John 18 - 15-27 - Cheap Equivocation and Costly Grace - Part 2

Last week we looked at Peter’s three denials – his “trial”.

·  We noted that it wasn’t Jesus whom Peter denied, but being Jesus’ disciple.

·  We saw that Beasley-Murray suggested that this distinction was crucial and John’s intent.

·  And so to that end, we called Peter’s rejection of His association with Jesus “cheap equivocation”.

·  More on that at the end of today’s lesson.

We also briefly went through the nature of Jesus’ trial.

·  His trial had both a Jewish phase and a Roman phase.

The Jewish phase contained the following scenes (DJG):

·  (1) “Initial examination by Annas in John” (John 18:12-14; 19-24)

o   Our text today.

·  (2) “A nighttime trial before Caiaphas in Matthew and Mark” (Matt. 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 22:54)

·  (3) “A Sanhedrin trial at dawn in Luke” (Matt. 27:1; Mark 15:1; Luke 22:66-71)

The Roman phase contained the following scenes:

·  (1) Standing before Pilate (Matt. 27:2, 11–14; Mark 15:1–5; Luke 23:1–5; John 18:28–38)

·  (2) Standing before Herod (Luke 23:6–12)

·  (3) And then another standing before Pilate (Matt. 27:15–26; Mark 15:6–15; Luke 23:13–25; John 18:39–19:16)

This week we deal with Jesus’ “trial” before Annas.

·  While Peter was in the courtyard denying his association with Jesus, Jesus was being interrogated by Annas.

·  We turn to that now.

1) THE TRIAL OF JESUS

Jesus’ Trial before Annas – Scene 1:

John 18:12–14 (ESV) — 12 So the band of soldiers and their captain and the officers of the Jews arrested Jesus and bound him. 13 First they led him to Annas, for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. 14 It was Caiaphas who had advised the Jews that it would be expedient that one man should die for the people.

Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane, bound, and led to Annas.

·  It is assumed by many that Annas was, at this time, located in the high priest’s palace.

·  Some even suggest he was living there.

o   A “feasible conjecture is that Annas and Caiaphas were in wings of the same residence somewhere in the upper city” – DJG.

·  Whatever the case, the thought is that this was a prearranged and deliberate audience with Annas, “the father-in-law of Caiaphas” orchestrated by Annas (vs. 13).

o   “…probably the matter was decided in advance…” – D.A. Carson.

John then also interjects a commentary about Caiaphas.

·  He reminds us that it was Caiaphas who said “one man should die for the people” (vs. 14).

·  John 11:50 (ESV) — 50 Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.

·  Caiaphas’ fear was that Jesus’ antics might arouse the people to such an extent that the Romans might see fit to bring down their might upon the status quo.

·  Clearly, Caiaphas did not want to jeopardize the status quo.

·  John MacArthur tells us that Caiaphas served as high priest from 18-36 A.D. – 18 years.

·  Holding office this long may reveal, he says, what “utterly ruthless” lengths Caiaphas might go to stay in power.

Jesus’ Trial before Anna – Scene 2:

John 18:19–24 (ESV) — 19 The high priest then questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. 20 Jesus answered him, “I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together. I have said nothing in secret. 21 Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me what I said to them; they know what I said.” 22 When he had said these things, one of the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand, saying, “Is that how you answer the high priest?” 23 Jesus answered him, “If what I said is wrong, bear witness about the wrong; but if what I said is right, why do you strike me?” 24 Annas then sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.

Before we get into this text we need to get into some background on Annas.

·  Annas had been high priest from A.D. 6-15.

·  From A.D. 17-41 he had 5 sons, 1 grandson and a son-in-law (Caiaphas) serve as high priest.

·  Because his family “had a monopoly of the high-priestly office” he “held a patriarchal position in the high-priestly circles” – Beasley-Murray.

o   In other words, he was the patriarch of the high priests.

·  Therefore he “continued to hold enormous influence” – D.A. Carson.

·  In fact, he “was to some extent the power behind Caiaphas” – D.A. Carson.

·  John MacArthur suggests Annas was “the most powerful figure in Jewish hierarchy”.

Annas’ power and influence are revealed in Scripture and explain what appears to be a mistake.

·  Both in our text, and in Luke-Acts, Annas is called the high priest even though Caiaphas is the high priest.

·  This is also because, like our presidents, he retained the title after he left office – John MacArthur.

·  In verse 19, John calls Annas the high priest even though he also rightly states in verse 24 that Caiaphas is currently serving as the high priest.

·  Luke does the same in Luke-Acts.

·  Luke 3:2 (ESV) — 2 during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.

·  Acts 4:5–6 (ESV) — 5 On the next day their rulers and elders and scribes gathered together in Jerusalem, 6 with Annas the high priest and Caiaphas and John and Alexander, and all who were of the high-priestly family.

Because of his patriarchal status, power and influence, it is suggested that Annas exerted his power and arranged to see Jesus first.

·  The speculation is that Annas, in questioning Jesus, was trying to see the best way to have Him killed.

In The Murder of Jesus, John MacArthur puts it as follows:

·  “The plan was for Annas to listen to Jesus give an account of His teaching, and then Annas would decide what kind of charge to file. He had several options at his disposal. He could charge Jesus with blasphemy, a crime punishable by death under Jewish law. Since Jesus had said many things in His public ministry that the Jewish leaders deemed blasphemous, that seemed the most likely charge. But the Romans, who must authorize and carry out all executions, rarely approved of the death penalty for blasphemy. For that reason Annas might also look for a way to charge Jesus with sedition or insurrection. Understandably, Rome was not inclined to be merciful to anti-Roman agitators.”

There is one other probable reason Annas arranged to see Jesus first.

·  Annas “received a share of the proceeds from the sale of sacrificial animals” used for temple sacrifice by the Jews – John MacArthur.

·  We are told that Annas was so notorious for his usage of the temple to make money that “the outer courts of the temple…became known as the Bazaar of Annas” – John MacArthur.

·  And as we all know, it was Jesus that disrupted Annas’ money making machine.

·  William Barclay suggests that Annas’ meeting with Jesus was payback time.

It is in this context that John tells us Annas questions Jesus on “his disciples and his teaching” (vs. 19).

·  Which, as we saw, may have been just a fishing expedition for Annas.

·  Or an attempt to get Jesus to incriminate Himself.

·  And perhaps to find out if His followers were high enough in number to pose a problem – D.A. Carson.

Jesus’ answer seems to be twofold.

·  (1) The things you are asking about are well known.

o   “I have spoken openly to the world” (vs. 20).

o   I didn’t hide my teaching from the public.

·  (2) So, “why do you ask me?” (vs. 21).

o   BTW – It was against Jewish law to have someone incriminate themselves.

o   If you think I have done something wrong, call witnesses.

o   “Ask those who have heard me” (vs. 21).

o   “They know what I said” (vs. 21).

Annas was subverting the legal system and Jesus’ answer essentially called Annas out on this issue.

·  We then see that because of that, “the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand” (vs. 22).

·  Jesus finally replied to Annas’ witch hunt with “impeccable logic” – MacArthur.

·  “If what I said is wrong, bear witness about the wrong; but if what I said is right, why do you strike me?” (vs. 23).

·  “If He was wrong about the proper legal procedure, they should have corrected Him instead of hitting Him [it was illegal to hit a prisoner]. But if (as He did) the Lord spoke accurately, what justifiable reason was there for striking Him?” – John MacArthur.

So getting nowhere, but perhaps establishing in his mind the best way to have Jesus killed, Annas sent Jesus to Caiaphas.

·  It would be Caiaphas as the high priest that would begin to formalize the path to Jesus’ death.

2) THE “OPEN” MINISTRY OF JESUS

We saw that Jesus said He taught and spoke “openly” throughout His ministry (vs. 20).

·  John and Luke also tell us about Jesus’ out in the open ministry.

·  John 7:26 (ESV) — 26 And here he is [at the temple], speaking openly, and they say nothing to him! Can it be that the authorities really know that this is the Christ?

·  Acts 26:26 (ESV) — 26 For the king knows about these things [Gospel and resurrection], and to him I speak boldly. For I am persuaded that none of these things has escaped his notice, for this has not been done in a corner.

In order to get into the contrast between Jesus “costly grace” and Peter’s “cheap equivocation” we need to tease this out a bit.

·  “Openly” carries with it the idea of courageous public speaking and actions – BDAG.

·  “He works publicly, i.e, in the synagogues and temple, not in secret” – TDNT.

·  Jesus was not hiding his teaching about the Kingdom of God.

·  Nor was He hiding His relationship to it.

A comparison between Jesus’ ministry and John the Baptist’s ministry demonstrates this as well.

·  “John came ‘neither eating nor drinking’” – “Jesus came ‘eating and drinking’ and is accused of being a ‘glutton and a drunkard’” – Michael Bird.

·  “John is ascetic” – “Jesus engages in open table-fellowship” – Michael Bird.

So the “openness” of Christ was a willingness to put Himself out there for His ministry and in obedience to the Father.

·  Understanding the “openness” of Christ, we can now properly understand the relationship between Jesus’ “costly grace” and Peter’s “cheap equivocation”.

3) COSTLY GRACE AND CHEAP EQUIVOCATION

Peter’s “cheap equivocation” – self-serving:

Last week we got into Peter’s “cheap equivocation”.

·  His “equivocation” was opting to hedge his bets against his association with Jesus and deny it.

·  The “cheap” was because there was very little at stake for him if he did own up to his discipleship.

·  Or to put it another way, he gained very little (thus the “cheap”) by denying he was a disciple of Jesus.

·  Perhaps he gained a low profile so that he could stay up with Jesus without being bothered.

·  But again, this gain just serves to highlight Peter’s “cheap equivocation” – nothing was at stake!

·  And whatever else his “cheap equivocation” was, self-serving would be at the top of the list.

Jesus “costly grace” – selfless:

By contrast, we just saw Jesus “openly” declared His ministry and the Kingdom of God without regard for the cost to Himself.

·  And we know well that the free grace He made available to us through this “openness” was indeed costly.

·  Thus Jesus chose “costly grace” over “cheap equivocation”.

·  And whatever else Jesus’ “costly grace” was, selfless would be at the top of the list.

“Cheap equivocation” is self-serving – “costly grace” is selfless.

One need only look at the actions of each in our text to see this contrast.

·  Peter follows Jesus to the courtyard – possibly self-serving (“I have spent 3 years with this guy – now what”).

·  Peter denies his association with Jesus to gain entry – self-serving.

·  Peter warms himself – self-serving.

·  Peter disowns his associations with Jesus two more times – self-serving.

·  Peter even denied sticking up for Jesus – self-serving.

·  Jesus, falsely arrested, does not resist – selfless.

·  Jesus, unjustly bound and struck, speaks openly – selfless

·  Jesus owns up to His associations with His ministry – selfless

·  Jesus appeals to witnesses to even testify to His openness in His ministry – selfless

·  Peter’s actions point away from Jesus – Jesus’ actions point to His Father ordained ministry

So what was Peter’s problem?

Peter’s Problem:

·  Peter had not yet learned that, “The grace of God, mediated through Jesus, is free but not cheap” – Kenneth Bailey.

·  Or, as he puts another way, “Grace is costly for the one who offers it (Jesus) and the one who receives it (us)” – Kenneth Bailey.

o   Scripturally found in texts such as “the cost of discipleship” in Luke 14:25-33.

·  Jesus’ own ministry repeatedly demonstrated this principle.

·  The narrative of Jesus and Zacchaeus in Luke 19 demonstrates this beautifully.

Here is how – from Jesus Through Middle-Eastern Eyes – Kenneth Bailey:

·  Jesus enters Jericho.

·  Zacchaeus, the town tax collector, wants to see Jesus but he is too short and the crowd won’t accommodate him.

·  After all he is rich, and is rich because he takes their money – they simply don’t like him.

·  Zacchaeus climbs a tree to remedy his problem.

·  It is here something remarkable happens.

Jesus doesn’t marginalize Zacchaeus like the crowd.

·  He calls out Zacchaeus and invites Himself to Zacchaeus’ house for the night.

·  By doing this, Jesus deliberately shifted “the town’s hostility away from Zacchaeus to Himself” – Kenneth Bailey.

·  The crowd said, “He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner” (Luke 19:7).

·  Here is the problem.

·  “If Jesus enters Zacchaeus' house, sits on his chairs and sleeps in his guest bed, he will emerge the following morning defiled and in need of ceremonial cleansing. Is this the way a messiah should behave on the eve of Passover?” – Kenneth Bailey.

·  Jesus didn’t equivocate on his grace to Zacchaeus – He was all in.

What does this cost Jesus?

·  His “cred” in the eyes of others.

·  His pride.

·  All the things we refuse to give up on a daily basis.

·  Of course, this all pales in comparison to the cost of the cross.

·  But it is the little things (the cheap things) that we are faced with day after day.

·  And far too often we equivocate even on the cheap things, like Peter.

And the result of this “costly grace” to Zacchaeus is also quickly realized.

·  He finds He is compelled to repay what he has stolen.

·  “And if I have defrauded anyone anything, I restore it fourfold” – Luke 19:8).

John and Luke speak to this idea that Jesus’ grace is not cheap for us as follows:

·   “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30)

·   “So therefore, any one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:33)

Peter’s Solution:

It seems that through the Holy Spirit, Peter learned that grace is indeed free but not cheap.

·  As a disciple to Jesus, there is no room for:

o   Equivocation

o   Fence-Straddling

o   Compartmentalizing

o   Self-Serving behavior

·  Following Christ ain’t cheap.

But amen that the Holy Spirit displaced Peter’s instinct for selfishness with the freedom of self-forgetfulness and selflessness!

·  And Peter’s “cheap equivocation” was replaced with jail, persecution and eventually the loss of his own life.

John 18:15-27 – Peter’s Cheap Equivocation and Jesus’ Costly Grace – Part 1

Introduction:

Our text today develops two scenes for us simultaneously.

·  John does this by alternating between two scenes – A-B-A-B.

o   Jesus before the high priest (A)

o   Peter in the courtyard of the high priest’s palace (B)

·  His purpose is to compare and contrast these two parallel story lines.

·  We will gradually see why this is significant and how it plays out.

Before we start, however, I want to show where we are both in time and geographically.

The Timeline:

We are slowly moving from late Thursday night of Passover week into early Friday morning – the day of Jesus’ crucifixion.

·  Jesus has been arrested and transported to the High Priest’s palace.

·  His trial, which lasts all night, consists of both Jewish and Roman phases.

This is best seen in the following infographic from the FaithLife Study Bible:

The Geography:

Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane on the slopes of the Mount of Olives.

·  He was bound and then led back across the Kidron Valley.

·  From there He would have traveled south along the Temple mounts eastern wall.

·  He would have turned west, passing the mikvahs situated on the southern edge of the Temple mount.

·  Finally, He would have been led up a hill and a series of steps leading to the High Priest’s palace.

The following pics show some of Jesus’ likely route:

Temple Mount from Mount of Olives

Southern End of Temple Mount

Steps to Caiaphas’s Palace

High Priest’s Palace

It was in the courtyard of the High Priest’s Palace and within the Palace walls that our story takes place.

·  We will begin with Peter in the courtyard.

1) PETER ON “TRIAL”

Peter – Scene 1:

John 18:15–18 (ESV) — 15 Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. Since that disciple was known to the high priest, he entered with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest, 16 but Peter stood outside at the door. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the servant girl who kept watch at the door, and brought Peter in. 17 The servant girl at the door said to Peter, “You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?” He said, “I am not.” 18 Now the servants and officers had made a charcoal fire, because it was cold, and they were standing and warming themselves. Peter also was with them, standing and warming himself.

John tells us that after Jesus’ arrest at least two disciples, Peter and one other, followed a bound Jesus to the “courtyard of the high priest” (vs. 15).

·  It is at this point that things go south for Peter.

·  He is recognized by the servant girl tending the gate.

·  She asks him, “You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you (vs. 17)?”

·  His answer to the servant girl’s question is simply “I am not” one of this man’s disciples (vs. 17).

o   Scholars tell us the question was formulated in Greek so as to illicit a negative answer.

Then John describes an odd scene for us.

·  The servants and officers, who were just involved in the arrest of Jesus moments earlier, make a fire to keep warm.

o   It is the middle of the night and it is cold.

o   And the fact that we are told it is specifically a “charcoal fire” (vs. 18) seems to indicate that John’s account is an eyewitness account.

·  Peter, who just denied his association with Jesus to the servant girl, saddles up next to the very people who just arrested Jesus.

·  He did this, John tells us, because he is “warming himself” in the cold (vs. 18).

·  This brings us to scene two and Peter’s 2^nd and 3^rd denials.

Peter – Scene 2:

John 18:25–27 (ESV) — 25 Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. So they said to him, “You also are not one of his disciples, are you?” He denied it and said, “I am not.” 26 One of the servants of the high priest, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, asked, “Did I not see you in the garden with him?” 27 Peter again denied it, and at once a rooster crowed.

Again John tells us that Peter was “warming himself” – the reason he was standing with the servants and officers.

·  This time they, not the servant girl at the gate, ask Peter “You also are not one of his disciples, are you (vs. 25)?”

·   Peter answers them, “I am not” (vs. 25) one of his disciples.

·  So for the second time Peter denies his association with Jesus.

Then John tells us that those at the fire ask the obvious question we have all been waiting for – “Did I not see you in the garden with him (vs. 26)?”

·  Mark tells us Peter’s answer is unequivocal.

·  “I do not know this man of whom you speak (Mark 14:71b).”

·  So for the third time, Peter denies any association with Jesus.

·  Alluding to the contrast of the cold night and the warm fire, the Dictionary of Biblical Imagery suggests that, “The cold night seems to pervade [Peter’s] spirit and strip his courage, as his fiery zeal turns to three chilling denials of his Master” – DBI.

At that moment, “…a rooster crowed” (vs. 27).

·  Luke also adds the detail that at this very moment Jesus, perhaps from a window, turned and looked at Peter.

Although John makes no mention of it, we know that Peter’s reaction to the conviction brought by the rooster’s crow and Jesus’ glance is intense.

·  Mark 14:72b (ESV) — 72b And he broke down and wept.

·  Matthew 26:75b (ESV) — 75b And he went out and wept bitterly.

·  Luke 22:62 (ESV) — 62 And he went out and wept bitterly.

So Why the Denials?

What is the reason for the them?

·  Or put another way, what does God want us to learn from Peter’s denials?

·  They are, after all, included in all four Gospels.

·  One reason is easy to determine.

(1) Peter’s denials were a fulfillment of Jesus’ words and thus a demonstration of Jesus’ divinity.

·  We only need to look at what Jesus told Peter earlier that evening to see this.

·  John 13:36–38 (ESV) — 36 Simon Peter said to him, “Lord, where are you going?” Jesus answered him, “Where I am going you cannot follow me now, but you will follow afterward.” 37 Peter said to him, “Lord, why can I not follow you now? I will lay down my life for you.” 38 Jesus answered, “Will you lay down your life for me? Truly, truly, I say to you, the rooster will not crow till you have denied me three times.

Ok, that was the easy one.

·  To lay the groundwork for establishing more reasons, we need to exclude some commonly held views for Peter’s denials.

·  We call this “affirming the negative”.

(2) Peter’s denials were probably not because he feared for his life.

·  To demonstrate this we need to tease out some facts from the narrative.

·  Specifically with respect to:

o   The Other Disciple and Peter’s Own Actions.

(a) The Other Disciple:

·  In verse 15 John tells us that there was another disciple with Peter – the “other disciple”.

·  In verse 16, John tells us that this “other disciple” was Peter’s ticket into the high priest’s courtyard.

·  We see also that in verse 17 the servant girls question included the words, “you also”.

·  These pieces of information tell us that she recognized the “other disciple” and his association with Jesus.

·  In fact, her recognition of the “other disciple” probably led to her question Peter to begin with.

·  She merely wanted to know if Peter was a disciple too.

·  And D.A. Carson adds that Peter “may have viewed this first instance [at the gate] of self-distancing from the Master as a rite of admission to the courtyard; but once performed, it was easy to repeat, with rising vehemence” – D.A. Carson.

(b) Peter’s Own Actions:

Additionally, John tells us in verse 18 that Peter actually joined Jesus’ captors at the fire to keep warm.

·  John 18:18b (ESV) — 18b Peter also was with them, standing and warming himself.

·  This means he didn’t leave – he came further into the courtyard.

So these two factors together seem to indicate that Peter was not gripped by a fear for his life.

·  Why?

Summary of reasons why Peter didn’t fear for his life:

·  (i) It would be very odd for him to stand next to the men that just arrested Jesus.

o   Especially having been the one to cut off a servant’s ear.

·  (ii) Had he feared for his life or safety, he could have left or never entered the courtyard.

o   As it is, he and the “other disciple” regrouped after Jesus’ arrest and felt it was safe enough to track down Jesus and see what was happening to Him.

o   So they entered the courtyard.

o   And at least Peter saddled up next to the fire.

o   Which was close enough to the palace to be seen by Jesus.

·  (ii) And what of the “other disciple”?

o   Apparently he had no such fear.

o   He was even so well known he was easily admitted into the courtyard.

o   And had enough pull to get Peter in as well.

·  (iv) Finally, scholars tell us that it was not against the law to be a disciple of a prominent teacher.

o   Even if the teacher was controversial like Jesus.

 (3) Peter’s denials were not because he was being asked to vouch for the identity of Jesus.

·  In other words, Peter did not deny Jesus was the Christ; Peter denied that he was His disciple.

·  This is an important point.

·  In fact, Beasley-Murray argues that “the theme [in our text] is not that Peter denied that Jesus is Lord or Messiah, but that he himself was his disciple” – Beasley-Murray.

·  This is a significant observation!

So what is left that can explain Peter’s denials and why they are so prominent in all four Gospels?

·  Nobody really knows; it is all speculation.

·  “Why he should deny being a disciple of Jesus is not immediately apparent” – John MacArthur.

·  But I have a theory.

·  And it involves a contrast between “cheap equivocation” and “costly grace”.

We will get into this contrast next week when we dive into Jesus’ “trial” before Annas and Caiaphas.

John 18 – The Garden, the Response and the Cup

Last week we finally finished up John 17 with a discussion on unity.

·  Divine Unity

·  Shared Unity

·  Believer’s Unity

We focused primarily on Divine Unity and a discussion on the Trinity.

·  We briefly tried to understand why Christianity cannot stand w/o the Trinity.

Today, we are going to hit on a few themes in the narrative that unfolds in John 18:1-14.

·  We will briefly talk about:

o   (1) The Garden

o   (2) The Response

o   (3) The Cup

1) THE GARDEN

John 18:1–3 (ESV) — 1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went out with his disciples across the brook Kidron, where there was a garden, which he and his disciples entered. 2 Now Judas, who betrayed him, also knew the place, for Jesus often met there with his disciples. 3 So Judas, having procured a band of soldiers and some officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, went there with lanterns and torches and weapons.

(1) The Garden – John tells us that after Jesus’ Farwell Discourse and Priestly Prayer, He took the disciples “across the brook Kidron, where there was a garden” (vs. 1).

·  The Kidron was a valley on the east side of the Temple mount that separated the temple mount from a slope full of olive trees known as the Mount of Olives.

·  On the western slope of the Mount of Olives was the Garden of Gethsemane.

·  It was here, John tells us, that Jesus “often met there with his disciples” (vs. 2).

·  Luke 22:39 (ESV) — 39 And he came out and went, as was his custom, to the Mount of Olives, and the disciples followed him.

(2) Garden Habit – Interestingly, John points out that because Jesus “often met” in the garden “with his disciples” explains why Judas was able to track Jesus down without much trouble.

·  If you remember, Judas left during the Last Supper in John 13 and was not part of John 14-17.

·  John 13:30 (ESV) — 30 So, after receiving the morsel of bread, he immediately went out. And it was night.

·  So while Jesus is teaching the 11 remaining disciples a lifetimes worth of truth, Judas was out organizing a posse with the help of the powers that be to hunt Jesus down.

This fact raises an important question for us to consider.

·  Jesus, faced with the anguish and pain of the coming crucifixion, dealt with it by falling back on a habit that was such an integral part of His ministry that Judas knew right where to find Him.

o   He sought communion and comfort with God in prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane.

o   Mark 14:32b (ESV) — 32b And he said to his disciples, “Sit here while I pray.”

·  What habits do we fall back on when we are in the midst of, or are about to face temptation, suffering, inconvenience, etc.?

·  Do we seek communion and comfort with God through study of God’s word and prayer?

·  Or do we fall back into a nagging sin so that we might distract ourselves from our circumstances?

(3) Garden Arrest – Judas shows up with a “band of soldiers” and “officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees” to arrest Jesus and complete his betrayal (vs. 3).

·  And like the townsfolk of Frankenstein, Judas and the townies are carrying “lanterns and torches and weapons” as they track down the town “freak”.

·  There is disagreement as to whether the band of soldiers is the temple guard or actual Roman soldiers.

·  But if Roman soldiers (some say about 200), we have the following irony.

o   Representatives of the religious elite arrest our Prophet and Priest

o   Soldiers of the state arrest our King

2) THE RESPONSE

John 18:4–8a (ESV) — 4 Then Jesus, knowing all that would happen to him, came forward and said to them, “Whom do you seek?” 5 They answered him, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus said to them, “I am he.” Judas, who betrayed him, was standing with them. 6 When Jesus said to them, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground. 7 So he asked them again, “Whom do you seek?” And they said, “Jesus of Nazareth.” 8a Jesus answered, “I told you that I am he.

(1) Jesus’ Response – Jesus brings the encounter between His enemies and Him to a head with the question, “Whom do you seek?”

·  They tell Him they are looking for “Jesus of Nazareth”.

·  Jesus responds with, “ego eimi” which is literally translated “I am” (vs. 5).

·  So He not only claims the identity of “Jesus of Nazareth”, but also takes it up a notch and claims to be God.

BTW – Most believe that Judas’ kiss of betrayal took place between verses 3 and 4.

·  But in our text, John omits this and highlights Jesus’ control and willing surrender to His enemies.

(2) Posse’s Response – Then John tells us that Judas and the posse “drew back and fell to the ground” (vs. 6).

·  Why did they draw back and fall to the ground?

·  Context is significant here.

·  Jesus was on the path to exaltation and glorification on the cross at the will of the Father.

·  This moment is the culmination of 1500 years of Jewish history.

·  In this context, Jesus speaks two words that both identify Him as the one they are seeking, and as God.

·  And when God speaks power is unleashed.

Examples of Power in God’s word:

·  Psalm 33:6 (ESV) — 6 By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host.

·  John 11:43–44 (ESV) — 43 When he had said these things, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out.” 44 The man who had died came out, his hands and feet bound with linen strips, and his face wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Unbind him, and let him go.”

·  Mark 2:5 (ESV) — 5 And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”

·  Hebrews 1:3 (ESV) — 3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

So the posse’s response was because they were exposed to the power of God’s word as spoken by an obedient, soon to be “lifted up” Jesus – “ego eimi”.

·  Alexander Maclaren describes this fact beautifully.

·  “I am inclined to think that…there was for a moment a little rending of the veil of his flesh, and an emission of some flash of the brightness that always tabernacled within him; and that, therefore, just as Isaiah, when he saw the King in his glory, said, ‘Woe is me, for I am undone!’ and just as Moses could not look upon the Face, but could only see the back parts, so here the one stray beam of manifest divinity that shot through the crevice, as it were, for an instant, was enough to prostrate with a strange awe even those rude and insensitive men. When he said, ‘I am He,’ there was something that made them feel, ‘This is One before whom violence cowers abashed, and in whose presence impurity has to hide its face.’” – Alexander Maclaren.

This also means that, in the grand scheme of things, Judas and his posse weren’t controlling this situation at all – they were experiencing it.

·  “This amazing demonstration of His power clearly reveals that they did not seize Jesus. He went with them willingly, to carry out the divine plan of redemption that called for His sacrificial death” – John MacArthur.

·  Who killed Jesus?

o   Jesus’ death was a voluntary submission to the will of God.

3) THE CUP

 John 18:8b–14 (ESV) — 8b So, if you seek me, let these men go.” 9 This was to fulfill the word that he had spoken: “Of those whom you gave me I have lost not one.” 10 Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant and cut off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.) 11 So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?” 12 So the band of soldiers and their captain and the officers of the Jews arrested Jesus and bound him. 13 First they led him to Annas, for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. 14 It was Caiaphas who had advised the Jews that it would be expedient that one man should die for the people.

(1) The Cup – Jesus speaks words in our text that are a mile deep – “shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given men?”

·  Peter, as he often does, acts rashly and attempts to save the day – against 200+ soldiers mind you!

·  And Jesus reminds Peter of what must happen.

·  He must “drink the cup”.

·  “Peter’s effort at defending Jesus was rebuked by Jesus Himself, for despite Peter’s good intentions, the “cup” that was before Jesus had to be embraced” – HBH.

This cup language is also present in the synoptic Gospels.

·  Mark 14:36 (ESV) — 36 And he said, “Abba, Father, all things are possible for you. Remove this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.”

·  Matthew 26:39 (ESV) — 39 And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.”

·  Luke 22:42 (ESV) — 42 saying, “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done.”

What is the cup meant to symbolize?

·  As we have been taught for years, it certainly refers to His being “lifted up” to the cross.

·  But to leave it there is to miss widely the profound symbolism behind “the cup”.

The Cup – God’s Wrath:

The profound symbolism behind the cup is to be found in the OT.

·  Isaiah 51:17 (ESV) — 17 Wake yourself, wake yourself, stand up, O Jerusalem, you who have drunk from the hand of the Lord the cup of his wrath, who have drunk to the dregs the bowl, the cup of staggering.

·  Jeremiah 25:15 (ESV) — 15 Thus the Lord, the God of Israel, said to me: “Take from my hand this cup of the wine of wrath, and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it.

·  Obadiah 16 (ESV) — 16 For as you have drunk on my holy mountain, so all the nations shall drink continually; they shall drink and swallow, and shall be as though they had never been.

·  Habakkuk 2:16 (ESV) — 16 You will have your fill of shame instead of glory. Drink, yourself, and show your uncircumcision! The cup in the Lord’s right hand will come around to you, and utter shame will come upon your glory!

This means that the cup is not just the cross, but it is the wrath of God poured out in judgment on Jesus Christ for our sake!

·  And “The image of the cup of wrath carries special horror because drinking is something a person does deliberately” – DBI.

·  Jesus did this willingly!

·  To appreciate this, let’s look at an OT description of this wrath.

Example of the Wrath of God:

Ezekiel 22:17–22 (ESV) — 17 And the word of the Lord came to me: 18 “Son of man, the house of Israel has become dross to me; all of them are bronze and tin and iron and lead in the furnace; they are dross of silver. 19 Therefore thus says the Lord God: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem. 20 As one gathers silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire on it in order to melt it, so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you. 21 I will gather you and blow on you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it. 22 As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it, and you shall know that I am the Lord; I have poured out my wrath upon you.”

·  This is an example of the wrath that Jesus willingly embraced on our behalf.

·  He drank the cup of wrath that we might be restored!

But thankfully, by the grace and loving kindness of God, there is another cup.

The Cup – Salvation and Covenant:

His drinking the cup of God’s wrath made it possible for Him to apply the cup of salvation, a.k.a. the cup of the new covenant, to all believers.

·  Psalm 116:13 (ESV) — 13 I will lift up the cup of salvation and call on the name of the Lord,

·  Matthew 26:27–29 (ESV) — 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.