wherefore art thou come? Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him. 51 And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. 52 Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take d Gen. ix. 6. the sword shall perish with the sword. 53 Thinkest thou that I cannot a now pray to my Father, and he shall

Dan. vii. 10.

a presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? e2 Kings vi. 17. a One of these, "now," or "presently," should be omitted. The word is read by some authorities in the former clause, by some in the latter: but by none in both. agree in this account. Luke and John are most exact - the latter giving the name of the slave,-Malchus. The aim was a deadly one, and Peter narrowly escaped being one "who had committed murder in the insurrection." From Luke, ver. 51, we learn that our Lord said "Suffer ye thus far" (on the meaning of which see note there), touched the ear, and healed it.

"Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man
with a kiss?"-which sense is involved in
the text also: that variation shewing per-
haps that one of the accounts is not from
an eye-witness. Friend-see ch. xxii.
12 and note. It is more than doubtful
whether the words that follow can pro-
perly be rendered as a question. More
likely do they mean, "Friend, there needs
not this shew of attachment: I know
thine errand, do thy purpose." But the
command itself is suppressed. On any un-
derstanding of the words, it is an appeal
to the conscience and heart of Judas, in
which sense (see above) it agrees with
the words spoken in Luke:-see note
there. The fact that at this period our
Lord was laid hold of and secured (by hand
-not yet bound) by the band, is impor-
tant, as interpreting St. Luke's account
further on. 51.] The one of them...
was Peter;-John ver. 10. Why he was
not mentioned, is idle to enquire: one
supposition only must be avoided-that
there is any purpose in the omission. It
is absurd to suppose that the mention of
his name in a book current only among
Christians, many years after the fact,
could lead to his apprehension, which did
not take place at the time, although he
was recognized as the striker in the palace
of the High Priest, John ver. 26. The real
reason of the non-apprehension was that
the servant was healed by the Lord.
This is the first opposition to Thy will be
done.' St. Luke expresses it, that they saw
what would happen and asked, 'Lord,
shall we smite with the sword ?' Then,
while the other (for there were but two
swords in the company) was waiting for
the reply, the rash Peter, in the very
spirit of ch. xvi. 22, smote with the sword
-the weapon of the flesh :-an outbreak
of the natural man no less noticeable than
that more-noticed one which followed be-
fore morning. All four Evangelists

52.] thy sword-not mine, nor on my side. his place" the sheath," John. The sheath is the place for the Christian's sword-"a sword out of its sheath is not in its place, unless as ministering to the divine anger," Bengel; see note on Luke xxii. 36. Our Lord does not say

Cast away thy sword;' only in His willing self-sacrifice, and in that kingdom which is to be evolved from his work of redemption, is the sword altogether out of place. for all &c.] Peculiar to Matthew. There is no allusion, as Grotius and some of the ancients thought, to the Jews perishing by the Roman sword: for the very persons who were now taking Him were Romans. The saying is generaland the stress is on take-it was this that Peter was doing-taking up the sword' of his own will; taking that vengeance which belongs to God, into his own hand.

shall perish with the sword is a command; not merely a future, but an imperative future; a repetition by the Lord in this solemn moment of Gen. ix. 6. This should be thought of by those wellmeaning but shallow persons, who seek to abolish the punishment of death in Christian states. John adds the words

"the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" on which see notes there. 53, 54 are peculiar to Matthew.

53.] The Majesty of our Lord, and His Patience, are both shewn here. twelve-not perhaps so much from the number of the apostles, who were now "the eleven," but from that of the then

f Isa. liii. 7.&c. 54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, 'that thus xxiv. 25, 44, it must be? 55 In that same hour said Jesus to the multitudes, Are ye come out as against ba thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me. 56 But all this cwas done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him and fled. 57 And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled. 58 But Peter followed him afar off unto

the high priest's palace, and went in, and sat with the servants, to see the end. 59 Now the chief priests, [d and elders,] and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death; 60 e but found none: yea, though

h

k

1

XXXV. 11. so
Acts 13.

John ii. 19.

eh. xxvii. 12, 14.

g many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last 8 P. xxvii. 12: came two false witnesses, 61 and said, This [fellow] said, hetix. 15. i I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in ich. xxvii. 40. three days. 62 And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these 63 But Jesus held his peace. witness against thee? And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. 64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, mg Here₫ omitted by many ancient authorities.

Isa. lii. 7. see Lev. v. 1. 24, 20 cxvi. 27:

1 Sam. xiv.

m Dan. vii. 13.

xxiv. 30:
xxv. 31. John
i. 51. Rom.
xiv. 10.

mg Here- 1 Thess. iv.

16. Rev.1.7.

e read, but found none, even though many false witnesses came. f not expressed in the original. Better, This man, as in ch. xxvii. 47. 8 render, Henceforth.

in which both Annas and Caiaphas lived.
This is evident from a comparison of the
narratives of Peter's denial: see below.
The circumstance of a fire being lighted
and the servants sitting round it, men-
tioned by the other three Evangelists, is
here omitted.
59. false witness]

"As they thought, evidence, but in reality,
false witness," Euthymius. But is this
quite implied? Is it not the intention of
the Evangelist to represent that they
sought false witness, not that they would
not take true if they could get it, but that
they knew it was not to be had?
This hearing is altogether omitted in
Luke, and only the indignities following
related, vv. 63-65. 60.] found they
none, i. e. sufficient for the purpose, or
perhaps, consistent with itself. See note
on Mark ver. 56. 61.] See ch. xxvii.
40: the false witness consisted in giving
that sense to His words, which it appears
by ch. xxvii. 63 they knew they did not
bear. There is perhaps a trace, in the
different reports of Matt. and Mark, of the
discrepancy between the witnesses. There
is considerable difference between the words
attributed to Him here, and there.
The instance likewise of his zeal for the
honour of the temple, which had so lately
occurred, might tend to perplex the evi-
dence produced to the contrary.

62.]

Better rendered, Dost thou not answer what it is which these testify against thee? i. e. wilt thou give no explanation

of the words alleged to have been used by thee? Our Lord was silent; for in answering He must have opened to them the meaning of these his words, which was not the work of this His hour, nor fitting for that audience. 63.] See Levit. v. 1.

I adjure thee, I put thee under an oath,' the form of which follows. The junction of the Son of God with the Christ must not be pressed beyond the meaning which Caiaphas probably assigned to it-viz. the title given to the Messiah from the purport of the prophecies respecting Him. It is however a very different thing when our Lord by His answer affirms this, and invests the words with their fullest meaning and dignity. 64.] By Thou hast said, more may perhaps be implied than by St. Mark's "I am : .:" that is a simple assertion: this may refer to the convictions and admissions of Caiaphas (see John xi. 49). But this is somewhat doubtful. The expression is only used here and in ver. 25: and there does not appear to be any reference in it, as said to Judas, to any previous admission of his. nevertheless-i. e.

'there shall be a sign of the truth of what I say, over and above this confession of Mine.' Henceforth the glorification of Christ is by Himself said to begin with his betrayal, see John xiii. 31: from this time from the accomplishment of this trial now proceeding. In what follows, the whole process of the triumph of the Lord Jesus even till its end is contained.

n Ps. cx. 1.

Acts vii. 55.

87: xix. 1.

D

after shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. 02 Kings xviii. 65 Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. p Lev. xxiv. 16. 66 What think ye? They answered and said, P He is Isa.1.6: guilty of death. 67 9 Then did they spit in his face, and buffeted him; and others smote him [ with the palms of their hands], 68 saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?

q
3. ch. xxvii.

30.

r ver. 34.

69 Now Peter sat without in i the palace: and a damsel came unto him, saying, Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee. 70 But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest. 71 And when he was gone out into the porch, another maid saw him, and said unto them that were there, This [fellow] was also with Jesus of Nazareth. 72 And again he denied with an oath, I do not know the 73 And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech 1 bewrayeth thee. 74 Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. immediately the cock crew. 75 And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said [m unto him], 'Before the ǹ not necessarily implied in the word; see note.

man.

i

render, the hall.

k better, This man: see on ver. 61.
literally, maketh thee manifest.
m omitted by many ancient authorities.

The shall ye see is to the council, the re-
presentatives of the chosen people, so soon
to be judged by Him to whom all judg-
ment is committed-the power in contrast
to his present weakness-sitting-even as
they now sat to judge Him; and the
coming in the clouds of heaven (see Dan.
vii. 37) looks onward to the awful time of
the end, when every eye shall see Him.

65.] In Levit. xxi. 10 (see also Levit. x. 6) the High Priest is ordered not to rend his clothes; but that appears to apply only to mourning for the dead. In 1 Macc. xi. 71, and in Josephus, B. J. ii. 15. 4, we have instances of High Priests rending their clothes. On rending the clothes at hearing blasphemy, see 2 Kings xviii. 37. 66.] This was not a formal condemnation, but only a previous vote or expression of opinion. That took place in the morning, see ch. xxvii. 1, and especially

And

67.] Luke gives

Luke xxii. 66-71.
these indignities, and in the same place as
here, adding, what indeed might have been
suspected, that it was not the members of
the Sanhedrim, but the men who held
Jesus in custody, who inflicted them on
Him.
The word rendered buffeted
means to strike with the fist.
following verb (smote him) is, generally,
to strike a flat blow with the back of the
hand-but also, and probably here, since
another set of persons are described as do-
ing it, to strike with a staff.

The

69-75.] OUR LORD IS THRICE DENIED BY PETER. Mark xiv. 66-72. Luke xxii. 56-62. John xviii. 17, 18, 25-27. This narrative furnishes one of the clearest instances of the entire independency of the four Gospels of one another. In it, they all differ; and, supposing the denial to have taken place

cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out,

thrice, and only thrice, cannot be literally harmonized. The following table may

serve to shew what the agreements are, and what the differences :

MATTHEW.

MARK.

LUKE.

JOHN.

1st Is recognized by denial. hall without, is self in the hall be- fire is recognized the porteress on charged by a maid low,-&c. as Matt. by the maid and being introduced servant with hav- goes out into charged replies, by the other dising been with Jesus the vestibule-cock Woman, I know ciple. 'Art not the Galilæan. I crows. I know Him not.' know not what thou not, neither under

Sitting in the Warming him- Sitting by the

2nd

sayest.'

He has gone out

stand what thou

sayest.'

--

The same maid Another (but a

thou also one of this man's disciples ?' He saith, 'I am not.'

Is standing and warming himself.

denial. into the porch-(possibly but see male servant) says, another maid sees note, next page, col. Thou also art of They said to him, him. "This man 1, line 26) sees him them.' Peter said, also was with Jesus again, and says, Man, I am not.' of Naz.' He de- This man is of nies with an oath, them.' He denies I do not know the again. man.'

3rd

After a little

denial. while, the stand- As Matth.

After about an

Art not thou also of His disciples?' He denied, and said, I am not.'

One of the slaves

hour, another per- of the High Priest, ers-by say, 'Surely 'Surely thou art sisted saying, Truly his kinsman whose thou art of them; of them: for thou this man was with ear Peter cut off, for thy dialect be-art also a Gali- Him, for he is a says,Did I not trayeth thee.' He lean.'

began to curse and

to swear: I know

not the man.'

Galilæan.' Peter see thee in the gar-
said, 'Man, I know den with Him?'
not what thou say- Peter then denied
est.'
again.

Immediately the

Immediately the A second time Immediately while
cock crew, and the cock crew, and he was yet speaking cock crew.
Peter remembered, Peter remembered, the cock crew, and
&c.-and going out &c.-and when he the Lord turned and
he wept bitterly. thought thereon he looked on Peter,
wept.
and Peter remem-

On this table I would make the following remarks:-that generally,—(1) supposing the four accounts to be entirely independent of one another, we are not bound to require accordance, nor would there in all probability be any such accordance, in the recognitions of Peter by different persons. These may have been many on each occasion of denial, and independent narrators may have fixed on different ones among them. (2) No reader, who is not slavishly bound to the inspiration of the letter, will require that the actual words spoken by Peter should in each case be identically reported. See

the admirable remarks of Augustine, cited on ch. viii. 25: and remember, that the substantive fact of a denial remains the same, whether I know not what thou sayest, I know him not, or I am not, are reported to have been Peter's answer. (3) I do not see that we are obliged to limit the narrative to three sentences from Peter's mouth, each expressing a denial, and no more. On three occasions during the night he was recognized,-on three occasions he was a denier of his Lord: such a statement may well embrace reiterated expressions of recognition, and reiterated and importunate denials, on