well be doubted that even a quorum was present, but, on the other hand, it may be assumed that every effort was made to attain one.
Jesus went through six trials before His execution. There were six parts to Jesus’ trial, three stages in a religious court and three stages before a Roman court. On the night of His arrest, Jesus was brought before Annas, Caiaphas, and the Sanhedrin, a group of religious leaders.
In these trials He was charged with blasphemy, claiming to be the Son of God. He was imprisoned at Caiaphas’ palace. The Jewish High Priest and the Jewish High Court, the Sanhedrin, effectively asked Jesus two questions, ‘Are you the Messiah? And are you the Son of God?’ To both of these, Jesus answered, ‘I AM.’ This was enough to condemn Jesus for blaspheming God by claiming to be God, John 8:57-59.
1. No formal change had been made against Him.
2. The arrest was made by the men who would be His judges.
The High Priests and the Sanhedrin were also the ones who accused Him of violating the Law, which said that the Council was not permitted to lay charges.
3. The trial was held at night.
Forbidden by the Law, because it was believed that the darkness might bind the mind of the accused and cause him to testify against himself.
4. His questioning by the High Priest was alone forbidden by the Law.
The Judges were not allowed to question the accused, because he might be led into providing evidence against himself.
5. The law required the High Priest to ‘search, enquire and ask diligently’, if the charge against the accused was true, Deuteronomy 13:14.
6. A trial could not be held before sunrise.
So that potential witnesses for the defence could be present.
7. A guilty verdict could not be pronounced on the same day as the trial.
A night must intervene between trial and sentence so that the Judges could meditate on the verdict.
8. After the verdict, a period of nine hours must be allowed for potential objections to be made to the verdict.
9. The verdict must be pronounced in the Chamber of Stones, the room in the Temple, where the Sanhedrin held its Meetings, before being made public.
10. The death sentence was invalid because it was not the unanimous verdict of the full Council. Joseph of Arimathea was not present, Luke 23:50-51.
11. The testimony of the witnesses, procured by the Priests, on which the ‘Guilty’ verdict was based, was false.
They claimed that Jesus said, ‘I will destroy this Temple’.
12. The Law forbade the holding of a trial on a Friday.
The trial was illegal because it was held on a day that was followed by an Annual Sabbath, the Passover, John 18:28.
In John 18:25-27, we see Peter’s second, Luke 22:58, and third denials. It’s difficult to harmonise the accounts of the denials in the Gospels with that of John. This was during Jesus’ trial before Caiaphas, John 18:24-28.
Matthew and Mark relate that before this, Peter had gone out to the ‘porch’ or ‘gateway’, Matthew 26:71 / Mark 14:68. Perhaps, deeply ashamed by his first denial, he wanted to slip away unseen but was unable to escape unobserved.
Matthew and Mark both tell of his being approached in the porch by a ‘maid’. Accused of having been with Jesus, ‘he denied it with an oath’, Matthew 26:71-72 / Mark 14:69-70.
Peter ‘was standing and warming himself’ at a charcoal fire, John 18:18. This charcoal, only mentioned by John, would provide much heat but little light.
And he is challenged by bystanders, ‘You aren’t one of his disciples too, are you?’ again he answers, ‘I am not’, Luke 22:58. Then he is challenged by a slave of the high priest, who is also a kinsman of Malchus, ‘Didn’t I see you with him in the garden?’ John 18:26.
The Gospels tell what was said both to and about Peter regarding his speech, Matthew 26:73, the bystanders say, ‘certainly you are also one of them, for your accent betrays you’.
Mark 14:70, the bystanders say, ‘Certainly you are one of them, for you are a Galilean.’ In Luke 22:59, another bystander, probably a maid, says, ‘Certainly this man was with him, for he is a Galilean.’
So, we see he was twice challenged about his presence with the Lord. First, by a slave girl, one of the most unimportant persons imaginable. Her question expected a negative answer, and Peter takes the easy way out.
Next, by a relative of the servant whose ear Peter had cut off. Peter again denied any link with Jesus, and as he concluded his statement, the crowing began. John’s account is more discreet than the other Gospels; he merely states, ‘Peter again denied it and at once the cock crowed’, Matthew 26:34 / John 13:38 / Mark 14:30.
Notice that Matthew, Matthew 26:34, and John, John 13:38, both say that, ‘before the rooster crows’, Peter will have denied the Lord three times. And now notice that Mark, Mark 14:30, says that ‘before the rooster crows ‘twice,’ Peter will deny Christ three times. Although some see this as a contradiction, when we actually take a moment to slowly read the text itself, we will soon realise there’s no contradiction.
Notice how Matthew, Matthew 26:34, and John, John 13:38, don’t expressly state how many times the rooster will crow. They both simply say that Peter will deny Jesus three times, ‘before the rooster crows’, but they don’t tell us how many times it will crow.
I believe it’s reasonable to accept that Mark is being a little more specific in terms of how many times the rooster will actually crow. In fact, if you look at the word ‘twice’ in Mark 14:10 and Mark 14:72, you will notice that it has a footnote, which tells us that ‘some early manuscripts do not have ‘twice’.
In other words, it’s possible that different accounts are due to an early copyist error in Mark, which resulted in the insertion of the word, ‘twice’ in early manuscripts.
Luke records in his account that at this moment, Jesus was outside, probably on his way from Annas’ quarters to Caiaphas’s, and he looked straight at Peter, who broke down and cried, Luke 22:61-62 / Matthew 26:74-75 / Mark 14:71-72.
We can’t help but sympathise with Peter at this point as he saw Jesus and then remembered what He prophesied about his denying Him three times, Luke 22:33-34 / Matthew 26:33-35 / Mark 14:29-31 / John 13:36-38. He literally was sobbing his heart out.
This was probably one of the lowest points in his life, and it was an event he wasn’t going to forget for the rest of his life. It’s interesting that things seem to happen in threes for Peter from this point on, John 21:15-17 / Acts 10:9-16 / Acts 10:17-19.
What Peter was demonstrating here was genuine godly sorrow, which was the opposite of what Judas was demonstrating, as he went on to hang himself, Matthew 27:5 / Acts 1:18 / 2 Corinthians 7:10.
If we learn anything from Peter, we should learn that he didn’t allow this occasion to affect the rest of his life. He went on to become a powerful apostle for the Lord and became bolder when he spoke more openly about the Christ, Acts 2.
As Christians, we too will make many mistakes, some out of fear of being persecuted, but we must learn to draw a line under those occasions and move on. Think back upon the contributing factors in their failure.
1. They hadn’t listened when Jesus had frequently warned them of His impending suffering.
They had been too eager to argue about who would be the greatest in the kingdom.
2. They were overconfident. Earlier that evening, Jesus warned them that they would flee, but they didn’t believe it.
3. They didn’t watch and pray in the garden as He instructed.
Thus, they were not mentally prepared to face the challenge. We could fail in the hour of temptation for these same reasons.
Peter denied Jesus, but he repented. Judas was remorseful and returned the pieces of silver, Matthew 27:3. But he later hung himself, Matthew 27:5 / Acts 1:18.
There was a difference between the reaction of the two men to their discovery of what Jesus said each would do. Peter’s reaction led him to return to faithfulness with a stronger conviction. Judas’ reaction led him to further guilt and subsequently to his own suicide, Matthew 27:5 / Acts 1:18.
Note the governor’s movement in and out of the Praetorium.
1. Outside, John 18:28-32.
2. Inside, John 18:33-37.
3. Outside, John 18:38-40.
4. Inside, John 19:1-3.
5. Outside, John 19:4-7.
6. Inside, John 19:8-11.
7. Outside, John 19:12-16.
‘The Praetorium’ was the Roman governor’s official residence when in Jerusalem, which could be one of two locations.
1. The palace of Herod on the western side of the city, or
2. The castle of Antonia, which housed the Roman garrison and overlooked the temple.
If the ‘luthostratos’ pavement, John 19:13, in the church of the Flagellation is authentic, it would be the latter.
Notice they wanted to be able to eat the Passover, John 18:28. This appears to contradict the other Gospel writers because it suggests that Jesus is going to be crucified on the day before the Passover meal. In other words, how can Jesus have eaten the Passover meal if the time for eating the Passover meal hadn’t arrived yet?
The answer to this question is fairly straightforward when we remember that the entire Feast of Unleavened Bread is referred to as Passover. We see this in the Old Testament, where Ezekiel refers to the Passover as a feast of seven days, Ezekiel 45:21, and we see this in the New Testament, Luke 22:1.
When we keep this in mind, John 18:28 becomes clearer. The priests didn’t want to defile themselves at any point during the feast of Passover because they would be eating sacrifices every night.
According to Numbers 28:16-24, they offered sacrifices to God every day, for the entire seven days of the feast. Jesus is now on trial before Pilate. John doesn’t mention Jesus being sent to Herod Antipas, Luke 23:6-12, or the message received by Pilate from his wife, Matthew 27:19.
Pilate is abruptly introduced into the narrative, without any personal details, which suggests that he was well-known to John’s readers. Pilate was made procurator in 26 A.D.
He established himself in Caesarea, a Roman city on the Mediterranean coast. He was extremely harsh in his day-to-day dealings. On one occasion, he set up Roman standards in the temple, causing a riot.
Within six days, they were removed; perhaps this is why he seems now to be more tolerant of Jewish ways. He had the power of life and death over his subjects; he had about one-hundred and twenty cavalry and over five-thousand infantries, yet he himself was still subject to Caesar.
The whole assembly, Mark 15:1 / Luke 23:1, that is, all of the accusers who came to the garden, were men with evil on their hearts, men with false accusations with one thing on their mind, to get rid of Jesus once and for all, Luke 23:2 / Matthew 17:27 / Mark 12:17.
Notice the reason the religious rulers didn’t enter the Praetorium, ‘to avoid ceremonial uncleanness’ etc., John 18:28. A religious Jew wouldn’t enter the house of a Gentile, Acts 10:38 / Acts 11:3.
Pilate goes out to them and asks what accusation they bring against this Man? John 18:29. They said if this Jesus wasn’t an evildoer, they wouldn’t have delivered Him to Pilate,’ John 18:30. They also said, they found Jesus misleading their nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King, Luke 23:2.
Notice also the hypocrisy which shows they were determined to have an innocent man killed, John 18:29-30, they were prepared to lie to achieve their purpose, Luke 23:2.
They charged Him with sedition, rebellion and treason, Luke 23:2. Since Jesus was sinless, the only option they had was to make up a bunch of lies about Him to get Him charged.
Pilate tells them to take Jesus and judge Him according to their law, but the Jews reply that they aren’t permitted to put anyone to death, John 18:31. The word ‘yourselves’ is emphatic; if the prisoner couldn’t be charged with crimes against Roman law, then it wasn’t for Pilate to decide.
Their reply reveals their desire, not that Jesus shall be fairly tried, merely that he be killed, ‘it’s not lawful for us to put any man to death’, John 18:32. The Jews didn’t have the authority to carry out sentences of capital punishment that were determined by their own courts, capital crimes had to be tried by Roman officials.
They wanted to put Jesus to death in accordance with Leviticus 24:16, which demands death for the blasphemer, but as they were under Roman Law, they couldn’t do it without Pilate’s permission. Jesus had predicted that He would die by crucifixion, John 3:14 / John 12:32 / Matthew 20:19.
If the Jews had executed Him, it would have been by stoning, the Law’s penalty for blasphemy, but He was to be executed by being crucified, a method never used by the Jews.
Most likely, the chief priests wanted Jesus to be put to death by the Romans because of the implications for Jesus’ claims to be the Son of God, Galatians 3:13, ‘Curse. Curse. Cursed.’ Deuteronomy 21:23.
Notice the words, ‘You, ‘emphasis’ you are the King of the Jews?’ John 18:33 / Matthew 27:11 / Mark 15:2 / Luke 23:3. All four Gospels record that this was the charge on which the Sanhedrin asked for Jesus to be condemned.
Pilate asked Jesus if He was the king of the Jews, and Jesus replied, you have said so, Matthew 27:11 / Mark 15:2 / Luke 23:3. Jesus admits that He is a king. Pilate must have expected a political revolutionary, a self-styled ‘king’ who posed a threat to the rule of Rome. Jesus was the King of Israel, John 1:49 / John 12:13, but His kingdom was spiritual, John 18:36.
The word ‘My Kingdom’, ‘basileia’, means sovereignty, royal power, dominion. Jesus asserts the spiritual nature of His reign, ‘My basileia’ is not of this world, not from the world,’ John 18:36.
If it were physical, then His disciples would fight, John 18:36. It’s not worldly in worldly means, ‘My kingdom doesn’t belong to this world. If it did, my followers would be fighting to save me from arrest by the Jews,’ John 18:36-37.
In the garden, He had forbidden His followers to fight, even to save Him, John 18:10-11 / Matthew 26:51-52 / Matthew 5:43-48 / Romans 12:17-21 / Ephesians 6:10-17.
In John 18:37, we find an ironic question, ‘You are a king then. You!’ Obviously, Jesus wasn’t a leader of the sedition, just as obviously, He claimed to be King of the Jews. What did he mean? Jesus’ answer is ‘you say it correctly, you speak correctly, for I am a King, certainly I am the King!’
Jesus says, ‘This is why He was born and for this reason He has come into the world, to bear witness to the truth, John 18:37. Everyone who is of the truth, is a friend of the truth, who belongs to the truth, hears and listens to my voice,’ John 18:37.
If the governor’s sole consideration had been justice, that would have been the end of the matter, but he was influenced by considerations of political expediency and personal safety.
One who is ‘of the truth,’ John 18:37, will put it before every other consideration, Proverbs 23:23. The word, ‘truth’, ‘alethea,’ means reality, that which is genuine as opposed to that which is false, John 14:6. Pilate wasn’t ‘of the truth’, Luke 8:15.
Pilate tells Jesus that He is a king, and Jesus tells him that He is a king, and this was the reason He was born, He was born to testify concerning the truth, John 18:37. Everyone who is of truth hears Jesus’ voice, John 18:37. Pilate then asks him what is truth? John 18:38.
We don’t know what Pilate’s attitude was; John merely records the fact. Pilate’s question couldn’t be answered by a simple yes or no. In the political sense, as Pilate would use the term, he wasn’t king, and in the spiritual sense, as Jesus used the term, He was king.
Jesus replies to Pilate and asks if he is saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell him about Me? Matthew 27:34. In John 18:35, Pilate is basically saying, ‘I am not a Jew, am I?’ As if to say, ‘I am not interested in your theocratic subtleties.’
The governor is impatient and says, ‘Your own nation and the chief priests, the Sanhedrin, have handed you over to me. What have you done?’ What had caused the Jews, who might have been expected to support their ‘king’, to demand his death? He must be guilty of some serious crime. What is it? John 18:35.
Despite the chief priests and elders accusing Jesus harshly of many things, Mark 15:3, Jesus didn’t answer, Matthew 27:12. Pilate asks Jesus if He hears all the things being testified against Him, Matthew 27:13, but Jesus didn’t answer, Matthew 27:14 / Mark 15:4. Despite Pilate asking Jesus about the allegations, Jesus remained silent, which amazed Pilate, Matthew 27:14 / Mark 15:5.
The Jews accused Him of many things but Pilate was honest enough to declare that he found no basis to charge Jesus, John 18:38 / Luke 23:4. He was to say this, three times, John 19:4 / John 19:6. This was in accordance with Roman law, Matthew 27:11 / 1 Timothy 8:13.
Pilate questions Jesus about His claims but under Roman Law, there were no grounds to have Him executed, John 18:31. Jesus’ teaching did stir up the people, Luke 23:5, but the people who were stirred up weren’t the common people; it was the religious leaders, Mark 7:1-9. It was no longer the Israel of God, but their nation. Because Jesus was Galilean and Galilee wasn’t Pilate’s jurisdiction, he sent Jesus off to Herod, Luke 23:6-7.
Luke is the only writer who records Jesus before Herod, Luke 23:6-12. Herod Antipas was the ruler of Galilee and Perea, which was where most of Jesus’ ministry took place.
This is where we know that earlier the Pharisees lied about Herod wanting to kill Jesus, Luke 13:31, because we see that Herod had an opportunity to do so, but didn’t because he would send Jesus back to Pilate, Luke 23:11.
Herod only wanted to see Jesus because he had heard of the many miracles that Jesus had performed, Luke 23:8. It’s clear he thought of Jesus as some kind of showman or magician who was here to entertain the masses, Acts 4:26-27. Jesus didn’t answer Herod because He didn’t accept his authority; Herod had no place of authority, Luke 23:9.
Probably because the chief priests were vehemently accusing him, Luke 23:11, Herod and his soldiers ridiculed and mocked Jesus, then even dressed Him in an elegant robe,’ Luke 23:11.
We also see the tremendous self-control of Jesus; He knew exactly what was happening and what would eventually happen, John 10:17-18. Notice that Pilate and Herod became friends, Luke 23:12.
The hatred may have started between Pilate and Herod when Pilate had previously put down a probable insurrection in Galilee that was under Herod’s jurisdiction, Luke 13:1-2. Whatever the reason was for their hatred of each other seems to be laid to rest at this point.
Pilate now summons the chief priests and the rulers and the people and says to them, they have brought Jesus to him as one who incites the people to rebellion, and behold, having examined Jesus before them, I have found no guilt in this man regarding the charges which you make against Him, Luke 23:13-24.
He tells them that even Herod didn’t find anything in Jesus which describes death, Luke 23:15. Then Pilate declares that he will punish Jesus and then set Him free, Luke 23:16.
Pilate appears before what was now a mob and offers Jesus as the one to be set free, as was the tradition at that time of the year, John 18:39 / Matthew 27:15 / Mark 15:6 / Luke 23:17.
Pilate knew that releasing Jesus would not please the crowd. So, he tried to please the mob with a series of four cowardly compromises. Giving them what they wanted, without this whole fiasco turning into a gross miscarriage of justice.
It was a custom of the Roman governor to release someone during the Passover feast, John 18:39 / Matthew 27:15 / Mark 15:6 / Luke 23:17. This was done in order to appease the most radical Jews of the Roman Empire who were in Jerusalem at this time. Pilate asks the mob, do they wish then that he release for them the King of the Jews? John 18:39.
We are told that Barabbas was a notorious prisoner, Matthew 27:16, who had had been imprisoned with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the insurrection, Mark 15:7, a robber, John 18:40 and a murderer, Luke 23:19.
From this Mark’s account, we learn that Barabbas was a terrorist against the Roman government, Mark 15:7. He was possibly a member of the Zealot group of Jews whose ambition was to free Palestine from Roman occupation.
On this occasion and others, it seems that Pilate was trying to find some reason to release Jesus. Pilate once more asks, whom do they want to be released? Barabbas, or Jesus, who is called Christ? Matthew 27:17. Mark records that Pilate asks them if they want him to release for them the King of the Jews? Mark 15:8-9.
Again, we see their hypocrisy; that was the kind of Messiah they wanted, one who would throw off the Roman yoke. They lied about Jesus because they were determined to kill Him, John 11:53. Pilate knew they were motivated by ‘envy’, Matthew 27:18 / Mark 15:10.
Pilate sat on the judgment seat’, Matthew 27:19 / Acts 18:12 / Acts 18:16-17, was a raised platform on which roman judge sat to pronounce sentence and Matthew 27:19, tells us of the message from Pilate’s wife, ‘have nothing to do with that righteous man.’
Notice it was the chief priests and the elders who persuaded the crowds to ask for Barabbas and to put Jesus to death, Matthew 27:20. It is the religious leaders who are stirring up the crowd to release Barabbas, Mark 15:11. Pilate again asked the mob, which of the two do they want him to release? And they said, Barabbas.’ Matthew 27:21 / John 18:40.
Pilate then asked what he should do with Jesus, who is called Christ? And they all said, Crucify Him! Matthew 27:22. Mark tells us that Pilate asked them, what shall he do with Him whom they call the King of the Jews?, Mark 15:12, and they shouted back, Crucify Him! Mark 15:13.
Pilate again asked, why, what evil has He done? But they kept shouting all the more, saying, ‘Crucify Him!’ Matthew 27:23 / Mark 15:14. Pilate appears to be determined to release Jesus, and so once again he addressed the mob, but they kept on calling out, saying, ‘Crucify, crucify Him!’ Luke 23:20-21.
The word ‘him’ isn’t in the text. This has been called ‘an ominous chant, a monotonous refrain, ‘Crucify! Crucify! Crucify! Crucify!’ manipulated by their rulers, the mob shouted the same demand.
For a third time, he asks them what evil Jesus man done? He has found in Jesus no guilt demanding death; therefore, he will punish Jesus and release Him, Luke 23:22. But they were insistent, with loud voices asking that He be crucified, and their voices began to prevail, Luke 23:23.
Believing that the mob wouldn’t want a violent thug released to them, it didn’t work. The mob chose Barabbas, John 18:40 / Matthew 27:20 / Mark 15:11 / Luke 23:19.
Pilate wasn’t a Jew and had little understanding or sympathy for Jewish Law. He had the power of life and death over the people, but he would be reluctant to do anything that would disturb the peace; he didn’t want a riot on his hands, Matthew 27:24.
The nationalistic emotions of the multitudes, therefore, were running high. As governor of the region, Pilate had to make compromises with the intense Jewish multitudes in order to prevent riots in the city.
With great pomp and ceremony, Pilate had a bowl of water brought to him and washed his hands, Matthew 27:24 / Deuteronomy 21:6-9. He tells the mob ‘I am innocent of the blood of this good man, Matthew 27:24.
Notice that John doesn’t record Pilate’s ‘hand washing’. The responsibility is yours!’ And they said, that fine with us, ‘His blood is on us and on our children!’ Matthew 27:25 / Acts 20:26 / Matthew 27:24-26.
Wishing to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas for them, Matthew 27:26 / Mark 15:15, and Pilate pronounced a sentence that their demand be granted, Luke 23:24. He then released Barabbas but delivered Jesus to the mob, Luke 23:25.