Gospels

After false witnesses claim Jesus threatened the Temple, the High Priest speaks directly to Jesus, asking him to defend himself. This is to provide the illusion of legality (Matthew 26:62-63). The high priest directly asks Jesus: Are you the Messiah? Jesus does not answer the false accusations, in fulfillment of the Old Testament prophet of the Messiah as a suffering servant, quiet as a lamb sent to slaughter. See Isaiah 53:7; Psalm 38:13-14 (in response to friends’ betrayal, violence, etc.)

Caiaphas is frustrated by Jesus’s silence and tries to bind him with an oath: “I adjure you by the living God.” This is a rare word in the New Testament. The verb ἐξορκίζω is only used here and in Acts 19:13-14 (and then in a textual variant, ὁρκίζω appears in the text). The word is used “to compel someone to do something by invoking a transcendent power” (BDAG). This explains why it is used in the context of an exorcism in Acts 19. In LXX Gen 24:3, Abraham compels his servant to swear an oath to God to obtain a wife for Isaac. Remember, Jesus taught his disciples not to swear oaths (Matt 5:37). In this context, Jesus does not swear an oath on God, as the high priest demands. Yet in the following story, Peter denies the Lord with an oath.

The high priest again asks Jesus (under oath) to answer the question: Is Jesus really the Messiah or not? This forces Jesus to claim directly that he is the Messiah or swear by God that he is not the Messiah (destroying his credibility with his followers).

Jesus agrees with Caiaphas but goes well beyond a confirmation that he is the messiah by quoting two messianic passages and applying them to this situation (26:64). “It is as you have said” is the same ambiguous statement that Jesus used when Judas asked if he was the betrayer. In Mark, Jesus simply says, “I am” (Mark 14:62). Brown and Roberts suggest, “if you say so” (Matthew, THNTC, 244).

The second part of his answer shocks the temple leadership. Jesus combines Daniel 7:13 and Psalm 110:1 to claim they will not see him until he is standing in judgment as the Messiah. In Psalm 110:1 David is exalted to the right hand of God “until I make your enemies your footstool.” Jesus inserts the “Son of Man” as the subject, the Son of man will be seated at the right hand of Power (God). Jesus regularly referred to himself as the Son of Man during his public ministry, so he is saying, “I am going to be seated at the right hand of God,” like the Messiah in Psalm 110. Read the rest of Psalm 110, the enemies will be shattered on the day of wrath (verses 5-6 are particularly apocalyptic).

Who are the enemies when Jesus quotes this verse? The high priest, chief priests, and scribes. The Temple aristocracy has put themselves into the position of “enemies of God” (like Jeremiah 7). They will be shattered along with the nations “on the day of his wrath.” (Later in Acts, the apostles quote Psalm 2, “why do the nations rage,” and apply it to the persecution coming from the high priest).

Daniel 7:13 is one of the most important passages for understanding messianic ideas in the first century. Jesus has used the Son of Man as a title throughout his ministry. In the context of Daniel 7, the son of man comes on a cloud before the ancient of days to receive authority to judge the nations (the four beasts in Daniel 7:1-8).

Jesus, therefore, does not directly say, “why yes, I am the Messiah.” Instead, he claims to be the Danielic Son of Man who will stand at the right hand of the father in heaven and render justice on the nations who oppose God, inaugurating the eschatological age (including destroying and rebuilding the temple).

The reaction to Jesus’s claim is to charge him with blasphemy (Matthew 26:65-68).

When Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane by the temple guard, they led him to the High Priest, Caiaphas (26:57). This is often called a trial before the Sanhedrin as if the full ruling council of the Jews came together in the middle of the night for a formal trial. This is not the case. Rather than a meeting of the whole Sanhedrin, this is a hearing at the home of the High Priest, Caiaphas.

What is the Sanhedrin? The word refers to a Jewish council that met in Jerusalem and was something like a city council. The word comes from the Greek συνέδριον (synedrion). However, there are several possible Hebrew or Aramaic phrases used for the council (for example, term בֵּית דִּין (beit din, “house of judgment”). Sometimes it is simply called “the Great Assembly,” כְּנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה, keneseth haggedolah).

There is some question as to whether the Sanhedrin had an official meeting place in Jerusalem at this time. Josephus says there was a βουλή (boulē ) or βουλευτήριον in Jerusalem (JW 5.144; 6,354), referring to an official meeting place for the Sanhedrin. But Josephus uses the terms Sanhedrin and boulē quite loosely. It is an anachronism to think of the Sanhedrin as something like the US Congress. Based on the later and idealized Mishnah tractate Sanhedrin, the Sanhedrin had seventy members, but as few as twenty-three could make a quorum. Since only a few members are likely present, this is an informal hearing rather than a formal trial.

The meeting is at Caiaphas’s home, possibly in his courtyard with “the scribes and the elders.” This is a small group of Caiaphas’s close supporters gathered to figure out how to get rid of Jesus without getting blamed for it!  This is not an official trial. It is more like politicians making a shady backroom deal.

They did not meet in an official meeting place (if there was one) or call all the council members together because that would give the meeting (and decision) an official look. This meeting is “off the record” to give the political leaders “plausible deniability” when Jesus is executed. Remember, they fear the crowds and seek to arrest him quietly (Matthew 26:3-5).

They do not pretend this is a trial to determine if Jesus is guilty or not; 26:59 says they are looking for false testimony to put Jesus to death. They are not looking for facts, but for a pretext to do what they have already decided must be done.

It is possible this secret trial with no real witnesses alludes to Psalm 27:12 (LXX 26:12) and/or Psalm 35:11 (LXX Psalm 34:11).

Psalm 27:12 (ESV) Give me not up to the will of my adversaries; for false witnesses have risen against me, and they breathe out violence.

Psalm 35:11 (ESV) Malicious witnesses rise up; they ask me of things that I do not know.

When Jesus was arrested and led to the high Priest, Peter followed at a distance and remained in the courtyard of Caiaphas’s home “to see the end” (26:58). This is ironic: Peter was called to follow Jesus. He is still doing so, but not as disciple willing to die alongside his master.

After a disciple tries (and fails) to defend Jesus, Jesus distances himself from a violent uprising against Rome or the Temple. In fact, the arrest of Jesus fulfills prophecy.

Jesus could defend himself if he wanted to. He says he could ask his Father to send twelve legions of angels (26:53-54). This verse is unique to Matthew’s version of this story. A Roman legion was six thousand soldiers plus auxiliaries, so twelve legions would be a massive force in comparison to the group assembled to arrest him. It is better to see this as an intentional contrast to the twelve disciples who (allegedly) defend Jesus. He has twelve disciples, but he could have twelve legions of angelic soldiers if he asked for them.

In Daniel 7:10, the Ancient of Days sits on a fiery throne to judge the nations, surrounded by “a thousand thousands, ten thousand times ten thousand” servants. Since the Son of Man appears before the Ancient of Days and is given authority to judge, he has command of this angelic host. 2 Kings 6:17 is the classic example of an angelic army sent to defend God’s people. When Assyria threatened to destroy Hezekiah in Jerusalem, God sends an angel to destroy 185,000 Assyrian soldiers (2 Kings 19:35-26). Daniel 10:13 also describes angelic warfare. Angelic armies are also common in other Second Temple literature.

Testament of Levi 3.3 In the second [heaven] are the armies arrayed for the day of judgment to work vengeance on the spirits of error and of Beliar.

1QM 7:5-6 All these shall be volunteers for war, perfect in spirit and in body, and ready for the day of vengeance. And every man who has not cleansed himself of his ‘spring’ on the day of battle will not go down with them, for the holy angels are together with their armies.

Building on the scene from Daniel 7:10, In Matthew 25:31, the Son of Man will come with all the angels with him to judge the nations. Jude 14-15 quotes 1 Enoch, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones to execute judgment on all.”  In Revelation 19:14, the rider on the white horse leads the armies of heaven into battle against the armies of the beast.

Jesus asks the arresting soldiers, “Am I a rebel?” (26:55). Older translations use thief, but the word could be translated as “terrorist.” The word (λῃστής) refers to a robber or a highwayman (BDAG). The same word is used to describe Barabbas as well as the two thieves crucified along with Jesus. Barabbas appears to be more than a robber, but a terrorist and a rebel.

Jesus says that he is not one of these “rebels,” yet in the following stories, Jesus is crucified with robbers and mocked by robbers. He is saying “I am not a rebel, yet you are going to treat me like one anyway.” They could have been arrested at any time since he was teaching in public at the temple for the past five days.

As Jesus is arrested, the disciples fulfill Jesus’ own prophecy from a few hours earlier, that they would all desert him (26:56). Why does the arresting crowd let the disciples run off?  Jesus is the focus of the arrest; the High Priest understands that Jesus is the irreplaceable leader of the movement (Nolland, Matthew, 1109). Perhaps the High Priest did not have much respect for Jesus’s disciples. There is no need to take a threat from unschooled fishermen from Galilee seriously. The aristocratic priests probably think Jesu’s followers are a “basket of deplorables.”

Peter does completely abandon Jesus since he is follows the arresting Caiaphas’s home, where he will deny the Lord three times before dawn.

After Judas identifies Jesus, the temple guard takes Jesus into custody (Matthew 26:47-50). Although Jesus willingly goes to the cross, at least one of his disciples draws a sword, ready to defend Jesus with violence. Who is the disciple who defended Jesus? What did he think he was doing?

Wikipedia. 2022. “Malchus.” Wikimedia Foundation.

This is a good passage to observe the growth of the Gospel traditions. In Mark 14:51, “one of those who stood by” drew his sword and attacked. In Matthew 26:47, it is “one of those who were with Jesus.” Luke tells us that the disciples took weapons to the garden, two small swords (Luke 22:38), and that the disciples saw the betrayer, “they said, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?” (22:49). Luke also adds Jesus healed the man’s ear (Luke 22:51). It is not until John 18:10 that we learn the only disciple to defend Jesus was Peter, and the servant’s name was Malchus.

In Matthew, the story of Jesus’s arrest is limited to emphasize Jesus’s own actions and his refusal of a violent defense. Since Matthew 16, the disciples have been confused about what their role in the Kingdom would be. They thought the kingdom would be political, it was not. They all swore loyalty to Jesus and were prepared to fight to defend him and help him establish the kingdom.

A disciple cuts the ear off the servant of the high priest (26:51). The arresting crowd was expecting trouble. They were armed when they entered the garden to arrest Jesus. Sometimes pastors make fun of Peter’s impetuous attack, which fails laughably. Wilson says this is another example of apostolic failure, citing Matthew 5:38-39. Jesus taught the disciples not to resist persecution (see also Matthew 10:9, don’t carry a sword; Wilson, Matthew 13-28, 365).

However, Peter may have intended to cut the ear off the servant of the priest. By mutilating his ear, he would no longer be allowed to enter the temple courts to serve as a priest. Leviticus 21:16-24 lists a series of blemishes that disqualify a priest from service in the temple, including “one who has a mutilated face.” Josephus says Antigonus cut off Hyrcanus’s ears to disqualify him from the high priesthood (Antiq. 14.13.10, 366).

John 18:10 states Peter cut off his right ear; assuming Peter is right-handed, he attacked the servant from behind. Again, this is either a laughable failure to defend Jesus or a calculated attack to mutilate the High Priest’s servant. John 18:10 add the details that Peter attacked the servant, who is identified as Malchus, the servant of the high priest. In John 18:26-27, a relative of Malchus confronts Peter, leading to his third denial.

Malchus is a servant of the high priest. He may be there in an official capacity as the representative of the High Priest. However, BDAG says the name Malchus is “almost entirely of Gentiles, in fact of Nabataean Arabs,” so “Malchus may have been an Arab slave” (JoAnn Ford Watson, “Malchus (Person),” ABD 4:487).  If so, it does not matter if he was mutilated.  Luke adds the detail that Jesus healed the man’s ear (Luke 22:51). This would mean he could continue as a servant of the high priest and participate in temple worship.

What is remarkable is the disciple does not attack Judas, the betrayer. This could be more failure on the part of the disciples (misidentifying the source of the betrayal), or understanding the servant represents the high priest.

Jesus tells his disciples to put away the swords (26:52). To his disciples, Jesus tells them if they use the sword, they will die by the sword. The disciples were ready to risk their lives to defend Jesus, as James, John (Matt 20:22), and Peter (Matt 26:35) swore. But Jesus commands them to stand down, step aside and allow him to be peacefully arrested.

“Those that live by the sword will die by the sword.” Does this passage teach pacifism? These words have inspired Christian pacifism for centuries. Is Jesus teaching that the true followers of Christ should follow him in his example of complete pacifism? Those that would say that Christians are not to be total pacifists point out that Jesus says, “put the sword in its place,” indicating that he was not to get rid of it all together but use it at the appropriate time.

Jesus is clear: he is not a rebel, and he is not leading a rebellion (whatever his followers might think. If his followers behave like the (later) Zealots, they will die like the Zealots.

One of the most famous scenes in the Gospels is Judas kissing Jesus when the Temple guard comes to arrest Jesus. This “Judas Kiss” becomes proverbial for betrayal. Why does Judas kiss Jesus?

Judas slipped out at some point during the Passover meal to bring a crowd to where Jesus was praying with his disciples (Matthew 26:47). The “large crowd” is Jewish. Luke 22:52 mentions “officers of the temple”; John 18:3 adds the “officers from the chief priests.”  It is possible that some Roman guards were sent along to ensure peace. The Romans usually increased police activities during Passover since there were large crowds in Jerusalem. If this is the case, Pilate may have had some information about the arrest of Jesus prior to the trial and may have discussed the issue with his wife. She dreams of Jesus according to Matthew 27:19.

This is a “delegation of temple police” (Davies and Allison, Matthew, 507), but the high priest sometimes used some rough types to enforce tithes. The High priest Ananias (48-59) used “thugs” to enforce tithes, and Josephus says some of his servants were “wicked men” (Antiq., 20.181; 206-207). They are well-armed with swords and clubs. A sword (μάχαιρα) is the same word the disciple will use to attack the servant of the high priest. Jesus will point out that he is not a rebel, so there is no need for a show of force!

Judas kisses Jesus to confirm his identity (26:48). Why was a signal important? Even though Jesus had been publicly teaching in the Temple, it is unlikely that anyone would know him by sight in the relative darkness of the torchlight. There were no photographs, and the people making the actual arrest may never have seen Jesus in the temple.

The signal was something more than a “normal” greeting. He greets Jesus and kisses him. This kiss is an elaborate show of affection; the same terms are used to describe the father’s kiss at the prodigal son’s return and of the prostitute that washes Jesus’ feet with her tears. In the book of Acts, it is the same word used for the Ephesians church leaders after Paul’s farewell speech to them. It was not normal for a student to approach and kiss his master without permission. This is a bold insulting move.

Judas again refers to Jesus as rabbi while making this insulting signal to the arresting Jews. In Matthew, only Judas calls Jesus “rabbi” as opposed to Lord. R. T. France sees this act as a public repudiation of Jesus and his teaching. Old Testament allusions are thin for Judas kiss. When Joab assassinates Amasa, he made like he was going to kiss the general and then stabs him in the stomach (2 Sam 20:9-10). Proverbs 27:6 says, “profuse are the kisses of an enemy.”

Whether this is an insult or not, Jesus’ response is controlled: “Friend, do what you came for” (26:49). The “friend” is unusual, maybe something like “buddy” in American slang. There is no hint of sarcasm (and the older translation “comrade” does not work in contemporary English). The word is often used for an actual friend or companion, even a “drinking buddy” (BrillDAG). Jesus may want to remind Judas of the Passover meal they shared a few hours earlier and Jesus’s prediction that Judas would betray him.

Only Matthew uses this word to refer to Judas. Significantly, the king in the wedding banquet parable used the same word when addressing the unprepared guest (25:12). In the parable of the workers in the vineyard. The master addresses the complaining servant as a “friend.”

“Do what you came for” (ἐφʼ ὃ πάρει) is ambiguous. This could be understood as a question, can be translated as a question (as in the KJV, “wherefore art thou come?”), or as a statement, maybe roughly equivalent to “let’s get this over with.” As a question, it could have the sense of “you kiss me and call me rabbi? “Is that what you came here to do?”  John 13:27 has, “whatever you are going to do, do it quickly.” The Good News Bible has “Be quick about it!” This might sound testy, but it captures the moment well. Jesus has prepared himself through the prayers in the garden, now the moment is there, and he wants to move along toward the ultimate conclusion n the cross.

The arrest happens because Jesus allows it to happen (Nolland, Mathew, 1110). A central theme in this passage, and in the whole trial and crucifixion story, is that Jesus goes to his death as a humble and submissive servant, giving himself over to the death of the cross. Jesus knows why Judas is there, so his greeting is for the disciples and the arresting crowd to hear. Jesus is surrendering and not resisting arrest at all. Like John 12:27, this is the very thing he came into the world to do, so why would Jesus resist arrest? But at least one of the disciples does not “stand down” and allow Jesus to be arrested without a fight.