him, else it is more than probable that he would have struck at him rather than at Malchus. The appointed time of our Lord's sufferings being now come, he did not, as formerly, avoid his enemies; but when they told him that they sought Jesus of Nazareth, he replied, I am he; and thereby insinuated, that he was willing to put himself into their hands. At the same time, to shew them that they could not apprehend him without his consent, he exerted his Divine power, made the whole band to fall back, and threw them down to the ground. John xviii. 4. Jesus therefore knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye? 5. They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also which betrayed him, stood with them. 6. As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. But the soldiers and the Jews imagining, perhaps, that they had been thrown down by some demon or other, with whom the Jews said he was in confederacy, advanced towards him a second time. 7. Then asked he them again, Wham seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. 8. Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he; expressing a second time his willingness to fall into their hands. If therefore ye seek me, let these go their way: if you seek me only, let my disciples pass; for the party had surrounded them also. The evangelist observes that Jesus made this request to the soldiers. 9. That the saying might be fulfilled which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none. For as he always proportions the trials of his people to their strength, so here he took care that the disciples should escape the storm, which none but himself could sustain. At length some of the soldiers, more audacious than the rest, rudely caught Jesus, and bound him. Upon which Peter drew his sword, and smote off the ear of the high-priest's slave, who probably was shewing greater forwardness than the rest in this business. Matt. xxvi. 50. Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him. Luke xxii. 49. When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said unto him, Leod, shall we smite with the sword? 50. And one of them, (Matt. which were with Jesus, stretched out his hand, and drew his sword. John, Simon Peter having a sword, drew it, and) smote the servant (duxor, slave) of the high-priest, and cut off his right ear. John xviii. 10. The servant's name was Malchus. The enraged apostle was on the point of singly attacking the whole band, when Jesus ordered him to sheath the sword, telling him, that his unseasonable and imprudent defence might prove the occasion of his destruction; or rather, as Grotius interprets it, that there was no need of fighting in his defence, because God was to punish the Jews for putting him to death. Matt. xxvi. 52. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place; for all

they

they that take the sword, shall perish with the sword. See Rev. xiii. 10. where this very expression is used, in predicting the destruction of the persecutors of true Christians. He told him likewise, that it implied both a distrust of the Divine providence, which can always employ a variety of means for the safety of good men, and gross ignorance of the Scriptures. 53. Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? 54. But how then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be? The legion was a Roman military term, being the name which they gave to a body of five or six thousand soldiers. Wherefore, in regard that the band which now surrounded them was a Roman cohort, our Lord might make use of this term by way of contrast, to shew what an inconsiderable thing the cohort was, in comparison of the force he could summon to his assistance; more than twelve legions, not of soldiers, but of angels! Jesus prevented any bad consequences which might have flowed from Peter's rashness, by adding, in his rebuke to him, a declaration of his willingness to suffer, John xviii. 11. The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it? Then turning to the band, he addressed them; perhaps some of them were holding him. Luke xxii. 51. And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far; let me go to the wounded man. And he touched his ear, and healed him. The circumstance of his healing Malchus' ear by touching it, seems to imply, that he created a new one in the place of that which was cut off. Or though he performed the cure any other way, he equally demonstrated both his goodness and power. No wound or distemper whatever was incurable in the hand of Jesus, neither was any injury so great that he could not forgive it. It is surprising that this miracle made no impression upon the priests, especially as our Lord put them in mind, at the same time, of his other miracles. 52. Then (Matt. In that same hour) Jesus said (Mark, answered and said) unto the chief priests, and cap tains of the temple, and the elders which were come to him: they had kept at a distance during the scuffle, but drew near when they understood that Jesus was taken: Be ye come out as against a thief, with swords and staves? (Matt. Mark, to take me?) 53. When I was daily with you in the temple, ye stretched forth no hands against me; but this is your hour, and the hour of the Tower of darkness. Mark xiv. 49. But the Scriptures must be fulfilled. Matt. xxvi. 56. But all this was done that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. It seems they were proof against all conviction, being obstinately bent on putting him to death. When the disciples saw their Master in the hands of his enemies, they all forsook him and fled, according to his prediction, notwithstanding they might have followed him with safety, as the priests had no design against them. Matt. xxvi. 56. Then

all

all the disciples forsook him and fled. After the disciples were fied. John xviii. 12. Then the band, and the captain, and officers of the Jews (vangstα T India, the servants of the priests, &c.) took Jesus, and bound him. However, it was not the cord that held him; his immense charity was by far a stronger band. He could have stricken them all dead, with as much ease as he had before thrown them on the ground. Nevertheless he patiently submitted to this, and to every other indignity which they pleased to put on him; so meek was he under the greatest injuries. John xviii. 13. And led him away. Mark xiv. 51. And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him. 52. And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked. Perhaps this was the proprietor of the garden, who being awakened with the noise, came out with the linen cloth in which he had been lying, cast around his naked body, and having a respect for Jesus, followed him, forgetting the dress he was in. John xviii. 13. And led him away to Annas first (for he was father-in-law to Gaiaphas, which was the high-priest that same year.) Annas having himself discharged the office of high-priest, was a person of distinguished character, which, together with his relation to the high-priest, made him worthy of the respect they now put upon him. But he refused singly to meddle in the affair. They carried Jesus away therefore to Caiaphas, at whose palace the chiefpriests, elders, and scribes, were assembled, having staid there all night, waiting to see the issue of their stratagem. Matt. xxvi. 57. And they that laid hold on Jesus, led him away to Caiaphas the high-priest, (Luke, the high-priest's house.) Mark xiv. 53. And with him were assembled all the chief priests, and the elders, and the Scribes. John xvii. 14. Now Caiaphas was he which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people. (See on John xi. 50. § 100.) This Caiaphas was he who advised the counsel to put Jesus to death, though innocent, for the safety of the nation. He seems to have enjoyed the sacerdotal dignity during the whole course of Pilate's government in Judea; for he was advanced by Valerius Gratus, Pilate's predecessor, and was divested of it by Vitellius, governor of Syria, after he deposed Pilate from his procuratorship.

§ CXXXVI. Peter denies his Master. Matt. xxvi. 58. xxvi. 69, -75. Mark xiv. 54. xiv. 66,-72. Luke xxii. 55,-65. John xviii. 15,-18. xviii. 25,-27.

OUR Lord's trial in the high-priest's palace, and Peter's denying him, being contemporary events, might be related the one before the other, according to the historian's pleasure. Matthew and Mark describe the trial first, because it is the principal fact; but Luke brings it in after the denials. John has preserved the

exact natural order here, for he begins with the first denial, because it happened immediately after Peter entered the palace; then gives the history of the trial, as the principal fact; and concludes with the subsequent denials. But though this be the natural order, I have, in explaining this passage of the history, followed Luke, because by viewing the denials together, the reader can form a better notion of them.

The apostles no doubt were in great consternation when their Master was apprehended, as appears from their forsaking him and fleeing. Some of them, however, recovering out of the panic that had seized them, followed the band at a distance, to see what the end would be. Of this number was Peter, and another disciple whom John has mentioned without giving his name, and who therefore is generally supposed to have been John himself *, it being the manner of this evangelist to speak of himself in the third person. See chap. xiii. 23. xxi. 20. This disciple, whoever he was, being acquainted at the high-priest's, got admittance first for himself, then for Peter who had come along with him. John xviii. 15. And Simon Peter followed Jesus, (Matt. Mark, afar off, even unto the high-priest's palace) and so did another disciple. That disciple was known unto the high-priest, and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high-priest. 16. But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple which was known unto the high-priest, and spake unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter. Luke xxii. 55. And when they had kindled a fire in the midst of the hall, and were set down together, Peter sat down among them. Matt. xxvi. 58. Sat (Mark, and warmed himself at the fire) with the servants to see the end. But the maid who kept the door, concluding that Peter was a disciple also, followed him after a little to the fire, and looking earnestly at him, charged him with being a disciple of

Jesus.

Grotius is of opinion, that the disciple above mentioned was none of the twelve, but rather an inhabitant of Jerusalem; possibly the person at whose house our Lord ate the passover. Whitby likewise thinks it was not John. These authors found their opinion on this circumstance: that the twelve being Galileans, and men of mean station, could, not any of them be so well acquainted in the high-priest's family, as to procure ad mission for a friend at a time when there was such ado there. Limpe therefore has delivered it as his opinion, that the disciple who brought in Peter was Judas. Nevertheless, the common opinion may still be adhered to. For though. John was a Galilean, and a person in mean station, there is neither impossibility nor improbability in the notion, that he may have had a relation, friend, or acquaintance, in the station of a servant at the high-priest's, who might not only give him admittance, but at his desire admit Peter also. Farther, when we consider that John was to write an history of Christ's life, it will appear extremely proper, that in the course of providence he should have an opportunity afforded him of being an eyewitness of our Lord's trial before the council.

Jesus. Mark xiv. 66. * And as Peter was beneath,(Matt. without) in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high-priest. 67. And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him (Luke, earnestly). John tells us, that the maid who attacked Peter was the damsel who kept the door. It seems after having admitted him, she followed him to the fire, and spake to him in an angry tone; having been informed that it was he who had cut off her fellow-servant's ear, verse 26. John xviii. 17. Then saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not thou also one of this man's disciples? Matt. xxvi. 69. Thou also avast with Jesus of Galilee. She meant when he was apprehended. This blunt attack threw Peter into such confusion, that he flatly denied his having any thing to do with Jesus. John xviii. 17. He saith, I am not: Matt. xxvi. 70. He denied before them all: Luke xxii. 27. Saying, Woman, I know him not. Moreover, he added, as Mark informs us, xiv. 68. I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest: I do not understand any reason for your asking such a question. The apostle who had formerly acknowledged his Master to be Messiah, who was honoured with the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and who had most confidently bragged of fortitude and firm attachment to him in the greatest dangers,

Mark 66. And as Peter was beneath, &c.] Matthew and Mark seem to differ in the account which they give of the place where Peter first denied his Master. Matthew's words are, xxvi. 69. "Now Peter sat without in the palace, and a damsel came unto him, saying, Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee ;" namely, when he was apprehended. Mark says this denial happened, xiv. 66. "As Peter was beneath in the palace." To reconcile this difference, Lamy supposes that the high-priest's palace was built so as to form a court; that the fire at which the servants sat was lighted in the court; and that Jesus was examined in the vestibule, or porch, called by Matthew Tuλw, and by Mark goaudios. According to these suppositions, he thinks persons in the court might be said to have been (w) without in the palace; that is, without, in respect of the covered buildings; and (xaTw) beneath in the palace, with respect to the porch or vestibule, which was higher than the level of the court. But it appears from John xvi. 25. that Peter was with the servants at the fire, when he denied his Master the third time; and from Luke xxii. 61. that Jesus looked upon Peter just as he was pronouncing the words of the third denial. Our Lord, therefore, and his disciple, were not the one in the court and the other in the vestibule of the palace during his trial, as Lamy supposes, but they were together in one room, Jesus with his judges at the upper end of it, and Peter with the servauts at the fire in the other. Ac cording to this disposition, Peter might be said to have been without in the hall, that is, without, in relation to the crowd of judges, witnesses, and soldiers around Jesus; but in relation to the place where the council sat, he was beneath in the hall; a way of speaking common even in our own language. Farther, John, ver. 18. says that Peter, after the first denial, stood with the officers at the fire; whereas Matthew and Luke tells us, when he first denied his Master he sat by the fire. It seems the maid's words had put him into such confusion, that before he answered her, he arose from the seat which the servants had given him on his first coming in.