Mateus 26
Leon Morris · Citado em PreceptAustin
Mateus 26
Morris - Caiaphas had no legal right to ask this question, but Jesus answered it anyway. When asked if He were the Messiah and the Son of God, He said yes. However, He persisted in calling Himself the Son of Man.
Mateus 26
Morris - Mary of Bethany, in accordance with custom, had first anointed Jesus' feet (John 12:3+), but then decided also to pour all the expensive ointment on His head--in effect covering His whole body. She had learned deeply from His teachings (Luke 10:38-42+). She alone seems to have fully understood His words concerning His coming burial (Matthew 26:12+). Hiebert - Mary's act of extravagant love had prophetic and symbolic significance. "That she anointed Him beforehand indicates that she anticipated His speedy death and anointed Him in preparation for it. The burying referred to is not only the entombment but also includes the preparations for burial. She perceived that when the tragedy struck she would be utterly unable to reach Jesus to anoint His body, and so she acted to show her love and sympathy while she could. Her love discerned what the disciples could not see. She had a deeper understanding of His references to His coming death and resurrection than did any of His other followers. This does not mean that she plumbed the significance of His death, but she “had begun to understand something of the mystery of a Messiah who must die.” Mary of Bethany was not among the women who went to the tomb on Sunday morning to anoint the body. Swete points out that “it seems the only anointing which the Lord received was this anticipatory one at Bethany.’" Prepare for burial (1779) entaphiazo from entáphios = a shroud from en = in + táphos = sepulcher, tomb. Entaphiazo refers to interring or embalming a body. Prepare A BODY for burial by the use of every requisite provision and funereal adornment, to wit, baths, vestments, flowers, wreaths, perfumes, libations, etc.. Only 2x - Mt 26:12+, Jn 19:40+. Used twice in the Septuagint - Ge 50:2 "Joseph commanded his servants the physicians to embalm his father. So the physicians embalmed Israel." D L Moody - I IMAGINE when Mary died, if God had sent an angel to write her epitaph, he couldn’t have done better than to put over her grave what Christ said: “She hath done what she could.” I would rather have that said over my grave, if it could honestly be said, than to have all the wealth of the Rothschilds. Christ raised a monument to Mary that is more lasting than the monuments raised to Cæsar or Napoleon. Their monuments crumble away, but hers endures. Her name never appeared in print while she was on earth, but to-day it is famous in three hundred and fifty languages. We may never be great; we may never be known outside our circle of friends; but we may, like Mary, do what we can. May God help each one of us to do what we can! Life will soon be over; it is short at the longest. Let us rise and follow in the footsteps of Mary of Bethany. Matthew 26:13 “Truly I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be spoken of in memory of her.” wherever this gospel is preached: Mt 24:14+ Mt 28:19+ Ps 98:2,3 Isa 52:9 Mk 13:10+ Mark 16:15+ Lu 24:47+ Ro 10:18+ Romans 15:19+ Col 1:6,23+ 1Ti 2:6+ Rev 14:6+ What this woman has done: 1Sa 2:30+ Ps 112:6 Mk 14:9+ 2Co 10:18+ Heb 6:10+ Related Passages: Mark 14:9+ “Truly I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be spoken of in memory of her.” Truly (amen) I say to you, wherever this gospel (euaggelion) is preached (kerusso) in the whole (holos) world (kosmos) - Here Jesus extends His Commendation throughout the world and down the corridors of time! Notice also that Jesus expected the gospel to permeate the entire globe (cf. Mark 13:27+ and Mt. 28:19–20+; Acts 1:8+). What this woman has done (poieo) will also be spoken of in memory (mnemosunon) of her - Notice He does not mention her name, but God knows who she is and one day we will meet her in Heaven. O glorious day! Spurgeon on Mary's unusual, extraordinary deed - All those who have done wonders for Christ have always been called eccentric and fanatical. Why, when Whitfield first went on Bennington Common to preach, because he could not find a building large enough, it was quite an unheard of thing, to preach in the open air. How could you expect God to hear prayer, if there was not a roof over the top of the people’s heads? How could souls be blessed, if the people had not seats, and regular high-backed pews to sit in! Whitfield was thought to be doing something outrageous, but he went and did it; he went and broke the alabaster box on the head of his Master, and in the midst of scoffs and jeers, he preached in the open air. And what came of it? A revival of godliness, and a mighty spread of religion. I wish we were all of us ready to do some extraordinary thing for Christ—willing to be laughed at, to be called fanatics, to be hooted and scandallized because we went out of the common way, and were not content with doing what everybody else could do or approve to be done.” Alexander
Mateus 26
Morris comments that "“There is a rabbinic saying” ‘(The scent of) good oil is diffused from the bed-chamber to the dining-hall while a good name is diffused from one end of the world to the other.'”
Mateus 26
Morris - A number of modern writers have tried to find some justifiable motive in Judas' action, but the fact is that he was greedy and a thief (John 12:4-6+) and made this bargain on his own volition. In fact, Jesus had recognized him much earlier as a "devil," or adversary (John 6:70-71+). Later, He even called Judas "the son of perdition" (John 17:12+). He was chosen as a disciple, in spite of all this, because prophecy must be fulfilled (Psalm 41:9; John 13:18+). (See Why Jesus choose Judas) Yet many have sold Jesus for a less price than Judas received; a smile or a sneer has been sufficient to induce them to betray their Lord -- C H Spurgeon
Mateus 26
Morris has a lengthy discourse on this "thorny topic" and below is his conclusion... The evidence is thus confusing, and it is not in the least surprising that scholars have come to very different conclusions. I do not see how we can be dogmatic in our present state of knowledge. The most natural reading of the Synoptists shows the Last Supper there to be the Passover. The most natural reading of John shows that Jesus was crucified at the very time the Passover victims were slain in the Temple. While it is undoubtedly possible to interpret the accounts in such a way that we make them tell the same story, it seems better to see them as the result of following different calendars. According to the calendar Jesus was following the meal was the Passover. But the Temple authorities followed another, according to which the sacrificial victims were slain the next day. John appears to make use of this to bring out the truth that Christ was slain as our Passover. (BORROW The Gospel according to John PAGE 784 - HINT: This book seems to always be checked out - here is a trick you can try -- search page numbers starting by entering 777. The is cumbersome but might allow you to read some of Morris' lengthy discourse. You may have to play around with numbers to make this work.) F F Bruce, “while John times his passion narrative with reference to the official temple date of the Passover, our Lord and his disciples, following (it may be) another calendar, observed the festival earlier” (p. 279). I. H. Marshall, “Our conclusion, then, is that Jesus held a Passover meal earlier than the official Jewish date, and that he was able to do so as the result of calendar differences among the Jews” (Last Supper and Lord’s Supper [Exeter, 1980], p. 75). (NTCNT-John) John MacArthur helps understand the difference between John and the Synoptic Gospels The chronological reckoning between John's gospel and the synoptics presents a challenge, especially in relation to the time of the Last Supper (John 13:2+). While the synoptics portray the disciples and the Lord at the Last Supper as eating the Passover meal on Thursday evening (Nisan 14) and Jesus being crucified on Friday, John's gospel states that the Jews did not enter into the Praetorium "so that they would not be defiled, but might eat the Passover" (John 18:28+). So, the disciples had eaten the Passover on Thursday evening, but the Jews had not. In fact, John (John 19:14+) states that Jesus' trial and crucifixion were on the day of Preparation for the Passover and not after the eating of the Passover, so that with the trial and crucifixion on Friday Christ was actually sacrificed at the same time the Passover lambs were being slain (John 19:14+). The question is, "Why did the disciples eat the Passover meal on Thursday?" The answer lies in a difference among the Jews in the way they reckoned the beginning and ending of days. From Josephus, the Mishna, and other ancient Jewish sources we learn that the Jews in northern Palestine calculated days from sunrise to sunrise. That area included the region of Galilee, where Jesus and all the disciples, except Judas, had grown up. Apparently most, if not all, of the Pharisees used that system of reckoning. But Jews in the southern part, which centered in Jerusalem, calculated days from sunset to sunset. Because all the priests necessarily lived in or near Jerusalem, as did most of the Sadducees, those groups followed the southern scheme. That variation doubtlessly caused confusion at times, but it also had some practical benefits. During Passover time, for instance, it allowed for the feast to be celebrated legitimately on two adjoining days, thereby permitting the temple sacrifices to be made over a total period of four hours rather than two. That separation of days may also have had the effect of reducing both regional and religious clashes between the two groups. On that basis the seeming contradictions in the gospel accounts are easily explained. Being Galileans, Jesus and the disciples considered Passover day to have started at sunrise on Thursday and to end at sunrise on Friday. The Jewish leaders who arrested and tried Jesus, being mostly priests and Sadducees, considered Passover day to begin at sunset on Thursday and end at sunset on Friday. By that variation, predetermined by God's sovereign provision, Jesus could thereby legitimately celebrate the last Passover meal with His disciples and yet still be sacrificed on Passover day. Once again one can see how God sovereignly and marvelously provides for the precise fulfillment of His redemptive plan. Jesus was anything but a victim of men's wicked schemes, much less of blind circumstance. Every word He spoke and every action He took were divinely directed and secured. Even the words and actions by others against Him were divinely controlled. See, e.g., John 11:49-52+; John 19:11+. (Interpretative Difficulties) (See another discussion by MacArthur in his sermon on Mt 26:17-19 The Last Passover Part 1) See also Dr MacArthur's Study Guide on The Lord's Supper - Select passages from the "The Last Passover - Part 1" from the drop down menu - Jim Bomkamp - “In their excellent Harmony of the Gospels, Robert Thomas and Stanley Gundry (BORROW - SEE PAGE 320) suggest a possible solution to the dilemma (pp. 320-23). The Jews at that time reckoned days in one of two ways: from sunset to sunset or from sunrise to sunrise. The first approach was traditionally Jewish (Ge 1:5+) while the second was Roman, although it had biblical precedent (see Ge 8:22+). If Matthew, Mark, and Luke used the Jewish reckoning, and John the Roman, then there is no contradiction. There was an “overlapping” of days that permitted both groups to celebrate on the same date but a different day. The temple priests permitted the Jews to bring their lambs for sacrifice either the earlier or the later time. Apparently the Jewish leaders followed the Roman form of reckoning (John 18:28+) while Jesus and the disciples followed the Jewish form.” (Sermon) Bible Knowledge Commentary - The Synoptic Gospels speak of the meal Jesus ate with His disciples as the Passover meal. But the Gospel of John indicates Jesus died on the cross at the exact time that lambs were slain in preparation for the nation's Passover meals (John 19:14+). But this can be explained by the fact that the Feast of Unleavened Bread was a seven-day feast following the one-day Feast of the Passover, but sometimes all eight days were called "the Passover" (Luke 2:41+; Luke 22:1+; Acts 12:3-4+) or the seven days were the "Passover Week" (John 19:14+) A different explanation is that Jews in the first century followed two calendars in observing the Passover. According to this view Jesus and His disciples observed one date, eating the Passover meal before His crucifixion, whereas most of the nation, including the Pharisees, followed the other calendar in which the Passover lambs were slain on the very day of Jesus' death. (See Bible Knowledge Commentary - Page 258) Norman Geisler - Did Jesus institute the Lord’s Supper on the day of the Passover or the day before? PROBLEM: If the first three Gospels (synoptics) are correct, then Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper “on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they killed the Passover lamb” (cf. Matt. 26:17+; Luke 22:1+). But John places it “before the feast of the Passover” (13:1), the day before the crucifixion on which “they might eat the Passover” (18:28). SOLUTION: There are two basic positions embraced by evangelical scholars on this point. Those who hold that Jesus ate the Passover lamb (and instituted the Lord’s Supper at the end of it) on the same day it was observed by the Jews, support their view as follows: (1) It was the day required by OT Law, and Jesus said He did not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it (Matt. 5:17–18+). (2) It seems to be the meaning of Mark 14:12+ which says it was “on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they killed the Passover lamb.” (3) When John 19:14+ speaks of it being “the Preparation Day of the Passover” they take this to mean simply the preparation for the Sabbath which occurred in that paschal week. Other scholars contend that Jesus ate the Passover lamb on the day before the Jews did because: (1) He had to eat it a day early (Thursday) in order that He might offer Himself the next day (Good Friday) as the Passover Lamb (cf. John 1:29+) to the Jews, in fulfillment of OT type on the very day they were eating the Passover lamb (1 Cor. 5:7+). (2) The plain reading of John 19:14+ is that it was “the Preparation Day of the Passover” [not the Sabbath], or in other words, the day before the Passover was eaten by the Jews. (3) Likewise, John 18:28+ affirms that the Jews did not want to be defiled on the day Jesus was crucified “that they might eat the Passover.” Either view is possible without contradiction. However, the latter view seems to explain the texts more forthrightly. (When Critics Ask see page 319 - see also page 292 for related comments on the question "If Jesus was crucified on Friday, how could He have been in the grave three days and nights?") William Lane commenting on the parallel passages in Mark gives us an overview of the difficulty in resolving differences between the accounts in the Synoptic Gospels and the account in the Gospel of John: The chronological note in Mk 14:12+ (Lk 22:7+) clearly implies that the meal which Jesus celebrated with his disciples was the Passover and that the day of his arrest, condemnation and crucifixion was the 15th of Nisan. The Fourth Gospel, however, appears to situate Jesus’ death in the framework of the preparation for the Passover on the 14th of Nisan (John 18:28+; John 19:14, 31, 42+), which would mean that the meal could not have been the Passover. The resolution of this difficulty is one of the most difficult issues in passion chronology. There are a number of positive elements in the Marcan narrative which substantiate that the Last Supper was a Passover meal. The return to Jerusalem in the evening for the meal (Mk 14:17+) is significant, for the paschal meal had to be eaten within the city walls (M. Pesachim VII. 9). An ordinary meal was taken in the late afternoon, but a meal which begins in the evening and continues into the night reflects Passover practice (Ex 12:8+; Jubilees 49:12). The reference to reclining (Mk 14:18+) satisfies a requirement of the Passover feast in the first century when custom demanded that even the poorest man recline for the festive meal (M. Pesachim X. 1). While a normal meal began with the breaking of bread, on this occasion Jesus broke the bread during the meal and following the serving of a dish (Mk 14:18–20, 22+). The Passover meal was the one occasion when the serving of a dish preceded the breaking of bread. The use of wine was generally reserved for festive occasions and was characteristic of the Passover (M. Pesachim X. 1). Finally, the interpretation of the elements of the meal conforms to Passover custom where the haggadah (or interpretation) is an integral part of the meal. The cumulative evidence supports the claim made in Mk 14:12, 14, 16+ that the disciples prepared a Passover meal and that the external forms of the Passover were observed at the meal itself. There are indications that the Fourth Evangelist also regarded the meal which Jesus shared with his disciples as a Passover. The feast takes place within Jerusalem even though the city was thronged with pilgrims (John 12:12, 18, 20+; John 13:2+; John 18:1+; cf. Mark 14:17+). The supper is held in the evening and lasts into the night (John 13:30+; cf. Mark 14:17+). The meal was ceremonial in character and the participants reclined at table (John 13:12, 23, 25, 28+; cf. Mark 14:18+). Finally, the walk to Gethsemane followed by the betrayal conforms to the Marcan sequence of events (John 18:1+ff.; Mark 14:26+ff.). In this light it seems that the concern of the priests expressed in John 18:28+, that they should not become defiled and so be prohibited from eating “the pesach,” has reference not to the paschal lamb (which would have been eaten the evening before) but to the chagigah, the paschal sacrifices (lambs, kids, bulls) which were offered throughout the festival week. These paschal sacrifices are designated by the term pesach in Deut. 16:2+ and 2 Chron. 35:7+. If this understanding informed the tradition John has transmitted, the apparent contradiction with the evidence of Mark is removed. (NICNT-Mark or see The Gospel of Mark - Page 497) QUESTION - If Jesus was crucified on the Day of Preparation, why had He already eaten the Passover meal? Answer: All four Gospels state that Jesus was crucified on the Day of Preparation (Matthew 27:62+; Mark 15:42+; Luke 23:54+; John 19:14, 31, 42+). Mark, Luke, and John all state that the following day was the Sabbath. John’s account uses this wording: “It was the day of Preparation of the Passover” (John 19:14+). The question becomes, since Jesus was killed on the Day of Preparation, why had He already observed the Passover with His disciples (Matthew 26:17–29+; Mark 14:12–25+; Luke 22:7–22+; John 13:1–30+)? First, we should discard the theory that the writers of the New Testament made a mistake. Theorizing that all four of the Gospel writers got the chronology wrong stretches credulity to the breaking point. Are we really to believe that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all forgot what they had written from one chapter to the next? No, there must be a better explanation for why Jesus ate the Passover before the Day of Preparation. Next, we need to identify what the Day of Preparation was preparing for. Every week, preparations had to be made for the Sabbath—food had to be prepared ahead of time. This led to the “Day of Preparation” becoming the common term for “Friday.” Although many preparations also had to be made for the Passover, there is no record of “Passover Eve” being called the Day of Preparation. The Day of Preparation was always Friday, the day before the Sabbath. Mark 15:42+ makes this clear. How then do we explain John’s statement that Jesus died on “the day of Preparation of the Passover” (John 19:14+)? It’s quite possible that John simply meant that this particular Friday fell during Passover week; we could understand his words this way: “It was the day of Preparation, the one that happened to come during the season of Passover.” So, the Day of Preparation was to prepare for the Sabbath, not the Passover. The Mosaic Law stipulated what day the Passover lamb was to be eaten: Nissan 14 (Numbers 9:2–3+). We must assume that Jesus kept the Law and observed Passover at the appointed time (see Galatians 4:4+). After the Passover (Thursday) came the Day of Preparation (Friday) on which Jesus was killed. The Sabbath (Saturday) followed, of course, and then the first day of the week (Sunday)—the third day after the crucifixion and the day on which Jesus rose from the dead. One objection to the above chronology is based on John 18:28+, which says, “The Jewish leaders took Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness they did not enter the palace, because they wanted to be able to eat the Passover.” At first glance, it seems that, whereas Jesus had eaten the Passover the night before, the Jewish leaders had not yet eaten the Passover—they still “wanted to be able to eat” it after Jesus was arrested. To reconcile this verse with the Synoptic narratives, we must remember this: Passover was the first day of the week-long Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Feast (or Festival) of Unleavened Bread (Chag HaMatzot) lasted for a full week, from Nissan 15 to Nissan 22. The first day of Unleavened Bread coincided with the day of Passover. Because of the close relation between Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the whole week was sometimes referred to as “Passover.” The two holidays were (and still are) considered a single celebration. This explains John 18:28+. The Jewish leaders had already eaten the Passover proper, but there still remained other sacrifices to be made and meals to be eaten (ED: NOT EVERYONE AGREES THAT THE JEWISH LEADERS HAD ALREADY ACTUALLY EATEN THE PASSOVER MEAL - SEE THE PRECEDING DISCUSSION). They were unwilling to defile themselves (Pilate’s palace contained leaven) because it would disqualify them from participating in the remainder of the week’s ceremonies (see Leviticus 23:8+). There are other difficulties in pinpointing the exact chronology of Jesus’ arrest, trial, crucifixion, and resurrection. But this seems to be a workable solution: Thursday – Passover proper. The lamb is killed, and Jesus and His disciples eat the Passover meal in the upper room. Friday – the Day of Preparation. Jesus is tried and executed (although never convicted). The Jews continue their “Passover” celebrations with the chagigah, offerings made during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Saturday – the weekly Sabbath. Sunday – Resurrection Day. (Source: GotQuestions.org Matthew 26:20 Now when evening came, Jesus was reclining at the table with the twelve disciples. when: Mk 14:17-21+ Lu 22:14-16+ Joh 13:21+ he: Ex 12:11+ Song 1:12+ Related Passages: Mark 14:17-21+ When it was evening He *came with the twelve. 18 As they were reclining at the table and eating, Jesus said, “Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me–one who is eating with Me.” 19 They began to be grieved and to say to Him one by one, “Surely not I?” 20 And He said to them, “It is one of the twelve, one who dips with Me in the bowl. 21 “For the Son of Man is to go just as it is written of Him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.” Luke 22:14-16+ When the hour had come, He reclined at the table, and the apostles with Him. 15 And He said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 16 for I say to you, I shall never again eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” Reclining At the Table THE SCENE SHIFTS TO THE "UPPER ROOM" MEAL None of the Gospels describes Jesus and the twelve entering the city to arrive at the what has come to be known as the "Upper Room." But think about that for a moment. In the providence of God, Jesus somehow was able to get to this location without attracting attention of a crowd. Keep in mind His triumphal entry was in front of thousands and He had been teaching daily in the Temple (Lk 19:47-48+). How could Jesus possibly walk through the city without being recognized and causing considerable commotion? This is another implicit miracle! God was in complete control of every detail of this epoch meal, probably the most important meal in all eternity, other than the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:9+)! None of the Gospel writers describe Jesus' trek into the city to celebrate the Passover. What is notable is that Jesus and the disciples were able to enter the city and travel to the upper room without being noticed (at least nothing recorded in Scripture)! Was this made possible supernaturally? Keep in mind His triumphal entry was in front of thousands and He had been teaching daily in the Temple (Lk 19:47-48+). How could Jesus possibly walk through the city without being recognized and causing considerable commotion? This is one of the many questions that will not be answered until we are with Him! In the first Passover meal God gave Israel instructions ‘Now you shall eat it in this manner: with your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it in haste–it is the LORD’S Passover." (Ex 12:11+) So even though this was Jesus' last Passover meal, it would be a time to be savored with His twelve disciples. Now when evening (opsios) came - The location is within the city limits of Jerusalem which is where the Passover meal had to be eaten. Evening refers to the period between late afternoon and darkness, and in context specifically to the setting of the sun which marked the beginning of the Passover celebration on the 14th of Nisan. The time phrase when evening came is important because the Passover meal could not be eaten until after sundown. A T
Mateus 26
Morris - The next verse makes it clear that the liquid in the cup was not actual blood but "the fruit of the vine." Nevertheless, it became an unforgettable symbol of His shed blood, just as the bread represented His broken body. This last meal of the Lord has, therefore, been commemorated by His followers ever since (1 Corinthians 11:23-26+). The regular practice of the Lord's supper, or the Holy Communion, or whatever it may be called by different churches, has thus become a perpetual testimony to the authenticity of the Christian faith. There is no way of accounting for the beginning of this universal and unique practice except that Christ Himself commanded it just before He died. It could not have been initiated only when this account was first read by the churches, for it has been observed ever since the last supper of Christ. In fact, if it were not already being observed when the written account was first received, the written account would itself have been rejected as false. NET NOTE - Greek “for this is my blood of the covenant that is poured out for many.” In order to avoid confusion about which is poured out, the translation supplies “blood” twice so that the following phrase clearly modifies “blood,” not “covenant.” Jesus’ death established the forgiveness promised in the new covenant of Jer 31:31+. Jesus is reinterpreting the symbolism of the Passover meal, indicating the presence of a new era. J C Ryle on "the purpose and object for which the Lord’s Supper was appointed.This is a subject again on which great darkness prevails. The ordinance of the Lord’s Supper has been regarded as something mysterious and past understanding. Immense harm has been done to Christianity by the vague and high-flown language in which many writers have indulged in treating of the sacrament. There is certainly nothing to warrant such language in the account of its original institution. The more simple our views of its purpose, the more Scriptural they are likely to be. The Lord’s Supper is not a sacrifice. There is no oblation in it,—no offering up of anything but our prayers, praises, and thanksgivings. From the day that Jesus died there needed no more offering for sin. By one offering He perfected for ever them that are sanctified. (Heb. 10:14+.) Priests, altars, and sacrifices, all ceased to be necessary, when the Lamb of God offered up Himself. Their office came to an end. Their work was done. The Lord’s Supper has no power to confer benefit on those who come to it, if they do not come to it with faith. The mere formal act of eating the bread and drinking the wine is utterly unprofitable, unless it is done with a right heart. It is eminently an ordinance for the living soul, not for the dead,—for the converted, not for the unconverted. The Lord’s Supper was ordained for a continual remembrance of the sacrifice of Christ’s death, until He comes again. The benefits it confers, are spiritual, not physical. Its effects must be looked for in our inward man. It was intended to remind us, by the visible, tangible emblems of bread and wine, that the offering of Christ’s body and blood for us on the cross, is the only atonement for sin, and the life of a believer’s soul. It was meant to help our poor weak faith to closer fellowship with our crucified Saviour, and to assist us in spiritually feeding on Christ’s body and blood. It is an ordinance for redeemed sinners, and not for unfallen angels. By receiving it we publicly declare our sense of guilt, and need of a Saviour,—our trust in Jesus, and our love to Him,—our desire to live upon Him, and our hope to live with Him. Using it in this spirit, we shall find our repentance deepened, our faith increased, our hope brightened, and our love enlarged,—our besetting sins weakened, and our graces strengthened. It will draw us nearer to Christ. Let us bear these things in mind. They need to be remembered in these latter days. There is nothing in our religion which we are so ready to pervert and misunderstand as those parts which approach our senses. Whatever we can touch with our hand, and see with our eyes, we are apt to exalt into an idol, or to expect good from it as a mere charm. Let us especially beware of this tendency in the matter of the Lord’s Supper. Above all, “let us take heed,” in the words of the Homily, “lest of the memory it be made a sacrifice.” Blood (129) haima is literally the red fluid that circulates in the heart, arteries, capillaries, and veins of a vertebrate animal carrying nourishment and oxygen to and bringing away waste products from all parts of the body and thus is essential for the preservation of life. Haima gives us English words like hemorrhage (Gk - haimorragia from haimo- + rragia from regnuo - to burst) English derivatives inclue hematology (study of blood) and "leukemia" which is from leuco (white) plus haima (blood), which is fitting as leukemia is a disease that affects the white blood cells. Haima was used to describe “descent” or “family” in ancient times. “To shed blood” is to destroy life. See discussion of the Blood of Christ. Summary of haima - (1) human blood (Jn 19.34+); by metonymy human nature, physical descent (Heb 2.14+); (2) of sacrificial animals blood (Heb 9.7+); (3) idiomatically - literally pour out blood, i.e. kill (Rev 16.6+); menstrual flow, hemorrhage (Mk 5.25+); literally fountain of blood, i.e. bleeding (Mk 5.29+); (4) by metonymy, of another’s murder (Mt 23.30+); of Christ’s atoning sacrifice death, the blood of Christ (Ro 3.25+); (5) in apocalyptic language, the red color of blood as symbolizing disaster (Acts 2.19+) (BORROW Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament) Blood Of Christ which in many contexts represents the life that He gave for our atonement - Matthew 26:28+, Mk 14:24+, Lk 22:20+, John 6:53, 55, 56+, John 19:34+, Acts 20:28+ Ro 5:9+, Eph 2:13+, Colossians 1:20+, Hebrews 9:14+, 1 Peter 1:18+, 1 Peter 1:19+, 1 John 1:7+, Revelation 1:5+, Revelation 5:9+, Revelation 7:14+, Revelation 12:11+ Redemption through Christ's blood (Mt 26:28+, Jn 6:56+, John 19:34+, Acts 20:28+, Ro 5:9+, Col 1:20+, Heb 9:14+, 1Pe 1:18+, 1 Peter 1:19+, 1Jn 1:7+, Rev 1:5+, Revelation 5:9+, Revelation 7:14+, Revelation 12:11+) It is clear that the blood of Christ is supremely significant in the NT (1Cor. 10:16+; Ep 2:13+), not so much His material blood, but what happened to His material blood - it was shed in violent death. Haima is used in the phrase "blood of the covenant" (Ex 24:8+, Mt 26:28+, Mk 14:24+, Heb 9:20+, Hebrews 10:29+). See also blood associated with covenant (Zech 9:11, Lk 22:20+, 1Cor 11:25+, Heb 9:18+, Hebrews 12:24+, Hebrews 13:20+). In John John 6:53-56+ Jesus refers to drinking His blood, which clearly is not literal and is probably best explained as entering into the new covenant in Jesus' blood (Lk 22:20+) by grace through faith. Why did God require animal sacrifices in the Old Testament? Why did the sacrificial system require a blood sacrifice? What was the significance of the sprinkling of blood? Covenant (1242) diatheke from diatithemi = set out in order, dispose in a certain order <> from dia = two + tithemi = to place pictures that which is placed between two Thus, a covenant is something placed between two = thus an arrangement between two parties) literally conveys the idea of a testament, as in one's last will and testament. A covenant is an agreement between two parties that binds them together and conveys the associated ideas of very close fellowship (even oneness and identity as for example in the marriage covenant where two mystically become one flesh). Cleon Rogers describes covenant in the ancient world as…the uniting and community of the souls and wills of the two, which results in a common purpose, common friends, common enemies, mutual confidence, loyalty, and exclusion of strife. In all of this the will of the stronger was the dominating force. This resulting harmony is often described by the word Shalom which stresses the wholeness, harmony, and unity of the two. Along with this unity there was also the obligation to help or aid one another in time of trouble. Because of these tremendous implications it was always advisable to proceed with caution before making a covenant with anyone. (SEE THE FULL ARTICLE The Covenant with Abraham and Its Historical Setting. Bibliotheca Sacra. Volume 127. Issue 507. Page 240. 1970) (See another article by Cleon Rogers - Covenant with Moses) The 3 major meanings of diatheke in the NT can be summarized as… (1) A legal technical term used when one settles an inheritance and known by our familiar English term "last will and testament" (2) A binding contract between two or more persons, as in Galatians 3:15+ where the covenant is between men. (3) The major NT (and Septuagint use) is a declaration of the will of God in "concerning His self-commitment, promises, and conditions by which he entered into relationship with man covenant, agreement" (BORROW Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament) Covenant has profound implications and is the most solemn, binding, intimate contract known in the Bible. Covenant was considered a binding agreement among the ancients, and so was not entered into lightly. After pieces of the sacrificial animal were laid opposite one another, the individuals who were cutting covenant would walk between the flesh. This walk represented the so-called walk into death indicating their commitment to die to independent living and to ever after live for their covenant partner and to fulfill the stipulations of their covenant (See this practice in Jer 34:8ff, esp Jer 34:18-19). Furthermore, this walk into death was a testimony by each covenant partner that if either broke the covenant God would take their life, even as had been done to the sacrificial animal. In short, we see the gravity of entering into and then breaking covenant. Covenant was a pledge to death. A pledge cut in blood. In covenant the shedding of blood demonstrated as nothing else could the intensity of the commitment. By cutting covenant the two parties were bound for life. Thus the shedding of blood in the cutting of covenant established the gravity and binding nature of this transaction. Both the Old and the New Covenants were inaugurated with blood. The practice of cutting covenant is found throughout history with traces or remnants of covenant truth in every quarter of the globe. See Introduction to Covenant and Summary of Major Biblical Covenants) Related Resources: Covenant: Why the New is Better Covenant: New Covenant in the Old Testament Covenant: Abrahamic vs Old vs New Covenant: The Exchange of Robes Covenant: The Exchange of Armor and Belts Covenant: Solemn and Binding Covenant: A Walk Into Death Covenant: The Oneness of Covenant Oneness Notes Covenant: Withholding Nothing from God Covenant: Abrahamic versus Mosaic Poured out (1632) ekcheo from ek = out + chéo = pour) means literally to flow out, to gush forth or to pour out . The inherent idea is to cause something to be emitted in quantity. Used of literal pouring out of liquids = wine from wineskins in Mt 9:17+; Mk 2:22+ and Lk 5:37+; Jn 2:15+, Acts 1:18+. Used of literal pouring out of solids - coins of the moneychangers in John 2:15+, bowels of Judas in Acts 1:18+. Holy Spirit poured out - Acts 2:17-18+, Acts 2:33+, Acts 10:45+; love of God poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit; Titus 3:6+ To pour out blood is an idiomatic way of saying to murder (of righteous blood shed Mt 23:35+, Luke 11:50+, Acts 22:20+; see note Romans 3:15+. Forgiveness (859) aphesis from aphiemi = action which causes separation and is in turn derived from apo = from + hiemi = put in motion, send) literally means to send away or to put apart, a letting go, a leaving behind, a removal. Aphesis refers to a remission as when one remits (pardons, cancels) a debt, or releases then from an obligation. To release from captivity. The root meaning of forgiveness is to put away an offense. In secular Greek literature, the related word aphiemi was used to indicate the sending away of an object or a person and came to include the release of someone from the obligation of marriage, or debt, or even a religious vow. In its final form this word group came to embrace the principle of release from punishment for some wrongdoing. Remission (see definition of English word) of sins means once and for all taking them away, removing the guilt, punishment and power of sin. And so to release one’s sins, is not just release from the ("legal" or forensic) charge and the just penalty of sin but also release from the power and dominion of sin (and in Heaven the release from the presence of sin and the pleasure of sin). And so we see that Wuest translates Col 1:14+ as "the putting away of our sins" (Wuest) Friberg says aphesis means "(1) of captivity release, liberation, deliverance (Lk 4.18+); (2) of an obligation or debt cancellation, pardon; (3) predominately in relation to sins forgiveness, cancellation of guilt (Mt 26.28+); in the new covenant, a;. involves not a passing over of sins as in the old covenant (cf. pa,resij [passing over, overlooking] in Ro 3.25+), but their removal from the mind of God, taking away (Heb 10.18+; cf. Heb 10.3+) (BORROW Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament) Mounce writes that aphesis "almost always refers to divine forgiveness, and its meaning is usually clarified by adding “of sins.” In Eph 1:7+; Col 1:14+, Paul defines redemption as specifically related to “the forgiveness of sins.” The forgiveness of sins is a central feature of the Christian message and witness, standing at the heart of the gospel. Also, the divine initiative in the forgiveness of sins creates a forgiving spirit in the life of the Christian. As Christ forgave us, so should we forgive others (Mt 5:38–48+; Ro 12:19–21+)." (Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words.) Aphesis is followed by sin (hamartia) 11/17 uses in the NT (Mt 26:28+, Mk 1:4+, Lk 1:77+, Luke 3:3+, Luke 24:47+, Acts 2:38+, Acts 5:31+, Acts 10:43+, Acts 13:38+, Acts 26:18+, Col 1:14+), where Sin is depicted as a "master" that has bound and enslaved all mankind (cf "slave of sin" Ro 6:20+). Paul writes "thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin Sin (see discussion of Sin personified as a "Slavemaster"), you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. (Ro 6:17-18+) Aphesis releases (so to speak) a man from the cords of Sin, the power of Sin. Jesus declared that one of the goals of His ministry was to "release [aphesis] the captives" (Lk 4:18+). Here the word captives is aichmalotos which refers to prisoners of war, and in context refers to all men as in a state of captivity to Sin as a result of having inherited Adam's sin nature (Ro 5:12+). APHESIS - 17/16V - forgiveness(15), free*(1), release(1). Matt. 26:28+; Mk. 1:4+; Mk. 3:29+; Lk. 1:77+; Lk. 3:3+; Lk. 4:18+; Lk. 24:47+; Acts 2:38+; Acts 5:31+; Acts 10:43+; Acts 13:38+; Acts 26:18+; Eph. 1:7+; Col. 1:14+; Heb. 9:22+; Heb. 10:18+ Sins (266) hamartia literally conveys the idea of missing the mark as when hunting with a bow and arrow (in Homer some hundred times of a warrior hurling his spear but missing his foe). Later hamartia came to mean missing or falling short of any goal, standard, or purpose. Hamartia in the Bible signifies a departure from God's holy, perfect standard of what is right in word or deed (righteous). It pictures the idea of missing His appointed goal (His will) which results in a deviation from what is pleasing to Him. In short, sin is conceived as a missing the true end and scope of our lives, which is the Triune God Himself. As Martin Luther put it "Sin is essentially a departure from God." Ryrie adds that sin "is not only a negative idea but includes the positive idea of hitting some wrong mark." From a Biblical perspective hamartia describes the missing of the ultimate purpose and person of our lives, that purpose being to please God Who is also the Person the sinner misses! Hamartia is a deviation from God's truth or His moral rectitude (righteousness). It is a deviation from the straight line, marked off by the "plumb line" of God's perfect, pure Word. As someone has well said ultimately sin is man's (foolish) declaration of independence of God, of the "apostasy" of the creature from his Creator! Woe! QUESTION - What is the meaning of the blood of Christ? | GotQuestions.org ANSWER - The phrase “blood of Christ” is used several times in the New Testament and is the expression of the sacrificial death and full atoning work of Jesus on our behalf. References to the Savior’s blood include the reality that He literally bled on the cross, but more significantly that He bled and died for sinners. The blood of Christ has the power to atone for an infinite number of sins committed by an infinite number of people throughout the ages, and all whose faith rests in that blood will be saved. The reality of the blood of Christ as the means of atonement for sin has its origin in the Mosaic Law. Once a year, the priest was to make an offering of the blood of animals on the altar of the temple for the sins of the people. “In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22+). But this was a blood offering that was limited in its effectiveness, which is why it had to be offered again and again. This was a foreshadowing of the “once for all” sacrifice which Jesus offered on the cross (Hebrews 7:27+). Once that sacrifice was made, there was no longer a need for the blood of bulls and goats. The blood of Christ is the basis of the New Covenant. On the night before He went to the cross, Jesus offered the cup of wine to His disciples and said, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you” (Luke 22:20+). The pouring of the wine in the cup symbolized the blood of Christ which would be poured out for all who would ever believe in Him. When He shed His blood on the cross, He did away with the Old Covenant requirement for the continual sacrifices of animals. Their blood was not sufficient to cover the sins of the people, except on a temporary basis, because sin against a holy and infinite God requires a holy and infinite sacrifice. “But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (Hebrews 10:3+). While the blood of bulls and goats were a “reminder” of sin, “the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19+) paid in full the debt of sin we owe to God, and we need no further sacrifices for sin. Jesus said, “It is finished” as He was dying, and He meant just that—the entire work of redemption was completed forever, “having obtained eternal redemption” for us (Hebrews 9:12+). Not only does the blood of Christ redeem believers from sin and eternal punishment, but “His blood will make our consciences pure from useless acts so we may serve the living God” (Hebrews 9:14+ NCV). This means that not only are we now free from having to offer sacrifices which are “useless” to obtain salvation, but we are free from having to rely on worthless and unproductive works of the flesh to please God. Because the blood of Christ has redeemed us, we are now new creations in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17+), and by His blood we are freed from sin to serve the living God, to glorify Him, and to enjoy Him forever. QUESTION - What is the significance that life is in the blood (Leviticus 17:14)? ANSWER - Thousands of years before scientists understood the complex and extraordinary life-sustaining properties of blood, the Bible informed that “the life of every creature is in its blood” (Leviticus 17:14+NLT). In ancient Israel, blood was not only a metaphor or symbol for life; it was equivalent to life itself. In most occurrences where blood was shed in Scripture, it meant that life had ended. To remove the blood is to terminate life. In Leviticus chapter 17, God gives instructions regarding sacrifices and offerings, particularly on the proper slaughtering of animals. The people of Israel were to bring each animal to the tabernacle entrance for the priest to offer. The blood of the animal was never to be treated as common food; it belonged to God, who is the giver of life (Genesis 2:7+; Job 33:4; Psalm 139:13). Thus, the blood of animals had to be drained and offered to God on the altar. Blood was God’s ordained means of effecting atonement: “For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life” (Leviticus 17:11+). Atonement for sin was achieved by sacrificing an animal’s life in substitution for one’s own life. The shedding of blood was the most critical element—it was the blood of the guiltless substitute offered on the altar that served as payment for the people’s sins (Leviticus 16:15+). Through God’s ordained system of sacrifice in the Old Testament, the Lord laid the groundwork for a message that would not be fully grasped until later: “The old system under the law of Moses was only a shadow, a dim preview of the good things to come, not the good things themselves. The sacrifices under that system were repeated again and again, year after year, but they were never able to provide perfect cleansing for those who came to worship” (Hebrews 10:1+, NLT). The full meaning of “the life is in the blood” would only be revealed in Jesus Christ: “That is why, when Christ came into the world, he said to God, ‘You did not want animal sacrifices or sin offerings. But you have given me a body to offer’” (Hebrews 10:5+, NLT). It has always been God’s will for humans to be made right with God by the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ, once for all time (Hebrews 10:10+). In the Old Testament, the priests offered animals’ blood over and over again, but this repeated shedding of blood never permanently removed the curse of sin (Hebrews 10:11+). When Jesus came and offered up His life—pouring out His blood on the cross—the perfect sacrifice had finally been made: “Just think how much more the blood of Christ will purify our consciences from sinful deeds so that we can worship the living God. For by the power of the eternal Spirit, Christ offered himself to God as a perfect sacrifice for our sins” (Hebrews 9:14+NLT). All those from times past, present, and future who put their faith in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, are made right with God: “For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin. People are made right with God when they believe that Jesus sacrificed his life, shedding his blood. This sacrifice shows that God was being fair when he held back and did not punish those who sinned in times past, for he was looking ahead and including them in what he would do in this present time. God did this to demonstrate his righteousness, for he himself is fair and just, and he makes sinners right in his sight when they believe in Jesus” (Romans 3:25–26+, NLT). The apostle John saw a future multitude of believers in heaven who “have washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb.” They have been purified from sin and “clothed in white” (Revelation 7:13–14+). Because of the Old Testament system, Christ’s followers could comprehend what He was doing when He shed His blood on the cross. And today we can better see what His sacrifice means. Just as physical life is in the blood of animals, eternal life is in the blood of Jesus Christ. Physically, our existence depends on blood to sustain life, and, spiritually, our lives depend on the shed blood of Jesus Christ (Romans 5:10+; 1 John 1:7+; Ephesians 1:7+; Colossians 1:14+; Hebrews 9:22+). Through those ancient sacrifices repeatedly offered in the Old Testament, we are led to appreciate that death—the shedding of blood—has always been the cost of securing eternal life for sinful humans. Believers are cleansed, forgiven, and made right with God by the blood of the Lamb, God’s guiltless substitute. The life that Christ emptied of its blood now pumps everlasting life into our veins. Oh, how astounding it is that God would shed His own blood to pay the penalty for our sins! Related Resources: Why did God require animal sacrifices in the Old Testament? Why did the sacrificial system require a blood sacrifice? What was the significance of the sprinkling of blood? F B
Mateus 26
Morris - It is striking that the only recorded instance of Jesus singing is just as He prepared to go to the cross. However, after He comes again, He will sing joyfully in the midst of His redeemed people (Zephaniah 3:17+). Utley on singing a hymn - This was probably part of the Hallel Psalms (i.e. Ps. 113–118, cf. Matt. 26:30+), which was the last part of the Passover ritual. These psalms were expressions of joy and gratitude for YHWH’s redemption. They are recited or chanted in whole, or in part, at all major feast days, except the Day of Atonement. Psalms 113–114 are chanted early in the Passover meal and 115–118 towards the end of the meal. NET NOTE - After singing a hymn. The Hallel Psalms (Pss 113–118) were sung during the meal. Psalms 113 and 114 were sung just before the second cup and 115–118 were sung at the end of the meal, after the fourth, or hallel cup.
Mateus 26
Morris - The Gardens of the Lord "When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the which he entered, and his disciples" (John 18:1+). As Jesus, after the last supper with His disciples, walked out with them, they soon crossed over a small brook and entered the little garden called Gethsemane. Eventually He left the disciples and went farther into the garden alone for a time of solitary prayer. Perhaps He remembered how, long ago, He had walked in His first garden with Adam and Eve in beautiful fellowship. Then they had rebelled against His word, and had to be expelled from the Garden of Eden, leaving Him alone there also (Gen. 3:8+). As He prayed in Gethsemane, He knew that it would be only a few hours before He would be buried in still another garden, one "wherein was never man yet laid" (John 19:41+). He would be carried to a new tomb prepared in a newly planted garden by the loving hands of Joseph and Nicodemus, but then He would be alone once again. He had walked alone in the first garden, seeking His own; then had knelt alone in the second garden, praying for His own; and finally, was buried alone in the third garden, after dying for His own. Because He came "to seek and to save that which was lost" (Luke 19:10+), and because He now "ever liveth to make intercession for them" (Heb. 7:25+), after paying the awful price of "redemption through his blood" (Eph. 1:7+), all those who believe and trust Him will spend eternity in fellowship with Him in a beautiful garden city, where flows "a pure river of water of life" surrounded on both sides by "the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month" (Rev. 22:1-2+), and all will be "very good" forever. (Days to Remember) HOME AT LAST IN GOD’S BEAUTIFUL GARDEN Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb. Rev 22:1+ Throughout history gardens have been the scenes of significant life-and-death struggles. In a garden Eve made a decision that bore the fruit of death. In a garden the Savior agonized over a decision that would mean life eternal for all who believed. John Henry Jowett probes the significance of that fateful night in a garden called Gethsemane. WALK WITH JOHN HENRY JOWETT “The Bible opens with a garden. It closes with a garden. The first is the Paradise that was lost. The last is paradise regained. “Between the two there is a third, the garden of Gethsemane. And it is through the unspeakable bitterness and desolation of Gethsemane that we find again the glorious garden through which flows ‘the river of the water of life’ (Revelation 22:1+). “Without Gethsemane, no new Jerusalem! Without its mysterious and unfathomable night, no blessed sunrise of eternal hope! “Can I forget Gethsemane? Yes, I can; and in the forgetfulness I lose the sacred awe of my redemption, and I miss the real glory of ‘paradise regained.’ “ ‘You are not your own; you were bought at a price’ (1 Corinthians 6:19–20+). That is the remembrance that keeps the spirit lowly, and that fills the heart with love for him ‘whose I am,’ and whom I ought to serve.” WALK CLOSER TO GOD Eden … Gethsemane … the new Jerusalem. The journey has been costly and difficult. Yet through it all, God’s purposes triumph. His grace, his goodness, his Gethsemane have made it possible for you to dwell in the garden of God—forever. A garden in which there is no curse or darkness, only face-to-face fellowship with the Creator. To forget such a gift might seem unthinkable. To understand fully such a gift—unfathomable. To spend this day thanking him for it—unbeatable! (Closer Walk New Testament) Two Gardens The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there He put the man whom He had formed. —Genesis 2:8+ Two gardens are mentioned prominently in the Bible: the garden of Eden and the garden of Gethsemane. God placed the first man, Adam, in the garden of Eden; Jesus went into Gethsemane to restore what the first man had lost. The first Adam sinned in the garden; the last Adam took this sin upon Himself. The garden of Eden had the tree of life, which man could have enjoyed forever had he not broken fellowship with God. The garden of Gethsemane was a step toward the tree of death (Acts 5:30+; 1 Peter 2:24+). By Adam’s transgression, he forfeited his right to the tree of life and brought death to all mankind. He who hung on the tree of Calvary conquered death and by His glorious resurrection restored the tree of life to all who believe. The garden where Adam fell is gone from the earth, but there is a glad day coming when He who suffered alone in Gethsemane will restore all things. The curse will be lifted from the earth, the animals will again be docile (Isaiah 11:6-8+), the deserts will disappear (Isaiah 35:6+), the earth will yield her increase abundantly (Amos 9:13+), and Jesus will be here personally to bless His people (Revelation 21:3+). Adam was God’s first man in creation— He through sin brought death to all mankind; Jesus came to earth to bring salvation: Trusting Him, eternal life we’ll find. —Hess God formed us; Sin deformed us; Christ transforms us LEST I FORGET GETHSEMANE Mt 26:30-46+ - Wayne Stiles (See Going Places with God: A Devotional Journey Through the ... - Page 44) At the base of the Mount of Olives today lies a small grotto that produced evidence of an ancient oil press, the meaning of the name “Gethsemane.” Byzantine Christians believed that Jesus left His disciples at this place while He went a stone’s throw away to pray in the garden. “Sit here,” Jesus told them, “while I go over there and pray” (Matt. 26:36+). Then, taking Peter, James and John with Him into the garden, He said to them, “Remain here and keep watch with Me” (Mt 26:38+). Going a bit farther, Jesus fell prostrate and prayed with passion. Today, the Church of All Nations covers the traditional place where Jesus prayed to the Father and displays a beautiful mosaic of the event. Ancient olive trees still stand in the garden, but it’s unlikely they ever beheld Christ in prayer, as the Romans cut down all the trees in the region during the siege on Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Still, entering the Garden of Gethsemane, one can imagine the scenes and almost retrace Jesus’ steps along the places Matthew mentioned: “‘Sit here [in the grotto] while I go over there and pray’ . . . ‘Remain here [in the garden] and keep watch with Me’ . . . He went a little beyond them [where today sits the Church of All Nations]” (Mt 26:36,38-39+). Standing in the garden, a stunning insight occurs when one turns around and sees the walls of Jerusalem so close behind: Jesus could easily see the soldiers coming to arrest Him! In fact, He said, “Here comes my betrayer!” (Mt 26:46+, NIV). He could see those who would lead Him to death approaching, but still He chose to stay in the garden out of obedience to the Father . . . and out of love for us. Lord Jesus, no one took Your life—You gave it up willingly for me. You chose to do the Father’s will above Your own and thus became my Savior—and my example. It costs God nothing, so far as we know, to create nice things; but to convert rebellious wills cost Him crucifixion. —C. S. Lewis Joe Stowell - SURRENDER THAT I MAY KNOW HIM . . . BEING CONFORMED TO HIS DEATH.—Philippians 3:10+ NASB In Gethsemane, Jesus knelt in agony at the rock praying that the prospect of the cross could be lifted from Him. It is not surprising that Jesus in His humanity shrank from the horror—but in the end, broken and weary, through lips parched with anxiety, with a voice heavy with the weight of the cross to come, he uttered these words that now ring through history with a strength of unparalleled resolve, “Not My will, but Yours be done!” This is the ‘image of His death’, and being conformed to the image of His death means full surrender to our Father’s will . . . regardless. No excuses. No escape clauses. No negotiation. And not only is it surrender for the moment, it is about persevering in the resolve until we have fully obeyed. As Jesus rose from the rock exhausted, the torch lit lynch mob was approaching. But Jesus would not be deterred. When Peter unsheathed his sword and slashed the side of the soldiers face leaving his ear on the ground, Jesus had the perfect excuse to escalate the conflict. It’s one thing to surrender. It’s quite another to persevere when opportunities to justifiably slide out of our resolve present themselves. Through all of those horrible hours to follow, when Jesus was dragged through the halls of the kangaroo courts, He refused to return their accusations and slander. Years later Peter would pen, “Christ also suffered for you, leaving an example that you should follow in His steps” (1 Peter 2:23+). Regardless of what He requires, those of us who want to draw close to Him meet Him at that sweat stained rock in the garden brokenly repeating His words after Him: “Not My will but Yours be done.” It is a resolve that covers the whole waterfront of our existence. Nothing is exempt. Relationships, real estate, financial resources, spouses, children, grandchildren, desires, dreams, plans, attitudes, and actions all are included. It demands no flirting around the edges of sensuality. It requires the expulsion of jealousy, residual anger, and the bitterness that tears at our relationships. Gethsemane asks for it all. Is there anything in your life that is unsurrendered to the will of the Father (Strength for the Journey) 'TIS MIDNIGHT Words by Wm. B. Tappan Music by Virgil C. Taylor “‘Tis midnight; and on Olive’s brow The star is dimm’d ‘that lately shone.” The author of the words of this hymn, William Bingham Tappan, was born at Beverly, Mass., October 29, 1794. He was a Congregational minister and was engaged for many years in the service of the American Sunday-school Union. The hymn was first published in the author’s “Gems of Sacred Poetry,” in 1822, under the title, “Gethsemane.” Mr. Tappan died in his native state in 1849. QUESTION - What happened in the Garden of Gethsemane? ANSWER - The garden at Gethsemane, a place whose name literally means “oil press,” is located on a slope of the Mount of Olives just across the Kidron Valley from Jerusalem. A garden of ancient olive trees stands there to this day. Jesus frequently went to Gethsemane with His disciples to pray (John 18:2+). The most famous events at Gethsemane occurred on the night before His crucifixion when Jesus was betrayed. Each of the Gospel writers describes the events of that night with slight variations, so reading the four accounts (Matthew 26:36-56+, Mark 14:32-52+, Luke 22:40-53+ and John 18:1-11+) will give an accurate picture of that momentous night in its entirety. s the evening began, after Jesus and His disciples had celebrated the Passover, they came to the garden. At some point, Jesus took three of them—Peter, James and John— to a place separated from the rest. Here Jesus asked them to watch with Him and pray so they would not fall into temptation (Matthew 26:41+), but they fell asleep. Twice, Jesus had to wake them and remind them to pray so that they would not fall into temptation. This was especially poignant because Peter did indeed fall into temptation later that very night when three times he denied even knowing Jesus. Jesus moved a little way from the three men to pray, and twice He asked His Father to remove the cup of wrath He was about to drink, but each time He submitted to the Father’s will. He was “exceedingly sorrowful unto death,” but God sent an angel from heaven to strengthen Him (Luke 22:43+). After this, Judas Iscariot, the betrayer, arrived with a “multitude” of soldiers, high priests, Pharisees, and servants to arrest Jesus. Judas identified Him by the prearranged signal of a kiss which he gave to Jesus. Trying to protect Jesus, Peter took a sword and attacked a man named Malchus, the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. Jesus rebuked Peter and miraculously healed the man’s ear. It’s surprising that witnessing this amazing miracle of healing had no effect on the multitude. Neither were they shaken by His awesome display of power as described in John 18:5-6+, where either at the majesty of His looks, or at the power of His words, or both, they became like dead men, falling to the ground. Nevertheless, they arrested Him and took Him to Pontius Pilate, while the disciples scattered in fear for their lives. The events that occurred in the Garden of Gethsemane have reverberated down through the centuries. The passion Jesus displayed on that momentous night has been depicted in music, books, and films for centuries. From the 16th century, when Bach wrote two magnificent oratorios based on the gospel accounts of Matthew and John, to the present day with the film The Passion of the Christ, the story of this extraordinary night has been told again and again. Even our language has been affected by these events, giving us such phrases as “he who lives by the sword dies by the sword” (Matthew 26:52+); “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Mark 14:38+); and “sweating drops of blood” (Luke 22:44+). Of course, the most important impact of this night was the willingness of our Savior to die on the cross in our place in order to pay the penalty for our sins. God “made Him who knew no sin, to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21+). This is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Related Resources: What happened on the Mount of Olives? Why did Jesus sweat blood in the Garden of Gethsemane? Why did Jesus have to experience so much suffering? Why did Jesus choose Peter, James, and John to be His inner circle? LIFE’S FINAL CROSSROADS - John Mayshack 1. Gethsemane—The Crossroad of Prayer 2. Gethsemane—The Crossroad of Betrayal 3. Gethsemane—The Crossroad of God’s Will James Smith - GETHSEMANE.Matthew 26:36-46+. The supper was finished, the precious words recorded in John 14, 15, 16, 17, having been spoken, Christ and His disciples pass over the brook into the quiet seclusion of the garden. In a garden the first man fell through yielding to the wicked one, in a garden the Second Man conquered through yielding to the Holy One. May the calm of Gethsemane pervade our spirits, as we in thought follow our Lord's footsteps thither. This place called Gethsemane was to Him— I. A Place of Great Heaviness. "He began to be sorrowful and very heavy" (Mt 26:37+). Mark adds, "Sore amazed." Heaviness of spirit laid hold of Him. Who can tell the weight of this burden to Him? "The Lord laid on Him the iniquity of us all" (Isa. 53:6+). What a burden! To us the sense of sin is about as natural as the clothes we wear. To the sinner sin is but a trifle, to the Holy Son of God it was very heavy. "It bowed Him to the earth with grief." II. A Place of Intense Suffering. "He began to be sorrowful" (Mt 26:38+). Then saith He, "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death" Now that the blessed Lord is entering into the relationship of the sinner's substitute He begins to be sorrowful. Sin and suffering have been joined together by the righteousness of God. The sufferings of Christ were the sufferings of sorrow, heart sufferings. This sorrow was not the result of the fear of death neither was it the sorrow of regret or failure, but of pure love and sympathy. He was in deep sympathy with the holiness of God and the helplessness of man. May our eyes be opened to see, and our hearts touched to appreciate the "beautiful sadness" of the Son of God! (Isa. 53:3, 4+). III. A Place of Solemn Loneliness. "Tarry ye here and watch with Me... What, could ye not watch with Me one hour?" (Mt 26:38+). The tender heart of the Man of Sorrows yearned for fellowship in His sufferings, but they "could not." They slept even while He was in agony, sweating as it were, great drops of blood. He looked, but there was none to help Him. No; man cannot help the Lamb of God to bare away the sin of the world. "I looked for some to take pity, and for comforters, but I found none" (Psa. 69:20). IV. A Place of Agonising Prayer. "He fell on His face and prayed, saying, O My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me" (Mt 26:39+). "He prayed the third time, saying the same words" (Mt 26:44+). "He offered up prayer and supplications with strong crying and tears, unto Him that was able to save Him from death, and was heard in that He feared" (Heb. 5:7+). What a contrast between this prayer and the one in John 17! This awful cup contained desertion and death, a most repulsive portion to the loving, holy, obedient Son of God. Around this prayer there is a halo of mystery, both deep and glorious, into which the carnal thoughts cannot enter. We bow in adoration, saying, "Behold, what love!" (1 John 3:1+). V. A Place of Entire Resignation. "Nevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt" (Mt 26:39+). My will, not Thine, be done, opened the flood gate of sin, and turned man out of the Paradise of God. In the wilderness, while tempted of the devil, the will of Christ was as firm and unyielding as the mountains. We will be strong to resist evil in proportion as we are willing to resign to the will of God. In every crisis in our spiritual experience let us remember these words of our Lord. Who can tell what tremendous consequences may hang on our "Not as I will, but as Thou wilt." VI. A Place of Special Succour. "There appeared an angel unto Him from Heaven, strengthening Him" (Luke 22:43+). Blessed be God for this. The place of entire surrender to the will of God will always be the place of special succour from the Lord. "I will glory in my infirmity, that the power of Christ may rest upon me" (2 Cor. 12:9+). The angel of His sufficiency will minister perfect strength in our weakness. Be not anxious about the angel, let His promise suffice. VII. A Place of Heartless Betrayal. "Behold, he is at hand that doth betray Me. While He yet spake, lo, Judas came" (Mt 26:46+). Could anything be more heartrending to the Son of God than this? Kissed with traitor lips while yet the agonising sweat is on His brow. Christ had just accepted the awful cup in man's room and stead, and all the reward He receives at the hands of men is a hypocritical salutation, condemnation, and death. It is possible to play the Judas while sitting at the Lord's table. Salute Him with an holy kiss. Let our whole souls gush in love through our lips while we confess Him as our Lord before men Oswald Chambers - His Agony and Our Access “Jesus came with them to a place called Gethsemane, and said to the disciples … ‘stay here and watch with Me’ ” (Matthew 26:36, 38+). We can never fully comprehend Christ’s agony in the Garden of Gethsemane, but at least we don’t have to misunderstand it. It is the agony of God and man in one Person, coming face to face with sin. We cannot learn about Gethsemane through personal experience. Gethsemane and Calvary represent something totally unique—they are the gateway into life for us. It was not death on the cross that Jesus agonized over in Gethsemane. In fact, He stated very emphatically that He came with the purpose of dying. His concern here was that He might not get through this struggle as the Son of Man. He was confident of getting through it as the Son of God—Satan could not touch Him there. But Satan’s assault was that our Lord would come through for us on His own solely as the Son of Man. If Jesus had done that, He could not have been our Savior (see Hebrews 9:11–15+). Read the record of His agony in Gethsemane in light of His earlier wilderness temptation—“… the devil … departed from Him until an opportune time” (Luke 4:13+). In Gethsemane, Satan came back and was overthrown again. Satan’s final assault against our Lord as the Son of Man was in Gethsemane. The agony in Gethsemane was the agony of the Son of God in fulfilling His destiny as the Savior of the world. The veil is pulled back here to reveal all that it cost Him to make it possible for us to become sons of God. His agony was the basis for the simplicity of our salvation. The Cross of Christ was a triumph for the Son of Man. It was not only a sign that our Lord had triumphed, but that He had triumphed to save the human race. Because of what the Son of Man went through, every human being has been provided with a way of access into the very presence of God. The following chart is from Rod Mattoon - Man was created in the Garden of Eden. In Genesis chapter two, we find a garden of tragedy where the seeds of death were planted. The events that took place in Eden led to the events in Gethsemane, which is the garden of testing where death stalked our Savior and beat at His door. The Garden of Eden The Garden of Gethsemane All was delightful. All was dreadful & despicable. Adam parleyed with Satan. The Last Adam, Jesus, prays with the Father. Adam disobeyed and sinned. The Savior suffered and obeyed. Adam is conquered by sin. Jesus conquered His own will. Adam took fruit from Eve's hand. Christ took the cup from His Father's hand. God sought for Adam. The Last Adam sought God His Father. The Self-indulgence of Adam ruined us. The agonies of the Second Adam restored us. Adam's attitude, "My will be done." Jesus' attitude was, "Thy will be done." Matthew 26:37 And He took with Him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be grieved and distressed. Peter: Mt 4:18,21+ Matthew 17:1+ Matthew 20:20+ Mk 5:37+ grieved and distressed: Mk 14:33,34+ Lu 22:44+ Joh 12:27+ Related Passages: Mark 14:33-35+ And He *took with Him Peter and James and John, and began to be very distressed and troubled. 34 And He *said to them, “My soul is deeply grieved to the point of death; remain here and keep watch.” 35 And He went a little beyond them, and fell to the ground and began to pray that if it were possible, the hour might pass Him by. JESUS' COMPANIONS IN HIS PRAYER VIGIL And He took (paralambano) with Him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee (James and John - Mk 14:33+) - Peter, James and John are the three in Jesus "inner circle" who were present at other significant events such as the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2+, Mk 9:2+), resurrection of Jairus' daughter (Mk 5:37-43+), on the Mount of Olives questioning Jesus (Mk 13:3+). It is notable that these three men witnessed the height of His glory at the transfiguration and the depth and pathos of His agony in Gethsemane. Took is paralambano which has the prefix "para-" which means by His side and would have been a mark of special favor and privilege. Robertson suggests that " The eight would serve as a sort of outer guard to watch by the gate of the garden for the coming of Judas while the three would be able to share the agony of soul already upon Jesus so as at least to give him some human sympathy which he craved as he sought help from the Father in prayer." Van Parunak adds that "These three were the disciples closest to the Lord. They were the first called, along with Andrew, in (Matt 4:18-21+). They alone went with him to Jairus’ house for the raising of his daughter (Mark 5:37+). He chose them to accompany him into the mount of transfiguration (Matt 17:1+). These were the first three mentioned when the disciples gathered after the ascension (Acts 1:13+). When Paul came from Antioch to Jerusalem with Barnabas at the time of the famine (Acts 11:27+- 30), he mentions the three as pillars of the church. (Quoted by Paul Apple) Hiebert - As Jesus walked farther into the garden with the three, a strong agitation swept over Him, visible to them before He spoke.....Jesus had long foreseen His coming death, but now that the shadow of the actual cross fell upon Him He felt the shuddering horror of the terrible ordeal. “The cause of Jesus’ soretrouble was not physical fear, but the pressure upon His sinless soul of the sin of the world, together with His knowledge of what bearing it involved.” It came with stunning effect. (Expositional Commentary) James Edwards - All three have earlier crowed of their mettle (Peter, Mk 14:29–31+; James and John, Mk 10:38–39+; Mk 14:31+); they should be exactly the companions Jesus needs in the crisis before him. (The Gospel according to Mark) And began (archo) to be grieved (lupeo in present tense) and distressed (ademoneo in present tense) - Began (archo) describes the initiation of an action or state of being. To be sure Jesus had experienced deep emotions before (Jn 11:35+), but now the Cross looming near brought forth a depth and degree of emotions that even these strong Greek words surely fail to describe! The present tense depicts these emotions as continually present in Jesus. Distressed (ademoneo) describes Jesus being almost overwhelmed with sorrow or burden of mind by the truth that He would soon "taste death for everyone." (Heb 2:9+). Alfred Edersheim gave us a sense of the profound pathos and deep emotion of Jesus when he wrote that Jesus "disarmed Death by burying its shaft in His own heart.” Grieved (to sorrow) (3076) lupeo from lupe = sorrow) signifies pain, of body or mind and means to cause one to experience severe mental or emotional distress or physical pain which may be accompanied by sadness, sorrow or grief. The King James' translation of lupeo as heaviness parallels our colloquial sayings like -- "It weighs heavy on my soul" or "My soul is weighed down with affliction." or "My soul is so burdened." Lupeō is a general term for “sorrow,” encompassing various expressions of grief (cf. thrēneō, “to lament”; koptō, “to smite the breast in grief”; pentheō, “to mourn passionately”). It may refer to outward mourning or simply to sad feelings. It is commonly used to designate heaviness of heart." In the papyri its use ranges from grief over the loss of a loved one to sadness over the loss of a cloak (Moulton-Milligan). It is also used of the general troubles of a steward (ibid.). Friberg - (1) active (cause) pain, grieve, make sad (Eph 4.30+); (2) passive be sad, be sorrowful, be distressed (Mt 26.22+); aorist become distressed or sorry (2Co 7.9+) LUPEO - 26X/21V - cause...sorrow(1), caused...sorrow(2), caused sorrow(2), distressed(1), grieve(3), grieved(7), grieving(2), hurt(1), made sorrowful(5), sorrow(1), sorrowful(1). Matt. 14:9+; Matt. 17:23+; Matt. 18:31+; Matt. 19:22+; Matt. 26:22+; Matt. 26:37+; Mk. 10:22+; Mk. 14:19+; Jn. 16:20+; Jn. 21:17+; Rom. 14:15+; 2 Co. 2:2+; 2 Co. 2:4+; 2 Co. 2:5+; 2 Co. 6:10+; 2 Co. 7:8+; 2 Co. 7:9+; 2 Co. 7:11+; Eph. 4:30+; 1 Thess. 4:13+; 1 Pet. 1:6+ Distressed (85) ademoneo from a derivative of adeo = to be sated to loathing) means to be distressed, deeply troubled or distressed, this intense discomfort being quite plain. Be sorely troubled. Be upset. Be dismayed. Be in anguish. The present tense indicates this was a lingering distress. Ademoneo describes the confused, chaotic, heavy state of restlessness that results from a time of turmoil or great trauma. ADEMONEO - 3V -distressed(2), troubled(1). Matt. 26:37+; Mk. 14:33+; Phil. 2:26+ Matthew 26:38 Then He *said to them, “My soul is deeply grieved, to the point of death; remain here and keep watch with Me.” My: Job 6:2-4 Ps 88:1-7,14-16 Psalm 116:3+ Isa 53:3,10+ Ro 8:32+ 2Co 5:21+ Ga 3:13+ 1Pe 2:24+ 1 Peter 3:18+ remain: Mt 26:40+ Matthew 25:13+ 1Pe 4:7+ IN HIS TIME OF DISTRESS JESUS DESIRES DISCIPLE'S COMPANY Then He *said to them, “My soul (psuche - "inner self-conscious life" - Grassmick) is deeply grieved (perilupos), to the point of death (thanatos) - Deeply grieved is perilupos where the preposition peri = means around which gives us the picture of Jesus being surrounded by sorrow, encompassed by grief. Clearly Jesus' soul afflicted beyond measure and far beyond what we as finite humans can fully understand.. Perilupos is used in the Lxx of Ps 42:5+ in the question "Why are you in despair (Lxx = perilupos) O my soul." One would think that His addendum of to the point of death (thanatos) would have been sufficient to stir them to obedience to the following commands. Jesus' agony was not over the physical suffering, as horrible as it would be, but was over the fact that He Who was eternally sinless would be made in a moment of time the bearer of all the sins of the world, past, present and future, and worst of all, his would result for the first time in eternity in alienation from His Father, which prompted His agonizing cry ""ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAST THOU FORSAKEN ME?" (Mt 27:46+, Mk 15:34+). Paul explained that in that fateful moment "He (HIS FATHER) made Him Who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." (2Co 5:21+) Amazing love how can it be that Thou My God hast died for me? John MacArthur makes an interesting comment on to the point of death - It is possible to die from sorrow just as from other strong emotions, such as fright and anger. Jesus’ anguish was enough to kill Him and doubtlessly would have done so had He not been divinely preserved for another kind of death. (Matthew Commentary) H A
Mateus 26
Morris - this cup. This "cup" was nothing less than the cup of God's wrath against all the sin and rebellion of all the men and women through all the ages (compare Revelation 14:10+; Revelation 16:19+). Note also Psalm 16:5; in fact, the entire 16th psalm seems to suggest the very prayer that Christ may have prayed that night in the garden of Gethsemane. not as I will. The Lord Jesus not only has taught us how to pray (Matthew 6:9+) but also has set us an example. Our prayer must always be that God's will--not ours--be done (1 John 5:14+), no matter how difficult that may prove to be. Some have suggested that Satan was here trying to slay Jesus before He could go to the cross, and that the Lord was beseeching the Father to let that cup be removed, but this is highly speculative at best. Jesus was fully human and would suffer as a man on the cross as no man had ever suffered before, bearing the full weight of the sin of the whole world in His body, and even suffering for the first time the loss of His Father's presence and approval. In His humanity, never calling on the resources of His own deity at all (Philippians 2:5-8+), it would be inhuman not to shrink from such a prospect. It was this cup that He would have removed. Nevertheless, "not as I will, but as thou wilt," He said. Believer's Study Bible - The "cup" in the O.T. is a metaphor for divine punishment of sin. Hence, Jesus' death involved far more than physical death, for He becomes the object of the divine wrath (cf. Rom. 1:18-3:20) against sin by His identification with sinful man. Although Jesus knew that death and God's wrath comprised the climax of His mission as Messiah, His consciousness of God's wrath against sin becomes even more intense as the hour approaches. Cup (4221) poterion refers to a literal cup (Mt 10:42+; Mt 26:27+; Mk 7:4+; Mark 9:41+; Mark 14:23+; Lk 11:39+; Luke 22:17, 20+; 1 Cor 10:16, 21+; 11:25a, 27f; Rev 17:4+). The cup stands, by metonymy, for what it contains ( Lk 22:20+b; 1 Cor 11:25+b, 26. Figuratively it referred to undergoing a violent death, of one's lot or experience, joyous or sorrowful (frequent in the Psalms; cp. Ps 116:18+, "cup of salvation"). In the NT it is used most frequently of the sufferings of Christ, Matt. 20:22, 23+; Matt. 26:39+; Mark 10:38, 39+; Mark 14:36+; Luke 22:42+; John 18:11+; also of the evil deeds of Babylon, Rev. 17:4+; Rev. 18:6+; of Divine punishments to be inflicted, Rev. 14:10+; Rev. 16:19+. Cp. Psa. 11:6; Psa. 75:8; Isa. 51:17; Jer. 25:15+; Ezek. 23:32-34; Zech. 12:2+. POTERION - 28V - Matt. 10:42+; Matt. 20:22+; Matt. 20:23+; Matt. 23:25+; Matt. 23:26+; Matt. 26:27+; Matt. 26:39+; Mk. 7:4+; Mk. 9:41+; Mk. 10:38+; Mk. 10:39+; Mk. 14:23+; Mk. 14:36+; Lk. 11:39+; Lk. 22:17+; Lk. 22:20+; Lk. 22:42+; Jn. 18:11+; 1 Co. 10:16+; 1 Co. 10:21+; 1 Co. 11:25+; 1 Co. 11:26+; 1 Co. 11:27+; 1 Co. 11:28+; Rev. 14:10+; Rev. 16:19+; Rev. 17:4+; Rev. 18:6+ Nancy DeMoss Wolgemuth - Whatever He Says (BORROW The quiet place : daily devotional readings Page 96) “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.”—Matthew 26:39+ ONE OF THE SWEET BY-PRODUCTS of spending time alone with God in His Word and prayer is that our lives are brought into submission to God and His will. Yes, submission. Now I’ll be the first to admit that the “S” word is not one of the most popular in our free-spirited era. The idea of submitting to the control or will of another is utterly contrary to our sinful human nature. When we became children of God, however, we received a new nature, one that recognizes God’s right to rule over us. Yet even though our spirit now wants to obey Him, our flesh (our natural inclination) wars against our spirit and still wants to have its own way. As a result, there are times when we resent, resist, or run from what God has brought into our lives. We view difficult, annoying people and circumstances as a problem, resenting the pressure they place upon us. In so doing, we end up pushing against God Himself, resisting His sovereign choices and purposes for our lives. But when we place ourselves under the ministry and microscope of His Word, our resistance is exposed. We see the wise hand of God that is acting for our good. We realize the folly of trying to “box” with God. Whether the problem is earth-shattering or a mere blip on the radar screen, the real issue often comes down to this: “Do I trust that God is wise and good? And will I submit to His hand and purposes in my life?” Is there an issue (big or small) in your life where your flesh is resisting the will of God? As you meet with Him, ask Him to bring you to a place of wholehearted submission and trust, until you can say, “Yes, Lord! Not as I will, but as You will.” Too Much For Me O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me. —Matthew 26:39+ Today's Scripture & Insight : Matthew 26:36-46+ “God never gives us more than we can handle,” someone said to a father whose 5-year-old son had just lost his battle with cancer. These words, which were intended to encourage him, instead depressed him and caused him to wonder why he wasn’t “handling” the loss of his boy at all. The pain was so much to bear that he could hardly even breathe. He knew his grief was too much for him and that he desperately needed God to hold him tight. The verse that some use to support the statement “God never gives us more than we can handle” is 1 Corinthians 10:13, “When you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it” (niv). But the context of these words is temptation, not suffering. We can choose the way out of temptation that God provides, but we can’t choose a way out of suffering. Jesus Himself wanted a way out of His upcoming suffering when He prayed, “My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even to death. . . . O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me” (Matt. 26:38-39+). Yet He willingly went through this for our salvation. Father, I feel vulnerable and weak. I know You are my refuge and strength, my help in trouble. I call upon Your name, Lord. Hold on to me. With God behind you and His arms beneath you, you can face whatever lies ahead. The Work Of Prayer [Jesus] went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed. — Matthew 26:39+ Today's Scripture : Matthew 26:36-46+ I must admit that I have found prayer strenuous, boring, and confusing at times. Occasionally I have gotten ahold of prayer, only to discover that I couldn’t sustain the grip. I’ve learned that real prayer can be tough, hard business. We often think of prayer as preparation for the battle, but Christ showed us that it is the battle itself. Prayer was the heart of His work. Where was it that Jesus’ sweat was like drops of blood? Not in Pilate’s hall, nor on His way to Golgotha. It was in the Garden of Gethsemane. There He “offered up prayers and supplications, with vehement cries and tears to Him who was able to save Him from death” (Heb. 5:7+). If I had witnessed His struggle that night, I might have misinterpreted the situation and said, “If He is so broken up when all He is doing is praying, what will He do when He faces a real crisis? Why can’t He approach this ordeal with the calm confidence of His three sleeping friends?” Yet when the test came, Jesus walked to the cross with courage, and His three friends fell apart and ran away. Something happens when we pray, Take our place and therein stay, Wrestle on till break of day; Ever let us pray. —Anon. Prayer was never intended to be a labor-saving device. His Way O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will. — Matthew 26:39+ Today's Scripture : Matthew 26:36-46+ A question about the title of a hymn took me back to a wonderful old song I grew up singing in church called “Let Him Have His Way With Thee.” The chorus says: “His power can make you what you ought to be; His blood can cleanse your heart and make you free; His love can fill your soul, and you will see ’twas best for Him to have His way with thee.” Even when we know that God’s way is best for us, we may still struggle to obey Him. When Christ our Savior faced the horrible reality of bearing our sins on the cross, He agonized in prayer, saying, “O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will” (Matthew 26:39+). Jesus, who lived to do His Father’s will, struggled and prayed, then willingly obeyed. And He can help us as we grapple with the difficult choices in our lives. C. S. Lewis wrote: “There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done.'” If we continually choose our own way, He will eventually allow us to suffer the consequences. It’s best to surrender to God now. If we do, we’ll have the assurance that His way is best for us. By: David C. McCasland Have Thine own way, Lord! Have Thine own way! Thou art the Potter, I am the clay; Mould me and make me after Thy will, While I am waiting, yielded and still. —Pollard There is victory in surrender when the conqueror is Christ. Hymns Related to Mt 26:39+ Deep in Our Hearts Let Us Record Gethsemane (Cleator) Immanuel, Sunk with Dreadful Woe Thou Who Didst Stoop Below C H
Mateus 26
Morris - Jesus' message here to Peter (John 18:11+) is worth heeding. For defense and order, God has ordained the powers of government to bear "the sword" (Romans 13:1-4+). His angels are well able to protect His people when it is His will. Note the following verse and also Psalm 34:7+; Psalm 91:11. (Defender's Study Bible) A T
Mateus 26
Morris - Caiaphas the high priest. Caiaphas' father-in-law was Annas (John 18:13+). Acts 4:6+ and Luke 3:2+ support the fact that both were high priests. This position of high priest had become a political position. Annas had been deposed by Rome, with Caiaphas appointed in his place, but Annas still managed to exercise much of the power of the position. It is sad that both were Sadducees, rejecting the supernatural, and wanting the prestigious position for political and financial reasons only. They were intensely hostile to Jesus for these reasons, rather than for their manufactured charge of blasphemy against God. (Defender's Study Bible) SUMMARY OF THE THREE ILLEGAL JEWISH TRIALS (1) The "pre-trial" or preliminary arraignment before Annas only recorded in John 18:12-27+ (2) An informal trial before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin before dawn (Jn 18:24+) (See Mt 26:57–68+, Mk 14:53–65+) (3) A formal trial by the Sanhedrin after dawn (Luke 22:66–71+, Mt 27:1+, Mk 15:11+) THE SIX MOCK TRIALS OF THE MESSIAH JESUS' THREE RELIGIOUS TRIALS See also Detailed Discussion of 3 Religious Trials MATTHEW MARK LUKE JOHN Before Annas Nighttime ~1-3 AM Jn 18:12-14,19-24+ Before Caiaphas Nighttime - ~1-3 AM Mt 26:57-68+ Mk 14:53-65+ Lk 22:54, 63-65+ Before Sanhedrin Daybreak ~5 AM Mt 27:1+ Mk 15:1+ Lk 22:66-71+ JESUS' THREE CIVIL TRIALS Before Pilate Mt 27:2, 11-14+ Mk 15:1-5+ Lk 23:1-5+ Jn 18:28-38+ Before" Herod Antipas Lk 23:6-12+ Before Pilate Mt 27:15-26+ Mk 15:6-15+ Lk 23:13-25+ Jn 18:39-19:16+ For a more detailed discussion of the rules/laws for trials, witnesses, etc. see Buss' ten page discussion "Extracts from the Mishna." Buss - The Trial Before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin Buss - Importance of Witnesses Buss - Many False Witnesses Buss - Second Stage, Before Caiaphas - Two Witnesses Buss - Third Stage Before Caiaphas - Ye Are All Witnesses Buss - Meeting At Daybreak See James Stalker The Trial and Death of Jesus Christ-A Devotional History of Our Lord's Passion 1. THE ARREST Matt. 26:47–56+; Mark 14:43–50+; Luke 22:47–53+; John 18:1–11+. 2. THE ECCLESIASTICAL TRIAL Matt. 26:57–68+; Mark 14:51–65+; Luke 22:54–71+; John 18:12–14, 19–24+. 3. THE GREAT DENIAL Matt. 26:69–75+; Mark 14:66–72+; Luke 22:54–62+; John 18:15–18, 25–7+. QUESTION - What happened during Jesus' last hours before His death? ANSWER - The night before Jesus’ death, He washed the feet of His disciples and shared the Passover meal with them. During this time Judas was revealed as the one who would betray His master (John 13:1-30+). At the conclusion of the meal, Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (Matthew 26:26–29+; 1 Corinthians 11:23–26+). After the meal, He took His disciples to the Garden of Gethsemane. There, He pulled Peter, John, and James away, told them to pray they wouldn’t fall into temptation, and went off by Himself. The trio promptly fell asleep. Alone, Jesus was grieved and depressed, sorrowful as He approached death. His sweat fell like drops of blood (Luke 22:44+)—His anguish was such that His life was practically dripping away from Him. He asked God to take the coming torment from Him, but only if it was the Father’s will (Luke 22:42+). But it wasn’t the anticipation of scourging or the horrible hours on the cross that had Jesus so sorrowful. What had Him crying out in the garden was the anticipation of carrying the weight of sin (Matthew 27:46+). God sent an angel to strengthen Him enough to get through it. Jesus asked Peter, James, and John to pray that they would stay loyal to Him, but they fell asleep again. He had shared His life and His coming death with His disciples for three years. Then one of them, Judas, walked up to Him, greeted Him as a friend, and handed Him to the Roman guards. The next few hours were a blur of beatings, mockings, and whippings with leather thongs tipped with balls of metal and shards of bone. Jesus’ skin was flayed off, and blood dripped off His head from the long thorns in His crown. He also suffered the humiliation of numerous illegal mock trials before Annas (John 18:13+), Caiaphas, and the Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:57–68+); and Roman trials before Pontius Pilate, then Herod, then Pilate again. Pilate, who knew Jesus was innocent, finally bent to the will of the crowd who were shouting, “Crucify him!” and sent Jesus to the cross (Luke 23:1–25+). Once on the cross, He had the choice of resting His weight on the spikes driven into His hands or pushing up on the spikes in His feet and being able to breathe. People who had celebrated Him a week earlier now taunted Him. He watched the Roman soldiers divide His possessions before He died. And He took in His mother’s grief as she looked up at the One the angel had promised would save the world. When the soldiers came to break His legs (a typical method of hastening the death of the crucified), He was already dead, for He had given up His spirit (John 19:30+). Related Resources: Did the Romans give Jesus 39 lashes? Where/what is Golgotha/Calvary? What is the meaning and significance of the crown of thorns? Why did the crowds shout, “Crucify Him!” when Pilate wanted to release Jesus? What is the significance of Jesus saying, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36)? Rick Renner - Led Like a Sheep To Its Slaughter Matthew 26:57+ After Jesus demonstrated His phenomenal power, He permitted the soldiers to take Him into custody. In a certain sense, this was simply an act, for He had already vividly proven that they didn’t have adequate power to take Him. Just one word and He could put them on their backs, yet the Bible says that they “laid hold on Jesus” and “led him away.” The words “laid hold” are from the Greek word kratos. In this case, this word means to seize, to take hold of, to firmly grip, and to apprehend. Used in this context, it primarily carries the idea of making a forceful arrest. Once Jesus demonstrated that He could not be taken by force, He then allowed the soldiers to seize Him. Once Jesus was in their hands, Matthew 26:57+ tells us that they “led him away.” This phrase comes from the Greek word apago—the same word used to picture a shepherd who ties a rope about the neck of his sheep and then leads it down the path to where it needs to go. This word pictures exactly what happened to Jesus that night in the Garden of Gethsemane. He wasn’t gagged and dragged to the high priest as one who was putting up a fight or resisting arrest. Instead, the Greek word apago plainly tells us that the soldiers lightly slipped a rope about Jesus’ neck and led Him down the path as He followed behind, just like a sheep being led by a shepherd. Thus, the Roman soldiers and temple police led Him as a sheep to slaughter, just as Isaiah 53:7+ had prophesied many centuries earlier. Specifically on that night, however, the soldiers led Jesus to Caiaphas the high priest. Let’s see what we can learn about Caiaphas. We know that Caiaphas was appointed high priest in the year 18 AD. As high priest, he became so prominent in Israel that even when his term as high priest ended, he wielded great influence in the business of the nation, including its spiritual, political, and financial affairs. Flavius Josephus, the famous Jewish historian, reported that five of Caiaphas’ sons later served in the office of the high priest. As a young man, Caiaphas married Anna, the daughter of Annas, who was serving as high priest at that time. Annas served as Israel’s high priest for nine years. The title of high priest had fallen into the jurisdiction of this family, and they held this high-ranking position firmly in their grip, passing it among the various members of the family and thus keeping the reins of power in their hands. It was a spiritual monarchy. The holders of this coveted title retained great political power, controlled public opinion, and owned vast wealth. After Annas passed the title of high priest to his son-in-law Caiaphas, Annas continued to exercise control over the nation through his son-in-law. This influence is evident in Luke 3:2+, where the Bible says, “Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests.…” It was impossible for two people to serve as high priests at the same time; nonetheless, Annas held his former title and much of his former authority. He was so influential to the very end of Jesus’ ministry that the Roman soldiers and temple police who arrested Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane led Jesus to Annas first before delivering him to Caiaphas, the current high priest (John 18:13+). Both Annas and Caiaphas were Sadducees, a group of religious leaders who were more liberal in doctrine and had a tendency not to believe in supernatural events. In fact, they regarded most supernatural occurrences in the Old Testament as myths. The constant reports of Jesus’ supernatural powers and miracles, as well as the reputation He was gaining throughout the nation, caused Caiaphas, Annas, and the other members of the Sanhedrin to view Jesus as a threat. These religious leaders were control freaks in the truest sense of the word, and it was an affront to them that Jesus’ ministry was beyond their control and jurisdiction. Then they heard the verified report that Lazarus had actually been resurrected from the dead! This incident drove them over the edge, causing them to decide to do away with Jesus by committing murder. These leaders were so filled with rage about Lazarus’ resurrection and were so worried about Jesus’ growing popularity that they held a secret council to determine whether or not Jesus had to be killed. Once that decision was made, Caiaphas was the one who was principally responsible for scheming how to bring His death to pass. As high priest and the official head of the Sanhedrin, Caiaphas was also responsible for arranging Jesus’ illegal trial before the Jewish authorities. At first, he charged Jesus with the sin of blasphemy. However, because Jesus wouldn’t contest the accusation Caiaphas brought against Him, the high priest then delivered Him to the Roman authorities, who found Jesus guilty of treason for claiming to be the king of the Jews. Caiaphas was so powerful that even after the death of Jesus, he continued to persecute believers in the Early Church. For instance, after the crippled man at the Beautiful Gate was healed (see Acts 3), Peter and John were seized and brought before the council (Acts 4:6+). Caiaphas was the high priest at this time and continued to serve as high priest until he was removed in 36 AD. This emphatically tells us that Caiaphas was also the high priest who interrogated Stephen in Acts 7:1+. In addition, he was the high priest we read about who gave Saul of Tarsus written permission that authorized him to arrest believers in Jerusalem and later in Damascus (Acts 9:1, 2+). Because of the political events in the year 36 AD, Caiaphas was finally removed from the office of high priest. Of the nineteen men who served as high priests in the first century, this evil man ruled the longest. The title of high priest, however, remained in the family after Caiaphas stepped down, this time passed on to his brother-in-law Jonathan, another son of Annas. Consider this: Jesus had never sinned (2 Corinthians 5:21+); no guile had ever been found in His mouth (1 Peter 2:22+); and His entire life was devoted to doing good and to healing all who were oppressed of the devil (Acts 10:38+). Therefore, it seems entirely unjust that He would be led like a sheep into the midst of the spiritual vipers who were ruling in Jerusalem. According to the flesh, one could have argued that this wasn’t fair; however, Jesus never questioned the Father’s will or balked at the assignment that was required of Him. The apostle Peter wrote this regarding Jesus: “Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously” (1 Peter 2:23+). The word “committed” is the Greek word paradidomi, a compound of the words para and didomi. The word para means alongside and carries the idea of coming close alongside to someone or to some object. The word didomi means to give. When compounded together, it presents the idea of entrusting something to someone. The prefix para suggests that this is someone to whom you have drawn very close. It can be translated to commit, to yield, to commend, to transmit, to deliver, or to hand something over to someone else. The Lord Jesus yielded Himself to the Father who judges righteously when He found Himself in this unjust situation. In that difficult hour, He drew close to the Father and fully entrusted Himself and His future into the hands of the Father. Jesus knew He was in the Father’s will, so He chose to entrust Himself into the Father’s care and to leave the results in His control. If you are in a situation that seems unfair or unjust and there is nothing you can do to change it, you must draw as close to the Father as you can and commit yourself into His loving care. You know He wants the best for you, even though you have found yourself in a predicament that seems so undeserved. Your options are to get angry and bitter and turn sour toward life, or to choose to believe that God is in control and working on your behalf, even if you don’t see anything good happening at the present moment. When Jesus was arrested and taken to Caiaphas to be severely mistreated, there was no escape for Him. He had no choice but to trust the Father. What other choice do you have today? Matthew 26:58 But Peter was following Him at a distance as far as the courtyard of the high priest, and entered in, and sat down with the officers to see the outcome. Jn 18:15,16,25+ Related Passages: John 18:15-16+ Simon Peter was following Jesus, and so was another disciple. Now that disciple was known to the high priest, and entered with Jesus into the court of the high priest, 16 but Peter was standing at the door outside. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the doorkeeper, and brought Peter in. PETER HAD FLED BUT RETURNED TO FOLLOW JESUS Note that all Four Gospels have descriptions of Peter's denial, but comparing these four accounts is not always straightforward. Keep this in mind as you study, teach and preach on Peter's denials. Robert Stein for example comments that there are several differences including "such things as: (1) exactly where and when the three denials took place, (2) who the people were who questioned Peter, (3) the exact wording of Peter’s denials,(4) and the number of cock crows (one or two). All four (Gospel writers agree) that Peter (1) denied his Lord three times (2) on the night of Jesus’ betrayal (3) in the courtyard of the high priest, (4) that a maid questioned Peter, and (5) that a cock crowed “immediately” after the third denial." (See Luke - Page 564) (Numbers in parentheses added). But Peter was following (akoloutheo) Him at a distance (makrothen) as far as the courtyard of the high priest (archiereus) - Yes, Peter is following Jesus but making sure to keep his distance so he is not identified with Jesus! THOUGHT - Peter keeping a distance to keep from being associated with Jesus begs the question -- Are you following Jesus at a distance at work, school, etc, to keep from being identified as a "Jesus freak?" (If you are uncertain see What is a Jesus freak? - DC Talk popularized a song in 1995 entitled Jesus Freak. WARNING - Probably not my favorite song as it has a bit of a "heavy metal" beat, but I do like the line "What will people think when they hear that I'm a Jesus freak? What will people do when they find that it's true?") Am I a closet Christian in my workplace or school? Paul Apple - Commendable that Peter followed him at all – after putting himself in jeopardy by cutting off the ear of Malchus, the servant of the high priest But noteworthy that he only followed Jesus at a distance – not exactly the commitment that Jesus had called for when he commanded His disciples to forsake all and follow after Him; to deny themselves and take up their cross daily Grassmick explains that the courtyard "was a central quadrangle with the high priest’s residence built around it (cf. John 18:15–18+)." (See Bible Knowledge Commentary) While the Scriptural evidence is lacking most authorities (since Augustine in the 4th century) have said that Annas and Caiaphas resided in different wings of the the same palace which was connected by a common courtyard through which Jesus was led (from Annas to Caiaphas). In the Jewish culture of the day a son-in-law would commonly build their residence adjacent to the parents’ home with a courtyard in between. Apparently it was in this courtyard that Peter and John stood, warming their hands on a fire of coals while waiting to hear the results of the hearing. And when Jesus was taken from Annas to Caiaphas, it was most likely through the very same courtyard where the two disciples were seated. And entered in (eiserchomai), and sat down with the officers (huperetes) to see the outcome (telos) - John was known by the high priest and was able to get Peter entree into the courtyard. Little did Peter know this entree was providentially as it set the stage for the 3 "trials" of Peter! Peter wanted to know how this would end. Apparently he still does not completely grasp that Jesus must die as the sacrificial Lamb for the sins of the world. Mark 14:54+ gives us an added detail writing that Peter "was sitting with the officers and warming himself at the fire" - Jerusalem is elevated about 2500 feet above sea level and it can become cold at night in the spring. Sitting with the officers was a daring ploy in a dangerous place as he would soon discover. These officers would not have been Roman soldiers but were the "Temple police" under Jewish jurisdiction. At the fire is literally "toward the light" (fire is the word phos = light) or facing the fire. This small detail means that even though it was dark, his face would be well illuminated which would lead to discovery of his identity described in Mark 14:67+. Not smart Peter! But Jesus had given the prophecy and God took care of the details (cold night, need for fire, Peter facing the fire), so that it would be fulfilled perfectly.
Mateus 26
Morris - This was a distortion of Jesus' words in John 2:19+, but it was the best evidence the illegally assembled kangaroo court of Caiaphas could produce in this infamous travesty of a trial. (Defender's Study Bible) Matthew 26:62 The high priest stood up and said to Him, “Do You not answer? What is it that these men are testifying against You?” Do You not answer: Mt 27:12-14+ Mk 14:60+ Lu 23:9+ Jn 18:19-24+ Jn 19:9-11+ Related Passages: Matthew 27:12-14+ And while He was being accused by the chief priests and elders, He did not answer. 13 Then Pilate *said to Him, “Do You not hear how many things they testify against You?” 14 And He did not answer him with regard to even a single charge, so the governor was quite amazed. Luke 23:8-9+ Now Herod was very glad when he saw Jesus; for he had wanted to see Him for a long time, because he had been hearing about Him and was hoping to see some sign performed by Him. 9 And he questioned Him at some length; but He answered him nothing. John 19:9-11+ and he entered into the Praetorium again and *said to Jesus, “Where are You from?” But Jesus gave him no answer. 10 So Pilate *said to Him, “You do not speak to me? Do You not know that I have authority to release You, and I have authority to crucify You?” 11 Jesus answered, “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.” CAIAPHAS CRIES OUT FOR ANSWER The high priest (archiereus) stood up and said to Him, “Do You not answer? What is it that these men are testifying against You - CSB - ""Don't You have an answer to what these men are testifying against You?" NLT - "Well, aren't you going to answer these charges? What do you have to say for yourself?" Why would Jesus need to respond? Every charge brought against Him was false!
Mateus 26
Morris - Yet this same Peter, only a few hours before, had said: "If I should die with thee, I will not deny thee in any wise" (Mark 14:31+). We need to be careful before boasting of what we intend to do spiritually. QUESTION - What was the reason behind Peter's denial of Jesus? ANSWER - The story of Peter’s threefold denial of Christ is found in all four Gospel accounts: Matthew 26:69–74+, Mark 14:66–72+, Luke 22:55–62+, and John 18:15–18, 25–27+. But why would the chief of the disciples deny even knowing Him? There were two main reasons why Peter denied Jesus: weakness and fear. Peter’s denial was based partially on weakness, the weakness born of human frailty. After the Last Supper, Jesus took His disciples to the Garden of Gethsemane to await His arrest. He told them to stay awake and pray while He went off to pray alone. When He returned to them, He found them sleeping. He warned Peter to stay awake and pray because, although his spirit might be willing, his flesh was weak. But he fell asleep again, and, by the time the soldiers had come to arrest Jesus, it was too late to pray for the strength to endure the ordeal to come. No doubt his failure to appropriate the only means to shore up his own weakness—prayer—occurred to him as he was weeping bitterly after his denials. But Peter learned his lesson about being watchful, and he exhorts us in 1 Peter 5:8+, “Be on the alert, because your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.” Peter’s weakness had caused him to be “devoured” momentarily as he denied his Lord because he hadn’t been prepared through prayer and he underestimated his own weakness. A second reason for Peter’s failure was fear. To his credit, although all the others had fled (Mark 14:50+), Peter still followed Jesus after His arrest, but he kept his distance so as not to be identified with Him (Mark 14:54+). There’s no question that fear gripped him. From the courtyard, he watched Jesus being falsely accused, beaten, and insulted (Mark 14:57–66+). Peter was afraid Jesus would die, and he was fearful for his own life as well. The world hated Jesus, and Peter found that he was not prepared to face the ridicule and persecution that Jesus was suffering. Earlier, Jesus had warned His disciples as well as us today, “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first” (John 15:18; cf. Matthew 24:9). Peter quickly found he wasn’t nearly as bold and courageous as he had proclaimed, and in fear he denied the One who had loved him. We might well wonder why Jesus allowed Peter to fail so miserably and deny his Lord three times that night. Jesus revealed to Peter that Satan had asked for permission to sift Peter like wheat (Luke 22:31+). Jesus could have easily protected Peter and not allowed Satan to sift him, but Jesus had a higher goal. He was equipping Peter to strengthen his brothers (Luke 22:32+). Not only did Peter strengthen the other disciples, but he became the pillar of the early church in Jerusalem, exhorting and training others to follow the Lord Jesus (Acts 2). And he continues to this day to strengthen us through his epistles, 1 and 2 Peter. As with all our failures, God used Peter’s many failures, including his three denials of Christ, to turn him from Simon, a common man with a common name, into Peter, the Rock. Josh McDowell - Answers to tough questions skeptics ask about the Christian Faith QUESTION - Doesn’t Mark disagree with the other three Gospels about Peter’s denial of Jesus? ANSWER - A problem that has perplexed many careful students of the Bible concerns the accounts of the denial of Christ by Simon Peter. Jesus said to Peter, “Truly I say to you that this very night, before a cock crows, you shall deny Me three times” (Matthew 26:34+, NASB). Matthew records the fulfillment of this prediction, “And immediately the cock crew. And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly” (Matthew 26:74, 75+, KJV). The problem comes when we read Mark’s version, “and Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice” (Mark 14:30+, KJV). The fulfillment reads, concerning Peter, “He went out into the porch” (Mark 14:68+, KJV), and later, in verse 72, “the second time the cock crew.” Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said to him, “Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.” Was it before the cock crowed once or twice that Peter denied Jesus? Luke and John give the same basic account as Matthew, making Mark’s statement seemingly at variance with the other three. This problem is not as unresolvable as it may seem. It is quite reasonable that Jesus made both statements. He told Peter that he would deny Him before the crowing of the cock, and his denial would occur before it had crowed twice. What we have, therefore, is Mark recording the story in more detail. This would seem natural since Mark wrote his Gospel under the influence of Simon Peter, and it would be natural for him to further detail this story, seeing that he is one of the main characters. Thus we have all four evangelists recording that Jesus predicted Peter’s denial of Jesus, with Mark adding further details. A possible reconstruction would be the following: Jesus reveals to Peter that before the cock crows, Peter will deny Him three times. Peter, as was his way, probably objected loudly to this idea that he would deny his Lord. Jesus then in turn repeats His earlier prediction, along with a further note that before the cock crows twice Peter will deny Him three times. (This harmony fits well with Mark’s account in his Gospel.) Furthermore, the clause, “Before a cock crows, you shall deny Me three times” (Matthew 26:34+, NASB), is not contradicted by Mark relating that after Peter had denied Jesus the first time, the cock crowed. The cock crow was the sign that morning was soon to appear, and the phrase, “the time of the cock crow,” is another term for dawn. When Jesus is referring to the cock crowing twice, he is predicting a crowing of the cock in the middle of the night long before daybreak. “Observation over a period of 12 years in Jerusalem has confirmed that the cock crows at three distinct times, first about a half hour after midnight, a second time about an hour later, and a third time an hour after the second” (William Lane, The Gospel According to Mark, p. 543). When all the facts are considered, the problem of Peter’s denial is not at all a blatant contradiction, but can be harmonized. Matthew 26:71 When he had gone out to the gateway, another servant-girl saw him and *said to those who were there, “This man was with Jesus of Nazareth.” when: Mk 14:68,69+ Lu 22:58+ Jn 18:25-27+ This: Mt 26:61+ See additional comments on Matthew 26:34 regarding Peter's denial James Stalker's Devotional Commentary on Peter's Denial - THE GREAT DENIAL Mt 26:69–75+ Related Passages: Mark 14:68-69+ But he denied it, saying, “I neither know nor understand what you are talking about.” And he went out onto the porch. 69 The servant-girl saw him, and began once more to say to the bystanders, “This is one of them!” Luke 22:58+ A little later, another saw him and said, “You are one of them too!” But Peter said, “Man, I am not!” John 18:25+ Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. So they said to him, “You are not also one of His disciples, are you?” He denied it, and said, “I am not.” PETER'S SECOND ACCUSATION When he had gone out to the gateway (pulon) - Peter presumably begin to feel the heat (and not from the fire) so he moved to another location to avoid further scrutiny. Mark 14:68+ has "And he went out onto the porch." Another servant-girl saw him and *said to those who were there, “This man was with Jesus (Iesous) of Nazareth - The NASB adds "servant-girl" which is stated in Mark 14:69+ where she declares "This is one of them!" Notice this second servant girl does not directly address Peter, but those who were around him. Matthew 26:72 And again he denied it with an oath, “I do not know the man.” with an oath: Mt 5:34-36+ Ex 20:7+ Isa 48:1 Zec 5:3,4+ Zechariah 8:17 Mal 3:5+ Ac 5:3,4+ Man, I am not: Mt 26:74+ Lu 22:34+ See additional comments on Matthew 26:34 regarding Peter's denial James Stalker's Devotional Commentary on Peter's Denial - THE GREAT DENIAL Mt 26:69–75+ Related Passages: Mark 14:70+ But again he denied it. And after a little while the bystanders were again saying to Peter, “Surely you are one of them, for you are a Galilean too.” Luke 22:58+ A little later, another saw him and said, “You are one of them too!” But Peter said, “Man, I am not!” John 18:25+ Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. So they said to him, “You are not also one of His disciples, are you?” He denied it, and said, “I am not.” PETER'S SECOND DENIAL INCLUDES AN OATH And again he denied (arneomai) it with an oath (horkos) - This second denial is more emphatic as he invokes a divine witness, the idea being that if he lied, there would be a penalty for failing to keep this oath. “I (absolutely) do not know (eido) the man - Luke 22:58+ has ”But Peter said, “Man, I am not!” Use of the word "man" can even convey a sense of contempt. Stuart Weber on oath (horkos)- An oath in Jewish culture made God a party to the assertion, calling down the judgment of God if the words spoken were false. This was an ultimate oath of denial. Peter invited God’s curse on himself if he was not telling the truth when he said, I don’t know the man! (See Holman New Testament Commentary - Matthew)