John 18 commentary

Sin began in the garden of Eden, there the curse was pronounced, there the Redeemer was promised; and in a garden that promised Seed entered into conflict with the old serpent. Christ was buried also in a garden. Let us, when we walk in our gardens, take occasion from thence to mediate on Christ's sufferings in a garden. Our Lord Jesus, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth and asked, Whom seek ye? When the people would have forced him to a crown, he withdrew, ch. 6:15, but when they came to force him to a cross, he offered himself; for he came into this world to suffer, and went to the other world to reign. He showed plainly what he could have done; when he struck them down he could have struck them dead, but he would not do so. It must have been the effect of Divine power, that the officers and soldiers let the disciples go away quietly, after the resistance which had been offered. Christ set us an example of meekness in sufferings, and a pattern of submission to God's will in every thing that concerns us. It is but a cup, a small matter. It is a cup that is given us; sufferings are gifts. It is given us by a Father, who has a father's authority, and does us no wrong; a father's affection, and means us no hurt. From the example of our Saviour we should learn how to receive our lighter afflictions, and to ask ourselves whether we ought to oppose our Father's will, or to distrust his love. We were bound with the cords of our iniquities, with the yoke of our transgressions. Christ, being made a sin-offering for us, to free us from those bonds, himself submitted to be bound for us. To his bonds we owe our liberty; thus the Son makes us free.

Simon Peter denied his Master. The particulars have been noticed in the remarks on the other Gospels. The beginning of sin is as the letting forth of water. The sin of lying is a fruitful sin; one lie needs another to support it, and that another. If a call to expose ourselves to danger be clear, we may hope God will enable us to honour him; if it be not, we may fear that God will leave us to shame ourselves. They said nothing concerning the miracles of Jesus, by which he had done so much good, and which proved his doctrine. Thus the enemies of Christ, whilst they quarrel with his truth, wilfully shut their eyes against it. He appeals to those who heard him. The doctrine of Christ may safely appeal to all that know it, and those who judge in truth bear witness to it. Our resentment of injuries must never be passionate. He reasoned with the man that did him the injury, and so may we.

It was unjust to put one to death who had done so much good, therefore the Jews were willing to save themselves from reproach. Many fear the scandal of an ill thing, more than the sin of it. Christ had said he should be delivered to the Gentiles, and they should put him to death; hereby that saying was fulfilled. He had said that he should be crucified, lifted up. If the Jews had judged him by their law, he had been stoned; crucifying never was used among the Jews. It is determined concerning us, though not discovered to us, what death we shall die: this should free us from disquiet about that matter. Lord, what, when, and how, thou hast appointed.

Art thou the King of the Jews? that King of the Jews who has been so long expected? Messiah the Prince; art thou he? Dost thou call thyself so, and wouldest thou be thought so? Christ answered this question with another; not for evasion, but that Pilate might consider what he did. He never took upon him any earthly power, never were any traitorous principles or practices laid to him. Christ gave an account of the nature of his kingdom. Its nature is not worldly; it is a kingdom within men, set up in their hearts and consciences; its riches spiritual, its power spiritual, and it glory within. Its supports are not worldly; its weapons are spiritual; it needed not, nor used, force to maintain and advance it, nor opposed any kingdom but that of sin and Satan. Its object and design are not worldly. When Christ said, I am the Truth, he said, in effect, I am a King. He conquers by the convincing evidence of truth; he rules by the commanding power of truth. The subjects of this kingdom are those that are of the truth. Pilate put a good question, he said, What is truth? When we search the Scriptures, and attend the ministry of the word, it must be with this inquiry, What is truth? and with this prayer, Lead me in thy truth; into all truth. But many put this question, who have not patience to preserve in their search after truth; or not humility enough to receive it. By this solemn declaration of Christ's innocence, it appears, that though the Lord Jesus was treated as the worst of evil-doers, he never deserved such treatment. But it unfolds the design of his death; that he died as a Sacrifice for our sins. Pilate was willing to please all sides; and was governed more by worldly wisdom than by the rules of justice. Sin is a robber, yet is foolishly chosen by many rather than Christ, who would truly enrich us. Let us endeavour to make our accusers ashamed as Christ did; and let us beware of crucifying Christ afresh.

1. When Jesus bad spoken these words. In this narrative John passes by many things which the other three Evangelists relate, and he does so on purposej as his intention was to collect many things worthy of being recorded, about which they say nothing; and, therefore, let the reader go to the other Evangelists to find what is wanting here.

Over the brook Kedron. In the Greek original there is an article prefixed to Kedron, which would seem to intimate that the brook takes its name from the cedars; Is Κέδρων, a proper name, or an appellative? Calvin does not mean that the presence of the article settles this question, but that it depends on the preference which shall be given to one or another of the various readings. If we read τῶν Κέδρων, it will be difficult to resist the conclusion that Κέδρων is the genitive plural of Κέδρος, a cedar; but if we read τοῦ Κέδρων, or rather, τοῦ Κεδρὼν, we must treat Κεδρὼν, as an indeclinable Hebrew word, though Josephus chooses sometimes to decline it, as in the phrase, χείμαρρον Κεδρῶνος, the brook of Kedron, (Ant. 8:1.) “Instead of the common reading, τῶν Κέδρων,” says Bloomfield, “four of the most ancient MSS. and six ancient Versions, with some Fathers, have,τοῦ Κεδρὼν, which was preferred by Beza, Casaubon, Campbell, Castalio, Drusius, Lightfoot, Bols, Bynmus, Reland, and others of the best Commentators down to Middleton, Kuinoel, and Tittmann, and has been received by Bengel, Griesbach, Knapp, Vater, and Scholz. The common reading, however, is strenuously, but not satisfactorily, defended by Lampe and Matthsei.” Our Author proceeds no further than to propose, τοῦ instead of τῶν, as a conjectural emendation; but Bloomfield has given a prodigious list of authorities on the same side. — Ed. but this is probably an error which has crept into the text; for the valley or brook Kedron is often mentioned in Scripture. The place was so called from its being dark or gloomy, because, being a hollow valley, it was shady, The Hebrew name קדרון (Kidron) is derived from קדר, (Kadar,) it was black, and signifies the black brook. — Ed. on that point, however, I do not dispute: I only state what is more probable.

The chief thing to be considered is, the intention of the Evangelist in pointing out the place; for his object was, to show that Christ went to death willingly. He came into a place which, he knew, was well known to Judas. Why did he do this but to present himself, of his own accord, to the traitor and to the enemies? Nor was he led astray by inadvertency, for he knew beforehand all that was to happen. John afterwards mentions also that he went forward to meet them. He therefore suffered death, not by constraint, but willingly, that he might be a voluntary sacrifice; for without obedience atonement would not have been obtained for us. Besides, he entered into the garden, not for the purpose of seeking a place of concealment, but that he might have a better opportunity, and greater leisure, for prayer. That he prayed three times to be delivered from death, (Matthew 26:44,) is not inconsistent with that voluntary obedience of which we have spoken; On this point the reader will do well to consult our Author’s elaborate exposition and argument, Harmony of the Evangelists, vol. 3, pp. 226-234. for it was necessary that he should contend with difficulties, that he might be victorious. Now, having subdued the dread of death, he advances to death freely and willingly.

3. Judas, therefore, having received a band of soldiers. That Judas came accompanied by soldiers and by so large a retinue, is a sign of a bad conscience, which always trembles without any cause. It is certain that the band of soldiers was borrowed from the governor, who also sent a captain at the head of a thousand soldiers; for, on account of sudden mutinies, a garrison was stationed in the city, and the governor himself kept a body-guard, wherever he was. The rest were officers sent by the priests; but John makes separate mention of the Pharisee, because they were more enraged than all the rest, as if they had cared more about religion.

4. Jesus therefore, hnowing. The Evangelist states more clearly with what readiness Christ went forward to death, but, at the same time, describes the great power which he exercised by a single word, in order to inform us that wicked men had no power over him, except so far as he gave permission.

5. It is I. He replies mildly that he is the person whom they seek, and yet, as if they had been struck down by a violent tempest, or rather by a thunderbolt, he lays them prostrate on the ground. There was no want of power in him, therefore, to restrain their hands, if he had thought proper; but he wished to obey his Father, by whose decree he knew that he was called to die.

We may infer from this how dreadful and alarming to the wicked the voicc of Christ will be, when he shall ascend his throne to judge the world. At that time he stood as a lamb ready to be sacrificed; his majesty, so far as outward appearance was concerned, was utterly gone; and yet when he utters but a single word, his armed and courageous enemies fall down. And what was the word? He thunders no fearful excommunication against them, but only replies, It is I What then will be the result, when he shall come, not to be judged by a man, but to be the Judge of the living and the dead; not in that mean and despicable appearance but shining in heavenly glory, and accompanied by his angels? He intended, at that time, to give a proof of that efficacy which Isaiah ascribes to his voice. Among other glorious attributes of Christ, the Prophet relates that

he will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth, and will slay the wicked by the breath of his lips, (Isaiah 11:4.)

True, the fulfillment of this prophecy is declared by Paul to be delayed till the end of the world, (2 Thessalonians 2:8.) Yet we daily see the wicked, with all their rage and pride, struck down by the voice of Christ; and, when those men fell down who had come to bind Christ, there was exhibited a visible token of that alarm which wicked men feel within themselves, whether they will or not, when Christ speaks by his ministers. Besides, as this was in some measure accidental to the voice of Christ, to whom it peculiarly belongs to raise up men who were lying in a state of death, he will undoubtedly display toward us such power as to raise us even to heaven.

John 18:7-9

7. He therefore asked them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. 8. Jesus answered, I told you that it is I: if therefore you seek me, allow these to go away. 9. That the word which he had spoken might be fulfilled, Of those whom thou gavest to me I have lost none.

7. He therefore asked them again. Hence it appears what is the powerful effect of that blindness with which God strikes the minds of wicked men, and how dreadful is their stupidity, when, by a just judgment of God, they have been bewitched by Satan. Oxen and asses, if they fall, are touched with some kind of feeling; but those men, after having had an open display of the divine power of Christ, proceed as fearlessly as if they had not perceived in him even the shadow of a man; nay, Judas himself remains unmoved. Let us learn, therefore, to fear the judgment of God, by which the reprobate, delivered into the hands of Satan, become more stupid than brute beasts. Nor can it be doubted that Satan hurried them on, with wild fury, to such a desperate hardihood; for there is no insanity that drives a man with such viohnee as this kind of blindness; Wicked men, after having been given over to a reprobate mind, (Romans 1:28,) care no more about rushing against God than if they had only to do with a fly. They feel his power, indeed, but not so as to be disposed to obey; for sooner will they be broken a hundred times than they will yield. In short, their malice is a veil to hinder them from observing the light of God; their obstinacy renders them harder than stones, so that they never suffer themselves to be subdued.

8. I have told you that it is I. Here we see how the Son of God not only submits to death of his own accord, that by his obedience he may blot out our transgressions, but also how he discharges the office of a good Shepherd in protecting his flock. He sees the attack of the wolves, and does not wait till they come to the sheep which have been committed to his care, but immediately goes forward to guard them. Whenever, therefore, either wicked men or devils make an attack upon us, let us not doubt that this good Shepherd is ready “Que ce bon Pasteur ne soit prest.” to aid us in the same manner. Yet by his example Christ has laid down to shepherds a rule which they ought to follow, if they wish to discharge their office in a right manner.

9. I have lost none. This passage appears to be inappropriately quoted, as it relates to their souls rather than to their bodies; for Christ did not keep the apostles safe to the last, but this he accomplished, that, amidst incessant dangers, and even in the midst of death, still their eternal salvation was secured. I reply, the Evangelist does not speak merely of their bodily life, but rather means that Christ, sparing them for a time, made provision for their eternal salvation. Let us consider how great their weakness was; what do we think they would have done, if they had been brought to the test? While, therefore, Christ did not choose that they should be tried beyond the strength which he had given to them, he rescued them from eternal destruction. And hence we may draw a general doctrine, that, though he try our faith by many temptations, still he will never allow us to come into extreme danger without supplying us also with strength to overcome. And, indeed, we see how he continually bears with our weakness, when he puts himself forward to repel so many attacks of Satan and wicked men, because he sees that we are not yet able or prepared for them. In short, he never brings his people into the field of battle till they have been fully trained, so that even in perishing they do not perish, because there is gain provided for them both in death and in life.

John 18:10-14

10. Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it, and struck the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear; and the servant's name was Malchus. 11. Jesus therefore said to Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath. Shall I not drink the cup which my Father hath given me? 12. Then the band, and the captain, and officers of the Jews, took Jesus, and bound him; 13. And led him away to Annas first; for he was father-in-law to Caiaphas, who was the high priest of that year. 14. And Caiaphas was he who had given counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people.

10. Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it. The Evangelist now describes the foolish zeal of Peter, who attempted to defend his Master in an unlawful manner. Boldly and courageously, indeed, he incurs great risk on Christ’s account; but as he does not consider what his calling demands, and what God permits, his action is so far from deserving praise, that he is severely blamed by Christ. But let us learn that, in the person of Peter, Christ condemns every thing that men dare to attempt out of their own fancy. This doctrine is eminently worthy of attention; for nothing is more common than to defend, under the cloak of zeal, every thing that we do, as if it were of no importance whether God approved, or not, what men suppose to be right, whose prudence is nothing else than mere vanity.

If we saw nothing faulty in the zeal of Peter, still we ought to be satisfied on this single ground, that Christ declares that he is displeased with it. But we see that it was not owing to him that Christ did not turn aside from death, and that his name was not exposed to perpetual disgrace; for, in offering violence to the captain and the soldiers, he acts the part of a highwayman, because he resists the power which God has appointed. Christ having already been more than enough hated by the world, this single deed might give plausibility to all the calumnies which his enemies falsely brought against him. Besides, it was exceedingly thoughtless in Peter to attempt to prove his faith by his sword, while he could not do so by his tongue. When he is called to make confession, he denies his Master; and now, without his Master’s authority, he raises a tumult.

Warned by so striking an example, let us learn to keep our zeal within proper bounds; and as the wantonness of our flesh is always eager to attempt more than God commands, let us learn that our zeal will succeed ill, whenever we venture to undertake any thing contrary to the word of God. It will sometimes happen that the commencement gives us flattering promises, but we shall at length be punished for our rashness. Let obedience, therefore, be the foundation of all that we undertake. We are also reminded, that those who have resolved to plead the cause of Christ do not always conduct themselves so skilfully as not to commit some fault; and, therefore, we ought the more earnestly to entreat the Lord to guide us in every action by the spirit of prudence.

11. Put up thy sword into the sheath. By this command Christ reproves Peter’s action. But we must attend to the reason, which is, that a private individual was not permitted to rise in opposition to those who had been invested with public authority; for this may be inferred from the other three Evangelists, who relate Christ’s general declaration,

He who strikes with the sword shall perish by the sword, (Matthew 26:52.)

We must also beware of repelling our enemies by force or violence, even when they unjustly provoke us, except so far as the institutions and laws of the community admit; for whoever goes beyond the limits of his calling, though he should gain the applause of the whole world, will never obtain for his conduct the approbation of God. The reader will find our Author’s views on this subject stated fully in the Harmony of the Evangelists, vol. 3, page 244.

Shall I not drink the cup which my Father hath given to me? This appears to be a special reason why Christ ought to be silent, that he might be led as a lamb to be sacrificed, (Isaiah 53:7;) but it serves the purpose of an example, for the same patience is demanded from all of us. Scripture compares afflictions to medicinal draughts; for, as the master of a house distributes meat and drink to his children and servants, so God has this authority over us, that he has a right to treat every one as he thinks fit; and whether he cheers us by prosperity, or humbles us by adversity, he is said to administer a sweet or a bitter draught. The draught appointed for Christ was, to suffer the death of the cross for the reconciliation of the world. He says, therefore, that he must drink the cup which his Father measured out and delivered to him.

In the same manner we, too, ought to be prepared for enduring the cross. And yet we ought not to listen to fanatics, who tell us that we must not seek remedies for diseases and any other kind of distresses, lest we reject the cup which the Heavenly Father “Le Pere Celeste.” presents to us. Knowing that we must once die, (Hebrews 9:27,) we ought to be prepared for death; but the time of our death being unknown to us, the Lord permits us to defend our life by those aids which he has himself appointed. We must patiently endure diseases, however grievous they may be to our flesh; and though they do not yet appear to be mortal, we ought to seek alleviation of them; only we must be careful not to attempt any thing but what is permitted by the word of God. In short, provided that this remain always fixed in our hearts, Let the will of the Lord be done, (Acts 21:14,) when we seek deliveralice from the evils which press upon us, we do not fail to drink the cup which the Lord has given to us.

12. Then the band of soldiers and the captain. It might be thought strange that Christ, who laid the soldiers prostrate on the ground by a single word, now allows himself to be taken; for if he intended at length to surrender to his enemies, what need was there for performing such a miracle? But the demonstration of divine power was advantageous in two respects; for, first, it serves to take away the offense, that we may not think that Christ yielded as if he had been overcome by weakness; and, secondly, it proves that in dying he was altogether voluntary. So far as it was useful, therefore, he asserted his power against his enemies; but when it was necessary to obey the Father, he restrained himself, that he might be offered as a sacrifice. But let us remember that the body of the Son of God was bound, that our souls might be loosed from the cords of sin and of Satan.

13. And led him away to Annas first. The other Evangelists omit this circumstance, because it does not greatly affect the substance of the narrative; for nothing was done there that was worthy of being recorded. Perhaps the convenience of the place induced them to imprison Christ in the house of Annas, till the high priest assembled the council.

The high priest of that year. He does not mean that the office of the high priesthood was annual, as many have falsely imagined, but that Caiaphas was high priest at that time, which appears plainly from Josephus. By the injunction of the Law, this honor was perpetual, and ended only at the death of him who held it; but ambition and intestine broils gave occasion to the Roman governors to dethrone one high priest and put another in his room, at their own pleasure, either for money or for favor. Thus Vitellius deposed Caiaphas, and appointed Jonathan, the son of Annas, to be his successor.

14. Who had given counsel to the Jews. The Evangelist repeats the opinion of Caiaphas, which formerly came under our notice; Vol. 1: page 453. for God employed the foul mouth of a wicked and treacherous high priest to utter a prediction, (John 11:50,) just as he guided the tongue of the prophet Baham, contrary to his wish, so that he was constrained to bless the people, though he desired to curse them, to gain favor with king Balak, (Numbers 23:7, 8.)

John 18:15-18

15. And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and another disciple; “Or Simon Pierre, avec un autre disciple, suyvoit Jesus.” — “Now Simon Peter, with another disciple, followed Jesus.” and that disciple was known to the high priest; therefore he went in with Jesus into the court of the high priest. 16. But Peter stood without at the door. The other disciple, therefore, who was known to the high priest, went out, and spoke to her that kept the door, and brought in Peter “Et parla a la portiere, laquelle fit entrer Pierre;” — “and spoke to her that kept the door, who brought in Peter.” 17. Then the maid that kept the door said to Peter, Art not thou also one of that man's disciples? He saith, I am not. 18. And the servants and officers, who had kindled a fire of coals, because it was cold, stood there and warmed themselves; and Simon Peter was also standing with them, and warming himself.

15. And another disciple. Some have been led astray, by a slight conjecture, to suppose that this disciple was the Evangelist “Nostre Evangeliste.” John, because he is accustomed to speak of himself without mentioning his name. But what intimacy with a proud high priest could John have, who was a mean fisherman? And how was it possible for him, being one of Christ’s household, to be in the habit of visiting the house of the high priest? It is more probable that he was not one of the twelve, but that he is called a disciple, because he had embraced the doctrine of the Son of God.

John is not very exact in arranging the narrative, being satisfied with drawing up a brief summary; for, after having related that Peter once denied Christ, he intermingles other matters, and afterwards returns to the other two denials. Inattentive readers were led by this circumstance to conclude that the first denial took place in the house of Annas. The words, however, convey no such meaning, but rather state clearly that it was the high priest’s maid that constrained Peter to deny Christ. We must, therefore, understand that, when Christ was brought before the high priest, admission was not granted to any person who chose, but that the disciple who was known to the high priest requested, as a personal favor, that Peter might be admitted. There is no reason to doubt that godly zeal was the motive that induced both of them to follow Christ; but since Christ had plainly declared that he spared Peter and the others, he who was so weak would have found it to be far better for him to groan and pray in some dark corner than to go into the presence of men. He now undertakes, with great earnestness, the performance of a duty from which Christ had released him; and when he comes to the confession of faith, in which he ought to have persevered even to death, his courage fails. We ought always to consider what the Lord requires from us, that those who are weak may not undertake what is not necessary.

17. Then the maid that kept the door said to Peter. Peter is introduced into the high priest’s hall; but it cost him very dear, for, as soon as he sets his foot within it, he is constrained to deny Christ. When he stumbles so shamefully at the first step, the foolishness of his boasting is exposed. He had boasted that he would prove to be a valiant champion, and able to meet death with firmness; and now, at the voice of a single maid, and that voice unaccompanied by threatening, he is confounded and throws down his arms. Such is a demonstration of the power of man. Certainly, all the strength that appears to be in men is smoke, which a breath immediately drives away. When we are out of the battle, we are too courageous; but experience shows that our lofty talk is foolish and groundless; and, even when Satan makes no attacks, we contrive for ourselves idle alarms which disturb us before the time. The voice of a feeble woman terrified Peter: and what is the case with us? Do we not continually tremble at the rustling of a falling leaf? A false appearance of danger, which was still distant, made Peter tremble: and are we not every day led away from Christ by childish absurdities? In short, our courage is of such a nature, that, of its own accord, it gives way where there is no enemy; and thus does God revenge the arrogance of men by reducing fierce minds to a state of weakness. A man, filled not with fortitude but with wind, promises that he will obtain an easy victory over the whole world; and yet, no sooner does he see the shadow of a thistle, than he immediately trembles. Let us therefore learn not to be brave in any other than the Lord.

I am not. This does not seem, indeed, to be an absolute denial of Christ; but when Peter is afraid to acknowledge that he is one of Christs disciples, it amounts to an assertion that he has nothing to do with him. This ought to be carefully observed, that no one may imagine that he has escaped by acting the part of a sophist, when it is only in an indirect manner that he shrinks from the confession of his faith.

18. And Simon Peter was standing with them. When the evangelist adds that Peter was standing near the fire, along with the others and servants, this serves to connect the various parts of the narrative, as we shall afterwards see. But this shows how great was Peter’s stupidity, when, without the least concern, he warmed himself along with a multitude of wicked men, after having denied his Master; though it is possible that he may have been restrained by fear lest, in going out of the high priest’s house, he should fall into another danger of the same kind.

John 18:19-24

19. The high priest then asked Jesus concerning his disciples, and concerning his doctrine. 20. Jesus answered him, I spoke openly in the world; I always taught in the synagogue and in the temple, where all the Jews assemble, and in secret I have spoken nothing. 21. Why askest thou me? Ask those who have heard what I have spoken to them: behold, they know what I have said. 22. When he had said these things, one of the officers that stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? 23. Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me? 24. Now Annas had sent him bound to Calaphas the high priest.

19. The high priest then asked Jesus. The high priest interrogates Christ, as if he had been some seditious person, who had split the Church into parties by collecting disciples; and he interrogates him as if he had been a false prophet, who had endeavored to corrupt the purity of the faith by new and perverse doctrines. Our Lord “Nostre Seigneur.” Jesus Christ, having completely and faithfully discharged the office of teacher, does not enter into a new defense; but, that he may not abandon the cause of truth, he shows that he was prepared to defend all that he had taught. Yet he likewise reproves the impudence of the high priest, who inquires about a matter perfectly well known, as if it had been doubtful. Not satisfied with having rejected the Redeemer offered, together with the salvation promised to them, they likewise condemn all the exposition of the Law.

20. I spoke openly in the world. It is a childish error into which some have fallen, who think that this reply of Christ condemns those who expound the word of God in private apartments, when the tyranny of wieked men does not allow them to expound it publicly; for Christ does not argue as to what is lawful and what is not lawful, but his intention was to put down the insolent malice of Caiaphas.

This passage, however, appears to be inconsistent with another saying of Christ, where he enjoins the apostles to

proclaim on the house-tops what he had whispered in their ear, (Matthew 10:27;)

and again, when he declares that

it is not given to all to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, (Matthew 13:14)

and that he therefore confers this favor on none but the twelve apostles. I answer, when he says in the passage now under review, that he spoke nothing in secret, this refers to the substance of the doctrine, which was always the same, though the form of teaching it was various; for he did not speak differently among the disciples, so as to instruct them in something different; nor did he act cunningly, as if he purposely intended to conceal from the people what he spoke to a small number of persons in the house. He could, therefore, testify with a good conscience that he had openly declared and honestly proclaimed the substance of his doctrine.

22. When he had said these things. This is added, in order to inform us, first, how great was the rage of the enemies of Christ, and how tyrannical their government was; and, secondly, what sort of discipline existed among those priests. They sit like judges, but they are as cruel as ferocious beasts. A council is assembled, in which the utmost gravity ought to have prevailed; and yet a single officer is so daring and presumptuous, that, in the midst of the judicial proceedings, and in the presence of the judges, he strikes the person accused, who was not found to be in any respect guilty. We need not wonder, therefore, that the doctrine of Christ is condemned by so barbarous an assembly, from which not only all justice, but likewise all humanity and modesty, are banished.

23. If I have spoken evil. That is, “If I have sinned, accuse me, that, when the cause has been tried, I may be punished according to the offense; for this is not a lawful mode of procedure, but very different order and very different modesty ought to be maintained in judicial courts.” Christ complains, therefore, that a grievous injury has been clone to him, if he has committed no offense, and that, even if he has committed an offense, still they ought to proceed in a lawful manner, and not with rage and violence.

But Christ appears not to observe, in the present instance, the rule which he elsewhere lays down to his followers; for he does not

hold out the right cheek to him who had struck him on the left, (Matthew 5:39.)

I answer, in Christian patience it is not always the duty of him who has been struck to brook the injury done him, without saying a word, but, first, to endure it with patience, and, secondly, to give up all thoughts of revenge, and to endeavor to overcome evil by good, (Romans 12:21.) Wicked men are already too powerfully impelled by the spirit of Satan to do injury to others, in order that nobody may provoke them. It is a foolish exposition of Christ’s words, therefore, that is given by those who view them in such a light as if we were commanded to hold out fresh inducements to those who already are too much disposed to do mischief; for he means nothing else than that each of us should be more ready to bear a second injury than to take revenge for the first; so that there is nothing to prevent a Christian man from expostulating, when he has been unjustly treated, provided that his mind be free from rancour, and his hand from revenge.

24. Now Annas had sent him bound. This sentence must be read by way of parenthesis; for, having said that Christ was taken to the house of Annas, and having continued his narrative, as if the assembly of the priests had been held there, the Evangelist now reminds the reader that Christ was taken from the house of Annas to the high priest’s house. But as the tense of the Greek verb ἀπέστειλε has led many people into a mistake, I have preferred translating it by the pluperfect tense, Had sent. “J’ay mieux aime tourner en ceste sorte, Avoit envoye; que, I1 a envoy;“ — “I have chosen to render it in this way, Annas Had Sent, rather than, Annas Sent.”

John 18:25-27

25. And Simon Peter was standing there and warming, himself. They said therefore to him, Art not thou also one of his discipYes? He denied it? “Il le nia.” and said, I am not. 26. One of the servants of the high priest, who was a kinsman of him whose ear Peter had cut off, said, Did not I see thee in the garden with him? 27. Then Peter denied it again; “Le nia derechef.” and immediately the cock crew.

25. He denied it. How shocking the stupidity of Peter, who, after having denied his Master, not only has no feeling of repentance, but hardens himself by the very indulgence he takes in sinning! If each of them in his turn had asked him, he would not have hesitated to deny his Master a thousand times. Such is the manner in which Satan hurries along wretched men, after having degraded them. We must also attend to the circumstance which is related by the other Evangelists, (Matthew 26:74; Mark 14:71,) that he began to curse and to swear, saying, that he did not know Christ. Thus it happens to many persons every day. At first, the fault will not be very great; next, it becomes habitual, and at length, after that conscience has been laid asleep, he who has accustomed himself to despise God will think nothing unlawful for him, but will dare to commit the greatest wickedness. There is nothing better for us, therefore, than to be early on our guard, that he who is tempted by Satan, while he is yet uncorrupted, may not allow himself the smallest indulgence.

27. Immediately the coch crew. The Evangelist mentions the crowing of the coch, in order to inform us, that Peter was warned by God at the very time; and for this reason the other Evangelists tell us, that he then remembered the words of the Lord, (Matthew 26:75; Mark 14:72,) though Luke relates that the mere crowing of the cock did not produce any effect on Peter, till Christ looked at him, (Luke 22:61.) Thus, when any person has once begun to fall through the suggestions of Satan, no voice, no sign, no warning, will bring him back, until the Lord himself cast his eyes upon him.

John 18:28-32

28. Then they lead Jesus from Caiaphas into the hall of the governor; “In Praetorium;” — “au Pretoire;” — “into the Pretorium.” and it was early in the morning; and they themselves did not enter into the hall, that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover “L’agneau de pasque;” — “the paschal lamb.” 29. Pilate therefore went out to them, and said, What accusation do you bring against this man? 30. They answered and said to him, If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him to thee. 31. Pilate therefore said to them, Take you him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said to him, We are not allowed to put any man to death: 32. That the word of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he had spoken, signifying by what death he should die.

28. Then they lead Jesus. That trial, which the Evangelist mentions, took place before daybreak; and yet there can be no doubt, that they had their bellows at work throughout the whole of the city to inflame the people. Thus the rage of the people was suddenly kindled, as if all, with one consent, demanded that Christ should be put to death, Now, the trial was conducted by the priests, not that they had it in their power to pronounce a sentence, but that, after having excited a prejudice against him by their previous decislon, they might deliver him to the governor, as if he had already been fully tried. “Mals a fin de livrer au juge, etant desja charge, et comme suffisamentconveincu par leur premiere cognoissance et les interrogatoires qu’ils luy avoient faites;” — “but to deliver him to the judge as a person already accused, and as having been sufficiently convicted by their previous trial, and by the questions which they had put to him.” The Romans gave the name Praetorium both to the governor’s house or palace, “La maison ou palais du gouverneur.” and to the judgment-seat, where he was wont to decide causes.

That they might not be defiled. In abstaining from all defilement, that, being purified according to the injunction of the Law, they may eat the Lord’s Passover, their religion, in this respect, deserves commendation. But there are two faults, and both of them are very heinous. The first is, “La premiere fkute est.” they do not consider that they carry more pollution within their hearts, than they can contract by entering any place however profane; and the second is, they carry to excess their care about smaller matters, and neglect what is of the highest importance.

To the defiled and to unbelievers, says Paul, nothing is pure; because their minds are polluted, (Titus 1:15.)

But these hypocrites, though they are so full of malice, ambition, fraud, cruelty, and avarice, that they ahnost infect heaven and earth with their abominable smell, are only afraid of external pollutions. So then it is an intolerable mockery, that they expect to please God, provided that they do not contract defilement by touching some unclean thing, though they have disregarded true purity.

Another fault connected with hypocrisy is, that, while it is careful in performing ceremonies, it makes no scruple of neglecting matters of the highest importance; for God enjoined on the Jews those ceremonies which are contained in the Law, for no other reason, than that they might be habituated to the love and practice of true holiness. Besides, no part of the Law forbade them to enter into the house of a Gentile, but it was a precaution derived from the traditions of the fathers, that no person might, through oversight, contract any pollution from an unclean house. But those venerable expounders of the Law, while they carefully strain at a gnat, swallow the camel See Harmony of the Evangelists, vol. 3 page 93. without any hesitation, (Matthew 23:24;) and it is usual with hypocrites to reckon it a greater crime to kill a flea than to kill a man. This fault is closely allied to the other, of greatly preferring the traditions of men to the holy commandments of God. In order that they may eat the passover in a proper manner, they wish to keep themselves pure; but they suppose uncleanness to be confined within the wails of the governor’s house, and yet they do not hesitate, while heaven and earth are witnesses, to pursue an innocent person to death. In short, they observe the shadow of the passover with a false and pretended reverence, and yet not only do they violate the true passover by sacrilegious hands, but endeavor, as far as lies in their power, to bury it in eternal oblivion, “De la ruiner et en abolir la memoire a jamais.”

29. Pilate therefore went out to them. This heathen is not unwilling to encourage a superstition, which he ridicules and despises; but in the main point of the cause, he performs the duty of a good judge, when he orders them, if they have any accusation, to bring it forward. The priests, on the other hand, not having sufficient authority to condemn him whom they pronounce to be guilty, make no other reply, than that he ought to abide by their previous decision.

30. If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him to thee. They indirectly complain of Pilate, that he has not a proper reliance on their integrity. “Why do you not, without further concerns” say they, “hold it to be certain, that the person whom we prosecute deserves to die?” Such is the manner in which wicked men, whom God has raised to a high degree of honor, blinded as it were by their own greatness, allow themselves to do whatever they choose. Such, too, is the intoxicating nature of pride. “Voyla aussi comme orgueil remplit les gens d’une yvrognerle, et les met hors du sens.” — “See, too, how pride fills people with a sort of drunkenness, and puts them out of their senses.” They wish that Christ should be reckoned a malefactor, and for no other reason “Et non pour autre raison.” but because they accuse him. But if we come to the truth of the matter, what deeds of a malefactor shall we find in him, except that he has cured every kind of diseases, has driven the devils out of men, has made the paralytics and the lame to walk, has restored sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, and life to the dead? Such were the real facts, and those men knew them well; but, as I said a little ago, when men are intoxicated with pride, nothing is more difficult than to arouse them to form a sound and correct judgment.

31. According to your law. Pilate, offended by their barbarous and violent proceedings, undoubtedly reproaches them by stating that this form of condemnation, which they were eager to carry into effcct, was at variance with the common law of all nations and with the feelings of mankind; and, at the same time he censures them for boasting that they had a law given to them by God.

Take you him. He says this ironically; for he would not have allowed them to pronounce on a man a sentence of capital punishment; but it is as if he had said, “Were he in your power, he would instantly be executed, without being heard in his own defense; and, is this the equity of your Law, to condemn a man without any crime?” Thus do wicked men, falsely assuming the name of God as an excuse for their conduct, expose his holy doctrine to the reproaches of enemies, and the world eagerly seizes on it as an occasion of slander.

We are not allowed. Those who think that the Jews refuse an offer, which Pilate had made to them, are mistaken; but rather, knowing that he had said to them in mockery, Take you him, they reply, “You would not allow it; and since you are the judge, execute your office.”

32. That the word of Jesus might be fulfilled. Finally, the Evangelist adds, that it was necessary that this should be done, in order that the prediction which Christ had uttered

might be fulfilled, The Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of the Gentiles, (Matthew 20:19.)

And, indeed, if we wish to read with advantage the history of Christ’s death, the chief point is, to consider the eternal purpose of God. The Son of God is placed before the tribunal of a mortal man. If we suppose that this is done by the caprice of men, and do not raise our eyes to God, our faith must necessarily be confounded and put to shame. But when we perceive that by the condemnation of Christ, our condemnation before God is blotted out, because it pleased the Heavenly Father to take this method of reconciling mankind to himself, raised on high by this single consideration, we boldly, and without shame, glory even in Christ’s ignominy. Let us therefore learn, in each part of this narrative, to turn our eyes to God as the Author of our redemption.

John 18:33-36

33. Then Pilate went again into the hall, and called Jesus, and said to him, Art thou the King of the Jews? 34. Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this from thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? 35. Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the priests have delivered thee to me: what hast thou done? 36. Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have striven that I should not be delivered to the Jews. But now my kingdom is not from hence.

33. Then Pilate went again into the hall. It is probable that many things were said on both sides, which the Evangelist passes over; and this conclusion might be readily drawn from the other Evangelists. But John dwells chiefly on a single point, that Pilate made a laborious inquiry whether Christ was justly or unjustly accused. In the presence of the people, who were inflamed with sedition, nothing could be done but in a riotous manner. He therefore goes again into the hall; and, indeed, his intention is to acquit Christ, but Christ himself, in order that he may obey his Father, presents himself to be condemned; and this is the reason why he is so sparing in his replies. Having a judge who was favorable, and who would willingly have lent an ear to him, it was not difficult for him to plead his cause; but he considers for what purpose he came down into the world, and to what he is now called by the Father. Of his own accord, therefore, he refrains from speaking, that he may not escape from death.

Art thou the King of the Jews? It would never have struck Pilate’s mind to put this question about the kingdom, if this charge had not been brought against Christ by the Jews. Now, Pilate takes up what was more offensive than all the rest, that, having disposed of it, he may acquit the prisoner. The tendency of Christ’s answer is to show that there is no ground for that accusation; and thus it contains an indirect refutation; as if he had said, “It is absurd to bring that charge against me, fbr not even the slightest suspicion of it can fall upon me.”

Pilate appears to have taken amiss that Christ asked him why he suspected him of such a crime; “De tel crime.” and, therefore, he angrily reproaches him, that all the evil comes from his own nation. “I sit here as a judge,” says he; “it is not foreigners, but your own countrymen, who accuse you. There is no reason, therefore, why you should involve me in your quarrels. You would be allowed by me and by the Romans to live at peace; but you raise disturbances among yourselves, and I am reluctantly compelled to bear a part in them.”

36. My kingdom is not of this world. By these words he acknowledges that he is a king, but, so far as was necessary to prove his innocence, he clears himself of the calumny; for he declares, that there is no disagreement between his kingdom and political government or order; “Et le goavernement ou ordre politique.” as if he had said, “I am falsely accused, as if I had attempted to produce a dis-turbanee, or to make a revolution in public affairs. I have preached about the kingdom of God; but that is spiritual, and, therefore, you have no right to suspect me of aspiring to kingly power.” This defense was made by Christ before Pilate, but the same doctrine is useful to believers to the end of the world; for if the kingdom of Christ were earthly, it would be frail and changeable, because

the fashion of this world passeth away, (1 Corinthians 7:31;)

but now, since it is pronounced to be heavenly, this assures us of its perpetuity. Thus, should it happen, that the whole world were overturned, provided that our consciences are always directed to the kingdom of Christ, they will, nevertheless, remain firm, not only amidst shakings and convulsions, but even amidst dreadful ruin and destruction. If we are cruelly treated by wicked men, still our salvation is secured by the kingdom of Christ, which is not subject to the caprice of men. In short, thougll there are innumerable storms by which the world is continually agitated, the kingdom of Christ, in which we ought to seek tranquillity, is separated from the world.

We are taught, also, what is the nature of this kingdom; for if it made us happy according to the flesh, and brought us riches, luxuries, and all that is desirable for the use of the present life, it would smell of the earth and of the world; but now, though our condition be apparently wretched, still our true happiness remains unimpaired. We learn from it, also, who they are that belong to this Mngdom; those who, having been renewed by the Spirit of God, contemplate the heavenly life in holiness and righteousness. Yet it deserves our attention, likewise, that it is not said, that the kingdom of Christ is not in this world; for we know that it has its seat in our hearts, as also Christ says elsewhcre, The kingdom of God is within you, (Luke 17:21.) But, strictly speaking, the kingdom of God, while it dwells in us, is a stranger to the world, because its condition is totally different.

My servants would strive. He proves that he did not aim at an earthly kingdom, because no one moves, no one takes arms in his support; for if a private individual lay claim to royal authority, he must gain power by means of seditious men. Nothing of this kind is seen in Christ; and, therefore, it follows that he is not an earthly king.

But here a question arises, Is it not law fill to defend the kingdom of Christ by arms? For when Kings and Princes “Quand il est commande aux Rois ct Princes.” are commanded to kiss the Son of God, (Psalm 2:10-12) not only are they enjoined to submit to his authority in their private capacity, but also to employ all the power that they possess, in defending the Church and maintaining godliness. I answer, first, they who draw this conclusion, that the doctrine of the Gospel and the pure worship of God ought not to be defended by arms, are unskillful and ignorant reasoners; for Christ argues only from the facts of the case in hand, how frivolous were the calumnies which the Jews had brought against him. Secondly, though godly kings defend the kingdom of Christ by the sword, still it is done in a different manner from that in which worldly kingdoms are wont to be defended; for the kingdom of Christ, being spiritual, must be founded on the doctrine and power of the Spirit. In the same manner, too, its edification is promoted; for neither the laws and edicts of men, nor the punishments inflicted by them, enter into the consciences. Yet this does not hinder princes from accidentally defending the kingdom of Christ; partly, by appointing external discipline, and partly, by lending their protection to the Church against wicked men. It results, however, from the depravity of the world, that the kingdom of Christ is strengthened more by the blood of the martyrs than by the aid of arms.

John 18:37-40

37. Pilate therefore said to him, Art thou then aking? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. For this cause was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I may bear testimony to the truth: every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. 38. Pilate saith to him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews, and said to them, I find no guilt in him. 39. But you have a custom, that I should release to you some one at the passover; do you wish then that I should release to you the King of the Jews? 40. Then they all cried out again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.

37. Thou sayest that I am a king. Although Pilate had already learned, from the former answer, that Christ claims for himself some sort of kingdom, yet now Christ asserts the same thing more firmly; and, not satisfied with this, he makes an additional statement, which serves for a seal, as it were, to ratify what he had said. Hence we infer, that the doctrine concerning Christ’s kingdom is of no ordinary importance, since he has deemed it worthy of so solemn an affirmation.

For this cause was I born, that I may bear witness to the truth. This is, no doubt, a general sentiment; but it must be viewed in relation to the place which it holds in the present passage. The words mean, that it is natural for Christ to speak the truth; and, next, that he was sent for this purpose by the Father; and, consequently, that this is his peculiar office. There is no danger, therefore, that we shall be deceived by trusting him, since it is impossible that he who has been commissioned by God, and whose natural disposition leads him to maintain the truth, shall teach any thing that is not true.

Every one that is of the truth. Christ added this, not so much for the purpose of exhorting Pilate, (for he knew that he would gain nothing by doing so,) as of defending his doctrine against the base reproaches which had been east on it; as if he had said, “It is imputed to me as a crime that I have asserted that I am a king; and yet this is an unquestionable truth, which is received with reverence and without hesitation by all who have a correct judgment and a sound understanding.” When he says, that they are of the truth he does not mean that they naturally know the truth, but that they are directed by the Spirit of God.

38. What is truth? Some think that Pilate puts this question through curiosity, as irreligious men are sometimes accustomed to be eagerly desirous of learning something that is new to them, and yet do not know why they wish it; for they intend nothing more than to gratify their ears. For my own part, I rather think that it is an expression of disdain; for Pilate thought himself highly insulted when Christ represented him as destitute of all knowledge of the truth. Here we see in Pilate a disease which is customary among men. Though we are all aware of our ignorance, yet there are few who are willing to confess it; and the consequence is, that the greater part of men reject the true doctrine. Afterwards, the Lord, who is the Teacher of the humble, blinds the proud, and thus inflicts on them the punishment which they deserve. From the same pride arises such disdain, that they do not choose to submit to learn, because all lay claim to sagacity and acuteness of mind. Truth is believed to be a common thing; but God declares, on the contrary, that it far exceeds the capacity of the human understanding.

The same thing happens in other matters. The principal articles of theology are, the curse pronounced on the human race, the corruption of nature, the mortification of the flesh, the renewal of the life, the reconciliation effected by free grace through the only sacrifice, the imputation of righteousness, by means of which a sinner is accepted by God, and the illumination of the Holy Spirit. These, being paradoxes, are disdainfully rejected by the ordinary understanding of men. Few, therefore, make progress in the school of God, because we scarcely find one person in ten who attends to the first and elementary instructions; and why is this, but because they measure the secret wisdom of God by their own understanding?

That Pilate spoke in mockery is evident from this circumstance, that he immediately goes out. In short, he is angry with Christ for boasting that he brings forward the truth, which formerly lay hidden in darkness. Yet this indignation of Pilate shows that wicked men never reject the doctrine of the Gospel so spitefully as not to be somewhat moved by its efficacy; for, though Pilate did not proceed so far as to become humble and teachable, yet he is constrained to feel some inward compunction.

39. But you have a custom. Pilate was all along pondering in what way he might save Christ’s life; but, the people being so fiercely enraged, he attempted to keep a middle path, in order to allay their fury; for he thought that it would be enough if Christ, being dismissed as a malefactor, were marked with perpetual ignominy, lie therefore selects Barabbas above all others, in order that, by a comparison with that man, the hatred which they bore to Christ might be softened down; for Barabbas was universally and strongly detested on account of his atrocious crimes. And, indeed, is there any thing more detestable than a robber? But Luke (Luke 23:19) relates that, in addition to this, he was guilty of other crimes.

That the Jews preferred him to Christ, did not happen without a singular interposition of the providence of God; for it would have been highly unbecoming, that the Son of God should be rescued from death by so dishonorable a price. Yeb by his death, he was thrown into the deepest ignominy, so that, in consequence of the release of Barabbas, he was crucified between two robbers; for he had taken upon himself the sins of all, which could not be expiated in any other way; and the glory of his resurrection, by which it was speedily followed, caused his death itself to be a splendid triumph.

This custom, by which the Roman governor delivered up to the Jews, every year, at the passover, some criminal, involved a base and heinous crime. It was done, no doubt in order to honor the sacredness of the day, but was, in reality, nothing else than a shameful profanation of it; for Scripture declares, that

he who acquitteth the guilty is abomination in the sight of God, (Proverbs 17:15;)

and therefore he is far from taking delight in that improper kind of forgiveness. Let us learn by this example, that nothing is more ridiculous, than to attempt to serve God by our inventions; for, as soon as men begin to follow their own imaginations, there will be no end till, by falling into some of the most absurd fooleries, they openly insult God. The rule for the worship of God, therefore, ought to be taken from nothing else than from his own appointment.

CHAPTER 19.

John 19:1-6

1. Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him. 2. And the soldiers, platting a crown of thorns, put it on his head, and put on him a purple robe, 3. And said, Hail, King of the Jews! and struck him with the palms of their hands. 4. Pilate therefore went out again, and said to them, Behold, I bring him out to you, that you may know that I find no guilt in him. 5. Jesus then went out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Then he said to them, “Et Pilate leur dit.” — “And Pilate said to them.” Behold the man! 6. When therefore the chief priests and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith to them, Take you him, and crucify him; for I find no guilt in him.

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).

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.

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].

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.)

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.

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.)

22. struck Jesus with the palm ... Answerest Thou the high priest so--(See Is 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.)

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.

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.

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].

Over the brook Cedron - Having finished the prayer related in the preceding chapter, our Lord went straight to the garden of Gethsemane, Mat 26:36, which was in the mount of Olives, eastward of Jerusalem. This mount was separated from the city by a very narrow valley, through the midst of which the brook Cedron ran: see 1 Maccabees 12:37; Joseph. War, b. v. c. 2, s. 3. xii. 2. Cedron is a very small rivulet, about six or seven feet broad, nor is it constantly supplied with water, being dry all the year, except during the rains. It is mentioned in the Old Testament: 2Sam 15:23; 1Kgs 15:13; 2Kgs 23:4. And it appears the evangelist only mentions it here to call to remembrance what happened to David, when he was driven from Jerusalem by his son Absalom, and he and his followers obliged to pass the brook Cedron on foot: see 2Sam 15:23. All this was a very expressive figure of what happened now to this second David, by the treachery of one of his own disciples. This brook had its name probably from קדר Kadar, he was black; it being the place into which the blood of the sacrifices, and other filth of the city, ran. It was rather, says Lightfoot, the sink, or the common sewer, of the city, than a brook. Some copyists, mistaking Κεδρων for Greek, have changed του into των, and thus have written των Κεδρων, of cedars, instead of του Κεδρων, the brook of Cedron: but this last is undoubtedly the genuine reading.

A garden - Gethsemane: see on Mat 26:36 (note).

The Jewish grandees had their gardens and pleasure grounds without the city even in the mount of Olives. This is still a common custom among the Asiatics.

St. John mentions nothing of the agony in the garden; probably because he found it so amply related by all the other evangelists. As that account should come in here, the reader is desired to consult the notes on Mat 26:36-47 (note). See also Mar 14:30-36 (note), and Luk 22:40-44 (note).

Judas - knew the place - As many had come from different quarters to celebrate the passover at Jerusalem, it could not be an easy matter to find lodging in the city: Jesus therefore chose to pass the night in the garden with his disciples which, from this verse, and from Luk 22:39, we find was his frequent custom, though he often lodged in Bethany. But, as he had supped in the city this evening, Judas took it for granted that he had not gone to Bethany, and therefore was to be met with in the garden; and, having given this information to the priests, they gave him some soldiers and others that he might be the better enabled to seize and bring him away.

A band - Την σπειραν, The band or troop. Some think that the spira was the same as the Roman cohort, and was the tenth part of a legion, which consisted sometimes of 4200, and sometimes of 5000 foot. But Raphelius, on Mat 27:27, has clearly proved, from Polybius, that the spira was no more than a tenth of the fourth part of a legion. And as the number of the legion was uncertain, and their divisions not at all equal, no person can tell how many the band or spira contained. See many curious particulars in Raphelius on this point, vol. i. p. 351, edit. 1747. This band was probably those Roman soldiers given by the governor for the defense of the temple; and the officers were those who belonged to the Sanhedrin.

With lanterns and torches - With these they had intended to search the corners and caverns, provided Christ had hidden himself; for they could not have needed them for any other purpose, it being now the fourteenth day of the moon's age, in the month Nisan, and consequently she appeared full and bright. The weapons mentioned here were probably no other than clubs, staves, and instruments of that kind, as we may gather from Mat 26:55; Mar 14:48; Luk 22:52. The swords mentioned by the other evangelists were probably those of the Roman soldiers; the clubs and staves belonged to the chief priest's officers.

Jesus knowing all things, etc. - He had gone through all his preaching, working of miracles, and passion, and had nothing to do now but to offer up himself on the cross; he therefore went forth to meet them, to deliver himself up to death.

Jesus of Nazareth - They did not say this till after Judas kissed Christ, which was the sign which he had agreed with the soldiers, etc., to give them, that they might know whom they were to seize: see Mat 26:48. Though some harmonists place the kiss after what is spoken in the ninth verse.

They went backward, and fell to the ground - None of the other evangelists mentions this very important circumstance. Our Lord chose to give them this proof of his infinite power, that they might know that their power could not prevail against him if he chose to exert his might, seeing that the very breath of his mouth confounded, drove back, and struck them down to the earth. Thus by the blast of God they might have perished, and by the breath of his nostrils they might have been consumed: Job 4:9.

Let these go their way - These words are rather words of authority, than words of entreaty. I voluntarily give myself up to you, but you must not molest one of these my disciples. At your peril injure them. Let them go about their business. I have already given you a sufficient proof of my power: I will not exert it in my own behalf, for I will lay down my life for the sheep; but I will not permit you to injure the least of these. It was certainly the supreme power of Christ that kept the soldiers and the mob from destroying all the disciples present, when Peter had given them such provocation, in cutting off the ear of Malchus. There were probably no other disciples with Christ than Peter, James, and John, at this time. see Mat 26:37; Mar 13:33.

Having a sword - See the note on Luk 22:36.

Cut off his right ear - He probably designed to have cloven his scull in two, but God turned it aside, and only permitted the ear to be taken off; and this he would not have suffered, but only that he might have the opportunity of giving them a most striking proof of his Divinity in working an astonishing miracle on the occasion: see the notes on Mat 26:51-56 (note).

The other three evangelists mention this transaction; but neither give the name of Peter nor of Malchus, probably because both persons were alive when they wrote; but it is likely both had been long dead before St. John published his history.

The cup which my Father hath given me - The cup signifies, sometimes the lot of life, whether prosperous or adverse: here it signifies the final sufferings of Christ.

The captain - Χιλιαρχος, The chiliarch, or chief over one thousand men - answering nearly to a colonel with us. See the note on Luk 22:4. He was probably the prefect or captain of the temple guard.

To Annas - This man must have had great authority in his nation:

1. Because he had been a long time high priest;

2. Because he had no less than five sons who successively enjoyed the dignity of the high priesthood; and,

3. Because his son-in-law Caiaphas was at this time in possession of that office.

It is likely that Annas was chief of the Sanhedrin, and that it was to him in that office that Christ was first brought. Some think that Annas was still high priest, and that Caiaphas was only his deputy, though he did the principal part of the business, and that it as because of this that he is called high priest. But see the notes on Mat 2:4, and Luk 3:2.

That same year - The office was now no longer during life as formerly. See the note on Joh 11:49.

What is related in the 24th verse, Now Annas had sent him bound to Caiaphas, comes properly in after the 13th verse. One of the Vienna MSS. adds this verse here; the later Syriac has it in the margin, and St. Cyril in the text.

Caiaphas was he which gave counsel, etc. - Therefore he was an improper person to sit in judgment on Christ, whom he had prejudged and precondemned: see on Joh 11:50-52 (note). But Christ must not be treated according to the rules of justice: if he had, he could not have been put to death.

And - another disciple - Not That other disciple, for the article is omitted by AD, two others; some editions; Syriac, Persic, Gothic, and Nonnus. So the Vulgate is to be understood. There are many conjectures who this disciple was: Jerome, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Nonnus, Lyra, Erasmus, Piscator, and others, say it was John. It is true John frequently mentions himself in the third person; but then he has always, whom Jesus loved, as in Joh 13:23; Joh 19:26; Joh 21:7, Joh 21:20, except in Joh 19:35, where he has plainly pointed out himself as writer of this Gospel; but, in the place before us, he has mentioned no circumstance by which that disciple may be known to be John. To this may be added that John being not only a Galilean, but a fisherman by trade, it is not likely that he should have been known to the high priest, as it is here said of that disciple who followed Jesus with Peter. See Bishop Pearce and Calmet. The conjecture of Grotius is the most likely: viz. that it was the person at whose house Jesus had supped. St. Augustin, Tract. 113, speaks like a man of sound sense: We should not decide hastily, says he, on a subject concerning which the Scripture is silent.

The damsel that kept the door - Caezarius, a writer quoted by Calmet, says this portress was named Ballila. It is worthy of remark that women, especially old women, were employed by the ancients as porters. In 2Sam 4:6, both the Septuagint and Vulgate make a woman porter to Ishbosheth. Aristophanes, in Vespis, v. 765, mentions them in the same office and calls them Σηκις, Sekis, which seems to signify a common maid-servant: - Ὁτι την θυραν ανεῳξεν ἡ Σηκις λαθρα.

And Euripides, Troad. brings in Hecuba, complaining that she, who was wont to sit upon a throne, is now reduced to the miserable necessity of becoming a porter, or a nurse, in order to get a morsel of bread. And Plautus, Curcul. Act. i. sc. 1, mentions an old woman who was keeper of the gate: -

Anus hic solet cubitare custos janitrix.

Why they, in preference to men, should be pitched upon for this office, I cannot conceive; but we find the usage was common in all ancient nations. See the notes on Mat 26:69.

Servants and officers - These belonged to the chief priests, etc.; the Roman soldiers had probably been dismissed after having conducted Christ to Annas.

Asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine - He probably asked him by what authority, or in virtue of what right, he collected disciples, formed a different sect, preached a new doctrine, and set himself up for a public reformer? As religion was interested in these things, the high priest was considered as being the proper judge. But all this, with what follows, was transacted by night, and this was contrary to established laws. For the Talmud states, Sanhed. c. iv. s. 1, that - "Criminal processes can neither commence not terminate, but during the course of the day. If the person be acquitted, the sentence may be pronounced during that day; but, if he be condemned, the sentence cannot be pronounced till the next day. But no kind of judgment is to be executed, either on the eve of the Sabbath, or the eve of any festival." Nevertheless, to the lasting infamy of this people, Christ was judicially interrogated and condemned during the night; and on the night too of the passover, or, according to others, on the eve of that feast. Thus, as I have remarked before, all the forms of justice were insulted and outraged in the case of our Lord. In this his humiliation his judgment was taken away. See Act 8:33.

I spake openly to the world - To every person in the land indiscriminately - to the people at large: the τῳ κοσμῳ, here, is tantamount to the French tout le monde, all the world, i.e. every person within reach. This is another proof that St. John uses the term world to mean the Jewish people only; for it is certain our Lord did not preach to the Gentiles. The answer of our Lord, mentioned in this and the following verse, is such as became a person conscious of his own innocence, and confident in the righteousness of his cause. I have taught in the temple, in the synagogues, in all the principal cities, towns, and villages, and through all the country. I have had no secret school. You and your emissaries have watched me every where. No doctrine has ever proceeded from my lips, but what was agreeable to the righteousness of the law and the purity of God. My disciples, when they have taught, have taught in the same way, and had the same witnesses. Ask those who have attended our public ministrations, and hear whether they can prove that I or my disciples have preached any false doctrines, have ever troubled society, or disturbed the state. Attend to the ordinary course of justice, call witnesses, let them make their depositions, and then proceed to judge according to the evidence brought before you.

One of the officers - struck Jesus - This was an outrage to all justice: for a prisoner, before he is condemned, is ever considered to be under the especial protection of justice; nor has any one a right to touch him, but according to the direction of the law. But it has been observed before that, if justice had been done to Christ, he could neither have suffered nor died.

Now Annas had sent him, etc. - It has been observed before that the proper place of this verse is immediately after the 13th; and, if it be allowed to stand here, it should be read in a parenthesis, and considered as a recapitulation of what had been before done.

And - the cock crew - Peter denied our Lord three times: -

Peter's First Denial.

I. This took place, when he was without, or beneath, in the hall of Caiaphas's house. He was not in the higher part where Christ stood before the high priest; but without that division of the hall, and in the lower part with the servants and officers, at the fire kindled in the midst of the hall, Joh 18:16, Joh 18:18; and the girl who kept the door had entered into the hall, where she charged Peter.

Peter's Second Denial.

II. This was in a short time after the first, Luk 22:58. Having once denied his Master, he naturally retired from the place where his accuser was to the vestibule of the hall, Mat 26:71, and it was the time of the first cock-crowing, or soon after midnight. After remaining here a short time, perhaps an hour, another girl sees him, and says to them who were standing by in the vestibule, that he was one of them. Peter, to avoid this charge, withdraws into the hall, and warms himself. The girl, and those to whom she had spoken, follow him; the communication between the two places being immediate. Here a man enforces the charge of the girl, according to Luke; and others urge it, according to St. John; and Peter denies Jesus vehemently.

Peter's Third Denial.

III. He was now in the hall, and also within sight of Jesus, though at such a distance from him that Jesus could not know what passed, but in a supernatural way. And, about an hour after his second denial, those who stood by founded a third charge against him, on his being a Galilean, which St. Luke says, Luk 22:59, one in particular strongly affirmed; and which, according to John, Joh 18:26, was supported by one of Malchus's relations. This occasioned a more vehement denial than before, and immediately the cock crew the second time, which is eminently called αλεκτοροφωνια. The first denial may have been between our twelve and one; and the second between our two and three.

At the time of the third denial, Luk 22:61 proves that Jesus was in the same room with Peter. We must farther observe that Matthew, Mat 26:57, lays the scene of Peter's denials in the house of Caiaphas: whereas John, Joh 18:15-23, seems to intimate that these transactions took place in the house of Annas; but this difficulty arises from the injudicious insertion of the particle ουν, therefore, in Joh 18:24, which should be omitted, on the authority of ADES, Mt. BH, many others; besides some versions, and some of the primitive fathers. Griesbach has left it out of the text. See Bishop Newcome's Harm. notes, p. 48.

The time of Peter's denials happened during the space of the third Roman watch, or that division of the night, between twelve and three, which is called αλεκτοροφωνια, or cock-crowing, Mar 13:35. Concerning the nature and progress of Peter's denial, see the notes on Mat 26:58, Mat 26:69-75.

The hall of judgment - Εις το πραιτωριον, To the praetorium. This was the house where Pilate lodged; hence called in our margin, Pilate's house. The praetorium is so called from being the dwelling-place of the praetor, or chief of the province. It was also the place where he held his court, and tried causes.

St. John has omitted all that passed in the house of Caiaphas - the accusations brought against Christ - the false witnesses - the insults which he received in the house of the high priest - and the assembling of the grand council, or Sanhedrin. These he found amply detailed by the other three evangelists; and for this reason it appears that he omitted them. John's is properly a supplementary Gospel.

Lest they should be defiled - The Jews considered even the touch of a Gentile as a legal defilement; and therefore would not venture into the praetorium, for fear of contracting some impurity, which would have obliged them to separate themselves from all religious ordinances till the evening, Lev 15:10, Lev 15:11, Lev 15:19, Lev 15:20.

That they might eat the passover - Some maintain that το πασχα here does not mean the paschal lamb, but the other sacrifices which were offered during the paschal solemnity - for this had been eaten the evening before; and that our Lord was crucified the day after the passover. Others have maintained that the paschal lamb is here meant; that this was the proper day for sacrificing it; that it was on the very hour in which it was offered that Christ expired on the cross; and that therefore our Lord did not eat the Paschal lamb this year, or that he ate it some hours before the common time. Bishop Pearce supposes that it was lawful for the Jews to eat the paschal lamb any time between the evening of Thursday and that of Friday. He conjectures too that this permission was necessary on account of the immense number of lambs which were to be killed for that purpose. When Cestius desired to know the number of the Jews, he asked the priests how he might accomplish his wish? They informed him that this might be known by the number of the lambs slain at the passover, as never less than ten partook of one lamb, though twenty might feast on it. On this mode of computation he found the lambs to be 256,500; εικοσι πεντε μυριαδας ηριθμησαν, προς δε ἑξακισχιλια και πεντακοσια. See Josephus, War, b. vi. c. 9. s. 3.

That Jesus ate a passover this last year of his life is sufficiently evident from Mat 26:17-19; Mar 14:12-18; Luk 22:8-15; and that he ate this passover some hours before the ordinary time, and was himself slain at that hour in which the paschal lamb was ordered by the law to be sacrificed, is highly probable, if not absolutely certain. See the note on Mat 26:20, and at the conclusion of the chapter, where the subject, and the different opinions on it, are largely considered.

Pilate then went out - This was an act of condescension; but, as the Romans had confirmed to the Jews the free use of all their rites and ceremonies, the governor could not do less than comply with them in this matter. He went out to them, that they might not be obliged to come into the hall, and thus run the risk of being defiled.

If he were not a malefactor - So they did not wish to make Pilate the judge, but the executor of the sentence which they had already illegally passed.

It is not lawful for us to put any man to death - They might have judged Jesus according to their law, as Pilate bade them do; but they could only excommunicate or scourge him. They might have voted him worthy of death; but they could not put him to death, if any thing of a secular nature were charged against him. The power of life and death was in all probability taken from the Jews when Archelaus, king of Judea, was banished to Vienna, and Judea was made a Roman province; and this happened more than fifty years before the destruction of Jerusalem. But the Romans suffered Herod, mentioned Act 12:1, etc., to exercise the power of life and death during his reign. See much on this point in Calmet and Pearce. After all, I think it probable that, though the power of life and death was taken away from the Jews, as far as it concerned affairs of state, yet it was continued to them in matters which were wholly of an ecclesiastical nature; and that they only applied thus to Pilate to persuade him that they were proceeding against Christ as an enemy of the state, and not as a transgressor of their own peculiar laws and customs. Hence, though they assert that he should die according to their law, because he made himself the Son of God, Joh 19:7, yet they lay peculiar stress on his being an enemy to the Roman government; and, when they found Pilate disposed to let him go, they asserted that if he did he was not Caesar's friend, Joh 18:12. It was this that intimidated Pilate, and induced him to give him up, that they might crucify him. How they came to lose this power is accounted for in a different manner by Dr. Lightfoot. His observations are very curious, and are subjoined to the end of this chapter.

That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled - Or, thus the word was fulfilled. God permitted the Jews to lose the power of life and death, in the sense before stated, that according to the Roman laws, which punished sedition, etc., with the cross, Christ might be crucified, according to his own prediction: Joh 12:32, Joh 3:14.

Art thou the king of the Jews? - St. Luke says, expressly, Luk 23:2, that when the Jews brought him to Pilate they began to accuse him as a rebel, who said he was king of the Jews, and forbade the people to pay tribute to Caesar. It was in consequence of this accusation that Pilate asked the question mentioned in the text.

Sayest thou this thing of thyself - That is, Is it because my enemies thus accuse me, or because thou hast any suspicion of me, that thou askest this question?

Am I a Jew? - That is, I am not a Jew, and cannot judge whether thou art what is called the Christ, the king of the Jews. It is thy own countrymen, and their spiritual rulers, who delivered thee up to me with the above accusation.

What hast thou done? - If thou dost not profess thyself king over this people, and an enemy to Caesar, what is it that thou hast done, for which they desire thy condemnation?

My kingdom is not of this world - It is purely spiritual and Divine. If it had been of a secular nature, then my servants would have contended - they would have opposed force with force, as the kingdoms of this world do in their wars; but as my kingdom as not of this world, therefore no resistance has been made. Eusebius relates, Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. c. 20, that "The relatives of our Lord were brought before Domitian, and interrogated whether they were of the family of David; and what sort the kingdom of Christ was, and where it would appear? They answered, that this kingdom was neither of this world, nor of an earthly nature; that it was altogether heavenly and angelical; and that it would not take place till the end of the world."

Thou sayest - A common form of expression for, yes, it is so. I was born into the world that I might set up and maintain a spiritual government: but this government is established in and by truth. All that love truth, hear my voice and attend to the spiritual doctrines I preach. It is by truth alone that I influence the minds and govern the manners of my subjects.

What is truth - Among the sages of that time there were many opinions concerning truth; and some had even supposed that it was a thing utterly out of the reach of men. Pilate perhaps might have asked the question in a mocking way; and his not staying to get an answer indicated that he either despaired of getting a satisfactory one, or that he was indifferent about it. This is the case with thousands: they appear desirous of knowing the truth, but have not patience to wait in a proper way to receive an answer to their question.

I find in him no fault - Having asked the above question, and being convinced of our Lord's innocence, he went out to the Jews to testify his convictions and to deliver him, if possible, out of their hands.

But ye have a custom - Nothing relative to the origin or reason of this custom is known. Commentators have swam in an ocean of conjecture on this point. They have lost their labor, and made nothing out: see the notes on Mat 27:15; Luk 23:17.

Barabbas was a robber - See Mat 27:16. The later Syriac has in the margin, αρχιλῃστης, a chief robber, a captain of banditti, and it is probable that this was the case. He was not only a person who lived by plunder, but shed the blood of many of those whom he and his gang robbed, and rose up against the Roman government, as we learn from Luk 23:19. There never existed a more perfidious, cruel, and murderous people than these Jews; and no wonder they preferred a murderer to the Prince of peace. Christ himself had said, If ye were of the world, the world would love its own. Like cleaves to like: hence we need not be surprised to find the vilest things still preferred to Christ, his kingdom, and his salvation.

1. It is not easy to give the character of Pilate. From the manner of his conduct, we scarcely can tell when he is in jest or in earnest. He appears to have been fully convinced of the innocence of Christ; and that the Jews, through envy and malice, desired his destruction. On this ground he should have released him; but he was afraid to offend the Jews. He knew they were an uneasy, factious, and seditious people; and he was afraid to irritate them. Fiat justitia, ruat caelum! was no motto of his. For fear of the clamors of this bad people, he permitted all the forms and requisitions of justice to be outraged, and abandoned the most innocent Jesus to their rage and malice. In this case he knew what was truth, but did not follow its dictates; and he as hastily abandoned the author of it as he did the question he had asked concerning it. Pilate, it is true, was disposed to pity - the Jews were full of malice and cruelty. They both, however, joined in the murder of our Lord. The most that we can say for Pilate is, that he was disposed to justice, but was not inclined to hazard his comfort or safety in doing it. He was an easy, pliable man, who had no objection to do a right thing if it should cost him no trouble; but he felt no disposition to make any sacrifice, even in behalf of innocence, righteousness, and truth. In all the business Pilate showed that he was not a good man; and the Jews proved that they were of their father, the devil. See Joh 19:8.

2. As Dr. Lightfoot has entered into a regular examination of when and how the Jews lost the power of life and death in criminal cases, it may be necessary to lay before the reader a copious abstract of his researches on this subject, founded on Joh 18:31. "It cannot be denied that all capital judgment, or sentence upon life, had been taken from the Jews for above forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem, as they oftentimes themselves confess. But how came this to pass? It is commonly received that the Romans, at this time the Jews' lords and masters, had taken from all their courts a power and capacity of judging the capital matters. Let us superadd a few things here. Rabh Cahna saith, When R. Ismael bar Jose lay sick, they sent to him, saying, Pray, sir, tell us two or three things which thou didst once tell us in the name of thy Father. He saith to them, A hundred and fourscore years before the destruction of the temple, the wicked kingdom (the Roman empire) reigned over Israel, fourscore years before the destruction of the temple, they (the fathers of the Sanhedrin) determined about the uncleanness of the heathen land, and about glass vessels. Forty years before the destruction of the temple, the Sanhedrin removed and sat in the Taberne. What is the meaning of this tradition? Rabbi Isaac bar Abdimi saith, They did not judge judgments of mulcts. The gloss is, Those are the judgments about fining any that offered violence, that entice a maid, and the price of a servant. When, therefore, they did not sit in the room Gazith, they did not judge about these things, and so those judgments about mulcts or fines ceased. Avodoh Zarah. fol. 82. Here we have one part of their judiciary power lost; not taken away from them by the Romans, but falling of itself, as it were, out of the hands of the Sanhedrin. Nor did the Romans indeed take away their power of judging in capital matters; but they, by their own oscitancy, supine and unreasonable lenity, lost it themselves, for so the Gemara goes on: Rabh Hachman bar Isaac saith, Let him not say that they did not judge judgments of mulcts, for they did not judge capital judgments either. And whence comes this? When they saw that so many murders and homicides multiplied upon them that they could not well judge and call them to account, they said, It is better for us that we remove from place to place; for how can we otherwise (sitting here and not punishing them) not contract guilt upon ourselves? "They thought themselves obliged to punish murderers while they sat in the room Gazith, for the place itself engaged them to it. They are the words of the Gemarists, upon which the gloss. The room Gazith was half of it within, and half of it without, the holy place. The reason of which was, that it was requisite that the council should sit near the Divine Majesty. Hence it is that they say, Whoever constitutes an unfit judge is as if he planted a grove by the altar of the Lord, as it is written, Judges and officers shalt thou make thee; and it follows presently after, Thou shalt not plant thee a grove near the altar of the Lord thy God, Deu 16:18, Deu 16:21. They removed therefore from Gazith, and sat in the Taberne; now though the Taberne were upon the mountain of the temple, yet they did not sit so near the Divine Majesty there as they did when they sat in the room Gazith. "Let us now in order put the whole matter together. "I. The Sanhedrin were most stupidly and unreasonably remiss in their punishment of capital offenders; going upon this reason especially, that they counted it so horrible a thing to put an Israelite to death. Forsooth, he is of the seed of Abraham, of the blood and stock of Israel, and you must have a care how you touch such a one! "R. Eliezer bar Simeon had laid hold on some thieves. R. Joshua bar Korchah sent to him, saying, O thou vinegar, the son of good wine! (i.e. O thou wicked son of a good father!) how long wilt thou deliver the people of God to the slaughter! He answered and said, I root the thorns out of the vineyard. To whom the other: Let the Lord of the vineyard come and root them out himself. Bava Meziah, fol. 83, 2. It is worth noting, that the very thieves of Israel are the people of God; and they must not be touched by any man, but referred to the judgment of God himself! "When R. Ismael bar R. Jose was constituted a magistrate by the king, there happened some such thing to him; for Elias himself rebuked him, saying, How long wilt thou deliver over the people of God to slaughter! Ibid. fol. 64, 1. Hence that which we alleged elsewhere: The Sanhedrin that happens to sentence any one to death within the space of seven years, is termed a destroyer. R. Eliezer ben Azariah saith it is so, if they should but condemn one within seventy years. Maccoth, fol. 7, 1. "II. It is obvious to any one how this foolish remissness, and letting loose the reins of judgment, would soon increase the numbers of robbers, murderers, and all kinds of wickedness; and indeed they did so abundantly multiply that the Sanhedrin neither could nor durst, as it ought, call the criminals to account. The law slept, while wickedness was in the height of its revels; and punitive justice was so out of countenance that as to uncertain murders they made no search, and against certain ones they framed no judgement. Since the time that homicides multiplied, the beheading the heifer ceased. Sotoh, fol. 47, 1. And in the place before quoted in Avodah: When they saw the numbers of murderers so greatly increase that they could not sit in judgment upon them, they said, Let us remove, etc., fol. 8, 2. So in the case of adultery, which we also observed in our notes on Joh 8:3-11. Since the time that adultery so openly advanced, under the second temple, they left off trying the adultress by the bitter water, etc. Mainaon. in Sotoh, cap. 3. "So that, we see, the liberty of judging in capital matters was no more taken from the Jews by the Romans than the beheading of the heifer, or the trial of the suspected wife by the bitter waters, was taken away by them, which no one will affirm. It is a tradition of R. Chaia, from the day wherein the temple was destroyed, though the Sanhedrin ceased, yet the four kinds of death (which were wont to be inflicted by the Sanhedrin) did not cease. For he that had deserved to be stoned to death, either fell off from some house, or some wild beast tore and devoured him. He that had deserved burning, either fell into some fire, or some serpent bit him. He that had deserved to be slain (i.e. with the sword) was either delivered into the hands of some heathen king, or was murdered by robbers. He that had deserved strangling, was either drowned in some river, or choked by a squinancy. "This must be observed from the evangelists, that when they had Christ in examination in the palace of the high priest all night, in the morning the whole Sanhedrin met that they might pass sentence of death upon him. Where then was this that they met? Questionless in the room Gazith - at least if they adhered to their own rules and constitutions: Thither they betook themselves sometimes upon urgent necessity. The gloss before quoted excepts only the case of murder, with which, amongst all their false accusations, they never charged Christ. "But, however, suppose it were granted that the great council met either in the Taberne, or some other place, (which yet agreed by no means with their own tradition), did they deal truly, and as the matter really and indeed was, with Pilate, when they tell him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death? He had said to them, Take ye him and judge him according to your laws. We have indeed judged and condemned him, but we cannot put any one to death. Was this that they said in fact true? How came they then to stone the proto-martyr Stephen? How came they to stone Ben Sarda at Lydda? Hieros. Sanhed. fol. 25, 4. How came they to burn the priest's daughter alive that was taken in adultery? Bab. Sanhed. fol. 52, 1, and 51, 1. It is probable that they had not put any one to death as yet, since the time that they had removed out of Gazith, and so might the easier persuade Pilate in that case. But their great design was to throw off the odium of Christ's death from themselves; at least among the vulgar crowd; fearing them, if the council should have decreed his execution. They seek this evasion, therefore, which did not altogether want some color and pretext of truth; and it succeeded according to what they desired. Divine Providence so ordering it as the evangelist intimates, Joh 18:32, That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake signifying what death he should die: that is, be crucified according to the custom of the Romans. While I am upon this thought, I cannot but reflect upon that passage, than which nothing is more worthy observation in the whole description of the Roman beast in the Revelation, Rev 13:4. The dragon which gave power to the beast. We cannot say this of the Assyrian, Babylonish, or any other monarchy; for the Holy Scriptures do not say it. But reason dictates, and the event itself tells us, that there was something acted by the Roman empire in behalf of the dragon, which was not compatible with any other, that is, the putting of the Son of God to death. Which thing we must remember as often as we recite that article of our creed, 'He suffered under Pontius Pilate,' that is, was put to death by the Roman empire,"

A garden - Probably belonging to one of his friends. He might retire to this private place, not only for the advantage of secret devotion, but also that the people might not be alarmed at his apprehension, nor attempt, in the first sallies of their zeal, to rescue him in a tumultuous manner. Kedron was (as the name signifies) a dark shady valley, on the east side of Jerusalem, between the city and the mount of Olives, through which a little brook ran, which took its name from it. It was this brook, which David, a type of Christ, went over with the people, weeping in his flight from Absalom. Mt 26:30; Mr 14:26; Lu 22:39.

Mr 14:43; Lu 22:47.

A troop of soldiers - A cohort of Roman foot.

As soon as he said, I am he, they went backward and fell to the ground - How amazing is it, that they should renew the assault, after so sensible an experience both of his power and mercy! But probably the priests among them might persuade themselves and their attendants, that this also was done by Beelzebub; and that it was through the providence of God, not the indulgence of Jesus, that they received no farther damage.

If ye seek me, let these (my disciples) go - It was an eminent instance of his power over the spirits of men, that they so far obeyed this word, as not to seize even Peter, when he had cut off the ear of Malchus.

Joh 17:12.

Then Simon Peter - No other evangelist names him. Nor could they safely. But St. John, writing after his death, might do it without any such inconvenience.

Annas had been high priest before his son - in - law Caiaphas. And though he had for some time resigned that office, yet they paid so much regard to his age and experience, that they brought Christ to Annas first. But we do not read of any thing remarkable which passed at the house of Annas; for, which reason, his being carried thither is omitted by the other evangelists. Mt 26:57; Mr 14:53; Lu 22:54.

Art thou also - As well as the others, one of this man's disciples - She does not appear to have asked with any design to hurt him.

I spake openly - As to the manner: continually - As to the time: in the synagogue and temple - As to the place. In secret have I said nothing - No point of doctrine which I have not taught in public.

Why askest thou me - Whom thou wilt not believe?

Answerest thou the high priest so? - With so little reverence?

Now Annas had sent him to Caiaphas - As is implied John 18:13. Bound - Being still bound, John 18:12.

They went not into the palace themselves, lest they should be defiled - By going into a house which was not purged from leaven, Deut 16:4. Mt 27:2; Mr 15:1; Lu 23:1.

It is not lawful for us to put any man to death - The power of inflicting capital punishment had been taken from them that very year. So the sceptre was departed from Judah, and transferred to the Romans.

Signifying what death he should die - For crucifixion was not a Jewish, but a Roman punishment. So that had he not been condemned by the Roman governor, he could not have been crucified. John 3:14.

My kingdom is not of this world - Is not an external, but a spiritual kingdom; that I might not be delivered to the Jews - Which Pilate had already attempted to do, Joh 18:31, and afterward actually did, Joh 19:16.

Thou sayest - The truth. To this end was I born - Speaking of his human origin: his Divine was above Pilate's comprehension. Yet it is intimated in the following words, I came into the world, that I might witness to the truth - Which was both declared to the Jews, and in the process of his passion to the princes of the Gentiles also. Every one that is of the truth - That is, a lover of it, heareth my voice - A universal maxim. Every sincere lover of truth will hear him, so as to understand and practise what he saith.

What is truth? - Said Pilate, a courtier; perhaps meaning what signifies truth? Is that a thing worth hazarding your life for? So he left him presently, to plead with the Jews for him, looking upon him as an innocent but weak man.

WHen Jesus had spoken these words , he went forth with his disciples over the, brook-Cedron , where was a garden, into the which he entred, and his disciples .

Matthew hath nothing of these discourses, or Prayer, which we have had in the four last Chapters; no more have any of the other Evangelists, who yet all mention his going into the Mount of Olives, after his celebration of his last Supper, Matth. 26.30. Mark 6.26. Luke 22.39. Our Evangelist saith, he went over the Brook-Cedron into a garden. The others say nothing of a garden, but mention his coming to a place called Geths[illegible: 1 letter]mane. It is probable, that this Village was at the foot of Mount Olivet; and the garden mentioned, was a garden near that Village, and belonging to it, (for they had not their gardens within their Towns, but without) now the way to this was over the Brook-Cedron; of which brook we read, 2 Sam. 15.23. David passed over it when he fled from Absolom; and 1 Kings 2.37 where it is mentioned as Shimet's limit, which he might not pass. This brook was in the way towards the Mount of Olives;

which being passed, he with his Disciples went into a garden belonging to the Town Gethsemane.

Marginal references: Matt. 26.36.

2 And Judas also which betrayed him, knew the place: for Jesus oft times resorted thither with his disciples .

We read that Christ when he was at Ierusalem, was wont at night for privacy to retire to the Mount of Olives, Luke 21.37. and 22.39. and it should seem that he was wont ordinarily, to go to this garden, which made Iudas know the particular place where he might find him.

3 Judas then having received a band of men, and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns, and torches, and weapons .

The Evangelist here passeth over all mentioned by the other Evangelists, about Iudas his going to the High Priests, and contracting with them, and cometh to relate his coming to apprehend him with a band of men that he had obtained from the chief Priests and Pharisees for that purpose. By band, we must not understand a Roman Cohore, as the word signifies, but such a convenient number out of that band, (probably) which at the time of the Passover, guarded the Temple, as was sufficient to take him, they came with lanterns, and torches, (tho it were the time of full moon) to make the stricter search; and with Arms, fearing where no fear was; for Iudas (their leader) could have told them, that he was not wont to go with any great company to the Mount of Olives.

Marginal references: Matth. 26.47. Luke 22.47. Acts 1.16.

4 Jesus therefore knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye ?

This Evangelists saith nothing of what the other Evangelists mention, of the sign that Iudas had given them, by which they should know him; nor of Iudas his kissing of him, or our Saviours reply to him, (Iohn all along his Gospel, mentioneth very little of what is recorded by the other Evangelists). It must be supposed, that after Iudas had kissed our Saviour, our Saviour himself came forth, and asked him whom they looked for? Hereby shewing, that he laid down his life, and no man took it from him; he could easily have delivered himself out of their hands, (tho I think they are too charitable to Iudas, who think that it was that which made Iudas discover him, not that he designed his death) he had once and again before so escaped them: But now his hour was come, he freely offers himself unto his enemies, and asketh whom they looked for.

5 They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also which betrayed him, stood with them .

They tell him Iesus of Nazareth. Christ was born in Bethlehem Iuda, Matth 2.[illegible: 1 letter]. But his Father and Mother lived at Nazareth, a City of Galilee, Luke 2.4, 39. where he lived with them, ver. 51. hence he was called Iesus of Nazareth, from the place where he lived, and most ordinarily conversed, Matth. 21.11. and 26.71. Mark 1.24. and 10.47. and 14.67. and 16.6. Christ replyeth that he was the man, and it is particularly noted, that Iudas was with this Armed company.

6 Assoon then as he had said unto them, I am [illegible: 1 letter]e, they went backward and fell to the ground .

For a further evidence to the World, that Christ was the Son of the Everlasting Father; it pleased God in all the periods of his life, to shew forth by him some Acts of the Divine Power: What had Christ said or done, here to prostrate his Armed adversaries? He had onely asked them whom they lookt for? and hearing that it was for him, told them he was the man: they are struck with a terror, and instead of apprehending him, start from him, and fall down to the ground. If there were so much Majesty in, and such an effect of the Voice of Christ, in one of the lowest acts of his humiliation; what will the Voice of a glorified Christ be to sinners, when he shall return as a Judge to condemn the World? And what will the effect of that be upon his enemies? How easily might our Saviour have escaped, now that his enemies were fallen to the ground? But he suffereth them to rise up again, to take him, and to carry him away, to shew that he laid down his life freely.

8 Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: If therefore ye seek me, let these go their way :

Our Saviours question, and their Answer, are the same as before. They fell down, but they rose up again, and go on in their wicked purpose. This is the genius of all sinners; they may be under some convictions and terrors, but they get out of them, if God doth not concur by his Spirit, and sanctifie them as means to make a through change in their hearts: tho those words [illegible: 1 word] these go away, might be interpreted of the armed men that came with the Officers, of whom there seemed no such need to carry away an unarmed man; yet the next words make it evident, that they are to be understood of his Disciples, being persons against whom they had no warrant. Our Lord hath a care of his Disciples that they might not suffer with him.

9 That the saying might be fulfilled which he spake , Of them which thou gavest me, have I lost none .

But were those words of our Saviour, Of them whom thou hast given me. I [illegible: 1 word] lost none; to be understood as to a Temporary losing, or of an eternal D[illegible: 4 letters]uction? Some of the Ancients were of opinion, that they were to be understood of a losing with reference to a Spiritual and Eternal State; but that they were applicable also to a losing as to this life; I think that they are applicable to both, and that in this Text, they are primarily to be understood of a losing as to a Temporal death and Destruction. It was Christ's purpose, that eleven of his twelve Apostles should outlive him, receive the Promise of the Father, in the pouring out of the Spirit, and be his instruments to carry the Gospel over a great part of the World: this they could not have done, had they been put to death at this time; he therefore resolved not to lose them in this sense, but to uphold and preserve their lives; for these ends to which he had designed them, and therefore he said to these Officers, you have the person whom ye seek for; for these my Disciples you have nothing against them, let them go away; and by his Power upon their hearts he effected it, so that they had a liberty to forsake him, and to flie, and to shift for themselves.

Marginal references: Chap. 17.12.

10 Then Simon Peter having a sword, drew it, and smote the high priests servant, and cut off his right ear . The servants name was Malchus.

It is thought that this action of Peters was before the apprehension of our Saviour; tho after the discovery of it, (as our Evangelist reports it) because upon the apprehension of our Saviour; both Matthew Chap. 26.56. and Mark Chap. 14.50. agree, that the Disciples fled, and it can hardly be thought, that if Peter had seen his Master apprehended, he would have adventured upon so daring and provocative an action; nor could Christ had he been first bound, have stretched out his hand, to have touched his ear, and healed it. Lest any should wonder how Peter came by a Sword, we may read Luke 22.38. that the Disciples had two Swords amongst them, probably brought out of Galilee for the defence of themselves and their Master, against assaults from robbers in that long journey.

Marginal references: Mat. 26.51. Mark 14.47.

11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath : the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it ?

The other Evangelists report this part of the History with many more circumstances; particularly our Saviours Miraculous healing Malchus again, see the notes on Matthew 26.51, 52, 53, 54. Mark 14.47, 48, 49. Luke 22.50, 51. With what pretence, some both of the Ancient and Modern Writers think, that Peter did not sin in this action, I do not understand, when our Saviour did not onely (as Iohn saith) command him to put up his Sword again into its sheath, but also as Matthew tells us, Chap. 26.52. told him, That all they that take the sword, that is, without commission from God, should perish with the sword; he used that argument according to the other Evangelists. This Evangelist tells us of another,

The cup which my Father, &c. That is, shall I not freely and cheerfully submit to the Will of God in suffering what he willeth me to suffer? The term cup is often in Scripture to signifie peoples measure and proportion of affliction and suffering, which God alotteth them; (possibly the metaphor is taken from the custom of some Nations, to put some kinds of Malefactors to death, by giving them a cup of poyson) See the notes on Matthew 20.22. and 26.39. It is a good argument to quiet our Spirits ro[illegible: 1 letter]led by any afflictive Providences. They are but a cup, and the cup our Father hath given me.

12 Then the band, and the captain, and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him ,

As is usual for Officers to do with ordinary malefactors, which are great Crimina[illegible: 1 letter]s; they put no difference between Christ and the most villanous Thieves and murderers. There are many conjectures why Christ was first led to Annas, whereas Caiaphas was the High Priest that year, not Annas, (as the next words tell us) but it is uncertain whether it was, because his house was very near, and in the way to Caiaphas his house, or that he lived in the same house with his Son-in-law; or out of an honour and respect to him, being the High Priests Father, or to please the old mans peevish eyes with such a sight; or by this means to draw Annas to the Tryal of Christ, or because he had had a more than ordinary hand about the apprehending him, or to take direction from him what to do: we cannot give a certain account why they used this method; we are onely certain they did it, and that they did not carry him before him as High Priest; for the next words tell us.

13 And led him away to Annas first, For he was father in law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year .

That his Son-in-law Caiaphas was the High Priest that year; which we had also before, Chap. 11.51. where we discoursed more largely, about the disorder of the Iews in that most corrupt time; when that place was bestowed without regard to the family of Aaron, and bought, and sold, or conferred at the will of their Conquerors. (See the notes on Chap. 11.51.)

Marginal references: Mat. 26.57.; Luke 3 2.; Or, And An [illegible: 1 letter]sers Christ [illegible: 1 word] unto [illegible: 1 word] the High Priest.

14 Now Caiaphas was he which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people .

Of his giving that Counsel, and the wickedness of it, (tho it proved an Oracle beyond his intention) we discoursed before (see the notes on Chap. 11.51.) the meaning of the High Priest was, that right or wrong, whether they had any just accusation against Christ or no, yet they might for expediency put him to death, because his death might prevent mutinies and seditions amongst the people.

15 ¶ And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. That disciple was known unto the high priest , and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest.

When Christ was apprehended, the other Evangelists tell us, All his disciples forsook him and fled; but it should seem that Peter, who all along the Gospel History, hath appeared more forward, and bold▪ and daring than any of the rest, came back; but who that other Disciple was that went in with him, and in favour of whom Peter was admitted, we are not told: It is but a conjecture of those who think that it was Iohn, for Iohn was a Galilean as well as Peter, and would have been as much to be questioned upon that account as Peter was. They judge more probably who think it was the Master of the House where Christ had are the Passover, and celebrated his Supper; or some person of note in Ierusalem, who by reason of his reputation, might have free access to the chief Magistrate, than one of the Apostles, who were but mean persons in the account of the Iews;

this Disciple who ever he was, was one that had some familiarity and acquaintance with Caiaphas, which it is no way probable that either Iohn or any of the Apostles had.

Marginal references: Mat 26.58. Mark 14 54. Luke 22.[illegible: 1 letter]4

16 But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter .

This further confirmeth the conjecture of those, who think that other Disciple was none of the Apostles, but a favourer of Christ, that lived in Ierusalem, and was of some repute either for estate or place; so as he had not onely an acquaintance with the High Priest, but also with his family; and could gain admittance into his Palace, not onely for himself, but also for his friend.

Marginal references: Mat. 26.58.

17 Then saith the damosel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not thou also one of this mans disciples ? He saith, I am not.

This is Peters first denial of his Master; betwixt which and his second denial, (of which Iohn saith nothing till he comes to ver. 26.) the Evangelist interposeth many things not mentioned by the other Evangelists.

18 And the servants and officers stood there, who had made a fire of coals, for it was cold and they warmed themselves: and Peter stood with them, and warmed himself .

Here is nothing in this Verse, which needeth any explication, unless any should ask, how it could be cold weather at that time of the year, (about April 14.) especially in a Country where it now was the time of Harvest? which may easily be resolved. It was now about three of the clock in the morning, and we know that in Summer (the Spring especially) mights are cold; besides, that in those Countries that are more Equinoctial, the nights are longer, and consequently colder towards the morning, as the air hath had more time to cool.

19 ¶ The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine .

Questions about Sedition or Rebellion, belonged not to the Iudge of this Court, but [illegible: 1 letter]ell under the Cognisance of the Roman Governor, they being now a Conquered people, and Tributary to the Romans; who, tho themselves Heathens, granted the Iews their liberty as to Religion, and Courts in order thereunto; as also a liberty of Courts for civil causes: the High Priest therefore saith nothing to Christ about his being a King, but onely inquireth of him about his Doctrine; what particular questions he propounded to him, we do not read; onely in general he inquired about the Doctrine he had Preached, and the Disciples he had sent out, which was one and the same cause, to see if he could bring him under the guilt of a false Prophet; for that, and Blaspemy, and Idolatry, were three principal causes that fell under the Cognisance of this Court, as appeareth from Deut. 13.

20 Jesus answered him , I spake openly to the world ; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort , and in secret have I said nothing .

To all sorts of men, my Enemies as well as my Friends.

The Iews for instruction do use to resort to the Temple, which was in Ierusalem, and whither three times in the year, all the Males were wont to come from all parts of the Countrey; and in the publick assemblies of the Iews, and in the places where they use to meet:

I have said nothing in secret, contrary to the Doctrine which I have publickly taught; tho I have Preached in other places, yet it hath been the same thing which I have said in publick.

Marginal references: Chap. 7.26

21 Why askest thou me ? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said b:

We are told by those that have written about the Iewish order in their Courts of Judgment; That their Capital causes always began with the defensative part; and that it was lawful for any to speak for the defendants, for a whole day together; (tho they did not observe this in the cause of Christ) and their method was not to put the Defendents to accuse themselves, but to examine witnesses against them; Our Saviour therefore appeals to their own order, and says, Why askest thou me? It was, saith he, no secret action; I spake publickly, ask them that heard me speak, they know what Doctrine I preached, and can accuse me if I delivered any false Doctrine.

22 And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by , stroke Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so ?

This lets us see in what indecent disorder the Iewish Government was at this time, that an inferior Officer dared to strike a supposed Criminal, standing before the Judgment-seat, and defending himself from their own known rules and methods; for what had our Saviour said or done, more than making use of the liberty their own Law allowed, not confessing any thing against himself, but putting them upon the proof of what they laid to his charge? yet we read no notice taken of this disorder.

Marginal references: Jer. 20.2. Acts 23.2.; Or, With a rod.

23 Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me ?

Our Saviour could easily have revenged himself upon this Officer; but to teach us our duty, he onely gently reproves him; and lets him know, that he did not behave himself as one ought to do in the face of a Court of Justice, where he had both a liberty, and a present opportunity to have accused him, if he had spoken ill; and if he had spoken well, there was no reason for his striking him.

24 ( Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest ).

The words in the 24th. ver. are onely to let us know, that these things were not done before Annas, but before Caiaphas the High Priest, to whom (as to his proper Judg) Annas had sent him bound, as he was at first brought to him.

Marginal references: Mat. 26.57.

27 Peter then denied again, and immediately the cock crew .

This History of Peters denial of his Master the second time, we have before met with, Matth. 26.69, 70, 71. Mark 14.69, 70. Luke 22.58, 59. with several circumstances not mentioned by Iohn. See the notes upon Matthew 26.69, &c.

Marginal references: Chap. 13.38.

28 ¶ Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment , and it was early , and they themselves went not into the judgment-hall, lest they should be defiled: but that they might eat the passover .

The Chief Priests having in their Sanhedrim done with our Saviours case, and judg'd him worthy of death, as we read Matth. 26.66. Mark 14.64. which two Evangelists, with Luke, relate this History of Christs Tryal before the Sanhedrim, with many more circumstances than Iohn doth, (see the notes on those Texts) they now lead him from the Ecclesiastical Court, to the Court of the Civil Magistrate; either kept in Pilates House, who was the present civil Governor under the Romans, or some where at least where he sat as Judge; which was therefore called the Hall of Iudgment.

How early it was, we cannot tell, but early i[illegible: 1 letter] was; probably about five or six of the Clock.

The Iews would not go into the Judgment-hall, that they might not be defiled, for they accounted a legal pollution and uncleanness to come into an Heathens House, or to touch any thing which an Heathen had touched; now the reason is assigned why they were afraid of contracting any legal pollution, viz. That they might eat the Passover. Obj. But had they not eaten the Passover the night before; that was the time prescribed by the Law, to the latter of which there is no doubt but that our Saviour strictly kept himself? Ans. Some say, that they had not, because, the day wherein they should have eaten it, this year, falling the day before their Sabbath, the Passover was put off to be kept on the Sabbath, that two great Festivals might not be kept two days successively; so as, tho our Saviour kept it at the time appointed by the Law, yet the Iews did not. But this is denied by oother very Learned men, who tell us, the Iews never altered their day for keeping their Passover, neither for the succeeding Sabbath, nor any other reason. They say therefore, that by the Passover which is mentioned in this Verse, is to be understood, The Feast mentioned, Num. 28.17. which was to be kept the fifteenth day, which day was a day of great solemnity with them from the morning to the evening; all the seven days they also offered various Sacrifices, which all went under the name of the Passover, because they followed in the days of the Paschal Feast. Thus the term Passover is taken, Deut. 16.2. Thou shalt therefore sacrifice the Passover unto the Lord thy God, of the flock and the herd. According to this Notion, the meaning of those words, that they might eat the Passover, is, That they might proceed in their Paschal solemnity, keeping the Feast according to the Law. Be it as it will, these Hypocrites in it notoriously discovered their hypocrisie, scrupling what caused a legal uncleanness, and not at all scrupling either immediately before their eating the Passover, or presently after it, in their great Festival to defile themselves with the guilt of Innocent blood; nay, had Christ been such a malefactor as they pretended, yet the bringing him into judgment, their prosecuting, and accusing, and condemning him, and assisting in his Crucifying, were not works fit for the day before such a Solemnity, or the day after it, which was so great a Festival; but there is nothing more or[illegible: 1 letter]inary, than for persons over zealous as to Rituals, to be as remiss with reference to Moral duties.

Marginal references: Mat. 27.2.; Or, Pilates House.; Acts 10.28. and 11 3.

29 Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation bring you against this man ?

The Roman Governor humoureth them in their superstition; (the Romans having granted them the liberty of their Religion) they scruple to go in to the ordinary place of judgment; he goes out to them, and calls for their Accusation of Christ, according to the ordinary and regular course of judgments.

30 They answered and said unto him, If he were not a [illegible: 2 letters]lefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee .

They had in their Sanhedrim before, judged him guilty of Blasphemy, Matth. 26.65. but this they durst not mention, lest Pilate should have rejected them, as being not concerned in questions of their Law; they therefore onely exclaim against him in the general as a great Malefactor; but of what kind, they do not say. It should seem they would have had Pilate have added his civil Authority, to confirm and execute their Ecclesiastical censure, without so much as hearing any thing of the cause, (altho at this day frequent in Popish Countries) but they met with a more equal Judge.

31 Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law . The Jews therefore said unto him, it is not lawful for us to put any man to death .

I will judge no man before my self first hear, and judge of his crime; you have a Law amongst your selves, and a liberty to question and judge men upon it, proceed against him according to your Law.

They reply, It was not lawful for them to put any man to death: We are assured by such as are exercised in the Iewish Writings, That the power of putting any to death, was taken away from the Jews forty years before the D[illegible: 1 letter]struction of Jerusalem. Some say, it was not taken away by the Romans, but by their own Court: They thought it so horrid a thing to put an Israelite to death, that wickedness of all sorts grew to such an heighth amongst them, through the impunity, or too light punishment of Criminals, that their Courts durst nor execute their just Authority. And at last their great Court determined against the putting any to death; nor (as they say) was any put to death by the Iews, but in some popular Tumult, after their Court had prejudiced the person by pronouncing him guilty of Blasphemy, or some capital Crime: which seemeth the case of Stephen, Acts 7.

32 That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled which he spake, signifying what death he should die .

Christ had before this time told his Disciples that he should die, and that by the death of the Cross, as we read Matth. 2[illegible: 1 letter].19. God by his Providence ordereth things accordingly, to let us know, that the Scripture might be fulfilled to every tittle; Crucifying was no Iewish but a Roman death; had the Iews put him to death, they would have stoned him; but he must remove the curse from us, by being made a curse for us, being hanged on a tree, which was lookt upon as an accursed death, Gal. 3.13. The Iews therefore knowing nothing of this Counsel of God, yet execute it, by refusing themselves to put him to death, and putting it off to Pilate, tho possibly their design was but to avoid the odium of it. Thus God maketh the wrath of men to praise him.

Marginal references: Chap. 12▪ 33.

33 Then Pilate entred into the judgment-hall again , and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the king of the Jews ?

The ordinary place of Judicature, from whence we read before he went out, in civility to the Iews, whose superstition (as we before heard) kept them from going there during the Festival:

He called Jesus to him privately, and asks him, if he owned himself to be the King of the Iews? The confessing of which, (for without doubt they had suggested some such thing to Pilate, and could not prove it) had brought Christ under Pilates power, he being Governor for the Romans, and so concerned to inquire upon any that pretended to any Regal Power over that Conquered people.

Marginal references: Mat. 27.11.

34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thy self, or did others tell it thee of me ?

Our Saviour neither affirmeth nor denieth: tho we be bound when ever we speak, to speak the truth, yet we are not bound at all times to speak the whole truth. Our Saviour desireth to be satisfied from Pilate, whether he asked him as a private person for his own satisfaction, or as a Iudge, having received any such accusation against him? For if he asked him as a Iudge, he was bound to call them to the proof of what they had charged him with

35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation, and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: What hast thou done ?

The sum of this is no more, than that he did not devise this captious question, for he was no Iew; nor concerned in, nor regarding what they had in their books of the Law and the Prophets; but he was accused to him by those of his own Nation: and he was desirous to find out the truth, and to know what he had done.

36 Jesus answered , My kingdom is not of this world : if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence .

That is, I cannot deny, but that I am the King of the Iews, but not in the sense they take it; not such a King as they look for in their Messiah; my Kingdom is Spiritual, over the hearts and minds of men, not earthly and Worldly. And of this thou thy self mayest be convinced;

for was there ever an earthly Prince apprehended, and bound, for whom none of his Subjects would take up Arms? Here's none of my Disciples takes up Arms, or offereth to fight for me; which is a plain evidence, that I pretend to no Kingly Power in disturbance of the Roman Government.

Marginal references: 1 Tim. 6.13.; Chap. 6.15.

37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a King then ? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a King . To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth . Every one that is of the truth, heareth my voice .

Pilate seems to have spoken this, rather in derision and mockery, than out of any desire to catch him in his words:

Christ neither owneth himself to be a King, nor yet denieth it, but tells Pilate that he said so; and to this end he was born, and for this cause he came into the world, to bear testimony to the truth. i. e. I cannot deny but that I have a Spiritual Kingdom, that is truth, and I must attest the truth;

It was a part of my errand into the World;

and every one who is by Divine grace disposed to believe, and love the truth, will hear and obey my Doctrine.

38 ¶ Pilate saith unto him, What is truth ? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them , I find in him no fault at all .

Pilate (as prophane persons use to do) thought that our Saviour speaking of truth, and a Spiritual Kingdom, did but Cant, and therefore asking him, what he meant by truth, he never stays for an answer, but goes out again to the Iews, whom he had left without the door of the Judgment-hall, and

tells them he found no fault in him. Whatever the quality of the Kingdom was, of which our Saviour spake, he judged that his pretensions to it were not prejudicial to the Authority of the Emperor, nor the Tranquility of the State; and would have dismist him from their unjust prosecution.

Marginal references: Mat. 27.24. Luke 23.4.

39 But ye have a custom that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews ?

Whence this custom came is uncertain; most probably from the Romans, who in some honour of this great Festival of the Iews, and in humor of them, granted them the life of any Criminal whom they desired: Pilate propounds Christ as the prisoner whom he had most mind to release, perceiving that his prosecution was of malice, rather than for any just cause.

Marginal references: Mark 15.6.

40 Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber .

But such was the malice of his Adversaries, that tho Barabbas was one that had committed murder in an Insurrection, yet they chuse him rather than Christ. (See the notes on Matth. 27.15, 16, 17, 18.)

Marginal references: Acts 3.14.; Luke 23.19.

Christ in the Garden; The Treachery of Judas; The Ear of Malachus Cut Off; Christ Yields Himself a Prisoner.

1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the which he entered, and his disciples. 2 And Judas also, which betrayed him, knew the place: for Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with his disciples. 3 Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. 4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye? 5 They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. 6 As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. 7 Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. 8 Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way: 9 That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none. 10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus. 11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it? 12 Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him,

The hour was now come that the captain of our salvation, who was to be made perfect by sufferings, should engage the enemy. We have here his entrance upon the encounter. The day of recompence is in his heart, and the year of his redeemed is come, and his own arm works the salvation, for he has no second. Let us turn aside now, and see this great sight.

I. Our Lord Jesus, like a bold champion, takes the field first (v. 1, 2): When he had spoken these words, preached the sermon, prayed his prayer, and so finished his testimony, he would lose no time, but went forth immediately out of the house, out of the city, by moon-light, for the passover was observed at the full moon, with his disciples (the eleven, for Judas was otherwise employed), and he went over the brook Cedron, which runs between Jerusalem and the mount of Olives, where was a garden, not his own, but some friend's, who allowed him the liberty of it. Observe,

1. That our Lord Jesus entered upon his sufferings when he had spoken these words, as Matt. xxvi. 1, When he had finished all these sayings. Here it is intimated, (1.) That our Lord Jesus took his work before him. The office of the priest was to teach, and pray, and offer sacrifice. Christ, after teaching and praying, applies himself to make atonement. Christ had said all he had to say as a prophet, and now he addresses himself to the discharge of his office as a priest, to make his soul an offering for sin; and, when he had gone through this, he entered upon his kingly office. (2.) That having by his sermon prepared his disciples for this hour of trial, and by his prayer prepared himself for it, he then courageously went out to meet it. When he had put on his armour, he entered the lists, and not till then. Let those that suffer according to the will of God, in a good cause, with a good conscience, and having a clear call to it, comfort themselves with this, that Christ will not engage those that are his in any conflict, but he will first do that for them which is necessary to prepare them for it; and if we receive Christ's instructions and comforts, and be interested in his intercession, we may, with an unshaken resolution, venture through the greatest hardships in the way of duty.

2. That he went forth with his disciples. Judas knew what house he was in in the city, and he could have staid and met his sufferings there; but, (1.) He would do as he was wont to do, and not alter his method, either to meet the cross or to miss it, when his hour was come. It was his custom when he was at Jerusalem, after he had spent the day in public work, to retire at night to the mount of Olives; there his quarters were, in the skirts of the city, for they would not make room for him in the palaces, in the heart of the town. This being his custom, he could not be put out of his method by the foresight of his sufferings, but, as Daniel, did then just as he did aforetime, Dan. vi. 10. (2.) He was as unwilling that there should be an uproar among the people as his enemies were, for it was not his way to strive or cry. If he had been seized in the city, and a tumult raised thereby, mischief might have been done, and a great deal of blood shed, and therefore he withdrew. Note, When we find ourselves involved in trouble, we should be afraid of involving others with us. It is no disgrace to the followers of Christ to fall tamely. Those who aim at honour from men value themselves upon a resolution to sell their lives as dearly as they can; but those who know that their blood is precious to Christ, and that not a drop of it shall be shed but upon a valuable consideration, need not stand upon such terms. (3.) He would set us an example in the beginning of his passion, as he did at the end of it, of retirement from the world. Let us go forth to him, without the camp, bearing his reproach, Heb. xiii. 13. We must lay aside, and leave behind, the crowds, and cares, and comforts, of cities, even holy cities, if we would cheerfully take up our cross, and keep up our communion with God therein.

3. That he went over the brook Cedron. He must go over this to go to the mount of Olives, but the notice taken of it intimates that there was something in it significant; and it points, (1.) At David's prophecy concerning the Messiah (Ps. cx. 7), that he shall drink of the brook in the way; the brook of suffering in the way to his glory and our salvation, signified by the brook Cedron, the black brook, so called either from the darkness of the valley it ran through or the colour of the water, tainted with the dirt of the city; such a brook Christ drank of, when it lay in the way of our redemption, and therefore shall he lift up the head, his own and ours. (2.) At David's pattern, as a type of the Messiah. In his flight from Absalom, particular notice is taken of his passing over the brook Cedron, and going up by the ascent of mount Olivet, weeping, and all that were with him in tears too, 2 Sam. xv. 23, 30. The Son of David, being driven out by the rebellious Jews, who would not have him to reign over them (and Judas, like Ahithophel, being in the plot against him), passed over the brook in meanness and humiliation, attended by a company of true mourners. The godly kings of Judah had burnt and destroyed the idols they found at the brook Cedron; Asa, 2 Chron. xv. 16; Hezekiah, 2 Chron. xxx. 14; Josiah, 2 Kings xxiii. 4, 6. Into that brook the abominable things were cast. Christ, being now made sin for us, that he might abolish it and take it away, began his passion by the same brook. Mount Olivet, where Christ began his sufferings, lay on the east side of Jerusalem; mount Calvary, where he finished them, on the west; for in them he had an eye to such as should come from the east and the west.

4. That he entered into a garden. This circumstance is taken notice of only by this evangelist, that Christ's sufferings began in a garden. In the garden of Eden sin began; there the curse was pronounced, there the Redeemer was promised, and therefore in a garden that promised seed entered the lists with the old serpent. Christ was buried also in a garden. (1.) Let us, when we walk in our gardens, take occasion thence to meditate on Christ's sufferings in a garden, to which we owe all the pleasure we have in our gardens, for by them the curse upon the ground for man's sake was removed. (2.) When we are in the midst of our possessions and enjoyments, we must keep up an expectation of troubles, for our gardens of delight are in a vale of tears.

5. That he had his disciples with him, (1.) Because he used to take them with him when he retired for prayer. (2.) They must be witnesses of his sufferings, and his patience under them, that they might with the more assurance and affection preach them to the world (Luke xxiv. 48), and be themselves prepared to suffer. (3.) He would take them into the danger to show them their weakness, notwithstanding the promises they had made of fidelity. Christ sometimes brings his people into difficulties, that he may magnify himself in their deliverance.

6. That Judas the traitor knew the place, knew it to be the place of his usual retirement, and probably, by some word Christ had dropped, knew that he intended to be there that night, for want of a better closet. A solitary garden is a proper place for meditation and prayer, and after a passover is a proper time to retire for private devotion, that we may pray over the impressions made and the vows renewed, and clench the nail. Mention is made of Judas's knowing the place, (1.) To aggravate the sin of Judas, that he would betray his Master, notwithstanding the intimate acquaintance he had with him; nay, and that he would make use of his familiarity with Christ, as giving him an opportunity of betraying him; a generous mind would have scorned to do so base a thing. Thus has Christ's holy religion been wounded in the house of its friends, as it could not have been wounded any where else. Many an apostate could not have been so profane, if he had not been a professor; could not have ridiculed scriptures and ordinances, if he had not known them. (2.) To magnify the love of Christ, that, though he knew where the traitor would seek him, thither he went to be found of him, now that he knew his hour was come. Thus he showed himself willing to suffer and die for us. What he did was not by constraint, but by consent; though as man he said, Let this cup pass away, as Mediator he said, "Lo, I come, I come with a good will." It was late in the night (we may suppose eight or nine o'clock) when Christ went out to the garden; for it was not only his meat and drink, but his rest and sleep, to do the will of him that sent him. When others were going to bed, he was going to prayer, going to suffer.

II. The captain of our salvation having taken the field, the enemy presently comes upon the spot, and attacks him (v. 3): Judas with his men comes thither, commissioned by the chief priests, especially those among them that were Pharisees, who were the most bitter enemies to Christ. This evangelist passes over Christ's agony, because the other three had fully related it, and presently introduces Judas and his company that came to seize him. Observe,

1. The persons employed in this action—a band of men and officers from the chief priests, with Judas. (1.) Here is a multitude engaged against Christ—a band of men, speira—cohors, a regiment, a Roman band, which some think was five hundred men, others a thousand. Christ's friends were few, his enemies many. Let us therefore not follow a multitude to do evil, nor fear a multitude designing evil to us, if God be for us. (2.) Here is a mixed multitude; the band of men were Gentiles, Roman soldiers, a detachment out of the guards that were posted in the tower of Antonia, to be a curb upon the city; the officers of the chief priests, hyperetas. Either their domestic servants, or the officers of their courts, were Jews; these had an enmity to each other, but were united against Christ, who came to reconcile both to God in one body. (3.) It is a commissioned multitude, not a popular tumult; no, they have received orders from the chief priests, upon whose suggestion to the governor that this Jesus was a dangerous man, it is likely they had a warrant from him too to take him up, for they feared the people. See what enemies Christ and his gospel have had, and are likely to have, numerous and potent, and therefore formidable: ecclesiastical and civil powers combined against them, Ps. ii. 1, 2. Christ said it would be so (Matt. x. 18), and found it so. (4.) All under the direction of Judas. He received this band of men; it is probable that he requested it, alleging that it was necessary to send a good force, being as ambitious of the honour of commanding in chief in this expedition as he was covetous of the wages of this unrighteousness. He thought himself wonderfully preferred from coming in the rear of the contemptible twelve to be placed at the head of these formidable hundreds; he never made such a figure before, and promised himself, perhaps, that this should not be the last time, but he should be rewarded with a captain's commission, or better, if he succeeded well in this enterprise.

2. The preparation they had made for an attack: They came with lanterns, and torches, and weapons. (1.) If Christ should abscond, though they had moonlight, they would have occasion for their lights; but they might have spared these; the second Adam was not driven, as the first was, to hide himself, either for fear or shame, among the trees of the garden. It was folly to light a candle to seek the Sun by. (2.) If he should resist, they would have occasion for their arms. The weapons of his warfare were spiritual, and at these weapons he had often beaten them, and put them to silence, and therefore they have now recourse to other weapons, swords and staves.

III. Our Lord Jesus gloriously repulsed the first onset of the enemy, v. 4-6, where observe,

1. How he received them, with all the mildness imaginable towards them, and all the calmness imaginable in himself.

(1.) He met them with a very soft and mild question (v. 4): Knowing all things that should come upon him, and therefore not at all surprised with this alarm, with a wonderful intrepidity and presence of mind, undisturbed and undaunted, he went forth to meet them, and, as if he had been unconcerned, softly asked, "Whom seek you? What is the matter? What means this bustle at this time of night?" See here, [1.] Christ's foresight of his sufferings; He knew all those things that should come upon him, for he had bound himself to suffer them. Unless we had strength, as Christ had, to bear the discovery, we should not covet to know what shall come upon us; it would but anticipate our pain; sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof: yet it will do us good to expect sufferings in general, so that when they come we may say, "It is but what we looked for, the cost we sat down and counted upon." [2.] Christ's forwardness to his sufferings; he did not run away from them, but went out to meet them, and reached forth his hand to take the bitter cup. When the people would have forced him to a crown, and offered to make him a king in Galilee, but he withdrew, and hid himself (ch. vi. 15); but, when they came to force him to a cross, he offered himself; for he came to this world to suffer and went to the other world to reign. This will not warrant us needlessly to expose ourselves to trouble, for we know not when our hour is come; but we are called to suffering when we have no way to avoid it but by sin; and, when it comes to this, let none of these things move us, for they cannot hurt us.

(2.) He met them with a very calm and mild answer when they told him whom they were in quest of, v. 5. They said, Jesus of Nazareth; and he said, I am he. [1.] It should seem, their eyes were held, that they could not know him. It is highly probable that many of the Roman band, at least the officers of the temple, had often seen him, if only to satisfy their curiosity; Judas, however, to be sure, knew him well enough, and yet none of them could pretend to say, Thou art the man we seek. Thus he showed them the folly of bringing lights to see for him, for he could make them not to know him when they saw him; and he has herein shown us how easily he can infatuate the counsels of his enemies, and make them lose themselves, when they are seeking mischief. [2.] In their enquiries for him they called him Jesus of Nazareth, which was the only title they knew him by, and probably he was so called in their warrant. It was a name of reproach given him, to darken the evidence of his being the Messiah. By this it appears that they knew him not, whence he was; for, if they had known him, surely they would not have persecuted him. [3.] He fairly answers them: I am he. He did not improve the advantage he had against them by their blindness, as Elisha did against the Syrians, telling them, This is not the way, neither is this the city; but improves it as an opportunity of showing his willingness to suffer. Though they called him Jesus of Nazareth, he answered to the name, for he despised the reproach; he might have said, I am not he, for he was Jesus of Bethlehem; but he would by no means allow equivocations. He has hereby taught us to own him, whatever it cost us; not to be ashamed of him or his words; but even in difficult times to confess Christ crucified, and manfully to fight under his banner. I am he, Ego eimi—I am he, is the glorious name of the blessed God (Exod. iii. 14), and the honour of that name is justly challenged by the blessed Jesus. [4.] Particular notice is taken, in a parenthesis, that Judas stood with them. He that used to stand with those that followed Christ now stood with those that fought against him. This describes an apostate; he is one that changes sides. He herds himself with those with whom his heart always was, and with whom he shall have his lot in the judgment-day. This is mentioned, First, To show the impudence of Judas. One would wonder where he got the confidence with which he now faced his Master, and was not ashamed, neither could he blush; Satan in his heart gave him a whore's forehead. Secondly, To show that Judas was particularly aimed at in the power which went along with that word, I am he, to foil the aggressors. It was an arrow levelled at the traitor's conscience, and pierced him to the quick; for Christ's coming and his voice will be more terrible to apostates and betrayers than to sinners of any other class.

2. See how he terrified them, and obliged them to retire (v. 6): They went backward, and, like men thunder-struck, fell to the ground. It should seem, they did not fall forward, as humbling themselves before him, and yielding to him, but backward, as standing it out to the utmost. Thus Christ was declared to be more than a man, even when he was trampled upon as a worm, and no man. This word, I am he, had revived his disciples, and raised them up (Matt. xiv. 27); but the same word strikes his enemies down. Hereby he showed plainly,

(1.) What he could have done with them. When he struck them down, he could have struck them dead; when he spoke them to the ground, he could have spoken them to hell, and have sent them, like Korah's company, the next way thither; but he would not do so, [1.] Because the hour of his suffering was come, and he would not put it by; he would only show that his life was not forced from him, but he laid it down of himself, as he had said. [2.] Because he would give an instance of his patience and forbearance with the worst of men, and his compassionate love to his very enemies. In striking them down, and no more, he gave them both a call to repent and space to repent; but their hearts were hardened, and all was in vain.

(2.) What he will do at last with all his implacable enemies, that will not repent to give him glory; they shall flee, they shall fall, before him. Now the scripture was accomplished (Ps. xxi. 12), Thou shalt make them turn their back, and Ps. xx. 8. And it will be accomplished more and more; with the breath of his mouth he will slay the wicked, 2 Thess. ii. 8; Rev. xix. 21. Quid judicaturus faciet, qui judicandus hoc facit?—What will he do when he shall come to judge, seeing he did this when he came to be judged?—Augustine.

IV. Having given his enemies a repulse, he gives his friends a protection, and that by his word too, v. 7-9, where we may observe,

1. How he continued to expose himself to their rage, v. 7. They did not lie long where they fell, but, by divine permission, got up again; it is only in the other world that God's judgments are everlasting. When they were down, one would have thought Christ should have made his escape; when they were up again, one would have thought they should have let fall their pursuit; but still we find, (1.) They are as eager as ever to seize him. It is in some confusion and disorder that they recover themselves; they cannot imagine what ailed them, that they could not keep their ground, but will impute it to any thing rather than Christ's power. Note, There are hearts so very hard in sin that nothing will work upon them to reduce and reclaim them. (2.) He is as willing as ever to be seized. When they were fallen before him, he did not insult over them, but seeing them at a loss, asked them the same question, Whom seek you? And they gave him the same answer, Jesus of Nazareth. In his repeating the question, he seems to come yet closer to their consciences: "Do you not know whom you seek? Are you not aware that you are in error, and will you meddle with your match? Have you not had enough of it, but will you try the other struggle? Did ever any harden his heart against God and prosper?" In their repeating the same answer, they showed an obstinacy in their wicked way; they still call him Jesus of Nazareth, with as much disdain as ever, and Judas is as unrelenting as any of them. Let us therefore fear lest, by a few bold steps at first in a sinful way, our hearts be hardened.

2. How he contrived to secure his disciples from their rage. He improved this advantage against them for the protection of his followers. When he shows his courage with reference to himself, I have told you that I am he, he shows his care for his disciples, Let these go their way. He speaks this as a command to them, rather than a contract with them; for they lay at his mercy, not he at theirs. He charges them therefore as one having authority: "Let these go their way; it is at your peril if you meddle with them" This aggravated the sin of the disciples in forsaking him, and particularly Peter's in denying him, that Christ had given them this pass, or warrant of protection, and yet they had not faith and courage enough to rely upon it, but betook themselves to such base and sorry shifts for their security. When Christ said, Let these go their way, he intended,

(1.) To manifest his affectionate concern for his disciples. When he exposed himself, he excused them, because they were not as yet fit to suffer; their faith was weak, and their spirits were low, and it would have been as much as their souls, and the lives of their souls, were worth, to bring them into sufferings now. New wine must not be put into old bottles. And, besides, they had other work to do; they must go their way, for they are to go into all the world, to preach the gospel. Destroy them not, for a blessing is in them. Now herein, [1.] Christ gives us a great encouragement to follow him; for, though he has allotted us sufferings, yet he considers our frame, will wisely time the cross, and proportion it to our strength, and will deliver the godly out of temptation, either from it, or through it. [2.] He gives us a good example of love to our brethren and concern for their welfare. We must not consult our own ease and safety only, but others, as well as our own, and in some cases more than our own. There is a generous and heroic love, which will enable us to lay down our lives for the brethren, 1 John iii. 16.

(2.) He intended to give a specimen of his undertaking as Mediator. When he offered himself to suffer and die, it was that we might escape. He was our antipsychos—a sufferer in our stead; when he said, Lo, I come, he said also, Let these go their way; like the ram offered instead of Isaac.

3. Now herein he confirmed the word which he had spoken a little before (ch. xvii. 12), Of those whom thou gavest me, I have lost none. Christ, by fulfilling that word in this particular, gave an assurance that it should be accomplished in the full extent of it, not only for those that were now with him, but for all that should believe on him through their word. Though Christ's keeping them was meant especially of the preservation of their souls from sin and apostasy, yet it is here applied to the preservation of their natural lives, and very fitly, for even the body was a part of Christ's charge and care; he is to raise it up at the last day, and therefore to preserve it as well as the spirit and soul, 1 Thess. v. 23; 2 Tim. iv. 17, 18. Christ will preserve the natural life for the service to which it is designed; it is given to him to be used for him, and he will not lose the service of it, but will be magnified in it, whether by life or death; it shall be held in life as long as any use is to be made of it. Christ's witnesses shall not die till they have given in their evidence. But this is not all; this preservation of the disciples was, in the tendency of it, a spiritual preservation. They were now so weak in faith and resolution that in all probability, if they had been called out to suffer at this time, they would have shamed themselves and their Master, and some of them, at least the weaker of them, would have been lost; and therefore, that he might lose none, he would not expose them. The safety and preservation of the saints are owing, not only to the divine grace in proportioning the strength to the trial, but to the divine providence in proportioning the trial to the strength.

V. Having provided for the safety of his disciples, he rebukes the rashness of one of them, and represses the violence of his followers, as he had repulsed the violence of his persecutors, v. 10, 11, where we have,

1. Peter's rashness. He had a sword; it is not likely that he wore one constantly as a gentleman, but they had two swords among them all (Luke xxii. 38), and Peter, being entrusted with one, drew it; for now, if ever, he thought it was his time to use it; and he smote one of the high priest's servants, who was probably one of the forwardest, and aiming, it is likely, to cleave him down the head, missed his blow, and only cut off his right ear. The servant's name, for the greater certainty of the narrative, is recorded; it was Malchus, or Malluch, Neh. x. 4.

(1.) We must here acknowledge Peter's good-will; he had an honest zeal for his Master, though now misguided. He had lately promised to venture his life for him, and would now make his words good. Probably it exasperated Peter to see Judas at the head of this gang; his baseness excited Peter's boldness, and I wonder that when he did draw his sword he did not aim at the traitor's head.

(2.) Yet we must acknowledge Peter's ill conduct; and, though his good intention did excuse, yet it would not justify him. [1.] He had no warrant from his Master for what he did. Christ's soldiers must wait the word of command, and not outrun it; before they expose themselves to sufferings, they must see to it, not only that their cause be good, but their call clear. [2.] He transgressed the duty of his place, and resisted the powers that were, which Christ had never countenanced, but forbidden (Matt. v. 39): that you resist not evil [3.] He opposed his Master's sufferings, and, notwithstanding the rebuke he had for it once, is ready to repeat, Master, spare thyself; suffering be far from thee; though Christ had told him that he must and would suffer, and that his hour was now come. Thus, while he seemed to fight for Christ, he fought against him. [4.] He broke the capitulation his Master had lately made with the enemy. When he said, Let these go their way, he not only indented for their safety, but in effect passed his word for their good behaviour, that they should go away peaceably; this Peter heard, and yet would not be bound by it. As we may be guilty of a sinful cowardice when we are called to appear, so we may be of a sinful forwardness when we are called to retire. [5.] He foolishly exposed himself and his fellow disciples to the fury of this enraged multitude. If he had cut off Malchus's head when he cut off his ear, we may suppose the soldiers would have fallen upon all the disciples, and have hewn them to pieces, and would have represented Christ as not better than Barabbas. Thus many have been guilty of self-destruction, in their zeal for self-preservation. [6.] Peter played the coward so soon after this (denying his Master) that we have reason to think he would not have done this but that he saw his Master cause them to fall on the ground, and then he could deal with them; but, when he saw him surrender himself notwithstanding, his courage failed him; whereas the true Christian hero will appear in the cause of Christ, not only when it is prevailing, but when it seems to be declining; will be on the right side, though it be not the rising side.

(3.) We must acknowledge God's over-ruling providence in directing the stroke (so that it should do no more execution, but only cut off his ear, which was rather marking him than maiming him), as also in giving Christ an opportunity to manifest his power and goodness in healing the hurt, Luke xxii. 51. Thus what was in danger of turning to Christ's reproach proved an occasion of that which redounded much to his honour, even among his adversaries.

2. The rebuke his Master gave him (v. 11): Put up thy sword into the sheath, or scabbard; it is a gentle reproof, because it was his zeal that carried him beyond the bounds of discretion. Christ did not aggravate the matter, only bade him do so no more. Many think their being in grief and distress will excuse them if they be hot and hasty with those about them; but Christ has here set us an example of meekness in sufferings. Peter must put up his sword, for it was the sword of the Spirit that was to be committed to him—weapons of warfare not carnal, yet mighty. When Christ with a word felled the aggressors, he showed Peter how he should be armed with a word, quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and with that, not long after this, he laid Ananias and Sapphira dead at his feet.

3. The reason for this rebuke: The cup which my Father has given me, shall I not drink it? Matthew relates another reason which Christ gave for this rebuke, but John preserves this, which he had omitted; in which Christ gives us, (1.) A full proof of his own submission to his Father's will. Of all that was amiss in what Peter did, he seems to resent nothing so much as that he would have hindered his sufferings now that his hour was come: "What, Peter, wilt thou step in between the cup and the lip? Get thee hence, Satan." If Christ be determined to suffer and die, it is presumption for Peter in word or deed to oppose it: Shall I not drink it? The manner of expression bespeaks a settled resolution, and that he would not entertain a thought to the contrary. He was willing to drink of this cup, though it was a bitter cup, an infusion of the wormwood and the gall, the cup of trembling, a bloody cup, the dregs of the cup of the Lord's wrath, Isa. li. 22. He drank it, that he might put into our hands the cup of salvation, the cup of consolation, the cup of blessing; and therefore he is willing to drink it, because his Father put it into his hand. If his Father will have it so, it is for the best, and be it so. (2.) A fair pattern to us of submission to God's will in every thing that concerns us. We must pledge Christ in the cup that he drank of (Matt. xx. 23), and must argue ourselves into a compliance. [1.] It is but a cup; a small matter comparatively, be it what it will. It is not a sea, a red sea, a dead sea, for it is not hell; it is light, and but for a moment. [2.] It is a cup that is given us; sufferings are gifts. [3.] It is given us by a Father, who has a Father's authority, and does us no wrong; a Father's affection, and means us no hurt.

VI. Having entirely reconciled himself to the dispensation, he calmly surrendered, and yielded himself a prisoner, not because he could not have made his escape, but because he would not. One would have thought the cure of Malchus's ear should have made them relent, but nothing would win upon them. Maledictus furor, quem nec majestast miraculi nec pietas beneficii confringere potuit—Accursed rage, which the grandeur of the miracle could not appease, nor the tenderness of the favour conciliate.—Anselm. Observe here,

1. How they seized him: They took Jesus. Only some few of them could lay hands on him, but it is charged upon them all, for they were all aiding and abetting. In treason there are not accessaries; all are principals. Now the scripture was fulfilled, Bulls have compassed me (Ps. xxii. 12), compassed me like bees, Ps. cxviii. 12. The breath of our nostrils is taken in their pit, Lam. iv. 20. They had so often been frustrated in their attempts to seize him that now, having got him into their hands, we may suppose they flew upon him with so much the more violence.

2. How they secured him: They bound him. This particular of his sufferings is taken notice of only by this evangelist, that, as soon as ever he was taken, he was bound, pinioned, handcuffed; tradition says, "They bound him with such cruelty that the blood started out at his fingers' ends; and, having bound his hands behind him, they clapped an iron chain about his neck, and with that dragged him along." See Gerhard. Harm. cap. 5.

(1.) This shows the spite of his persecutors. They bound him, [1.] That they might torment him, and put him in pain, as they bound Samson to afflict him. [2.] That they might disgrace him, and put him to shame; slaves were bound, so was Christ, though free-born. [3.] That they might prevent his escape, Judas having told them to hold him fast. See their folly, that they should think to fetter that power which had but just now proved itself omnipotent. [4.] They bound him as one already condemned, for they were resolved to prosecute him to the death, and that he should die as a fool dieth, that is, as a malefactor, with his hands bound, 2 Sam. iii. 33, 34. Christ had bound the consciences of his persecutors with the power of his word, which galled them; and, to be revenged on him, they laid these bonds on him.

Christ before Annas and Caiaphas; The Fall of Peter; Christ Arraigned; Peter Again Denies Christ.

13 And led him away to Annas first; for he was father in law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year. 14 Now Caiaphas was he, which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people. 15 And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple: that disciple was known unto the high priest, and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest. 16 But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter. 17 Then saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not thou also one of this man's disciples? He saith, I am not. 18 And the servants and officers stood there, who had made a fire of coals; for it was cold: and they warmed themselves: and Peter stood with them, and warmed himself. 19 The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. 20 Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. 21 Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. 22 And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? 23 Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me? 24 Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest. 25 And Simon Peter stood and warmed himself. They said therefore unto him, Art not thou also one of his disciples? He denied it, and said, I am not. 26 One of the servants of the high priest, being his kinsman whose ear Peter cut off, saith, Did not I see thee in the garden with him? 27 Peter then denied again: and immediately the cock crew.

We have here an account of Christ's arraignment before the high priest, and some circumstances that occurred therein which were omitted by the other evangelists; and Peter's denying him, which the other evangelists had given the story of entire by itself, is interwoven with the other passages. The crime laid to his charge having relation to religion, the judges of the spiritual court took it to fall directly under their cognizance. Both Jews and Gentiles seized him, and so both Jews and Gentiles tried and condemned him, for he died for the sins of both. Let us go over the story in order.

I. Having seized him, they led him away to Annas first, before they brought him to the court that was sat, expecting him, in the house of Caiaphas, v. 13. 1. They led him away, led him in triumph, as a trophy of their victory; led him as a lamb to the slaughter, and they led him through the sheep-gate spoken of Neh. iii. 1. For through that they went from the mount of Olives into Jerusalem. They hurried him away with violence, as if he had been the worst and vilest of malefactors. We had been led away of our own impetuous lusts, and led captive by Satan at his will, and, that we might be rescued, Christ was led away, led captive by Satan's agents and instruments. 2. They led him away to their masters that sent them. It was now about midnight, and one would think they should have put him in ward (Lev. xxiv. 12), should have led him to some prison, till it was a proper time to call a court; but he is hurried away immediately, not to the justices of peace, to be committed, but to the judges to be condemned; so extremely violent was the prosecution, partly because they feared a rescue, which they would thus not only leave no time for, but give a terror to; partly because they greedily thirsted after Christ's blood, as the eagle that hasteth to the prey. 3. They led him to Annas first. Probably his house lay in the way, and was convenient for them to call at to refresh themselves, and, as some think, to be paid for their service. I suppose Annas was old and infirm, and could not be present in council with the rest at that time of night, and yet earnestly desired to see the prey. To gratify him therefore with the assurance of their success, that the old man might sleep the better, and to receive his blessing for it, they produce their prisoner before him. It is sad to see those that are old and sickly, when they cannot commit sin as formerly, taking pleasure in those that do. Dr. Lightfoot thinks Annas was not present, because he had to attend early that morning in the temple, to examine the sacrifices which were that day to be offered, whether they were without blemish; if so, there was a significancy in it, that Christ, the great sacrifice, was presented to him, and sent away bound, as approved and ready for the altar. 4. This Annas was father-in-law to Caiaphas the high priest; this kindred by marriage between them comes in as a reason either why Caiaphas ordered that this piece of respect should be done to Annas, to favour him with the first sight of the prisoner, or why Annas was willing to countenance Caiaphas in a matter his heart was so much upon. Note, Acquaintance and alliance with wicked people are a great confirmation to many in their wicked ways.

II. Annas did not long detain them, being as willing as any of them to have the prosecution pushed on, and therefore sent him bound to Caiaphas, to his house, which was appointed for the rendezvous of the sanhedrim upon this occasion, or to the usual place in the temple where the high priest kept his court; this is mentioned, v. 24. But our translators intimate in the margin that it should come in here, and, accordingly, read it there, Annas had sent him. Observe here,

1. The power of Caiaphas intimated (v. 13). He was high priest that same year. The high priest's commission was during life; but there were now such frequent changes, by the Simoniacal artifices of aspiring men with the government, that it was become almost an annual office, a presage of its final period approaching; while they were undermining one another. God was overturning them all, that he might come whose right it was. Caiaphas was high priest that same year when Messiah was to be cut off, which intimates, (1.) That when a bad thing was to be done by a high priest, according to the foreknowledge of God, Providence so ordered it that a bad man should be in the chair to do it. (2.) That, when God would make it to appear what corruption there was in the heart of a bad man, he put him into a place of power, where he had temptation and opportunity to exert it. It was the ruin of Caiaphas that he was high priest that year, and so became a ringleader in the putting of Christ to death. Many a man's advancement has lost him his reputation, and he had not been dishonoured if he had not been preferred.

2. The malice of Caiaphas, which is intimated (v. 14) by the repeating of what he had said some time before, that, right or wrong, guilty or innocent, it was expedient that one man should die for the people, which refers to the story ch. xi. 50. This comes in here to show, (1.) What a bad man he was; this was that Caiaphas that governed himself and the church by rules of policy, in defiance of the rules of equity. (2.) What ill usage Christ was likely to meet with in his court, when his case was adjudged before it was heard, and they were already resolved what to do with him; he must die; so that his trial was a jest. Thus the enemies of Christ's gospel are resolved, true or false, to run it down. (3.) It is a testimony to the innocency of our Lord Jesus, from the mouth of one of his worst enemies, who owned that he fell a sacrifice to the public good, and that it was not just he should die, but expedient only.

3. The concurrence of Annas in the prosecution of Christ. He made himself a partaker in guilt, (1.) With the captain and officers, that without law or mercy had bound him; for he approved it by continuing him bound when he should have loosed him, he not being convicted of any crime, nor having attempted an escape. If we do not what we can to undo what others have ill done, we are accessaries ex post facto—after the fact. It was more excusable in the rude soldiers to bind him than in Annas, who should have known better, to continue him bound. (2.) With the chief priest and council that condemned him, and prosecuted him to death. This Annas was not present with them, yet thus he wished them good speed, and became a partaker of their evil deeds.

III. In the house of Caiaphas, Simon Peter began to deny his Master, v. 15-18.

1. It was with much ado that Peter got into the hall where the court was sitting, an account of which we have v. 15, 16. Here we may observe,

(1.) Peter's kindness to Christ, which (though it proved no kindness) appeared in two things:—[1.] That he followed Jesus when he was led away; though at first he fled with the rest, yet afterwards he took heart a little, and followed at some distance, calling to mind the promises he had made to adhere to him, whatever it should cost him. Those that had followed Christ in the midst of his honours, and shared with him in those honours, when the people cried Hosanna to him, ought to have followed him now in the midst of his reproaches, and to have shared with him in these. Those that truly love and value Christ will follow him all weathers and all ways. [2.] When he could not get in where Jesus was in the midst of his enemies, he stood at the door without, willing to be as near him as he could, and waiting for an opportunity to get nearer. Thus when we meet with opposition in following Christ we must show our good-will. But yet this kindness of Peter's was no kindness, because he had not strength and courage enough to persevere in it, and so, as it proved, he did but run himself into a snare: and even his following Christ, considering all things, was to be blamed, because Christ, who knew him better than he knew himself, had expressly told him (ch. xiii. 36), Whither I go thou canst not follow me now, and had told him again and again that he would deny him; and he had lately had experience of his own weakness in forsaking him. Note, We must take heed of tempting God by running upon difficulties beyond our strength, and venturing too far in a way of suffering. If our call be clear to expose ourselves, we may hope that God will enable us to honour him; but, if it be not, we may fear that God will leave us to shame ourselves.

(2.) The other disciple's kindness to Peter, which yet, as it proved, was no kindness neither. St. John several times in this gospel speaking of himself as another disciple, many interpreters have been led by this to fancy that this other disciple here was John; and many conjectures they have how he should come to be known to the high-priest; propter generis nobilitatem—being of superior birth, saith Jerome, Epitaph. Marcel., as if he were a better gentleman born than his brother James, when they were both the sons of Zebedee the fisherman; some will tell you that he had sold his estate to the high priest, others that he supplied his family with fish, both which are very improbable. But I see no reason to think that this other disciple was John, or one of the twelve; other sheep Christ had, which were not of the fold; and this might be, as the Syriac read it, unus ex discipulis aliis—one of those other disciples that believe in Christ, but resided at Jerusalem, and kept their places there; perhaps Joseph of Arimathea, or Nicodemus, known to the high priest, but not known to him to be disciples of Christ. Note, As there are many who seem disciples and are not so, so there are many who are disciples and seem not so. There are good people hid in courts, even in Nero's, as well as hid in crowds. We must not conclude a man to be no friend to Christ merely because he has acquaintance and conversation with those that were his known enemies. Now, [1.] This other disciple, whoever he was, showed a respect to Peter, in introducing him, not only to gratify his curiosity and affection, but to give him an opportunity of being serviceable to his Master upon his trial, if there were occasion. Those that have a real kindness for Christ and his ways, though their temper may be reserved and their circumstances may lead them to be cautious and retired, yet, if their faith be sincere, they will discover, when they are called to it, which way their inclination lies, by being ready to do a professed disciple a good turn. Peter perhaps had formerly introduced this disciple into conversation with Christ, and now he requites his kindness, and is not ashamed to own him, though, it should seem, he had at this time but a poor downcast appearance. [2.] But this kindness proved no kindness, nay a great diskindness; by letting him into the high priest's hall, he let him into temptation, and the consequence was bad. Note, The courtesies of our friends often prove a snare to us, through a misguided affection.

2. Peter, having got in, was immediately assaulted with the temptation, and foiled by it, v. 17. Observe here,

(1.) How slight the attack was. It was but a silly maid, of so small account that she was set to keep the door, that challenged him, and she only asked him carelessly, Art not thou one of this man's disciples? probably suspecting it by his sheepish look, and coming in timorously. We should many a time better maintain a good cause if we had a good heart on it, and could put a good face on it. Peter would have had some reason to take the alarm if Malchus had set upon him, and had said, "This is he that cut off my ear, and I will have his head for it;" but when a maid only asked him, Art not thou one of them? he might without danger have answered, And what if I am? Suppose the servants had ridiculed him, and insulted over him, upon it, those can bear but little for Christ that cannot bear this; this is but running with the footmen.

(2.) How speedy the surrender was. Without taking time to recollect himself, he suddenly answered, I am not. If he had had the boldness of the lion, he would have said, "It is my honour that I am so;" or, if he had had the wisdom of the serpent, he would have kept silence at this time, for it was an evil time. But, all his care being for his own safety, he thought he could not secure this but by a peremptory denial: I am not; he not only denies it, but even disdains it, and scorns her words.

(3.) Yet he goes further into the temptation: And the servants and officers stood there, and Peter with them v. 18.

[1.] See how the servants made much of themselves; the night being cold, they made a fire in the hall, not for their masters (they were so eager in persecuting Christ that they forgot cold), but for themselves to refresh themselves. They cared not what became of Christ; all their care was to sit and warm themselves, Amos vi. 6.

[2.] See how Peter herded himself with them, and made one among them. He sat and warmed himself. First, It was a fault bad enough that he did not attend his Master, and appear for him at the upper end of the hall, where he was now under examination. He might have been a witness for him, and have confronted the false witnesses that swore against him, if his Master had called him; at least, he might have been a witness to him, might have taken an exact notice of what passed, that he might relate it to the other disciples, who could none of them get in to hear the trial; he might have learned by his Master's example how to carry himself when it should come to his turn to suffer thus; yet neither his conscience nor his curiosity could bring him into the court, but he sits by, as if, like Gallio, he cared for none of these things. And yet at the same time we have reason to think his heart was as full of grief and concern as it could hold, but he had not the courage to own it. Lord, lead us not into temptation. Secondly, It was much worse that he joined himself with those that were his Master's enemies: He stood with them, and warmed himself; this was a poor excuse for joining with them. A little thing will draw those into bad company that will be drawn to it by the love of a good fire. If Peter's zeal for his Master had not frozen, but had continued in the heat it seemed to be of but a few hours before, he had not had occasion to warm himself now. Peter was much to be blamed, 1. Because he associated with these wicked men, and kept company with them. Doubtless they were diverting themselves with this night's expedition, scoffing at Christ, at what he had said, at what he had done, and triumphing in their victory over him; and what sort of entertainment would this give to Peter? If he said as they said, or by silence gave consent, he involved himself in sin; if not, he exposed himself to danger. If Peter had not so much courage as to appear publicly for his Master, yet he might have had so much devotion as to retire into a corner, and weep in secret for his Master's sufferings, and his own sin in forsaking him; if he could not have done good, he might have kept out of the way of doing hurt. It is better to abscond than appear to no purpose, or bad purpose. 2. Because he desired to be thought one of them, that he might not be suspected to be a disciple of Christ. Is this Peter? What a contradiction is this to the prayer of every good man, Gather not my soul with sinners! Saul among the prophets is not so absurd as David among the Philistines. Those that deprecate the lot of the scornful hereafter should dread the seat of the scornful now. It is ill warming ourselves with those with whom we are in danger of burning ourselves, Ps. cxli. 4.

IV. Peter, Christ's friend, having begun to deny him, the high priest, his enemy, begins to accuse him, or rather urges him to accuse himself, v. 19-21. It should seem, the first attempt was to prove him a seducer, and a teacher of false doctrine, which this evangelist relates; and, when they failed in the proof of this, then they charged him with blasphemy, which is related by the other evangelists, and therefore omitted here. Observe,

1. The articles or heads upon which Christ was examined (v. 19): concerning his disciples and his doctrine. Observe,

(1.) The irregularity of the process; it was against all law and equity. They seize him as a criminal, and now that he is their prisoner they have nothing to lay to his charge; no libel, no prosecutor; but the judge himself must be the prosecutor, and the prisoner himself the witness, and, against all reason and justice, he is put on to be his own accuser.

(2.) The intention. The high priest then (oun—therefore, which seems to refer to v. 14), because he had resolved that Christ must be sacrificed to their private malice under colour of the public good, examined him upon those interrogatories which would touch his life. He examined him, [1.] Concerning his disciples, that he might charge him with sedition, and represent him as dangerous to the Roman government, as well as to the Jewish church. He asked him who were his disciples—what number they were—of what country—what were their names and characters, insinuating that his scholars were designed for soldiers, and would in time become a formidable body. Some think his question concerning his disciples was, "What is now become of them all? Where are they? Why do they not appear?" upbraiding him with their cowardice in deserting him, and thus adding to the affliction of it. There was something significant in this, that Christ's calling and owning his disciples was the first thing laid to his charge, for it was for their sakes that he sanctified himself and suffered. [2.] Concerning his doctrine, that they might charge him with heresy, and bring him under the penalty of the law against false prophets, Deut. xiii. 9, 10. This was a matter properly cognizable in that court (Deut. xvii. 12), therefore a prophet could not perish but at Jerusalem, where that court sat. They could not prove any false doctrine upon him; but they hoped to extort something from him which they might distort to his prejudice, and to make him an offender for some word or other, Isa. xxix. 21. They said nothing to him concerning his miracles, by which he had done so much good, and proved his doctrine beyond contradiction, because of these they were sure they could take no hold. Thus the adversaries of Christ while they are industriously quarrelling with his truth, willfully shut their eyes against the evidences of it, and take no notice of them.

2. The appeal Christ made, in answer to these interrogatories. (1.) As to his disciples, he said nothing, because it was an impertinent question; if his doctrine was sound and good, his having disciples to whom to communicate it was no more than what was practised and allowed by their own doctors. If Caiaphas, in asking him concerning his disciples, designed to ensnare them, and bring them into trouble, it was in kindness to them that Christ said nothing of them, for he had said, Let these go their way. If he meant to upbraid him with their cowardice, no wonder that he said nothing, for Rudet hæc opprobria nobis, Et dici potuisse, et non potuisse refelli— Shame attaches when charges are exhibited that cannot be refuted: he would say nothing to condemn them, and could say nothing to justify them. (2.) As to his doctrine, he said nothing in particular, but in general referred himself to those that heard him, being not only made manifest to God, but made manifest also in their consciences, v. 20, 21.

[1.] He tacitly charges his judges with illegal proceedings. He does not indeed speak evil of the rulers of the people, nor say now to these princes, You are wicked; but he appeals to the settled rules of their own court, whether they dealt fairly by him. Do you indeed judge righteously? Ps. lviii. 1. So here, Why ask you me? Which implies two absurdities in judgment: First, "Why ask you me now concerning my doctrine, when you have already condemned it?" They had made an order of court for excommunicating all that owned him (ch. ix. 22), had issued out a proclamation for apprehending him; and now they come to ask what his doctrine is! Thus was he condemned, as his doctrine and cause commonly are, unheard. Secondly, "Why ask you me? Must I accuse myself, when you have no evidence against me?"

[2.] He insists upon his fair and open dealing with them in the publication of his doctrine, and justifies himself with this. The crime which the sanhedrim by the law was to enquire after was the clandestine spreading of dangerous doctrines, enticing secretly, Deut. xiii. 6. As to this, therefore, Christ clears himself very fully. First, As to the manner of his preaching. He spoke openly, parresia—with freedom and plainness of speech; he did not deliver things ambiguously, as Apollo did his oracles. Those that would undermine the truth, and spread corrupt notions, seek to accomplish their purpose by sly insinuation, putting queries, starting difficulties, and asserting nothing; but Christ explained himself fully, with, Verily, verily, I say unto you; his reproofs were free and bold, and his testimonies express against the corruptions of the age. Secondly, As to the persons he preached to: He spoke to the world, to all that had ears to hear, and were willing to hear him, high or low, learned or unlearned, Jew or Gentile, friend or foe. His doctrine feared not the censure of a mixed multitude; nor did he grudge the knowledge of it to any (as the masters of some rare invention commonly do), but freely communicated it, as the sun does his beams. Thirdly, As to the places he preached in. When he was in the country, he preached ordinarily in the synagogues—the places of meeting for worship, and on the sabbath-day-the time of meeting; when he came up to Jerusalem, he preached the same doctrine in the temple at the time of the solemn feasts, when the Jews from all parts assembled there; and though he often preached in private houses, and on mountains, and by the sea-side, to show that his word and worship were not to be confined to temples and synagogues, yet what he preached in private was the very same with what he delivered publicly. Note, The doctrine of Christ, purely and plainly preached, needs not be ashamed to appear in the most numerous assembly, for it carries its own strength and beauty along with it. What Christ's faithful ministers say they would be willing all the world should hear. Wisdom cries in the places of concourse, Prov. i. 21; viii. 3; ix. 3. Fourthly, As to the doctrine itself. He said nothing in secret contrary to what he said in public, but only by way of repetition and explication: In secret have I said nothing; as if he had been either suspicious of the truth of it, or conscious of any ill design in it. He sought no corners, for he feared no colours, nor said any thing that he needed to be ashamed of; what he did speak in private to his disciples he ordered them to proclaim on the house-tops, Matt. x. 27. God saith of himself (Isa. xlv. 19), I have not spoken in secret; his commandment is not hidden, Deut. xxx. 11. And the righteousness of faith speaks in like manner, Rom. x. 6. Veritas nihil metuit nisi abscondi—truth fears nothing but concealment.—Tertullian.

[3.] He appeals to those that had heard him, and desires that they might be examined what doctrine he had preached, and whether it had that dangerous tendency that was surmised: "Ask those that heard me what I said unto them; some of them may be in court, or may be sent for out of their beds." He means not his friends and followers, who might be presumed to speak in his favour, but, Ask any impartial hearer; ask your own officers. Some think he pointed to them, when he said, Behold, they know what I said, referring to the report which they had made of his preaching (ch. vii. 46), Never man spoke like this man. Nay, you may ask some upon the bench; for it is probable that some of them had heard him, and had been put to silence by him. Note, The doctrine of Christ may safely appeal to all that know it, and has so much right and reason on its side that those who will judge impartially cannot but witness to it.

V. While the judges were examining him, the servants that stood by were abusing him, v. 22, 23.

1. It was a base affront which one of the officers gave him; though he spoke with so much calmness and convincing evidence, this insolent fellow struck him with the palm of his hand, probably on the side of his head or face, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? as if he had behaved himself rudely to the court.

(1.) He struck him, edoke rhapisma—he gave him a blow. Some think it signifies a blow with a rod or wand, from rhabdos, or with the staff which was the badge of his office. Now the scripture was fulfilled (Isa. l. 6), I gave my cheeks, eis rhapismata (so the LXX.) to blows, the word here used. And Mic. v. 1, They shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek; and the type answered (Job xvi. 10), They have smitten me upon the cheek reproachfully. It was unjust to strike one that neither said nor did amiss; it was insolent for a mean servant to strike one that was confessedly a person of account; it was cowardly to strike one that had his hands tied; and barbarous to strike a prisoner at the bar. Here was a breach of the peace in the face of the court, and yet the judges countenanced it. Confusion of face was our due; but Christ here took it to himself: "Upon me be the curse, the shame."

(2.) He checked him in a haughty imperious manner: Answerest thou the high priest so? As if the blessed Jesus were not good enough to speak to his master, or not wise enough to know how to speak to him, but, like a rude and ignorant prisoner, must be controlled by the jailor, and taught how to behave. Some of the ancients suggest that this officer was Malchus, who owed to Christ the healing of his ear, and the saving of his head, and yet made him this ill return. But, whoever it was, it was done to please the high priest, and to curry favour with him; for what he said implied a jealousy for the dignity of the high priest. Wicked rulers will not want wicked servants, who will help forward the affliction of those whom their masters persecute. There was a successor of this high priest that commanded the bystanders to smite Paul thus on the mouth, Acts xxiii. 2. Some think this officer took himself to be affronted by Christ's appeal to those about him concerning his doctrine, as if he would have vouched him to be a witness; and perhaps he was one of those officers that had spoken honourably of him (ch. vii. 46), and, lest he should now be thought a secret friend to him, he thus appears a bitter enemy.

2. Christ bore this affront with wonderful meekness and patience (v. 23): "If I have spoken evil, in what I have now said, bear witness of the evil. Observe it to the court, and let them judge of it, who are the proper judges; but if well, and as it did become me, why smitest thou me?" Christ could have answered him with a miracle of wrath, could have struck him dumb or dead, or have withered the hand that was lifted up against him. But this was the day of his patience and suffering, and he answered him with the meekness of wisdom, to teach us not to avenge ourselves, not to render railing for railing, but with the innocency of the dove to bear injuries, even when with the wisdom of the serpent, as our Saviour, we show the injustice of them, and appeal to the magistrate concerning them. Christ did not here turn the other cheek, by which it appears that that rule, Matt. v. 39, is not to be understood literally; a man may possibly turn the other cheek, and yet have his heart full of malice; but, comparing Christ's precept with his pattern, we learn, (1.) That in such cases we must not be our own avengers, nor judges in our own cause. We must rather receive than give the second blow, which makes the quarrel; we are allowed to defend ourselves, but not to avenge ourselves: the magistrate (if it be necessary for the preserving of the public peace, and the restraining and terrifying of evil-doers) is to be the avenger, Rom. xiii. 4. (2.) Our resentment of injuries done us must always be rational, and never passionate; such Christ's here was; when he suffered, he reasoned, but threatened not. He fairly expostulated with him that did him the injury, and so may we. (3.) When we are called out to suffering, we must accommodate ourselves to the inconveniences of a suffering state, with patience, and by one indignity done us be prepared to receive another, and to make the best of it.

VI. While the servants were thus abusing him, Peter was proceeding to deny him, v. 25-27. It is a sad story, and none of the least of Christ's sufferings.

1. He repeated the sin the second time, v. 25. While he was warming himself with the servants, as one of them, they asked him, Art not thou one of his disciples? What dost thou here among us? He, perhaps, hearing that Christ was examined about his disciples, and fearing he should be seized, or at least smitten, as his Master was, if he should own it, flatly denied it, and said, I am not.

(1.) It was his great folly to thrust himself into the temptation, by continuing in the company of those that were unsuitable for him, and that he had nothing to do with. He staid to warm himself; but those that warm themselves with evil doers grow cold towards good people and good things, and those that are fond of the devil's fire-side are in danger of the devil's fire. Peter might have stood by his Master at the bar, and have warmed himself better than here, at the fire of his Master's love, which many waters could not quench, Cant. viii. 6, 7. He might there have warmed himself with zeal for his Master, and indignation at his persecutors; but he chose rather to warm with them than to warm against them. But how could one (one disciple) be warm alone? Eccl. iv. 11.

(2.) It was his great unhappiness that he was again assaulted by the temptation; and no other could be expected, for this was a place, this an hour, of temptation. When the judge asked Christ about his disciples, probably the servants took the hint, and challenged Peter for one of them, "Answer to thy name." See here, [1.] The subtlety of the tempter in running down one whom he saw falling, and mustering a greater force against him; not a maid now, but all the servants. Note, Yielding to one temptation invites another, and perhaps a stronger. Satan redoubles his attacks when we give ground. [2.] The danger of bad company. We commonly study to approve ourselves to those with whom we choose to associate; we value ourselves upon their good word and covet to stand right in their opinion. As we choose our people we choose our praise, and govern ourselves accordingly; we are therefore concerned to make the first choice well, and not to mingle with those whom we cannot please without displeasing God.

(3.) It was his great weakness, nay, it was his great wickedness, to yield to the temptation, and to say, I am not one of his disciples, as one ashamed of that which was his honour, and afraid of suffering for it, which would have been yet more his honour. See how the fear of man brings a snare. When Christ was admired, and caressed, and treated with respect, Peter pleased himself, and perhaps prided himself, in this, that he was a disciple of Christ, and so put in for a share in the honours done to his Master. Thus many who seem fond of the reputation of religion when it is in fashion are ashamed of the reproach of it; but we must take it for better and worse.

2. He repeated the sin the third time, v. 26, 27. Here he was attacked by one of the servants, who was kinsman to Malchus, who, when he heard Peter deny himself to be a disciple of Christ, gave him the lie with great assurance: "Did not I see thee in the garden with him? Witness my kinsman's ear." Peter then denied again, as if he knew nothing of Christ, nothing of the garden, nothing of all this matter.

(1.) This third assault of the temptation was more close than the former: before his relation to Christ was only suspected, here it is proved upon him by one that saw him with Jesus, and saw him draw his sword in his defence. Note, Those who by sin think to help themselves out of trouble do but entangle and embarrass themselves the more. Dare to be brave, for truth will out. A bird of the air may perhaps tell the matter which we seek to conceal with a lie. Notice is taken of this servant's being akin to Malchus, because this circumstance would make it the more a terror to Peter. "Now," thinks he, "I am gone, my business is done, there needs no other witness nor prosecutor." We should not make any man in particular our enemy if we can help it, because the time may come when either he or some of his relations may have us at their mercy. He that may need a friend should not make a foe. But observe, though here was sufficient evidence against Peter, and sufficient provocation given by his denial to have prosecuted him, yet he escapes, has no harm done him nor attempted to be done. Note, We are often drawn into sin by groundless causeless fears, which there is no occasion for, and which a small degree of wisdom and resolution would make nothing of.

(2.) His yielding to it was no less base than the former: He denied again. See here, [1.] The nature of sin in general: the heart is hardened by the deceitfulness of it, Heb. iii. 13. It was a strange degree of effrontery that Peter had arrived to on a sudden, that he could with such assurance stand in a lie against so clear a disproof; but the beginning of sin is as the letting forth of water, when once the fence is broken men easily go from bad to worse. [2.] Of the sin of lying in particular; it is a fruitful sin, and upon this account exceedingly sinful: one lie needs another to support it, and that another. It is a rule in the devil's politics Male facta male factis tegere, ne perpluant—To cover sin with sin, in order to escape detection.

Christ in the Judgment-Hall; Christ Arraigned before Pilate.

28 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover. 29 Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man? 30 They answered and said unto him, If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee. 31 Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death: 32 That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die. 33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? 34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? 35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? 36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. 37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. 38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. 39 But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews? 40 Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.

We have here an account of Christ's arraignment before Pilate, the Roman governor, in the prætorium (a Latin word made Greek), the prætor's house, or hall of judgment; thither they hurried him, to get him condemned in the Roman court, and executed by the Roman power. Being resolved on his death, they took this course, 1. That he might be put to death the more legally and regularly, according to the present constitution of their government, since they became a province of the empire; not stoned in a popular tumult, as Stephen, but put to death with the present formalities of justice. Thus he was treated as a malefactor, being made sin for us. 2. That he might be put to death the more safely. If they could engage the Roman government in the matter, which the people stood in awe of, there would be little danger of an uproar. 3. That he might be put to death with more reproach to himself. The death of the cross, which the Romans commonly used, being of all deaths the most ignominious, they were desirous by it to put an indelible mark of infamy upon him, and so to sink his reputation for ever. This therefore they harped upon, Crucify him. 4. That he might be put to death with less reproach to them. It was an invidious thing to put one to death that had done so much good in the world, and therefore they were willing to throw the odium upon the Roman government, to make that the less acceptable to the people, and save themselves from the reproach. Thus many are more afraid of the scandal of a bad action than of the sin of it. See Acts v. 28. Two things are here observed concerning the prosecution:—(1.) Their policy and industry in the prosecution: It was early; some think about two or three in the morning, others about five or six, when most people were in their beds; and so there would be the less danger of opposition from the people that were for Christ; while, at the same time, they had their agents about, to call those together whom they could influence to cry out against him. See how much their heart was upon it, and how violent they were in the prosecution. Now that they had him in their hands, they would lose no time till they had him upon the cross, but denied themselves their natural rest, to push on this matter. See Mic. ii. 1. (2.) Their superstition and vile hypocrisy: The chief priests and elders, though they came along with the prisoner, that the thing might be done effectually, went not into the judgment-hall, because it was the house of an uncircumcised Gentile, lest they should be defiled, but kept out of doors, that they might eat the passover, not the paschal lamb (that was eaten the night before) but the passover-feast, upon the sacrifices which were offered on the fifteenth day, the Chagigah, as they called it, the passover-bullocks spoken of Deut. xvi. 2; 2 Chron. xxx. 24; xxxv. 8, 9. These they were to eat of, and therefore would not go into the court, for fear of touching a Gentile, and thereby contracting, not a legal, but only a traditional pollution. This they scrupled, but made no scruple of breaking through all the laws of equity to persecute Christ to the death. They strained at a gnat, and swallowed a camel. Let us now see what passed at the judgment-hall. Here is,

I. Pilate's conference with the prosecutors. They were called first, and stated what they had to say against the prisoner, as was very fit, v. 29-32.

1. The judge calls for the indictment. Because they would not come into the hall, he went out to them into the court before the house, to talk with them. Looking upon Pilate as a magistrate, that we may give every one his due, here are three things commendable in him:—(1.) His diligent and close application to business. If it had been upon a good occasion, it had been very well that he was willing to be called up early to the judgment-seat. Men in public trusts must not love their ease. (2.) His condescending to the humour of the people, and receding from the honour of his place to gratify their scruples. He might have said, "If they be so nice as not to come in to me, let them go home as they came;" by the same rule as we might say, "If the complainant scruple to take off his hat to the magistrate, let not his complaint be heard;" but Pilate insists not upon it, bears with them, and goes out to them; for, when it is for good, we should become all things to all men. (3.) His adherence to the rule of justice, in demanding the accusation, suspecting the prosecution to be malicious: "What accusation bring you against this man?" What is the crime you charge him with, and what proof have you of it? It was a law of nature, before Valerius Publicola made it a Roman law, Ne quis indicta causa condemnetur—No man should be condemned unheard. See Acts xxv. 16, 17. It is unreasonable to commit a man, without alleging some cause in the warrant, and much more to arraign a man when there is no bill of indictment found against him.

2. The prosecutors demand judgment against him upon a general surmise that he was a criminal, not alleging, much less proving, any thing in particular worthy of death or of bonds (v. 30): If he were not a malefactor, or evildoer, we would not have delivered him to thee to be condemned. This bespeaks them, (1.) Very rude and uncivil to Pilate, a company of ill-natured men, that affected to despise dominion. When Pilate was so complaisant to them as to come out to treat with them, yet they were to the highest degree out of humour with him. He put the most reasonable question to them that could be; but, if it had been the most absurd, they could not have answered him with more disdain. (2.) Very spiteful and malicious towards our Lord Jesus: right or wrong, they will have him to be a malefactor, and treated as one. We are to presume a man innocent till he is proved guilty, but they will presume him guilty who could prove himself innocent. They cannot say, "He is a traitor, a murderer, a felon, a breaker of the peace," but they say, "He is an evil-doer." He an evil-doer who went about doing good! Let those be called whom he had cured, and fed, and taught; whom he has rescued from devils, and raised from death; and let them be asked whether he be an evil-doer or no. Note, It is no new thing for the best of benefactors to be branded and run down as the worst of malefactors. (3.) Very proud and conceited of themselves, and their own judgment and justice, as if their delivering a man up, under the general character of a malefactor, were sufficient for the civil magistrate to ground a judicial sentence upon, than which what could be more haughty?

3. The judge remands him to their own court (v. 31): "Take you him, and judge him according to your own law, and do not trouble me with him." Now, (1.) Some think Pilate herein complimented them, acknowledging the remains of their power, and allowing them to exert it. Corporal punishment they might inflict, as scourging in their synagogues; whether capital or no is uncertain. "But," saith Pilate, "go as far as your law will allow you, and, if you go further, it shall be connived at." This he said, willing to do the Jews a pleasure, but unwilling to do them the service they required. (2.) Others think he bantered them, and upbraided them with their present state of weakness and subjection. They would be the sole judges of the guilt. "Pray," saith Pilate, "if you will be so, go on as you have begun; you have found him guilty by your own law, condemn him, if you dare, by your own law, to carry on the humour." Nothing is more absurd, nor more deserves to be exposed, than for those to pretend to dictate, and boast of their wisdom, who are weak and in subordinate stations, and whose lot it is to be dictated to. Some think Pilate here reflects upon the law of Moses, as if it allowed them what the Roman law would by no means allow—the judging of a man unheard. "It may be your law will suffer such a thing, but ours will not." Thus, through their corruptions, the law of God was blasphemed; and so is his gospel too.

4. They disown any authority as judges, and (since it must be so) are content to be prosecutors. They now grow less insolent and more submissive, and own, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death, whatever less punishment we may inflict, and this is a malefactor whom we would have the blood of."

(1.) Some think they had lost their power to give judgment in matters of life and death only by their own carelessness, and cowardly yielding to the darling iniquities of the age; so Dr. Lightfoot ouk exesti—It is not in our power to pass sentence of death upon any, if we do, we shall have the mob about us immediately.

(2.) Others think their power was taken from them by the Romans, because they had not used it well, or because it was thought too great a trust to be lodged in the hands of a conquered and yet an unsubdued people. Their acknowledgement of this they designed for a compliment to Pilate, and to atone for their rudeness (v. 30), but it amounts to a full evidence that the sceptre was departed from Judah, and therefore that now the Messiah was come, Gen. xlix. 10. If the Jews have no power to put any man to death, where is the sceptre? Yet they ask not, Where is the Shiloh?

(3.) However, there was a providence in it, that either they should have not power to put any man to death, or should decline the exercise of it upon this occasion, That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spoke, signifying what death he should die, v. 32. Observe, [1.] In general, that even those who designed the defeating of Christ's sayings were, beyond their intention, made serviceable to the fulfilling of them by an overruling hand of God. No word of Christ shall fall to the ground; he can never either deceive or be deceived. Even the chief priests, while they persecuted him as a deceiver, had their spirit so directed as to help to prove him true, when we should think that by taking other measures they might have defeated his predictions. Howbeit, they meant not so, Isa. x. 7. [2.] Those sayings of Christ in particular were fulfilled which he had spoken concerning his own death. Two sayings of Christ concerning his death were fulfilled, by the Jews declining to judge him according to their law. First, He had said that he should be delivered to the Gentiles, and that they should put him to death (Matt. xx. 19; Mark x. 33; Luke xviii. 32, 33), and hereby that saying was fulfilled. Secondly, He had said that he should be crucified (Matt. xx. 19; xxvi. 2), lifted up, ch. iii. 14; xii. 32. Now, if they had judged him by their law, he had been stoned; burning, strangling, and beheading, were in some cases used among the Jews, but never crucifying. It was therefore necessary that Christ should be put to death by the Romans, that, being hanged upon a tree, he might be made a curse for us (Gal. iii. 13), and his hands and feet might be pierced. As the Roman power had brought him to be born at Bethlehem, so now to die upon a cross, and both according to the scriptures. It is likewise determined concerning us, though not discovered to us, what death we shall die, which should free us from all disquieting cares about that matter. "Lord, what, and when, and how thou hast appointed."

II. Here is Pilate's conference with the prisoner, v. 33, &c., where we have,

1. The prisoner set to the bar. Pilate, after he had conferred with the chief priests at his door, entered into the hall, and called for Jesus to be brought in. He would not examine him in the crowd, where he might be disturbed by the noise, but ordered him to be brought into the hall; for he made no difficulty of going in among the Gentiles. We by sin were become liable to the judgment of God, and were to be brought before his bar; therefore Christ, being made sin and a curse for us, was arraigned as a criminal. Pilate entered into judgment with him, that God might not enter into judgment with us.

2. His examination. The other evangelists tell us that his accusers had laid it to his charge that he perverted the nation, forbidding to give tribute to Cæsar, and upon this he is examined.

(1.) Here is a question put to him, with a design to ensnare him and to find out something upon which to ground an accusation: "Art thou the king of the Jews? ho basileus—that king of the Jews who has been so much talked of and so long expected—Messiah the prince, art thou he? Dost thou pretend to be he? Dost thou call thyself, and wouldest thou be thought so?" For he was far from imagining that really he was so, or making a question of that. Some think Pilate asked this with an air of scorn and contempt: "What! art thou a king, who makest so mean a figure? Art thou the king of the Jews, by whom thou art thus hated and persecuted? Art thou king de jure—of right, while the emperor is only king de facto—in fact?" Since it could not be proved he ever said it, he would constrain him to say it now, that he might proceed upon his own confession.

(2.) Christ answers this question with another; not for evasion, but as an intimation to Pilate to consider what he did, and upon what grounds he went (v. 34): "Sayest thou this thing of thyself, from a suspicion arising in thy own breast, or did others tell it thee of me, and dost thou ask it only to oblige them?" [1.] "It is plain that thou hast no reason to say this of thyself." Pilate was bound by his office to take care of the interests of the Roman government, but he could not say that this was in any danger, or suffered any damage, from any thing our Lord Jesus had ever said or done. He never appeared in worldly pomp, never assumed any secular power, never acted as a judge or divider; never were any traitorous principles or practices objected to him, nor any thing that might give the least shadow of suspicion. [2.] "If others tell it thee of me, to incense thee against me, thou oughtest to consider who they are, and upon what principles they go, and whether those who represent me as an enemy to Cæsar are not really such themselves, and therefore use this only as a pretence to cover their malice, for, if so, the matter ought to be well weighed by a judge that would do justice." Nay, if Pilate had been as inquisitive as he ought to have been in this matter, he would have found that the true reason why the chief priests were outrageous against Jesus was because he did not set up a temporal kingdom in opposition to the Roman power; if he would have done this, and would have wrought miracles to bring the Jews out of the Roman bondage, as Moses did to bring them out of the Egyptian, they would have been so far from siding with the Romans against him that they would have made him their king, and have fought under him against the Romans; but, not answering this expectation of theirs, they charged that upon him of which they were themselves most notoriously guilty-disaffection to and design against the present government; and was such an information as this fit to be countenanced?

(3.) Pilate resents Christ's answer, and takes it very ill, v. 35. This is a direct answer to Christ's question, v. 34. [1.] Christ had asked him whether he spoke of himself. "No," says he; "am I a Jew, that thou suspectest me to be in the plot against thee? I know nothing of the Messiah, nor desire to know, and therefore interest not myself in the dispute who is the Messiah and who not; the dispute who is the Messiah and who not; it is all alike to me." Observe with what disdain Pilate asks, Am I a Jew? The Jews were, upon many accounts, an honourable people; but, having corrupted the covenant of their God, he made them contemptible and base before all the people (Mal. ii. 8, 9), so that a man of sense and honour reckoned it a scandal to be counted a Jew. Thus good names often suffer for the sake of the bad men that wear them. It is sad that when a Turk is suspected of dishonesty he should ask, "What! do you take me for a Christian?" [2.] Christ had asked him whether others told him. "Yes," says he, "and those thine own people, who, one would think would be biased in favour of thee, and the priests, whose testimony, in verbum sacerdotis—on the word of a priest, ought to be regarded; and therefore I have nothing to do but to proceed upon their information." Thus Christ, in his religion, still suffers by those that are of his own nation, even the priests, that profess relation to him, but do not live up to their profession. [3.] Christ had declined answering that question, Art thou the king of the Jews? And therefore Pilate puts another question to him more general, "What hast thou done? What provocation hast thou given to thy own nation, and particularly the priests, to be so violent against thee? Surely there cannot be all this smoke without some fire, what is it?"

(4.) Christ, in his next reply, gives a more full and direct answer to Pilate's former question, Art thou a king? explaining in what sense he was a king, but not such a king as was any ways dangerous to the Roman government, not a secular king, for his interest was not supported by secular methods, v. 36. Observe,

[1.] An account of the nature and constitution of Christ's kingdom: It is not of this world. It is expressed negatively to rectify the present mistakes concerning it; but the positive is implied, it is the kingdom of heaven, and belongs to another world. Christ is a king, and has a kingdom, but not of this world. First Its rise is not from this world; the kingdoms of men arise out of the sea and the earth (Dan. vii. 3; Rev. xiii. 1, 11); but the holy city comes from God out of heaven, Rev. xxii. 2. His kingdom is not by succession, election, or conquest, but by the immediate and special designation of the divine will and counsel. Secondly, Its nature is not worldly; it is a kingdom within men (Luke xvi. 21), set up in their hearts and consciences (Rom. xiv. 17), its riches spiritual, its powers spiritual, and all its glory within. The ministers of state in Christ's kingdom have not the spirit of the world, 1 Cor. ii. 12. Thirdly, Its guards and supports are not worldly; its weapons are spiritual. It neither needed nor used secular force to maintain and advance it, nor was it carried on in a way hurtful to kings or provinces; it did not in the least interfere with the prerogatives of princes nor the property of their subjects; it tended not to alter any national establishment in secular things, nor opposed any kingdom but that of sin and Satan. Fourthly, Its tendency and design are not worldly. Christ neither aimed nor would allow his disciples to aim at the pomp and power of the great men of the earth. Fifthly, Its subjects, though they are in the world, yet are not of the world; they are called and chosen out of the world, are born from, and bound for, another world; they are neither the world's pupils nor its darlings, neither governed by its wisdom nor enriched with its wealth.

[2.] An evidence of the spiritual nature of Christ's kingdom produced. If he had designed an opposition to the government, he would have fought them at their own weapons, and would have repelled force with force of the same nature; but he did not take this course: If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews, and my kingdom be ruined by them. But, First, His followers did not offer to fight; there was no uproar, no attempt to rescue him, though the town was now full of Galileans, his friends and countrymen, and they were generally armed; but the peaceable behaviour of his disciples on this occasion was enough to put to silence the ignorance of foolish men. Secondly, He did not order them to fight; nay, he forbade them, which was an evidence both that he did not depend upon worldly aids (for he could have summoned legions of angels into his service, which showed that his kingdom was from above), and also that he did not dread worldly opposition, for he was very willing to be delivered to the Jews, as knowing that what would have been the destruction of any worldly kingdom would be the advancement and establishment of his; justly therefore does he conclude, Now you may see my kingdom is not from hence; in the world but not of it.

(5.) In answer to Pilate's further query, he replies yet more directly, v. 37, where we have, [1.] Pilate's plain question: "Art thou a king then? Thou speakest of a kingdom thou hast; art thou then, in any sense, a king? And what colour hast thou for such a claim? Explain thyself." [2.] The good confession which our Lord Jesus witnessed before Pontius Pilate, in answer to this (1 Tim. vi. 13): Thou sayest that I am a king, that is, It is as thou sayest, I am a king; for I came to bear witness of the truth. First, He grants himself to be a king, though not in the sense that Pilate meant. The Messiah was expected under the character of a king, Messiah the prince; and therefore, having owned to Caiaphas that he was the Christ, he would not disown to Pilate that he was king, lest he should seem inconsistent with himself. Note, Though Christ took upon him the form of a servant, yet even then he justly claimed the honour and authority of a king. Secondly, He explains himself, and shows how he is a king, as he came to bear witness of the truth; he rules in the minds of men by the power of truth. If he had meant to declare himself a temporal prince, he would have said, For this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, to rule the nations, to conquer kings, and to take possession of kingdoms; no, he came to be a witness, a witness for the God that made the world, and against sin that ruins the world, and by this word of his testimony he sets up, and keeps up, his kingdom. It was foretold that he should be a witness to the people, and, as such, a leader and commander to the people, Isa. lv. 4. Christ's kingdom was not of this world, in which truth faileth (Isa. lix. 15, Qui nescit dissimulare, nescit regnare—He that cannot dissemble knows not how to reign), but of that world in which truth reigns eternally. Christ's errand into the world, and his business in the world, were to bear witness to the truth. 1. To reveal it, to discover to the world that which otherwise could not have been known concerning God and his will and good-will to men, ch. i. 18; xvii. 26. 2. To confirm it, Rom. xv. 8. By his miracles he bore witness to the truth of religion, the truth of divine revelation, and of God's perfections and providence, and the truth of his promise and covenant, that all men through him might believe. Now by doing this he is a king, and sets up a kingdom. (1.) The foundation and power, the spirit and genius, of Christ's kingdom, is truth, divine truth. When he said, I am the truth, he said, in effect, I am a king. He conquers by the convincing evidence of truth; he rules by the commanding power of truth, and in his majesty rides prosperously, because of truth, Ps. xlv. 4. It is with his truth that he shall judge the people, Ps. xcvi. 13. It is the sceptre of his kingdom; he draws with the cords of a man, with truth revealed to us, and received by us in the love of it; and thus he brings thoughts into obedience. He came a light into the world, and rules as the sun by day. (2.) The subjects of this kingdom are those that are of the truth. All that by the grace of God are rescued from under the power of the father of lies, and are disposed to receive the truth and submit to the power and influence of it, will hear Christ's voice, will become his subjects, and will bear faith and true allegiance to him. Every one that has any real sense of true religion will entertain the Christian religion, and they belong to his kingdom; by the power of truth he makes them willing, Ps. xc. 3. All that are in love with truth will hear the voice of Christ, for greater, better, surer, sweeter truths can nowhere be found than are found in Christ, by whom grace and truth came; so that, by hearing Christ's voice, we know that we are of the truth, 1 John iii. 19.

(6.) Pilate, hereupon, puts a good question to him, but does not stay for an answer, v. 38. He said, What is truth? and immediately went out again.

[1.] It is certain that this was a good question, and could not be put to one that was better able to answer it. Truth is that pearl of great price which the human understanding has a desire for and is in quest of; for it cannot rest but in that which is, or at least is apprehended to be, truth. When we search the scriptures, and attend the ministry of the word, it must be with this enquiry, What is truth? and with this prayer, Lead me in thy truth, into all truth. But many put this question that have not patience and constancy enough to persevere in their search after truth, or not humility and sincerity enough to receive it when they have found it, 2 Tim. iii. 7. Thus many deal with their own consciences; they ask them those needful questions, "What am I?" "What have I done?" but will not take time for an answer.

[2.] It is uncertain with what design Pilate asked this question. First, Perhaps he spoke it as a learner, as one that began to think well of Christ, and to look upon him with some respect, and desired to be informed what new notions he advanced and what improvements he pretended to in religion and learning. But while he desired to hear some new truth from him, as Herod to see some miracle, the clamour and outrage of the priests' mob at his gate obliged him abruptly to let fall the discourse. Secondly, Some think he spoke it as a judge, enquiring further into the cause now brought before him: "Let me into this mystery, and tell me what the truth of it is, the true state of this matter." Thirdly, Others think he spoke it as a scoffer, in a jeering way: "Thou talkest of truth; canst thou tell what truth is, or give me a definition of it?" Thus he makes a jest of the everlasting gospel, that great truth which the chief priests hated and persecuted, and which Christ was now witnessing to and suffering for; and like men of no religion, who take a pleasure in bantering all religions, he ridicules both sides; and therefore Christ made him no reply. Answer not a fool according to his folly; cast not pearls before swine. But, though Christ would not tell Pilate what is truth, he has told his disciples, and by them has told us, ch. xiv. 6.

III. The result of both these conferences with the prosecutors and the prisoner (v. 38-40), in two things:—

1. The judge appeared his friend, and favourable to him, for,

(1.) He publicly declared him innocent, v. 38. Upon the whole matter, I find in him no fault at all. He supposes there might be some controversy in religion between him and them, wherein he was as likely to be in the right as they; but nothing criminal appears against him. This solemn declaration of Christ's innocency was, [1.] For the justification and honour of the Lord Jesus. By this it appears that though he was treated as the worst of malefactors he had never merited such treatment. [2.] For explaining the design and intention of his death, that he did not die for any sin of his own, even in the judgement of the judge himself, and therefore he died as a sacrifice for our sins, and that, even in the judgment of the prosecutors themselves, one man should die for the people, ch. xi. 50. This is he that did no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth (Isa. liii. 9), who was to be cut off, but not for himself, Dan. ix. 26. [3.] For aggravating the sin of the Jews that prosecuted him with so much violence. If a prisoner has had a fair trial, and has been acquitted by those that are proper judges of the crime, especially if there be no cause to suspect them partial in his favour, he must be believed innocent, and his accusers are bound to acquiesce. But our Lord Jesus, though brought in not guilty, is still run down as a malefactor, and his blood thirsted for.

(2.) He proposed an expedient for his discharge (v. 39): You have a custom, that I should release to you a prisoner at the passover; shall it be this king of the Jews? He proposed this, not to the chief priests (he knew they would never agree to it), but to the multitude; it was an appeal to the people, as appears, Matt. xxvii. 15. Probably he had heard how this Jesus had been attended but the other day with the hosannas of the common people; he therefore looked upon him to be the darling of the multitude, and the envy only of the rulers, and therefore he made no doubt but they would demand the release of Jesus, and this would stop the mouth of the prosecutors, and all would be well. [1.] He allows their custom, for which, perhaps, they had had a long prescription, in honour of the passover, which was a memorial of their release. But it was adding to God's words, as if he had not instituted enough for the due commemoration of that deliverance, and, though an act of mercy, might be injustice to the public, Prov. xvii. 15. [2.] He offers to release Jesus to them, according to the custom. If Pilate had had the honesty and courage that became a judge, he would not have named an innocent person to be competitor with a notorious criminal for this favour; if he found no fault in him, he was bound in conscience to discharge him. But he was willing to trim the matter, and please all sides, being governed more by worldly wisdom than by the rules of equity.

2. The people appeared his enemies, and implacable against him (v. 40): They cried all again and again, Not this man, let not him be released, but Barabbas. Observe, (1.) How fierce and outrageous they were. Pilate proposed the thing to them calmly, as worthy their mature consideration, but they resolved it in a heat, and gave in their resolution with clamour and noise, and in the utmost confusion. Note, The enemies of Christ's holy religion cry it down, and so hope to run it down; witness the outcry at Ephesus, Acts xix. 34. But those who think the worse of things or persons merely for their being thus exclaimed against have a very small share of constancy and consideration. Nay, there is cause to suspect a deficiency of reason and justice on that side which calls in the assistance of popular tumult. (2.) How foolish and absurd they were, as is intimated in the short account here given of the other candidate: Now Barabbas was a robber, and therefore, [1.] A breaker of the law of God; and yet he shall be spared, rather than one who reproved the pride, avarice, and tyranny of the priests and elders. Though Barabbas be a robber, he will not rob them of Moses's seat, nor of their traditions, and then no matter. [2.] He was an enemy to the public safety and personal property. The clamour of the town is wont to be against robbers (Job xxx. 5, Men cried after them as after a thief), yet here it is for one. Thus those do who prefer their sins before Christ. Sin is a robber, every base lust is a robber, and yet foolishly chosen rather than Christ, who would truly enrich us.

CHAP. XVIII.

THis was the Town-dirch, 2 Chron. 30.14. and had it's name from it's darkneſſe or muddineſſe: for it received the baggage, as a common ſinke. Not farre from hence was the valley of Hinnom, wherein there was kept a continuall fire for the burning of dead carcaſes and other garbadge, as Kimchi notes upon Pſal. 27. Hence hell is called, Gehenna.

Verſe 2. And Judas alſo which betrayed him] No ſuch danger to Chriſts Church by any, as by Apoſtates and falſe brethren, Gal. 2.4. Julian, of a for ward Profeſſour became a furious perſecutour, and drew more from the faith by fraud and craſt, then all the Heathen Emperours before him had done, by their force and cruelty. Eo tantum fine ut ipſi ob mutuam inter ſe contentionem bello inteſt ino oppuſnarent eccleſiā. S. zom. Jac. Reu. de vit. Ponuf p. 176. He perſecuted by his perſwaſions, as Nazianzen witneſſeth, and called back the Biſhops that were baniſhed by Constantine, that, by their mutuall wranglings amongſt themſelves, they might embroyl and overthrow the Church. About the year of grace, 1240. One Robert a Bulgarian fell off from the Waldenſes, and turning to be a Dominican, he proved to be a ſore enemy to the Church of Chriſt, in Flanders eſpecially. Biſhop Bonner was at firſt advanced by Cromwelol, and ſeemed muck to diſlike Stephen Gardiner for his Popery. Act. and Mon. Jol. [illegible: 2 letters]87. His words to Grafton at Paris, when he was newly made Biſhop of London, were theſe, Before God, the greateſt fault that I ever ſound in Stokeſly (who was his Predeceſſour) was for vexing and troubling of poor men for their Religion, as Lobley the Book-binder and others, for having the Scripture in Engliſh: And (God willing) he did not ſo much hinder it, but I will as much further it, &c. Baldwin the renegado, and Bolſecus (that was hire by the Papiſts to write Calvins life) were deſperate enemies to the truth they had formerly profeſſed. Harding, that had conference with Jewell, was once a zealous Proteſtant, Camd. Eliz. fol. 115. and Chaplain to Lady Jane Gray. Campian of S. Johns Colledge in Oxford, Proctour of the Univerſity, 1568. diſſembled the Proteſtant Religion, which he afterwards oppoſed to his utmoſt. So did Parſons, who was of Balioll Colledge, till he was for his diſhoneſty expelled with diſgrace, and fled to the Papiſts. Chriſts greateſt enemies are uſually thoſe of his owne houſe. He was of the ſociety of Jeſus, that betrayed him.

Verſe 3. Judas having then received a band.] Theſe are the enemies beſt arguments, and thoſe they fiee to when ali's done. So the Jeſuites, thoſe ſworn ſword-men of Satan, give out that their weapons are only, preces & loachrymae, prayers and tears; and that it is unlawfull for them to uſe any other, even then when they are about their moſt bloudy deſigns. Camd. Eliz Epiſt. to Read. A late King of France (after his revolt to Popery) being perſwaded by a great Dake about him not to read mit the Jeſuites, which had been juſtly baniſhed the Realm, he anſwered ſuddenly, Give me then ſecurity for my life. He therefore admitted them, even into his boſome, giving them his houſe for a Colledge; and in a publike ſpeech, laying, Vita Devid. Parei operth. praefix. That they were Timothies in the houſe, Chryſoſtomes in the Chair, Auguſtines in the Schools, &c. But what came of it? One of the Popes ſlaughter flaves, by the inſtigation of the Jeſuites, ſtabbed him to the heart: Theſe Timothies proved Judaſſes; theſe Chryſoſtoms, Catilines; theſe Augustines, Aſſaſſines.

Commeth thither with lanterns, Eſſries divine and morall. &c.] Hypocrites may be compared (ſaith one) to thoſe ſouldiers in the Goſpel, which came to ſeek Chriſt with lights and lanterns, as if they meant not to miſſe of him; yea, they brought clubs and ſtaves, as if they would fight for him: Yet, when he ſaith, Here I am, take you up my Croſſe, they ſtumble at the Croſſe, and fall backwards.

Verſe 4. Went forth and ſaid unto them] Met his enemy in the face, after he had pray'd; whereas till then, he feared. See the power of prayer. So Eſther, when ſhe had faſted and pray'd, found her heart fortified againſt fear of man; and putting her life in her hand, went boldly to the King. So Hudſon the Martyr, of whom afore.

Verſe 5. Jeſus of Nazareth. Jeſus ſaith, I am he] They called him Jeſus of Nazareth by way of reproach. He takes it upon him, and wears it for a crown: And ſhould not we do like wiſe?

And Judas alſo, &c.] With what face could the Traitour ſtand there? But being full of the devil, he was paſt grace, and could bluſh no more then a ſack-but, Effraenis & effron que

Verſe 6. Affoon then as he had ſaid, &c.] Here our Saviour let out a little beam of the Majeſty of his Deity, and ſive hundred men fell before him, Q[illegible: 1 letter]id autem judicaturus facier, qui judicandus hoc fecit, Pſal. 1.7. ſaith Auguſtine? The wicked ſhall not ſtand in judgement, Ila. 11.4. ſaith David. Chriſt ſhall ſmite the earth with the rod of his mouth, ſaith Iſaias; and with the breath of his lips ſhall he ſlay the wicked. Godly men (who have but a drop of Chriſts Ocean, a ſpark of his flame) have a daunting preſence. When Valens the perſecuting Emperour came to S Baſil, while he was in holy exerciſes, it ſtruck ſuch a terrour into him, that he reeled, and had fallen, had he not been upheld by thoſe that were with him. And another time, when he ſhould have ſubſcribed an order for St Baſils baniſhment, Triport. b[illegible: 1 letter]ſtor. ſuch a ſudden trembling took his right hand, that he could write never a good letter, whereupon be tore the order for anger, and there was an end of the buſineſſe. When an Officer was ſent to apprechend a godly Deacon at Miltenberg (a Town in the territory of Ments) the Deacon embracing him, ſaid, Salve, frater, frater enimverò meus es, en adſum, transfode me, ſuffoca me, Domine, à me quidem nibil mali expectes. Scultet. Annal. p. 174. Here I am, brother, ſtab me, hang me, doe what you will with me. The officer, as if changed from heaven, anſwered, Sr, you ſhall receive no hurt from me. And when the Boars ran in to kill the Deacon, he delivered him, and ſet him ſafe out of danger. Judas dealt not ſo by Jeſus but as he fell with the reſt, ſo roſe with the reſt, who deſperately went on with their devil. ſh deſign, nothing daunted by their late diſaſter.

Verſe 7. Then asked he them again.] Though ſtruck to the earth, they deſiſt not: So the Sodomites, ſmitten with blindeneſſe, grope for the door. Pharaoh in that palpable darkneſſe, rageth againſt God, and menaceth Moſes, Monoceros interim poteſt, capi non poteſt: Stubborn men will ſooner break then bend. Man, Solinus. faith Polibyus, is held the wrſeſt, but to me he ſeemeth the moſt fooliſh of all creatures: for they, where they have miſcarried once, will not eaſily be driven thither again, Solus home ab evo adaevum peccat fere in y dem: Only man will not be warned, though he have ſoundly ſmarted. We load an Aſſe (ſaith Bernard) and he cares not, becauſe he is an Aſſe, Caver quantum poteſt, quta vitam amct, & mortem timet. and born to bear burdens: But if you would drive him into a ditch, or thruſt him into the fire, he ſhuns it as well as he can, becauſe he loves life, and fears death. Yet ſilly man fears not his eternall bane.

Verſe 8. Let theſe goe their way] This he ſeems to indent with the Jewes, ere he yeelded himſelfe their priſoner. As a good Shepherd, he interpoſeth between the Wolf and the Flock: as an heavenly Eagle, he hath ever an eye to his neſt, when he flieth higheſt from it.

Verſe 9. That the ſaying might be fulfilled, &c.] Chriſt ſpake it of their fouls, it is here applied to their bodies. God hath a fatherly care of both, and will not lay more upon the outward man, then the inward ſhall be enabled to undergoe. Hence that of the Prophet, Behold, I have tried thee, but not as ſilver, Why ſo? Iſa. 48.10. Becauſe Gods weak children having far more droſſe in them, then good oare, would never be able to abide a ſtrict triall.

Verſe 10. The ſervants name was Maelchus] A buſie fellow belike in ſurprizing our Saviour. L Brook. But it was a ſad Omen (ſaith a noble and renowned Writer) that Peters ſword ſhould cut off the ear of Malchus, which ſignifies a King or kingly authority. How the Pope hath lifted up himſelf, [non-Latin text not transcribed], above all that is called Auguſtus, or Emperour, is better known, then that it need be here related. And if Biſhops forbear (ſaith he) to touch the Scepter (which they ſtrive to ſway) it is but as once Mercury ſpared Jupiters thunder-bolts, which he durſt not ſteale, leſt they ſhould roare too loud, or at leaſt burne his fingers.

Verſe 11. Put up thy Sword.] Our Saviour checks him for his inordinate zeal; wherein to be over-carried, is eaſie and ordinaty. The memorable ſtory of William Gardiner Martyr in Portugall, who in the very preſence of the King and his Nobles could not forbear, but fell upon the Cardinall, as he was acting a Maſſe. See Act. and Monum. fol. 1242. So William Flower, upon an Eaſterday at Westminſter, ſeeing a Prieſt miniſtering the Sacrament of the Aitar to the people, ſtruck and wounded him upon the head, and alſo upon his arme and hand with a wood-knife: In the which ſo doing, as indeed he did not well, nor evangelically: ſo being afterwards examined by Biſhop Bonner, he did no leſſe confeſſe his not-well-doing in the ſame, ſubmitting therefore himſelf willingly to puniſhment, when it ſhould come. Howbeit touching his belief in the Sacrament, and Popiſh miniſtration, he neither did, nor would ſubmit himſelf: But when he was rempted to turn, and alſo threatned, he anſwered, Doe what ye will, I am at a point: for the heavens ſhall aſſoon fall, as I will forſake mine opinion, Act. and Mon. Jol. 1430. &c. At his execution, firſt his hand being held up againſt the Stake, was ſtricken off: At the which, ſome that were preſent affirmed, that he ſhrunk not, but once a little ſtirred his ſhoulders.

Verſe 12. Took Jeſus and bound him.] This was done [non-Latin text not transcribed], as Irenaeus hath it, whiles the Deity reſted: for he could as eaſily have delivered himſelf, as he did his Diſciples; but this Sacrifice was to be bound with cords to the Altar: he was pinnioned and manacled, as a malefactour. So was not Abner: His hands were not bound, nor his feet put into the fetters, 2 Sam. 3 34. But Chriſt was bound for our tranſgreſſions, he was bruiſed for our iniquities. Paul by his priviledge was freed from whipping; [non-Latin text not transcribed]. but we by Chriſts bondage, from thoſe chains of darknes, 2 Pet. 2.4. from thoſe ſcourges and ſcorpions in hell.

Verſe 13. And led him away to Annas firſt.] Who would not goe to bed (late though it were) till he had ſeen Chriſt brought bound before him, and then cried out, likely, as Hanuibal did, when he ſaw a pit full of mans bloud, O formoſum ſpectaculum! So Stephen Gardiner would not ſit down to dinner, till the news came of the good Biſhops burnt at Oxford. Then he came out rejoycing, and ſaying to the Duke of Norfolk, Act. and Mon. fol. 1622. Now let us goe to Dinner: but it was the laſt that ever he eat for it. Shall they eſcape by iniquitie? No: In anger caſt them down, ô God, Pſal. 56.7.

Verſe 14. Now Caiaphas was he, &c.] So Balaam, the devils Spelman, ſpake excellently of the Star of Jacob. See the Notes on Chap. 11.51, 52.

Verſe 15. That Diſciple was known to the high-Prieſt.] Perhaps for that he and his father Zebedee were wont to ſerve the fat Prieſt with the beſt and daintieſt fiſh: (for this other Diſciple was John, who had firſt fled with the reſt, and now came ſculking in, De nat. anima. to ſee what would become of his Maſter.) Of the Aſſe-fiſh Ariſtotle affirmeth, that he, of all other creatures, hath his heart in his belly: Such a thing was this Prieſt.

Verſe 16. But Peter ſtood at the door] Better he had kept him further off. He that will not fall into the ditch, muſt not walk too near the brimme. Peter might better have beſtowed himſelf ſomewhere elſe: Longè utilius fuiſſet gemere, & precari in obſcuro aliquo angulo, ſaith Muſculus. It had been better for him to have been praying in a corner, then thus to put himſelf upon a danger, unleſſe he had known himſelf the ſtronger. Luther comforteth the men of Miltenberg by an Epiſtle; and becauſe they were forbidden to meet and talk together, about matters of Religion, upon pain of death, Qui infir miores ſunt, tacitè in Domino gaudeant, Deum que rogent, ut ſe quo que animet ad publicam veritat que proſeſſionem. he adviſeth thoſe of them that were ſtrong in the ſpirit, to doe their duty, notwithſtanding the danger. But for the weaker ſort, he exhorteth them to rejoyce ſecretly in the Lord, and to pray to him for further ſtrength, that they may be able to make a bold and wiſe profeſſion of his truth.

Verſe 17. He ſaith, I am not.] Falſe diſſimulation is true deniall. A ſilly wench is too hard for this ſtout ſtickler, who was alway, Melius animatus quam armatus, as one obſerveth of him: Sir Elias fulminator ad Jeſubelis minas trepidat, factus ſeipſo imbecillior. Thou alſo ſtandeſt by faith: Rom. 11. be not high-minded, but fear.

Verſe 18. And Warmed himſelf.] But whiles he warmed without, he cooled within. Evil company is a great quench-coal, an ill air for zeal to breathe in, it caſts a damp. For the abundance of iniquity, Mat 24. the love of many waxeth cold. Peters evil example was a compulſion to other good people, Gal. 2.14. What marvell then if the ſwearing, curſing ſouldiers compel'd him to doe the like? They were the trunks, thorow which the devil delivered himſelfe, jeering at, and railing upon Chriſt, no doubt, &c.

Verſe 19. Alſted Chron. Aventin, An. nal l. 3. Cade of the Church. Asked Jeſus of his Diſciples] Queſtioned him in the ſpirituall Court firſt, as an heretike; as afterwards in the temporall Court, for a ſeditious perſon. So the Papiſts condemned married Prieſts for Nicolaitans, in the Synod of Millain, anno 1067. Virgilius a Germane Biſhop, and a great Mathematician, they condemned for an heretike, for affirming that there were Antipodes. Paulus 2. Iac. Reu de vit. Pontiſ p. 139. Act and Mon. fol. 1550. Pope, pronounced them heretikes that did but name the name Academy, either in jeſt or in earneſt. Innocent 2. condemned Arnoldus Brixius of hereſie, for ſaying that the Clergy ſhould have their temporalties taken away, and be tied to their ſpirituals only. Bonner objected to Philpot the Martyr that he found written in his book, In me Joanne Philpotto ubi abundavit peccatum, ſuperabundavit & gratia. And when the Biſhop of Worcecter exhorted Philpot, Ibid. 1637. before he began to ſpeak, to pray to God for grace: Nay, my Lord of Worcester, ſaid Bonner, you doe not well to exhort him to make any prayer; for this is the thing theſe heretikes have a ſingular pride in, that they can often make their vain prayers, in the which they glory much: For in this point they are like to certain arrant heretikes, of whom Pliny makes mention, Plin Epiſt. that they ſing Antelucanos hymnos, &c. Was not this well aimed? Thoſe he ſpoke of were the Primitive Chriſtians, whom Pliny excuſeth to Trajan the Perſecutour. But it is eaſie for malice to make hereſie what it pleaſeth, when it is armed with power, and can make havock at pleaſure.

Verſe 20. Veritas abſconde crubeſcit. I spake openly to the world.] Truth is bold and bare faced: when hereſie hides it ſelf, and loatnes the light. What ſaid John Frith, Martyr, to the Archbiſhops men, that would have let him goe and ſhift for himſelf? If you ſhould both leave me here, and goe to Croydon, declaring to the Biſhops, that you had loſt Frith, Act. and Mon. fol. 19 7. I would ſurely follow as faſt after as I might, and bring them news that I had found and brought Frith again. Do ye think that I am afraid to declare my opinion to the Biſhops of England in a manifeſt truth?

Verſe 21. Why askeſt thou me?] We are to be ready alwaies to give an anſwer, to thoſe that ask as a reaſon of our hope, ſo they doe it to learn of us, and not to inſnare us. Thus I kept the banddogs at ſtaves end (ſaid Nicolas Shetterden, Act. and Mon. ſot. 1575. Martyr) not as thinking to eſcape them, but that I would ſee the Foxes leap above ground for my bloud, if they can reach it (ſo it be the will of God) yet we ſhall ſee them gape and leap for it. Mr Hawks, Martyr, asked a Parſon that examined him, what kin he was to the weather-cock of Pauls? Ibid 1445. And told one Miles Huggard a Hoſier in Pudding-lane, who began to queſtion him, that he could better skill to eat a pudding, and make an hoſe, then in Scripture either to anſwer or oppoſe.

Verſe 22. One of the Officers.] Becauſe our Saviour gave not the high Prieſt his uſuall titles, but dealt freely with him, this officer to curry favour, Veluti pontificy honoris vindex, beats our Saviour with his hand, or ſtick, and is the better thought of. Like Maſter, like man. Disploſo ſclopeto a Vicarij ſamuto, ſed fruſtraimpetitur. Scultet. So the Biſhop of Geneva's ſervant diſcharged his Piſtoll at Farellus (that faithfull man of God) when he was convented before his Lord; but by Gods good providence, miſſed him. Great mens vices goe as ſeldome unattended, as their perſons: they ſhall be ſure of ſuch about them, Ne leonum laudibus murem obruas. as will lick up their ſpettle, and load the Mouſe with the Lions praiſes.

Verſe 23. If I have spoken evil.] Chriſt bears with the officers inſolency, but forbears not to clear his own innocency. We muſt, when aſperſed, labour as the eclipſed Moon, by keeping our motion, to wade out of the ſhadow, and recover our former ſplendour.

Verſe 24. Bound, to Caiaphas the high-Prieſt.] Who ſhould have done our Saviour better juſtice, then to have ſuffred him, bound and uncondemned, to be injuriouſly beaten before his face. But the times were then law leſſe and licentious for the ſans of the people. Tales ſunt principum mores, quales ſubditorum humores, ut malo nodo non deſit malus cuneus.

Verſe 25. He denied it, and ſaid, I am not.] Take heed by this example, Patres nos inſtruunt tum docentes, tum labantes, ſaith Auguſtin. Seeſt thou ſuch as Peter to make ſhipwrack? Look well to thy tackling, They that will not profeſſe Chriſt (unleſſe they repent with Peter, which Stephen Gardener ſaid at his death, Act. and Mon. fol. 190[illegible: 1 letter]. that he could not) ſhall be ſorted with ſuch in participation of plagues, as, through exceſſe of pain, and defect of patience, gnaw their own tongues, Revel. 16.10.

Verſe 26. Whoſe ear Peter cut off.] A great mercy it was, that Peter had not been then hewed in a hundred peeces, by the ruffianly ſouldiers. But God had deſigned him to a further ſervice. My times are in thy hand, ſaith David. They were deceived, that ſwore to kill Paul by ſuch an hour, Act. 23.12.

Verſe 27. Peter then denied again.] He that is fallen down one round of hels ladder, knowes not where he ſhall ſtoppe or ſtay, till he come to the bottome. Sin is of an encroaching nature; modeſt and maidenly at firſt; but yeeld to it once, and there's no hoe with it.

The Cockcrew.] And withall Chriſt looked back upon him, as a peece of his ſufferings, with [non-Latin text not transcribed], what thou my friend, Peter? Scipio had rather Annibal ſhould eat his heart with ſalt, then Laelius give him a croſſe word.

Verſe 28. Leſt they ſhould be defiled.] Putid hypocriſie! they ſtand upon legall defilements, and care not to defile their conſciences with innocent blond. [non-Latin text not transcribed]. What is this but to ſtrain at a gnat, and ſwallow a Camel? So Saul ſeemed to make a hainous matter of eating the fleſh with the bloud, 1 Sam. 14.33. when it was nothing with him to ſpill the bloud of innocent Jonathan. Nay, he was ſo ſcrupulous, that he would not ſo much as name a guilty man, or ſinner, but, in caſting of lots, in ſtead of ſaying; ſhew the nocent on guilty, he ſaid, ſhew the innocent or upright perſon, as Tremellius reads it, yet at the ſame time (as is well obſerved) he made no conſcience of bloody baths. So Doeg was detained before the Lord, either becauſe it was the Sabbath, or his vow was not finiſhed, &c. But when he went thence, he became deaths-man to the Lords Prieſts.

Verſe 29. Pilate then went ant unto them.] It was much he would gratifie them ſo farre in their ſtand further off, for I am holier then thou; Breerw. Enq. p. [illegible: 1 letter]8. that he would yeeld to their ſuperſtition, which he could not but contemn. But the very Turk, ſo the Chriſtians pay him his yearly tribute (which is one fourth part of their encreaſe, and a Sultan for every poll) permitteth them the liberty of their religion.

Verſe 30. If he were not a malefactour] Why? What evil had he done them? Might he not have ſaid to them as Themiſtocles to his Athenians? Are ye weary of receiving ſo many benefits by one man?

Verſe 31. It is not lawfull for us.] That is, upon this or any ſuch like day, upon an holy-day, or holy-day-Eeve. For otherwiſe they had power, or at leaſt took it at their pleaſure; as when they ſtoned Stephen, Act. 7. and would have killed Paul, Act. 24. But note, that they would ſeem to do all according to Law by any means; ſo would their ſucceſſours, the Catholikes. Which, if it be ſo (ſaith M. Fox) how did they then to Anne Askew, Act. and Mon. fol. 1392. whom they firſt condemned to death, and then ſet her on the tack? By what law did they call up Mr Hooper, and priſon him for the Queens debt (when the Queen in very deed did owe him fourſcore pound) and kept him a year and half in priſon, and gave him never a peny? By what Law did Biſhop Bonner condemn and burn Richard Mekins, a lad of fifteen years, when the firſt Jury had quit him, and at the ſtake he revoked all hereſie, and praiſed the ſaid Bonner to be a good man: and alſo having him in priſon, would not ſuffer his father and mother to come to him, to comfort their own childe? What Law had they to put Mr Rogers our Protomartyr in priſon, when he did neither preach nor read lecture, after the time of the Queens inhibition? And when they had kept him in his own houſe half a year, being not deprived of any living, yet would not let him have one half-peny of his owne means to relieve him, his wife and eleven children? By what Law was Thomas Tomkins hand burned, and after his body conſumed to aſhes? What good Law or honeſty was there to burn the three poor women at Garneſ[illegible: 1 letter]e, with the Infant-childe falling out of the mothers womb, when as they all before recanted their words and opinions, and were never abjured before? So, what right or order of Law did Stephen Gardener follow, in troubling and impriſoning Judge Hales, when he had done nothing neither againſt Gods Law nor mans, proceeding in order of Law againſt certain preſumptuous perſons, which, both before the Law, and againſt the Law then in force, took upon them to ſay their Maſſe?

Verſe 32. Signifying what death he ſhould die.] This ſhews that the Jewes had power to put to death, but by a providence he was brought to Pilate, that, according to the manner of the Romans he might be crucified a that kinde of death being not, otherwiſe, in uſe among the Jews. Hence our Lord is ſaid to have been crucified at Rome, Rev. 11.8.

Verſe 33. Entred into the judgement-hall again.] For without among the people, there was nothing but clamour and confuſion: much like to that regnum Cyclopum, ubi [non-Latin text not transcribed], Pilate therefore retires himſelfe into the palace, that he might more ſedately ſet himſelf to ſift the buſineſſe.

Verſe 34. Sayeſt thou this of thy ſelf,] As who ſhould ſay; If thou doeſt this of thy ſelf, what reaſon is it that thou ſhouldſt be both Judge and witnes? If others have done it, why are not mine accuſers brought face to face? If to be accuſed be enough to make a man guilty, none ſhall be innocent. Judges are to proceed ſecundum allegata & probata.

Verſe 35. Am I a Jew?] This he asketh in ſcorn of that Nation; hatefull among the Heathens for their difference from them in Religion. Caius the Emperour caſt them out with their Oratour Philo, Serab, Geog. who came to make Apology for them againſt Appion of Alexandria their adverſary and accuſer. Strabo of meer ſpite, ſaith, that Judea is a dry and barren countrey, when the Scripture calleth it a land flowing with milk and honey, plenty and dainty; and Tacitus cannot but grant as much. Heyl. Geng. Au. de[illegible: 1 letter]iv, Dei Florus calleth the Temple at Jeruſalem, impiae gentis arcanum, a Sanctuary for rogues, as the Papiſts fay of Geneva. Seneca jeers them for caſting away the ſeventh part of their time upon a weekly Sabbath. Juvenal plaies upon their circumciſion. Lib [non-Latin text not transcribed]. [illegible: 1 letter]ap. 5 Ta[illegible: 1 letter]. Ann[illegible: 1 letter]t. [illegible: 1 letter]. 21. Plutarch tels a long Story of their feaſt of Tabernacles, which, ſaith he, they keep in honour of Batcbus. Tacitus ſaith, they were called Aſinarij, becauſe they worſhipped the golden head of an Aſſe, &c. No wonder though profane Pilate diſdeign to be held a Jew, when they were thus traduced.

Verſe 36. My kingdome is not of this world.] Chriſt could not be received as a god into the Pantheon at Rome, for that he wanted worſhippers, preached poverty, and choſe mean men for his Diſciples. Domitian the Emperour, after he had baniſhed John into [illegible: 2 letters]thmos, and Damicilla Flavia his own ſſiters daughter, with many more, into Pontus, and put divers to death for that they were Chriſtians, he commanded all ſuch Jews as he could finde, to be put to death, that were of the ſtocke of David. Amongſt whom meeting with ſome Chriſtians alſo, that were allied to Chriſt, and underſtanding that they were poor, harmleſſe people, he diſmiſſed them, and by Proclamation forbad any more to be martyred. Euſ[illegible: 1 letter]b. l. 7 c. 20.

Verſe 37. That I ſhould bear witneſſe of the truth.] Our Saviour ſpeaketh religiouſly to a profane perſon: So doth Jacob to Eſau. Each Countrey-man is knowne by his language. Gen. 33.5. God will turne to all his people a pure lip, Zephan. 3.9. They are none of his that can ſhift their ſailes to the ſitting of every winde, tune their fiddles to other mens baſe, and, as the Planet Mercury, be good in conjunction with good, and bad with bad.

Verſe 38. What's truth?] In a ſcornefull, profane manner. As indeed profane ſpirits cannot heare favoury words, but they turne them off with a ſcorne. What's truth? Fastidientis atque irridentis vox, non interrogantis, ſaith Beza. Some thinke it is, vox admirantis. As if Pilate wondered at Chriſt, that when his life was in queſtion he ſhould talke of truth, q. d. Your life is in danger, and talke you of truth? Politicians thinke Religion niceneſſe. How ever it was, or with what minde ſoever, out hee goes, and ſtaies not an anſwer: As Saul bad the Prieſt bring to him the Arke, but, ere that could be done, drawes forth his Armie, 1 Sam. 14.

Verſe 39. But ye have a cuſtome] An ungaine, ungodly cuſtome it was, Prov. 17.15. What ever were the ground of it. Some thinke it was in memory of Jonathan, In iſt a conſuetudine turpe & craſſum ſuit vitium Calv. Goodw. Antiq. Heb p. 39. Prov. 28.97. reſcued from his father by the people. Others, that the Feaſt might be celebrated with the greater joy and gladneſſe. Others, more probably, in remembrance of their deliverance from the Aegyptian bondage. But why ſhould any Barabbas ſcape by it? A bloody man ſhall flee to the pit, and no man may ſtay him.

Verſe 40. Now Barabbas was a robber] And a murtherer too, Act. 3.14. yet preferred before Chriſt, who was alſo crucified in the midſt of two theeves, as the worſt of the three. Thus he was peccatorum maximus, both by imputation, for he bore our ſinnes, which were all made to meet upon him, Iſa. 53.6. And by reputation, for he was numbred with the tranſgreſſours, ver. 12. and made his grave with the wicked, verſ. 9.

The brook Cedron. This was a small stream that flowed to the east of Jerusalem, through the valley of Jehoshaphat, and divided the city from the Mount of Olives. It was also called Kidron and Kedron. In summer it is almost dry. The word used here by the evangelist--χειμαρρου denotes properly a water-stream (from χειμα shower or water, and ρεω, ροδς, to flow, flowing), and the idea is that of a stream that was swollen by rain or by the melting of the snow (Passow, Lex.). This small rivulet runs along on the east of Jerusalem till it is joined by the water of the pool of Siloam, and the water that flows down on the west side of the city through the valley of Jehoshaphat, and then goes off in a south-east direction to the Dead Sea. (See the Map of the Environs of Jerusalem in vol. i.) Over this brook David passed when he fled from Absalom, 2Sam 15:23. It is often mentioned in the Old Testament, 1Kgs 15:13; 2Chr 15:16; 2Chr 30:14; 2Kgs 23:6,12.

Where was a garden. On the west side of the Mount of Olives. This was called Gethsemane. Mt 26:36. It is probable that this was the property of some wealthy man in Jerusalem--perhaps some friend of the Saviour. It was customary for the rich in great cities to have country-seats in the vicinity. This, it seems, was so accessible that Jesus was accustomed to visit it, and yet so retired as to be a suitable place for devotion.

(a) "Cedron" 2Sam 15:23

Jesus ofttimes resorted thither. For what purpose he went there is not declared, but it is probable that it was for retirement and prayer. He had no home in the city, and he sought this place, away from the bustle and confusion of the capital, for private communion with God. Every Christian should have some place--be it a grove, a room, or a garden--where he may be alone and offer his devotions to God. We are not told much of the private habits of Jesus, but we are permitted to know so much of him as to be assured that he was accustomed to seek for a place of retirement, and during the great feasts of the Jews the Mount of Olives was the place which he chose, Lk 21:37, Mt 21:17, Jn 8:1.

A band. Mt 26:47 Mt 27:27; John passes over the agony of Jesus in the garden, probably because it was so fully described by the other evangelists.

Lanterns, &c. This was the time of the full moon, but it might have been cloudy, and their taking lights with them shows their determination to find him.

(b) "Judas, then" Mt 26:47, Mk 14:43, Lk 22:47

They went backward, &c. The cause of their retiring in this manner is not mentioned. Various things might have produced it. The frank, open, and fearless manner in which Jesus addressed them may have convinced them of his innocence, and deterred them from prosecuting their wicked attempt. His disclosure of himself was sudden and unexpected; and while they perhaps anticipated that he would make an effort to escape, they were amazed at his open and bold profession. Their consciences reproved them for their crimes, and probably the firm, decided, and yet mild manner in which Jesus addressed them, the expression of his unequalled power in knowing how to find the way to the consciences of men, made them feel that they were in the presence of more than mortal man. There is no proof that there was here any miraculous power, any mere physical force, and to suppose that there was greatly detracts from the moral sublimity of the scene.

(e) "they went backward"

Let these go their way. These apostles. This shows his care and love even in the hour of danger. He expected to die. They were to carry the news of his death to the ends of the earth. Hence he, the faithful Captain of salvation, went foremost into trials; he, the Good Shepherd, secured the safety of the flock, and went before them into danger. By the question which he asked those who came out against him, he had secured the safety of his apostles. He was answered that they sought for him. He demanded that, agreeably to their declaration, they should take him only, and leave his followers at liberty. The wisdom, caution, and prudence of Jesus forsook him in no peril, however sudden, and in no circumstances, however difficult or trying.

(f) "I am he" Isa 53:6, Eph 5:25

The saying. Jn 17:12. As he had kept them for more than three years, so he still sought their welfare, even when his death was near.

(g) "Of them which thou gavest" Jn 17:12

Mt 26:51, Mt 26:52.

The servant's name was Malchus. His name is mentioned by neither of the other evangelists, nor is it said by the other evangelists who was the disciple that gave the blow. It is probable that both Peter and the servant were alive when the other gospels were written.

(h) "Then Simon Peter" Mt 26:51, Mk 14:47, Lk 22:49,50

To Annas first. Probably his house was nearest to them, and he had great authority and influence in the Jewish nation. He had been himself a long time high-priest; he had had five sons who had successively enjoyed the office of high-priest, and that office was now filled by his son-in-law. It was of importance, therefore, to obtain his sanction and counsel in their work of evil.

That same year. Jn 11:14.

(k) "Annas" Lk 3:2 (1) "that same year" "And Annas send Christ bound unto Caiphas, the high priest," Jn 18:24

Which gave counsel, &c. Jn 11:49,50. This is referred to her, probably, to show how little prospect there was that Jesus would have justice done him in the hands of a man who had already pronounced on the case.

(l) "gave counsel to the Jews. Jn 11:49,50

Mt 26:57, Mt 26:58.

Another disciple. Not improbably John. Some critics, however, have supposed that this disciple was one who dwelt at Jerusalem, and who, not being a Galilean, could enter the palace without suspicion. John, however, mentions the circumstance of his being known to them, to show why it was that he was not questioned as Peter was. It is not probable that any danger resulted from its being known that he was a follower of Jesus, or that any harm was meditated on them for this. The questions asked Peter were not asked by those in authority, and his apprehensions which led to his denial were groundless.

The high-priest then asked Jesus of his disciples. To ascertain their number and power. The charge on which they wished to arraign him was that of sedition, or of rebellion against Caesar. To make that plausible, it was necessary to show that he had made so many disciples as to form a strong and dangerous faction; but, as they had no direct proof of that, the high-priest insidiously and improperly attempted to draw the Saviour into a confession. Of this he was aware, and referred him to the proper source of evidence--his open, undisguised conduct before the world.

His doctrine. His teaching. The sentiments that he inculcated. The object was doubtless to convict him of teaching sentiments that tended to subvert the Mosaic institutions, or that were treasonable against the Roman government. Either would have answered the design of the Jews, and they doubtless expected that he--an unarmed and despised Galilean, now completely in their power--would easily be drawn into confessions which art and malice could use to procure his condemnation.

Openly to the world. If his doctrine had tended to excite sedition and tumult, if he had aimed to overthrow the government, he would have trained his friends in secret; he would have retired from public view, and would have laid his plans in private. This is the case with all who attempt to subvert existing establishments. Instead of that, he had proclaimed his views to all. He had done it in every place of public concourse--in the synagogue and in the temple. He here speaks the language of one conscious of innocence and determined to insist on his rights.

Always resort. Constantly assemble. They were required to assemble there three times in a year, and great multitudes were there constantly.

In secret, &c. He had taught no private or concealed doctrine. He had taught nothing to his disciples which he had not himself taught in public and commanded them to do, Mt 10:27, Lk 12:3.

(n) "I spoke openly to the world" Lk 4:15, Jn 7:14,26,28, 8:2 (o) "in secret have I said nothing" Acts 26:26

Why askest thou me? Ask them, &c. Jesus here insisted on his rights, and reproves the high-priest for his unjust and illegal manner of extorting a confession from him. If he had done wrong, or taught erroneous and seditious doctrines, it was easy to prove it, and the course which he had a right to demand was that they should establish the charge by fair and incontrovertible evidence. We may here learn,

1st. That, though Jesus was willing to be reviled and persecuted, yet he also insisted that justice should be done him.

2nd. He was conscious of innocence, and he had been so open in his conduct that he could appeal to the vast multitudes which had heard him as witnesses in his favour.

3rd. It is proper for us, when persecuted and reviled, meekly but firmly to insist on our rights, and to demand that justice shall be done us. Laws are made to protect the innocent as well as to condemn the guilty.

4th. Christians, like their Saviour, should so live that they may confidently appeal to all who have known them as witnesses of the sincerity, purity, and rectitude of their lives, 1Pet 4:13-16.

One of the officers. One of the inferior officers, or those who attended on the court.

With the palm of his hand. This may mean, wave him a blow either with the open hand or with a rod"--the Greek does not determine which. In whatever way it was done, it was a violation of all law and justice. Jesus had showed no disrespect for the office of the high-priest, and if he had, this was not the proper way to punish it. The Syriac reads thus: "Smote the cheek of Jesus." The Vulgate and Arabic: "Gave him a blow."

(2) "with the palm of his hand" or, "with a rod"

Spoken evil. In my answer to the high-priest. If there was any disrespect to the office, and want of regard for the law which appointed him, then testify to the fact, and let punishment be inflicted according to the law; comp. Ex 22:28.

But if well, an accused person is on trial he is under the protection of the court, and has a right to demand that all legal measures shall be taken to secure his rights. On this right Jesus insisted, and thus showed that, though he had no disposition to take revenge, yet he claimed that, when arraigned, strict justice should be done. This shows that his precept that when we are smitten on one cheek we should turn the other (Mt 5:39), is consistent with a firm demand that justice should be done us. That precept refers, besides, rather to private matters than to judicial proceedings. It does not demand that, when we are unjustly arraigned or assaulted, and when the law is in our favour, we should sacrifice our rights to the malignant accuser. Such a surrender would be injustice to the law and to the community, and be giving legal triumph to the wicked, and destroying the very end of all law. In private matters this effect would not follow, and we should there bear injuries without reviling or seeking for vengeance.

(q) "but if well" 1Pet 2:19-23

Comp. Jn 18:13 with Mt 26:57.

(3) "Now Annas" Jn 18:13

Mt 27:1,2. Mt 26:72, also Mt 26:73-74.

See Mt 27:1,2.

Hall of judgment. The praetorium--the same word that in Mt 27:27, is translated common hall. Mt 27:27. It was the place where the Roman praetor, or governor, heard and decided cases brought before him. Jesus had been condemned by the Sanhedrim, and pronounced guilty of death (Mt 26:66); but they had not power to carry their sentence into execution (Jn 18:31), and they therefore sought that he might be condemned and executed by Pilate.

Lest they should be defiled. They considered the touch of a Gentile to be a defilement, and on this occasion, at least, seemed to regard it as a pollution to enter the house of a Gentile. They took care, therefore, to guard themselves against what they considered ceremonial pollution, while they were wholly unconcerned at the enormous crime of putting the innocent Saviour to death, and imbruing their hands in their Messiah's blood. Probably there is not anywhere to be found among men another such instance of petty regard to the mere ceremonies of the law and attempting to keep from pollution, at the same time that their hearts were filled with malice, and they were meditating the most enormous of all crimes. But it shows us how much more concerned men will be at the violation of the mere forms and ceremonies of religion than at real crime, and how they endeavour to keep their consciences at ease amid their deeds of wickedness by the observance of some of the outward ceremonies of religion--by mere sanctimoniousness.

That they might eat the passover. Mt 26:2, Mt 26:17. This defilement, produced by contact with a Gentile, they considered as equivalent to that of the contact of a dead body (Lev 22:4-6; Nu 5:2), and as disqualifying them to partake of the passover in a proper manner. The word translated passover means properly the paschal lamb which was slain and eaten on the observance of this feast. This rite Jesus had observed with his disciples the day before this. It has been supposed by many that he anticipated the usual time of observing it one day, and was crucified on the day on which the Jews observed it; but this opinion is improbable. The very day of keeping the ordinance was specified in the law of Moses, and it is not probable that the Saviour departed from the commandment. All the circumstances, also, lead us to suppose that he observed it at the usual time and manner, Mt 26:17,19. The only passage which has led to a contrary opinion is this in John; but here the word passover does not, of necessity, mean the paschal lamb. It probably refers to the feast which followed the sacrifice of the lamb, and which continued seven days. Comp. Nu 28:16,17. The whole feast was called the Passover, and they were unwilling to defile themselves, even though the paschal lamb had been killed, because it would disqualify them for participating in the remainder of the ceremonies (Lightfoot).

(s) "Then led they Jesus" Mt 27:2, Mk 15:1, Lk 23:1 (4) "the hall of judgment" or, "Pilate's house" (t) "lest they should be defiled" Acts 10:28

If he were not a malefactor. A violator of the law. If we had not determined that he was such, and was worthy of death, Mt 26:66. From this it appears that they did not deliver him up to be tried, but hoped that Pilate would at once give sentence that he should be executed according to their request. It is probable that in ordinary cases the Roman governor was not accustomed to make very strict inquiry into the justice of the sentence. The Jewish Sanhedrim tried causes and pronounced sentence, and the sentence was usually approved by the governor; but in this case Pilate, evidently contrary to their expectations, proceeded himself to rehear and retry the cause. He had doubtless heard of the miracles of Jesus. He seems to have been strongly prepossessed with the belief of his innocence. He knew that they had delivered him from mere envy (Mt 27:18), and hence he inquired of them the nature of the case, and the kind of charge which they expected to substantiate against him.

Judge him, &c. The Jews had not directly informed him that they had judged him and pronounced him worthy of death. Pilate therefore tells them to inquire into the case; to ascertain the proof of his guilt, and to decide on what the law of Moses pronounced. It has been doubted whether this gave them the power of putting him to death, or whether it was not rather a direction to them to inquire into the case, and inflict on him, if they judged him guilty, the mild punishment which they were yet at liberty to inflict on criminals. Probably the former is intended. As they had already determined that in their view this case demanded the punishment of death, so in their answer to Pilate they implied that they had pronounced on it, and that he ought to die. They still, therefore, pressed it on his attention, and refused to obey his injunction to judge him.

It is not lawful, &c. The Jews were accustomed to put persons to death still in a popular tumult (Acts 7:59,60), but they had not the power to do it in any case in a regular way of justice. When they first laid the plan of arresting the Saviour, they did it to kill him (Mt 26:4); but whether they intended to do this secretly, or in a tumult, or by the concurrence of the Roman governor, is uncertain. The Jews themselves say that the power of inflicting capital punishment was taken away about forty years before the destruction of the temple; but still it is probable that in the time of Christ they had the power of determining on capital cases in instances that pertained to religion (Josephus, Antiq., b. xiv. ch. 10, 2; comp. Jewish Wars, b. vt. ch. 2,  4). In this case, however, it is supposed that their sentence was to be confirmed by the Roman governor. But it is admitted on all hands that they had not this power in the case of seditions, tumults, or treason against the Roman government. If they had this power in the case of blasphemy and irreligion, they did not dare to exert it here, because they were afraid of tumult among the people (Mt 26:5); hence they sought to bring in the authority of Pilate. To do this, they endeavoured to make it appear that it was a case of sedition and treason, and one which therefore demanded the interference of the Roman governor. Hence it was on this charge that they arraigned him, Lk 23:2. Thus a tumult might be avoided, and the odium of putting him to death they expected would fall, not on themselves, but on Pilate.

(u) "It is not lawful" Gen 49:10, Eze 21:27

That the saying of Jesus, &c. To wit, that he would be delivered into the hands of the Gentiles and be crucified, Mt 20:19. Neither of these things would have happened if he had been put to death in the way that the Jews first contemplated, Mt 26:4. Though it should be admitted that they had the power, in religious cases, to do this, yet in such a case it would not have been done, as Jesus predicted, by the Gentiles; and even if it should be admitted that they had the right to take life, yet they had not the right to do it by crucifixion. This was particularly a Roman punishment. And thus it was ordered, in the providence of God, that the prediction of Jesus in both these respects was fulfilled.

(v) "That the saying of Jesus" Mt 20:19, Lk 18:32,33

Art thou the King of the Jews? This was after they had accused him of perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, Lk 23:2,3.

Of thyself. From any conviction of your own mind, or any apprehension of danger. During all the time in which you have been praetor, have you seen anything in me that has led you to apprehend sedition or danger to the Roman power? This evidently was intended to remind Pilate that nothing was proved against him, and to caution him against being influenced by the malicious accusations of others. Jesus demanded a just trial, and claimed that Pilate should not be influenced by any reports that he might have heard of him.

Am I a Jew? Am l likely to be influenced by Jewish prejudices and partialities? Am not I, being a Roman, likely to judge impartially, and to decide on the accusations without being biassed by the malignant charges of the accusers?

Thine own nation &c. In this Pilate denies that it was from anything thing that he had observed that Jesus was arraigned. He admits that it was from the accusation of others; but then he tells the Saviour that the charge was one of moment, and worthy of the deepest attention. It had come from the very nation of Jesus, from his own countrymen, and from the highest authority among the people. As such it demanded consideration, and Pilate besought him to tell him what he had done--that is, what there had been in his conduct that had given occasion for this charge.

(w) "own nation" Jn 19:11, Acts 3:13

My kingdom, &c. The charge on which Jesus was arraigned was that of laying claim to the office of a king. He here substantially admits that he did claim to be a king, but not in the sense in which the Jews understood it. They charged him with attempting to set up an earthly kingdom, and of exciting sedition against Caesar. In reply to this, Jesus says that his kingdom is not of this world--that is, it is not of the same nature as earthly kingdoms. It was not originated for the same purpose, or conducted on the same plan. He immediately adds a circumstance in which they differ. The kingdoms of the world are defended by arms; they maintain armies and engage in wars. If the kingdom of Jesus had been of this kind, he would have excited the multitudes that followed him to prepare for battle. He would have armed the hosts that attended him to Jerusalem. He would not have been alone and unarmed in the garden of Gethsemane. But though he was a king, yet his dominion was over the heart, subduing evil passions and corrupt desires, and bringing the soul to the love of peace and unity.

Not from hence. That is, not from this world.

(x) "answered" 1Timm 6:13 (y) "My kingdom" Ps 45:3,6, Isa 9:6,7, Dan 2:44, 7:14, Zech 9:9, Lk 12:14 Jn 6:15, Rom 14:17, Col 1:13

Art thou a king then? Dost thou admit the charge in any sense, or dost thou lay claim to a kingdom of any kind?

Thou sayest, &c. This is a form of expression denoting affirmation. It is equivalent to yes.

That I am a king. This does not mean simply that Pilate affirmed that he was a king; it does not appear that he had done this; but it means, "Thou affirmest the truth; thou declarest what is correct, for I am, a king." I am a king in a certain sense, and do not deny it.

To this end, &c. Comp. Jn 3:11,12, &c. Jesus does not here affirm that he was born to reign, or that this was the design of his coming; but it was to bear witness to and to exhibit the truth. By this he showed what was the nature of his kingdom. It was not to assert power; not to collect armies; not to subdue nations in battle. It was simply to present truth to men, and to exercise dominion only by the truth. Hence the only power put forth in restraining the wicked, in convincing the sinner, in converting the heart, in guiding and leading his people, and in sanctifying them, is that which is produced by applying truth to the mind. Men are not forced or compelled to be Christians. They are made to see that they are sinners, that God is merciful, that they need a Redeemer, and that the Lord Jesus is fitted to their case, and yield themselves then wholly to his reign. This is all the power ever used in the kingdom of Christ, and no men in his church have a right to use any other. Alas! how little have persecutors remembered this! And how often, under the pretence of great regard for the kingdom of Jesus, have bigots attempted by force and flames to make all men think as they do! We see here the importance which Jesus attached to truth. It was his sole business in coming into the world, He had no other end than to establish it. We therefore should value it, and seek for it as for hid treasures, Prov 23:23.

Every one, &c. See Jn 8:47.

(z) "I should bear witness" Isa 55:4, Rev 1:5, 3:14 (a) "Every one that is of the truth" Jn 8:47, 1Jn 4:6

What is truth? This question was probably asked in contempt, and hence Jesus did not answer it. Had the question been sincere, and had Pilate really sought it as Nicodemus had done (Jn 3:1), Jesus would not have hesitated to explain to him the nature of his kingdom. They were now alone in the judgment-hall (Jn 18:33), and as soon as Pilate had asked the question, without waiting for an answer, he went out. It is evident that he was satisfied, from the answer of Jesus (Jn 18:36,37), that he was not a king in the sense in which the Jews accused him; that he would not endanger the Roman government, and consequently that he was innocent of the charge alleged against him. He regarded him, clearly, as a fanatic--poor, ignorant, and deluded, but innocent and not dangerous. Hence he sought to release him; and hence, in contempt, he asked him this question, and immediately went out, not expecting an answer. This question had long agitated the world. It was the great subject of inquiry in all the schools of the Greeks. Different sects of philosophers had held different opinions, and Pilate now, in derision, asked him, whom he esteemed an ignorant fanatic, whether he could solve this long-agitated question. He might have had an answer. Had he patiently waited in sincerity, Jesus would have told him what it was. Thousands ask the question in the same way. They have a fixed contempt for the Bible; they deride the instructions of religion; they are unwilling to investigate and to wait at the gates of wisdom; and hence, like Pilate, they remain ignorant of the great Source of truth, and die in darkness and in error. All might find truth if they would seek it; none ever will find it if they do not apply for it to the great source of light--the God of truth, and seek it patiently in the way in which he has chosen to communicate it to mankind. How highly should we prize the Bible! And how patiently and prayerfully should we search the Scriptures, that we may not err and die for ever! Jn 14:6.

I find in him no fault. See Lk 23:4.

Mt 27:15; also Mt 27:16-21.

[Over the brook Cedron.] There is a question among expositors about the article in the plural number, and the accent in Cedron; and that upon this occasion, that it might not be thought as if any relation were to be had here to Cedars, wherein one hath been deceived when he thus comments upon it: "It is called the brook Cedron, that is, of Cedars, that grow there." So also the Arab. Interp. in this place, over the brook of Cedar. But in 2 Samuel 15:23, and 1 Kings 2:37, he retains the word Cedron.

Amongst the Talmudists, kedar signifies dung: where the Gloss renders kedar by the easing of nature. Aruch renders it by dung: and the sense of that clause is, More die of inconvenient easing nature than of hunger. I would not affirm that the word kedar was used in this sense in the primitive denomination of the brook Kidron; but rather that the brook was called so from blackness; the waters being blackened by the mud and dirt that ran into it; it being, indeed, rather the sink or common sewer of the city than a brook.

But when the word kedar was used for dung, which it might be at that time when the Greek version was made, perhaps those interpreters might translate the Hebrew word into Greek, which is not unusual with them; so that the brook Cedron might be the same with them as the brook of filth.

[Where was a garden.] The grandees of the nation had their gardens and places of pleasure about the city, yea, even in the mount of Olives: for there were none within the city itself. "The blood that was over and above, after the sprinkling of the inward altar, was poured out towards the foundation on the west of the outward altar. And the blood that was over and above at the outward altar was poured out at the foot of it on the south side: and both the one and the other meeting together ran down through a conveyance under ground into the brook Kidron; and was sold to the gardeners to dung their gardens with; which having bought they used for that purpose."

For the blood, having been once dedicated to sacred use, might not be put to any common use without trespass; so that the gardeners paid so much money for it as would purchase a trespass offering.

[With lanterns and torches.] Out of Succah; "They danced" [that is, in the feast of Tabernacles], "holding in their hand burning torches." The Gloss is: "They threw up their torches into the air, and caught them again in their hands; and some there were so great artists in this exercise, they could do it, some with four, others with eight torches at once, throwing up one and catching another."

[Malchus.] A name very much in use amongst the Jews; Malluch, Nehemiah 10:4,27: Malchus the Arabian. This was also the name of that implacable enemy to Christianity Porphyrius, and of his father before him. So Luke Holsteine in the Life of Porphyrius, where he reckons up more of that name.

Christ had struck those to the ground that came to apprehend him, by the power of his word, that he might thereby provide for the flight of his disciples, and shew his own divine power. They, getting up again, accost him; Judas kisseth him; they lay hands upon him; and then Peter draws his sword, &c.

[To Annas first.] For "Annas was father-in-law to Caiaphas," as also the sagan of the priests, Luke 3:2: Targum in 2 Kings 23:4. Now sagan was the same with the prefect or ruler, which we have so frequent mention of amongst the Rabbins.

The 'ruler' saith unto them. Gloss: The 'ruler' is the 'sagan.' 'Sagan' is the same with 'ruler.'

There is frequent mention amongst the Talmudists, of R. Ananias, the sagan of the priests. He was destroyed, with Rabban Simeon and Ismael, at the siege of Jerusalem. But I am apt to think he was that sharp and unjust judge that St. Paul had to do with, Acts 23, rather than our Annas in this place.

Why they should carry our Saviour, when they had taken him, before Annas the sagan, sooner than to Caiaphas the high priest, the evangelist gives us one reason, viz. "because he was father-in-law to Caiaphas"; under which another reason may be deduced, viz. that he was the older man, of greater experience and skill in the law: for there were sometimes some high priests that were very unlearned fellows, as may be gathered from that supposition in Joma; "If the high priest be a wise man, he expounds; if not, they expound to him. If he be accustomed to reading, he reads himself; if not, they read before him."

But for the sagan of the priests, it was very necessary he should be a man of learning, because his charge was about the things and service of the Temple, and was bound to be always assistant and present there, when the high priest was seldom there, or conversed in those affairs.

Juchasin and Aruch; No one could by right be promoted to the high priesthood, unless he had first been sagan. A good cautelous provision indeed, that so in the time of their saganship they might gain experience in the laws and rituals, and might be the better fitted for the high priest's chair. But when it came to that pass, that persons were made high priests for their money, and not for their deserts, it might easily happen that very unlearned wretches might sometimes possess that seat. And perhaps Caiaphas himself was of this stamp.

It seems therefore that they led Jesus to Annas first, that Caiaphas might be directed by his counsel; and, himself being but little versed in things of this nature, might proceed in this affair by the steerage of his father-in-law. And let this high priest pardon me if I ascribe that sentence of his, "It is expedient that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish," not to his prudence and gravity, but to his rashness and cruelty; although the Holy Spirit directed it to its proper end, which the high priest himself did not dream of.

There might be another reason why they led Christ before Annas first, but that I shall speak of anon.

[Which was the high priest that same year.] If the Gloss which I had upon these very same words, chapter 11:51, will not so well fit here as they did there, we may add this also, which will suit well enough in both places; that is, that there was so great a vicissitude and change in the high priesthood, there being a new high priest almost every year, that it was not unnecessary to set down this particular circumstance, Caiaphas was high priest for that year.

"In the second Temple, which stood but four hundred and twenty years, there were more than three hundred high priests within that time. Of these four hundred and twenty years, deduct those forty wherein Simeon the Just ministered, and those eighty wherein Jochanan sat, and those ten wherein Ismael Ben Phabi, and (as it is said) those eleven wherein Eleazar Ben Harsom governed; and then reckon, and you will find that hardly any other high priest sat out his whole year."

But this number of high priests is very much lessened in Vajicra Rabba: "under the first Temple, because they that served therein served in the truth, there were but eighteen high priests, the father, the son, and grandson successively. But under the second Temple, when that honour came to be obtained by money [there are also that say how they murdered one another by charms and witchcrafts], there were fourscore high priests served in that time: fourscore and one, say some; fourscore and two, say others; and there are that say fourscore and four. Amongst these, Simeon the Just sat forty years: but when the place was bought and sold, the years of enjoying it were cut short. The story goes of one that sent his son with two bushels of silver [to purchase the high priest's office], and the bushels themselves were silver. Another sent his son with two bushels of gold, and the bushels themselves were of gold too."

As to this difference of numbers, we will not much trouble our heads about it: perhaps the Gemarists might reckon the sagans together with the high priests, for they were indeed deputed to minister in their stead, if any uncleanness had happened to them. Let there be fourscore high priests, or thereabouts, it is certain that so frequent were the changes and successions amongst them, that the high priest of this year was hardly so the year that went before or that followed after. Although indeed in this Caiaphas it was something otherwise, yet did the evangelist justly and properly enough add this clause, that he was the high priest that same year; tacitly noting the common state of affairs as to the office of high priest at that time.

[And Simon Peter followed Jesus, &c.] There are some that apprehend in this place some interruption in the order of the story: they would therefore have the twenty-fourth verse weaved in here, "Annas sent Jesus bound to Caiaphas": because what is here related and so on seems all to have been done in Caiaphas' hall, and not in Annas'.

This order the Syr., Arab., Vulg. interpreters, and others do still observe: Nonnus, [Dionysius] Carthusianus, Beza, and, as he quotes him, St. Cyril, invert it. It is true there is here a tacit transition, and a trajection of the words in verse 24, which is not very usual; but neither the one nor the other seems to be without some reason for it.

I. It is told us, Matthew 26:56, and Mark 14:50, that "all the disciples forsook him, and fled." So that probably 'Peter and that other disciple' was amongst the number when it is said they all fled. The transition of our evangelist therefore seems to teach us that neither 'Peter nor the other disciple' followed Christ to Annas' house; but being surprised and confounded with a very great fear, hid themselves for a while; and (not till after some time) recollecting themselves, they put forward amongst the crowd to Caiaphas' hall, or else came thither after them.

II. Annas alone could determine nothing judicially concerning Christ: for when an inquiry must be made concerning his disciples, and the nature of his doctrines, when witnesses must be produced pro and con, this necessarily required a session of the Sanhedrim. He sent him therefore to Caiaphas, where the Sanhedrim also was; and the evangelist lets the mention of that alone till he came to relate their way of proceeding.

But why, or by what right, should Annas be absent from the Sanhedrim? Could there be any right or legal proceeding in the great council, if the whole number of seventy-one elders were not complete? Let Maimonides give the answer: "It is not necessary that the whole bench of seventy-one should all sit together in their places in the Temple; but when it is necessary for them all to meet, let them be called together. But at other times, if any one of them have any business of his own, he may go out and do his affairs and return again. This provision is made, that there might never be fewer than twenty-three sitting together during the whole session. If any have occasion to go forth, let him look about him and see if there be twenty-three of his colleagues in the court, then he may go out; if not, he must stay till some other enter." We give another reason of Annas' absence by and by.

[That disciple was known unto the high priest.] Nonnus supposes that other disciple known to the high priest, from his fishing trade. Others guess other reasons; but to determine any thing in this matter would look rashly. However this knowledge of the high priest came about, it is certain this disciple had the greater opportunity to have stood in the defence of his Master as a witness in his behalf. For,

"Capital judgments begin always on the defendant's side, and not on the accuser's. It is lawful for all to plead on the defendant's side, not so on the accuser's."

"They begin on the defendant's side. One of the witnesses saith, I have something to say in his defence. If any of his disciples say, 'I have wherewith to accuse him,' they enjoin him silence. If the disciple say, 'I can offer something in his defence,' they call him up and place him among themselves, and suffer him not to go down thence the whole day after."

Did they thus proceed with our Saviour? did they endeavour first for the clearing his innocency? and were there any witnesses produced for this purpose? If so, then here were 'Peter and that other disciple,' who could have witnessed in his behalf: but Peter denies that he ever knew him.

[For it was cold.] It was the very dead of night, almost at cockcrowing. Our countryman Biddulph, who was at Jerusalem at the very time when they were wont to celebrate the Passover, gives us the reason of this cold by his own experience. He acknowledgeth indeed that he found it so hot at that time as we usually feel it in our own country about midsummer, that he could not but wonder how Peter, at that time of the year, should be so cold. But within a few days his doubt was resolved, for there were mighty dews fell, which not being wholly dried up by the sun made it very cold, especially in the night, &c.

Nay, the traditional fathers suppose there may be frost and snow in the time of Passover, by that canon of theirs: "They do not intercalate the year either for snow or for frost."

The intercalation of the year respected chiefly the Paschal solemnity; namely, that by the interposing of the intercalated month all things might be ripe and fit for that feast. If when it came to the month Nisan the barley was not yet ripe enough to offer the sheaf of the first fruits, then they put a month between, which they called the second Adar. So if the ways were so bad that people could not travel up to Jerusalem, if the bridges were so broken that they could not pass the rivers, they intercalated or put a month between, that at the coming in of the month Nisan every thing might be ready that was requisite for the Paschal solemnity. But if frost or snow should happen when Nisan was entering in its ordinary course, they did not put a month between upon that account. From whence it is plain that frost and snow did sometimes happen at that time.

[Ask them which heard me.] Does not Jesus here appeal to the common right and rule amongst themselves? viz. that the witnesses in behalf of the defendant might be heard first. But who, alas! was there that durst witness for him? It is said, indeed, that "the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against him," Matthew 26:59. But did they seek any true witness for him? or did they indeed deal with the witnesses against him as their customs obliged them to have done? did they search their testimony by a strict and severe examination? did they terrify them, or by grave exhortations admonish them to say nothing but the truth? This by right ought to have been done: but we have reason to suppose it was not done.

[But that they might eat the Passover.] I. We have already shewn, in our notes upon Mark 14:12, that the eating of the Paschal lamb was never, upon any occasion whatever, transferred from the evening of the fourteenth day, drawing to the close of it; no, not by reason of the sabbath, or any uncleanness that had happened to the congregation; so that there needs little argument to assure us that the Jews ate the lamb at the same time wherein Christ did...

II. The Passover, therefore here doth not signify the Paschal lamb, but the Paschal Chagigah: of which we will remark these two or three things:

1. Deuteronomy 16:2, "Thou shalt sacrifice the Passover unto the Lord thy God, of the flock and the herd." Where R. Solomon; "The flocks are meant of the lambs and the kids; the herd of the Chagigah." And R. Bechai in locum: "The flocks are for the due of the Passover; the herd, for the sacrifices of the Chagigah." So also R. Nachmanid: "The herd, for the celebration of the 'Chagigah.'" Pesachin: The flock for the Passover, the oxen for the Chagigah.

Where the Gloss, p. 1: "Doth not the Passover consist wholly of lambs and kids? Exodus 12:5. If so, why is it said oxen? To equal every thing that is used in the Passover. As the Passover [i.e. the Paschal lamb ] is of due, and is not taken but out of the common flocks," neither from the first-born nor from the tenths]; "so this also [i.e. of the oxen] is of due, and not taken but out of the common herd." See 2 Chronicles 30:24, &c., and 35:8,9.

2. The Chagigah was for joy and mirth, according to that in Deuteronomy 16:14, "And thou shalt rejoice in the feast," &c. Hence the sacrifices that were prepared for that use are called sacrifices of peace or eucharistic offerings, sacrifices of joy and mirth.

3. The proper time of bringing the Chagigah was the fifteenth day of the month. Aruch: "They ate, and drank, and rejoiced, and were bound to bring their sacrifice of Chagigah on the fifteenth day"; i.e. the first day of the feast, &c.

There might be a time, indeed, when they brought their Chagigah on the fourteenth day; but this was not so usual; and then it was under certain conditions. "When is it that they bring the Chagigah at the same time with the lamb? When it comes on another day in the week, and not on the sabbath; when it is clean, and when it is small." Let the Gloss explain the last clause; and for the two former, we shall do that ourselves.

"If the lamb be less than what will satisfy the whole company, then they make ready their Chagigah, eating that first, and then the lamb," &c. And the reason is given by another Glosser; viz. that the appetites of those that eat might be pretty well satisfied before they begin the lamb: for if they should fall upon the lamb first, it being so very small, and the company numerous and hungry, they would be in danger of breaking the bones, whiles they gnaw it so greedily.

For this and other reasons the Rabbins account the Chagigah of the fourteenth day to be many degrees less perfect than that of the fifteenth; but it would be very tedious to quote their ventilations about it. Take only these few instances:

"R. Issai saith, 'The Chagigah on the fourteenth day is not our duty.'" And a little after: "R. Eliezer saith, 'By the peace offerings which they slay on the evening of the feast, a man doth not his duty, either as to rejoicing, or as to Chagigah.'"

And now let us return to the words of our evangelist.

III. It was the fifteenth day of the month when the fathers of the council refused to enter into the praetorium, lest they should be defiled; for they would eat the Passover, that is, the Chagigah.

1. The evangelist expresseth it after the common way of speaking, when he calls it the Passover. "It is written, Observe the month of Abib: and keep the Passover: that all that you do may go under the denomination of the Passover." The calf and the young bullock which they kill in the name of the Passover, or for the Passover. Whence we may observe, the calf is the Passover as well as the lamb.

2. The elders of the Sanhedrim prepare and oblige themselves to eat the Chagigah [the Passover] on that day, because the next day was the sabbath; and the Chagigah must not make void the sabbath.

The Chagigah doth not set aside the sabbath. Hence that we quoted before, that the Chagigah was not to be brought upon the sabbath day, as also not in case of uncleanness: because however the Chagigah and defilement might set aside the Passover, yet it might not the sabbath.

[It is not lawful for us to put any man to death.] Doth Pilate jest or deride them, when he bids them "take him, and judge him according to their own law?" It cannot be denied but that all capital judgment, or sentence upon life, had been taken from the Jews for above forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem, as they oftentimes themselves confess. But how came this to pass? It is commonly received, that the Romans, at this time the Jews' lords and masters, had taken from all their courts a power and capacity of judging the capital matters. We have spoken largely upon this subject in our notes upon Matthew 26:3. Let us superadd a few things here:

"Rabh Cahna saith, When R. Ismael Bar Jose lay sick, they sent to him saying, 'Pray, sir, tell us two or three things which thou didst once tell us in the name of thy father.' He saith to them, 'A hundred and fourscore years before the destruction of the Temple, the wicked kingdom' [the Rome empire] reigned over Israel. Fourscore years before the destruction of the Temple, they" [the fathers of the Sanhedrim] "determined about the uncleanness of the heathen land, and about glass vessels. Forty years before the destruction of the Temple, the Sanhedrim removed and sat in the Tabernae. What is the meaning of this tradition? Rabh Isaac Bar Abdimi saith, 'They did not judge judgments of mulcts.'" The Gloss is: "Those are the judgments about finding any that offered violence, that entice a maid, and the price of a servant. When, therefore, they did not sit in the room Gazith, they did not judge about these things; and so those judgments about mulcts or fines ceased."

Here we have one part of their judiciary power lost, not taken away from them by the Romans, but falling of itself, as it were, out of the hands of the Sanhedrim. Nor did the Romans indeed take away their power of judging in capital matters, but they, by their own oscitancy, supine and unreasonable lenity, lost it themselves. For so the Gemara goes on:

"Rabh Nachman Bar Isaac saith, 'Let him not say that they did not judge judgments of mulcts, but that they did not judge capital judgments. And whence comes this? When they saw that so many murderers multiplied upon them, that they could not well judge and call them to account, they said, It is better for us that we remove from place to place, for how can we otherwise" [sitting here and not punishing them] "not contract a guilt upon ourselves?'"

They thought themselves obliged to punish murderers while they sat in the room Gazith: for the place itself engaged them to it. They are the words of the Gemarists. Upon which the Gloss: "The room Gazith was half of it within and half of it without the Holy Place. The reason of which was, that it was requisite that the council should sit near the Divine Majesty. Hence it is that they say, 'Whoever constitutes an unfit judge, is as if he planted a grove by the altar of the Lord: as it is written, Judges and officers shalt thou make thee': and it follows presently after, 'Thou shalt not plant thee a grove of any trees near unto the altar of the Lord thy God,' Deuteronomy 16:18,21. They removed therefore from Gazith, and sat in the Tabernae. Now though the Tabernae were upon the Mountain of the Temple, yet they did not sit so near the Divine Majesty there as they did when they sat in the room Gazith."

Let us now, in order, put the whole matter together:

I. The Sanhedrim were most stupidly and unreasonably remiss in their punishment of capital offenders, going upon this reason especially, that they accounted it so horrible a thing to sentence an Israelite to death. Forsooth, he is of the seed of Abraham, of the blood and stock of Israel; and you must have a care how you touch such a one!

"R. Eliezer Bar R. Simeon had laid hold on some thieves. R. Joshua Bar Korchah sent to him, saying, 'O thou vinegar, the son of good wine'" [i.e. O thou wicked son of a good father], "'how long wilt thou deliver the people of God to the slaughter?' He answered and said, 'I root the thorns out of the vineyard.' To whom the other, 'Let the Lord of the vineyard come and root them out himself.'" It is worth nothing that the very thieves of Israel are the people of God: and O! they must not be touched by any means, but referred to the judgment of God himself.

"When R. Ismael Bar R. Jose was constituted a magistrate by the king, there happened some such thing to him; for Elias himself rebuked him, saying, 'How long wilt thou deliver over the people of God to slaughter?'" Hence that which we alleged elsewhere: "The Sanhedrim that happens to sentence any one to death within the space of seven years is called 'a destroyer.' R. Eleazar Ben Azariah saith, 'It is so, if they should but condemn one within seventy years.'"

II. It is obvious to any one, how this foolish remissness and letting loose the reins of judgment would soon increase the number of robbers, murderers, and all kind of wickedness: and, indeed, they did so abundantly multiply, that the Sanhedrim neither could nor durst, as it ought, call the criminals to account. The laws slept while wickedness was in the height of its revels; and punitive justice was so out of countenance, that, as to uncertain murders, they made no search; and certain ones they framed no judgment against.

"Since the time that homicides multiplied, the beheading the heifer ceased." And in the place before quoted in Avodah; "When they saw the number of murderers so greatly increase, that they could not sit in judgment upon them, they said, 'Let us remove,'" &c.

So in the case of adultery, which we also observed in our notes upon chapter 8. "Since the time that adultery so openly advanced under the second Temple, they let off trying the adulteress by the bitter water," &c.

So that we see the liberty of judging in capital matters was no more taken from the Jews by the Romans than the beheading of the heifer or the trial of the suspected wife by the bitter waters was taken away by them; which no one will affirm. But rather,

III. When the Sanhedrim saw that it was in vain to struggle against the mighty torrent and inundation of all manner of wickedness, that played rex and encroached so fast upon them, and that the interposure of their authority could do nothing in suppressing them, they being incapable of passing judgment as they ought, they determine not to sit in judgment at all. And whereas they thought themselves bound by the majesty and awfulness of the place, while they sat in the room Gazith [in the very Court of Israel before the altar], to judge according to the sacredness of the place, but could not indeed do it by reason of the daring pride and resolution of the criminals, they threw themselves out of that apartment, and went further off into the place where the exchangers' shops were kept in the Court of the Gentiles, and so to other places, which we find mentioned in Rosh hashanah.

IV. It is disputed whether they ever returned to their first place Gazith, or no. It is affirmed by the Gloss in Avodah Zarah: "When for a time they found it absolutely necessary, they betook themselves again to that room." We have the same also elsewhere upon this tradition:

"It is a tradition of R. Chaia. From the day wherein the Temple was destroyed, though the Sanhedrim ceased, yet the four kinds of death" [which were wont to be inflicted by the Sanhedrim] "did not cease. For he that had deserved to be stoned to death, he either fell off from some house, or some wild beast tore and devoured him. He that had deserved burning, he either fell into some fire or some serpent bit him. He that had deserved to be slain: [i.e. with the sword], was either delivered into the hands of a heathen king, or was murdered by robbers. He that had deserved strangling was either drowned in some river, or choked by a squinancy [angina]."

But it may be objected, Why is it said, "From the time that the Temple was destroyed," and not, "forty years before the destruction of the Temple?" To this the Gloss answereth: "Sometimes, according to the urgency and necessity of the time, the Sanhedrim returned to the room Gazith," &c. It is further excepted "But they never returned to sit in capital causes, or to try murders. For the reason of their removal at first was because the numbers of homicides so increased upon them," &c.

V. When the great council did not sit in Gazith, all courts for capital matters ceased everywhere else. One Gloss saith thus: "They took no cognizance of capital matters in any of the lesser sessions, so long as the great Sanhedrim did not sit in the room Gazith." Another saith; "What time the great Sanhedrim sat in its proper place, where it ought, near the altar, then thou shalt make thee judges in all thy gates, to judge in capital causes: but when that removed, then all cognizance about those matters ceased."

VI. The Sanhedrim removed, as we have already seen, from Gazith, forty years before Jerusalem was destroyed: and this is the very thing that was said, "Forty years before the destruction of the city, judgment in capital causes was taken away from them." And now let the reader judge what should be the reason of their being deprived of this privilege: whether the Romans were in fault; or whether rather the Jews, nay, the Sanhedrim itself, had not brought it upon themselves. When the Sanhedrim flitted from Gazith: all judgment of this kind vanished, and upon what reasons they did thus flit we have learned from their own pens.

We will not contend about the time when these forty years should first begin: though I am apt to think they might begin about half a year before Christ's death. The words which we have under consideration, spoken by the Sanhedrim to Pilate, seem to refer wholly to the reason we have already mentioned: "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." Why is it not lawful? Because, being forced by the necessity of the times, we retired from the room Gazith, where if we sit not, neither we ourselves nor any court under us can take any cognizance of causes of life and death.

But what necessity of times could urge you to remove? So greatly did the criminals multiply, and grew to such a head, that we neither could not durst animadvert upon them, according to what the majesty of the place might expect and require from us if we should sit in Gazith.

That must be observed in the evangelists, that when they had had Christ in examination in the palace of the high priest all night, in the morning the whole Sanhedrim met, that they might pass sentence of death upon him. Where then was this that they met? Questionless in the room Gazith; at least if they adhered to their own rules and constitutions: "Thither they betook themselves sometimes upon urgent necessity." The Gloss before quoted excepts "only the case of murder"; which, amongst all their false accusations, they never charged Christ with.

But however suppose it were granted that the great council met either in the Tabernae or some other place, (which yet by no means agreed with their own tradition,) did they deal truly, and as the matter really and indeed was, with Pilate, when they tell him, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death?" He had saith to them, "Take ye him, and judge him according to your law." We have indeed judged and condemned him, but we cannot put any one to death. Was this that they said in fact true? How came they then to stone the protomartyr Stephen? How came they to stone Ben Satda at Lydda? How came they to burn the priest's daughter alive that was taken in adultery?

It is probable they had not put any one to death as yet, since the time that they had removed out of Gazith; and so might the easilier persuade Pilate in that case. But their great design was to throw off the odium of Christ's death from themselves, at least amongst the vulgar crowd, fearing them, if the council themselves should have decreed his execution. They seek this evasion, therefore, which did not altogether want some colour and pretext of truth: and it succeeded according to what they did desire; Divine Providence so ordering it, as the evangelist intimates, verse 32, "That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die": that is, be crucified, according to the custom of the Romans.

Whilst I am upon this thought, I cannot but reflect upon that passage, than which nothing is more worthy observation, in the whole description of the Roman beast in the Revelation, chapter 13:4: "The dragon which gave power unto the beast." We cannot say this of the Assyrian, Babylonish, or any other monarchy; for the Holy Scriptures do not say it. But reason dictates, and the event itself tells us, that there was something acted by the Roman empire in behalf of the dragon which was not compatible with any other, that is, the putting of the Son of God to death. Which thing we must remember, as often as we recite that article of our creed, "He suffered under Pontius Pilate"; that is, was put to death by the Roman empire.

[What is truth?] Christ had said, "For this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth": q.d. "I will not deny but that I am a king, as thou hast said; for for this end I came, that I should bear witness to the truth, whatever hazards I should run upon that account." Upon this Pilate asks him, What is truth? that is, "What is the true state of this affair? that thou, who art so poor a wretch, shouldst call thyself a king, and at the same time that thou callest thyself a king, yet sayest thy kingdom is not of this world? Where lies the true sense and meaning of this riddle?"

But supposing when Christ said, he came "that he should bear witness to the truth," he meant in general the gospel; then Pilate asks him, What is that truth? However, the evangelist mentions nothing, either whether our Saviour gave him any answer to that question, or whether indeed Pilate stayed in expectation of any answer from him.

No sooner had our dear Lord ended his divine prayer, recorded in the foregoing chapter, but he goes forth to meet his sufferings with a willing cheerfulness. He retires with his disciples into a garden, not to hide and shelter himself from his enemies; for, if so, it had been the most improper place he could have chosen; it being the accustomed place where he was wont to pray, and a place well known to Judas, who was now coming to seek him. Judas which betrayed him knew the place; for Jesus oft-times resorted thither with his disciples; so that Christ repaired to this garden, not to shun but to meet the enemy, to offer himself a prey to the wolves, which in the garden hunted him, and laid hold upon him; he also resorted to this garden now for privacy, that he might freely pour out his soul to God.

Learn hence, that the Lord Jesus Christ was praying to his Father in the garden, when Judas with his black guard came to apprehend him.

As the sin of the first Adam, which brought destruction upon his posterity, was committed in a garden, so the salutary passion of the second Adam, which was to rescue us from that destruction, did begin in a garden also.

Observe here, 1. How our Lord's sufferings were all foreknown to himself, before they came upon himself, before they came upon him, and yet how willingly and cheerfully did he go forth to meet them.

Should our sufferings be known unto us before they come upon us, how would it disquiet and disturb us! yea, not only discompose us, but distract us! In great wisdom, therefore, and in tender mercy, has God concealed future events from us.

But it was otherwise with Christ; he had an exact knowledge of those bitter sufferings which he was to undergo, and yet with a composed mind he goes forth to meet them: Jesus knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth.

Lord! how endearing are our obligations to thyself, that when thou knewest before-hand the bitterness of that cup, which the justice of God was about to put into thy hand, thou didst not decline to drink it off for our sakes!

Observe, 2. That it was not man's power, but Christ's own permission, which brought his sufferings upon him. How easily could Christ have delivered himself out of his enemies' hands, who with a word from his mouth caused them to go backward and fall to the ground!

Christ in speaking those words did let out a little ray or beam of his deity, and this struck them down. Mark what a strange power was here in the word of Christ, and that not an angry word neither. He did not chide them, and say, "You wretches, how dare you lay hands on me, and carry me to judgment who shall one day be your judge!" Christ only said, I am he, and down they fell.

O what fear will Christ send out when he cometh to judge the world, who could send forth such a fear when he yielded up himself to be judged and condemned in the world! If there was so much majesty in the voice of Christ, in one of the lowest acts of his humiliation, what will the voice of a glorified Christ be to sinners, when he shall come as a judge to condemn the world.

Here note, 1. How voluntarily and freely Christ laid down his life! When his enemies were fallen to the ground, he suffered them to rise again, and offers himself to them to take him and carry him away.

Note, 2. How the sight of this glorious miracle of the soldiers falling to the ground did not deter or discourage them from their wicked purpose; they get up again, and go on with their bloody design.

Learn hence, that obstinate and obduraate sinners will not be reclaimed by the most evident and convincing, by the most miraculous and surprising, appearances of God against them.

Note, 3. How mindful, in the midst of his sufferings, Christ was of his dear disciples, to secure them, at this time, from death and danger; If ye seek me, let these go their way: that is, my disciples, against whom ye have no warrant at this time.

Learn hence, that Christ is so tender of his followers, that he will not put them upon trials, or call them forth to sufferings, till they are ripe and ready, fitted and prepared for them.

The disciples yet were weak and feeble, timorous and fearful, and Christ had much work and service for them to do in the world; namely, to plant and propagate the gospel in foreign countries; he therefore resolves not to lose any one of them by persecution at this time. And thus was his word fulfilled, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none.

Observe here, St. Peter's love unto, and zeal for, his Lord and Master, in defence of whom he now draws his sword: but why did he not rather draw upon Judas than upon Malchus?

Possibly, because though Judas was most faulty, yet Malchus might be most forward to carry off our Saviour. O, how doth a pious breast swell with indignation, at the sight of an affront offered unto its Saviour!

Observe farther, the rebuke which Christ gave St. Peter for what he did: though his heart was sincere, yet his hand was rash; good intentions are no warrant for irregular actions: Christ will thank no man for drawing a sword in defence of him, without a warrant and commission from him. To resist a lawful magistrate, even in Christ's own defence, is rash zeal, and discountenanced by the gospel.

Here observe, 1. A metaphorical description of Christ's sufferings: they are a cup put into his hand top drink off, and that by his own Father. They are a cup, and but a cup: God will not over-charge his people; and this cup is from the hand of a Father, yea, from the hand of our Father: The cup which our Father hath given me.

Observe, 2. Our Lord's resolution to drink off this cup, how bitter soever, being put to his mouth by his Father's hand: Shall I not drink it? that is, I will drink it.

Learn hence, 1. That oft-times the wisdom of God is pleased to put a cup, a very bitter cup, of affliction into the hand of those to drink whom he doth most sincerely love.

2. That when God doth so, it is their duty to drink it with silence and submission: Shall I not drink it? That is, I will certainly drink it with cheerfulness and resignation.

Judas having made good his promise to the chief priests, and delivered Jesus a prisoner bound into their hands, those evening wolves no sooner seize the Lamb of God, but they thirst and long to suck his innocent blood; yet, lest it should look like a downright murder, they allow him a mock-trial, and abuse the law by perverting it to injustice and bloodshed. How impossible is it for the greatest innocence and virtue to protect from slander and false accusation! and no person can be so innocent or good, whom false witnesses may not condemn.

All the four evangelists give us an account of Peter's fall in denying his Master.

And therein we have observable, 1. The sin itself which he fell into, the denial of Christ, and this backed with an oath; he sware that he knew not the man.

Lord! how may the slavish fear of suffering drive the holiest and best of me to commit the foulest and worst of sins!

Observe, 2. The occasion of his fall.

1. His presumptuous confidence of his own strength and standing: Though all men forsake thee, yet will not I.

Lord! to presume upon ourselves, is the ready way to provoke thee to leave us to ourselves. If ever we stand in the day of trial, 'tis the fear of falling must enable us to stand; we soon fall, if we believe it impossible to fall.

2. His being in bad company, amongst Christ's enemies: Peter had better have been acold by himself alone, than warming himself at a fire which was compassed in with the blasphemies of the soldiers, where his conscience, though not seared, was yet made hard.

Observe, 3. The reiteration or repetition of this sin: he denied Christ again and again; he denied him first with a lie, then with an oath and curse.

O, how dangerous is it not to resist the beginnings of sin! If we yield to one temptation, Satan will assault us with more and stronger.

Observe, 4. The heinous and aggravating circumstances of Peter's sin.

1. From the character of his person; a disciple, an apostle, a chief apostle, yet he denies Christ.

2. From the person whom he denies: his Master, his Saviour.

3. The time when he denied him: soon after Christ had washed his feet; yea, soon after he had received the sacrament from Christ's own hand.

How unreasonable then is their objection against coming to the Lord's table, that some who go to it dishonour Christ as soon as they come from it!

Such examples ought not to discourage us from coming to the ordinance, but should excite and increase our watchfulness after we have been there, that out after-deportment may be suitable to the solemnity of a sacramental table.

Our Saviour being brought before Caiaphas the high-priest, he examines him concerning his doctrine, and his disciples, pretending him to be guilty of heresy in doctrine, and sedition in gathering disciples and followers.

Our Saviour answers, that as to his doctrine, he had not delivered it in holes and corners, but had taught publicly in the temple and synagogues; and that in secret he had said nothing, that is, nothing contrary to what he had delivered in public. Christ never willingly affected corners; he taught openly, and propounded his doctrine publicly and plainly in the world. A convincing evidence, that both he and his doctrine were of God.

Learn hence, 1. That it is not unusual for the best of doctrines to pass under the odious name and imputation of error and heresy. Christ's own doctrine is here charges: The high-priest asked Jesus of his doctrine.

2. That the ministers of Christ who have truth on their side, may and ought to speak boldly and openly: I spake openly unto the world. "Veritas nihil erubescit, praeterquam abscondi." Truth blushes at nothing, except at its being concealed; In secret, says Christ, have I said nothing.

Observe here, 1. How insolently and injuriously an officer strikes our Saviour in this court of judiacature: One of the officers struck Jesus with the palm of his hand.

What had the holy and innocent Jesus done, to deserve these buffetings?

He only made use of the liberty which their law did allow him, which was not to accuse himself, but to put them upon the proof of those accusations which were brought against him.

But from this instance of our Saviour's sufferings, we learn, that Christ did endure painful buffetings, ignominious and contemptuous usage, even from inferior servants: giving his cheek to the smiters, to testify that shame and reproachful usage which was deserved by us, and to sanctify that condition to us, whenever it is allotted for us.

Observe, 2. The meek and gentle reproof which the Lord Jesus gives to this rude officer: he doth not strike him dead upon the place, nor cause that arm to wither which was stretched forth against the Lord's Anointed; but only lets him know, that there was no reason for his striking of him.

Where note, that though our Saviour doth not revenge himself, yet he vindicates himself, and defends himself both with law and reason: If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me?

Hence we learn, 1. That we are not literally to understand the command, Matt 5:39 of turning the cheek to him that smites us. For Christ himself did not this, but defends the innocency of his words.

2. That to stand up in defence of our own innocency, is not contrary either to the duties of patience and forgiveness, or to the practice and example of our Lord Jesus.

Note, 3. That when the soldier had struck Christ upon one cheek, he did not turn to him the other also, according to Matt 5:39. Which evidently shows, that that precept, If they smite thee on one cheek, turn the other also, commands only this, that rather than take revenge, we should bear a second injury.

Christians ought rather to suffer a double wrong, than to seek a private revenge: Christianity obliges us to bear many injuries patiently, rather than avenge one privately.

But though it binds up our hands from private revenge, yet it doth not shut our mouths from complaining to public authority. Christ's own practice here expounds the precept elsewhere, Matt 5:39. For he complains here of the officer's injustice in smiting him before the judicatory, and challenges the man to bear witness of the evil.

Observe, lastly, how our Lord was not only buffeted, but bound, and sent bound from Annas to Caiaphas, from Caiaphas to Pilate, from Pilate to Herod, and from Herod to Pilate again: and all this on foot through the streets of Jerusalem, from one end of the city to the other; partly to render his passion more public, being made a gazing-stock to the world, and a spectacle both to angels and men.

And his condescending to go bound from one tribunal to another, teaches his people what delinquents they were before the tribunal of God, and what they deserved by reason of sin; even a sentence of eternal condemnation at the tribunal of the just and holy God.

There were two courts of judicature which our blessed Saviour was brought before, and condemned by.

1. The ecclesiastical court or sanhedrin, in which the high-priest sat as judge; here he was condemned to death for blasphemy.

2. The civil court or judgment-hall, where Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, sat judge, who, because he was a Gentile, they would not go into his house, lest they should be defiled; for they accounted it a legal pollution to come into the house of a Gentile.

Where observe, the notorious hypocrisy of these Jews: they scruple the defiling of themselves by coming near the judgment-hall, where Pilate sat, but make no scruple at all to defile themselves with the guilt of that innocent blood which Pilate shed.

When persons are over zealous for ceremonial observations, they are oftentimes too remiss with refernce to moral duties: They brought him to the judgment-hall; but they themselves went not in, lest they should be defiled.

Observe here, 1. How Pilate humours these Jews in their superstition.

They scruple to go into the judgment-hall to him; he therefore goes out to them,and demands what accusation they had against Christ.

They charge him here only for being a malefactor, or an evil-doer in the general; but elsewhere ( Luke 23:1) they particularly accuse him,

1. "For perverting the nation."

2. "For forbidding to pay tribute to Caesar."

3. "For saying that he himself was Christ a king."

All which was filthy calumny, yet Christ underwent the reproach of it without opening his mouth; teaching us, when we lie under calumny, and unjust imputation, to imitate him who opened not his mouth, but committed his cause to him that judgeth uprightly.

The Jews being now under the power of the Romans, though they had a power of judging and censuring criminals in smaller matters, yet not in capital cases; they could not pronounce a sentence of death upon any person, say some; they might, and did, say others, punish blasphemers by stoning them to death; but then their sentence is to be ratified by the Roman power. Accordingly, here they had in their ecclessiastical court condemned Christ for blasphemy, now they bring him to Pilate the Roman governor, to confirm the sentence of death.

From hence it appears, that Christ was the true Messias, being sent into the world when the sceptre was departed from Judah, according to that ancient prophecy of Jacob, The sceptre shall not depart from Judah until Shiloh come Gen 49:10.

The Jews had no power absolutely to condemn any man, or put him to death; but his power the Roman emperor reserved to his own deputy. This contributed towards the fulfilling of our Saviour's words, That he should be delivered to the Gentiles, and should be crucified Matt 20:19: which was not a Jewish, but a Roman punishment.

Had the Jews put him to death, they had stoned him. But Christ was to be made a curse for us by hanging upon a tree; and accordingly the Jews execute the counsel of God, though they knew it not, by refusing to put him to death themselves.

Learn hence, how willing Christ was to undergo a shameful, painful, and accursed death, that he might testify his love unto, and procure a blessing for, his people. Thus the saying of Jesus was fulfilled; when he spake, signifying what death he should die.

Observe here, 1. Pilate's ensnaring question, Art thou the King of the Jews? How jealous are great men of Jesus Christ, and how afraid are they of his kingdom, power, and authority, as if it would be prejudicial to their authority and power in the world; which was far enough from Christ's thoughts!

Observe, 2. The wisdom and caution of our Saviour's answer: he neither affirms nor denies. Though whenever we speak, we are bound to speak the truth, yet we are not bound at all times to speak the whole truth.

Christ tells him therefore, that, upon the supposition that he was a king, yet his kingdom was no earthly, but a spiritual kingdom; he was no temporal king, to rule over his subjects with temporal power and worldly pomp; but a spiritual king, in and over his church only, to order the affairs and look after the government thereof.

Learn hence, that Christ as God hath an universal kingdom of power and providence even over the highest of men, and as a Mediator hath a spritual kingdom in and over his church.

2. That it is a clear evidence that Christ's kingdom is spiritual inasmuch as it is not carried on by violence and force of arms, as worldly kingdoms are, but by spiritual means and methods: If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would fight for me: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Pilate asks him again directly and expressly, Art thou a king or not?

Our Saviour answers, "Thou sayest that I am a king, and so it is indeed as thou sayest, I am a king, and the king of the Jews too; but not a temporal king, to rule over them after the manner of earthly kings with temporal power, and worldly pomp and splendour: but I am a spiritual king, to rule and govern, not only the Jews, but my whole church, consisting both of Jews and Gentiles, after a spiritual manner."

Observe here, 1. The dominion and sovereignty of Jesus Christ; he has a kingdom: My kingdom.

Observe, 2. The condition and qualification of this kingdom, negatively expressed: My kingdom is not of this world.

Observe, 3. The use and end of this kingdom: that the truth may have place among the children of men for their salvation: To this end was I born, and came into the world, to bear witness unto the truth.

Observe, 4. The subjects of Christ's kingdom declared: Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice; that is, every one who is by divine grace disposed to believe and love the truth, will hear and obey Christ's doctrine.

Observe here, 1. The question Pilate put to Christ, What is truth? A most noble and important question, had it been put forth with an honest heart, with a mind fairly disposed for information and satisfaction: but it is evident, Pilate's enquiry was not serious; nay, it is generally thought, that Pilate asked this question in scorn, contempt and derision: for he stays not for our Lord's answer but as soon as he started this query, went off the bench in haste.

Learn hence, that this question, what is truth? or how may we come to the knowledge of the truth? is of unspeakable use and importance, and a question, whereon the whole frame and constitution of religion depends: because truth is claimed by all parties of men, by all professors of religion.

Ask the different parties from the old gentleman at Rome to the poorest Quaker and Muggletonian, Where is truth? and they will all tell you.

They are in the possession of it: Every sect hath thus much of popery with it, that the professors of it think themselves infallible, and every one cries out, Here is truth.

But God has given us a two-fold light to search for truth: namely, the light of reason, and the light of scripture, or divine revelation.

The former Solomon calls the candle of the Lord, set up in our breasts by God, on purpose to discover truth unto us. God allows us, yea, enjoins us, the free and impartial use of our understandings and judgments, in order to the finding out of divine truth; but because nature's light or the light of natural reason is not clear and bright enough to give us a prospect of supernatural truths, (for nature and reason can never dictate those things which depend only upon God's free grace and good pleasure; such as the doctrines of a Saviour and Redeemer, and the method of man's salvation by the sufferings of the Son of God,) it had been blasphemy once to have supposed such things, had not God revealed them in scripture: therefore the second standard of divine truth, is the infallible word of God.

The gospel of Christ is the way, and the truth; Truth came by Jesus Christ. And would men be ruled and conducted by these unalterable standards of truth, namely, right reason and divine revelation, they would easily agree in their judgments what is to be believed, and all duties and controversies would vanish. Right reason and inspired scriptures are the best judges of controversies; they being the fixed standards and measures of divine truth, can best resolve Pilate's question here, and tell us What is truth.

Observe, 2. How unwilling, how very unwilling Pilate was to be the instrument of our Saviour's death: he came forth three several times, and tells the Jews that he finds no fault in him; he bids them take him, and judge him according to their law. Pilate, a Pagan, absolves Christ, whilst the hypocritical Jews, that heard his doctrine, and saw his miracles, do condemn him.

Observe, 3. Pilate having absolved Christ, I find no fault in him, endeavours next to release him, and takes occasion from their custom of having a prisoner released to them at their feast, to insinuate his desire that they should choose Christ: Ye have a custom that I should release unto you one at the passover.

Observe, lastly, how the Jews prefer Barabbas, a robber, before the holy and innocent Jesus: They all cried out, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas.

Learn hence, that no persons, how wicked and vile soever, are so odious in the eyes of the enemies of God, as Christ himself was, and his friends and followers now are: Christ did find it thus in his own person when on earth: Barabbas, a robber, was preferred before him: and now he is in heaven, he suffers in the members, the filth of the world being preferred before them.