The Passover () Both names (unleavened bread and passover) are used here as in Mr 14:1. Strictly speaking the passover was Nisan 14 and the unleavened bread 15-21. This is the only place in the N.T. where the expression “the feast of unleavened bread” (common in LXX, Ex. 23:15, etc.) occurs, for Mr 14:1 has just “the unleavened bread.” Mt 26:17 uses unleavened bread and passover interchangeably.

Drew nigh (). Imperfect active. Mark 14:1; Matt 26:2 mention “after two days” definitely.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Feast [] . Properly festival. See on Mr 14:1.

Drew nigh. Imperfect : “was drawing nigh.”

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

JUDAS BARGAINS TO BETRAY JESUS V. 1-6

1) “Now the feast of unleavened broad drew nigh,” (erygizen de he heorte ton azumon) ‘Then the feast of the unleavened bread drew near,” a feast that lasted for a week, to begin within two days, Mat 26:1-2; Exo 12:14-20. No leaven was permitted in any house during this entire week.

2) “Which is called the Passover.” (he legomene pascha) “Which is being called the Passover,” or Is known as the Passover feast. This indicates Luke wrote for Gentiles who were not familiar with the feast. The actual day of the Passover was the 15th of Nissan, called, “the great day of the feast,” of seven days, the high-light or high moment of the event, Mar 14:1; Exo 12:11.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES

Luk. 22:1 Feast of unleavened bread.Which lasted for a week. Called the Passover.An explanation for Gentile readers. Strictly speaking, it was the 15th Nisan, and not the whole week, that was the Passover, the great day of the feast.

Luk. 22:2. Chief priests, etc.The Pharisees now drop out of the foreground. Those now most active against Christ were the Sadducean party. Sought.This corresponds to the calling of the council and the deliberation spoken of in Joh. 11:47. For they feared.Before this clause such words as but not on the feast day are to be understood.

Luk. 22:3. Then entered Satan.I.e., put it into the heart of Judas to betray Christ. The phrase is used in Joh. 13:27, with greater emphasis than here, to describe the final abandonment of Judas to his wicked purpose.

Luk. 22:4. Captains.I.e., of the Temple (see Luk. 22:52). These were commanders of the body of Levites who kept guard in the Temple. They were, strictly speaking, civil and not military officers. One of them had the special title captain of the Temple (cf. Act. 5:26; Act. 4:1). Betray Him.Rather deliver Him (R.V.).

Luk. 22:5. Covenanted.I.e., agreed to pay. The actual payment was evidently made at a later meeting, when the definite plan of betrayal was fixed upon. Money.St. Luke does not state the amount, perhaps because the thirty pieces of silver foretold in prophecy would not have significance for a Gentile reader.

Luk. 22:6. In the absence of the multitude.Or perhaps without tumult (R.V. margin).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Luk. 22:1-6

The Unholy Covenant.So great was the enmity of the chief priests and scribes against Jesus that they had definitely resolved to put Him to death. The only question was how they could best accomplish their design (Luk. 22:2). The feast of the Passover was at hand, when the city would be crowded by pilgrims from all parts of the land, and from foreign countries; and the Jewish authorities were afraid that a serious riot might be caused if they took any open and precipitate step in carrying out their project. The inhabitants of Jerusalem were largely under their influence; but Christ still enjoyed a considerable measure of popularity among His Galilan countrymen, many of whom would be present in the Holy City on the occasion of the feast. Their present intention evidently was to take no action during the feast, but to wait until the bands of pilgrims had returned to their homes. The unexpected offer, on the part of Judas, to deliver Him into their hands, however, determined them to act at once and to arrest Jesus before the feast. The sight of the chief priests and scribes entering into an unholy compact with the traitor apostle for the destruction of our blessed Lord suggests some solemn lessons.

I. It brings to light the fact that there is no alternative between obedience to Christ and enmity against Him.It is impossible to ignore Him. The chief priests felt that power was slipping away from them, and that the movement with which Jesus was associated was out of their control. They must either yield to Him or take instant action against Him. In like manner Judas, who had cast off his allegiance as a disciple, went straightway to the enemies of his Lord and planned with them how he might betray Him unto them. This fact that there is no alternative between being a disciple and an enemy was clearly stated by Christ Himself in the word He that is not with Me is against Me. And what was the case when the Saviour was upon earth, still holds good: all who are brought into connection with Christ are forced, by an inexorable law, to take up either the one attitude towards Him or the other. He claims our worship as God incarnate, and He lays down rules of conduct for the guidance of all men, and if we refuse to accept His claims, or to obey His precepts, we instantly become hostile to Him.

II. It also shows that it is out of our power to fix the limit to which we will go, when once we have entered on a sinful course.Both the chief priests and scribes and the disloyal disciple were led, by their alienation from Christ, to the perpetration of the most shameful deeds: actions from which they would once have recoiled with horror now seem necessary, and do not shock them. They are deliberately planning the murder of an innocent person under the guise of zeal for religion. All checks of conscience are powerless to control them. The priests forget their sacred office, the claims of justice, and the covenant between God and Israel of which the feast now at hand was so solemn a memorial, and think of nothing but the gratification of their personal hatred of Jesus. Judas forgets all his Masters love and compassion, His wonderful deeds and teaching, His holy and innocent life; he forgets all that was due from him as a disciple, a friend, and an apostle, to that Master with whom He had lived so long in intimate communion, and in whose character and conduct even the closest scrutiny could discover no flaw or stain. Without a shudder he sees the unhallowed joy upon the faces of the enemies of Christ as he discloses to them the hatred against Him that fills His breast also, and he arranges with them the price at which his treachery is to be rewarded. Probably neither of the parties would have believed it possible for them to descend to such a depth of infamy, when first they began to be conscious of alienation from Jesus. A sinful course is a course downhill; it may be in our choice to enter upon it or not, but when we have wilfully entered upon it, it is not in our power to check ourselves and to fix the point at which we shall stop.

III. The historian lays stress upon the special guilt of apostasy from Christ.While both chief priests and scribes were guilty of grave sin in planning the death of Jesus, the traitor apostle was guilty of a worse offence than theirs. They had never been Christs disciples; their enmity had been open and intense from a very early period in His career. The peculiar infamy of Judas is indicated by St. Luke in the reminder (Luk. 22:3) that Judas had been of the number of the twelve, and in the statement that Satan entered into Him, as an explanation of his shameful conduct. He does not speak of Satan as entering into the chief priests and scribes. Some palliation of the guilt of the latter might be found in their ignorance of the Saviour, and in the false conceptions they had formed of Him. The knowledge Judas had of Christ only intensified the heinousness of his sin in betraying Him. A very solemn lesson is here contained for all who are professed disciples of Christ. Our responsibilities are increased by our relations with Him. The sin of those who wilfully depart from Him is necessarily greater than that of those who never acknowledged Him as their Lord and Master.

IV. The history before us is an illustration of there being an over-ruling Providence.God makes even the wrath of men to serve Him. The priests had decided to take no present action, but to wait till the feast was past. But it was part of the Divine purpose that the death of Christ should occur at the time of the feastthat then He, who is our Passover, should be sacrificed. And hence the very treachery of Judas was made to serve a higher end. Without any violation of human free-will the purposes of God were carried into effect, and those who were simply bent upon gratifying their own selfish and evil feelings were unconsciously made to assist in accomplishing a plan predetermined by God. Gods power cannot be resisted; if we are not fellow-workers with Him consciously and deliberately, He will yet be glorified by controlling and directing all our actions in accordance with His own will.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Luk. 22:1-6

Luk. 22:1. Feast of unleavened bread.The rulers of the people were unwilling to put Christ to death at this season, as they dreaded an uproar being caused among the people. Yet in the providence of God their counsels were overruled. Had Christ been put to death at any other time, there would not have been that coincidence between the offering of the typical lamb, sacrificed year after year for nearly fifteen centuries, and the sacrifice of the true Passover, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

Luk. 22:2. Sought how they might kill Him.On more than one occasion before they had endeavoured to take Him, but He had escaped from them, for He would not then be taken (Joh. 10:39). But at the very time when they were unwilling to take Him, He willed to be taken: so, against their will, they fulfilled the types and prophecies in killing Him who is the true Paschal Lamb.

Luk. 22:3. Then entered Satan.At first Satan came to make the heart of Judas his own; now he enters, because it is his own.Hall.

Luk. 22:4. Went his way.Unconscious of being under the control of the evil passion by which He had given Satan access to his heart.

Luk. 22:5. Were glad.The thing wished for, but scarcely expected, being now within reach.

Luk. 22:6. Sought opportunity.Doubtless he was baffled at first by the entire and unexpected seclusion which Jesus observed on the Wednesday and Thursday of that week.Farrar.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Appleburys Comments

The Search for a Way
Scripture

Luk. 22:1-6 Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover. 2 And the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might put him to death; for they feared the people.

3. And Satan entered into Judas who was called Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.
4. And he went away, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might deliver him unto them. 5 And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money. 6 And he consented, and sought opportunity to deliver him unto them in the absence of the multitude.

Comments

Now the feast of the unleavened bread drew nigh.This is one of the three principle feasts of the Jews. It lasted a whole week and came immediately after the Passover Feast. For this reason, Luke says it was called the Passover.

how they might put Him to death.The chief priests and scribes had already decided that He must die. Jesus was well aware of their intention to kill Him. On one occasion He had asked, Why seek ye to kill Me? (Joh. 7:19) While the Jews, of course, denied it, they had actually attempted to carry out their plot more than once. See Joh. 8:9; Joh. 10:31. This murderous plot crystalized in the minds of their leaders at the time of the healing of the lame man at the pool of Bethseda. It was at that time that Jesus had made it clear that He was equal with God. This, in their minds, was blasphemy and punishable by death. Their only problem was how to get it done. They, of course, would have to get permission from the Roman governor to have Him put to death, but this was no problem. The real problem was to carry out the plot without arousing the people, Luke had already indicated that the people were coming early in the morning to hear Him teach in the temple. The crowd had welcomed Him at the triumphal entry. But the search for the way would soon be over.

and Satan entered into Judas.The plot of these conspirators was master-minded by Satan himself. It was both daring and clever, for Judas was one of the twelve, But it was the biggest mistake Satan ever made. In the Garden of Eden, God had said that the seed of the woman would bruise the head of the serpent. Evidentially, Satan did not believe Him, for he tried to overcome Jesus in the wilderness temptation and was now seeking a way to put Him to death. But it was through death that Jesus was to bring to nought this one who had the power of death; that is, the devil. (Heb. 2:14).

Luke says that Satan entered into Judas. This is not demon possession. Jesus called Judas a devil (Joh. 6:70-71), not a demon. He was a man who had deliberately given himself over to the control of Satan. It is not too difficult to see how this was done. Judas was a thief (Joh. 12:6). He had charge of the treasury of Jesus and the apostles and had been in the habit of stealing from that fund. This unholy desire for money was his downfall. The thought of selling his Lord for thirty pieces of silver was too great a temptation for him to withstand. He bargained with the chief priests and the captains to betray Jesus into their hands. He knew how to get the deed done, for he knew that sacred spot in Gethsemane where Jesus and His disciples often went to be alone in prayer. There he could betray his Lord, without arousing the people.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

Butlers Comments

SECTION 1

Communion (Luk. 22:1-30)

22 Now the feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called the Passover.2And the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to put him to death; for they feared the people.

3 Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was of the number of the twelve; 4he went away and conferred with the chief priests and officers how he might betray him to them. 5And they were glad, and engaged to give him money. 6So he agreed, and sought an opportunity to betray him to them in the absence of the multitude.

7 Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the passover lamb had to be sacrificed. 8So Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare the passover for us, that we may eat it. 9They said to him, Where will you have us prepare it? 10He said to them, Behold, when you have entered the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you; follow him into the house which he enters, 11and tell the householder, The Teacher says to you, Where is the guest room, where I am to eat the passover with my disciples? 12And he will show you a large upper room furnished; there make ready. 13And they went, and found it as he had told them; and they prepared the passover.

14 And when the hour came, he sat at table, and the apostles with him. 15And he said to them, I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer; 16for I tell you I shall not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God. 17And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves; 18for I tell you that from now on I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes. 19And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me. 20And likewise the cup after supper, saying, This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. 21But behold the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table. 22For the Son of man goes as it has been determined; but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed! 23And they began to question one another, which of them it was that would do this.

24 A dispute also arose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest. 25And he said to them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. 26But not so with you; rather let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. 27For which is the greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves.

28 You are those who have continued with me in my trials; 29and I assign to you, as my Father assigned to me, a kingdom, 30that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Luk. 22:1-13 Preparation: The day on which the Passover feast was to be observed was determined by the Lunar Calendar (moon phases). Passover supper was to be eaten on the 14th of Nisan (Jewish month). This was calculated to be fourteen days after the first new moon, following the vernal (Spring) equinox. Passover, therefore, was in the month we know as April. According to the Gregorian Calendar (presently in use by most of the world), Passover varies as to the day because Gregorian months are not lunar. Fourteen days after each new moon a full moon appears. So Passover time was always at full moon.

The Hebrew word pesach is translated Passover, and means literally, to pass, spring over, or spare (cf. Exo. 12:13-27). Passover day was one day out of a festival of seven or eight days duration, called in Hebrew, hammatzzoth, literally, the unleavened things, (cf. Lev. 23:4 ff.). So, Passover came to be called, the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Luk. 22:1). The parallel accounts, which the student should read are Mat. 26:3-75; Mat. 27:1; Mar. 14:1-72; Mar. 15:1 and Joh. 13:1 through Joh. 18:27.

Luke notes that as the Passover drew near, the chief priests and scribes were seeking how to put Jesus to death. Matthew records that at that moment Jesus was predicting, for the fifth time, His death at their hands (Mat. 26:1-2). While the chief priests and Sanhedrin were planning to postpone their efforts to destroy Jesus until after the Feast (Mat. 26:3-5), Jesus was predicting they would actually crucify Him during the Feast. Jesus not only knew their murderous scheme, but He knew they would change their plans to delay and carry them out during the Feast. So, in the palace of Caiaphas, the high priest, they concluded they must arrest Jesus by stealth or secretly, lest the multitudes, who were proclaiming Jesus to be the Son of David, their king, might rise up against them. Quite unexpectedly, they are presented a way to find Him and arrest Him without the multitudes knowing it until it is done.

Luke alone records, Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot . . . He went away and conferred with the chief priests and captains how he might betray him to them, (see also Joh. 13:2; Joh. 13:27). Scripture indicates Judas was greedy and dishonest from the beginning of his discipleship (cf. Joh. 12:6). The point to remember here is that Satan accomplished possession or entry into Judas heart because Judas wanted him to! Men may either give place to the devil or not, Eph. 4:27. Men may resist the devil or not, Jas. 4:7. God only gives up on men when men refuse to have God (Rom. 1:18 ff.; 2Th. 2:10-12; Rev. 13:1 ff.). Judas knew of the hatred, anger, malice and subterfuge of the priesthood toward Jesus. Judas had seen and heard their desire to destroy Jesus many times. Judas was not an unwilling victim of Satan. Judas motive, so far as the record goes, was strictly greed. There is no indication that there was anything political, ideological or theological involved at all. H. Schonfield says in his book, Passover Plot, that Jesus, wanting to be Messiah, plots to get Himself crucified so He can fulfill Old Testament prophecies. In doing so, Jesus tricks Judas into betraying Him by continually applying pressure or psyching Judas into it through pointed references to Judas as betrayer, thief, etc. Judas, then, having supposedly discerned that this is what Jesus wanted, decided to make a few pieces of silver from the plot. One has only to read the gospel documents to see the absurdity of such run-away imagination. For Jesus to have carried out such a plot would have required more divine omniscience and omnipotence almost than even the gospel records accord Him! He would have to know with divine certainty the future movements and decisions of scores of people; He would have to have had the power to manipulate people and times and circumstances beyond any mortals control. How did Jesus, if He were only human and not divine, even know Judas had betrayed Him? Judas did not report back to Jesus!

The day of Unleavened Bread was the day when the Jew searched his house for chametz, leaven, to purge the house of all of it. It was also the day on which the passover lamb had to be sacrificed on the Temple altar. Luke indicates Jesus waited until the Feast was in its first day to prepare. He apparently did this because there would be no need to prepare sooner (except to have the lamb selected, which the owner of the upper room probably did), and He was extremely busy up until the very day of the Passover meal. It also gave opportunity for another demonstration of His supernatural foreknowledge of the exact place and circumstances in connection with His observance. Finally, it would keep the meeting place secret until He could assemble His disciples for a final, personal and intensive session of instructions and encouragements. Judas was thereby prevented from betraying the place where Jesus might be arrested before Jesus desired it.

Jesus appointed Peter and John to make preparations for the observance of the Passover. When they asked Him Where?, He demonstrated once again His divine foreknowledge by predicting they would meet a man carrying a pitcher (Gr. keramion, from which we get English, ceramic) of water. It would be unusual for the master of a house (Gr. oikodespote, the despot of the house) to be carrying a ceramic jar of waterthat was the work of servants and women! But Jesus foreknew the exact moment the two disciples would reach a certain point in order to be able to find this particular householder carrying a jar of water, and that this householder would invite them to use his upper room, A literal translation of the Greek text would read: And you will say to the house-master of the house, Says to you the Teacher. . . . This man must have been a wealthy disciple of Jesus. The homes of the wealthy had large upper rooms as second-story guest rooms with a staircase built on the outside wall of the house. Guests could enter and leave their guest room on the second floor without disturbing the householders family. The word furnished is the Greek word estromenon and means literally, spread out, as one prepares a bed or spreads out straw for a bed. The upper room was spread out (furnishes) especially with a table and couches for Jesus observance of the Passover.

The two apostles went into the city and found it exactly as Jesus had told them it would be. They immediately set about to prepare for the Passover. Wednesday evening, at sundown, would have begun the Passover when every householder would gather his family and they would all take lamps and search the house diligently for leaven. So many preparations were required, the actual meal itself would not be eaten until the next evening (Thursday). The ingredients for bitter herbs had to be gathered (horse radish, bay, thyme, majoram or mint and basil). This was all used to make the sauce or gravy called charoseththe sop into which the unleavened bread (matza-bread) was dipped to symbolize the mortar the Hebrews had to make as slaves in Egypt. Utensils for holding the sop, for drinking the wine, for washing (purification) of hands and feet, etc., had to be procured. The most important preparation was taking the lamb (which had been selected four days earlier) to the temple and slitting its throat so that its blood could be poured out on the altar. Priests and Levites collected the blood and poured it out. The blood then ran down the gutters into the Kidron valley. Even with a conservative estimate of one million worshipers at Passover, there would be 100,000 lambs slain in one day. That would average approximately 4,166 every hour or 69 every minute! The entrails and fat were thrown on the fire on the altar causing the stench of burning flesh to float over the city. The smoke, bleating of sheep, smell of warm blood, trumpets blowing and people shouting must have made a spectacle beyond imagination. The worshiper took his slain lamb home, roasted it, careful not to break a bone, and the Feast was ready, Using a bunch of hyssop, its blood was sprinkled on the lintel and door-posts of the house. All these preparations probably took Wednesday night and most of Thursday morning so Jesus and the apostles did not start supper until late Thursday afternoon. They may have slept a few hours Wednesday night, but they would not get but a few winks for on Thursday night they were out in the garden of Gethsemane.

Luk. 22:14-30 Participation: When everything was ready, Jesus reclined (Greek, anepese) on a couch pulled up to the table (Luk. 22:21, Greek word for table is trapezes, from which we get the English word, trapeze). Jews of that day usually ate according to the Roman custom by reclining on couches large enough to hold three people. When the family had gathered to the table, a prayer was said and then everyone dipped a piece of matza bread into the charoseth sauce (the sop). Charoseth is a Hebrew word meaning bondage or captivity. This was eaten and the first cup of wine was drunk accompanied by a blessing (the Greek word for blessing is euchariste, see Luk. 22:17). Then, Psa. 114:1-8 was recited telling how the Israelites left Egypt. Next, drops of salt water were drunk in memory of the tears their forefathers shed in bondage. Next, they began to eat the roasted lamb, accompanied by the bitter herb sauce. Two more cups of wine were drunk, passed from hand to hand, and the third cup was called, with particular solemnity, the cup of benediction. Next, the Hallel (Psa. 113:1-9; Psa. 114:1-8; Psa. 115:1-18; Psa. 116:1-19; Psa. 117:1-2; Psa. 118:1-29) was chanted as a prayer of thanksgiving, and when the verse, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord (Psa. 118:26) was recited, a fourth cup of wine, the last of the ritual, was passed among the family. The Passover was usually a cheerful feast, reminding the Hebrews of the deliverance of their nation from bondage. The Talmud says: It is as savory as an olive, and, The Hallel should burst through the roof of the house. This feast was extremely significant for Jesus! Just before they began the rituals of the Passover, Jesus announced, I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer. He knew it would be the last Passover of any significance for these apostles. The Passover was to be superceded by the fulfilling of it in the kingdom of God (the church). Henceforth Jesus disciples would memorialize Him (cf. 1Co. 5:6-8; 1Pe. 1:19) as their Passover in a ceremony called, the Lords Supper. This is the last Jewish communion Jesus would have with His disciples. After this, in His Spirit, He would meet with them around His table, communing with them in His Supper. Paul clearly indicates that when Christians observe the Lords Supper they are communing with Him (1Co. 10:16) and He is participating with them. Jesus said, Wherever two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them, (Mat. 18:20). Jesus had much to teach these apostles before He left them to return to heaven. The Passover usually called forth the most spiritual moments in the life of a Hebrew. With all the remembering of Gods atonement, Gods love, Gods serving and Gods Spirit guiding the Hebrews in their deliverance from Egypt, Jesus anticipated this last Passover at the most opportune time to focus the hearts of the apostles on the new deliverancethe fulfillment of what the Passover merely typified. It is evident the apostles needed spiritual edification! The kingdom of God was soon to be established and left to their charge and they were still very much insensitive to its true nature. They were arguing and competing for places of honor and position, (Luk. 22:24).

Luke apparently departs from a strict chronological account of these events, and places the institution of the Lords Supper (Luk. 22:19-23) before it actually took place. Marks gospel places it later, after the departure of Judas (cf. Joh. 13:27-30). It seems more logical to follow Marks chronology. When one takes all four gospel accounts into consideration here, it is evident that some omit what others record and as a result some rearrangement in chronology must be made. This, of course, does not destroy the integrity of authenticity of any of the accounts. The same omissions and anachronisms would be found in the notes of any four newspaper reporters should they report on the same incident after having talked to different eyewitnesses on different days! We skip now to Luk. 22:24-30 for the sake of chronological precision.

Apparently Jesus had just poured the first cup of wine for the Passover and given it to the apostles when He noticed their contention. The Greek word philoneikia, means love of strife and signifies a spirit of contentiousness. The apostles were enjoying their dispute over who would be greatest. Jesus had to interrupt this precious moment to rebuke these ambitious men. He had already rebuked them in practically the same words, just a few weeks earlier, as they walked through Perea on their way to this very Passover (cf. Mat. 20:25-28). They did not get the message then. Now they were still acting like pagans. Gentiles (unbelievers) get power over one another by bribery, flattery, deceit, favoritism or force. They do it for selfish reasons: security, fame or self-indulgence. Jesus made it very plain: Not so with you! They must understand what the world does not understandthe only man who really has any influence over others is the one who gets it from others who have given it willingly because he has loved them and served them. Any man whose influence over others depends on force, deceit, flattery or partiality does not really have honor, willingly, but grudgingly. That is false honor. The greatest apostle would be the one who served the most. Jesus was the ultimate example of this principle. Whereas the so-called great rulers of mankind have ruled because men gave in to them grudgingly, and partially, Jesus rules completely because men and women surrender to Him willingly and totally. Men give Jesus their minds, souls, hearts and bodies, because He demonstrated genuine, perfect love for them. He who was the greatest servant is the greatest ruler. He promised the apostles that the rewards which were to be theirs when they served in His kingdom would surpass any kind of fleshly reward or honor they were then dreaming about. They would receive the real rewards, the spiritual rewards, the eternally abiding rewards. They, as believers, would be allowed to sit with Him at His table in the messianic kingdom, constantly feasting on the Bread of Life and the Living Water. They, as apostles and evangelists, would be given the privilege of preaching the gospel and writing the new covenant scriptures which would judge the twelve tribes of Israel. Jesus is not ranking the apostles in some sort of ecclesiastical hierarchy here, He is offering them the privilege of being first into the vineyard (cf. Mat. 20:1-16). They will be first to open the doors of the kingdom of the Messiah by preaching the gospel on the Day of Pentecost (Act. 2:1-47). Every Jew will ultimately be judged by Jehovah according to the response he makes to the apostolic gospel, preached and written. So will every Gentile. The apostles themselves are not the judgethe gospel is. Whatever they proclaim will have already been bound in heaven (cf. Mat. 16:19 et al.).

Immediately after this rebuke, Jesus rose from the supper, laid aside His garments, and wrapped a towel around His waist. He then took a wash basin filled with water and began to wash the apostles feet (cf. Joh. 13:1-21). This event should be chronologically inserted here.

Next, as Luke records in Luk. 22:21-23, Jesus exposed the betrayer, Judas (see also Mat. 26:21-24; Mar. 14:18-21; and Joh. 13:22-30). A number of Old Testament predictions were fulfilled when the Messiah was betrayed (see Psa. 41:9; Zec. 11:7-14). Jesus predicted His betrayal before it was known by others so that when it came to pass the apostles would not be caught unaware and fall into despondency. When they looked back on these events after His resurrection they would have their faith in Jesus strengthened. Jesus also made a last attempt to provoke Judas to repentance. Mainly, Jesus prediction here was to show that what was happening to Him was within the fore-ordained plan of God. Jesus was not the unfortunate victim of circumstances. He was not powerless before the evil machinations of men. He was not killed, He chose to die. He chose when, how, and by whom. He laid down His life and He took it up again. No one took it from Him (cf. Joh. 10:17-18; Joh. 19:11). Jesus encouraged His apostles, that when they should see Him betrayed, they should not be dismayedit was what He came for, He was in complete control, this was His mission (cf. Joh. 13:20).

The other disciples did not understand that Judas was the betrayer when Jesus announced it! Perhaps this was because He first gave a generalized statement about a betrayer. Matthew and Mark indicate the apostles began to be very depressed and question one after the other, Is it I, Lord? Peter beckoned to John to ask Jesus who the betrayer was (Joh. 13:23-26). Still Jesus gave an answer that could have included all or any one of them when He said, It is he to whom I shall give this morsel. . . . (Joh. 13:26). He probably had dipped the morsel for each one of them since He would be the master of the group. Judas was expert at deceiving his comrades. He joined right in with the chorus of Is it I, Lord? Jesus probably reclined on a couch with John and JudasJohn at His front, Judas at His back; Peter was on a couch with two others across the table from Jesus. Jesus leaned back toward Judas and lowered His voice as He replied to Judas (Joh. 13:27-30). The other apostles, still in a state of shock and confusion, murmuring among themselves, did not observe Jesus hushed remarks to Judas, nor did they observe Judas as he got up and slipped out into the night. Jesus aimed to expose the plot, let Judas know privately He knew who the betrayer was, and yet not cause the other apostles to mob Judas and kill him with their own hands.

Now we come back to Luk. 22:19-20, and the institution of the Lords Supper. The careful student will notice there is no Luk. 22:20 in the RSV text printed at the beginning of this lesson. After the word body in Luk. 22:19, the following words have been deleted from the Revised Standard Version English text:

which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me. 20 And likewise the cup after supper, saying, This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.

There is, however, such a preponderance of the best, most ancient, Greek texts in favor of these words as part of the original text, we choose to consider them as such and comment on them. The Greek texts called Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, Codex Ephraemi and a host of others include these words. The Greek texts which do omit them are not of the same significance as those which include these words.

During the discussion of the betrayal Jesus and the apostles continued to eat the Passover meal. As they were eating, according to Matthew and Mark, He took bread and blessed it, and broke it and gave to them. . . . Luke uses the Greek word eucharistesas which is translated into English, thanks. It is the word from which we get the English word, eucharist, often used as a synonymous title for the Lords Supper. Jesus used two elements right out of the Passover supper itself to institute the memorial supper He commanded His disciples to observe forever afterunleavened bread (Hebrew, matzzah; Greek, azumon) and wine (Hebrew, yayin; Greek, oinos). In the text the wine is referred to as the cup (Gr. poterion). At the Passover the cup contained yayin, a sweet wine from the grape with probably a low degree of fermentation (see Harold Fowlers Special Study, Should Jesus Drink Wine?, in The Gospel of Matthew, Vol. II, pg. 526533, pub. College Press). These two elements, bread and wine, are used often in the Bible to symbolize flesh and blood or life. Their symbolic significance would not be lost on these Jewish apostles.

Jesus said, Do this in remembrance of me. The apostle Paul tells us that Jesus also said, Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me, (cf. 1Co. 11:25). Jesus did not, at this Passover supper, so far as the record goes, specify how often this remembrance was to be observed. However, the divine history of the early church (Acts of Apostles, Luk. 20:7), indicates the first century church observed this memorial each first day of the week. Writings of the earliest post-apostolic church leaders (Justin Martyr, cir. 150 A.D. et al.) indicate it was observed every first day of the week by the early Christians. It would certainly seem reasonable that every time a local congregation of Christians meets as a whole body for worshiping the Lord they would want to observe the Lords Supper. It would also appear that following the precedent set by the first century church would be desirable for the church for all ages. The very fact, however, that Jesus did not specify in detail how often it must be observed, should make any Christian beware of being legalistic about the matter. Legalism in respect to frequency, whether too often or not often enough, robs it of its very essenceremembrance out of love. Jesus did not want Christians to have to be forced or coerced by human manipulation to remember Him. He wants believers to come in loving remembrance of His atonement of grace. He does not want anyone to come to His supper trusting in a ritualistic observance to attain self-justification.

The purpose of the Supper is, first, to memorialize in a new and more complete manner Gods redemption of man. The Passover typified a redemption God would fulfill in the future. Christs Supper memorializes redemption as an accomplished fact of history. It signifies that our redemption is accomplished by the Person, Christ, not by any works of our own. The Supper is not a means of grace. Christians observe it as an expression of their faith in what Christ accomplished for them. It is a divinely instituted ceremony through which Christians express their love for Jesus. Deliberate refusal to observe it would result in being lost because that would be rebellion and faithlessness. The Supper is also for the purpose of communion. Jesus said it was the new covenant in my blood. After His death, resurrection and ascension He promised He would participate with believers through this Supper. So, all Christians commune with Christ as they observe His supper. The Greek word koinonia (1Co. 10:16-17) is translated communion, but means participation. Christians participate by faith expressed through this Supper, in the death and resurrection of Christ. But the Lords Supper is not the only expression of faith or participation in the atonement of Christ. Peter tells us Christians are made partakers (Gr. koinonoi, same word as used in 1Co. 10:16-17) of the divine nature through a long list of things, headed by His very great and precious promises (cf. 2Pe. 1:3-11)! Christians also declare their participation with one another as one body through this Supper (1Co. 10:17; 1Co. 11:17-34). The Supper is a weekly celebration of the believers union with Jesus and with His body, the church.

According to the apostle Paul, the Lords Supper is also to be used as a vehicle for self-examination, for proclamation of the gospel and a testimony to His Second Coming (cf. 1Co. 11:23-32). It certainly should be a time for thanksgiving (eucharist). It is one way a believer may offer a beautiful prayer to the Lord Jesus Christ. Man is so prone to forget! The Lords supper is an act of gracious mercy by Jesus-not a tyrannical enslavement. If He had not instituted it, we would surely be spiritually poor. What a blessing it isimpressive in its simplicity, grand in its depth. Let us love it and honor it from the heart.

Some religious people want to make the Lords Supper a sacramenta literal means of obtaining the grace of God. One form of such literalism is called transubstantiation. In this particular view, the Supper is called Mass and at a specific time in the Mass, when the host is elevated, a bell rings, and the bread and wine are, allegedly, changed by a miracle into the actual body and actual blood of Jesus. This literalism, and many differing shades of it, are all based on an unnatural emphasis on the word is in the statement of Jesus, This is my body . . . this is my blood. . . . Consider the following:

a.

When Jesus instituted the Supper His physical flesh and blood were still intact in His physical body. None of the apostles were actually chewing His flesh or drinking His blood. No miracle is said to have taken place in the upper room to make the bread and wine into His actual substance.

b.

Even if one could literally eat His flesh and drink His blood, it would not be profitable (cf. Joh. 6:63). When Jesus gave His sermon on the Bread of Life (Joh. 6:51 ff.), many Jews did think He was talking like a cannibal, but Jesus corrected them precisely and concisely.

c.

Which bread and wine are actually His flesh and blood? If we should put the emphasis on This is my body. . . . then the very bread and wine which the apostles consumed would be the only body and blood Jesus gave.

d.

Jesus used other things in a representative way and never intended them to be taken literally: I am the Vine, you are the branches . . . I am the door of the sheep, my sheep hear my voice. . . .

It is faith in the heart of the believer expressing itself in obedient love that makes the bread and wine efficaciousnot the ceremony, not the elements and not even the statement, alone, of Christ. If efficaciousness be in the ceremony, or the elements or even in the statement, alone, of Christ, without the faith of the believer, then the Supper provides efficacy for anyone who merely partakes. Paul makes it clear that there is a possibility of participants, with the wrong motives and attitudes, drinking condemnation unto themselves (1Co. 11:27).

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XXII.

(1, 2) Now, the feast of unleavened bread . . .See Notes on Mat. 26:1-5; Mar. 14:1-2. St. Lukes way of giving a preliminary explanation of the Jews Passover is characteristic of the Gentile Evangelist.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 22

AND SATAN ENTERED INTO JUDAS ( Luk 22:1-6 )

22:1-6 The Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover, was near, and the chief priests and the scribes searched to find a way to destroy Jesus, for they were afraid of the people. And Satan entered into Judas, who was called Iscariot, who belonged to the number of the Twelve. So he went away and discussed with the chief priests and captains how he might betray Jesus to them. They were glad and they undertook to give him money. So he agreed, and he began to look for a suitable time to betray him, when the mob were not there.

It was at Passover time that Jesus came to Jerusalem to die. The Feast of Unleavened Bread is not, strictly speaking, the same thing as the Passover. The Feast of Unleavened Bread lasted for a week, from 15th to 21st Nisan (April), and the Passover itself was eaten on 15th Nisan. It commemorated the deliverance of the people of Israel from their slavery in Egypt ( Exo 12:1-51). On that night the angel of death smote the first-born son in every Egyptian family; but he passed over the homes of the Israelites, because the lintels of their doors were smeared with the blood of the lamb to distinguish them. On that night they left so quickly that, at their last meal, there was no time to bake bread with leaven. It was unleavened cakes they ate.

There were elaborate preparations for the Passover. Roads were repaired; bridges were made safe; wayside tombs were whitewashed lest the pilgrim should fail to see them, and so touch them and become unclean. For a month before, the story and meaning of the Passover was the subject of the teaching of every synagogue. Two days before the Passover there was in every house a ceremonial search for leaven. The householder took a candle and solemnly searched every nook and cranny in silence, and the last particle of leaven was thrown out.

Every male Jew, who was of age and who lived within 15 miles of the holy city, was bound by law to attend the Passover. But it was the ambition of every Jew in every part of the world (as it is still) to come to the Passover in Jerusalem at least once in his lifetime. To this day, when Jews keep the Passover in every land they pray that they may keep it next year in Jerusalem. Because of this vast numbers came to Jerusalem at the Passover time. Cestius was governor of Palestine in the time of Nero and Nero tended to belittle the importance of the Jewish faith. To convince Nero of it, Cestius took a census of the lambs slain at one particular Passover. Josephus tells us that the number was 256,500. The law laid it down that the minimum number for a Passover celebration was 10. That means that on this occasion, if these figures are correct, there must have been more that 2,700,000 pilgrims to the Passover. It was in a city crowded like that that the drama of the last days of Jesus was played out.

The atmosphere of Passover time was always inflammable. The headquarters of the Roman government was at Caesarea, and normally only a small detachment of troops was stationed at Jerusalem; but for the Passover season many more were drafted in. The problem which faced the Jewish authorities was how to arrest Jesus without provoking a riot. It was solved for them by the treachery of Judas. Satan entered into Judas. Two things stand out.

(i) Just as God is ever looking for men to be his instruments, so is Satan. A man can be the instrument of good or of evil, of God or of the devil. The Zoroastrians see this whole universe as the battle ground between the god of the light and the god of the dark, and in that battle a man must choose his side. We, too, know that a man can be the servant of the light or of the dark.

(ii) But it remains true that Satan could not have entered into Judas unless Judas had opened the door. There is no handle on the outside of the door of the human heart. It must be opened from within.

To every man there openeth

A high way and a low;

And every man decideth

The way his soul shall go.

It is our own decision whether we will choose to be the instrument of Satan or a weapon in the hand of God. We can enlist in either service. God help us choose aright!

THE LAST MEAL TOGETHER ( Luk 22:7-23 )

22:7-23 There came the day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, on which the Passover had to be sacrificed. Jesus despatched Peter and John. “Go,” he said, “and make ready the Passover for us that we may eat it.” They said to him, “Where do you want us to make it ready?” “Look you,” he said to them, “when you have gone into the city, a man will meet you, carrying a jar of water. Follow him to the house into which he enters; and you will say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says to you, “Where is the guest room that I may eat the Passover with my disciples?”‘ And he will show you a big upper room, ready furnished. There, get things ready.” So they went away and found everything just as he had told them; and they made ready the Passover.

When the hour came he took his place at table, and so did his disciples. “I have desired with all my heart,” he said to them, “to eat this Passover with you before I suffer, for I tell you that I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” He received the cup, and gave thinks, and said, “Take this and divide it among yourselves. For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God has come.” And he took the bread, and gave thanks, and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body which is being given for you. Do this so that you will remember me.” In the same way, after the meal, he took the cup saying, “This cup is the new covenant made at the price of my blood, which is shed for you. But–look you–the hand of him who betrays me is on the table with me, for the Son of Man goes as it has been determined. But woe to that man by whom he has been betrayed”; and they began to question one another which of them it could be who was going to do this.

Once again Jesus did not leave things until the last moment; his plans were already made. The better class houses had two rooms. The one room was on the top of the other; and the house looked exactly like a small box placed on top of a large one. The upper room was reached by an outside stair. During the Passover time all lodging in Jerusalem was free. The only pay a host might receive for letting lodgings to the pilgrims was the skin of the lamb which was eaten at the feast. A very usual use of an upper room was that it was the place where a Rabbi met with his favourite disciples to talk things over with them and to open his heart to them. Jesus had taken steps to procure such a room. He sent Peter and John into the city to look for a man bearing a jar of water. To carry water was a woman’s task. A man carrying a jar of water would be as easy to pick out as, say, a man using a lady’s umbrella on a wet day. This was a prearranged signal between Jesus and a friend.

So the feast went on; and Jesus used the ancient symbols and gave them a new meaning.

(i) He said of the bread, “This is my body.” Herein is exactly what we mean by a sacrament. A sacrament is something, usually a very ordinary thing, which has acquired a meaning far beyond itself for him who has eyes to see and a heart to understand. There is nothing specially theological or mysterious about this.

In the house of everyone of us there is a drawer full of things which can only be called junk, and yet we will not throw them out, because when we touch and handle and look at them, they bring back this or that person, or this or that occasion. They are common things but they have a meaning far beyond themselves. That is a sacrament.

When Sir James Barries mother died and they were clearing up her belongings, they found that she had kept all the envelopes in which her famous son had posted her the cheques he so faithfully and lovingly sent. They were only old envelopes but they meant much to her. That is a sacrament.

When Nelson was buried in St. Paul’s Cathedral a party of his sailors bore his coffin to the tomb. One who saw the scene writes, “With reverence and with efficiency they lowered the body of the world’s greatest admiral into its tomb. Then, as though answering to a sharp order from the quarter deck, they all seized the Union Jack with which the coffin had been covered and tore it to fragments, and each took his souvenir of the illustrious dead.” All their lives that little bit of coloured cloth would speak to them of the admiral they had loved. That is a sacrament.

The bread which we eat at the sacrament is common bread, but, for him who has a heart to feel and understand, it is the very body of Christ.

(ii) He said of the cup, “This cup is the new covenant made at the price of my blood.” In the biblical sense, a covenant is a relationship between man and God. God graciously approached man; and man promised to obey and to keep his law. The whole matter is set out in Exo 24:1-8. The continuance of that covenant depends on man’s keeping his pledge and obeying this law; Man could not and cannot do that; man’s sin interrupts the relationship between man and God. All the Jewish sacrificial system was designed to restore that relationship by the offering of sacrifice to God to atone for sin. What Jesus said was this–“By my life and by my death I have made possible a new relationship between you and God. You are sinners. That is true. But because I died for you, God is no longer your enemy but your friend.” It cost the life of Christ to restore the lost relationship of friendship between God and man.

(iii) Jesus said, “Do this and it will make you remember me.” Jesus knew how easily the human mind forgets. The Greeks had an adjective which they used to describe time–“time,” they said, “which wipes all things out,” as if the mind of man were a slate and time a sponge which wiped it clean. Jesus was saying, “In the rush and press of things you will forget me. Man forgets because he must, and not because he will. Come in sometimes to the peace and stillness of my house and do this again with my people–and you will remember.”

It made the tragedy all the more tragic that at that very table there was one who was a traitor. Jesus Christ has at every communion table those who betray him, for if in his house we pledge ourselves to him and then by our lives go out to deny him, we too are traitors to him.

STRIFE AMONG THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST ( Luk 22:24-30 )

22:24-30 Strife arose amongst them about which was to be considered greatest. Jesus said to them, “The kings of the gentiles exercise lordship over them and those who have authority over them claim the title of Benefactor. It must not be so with you; but let him who is greatest among you be as the youngest; and let him who is the leader be as him who serves. Who is the greater? He who sits at table, or he who serves? Is it not he who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves. You are those who have stayed with me in my tribulations; and I assign to you a kingdom, just as my Father has assigned one to me, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom; and you will sit upon thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

It is one of the most poignantly tragic things in the gospel story that the disciples could quarrel about precedence in the very shadow of the cross. The seating arrangements at a Jewish feast were very definite. The table was arranged like a square with one side left open. At the top side of the square, in the centre, sat the host. On his right sat the guest of first honour; on his left the second guest; second on his right, the third guest; second on his left the fourth guest; and so on round the table. The disciples had been quarrelling about where they were to sit, for they had not yet rid themselves of the idea of an earthly kingdom. Jesus told them bluntly that the standards of his kingdom were not the standards of this world. A king on earth was evaluated by the power he exercised. One of the commonest titles for a king in the east was Euergetes ( G2110) , which is the Greek for Benefactor. Jesus said, “It is not the king but the servant who obtains that title in my kingdom.”

(i) What the world needs is service. The odd thing is that the business world knows this. Bruce Barton points out that you will find by the road-side, over and over again, the sign, Service Station. It was the claim of one firm, “We will crawl under your car oftener and get ourselves dirtier than any of our competitors.” The strange thing is that there is more argument about precedence, and more concern about people’s “places” in the church than anywhere else. The world needs and recognizes service.

(ii) It is only the man who will consent to serve more than anyone else who will really rise high. It frequently happens that the ordinary worker will go home at 5.30 p.m. to forget his or her job until next morning, while the light will be burning in the office of the chief executive long after that. Often passers-by would see the light burning in John D. Rockefeller’s office when the rest of the building was in darkness. It is a law of life that service leads to greatness; and the higher a man rises the greater the servant he must be.

(iii) We can found our life either on giving or on getting; but the plain fact is that if we found it on getting we shall miss both the friendship of man and the reward of God, for no one ever loved a man who was always out for himself.

(iv) Jesus finished his warning by promising his disciples that those who had stood by him through thick and thin would in the end reign with him. God will be in no man’s debt. Those who have shared in the bearing of Christ’s cross will some day share in the wearing of his crown.

PETER’S TRAGEDY ( Luk 22:31-38 ; Luk 22:54-62 )

22:31-38,54-62 “Simon, Simon,” Jesus said, “Look you, Satan has been allowed to have you that he may sift you like wheat. But I have prayed for you that your faith may not wholly fail. And you–when you have turned again–strengthen your brothers.” He said to him, “Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death.” “Peter,” he said, “I tell you, the cock will not crow today before you have three times denied that you know me.”

And he said to them, “When I sent you out without purse or wallet or shoes, did you lack for anything?” They said, “For nothing.” But he said to them. “But now, let him who has a purse take it, and so with a wallet; and let him who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you that this which stands written must be fulfilled in me–‘And he was reckoned with the law-breakers’–for that which was written of me is finding its fulfilment.” They said, “Lord, here are two swords.” He said to them, “It is enough.”. . .

So they seized Jesus and led him away, and brought him to the High Priest’s house. Peter followed a long way away. When they had kindled a fire in the middle of the courtyard, and were sitting there together, Peter sat in the midst of them. A maidservant saw him as he sat in the firelight. She looked intently at him. “This man, too,” she said, “was with him.” He denied it. “Woman,” he said, “I do not know him.” Soon after another man saw him and said, “You, too, were one of them.” Peter said, “Man, I am not!” About an hour elapsed and another insisted, “Truly this man, too, was with him. I know it for he is a Galilaean.” Peter said, “Man, I don’t know what you are talking about.” And immediately–while he was still speaking–a cock crew. And the Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered what the Lord had said, that he said to him, “Before the cock crows today you will deny me three times.” And he went out and wept bitterly.

We take the story of the tragedy of Peter all in one piece. Peter was a strange paradoxical mixture.

(i) Even in spite of his denial he was fundamentally loyal. H. G. Wells once said, “A man may be a bad musician, and yet be passionately in love with music.” No matter what Peter did, however terrible his failure, he was nonetheless passionately devoted to Jesus. There is hope for the man who even when he is sinning is still haunted by goodness.

(ii) Peter was well warned. Jesus warned him both directly and indirectly. Luk 22:33-38 with their talk of swords is a strange passage. But what they mean is this–Jesus was saying, “All the time so far you have had me with you. In a very short time you are going to be cast upon your own resources. What are you going to do about it? The danger in a very short time is not that you will possess nothing; but that you will have to fight for your very existence.” This was not an incitement to armed force. It was simply a vivid eastern way of telling the disciples that their very lives were at stake. No one could say that the seriousness and danger of the situation, and his own liability to collapse were not presented to Peter.

(iii) Peter was over-confident. If a man says, “That is one thing I will never do,” that is often the very thing against which he must most carefully guard. Again and again castles have been captured because the attackers took the route which seemed unattackable and unscalable and at that very spot the defenders were off their guard. Satan is subtle. He attacks the point at which a man is too sure of himself, for there he is likeliest to be unprepared.

(iv) In all fairness it is to be noted that Peter was one of the two disciples ( Joh 18:15) who had the courage to follow Jesus into the courtyard of the High Priest’s house at all. Peter fell to a temptation which could only have come to a brave man. The man of courage always runs more risks than the man who seeks a placid safety. Liability to temptation is the price that a man pays when he is adventurous in mind and in action. It may well be that it is better to fail in a gallant enterprise than to run away and not even to attempt it.

(v) Jesus did not speak to Peter in anger but looked at him in sorrow. Peter could have stood it if Jesus had turned and reviled him; but that voiceless, grief-laden look went to his heart like a sword and opened a fountain of tears.

I think I’d sooner frizzle up,

I’ the flames of a burnin’ ‘ell,

Than stand and look into ‘is face,

And ‘ear ‘is voice say–“Well?”

The penalty of sin is to face, not the anger of Jesus, but the heartbreak in his eyes.

(vi) Jesus said a very lovely thing to Peter. “When you have turned,” he said, “strengthen your brothers.” It is as if Jesus said to Peter, “You will deny me; and you will weep bitter tears; but the result will be that you will be better able to help your brothers who are going through it.” We cannot really help a man until we have been in the same furnace of affliction or the same abyss of shame as he has been. It was said of Jesus, “He can help others who are going through it because he has been through it himself.” ( Heb 2:18.) To experience the shame of failure and disloyalty is not all loss, because it gives us a sympathy and an understanding that otherwise we would never have won.

THY WILL BE DONE ( Luk 22:39-46 )

22:39-46 Jesus went out, and, as his custom was, made his way to the Mount of Olives. The disciples, too, accompanied him. When he came to the place, he said to them, “Pray that you may not enter into temptation.” And he was withdrawn from them, about a stone’s throw, and he knelt and prayed. “Father,” he said, “if it is your will, take this cup from me; but not my will, but yours be done,” And an angel from heaven appeared strengthening him. He was in an agony, and he prayed still more intensely, and his sweat was as drops of blood failing upon the ground. So he rose from prayer and came to his disciples, and found them sleeping from grief. “Why are you sleeping?” he said to them. “Rise and pray that you may not enter into temptation.”

The space within Jerusalem was so limited that there was no room for gardens. Many well-to-do people, therefore, had private gardens out on the Mount of Olives. Some wealthy friend had given Jesus the privilege of using such a garden, and it was there that Jesus went to fight his lonely battle. He was only thirty-three; and no one wants to die at thirty-three. He knew what crucifixion was like; he had seen it. He was in an agony; the Greek word is used of someone fighting a battle with sheer fear. There is no scene like this in all history. This was the very hinge and turning point in Jesus’ life. He could have turned back even yet. He could have refused the cross. The salvation of the world hung in the balance as the Son of God literally sweated it out in Gethsemane; and he won.

A famous pianist said of Chopin’s nocturne in C sharp minor, “I must tell you about it. Chopin told Liszt, and Liszt told me. In this piece all is sorrow and trouble. Oh such sorrow and trouble!–until he begins to speak to God, to pray; then it is all right.” That is the way it was with Jesus. He went into Gethsemane in the dark; he came out in the light–because he had talked with God. He went into Gethsemane in an agony; he came out with the victory won and with peace in his soul–because he had talked with God.

It makes all the difference in what tone of voice a man says, “Thy will be done.”

(i) He may say it in a tone of helpless submission, as one who is in the grip of a power against which it is hopeless to fight. The words may be the death-knell of hope.

(ii) He may say it as one who has been battered into submission. The words may be the admission of complete defeat.

(iii) He may say it as one who has been utterly frustrated and who sees that the dream can never come true: The words may be those of a bleak regret or even of a bitter anger which is all the more bitter because it cannot do anything about it.

(iv) He may say it with the accent of perfect trust. That is how Jesus said it. He was speaking to one who was Father; he was speaking to a God whose everlasting arms were underneath and about him even on the cross. He was submitting, but he was submitting to the love that would never let him go. Life’s hardest task is to accept what we cannot understand; but we can do even that if we are sure enough of the love of God.

God, thou art love! I build my faith on that …

I know thee, who has kept my path, and made

Light for me in the darkness, tempering sorrow

So that it reached me like a solemn joy:

It were too strange that I should doubt thy love.

Jesus spoke like that; and when we can speak like that, we can look up and say in perfect trust, “Thy will be done.”

THE TRAITOR’S KISS ( Luk 22:47-53 )

22:47-53 While Jesus was still speaking–look you–there came a crowd, and the man called Judas, one of the Twelve, was leading them. He came up to Jesus to kiss him; but Jesus said to him, “Judas, is it with a kiss that you would betray the Son of Man?” When those who were around him saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?” And one of them struck the servant of the High Priest and cut off his ear. Jesus answered, “Let it come even to this!” Jesus said to the chief priests and the Temple captains, and to the elders who had come to him, “Have you come out with swords and cudgels as against a brigand? When I was daily with you in the Temple you did not lift your hand against me; but this is your hour, and the power of darkness is here.”

Judas had found a way to betray Jesus in such a way that the authorities could come upon him when the crowd were not there. He knew that Jesus was in the habit of going at nights to the garden on the hill, and there he led the emissaries of the Sanhedrin. The captain of the Temple, or the Sagan, as he was called, was the official who was responsible for the good order of the Temple; the captains of the Temple here referred to were his lieutenants who were responsible for carrying out the actual arrest of Jesus. When a disciple met a beloved Rabbi, he laid his right hand on the Rabbi’s left shoulder and his left hand on the right shoulder and kissed him. It was the kiss of a disciple to a beloved master that Judas used as a sign of betrayal.

There were four different parties involved in this arrest, and their actions and reactions are very significant.

(i) There was Judas the traitor. He was the man who had abandoned God and entered into a league with Satan. It is only when a man has put God out of his life and taken Satan in, that he can sink to selling Christ.

(ii) There were the Jews who had come to arrest Jesus. They were the men who were blind to God. When God incarnate came to this earth, all that they could think of was how to hustle him to a cross. They had so long chosen their own way and shut their ears to the voice of God and their eyes to his guidance that in the end they could not recognise him when he came. It is a terrible thing to be blind and deaf to God. As Mrs. Browning wrote,

“I too have strength–

Strength to behold him and not worship him,

Strength to fall from him and not to cry to him.”

God save us from a strength like that!

(iii) There were the disciples. They were the men who for the moment had forgotten God. Their world had fallen in and they were sure the end had come. The last thing they remembered at that moment was God; the only thing they thought of was the terrible situation into which they had come. Two things happen to the man who forgets God and leaves him out of the situation. He becomes utterly terrified and completely disorganized. He loses the power to face life and to cope with it. In the time of trial, life is unlivable without God.

(iv) There was Jesus. And Jesus was the one person in the whole scene who remembered God. The amazing thing about him in the last days was his absolute serenity once Gethsemane was over. In those days, even at his arrest, it was he who seemed to be in control; and even at his trial, it was he who was the judge. The man who walks with God can cope with any situation and look any foe in the eyes, unbowed and unafraid. It is he, and he alone, who can ultimately say,

“In the fell clutch of circumstance,

I have not winced nor cried aloud.

Under the bludgeonings of chance

My head is bloody, but unbow’d.

It matters not how strait the gate,

How charged with punishments the scroll,

I am the master of my fate:

I am the captain of my soul.”

It is only when a man has bowed to God that he can talk and act like a conqueror.

MOCKING AND SCOURGING AND TRIAL ( Luk 22:63-71 )

22:63-71 The men who were holding Jesus mocked him and beat him. They blindfolded him and asked him, “Prophesy! Who is it who hit you?” And many another insulting word they spoke to him.

And when it was day, the assembly of the elders of the people came together, the chief priests and the scribes; and they led him away to the Sanhedrin, saying, “Tell us if you are God’s anointed one.” He said to them, “If I tell you, you will not believe me; if I ask you, you will not answer. But from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God.” They all said, “Are you then the Son of God?” He said to them, “You say that I am.” They said, “What further evidence do we need? We ourselves have heard it from his own mouth.”

During the night Jesus had been brought before the High Priest. That was a private and unofficial examination. Its purpose was for the authorities to gloat over him and, if possible, to trip him up in cross-examination so that a charge could be formulated against him. After that, he was handed over to the Temple police for safe-keeping, and they played their cruel jests upon him. When the morning came, he was taken before the Sanhedrin.

The Sanhedrin was the supreme court of the Jews. In particular it had complete jurisdiction over all religious and theological matters. It was composed of seventy members. Scribes, Rabbis and Pharisees, priests and Sadducees, and elders were all represented on it. It could not meet during the hours of darkness. That is why they held Jesus until the morning before they brought him before it. It could meet only in the Hall of Hewn Stone in the Temple court. The High Priest was its president.

We possess the rules of procedure of the Sanhedrin. Perhaps they are only the ideal which was never fully carried out; but at least they allow us to see what the Jews, at their best, conceived that the Sanhedrin should be and how far their actions fell short of their own ideals in the trial of Jesus. The court sat in a semi-circle, in which every member could see every other member. Facing the court stood the prisoner dressed in mourning dress. Behind him sat the rows of the students and disciples of the Rabbis. They might speak in defence of the prisoner but not against him. Vacancies in the court were probably filled by co-option from these students. All charges must be supported by the evidence of two witnesses independently examined. A member of the court might speak against the prisoner, and then change his mind and speak for him, but not vice-versa. When a verdict was due, each member had to give his individual judgment, beginning at the youngest and going on to the most senior. For acquittal a majority of one was all that was necessary; for condemnation there must be a majority of at least two. Sentence of death could never be carried out on the day on which it was given; a night must elapse so that the court might sleep on it, so that, perchance, their condemnation might turn to mercy. The whole procedure was designed for mercy; and, even from Luke’s summary account, it is clear that the Sanhedrin, when it tried Jesus, was far from keeping its own rules and regulations.

It is to be very carefully noted that the charge the Sanhedrin finally produced against Jesus was one of blasphemy. To claim to be the Son of God was an insult to God’s majesty and therefore blasphemy, and punishable by death.

It is the tragic fact that when Jesus asked for love he did not even receive simple justice. It is the glorious fact that Jesus, even when he had emerged from a night of malignant questioning, even when he had been mocked and buffeted and scourged, still had utter confidence that he would be set down at the right hand of God and that his triumph was sure. His faith defied the facts. He never for a moment believed that men in the end could defeat the purposes of God.

-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)

Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible

120. TRANSACTIONS OF THE TUESDAY PRECEDING THE CRUCIFIXION, Luk 22:1-6 .

Compare notes on Mat 26:1-16; Mar 14:1-11; Joh 12:2-7.

3. Then entered Satan into Judas After the supper at Bethany, as narrated by the other evangelists, at which the provocation produced a diabolical excitement in Judas’s mind. This entering of Satan into him is not to be interpreted as an actual possession, but as a filling his whole soul, by Satan, with his devilish spirit and purpose.

Surnamed Iscariot See note on Mat 10:4. The town of Kerioth, from which Judas seems to be named, is mentioned in Jos 15:25. Dr. Hackett identifies it with Khureitun, “a few miles south of Bethlehem.” “A dark spirit would find its own element in the gloomy scenery of Khureitun.”

Of the twelve A fact which both rendered the crime possible and aggravated its guilt. At the present time none but an apostle could have surrendered Jesus; for so great was his present influence with the people that the authorities needed to have it done in the absence of the multitude.

Compare notes on Mat 26:17-19; Mar 14:12-16.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘Now the feast of unleavened bread drew near, which is called the Passover, and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might put him to death, for they feared the people.’

Day by day the Passover or Feast of Unleavened Bread (the two feasts were seen as one and could be called by either name, as we also discover from Josephus, compare also Mat 26:17) drew nearer, and day by day the Chief Priests and Scribes sought ways of getting rid of Him. Note how it is emphasised that it was those who had special religious interests, and who were in direct conflict with each other, who were seeking to get rid of Him. They were each out to defend their own interests, but common interest had brought them together. On the other hand, they were afraid of the people. The situation was very tricky. Emotions, which were always high in Galilee and Judea, were at this time especially high, and any suggestion of the possibility of a disturbance had to be avoided. That would only bring the Roman authorities down on them, and they would be blamed for it. And then something happened that altered the whole picture. It must have seemed to them like a gift from Heaven, although as Luke makes clear, it was in fact a gift from Hell.

‘The chief priests and the scribes sought how they might put Him to death.’ We must assume here that an official decision had been reached. Jesus was now seen as a false prophet and must die. The only question therefore was how to bring it about without causing a riot. Yet their dishonesty comes out in that they wanted to put all the blame on Pilate, and avoid an execution for blasphemy, the very charge that they held against Him. For they knew how the people felt about the death of John the Baptiser, and they did not want any reaction against themselves. They wanted Pilate to take any backlash.

‘The people.’ This would be mainly the huge numbers of Galileans and Peraeans who were present at the Feast, among whom He was exceedingly popular and highly revered. And they would no doubt also include some Judeans and Jerusalemites who had witnessed His ministry.

‘The Passover.’ Elaborate preparations were always made for this feast so as to ensure the arrival of travellers in a fit religious state for it. Roads would be repaired, bridges made safe, and tombs whitewashed (so that they could be avoided, thus preventing religious defilement). Teaching about the Passover would be given in the synagogues from up to a month beforehand, and every male Jew within fifteen miles of Jerusalem who was thirteen years old or upwards would be required to attend. But many would flock from farther afield, and it was the ambition, even of those in the Dispersion, scattered around the world, to attend at least once in their lifetime. And, as a time when all Israel was gathered, it was a time for exposing false prophets (compare Deu 17:13). So this was not just any occasion. It was central in the nation’s life. Here at this time ‘the congregation of Israel’ was gathered together.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jesus Is Crucified And Rises Again (22:1-24:53).

We now come to the final Section of Luke which is also in the form of a chiasmus (see analysis below). Central in this final chiasmus is the crucifixion of Jesus. This brings out how central the crucifixion is in the thinking of Luke. As the Servant of the Lord He is to be numbered among the transgressors for their sakes (Luk 22:37). This is indeed what the Gospel has been leading up to, something that is further demonstrated by the space given to Jesus’ final hours. He has come to give His life in order to redeem men (Luk 21:28; Luk 22:20; Luk 24:46-47; Act 20:28; Mar 10:45), after which He will rise again, with the result that His disciples are to receive power from on high (Luk 24:49) ready for their future work of spreading the word, so that through His death repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in His name to all nations beginning from Jerusalem (Luk 24:46-47). Note especially how closely the forgiveness of sins is connected with His suffering, death and resurrection. This belies the argument that Luke does not teach atonement, for without atonement there can be no forgiveness, and why else is it so closely connected with His suffering and death?

But another emphasis raises its head here. Right from the commencement of Jesus’ ministry Satan, the hidden but powerful cosmic adversary, had sought to destroy His ministry (Luk 4:1-13), and having failed in that he will now seek to destroy both Jesus Himself, and the band of twelve whom He has gathered around Him. Luke wants us to see that there are more than earthly considerations in view. To him this is a cosmic battle.

This final section may be analysed as follows:

a Satan enters into Jesus’ betrayer who plots His betrayal in return for silver (Luk 22:1-6).

b Jesus feasts with His disciples (Luk 22:7-22).

c They discuss who is the greatest, but learn that they are rather to be servants, for which reason they will sit at His table with responsibility for His people (Luk 22:23-28).

d Jesus comes to the Garden of Gethsemane where He shuns what He has to face but submits to His Father’s will. In contrast Peter is revealed to be empty and as lacking the power that will later come in fulfilment of Christ’ words (Luk 22:29-62).

e Jesus is exposed to the mockery of the soldiers and the verdicts of the chief priests and then of Pilate and Herod (Luk 22:63 to Luk 23:25).

f Jesus is crucified (as the King of the Jews, the Messiah) and judgement is forecast on Jerusalem (Luk 23:26-33).

e Jesus is exposed to the mockery of the chief priests (the rulers) and to the verdicts of the two thieves and the Roman centurion ( Luk 23:34-49).

d Jesus is brought to the Garden where He is buried, but defeats death, the tomb when opened proving to be empty in fulfilment of Christ’s words (Luk 23:50 to Luk 24:10).

c The risen Jesus sits at table with two of His disciples a prelude to their future (Luk 24:11-35).

b The risen Jesus feasts with His disciples (Luk 24:36-47).

a God’s Power will enter into His faithful disciples and they are to be His witnesses to His glory and triumph (in contrast with Satan entering His betrayer who sought His downfall) (Luk 24:48-53).

‘And they returned to Jerusalem with great joy and were continually in the Temple, blessing God’ (Luk 24:53).

Note how in ‘a’ Satan enters into Judas to empower him to betray Jesus, and in the parallel the Holy Spirit will enter the other Apostles to empower them to be witnesses to Jesus. Judas is His betrayer, the others are His witness. In ‘b’ Jesus feasts with His disciples before He dies and shows them the bread and the wine, in the parallel He feasts with His disciples after the resurrection and shows them His hands and His feet. In ‘c’ they are to sit at His table, and in the parable two of His disciples sit with Him at table, symbolic of their future. In ‘d’ Jesus enters a Garden which will lead to His death, in the parallel He is brought into a Garden which will lead to His resurrection. In ‘e’ Jesus is exposed to the verdicts of the chief priests and rulers, and in the parallel He is exposed to the mockery of the chief priests and the thieves. But central to all in ‘f’ is His crucifixion as King of the Jews and Messiah.

The drama is in three stages:

The time of preparation of His disciples for the future before His trial and crucifixion.

The trial and crucifixion itself.

The resurrection and preparation for the sending forth of His disciples to all nations.

This will be followed in Acts by a description of this outreach until it reached Rome itself. We would surely therefore expect that in this first part His words will include words of preparation for that future. That should be kept in mind in all our interpretation.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Prophecy of His Betrayal In Luk 22:1-23 Jesus gives a prophecy of His betrayal by one of His disciples.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. The Plot to Kill Jesus Luk 22:1-6

2. The Preparation for the Passover Luk 22:7-13

3. Jesus Institutes the Lord’s Supper Luk 22:14-23

Luk 22:1-6 The Plot to Kill Jesus ( Mat 26:1-5 ; Mat 26:14-16 , Mar 14:1-2 ; Mar 14:10-11 , Joh 11:45-53 ) In Luk 22:1-6 we have the account of Judas Iscariot plotting with the chief priests and the scribes to kill Jesus.

Luk 22:3 Comments Judas Iscariot was chosen by Jesus Christ to be one of the Twelve (Mat 10:4), and he was given authority over demons to cast them out (Mat 10:1). Judas had also been given the responsibility of carrying the moneybag. At some point in time, he gave place to the devil and began to steal out of the money (Joh 12:6). After repeatedly giving place to the devil, Judas opened the door in his life for Satan to enter him (Luk 22:3). At this point, Satan was able to control his thoughts and moved him to betray the Lord (Joh 13:2). Judas had been given authority over Satan and his kingdom of demons, but he was deceived by the devil and later committed suicide in the midst of great remorse.

Mat 10:1, “And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.”

Mat 10:4, “Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.”

Joh 12:6, “This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.”

Joh 13:2, “And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him;”

This series of events reveals the way people become demon possessed without intending to do so from the beginning. Sin leads people down a path that may look appealing at first, but it ends in bondage, then condemnation and eventually destruction, as when Judas hanged himself out of guilt (Mat 27:3-5, Act 1:18).

Mat 27:3-5, “Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.”

Act 1:18, “Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.”

Luk 22:4 Comments You and I must ask the question, “How can a man connive and outsmart God”; for Jesus was God. Surely, in the hardness of Judas’ heart he allowed Satan to deceive him into believing that Jesus could be outdone by man.

Luk 22:6 Comments The reason for Jesus being seized in the Garden of Gethsemane is so that the crowd would not know.

Luk 22:7-13 The Preparation for the Passover ( Mat 26:17-25 , Mar 14:12-21 , Joh 13:21-30 ) In Luk 22:7-13 we have the account of Jesus and His disciples preparing for the Passover meal. When Jesus sent His disciples out to prepare a place for this meal, they asked Him where they should go. Rather than telling them the exact place, Jesus told them to look for a man carrying a pitcher of water. This lesson was to teach them about divine providence. He then told them to follow this man into a house, where they would be given a place to conduct the Passover meal. At this step in their act of obedience the disciples were to learn a lesson in divine provision. At an earlier time Simon Peter hesitated at such commandments from Jesus Christ (Luk 5:1-11). When Jesus told Peter to cast his nets on the other side he said, “we have toiled all the night, and have taken nothing: nevertheless at thy word I will let down the net.” Now they were learning to trust His word.

Jesus had commanded the twelve not to take anything with them when He sent the out to preach the Gospel and heal the sick (Luk 9:1-6). After teaching and healing the multitudes (Luk 9:10-17), He then tested them by asking them to feed the five thousand when the disciples had no food (Luk 9:13). Later, Jesus told His disciples to prepare for His triumphant entry into Jerusalem by going into the city and finding a colt tied (Luk 19:28-38).

In addition, Jesus was operating in the gifts of a word of knowledge, which He had received from the Father through the Holy Spirit when He charged them these things. Thus, Jesus was simply telling His disciples about what He had seen. In other words, Jesus did not know any further details, because they had not been revealed to Him.

Luk 22:13 Comments We see from Act 1:13 that this upper room is the same place where the disciples were gathered on the day of Pentecost.

Act 1:13, “And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.”

Luk 22:14-23 Jesus Institutes the Lord’s Supper ( Mat 26:26-30 , Mar 14:22-26 , 1Co 11:23-25 ) In Luk 22:14-23 Jesus institutes the Lord’s Supper using the bread and the wine.

Luk 22:14 Comments The hour that had arrived was the hour when the sun was setting.

Deu 16:6-7, “But at the place which the LORD thy God shall choose to place his name in, there thou shalt sacrifice the passover at even, at the going down of the sun , at the season that thou camest forth out of Egypt. And thou shalt roast and eat it in the place which the LORD thy God shall choose: and thou shalt turn in the morning, and go unto thy tents.”

Luk 22:15 Comments We know from Joh 13:1-2 that Jesus held a “Passover” meal with His disciples earlier in the day before the traditional evening Passover. This fact is further confirmed by the fact that the disciples thought that Jesus sent Judas Iscariot out to perhaps buy food for the Passover feast.

Joh 13:1, “ Now before the feast of the passover , when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. And supper being ended , the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him;”

Therefore, we see in this verse in Luke that Jesus’ great desire to eat with His disciples was the reason for an early meal.

Luk 22:16 Comments The fulfillment of the Old Testament Passover in the Kingdom of God is Jesus’ Passion as our sacrificial lamb.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Witnesses of Jesus’ Betrayal and Arrest In Luk 22:1-54 the author records three predictions by Jesus Christ concerning His betrayal and arrest.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. Prophecy of His Betrayal Luk 22:1-23

2. Prophecy of the Disciples’ Denial Luk 22:24-38

3. Prophecy of His Arrest Luk 22:39-54

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Witnesses of Jesus’ Glorification: His Passion and Resurrection – Luk 22:1 to Luk 24:53 organizes narrative material that testifies to Jesus’ rejection by the Jews, His death and His resurrection. This collection of material is organized in a way that gives three witnesses to each of these four events surrounding His Passion; His betrayal and arrest, His trial, His crucifixion and His resurrection. This section begins with His rejection by the Jewish leaders and culminates with His resurrection and commission to His disciples to preach the Gospel to all the world. While Act 1:1 reflects the two-fold emphasis of Jesus’ ministry of doing and teaching, Act 1:2-5 makes a clear reference to the rest of Luke’s Gospel beginning from His Passion until His ascension (Luk 22:1 to Luk 24:53).

Act 1:2-5, “Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.”

Outline – Note the proposed outline:

A. Witnesses of His Betrayal & Arrest Luk 22:1-54

1. Prophecy of His Betrayal Luk 22:1-23

2. Prophecy of the Disciples’ Denial Luk 22:24-38

3. Prophecy of His Arrest Luk 22:39-54

B. Witnesses of His Trial Luk 22:55 to Luk 23:25

1. Jesus’ Prophecy to Peter Fulfilled Luk 22:55-62

2. Jesus’ Prophecy to Jewish Leaders Luk 22:63-71

3. Jesus’ Prophecy to Pontus Pilate Luk 23:1-25

C. Witnesses of His Crucifixion Luk 23:26-56

1. Prophecy to the Multitude Luk 23:26-38

2. Prophecy to Criminal on the Cross Luk 23:39-43

3. Witness of the Centurion (a Roman) Luk 23:44-49

4. Witness of Joseph of Arimathea (a Palestinian Jew) Luk 23:50-56

D. Witnesses of His Resurrection Luk 24:1-53

1. Witness of His Resurrection by Women Luk 24:1-12

2. Witness of His Resurrection on Road to Emmaus Luk 24:13-35

3. Witness of His Resurrection by the Disciples Luk 24:36-49

E. Witness of His Ascension Luk 24:50-53

Witnesses of His Passion and Resurrection (The Trials of Jesus and His Apostles) – Luk 22:1 to Luk 24:53 records the lengthiest account within the four Gospels of Jesus’ arrest and trials leading up to His crucifixion. The trials recorded in Luke-Acts are numerous: of Jesus before the Sanhedrin (Luk 22:66-71), before Pontus Pilate (Luk 23:1-5; Luk 23:13-25), before King Herod (Luk 23:6-12), and Peter’s two trials before the Sanhedrin (Act 4:1-22; Act 5:17-42), and Stephen’s unjust trial and stoning (Act 6:8 to Act 7:60), and Peter’s imprisonment by King Herod Agrippa I (Act 12:1-19), and Paul’s arrest in the Temple and address to the Jewish mob (Act 21:26 to Act 22:29), his hearings before the Sanhedrin (Luk 22:30 to Luk 23:10), the chief captain sending Paul to Felix the governor with a letter (Act 23:11-35), his defense before Felix (Act 24:1-27), his defense before Festus (Act 25:1-12), his defense before King Herod Agrippa II (Act 25:13 to Act 26:32), and his voyage to Rome to await his trial before Nero (Act 27:1 to Act 28:31). All of these trials and events surrounding them serve as testimonies to prove the innocence of Jesus and His apostles.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Preparation for, and the Celebration of, the Passover.

The Jewish leaders and Judas:

v. 1. Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.

v. 2. And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill Him; for they feared the people.

v. 3. Then entered Satan into Judas, surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the Twelve.

v. 4. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains how he might betray Him unto them.

v. 5. And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money.

v. 6. And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray Him unto them in the absence of the multitude.

Originally, the day of the Passover proper had been distinguished from the Days of Unleavened Bread, but in the course of time the names were used without discrimination, the entire 14 th

of Nisan being reckoned with the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Passover merged into the festival following, and the two were regarded as one. This festival was now at hand; for its celebration the pilgrims had been thronging to Jerusalem for some time past. With every day the hatred of the chief priests and scribes against Jesus had increased. On Tuesday they would gladly have laid murderous hands upon Him, being detained only by their fear of the people. And by Wednesday morning they had determined that He must be put out of the way, that He must die. Yet their fear of the people, who were hanging upon every word that Jesus uttered, restrained them from open acts of violence. They concluded that it would be best not to take the last decisive step before the feast, but to seize the first favorable opportunity afterwards, after the majority or all of the pilgrims would have returned to their homes. See Mar 14:2; Mat 26:5. In the mean time they received the promise of assistance from an unexpected quarter. For Satan had entered into Judas, who was called Iscariot. Although this man was one of the Twelve, he had opened his heart to the love of money, he had given way to covetousness, he had become a thief, he had rejected all the earnest admonitions which the Lord had addressed to him during the last days. So fully had the devil of avarice taken possession of his heart that he deliberately went away from the rest and had a conference with the chief priests and the leaders, the heads of the Temple watches. He entered into negotiations with them, haggling with them after the fashion of the avaricious. About the manner of the betrayal he was fairly certain, needing only the time and the place. But to Judas the chief incentive and reward was the most important point. Even in their joy over the probable early success of their schemes the chief priests did not overlook the weakness of covetousness. They held out before him, as the price of the betrayal, the silver, the usual price of a slave. And so Judas bound himself to these enemies of his Lord with his promise, and from that hour watched every opportunity for a good chance to deliver Christ to them without the people, at a time and under circumstances when there would be no danger of interference on the part of the pilgrim crowds. Note: Judas is a type of many a Christian that permits the devil to take hold of his heart to fill it with covetousness. It is a sad and miserable price for which many confessors of Jesus have betrayed their Lord, a better-paying position, greater honor before men, -the evanescent and ephemeral favor of the world. Woe unto those that follow Judas!

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

Luk 23:1-56

THE LAST PASSOVER.

Luk 22:1, Luk 22:2

Short explanatory introduction.

Luk 22:1

Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover. These words show that many of the readers for whom this Gospel was intended were foreigners, who were unacquainted with Jewish terms such as the “Passover.” Passover ( , ) means, literally, “a passing.” The feast so named commemorated the manner in which the chosen people were spared in Egypt when the destroying angel of the Lord passed over all Israelitish houses, which had been sprinkled with the blood of the lamb, without slaying the firstborn. Dr. Farrar suggests that the Greek word is a transliteration, with a sort of alliterative allusion to the Greek , “I suffer.” This greatest and most important of the Jewish feasts, which ever brought a great host of pilgrims to Jerusalem, was kept in the first month of the Jewish year (Nisan), from the 15th of the month, the day of full moon, to the 21st. Roughly, this corresponded to the end of our March.

Luk 22:2

And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people. The determination, long maturing, had, during the last few days of public teaching, been come to on the part of the Sanhedrin. They had determined to put the dangerous public Teacher to death. The bitter hatred on the part of the Jewish rulers had been gradually growing in intensity during the two years and a half of the public ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. The raising of Lazarus seems to have finally decided the governing body with as little delay as possible to compass the Reformer’s death. The temporary withdrawal of the Lord after the great miracle deferred their purpose for a season; after, however, a retirement for a few weeks, Jesus appeared again, shortly before the Passover, and taught publicly in the temple, at a season when Jerusalem was crowded with pilgrims arriving for the great feast. Never had his teaching excited such interest, never had it stirred up such burning opposition as at this juncture. This decided the Jewish rulers to carry out their design on the life of the Galilaean Teacher with as little delay as possible. The only thing that perplexed them was how this could safely be accomplished, owing to the favor in which he was held by the people, especially by the crowds of pilgrims from the provinces then in Jerusalem.

Luk 22:3-6

Judas Iscariot betrays his Master. Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them. And they were glad. This was their chance. In the very heart of the Galilaean Teacher’s own company a traitor showed himself, one who knew well the plans of his Master. With his help the Sanhedrin and the priestly party would be enabled to effect the arrest privately. They then must trust to Roman jealousy to help them to carry out their evil design. The expression, “Then entered Satan into Judas,” is a strong one, and definitely shows that, in the opinion of these inspired compilers of the Gospels, there was a person who bore rule over the powers of evil. The character and history of the faithless friend of Jesus is mournfully interesting. For one to whom such splendid chances were offered to fall so low, is an awful mystery. It is clear that the betrayal was no sudden impulse. He set up self as the one object of all his thoughts, and followed Jesus because he believed that, in following him, he could best serve his own interests. His ambition was cruelly disappointed by his Master’s gradual unfolding his views respecting his kingdom, which was not to be of this world. He was still further shocked by the undisguised announcement on the part of his Master, whose greatness and power Judas recognized from the first, that he would be rejected by the nation, and even put to death, has been suggested, as an explanation of the betrayal, that at the last he seems to have fancied that he could force the manifestation of Christ’s power by placing him in the hands of his enemies; but the acceptance of a reward, miserable though it was, seems to point to vulgar greed, and to the idea of making friends with the dominant party in the state now that his Master evidently looked forward to a violent death, as the real motives of the betrayal. The question has been asked whether Christ, in his choice of Judas as one of the twelve, read the inmost depths and issues of his character. Canon Westcott, in a profound note on Joh 13:18, writes “that the records of the gospel lead us to believe that the Lord had perfect human knowledge realized in a human way, and therefore limited in some sense, and separable in consciousness from his perfect Divine omniscience. He knew the thoughts of men absolutely in their manifold possibilities, and yet as man, not in their actual future manifestation.” These mysteries “underlie all religious life, and, indeed, all finite lifefor finite being includes the possibility of sin and the possibility of fellowship between the Creator and the creature Thus we may be content to have this concrete mystery as an examplethe most terrible exampleof the issues of the two fundamental mysteries of human existence.”

Luk 22:7-13

The disciples Peter and John are directed to prepare for the last Passover.

Luk 22:7

Then came the day of unleavened bread. This was the Thursday, Nisan 13. On this afternoon all leaven was carefully and scrupulously put away; hence the name.

Luk 22:8

Go and prepare us the Passover, that we may eat. The three synoptists unite in describing this solemn meal, for which Peter and John were sent to prepare, as the ordinary Paschal Supper. But, on comparing the record of the same Supper given by St. John, we are irresistibly led to a different conclusion; for we read that on the following day those who led Jesus into the Praetorium went not in themselves, “lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover“ (Joh 18:28); and again it is said of the same day, that “it was the preparation of the Passover” (Joh 19:14). So the time of the Supper is described by St. John (Joh 13:1) as “before the Feast of the Passover.” It appears that our Lord was crucified on the 14th of Nisan, on the very day of the sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb, a few hours before the time of the Paschal Supper, and that his own Last Supper was eaten the night before, that is, twenty-four hours before the general time of eating the Passover Supper. The most venerable of the Fathers preserved this as a sacred tradition. So Justin Martyr: “On the day of the Passover ye took him, and om the day of the Passover ye crucified him” (‘Dial. cum Trypho,’ ch. 3.). To the same effect write Irenaeus (‘Adv. Haer.,’ 4.23) and Tertullian (‘Adv. Judaeos,’ ch. 8). Clement of Alexandria is most definite: “The Lord did not cat his last Passover on the legal day of the Passover, but on the previous day, the 13th, and suffered on the day following, being himself the Passover”. Hippolytus of Portus bears similar testimony. The questionas to whether the famous Last Supper was the actual Passover Supper, or the anticipatory Paschal Feast, which we believe it to have beenis important; for thus the language of St. Paul (1Co 5:7), “Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us,” is justified. “The apostle regarded not the Last Supper, but the death of Christ, as the antitype of the Paschal sacrifice, and the correspondence of type and antitype would be incomplete unless the sacrifice of the Redeemer took place at the time on which alone that of the Paschal lamb could legally be offered” (Dean Mansel).

Luk 22:9

And they said unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare? It is probable that the disciples, in asking this question, concluded that the Passover was to be eaten by them and their Master at the same time with the rest of the Jews on the following day; but our Lord gave directions for its being eaten the same evening.

Luk 22:10

And he said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you. The name of the man who should meet them was omittedpurposely, think Theophylact and others, lest the place of meeting should be prematurely known to Judas. Bearing a pitcher of water. This would be an unusual sight in an Oriental city, where the water is drawn by women. It is probable that the “man” whom the Master foretold John and Peter would meet, was the master of the house, who, according to the Jewish custom on the 13th of Nisan, before the stars appeared in the heavens, had himself to go to the public fountain to draw the water with which the unleavened bread for the Passover Feast was kneaded.

Luk 22:12

And he shall show you a large upper room furnished: there make ready. The house which possessed so large an upper chamber must have been one of considerable size, and evidently belonged to a man of some wealth and position, possibly to Nicodemus or Joseph of Arimathaea. That it perhaps belonged to St. Mark’s family has also been suggested. It had evidently been prepared beforehand for the purpose of the feast, in obedience to a previous direction of Jesus. “Furnished” (,) applies specially to carpets spread over the couches for the reception of guests. “In this large upper chamber thus prepared,” said the Lord, “make the necessary arrangements for the Paschal Supper; procuring and preparing the lamb, the unleavened bread, the herbs, and other customary dishes.” It seems probable that this” large upper room,” evidently belonging to a disciple, or at least to one friendly to Jesus, was the same room which, in the happier hours after the Resurrection, witnessed the appearance of the Risen to the eleven, and, later, the descent of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost.

Luk 22:14-38

The Last Supper.

Luk 22:14

And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. The preparation had been made in the “large upper room,” and the Lord and the twelve sat down, or rather reclined on the couches covered with carpets, the tables before them laid with the dishes peculiar to the solemn Passover Supper, each dish telling its part of the old loved story of the great deliverance. There was the lamb the Paschal victim, and the bitter herbs, the unleavened bread and the reddish sweet conserve of fruitscommemorating, it is said, by its color the hard labors of brickmaking, one of the chief burdens of the Egyptian bondageinto which the Blaster dipped the sop, and gave it to the traitor-apostle (Joh 13:26). The Lord reclined, probably, at the middle table; St. John next to him; St. Peter most likely on the other side; and the others reclining in an order corresponding more or less closely with the threefold division of the twelve into groups of four. The Supper itself had its special forms and ceremonies, which the Lord transformed as they proceeded in such a way as to change it into the sacred Supper of the New Testament.

Luk 22:15

And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. This peculiar expression, “with desire,” etc., is evidently a reproduction by St. Luke of the Lord’s very words repeated to him originally in Aramaic (Hebrew), They seem to be a touching apology or explanation from him to his own, for thus anticipating the regular Passover Supper by twenty-four hours. He had been longing with an intense longing to keep this last Passover with them: First as the dear human Friend who would make this his solemn last farewell. (Do not we, when we feel the end is coming, long for a last communion with our dearest ones?) And, secondly, as the Divine Master who would gather up into a final discourse his most important, deepest teaching. We find this teaching especially reported by St. John in his Gospel (Jn 13-17.). And thirdly, as the Founder of a great religion, he purposed, on this momentous occasion, transforming the most solemn festal gathering of the ancient Jewish people, which commemorated their greatest deliverance, into a feast which shouldas age succeeded agecommemo-rate a far greater deliverance, not of the old chosen race only, but of every race under heaven. These were three of the reasons why he had desired so earnestly to eat this Passover with them. “To-morrow, at the usual hour, when the people cat their Passover, it will be too late for us.” This he expresses in his own sad words, “before I suffer.“

Luk 22:16-18

For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. There was yet one other reason for the Master’s special desire once more to eat the solemn Passover with his chosen disciples. He would, by some significant action and word, show that the great Jewish feast, for so many centuries the central act of the ritual observances under the Mosaic Law, from henceforth would be superseded by a new and a yet more solemn religious rite. The Jewish Passover was to give place to the Christian sacrament. He, their Master, would with them share in the Passover meal that evening for the last time. The next time that he would partake would be still with them, but it would be in the kingdom of God, that is to say, in the Church of God, which was to be founded after his resurrection. The kingdom of God commenced with the resurrection of Jesus. The constant celebration of the Holy Eucharist commenced from that time; it is more than probable that our Lord partook of it, after his resurrection, with his own (see Luk 24:30; Act 10:41). I will not any more eat thereof, until I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until, etc. These statements, which speak of a final partaking (eating and drinking), are closely parallel to the command contained in Luk 22:19, Luk 22:20. The first statement seems solemnly to close the celebration of the Passover Feast; the second, to institute with equal solemnity a new feast in its place

“With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer“ (Luk 22:15); for

The Passover Feast is solemnly put an end to.

“I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God” (Luk 22:16).

“I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come” (Luk 22:18).

The Holy Eucharist is solemnly instituted.

“He took bread, and brake it, and gave unto them: This do in remembrance of me” (Luk 22:19).

“Likewise also the cup after Supper” (Luk 22:20).

It was in the course of the great ritual Supper on some of the occasions when the cup was passed round, and the unleavened bread formally broken or dipped in one of the Passover dishes, that the Lord found his opportunity solemnly to announce the formal abrogation of the old Paschal Supper and the institution of the new communion feast. The above literal interpretation of the Lord’s mystic words, “until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom” (Mat 26:29), or, as St. Luke reports them, “I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come “which literal interpretation in the main is that preferred by Dean Mansel (Commentary on Mat 26:29); see, too, St. Chrysostom in Matthew Hom. 72., who adopts the same literal interpretationdoes not exclude a yet deeper and more spiritual meaning which lies beneath the surface, and which speaks of another and spiritual banquet in the heavenly realm, which not only the Redeemer, but also his redeemed, will partake of. Heaven-life under the form of a banquet was imagery well known and often painted by the Jewish masters in the old rabbinic schools before and contemporary with the earthly life of Christ. The New Testament writers in several places have adopted the similar imagery, notably in Mat 8:11; Luk 22:30; Rev 19:9. How widespread and well loved was this Jewish representation of the heaven-life under the form of a banquet is clear from the three above-quoted references taken from SS. Matthew, Paul (Luke), and John.

Luk 22:19, Luk 22:20

And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gays unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. Around these words, and the parallel passages in SS. Matthew and Mark, for more than a thousand years fierce theological disputes have raged. Men have gone gladly to prison and to death rather than renounce what they believed to be the true interpretation. Now, a brief exegetical commentary is not the place to enter into these sad controversies. It will be sufficient here to indicate some of the lines of thought which the prayerful earnest reader might wisely follow out so as to attain certain just ideas respecting the blessed rite here institutedideas which may suffice for a practical religious life. Now, we possess a Divine commentary on this sacrament instituted by our Lord. It is noticeable that St. John, whose Gospel was the latest or well-nigh the latest of the canonical writings of the New Testament, when at great length he relates the story of the last Passover evening and its teaching, does not allude to the institution of that famous service, which, when he wrote his Gospel, had become part of the settled experience of Church life. He presupposes it; for it had passed then into the ordinary life of the Church. In another and earlier portion of his Gospel, however, St. John (Joh 6:32-58) gives us a record of the Lord’s discourse in the synagogue of Capernaum, in which Jesus, while speaking plainly to those who heard him at the time, gave by anticipation a commentary on the sacrament which he afterwards instituted. The truth which was taught in thin discourse is presented in a specific act and in a concrete form in the Holy Communion. In the fifty-third verse of that sixth chapter we read, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.” How is this now to be done? We reply that our Lord has clothed these ideas and brought them near to us in this sacrament; while, by his teaching in the sixth chapter of St. John, he guards this sacrament from being regarded on the one hand as an end in itself, or on the other as a mere symbol. Certain truths, great landmarks laid down in this discourse, have to be borne in mind.

(1) The separation of the flesh of the Son of man into flesh and blood (Joh 6:53) presupposes a violent death submitted to for the sake of others (Joh 6:51).

(2) Both these elements, the flesh and the blood, are to be appropriated individually by the believer (Joh 6:56).

(3) How appropriated? St. Bernard well answers the question which he asks: “What is it to eat his flesh and to drink his blood, but to share in his sufferings and to imitate the life he lived when with us in the flesh?“ (St. Bernard, on Psa 3:3). “If ye suffer with him, ye shall also reign with him.” The Holy Eucharist is from one point of view a great truth dramatized, instituted for the purpose of bringing before men in a vivid manner the great truths above alluded to. But it is something more. It brings to the believer, to the faithful communicant, to the one who in humble adoring faith carries out to the best of his ability his Master’s dying chargeit brings a blessing too great for us to measure by earthly language, too deep for us to fathom with human inquiry. For the partaking of this Holy Communion is, first, the Christian’s solemn public confession of his faith in Christ crucified; his solemn private declaration that it is his deliberate wish to suffer with his Lord and for his Lord’s sake; that it is, too, his firm purpose to imitate the earthly life lived by his Lord. The partaking of this Holy Communion, too, is the Christian’s most solemn prayer for strength thus to suffer and to live. It is, too, his fervent expression of belief that this strength will be surely given to him. Further, the partaking of this Holy Communion is, above all, the Christian’s most solemn prayer for living union with Christ”that Christ may dwell in his heart by faith.” It is, too, his fervent expression of belief that “then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us; we are one with. Christ, and Christ with us.” This confession, declaration, and prayer he constantly renews in obedience to the dying command of his Master. It is difficult to understand how any belief in a physical change in the elements of bread and wine, such as is involved in the theory of transubstantiation held in the Roman Church, or of consubstantiation in the Lutheran community, can be supposed to enhance the reverence of the communicant, or to augment the blessing promised. The words of the Lord, “This is my body my blood,” cannot surely be pressed, seeing that the same Divine Speaker was in his discourses in the habit of using imagery which could not literally be pressed, such as “I am the Bread of life,” “I am the Door of the sheep,” “I am the true Vine,” etc. Nothing that can be conceived is more solemn than the simple rite, more awful in its grandeur, more Divine and far-reaching in its promises to the faithful believer. Human imaginings add nothing to this Divine mystery, which is connected at once with the Incarnation and the Atonement. They only serve to envelop it in a shroud of earth-born mist and cloud, and thus to dim if not to veil its Divine glory.

Luk 22:21-23

The Lord‘s sorrowful allusion to Judas the traitor.

Luk 22:21

But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. This is the second mention of the traitor in St. Luke’s account of the Last Supper. From St. John’s recital, we gather that Jesus returned several times in the course of that solemn evening to this sad topic. That one of his own little inner circle, so closely associated with him, should so basely betray him, was evidently a very bitter drop in the Lord’s cup of suffering. In his dread experience of human sorrow it was needful that the Christ should fulfill in his own experience what even the noblest of the children of menDavid, for instancehad felt of the falseness of friends. What suffering can be inflicted on a generous heart comparable to it? Surely he of whom it was written, “Whose sorrows are like unto my sorrows?” must make trial of this bitterness. Chrysostom thinks that the Master, in some of these repeated allusions during the “Supper,” tried to win Judas over to a better mind.

Luk 22:22

Woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed! We seem to hear a wailing in this woe, although the denunciation was so firmly pronounced. St. Matthew, in his account, here adds some more words spoken by the Master, “It had been good for that man if he had not been born.” Dean Plumptre, on this saying of Christ, very suggestively remarks, “Awful as the words were, they have their bright as well as their dark side. According to the estimate which men commonly form, the words are true of all except these who depart this life in the faith and fear of God. In his applying them to the case of the traitor in its exceptional enormity, there is suggested the thought that for others whose guilt was not like his, existence even in the penal suffering which their sins have brought upon them may be better than never to have been at all.”

Luk 22:23

And they began to inquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing. That all the disciples, on hearing this statement of their Master, should at once question their own hearts with the “Is it I?” (of St. Matthew’s Gospel), shows with what cunning skill the arch-traitor must have concealed not merely his plans but his very sentiments. No suspicion on their parts ever seems to have fallen on Judas, their companion for so long a time. The direct colloquy of the Lord with the traitor, reported at length in the other Gospels on the occasion of dipping the sop into one of the Paschal dishes, was most probably carried on in a whisper (see Joh 13:26-29, where mention is specially made of the disciples’ ignorance of the dread meaning of their Master’s words to Judas).

Luk 22:24-30

The jealousy, among the disciples.

Luk 22:24

And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest. The Lord’s words in these verses are peculiar to St. Luke. The strife among the disciples which suggested the Lord’s corrective sayings was evidently no mere dispute as to precedence in their places at the supper, but some question as to their respective positions in the coming kingdom of which their Master had said so much in the course of his later instructions. It is closely connected with the “feet-washing” related at length by St. John (Joh 13:4-17). This has been well described as a parable in action, exhibited to illustrate forcibly the novel and sublime truth which he was teaching them, the world-teachers of the future, that in self sacrifice consisted the secret of true greatness. In the kingdom of heaven this would be found to be conspicuously the case.

Luk 22:25

Are called benefactors (). Those who were listening knew well how utterly false these high-sounding human titles often were. (Euergetes), Benefactor, was the well-known title appropriated by Ptolemy Euergetes and other hated royal tyrants well known to the Jewish people.

Luk 22:28

Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations. But after the gentle rebuke of their jealous ambition, which rebuke was veiled in the great instruction, their Master, with the tenderest grace, referred to their unswerving loyalty to him. Their faithfulness stood out at that hour in strong contrast with the conduct of Judas. It is always thus with their Master and ours. Every good deed, every noble thought, each bit of generosity and self-forgetfulness on our part, is at once recognized and rewarded a hundredfold now as then.

Luk 22:29

And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me. This promise refers to earth and this life. They and their successors in his Church would bear sway over men’s hearts, His kingdom would be administered by them. With strangely literal accuracy has this promise been fulfilled. From the hour when the despised Master, already doomed to a shameful death, uttered this seemingly improbable prediction, his kingdom over men’s hearts has been extending. Then at most the kingdom numbered a few hundreds; nine it can only be reckoned by millions. For centuries the story of the civilized world has been the story of this kingdom.

Luk 22:30

That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. While the words just considered (Luk 22:29) referred to a success and a reward, the scene of which was to be this world, the Master now continues his promises of reward to his chosen faithful followersa reward which will be their blessed portion in eternal life, which will follow this. First, the endless bliss to be shared with him is pictured under the old favourite Jewish image of the heavenly banquet; and second, in that heavenly realm a special place of honor and a distinct work is promised to these his chosen faithful servants.

Luk 22:31-38

The Lord foretells Simon Peter‘s fall. He tells She disciples of the hard times coming on them.

Luk 22:31

And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. The majority of the more ancient authorities omit the words, “and the Lord said.” These words were possibly inserted at an early date to obviate the abruptness of this sudden change in the subject-matter of the Lord’s discourse. The more accurate translation would be, “Satan obtained you by asking that he,” etc. Bengel comments with “not content with Judas.“ This saying of Jesus is a very mysterious one; it reveals to us something of what is going on in the unseen world. A similar request was made by the same bitter, powerful the in the case or Job (Job 1:12). Are we to understand that these are examples of what is constantly going on in that world so close to us, but from which no whisper ever reaches our mortal ears? Such grave thoughts lend especial intensity to those words in the prayer of prayers, where we ask “our Father which is in heaven” to deliver us from evil, or the evil one, as so many of our best scholars prefer to translate . Satan asks that he may test and try the apostles. Judas he had already tempted, and he had won him. Possibly this signal victory emboldened him to proffer this request. We may imagine the evil one arguing thus before the Eternal: “These chosen ones who are appointed to work in the future so tremendous a work in thy Name, are utterly unworthy. Let me just try to lure them away with my lures. Lo, they will surely fall. See, one has already.”

Luk 22:32

But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not. The prayer of Satan apparently was not refused. Jesus, however, says, that for one of that loved company, who he knew from his peculiar temperament was in especial peril, he had prayed. The prayer was answered thus: the temptation came to all the apostles; all fell; Peter, though, more disastrously by far than his brethren, but the result of the fall was not hopeless despair as in the case of Judas, but bitter remorse and a brave manly repentance. “It is said by Roman divines (e.g. Maldonatus, a Lapide, and Mai, here) that this prayer and precept of our Lord extends to all bishops of Rome as St. Peter’s successors, and that in speaking to St. Peter our Lord spoke to them. Would they be willing to complete the parallel, and say that the bishops of Rome specially need prayer, because they deny Christ? Let them not take a part of it and leave the rest” (Bishop Wordsworth). When thou art converted. “Converted” must not be understood here in its technical sense; it should rather be translated, “And thou, when thou hast turned (i.e. to God) strengthen thy brethren.”

Luk 22:33

And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death. This kind of confident enthusiasm is usually a sign of weakness. Jesus, the Heart-reader, knew too well what such a wild protestation was worth, and went on at once to predict his friend’s and servant’s awful fall, that very night.

Luk 22:35, Luk 22:36

And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything. And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. The Lord speaks one more word to his own before leaving the upper room, More occupied with the future trials of his disciples than with his own tragic destiny, which he knew was about to be fulfilled, he reminds his friends of the comparatively quiet and serene existence they had been spending during the last two years and a half with him. In that period, generally speaking, they had been welcomed and kindly entertained by the people, sometimes, they would remember, even with enthusiasm. But they must prepare now for a different lifecold looks, opposition, even bitter persecution, would be their lot for the future. They must order themselves now to meet these things. No ordinary prudent forethought must be omitted by them. He had more than hinted that this future lay before them in his words, “Behold I send you forth as lambs in the midst of wolves;” now he plainly tells them what kind of life awaited them in the immediate future. Of course, the advice as to the sword was not meant to be taken literally. It was one of those metaphors the Lord used so often in his teaching. For a similar metaphor still more elaborately developed, see Eph 6:17, and following verses.

Luk 22:37

For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors. Here he shows them what he meant. They, as disciples of One treated as a malefactor, had surely nothing to expect but hatred and persecution. Stier remarks that this is the first time that the Lord himself directs us to the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah, that most pre-eminent and complete text of the Passion. For the things concerning me have an end. The tragic end of his earthly ministry is close at hand. The prophetic description of the suffering Servant of the Lord will soon be found to have been terribly accurate.

Luk 22:38

And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough. As so often, the disciples took their Master’s words with curious literalness, and, as a reply, produced two swords, as if these two poor weapons could help them in the coming times of sore need. If they were to stand firm in the long trial-season which lay before them, they must surely provide themselves with very different weapons to these; their arms in the campaign of the future must be forged in no earthly workshop. But our Lord sadly declined then to enter into further explanation. His meaning would be all clear to them soon, so he closed the dialogue with the words, “It is enough.” This verse was curiously perverted in the famous Bull of Pope Boniface VIII., “Unam sanctam,” to prove his possession of both secular and spiritual power: “Dicentibus apostolis, ecce gladii duo, in Ecclesia scilicet, quum apostoli loquereutur, non respondit Dominus nimis esse, sed satis Uterque ergo in potestate est Ecclesiae, spiritualis scilicet gladius et materialis.”

Luk 22:39-46

The agony in the garden. This eventful scene is recounted in detail by all the three synoptists. St. Matthew’s account is the most complete. St. Mark adds one saying of the Lord’s containing a deep theological truth, “Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee.” These remarkable words, occurring as they do in the midst of the most solemn scene of prayer in the Redeemer’s earth-life, tell of the vast possibilities of prayer. What may not be accomplished by earnest supplication to the throne of grace?

St. Luke’s account is the shortest, but it contains the story of the angelic mission of help, and the additional detail of the “bloody sweat.”

St. John alone of the four omits the scene; but, as in other most important recitals where he refrains from repeating the story of things thoroughly known in his Master’s Church at the period when he committed his Gospel to writing, he takes care, however, often to record some hitherto unrecorded piece of the Lord’s teaching, which is calculated to throw new light upon the momentous twice and thrice told incident, the story of which he does not deem it necessary to repeat. So in Joh 2:1-25. he throws a flood of light upon Christian baptism. Joh 6:1-71. is a Divine commentary on the Holy Eucharist. While in Luk 12:23-28 he gives us, in his Master’s words, a new insight into that awful sorrow which was the source of the agony in Gethsemane.

Canon Westcott suggests that the succession of the main events recorded by the four evangelists was as follows:

Approximate time

The Event

1 a.m

The agony. The betrayal. The conveyance to the high priest’s house, probably adjoining “the Booths of Hanna.”

2 a.m

The preliminary examination before Annas in the presence of Caiaphas.

About 3 a.m

The examination before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin at an irregular meeting at “the Booths.”

About 5 a.m

The formal sentence of the Sanhedrin in their own proper place of meetingGazith or Beth Midrash (Luk 22:66; Mat 27:1, ; comp. Mar 15:1; Luk 22:66, . The first examination before Pilate at the palace.

5.30 a.m

The examination before Herod. The scourging and first mockery by the soldiers at the palace.

6.30 a.m

The sentence of Pilate (Joh 19:14, ).

7 a.m

The second mockery of the condemned “King” by the soldiers.

9 a.m

The Crucifixion, and rejection of the stupefying draught (Mar 15:25, ).

12 noon

The last charge.

12-3 p.m

The darkness.

3 p.m

The end.

Luk 22:39

And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the Mount of Olives. In the other evangelists we find the place on the Mount of Olives described as Gethsemane. The word Gethsemane signifies “oil-press.” It was a garden; one of the many charming gardens which Josephus tells us old Jerusalem abounded with. It perhaps belonged to a friend of Christ, or else was with others of these gardens, or “paradises,” thrown open at the great festival seasons to the faithful pilgrims who on these occasions crowded the holy city and its suburbs. There is at the present day just beyond the brook Kedron, between the paths that go up to the summit of the mount, about three quarters of a mile from the Jerusalem wall, an enclosed garden called Gethsemane. It belongs to the Latin community in Jerusalem. In it are eight very ancient olive trees. When Henry Maundrell visited the spot, in 1697, these eight aged trees were believed to be the same that stood there in the blessed Savior’s time. Bove the botanist, in Ritter’s ‘Geography of Palestine,’ vol. 4., quoted by Dean Mansel, says these venerable olive trees are two thousand years old. Josephus, however, relates that in the great siege the soldiers of Titus cut down all the trees in the Jerusalem suburbs. Even if this be assumed, these soldiers, from some feeling of awe stirred up by the tradition which hung, of course, round this hallowed spot, might have spared this little sacred grove; or they might at the time have been still young saplings, of no use for the put-pose of the siege operations. “In spite of all the doubts that can be raised against their antiquity, the eight aged olive trees, if only by their manifest difference from all others on the mountain, have always struck even the most indifferent observers. They will remain, so long as their already protracted life is spared, the most venerable of their race on the surface of the earth. Their gnarled trunks and scanty foliage will always be regarded as the most affecting of the sacred memorials in or about Jerusalemthe most nearly approaching to the everlasting hills themselves in the force with which they carry us back to the events of the gospel history”.

Luk 22:40

Pray that ye enter not into temptation. The temptation in question was the grave sin of moral cowardice into which so soon the disciples fell. Had they prayed instead of yielding to the overpowering sense of weariness and sleeping, they would never have forsaken their Master in his hour of trial and danger.

Luk 22:42

Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. The three synoptists give this prayer in slightly varying terms; “but the figure of the cup is common to all the three; “it was indelibly impressed on tradition. This cup, which Jesus entreats God to cause to pass from before () his lips, is the symbol of that terrible punishment, the dreadful and mournful picture of which is traced before him at this moment by a skillful painter with extraordinary vividness. The painter is the same who in the wilderness, using a like illusion, passed before his view the magical scene -f the glories belonging to the Messianic kingdom” (Godet). If thou be willing. He looked on in this supreme hour, just before “the Passion” really began, to the Crucifixion and all the horrors which preceded it and accompanied itto the treason of Judas; the denial of Peter; the desertion of the apostles; the cruel, relentless enmity of the priests and rulers; the heartless abandonment of the people; the insults; the scourging: and then the shameful and agonizing lingering death which was to close the Passion; and, more dreadful than all, the reason why he was here in Gethsemane; why he was to drink this dreadful cup of suffering; the memory of all the sin of man! To drink this cup of a suffering, measureless, inconceivable, the Redeemer for a moment shrank back, and asked the Father if the cross was the only means of gaining the glorious end in viewthe saving the souls of unnumbered millions. Could not God in his unlimited power find another way of reconciliation? And yet beneath this awful agony, the intensity of which we are utterly incapable of graspingbeneath it there lay the intensest desire that his Father’s wish and will should be done. That wish and will were in reality his own. The prayer was made and answered. It was not the Father’s will that the cup should pass away, and the Son’s will was entirely the same; it was answered by the gift of strengthstrength from heaven being given to enable the Son to drink the cup of agony to its dregs. How this strength was given St. Luke relates in the next verse.

Luk 22:43

And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. The Lord’s words reported by St. Matthew were no mere figure of rhetoric. “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.” The anguish and horror were so great that he himself, according to his humanity, must have before the time become the victim of death had he not been specially strengthened from above. This is the deep significance and necessity of the angel’s appearance. So Stier and Godet, the latter of whom writes, “As when in the wilderness under the pressure of famine he felt himself dying, the presence of this heavenly being sends a vivifying breath over him,a Divine refreshing pervades him, body and soul, and it is thus he receives strength to continue to the last the struggle.”

Luk 22:44

And his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. Some (for instance, Theophylact) understand this “as it were” to signify that the expression, “drops of blood,” was simply parabolic; but it is far better to understand the words in their literal sense, as our Church does when it prays, “By thine agony and bloody sweat.” Athanasius even goes so far as to pronounce a ban upon those who deny this sweat of blood. Commentators give instances of this blood-sweat under abnormal pathological circumstances. Some, though by no means all, of the oldest authorities omit these last two verses (vv.43, 44). Their omission in many of these ancient manuscripts was probably due to mistaken reverence. The two oldest and most authoritative translations, the Itala (Latin) and Peshito (Syriac), contain them, however, as do the most important Fathers of the second century, Justin and Irenaeus. We have, then, apart from the evidence of manuscripts, the testimony of the earliest Christianity in Italy and Syria, Asia Minor and Gaul, to the genuineness of these two famous verses. They are printed in the ordinary text of the Revised English Version, with a side-note alluding to their absence in some of the ancient authorities.

Luk 22:45, Luk 22:46

He found them sleeping for sorrow, and said unto them, Why sleep ye rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The events of the past evening; the long excitement stirred up by listening to such words as their Master had been speaking to them during the sad hours of the Last Supper; the sure consciousness of coming sorrow; then the walk through the silent city:all predisposed them to sleep. Commentators are never weary with pressing these excuses for the slumber of the eleven at that awful moment. But all these things, though they may well have predisposed them to slumber, are not sufficient to account for that strange heavy sleep which seems to have paralyzed the eleven in Gethsemane. In spite of their Master’s solemn injunction to watch and pray, he finds them, several times during that dreadful watch of his in the garden, asleep, in spite of his asking them for sympathy and prayer, in spite of his evident longing for their sympathyeach time he cast his eyes on them, he sees them, not watching, but sleeping! Many a time in their work-filled lives those fishermen he loved so well, John and Peter and Andrew, had toiled all night with their nets; but on this night of sorrow, when their pleading voices were listened for, possibly their hand-press waited for, their silent sympathy certainly longed for, they slept, seemingly forgetful of all save their own ease and comfort. Surely on this night of temptation they were influenced by some invisible power, who lulled them to sleep during those precious moments when they should have been agonizing with their Master in prayer, and so arming themselves against the supreme moment of temptation just coming upon them. But swayed by the power of evil of whom the Lord had been warning them, but in vain, they let the moments slip by, and the hour of temptation came on them unawares. We know how grievously they all fell.

“‘Forsake the Christ thou sawest transfigured! him
Who trod the sea and brought the dead to life?
What should wring this from thee?’ye laugh and ask.
What wrung it? Even a torchlight and a noise,
The sudden Roman faces, violent hands,
And fear of what the Jews might do! Just that;
And it is written, ‘I forsook and fled:’
There was my trial, and it ended thus “

(Browning, ‘A Death in the Desert.’)

Luk 22:47-53

The arrest of the Redeemer. All the four evangelists tell the story of the last hours, in the main the same, though the language is often quite different, and fresh and important details appear in each memoir.

The general effect on the thoughtful reader is that the Crucifixion and the events leading up to it were very far from being the result of the counsels of the Jewish leaders, the outcome of their relentless enmity. The death and all the attendant circumstances took place in their solemn order, then, when the public teaching of the Redeemer was finished, because it had been determined by some higher and grander power than was possessed by Jerusalem Sanhedrin or Roman Senate.

So St. Matthew, in his account, twice (Mat 26:54, Mat 26:56) gives the ground for the arrest, “That the Scriptures might be fulfilled.” And the Scriptures were but the echoes of that other and grander power.

Luk 22:47

And while he yet spake, behold a multitude. Different to his disciples, their Master, who had prayed and received as an answer to his prayer the angel’s visit, was now, when the hour of mortal danger struck, in possession of the profoundest calm. No. thing disturbed his serenity any more. With calm majesty he advanced to meet the traitor as he guided his Master’s deadly enemies into the garden. From this hour Jesus welcomes the cross, from which for a brief moment he had seemed to shrink. The corn-pony who was thus guided to Gethsemane to effect the arrest in the dead of the night was composed of Roman legionaries detailed for this duty from a cohort on guard in the Antonia Fort by the temple, and of Levitical guards belonging to the templean armed force of police, part of the temple watch at the disposal of the priests. He that was called Judas, one of the twelve. Each of the evangelists mention the presence of the traitor. It was evidently a strange and startling detail for the writers of these memoirs that one of the chosen twelve should have been the betrayer! And drew near unto Jesus to kiss him. This was the sign agreed upon between Judas and his employers. They knew that it would be night, and that Gethsemane was shaded with olives, and that therefore some conspicuous sign would be necessary to indicate to the guards which of the company of twelve was the Master whom they were to seize. But the signal was superfluous, for, as St. John tells us, Jesus of his own accord advanced before the others, telling those who came for him who he was. Because of this kiss the early Christian Church discontinued the customary brotherly kiss on Good Friday.

Luk 22:50

And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. The name of the disciple who smote the servant of the high priest is given by St. John: it was Peter. He gives, too, the servant’s name, Malchus. John wrote many years later, when Jerusalem had long ceased to exist; Peter, too, had passed away. Before this incident, St. John relates how the Roman and Jewish guards “went backward, and fell to the ground.” What overawed the party of armed men is un-certain-whether some supernatural or merely a natural cause; possibly something of majesty in the Lord’s appearance impelled these men to retire and reverently to salute him they were ordered to seize. St. John mentions this to show that it was of his own free will that he rendered himself up.

Luk 22:51

Suffer ye thus far. The exact meaning of these words has been much debated. They probably were addressed to the company of armed men, and contained a plea for the mistaken zeal of his disciple Peter. “Excuse this resistance.” And he touched his ear, and healed him. This miraculous cure of the wound inflicted by the zealous disciple is related by the physician Luke.

Luk 22:53

When I was daily with you in the temple, ye stretched forth no hands against me: but this is your hour, and the power of darkness. These words of the Lord may signify, “It was from a cowardly fear of the people whom you felt were my friends that you did not dare to arrest me in the full light of day.” But it is better to take the last clause as possessing a deeper meaning: “I have often been in your power before, when, without concealment, I taught publicly in that sacred house where you are the appointed guardians; you never dared to lay hands on me then. But this, I know, is your hour, the moment God has given up to you to effect this sad triumph, and this (i.e. the power by which you work) is the power or’ darkness (i.e. the power of the spirit of darkness).”

Luk 22:54-62

The denial of Peter.

Luk 22:54

Then took they him, and led him, and brought him into the high priest’s house. And Peter followed afar off. There has been some discussion here on the question of harmonizing the separate accounts. There is, however, no real difficulty if the following historical details be borne in mind. The actual high priest at this juncture was Caiaphas, son-in-law to Annas, who was the legal high priest, but had been deposed by the Roman power some time before. Annas, however, although prevented by the Roman government from bearing the high priestly insignia, was apparently looked upon by the people as the rightful possessor of the dignity, and evidently exercised the chief authority in the Jewish councils. It seems that he and his son-in-law Caiaphas, the Roman nominee, occupied together the high priest’s palace. There were three trials of our Lord by the Jews:

(1) Before Annas (Joh 18:12-18).

(2) Before Caiaphas and what has been termed a committee of the Sanhedrm.

(3) Formally before the whole Sanhedrin at dawn.

The thrice-repeated denial of Peter took place:

(1) On his first going in (he was admitted through the influence of John, who was known to the officials) to the court-yard of the high priest’s palace, in answer to the female servant who kept the door (Joh 18:17).

(2) As he sat by the fire warming himself, in answer to another maid (Mat 26:69) and to other bystanders (Joh 18:25 : Luk 22:58), including the kinsman of Malchus (Joh 18:26).

(3) About an hour later (Luk 22:59), after he had left the fire to avoid the questioners, and had gone out into the porch or gateway leading into the court-yard, in answer to one of the maids who had spoken before (Mar 14:69; Mat 16:1-28 :71), and to other bystanders.

Luk 22:55

And when they had kindled a fire in the midst of the hall, and were set down together, Peter sat down among them. We know that the arrest in Gethsemane was followed by the flight of the eleven apostles. John and Peter, however, once out of reach of the armed band, seem in some way to have recovered from their first panic, and to have followed their Master and his guards into the city. Arrived at the high priest’s house, John, who was known to the high priest, had no difficulty in procuring admission for himself and his companion. Peter’s motive in pressing into what he knew for him was a locality full of peril, is given by St. Matthew (Mat 26:58), “to see the end.” There was no doubt there was in the heart of the impulsive, loving man, sorrowful anxiety and deep sorrow for his dear Master’s fate. But, alas! with the feverish sad expectation to see what he felt would be the end, there was no earnest prayer for guidance and help. The fire is mentioned because, generally speaking, the nights in the Holy Land about the Passover season are warm. The cold on this night appears to be spoken of as something unusual. Peter sat down among them. “St. John (it must be supposed) had passed on into the audience-chamber, so that St. Peter was alone. St. John, who remained closest to the Lord, was unmolested; St. Peter, who mingled with the indifferent crowd, fell” (Westcott).

Luk 22:56

But a certain maid beheld him as he sat by the fire, and earnestly looked upon him, and said, This man was also with him. Comparing the several accounts of the evangelists together, we see how naturally the incidents followed each other. As he entered, the portress first thought she recognized him as one of the followers of the well-known Teacher just arrested on a capital charge. Then as, weary and chilled, he drew near the fire, the firelight shone on his face, a face known to many who had listened during the last few days to his Master as he taught, with his disciples grouped round him in the temple-courts before crowds of listeners. Thoroughly alarmed, he drew aside from the friendly warmth of the fire into the outer shade of the gateway; yet he could not tear himself away from the neighborhood of the spot where his dear Master was being interrogated by his deadly foes; and even there, while lurking in the shadow, he was recognized again, and then, just as he was in the act of fiercely denying, with oaths and curses, his friendship for and connection with Jesus, came the Master by, after the second examination before Caiaphas and certain members of the Sanhedrin, being conducted by the guard to another and more formal court. And as the Master passed, he turned and looked upon his poor cowardly disciple.

Luk 22:59

For he is a Galilaean. The strong provincial dialect of the fisherman of the Lake of Galilee at once told these Jerusalem Jews, accustomed to the peculiar pronunciation of the Galilee pilgrims at the Passover Feast, that the man whom they suspected certainly came from the same province as Jesus the Accused.

Luk 22:61

And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. As he was passing from the interrogation before Caiaphas to be examined before the Sanhedrin assembled in solemn council, he heard his servant’s well-known voice raised and accompanied with oaths and curses, assuring the by-standers he had no connection with and knew nothing of Jesus of Nazareth. Then, as he passed, the Master turned and looked on his old friend, that disciple who so lately had declared that even if all others deserted the Lord, he never would! The glance of Jesus was full of the tenderest pity; it was not angry, only sorrowful; but it recalled Peter to his better, nobler self. SS. Matthew and Mark (Peter’s own Gospel) record how, when he heard the cock crow, which St. Luke tells us happened as our Lord turned to look on the recreant disciple, he remembered all, and burst into bitter weeping. We meet him again on the Resurrection morning in company with St. John (Joh 20:3), whence, it would seem, that in his bitter sorrow he had turned to his old friend, who had probably heard his denial. St. John, who briefly in his narrative touches upon the “denial,” omits to mention the repentance, but, according to his custom, specially illustrates it in the scene by the lake (Joh 21:15, and following verses).

Luk 22:63-65

After the second examination, the officials of the Sanhedrin mock and ill treat Jesus as one doomed to death.

Luk 22:63

And the men that held Jesus mocked him, and smote him. The position of the Redeemer when the cruelties took place, described in this and the two following verses, was as follows: After the arrest in Gethsemane, the guards, Jewish and Roman, escorted the Prisoner to the palace of the high priest in Jerusalem. There both Annas and Caiaphas apparently lodged. In the first instance, Jesus was brought before Annas, who was evidently the leading personage of the Sanhedrin of that day. Details of the preliminary examination are given apparently by Joh 18:13, Joh 18:19-24. In this first and informal trial Caiaphas was evidently present, and took part (Joh 18:19). At the close of this unofficial but important proceeding, Annas sent him to Caiaphas. The true reading in Joh 18:24 is , “Annas therefore sent him.” That is, at the close of the first unofficial examination, which took place in Annas’s apartments in the palace of the high priest, Annas sent him to be examined officially before Caiaphas, the reigning high priest, and a committee of the Sanhedrim This, the second trial of Jesus, is related at some length by St. Matthew (Mat 26:59-66) and St. Mark (Mar 14:55 – 64). The priests on that occasion sought false witnesses, but their witness did not, we know, agree. Jesus kept silence until Caiaphas arose, and with awful solemnity adjured him to say whether he was the Christ, the Son of God. So adjured, Jesus answered definitely in the affirmative. Then Caiaphas rent his robe, and appealed to the assembly, who answered the appeal by a unanimous cry,” He is guilty of death.” After this hearing before Caiapnas and a committee of the Sanhedrin, the condemned One was conducted before the full assembly of the Sanhedrim While being led across the court, he heard Peter’s third denial. It was during the interval which elapsed before the great council assembled, that the mocking related in these verses (63-65) took place.

Luk 22:64

And when they had blindfolded him, they struck him on the face, and asked him, saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote thee? The Jews, in this terrible scene, were unconsciously working out a literal fulfillment of Isaiah’s picture of the righteous Sufferer (Isa 1:6; Isa 53:3-7).

Luk 22:66-71

The third trial before the Sanhedrin.

Luk 22:66

And as soon as it was day. The Sanhedrin as a council could only meet by day; all the preliminaries had been settled and the course of procedure fully arranged when the legal time for the meeting of the state council arrived. The elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes earns together, and led him into their council. These were the three constitutional parts of the Sanhedrin. The name of the famous Sanhedrin, curiously enough, is a Greek, not a Hebrew or Aramaic word, being derived from , an assembly. We first come on the word, says Dr. Farrar, when this state council summoned before them Hyrcanus II., son of Alexander Jannaeus. In the time of our Lord, the Roman government had taken from them the power of carrying out capital sentences; hence their bringing Jesus before Pilate. There is a remarkable tradition that the council left their proper place of assembly, Gazith, and sat in another chamber (forty years before the destruction of the temple). Now, it was forbidden to condemn to death except in Gazith. Dr. Westcott quotes from Derenbourg (‘Essai sur l’Histoire et la Geographie de Palestine’), who suggests the probability of the night sitting of Anrias and Caiaphas and the members of the Sanhedrin favorable to their policy (the second trial) being held at “the Booths of the Sons of Hanan” (Annas), These booths, or shops, were under two cedars on the Mount of Olives (Jerusalem Talmud, ‘Taanith,’ 4.8). There were four of these booths, which were for the sale of objects legally pure. In one of these pigeons were sold for the sacrifices of all Israel. Derenbourg conjectures that these booths on the Mount of Olives were part of the famous Booths of the Sons of Hanan (Annas), to which the Sanhedrin retired when it left the chamber Gazith.

Luk 22:67

Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe. In his answer Jesus evidently refers to something which had preceded this interrogation on the part of the Sanhedrim He referred, no doubt, to that night examination before Caiaphas and certain chosen members of the councilthe meeting passed over by St. Luke, but recounted by SS. Matthew and Mark. In this earlier trial, which we (see above) term the second, a similar question had been put to Jesus, but, as Lange and Stier point out, now the political significance of the charge, the claim to Messianic royalty, is brought into prominence. They were desirous to formulate an accusation which they could bring before the Roman tribunal of Pilate. The words, “Son of God,“ which the fury of jealous anger had wrung from Caiaphas (Mat 26:63), is here left out of sight, and is only brought forward again by the fierce Jewish wrath excited by the Lord’s quiet words telling of his “session at the right hand” (verses 69, 70). If I tell you, ye will not believe. If you, who have seen my life, have heard my words, and seen my works, believe not, to what end is it to say it again now?

Luk 22:68

And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me. The Lord here especially refers to those public questions of his put to members of the Sanhedrin and others in the last days of his public ministry, such as we find in Mat 22:45, to which the rulers had attempted to give no answer.

Luk 22:69

Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. Jesus decided to put an end to this weary and useless trial, and supplied his judges with the evidence they were seeking to extort from him. The Master’s words would recall to the teachers of Israel, sitting as his judges, the words of their loved prophet Daniel (Dan 7:13, Dan 7:14). These solemn words of his were, and they perfectly understood them as such, a claim on the part of the Prisoner who stood before thema direct claim to Divine glory.

Luk 22:70

Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? Now bringing forward the loftier title formerly suppressed (in Luk 22:67). “And art thou, then, dost thou, poor Man, vain in thy imagining, dost thou assert thyself to be the Son of God?” So Stier. And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. This form of reply is not used in Greek, but is frequent in rabbinic. By such an answer the one interrogated accepts as his own affirmation the question put to him in its entirety. We have, then, here, in the clearest possible language:

(1) A plain assertion by our Lord of his Divinity.

(2) The reply of the Sanhedrists, showing that they for their part distinctly understood it as such, but to make it quite clear they asked him if that was his meaning, i.e. the assertion of his Divinity.

(3) We have the Lord’s quiet answer, “Yes, that was his meaning.” The next verse (71) shows that they were satisfied with the evidence which they pro, ceeded without delay to lay before the Roman governor, Pilate.

HOMILETICS

Luk 22:1-30

Wednesday and Thursday of Passion Week.

Look at that picturethe Son of God awaiting the hour; spending the last day before the arrest and the trial in the deep seclusion of the Bethany home. Over that day the veil of an impenetrable secrecy hangs. One thing only is certainit was a time in which the shrinking spirit, whilst feeling even unto death the shadow of the exceeding heaviness, nevertheless drank of the brook by the way, the comforting “I am not alone, for the Father is with me.” Look at this picturethe priests and scribes, defied and denounced in the temple and in the presence of the people, have resolved that, by fair means or by foul, they must get rid of this “Swift Witness” against them. These men, united by a common hatred, consult (Luk 22:2) how they may kill him. We can imagine the conferences in the dimly lighted chamberthe partial light only casting deeper shadows, and bringing into fuller relief the lines of fierce resentment on the faces of the councillors. There is no debate as to the object; the only and the long debate is simply as to the means of accomplishing the object. Their deliberations are unexpectedly aided. The evangelist informs us of the satisfaction which lightens their countenances as they conclude the bargain with Judas of Karioth, and receive from him the assurance that he will find “the opportunity to betray him to them” (Luk 22:6) without the risk of exciting a tumult. Thus, whilst heaven is calm, hell is agitated at its depths; whilst love is directing its prayer and looking up, pride and envy are laying their plots and meditating the darkest crime which blots the page of history. “Mark the perfect, and behold the upright; for the end of that man is peace.” “But the wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt.” The early hours of Thursday swiftly pass. The next day is the great Passover day; and the disciples have begun to press the inquiry, “Where shall we keep it?” In the forenoon (verse 8) Jesus gives Peter and John his instructions. A place is in the Lord’s view. That the one to whose house the apostles are directed was a believer may be inferred

(1) from the word which the three synoptists represent the Lord as using, “The Master saith” (verse 11); and

(2) from the confidential character of the message. The two are commanded to go in advance of the party, and have all in readiness for a celebration of the Paschal meal, which probably anticipated by one day the usual celebration of the Lord’s Passover. Christ and the remaining ten apostles follow in the evening. Nothing is told us of that journey, whether, e.g., it was private, or whether, as usual, Jesus was accompanied by a multitude of people. It is the last time on which the feet of the Christ who had been known after the flesh shall press the grassy slope of the hill he loved. But he had spoken to his own of another day, that foretold in prophecy, when “his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east the day when the light shall not be clear nor dark, but one day known to the Lord. And living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea; and the Lord shall be King over all the earth” (Zec 14:4-9). All that is reported is this: “When the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him” (verse 14). The details of that memorable evening are full of interest; and, regarding them, the narratives of the evangelists are singularly explicit. “The four streams that go forth to water the earth in that tale meet in a common channel; the four winds of the Spirit are in it, united and one.” The scene is (verses 11, 12) “a large upper room”the guest-chamber of the house. (For distinction, emphasize ” the guest-chamber.“)

1. Its object. To receive and entertain the Friend, the one to be honored. Is not Christ the Guest (Rev 3:20)?

2. Its characteristics. The best room. Is he not entitled to the best? A large room. The whole breadth of the life’s aims, the whole strength of the heart’s love, is due to him. An upper room. Poor and sorry is the life that has no upper room; blessed is the life whose upper room is reserved for him. A furnished room, all in readiness for his presencea heart and will furnished for every good work.

3. Its consecration. How realized? On our side, by an unreserved surrender: “The Master saith;” and by the ready-making of faith and love, as symbolized in Peter and John. On his side, by the coming as the Lamb of God with the gospel of forgiveness, and as the Bread of life to have communion with us and we with him. When Jesus enters the room there is a strife for precedence, for the places nearest him. St. Luke places the strife (verse 24) along with the questioning among themselves who would be false to Christ; but his language, “there was also,” is inexact, and it seems consistent with the fitness of things that the contention should occur when seats were being taken. The Master, observing it, administers the rebuke recorded in verses 26, 27; and, having so done, he proceeds to comply with the ceremonial of the feast. It was wont to begin with the passing of a cup of wine, blessed and hallowed. The word recorded in verses 15, 16 is spoken before the dispensation of the cup; the word in verses 17, 18 accompanies the dispensation; both words intimating the declinature to partake of the shadowy rite when the substance is so soon to be realized. “Suffer it to be so now,“ said Jesus to John at the baptism. The now is exhausted. “I will not any more” is the sentence of the supper-table. As they divide the cup, he rises. He is minded to give them the lesson never to be forgotten, as his sharpest rebuke of all their contentions for prioritythe lesson so graphically related in Joh 13:1-17. Resuming his place at the table, lo! a troubled look flits across the countenance. A little later in the evening he can no longer refrain. There is one seated near him over whom the heart yearns, though it recoils from his baseness (Joh 13:21). The hand of the betrayer is with him. “One of you,“ Startled, deeply moved, the question passes from one and another, “Lord, is it I?” Simon whispers to John, “Ask who it is;” and John, leaning forward, his head close to Jesus, puts the question. He gets the sign by which the one will be identifieda morsel to be dipped in the dish that is before the Lord will be given to him. It is given to Judas, hitherto silent, something of the better self still struggling within. But, after the sop, the Satanic spirit gains in boldness. He has the effrontery to ask, “Is it I?” What is the answer? “Thou hast said That thou doest do quickly.” O Judas, there is no need to linger; thou art detected. “The Son of man goeth, as it is written: but woe unutterable to thee!” It is difficult to determine the precise stage in the keeping of the feast at which the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was instituted. Matthew makes the departure of the traitor precede the appointment of the ordinance. Luke seems to place the institution of the Supper at an earlier period than the departure. But the fact of the institution is beyond doubt (verses 19-21). The Christian Church, in all ages, has obeyed the command of her beloved Lord, spoken in the guest-chamber when keeping the Passover with his disciples: “This do in remembrance of me.” The central point of the interest attaching to the Thursday evening is this consecration of the bread and the cup as the abiding pledges of redeeming love. It is sad to think that over the gracious words of Christ in the consecration so many controversies should have been waged. Why cannot men recognize the language of figure and symbol? Those who insist that in the sentence, “Take, eat; this is my body” there is implied the transubstantiation of the cake of bread held in the hand, claim for that sentence a narrow literalism which they themselves do not observe when they read, “I am the true Vine,” or “I am the Door.” Let us receive, with all possible oblation of praise, the earthly creatures as, in sacramental use, the hallowed representations to the eye and pledges to the soul of the never-failing nourishment of the body that was broken and the blood that was shed for us. Let all who would feed on Jesus in their heart with thanksgiving reflect on the words of the Thursday evening which mirror his consciousness, and let them examine themselves in the light of this consciousness. “With desire I have desired” (verse 15). O my Lord, if thy desire was thus vehement; if, because of it, thou didst overlook all that lay in the immediate future; if thou didst so long to share thy feast with men, why the want of desire in me? why the backwardness and slowness of my soul to receive thee in the mysteries of thy love? Lord, lead me in thy truth, and teach me. “Until the kingdom of God shall come” (verse 18). O my Lord, how vivid to thee was the future consummation of thy sacrifice! As, in perspective, the distant is often near, the intervening spaces being lost to sight, so was it with thee. Thou didst behold thy kingdom in glory as at hand. and thy soul stretched forward whither thy prayer afterwards pointed,”Father, that which thou hast given me, I will that where I am they also may be with me.” Why beats my pulse so slow and feeble in response to the hope of thy kingdom? Why is my Lord’s Supper so much of a mere commemoration, so little of a prophetic joy, of a prayer, as already in the vision of the kingdom? “Come, Lord Jesus, come quickly.”

“Thou strong and loving Son of man,

Redeemer from the bonds of sin,

‘Tis thou the living spark dost fan

That sets my heart on fire within.

Thou openest heaven once more to men

The soul’s true home, thy kingdom, Lord;

And I can trust and hope again,

And feel myself akin to God.”

Luk 22:31-34

The special word to Simon.

Its solemnity is indicated by the twice- repeated “Simon.” Observe, when the warning is given, this is the name used; afterwards (Luk 22:34), in reply to the disciple’s protestation, “I am ready to go both to prison and to death,” the name is changed, “I tell thee, Peter.“ How gentle, how pathetic, the irony! Of the Peter, the rock, it is to be said, “The cock shall not crow until thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.” Note three points in the word of Christ.

I. THE TEMPTATION. To him the personality of the tempter is always real. Real, in respect of his own temptations: “Get thee hence, Satan;” “The prince of this world cometh.” Now we are reminded that it is real in respect of the temptations of men. Beware of foolish speaking and jesting in connection with the actual existence of the Satan. “Behold!” says Jesus All is vividly present to him; he would have the agency of the adversary vividly present to his follower. The expression employed is very striking (see the Revised Version, “Satan asked to have you”). The phrase recalls the scene in Job 2:1-13. But this is memorablethe tempter recognizes the proprietary of the Lord. Of Judas it is said, “Satan entered into him.” Of Simon it is said, “He asked to have you.” This is one over whom he has no right. He belongs to the Son of Goda man given him by the Father. And he makes request that the disciple be sifted. In the margin of the Revised Version it is put as an alternative reading: “He obtained you by asking.” All is so suggestive. The Christian Father speaks of the Christian‘s fasting-days. Such days are often part of the experience of God’s people. The sieve, as if with God’s permission, is applied. The tempter obtained the Lord himself by asking, and the sieve was applied to him. It was similarly applied to his apostle; it is similarly applied, in one form or another, to those who are his. God will have his wheat winnowed. Remember, there is the sieve: “Watch and pray.”

II. THE INTERCESSION. It is spoken of (verse 32) as past, and as a transaction accomplished in the invisible world. And who knows what transactions are there realized? How blessed is the assurance that

“Where high the heavenly temple stands.
The house of God, not made with hands,
A great High Priest our nature wears,
The Guardian of mankind appears”!

“I made intercession for thee.” Ah! in the day when all secrets are declared, with what marvellous light will this word be illumined! Ye Simons of all ages, thyself, O my soul, what a reflection it is that between the one tempted and the outer darkness there is the intercession of the ever-living and ever-mighty One, who is able to “save to the uttermost”! What is the intercession? Not that the sieve be withdrawn, that the sifting fail? It is needful. Simon would not have been the Peter he became without the sieve and without the discipline. The tempter and the trial are used as discipline. He who world not pray that his own be taken out of the world, will not pray that the Satan-request be refused. No; but he intercedes that the “faith fail not” (verse 32). The great feature of Simon was his confidence in Christ. Why should he have been selected as the Rock-man, who was so often rash, and who so weakly denied his Master? Through all there was still the faith. He had quicker insight into the secrets of his Master’s power and presence than any of his fellows; he had a higher and fuller perception of and trust in him. Were this to fail, all would fail. And the fruit of the intercession was evidenced in the springing back of his faithnay, in its rising to a still higher measure of knowledge on the ruins of the old self-confidence; there was created the new heart that by-and-by was ready to go to prison and death.

III. THE EXHORTATION. Simon will turn again. When the Lord turns, in the day of the trial, and looks on the apostate disciple, there is born a godly sorrow which works repentance not to be repented of. Out of this repentance there comes the earnest, “Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee.” And the charge is, “Do thou, when once thou hast turned again, stablish thy brethren” (verse 32, Revised Version). The most helpful man is he who has himself been tempted, who has passed, not without scars, through the fight of faith. It is the sympathy of the soul that has come through great tribulation that has the delicate touch, the magnetic force, the faculty of establishing the brethren. All discovery of the Lord is to be utilized in the way of strengthening, cheering, building up human souls in the kingdom of God. What we receive we hold in trust for others, and, in giving as we receive, what we have gained becomes doubly ours.

“Heaven does with us as we with torches do.
Not light them for themselves.”

Experience of God and his love is the best teacher. What we learn, even through falls and failures, turns most to the profit of poor human nature. Simon, after the sifting, through the turning again, was the confirmer of the brethren.

Luk 22:39-46

Gethsemane.

It is now dark. On the way to the Mount of Olives, the customary retreat of Jesus (Luk 22:39), at the point where the upward slope begins, there is a shady place, belonging, perhaps, to one of those who believed in him, whither “Jesus had often resorted” (Joh 18:2). The site of the garden of Gethsemane may, with sufficient accuracy, be identified. It may not have been the exact spot, overshadowed by the eight venerable trees, which immemorial tradition has distinguished as the scene of the lonely vigil, but it must have been close to that spot. It was a place where there were many olives, and, as the name suggests, an oil-press; a place of perfect quiet and seclusion, where, beyond the voices of rude men, there was the peace of heaven. To this place he who had uttered the high-priestly prayer brought the high-priestly sacrifice; and there he began the walk through the valley of the shadow of death. The tale of the sore amazement and exceeding heaviness is told, with more fullness of detail, by the Evangelists Matthew and Mark (see homiletics in loc.). Here, without enlarging on the meaning and scope of the features of the narrative, note

I. THE AGONY. (Verse 44.) It has always been felt that in this there is immeasurably more than a mere revolt from imminent pain and death. The anguish is marked by an intensity for which this revolt cannot account. A brave man, however sensitive, can face, with unflinching fortitude, a high enterprise, even though its fatal consequence is evident. “The sweat becoming as it were great drops of blood,” speaks of a conflict in the soul for which the impending physical dissolution cannot account. Some references supply us with suggestions.

1. The announcement made at the Supper-table (Joh 14:30), of the coming of the prince of the world, speaks to us of a temptation, intensified by the circumstances of the hour, in the line of the wilderness-temptation, to grasp the power of the Messiah otherwise than through the suffering of the cross (see, in this connection, Mat 26:53).

2. The sorrow which cast its shade over his countenance when the betrayal was mentioned (Joh 13:21); the horror with which he regarded the perfidy (verse 22; Mat 26:24); the utterance by which he awoke the disciples, marking out the betrayal as the bitterness of the hour at hand (Mat 26:45); the appeal to Judas (verse 48);these things indicate the amazement and pain caused by the action of the son of perdition.

3. The word of the Son to the Father as to the cup so full of woe that he humbly besought its removal, reminds us of a region beyond all that our thought can trace, in which the Christ of God was treading the wine-press alone. Better, in view of this, a holy reticence than a zeal which is eager with explanations. If we must speak of the special fearfulness and trembling of Gethsemane, let us simply say that there, in all its crushing weight, was realized the bearing of the sin of the world.

II. THE PRAYER.

1. Observe its characteristics.

(1) Humility. He kneeled down.

More strongly still St. Mark says (Mar 14:35), “He fell on the ground.” It was the attitude of deepest reverence, of entire prostration. In the high-priestly prayer, “he lifted up his eyes to heaven;” but now, in human weakness and dependence, he is prostrate before his Father. Sign of the “godly fear” (Heb 5:7) for which he was heard.

(2) Importunate repetition. Thrice he prayed, “saying the same words” (Mat 26:44). It is not the eloquence, but the sincerity of desire in the prayer which God regards.

(3) Increasing earnestness. “Being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly.” The greater the pressure on the soul, the more fervent became the cry. The sorrow of the disciples sent them to sleep; his sent him to the Father. “Love overmasters agony,” not agony love. Let the disciple learn, of the Master.

2. Observe its subject-matter. (Verse 42.) “Remove this cup from me; or (as in Mat 26:30), “Let this cup pass from me.” It was the pleading of the sensitive human soul. And we may be assured that to plead for the removal of a cup of pain, for relief from burdens which seem greater than we can bear, is in the way of the child’s privilege; only there must be the spirit of entire dependence. “If thou be willing.” There is to be no “if” where God’s promise is absolute. We do not need to say, If thou be willing, make thy grace sufficient.” His pledge as to this is distinct and unequivocal: “My grace is sufficient.” From this, on this resting, we pray. But when we desire that concerning which we have no definite assurance of the Father’s mind, then all is to be subordinated to him. This is to abide in the Son as he is revealed in Gethsemane. “If we ask any thing according to God’s will, he heareth us.” The godly McCheyne spoke of getting into tune for prayer. We get into tune when we learn Christ’s “if it be possible;” “If thou be willing.”

“Renew my will from day to day;
Blend it with thine,” etc.

3. Observe its answer. The answer is manifest:

(1) In the righting “Nevertheless.” (Verse 42.) In the prayer the soul realized “God my Rock.” From what might have been self-seeking, it was delivered.

“Do thou thy holy will:
I will lie still; I will not stir,
Lest I should break the charm.”

“In the day when I cried, thou answeredst me, and strengthenedst me with strength in my soul.”

(2) In the comforting angel. (Verse 43.) The holy one, sign of the sympathy in heaven above. For to the one who prays in an agony the heavens are not brass. There are ministries of love. God’s angels are all ministering spirits. In visible form the angel may not appear; but we know that he is with us in the comfort and peace. Have we not the Comforter himself?

“A gracious, willing Guest,
While he can find one humble heart
Wherein to rest.”

And thus, though the cup does not pass, the will of the Son is strengthened into perfect harmony with the will of the Father. He rises up from prayer, ready, “strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.”

III. Observe, finally, THE REMONSTRANCE. Very touching the word to Peter (Mat 26:40). The one hour never again to come, the one hour of watching, lost in sleep! And now (verse 46). May not the pathetic question ring in the ears of the Christian?

Why do we sleepwe whom the Son of man has associated with himself in his prayers and pains? We asleep, and he toiling! We asleep, and the world lying in darkness! Ah! in the solemn light of Gethsemane, what is the utmost Christian activity but a slumber? and how many who claim to be Christ’s are fast asleep, not for sorrow, but in self-indulgence and sin! Oh that the gentle, reproachful “why?” may be as an alarum-clock to conscience, a continual incitement to will and heart! The spirit may be willing, but the flesh is ever weak. “Rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation!”

Luk 22:47 Luk 23:46

Thursday night to Friday evening.

It is time to be going. The footfall of the coming host has already been heard, and the gleam of the lanterns and the flashing of the swords have been detected at no great distance. Guiltily, under shadow of night, the conspirators have approached. “While Jesus is yet speaking.” (Luk 23:47), the traitor is bending forward to give the salute of friendship. Note the question, so full of gentle dignity, “Companion, wherefore art thou come? Betrayest thou the Son of man, with a kiss?” Note what follows down to the flight of the apostles, when to them it seems that the end has come. “We trusted that it had been he who should have redeemed Israel;” and now? Betrayed into the hands of sinners, he is “led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep dumb before her shearers.” Priest, Pharisee, scribe, he who scourged you with the whip of his holy indignation is now the Prisoner on whose bleeding body the furrows of your scourge may be made long. No legion of angels will interpose. The Son of God only waits to die. There are:

(1) a precognition by Annas;

(2) an arraignment before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin; and, finally

(3) the deliverance to the judicature of the governor.

Briefly trace the narrative.

I. THE PRECOGNITION BY ANNAS. Annas, or Hanan, to whom first the fettered Jesus is borne, occupied at the time a peculiar position. His son-in-law, Joseph Caiaphas, was the actual high priest. But Annas, having been deposed by the Roman governor, was still regarded as the priest jure divino, and his influence seems to have been immense. Five of his sons and his son-in-law were raised to the pontifical throne. It was under the last of his five sons that James, the brother of our Lord, was put to death. He was an unscrupulous, intriguer. A Sadducee, who had been mixed up in foul plots and conspiracies, the head of “a viper brood,” as a Jewish chronicler says, which amassed wealth by unlawful gains. Farrar has called attention to the fact that, when the capture of Jesus is determined, the Pharisees disappear from the scene; his implacable enemies are the chief priests and scribes. Before this Annas Jesus stands (Joh 18:13-23). Some questions are put as to his disciples and doctrine. And these, as has well been remarked, Jesus answers “with dignified repulsion”a repulsion so sharp that the first blow inflicted on that sacred face was bestowed by one of the menials of the court. “Answerest thou the high priest so?” How complete the self-restraint expressed in the only action which followedthe reply, “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if not, why strikest thou me?”

II. THE ARRAIGNMENT BEFORE CAIAPHAS AND THE SANHEDRIM. All that Annas could do was to order his Prisoner to be still more tightly bound, and to send him to the portion of the temple court which was occupied by the priest, his son-in-law, Caiaphas. The morning had not yet dawned, and until dawn no meeting of council could be convened. It was during this interval that the predicted denial of the Lord by Peter occurred (verses 54-62). The clock marks the hour of six, when Caiaphas and his assessors confront the Nazarene. Their object is to establish a charge of blasphemy, and suborned witnesses are cited. They are clumsy perjurers, who contradict one another and contradict themselves. And the evidence breaks down. Then the tactics are changed. The high priest, directly addressing the Prisoner, demands a “yea” or “nay” to the interrogation, “Art thou the Christ?” Jesus has been silent, but now (verses 60-71), calmly and solemnly, he answers, “Thou hast said;” and adds that, by-and-by, they should see “the Sou of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God.” It is enough. “Blasphemy!” is the shout, and he is condemned as worthy of death. And there ensues a scene of brutal ferocity. The wretches in attendance spit on the face, buffet, strike him with the palms of their hands, and rend the air with ribald cries. For the world shows its baseness when a man is down; then the many rush forward to have their fling and kick.

III. JESUS IS DELIVERED TO THE JUDICATURE OF THE GOVERNOR, What priests and elders could do has been done. The procurator alone could inflict the sentence of death. Their next movement must be to coerce him into the carrying out of their plan. And they know that in Pontius Pilate, stained with violences the report of which to his imperial master would cost him his government, if not his life, they have the ruler whom they can rule. Two appearances (ch. 23.) of our Lord before the governor are recorded, and between them stands the episode with which the name of Herod is associated. There is nothing more sad than the record of the expedients, the shufflings to and fro, the efforts to save One whom Pilate felt to be guiltless, whilst yet he dared not give effect to his convictions. A record most sad, but most instructive. Is it not a portrait, many of whose features suggest cowardly concessions, timidities, struggles between conscience and policy in which conscience is worsted, with which, in one form or another, too many of us are familiar? A character-sketch, like that of Pilate in the trial, gauges the directions and the possibilities of the human nature which is common to us all. In the afternoon of Friday the Savior of sinners was crucified. An incident on the way to Calvary is related by the evangelist, which is touching in itself, and which reminds us of the attitude of mind, the kind of feeling towards him, the Crucified, which he denies and accepts. We are told that he was “followed by a great company of women, who bewailed and lamented him” (verses 27-31). Observe his saying, most tenderly prefaced by the phrase, “Daughters of Jerusalem.” Virtually, he declines tears and cries, which express only sorrow over his fate. He wishes those who bewail to estimate the significance of the spectacle, to realize what it foreboded for them and theirs; to weep not for him, but with him in his sadness concerning Jerusalem, in his baffled longing to gather its children together, in his thwarted purpose to save and bless. The events of that day were the prophecy of a doom not to be long delayed: in his thought and emotion as to this doom, and in this alone, he sought their sympathy. And so, remember, Christ desires not a luxury of sentiment, which ends in lamentations on account of his suffering. He desires partnership in his suffering. His cross is to be our cross. We are to hold ourselves identified with him in it. The apostle’s words are the interpretation of the genuine Christian sentiment: “I was crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me;” “God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.”

HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON

Luk 22:2

Piety, pedantry, and formalism.

Of all those who in any and every way were responsible for the death of Jesus Christ, the largest share of guilt lies at the door of the religious leaders of the time. The Roman soldiers were only the immediate instruments of it; the Jewish populace were only the blind agents of it; but these scribes and chief priests were the guilty instigators of it: they brought it about. It was they who first conceived the idea; it was they who suggested and urged it; it was they who ceased not to agitate and direct until the dark deed was done. How came they to go so far astray? How came it to pass that while “all the people came early in the morning to him in the temple for to hear him” (Luk 21:38), thus bearing witness to the sincerity of their discipleship and their desire to know the truth he taught, they, the leaders of the landscribes who were familiar with every letter of the Law, priests who were daily occupied in the services of the sanctuary, learned doctors, and pious ministrantswere actively and earnestly compassing his death? The fact is that

I. RELIGIOUS PEDANTRY MAY BE VERY LEARNED, AND YET WHOLLY WRONG. These men knew their Scriptures with a fullness and nicety of detail that surpasses the knowledge we have of our sacred writings; and they had also a perfect familiarity with the teachings of traditional lore. They despised the ignorance of the common people in these respects (see Joh 7:47). Yet they were not wise with the wisdom of God; they entirely failed to understand the Divine will and the way to eternal life. The religion they taught and lived was utterly heartless; it was a service without any soul in it, a mechanism without any life in it; it was an elaborate error, a great and sad misconception of the mind of God; it was a surrender of freedom that did man no good and gave God no pleasure; it was a toilsome and torturing imposition that neither satisfied the intellect, nor cleansed the heart, nor elevated the life. And it so perverted the judgment that, when the Truth himself came to reveal the Father, these learned bat unwise leaders, instead of being eager to hear him like the people (Luk 21:38), were “seeking how they might kill him.”

II. RELIGIOUS FORMALISM WILL GO TO GREAT LENGTHS OF WRONG–DOING. If the scribes were men of pedantry, the chief priests represented the evil and error of religious formalism; and the latter were in no way behind the former in either spiritual blindness or malevolence. They, too, failed to recognize their Messiah, and were actively engaged in compassing his murder. In every age and land religious formalism has been blind and cruel; it has failed to recognize the reformer when he has come to speak in God’s name; and it has been forward to accuse and to slay him. Such has been its spirit and its course, that the home of love and mercy has been converted into the hotbed of hatred and of cruelty. It is another illustration of the truth that the corruption of the best becomes the worst of all; the piety that runs into ordinances, utterances, abstinences, formalities, will in time degenerate into utter error and shameful wrong. This is a truth which applies to many more Churches than one; it is, indeed, more or less applicable to all religious circles. There lies a deep-seated tendency in our nature which accounts for the facts in our Lord’s time and in every age since then. Let us, therefore, learn that

III. TRUE PIETY IS FOUND IN RECTITUDE OF HEART AND LIFE. Not in holding and professing certain correct formulae; not in going through certain ceremonies or observing a number of rules and regulations. These have their place in the kingdom of God, but they do not by any means assure us of our place in it. It is rightness of heart toward God our Father and our Savior, and consequent integrity of life, which make us to “stand before God” as his loyal subjects now, and will make us “worthy to stand before the Son of man” when he shall call us to his nearer presence.C.

Luk 22:3-6

The deepest wound, etc.

When everything has been allowed for Judas that the most ingenious and the most charitable have begged us to consider, we must judge him to be a man whose conduct is to be solemnly and seriously condemned. It is Divine Love itself that decides this question (see Luk 22:22; Mat 26:24; Joh 17:12). The text suggests to us

I. THAT OUR DEEPEST WOUNDS ARE THOSE WE RECEIVE AT THE HAND OF OUR NEAREST FRIENDS. How much force is there in the parenthesis, “being of the number oft he twelve“! What deep pathos is in those sad words of the Lord, “Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me” (Mat 26:21)! This was a “sword that entered into his soul,” a keen distress, one of the very bitterest of all the sorrows of the Son of man. That one whom he had admitted to his intimate fellowship, of whom he had made a friend, who had partaken of his confidence and shared his strong affection,that he should be the one to betray him to his foes! There is no trouble possible to us so great as that which lies open to us on the side of our purest and strongest affections. It is not our avowed enemy, nor the man to whom we are indifferent, but it is our dearest friend, who has it in his power to lacerate our soul with the sharpest thrust, and to spoil our life by throwing over it the darkest shadow (see Psa 41:9).

1. Be slow to admit to the inner sanctuary of the heart; for he who has entrance there holds your happiness in his own right hand.

2. Realize the responsibility of intimate friendship; it is not only a privilege, but an obligation; it gives you power to gladden and to bless, but also opportunity to mar and to destroy.

II. THAT MONEY PLAYS A LARGE PART, FOR GOOD OR EVIL, IN HUMAN LIFE. They “covenanted to give him money.” It seems hardly credible that any man who had lived in the society of Jesus Christ, and had witnessed his kindness and his purity, should take money for betraying him. Other motivesthose of resentment or ambition- are far less shocking and revolting than this mercenary one. To betray his Master, his Friend, for thirty pieces of silver, fills us with wonder and excites the deepest reprobation. But for what has not money been responsible in human history? How large a part it plays in the great drama! What untold good it is instrumental in effecting! What admirable virtues it is the means of illustrating I To what deeds of folly and even of infamy the desire to obtain it has conducted! It is clear that men who have been trained to hate immoral and criminal behavior with an intense hatred have been induced to part with every principle they have honored, and to do the worst deeds they have denounced, in order to obtain money, when they have found themselves pressed for its possession. Probably no man who has not felt it knows the deadly force of the temptation. Who shall say that he is safe from this powerful snare? It is probable that to obtain money more evil deeds have been done than under any other inducement whatever. Therefore let every man beware lest he subjects himself to this strong and fell temptation. Let neither an overweening ambition nor extravagance of habit lead where the possession of more money becomes an imperative demand. Moderation in desire and economy in habit save men from a temptation in which, it may be, their souls would be entangled and their very life taken away.

III. THAT EARNESTNESS IS SURE TO SEEK ITS OPPORTUNITY UNTIL IT FINDS IT. He “sought opportunity to betray him.” By whatever motives inspired, Judas was intent on compassing the act he had undertaken. And he did not wait idly until an opportunity offered itself. He sought it. If evil is thus in earnest, how much more so should righteousness and mercy be! These should surely be about their holy and loving work “with both hands earnestly.” Opportunity to raise, to help, to redeem, to restore,this is not to be passively waited for, but to be actively sought out. There is a very marked difference between readiness to work when we are invited and even urged to do so, and that noble zeal which will not be contented without finding material for activity. It is the difference between a goodness that you do not blame and a goodness that you admire; between a life that will not stand condemned and a life that will be crowned with victory and honor. If there are those who, in the interest of error and of evil, will set about diligently to promote these ends. shall we not put forth our utmost energy on behalf of truth and heavenly wisdom? If men can be found who will “seek opportunity” to betray, shall not we with deeper devotedness “seek opportunity” to honor our Lord?C.

Luk 22:15, Luk 22:16

The Passion, from two standpoints.

I. As IT LOOKED TO OUR LORD WHEN HE WAS APPROACHING IT. It was to him a terrible trial, which he was eager to reach and pass through. “With desire he desired” the time to arrive when he should suffer and should complete his work. He did not wish to escape it; he was not looking about for an alternative; he knew that he could not save himself if he would save the world; and he longed for the trial-time to come and to be passed. Here was the heroic, and here was also the human. Here was the determination to endure, and, at the same time, the natural, human anxiety to know the worst and to exchange an almost intolerable suspense for the suffering that awaited him.

1. Having chosen the path of self-sacrifice, and having entered upon and pursued it, it behoved him to continue and to complete his appointed work. He could not turn back without suffering defeat; he accepted the dark future that was before him as a sacred duty. From it there must be no turning aside to other ends; and there was none. He never wavered in his purpose from beginning to end. “This shall not be unto thee,” from Peter, appears to have been. a strong shock of temptation to him (Mat 16:21-23). But nothing induced him to turn aside by a single step from the path of sacrificial service.

2. Yet we have here a glimpse of the extreme severity of the trial he underwent. He knew that his “suffering” would immediately follow this Passover, and he “earnestly desired” that Passover to come, that the sufferings might follow. With perfect reverence we may say that he could not realize what they would include, for they had never before been experienced; they stood absolutely by themselves, and could not be known until they were actually felt. And this element of suspense and uncertainty must have added a great weight of trouble to the sorrows of our Lord. “How bitter that cup no heart can conceive;” not even his heart did conceive until it was in his hands.

(1) Like our Lord, we should go on without faltering to the darkest future which we feel it becomes us to face.

(2) As with him, the uncertainty of the actual elements of our grief may oppress our spirit and fill us with eager desire for its coming (see also Luk 12:50).

(3) We shall find, as he found, all needful Divine help when the hour does actually arrive.

II. AS HE WOULD HAVE US REGARD IT NOW. That is, as a completed work of redeeming love. That last Passover has been “fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” All that the Passover prophesied has been fulfilled. The “Lamb of God” has been slainthat Lamb “which taketh away the sin of the world.” Everything in the way of sacred endurance, of Divine preparation, is now completed, and the way into the kingdom is open. Those sufferings to which Jesus was so eagerly looking forward, to which he had now come, with nothing between them and him but that Passover Feast, had to he endured (see Luk 24:26); and now they have been endured. Everything predicted in sacred rite or solemn utterance has been “fulfilled,“ and we wait for nothing more. We sit down to no predictive Passover Feast, because “Christ, our Passover, is slain for us.” What we have to do is gratefully and eagerly to avail ourselves of the “finished” work of our redeeming Lord; to let that suffering, that death, that sacrifice,

(1) evoke our humility;

(2) call forth our faith;

(3) kindle our love and command our obedience;

(4) inspire us with sacred and abiding joy, inasmuch as his “sorrow unto death” is the source of our eternal life.C.

Luk 22:19, Luk 22:20

The Lord’s Supper.

A very simple rite as first observed was the Lord’s Supper. But for certain passages in the Acts of the Apostles and in the Epistles, we should not have known that Jesus Christ intended to create a permanent institution. But though the simpler the ceremony is the more scriptural it is, yet are the ideas associated with it and suggested by it many and important. They are these

I. THE NEAR PRESENCE OF OUR LORD. Not in the elements but presiding over the company. It is a table at which he entertains his friends; and can he, the Divine Host, himself be absent?

“Around a table, not a tomb,

He willed our gathering-place should be;

When going to prepare our home,

The Savior said, ‘Remember me.'”

And at that table, meeting and communing with his friends, we may feel sure and can realize forcibly that our living Lord is, in spirit and in truth, “in the midst of us.”

II. CHRIST OUR STRENGTH AND OUR JOY. The chosen elements are bread and wine, the sources of strength and of gladness. He, our Lord, is the one constant Source of our spiritual nourishment and strength, of the joy with which our hearts are for ever glad.

III. CHRIST OUR PROPITIATION. The broken bread, the outpoured wineof what do these speak to our hearts? Of the “marred visage,” of the weariness, of the poverty and privation, of the toilfulness and loneliness of that troubled life, of the griefs and pains of that burdened and broken heart, of the shame and the darkness and the death of the last closing scene. We stand with bowed head and reverent spirit at that cross and see

“Sorrow and love flow mingled down.”

And our hearts are full as we ask

“Did e’er such love and sorrow meet;
Or thorns compose so rich a crown?”

And we realize that that sorrow was borne, that death died for us. “This is my body, ‘given for you;’ my blood, ‘shed for you.'” It is the Propitiation for our sins.

IV. OUR INDIVIDUAL APPROPRIATION OF OUR LORD‘S GREAT WORK. Each one eats of that bread and drinks of that cup. As he does so, in and by that act he declares his own personal need of a Divine Savior; he affirms his conviction that the sacrifice was offered for him; he renews his faith in the Divine Redeemer; he recognizes the claim of him that loved him unto death; he rededicates himself to Jesus Christ and to his service; he rejoices, in spirit, in his reconciled Father, in his Divine Lord and Friend.

V. HAPPY AND HOLY COMMUNION WITH ONE ANOTHER. Gathered round one table, in the felt presence of our common Lord, all invited to drink of the same cup (Mat 26:27), we are drawn to one another in the bonds of Christian love. We realize our oneness in him as a strong bond which triumphs over all the separating influences of the world. Faith, joy, love, are kindled and” burn within us;” and we are strengthened and sanctified, built up, enabled to “abide in him.”C.

Luk 22:21, Luk 22:22

Jesus and Judas; our Lord and ourselves.

The ordinance of the Lord’s Supper was closely connected, not only in time but in apostolic thought, with the act of the betrayal (see 1Co 11:23)the institution of the greatest privilege with the commission of the darkest crime. Oar Lord’s demeanour on this occasion is well worthy of our most reverent thought.

I. JESUS AND JUDAS.

1. His length of sufferance. After knowing that Judas was seeking to betray him (Luk 22:6), Jesus might well have expelled him from his society. He might have done so, acting judicially, as being no longer worthy to be classed among his apostles. He might have done so, acting prudentially, as one

(1) whom it was not wise to admit to his counsels and his plans; and as one

(2) whose association with the eleven would be a source of evil. He might very appropriately have declined to acknowledge him as an officer and a friend. But Jesus did not press his right. On the contrary, he let him continue as one of the twelve, he let him come under the same roof with himself, he permitted him to share the Paschal feast: the hand of him that was betraying him was “with him on the table.” To such a length as that his longsuffering went.

2. His dignity in rebuke. He did not break forth into passionate invective; he did not use words of natural and permissible vehemence; he quietly said, “Woe unto that man,” etc.! Matthew tells us that he added, “It had been good for that man if he had not been born.” What a transcendent calmness and serenity of spirit we have here! What a contrast between two children of men! One man preparing to betray his Teacher, his Friend, his Master; the other compassionating his betrayer for the depth of his fall and the sadness of his doom. Jesus went on to his sacrificial death and to his throne; Judas went out into the night (Joh 13:30)into the dark night of guilt, of shame, of despair, of death.

II. ONE LORD AND OURSELVES.

1. The wrong against our Lord it is still open to us to commit. We cannot betray him as Judas did; yet may we do that which answers to, and is almost if not quite as deplorable as that sad and shameful act. Let us consider that:

1. We know more about Jesus than Judas then did; for we have all the light of his resurrection and of the teaching of his apostles.

2. He has granted to us mercies as many and as great in intrinsic value as those he bestowed on Judas.

3. Owing him as much as Judas did, we may do even greater injury to his cause than the traitor did. The act of Iscariot ultimately issued in the all-sufficient sacrifice; this did not extenuate or lessen his guiltiness by a simple grain; but it nullified the mischief of the crime. We may do incalculable and irreparable mischief to the cause of our Master by our unfaithfulness, our infidelity, our disobedience, our criminal negligence.

4. By such disloyalty we may wound and grieve his Spirit almost as severely as his betrayer did. Wherefore let us:

(1) Be humble-minded. “Let him that thinketh he standeth,” etc. If we could find the man who has smitten Christ and his cause the severest blow that was ever struck, it is probable that we might easily find an hour in that man’s history when he would have shrunk with holy horror from such a guilty act.

(2) Be prayerful; ever looking heavenward with the supplication, “Hold thou me up,” etc.

(3) Be diligent in the field of earnest Christian work. It is the idler in the vineyard whom the tempter will assail. It is the faithful workman who is in a position to say, after his Lord and Leader, “The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me” (Joh 14:30).C.

Luk 22:24 -27

Greatness after Christ.

Three things claim our attention.

I. APOSTOLIC FAILURE. When the apostles of our Lord came to look back on this most memorable evening, how pained and how ashamed they must have felt as they recollected this unseemly contest (Luk 22:24)! At the very hour when their Lord was manifesting his love and his forethought for his Church in two most striking and touching waysat the very hour when his heart was torn with distracting sorrow by the desertion and treachery of one of his chosen band, and when he might well have been looking for some consolation in the attachment and the obedience of the others, they must needs show their unlikeness to himself and their unworthiness of their position by an untimely dispute about their own importance in connection with that condescending service of their Lord’s, how small such a controversy seems! And in connection with such a trial as that through which he was passing, how unbecoming and ill-timed was any anxiety about their own affairs! It was in their power to render to Jesus Christ a most helpful sympathy, and, instead of doing that, they grieved him by the exhibition of a contentious and an ambitious spirit. It was a sad failure on their part. How often do his disciples fail him now! How often do they let the opportunity of loving and effective service pass unused! When the hour strikes for faithfulness, or for courage, or for self-sacrifice, or for humility, or for energetic action, is there not found unfaithfulness, or timidity, or selfish time-serving, or pride, or a culpable inactivity, that loses everything and leaves behind nothing but failure and regret?

II. WORLDLY VANITY. (Luk 22:25.) What a poor thing indeed is mere official dignity, or even arbitrary power, or servile flattery! Official dignity without moral worth is a miserably hollow thing. Arbitrary power, exercised in caprice and apart from a pure desire to do good and to enrich, is an evil thing; it is injurious to the possessor and it is burdensome to the objects of it. Servile flattery is a false thing. It is simply contemptible on the part of those who pay it; it is morally ruinous to those who accept it. Let the “Gentiles” act thus if they must; but “ye shall not be so.” Ye who care to be true, to be loving, to be humbleye shall not sit on that seat of honor, ye shall not run into that serious temptation, ye shall not pursue such a worthless prize. Other and better things are within your reach; for you there is

III. CHRISTIAN GREATNESS. (Luk 22:26, Luk 22:27.)

1. Jesus Christ, the greatest One, was the Servant of all. He came to serve; it was his holy, heavenly errand; he came to seek and to save the lost. He lived to serve. That act of menial service in which he had just been engaged (Joh 13:1-5) was only a picture and illustration of the whole spirit and substance of his life; to bear the burden of others was the law of his life (Gal 6:2). He lived to heal, to help, to comfort, to enlighten, to redeem; his life from end to end was a loving ministry, a gracious and generous service (Mar 10:45). He suffered to serve. He died to serve. He had a perfect right to say,, I am among you as he that serveth.”

2. We are nearest to our Lord as we live to serve; we rise towards the spiritual stature of Jesus Christ as we are filled with this his spirit and as we live this his life. There is a path for ambition to tread in the kingdom of Christ; but it is not the path that leads to high office and official dignity and popular applause: these things may come unsought, and be used for good. But the one road along which true Christian greatness travels is the way of self-forgetting service. To be touched and moved by the sorrows and the sins of our fellow-men; to be stirred to helpful, earnest, sacrificial effort on their behalf; to pity the poor and needy; to seek and to save the lost; to breathe the air and to do the work of an unpretentious but effective kindness, to have the right to say, “I am among you as he that serveth; “that is greatness after Christ himself.C.

Luk 22:28-30

Fidelity and its reward.

The lesson of the text is the bountiful reward of faithfulness to Jesus Christ; but taking these words of his in connection with the position in which he well knew himself to be, they speak to us of

I. THE MAJESTIC CONFIDENCE OF OUR LORD. “I appoint [bequeath] unto you a kingdom that ye may sit on thrones.” And who is this thus calmly disposing of kingdoms and thrones?a reigning emperor, a brilliant conqueror? Only a poor, homeless, soldierless Prophet! One who knew that he was about to be taken, tried, convicted, scourged, crucified! Yet he meant it all. What majestic confidence in God, in the power of his gospel, in his own integrity! With what reverent homage shall we bow before him who could make such royal offers when the shadow of the cross already rested on his path! And what nobler sight is there to be seen among men than that of one (missionary, minister, teacher, reformer, etc.) calmly going on his way when every one and when everything is against him, confident in the triumph of the cause for which he pleads] Taking these words of Christ in connection with the preceding verses, we see

II. THE QUICKNESS WITH WHICH HE PASSED FROM CORRECTION TO COMMENDATION. Seeing that his apostles were not only silenced, but humbled by the rebuke he had administered to them (Luk 22:24-26), and wishing to reassure and revive them, our Lord turned to the fidelity they had shown toward himself, and spoke words of praise and of promise. “You are wrong altogether in your spirit and behavior in this matter; I blame you for this. But be not cast down; I do not forget your constancy toward me in all my times of trial, and I will reward you.” Such was, such is, the gracious, considerate, generous Master.

“His anger is so slow to rise.
So ready to abate.”

It is the flying shadow which the wind-driven cloud casts upon the field, chased by the hastening sunshine. “O slow to strike and swift to spare!” might well have been written of him. Can it be said or sung of us, in our relations with one another? But the main truth here is

III. THE REWARD OF FIDELITY IN THE MASTER‘S SERVICE. Our Lord wished to assure his disciples that he was by no means unmindful or unappreciative of their faithfulness; and he found the best proof of this in their constancy toward himself in his times of trouble. Through all poverty, all persecution, all desertion, all apparent failure, they had been true and loyalthey had shared his sorrows, had kept step with him through the dark shadows; they had ministered to his bodily necessities (Joh 4:8), and (so far as they could) had sympathized with him in his spiritual conflicts. “Ye are they who have continued with me in my trials.” And what a reward he was prepared to give them (Luk 22:29, Luk 22:30)! Not understanding these words literally, we take it that their Lord held out before them:

1. Fulness of joy. “Eat and drink at my table.”

2. Signal honor. “Sit on thrones.”

3. Large and abiding power and influence.

“I appoint unto you a kingdom.” This promise has been already fulfilled, though in a different form from that which they then expectedin the exalted privilege of being the first to publish the gospel of his grace to mankind; in the glorious work of writing those memorials and letters which show no sign of age and are esteemed the one absolutely invaluable literature of the world; in the celestial joy, dignity, influence, which they have long inherited.

(1) What are the best proofs of loyalty we can give? These are

(a) showing tender sympathy and untiring helpfulness towards his people (see Mat 25:40);

(b) having continual regard to his will in all the duties and details of our life (see Joh 14:15, Joh 14:21, Joh 14:23);

(c) being practically concerned for the progress of his kingdom.

(2) What is the reward he will grant us? A goodly measure of joy,of sacred joy in worship, fellowship, work, life; of honor,the esteem which purity and love rarely, if ever, fail to win; of quiet power,the holy and blessed influence which spiritual beauty and earnest testimony exert on heart and life, which they transmit from generation to generation. This reward here; and hereafter joy, honor, power, such as we must wait to see and must resolve to experience.C.

Luk 22:31, Luk 22:32 (first part)

The worth of man.

These verses afford incidental but valuable evidence of the surpassing worth of the human spirit, and should help us to feel of how much greater account are we ourselves than anything that merely belongs to us. This is brought out by

I. THE DESIGNS THAT ARE LAID AGAINST US. It was evidently in a very solemn and earnest strain that Jesus said, “Satan desired to have you [plural], that he may sift,” etc. The evil one longed with eagerness, and strove with strength, to pass the apostles of Christ through the sieve of temptation, that he might compass their overthrow. And Peter, at a later hour, tells us that that is his attitude and habit in regard to all Christian disciples (1Pe 5:8). We may take it that:

1. All the unholy intelligences of the spiritual realm are bent on securing our overthrow.

2. In this malign intention they are supported by human agents. And this, not only because evil naturally propagates evil, and because the wicked feel stronger and more secure as they are more numerous, but because they recognize the value of one human spirit and the advantage secured by gaining it to their side. Hence there is a deliberate and determined design often made upon the individual man by the forces of evil. This is a fact by no means to be overlooked. As we go on our heavenward way there may be an ambush laid for us at any point; at any time strong spiritual foes may do their utmost to contrive our fall. The possibilities of evil and of ruin are manifold. We may fall by error and unbelief, by pride, by selfishness, by worldliness and vanity, by intemperance or impurity, by departure in spirit from the fear and love of God. There is room, there is reason, for vigilance on the part of him who believes himself well on the way toward or even nearing the gates of the celestial city.

II. THE SOLICITUDE OF OUR SAVIOUR ON OUR BEHALF. “I have prayed for thee.” The strain of our Lord’s address, “Simon, Simon,” and the fact of his interceding on Peter’s behalf, speak of a tender solicitude on his part for his disciple. Jesus knew well all Peter’s infirmities; but he also knew how ardently he could love, how devotedly he could serve, how much he could be. Hence the intensity of his desire that he would not be overcome. And for this reason we may be sure that our Lord is regarding us all with a Divine interest. He knows the worth of any and every human spirithow much it can know and can enjoy; whom and what it can love; what graces it can illustrate, and what truth adorn; what influence it can instil; what good, and even great, work it can accomplish for God and man. He knows also what sorrow it may bring upon itself, what shame, what ruin; and also what irreparable injury it may do. We need not hesitate, but should accustom ourselves to think that Jesus Christ is regarding us with a very tender interest; is following the choices we are making and the course we are pursuing with holy and loving solicitude; is grieved when he sees us wander from the way of wisdom, rejoices in us and over us when he sees us take the upward path.

III. THE REALITY OF OUR HUMAN RESPONSIBILITY. Jesus Christ prayed that Peter’s faith might not fail. And it did notwe should naturally expect. But in part it did. It did not utterly break down as that of Judas did, but it failed to keep him loyal in a very trying hour. It did not save him from the act of denial and from the sorrow which succeeded the sin. It did not in any way relieve the apostle of his individual responsibility. He continued to “bear his own burden,” as every man must. Not the very highest privilege, not even the intercession of the Lord himself, will relieve us of that. It must rest with us, in the last resort, whether we will strive and win, or whether we wilt yield and be lost.C.

Luk 22:32 (latter part)

The privilege of spiritual maturity.

“When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.” This forward-looking injunction of Christ reminds us of

I. OUR NEED OF STRENGTHENING POWER. Such are the manifold and effective forces opposed to us, invisible as well as visible and human (see Eph 6:12); so strong and so subtle are the temptations that beset us on every side; that we urgently need, not only the presence of resisting principles within us, but the aid of friendly and helpful auxiliaries around us. We want, indeed, the help which is from above; that is the first thing to seek. And, having besought that, we do well to avail ourselves of all the strength we can gain from other sources. For the battle is severe, and we are often hard pressed by our vigilant and relentless foes.

II. THE HELP WE CAN FIND IN MAN. God is, as stated, the Source of spiritual strength. He renews our strength by the direct communications of his Divine Spirit. But man helps us also. “A man shall be as an hiding-place as rivers of water as the shadow of a great rock.” Paul went through the region of Galatia, “strengthening the disciples” (Act 18:23). Peter was to “strengthen his brethren.” We can and we should do much to strengthen one another, to build one another up on our holy faith. We can do this:

1. By the force of a beautiful and attractive example.

2. By the utterance of invigorating truth.

3. By the inspiration of a cheerful, hopeful, loving spirit.

III. THE INCOMPETENCE OF INEXPERIENCE. Peter was not in a position to afford spiritual strength then. He was too inexperienced. He had not yet learned what the fierceness of the fire of temptation meant. He did not then understand where his true strength lay. He had not yet graduated in the school of experience. It is they, and only they, who know what spiritual struggle means who can impart to others the help they need. We must have passed through the waters before we can undertake to teach others how to swim the strong stream of trial and temptation.

IV. THE UNFITNESS OF UNFAITHFULNESS. Peter was about to fall. A few hours would find him in the power of the adversary. Before another day dawned he would have to reproach himself as a disloyal disciple. He was about to rest under the shadow of great guilt, and he would have to wait until he came forth from that shadow. Not until he “was converted,” not until the spirit of overweening self-confidence had given place to that of humble trust in God, not until the knowledge of Christ “after the flesh” had passed, had risen into a knowledge of him that was truly spiritual and real,not till then would he be fitted to “strengthen his brethren.” His case was strikingly parallel with that of David (see Psa 51:11-13). We have similar experiences now. When the Christian disciple loses ground spiritually and morally, it becomes him to “return unto the Lord” himself, and “then to teach transgressors” the way of God; it becomes him to undergo a change of spirit, to be “renewed in the spirit of his mind,” and then to speak the helpful and sustaining truth of Christ. Unfaithfulness to our Lord, departure and distance from him,this has no teaching function; its first duty is penitential; then it may think of useful work. But we should understand that all true usefulness rests on the foundation of spiritual integrity; it can find no other footing.

V. THE PRIVILEGE OF CHRISTIAN MATURITY. Peter was to look forward to a not distant future, when, having learnt truth by what he suffered, he should strengthen his brethren in all that was true and wise and good. This he did, and in this he found a noble heritage. To this we may look forward as the reward of spiritual struggle, as the goal of earthly good. What better portion can we ask for than to be the source of spiritual strength to our brethren and sisters as they bear the burdens and fight the battles of their life?C.

Luk 22:33, Luk 22:34 (with 55–62)

The apostle’s fall.

From this most memorable incident, recorded with noticeable candour by all the evangelists, many lessons spring.

I. HOW IGNORANT OF HIMSELF EVEN A GOOD MAN MAY PROVE! (Luk 22:33.) Peter believed himself to be capable of daring and enduring the very last extremity in the cause of his Master. He would have utterly ridiculed the idea that the sneer of a servant-girl could draw from him a denial of his Lord. The event showed how entirely he mistook himself. We ought to know ourselves well; but, in fact, we do not. We suppose ourselves to be strong and steadfast, when we are feeble and unreliable; or to be humble-minded, when we are proud of heart; or to be generous, when we are essentially self-seeking; or to be devout, when we are really unspiritual; to be near to God, when we are afar off (Rev 3:17; 1Co 10:12; Psa 19:12, Psa 19:13; Psa 139:23, Psa 139:24).

II. How PERFECT THE KNOWLEDGE OUR MASTER HAS OF OUR HEART AND LIFE! (Luk 22:34.) Jesus knew how weak his disciple was, and he foresaw his speedy failure. He knows us altogether. He knows our heart; how sincere is our purpose, how frequent are our efforts, how many our disappointments, how faulty is our nature, how wounded and weak is our spirit. He knows also our life. He sees it as it lies before his all-beholding eye; he “knows the way we take,” the path we are about to pursue. It is to One who has a thorough and complete knowledge of us that we belong, and it is to him we draw nigh in our best hours.

III. FROM WHAT A HEIGHT a GOOD MAN MAY FALL! This erring one is no other than the Apostle Peter, the very man who had made the great confession, and upon whom or upon whose testimony Christ would build his Church (Mat 16:13-19). It is he who had been admitted to such close fellowship with Christ, and been allowed the high privilege of rendering him constant personal service. There is no office, however high it may be in the Christian Church, which will ensure to its occupant spiritual integrity. And even he who has been “raised up to heavenly places,” and has known even the raptures of an exalted spiritual experience, may fall under the power of temptation. It is not the lofty but the lowly that stand on safe ground in the kingdom of God.

IV. How STEEP IS THE DESCENT OF SIN! From a presumptuous and blind self-confidence Peter fell to a half-hearted following (Luk 22:54); from that he fell to untruthfulness and denial of his Lord (Luk 22:57); from that to a more deliberate and repeated denial (Luk 22:58, Luk 22:59), accompanied even (as Matthew tells us) with profanity. Sin is a slope which seems slight at the summit, but it becomes steeper and yet steeper as we go on our downward way. And it too often happens that we reach a point where we cannot arrest ourselves, but are compelled against our own desire to continue. Shun the first step in the downward course!

V. HOW MERCIFUL IS CHRIST‘S METHOD OF CONVICTION[(Luk 22:61.) Not a blow that smote him to the ground; not even burning words of condemnation that should sound ever afterwards in his soul; but one reproachful glancethe look of wounded love. So merciful and so pitiful is our Lord when we are unfaithful or disloyal to him now. He bears long with us; he seeks to win us back through added privilege and multiplied mercy; he deals very patiently and gently with us; only when other and milder methods fail does he mercifully afflict us, that in some way and by some means he may redeem us from folly and from ruin.

VI. WHITHER CHRIST SEEKS TO LEAD THE ERRING. (Luk 22:62.) He seeks to lead us, as by his reproving glance be led his fallen disciple, to a pure and saving penitence. He would have our hearts filled with a worthy and a cleansing shame, with a purifying sorrow; that this may lead us into a condition of

(1) abiding humility, of

(2) living faith, of

(3) thorough reconsecration to himself and to his cause.C.

Luk 22:35-38

Misunderstanding Christ.

There is no teacher who has been so well beard, and none that has been so much honored and obeyed, as Jesus Christ. Yet there can have been few who have been so much misunderstood as he has been. We have our attention drawn by the text to

I. CONTEMPORARY MISUNDERSTANDING.

1. By the apostles themselves.

(1) On this occasion their Lord wished to intimate to them, in strong and forcible language, that to whatever perils and straits they had been exposed before, the time was now at hand when, he himself being taken from their side and the saddest foreshadowings being fulfilled, they would be subjected to far severer trials, and would be (in a sense) cast on their own defences. The apostles, mistaking his meaning, put a literal interpretation on his words, and produced a couple of swords, as perhaps meeting the emergency!

(2) On a previous occasion (Mat 16:5-8) the Lord warned them against “the leaven of the Pharisees;” and they supposed him to refer to their neglect in forgetting the bread!

(3) They completely failed to apprehend his meaning when he foretold his own sufferings and death (Luk 18:31-34).

2. By his disciples generally.

(1) They could not comprehend what he meant by “eating his flesh and drinking his blood (Joh 6:60).

(2) They completely misunderstood the end he had in view, the character of that “kingdom of heaven” of which he spoke so much.

(3) They did not enter into the great redeeming purpose for which he came.

3. By his enemies.

(1) In so small a matter as his saying recorded in Joh 2:19;

(2) in so great a matter as that recorded in Joh 18:37.

II. SUBSEQUENT MISUNDERSTANDING. In how many ways has the Church of Christ, since apostolic days, misunderstood its Lord! It has done so in regard to the meaning of particular words; and in regard to the great end he had in view (the nature of his kingdom); and in regard to the means and methods he would have his friends employ. How pitifully and how painfully has it misunderstood him when it has interpreted his reference to the sword of the text (Joh 18:36), and his use of the word “compel” (Luk 14:23) as justifying every conceivable cruelty in the furtherance of his cause!

III. MODERN MISUNDERSTANDING. Judging from what we know has been, we conclude that it is likely enough that we also misunderstand our Master.

1. We may fail to reach the true significance of his words; we may find out, further on, that they have another and a larger meaning than that we have been ascribing to them.

2. We may mistake his will as to the object we should work for, or as to the right and the wise methods we should adopt to secure our end.

3. We may be wrong in our judgment of what Christ is doing with ourselves and with our life; we may misread his Divine purpose concerning us. There are three principles which we shall do well to keep in mind in our endeavor to understand the Divine Teacher. The thought of Christ is

(1) profound rather than superficial:

(2) spiritual rather than sensuous;

(3) comprehensive and far-seeing (reaching through time to immortality) rather than narrow and time-bounded.C.

Luk 22:39-45

Gethsemane.

As we enter “the place which is called Gethsemane,“ we pass into the “holy place,” the nearest of all to “the holy of holies”that is, to Calvary itself. Thither our Lord went on this most memorable evening; and “his disciples followed him”the eleven who remained faithful to him. But even of these only three were counted worthy to attend him into the secret place of prayer and struggle, and to witness his agony. Such sorrow as he was then to know seeks the secret place and chooses only the very closest and dearest friendship for its ministry. Then fell upon our Divine Lord a sorrow and a temptation; an agitation and agony of soul for which our language has no name, our heart no room, our life no experience. We askWhat was that intolerable and overwhelming anguish, which the Savior asked might pass from him, and which had so marvellous and so terribly significant an effect on his bodily nature (Luk 22:42-44)? Our completest answer leaves much to be said, much to be explained.

1. We barely touch the outer line of the whole circle of truth when we speak of the apprehension of coming torture and death as events in the natural, physical sphere. It is an irreverent and wholly unworthy conception that what many menmany who have not even been good menhave faced without flinching, our Lord and Master shrank from with an overmastering dread.

2. We come nearer to the center of the truth when we think that the whole shadow of the cross, with its spiritual darkness and desolation, then began to rest upon him Something of that shadow had been darkening his path before (Mar 10:38; Luk 12:50; Joh 12:27). And this shadow darkened and deepened as he drew near to the dread hour itself. At this point the cross immediately confronted him in all its awful severity, and he knew that this was the time when he must finally resolve to endure everything or to retrace his steps. This, then, was the critical hour; then was “the crisis of the world.” Great and terrible was the temptation to decline the fearful future now at hand; it was a temptation he struggled against with a spiritual violence that showed itself in the drops of blood; it was a temptation he only overcame by tearful supplications to the Eternal Father for his prevailing succor (Heb 5:7).

3. But we miss our true mark if we do not include the thought that he was then bearing something of the burden of human sin. Whatever was intended by “bearing our sins in his own body,” by “making his soul an offering for sin,” and by expressions similar to these, we believe that Jesus Christ was then in the very act of fulfilling these predictions when he thus strove and suffered in the garden. As we look upon him there we see “the Lamb of God taking away the sin of the world.” The scene may teach us very varied lessons and affect us in many ways; but it is certainly well fitted to be

I. AN ATTRACTION TO SOULS STILL DISTANT FROM THE SAVIOUR. It says, “Behold how he loved you!”

II. AN INVITATION TO PRAYER FOR FAITHFULNESS IN THE HOUR OF TRIAL. Both before and after, the Master exhorted his disciples to pray that “they entered not into temptation” (Luk 22:40, Luk 22:46). He himself triumphed through the strong efficacy of prayer (Luk 22:41). Prayer, appropriate at all times, is urgently needed as we enter the shadow of temptation; but it is positively indispensable when the greater trials of our life assail us.

III. A SUMMONS TO STRENUOUS AND UNFALTERING PERSEVERANCE. Christian pilgrim, Christian workman, do you weary of your way or of your work? Does the one seem long and thorny, or the other tedious and unsuccessful? Do you think you must sleep as the disciples did, or that you must put down the cup as their Master did not? Do you talk about giving up the journey, about retiring from the field? Consider him who went quite through the work the Father game him to do, who strove and suffered to the very last; consider him, the agonizing but undaunted, the suffering but resolving Savior; consider him, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.

“Go, labor on, spend and be spent,

Thy joy to do the Father’s will;

It is the way the Master went,

Should not the servant tread it still?”

C.

Luk 22:42 (latter part)

Self-surrender.

“Not my will, but thine, be done.” These words are suggestive as well as expressive. They suggest to us

I. THE ESSENTIAL NATURE OF SIN. Where shall we find the root of sin? Its manifold fruits we see around us in all forms of irreligion, of vice, of violence. But in what shall we find its root? In the preference of our own will to the will of God. If we trace human wrong-doing and wrong-being to its ultimate point, we arrived that conclusion. It is because men are not willing to be what God created them to be, not willing to do what he desires them to do; it is because they want to pursue those lines of thought and of action which he has forbidden, and to find their pleasure and their portion in things which he has disallowed,that they err from the strait path and begin the course which ends in condemnation and in death. The essence of all sin is in this assertion of our will against the will of God. We fail to recognize the foundation truth that we are his; that by every sacred tie that can bind one being to another we are bound, and we belong to him from whom we came and in whom we live, and move, and have our being. We assume to be the masters of our own lives and fortunes, the directors of our own selves, of our own will; we say, “My will, not thine, be done.” Thus are we radically wrong; and being radically wrong, the issues of our hearts are evil. From this fountain of error and of evil the streams of sin are flowing; to that we trace their origin.

II. THE HOUR AND ACT OF SPIRITUAL SURRENDER. When does the human spirit return to God, and by what act? That hour and that act, we reply, are not found at the time of any intellectual apprehension of the truth. A man may understand but little of Christian doctrine, and yet may be within the kingdom of heaven; or, on the other hand, he may know much, and yet remain outside that kingdom. Nor at the time of keen sensibility; for it is possible to be moved to deep and to fervent feeling, and yet to withhold the heart and life from the Supreme. Nor at the time of association with the visible Church of Christ. It is the hour at which and the act by which the soul cordially surrenders itself to God. When, in recognition of the paramount claims of God the Divine Father, the gracious Savior of mankind, we yield ourselves to God, that for all the future he may lead and guide us, may employ us in his holy service; when we have it in our heart to say, “Henceforth thy will, not ours, be done;”then do we return unto the Lord our God, and then does he count us among the number of his own.

III. THE HIGHEST ATTAINMENT OF CHRISTIAN ENDEAVOUR. When do we reach our highest point? Not when we have fought our fiercest battle, or have done our most fruitful work, or have gained our clearest and brightest vision of Divine truth; but when we have reached the point in which we can most cheerfully and most habitually say, after Christ our Lord, “Not my will, but thine, be done;” when under serious discouragement or even sad defeat, when after exhausting pain or before terrible suffering, when under heavy loss or in long-continued loneliness, or in prospect of early death, we are perfectly willing that God should do with us as his own wisdom and love direct.C.

Luk 22:47-52, Luk 22:63

Christianity and violence.

The use of the sword by Peter, and the presence of “swords and staves” in the hands of the officers, suggest to us the connection between Jesus Christ (and his disciples) and the employment of violence; and this both by them and against them.

I. THE UNSEEMLINESS OF VIOLENCE USED AGAINST JESUS CHRIST AND HIS DISCIPLES. It is true that there was something worse than the weapons of violence in that garden; the traitor’s kiss was very much worse. We may be sure that Jesus was conscious of a Far keener wound from those false lips of Judas than he would have been from the hands of those armed men had they struck him with their strength. The subtle schemes and the soft but treacherous suggestions of false friends are deadlier in their issue, if not in their aim, than the hard blows of open adversaries. But:

1. How unseemly was open violence shown to Jesus Christ! To come with sword and stick against the Gentle One from heaven; against him who never used his omnipotence to harm a single adversary; against him who “would not break the bruised reed” among the children of men; against him who had been daily employing his power to relieve from pain, to raise from weakness, to remove privation, to restore from death!

2. How unseemly is such violence shown to Christ‘s true disciples! His true disciples, those who are loyal and obedient to their Lord, are men and women in whom a patient and loving spirit is prevailing; they are peace-makers among their brothers and sisters; they have “put away bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, railing;” they walk in love; they seek to win by a gentle manifestation and by a gracious utterance of the truth. How entirely inappropriate and unseemly is violence shown to them! And it may be added, how useless is such violence employed against the cause they advocate! It has never happened yet that sword and stave have crushed the living truth. They have smitten its champions to the ground, but they have only brought out into the light the heroic courage and noble unselfishness which that truth inspires. “So that those things [those persecutions] have fallen out rather unto the furtherance of the gospel.” Cruelty strikes at its enemy, and smites itself.

II. THE UNLAWFULNESS OF VIOLENCE EMPLOYED ON BEHALF OF CHRISTIANITY. How vain and how foolish the act of “smiting with the sword” (Luk 22:49)! It was an act of intemperate and ill-considered zeal; it was calculated to do much more harm than good. Its effects had to be undone by the calm interposition and the healing power of Christ (Luk 22:51). It was rebuked by the Master in decided terms (Mat 26:52). And from that hour to the end of apostolic history the use of physical violence disappears. Well would it have been for the cause and kingdom of our Lord if it had never been revived. The sword and the stave have no place in the Christian armoury. The weapons of its warfare are not carnal. Such instruments do not, they cannot, serve it; they gain a momentary victory at the sad and great expense of entirely misrepresenting the spirit and the method of Jesus Christ. Compulsion is utterly out of place in connection with the Church of Christ; it loses immeasurably more than it gains by that resource. Let the disciples of Christ be assured that

(1) the utterance of Divine truth, especially the truth that relates to the redeeming love of the Savior himself;

(2) living a life of blamelessness and beauty, of integrity and kindness;

(3) dependence on the aid of the Divine Spirit to make the spoken Word and the living influence effectual and mighty;that these are the weapons which will conquer the enemies of Christ, and will place him upon the throne of the world.C.

Luk 22:53

The power of spiritual darkness.

As our Lord, declining to avail himself of the physical forces at his command, surrendered himself to the will of his assailants, he used an expression which was full of spiritual significance. “This is your hour,” he said, “and the power of darkness.” By this he intimated

(1) that the hour of his enemies’ triumph had arrivedthe brief hour of their outward success and inward exultation, the dark hour of his humiliation and visible defeat; and

(2) that this passing hour was simultaneous with the prevalence of the power of darkness. Wicked men were to triumph because the forces of guilty error were for the time prevailing. We look at

I. THE POWER OF DARKNESS.

1. Its spiritual nature. It is a state of spiritual blindness. We may not, with a great Greek philosopher, resolve all evil into error; but we may say that sin is continually, is universally, springing from inward blindness. Men do not see the truth; they call good evil, and evil good; they have the most false imaginations concerning all objects, from the Divine Being himself to the lowliest human duty; and hence they go far astray.

2. Its most glaring manifestations. It lays its unholy hand on innocence, on Divine Love itself, and leads it away to trial and crucifixion. It conducts the devoted servant of Christ to the brutal judge, to the shameful scaffold, to the devouring flame. It arms a vast multitude of men and leads them forth to a vain and useless strife, shedding human blood and wasting human labor, as if Christ would be pleased or could be served by such means as these. It covers with the sacred name of religion a system that holds millions of human beings in a degrading bondage. It sanctions all the sinful institutions the world has seen and suffered from.

3. Its most deplorable effects. These are not found in the deeds and the sufferings of men, but rather in their souls; the worst issue of spiritual misconception is in the utter darkness of spirit in which it ends. “If the light that is in us be darkness, how great must that darkness be!” It means

(1) False thoughts. Here were men who should have known better thinking the worst things of Jesus Christjudging him to he a criminal, to be a traitor, to be a blasphemer; and there are men amongst us who, under the power of error, think altogether wrong thoughts of God and of the Saviorthoughts which do him wrong, which misrepresent him to the mind, which repel rather than attract the soul.

(2) Bad feelings. Here were men indulging in feelings of positive and perfect hatred against Jesus Christ; and there are men, misled by the power of darkness, hating instead of loving the Father of spirits, repelled from instead of being drawn towards good and true souls whom they have grievously misunderstood.

(3) Wrong purposes of heart. Under this malignant influence men are purposing to injure their fellow-men. Instead of resolving to rescue, to raise, to ennoble them,-they determine to put them down or to hold them down, to lay a hard hand upon them and keep them harmless because helpless. It is in the blinding, misleading, deteriorating effects upon the soul itself that the very worst results of darkness are to be seen.

II. OUR HOPE CONCERNING IT. The “power of darkness” was coincident with “the hour” of the enemies of our Lord. And that was but an hour; it was limited to the brief period of the Passion. Then came Christ’s glorious hourthe hour of his resurrection; the hour of his ascent to the right hand of Power. The prevalence of this evil power of darkness is limited in time; it will not last for ever. Innocence, purity, truth, love, righteousness, may be led away to trial and death, as they were then in the Person of Jesus Christ; but the hour of their resurrection and their triumph will arrive. Let faithful labor do its noble part, and let calm and Christian patience bring its priceless contribution, and another hour will strike than that of the foes of Christ, and another power than that of moral darkness will take the scepter and rule the world.C.

Luk 22:54

Distant discipleship.

“Peter followed afar off.”

1. In this we find something that was commendable. The impulsive and energetic Peter did not exhaust his zeal in that unfortunate sword-stroke of his; nor was it quenched by the rebuke of his Master. Though it was far from an ideal discipleship to “follow afar off,“ it was discipleship still. We do not read that the others did as much as that; they probably sought their own safety by complete retirement. Peter could not do that; his attachment to Christ did not allow him to disconnect himself any further than was involved in a distant following. But:

2. In this we find something that was incomplete. The disciple desired to be near enough to his Master to know what the end would be, but he wished to be far enough off to be secure from molestation. He took counsel of his fears, and was so far from the scene that he was showing no sympathy with his Friend, and was running no risk from his enemies. It is not at all unlikely that this timidity, from which he succeeded in partially and momentarily shaking himself, was the beginning and the explanation of his subsequent failure.

I. GENUINE DISCIPLESHIP. this is found in following Christ.

1. Owning his claim as Lord and Leader of the soul; owning it by a willing and entire submission of our will to his will, a consecration or our life to his service, a perfect readiness of heart to say, “Lord, I will follow thee.”

2. Endeavouring to walk even as he walkedin reverence, in righteousness, in love.

3. Striving to live this Christian life not only after him, but unto him.

II. DISTANT DISCIPLESHIP. We follow “afar off” when we are:

1. Lacking in devotion, lie who is only found irregularly and infrequently with God, in the attitude of praise and prayer, and in the act of studying his holy will, must be at a great distance from that “beloved Son” who spent so much time with his Father, and found so much strength in his conscious presence and loving sympathy.

2. Wanting in purity, lie whose spirit is much entangled with the cares, absorbed in the pursuits and prizes, hungering and thirsting for the pleasures of this world, and certainly he whose soul is to any considerable degree affected and tainted by the lower temptations of the flesh,is a long way behind the holy Savior; is far off from him who was “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sin,” from him “in whose mouth no guile was found.”

3. Failing in generous and practical kindness. He who is only sparingly offering his resources, spiritual or material, to the cause of human comfort and elevation, who is drawing the line of his service at the point of self-sacrifice, and declines to go across it,is surely a very distant follower of that gracious and generous Friend of man who suffered the very last and the very worst that he might redeem us from sin and restore us to truth, to holiness, to God. This distant discipleship is, in every aspect, to be deplored.

(1) It is unfaithfulness to ourselves. A departure from the position we took when we first “yielded ourselves unto God, as those alive from the dead.”

(2) It is perilous to our own souls. That way failure lies; and failure here means utter and disastrous defeat; it means suffering and shame; it may even mean death.

(3) It is disappointing to our Divine Lord. He looks for a close following on our part; he wants us to be at his side, to be serving him with all our strength, to be like him in spirit and in character and in life.

And when he sees us “afar off,” he is grieved with us instead of rejoicing in us.

(1) Let those who have been abiding in him, and there-fore following him closely, be watchful and prayerful that they do not “drift away” and lag behind;

(2) and let those who have to reproach themselves as distant disciples draw near to their Lord in renewed penitence and devotedness of spirit.C.

Luk 22:61

The look of our Lord.

“And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter.” What was there then, and what is there now, in the glance of Jesus Christ?

I. HIS LOOK OF PENETRATION. We read of one of the earliest disciples being convinced by our Lord’s discernment of him under the thick foliage of the fig tree; he was then told to look for greater things than that (Joh 1:50). And surely one of those greater things was found in that penetration which saw through the thicker covering of the human flesh and of human speech and demeanour to the very thought of the mind, to the very desire of the heart, to the inmost secrets of the soul. He knew what was in man. It was his knowledge of men that directed him in his varying treatment of them; it is his penetrating insight into men now that determines his dealing with us all.

II. HIS LOOK OF COMPASSION. What did the sick and the suffering, the fevered and the paralyzed and the leprous, the men and women who had left afflicted ones behind them at their homeswhat depths of tender compassion did these sons and daughters of Israel see in the eyes of Jesus Christ? And what inexhaustible fullness of pity, what unbounded sympathy, may not the stricken and the sorrowing souls who are badly bruised and wounded on life’s highway still find in “the face of Jesus Christ”!

III. HIS LOOK OF SAD REPROACH. Sometimes there was that in the glance of Jesus Christ from which the guilty shrank. When “he looked round about on them with anger,” we may be sure that his baffled enemies quailed before his glance. And when “the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter,” what keen sorrowful reproach was then apparent in the face of Jesus Christ! how that look gathered up all possible words and tones of solemn expostulation, of sad disappointment, of bitter sorrow! It was a look which wrought great things in the apostle’s soul, the remembrance of which, we may be sure, he carried with him to the end. Christ has all too many occasions now to turn toward us that reproachful glance.

1. When we fail to keep the promises we made him at the time of our self-surrender.

2. When we fail to pay the vows we made him in some hour of discipline.

3. When we fall seriously short of the allegiance which all his disciples owe to himin reverence, in obedience, in submission. Let us, who are professing to follow him, ask ourselves what we should see in his countenance if we stood face to face with him to-day. Would it be the benign look of Divine commendation? or would it be the pained look of sorrowful reproach? To those who are inquiring their way to life it is a source of blessed encouragement that they will see, if they regard their Lord

IV. HIS LOOK OF TENDER INTEREST. When the rich young man came and made his earnest inquiry of the great Teacher, he was not yet in the kingdom, and was not yet fully prepared to enter it; but he was a sincere and earnest seeker after God, and “Jesus, beholding him, loved him” (Mar 10:21). With such tender regard, with such loving interest, does he look down on every true suppliant who looks up to him with the vital question on his lips, “Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?”C.

Luk 22:63, Luk 22:64

The patience of Christ.

In these touching words, which we cannot read without a sentiment of shame as members of the human race, we have

I. A PICTURE OF SUPREME ENDURANCE. How much our Lord was called upon to endure, we shall be best able to realize when we consider:

1. The greatness of which he was conscious (see Luk 22:70). He knew and felt that he had a right to the most reverent homage of the best and highest, and was thus treated by the worst and lowest.

2. The power which he knew he wielded: with what perfect ease could he have extricated himself from these cruel insults!

3. The character of the men who were maltreating himthe lowest amongst the low.

4. The nature of the indignities to which they subjected him; these went from bad to worsefrom binding him to beating him, from beating him to spitting upon him, from this most shameful indignity to the yet more cruel sneer at his holy mission,” Prophesy unto us,” etc. They vented upon him the very last extremes of human contumely and shame.

II. A PICTURE OF SUBLIME PATIENCE. He bore it all with perfect calmness. Here shone forth in its full lustre “the meekness of Jesus Christ.” “When he was reviled, he reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not;” “As a sheep before her shearers,” etc. And wherein shall we find the source and explanation of this sublime patience?

1. He was bent on bearing, to the full and to the end, his Father’s will.

2. He was determined to complete the work he had undertaken, and of that work those sufferings were a part. He was then “wounded for our trangressions,” then he was “bruised for our iniquities,” and by those “stripes were we healed.”

APPLICATION.

1. Like our Divine Master, we ore called upon to endure. In doing those things we believe to be right of which others do not feel the obligation, also in abstaining from those things we feel to be wrong, which other people allow, we come into conflict, we excite displeasure, we incur odium, we suffer censure, opposition, ridicule; we “bear his reproach.” Thorough loyalty to our Lord and to our own convictions means exposure to the assaults and indignities of the world.

2. We have the highest incentives to endure.

(1) As with our Master, it is the Father‘s will that we should suffer.

(2) As with Christ, it is an important part of the testimony we are to bear and the work we are to do in this world.

(3) Only thus can we completely follow our great Leader; he who does not go with Christ into the valley of humiliation does not follow him all the way he trod.

(4) So doing, we are building up a strong Christian character, and are thus preparing for fuller and higher service.

(5) Then are we especially, pleasing our Master, and “great is our reward in heaven” (Mat 5:10-12).C.

HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR

Luk 22:1-23

The last Passover of our Lord.

After the significant survey of Jerusalem’s fate which is given in the previous chapter, Jesus seems to have remained quietly at Bethany, or in the Mount of Olives, until the time for the Passover. The season of solitude was brief, but all the more important in consequence. Every moment was utilized by our Lord that he might be ready for his great ordeal. But if he was making preparations, so were his enemies. Accordingly, we have an account here of the treason which led up to his sacrifice. We have, consequently, to consider

I. THE TREASON OF JUDAS. (Luk 22:1-6.) The Sanhedrin was in session, anxious to seize on Jesus and get him removed; for they feared that an attached populace would declare for him rather than for the old leaders. It was a vain fear. The people were fickle, and as ready to cry out for his crucifixion as they had been to cry “Hosanna!” Yet the fear of losing popularity goaded the Church leaders to desperation. Being beaten in debate by the Master-Mind who tabernacled among them, they can only expect by treachery to secure their purpose. They find their ready instrument in Judas. And here consider:

1. The worldliness of Judas. He had evidently joined the cause of Jesus in hope of a place in a world-kingdom. But our Lord’s prophecies of his speedy suffering and death have blighted all these hopes. How can he best make his peace with the world, which is getting the upper hand, and before which Jesus is going down? Judas believes that he can best do this by betraying Jesus to his enemies, and, to make the transition the easier for himself, he consents to do the shameful work for thirty pieces of silverthe mean price of the life of a slave! It was not covetousness pure and simple which led Judas to such a bargain, but astute worldliness. He was making his peace with the world on the most liberal terms.

2. Notice the Satanic inspiration under which Judas acted. It is evident that Scripture represents the sphere of evil as under the domination of a great personality called Satan. He can enter into men and take possession of them. But we are not to suppose that he has the same intimate access to the human spirit which God the Holy Ghost enjoys We have reason to believe that Satan moves men by presenting in all their attractiveness the worldly motives such as we have noticed. Further, the Satanic impulse is such as in no way to relieve the subject of it from responsibility. No one will be able to plead “not guilty” on the ground of Satanic temptation.

3. Notice the mean prudence under which the traitor acted. Had the band come in open day, when the entranced populace hung upon the lips of Jesus, there would have been a dangerous emeute, and life been lost. Accordingly, Judas seeks to betray Jesus “in the absence of the multitude.” There is a meanness and cowardice about most of the diabolic wickedness which goes on in the world; a cowardice, moreover, which is generally overtaken by just and terrible retribution.

II. PREPARATIONS FOR THE LAST PASSOVER. (Luk 22:7-13.) Jesus meanwhile directs the two disciples, Peter and John, to make ready the Passover. He so times the celebration as to have it over on the Thursday night of the Passover week, and without haste, to secure the further preparation which his spirit required. And here we have the facts set before us

(1) that he owed accommodation to the consideration of a stranger; and

(2) that his supernatural knowledge guided the disciples in their quest of a guest-chamber. There, then, in the guest-chamber of a stranger, without taking the lamb to the temple, but in the primitive fashion, the two faithful men made ready for their Master. It was a recurrence to the primitive ritual.

III. THE PASSOVER FEAST. (Verses 14-18.) With the twelve accordingly he comes at the appointed hour, and sits down to the significant feast. He tells them with what desire he had contemplated this last Passover before he should suffer. He will not again eat of it till it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God. The order of celebration was first the passing round of the wine-cup; next, the bitter herbs, dipped, as salad would be, in a red sauce made of almonds, nuts, figs, and other fruits; next, another wine-cup, after which the father of the family explained the nature of the rite; then came the morsel of unleavened bread and the piece of the roast lamb, made palatable by the aforesaid sauce; the last act was the passing round of a third wine-cup (cf. Godet, in loc.). It must have been a touching and tender type in the eyes of him who was so soon to be offered. We should have listened to his explanations on that occasion with peculiar interest. His references must have been somewhat veiled in presence of the betrayer, yet sufficiently explicit to have broken ordinary hearts. It was a marvellous feastthe Paschal Lamb himself partaking of the Passover; the Antitype experiencing a special benefit through the study of the type! What a solemnity, moreover, is thrown over the whole scene through his indication that it is all shortly to be fulfilled!

IV. THE INSTITUTION OF THE LORD‘S SUPPER. (Verses 19, 20.) Upon the more formidable feast, which is to pass away on fulfilment, Jesus founds a simpler feast, to be celebrated till he comes again. It is to consist of bread and wine, two of the elements there at the table. The bread is to represent his body, which is to be broken for his people; and the wine his blood, which is for them to be shed. In this way a memorial more lasting than brass or marble is to be reared, and his gracious presence is to be experienced in the Christian Church. The new institution was a promise of the most gracious kind, regarding the season when he would be absent from them.

V. THE INTIMATION OF THE BETRAYAL. (Verses 21-23.) Along with the solemn joy there is dashed profoundest sorrow at the intimation of betrayal by one of the apostolic band. A traitor is there, and they should know it. Good sign in that each man suspects himself! They all, except Judas, ask Christ if it is he. Last of all, it would seem, came the inquiry of the real traitor. But this unearthing of the false one does not shake him from his foul purpose. Christ could not do more for him than he here does, even though it does not saw him. How salutary is self-suspicion! How dangerous self-confidence!R.M.E.

Luk 22:24-38

The proper Christian spirit.

Through our Lord’s faithful dealing the disciples had been led to wholesome selfsuspicion. They cried out at the possibility of a betrayal of the Master, “Lord, is it I?” But no sooner have their minds been relieved through the singling out of Judas than they swing round again to self-confidence and even base ambition. There, at the table of the Lord, in spite of the hallowed associations, they speculate who is to be greatest in the coming kingdom. Jesus has consequently to check this nascent ambition. He does so by ennobling

I. THE SPIRIT OF SERVICE. (Luk 22:24-27.) Now, the world’s idea is that it is noble to exercise authority, to be able to order people about. In fact, the world has come to call men “benefactors” who have done nothing but command other people. What tributes are paid to princes, who have done nothing all their lives but issue orders and receive the homage and service of other people! A blear-eyed world is ready, as Christ here shows, to pronounce such princes the benefactors of their age and country. But he has come into the world to ennoble the opposite idea. Here at this very feast he has been as one that serveth. His whole life, moreover, has been a public service. Everywhere he has just considered how he could serve others. To minister, not be ministered unto, was his continual care. To make the service of others glorious in the eyes of discerning men was one great purpose of his earthly life. This reveals also the very spirit of the Divine life. God is Lord of all because Servant of all. He sustains all, as he has created all; and his greatness is the greatness of ministration. It is only Oriental barbarism which supposes greatness to consist in indolent and luxuriant state. Here, then, is the field of genuine ambition. Let us try to be first in the field of service; let us do our best and most for the benefit of all about us; and then alone shall we become noble and Christ-like.

II. CHRIST INDICATES THE RESULTANT INFLUENCE. (Luk 22:28-30.) To these disciples, who continue with Christ in his temptations, he appoints a kingdom. In this kingdom they are to have thrones, and to be judges of the twelve tribes of Israel. In this way our Lord indicates the influence which these men, who entertain his spirit of service, will acquire. And when we consider the history of Christianity, we see that even in the world of humanity these humble servants of God and mankind have become kings and judges. It is by their deliverances in the primitive age that men are judging themselves and being judged. The apostles are pre-eminently the sovereigns of this new and better time. And this posthumous influence on earth is only a faint reflection of their influence in heaven. Now, is not this to encourage every serviceable soul? Let each of us be only content to serve, to do whatever a brother needs, and by our service we acquire influence and kingship. The world is really ruled by obliging, serviceable, meek, and earnest men.

III. CHRIST NEXT POINTS OUT TO PETER HIS DANGER, RECOVERY, AND CONSEQUENT USEFULNESS. (Luk 22:31-34.) For, strange to say, temptation is overruled as well as service to the creation of influence. There is in Peter’s nature a good deal of pride and vain-glory to be winnowed out. There is wheat within him, but also chaff. Now, Satan had set his mind upon the fall of Peter; but Jesus has already prayed for him that his faith may not fail. Here was Peter’s safeguard in the timely intercession of his Master.

In sending the disciples out on their first missions, Jesus relied on the hospitality of the people as a fitting support for his agents. Going to the people as philanthropists, working miracles, preaching the advent of Messiah, they would meet with such support as would be all-sufficient. This was the policy of confidencethe reliance on the people for entire support. But when the world turned against Christ, and realized how opposed he was to its worldliness, then the disciples would require to exercise all possible prudence. They would require to look out for themselves, and even to fight for their own hand. That is to say, there are times when we may trust the world, and times when we are warranted in distrusting it. When is it, we are inclined to ask, that the prudential temper must take the place of confidence? When the world is determined on injustice. Thus at this time the world is about to reckon Christ among the transgressors, and to do him manifest injustice. The fit of unfairness was upon it, and the disciples should then stand in self-defence. But other days would dawn again, when disciples will be warranted in pursuing a policy of public confidence, and thus giving the world the chance of compensation. Let us wisely consider the “signs of the times,” and act accordingly. Christ will guide us to the policy which is best, if we prayerfully ask him.R.M.E.

Luk 22:39-53

Gethsemane.

After the Passover and the address given in Joh 14:1-31., he led the disciples out through the vineyards, where most likely Joh 15:1-27. was delivered to them, and Joh 16:1-33., until he reached his usual rendezvous in Gethsemane, part of the Mount of Olives. Here let us suppose the high-priestly prayer given in Joh 17:1-26. took place, which being ended, he retired to an adjacent and secluded place for further prayer. Gethsemane was thus his preparation for suffering and death, as the Transfiguration had been for work. And here we have to notice

I. HIS DREAD OF THE DENOUEMENT WAS NOT A DREAD OF PHYSICAL PAIN AND DEATH. His cry for escape, if possible, was not prompted by physical fear. He always showed himself brave before danger of a mere physical kind. Socrates seems the braver man before he drank the hemlock, but this was because Socrates could not see the issues that were before him as Christ foresaw his fate. The cup he shrank from was not like that of Socrates. It was no literal cup, but the apprehension of isolation from his Father. Not the trial, nor the mockery, nor the physical pain, but the isolation from God, the sense of forsakenness, the constraint to cry, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” which prompted the cry to escape. Now, the very elevation of his being rendered the dread of separation even for the shortest season from his Father intensely painful. Vulgar souls can take separation from others quietly, but the elect souls pass through deepest pains in consequence. That darkness which came on when Son was separated from Father because of the sin-bearing was what Jesus dreaded, and would gladly have escaped. Want of fellowship with the Father seemed to this holy Child Jesus something to be escaped if at all possible.

II. THE INTENSITY AND EFFICACY OF HIS PRAYER. Just as Jacob had to wrestle at Peniel to obtain the blessing, so had the Saviour in the garden. He was in an agony of earnestness, and was in consequence bathed in a bloody sweat. Time after time he prayed thus earnestly. And we are expressly told, “He was heard in that he feared” (Heb 5:7). His prayer was efficacious. Now, let us consider what he prayed for. It was for deliverance from isolation from Goddeliverance from death without a sense of the Divine fellowship. And when we consider the sequel, we find that he was heard, and his prayer answered. For

(1) he enjoyed an angelic visit and was strengthened by it (verse 43);

(2) he was granted light and fellowship with the Father before death supervened; and

(3) he was saved from death by resurrection. In these ways the Father undoubtedly heard and answered the cry of Christ in Gethsemane.

III. NOTICE THE DISCIPLES‘ SLEEP OF SORROW. For sorrow often induces sleep, while at other times it makes sleep impossible. In the present case the disciples ought to have been praying for Jesus, for themselves, seeking preparation for the trial he had forewarned them was at hand. Instead of doing so they slept. Here we have to notice:

1. Opportunity for showing spiritual sympathy was missed. Jesus, as we know, was most anxious they should watch with him. He needed and he sought their sympathy; but they, in thoughtlessness, denied it to him. It would be well it deepest consideration were exhibited for noble souls that are greatly tried.

2. Opportunity for private preparation was missed. They themselves needed spiritual help more than Christ. They could less afford than he to meet the crisis prayerlessly. Yet this was their condition when the trial fell upon them.

3. Physical effort was their only resource when the crisis came. They could lay on with the sword. It does not take much prayer to help men to fight. But other and better weapons were needed than Peter’s sword, but they could only be taken out of the armoury by prayer.

IV. THE BETRAYAL. Judas and his band were upon them before the sleepy disciples had time to pray. He had planned the capture as only a coward can. He betrays Christ with the semblance of friendship, trying to give the Master the usual kiss. To this offer Jesus simply replies, “Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?” Force behind deceit is apparently overpowering the spirituality which had its home in that place of prayer.

V. THE DEFENCE OF THE DISCIPLES AND THE MIRACLE OF THE MASTER, The disciples, spiritually off guard, betake themselves to the carnal weapon, and Peter lays round him with the sword. He succeeds in cutting off the right ear of the high priest’s servant. Here is fresh trouble created. If this servant has to go back thus wounded, a warrant will soon be out for the disciples, and the whole issue thrown into perplexity. Our Lord accordingly interposes, heals the sufferer’s ear, and advises Peter to put up his sword. In this way Jesus rescues the disciples from the liability incurred through their own imprudence. It was a wonderful consideration manifested when his own troubles were rising to their height.

VI. THE REBUKE ADMINISTERED TO HIS ENEMIES. Why had they come out against him as against a thief? Had he not confronted them time after time in open day? They had not dared to lay hands upon him then. He thus convicted them of cowardice. It was “their hour, and the power of darkness.” A deed of darkness dare not be done in open day. Thus was it that our Lord bravely met his adversaries. He was prepared, though the disciples were not.R.M.E.

Luk 22:54-71

Christ’s trials in the high priest’s palace.

The agony of Gethsemane is over, and our Lord has met his enemies in the calmness of real courage. He allows himself to be led to the palace of the high priest, and we have now to consider all the trials through which he passed there. The first of these is from Peter. Love to the Master keeps the disciple in the train of the procession, and even leads him to linger without until through John’s good offices he gets into the hall. But, alas! instead of keeping near the Master, he lingers near the fire which was kindled in the hall to keep the cold at bay. And here let us notice

I. PETER‘S TEMPTATION. (Verses 54-60.) It was identification with a lost cause. Here is Jesus down; no hope apparently lingers about him; he cannot now be saved. What use is there in further identifying himself with Jesus? Instead of responding boldly to the challenge and confessing Christ, he is tempted to deny him. And the denials are repeated, the last time with an oath. Peter’s distant view of his Master and of his cause leads him to the fatal conclusion that it is safest to cut the connection and deny that he has ever known him. It is, alas! the temptation of men still. In the blazing light of society, when worldliness seems so strong and comfortable, it is convenient to ignore the Master and his cause. Peter’s temptation is constantly repeated, and his fall has its counterpart continually in the cowardice of souls.

II. PETER‘S RECOVERY AND REPENTANCE. (Verses 61, 62.) The Master in warning him had given him a sign, that of the cock-crow. It acts as an alarum upon the dull ear of Peter. Along with this there comes the look ineffable of the loving Lord. The great heart is broken, and Peter passes out to weep bitterly. We have a great contrast between the sorrow of Peter and that of Judas. It is the sorrow of the world which worketh death in the one case; it is the sorrow which is godly and saving in the other. As Gerok, in an admirable discourse upon the subject, says,

(1) Peter‘s sorrow proceeds upon his sin, Judas’s upon the consequences of his sin;

(2) Peter’s sorrow turns him from the world, Judas’s turns him towards the world; and

(3) Peter’s sorrow leads him to life, Judas’s leads him to death. Peter’s repentance was thus the consequence of his Master’s love, and the sign of his recovery. How sensible he must have been of the mighty wrong he had done the Master! Jesus knew when Peter slunk away out of the palace that he was safe in his bitter sorrow, and that he would come forth from it a better man. Our Lord’s trial through Peter’s faithlessness terminated when the disciple’s heart was broken.

III. THE BUFFET–GAME. (Verses 63-65.) The heavy hours till morning must be spent, and so the soldiers determine to get some amusement out of their notable Prisoner. They make Jesus, consequently, the centre in what is now known as the buffet-game. Blindfolding him, they proceed to strike him, and call upon him to tell who has inflicted the blows. They are terrible liberties they thus take with the Son of God. But they are unable to irritate this meek and lowly Man. Their blows are lost upon his magnificent meekness. They must have been struck at the majestic carriage of the Prisoner under their brutal horse-play. Yet the blows of the soldiers were less a trial, we may be sure, than the faithlessness of the disciple. But we are surely taught how essentially degrading it is to manufacture mirth out of the humiliation of others! The soldiers never were so brutal as when they treated Jesus in the style they did.

IV. HIS TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN. (Verses 66-71.) In the morning the Jewish authorities assembled, and their line of examination was as to the nature of his Messiahship. As we have seen, it was not a Divine, but a military Messiah the Jews desired. To their question he replies first that they will not believe him if he answers them truthfully. They will only believe what they like. In other words, faith is largely a matter of the will as influenced by emotion. They were not prepared to accept truth and follow it to its consequences. After this preliminary, Jesus goes on to declare, “From henceforth shall the Son of man be seated at the right hand of the power of God” (Revised Version). That is to say, his Messiahship is to be a heavenly reign, not an earthly and temporal one. At once they saw in this a claim to Divine Sonship. Hence they challenge him upon the point, and get his manly reply that he is. On this ground they condemn him. It is plain, therefore, that this Divine Messiah was not what suited their fancy. It was not deliverance from such impalpable foes as sin and anxiety and suffering they desired, but from the Romans. They wanted a military leadera pasha; and when God gave them his Son as their heavenly King, they condemned him to an ignominious death. It is thus that men despise their greatest blessings, and do their best to put them out of the way.R.M.E.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Luk 22:1-2 . With more detail and definiteness Mat 26:1-5 and Mar 14:1 f. (Luke follows Mark with abbreviation).

. . ] the adherents that Jesus found among the people (Luk 21:38 ) made them afraid; hence they endeavoured to discover ways and means to remove Him, i.e. , , Theophyl.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

The History of the Passion

The more particular and intimate Leavetaking of the Saviour with His Disciples at the Approach of the Final Conflict

1. The Last Conspiracy of His Enemies, assisted by Judas (Luk 22:1-6)

(Parallel to Mat 26:3-5; Matthew 14-16; Mar 14:1-2; Mar 14:10-11.)

1Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the passover [].2And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people. 3Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being [or, who was] of the number of the twelve. 4And he went his way, and communed [consulted1] with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him [deliver him up, 2] unto 5,them. And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money. 6And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him [deliver him up] unto them in the absence of the multitude [or, without attracting a multitude together].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

For the history of the Passion in general, and respecting the literature belonging to it, see Lange on Matthew 26.

As respects the form of the relation of the history of the Passion in Luke, he has on the one hand much in common with the other Evangelists, but on the other hand, also, not a little peculiar to himself. Like Matthew and Mark and John, he also, in this part of the history of the life of Jesus, is unquestionably most detailed, and while he, in the beginning of his gospel, upon the events of many years gives only a few lines, he enables us at the end of it to accompany our Lord almost step by step upon His way of sorrow. Like his predecessors, he also brings into a strong light, on the one hand, the innocence and greatness of our Lord over against His enemies, on the other hand, the adorable providence of God over against the free acts of men. In the choice of that which he relates or passes over, he agrees much more with Matthew and Mark than with John, who, in the history of the Passion also, has taken a way peculiarly his own. And yet we find in Luke by no means a spiritless repetition and supplementing of that which the first two Synoptics have already communicated, much as in many respects his narrative is undeniably inferior to the narratives of these. The sequence of the events is with him less chronologically exact, as Bynus, De morte Jesu Christi, ii. pp. 12, 13, has remarked, comp. e.g., his account of the celebration in the passover-chamber with that of Matthew and Mark. How much less complete and well arranged is his narrative of the agony in Gethsemane than that of the others, and again how brief and general are his notices of that which took place in the judgment-house of Pilate! But, on the other hand, it is to no other than Luke that we owe a number of notices and intimations by which our historical knowledge of the last hours of our Lord is partly cleared up, partly enlarged. He alone gives the names of the disciples who prepared the PassoverPeter and John, Luk 22:8, and communicates to us, Luk 22:15, the affecting words with which our Lord opens the meal. Besides him, no one of the Synoptics mentions the disciples dispute as to rank, Luk 22:24 seq., which in all probability was the occasion for the foot-washing, as well as also the remarkable utterance, Luk 22:28-30. At the agony in Gethsemane he alone mentions the strengthening angel, as well as the sweat of blood, Luk 22:43-44; he has also, at the same time, in this preserved for us some remarkable words of our Lord. All the Evangelists relate the denial of Peter: Luke alone speaks, Luk 22:61, of the look of the Lord. All relate the night-session: Luke alone gives account of the official session of the Sanhedrim, in the morning, Luk 22:66-71, which is not to be confounded with the former. Without him we should have remained in ignorance of the first special accusation which the Jews had preferred to Pilate against Jesus, Luk 23:2, and also of what our Lord suffered before Herod, Luk 23:5-16; of His address to the weeping women, Luk 22:27-31; of His first word on the cross, Luk 22:34; of the absolution of the Penitent Thief, Luk 22:39-43; of the last exclamation of the Dying One, Luk 22:46; of the part taken by Joseph of Arimatha in the Jewish senate, Luk 22:51, and many other minor traits besides. The special mention of the women who came into relation to the suffering Saviour is peculiar to Luke, Luk 23:27-31, and also Luk 22:55-56, as indeed even previously, Luk 8:2-3, he had given a special statement of the service rendered by the Galilean female friends. Taking all together, we see that Luke, in the history of the Passion also, does not at all belie his character as physician, as Hellenist, as Paulinist; and for the very freshness and originality of his delineation he deserves that we, even after that which has been related respecting the history of the Passion by Matthew and Mark, should devote to his narrative a particular investigation. As respects general topics which he has in common with the two before named, in particular all that is of a chronological, archological, and topographical character, as, for instance, Passover and Gethsemane, Golgotha, &c., we must, as a rule, in order to avoid too great a prolixity, refer the reader to the admirable expositions of Lange in the Gospel of Matthew, at the passages in question.

Luk 22:1. Now drew nigh.In the beginning of the history of the Passion, Luke agrees most with Mark, although he is chronologically less exact. The decisive transition, in Mat 26:1, from the accomplished prophetical to the now beginning high-priestly work of the Lord, does not appear so conspicuously in Luke, although it is plain enough that he also now begins to give account of a new period.The feast of unleavened bread, which is called the Passover.An exact periphrastic designation of the approaching feast in its whole extent (not of the first evening alone), as was requisite for readers who were not acquainted from their own observation and experience with the Israelitish Passover.

Luk 22:2. Sought how they might kill Him.Here, especially, Luke must be complemented from Mat 26:3-5. It appears, then, that we have not to understand an indefinite and planless , but a definite assembling of a part of the Sanhedrim, apparently the first one, ad hoc, after that which is mentioned Joh 11:47-53. This gathering, held in the palace of the high-priest, had probably a more confidential character, and was, we may suppose, in chief part composed of those of like mind. The theme of their deliberation was in general . That their will is, at any cost, to remove Him out of the way, is already tacitly understood: but now they must yet further become agreed upon the manner in which to carry out their purpose, and that this costs deliberation as well as effort, Luke brings to view by: for they feared the people.Comp. Mar 14:2; Mat 26:5. It is by no means their intention to remove our Lord out of the way, even before the feast (Neander), but they mean to let the time of the feast go by, in order immediately afterwards to seize the favorable opportunity. Yet unexpectedly the carrying out of the murderous plan is hastened, and the fulfilment of the prophecy of our Lord, Mat 26:1-2, prepared by the base offer of Judas.

Luk 22:3. Then entered Satan.Not an expression for the completed, fully confirmed resolution of the traitor (De Wette), but for a preparatory influence of Satan upon him, whereby a later decisive possession (Joh 13:27) is by no means excluded. Not all at once does Satan possess himself of the soul of the unhappy traitor. Not till after several assaults does he fully succeed in this. His plan itself was devilish, but not less the carrying out. For more particular details upon this transaction, see Mat 26:14-16. The anointing at Bethany, which Matthew and Mark narrate previously, Luke passes over, because he had already, Luk 7:36-50, related something similar. Apparently the offer of Judas was made on Wednesday, after the Jewish council had separated on Tuesday evening with the preliminary conclusion, Not on the feast.

Of the number of the Twelve.It is worthy of note that this particular circumstance is mentioned by all the Evangelists with so much emphasis. So much the more natural is the question how precisely one of the Twelve could have come to commit such a crime. That Judas was a man of peculiar talents, who, however, more than even the other disciples, had been filled with earthly-minded expectations, cannot be seriously doubted. Only he can become a devil, who has possessed the possibility of becoming an angel. In his expectations he now saw himself more and more deceived, when he became aware that our Lord did not at all make the desired use of the enthusiasm of the people; nay, that He suffered the Hosannas of the people to decline into a jubilee of children. This disappointed hope must have made him doubly receptive for the feeling of injured self-love, when he at Bethany was humbled before the eyes of all, and his covetousness unmasked. From a Nazarene, who would be no Messiah, who would be only a Rabbi, a Judas could naturally endure no hard words. Perhaps also the prediction of the , Mat 26:2, had given to his revengeful thoughts more form and fixedness, while his avarice had at the same time impelled him to indemnify himself by treachery for the damage which he believed himself to have suffered by Marys anointing. On the consequences of his act he appears in truth scarcely to have thought, but, like a drunken man, to have stumbled along on the dark way of destruction, until afterwards his eyes were opened in the most terrible manner upon his guilt. By no means is the opinion well grounded that he wished to constrain the Lord to free Himself by force or by a miracle from the hands of His enemies, and so to reveal His majesty. What a common comedian nature he must needs have been to let his holy Master pass unharmed, as profitable capital, through a danger as through a speculation. According to this opinion Judas does not become better, but instead of a devilishly revengeful man, we gain only a rascally soul, of which it is inconceivable how Jesus could have chosen it among His disciples. Ebrard. On the contrary, two of the Evangelists give us a very pregnant intimation that the treason towards Jesus, psychologically considered, cannot be fully comprehended unless we assume a direct Satanic influence, of course not without the guilt of the traitor, who had voluntarily and stubbornly opened his heart to this influence.

Luk 22:4. The captains.These had a very important part in the matter, since they constituted the clerical police of the temple, who, in any case, would have to appoint and despatch the necessary force for the arrest of the Saviour. They were the subordinate executive board for discharging the commands of the high-priest, a Levitical corps of officers that stood under the command of a , while by the name commanders of the individual watches are denoted.

Luk 22:5. And they were glad.Not only because there now opens to them the prospect of the fulfilment of their intended wishes, but also (Euthymius) because among Jesus disciples themselves a spirit of unfaithfulness and hatred begins to reveal itself. In this joy they assume the obligation () of giving him money, and Judas, who concludes the bargain with them (), seeks now, on his side, without delay, a good opportunity therefor. Like Mark, Luke also speaks only of money in general, without a more precise statement of the sum, which is mentioned by Matthew alone. It is entirely without ground (De Wette, Strauss, Scholten) to consider the number of the thirty pieces of silver as the fruit of a construction of the history according to the prophecy of Zechariah, least of all if we assume that this sum was only intended for a preliminary payment, which subsequently, perhaps, if the plan should have been carried out successfully, was to be followed by a more considerable one.

Luk 22:6. Without attracting a multitude, , without having a popular tumult arise. The opposite, see in Act 24:18. The poetical word used only here and in Luk 22:35. Without doubt, a quiet execution of the plan appears quite as desirable to Judas for himself, as the chief-priests consider it necessary in the general interest. Wickedness is always cowardly.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. With the last Passover the hatred of the principal Jews towards Jesus has reached its highest point. The reason of the augmentation of this hatred with every feast which the Lord celebrated at Jerusalem, becomes especially visible from the fourth gospel. His enemies destroy for themselves the joy in the Passover of the Old Covenant, and rise without knowing it to slaughter the Passover of the New Covenant. No fear before God, only fear before men, dwells in their hearts; withal their impotency is so great that they are not able to carry out their plans unless they find an accomplice from Jesus own circle of disciples.

2. By the mention of the treachery of Judas the veil of the spiritual world is lifted, and the folly of those becomes manifest who will not believe in a personal influence of Satan. After the Evil One has vainly sought (Mat 4:1-11) to bring our Lord in person to apostatize, he now seeks to destroy His work, and to inflict upon Him through one of His own disciples a deadly wound. The manner in which he now possesses himself of Judas, after the latter had belonged for a while to the disciples of our Lord, serves as a new proof of the deeply earnest utterance, Luk 11:24-27. Dicitur in reprobos intrare Satan, cum, reverso Dei metu, extincta rationis luce, pudore etiam excusso, sensus omnes occupat. Calvin.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The approaching of the last Passover of the Old Covenant.The very different manner in which our Lord and in which His enemies prepare themselves to celebrate the feast.Spite and despondency united in the enemies of our Lord.Two gatherings, that of our Lord with His disciples and that of the chief-priests and scribes: 1. Here the composure of innocence, there the suspense of wickedness; 2. here certainty as to that which is to be suffered, there uncertainty as to that which is to be done; 3. here courageous awaiting of danger, there unquiet fear of the people.The Divine and the human plan of suffering.The first steps in the way of treason: 1. Their preparation; 2. their carrying out; 3. their aim.The uncommonly deep significancy of a first step.Satan in the way to cast down: 1. Judges 2. our Lord; 3. himself.The hellish joy of the confederates of sin.The fearful might of money.The evil covenant of Judas with the enemies over against the unsuspiciousness of the faithful disciples, a new proof for the truth of the saying, Luk 16:8 b.Craft and covetousness in covenant against the Redeemer of the world: 1. The terrific character of this covenant; 2. the impotency of this covenant; 3. the instructiveness of this covenant.The greatest crime that was ever committed, the way to the greatest blessing of the world.The might and the impotency of sin: 1. The might, a. it has mighty servants, b. strong weapons, c. ready confederates; 2. the impotency, it is not capable, a. of covering its own shame, b. of shaking the composure of Jesus, c. of frustrating the counsel of God.Judas a warning example of the insufficiency of a merely outward fellowship with Christ.Nothing is casualty, nothing without purpose.Even the mode of death, like the time of death, predetermined.

Starke:Nova Bibl. Tub.:One may from fear of men omit or postpone the sin, and yet have a plan of murder against Jesus in the heart.Like and like join together.Sin has its degrees.Woe to covetous priests !Cramer:Unfaithfulness is widely extended upon earth, and a mans foes are often they of his own house.Quesnel:He that has once made room for Satan in his heart is capable of the greatest sins.He that loves sin easily finds opportunity to commit it.Whoever sins presumptuously seeks opportunity thereto, but who out of weakness, is overcome by the opportunity.To promise evil is a great sin, but to keep the evil promise is even greater.Heubner:Christ addresses Himself to bring Himself as a sacrifice, and His enemies to sacrifice Him to their hate.Judas a type of those who value all religion, Christianity, and the virtue of men according to their profitableness.Jesus, for Judas, had His price.Interrogate thyself whether thou wouldst not have been ready, had enough been offered thee for it, to give up Jesus, therefore whether thy faith, thy virtue have a price for which it may be bought.F. R. Arndt:The sudden appearing of Judas in the great council: 1. His coming: 2. his going.Tholuck:The Passion-Week makes plain in Judas to what degree even the human heart is capable of being hardened that has already known the way of righteousness, 2Pe 2:2; 2Pe 2:21.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

An Account of the Passover. Judas engageth to betray Christ. The Lord’s Supper instituted. Christ apprehended, and led away to the High Priest’s House. Peter denieth Christ. The Lord Jesus brought before the Council.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

“Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover. (2) And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people.”

We are now entering upon the most sublime, the most solemn and interesting subject which the mind of a truly regenerated child of God can possibly contemplate. It is indeed endeared to every heart. I have been always led to consider the wonderful events recorded in this chapter as of the tenderest nature, since the Lord brought me in any measure acquainted with himself. And at every renewed opportunity of going over the sacred contents, I would look up for renewed teachings of God the Holy Ghost, that I may discover somewhat increasingly precious to my view, in the person and offices of Jesus, that may render the subject increasingly interesting. Lord! I would say, shed those sweet influences in the present moment!

Of the Passover I have already had occasion to notice, Mat 26 . and shall again have somewhat further to offer as we enter upon it. But for the present I pass it by, in order to attend to what is related of Judas in the following verses.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Sacramental Thoughts

Luk 22:15

It seems almost unjust to these words to speak them loudly. Oh, that we had the power to whisper into the most distant, ear without raising the voice at all! There are far-reaching whispers. The Holy Spirit may now take up our poor weakness and whisper to each listening soul this mournful but most thrilling text.

We cannot get rid of the blood-shedding, because it was Jesus Himself who told us about the blood, and His own blood, and why it was shed, and for whom it was shed. That is the simple scene.

I. Let us notice, first, that it was all of Christ’s own suggestion. The disciples suggested nothing they were wise. Who would offer suggestions to the Eternal? It was Christ that said, Let us make a bigger and greater passover than the one that has been celebrated outside, let us have an inner and spiritual passover, let us get at the reality and the true music of the passover historic, let us dwell in the secret places of the tabernacles of the Most High. Everything is of Christ’s suggestion, if we could but hold ourselves and not deafen ourselves with our own noises. The morning is a sacrament, and the evening star, and all growing things, and all things beautiful and living. Oh, how they do err, with such strange obliquity amounting almost to criminality, who have made this dear table now standing before us into something of a priestly kind! I love the white cloth. It has a symbolic meaning, and I love the redness of the cup, because it does suggest the redness of blood; the bread is the staff of life Oh, give it to me, and let me eat it as my Lord’s body! This was not an afterthought; this is not an anecdote in a history of surprises: the tree out of which the sacramental board was cut was growing before the forests were planted. This is the voice of eternity; this is the vision of things ineffable.

II. Then notice that all this was done in anticipation of the death. I repeat, this is not the general order. It was, however, Christ’s order, and that is enough for us. Have we seen the picture in its vivid and impressive reality? Here is a Man celebrating his own death, doing something on the way to the final excruciating agony. Christ established a great preventive ministry, a great ministry that outran events and waited for them. He gave His followers bread lest they should faint by the way.

III. Now my Lord speaks a word which is seldom quoted, and which ought to rule the administration of the whole feast, when we come together in one place for one purpose. What said He? ‘Take this, and divide it among- yourselves. Was He ever so simple, was He ever so little mechanical? This was a mutual feast, a mutual covenant-making. Take this cup, take this bread, and divide it among yourselves, and you will find, what I showed you a little while ago, that you can never give the bread all away, and you can never empty the chalice.

Such simple things the Lord gave us. He said in reality, If you want to outdress Solomon cover yourselves with lilies no, take one white-faced lily, and Solomon will be ashamed of his finery, if it be a question of competition, rivalry, and social envy. And now He says, the supper being ended, ‘This is My body, and My blood’. There are people who wish to understand it. It never can be understood; no man can enter the kingdom of heaven by understanding it. He may think he has some initial notion of the meaning, and he will feel a strange warming of the heart, quite a glow in the innermost places of the soul, but he can never tell it in words; and yet some people have taken brush and paint and colour and have written what they believe, they have detailed their faith into a catalogue. Believest thou? The act is one, thrilling, consummating, self-attesting. God answers by fire.

Joseph Parker, City Temple Pulpit, vol. vi. p. 136.

References. XXII. 15. H. D. M. Spence, Voices and Silences, p. 235. J. Keble, Miscellaneous Sermons, p. 498. Expositor (5th Series), vol. viii. p. 90; ibid. vol. x. p. 250.

Christ Giving Thanks At the Supper Table

Luk 22:17

Let us remember how Jesus came to be engaged at this time as He was. The occasion of His instituting the rite which was to keep His memory fresh in the hearts of His followers was the observance of the most sacred of Jewish usages. No service outside the Temple ritual was so full or detailed as this; and amongst that little company, as in all the homes of the city that night, the unleavened cakes had been broken, the bitter herbs partaken of, and the cups raised, the prayers offered, and the Hallel sung, as had been done at the same annual season from time immemorial. But of all this we have here scarcely a trace. In the view of the writers of the Gospels all that had passed away, had been overlaid and obliterated by more sacred associations still. Nevertheless and the more just on this account it is needful to remember that the new was attached to the old, was its lineal descendant, and inherited various of its features.

I. Thus with regard to this giving of thanks; it appears in our Christian Sacrament, but it was a feature of the earlier ordinance also. At a certain point, towards the close of the ceremony, the cup was raised, and what was of the nature of a grace before meat was said in acknowledgment of the bounty of the Giver of all good. So that we have the example of Jesus Christ for what is amongst the most ordinary of the religious acts of our lives. It is characteristic of true religion not to ignore the Divine aspect of common things, but to seize upon it, and to dwell with relish upon their spiritual significance.

II. The ordinance He and the rest were engaged in celebrating was commemorative of the past, of those great events and experiences in which the history of the Chosen People had had its origin, and the entire ritual was full of reminiscences of these things. We are free to say that, besides what we have pointed out, that thanksgiving included a devout and adoring acknowledgment of the purpose of God’s grace towards His people, which in these early days had been embodied in so express a deliverance from outward oppression, and which was waiting a fuller accomplishment on a more wonderful scale and after a more wonderful manner still.

III. And further I cannot but think that there was included in this act of praise something in respect of which He drew from His own heart alone. It does not do justice to the Spirit of Jesus to say that notwithstanding His own suffering share in it He rejoiced that the Father’s will was being brought to fulfilment. It was not in spite of the part He was to play in it that He rejoiced, but in a certain strange way because of it. For this also He gave thanks: ‘I delight to do Thy will, O My God: Thy law is within My heart.’

A. Martin, Winning the Soul, p. 299.

Reference. XXII. 17-20. Expositor (5th Series), vol. x. p. 243.

The Demand of Christ

Luk 22:19

I. Notice Christ’s longing to live in our memory. Love cannot bear to be forgotten. The heart would fain be solaced ere it ceases to beat by the assurance that its dear ones will turn with pensive pleasure to the pale shadow of the days that are no more.

II. Notice too Christ’s lofty consciousness of His place in the world’s history. He speaks not to a generation but to all time and all the world, and claims their remembrance.

III. Notice Christ witnessing to His death as the centre point of His work.

IV. Notice Christ’s requirement of personal attachment to Him as true religion. He demands loving remembrance. He has remembered us, and shall we forget Him; He has given us everything, He asks only for our love; He has poured out His blood and He beseeches us that we despise it not. How blessed are they to whom the memory is full of Jesus!

A. Maclaren.

Luk 22:19

Carlyle, summing up the theatrical displays of the French Revolutionaries at Lyons and elsewhere ( French Revolution, vol. ii. bk. i. ix.), reflects: ‘How true also, once more, that no man or Nation of men, conscious of doing a great thing, was ever, in that thing, doing other than a small one! O Champ-de-Mars Federation, with three hundred drummers, twelve hundred wind-musicians, and artillery planted on height after height to boom the tidings of it all over France, in few minutes! Could no Atheist-Naigeon contrive to discern, eighteen centuries off, those Thirteen most poor mean-dressed men, at frugal Supper, in a mean Jewish dwelling, with no symbol but hearts god-initiated into the “Divine depth of Sorrow,” and a Do this in remembrance of Me; and so cease that small difficult crowing of his, if he were not doomed to it?’

References. XXII. 19. E. White, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlvii. p. 253. H. Bell, Sermons on Holy Communion, p. 1. C. Stanford, The Evening of Our Lord’s Ministry, p. 52. E. S. Talbot, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliv. p. 342. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxiv. No. 2038. Expositor (5th Series), vol. i. p. 120. XXII. 19, 20. Bishop Bethell, Sermons, vol. i. p. 465. Expositor (4th Series), vol. ii. pp. 70, 77; ibid. (6th Series), vol. vii. p. 379. XXII. 20. A. B. Bruce, The Galilean Gospel, p. 180.

The Hidden Life (For St. Bartholomew’s Day)

Luk 22:24

We know almost nothing of St. Bartholomew. His saintly life was hidden in the knowledge of his Lord, and we may believe that he was content to have it so. There was a time when he was found disputing with the others which of them was the greatest a sin which he would have looked back upon with shame and sorrow. What though our life is unknown amongst men, if it is hidden with Christ in God?

I. Temptation to become Notorious. Yet our conscience tells us that perhaps this temptation to have our name known, to have our good works applauded before the public, is a temptation that is very real. Over how many of our churches, and our gatherings of Church workers; over how many of our guilds and societies, where Christians meet together, is there not good reason to say, ‘And there was also a strife among them which of them should be accounted greatest?’ We are so human. Yet if our work is done because we wish to stand well with our clergy, or because it brings us into a certain prominence, or because we seek praise from human lips, then it is time for us to stop and consider our position.

II. Is our Life hid with Christ in God? Are we content to let the world go by? If so, happy indeed are we. When we are quite alone and no human eye can see or lip can praise, we do sometimes fall down and pray long and pray earnestly. A life hid with Christ in God, that is grander than anything that the world can give. So St. Bartholomew found it, and so may we.

What Unites to Christ?

Luk 22:24

I. Faith and Love to Jesus, not knowledge nor perfectness, unite us to Him.

II. The faith which unites us with Christ may co-exist with much imperfection.

III. Notice the Lord’s demeanour as the exhibition of the principle that Christ bears with and cleanses those who love Him.

IV. Partial faith will go on to perfection.

A. Maclaren.

References. XXII. 24. Phillips Brooks, The Law of Growth, p. 236. T. F. Crosse, Sermons (2nd Series), p. 129. XXII. 24, 25. H. P. Liddon, Sermons on Some Words of Christ, p. 296. XXII. 24-37. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Luke, p. 217. XXII. 25. Expositor (7th Series), vol. v. p. 84. XXII. 25, 26. A. Maclaren, After the Resurrection, p. 219. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Luke, p. 224. XXII. 27. Bishop Winnington-Ingram, Under the Dome, p. 99. J. Keble, Sermons for the Saints’ Days, p. 319. H. Bonar, Short Sermons for Family Reading, pp. 64 and 70. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xliii. No. 2514. Expositor (4th Series), vol. iii. p. 25; ibid. (6th Series), vol. iii. p. 105. XXII. 28. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Luke, p. 231. XXII. 28-30. F. B. Meyer, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lviii. p. 72. XXII. 29. J. Eames, Sermons to Boys and Girls, p. 75. Expositor (4th Series), vol. i. p. 355. XXII. 29, 30. Bishop Boyd-Carpenter, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlvii. p. 129. XXII. 30. Expositor (6th Series), vol. i. p. 279.

Luk 22:31

Now, about a week or fortnight after this, I was much followed by this Scripture, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you. And sometimes it would sound so loud within me, yea, and as it were call so strongly after me, that once above all the rest, I turned my head over my shoulder, thinking verily that some man had, behind me, called me: being at a great distance, methought he called so loud. It came, as I have thought since, to have stirred me up to prayer and to watchfulness; it came to acquaint me that a cloud and storm was coming down upon me; but I understood it not.

Bunyan, Grace Abounding, sec. 93.

References. XXII. 31. C. Perren, Sermon Outlines, p. 289. E. A. Stuart, His Dear Son, and other Sermons, p. 161. Expositor (6th Series), vol. i. p. 238.

Strengthen the Brethren

Luk 22:31-32

It is, I suppose, hardly possible to imagine a greater contrast in history than the two scenes presented to our minds as these words are read out as our text to-night. Our Lord Jesus Christ and His little band of disciples met together in a small province of the Roman Empire, insignificant, unknown, on the brink of a dread, mysterious separation; and, on the other hand, the enthusiastic band of Church workers gathered together from all parts of this great diocese, in a cathedral planted in the very heart of the busiest city of the world, members of a Church which bears not only the name of national, but which represents in a very real sense the witness, the fortunes, and the characteristics of the widespread and progressive Anglo-Saxon race; a body of Church-workers who, with a long history and deep spiritual experience behind them, are in no dread of separation from their Lord, but rejoice in permanent communion with Him in prayer, in worship, in sacrament. And yet, though that is true, as we read our Lord’s words to St. Peter, perhaps for the thousandth time, how fresh and vivid they seem, how true they are for all time.

I. What is life, as we have known it so far, but a sifting by the enemy? The Tempter desires to have us. He tries every ingenious device to induce the enlisted soldier to depart from his allegiance. What a discipline it is, this sifting that we receive from the hands of the enemy! How good for us! How impossible it is to be a hypocrite, especially, I imagine, in the struggle of this great city! We find out whether our faith will stand attack, whether our lives will bear inspection at close quarters. We cannot be too thankful for the enemy. He makes it impossible for us to live in a fool’s paradise. We cannot, for instance, when He is dealing freely with us, imagine that we are really Christians if we are not working desperately hard for Christ.

II. There is a good side to having to fight for your Christianity. But the real danger is lest our faith should fail. Our Blessed Lord knew that would be the danger with St. Peter: twelve ignorant and unlearned men against Greek philosophy, the Jewish hierarchy, and the Roman Empire. And that is the danger with us. The problems are so vast, they are so complicated. If things are better in one way they get worse in another. There are so many contradictory remedies; there are such divisions, alas! even amongst Christians. There are voices, insistent voices, which say, ‘Your Christian remedy has been tried and it is a failure’. There are men who prophesy new worlds for old; and, so far as I can make out, the new are more heartless, more dismal, and more forlorn a great deal than the old. Men feel the pressure of these tremendous tasks more perhaps in South London than anywhere else. Nowhere is it more necessary to call up to memory our Lord’s words, ‘I have prayed for thee, I have made supplication for thee, that thy faith fail not’. The personal Christ, with His individual call and His prayer for each one of us that is our only hope now as then.

III. And then we read that our Lord turned from the individual life, its call, its conflict, its discipline, its faith, to the place of the individual in the corporate life. There is nothing, surely, which so stamps the teaching of our Lord as Divine as the natural, confident way in which He is always able to turn from one side of the truth to the other, giving its full weight to both, and holding both in due proportion. The best of His followers, alas! except on very rare occasions, did not get further than exaggerating the one side of the truth to the depreciation of the other. Here we have in one verse the most distinctive singling out of the apostle, the leader, the one man, the one soul, and then the placing it the polished, chiselled, shining jewel in its setting in the diadem: the disciplined, the trained worker in his place in the Church. And do thou, when once thou hast turned again, strengthen thy brethren, stablish thy brethren, place them on firm ground.

L. H. Burrows (Bishop of Lewes), Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxxviii. p. 317.

References. XXII. 31, 32. J. Bunting, Sermons, vol. i. p. 389. T. Arnold, Sermons, vol. iii. p. 114. W. P. Balfern, Lessons from Jesus, p. 181. C. Bradley, The Christian Life, p. 410. Expositor (6th Series), vol. iii. p. 204 XXII. 31-34. Ibid. (6th Series), vol. iv. p. 1.

Luk 22:32

Our guides, we pretend, must be sinless: as if those were not often the best teachers who only yesterday got corrected for their mistake.

George Eliot.

When thou art converted [or hast turned, R.V.], strengthen thy brethren. But first, the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter.

Pascal.

References. XXII. 32. A. Shepherd, The Gospel and Social Questions, p. 147. J. Keble, Sermons for the Saints’ Days, p. 296. J. A. Alexander, The Gospel of Jesus Christ, p. 233. Bishop Westcott, Village Sermons, p. 92. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxiv. No. 2035, and vol. xlv. No. 2620. A. Maclaren. Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Luke, p. 240.

Luk 22:34

You know the Liar; you must have seen him diminishing, until he has become a face without features, withdrawn to humanity’s preliminary sketch (some half-dozen frayed threads of woeful outline on our original tapestry-web); and he who did the easiest of things, he must from such time sweat in being the prodigy of inventive nimbleness, up to the day when he propitiates Truth by telling it again.

George Meredith.

References. XXII. 34. Expositor (5th Series), vol. i. p. 471. XXII. 35. Church Family Newspaper, vol. xv. p. 979. XXII. 35, 36. Newman Smyth, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlviii. p. 283. XXII. 36. C. S. Home, London Signal, No. 36, p. 1. XXII. 37. John Kelman, Ephemera Eternitatis, p. 75. Expositor (6th Series), vol. v. p. 369. XXII. 39, 40. Expositor (5th Series), vol. v. p. 114. XXII. 39-46. J. Laidlaw, Studies in the Parables, p. 177. XXII. 39-53. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Luke, p. 247.

Luk 22:40

Truly this thing is to this day of such weight and awe upon me, that I dare not, when I come before the Lord, go off my knees until I entreat Him for help and mercy against the temptations that are to come.

Bunyan, Grace Abounding, sec. 239.

References. XXII. 41-43. R. Higinbotham, Sermons, p. 149. XXII. 41-44. C. J. Vaughan, The Prayers of Jesus Christ, p. 83.

Luk 22:42

My man, dare to look up to God and say: Deal with me henceforth as Thou wilt. I am of Thy mind. I am Thine. I refuse nothing that pleases Thee. Lead me where Thou wilt.

Epictetus, Diss. 11. 16.

In one of Harriet Martineau’s tales a mother says to her son: ‘They soon had a new and delicious pleasure, which none but the bitterly disappointed can feel the pleasure of rousing their souls to bear pain, and of agreeing with God silently, when nobody knows what is in their hearts’.

References. XXII. 42. F. B. Cowl, Preacher’s Magazine, vol. xvii. p. 525. H. M. Butler, Harrow School Sermons (2nd Series), p. 204. Bishop Westcott, Village Sermons, p. 120. XXII. 43. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlviii. No. 2769. XXII. 43, 44. Expositor (5th Series), vol. ii. pp. 405, 421.

Luk 22:44

Labour, wide as Earth, has its summit in Heaven. Sweat of the brow; and up from that to sweat of the brain, sweat of the heart; which includes all Kepler calculations, Newton meditations, all sciences, all spoken epics, all acted heroines, Martyrdoms up to that ‘agony of bloody sweat,’ which all men have called divine!

Carlyle, Past and Present.

References. XXII. 44. Bishop Gore, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lv. p. 184. W. P. Balfern, Lessons from Jesus, p. 195. J. H. Jellett, The Elder Son, p. 153. H. Bushnell, Christ and His Salvation, p. 198. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. ix. No. 493 and vol. xx. No. 1199.

Luk 22:45

In his funeral sermon for Juxon, Archbishop of Canterbury, Jeremy Taylor used these words: ‘As the Apostles in the vespers of Christ’s passion, so he, in the eve of his own dissolution, was heavy not to sleep, but heavy unto death; and looked for the last warning, which seized on him in the midst of business; and though it was sudden, yet it could not be unexpected or unprovided by surprise, and therefore could be no other than that , which Augustus used to wish unto himself, a civil and well-natured death, without the amazement of troublesome circumstances, or the great cracks of a falling house, or the convulsions of impatience.’

References. XXII. 45. G. Matheson, Scottish Review, vol. ii. p. 384. XXII. 46. Expositor (5th Series), vol. viii. p. 431. XXII. 47. Ibid. (4th Series), vol. iii. p. 227. XXII. 47-48. J. C. M. Bellew, Sermons, vol. iii. pp. 163 and 174. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. ix. No. 494.

Luk 22:48

Hypocrisy, the deadly crime which, like Judas, kisses Hell at the lips of Redemption.

Coleridge.

References. XXII. 48. W. P. Balfern, Lessons from Jesus, p. 199. C. Bosanquet, The Consoler and the Sufferer, p. 146.

Luk 22:49

Saint Peter asked permission to strike Malchus, and struck before having the answer; Jesus Christ answered afterwards.

Pascal.

Reference. XXII. 49. Expositor (6th Series), vol. ix. p. 73.

Luk 22:50

If the sword turns preacher, and dictates propositions by empire instead of arguments, and engraves them in men’s hearts with a poniard, it must needs be unsafe to try the spirits, to try all things, to make inquiry…. This is inordination of zeal; for Christ, by reproving St. Peter drawing his sword even in the cause of Christ, for his sacred and yet injured person, teaches us not to use the sword, though in the cause of God, or for God Himself.

Jeremy Taylor.

Reference. XXII. 51. Expositor (6th Series), vol. vii. p. 114.

A Transient Hour

Luk 22:53

Their hour appropriate for their deeds: the hour in which they had it all their own way. But even in the very expression there lies concealed the ideas:

I. Of their apparent triumph being permitted them by Divine decree.

II. Of the brevity of their triumph. The hour seems to be yours. But tomorrow is mine.

III. The transiency of the antagonistic forces that resist Christ.

A. Maclaren.

References. XXII. 53. H. H. Almond, Sermons by a Lay Head Master, p. 253. Expositor (5th Series) vol. v. p. 106. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Luke, p. 254.

Peter’s Denial

Luk 22:54-62

Why does Christ turn as they lead Him to the guardroom, and gaze into the lights and shadows of the court? ‘And the Lord turned and looked on Peter.’ For one brief instant their eyes met. And if ever, since man was man, there was life in a look, there was life for Peter in that look of Jesus.

I. For in the first place it brought back all the past The Lord looked and Peter remembered. There are some hours when we forget everything. There are seasons of crisis, there are times of panic, when all that a man has won seems to be blotted out, and he descends to the level of the beasts again. So all the past was swept from Peter’s memory as he went headlong downward to the mire. But sometimes in a shipwreck when men are panic-stricken, the touch of a hand will bring them to themselves. And sometimes in a fire, when women are beside themselves, the cry of a child will quiet them again. So Peter, panic-stricken and beside himself, had one look from Christ, and it brought back all the past to him.

II. But there was more than memory in that look of Jesus. It was a look of unutterable tenderness. There come some moments in the education of the soul when the strongest power in heaven or earth is tenderness. A harsh word and the spring clicks the heart is shut. A gentle word and heaven is in the eyes. The Lord turned with never a chiding word and looked on Peter, and the look was so full of pity and of yearning, so full of pain and yet so full of hope, that it broke Peter’s heart, and breaking, saved it, and like a summer tempest came his tears.

III. And that look in the High Priest’s court was the last look that Peter had from Jesus before Calvary. They never met again before the cross. When Jesus was crucified, Peter was not there. But on the third day, when Jesus rose, do you remember His commission to the angels? ‘Go, tell the disciples and Peter that He is risen from the dead.’ Tell the disciples and Peter then Christ’s first thought on rising was of Peter. And who can tell what hopes went thrilling in the heart of Peter as he heard of the Lord’s singling out of him. Then came that memorable morning by the Sea of Galilee, and the thrice-repeated question, Lovest thou Me? And Peter found how full was Christ’s forgiveness when Christ commanded him to feed His sheep.

G. H. Morrison, Eden and Gethsemane, p. 93.

References. XXII. 54-62. G. Jackson, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lviii. p. 284. XXII. 54-71. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Luke, p. 264. XXII. 60-62. W. Brock, Repentance, False and True, p. 32. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxiv. No. 2034.

Simon Peter

Luk 22:61

It is very easy to underrate the character of Simon Peter; it is very easy for us to adopt a superior kind of air, and criticise him as if we should have done so very much better in his place.

I. Let us first then look at his virtues. What did Jesus have in Peter which made Him undoubtedly love him very much, trust him very much, and allow him constantly to be the leader and spokesman of the rest? (1) He had first a man of undoubted personal loyalty. (2) He had in him a friend of undoubted courage. (3) Jesus had in this friend of His a quick and apt pupil.

II. Are we quite sure, before we go on to think of Peter’s faults, that we have his virtues? (1) Have we got that touching sense of personal devotion? (2) Or, again, take his courage. (3) Or, again, are we apt pupils?

III. Face the sad question why a man who had all this could have failed as Peter did at the crucial point. (1) First, no doubt, from his besetting sin of self-confidence. (2) And side by side with that, as always happens, went his dread of adverse criticism. (3) And so, from his self-confidence, the brave man became a coward.

IV. Now, the advantage of Peter’s story is that it preaches itself. (1) Few of us have to look far for the fault of egotism. What is the figure which rises most often before the horizon of your mind? Is it not the image of yourself, rich, or famous, or universally popular? (2) Does not this same self-love often make us very sensitive as to what people say? (3) It unfits us to stand alone.

V. But there is just time to look for our comfort at the beautiful finish of the story. Notice (1) How humbly he answers back when Christ in His mercy gave him his second trust: ‘Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me?’ He asserts nothing, boasts nothing: he uses the less strong word for love in his reply than his Lord had used, ‘Thou knowest that I love Thee’. (2) Notice the power he became when he was trained at last to trust to the Holy Spirit and not to himself. (3) Notice the unflinching courage with which he went alone to death. It gives us a hope that it is not too late for any of us to pass from egotistical, weak, and undecided disciples into humble and decided men of God.

Bishop Winnington- Ingram, Christ and His Friends, p. 39.

The Look of Christ (For St. Peter’s Day)

Luk 22:61

With that look St. Peter’s penitence begins. It was not with him a first repentance. It was restoration; a recovery from a fall. ‘Conversion’ certainly it was, for Christ calls it so ‘When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren’. But conversion in the sense in which we all want to be converted every day of our lives a turning round; a coming back from a wandering and a separation.

I. It was the Penitence of a Fallen Believer. The ‘cock’ had just ‘crowed twice,’ and St. Peter, according to tradition, had just denied his Master three times. St. Peter’s fall had been very gradual. First, as always, came the pride of self-confidence a feeling of superiority to other men: ‘Though all men be offended because of Thee, yet will I never be offended’. ‘Though I should die with Thee, yet will I not deny Thee.’ And with it there was the putting aside of a kind and needful warning. Then came the rashness of undisciplined zeal. And then the reaction, the reaction which always comes at the dread of cowardice. Then the running into danger with unguarded and indolent mind. Then the fear of man. Then the hasty speech. Then the climax and the wretched baseness, thrice repeated, though each time more reckless and more violent and unfaithful to Him to whom he owed every joy and every hope of his soul. Then cursing and swearing! And then treachery and lies! Oh, how deep the precipices of our grandest heights! How tremendous the temptations of saints! How mean the defeats of the bravest heroes! How awful the sins of Christians! See St. Peter at that moment. He stood in the presence of his outraged Master and his insulted Friend, a dastard at heart, a traitor before men to his Master’s cause: ‘And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter’.

II. What a Delicate and Sensitive Thing is Memory! We all have found that a touch will awaken it. A breath, an accent, a flower, a scene. And it is one of the best offices of the Holy Spirit to stir up and strengthen memory. Where would many of our holiest memories be but for this? And is it not very often He who gives the power to those little things to wake the sleeping memories? No wonder that the eye of Jesus woke the half-slumbering affection of the disciple whom Satan had too truly as Jesus told him ‘sifted as wheat’. I say half-slumbering never quite asleep! Had it altogether slept, had love ceased in that heart, how would he have known that Jesus was looking? Would his eye have met his Master’s eye? Oh, strange fascination! St. Peter, in the depths of his sin, was looking at Jesus! That ‘look’ was enough. It was all-eloquent, needing nor word, nor act, it went straight to St. Peter’s soul. The past all lived again, and, in sad contrast, the bad, the bitter present. ‘And he went out’ Was it that he could not trust himself another moment in that place? Was it to seek for John? Was it that there were feelings too deep and sacred for public gaze? Was it to pray? ‘Peter went out, and wept bitterly.’

III. Another Scene. St. Peter is once more restored. Christ, for the first time, alluded to his fall. But how delicate, with what a touch of sadness, with what a gush of affection, with what faithfulness to the sin, going to its very root: ‘Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me more than these?’ There is the point. Have you shown your love? Was it so superior? Was it real? Would you now say, ‘Though all men should be offended because of Thee, yet will I never be offended?’ Every word told, and every word did its intended work. There were no more comparisons. There is a manifest modesty. And there is the testimony of a clear conscience, a love simple and sincere. ‘Lord, Thou knowest that I love Thee.’

IV. How well St. Peter Fulfilled the High Trust Committed to Him how he fed Christ’s lambs; how he tended the flock; how characteristically he ‘strengthened his brethren’; how he endured the confinement and the shame assigned to him; how he bore himself in persecution, even to the death; how, if tradition is true, feeling himself unworthy even to follow his Master’s dying, he begged to be crucified on an inverted cross; how patient, how self-restrained, how calm in energy, how holy, how bold, how honoured, and yet how humble Peter was; how he uses all his experience of sin and pardon and sorrow and comfort for others’ good, and how he always magnified his dear Master only, let the Acts of the Apostles, let his own most strengthening, feeding epistles, let early Church history testify. There never was such an instance, so teaching, so comforting to any of us, how a besetting sin may all turn to grace; how what was wrong in nature may by Divine power be all sanctified to the greater usefulness and the higher attainment in the Christian life. But he owed it all, where we must owe it all, to the marvellous way in which Christ acts with penitents; to His jealous care of His own fallen ones; to His unwearied patience and His unswerving faithfulness.

The Lord’s Look

Luk 22:61

I. The Lord’s Look. Has there ever been a painter who had genius enough it would have to be genius direct from heaven to paint the look that Christ cast upon St. Peter? There would be, at least, three things in that look sorrow, love, and encouragement. Sorrow that St. Peter, after his promise ‘I am ready to go with Thee both to prison and to death,’ should prove so sorry a coward. And love a love so great, so strong, that it cannot be quenched even by a denial such as this. And encouragement ‘I have prayed for thee’. Has there ever been a poet the man who is supposed to know most about the human heart who could write down on paper what St. Peter must have felt when the Lord turned and looked upon him?

II. The Denial. Now what is the use of a story like this? You say, if I had been in St. Peter’s place I should not have acted as he did. But you are not in St. Peter’s place: you are here. St. Peter denied Christ. Do we ever deny Christ today? Every time we do Christ turns and looks upon us. On the first Good Friday, Pontius Pilate asked the question: ‘Which do you choose, Jesus or Barabbas’. Which do you choose today? It is no good just saying you choose Christ. It is so easy to say it. There were men who called out one day, ‘Hosannah! Hosannah!’ and a few days after, just as cheerily cried, ‘Crucify Him! Crucify Him!’ With all of us who make the chief aim of our life other than this trying to become perfect like God it is a choosing of Barabbas, it is a denying of Christ. That same Christ turns and looks upon us as He looked upon Peter of old.

III. The Right Choice. If we only all chose Christ, what a bringing down of that great city the Holy Jerusalem out of heaven there would be! And when we do so choose Him, the Lord turns and looks upon us; but the look is altered. It is no longer a sad one; it is a glad one. We say we love Christ. Do we not want to make Him glad? And so, when the great question is put to us and it is always being put, every day ‘Are you this man’s disciple?’ we will turn a deaf ear to our passions which urge us to deny the Master, and range ourselves bravely on the side of Christ, calling upon our great Elder Brother to help us to make our lives worthy of the children of the Father which is in heaven.

References. XXII. 61. J. Keble, Sermons for Septuagesima to Ash Wednesday, pp. 270 and 281. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Luke, p. 270.

Penitence

Luk 22:61-62

We find here four outstanding characteristics of the state of penitence: I. It is a Divine thing. It began with God. Peter did not turn. But ‘the Lord turned and looked upon Peter’. Now the result of this distinction is this: that there are two kinds of sorrow for sin. And these are different in their origin, in their religious value, and in their influence on our life. (1) The commoner kind is when a man does wrong, and, in the ordinary sense of the word, is sorry that he has done it. But it is no true sorrow for sin. It is sorrow that we were weak enough to sin. (2) Contrast with such a penitence the publican’s prayer of penitence in the temple. It was no chagrin nor wounded pride with him. The difference between the publican’s penitence and the first-named sorrow is just the difference between the Divine and the human. The one is God turning and looking upon man, the other is man turning and looking upon himself.

II. But now, secondly, we come to the sensitiveness of penitence. There is nothing more sensitive in all the world than a human soul which has once been quickened into its delicate life by the touch of the Divine. Men seldom estimate aright the exquisite beauty and tenderness of a sinner’s heart. There is a text in the Psalms which uses the strange expression, the gentleness of God. Coarse treatment never wins souls. Here, then, are two great lessons the gentleness of God, and the gentleness of the soul the one as Divine a marvel as the other.

III. We learn from Peter’s recovery that spiritual experience is intense. Peter wept bitterly. And this short sentence for ever settles the question of emotion in religion. Every sin that was ever done demands a bitter penitence. And if there is little emotion in a man’s religion, it is because there is little introspection. Religion without emotion is religion without reflection.

IV. l’enitence is a lonely thing. Peter went out. Men know two kinds of loneliness, it has been said a loneliness of space and a loneliness of spirit. Peter’s was loneliness of spirit. But what gave the beauty to Peter’s loneliness was this that he took God’s time to be alone. Peter’s penitence was not only an intense thing and a lonely thing, it was an immediate thing. When God speaks He speaks so loud that all the voices of the world seem dumb. And yet when God speaks He speaks so softly that no one hears the whisper but yourself.

Henry Drummond, The Ideal Life and other Addresses, p. 201.

Luk 22:62

A great captain profits, we are told, by the mistakes of his enemy; he is yet greater who can profit fearlessly by his own.

From Lady Dilke, The Book of the Spiritual Life.

References. XXII. 61, 62. E. A. Bray, Sermons, vol. i. p. 137. W. P. Balfern, Lessons from Jesus, p. 39. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlviii. No. 2771. XXII. 63. H. H. Almond, Sermons by a Lay Head Master, p. 253. XXII. 63-65. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlix. No. 2825.

Luk 22:65

Excepting in one word, the betrayal of Jesus, the defection of Peter, the examination before Pilate and Herod, and the crucifixion, are recorded, as Spedding notices, without any vituperation. The excepted word, not named by Spedding, is ‘blasphemously’ (Luk 22:65 ). Even this word disappears in the Revised Version, where the Greek is translated ‘reviling Him’.

Mark Rutherford.

References. XXIII. 1-12. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Luke, p. 279. XXIII. 2. W. P. Balfern, Lessons from Jesus, p. 202.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Seeking Opportunity

Luk 22:3

Here is a vivid instance of the craft of that old serpent the devil. He did not seek out a stranger, a prominent politician, or statesman, or leader of the general public; he entered into one of the twelve. We should recognise ability wherever we discern it. Here is a lesson for the Church. Only one of the twelve could have done this work. A singular qualification for mischief indeed, a qualification undeniable; that which ought to have been the secret of the best influence was the secret of the worst. It is always one of two things with this Christianity: it is our life, or it is our death; it is a savour of life unto life, or of death unto death, just as we may appropriate and use it. Let us give credit even to evil ingenuity. Satan entered into one of the twelve. He always wants to do that: to get hold of a nominal Christian, that is his supreme intent and desire. Nobody can hurt Christ so much as one who professes to follow him. It does not lie within the scope of so-called infidel power to hurt the Son of man in the sense in which he can be hurt by those who have touched his dear hand, and joined with him at least nominally and apparently in tenderest communion and prayer. What a lesson is this to the Church! How the Church should be continually on its guard! A man who would be of no account were he outside the Church becomes a rather important factor by the very incident of his being within the Church. We get influence from our environment which does not properly belong to our personality. The whole stress of the terms is upon “being of the number of the twelve.” Only break up that unit, make it into an odd number, let there be schism at the heart. As for you, quoth the devil, discoursing with one another in marketplaces, speculating, inventing, dreaming, blaspheming, it amounts to nothing; last night I caught a Christian at his prayers, and sowed black seed in his heart, tomorrow there will be a harvest. Think of the doubt of a Christian! From my point of view a Christian should never doubt. Let me tell you why. If Christianity were a matter of intellectual speculation only, doubt would be timely and reasonable and inevitable; but Christianity is not wholly speculative, Christianity is profoundly, essentially, eternally moral. Why do you not hold on there? If you have doubts about the moral content and purpose of Christianity, then you are not of the number of the twelve; but if you are of the number of the twelve whatever speculative difficulties you may have should be lost in your moral enthusiasm, that is to say in your spiritual conviction regarding the righteousness and beneficence of God and Christ.

People will not take hold where they can. Is it an infirmity of the mind or an infirmity of the body that men will allow themselves to be led about in places where there can be no immediate certainty? The infinite never can be expressed in the terms of the finite: it is not the infinite that is to blame. You cannot put the ocean into any vessel that man ever made: it is not the fault of the ocean that it cannot be so included and contained. Why dwell upon these matters that lie away innumerable miles from life’s tedious, dreary, suffering road? If any man have pinions strong enough to fly through these infinite firmaments, do not hinder him; the most of us, however, must hold on to commandments, beatitudes, duties, and responsibilities: and of God’s goodness I have never had the shadow of a doubt. There I stand. If I had read about it, or listened to some high and eloquent defence of it, I might have forgotten what I had read and what I had heard, but I have seen it, known it, lived it; from the very first God has done all things well for me. When he stripped me naked and lacerated me to the bone, it was well, it was right, it was good; when he took me out into the wilderness, and left me there at midnight, it was for my benefit; I cried against him then, and vehemently complained, and said, The Lord hath forgotten to be gracious: I was wrong, wholly, absolutely wrong. When he dug the first grave under my very hearthstone, I said, Can this be kindness? can this be love? God does not expect you to turn the grave into a garden the very first day; he gives you time and space, and sets life before you in new perspectives and distances and colours, and then you go back and say, Where is that grave? and, lo, you need not make a garden of it, for God has done that already. Why not then cling to this? What can the most of us know about high terms in speculation, so-called philosophy, and the higher thought? There may be men who have rights on these elevations, and we should be foolish to dispute those rights; but no man has a right to take from me my own recollection of God’s goodness to me. Every Christian should say that about his own case. Let me repeat, therefore, that if Christianity were purely intellectual, imaginative, ideal, or speculative men might have a thousand doubts, and have them naturally and justifiably; but seeing that it is moral, practical, beneficent, seeing that there is something we can lay hold of and testify about clearly and with a good conscience, we should hold fast there, and the rest shall be revealed and declared as we may be able to bear it.

Why are we of the number of the twelve? The answer ought to be that we may help Christ, co-operate with Christ, make Christ better known, represent Christ, so much so that men coming to us may as it were come to the Lord himself. Be ye imitators of God, be ye imitators of Christ. The word “imitators” we do not like, but it is the right word. If we first of all impoverish terms of their meaning, and then deride them, it is not the terms that are to blame, but our ill-treatment of them. To imitate it now means to affect, to endeavour to produce a kind of similitude; it means also to appear to be what we are not in reality: that is the corrupt meaning of the word imitation; but the Revised Version has restored that word to its right place, and now we read, “Be ye imitators,” of God, of Christ, of truth. The question which we shall have to decide is this, whether we shall use our influence for good or for evil. If Christians are doubting God, if Christians are speaking coldly about inspiration and spiritual enthusiasm and duty, the world cannot be expected to take up these great themes and glorify them. Why not stand a little aside for a time? why not cease to be of the number of the twelve until certain doubts be removed, or a new position can be taken up rationally and strongly? There need be no sense of exclusion or excommunication on the part of others. This may be a duty which a man owes to himself. I could conceive it perfectly possible for a minister to say: I want a month or a year alone; I want to be away among the hills or on the sea, far hence, where I know no man’s language round about me, that I may think it all out again, and mayhap I shall come back and ask for the old mantle and the old position, that I may declare God with new influence, new emotion, and new energy. That man is not to be banned as an infidel or a traitor; he is rather to be regarded with admiration as one animated by the spirit of stewardship and faithfulness. Every man’s life should be his own Bible. Why ask questions about other people’s doubts and faith? What of your own soul, your own life? Have you forgotten your own yesterdays? You do not need your faith to be supported by a buttress on the outside, you only need to remember God’s goodness to your own life in the past, and you shall have lifting up and strengthening within. That is the abiding and gracious power.

What did Judas do under this bad inspiration? He “sought opportunity.” That is a simple expression, but there is a whole tragedy in it. What self-involution, what scheming, what balancing of probabilities, what shading and blending of colours, what weighing with the right hand and weighing with the left hand and deduction of inferences! What a recall of Christ’s methods when he rises, whence he travels, what he does, what he prays; what is his weak point: at what time can I catch him? He “sought opportunity.” Whoever does that will find it. Whoever seeks for the door of hell will find it. We read of Herod, “when a convenient day was come.” Have you sufficiently lingered upon that word “convenient”? It is a suggestive word when things come together, from east and west, from north and south; when circumstances are made to focus “when a convenient day was come.” We make our opportunities, we make our conveniences; we write our diary so that it may lead up to the day of red murder. What do you want to make, what do you want to create? You can do it. Happily, this doctrine holds good not in the evil direction alone, but in the beneficent and sacredly happy direction of the soul. We can make opportunities for doing good; we can put ourselves in the way. We understand how certain actions move, and how certain events develop, and we can throw ourselves by skilful accident into the way of doing good without at all appearing to be aggressive or obtrusive. We could create sweet incidents. If we liked we could almost any day meet poverty and help it without poverty ever suspecting that we have been parties to a gracious conspiracy. There may be those who go out hooded and ulstered, saying, Where art thou, poverty? I want thee: stand up, grim spectre, and let me talk to thee! I hope poverty will have more sense than to do so!

There is a way of seeking an opportunity, as who should say, Behold! good day! and good luck to thee! I have had sweet fortune singing to me, and helping me, and it may be that in this happy chance I have an opportunity of sharing something with thee. You can make the opportunity; you can be standing in the road; you can be saying, It was on this path that the awful incident occurred, there may be some repetition of it; I intend to be close at hand, so that if any chance be given me of doing good I may do it with both hands earnestly. And all this you can say to your own soul and to God. It is not to be written large or spoken aloud; it is to be a soliloquy that the soul shall turn into music. Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and gave thee no bread? When saw we thee athirst, and gave thee no drink? When? O lying soul! O dead, dead conscience! The Christ was standing beside you all the time, and you mistook him for a stranger, for the gardener, perhaps for an enemy: why did you not seek opportunity of testing the man’s necessity without making him feel it doubly? It might have been worth while to risk something if haply you could have identified the Son of God in a brother man. It is worth while to burn this kind of excuse out of the Church, that if men had only known, they would have done wonders. Why did they not know? Why did they not inquire? “The cause which I knew not I searched out.” You might have given that minister something that would have saved him from broken-heartedness. If you had known, you would. No, you would not, thou wicked servant! You might have known. And you, minister, might have helped some poor creature in darkness, and poverty, and misery, if you could have withdrawn yourself from what to you was luxurious enjoyment, it may be of a literary or intellectual kind. Do not say you would have gone if you had known; it might have been worth while for you to have tried to know. So if you want opportunities to do people harm, you can have them. You can find fault with any man. I find now that it is supposed to be as near as possible to having heaven, that “nobody was ever heard to breathe one word against him.” That was how it was with the Apostle Paul! Nobody ever spoke a word against the Apostle Paul, either about his bodily presence or his public speech. Paul would not have had a heaven of that kind; he would not have had room in it. No man ever spoke against the apostles, not a breath O beautiful obscurity, celestial orphanage! Yet this is the highest encomium we can now pass upon men, that we never heard anybody in the world take the slightest notice of them; and there are ministers who say, “We have been forty years together in this town, and never had a cross word.” What a miracle! Plow often have you met? “We have not had many opportunities of meeting.” Then why did you not make them, create your opportunities, and test one another’s trust, and chivalry, and love? If I could address the mischief-maker, I would speak to him words intended to scorch his insignificance. Do not do harm in your churches, do not make yourselves the mediums of harm-doing and mischief in your churches in London, or in the country, or in the mission-field. Have nothing to do with evil-minded men; seek opportunities for helping one another, and blessing life, and when other opportunities occur, avoid them.

Here is, lastly, an instance of what may be termed indirect mischief: he “sought opportunity to betray him unto them.” It is in the last words that we find the indirectness of the mischief. There are plenty of people willing to do the sin if they can escape the crime. There is a temptation to do the first, and seeking to avoid the last. We are willing to point Christ out, and then to run away and leave others to do the murder. That is what you did when you told the young man, that was the book that he ought to read. You never saw him again; you knew that if he read that book he was a dead soul. All you did was to say that the book was interesting, fascinating, and very novel and suggestive, and then you ran away. Are you guiltless of that young man’s death? Will he have nothing to say to you when you face one another at the bar? You bought the book, named the book, lent the book, watched the effect of the book, and professed to deplore the result. What if I tell a child that the cup is there which contains a very pleasant draught, and if I run away, and hear afterwards that the child drained the cup and fell down dead, which is the criminal? Can I retain my social status and respectability, and allow the blackness of infamy to fall upon the name which I cursed? There is nothing so easy for Judas to do as to point out to others how murder may be done, how vulgarity may be perpetrated, whilst he himself escapes in darkness. He does not escape long; the Lord is against him, and the Lord will bring him to judgment, the Lord will avenge his own cause.

What we have to do is to support Christ, uphold Christ, and to do this by the eloquence of example as well as by the eloquence of speech. Can we all be perfect? Certainly not, but we can want to be perfect, aim to be perfect; we can desire above all other wishes to be imitators of God and of Christ Jesus, and the bent, the trend, of the mind will be accepted as an actual fact. O blessed Saviour, keep us from betraying thee, from pointing out any weakness, even in thy poorest followers, over which the scorner can rejoice and the mocker can be glad with malignant joy. May we be solicitous to find or make opportunities for doing good, speaking good, and being good. May we know that we do not represent ourselves, but that we represent thee. O thou Man, wounded in the right hand, and in the left hand, and in both feet, thou Son of man, whose temples bled under the piercing thorns, may we know that we represent thee, and may every unkind speech, or word, or thought, or evil deed, be felt by us to be a sharp sword thrust into thine own heart. Thus keep thy Church, thou who didst buy it with thy blood!

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXII

THE BETHANY SUPPER; THE PASSOVER SUPPER; WASHING THE DISCIPLES’ FEET; PETER AND JUDAS AT THE LAST SUPPER

Harmony, pages 169-177 and Mat 26:1-25 ; Mat 26:31-35 ; Mar 14:1-8 ; Mar 14:27-31 ; Luk 22:1-16 ; Luk 22:21-38 , Joh 12:2-8 ; Joh 13:1-38 .

This section is taken from the events from our Lord’s great prophecy to his betrayal by Judas. The principal events in their order are: (1) Jesus predicts and the rulers plot his death; (2) the three great suppers at Bethany, the Passover, and the Lord’s Supper; (3) the farewell discourse of comfort to his disciples; (4) Christ’s great intercessory prayer; (5) Gethsemane.

Their importance consist not only in the signification of the events themselves, but also in the sharp contrasts of character in the light of the presence of Jesus, and their bearing upon the meaning of all the rest of the New Testament. The space devoted to them by the several historians is as follows: Matthew, Mark, and Luke give less than one chapter each; Paul a single paragraph; John four full chapters. Here we note the value of John’s contribution to this matter, with similar instances, and his great silences sometimes where the others speak, and the bearing of the facts on two points: Did he have the other histories before him when he wrote, and what one of the purposes of his writing? John’s large contribution to this matter, with similar instances for example, the early Judean ministry and the discourse on the Bread of Life in Capernaum, and his silences in the main concerning the Galilean ministry, clearly show that he did have before him the other histories when he wrote, and that one of his purposes was to supplement their story.

According to Dr. Broadus these intervening events between the prophecy and the betrayal are but successive steps through which our Lord seeks to prepare both himself and his disciples for his approaching death and their separation. They did prepare Christ himself but not his disciples, who did not understand until after his resurrection, nor indeed, fully, until after the coming of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost.

The Bethany supper. Bethany, the village, and Jerusalem, the city, are brought in sharp contrast. The Holy City rejects the Lord, and the little village entertains him by a special supper in his honor.

Two persons also are contrasted, viz.: Judas and Mary. This revealing light of places and persons was in Jesus. The revelations of Mary in her anointing were:

(1) Her faith in the Lord’s words about his approaching death, greater than that of any of the apostles. They were surprised; the great event came upon them as a surprise, but later they understood.

(2) It is a revelation of the greatness of her love, selecting the costliest and best of all she had without reservation to be used as an ointment for her Lord a preparation for his burial.

(3) It is a revelation of the far-reaching effect of what she did; as the ointment was diffused throughout the house, the fame of her glorious deed would be diffused throughout the world and to the end of time. Such love, such faith, no man has ever evinced.

This incident reveals Judas as one who had become a disciple for ambitious ends and greed. He, like Mary, is convinced now that Christ will not evade death, and that his ambitious desire of promotion in a worldly government will not be realized. The relation between Mary’s anointing and his bargain to sell his Lord arise from the fact that as he was treasurer of the funds, mainly contributed by the women who followed the Lord, and was a thief accustomed to appropriate to himself from this fund, and as Mary’s gift, in his judgment, should have been put into the treasury and thus increase the amount from which he could steal, he determined to get what he could in another direction. This treasury being about empty, and under such following as that of Mary was not likely to be increased, then he must turn somewhere else for money.

In the same way the light of the Lord’s presence revealed by marvelous contrast all other men or women who for a moment stood in that light. We would know nothing worth considering of Pilate, Caiaphas, and Herod, or the thieves on the cross, except as they stand revealed in the orbit of Christ’s light, in which they appear for a short time. On them that light confers the immortality of infamy; as in the case of others like Mary, it confers the immortality of honor.

The Passover supper. Our Lord’s intense desire to participate in this particular Passover arises from his knowledge of its relation to his own approaching death, he being the true Passover Lamb, the antitype, and because at this Passover supper is to be the great transition to the Supper of the New Covenant. Here the question arises: In the light of this and other passages, did he in fact eat the regular Passover supper? His words, “I will not eat it,” being only a part of a sentence, do not mean that he did not participate in the last Passover supper, but it means that he will not eat it again. That he did partake of this supper the text clearly shows. See the argument in Dr. Robertson’s note at the end of the Harmony. But the clause, “Until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God” (Luk 22:16 ; Luk 22:29-30 ), needs explanation. Both the Passover supper and the Lord’s Supper, instituted thereafter, are shadows of substances in the heavens. There will be in the glory world a feasting, not on earthly materials, but on the spiritual food of the kingdom of God.

Our Lord washing the feet of the apostles. When we carefully examine Luk 22:24-30 and John’s account, we find that the disciples, having complied with the ablutions required by the Levitical law preparatory to the Passover, knew that when they got to the place of celebrating, somebody must perform the menial service of washing the feet which had become defiled by the long walk to the place. Hence a controversy arose as to greatness and precedence; each one, on account of what he conceived to be his high position in the kingdom, was unwilling to do the needed service. This washing of feet was connected with the Passover, an Old Testament ordinance, and not with our Lord’s Supper, a New Testament ordinance. A Southern theologian, Rev. John L. Dagg, preached a brief, simple, but very great sermon on this washing of feet, found in the Virginia Baptist Pulpit, an old book now out of print. That sermon gives two classes of scriptures, and analyzes this washing of feet, giving its lessons and showing how it cannot be a New Testament church ordinance, as follows: The two classes of scriptures are: (1) Those which refer to the purifications required before entering the Passover proper, or its attendant seven-day festival of unleavened bread, e.g., Num 9:6-10 ; 2Ch 30:2-4 ; 2Ch 30:17-20 ; Luk 22:14-30 ; Joh 13:1-26 ; Joh 18:28 . (2) Those referring to the ablution of feet, before an ordinary meal and as an act of hospitality, e. g., Gen 18:4 ; Gen 19:2 ; Gen 24:32 ; Gen 43:24 ; Jdg 19:21 ; 1Sa 25:41 ; Luk 7:38-44 ; Joh 12:2-3 ; 1Ti 5:10 , counting, particularly, I Samuel 25-41 with Luk 7:38-44 and 1Ti 5:10 .

The feast of Joh 18:28 is the feast of unleavened bread following the Passover supper. Here we need also to explain Joh 13:31-32 and the new commandment, Joh 13:34 , in the light of 2Jn 1:5 , where it is said to be not new.

(1) The going out of Judas to betray his Lord through the prompting of Satan, Jesus knowing it to be the last step before his person should pass into the hands of his enemies that would result in that expiatory death which would bring about his own glory, used the words, “Now is the Son of man glorified and God is glorified in him.”

(2) When Jesus says in Joh 13:34 , “A new commandment I give unto you, that you love one another,” it was indeed new to their apprehension at that time, but when very many years later, John, in his second letter, declares it to be not a new commandment, but one they had from the beginning, he means by the beginning, this declaration in Joh 13:34 . But since that time the Holy Spirit had come, and many years of intervening events in which the disciples had understood and practiced the commandment until it was no longer new, when John wrote his second letter.

Peter and Judas (it the last Passover. These two persons are revealed, in the light of Christ’s presence at this last Passover. Peter, standing in the light of Christ, is shown indeed to be a sincere man and true Christian, but one greatly ignorant and self-confident. He is evidently priding himself upon the special honor conferred upon him at Caesarea Philippi, and has no shadow of doubt about his own future fidelity. In this connection Christ makes a triple prediction, which is a remarkable one. This we find set forth on pages 176-177 of the Harmony. He predicted that Judas would betray him; that every one of them would be offended at him, and that Peter would deny him outright three times. What a remarkable prediction! that with those chosen ones before whom he had displayed all of his miraculous powers and with whom he had been intimately associated so long, and who had received such highly responsible positions and who had been trained by him, to whom he had expounded the principles of the kingdom of God that he would say to them, “All of you shall be offended in me this night.” It was very hard for them to believe that this could take place, and when he went beyond that to predict that Peter would deny him outright, Peter just couldn’t believe it.

In Luk 22:3-32 ; Job 1:6-12 ; Job 2:1-6 ; Joh 10:15 ; Joh 10:28-29 ; 1Jn 5:18 ; Jud 1:9 , are five distinct limitations of Satan’s power toward Christians, with the meritorious ground of the limitations. Looking at Luke’s account, Harmony, page 176 near the bottom: “Simon, Simon, behold Satan asked to have you” “you” being plural, meaning all the apostles “by asking.” To give it literally, “Satan hath obtained you by asking that he might sift you as wheat.” That is one of the greatest texts in the Bible: “Satan hath obtained you apostles by asking that he might sift you as wheat, but I have prayed for thee,” using a singular pronoun and not a plural, “that thy faith fail not: and when thou art turned, strengthen [or confirm] thy brethren.” Thus is expressed one of the limitations of Satan’s power.

By looking at Job I we find that Satan has to make stated reports to God of all that he does, wherever he goes. I have heard ministers preach on that text “When the sons of God came, Satan appeared among them,” and they seemed to misunderstand altogether the signification of it. Satan did not make any appearance there because he wanted to, but because he had to. Not only good angels, but evil angels, are under the continual control of God, and they have to make stated reports to God. God catechized Satan: “Where have you been?” Satan replies, “Wandering up and down through the earth.” “Did you see my servant, Job?” “Yes.” “Did you consider him?” “Yes, walked all around him. Wanted to get at him.” “What kept you from getting at him?” “You have a hedge built around him, and I couldn’t get to him.” “What is your opinion of him?” “Why, I think if you would let me get at him I would show you there is not as much in him as you think there is.” Let the Christian get that thought deep into the heart, that Satan is compelled to come before God with the holy angels and make his report to God of every place he has been, of every Christian he has inspected and what his thoughts were about that Christian, what he wants to do with that Christian that he has to lay it all before God. That is the first limitation.

Let us take the second limitation: “Simon, Satan hath obtained you by asking.” The second limitation is that he can’t touch a Christian with his little finger without the permission of God. That is very comforting to me. Satan walks all around us, and it is in his mind to do us damage, for he would destroy us if he could, and if he can’t destroy us, he will worry us. So a wolf will prowl around a fold of sheep and want to eat a sheep mighty bad, but before Satan can touch that Christian at all he has to ask permission has to go to Jesus and ask permission.

The third limitation is that when he gets the permission, it is confined to something that is really beneficial to the Christian: “Satan hath obtained you by asking that he may sift you as wheat.” If he had asked that he might burn them like chaff it would not have been granted, but he asked that he might sift them as wheat. It doesn’t hurt wheat to be sifted. The more we separate the pure grain from the chaff the better. So you see that limitation. Satan made that request on this account: He thought God loved Peter and Jesus loved Peter, so that if Jesus sifted him he would not shake him hard. But Satan says, “I have been watching these twelve apostles. You let me shake them up.” And at the first shake-up he sifted Judas out entirely, and Peter got an awful fall. Don’t forget in your own experience, for the comfort of your own heart, that the devil can’t touch you except in the direction of discipline that will really be for your good.

The fourth limitation: Even when he obtains permission to act for God in a lesson of discipline, he can’t take the Christian beyond the High Priest’s intercession: “But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not.” “Now I will let Satan take you in hand. You need to be taken in hand by somebody. You have very wrong notions. You think that a man’s salvation depends on his hold on Christ, while it really depends on Christ’s hold on him, and you are sure that if everybody else turns loose, you will stand like a rock till you die.” In other words, Peter says, “I keep myself.” Jesus was willing for Satan, by sifting Peter, to discover to him that if his salvation depended on his hold on Christ, the devil would get him in a minute. It depended on Christ’s hold on Peter. So we have that limitation that Satan is not permitted, even after he obtains permission to worry or tempt a Christian, to take him beyond the intercession of the High Priest; Christ prayed for Peter. We will, in a later discussion, see how he prays for all that believe on him, and all that believe on him through the word of these apostles, and he ever liveth to make intercession for us, and that is the reason we are saved unto the uttermost. He is able to save unto the uttermost because he ever liveth to make intercession.

The last limitation of Satan:

Satan cannot cause a Christian to commit the unpardonable sin. He can’t touch the Christian’s life.

When Satan asked permission to try Job, God consented for him to take away his property and bring temporal death to his children, but not to touch Job’s life. And John (1Jn 5:16 ), in discussing the two kinds of sin the sin which is not unto death and the sin which is unto death says, “When you see a brother sin a sin which is not unto death, if you will pray to God he will forgive him, but there is a sin which is unto death. I do not say that you shall pray for it.” Prayer doesn’t touch that at all. “And whosoever is born of God does not commit sin [unto death], and cannot, because the seed of God remains in him and he cannot sin it, because that wicked one toucheth him not.” Satan never has been able to destroy a Christian. As Paul puts it: “I am persuaded that neither angels, nor principalities, nor powers, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Or, as Jesus says, in talking about his sheep, “My father is greater than all, and none can pluck them out of his hand.” To recapitulate: The first limitation of Satan he must make report statedly to God; second limitation he must ask permission before he touches a Christian; third limitation he can then only do to a Christian what is best for the Christian to have done to him; fourth limitation he cannot take a Christian beyond the intercession of the High Priest; fifth limitation he cannot make the Christian commit the unpardonable sin.

Let us set over against that the revelation of Judas in Joh 12:4-6 ; Luk 22:3-6 ; Mat 26:23 ; Luk 22:48 ; Mat 27:3-5 ; Act 1:16-20 , showing the spiritual status, change of conviction, and trace the workings of his mind in selling and betraying Jesus, his subsequent remorse, despair and suicide, with no limitations of Satan’s power in his case. When we carefully read in the proper order the statements concerning Judas in Joh 12:4-6 , we behold him outwardly a disciple, but inwardly a thief. In the subsequent references to him (Luk 22:3-6 ; Mat 26:23 ; Luk 22:48 ; Mat 27:3-5 ; Act 1:16-20 ), the whole man stands clearly before us. Evidently he expected, when he commenced to follow Christ, that he would be the Messiah according to the Jewish conception a king of the Jews and a conqueror of the world and that there would come to him high position and great wealth as standing close to the Lord, but when subsequent developments made it plain to him that Christ’s kingdom was not to be of this world, and that his enemies were to put him to death, and that neither worldly honors nor wealth would come to his followers, then he determined to sell and betray his Lord. We are indeed surprised at the small price at which he sells his Lord and himself, but our only account for it is that he was under the promptings of Satan, and as Satan, having used a man and wrecked him, leaves him to his own resources, it is quite natural that remorse and despair should come to Judas. If there be something worth having in the spiritual kingdom, he has lost that. He has gained nothing by betraying and selling his Lord, and now in his despair, there being no limitation of Satan’s power over a lost soul, he is goaded to suicide. We cannot account for Judas and leave Satan out.

Arminians apply the doctrine of apostasy to both Judas and Peter. They say that Peter was truly converted and utterly fell away from the grace of God, and after the resurrection was newly converted. They say that Judas was a real Christian and fell from grace, and was finally lost. Though Adam dark, the noted Methodist commentator, contends that Solomon was a Christian and apostatized and was lost, he contends that Judas, after his apostasy, repented and was saved.

Somewhere about 1875 there appeared a poem in the Edin- burgh Review, which gave this philosophy of the betrayal of Judas: It affirms that Judas was a true Christian and did not mean to bring about the death of Christ, but thought that if he would betray Christ into the hands of his enemies that the Lord would at the right time, by the display of his miraculous power, destroy his enemies and establish his earthly kingdom. But when he found that the Lord refused to exercise his miraculous power to avert his death, then he was filled with remorse that he had precipitated this calamity. The poem is a masterly one, but attributes to Judas motives foreign to any revelation of him in the New Testament. The New Testament declares him to be a thief, and that what prompted him to sell the Lord was the waste of the ointment on Jesus that might have been put into the treasury, which he not only disbursed, but from which he abstracted what he would.

It is seen in Luk 22:32 that Peter did establish the brethren. “When once thou hast turned again, establish thy brethren.” The word convert in the King James Version, “when thou art converted,” does not mean “when thou art regenerated.” It is used there in its etymological sense. Here is a man going through temptation. He has a wrong notion in his mind. “Now, when thou art turned, establish thy brethren.” He is to establish them on the same point where he has been wrong, and got into trouble by it, and now he is to consider that the other brethren will have the same weakness, and he must, as a teacher, confirm them upon that weak point.

If we turn to 1 Peter we will see how he did establish the brethren on that very point. He thought then he could keep himself that he could hold on to Jesus, while weak-kneed people, weak-handed people, might turn loose, but he would not. Now, Jesus says, “When you are turned from that error, establish your brethren on that very point.” In 1Pe 1 , he says, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, according to his great mercy begat us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, unto an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in the heavens for you, who, by the power of God are guarded through faith.” How long and unto what? “Unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time.” “You who are kept through the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last day.”

You have learned a great lesson if you will take into your heart all of the thoughts in connection with Peter that we have been discussing here, for every point that you can get clear in your mind that touches the devil, will be very helpful to you.

On page 177 of the Harmony we come to this statement: “And he said unto them, When I sent you forth without purse and wallet and shoes, lacked you anything?” They said, “Nothing.” By reading Mat 10 and Luk 10 you will find that the Lord there ordains that they that preach the gospel should live by the gospel: “The laborer is worthy of his hire.”

You don’t have to furnish out of your own pocket the expenses of your living while you are preaching for Jesus Christ. Ha is to take care of you. You are to live of the gospel.

And now he puts a question, “When I sent you forth without purse and wallet and shoes, lacked you anything?” A great deal is involved in that. Christ promised to take care of them. “I send you out like no set of men were ever sent before on such a mission in the world.” A soldier does not go to war on his own charges. The government takes care of him: “I send you out that way.”

But this commission was temporarily suspended at this Passover: “And he said unto them, but now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise a wallet: and he that hath none let him sell his clothes and buy a sword. [He that hath no sword, let him sell his clothes and buy a sword.] For I say unto you, that this which is written must be fulfilled in me. And he was reckoned with the transgressors: for that which concerneth me hath fulfillment. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords, and he said unto them, it is enough” (Luk 22:36-38 ).

Now, I will give you some sound doctrine. Christ had ordained that they who left everything and committed themselves with absolute consecration to his service, that he would take care of them, and he established and ordered that they who preach the gospel should live of the gospel. Now he comes to a time when he is going to reverse that: “There is just ahead of you and very near to you a separation from me, and as much as you are separated from me, i.e., as long as I lie in the grave dead, you will have to take care of yourselves. If you have a purse, take it, and you will not only have to take care of yourselves, but you will have to defend yourselves. If you haven’t a sword, buy one.” But that suspension was only for the time that he was in the grave.

Peter applied it both too soon and too late. This is a peculiarity of Peter. See my sermon in my first book of sermons called, “From Simon to Cephas.” “Simon” means a hearer, and “Cephas” means established a stone. But Peter here was both too short and too long in getting hold of what Christ meant. He was too short in this, that he used that sword before Christ was separated from him. He cut off the ear of the servant of the high priest. He was not to depend on the sword and not to defend himself as long as the Master was with him. As long as Jesus is alive, we don’t use our swords to take care of ourselves. When Jesus is dead, we may. Peter was too short. He commenced too soon and used the sword. Now I will show that be was too long. After Christ rose from the dead, Peter says, “I go a fishing.” In other words, “I go back to my old occupation; I must make a living, and my occupation is fishing, and times are getting hard. I go back to my fishing.” It did not apply then, because Jesus was risen and alive. So he took that too far. He commenced too soon, and he carried, it too far.

Whoever opposes ministerial support, and I mean by ministerial support the support of a man who consecrates himself in faith, who does like Peter said they did, “Lord, we left all to follow thee,” and whoever opposes the ordinance of Jesus Christ, that they that preach the gospel should live of the gospel, virtually put themselves under a dead Christ. They virtually say that Jesus has not risen from the dead.

They go under this temporary commission: “He that hath a purse, let him take it, and a wallet, let him take that, and he that hath no sword, let him take his coat and sell it and buy one to defend himself with. Let the preacher do like other people do.” They that take that position virtually deny the resurrection of Christ, and virtually affirm that Jesus Christ is not living. Just as soon as Jesus rose from the dead he said, “Now you can put that sword away, Peter. There was a time when you could defend yourself and make your own living, and that was while I was dead.” But we believe that Christ is now alive. He is risen indeed: “I am he that was dead) but am alive to die no more.”

The man who believes that God has called him to preach ought to burn the bridges behind him.

A deacon got up once, when we were ordaining a preacher and said, “I am leaving it to the presbytery here to ask the things on doctrine, but I have a question to ask: ‘Do you, in seeking this office and submitting to this ordination, burn every bridge between you and the secular life, or do you leave that bridge standing, thinking in your mind that if you don’t make a living you will go back and take up the secular trade?’ ” “Well,” the candidate said, “I will have to study about that.” The deacon replied, “I will have to study about voting for your ordination until you are ready to answer that question.” One of the sharpest sentences I ever made in my life was a declaration that:

No man on earth that God called to preach and who burned absolutely all the bridges behind him and really trusted in Jesus Christ to take care of him, ever failed of being taken care of.

That is a hard saying and a broad one, but it is the truth. And whenever a preacher is disposed to question that, let him remember the words of Jesus Christ, “I sent you out without purse or wallet, or sword. You just took your life into your hands. You went out as sheep among the wolves. Did you lack anything?” You won’t lack anything that is good for you. Sometimes you will get mighty hungry. I don’t say you won’t get hungry. Sometimes you will get cold. I don’t deny that.

But I do affirm before God that whoever puts himself unreservedly upon the promise of the Lord Jesus Christ and keeps himself on that, either God will take care of him, or it is the best for him to die, one or the other. Never any good comes from doubting.

QUESTIONS 1. From what great division is this section taken?

2. What are the principal events in their order?

3. What is their importance?

4. What space devoted to them by the several historians?

5. What value of John’s contribution to this matter?

6. According to Dr. Broadus what successive steps do we find in this group of events?

7. Did they prepare Christ himself but not his disciples for his approaching death?

8. What two places are revealed in sharp contrast by the Bethany supper?

9. What two persons are also contrasted?

10. In whom was this revealing light of places and persons?

11. What revelations of Mary in her anointing?

12. What revelation of Judas and the relation between Mary’s anointing and his bargaining to sell our Lord?

13. Show how the light of our Lord’s presence revealed others also.

14. Explain our Lord’s intense desire to eat this particular Passover (Luk 22:15 ).

15. Explain “I will not eat it” (Luk 22:16 ).

16. Explain “until it be fulfilled, etc.” (Luk 22:16 ; Luk 22:29-30 ).

17. What was the occasion of the foot-washing in Joh 13 ?

18. Was it connected with the Passover or the Lord’s Supper?

19. What sermon on it is commended?

20. What two classes of scriptures cited and what are the lessons?

21. What was the feast of Joh 18:28 ?

22. Explain Joh 13:31-32 ; Joh 13:34 in the light of 2Jn 1:5 .

23. What two persons are revealed in the light of Christ’s presence at this last Passover?

24. Analyze the revelation of Peter.

25. What triple prediction did Christ set forth in this connection, and what makes it a remarkable prediction?

26. Give five distinct limitations of Satan and the scriptures therefore.

27. Correlate and analyze the scriptures on Judas.

28. How do Arminians apply the doctrine of apostasy to both Judas and Peter and what was the reply?

29. What was the explanation of Judas’ betrayal of our Lord, in the Edinburgh Review)

30. What the meaning and application of Luk 22:32 and what the evidence from his letter that Peter did this?

31. What is the law of ministerial support?

32. What was the reason of its temporary suspension at this Passover?

33. How long was the suspension?

34. How and wherein did Peter apply it too soon and too late?

35. What does one who opposes ministerial support virtually say, and what the lesson for the preachers?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

1 Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.

Ver. 1. Now the feast of unleavened bread, &c. ] It is good to bring Bibles to church. Socrates relates of one Sabbatius, a Novatian bishop, that, reading this text, added such things of his own as carried away many simple people from the faith.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

1, 2. ] CONSPIRACY OF THE JEWISH AUTHORITIES TO KILL JESUS. Mat 26:1-5 .Mar 14:1-2Mar 14:1-2 . The account of Matt. is the fullest: see notes there. The words here give us a mere compendium of what took place.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Luk 22:1-2 . Introductory (Mat 26:1-5 , Mar 14:1-2 ). , drew near, for the more definite note of time in parallels. , etc.: the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the Passover are treated as one. Mk. distinguishes them. Lk. writes for Gentiles; hence his “ called ” the passover ( ).

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Luke Chapter 22

Luk 22:1-2

Mat 26:1-5 ; Mar 14:1 f.

The end approaches, with all its solemn and momentous issues, which our Evangelist relates after his wonted manner, adhering to moral connection rather than illustrating dispensational change, or the series of facts in His ministry, or the glory of His person.

Luk 22:3-6 .

Mat 26:14-16 ; Mar 14:10 f.

“Now the feast of unleavened [bread] which [is] called passover was drawing nightid=67#bkm528- and the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how they might kill him, for they were afraid of the people. And Satan entered into Judas Who is called* Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve; and he went away and spoke with the chief priests and captainstid=67#bkm529- as to how he should deliver him up to them. And they rejoiced and engaged to give him money; and he agreed fully,tid=67#bkm530- Was seeking an opportunity to deliver him up to them away from [the] crowd.” When the will is thus engaged on the one side and on the other nearness to the Lord was enjoyed without self-judgment, nay, in conscious hypocrisy and the habitual yielding to covetousness; Satan readily found means to, effect his own designs, as a liar and murderer, against the Son of God. Yet how reassuring it is to observe that both man and the devil were powerless till the due moment came for the execution of God’s purposes, which their malice even then only subserved, unconsciously and in a way which they counted most sure to hinder and nullify them. But He catcheth the wise in their own craftiness.

*”Called”: so BDLX, 69, Memph. Arm. “Surnamed” is found in ACPR, etc., Syrsin.

It may be well here to note that the English Version misleads if it be inferred from verse 3 that it was at this time Satan entered into Judas; for we know from Joh 13:27 that it was only after the sop, the latter Gospel also distinguishing this full action of the enemy from the earlier occasion when he had put it into the betrayer’s heart. The truth is that Luke has no expression of time here, using only a particle of transition, and therefore contents himself with the broad fact without entering into the detail of its successive stages, which found their fitting place with him whose task of love was to linger on the person of the Lord.

Luk 22:7-23 .

Mat 26:17-29 ; Mar 14:12-25 .

“And the day of unleavened [bread]”‘ came, in which the passover was to be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare the passover for us, that we may eat. But they said to him, Where wilt thou that we prepare? And he said to them, Behold when ye have entered into the city, a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; tid=67#bkm532- follow him into the house where he goeth in; and ye shall say to the master of the house, The Teacher saith to thee, Where is the guest-chamber where I may eat the passover with my disciples? And he will show you a large upper room furnished; there make ready. And they went away and found as he had said to them; and they prepared the Passover.”tid=67#bkm533- There is no ground of difficulty here for him who believes the Word of God. He who beforehand could describe thus minutely the person, place, time, and circumstances was in communion with the Divine power and grace which controlled the heart of the Jewish householder, even though a stranger hitherto, and made him heartily acquiesce in the Lord’s using it for the paschal feast with His disciples. That God should thus order all in honour of His Son for the last Passover seems to me beautifully in keeping as a testimony in Jerusalem where the religious chiefs, and even a disciple, with the mass were hardening themselves to their destruction in His rejection and death.

“And when the hour was come, he took his place, and the* apostles with him.tid=67#bkm534- And he said to them, With desire I desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer, for I say unto you that I will not any more at all eat it until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And having received a cup, he gave thanks and said, Take this and divide it among yourselves; for I say unto you, I will in no wise drink tid=67#bkm535- henceforth of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God tid=67#bkm536- come.” What an expression of tender love for the disciples! For the last time He would eat it with them, not at all more. As to the cup of the Passover,tid=67#bkm537- they were to take and divide it among themselves, not He with them. The Passover was to be fulfilled in the kingdom of God; and of the fruit of the vine He would in no wise drink henceforth till the kingdom of God come. It is the sign of the passing away of the old system.

*Before “apostles” T.R. has “twelve,” from ACEPR, etc., Amiat. Memph. Edd. omit, after BD, Syrsin Old Lat.

“Not . . . any more” (): so Weiss and Blass, after Ccorr DP, etc., Syrrcu sin Aeth. Arm. W. H. omit after ABCpm HL. It can scarcely, however, have been added from Mark (Meyer, Weiss).

“A”: so Edd. with BCEGH, etc., most cursives. AD, etc., have “the.”

“Henceforth”: so Edd. after BDGKLM, 1, Syrcu Egyptians, Arm. Omitted in AC, etc., most cursives, and Old Lat.

Next, the Lord institutes the new thingtid=67#bkm1538- in a foundation sign of it. “And having taken a loaf with thanksgiving he broke and gave [it] to them, saying, This is my body which is given tid=67#bkm539- for you;* this do in remembrance of me.tid=67#bkm540- In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup [is] the new covenant in my bloodtid=67#bkm541- which is poured out for you.”* It was a better deliverance on an infinitely better ground, as the cup Was the new covenant in His blood, not the old legal one guarded by penal sanction in the blood of accompanying victims. What immeasurable love breathes in “my body, Which is given for you,” “the new covenant in my blood,” etc.!tid=67#bkm542- It will be observed that Luke presents a more personal bearing of the Lord’s words here, as in the great discourse of Luk 6 . Matthew gives rather the dispensational change in consequence of a rejected Messiah.

*”Which is given for you . . . poured out for you.” These words, accepted by Lachm. Tisch. Treg. and Alford, no less than by Wordsworth, as being in all uncials except D, the whole of the cursives and versions except Old Lat. and Syrcu, which last omits verse 20 (in Syrsin it is merely a question of arrangement), are on the “one cup” theory, discredited by W. H. (preceded by Dean Blakesley), Weiss and Blass. The English critics’ case against this alleged “interpolation” (from 1Co 11:24 f.) would be found stated in W. H., Vol. II., App., p. 63f. In defence of the title of the words to a place in Luke’s text, see Scrivener, Vol. II., p. 351ff., and Expositor, March-April, 1908. See, further, note tid=67#bkm539- in Part II. of this volume.

Luke 22: 24.tid=67#bkm543-

Luk 22:25 f.

Mat 20:5-27 ; Mar 10:42-44 .

“But, behold, the hand of him that delivereth me up [is] with me on the table; and* the Son of man indeed goeth according to that which is determined, but woe unto that man by whom he is delivered up! And they began to question together among themselves who then it could be of them who was about to do this. And there was also a strife (and emulation) among them which of them should be accounted greater. But he said to them, The kings of the nations rule over them, and they that exercise authority over them are called benefactors.tid=67#bkm544- But ye [shall] not [be] so; but let the greater among you be as the younger, and the leader as he that serveth. Luk 22:27-30 . – For which [is] greater, he that is at table, or he that serveth? [Is] not he that is at table? But I am among you as he that serveth. But ye are they who have persevered with me in my temptations.tid=67#bkm545- And I appoint unto you as my Father appointed unto me, a kingdom, that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdomtid=67#bkm546- and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” The Lord announces the betrayer’s presence at that last feast of love. How perfect the grace which knew but never once by behaviour made known the guilty soul! How consummate the guile of him who had so long heartlessly companied with such a Master! Now when His death in all its ineffable fragrance and power for them is before Him, and as a sign little then appreciated by them, He tells out the sad secret which lay on His heart, a bitter burden He felt for him who as yet felt it not at all. And the disciples question who it could be, but none the less strive for the greater place. How humbling for the twelve, especially at such a moment in presence of Him, of the supper before them, and of the cup before Him alone! But such is flesh, in saints of God most of all offensive when allowed to work. No good thing dwells in it. Tenderly but in faithful love the Lord contrasts the way of men with that which He would cultivate and sanction in His own. The condescension of patronage is too low for saints. It is of earth for Nature’s great ones. He would have them to serve as Himself. In a ruined, wretched world what can the love that seeks not its own do but serve? The greatest is he that goes down the lowest in service. It is Christ: may we be near Him! Then He turns to what they had been in view of His disposal of the Kingdom according to the Father’s mind, and puts the highest value on all they had done. Matchless love surely this. which could thus interpret His calling and keeping them as their continuing with Him in His temptations ‘ But such is Jesus to us as to them, while in the day of glory each will have his place, yet all according to the same rich, unjealous grace.

*”And”: so A, etc., Syrcu sin and Vulg. Edd. follow BDLT, Memph. “for.”

Luk 22:31-34 .

Mat 26:31-35 ; Mar 14:27-31 ; Joh 13:36-38 .

But the Lord* makes a special appeal to one while warning all of a common danger. “Simon, Simon, behold Satan has begged.tid=67#bkm547- for you to sift as wheat, but I have besought for thee that thy faith fail not, and thou, when once turned back tid=67#bkm548- establish (confirm) thy brethren.tid=67#bkm549- And he said to him, Lord, with thee I am ready to go both to prison and to death. And he said, I tell thee, Peter,tid=67#bkm550- [the] cock shall not crow today before that thou hast thrice denied that thou knowest me.” Love not only brings into what itself possesses, but holds out and provides against the greatest possible strain where every appearance must condemn the object loved. Yet it was no lack of love that exposed Peter to the sin of denying his Master, but his self-confidence made shipwreck of his faithfulness. Through grace alone his faith failed not utterly. We see it not only in the tears of bitter self-reproach, but yet more in the earnest ardour after the Lord which went into the tomb whither John had outrun him. But we see the grace of the Lord, which here supplicated beforehand, still shining after all in the message to “the disciples and Peter,” in His early appearing to him by himself, and in his later more than re-instatement when all his failure was traced and judged to the root. What can we express but our shame and sorrow that such is nature even in the most zealous, when put to the test, and above all when the Word of the Lord is practically slighted? If we believe not His admonition of our own weakness, we are on the point of proving its truth, perhaps to the uttermost.

*The words “And the Lord said,” are in ADQ. Edd. omit, following BLT, Syrsin and Egyptian versions. A precarious omission with no more than three uncials. (B.T.)

“Has begged for.” It is a mistake that means always “to have prevailed,” though it sometimes bears this force. But it is often no more than begging off, or to have in one’s power, as here. “Obtain by asking” (Alford) is clean contrary to the context, and, indeed, to the truth generally. (B.T.)

“When once turned back.” The verb is used both for the first turning to the Lord, and for turning back if one have wandered, as here. (B.T.) See, further, note tid=67#bkm548- at end of this volume.

Luk 22:35-38 .

The Lord now prepares the disciples for the great change at hand. He contrasts their past experience with that which was coming. “And he said to them, When I sent you without purse and wallet tid=67#bkm551- and sandals, did ye lack anything? And they said Nothing. He said therefore to them, But now he that hath a purse [pouch], let him take [it] and likewise his wallet, and he that hath none, let him sell his garment and buy a sword. For I say unto you, that this which is written must yet* be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among lawless. [men]: for also the things concerning me have an end.”tid=67#bkm552- Thus the changes to them depended on Him. Jesus was about to be given up into the hands of wicked men; the protection thrown around Him, as around them, was now to be withdrawn. Clearly this is no question of atonement, though of suffering and rejection in which others could have communion, as the apostle expressly teaches in Phi 3:10 . Jesus was despised and rejected of men, yea, given up to it finally of God; besides He “who knew no sin” was about to be “made sin” for us.

*”Yet”: so Blass (omitting , that), with , Syrcu Vulg. Arm. Other Edd. omit, after ABDHL, etc., 1, Memph.

Little did the disciples understand their Master. Indeed, flesh and blood can never relish suffering, more especially suffering such as His, where man proves his vileness and opposition to God to the uttermost. Even saints are slow to enter in. They necessarily feel the value of atonement; for otherwise they have no standing-place, not even a well-grounded hope of escape as sinners before God. “And they said, Lord, behold here [are] two swords. And he said to them, It is enough”tid=67#bkm553- – a correction of their thought, however mild. For had it been a question of the literal use of the sword in self-defence, two must have proved a wholly inadequate means of protection. The Lord had employed the sword, purse, and wallet as symbolic of ordinary means on which the disciples would henceforward be thrown, but certainly not to abandon personally the ground of grace in presence of evil, even to the last degree of insult and injury, on which He had insisted at the beginning of their call and charge as apostles. No more, however, is said; the true sense is left for that day when the Holy Spirit being given would lead them into all the truth. Alas! Christendom has lost the faith of the Spirit’s presence as well as the certainty of the truth, into which grace alone has been leading back a feeble remnant as they wait for the return of the Lord Jesus. Truths such as this cannot be appreciated unless we go forth unto Him without the camp bearing His reproach.

Luke 22: 39-46.tid=67#bkm554-

Mat 26:30 , Mat 26:36-46 ; Mar 14:26 , Mar 14:32-42 .

But now we approach what is still more solemn and sacred ground. “And going out he proceeded according to his custom to the Mount of Olives, and the* disciples also followed him. And when he was at the place, he said to them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s throw, and, having knelt down, he prayed, saying, Father,tid=67#bkm555- if thou wilt, remove this cup from me, but then, not my will but thine be done.” It was, indeed, no wonted occasion even for Him, but the awful moment of the enemy’s return, who had departed for a season after his old defeat in the wilderness. But this garden was to behold an equally decisive defeat of the enemy as became the Second man, the Lord from heaven. It was no longer Satan seeking to draw away from the path of obedience by what was desirable in the world. He sought now, if he could not drag Jesus out of the path of obedience, to fill Him with alarm and to kill Him in it. But Jesus shrank from no suffering and weighed before God all that was before Him. He watched and prayed and suffered, being tempted. The disciples failed to pray and entered into temptation, so that nothing but grace delivered them.

*”The”: so Edd., following ABDL, etc., Amiat. “His” (T.R.) is the reading of EQpm, etc., 69, Syrrcu sin pesch.

The Holy Spirit does not give us the detail of the three prayers of the Lord as in Matthew, but rather a summary of all in one. In both we see His dependence in prayer and His tried but perfect submission to the will of His Father. Here, however, we have what is characteristic of our Evangelist, both in the angelic succour which was sent Him, and in the bloody sweat that accompanied His conflict. It is well known that many Fathers, Greek and Latin, have cast a doubt upon verses 43 and 44. “And an angel appeared to him from heaven strengthening him. And being in conflict he prayed more intently, and his sweat became as clots of blood falling down upon the earth.” Several of the more ancient MSS. indeed also omit them, as the Alexandrian, Vatican, and others, beside ancient versions; but they are amply verified by external witnesses, and the truth taught has the closest affinity to the line which Luke was given to take up.* The true humanity and the holy suffering of the Lord Jesus stand out here in the fullest evidence.tid=67#bkm556-

*Cf. “Lectures on Gospels,” p. 383f. Besides All, corrRT, and Akhmim MS., the Sinaitic Syriac omits these verses; whilst pm DFGHKLM, etc., most cursives, Syrrcu pesch hcl hier, ancient Armenian attest them, as do Old Lat. also Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Gregory Nazianzen, Jerome, Augustine, etc. After Lachmann, W. H. (see their App., p. 64ff.) and Weiss question; but Blass, after Treg. Tisch. Meyer, Alford, etc., upholds them. Cf. Scrivener, Vol. II., p. 353ff., and see note tid=67#bkm557- in App. Their omission is explicable from lectionary arrangements.

Here again, however, observe that the suffering differs essentially from atonement. For not only does He speak out of the full consciousness of His relationship with the Father but He has also the angelic help which would have been wholly out of season when forsaken of God because of sin-bearing. All was most real. It is not meant that His sweat fell merely like great drops of blood, but that it became this as it were; that is, the sweat was so tinged with blood which exuded from Him in His conflict that it might have seemed pure blood.tid=67#bkm557- “And rising up from his prayer, he came to the* disciples and found them sleeping from grief. And he said to them, Why sleeptid=67#bkm558- ye? Rise up and pray that ye enter not into temptation.” We shall see presently the result of their sleeping instead of praying. Not only did the absent Judas betray, but all forsook, and even the most prominent of the three chosen to be nearest the Lord denied Him with oaths, denied Him thrice before the cock crew. They entered into temptation and utterly failed. We can only be kept by watching and prayer. Evil is not judged aright save in the presence of God. There the light detects and His grace is sufficient, even for us. But man has no strength against Satan. It must be His light and His grace; without the power of His might we enter only to dishonour our Master, Leaning upon Him, the weakest of saints is more than conqueror. Thus only is the devil resisted and he flees from us.

*”The”: so Edd. after BDQRT, Arm. The “his” of T.R. (Elzevir) came from 1, Latt. Syrrcu sin Memph. Aeth.

Luk 22:47-53 .

Matt. 25: 47-56; Mar 14:43-50 ; Joh 18:3-11 .

“As* He was yet speaking, behold, a crowd and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went on before them and drew near to Jesus to kiss him. And Jesus said to him, Judas, deliverest thou up the Son of man with a kiss?”tid=67#bkm558a- How gracious, but how terrible the words of Jesus to him who knew his Master and his Master’s haunts enough to deliver Him thus to His enemies! “And those around him, seeing what was about to happen, said, Lord, shall we smite with [the] sword? And a certain one from among them smote the bondman of the high priest and took off his right ear.tid=67#bkm558b- And Jesus answering said, Suffer thus far; and having touched the ear, he healed him.” He could still work miraculously by the Holy Ghost. Indeed, we know from Joh 18 : that He could and did cast them all down to the ground by the power of His name; but here it is the witness of His grace to man, even at such a moment, rather than of His own personal majesty, which was about to be east off and to suffer on the cross. Each incident is of the deepest interest and eminently suited to the Gospel in which it occurs.

*”As,” etc.: DE, etc., have “But as.” Edd., however, reject the , following ABLRTX, etc., 1, 69, Amiat.

“Said”: AER, etc., 1, 69, Syrr. Amiat. add “to him,” which Edd. omit, according to BLTX, Memph.

Blass follows D: “And stretching forth his hand, he touched him, and his ear was restored.”

“And Jesus said to the chief prieststid=67#bkm559- and captains of the temple and elders, who had come against him, Have ye come out as against* a robber with swords and sticks? When I was day by day with you in the temple, ye did not stretch out your hands against me; but this is your hour and the power of darkness.” God was giving up the Lord Jesus to men before He was forsaken in accomplishing the work of redemption.

*”Against”: so most Edd., with BDL, etc. Tisch.: “to,” as GH, etc.

Luke 22: 54-62.tid=67#bkm560-

Mat 26:57 f., 69-75; Mar 14:53 f., 66-72; Joh 18:12-18 , Joh 18:25-27 .

“And having apprehended him, they led and introduced* [him] into the house of the high priest. And Peter followed afar off. And having lit a fire in the midst of the court, and sat down together, Peter sat among them. And a certain maid, having seen him sitting by the light fixed her eyes upon him and said, And this [man] was with him. But be denied [him], saying, Woman, I do not know him. And after a short while anothertid=67#bkm56- seeing him, said, And thou art of them. But Peter said, Man, I am not. And after the lapse of about one hour, another stoutly maintained, saying, In truth this [man] also was with him, for he is a Galilean too. But Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he was yet speaking, a cock crew. And the Lord turned round and looked upon Peter tid=67#bkm562- and Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he said to him, Before [the] cock crows today,|| thou shalt deny me thrice. And Peter, going forth without, wept “bitterly.” We see here the worthlessness of natural courage in the saint and the weakness of one’s own love when relied on. Only God can sustain, and this, too, in exercised distrust of self, when the Word is received by faith and the heart abides in dependence on God. A servant-girl frightens an apostle, and the first false step involves others deeper and farther, if possible, from God; for what is our consistency if we be not consistent with the Cross? The unbelief which refuses the humiliating warning of the Lord works out the accomplishment of His Word. But the Lord never fails, and as He had not in faithfulness beforehand, so, after the fact, He does not hide His face from Peter, but turns round and looks at him. His own sufferings did not preoccupy the Lord to the extent of forgetting Peter, and Peter’s guilt and shame in no way turned the Lord from him, but rather drew His look towards him. “and Peter remembered the word of the Lord,” and his sorrow worked repentance, though the Lord carried it farther still, as we know, after He rose from the dead; for the root of evil must be judged as well as the fruit, if we are to be fully blessed and would know how to hell,) others, as Peter was called to do and did.

*”introduced”: so most of the authorities. Blass follows DT, Syrrcu sin, and some Old Lat. with Aeth. in the omission of .

[“Him”]: so EX, etc., 69, Memph. Edd. omit, as ABDKLM, etc., Old Lat.

[“Him”]: so ADpm EGH, etc., most cursives (69), Amiat. Edd. omit, as BKLM, etc., Syrrcu sin pesch, most Old Lat. and the Egyptian versions.

“A”: so all authorities, except a few of the minuscules, Syrsin and Sah., which have “the.”

||”Today”: so most Edd., after BKLMT, Syrsin Aeth. Blass omits, as AD, nearly all cursives, and copies of Old Lat. Syrcu Arm.

Verse 62, which W. H. bracket, Blass omits entirely because the verse is absent from some copies of the Old Lat. and he supposes was inserted from Matthew. It is in Syrsin as in all Greek MS., “Peter”: so A, etc., Syrr. Vulg. Aeth. Edd. omit, as BDKLM, etc., Syrrcu sin Memph. Arm.

Luk 22:63-65 .

Mat 26:67 f.; Mar 14:65 .

Then follows the sad tale of men’s insolence and blasphemy towards the Lord. “And the men who held him,* mocked him, beating him, and covering him up, asked him, saying, Prophesy who is it that struck thee? And many other things they were saying blasphemously to Him.” Such was the rude evil of the underlings. The chiefs might act with more seeming decorum, but with no less unbelief and scorn of His claims.

Luke 22: 66-71.tid=67#bkm564-

Mat 26:59-66 ; Mar 14:55-64 .

“And when it was day, the elderhood of the people, both chief priests and scribes, were gathered together, and led him into their council, saying, If thou art the Christ,tid=67#bkm565- tell us. And he said to them, If I tell you, you will not at all believe; and if I should ask, ye would not at all answer. But|| henceforth shall the Son of Man be sitting on the right hand of the power of God. And they all said, Thou, then, art the Son of God? And He said to them, Ye, say that I am. And they said, What need have we of witness further? For we have ourselves heard from his mouth.” There was lying testimony brought against Jesus; but it failed. He was condemned for the truth, which man believed not. He declined to speak of His Messianic dignity, which was already rejected by man, and was about to be replaced by His position as Son of man on the right hand of the power of God. If they all infer that He is the Son of God, say it or gainsay it whoever will, He acknowledges and denies not, but acknowledges that truth which is eternal life to every believer.

*”Him”: so Edd., with BDLM, etc., Syrsin Old Lat. Memph. “Jesus” is the reading of AEX, etc., 1, 69, the other Syrr.

After “covering him up,” AX, etc., most cursives, Amiat., add “smote his face and,” which Edd. omit, after BKLM, Syrrcu sin and Egyptians.

After “their,” , 1, 69, add “own,” which is omitted by Edd. as not in BDLT, etc.

AD, all later uncials, most cursives. Syrr. (including sin.) Old Lat. here add “nor let me go,” which Edd. omit, as BLT, Memph.

||”But”: so Edd. with ABDLTX, Old Lat. ED, etc., omit. Syrrcu sin have “for.”

NOTES ON THE TWENTY-SECOND CHAPTER.

528 Luk 22:1 . – “Which is called Passover.” Cf. Joseph. “Antiqq.,” xiv. 2, 1, from which we learn that the name was by this time applied to the whole season. The Paschal Feast and the Feast of Unleavened Bread had long been blended. Cf. Lev 23:5 f. and Num 28:16 f., where they are distinguished, with Deu 16:1 , Deu 16:3 in which they coalesce, as here.

The words of Mark, “after two days,” and “not on the feast day” (14: 16), Wellhausen considers Luke left out in order to avoid contradiction with that which had actually happened. The simple truth of the matter, whether critics will recognize it or not, is that the plan of the Jewish leaders was frustrated.

The “difficulties” felt in connection with the Evangelists’ several accounts of this celebration – in particular, the circumstance that the Lord observed the Passover before the Judean conventional hour – have been discussed in note 142 on Mark, and in notes 336, 346 on John. Here may be added that the different ways of determining the new moon, of which Khodadad in his pamphlet speaks (p. 21), occasioned letters of Gamaliel the Elder to the Galileans, referred to in “Tosefta: Sanhedrin,” chapter ii. Cf. notes 531, 533.

529 Luk 22:4 . – “Captains.” For these , cf. Joh 18:12 ; and see Schrer, 11. i. 265, or Edersheim, “The Temple, etc.,” p. 389 ff.

530 Luk 22:6 . – “Agreed fully.” Field, “fully consented.”

531 Luk 22:7 . – “The day of unleavened [bread].” Provision of (Exo 23:15 ) began, as we should say, with 6 p.m. (cf. verse 14) on the Thursday, when the 14th Nisan set in (cf. Mat 26:17 ; Mar 14:12 ), i.e., the Eastern Friday eve, but our Thursday night. The theory, occasioned by comparison with the Fourth Gospel, that the Lord anticipated the ceremony by one whole day (Neander, Godet, Westcott, etc.) seems to be already excluded by the Evangelist’s words “the day . . . in which the passover had to be killed.” It was simply the darkness of one half of the technical day that divided the Lord’s celebration from that of the Jerusalemites in general.

532 Luk 22:10 . – As to such an unwonted sight, see Schor, p. 43.

533 Luk 22:13 . – “Prepared the passover,” i.e., the initial Paschal meal. This preparation must not be confounded with the , a word of different formation, spoken of in Luk 23:54 in closest connection with the Sabbath, although it was a name given to the whole time between one sunset and the next succeeding in each recurring week. Cf. note concerned on chapter 23.

534 Luk 22:14 . – The disciples, observe, did not on this notable occasion partake of the Paschal feast with their families, “showing how they had forsaken all for Christ” (Carr).

535 Luk 22:16 . – “I will in no wise drink.” Apparently, so far as regards the present occasion, because the cup of which He must drink is to be that of God’s wrath against sin, in contrast with the joy symbolized by the ritual of the Passover. This will be celebrated throughout the Millennium (Eze 45:21 ).

Burkitt would extend the Lord’s words here into meaning that the meal described was not a Passover at all (The Journal of Theological Studies, July, 1908, pp. 569-571), thus understanding the opening words, of deep Hebrew colouring, in a scarcely natural way. Although Harnack and Ramsay have lent their support to this idea (Journal of Theological Literature, 1909, col. 49 f.), writers of the most opposite schools combine in treating it as a Passover. Such it was at any rate in the sense of the Mosaic ordinance. Our Lord, however, seems not to have partaken of any cup, as an accretion (see Stuart, p. 254 ff.)

536 The “Kingdom of God,” the Father’s Kingdom, Mat 26:29 , or “Kingdom of Heaven,” yet future. Cf. Rev 19:9 .

537 Luk 22:17 – “A cup,” viz., the first of four used in the historical ceremony (Khodadad, p. 27). Some suppose that for the second of such cups was substituted that used in the institution of the Supper (Carr). Whilst the Lord is said by Luke to have “received” () the Passover cup (cf. note 535), Matthew speaks of His spontaneously having “taken” () – used in institution of His Supper.

538 Luk 22:19 f. – The LORD’S SUPPER, (1Co 11:20 ). Until the discoveries of Papyri, within the last twenty years, it was supposed that the word (cf. of the Lord’s Day, in Rev 1:10 ) was coined for the purpose; but it is now known that the word belonged to the Greek language of everyday life in that period, being used in the sense of “imperial,” or “royal.”

Besides this designation of the ordinance, Scripture sanctions “the breaking of bread” (Act 2:42 , Act 20:7 ), “the Communion” (1Co 10:16 ) and “the Eucharist” or “Thanksgiving” (1Co 11:24 , 1Co 14:16 ).

539 “This is My body given for you.” The unleavened cake declared His sacrificial death. Cf. 1Co 11:29 , the Lord’s “body,” which cannot mean the Church, described in Scripture as the “body of Christ.” Tertullian uses the words against Marcion (book iv., chapter xl.) by saying, “That is, the figure of My body. . . . It would not contribute very well to the support of Marcion’s theory of a phantom body, that the bread should have been crucified.” This was before the days of Transubstantiation!

The form of words used by a father in family celebration of the Passover has been strangely neglected by Catholic writers. The “is” could only so mean represents.

“Given,” . Catholic commentators avail themselves of the present participle for their theory that “the sacrifice was in the Eucharist itself, not on the Cross only” (Darby-Smith). Cf. the “Explanatory Catechism,” Nos. 278-280. But all that is really meant is that the Lord’s body was on the point of being given for them, just as He was on the point of going to the Father: see the present tense of Joh 17:11 .

Since the Reformation the great Anglican divine Hooker has written that the virtue resides in the recipient: his wise language is borne out by Mar 14:23 f., for it was when the disciples had already drunk of the cup, that our Lord addressed to them the words of verse 24 there.

The present High Anglican view may be seen in Sadler, “Commentary on Luke,” pp. 555-563. Canon (since Bishop) Gore, in revolt from the idea of worship of dead elements, has had recourse to a theory that the communion is with the glorified body of the Lord (“The Body of Christ,” p. 66). But where would be the “remembrance” of words spoken by the historical JESUS before He suffered? If it is His death which governs the ordinance, all must be in keeping with that; whilst the Bishop, on that page of his book, directs the mind of the reader to Christ in His heavenly condition, and not as the earthly Speaker. lt is impossible to think of the Saviour as dead and alive at the same time (Rev 1:18 ). Eucharistic doctrine developed from the “Mysteries” is accountable for such dilemmas.

That the mediaeval idea of eating a Divine being (“Theophagy”), to which official Catholicism still adheres, was a survival of pagan thought (Reinach, p. 26) seems to be undeniable. The attempt made, even by some Protestant “critics,” to saddle it on the Gospels, must ever be resisted. Bousset, indeed, has to own (on 1Co 10:22 ) that, however it may have been in the hands of Paul, in the Gospels there is not the least tendency to sacramentalism discernible. It behoves every Christian to view the rite as it came from the Lord’s own lips. The Apostle cites, and does not enlarge upon, His words when 1Co 11:27-29 is rightly understood.

540 “This do in remembrance of Me.” As to the omission of these words, with the rest of verse 19 after “body” and the whole of verse 20 in the “Western” text, see, besides references in critical footnote, Zahn, “Introduction,” ii. 357-359 (German edition).

For memorial before God, see Lev 24:7 , etc., with which compare 1Co 11:26 , as to the voice of this ordinance to men in general.

Luke’s words, “this cup . . . shed,” it will be found, combine those of Matthew, Mark, and Paul. It is because of their special relation to the Apostle’s statement in 1Co 11:24 that some suppose there is an interpolation in Luke’s text. Yet it is Codex D in particular, elsewhere prone to harmonize, which omits them. The effect of supposing interference with the Evangelist’s primitive text is, of course, questioning, so far as the Gospel records are concerned, that the Lord Himself instituted the ecclesiastical “Breaking of Bread” (Act 2:42 , Act 2:46 ) as a permanent rite; for it is in the Third Gospel alone that the words “Do this, etc.,” appear. As confirming their rejection of the ordinance, “Friends” naturally hail this view (see British Friend, 1908), represented by writers such as Jlicher (Essay, 1892) in Germany, Gardner (“The Origin of the Lord’s Supper,” 1893) in England, and McGiffert in America. The last-named scholar remarks: “Expecting to return at an early day (Mar 14:25 ), Jesus can hardly have been solicitous to provide for the preservation of His memory” (“Apostolic Age,” p. 69). The assumption here expressed has already been dealt with in note 524. Reference might further be made to Sanday, art. “Jesus Christ,” in Hastings’ “Dict. of the Bible,” vol. ii., p. 638).

Paul says that he “received of the Lord” the account which he gives, covering the injunction. Although Sir W. M. Ramsay does not seem right in treating the Apostle’s statement as meaning that the record contained in 1 Corinthians had been handed down to Paul by tradition (Expository Times, April, 1908, p. 296 f.), the Church must have had a true instinct in continued observance of the Supper, which forms part of the historical evidence of the Faith; but the way in which the “Holy Communion” has been used as an instrument of oppression has doubtless counteracted its function in this respect, so great has been the corruption or defacement by which it is marred. Happily, the day is fast running out when men, because of doctrinal differences, hesitate to partake in common of these symbols of love and unity, so much needed for the realization of our Lord’s High-priestly Prayer. Cf. note on Joh 17:21 .

541 For wine as a figure of blood, Tertullian (loc. cit.) refers to Isa 63:1 and Gen 49:11 .

In Heb 10:19 we have the “blood of Jesus”: in 1Pe 1:19 , “the blood of Christ” in 1Jn 1:7 , the “blood of Jesus Christ.” What “higher criticism” is sufficient for these things?

Albert Ritschl, by whom many living German theologians have been influenced, in his work on “Justification and Reconciliation” (vol. iii., p. 568, of E. T.), has expressed repugnance to such hymns, dear to every spiritual mind, as the notable one by Bernard of Clairvaux (Trench, “Sacred Latin Poetry,” p. 139 ff.; cf. “Hymns Ancient and Modern,” No. 111); and, in his “History of Pietism,” of the like compositions of Paul Gerhardt (see “Lyra Germanica,” Newnes’ ed., pp. 60-63), which visualized the bleeding Saviour on the Cross for the comfort of the dying, but are often discredited as voicing unpopular “blood theology.” Nevertheless, in his own last hours, the Gttingen professor requested his son to recite to him Gerhardt’s soul-stirring lines (Gerok’s edition, p. 63), not excepting certain verses which, in his writings, he had singled out for animadversion.

As to redemptive significance of the Death of Christ, see recent works of the Scottish professors Stalker and Denney; also articles in Hastings’ one vol. Bible Dictionary on Atonement, Mediation, Redemption, and Salvation, all by Prof. Orr. The late Dr. N. M. Adler, British Chief Rabbi, stated that “For the modern Jew there is no Atonement. . . . He believes that he obtains forgiveness simply by repentance”; and he went on to quote Exo 32:30 , maintaining that Jehovah’s answer there shows that He did not accept the idea of Atonement.

542 Stalker has happily remarked: “The essence of this ordinance is . . . God giving Himself to man, and man giving Himself to God” (p. 193). Cf. Jer 31:33 .

As to remission of sins (Mat 26:28 ), see note below on Luk 24:47 , and as to the word “covenant,” note 149 on Mark, besides papers of Carr in the Expositor.

Luk 22:23 shows that Judas partook of the Supper.

543 Luk 22:24 . – “Should be held”: American Revv., “Was accounted.” The order here is peculiar to Luke. According to his Gospel, the disciples must have had this contention twice over: see 9: 46. In the shibboleth of critics, it is a “doublet.”

544 Luk 22:25 . – Such were Philip of Macedon and Alexander “the Great,” Ptolemy III. and Antigonus.

545 Luk 22:28 . – “Temptations,” e.g., such as described in Joh 6:15 . Our blessed Lord was ever sinless: 1Jn 3:5 .

546 Luk 22:29 f. – “I appoint,” . Not “I bequeath”: cf. Jer 31:31 in the LXX. Wills are believed to have been unknown to the Jews at the time the Gospel of Luke and the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb 9:15 f.) were first circulated. Cf. paper of Carr in Expositor, April, 1909.

We have here a New Testament version of the “Messianic banquet” in Isa 45:6 , Isa 49:12 . Cf. Luk 13:28 f.; in connection, not merely with the Passover celebration, but with the institution of “Breaking of Bread.” It sets before us “the time of Regeneration,” spoken of in Mat 19:28 (the “restoration” of Act 3:21 ). To it refer the words, “Many are called, but few chosen” (Mat 22:14 , cf. 20: 16), with which contrast the statement of Rev 7:9 .

Wellhausen’s comment on , first without and then accompanied by the article, is that the one expresses “sovereignty,” the other the “Kingdom.” But what about Rev 1:6 ?

A leading idea of all Millenarians may be expressed in the words of one amongst the Germans: “The whole congregation of the faithful rule and judge mankind for 1,000 years” (Hofmann, “Prophecy and Fulfilment,” ii. 373).

The future aspect of the Kingdom comes out conspicuously in this last reference to it in our Gospel. It is this dominating aspect to which recent German literature (surveyed by Schweitzer) has been addressed. Thus Wernle speaks of “the centre of gravity of the Christian faith transferred to its Eschatology” (“Beginnings,” i. 140). Schweitzer’s own position is preposterous: the Lord died, he says, for the Apocalyptic idea, but by His death sounded its death-knell! Facts, however, are still more stubborn than theories: and the fact here is that, “not only in later Jewish and early Christian history, but right down through the Middle Ages, Apocalyptic Eschatology has been a constantly recurring phenomenon” (B. H. Streeter, in Interpreter, Oct., 1911, p. 38). The topic, nevertheless, has been until recently much more cultivated in this country than in Germany, where the influence of Bengel was largely ephemeral, and scarcely revived by such as Auberlen in the nineteenth century. Cf. note 282.

As for the relation of the Second Coming of Christ to the Kingdom, with the exception of Origen and the few who rejected the “Apocalypse” as apostolic, all primitive expositors – Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Hippolytus, etc. – were premillenarians; that is, held that the Lord’s Second Advent will precede the Millennium: see Gibbon, “Decline and Fall, etc.,” chapter 15, comparing Elliott, “Horae Apocalypticae,” iv p. 310. “The expectation,” remarks Wernle, “of the Kingdom of God upon earth and of the resurrection of the dead, the two thoughts least Greek in character, stand at the centre of the Christian Hope.” To this the same writer devotes his chapter 13. “Even so educated a Christian as Justin,” he says, “was a convinced Millenarian. The process of Hellenization set in about the end of the second century” (ii., p. 133), that is, in Origen’s youth. Augustine did the disservice of following in the wake of the allegorizing of that erratic theologian: see the celebrated Latin Father’s “City of God,” in particular book x., 7. Gibbon observes that “Agreement of the Fathers went by the board;” that the Apocalyptic Kingdom “came to be treated as the invention of heresy and fanaticism.” J. H. Newman, naturally, in his Oxford sermons, through his, incipient Catholicism – that farrago of ideas – discredited the Patristic Millennium indiscriminately. And so Bishop Christopher Wordsworth, in his “Lectures on the Apocalypse” (1848), as to whose views see criticism by B. W. Newton in “Aids to Prophetic Inquiry,” pp. 310-386 (3rd ed., 1881). The darkening of counsel seems complete when an esteemed writer like the Protestant Bishop Martensen is found attaching a symbolic meaning, derived from 2Pe 3:8 , to the “thousand years” of Rev 20:4 .

On the other hand, leading expositors of such different schools as Godet, Alford, Sadler, and W. H. Simcox have resolutely maintained that there can be no honest escape from the conclusion that the classical passage of the Apocalypse shows a thousand years’ reign of Christ upon earth (pace Kennett, in Interpreter: see note 509). “The plain meaning of the words,” says Simcox, “is that after the overthrow of Antichrist the martyrs and other most excellent saints will rise from the dead; the rest of the dead, even those finally saved, will not rise till later. But at last, after the Millennium, and after the last short-lived assault of Satan, all the dead, good and wicked, will arise” (“Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges: The Revelation of St. John the Divine,” Appendix, p. 237). The belief of W. Kelly – founded upon a now much-received interpretation of 1Th 4:13 ff. – diverged from this statement so far as to view all “saints” as rising before the of the (see note 524), and so, before the revelation of Antichrist (2Th 2:8 ); and, further, to see only the wicked dead in those standing before the “Great White Throne” of Rev 20:11-15 . Cf. his last “Exposition of the Revelation” (3rd ed., 1904). Simcox continues: “Any view but the literal seems exposed to insuperable exegetical difficulties. If the true sense be not the literal one, it is safest to regard it as being as yet undiscovered.” To realise the force of these words one has only to study the later expositions of the Apocalypse by Bousset and J. Weiss, partly on the lines laid down by Gunkel, who plumes himself on having “discovered” by critical acumen the clue to that book in Babylonian mythology! A humiliating circumstance here is, that this grotesque theory has been acclaimed by some in England.

The Kingdom in its present aspect has been discussed from various points of view, in England by Whately, Maurice, Seeley, Bruce, Horton, etc.; in America by Stevens and others; and in Germany by writers of the Ritschlian school, so ably represented by Harnack. Its eschatological character has been taken up also by, amongst others, the last-named scholar in the “Encyclopaedia Biblica,” and during recent years in this country by Charles.

547 Luk 22:31 f. – “Has begged,” etc. The of denotes vehemence, importunity. See, however, Field’s note, and Burton, 35.

548 “When once turned back,” . Cf. the LXX. at Psa 51:13 , , for Hebrew yashubu, “shall return,” and P. B. version of Psa 23:3 , “He shall convert my soul.” See also Field ad loc. on the present passage, as to “convert” (act.) and “conversion” on man’s part, which answers to God’s grace in quickening – to regeneration as used conventionally in the sense of being “born again.” The learned writer of “Otium Norvicense” would, of course, not have questioned the Psalmist’s “Turn us again,” which has doubtless given rise, since the days of Wesley, to the now current use of the word “conversion.”

Dr. Arnold has preached from this passage, on Conversion (“Sermons,” iii., 173).

549 With verse 32 cf. 1Pe 1:17 , 1Jn 2:1 , each time “the Father,” before whom the Advocate pleads.

Reference should here be made to the Catholic Catechism, No. 91.

550 Luk 22:34 . – “Peter.” Cf. verse 31, “Simon.” Wellhausen “cannot see” any reason for the change. Was it not now to say, Strong as he was (Mat 18:18 ) he needed reminding of his weakness? (Farrar, apparently after Godet).

As to the here, see notes 142, 151 on Mark (14: 30). Matthew and Mark give the prediction as if said on the way to Gethsemane; Luke and John as though pronounced in the upper room; so that it is probably referable to both connections divisibly, to which the account of Matthew and Mark itself lends support. The added assurance of the other disciples, uttered with raised voice, could scarcely have been given in public.

551 Luk 22:35 . – “Without purse,” etc., words used to the Seventy (Luk 10:4 ).

552 Luk 22:37 . – “Have an end.” Field: “are being fulfilled.” The quotation is from the Hebrew.

553 Luk 22:38 . – For the idea of “saying no more about it,” cf. Deu 3:26 .

Upon the words of this verse was founded the Bull of Pope Boniface VIII. (“Unam Sanctam”) – the two swords, spiritual and civil.

554 Luk 22:39-46 . – This section definitely introduces the last day (Friday) of the Lord’s life on earth.

The AGONY. Cf. Joh 12:27 , as of course the parallels in Matthew and Mark. Pfieiderer speaks of “The preceding predictions of passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus” being “not historical; otherwise the struggle in Gethsemane could not have taken place” (i., p. 389). But Fairbairn: “Few incidents have been more utterly misunderstood than this. . . . The antecedent of the agony was not the idea of death, but the feeling as to its means and agents” (op. cit., pp. 426-431). Cf. note 152 on Mark.

A difficulty has been manufactured out of no man hearing the utterances of the Lord on this occasion. As to such objections, see note on the Temptation.

555 Luk 22:42 . – Observe that our Lord says, “Father”; on the Cross, “My God” (Mat 27:46 : cf. Psa 40:8 ).

556 Luk 22:43 f. – The Gospel of Peter (Docetic) says that JESUS on the Cross “held His peace, as in nowise having pain”! (Orr, “New Testament Apocryphal Writings,” p. 73). On Divine suffering, Caird has said: “Separation of Divine from human acts and experiences is really the dissolving or rending in twain of the unity of Christ’s person and life. It virtually asserts that He was not always, throughout His whole life, the God-Man, but only now the God, and now the man,” etc. Again: “Incapacity to suffer is not a sign of largeness, but of littleness” (Gifford “Lectures,” vol. ii., pp. 108, 142).

We meet here with an experience of the “reasonable soul” of our Lord. Cf. Mat 26:38 ; Joh 12:27 .

Conflict, , an “agony of fear” (Field). Burgon has referred to Psa 55:4-6 .

“Appeared,” : cf. 1Ti 3:16 .

557 As to doctrinal repugnance to the admission of such records into Scripture, Plummer writes, “There is not any tangible evidence for the excision of a considerable portion of narrative for doctrinal reasons at any period of textual history.” It is, however, just such evidence which resists detection and is difficult to obtain: repugnance works silently as well as ostensibly.

558 Luk 22:45 . – There are two distinct words for “sleep” used in this verse, (as in 1Th 4:13 f.) and (as in 1Th 5:6 , 1Th 5:7 , 1Th 5:10 ). Two distinct classes of mankind are concerned in these chapters of 1 Thessalonians.

558a Luk 22:47 f. – Tholuck has preached on these verses.

558b Luk 22:50 . – Cf. Joh 18:10 . “Suffer thus far” would be said to the soldiers.

559 Luk 22:52 . – “Chief priests,” it will be observed, is peculiar to Luke’s account.

“Power.” The Greek is , “authority.”

For hands not being laid on the Lord until His voluntary submission, cf. Joh 8:20 .

560 Luk 22:54-60 . – Cf. Joh 18:12-18 , the informal investigation before Annas. For “laid hold on Him,” cf. Act 2:23 .

561 Luk 22:58 . – Luke: a man, the second time; Matthew, “another maid.” See note 156 on Mark, in which Gospel the two other accounts coalesce. There is a helpful analysis of Peter’s denials in Stuart, pp. 269, 271.

562 Luk 22:61-65 . – The Lord is here before Caiaphas and a committee of the Sanhedrin (Joh 18:24 ; Mar 14:55-65 ; Mat 26:59-68 ).

“The Lord turned,” peculiar to this Gospel.

“Looked,” i.e., fixedly, is a form of , used in Joh 1:42 of the Lord’s gaze then at Peter, as already of the Baptist’s at Himself (verse 36).

563 Luk 22:62 . – “Wept,” or “sobbed,” .

564 Luk 22:65-71 . – This is the third trial, before the whole Sanhedrin (Mat 27:1 ; Mar 15:1 ), merging in appearance before Pilate, 23: 1.

Cf. Joh 18:13 , which is accounted for by Luke’s record – an interval between the arrest and the Council’s meeting.

Fairbairn: “The elders are Israel as a State; the chief priests, Israel as a Church; the scribes, Israel as possessed of the oracles of God” (op. cit., p. 398).

“Ye say that I am.” American Revv., “Ye say (it) because I am.”

565 Luk 22:67-70 . – See note 154 on Mark. In each of the Synoptics is brought out the contrast between “the Christ” of the high priest and “the Son of Man” in the Lord’s answer. Cf. note 127.

With verse 69 cf. Psa 80:17 .

For the now ordinary Jewish idea of Messiah, see Montefiore, vol. i. pp. 50, 100 f.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Luk 22:1-2

1Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover, was approaching. 2The chief priests and the scribes were seeking how they might put Him to death; for they were afraid of the people.

Luk 22:1 “the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover” These two feasts are discussed in Exodus 12 (Passover, Luk 22:1-14; Luk 22:21-36 and Unleavened Bread, Luk 22:15-20). Originally they were separate feasts, but were later combined into one eight- day feast (cf. Num 28:16-31) beginning on the 14th of Nisan (March-April). The Passover Feast commemorates the Death Angle passing over the Jewish slaves’ homes in Egypt and the deliverance of God’s people from the Egyptians as promised in Gen 15:12-21.

Luk 22:2 “The chief priests and the scribes” This refers to the Sanhedrin, the Supreme Court of the Jews in Jerusalem. See Special Topic: Sanhedrin at Luk 9:22.

“how they might put Him to death” The religious leaders felt that Jesus

1. was heretical

2. could cause problems with Rome (cf. Mat 26:5)

3. made them to feel jealous

The Gospel of John mentions several plots to kill Jesus (cf. Joh 7:30; Joh 7:44; Joh 8:59; Joh 10:31; Joh 10:39; Joh 11:53).

“death” This word for death (anaire) is used in the NT almost exclusively by Luke for someone being put to death (cf. Luk 22:2; Luk 23:32 : Act 2:23; Act 5:33; Act 5:36; Act 7:28; Act 9:23-24; Act 9:29; Act 10:39; Act 12:2; Act 13:28; Act 16:27; Act 22:20; Act 23:15; Act 23:21; Act 23:27; Act 25:3; Act 26:10). It is also used this way in the Septuagint (cf. Gen 4:15; Exo 15:9; 2Sa 10:18).

The other Synoptic Gospels use the terms apollumi or apoktein for these murderous plots by these Jerusalem leaders.

Luke, being the only Gentile writer of the NT, had a different vocabulary from the other Gospel writers whose primary language was Aramaic. Luke is heavily influenced by the terminology and vocabulary of the Greek translation of the NT, the Septuagint.

“for they were afraid of the people” This is a recurrent theme (cf. Mat 21:26; Mat 21:44; Mar 11:18; Mar 11:32; Mar 12:12; Luk 20:19).

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Now, &c. Compare Mat 26:17-19. Mar 14:12-16.

drew = was drawing.

passover. Aramaic, pascha. App-94.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

1, 2.] CONSPIRACY OF THE JEWISH AUTHORITIES TO KILL JESUS. Mat 26:1-5. Mar 14:1-2. The account of Matt. is the fullest: see notes there. The words here give us a mere compendium of what took place.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Luke’s gospel, chapter 22.

Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover ( Luk 22:1 ).

The Feast of Unleavened Bread actually was for six days, from the fifteenth of Nizan to the twenty-first. However, the fifteenth of Nizan was the day of the Passover. And so it was drawing nigh. People were beginning to prepare for it. Two days before the feast they would go through the house with brooms and brushes and make sure that they got rid of all of the leaven out of the house, in quite a ceremony. And of course, they would always leave a little bit of leaven for one of the children to find, in order that they could find the last bit of leaven that was there. And they would purge the house of leaven in preparation for the Passover. And so this time was drawing close.

And the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might kill Jesus; but they feared the people. Then Satan entered into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and the captains, how he might betray him unto them. And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money. And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude ( Luk 22:2-6 ).

So it was their desire to catch Jesus away from the multitudes. Because, as we noticed last week in our study, the crowds were coming to hear Him in the temple daily as He was teaching, and many counted Him to be a prophet. And so, though the scribes and the high priests and all were wanting to move against Jesus, they were too cowardly to move against the popular movement of the crowd that was being attracted to Jesus at this point. And so when Judas came to them, they were very happy, actually, that they might have this opportunity of catching Jesus away from the crowd, arresting Him and getting the movement going the other direction before the people would really realize what was happening.

Judas Iscariot is, of course, a very interesting character. We are not really told too much about him. As we get into John’s gospel, we’ll learn that he was actually the treasurer of the group. And according to John, had been pilfering out of the group treasury. Here we are told that Satan entered into him. He is called the Son of Perdition by Peter. And Jesus said of him, “It would have been good for that man if he had never been born.” A tragic life. A man who became obsessed by the greed, the desire for power. And there are many suggestions as to the motives behind Judas’ betrayal of Jesus. There are those who suggest that he was only trying to force Jesus to establish the kingdom. And that he felt by betraying Him and turning Him over to the Jews, it would force the hand of Jesus that He would not be able to wait any longer, but would have to manifest who He was and establish the kingdom of God. And that when Jesus was not defending Himself, but was submitting to the edict of death, that his plan more or less backfired, and that’s when he came to the priests bringing the money back and throwing it at their feet. Who knows what the true motive of a man is? These are only speculations by men who have perhaps tried to somehow excuse in a way the actions of Judas Iscariot. I personally feel that his actions are inexcusable. The method by which he chose to betray the Lord with a kiss is reprehensible.

Now, verse Luk 22:7 : The Day, or the Preparation of the Passover, has come.

Now the day came of unleavened bread, when the Passover must be killed ( Luk 22:7 ).

The Passover was a Sabbath day in which they were to do no work; it was a feast day. And this day had come in which they were to kill the lamb for the Passover dinner. All of the cooking, all of the baking, all of the preparation had to be done before sundown. It is important that we recall that the Jewish day begins at six o’clock in the evening. So all of the preparation had to be made for the Passover dinner before six o’clock in the evening. And to them, the day began, the day of Passover began at six o’clock in the evening and did not end until the following day at six o’clock in the evening. Now, by the end of the following day, Jesus had been crucified, which means that Jesus was crucified on the day of the Passover Feast, which began at six o’clock the evening before when He celebrated the feast with His disciples. But He was crucified on the day of Passover. Which, of course, is extremely significant when you remember that the Passover was a memorial feast to remind them of how God had delivered their fathers from the plague of death in Egypt when they followed the instructions of God and had slain the lamb and put the blood on the lentil in the doorpost of their house. So that when the Lord passed through Egypt that night, when He saw the blood upon the doors of their houses, He passed over those houses; hence the word Passover. He had passed over those houses and the firstborn was saved alive, because of the sacrificial lamb, the lamb for the house. That was only to look forward to the Lamb of God that would one day take away the sins of the world. Our sacrificial Lamb, who by His death, by His sacrifice, has spared us from death. And so this Passover feast that the Jews observed was looking back, but it was also looking forward. And it had its fulfillment in Jesus. Paul, in writing to the Colossian church about the Sabbath days, about the new moons, the holy days…and of course, the Passover was related to the new moon…in talking to them about these, he said, “These were all a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ” ( Col 2:17 ). They were all really looking forward to their fulfillment in Jesus Christ. And so the Feast of the Passover was fulfilled in the death of Jesus Christ on that very day, God’s Lamb slain for the sins of the world. The Feast of Pentecost was fulfilled fifty days later when the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the church and 3,000 people were converted, the first fruits of what we see the continuing work today. As the Feast of Pentecost was the Feast of First Fruits, the offering of the first fruits unto the Lord.

Inasmuch as these two major feasts have their fulfillment in the New Testament and in the church, we would then conclude that that third feast, which was inaugurated by God in the Old Testament, the Feast of Trumpets, must also have a fulfillment within the church…that feast that looked back to God’s delivering their fathers out of the ravages of the wilderness and bringing them into the promised land. And so its fulfillment is yet awaited by the church. “When the trumpet of God shall sound, and we who are alive and remain shall be caught up to meet the Lord in the air and ever be with our Lord” ( 1Th 4:17 ).

“And so came the Day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover must be killed.”

And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat. And they said unto him, Where do You want us to prepare it? And he said to them, Behold, when you enter the city, there you will find a man who will meet you, and he is bearing a pitcher of water; follow him into the house where he goes. And you shall say to the goodman of the house, The Master says to thee, Where is the guest chamber, where I shall eat the Passover with my disciples? And he shall show you a large upper room furnished: there make ready. And they went, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the Passover. And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto them, With desire have I desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer: for I say unto you, I will not eat any more thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he took the cup, and he gave thanks, and he said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: for I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. And he took the bread, and he gave thanks, and he broke it, and he gave it unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. And likewise also the cup after the supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is shed for you ( Luk 22:8-20 ).

And so Jesus, here, instituted what we call the Lord’s Supper with His disciples, as He took the traditional Jewish Passover feast and gave to the emblems of that feast their true meaning. Now, they always had these three pieces of bread that they would put in these little sacks. The middle piece was broken, sort of a matzoh loaf, and it was broken. And Jesus broke it and said, “Take, eat, this is My body, which was broken for you.” And then, after dinner they always had the final cup. And when they were having this after dinner cup, Jesus said, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for the remission of sins.” To study the traditional Jewish Passover feast, even as it is observed by them today, is extremely enlightening and extremely significant to us as Christians, because you can see in its symbolism Jesus Christ so clearly. You can see the gospel so clearly. Their hearts surely should have been prepared by it for the receiving of Jesus Christ. It’s just woven into the traditions of the Passover feast. But to them, it was a memorial of God’s deliverance in Egypt. From the time the child said, “What makes this night different from all other nights?” and the father begins to explain the story of God’s delivering of their fathers out of the bondage of Egypt, with the various things around the table representing the bondage of Egypt and God’s deliverance. Now a whole new meaning is given to it by Jesus Christ, for it is now been fulfilled. And the bread now represents the broken body of Jesus, and the cup now represent His blood that was shed for our sins.

But, behold, [He said,] the hand of him that betrays me is with me on this table. And truly the Son of man goes, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom He is betrayed! ( Luk 22:21-22 )

The Bible tells us that Jesus knew who it was that was going to betray Him. Here He is just giving a solemn warning. I think that with this solemn warning, Judas still had a chance to back out if he wanted to.

And they began to inquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing. And there was also a strife among them, of which of them should be accounted the greatest ( Luk 22:23-24 ).

It’s sort of sad, sort of pathetic…here Jesus is filled with the knowledge that He is soon going to be suffering on the cross. And He is saying, “Look, I’ve really wanted to eat this supper with you before I suffer. Now this bread is My body; it’s going to be broken for you. This cup is My blood; it’s going to be shed for the remission of sins. This is going to be God’s new covenant.” And He is really now sort of obsessed with the suffering and the cross. And the disciples are arguing among themselves as to which one is going to be the greatest when He establishes the kingdom.

And so he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles ( Luk 22:25 )

And the word Gentiles in the New Testament is equivalent to heathen.

they exercise lordship over their subjects; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors ( Luk 22:25 ).

It hasn’t changed much. The government today declares that they are our benefactors. They take away a hundred and then give you back one, declaring them to be your benefactors.

But [He said,] it shall not be so among you: but he that is the greatest, let him be as the youngest; and he that is chief, as he that does serve. For whether is greater, he that sits at meat, or he that serves? Is not he that sits at meat? but I am one from among you as one who serves ( Luk 22:26-27 ).

Jesus is teaching His disciples that the true path to greatness is the path of serving. Jesus said, “I am among you as One who serves.” He also said in another place, “The servant is not greater than his lord.” Too many ministers have the wrong concept of the ministry. They fail to see the servanthood of the ministry. They get to the place where they almost expect people to do special favors for them because they are the minister. But in reality, as a minister, it means that I am a servant, a servant to all. Now the Gentiles loved these positions of authority. They loved to rule over people. They loved dominion over people’s lives. But Jesus said, “It shall not be among you. You need to learn to be servants.”

“And then He said unto them,”

You are those who have continued with me and my temptations. And I appoint you a kingdom, as my father has appointed unto me; that you may eat and drink at my table in the kingdom, and sit on the thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel ( Luk 22:28-30 ).

Now this He is saying to His twelve apostles; of course, excluding Judas Iscariot. But He is telling the apostles. And I think Paul actually is the one who got appointed to take the place of Judas, though the church drew straws and picked Mathias. That was the luck of the straws, but it would appear that it was God’s choice that Paul was the twelfth. But the Lord is saying, and this to me is something that is glorious to contemplate, that “you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and sit on the thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen your brothers ( Luk 22:31-32 ).

There’s something special about Simon. They say that he was large of physical stature. He was impulsive, lovable, just a big, strong, lovable guy. Because of his impulsiveness, getting into trouble, he would often speak up and say the first thing that came into his mind, right or wrong. And sometimes it was right and very good, and sometimes it was very wrong. But Jesus said of him, “Satan has desired to have you, that he might sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, that you faith fail not.” I believe that the prayer of Jesus was answered. I don’t believe that the problem of Peter was the problem of faith. Oh, he failed as a witness. He denied his Lord, but there was never a failure of his faith. He always believed in the Lord. “…and when you are converted, when you’re turned, strengthen your brothers.”

And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death ( Luk 22:33 ).

Yes, Peter, we know.

And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before you shall have thrice denied that you even know Me. And then he said unto them, When I sent you out ( Luk 22:34-35 )

Now, this is when He had sent them out into the ministry two by two.

I told you not to take a purse, not to take any script, not to take extra shoes, did you lack anything? And they said, Nothing, Lord. And he said unto them, But now, if you have a purse, take it, and likewise script: and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end ( Luk 22:35-37 ).

Jesus is saying, “Look, I sent you out before. I provided for you. But you’re going to be going out soon again. I’m not going to be there this time. And things are going to be different; it’s going to be tough. Before you were received, you’re going to be rejected, you’re going to be imprisoned, you’re going to be hailed before the courts, you’re going to have persecution. It’s going to be hard.”

And they said, Lord, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough ( Luk 22:38 ).

In other words, “You don’t really understand, but you will.” Jesus is not telling them to go out and make war against the world with swords, but He’s just indicating the difficulty of that ministry that they are going to face after He has been taken away from them.

Now, in verse Luk 22:37 He said, “Those things must be accomplished in Me, which the scriptures declared.” Jesus had absolute confidence in the prophecies, declaring, “They must be fulfilled.” You can have that same absolute confidence in the word of prophecy. You can know that it must be fulfilled. Now, many times we make a mistake when we guess how it is going to be fulfilled. And a lot of damage has been done to the subject of prophecy by men’s guesswork. To try to guess just who the anti-christ is, is a dangerous and futile bit of speculation. We know that there shall arise an anti-christ. We don’t know who he is. We know they’re going to rebuild their temple. We don’t know when or how. We know that the scriptures must be fulfilled. They will be fulfilled. And Jesus had that confidence. And the scripture said, Isa 53:1-12 , “He will be numbered with the transgressors.” “This,” He said, “has to be fulfilled.”

And so he came out of the upper room, and he went, as he was accustomed to going to the Mount of Olives; and his disciples followed him. And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that you enter not into temptation ( Luk 22:39-40 ).

Good prayer! Lord, help me not to enter into temptation.

And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast, and he kneeled down, and prayed, and he said, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. And when he rose up from prayer, and he was come to his disciples, he found them sleeping for sorrow, and he said unto them, Why sleep? rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation ( Luk 22:41-46 ).

The prayer of Jesus is significant because Jesus is talking about redemption for man. “If it is possible.” If what is possible? “If salvation for man is possible by anything other than the cross, let this cup pass from Me.” That’s basically what He was praying. That is why the cross of Jesus Christ offends many people today, because they say Christianity is too narrow. “All roads lead to God. It doesn’t matter who you believe in, it’s just important that you believe and have faith.” But the cross of Jesus Christ declares that there is only one way to God and that is through the cross. If it is possible, if it were possible that man could be saved by being religious, the cross would be unnecessary. If you could be saved by keeping the law, the cross would be unnecessary. If you could be saved by being good, the cross would be unnecessary. The cross declares that there is only one way by which a man can have forgiveness of sins and approach God, and that is through the death of Jesus Christ, and it declares a narrow one-way path. And that’s why it offends a lot of people. And so the cross, the Bible says, is an offense to the Jews. To the Greeks, it’s foolishness. But unto us who have been saved thereby, it is the power of God unto salvation. So Jesus is praying about the cross, really asking the Father for a substitute way, if it is possible. And the fact that He went to the cross declares it was not possible. There’s only one way by which man could be redeemed.

And while he was yet speaking to his disciples, behold a multitude, and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them, and he drew near to Jesus to kiss him. And Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss? When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said to him, Lord, shall we smite with a sword? ( Luk 22:47-49 )

The disciples had just awakened. Now there’s a crowd there and they’re getting ready to arrest Jesus. And the disciples are confused and they asked, “Lord, shall we smite with the sword?” He had just said, you know, “If you don’t have a sword, sell your garment and get one.”

And one of them ( Luk 22:50 )

We are told in another gospel which one it was. And, of course, we could guess, couldn’t we? Peter.

smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear ( Luk 22:50 ).

He can be lucky Peter was sleepy. Peter would have had halved him.

And Jesus answered and said, That’s enough. And he touched his ear, and healed him. Then Jesus said to the chief priests, and the captains of the temple, and the elders, which had come to him, Are you come out, as against a thief with swords and staves? When I was daily with you in the temple, you did not stretch forth your hand against me: but this is your hour, the power of darkness ( Luk 22:51-53 ).

Oh, what a horrible hour in the history of mankind, when the power of darkness took over!

And they took him, and led him, and brought him to the high priest’s house. And Peter followed afar off. And when they had kindled a fire in the middle of the hall, and they were sat down together, Peter sat down among them. But a certain maid beheld him as he sat by the fire, and earnestly looked upon him, and said, This man was also with him. And he denied him, saying, Woman, I don’t know him. And after a little while another saw him, and said, Thou art also of them. And Peter said, Man, I am not. And about the space of an hour after another one confidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this fellow was also with him; for he is a Galilean. And Peter said, Man, I don’t know what you’re talking about. And immediately, while he yet spoke, the cock crew. And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said unto him, Before the cock crows, you will deny me thrice. And Peter went out, and wept bitterly ( Luk 22:54-62 ).

“Lord, I’m ready to go to prison. I’m ready to die with You.” Now, do not think that Peter was insincere. I believe with all of my heart that Peter meant that exactly; that in his heart he was ready to go to prison, he was ready to die for Jesus. Even as when we make our promises to the Lord, there is great sincerity. However, so many times when the showdown comes, we find ourselves with Peter, denying even in simple things. How is it that he denied his Lord? First of all, I think that we observe that he was sleeping when he ought to be praying. I think that that’s one of the reasons behind his failure. As it is a reason behind our failure, so often we are sleeping instead of praying. Secondly, he sought to follow the Lord afar off. That again is a dangerous place to be–trying to just be a fringe Christian, follow the Lord from afar. Not to make that deep total commitment, but just, “Oh, yes, I think it’s great to go to church and that’s fine and people should, you know.” And then, he was warming himself at the enemies’ fire, another dangerous thing. The result is denial. Now, how did Jesus look at Peter? I do not think it was a… “Peter, how could you?” look. Nor do I think it was a… “I told you so!” look.

Someone came up to me this morning, and they had been in the fellowship hall where you get a close-up. And they noticed this spot on my head. And they said, “Tell your wife to be more gentle with you.” And I said, “Would you believe that I bumped it on a cupboard door in the kitchen?” I was messing around in the kitchen and I had left the upper cupboard door open slightly and, you know, wasn’t looking or paying attention and “whamo!” And here I saw that skin and flesh on the corner of the door. And my dear wife, when she saw my head, said, “I’ve told you to close those doors!” Oh, the sympathy I get.

I think that the look that Jesus gave Peter was, “Peter, I understand. I understand, Peter. I love you still, Peter.” I think it was a look of love; perhaps the deepest love that Peter had ever observed in one’s eyes. The understanding of Jesus. More or less, “That’s alright, Peter. I understand.” And that’s what broke Peter’s heart. The Bible said, “Don’t you realize that it is the goodness of God that brings man to repentance?” You know, if a person comes down really hard on you, your tendency is to defend yourself, to stiffen, to justify your actions. But when a person comes and puts their arm around you, and you say, “Ah,” they say, “I understand and I’m praying for you. And I love you brother.” Hey, that breaks you up. You know, you have no defenses against that. It melts you. And I think that’s exactly how Jesus looked at Peter. “Peter, I love you. I understand, Peter, that’s okay.”

“And Peter went out and he wept bitterly.” Failure! “God, must I always be a failure?” “No, Peter, not always. In a few days you’re going to receive power and you’re going to be the witness God wants you to be.” We’ll get to that in the twenty-fourth chapter.

And the men that held Jesus mocked him, and smote him. And when they had blindfolded him ( Luk 22:63-64 ),

A very cruel thing to do! Because the body is marvelously constructed so that when we can see a blow coming, there is that natural reflex action of the body of a movement with a blow that cushions the blow. The body is marvelously coordinated and we have marvelous reflex capacities. The quarterback is injured when he’s blindsided. You see these big three hundred pound guards coming in and throwing their shoulder in and knocking him to the ground, and another guy pouncing on him. And he bounces up and gets back into the huddle. When they get hurt is when he gets blindsided. He doesn’t see it coming, he isn’t able to roll with it, he isn’t able to relax and roll with it; that’s when you get hurt. You can jump off of a table and not hurt yourself, because you’re expecting it, you’re bracing for it and you’re bending your knees and you’re giving with it when you hit. And yet, you can step off of a curb and break your leg if you don’t realize the curb is there. Just that six inches can jar you so bad it can break an ankle, break a leg if you’re not expecting it, if you’re not coordinating for it. The same with a blow. If you’re blindfolded and you can’t see the blow coming, you’re not able to move, you’re not able to faint with it or move with it. And it hits you with its full force. And that hurts. And so, blindfolding Him and then beginning to hit Him, His face began to be disfigured, as these lumps began to rise. The eyes began to blacken and these huge lumps began to form from these blows. Isaiah tells us that His face was so beaten, so marred, that when they were through, you could not recognize Him as a human being. And he said, “We hid as it were our faces from Him.” To look at Him was such a shocking thing; we couldn’t stand to look. You just sort of cringed and closed your eyes and turned away. It’s too horrible. You just can’t look; you’re shocked.

“And they mocked Him,”

saying, Prophesy, who is it that hit you? And many other things blasphemously spake they against him ( Luk 22:64-65 ).

As He said, “This is your hour; it is the power of darkness.” And we see man at his worst.

And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and they led him into their council, saying, Art thou the Christ? ( Luk 22:66-67 )

You see, it was not lawful for them to assemble until daylight. And so they held Him. And as soon as it was day, they gathered into their chambers and they said, “Art Thou the Messiah? Tell us.”

And he said unto them, If I told you, you wouldn’t believe: And if I ask you, you’ll not answer me, or let me go. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. Then said they all, Are you then the Son of God? And he said unto them, You said it. And they said, What need we for any further witness? we ourselves have heard it out of his own mouth ( Luk 22:67-71 ). “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Luk 22:1-2. Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover. And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people.

Dastardly fear often drives men to the greatest crimes. He who is not brave enough to be master of his own spirit, and to follow the dictates of his own conscience, may do, before long, he little knows what. Because of the fear of the people, the chief priests and scribes were driven to compass the death of Christ by craft, and to bring him to his death by the cruel betrayal of Judas, one of his own apostles.

Luk 22:3-6. Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them. And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money. And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude.

Was it not a sad thing that the betrayer of Christ should be one of the twelve? Yet deeply trying as it must have been to the heart of Christ, there is something useful about even that horrible transaction. It says to all the professing Church of Christ, and it says to us who claim to be Christs followers, Do not think yourselves safe because you are in the visible church; do not imagine that even holding the highest office in the church can prevent you from committing the basest crime. Nay, for here is one of the twelve apostles, yet he betrays his Master. Sometimes, we have found this betrayal to be a source of comfort. I have myself desired, in receiving members into the church, to be very careful if possible only to receive good men and true; yet, though pastors and elders of the church may exercise the strictest watch, some of the worst of men will manage to get in. When that is the case, we say to ourselves, No new thing has happened to us, for such a sinner as this marred the Church from the very beginning. Here is Judas, when Christ himself is the Pastor, when the twelve apostles make up the main body of the Church, here is Judas, one of the twelve, ready to betray his Master for the paltry bribe of thirty pieces of silver, just the price of a slave. Yes, we might have been put out of heart in building up the Church of God if it had not been for this sad but truthful narrative concerning Judas and his betrayal of our Lord.

Luk 22:7-8. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.

Notice how carefully our Lord respected the ordinances of that dispensation so long as it lasted. The passover was an essential rite of the Jewish faith, and our Lord therefore duly observed it. Learn hence, dear brethren, to esteem very highly the ordinances of Gods house; let baptism and the Lords supper keep their proper places. You do them serious injury if you lift them out of their right places, and try to make saving ordinances of them; but, in avoiding that evil, do not fall into the opposite error of neglecting them. What Christ has ordained, it is for his people to maintain with care until he comes again; and if he kept up the passover even when, in himself, it was already on the point of being fulfilled, let us keep up the ordinances which he has enjoined upon us. If any of you have neglected either of them, let me remind you of his gracious words, Thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness, and This do ye, in remembrance of me.

Luk 22:9-13. And they said unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare? And he said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water; follow him into the house where he entereth in. And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples? And he shall show you a large upper room furnished; there make ready. And they went, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover.

Observe in this passage a singular blending of the human and the Divine; no mention is made of either as a matter of doctrine, but incidentally our Lords Divinity and humanity are most fully taught. Here is Christ so poor that he has not a room in which to celebrate the most necessary feast of his religion; he has made himself of no reputation, and he has no chamber which he can call his own; yet see the Godhead in him. He sends his messengers to a certain house, and tells them to say to the goodman of the house, Where is the guestchamber? It all turns out just as he said it would be, and he is welcomed to this mans best room, and to the furniture thereof. Jesus speaks here as did his Father when he said to Israel in the olden time, Every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. All the guestchambers in Jerusalem were really at Christs disposal; he had but to ask for them, and there they were all ready for him. Here we see the majesty of his Deity; but, inasmuch as he had no room that he could call his own, we see also the humility of his manhood.

Luk 22:14-16. And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.

This was to be his last meal with his disciples before he died, and he had looked forward to it with great desire. It was a most solemn occasion, and yet to him a most desirable one. May something of the Masters desire overflow into your hearts, beloved, whenever you are about to partake of the sacred feast which he instituted that night!

Luk 22:17-20. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

Do you see how this new memorial was blended with the passover, how it melted into that social meal which formed part of the paschal celebration? There was a cup, then bread, and then the cup after supper; so there was a gracious melting of the one dispensation into the other. We see our Lords wisdom in thus leading his children on from step to step, without a break, conducting them from one line of service to another and a still higher one.

Luk 22:21. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.

This was a sad and solemn fact; yet it has often been so since that night. The nearer to Christ, the farther from him, so has it sometimes happened since. He who was in some respects the highest in the College of the Apostles became the lowest in the ranks of the children of perdition.

Luk 22:22-23. And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed! And they began to inquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing.

Let us also pass that question round among ourselves.

When any turn from Zions way,

(Alas, what numbers do!)

Methinks I hear my Saviour say,

Wilt thou forsake me, too?

Ah, Lord, with such a heart as mine,

Unless thou hold me fast,

I feel I must, I shall decline,

And prove like them at last.

The help of men and angels joind Could never reach my case;

Nor can I hope relief to find But in thy boundless grace.

What anguish has that question stirrd,

If I will also go;

Yet, Lord, relying on thy Word,

I humbly answer, No.

God grant us more grace, that we may be held fast by the records of love!

Luk 22:24. And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest.

Let me read you these two verses together; they strike me as being very remarkable. Here are two questions: They began to enquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing, that is, betray their Lord. And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest. What poor creatures we are! How we are tossed with contrary winds! The new question comes up; and yet the old question, which ought to have been smothered by it, still remains there. It is possible that Luke is here alluding to some dispute which the apostles had previously had; and now the Lord, remembering that even in the ashes of contention lived the wonted fires of ambition, would quench the last sparks of the evil fire.

Luk 22:25. And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.

The people are compelled to use sweet terms to express a very bitter bondage; so they call their tyrants benefactors.

Luk 22:26-27. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth?

The guest, or the waiter at the table?

Luk 22:27-31. Is not he that sitteth at meat? but 1 am among you as he that serveth. Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations. And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:

As our Lord Jesus looked upon his eleven apostles, he felt that their time of greatest trial was fast approaching. Beyond anything they had ever endured before, they were now to be put into the devils sieve, and Satan would toss them to and fro, and seek, if possible, to destroy them.

Luk 22:32. But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not:

I have made thee, Simon, a special object of thy prayer. All the brotherhood will be tried, but for thee I have especially prayed, for thou, who seemest to be the strongest, art the weakest of them all, so I have prayed specially for thee, that thy faith fail not.

Luk 22:32. And when thou art converted,

When thou art restored,

Luk 22:32-39. Strengthen thy brethren. And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death. And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me. And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything? And they said, Nothing.

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip, and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough. And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible

Luk 22:1. , which is called) Therefore Luke takes it for granted, that the persons to whom he writes do not all know what the Jewish Passover was. So Joh 2:13. Add Joh 19:40; Joh 19:42.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Luk 22:1-6

SECTION SIX

BETRAYAL, ARREST, TRIALS,

CRUCIFIXION OF JESUS

Luke 22:1 to 23:56

1. THE TREACHERY OF JUDAS

Luk 22:1-6

1 Now the feast of unleavened bread drew high,-Parallel records are found in Mat 26:1-5 and Mar 14:1-2. Luke states “‘the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh”; Matthew and Mark record the fact that “after two days” the Passover cometh. Matthew does not speak of the “feast of unleavened bread,” but only of the “passover”; Mark speaks of “the feast of the passover” and “the unleavened bread.” The difference between Mark and Luke is that Luke makes the “feast of unleavened bread” “the passover,” while Mark speaks of “the feast of the passover” and “the unleavened bread.” In the Old Testament there were two feasts: the Passover, which came on the fourteenth day of the first month, and “the feast of unleavened bread,” which began immediately after the Feast of the Passover and continued seven days. (Lev 23:5-6; Num 28:16-17.) Josephus made a distinction between these two feasts; but in later times they were regarded as one feast. The Passover came on the fourteenth day of the first month; at this feast they were to put away all leaven. The feast of unleavened bread began on the fifteenth day of the first month; hence one followed the other and later one name was applied to both feasts; sometimes “the feast of unleavened bread” included the Passover and sometimes “the passover” included the feast of unleavened bread.

2 And the chief priests and the scribes-Luke and Mark mention “the chief priests and the scribes,” while Matthew mentions “the chief priests, and the elders of the people.” (Mat 26:3.) Matthew states that they “were gathered together” “unto the court of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas.” They took counsel “together that they might take Jesus by subtlety, and kill him.” (Mat 26:4.) Jesus had predicted that “the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and the third day be raised up.” (Luk 9:22.) Since, according to Matthew, they assembled at the palace of the high priest, it seems very probable that the Sanhedrin held a brief session to determine what should be done. They had purposed to put him to death, but “they feared the people.” Their problem was to put him to death without incurring the condemnation of the people, they did not want to put him to death on the feast day, for the popular feeling strongly supported Jesus, and the rulers feared a tumult of the people. They “sought”; that is, they were seeking the ways and means of destroying Jesus. “Sought” in the original is in the imperfect tense, “were seeking,” and means contemporaneously with the approach of the feast. At this stage they planned to “take Jesus by subtlety, and kill him.”

3 And Satan entered into Judas-Frequently “Satan” is called “the devil.” This statement is peculiar to Luke. As the rulers were seeking an opportunity to destroy Jesus, it soon presented itself; it comes from Judas, who was one of the chosen apostles. He is called “Judas Iscariot” to distinguish him from other men of that name. Some think that he was a native of Karioth, a small town in the tribe of Judah. “Satan” means “adversary,” the Old Testament name of the chief of fallen spirits; “devil” means “slanderer.” Both names are descriptive of his character and work. He is known by the name Beelzebub, “prince of the demons” (Mat 12:24), “the prince of the powers of the air” (Eph 2:2), and “the old serpent, he that is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world” (Rev 12:9). It seems that Judas had taken offense at the rebuke of Jesus (Joh 12:4-8), and he yielded to the temptation of the devil, who worked upon his avaricious disposition (Joh 12:4-8). Judas being one of the twelve aggravates his crime and fulfills the prophecy in Psa 41:9.

4 And he went away, and communed with the chief priests and captains,-Judas went off under the impulse of Satan and after the indignation over the rebuke of Jesus at the feast in Simon’s house to confer “with the chief priests and captains.” It is thought that between this and the preceding section the supper at Bethany (Mat 26:6-13; Mar 14:3-9; Joh 12:2-8) occurred; this is the supper at which Judas with others murmured against the use of the expensive ointment and Jesus’ rebuke to Judas and others. “The captains” were in charge of the temple. (Verse 52; Act 4:1.) It was the duty of the captains to maintain order in the temple; they were especially busy during the feasts when crowds would be present. Judas sought the captains and the chief priests to propose his plan for betraying Jesus secretly into their hands.

5 And they were glad,-The chief priests and captains were glad that one of the twelve had offered to betray Jesus into their hands. “Glad” with a hellish glee; they were pleased to know that one would assist them who could be of real help, but they must have had no respect for the traitor; they lost no time in completing the arrangements. They “covenanted to give him money”; Matthew says: “They weighed unto him thirty pieces of silver.” (Mat 26:15.) Thirty shekels was the price of a slave (Exo 21:32); some think that this was a fulfillment of Zec 11:12. The “thirty pieces” was equal to about fifteen dollars in our money. If this was all that was paid, it shows the contempt of the chief priests for Jesus as well as the sordid meanness of Judas who betrayed his Lord for so small a sum.

6 And he consented, and sought opportunity-Judas agreed to the price that the chief priests offered. There were five steps in the corrupt bargain: (1) Judas sought the chief priests (2) he offered to betray Jesus; (3) they gladly made a bargain with him for money; (4) Judas agreed to the bargain; (5) he sought to fulfill his wicked pledge. He knew, as did the chief priests, the popularity of Jesus, and he adroitly sought an occasion when the multitude could not he used to defend him against assault. Judas sought to keep his betrayal a secret, and the chief priests sought to do their dastardly deed “in the absence of the multitude”; they desired that a tumult of the people be avoided. It seems to. have been a part of the bargain to work “under cover” or secretly.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Here we have the record of final things before the Cross. The priests and the devil are seen in coalition.

As the end approached, the Master is seen with the shadow of the Cross on Him, desiring to eat the Passover with His loved ones. Even in this connection the disciples contend over which of them is to be accounted the greatest.

After the observance of the Passover and the institution of the new Feast, He declared to them, “Satan hath obtained you by asking” (margin). Notice carefully Satan’s demand, and that it was granted. This involves the truth that he could not touch the disciples without the divine permission. As at the moment Peter was the man in supreme danger, our Lord singled him out as He said, “I made supplication for thee.”

The new order was approaching. The Master was leaving His disciples in His bodily form. It was in this connection He said, “Let him sell his cloke and buy a sword.” The word “sword” arrested them, and they produced two, to which action the Master responded, “It is enough.” Notice carefully He did not say, “They are enough.” He was not referring to the swords, but to the principle He had laid down. Indeed, their eagerness to produce the swords evidenced their slowness to appreciate the spiritual nature of the conflict ahead of them. When presently Peter used one of the swords, the Lord sharply rebuked him.

Passing out, and into Gethsemane, He was followed by His disciples. The supreme revelation of our Lord in Gethsemane is of His complete submission to the will of God as He said, “Nevertheless, not My will, but Thine be done.”

Then followed the darkness of which our Lord said to His enemies, “This is your hour, and the power of darkness.” Through this hour He passes alone with the firm step of the Conqueror.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

22-24. THE PASSION AND THE RESURRECTION

We now enter upon the last main division of the Gospel (22-24.), containing the narratives of the Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension. The first of these three subjects falls into three parts:-The Preparation (22:1-38); the Passion (22:39-23:49); and the Burial (23:50-56). In the first of these parts we may distinguish the following sections:-The Approach of the Passover and the Malice of the Hierarchy (22:1, 2); the Treachery of Judas (3-6); the Preparation for the Paschal Supper (7-13); the Institution of the Eucharist (14-23); the Strife about Priority (24-34); the New Conditions (35-38). In this part of the narrative the particulars which are wholly or mainly peculiar to Lk. are those contained in vv. 8, 15, 24, 28-30, 35-38.

22:1-38. The Preparation for the Passion. Comp. Mat 26:1-29; Mar 14:1-25. For date see Hastings. D.B. i. p. 410.

1. . Was drawing nigh. Mt. and Mk. say more definitely . Keim calls attention to the fidelity of this introductory section. vv. 1-13 (v. p. 305. n.).

. The phrase is freq. in LXX (23:15, 34:18; Deu 16:16; 2Ch 8:13, etc.), but occurs nowhere else in N.T. Comp. 2:41 Lk. is fond of these Hebraistic circumlocutions: . . (ver. 7), (4:16; Act 13:14, Act 16:13), . . (Act 12:3, Act 20:6); (20:42; Act 1:20), (Act 7:42), etc. See small print on 4:16.

. Strictly speaking the Passover on Nisan 14th was distinct from the F. of Unleavened Bread, which last from the 15th to the 21st (Lev 23:5, Lev 23:6; Num 28:16, Num 28:17; 2Ch 30:15, 2Ch 30:21; Ezr 6:19, Ezr 6:22; Ezr_1 Esdr. 1:10-19; comp Mar 14:1). But they were so closely connected, that it was common to treat them as one festival. Not only Lk. as writing mainly for Gentiles does so, but Mt. (26:17); and Josephus goes beyond either in saying , (Ant. ii. 15, 1). Comp. (xiv. 2, 1). Elsewhere he distinguishes them (Ant. iii. 10, 5, ix. 13, 3).

2. . They continued seeking as to the method: comp. 19:47, 48, and for the see on 1:62. tells us that they held a meeting in the house of Caiaphas.

. Another of Lk.s favourite words. Here, 23:32, and eighteen times in the Acts it has the special meaning of remove, slay: so also 2Th 2:8, where the reading is doubtful. This meaning is common in LXX (Gen 4:15; Exo 2:14, Exo 2:15, Exo 2:21:29, etc.) and in class. Grk. Except Mat 2:16; 2Th 2:8, and Heb 10:9 (where see Wsctt.), it occurs only in Lk. With comp. 20:19, 19:48, 21:38.

3. . Comp. Joh 13:2, where this stage is represented as the devil making suggestions to Judas, while his entering and taking possession of the traitor is reserved for the moment before he left the upper room to carry out his treachery (13:27). See on 10:18 and comp. 4:13, to which this perhaps, looks back. Satan is renewing the attack. Neither Mt. nor Mk. mentions Satan here. But there is no hint that Judas is now like a demoniac, unable to control his own actions (Hahn). Judas opened the door to Satan. He did not resist him, and Satan did not flee from him. Jesus must suffer, but Judas need not become the traitor.

. All three give this distinctive sure (see on 6:16), and also the tragic fact that he was . Comp. 1:36, 6:15, 7:11, 8:2, 9:10, 10:39, 19:2, 29.

For ( B D L X) TR. has (A C P R ), a from commonly used in Acts (1:23, 4:36, 10:5, 32, 12:25). In Act 1:23 we have both verbs.

4. . Lk. alone mentions these officials. They are the leaders of the corps of Levitas, which kept guard in and about the temple. The full title is (ver. 52). See Edersh. The Temple, 119; Jos. B. J. vi. 5, 3. These officers would be consulted, because they had to take part in carrying out the arrest. The chief of them was called (Act 4:1, Act 4:5:24, Act 4:26). or the man of the temple mount or the man of the mount of the house. Comp. 2 Mal 3:4. Here and ver. 52 the plur. has no art.

D, a b c d e ff2i l q Syr-Cur. Aeth. omit , but all these, excepting D d, substitute . C P retain both, adding to .

. In 6:16 Judas is called but elsewhere , not , is the word used to describe his crime.

5. . It was wholly unexpected, and it simplified at matters enormously.

. Act 23:20; Joh 9:22; and quite classical. Mk. has . The of Mt. refers to the actual paying of the money. He alone states the amount,-thirty shekels.

6. . Either without a crowd or without tumult. Comp. Mat 26:5. Contrast , Act 24:18. In bibl. Grk. the poetical word occurs only here, ver. 35, and 2 Mac. 12:15. Very possibly the priests had intended to wait the feast was over before arresting Jesus. The offer of Judas induced them to make the attempt before the feast began.

Keim rightly rejects with decision the theory that the betrayal by Judas is not history, but a Christian fiction personifying in Judas the Jewish people. That Christians should invent so appalling a crime for an Apostle is quite beyond belief. The crime of Judas is in all four Gospels and in the Acts, is emphasized by Christs foreknowledge of it. Speculations as to other causes of it besides the craving for money are not very helpful: but the motives may easily have been complex.

The well-known difficulty as to the time of the Last Supper and of our Lords death cannot be conclusively solved with our present knowledge. But the difficulty is confined to the day of the month. All four accounts agree with the generally accepted belief that Jesus was crucified on a Friday. In the Synoptists this Friday seems to be the 15th Nisan. Jn. (13:1, 29, 18:28, 19:14, 31) clearly intimates that it was the 14th. and we shall probably do rightly in abiding by his statements and seeing whether the others can be brought into harmony with it. This is perhaps most easily done by ding. in accordance with Jewish reckoning, the evening of the 13th as the beginning of the 14th. All, therefore, that is said to have taken place on first day of unleavened bread may have taken place after sunset on what we should call 13th. It seems improbable that the priests and their officials would go to a Jesus at the very time when the whole nation was celebrating the Paschal meal. It is more easy to believe that Jesus celebrated Paschal meal before the usual time, viz. on the Jewish 14th, but before midnight and some twenty hours before the usual time for slaughtering the lambs, at which time He was dying or dead upon the cross.

Professor D. Chwolson of Petersburg has made a new attempt at a solution in a recently published essay, Das letzte Passamahl Christi und der Tag seines Todes; Mmoire de l Acadmie Impriale des Sciences, 7c Serie, tome 41. No. 1. A criticism in the Guardian, June 28, 1893, tends to show that it leaves the crucial question just where it was. A later contribution is that of G. M. Sermeria. Le Jour de la Mort de Jsus; Rev. bibl. I, 1896.

7. . . The day itself arrived, as distinct from was approaching (ver. 1). This arriving would take place at sunset on the 13th. See Schanz, ad loc. Mt. and Mk. have .

. This in no way proves that the 14th, according to our reckoning, is intended. The day on which the lambs had to be killed began at sunset on the 13th, and ended at sunset on the 14th; and the lambs were killed about 2:30-5:30 P.M. on the 14th in the Court of the Priests. Each head of the company sharing the lamb slew the animal, whose blood was caught in a bowl by a priest and poured at the foot of the altar of burnt-offering (Edersh. The Temple. p. 190). It was on the evening of the 13th that the houses were carefully searched for leaven, in silence, and with a light: comp. 1Co 5:7; Zep 1:12. The refers to legal necessity: it was so prescribed.

8. . Both Mt. and Mk. omit this preliminary order and begin with the disciples question: and Lk. alone gives the names of the two who were sent. As this does not harmonize with the theory that Lk. shows animus against Peter, we are told that Peter and John are named by Lk. as the representatives of the old Judaism. The treason of Judas might lead Jesus to select two of His most trusted Apostles.

10. The care with which Jesus avoids an open statement to all the disciples as to the place ordained for the supper may be explained in the same way. Until His hour is come Judas must be prevented from executing his project: and no miracle is wrought, where ordinary precautions suffice. In what follows Lk. and Mk. are almost identical: Mt. is more brief.

Evidently the is not the head of the household, but a servant or slave: the carrying of water was specially the work of slaves or of women (Deu 29:11; Jos 9:21-27; Gen 24:11; Joh 4:7). The head of the house is in the house (vv. 10, 11). The suggestion, therefore, that this is the master of the house drawing the water for making the bread, according to Custom, on the 13th of Nisan, falls to the ground. This incident gives no help in deciding between the 13th and the 14th., The water was more probably for washing the hands before the evening With comp. (7:37). As in the case of the colt (19:30), we are uncertain whether this is a case of supernatural knowledge, or of previous arrangement,, but in both cases prophetic prescience seems to be implied.

For amphoram aqu portans (Vulg.) bajulans bascellum (vascellam) aqu (d).

11. . Fut. for imperat. This is more common in prohibitions than in commands (4:12; Act 23:5; Mat 6:5). In the Decalogue. only the positive has the imperative: the negative commandments have with the fut. indic. Win. xliii. 5. c, p. 396.

. A pleonasm marking a late stage in the language, in which the meaning of has become indefinite: comp. (20:43), , , the Daily Journal, etc. The cogn. accus. ( , ) is different.

. like (19:31), this implies that man knows Jesus. and is perhaps in some degree a disciple.

. Not necessarily the same as the (ver. 12). It is possible that Jesus only asked for the large general room on the ground floor (comp. 2:7), but that the man gave Him the best room, reserved for more private uses. above the . It was a common thing for the inhabitants of Jerusalem to lend a room to pilgrims for the passover, the usual payment being the skin of the paschal lamb and the vessels used at the meal. Mt. alone gives the words , which perhaps explains why Jesus is having the paschal meal before the time. Neither here. nor at the supper, is any mention of a lamb: and perhaps there was none. The time for slaughtering had not yet come; and, as Jesus was excommunicated, it is not likely that the priests would have helped His disciples to observe the ritual respecting it. Moreover, there would hardly be time for all this and for the roasting of the lamb. The Last Supper was the inauguration of a new order rather than the completion of an old one; and its significance is enhanced if the central symbol of the old dispensation was absent, when He whom it symbolized was instituting the commemoration of that which the old symbol prefigured. It was on the last great day of the F. of Tabernacles, when the water from Siloam was probably not poured out beside the altar, that Jesus cried, If any man thirst, let him come unto Me, and drink (Joh 7:37); and it was when the great lamps were not lit in the Court of the Women, that He said. I am the Light of the World (Joh 8:12). From vv. 15-19 it appears that and refer to the eucharistic bread and wine.

12. . Anything raised above the ground ( or and or ) upper floor (Xen. Anab. v. 4, 29), upper room. Only here and Mar 14:15. The MSS. vary between , , , , , and . Most, including the best, have . That this room is identical with the . Act 1:13 is pure conjecture: the change of word is against it.

In both Passages Vulg. has cnaculum, for which Old Latin texts have here medianum (a), pede plano locum (b), superiorum locum (q), in superioribus locum (c e), and superiorem domum (d).

. Spread, furnished-with what, depends upon the context, which here suggests couches or cushions: comp. Act 9:34. Luther erroneously has gepflastert. Mk. adds , which some insert here.

13. Even as the correspondence was exact; comp. 19:32. The Evangelists seem to intimate that Christs knowledge was supernatural rather than the result of previous arrangement. But in any case the remaining ten, including Judas, were left in ignorance as to where the meal was to take place.

14-23. The Last Supper, with the Institution of the Eucharist as a new Passover: comp. Mat 26:20-29; Mar 14:17-25. The declaration that one of them is a traitor is placed by Mt. and MK. at the beginning of the section, by Lk. at the end (ver. 21): comp. Joh 13:21 where the wording of the declaration agrees with Mt. and Mk. Lk. seems to have used an independent source: comp. 1Co 11:24, 1Co 11:25.

14. Lk.s independence appears at once: nearly every word in the verse differs from Mt. and Mk.

. Mt. has : the practice of standing (Exo 17:11) had long been abandoned; first for sitting, and then for reclining. Mos servorum est, ut edant stantes; at nunc comendunt recumbentes, ut dignoscatur, exisse eos e servitute in libertatem, was the explanation given by the Rabbins. The choosing of the lamb ten days in advance had also been given up. Here, as elsewhere, implies a change of position (11:37, 14:10, 17:7; Joh 13:12, Joh 13:25, etc.). Lft. On a Fresh Revision of N.T. p. 80.

. This is the true reading. In some texts has been Inserted (A C P R) or substituted (LX) from Mt. and Mk. Ten to thirty was the number for a passover. Note that Lk. once more has , where others have or comp. 8:38, 51, 20:1, 22:56.

15. The whole of this verse and most of the next are peculiar to Lk. The combination of with is remarkable. The knowledge of the intensity of the suffering does not cancel the intensity of the desire.

. A Hebraism common in LXX. Comp. Act 5:28, Act 5:23:14; Joh 3:29; Mat 13:14, Mat 13:15:4; Jam 5:17; Gen 31:30; Exo 21:20; Deu 7:26, etc.

16. . After this present occasion. The must refer to (ver. 15), and shows that this need not imply a lamb. The Passover of which Christ will partake, after having fulfilled the type, is the Christian Eucharist, in which He joins with the faithful in the Kingdom of God on earth. Others suppose the reference to be to the spiritual banquet in the world to come. But if means the paschal lamb, in what sense could Jesus partake of that in the future? The Mishna itself contemplates the possibility of a passover without a lamb, and rules that unleavened bread is the only essential thing. With an influx of many thousands of pilgrims, to provide a lamb might be in some cases impossible.

17. . It was handed to Him: contrast , ver. 19 (schanz). It is usual to consider this as the first or second of the four cups that were handed round during the paschal meal; the eucharistic cup being identified with the third or fourth. But we are in doubt (1) as to what the paschal ritual was at this time; (2) as to the extent to which Jesus followed the paschal ritual in this highly exceptional celebration; (3) as to the text of this passage, especially as to whether Lk. records two cups or only one: so that identifications of this kind are very precarious. In any case, Lk. mentions a cup before the breaking of the bread, whether this be the eucharistic cup or not: and S. Paul twice mentions the cup first (1Co 10:16, 1Co 10:21), although in his account of the institution he follows the usual order (1Co 11:23). In the the cup is placed first (9:2: see Schaffs 3rd ed. PP. 58-61, 191).

. This seems to imply the eucharistic cup. All three have of the cup. Lk. repeats it of the bread. where Mt. and Mk. have .

In the Jewish ritual the person who presided began by asking a blessing on the feast; then blessed, drank, and passed the first cup. Then Psa_113. and 114. were sung and the bitter herbs eaten, followed by the second cup. After which the president explained the meaning of the feast: and some think that for this explanation of the old rite Jesus substituted the institution of the new one. After eating of the lamb and unleavened cakes came the thanksgiving for the meal and the blessing and drinking of the third cup. Lastly, the singing of Ps. 115.-118. followed by the fourth cup: and there as sometimes a fifth.

. Comp. Act 2:45; Jdg 5:30 Followed by , it expresses more strongly than the mid. (23:34; Mat 27:35) the fact of mutual distribution. In some texts (AD etc.) has been altered into the more usual dat. (Joh 19:24; Act 2:45). The distribution would be made by each drinking in turn, rather than by each pouring some into a cup of his own. The perhaps corresponds to the of Mt. and Mk. () .

18. . This at first sight appears to mean that Jesus did not partake of the cup. I say, Divide it among yourselves, because henceforth I shall not drink, etc. But this would be strange; for (1) according to Jewish practice it would be monstrous for the presiding person to abstain from partaking; (2) Jesus had just said that He earnestly desired to partake of this paschal meal; and (3) vv. 17, 18 seem to be parallel to 15, 16: He eats the paschal food, and then says that it is for the last time under these conditions; and He drinks of the paschal cup, and then says that it is for the last time under these conditions. There is nothing in any of the accounts to prevent us from supposing that Jesus drank before handing the cup to the others. The explains why they are to consume it among themselves, and not expect Him to take more than was ceremonially necessary; and the will then be quite exact. I have just drunk; but from this moment onwards I will drink no more: Comp. . It was possibly because seemed to mean that Jesus refused to drink that some texts (A C etc.) omitted the words.

. Some regard this as a reference to the Jewish benediction at the first cup: Blessed be Thou, O Lord our God, the King of the world, who hast created the fruit of the vine. It is quite uncertain that this form was in use at the time. For see Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 109, 184.

Latin variations in rendering are of interest: generatione vitis (Vulg.), fructu vine (a), creatura vine (d). gonimine vitis (). Comp. 3:7. Syr-Sin. omits of the vine. See Parch. Radb. on Mat 26:29, Migne cxx. 895.

19, 20. In connexion with what follows we have these points to consider. (1) Are the words from to Part of the original text? (2) If they are, is in ver. 20 the same as in ver. 17?

Assuming provisionally that the overwhelming external evidence of almost all MSS. and Versions in favour of the words in question is to be accepted, we may discuss the second point. As in the other case. neither view is free from Serious difficulty. If the cup of ver. 20 is not the same as that of ver. 17, then Lk. not only states that Jesus did not drink of the eucharistic cup (for excludes the partaking of any subsequent cup), but he also records that Jesus charged the Apostles to partake of the earlier cup, while he is silent as to any charge to partake of the eucharistic cup. So far as this report of the Institution goes, therefore, we are expressly told that the Celebrant refused the cup Himself, and we are not told that He handed it to the disciples. If, on the other hand, we identify the two cups, and regard vv. 17, 18 as the premature mention of what should have been given in one piece a ver. 20, mean its severance into two portions, and the insertion of the distribution of the bread between the two portions. are inexplicable. Of the two difficulties, this seems to be the greater, and it is better not to identify the two cups. It is some confirmation of this that in ver. 17 is without the article, a cup, while in ver. 20 it is the cup. But need not mean more than the cup just mentioned. In Mt. and Mk. has no article: and in all three has no article: so that is absence in ver. 17 and presence in ver. 20 is not of much weight in deciding between the two difficulties. The only way to avoid both these difficulties is to surrender the passage as an interpolation.

D a d ff2, i l omit from to , and Syr-Cur. omits ver. 20, while b e Syr-Cur. and Syr-Sin.place ver. 19 before ver. 17, an arrangement which has been elaborately advocated by Dean Blakesley (Prlectio in Scholis. Feb. 14, 1850). The possibility of the whole being an importation from 1Co 11:24, 1Co 11:25 may be admitted on the evidence; but the probability of ver. 19 either to (b e Syr-Cur.), or to the end (Syr-Sin.), having stood originally before ver. 17 is almost infinitesimal. In what way can we account for so simple an arrangement (harmonizing with Mt. and Mk.) becoming almost universally disturbed? These difficulties, added to the suspicious coincidence with 1Co 11:24f., and the Transcriptional evidence given above, leave no moral doubt (see Introd. 240) that the words in question were absent from the original text of Lc, notwithstanding the purely Western ancestry of the documents which omit them (WH, ii. App. p. 64). For the other view see Scrivener; also R. A. Hoffmann, Abendmahlsgedanken Jesu Christi, 1896, Pp. 5-25.

19. . The taking bread (or a loaf), breaking, giving thanks. and the declaration. This is My Body, are in all four accounts. But for here and 1Co 11:24 Mt. and Mk. have and both here and 1 Cor. is omitted. Mt. alone has with of the bread, and Lk. alone has of the cup (ver. 17); but perhaps this is not the eucharistic cup (see above).

. Not much is gained by pointing out that the would not be expressed in Aramaic. It must be understood; and the meaning of , and its relation to must be discussed. The cannot mean the act of breaking and eating, nor anything else excepting this bread. For the meaning of see ver. 20. where the is identified with , and comp. in Joh 8:12, Joh 8:9:5, Joh 8:14:6, Joh 8:15:1, Joh 8:5. In taking this bread they in some real sense take His Body. See Thirlwalls Charges, vol. i. Charges v. and vi.; vol. ii. Charge x and esp. p. 25, e d. Perowne, 1877; also Gould on Mar 14:22.

. Peculiar to this account: which is being given for your advantage. The which many texts add to in 1Co 11:24, is not genuine.

. The proposal to give these words a sacrificial meaning, and translate them Offer this, Sacrifice this, Offer this sacrifice, cannot be maintained. It has against it (1) the ordinary meaning of in N.T., in LXX, and in Greek literature generally; (2) the authority of all the Greek Fathers, 1 who knew their own language. knew the N.T. and the LXX, and understood the words as having the ordinary meaning, Perform this action; (3) the authority of the Early Liturgies. which do not use or facere when the bread and wine are offered. but or offerre, although the words of institution precede the oblation, and thus suggest or facere; (4) the authority of a large majority of commentators, ancient and modern, of the most various schools. who either make no comment, as if the ordinary meaning were too obvious to need stating: or give the ordinary meaning without mentioning any other as worthy of consideration; or expressly reject the sacrificial meaning; (5) the testimony of the Septuagint, in which the various and frequent Hebrew words which mean offer or Sacrifice are translated, not by , but by or or the like; (6) the fact that here and in 1Co 11:24 the writer might easily have made the sacrificial meaning clear by using or . He has not even suggested such a meaning, as he might have done by writing , i.e. . He has given as a translation of Christs words neither Offer this bread, nor Offer this, nor Do this bread (which might have suggested Offer this bread), but Do this thing. See Expositor, 3rd series, vii. 441; T. K. Abbott, Essays on the Original Texts of O. & N.T., Longmans, 1893, p. 110; A Reply to Mr. Supples and other Criticisms, Longmans, 1893; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, Rivingtons, 1888, p. 309.

. With a view to a calling to mind, a recollection, of Me. The word means more than a mere record or memorial, and is in harmony with the pres. imperat. : Continually do this in order to bring Me to mind, i.e. to remind yourselves and others of the redemption which I have won by My death. The eucharist is to be a continual calling to mind of Him who redeemed men from the bondage of sin, as the Passover was an annual calling to mind of redemption from the bondage of Egypt (Exo 12:24-27, Exo 12:13:8, Exo 12:14). In N.T. occurs only here, 1Co 11:24, 1Co 11:25, and Heb 10:3, where see Wsctt. Comp. 1Co 4:17; 2Ti 1:6. In LXX it occurs Lev 24:7; Num 10:10; Wisd. 16:6; the titles of Psa_37. and 69. T. K. Abbott has shown that a sacrificial meaning cannot be obtained from any more than from (Essays, etc. P 122; A Reply, etc. p. 34).

The corresponds to , rather than to , and indicates the purport of the new institution. For the possessive pronoun used objectively comp. Rom 11:31; 1Co 15:31, 1Co 16:17.

The omission of this charge, , …, in Mt and Mk. has attracted attention. DR. C. A. Briggs says, Jlicher (Zur Gesch. der Abendmahlsfeier in der llesten Kirche, in the Theolog. Abhandlungen Weizscker gewidment, 1892, s. 238 seq.) and Spitta (Urchristenthum, i. S. 238 seq.) are doubtless correct in their opinion that the earliest Christian tradition. represented by Mark and Matthew. knew nothing of an institution of the Lords Supper by Jesus on the night of His betrayal, as a sacrament to be observed continuously in the future. But they admit that Paul and Luke are sustained by the earliest Christian usage in representing it as a permanent institution. It is easier to suppose that the risen Lord in connection with these manifestations commanded the perpetual observance of the holy supper. Just as He gave the Apostles their commission to preach and baptize, and explained the mystery of His life and death (Luk 24:25-49). Paul and Luke would then combine the words of Jesus on two different occasions (The Messiah of the Gospels, T. & T. Clark, 1894, p. 123). See Schaefer, Das Herrenmahlnach Ursprung und Bedeutung, Gtersloh, 1897.

20. . The may mean the cup which all Christians know as part of the eucharist, or (if this passage be genuine) the cup mentioned before (ver. 17). Paul also has the article, Mt. and Mk. not. The other portions of this verse which are in 1 Cor., but not in Mt. and Mk., are . On the other hand, Paul and Lk. omit (Mt.) or (Mk.). The means that He took it, gave thanks, and gave it to them. For , which is opposed to (2Co 3:6; comp. Rom 11:27), see on 5:38.

. Mt. and Mk. have , which is closer to LXX of Exo 24:8, . Comp. (Zec 9:11). The testamentum sanguine suo obsignatum of Tertullian (Adv. Marcion. IV. 40) gives the sense fairly well. The ratification of a covenant was commonly associated with the shedding of blood; and what was written in blood was believed to be indelible. For see Wsctt. on Heb 9:15, Heb 9:16, with the additional note. p. 298.

. The is peculiar to this passage. Mk. has , Mt. , and Paul omits. The both here and in ver. 19 means the Apostles as representatives of all.

The part. is the olic form of the pres. part. pass. of = (Comp. Act 22:20); being poured out, like (ver. 19). In sense . agrees with , but in grammar with : in Mt. and Mk., both in sense and grammar. with . But see Win. lxvii. 3. p. 791.

21-23. The Declaration about the Traitor. Comp. Mat 26:21-25; Mar 14:18-21; Joh 13:21-30.

If Lk. places this incident in its proper place, Judas did partake of the eucharist. But the question cannot be decided. See Schanz, ad loc. pp. 509, 510.

21. . The expression is peculiar to Lk. The here indicates a transition; an expansion or change of subject. From the meaning of His death He passes to the manner of it. Others take it as a restriction of ; others again as marking a contrast between Christs conduct and that of the traitor. See on 6:24, 35, 10:11, 14. The verse may be understood literally, but probably means no more than that the traitor was sharing the same meal with Him: comp. Mat 26:23.

22. It is here that Lk. is almost verbatim the same as Mt. and Mk. Such solemn words would be likely to be remembered in one and the same form. Keim draws attention to their conspicuous originality. They are not adaptations of anything in O.T., although Oba 1:7 and Mic 7:6 might appropriately have been used (v. p. 309). He regards Lk. as most exact. In any case , for which Mt. and Mk. have , is to be noticed. It is probably used in the LXX sense of depart, die: comp. Psa 78:39.

. The because explains how such an amazing thing has come to pass. Failure to see the meaning of ( B D L T, Sah. Boh.) has caused the substitution in many texts of (A X b c e f ff2. Vulg. Syr-Sin. Arm. Aeth.), while others omit (a d, Orig.).

. It is part of the Divine decree that the death of the Christ should be accompanied by betrayal: Mt. and Mk. have : comp. Act 2:23. Excepting Rom 1:4; Heb 4:7, is peculiar to Lk. (Act 2:23, Act 2:10:42, Act 2:11:29, Act 2:17:26, Act 2:31).

. Mt and Mk. have ; but Lk. is fond of (ver. 21). Although God knows from all eternity that Judas is the betrayer of the Christ. yet this does not destroy the freedom or responsibility of Judas. The marks him off as an alien: comp. Joh 13:26, Joh 13:27, Joh 13:30. Mt. and Mk. add .

23. Here is the one word which is common to all three. Mt. and Mk. say that they each asked Jesus (and Mt. adds that Judas in particular asked) Is it I ? No one seems to have suspected Judas; and perhaps Christs was heard by Judas alone. Jesus may have had Judas next to Him on one side, S. John being on the other. For of doing evil comp. Joh 3:20, Joh 3:21; Rom 7:19; Thuc. iv. 89. 2.

24-30. The Strife as to Precedence.

Disputes of this kind had taken place before, and the frequent records of them are among the abundant proofs of the candour of the Evangelists. But a comparison of the records seems to indicate that the tradition respecting them had become somewhat confused; and it is possible that what was said on one occasion has in part been transferred to another. Comp. Mat 18:1-5; Mar 9:33-37; Luk 9:46-48; Joh 13:14: also Mat 20:24-28; Mar 10:41-45; Luk 22:24-27. Of these last three passages, Mt. and Mk. clearly refer to the same incident, which took place considerably before the Last Supper. If Lk. merely knew what Jesus said on that occasion, but did not know the occasion, he would hardly have selected the Last Supper as a suitable place for the incident. He probably had good reason for believing that a dispute of this kind took place at the supper. Jesus may have repeated some of what He had said on a similar present occasion. But there is no note of time or sequence in ver. 24, where simply indicates that something of a different character () from what precedes also () took place: and it is scarcely credible that this strife occured after Jesus had washed their feet and instituted the eucharist. More probably the dispute arose respecting the places at the paschal meal-who was to be nearest to the Master; and the feet-washing was a symbolical rebuke to this contention. Here ver. 27 appears to have direct reference to His having washed their feet.

24. . But there arose also: see small print on 3:9. The perhaps contrasts this discussion with that as to which of them was the traitor. But we are not sure that the one discussion came closely after the other.

. Contentiousness. Here only in N.T., but quite classical. It is sometimes coupled with (4 Mac. 1:26; M. Antonin. iii. 4), and easily comes to mean contention (2 Mal 4:4; Jos. Ant. vii. 8. 4).

. Is accounted, allowed to be-omnium suffragiis; implying who ought to be so accounted. See Lft. on Gal 2:6.

. Not quite equivalent to the superlative, which would have indicated several gradations from lowest to highest. The comparative implies only two,-a superior and all the rest as equals: 9:46; Mar 9:34. Win. 35:4, p. 305.

25. Almost verbatim as the account of the earlier strife provoked by James and John (Mat 20:25; Mar 10:42). For comp. Rom 14:9; 2Co 1:24; 1Ti 6:15. Mt. and Mk. use the compounds, . and .

Peculiar to Lk. The phrase (Hdt. viii. 85, 4: comp. Thuc. i. 129. 2; Est 2:23, Est 6:1) is not parallel. There persons who have done special service to the sovereign are formally credited with it. Here it is the sovereign who receives the title of Benefactor (i.e. of his country, or of mankind) as a perpetual epithet; e.g. some of the Greek kings of Egypt. Comp. , Pater patri, Servus servorum. For less formal instances of the title see McClellan and Wetstein.

It is better to take as middle: claim the title, hunc titulum sibi vindicant (Beng.). This is what the disciples were doing.

26. . He who is really above the rest. True greatness involves service to others: noblesse oblige. For , let him prove himself to be, comp. 10:36, 12:40, 16:11, 19:17. We have an echo of this 1Pe 5:3. For as comp. Act 5:6, Act 5:10: (Euthym.), the lowest in rank.

The Latin Versions have junior (e f Vulg.), minor (a c ff2 i), minus (d, D), juvenis (r), adulescentior (b q).

For we have qui prest (a b f q), qui princeps est (r). qui primes est (l) qui prsens est (e), qui ducatum agit (d), qui prcessor est (Vulg.). In N.T. means lead only in pres. part., and most often in Lk. It is used of any leader. ecclesiasticat of civil (Act 7:10, Act 7:14:12. Act 7:15:22; Mat 2:6; Heb 13:7, Heb 13:17, Heb 13:24). In LXX it is freq.

27. . This need not be confined to the feet-washing (Euthym. De W. Godet, Hahn), nor to the fact that the person who presided at the paschal meal served the others (Hofm.): and the reference to either is uncertain. The whole of Christs ministry was one of service to His disciples (Nsg. Weiss). For , see on 8:7.

Strauss, Keim, and others regard the feet-washing recorded in Jn. as a mere fictitious illustration of Luk 12:37 and 22:27 (L. J. 86, p. 542, ed. 1864; Jes. of Naz. v. p. 341 n).

28-30. Nearly the whole of this is peculiar to Lk. But comp. Mat 19:28. Having rebuked them for raising the question of precedence among themselves, Jesus shows them wherein the privileges which they all enjoy consist, viz. in their standing by Him in His service to others. He gives preference to none.

28. . The idea of persistent loyalty is enforced by the compound verb, by the perfect tense, and by the preposition (Lft. on Gal 2:5): who have perseveringly remained with Me and continue to do so (1:22; Heb 1:11; 2Pe 3:4).

. The trials to which He had been subjected during His ministry, and especially the latter portion of it. These, even to Him, were temptations to abandon His work. Comp. (4:13).

. And I on My part, in return for your loyalty, hereby appoint to you dominion, even as My Father appointed to Me dominion. As in 1:33, is here dominion rather than a kingdom: comp. 23:42; Rev 17:12; 1Th 2:12. See on 11:2. Comp. (Jos. Ant. xiii. 16. 1).

A connexion with (ver. 20) is doubtful. The is with all the faithful; this seems to be confined to the Apostles. The verb does not necessarily mean covenant to give or assign assign by bequest, which would not fit here, but may be used of any formal arrangement or disposition (Hdt. i. 194, 6; Xen. Anab. vii. 3, 10; Mem. i. 6, 13; Cyr. v. 2. 7, 9).

30. . This is the purpose of,conferring regal power upon them. Some make from to a parenthesis and render, I also (even as My Father appointed to Me dominion) appoint to you that ye may eat and drink, etc. So Theophyl. Nsg. Hahn. But belongs to both and . So Buthym. De W. Mey. Weiss, Schanz, Godet.

. The Jews commonly regarded the Messianic Kingdom as a banquet: Comp. 13:29, 14:15. Cibus potusque, ille de quo alias dicitur. Beati qui esuriunt et sitiunt justitiam (Bede).

. The meaning of the promise is parallel to what precedes. As they have shared the trials, so they shall share the joy; and as they have proclaimed the Kingdom to Israel, so they shall exercise royal power over Israel, judging them according as they have accepted or rejected what was proclaimed. Comp. 1Co 6:2, 1Co 6:3; Rev 20:4.

As to the verb, the readings are very various: (A F K M S U V X ), (H), (D). But the choice lies between (B* T D), which must depend upon , and ( A B3 G L Q), which rather gives this as an independent promise. In Mat 19:28 is right, and may have been transferred to this passage, as has been in some authorities ( D Xm a b c d f1 q) with .

31-34. The Prediction of Peters Denial.

Both the prediction and the fulfilment are given in all four Gospels. A comparison of them shows that Lk. and Jn. are quite independent of one an other and of the other two. We have three separate narratives. Lk. agrees with Jn. (13:36-38) in placing the prediction in the supper-room. Mt. (26:30-35) and Mk. (14:26-30) place it on the way from the room to Gethsemane. It is not likely that it was repeated; and the arrangement of Lk and Jn. is to be preferred. But some make three predictions; two in the room (Lk. being different from Jn.), and one during the walk to Gethsemane. Godet regards a repetition of such a prophecy impossible de supposer (2. p. 476).

31. Lk. makes no break in Christs words, but it is possible that a remark of Peters, such as Jn. records, is omitted. The apparent want of connexion between vv. 30 and 31 has led to the insertion ( A D X, Latt.), as if to mark the beginning of a new subject. B L T, Sah. Boh. Syr-Sin. omit. Bede suggests by way of connexion, Ne gloriarentur undecim apostoli, suisve viribus tribuerent, quod soli pne inter tot millia Judorum dicerentur in tentationibus permansisse cum Domino, ostendit et eos si non juvantis se Domini assent opitulatione protecti, eadem procella cum cteris potuisse conteri.

. The repetition of the name is impressive: see on 10:41. Contrast ver. 34. The whole of this address (31, 32) is peculiar to Lk. It tends to mitigate Peters guilt, by showing how sorely he was tried. Lk. ever spares the Twelve. See pp. 146,, 172, 511,.

Satan obtained you by asking (RV. marg.); procured your being surrendered to him, as in the case of Job (1:12, 2:6): exoravit vos. Neither postulavit (Tert. Cypr.), nor qusivit (c), nor expetivit (f Vulg.) is adequate. The aorist of the compound verb necessarily implies success in the petition. In class. Grk. the mid. would generally have a good sense: obtained your release by entreaty. See instances in Wetst. and Field. As in 10:18 Jesus is here communicating a portion of His divine knowledge. See notes there and on 8:12. Note the plur. , which covers both and . Satan was allowed to try them all (Mat 26:31, Mat 26:56; Mar 14:27, Mar 14:50); Jud non contentus (Beng.). Comp. Apost. Const, vi. 5, 4: Test. XII. Patr. Benj. iii.

. See on 1:74: in order to sift. Neither verb nor substantive (, a sieve, winnowing riddle) is classical. They are probably colloquial for and which survives in modern Greek. In Amo 9:9 we have . See Suicer, s.v.

Ut ventilet (e f ff2 i l q r, Ambr.), ut vexaret (Cypr. Aug.). ut cerneret (d, Tert. Hil.), ad cernendum (c), ut cribraret (Vulg.).

32. . See on 5:12. The and the aor. are in marked contrast to Satan and his request. We may regard and as contemporaneous.

As being the leader on whom so much depended, and as being in special need of help, as his fall proved. Jesus prayed for all (Joh 17:2, Joh 17:9, Joh 17:15, Joh 17:17). The interpolator of Ignatius understands this as a prayer for all: (Smyrn. 7.) For after comp. 9:40, 21:36.

. Fail not utterly, once for all. Defectt in Petro ad tempus: at labefactavit, non extinxit (Grotius).

. Answering to . Christ has helped him: he must do what he can for others.

. When once thou hast turned again, stablish (RV.). It is unnatural to take with (Mey. Weiss); and it is a mistake to make a sort of Hebraism (Psa 85:7, ), meaning in turn (Grot. Maldon. Beng.), a use which perhaps does not occur in N.T. See Schanz. On the other hand, when thou art converted is too strong. It means turning again after a temporary aberration. Yet it is not turning to the brethren, but turning from the fault that is meant. It is not likely that the transitive sense is meant: convert thy brethren and strengthen them. comp. 1:16, 17; Jam 5:19, and contrast Act 3:19, 28:27; Mat 13:15; Mar 4:12. See Expos. Times, Oct 1899, p. 6.

This metaphorical sense of is not classical: comp. Act 18:23; Rom 1:11, Rom 1:16:25; Jam 5:8, etc. The form for is late.

Some Latin texts add. without any Greek authority, et rogate nen iniretis in temptationem (a b c e ff2 i q).

33. . First. with enthusiastic emphasis: With Thee I am ready. The impulsive reply is thoroughly characteristic. As at the feet-washing (Joh 13:6, Joh 13:8) he has more confidence in his own feelings than in Christs word; but this version of the utterance is less boastful than that in Mat 26:33 and Mar 14:29.

34. , . For the first and last time in the Gospels Jesus addresses him by the significant name which He had given him. Rock-like strength is not to be found in self-confidence, but in humble trust in Him. Mt. and Mk. have : Jn. . . The solemn earnestness with which this definite prediction was uttered made a deep impression upon all.

. Mt. his . Mk. has both. The new day began after sunset. See 4:40, 13, and 23:38 for similar cases in which Mt. and Lk. have different parts of an expression, of which Mk. has the whole.

. The third of the four Roman watches was called , gallicinium (Mar 13:35; Apost. Const. viii. 34, 1; Strabo, vii. 35; Geopon. 1153). The expression here is equivalent to Before this night is past. Mk. alone mentions the double cock-crowing, and the fact that Peter, so far from being silenced, kept on protesting with increased vehemence.

. This is the true reading ( B L M Q X T), The is in all four Gospels: the in Lk. alone.

35-38. The New Conditions; the Saying about the Sword. The opening words mark the beginning of a new subject; and there is no indication of any connexion with what precedes. It is one more proof of His care for them. Precautions and equipments, which would have hindered them in more peaceful times, have become necessary now. What He formerly forbade, He now enjoins. Dominus non edem vivendi regul persecutionis quam pacis tempore discipulas informat (Bede).

35. . The wording suggests a direct reference to 10:4. which is addressed to the Seventy. In 9:3, where similar directions are given to the Twelve, the wording is different. In the source which Lk. is here using the words given in 10:4 would seem to have been addressed to the Apostles. There may have been some confusion in the tradition respecting two similar incidents, or in the use which Lk. makes of it.

This use of occurs here only in N.T. Comp. Jos. Ant. ii.2, 1. The pass. is thus used 15:14; Rom 3:23; Heb 11:37.

36. . This is ambiguous. It may look back to : He that hath no purse, let him sell his garment and buy a sword (Cov. Gen. Rhem. RV.). Or it may anticipate : He that path no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one (Tyn. Cran. AV.). The former is far the more probable. Only he who has no money or wallet, would sell the most necessary of garments (, 6:29), to buy anything. But even the is less indispensable than a sword; so dangerous are their surroundings. For henceforth the question with all those who continue in the land will not be whether they possess anything or not, but whether they can exist and preserve their lives (Cyril Adex. Syr. Com. ad loc., Payne Smith. p. 680) Christ implies that His Apostles will have to rely upon their own resources and to confront deadly hostility. Comp. Joh 15:18-21. Christ does no mmean that they are to repel force by force; still less that they are to use force in spreading the Gospel. But in a figure likely to be remembered He warns them of the changed circumstances for which they must now be prepared.

37. . The introduces the explanation of the change from to .

. Comp. 20:17; 2Co 4:13, More often we have : 18:31, 21:22; Act 13:29; Rev 20:12, Rev 22:19.

The before (G , Vulg. Arm.) is spurious. It is the kind of insertion which versions are apt to make for the sake of completeness: must yet be fulfilled. For see on 4:43 and 9:22.

. Therefore the disciples must expect no better treatment than the Master receives (Mat 10:24; Joh 15:20, Joh 13:16: see on 6:40).

. The is part of the quotation: (Isa 53:12): even with the transgressors is incorrect. In AV. is translated in five different ways: transgressor (Mar 15:28); wicked (Act 2:23; 2Th 2:8), without law (1Co 9:21), lawless (1Ti 1:9), unlawful (2Pe 2:8).

. An extension of the argument: and what is more. This fulfilment is not only necessary,-it is reaching its conclusion, is having an end (Mar 3:26). The phrase is used of oracles and predictions being accomplished. See Field, Ot. Norvic. iii., and comp. (Joh 19:30).

Om. D, a d e ff2 i l Syr-Sin. Failure to see the point of the would cause the omission.

This form of expression is found in no other Gospel; but the plur. , occurs 24:19, 27 and is freq. in Acts (1:3, 18:25, 23:11, 15, 24:10, 22, 28:15, 31: in 8:12, 19:8, 28:23 the is probably spurious). Some text (A X etc.) have here for : ea qu sunt de me (Vulg.); ea qu de me scribta sunt (Cod. Brix.). But ( B D L Q) has been altered to the more usual expression. perhaps to avoid the possible combination of . There is no need to understand . Much which concerned the Christ had never been written.

38. . Chrysostom has supposed that these were two knives, prepared for the slaughtering (ver. 8) or carving of the paschal lamb. In itself this is not improbable: but nowhere else in N.T. does mean a knife. Assuming that swords are meant, these weapons may have been provided against robbers on the journey to Jerusalem, or against attack in the city. Peter had one of them, and may have been the speaker here. It is one more instance of the Apostles want of insight, and of the Evangelistbs candour: comp. Mar 8:17. Schleiermacher points out that the obscurity of the passage is evidence of its genuineiess and originality (p. 299, Eng. tr.).

. Satis est (c ff2 q Vulg.), sat est (a i), sufficit (b d f l r), which law perhaps represents (D). The reply is probably the equivalent for a Hebrew formula for dismissing the subject (Deu 3:26), not with impatience, but with satiety or sorrow. Comp. [] (1 Mac. 2:33). But even if it means that two swords are a sufficient quantity (They are enough for you, SyrSin.), it intimates that the subject is dismissed. Bede is hardly right in his view: duo gladii sufficiunt ad testimonium sponte passi salvatoris, i.e. to prove that he could have resisted. had He pleased. If the words apply to the swords, they are spoken with a sad irony ( , Cyril Alex.). as meaning, not that the two weapons will be sufficient for the protection of the company, but that none at all are required: they have grievously misunderstood Him.1 Es gilt nith: mehr mit dem leiblichen Schwerdt fechten, sondern as gilt hinfort leiden um des Evangelii willen und Kreuz tragen: denn man kann wider den Teufel nicht mit Eisten fechten; darum ist Noth Alles dran zu setzen, und nur das geistliche Schwerdt, das Wort Gottes, zu fassen (Luth.).

22:39-23:49. The Passion. In this part of the narrative of the Passion proper, i.e. from the Agony to the Death, the particulars which are wholly or mainly peculiar to Lk. are 22:51, 23:6-12, 27-32 [34]. 40-43, 46: and these particulars are among the most precious details in the history of the Passion.

39-46. The Agony in the Garden. With regard to the omission of nearly the whole of the last discourses (Jn. 14-17.) Godet remarks that the oral tradition was not a suitable vehicle for transmitting such things: ctaient den trsors quun cur dlite Pouvait seul garder et reproduire. On the other hand Jn. omits the whole of this scene, although there is a clear reference to it 18:11. Lk.s narrative once more differs considerably from that of Mt. (26:30-41) and of Mk. (14:26-38), which are almost verbatim the same; and it is very much shorter. It is in vv. 39, 42, 46 that Lk. comes most closely to the other two.

39. . From the house.

Peculiar to Lk. (1:9, 2:42): Comp. (Joh 18:2). It was no longer necessary to keep Judas ignorant of His movements; so He follows His usual practice. Lk. omits the which records the chanting of the second part of the Hallel. Jn. alone mentions the passing of the gloomy ravine of the Kidron (18:1).

40. . Lk. and Jn. call it the place, Mt. and Mk. and add the name = oil-press. The traditional Gethsemane is a questionable site. Both Robinson and Thomson would place the garden higher up the Mount of Olives. The tradition is continuous from the age of Constantine, but cannot be traced to any earlier source. Stanley inclines to accept it as correct (Sin & Pal. p. 455). See D. B.2 art. Gethsemane.

. This first command to pray (comp. ver. 46) is recorded by Lk. alone. It is given to the eleven; the second is to the chosen three. whom Lk. does not notice particularly.

41. . Avulsus est (Vulg.). He was drawn away by the violence of His emotion. which was too strong to tolerate the sympathy of even the closest friends: comp. Act 21:1. It seems to be too strong a word to use of mere separation: but comp. 2 Mac. 12:10, 17; 4 Mac. 13:18; Isa 28:9.

. Mt. and Mk. have Comp. (Gen 21:16): (Hom. Il. xxiii. 529). The acc. in Joh 6:19 is not quite parallel.

. Lk. alone mentions this. Standing was the more common attitude (18:11; Mat 6:5; Mar 11:25; 1Sa 1:26): but on occasions of special earnestness or humiliation kneeling was more natural (1Ki 8:54; Ezr 9:5; Dan 6:10). In N. T. kneeling is the only attitude mentioned; perhaps in imitation of Christs example here: Act 7:60, Act 7:9:40, Act 7:20:36, Act 7:21:5; Eph 3:14. The phrase is not classical, but comp. genua ponere. See on 3:21: the imperf. implies continued prayer.

42. , , . We might have expected (comp. , 5:12), because of in the next sentence. But this is one of the passages which tend to show that in N.T. indicates mere choice, while implies deliberate selection (Mat 1:19). The latter is far less common in N.T. In LXX there is not much difference.

This is the only passage in which the Attic for is well supported. Such forms are found in some texts Mat 27:4; Joh 11:40; Act 16:31, Act 24:8.

In D a c d e ff2 precedes , being omitted. Several of the same authorities have a similar inversion 9:62.

The reading (A Q X ) turns the prayer into an unfinished pleading: Father, if Thou be willing to remove this cup from Me.-Comp. Exo 32:32. B D T Versions, and Orig. support . Vulg. transfer calicem istum; Tert. transfer poculum istud; but he may be quoting Mar 14:36 (De Orat. 4.). Boh. Sah. Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. have let this cup pass.

. This cup and the address Father are in all three accounts. In O.T. the metaphor of cup for a persons fortune, whether good or bad, is very common (Psa 11:6, Psa 16:5, Psa 23:5, Psa 75:8, etc.). In N.T. specially of the sufferings of Christ (Mar 14:36; Joh 18:11; Mat 20:22, Mat 20:23; Mar 10:38, Mar 10:39): comp. Rev 14:10, Rev 16:19, Rev 18:6. In class. Grk. would mean to place a cup at the side of a person. put it on the table near him (Hdt. 1:119, 5, 133, 3; Plat. Rep. 1. p. 354). But in Plutarch is used in the sense of lay aside, remove (Camill. 41.). Elsewhere in N.T. it is used of leading astray (Heb 13:9; Jud 1:12).

. Either or might have been used of the Fathers will. but less suitably of Christs (Eph 1:11). The is peculiar to Lk. It recalls (Mat 6:10), which Lk. omits (11:2). For comp. 10:11, 14, 20.

43, 44. As in the case of vv. 19, 20, we have to consider whether this passage is part of the original text. For be evidence see be additional note at the end of ch. 23. One thing is certain. It would be impossible to regard these verses as a product of the inventiveness of the scribes. They can only be a fragment from the traditions, written or oral, which were, for a time at least, locally current beside the canonical Gospels, and which doubtless included matter of every degree of authenticity and intrinsic value. These verses and the first sentence of 22:34 may be safely called the most precious among the remains of this evangelic tradition which were rescued from oblivion by the scribes of the second century (WH. 2. App. p. 67). It matters little whether Lk. included them in his narrative, so long as their authenticity as evangelic tradition is acknowledged. In this respect the passage is like that respecting the Woman taken in Adultery.

43. . Was visible to the bodily eye is obviously meant. It is against the context and the use of the expression in other places to suppose that internal perception of an invisible spiritual presence is intended. Lk. is fond of the expression (1:11, 9:31, 24:34; Act 2:3, Act 2:7:2, Act 2:26, Act 2:30, Act 2:35, Act 2:9:17, Act 2:13:31, Act 2:16:9, Act 2:26:16; comp. 1Co 15:5-8), which Mt. and Mk. use once each (17:3. 9:4), and Jn. thrice (Rev 11:19, Rev 11:12:1, Rev 11:3), but not in his Gospel. The would not have been added if the presence of the Angel was invisible.

. Elsewhere in N.T. only Act 9:19, of bodily strengthening: comp. 2Sa 22:40; Ecclus. 50:4; and this may well be the meaning here, but without excluding the strengthening of soul and spirit. Either would tend to produce the other; and the sight of His Fathers messenger would strengthen both body and spirit. Commentators have speculated as to what the Angel said (see Corn. Lap. ad l.). There is nothing to indicate that he spoke. Hobart remarks of that, outside the LXX its use in the transitive sense, to strengthen, is confined to Hippocrates and St. Luke (p. 80). In Act 9:19 the true reading is probably .1

. Here only in N.T. Field contends that fear is the radical notion of the word. The passages in which it occurs in LXX confirm this view: 2 Mal 3:14, Mal 3:16, Mal 3:15:19; comp. Esth. 15:8 [5:1]; Dan 1:10; Dan_2 Mac. 3:21. It is frequently coupled with such words as , , , etc. For examples see Field, Ot. Norv. 3. p. 56. It is, therefore, an agony of fear that is apparently to be understood. Mk. has with , Mt. with .-. More extendedly, and hence more persistently. This seems to be parallel to the (Mt.) and (Mk.). Heb. v. 7 probably refers specially to this. Comp. of prayer, and of worship and service. Act 12:5, Act 26:7.

44. . Even if ( V X, Vulg. Boh.) be right, the words do not necessarily mean more than that the drops of sweat in some way resembled drops of blood, e.g. by their size and frequency. But it is not likely that no more than this is intended, or that the words are a metaphorical expression. like our tears of blood. That Justin in referring to the statement omits – (Try. 103.)-does not prove that he did not understand actual blood to be meant. Rather it shows that he considered that , clots, sufficiently expressed drops of blood.2

The expression bloody sweat is probably a correct interpretation: and the possibility of blood exuding through the pores seems to be established by examples. Comp. Arist. Hist. Anim. 3:19. De Mezeray states of Charles 9. of France that During the last two weeks of his life (May 1574) his constitution made strange efforts blood gushed from all the outlets of his body, even from the pores of his skin; so that on, one occasion he was found bathed in a bloody sweat. See W. Stroud, The Physical Cause the Death of Christ, 1847, pp. 85-88, 379-389. Schanz cites Lnarz, De sudore sanguinis, Bonn, 1850, and Langen, Die letzten Lebenstage, p. 214. Why is added, if no accompanied the ? It would be visible in the moonlight, when Jesus returned to the disciples: ubi quidem non solis oculis, sed quasi membris omnibus flevisse videtur (Bernard, In Dom. Palm. Serm. 3:4). Diatess-Tat. has like a stream of blood.

45. Lk. is much more brief than Mt. and Mk., but adds and also . Prolonged sorrow produces sleep, and in mentioning this cause of their slumber Lk. once more spares the Twelve. For see on 1:39, and for of the cause see on 19:3, 21:26, 24:41.

46. ; The special address to Peter is omitted.

. All three assign this to the first return from prayer. No words are recorded of the second, and Lk. omits both it and the third. These movements are some evidence as to Christs human knowledge. Would He have come to the disciples, without waking them (as seems on the second occasion to have been the case), had He known beforehand that they were asleep? And does not , which is in all three, almost imply that until He came He did not know, as in the case of the barren fig tree (Mar 11:13)?

. That not (Wic. RV.) rather than lest (Tyn. Gen. Rhem. AV.). Comp. ver. 40, where the constr. is equivalent, although not identical. In both places we have the pres. imperat. of continuous prayer.

47-53. The Traitors Kiss and the Arrest of Jesus. Mat 26:47-56; Mar 14:43-52; Joh 18:2-11. It would have been possible for Jesus to have evaded Judas by not going to the usual place (ver. 40) or by leaving it before he arrived. The sneer of Celsus, that Jesus went to the garden to make His escape by disgracefully hiding Himself, is out of place. By going and remaining where Judas must find Him, He surrendered Himself voluntarily. As Origen says, At the fitting time He did not prevent Himself from falling into the hands of men (Cels. 2:10).

47. . These nine words are in all three accounts. He was still addressing the disciples when He was interrupted by a hostile multitude led by one of the Twelve. See Blass on Act 10:44.

. Lk. omits that it was a prearranged sign; also the and the fact that an ostentatiously affectionate kiss () was given. Jn. does not mention the kiss. His narrative shows how unnecessary the treacherous signal was, for Jesus came forward and declared Himself.1

48. . First, with great emphasis. Is it with a kiss thou betrayest? Osculo Filium hominis tradis? hoc est amoris pignore vulnus infligis, et caritatis officio sanguinem fundis, et pacis instrumento mortem irrogas, servus Dominum, discipulus prodis magistrum, electus Auctorem (Bede). Jesus does not say, betrayest thou Me? but betrayest thou the Son of Man? He reminds Judas that it is the Messiah whom he is treating with this amazing form of treachery. Mt. words Christs rebuke very differently: , . Mk. omits the rebuke.

49. , ; Lk. alone records this question. It is said that since it was illegal to carry swords on a feast-day, we have here another sign that the Last Supper had not been the Passover. But if the was a large knife used for killing the lamb, this would not hold: see on ver. 38.

For the constr. see on 13:23 and Burton., 70, 169: and for the form see on 21:24.

50. . All three use this indefinite expression: Jn. alone tells us that it was the impetuous Peter, who acted without waiting for Christs reply. When Jn. wrote it was not dangerous to disclose the name of me Apostle who had attacked the high priests servant. And John alone gives the servants name. As a friend of the high priest (18:15) he would be likely to know the name Malchus. Malchus was probably taking a prominent part in the arrest, and Peter aimed at his head.

. Mt. has , Mk. and Jn. . Jn. also specifies the right ear. Mt. records the rebuke to Peter, Put up again thy sword, etc.

51. . The obscurity of the saying is evidence that it was uttered: an invented utterance would have been plainer. If addressed to the disciples (as implies, for He is answering either their question or Peters act), it probably means, Suffer My assailants to proceed these lengths against Me. If addressed to those who had come to arrest Him, it might mean, Tolerate thus much violence on the part of My followers,-violence which He at once rectifies. It can hardly mean, Allow Me just to touch the sufferer, for He is still free, as ver. 52 implies: the arrest takes place at ver. 54. Some even make masc. to go as far as Malchus: but comp. Lev 26:18. In either of these last cases we should have had after . For see on 4:41.

. Lk. the physician alone records this solitary miracle of surgery. A complete restoration of the ear is meant and required. He touched the ear, not the place where the ear had been. Peters act had seemed to place Jesus in the wrong and to justify His enemies: He was shown to be the Leader of dangerous persons. To undo this result it was necessary to render Malchus uninjured, and to surrender without resistance. This confirms the interpretation given above of : they are a public command to the disciples not to impede the arrest. Comp. Joh 18:36. Marcion omitted vv. 49-51.

In the Classical Review of Dec. 1893 Dr. E. A. Abbott proposes to resolve this miracle into a misunderstanding of traditional language. The ingenuity is unconvincing. See Additional Note p. 545.

52. . These are not fresh arrivals, but portions of the of ver. 47 more particularly described. There is nothing improbable in the presence of , who are mentioned by Lk. alone. Anxiety about the arrest, which might be frustrated by a miscalculation of time, or by the people, or by a miracle, would induce them to be present. For see on ver. 4. Jn. tells us that Roman soldiers with their chief officer were there also (18:3, 12). Jesus addresses the Jewish authorities, who are responsible for the transaction.

The reading (A B D L T X ), against Him (RV.), is to be preferred to ( G H R ), to Him (AV.); but Tisch., with his bias for , adopts the latter.

. First with emphasis. These words down to are the same in all three accounts. Jesus is not a bandit (10:30, 19:46). The fact that they did not arrest Him publicly, nor without violence, nor in the light of day, is evidence that the arrest is unjustifiable. Perhaps means clubs, as Rhem. from fustibus (Vulg.): comp. Jos. B. J. 2:9, 4.

53. Every point tells: Every day there was abundant opportunity; you yourselves were there; the place was the most public in the city; and you made no attempt to touch Me. The sentence is certainly not a question (Hahn). Tisch. does not make even the first part, from to , a question: so also Wic. and Cran.

. But the explanation of such outrageous conduct is not difficult. This is your hour of success allowed by God; and it coincides with that allowed to the power of darkness. So Euthym comp. Joh 8:44. Perhaps there is an intimation that the night is a fit season for such work: comp. Joh 13:30, and see Schanz, p. 529.

. See Lft. on Col 1:13, where the same phrase occurs. He points out that is sometimes used of unrestrained and tyrannical power, as well as of delegated and constitutional power. But the latter may be the meaning here. It is by Divine permission that Satan is (Joh 14:30).

Lk. omits the flight of all the disciples, which Mt. and Mk record. This is further evidence, if any be needed, that Lk. exhibits no animus against the Twelve. See on ver. 45 and 6:13.

54-62. Peters Denials are recorded in detail by all four Elvangelists, who tell us that three denials were predicted (Mat 26:34; Mar 14:30; Luk 22:34; Joh 13:38), and record three denials (Mat 26:70, Mat 26:72, Mat 26:74; Mar 14:68, Mar 14:70, Mar 14:71; Luk 22:57, Luk 22:58, Luk 22:60; Joh 18:17, Joh 18:25, Joh 18:27). As already pointed out, Lk. and Jn. place the prediction during the supper, Mk. and Mt. on the road to the Mount of Olives, which is less likely to be correct, if (as is probable) the prediction was made only once.

As to the three denials, all four accounts are harmonious respecting the first, but differ greatly respecting the second and third. The first denial, provoked the accusation of the maid, seems to have led to a series of attacks upon S. Peter, which were mainly in two groups; and these were separated from one another by an interval, during which he was not much noticed. Each of the four narratives notices some features in these groups of attacks and denials: but it is unreasonable to suppose that they profess to give the exact words that were spoken in each case. See on 8:24 for Augustines remarks on the different words recorded by the three Synoptists as uttered during the storm on the lake. Alford on Mat 26:69, and Westcott in an additional note on Jn. 18., have tabulated the four narratives: see also Rushbrookes Synopticon, p. 114. With these helps the four can readily be compared clause by clause; and the independence of at least three of them soon becomes apparent. This independence results from truthfulness, and the variations will be a difficulty to those only who hold views of verbal inspiration which are contradicted by abundant phenomena both in O.T. and N.T. St. Luke adds force to the episode by placing all three denials together. With St. John, however, dramatic proprietys is sacrificed to chronological accuracy (Lft. Biblical Essays, p. 191).

54. . All four use this verb in connexion with the arrest of Jesus. It is freq. in Lk., especially of the capture of prisoners: Act 1:16, Act 12:3, Act 23:27, Act 26:21. Jn. tells us that they bound Him and took Him , i.e. before His being examined by Caiaphas, as recorded Mat 26:57-68 and Mar 14:53-65. Both these examinations were informal. They were held at night, and no sentence pronounced in a trial held at night was valid. Hence the necessity for a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin after daybreak, to confirm what had been previously decided. This third ecclesiastical trial is mentioned by all the Synoptists (ver. 66; Mat 27:1; Mar 15:1); whereas Jn. gives only the first (18:12), and shows that it was in connexion with it that Peters denials took place. Lk. can hardly be said to give either of the first two hearings. He says that Jesus was taken to the high priests house, and was there denied by Peter and ill-treated by His captors; and then he passes on to the formal assembly of the Sanhedrin; but there is no mention of any previous examination. With the help of the other narratives, however, we obtain an account of all three hearings. The space devoted by all four to these Jewish and Roman trials seems to be out of proportion to the brief accounts of the crucifixion. But they serve to bring out the meaning of the crucifixion by exhibiting the nature of the Messiahship of Jesus. Why was Jesus condemned to death by the Sanhedrin? Because He claimed to be the Son of God. Why was He condemned to death by Pilate? Because He claimed to be the King of the Jews.

. They led Him (away) and brought Him. The latter verb is a favourite with Lk. See on 2:27.

D , Syr-Sin. some Old Lat. texts Vulg. Aeth. omit .

. It is impossible to determine whether this means of Annas or of Caiaphas (comp. 3:2 and Act 4:6): but the narrative of Jn. (18:12-24) renders it highly probable that Annas and his son-in-law Caiaphas shared the same palace, occupying different parts of it. As Lk. records no examination of Christ before either of them, we do not know whether he connects Peters fall with the hearing before Annas (as Jn.), or with that before Caiaphas (as Mt. and Mk.). All that he tells us is that Jesus was kept a prisoner and insulted between the night arrest and the morning sitting of the Sanhedrin. Possibly his authorities told him no more. See Hastings, D.B. 1. p. 100.

. This following at a distance is noted by all three. Quod sequitur, amoris est, quod e longo, timoris.

55. . Here only in N.T. Comp. 3 Mal 3:7. This would be April, at which time cold nights are not uncommon in Jerusalem, which stands high.

A D R X have , which is peculiar to Lk. in the sense of kindling: 8:16, 11:33, 15:8; Act 28:2. For see on 8:7.

. Cod. Am. and other MSS. of Vulg. have erat Petrus in medio eorum. All Greek texts have . Where did Jerome find ? See on 9:44.

Here only in N.T. is intransitive: contrast Eph 2:6. D G, b c d e f ff2 i l q Vulg. Arm. Syr-Sin. have . But a (consedentibus supports A B L R X etc. (): and this is doubtless right.

56. . All four use this word of the person who began the attack on Peter. Jn. says that she was the doorkeeper. It was not Pilate, nor any of the Sanhedrin, nor a mob of soldiers, but a single waiting-maid, who frightened the self-confident Apostle into denying his Master. Note the .

. Comp. Mar 14:54. For , which is a favourite word with Lk. (4:20 and often in Acts), Mk. has .

. The meaning of the is not obvious: as well as who? Possibly S. John, who was present and known to the household. With comp. 24:44; Act 13:7. The fondness of Lk. for here comes out. Mk. and Mt. have , and Jn. has .

57. . For Mk. and Mt. have the less explicitly false . Lk. has ver. 60, where they have . Here Lk. again mitigates by omitting the oath which accompanied the second denial (Mt.), and the cursing and swearing which accompanied the third (Mt. Mk.). This first denial seems to have been specially public, (Mt.).

58. . Lk. alone states that a second denial followed close on the first. For Mt. has , Mk. , Jn. . For see on 12:14.

59. . Mk. and Mt. say . The classical is peculiar to Lk. (24:51; Act 27:28. In LXX Exo 15:8; Pro 17:9, etc.).

. Jn. says a kinsman of Malchus; Mt. and Mk. say the bystanders. In this third attack all four call attention to the positiveness of the speaker; because he had seen Peter in the garden with Jesus (Jn.), and because of Peters Galilean (Mt.). The Galileans are said to have mixed the gutturals in pronunciation, and to have had in some respects a peculiar vocabulary.

. Classical, but only here and Act 12:15 in bibl. Grk.

60. . All four note how quickly the crowing followed upon the third denial. Lk. has his favourite and Mk. his favourite : comp. 5:25, 8:44, 55, 18:43. But the graphic is given by Lk. alone.

. No article: a cock crew. A few cursives insert .

The objection which has been raised, that the Talmud pronounces fowls which scratch on dungheaps to be unclean, is futile. In this the Talmud is inconsistent with itself: and Sadducees would have no scruples about what was not forbidden by the written law. Certainly Romans would have no such scruples.

61. . Lk. alone preserves this incident. Peter is probably still in the court, while Jesus is inside. It is improbable that Jesus was present when Peter denied Him. He may have been visible through door or window, but scarcely within hearing. The may have taken place as He was being led to or from the examination before Caiaphas.

. Lk. alone repeats this word, as Mk. repeats his : otherwise all three have the same words. Jn. omits Peters recollection of the warning and also his bitter weeping.

The is omitted in A B and several Versions, but it is attested by B K L M T, Boh. Sah. Syr-Sin. Aeth. b ff2 l.

62. WH. bracket this verse, which is wanting in a b e ff2 i 1* r. But (A , Vulg.) is no doubt an addition both here and Mat 26:75.

63-65. The First Mocking. As Lk. omits the examination by Caiaphas, it is impossible to determine whether he places this mocking before or after it. He knows that Jesus, after being denied by His chief Apostle, was insulted by His captors, and then taken before the Sanhedrin. His omissions seem to show that he is making no use of Mt. or Mk. Comp. Mat 26:67, Mat 26:68; Mar 14:65.

63. . Not members of the Sanhedrin, but the servants or soldiers in whose charge Jesus had been left. Here only is used of holding fast a prisoner. Comp. 8:45; 19:43. See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 160.

. Comp. 12:47, 20:10. Of the five expressions which are used in describing these blows each Evangelist uses two: Lk. and ; Mt. and ; Mk. and . Comp. the treatment of the Apostles, Act 5:40; and of S. Paul, Act 21:32, Act 23:2. Lk. omits the spitting. All three have the .

65. . Comp. 3:18. The statemenk here is made by Lk. only. On the combination of participle and verb, describing the same action from different points of view, see Burton., 121.

66-71. The Third Jewish Trial. The Sanhedrin could hold no valid meeting before daybreak, and what had been irregularly done in the night had to be formally transacted after dawn.1 Comp. Mat 27:1; Mar 15:1. But Lk. is quite independent; whereas Mt. and Mk. have much in common.

66. . All three note the early hour: (Mk.), (Mt.). The expression is characteristic of Lk. Comp. 4:42, 6:13; Act 12:18, Act 12:16:35, Act 12:23:12, 27:29, 33, 39.

, . The meaning is that the three component parts of the Sanhedrin met, and that Jesus was brought before the whole assembly. Mt. and Mk. also give the parts as well as the whole; but the place of meeting is not given by any. That portions of what is recorded of one examination should resemble portions of what is recorded of another is natural. Before Annas, Caiaphas, and the Sanhedrin the same questions would be asked. At this last and only valid trial everything of importance would have to be repeated. It is probable that is here used in a technical sense for the Great Council or Sanhedrin. Comp. Act 4:15, Act 4:5:21, Act 4:27, Act 4:34, 41, Act 4:6:12, Act 4:15, Act 4:22:30, Act 4:23:1, Act 4:6, Act 4:15, Act 4:20, Act 4:28, Act 4:24:20. See Herzog, art. Synedrium; Keim, Jes. of Naz. 6. pp. 63-72; Edersh. L. & T. 2. pp. 553-557; Hist. of. J. N. ch. 5.; Farrar, L. of C. II Excurs. 13.; and above all Schurer, J. P. in T. of J. C. II. 1. pp. 163-195, where the literature of the subject is given.

Note the , which neither Mt. nor Mk. has. In the Gospel Lk. never has without following: 2:16, 12:45, 21:11, etc.

67. , . Si tu es Christus, dic nobis (Vulg.). The is conditional, and the emphasis is on , not on . This is the simplest construction, and is adopted by Luth. Wic. Rhem. RV. De W. Schanz, Mey. Nsg. Go. Hahn, etc. Others prefer, Art Thou the Christ? tell us : so Erasm. Tyn. Cran. Gen. AV. Or, Tell us whether Thou art the Christ: Ewald and some others. The question was vital; and in the examination recorded by Mt. and Mk. it was coupled with Art Thou the Son of God? (ver. 70).

. This part of Christs reply is peculiar to this occasion, whereas what follows (ver. 69) is almost verbatim as in Mt. and Mk. The meaning seems to be, If I tell you that I am the Christ, ye will assuredly not believe; and if I try to discuss the question, ye will assuredly refuse to do so. Note that here the proceedings are conducted by the Sanhedrin as a body; not, as in the earlier trial, by the high priest alone (Mat 26:62, Mat 26:63, Mat 26:65; Mar 14:60, Mar 14:61, Mar 14:63). For the addition see additional note at the end of ch. 23.

69. . His glorification has already begun: Joh 12:31. Hoc ipsum erat iter ad gloriam (Beng.) Comp. the parallel Act 7:56, where see Blass.

The is thus placed because is virtually one word. TR. with , Sah. omits , and Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. substitute . The Latin Versions are again interesting in their rendering of : a modo (a c d r), ex hoc (f Vulg.): see on 1:48 and also on 5:10.

70. . The is again peculiar to Lk. (7:35, 19:37, 20:18); in Mt. and Mk. the high priest asks the question. In the allusion to Dan 7:3 they recognize a claim to Divinity, and they translate into . But it is not clear whether by the latter they mean the Messiah or something higher.

. Both here and Joh 18:37 that I am (English Versions, Godet) is more probable than because I am (Luth. Weiss, Hahn). A third possibility, to make the whole a question. is worth noting. For other cases of ambiguous comp. 1:45. 7:16, 19:31.

71. . We have heard that He claims to be the Messiah and the Son of God. It is quite natural that in accusing Him to Pilate nothing is said about this charge of blasphemy,-one of great weight with the Sanhedrin, but which the heathen procurator would not appreciate.

Wsctt. Westcott.

Cod. Sinaiticus, sc. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete.

B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sc. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86).

D D. Cod. Bezae, sc. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel.

L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sc. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel.

X X. Cod. Monacensis, sc. ix. In the University Library at Munich. Contains 1:1-37, 2:19-3:38, 4:21-10:37, 11:1-18:43, 20:46-24:53.

TR. Textus Receptus.

A A. Cod. Alexandrinus, sc. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library at Alexandria; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles 1. in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete.

C

C. Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus, sc. 5. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the following portions of the Gospel: 1:2-2:5, 2:42-3:21, 4:25-6:4, 6:37-7:16, or 17, 8:28-12:3, 19:42-20:27, 21:21-22:19, 23:25-24:7, 24:46-53.

These four MSS. are parts of what were once complete Bibles, and are designated by the same letter throughout the LXX and N.T.

R R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, sc. 8. Brought from a convent in the Nitrian desert about 1847, and now in the British Museum. Contains 1:1-13, 1:69-2:4, 16-27, 4:38-5:5, 5:25-6:8, 18-36, 39, 6:49-7:22, 44, 46, 47, 8:5-15, 8:25-9:1, 12-43, 10:3-16, 11:5-27, 12:4-15, 40-52, 13:26-14:1, 14:12-15:1, 15:13-16:16, 17:21-18:10, 18:22-20:20, 20:33-47, 21:12-22:15, 42-56, 22:71-23:11, 38-51. By a second hand 15:19-21.

. Cod. Sangallensis, sc. ix. In the monastery of St. Gall in Switzerland. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel.

Jos. Josephus.

Syr Syriac.

Cur. Curetonian.

Aeth. Ethiopic.

Vulg. Vulgate.

Win. Winer, Grammar of N.T. Greek (the page refers to Moultons edition).

Sin. Sinaitic.

1 It has been asserted that Justin Martyr (Try. xli. and lxx.) is an exception. But this is a mistake. That Justin himself sometimes uses in a sacrificial sense is possible; that he understood in this sense is not credible. No subsequent Father notes that Justin gives this interpretation, an interpretation so remarkable that it must have attracted attention.

T T. Cod. Borgianus, sc. v. In the Library of the Propaganda at Rome. Greek and Egyptian. Contains 22:20-23:20.

Sah. Sahidic.

Boh. Bohairic.

Arm. Armenian.

Orig. Origen.

Beng. Bengel.

Euthym. Euthymius Zigabenus.

De W. De Wette.

Nsg. Nsgen.

L. J. Leben Jesu

Mey. Meyer.

F F. Cod. Boreeli, sc. ix. In the Public Library at Utrecht. Contains considerable portions of the Gospel.

K K. Cod. Cyprius, sc. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel.

M M. Cod. Campianus, sc. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel.

S S. Cod. Vaticanus, sc. x. In the Vatican. The earliest dated MS. of the Greek Testament. Contains the whole Gospel.

U U. Cod. Nanianus, sc. x. In the Library of St. Marks, Venice. Contains the whole Gospel.

G G. Cod. Harleianus, sc. ix. In the British Museum. Contains considerable portions.

Latt. Latin.

RV. Revised Version.

Tert. Tertullian.

Cypr. Cyprian.

Wetst. Wetstein.

Ambr. Ambrose.

Aug. Augustine.

Grot. Grotius.

Maldon. Maldonatus.

Found in Luke alone.

Cov. Coverdale.

Gen. Geneva.

Rhem. Rheims (or Douay).

Tyn. Tyndale.

AV. Authorized Version.

1 The Bull Unam Sanctam of Boniface 8., a.d. 1302, bases the double power of the Papacy on this text. The following are among the most remarkable passages: Igitur Ecclesi, unius, et unic unum corpus, unum caput, non duo capita quasi monstrum, Christus scilicet et Christi vicarius, Petrus Petrique successor In has ejusque potestate duos esse gladios, spiritualem videlicet et temporalem evengelicis dicits instruimur. Nam dicentibus Apostolis: Eccegladii duo hic; in Ecclesia scilicet, cum Apostoli loquerentur; non respondit Dominus nimis esse, sed satis Uterque ergo in potestate Ecclesi, spiritualis scilicet gladius, et materialis: sed is quidem pro Ecclesia, ille vero ab Ecclesia exercendus; ille sacerdotis, is manu Regum et militum; sed ad nutum et patientiam sacerdortis. Oportet autem gladium esse sub gladio, et temporalem auctoritatem spirituali subjici potesttati sic de Ecclesia et ecclesiastica potestate verificatur vaticinium Jeremi [i. 10]: Ecce constitui te hodie super gentes, et regna, etc. qu sequuntur Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omnem humanam creaturam declaramus, dicimus et definimus omnino esse denecessitate salutis (Raynald. 23. p. 328; see Milman, Lat. Chr. Bk. xi. ch. ix.; Robertson, Bk. vii. ch. v.; Stubbs Mosheim, ii. p. 261; Zoeckler, Handb d. Theol. Wiss. ii. p. 167; Gregorovius, Stadt Rom, 5. p. 562; Berchtold, Du Bulle Unam Sanctam. Mnchen. 1888).

Luth. Luther.

D. B. Smiths Dictionary of the Bible, 2nd edition.

WH. Westcott and Hort.

1 Even Meyer is disposed to admit that this strengthening by an Angel is legendary, because it is singular (absonderlich), and not mentioned by Mt. or Mk., who has Peter to rest upon. Let us admit that perhaps Lk. did not mention it either. That does not prove that it is legendary; unless we are prepared to admit that the ministry of Angels after the temptation, which is analogous to this, and which is attested by both Mt. (4:11) and Mk. (1:13), is legendary also.

2 In class. Grk. , both with and without , may mean a drop of blood (Aesch. Eum. 184; Choph., 533, 546; Plato, Crit. p. 120 A.).

Wic. Wiclif.

1 It was perhaps in memory of this treacherous act that the kiss of peace was omitted in public service on Good Friday. Tertullian blames those who omit it on fast-days which are less public and universal. But die pasch, quo communis et quasi publica jejunii religio est, merito deponimus osculum (De Orat. 18.). At other times the omission would amount to a proclamation that one was fasting, contrary to Christs command.

Burton. Burton, N.T. Moods and Tenses.

Tisch. Tischendorf.

Cod. Am. Codex Amiatimus.

1 Synedrium magnum sedet a sacrificio jugi matutino ad sacrificium juge pomeridianum (Maimonides, Sanhed. 3.); sessiones judicii sunt instituend mane, non autem postquam homo edit et bibit (Synops. Soh. p. 56 n. 2).

Edersh. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.

Schurer, Schrer, Jewish People in the Times of Jesus Christ.

Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament

Selling or Serving the Master

Luk 22:1-13

The world seemed in arms against the greatest Lover of souls that had ever trod earths soil. Satan entered the heart of Judas, for it was his hour, and he gathered all his strength for one last prodigious effort to overthrow the Son of man and thwart His sublime purpose of redemption. Judas, one of the inner circle, did not hesitate to choose thirty pieces of silver rather than love, purity, compassion, as they were incarnate in the Son of man. The religious leaders of the age also eagerly caught at their chance.

In the meanwhile the Lord girded Himself for the conflict by gathering to His heart the remainder of the apostolic band, though none of them really understood. The arrangement of the man with the waterpot was evidently to elude arrest during the supper, as Judas could not inform his accomplices beforehand of the selected supper room. Remember that Jesus asks each of us for the guest chamber of our heart! Ask Him, not to be as a wayfaring man who tarries for the night, but to abide always.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

The Last Passover And The Institution Of The Lord’s Supper — Luk 22:1-38

Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover. And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill Him; for they feared the people. Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray Him unto them. And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money. And he promised, and sought oportunity to betray Him unto them in the absence of the multitude. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. And He sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat. And they said unto Him, Where wilt Thou that we prepare? And He said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water; follow him into the house where he entereth in. And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with My disciples? And he shall show you a large upper room furnished: there make ready. And they went, and found as He had said unto them: and they made ready the passover. And when the hour was come, He sat down, and the twelve apostles with Him. And He said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: for I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: for I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. And He took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is My body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of Me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth Me is with Me on the table. And truly the Son of Man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom He is betrayed! And they began to enquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing. And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest. And He said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them: and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as He that serveth. Ye are they which have continued with Me in My temptations. And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as My Father hath appointed unto Me; that ye may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. And he said unto Him, Lord, I am ready to go with Thee, both into prison, and to death. And He said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest Me. And He said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. Then said He unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in Me, And He was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning Me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And He said unto them, It is enough- Luk 22:1-38.

We now look at this lengthy section which deals with five distinct events: first, the treachery of Judas; second, the preparation and observance of the passover; third, the Lords Supper instituted; fourth, the place which His disciples will occupy in the future kingdom; and last, the Lords warning to Peter.

The Passover Lamb was slain on the night the children of Israel were delivered out of Egypt. For the Jews the passover was a memorial of that event, but it was also a type of something that was yet to take place. The day had now come when this was about to be fulfilled. In 1Co 5:7-8 we read, Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. In the Bible leaven is always a symbol of evil, as we have seen. So we are called upon to put away from our lives everything unclean, everything contrary to the Spirit of Christ.

For centuries Israel had kept this feast. Now the Lord Jesus Christ, the real Paschal Lamb, was in their midst and most of the people were utterly unaware of His presence. While He was preparing to keep the feast, the chief priests and scribes were conferring together how they might kill Him, little realizing that He was the antitypical Passover Lamb. Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. He was doing only what God had foreseen should be done. The perfidy ,of Judas was prophesied centuries before it became a reality. The leaders were plotting to kill Jesus, and Satan took possession of one of His disciples, who offered to betray Him for money. Think of Judas, companying with the Lord and the other disciples for three-and-one-half wonderful years, now communing with the chief priests and captains how he might deliver Him into their hands! There are many today who associate with Christians and take active part in religious services but have never known Christ themselves. Such was Judas. So when the time came Satan found in him a ready instrument to carry out his will. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray Him unto them. It would seem almost unbelievable were it not for the fact that the same kind of conduct has been repeated many times since. And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money. And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray Him unto them in the absence of the multitude. Judas imagined that no other eye saw nor ear heard as he plotted with the chief priests; but Jesus, God manifest in Him, knew all about the transaction, as He later revealed.

Then the day came when the passover was to be killed. This involves a perplexing question for some people. We need to remember that the Jews day began at sunset, and it was after sunset on the fourteenth of Nisan that the Lord kept the pass-over with His disciples. Before the next sunset, that is, in the afternoon of the day following, our Lord Himself died on the cross. So He kept the Passover on the first evening of the appointed day, and He Himself suffered and died as the true Passover before the next evening. According to the Jews reckoning, therefore, both events took place on the one day.

Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat. And they put the natural question to Him, Where wilt Thou that we prepare? He had no home in or about Jerusalem. But in those days it was customary for the Jews to have a special room set apart as a guestchamber where they might entertain travelers, especially at the passover time. Now Jesus knew of one in whose house He would be welcome, and where He could eat the passover with His disciples. So He said, Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water; follow him into the house where he entereth in. We might think these directions were rather indefinite. He did not tell them the mans name nor anything else whereby to identify him; how were they to know when they met the right person? Well, you see it was a very unusual thing for a man to be found in the public streets bearing a pitcher of water. Ordinarily it was the women who went to the wells and carried the water, generally in earthen jars upon their heads. This is the common practice still in Oriental lands. So when Jesus said, There shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water, He indicated something distinctive. The water-bearer may speak to us of those who with joy draw water from the wells of salvation. And ye shall say unto the good-man of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with My disciples? That was all that was necessary. The owner of the house was evidently a believer in the Lord. And he shall show you a large upper room furnished: there make ready. It may be that this was the house in which John Mark lived, and that this large upper room was the same as that to which the disciples resorted after the resurrection of our Lord, and where the early Church held its first prayer-meetings. And they went, and found as He had said unto them: and they made ready the passover. They set the table with the roasted lamb, the unleavened bread, the bitter herbs, and the Passover wine. Then we read, And when the hour was come, He sat down, and the twelve apostles with Him. It was a blessed scene of fellowship, save for one jarring note-the presence of Judas the traitor. And He said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer. He had often participated in the pass-over feasts in the years that had gone. It was a picture of His own approaching death, and His love led Him to long to have His own with Him at the paschal table. He knew so well what was ahead of Him. He was the only One in Israel who knew that this passover prefigured His own death on Calvary and the salvation which He was to procure by the shedding of His precious blood. Now He had come to the last passover that God would ever recognize, the last passover of which He Himself would partake before fulfilling all He came to accomplish. He said, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. The type was passing away, the antitype was seen to take its place. And He took the cup, and gave thanks. This cup has nothing to do with the Lords Supper; it concluded the passover. He said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: for I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. God had not commanded them to use the fruit of the vine in the passover, but this was a custom that had been practised for many centuries, and the Lord recognized this and accepted it. He Himself did not drink of it, for the fruit of the vine speaks of joy and gladness. He was going to death and sorrow: it was not His hour of gladness; He was to endure the cross before He entered into His joy. Following the passover He established the beautiful .ordinance which has been carried on by the Church of God for nineteen hundred years as a memorial of His death and suffering. And He took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is My body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of Me. He took one of the passover loaves, the flat unleavened cakes, which He brake. Strange that anyone should have ever supposed that what He meant here was that the bread was changed into His own physical body. It was a symbolic act. The bread remained as it was after His thanksgiving, but it now had a special character as a picture of His body about to be given up to death. He said, This is My body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of Me. That is, do this from time to time to call Me to mind. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you. The word for testament and covenant is the same. I prefer the word covenant here. This is the cup of blessing (1Co 10:16) setting forth the new covenant in His blood about to be shed upon the cross for our redemption. As they drank of it they were expressing their fellowship as sinners redeemed to God by His blood. The day of the old covenant was passing away, and He was about to seal the new covenant by the shedding of His blood upon the cross.

The Lords Supper (1Co 11:20) is a feast of remembrance, which is intended to carry our minds back to the death of our Saviour and also to cause us to look on to His coming again (1Co 11:26). It consisted, in the beginning, of a very simple meal, called the breaking of bread (Act 2:46), and seems at first to have been observed daily or whenever a few Christians came together, possibly at the close of every ordinary meal. Later it appears to have been celebrated regularly on the first day of the week (Act 20:7), though there is no hard-and-fast rule as to this. As oft as ye do this, seems to leave the question of time and frequency to the love and spiritual sensibilities of the disciples of Christ. In this service of remembrance the bread remains bread, and the fruit of the vine in the cup is unchanged in character, but the representative characters of both are insisted on. When Jesus said, This is My body, and, This is My blood, He sat in the midst of His followers, and His blood was still flowing in His veins and His body manifest among them. It was as if one held a photograph before a friend and said, This is my mother. No one would think that the piece of cardboard had been actually changed into the flesh and blood of a woman! But these memorials were designed to bring before us vividly the Person of our adorable Lord, enabling us to call Him to mind with more than ordinary clarity. Because of this, and of the expressed desire of Jesus Christ that we should thus remember Him, it has been the joy of christian hearts down through the centuries to come together around the table of the Lord to think of His sufferings, to meditate upon His love, and to enjoy communion with Him.

In the celebration of the Lords Supper we are to be occupied with Christ Himself, with the memories of His love and grace, recalling His sorrows, sufferings, and death, and bearing in mind His promise to come again and receive us unto Himself. It is a mistake to think of this blessed ordinance as a means of grace, in the sense of having to do with the salvation of the soul. It is intended to deepen in the heart of those already saved, the realization of the preciousness of Christ. We come together to remember Him, and as He fills the vision of our souls we feast in spirit upon all that He is and all that He has done.

Following this we have the treachery of Judas. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth Me is with Me on the table. We read, After the sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, That thou doest, do quickly. And he went immediately out and it was night-night not only outside but also in his own soul, never to be relieved by one ray of light. Jesus went on to say that the fact that the Son of Man had come into the world to die would not excuse those who deliberately sought to crucify Him. And truly the Son of Man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom He is betrayed! Actually, according to Joh 13:29-30, Judas left the room before the Lords Supper was instituted.

In Luk 22:24 we read of a strife among the disciples as to which of them should be the greatest. The Lord was about to die; He had just given them the communion, a picture of His death, and now these who really loved Him began to quarrel among themselves as to who would have the chief place in the coming kingdom. Pride is so hard to root out. There they were with the shadow of the cross falling over them, striving among themselves as to who should be greatest. He gently rebuked them by indicating that although this ambitious spirit is common among the nations and is to be expected among sinful men, it should not be found among His own. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. It was customary for worldly leaders to seek to hold their fellows in subjection, and those who did so were looked up to as benefactors if they seemed to govern righteously. But this lust for place and power is inconsistent for a disciple ,of Jesus. Greatness is shown by lowly service. The kingdom of God is the only kingdom ever known to man where the greatest are those who take the humblest place. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as He that serveth. In this attitude Jesus has set the example which all His followers should emulate.

Then our Lord said, Ye are they which have continued with Me in My temptations. And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as My Father hath appointed unto Me. When He comes again to reign in glory, those who share His rejection now will participate with Him in His triumph (Rev 3:21). He refers not to the present age but to that which succeeds this, when His kingdom will be established over all this earth; and in that day those who have been identified with Jesus, His own people, who owned Him when He was mocked and rejected, will have a wonderful place of recognition. The twelve will sit ,on thrones and judge the twelve tribes of Israel. That ye may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. The twelve (Matthias taking Judas place, Act 1:26) are to have a special place in the administration of the coming kingdom in connection with restored Israel. While of the Church, they will rule with Christ over Israel on earth.

The Lord says finally, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. The word translated desired is really a stronger term than our English word; it is better rendered demanded. Just as Satan went before God and practically demanded to have the opportunity to test Job, accusing him before God, saying that Job loved God only for what God gave him, so Satan demanded to test Peter. But Jesus said, I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not. You know when we get into the devils sieve he can shake us up badly, but all that is left when he is through is chaff: the wheat falls through, and Satan has only the chaff. So do not be afraid of the devils sieve; God is able to sustain us. Remember that Jesus has said, I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not! Peter failed sadly. He denied his Lord three times, but his faith was preserved, and we find him turning back to Jesus and able to say, Lord, Thou knowest all things, Thou knowest that I love Thee. The Lord Jesus said, And when thou art converted (when you are restored), strengthen thy brethren. Sometimes the Lord has to allow some of His best servants to fail terribly in order to show them their weakness, and that they may be more tender and sympathetic toward others. Not realizing his own weakness Peter said, Lord, I am ready to go with Thee, both into prison, and to death. But the Lord said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest Me. The Lord knew Peter far better than he knew himself, and He knows you and me better than we know ourselves.

Next our Lord warned His disciples of coming conflicts. He knew what would take place, and He said to them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing?-that is, when He sent them out into the cities of Galilee to give out the message of the gospel of the kingdom. And they said, Nothing. Everything had been provided. He said to them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his script: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. He did not mean literally that they should be armed with material swords; but we are taught elsewhere in Scripture that the Word of God is sharper than any two-edged sword (Heb 4:12). When they were ready to leave the upper room they said to Him, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And He said unto them, It is enough- that is, no more talk about that. He was not speaking about actual defense; He was not interested in weapons. He wanted them to go forth armed with the sword of the Spirit that they might meet the enemies of the truth as they went forth to proclaim the gospel.

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

Luk 22:15

The Passover greatly desired.

I. We cannot enter into the Divine intensity of this desire, but it would seem that the longing Christ had to eat this Passover with His disciples before He suffered arose, (1) from the consciousness that, in that hour and in that act He would for ever put an end to shadows, and bring in the substance of our redemption; (2) because that hour was the winding up of the long years in which He had waited for His bitter passion; (3) that last mournful Passover was a solace to the Son of Man. It was sad, but sweet.

II. What a light these words cast on the Blessed Sacrament which He then bequeathed to us, and on the law which binds us to it. For (1) it shows us that the Holy Sacrament is this last Passover continuing still. What was then begun is a perpetual celebration. In heaven and in earth, it is but one act still, one priesthood and one sacrifice. The Church is the upper chamber spread abroad; a sphere above this visible world, hanging over all the earth. It is in all lands, under all skies, upon the floods and in the mountains, in the wilderness and on trackless shores-wherever two or three are gathered together, there is the upper chamber, and the paschal table, the disciples and the Lord of the true Passover, the Sacrifice and the Priest. (2) This may show us still further that with desire He desires still to eat this sacrament of His love with us, The first moving cause of this Divine desire is, that He may pour forth His blessings of power and grace upon us. (a) He desires to apply to us the benefits of His passion. (b) He desires to give Himself to be our spiritual food. (c) He desires to make us, even now in this life, behold His love. Love pent up withers away; but Divine love cannot be straitened; it is like the light of heaven which pours down in floods upon the earth. Our Redeemer is not only very God but very Man in all the truth of our humanity, and His human affections follow the laws of our perfect manhood. With desire He invites us to Himself, that He may show to our intimate consciousness the personal love which moved Him to give Himself, with full intention, for each several soul.

H. E. Manning, Sermons, vol. iv., p. 248.

Consider some of the reasons why the Saviour desired so earnestly to join in this last Passover before He suffered.

I. One reason was, that the Passover had now reached its end and found its full meaning.

II. Another reason was for the support of His own soul in the approaching struggle.

III. Christ desired to be present at the last Passover, because His friends needed special comfort.

IV. He desired it because it looked forward to all the future of His Church and people.

J. Ker, Sermons, p. 37.

References: Luk 22:15.-R. Tuck, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xii., p. 195; J. Keble, Sermons on Various Occasions, p. 495. Luk 22:17-20.-A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 359. Luk 22:19.-A. P. Peabody, Ibid., p. 111; Ibid., vol. xix., p. 260; C. Stanford, Evening of Our Lord’s Ministry, p. 52; H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, Waterside Mission Sermons, 2nd series, No. i.; Sermons for Boys and Girls, p. 347; R. Tuck, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiii., p. 142. Luk 22:19, Luk 22:20.-Spurgeon, My Sermon Notes: Gospels and Acts, p. 106. Luk 22:20.-H. P. Liddon, Thoughts on Present Church Troubles, p. 1. Luk 22:21-23.-A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 380. Luk 22:24-30.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. iv., p. 333; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. viii., p. 102; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 24.

Luk 22:27

We find in these words a double reference: (1) To the character, and (2) to the office, of the Son of Man; to His character as the Lowly One, to His office as a servant. For the purpose of bringing both these things before His disciples He makes use of those marvellous words: “I am among you as the serving one.” Consider three things in reference to this service: (1) Its history; (2) its nature; (3) the ends and objects which it is intended to meet.

I. Its history. It is not with His birth in Bethlehem that Christ’s service begins. His visit to our first father in Paradise was its true commencement. After that we find Him, age after age, visiting the children of men, and always in the character of one ministering to their wants. At His birth His life of service visibly began.

II. Its nature. (1) It is willing service. (2) It is a loving service. (3) It is self-denying service. (4) It is patient, unwearied service. (5) It is free service.

III. Its ends and objects. It is to sinners that this service is rendered; and there is much in this to exhibit the ends which it has in view. We need forgiveness, cleansing, healing, strength, wisdom, faith, protection. He ministers these to us, according to our need. In every scene and place and duty and struggle and trial He will be at our side, as the servant, to minister to us in everything, so that in nothing we may be found lacking.

H. Bonar, Short Sermons, p. 70.

References: Luk 22:27.-J. Oswald Dykes, Sermons, p. 291; H. P. Liddon, Advent Sermons, vol. ii., p. 330; J. Keble, Sermons for Saints’ Days, p. 319; R. Tuck, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xii., p. 195; S. A. Brooke, Ibid., vol. xviii., p. 65; Spurgeon, My Sermon Notes: Gospels and Acts, p. 109. Luk 22:29, Luk 22:30.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. v., p. 32.

Luk 22:31-32

These words contain a warning, a comforting assurance and a solemn charge. Note:-

I. The warning. We must remember that the word “you” is not used here in the sense of our common language-that is, to express a single person. Our Lord does not say that Satan had desired to have Peter only, but all the Apostles. The hour was coming, when their faith was to be severely tried, when they were to be sifted as wheat, to see what in them was good corn, and what chaff. In our lives also the words can never be otherwise than true.

II. The comforting assurance. “I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not.” This is spoken of Peter particularly; it is “I have prayed for thee” not, I have prayed for you, but though these words speak of Peter only, yet we have the assurance elsewhere that it is true of us also. Nay, on that very evening when He thus declared that He had prayed for Peter, we know that He prayed for the other Apostles too, and not for them only, but for us also.

III. All are warned of the coming danger; but one is especially prayed for, that being converted himself he might also strengthen his brethren. These words were addressed to Peter, and if we read the first twelve chapters of the Acts, we shall find their fulfilment. There we find him, indeed, strengthening his brethren, passing through all quarters, and by signs and wonders, by the word of wisdom, by fervent boldness and love unfeigned convincing the unbelievers, opening the eyes of the ignorant, baffling the threats of the enemy-enlightening, cheering, and comforting his fellow-Christians. But this also was said, not to Peter only, but to us. In every society, there are those like him to whom it may be said, “When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.” There are, and always must be, some who have more influence than their neighbours. Every advantage which we have over others makes us subject to this charge. If we are older, we should strengthen those that are younger; if we have the ascendency given by strength and activity, by decision of character, or by general ability, or by consideration of whatever sort, then we, being converted, should strengthen our brethren; we are answerable not for our souls only, but also in a certain measure, for those of others.

T. Arnold, Sermons, vol. iii., p. 114.

References: Luk 22:31, Luk 22:32.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. viii., p. 126; vol. x., p. 133; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. i., p. 352. Luk 22:31-34.-J. Oswald Dykes, Sermons, p. 263.

Luk 22:32

I. In this world of sin and sorrow, we have our work to do, and the question is-What work, and how do we do it? Let us take the world of sin, and plainly and practically, with earnest consideration, ask what we can and what we ought to do. On all sides of us we see life blighted and ruined by human passions, which sweep over the earth like flame over a dry heath, and leave it black and scarred behind them. The sorrows of the world are in the sad heritage of its sins-and these bitter fruits of sin have their bitter roots in selfishness. Things are as they are, and this is the world of sin. We. may not leave it. We are where God has placed us, and there we must stay until He gives us the signal to fall out of the ranks. How can we make better this ruined world of sin? The answer is a very simple one, but stringent, rigid, and inexorable; that is, we can only begin to do it by personal innocence and by personal holiness. Ah, how many will stumble over this entrance! No man who is not sincere in self-amelioration can ever be a prophet of God. Men who have begun wickedly have indeed, sometimes, like St. Augustine, like Bunyan, like Whitefield, turned over a new leaf and begun a new life; but we do not believe that even these have done as much as they might otherwise have done; even as he builds better who builds upon a foundation than he who builds upon ruins. But this, at any rate, is certain-that no hypocrite-no bad, no insincere, man-can heal, in any appreciable degree, the sinfulness of the world. Not till he is converted can he strengthen his brethren. Alas! even when he is converted he may find that he is maimed, that he has ruined his own transcendent powers of usefulness.

II. About the mere presence and person of good men there hang a charm and a spell of good which make them do good even when they are not consciously thinking of doing good at all. Their very presence does good, as if there were an angel there; and from their mere silence there spreads an influence, a flowing in of higher motives and purer thoughts into the souls of men. So, too, the mere presence of bad men makes us bad when they are not thinking of doing harm. Marguerite asks Faust with surprise how it is she finds herself unable to pray when his friend is by. How many a crime has been consummated solely because of vicious wickedness unconsciously made plastic by stronger wickedness! Among the pure and good the base and impure inspire a shuddering repulsion such as the presence of Judas Iscariot seems to have inspired in the heart of St. John; but among the many who are but the weakly bad the contagion of the stronger bad has an assimilating force. Are we noble enough to enter into the meaning of the sigh of Jesus, and to share His pure and Divine Passion for the world? If so, we must enter also into the spirit of His life, and the very first condition of doing that is, sincerity-a sincerity which can only be shown in the whole-hearted effort after personal innocence and personal holiness. If we would do as Jesus did we must be His servants. If we would help to heal the acknowledged evils of the world, we must ourselves be free from them. If we would tend the plague-stricken, there must not be the plague-spot in our own hearts. He who would help others must not only show others, but lead the way.

F. W. Farrar, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xvi., p. 385.

References: Luk 22:31, Luk 22:32.-A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 476. Luk 22:32.-A. Murray, With Christ in the School of Prayer, p. 198; Plain Sermons by Contributors to “Tracts for the Times,” vol. vi., p. 135; H. Crosby, Christian World Pulpit, vol. x., p. 308; Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 11; J. Keble, Sermons for Saints’ Days, p. 296. Luk 22:33.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. ii., p. 306. Luk 22:34.-W. G. Horder, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xviii., p. 278. Luk 22:35, Luk 22:36.-Expositor, 1st series, vol. vi., p. 312. Luk 22:35-38.-A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 471.

Luk 22:36

St. Luke alone records this saying. No other like it is to be found in any Gospel. Once, indeed, in commissioning the Twelve, Christ used the startling expression, “I came not to send peace, but a sword;” but there the whole context shows that He speaks not of the purpose, but of the result of His coming; so that even that saying hardly helps or illustrates this, where He Himself gives the command, and is understood by them literally, “He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.” This parable of the sword says this to us: “In the world you will have conflict. You will want your sword. Better lack a garment than lack a sword.”

Marvel not at the vehemence of the words: there are two reasons for it-

I. They contradict flesh and blood. It is painful to be always armed. It makes life a painful effort. What should we think of living in a beleaguered house-of having an enemy, secret or open, within the household? What food would nourish, what rest would refresh, on these conditions? How, then, if life itself, how if this fair world, how if this pleasant, converse, this delightful friendship, this seemingly innocent joy, is, to the eye that reads it truly, one insidious snare, or one perilous battlefield? What is existence worth on such terms? Nature speaks thus in her indolence and self-sparing. Scarce two or three in a generation really rise at Christ’s call to sell the garment for a sword. If He spoke one whit less vehemently, not one-not one-in a generation would listen.

II. There is a second reason for this vehemence. Because in this field deception and self-deception are ever busily working, and he who might gird himself for mere difficulty is in danger of relaxing effort under illusion. It is the master art of the devil to persuade us that there is no battle, that all are agreed. It is a mighty responsibility, if Christ be true, for a Christian to be about in this world. In proportion to his intermixture with it, in proportion to his place and his talent and his influence, is his want of the sword. Better, for him at all events, no garment than no sword. For he must fight either against the world or for it. He cannot be neutral. Weaker men may pass through it and escape notice. But he is one of its constituents, for his day one of its makers. Might he but desire to buy of Christ the indispensable sword.

C. J. Vaughan, Good Words, 1870, p. 612; see also Half Hours in the Temple Church.

References: Luk 22:37.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. ii., p. 159. Luk 22:39-46.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. v., p. 70; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. i., p. 277. Luk 22:41, Luk 22:42.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. xvi., p. 228; Christian World Pulpit, vol. xv., p. 250. Luk 22:42.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ix., p. 200. Luk 22:43.-J. E. Vaux, Sermon Notes, 4th series, p. 30.

Luk 22:44

I. The text expresses a deep mystery, of which we should try to give some account. It is a mystery; for what reason can be assigned for this intensity of suffering? Was the anticipation of that which awaited Him-desertion, ignominy, a death of torture-enough to cause all the agony which He felt? Do we not degrade our conception of the Lord Jesus Christ by admitting even the sufficiency, to say nothing of the truth, of such an explanation? Many an ancient stoic, many a Christian martyr would have met-has met-such a fate with a smile on his face. Shall we place Christ below them in the moral scale? It is, I believe, for the purpose of avoiding this difficulty that theories have been invented, in which some new and mysterious element in the suffering of Christ has been introduced. Thus, for example, we are told that the bitterness of Christ’s suffering in the garden of Gethsemane consisted in this: That “in some mysterious way” he had to endure the wrath of God. Of this theory I have no hesitation in saying that it is distinctly immoral, for it represents God, the Judge of all the earth, as so far from doing right, that He is angry with an innocent being.

II. While we may not presume to dogmatise on the feelings which passed through His mind then, it is a fair subject for inquiry. Is there any unsurmountable difficulty in ascribing the agony in the garden to a feeling that must have passed through His mind. Anticipation of that which, as we know now, and He knew then, awaited Him. Insensibility does, to some extent, the work of fortitude. But fortitude cannot do the work of insensibility. Insensibility may make action easier. Fortitude cannot make suffering less. Pain or sorrow cannot turn a brave man from his course; but unless he is insensible as well as brave, feel them he must. It is to the sensitive, imaginative nature that suffering, felt or anticipated, is most bitter. Such a man needs more fortitude than one less finely organised. But to say that because he is more finely organised he is less brave, is to assume that for which neither reason nor fact give the slightest warrant. That it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to understand fully the connection between the suffering of Christ and the fulfilment of sin is undeniable; but if this connection be once admitted, I cannot see that there is any difficulty in understanding why anticipated suffering should have caused a sharper pang to Him than it would have done to many an ordinary man. It is a mistake to confound this sensitiveness with a deficiency in fortitude, but the conclusion arrived at is quite independent of the relative esteem in which you may choose to hold the stoical and the sensitive nature. You may call the former the higher nature, if you like, but it would not have been suited to the mission of Christ.

J. H. Jellett, The Elder Son and Other Sermons, p. 153.

References: Luk 22:44.-H. Wace, Expositor, 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 203; Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. ix., No. 493; Ibid, vol. xx., No. 1199; Ibid., Morning by Morning, p. 83; G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines of Sermons, p. 82. Luk 22:45, Luk 22:46.-J. Keble, Sermons for Holy Week, p 46. Luk 22:46.-Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 299. Luk 22:46-48.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 224. Luk 22:47, Luk 22:48.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. ix., No. 494. Luk 22:48.-Ibid., Morning by Morning, p. 85; G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines of Sermons, p. 304; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. ii., p. 81. Luk 22:50, Luk 22:51.-G. Macdonald, Miracles of Our Lord, p. 70.

Luk 22:51

I. By one act, in a moment, Christ made Himself the repairer of the breach. The evil which His follower had done was cancelled; and through the kind interposition of a special act, the injured man was none the worse, but rather the better; and the harm, of which a Christian had been the occasion, was neutralised by his Master. Ill would it be for any of us, if there were not that refuge of thought to fall back upon, from all the foolish things and all the wrong things said and done, which we have afterwards so much regretted. It would be tremendous to think of all the trail of harm which we were dragging after us, if there were not a Christ-a Canceller and a Rectifier.

II. There is a great difference between those troubles which come straight from God, and those which pass to us from the hand of man. There are a dignity and sacredness about the one and an almost defilement about the other. But it would, be a mistake to infer that any one kind of trial comes more under the remedial power of the Lord Jesus Christ than another. It does not matter where the root and spring of the trouble lie, as soon as they are brought to Him they are all alike. Take it, in all its breadth, whatever the wound be, and whoever was the wounder-equally Christ is the Healer.

III. Malchus, as we have seen, had been one of the foremost against Christ. In his opposition to Christ he got his hurt. Christ cures the hurt which was the consequence of opposition to Himself. The worst hurts we get in life are those which we incur by taking the side against light, against conviction, against truth, i.e. against God. We all of us have borne, and perhaps some of us are bearing now, some of those hurts. Our only remedy lies with Him, whom we were, at that moment, in the act of making our enemy, when we got that hurt. And the marvel is, how He heals us; not a word of reproach, not a shadow of retaliation; it is enough we are wounded, and we cannot do without Him-therefore He does it. There is no healer of wounds but the Lord Jesus Christ.

J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 4th series, p. 239.

References: Luk 22:51.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. viii., p. 143; T. Birkett Dover, The Ministry of Mercy, p. 209. Luk 22:54-61.-A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 469.

Luk 22:61-62

Peter’s Repentance a Type of True Sorrow.

Observe:-

I. That Peter’s sorrow did not arise from the fact that his guilt was known.

II. It was not simply the suffering of remorse.

III. The Divine power of Peter’s sorrow is shown by three facts. (1) It rose from the sense of Christ’s love; (2) it was manifested in the conquest of self-trust; (3) it became the element of spiritual strength.

E. L. Hull, Sermons, 3rd series, p. 191.

Although the failings and sins of God’s eminent servants are faithfully recorded in Holy Scripture, we can never fail to cherish an affectionate and reverential remembrance of those chosen saints of God. Let us never forget how Jesus Himself valued and loved them, and was cheered and encouraged by their affection, their sympathy and their obedience. The faults and sins of God’s people are recorded in Scripture, not that we may love and esteem them less, but that we may honour and love and esteem God more, and that we may be more thoroughly convinced of our own inability to serve and please our God.

I. Peter sinned against Light; against bright and fully revealed Light. The Father Himself had revealed unto him that Christ was the Son of God; and he not only sinned against Light, but in the actual presence of Light. Jesus was before him while he denied Him. And so do we all sin-against Light and in the presence of Light. The very eyes of Jesus are resting upon us, and the very truth of the words of Jesus is within our hearts, whilst we forget Him and deny Him.

II. Remember how Christ had forewarned Peter, even when He had before Him His own sorrow and coming agony. So wonderful was His faithfulness and His love that He never for a moment forgot the sorrows of His disciples. The Lord looked upon Peter, and that brought back to Peter his individual relationship to Jesus.

III. Peter’s weeping was a life-long weeping. Repentance which is born out of love lasts all our life. Repentance which exists chiefly out of fear may end in despondency, or may be banished altogether, as the morning cloud. Then this weeping, although it was bitter, was also sweet. Repentance is not bitter in the sense of that bitterness which the world’s sorrow is, but is full of sweetness. In God’s Word we have the blessedness of the poor in spirit, of those that mourn, of those that are weak, of those that hunger and thirst after righteousness, nay, more wonderful than all, we have the blessedness of the pure in heart. And when we repent and sorrow over our sins, it is because the voice of Jesus is heard saying, “Thy sins are forgiven thee.”

A. Saphir, Penny Pulpit, new series, No. 673.

Reference: Luk 22:61, Luk 22:62.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. vi., p. 278.

Luk 22:62

Only a Fall.

It is very difficult to define a fall. It has boundaries; you go into it and you come out of it. Some conditions of sin have no boundaries. Therefore, till the issue we cannot absolutely pronounce upon any wrong state and tell it is a fall. It rests with you, so to get up at this minute from any sin that you have ever done, that you shall make it only a fall. “Only a fall?” Yes-a mere parenthesis, a mere exception, to be absorbed back into the eternal grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I. Look at the downward steps in Peter which go to make that long fearful slide which we name a fall. Peter, presuming on his position, and elated with his high distinctions, began to compare himself with other people and to prefer himself to them. I do not know whether this habit of comparison was the child of-or gendered-the pride which took possession of Peter’s heart. Certain it is that he was proud, and the reason he was proud was that he was dealing with a low level. Whenever you have proud feelings, it is a proof, not that your attainment is great, but that your standard is deficient. “We have left all and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?”

II. Peter was reproved. But he was where all caution falls impotent. Without any measurement of himself, without any thought of past monition, he hurried on and ventured into the” very midst of scenes which were full of the ordeal which he was least able at that moment, to meet; and at once he was precipitated into the depth of his humiliation. He is as weak as the slenderest reed upon the lake. He, whom we should have called characteristically and fearlessly honest, tells three base lies. His Master is despised, sacrificed to a fear and a blush.

III. How did the restoring mercy work? By the simplest of all simple processes. Peter’s eye was still on Christ. There was a fascination in the Saviour to him, even in his wickedness. There was a relationship between that man and Christ which nothing could ever dissolve; he could not help but look at Christ. And as Peter looked, the face of Jesus turned and looked upon Peter, and the Saviour’s and the sinner’s eyes met, and that meeting was salvation. It was but a glance, and it took but a moment, but it was the hinge of Peter’s destiny for ever and ever.

J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 5th series, p. 290.

References: Luke 22-F. D. Maurice, The Gospel of the Kingdom, p. 324. Luk 23:2.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 216. Luk 23:8, Luk 23:9.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxviii., No. 1645; Homiletic Magazine, vol. xiii., p. 65. Luk 23:8-11.-Parker, Hidden Springs, p. 269. Luk 23:9.-W. M. Taylor, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxix., p. 47. Luk 23:13-16.-W. Hanna, The Last Days of Our Lord’s Passion, p. 119. Luk 23:15.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 99.

Luk 23:16

Note:-

I. That the trials and sufferings of Jesus Christ were essential to the perfection of His character as our Great Example. There have been in the world examples of patience and resignation and submission to the will of God, but there have been none like that of Jesus Christ.

II. The sufferings of a Redeemer as a substitute for man have made a wondrous impression upon the human mind. Since the world began, no transaction like it has ever taken place-no expedient like it has ever been found to influence the human heart, or stay the swelling tide of human corruption. The flood swept away a guilty world, and the impression made by that dread manifestation of Divine displeasure was soon forgotten. But the event of Calvary attracted the attention, affected the hearts, and changed the character, of thousands. The. impression, moreover, which it makes is of the very character needed. An impression not more distinct of God’s readiness to forgive sin than of His displeasure against sin.

III. The Cross of Christ is a demonstration of love, a warrant for confidence, an appeal to everything noble and generous about human nature. I question not that the Redeemer’s work took its peculiar form as much to meet the feelings of the human hearts as to meet the requirements of God’s justice and truth. Our feelings towards God are naturally those of distrust and opposition, and that simply because we are sinners; and these feelings must be mastered before we can be saved; and they must be mastered by an unequivocal overwhelming demonstration of love; and we have it in the Cross, for there God is in Christ, reconciling man into Himself. The Redeemer was not compelled to suffer; but because He loved man so much the thickening darkness of the curse only bound him the faster to His work; He saw, He endured, He triumphed under the influence of love to man; and now He not only shows us that we may trust Him, but He addresses His appeal to our hearts.

E. Mason, A Pastor’s Legacy, p. 42.

Reference: Luk 23:20-25.-Christian World Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 270.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

VI. His Rejection, Suffering and Death — Chapter 22-23

CHAPTER 22

1. The Betrayer. (Luk 22:1-6.)

2. Preparation for the Passover. (Luk 22:7-13.)

3. The Last Passover. (Luk 22:14-18.)

4. The Lords Supper Instituted. (Luk 22:19-20)

5. The Betrayal Announced. (Luk 22:21-23)

6. Strife for Honor; True Greatness. (Luk 22:24-27)

7. Rewards Promised. (Luk 22:28-30)

8. Peter and the Disciples Warned. (Luk 22:31-38)

9. The Agony in the Garden. (Luk 22:39-46)

10. The Betrayal and the Arrest. (Luk 22:47-53)

11. Peters Denial. (Luk 22:54-62)

12. The Son of Man Buffeted and Before the Council. (Luk 22:63-71.)

And now we reach the story of His Rejection, Suffering and Death. What pen is able to describe it all! What mind can fathom it! We shall again confine ourselves to those things which are peculiar to Luke and not repeat annotations as given in Matthew and Mark. Notice the difference in the words of the institution of the Lords supper. Matthew and Mark have My blood shed for many. In Luke we find the words My body which is given for you; My blood which is shed for you. His love shines out fully in these words. In Luke alone we have His loving request this do in remembrance of Me. Oh! that His people for whom He shed His blood may never forget this beautiful word and remember Him in this simple way.

And Luke shows us the contrast between Himself and His disciples. He was about descending into the deepest depths of humiliation; sorrow and shame were before the willing victim, yea the greatest agony and death. Among them was strife, who of them should be accounted the greatest. This was the second instance of contention for preeminence recorded by Luke. (Luk 9:46.) Then He announced the denial of Peter. Luk 22:31-32 are peculiar to Luke. Satan was to sift him as wheat, but the Lord knew all about it and had prayed for him and therefore Peter could not succumb and be lost. And the Lord is the same today. He knows His own and prays for them before Satan can ever come near with his temptations. The word when thou art converted does not mean that Peter was unconverted. It has the meaning when thou hast returned back.

There is also a marked difference in the account Luke gives of Gethsemane from the accounts in Matthew and Mark. Luke tells us of an angel who strengthened Him. How could an angel strengthen Him, who is the Creator of the angels? He certainly could not strengthen His holy soul. That an angel strengthened Him must belong to His deep humiliation.

But the body suffers, and presently the strain upon it is seen in the sweat, as it were great drops of blood, that fall down upon the ground. Laborer for God and man as He is, His labor is a warfare also: the enemy is here, as He presently says to those who come to apprehend Him: This is your hour, and the power of darkness. The Seed of the woman is planting His heel upon the head of the old serpent, but His heel is bruised in doing this. In the weakness of perfect Manhood He suffers, and conquers by suffering (F.W. Grant).

Then follows the Betrayal with a kiss, the arrest of the Son of Man, Peters Denial. Luke alone tells us that the Lord looked upon denying Peter; what look that must have been! The chapter ends with the cruel treatment of the Son of Man, the Friend of sinners, who had come to seek and to save that which is lost, received from man, His glorious self-witness and unjust condemnation by the council.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

Chapter 39

Preparations For The Last Passover

Luke 22 begins Lukes inspired narrative of our adorable Saviours sufferings and death as our Substitute. We now begin to consider the most holy, most profound, and most wondrous things revealed in the Book of God. Nothing is so sublime, so solemn, and so sweet to the regenerate soul as the sacrifice of Christ. No portion of holy scripture is more important than the things God the Holy Spirit inspired Luke to describe in these last chapters of his gospel narrative. And no part of our Lords earthly history is so fully given by all the gospel writers as this. Only Matthew and Luke describe the circumstances of our Redeemers birth. But all four gospel writers describe our Saviours death minutely. And, of the four, Lukes account is the most detailed.

In these first thirteen verses Luke sets before us the preparations made by our Lord Jesus for the last observance of the Passover and for the first observance of the Lords Supper. It is important that we recognize this fact. Our Saviour here forever abolished the legal, Jewish Passover and established as a perpetual ordinance in his church the observance of the Lords Supper. That which he prepared to keep with his disciples was the last Passover ever to be observed by believing men and women. Christ the true Passover was now about to be sacrificed for us. At the same time, our Lord was preparing to observe the Lords Supper with his disciples for the first time.

Christ Our Passover

Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover (Luk 22:1). First, I want to remind you that the Old Testament Passover was merely a temporary type and picture of our Lord Jesus Christ. God the Holy Spirit declares in 1Co 5:7, Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. The Passover was the first legal ordinance established by God in the Old Testament (Exodus 12). It was established as a memorial of Israels redemption out of Egypt by the blood of the paschal lamb and the power of God. That first Passover and all the Passover sacrifices that followed it (as well as all the other requirements, ceremonies, services, and sacrifices of the law) were given for only one purpose: to hold forth in type the Lord Jesus Christ. To him the whole law pointed; and by him the whole law was fulfilled. All those things were, as we are plainly told, shadows of good things to come (Col 2:17; Heb 10:1).

Believers in the Old Testament era observed the Passover looking upon the paschal lamb as a type of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world (Rev 13:8), just as we now observe the Lords Supper in remembrance of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. The lamb appointed in the Jewish Passover was to be a male of the first year without blemish and without spot. Such was Christ. The lamb was set apart four days before the Passover. So Christ was set apart eternally in the purpose, council, and foreknowledge of God and by entering into Jerusalem four days before his death upon the cursed tree. The Jewish paschal lamb was roasted whole with fire, and not a bone of it broken. So our Lord Jesus, in the accomplishment of our eternal redemption, sustained all the fire of Divine wrath against sin in his sacrifice; and we are expressly told that not one of his bones were broken, that the scripture might be fulfilled (Joh 19:36).

The scriptures tell us that our Saviour observed the feast of Passover four times during the course of his earthly ministry. The first public Passover Christ observed is related to us in Joh 2:13-25. The second Passover, which our Lord graced with his presence, is recorded in John 5, when he healed the lame man at the pool of Bethesda. The third public Passover where we find the Lord Jesus present is recorded in John 6, at which time our Lord gave instructions about himself as the Bread of Life. The fourth and last Passover the Lord Jesus kept is recorded here in Luke 22 and by Matthew, Mark, and John.

Robert Hawker made the following tremendous observation.

If the Lord Jesus never once during his ministry omitted his attendance on the Passover, how hath he thereby endeared to his redeemed his holy Supper, instituted and appointed as it was by himself to take place in his church in the room of the Jewish Passover! Surely by this Jesus might be supposed to intimate his holy pleasure, that his people should be always present at the celebration of it. Methinks by this constant attendance of the Lord, he meant to say that not one of his little ones should be absent at his Supper. And his servant, the Apostle, seems to have had the same views of his Masters gracious design in this particular when he saith, For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lords death till he come (1Co 11:26).

Overruling Providence

And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people (Luk 22:2). Second, I cannot avoid again calling your attention to the display here given of the overruling providence of our God, as we read here of the chief priests and scribes plotting to murder our Saviour. Though they had no awareness of it, they were but instruments in the Lords hands for the accomplishment of his holy will and eternal decrees, by their wicked hands, doing all that they did by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God (Act 2:23; Act 4:27-28; Act 13:27-28).

How sweet! How comforting! How delightful this is! To behold the chief priests and scribes as Gods instruments, for the purpose of bringing Christ into the very situation where our sins must have brought us, but for his intervention! Though they utterly hated him, they brought him forward on the mission for which he came into the world, to save Hs people from their sins, being made both sin and a curse for us. There was no other means whereby we could have been redeemed; and God sovereignly overruled and used the most wicked deeds of the most wicked men to accomplish it!

I say this is sweet, comforting, and delightful to behold. Just as it was here, so it is now. Our God overrules and uses the most malicious devices of the most wicked men to bring his purposed blessings to his chosen.

Blind Guides

Third, when we read that the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him, I am reminded that the most prominent, highly respected, and well-trained religious leaders are often blind guides. High office in the church does not indicate grace in the heart.

The first step in putting our Saviour to death was taken by the religious teachers of the Jewish nation. The very men who ought to have welcomed the Messiah were the men who conspired to murder him. The very pastors who ought to have rejoiced at the appearing of the Lamb of God plotted his slaughter. They sat in Moses seat. They claimed to be guides of the blind and lights of them that were in darkness (Rom 2:19). They belonged to the tribe of Levi. They were, most of them, direct descendants of Aaron. Yet, they were the very men who crucified the Lord of glory!

Beware of attaching importance, significance, and spiritual knowledge to preachers and religious leaders. Ordination papers do not make men faithful. The greatest of heresies have been started by preachers.

By all means, honour faithful men. Hear them and obey them. Faithful pastors are the angels of God to his church. They speak to you the Word of God; and they are to be followed (Heb 13:7; Heb 13:17). But we must never allow blind men to lead us into the ditch. We must never allow modern chief priests and scribes to make us crucify Christ afresh. We must test all teachers by the unerring rule of the Word of God. To the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them (Isa 8:20).

Judas Apostasy

Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them. And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money. And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude (Luk 22:3-6).

Fourth, Judas apostasy sets before us a glaring example of the fact that men and women who appear to have a good profession of faith often prove reprobates in the end, teaching us the necessity of perseverance. The treachery here described was the treachery of one of the twelve Apostles of Christ. Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. Those words are peculiarly dreadful. Judas Iscariot ought to be a standing beacon to us all. Judas was one of our Lords chosen apostles. He followed our Lord during the whole course of his ministry. He forsook all for Christs sake. He heard Christ preach and saw Christs miracles. He preached the same doctrine Christ preached. He spoke like all the other Apostles. There was nothing about Judas to distinguish him from Peter, James, and John. He was never suspected of being unsound, let alone the betrayer. Yet, Judas was a reprobate man, the son of perdition (Joh 17:12).

At best we have but a faint conception of the horrid deceitfulness of our hearts. The lengths to which men may go in religion without grace in their hearts is far greater than we think (Psa 139:23-24; Mat 10:22; 1Co 9:26-27; Heb 6:4-6; Heb 10:38-39; 1Jn 2:19-20).

Beware of Covetousness

Fifth, the fact that Judas betrayal was the result of his love of money reinforces our Lords warning in Luk 12:15. Take heed and beware of covetousness. What enormous power the love of money has over men!When Judas went to the chief priests and offered to betray his Master, they were glad, and covenanted to give him money (Luk 22:5). That tells us the hidden secret of Judas heart and the motive behind his behaviour. He loved money. He loved the world. He was fond of riches. He had heard our Lords solemn warning. Take heed and beware of covetousness. But he gave it no heed. Covetousness was the rock upon which he made shipwreck of his soul. Covetousness dragged him headlong into hell!

Beware of the love of this world, particularly as it involves the love of money, which the Holy Spirit tells us is the root of all evil (1Ti 6:10). Gehazi, Ananias and Sapphira, and Judas were brought to ruin because of their love of money. And the money they sought, for which they sold their souls, was terribly insignificant! For a mere thirty pieces of silver Judas Iscariot betrayed the Son of God! Thirty pieces of silver was the legal price of a slave. No doubt, these religious hypocrites soothed their consciences by telling themselves that by purchasing Jesus like any other slave, it was perfectly legal for them to hand him over to the Roman authorities. Thirty pieces of silver. What did Judas buy with his hellish craftiness? He did not gain acceptance with the powerful, elite priests and scribes, as he probably hoped he would; but was now looked upon as nothing but a contemptible slave trader, a hireling, and a betrayer. Thirty pieces of silver, the price of a slave to a greedy man, proved at last to be the price he put upon his own immortal soul. Thirty pieces of silver was taken out of the temple treasury, silver that was marked for the purchase of sacrifices. The Lamb of God was purchased with money from the temple treasury for the price of a slave!

Beware of the love of money! It is a subtle thing, and far nearer than we might imagine. A poor man is just as susceptible to it as a rich man. Some have much who do not love it; and many have very little who yet love it. Let us be content with such things as we have (Heb 13:5), be it little or much. We never know what we might do if we became suddenly rich. I find it striking that in the Book of Wisdom (Proverbs) we find only one prayer (Pro 30:8-9).

Remove far from me vanity and lies: give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me: Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the LORD? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain.

Made Ready

Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the Passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the Passover, that we may eat. And they said unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare? And he said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered into the city, there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher of water; follow him into the house where he entereth in. And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the Passover with my disciples? And he shall show you a large upper room furnished: there make ready. And they went, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the Passover (Luk 22:7-13).

Sixth, we learn that when the time came for the Passover to be kept, everything was made ready. Even so, when chosen sinners are called by the Spirit of God to eat the true Passover, to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, they find everything made ready for them.

All things were made ready by divine arrangement. What a marvellous display we have in these verses of our Saviours absolute dominion over all things and all men! The disciples found a man by divine direction, who by divine command provided everything that was needed.

All things were made ready for the keeping of the feast. A lamb was provided. The lamb was slain and burnt upon the altar for the Lord God and for these disciples. Its blood was sprinkled at the foot of the altar. The lamb was brought into the house, where it was to be eaten. The lamb was roasted and eaten with bitter herbs.

In all these things we see a close parallel with Christ our Passover who was sacrificed for us, and of our faith in him. Four times we are reminded in these thirteen verses that the evening before our Saviours crucifixion was the appointed day when the Passover must be killed. Then came the day! How thankful I am that that day came! Arent you! In due time Christ died for the ungodly!

By divine arrangement, the Lamb of God died at the very time when the passover lamb was being slain. The death of Christ was the fulfilment of the Passover. He was the true sacrifice to which every passover-lamb had been pointing for 1500 years. What the death of the lamb had been to Israel in Egypt, his death is to us in reality. The safety which the blood of the passover-lamb had provided for Israel, his blood provides in infinite abundance for believing sinners. Blessed be God forever Christ our passover is sacrificed for us! (1Co 5:7).

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

Exo 12:6-23, Lev 23:5, Lev 23:6, Mat 26:2, Mar 14:1, Mar 14:2, Mar 14:12, Joh 11:55-57, 1Co 5:7, 1Co 5:8

Reciprocal: Exo 34:18 – General 2Ch 30:21 – the feast Psa 2:1 – rage Luk 22:7 – General Joh 13:1 – the feast Act 4:27 – of a

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

AS WE COMMENCE to read this chapter, we reach the closing scenes of our Lords life. The Passover was not only a standing witness to Israels deliverance from Egypt but also a type of the great Sacrifice which was yet to come. Now at last the climax approached, and Christ our Passover was to be sacrificed for us precisely at the Passover season. The religious leaders were scheming how they might kill Him in spite of the fact that many of the people viewed Him with favour. Satan inspired their hatred, and Satan it was who presented them with a tool wherewith to carry out their wishes.

John, in his Gospel, unmasks Judas for us before the end is reached. In his twelfth chapter he tells us that, consumed with covetousness, he had become a thief. He also tells us in his thirteenth chapter the exact moment at which Satan entered into him. Luke relates that dreadful fact in a more general way; and it shows that the prince of the powers of darkness considered that to encompass the death of Christ was a task of such importance that it should be delegated to no lesser power: he would take charge of the business himself. Yet he undertook the work to his own overthrow. The compact between Judas and the religious leaders was easily settled. They were consumed with envy, and Judas with the love of money.

For many centuries the Passover had been observed with more or less faithfulness, it was now, in its full significance, to be observed for the last time. Within twenty-four hours its light grew pale in the shining of its Antitype, when the true Lamb of God died on the cross. It is a remarkable fact that the last time it was celebrated in its full significance, there was present to partake of it the One who instituted it-the perfect, holy Man, who was Jehovahs Fellow. He ordered the Passover to be prepared, and He decided the very place where they should eat it. The time, the manner, the place, were all His appointment. The choice lay not with the disciples but with Him, as verse Luk 22:9 shows.

The Lords foreknowledge is strikingly displayed in verse Luk 22:10. Carrying the water was the task of the women; a man bearing a pitcher of water was a very uncommon sight. Yet He knew that there would be a man performing this unusual act, and that Peter and John would meet him as they entered the city. He knew also that the goodman of the house would respond to the message delivered by the disciples in the name of the Master. Doubtless he recognized the Master as being his Master; in other words, he was one of the godly in Jerusalem who acknowledged His claims, and the Lord knew how to lay His hand upon him. This man had the privilege of furnishing a guest-chamber for the use of the One who had no chamber of His own, and when the hour was come He sat down with His disciples.

In the account which Luke gives, the distinction between the Passover Supper and the Supper which He instituted is very clear: verses Luk 22:15-18 give the one, and verses Luk 22:19, Luk 22:20 the other. The Lords words as to the Passover indicate the closing up of that old order of things. His sufferings would mean its fulfilment, and when a spared remnant of Israel enters at last into the blessedness of the millennium, it will be as sheltered by the blood of Christ. As to the cup (verse Luk 22:17), this does not appear to have been any part of the Passover as instituted through Moses, and the Lord apparently did not drink of it. Instead, He indicated that His day of joy, which the fruit of the vine symbolized, would only be reached in the coming kingdom.

Then He instituted His own Supper in remembrance of His death; the bread symbolizing His body, the cup, His shed blood. The account is very brief, and, for the full significance of it all, we have to go to 1Co 10:1-33; 1Co 11:1-34. Remembrance, was what the Lord emphasized at the moment, and in view of His long absence we can see the importance of this. Through the centuries the memorial of His death has been with us, and the abiding witness of His love.

The verses which follow (21-27) witness to the folly and the feebleness which was found amongst the disciples. The hand of the betrayer was on the table, and He knew it, though the rest of the disciples were quite unaware of it. There was also strife amongst them, each wishing for the foremost place, and this just as their great Master was about to take the lowest place. Such, alas! is the heart of man, even of saints. It served however to bring out very clearly the fundamental difference between the disciple and the world. Worldly greatness is expressed and maintained by taking a lordly place: Christian greatness is found in taking a servants place. In that greatness Jesus Himself was pre-eminent. Few words are more touching than this- I am among you as he that serveth. Such had been His life of perfect grace; and such, in supreme measure, His death was about to be.

It is also most touching to observe how He spoke to the disciples in verses Luk 22:28-30. They were indeed foolish, and their spirit far astray from His, yet with what graciousness He brought into the light the good feature that had characterized them. They were firmly attached to Him. In spite of His temptations, culminating in His rejection, they had continued with Him. This He would never forget, and there would be an abundant recompense in the kingdom. In the coming day He will take up the kingdom for His Father, and take it up by His saints, and these disciples of His will have a very special place of prominence. In the light of this gracious pronouncement they must surely have felt how mean and sordid had been their previous strife for a great place. And, may we feel the same.

Next, verses Luk 22:31-34, comes the Lords special warning to Peter. At this moment he was thinking and acting in the flesh, so Jesus used his name according to the flesh, and His repetition of it conveyed the urgency of His warning. Self-confidence marked him as well as desire for pre-eminence, and this laid him open to Satan: yet the Lords intercession would prevail, and there was wheat there and not chaff only. This wheat would remain when the winnowing was passed.

The four verses which follow, 35-38, were addressed to all the disciples. They had to bear witness that they had possessed an absolute sufficiency as the fruit of His power, though sent without any human resources; and He intimated that with His death and departure another order of things would supervene. Men would reckon Him among the transgressors in this world, but the things concerning Him had an end in another world. He would be exalted to glory, and His disciples left as His witnesses, having to resume the ordinary circumstances of this world. Their response to these words showed that they were likely to miss the spirit of what He said, by seizing upon one literal detail; so for the moment He left it.

Thus far it has been the dealings of His love with His own; now we see the perfection of His Manhood displayed in Gethsemane. He faced, as before the Father, the full bitterness of that cup of judgment which He had to drink; and His full perfection is seen in that, while shrinking from it, He devoted Himself to the accomplishing of the Fathers will, whatever it might cost Him. Luke, alone of the Evangelists, tells us of the appearance of the angel to strengthen Him. This emphasizes the reality of His Manhood, in keeping with the special character of this Gospel. So also His sweat being as great drops of blood is only mentioned in this Gospel. The horror of that which was before Him was entered into in communion with the Father.

With verse Luk 22:47 the last scenes begin; and now all is calmness and grace with the Lord: all is confusion and agitation with His friends, His adversaries, and even with His judges. The communion in the garden led to the calmness in the great hour of trial. Judas reached the heights of hypocrisy in betraying his Master with a kiss. Peter used one of those two swords they had just alluded to, in ill-conceived and ill-directed violence. What he did in his violence the Lord promptly undid in His grace. The violence was to be left to the multitude with the swords and staves. It was their hour, and the hour in which the power of darkness was to be displayed. Against that dark background the Lord displayed His grace.

The account of Peters fall follows. The way for it had been prepared by his previous desire for the first place, his self-confidence, and his violent action. Now he followed afar off, and soon got amongst the enemies of his Master. Satan set the trap with consummate skill. First the maid and then the other two servants pressed home their identification of him, leading him to denials increasing in emphasis; though Luke does not tell us how he broke into curses and swearing. That after all was incidental; the essential thing was that he denied his Lord.

Precisely at that moment, just as Jesus had predicted, the cock crew; and then the Lord turned and looked upon him. Just what that look conveyed we may not know, but it spoke such volumes to the fallen disciple that he went out from the enemies of his Master with bitter tears. Judas was filled with remorse, but we do not read that he wept. Peters bitter weeping was a witness that after all he did love his Lord, and that his faith was not going to fail. The prayer and the look were beginning to prove their efficacy.

This Gospel makes it clear that the trial of Jesus was divided into four parts. First, there was the examination before the chief priests and scribes, as they sought for some plausible pretext for condemning Him to death. The account of this fills the closing verses of the chapter, and it is given with brevity. It is made very plain however that they condemned Him on His own plain confession of who He was. They challenged Him as to being the Christ, and the Lords answer showed that He knew they were fixed in their unbelief and in their determination to condemn Him. Still, He claimed to be the Son of Man, who should presently wield the very power of God, and this they interpreted as meaning that He must also claim to be the Son of God. This indeed He was, and His reply, Ye say that I am, was an emphatic, Yes. As claiming to be the Christ, the Son of Man, the Son of God, they condemned Him to death,

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

1

In Mar 14:1 the passover and unleavened bread are spoken of as separate feasts. That is because there was no leaven allowed in their houses on the 14th day of the first month, nor on the seven days immediately following. Because of this, the two terms are sometimes used interchangeably. (See Lev 23:4-6.)

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

THE chapter which opens with these verses, begins Luke’s account of our Lord’s sufferings and death. No part of the Gospels is so important as this. The death of Christ was the life of the world.-No part of our Lord’s history is so fully given by all the gospel writers as this. Only two of them describe the circumstances of Christ’s birth. All four dwell minutely on Christ’s death. And of all the four, no one supplies us with such full and interesting details as Luke.

We see, firstly, in these verses, that high offices in the church do not preserve the holders of them from great blindness and sin. We read that “the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill” Jesus.

The first step in putting Christ to death, was taken by the religious teachers of the Jewish nation. The very men who ought to have welcomed the Messiah, were the men who conspired to kill Him. The very pastors who ought to have rejoiced at the appearing of the Lamb of God, had the chief hand in slaying Him. They sat in Moses’ seat. They claimed to be “guides of the blind,” and “lights of them that were in darkness.” (Rom 2:19.) They belonged to the tribe of Levi. They were, most of them, in direct succession and descent from Aaron. Yet they were the very men who crucified the Lord of glory! With all their boasted knowledge, they were far more ignorant than the few Galilean fishermen who followed Christ.

Let us beware of attaching an excessive importance to ministers of religion because of their office. Orders and rank confer no exemption from error. The greatest heresies have been sown, and the greatest practical abuses introduced into the church by ordained men. Respect is undoubtedly due to high official position. Order and discipline ought not to be forgotten. The teaching and counsel of regularly appointed teachers ought not to be lightly refused.-But there are limits beyond which we must not go. We must never suffer the blind to lead us into the ditch. We must never allow modern chief priests and scribes to make us crucify Christ afresh. We must try all teachers by the unerring rule of the Word of God. It matters little who says a thing in religion;-but it matters greatly what it is that is said. Is it scriptural? Is it true? This is the only question.-“To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” (Isa 8:20.)

We see, secondly, in these verses, how far men may fall after making a high profession. We read that the second step toward our Lord’s crucifixion, was the treachery of one of the twelve apostles: “Then entered Satan into Judas Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.” These words are peculiarly awful. To be tempted by Satan is bad enough. To be sifted, buffeted, led captive by him is truly terrible. But when Satan “enters into a man,” and dwells in him, the man becomes indeed a child of hell.

Judas Iscariot ought to be a standing beacon to the church of Christ. This man, be it remembered, was one of our Lord’s chosen apostles. He followed our Lord during the whole course of His ministry. He forsook all for Christ’s sake. He heard Christ preach and saw Christ’s miracles. He preached himself. He spoke like the other apostles. There was nothing about him to distinguish him from Peter, James, and John. He was never suspected of being unsound at heart. And yet this man turns out at length a hypocrite, betrays his Master, helps his enemies to deliver Him up to death, and dies himself a “son of perdition.” (Joh 17:12.) These are fearful things. But they are true.

Let the recollection of Judas Iscariot constrain every professing Christian to pray much for humility. Let us often say, “Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts.” (Psa 139:23.) At best we have but a faint conception of the deceitfulness of our hearts. The lengths to which men may go in religion, and yet be without grace, is far greater than we suppose.

We see, thirdly, in these verses, the enormous power of the love of money. We are told that when Judas went to the chief priests and offered to betray his Master, they “covenanted to give him money.” That little sentence reveals the secret of this wretched man’s fall. He was fond of money. He had doubtless heard our Lord’s solemn warning, “Take heed and beware of covetousness.” (Luk 12:15.) But he had either forgotten it, or given it no heed. Covetousness was the rock on which he made shipwreck. Covetousness was the ruin of his soul.

We need not wonder that Paul called the love of money “the root of all evil.” (1Ti 6:10.) The history of the church is full of mournful proofs, that it is one of the choicest weapons of Satan for corrupting and spoiling professors of religion. Gehazi, Ananias and Sapphira are names which naturally occur to our minds. But of all proofs, there is none so melancholy as the one before us. For money a chosen apostle sold the best and most loving of Masters! For money Judas Iscariot betrayed Christ!

Let us watch and pray against the love of money. It is a subtle disease, and often far nearer to us than we suppose. A poor man is just as liable to it as a rich man. It is possible to love money without having it, and it is possible to have it without loving it. Let us be “content with such things as we have.” (Heb 13:5.) We never know what we might do if we became suddenly rich. It is a striking fact, that there is only one prayer in all the Book of Proverbs, and that one of the three petitions in that prayer, is the wise request,-“Give me neither poverty nor riches.” (Pro 30:8.)

We see, lastly, in these verses, the close connection between our Lord Jesus Christ’s death and the Feast of the Passover. Four times we are reminded here that the evening before His crucifixion was the time of the great Jewish feast. It was “the day when the Passover must be killed.”

We cannot doubt that the time of our Lord’s crucifixion was overruled by God. His perfect wisdom and controlling power arranged that the Lamb of God should die, at the very time when the passover-lamb was being slain. The death of Christ was the fulfillment of the passover. He was the true sacrifice to which every passover-lamb had been pointing for 1500 years. What the death of the lamb had been to Israel in Egypt, His death was to be to sinners all over the world. The safety which the blood of the passover-lamb had provided for Israel, His blood was to provide far more abundantly for all that believed in Him.

Let us never forget the sacrificial character of Christ’s death. Let us reject with abhorrence the modern notion that it was nothing more than a mighty instance of self-sacrifice and self-denial. It was this no doubt;-but it was something far higher, deeper, and more important than this. It was a propitiation for the sins of the world. It was an atonement for man’s transgression. It was the killing of the true passover, through whose death destruction is warded off from sinners believing on Him. “Christ our passover,” says Paul, “is sacrificed for us.” (1Co 5:7.) Let us grasp that truth firmly, and never let it go.

==================

Notes-

v1.-[Which is called the passover.] Let it be noted that this expression shows that Luke wrote his Gospel specially for the benefit of the Gentiles. Such an explanatory phrase as this would not have been used, if it had been written for the Jews.

v2.-[Chief Priests and Scribes sought how, &c.] Burkitt remarks on this verse, “As general councils have erred, and may err fundamentally, both in matter of doctrine and practice, so did this general council at Jerusalem, consisting of Chief Priests, Doctors, and Elders, with the High Priest for their president.”

[Feared the people.] The dread of public opinion is curiously shown here, as well as in the famous case of Herod desiring to kill John the Baptist, and yet afraid. Well-directed public opinion is one of God’s most powerful instruments for controlling tyrants and oppressors, and keeping the world in order.

v3.-[Then entered Satan into Judas.] Calvin remarks on this expression, “Though Satan drives us every day to crime, and reigns in us, when he hurries us into a course of extraordinary wickedness; yet he is said to enter into the reprobate when he takes possession of all their senses, overthrows the fear of God, extinguishes the light of reason, and destroys every feeling of shame.”

v4.-[The Captains.] These were not Roman officers. They were commanders of the Jewish guard of the Temple.

v5.-[To give him money.] Quesnel remarks, “It is avarice and the desire of earthly riches, which generally lays open the hearts of ecclesiastical persons to the devil, as it did that of the apostle. They deliver up the key of their hearts when they deliver up themselves to this passion.”

v6.-[He promised.] The Greek word so rendered, is translated in every other place where it is used in the New Testament, “thank,” or “confess.” Hammond thinks that it indicates “promising with great professions of thankfulness and gratitude.”

v7.-[The day…when the passover must be killed.] There is a difficulty here which has occasioned much speculation among commentators.

The difficulty is this. Our Lord appears to have eaten the passover one day in the week, and the Jews his enemies to have eaten it on another. He ate the passover on Thursday evening, while we are distinctly told that the next morning early “they went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the passover.” (Joh 18:28.) The law was distinct that the passover was to be killed the evening of the fourteenth day, and eaten that night. Why then did our Lord and the chief priests and Scribes not eat the passover at the same time? How is this to be explained?

1. Some think that our Lord kept the passover on the right and lawful day, but the Jews on the wrong one. They think that the Jews kept it on the wrong day, because of some tradition they had adopted, or because their time, on the lawful night, was entirely occupied with taking Christ prisoner, and preparing for His trial. This last view is that of Chrysostom and Eusebius.

2. Pearce says, that “in the days of Jesus, the number of Jews assembled to eat the passover was exceedingly great, and that from necessity they took the liberty of eating the passover on any hour before the second evening, or fifteenth day.”

I offer no opinion on the difficulty beyond the two following remarks.

For one thing, I think it noteworthy that at the original appointment of the passover, the command is distinct to kill the lamb in the evening, but not equally distinct to eat it immediately. On the contrary, it is only said “they shall eat the flesh in that night.” (Exo 12:8.) May it not therefore be possible, that when the chief priests would not go into the judgment hall at the “early hour” mentioned by John, they seized the opportunity to eat the passover, before the day broke, and so kept within the letter of the law?-Our Lord would then, in that case, have eaten the passover at the beginning of the night, and his enemies at the end of it.

For another thing, I venture to suggest, that in the passover, as well as in other things, it is highly probable that great irregularities had crept in among the Jews, and that the letter of the law was not strictly observed, but infringed in many things, on the authority of rabbinical traditions. That our Lord kept the passover at the right day and hour, I feel no doubt. I see much force in’ the Greek word, “when the passover must be killed.” But that His enemies may have been less strict in their time of keeping it, I think highly probable.

v10.-[There shall a man meet you, &c.] There is difference of opinion among commentators about this man. Some think that he was a friend and disciple of our Lord, and that He knew well what Peter and John meant, when they spoke of the “Master.” Others think that He was an entire stranger, and that the ease with which He received the disciples and made all the arrangements, may be accounted for by the fact, that the inhabitants of Jerusalem were accustomed to receive strange Jews, and accommodate them at the time of the passover feast. The latter view seems perhaps the more probable of the two.

Here, as in other places, we ought to note our Lord’s perfect knowledge. He mentions a number of circumstances in this and the following verses, with as much minuteness and precision as if the whole transaction had been previously arranged. And yet the disciples found things exactly as He had said to them.

[Bearing a pitcher of water.] Some writers see much significance in this pitcher of water, and remind us of the many occasions where mercies are described in Scripture as having befallen some in connexion with water, and hint that there is here an allusion to the water of baptism introducing us to the Lord’s supper! I cannot see anything in the circumstance beyond a simple fact designating the man and marking him out to the disciples.

v13.-[They made ready the passover.] We may suppose that the following things were required, in order to make ready,-the lamb, the wine, the bitter herbs and the unleavened bread. These things being procured and placed in order, the upper room was ready.

Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels

Luk 22:1-2. THE PLOT OF THE RULERS Which if called the Passover. Explanation for Gentile readers.

How they might put him to death; for they feared the people, who had been hearing Him so attentively (chap. Luk 21:38); hence the question was how they could carry into effect a purpose already determined. Not on the feast-day (Matthew, Mark) is implied here, and also in Luk 22:6.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

LAST DAY UPON EARTH

Here we meet the momentous events recorded in Matthew 26-27 and Mark 14-15, and there treated as fully as space permitted.

The incidents peculiar to Luke are first, the explanation of Judas conduct that Satan entered into him (Luk 22:3). Satan can enter into no man without his own consent, but the only safeguard against that is the new birth, (John 3); second, the information that Peter and John were the two disciples sent to make ready the passover (Luk 22:8); third, the report of the strife among the disciples at that feast (Luk 22:24-30); fourth, the prediction of Peters fall as the direct result of the work of Satan upon him (Luk 22:31-34). Satans desire here should be understood as comprehending all the twelve, although it is Peter only for whom the Lord would pray as the one in danger. We cannot fail to contrast the sin of Peter with that of Judas, the former being forgiven while the latter was not. Peter a child of God was ensnared by Satan, Judas, a child of the devil was his tool. That is the great difference which faith produces; fifth, the story of Gethsemane is enriched by Luke in the mention of the angel from heaven strengthening Jesus, the drops of blood He sweat, and the circumstance that it was for sorrow, the disciples slept (Luk 22:39-46); sixth, in the arrest, Luke alone reports the words of Jesus to the betrayer, Betrayest thou the Son of Man with a kiss? The request of the disciples whether they should smite with the sword? and the healing of Malcus ear (Luk 22:47-53). Last, but not least, so far as Chapter 22 is in mind, it is Luke who tells us that Peter remembered the word of the Lord about his denial of Him, after the latter had turned and looked upon Peter (Luk 22:61-62).

Coming to the next chapter, Luke tells us the nature of the indictment against Jesus before Pilate, and perhaps the very form of it (Luk 23:2); and he alone gives us the hearing before Herod (Luk 23:6-12). On the way to Golgotha, he describes with detail the procession. Simon the Cyrenian is bearing the cross after Jesus (Luk 23:26); that is, as some think, Jesus Himself is bearing the cross, but the other is carrying the lighter end of it behind Him. A great multitude are following, and lamenting women among them (Luk 23:27). To these Jesus addresses the warning of verses 28-31 not recorded elsewhere. Luke also gives the correct meaning of Golgotha (Aramaic) and Calvary (Latin) as the Skull (Luk 23:33).

Lukes account of the crucifixion is different from the others. Matthew and Mark bring out mens hatred of Christ in the fullest way, John presents Him as a Divine Person in Whom is the calmness of One who knew whence He was, but Luke shows us the Man Christ Jesus, suffering, but showing grace even on the cross. Of the seven sayings on the cross three are found only in Luke, one when interceding for His murderers, one when about to breathe out His life, and the third when His reply to the penitent thief.

The story of the thief is original with Luke, who presents Him as a witness to Christ little expected at that moment and in that place. But what a miracle of grace is he a malefactor saved, blessed, and received into Paradise!

QUESTIONS

1. What chapters of Matthew and Mark parallel the events of this lesson?

2. Name the incidents in chapter 22 peculiar to Luke.

3. Do the same with chapter 23.

4. Contrast the sin of Peter with that of Judas.

5. Give the Aramaic sayings of Jesus on the cross as recorded only by Luke.

6. Give the Aramaic and Latin words for the place of a skull.

Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary

This chapter gives a sad and sorrowful relation of the chief priests’ conspiracy against the life of our blessed Saviour, in which we have three particulars observable: 1. The person making this conspiracy, the chief priests, scribes, and elders, that is, the whole Jewish Sanhedrin, or general council; they all lay their malicious heads together to contrive the destruction of the holy and innocent Jesus.

Thence learn, that general councils have erred, and may err fundamentally, both in matters of doctrine and practice; so did this general council at Jerusalem, consisting of chief priests, doctors, and elders, with the high priest their president. They did not believe Jesus to be the Messiah, after all the miracles wrought before their eyes, but ignominiously put him to death.

Observe, 2. The manner of this conspiracy against the life of our blessed Saviour, it was clandestine, secret, and subtle: They consulted how they might take him by craft, and put him to death.

Learn thence, that Satan makes use of the subtilty of crafty men, and abuses their parts as well as their power for his own purposes and designs: the devil never sends a fool on his errand.

Observe, 3. The circumstances of time, when this conspiracy was managed, At the feast of the passover. It was a custom among the Jews to execute malefactors at their solemn feasts, at which time all the Jews came up to Jerusalem to sacrifice, then put the malefactors to death, that all Israel might see and fear, and not do so wickedly. Accordingly the feast of the passover was waited for by the Jews as a fit opportunity to put our Saviour to death.

The only objection was, that it might occasion a tumult and uproar amongst the people, there being such a mighty concourse at that time in Jerusalem; but Judas making them a proffer, they readily comply with the motion, and resolve to take the first opportunity to put our Saviour to death.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Luk 22:1-6. Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh Being to be celebrated within two days after our Lord had delivered the prophecies and admonitions recorded above. Concerning this feast, see on Mat 26:2. The chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him See on Mat 26:3-5. But they feared the people Lest, if they seized him openly, a tumult should be raised among them, either to rescue him out of their hands, or to avenge his death. Then entered Satan For he is never wanting to assist those whose hearts are bent upon mischief; into Judas Being one of the twelve. This was a circumstance of such high aggravation, that it is observable each of the evangelists has marked it out in this view. See on Mat 26:14-16, and Mar 14:10. He went He went from Christ and his company, who were at Bethany, in the house of Simon, to the house of Caiaphas, the high-priest, whom he knew to be a most inveterate enemy to his Master, and having found means of introducing himself, and communicating his general design, communed, or conversed, with the chief priests and captains Called captains of the temple, Luk 22:52. They were Jewish officers, who presided over the guards which kept watch every night in the temple. The result of their communing is not mentioned, only by the sequel it appears, that he informed the priests of the place where his Master used to spend the nights, and undertook to conduct a band of armed men thither, who, in the absence of the multitude, might easily take him. And, because none of them were so well acquainted with Jesus as to be able to distinguish him from his disciples, in the darkness of the night, he agreed to point him out to them by kissing him. And they were glad When they heard his proposal, they thought it very practicable, and rejoiced at so unexpected an offer from one of his disciples, to facilitate their measures. And covenanted to give him money As a reward for that service. See on Mat 26:4-16. And he promised To attend particularly to the affair; and sought opportunity to betray him To put him into their hands in as private a manner as possible; in the absence of the multitude That, knowing nothing of what was done, they might not raise a tumult, and rescue him out of the hands of those that seized him.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

First Cycle: The Preparation for the Passion, Luk 22:1-46.

This cycle comprehends the three following events:

Judas preparing for the Passion by selling Jesus; Jesus preparing His disciples for it at His last supper; His preparing Himself for it by prayer in Gethsemane.

I. The Treachery of Judas: 22:1-6.

Vers. 1-6. The resolution of the Sanhedrim was taken. The only question for it henceforth was that of the how ( , Luk 22:2). Its perplexity arose from the extraordinary favour which Jesus enjoyed with the people, particularly with the crowds who had come from Galilee and from abroad; the rulers feared a popular rising on the part of those numerous friends who had come from a distance with Him, and of whom they did not feel themselves the masters, as they did of the population of Jerusalem. So, according to Matthew and Mark, they said in their conclaves, Not during the feast, which may signify either before, ere the multitudes are fully assembled, or after, when they shall have departed, and they shall be again masters of the field. But it was in exact keeping with the divine plan that Jesus should die during the feast ( ); and the perfidy of Judas, the means which the rulers thought they could use to attain their end, was that of which God made use to attain His.

It appears from Mat 26:2 and Mar 14:1 that it was Wednesday when the negotiation between Judas and the Sanhedrim took place. Luke and Mark omit the words of Jesus (Matthew), In two days is the Passover… But those two days appear in Mark in the form of the narrative.

The word Passover, , from , H7175, in Aramaic , signifies a passing, and commemorates the manner in which the Israelites were spared in Egypt when the Almighty passed over their houses, sprinkled with the blood of the lamb, without slaying their first-born. This name, which originally denoted the lamb, was applied later to the Supper itself, then to the entire feast. The Passover was celebrated in the first month, called Nisan, from the 15th of the month, the day of full moon, to the 21st. This season corresponds to the end of March and beginning of April. The feast opened on the evening which closed the 14th and began the 15th, with the Paschal Supper. Originally every father, in virtue of the priesthood belonging to every Israelite, sacrificed his lamb himself at his own house. But since the Passover celebrated by Josiah, the lambs were sacrificed in the temple, and with the help of the priests. This act took place on the afternoon of the 14th, from three to six o’clock. Some hours after the Supper began, which was prolonged far into the night. This Supper opened the feast of unleavened bread ( , Luk 22:1), which, according to the law, lasted the seven following days. The first and last (15th and 21st) were sabbatic. The intermediate days were not hallowed by acts of worship and sacrifices; work was lawful. As Josephus expressly says that the feast of unleavened bread lasted eight days, agreeing with our Syn., who make it begin on the 14th (Luk 22:7; Mat 26:17; Mar 14:12), and not on the 15th, we must conclude that in practice the use of unleavened bread had been gradually extended to the 14th. To the present day, it is on the night between the 13th and 14th that all leaven is removed from Israelitish houses.

Luke, Luk 22:3, ascribes the conduct of Judas to a Satanic influence. He goes the length of saying that Satan entered into him. He means to remark here, in a general way, the intervention of that superior agent in this extraordinary crime; while John, seeking to characterize its various degrees, more exactly distinguishes the time when Satan put into the heart of Judas the first thought of it (comp. Luk 13:2), and the moment when he entered into him so as to take entire possession of his will (Luk 13:27). According to the biblical view, this intervention of Satan did not at all exclude the liberty of Judas. This disciple, in joining the service of Jesus, had not taken care to deny his own life, as Jesus so often urged His own to do. Jesus, instead of becoming the end to his heart, had remained the means. And now, when he saw things terminating in a result entirely opposed to that with which he had ambitiously flattered himself, he wished at least to try to benefit by the false position into which he had put himself with his nation, and to use his advantages as a disciple in order to regain the favour of the rulers with whom he had broken. The thirty pieces of silver certainly played only a secondary part in his treachery, although this part was real notwithstanding; for the epithet thief (Joh 12:6) is given to him with the view of putting his habitual conduct in connection with this final act.

Matthew and Mark insert here the narrative of the feast at Bethany, though it must have taken place some days before (John). The reason for this insertion is an association of ideas arising from the moral relation between these two particulars in which the avarice of Judas showed itself.

The , captains (Luk 22:4), are the heads of the soldiery charged with keeping guard over the temple (Act 4:1). There was a positive contract (they covenanted, he promised). , not at a distance from the multitude, but without a multitude; that is to say, without any flocking together produced by the occasion. This wholly unexpected offer determined the Sanhedrim to act before rather than after the feast. But in order to that, it was necessary to make haste; the last moment had come.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

CXVI.

JESUS PREDICTS, THE RULERS PLOT FOR,

AND JUDAS BARGAINS FOR HIS DEATH.

(Mount of Olives, Bethany, and Jerusalem. Tuesday after sunset,

which Jews regarded as the beginning of Wednesday.)

aMATT. XXVI. 1-5, 14-16; bMARK XIV. 1, 2, 10, 11; cLUKE XXII. 1-6.

c1 Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover. {b1 Now after two days was the feast of the passover and the unleavened bread:} a1 And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these words, he said unto his disciples, 2 Ye know that after two days the passover cometh, and the Son of man is delivered up to be crucified. [We may regard Jesus as having entered the temple Tuesday morning, and as having taught there until the evening. * He then retired to the slopes of Olivet and delivered the discourse which occupies Sections CXIII.-CXV., The discourse finished, it is likely that he arose about or a little after sunset (which the Jews reckoned as Wednesday) and proceeded on his way to Bethany, where he remained until late Thursday afternoon. On his way to Bethany he spoke the words of this section. The two days mentioned are Wednesday and Thursday. The passover was eaten Thursday night after sunset, which the Jews reckoned as Friday. For a full discussion of the time when the Passover was eaten, see Andrews’ “Life of Christ,” pp. 423-460.] 3 Then were gathered together the chief priests, and the elders of the people, unto the court of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas; 4 and they took counsel together c2 And [641] sought bhow athat they might take Jesus by subtlety, and chow they might put him to death; {akill him.} [This council may have begun on the evening of Tuesday and continued until the beginning of Wednesday, Jewish time. It seems to have been a formal rather than an informal conference. The court where they met was the open space enclosed by the palace of the high priest. Caiaphas had been appointed high priest in A.D. 26 by the Procurator Valerius Gratus and was deposed A.D. 38. Ishmael, Eleazar, and Simon held the office between the deposition of Annas and the appointment of Caiaphas (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2. 2). See also p. 64.] 5 But {b2 for} they said, Not during the feast, lest haply there shall be a tumult aarise among {bof} people. cfor they feared the people. [They knew that there were many at the feast from Galilee, and other sections of the country where Jesus ministered; and, judging by the demonstration made at the triumphal entry, they felt that there were plenty to take arms in Jesus’ behalf. The sense of their council, therefore, seemed to be that if Jesus could be taken by subtlety–i. e., arrested privately–he might be taken during the feast. But if he had to be arrested publicly, then it was better to postpone his apprehension until after the feast. The treachery of Judas caused them to adopt the former course. At this place Matthew and Mark insert the account of the supper given to Jesus in the house of Simon the leper. They do this because the treacherous determination of Judas was formed at it and dates from it. The rebuke of the Lord then administered, or the desire to reimburse himself for the price of the ointment, which Mary expended, and which he felt that he ought to have had, or some other reasons, evidently induced him at that time to decide upon our Lord’s betrayal. Since then he had been seeking opportunity to betray the Master.] 3 And Satan entered into Judas who was called Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. {bhe that was one of the twelve,} [See pp. 226, 391, 392.] a14 Then one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, bwent away unto the chief priests, that [642] he might deliver him unto them. cand communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might deliver him unto them. a15 and said, What are ye willing to give me, and I will deliver him unto you? [It is probable that the proposal to sell his Master was made by Judas to individual members of the Sanhedrin, and that this proposal was one of the moving causes leading to the assembling of the council. The language implies that Judas appeared before the council and bargained openly with it.] b11 And they, when they heard it, were glad, and promised cand covenanted to give him money. aAnd they weighed unto him thirty pieces of silver. [There had been coined shekels since the time of Simeon, or 143 B.C., before that the money was weighed. It is likely that the term “weighed” survived the practice and became a synonym or equivalent for “paid.” The amount paid him was about fifteen dollars of our money. It was indeed a low price for so base a deed, but from the language used it may be fairly implied that it was but the earnest money of a larger sum. But Judas evidently hardened himself, and shut out all thought as to anything save the actual labor involved. Viewed thus, his task was neither difficult nor dangerous.] c6 And he consented, a16 And from that time he sought opportunity to deliver him bhow he might conveniently deliver him unto them. cin the absence of the multitude. [He soon found his opportunity. He bargained on Tuesday night and fulfilled his contract on Thursday night. Or, as the Jews reckoned time, he agreed in the beginning of Wednesday and fulfilled his covenant on the beginning of Friday.] [643]

{*} NOTE.–If this had been Tuesday, he would have said “after three days,” as is the case of the resurrection. In all such expressions the remaining part of the present day was counted as one.–J. W. McG.

[FFG 641-643]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

Luke Chapter 22

In chapter 22 commence the details of the end of our Lords life. The chief priests, fearing the people, seek how they may kill Him. Judas, under the influence of Satan, offers himself as an instrument, that they might take Him in the absence of the multitude. The day of Passover comes, and the Lord pursues that which belonged to His work of love in these immediate circumstances. I will notice the points that appertain to the character of this Gospel, the change that took place in immediate and direct connection with the Lords death. Thus He desired to eat this last Passover with His disciples, because He would eat thereof no more until it was fulfilled in the kingdom of God, that is, by His death. He drinks wine no more until the kingdom of God shall come. He does not say, until He shall drink it new in the kingdom of His Father, but only that He will not drink it tillthe kingdom shall come: just as the times of the Gentiles are in view as a present thing, so here Christianity, the kingdom as it is now, not the millennium. Observe also what a touching expression of love we have here: His heart needed this last testimony of affection before leaving them.

The new covenant is founded on the blood here drunk in figure. The old was done away. Blood was required to establish the new. At the same time the covenant itself was not established; but everything was done on Gods part. The blood was not shed to give force to a covenant of judgment like the first; it was shed for those who received Jesus, while waiting for the time when the covenant itself should be established with Israel in grace.

The disciples, believing the words of Christ, do not themselves know, and they ask one another, which of them it could be that should betray Him, a striking expression of faith in all he uttered-for none, save Judas, had a bad conscience-and marked their innocence. And at the same time, thinking of the kingdom in a carnal way, they dispute for the first place in it; and this, in the presence of the cross, at the table where the Lord was giving them the last pledges of His love. Truth of heart there was, but what a heart to have truth in! As for Himself, He had taken the lowest place, and that-as the most excellent for love-was His alone. They had to follow Him as closely as they could. His grace recognises their having done so, as if He were their debtor for their care during His time of sorrow on earth. He remembered it. In the day of His kingdom they should have twelve thrones, as heads of Israel, among whom they had followed Him.

But now it was a question of passing through death; and, having followed Him thus far, what an opportunity for the enemy to sift them since they could no longer follow Him as men living on the earth! All that belonged to a living Messiah was completely overthrown, and death was there. Who could pass through it? Satan would profit by this, and desired to have them that he might sift them. Jesus does not seek to spare His disciples this sifting. It was not possible, for He must pass through death, and their hope was in Him. They cannot escape it: the flesh must be put to the test of death. But He prays for them, that the faith of the one, whom He especially names, may not fail. Simon, ardent in the flesh, was exposed more than all to the danger into which a false confidence in the flesh might lead him, but in which it could not sustain him. Being however the object of this grace on the Lords part, his fall would be the means of his strength Knowing what the flesh was, and also the perfection of grace; he would be able to strengthen his brethren. Peter asserts that he could do anything-the very things he should entirely fail in. The Lord briefly warns him of what he would really do.

Jesus then takes occasion to forewarn them that all was about to change. During His presence here below, the true Messiah, Emmanuel, He had sheltered them from all difficulties; when He sent them throughout Israel, they had lacked nothing. But now (for the kingdom was not yet coming in power) they would be, like Himself, exposed to contempt and violence. Humanly speaking, they would have to take care of themselves. Peter, ever forward, taking the words of Christ literally, was permitted to lay bare his thoughts by exhibiting two swords. The Lord stops him by a word that shewed him it was of no use to go farther. They were not capable of it at that time. As to Himself, He pursues with perfect tranquillity His daily habits.

Pressed in spirit by that which was coming, He exhorts His disciples to pray, that they enter not into temptation; that is to say, that when the time came that they should be put to the test, walking with God, it should be for them obedience to God, and not a means of departure from Him. There are such moments, if God permits them to come, in which everything is put to the proof by the enemys power.

The Lords dependence as man is then displayed in the most striking manner. The whole scene of Gethsemane and the cross, in Luke, is the perfect dependent man. He prays: He submits to His Fathers will. An angel strengthens Him: this was their service to the Son of man. [41]

Afterwards, in deep conflict, He prays more earnestly: dependent man, He is perfect in His dependence. The deepness of the conflict deepens His intercourse with His Father. The disciples were overwhelmed by the shadow only of that which caused Jesus to pray. They take refuge in the forgetfulness of sleep. The Lord, with the patience of grace, repeats His warning, and the multitude arrive. Peter, confident when warned, sleeping at the approach of temptation when the Lord was praying, strikes when Jesus allows Himself to be led as a sheep to the slaughter, and then alas! denies when Jesus confesses the truth. But, submissive as the Lord was to His Fathers will, He plainly shews that His power had not departed from Him. He heals the wound that Peter inflicted on the high priests servant, and then permits Himself to be led away, with the remark that it was their hour and the power of darkness. Sad and terrible association!

In all this scene we behold the complete dependence of the man, the power of death felt as a trial in all its force; but, apart from that which was going on in His soul and before His Father, in which we see the reality of these two things, there was the most perfect tranquillity, the most gentle calmness towards men [42] -grace that never belies itself. Thus, when Peter denied Him as He had foretold, He looks upon him at the fitting moment. All the parade of His iniquitous trial does not distract His thoughts, and Peter is broken down by that look. When questioned, He has little to say. His hour was come Subject to His Fathers will, He accepted the cup from His hand. His judges did but accomplish that will, and bring Him the cup. He makes no answer to the question whether He is the Christ. It was no longer the time to do so. They would not believe it-would not answer Him if He had put questions to them that would have brought out the truth; neither would they have let Him go. But He bears the plainest testimony to the place which, from that hour, the Son of man took. This we have repeatedly seen in reading this Gospel. He would sit on the right hand of the power of God. We see also it is the place He takes at present. [43] They immediately draw the right conclusion-Thou art, then, the Son of God? He bears testimony to this truth, and all is ended; that is to say, He waives the question, whether He was the Messiah-that was gone by for Israel-He was going to suffer; He is the Son of man, but thenceforth only as entering into glory; and He is the Son of God. It was all over with Israel as to their responsibility; the heavenly glory of the Son of man, the personal glory of the Son of God was about to shine forth; and Jesus (chap. 23) is led away to the Gentiles, that all may be accomplished.

Footnotes for Luke Chapter 22

41: There are elements of the profoundest interest which appear in comparing this Gospel with others in this place; and elements which bring out the character of this Gospel in the most striking way. In Gethsemane we have the Lords conflict brought out more fully in Luke than anywhere; but on the cross we have His superiority to the sufferings He was in. There is no expression of them: He is above them. It is not, as in John, the divine side of the picture. There in Gethsemane we have no agony, but when He names Himself, they go backward and fall to the ground. On the cross, no My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? but He delivers up His own spirit to God. This is not so in Luke. In Gethsemane we have the Man of sorrows, a man feeling in all its depths what was before Him, and looking to His Father. Being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly. On the cross we have One who as man has bowed to His Fathers will, and is in the calmness of One who, in whatever sorrow and suffering, is above it all. He tells the weeping women to weep for themselves, not for Him, the green tree, for judgment was coming. He prays for those who were crucifying Him; He speaks peace and heavenly joy to the poor thief who was converted; He was going into Paradise before the kingdom came. The same is seen specially in the fact of His death. It is not, as in John, He gave up His spirit; but, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit. He trusts His spirit in death, as a man who knows and believes in God His Father, to Him whom He thus knew. In Matthew we have the forsaking of God and His sense of it. This character of the Gospel, revealing Christ distinctively as perfect Man, and the perfect Man, is full of the deepest interest. He passed through His sorrows with God, and then in perfect peacefulness was above them all; His trust in His Father perfect, even in death-a path not trodden by man hitherto, and never to be trodden by the saints. If Jordan overflowed all its banks at the time of harvest, the ark in the depths of it made it a passage dryshod into the inheritance of Gods people.

42: It is most striking to see how Christ met, according to divine perfectness, every circumstance He was in. They only drew out the perfectness. He felt them all, was governed by none, but met them always Himself. This which was always true was wonderfully shewn here. He prays with the fullest sense of what was coming upon Him-the cup He had to drink-turns and warns them, and gently rebukes and excuses Peter, as if walking in Galilee, the flesh was weak; and then returns into yet deeper agony with His Father. Grace suited Him with Peter, agony in the presence of God; and He was grace with Peter-in agony at the thought of the cup.

43: The word hereafter, in the Authorised Version, should be henceforth. That is, from this hour they would see Him no longer in humiliation, but as Son of man in power.

Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament

Luk 22:1. The feast of unleavened bread drew nigh. See Mat 26:2-3.

Luk 22:3. Then Satan entered into Judas, by divine permission, his reigning sin of covetousness having proved his destruction. Judas after that was Satans instrument.

Luk 22:4. He went his way, and communed with the chief priests and , captains. The offices of priests and levites, of the twenty four courses, had each a superior; but these were captains of the temple, and called by that military name because they bore arms. Those captains were rulers of the temple, and saw the brazen gates shut at night by a guard of strong men.

Luk 22:5. They were glad, and covenanted to give him money. Christ was valued, as Jeremiah says; a price was set upon him, as the chief enemy of the temple.

Luk 22:15. With desire, yea, with the supreme desire of consummating my work and victory, have I desired to eat this passover. The transactions of the last supper are full of grace, and claim our special attention.

Luk 22:19. He took bread, a figure of his body broken for us. Collectively considered, this is a figure of his church, composed of many members, as the loaf is composed of many grains of wheat. His flesh spiritually sustains the divine life, as bread sustains the life of the body. Adorable mystery, where faith is lost in the plenitude of redeeming love.

Luk 22:20. This cup is the new testament in my blood, or covenant, which is shed for you, for the remission of sins. When princes made covenants, they drank wine; and when the highpriest offered sacrifice, he poured out a libation of wine on the victim. Here is the ransom, here is remission of sins, here is joy for the righteous. Here is the cup of memorial: this do in remembrance of me. The jews ate the paschal supper in remembrance of the emancipation from Egypt, a national memorial, local and small compared with the redemption of the world by our Lord Jesus Christ. It is a cup once for all. I will not drink of the fruit of the wine, until the kingdom of God shall come: Luk 22:18. What a felicitous transition of thought, and what burning words to enkindle the heart with a flame of devotion.

Luk 22:21. The hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. It seems quite plain from this chapter, that Judas was present at the sacrament with Christ; and yet the first of critics are divided in opinion on this subject. It is also contended that this was not the paschal supper, but the common supper which preseded it. Grotius contends that the Lord having desired with strong desire to eat the passover before his passion, celebrated it one night before the time. Now, though Grotius held a first rank as a learned lawyer; yet as a divine he is guilty of temerity in a hundred places. Let it be remarked, that St. Matthew does not mention the time that Judas went out, neither does St. Mark. St. John mentions the sop, but not the supper: chap. Luk 13:26. This sop, according to Erasmus, was psomion, panem, buccella, sive offula; bread, morsel, or fragment of flesh. It was probably a piece of unleavened bread dipped in the sauce of bitter herbs and gravy. In that case our Lord would not eat with the traitor, but sent him away.

Luk 22:22. Woe to that man by whom he is betrayed. See Dr. Whitbys remarkable note on this verse. Also on this head, a striking comment of Chrysostom will be found on Jer 36:3.

Luk 22:25. The kings of the gentiles exercise lordship. Mat 20:26.

Luk 22:29. I appoint, covenant, give, dispose, or prepare for you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed, or disposed to me a kingdom; that is, the mediatorial kingdom, and also the everlasting kingdom. What a gift at parting. Some, in regard of the feast at which these words were spoken, would read, I grant you to eat bread at my table in my kingdom, seeing my Father hath given me a kingdom.

Luk 22:31. Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired to have you. From the sacred scriptures we everywhere learn, that Satan could hurt neither Job nor Peter, nor any saint, without the divine permission. Christ was privy to that permission, being in his divine nature associate in the council of the Godhead. He therefore prayed for Peter, that his faith and courage might not fail. When Satan is permitted to tempt a man, he will try and sift him to the extent of his commission. Our Lord forewarns and forerms men against the day of trial. He showed Peter his glory on the mount, he warned him of his fall, he capitulated with the multitude that his disciples should go their way; and here he told Peter that he prayed for him that his faith should not fail. Hence there was no absolute necessity that Peter should fall; the prediction that he should thrice deny his Master was no more positive than the sentence against Ahab, Hezekiah, and Nineveh. But at the same time let the converted backslider strengthen his brethren: he is under a thousand obligations so to do.

Luk 22:37. The things concerning me have an end; that is, all the prophecies concerning my sufferings have their accomplishment in my exit from the world.

Luk 22:44. Being in an agony he prayed more earnestly. St. Mark says he began to be sorely amazed, and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood, falling down to the ground. Biblical critics quote Aristotle, a physician, and Diodorus Siculus, who both affirm that violent wrestling and exertions will produce these effects. And who can conceive the conflict of wrestling under the divine displeasure against a guilty world?

Luk 22:54. Peter followed afar off. See on Mat 26:75. John 21.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Luk 22:1 f. The Decision of the Chief Priests (Mar 14:1 f.*, Mat 26:1-5*).

Luk 22:1. The feast of unleavened bread (Nisan 1521) was really distinct from the Passover (Nisan 14), though the close association of the two led them to be spoken of as one, and even identified by Gentiles like Luke. Cf. p. 103.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

THE TREACHERY OF JUDAS

(vs.1-6)

As the Passover feast drew near, the chief priests and Pharisees felt hard pressed to find some way of apprehending and killing this “prophet” who was offending their pride. They feared to arrest Him in the presence of the people, and further, they did not want to do it on the Passover, for it might cause an uproar of the people (Mat 26:5). But God had decreed that the Passover would be the day of His sacrifice. Also Judas, because of having hardened his heart against every kindness of the Lord Jesus, had at this time permitted Satan to enter into him (v.3), showing that he was not a true believer. His motive was greed, which he might have restrained, but Satan’s power impelled him to bargain with the chief priests and captains of the Jewish soldiers as to betraying his Master for a price. But note the shame of the condition of the chief priests. Being in close outward relationship to God, one would expect their character to be honorable, faithful, reliable, but they were glad to patronize a man in his treachery toward a friend! Judas then looked for an opportunity to betray Him when the masses of the people were not present.

The day of unleavened bread arrived, and Luke added, “when the Passover must be killed” (v.7). It was the day God had ordained for the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus. That day began at 6:00 pm. The mock trial took place during the night, and at 9:00am that same day He was put on the cross. But knowing well all that awaited Him, the Lord was in calm control of all the circumstances.

PREPARING THE PASSOVER

(vs.7-13)

He sent Peter and John with instructions to prepare the Passover, “that we may eat.” This fellowship of eating together with His disciples was a matter of precious value to Him as He was about to be taken from them to suffer and die. How good to see that the disciples did not trust themselves to decide where to prepare the Passover, but rather asked Him to direct them. If they had not had this simplicity of faith, they could not have expected His miraculous answer to their question. He told them that as they entered the city they would meet a man bearing a pitcher of water (v.10). They needed only to follow him to the house to which he was going. The Old Testament refers often of those carrying containers of water. The container holds only a very limited measure. Does this not remind us of the ministry of the Word of God under law, as for instance with Hagar, type of the legal covenant, and the water in her bottle soon spent? (Gen 21:14-16). The Old Testament ministry was only a sample of something better than itself (2Co 3:7-11). The man with the pitcher led to the house, as the ministry of the law leads to the house of the New Testament, that is, the truth of God’s house, the Church. In reading the Old Testament all who had spiritual eyes to see would recognize that the Old Testament was leading to something far better than itself. But sad to say, only comparatively few in Israel were prepared for the marvelous revelation of the truth of the Church, for which the Old Testament was intended to prepare them.

The Lord’s message to the owner of the house was immediately received, and he showed them a large upper room furnished. If the house speaks of the truth of the Church, the house of God, the upper room speaks of the heavenly elevation of Christian worship in contrast to Israel’s earthly, carnal worship. The furnished room reminds us that God has made every provision for the Church: no human additions are needed, such as a robed choir, stained glass windows, imposing ceremonies, musical instruments, etc.

Indeed, at this Passover and the introduction of the Lord’s supper there was nothing ornate or imposing: the Lord was facing the stark reality of the death of the cross with a small group of sorrowful men, distressed at having been told that He was leaving them. As will always be the case for faith, they found things just as He had told them, and they prepared the Passover. How little they understood all that was involved in this at the time! Later they would see it with better understanding, specially when Paul wrote 1Co 11:23-26. But they were obedient.

THE PASSOVER AND THE LORD’S SUPPER

(vs.14-23)

The observance of the Passover, followed by the breaking of bread, was “when the hour had come” (v.14). The breaking of bread is not to be a haphazard thing, observed just whenever people feel the Spirit leads them. The time should be known beforehand, so that the coming together is for this purpose (note Act 20:7 as to the stated reason for gathering). What the time should be is of course dependent on local circumstances, but all should know beforehand that all may be present at the appointed hour.

Verse 15 is a most beautiful expression, restrained, yet intimating the depths of His desire for fellowship with His disciples at the moment when His great sufferings were imminent, “With fervent desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before suffer.” In deep affection for them He sought their affections too, some little comfort of their fellowship in view of His very soon being utterly alone on a cross of unspeakable agony.

He would not again eat of the Passover until the spiritual significance of the Passover is fulfilled in the kingdom of God. Of course His own death was the fulfillment of the meaning of the Passover, but Israel remains blinded as to this until they will “look on Me whom they pierced” (Zec 12:10) and He will bring in the kingdom for that nation. Only then will the Passover be fulfilled for them.

Verses 17 and 18 refer strictly to the Passover, and again the Lord referred to the kingdom of God in connection with the cup He gave them. He would not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God should come. This is in reference to Israel also, and the spiritual significance is most important. From that nation as such, the Lord would receive no joy until that time. This fact was in His mind when He immediately introduced the Lord’s supper. For since He receives no joy from Israel at this present time, He seeks His joy from the Church, the body of Christ, during this dispensation of the grace of God.

The observance of the Lord’s supper (verses 19 and 20) forms a parenthesis here, so that verse 21 connects with the Passover, not the Lord’s supper, at which Judas was not present (Joh 13:27-30), for he had gone out before the Lord’s supper. This parenthesis coincides with the parenthetic character of this present dispensation. The whole Church dispensation is a parenthesis inserted between Israel’s rejection of Christ and the future time when God will deal with Israel in the tribulation period to bring them into subjection to Christ. Thus the Church is set as a lovely jewel in the dark background of Israel’s history, and these two verses (1-20) are also like a beautiful jewel presented in a black background, precious indeed to the hearts of those who love the Lord at a time when He has been cast out by Israel and the world.

The bread, for which He gave thanks and broke it, is the staple food of life, symbolical of His body given for us. Suffering and death are strikingly illustrated in the bread. A grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies. After growing up, it is cut down, then threshed, and the grain ground into flour, then mixed with other ingredients, kneaded, allowed to rise, kneaded again and again, then exposed to the heat of the fire to provide food for people. Little indeed do we know the depths of His sufferings, but the remembrance of His sufferings and death is surely of vital importance in the breaking of bread. Tenderly He asked His disciples to observe this for a remembrance of Himself.

The cup — the wine — speaks, not so much of His sufferings, but of His blood shed, the sign of an accomplished sacrifice, for the wine symbolically speaks of joy, the precious result of the work of Christ in redemption. For it is “the cup of blessing which we bless” (1Co 10:16), though it too is the result of suffering and death, for grapes are crushed to produce the wine. Indeed, unspeakable joy is the result of the unutterable sufferings of our blessed Lord. Therefore it is “with joy and sorrow mingling” that we remember Him.

The cup is “the new covenant in My blood” (v.20) as the Lord Jesus says. For this new covenant, as was true of the old, must be ratified with the shedding of blood, but in this case the blood of a sacrifice of eternal value, for He is Himself the eternal God as well as sinless, unique Man. This new covenant had been made with Israel centuries before (Jer 31:31-34), and its terms will be totally fulfilled to Israel in the Millennium. The Church today was the subject of that covenant, but we receive all the benefits of it by pure grace, through not under it! We receive those blessings, not as a matter of having been promised them, but as brought in from being far from God, by the grace of God alone. See Rom 9:4 and Eph 2:11-13.

Next we are faced with the somber contrast of the sad treachery of Judas. The Lord spoke the words of verses 21 and 22 during the Passover feast, before the Lord’s supper was introduced, but Luke only reported those words afterwards to emphasize the great contrast of the betrayer’s cold unfaithfulness to the unswerving faithfulness and grace of the Lord Jesus as expressed in the supper. The hand of Judas was with the Lord on the table when the Passover had been celebrated. Divine sovereignty had ordained that the Son of Man would go to the cross, yet this took nothing from the seriousness of human responsibility on the part of Judas. The inquiring of the disciples as to whom the Lord referred to shows that evidently none had suspicions, so the deceit of Judas was apparently well covered.

THE DISCIPLES’ SELFISH AMBITION

(vs.24-30)

Verses 24 to 30 indicate another sad contrast to the grace of the Lord Jesus. This contrast is seen in His own disciples. Judas was false, but these were true disciples who quarreled about who would be the greatest! But the Lord Jesus was at the very time willingly taking the lowest place! His answer to them was beautifully gentle and faithful. The kings of the nations, while flattered as “benefactors,” were actually putting others in subjection to their authority. Sinful human nature aspires to such power over men, but believers were to have no such ambitions. If one is great, let him be as the younger, taking a lesser place: if one would be chief, let him be a servant.

In natural relationships the one who is served is the greater, but the blessed Lord of glory reversed this in the world: He was in the midst of His disciples as a servant. How precious an example indeed! True service is a most honorable and fruitful occupation. The Lord gave them also a word of commendation and encouragement. It was they who had continued with Him at a time when He was tried by the animosity of the world. He deeply valued this faithfulness, and His words would surely encourage them in their appointed path of trial and of service.

Yet, though they could expect present trial, He appointed His disciples a kingdom — future indeed, but such as the Father had appointed to Him to be revealed in due time. They would have to wait for the time of this glorious exaltation, when they would be feasted in His kingdom and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. This judging will be an administrative government in the Millennium, for which suffering with Him has fitted them. Then indeed they will have no such attitude of seeking to exalt themselves, and only then will he exalt them.

PETER WARNED, YET SELF-CONFIDENT

(vs.31-34)

In verses 31 to 34 the Lord dealt with another evil in His own disciples that contrasts sharply with His own blessed character as seen in the Lord’s supper. This is human self-confidence. Peter was singled out in this case, for he was a natural leader, yet we must not suppose that he alone needed to learn lessons concerning self-confidence. Rather he was an object lesson to speak seriously to all the disciples.

The Lord Jesus told Peter that Satan had desired to have “you” (a plural word), that is, all the disciples, that he might sift them as wheat. To sift wheat is to remove the chaff from the kernels. The disciples were “wheat,” but needed fleshly “chaff” removed from them. Certainly all the disciples were deeply tried that night: in fact all “forsook Him and fled” (Mat 26:56). But it is Peter alone to whom He says, “I have prayed for you (singular) that your faith should not fail.” The King James Version reads, “I have prayed for thee,” which is singular. Modern English uses the word “you” for either singular or plural, but the original is singular. A special need was present, which the Lord fully discerned, though Peter did not. Yet it is good to observe that the eleven (Judas having gone out) were wheat from which of was necessary that the chaff should be separated through their experience of failure. The Lord Jesus, as the faithful Advocate, prayed for Peter before his fall. Certainly then Peter’s faith did not fail, though he failed. Indeed, his faith in Christ was more strengthened by this experience that taught him to have “no confidence in the flesh” (Php 3:3), and after that he was fitted to “strengthen his brethren” (v.32).

But at that moment Peter’s self-confidence was so strong that he virtually said the Lord was in error by telling Him that he was ready to accompany Him to prison and to death. His denial later was sadly shameful, yet his self-confidence was worse evil than his denial because it was the root cause of his denial. The Lord had the last word, however, telling Peter firmly that the rooster would not crow until Peter had three times denied that he knew Him.

THE LORD’S REPROVAL OF FLESHLY ZEAL

(vs.35-38)

Yet another sad feature of the disciples’ contrary character was exposed by the Lord’s words in verses 35 to 38. He reminded them of His former commission to them, when He sent them only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, without money, a container for food or shoes (Mat 10:5-23); and they acknowledged that they had lacked nothing in this venture. Now He changes the commission. Why? Verse 37 gives the answer: Christ was to be reckoned among the transgressors. His death was imminent. Israel had rejected Him. They could no longer depend on that nation for support. In fact they would be sent to others beside the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and they would have to be prepared for their new mission by taking their purse and a food container. Vitally important also was a sword, for which even their garment was to be exchanged if one had no sword.

It is most evident that the Lord referred to “the sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God” (Eph 6:17), for this is the weapon most essential for every servant of God in the present age. If we must sacrifice our garment of self-respectability so as to have the Word of God as a vital possession, this is preferable to being without a solid grounding in the Word of God, by which to meet the enmity of Satan in a world under his domination. For we must take the offensive in carrying the gospel to a world opposed to it, and this requires serious preparation. For we serve a Lord who has been reckoned among the transgressors, and we can expect no sympathy from His enemies.

The disciples, however, missed the force of the Lord’s words, and considered only their carnal weapons. Their forwardness in displaying two swords indicated their fleshly zeal that was ready to fight, in contrast to His firm, decided faith in meeting all enmity with His Word, without carnal weapons. He simply said, “It is enough,” certainly not enough swords, but enough discussion. He would say no more since they did not understand. They had to learn by sad experience.

HIS PRAYER OF AGONY IN THE GARDEN

(vs.39-46)

Again, from verse 39 to 46, the beauty of the grace, faithfulness and devotedness of the Lord Jesus shone radiantly in contrast to the spiritual sloth of His wearied disciples. As had been His practice each night, He went to the mount of Olives, His disciples following Him. But well knowing that the sufferings of the cross lay immediately before Him, and knowing the serious testing His disciples were about to face, He told them to pray that they might not enter into temptation, that is, pray that they should not succumb to it. His words surely ought to have prepared them for the solemnity of that hour, yet how little did they realize their need of preparation! Indeed, Peter had said, “I am ready” (v.33); but we may reverently say that the Lord Himself was not ready to face the cross until His blessed preparatory prayer in the garden. He always did everything at precisely the right time, not too early, not too late.

Withdrawing a distance from them, He prayed alone. With what holy, reverent awe and adoration we should view that sight. Even this sorrow of His in Gethsemane we cannot rightly enter into; and far less that of the cross.

While the Lord Jesus prayed for the removal of the cup of the anguish of being made a curse by God (and it was perfectly right that He should have a will desirous of avoiding this), yet He added, “not my will, but Yours, be done.” Here is precious, perfect manhood, having and expressing His own Human will, yet fully submitting Himself rather to the will of the Father.

Only Luke mentions an angel from heaven strengthening Him. The intensity of His distress had a weakening physical effect, and this specially is noted in the Gospel that deals with His true manhood. The angel ministered physical strength, not spiritual. Even in His saints it is the Spirit of God Himself who ministers spiritual strength (Eph 3:16). But as His deep agony increased the earnestness of His prayer, He was bodily afflicted with His sweat becoming like great drops of blood falling down to the ground. How truly and fully He is Man, with all the limitations of dependent weakness that this implies, but totally apart from sin and always doing the Father’s will.

In contrast to His anguish, His disciples, unaware of the imminent accomplishment of the most dreadful yet wonderful event of all history, were asleep. The Lord had told them what lay before, but the sorrow of it was only sufficient to make them heavy with sleep, rather than earnestly concerned (v.45). They had slept in the presence of His glory (Luk 9:32), and now also in the presence of His agony. How sadly we resemble them! We too might take to heart His serious admonition to rise and pray lest we enter into temptation rather than resisting it.

BETRAYED AND ARRESTED

(vs.47-53)

Only the Lord was prepared when the enemy came. Judas went ahead of the crowd, evidently thinking that the Lord would not know that he was in any way linked with these soldiers. How blind was his unbelief, and how grossly deceitful, that he would kiss the Lord with the object of betraying Him! The Lord’s words to him (v.48), faithful, yet with no bitterness or anger, showed him that his treachery had been discerned. What could he do now? Where could he go? For he had proven to friends and enemies alike that he could not be trusted. Terrible exposure! We know from Mat 27:3-5 the tragic end of this pathetic victim of Satan’s delusion, that he hanged himself and entered eternity lost, and destined to eternal punishment.

But the disciples were panic stricken. What could they do? They questioned the Lord as to whether they should use their carnal weapons for defense. But one of them (Peter) didn’t wait for an answer. We too may sometimes pray, then excitedly act without an answer from the Lord. No doubt he aimed for the man’s head, but only cut off his right ear. If the Lord had not been present, this act would have likely started a violent riot, but how blessed it is to see the calm dignity of the Son of God in true control of the situation. With gentle words He touched the servant’s ear and healed him. One may wonder if that act was not enough to awaken some serious exercise in the man’s soul, which would never have been awakened by Peter’s fleshly zeal. For it is the goodness of God that leads people to repentance.

No mention is made in Luke of the divine power by which the Lord Jesus, speaking His Old Testament name, “I Am”, put His attackers prostrate on their backs. Only John mentions this (Joh 18:6). But His calm rebuke to the chief priests, captains and elders in verses 52 and 53 should have burned deeply into their consciences. They had come with carnal weapons, but His daily contact with them in the temple had shown that He never adopted such weapons. The incongruity of their coming in this way only exposed their evil motives. “But,” He added, “this is your hour and the power of darkness” (v.53). They were to be allowed in their brief hour, to fully express their hatred against Him and against God, they being the willing tools of satanic power.

BROUGHT TO THE HIGH PRIEST: PETER’S DENIAL

(vs.54-65)

The Lord with calm dignity submitted to being apprehended. First, He was brought to the house of the high priest, a man responsible to be Israel’s intercessor, but become the accuser of Israel’s Messiah! Peter followed, but afar off. In fact, all the disciples had at this time forsaken Him and fled (Mat 26:56). John had however later entered the high priest’s house, and through his influence Peter also was allowed in (Joh 18:15-16). Peter’s heart needed warming, but the world’s fire is a poor substitute for the Lord’s companionship. Peter sat down in the wrong company. His self-confidence (v.33) his rash use of the sword (v.50), his following afar off (v.54), had been leading him in this dangerous direction, and now he was caught in Satan’s snare. It required only the words of a girl to frighten him into denying that he knew the Lord.

Peter had a little while to think this over before another challenged him, with the same result. Then an hour went by before the third challenge, a confident, pressing one. What could he expect in remaining in their company? He certainly had no more strength the third time than the first, except to deny more strongly that he knew the Lord. As he spoke, the rooster crew. How could his eyes refrain from turning toward the Lord, as the Lord turned to look (surely in tender compassion) at Peter? No use any longer to try to brazen the matter through: he went out and wept bitterly. For he was “wheat,” a true believer, but he had miserably failed in this solemn sifting of Satan. What believer has not had a similar experience in one way or another falling under Satan’s attack?

MOCKED AND BEATEN BY THE JEWISH SOLDIERS

(vs.63-65)

Our eyes are directed now to the Master, who was the object of the vindictive hatred of the Jews who had arrested Him (vs.63-65). With the same quiet calmness of perfect manhood He bore in lowly dignity the many abuses inflicted on Him all that night. Luke does not say as much about this ordeal as does Matthew, but refers to the many things spoken blasphemously against Him. Peter did not have the privilege of witnessing the Lord’s calm dignity in bearing the cruel abuse of the soldiers.

BEFORE THE JEWISH COUNCIL

(vs.66-71)

In the early morning the Jewish council (the Sanhedrim) was gathered to sit in judgment against the Lord Jesus. Yet the due order of a court was glaringly absent. No charge was laid, but they asked Him if He was the Christ. He responded that if He would tell them the truth, they would not believe Him. They had already made up their minds to disbelieve Him. On the other hand, if He would ask them the same question, that is, if He was Christ, they would not answer. They did not want to be involved in a discussion as to who the Christ really is, lest they should trap themselves. But they demanded that He declare Himself, was He the Christ? Why did they ask Him this? He had not demanded any official position as Christ, the Messiah. Nor would His answer to them in one way or the other affect their determination not to let Him go. They were seeking only some deceitful justification for their murderous intentions.

But He added a positive, solemn, striking statement to the effect that, in spite of all they would do against Him, the Son of Man would in due time sit on the right hand of the power of God. Though killed Him, God would exalt Him above all creation.

Blindly, they have no hesitation in fighting against God. They asked the crucial question: was He the Son of God? His answer was positive, the form of the expression meaning simply, “as you say, so it stands: I am.” He had not been advertising who He was, but the matter bothered their consciences: they were afraid He might be the Son of God because of much evidence in His life and ministry, but they hated the thought of having to give Him a place of honor, and in spite of every evidence they were determined to reject Him. His answer then was all the more designed to strike their consciences.

Because of the Lord’s answer they considered they had justification for condemning Him. His faithful confession was interpreted by their religious prejudice as blasphemy. He was condemned for telling the truth as to who He is.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

CHAPTER 22

Ver.6.-And he sought opportunity to betray Him unto them. Judas sold Jesus Christ on the fourth day of the week, the day of Mercury; on the following day, or the day of Jupiter, he delivered Him to them. Thence followed “the day of unleavened bread.” See how sudden was the wickedness of the Jews, and equally cunning and crafty. For they knew that Christ would celebrate the Passover, according to His custom, on the day following at Jerusalem, and that it would therefore be most convenient to deliver Him up then to the Jews at Jerusalem.

Ver. 20.-This cup is the new Testament in My blood. That is, this cup is the authentic instrument, and, as it were, the chart and tabula testamentaria, in which My new covenant is written and signed for giving you My heavenly inheritance, written, I say, not with ink, but in My blood. 1Co 11:23, &c.

Ver. 25.-And they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. Benefactor is a title of honour and praise which is bestowed upon princes because they are, or ought to be, good. The proper epithet of kings in former time was “good.” Virgil uses it of Acestes (n i. 195). Martial applies it to Trajan and Domitian, and Horace to Romulus. Homer thought nothing requisite in a king, but to be brave against the enemy, and good to the citizens. Paul calls Felix “Most Excellent.” Act 24:3.

Ver. 26.-But ye shall not be so. The Arabic has “Let the greater of you be as the least”-that is, let him among you who wishes to be the greatest, become the least. In this way he shall be the greatest.

Morally, let us learn this parable of Christ, incredible to the world, but in itself most true, and by experience most certain, namely, that the way to exaltation is abasement of self. Do we wish to become greater? Let us become less. God has sanctioned and fixed this way by His eternal law, and therefore Christ was the first-fruits to enter upon it, that we, by the same law, might follow Him, as in Phil. ii. 8, 9, 10, 11.

Hence S. Francis, a great follower and imitator of Christ, humbled himself to the lowest of all lowness, and wished to be the poorest and vilest of all men; and to a certain saint, a most lofty and splendid seat in heaven was shown, and when he asked whose it was, the answer was given, “It was the seat of one of the great ones among the fallen angels, but it is now reserved for the holy Francis.” S. Bonav., chap. vi., Life of St. Francis. The same S. Francis wished his followers to be called “Minores,” lest they should presume to become majores. His scribe, S. Francis de Paula, ordered the brethren of his order, to be called not Minores but Minimi. Hence the blessed Magdelena de Pazzi, who has been lately enrolled among the blessed by our holy father, Urban VIII., received the following order from God, “Be of the order of Minim, and the least of them, that thou mayest strive as zealously to be the least as men of this world do to be the greatest.” S. Elizabeth, wife of the Landgrave of Hesse, and the daughter of the king, of Hungary, personally, against the remonstrances of her friends, tended the sick and outcast, and said that if there were any position more humble still she would gladly fill it, the more closely to follow Christ, who from the first humbled Himself to be the lowest of men, as Isaiah describes, ch. liii.; for in this consists the crown of virtue and perfection. The like did Hedwig, Duchess of Polonia, and her granddaughter, S. Elizabeth, Queen of Portugal. So S. Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, sold himself for a slave, for the good of a son of a widow, that he might imitate Christ, and make himself one of the most humble of men. Peter Telonarius did the same, as is related in the Life of S. John Eleemosynarius. This is what the wise man teaches, Ecclus. iii. 20. See what I have commented thereon.

Ver. 29.-And I appoint unto you a kingdom. As My Father has decreed and prepared for Me, through humility and the cross: through so many labours and sufferings: a kingdom heavenly and eternal, so do I also appoint the same unto you: that is, I decree, prepare, and, going to death I now appoint, as by my will, that through the same humility, cross, and suffering, you shall possess a like, nay, the same kingdom with Me in heaven; dispute not then who among you shall be greatest, but who shall be less, that each may study to surpass the other in low estate and humility, for whoever does this, shall be first and greatest in my kingdom.

Ver. 30.-That ye may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom. As kings gave to their most intimate nobles a place at their own table, and made them companions of their banquets, but assigned to other and less famous nobles another table, so will I make you, My Apostles, the chief and foremost of My kingdom, and place you most nearly to Myself, and, as it were, at My table, and I will have you as the most intimate guests of My royal feasts. “In like manner,” say Euthymius, Titus, and Theophylact, “He shows that the Apostles, as the first and most illustrious of His followers, should enjoy the highest honours with their immortal king. It is by catachresis that the pleasures and honours of the kingdom of heaven are often compared in Holy Scripture to banquets, and feasts of meat and drink, and to the first seats at table with kings; because carnal men understand these things best, but are unable to estimate spiritual ones, and because, as meat and drink are incorporated into ourselves and made our own, so, in heaven by the beautiful vision and His other glorious gifts, God will be incorporated into us, as it were, and will be made our own.”

Ver. 31.-And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have You. Sift-that is vex, afflict, agitate, cast you down as wheat in a sieve that it may be cleared of chaff and dust. Satan in the same manner asked God to permit him to sift and afflict Job, and in some degree he obtained his end. He did the same again to Peter and the other Apostles, and again, in part succeeded, when he stirred up the Jews to seize Christ, for then the Apostles themselves fled in fear and were dispersed. The temptation is well compared to sifting and a sieve, because, as by means of the sieve the grains of wheat are separated from the chaff, and remain in the sieve, while the chaff is scattered to the wind, and dispersed in air, so the faithful and the saints in temptation remain constant, but the wicked fail and fly off.

But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not. For thee, because I destine thee to be the head and chief of the Apostles and of My Church, that thy faith fail not in believing Me to be the Christ and the Saviour of the world. Observe that Christ in this prayer asked and obtained for Peter two especial privileges before the other Apostles: the first was personal, that he should never fall from faith in Christ; for Christ looked back to the sifting in the former verse, that is the temptation of His own apprehension when the other Apostles flew off from Him like chaff and lost their faith, and were dispersed, and fled into all parts. But Peter, although he denied Christ with his lips, at the hour foretold, and lost his love for Him, yet retained his faith. So S. Chrysostom (Hom. xxxviii.) on S. Matthew; S. Augustine (de corrept. et Grat. chap. viii.); Theophylact and others. This is possible but not certain, for F. Lucas and others think that Peter then lost both his faith and his love, from excessive perturbation and fear; but only for a short time, and so that his faith afterwards sprang up anew, and was restored with fresh vitality. Hence it is thought not to have wholly failed, or to have been torn up by the roots, but rather to have been shaken and dead for a time.

Another and a certain privilege was common to Peter with all his successors, that he and all the other bishops of Rome (for Peter, as Christ willed, founded and confirmed the Pontifical Church at Rome), should never openly fall from this faith, so as to teach the Church heresy, or any error, contrary to the faith. So S. Leo (serm. xxii.), on Natalis of SS. Peter and Paul; S. Cyprian (Lib. i. ep 3), to Cornelius; Lucius I., Felix I., Agatho, Nicolas I., Leo IX., Innocent III., Bernard and others, whom Bellarmine cites and follows (Lib. i. de Pontif. Roman).

For it was necessary that Christ, by His most wise providence, should provide for His Church, which is ever being sifted and tempted by the devil, and that not only in the time of Peter, but at all times henceforth, even to the end of the world, an oracle of the true faith which she might consult in every doubt and by which she might be taught and confirmed in the faith, otherwise the Church might err in faith, quod absit! For she is as S. Paul said to Timothy, “the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. iii 15). This oracle of the Church then is Peter, and all successive bishops of Rome. This promise made to Peter, and his successors, most especially applies to the time when Peter, as the successor of Christ, began to be the head of the Church, that is, after the death of Christ.

And when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. “From the sifting of Satan, that is from his temptation and from the sin by which thou wilt deny Me; for by this thou wilt be turned aside from Me, and My grace and love.” So Euthymius, Theophylact, Jansen, F. Lucas, and others.

Some take this converted (conversus) as meaning “again” (iterum). So Bede, “Do thou, 0 Peter, again confirm the Apostles thy brethren, in the faith after My death, whom I now, while alive, strengthen by My words.” For the Hebrew often uses the verb for the adverb. So Psa 85:6.

Strengthen thy brethren. Thy brethren, and therefore Mine. The condescension of Christ here is wonderful. He does not call the Apostles sons although He spiritually begot them to God, but brothers: as well because Christ as man, was the brother of all men, being a sharer of the same human nature, as because the Apostles in their apostleship and preaching of the Gospel, were the brothers and colleagues of Christ; for they did the same work as He. Hence the Fathers, whom I have cited, and the Doctors of the Church conclude that Peter was set over the other Apostles by Christ, and consequently was made the head and chief over the whole Church, that he might build up, perfect, and confirm the Church in the faith and religion of Christ.

Ver. 36.-But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip. A purse filled with money, a scrip with food, that they might have support in the impending persecution; for they will never find either, “because men will fly from Me, who am bound and accused, and consequently from My disciples as men wicked and condemned.”

And he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Christ, in these words, did not command them to take a purse and a scrip, and to sell their garment and buy a sword, for He soon after forbade Peter to draw his sword; but they were a warning of the fierce persecution which was about to fall upon Himself and the apostles, and which was so heavy to those that regarded the difficulty of the case with the eyes of mere human wisdom, that food and weapons would appear things absolutely necessary for the preservation of life. The meaning therefore is this, “Everything, so far, has happened to you, 0 my Apostles, well and prosperously; for when I sent you to preach the Gospel without purse, or scrip, or sword, you were kindly received by most, fed, and sheltered, and had no need of these things. But now so grievous a persecution is impending over you, and so great is the danger to your lives, that in human prudence it may seem necessary to each to think of the preservation of his life, and therefore to take a scrip and purse for provision, and a weapon for defence, and to sell his cloak, and buy a sword. But to Me, who weigh circumstances by the design and decree of God the Father, there is no need of such things; for I go voluntarily to the cross, and to death, and I offer Myself of My own free will, to those who will persecute Me and crucify Me, so that I may conform Myself to the will of My Father.” So S. Chrysostom (Hom. 85 on S. Matt.), and from him Theophylact on this passage, Jansen, Maldonatus, and others. S. Ambrose says well, “0 Lord, why commandest Thou me to buy a sword, and forbiddest me to strike, unless that I may be prepared for my defence, and that Thou mayest appear able to avenge though Thou wouldst not?”

Ver. 38.-And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. They did not understand the mind and words of Christ clearly. He did not mean that they should buy swords, but He wished to show them the impending danger. Christ did not explain His meaning to the Apostles, but concealed it, saying, “It is enough,” meaning that Peter and the other Apostles might carry these swords, and even cut off Malchus’ ear, which He Himself afterwards restored and healed, showing that He was not compelled by force, but was urged by love, willingly and freely to suffer and die. Some think that they were not military swords, but rather large butchers’ knives, which the apostles used for the slaughtering, sacrificing, and disjointing of the Paschal Lamb. So S. Chrysostom, from whom I have said more on Matt. xxvii.

Ver. 39.-And He came out, and went, as He was wont, to the mount of Olives. Bede gives the reason of this: “The Lord, when about to be delivered up, came to the retirement of this accustomed place, that He might be found the more easily. Where are they who maintained that He feared death, and was crucified against His will? Christ was wont, in these last days of His life, to preach in the temple by day, and to retire at night to the mount of Olives to pray. This, Judas, as being an Apostle, and a companion of Christ knew; and hence he came to this mountain with his followers, and there betrayed and delivered up Christ to them.”

Ver. 43.-And there appeared an angel unto Him from heaven. The angel appeared in a body assumed visibly that he might comfort the eyes and ears of Christ by his appearance and voice. Jansenius thinks that the angel appeared at each of Christ’s three prayers, and therefore comforted Him three times, to teach us that God always hears those who pray, and gives them grace and strength unceasingly. F. Lucas, and others, think with more reason, that the angel only appeared once, at the third and last prayer, and comforted Him when He prayed more earnestly, and sweated blood, to show that we ought to persevere in prayer, and that the fruit of such perseverance is the comfort of God, and the vision of angels. For after this consolation from the Father by the angel, the agony of Christ seems to have passed away, and He appears to have prayed no more but to have prepared bravely for death. This angel was Gabriel, says Gabriel Vasquez (I. p. tom. ii. disbut. 244, No. 3), for Gabriel has his name from his fortitude, Gabriel being Geber-el the man of God, or Gebura-el the fortitude of God; for he has the office of comforting the weak, afflicted, and fearful. But he comforted Christ not by strengthening His weakness, but by praising His surpassing fortitude. Lud. de Pont. thinks the same in his “Meditation on the Agony of Christ in the Garden,” because Gabriel was the legate and messenger of the conomy of Christ, as at the Incarnation (Luke i. 26), and of the seventy weeks of Daniel, which foretold the time of the nativity of Christ.

Others, however, as F. Lucas, think that it was Michael, for he is the highest of all angels, and it became him, as such, to perform this office for the supreme God, that is Christ.

Strengthening Him. “The praise and due adoration of Christ,” says Titus, “being premised,” he comforted Christ by speaking to Him outwardly and setting before Him the will and glory of the Father, and the rich fruit which would ensue, both to Christ Himself, to men, and to angels, from His Passion. For the angel could not affect the inner mind of Christ, nor immediately change His inner powers. And as He could only be tempted by Satan, externally, so He could only be comforted by the angel outwardly. He could not be taught nor illuminated by him, for He was above all angels, and from the first moment of His conception, was full of wisdom and knowledge. So say the schoolmen with S. Thomas (3. p. q. 12, art. 4): The angel spoke the following, or like words to Christ, “0 Lord, bravest of men, Thy prayer is most acceptable to Thy Father; because, notwithstanding Thy natural dread of death, Thou resignedst Thyself wholly to the will of the Father boldly to undergo the death appointed for Thee by Him. Lay aside therefore this Thy horror and grief with which Thou hast voluntarily invested Thyself, and reassume Thy former mind and strength, and come bravely to the work of human Redemption, by which Thou wilt most signally celebrate the glory of God, rejoice the angels, redeem men from Hell, and bring them back to the glories of heaven. Endure the cross for the joy that is offered Thee, as the future author and perfector of the faith of very many. Heb 12:2. Thus Thou wilt cause SS. Peter and Paul, Laurentius, Vincentius, Agnes, Ccilia and very many other martyrs and virgins, men, and noble heroes and heroines boldly to undergo martyrdom for God, and the faithful, with other holy men, who triumphed gloriously over the flesh, the world, and the devil. I know that Thou, 0 Lord, hast no need of any strengthening of mine, who am myself strengthened by Thee both to be and to live; but, that this my ministry which I execute as a steward at the command of God Thy Father may be acceptable to Thee, I pray again and again.”

Theophylact thinks that the angel spoke thus, “0 Lord, Thine is the strength, for thou art powerful against death and hell, to set free the race of men.”

Ver. 44.-And being in an agony, He prayed more earnestly. The “et” here in the Hebrew is causal, and means quia, because. That is, the angel comforted Him; because being in an agony and praying more earnestly, He sweated blood, and then appeared to need comfort, and to merit it. The following, was the order of events. Christ had prayed the first and second time, but felt no help of God. Then His feeling growing on Him, He, permitting the agony (that is, a more vehement horror and anguish) to arise in Himself, He sweated blood. To overcome this, He prayed a third time more earnestly, teaching us that as temptation increases our prayers should increase equally. The angel therefore appeared to Him immediately, comforting Him; whereupon He ceased to pray and to fear, and to grieve, and, suppressing and overcoming His agony, He manfully prepared Himself for His Passion, and went forth of His own accord to meet Judas.

More earnestly. The Greek is , that is, more exclusively, more intensely. For this, as appears from SS. Matthew and Mark, was the third prayer of Christ, and He appears to have remained in it longer. More earnestly, because, as the anguish pressed upon Him, Christ, to overcome it, at once directed the contention of His mind, by praying; and He prayed with a more intense feeling and ardour. Luke includes in one as in a compendium, the three prayers of Matthew and Mark, and therefore relates some things of it, which took place in the first and second, and some which took place in the third.

And His sweat was as it were great drops of blood. The Greek has , gouts, thick masses. The Arabic and S. Irenus have globi. The Arabic says, “His sweat was (made) as distilling blood descending on the ground.”

Note. Firstly, Some copies have nothing about this bloody sweat, as S. Hilary shows (De Trinit. lib. x.); S. Jerome (lib. ii. against Pelagius), lest men should ascribe infirmity of mind and weakness to Christ. But now all versions, Greek, Latin, Syriac, Arabic, have the same account, so it is certainly to be read, according to the agreement of the Council of Trent, Session IV.

Secondly, Christ is said to have sweated blood not improperly or as a by-word, and an allegory, as we say of one who is grievously afflicted and tormented, “he sweats blood,” as Euthymius and Theophylact explain it-but truly and properly. Hence the words “as it were” denote not resemblance but the truth. So SS. Hilary, Jerome, Augustine passim. The Ethiopic renders it plainly, “And His sweat was made as the sweat of blood flowing down upon the earth.” The Persian agrees with it. S. Athanasius, also, in his sixth book to Theophilus, which is on the Beatitude of the Son of God, says, “Anathema to those who deny that Christ sweated true blood.”

S. Bernard, treating of this prayer of Christ in the garden, says, “Not only with His eyes does He seem to have wept, but, as it were, with all His members, that His whole Body, which is the Church, might be the more effectually purged by His tears” (Serm. 3 on Palm Sunday). The love of Christ indeed was not content with the watery tears of His eyes, but wished, by the bloody tears of His whole Body, to lament and blot out our sins, and these tears of Christ were most efficacious with God the Father. “For,” says S. Irenus (Lib. v. cap. i.) “the blood of Christ has a voice and ‘speaketh better things than that of Abel,’ Heb. xii. 24. The blood of Abel calls for vengeance, that of Christ for mercy.”

Symbolically, “the reason was,” says S. Augustine, “that Christ might show that from His whole Body would proceed the passions of martyrs” (Seutent. sent. 68). Again, “The blood of Christ,” says Bede, “flowed down upon the earth to show that men of the earth would be moistened by it.”

Ver. 45.-And when He rose up from prayer. For sorrow contracts the heart, and hinders the vital and subtle spirits from being sent to the head; wherefore the black and crass vapours which are the cause of sleep, invade the brain. But there is a hysteron proteron here. For these things happened before the bloody sweat which took place in the third prayer of Christ, while the former happened in the first prayer, as is clear from SS. Matthew and Mark. The reason is that S. Luke compresses the three prayers into one, and unites what happened at different times in the three prayers as if they had been done in one and the same. For after the first prayer, Christ, visiting the Apostles and finding them asleep, said as follows,

Ver. 46.-And said unto them, Why sleep ye? See what has been said on Matthew xxvi. xxvii.

Fuente: Cornelius Lapide Commentary

22:1 Now the {1} feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.

(1) Christ is taken upon the day of the Passover rather by the providence of his Father, than by the will of men.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

A. The plot to arrest Jesus 22:1-6

This significant plot is the core around which several other incidents cluster.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

1. The leaders’ desire 22:1-2 (cf. Matthew 26:1-5; Mark 14:1-2)

The leaders of Israel had already decided to do away with Jesus. His presence in Jerusalem for the Passover season gave them a chance to arrest Him and put Him on trial before Pilate and Herod Antipas. Both of these rulers were in Jerusalem for the occasion.

Luke mentioned the seven-day feast of Unleavened Bread as the better known of the two feasts whereas Matthew and Mark both featured the Passover in their accounts. Greek readers may have known this feast as the feast of Unleavened Bread more commonly than as Passover.

The Jewish religious leaders took the initiative against Jesus, but the common people did not share their antagonism. The chief priests were mainly political leaders who owed their jobs to Rome. The situation also required the legal expertise of the scribes or lawyers. The Jewish leaders could not discover a way to take Jesus without causing a riot until Judas came forward with his plan.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 24

THE WATCH IN GETHSEMANE.

HITHERTO the life of Jesus has been comparatively free from sorrow and from pain. With the exception of the narrow strip of wilderness which fell between the Baptism and His inaugural miracle, the Divine Life has lain for the most part in the sunshine, above the fret and fever of anxious thought and care. True, He had enemies, whose hatred was persistent and virulent; the shafts of calumny fell around Him in one steady rain; His motives were constantly misconstrued, His words misunderstood; but with all this His, life was peace. How could He have spoken of “rest of soul,” and have promised it to the weary and heavy-laden, if He Himself were a stranger to its experience? How could He have awoke such songs and shouts of gladness, or have strewn the lives of men with such unusual brightness, without having that brightness and music coming back in reflections and echoes within His own heart-that heart which was the fontal source of their new-found joys? And if many doubted, or even hated Him, there were many who admired and feared, and not a few who loved and adored Him, and who were glad to place at His disposal their entire substance, nay, their entire selves. But if His anointing thus far has been the anointing of gladness, there is a baptism of sorrow and anguish prepared for Him, and to that ordeal He now proceeds, first girding up His soul with the music of a thanksgiving psalm. Let us, too, arise and follow Him; but taking off our shoes, let us step softly and reverently into the mystery of the Divine sorrow; for though we must ever stand back from that mystery more than a “stones cast,” perhaps, if we keep in mind and heart awake and alert, we may read something of its deep meaning.

The whole scene of Gethsemane is unique. Like the Mount of Transfiguration, the Garden of the Agony stands “apart” from all other paths, in a profound isolation. And in more senses than this these two august scenes are related and coincident. Indeed, we cannot fully understand the mystery of the Garden but as we allow the mystery of the Mount to explain it, in part at least, so threading the light of the one into the darkness of the other. On the Mount of Transfiguration the Divine Life, as we have seen, reached its culminating point, its perihelion as we may call it, where it touched the very heavens for one brief night, passing through its out-streaming glories and crossing the paths of celestials. In Gethsemane we have the antipodal fact; we see the Divine Life in its far aphelion, where it touches hell itself, moving round in an awful gloom, and crossing the paths of the “powers of darkness.” And so our best outlook into Gethsemane is not from the Mount of Olives-though the two names are related as the two places are adjacent, Gethsemane lying at the foot of Olivet-but from that more distant Mount of Transfiguration.

Leaving the “guest-chamber,” where a Passover of a new order has been instituted, and the cup, with its fruit of the vine, has received a higher consecration, Jesus leads the broken band down the stairs, which still vibrate with the heavy tread of the traitor, and in the still, full moonlight they pass out of the city, the gates being open because of the Passover. Descending the steep ravine, and crossing the brook Kedron, they enter the enclosure of Gethsemane. Both St. Luke and St. John tell us that He was accustomed to resort thither-for, strangely enough, we do not read of Jesus spending so much as one night within the city walls-and so probably the garden belonged to one of His adherents, possibly to St. Mark. Bidding the eight remain near the entrance, and exhorting them to pray that they enter not into, or, as it means here, that they “yield not to,” the temptation which is shortly to come upon them, Jesus takes Peter, James, and John farther into the garden. They were witnesses of His Transfiguration, when His face shone like the sun, and the spirits of the perfected came to do Him homage; they must now see a transfiguration of sorrow, as that face is furrowed by the sharp lines of pain, and half-masked by a veil of blood. From the narratives of St. Matthew and St. Mark it would appear as if Jesus now experienced a sudden change of feeling. In the guest-chamber He was calmly confident; and though we may detect in His words and symbolic acts a certain undertone of sadness, the salutation of one “about to die,” yet there was no tremor, no fear. He spoke of His own death, which now was near at hand, as calmly as if the Mount of Sacrifice were but another mountain of spices; while to His disciples He spoke words of cheer and hope, putting around their hearts a soothing, healing balm, even before the dreadful wound is made. But now all this is changed: “He began to he greatly amazed and sore troubled”. {Mar 14:33} The word we here render “amazed,” as St. Mark uses it, has sometimes the element of fear within it, as when the women were “amazed,” or “affrighted,” by the vision of the angels; {Mar 16:5} and such, we are inclined to think, is its meaning here. It was not so much wonder as it was trepidation, and a certain dread, which now fell of a sudden upon the Master. Over that pure soul, which ever lay calm and serene as the bright heaven which stooped to embrace it, has broken a storm of conflicting winds, and dense, murky clouds, and all is disquiet and distress, where before was nothing but peace. My soul is exceeding sorrowful, “even unto death”; such is the strange confession of tremulous lips, as for once He opens the infinite depths of His heart, and shows the mortal grief which has suddenly fallen there. It is the first contact of the eclipse, as between Himself and the Fathers smile another world is passing, the world of the “outer darkness,” even hell, throwing down upon His soul a chilling, awful shadow.

Jesus understands its meaning. It is the signal for the final battle, the shadow of “the prince of this world,” who, rallying all his forces, cometh to find “nothing in Me.” Jesus accepts the challenge, and that He may meet the enemy single-handed, with no earthly supports, He bids the three, “Abide ye here, and watch with Me.” “With me,” and not “for Me”; for what could avail to Him the vigilance of human eyes amid this felt darkness of the soul? It was not for Himself He bade them “watch,” but for themselves, that waking or praying they might gain a strength which would be proof against temptation, the test which would be keenly severe, and which now was close at hand.

“And He was parted from them about a stones cast.” The verb implies a measure of constraint, as if, in the conflict of emotion, the longing for some human presence and human sympathy held Him back. And why not? Is not the very presence of a friend a solace in grief, even if no words are spoken? And does not the “aloneness” of a sorrow make the sorrow tenfold more bitter? Not like the “stricken deer that left the herd,” the human heart, when wounded or sore pressed, yearns for sympathy, finding in the silent look or the touch of a hand a grateful anodyne. But this wine-press He must tread alone, and of the people there must be none with Him; and so the three who are most favored and most beloved are left back at a stones cast from the physical suffering of Christ, while from His heart-agony they must stand back at an infinite distance.

It was while Jesus was praying upon the holy mount that the heavens were opened unto Him; and now, as another cloud envelops Him, not of glory, but of a thick darkness, it finds Him in the same attitude of prayer. He at whose feet sinful man had knelt, all unrebuked, Himself now kneels, as He sends to heaven the earnest and almost bitter cry, “O My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me!” the three Evangelists differ in their wording of the Saviors petition showing that the spirit is more than the letter of prayer; that Heaven thinks more of the inner thought than of the outward drapery of words; but the thought of the three is identical, while all make prominent the central figure of the “cup.”

The cups of Scripture are of divers patterns and of varied meanings. There was the cup of blessing, like that of the Psalmist, {Psa 23:5} filled to the brim and running over with mercy. There was “the cup of salvation,” that sacrament of the Old Testament which kept in memory one deliverance, that of Israel, while it prophesied of another, the “great salvation” which was to come. What, then, was the cup Jesus so feared to drink, and which He asked, so earnestly and repeatedly, that it might pass from Him? Was it the fear of death? Certainly not; for how could He be afraid of death, who had so triumphed over it, and who had proclaimed Himself the Resurrection and the Life? How could He fear death, when He knew so well “the seraph face that smiled beneath the frowning mask,” and knew that it would end forever all His sufferings and His pain? Death to Him was a familiar thought. He spoke of it freely, not either with the hard indifference of the Stoic, or with the palsied speech of one whose lips shake with an inward fear, but in calm, sweet accents, as any child of earth might speak of going home. Was this “cup,” then, the death itself? And when He asked that it might pass away, was He suggesting that possibly some mode of atonement might be found other than the cross? We think not. Jesus knew full well that His earthly life would have, and could have, but one issue. Death would be its goal, as it was its object. Whether, as Holman Hunt represents, the cross threw its shadow back as far as the shop at Nazareth, we do not know, for the record is silent. But we do know that the shadow of death lay across the whole of His public life, for we find it appearing in His words. The cross was a dark and vivid certainty that He wished neither to forget nor to evade, for must not the Son of man be “lifted up,” that He may draw all men to Himself? Must not the corn of wheat be hidden in its grave before it can become fruitful, throwing itself forward down the years in hundredfold multiplications? Yes; death to Jesus is the inevitable, and long before the Roman soldiers have pieced together the transverse beams Jesus had made His cross, fashioning it in His thought, and hiding it in His words. Nay, He has this very night instituted a new sacrament, in which, for all generations, the broken bread shall be the emblem of His bruised and broken body, and the wine, of His blood, the blood of the New Testament, which is shed for man. And does Jesus now seek, by reiterated prayers, to shift that cross from the Divine purpose, substituting in its place something less painful, less cruel? Does He seek now to annul His own predictions, and to make His own sacrament void and meaningless? This cannot be; and so, whatever the “cup” may mean, we cannot take it as a synonym for His death.

What, then, is its meaning? The Psalmist had long before sung-

“For in the hand of the Lord there is a cup, and the wine foameth; It is full of mixture, and he poureth out of the same: Surely the dregs thereof, all the wicked of the earth shall wring them out, and drink them”; {Psa 75:8}

while St. John, speaking of the last woes, {Rev 14:10} tells us how they who have the mark of the beast upon their foreheads “shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is prepared unmixed in the cup of His anger.” Here, then, is the “cup” which now is set before the Son of man, the very touch of which fills His soul with unutterable dread. It is the cup of Gods anger, filled to the brim with its strange red wine, the wine of His wrath. Jesus comes to earth as the Representative Man, the Second Adam, in whom all shall be made alive. He voluntarily assumes the place of the transgressor, as St. Paul writes, {2Co 5:21} “Him who knew no sin He made to be sin on our behalf; that we might become the righteousness of God in Him,” a passage which corresponds exactly with the prophetic idea of substitution, as given by Isaiah, {Isa 53:5} “He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed.” And so “the iniquity of us all” was laid on Him, the Holy One. In His own Person He must feel, in its concentrated forms, the smart and consequence of sin; and as His physical sufferings are the extremest pain even sin can produce, so Jesus must suffer, too, all the mental anguish, the agony of a soul bereft of God. And as Jesus, on the Transfiguration Mount, passed up to the very gate of heaven, so lighting up with splendor and glory the lost path of unfallen man, so now, in the Garden, Jesus tracks the path of fallen man, right on to its fearful consummation, which is the “outer darkness” of hell itself. This vivid consciousness has been graciously withheld from Him hitherto; for the terrible pressure would simply have unfitted Him for His ministry of blessing; for how could He have been the “kindly Light,” leading humanity homeward, heavenward, if that Light Himself were hidden in “encircling gloom,” and lost in a felt darkness? But ere His mission is complete this is an experience that He must know. Identifying Himself with sin, He must feel its very farthest consequence, the awful solitude, and the unutterable anguish, of a soul now bereft of hope and forsaken of God. In the heathen fable Orpheus goes down, lyre in hand, to the Plutonic realm, to bring back again to life and love the lost Eurydice; but Jesus, in His vicarious sufferings, goes down to hell itself, that He may win back from their sins, and bear in triumph to the upper heavens, a lost humanity.

Rising from the ground, and going back to His three disciples, He finds them asleep. The Synoptists all seek to explain, and to apologize for, their unnatural slumber, St. Matthew and St. Mark telling us that their “eyes were heavy,” while St. Luke states that their sleep was the result of their grief; for, happily, in the wonderful compensations of nature, intense grief does tend to induce somnolence. But while the Evangelists refer their slumber to natural causes, might there not be something more in it, some supernatural element? Sleep can be caused by natural means, and yet be an unnatural sleep, as when narcotics benumb the senses, or some mesmeric spell muffles the speech, and makes the soul for a time unconscious. And might it not have been some invisible touch which made their eyes so heavy? For it is an exact repetition of their attitude when on the holy mount, and in that sleep sorrow certainly had no part. When St. John saw the vision upon Patmos, he “fell at His feet as one dead”; and when Saul beheld the light, near Damascus, he fell to the ground. And how often we find the celestial vision connected with a trance-like state! And why may not the “trance” be an effect of the vision, just as well as its cause, or rather its circumstance? At any rate, the fact is plain, that supernatural visions tend to lock up the natural senses, the veil which is uplifted before the unseen world being wrapped around the eyes and the soul of the seer. And this, we are inclined to think, was a possible, partial cause for the slumber upon the mount and in the garden, a sleep which, under the circumstances, was strangely unnatural and almost unpardonable.

Addressing Himself directly to Peter, who had promised to follow his Lord unto death, but whose heart now strangely lagged behind, and calling him by his earlier name-for Jesus only once made use of the name He Himself had chosen; the “Rock” was at present in a state of flux, and had not yet settled down to its petrine character-He said, “What, Simon, could ye not watch with Me one hour? Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation.” Then, for a moment forgetting His own sorrow, and putting Himself in their place, He makes the apology for them which their lips are afraid to utter: “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak”; so compassionate is He over human weakness and infirmity, even while He is severity itself towards falsity and sin.

St. Luke records the narrative only in a condensed form, giving us the salient points, but not entering so fully into detail. It is from St. Matthew and St. Mark that we learn how Jesus went back a second time, and falling prostrate on the ground, prayed still in the self-same words, and how He returned to His disciples to find them again asleep; even the reproof of the Master has not been able to counterbalance the pressure of the supernatural heaviness. No word is spoken this time-at any rate the Evangelists have not repeated them for us-but how eloquent would be that look of disappointment and grief! And how that rebuke would fall burning hot upon their heart, focused in the lenses of His sad and tearful eyes! But the three are dazed, bewildered, and for once the ready tongue of Peter is speechless; “they wist not what to answer Him”. {Mar 14:40}

Not yet, however, is the conflict ended. Three times did the tempter come to Him in the wilderness, and three times is the fierce battle to be waged in the garden, the last the sorest. It would almost seem as if the three assaults were descending steps of sorrow, each marking some lower deep in the dark mystery; for now the death-sorrow becomes an “agony” of spirit, a pressure from within so fearful as to arrest the flow of blood, forcing it through the opened pores in an awful sweat, until great drops, or “clots,” of blood gathered upon His face, and then fell to the ground. Could there be possibly, even for the lost, an anguish more intense? And was not Jesus then, as mans Surety, wringing out and drinking the very last dregs of that cup of His anger which “the wicked of the earth,” if unredeemed, had been doomed to drink? Verily He was, and the bloody sweat was a part, an earnest, of our atonement, sprinkling with its redemptive virtues the very ground which was “cursed” for mans sake. {Gen 3:17} It was the pledge and the foregathered fruit of a death already virtually accomplished, in the absolute surrender of the Divine Son as mans Sacrifice.

And so the thrice-uttered prayer of Jesus, even though He prayed the “more earnestly,” was not granted. It was heard, and it was answered, but not in the specific way of the request. Like Pauls prayer for the removal of the thorn, and which, though not granted, was yet answered in the promise of the “sufficient” grace, so now the thrice-uttered prayer of Jesus does not remove the cup. It is there, and it is there for Him to drink, as He tastes for man both of the earthly death and of the bitterness of the after, the second death. But the answer came in the strengthening of His soul, and in the heavenly greetings the angel brought down to Him when the conflict was over. But in this reiterated prayer for the removal of the cup there was no conflict between Himself and the Father. The request itself was enveloped in submission, the contingent “if” which preceded it, and the “not My will, but Thine,” which followed, completely enclosing it. The will of Jesus was ever adjusted to the will of the Father, working within it in an absolute precision, with no momentary breaks. But here the “if” implies uncertainty, doubt. Even Jesus is not quite sure as to what, in the special case, the Fathers will may involve, and so, while He asks for the removal of the cup, this is the smaller request, inlaid within the larger, deeper prayer, that “not My will, but Thine, be done.” Jesus did not seek to bend the Fathers will, and make it conform to His desires, but He sought, whatever might be the cost, to configure His desires to that all-wise and all-loving Will.

So in our smaller lives there may be hours of distress and uncertainty. We may see, mingled for us, cups of sorrow, loss, or pain, which we fear to drink, and the shrinking flesh may seek to be exempted from the ordeal; but let us not too hastily ask that they may be put away, for fear we may dismiss some cup of blessing from our life. Let us seek rather for a perfect submission to the will of God, conforming all our desires and all our prayers to that will. So in that “perfect acquiescence” there will be for us a “perfect rest.” Gethsemane itself will become bright and all musical with songs, and where the powers of darkness mocked us Heavens angels will come, with their sweet ministry. Nay, the cup of sorrow and of pain, at which we trembled before, if we see how Gods will has wrought and filled it, and we embrace that will, the cup of sorrow will be a transfigured cup, a golden chalice of the King, all filled to the brim, and running over, with the new wine of the kingdom.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary