THE LORD BETRAYED.
MAY 14.-JOHN
18:1-14.
“He is despised and rejected of men.”-Isa. 53:3.
AFTER the Last
Supper, and after his discourse to the disciples respecting the Vine and the
branches, came our Lord’s beautiful prayer recorded in John’s 17th chapter.
Then, probably about midnight, Jesus, with the eleven, passed outside the gate
of Jerusalem, crossed the little brook called Cedron, and on the farther hill
above it entered the olive orchard known as the Garden of Gethsemane: perhaps
it was a public garden, or possibly the property of some one friendly to our
Lord. What purports to be its site is now maintained as a garden, and has been
for centuries. It is in charge of monks who take pleasure in receiving visitors
to view it. There are about six or eight very large and evidently very old
olive trees in this garden at the present-they give evidence of being at least
one thousand years old, but possibly are much older.
While talking with his disciples and praying for them our Lord seemingly
was full of good courage: while exhorting them that their hearts be not
troubled evidently his own heart was not cast down. But as the little company
wended its way to Gethsemane we may well suppose that a great weight fell upon
our dear Redeemer’s sensibilities. We can imagine him saying, “My soul is
exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.” (Matt. 26:38.) The present visit to
Gethsemane, therefore, was evidently very different from previous visits. Some
appreciation of the momentous occasion was no doubt inspired in the hearts of
the Apostles by the Master’s dejection, and yet they probably but slightly
comprehended what was about to come to pass.
Arrived at the Garden, we glean from other Evangelists that our Lord left
eight of the Apostles near the gate, taking Peter, James and John, his closest
companions, a little farther with him, and cautioning them all to watch and
pray, because it was an hour of special trial. Going a little farther by
himself, he communed with the Father in secret. His feelings were not and
could not be shared even by his beloved disciples; they could not appreciate
the trial through which he was passing; they had not yet been begotten of the
spirit. Thus in his most trying hour Jesus was alone-“Of the people there was
none with me.”-Isa. 63:3.
It is difficult for the majority, even of Christian people, to appreciate
the true character of our dear Lord’s trial, which in this instance so wrought
upon his nervous system as to produce a bloody sweat. Many compare our Lord’s course
with that of some of his martyr followers who have gone forth into death with
remarkable courage, and in contrasting matters they are inclined to wonder why
our Lord, who was perfect, should have endured so much more a passion of
suffering than his imperfect followers. To grasp the true situation it is
necessary that several things be borne in mind:-
(1) For our Lord, who had a perfect right to life, to lay it down in
death, was a very different matter from the laying down of a forfeited and
impaired life on the part of those who could not hope to keep it long anyway.
(2) Our race, already nine-tenths dead, has but a feeble appreciation of the
great value of life-all of its experience having been in connection with dying,
it has come to regard death with equanimity. But not so our Lord, the “prince
of life,” who had been with the Father from the beginning, and by whom all
things were made-he realized life as a very precious boon, privilege,
enjoyment. To him, therefore, death must have been much more terrible than to
us who are already nine-tenths dead, and correspondingly blunted in all of our
sensibilities. True he had the Father’s assurance that if faithful unto death
he should have a resurrection, and unquestionably he believed the Father’s promise-all
of his course in life gives abundant evidence of his implicit faith in the
Father. And yet in his case this must have been a crucial trial to faith, much
more so than with us. As we have only a shred of a forfeited life to lay down,
so we have on the other hand, not only the Father’s promise of a future life
through Christ, but we have the example of the Father’s power in the
resurrection of our dear Redeemer: but our Lord Jesus had no such evidence of
the divine power; he himself, according to the divine promise, was to be the
“first-born from the dead,” a first-fruit unto God of his creatures.-Col. 1:18;
1 Cor. 15:20.
But all this had already been counted, weighed and accepted from the very
beginning of his ministry. He had already informed the disciples that it was
necessary that he should lay down his life for the sheep, and that he was about
to do so. (John 10:15.) We are not to assume, therefore, when our dear
Redeemer prayed, “Father, if it be possible let this cup pass from me,” that he
meant if it were possible he might escape dying. He well knew, and had already
explained to the Apostles, that the drawing of the world could not take place
except he were lifted up as the sin-offering-that it was absolutely necessary
that he should die for our sins and enter into his glory.-John 3:14; 12:32.
The cup which he prayed might pass from him, if possible, we must
therefore suppose to have been the shame and ignominy of arrest as a
law-breaker, a public trial and conviction, and subsequent crucifixion as a
malefactor. It was one thing to die for our sins, as men generally die,
without special shame or contumely; it was another thing that he should die
with such extreme shame, dishonor and contempt. Quite probably in the Father’s
wisdom this last feature was kept more or less hidden from our dear Redeemer
until just about the time of its accomplishment. And apparently our Lord Jesus
did not see any absolute necessity for his suffering more than the
sinner suffered, in order to pay man’s ransom price. Hence his prayer for a
time was, “If it be possible, let this cup pass from me.” The Apostle also
notes this distinction, saying, he “became obedient unto death,” and then adds
“even the death of the cross.”-Phil. 2:8.
The death of the cross, with its attendant dishonor, reproach, etc., so
far as we may be able to judge, was not necessary as our ransom price, because
the penalty did not read, In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely
die with public reprobation and dishonor by crucifixion. Since the penalty was
death (Gen. 2:17), we may suppose that our Lord’s death by any means would have
fully paid man’s ransom price. However, the additional features were deemed
necessary by the Father, and the “cup” did not pass. The Father required this
extreme of obedience as a test, a proof not only to himself but before all his
intelligent creatures of the absolute loyalty of heart of his “well beloved
Son,” upon whom he designed shortly thereafter to confer the great blessing and
high exaltation of his own divine nature and joint-heirship in his Kingdom. And
the loyalty of our dear Redeemer was fully attested, as the Apostle declares;
he “despised the shame,” that is to say, the shame was as nothing in his sight
in comparison with the accomplishment of the Father’s purposes, the pleasing of
the Father. (Heb. 12:2.) So long as he thought there was a possibility of the
elimination of the shame feature, he was nervously anxious to have it so, if
possible; but as soon as he realized that this was not the Father’s will his
heart instantly responded, “Not my will but thine be done.” Decision
respecting the Father’s will immediately brought strength; he was now prepared
for any experience, “strong in the Lord and in the power of his might.”
Meanwhile Judas, who some days before had engaged with the high-priest to
betray Jesus, and who left the upper room immediately after the Supper to carry
out his nefarious plan, had received of the chief priests and Pharisees a band
of men, with a person in charge as an officer, whose mission it was to arrest
Jesus in the night and to secure his execution before the Passover. We must
wholly disagree with the common thought that this “band” consisted of an army
of three to six hundred Roman soldiers. They certainly acted very differently
from soldiers ordinarily under such circumstances. Besides, the record by all
of the Evangelists is that this band was sent, not by Pilate nor by Herod, the
Roman representatives, but by the chief priests and Pharisees, who we know had
no command whatever of the Roman garrison. To our understanding this band which
apprehended Jesus was very similar to the one mentioned in John 7:32-46.
It would appear that the Jewish Sanhedrin exercised a certain amount of
authority in respect to religious matters, and were permitted to make arrests,
but not to execute criminals without the consent of the Roman governor. We
remember that the apostles were arrested on several occasions by such officers
of the Jews.-See Acts 5:17,18,22,25-40.
Both Matthew and Mark speak of this aggregation, under officers from the
chief priests and Pharisees, as a “multitude,” and our Lord’s words indicate
that they were armed with sticks and swords such as were common to the people
in general, and he does not mention spears, which would probably have been a
part of the armament of a band of Roman soldiers. This thought is further
emphasized by the fact that it was the high priest’s servant who evidently made
the first assault upon Jesus, and received a blow from Peter’s sword. If Roman
soldiers had the matter in charge the high priest’s servant no doubt would have
been less officious.
It is presumed, and apparently on good grounds, that this company seeking
Jesus, under the guidance of Judas, went first to the upper room which our Lord
and the Apostles had left probably less than an hour before. Finding that
Jesus and the eleven were gone, Judas knew that he would be most likely to find
them in the Garden of Gethsemane, for “Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with his
disciples.” John’s account omits the particulars of the betrayal given by the
other Evangelists: possibly the loving disciple felt so much ashamed of the
facts that he preferred not to mention them. Certainly very few acts of
treachery ever paralleled this one, and all mankind, even in their perverted
condition of mind, seem to realize that the position of traitor is amongst the
most despicable on the calendar, and such treachery as that of Judas, against
such kindness and love and goodness as that of his Master, we may be thankful
is not so very common. And yet there are correspondences in the experiences of
the Lord’s people, “in perils amongst false brethren.” It behooves us each to
look to it that we permit nothing akin to the spirit of Judas to rankle in our
hearts. Our Lord puts the “members of his body” in such matters on a plane with
himself, and assures us that whoever shall injure one of the least of these his
brethren, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and
he were drowned in the depth of the sea.-Matt. 18:6.
Of course there will always be a motive, good or bad, back of every
deed done to the under-members of his body as well as to the Head. To find
strong motives is not to find valid excuses for treacheries. So far as our
experience and judgment go, the lesson is that such treachery from “false
brethren” usually has its spring in covetousness, lust for influence, power or
position, and the desire to glorify such unholy ambitions cannot fail to
corrupt any heart which entertains them. As one has said:-
“Sow a thought, you reap an act;
Sow an act, you reap a habit;
Sow a habit, you reap a character;
Sow a character, you reap a destiny.”
Judas had been doing some of this sowing of evil thoughts for a
considerable time before his thoughts took outward shape in evil acts. He was
covetous of wealth and of influence; he became the treasurer of the little
group of disciples, and the intimation of the Scriptures is that he purloined
to his own private uses a portion of the contributions. As usual, his love for
money increased the more he exercised it, until he was willing to betray his
Master for thirty pieces of silver -equivalent to about twenty dollars of our
money, though representing in value of labor a much larger sum. It would seem,
too, that Judas was looking forward to the promised Kingdom, and probably
anticipated a high position as royal treasurer of that Kingdom.
It is quite possible, indeed probable, we think, that Judas was seriously
disappointed in respect to the result of his betrayal. Apparently he expected
that our Lord would deliver himself by miraculous power from the hands of his
enemies. This is the most charitable view we would know how to take of his
treacherous conduct: it relieves the blackness of the act only a very little,
however, for he who would be willing to despitefully use his best friend, even
temporarily, for a money consideration, gives evidence of having prostituted
every good and noble sentiment of his being to his love of money. Indeed, the
love of honor may have had considerable to do with the matter, for he may have
hoped by bringing about this crisis that our Lord would be compelled to set up
the long-promised Kingdom, or else to own that all his claims and promises were
fraudulent.
Judas surely did succeed in expediting matters, and in bringing about the
installation of the embryo Kingdom of God; but not in the manner he expected,
nor in any degree to his own honor or advantage. Thus it must be with those who
receive the truth and who profess discipleship under it-not in the love of the
truth, but in the love of honors hoped for, either present or future. Let us
all who have named the name of Christ take heed and watch and pray lest there
should be in any of us any of the elements of this vile character. And let us
remember that there are various secret ways, as well as the more outward ones,
in which we may betray the Lord and the “brethren.”
The evangelist declares that Jesus knew in advance all things that would
come upon him. We are elsewhere told that while he prayed, “There appeared an
angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.” (Luke 22:43.) This ministry
may have consisted in informing him of the Father’s will in respect to what
things he should suffer, and how they were to be expected, and this knowledge
that the matter was settled, and the assurance that the Father would overrule
it all, strengthened his heart and gave him the great calmness which we observe
in all his subsequent course.
The “band” sent to apprehend him evidently expected that they might be
obliged to seek for him in the shadows of the trees, etc., and hence they were
provided with torches and lanterns. Unquestionably they were greatly surprised
that our Lord, instead of fleeing from them, advanced to them, and inquired
whom they sought. Quite possibly some of those in the “band” had previous
knowledge of the Lord-of his miracles, power over devils, etc., and this may
have been the reason for their manifestation of weakness in retreat and falling
to the ground. Or it is possible that our Lord exercised over them a superior
mental power which produced this effect, for the purpose of showing that he had
full power to resist them if he had chosen to use it.
The same lesson, we believe, is taught by Peter’s use of the sword upon
the high priest’s servant. We are to remember that one of the Evangelists
records that our Lord instructed the apostles to take swords with them, and
that when two were found he said, “It is enough.” (Luke 22:36,38.) Our Lord
had no thought of having his disciples war a carnal warfare on his behalf, as
he subsequently stated, “If my kingdom were of this world then would my
servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews.” (John 18:36.) The
two swords were sufficient to show that our Lord’s apprehension was not because
there were no means of defense, nor because of cowardice on the part of his
disciples, but merely because of his submission-knowing that his hour was come,
and that thus it behooved him to suffer for our sins and to enter into his
glory.-Luke 24:46.
After this one manifestation of power, as indicating his full ability to
cope with that multitude, and indeed his power to have more than twelve legions
of angels to defend him, had he so desired (Matt. 26:53), we find our Lord
fully submitting himself to capture, merely making condition that the disciples
might go their way. How grand the character which at such a moment, under such
trying conditions, could so fully forget self and feel interested merely in the
welfare of others! How like what we should expect of Him!
“That the saying might be fulfilled which he spake, Of them which thou
gavest me I have lost none.” We understand the writer to mean that here again
in the Master’s course we find an exemplification of his care for his
disciples, as enunciated in his prayer just before leaving the upper room.
While the thought of his prayer was chiefly in respect to their spiritual
interests, that none of them should be lost, we do well to notice this as a
corroborative illustration of our Lord’s care of the physical interests of all
who become his disciples. Not a hair of their heads shall fall; nothing shall
be permitted to injure them-every event and affair of life will be overruled
for their highest good.-Matt. 6:32,33.
It was probably when Jesus began to be bound that Peter drew his sword in
his defense; perhaps he remembered the Lord’s words of a few hours previous, to
the effect that his followers would all forsake him, and his own promise,
“Although all shall be offended, yet will not I.” (Mark 14:29.) Noble, zealous
Peter! We love him for his noble expression of sentiment, and for his heroic
defense of the Master with the sword against superior numbers. It is the
custom of many to decry Peter’s action, as another of his rash errors. We are
to remember, however, that the Apostles had not yet received the holy Spirit
and therefore could not clearly appreciate the fact that the Kingdom to which
they were called is a spiritual Kingdom. Besides, as we have seen, he was
merely following the Lord’s counsel in taking the sword with him, and evidently
also carrying out the divine purpose in using it. We see nothing to blame,
everything to commend. It was a sign of larger import than Peter and the others
there realized.
But having permitted the matter to go thus far, our Lord restrained Peter,
saying, “Suffer yet thus far. Put up thy sword into the sheath; the cup which
my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” And so saying he touched his
wounded enemy and healed him. The disciples were to see, understand, be fully
assured, that our Lord, in delivering himself to his enemies, did it
voluntarily, and hence the proceedings were so pantomimed as to enforce this
lesson.
How the grace of humility shines out in all the
little affairs of our dear Redeemer’s ministry; even at this moment of his
surrender to his enemies he does not boast that his course is a voluntary one,
nor seek praise as a martyr! He declares the simple truth, that the Father
required this of him as an evidence of his personal loyalty to him. He
confesses himself a servant of God, a son who learned obedience by the things
which he suffered. “The cup which the Father hath given me, shall I not
drink it?” Indeed, this was the strength of his victory-his will was fully
submitted to the Father’s will, and his faith grasped the fact that the Father
permitted no unnecessary evils to come upon him, but only such as he could and
would overrule for good.
There is a valuable lesson here for all who are seeking to walk in the
footsteps of the great High Priest,-for all the Royal Priesthood. We also are
to remember that so long as we abide in Christ, and seek to walk in his
footsteps, all the trying experiences of life are carefully measured for us by
the Lord-that he does not pour into our cup of sorrow and trial any bitter
experiences that are not needful to us, and that will not subsequently work out
for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory. (2 Cor. 4:17.) With
these assurances, and with the evidences of the Father’s faithfulness to our
glorified Master and Forerunner, we indeed may have strong consolation who have
fled for refuge to the hope set before us in the Gospel.-Heb. 6:18-20.
The healing of the smitten ear, our Lord’s last miracle, was most
beautifully illustrative of his character and teachings. It exemplified his
words, “Love your enemies, do good to them that persecute you.” It showed that
he was filled with the divine love which his teachings inculcated, and that he
had no bitterness toward those who despitefully used and persecuted him.
The binding of our Lord seems to have been entirely unnecessary, except as
the “band” might desire to make an exhibition of their prowess to those who had
sent them. Our Lord seems to have remonstrated in respect to this, as per the
account given in Mark 14:48,49: “Are ye come out as against a thief, with
swords and with staves, to take me? I was daily with you in the Temple,
teaching, and ye took me not. But the Scriptures must be fulfilled.” It was
then that the eleven forsook him and fled. Judas continuing with the band went
to the house of Annas the priest, who doubtless had bargained with Judas, and
no doubt it was at this time that the thirty pieces of silver were paid over,
Judas having now shown a fulfillment of the contract. Poor wretched man! The
Son of man indeed went to death, as it had been written of him, but this made
none the less horrible the treachery, the covetousness and murderous spirit
that delivered him up to his enemies. So with the members of the body of
Christ: it must needs be that offences come-it is a part of the divine plan
that the body of Christ should fill up that which is behind of the afflictions
of the Head (Col. 1:24)-but this makes none the less sinful the conduct of
those who have to do with such betrayals-especially if they be “false brethren”
who have enjoyed some knowledge of the truth. In every instance, however, it
will be observed that although the trials worked out blessing for the Lord and
will do so also for all the faithful who suffer with him, the rewards of
unrighteousness sought by those who take Judas’ course never yield them the
honors and blessings they coveted, and for which they sold themselves to work
evil.