John Chapter 18:1-18

The Gospel Of John Chapter 18:1-18

I. Outline: I. The Arrest In The Garden: 18:1-12 II. Jesus Before Annas/Caiaphas: 18:13-23 III. Peter’s Denial: 18:24-27 IV. Jesus Before Pilate: 18:28-40

II. Introductory Comments: ‘There is no more time for private counsel with the disciples. The hour of darkness has come….He will be betrayed by one of His closest friends. He will be arrested, mocked, ridiculed, falsely and illegally tried and condemned. He will be denied by the one closest to Him, and the same one who swore that he would never let Him down. Then, declared innocent at first, He will, because of political expediency, be given over to His murderers.’

(Butler p. 349) ‘As in the other Gospels it is the events surrounding the crucifixion and the resurrection that form the climax of the whole book…..Thus his account of the arrest stresses Jesus’ complete mastery of the situation, and there are touches like the “It is finished” (19:30) of the dying Saviour which indicate plainly that the outcome was completely in God’s control.’ (Morris p. 739) From these final chapters in the Gospel of John, it is clear that the Gospel writers did not depend upon their material from some mysterious and unknown source document. In contrast to the other Gospels, John mentions a trial before Annas (18:12-24); additional details about Jesus’ hearing before Pilate, the committal of Mary to the beloved disciple (19:25-27), the last four words from the cross, the visit of Peter and the other disciple to the tomb (20:3-10), the interview with Mary Magdalene (20:11-18), the remarks of Thomas (20:24-29), the appearance to the seven disciples at Galilee (21:1-24). In addition, John omits various details recorded in the other Gospels, the agony in Gethsemane, the rendering of the veil, the group of women at the tomb, the walk to Emmaus, the great commission, and the ascension.

III. Commentary: 1

John 18:1 ‘When Jesus had spoken these words, He went forth with His disciples over the ravine of the Kidron, where there was a garden, into which He Himself entered, and His disciples.’

‘He went forth’-either from the upper room or from some point within the city. ‘over the ravine of the Kidron’-John correctly describes the Kidron as a “ravine”,i.e. a seasonal water course which is dry during the summer, but is a brook in the winter, especially after heavy rains. This ravine runs north and south along the eastern wall of Jerusalem, separating the city from the Mount of Olives.

‘Kidron’-meaning possibly dark or turbulent. ‘where there was a garden’-In contrast to Matthew and Mark, John doesn’t give the proper name for the garden (Gethsemane), in addition, of all the writers, it is only John who calls Gethsemane a ‘garden’. One more indication that John already knew that his readers also knew the name of this garden from the other Gospel accounts which had been previously written. Gethsemane means “olive-press”. ‘This then, was a garden in the sense of a grove of olive trees which had the equipment for making olive oil.’ (Lenski p.

1173) Points To Note: 1.

From Luke 22:39 we learn that this garden was located on the lower slopes of the Mount of Olives. The exact site cannot definitely be fixed, but a very old garden with olives trees does exist in this area that appears to go back prior to the Moslem conquest of Jerusalem. 2. This may have been a private garden, for many well-to-do people in Jerusalem had gardens in this section outside the city. 3. Olive trees can survive for centuries, but Josephus records that the Roman General Titus (A.D. 70) cut down all the trees East of the city of Jerusalem.

John 18:2 ‘Now Judas also, who was betraying Him, knew the place; for Jesus had often met there with His disciples.’ ‘who was betraying Him’-that is, who was in the process of betraying Him, or who was betraying Him at that very moment. In addition, who, with the soldiers was presently on the way to arrest Jesus.

‘knew the place; for Jesus had often meet there’ Points To Note:

2

1.

Luke 21:37 reveals that Jesus and His disciples had every night during that week had stayed the night on the mount of Olives. We must conclude that Jesus had used this Garden as a place to camp out, and Judas knew that tonight, as all the other nights, Jesus would be here. See also Luke 22:39. 2. Lenski notes, ‘purposely, it seems, Jesus had spent the past three nights in Gethsemane; he may have used its shelter also during previous visits to the city. Judas was to know where Jesus could be found when the hour had come. We also see how easily Jesus could have frustrated the plans of Judas; all he needed to do was to avoid Gethsemane and to go to some new place for the night. By again going to Gethsemane, Jesus who knew the plans of Judas, deliberately placed himself into the hands of his enemies.’ (pp. 1173-1174) 3. Let the reader be impressed, that Jesus isn’t acting like a deceiver, some man bent on earthly power, who is filled with self interest. Jesus won’t be “caught”, rather He will voluntarily allow Himself to be taken (John 10:18). 4. Between this verse and the next is Jesus’ prayer in the Garden, which is recorded in Matthew 26:36-46; Mark 14:32-42; Luke 22:41-46.

John 18:3 ‘Judas, then, having received the Roman cohort, and officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, came there with lanterns and torches and weapons.’

‘Roman cohort’-A cohort could range from 300 to 600 men. A Roman cohort was stationed in the fortress of Antonio which overlooked the Temple Courts. ‘During the Jewish festivals (such as the present Passover), when Jewish patriots streamed to Jerusalem in great numbers and enthusiasm ran high, the garrison was enlarged, in order to be ready for all emergencies…It seems well-nigh certain that permission from its use had been obtained from Pilate, the governor. Matthew 27:18,19 clearly proves (?) that he knew about the “case” of Jesus before the accused was actually brought to him.’

(Hendriksen p. 377) Permission for using these soldiers may have been obtained from Pilate himself or some lesser Roman authority. In view of the events surrounding Jesus’ triumphal entry, it might have been easy to convince the Romans to arrest Jesus, especially at night, when all the people were inside and occupied with the Passover festivities.

Butler notes, ‘It was not, as we have seen, the intention to arrest Him during the feast least there should be a popular tumult (uprising) (Matthew 26:5); but now that an opportunity offered of seizing Him secretly at dead of night when all were asleep or engaged at the paschal meal, and therefore without danger of interference or uproar, His enemies could not hesitate. Once in their hands, the rest was easy. A hasty trial, a prejudged condemnation, an immediate execution, and the hated Prophet of Galilee was forever removed out of their way.’ (p. 353)

‘and officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees’-these officers were the ‘temple police’ which were sent by the Sanhedrin, the Jewish High Court, which was composed of Pharisees and Sadducees, the party which included the chief priests. Hence the full authority and support of the Sanhedrin when with these soldiers. This was quite a large force, but remember the temple police had failed to arrest Jesus on other occasions

3

(John 7:45). They weren’t taking any chances, especially if Jesus and His followers tried to flee in the night, or if a mob quickly gathered in support of Jesus.

‘with lanterns, and torches and weapons’-The lanterns were probably oil lamps.

A portion of the group was provided with lanterns and torches, just in case the garden had to be searched. ‘They would need lanterns and torches, even in a clear night and under a brilliant moon, because the western side of Olivet abounds in deserted tombs and caves.’

(Butler p. 353)

John 18:4 ‘Jesus therefore, knowing all the things that were coming upon Him, went forth, and said to them, “Whom do you seek?”’ ‘knowing all the things that were coming’-And yet, in spite of this knowledge, which included knowing beforehand about the intense humiliation, ridicule and physical torture He was about to suffer, Jesus instead of prolonging His arrest, went out to meet His enemies.

‘”Whom do you seek?”’-Jesus remains in complete control of the situation. ‘Here is the courage of a man who will face things out’ (Barclay p. 261) Once again, be impressed that Jesus wasn’t captured or “caught”, rather He voluntarily placed Himself in their hands. Now what impostor, bent on power, would do such a thing? With very little effort, Jesus could have frustrated their plans to seize Him, and probably have lived to a ripe old age.

John 18:5 ‘They answered Him, “Jesus the Nazarene.” He said to them, “I am He”. And Judas also who was betraying Him, was standing with them.”

It seems that prior to this, Judas had kissed Jesus repeatedly (Matthew 26:49; Mark 14:45), ‘and then Jesus at once faced the crowd of captors and demanded, “Whom are you seeking?” Judas was allowed to carry out his prearranged plan regarding the kiss, but immediately Jesus takes the situation out of Judas’ hands into his own. Not by a secretly arranged sign is Jesus to be identified to his captors but by an open declaration of his own.’ (Lenski p. 1177)

John 18:6 ‘When therefore He said to them, “I am He”, they drew back, and fell to the ground.’ “drew back, and fell to the ground”- Rather, Jesus catches them by surprise.

Instead of retreating, Jesus confidently and forcefully moves toward them. ‘It is possible that those in front recoiled from Jesus’ unexpected advance, so that they bumped those behind them, causing them to stumble and fall.’ (Morris pp. 743-744) And yet, some see something more happening here. It would appear that the Roman troops are the first line of defense against Jesus. Lenski notes, ‘Trained soldiers of the Roman type, standing in formation, do not go down so easily, including even their chief commander.’ (p. 1181) Were they caught off guard by His advance and confidence, had they heard that great 4

powers were at His command? Or, did the mere words of Jesus, words which had silenced the devil, resurrected the dead, calmed the sea, and Created the worlds, push them back? Lenski notes that this action demonstrates, ‘if the Lord did not voluntarily intend to give himself into death, he would have been well able to protect himself and to hinder his enemies, not needing other people’s help thought his disciples dared to offer it.

Very properly they should have thought: lo, if this man can do this with a single word, which is not even a curse but a friendly answer, it surely must signify something especial that he so willingly yields himself and allows himself to be captured.’ (p. 1182) ‘and still He waited for action. His capture was not effected by their superior astuteness or power, but by His ready consent.’ (Tenney p. 255)

John 18:7 ‘Again therefore He asked them, “Whom do you seek?” And they said, “Jesus the Nazarene.”’

Notice it is almost as if Jesus is saying, ‘Yes, you can arrest Me.’ Here we have Jesus interrogating those who are sent to arrest Him.

John 18:8 ‘Jesus answered, “I told you that I am He; if therefore you seek Me, let these go their way.”’ ‘let these go their way’-Even in His great hour of trial, Jesus is thinking about the welfare of His disciples rather than His own safety and physical comfort. These words also infer to the authorities, that He is willing to be arrested, He won’t put up a fight, and that He is alone. The Good Shepherd lays down His life for His sheep. The Sanhedrin accepted these terms, because they probably thought, with Jesus out of the way, what could the disciples do? In addition, convicting one man is much easier than dealing with 12. These words are a clear signal to the disciples to leave, that Jesus doesn’t expect them to fight.

John 18:9 ‘that the word might be fulfilled which He spoke, “Of those whom Thou hast given Me I lost not one.”’ ‘that the word might be fulfilled’-John 17:12. In preserving them physically at this moment, He was also protecting them spiritually. At this point in their lives, to be arrested with Jesus and so on, might have caused great spiritual harm. Jesus still remains in control, He is exercising His Divine powers in guarding His disciples against a temptation that might overwhelm their faith (1 Corinthians 10:13).

John 18:10 ‘Simon Peter therefore having a sword, drew it, and struck the high priest’s slave, and cut off his right ear; and the slave’s name was Malchus.’

5

‘drew it, and struck’-according to Luke 22:49, the disciples had asked if now was the time to smite with the sword, but Peter hadn’t waited for an answer. ‘John names Peter as the man who wielded the sword, whereas the Synoptists leave him nameless.’ (Morris p.

745) The sword here was either a long knife or a short sword or dagger like weapon.

‘cut off his right ear’-it appears that the slave moved to the side as Peter lurched out and struck. ‘Just how one could swing a sword at an opponent and only clip off an ear is seen if the servant saw Peter lunge and swing and in the instant dodged to escape the blow. Thus a solid blow which might have split the head or severed the shoulder, was almost escaped.’ (Foster p. 1238) It is clear that Peter fully intended to inflict serious harm, for he was aiming for that man’s head!

‘the slave’s name was Malchus’-‘It is worthy of note in passing that this record, which not only gives the name of the servant but tells that it was his right ear which was severed by Peter, certainly is the record of one who was an eyewitnesses and not the record of someone in the second century church making up silly little subjective myths about a mythical Jesus!’ (Butler p. 355) Points To Note: 1.

Luke records that Jesus instantly healed the ear which had been severed (Luke 22:51).

Once again, Jesus manifests His power and demonstrates that His death will be completely voluntary in nature. He has the power to destroy His enemies, but that isn’t God’s plan (Matthew 26:53). 2. Tenney notes, ‘Judas arrived with armed men to capture Jesus; Peter drew arms to defend Him. Judas apprehended Him by stealth; Peter defended Him openly. Judas betrayed Him in cold blood; Peter attacked Jesus’ enemies…Judas’ crime was deliberate throughout; Peter’s blunder in drawing the sword was prompted by a loyal though mistaken impulsiveness.

The chilly indifference of unbelief and the erratic action of belief which had not yet reached stability was alike destructive.’ (p. 256) In addition, by immediately healing the ear of the high priest’s servant, Jesus is protecting Peter from retaliation. Just be impressed with how Jesus remains the master of this whole situation. None of the disciples are arrested and none of them are killed, even after one of them tries to kill those on the other side.

John 18:11 ‘Jesus therefore said to Peter, “Put the sword into the sheath; the cup which the Father has given Me, shall I not drink it?”’ “the cup which the Father has given Me, shall I not drink it?”

Points To Note:

6

1.

The cup under consideration is the cup of suffering (Matthew 26:39). Notice the attitude of Jesus, if suffering must be experienced to further the purposes of God, then Jesus will gladly submit to whatever suffering is necessary! Is this our attitude? Or, do we use suffering as an excuse why we can’t keep certain commandments of God? 2. In addition to the above: A. Jesus must be able to say before Pilate that His kingdom is not of this world, and therefore, that’s why His followers aren’t engaging in carnal means to trying to protect Him or work towards His freedom (18:36). B. If Jesus had wished to defend Himself, He had other means to protect Himself (Matthew 26:53). C. The death of Jesus was prophesied in the Scriptures (Matthew 26:55-56). ‘Hence, this yielding was, in reality, no surrender at all. It was victory!’ (Hendriksen p. 382)

John 18:12 ‘So the Roman cohort and the commander, and the officers of the Jews, arrested Jesus and bound Him,’ ‘and bound Him’-‘Though Jesus willingly submitted Himself, they began this whole unjust procedure by seizing and binding Him. The disciples then flee (Matthew 26:56).’

(Harkrider p. 120)

John 18:13 ‘and led Him to Annas first; for he was father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year.’ ‘led Him to Annas first’-Even though Annas had been deposed as high priest, many of the Jews still viewed Him as the legitimate high priest, since according to the Law such a position was to be held for life (Numbers 20:28; 35:25). John is the one Gospel writer who informs us that Jesus first appeared before Annas. ‘Godet reminds us that according to Jewish law a prisoner could not be sentenced on the same day as his trial….the appearance before Annas did not fully meet the legal requirements, but “they must at least try to save appearances as far as possible, and to offer the semblance of a first preliminary meeting, before that at which the sentence should be pronounced.” (Morris p. 747)

‘father-in-law of Caiaphas’-Ever since the Romans had occupied Palestine the high priests no longer held their office for life. They were now appointed by the Romans as they saw fit. Annas had been high priest from A.D. 6 to A.D. 15. His son-in-law Caiaphas was appointed and would rule from A.D. 18 to 36 A.D. Hendriksen notes, ‘Though deposed, he remained for a long time the ruling spirit of the Sanhedrin. He was the dominant member of the Jewish hierarchical machine…It generally takes a clever manipulator to be the virtual head of one. Annas was just such a man. Five sons..one sonin-law….and a grandson followed him in the highpriesthood…Thus, during the entire period of Christ’s ministry and for a long-time afterward, Annas was the was who was responsible, to a large extent, for the actions of the Jewish Sanhedrin….He was very proud, exceedingly ambitious, and fabulously wealthy. His family was notorious for its greed. The main source of his wealth seems to have been a goodly share of the proceeds from the price of sacrificial animals, which were sold in the Court of the Gentiles….Let Annas get some preliminary evidence in the case of Jesus. He will probably be able to give

7

some good (?) advice to his son-in-law. Meanwhile, there will be an opportunity to gather the members of the Sanhedrin, as many as can be assembled at this hour of the night!’ (pp.

387-388)

‘who was high priest that year’-Which doesn’t mean that he stopped being high priest at the end of the year, rather, ‘that year’ is ‘that fateful year, the year that Jesus will die for the sins of the world.’ This same Caiaphas had predicted the death of Jesus (John 11:50), and the early church would have various encounters with both Annas and Caiaphas (Acts 4:6).

John 18:14 ‘Now Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it was expedient for one man to die on behalf of the people.’ ‘was the one who had advised’-John 11:47-52. Once again note how God is helping us to understand what is happening. God is saying, ‘Yes, this is the same Caiaphas that you read about in chapter 11.’

John 18:15 ‘And Simon Peter was following Jesus, and so was another disciple. Now that disciple was known to the high priest, and entered with Jesus into the court of the high priest,’ ‘Simon Peter was following Jesus’-Though rebuked by Jesus previously, Peter didn’t flee as the others. Matthew records that Peter followed at a distance (Matthew 26:58). Even though Peter will deny Christ, notice his loyalty, notice his attempt to do the right thing, even after being rebuked. Peter is someone that Jesus just couldn’t offend or get rid of. Are we that type of follower?

‘and so was another disciple’-Most feel that this unnamed disciple, is the same unnamed disciple as found in other parts of the book, that is, this disciple is the author, John (John 1:40; 13:23).

‘Now that disciple was known to the high priest’-How it is that Annas and or Caiaphas knew John remains a mystery. Various theories include that idea that John was a distant relative, or his father’s firm delivered fish to the highpriest’s palace (the view of Nonnus, an Egyptian scholar, about 400 A.D.). But all such theories are mere guesses.

Yet, the text does reveal that that the disciples of Jesus did have contacts, acquaintances and so on in the world. They were not fictional characters.

‘entered with Jesus into the court of the high priest’-The court was a open court yard around which a house or palace was built. From other passages it seems that this palace was occupied by both Annas and Caiaphas (Matthew 26:57,59; John 18:13,15,24). Hendriksen notes, ‘That in such a palace, occupied by the most important persons in all Judea, there would, indeed, be a room or hall big enough to accommodate a

8

large assembly may be taken for granted. A prisoner could easily be sent from one wing to another, across the courtyard.’ (p. 391)

John 18:16 ‘but Jesus was standing at the door outside. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the doorkeeper, and brought in Peter.’

‘So the other disciple…’-‘Perhaps John saw Peter through the gate; he stepped outside, spoke a few words to the doormaid, secured her permission, and thus enabled Peter to enter.’ (Lenski p. 1194) Concerning Peter’s actions, Butler notes, ‘If Peter was a coward, why did he walk right into the midst of the arresting officers? And why, if he was a coward, did he not bolt and run when challenged the first time---why did he stay on? We believe the exact opposite of cowardice may have moved Peter to get into the palace of the high priest to courageously spy out the possibilities of counter-attack…His denials were probably to conceal his association with Jesus until he could spy out the information needed to carry out a rescue later…’ (p. 362) Like many people, Peter had convinced himself that the means (deception, outright lying) justified the end (I am trying to help Jesus). Instead of trusting Jesus, instead of being convinced that Jesus knew what He was doing, Peter was attempting to use carnal tactics, the tactics of the world. Unfortunately, in many cases we behave like Peter. We think that we must fight fire with fire, and such things as faith in God, entrusting an unknown future to a known God, and believing that God still is in control of any situation, are viewed as naïve convictions. Peter will finally realize what a fool he has been that night, and what a lack of faith he has had in Jesus.

John 18:17 ‘The slave-girl therefore who kept the door said to Peter, “You are not also one of this man’s disciples, are you?” He said, “I am not”.’ ‘the slave-girl’-The other writes inform us that this slave girl was the one who confronted Peter with pointed questions (Matthew 26:69ff; Mark 14:66ff; Luke 22:54ff).

This slave-girl clearly had her suspicions and reservations about Peter. Morris notes, ‘All four Gospels agree that this challenge came from a slave girl. It may be that this is part of the reason for Peter’s fall. He may well have been nerving himself to face some stiff challenge. But instead was asked a simple question from a little slave girl.’ (p. 753) In like manner, often the things that trip us up, are not some huge temptation, but something small, unexpected, a small compromise which then starts to snowball out of control. ‘It would seem that the very moment when Peter entered, the portress had her suspicions…

His failure to enter the hearing hall with John, and the general uneasiness which characterized all his movements and which could be read on his countenance, confirmed her suspicions.’ (Hendriksen p. 393)

9

John 18:18 ‘Now the slaves and the officers were standing there, having made a charcoal fire, for it was cold and they were warming themselves; and Peter also was with them, standing and warming himself.’ ‘for it was cold’-‘it was between midnight and dawn—the month corresponds to our April; and it was quite cold requiring a fire..Peter, feeling the biting cold of the dark night, had edged his way to the group and warmed himself at their fire. While his Lord was on trial for his life the wavering disciple chose the company of the Lord’s enemies! Why was he there at all? There must have been in his heart deep agitation.’ (Woods p. 378) I think many of us can feel for Peter, for there are times that we have been in a similar situations. Not sure if we should be there or not be there, justifying our actions, even though they are manifesting a lack of faith. Arguing to ourselves that we are “kind of doing the right thing”, or, “we may not be completely right, but we are at least doing something.”

In Peter we see a great lesson of what happens when zeal becomes misdirected, when a person can’t wait for God to act (Romans 10:1-2).

10