The Gospel of John 18:1-24

We're in John 18, 1 through 24. This is part one of two of the chapter, so it breaks in the middle of the chapter. The place shifts from the Kidron Valley, that's the valley between the Mount of Olives and Jerusalem, and then the Garden of Gethsemane, and then it starts into Annas, and then off to Caiaphas' house.

Let's take a look through the slides here first. And so as we talked about before, this is after the Last Supper. Basically, the trials and things go through the night. And so this is after the Last Supper, when the events of Chapter 18 take place. We had this map previously. We had the upper room. And I think one of the things we'll bring up in here, it's important to talk about, you know, what's the certainty of location? It's very likely that this upper room location is correct. The structure up above it has been added definitely since. But the floor is very likely that of the upper room where Jesus met with his disciples.

The Garden of Gethsemane is very likely the same location. And then, To bring up the next one, we've got Caiaphas residence, and there we've got an asterisk, and you also have this on the front of your handout. Caiaphas residence is possibly but debated. Possibly is residence but debated. So that we have less certainty. Here's some shots of the Garden of Gethsemane that we've been showing, and this one here looking towards the Eastern or Golden Gate. And then as we look at location possibly of Caiaphas house.

Here is where Dr. Leon Rittmeyer believes is the house of Annas where Peter denied Christ. Not certain but he believes he's located it and one of the things he points out is see there's kind of an upper balcony here in this courtyard and then it goes down And what he envisions is that Peter would have been standing up here at the courtyard and looking down on the proceedings down there. That's where he and Christ would exchange glances. And Dr. Rittmeyer, he's probably the foremost expert on the geology, excuse me, archaeology of Jerusalem, in Old Jerusalem.

His opinion on these things is to be considered. Pardon? What do you mean? Oh, it's a cutaway view. It's a cutaway view so that you can see it. Yeah. And here we have the steps to what some believe is the House of Caiaphas. That's the one shown on your map with the asterisk.

Others argue that it's not the location, while others argue that Annas lived close by this house. So again, that's one of those things that is probably subsequent archaeological studies may surface it. Here's the dungeon beneath what may be Caiaphas' house, which if that is the case, that's where Jesus would have been held. Here is an archaeological model of Annas' house.

Here's the ossuary box of Caiaphas and other family members. What they would do is put several different sets of bones in there. So there's various ones, but one of the sets of bones that was found in there was of a man about 60 years old, which would fit Caiaphas and the name Caiaphas is on the side of the box.

Because of its ornate carving, which would fit someone who is wealthy and able to afford such things, that seems to fit very well. Both the contents of the box, the ornate carving, and the name inscribed on the side all seem to point to, yep, that's the guy.

I won't go through all the details here. Caiaphas and Pilate both served in their posts as high priests and governor until 36 AD, when one administrative decision took them both out. Recently was found, this is the granddaughter of Caiaphas, her ossuary box was found. and found in the valley where David slew Goliath, for what that's worth. And so here are some dramatic or artistic presentations of some of the scenes in here. Jesus praying in the garden would be this one. Some of the people coming to arrest Jesus.

Now, one of the things to keep in mind as we go through here, and you can critique some of the paintings and dramatic presentations and whatnot, Passover is always at the full moon, right? So if you see some picture and it's just pitch black, it's not quite the right one. The fact that they brought torches and lamps to go look for Jesus on a moonlit full moon night would indicate that they're expecting Him to be hiding. And the fact that they brought a lot of soldiers indicated they were expecting some resistance. So when he wasn't hiding, and there was no resistance, other than Peter's fumble, there was no resistance, then they were stunned. Here's another depiction of them coming out with the torches.

And Judas betraying Jesus with a kiss. By the way, you imagine Judas when Jesus comes up and says, as we'll see, you know, whom are you seeking? Jesus of Nazareth. I'm he. It almost just kind of took the wind out of Judas' sails. It's like, why did I do this? So here's a depiction of the soldiers and everyone falling back.

Here's Peter hiding as he's kind of sneaking his way towards wherever Jesus is there. Jesus being held in front of Anna's house at the courtyard there. Here is an artistic representation of Peter denying, I don't know him, right? And there's a little rooster off in the corner here. And another depiction, Peter denying that he knows Jesus. And another. So various ones. Let's go to the handout here. So here's John 18, 1-3.

So when Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples over the ravine of the Kidron. where there is a garden in which he entered with his disciples. Now Judas also, who was betraying him, knew the place, for Jesus had often met there with his disciples. Judas then, having received the Roman cohort and officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, came there with lanterns and torches and weapons."

So we mentioned in the next paragraph talks about degrees of certainty and I think that's worthwhile because sometimes you'll see various things. Here's a picture of the garden tomb, and here's a picture of a skull-looking rock, and that's Golgotha and whatnot. The reality is there are degrees of certainty about different ones as to is this the right location. So as we go along, we'll make note of that.

So the name of the garden actually comes from Matthew and Mark, Garden of Gethsemane. Gethsemane is just an olive press. So John offers a lot of unique material in John 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17. John does not report, as the other Gospels do, and I'm at the top of page two here, the interactions in the garden or Jesus' prayer. John does tell us, however, that Jesus had met with his disciples in the garden of Gethsemane often, which is why Judas could lead the soldiers Apparently it was like a nightly custom. Let's go to the garden and we can pray and that kind of thing. Which may have been one of the reasons why the disciples just got all drowsy.

It's like, hey, we've been here numerous times before. It's just like there's nothing unusual about this. We've been here. So that Jesus went to that place so as to be deliberately found and arrested reveals Jesus' intent to be crucified now that his time and his hour had come. Let me ask you this, did Jesus have a death wish? Not the same way we're thinking. Yeah, not the same way we're thinking. He intended to die, right? He intended to die. Now that the time and the hour had come, he did in fact intend to die.

So there were Roman soldiers there and members of the Jewish Temple Guard who both came to arrest Jesus. So while a cohort is often taken to 600, you may have notes in your Bibles or something like that saying that the word that's used here, spera, could have been a large group but less than 600, 200 or something like that, for example. So still a large number of people compared to, you know, eleven disciples and Jesus. But, nonetheless, possibly a smaller group. The soldiers brought torches and lamps, anticipating that Jesus might hide and that there might be resistance, because it says they also brought weapons.

So they were ready for the worst, right? So the chief priests, because that's what John calls them, those were Sadducees, actually only serving one at a time. You'll see repeatedly, dozens of times in the Gospels, the term chief priests. And the reality is only one priest served at a time, but what would happen is that they would serve and then continue to be called chief priests, even though they officially only had one at a time. Annas was the father-in-law of Caiaphas. Annas himself had five sons, all of whom served as chief priests briefly after him. And then Caiaphas served some years, 18 AD to around 36. Caiaphas had served at length. But if you had been a chief priest before, you still got the title, even though you're retired, right? So, Passover was held at the time of the full moon, so the torches and lamps would only be needed if Jesus hid himself, which he did not. In fact, he did the opposite.

Stood out there in the open, you know, hi, I'm Jesus, right? And just make it plain and clear, on a moonlit night, no question, He was the one and He wanted to be found and arrested. So let's read John 18, 4-9, that's the middle of page 2. So Jesus, knowing all things, the things that were coming upon Him, went forth and said to them, Whom do you seek?

They answered him, Jesus the Nazarene. He said to them, I am he. And Judas also, who was betraying him, was standing with them. So when he said to them, I am he, they drew back and fell to the ground. Therefore he again asked them, Whom do you seek? And they said, Jesus the Nazarene. Jesus answered, I told you that I am he.

So if you seek me, let these go their way, to fulfill the words that he spoke of those whom you have given me. I lost not one. He had spoken those words in chapter 17. Jesus answered not just with, you know, that's me, but he answered with the egoe me, which was the claim to deity. Isn't that amazing? I, being in fact God, am Jesus. I'm the one you're seeking. So, amazing claim.

Why do you think, because it doesn't explain it, why do you think these fell back? Was it an emotional reaction? Was it Jesus giving them a fairly light, miraculous tap? Why did they fall back? Yeah? I'm thinking Judas might have been the first one to jerk back, obviously. Well, and surprise. He, I'm sure, was expecting to have a much more important and prominent place in helping find Jesus, but not so much. Any other thoughts on that? Why the falling back? Was it because of the Sadducees response? Pardon? Was it the response of the Sadducees?

They knew what they were saying. I am. Ah. And so, yeah, I think there was some shock. If you imagine it, what were they expecting? And then what does he do? Total opposites. They were expecting some guy that might be hiding. They were expecting some guy that might have you know, quite a bit of band of resistance. They're expecting some guy who would quite possibly deny, you know, that he's the guy, you know, wrong guy strategy.

Yeah. spiritual power there in his presence, because when he says, I am God, things that you can't see that are actually there, I think, are more or less not manifested because that would mean you'd be able to see them, but they're still in an active state.

In the eighth stage of the campaign of Armageddon, when Christ comes again, He will speak, and Revelation describes as the sword from his mouth, the Ramphaya sword. He will speak and there will be massive slaughter just with his words. And that will be very close to where this garden is here. So very interestingly, Jesus, if there is some miraculous impact where he just, you know, they all of a sudden fall back He gave them the light touch compared to what he one day will in that same location.

Yeah, Gail? Do you think there was any drawback in order because they thought he was a blasphemer? Ah, that's a thought. We don't know for sure, but I think that's probably worth considering. It's an element of surprise, an element of shock at what claim he was making. They had long accused him of claiming to be God. And so, yeah, everything about what he did was not expected. Yeah. Kind of the poof effect. They expected him not to be quite as bold. They expected him to be hiding, and here he is, he just comes out and says, I'm not resisting, and all these things.

Kind of like, ooh, this is kind of spooky. What about this? Yeah, not at all what you would expect. As a matter of fact, from that point until the time that the centurion said, truly this was the Son of God, all the way along it was not what was expected. All the way along. They kind of had been emotionally prepared, their adrenaline was flowing and no place to put it.

At that point. Yeah, stunning. A stunning appearance, a stunning presentation, stunning words. Then at the end of that passage we just read there, Jesus answered, I told you that I am he, so he says it again, so if you seek me, let these go their way. And why would he want these to be let go and not involved in this process? Get the disciples all snarled up in a legal entanglement.

Yeah? I think it's kind of predicted in the Old Testament. It's pathetic. Okay. And what passage are you thinking of? I can't remember where. Sorry. Okay. Certainly Jesus said, just in the previous chapter, said, I have lost not a one. So, and think about it.

What would the likely outcome be if they had been gathered up with Jesus? Yeah, very likely, they just would have been crucified along with him. We don't know, but you can anticipate that because that's what Jesus said, hey, you got me to leave these alone. And everything would have been fine, except for what happened. What happened next? Yeah, this is Peter's time to decide to try out his fencing skills, right? He should have stuck with building fences.

Alright, so on Jesus' statement, I am, Jesus' statement, I am, top of page 3, the ones who came to arrest Jesus fell back. Now certainly Jesus had the power to turn every arresting soldier into dust, but Jesus' open identification himself I am was not all at all what the soldiers were expecting they were expecting someone to be hiding out Possibly putting up resistance instead Jesus came to them Identifying himself as deity and the one they were seeking with 11 men about him who did not appear to be prepared for battle on that moonlit night There's a little insight we get from Luke that we'll make reference to here shortly. So Jesus then claimed again to be Jesus of Nazareth, repeating his identification as deity, but also pleading to have the eleven disciples go. Jesus was to die, but these disciples were to live to continue on as his apostles.

But Peter, being a man of impulsive words and actions, pulls out his sword. Peter, Peter, okay. Simon Peter then, having a sword, drew it back and struck the high priest's slave and cut off his right ear. And the slave's name was Malchus. So Jesus said to Peter, Put the sword into the sheath. The cup which the Father has given me, shall I not drink it?

So we have the insight from the Gospel of Luke. Just before they entered the Garden of Gethsemane, The conversation goes like this Luke 22 35 to 38 He said to them when I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals. You did not lack for anything. Did you? They said no nothing and he said to them, but now whoever has a money belt is to take it along Likewise also a bag and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one Okay, why would he give him this instruction?

What's different? What's different that he would give them this instruction? And by the way, this is a critical time. Why would he take the time right before entering the Garden of Gethsemane? Because that's the context. Why would he take the time to give them that instruction? Yeah.

I was going to say, well, Jesus said that the world hated Him and they're going to hate them as well. And they're going to have to protect themselves now that Jesus is not around. Okay, so there's some of that. That's there. What are they going to be doing in the years to come? They're going to be going out different places, kind of highways and byways, and away from Israel. Okay, you're not allowed to be a thief, at least not by the law. And they're going to be going out into open roads around the Roman Empire and off to the east and places where they're vulnerable.

And so you need to defend yourself, right? Yeah. Maybe it's not so much the fact that they would have to actually use them, but sometimes having one makes you less vulnerable to the world, so to speak. Yeah, could be, yeah. Even if it's a simple lock, a lot of people will just bypass it and go to the next one.

So what you have here, Jesus tells them, that this which is written must be fulfilled in me, and he was numbered with transgressors. For that which refers to me has its fulfillment. And they said, Lord, look here are two swords. And so he said to them, it's enough. So how many swords are there? There's two, and Peter's got one of them. And he says, I'm going to use it. I'm going to use it.

So the Apostle John seems to have some unique connections to the Sanhedrin. We've been pointing that out since chapter 2. John is the only one who mentions Nicodemus, and he does several times, right? And so Peter wants to get into the high priest's courtyard, and they won't let him, except who gets him in? John gets him in. So John's got connections, and we've got one other indicator that John's got connections, and that's that he's the only one that mentions the name of the high priest's servant or slave, Malchus. He's the only one that brings that out. So he's well-connected. And by the way, let's ask the question, why would John be well-connected with the Sanhedrin? What would be the reason for that? Yeah, one would be he actually may have been from the tribe of Levi, we don't know that, but that is one possibility that's been suggested. Now, let's ask something else.

Do you remember the account where John and James, the brothers, sons of Zebedee, their mother came to Jesus and said, hey, I'd like you to give my sons the right and the left hand seats here. What's she doing? Yeah, she's going and making sure her son's got all the right connections, right? And so she may well, and possibly Father Zebedee, may well have made sure they made connections with the higher-ups in Israel. So this may be a part of her pattern that we've seen in the Gospels already. Yeah.

And it's kind of interesting when you talk about this that maybe John may have had a very specific influence on Nicodemus and also Joseph of Arimathea and maybe some of the other people. If he had an in and he was with these people, he could have been testifying to what Jesus was. This could have been their personal end. So you think about it, here's a number of connections that John has with Sanhedrin.

So what you find is the Gospel of John mentions a series of those and we're not done. with those kinds of connections who reports things that seem to be uniquely known to him or because of his special connection to the Sanhedrin. And he continues to write that.

Yeah? Why were his brother nicknamed also Son of Thunder? You know, that's an interesting thing. Why would they be Sons of Thunder? Yeah? Well, it's possible that they were had their own attitude, and they were good to each other, and it just came out. Alright, so here's Sons of Thunder. That's not their father's name. That's Zebedee, right?

Now, remember, here's the principle, and you can apply this throughout all the scripture. If it isn't about a biological son, son of or child of is an expression used throughout the Bible, and it means like in character and close in relationship to. And so, all right, so it's not talking, in Sons of Thunder, it's not talking about some biological relationship to thunder. But like in character?

Yeah, that's probably a good description. Now, Sons of Thunder, that meant the pair of them were guys who were of great impact or at least noisy about things. Does that answer the question there? Yeah. It characterized them. And it seems like their mom wanted it to be this way.

They were people who were connected and had great impact and made a lot of noise. In my household growing up, we had a name up and down the neighborhood. We were the Screamin' Petermans, but anyway. I have a sneaking suspicion, it doesn't say in the literature, but if they were so that way, you almost have to think they must be twins. Yeah, except they weren't. Let's take a look here.

Towards the bottom end of page 3, the Apostle John seems to have some unique connections to the Sanhedrin and priestly class. Only John mentions Nicodemus, one of the Sanhedrin, and also Joseph of Arimathea, also of the Council. So we have the reference there, John 3.1, where Nicodemus comes up. And then in 7.50-52, Nicodemus attempts to defend Jesus, and they're not having anything to do with it, and he never tries that again. He gets shut down. And then we'll see it again when it comes time to bury Jesus and put him in the tomb. Nicodemus shows up again.

Now, bottom there, but Jesus tells Peter to put his sword away because Jesus was intending to go to the cross. He had an appointment to keep, agreed upon by the Father who had sent him." Why do you think Peter pulled the sword out? Why do you think he pulled it out? Yeah, either acting or talking, he was one impetuous. He just had to do it. I've got a sword, of course I have to use it, right? So that's Peter, right? That's Peter. Let's look at page 4 here.

So Jesus heals Malchus here. And by the way, that's recorded in Luke 22.51 and not in John. Why would John skip over the healing? The focus was on Jesus being who He really is, never mind some of this silence that's already been discussed. What's interesting is John skips over details that are given in some of the other Gospels.

And he's more like, you know, Cut to the chase here. Yeah. So Luke is a physician, so he would be depressed. Ah, yes. And one of the things, Luke is a fascinating writer. He writes definitely from a medical perspective, and it would matter to him that the ear is healed, right? By the way, Luke is the only one of the Gospel writers who makes repeated note that a child that Jesus healed or raised was an only child. Isn't it interesting? He makes repeated note of that. Only child, only son, etc. So, fascinating. Now, let's read John 18, 12-14 here.

So the Roman cohort and the commander and the officers of the Jews arrested Jesus and bound him and led him to Annas first, for he was father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. Now Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it was expedient for one man to die on behalf of the people. So, in spite of Jesus having approached the arresting soldiers, and in spite of Jesus telling Peter to put his sword away and healing Malchus here, and in spite of Jesus' cooperation, they bound him.

Was there a need to bind him? No. Was he going to the cross? Yes. And he wasn't going to do anything to change that. Of course, they didn't know all that, but they bound him. So at first they took Jesus to the house of Annas. And by the way, why might they have bound him?

Even in spite of all the other characteristics of the rest. Yeah? It's possible they had a panic attack at the time of this, saying who he really was, and they thought, why don't you try something? Yeah? Well, is it possible that somebody offers no resistance and acts real calm and uses that as a surprise way to get away so they may have been saying hey we're just not taking any chances here.

So first they took Jesus to the house of Annas and depending on which archaeologist you believe because it's basically it's not conclusive yet That may have either been right close by to Caiaphas or some slight distance away. Yeah. Back to the binding, it may have been that they were just following orders. Yeah, yeah, make sure you bind them and that's what we do. We always do it or some standard procedure. Yeah, could have been that.

What Caiaphas had said about Jesus dying for the people is uniquely recorded in John 11, 47-53. The other Gospels don't record that, which again is another point to the fact that John seems to have a special connection to the Sanhedrin and what went on and what was said and who the names were and those kinds of things. So here's John 18, 15 through 18.

Simon Peter was following Jesus and everybody else who was with him and so was another disciple. Who's another disciple? This is John, as we see fairly consistently. Now that disciple was known to the high priest, so here's John being connected. Here's the high priest, the guy, and John recognizes the high priest, but the high priest knows John and knows who he is. That's kind of amazing. and entered with Jesus into the court of the high priest.

But Peter was standing at the door outside, so the other disciple who was known to the high priest went out and spoke to the doorkeeper and brought Peter in. Then the slave girl who kept the door said to Peter, You are not also one of this man's disciples, are you? He said, I am not. Now the slaves and the officers were standing there, having made a charcoal fire, for it was cold and they were warming themselves, and Peter was also with them, standing and warming himself." Well, if you're not part of this courtyard, and we had to get special permission to let you in, and the guy that let you in is one of Jesus' disciples, why are you standing here? Right? Awfully suspicious. Very strange behavior.

So, John has a special connection to the high priest so that John, identifying himself as another disciple, is able to get into the high priest's courtyard and allow Peter to gain access as well. As Peter warmed himself by the fire, he denied the slave girl's question about him being one of Jesus' disciples. So John 18, 19 through 24, the high priest then questioned. Now this is Annas, and he wasn't currently the high priest, but notice he gets the title anyway.

Do we do that in our you know, culture where somebody is formerly of a particular role and we tend to call someone by that. So it's actually not an unusual tradition. We'll still refer to a past president as president and a past governor as governor, etc. So Jesus answered him. Excuse me, let me get in sync here.

The high priest then questioned Jesus about his disciples and about his teaching. And Jesus answered him, I have spoken openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple where all the Jews come together and I spoke nothing in secret. Okay, now look at what Jesus says, I have spoken openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple.

Is that the truth? Did he always teach in synagogues in the temple? He had something special to his disciples after Jews left. That was different. He actually did speak in synagogues and in the temple. What they would have is the temple courtyard, the perimeter colonnade, and Jesus would teach there.

Where all the Jews come together and I spoke nothing in secret. Why do you question me? Question those who have heard what I spoke to them. They know what I said." When he said this, one of the officers standing nearby struck Jesus, saying, Is that the way you answer the high priest? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken wrongly, testify of the wrong, but if rightly, why do you strike me?

Why did Jesus, in some degree, defend himself here? And why did he talk this way to the high priest? He was not the active duty high priest. Well, he wasn't the active duty high priest, but why? That doesn't seem to be the... cause here. What's going on that he is talking this way to the high priest and openly in front of everybody? Okay, legal ramifications. Think about this.

When was it decided that they would have Jesus killed? It was decided in chapter 11 when Caiaphas said, You know, one person must die for the people, right? So chapter 11, so this had been a fairly long-standing, at least as things go in the Gospel of John, a fairly long-standing strategy. We're going to kill him. We're going to have him killed.

So really, did it matter what anybody said? No. They were going to go to that conclusion. Here's Pilate, later on, who's going to try to get Jesus off. He says, I find no fault in him. And still they're screaming, crucify Him. So they're going to drive this thing home no matter what.

So all the questioning of Jesus is just a scam. It's just a scam. They're really not interested in the truth. Jesus was quite open in what He said, and here He was, you know, in the synagogues and in the temple, you know, speaking openly. But they're going to get rid of Him. And so going through the motions of asking questions and whatnot, it's all a sham and a scam.

Here's a question to ponder. Here Jesus is appearing before Annas. He's soon to appear before Caiaphas. Will Annas and Caiaphas one day appear before Jesus? So what's happening is they're interrogating in a false way, as if these things, they're on judge. And let's ask this question. Will this come up when Jesus judges them? Yes. These are Revelation 20, 11 through 15. These are written in the books. The book of works. And what they said, and how they went about things, and their sham and scam proceedings will be things that will be judged on.

John being there, certainly he could have been known as a disciple of Jesus. He could have been questioned about what he taught. It's very interesting. The question seems not to have been put to John. It seems like, we don't have an evidence statement, but it seems like John was known to the high priest and that it was known that he was a disciple.

But somehow Peter is the one who gets interrogated and denies it. That's the appearance at any rate. Let's take a look here. Here's this response. Why do you strike me? It says, So Annas sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest. it has the appearance that this interrogation was cut short. Does that look that way to you? It's like here Jesus is challenging him and after the striking of the face, Jesus didn't let the whack across the face stop him. He didn't back off. Why do you strike me? Why do you ask me? Why do you strike me? So he's challenging him on this point. Do you think that's going to make them more inclined to favor him or less inclined to favor him? Pardon? Less. Yeah, very likely less. What we have here is, Anna sent him bound to Caiaphas, the high priest. Why? Why didn't you just take care of it there? Why send him off to Caiaphas? Like Tom said, he wasn't the high priest that year. He wasn't the high priest that year.

So this would be actually unofficial proceedings. by Annis. However, as we go through it, if you read through the account and you read through the laws that they're supposed to be operating by, they were very, shoot from the hip, very loose on their application of law here.

There's something else going on there, too, and that is passing the buck, as we say, right? Hey, this guy's a little tough to deal with. He challenges us, and I have to say, he was out in the public, and his objections are not something we have an answer for. But I know how to deal with this. Let's pass him off, right? Let's pass him off. Now, what happens next? He sends him to Caiaphas, the high priest, and that's kind of our next step here as we go through this. Is anything different going to happen to Caiaphas? With Caiaphas?

Yeah? Well, he's still going to, you know, they're just following what they had already planned out. Okay. Yeah, and Caiaphas was also the originator. Right. Caiaphas was the originator of the scheme, right? So it's like, okay, he's the guy who really knows how to, you know, interrogate this guy. but they aren't being very transparent.

No, not really. And we'll just pass them around. And guess what? There's something else going on here. This is the middle of the night, right? And so being the middle of the night, nobody's getting any sleep, but basically they just have to keep this guy tossing back and forth until it's time to pass him on to pilot. So they just keep, all right, send them here, send them there, keep bouncing them around until it's time to give them to Pilot, because that's ultimately where he's got to go. Pilot's got to be the one to do the judging and pass final sentence. It's also possible they want to whitewash the whole thing, make it look like it's up and up.

So it's after daylight, so technically no violation, but Yeah, the more officials you pass, you know, pass them in front of, then it looks like, you know, yeah, we've all drawn this conclusion, right? So, of course everybody has concluded this guy's a phony.

This guy, Jesus, needs to be killed. Right? So we get more and more people involved. Okay? Done a bit early here. Kind of amazing. Any thoughts, comments, questions to justify what they were doing to other people that might know about what the purpose of what I was hearing about. Ah, if no one else heard about it. It's kind of a closed session. There was no other people witnessing.

You do it at night, you kind of tend to limit your exposure, don't you? Yes. And very likely that was a part of the strategy. You do it at night and everybody's kind of settled down and in their houses and all that. So I just pass over. People are busy with other things.

Yeah, we do that. Yeah. That kind of brings to mind that statement about things that are done in secret and in the dark will be brought to light. Yeah. Which, by the way, that's judgment not of believers. Yes. The Sermon on the Mount, was that not a teaching? Yes. So it's not in a synagogue or a temple? The Sermon on the Mount was out in the open and not in a synagogue or a temple. So Jesus did not always teach in synagogues and temples, but he did teach in synagogues and temples, including the one in Nazareth.

Yeah, he could have been referring to. the accusation that Peter, they're accusing Peter of being one of his disciples. And he was saying, I've spoken where everybody can hear me. And so lots of people can be my followers and be called disciples. It's not restricted to just these 12 people, because I've taught publicly and people have heard me.

Let's ask this question, if Jesus testified on his own behalf, was that valid? How many would it take to get a valid testimony? You'd have to get two or three, would be the Old Testament requirement. And so what Jesus is saying is, there's no need to interrogate me, my testimony isn't valid anyway. You will need to get word from two or three, and you have a lot more than that that you could call upon to testify about what I taught and those kinds of things. You could easily do that.

Why do you think that the four different Gospels give more than three denials? I mean, one talks about sleep. I can't remember specifically, but actually if you go through it, there's at least four, right? There's more than three denials if you look at all the Gospels together. Why do you think that is? Let's ask this question. Is three all that's required to meet Jesus' prediction? Oh, yeah. Right?

So what happened is Peter's told, you're going to deny me three times for the rooster crows. And the reality is he denied me more than that when we put it together. But he certainly denied him three times. Is there anything special about the number three?

Pardon? Yeah, it's a number of, you're going to completely deny me, is essentially what the picture is saying there. Yeah, in truth he denies him more times. Ruth? Can we go back to the, I always teach in synagogues and temples. Or in THE temple, yeah. I'm struggling with the word always. Is that always or only? Let's take a look at it. Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead.

Jesus answered him, as for myself, I have spoken openly to the world. I, at all times, taught in the synagogue and in the temple, where all the Jews officially come together and have a secret, et cetera. Is it because he's answering specifically the chief priest? And do you say, I mean, is it the idea of I've been here all the time.

You mentioned we haven't been teaching. You say Jesus is in the open. Why did you arrest me in the open at one of these fifty to a hundred times? I haven't seen you here in the temple, in the synagogue. Were you guys fasting? Were you guys doing things? Is that the idea? He's basically saying, look, I teach out in the open.

I've been right here in the temple colonnades, the perimeter colonnades, repeatedly. I've been there again and again and again. Even this last week I've been there, you know, out in the open. And you guys didn't arrest me, and you wait until it's late at night, and you wait until you get me, not there in the temple courtyards, but at the Garden of Gethsemane where it's quiet and nobody's around.

And again this goes back to the point that they're always concerned about the crowd. Paul was always talking about the crowd and all we have to do is look at TV and look at Egypt today and see what the people of the Middle East, how they react. to certain things. There's riots, there's chaos, there's all kinds of violence and stuff. Because this is just how they respond. So Jesus knew the crowd was actually on his side. Yeah, the crowd might break things open in a direction that's hard to control. So these guys wanted to have things well under control. Yeah?

Would it help if Like, just the analogy, if I were, for instance, to speak to a student, or Matt's here, and say, Vern always teaches in front of the congregation, given that we understand the context, because we go there. I'm not saying every single time Vern teaches, he teaches in front of the church, because that would be a true statement. But I can say, he always teaches in this context, being in a church on a Sunday morning. Yeah, it's always not as an absolute statement, but as a statement of prominence. So, yeah, it's not intended to be a, okay, roll call.

He's always, you know, the one that teaches here, and he always teaches here. Because he did teach in other places. He did teach, like, the Sermon on the Mount. Here's on the mountain. So this is a statement of generalization, not a statement of absolutes. Yeah. Jesus' whole period of ministry was a teaching situation. So it wasn't ever a teaching. In some way it wasn't a teaching. Right, right.

I can also add to it a similar pattern. Here is Paul writing to Titus that Cretans are always liars. He says, right? Does it mean that every single absolute time that they lie? No, but it's a good generalization. By the way, I was asked that in the deposition. Anyway, okay. Anyway, a guy I did business with. Does Paul always lie? Anyway, we've got people hanging outside, so let's pray and close it up here. Lord, we thank you for what you've revealed here.

We're in the middle of the chapter and yet more to go. Soon Jesus will be on to the house of Caiaphas and we'll see what unfolds there. We thank you that we can see here a determination for Christ to go to the cross, to die for our sins and for the other purposes for which he died. And we just thank you for your immense love and faithfulness toward us. We pray in Jesus' name. Amen.