▾ Heb. v. 7. w John xii. 27. x ch. xx. 22. vi. 38. Rom. X V W farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, "O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: y John v.30: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt. 40 And he xv. 3. Phil. cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one pray, that ye enter not into temp ii. 8. ■ Eph. vi. 18. hour? 41 z Watch and drowsiness overpowered them. Luke has however only kneeled down, which is not so full as our occount. prayed] Stier finely remarks: This was in truth a different prayer from that which went before, which John has recorded.' But still in the same spirit, uttered by the same Son of God and Redeemer of men. The glorifying (John xvii. 1) begins with suffering, as the previous words, the hour is come, might lead us to expect. The 'power over all flesh' shews itself first as power of the conflicting and victorious spirit over his own flesh, by virtue of which He is 'one of us.' St. Mark expresses the substance of the prayer, and interprets cup by hour. St. Luke's report differs only in verbal expression from St. Matthew's. In the address, we have here and in Luke Father-in Mark Abba, Father. In all, and in the prayer itself, there is the deepest feeling and apprehension in the Redeemer's soul of his Sonship and the unity of the Father-the most entire and holy submission to His Will. We must not for a moment think of the Father's wrath abiding on Him as the cause of his suffering. Here is no fear of wrath,-but, in the depth of His human anguish, the very tenderness of filial love. The variation in Mark and Luke in the substance of the prayer, though slight, is worthy of remark. if it be possible, -all things are possible with thee,-if thou be willing. All these three find their union in one and the same inward feeling. That in the text expresses, If, within the limits of thy holy will, this may be ;'-that in Mark, All things are (absolutely) possible to Thee-Thou canst therefore-but not what I will, but what thou wilt:that in Luke, If it be thy will to remove, &c. (Thou canst): but not my will, but thine be done.' The very words used by our Lord, the Holy Spirit has not seen fit to give us; shewing us, even in this solemn instance, the comparative indifference of the letter, when we have the inner spirit. That our Lord should have uttered all three forms of the prayer, is not for a moment to be thought of; and such a view could only spring out of the most petty and unworthy appreciation of the purpose of Scripture narrative. pass from me] as we should say of a threatening cloud, 'It has gone over?' But what is the cup or hour, of which our Lord here prays that it may pass by? Certainly, not the mere present feebleness and prostration of the bodily frame: not any mere section of his sufferings-but the whole-the betrayal, the trial, the mocking, the scourging, the cross, the grave, and all besides which our thoughts cannot reach. Of this all, His soul, in humble subjection to the higher Will, which was absolutely united and harmonious with the Will of the Father, prays that if possible it may pass over. this prayer was heard-see Heb. v. 7"in that he feared"-on account of His pious resignation to the Father's will, or on the ground of it, so that it prevailed— He was strengthened from Heaven. He did indeed drink the cup to the dregsbut He was enabled to do it, and this strengthening was the answer to his prayer. And nevertheless not as I will.. The Monothelite heresy, which held but one will in the Lord Jesus, is here plainly convicted of error. The distinction is clear, and marked by our Lord Himself. In his human soul, He willed to be freed from the dreadful things before Him-but this human will was overruled by the inner and divine purpose-the will at unity with the Father's will. 40.] St. Mark agrees, except in relating the beginning of the address in the singular— -no doubt accurately-for it was Peter ("Simon, who was no Peter on this occasion," Stier), who had pledged himself to go with him to prison and death. The question is literally could ye thus not watch...?-it implies their utter inability, as shewn by their present state of slumber, Are ye so entirely unable, &c. hour need not imply that our Lord had been absent a whole hour:-if it is to be taken in any close meaning, it would be that the whole trial would last about that time. But most likely it is in allusion to the time of our Lord's trial, so often called by that name. 41.] St. Luke gives this command at the beginning and end one tation the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. of the whole; but his account is manifestly only a compendium, and not to be pressed chronologically. The command has respect to the immediate trial which was about to try them, and (for watch is a word of habit, not merely, as "arise" Eph. v. 15, or "awake to righteousness" 1 Cor. xv. 34, one of immediate import) also to the general duty of all disciples in all time. enter into temptation is not to come into temptation merely, to be tempted: this lies not in our own power to avoid, and its happening is rather joy than sorrow to us-see James i. 2, where the word is “fall into”—but it implies an entering into temptation with the will, and entertaining of the temptation. Compare "fall into temptation" used in this sense, 1 Tim. vi. 9. the spirit...] I cannot doubt that this is said by our Lord in its most general meaning, and that He himself is included in it. At that moment He was giving as high and pre-eminent an example of its truth, as the disciples were affording a low and ignoble one. He, in the willingness of the spirit-yielding Himself to the Father's will to suffer and die, but weighed down by the weakness of the flesh: they, having professed, and really having, a willing spirit to suffer with Him, but, even in the one hour's watching, overcome by the burden of drowsiness. Observe it is here spirit, not soul; and compare ver. 38 and note. To enter further into the depths of this assertion of our Lord would carry us beyond the limits of annotation: but see Stier's remarks, vi. 237–242. 42.] St. Mark merely says of this second prayer, X omitted by ancient authorities. what precise time the angel appeared to Him is uncertain: I should be inclined to think, after the first prayer, before He came to His disciples. The words are not exactly the same: "the Lord knew that the Father always heard Him (John xi. 42); and therefore He understands the continuance of His trial as the answer to His last words, as Thou wilt." Stier. Here therefore the prayer is If it be not possible. . Thy will be done. It is spoken in the fulness of self-resignation. ... 43.] St. Mark adds, and it is a note of accuracy, "neither wist they what to answer him." 44.] the same, viz. as the last. This third prayer is merely indicated in Mark, by "he cometh the third time," on our Lord's return. 45, 46.] The clause Sleep on now, &c., has been variously understood. To take it interrogatively ("are ye sleeping" &c. ?), does not improve the sense, and makes an unnatural break in the sentence, which proceeds indicatively afterwards. It seems to me that there can be but two ways of interpreting it-and both with an imperative construction. (1) Either it was said bona fide,-" Since ye are not able to watch with Me, now ye may sleep onfor my hour is come, and I am about to be taken from you'-which sense however is precluded by the "Rise, let us be going” below: or (2) it was said with an understanding of if you can,' as Bengel; if you hear not Me arousing you, there will speedily come others who will arouse you. Meanwhile, sleep, if ye will." behold, the hour is at hand] "it is enough, the hour is come," Mark. It is enough'-enough of reproof to them for drowsiness-enough of exhortations to watch and pray-that was now coming which would cut all this short. This first behold is hardly to be taken literally of the appearance of Judas and a Acts i. 16. 47 And a while he yet spake, lo, Judas, one of the twelve, came, and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and elders of the people. 48 Now he that betrayed him gave them a sign, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he: hold him fast. 49 And forthwith he came to Jesus, and said, Hail, master; e P. xli. 9: Iv. b and kissed him. 50 And Jesus said unto him, cy Friend, b 2 Sam. xx. 9. 13. yor, Comrade. с It is the same word as in ch. xi. 16; xx. 13; xxii. 12: but not the same as in John xi. 11; xv. 13, 14, his band; it merely announces the ap- 47-56.] BETRAYAL AND APPREHENSION OF JESUS. Mark xiv. 43-52. Luke xxii. 47-53. John xviii. 2-11. St. Mark's account has evidently been derived from the same source originally as St. Matthew's, but both had gained some important additions before they were finally committed to writing. St. Luke's is, as before, an abridged narrative, but abounding with new circumstances not related by the others. St. John's account is at first sight very dissimilar from either; see text above cited, and notes there. It may suffice now to say, that all which St. John, vv. 4-9, relates, must have happened on the first approach of the band -and is connected with our "Rise, let us be going." Some particulars also must have happened, which are omitted by all: viz. the rejoining of the eight apostles (not alluded to in Luke, ver. 46, as Greswell sup,poses), and the preparing them for what was about to take place. On the other hand, John gives a hint that something had been passing in the garden, by his "went forth," ver. 4. The two first Evangelists were evidently unaware of any such matter as that related by St. John, for they (Matt. ver. 49: Mark ver. 45) introduce the Kiss by a "forthwith." 47. 15. sisting of (1) a detachment of the Roman 49.] 48.] gave them a sign;—when is not stated. On St. Mark's addition, " and lead him away safely," see notes there. forthwith-see above on ver. 47. The purpose of the kiss, supposing it to have taken place after John vv. 4-8, (and it is surely out of the question to suppose it to have taken place before, contrary to the plain meaning of John ver. 4,) has been doubted. Yet I think on a review of what had happened, it is very intelligible-not perhaps as some have supposed, to shew that Jesus could be approached with safety-but at all events as the sign agreed on with the Roman soldiers, who probably did not per]sonally know Him, and who besides would have had their orders from the city, to take Him whom Judas should kiss. Thus the kiss would be necessary in the course of their military duty, as their authorization,-notwithstanding the previous declaration by Jesus of Himself. The word in the original implies, kissed him eagerly,' with ostentation, as a studied and prearranged sign. 50.] In Luke we have Judas is specified as one of the Twelve," wherefore art thou come ? Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him. 51 And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. 52 Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place for all they that take d Gen. ix. 6 the sword shall perish with the sword. 53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall Dan. vii. 10. 7 presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? e2 Kings vi. 17. z One of these, "now," or "presently," should be omitted. The word is read by some authorities in the former clause, by some in the latter: but by none in both. "Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?"--which sense is involved in the text also: that variation shewing perhaps that one of the accounts is not from an eye-witness. Friend-see ch. xxii. 12 and note. It is more than doubtful whether the words that follow can properly be rendered as a question. More likely do they mean, Friend, there needs not this shew of attachment: I know thine errand,-do thy purpose." But the command itself is suppressed. On any understanding of the words, it is an appeal to the conscience and heart of Judas, in which sense (see above) it agrees with the words spoken in Luke :-see note there. The fact that at this period our Lord was laid hold of and secured (by hand -not yet bound) by the band, is important, as interpreting St. Luke's account further on. 51.] The one of them... was Peter ;-John ver. 10. Why he was not mentioned, is idle to enquire: one supposition only must be avoided-that there is any purpose in the omission. It is absurd to suppose that the mention of his name in a book current only among Christians, many years after the fact, could lead to his apprehension, which did not take place at the time, although he was recognized as the striker in the palace of the High Priest, John ver. 26. The real reason of the non-apprehension was that the servant was healed by the Lord. This is the first opposition to Thy will be done.' St. Luke expresses it, that they saw what would happen-and asked, 'Lord, shall we smite with the sword?' Then, while the other (for there were but two swords in the company) was waiting for the reply, the rash Peter, in the very spirit of ch. xvi. 22, smote with the sword -the weapon of the flesh :-an outbreak of the natural man no less noticeable than that more-noticed one which followed before morning. All four Evangelists aim was a deadly one, and Peter narrowly escaped being one "who had committed murder in the insurrection." From Luke, ver. 51, we learn that our Lord said “Suffer ye thus far" (on the meaning of which see note there), touched the ear, and healed it. 52.] thy sword-not mine, nor on my side. his place" the sheath," John. The sheath is the place for the Christian's sword-"a sword out of its sheath is not in its place, unless as ministering to the divine anger," Bengel; see note on Luke xxii. 36. Our Lord does not say Cast away thy sword;' only in His willing self-sacrifice, and in that kingdom which is to be evolved from his work of redemption, is the sword altogether out of place. for all &c.] Peculiar to Matthew. There is no allusion, as Grotius and some of the ancients thought, to the Jews perishing by the Roman sword: for the very persons who were now taking Him were Romans. The saying is generaland the stress is on take-it was this that Peter was doing-taking up the sword' of his own will; taking that vengeance which belongs to God, into his own hand. shall perish with the sword is a command; not merely a future, but an imperative future; a repetition by the Lord in this solemn moment of Gen. ix. 6. This should be thought of by those wellmeaning but shallow persons, who seek to abolish the punishment of death in Christian states. John adds the words "the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" on which see notes there. 53, 54 are peculiar to Matthew. 58.] The Majesty of our Lord, and His Patience, are both shewn here. twelve-not perhaps so much from the number of the apostles, who were now "the eleven," but from that of the then ver. 24. Luke 46. f Isa. liii. 7, &c. 54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus xxiv. 25, 44, it must be? 55 In that same hour said Jesus to the multitudes, Are ye come out as against a a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me. 56 But all this b was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him and fled. 57 And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled. 58 But Peter followed him afar off unto a render, a robber. company, viz. the Lord and the eleven. legions-because they were Roman soldiers who were taking Him. The complement of the legion was about 6000 men. The power implied in thinkest thou that I cannot, shews the entire and continued free self-resignation of the Lord throughout-and carries on the same truth as He expressed John x. 18. 54.] how then -considering that this is so, that I voluntarily abstain from invoking such heavenly aid, shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be, if thou in thy rashness usest the help of fleshly weapons? 55.] St. Mark begins this with an answered -it was an answer to their actions, not to their words. St. Luke, here minutely accurate, informs us that it was to the chief priests and captains of the temple and elders, that our Lord said this. In his submission to be reckoned among the transgressors, our Lord yet protests against any suspicion that He could act as such. sat (Matt. only) to indicate complete quiet and freedom from attack. daily-during the week past, and perhaps at other similar times. sat teaching is the greatest possible contrast to a thief and robber. 56.] It is doubted whether these words are a continuation of our Lord's speech, or a remark inserted by St. Matthew. The use of "all this was (is) done" in this Gospel would lead us to the latter conclusion: but when we reflect that thus our Lord's speech would lose all its completeness, and that St. Mark gives in different words the speech going on to this same purport, we must I think decide for the other view. Besides, if the remark were St. Matthew's, we should expect some particular citation, as is elsewhere his practice: see ch. i. 22; xxi. 4. Mark gives it elliptically, "but (so literally) that the scriptures might be fulfilled." The Passion and Death of Christ were especially the fulfilment of the Scriptures. In this they all found their central point. Compare his dying words on the Cross,It is finished,-with this his assertion. On the addition in Luke, see note there. Then all] Some of them did not flee far. Peter and John went after Him to the palace of the High Priest; John, ver. 15. On the additional circumstance in Mark, ver. 51, see note there. 57-68.] HEARING BEFORE CAIAPHAS. Mark xiv. 53-65. [Luke xxii. 54, 6365.] John xviii. 24. Previous to this took place a hearing before Annas the real High Priest (see note on Luke iii. 2), to whom the Jews took Jesus first;-who enquired of Him about his disciples and his teaching (John vv. 19–23), and then (ver. 24) sent Him bound to Caiaphas. Only John, who followed, relates this first hearing. See notes on John vv. 12-24, where this view is maintained. It may be sufficient here just to indicate the essential differences between that hearing and this. On that occasion no witnesses were required, for it was merely a private unofficial audience. Then the High Priest questioned and our Lord replied: whereas now, under false witness and reproach, He (as before Herod) is silent. 57. Caiaphas the high priest] He was High Priest of that year, Annas having been deposed, and since then the High Priests having been frequently changed by the Roman governors. where the scribes...] Probably they had assembled by a preconcerted design, expecting their prisoner. This was a meeting of the Sanhedrim, but not the regular assembly, which condemned him and handed Him over to Pilate. That took place in the morning, Luke xxii. 66-71 (where see note). We have not here the more complete detail of John xviii. 15-19. The palace is one and the same great building, |