Marcos 14
Thomas Constable · Citado em PreceptAustin
Marcos 14
Constable has an interesting note on Mark 14 and Mark 15 - This section of Mark’s Gospel records the climaxes of many themes that the writer had introduced. Mark chose to concentrate on the passion or sufferings of Jesus rather than simply to give a record of all the events of the last week of Jesus’ life. Out of Mark’s 661 verses, 242 (37%) deal with the last week, from the Tri umphal Entry through the Resurrection, and 128 concern Jesus’ passion and resurrection. Over half the events Mark recorded in the last week (53%) deal with Jesus’ sufferings and triumph, the two major themes in the last three chapters A note of warning as we begin to study what is often referred to as Jesus' Passion (suffering) - Reading different commentaries may result in some confusion as to the timing of events on the last days of Passion week. For example, the noted expositor John MacArthur is one of the few who state that the Triumphal Entry was on a Monday and not a Sunday (see his sermon notes explaining his logic), which would make the events in Luke 22:1-6 as occurring on Wednesday, not Tuesday as described by most other commentators. For example, Jewish commentator Arnold Fruchtenbaum places the events in Luke 22:1-6 on Tuesday adding that "the Gospels are silent about the events of Wednesday. We can only guess that it was a day of private preparation by Jesus for what will begin on the Passover, which began on Thursday afternoon." MacArthur places the events in Luke 22:1-6 on Wednesday. So that is one point of difference in many of the commentaries. Another point of difference is regarding the chronology of the Passover. Specifically, did Jesus really celebrate the Passover meal with His disciples on Thursday evening and then die as the Passover Lamb of God on Friday afternoon. This will be discussed in more detail below, but just be aware that there is not a clear cut consensus regarding the events on Thursday and Friday. Another point to keep in mind as taught in Lk 22:1 is the fact that in Jesus' day the two separate feasts, Passover and Unleavened Bread, were considered as one feast, sometime referred to as Passover and sometimes as the Feast of Unleavened Bread (see Mt 26:17, Mk 14:1, 12, Lk 22:1). Leon Morris also points out that "All our Gospels agree that the crucifixion took place on a Friday in the Passover season, but whether the Passover coincided with the Lord’s Supper (as it seems to do in the Synoptics) or with the crucifixion itself (as John seems to say) is one of the most difficult questions in New Testament interpretation....Possibly the best explanation is that there were different calendars in use (Ed: see note below). Jesus died as the Passover victims were being slain according to the official calendar; but he had held the Passover with his followers the previous evening according to an unofficial calendar. Grassmick adds that "The chronology of the Passion Week events is complicated partly because two systems of reckoning time were in use, the Roman (modern) system in which a new day starts at midnight and the Jewish system in which a new day begins at sunset (cf. Mark 13:35)." (See The Bible Knowledge Commentary) J C
Marcos 14
Constable - These verses introduce the whole passion narrative. Passover commemorated the Israelites’ redemption from slavery in Egypt through the Exodus (Exod. 12:1–13:16). It anticipated a greater deliverance from the consequences of slavery to sin. The Jews began to celebrate Passover on the fourteenth of Nisan, and the feast of Unleavened Bread followed on the fifteenth through the twenty-first of Nisan. Mark dated the events that follow immediately as occurring two days before Passover. This would have been Wednesday, April 1, 33 A.D. And so strictly speaking in the Mosaic Law, the Feast of Passover was one day, followed by a distinct celebration of unleavened bread for 7 days. As Fruchtenbaum notes "by Jesus’ day in 1st century Israel, and up until today, these two feasts were combined into one 8 day observance all labeled Passover." Passover of course was a memorial that celebrated (Ex 12:14+) the night when the death angel passed over (Ex 12:12, 13+) the doors of homes marked with the blood (Ex 12:7+) of a blemish free lamb (Ex 12:3-5+, cf Jn 1:29+, 1 Pe 1:18-19+, 1 Cor 5:7). The Feast of Unleavened Bread commemorated Israel's exodus journey out of Egypt after the Passover. So at this time in Jerusalem, there would be Jewish pilgrims flooding in for these two great feasts which were in effect a celebration of Israel's past temporal salvation! How ironic that the very One to Whom all of the Feasts pointed (1 Cor 5:7) was preparing to sacrifice Himself to make a way for the eternal salvation of their souls! Sadly, most of the pilgrims did not have eyes to recognize Jesus as the Lamb of God Who could take away their sin and the sin of the world (Jn 1:29+). Wuest on the Passover - The word “Passover” is the translation of pascha which means “a passing over.” The paschal lamb was the lamb for sacrifice which the Israelites were bidden to kill, the blood of which they were to sprinkle on the door-posts of their dwellings in Egypt so that the destroying-angel might pass over their homes without entering and taking the life of the first-born. The paschal lamb therefore was the slain lamb, the death of which was accepted in lieu of the life of the first-born child. Our Lord is the Paschal Lamb in the sense that His death was accepted by the High Court of Heaven as a payment for our sin. As the symbolic Passover was about to be celebrated in Israel, the actual Passover Lamb was entering Jerusalem to fulfill the type by dying on the Cross. Unleavened (106)(azumos from a = negative + zume = leaven) means free from yeast, without fermentation and speaks of unleavened bread, the Hebrew word matzoth, eaten by the Jews during Passover. Figuratively, undefiled or a life free from sinful corruption (1 Cor 5:7-8). In the NT feast of unleavened bread is used to speak of the Passover (Mt. 26:17; Mk. 14:1; Mk. 14:12; Lk. 22:1; Lk. 22:7; Acts 12:3; Acts 20:6). Passover (3957)(pascha) is the transliteration of the Hebrew word pesach/pesah (06453) which is a masculine noun thought by some writers (Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon) to have its origin from pacach/pasah which apparently means to pass over; to spare (Ex 12:13, 23, 27+ - "Jehovah will pass"). Depending on the context, pascha refers to the Passover lamb (Lk 22:7+), the Passover meal (Lk 22:8+), or the festival of Passover (Lk 22:1+). Click here for much more in depth discussion of the actual Seder or Passover celebration. This is a fascinating side note: The Jewish Talmud describes the death of the Passover Lamb of God on the eve of Passover! And yet the Jewish scholars remained blind to the truth for "their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ." (2 Cor 3:14+) Sanhedrin folio 43a records - On the eve of the Passover Yeshu (34) was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!" And the chief priests and the scribes - Members of the Sanhedrin – this was not some radical, outsider group – these were the hard core religious leaders of the establishment. They wanted to make their problem go away quietly, with the least amount of commotion. We have seen these men before in Mark 8:31 and Mark 11:27. Matthew 26:3 adds that "the chief priests and the elders of the people were gathered together in the court of the high priest, named Caiaphas." And so we see that representatives of each order of the Sanhedrin were present for this plot to put Jesus to death. Recall that Caiaphas was the one who had advocated sacrificing Jesus John recording "You know nothing at all, nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish.”" (Jn 11:49-50, see context Jn 11:47,48) Paul Apple speaks of the utter irony - These were the religious leaders plotting to kill the ultimate Passover Lamb at the very time they were celebrating the feast that pointed to his redemptive work! These men are the ones pictured in Ps 41:5-8+ My enemies speak evil against me, “When will he die, and his name perish?” 6 And when he comes to see me, he speaks falsehood; His heart gathers wickedness to itself; When he goes outside, he tells it. 7 All who hate me whisper together against me; Against me they devise my hurt, saying, 8 “A wicked thing is poured out upon him, That when he lies down, he will not rise up again.” IVP Background Commentary - Jewish literature reports that the high priests bullied those who opposed them. Grassmick points out that "Like other passages in Mark the first cycle of events in this division also has a “sandwich” structure (ED: SEE SANDWICH BELOW) (cf. Mark 3:20–35; Mark 5:21–43; Mark 6:7–31; Mark 11:12–26; Mark 14:27–52). The account of the conspiracy by the religious leaders and Judas (Mark 1–2, 10–11) is divided by the account of Jesus’ anointing in Bethany (Mark 14:3–9). In this way Mark emphasized the striking contrast between the hostility of those who plotted His death and the loving devotion of one who recognized Him as the suffering Messiah. (See The Bible Knowledge Commentary) SANDWICH STRUCTURE: The Decision of the Rulers to kill Christ - Mark 14:1-2 The Devotion of Mary to anoint Christ- Mark 14:3-9 The Determination of Judas to betray Christ - Mark 14:10-11 (from What the Bible Teaches - Mark) Chief priests (749)(archiereus) in the plural denotes members of the Sanhedrin (Wikipedia) who belonged to high priestly families (Mt 2:4; Lk 23:13; Ac 4:23) and would include the current high priest, Caiaphas (Mt 26:3), a Sadducee, the leader of the Sanhedrin, and the former high priest Annas, who still wielded significant influence behind the scenes. Scribes (1122)(grammateus) most of whom were Pharisees were those skilled in the law of Moses and rabbinic literature (Mt 2:4; 23:2, 13ff; Mk 2:16; Lk 9:22; Acts 6:12). It always amazes me that the Scribes were the Biblical experts and thus would have (or should have) been familiar with the Messianic Prophecies (>300 specific prophecies), the very prophecies that were perfectly fulfilled in the God-Man Christ Jesus! Sin blinds our spiritual eyesight. Sin makes it impossible to see truth in the Scriptures! It follows that before you go to the Word of God, go to the God of the Word and confess any sin that might impede the illuminating work of God's Spirit. (cf 1 Jn 1:6-7+, 1 Jn 1:9+) To read the Word, without allowing God's Spirit to "read your heart" (cf Jn 16:8) is an exercise in futility. Were seeking how to seize Him by stealth (“some sly way” - NIV) and kill Him - Mark begins with a striking contrast between the enemies who sought to kill Christ (Mk 14:1-2) and the friends, one of whom sought to anoint Christ (ultimately for burial) (Mark 14:3-9). It is also notable that at the same time the Jewish leaders were seeking to seize Him and kill Him Matthew 26:1-2 tells us Jesus was predicting the exact day of His death declaring "You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man is to be handed over for crucifixion.” Once again we see the juxtaposition of men's responsibility (seeking to kill) and God's sovereignty (giving the day of the killing). Stealth is a detail not found in the other Gospel accounts and is the word dolos which Jesus had used in Mark 7 declaring "For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22 deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit (dolos), sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness." THOUGHT - The point of the juxtaposition of the evil and the good discussed above should serve as a constant reminder that God was in complete control of every aspect related to the Crucifixion of His Beloved Son. And beloved saint, He is just as IN CONTROL of every aspect of our lives, even when our lives may appear (humanly speaking) to be out of control! Rest in that absolute truth in full confidence that He is still the God Who is able even when it seems impossible to fulfill His promise in Romans 8:28 to cause "all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." This is His trustworthy Word dear suffering saint! Take a moment and rejoice in the truth that God is in Control. Arnold Fruchtenbaum - The leaders of Israel are in unison on their desire to kill Jesus. Their conspiracy has TWO goals: (1) They want to find a way to arrest Jesus away from the multitude to avoid a riot breaking out. (2). They want to avoid killing Him on the Passover. This goal is in keeping with Satan’s plan to kill Jesus but avoid fulfilling the prophetic nature of the Feast of Passover. But we see that despite Satan’s best efforts God is the one who is in control, and Jesus’ death occurred when it was ordained to occur. Previous attempts to kill Jesus had been unsuccessful, as they had not been at the appointed time. In order for the atonement to be made Jesus HAD to die during this Passover, and He HAD to die by crucifixion. Read Isaiah 53:5+, and Psalm 22:11-18. If that were not the case God could have allowed the death of the Messiah Jesus to happen at any other time by any other means. But He ordained the feasts of Israel as a prophetic template in which He would accomplish His purposes towards Israel and mankind in general. (Life of Messiah) Seeking (imperfect tense - again and again, constantly on watch for an opportunity to seize Jesus)(2212)(zeteo) means these evil men were continually trying to discover some way to destroy Jesus, thus it is not surprising that this verb zeteo is used repeatedly by the Gospel writes to describe the efforts of the Jewish religious leaders to seize and destroy Jesus (Mt 21:46, 26:16 , Mt 26:59, Mk 11:18, 12:12, Mk 14:1, 11, 55, Lk 19:47, 20:19 , Lk. 20:19, 22:2, 22:6, John 5:18, 7:1, 7:25, 7:30, Jn 8:37, 8:40, 10:39, 11:8, Jn 18:4, 7, 8) Stealth (deceit) (1388)(dolos from dello = to bait) literally refers to a fishhook, trap, or trick all of which are various forms of deception. Dolos is a deliberate attempt to mislead, trick, snare or "bait" (baiting the trap in attempt to "catch" the unwary victim) other people by telling lies. It is a desire to gain advantage or preserve position by deceiving others. A modern term in advertising is called "bait and switch" where the unwary consumer is lured in by what looks like an price too good to be true! 11x in NT =- Matt. 26:4; Mk. 7:22; Mk. 14:1; Jn. 1:47; Acts 13:10; Rom. 1:29; 2 Co. 12:16; 1 Thess. 2:3; 1 Pet. 2:1; 1 Pet. 2:22; 1 Pet. 3:10 Kill (put to death)(615)(apokteino from apó = intensifies meaning + kteíno = slay) means to kill outright or to put to death in any manner. To kill someone results in a state of separation. To kill physically (Mt. 10:28; Mt. 14:5, Jn 18:31; often of Christ's death; in Rev. 2:13, Rev. 9:15, Rev. 11:13). Uses in Mark - Mk. 3:4; Mk. 6:19; Mk. 8:31; Mk. 9:31; Mk. 10:34; Mk. 12:5; Mk. 12:7; Mk. 12:8; Mk. 14:1 Related Resources: Passover & Unleavened Bread Leviticus 23 Feast of Unleavened Bread & Day of Pentecost (cp Acts 2) Leviticus 23 Commentary - deals with the Jewish feasts What are the Jewish Festivals? Passover - Wikipedia Should Christians celebrate Passover? Yeshua and the Feast of Unleavened Bread THE SEVEN GREAT FEASTS OF ISRAEL Note that each of the Seven Great Feasts has a specific eschatological (prophetic) fulfillment. The four Spring feasts have been fulfilled at the First Coming of the Messiah. The final three feasts will be fulfilled at the Second Coming of the Messiah when He returns to to establish His Kingdom (cf Lk 17:20ff+, Lk 22:18+) and fulfill God's literal promises to the literal nation of Israel, promises which are summarized by Paul when he wrote "all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, “THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB.” (Ro 11:26+) SPRING FEASTS FALL FEASTS 1st Month = Nisan Festival of Passover (Pesach) 3rd Month = Sivan Feast of Pentecost I N T E R L U D E 7th Month = Tishri Festival of Booths (Tabernacles) (Sukkot) Passover Pesach Unleavened Bread First Fruits Feast of Weeks Feast of Trumpets Day of Atonement Feast of Booths Lamb's blood on Door Ex 12:6-7+ Purging Leaven (Sin) Wave Offering (Promise of Harvest to come) Wave Offering of two loaves of leavened bread (promise of harvest to come) Trumpet Blown - A Holy Convocation Atonement shall be made to cleanse you Lev 16:30+ Celebrates harvest, memorial of God's care in wilderness 1st Month, 14th Day Lev 23:5+ 1st Month, 15th Day Lev 23:6-8+ (1st & 8th are Sabbath) Day after Sabbath Lev 23:9-14+ 50 Days after first fruits Lev 23:14-21+ 7th Month, 1st Day Lev 23:23-25+ (A Sabbath) 7th Month, 10th Day Lev 23:26-32+ (A Sabbath) 7th Mo, 15th Day 7 Days; Convocation on 8th Day Lev 23:33-44 (1st & 8th are Sabbath) Christ our Passover has been sacrificed Clean out the old leaven… just as you are in fact unleavened Christ has been raised… the first fruits Promise of the Spirit, Mystery of Church - Jews and Gentiles in one body Regathering of Israel before final day of atonement Jer 32:37-41+ Israel repents and looks to Christ in one day Zech 3:9-10, Zech 12:10+, Zech 13:1+, Zech 14:9+ All families come to Jerusalem for Feast of Booths Zech 14:16-19+ 1Cor 5:7 1Cor 5:7-8 1Cor 15:20-23 Acts 2:1-47+ Ezekiel 36:24+ Ezekiel 36:25-27+ Heb 9-10 Ro 11:25-29+ Ezek 36:28+ Mark 14:2 for they were saying, "Not during the festival, otherwise there might be a riot of the people." NET Mark 14:2 For they said, "Not during the feast, so there won't be a riot among the people." NLT Mark 14:2 "But not during the Passover celebration," they agreed, "or the people may riot." ESV Mark 14:2 for they said, "Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar from the people." NIV Mark 14:2 "But not during the Feast," they said, "or the people may riot." GNT Mark 14:2 ἔλεγον γάρ, Μὴ ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ, μήποτε ἔσται θόρυβος τοῦ λαοῦ. KJV Mark 14:2 But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar of the people. YLT Mark 14:2 and they said, 'Not in the feast, lest there shall be a tumult of the people.' ASV Mark 14:2 for they said, Not during the feast, lest haply there shall be a tumult of the people. CSB Mark 14:2 "Not during the festival," they said, "or there may be rioting among the people." Not: Pr 19:21 21:30 La 3:27 Mt 26:5 otherwise: Mk 11:18,32 Lu 20:6 Joh 7:40 12:19 Mark 14 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Matthew 26:5 But they were saying, “Not during the festival, otherwise a riot might occur among the people.” Luke 22:2+ The chief priests and the scribes were seeking how they might put Him to death; for they were afraid of the people. for they were saying, "Not during the festival, otherwise there might be a riot of the people" - As discussed above, during the festival would have been between Nisan 14-21, referring to the combined feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread which were often spoken of as one "festival." What are the religious leaders saying? They are thinking that they would not be able to complete their task of killing Him until AFTER the Passover. As discussed above Jesus' prediction was "spot on" and reiterates the theme that God not men is in total control of this grand story of redemption.
Marcos 14
Constable on cup - Jesus referred to the Cross as the “hour” and the “cup.” The first expression includes everything involved in the Cross (cf. John 7:30; 8:20; et al.). The “cup” figuratively particularized God’s judgment in the Cross (cf. 10:38–39).
Marcos 14
Constable explains that this first day "would have been Thursday, April 2. Mark could say the Passover was two days away on Wednesday (Mark 14:1) because the Jews ate the Passover lamb between sunset and midnight on the evening of the day they slew the lamb. For the Jews this was two days later since they began each day with sunset. The disciples had to prepare to eat the Passover within Jerusalem (Deut. 16:5–6) that very evening." Deuteronomy 16:5-6 “You are not allowed to sacrifice the Passover in any of your towns which the LORD your God is giving you; 6 but at the place where the LORD your God chooses to establish His name (WHICH WOULD LATER BE JERUSALEM), you shall sacrifice the Passover in the evening at sunset, at the time that you came out of Egypt. Wuest on being sacrificed - The customary imperfect is used, “when they were accustomed to kill the to pascha (το πασχα),” literally “the passing over,” thus, that which enabled God to withhold the judgment of death, thus passing over the homes of the Israelites in Egypt where the blood was sprinkled, thus, finally, the passover. Here the paschal lamb for sacrifice is called to pascha (το πασχα), the passover. NET Note adds "Generally the feast of Unleavened Bread would refer to Nisan 15 (Friday), but the following reference to the sacrifice of the Passover lamb indicates that Nisan 14 (Thursday) was what Mark had in mind (Nisan = March 27 to April 25). The celebration of the Feast of Unleavened Bread lasted eight days, beginning with the Passover meal. The celebrations were so close together that at times the names of both were used interchangeably." Passover (3957)(pascha is the transliteration of the Hebrew word pesach/pesah 06453) which is a masculine noun thought by some writers (Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon) to have its origin from pacach/pasah which apparently means to pass over; to spare (Ex 12:13, 23, 27 - "Jehovah will pass"). Depending on the context, pascha refers to the Passover lamb (Lk 22:7), the Passover meal (Lk 22:8), or the festival of Passover (Lk 22:1). The Passover as used in Lk 22:1 is combined with the Feast of Unleavened Bread by Luke in a metonymy (one word or phrase is substituted for another with which it's closely associated) writing "the Feast of Unleavened Bread…called the Passover, was approaching." (Lk 22:1) Rooker adds that "These two ceremonies were apparently combined at the beginning, for the Passover lamb was to be eaten with unleavened bread (Ex 12:8)." (New American Commentary). Being sacrificed (killed, butchered)(2380)(thuo) means to kill or slaughter for a sacrifice, to offer bloody and nonbloody offerings (Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23; Jn 10:10; Acts 10:13; 1 Cor 5:7). To sacrifice the passover means to kill the paschal lamb as a species of sacrifice (Mk 14:12; Lk 22:7; 1 Cor. 5:7; Ex. 12:21; Deut. 16:2, 4-6). This is the only use of thuo in Mark. His disciples said to Him - On Thursday afternoon the disciples take the initiative to broach this subject. Where do You want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover? - They asked "where" not "if" indicating they knew Jesus had celebrated previous Passovers and would desire to celebrate this one. In short, they leave the "where" to Jesus and they would do the preparation. It is interesting that although Judas was the treasurer (John 12:6), Jesus did not give him the task of purchasing the needed provisions. McKenna notes, “Treachery shadows the final hours. Jesus must protect Himself by limiting His confidence to two disciples who will know the time and place for the Passover feast.” (BORROW Communicator’s Commentary - Mark PAGE 284) Hiebert- deferentially they spoke of Him eating, for He would be the host; but it was assumed that they would eat with Him. It was a family feast, but the disciples accepted that they would eat the Passover with Jesus rather than scatter to their respective families. It speaks of the close relationship between Jesus and His disciples. (The Gospel of Mark: An Expositional Commentary)
Marcos 14
Constable - Jesus explained that His betrayal was part of divine purpose that the Old Testament had predicted (e.g., Ps. 22; Isa. 53). Nevertheless the betrayer would bear the responsibility for his deed and would pay a severe penalty. “The fact that God turns the wrath of man to his praise does not excuse the wrath of man.” (Cranfield) The seriousness of Judas’ act was in direct proportion to the innocence of the person he betrayed (cf. v. 9). “By whom the Son of Man is betrayed” (NASB) views Judas as Satan’s instrument. R C
Marcos 14
Constable: He was wearing a rather costly linen outer garment (Gr. sindon) without an undergarment (Gr. chiton). It may have been his sleeping garment. This incident makes little contribution to the story of Jesus' arrest, apart from illustrating that everyone fled. Therefore some of the church fathers and most of the modern commentators have concluded that the young man was Mark, the writer of this Gospel. However, there is no solid evidence for this.
Marcos 14
Constable note that "This was an unofficial meeting of the Sanhedrin since Jewish law required that official meetings take place during the daytime. It transpired before dawn on Friday, the fifteenth of Nisan, a feast day. Normally the Sanhedrin did not conduct hearings of this type on a feast day. The Jewish leaders probably met at this unorthodox hour because the Romans conducted their civil trials shortly after sunrise. The Sanhedrin wanted to deliver Jesus over to Pilate for a hasty trial before public sentiment built in favor of Jesus. Normally the Sanhedrin did not pass sentence on an accused capital offender until the day following his trial. They made an exception in Jesus’ case. Usually the Sanhedrin met in a hall on the west side of the temple enclosure. However now they met in Caiaphas’ house or palace (Luke 22:54). “All” the Sanhedrin may mean every one of its 71 members or, probably, all that were necessary for a quorum, at least 23." Hiebert: All the gospels make it clear that the trial of Jesus fell into two general parts. He was first tried by the ecclesiastical authorities and then by the political authorities. A comparison of the different accounts indicates that both parts comprised three stages. None of the gospels record all the different stages. (The Gospel of Mark: An Expositional Commentary) Comparing all 4 gospels we discover Jesus endured 6 hearings or "trials" (used only loosely for these were hardly fair trials!) in a matter of hours, the first three were Religious Trials before the Jewish authorities and the last three were Civil Trials before the Roman political authorities, Pilate and Herod Antipas (Mt 26-27; Mark 14-15; Luke 22-23; John 18-19). THE SIX MOCK TRIALS OF THE MESSIAH JESUS' THREE RELIGIOUS TRIALS See also Detailed Discussion of 3 Religious Trials MATTHEW MARK LUKE JOHN Before Annas Nighttime ~1-3 AM Jn 18:12-14,19-24+ Before Caiaphas Nighttime - ~1-3 AM Mt 26:57-68+ Mk 14:53-65+ Lk 22:54, 63-65+ Before Sanhedrin Daybreak ~5 AM Mt 27:1+ Mk 15:1+ Lk 22:66-71+ JESUS' THREE CIVIL TRIALS Before Pilate Mt 27:2, 11-14+ Mk 15:1-5+ Lk 23:1-5+ Jn 18:28-38+ Before" Herod Antipas Lk 23:6-12+ Before Pilate Mt 27:15-26+ Mk 15:6-15+ Lk 23:13-25+ Jn 18:39-19:16+ For a more detailed discussion of the rules/laws for trials, witnesses, etc. see Buss' ten page discussion "Extracts from the Mishna." Buss - The Trial Before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin Buss - Importance of Witnesses Buss - Many False Witnesses Buss - Second Stage, Before Caiaphas - Two Witnesses Buss - Third Stage Before Caiaphas - Ye Are All Witnesses Buss - Meeting At Daybreak THE DENIAL OF CHRIST—Mark 14:53–72 - Croft Pentz I. THE DIVINE SAVIOUR—Mark 14:53–56 A. The court—Mark 14:53. They wanted a quick court session. They wanted to condemn Him as soon as possible. It was wrong to have a court session at night. B. The coward—Mark 14:54. Peter, who boasted he would never deny Christ. Peter, who cut off an ear in defending Christ (John 18:10) is now afraid to stand for Christ. C. The Christ—Mark 14:55–56. They sought to find fault, but could find none. The false witnesses could not give sufficient proof. II. THE DEGRADED SAVIOUR—Mark 14:57–65 A. Prophecy—Mark 14:57–59. Christ’s words of destroying the temple and raising it up in three days (John 2:19–21). They didn’t fully understand. They twist its meaning, seeking to destroy Christ. He spoke of His body being crucified, then rising the third day. B. Patient—Mark 14:60–61. When accused of doing wrong, He remained silent. He now was practicing His teachings of “turning the cheek,” and being kind in pressure situations. C. Power—Mark 14:62–63. When asked if He was the Messiah, He admitted He was. This stirred up the Jewish leaders, who felt He had no respect toward God. D. People—Mark 14:64. All present agreed Christ was guilty of blasphemy and sentenced Him to death. E. Punished—Mark 14:65. They spat upon Him and beat Him with their fists. He remains silent, suffering, though doing no wrong. III. THE DENIED SAVIOUR—Mark 14:66–72 A. Recognition—Mark 14:66–67. Peter was with the wrong people. A maid of the high priest recognizes Peter as a disciple of Christ. B. Rejection—Mark 14:68–71. Note how Peter denies Christ three times: Mark 14:68, 70, 71. The last time he swears, saying he didn’t know Christ. What a difference from Mark 14:29–31! C. Remembrance—Mark 14:72. After the third denial, the rooster crows. Peter remembers Christ’s words (Luke 22:34). He is filled with sorrow. Why did Peter deny the Lord? 1. When he should have been praying, he was sleeping. 2. He did much talking and little practicing. Question: What trials did Jesus face before His crucifixion? Answer: The night of Jesus’ arrest, He was brought before Annas, Caiaphas, and an assembly of religious leaders called the Sanhedrin (John 18:19-24; Matthew 26:57). After this He was taken before Pilate, the Roman Governor (John 18:28), sent off to Herod (Luke 23:7), and returned to Pilate (Luke 23:11-12), who finally sentenced Him to death. There were six parts to Jesus’ trial: three stages in a religious court and three stages before a Roman court. Jesus was tried before Annas, the former high priest; Caiaphas, the current high priest; and the Sanhedrin. He was charged in these “ecclesiastical” trials with blasphemy, claiming to be the Son of God, the Messiah. The trials before Jewish authorities, the religious trials, showed the degree to which the Jewish leaders hated Him because they carelessly disregarded many of their own laws. There were several illegalities involved in these trials from the perspective of Jewish law: No trial was to be held during feast time. Each member of the court was to vote individually to convict or acquit, but Jesus was convicted by acclamation. If the death penalty was given, a night must pass before the sentence was carried out; however, only a few hours passed before Jesus was placed on the Cross. The Jews had no authority to execute anyone. No trial was to be held at night, but this trial was held before dawn. The accused was to be given counsel or representation, but Jesus had none. The accused was not to be asked self-incriminating questions, but Jesus was asked if He was the Christ. The trials before the Roman authorities started with Pilate (John 18:23) after Jesus was beaten. The charges brought against Him were very different from the charges in His religious trials. He was charged with inciting people to riot, forbidding the people to pay their taxes, and claiming to be King. Pilate found no reason to kill Jesus so he sent Him to Herod (Luke 23:7). Herod had Jesus ridiculed but, wanting to avoid the political liability, sent Jesus back to Pilate (Luke 23:11–12). This was the last trial as Pilate tried to appease the animosity of the Jews by having Jesus scourged. The Roman scourge was a terrible whipping designed to remove the flesh from the back of the one being punished. In a final effort to have Jesus released, Pilate offered the prisoner Barabbas to be crucified and Jesus released, but to no avail. The crowds called for Barabbas to be released and Jesus to be crucified. Pilate granted their demand and surrendered Jesus to their will (Luke 23:25). The trials of Jesus represent the ultimate mockery of justice. Jesus, the most innocent man in the history of the world, was found guilty of crimes and sentenced to death by crucifixion. (Source: GotQuestions.org) Related Resources: Who was Annas in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org What is the account of Annas and Caiaphas? | GotQuestions.org Who was Caiaphas in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org What happened during Jesus’ last hours before His death? | GotQuestions.org Mark 14:54 Peter had followed Him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest; and he was sitting with the officers and warming himself at the fire. Peter: Mk 14:29-31,38 1Sa 13:7 Mt 26:58 right: Joh 18:15,16 and he: 1Ki 19:9,13 Lu 22:55,56 Joh 18:18,25 warming: Lu 22:44 Mark 14 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Excellent Diagram/Map of Jesus' Arrest, Trial and Crucifixion Related Passages: Matthew 26:58 But Peter was following Him at a distance as far as the courtyard of the high priest, and entered in, and sat down with the officers to see the outcome. Luke 22:54+ Having arrested Him, they led Him away and brought Him to the house of the high priest; but Peter was following at a distance. PETER FOLLOWS AT A DISTANCE BUT PETER'S DENIAL FOLLOWS SOON Mark sets the stage for Peter's denial in Mark 14:53, then interrupts with an account of Jesus' trial before Caiaphas the high priest (Mark 14:55-65) and then returns to finish the saga of Peter's triple denial before the double crowing. (Mark 14:66-72) Note that all Four Gospels have descriptions of Peter's denial, but comparing these four accounts is not always straightforward. Keep this in mind as you study, teach and preach on Peter's denials. Stein for example comments that there are several differences including "such things as: exactly where and when the three denials took place, who the people were who questioned Peter, the exact wording of Peter’s denials, and the number of cock crows (one or two). All four (Gospel writers agree) that Peter (1) denied his Lord three times (2) on the night of Jesus’ betrayal (3) in the courtyard of the high priest, (4) that a maid questioned Peter, and (5) that a cock crowed “immediately” after the third denial." (NAC) (Numbers in parentheses added). Peter had followed (akoloutheo) Him at a distance (makrothen), right into the courtyard of the high priest (Caiaphas - see Mt 26:57) - "drawn by love but keeping at a safe distance because of fear" (Hiebert). John's account adds that "Simon Peter was following Jesus, and so was another disciple (JOHN). Now that disciple was known to the high priest, and entered with Jesus into the court of the high priest, 16 but Peter was standing at the door outside. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the doorkeeper, and brought Peter in." (John 18:15-16) Paul Apple - Commendable that Peter followed him at all – after putting himself in jeopardy by cutting off the ear of Malchus, the servant of the high priest But noteworthy that he only followed Jesus at a distance – not exactly the commitment that Jesus had called for when he commanded His disciples to forsake all and follow after Him; to deny themselves and take up their cross daily Earle - One of the outstanding features of Mark's Gospel is the addition of little details, like this one. The Greek literally says: "warming himself (thermainomenos) at the light (phos)." The fire would serve for both heating and lighting. Incidentally, our word "thermometer" is a combination of two Greek words: therme, "heat," and the verb metreo, "measure." Hiebert: Peter drawn by love but holds back due to fear. (The Gospel of Mark: An Expositional Commentary) James Edwards: Peter has forsaken a discipleship of costly following (Mk 8:34) for one of safe observation. (The Gospel according to Mark) Grassmick explains that the courtyard "was a central quadrangle with the high priest’s residence built around it (cf. John 18:15–18)." (See Bible Knowledge Commentary) Matthew gives the reason for Peter following writing that "Peter was following Him at a distance as far as the courtyard of the high priest, and entered in, and sat down with the officers to see the outcome (telos - the conclusion of a process of events)." (Mt 26:58) Peter wanted to know how this would end. Apparently he still does not completely grasp that Jesus must die as the sacrificial Lamb for the sins of the world. And he was sitting with the officers and warming himself at the fire - Jerusalem is elevated about 2500 feet above sea level and it can become cold at night in the spring. Sitting with the officers was a daring ploy in a dangerous place as he would soon discover. These officers would not have been Roman soldiers but were the "Temple police" under Jewish jurisdiction. At the fire is literally "toward the light" (fire is the word phos = light) or facing the fire. This small detail means that even though it was dark, his face would be well illuminated which would lead to discovery of his identity described in Mark 14:67. Not smart Peter! But Jesus had given the prophecy and God took care of the details (cold night, need for fire, Peter facing the fire), so that it would be fulfilled perfectly. Hiebert on the officers - The temple police acted under the authority of the high priest. They remained out in the court while Jesus was before the Sanhedrin. Peter joined them. (The Gospel of Mark: An Expositional Commentary) Edwards - In this section we see the final stage leading to Peter's downfall - SELF PRESERVATION. The key verse here is verse 54. ". . . but Peter followed Him at a distance." In trying to preserve himself, Peter lost vital contact with Christ and ultimately disassociated himself with the Lord. Many Christians today are following Christ "from a distance," desiring to sap all His benefits but unwilling to bear His reproach. This spirit of self-preservation will inevitably lead to denying Christ when the heat is on, for reputation and comfort will be of greater value than the praise of God and eternal reword. May we join in the ranks of the saints described in Revelation 12:11, "And they overcame him (Satan) by the blood of the lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death." (The Gospel according to Mark) Officers (5257)(huperetes from hupo = under, beneath + eretes = a rower) is literally and under oarsman and then a subordinate, a servant, an attendant (Lk 4:20), one who is in the service of another or an assistant in general.
Marcos 14
Constable - Jesus’ human will was distinct from the Father’s will but never opposed to it.....Jesus’ submission to His Father here recalls Genesis 22:7 where Isaac addressed his father Abraham in a very similar situation quite near this place.
Marcos 14
Constable comments that "The contrast between the flesh and the spirit is not between the sinful human nature and the Holy Spirit (as in Gal 5:17) but between man’s volitional strength and his physical weakness (cf. Mt 26:35). We often want to do the right thing but find that we need supernatural assistance to accomplish it (cf. Ro 7:15-25). While I would agree that clearly the "spirit" in this context is not the Holy Spirit and therefore the clash between Spirit and flesh of Galatian 5:17 is not in view, I think the flesh is still referring to the "fallen flesh" because what else makes a man or woman morally "weak"? To be sure the disciples were undoubtedly physically "weak" (in that sense their "bodies of flesh and blood" were weak) but Jesus is clearly speaking not just of physical issues but of moral/ethical issues (prayer, temptation, falling spiritually). Keep in mind that all men have inherited the "sin virus" from Adam (Ro 5:12-note) and therefore are "contaminated" by Sin so that everything (exclamation point!) we do before we are born again, is tainted by the effects of the fall (and thus the effects of the "flesh"). In the context of Matthew 26 we have somewhat of a unique situation, in which the disciples clearly had believed in Jesus (cp Mt 16:16, 20) and yet they did not yet have the indwelling Holy Spirit (Jn 7:39), Who gives believers the desire and power necessary to live the Christian life (cp Acts 1:8, Ro 8:13-note, 1Co 15:10) and specifically in context, the desire and power to "watch and pray". Hiebert adds "Some (like Constable above) hold that spirit and flesh here have a non-theological meaning and that the reference is simply to their mind or inner desire and the weary physical body which frustrates their desire. More probably, the two terms have their usual ethical significance. Their higher spiritual nature, already quickened by the Spirit of God, was eager to be loyal to Him, but the flesh, the old nature, was weak and opposed to the desire of the spirit. By calling them to watch and pray, Jesus sought to arouse their higher nature to full activity so that they will not yield to the flesh." (The Gospel of Mark: An Expositional Commentary) James Montgomery Boice expounds on "The Weakness of Our Flesh" asking first… Did Jesus need to pray? In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. (He 5:7-note, see Mt 26:39, 40) He obviously did, and he was the sinless Son of God. He was the Rock of Ages, an unshakable pillar of strength compared to those around him. But if he needed to pray, how much more do we who are weak and sinful and ignorant and usually oblivious to the temptations that surround us every day? "The flesh is weak," Jesus said. But not only weak. It is a pit of corruption and rebellion too. The New International Version translates the Greek word sarx ("flesh") as "body" in verse 41, but that greatly weakens the word in my opinion. In the New Testament, flesh usually means "mere flesh," that is, the whole person as he or she is apart from the regenerating and purifying Spirit of God. Flesh stands for "man the sinner," and man the sinner is more than physically weak. He is corrupt, sinful, and rebellious in his soul. What is the solution? It is staring us in the face. "Watch and pray," said Jesus. Why? Because apart from prayer we will certainly "fall into temptation" (Mt 26:41). The only way we can stand is in the power of Jesus, Who was Himself able to stand and Who intercedes for us to enable us to stand (Heb 7:25-note, Ro 8:34-note, cp the Spirit also interceding for us - Ro 8:27-note), even as we pray. Peter thought he was strong. When Jesus spoke of his impending death, indicating that the disciples would forsake him and scatter, Peter protested. Although that might be true for the others, it would not be true for him since he was willing not only to suffer but even to die for Jesus' sake. Peter meant it. He loved the Lord. He thought he could stand by him. But Peter was weak in the flesh, and he was not able even to keep awake long enough to pray. Peter also fell into temptation, and he would have fallen away utterly if Jesus had not prayed for him that his faith might be strengthened. Jesus said, "I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith might not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers" (Luke 22:32). John H. Gerstner suggested at one of the Philadelphia Conferences on Reformation Theology that it must have been Peter who composed the song found in some of today's hymnbooks. It has the recurring chorus line, "Lord, we are able." That is what Peter sang before his fall. But Gerstner suggested that after Peter had fallen and been restored by Jesus, he rewrote his self-confident hymn to read, "Lord, we are not able." Peter was not able, and neither are we. In the flesh we will fall, but we can stand in Christ if we come to Him and pray, seeking the strength He makes available. So pray. If you have trouble praying, remember that Jesus prayed and that he is praying for you right now. (An Expositional Commentary – The Gospel of Matthew, Vol 2: The Triumph of the King). Alexander
Marcos 14
Constable: Part of the crowd consisted of Jewish temple police (Luke 22:52) and Roman soldiers (John 18:12). The police carried clubs and the soldiers had short swords. William Lane says chief priests "included former holders of the high priestly office, … the commander of the Temple Guard, the steward of the Temple, and the three Temple treasurers. The “elders” represented the most influential lay families in Jerusalem, and seem to have been primarily wealthy landowners. The chief priests and the elders constituted the old ruling class in Jerusalem, with Sadducean leanings, who still held the balance of power in the Sanhedrin. The third group, the representatives of the scribes, consisted primarily of lawyers drawn from the middle classes who tended to be Pharisaic in their convictions. (NICNT-Mark) MARK 14:43-72 "Rise Up, O Men of God" - Selwyn Hughes "I am," said Jesus, "and all of you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven."—MARK 14:62 Although the fullness of God's kingdom is yet to come, there is a sense in which the King is reigning now, and we can say with the utmost certainty, "Our God reigns!" (Take a respite from your busy day and worship Him - Play and worship the Living God Who reigns forever and ever. Amen) A lady once wrote to me indicating her intention to withdraw from life and await the day when God would finally establish His kingdom in power and glory on the earth. I replied with a parody of a hymn that apparently got her thinking. She wrote back in a few weeks and said, "You were right. I was waiting for God, but now I realize He is waiting for me." She ended her letter with the words of the hymn: (Play this hymn or here) Rise up, O men of God! Have done with lesser things; Give heart and soul and mind and strength To serve the King of kings. This must indicate our line of action. Yes, of course, the final ushering in of God's kingdom is yet to take place, but that does not mean that He is taking a backseat in the world's affairs. God wants to reign through us! We need not wait for the day when spectacularly the great God of the universe demonstrates His imperial power. As He sounds forth a rallying cry, even through these pages, respond to Him, I urge you, with a fresh consecration of purpose, and dedicate yourself to letting Him reign through you. Prayer God, I give myself wholly to You, not only just to live in me, but to reign through me. I gladly submit my whole being to You today. Live and reign in me. For Jesus' sake. Amen. WOUNDS OF A FRIEND - Allen Ross - Proverbs 27:6 “Reproof, Its Value” Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses. The message of this proverb is that reproof given in love is superior to insincere expressions of affection. The lines are in antithetical parallelism, contrasting the faithful (ne’emanim) wounds of a friend (’oheb) with the profuse kisses of an enemy (sone’). The NIV translated the first line “wounds from a friend can be trusted.” These wounds, no doubt verbal wounds, are “faithful” because they are meant to correct or to improve (see 25:12; Deut. 7:9; Job 12:20). There is no false flattery here--a good friend gives an honest response or a constructive criticism because there is concern for the well-being of the person. The friendship is strong enough so that the friends know that the other person is not trying to hurt or destroy, but to help. But an enemy’s kisses are deceptive (consider the kiss of Judas in Mark 14:43-45). In spite of their profusion (for this word the versions have a variety of translations, including “confused, fraudulent, bad”), the “kisses,” that is, the outward expressions of professions of affection, mean nothing. It is all show. One can usually see through this false display of affection, for there is nothing behind it that remotely resembles true affection. But some people thrive on this kind of false flattery because they cannot handle the truth. The proverb is simply making a comparison between the genuine way that friends function and the false display of friendship. The mature person would much rather have a true friend who “told it like it was” than a number of people who pretend to be friends. The goal is to cultivate a good friendships like this, ones in which the people care enough to be honest, even when it is painful to hear. But these are the kinds of friendships that last. See James Stalker The Trial and Death of Jesus Christ-A Devotional History of Our Lord's Passion 1. THE ARREST Matt. 26:47–56; Mark 14:43–50; Luke 22:47–53; John 18:1–11. 2. THE ECCLESIASTICAL TRIAL Matt. 26:57–68; Mark 14:51–65; Luke 22:54–71; John 18:12–14, 19–24. 3. THE GREAT DENIAL Matt. 26:69–75; Mark 14:66–72; Luke 22:54–62; John 18:15–18, 25–7. Mark 14:44 Now he who was betraying Him had given them a signal, saying, "Whomever I kiss, He is the one; seize Him and lead Him away under guard." NET Mark 14:44 (Now the betrayer had given them a sign, saying, "The one I kiss is the man. Arrest him and lead him away under guard.") NLT Mark 14:44 The traitor, Judas, had given them a prearranged signal: "You will know which one to arrest when I greet him with a kiss. Then you can take him away under guard." ESV Mark 14:44 Now the betrayer had given them a sign, saying, "The one I will kiss is the man. Seize him and lead him away under guard." NIV Mark 14:44 Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: "The one I kiss is the man; arrest him and lead him away under guard." had given them a signal: Ex 12:13 Jos 2:12 Php 1:28 2Th 3:17 Whoever: 2Sa 20:9,10 Ps 55:20,21 Pr 27:6 Mt 26:48-50 and lead: 1Sa 23:22,23 Ac 16:23 Mark 14 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries A SERPENTINE SEDITIOUS SIGNAL Serpentine means resembling a serpent and thus speaks of slyness and subtlety. A "Serpent of Old" possessed man inflicted a fatal "kiss" on the perfect Man in a garden setting. The Serpent of Old killed Adam in the Garden of Eden, but here served to expedite the killing of the Son of Man, so that spiritually dead sons of men might live forever in the garden of Paradise! Glory! Hallelujah! (See also Seditious). Now he who was betraying Him had given them a signal - Was betraying (historical present tense) is the idea of handing over, in this case Judas handing over Jesus to the authorities. In the parallel account in Mt 26:48 the word used is sign (semeion) but Mark uses a word found only here in the Bible. Signal is sussemon (sun = together + semaino from sema = sign,mark) is literally a "sign together," thus a sign in common, a preconcerted signal or token which they had agreed upon before they came to seize Jesus. It was a common word for a concerted signal according to agreement. It was a nonverbal action or gesture (a kiss) which "encoded" the message that this is the Man, the Son of Man! NET Note says "This remark is parenthetical (see NET rendering above) within the narrative and has thus been placed in parentheses. Was betraying (handed over) (3860) see note on paradidomi Saying "Whomever I kiss, He is the one - Judas explains the non-verbal signal. (See Kiss of Judas and note below)
Marcos 14
Constable: Peter had not only boasted too much (Mk 14:29, 31), and prayed too little (Mk 14:37, 40, 41), but he also acted too violently.
Marcos 14
Constable - Previously Jesus had veiled His messiahship because publicly claiming to be the Messiah would have precipitated a premature crisis (cf. Mark 1:43–44; 8:29–30; 9:9; 11:28–33; 12:12). Now He openly admitted His messiahship because the time for crisis had arrived. Robertson on I am - Matthew 26:64 has it, “You have said,” which is the equivalent of the affirmative rephy. But Mark’s statement is definite beyond controversy. But this is not all that Jesus said to Caiaphas. He claims that the day will come when Jesus will be the Judge and Caiaphas the culprit using the prophetic language in Dan. 7:13 and Psa. 110:1. It was all that Caiaphas wanted.
Marcos 14
Constable - The Mosaic Law prescribed death by stoning for blasphemers (Lev. 24:14), but this was not bad enough for Jesus. Jesus had foreseen this and had predicted death at the hands of the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Mk 10:33).
Marcos 14
Constable - Spitting and hitting were traditional Jewish ways of expressing repudiation (cf. Num. 12:14; Deut. 25:9; Job 30:10; Isa. 50:6). Even today spitting in someone’s face is one of the grossest forms of personal insult.
Marcos 14
Constable - Evidently they blindfolded Jesus and challenged Him to identify His assailants because of a belief that Messiah did not need to see but could judge by smell (Isa. 11:2–4) Grassmick on blindfold and beat - This reflects a traditional test of messianic status based on a Rabbinic interpretation of Isaiah 11:2–4. The true Messiah could judge such matters without the benefit of sight (cf. Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 93b). But Jesus refused to submit to their test and remained silent (cf. Isa. 53:7; 1 Peter 2:23). (See The Bible Knowledge Commentary) And to beat Him with their fists (kolaphizo) - Beat means to pummel Jesus with their clenched fists and in the is in the present tense indicating continuous abuse! This is a mob scene by these religious leaders. Hiebert remarks that "These acts of brutality were intended as a brilliant demonstration of the absurdity of His messianic and prophetic claims. They succeeded only in demonstrating the awful depravity of the human heart. (The Gospel of Mark: An Expositional Commentary) Some 700 years earlier Isaiah had prophesied of this horrible fate of our Messiah... Just as many were astonished at you, My people, So His appearance was marred more than any man And His form more than the sons of men.( Isaiah 52:14) Scofield Bible on Isaiah 52:14 - “The literal rendering is terrible: ‘So marred from the form of man was His aspect that His appearance was not that of a son of man’—i. e. not human—the effect of the brutalities described in Matt. 26:67, 68; 27:27–30.” And to say to Him, "Prophesy!" (propheteuo - aorist imperative - Do it now!) - What a jeering demand. Matthew 26:68 (cf Luke 22:63+) amplifies their caustic command - “Prophesy to us, You Christ; who is the one who hit You?” They were taunting the King of glory. He knew exactly who had just hit Him! One can only imagine their horror when Jesus' "prophecy" will be made reality, for Paul writes "at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Php 2:10-11) Could Jesus have prophesied? Of course, but again He remained silent not indulging these evil irreverent mockers As Peter said "while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously." (1 Peter 2:23+). He would not prophesy then, but one day He will pronounce their final sentence "‘I never knew you; Depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!" (Mt 7:23+) Once more our Lord remained silent in partial fulfillment of Isaiah 53:7+ He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth. NET Note on Who hit you? (Luke 22:63) - This is a variation of one of three ancient games that involved blindfolds. (ED: The difference of course is that children would only "hit" but here they were beating Him!) If one ever doubted the depravity of the human heart, all they need do is read this section on the treatment of Jesus by so-called religious men. It reminds me of the horrible Spanish Inquisition of men and women by those who called themselves "religious!" And the officers (huperetes) received Him with slaps in the face - Received Him means the Sanhedrin gave Jesus back over to their custody. NET = "The guards also took Him and beat Him." These officers are not Roman but Jewish, presumably the Temple police. The abuse Jesus suffered fulfilled His prophecy given earlier to His disciples and soon the prophecy of His death would be fulfilled... The Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death and will hand Him over to the Gentiles. They will mock Him and spit on Him, and scourge Him and kill Him, and three days later He will rise again. (Mark 10:33–34) Spit (1716) emptuo spit on or at, as in one's face(Mt 26.67, Mt 27:30; Lxx - Nu 12:14); passive be spit on (Lk 18.32), to be understood as a gesture of extreme contempt (Lxx - 25:9) Emptuo - 8v Matt. 26:67; Matt. 27:30; Mk. 10:34; Mk. 14:65; Mk. 15:19; Lk. 18:32 Twice in Lxx = Num. 12:14; Deut. 25:9; Beat with fists (buffet, harshly treat) (2852) kolaphizo from kolaphos = the knuckles or a closed fist and kolapto = to strike) means to beat or strike with the fist. To strike with clenched hand. Figuratively it means to cause harm, treat roughly or harshly (1Cor 4:11). Gilbrant - Found primarily in the New Testament and early Christian literature, the meaning of the verb kolaphizō is “to strike with a clenched fist” or “to beat with one’s hands.” Although this meaning is to be taken literally, the usage in one location in the New Testament is better understood in a figurative sense. In Matthew 26:67, and the parallel passage in Mark 14:65, kolaphizō is used to refer to the “beating” which Jesus suffered at the hands of the high priest and others during His trial. Paul wrote concerning the apostles and the beatings which they suffered in 1 Corinthians 4:11. In 1 Peter 2:20 Peter addressed servants in regard to enduring beatings at the hands of overbearing masters as a mark of Christian commitment. In each of the above cited passages kolaphizō is used in a literal sense; i.e., receiving physical abuse, beatings. There is, however, one passage in which the meaning of kolaphizō is better understood in a figurative sense. In 2 Corinthians 12:7 Paul described his “thorn” as being given to him “to beat or buffet him.” This could refer to some sort of physical illness delivered by a “messenger of Satan.” KOLAPHIZO - 5V - beat...with their fists(2), harshly treated(1), roughly treated(1), torment(1). Matt. 26:67; Mk. 14:65; 1 Co. 4:11; 2 Co. 12:7; 1 Pet. 2:20 NOT IN THE SEPTUAGINT. Prophesy (4395) propheteuo from pró = before or forth + phemí = tell) means literally to tell forth and can mean to speak forth God's message, not necessarily referring to speaking of future events. In other contexts to prophesy means to speak under inspiration and foretell future events. In this context the meaning could be either sense, although if the latter, it would imply that they were prophesying falsely in His name, because the canon of revelation is complete. The only legitimate prophesying in this age is to speak forth God's Word. They were commanding (aorist imperative = Do this now!) Jesus to give them a divine revelation. They were making fun of His divinity, but see Grassmick's comment. Friberg - (1) generally, of speaking with the help of divine inspiration proclaim what God wants to make known, preach, expound (Acts 2.17; 1 Co 11.4); (2) as speaking out divinely imparted knowledge of future events foretell, prophesy (Mk 7.6; Jn 11.51; Rev 10.11); (3) as bringing to light what was concealed and outside the possibility of naturally acquired knowledge prophetically reveal, prophesy (Mt 26.68) (BORROW Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament) PROPHETEUO - 27V - Matt. 7:22; Matt. 11:13; Matt. 15:7; Matt. 26:68; Mk. 7:6; Mk. 14:65; Lk. 1:67; Lk. 22:64; Jn. 11:51; Acts 2:17; Acts 2:18; Acts 19:6; Acts 21:9; 1 Co. 11:4; 1 Co. 11:5; 1 Co. 13:9; 1 Co. 14:1; 1 Co. 14:3; 1 Co. 14:4; 1 Co. 14:5; 1 Co. 14:24; 1 Co. 14:31; 1 Co. 14:39; 1 Pet. 1:10; Jude 1:14; Rev. 10:11; Rev. 11:3 Understanding that Jesus endured such pain and humiliation should cause us to respond in three ways. The following are from Spurgeon... We should bravely bear pain and humiliation for the sake of Jesus ourselves. “How ready should we be to hear slander and ridicule for Jesus’ sake. Do not get into a huff, and think it a strange thing that people should mock you. Who are you, dear sir? Who are you? What can you be if compared with Christ? If they spat upon him, why should they not spit upon you? If they buffeted him, why should they not buffet you? Shall your Master have all the rough of it? Shall he have all the bitter, and you all the sweet? A pretty soldier you, to demand better fare than your Captain!” We should be more diligent to praise Jesus. “How earnestly, next, ought we to honor our dear Lord. If men were so eager to put him to shame, let us be ten times more earnest to bring him glory. Is there anything we can do today by which he may be honored? Let us set about it. Can we make any sacrifice? Can we perform any difficult task which would glorify him? Let us not deliberate, but at once do it with our might. Let us be inventive in modes of glorifying him, even as his adversaries were ingenious in the methods of his shame.” We should have more assurance and confidence in receiving the finished work of Jesus for our redemption. “Surely I know that he who suffered this, since he was verily the Son of the Blessed, must have ability to save us. Such griefs must be a full atonement for our transgressions. Glory be to God, that spittle on his countenance means a clear, bright face for me. Those false accusations on his character mean no condemnation for me.” Mark 14:66 As Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant-girls of the high priest came, as: Mk 14:54 Mt 26:58,69,70 Lu 22:55-57 One: Joh 18:15-18 Mark 14 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Matthew 26:69 Now Peter was sitting outside in the courtyard, and a servant-girl came to him and said, “You too were with Jesus the Galilean.” Luke 22:55+ After they had kindled a fire in the middle of the courtyard and had sat down together, Peter was sitting among them. 56 And a servant-girl, seeing him as he sat in the firelight and looking intently at him, said, “This man was with Him too.” John 18:17 Then the slave-girl who kept the door *said to Peter, “You are not also one of this man’s disciples, are you?” He *said, “I am not.” PETER'S TRIAL BEGINS IN CAIAPHAS' COURTYARD After the discussion of Jesus "trial" before Caiaphas, Mark picks up the story of Peter which began in Mark 14:54.
Marcos 14
Constable - Peter’s presence was a testimony to His love for Jesus. Unfortunately his love could not stand the test of fear. Hiebert adds below in the courtyard "indicates that the apartments around the courtyard were on a higher level than the open court. The rooms were approached by steps. It need not mean that the trial of Jesus took place in an upstairs apartment." (The Gospel of Mark: An Expositional Commentary) one of the servant-girls of the high priest came - John says she was "the slave-girl who kept the door" (John 18:17) and therefore may have been the one who admitted Peter to the courtard.