| |
THE GOSPEL
ACCORDING TO
JOHN
Commentary by DAVID BROWN
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
CHAPTER 18
@Joh
18:1-13. BETRAYAL AND APPREHENSION OF JESUS.
1-3. over the brook Kedron--a deep, dark ravine, to
the northeast of Jerusalem, through which flowed this small
storm brook or winter torrent, and which in summer is dried
up.
where was a garden--at
the foot of the Mount of Olives, "called Gethsemane;
that is, olive press (@Mt
26:30,36).
2. Judas . . . knew the place, for Jesus
ofttimes--see @Joh
8:1 Lu 21:37.
resorted thither with his
disciples--The baseness of this abuse of knowledge in
Judas, derived from admission to the closest privacies of
his Master, is most touchingly conveyed here, though nothing
beyond bare narrative is expressed. Jesus, however, knowing
that in this spot Judas would expect to find Him, instead of
avoiding it, hies Him thither, as a Lamb to the slaughter.
"No man taketh My life from Me, but I lay it down of
Myself" (@Joh
10:18). Besides, the scene which was to fill up the
little breathing-time, the awful interval, between the
Supper and the Apprehension--like the "silence in
heaven for about the space of half an hour" between the
breaking of the Apocalyptic Seals and the peal of the
Trumpets of war (@Re
8:1)--the AGONY--would have been too terrible for the
upper room; nor would He cloud the delightful associations
of the last Passover and the first Supper by
pouring out the anguish of His soul there. The garden,
however, with its amplitude, its shady olives, its endeared
associations, would be congenial to His heart. Here He had
room enough to retire--first, from eight of them, and then
from the more favored three; and here, when that mysterious
scene was over, the stillness would only be broken by the
tread of the traitor.
3. Judas then--"He that was called Judas, one of
the Twelve," says Luke (@Lu
22:47), in language which brands him with peculiar
infamy, as in the sacred circle while in no sense of
it.
a band of men--"the
detachment of the Roman cohort on duty at the
festival for the purpose of maintaining order" [WEBSTER
and WILKINSON].
officers from the chief
priests and Pharisees--captains of the temple and armed
Levites.
lanterns and torches--It
was full moon, but in case He should have secreted Himself
somewhere in the dark ravine, they bring the means of
exploring its hiding-places--little knowing whom they had to
do with. "Now he that betrayed Him had given them a
sign, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is He, hold
Him fast" (@Mt
26:48). The cold-bloodedness of this speech was only
exceeded by the deed itself. "And Judas went before
them [@Lu
22:47], and forthwith he came to Jesus, and said, Hail,
Master, and kissed Him" (@Mt
26:49; compare @Ex
4:27 18:7 Lu 7:45). The impudence of this atrocious deed
shows how thoroughly he had by this time mastered all his
scruples. If the dialogue between our Lord and His captors
was before this, as some interpreters think it was,
the kiss of Judas was purely gratuitous, and probably to
make good his right to the money; our Lord having presented
Himself unexpectedly before them, and rendered it
unnecessary for any one to point Him out. But a comparison
of the narratives seems to show that our Lord's "coming
forth" to the band was subsequent to the
interview of Judas. "And Jesus said unto him,
Friend"--not the endearing term "friend" (in
@Joh
15:15), but "companion," a word used on
occasions of remonstrance or rebuke (as in @Mt
20:13 22:12)--"Wherefore art thou come?" (@Mt
26:50). "Betrayest thou the Son of man with a
kiss"--imprinting upon the foulest act the mark of
tenderest affection? What wounded feeling does this
express! Of this Jesus showed Himself on various occasions
keenly susceptible--as all generous and beautiful natures
do.
4-9. Jesus . . . knowing all things that should
come--were coming.
upon him, went forth--from
the shade of the trees, probably, into open view, indicating
His sublime preparedness to meet His captors.
Whom seek ye?--partly
to prevent a rush of the soldiery upon the disciples [BENGEL];
and see @Mr
14:51,52, as showing a tendency to this: but still more
as part of that courage and majesty which so overawed them.
He would not wait to be taken.
5. They answered . . . Jesus of Nazareth--just
the sort of blunt, straight forward reply one expects from
military men, simply acting on their instructions.
I am He--(See on Joh
6:20).
Judas . . .
stood with them--No more is recorded here of his
part of the scene, but we have found the gap painfully
supplied by all the other Evangelists.
6. As soon then as he said unto them, I am He, they went
backward--recoiled.
and fell to the ground--struck
down by a power such as that which smote Saul of Tarsus and
his companions to the earth (@Ac
26:14). It was the glorious effulgence of the majesty of
Christ which overpowered them. "This, occurring before
His surrender, would show His power over His enemies,
and so the freedom with which He gave Himself
up" [MEYER].
7. Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye?--Giving
them a door of escape from the guilt of a deed which now
they were able in some measure to understand.
Jesus of Nazareth--The
stunning effect of His first answer wearing off, they think
only of the necessity of executing their orders.
8. I have told you that I am He: if therefore ye seek me,
let these go their way--Wonderful self-possession, and
consideration for others, in such circumstances!
9. That the saying might be fulfilled which he spake, Of
them which thou gavest me have I lost none--The
reference is to such sayings as @Joh
6:39 17:12; showing how conscious the Evangelist was,
that in reporting his Lord's former sayings, he was giving
them not in substance merely, but in form
also. Observe, also, how the preservation of the disciples
on this occasion is viewed as part that deeper
preservation undoubtedly intended in the saying quoted.
10, 11. 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--None of the other
Evangelists mention the name either of the ardent disciple
or of his victim. John being "known to the high
priest" (@Joh
18:15), the mention of the servant's name by him
is quite natural, and an interesting mark of truth in a
small matter. As to the right ear, specified both
here and in Luke (@Lu
22:50), the man was "likely foremost of those who
advanced to seize Jesus, and presented himself in the
attitude of a combatant; hence his right side would be
exposed to attack. The blow of Peter was evidently aimed
vertically at his head" [WEBSTER and WILKINSON].
11. Then said Jesus--"Suffer ye thus far"
(@Lu
22:51).
Put up thy sword into the
sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not
drink it?--This expresses both the feelings which
struggled in the Lord's breast during the Agony in the
garden--aversion to the cup viewed in itself,
but, in the light of the Father's will, perfect preparedness
to drink it. (See on Lu
22:39-46). Matthew adds to the address to Peter the
following:--"For all they that take the sword shall
perish by the sword" (@Mt
26:52)--that is, 'Those who take the sword must run all
the risks of human warfare; but Mine is a warfare whose
weapons, as they are not carnal, are attended with no such
hazards, but carry certain victory.' "Thinkest thou
that I cannot now"--even after things have proceeded so
far--"pray to My Father, and He shall presently give
Me"--rather, "place at My
disposal"--"more than twelve legions of
angels"; with allusion, possibly, to the one angel who
had, in His agony, "appeared to Him from heaven
strengthening Him" (@Lu
22:43); and in the precise number, alluding to the twelve
who needed the help, Himself and His eleven disciples. (The
full complement of a legion of Roman soldiers was six
thousand). "But how then shall the scripture be
fulfilled that thus it must be?" (@Mt
26:53,54). He could not suffer, according to the
Scripture, if He allowed Himself to be delivered from the
predicted death. "And He touched his ear and healed
him" (@Lu
22:51); for "the Son of man came not to destroy
men's lives, but to save them" (@Lu
9:56), and, even while they were destroying His, to save
theirs.
12. Then the band . . . took Jesus--but not
till He had made them feel that "no man took His life
from Him, but that He laid it down of Himself."
13. And led him away--"In that hour," says
Matthew (@Mt
26:55,56), and probably now, on the way to judgment.
when the crowds were pressing upon Him, "said Jesus to
the multitudes, Are ye come out as against a thief, with
swords and staves, for to take Me"--expressive of the
indignity which He felt to be thus done to Him--"I sat
daily with you in the temple, and ye laid no hold on Me. But
this" (adds @Lu
22:53) "is your hour and the power of
darkness." Matthew continues--"But all this was
done that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.
Then all the disciples forsook Him and fled" (@Mt
26:56)--thus fulfilling His prediction (@Mr
14:27 Joh 16:32).
@Joh
18:13-27. JESUS BEFORE ANNAS AND CAIAPHAS--FALL OF
PETER.
13, 14. And led him away to Annas first--(See on Lu
3:2, and Mt 26:57). (Also see on Mr 14:53.)
14. Now Caiaphas was he, which gave counsel to the Jews,
that it was expedient that one man should die for the people--(Also
see on Mr 14:53.)
15-18. Simon Peter followed Jesus--Natural though
this was, and safe enough, had he only "watched and
prayed that he enter not into temptation," as his
Master bade him (@Mt
26:41), it was, in his case, a fatal step.
and . . .
another disciple--Rather, "the other
disciple"--our Evangelist himself, no doubt.
known unto the high priest--(See
on Joh 18:10).
went in with Jesus into
the palace of the high priest.
16. But Peter stood at the door without--by
preconcerted arrangement with his friend till he should get
access for him.
Then went out that other . . .
and spake to her that kept the door, and brought in Peter--The
naturalness of these small details is not unworthy of
notice. This other disciple first made good his own entrance
on the score of acquaintance with the high priest; this
secured, he goes forth again, now as a privileged person, to
make interest for Peter's admission. But thus our poor
disciple is in the coils of the serpent. The next steps will
best be seen by inverting @Joh
18:17 and @Joh
18:18.
17. Then saith the damsel that kept the door--"one
of the maids of the high priest," says Mark (@Mr
14:66). "When she saw Peter warming himself, she
looked upon him and said" (@Mr
14:67). Luke is more graphic (@Lu
22:56)--She "beheld him as he sat by the fire
(literally, 'the light'), and earnestly looked on him (fixed
her gaze upon him), and said." "His demeanor and
timidity, which must have vividly showed themselves, as it
so generally happens, leading to the recognition of
him" [OLSHAUSEN].
Art thou not also one of
this man's disciples?--that is, thou as well as
"that other disciple," whom she knew to be one,
but did not challenge, perceiving that he was a privileged
person.
He saith, I am not--"He
denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest"
(@Mt
26:70)--a common form of point blank denial; "I
know [supply 'Him'] not, neither understand I what thou
sayest" (@Mr
14:68); "Woman, I know Him not" (@Lu
22:57). This was THE FIRST DENIAL. "And he went out
into the porch [thinking, perhaps, to steal away], and
the cock crew," (@Mr
14:68).
18. And the servants and officers--the menials and
some of the "band" that "took Jesus."
(Also see on Mr 14:54.)
stood there, who had made--"having
made."
a fire of coals, for it
was cold, and they warmed themselves--"John alone
notices the material (charcoal) of which the fire was made,
and the reason for a fire--the coldness of the night"
[WEBSTER and WILKINSON]. "Peter went in and sat with
the servants to see the end (@Mt
26:58), and warmed himself at the fire" (@Mr
14:54). These two statements are extremely interesting.
His wishing to "see the end," of issue of these
proceedings, was what led him into the palace, for he
evidently feared the worst. But once in, the serpent coil is
drawn closer; it is a cold night, and why should not he take
advantage of the fire as well as others? Besides, in the
talk of the crowd about the all-engrossing topic, he may
pick up something which he would like to hear. "And as
Peter was beneath in the palace" (@Mr
14:66). Matthew (@Mt
26:69) says, "sat without in the
palace." According to Oriental architecture, and
especially in large buildings, as here, the street door--or
heavy folding gate through which single persons entered by a
wicket kept by a porter--opened by a passage or
"porch" (@Mr
14:68) into a quadrangular court, here called the
"palace" or hall, which was open above,
and is frequently paved with flagstones. In the
center of this court the "fire" would be kindled
(in a brazier). At the upper end of it, probably, was the
chamber in which the trial was held, open to the court
and not far from the fire (@Lu
22:61), but on a higher level; for Mark (@Mr
14:66) says the court was "beneath" it.
The ascent was, perhaps, by a short flight of steps. This
explanation will make the intensely interesting details more
intelligible.
19-21. The high priest . . . asked Jesus of his
disciples, and of his doctrine--probably to entrap Him
into some statements which might be used against Him at the
trial. From our Lord's answer it would seem that "His
disciples" were understood to be some secret party.
(Also see on Mr 14:54.)
20. I spake--have spoken.
openly to the world--See
@Joh
7:4.
I ever taught in the
synagogues and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort--courting
publicity, though with sublime noiselessness.
in secret have I said--spake
I.
nothing--that is,
nothing of any different nature; all His private
communications with the Twelve being but explanations and
developments of His public teaching. (Compare @Isa
45:19 48:16). (Also see on Mr 14:54.)
21. Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me . . .
they know what I . . . said--This seems to
imply that He saw the attempt to draw Him into
self-crimination, and resented it by falling back upon the
right of every accused party to have some charge laid
against Him by competent witnesses. (Also see on Mr 14:54.)
22. struck Jesus with the palm . . . Answerest
Thou the high priest so--(See @Isa
50:6; and compare @Ac
23:2). (Also see on Mr 14:54.)
23. If I have spoken, &c.--"if I spoke"
evil, in reply to the high priest. (Also see on Mr 14:54.)
if well--He does not
say "If not" evil, as if His reply were
merely unobjectionable: "well" seems to
challenge more than this as due to His remonstrance This
shows that @Mt
5:39 is not to be taken to the letter.
24-27. Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas--Our
translators so render the words, understanding that the
foregoing interview took place before Caiaphas; Annas,
declining to meddle with the case, having sent Him to
Caiaphas at once. But the words here literally are,
"Annas sent Him [not 'had sent Him'] to Caiaphas"--and
the "now" being of doubtful authority. Thus read,
the verse affords no evidence that He was sent to Caiaphas before
the interview just recorded, but implies rather the
contrary. We take this interview, then, with some of the
ablest interpreters, to be a preliminary and non-official
one with Annas, at an hour of the night when Caiaphas'
Council could not convene; and one that ought not to be
confounded with that solemn one recorded by the other
Evangelists, when all were assembled and witnesses called.
But the building in which both met with Jesus appears to
have been the same, the room only being different, and the
court, of course, in that case, one. (Also see on Mr
14:54.)
25. And Simon Peter was standing and warming himself.
They said therefore . . . Art thou not also one of
his disciples?--In @Mt
26:71 the second charge was made by "another
maid, when he was gone out into the porch," who
"saw him, and said unto them that were there, This
[fellow] was also with Jesus of Nazareth." So also @Mr
14:69. But in @Lu
22:58 it is said, "After a little while" (from
the time of the first denial), "another [man]
saw him, and said, Thou art also of them." Possibly it
was thrown at him by more than one; but these circumstantial
variations only confirm the truth of the narrative.
He denied it, and said, I
am not--in @Mt
26:72, "He denied with an oath, I do not know the
man." This was THE SECOND DENIAL.
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--No doubt his relationship to
Malchus drew attention to the man who smote him, and this
enabled him to identify Peter. "Sad reprisals!" [BENGEL].
The other Evangelists make his detection to turn upon his dialect.
"After a while ['about the space of one hour after' (@Lu
22:59)] came unto him they that stood by and said to
Peter, Surely thou also art one of them, for thy speech
betrayeth thee" (@Mt
26:73). "Thou art a Galilean, and thy speech
agreeth thereto" (@Mr
14:70; and so @Lu
22:59). The Galilean dialect had a more Syrian
cast than that of Judea. If Peter had held his peace,
this peculiarity had not been observed; but hoping,
probably, to put them off the scent by joining in the fireside
talk, he only thus revealed himself.
27. Peter then denied again--But, if the challenge of
Malchus' kinsman was made simultaneously with this on
account of his Galilean dialect, it was no simple denial;
for @Mt
26:74 says, "Then began he to curse and to
swear, saying, I know not the man." So @Mr
14:71. This was THE THIRD DENIAL.
and immediately--"while
he yet spake" (@Lu
22:60).
the cock crew--As Mark
is the only Evangelist who tells us that our Lord predicted
that the cock should crow twice (@Mr
14:30), so he only mentions that it did crow
twice (@Mr
14:72). The other Evangelists, who tell us merely that
our Lord predicted that "before the cock should crow he
would deny Him thrice" (@Mt
26:34 Lu 22:34 Joh 13:38), mention only one actual
crowing, which was Mark's last. This is something affecting
in this Evangelist--who, according to the earliest tradition
(confirmed by internal evidence), derived his materials so
largely from Peter as to have been styled his "interpreter,"
being the only one who gives both the sad prediction
and its still sadder fulfilment in full. It seems to
show that Peter himself not only retained through all his
after-life the most vivid recollection of the circumstances
of his fall, but that he was willing that others should know
them too. The immediately subsequent acts are given
in full only in Luke (@Lu
22:61,62): "And the Lord turned and looked upon
Peter," from the hall of judgment to the court, in the
way already explained. But who can tell what lightning
flashes of wounded love and piercing reproach shot from that
"look" through the eye of Peter into his heart!
"And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how He had
said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny Me
thrice. And Peter went out and wept bitterly." How
different from the sequel of Judas' act! Doubtless the
hearts of the two men towards the Saviour were perfectly
different from the first; and the treason of Judas was but
the consummation of the wretched man's resistance of the
blaze of light in the midst of which he had lived for three
years, while Peter's denial was but a momentary obscuration
of the heavenly light and love to his Master which ruled his
life. But the immediate cause of the revulsion, which made
Peter "weep bitterly," was, beyond all doubt, this
heart-piercing "look" which his Lord gave him. And
remembering the Saviour's own words at the table,
"Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired to have you that he
may sift you as wheat, but I have prayed [rather, 'I
prayed'] for thee that thy faith fail not" (see
on Lu 22:31,32), may we not say that this prayer fetched
down all that there was in that 'look' to pierce and
break the heart of. Peter, to keep it from despair, to work
in it "repentance unto salvation not to be repented
of," and at length, under other healing touches, to
"restore his soul?" (See on Mr 16:7).
@Joh
18:28-40. JESUS BEFORE PILATE.
Note.--Our Evangelist, having given the interview
with Annas, omitted by the other Evangelists, here omits the
trial and condemnation before Caiaphas, which the others had
recorded. (See on Mr 14:53-65). [The notes broken off
there at @Mr
14:54 are here concluded].
@Mr
14:53-65: @Mr
14:61:
The high priest asked
Him, Art Thou the Christ, the Son of the blessed?--Matthew
says the high priest put Him upon solemn oath,
saying, "I adjure Thee by the living God that Thou
tell us whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of God"
(@Mt
26:63). This rendered an answer by our Lord legally
necessary (@Le
5:1). Accordingly, @Mr
14:62:
Jesus said, I am--"Thou
hast said" (@Mt
26:64). In @Lu
22:67,68, some other words are given, "If I tell
you, ye will not believe; and if I also ask you, ye will
not answer Me, nor let Me go." This seems to have
been uttered before giving His direct answer, as a
calm remonstrance and dignified protest against the
prejudgment of His case and the unfairness of their mode
of procedure.
and ye shall see the
Son of man, &c.--This concluding part of our
Lord's answer is given somewhat more fully by Matthew and
Luke. "Nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter
[rather, 'From henceforth'] shall ye see the Son of man
sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the
clouds of heaven" (@Mt
26:64 Lu 22:69).--that is, I know the scorn with which
ye are ready to meet such an avowal: To your eyes, which
are but eyes of flesh, there stands at this bar only a
mortal like yourselves, and He at the mercy of the
ecclesiastical and civil authorities: "Nevertheless,"
a day is coming when ye shall see another sight: Those
eyes, which now gaze on Me with proud disdain, shall see
this very prisoner at the right hand of the Majesty on
high, and coming in the clouds of heaven: Then shall the
judged One be revealed as the Judge, and His judges in
this chamber appear at His august tribunal; then shall the
unrighteous judges be impartially judged;
and while they are wishing that they had never been born,
He for whom they now watch as their Victim shall be
greeted with the hallelujahs of heaven, and the welcome of
Him that sitteth upon the throne! @Mr
14:63,64:
Then the high priest
rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further
witnesses? Ye have heard the blasphemy--"of
his own mouth" (@Lu
22:71); an affectation of religious horror.
What think ye?--"Say,
what verdict would ye pronounce."
They all condemned
Him to be guilty of death--of a capital crime.
(See @Le
24:16). @Mr
14:65:
And some began to
spit on Him--"Then did they spit in His
face" (@Mt
26:67). See @Isa
50:6.
And to cover His
face, and to buffet Him, and to say unto Him, Prophesy--or,
"divine," "unto us, Thou Christ, who is he
that smote Thee?" The sarcasm in styling Him the
Christ, and as such demanding of Him the perpetrator
of the blows inflicted upon Him, was in them as infamous
as to Him it was stinging.
and the servants did
strike him with the palms of their hands--"And
many other things blasphemously spake they against
him" (@Lu
22:65). This general statement is important, as
showing that virulent and varied as were the recorded
affronts put upon Him, they are but a small specimen
of what He endured on that black occasion.
28. Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas to the hall of
judgment--but not till "in the morning the chief
priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and
the whole council against Him to put Him to death, and bound
Him" (@Mt
27:1; and see on Mr 15:1). The word here rendered
"hall of judgment" is from the Latin, and
denotes "the palace of the governor of a Roman
province."
they themselves went not
into the judgment hall lest they should be defiled--by
contact with ceremonially unclean Gentiles.
but that they might eat
the passover--If this refer to the principal part of the
festival, the eating of the lamb, the question is, how our
Lord and His disciples came to eat it the night before; and,
as it was an evening meal, how ceremonial defilement
contracted in the morning would unfit them for
partaking of it, as after six o'clock it was reckoned a new
day. These are questions which have occasioned immense
research and learned treatises. But as the usages of the
Jews appear to have somewhat varied at different times, and
our present knowledge of them is not sufficient to clear up
all difficulties, they are among the not very important
questions which probably will never be entirely solved.
29-32. Pilate went out to them, and said, What accusation
bring ye against this man?--State your charge.
30. If he were not a malefactor, we would not have
delivered him up unto thee--They were conscious they had
no case of which Pilate could take cognizance, and
therefore insinuate that they had already found Him worthy
of death by their own law; but not having the power, under
the Roman government, to carry their sentence into
execution, they had come merely for his sanction.
32. That the saying . . . might be fulfilled
which he spake, signifying what death he should die--that
is, by crucifixion (@Joh
12:32,33 Mt 20:19); which being a Roman mode of
execution, could only be carried into effect by order of the
governor. (The Jewish mode in such cases as this was by stoning).
33-38. Pilate . . . called Jesus, and said . . .
Art thou the King of the Jews?--In @Lu
23:2 they charge our Lord before Pilate with
"perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute
to Cæsar, saying that He Himself is Christ a king."
Perhaps this was what occasioned Pilate's question.
34. Jesus answered . . . Sayest thou this of
thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?--an important
question for our Lord's case, to bring out whether the word
"King" were meant in a political
sense, with which Pilate had a right to deal, or whether he
were merely put up to it by His accusers, who had no
claims to charge Him but such as were of a purely religious
nature, with which Pilate had nothing to do.
35. Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the
chief priests delivered thee to me: What hast thou done?--that
is, "Jewish questions I neither understand nor meddle
with; but Thou art here on a charge which, though it seems
only Jewish, may yet involve treasonable matter: As they
state it, I cannot decide the point; tell me, then, what
procedure of Thine has brought Thee into this
position." In modern phrase, Pilate's object in this
question was merely to determine the relevancy of the
charge.
36. Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world--He
does not say "not over," but "not of
this world"--that is, in its origin and nature;
therefore "no such kingdom as need give thee or thy
master the least alarm."
if my kingdom were of this
world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be
delivered to the Jews--"A very convincing argument;
for if His servants did not fight to prevent their King from
being delivered up to His enemies, much less would they use
force for the establishment of His kingdom" [WEBSTER
and WILKINSON].
but now--but the fact
is.
is my kingdom not from
hence--Our Lord only says whence His kingdom is not--first
simply affirming it, next giving proof of it, then
reaffirming it. This was all that Pilate had to do with. The
positive nature of His kingdom He would not obtrude
upon one who was as little able to comprehend it, as
entitled officially to information about it. (It is worthy
of notice that the "MY," which occurs four
times in this one verse--thrice of His kingdom,
and once of His servants--is put in the
emphatic form).
37. Art thou a king then?--There was no sarcasm or
disdain in this question (as THOLUCK, ALFORD, and others,
allege), else our Lord's answer would have been different.
Putting emphasis upon "thou," his question
betrays a mixture of surprise and uneasiness,
partly at the possibility of there being, after all,
something dangerous under the claim, and partly from a
certain awe which our Lord's demeanor probably struck into
him.
Thou sayest that I am a
king--It is even so.
To this end was I--"have
I been."
born and for this cause
came I--am I come.
into the world, that I may
bear witness to the truth--His birth expresses
His manhood; His coming into the world, His existence
before assuming humanity: The truth, then, here affirmed,
though Pilate would catch little of it, was that His
Incarnation was expressly in order to the assumption of
Royalty in our nature. Yet, instead of saying, He came
to be a King, which is His meaning, He says He came to testify
to the truth. Why this? Because, in such circumstances
it required a noble courage not to flinch from His royal
claims; and our Lord, conscious that He was putting forth
that courage, gives a turn to His confession expressive
of it. It is to this that Paul alludes, in those remarkable
words to Timothy: "I charge thee before God, who
quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who, in
the presence of Pontius Pilate, witnessed the good
confession" (@1Ti
6:13). This one act of our Lord's life, His courageous
witness-bearing before the governor, was selected as an
encouraging example of the fidelity which Timothy
ought to display. As the Lord (says OLSHAUSEN beautifully)
owned Himself the Son of God before the most exalted
theocratic council, so He confessed His regal dignity
in presence of the representative of the highest political
authority on earth.
Every one that is of the
truth heareth my voice--Our Lord here not only affirms
that His word had in it a self-evidencing, self-recommending
power, but gently insinuated the true secret of the
growth and grandeur of His kingdom--as A KINGDOM OF
TRUTH, in its highest sense, into which all souls who have
learned to live and count all things but loss for the truth
are, by a most heavenly attraction, drawn as into their
proper element; THE KING of whom Jesus is, fetching them in
and ruling them by His captivating power over their hearts.
38. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth?--that is,
"Thou stirrest the question of questions, which the
thoughtful of every age have asked, but never man yet
answered."
And when he had said this--as
if, by putting such a question, he was getting into
interminable and unseasonable inquiries, when this business
demanded rather prompt action.
he went out again unto the
Jews--thus missing a noble opportunity for himself, and
giving utterance to that consciousness of the want of all
intellectual and moral certainty, which was the feeling of
every thoughtful mind at that time. "The only
certainty," says the elder PLINY, "is that nothing
is certain, nor more miserable than man, nor more proud. The
fearful laxity of morals at that time must doubtless be
traced in a great degree to this skepticism. The revelation
of the eternal truth alone was able to breathe new life into
ruined human nature, and that in the apprehension of
complete redemption" [OLSHAUSEN].
and saith unto them--in
the hearing of our Lord, who had been brought forth.
I find in him no fault--no
crime. This so exasperated "the chief priests and
elders" that, afraid of losing their prey, they poured
forth a volley of charges against Him, as appears from @Lu
23:4,5: on Pilate's affirming His innocence, "they
were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the
people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from
Galilee to this place." They see no hope of getting
Pilate's sanction to His death unless they can fasten upon
Him a charge of conspiracy against the government; and as Galilee
was noted for its turbulence (@Lu
13:1 Ac 5:37), and our Lord's ministry lay chiefly
there, they artfully introduce it to give color to their
charge. "And the chief priests accused Him of many
things, but He answered nothing (@Mr
15:3). Then said Pilate unto Him, Hearest Thou not how
many things they witness against Thee? And He answered him
to never a word, insomuch that the governor marvelled
greatly" (@Mt
27:13,14). See on Mr 15:3-5. In his perplexity, Pilate,
hearing of Galilee, bethinks himself of the expedient of
sending Him to Herod, in the hope of thereby further shaking
off responsibility in the case. See @Mr
15:6, and see on Lu 23:6-12. The return of the prisoner
only deepened the perplexity of Pilate, who, "calling
together the chief priests, rulers, and people," tells
them plainly that not one of their charges against
"this man" had been made good, while even Herod,
to whose jurisdiction he more naturally belonged, had done
nothing to Him: He "will therefore chastise and release
him" (@Lu
23:13-16).
39. But ye have a custom that I should release one unto
you at the passover, &c.--See on Mr 15:7-11.
"On the typical import of the choice of Christ to
suffer, by which Barabbas was set free, see the sixteenth
chapter of Leviticus, particularly @Le
16:5-10, where the subject is the sin offering on
the great day of atonement" [KRAFFT in LUTHARDT].
|
|