John 18:1-27, They Should Have Known Better
From 2Timothy2.org
Revision as of 17:54, 22 October 2018 by Wakefien (talk | contribs) (→Peter Should Have Known Better (V. 7-11, 15-18, 25-27))
Contents
Objectives
Introduction
Main Proposition
We must realize whether in rebellion, ignorance, or accident, we all fail to live up to Christ's standard. Yet, Christ, in His grace continues to provide for this who call upon his name.
Main Body
Setting the Stage (V. 1)
- In verse 1 we see that the stage has been set for the most significant event in history. Ancient drama utilized dynamic entrances and exits to highlight narrative development. In verse 1 we see a dramatic exit from the farewell discourse and a dramatic entrance into the garden. The narrative has shifted and something new is about to be revealed.
- John chooses not to even mention the name of the garden, we know it as Gethsemane, but for John, the name is irrelevant what matters to John is the significance.
- John presents Jesus, like Adam, in a garden about to face the most significant test of obedience to the Father. However, unlike Adam, Jesus willingly surrenders His will to the Father and provides salvation. Where the first Adam failed, the second Adam will triumph.
- "the first garden was the place where death was born out of life," in a complete reversal of order, "the second garden is the place where life was born out of death."[1]
Judas Should Have Known Better (V. 2-6)
Judas knew Christ's Teaching (V. 2)
- V2. Just as in the first garden the serpent entered to betray God, here Judas enters to betray Christ (both of course backed by Satan). Back in John 6:71 Judas had been identified as the betrayer, now the narrative would reach conclusion as the betrayer enters the scene.
- John emphasizes that Judas knew the place because Judas had been there with Jesus many times. We must not understate the betrayal. Judas knew Christ, His teaching, His works. Judas knew exactly where Christ would be.
Judas planned his betrayal (V. 3)
- In verse 3 we see Judas leading a large group. The text emphasizes that it is Judas by using the first person singular verb came.
- Who is Judas leading? Judas is leading a detachment of soldiers, the word here for detachment is the word for one tenth of a legion or about 600 soldiers and who is it leading them, the commander? the chief priest? no none other than Judas.
- The Romans, Jews, and Judas come together at this moment, with the tools of the trade (weapons) for one purpose, to betray the God of the universe.
Judas Consented to the crucifixion (V. 4-6)
- In verse 4 we are reminded that Jesus knows full well what is happening. But more than merely knowing what is happening, Jesus is in control. Jesus steps forward to meet the crowd.
- The book of John has set out to answer the question "Who is Jesus?" and here Jesus forces the mob to answer that same question.
- Notice that on two occasions Jesus asks "whom are you seeking?" Jesus forced the people to admit that it was Jesus they were arresting, not the disciples or any other followers. Jesus, the God of the universe alone was the one with whom they had issue.
- In verses 5 and 6 we see that the very answer "I am He" forces the crowd to physically acknowledge what they are about to do.
- Don't miss the reference to Judas yet once again. Judas should have known better yet Judas here as representative all of fallen creation corporeal and spiritual consents to the actions about to be taken.
- Before we get too carried away we must realize that our sin put Christ on the cross, in that sense, each of us consented to Christ's crucifixion.
As Christians we must not allow our knowledge and experience with Christ to puff us up and keep us from real knowledge of Christ.
The Jews Should Have Known Better (V. 12-14, 19-24, 28)
The Jews rushed the decision (V. 12-14)
- Annas had ben high priest from AD 6-15. Caiaphas was the high priest that year and was the son in law of Annas. However, Annas still wielded high priestly power. In fact, Annas had been removed from office by Pilate's predecessor Valerius Gratus. Annas was regarded by many as the true High Priest. Indeed no fewer than 5 of the sons of Annas had been high priest at one time or another.
- In verse 13 Annas begins an informal examination of God's True High Priest. This sham of a trial allowed the Sanhedrin to gather together and is documented in Matthew 26:57-68.
The Jews Ignored the Facts (V. 19-23)
- In verse 19-21 we see the Jews interrogating God's High Priest. But notice what they their technique. They are not interrogating over specific acts, but rather the entire work of Jesus. The trial is a sham, Jesus is not on trial for committing a crime, no, God Himself is on trial. Christ's answer, as usual, is calculated. The message of the gospel is nothing hidden. The message of the gospel is available and anyone who wants to know what Christ said only needs to look at the words of His followers.
- Notice that John chooses not to quote the Jews first in this trial, instead John quotes Christ. Christ is the one who is in control.
- In verse 22 and 23 John brings the narrative full circle. Ironically, God's High Priest is illegally struck for His legal response to the person who is not actually the High Priest. The entire events peaks of a sham trial that ignores the real facts.
The Jews Rejected the Truth (V. 24, 28)
- In verse 24 we are reminded that everything which happened so far has occurred not at the house of Caiaphas, but at the house of Annas. Who is in charge, who is the High Priest. Ironically, the answer is neither Annas or Caiaphas are actually in charge. God's High Priest is the one running the show.
- Matthew 26:57-68 provides us more detail on the actual trial before the Sanhedrin.
- They were willing to hold an illegal private trial in the middle of the night.
- They were willing to pursuer themselves.
- Caiaphas illegally tore his clothes in direct violation of Leviticus 21:10
- The whole trial before the Jews demonstrates one thing. The Jews should have known their Messiah instead they had him executed.
As Christians we need to take the time to study God, uncover the facts, and accept the truth of God's word.
Peter Should Have Known Better (V. 7-11, 15-18, 25-27)
Peter missed the point (V. 7-11)
- Verse 7 is almost comedic. The Jesus asks the same question again. How do you suppose the events played out? Did the Jews get back up, dust themselves off and approach again? Nothing is said in the text, we simply don't know. What we do know is that Jesus is in complete control of the situation and he demonstrates His complete control by asking the question again.
- In verses 8 and 9 we see Jesus taking great care to protect his disciples from the arrest. Klink states "If the greater purpose of the coming of Jesus was to remove the wrath of God from His disciples and place it upon Himself, He could certainly do the same with the wrath of the world."[2]
- In verse 10 we are given an unusually detailed account of Peter's response to the arrest of Jesus. Peter lashes out in violence, takes a long knife and mutilates the ear of the servant of the high priest. Ironically, it is the servant of the High God who will require mutilation and Peter has failed to realize or submit to this fact.
- In verse 11 Jesus responds. The cup often symbolizes suffering or the wrath of God. Jesus emphasizes that the cup is given Him from the Father, not a jewish leader or Roman authority.
- In Matthew 16, Peter had tried to prevent Jesus from accomplishing His mission. In John 13, Peter had tried to prevent Jesus from washing his feet. Now Peter tries to prevent Jesus from sacrificially giving himself. Peter did not understand that truly knowing Jesus means knowing his suffering and death.
- In Philippians 3:10 Paul desires to "know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death,"
- In our walk with Christ we must make sure that we don't miss the point.
Peter faltered (V. 15-18)
- In verse 15-16 we see that Peter, even though he had been just earlier rebuked by Jesus continues his allegiance.
- However, in verse 17 we see that Peter faltered. Peter, in an effort to gain access to the house of Annas, denies access to God's true High Priest.
- In verse 18, John brings out the irony. Peter is seen at the fire, in close fellowship with the very people he had ben ready to attack with he sword comments earlier. Peter maneuvered to make himself an insider at the very moment the the Lord was being treated like an outsider.
- Peter should have known better.
Peter lost faith (V. 25-27)
- Notice that in the entire discussion only two speakers are named, Jesus and Peter. (others are named, but not as speakers, John is careful to only give titles to other speakers.). The irony, as stated by Klink is that "at the same time the real high priest (Jesus) is not treated like one, the real witness (Peter) is not acting like one." [3]
- In the first denial Peter may not have known the women. In second denial of verse 25, the people may have ben part of the arresting party in the garden but still Peter had some level of plausible deniability.
- In verse 26 we see this is a relative of Malchus, someone with whom Peter had no deniability.
- In verse 27 Peter make his third and final denial. Jesus is not finished with Peter, but Peter's brokenness is complete.
As Christians we must be careful not to miss the point.
Conclusion
- People failed Jesus in three distinct ways
