From: Busy Person’s Guide to John 11 to 21 Return to Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2019
All reproduction of
text in paper, electronic, or computer
form both permitted and encouraged so long as
authorial
credit is given and the text is not altered.
Busy Person’s Guide to the
New Testament:
Quickly Understanding John
(Volume 2: Chapters 16 to 18)
Chapter Sixteen
Jesus Warns Them of Coming Persecution So They Will Be
Prepared for It When It Occurs (John 16:1-4):
1 “I have told you all these things so that you will not fall away. 2 They will put you out of the synagogue, yet a time is coming when the
one who kills you will think he is offering service to God. 3 They will do these things because they have not known the Father or me. 4 But I have told you these things so that when their time comes, you will
remember that I told you about them. I did not tell you
these things from the beginning because I was with you.” --New English
Translation (for comparison)
16:1 “These things I have spoken to you, that you should not be made to
stumble. Jesus had already warned them of
the coming dangers (
“Stumble”
implies losing one’s balance and being in danger of falling--with the
implication of falling away from the truths, loyalty, and dedication
they had previously known. Hence some
translations render along the line of “turn away” (CEV), “give up your faith”
(GNT), and “lose your faith” (GW).
16:2 They will put you out of the
synagogues; yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he
offers God service. It was
unquestionable that they would pay a stiff price for continued loyalty. They would be kicked out of synagogues when
their loyalties became known. (Disciples
were already being treated that way:
John
Since they
are doing this out of a misled sense of loyalty to God, the suggestion of some
commentators that “offers God service” carries the idea of providing the
equivalent of a temporal “sacrifice” to God has an appeal. To them it is as “devout” an offering to God
as if they had offered an animal in the
The ancient
Syriac and Gothic translations explicitly use that
imagery in their renderings: “ ‘The time shall come when the killing you will be
thought a part of the worship of God, and equally meritorious and acceptable
with the offering of sacrifices.’
Archbishop Leighton’s observation on the passage is, that ‘the servants
of Christ should be considered not only as sheep for the slaughter, but as
sheep for the altar too.’ ”
(Benson Commentary)
“A Rabbinic comment on Numbers 25:13 is, ‘Whosoever sheddeth the blood
of the wicked is as he who offereth sacrifice.’ The martyrdom of Stephen, or Paul’s account
of himself as a persecutor (Acts 26:9; Galatians
16:3 And these things they will do to you because they have not known the Father nor Me. Such behavior would grow out of their fundamental failure to “know” (= understand, grasp, embrace) either the Father or the Divine Son. Today we would say they would become “collateral damage” because nothing could be done against their real target since Jesus was no longer on the earth.
Within their own intellectual limits such persecutors might even be sincere. But that would not change in the least the fact that what they are doing is evil and that it furthers Satan’s agenda and not that of God.
16:4 But these things I have told you, that when the time
comes, you may remember that I told you of them. And these things I did not say to you at the
beginning, because I was with you. It is true that Jesus had previously
warned them that life threatening dangers would come to them because of their
loyalty (Matthew
Even Though It Saddened Them to Hear He Was Leaving, There
Was Still an Important Gain to Come—They Would Be Able to Receive the Holy
Spirit, Who Would Provide Them a Complete Revelation of the Divine Will (John
16:5-15): 5 “But now I am going to
the one who sent me, and not one of you is asking me, ‘Where are you going?’ 6 Instead your hearts are filled with sadness because I have said these
things to you.
7 “But I tell you the
truth, it is to your advantage that I am going away. For if I do not go away, the Advocate will not
come to you, but if I go, I will send him to you. 8 And when he comes, he will prove the world wrong concerning sin and
righteousness and judgment— 9 concerning sin,
because they do not believe in me; 10 concerning righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you will
see me no longer; 11 and concerning
judgment, because the ruler of this world has been condemned.
12 “I have many more
things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all
truth. For he will not speak on his own
authority, but will speak whatever he hears, and will tell you what is to come.
14 “He will glorify me,
because he will receive from me what is mine and will tell it to you. 15 Everything that the Father has is mine; that is why I said the Spirit
will receive from me what is mine and will tell it to you. --New English Translation (for comparison)
16:5 “But now I go away to Him
who sent Me, and none of you asks Me, ‘Where are You
going?’ Although Jesus was
departing none of them felt comfortable in pursuing and insisting upon an
answer as to where it would be.
Since the question itself had already been asked in passing (
16:6 But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your heart. Even though they weren’t quite sure where He was heading, the ominous overtones that were inherent in the prediction produced an emotional backlash in the “sorrow” that had overcome them. Past separations--such as their being sent out to share the joy of the coming kingdom (Luke 9:1-6)--were temporary and they knew they would be back with Jesus in a limited amount of time. Here there was no indication that the separation would be relatively brief; “sorrow” was the inevitable result. They were concentrating on their loss and it drove out all other thoughts. Hence He promptly stresses that they need to center on their gain. . . .
16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. However much it might disturb them, there was an “advantage” to Jesus leaving (“benefit,” Holman; “best for you,” CEV): only by doing so would the Helper be sent to them. Jesus personally would not be there, but the Holy Spirit would continue His work by helping them and encouraging them in their spiritual insight and actions.
16:8 And when He has come, He
will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: The divine Helper would teach
about three broad areas: (1) “sin,” (2)
“righteousness” (= how to be counted right with God and what constituted truly
moral behavior), and (3) the coming “judgment” all would face for their earthly
actions. The Greek for “convict” also
covers the related ideas of “expose” and “reprove.” The Spirit will expose what is really sin
(even when it contradicts secular delusions), will “reprove” (criticize and
condemn no matter who is doing it) and will “convict” (declare us guilty if we
practice such acts). All are sinners not
because they simply exist but because of how they act and think. The Final Judgment is not in the Spirit’s
hands; but if we listen and heed what the Spirit has taught, then the
“disposition of our case” on that great day will be one that will please us.
16:9 of sin, because they do not believe in Me; The Helper Spirit would teach of sin because the world was guilty of the sin of disbelief in Christ. Not to mention a wide variety of corrupt and bent behavior. It needed instruction on both subjects. Truth be told, most of the world was neck deep in self-destruction before Jesus even arrived to show a way out for both Jew and Gentile alike. Far too many people refused to believe in Jesus and what He had to say; through the teaching of the Spirit they would have a second chance to set their lives right.
Sidebar: For the Spirit inspired message rebuking those who passively allowed the crucifixion to occur (even if they were not actively involved) see Acts 2:1-4, 34-38.
In regard
to the fact that the Spirit also inspired the moral teaching of the apostles as
well, this can be seen in the fact that what they taught will be our standard
of judgment: “God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according
to my gospel” (Romans 2:16). Paul
also speaks of how “my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ” were based on
“the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began but now made
manifest” (Romans
16:10 of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; The Spirit would have to instruct them in varied aspects of right behavior because Jesus would be no longer there to tell them what they needed to know. This would be especially true as they had to deal with the new experiences of taking a pagan world their redemptive message. The challenges could be deep even when dealing within the cultural confines they were raised in; they would be even greater when they stepped beyond these and dealt with those with thoroughly different roots.
Divine judgments in the current life are inevitable for us mortals as well; the only question is when and in what form we will encounter them. Not to mention the Final Judgment in which this world will be rolled up like a well used scroll and its inhabitants evaluated on the basis of their personal behavior.
High on the
list of “hard things” for them to bear at the moment would be their (now still
unexpected) work among Gentiles--men and women with very different social
customs and behaviors--ones that would tax their emotional resources considerably: They would have to learn to distinguish
between what can be embraced, what should be handled with caution and
precaution, and what can only be rejected.
They knew this already about the culture in which they moved, but not
about the broader world. Hand-in-hand
with this would be the startling concept that henceforth being “God’s people”
would have nothing to do with ethnicity and ancestry, but solely with
consistently obeying the Lord’s will.
16:13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. The Holy Spirit would complete the teaching that Jesus had only begun; the Spirit would guide the apostles into “all truth.” The reason He would be able to do this lay in the fact that He would not invent teaching on His own initiative, but would strictly teach that which He had been given to share. That included predictions of future events--but note that this is presented as a virtual “add on” to the sentence; the central thrust of the Spirit’s teaching was to be about other matters--matters of the “here and now:” moral integrity, new spiritual insights they needed to learn, and the most constructive ways to function in an expanded church that would encompass those with no Jewish roots at all. There are some things we simply can’t handle without someone to “guide” us: The same Greek word is used in regard to the Ethiopian eunuch recognizing he needed help in understanding Old Testament prophecy (Acts 8:31).
Jesus has
already spoken of how they had not heard all that needed to be heard (verse 12);
the rest was what God had reserved for the Spirit to reveal to them rather than
Jesus personally. Hence the relevance of
1 Corinthians 2:10 to this principle: “But God has revealed them to us through
His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all
things, yes, the deep things of God.” Or if you wish a more colloquial rendering
that brings out the point well, “God has shown these things to us by his
Spirit. The Spirit understands everything,
even the things that God has kept secret” (Worldwide English New Testament).
These verses have obvious direct
relevance to the next verse as well.
“It should be noted that in these verses (14 and 15)
there is an implication of the following doctrinal truths. They are implied, let us remember, in the
words of our Lord Himself, and that they are implied and not stated increases
the force of their meaning:—(1) The divinity of the
Son: ‘He shall glorify Me;’ ‘All things that the Father hath are Mine.’ (2) The personality of the Holy Ghost: ‘He shall receive of Mine.’ . . .
(3) The Trinity in Unity, and Unity in Trinity: ‘the Father;’ ‘I;’ ‘He.’
” (Ellicott’s
Commentary for English Readers)
Jesus’ Departure from Them Would Sadden Them, But It Would
Ultimately Produce Great Joy for Them As Well (John 16:16-24): 16 In a little while you will see me no longer; again after a little while,
you will see me.” 17 Then some of his disciples said to one another, “What is the meaning of
what he is saying, ‘In a little while you will not see me; again after a little
while, you will see me,’ and, ‘because I am going to the Father’?” 18 So they kept on repeating, “What is the meaning of what he says, ‘In a
little while’? We do not understand what
he is talking about.”
19 Jesus could see that
they wanted to ask him about these things, so he said to them, “Are you asking
each other about this—that I said, ‘In a little while you will not see me;
again after a little while, you will see me’? 20 I tell you the solemn truth, you will weep and wail, but the world will
rejoice; you will be sad, but your sadness will turn into joy.
21 “When a woman gives
birth, she has distress because her time has come, but when her child is born,
she no longer remembers the suffering because of her joy that a human being has
been born into the world. 22 So also you have
sorrow now, but I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, and no
one will take your joy away from you.
23 “At that time you will
ask me nothing. I tell you the solemn truth, whatever you ask the Father in my
name he will give you. 24 Until now you have not
asked for anything in my name. Ask and
you will receive it, so that your joy may be complete.” --New English Translation (for comparison)
Sidebar: Jesus could know whatever He needed
miraculously if He wished or needed to, but this is one of those cases where He
seems to have known simply by the way the apostles were acting and
conspicuously avoiding asking Him what--logically--would be the
appropriate follow up questions. John
5:6 and
16:20 Most assuredly, I say to you that you will weep and lament, but the world will rejoice; and you will be sorrowful, but your sorrow will be turned into joy. He elaborated on His previous remarks to this extent: the time was soon coming when they would “lament” and the world “rejoice.” Yet thereafter, the world’s pride in triumph over Jesus would turn to sorrow as His cause not only did not vanish but actually prospered. Their own sorrow—at Jesus’ death—would quickly turn “into [thoroughly unexpected] joy” through the resurrection. Neither they nor their opponents expected this scenario to occur--but it would nonetheless.
This
childbirth imagery is “a common Old Testament
image of sorrow issuing in joy.
See Isaiah 21:3; 26:17; 66:7; Hosea 13:13; Micah
4:9-10.” (Vincent’s Word Studies)
Sidebar: “The word αιτησητε, rendered, ye shall ask, in this latter clause, is different from that used in the former, and properly signifies, to present a request, as the other word does to make inquiry, or ask questions.” (Benson Commentary)
Jesus Promises That the Day Is Coming When He Will Explain
Things to Them in Straightforward Language and Not in the Obscure Expressions He Was Currently Using (John
29 His disciples said,
“Look, now you are speaking plainly and not in obscure figures of speech! 30 Now we know that you know everything and do not need anyone to ask you
anything. Because of this we believe that you have come from God.”
31 Jesus replied, “Do you
now believe? 32 Look, a time is
coming—and has come—when you will be scattered, each one to his own home, and I
will be left alone. Yet I am not alone,
because my Father is with me. 33 I have told you these
things so that in me you may have peace. In the world you have trouble and suffering,
but take courage—I have conquered the world.”
--New English
Translation (for comparison)
16:25 “These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father. Jesus conceded that He had been speaking in non-literal language but that the time was coming when such obscurity would be removed. At that point, He would speak frankly and “plainly about the Father”--in a way that they would clearly grasp what was being driven at. In its fullness and completeness.
There has
been considerable controversy about how much “these things” cover. Some begin it at verse 19; others push it as
far back as beginning at 15:1. He is
clearly speaking of a period of invoking this kind of language. There were, however, other precedents for
doing so: There was language that the
audience in general did not understand but the apostles did (Matthew
Sidebar: The connotation of “figurative language” (“figures of speech,” ESV; “figurative language,” NASB; “proverbs,” KJV) is aptly defined by the Pulpit Commentary: “παροιμίαι, condensed word-utterances, in which words stood for higher things than in their ordinary usage.”
16:26 In that
day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I shall pray the
Father for you; That would
be the time when they would no longer need Jesus’ prayers on their behalf. Because of their great trust and reliance
upon the Lord this had to be more than a little startling so He immediately
explains why this would be the case--the all encompassing “love” God had for
them made it no longer necessary (verse 27).
They had vindicated their loyalty and the Father would never forget it.
Sidebar: In a very real sense we might ask how
else--logically--could it be than that the prayers would cease? Jesus prayed
to God because He was on earth and the Father was in heaven; after His
ascension He would also be in Heaven.
Anything that needed to be said could be said “face to face.” There would not be silence, but
intervention.
Hence we
find Jesus being described as being “even at the
right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us” (Romans
Clearly they would not have appreciated the later Gnostic virtual equating of obscure teaching with truth! To them truth went best with clarity and preciseness. But though that is true, there are times when the listener is not prepared to deal with painful and difficult subjects that fly in the face of their assumptions. Especially if their assumptions are erroneous--as Messianic thinking of the time was in its earthly monarch assertions.
Barnes’
Notes suggests a different but overlapping explanation: “When, by
His answers to them (verses 20-28), He showed that He clearly understood
their doubts; and when He gave them an answer so satisfactory without their
having inquired of Him, it satisfied them that He knew the heart, and that He
assuredly came from God. They were
convinced that there was ‘no need that any man should ask Him,’ or propose His
difficulties to Him, since He knew them all and could answer them.”
16:32 Indeed
the hour is coming, yes, has now come, that you will be scattered, each to his
own, and will leave Me alone. And yet I
am not alone, because the Father is with Me.
It has clearly not dawned on
them that anything could happen to Jesus that would be so startling and
shocking that they would be “scattered” in flight from what was happening. They saw themselves as the proverbial
“steadfast warriors” for the Lord--not realizing that even a stout soul has a
breaking point.
Sidebar: The image
of being innocent yet abandoned is one that those familiar with the Psalms
would recall: “Reproach
has broken my heart, and I am full of heaviness; I looked for
someone to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters,
but I found none.” (69:20). Zechariah 13:7 had
spoken of such abandonment happening to the Messiah: “Strike the
Shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.”
Chapter Seventeen
Jesus Asks the Father to “Glorify” Him As He Himself Had
Done the Father (John 17:1-5): 1 When Jesus had finished
saying these things, he looked upward to heaven and said, “Father, the time has
come. Glorify your Son, so that your Son
may glorify you— 2 just as you have given
him authority over all humanity, so that he may give eternal life to everyone
you have given him. 3 Now this is eternal
life—that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you sent.
4 “I glorified you on
earth by completing the work you gave me to do. 5 And now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory I had with you
before the world was created.” --New English
Translation (for comparison)
17:1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, Jesus’ words in the Sermon on the Mount are often, misleadingly, called “the Lord’s Prayer.” That, however, was an instructional guideline for disciples. Here we encounter the text of an actual prayer of His own and the many omissions of elements found in the Matthewean prayer are obvious. Hence prayer can properly vary from time to time and place to place according to the needs of the moment and the identity of the prayer. The immediate purpose of the prayer in John 17 is to reassure the apostles and to pray on their behalf because of the coming crisis they were all going to face. In that context, mention of daily food and such like is obviously not required.
Jesus began
with the petition that God might “glorify” Him so that He might do the same for
the Father. This restoration of His own “glory” would occur after the resurrection. Then He would be fully restored to the nature
He had in heaven before first coming to earth (verse 5). The glorification would also include His
being crowned King of Kings and Lords of Lords after His resurrection (Acts
17:2 as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should
give eternal life to as many as You have given Him. God had given the Son
supreme authority over the human race: “all
flesh” rather than some. Although
the apostles surely did not think of it at the time, no mention is made of
either gender or ethnicity; hence, logically, Jesus is claiming a world wide
and universal power. The apostles’
sharing His message throughout the world grew out of this wide ranging
supremacy (Matthew 28:18-20).
Within the scope of His authority is that of providing “eternal life” (= our ultimate redemption). Why then can anyone seriously believe that it can be obtained without meeting the Lord’s criteria? Hence the Lord has “given” Jesus all who are willing to be obedient to that Divine Law. “No one else need apply.”
17:3 And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. The preconditions for “eternal life” were rooted in recognition of God as the one and true deity and Jesus Christ as the One whom God had specially sent to earth. With that comes the concept that Jesus was specially commissioned by the Father and that anyone who claims to “listen to God” had better listen, heed, and obey what Jesus instructed or the claim is proved to be nothing but empty words.
The first assertion (“the only true God”) was a critique of Gentiles and one totally meaningless to Jews for they already embraced that truth. The second assertion (Jesus’ unique mission from the Father) would be the direct challenge to both groups of sinful earthlings.
17:4 I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. Throughout His ministry, Jesus labored in word and action to “glorify” (= honor and praise) God in act and doctrine: Nothing was done or said that did not meet that criteria of “glorification.” That work of revelation and teaching was now completed. Things could now move to the final stage--His own sacrificial death.
17:5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. In spite of all the earthly respect and deference that Jesus sometimes received, what He had in heaven was vastly superior. There He had a “glory” (honor, recognition, very nature) that neither would nor could ever be equaled or matched on earth.
“Glory”
must surely be taken as carrying with it the idea of His own supernaturalness and deityship
since the idea of His eternal existence is clearly asserted: “I had with You before
the world was,” i.e., even prior to the creation account in Genesis 1. This recalls the introductory words to this
gospel: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word
was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things
were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made”
(John 1:1-3). Both “separateness” from
the Father and yet a matching Deityship are clearly
asserted. Or as Paul
put it, though “being in the form of God, [He] did not consider it robbery
to be equal with God” (Philippians 2:6).
Jesus Prays for the Spiritual Well Being of His Apostles
After He Has Returned to the Father (John 17:6-19): 6 “I have revealed your name to the men you gave me out of the world. They belonged to you, and you gave them to me,
and they have obeyed your word. 7 Now they understand
that everything you have given me comes from you, 8 because I have given them the words you have given me. They accepted them and really understand that
I came from you, and they believed that you sent me. 9 I am praying on behalf of them. I
am not praying on behalf of the world, but on behalf of those you have given me,
because they belong to you. 10 Everything I have
belongs to you, and everything you have belongs to me, and I have been
glorified by them.
11 “I am no longer in the
world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep
them safe in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one just as
we are one. 12 When I was with them I
kept them safe and watched over them in your name that you have given me. Not one of them was lost except the one
destined for destruction, so that the scripture could be fulfilled. 13 But now I am coming to you, and I am saying these things in the world,
so they may experience my joy completed in themselves.
14 “I have given them your word, and the world has hated them, because they
do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world. 15 I am not asking you to take them out of the world, but that you keep
them safe from the evil one.
16 “They do not belong to
the world just as I do not belong to the world. 17 Set them apart in the truth; your word is truth. 18 Just as you sent me into the world, so I sent them into the world. 19 And I set myself apart on their behalf, so that they too may be truly
set apart.” --New English
Translation (for comparison)
17:6 “I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. Since they “have kept Your word,” it is only natural to take the fact that Jesus “manifested” to the apostles God’s “name” as carrying the connotation that this was done through His teaching and instruction about what God now desired from the human race. As Creator, He had the inherent right to create such criteria and demand conformity to it. And it was Jesus’ goal for mankind that it embrace those requirements.
“He says here, ‘Thy word,’ not ‘My word,’ because the
thought of these verses (verses 6-8) is that they were originally and were
still the Father’s. They had been given
to the Son, but this was only the completion of the revelation of the Father to
them. Christ’s word was that of the
Father who sent Him. (Compare
John
17:7 Now they have known that all
things which You have given Me are from You.
Unlike His critics in the
contemporary religious “establishment,” His apostles had rightly come to the
firm conclusion that all the teaching He gave came from the Father (John
17:8 For I have given to them the words which You have given Me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me. Jesus had shared with the disciples that message (“the words”) which God had provided Him to teach and, in response, the apostles had recognized that He had been sent on a special and unique mission from the Father. Even when His claims may have seemed a tad outlandish to their minds, what else could one believe when He so clearly and repeatedly performed so many miracles?
17:9 “I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. Jesus’ prayer this night was centered on the apostles because they were the ones God had “given” Him and they belonged to both of Them. Hence their best interests had to be important to both Jesus and the Father. The surrounding “world” had had its opportunity to join in but had spurned it. They had not been ignored; but they had been openly rejective.
Sidebar: Jesus is not laying down a blanket claim that
He never prayed for outsiders. He is
describing what He is currently saying in the prayer and what the
apostles are hearing. Later in this
prayer (verse 21) He indirectly prays for the world as He also does on certain
other occasions. “Against any limitation of the prayer of our Lord,
see John
The
apostles were going to remain behind and hence He prayed that they might enjoy an unity as close as that enjoyed between Jesus and His
Father. The language “refers not to a union of nature, but of feeling,
plan, purpose.
Any other union between Christians is impossible; but a union of
affection is what the Savior sought, and this He desired might be so strong as
to be an illustration of the unchanging love between the Father and the
Son. See John 17:21-23.” (Barnes’ Notes) That was especially important in the
bad times that could and would come.
Sidebar: The label applied to Judas. “The term ‘son of perdition,’ is a well-known Hebrew idiom, by which the lack of qualitative adjectives is supplied by the use of the abstract substantives, which express that quality. A disobedient child is, e.g., ‘a son of disobedience;’ other common instances are ‘children of light,’ ‘children of darkness.’ A ‘son of perdition’ is one in whose nature there is the quality expressed by ‘perdition.’ The phrase is used in Isaiah 57:4 to express the apostacy of the Israelites (in English version, ‘children of transgression’). It occurs once again in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, of the ‘man of sin.’ . . . In the present passage it is difficult to express the meaning in English, because we have no verb of the same root as the abstract substantive ‘perdition,’ and no abstract substantive of the same root as the verb ‘perish.’ No exact translation can therefore give in English the point of our Lord’s words, ‘And none of them perished except him whose nature it was to perish.’ ” (Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers) Other efforts to translate the idiom: “the one doomed to destruction” (NIV); “the one destined for destruction” (NET).
17:15 I do not
pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them
from the evil one. Jesus did
not pray for their removal from the temptations and dangers of the world but
their protection from evil while in the world. If they were removed from the world, how
could they possibly carry out the responsibility to fully share the gospel
throughout it (verse 18)? Even so Satan’s
power was great and they needed protection from it (cf. John
In other words they were set apart from it by how they believed and acted as 1 Thessalonians 5:23 points out: “Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Hence sanctification is produced and exhibited in the moral excellence reflected in one’s life. Similarly 1 Corinthians 6:8-10 lists various popular sins (both then and today) and stresses that their being “sanctified” involved separating themselves from such a lifestyle (verse 11).
The latter, of course, is the concept underlying the Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20. Even without that Commission being quoted in this gospel the point seems clearly present both here and in the appearance after the resurrection found in John 20:21: “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” Intent can also be deduced from actions: They went; therefore they were sent.
Others suggest
that this self-sanctification of the Lord refers to Him consciously
setting Himself apart for crucifixion and death, but the point of the verse is
not what He is sanctified to do but what He is sanctified by: He specifies “by the truth”--which fits our
approach much better. That is, His
behavior throughout His life was holy because He continually obeyed God’s law;
His prayer for the apostles is that they may also be steadfast in doing the
same.
Jesus Expands His Prayer to Include the Well Being of Those
the Apostles Convert (John
22 “The glory you gave to
me I have given to them, that they may be one just as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—that they may be completely one, so that the
world will know that you sent me, and you have loved them just as you have
loved me.
24 “Father, I want those
you have given me to be with me where I am, so that they can see my glory that
you gave me because you loved me before the creation of the world. 25 Righteous Father, even if the world does not know you, I know you, and
these men know that you sent me. 26 I made known your name to them, and I will continue to make it known, so
that the love you have loved me with may be in them, and I may be in them.” --New English
Translation (for comparison)
Sidebar: Some translations, adopting a different Greek text, render it “who believe” rather than “who will believe,” thereby making it a plea for the broader believing community that had already begun to exist as well. We know, for example, that there were roughly 120 in Jerusalem when the apostles chose a substitute for Judas less than two months later (Acts 1:15) and they were surely already believers at this earlier date. What already “is” in miniature represents all the vastness that will ultimately grow out of this humble beginning.
17:21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. What Jesus prayed for both the apostles and those they converted was that they would be united together justly as firmly as Jesus and the Father themselves were. This would encourage yet others in the surrounding world to embrace belief in Jesus’ Divine mission.
“Christians are all redeemed by the same blood, and
are going to the same heaven. They have the same wants, the same enemies, the
same joys. . . There are no ties so tender as those
which bind us in the gospel. There is no friendship so
pure and enduring as that which results from having the same attachment to the
Lord Jesus. . . . On the ground of this union they are exhorted to love one
another, to bear one another's burdens, and to study the things that make for
peace, and things wherewith one may edify another, Ephesians
4:3; Romans 12:5-16.” (Barnes’
Notes)
17:22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: Jesus had received a “glory” from God and He had shared it with the apostles to help them stay united. He does not tell us what glory He has specifically in mind. There is, however, an inherent “glory” (= honor) in faithfully serving--by being united with Him by obeying the truth; by conforming ourselves to it (verses 17, 19). Unity with God is thereby maintained.
Our “glory” consists of all of us being united with Jesus in obeying the Father’s will. And treating each other right while doing so. How many times Jesus could have given them a tongue lashing if He had desired to! Yet He resorted to strong words with His disciples only as the last resort--not verbal “brass knuckles” at just minor annoyances!
Hence to
take this idea a little further, this “glory” could easily be the shared honor
and respect that comes from visibly doing what one knows is the right thing to
do and not being needlessly divisive with others trying to meet the same
standard. Jesus had set this example
in His own life and they were to do the same.
17:23 I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me. This unity based upon the divine oneness would encourage the world not only to believe in Jesus but also to believe that God shared with them the deep love He had toward His Son as well. In other words this unity was not merely urged for utilitarian purposes but because it was the means to give greater honor to God Himself.
“It is worthy of remark here how entirely the union
of his people occupied the mind of Jesus as he drew near to death. He saw the danger of strifes
and contentions in the church. He knew
the imperfections of even the best of men.
He saw how prone they would be to passion and ambition; how ready to
mistake love of sect or party for zeal for pure religion; how selfish and
worldly men in the church might divide His followers, and produce unholy
feeling and contention; and He saw, also, how much this would do to dishonor
religion.” (Barnes’ Notes)
17:24 “Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. Jesus prayed that the day would come when they would share in heaven with Him the sight of His pre-earthly “glory.” What they had and could see now was but a shadow of the fullness that mere earthly eyes could not comprehend. Then “we shall be like Him for we shall see Him as He is” (1 John 3:2). Indeed He was leaving, in part, “to prepare a place for you;” this implied that He would ultimately return with the purpose of bringing them to it (John 14:2-3).
Chapter Eighteen
Jesus Arrested in the Garden After
Judas Leads Them to Him (John 18:1-11): 1 When he had said these
things, Jesus went out with his disciples across the
4 Then Jesus, because he
knew everything that was going to happen to him, came and asked them, “Who are
you looking for?” 5 They replied, “Jesus the Nazarene.” He told them, “I am he.” (Now Judas, the one who
betrayed him, was standing there with them.) 6 So when Jesus said to them, “I am he,” they retreated and fell to the
ground.
7 Then Jesus asked them
again, “Who are you looking for?” And they said, “Jesus the Nazarene.” 8 Jesus replied, “I told you that I am he. If you are looking for me, let these men go.” 9 He said this to fulfill the word he had spoken, “I have not lost a single
one of those whom you gave me.”
10 Then Simon Peter, who
had a sword, pulled it out and struck the high priest’s slave, cutting off his
right ear . (Now the slave’s name was Malchus.) 11 But Jesus said to
Peter, “Put your sword back into its sheath! Am I not to drink the cup that the Father has
given me?” --New English
Translation (for comparison)
18:1 When Jesus had spoken these words, He went out with His disciples over
the Brook Kidron, where there was a garden, which He
and His disciples entered. After
the prayer in the previous chapter, Jesus went with the apostles to a
“garden”--called
It seems
far wiser to take
Sidebar
on the role in Israelite history of the brook Kidron
and its surrounding geography: “The Kidron is the brook
over which David passed, barefoot and weeping, when fleeing from Absalom (2
Samuel
Sidebar on the physical description of the Kidron: “The
name is formed from a Hebrew word which means ‘black.’ The torrent was the ‘
18:2 And Judas, who betrayed Him,
also knew the place; for Jesus often met there with His disciples. Jesus had often gone there in the
past and therefore Judas was well aware of it.
What he would not have been aware of prior to that day, would be
rather Jesus planned on returning to that site on the present evening. Without that knowledge he could not be
absolutely certain where to lead the arresting party. The fact that Jesus could freely use the
location argues that it was owned by a friend or disciple.
18:3 Then Judas, having received a detachment of troops, and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, came there with lanterns, torches, and weapons. Because of his previous acquaintance with the location, Judas knew where to lead the arresting party of soldiers and religious officials. Being night they carried “lanterns” and “torches.” Passover was the time of a full moon and it could be that the evening was unusually cloudy or that they wanted to be able to check possible hiding places if it became necessary. They were covering all contingencies that might arise. Being an arresting party they quite naturally carried unspecified “weapons” as well. Matthew 26:55 and Mark 14:48 are more specific: “with swords and clubs.”
Sidebar on
the types of individuals involved in the arrest: “The other
Gospels tell us of a ‘great multitude’ (Matthew), or a ‘multitude’ (Mark and
Luke). John uses the technical word for
the Roman cohort. It was the garrison
band from
18:4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that would come upon Him, went forward and said to them, “Whom are you seeking?” Recognizing what was happening Jesus seized the initiative, approached the crowd, and challenged them with the words, “Who are you seeking?” Hardly the reaction of a guilty individual who, as soon as seeing the mob, would have taken off running in flight!
Sidebar on
chronology: “went forth -- From what?
(1) from the shade into the light; (2) from the
circle of disciples; (3) from the depth of the garden; (4) from the garden
itself. It is impossible to say which of
these suggestions is right; the last is not contradicted by John 18:26. The kiss of Judas is by some placed here, by
others after John 18:8.” (
18:5 They answered Him,
“Jesus of
18:6 Now when He said to them, “I am He,” they drew back and fell to the ground. This candor and self-assurance startled them and they moved backward and some even “fell to the ground”--stumbling due to the moving crowd? Awed by the sense of something unique in their experience happening? Some expect the use of Divine power to warn them that this unjust arrest would only take place with Him being willing.
18:7 Then He asked
them again, “Whom are you seeking?” And
they said, “Jesus of
18:8 Jesus answered, “I have told you that I am He. Therefore, if you seek Me, let these go their way,” What He puts first is a gentle rebuke--that they already knew who He is because He had freely confessed it. Implied: If you are serious in arresting Me, why haven’t you? A thoroughly rational question and one that kept them on the psychological defensive. Making it even more likely that they won’t give trouble over what He asks for next. Here is revealed what is at the heart of His concern: “If it is Me you seek, then let these depart on their own. You have no warrant to do anything to or about them since by your own response you are only authorized to arrest Me.”
18:9 that the saying might be fulfilled which He spoke, “Of those whom You gave Me I have lost none.” In this intervention was fulfilled His obligation for the welfare and safety of those under His charge. Literally “saving” them from arrest, mistreatment, and quite possible death.
In Jesus’
extended prayer in the previous chapter He had said, “While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom
You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the
Scripture might be fulfilled” (
The Roman troops do not immediately retaliate. In part surely due to Jesus’ prompt healing of the wound. But also quite possibly because they weren’t at all thrilled at being mustered out of their barracks “in the middle of the night” for this intra-Jewish dispute in the first place. It had only happened to one of the “well deserving” idiots who had caused their unwanted assignment. He wasn’t one of theirs. Rather the servant was part of the Jewish contingent; let them deal with it themselves if they wished!
Sidebar on
the impact of this action on whether the Lord’s Supper was established during
an official Passover celebration: This
was “probably one of the two produced in
misunderstanding of Christ’s words at the end of the supper (Luke
The First Place that Jesus Was Taken Was Annas,
Former High Priest (and Still Very Influential) and the Father-in-Law of the
Current High Priest, Caiaphas (John 18:12-14): 12 Then the squad of soldiers with their commanding officer and the
officers of the Jewish leaders arrested Jesus and tied him up. 13 They brought him first to Annas, for he was
the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest
that year. 14 (Now it was Caiaphas who had advised the Jewish leaders that it was to
their advantage that one man die for the people.) --New English
Translation (for comparison)
Hence although Caiaphas had Roman power behind him, it was always wise to be courteous and respectful to the man everyone knew should be occupying the post. We have no way of knowing the kind of relationship Caiaphas had with his father-in-law, but common prudence argued that he provide every appropriate attention to assure it stayed a stable relationship on that grounds as well.
Of what was said or done there at this time, none of the gospels provide us any hint. This would suggest that it had no impact upon what was done in the rest of the hearings. On the other hand, there is no reason to assume any dramatic difference on policy between the two priests either: In Luke 3:2 they are mentioned, together, as high priest; in Acts 4:6 the title is granted by the same author only to Annas though Caiaphas is mentioned as part of his family group. This argues that they more or less routinely had counsel together on matters that might arise before the Sanhedrin, especially those which might be controversial.
Peter Denies to the Doorkeeper That He Is a Disciple of
Jesus (John
17 “The girl who was the
doorkeeper said to Peter, “You’re not one of this man’s disciples too, are
you?” He replied, “I am not.” 18 (Now the slaves and the guards were standing around a charcoal fire they
had made, warming themselves because it was cold. Peter also was standing with them, warming
himself.)
--New English
Translation (for comparison)
This man is traditionally and reasonably identified as John the apostle. John and Peter had jointly worked on making arrangements for the Passover (Luke 22:8). After the resurrection they are twice mentioned as working together in Jerusalem (Acts 3:1; 4:13) and for being sent together to the Samaritans when word was received that the gospel was being embraced there as well (Acts 8:14).
On the
other side of the coin, three times in this book John is identified as “the
disciple whom He loved” (
Sidebar: We are given no hint of why John “was known to the high priest” and, by implication (since he is freely admitted) to a number of his household staff. It has reasonably been speculated that as a fisherman, his household may well have been a regular supplier for this household.
This
question and answer did not occur immediately at the door itself, however, as
the other accounts inform us: “ ‘When she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him
and said’ (Mark 14:67). Luke is more
graphic (Luke
Jesus Declines to Get Into a Discussion of His Teaching with
Annas Since It Was a Matter of Public Record (John
18:19-24): 19 While this was
happening, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and about his
teaching. 20 Jesus replied, “I have
spoken publicly to the world. I always
taught in the synagogues and in the temple courts, where all the Jewish people
assemble together. I have said nothing in secret. 21 Why do you ask me? Ask those who heard what I said. They know what I said.”
22 When Jesus had said
this, one of the high priest’s officers who stood nearby struck him on the face
and said, “Is that the way you answer the high priest?” 23 Jesus replied, “If I have said something wrong, confirm what is wrong. But if I spoke correctly, why strike me?” 24 Then Annas sent him, still tied up, to Caiaphas the high priest. --New English
Translation (for comparison)
Although Jesus is still within the part of the complex that was Annas’ the reference to “high priest” could be to either him or Caiaphas since the latter is the one that John has already acknowledged as currently the official one (verse 13). However verse 24 refers to how “Annas sent Him bound to Caiaphas.” Hence it is hardly likely that he was present for this portion of the examination at all--even as a silent observer. Hence the reference is to the one who by right--rather than Roman interference--was the proper occupant of the office.
This is a
slight exaggeration for there was sometimes an
explicitness on matters such as His Messiahship
because of fear that if it were presented to a broader audience that it would
be misunderstood and misrepresented. Yet
even here He had said sufficient even in public that one could come to
the conclusion that He was the Messiah (
However for
someone suspected of having nefarious plans, “in secret” carried a far more
ominous subtext: “If His doctrine had tended to excite sedition and
tumult, if He had aimed to overthrow the government, He would have trained His
friends in secret; He would have retired from public view, and would have laid
His plans in private. This is the case
with all who attempt to subvert existing establishments. Instead of that, He had proclaimed His views
to all.” (Barnes’ Notes)
Especially in this context of it being essential to getting Him dead before the end of the next day lest the Sabbath be defiled--or the execution delayed. Then concerned individuals would wonder whether they should act to stop it from happening at all. The officials had locked themselves into a rigid time frame for action in which normal delay could cause the very popular explosion they knew it was essential to avoid.
18:22 And when He had said these things, one of the officers who stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, “Do You answer the high priest like that?” This refusal to say anything more caused one of the arresting officers to slap Jesus for speaking in that manner to the high priest. The mentality was clearly that even legitimate responses are insulting if it delays the intended results: The high priest must get his desired results now. Innocence should in no way impede providing evidence for conviction.
Furthermore His critics faced the fundamental problem of finding an accusation that both rival parties in the Sanhedrin could agree to and Jesus was “daring” not to help them find a way out of their dilemma! “Dr. Farrar (Life of Christ) has pointed out with great force that the chief priests and Pharisees, from their intestine animosities, had great difficulty in formulating any specific charge. The Pharisaic party, if they made a point of His doctrine and practice concerning the Sabbath, would have been foiled by the Sadducean latitudinarians; and the priests did not dare to call in question His imperial cleansing of the temple, knowing that the Pharisees would immediately have justified the act. Consequently, Annas limited his inquiries to the supposed esoteric character of some private teachings to his initiated disciples--a charge that was refuted by the continual publicity and openness of all His teaching.” (Pulpit Commentary)
Peter Denies Two More Times That He Is a Follower of Jesus
(John
26 One of the high
priest’s slaves, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, said, “Did
I not see you in the orchard with him?” 27 Then Peter denied it again, and immediately a rooster crowed. --New English
Translation (for comparison)
“The words are repeated to draw attention to the fact
that he was standing in the court at the time when Jesus was sent from Annas unto Caiaphas, that is,
from one wing of the quadrangular building across the court to the other. In Luke 22:61 it is said that ‘the Lord
turned and looked upon Peter.’ ” (Ellicott’s
Commentary for English Readers) “A
look of sympathy and distress [showed] on Peter’s face, as His Master appears
bound as a criminal, and perhaps with the mark of the blow (John 18:22) on His
face, provokes the exclamation, Surely thou also art
not one of His disciples?” (
“The other Evangelists make his detection to turn upon
his dialect. ‘After a while . . . came
unto him they that stood by and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of
them, for thy speech betrayeth thee’ (Matthew
26:73). ‘Thou art a Galilean, and thy
speech agreeth thereto’ (Mark 14:70; and so Luke
Sidebar on
the crowing: “[Not] the cock
crew] rather, a cock crew. In
none of the gospels is there the definite article which [the KJV, ASV, ERV]
translation inserts. This was the second
crowing (Mark 14:72). A difficulty has
been made here because the Talmud says that fowls, which scratch in dunghills,
are unclean. But (1) the Talmud is
inconsistent on this point with itself; (2) not all Jews would be so scrupulous
as to keep no fowls in
Jesus Transferred to Pilate’s Court and the Governor Tries
to Avoid Getting Involved in the Case At All (John 18:28-32): 28 Then they brought Jesus from Caiaphas to the
Roman governor’s residence. (Now it was very early morning.) They did not go into the governor’s residence
so they would not be ceremonially defiled, but could eat the Passover meal. 29 So Pilate came outside to them and said, “What accusation do you bring
against this man?” 30 They replied, “If this
man were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you.”
31 Pilate told them,
“Take him yourselves and pass judgment on him according to your own law!” The Jewish leaders replied, “We cannot legally
put anyone to death.” 32 (This happened to
fulfill the word Jesus had spoken when he indicated what kind of death he was
going to die.) --New English
Translation (for comparison)
Sidebar
on the nature of the Praetorium: “The meaning
of praetorium varies
according to the context. The word is of
military origin; (1) ‘the general’s tent’ or ‘head quarters.’ Hence, in the provinces, (2) ‘the governor’s
residence,’ the meaning in Acts
Sidebar on the chronology: “It is quite evident that John does not
regard the Last Supper as a Paschal meal.
Compare John 13:1; 13:29. It
is equally evident that the synoptic narratives convey the impression that the
Last Supper was the ordinary Jewish Passover. . . . Whatever be the right solution of the
difficulty, the independence of the author of the Fourth Gospel is
manifest. Would anyone counterfeiting an
Apostle venture thus to contradict what seemed to have such strong Apostolic
authority? Would he not expect that a
glaring discrepancy on so important a point would prove fatal to his
pretensions? Assume that John is simply
recording his own vivid recollections, whether or not we suppose him to be
correcting the impression produced by the Synoptists,
and this difficulty at any rate is
avoided. John’s narrative is too precise
and consistent to be explained away.” (
His words
clearly argue that nothing has come to his own attention to merit either the
arrest or such a pre-dawn meeting as this one and if Jesus were that
dangerous he should have already received at least a vague report of why he was
such. Perhaps growling a bit over the
ridiculously early hour tribunal (before
Some have believed that this was simply the formality that was supposed to begin such a proceeding. After he was being twice bothered in the same night, it was hardly likely to be regarded by him as simply another formality to go through!
The
legal game playing being engaged in by the top Jewish religious authorities: The Greek word πρωΐ· (prōi) is typically rendered as “early morning” or
the equivalent in this verse. “In Mark
And Roman
officials could get downright violent against those trying to get them involved
in internal Jewish religious controversies--as happened when Paul was dragged
before the Roman proconsul in Corinth and the accusers were chased out (Acts
18:12-16). These
They,
however, being at the top of the Jewish religious system probably felt that
their prestige would be sufficient to gain automatic deference on one of their
“internal matters.” That they weren’t
prepared for such a response shows in the incredible vagueness of their charge
of being “evildoer” without the least specification of how, when, and in what
manner.
That
they couldn’t do so was legally correct; it had been removed a few years
earlier based on the Talmud’s chronology; some push it even earlier in the
century. That this
prohibition could be “bent” by stoning someone to death for heresy, think of
the case of Stephen. He had been
hauled from the synagogue by some of it members. They took him for trial and judgment to the
Sanhedrin (Acts
Whether
the Sanhedrin members participated or not in the actual execution, we are not
told. On the other hand, if it did not
have at least their passive approval how could the persecution of one man
quickly escalate into a city wide assault on all the Christian community
(8:1-3)? The action of the high priest
in approving carrying the active suppression even to distant
But they couldn’t in this case because there was no anti-Jesus mob handy to carry out the killing. Trying to raise one was far more likely to create a mob aimed at themselves! Furthermore they wanted to “insulate” themselves from direct responsibility for the death. Hence they desperately needed to be able to blame the Romans. They wanted, if you will, the triumph without the responsibility. And they feared that if they personally acted during a major festival with the tens of thousands of outsiders present there would be a dangerous and massive riot (as Matthew 26:5 notes). Or, to be more exact, a dangerous and massive riot aimed at them.
Sidebar on
Jesus’ repeated reference to a Roman death:
“The manner of the death had been
foretold by our Lord. In John
3:14 he spoke of being lifted up (ὑψωθήαι),
in John 8:28 He charged the Jews with the intention of so lifting Him
up to die (ὅταν ὑψώσητε),
implying a method of capital punishment which was contrary to their ordinary
habits; and in John 12:32 He declared that this lifting up of the Son
of man would create part of His sacred and Divine attraction to the human
race. In the Synoptists
He is said to have repeatedly spoken of his σταυρός [i.e.,
crucifixion] (Luke
Pilate Finds Nothing to Justify Death under Roman Law and
Tries to Divert Their Blood Lust to Someone Deserving of Execution (John
18:33-40): 33 So Pilate went back
into the governor’s residence, summoned Jesus, and asked him, “Are you the king
of the Jews?” 34 Jesus replied, “Are
you saying this on your own initiative, or have others told you about me?” 35 Pilate answered, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own people and your chief priests handed
you over to me. What have you done?”
36 Jesus replied, “My
kingdom is not from this world. If my
kingdom were from this world, my servants would be fighting to keep me from
being handed over to the Jewish authorities. But as it is, my kingdom is not from here.”
37 Then Pilate said, “So
you are a king!” Jesus replied, “You say that I am a king. For this reason I was born, and for this
reason I came into the world—to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to
my voice.” 38 Pilate asked, “What is
truth?”
When he had said this he went back outside to the Jewish leaders and
announced, “I find no basis for an accusation against him. 39 But it is your custom that I release one prisoner for you at the Passover.
So do you want me to release for you the
king of the Jews?” 40 Then they shouted
back, “Not this man, but Barabbas!” (Now Barabbas
was a revolutionary.) --New English
Translation (for comparison)
“In all four Gospels these are the first words of
Pilate to Jesus, and in all four there is an emphasis on ‘Thou.’ The pitiable appearance of Jesus was in such
contrast to the royal title that Pilate speaks with a tone of surprise (compare
John
In Luke
23:2 we read of the Jewish leaders and their mob and how they insisted upon
inventing a political interpretation of such claims: they “began
to accuse Him, saying, ‘We found this fellow perverting the
nation, and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar [an
outright lie], saying that He Himself is Christ, a King.’ ” Jesus’ query here makes best sense only if
the words in this verse were spoken before what Luke has recorded for Jesus
obviously would have known that that accusation came from others.
Now this was something Pilate could understand. Anyone with temporal aspirations would have fought. How could he avoid it when his liberty was at stake? Hence the most powerful evidence that Jesus was not a threat to Roman rule lay in what He and His movement had conspicuously not done when they had the opportunity.
Although he
might or might not know it, there had been “followers” who wanted to
force Jesus into a kingship role (John
Vague word of one or more of these events would likely have reached Pilate’s ears for his supporters would have been alert to signs of potential instability. If so they would have been predisposed to believe that whatever Jesus’ rhetoric, He was far from a security threat to the Empire. He had done nothing to undermine it or challenge its ongoing right to earthly rule.
Sidebar on
“not of this world:” “Has not its origin or root there so as to draw its
power from thence.” (
Note
the self-description “for this cause I have come into the world.” That implies pre-existence before
coming into the world. (For John’s own
“commentary” on this idea see 1:1-5.)
Jesus had referred to this earlier to the apostles: “I came forth
from the Father and have come into the world.
Again, I leave the world and go to the Father” (John
He had an established custom of releasing one prisoner at Passover. From the Roman standpoint, this “executive clemency” was a useful public relations tool. One prisoner rarely meant all that much to the Romans and it represented a token of respect for their often neglected local preferences. Would they rather have him release non-violent Jesus or someone that was diametrically the opposite? The conclusion seemed inherently obvious.
But not if you are the key religious leaders who have arranged the mob--through, probably, all four of these sources: (1) extreme religious loyalists who are convinced that your position means you have to be obeyed; (2) zealots who believe you intellectually are right because Jesus is so “destabilizing” an influence; (3) well placed bribes for known malcontents and (4) those of your own servants who have been ordered or “requested” to be there--and who know full well they had better be.
In fairness
to the crowd, however, it must be conceded that there was at least some
wavering and the leading priests intervened to assure that it did not grow
(Mark
It was no secret that he had been involved with others in revolt against the government: he “was chained with his fellow rebels; they had committed murder in the rebellion” (Mark 15:7). John’s Greek word for “robber” refers to a person willing to use even extreme violence and bloodshed. That such an individual would become wrapped up in such a revolt--to try to “morally justify” his own excesses--makes a great deal of sense. “Thus by a strange irony of fate the hierarchy obtain the release of a man guilty of the very political crime with which they charged Christ—sedition. . . . Barabbas had done, just what Jesus had refused to do, take the lead against the Romans.” (Pulpit Commentary)