Mark 14

Mark 14:1-9

**13. THE ANOINTING AT BETHANY 14:1-9

TEXT 14:1-9**

Now after two days was the feast of the passover and the unleavened bread: and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him with subtlety, and kill him: for they said, Not during the feast, lest haply there shall be a tumult of the people. And while he was in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat there came a woman having an alabaster cruse of ointment of spikenard very costly; and she brake the cruse, and poured it over his head. But there were some that had indignation among themselves, saying, To what purpose hath this waste of the ointment been made? For this ointment might have been sold for above three hundred pence, and given to the poor. And they murmured against her. But Jesus said, Let her alone; why trouble ye her? She hath wrought a good work on me. For ye have the poor always with you, and whensoever ye will ye can do them good: but me ye have not always. She hath done what she could: she hath anointed my body beforehand for the burying, And verily I say unto you, Wheresoever the gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, that also which this woman hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:1-9

If the feast of the Passover was held on Thursday (as traditionally represented) then this plot was made on Tuesday or Wednesdaydo you agree with this thought? Discuss.

Why did they want to kill Him?

When did the feast of unleavened bread begin? How long did it last?

Please read John 12:2-8. When did this anointing take place? Isn-’t there a break in the chronology? Discuss.

Read Luke 7:36-50please notice the differences in the two anointings.

Read Matthew 26:6-13note the additions Matthew makes to Mark’s account.

Why refer to Simon as a leper; was he a leper at the time of the anointing?

We know by reading John’s account who the woman waswho was it?

Was this a common meal? A celebration? What is meant by as he sat at meat?

Why was the ointment in an alabaster container?

What is pure nard?

How could she pour it if she broke the container?

Wasn-’t it messy to thus be covered with this ointment?

Was the complaint of waste a justifiable one? Discuss.

In what sense were they to let her alone?

Jesus accepted the anointing in spite of criticismdoes this offer some encouragement to us?

Jesus says something about good intentions vs. good works, in His words of Mar 14:7what is it?

Why say she has done what she could?

Did Mary intend a pre-burial anointing by her actions?

How have the words of Jesus in Mark 14:9 been fulfilled?

COMMENT

TIMEMark has placed the account of the anointing out of its chronological order. The preceding incident was dated Tuesday, April 4, A.D. 30. This event, instead of following, occurred on Saturday, April 1st, three days before, the day before the Lord’s entry into Jerusalem. It was during the Lord’s stay at Bethany on his way to the Holy City. The consultation of the priests referred to in Mark 14:1-2, was on Tuesday evening, April 4, the same day as Jesus-’ predictions.

PLACESThe consultation of the priests and scribes took place in Jerusalem, probably in the palace of Caiaphas. The anointing and feast were at Bethany, the home of Lazarus and his sisters, the beloved retreat of the Saviour two miles east of Jerusalem, on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives, on the highway that led to Jericho and the country east of the Jordan.

PARALLEL ACCOUNTSThe plotting against Jesus (Mark 14:1-2; Mark 14:10-11) is recorded also, Matthew 26:1-5; Matthew 26:14-16; Luke 22:1-6. The supper (Mark 14:3-9) in Matthew 26:6-13; John 12:2-8.

LESSON OUTLINE1. The Conspiracy of the Rulers, 2. The Lord Anointed. 3. The Lord’s Commendation.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE CONSPIRACY OF THE RULERS, Mark 14:1-2.

The Chief Priests Hold Counsel. Mark 14:1; Matthew 26:2; Luke 22:1; John 11:55.

Fear of the People. Mark 14:2; Matthew 26:5; Luke 22:2.

II. THE LORD ANOINTED, Mark 14:3-5.

The Ointment Poured on His Head. Mark 14:3; Matthew 26:6; John 12:1; John 12:3.

The Indignation of Disciples, Mark 14:4; Matthew 26:8; John 12:4.

The Charge of Waste, Mark 14:5; Matthew 26:9; John 12:5.

III. THE LORD’S COMMENDATION, Mark 14:6-9.

A Good Work. Mark 14:6; Matthew 26:10.

Have the Poor Always. Mark 14:7; Matthew 26:11; John 12:8.

The Lord Anointed for Burial. Mark 14:8; Matthew 26:12.

The Woman’s Deed Praised in All the World. Mark 14:9; Matthew 26:13.

INTRODUCTION

We have before us here a simple-hearted, loving woman, who has had no subtle questions of criticism about matter of duty and right, but only loves her Lord’s person with a love that is probably a kind of mystery to herself, which love she wants somehow to express, She comes, therefore, with her box of ointment, having sold we know not what article or portion of her property to buy it, for it was very costly, and pours it on the Saviour’s headjust here to encounter, for the first time, scruples, questions, and rebuffs of argument.Bushnell. John says that this was six days before the Passover. From the order in which Matthew and Mark mention it, it would have been supposed that it Was but two days before the Passover, and after the cleansing of the temple. But it is to be observed, (1) That Matthew and Mark often neglect the exact order of the event that they record; (2) That they do not affirm at what time this was. They leave it indefinite, saying that while Jesus was in Bethany he was anointed by Mary; (3) That Mark introduced it here for the purpose of giving a connected account of the conduct of Judas. Judas murmured at the waste of the ointment (John 12:4), and one of the effects of his indignation, it seems, was to betray his Lord.Barnes.

I.

THE CONSPIRACY OF THE RULERS.

Mark 14:1. After two dap was the feast of the pas over. It was Tuesday evening with us, but after Wednesday began with the Jews a new day began at sunset. Two days after would bring Friday, the day the Passover was slain. This date locates the time of the meeting of the rulers, not of the feast at the house of Simon the leper. Of unleavened bread. The Passover meal was the beginning of the feast of unleavened bread, which lasted for seven days. The whole paschal week was termed the feast of unleavened bread; the Passover was, strictly speaking, the 15th of Nisan, the great day of the feast. The chief priests and the scribes (members of the Sanhedrim). The meeting of the chief priests and the scribes for consultation was at the palace of Caiaphas, the high priest (Matthew 26:3), (which tradition places on the Hill of Evil Counsel). From the fact that the council met at the palace of Caiaphas, and also that its session was in the evening, we may infer that it was an extraordinary meeting, held for secret consultation. This plotting was begun at least three months before, after the raising of Lazarus; and more recently the triumphal entry, the driving out the money-changers from the temple, the parables spoken against the Jewish leaders, seem to have enraged them, so that they felt that something must be done immediately to put a stop to his career. No doubt there was long debate. Some certainly opposed the putting him to death, as Joseph of Arimathea (Luke 23:51), and Nicodemus (John 7:50-51), who were members of the Sanhedrim. For an instance of the debate in a like meeting for the same purpose, see John 11:46-51.P. The first step in putting Christ to death was taken by the religious teachers of the Jewish nation. The very men who ought to have welcomed the Messiah were the men who conspired to kill him. By craft. With subtlety. That is, by some secret plan that would secure possession of him without exciting the opposition of the people.

Mark 14:2. Not on the feast dayAs it was a time when vast multitudes were present from all parts of the land, and the Jews of Galilee and Perea being more friendly to Jesus than those of the capital, might make a disturbance if he were publicly arrested. Josephus computes that three million persons attended the Passover which is not incredible, seeing that the nation was expected to assemble at this greatest of the festivals. The acclamations on the Sunday before, as the Lord entered Jerusalem, demonstrated the favor he enjoyed with the people.

II.

THE LORD ANOINTED.

This anointing is not to be confounded with the anointing mentioned in Luke 7:36-50. There is nothing in common between them, except the name of the householder, Simon; and this was a very common name in Palestine. The occasion, the time, the parties, and the spiritual significance are all different. The repetition of the incident is not at all strange. An act of this kind, which had been once commended by our Lord (as in Luke), was very likely to have been repeated.Abbott.

Mark 14:3. Being in Bethany. See Time. Jesus arrived in Bethany Friday; and the supper was Saturday evening, just after the close of the Jewish sabbath, and, as John expressly states (John 12:1), the evening before the triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Bethan. A village about two miles east of Jerusalem (John 11:18), being on the other side of the Mount of Olives. It was the home of Mary and Martha, where Christ was wont to visit when in Jerusalem (Luke 10:38-41; Matthew 21:17; Mark 11:11-12). It was the scene of the resurrection of Lazarus (John, chap. 11), and of Christ’s own ascension (Luke 24:50). It is not mentioned in the Old Testament.Abbott, Simon the Leper. Perhaps he had been healed of his leprosy by Jesus. He dwelt in Bethany. It is natural to suppose that he had made Jesus a feast in gratitude. According to a tradition, he was the father of Lazarus; according to others, he was the husband of Martha, or Martha was his widow. Very likely he was in some way related to the family of Lazarus. Mary and Martha served (John 12:2). There came a woman. Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus (John 12:3), not the woman in Luke 7, who was a sinner. The latter person is generally, but without reason, identified with Mary Magdalene, and the three women confounded.Schaff. Having an alabaster box, or flask, Called an alabaster; as we say, a glass. These alabastra, or unguent flasks, were usually made of the Oriental or onyx alabaster, with long narrow necks, which let the oil escape drop by drop, and could easily be broken. Ointment of spikenard. The American portion of the Revision Committee would render this pure nard (with marginal reading, or liquid nard). Spikenard, from which the ointment was made, was an aromatic herb of the valerian family. It was imported from an early age from Arabia, India, and the Far East. The ointment of nard was highly esteemed, and was a costly luxury. Very precious. It was the costliest anointing oil of antiquity, and was sold throughout the Roman Empire, where it fetched a price that put it beyond any but the wealthy. Mary had bought a vase or flask of it containing twelve ounces (John 12:3).Cambridge Bible. The three hundred pence given as its selling value (Mark 14:5) would make it worth about $300 in our money. The value of the ointment only expressed the depth of her love. She brake the box; i.e., she broke the narrow neck of the small flask, and poured the perfume, first on the head and then on the feet of Jesus (John 12:3), the Oriental custom of reclining at table made the latter easier than the former. Poured it on his head. Anointing with oil was a primitive custom of consecration (Genesis 18:18). It was then used for the ritual of consecration of priests; occasionally, also, of prophets. The anointing of the head was also a distinction which was conferred upon the guest of honor (Luke 7:46)not only among the Jews, but generally in the East, and among the ancients. Mary may have intended only to show this honor; but this action symbolized Christ’s Messiahship, and had a deeper significance, as our Lord points out in Mark 14:8.

Mark 14:4. Some that had indignation. Matthew (Matthew 26:8) states that the disciples had indignation; Mark reports that some had indignation; John (John 12:4), as knowing who had whispered the first word of blame, fixes the uncharitable judgment on Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son. The narrow, covetous soul of the traitor could see nothing in the lavish gift but a waste. His indignation, partly real, partly affected, was perhaps honestly shared by some of his fellow-disciples. Why was this waste? Worldly men would of course agree with the idea of Judas, that money laid out in the cherishing or expression of mere devotional sentiment is waste. There is no waste in anything that helps the soul.

Mark 14:5. Might have been sold for more than three hundred pence. A penny here is the denarius, a Roman coin worth from fifteen to seventeen cents, or as the values of silver and gold were much greater then than now, about one dollar at the present time. The three hundred pence would make about forty-five dollars in silver, or at present, would amount to about $300. And have been given to the poor. The true friends of the poor, who give most and do most for them, will always be found among those who do most for Christ. It is the successors of Mary of Bethany, and not of Judas Iscariot, who really care for the poor.Ryle. Murmured against her. Scolded her.De Wette. Addressed her harshly.

III.

THE LORD’S COMMENDATION.

Mark 14:6. Jesus said, Let her alone. Let her alone, is the language of sharp rebuke. Christ was indignant at the hypocrisy which made a pretended consideration of the poor an excuse for attacking and condemning an act of love toward himself. The answer of Jesus indicates the woman’s cordial, unstudied sacrifice. Why trouble ye her? This indicates that Mary was herself abashed and downcast by the criticism of the twelve. Perhaps, as Maurice says, She could not herself have answered Judas Iscariot’s complaining question.Abbott. She hath wrought a good work on me. Christ measured the moral quality of the act by the motive, the disciples by its seeming utility.

Mark 14:7. Ye have the poor with you always. You will have plenty of opportunities to aid them; and the more they did for their Master, the more they would do for the poor, for the poor are left in his stead, and through them will be expressed the increased love of the Master.

Mark 14:8. She hath done what she could. This praise is more precious than the ointment, coming from such a one as Christ, It is like that which he passed upon the poor widow: She hath cast in all that she had. Blessed are they of whom the Master will say, They have done what they could, Come aforeband to anoint my body to the burying. She had anticipated the hour of my decease; anointing my body before death, and thus preparing it for burial. It is worthy of note that this was all the anointing which our Lord’s body received from the hand of Mary or her female friends, inasmuch as he had risen before they reached the sepulchre with their spices.

Mark 14:9. Wheresoever this gospel. The tidings of salvation, with special ref erence to Christ’s death, just alluded to.Schaf. Preached throughout the whole world. A prediction of the world-wide preaching of his death. This also that she hath done. a memorial. Fulfilled to the letter. It is right to record and remember the good deeds of those who love Christ; but when the desire to be put on record enters, the ointment is spoiled. This is the only case where such a promise is made; therefore the incident has a weighty lesson, and holds up a noble example,Schaff.

FACT QUESTIONS 14:1-9

Is it true that Mark placed the anointing out of its chronological order? When did the anointing occur?

When and where did the consultation of the priests take place?

How did Mary obtain this costly ointment?

What possible purpose did Mark have in introducing the incident of the anointing at the time he did?

Who did the most murmuring? Why?

On what day of the week was the Passover slain? What day and month of the Jewish calendar?

When was the feast of unleavened bread observed?

How does Matthew 26:3 help us in our understanding of the plot of the chief priests and scribes?

What prompted the thought that something must be done immediately to stop Jesus?

Who would oppose putting Him to death?

What is meant in the word craft or subtlety?

What group of Jews were especially friendly toward Jesus? How many Jews in Jerusalem for the Passover?

How could the commending given by our Lord as related in Luke 7:36-50 relate to this incident?

At what precise time was the feast held? Cf. John 12:1.

Three facts about Bethany:

Who was Simon the leper? Why the feast?

The woman (Mary) really never had a box at allwhat was it?

From what plant was the ointment made? From where was it imported?

How many ounces in the flask of Mary?

B. W. Johnson states the ointment was worth $300 in 1889what would be the value today?

In what way did she break the jar?

What special honor was associated with anointing the head?

Who was involved in the indignation?

There was no wasteexplain why.

Who really cares for the poor?

What sharp rebuke was delivered by our Lord? Why?

Was Mary affected by the criticism of the twelve? In what way? What answer did she have to Judas-’ question?

How did Jesus measure the moral quality of the act? How did the disciples measure it?

What is meant by the expression ye have the poor with you always?

What praise is more precious than the ointment?

Did Mary really anticipate our Lord’s death and come to aforehand anoint his body?

What prediction is made of the world-wide preaching of the death of Christ?

When is the ointment spoiled?

Mark 14:1-52

SUMMARY 14:1-52

This section exhibits, on the one hand, the evil purpose and wicked plottings of the enemies of Jesus, and on the other, the self-sacrifice with which he prepared himself for the fate which he foresaw, and to which he voluntarily submitted. It shows, by the counsel of the scribes and priests (Mark 14:1-2), by the agreement with Judas (Mark 14:10-11), by the remark concerning Judas at the supper-table (Mark 14:17-21), and by the manner of the arrest (Mark 14:44; Mark 14:48-49), that his death was sought for through malice and corruption. It shows, on the other hand, by the remarks of Jesus at the supper in Bethany (Mark 14:3-9), by his statement when instituting the Supper (Mark 14:22-25), and by his prayer in the garden (Mark 14:36), that he submitted voluntarily, though at the cost of unspeakable mental suffering, to a sacrificial death for the sins of the world. This last fact shows that he was impelled by a purpose which could originate in no human soul, and which no human being could under such circumstances maintain: for what mere human being, acquainted with the true God, could suppose that his own death would be an atonement for the sins of the world, and, having formed a purpose to die for this object, could maintain that purpose through such sufferings as Jesus endured? Here is an unmistakable mark of the divinity which dwelt in Jesus, giving direction to both his life and his death. (J. W. McGarvey)

Mark 14:10-11

**14. THE TREACHERY OF JUDAS Matthew 14:10-11

TEXT 14:10-11**

And Judas Iscariot, he that was one of the twelve, went away unto the chief priests, that he might deliver him unto them. And they, when they heard it, were glad, and promised to give him money. And he sought how he might conveniently deliver him unto them.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:10-11

Was the betrayal of Judas at all related to the incident which just preceded it? Discuss. Cf. Matthew 26:14.

What possible motive or motives did Judas have in the betrayal? Suggest at least two.

Just what agreement did Judas make with the chief priests?

Did the priests pay him at the time of his agreement with them?

How could these religious men act in such an irreligious mannerdiscuss the chief contributing cause to such a condition.

Did the betrayal of Judas include delivering Jesus into their hands?

COMMENT

TIMELate Saturday evening, April 1, A.D. 30. PLACESTemplethe house of Caiaphas.

PARALLEL ACCOUNTSMat 26:14-16; Luke 22:3-6.

OUTLINE1. The man of the betrayal, Mark 14:10 a. 2. Those who paid, Mark 14:10 b - Mark 14:11 a, 3. Waiting and watching, Mark 14:11 b.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE MAN OF THE BETRAYAL, Mark 14:10 a.

Judas Iscariot.

One of the Twelve.

II.

THOSE WHO PAID, Mark 14:10 b - Mark 14:11 a.

Chief priests.

They were pleased.

Money promised.

III.

WAITING AND WATCHING, Mark 14:11 b.

Waiting as a supposed friend.

Watching as a traitor for the best time to deliver Him up.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

I.

THE MAN OF THE BETRAYAL, Mark 14:11 b.

Mark 14:10-11Volunteering to betray. The and connects this with the preceding paragraph, not only historically but psychologically. His present action was (immediately) determined by the gift of Mary and the mild rebuke of the Master.

To deliver up Christ to his enemies. Whether he fully realized how much was involved as a result of this step is uncertain. He might imagine that not death, but the checking of his Master upon the career he had marked out, would ensue. But there is recklessness as to any consequences, provided he himself should be no loser. In robbing the alms from the bag, he was guilty of a breach of trust; in this new development of his master passion the unfaithfulness culminated. It is manifest that the spiritual side of Christ’s ministry had for him no value. It was only the earthly rewards that might attend on discipleship that made it attractive to him. Was it to force the hand of the ideal, unpractical Christ that he sought to deliver him up? A miracle of deliverance might then result in a realization greater than his most brilliant hopes could depict, and thus his (passing) act of villainy be condoned. Or was it in sheer disgust and desperation respecting the course affairs seemed to be taking that he conceived of his deed? We cannot tell. In a mind like that of Judas there are depths beyond depths.

II.

THOSE WHO PAID, Mark 14:10 b - Mark 14:11 a.

That selfishness was at the root we may be sure. Avarice is the direction it took. He proposed money, and asked how much (Matthew 26:15). Thirty pieces of silver a small sum? Yes, but he might be at that moment in real or fancied need, or the amount might be looked upon as a mere instalment of further reward, when he might have made himself useful, perhaps necessary, to the rulers. Fear of consequences, if he followed Christ further in the direction in which he was moving, may also have influenced his mind. And there can be no question as to the immediate impulse of wounded feeling, through baffled dishonesty and the sense that Christ saw through him. Falling short of the higher illumination and power of the Spirit, he was at the mercy of his own base, earthly nature.

III.

WAITING AND WATCHING, Mark 14:11 b.

The background to all this mental and spiritual movement on the part of Judas is the attitude of the chief priests and scribes, seeking how they might take Christ. But for opportunity afforded the treachery of Judas might have remained an aimless mood or a latent disposition, instead of becoming a definite purpose. In this consists the danger of unspiritual states of mind: they subject those in whom they are indulged to the tyranny of passing influences and circumstances.M. (Bickerstetb)

FACT QUESTIONS 14:10-11

Show the psychological connection of this act to the gift of Mary and the rebuke of Jesus.

Does one sin lead to another in the life of Judas? Discuss.

What had no attractionwhat had great attraction in the life of Judas?

How could it be said by some that Judas was attempting to force the hand of an unpractical Christ?

Show how selfishness turned to avarice.

Show how fear of consequences in following Christ and wounded feelings could have contributed to the motive for betrayal.

Except for something the treachery of Judas might have remained an aimless mood or a latent dispositionwhat was it?

Please note the vast import of this for us.

Mark 14:12-26

**D. THURSDAY: THE LORD’S SUPPER

TEXT 14:12-26**

And on the first day of unleavened bread, when they sacrificed the passover, his disciples say unto him. Where wilt thou that we go and make ready that thou mayest eat the passover? And he sendeth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, Go into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him; and wheresoever he shall enter in, say to the good man of the house, The Master saith, Where is my guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples? And he will himself shew you a large upper room furnished and ready: and there make ready for us, And the disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover. And when it was evening he cometh with the twelve. And as they sat and were eating, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One of you shall betray me, even he that eateth with me. They began to be sorrowful, and began to say unto him one by one, Is it I? And he said unto them, It is one of the twelve, he that dippeth with me in the dish. For the Son of man goeth, even as it is written of him: but woe unto that man through whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had not been born. And as they were eating, he took bread, and when he had blessed, he brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take ye: this is my body. And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the covenant, which is shed for many. Verily I say unto you, I will no more drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God. And when they had sung a hymn, they went out unto the mount of Olives.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:12-26

Just when was the first day of unleavened bread? i.e., according to our timeand according to Jewish time?

Who was responsible for sacrificing the passover lamb?

Had Jesus eaten the passover with His disciples before this occasion?

Why did the disciples feel responsible for preparation of the passover? How elaborate was the preparation?

Where were Jesus and His disciples when He gave the instructions for the Passover preparation?

Who were the two disciples?

Was there anything strange about a man carrying a pitcher of water?

What was the purpose of these rather strange instructions?

Why was the householder so willing to offer his large upper room? (There is a good deal of traditional information as to who owned the upper roomread some of it.)

What was the reaction of the disciples when they saw the words of Jesus fulfilled?

At what time was the Passover eaten?

Why did Jesus predict His own betrayal? Be specific.

Did any of the disciples feel they were capable of betraying Him?

How specific was Jesus in pointing out His betrayer?

What is meant by the expression dipping bread in the same dish with me.?

If Jesus was betrayed in fulfillment of prophecy why blame the one who did it?

How could a man be better off if he was never born?

What is involved in blessing bread?

What type of bread was broken? What had it symbolically represented before Jesus used it to represent His body?

By reading all the accounts of the Lord’s Supper attempt to reconstruct the order of service in the passover feast.

If there was just one cup in the institution of the Lord’s Supper how is it we use more than one?

Some can believe the bread underwent a change when Jesus said This is my bodythe fruit of the vine did the same when He said this is my blood. How can such a thought be gathered from the text?

Did Jesus drink fermented grape juice?

Did the apostles have any idea what covenant was meant when Jesus referred to the blood of the covenant?

When were the words of promise in Mark 14:25 fulfilled?

Why sing a hymn?

What thoughts filled their hearts as they departed?

COMMENT

TIME.Thursday evening, April 6 (14th Nisan), A.D. 30. With the Jews the 15th Nisan had begun. PLACE.Jerusalem, in an upper room with the disciples.

PARALLEL ACCOUNTS.Matthew 26:17-25; Luke 22:7-18; Luke 22:21-23; John 13:21-26.

INTERVENING HISTORY.Christ spent Tuesday eve, all day Wednesday, and part of Thursday in retirement at Bethany, it is supposed, The historians, however, do not indicate how or where Wednesday was spent, but on Thursday the Lord came in from Bethany to eat the passover, OUTLINE.The Passover Made Ready. 2. The Last Passover Feast, 3. The First Lord’s Supper.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE PASSOVER MADE READY, Mark 14:12-16.

The First Day of Unleavened Bread. Mark 14:12; Matthew 26:17; Luke 22:7.

The Two Disciples Sent, Mark 14:13; Matthew 26:18; Luke 22:8.

The Guest Chamber Prepared. Mark 14:16; Matthew 26:19; Luke 22:13.

II.

THE LAST PASSOVER FEAST, Mark 14:17-21.

The Lord Cometh with the Twelve. Mark 14:17; Matthew 26:20; Luke 22:14.

The Traitor Pointed Out. Mark 14:18; Matthew 26:21; Luke 22:20; John 13:26.

The Traitor’s Fate Predicted. Mark 14:21; Matthew 26:24; Luke 22:22.

III.

THE FIRST LORD’S SUPPER, Mark 14:22-26.

The Emblem of the Lord’s Body, Mark 14:22; Matthew 26:26; Luke 22:19.

The Emblem of the Blood. Mark 14:23; Matthew 26:27; Luke 22:20.

The Blood of the New Covenant. Mark 14:24; Matthew 26:28; Luke 22:20.

Departure to Gethsemane. Mark 14:26; Matthew 26:30.

INTRODUCTION

The most probable hypothesis combines these accounts as follows: Christ gives two of his disciples directions as to the preparation of the passover supper for himself and the twelve (Mark 14:12-16; Luke 22:7-13); when the even is come he goes with the twelve to the place prepared for them, where an unseemly strife occurs as to which shall be greatest (Luke 22:24-30); this Christ rebukes by washing the feet of the disciples (John 14:1-20); all then take their places at the table (Matthew 26:20); Christ prophesies his betrayal (Matthew 26:21-25; Mark 14:18-21; Luke 22:21-23; John 13:21-26); Judas, learning that his treachery is known, goes out to complete it (John 13:27-30). The supper, which has been interrupted by this incident, now goes on and ends with the institution of the Lord’s supper at the close of passover feast (Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-25). After or during this meal Christ gives his disciples the instructions and utters for them the prayer recorded in John, Chapter s 14-17 inclusive.Abbott. At the close of the discourse recorded in John, Chapter s 14-16, and the prayer of chapter 17, the Lord and his disciples left the upper chamber, went out into the darkness of the night, passed out of the city gates and across the Kedron to the ascent of the Mount of Olives, where he retired within the garden of Gethsemane.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

I.

THE PASSOVER MADE READY.

Mark 14:12. And the first day of unleavened bread. Strictly speaking, the 15th of Nisan (part of our March and April), after the Paschal lamb was killed, but here the 14th day (Thursday). See Exodus 12:16. This suggests one of the most difficult questions of Scripture chronology, whether the Lord ate the passover one day before the regular Jewish passover, or at the same time. Pressnse, Millman, Ellicott, Townsend, Alford, Neander, Farrar, and many other great authorities, hold that he ate it the day preceding, and died on the day and about the time the Jewish passover lambs were slain. This view I have accepted and shown the reason why in the Commentary on John, pp. 208, 209. [1] The statements of John that the supper was eaten, the Lord betrayed and condemned before the passover, seem positive. For a fuller discussion we must refer to the Commentary of John. When they killed the passover. Or at which the passover was sacrificed, as in the Revised Version. The word passover signifies a passing, and commemorates the manner in which the Israelites were spared in Egypt when the Almighty passed over their houses, sprinkled with the blood of the lamb, without slaying their first-born. This name, which originally denoted the lamb, was applied later to the supper itself, then to the entire feast (Exodus 12). The passover was the feast of spring, after the death of winter; the national birthday feast; the springtime of grace, pointing to the birth of the true Israel. The rabbis claimed that, (1) all were to be present; (2) they must offer thanksgiving offerings; (3) it was a feast of joyousness, looking forward to their complete deliverance. Where wilt thou that we go and prepare. the passover? According to the directions given in Deuteronomy 16:1-5, the passover must be eaten in the place where the Lord’s name was recorded, or where the tabernacle or temple was located. Jesus was at Bethany at this time. As that place was within a Sabbath day’s journey of Jerusalem, the passover could be eaten there according to the rabbis, and the disciples might have supposed that this would be the Lord’s decision. The preparation involved the selection of a guest chamber (Mark 14:15), the selection, sacrifice and cooking of the lamb, the procurement of unleavened bread, and the bitter herbs. That we go and prepare. The lamb had, we may believe, already been bought on the 10th of Nisan, according to the rule of the law, the very day of which He, the true Paschal Lamb, entered Jerusalem in meek triumph.Cambridge Bible, That thou mayest eat. Note the reverential feeling that dominated the disciples. They did not say, in order that we may eat the passover. They hid themselves behind their Lord.

[1] B. W. Johnson’s commentary on John.

Mark 14:13. Two of his disciples, Luke gives their namesPeter and John. Saith unto them. There can be no question that this direction was given them in superhuman foresight. The city. Jerusalem. A man bearing a pitcher of water. A very unusual sight in the East, where the water is drawn by women. He must probably have been the servant of one who was an open or secret disciple, unless we have here a reference to the Jewish custom of the master of a house himself drawing the water with which the unleavened bread was kneaded on Nisan 13th. On the evening of the 13th, before the stars appeared in the heavens, every father, according to Jewish custom, had to repair to the fountain to draw pure water with which to knead the unleavened bread.

Mark 14:14. To the goodman of the house; or, master of the house. The expression, goodman, as used by Tyndale, and preserved in our Authorized Version, is a relic of an olden time, when the heads of a household establishment expressed to one another, in their habitual intercourse, their mutual esteem. In some parts of the country the custom still lingers, and husbands and wives address each other as goodman, goodwife.Morison. The guest chamber. The Revision says, correctly, my guest chamber. The correct reading, my, is suggestive. Our Lord lays claim to it. During the passover week, hospitality was recognized as a universal duty in Jerusalem; pilgrims and strangers were received, and rooms were alloted to them for the celebration of the feast. But it is not probable that a room would have been given to entire strangers without previous arrangement; and the language which the disciples are instructed to use, The Master saith unto thee, seems to me clearly to indicate that the goodman of the house recognized Jesus as Master; in other words, was in some sense at least a disciple.Abbott. Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover? The Master saith. It is a personal question, a proposal to the inner life of all. It is an offer of the one infinite divine blessing; for, in receiving the Master, Christ, the Son of Mary and the Son of God, we receive all the real good there is in earth and heaven.F. D. Huntington.

Mark 14:15. He will shew you a large upper room furnished and prepared. A room on the second floor. Some think it was the Alijah, or the room on the housetop. Furnished; i.e., with tables and couches. Prepared. Already swept, and clean, and in order for the feast. Even at the present day, the very humblest Jewish family generally has at the passover time the walls of the house white-washed, the floor scrubbed, the furniture cleaned, and all things made to put on a new appearance. Make ready. The further preparations necessary for the passover. There are evidently two preparations for the passover mentioned in this sentence; that of the room, already made by the proprietor, and that of the lamb, with its accompaniments, bread and wine and bitter herbs, which was now to be made by the two disciples, and which they did make, as recorded in Mark 14:16, where we learn no new fact but the simple execution of the Savior’s orders.

Mark 14:16. They made ready. That is, they procured a paschal lamb, multititudes of which were kept for sale in the temple; they procured it to be killed and flayed by the priests, and the blood to be poured at the altar; they roasted the lamb, and prepared the bitter herbs, the sauce, and the unleavened bread.Barnes. As the new day opened, at sunset, the carcass was trussed for roasting, with two skewers of pomegranate wood, so that they formed a cross in the lamb. It was then put in an earthen oven of a special kind, resting, without bottom, on the ground, and was roasted in the earth. The feast could begin immediately after the setting of the sun and the appearing of the stars, on the opening of the 15th of Nisan, which was proclaimed by new trumpet-blasts from the temple.Geikie.

II. THE LAST PASSOVER FEAST.

Mark 14:17. In the evening he cometh with the twelve. It was probably while the sun was beginning to decline in the horizon that Jesus and the disciples descended once more over the Mount of Olives into the Holy City. Before them lay Jerusalem in her festive attire. White tents dotted the sward, gay with the bright flowers of early spring, or peered out from the gardens and the darker foliage of the olive plantations. From the gorgeous temple buildings, dazzling in their snow-white marble and gold, on which the slanting rays of the sun were reflected, rose the smoke of the altar of burnt-offerings. The streets must have been thronged with strangers, and the flat roofs covered with eager gazers, who either feasted their eyes with a first sight of the sacred city, for which they had so often longed, or else once more rejoiced in view of the well-remembered localities. It was the last day-view which the Lord had of the Holy Citytill his resurrectionEdersheim’s The Temple and its Services.

Mark 14:18. As they sat and did eat. Or, rather, reclined at table. The passover was originally eaten standing; but this was altered by the Jews when they came to the land of promise and rest. One of you which eateth with me shall betray me. This indefinite announcement would give Judas an opportunity of repentance; but it produced no effect. The announcement by Jesus of his knowledge of the traitor was needed to show the apostles that the manner of his arrest was no surprise to him. The words would seem to have been intentionally vague, as if to rouse some of those who heard them to self-questioning.

Mark 14:19. They began to be sorrowful. The very thought of treason was to their honest and faithful hearts insupportable, and excited great surprise and deepest sorrow. John (John 13:33) describes their perplexed and questioning glances at each other, the whisper of Peter to John, the answer of our Lord to the beloved disciple, announcing the sign by which the traitor was to be indicated. Unto him. They both inquired among themselves (Luke 22:23), and of Christ. Is it I? Their language expresses in the original a much stronger negation than in our versionSurely not I, Lord?

Mark 14:20. One. that dippeth with me. This answer, apparently given only to John (John 13:25-26), does not designate the betrayer to the disciples. According to the Jewish ritual, the administrator in the course of the supper dipped the bitter herbs in a prepared sauce, and passed the dish to the rest, This Christ now did. His reply to the question of John was simply an emphatic reiteration of his previous declaration (John 13:28), He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me. That it did not designate the traitor to any of the disciples is clear from John 13:28. Judas alone perceived that his treachery was known to Christ.Abbott.

Mark 14:21. The Son of man indeed goeth. He marches with unfaltering step in the way to the scene of death, as marked out by the divine prophecies. Yet that does not exculpate the authors of his betrayal and murder. Good were it for that man, etc. A proverbial expression of the most terrible destiny, forbidding the thought of any deliverance, however remote.Schaff. Observe incidental confirmation of the doctrine elsewhere taught, that for the finally lost soul there is no redemption.Abbott.

III.

THE FIRST LORD’S SUPPER.

Mark 14:22. As they did eat. While they were still at the passover table. One memorial institution had now ended its mission; as it departed another was ordained. Jesus took bread. The bread that was broken was a round cake or cracker of unleavened bread. Throughout the entire passover week no leavened bread was allowed in the house. Exodus 12:8; Exodus 12:15. The administration of the Lord’s Supper was subsequently termed the breaking of bread. The bread, then, is (1) a symbolic reminder that Christ is God’s unspeakable gift to us, (John 3:16; 2 Corinthians 9:15;) (2) that the gift is perfected only in that he is broken for us, (John 3:14; John 10:15; John 12:32;) (3) that it is efficacious only as we partake of him, i.e., receive him into ourselves, so that he becomes one with us as he is one with the Father, (John 17:23,) as the bread when eaten becomes part of our nature, and so the sustainer of our life. This is my body. His language here closely conforms to that of the Jewish ritual. When the lamb was passed the master was asked by one of the children, What is this? and the father replied, This the body of the lamb which our fathers ate in Egypt. Christ uses, but modifies, the same formula. Does any one suppose the lamb slain in Egypt was miraculously multiplied through all the subsequent ages?Abbott. The word for is denotes only likeness in all metaphors and in the explanation of all symbols. The seven good kine are seven years; These bones are the house of Israel; The seed is the Word of God; This is he who hears the Word; The field is the world; The rock was Christ; -The women are two covenants; The seven lamps are seven churches. Resemblance and representation are certainly implied in these and similar statements, but nothing more.Biblical Museum. In view of this usage how illogical are those who insist, contrary to their senses, that the bread is literally the flesh of Christ.

Mark 14:23. He took the cup. The cup was provided for the celebration of the paschal feast and was at hand as well as the bread. As before he gave thanks, and then commanded: Drink ye all of it. Observe that he simply said of the bread, Take, eat; but of the wine, Drink ye all, as if he intended to uproot the Catholic innovation of denying the cup to the laity.

Mark 14:24. This is my blood. A sign or emblem of my blood. This formula occurs again from the forms of the passover feast. The blood is the life (Leviticus 17:14). He laid down his life. It pleased the Lord to bruise him (Isaiah 53).Jacobus. Up to this time the blood of bulls and goats had represented Christ’s blood: henceforth the simple wine of this memorial supper should represent it (Hebrews 9:13-14). New testament; or, covenant. Covenant is the preferable sense here, as in most passages where the word occurs in the New Testament: the new covenant is contrasted with the covenant which God made with our fathers (Acts 3:25). It need hardly be remarked that the title of the New Testament is derived from this passage. The new covenant was, that God would renew and save all who believed in Jesus. In ancient times the ratification of important covenants was made by a sacrificial feast. Shed for many. Shed, in one sense, for all, for the benefits of the blood are offered to all; but many accept it and are saved.

Mark 14:25. I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine. He is done with earthly rites, and at this sad moment points them to a future re-union at the marriage supper of the Lamb, The ordinance now receives its prophetic meaning (Cf. 1 Corinthians 11:26, till he come) directing believers to the perfect vision and fruition of that time, through the foretaste which this sacrament is designed to give.Schaff. Drink it new. At the marriage supper of the Lamb. Revelation 19:9.

Mark 14:26. When they had sung an hymn. It was customary to conclude the passover by singing the Psalms from 115th to 118th. To the Mount of Olives. To the garden of Gethsemane which was on the slope of that mount.

FACT QUESTIONS 14:12-26

On what day of the week did Jesus eat the Passover? What Jewish month?what day of the month? To which of our months does this correspond?

Please mark carefully the order of progression of the nine or ten incidents beginning with the preparation for the passover and ending with retirement in the garden.

When and where did the prayers and promises of John 14-17 occur?

What is meant by the expression the first day of unleavened bread?

What problem of chronology is found in Mark 14:13? What was the conclusion of B. W. Johnson? Do you agree? Discuss.

Show the progressive use of the term passover. How did it become a birthday feast?

What does Deuteronomy 16:1-15 say about the place of the eating of the the passover?

What was involved in preparing the passover? How could it have been lawful to eat the passover in Bethany?

When was the lamb for the passover purchased?how related to the activities of Jesus?

How did the disciples show respect for Jesus in their question about the passover?

Who was the man with the pitcher of water?show the possible significance.

Why use the word goodman?

How did Jesus refer to the guest chamber or the upper room? Why?

What is an offer of the one infinite divine blessing?

What preparation in the room had the householder made?what preparations were the disciples to make?

Where was the lamb purchased?in what preparation did the priest engage?

Besides the roasted lamb what was on the paschal table?

In what particular manner was the lamb roasted?is there any possible symbolism here?

Silver trumpets were blown in the nightwhen and why?

Please read and re-read the beautiful description of Edersheim on Mark 14:17. Pauseclose your eyesconjure up the scene in your mind’s eye.

When was the posture at the table changed?

Why the indefiniteness of the announcement of the betrayal of Judas?it had a dual purposewhat was it?

Why were the apostles so surprised?how did they express their surprise?

What strong expression did the apostles use in inquiring about their betrayal?

The answer of Mar 14:20 was not given to allto whom? Why? How did Judas know?

Was the passover meal finished before Jesus instituted His Supper?Discuss.

What type of loaf was used? Why?

Show how very appropriate is the expression breaking of bread when referring to the Lord’s Supper. Specify three ways.

Show how closely the words this is my body conform to the Jewish ritual.

Show how illogical those are (Roman Catholics) who insist the bread was literally the flesh of Jesus.

What Catholic innovation is uprooted in Mark 14:23?

Before Jesus said of the fruit of the vinethis is my blood what had represented Christ’s blood?

Why is covenant a better word than testament? What was the covenant?

Was the blood shed for many or for all? Explain.

When wasor willthe promise of Mar 14:25 fulfilled? Will we drink grape juice in heaven?

What hymn was sung? Why? Read the hymn for an answer.

Mark 14:27-31

**4. PETER’S BOAST 14:27-31

TEXT 14:27-31**

I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered abroad. Howbeit, after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee. But Peter said unto Him, Although all shall be offended, yet will not I. And Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, that thou today, even this night, before the cock crow twice, shalt deny me thrice. But he spake exceeding vehemently, If I must die with thee, I will not deny thee. And in like manner said they all.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:27-31

Where was Jesus when He spoke of the defection of the disciples?

In what sense were the apostles to stumble?how did prophecy relate to the stumbling of the disciples?

What appreciation did the apostles have of the resurrection of Jesus?

Why mention His visit to Galilee?

What prompted Peter’s pledge of loyalty? Please note that pride was not the only element.

Read Matthew 26:34 and John 13:38harmonize these two accounts with Mark 14:30.

Why did Jesus predict the multiple denial of Peter?

Didn-’t Peter believe Jesus knew all things? Why did he continue to contradict the words of Jesus?

Just what did all the disciples say? Where they just as guilty as Peter? Discuss.

COMMENT

TIME.Thursday evening, April 6th (14th Nisan), A.D. 30. With the Jews the 15th of Nisan had begun. PLACE.Jerusalem, in an upper room with the disciples.

PARALLEL ACCOUNTS.Matthew 26:31-35; Luke 22:31-38.

OUTLINE,1. The prediction and promise of Jesus, Mark 14:27-28, 2. The poor pride of Peter, Mark 14:29. 3. Pointing up the prediction, Mark 14:30. 4. personal and public pride, Mark 14:31.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE PREDICTION AND PROMISE OF JESUS, Mark 14:27-28.

The prediction: All ye shall be offended: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered abroad.

The promise: after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee.

II.

THE POOR PRIDE OF PETER, Mark 14:29.

He took exception with Jesus.

He promised the highest of loyalty.

III.

POINTING UP THE PREDICTION, Mark 14:30.

It shall happen this very night.

Before the cock crows twice you shall deny me thrice.

IV.

THE PERSONAL AND PUBLIC PRIDE, Mark 14:31.

Personal pride of Peter: … he spake exceeding vehemently, If I must die with thee, I will not deny thee.

Public pride of the rest of the apostles: And in like manner also said they all.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

I.

THE PREDICTION AND PROMISE OF JESUS.

Mark 14:27. You will all be scandalized in my regard. Our Lord means that when the disciples witnessed His humiliations and sufferings, it would be a sore trial to their faith, and would lead them to doubt that He was the Messiah. That this actually occurred we see from Luke 24:21. But we hoped that it was he that should have redeemed Israel; and now besides all this, etc. Evidently these disciples no longer hoped, and all were incredulous at first as regards the resurrection of Christ.

I will strike the shepherd, etc. The prophecy is not literally quoted; it runs thus, Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that cleaveth to me, saith the Lord of hosts: strike the shepherd and the sheep shall be scattered, and I will turn my hand to the little ones (Zechariah 13:7). Jesus refers the prophecy to Himself as the good shepherd (John 10:11).

In quoting this prophecy the Evangelist represents God as saying I will strike, etc., and in truth the death of the Son was willed by the Father, that thus the Redemption of man might be effected, but He allowed human agents to accomplish His designs. God could not will man’s sin, but he can make it serve His designs, and thus bring good out of evil.

the sheep shall be dispersed. Primarily the prophecy referred to the Jewish priests and to the Israelites, but there is a secondary reference to Christ the Messiah and to the disciples, the sheep of His flock. These words were fulfilled when in Gethsemane his disciples leaving him, all fled away (Mark 14:50). They were also accomplished in the dispersion of the Jews.

Mark 14:28. But after I shall be risen, etc. Christ now turns His hand to His little ones. In spite of their weak faith and of their cowardice, He promises to see them again, and foretells once more His resurrection.

I will go before you into Galilee. The angel of the Resurrection used these very words, and reminded the disciples of Christ’s promise, Remember how he spoke unto you, when he was yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must. the third day rise again (Luke 24:6-7). And going quickly, tell ye his disciples that he is risen: and behold he will go before you into Galilee; there you shall see him. Lo, I have foretold it to you (Matthew 27:7). In spite of the disciples-’ predicted defection, Jesus consoles them

(1)

by the assurance that He will rise again.

(2)

by promising to meet them in Galilee.

The prediction itself after its accomplishment, would strengthen their faith, since knowing that they would forsake Him, Christ had promised to see them in Galilee. There is perhaps in these words an allusion to the shepherd preceding his flock.

II.

THE POOR PRIDE OF PETER.

Mark 14:29. Peter saith to him: Although all, etc. Peter, always impulsive and generous, cannot believe such desertion possible.

In his reply we notice

Peter rejects the very idea as an impossibility, and bluntly contradicts our Lord. He evidently regarded our Lord’s words as a mark of distrust of the disciples rather than as a prediction and solemn warning.

Peter asserts his strength of character to be greater than that of the other disciples.

He trusts to his own strength, though the remembrance of how his faith failed when he was sinking in the Lake of Galilee, should have presented this presumption.

III.

POINTING UP THE PREDICTION.

Mark 14:30. Truly I say to thee, Our Lord uses His solemn asseveration to check Peter’s assumption and enforce the warning.

today, even in this night, etc. Notice the gradation to-day (the day had begun at sunset), even this night, hence before tomorrow’s dawn, before the second cock-crowing. The cock crew at midnight, and again about three o-‘clock in the morning.

In this chapter (Mark 14:68-72) we find the fulfillment of this prediction. It has been objected that it was forbidden to have cocks and hens in Jerusalem, but this prohibition (if observed, which is very doubtful) could not affect the Romans, who would certainly have kept fowls in the Castle of Antonia, and whence Jews could hear the cock crowing distinctly. The Romans used these birds, and even carried them with them when on the march, since they required chickens for the auspices. It is mentioned by one of the rabbinical writers that a cock, which had killed a little child in Jerusalem, was slain.

deny me thrice: not merely once, but thrice. Mark alone gives the details

(a)

that the cock should crow twice.

(b)

Peter’s vehement, second declaration of fidelity.

IV.

THE PERSONAL AND PUBLIC PRIDE.

Mark 14:31. spoke the more vehemently. He denied the bare possibility of such a denial, with increased energy. Peter, from whom Mark received his gospel, reveals his own weakness with profound humility.

Some writers affirm that Peter never lost faith in our Lord, since Christ had prayed that his faith fail not, but that he sinned against charity in lacking the courage to profess his faith openly.

Although I should die, etc. Peter was sincere in his protestations of fidelity, but he had yet to learn how weak human nature is in the face of temptation and suffering. Luke and John give Peter’s protestation more fully. I will lay down my life for thee (John 13:37.) Lord, I am ready to go with thee both into prison and to death (Luke 22:33). Thomas likewise had made a protestation of fidelity in the name of his companions. Let us also go, that we may die with him (John 11:16).

in like manner also said they all (i.e. all the Eleven). Judas was not present. We may be sure that they were sincere in their offer, but their inexperience led them to underestimate the force of the trial that awaited them. (Cecilia)

FACT QUESTIONS 14:27-31

Show when and where the words of our Lord, you will all be scandalized in my regard found fulfillment.

Who struck the shepherd? Why?

God could not will man’S, ——, but He can make it serve His designs, and thus bring —– out of —–.

Show at least two places and times when the words the sheep shall be dispersed were fulfilled.

In spite of the disciples predicted defection, Jesus consoles them in two thoughtswhat are they?

Peter misunderstood the purpose of the words of Jesuswhat purpose did he find in the prediction of defection?

Peter had reason to doubt the strength of his faithwhat was it?

How is it that the expression today, and this night mean the same period of time? At what two times did the cock crow?

Where was the cock when it crowed?

How could some writers affirm that Peter never lost his faith in his denial?

Show how Thomas and Peter were alike.

What caused the disciples to underestimate the force of the trial that awaited them?

Mark 14:32-42

**1. FRIDAY 1. STRONG CRYING AND TEARS 14:32-42

TEXT: 14:32-42**

And they come unto a place which was named Gethsemane: and he saith unto his disciples, Sit ye here, while I pray, And he taketh with him Peter and James and John, and began to be greatly amazed, and sore troubled. And he saith unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful·even unto death: abide ye here, and watch. And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass away from him. And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; remove this cup from me: howbeit not what I will but what thou wilt, And he cometh, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter, Simon, sleepest thou? couldest thou not watch one hour? Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. And again he went away and prayed, saying the same words, And again he came, and found them sleeping, for their eyes were very heavy; and they wist not what to answer him. And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: it is enough; the hour is come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Arise, let us be going: behold, he that betrayeth me is at hand.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:32-42

Why did Jesus go to Gethsemane? Did this visit fill a need in His heart? Show what significance this place had in the life of our Lord.

What did Jesus want Peter, James and John to do while He was praying? Cf. Mark 14:37.

How would you explain the words greatly amazed, and sore troubled?

How is the word soul used in Mark 14:34?

Was there any possibility of Jesus dying in the garden? Could this possibility be the cup which He asked might pass away?

Is the hour of Mar 14:35 the same as the cup of Mar 14:36? Discuss.

What is the meaning of the expression Abba as in Mark 14:36 a?

Didn-’t Jesus know the will ofthe Father?why then make the request He did?

Wasn-’t the will of our Lord constantly the will of God?how shall we reconcile this fact with the request which includes my will and your will?

What did Jesus want the three apostles to do that they did not do?what is included in the expression watch?

Notice how Jesus addressed Peter, i.e. in namewhy?

About what were the three to pray?

What temptation was here present?

Explain the little phrase the spirit indeed is willing but the flesh is weakdo it in its context.

Why repeat the prayer as in Mark 14:39?

What question did Jesus ask the disciples as in Mark 14:40? Why no answer?

In what attitude were the words, sleep on now, and take your rest spoken? Was Jesus ironic? critical? sympathetic? sad? explain.

What was enough as in Mark 14:41 b?

Who were the sinners into whose hands the Son of man was betrayed?

COMMENT

TIME.Thursday evening, April 6th (14th Nisan), A.D. 30. With the Jews the 15th of Nisan had begun. PLACE.Jerusalemthe Garden of Gethsemane.

PARALLEL ACCOUNTS.Matthew 26:36-46; Luke 22:40-46.

OUTLINE.1. The place and persons of the Saviour’s agony, Mark 14:32-34. 2. Surrender in prayer, Mark 14:35-36. 3. Disappointing disciples, Mark 14:37-38. 4. He prayed and wept alone, Mark 14:39-40. 5. The Saviour’s hour and the disciples failure, Mark 14:41-42.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE PLACE AND PERSONS OF THE SAVIOUR’S AGONY, Mark 14:32-34.

The place:Gethsemane.

The persons:disciplesand the three.

His agony:greatly amazedsore troubledexceeding sorrowful.

II.

SURRENDER IN PRAYER, Mark 14:35-36.

The place of surrender:he went forward a little, and fell on the ground,

The struggle of the surrenderif it were possible, the hour might pass away from him.remove this cup from me.

The victory in surrenderhowbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt.

III.

DISAPPOINTING DISCIPLES, Mark 14:37-38.

He came for comfort and found them asleep.

He called Peter by his old name of Simonis one hour too long to watch for me?

He helped them (when they should have helped Him) with a warningwatch (be spiritually vigilant) and prayin this way you (like me) will escape temptation. You have assented to my will but you can never carry it out without being spiritually awake and in prayeryour flesh is too weak for such action.

IV.

HE PRAYED AND WEPT ALONE, Mark 14:39-40.

Away from the apostlesalone with

Godthe same needthe same answer.

Still asleepyielded to the fleshno

human answer to spiritual need.

V.

THE SAVIOUR’S HOUR AND THE DISCIPLES FAILURE, Mark 14:41-42.

Are you still sleeping and taking your rest? (Ralph Earle)

You have slept long enough (Thayer).

The great hour of the world’s redemption has come. (Ralph Earle)

Let us go to meet the betrayer.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

I.

THE PLACE AND PERSONS OF THE SAVIOUR’S AGONY.

Mark 14:32. And they come. We are taken back, and look on. To a place which was named Gethsemane. The word means oil-press. And, no doubt, originally there would be, in the spot, an olive-oil press. The real locality cannot now be precisely determined; neither is it necessary. There is an enclosed spot, lying at the base of the western slope of the mount of Olives, which is called Gethsemane (El-Jesmaniye), It is kept by the Latin Christians, and contains eight extremely aged olive trees. If, says Dr. Wilson, the Gethsemane of the Bible be not here, and we can see no reason for disturbing the tradition regarding it, it cannot certainly be far distant, as must be apparent from the incidental notices of the evangelists. (Lands of the Bible, vol. 1, p. 481.)

And He saith to His disciples, Sit here, until I shall pray. Until My prayer shall be past. The great crisis was at hand; and it was casting its dark shadow before on the spirit of our Lord. He felt that He must get into comparative retirement, in order that He might, without distraction, grapple with the appalling difficulties of the trial, and open up His heart, in the time of extremity, to His Father.

Mark 14:33. And He taketh with Him Peter and James and John. The elite of his elect, who had been witnesses of the counterpart scene, the transfiguration (chap. ix. 2). They were admitted by their own brethren to be a representative triumvirate, and primi inter pares. For, even among those who are good and true, some are better fitted than others for posts of eminence, and for intimacy of intercourse.

And began to be dismayed. Stunned, as it were. That is the radical idea of the word. (See G. Curtis, Grundzuge, p. 206.) He was astonished. Probably never before, within the limitations of His finite experience, had the sphere of our Lord’s vision, in reference to sins, and their desert and effects, been so vast. Probably never before had the corresponding sphere of His emotions, in relation to these sins, been so profoundly agitated and heaved. This state of things now -began.-’ And, as it -began,-’ it caused an amazement, that culminated in consternation. Wycliffe translates the verb to drede (to dread); Coverdale, to *waxe fearefull.

And greatly distressed.* Comp. Philippians 2:26. Tyndale’s version is borrowed from Luke, to be in an agony.

Mark 14:34. And He saith to them. Namely after the terrible experience had -begun-’ to roll in on His spirit.

My soul is exceeding sorrowful. The idea is, My soul is sorrowful all round and round. It was a kind of moral midnight within the periphery of His soul. At no point in the circumference was a single gleam of light.

Unto death. Not a mere rhetorical addition. The weight of woe was literally crushing out the Saviour’s life. In bearing it He was making more literal sacrifice of Himself than ever had been made on literal altar. The sacrifice would have been complete, then and there, had it not been that it appeared to Him and to His Father that certain momentous purposes of publicity, in reference to the conclusion of the tragedy, would be better subserved by shifting the scene.

Remain here and watch. He had wished His chosen three to be near Him in His woe; and yet, as it advanced, He felt that He must retire even from them, and be alone with Himself and His Father. -Of the people-’ none could be -with Him-’ in the agony, none on the altar. Still He wished that His chosen ones should not be at a great distance, and hence He said, Remain here. He desired to be the object of their active sympathy, and hence He said, and watch.

II.

SURRENDER IN PRAYER.

Mark 14:35. And He went forward a little. Still farther from the spot where the eight disciples had been asked to halt (Mark 14:32).

And fell on the ground. Gradually. The verb is in the imperfect. He would kneel first of all (Luke 22:41).

And prayed. He continued in prayer. The verb is in the imperfect. He kept addressing His heavenly Father. His aim in thus addressing His Father is brought out in the next clause.

That. In order that.

If it were possible, Very literally, if it is possible, We are taken back to the very time when the Saviour’s prayers were uttered, and to the spot whence they were uttered, and we hear the very words which He used. Possible: the reference is not so much to absolute as to relative possibility, possibility in consistency with the great objects contemplated in the mission of the Saviour.

The hour might pass from Him. The hour that was imminent, and that embraced within its compass His betrayal, His arrestment, and the desertion of His disciples. He did not pray that the hour of the atoning sacrifice might pass by. It was the incidental woes, inflicted so superfluously and wantonly by men, and to no small extent by His own chosen disciples, it was these apparently these more particularly at least, to which the cry of His spirit referred.

Mark 14:36. And He said, Abba Father. The filial element in His spirit rose up and overshadowed all the other elements of relationship. Mark alone records the -bilingual-’ appellation, Aramaic and Greek. No doubt it would be genuine; and most likely it would be current in certain bilingual-’ home circles, more especially at moments of earnest address on the part of children. At such moments there is often a tendency to emphatic redundancy or repetitiousness of expression. Comp. Romans 8:15, and Galatians 4:6. As employed by our Lord, the dual form of-’ the appellation is delightfully fitted to suggest that, in His great work, He personated in His single self not Jews only, but Gentiles also.

All things are possible to Thee. Literally true. A thing is a think; and all things thinkable are possible to almightiness. To imagine that there are actual limits to God’s power is merely to bewilder oneself in nntbinkabilities. In the preceding verse the reference is to conditional possibility: hence the -if,-’ In this the reference is to absolute possibility: hence the -all.-’

Remove this cup from Me. The Reheims translation is, transferre this chalice from Me. Not that our Saviour rued His enterprise, or desired to -back out of it.-’ Infinitely far from that. The cup, which He felt it so dreadful to drink, had in it ingredients which were never mingled by the hand of His Father, such as the treachery of Judas, the desertion of His disciples, denial on the part of Peter, the trial in the Sanhedrim, the trial before Pilate, the scourging, the mockery of the soldiery, the crucifixion, etc., etc. All these incidental and unessential ingredients were put into the cup by men, wilfully and wantonly. Hence the petition, Remove from Me this cup, this cup as it is. Without these superadded ingredients the potion would have been unquestionably bitter enough; and it need not be doubted that, in consideration of that bitterness, the exquisite sensibility of our Lord would be conscious of a feeling of shrinking and instinctive recoil. But still He had come for the very purpose of -tasting death for every man,-’ and was no doubt willing and wishful to die.

But not what I will, but what Thou wilt. But the question is not, What will I? but What wilt Thou? The reference in the word will, in so far as it is applied by the Saviour to Himself, is to that which Peter calls the sensitive will, and the schoolmen voluntas sensualitatis. The more literal translation however of the verb is wish rather than will. The question with the Savior was not, What do I wish? but What does My Father wish? There was infinite submissiveness to the wish and will of His Father. If the Father deemed it best that the cup, just as it was, should be drained, the Son was absolutely acquiescent. It is easy to conceive of the greatest possible diversity in the circumstantial incidents of the atoning sacrifice. The Saviour would have wished them to have been different from what they were. Who would not? But on almost everything that is done in the world, or that has to be endured, the foul fingers of sin are laid.

III.

DISAPPOINTING DISCIPLES.

Mark 14:37. And He cometh. To His disciples, viz. at some intermission in the agony of His spirit, when He had got strength through prayer. See Luke 22:43.

And findeth them sleeping. So far were they from profoundly realizing the solemnities that were imminent.

And saith to Peter. Peter is no doubt singled out, partly because he was the leader of the three, and partly because he had singled himself out but a little before. See Mark 14:29; Mark 14:31.

Simon, sleepest thou? Although thou sawest that I was in such distress, and although I expressly desired thee to keep awake and watch?

Couldst thou not watch one hour? Hadst thou not strength for that? Surely thou wilt not say so. Why then not use thy strength to watch, when I desired it, that I might have the consolation of thy sympathy? Note the expression one hour. It seems to indicate that our Savior had suffered an entire hour of agony. How long that period! when we remember that every moment would be stretched to its utmost.

Mark 14:38. Watch ye. The three disciples, we may suppose, had waked up when Peter was addressed. What our Lord said to one, He meant for all; and here He expressly addresses all.

And pray, that ye may not enter into temptation. They were in danger of losing confidence in Him as the Messiah. There was therefore much need for faithful watching and earnest praying.

The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. The Saviour’s gracious apology for the languor of His disciples. Even while He spoke to them, they had but imperfectly waked up. He saw them struggling with the oppressive languor, but ineffectively. And yet, true, as well as gracious, though His apology was, the spirit was nevertheless to be somewhat blamed. If it had been sympathetic to the quick, it would have roused the flesh. Some have supposed that the words, the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak, are the Saviour’s explanation of His own distress. Unnatural. The supposition proceeds on the false assumption that the Saviour’s horror was a weakness, and that it would have been more magnanimous and glorious to have had no experience of shrinking from the ingredients of the dreadful cup.

IV. HE PRAYED AND WEPT ALONE.

Mark 14:39, And again He went away. His agony returned on Him, Perhaps the very lethargy of His disciples might call up before His view the whole appalling succession of incidental and unessential woes that were about to overtake Him.

And prayed, saying the same words. More literally, as the Rheims, has it, saying the selfsame word. The term word is used collectively, as when we speak of the word of God.

Mark 14:40. And when He returned, He found them asleep again, for their eyes were heavy. Were, so to speak, -weighted-’, or, according to the better reading, weighed down. The for introduces, not a reason for, but an illustration of, their sleepiness. It would appear that they had not deliberately surrendered themselves to sleep. They did not lie down, for instance. They sat, and, to a certain extent, sought to keep themselves awake, But ever and anon, and prevailingly, their eyelids closed.

And they wist not what to answer Him. They knew not what they could say to Him in reply. They had no excuse which they could honestly plead. Wist, or wissed as it were, that is knew, is now obsolete, but is connected with an interesting group of words, wise, wisdom, wizard, and the German wissen -to know.-’ On another line it is connected with the Anglo-Saxon witan, the Dutch weten, and the Gothic vitan, -to know,-’ around which we have another group of words, wit, wits, witty, witless, witch, outwit, to-wit.

V. THE SAVIOUR’S HOUR AND THE DISCIPLES-’ FAILURE.

Mark 14:41. And He cometh the third time. After a third retirement for a solitary endurance of His overwhelming agony.

And saith to them, Sleep on now. A rather unhappy translation, almost suggesting irritation and irony on the part of our Lord. Peter actually thinks that our Lord spoke -in a taunting manner.-’ But the verb rendered sleep on, a translation got from Coverdale, is simply sleep, the translation of Tyndale, the Geneva and the Rheims; and the expression rendered now means literally the remainder, that is, the remainder of the time that is available. Tyndale and the Geneva render it henceforth. Sleep the remaining interval! It was in compassion that our Lord thus spoke. His own struggle was meanwhile past. He did not feel the same need of the intense active sympathy of His disciples which, in the crisis of His agony, He had so fervently desired. He saw too that they were still overpowered with drowsiness, notwithstanding the persevering efforts they were making to wake up. He hence spoke to them soothingly; and, as Cardinal Cajetan expresses it, -indulgently,-’ that they might get the refreshment they so much required, *Sleep for the interval that remains. I can now calmly wait and watch alone.

And take your rest.* Or, as the Rheims has it, and take rest. Rest yourselves, that is, refresh yourselves. The word is so rendered in 1 Corinthians 16:18; 2 Corinthians 7:13; Philemon 1:7; Philemon 1:20.

It is enough. An expression that has given almost infinite trouble to critics. It fairly puzzled the Syriac translator. He renders it, the end is at hand. Our English translation is just a reproduction of the Vulgate version (sufficit), which must, one should suppose, have been dashed off in a fit of despair. But howsoever dashed off, or otherwise introduced, there it stands; and Luther, in his version, simply accepted it, without any attempt at an independent judgement; as did Erasmus also, and Tyndale, and Coverdale. Henry Stephens, the lexicographer, was much perplexed with the word, and in particular with its Vulgate translation; but at length he found a solitary passage, in one of the apocryphal Odes of Anacreon (xxviii. 33), in which the term would seem to bear no other interpretation. It afforded him great relief. Beza too found in the same ode a corresponding relief, and speaks indeed of the passage -Occurring to him,-’ in the midst of his doubts, as if it had been he, and not Henry Stephens, who had first alighted on it. He makes no reference at all to Stephens. The translation of the Vulgate, thus fortified out of Anacreon, was thenceforward regarded as confirmed. It was accepted by Castellio, the Geneva, Piscator, Erasmus Schmid, Sebastian Schmidt. It is found in all the Dutch versions. the earlier, the later, the latest. So too in Diodati, Zinzendorf, Rilliet; and in many other versions, Accepting the translation (and Wetstein hunted up another passage from Cyril on Hag. ii.9), the great body of expositors have interpreted the expression as a repetition -in earnest-’ of the ironical expression that precedes, as if our Lord were now saying plainly, ye have had enough of sleep, See Diodati, Petter, and Schleusner. But Wolf supposes that the Saviour refers to His own sufferings, I have suffered enough for the present, and it only remains that I endure the sufferings that are to come! Neither phase of thought seems satisfactory, Grotius felt this, and imagined that the phrase must have an idiomatic import, corresponding to the technical expression employed in the Roman amphitheatre, when a gladiator was wounded, -Habet,-’ He has it, he has got it, he has got the fatal wound. The Saviour, according to Grotius, as it were says, It is all over with Me now. The time is past for any benefit to Me from your sympathy. An unlikely interpretation, both on philological and on moral grounds, but accepted nevertheless by Principal Campbell, who renders the phrase All is over, Bengel’s translation corresponds to a degree, only he gives it a turn in the direction of the disciples, not of the Saviour, it is over, viz. with your rest, So Felbinger. Kypke’s interpretation is, The time is up. Heumann again, and Wahl, and Godwin, would render the phrase, it is past, or It is away, that is, My agony is past. Le Clerc, The thing is past, My resolution to go on is taken. There are other modifications of idea suggested by other expositors. But the great objection to all such interpretations is that the verb does not mean, to be away, to be past, or to be over, or to be all over. It means, when used intransitively, to have off, to hold off, to be distant. Such is its meaning in all the other passages of the New Testament in which it occurs with its intransitive signification. So Matthew 15:8 and Mark 7:6, -their heart is far from Me,-’ -is distant from Me.-’ So Luke 7:6, -when He was now not far distant from the house.-’ So Luke 15:20, -when he was yet a great way off,-’ that is, -when he was yet a long way distant.-’ AndLuk 24:13, -A village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs,-’ that is, -which was distant from Jerusalem.-’ We see no reason for departing, in the passage before us, from this, the word’s accredited and ordinary signification. But the question arises, to what, or to whom, does the Saviour refer, when He says -is distant-’? He refers, as we apprehend, not to a thing, but to a person, of whom He was thinking much, as is evident at once from the last clause of this verse, and from the next verse. But, though thinking much of him, He did not feel inclined expressly to name him. The reference we take to be to Judas, He is distant, He is at a distance. The expression is thus not the unmasking of a previous sarcasm. It is the gracious utterance, partly to His own mind, and partly to the minds of His lethargic disciples, of a reason for indulging them in a few minutes more of rest. We shall lose much of the true significance of the whole scene, and of the grandeur of the Saviour’s demeanor, if we imagine that there was anything like hot haste and semi-irritation on the part of our Lord. There is not the slightest need for supposing that all the words, recorded by the evangelist, were spoken in rapid succession. It was, we believe, far otherwise. After our Saviour had got relief from the overwhelming pressure of His agony, and had graciously approached His disciples, and sympathised with them in their feelings of oppression, He would most probably seat Himself beside them, and say soothingly, Sleep for the remainder of the little time that we still have, and refresh yourselves. Then He would add, as a reason for this indulgence, the word before us, a word which did not demand, on the part of the disciples, any mental determination regarding the subject of the proposition. It was enough that they knew that, whether a person or a thing were referred to, distance was affirmed. They might indeed have waked up, and inquired, -who is distant?-’ what is? who is? But this was not necessary, if they understood that the reason for making a final effort to shake off their drowsiness was yet at a distance. After the Lord had said (He) is at a distance, we may suppose that He paused, and turning His eyes in the direction of Jerusalem, wrapped Himself up in His own meditations. At length, when the moving lights of the band around Judas became visible, the Lord broke silence, and spoke as follows.

The hour has come. The hour, the crisis time, the beginning of the end.

Lo, the Son of Man is delivered up. Is in the act of being delivered up, viz. by Judas. The verb is in the present tense. The event was now so imminent that the Saviour speaks of it as transpiring.

Into the hands of sinners. Literally, of the sinners. The word is used, as often elsewhere, in its emphatic acceptation, and hence Godwin’s translation does justice to its spirit, of the wicked. Such was the character of the white-washed men who bore sway in the Sanhedrim, and of the others who would co-operate with them in their eagerness to get rid of all who might disturb them in their hypocritical repose.

Mark 14:42. Rise up. Rouse yourselves up. There was no longer time for repose.

Let us be going. Let us voluntarily lead ourselves on, viz. that we may confront the traitor and his band. How sublimely does the heroism of our Lord reveal itself!

Lo, he who delivereth Me up is at hand. Instead of naming Judas, the Lord described him, and, in the description, verified His own former predictions regarding Himself. (James Morison)

FACT QUESTIONS 14:32-42

What is the meaning of the word Gethsemane? What do we know of its location?

Why did Jesus separate Himself from His disciples?

In what sense were the three apostles the elite of the elect?

What is the meaning of the word dismayed as in Mark 14:33?

Why use the word began in connection with amazed?

How else could we say greatly distressed?

What thought or idea is behind the expression my soul is exceeding sorrowful?

Was there literal danger of death in the garden? Explain.

Discuss: none could be with Him in the agony, none on the altar.

Show the meaning of the imperfect verbs of fell and prayed.

Jesus did not pray that the hour of the atoning sacrifice would pass awaywhat then is included in the expression the hour might pass from Him?

What element in the spirit of Jesus arose to overshadow all other elementsshow how touchingly and beautifully fitting is the bilingual use of the term Father.

Explainall things are possible to thee.

Jesus did not request that the cup the Father gave Him to drink would be removedwhat cup then is referred to in Mark 14:36?

Show how the expression Not what do I wish, but what does my Father wishgives a better meaning to not what I will, but what thou wilt.

Why single Simon out of the group?

What temptation was imminent when He said that ye enter not into temptation?

What was the Saviour’s gracious apology for the languor of His disciples?

Why go again to pray the same words?

What is meant by the expression and they wist not what to answer Him.?

How or in what manner did Jesus say sleep on now? What did He mean?

Give at least three meanings to the little expression it is enough.

Do you agree with Morison’s preference? Discuss.

Who were the sinners of Mar 14:41?

How does the sublime heroism of our Lord show itself?

Mark 14:43-54

**2. JESUS BETRAYED, 14:43-54

TEXT: 14:43-54**

And straightway, while he yet spake, cometh Judas, one of the twelve, and with him a multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders. Now he that betrayed him had given them a token, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that is he; take him, and lead him away safely. And when he was come, straightway he came to him, and saith, Rabbi; and kissed him. And they laid hands on him, and took him. But a certain one of them that stood by drew his sword, and smote the servant of the high priest, and struck off his ear. And Jesus answered and said unto them are ye come out, as against a robber, with swords and staves to seize me? I was daily with you in the temple teaching and ye took me not; but this is done that the scriptures might be fulfilled. And they all left him and fled. And a certain young man followed with him, having a linen cloth cast about him, over his naked body: and they lay hold on him; but he left the linen cloth, and fled naked. And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and there come together with him all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes. And Peter had followed him afar off, even within, into the court of the high priest; and he was sitting with the officers, and warming himself in the light of the fire.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:43-54

Please attempt a location of Jesus and His apostles when he said, Behold, he that betrayeth me is at hand.

At what time was the betrayal made? How many were with Judas?

Show how each of the three groups mentioned were involved in the betrayali.e.: (1) the chief priests, (2) the scribes, (3) the elders.

Did Judas hate Jesus? Why betray Him?

Why the need for a token. Why use a kiss as a sign? Notice the footnote on the word kissthis was not just a casual kiss.

Is there any thought that some feared Jesus would escape?

Show how Jesus willingly gave Himself up to His betrayer.

What is the meaning of Rabbi? Why use this greeting?

What was involved in laid hands on Him.

What was right and wrong with Peter’s defense of Jesus?

What did Peter imagine Jesus would do when he began his attack?

Why strike the servant of the high-priest?;was he the nearest one or was there some other reason?

What particular rebuke was in the words of Jesus in Mark 14:48-49? i.e. what reflection on their power?

What scripture was fulfilled in the betrayal and capture of Jesus?

Why the incident of the young man as in Mark 14:51-52?

Why was this young man following Jesus?

Why take Jesus to the high-priest for trial?

COMMENT

TIME.After the midnight of Thursday, April 6, A.D. 30. Probably between one and three o-‘clock on the morning of Friday, April 7th. PLACE.The betrayal took place at Gethsemane, near the base of the western slope of the Mount of Olives, where the Lord had passed the agony. Gethsemane was at the western foot of the Mount of Olives, beyond the Kedron (black brook), so called from its dark waters, which was still more darkened by the blood from the foot of the altar in the temple. The spot now pointed out as Gethsemane lies on the right of the path to the Mount of Olives. The wall has been restored. Eight olive trees remain, all of them very old, but scarcely of the time of our Lord, since Titus, during the siege of Jerusalem, had all the trees of the district cut down.Schaff.

PARALLEL ACCOUNTS.Matthew 26:47-58; Luke 22:47-55; John 18:2-18.

LESSON OUTLINE.1. The Traitor’s Kiss. 2. The Flight of the Disciples. 3. The Lord Delivered to the Priests.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE TRAITOR’S KISS, Mark 14:43-46.

Enemies Guided by Judas. Mark 14:43; Matthew 26:47; Luke 22:47; John 18:3.

The Traitor’s Sign. Mark 14:44; Matthew 26:48.

Betrayed by a Kiss. Mark 14:45; Matthew 26:49; Luke 22:48.

The Lord Laid Hands Upon. Mark 14:46; Matthew 26:50.

II.

THE LIGHT OF THE DISCIPLE:, Mark 14:47-50.

Peter Draws the Sword. Mark 14:47; Matthew 26:51; Luke 22:50; John 18:10.

The Lord’s Demand of His Enemies. Mark 14:47-48; Matthew 26:55-56; Luke 22:52-53.

The Apostles Panic-stricken. Mark 14:50; Matthew 26:56.

III.

THE LORD DELIVERED TO THE PRIESTS, Mark 14:51-54.

Mark Following at a Distance. Mark 14:51-52.

Jesus Led to the Sanhedrim. Mark 14:53; Matthew 26:57; Luke 22:54; John 18:13.

Peter in the Palace of Caiaphas. Mark 14:54; Matthew 26:58; Luke 22:54; John 18:18.

INTRODUCTION

After his prayer (recorded in John 17) was ended, Jesus went with his disciples over the brook Kedron to the garden of Gethsemane, where he would await the coming of Judas. The apostate, after leaving the supper-room, had gone to the priests, and with them made arrangement for the immediate arrest of the Lord. Coming to the garden, Jesus takes with him Peter and James and John, and retires with them to a secluded spot. Here he begins to be heavy with sorrow, and, leaving the three, goes alone to pray. Returning, he finds them asleep. Leaving them, he again prays, and, in his agony, sweats a bloody sweat, but is strengthened by an angel. Again returning to the three disciples, he finds them asleep; he goes a third time and prays, and returning bids them sleep on, but soon announces the approach of Judas.Andrews. The order of events, as indicated by a comparison of the four accounts, I think it to have been substantially as follows: Christ’s prayer is broken in upon by the tramp of the approaching guards, and the gleaming of their lights as they issue from the gate of the city; their approach, observed across the intervening brook Kedron, he interprets as God-’ final answer to his prayerit is the divine will that he should drink the bitter cup. He proceeds to the entrance of the garden and arouses his disciples (Mark 14:46); Judas, who leads the band, draws near to kiss Jesus according to the pre-arranged signal; is abashed by the Lord’s reproachful question, Betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss? and makes no reply (Mark 14:49-50; Luke 22:48); the band shares his confusion, and, under the influence of the superhuman majesty of our Lord, falls backward (John 18:4-6); the disciples, emboldened, ask permission to resist (Luke 22:49), and Peter, more impetuous than the rest, does not wait for an answer, but initiates the attack (Mark 14:51; John 18:10); Christ rebukes him (Mark 14:52-54), heals the wounded servant (Luke 22:51), and demands of the officers that they let the disciples go their way (John 18:8); the disciples, forbidden to resist, interpret this as a hint to escape, and flee (Mark 14:56); at the same time the officers, who have recovered from their momentary awe, proceed to bind Jesus (John 18:12), disregarding his dignified remonstrance against being treated as a thief (Mark 14:55). For a full understanding of all the elements in this midnight scene, all the accounts should be carefully compared, but especially Matthew and John.Abbott.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

I.

THE TRAITOR’S KISS.

Mark 14:43. Cometh Judas. Between one and two o-‘clock Friday morning. The movements of Judas, after the last supper, we may readily picture to ourselves in their outline. Going immediately to Caiaphas, or to some other leading member of the Sanhedrim, he informs him where Jesus is, and announces that he is ready to fulfill his compact, and at once to make the arrest. It was not the intention to arrest Christ during the feast, lest there be a popular tumult (Matthew 26:5); but, now that an opportunity offered of seizing him secretly at dead of night, when all were asleep or engaged at the paschal meal, his enemies could not hesitate.Andrews. Judas knew the place, for it was a frequent resort of Jesus with his disciples (John 18:2). A great multitude. This consisted, (1) of the band (John 18:3; John 18:12), or Roman cohort, which, consisting of 300 to 600 men, quartered in the tower of Antonia, overlooking the temple, and ever ready to put down any tumult or arrest any disturber. Probably so much of the band as could be spared was present. (2) There were the captains of the temple (Luke 22:52), with their men, who guarded the temple and kept order, (3) Some of the chief priests and elders (Luke 22:52). (4) And, finally, their servants, such as Malchus (John 18:10), and others, who had been commissioned by the Jewish authorities.Clark. Swords and staves. The soldiers were armed with swords, the officers of the priests with staves. They also had torches, though the moon was at the full, probably to search under the shadows of the trees and the rocks.

Mark 14:44. He that betrayed. a token. Judas had given them the sign previously. It was necessary, inasmuch as (the Roman soldiers did not personally know Christ, and) in the darkness he might be confounded, by the officers, with the disciples. The whole account indicates anxiety lest he should escape as he had done before (John 7:45-46; John 8:59; John 10:39).Abbott. Shall kiss. The kiss, among the ancients, was a sign of affectionate and cordial intimacy, and particularly a token of fidelity. Nothing could be baser than to come in enmity with the signs of deepest affection. Thus Joab betrayed and murdered Abner; a treacherous deed that David could not forget when he was dying.

Mark 14:45. Master, master; and kissed him. The salutation was hypocritical reverence. Master is the same as Rabbi, or teacher. Kissed him. An emphatic compound of the verb in the preceding verse, without exact equivalent in English, but denoting that he kissed him in an affectionate and earnest manner, adding to the guilt of the betrayal by the manner of committing it. .

Mark 14:46. Laid their hands on him. This is an epitome of the following verses describing the capture. And took him. But only because Christ offers himself to be taken. He could have had twelve legions of angels to defend and rescue him, had he desired (Matthew 26:53). It was to be emphatically set forth before the eyes of allJudas as wellthat no man had power to bind this Jesus, or to lead him away to death, unless he himself should lay down his life.

II.

THE FLIGHT OF THE DISCIPLES.

Mark 14:47. One of them. drew a sword. The one of them was Peter (John 18:10). Why he was not mentioned is idle to inquire; one supposition only must be avoided, that there is any purpose in the omission. It is absurd to suppose that the mention of his name in a book current only among Christians, many years after the fact, could lead to his apprehension, which did not take place at the time, although he was recognized as the striker in the palace of the high priest (John 18:26). The real reason of the non-apprehension was that the servant was healed by the Lord.Alford. And smote a servant of the high priest. His name was Malchus (John 18:10). The impetuosity of the attack was just like Peter. He asked, Shall we fight? and waited not for the answer, but struck at once. It is likely that Malchus was one of those who had seized the Lord. Peter’s blow was one of his mistakes. Carnal weapons cannot defend the cause ofthe Lord. Besides, the Lord needed no defenders. The death of Christ was a voluntary surrendering of himself for the redemption of the world. Knowing the designs of the Pharisees against him, he could have eluded them by remaining beyond Jordan. Knowing the purpose of Judas to betray him, he could have withdrawn to some place of safety. But now that his mission of teaching, of healing, of guiding, was accomplished, the hour of sacrifice had come; and he was prepared to meet it. At the last, he could have summoned legions of angels to his help; but he gave himself for us.

Mark 14:48. Are ye come out, as against a thief? The word is the same as that used in John 18:40, of Barabbas, and points to the brigand chieftain of a lawless band, as distinct from the petty thief of towns or villages.Plumptre. Judas had cautioned the guard to lead Jesus away securely (Mark 14:44), and when they finally arrested him they bound him (John 18:12). This indignity, it appears to me, probably called forth the remonstrance of this verse. Compare the language of Luk 22:52-53Abbott. Throughout his prolonged sufferings he complained of no other injury done to him than this; namely, that they came to apprehend him as a criminal.

Mark 14:49. I was daily with you in the temple teaching. This was not like a brigand. Why did they not arrest him then? Took me not. The offense with which he was charged was one of teaching, not of robbery or violence; it was open, public, unconcealed, and the time to arrest him was the time of his teaching; he had neither hid himself, nor surrounded himself with his followers for self-protection; the indignity of this midnight arrest-was, therefore, gratuitous.Abbott. The Scriptures must be fulfilled. As, for instance, relative to Judas (Psalms 41:9), relative to Christ being treated as a transgressor (Isaiah 53:12), relative to the desertion of the disciples (Zechariah 13:7), According to the counsel of God, for the salvation of a sinful world, as declared in the Scriptures, the Messiah must suffer; that suffering must be thus brought about, Our Lord’s death could not be incidental or accidental. This declaration also contained consolation for his terrified disciples.

Mark 14:50. They all forsook him and fled, All had said they would never forsake him, but as soon as he submitted to his captors they were all panic-stricken and fled like sheep. They had never taken up the idea that it would be consistent with the ends contemplated in the mission of the Messiah that he should be ignominiously arrested. This statement of the desertion of Jesus by -all the disciples-’ is one of the most remarkable instances of that honesty which led the evangelists to record facts, though to their own dishonor.Mimpriss.

III.

THE LORD DELIVERED TO THE PRIESTS.

Mark 14:51. A certain young man. The incident of this young man occurs very briefly, and is narrated apparently for no purpose whatever. The only solution, certainly the best, is the supposition that it was no other than Mark himself. Mark was at this time a young man, living probably in Jerusalem with his mother, and was more or less a follower of Jesus, and very likely to be present, from his interest in our Lord, during these awful transactions. That he should not name himself is very naturally explained, on the same principle of personal delicacy as induced the evangelist John to allude to himself in the third person. Such are the views of Schaff, Ellicott, Godet, and others. The minuteness of Mark’s details of these events points to one who writes from personal knowledge. A linen cloth. A wrapper thrown over his undressed body. Doubtless this was the aba, an outer cloth thrown over the dress, and used even in sleep to enwrap the body. Dr. Thomson (vol. 1, p. 500) speaks of the very poor who sleep in their aba, or outer garment, and have no other raiment for their skin. But the word rendered here naked often signifies undressed, that is, clad in the under-garments alone, Mark had, probably, been roused from sleep, or just preparing to retire to rest in a house somewhere in the valley of Kedron, and he had nothing to cover him except the upper garment; but, in spite of this, he ventured, in his excitement, to press on amongst the crowd. This upper garment was worn much like a Scottish plaid.

Mark 14:52. And he left the linen cloth. In attempting to lay hold on him, they grasped only the loose folds of the linen cloth. Letting this remain with them, he fled away and escaped, either not being pursued, or taking advantage of his knowledge of the place, in the darkness of the night, to elude his pursuers.

Mark 14:53. Led Jesus away. Jesus was now absolutely alone in the power of his enemies. At the command of the tribune his hands were tied behind his back, and, forming a close array around him, the Roman soldiers, followed and surrounded by the Jewish servants, led him once more through the night, over the Kedron, and up the steep city slope beyond it, to the palace of the high priest.Farrar. To the high priest. We learn from John (John 18:13-15) that Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, and, after a brief delay here, to the palace of Caiaphas, the high priest.Andrews. It was the duty of Annas to examine the sacrifices, whether they were without blemish; there was significancy in it that Christ, the great Sacrifice, was presented to him, and sent away bound as approved and ready for the altar.Lightfoot. The actual high priest at the time was Caiaphas; but this Annas had been high priest, and as such enjoyed the title by courtesy. Being also a man of great wealth and influence, and of active habits, he took upon him much of the business of that office, as a sort of assessor to, or substitute for, Caiaphas, who was his son-in-law. Hence the evangelist describes them both as high priests (Luke 3:2), as they were in fact. Were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes. It was against the rules of Jewish law to hold a session of the Sanhedrim or council for the trial of capital offenses by night. Such an assembly on the night of the paschal supper must have been still more at variance with usage. The present gathering was therefore an informal oneprobably a packed meeting of those who were parties to the plot; Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea, and probably not a few others, like the young ruler of Luk 18:18, not being summoned.Ellicott.

Mark 14:54. Peter followed him afar off. After their flight in the garden, at least two of the apostles, Peter and John, turned about and followed from a distance the band that led the Savior. Peter followed secretly to see what the result would be. Into the place of the high priest. John, who was acquainted there, as we learn from his account, secured admission for Peter and himself. And warmed himself at the fire. The spring nights at Jerusalem, 2,600 feet above the sea, are often cold. The fire was built in an open court in the interior of the building, open to the sky, around which the palace was constructed.

FACT QUESTIONS 14:43-54

At what time did the betrayal occur? Why?

Describe the location of the garden of Gethsemane.

What shall we say of the olive trees shown to tourists as the very ones under which our Lord knelt?

Was it necessary to go over the Brook Kedron to reach Gethsemane?Trace the route.

At what juncture in His agony was our Lord strengthened by an angel?

Why did Jesus return to His disciples three times?was there any excuse for the sleep of the disciples?

What does Christ interpret as God’s final answer to His prayer?

What very unusual event occurs to Judas and those who have come to arrest Jesus? Why?

What two rebukes are given by Jesus during this betrayal scene?

What was the circumstance that prompted the enemies of Christ not to hesitate in the arrest?

Describe briefly the four groups in a great multitude who came to arrest Jesus.

Read John 7:45-46; John 8:59; John 10:39 and show the reason for the anxiety of those who came to take Jesus.

How did Judas add to the guilt of his betrayal?

How did Jesus plainly show to all that no man could have taken Him without Jesus-’ consent?

What purpose was there in not mentioning the name of Peter as one who struck Malchus?

Show three ways Jesus could have used to prevent His capture.

In what way did Jesus link himself with Barabbas? Cf. John 18:40.

For what was Jesus arrested? Show how appropriate are the words of Mar 14:49 a.

Read Psalms 41:9; Isaiah 53:12; Zechariah 13:7 and show how these were all fulfilled.

Show how Mark 14:50 contains a remarkable instance of honesty on the part of the writer Mark.

Why record the incident of a certain young man? Who was this young man?

Why was the young man undressed?

Did the soldiers arrest the apostles? Why attempt to arrest the unnamed young man?

Describe the manner in which Christ was led away.

To whom was Jesus first led? WhyWhat special significance is there in this action?

How could it be that there were two high-priests? Who were they?

What type of assembly gathered to judge Jesus? Who was and who wasn-’t there?

Who followed with Peter? Why?Where?

Mark 14:55-65

**3. JESUS BEFORE THE COUNCIL 14:55-65

TEXT 14:55-65**

Now the chief priests and the whole council sought witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found it not. For many bare false witness against him, and their witness agreed not together. And there stood up certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands. And not even so did their witness agree together. And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and saith unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus said, I am; and ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming with the clouds of heaven. And the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What further need have we of witnesses? Ye have heard the blasphemy; what think ye? And they all condemned him to be worthy of death. And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the officers received him with blows of their hands.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:55-65

Why were the chief priests and the whole council so determined to put Jesus to death?

Just what was involved in the testimony of witnesses? Why were they unable to find witnesses?

What was unequal about the testimony of the witnesses?

Why were the authorities so opposed to Jesus? Please attempt to be specific.

Read John 2:19 and show how the words of Jesus were twisted to say what Jesus did not say. Cf. Mark 13:2.

Why the personal attempt on the part of the high priest to provoke a response from Jesus?

Why did Jesus answer the second question but not the first one?

What was the purpose of our Lord in speaking of the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power?

What is suggested in the action of the high priest in tearing his clothes?

Just what was the specific charge of the blasphemy?

Are we to understand the members of the Sanhedrim spit upon Jesus?

Are we to understand the members of the Sanhedrim spat upon Jesus? What was the cause of such intense hatred?

COMMENT

TIME.Early Friday morning, April 7, A.D. 30, between one and six o-‘clock. This meeting took place before the dawn of day on Friday morning. PLACE.The palace of Caiaphas, the high priest in Jerusalem. The exact location of the palace of Caiaphas is unknown, but it was probably not far from the temple.

PARALLEL ACCOUNTS.Matthew 26:59-75. The trial (Mark 14:55-65) is found in Luke 22:63-71 and John 18:19-24.

ORDER OF EVENTS.After the arrest, and its incidents: (1) Jesus was taken first to the house of Annas, ex-high priest (John 18:13), (2) Next to the palace of Caiaphas, Peter and John following (John 18:15). (3) Here was a preliminary examination before Caiaphas (John 18:19-24. (4) The trial before the council, illegal because held at nightbefore three o-‘clock the cock-crowing (Matthew 26:59-65. Mark 14:55-64). (5) Peter’s three denials during the trial (Matthew 26:69-75. Mark 14:66-72). (6) After the Sanhedrim had pronounced him guilty, it suspends its session till break of day. (7) During this interval Jesus is exposed to the insults of his enemies (Matthew 26:67-68. Mark 14:65. Luke 22:63-65). (8) At the dawn of day the Sanhedrim reassembles (Matthew 27:1. Mark 15:1. Luke 22:66). (9) After hearing Christ’s confession again, he is formally condemned to death for blasphemy (Luke 22:66-71.) (10) He is bound, and sent to Pilate (Mark 15:1).

OUTLINE.1. False Witness Against Christ. 2. The Lord bears Witness. 3. The Lord Condemned to Die.

ANALYSIS

I.

FALSE WITNESS AGAINST CHRIST, Mark 14:55-59.

False Testimony Sought. Mark 14:15; Matthew 26:59.

The False Witnesses fail to Agree. Mark 14:56; Matthew 26:50; 1 Peter 3:16.

The False Witness Concerning the Temple. Mark 14:57-59; Matthew 26:51.

II.

THE LORD BEARS WITNESS, Mark 14:60-62.

The High Priest Examines Christ. Mark 14:60; Matthew 26:52.

The Silence of Christ. Mark 14:61; Matthew 26:63; Isaiah 53:7.

The Great and Good Confession. Mark 14:62; Matthew 26:64.

III.

THE LORD CONDEMNED TO DIE, Mark 14:63-65.

The High Priest Pronounces Judgment. Mark 14:63; Matthew 26:65.

The Sanhedrim Votes the Death of Christ. Mark 14:64; Matthew 26:66.

The Lord Abused and Insulted. Mark 14:65; Matthew 26:67.

INTRODUCTION

I. THE COURT. The court convened to try Jesus Christ was the Sanhedrim, or Sanhedrin. It consisted of chief priests, that is, the heads of the twenty-four priestly classes; scribes, that is, rabbis learned in the literature of the church; and elders, who were chosen from amongst the most influential of the laity. Jewish tradition puts the number of members at seventy-one. The high priest usually presided: the vice-president sat at his right hand. The other councilors were ranged in front of these two in the form of a semicircle. Two scribes or clerks attended, who on criminal trials registered the votes, one for acquittal, the other for condemnation.Abbott. The priests were there, whose greed and selfishness he had exposed; and, worse than all, the worldly, sceptical Sadducees, the most cruel and dangerous of opponents, whose empty sapience he had confuted,Farrar. The Sanhedrin had power to try those charged with capital offences, but it had no power to execute the sentence of death (John 18:31).

II. THE TRIAL. The whole criminal procedure in the Pentateuch rests upon three principles: (1) publicity of the trial, (2) entire liberty of defence allowed to the accused, and (3) a guaranty against the dangers of testimony: one witness is no witness. There must be at least two or three who know the facts.M. Dupin. Throughout the whole course of the trial, the rules of Jewish law of procedure were grossly violated, and the accused was deprived of rights belonging even to the meanest citizen. He was arrested in the night, bound as a malefactor, beaten before his arraignment, and struck in open court during the trial. He was tried on a feast-day, and before sunrise. He was compelled to criminate himself, and this under an oath of solemn judicial adjuration; and he was sentenced on the same day of the conviction. In all these particulars the law was wholly disregarded.Prof. Greenleaf’s Trial of Jesus, in the Testimony of the Evangelists.

III. THE ACCUSATION. The crime for which Jesus was condemned before the Sanhedrin was his alleged blasphemy; i.e., an assumption of power and authority which belonged to Jehovah alone (Matthew 26:65). But when he was brought before Pilate they changed the accusation to one of treason against the Roman government, as the only one of which Pilate would take cognizance (Luke 23:2).

EXPLANATORY NOTES

I. FALSE WITNESS AGAINST CHRIST.

Mark 14:55. The chief priests, Annas and Caiaphas, the ex-high priest and the acting high priest, and the heads of the twenty-four courses. All the council. The priests just named and certain scribes and elders to the number of seventy-one (see Introduction) constituted the Sanhedrim, or council. Geikie says: In imitation of the traditional usages of the Sanhedrin, while it existed, the judges before whom Jesus was led sat, turbaned, on cushions or pillows, in Oriental fashion, with crossed legs, and unshod feet, in a half circle; Caiaphas, as high priest, in the center, and the chief or oldest, according to precedence, on each side. The prisoner was placed, standing before Caiaphas; at each end of the semicircle sat a scribe, to write out the sentence of acquittal or condemnation; some bailiffs, with cords and thongs, guarded the accused, while a few others stood behind, to call witnesses, and, at the close, to carry out the decision of the judges. Sought for witness. Not to ascertain the truth, but to destroy one whom they considered a personal enemy, was this trial conducted. Found one. It was necessary to find two who had been present at the same or a precisely similar offense, whatever it might be. The difficulty, then, was not that they found none, as the English Bible renders it, but, as the Greek words literally mean, they did not find (what they were seeking,) i.e., probably, two witnesses to one and the same act. It would have been strange indeed if no one could be found to testify at all; but it was not strange that they found it hard to obtain two concurrent witnesses to one and the same thing.Alexander.

Mark 14:56. Many bare false witness. The charge against Jesus of declaring himself the Son of the God and so making himself equal with God (John 10:33), was one which it was impossible to substantiate by any witnesses outside the immediate circle of Christ’s disciples, for his ministry had been one of singularly commingled boldness and cautionboldness in the truths he uttered, caution in the methods of his utterance. He never publicly proclaimed himself the Messiah. He forbade the evil spirits from announcing his character. Mark 1:34. He received the confession of his disciples, but refused to permit them to repeat it to others. Matthew 16:20. Interrogated by the Jews whether he was the Christ, he had refused a direct reply, and had referred them to his works. John 10:24-25. He had given the same response to the public questioning of John’s disciples. In most of his later ministry he had veiled his meaning in parables. Hence the witnesses were contradictory and failed to meet the demands of the law.

Mark 14:57. There arose certain. At least two were found who were willing to give a distorted version of something Christ had said over two years before.

Mark 14:58. We heard him say, I will destroy this temple. The false witness consisted in giving that sense to his words which it appears by Matthew 27:63 they knew they did not bear. There is perhaps a trace, in the different reports of Matthew and Mark, of the discrepancy between the witnesses. There is considerable difference between the words attributed to him here, and there. These witnesses falsely reported his words, and failed also to understand what he did say but gave a new version according to their understanding.

Mark 14:59. Neither so did their witness agree. Their statements varied so much that there was not sufficient testimony on any one point to convict. Therefore this first plan failed.

II.

THE LORD BEARS WITNESS.

Mark 14:60. The high priest stood up. Thus far, during all the wicked attempts to torture testimony against him the Lord had maintained unbroken silence. This was galling to the pride of Caiaphas, who saw that nothing remained but to force him, if possible, to criminate himself. In the midst. The high priest, leaving his official seat, came forward into the middle of the semi-circle, in which the members of the Sanhedrim were seated. The accused stood facing them, so that the high priest was then immediately side by side with our Lord. Answerest thou nothing? The question implies a long-continued silence, while witness after witness were uttering clumsy falsehoods. In the silence itself we may perhaps trace a deliberate fulfilment of Isa 53:7. What is it which these witness? The first object of Caiphas was to draw out an answer to the allegations, which, as he well knew, would not suffice, as they then stood, for condemnation.

Mark 14:61. But he held his peace. It was no part of his duty, as a defendant, to unravel the contradictions of his unprincipled accusers. Our Lord was silent; for in answering he must have opened to them the meaning of his words, which was not the work of this hour, nor fitting for that audience. Truth is never mute for want of arguments of defence, but sometimes silent, out of holy wisdom. Said unto him. I adjure thee (Matthew 26:63). This was the regular legal formula for administering oaths, and was binding on witnesses without their answering (Leviticus 5:1). Art thou the Christ? Caiaphas became desperate, and adopted a resource which our own rules of evidence would declare most infamous, and which was also wholly adverse to the first principles of Mosaic jurisprudence, and the like of which occurs in no circumstance of Hebrew history. It was that of putting the prisoner upon his oath to answer questions framed for his own crimination.Kitto.

Mark 14:62. And Jesus said, I am. His declaration of his divine Sonship constitutes Christ’s solemn testimony to himself, uttered at the momentous crisis of his life, under the solemn sanction of an oath, in the course of judicial proceedings, in the presence of the highest council of the realm, in the far more sacred presence of God and his recording angels, at the peril of his life, and with a clear comprehension of the meaning which not only priests and people would attach to it, but with which it would be forever invested by humanity. If it had not been true it would have been blasphemy,Abbott. Ye shall see. The shall ye see is to the council, the representatives of the chosen people, so soon to be judged by him to whom all judgment is committedthe power in contrast to his present weaknesssitting, even as they now sat, to judge him; and the coming in the clouds of heaven (see Daniel 7:13) looks onward to the awful time of the end, when every eye shall see him.Alford. Let it be noted that this is the Lord’s first formal, public declaration of his divinity. He now offered up his life in attestation of his Messiahship and divine character.

III.

THE LORD CONDEMNED TO DIE.

Mark 14:63. The high priest rent his clothes. The act was almost as much a formal sign of condemnation as the putting on of the black cap by an English judge.Plumptre. The practice of rending the clothes on occasions of supposed blasphemy was based on 2 Kings 18:37. Originally it was a natural outburst of intense grief, and was involuntary; but at a later period it became a mere form regulated by special rules. The rent made in the garment was from the neck downward, and about a span in length. The body dress and outer garment were left untouched.Lange. What need we any further witnesses? They had called but one true witness; his testimony they rejected; and yet on the strength of his testimony they were about to condemn him !

Mark 14:64. Ye have heard the blasphemy. Blasphemy here denotes reproachful, irreverent, or insulting language concerning God, or any of his names or attributes. Such would be the making God to be only like a man. Hence, had Jesus not been the Messiah, what he said would have been blasphemy. What think ye? A formal putting of the question. And they all. It may therefore be inferred that none had been summoned who were known or suspected to favor our Lord, though they may have been called to the more formal council at daybreak. Condemned him. This formal condemnation was, as they imagined, according to the law (Leviticus 24:16). Compare Deuteronomy 18:20. The Sanhedrim was forbidden to investigate any capital crime during the night, and according to the Roman law a sentence pronounced before dawn was not valid. This test vote, however, they considered as settling the question.Schaff. The council now adjourned, to meet at daybreak, when they could legally pronounce the sentence. In the mean time occurred the maltreatment by his lawless enemies described in the next verse. The daybreak meeting, at which the sentence already pronounced was formally ratified, is described in Luke 22:66-71. John only relates the examination before Annas; Matthew and Mark give the account of the packed and illegal meeting of the Sanhedrim before day, presided over by Caiaphas. Luke only gives the account of the ratification meeting of the Sanhedrim at the dawn of day. All the accounts must be studied in order to get the full account of the Jewish condemnation of the Lord.

Mark 14:65. Began to spit on him. One under sentence of death was always, in these rough ages, the sport of mockery of his guards, and those in charge of Jesus, made worse than common by the example of the judges, vented their cruelty on him with the coarsest brutality. Their passions, indeed, intensified their bitterness, for they were fierce Jewish bigots.Geikie. To say unto him, Prophesy. He who claims to be chief of the prophets should now give us a specimen of his prophetic powers. He was blindfolded, so that they were putting his prophetic powers to a mock test. Compare these insults before the Jews, which alluded to his claims of Messiahship with the insults by the Romans, which alluded to his political claims.

FACT QUESTIONS 14:55-65

Please retrace carefully the three incidents leading to the trial of Jesus and the seven following.

How many chief priests in the council? From whence did they come?

Who were the scribes? the elders?

Who presided? How was the condemnation or acquittal recorded?

Show why each class in the Sanhedrim were adverse in their opinion of Jesus.

The whole criminal procedure in the Pentateuch rests upon three principleswhat were they?

Show at least four particulars in which throughout the course of his trial the rules of Jewish law were grossly violated.

What were the two accusations brought against Jesus?

Why did the council seek a witness?

The problem was not that they could not find witnesses but rather in the quality of the ones they foundexplain.

Why would it be almost impossible to substantiate the charge of Jesus declaring Himself to be the Son of God?

When had anyone heard Him say I will destroy this temple? Cf. Matthew 27:63.

The testimony of the witnesses was rejectedwhy?

Why did Caiaphas stand up in the midst of the council?

Show how Isaiah 53:7 was fulfilled in the trial.

What did Caiaphas hope to do in any testimony Jesus would give?

Truth is never mute for want of arguments of defense, but sometimes silent out of___________ ___________.

In what manner did Caiaphas attempt to cause Christ to criminate Himself?

Please read Abbott’s beautiful comment under Mark 14:62. And Jesus said, I amgive three or four of the momentous circumstances attending this confession.

To whom did Jesus address the words Ye shall see? Why did He make such a stupendous prediction? Cf. Daniel 7:13.

What significance was there in the rent clothes of the high priest? How did the practice originate?

The claim of Jesus would have been indeed blasphemy except for one factwhat was it?

Who was called to this Council meeting? When was it held?

Read Leviticus 24:16; Deuteronomy 18:20 and show how the Council felt they had acted according to lawShow two particulars where they had not.

In what sense was a test vote taken?

Between the early morning meeting and daybreak what happened in the treatment of Jesus?

Who spit on Jesus?

Read Luke 22:66-71 for the daybreak meeting.

When was Jesus tried before Annas?

How can we imagine the dignified religious elders of the supreme court spitting on anyone?

The Jews mocked Jesus for one claim, the Romans for anotherwhat were the claims? Were they true?

Mark 14:66-72

**4. PETER’S DENIALS 14:66-72

TEXT 14:66-72**

And as Peter was beneath in the court, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest; and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked upon him and saith. Thou also wast with the Nazarene, even Jesus. But he denied, saying, I neither know, nor understand what thou sayest: and he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. And the maid saw him and began again to say to them that stood by. This is one of them. But he again denied it. And after a little while again they that stood by said to Peter, Of a truth thou art one of them; for thou art a Galilean. But he began to curse, and to swear, I know not this man of whom ye speak. And straightway the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word, how that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:66-72

Please attempt a picture in mind of the Court of Caiaphaswhat is meant by the expression beneath the court or below in the courtyard?

Why had Peter followed Jesus? What were his feelings about Jesus at this time?

Since it was dark (in the early morning hour) how could the maid recognize Peter?

Read John 18:16could we identify this maid with the one mentioned by John?

What tasks were performed by these maids of the high priest?

Why was Peter so quick in his denial? Wouldn-’t it have been easier to ignore the accusation? Discuss.

Of what did Peter have to be ashamed in his association with Jesus?

What was the porch or vestibule into which Peter went? Where was the cock? Why go into the vestibule?

Read Matthew 26:29-75; Luke 22:55-62 and discuss who the second maid was in the second denial by Peter.

Who accused Peter in his third denial? Why? Cf. Luke 22:59.

What caused the by-standers to join in the verbal attack? Cf. Matthew 26:73.

Please attempt a careful explanation as to what is involved in curse and to swearit is not profanity.

Read Luke 22:61 for a reason for the weeping of Peter.

What is meant by the word having thought thereon? i.e. in what manner did Peter think thereon?

Why was Peter willing to defend his Lord in Gethsemaneface a mob armed with swords and clubs and yet wilt before a maid who pointed her finger at him?

Attempt an explanation of the depth of repentance in the weeping of Peter.

*COMMENT

Time.*Early Friday morning, April 7, A.D. 30, between one and six o-‘clock.

*Place.*The palace of Caiaphas, the high priest in Jerusalem. The exact location of the palace of Caiaphas is unknown, but it was probably not far from the temple.

Parallel Accounts.Matthew 26:69-75; Luke 22:55-62; John 18:15-18; John 18:25-27.

*Outline.*1. The first denial, Mark 14:66-68. 2. The second denial, Mark 14:69-70 a. 3. The third denial, Mark 14:70 b - Mark 14:71. 4. Peter’s repentance, Mark 14:72.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE FIRST DENIAL, Mark 14:66-68.

The place of the denialbeneath in the courtyard.

The accuser in the denialthere cometh one of the maids of the high priest.

The light for the denialthe fire of the enemies of Jesusseeing Peter warming himself.she looked upon him.

The accusation of the denialThou also wast with the Nazarene, even Jesus.

The hasty, embarrassed denialI neither know, nor understand what thou sayest.

Peter’s retreathe went out into the porch.

The sermon of the cockand the cock crew.

II.

THE SECOND DENIAL, Mark 14:69-70 a.

Either the same maid or another one again accused Him. Cf. Matthew 26:71; Luke 22:58.

He again denied it.

III.

THE THIRD DENIAL, Mark 14:70 b - Mark 14:71.

Made by those who stood byperhaps aroused by the words of the maid.

Peter bound himself under an oath that he did not know Jesus.

IV.

PETER’S REPENTANCE, Mark 14:72.

The second crowing of the cock immediately after the third denial.

The promise of Jesus called to mind.

The meaning of what he had done broke his heart.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

I.

THE FIRST DENIAL.

Mark 14:66. beneath in the palace.) Or below in the court. Matthew, without in the hall. The chamber in which the Sanhedrim met was an upper room.

Mark 14:68. neither understand I.) Mark is careful to give every word; even this slight addition aggravates Peter’s sin.

And he went out into the porch.) The exact place designated was a small forecourt in the open air. There the crowing of the cock might be heard more easily than in the inner court; this crowning was about one or two o-‘clock,see note on Mark 14:30some three or four hours before the second crowing, giving therefore some intimation as to the length of the proceedings. According to the late Jewish tradition cocks were not kept in Jerusalem, being considered unclean; but there are distinct proofs to the contrary in the Talmud.

And the cock crew.) This is omitted by B, but is found in MSS of the highest authority, and in most ancient versions. It should certainly be retained.

II.

THE SECOND DENIAL.

Mark 14:69. And a maid.) This might give an impression that the same maid is meant; but Peter was then near the gate or outer door, and the person who would naturally see him was the portress. We know from John, chapter John 18:16, that a female kept the door. She could speak positively to his identity. Then came the second denial. There was an interval, it might be of two hours, between this and the preceding denial: another interval of about an hour (Luke Mark 14:59) passes and the bystanders, who had been present at the arrest, one recognizing him as the smiter of Malchus, unanimously charged him.

III.

THE THIRD DENIAL.

Mark 14:71. curse and to swear. Matthew has the same strong, expression, which Luke, the Pauline Evangelist, omits. But Mark adds a few sharp painful words, this (contemptuous), and the expression, whom ye speak of, as though he knew Him only from their statement.

The oldest MSS have immediately before the second time, which one omits.

IV.

PETER’S REPENTANCE.

Mark 14:72. the second time. This was about an hour before dawn. The trial was then just over: our Lord was now in the court passing towards the porch, bound and in the hands of the attendants, and turned, as Luke alone tells, to cast a look on the denier, That look Peter could not forget, but he could hardly bear to speak of it; it told too of unbroken affection, and that in relating his own great sin he might scarcely dare to record. What he does relate is the sudden reaction at the second cock-crowing, and when he thought thereon he wepthe will not even dwell on the bitterness of his anguish, which the other Synoptists record with natural sympathy. He omits also the words, he went out. He will say nothing of himself save what concerned the greatness of his fall, and the simple fact of his grief (a long weeping,) on the awakening of conscience. The rendering when he thought thereon, is correct; the Greek word implies exactly that when he turned his thought and recalled those words, he began to weep, and continued weeping. Other explanations are doubtful and unsatisfactory. N. B. Grimm (Lex. s.v.) gives good authority for this (Antonin. 10, 30; Plut. Plac. Philippians 4, 1), and adds, absol. sc. quum perpendisset effatum Christi. Rather, quum animum advertisset ad effatum Jesu.

Thus terminates the preliminary inquiry. The sentence of death is not pronounced in a formal and legal way, but the decision that death was the proper penalty has been given; the only question that remains is how it is to be executed. On the illegality of the whole proceeding, see note on Matt. xxvii. I. (F. C. Cook)

FACT QUESTIONS 14:66-72

What slight addition in the report by Mark aggravates Peter’s sin?

What intimation do we get of the length of the proceedings?

What was the total time involved in the three denials?

How is the word this used in Mark 14:71?

How do we learn of the unbroken affection between Jesus and Peter?

On what did Peter think that made him weep?