Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 22:6
And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude.
6. sought opportunity ] Doubtless he was baffled at first by the entire and unexpected seclusion which Jesus observed on the Wednesday and Thursday.
in the absence of the multitude ] Rather, without a mob; is poetic, and only occurs here and in Luk 22:35.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 6. And he promised] That is, to do it – : or, He accepted the proposal. See Wakefield.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
6. in the absence, &c.(SeeMt 26:5).
Lu22:7-38. LASTPASSOVERINSTITUTIONOF THE SUPPERDISCOURSEAT THE TABLE.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And he promised,…. He undertook to deliver him into their hands; he laid himself under obligation to do it; he faithfully promised he would. The Arabic version renders it, he gave thanks; for the money he received, being well pleased he had made such a bargain; and so the word here used sometimes signifies; and indeed commonly either to confess; or to give thanks, in which latter sense it is used, in Mt 11:25 but here rather it is to be understood in the sense of promising:
and sought opportunity; the two days following before the passover:
to betray him unto them in the absence of the people: when they were gone from him, and he was alone; but found no opportunity of doing it this way, which they had agreed upon with him, and he had promised, until the night of the passover, when he was alone in the garden with his disciples.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Consented (). Old verb, but the ancients usually used the simple form for promise or consent rather than the compound. This is the only instance of this sense in the N.T. It is from (, same, and , to say), to say the same thing with another and so agree.
Opportunity (). From (, ), a good chance. Old word, but in the N.T. only here and parallel passage Mt 26:16.
In the absence of the multitude ( ). is an old preposition, common in the poets, but rare in prose. Also in verse 35. It means “without,” “apart from,” like . The point of Judas was just this. He would get Jesus into the hands of the Sanhedrin during the feast in spite of the crowd. It was necessary to avoid tumult (Mt 26:5) because of the popularity of Jesus.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Promised [] . See on Mt 3:6; Mt 11:25. The idea is that of an open and fair consent or pledge.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And he promised,” (kai eksomologesen) “And he fully consented,” to accept the amount for leading them to the place that they might seize Jesus in the night.
2) “And sought opportunity,” (kai ezetei eukairian) “And he sought, watched for an opportunity,” Mat 26:16; Act 1:16.
3) “To betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude.” (paradounai auton ater ochlou autois) “To give him over (betray him) to them apart from the crowd,” who might have attempted to rescue Him in day time, or in the absence of and away from the multitudes, to avoid a tumult, a riot, Psa 41:9; Psa 55:12-14.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(6) In the absence of the multitude.The marginal reading, without a tumult, is perhaps nearer to the meaning of the original.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
‘And he consented, and sought opportunity to deliver him to them in the absence of the crowd.’
Judas accepted their terms, and from that moment on looked for an opportunity to deliver Jesus to the authorities when the crowds were absent. It was clear that it would have to be at night, for during the daytime Jesus was constantly surrounded by people who had come to hear Him and who revered Him. Judas is a pathetic figure, but before we sympathise with him too much we have to consider how hardened his heart must have become, in order for him to be able to go through all the experiences of the Upper Room, including Jesus’ gentle words to him, and still carry through his plan. For while Satan could prompt him and urge him, he could not force him to do what he did. Judas was still finally free to do his own thing. And he hardened his heart and did it of his own free choice.
There can be no doubt that the choice of Judas as one of the twelve and his subsequent betrayal of Jesus presents a problem to our human understanding. But it is really no greater problem that that of the idea of God’s sovereignty and free will. No man who wants to respond to Christ will ever be rejected, and yet, in spite of His attractiveness, the Bible tells us that only those who are chosen come to Him. No one will ever be able to say, ‘I wanted to come to Christ but He would not accept Me’, for ‘whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved’. And yet those who will be saved have been chosen in Him before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4) and have their names permanently recorded in the Lamb’s book of life from the foundation of the world. Their names are written in Heaven (Rev 13:8; Rev 21:27). By this we recognise that God’s sovereignty and man’s freewill move in parallel. God does not make history happen, but He makes it go according to His will. The cruelties of man are not God’s doing. But He utilises them in His purposes, as He did with both Sennacherib and Nebuchadnezzar, and as He does with all evil men.
Jesus did not choose the eager young Judas in order that he might be there as the betrayer. He chose one who was insistent on being a disciple, and who revealed his good qualities. One who showed especial determination. He chose him that he might serve like the others, and enjoy the same privileges. But gradually He began to realise that there was a lack in Judas’ character, so that He was forced to declare, ‘Have I not chosen you, twelve, and one of you is a devil?’ (Joh 6:70). Yet He would not cast him off. He would give him the full opportunity to prove Him wrong. Judas would never be able to say, ‘You did not give me my chance.’
What was it that Jesus saw in Judas that made Him in the end realise what Judas was? Perhaps it was his love for money. He gave Judas plenty of warning about that. Possibly it was because, unlike the others, he did not respond to Jesus’ moulding. Perhaps he continued in what would one day be called the way of Zealotry, and insisted in his own heart on a military solution to the problems of Jewry and somehow hoped that, once His enemies faced up to Him, Jesus could be stirred up to go along with it, and use His powers to that end. But Jesus gave much teaching concerning this as well. Judas thus really had no excuse for being in doubt on how things were, and it should be remembered that it was always open to him to withdraw, as other had done (Joh 6:66). Indeed the moment that he realised that he was out of step with Jesus, that is what he should have done, and no one would have blamed him. His crime was that he continued pretending to be a disciple when at length he knew that Jesus and he could never see eye to eye, to such an extent that he was willing to be a betrayer. He made all his choices himself, and broke every rule of honour of his background, for he ate at table with Jesus and pretended to be His friend, while plotting against Him. This would be a heinous crime in the eyes of every Easterner. Jesus was not to blame for this. He merely graciously put up with him even when He knew that his character was doubtful and was aware of what he might do. Indeed He appealed to him to the last. And yet in it all it was God’s will that was done and His purposes that were accomplished. And it must be remembered in it all that Judas did not have the last word. For Jesus did not go helplessly to the cross. At every step that He took, twelve legions of angels waited in order to snatch Him to safety (Mat 26:53). They waited eagerly and only needed His signal. But it never came. And so it was Jesus Who made the final choice to die alone, as He cried, ‘Your will, not Mine be done’.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
6 And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude.
Ver. 6. And he promised ] , by mutual stipulation (saith Beza), wherein the one asketh, Dost thou promise to do such a thing the other answereth, I do promise. Like as of old it was, Credis? Credo. Abrenuncias? Abrenuncio. Believest thou? I do believe. Forsakest thou? I do forsake.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Luk 22:6 . , he agreed, spopondit , for which the Greeks used the simple verb. The active of . occurs here only in N.T. , without a crowd, the thing above all to be avoided. is a poetic word in Greek authors; here and in Luk 22:35 only in N.T.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
he promised. For his part. See notes on Pro 16:1, Pro 16:9, Pro 16:33.
opportunity. Implying the difficulty.
in the absence of = without. Greek. ater. Occurs only here, and Luk 22:35.
the multitude = a crowd.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
in the absence of the multitude: or, without tumult, Mat 26:5, Mar 14:2
Reciprocal: Mat 26:16 – he Mar 14:11 – he sought
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
6
In the absence of the multitude. This was because they did not want to get the multitude stirred up in protest against the persecution of Jesus (Mar 14:2).
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
22:6 And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the {b} absence of the multitude.
(b) Without tumult, doing it without the knowledge of the people who used to follow him: and therefore they indeed waited patiently until they knew he was alone in the garden.