18:19
Jesus was questioned by the high priest about His teaching and His disciples. In a formal trial witnesses should have been brought forward to testify against Jesus So either the priest was just ignoring normal court rules or this was just seen as a kind of preliminary hearing.
18:20,21
Jesus’ answer is a rebuke against the high priest. His teaching had been done openly, much of it in the synagogues. He never made any secret of what He did. So Jesus is pointing out the ridiculousness of the question. Moreover, He challenges them to bring forward witnesses who had heard Him teach, of which there would have been many. Ie He is highlighting the illegality of the current proceedings.
18:22-24
That Jesus’ answer was a rebuke is shown by the reaction of the officials. They knew what Jesus was doing and so slapped Him in the face. This too showed the weakness of their position. If we are challenged when we know we are in the right we normally respond carefully arguing our case and pointing out the weakness of the opposing case. When we know we are doing something dodgy is when we normally respond with an outburst, usually a verbal one, but sometimes a violent one, as it was here.
Jesus remained calm and challenged them to show why He is not speaking the truth. So Jesus is taken to the high priest, Caiaphas.
18:25-27
Now some of the others standing by the fire ask Peter is he is one of the disciples as well. Apparently John was known as a disciple of Jesus. Yet again, Peter denies being a disciple. But one of them had been with the arresting party and had seen Peter strike the soldiers ear. Indeed he was a relative of the soldier who Peter had struck. Remember also that, despite the torches, the light would have been far from perfect, so he would not have been absolutely sure that it was Peter. Once again Peter denied it, and then the cock crowed.
No comments:
Post a Comment