The Jewish authorities were plotting to arrest and kill Jesus secretly in the two days before Passover to avoid disturbances among the large crowds gathered in Jerusalem for the festival. The chief priests and teachers of the law were scheming to seize Jesus by craft or subtlety. They did not want to do it during the feast itself because they were concerned it might cause a disturbance among the people who had come to celebrate Passover. Commentators provided historical context about the Passover festival and noted the high tensions and nationalist feelings it evoked among Jews that time.

1. MARK 14 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Jesus Anointed at Bethany
1 Now the Passover and the Festival of
Unleavened Bread were only two days away,
and the chief priests and the teachers of the law
were scheming to arrest Jesus secretly and kill
him.
BARNES, "And of unleavened bread - So called because at that feast no other
bread was used but that which had been made without leaven or yeast.
By craft - By subtlety (Matthew); that is, by some secret plan that would secure
possession of him without exciting the opposition of the people.
CLARKE, "Unleavened bread - After they began to eat unleavened bread: see
on Mat_26:2 (note).
GILL, "After two days was the feast of the passover,.... That is, two days after
Christ had delivered the foregoing discourse concerning the destruction of the temple
at Jerusalem, was the feast of the passover; which was kept in commemoration of
God's passing over the houses of the Israelites, when he destroyed the firstborn of
Egypt, and made way for the deliverance of the children of Israel from thence: and
which was kept by eating the passover lamb; and which, properly speaking, is the
feast of the passover:
and of unleavened bread; which was the same feast with the other, called so from
the unleavened bread which was then eaten; though with this difference, the
passover lamb was only eaten on the first night, but unleavened bread was eaten for
seven days together. The Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions render it, "the passover
of unleavened bread", leaving out the copulative "and".
And the chief priests and Scribes sought how they might take him by
craft; that is, Jesus,
and put him to death: for which purpose they assembled together in Caiaphas the
high priest's palace, and there took counsel together how to accomplish it; see Mat_
1

2. 26:2.
HENRY, "I. Of the kindness of Christ's friends, and the provision made of respect
and honour for him. Some friends he had, even in and about Jerusalem, that loved
him, and never thought they could do enough for him, among whom, though Israel
be not gathered, he is, and will be, glorious.
JAMIESON, "Mar_14:1-11. The conspiracy of the Jewish authorities to put Jesus
to death - The supper and the anointing at Bethany - Judas agrees with the chief
priests to betray his Lord. ( = Mat_26:1-16; Luk_22:1-6; Joh_12:1-11).
The events of this section appeared to have occurred on the fourth day
(Wednesday) of the Redeemer’s Last Week.
Conspiracy of the Jewish authorities to put Jesus to death (Mar_14:1, Mar_14:2).
After two days was the feast of the passover, and of unleavened bread —
The meaning is, that two days after what is about to be mentioned the passover
would arrive; in other words, what follows occurred two days before the feast.
and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by
craft, and put him to death — From Matthew’s fuller account (Mat_26:1-75) we
learn that our Lord announced this to the Twelve as follows, being the first
announcement to them of the precise time: “And it came to pass, when Jesus had
finished all these sayings” (Mat_26:1) - referring to the contents of Matthew
24:1-25:46, which He delivered to His disciples; His public ministry being now
closed: from His prophetical He is now passing into His priestly office, although all
along He Himself took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses - “He said unto His
disciples, Ye know that after two days is [the feast of] the passover, and the Son of
man is betrayed to be crucified.” The first and the last steps of His final sufferings are
brought together in this brief announcement of all that was to take place. The
passover was the first and the chief of the three great annual festivals,
commemorative of the redemption of God’s people from Egypt, through the
sprinkling of the blood of a lamb divinely appointed to be slain for that end; the
destroying angel, “when he saw the blood, passing over” the Israelitish houses, on
which that blood was seen, when he came to destroy all the first-born in the land of
Egypt (Exo_12:12, Exo_12:13) - bright typical foreshadowing of the great Sacrifice,
and the Redemption effected thereby. Accordingly, “by the determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God, who is wonderful in counsel and excellent in working,” it was
so ordered that precisely at the passover season, “Christ our Passover should be
sacrificed for us.” On the day following the passover commenced “the feast of
unleavened bread,” so called because for seven days only unleavened bread was to be
eaten (Exo_12:18-20). See on 1Co_5:6-8. We are further told by Matthew (Mat_
26:3) that the consultation was held in the palace of Caiaphas the high priest,
between the chief priests, [the scribes], and the elders of the people, how “they might
take Jesus by subtlety and kill Him.”
BARCLAY, "THE LAST ACT BEGINS (Mark 14:1-2)
14:1-2 The Feast of the Passover and of Unleavened Bread was due in two days'
time. And the chief priests and experts in the law were trying to find some way to
seize Jesus by some stratagem and to kill him, for they said, "This must not be
done at the Feast itself in case there should be a disturbance of the people."
The last crowded act of Jesus' life was now about to open. The Feast of the
Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were really two different things.
2

3. The Feast of the Passover fell on 14th Nisan, that is, about 14th April. The Feast
of Unleavened Bread consisted of the seven days following the Passover. The
Passover itself was a major feast and was kept like a sabbath. The Feast of
Unleavened Bread was called a minor festival, and, although no new work could
be begun during it, such work as was "necessary for public interest or to provide
against private loss" was allowable. The really great day was Passover Day.
The Passover was one of the three compulsory feasts. The others were the Feast
of Pentecost and the Feast of Tabernacles. To these feasts every male adult Jew
who lived within 15 miles of Jerusalem was bound to come.
The Passover had a double significance.
(a) It had an historical significance (Exodus 12:1-51 ). It commemorated the
deliverance of the children of Israel from their bondage in Egypt. God had sent
plague after plague on Egypt, and, as each plague came, Pharaoh promised to let
the people go. But, when each plague abated, he hardened his heart and went
back on his word. Finally there came a terrible night when the angel of death
was to walk through the land of Egypt and slay every first-born son in every
home. The Israelites were to slay a lamb. Using a bunch of hyssop they were to
smear the lintel of the door-post with the blood of the lamb, and when the angel
of death saw the door-post so marked, he would pass over that house and its
occupants would be safe. Before they went upon their way the Israelites were to
eat a meal of a roasted lamb and unleavened bread. It was that "passover," that
deliverance and that meal that the Feast of the Passover commemorated.
(b) It had an agricultural significance. It marked the ingathering of the barley
harvest. On that day a sheaf of barley had to be waved before the Lord
(Leviticus 23:10-11). Not till after that had been done could the barley of the new
crop be sold in the shops or bread made with the new flour be eaten.
Every possible preparation was made for the Passover. For a month beforehand
its meaning was expounded in the synagogue, and its lesson was taught daily in
the schools. The aim was that no one should come ignorant and unprepared to
the feast. the roads were all put in order, the bridges repaired. One special thing
was done. It was very common to bury people beside the road. Now if any
pilgrim had touched one of these wayside tombs he would technically have been
in contact with a dead body and so rendered unclean and unable to take part in
the feast. So, before the Passover, all the wayside tombs were white-washed so
that they would stand out and the pilgrims could avoid them. Psalms 120:1-7;
Psalms 121:1-8; Psalms 122:1-9; Psalms 123:1-4; Psalms 124:1-8; Psalms 125:1-5;
Psalms 126:1-6; Psalms 127:1-5; Psalms 128:1-6; Psalms 129:1-8; Psalms 130:1-8;
Psalms 131:1-3; Psalms 132:1-18; Psalms 133:1-3; Psalms 134:1-3 are entitled
Psalms of Degree, and it may well be that these were the psalms which the
pilgrims sang on their way to the feast, as they sought to lighten the road with
their music. It is said that Psalms 122:1-9 was the one which they actually sang as
they climbed the hill to the Temple on the last lap of their journey.
As we have already seen, it was compulsory for every adult male Jew who lived
3

4. within 15 miles of Jerusalem to come to the Passover, but far more than these
came. It was the one ambition of every Jew to eat at least one Passover in
Jerusalem before he died. Therefore from every country in the world pilgrims
came flocking to the Passover Feast. During the Passover all lodging was free.
Jerusalem could not hold the crowds, and Bethany and Bethphage were two of
the outlying villages where pilgrims lodged.
A passage in Josephus gives us an idea of how many pilgrims actually came. He
tells that Cestius, governor of Palestine round about A.D. 65, had some difficulty
in persuading Nero of the great importance of the Jewish religion. To impress
him, he asked the then High Priest to take a census of the lambs slain at the
Passover in one year. The number, according to Josephus, was 256,500. The law
was that there must be a minimum party of ten people to one lamb, so that there
must have been close on 3,000,000 pilgrims in Jerusalem.
It was just there that the problem of the Jewish authorities lay. During the
Passover, feeling ran very high. The remembrance of the old deliverance from
Egypt made the people long for a new deliverance from Rome. At no time was
nationalist feeling so intense. Jerusalem was not the Roman headquarters in
Judaea. The governor had his residence and the soldiers were stationed in
Caesarea. During the Passover time special detachments of troops were drafted
into Jerusalem and quartered in the Tower of Antonia which overlooked the
Temple. The Romans knew that at Passover anything might happen and they
were taking no chances. The Jewish authorities knew that in an inflammable
atmosphere like that, the arrest of Jesus might well provoke a riot. That is why
they sought some secret stratagem to arrest him and have him in their power
before the populace knew anything about it.
The last act of Jesus' life was to be played out in a city crammed with Jews who
had come from the ends of the earth. They had come to commemorate the event
whereby their nation was delivered from slavery in Egypt long ago. It was at that
very time that God's deliverer of mankind was crucified upon his Cross.
PULPIT, "Now after two days was the feast of the passover and the unleavened
bread; literally, the passover and the unleavened τό πάσχα καὶ τὰ ἄζυμα. It was
one and the same festival. The killing of the Paschal lamb took place on the first
of the seven days during which the festival lasted, and during the whole of which
they used unleavened bread. Josephus describes it as "the festival of the
unleavened, called Phaska by the Jews." The chief priests and the scribes. St.
Matthew (Matthew 26:3) says, "The chief priests and the elders of the people."
The two classes in the Sanhedrim who actually combined to put our Lord to
death were those here mentioned by St. Mark. They sought how they might take
him with subtlety ( ἐν δόλῳ), and kill him. It is, literally, they were seeking
( ἐλήτουν). The verb with its tense implies continuous and eager desire. They
used subtlety, because they feared lest he should escape out of their hands.
Moreover they feared the people, lest they should fight for him, and not suffer
him to be taken.
BURKITT, "This chapter gives us a sad and sorrowful account of the high
4

5. priest's conspiracy against the life of our blessed Saviour in which we have
observable, The persons that made this conspiracy, the manner of the
conspiracy, and the time when this conspiracy was made.
1. The persons conspiring are the chief priests, scribes, and elders; that is, the
whole Jewish sanhedrin, or general council; they lay their malicious heads
together, to contrive the destruction of the innocent Jesus.
Thence learn, That general councils have erred and may err fundamentally in
matters of doctrine; so did this general council at Jerusalem, consisting of chief
priests, doctors, and elders, with the high priest their president, in not believing
Jesus to be the Messias, after all the miracles wrought before their eyes.
Observe, 2. The manner of this conspiracy against our Saviour's life; it was
clandestine, secret, and subtile; they consult how they might take him by craft,
and put him to death.
Thence note, That Satan makes use of the subtilty of crafty men, and abuseth
their parts as well as their power, for his own purposes and designs; the devil
sends no fools of his errands.
Observe, 3. The circumstance of time when this conspiracy was managed, at the
feast of the passover; it being a custom among the Jews to execute malefactors at
their solemn feasts, as at the feast of the passover, the feast of weeks, and the
feast of tabernacles; at which times all the Jews came up to Jerusalem to
sacrifice, and then they put malefactors to death, that all Israel might see and
hear, and not do so wickedly.
Accordingly, this feast of the passover was waited for by the Jews, as a fit
opportunity to put our Saviour to death. The only objection was, That it might
occasion a tumult amongst the people, there being such a mighty concourse at
that time in Jerusalem. But Judas making them a proffer, they readily comply
with the motion, and resolve to take the first opportunity to put our Saviour to
death.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 1-2
The plot to arrest Jesus 14:1-2 (cf. Matthew 26:1-5; Luke 22:1-2)
These verses introduce the whole passion narrative. Passover commemorated the
Israelites' redemption from slavery in Egypt through the Exodus (Exodus 12:1 to
Exo_13:16). It anticipated a greater deliverance from the consequences of slavery
to sin. The Jews began to celebrate Passover on the fourteenth of Nisan, and the
feast of Unleavened Bread followed on the fifteenth through the twenty-first of
Nisan. Mark dated the events that follow immediately as occurring two days
before Passover. This would have been Wednesday, April 1, A.D. 33. [Note:
Hoehner, Chronological Aspects . . ., pp. 92, 143.]
Passover, like the feasts of Tabernacles and Pentecost, was a pilgrim feast. Many
Jewish families from all over the world traveled to Jerusalem to observe these
feasts as the Mosaic Law required (Deuteronomy 16:16). The Jews could observe
5

6. the Passover only in Jerusalem (Deuteronomy 16:5-6). Consequently mobs of
people choked the city. One writer claimed that the population of Jerusalem
swelled from 50,000 to 250,000. [Note: Lane, p. 490.] Jesus enjoyed a large
popular following, so the religious leaders wanted to avoid a riot by executing
Jesus inconspicuously. Evidently they wanted to postpone further confrontation
with Jesus until after the feasts when the pilgrims would have returned to their
homes. However, Judas' offer to betray Jesus (Mark 14:10-11) was too good to
refuse.
BENSON, "Mark 14:1-9. After two days was the feast of the passover — For an
explanation of these verses, see the notes on Matthew 26:1-13. Of ointment of
spike-nard, very precious — “Either the word πιστικη,” says Dr. Whitby,
“answers to the Syriac, pisthaca, and then it may be rendered, nardus spicata,
ointment made of the spikes of nard; or, if it be of a Greek original, I think
Theophylact well renders it πιστικη η αδολος και μετα πιστεως
κατασκευασθεισα, that is, nard unadulterated and prepared with fidelity; the
great price it bore tempting many to adulterate it, as Dioscorides and Pliny tell
us.” Nard is a plant which was highly valued by the ancients, both as an article
of luxury and medicine. The ointment made of it was used at baths and feasts as
a favourite perfume. From a passage in Horace, it appears that this ointment was
so valuable among the Romans, that as much as could be contained in a small
box of precious stone was considered as a sort of equivalent for a large vessel of
wine, and a proper quota for a guest to contribute at an entertainment,
according to the ancient custom. Hor., lib. 4. ode 12. This author mentions the
Assyrian, and Dioscorides the Syrian nard; but, it appears, the best is produced
in the East Indies. “The root of this plant is very small and slender. It puts forth
a long and small stalk, and has several ears or spikes, even with the ground,
which has given it the name of spikenard; the taste is bitter, acrid, and aromatic,
and the smell agreeable.” — Calmet. She brake the box and poured it on his
head — As this spikenard was a liquid, and there appears to be no reason for
breaking the box in order to get out the liquor, Knatchbull, Hammond, and some
others maintain, that συντριψασα, the word here used, ought not to be translated
she brake, but only that she shook the box, namely, so as to break the coagulated
parts of the rich balsam, and bring it to such a degree of liquidity, that it might
be fit to be poured out; and thus Dr. Waterland translates it. Dr. Doddridge and
others, however, think the original word does not so naturally express this, and
therefore imagine that the woman broke off the top of the vessel in which the
balsam was contained. Dr. Campbell renders it, She broke open the box,
observing, “I have chosen these words as sufficiently denoting that it required an
uncommon effort to bring out the contents, which is all that the word here
necessarily implies; and it is a circumstance that ought not to be altogether
overlooked, being an additional evidence of the woman’s zeal for doing honour
to her Lord. That the term ought not to be rendered shook, is to me evident. I
know no example of it in this meaning in any author, sacred or profane. Verbs
denoting to shake, frequently occur in Scripture. But the word is never
συντριβω, but τινασσω, σειω, σαλευω.” Mr. Harmer understands it of the
breaking the cement with which the vessel was closely stopped, a circumstance
which, he thinks, appears natural, and an explanation which is justified by the
phraseology of Propertius, a writer of the same age. There were some that had
6

7. indignation — At this which the woman had done, being incited thereto by
Judas; and said — Probably to the woman, Why was this waste of the ointment
made — Of this rich and costly balsam? And they murmured against her —
Spake privately among themselves against the woman, for what she had done.
But Jesus, knowing every thing they spake or thought, said, Why trouble ye
her — Without cause? She hath wrought a good work on me — Hath given a
great proof of her firm faith, and fervent love to me; and therefore, instead of
meriting your censure, deserves your commendation. She hath done what she
could — To testify her affection for me. She is come aforehand to anoint my
body to the burying — Matthew, προς το ενταφιασαι με, corpus meum ad funus
componere, to prepare my body for its burial. This vindication of the woman
suggests the reason why Jesus permitted so expensive a compliment to be paid to
him. Being desirous to impress his disciples with the thought of his death, he
embraced every opportunity of inculcating it, whether by word or deed.
COFFMAN, “This and the final two chapters comprise the heart of all that
Christianity means. Mark and the other three sacred authors devote more space
to the narrative of the arraignment, trials, mockery, suffering, crucifixion, death,
burial, and resurrection of Christ than to any other subject. The events and
circumstances of this final week of Jesus' ministry are the most important of all
human history. Here the decisive battle for human redemption was won; the
Seed of Woman bruised the head of the serpent; everlasting righteousness was
made available to men in Christ and the moral justification for any further
divine toleration of Adam's race was accomplished. On Calvary, and in the
events leading up to it, Satan threw in his last reserves, committed his total
strength, and brought evil to its mightiest crescendo at the cross, where the tides
of moral shame and darkness reached their all-time flood. The sufferings of the
Son of God were such as to chill the stoutest heart; and, when it is considered
that a single word from Christ could have annihilated his foes, the marvel of ages
is that he endured it all to redeem fallen and sinful men. Oh Christ, blessed is thy
Holy Name!
Now after two days was the feast of the passover and the unleavened bread: and
the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him with subtlety,
and kill him: for they said, Not during the feast, lest haply there should be a
tumult of the people. (Mark 14:1-2)
THE PLOT OF THE CHIEF PRIESTS
Clearly, the chief priests did not wish to have a public execution of Christ during
the feast, the popularity of our Lord with the masses being far too great to risk
such a thing. How then did it come to pass otherwise? As the anti-type of the
passover lamb, it was fitting that the Lord should be sacrificed at the Passover
season, as the Father's plan required, and as Jesus himself prophesied (Matthew
26:1-5). The Lord, not the priests, was the architect of the crucifixion.
Take him with subtlety ... They intended to assassinate Jesus in a gangland type
murder. The religious leaders of Israel had, in such a purpose, descended to a
record low plane of immorality.
7

8. From its placement, both here and in Matthew, the next event related seems to
have triggered the betrayal by Judas and a dramatic change of strategy by the
priests.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:1, Mark 14:2
The plot.
The apprehension and death of Jesus were brought about By a combination
between his foes and a professed friend. The avowed enemies employed the
necessary force, and secured the authority of the Roman governor for his
crucifixion; and the disciple suggested the occasion, the place and time of the
capture, and delivered his Master into the hands of the malignant persecutors.
The events of the first three days of this Passion week had been such as to enrage
the Pharisees and scribes beyond all bounds. The only way in which it seemed
possible for them to retain their threatened influence, necessarily diminished and
discredited by their repeated public confutation, seemed to be this—to strike an
immediate and decisive blow at the Prophet whom they were unable to withstand
upon the ground of argument and reason.
I. THE ENEMIES WHO PLOTTED AGAINST CHRIST. These seem to have
included all classes among the higher orders of society in Jerusalem, who,
whatever their distinctions, rivalries, and enmities, concurred in hatred of the
Holy One and the Just. The chief priests, who were largely Sadducees, the
scribes, and the Pharisees, who were the most honored leaders of the people in
religion, all joined in plotting against him who attacked their various errors with
equal impartiality, and whose success with the people was undermining the
power of them all.
II. THE CRAFT AND CAUTION OF CHRIST'S ENEMIES. It was in
accordance with the nature of such men that they should have recourse to
stratagem. Open violence was scarcely after their manner, and was out of the
question in this case; for many of the people honored the Prophet of Nazareth,
and would probably have interfered to protect or to rescue him from the onset of
his enemies. Upon days of great popular festivals the people thronged every
public place, where Jesus might be found teaching those who resorted to him;
and those who delighted to listen to Jesus would certainly resist his capture. The
opposition of Christ's enemies to his teaching had been captious, and it is not
surprising to find that their plot for his destruction was cunning and secret.
III. THE PURPOSE OF CHRIST'S ENEMIES—HIS DESTRUCTION. This
had, indeed, been foreseen and foretold by himself; but this does not lessen the
crime of those who compassed his death. The resolution to slay Jesus seems to
have been taken because of the popular impression produced by the raising of
Lazarus, and because of the discussions which had only just now taken place
between him and the Jewish leaders, whom he had overcome in argument and
put to silence. Thus, he had come up to the metropolis with the intention of so
conducting his ministry as he was well aware would bring down upon him the
8

9. wrath of his bitter foes.
IV. THE SEASON AND OCCASION OF THIS PLOT, It was at the time of the
Passover assemblies and solemnities that these deliberations took place. In this
there was a coincidence which was not unintended, and which did not escape the
observation of the Church. "Christ our Passover"—our Paschal Lamb and
Sacrifice—"was slain for us." The Lamb of God came to take away the sin of the
world. His death has become the life of humanity; his sacrifice has wrought the
emancipation of a sinful race.
BI 1-9, "And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper.
Working for Christ
The home of Mary and Martha and Lazarus at Bethany, about two miles from
Jerusalem across the Mount of Olives, had been the scene of some of the calmest and
happiest moments of our Lord’s life. We know something of the sweetness of a quiet
home after work and anxiety and worry-the labourer knows it, the man of business
knows it. We can therefore understand how restful to the Lord Jesus, after those
angry scenes that had been gathering around Him all day in the temple, were the
peaceful evenings of this week in the home at Bethany. There are two things which
we should notice about that home as we follow Jesus thither.
I. It was a home of true family love, or Jesus would not have sought its shelter so
often as He did. What tender memories cluster round the childhood that has been
spent in such a home! What a foretaste of the home beyond the grave, the haven
where we would be!
II. It was a home where Jesus always was a welcome guest, whither He was
summoned in every trouble, where He was the Companion, the Guide, and the
familiar Friend. Are our homes like that? Is He felt and acknowledged to be the
Master of the house? the unseen Guest at every meal? the unseen Hearer of every
conversation? Is His blessing asked on every meal, on every undertaking, on every
event? But now, as we stand with Jesus at Bethany, look what one of the sisters is
doing to Him as He sits at meat, either in her own house, or in one of a similar type
where she is hardly less at home. “Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard,
very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus.” Beloved, is there not something like that
that we can do for Jesus in this Holy Week? Is there not something that we can bring
and lay at His feet while we are watching with him through the hours of His Passion?
Something that will be an earnest of our love-some secret sin which it would really
cost us something to give up? And cannot we find something, too, in our family life,
or in the part we have to play in it? Is there not some new departure we might make
for Jesus’ sake, to make our homes a little less unworthy to be His dwelling place?
(Henry S. Miles, M. A.)
Mary anointing Christ
What she is said to have done. This standard for our service is, you perceive, at once
stimulating and encouraging. It is stimulating, for we are never to think that we have
done enough while there is anything more we can do; and it is encouraging, for it
tells us that though we can do but little, that little will be accepted, nay, considered by
our gracious Master as enough. We are not to condemn ourselves, or to repine,
because we can do no more. But something else must be noticed here.
9

10. I. Mary did more than she was aware of doing. It is an affecting circumstance,
brethren, that wherever our Lord was, and however engaged, His death seems to
have been always in His mind. It was in His mind here at a social meal, and what we
should have called a happy one, with those He loved the very best on earth around
Him, and with the love of some of them towards Him in the liveliest exercise. It is a
cheering truth, brethren, that we can never measure the use to which a gracious
Saviour may turn our poor doings. As His designs in our afflictions often lie deeper
than we can penetrate, so do His designs in the services to which He prompts us. We
do this, and we do that, and we mourn that it is so little, and that so little good to our
fellow men and so little honour to our God will come from it; but we know not what
will come from it. That little thing is in the hand of a great, omnipotent God, and His
mighty arm can bend and turn it we know not how or whither.
II. We must now ask what Mary’s motives probably were in this extraordinary act.
1. The strongest of them perhaps was a feeling of grateful love for her blessed
Lord. He had just raised her brother from the dead; had just shown a sympathy
and affection for herself and Martha, which might well astonish her; had put an
honour on her family she must have felt to be surpassingly great. “Thank Him,”
she perhaps said within herself, “I could not when Lazarus came forth. I cannot
now. My tongue will not move, and if it would, words are too poor to thank Him.
But what can I do? Kings and great men are sometimes anointed at their splendid
banquets. My Lord is to be at Simon’s feast. I will go and buy the most precious
ointment Jerusalem affords, and at that feast I will anoint Him. It will be nothing
to Him, but if He will suffer it, it will be much to me.” Do something to show that
you are thankful for blessings, though that something be but little.
2. Mary was probably influenced also by another motive-a desire to put honour
on Christ. “Let others hate Him, and spurn Him,” she must have said, “Oh for
some opportunity of showing how I honour Him.” It is an easy thing, brethren, to
honour Christ when others are honouring Him, but real love delights to honour
Him when none others will.
III. Let us now come to the judgment men passed on Mary’s conduct. They censured
it, and strongly. Men are generally made angry by any act of love for Christ which
rises above their own standard-above their own ideas of the love which is due to
Him. They can generally, too, find something in the warm-hearted Christian’s
conduct to give a colour to their displeasure. “Why was this waste of the ointment
made?” It was a plausible question; it seemed a reasonable one. And observe, too,
men can generally assign some good motive in themselves for the censure they pass
on others. And mark, also, Christ’s real disciples will sometimes join with others in
censuring the zealous Christian. “There were some that had indignation.” But yet
again, the censures passed on the servant of Christ often have their origin in some
one hypocritical, bad man. Who began this cavilling, this murmuring against Mary?
We turn to St. John’s Gospel, and he tells us it was Judas-Judas Iscariot, the
betrayer. Trace to their source the bitter censures with which many a faithful
Christian is for a time assailed, you will often find it in the secret, unthought of
baseness of some low, hypocritical man.
IV. The history now brings before us the notice our Lord took of this woman’s
conduct. He, first, vindicated it. And observe how He vindicates Mary-with a
wonderful gentleness towards those who had blamed her. The practical lesson is,
brethren, to adore the blessed Jesus for taking us and our conduct under His
protection, and while acting through His grace as He would have us, to feel ourselves
safe, and more than safe, in His hands. “He that toucheth you,” He says, “toucheth
the apple of My eye.” But this is not all-our Saviour recompenses this grateful woman
10

11. as well as vindicates her. “Wheresoever,” He says, “this gospel shall be preached,
throughout the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a
memorial of her.” Our Lord had said long before, “Blessed are ye when men shall
revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for
My sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven.” But here
He anticipates this; there is a reward for this woman on the earth, and a wide and
large one. And now, turning from Mary and her conduct, let us think of ourselves and
our conduct. What have we done for Christ? “We love Him because He first loved
us”-there is the secret of Christian obedience, Christian self-denial, Christian
devotedness. (C. Bradley, M. A.)
The box of ointment
I. The nature of the act. It was done to Christ. It was inspired by a right sentiment. If
we give all that we possess to Christ still it is less than He deserves. Her regret is not
that she gave so much, but so little.
II. The lessons. An action is precisely of the value of the motive by which it has been
actuated. We must, moreover, take into account the difference of positions and
mental tendencies. Good intention, which is no other thing than love, may deceive
itself, without doubt, but it does not always deceive itself. In the Divine flame which
the Spirit kindles the light is inseparable from the heat. He who seeks to do the will of
God will know the mind of God. Even in giving to the poor it is possible to make
serious mistakes. True charity does not open the heart without expanding the mind.
(Alexander Finer, D. D.)
A woman’s memorial
It well exhibits, in a single illustration, the appropriateness, the motive, the measure,
and the reward of Christian zeal (Mar_14:3-9).
I. We start out with a recognition, on our part, of a settled rule of activity. All of
Christ’s friends are expected to do something for Him.
1. Work and sacrifice are not inconsistent with even the highest spirituality, leer
this is the same Mary whose other story is so familiar to us all. She was the one
who used to sit at Jesus’ feet (Luk_10:39) in all the serene quiet of communion
with her Lord; yet now who would say that Mary at the Master’s head might not
be as fine a theme for the artist’s pencil? Piety is practical, and practical piety is
not the less picturesque and attractive because it has in such an instance become
demonstrative.
2. Our Lord always needed help while He was on the earth. There were rich
women among those whom He had helped, at whose generous hands He received
money (Luk_8:2-3). And His cause needs help now.
3. It is a mere temptation of the devil to assert that one’s work for Jesus Christ is
vitiated by the full gladness a loving soul feels in it. Some timid and self-
distrustful believers are stumbled by the fear that their sacrifices for our blessed
Master are meritless because they enjoy making them. There used to be rehearsed
an old legend of an aged prophetess passing through a crowd with a censer of fire
in one hand and a pitcher of water in the other. Being asked why she carried so
singular a burden, she replied, “This fire is to burn heaven with, and this water is
to quench hell with: so that men may hereafter serve God without desire for
11

12. reward or fear of retribution.” Such a speech may appear becoming for a mere
devotee’s utterance; but there is no warrant for anything like it in the Bible.
Heaven is offered for our encouragement in zeal (Rom_2:7). Hell is often
exhibited that it might be feared (Mat_10:28).
II. Next to this, the story of this alabaster box suggests a lesson concerning the
motive which underlies all true Christian activity.
1. In the case of this woman, we are told that her action grew out of her grateful
affection for her Lord. Every gesture shows her tenderness; she wiped His very
feet with her own hair (Joh_12:3). This was what gave her offering its supreme
value.
2. Herein lies the principle which has for all ages the widest application. It is not
so much what we do for our Saviour, nor the way in which we do it, as it is the
feeling which prompts us in the doing of anything that receives His welcome. It is
the affection pervading the zeal which renders the zeal precious.
3. It may as well be expected that the kindness which proceeds from pure love
will sometimes meet with misconstruction. Those who look upon zeal far beyond
their own in disinterested affection, will frequently be overheard to pass
uncharitable misjudgments upon it. We find (Joh_12:4-6) that it was only Judas
Iscariot after all, on this occasion, who took the lead in assigning wrong motives
to the woman, and he did not so much care for the poor as he did for his own bag
of treasure. No matter how much our humble endeavours to honour our Lord
Jesus may be derided, it will be helpful to remember they are fully appreciated by
Him.
4. This is the principle which uplifts and enobles even commonplace zeal When
true honest love is the motive, do we not all agree that it is slight ministrations
more than great conspicuous efforts which touch the heart of one who receives
them? The more unnoticed to every eye except ours, the more dear are the
glances of tenderness we receive. It is the delicacy, not the bulk, of the kindness
which constitutes its charm.
IV. The final lesson of this story is concerning the reward of Christian zeal. Higher
encomium was never pronounced than that which this woman received from the
Master.
1. It was Jesus that gave the approval. Set that over against the fault finding of
Judas! If we do our duty, we have a right to appeal away from anybody who
carps. When Christ justifies, who is he that condemns? Some of us have read of
the ancient classic orator, who, having no favour in the theatre, went into the
temple and gestured before the statues of the gods; he said they better
understood him. Thus may maligned believers retire from the world that
misjudges them, and comfort themselves with Jesus’ recognition.
2. Jesus said this woman should be remembered very widely-wherever the gospel
should go. Men know what is good and fine when they see it. And they stand
ready to commend it. Even Lord Byron had wit enough to see that-
“The drying up a single tear has more
Of honest fame, than shedding seas of gore.”
Some of the grandest lives in history have had only little show to make. Care
burdened women, invalids on couches, ill-clad and ill-fed sons of toil, maid servants,
man servants, apprentices and hirelings with few unoccupied hours, timid hearts,
uneducated minds, sailors kept on ships, soldiers held in garrisons-these, with only a
12

13. poor chance, have done such service that the world remembers them with its widest
renown (Psa_112:5-6).
3. It was just this parable of Jesus which became Mary’s memorial. A word
sometimes lasts longer than a marble slab. We must learn to be content with the
approval of God and our own consciences. Nothing will ever be forgotten that is
worth a record in God’s book. Those who die in the Lord will find their works
follow them, and the worthy fame remains behind: “The memory of the just is
blessed; but the name of the wicked shall rot.” Only we are to recollect that love
alone gives character and value to all zeal. That was a most suggestive remark of
old Thomas a Kempis: “He doeth much, who loveth much; and he also doeth
much, who doeth well.” (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)
The sacrifice of love
I. The sacrifice of love. Observe-
1. What Mary gave. The alabastron of precious and perfumed ointment. Rare and
costly. Love does not measure its offering by a bare utility; nor by a legal claim.
2. What Mary did. Anointed with this precious ointment. Things worthy of our
highest uses are honoured when used in the lowliest uses of religion. What is
worthy of our head, honoured by being laid at the Master’s feet.
II. The rebuke of covetousness. Judas’s criticism.
1. Waste! because his plan was not adopted. He thought not of the good that was
done, but of what might have been done.
2. He had an excuse. The poor! He was one of those who are always “looking at
home;” who do so with shut eyes; who see little, and do less.
III. The argument of wisdom.
1. I shall not be here long. Jesus is not long-in this life-with any of us. Let us
make much of this guest. Do what we can now.
2. You will always have the poor. These Jesus loved and eared for. This legacy
was not forgotten (Act_4:31-37). Nor are the spiritually poor forgotten.
Learn-
1. To love Jesus and show it.
2. That no gift consecrated to Jesus is wasted.
3. The best gift is a broken heart, the perfume of whose penitence and faith is
pleasant to the Lord. (J. C. Gray.)
Profusion not waste
I. A motive. Mary no doubt intended well. Her right intention would hardly have
been questioned by the murmuring disciples themselves. Whatever may be said of
her work, nothing can be said of her motive but that it was purely and altogether
good. Now motive is of first importance in the estimate we form of any act whatever,
small or great. Motive of some kind there must be, or the act cannot be moral; it
becomes merely mechanical. The motive too must be good, or the act cannot be
otherwise than bad. It need not, however, appear so, and frequently does not. Words
13

14. are not necessarily the garb of truth, nor appearances the signs and pledges of
corresponding realities. However good the motive may be it does not follow that the
act as such will be equally good. That is, there may be something more and higher in
the motive than appears in the act. This may arise from ignorance, from our not
knowing how to make the act better; or it may result from the nature of the act itself,
as being essentially humble and commonplace. But a deeper cause is found in our
inability to do what we would. We seem to do our very best, we put forth and strain
our resources to the utmost, and yet, after all, come short, and sometimes sadly
short, of our preconceived desires and hopes. There is, however, another and
brighter side to this. Our work is not considered absolutely by itself. The motive that
inspires it counts for something, it may be for much.
II. From the motive to this act let us pass to the act itself, with especial reference to
the impression produced by it on those who witnessed it. Mary intended well, I have
said: she also as certainly did well. This appears in part from what has been already
said, but the fact deserves and will repay still further exposition. “She hath done what
she could,” is the testimony borne to her conduct by the Saviour Himself, which
alone were commendation sufficient, as it implies that she had acted up to the full
measure of her ability. But to this He adds: “She hath wrought a good work on Me,”
thus greatly enlarging and heightening the commendation, especially as the term
rendered “good” means what is noble and beautiful. Her work was thus good because
it was the spontaneous overflow of a profoundly grateful affection for the restoration
of her brother Lazarus to life. It was thus good because it was in effect an act of
complete abandonment and loving devotion of her whole self to Christ as her one and
only Saviour. No doubt there was something extraordinary in the form which this
declaration took; but then there was something extraordinary in the sensibility of
Mary’s nature. But if Judas was first and chief he was quickly followed by others; for
evil is alike contagious and confederate. Complaining is easy, and also infectious, and
is often practised by some as though it were a virtue. Mark, then, our Lord’s reply to
their common protest, “Let her alone; why trouble ye her?” etc. A restrictive
economy, He virtually tells us, a bare and rigid utility is not at any time the
distinguishing characteristic of what is purest and noblest in human conduct. Utility
has its own sphere. Economy is a duty even where it is not a necessity. But there are
whole regions of thought and action into which neither the one nor the other can
enter, or, entering, can reign alone. There must be beauty as well as utility, there
must be generosity as well as economy, there must be splendour, magnificence,
profusion, seeming waste even, or human life will lose much of its charm. The like
profusion is seen in the Word of God as in His works. Shall men, then, in the service
of faith and piety, be so unlike God as to confine themselves within the narrow range
of a definite economy, or bind themselves to the strict and positive demands of a
rigorous utility? Is this what they do in regard to any other kind of service, and with
reference to interests that are purely secular and material? Shall it be called waste for
a vehement and self-forgetting love to pour costly perfumes on the head and feet of
an adored Redeemer, and yet not waste to consume them daily in the gratification of
a bodily sense? No one inspired only with what is called the “enthusiasm of
humanity” will say so. Still less will anyone who can profess in the words of the
apostle, as giving the animating and impellent principle of his whole life, “The love of
Christ constraineth me.” But, in truth, utility has a much larger sphere than is usually
assigned to it. That is not the only useful thing which simply helps a man to exist; nor
is it, when viewed comparatively with other things, even the most useful. The same
principle applies to faith and love, especially to the latter; while of this latter it may
further be said, that its utility is greatest when utility is least the motive to its
exercise. That is not love which looks directly to personal advantage, and knows how
14

15. to regulate its fervour by prudential considerations of profit and loss.
III. Mary’s recompense.
1. Christ vindicated her conduct against the angry complaints of His disciples.
2. He did more: He accepted and commended her work as “good”-as truly and
nobly beautiful. This itself would be recompense enough for her. She could, and
would, desire nothing more, and nothing better. What more and better, indeed,
could any one desire, for any work whatever, than the applauding “well done” of
Jesus?
3. Yet more there was in her case. She received assurance of everlasting
reputation and honour. Here was marvellous and unparalleled distinction, no
deed of merely human creature was ever promised a renown so great. And though
this renown could of itself add but little to her future felicity, yet the promise of it,
as indicating what the Saviour thought of her deed, must have been to her a deep
and unfailing source of most holy satisfaction and delight. Nothing of this kind is,
of course, possible to us; nor need we desire it. We may, however, learn from it,
or rather from both forms of Mary’s recompense combined, that whatever is done
for Christ shall not, even to ourselves, be in vain.
4. With gracious recompense, there was also natural result. “The house,” says
one evangelist, “was filled with the odour of the ointment.” Mary accomplished
more than she intended, anointing not only Jesus, but all who were with Him,
and even the house itself. The fact is very suggestive, giving us at the same time a
lesson both of admonition and of encouragement. Continuity and diffusion mark
all we do. The thought is stupendously solemn, and ought to be solemnly laid to
heart. It is one to inspire us with gladdening hope, or else to fill us with terrible
dismay. (Prof. J. Stacey, D. D.)
The broken vase
The affectionate Mary, in the devout prodigality of her love, gave-not a part-but the
whole of the precious contents, and did not spare the vase itself, in which they were
held, and which was broken in the service of Christ. She gave the whole to Christ, and
to Him alone. Thus also she took care, in her reverence for Christ, that the spikenard
and the vessel (things of precious value, and of frequent use in banquets and festive
pleasures of this world for man’s gratification and luxury) having now been used for
this sacred service of anointing the body of Christ, should never be applied to any
other less holy purpose. This act of Mary, providing that what had been thus
consecrated to the anointing of Christ’s body, should never be afterwards employed
in secular uses, is exemplary to us; and the same spirit of reverence appears to have
guided the Church in setting apart from all profane and common uses, by
consecration, places and things for the service of Christ’s mystical body, and for the
entertainment of His presence; and this same reverential spirit seems also to animate
her in consuming at the Lord’s Table what remains of the consecrated elements in
the Communion of His Body and Blood. (Bishop Christopher Wordsworth.)
Costly offerings acceptable to God
There is just one principle that runs through all the teaching of the two Testaments
concerning what men do for their Maker, and that is that God does not want, and
cannot otherwise than lightly esteem that which costs us nothing, and that the value
15

16. of any service or sacrifice which we render for His sake, is, that whatever may be its
intrinsic meanness or meagreness, it is, as from us, our very best, not given lightly or
cheaply or unthinkingly, but with care and cost and crucifixion of our self-
indulgence; and then again, that it is such gifts, whether they are the adornment of
the temple, or the box of alabaster-that these are gifts which God equally and always
delights in. (Bishop H. C. Potter.)
Broken things useful to God
It is on crushed grain that man is fed; it is by bruised plants that he is restored to
health. It was by broken pitchers that Gideon triumphed; it was from a wasted barrel
and empty cruse that the prophet was sustained; it was on boards and broken pieces
of the ship that Paul and his companions were saved. It was amid the fragments of
broken humanity that the promise of the higher life was given; though not a bone of
Him was broken, yet it is by the broken life of Christ that His people shall live
eternally; it was by the scattering of the Jews that the Gentiles were brought in; it was
by the bruised and torn bodies of the saints that the truth was so made to triumph
that it became a saying, that “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church.” It is
by this broken box, that throughout the wide world it is proclaimed how blessed and
glorious a thing it is to do a whole thing for Christ. When the true story of all things
shall be known, then will it appear how precious in God’s sight, how powerful in His
hands, were many broken things. Broken earthly hopes will be found to have been
necessary to the bringing in of the better hope which endures forever. Broken bodily
constitutions will be found to have been needful in some cases to the attainment of
that land where the body shall be weary and sore no more; broken earthly fortunes,
to the winning of the wealth beyond the reach of rust and moth and thief; broken
earthly honour, to the being crowned with the diadem which fadeth not away. Yes!
even for what we have to accomplish here, it often needs that we should be broken up
into personal helplessness ere we can accomplish anything; that the excellency of the
power may be not of man but of God. It is along a channel marred, and, as we should
say, of no worth, that the precious ointment flows. Therefore, when any of God’s
people are broken and marred, let them bethink themselves of this shattered box,
and how from it there flowed forth that ointment which anointed Jesus for His
burial, and how it gave materials for that story which every gospel should tell. (P. B.
Power.)
She brake the box
If relics were needed for the instruction of the Church of God, we can well
understand how among the choicest of them would be found the remnants of this
alabaster box. This broken vessel would not only be a monument of love, but a
preacher with varied eloquence; at once pathetic and practical, tender and even
stern; appealing to sentiment, and yet thundering against mere sentimentality; its
jagged edges preaching “fact” in this world which men are always telling us is a world
of fact; and saying, “Religion is fact-fact from God to man, and back from man to God
again.” It may be that, as we studied these poor fragments of the past, our minds
might pass from the stem teachings of those jagged edges to the sweet scent which
diffused itself therefrom; and so, impalpable and invisible as that scent, sweet-
savoured thoughts might steal into the secret recesses of our being, and we might be
won to more decided action for our Lord. We can understand the broken vessel being
carried into the exchange, the counting house, and the shop, and one man shrinking
from it as he heard its story, and another pouring out his gold as its depth and power
16

17. struck deep into his soul. We can picture it to ourselves on the table of the
philosopher, as with his midnight lamp beside it, he sits contemplating it with his
hands spread over his temples, and rises from his cold, unsanctified study, unable to
understand why the woman did this deed, and why anyone should now be called to
do the like; and we can imagine it now arresting with its broken form, now beguiling
with even the remembrance of its perfume, some strong intellect, which longs to
know the reality of things, and bows before the majesty and substance of true love as
offered and accepted here. We can understand how it would make a missionary of
this one, whose deeds would be known to all, and of another for Christ’s sake a lone
midnight watcher of the sick, whose deeds would be known to none-from the light of
love shining from this broken vessel, as the lamps shone from the broken pitchers of
Gideon, we can see thousands fleeing, as the bats and owls before the morning sun;
and others, opening and expanding as the flowers into bloom and scent. Were relics
needed for the conversion of man from his selfishness, his half-heartedness, his
ignorance of the power of love, first above all things we would carry through the
world the cross of Calvary and its thorny crown, and next to them this alabaster box.
(P. B. Power.)
Anointing
Anointing was employed in the East for several purposes: first, for pleasure, it being
a great luxury in that climate; and the ointments were prepared from oils with great
difficulty. They represented the very best fragrance that could be compounded. They
were used by a person upon himself; and it was a significant act of esteem when
ointment was presented by friend to friend. Ointments were also used in the
coronation and ordination of kings and priests; and so they came to signify
sacredness through reverence. Ointments were further used in the burial of the dead,
and so came to signify the sorrow of love. But in every case, whether for gifts, or for
pleasure, or for sacred uses of consecration or burial, it was not the intrinsic value of
the ointment, but the thought which went with it, that gave it significance. It
represented deep heart feeling, loyalty; deep religious consecration; sorrow and
hope. These various feelings, which have but very little expression awarded to them,
choose symbols; and these symbols almost lose their original meaning, and take this
second attributive meaning. (H. W. Beecher.)
An alabaster box of ointment-Mary’s gift
In climates where the skin gets feverish with dust, the use of oil in anointing the
person is still a common practice. It is so in India; it was so in ancient Greece and
Rome. It keeps the skin cool and soothes it, and is held to be healthful. In warmer
climes the senses are more delicate, and the smells often more strong and
disagreeable, and sweet odours are therefore greatly in demand. In Egypt today, the
guests would be perfumed by being fumigated with a fragrant incense; and as spices
are still used to give to the breath, the skin, the garments, an agreeable odour, so was
it then. In any house the Saviour would have had His head anointed with oil. It was
like the washing of the feet, a refreshment. In India these anointings with fragrant
oils and perfumes are largely practised after bathing, and especially at feasts and
marriages, so that the act of Mary was not something embarrassing and peculiar, but
only the very highest form of a service which was expected and welcome. But, instead
of the anointing with oil, which would have cost less probably than the widow’s mite,
she has provided a rich anointing oil. Judas estimated its value at three hundred
pence; Pliny says it sold generally for three hundred pence a pound of twelve ounces.
17

18. It was something of the same kind as attar of roses; made chiefly by gathering the
essential oil from the leaves of an Indian plant, the spikenard, described by
Dioscorides, 1,800 years ago, as growing in the Himalayas, and still found there, and
used today in the preparation of costly perfumes. Except in drops, it was, of course,
only used by kings and by the richest classes; was costly enough to be made a royal
present. Three hundred pence would be worth as much in those clays as £60 would
be in England today. Mary must have been a woman of property to be able to bring
such a holy anointing oil; unless, as is equally probable, this amount was the total of
her lowly savings, and she with her royal gift, like the widow with her lowly offering,
gives all she had. If there be none other to anoint Him, she will not let His sacred
head lack what honour she can bring. And if some reject Him, she will make it clear
that to do Him the least and most transient honour is worth, in her view, the sacrifice
of all she has. And so, with wondrous lavishness of generous love, she buys and
brings to the feast the costly unguent. It is enclosed in an alabaster vase or phial,
such as some which may be seen in the British Museum today, thousands of years
old, and not unlike the alabaster vases that are still made in vast numbers and sold in
toy shops and fairs for a few pence; the softness of the stone permitting it to be then,
as now, easily turned in a lathe. (R. Glover.)
There is no word for “box” in the original; and there is no reason to suppose that the
vessel, in which the perfume was contained, would be of the nature or shape of a box.
Doubtless alabaster boxes would be in use among ladies to hold their jewels,
cosmetics, perfumes, etc.; but it would, most probably, be in some kind of minute
bottles that the volatile scents themselves would be kept. The expression in the
original is simply, “having an alabaster of ointment.” Pliny expressly says that
perfumes are best preserved in alabasters. The vessel, because made of alabaster, was
called an alabaster, just as, with ourselves, a particular garment, because made of
waterproof stuff, is called a waterproof. And a small glass vessel for drinking out of is
called, generically, a glass. Herodotus uses the identical expression employed by the
Evangelist. He says that the Icthyophagi were sent by Cambyses to the Ethiopians,
“bearing, as gifts, a purple cloak, a golden necklace, an alabaster of perfume, and a
cask of palm wine.” (J. Morison, D. D.)
Wasted aroma
Just as soon as these people saw the ointment spilling on the head of Christ, they
said: “Why this waste? Why, that ointment might have been sold and given to the
poor!” Ye hypocrites! What did they care about the poor? I do not believe that one of
them that made the complaint ever gave a farthing to the poor. I think Judas was
most indignant, and he sold his Master for thirty pieces of silver. There is nothing
that makes a stingy man so cross as to see generosity in others. If this woman of the
text had brought in an old worn-out box, with some stale perfume, and given that to
Christ, they could have endured it; but to have her bring in a vessel on which had
been expended the adroitness of skilled artizans, and containing perfume that had
usually been reserved for palatial and queenly use, they could not stand it. And so it
is often the case in communities and in churches that those are the most unpopular
men who give the most. Judas cannot bear to see the alabaster box broken at the feet
of Christ. There is a man who gives a thousand dollars to the missionary cause. Men
cry out: “What a waste! What’s the use of sending out New Testaments and
missionaries, and spending your money in that way? Why don’t you send ploughs,
and corn threshers, and locomotives, and telegraphs?” But is it a waste? Ask the
18

19. nations that have been saved; have not religious blessings always preceded financial
blessings? Show me a community where the gospel of Christ triumphs, and I will
show you a community prospered in a worldly sense. Is it a waste to comfort the
distressed, to instruct the ignorant, to baulk immorality, to capture for God the
innumerable hosts of men who with quick feet were tramping the way to hell! If a
man buys railroad stock, it may decline. If a man invests in a bank, the cashier may
abscond. If a man goes into partnership, his associate may sink the store. Alas, for
the man who has nothing better than “greenbacks” and government securities! God
ever and anon blows up the money safe, and with a hurricane of marine disaster
dismasts the merchantmen, and from the blackened heavens He hurls into the
Exchange the hissing thunderbolts of His wrath. People cry up this investment and
cry down the other; but I tell you there is no safe investment save that which is made
in the bank of which God holds the keys. The interest in that is always being paid,
and there are eternal dividends. God will change that gold into crowns that shall
never lose their lustre, and into sceptres that shall forever wave over a land where the
poorest inhabitant is richer than all the wealth of earth tossed up into one glittering
coin! So, if I stand this morning before men who are now of small means, but who
once were greatly prospered, and who in the days of their prosperity were
benevolent, let me ask you to sit down and count up your investments. All the loaves
of bread you ever gave to the hungry, they are yours yet; all the shoes you ever gave to
the barefooted, they are yours yet; all the dollars you ever gave to churches and
schools and colleges, they are yours yet. Bank clerks sometimes make mistakes about
deposits; but God keeps an unfailing record of all Christian deposits; and, though on
the great judgment, there may be a “run” upon that bank, ten thousand times ten
thousand men will get back all they ever gave to Christ; get all back, heaped up,
pressed down, shaken together, and running over. A young Christian woman starts to
instruct the freedmen of the South, with a spelling book in one hand and a Bible in
the other. She goes aboard a steamer for Savannah. Through days, and months, and
years she toils among the freedmen of the South; and one day there comes up a
poisonous breath from the swamp, and a fever smites her brow, and far away from
home, watched tearfully by those whom she has come to save, she drops into an early
grave. “Oh, what a waste!-waste of beauty, waste of talent, waste of affection, waste of
everything,” cries the world. “Why, she might have been the joy of her father’s house;
she might have been the pride of the drawing room.” But, in the day when rewards
are given for earnest Christian work, her inheritance will make insignificant all the
treasure of Croesus. Not wasted, her gentle words; not wasted, her home sickness;
not wasted, her heart aches; not wasted, her tears of loneliness; not wasted, the
pangs of her last hour; not wasted, the sweat on her dying pillow. The freedman
thought it was the breath of the magnolia in the thicket; the planter thought it was
the sweetness of the acacia coming up from the hedge. No! no! it was the fragrance of
an alabaster box poured on the head of Christ. One day our world will burn up. So
great have been its abominations and disorders that one would think that when the
flames touched it a horrible stench would roll into the skies; the coal mines
consuming, the impurities of great cities burning, you might think that a lost spirit
from the pit would stagger back at the sickening odour. But no. I suppose on that day
a cloud of incense will roll into the skies, all the wilderness of tropical flowers on fire,
the mountains of frankincense, the white sheet of the water lilies, the million tufts of
heliotrope, the trellises of honeysuckle, the walls of “morning glory.” The earth shall
be a burning censer, held up before the throne of God with all the odours of the
hemispheres. But on that day a sweeter gale shall waft into the skies. It will come up
from ages past, from altars of devotion, and hovels of poverty, and beds of pain, and
stakes of martyrdom, and from all the places where good men and women have
suffered for God and died for the truth. It will be the fragrance of ten thousand boxes
19

20. of alabaster, which, through the long reach of the ages, were poured on the head of
Christ. (Dr. Talmage.)
Blinding influence of prejudice
A man said to Mr. Dawson, “I like your sermons very much, but the after meetings I
despise. When the prayer meeting begins I always go up into the gallery and look
down, and I am disgusted.” “Well,” replied Mr. Dawson, “the reason is, you go on the
top of your neighbour’s house, and look down his chimney to examine his fire, and of
course you get only smoke in your eyes!”
The anointing at Bethany
I. This prophecy by Christ has been fulfilled.
1. Unlikely as it must have seemed that the simple act of devotion here named
should be known in all the world, it has literally come to pass. It is told in all the
languages of men, till there is scarcely a patch of coral in the wide sea large
enough for a man to stand upon where this incident is not known. It should
increase our confidence in all our Lord’s promises. It is a witness that the rest will
be found true as their time comes.
2. Wherever this story has been told, it has received the commendation of those
who have heard it. The Lord’s judgment has been confirmed: not that of those
who “had indignation within themselves,” and considered the ointment wasted.
II. Why was this woman able to do so praiseworthy an act? How did she know so
much better than the others that Christ was to die, and that this was an appropriate
act in view of His death?
1. She had paid attention to His words. She was a good hearer. Her ear was
single, and her whole mind was full of truth.
2. Her act was the result of her character and feeling, not of her reasoning. She
gave to Him, because she was Mary and He was Christ. It was the impulse of love.
(Alex. McKenzie, D. D.)
The offering of devotion
The time will come when to do a thing for Christ and to have it accepted by Him will
be work and accomplishment enough. If He is pleased, we shall not care to look
beyond for recompense. If the spikenard is pleasant to Him, we shall not ask that the
house be filled with its fragrance. But the fragrance will fill the house. The poor are
best cared for where Christ is the best served. Virtue is strongest where piety is
purest. Let Him be satisfied and the world is blessed. Let us break at His feet the
alabaster which holds our life, that the spikenard may anoint Him. Go out and stand
before men and open the box of stone. Then men will be drawn to you and to your
devotion. Soon kings will swing the golden censer, and nations will east incense on
the glowing coals, and the perfume will make the air sweet: while many voices from
earth and from heaven blend in the song of adoration unto Him that loved us. (Alex.
McKenzie, D. D.)
The anointing at Bethany
20

21. In this narrative of Mary’s good work and the indignation of the apostles, we have an
example of all those views and all those judgments which have their foundation in
the favourite principle of utilitarianism, and which is so often falsely applied to the
wounding of pious hearts, and to the hindrance of that justifiable worship in the
Church of Christ, which seeks to express worthily the sentiment of reverence and of
love, and which is in itself productive of the highest blessing.
I.
(1) In Mary we have set before us an image of ardent love;
(2) in Judas an example of great hypocrisy;
(3) in the rest of the apostles an instance of the ease with which even good
men are often scandalized when God’s purpose happens to differ from their
own preconceptions.
II.
(1) In the acceptance of Mary’s offering of the ointment, we have the mercy of
God displayed in receiving and hallowing man’s gift when bestowed on Him;
(2) in the rejection of Judas, who impenitently hardened himself at the sight
of Mary’s devotion, an instance is given us of the righteous judgment of the
Almighty against the sinner. (W. Denton, M. A.)
The true principle of Christian expenditure
It is commonly argued that whatever may have been the appropriateness of that
earlier devotion which built and beautified the temple, it is superannuated,
inappropriate, and even (as some tell us) unwarranted now. Those costly and almost
barbaric splendours, it is said, were appropriate to a race in its infancy, and to a
religion in the germ. But the temple and the ritual of Judaism have flowered into the
sanctuary and the service of the Church of Christ. Not to Mount Gerizim nor
Jerusalem do men need to journey to worship the Father, says the Founder of that
Church Himself. “God is a Spirit, and they that worship Him must worship Him in
spirit and in truth.” If one would show his devotion to Him, says this same Teacher,
“sell all that thou hast and give to the poor.” It is not to adorn temples and garnish
holy places that Christianity is called nowadays, but to rear hospitals, and shelter
orphans, and feed the hungry. It is a diviner thing to send bread to some starving
household, or to minister in some plague smitten Memphis or New Orleans, to some
fevered sufferer, than to build all the altars and adorn all the sanctuaries that ever
were reared. No! it is not-not one whit diviner-noble and Christ-like as such service
surely is. Let us come to a distinct understanding here as to an issue concerning
which, in the popular mind, there is much confusion and much more
misapprehension. If it be asked, Is there not an order and sequence in which things
equally excellent may wisely and rightly be done, the answer is plain enough. If
anybody is starving or houseless or orphaned, the first thing to do is to feed and
shelter and succour them. And so long as such work is undone, we may wisely
postpone other work, equally meritorious and honourable. But it should be clearly
understood that if in some ages a disproportionate amount of time and money and
attention have been given to the aesthetics of religion, in others the same
disproportion has characterized that which has been given to what may justly be
called the sentimentalism of religion. An enormous amount of indiscriminate
almsgiving both in our own and other generations has bred only shiftlessness,
indolence, unthrift, and even downright vies. God forbid that we should hastily close
21

22. our hand or our heart against any needier brother! But God most of all forbid that we
thrust him down into a condition of chronic pauperism by the wanton and selfish
facility with which we buy our privilege of being comfortably let alone by him with an
alms or a dole. Better a thousand times that our gifts should enrich a cathedral
already thrice adorned, and clothe its walls already hung with groaning profusion of
enrichment, for then, at least, someone coming after us may be prompted to see and
own that, whatever fault of taste or congruity may offend him, there has not been
building and beautifying without cost and sacrifice Those wonderful men of an
earlier generation toiled singly and supremely to give to God their best, and to spend
their art and toil where, often if not ordinarily, it could be seen and owned and
adequately appreciated by no other eye than His. This, I maintain, is alone the one
sufficient motive for cost, and beauty, and even lavish outlay, in the building and
adornment of the House of God. We may well rejoice and be thankful when any
Christian disciple strives anywhere to do anything that tells out to God and men,
whether in wood, or stone, or gold, or precious stones, that such an one would fain
consecrate to Him the best and costliest that human hands can bring. When any poor
penuriousness cries out upon such an outlay, “To what purpose is this waste?” the
pitiful objection is silenced by that answer of the Master’s to her who broke ever His
feet the alabaster box of ointment very precious, “Verily, I say unto you,” etc. And
why was it to be told? for the spreading of her fame? No, but for the inculcation of
her example. (Bishop H. C. Potter.)
Contrast between Mary and Judas
“The Messiah, although going to death, let me lavish my all on Him,” was Mary’s
thought; “Going to death, and therefore not the Messiah, let me make what I can out
of Him,” was the thought of Judas. (T. M. Lindsay, D. D.)
Costly gifts acceptable to Christ
There is a great principle involved in this woman’s offering, or rather in our Lord’s
acceptance of it, which is this, that we may give that which is costly to adorn and
beautify the sanctuary of God and His worship. God Himself enjoined on the Jews
that they should make a tabernacle of worship of such materials as gold, and purple,
and fine linen, and precious stones; and the man after God’s own heart collected a
vast treasure of gold and costly materials to build and beautify a temple which was to
be exceeding magnificent. But since then a new dispensation has been given, which
had its foundations in the deepest humiliation-in the manger of Bethlehem-in the
journeyings of a poor, homeless man, with the simple peasants His companions-
ending in the cross and in the sepulchre. Is there place in such a kingdom for
generous men and women to lavish precious things on His sanctuaries and the
accompaniments of His worship? Now this incident at the end of the Lord’s life,
taken together with that at its beginning, when God-directed men offered to Him
gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh, teaches us that there is. Just as this woman
was led by a Divine instinct to lavish upon His Person what was costly and fragrant,
so the Church has, by the same Divine instinct, been led to pour at His feet the
richest treasures of the nations she has subdued to His faith. The Church has done
what she could. At least her faithful sons and daughters have. At first, in her days of
persecution, she could worship only in catacombs, and in her days of poverty she
could only offer what was rude; but when she subdued her persecutors and emerged
from her poverty, then also she did what she could. The grandest efforts of
architectural skill have been raised to the honour of Christ, the greater part built in
22

23. the form of the cross on which He hung to redeem us. The noblest paintings are of
His acts and sufferings; and the most elevating strains of music are accompaniments
of His worship. It is too true that many have taken part in these offices who have not,
like Mary, sat at His feet, and chosen the good part; but what we are now concerned
with is, whether this incident warrants those who have first given themselves to Him
to offer in and for His worship what has cost labour and treasure and skill. (M. F.
Sadler, M. A.)
2 “But not during the festival,” they said, “or
the people may riot.”
GILL, "But they said not on the feast day,.... The feast of the passover, and of
unleavened bread, which was nigh at hand, and would be two days hence, when there
would be a great concourse of people from all parts to keep it: and therefore they did
not choose to seize him, and put him to death at that time,
lest there should be an uproar of the people; or among them, lest they should
rise in his favour, and rescue him out of their hands; See Gill on Mat_26:5.
JAMIESON, "But they said, Not on the feast day — rather, not during the
feast; not until the seven days of unleavened bread should be over.
lest there be an uproar of the people — In consequence of the vast influx of
strangers, embracing all the male population of the land who had reached a certain
age, there were within the walls of Jerusalem at this festival some two million people;
and in their excited state, the danger of tumult and bloodshed among “the people,”
who for the most part took Jesus for a prophet, was extreme. See Josephus
[Antiquities, 20.5.3]. What plan, if any, these ecclesiastics fixed upon for seizing our
Lord, does not appear. But the proposal of Judas being at once and eagerly gone into,
it is probable they were till then at some loss for a plan sufficiently quiet and yet
effectual. So, just at the feast time shall it be done; the unexpected offer of Judas
relieving them of their fears. Thus, as Bengel remarks, did the divine counsel take
effect.
PULPIT, "For they said ( ἔλεγον γὰρ) literally, for they were saying—Not during
the feast, lest haply there shall be a tumult of the people. The same cause induced
them to avoid the time of the feast. The feast brought a great multitude of Jews
to Jerusalem, amongst whom would be many who had received bodily or
spiritual benefits from Christ, and who therefore, at least, worshipped him as a
Prophet; and the rulers of the people feared lest these should rise in his defense.
Their first intention, therefore, was not to destroy him until after the close of the
Paschal feast; but they were overruled by the course of events, all ordered by
God's never-failing providence. The sudden betrayal of our Lord by Judas led
them to change their minds. For when they found that he was actually in their
hands, they resolved to crucify him forthwith. And thus the Divine purpose was
23

24. fulfilled that Christ should suffer at that particular time, and so the type be
satisfied. For the lamb slain at the Passover was a type of the very Paschal Lamb
to be sacrificed at that particular time, in the predetermined purpose of God;
and to be lifted up upon the cross for the redemption of the world. St. Matthew
(Matthew 26:3) tells us that they were gathered together "unto the court of the
high priest, who was called Caiaphas." It was necessary to state his name,
because the high priests were now frequently changed by the Roman power.
3 While he was in Bethany, reclining at the table
in the home of Simon the Leper, a woman came
with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume,
made of pure nard. She broke the jar and
poured the perfume on his head.
BARNES, "Ointment - This word does not convey quite the proper meaning.
This was a perfume. It was used only to give a pleasant odor, and was liquid.
Of spikenard - The “nard,” from which this perfume was made, is a plant of the
East Indies, with a small, slender stalk, and a heavy, thick root. The best perfume is
obtained from the root, though the stalk and fruit are used for that purpose.
And she brake the box - This may mean no more than that she broke the “seal”
of the box, so that it could be poured out. Boxes of perfumes are often sealed or made
fast with wax, to prevent the perfume from escaping. It was not likely that she would
break the box itself when it was unnecessary, and when the unguent, being liquid,
would have been wasted; nor from a broken box or vial could she easily have “poured
it” on his head.
CLARKE, "Alabaster box - Among critics and learned men there are various
conjectures concerning the alabaster mentioned by the evangelists: some think it
means a glass phial; others, that it signifies a small vessel without a handle, from α
negative and λαβη, a handle; and others imagine that it merely signifies a perfume or
essence bottle. There are several species of the soft calcareous stone called alabaster,
which are enumerated and described in different chemical works.
Spikenard - Or nard. An Indian plant, whose root is very small and slender. It
puts forth a long and small stalk, and has several ears or spikes even with the ground,
which has given it the name of spikenard: the taste is bitter, acrid, and aromatic, and
the smell agreeable. Calmet.
Very precious - Or rather, unadulterated: this I think is the proper meaning of
πιστικης. Theophylact gives this interpretation of the passage: “Unadulterated hard,
24

25. and prepared with fidelity.” Some think that πιστικη is a contraction of the Latin
spicatae, and that it signifies the spicated nard, or what we commonly call the
spikenard. But Dr. Lightfoot gives a different interpretation. Πιστικη he supposes to
come from the Syriac ‫פיסתקא‬ pistike, which signifies the acorn: he would therefore
have it to signify an aromatic confection of nard, maste, or myrobalane. See his
Hebrew and Talmudical Exercitations; and see Scheuchzer’s Physica Sacra.
She brake the box - Rather, she broke the seal. This is the best translation I can
give of the place; and I give it for these reasons:
1. That it is not likely that a box exceedingly precious in itself should be broken to
get out its contents.
2. That the broken pieces would be very inconvenient if not injurious to the head
of our Lord, and to the hands of the woman.
3. That it would not be easy effectually to separate the oil from the broken pieces.
And,
4. That it was a custom in the eastern countries to seal the bottles with wax that
held the perfumes; so that to come at their contents no more was necessary
than to break the seal, which this woman appears to have done; and when the
seal was thus broken, she had no more to do than to pour out the liquid
ointment, which she could not have done had she broken the bottle.
The bottles which contain the gul i attyr, or attyr of roses, which come from the
east, are sealed in this manner. See a number of proofs relative to this point in
Harmer’s Observations, vol. iv. 469. Pouring sweet-scented oil on the head is
common in Bengal. At the close of the festival of the goddess Doorga, the Hindoos
worship the unmarried daughters of Brahmins: and, among other ceremonies, pour
sweet-scented oil on their heads. Ward’s Customs.
GILL, "And being in Bethany,.... A place about two miles from Jerusalem,
whither he retired after he had took his leave of the temple, and had predicted its
destruction; a place he often went to, and from, the last week of his life; having some
dear friends, and familiar acquaintance there, as Lazarus, and his two sisters, Martha
and Mary, and the person next mentioned:
in the house of Simon the leper; so called because he had been one, and to
distinguish him from Simon the Pharisee, and Simon Peter the apostle, and others;
See Gill on Mat_26:6;
as he sat at meat there came a woman; generally thought to be Mary
Magdalene, or Mary the sister of Lazarus:
having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard; or "pure nard", unmixed
and genuine; or liquid nard, which was drinkable, and so easy to be poured out; or
Pistic nard, called so, either from "Pista", the name of a place from whence it was
brought, or from "Pistaca", which, with the Rabbins, signifies "maste"; of which,
among other things, this ointment was made. Moreover, ointment of nard was made
both of the leaves of nard, and called foliate nard, and of the spikes of it, and called,
as here, spikenard. Now ointment made of nard was, as Pliny says (w), the principal
among ointments. The Syriac is, by him, said to be the best; this here is said to be
25

26. very precious, costly, and valuable:
and she brake the box. The Syriac and Ethiopic versions render it, "she opened
it"; and the Persic version, "she opened the head", or "top of the bottle", or "vial":
and poured it on his head; on the head of Christ, as the same version presses it;
See Gill on Mat_26:7.
HENRY, "1. Here was one friend, that was so kind as to invite him to sup with
him; and he was so kind as to accept the invitation, Mar_14:3. Though he had a
prospect of his death approaching, yet he did not abandon himself to a melancholy
retirement from all company, but conversed as freely with his friends as usual.
2. Here was another friend, that was so kind as to anoint his head with very
precious ointment as he sat at meat. This was an extraordinary piece of respect paid
him by a good woman that thought nothing too good to bestow upon Christ, and to
do him honour. Now the scripture was fulfilled, When the king sitteth at his table,
my spikenard sendeth forth the smell thereof, Son_1:12. Let us anoint Christ as our
Beloved, kiss him with a kiss of affection; and anoint him as our Sovereign, kiss him
with a kiss of allegiance. Did he pour out his soul unto death for us, and shall we
think any box of ointment too precious to pour out upon him? It is observable that
she took care to pour it all out upon Christ's head; she broke the box (so we read it);
but because it was an alabaster box, not easily broken, nor was it necessary that it
should be broken, to get out the ointment, some read it, she shook the box, or
knocked it to the ground, to loosen what was in it, that it might be got out the better;
or, she rubbed and scraped out all that stuck tot he sides of it. Christ must have been
honoured with all we have, and we must not think to keep back any part of the price.
Do we give him the precious ointment of our best affections? Let him have them all;
love him with all the heart.
JAMIESON, "Mar_14:3-9. The supper and the anointing at Bethany six days
before the Passover.
The time of this part of the narrative is four days before what has just been related.
Had it been part of the regular train of events which our Evangelist designed to
record, he would probably have inserted it in its proper place, before the conspiracy
of the Jewish authorities. But having come to the treason of Judas, he seems to have
gone back upon this scene as what probably gave immediate occasion to the awful
deed.
And being in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at
meat, there came a woman — It was “Mary,” as we learn from Joh_12:3.
having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard — pure nard, a
celebrated aromatic - (See Son_1:12).
very precious — “very costly” (Joh_12:3).
and she brake the box, and poured it on his head — “and anointed,” adds
John (Joh_12:3), “the feet of Jesus, and wiped His feet with her hair: and the house
was filled with the odor of the ointment.” The only use of this was to refresh and
exhilarate - a grateful compliment in the East, amid the closeness of a heated
atmosphere, with many guests at a feast. Such was the form in which Mary’s love to
Christ, at so much cost to herself, poured itself out.
26

27. BARCLAY, "LOVE'S EXTRAVAGANCE (Mark 14:3-9)
14:3-9 While Jesus was in Bethany, while he was reclining at a table in the house
of Simon the leper, there came a woman who had a phial of ointment of pure
nard. She broke the phial and poured it over his head. Some of them said
indignantly to each other, "To what purpose is the waste of this ointment? This
ointment could have been sold for more than ten pounds, and the money could
have been given to the poor." And they were angry at her. Jesus said, "Let her
be! Why do you trouble her? It is a lovely thing that she has done to me. You
have always got the poor with you, and you can do something for them any time
you like, but you have not got me always. She has done what she could. She has
taken my body and anointed it beforehand against my burial. This is the truth I
tell you--wherever the good news shall be proclaimed throughout the whole
world, the story of what she has done will be told, so that she will always be
remembered."
The poignancy of this story lies in the fact that it tells us of almost the last
kindness that Jesus had done to him.
He was in the house of a man called Simon the leper, in the village of Bethany.
People did not sit to eat; they reclined on low couches. They lay on the couch
resting on the left elbow and using the right hand to take their food. Anyone
coming up to someone lying like this would stand well above him. To Jesus there
came a woman with an alabaster phial of ointment. It was the custom to pour a
few drops of perfume on a guest when he arrived at a house or when he sat down
to a meal. This phial held nard which was a very precious ointment made from a
rare plant that came from far-off India. But it was not a few drops that this
woman poured on the head of Jesus. She broke the flask and anointed him with
the whole contents.
There may be more than one reason why she broke the flask. Maybe she broke it
as a sign that all was to be used. There was a custom in the East that if a glass
was used by a distinguished guest, it was broken so that it would never again be
touched by the hand of any lesser person. Maybe there was something of that in
the woman's mind. But there was one thing not in her mind which Jesus saw. It
was the custom in the East, first to bathe, then to anoint the bodies of the dead.
After the body had been anointed, the flask in which the perfume had been
contained was broken and the fragments were laid with the dead body in the
tomb. Although she did not mean it so, that was the very thing this woman was
doing.
Her action provoked the grudging criticism of some of the bystanders. The flask
was worth more than 300 denarii. A denarius was a Roman coin worth about 3 p
which was a working man's daily wage. It would have cost an ordinary man
almost a year's pay to buy the flask of ointment. To some it seemed a shameful
waste; the money might have been given to the poor. But Jesus understood. He
quoted their own scriptures to them. "The poor will never cease out of the land."
(Deuteronomy 15:11.) "You can help the poor any time," Jesus said, "but you
have not long to do anything for me now." "This," he said, "is like anointing my
27

28. body beforehand for its burial."
This story shows the action of love.
(i) Jesus said that it was a lovely thing the woman had done. In Greek there are
two words for good. There is agathos (Greek #18) which describes a thing which
is morally good; and there is kalos (Greek #2570) which describes a thing which
is not only good but lovely. A thing might be agathos (Greek #18), and yet be
hard, stern, austere, unattractive. But a thing which is kalos (Greek #2570) is
winsome and lovely, with a certain bloom of charm upon it. Struthers of
Greenock used to say that it would do the church more good than anything else if
Christians would sometimes "do a bonnie thing." That is exactly what kalos
(Greek #2570) means; and that is exactly what this woman did. Love does not do
only good things. Love does lovely things.
(ii) If love is true, there must always be a certain extravagance in it. It does not
nicely calculate the less or more. It is not concerned to see how little it can
decently give. If it gave all it had, the gift would still be too little. There is a
recklessness in love which refuses to count the cost.
(iii) Love can see that there are things, the chance to do which comes only once.
It is one of the tragedies of life that often we are moved to do something fine and
do not do it. It may be that we are too shy and feel awkward about it. It may be
that second thoughts suggest a more prudent course. It occurs in the simplest
things--the impulse to send a letter of thanks, the impulse to tell someone of our
love or gratitude, the impulse to give some special gift or speak some special
word. The tragedy is that the impulse is so often strangled at birth. This world
would be so much lovelier if there were more people like this woman, who acted
on her impulse of love because she knew in her heart of hearts that if she did not
do it then she would never do it at all. How that last extravagant, impulsive
kindness must have uplifted Jesus' heart.
(iv) Once again we see the invincible confidence of Jesus. The Cross loomed close
ahead now but he never believed that it would be the end. He believed that the
good news would go all round the world. And with the good news would go the
story of this lovely thing, done with reckless extravagance, done on the impulse
of the moment, done out of a heart of love.
SBC, "It was while our Lord was reclining at an evening meal, where Lazarus and
many other guests were present, and where the less contemplative, but probably, not
upon the whole less exemplary sister Martha was in attendance, that Mary came in,
bringing an alabaster vial of the costly essence; and with words perhaps, or gestures,
not left on record, but expressive of the adoration which prompted such an act of
homage, lavished the precious liquid upon the head and feet of the Redeemer, in
such wise that the whole house is filled with the odour of the perfume.
I. If when Iscariot interposed his odious, untimely, detestable and incongruous
question, taking the name of the sacred poor in vain, "Why was this waste made? why
was not all this bestowed upon the poor? "If some prophetic lip then present had
been severe enough, it might have answered, "This waste was made because Christ
chose to make Himself the friend, the advocate and the representative of the poor;"
28

29. and the more a man truly worships Christ, the more certainly he must regard the
poor—with the least, most suffering of whom the Saviour has identified Himself. This
waste was made, like the waste of seed-corn in the parable, that it might die and
spring up again an hundredfold. If Judas had been capable of appreciating that act of
worship by Mary, he might have gone down to his grave in peace, and lived in sacred
history, an honoured and a sainted man.
II. It well deserves remark that the two occasions upon which our Lord expressed
Himself with the most lavish approbation, were both of them essentially acts of
worship and nothing but worship, unmixed with any utilitarian element, with
anything of a directly and materially useful tendency; both of them actions of self-
sacrifice, one to the personal honour of our Lord, the other to the maintenance of
temple ceremonies; one was the gift of the perfume, the other was the poor widow’s
gift of the two mites which make a farthing; but both alike enjoyed the unstinted
praise of the Redeemer. Strange to think that now, when for eighteen centuries the
fragrance of that perfume has evaporated, and its component particles been
dissipated and blown hither and thither in the atmosphere, and while those two
mites have corroded utterly away and rejoined the primal elements of nature, the
memory of these two women survives, and will survive for ever while the Gospel
lives, as the representatives, one of profuse, the other of indigent liberality, but both
by force of example the instigators of immeasurable, incalculable beneficence, simply
from having done what they could.
W. H. Brookfield, Sermons, p. 158.
PULPIT, "And while he was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, as he
sat at meat, there came a woman having an alabaster cruse ( ἀλάβαστρον)—
literally, an alabaster; as we say, "a glass," of a vessel made of glass—of
ointment of spikenard very costly ( μύρου νάρδου πιστικῆς πολυτελοῦς); and she
brake the cruse, and poured it over his head. This anointing of our Lord appears
to have taken place on the Saturday before Palm Sunday (see John 12:1). The
anointing mentioned by St. Luke (Luke 7:36) evidently has reference to some
previous occasion. The narrative here and in St. Matthew and St. John would
lead us to the conclusion that this was a feast given by Simon—perhaps in
grateful acknowledgment of the miracle which had been wrought upon Lazarus.
He is called "Simon the leper," probably because he had been a leper, and had
been healed by Christ, although he still retained the name of "leper," to
distinguish him from others named Simon, or Simeon, a common name amongst
the Jews. There came a woman. This woman, we learn from St. John (John 12:2,
John 12:3), was Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus. The vessel, or cruse,
which she had with her was made of alabaster, a kind of soft, smooth marble,
which could easily be scooped out so as to form a receptacle for ointment, which,
according to Pliny ('Nat. Hist.,' 13.3), was best preserved in vessels made of
alabaster. The vessel would probably be formed with a long narrow neck, which
could easily be broken, or crushed (the word in the original is συντρίψασα so as
to allow of a free escape for the unguent. The ointment was made of spikenard
νάρδου πιστικῆς). The Vulgate has nardi spicati. If this is the true interpretation
of the word πιστικῆς, it would mean that this ointment was made from a bearded
plant mentioned by Pliny ('Nat. Hist.,' John 12:12), who says that the ointment
made from this plant was most precious. The plant was called by Galen "nardi
spica." Hence πιστικῆν it would mean "genuine" ointment—ointment made
from the flowers of the choicest kind of plant, pliny ('Nat. Hist.,' 12.26) says that
29

30. there was an inferior article in circulation, which he calls "pseudo-nard." The
Syriac Peshito Version uses an expression which means the principal, or best
kind of ointment. The anointing of the head would be the more usual mark of
honor. It would seem most probable that Mary first wiped the feet of Jesus,
wetting them with her tears, and then wiping off the dust, and then anointing
them; and that she then proceeded to break the neck of the cruse, and to pour its
whole contents on his head.
BURKITT, "Several particulars are observable in this piece of history: as, first,
the action which this holy woman performed; she pours a box of precious
ointment upon our Saviour's head as he sat at meat, according to the custom of
the eastern countries at their feasts. Murmuring Judas valued this ointment at
three hundred pence, which makes, of our money, nine pounds seven shillings
and a sixpence halfpenny. I do not find that any of the apostles were at thus
much cost and charge to put honour upon our Saviour, as this poor woman was.
Learn hence, That where strong love prevails in the heart towards Christ,
nothing is adjudged too dear for him, neither will it suffer itself to be outshined
by any examples; the weakest woman that strongly loves her Saviour, will
piously strive with the greatest apostle to expresss the fervour of her affection
towards him.
Observe, 2. How this action was resented and reflected upon by Judas, and some
other disciples whom he influenced; They had indignation within themselves,
and said, To what purpose is this waste?
O! how doth a covetous heart think everything too good for Christ! Happy was it
for this poor woman, that she had a more righteous Judge to pass sentence upon
her actions than murmuring Judas.
Observe, 3. How readily our holy Lord vindicates this good woman; she says
nothing for herself, nor need she, having so good an advocate.
First he rebukes Judas, Let her alone, why trouble ye the woman?
Next he justifies the action, She hath wrought a good work, because it flowed
from a principle of love to Christ.
And lastly, he gives the reason of her action, She did it for my burial. As kings
and great persons were wont in those eastern countries, at their funerals, to be
enbalmed with odours and sweet perfumes, so, says our Saviour, this woman, to
declare her faith in me as her king and Lord, both with this box of ointment, as it
were beforehand, embalm my body for its burial.
True faith puts honour upon a crucified, as well as a glorified , Saviour. This
holy woman accounts Christ worthy of all honour in his death believing it would
be a sweet-smelling sacrifice unto God, and the saviour of life unto his people.
Observe, 4. Our Saviour doth not only justify and defend the action of this poor
30

31. woman, but magnifies and extols it; declaring that she should be rewarded for it
with an honourable memorial in all ages of the church: Whensoever this gospel is
preached, this shall be spoken of as a memorial of her.
Note hence, The care which Christ takes to have the good deeds of his children
not buried in the dust with them, but had in everlasting remembrance. Though
sin causes men to rot above the ground, and stink alive, and when they are dead,
leaves an ignominy upon their graves; yet will the actions of the just smell sweet
and blossom in the dust.
CONSTABLE, "For thematic reasons Matthew and Mark both placed this event
within the story of the hostility of Jesus' enemies. It is apparently out of
chronological order (cf. John 12:1). This rearrangement of the material
highlighted the contrast between the hatred of unbelievers and the love of
believers for Jesus. The incident probably occurred the previous Saturday
evening. [Note: Hoehner, Chronological Aspects . . ., p. 91.]
John added that the woman was Mary, the sister of Lazarus and Martha, and
that she anointed Jesus' feet as well as His head. Anointing a guest's head was a
common way to honor such a person at a festive occasion (cf. Psalms 23:5; Luke
7:46). Mary appears in three scenes in the Gospels, and each time she is at Jesus'
feet (cf. Luke 10:38-42; John 11:31-32). She is a good model for all disciples to
emulate. The high value of her perfume and its expensive container may suggest
that this was an heirloom passed from one generation to another. [Note: Lane, p.
492.]
COKE, "Mark 14:3. Ointment, &c.— Balsam of spikenard, which was very
costly; and she broke open the box, or vessel, &c. See Blackwall's Sac. Classics,
vol. 2: p. 166. The spikenard, — πιστικης ναρδου, pure and unadulterated
spikenard, was esteemed a very valuable aromatic. Sir Norton Knatchbull, Dr.
Hammond, and others maintain, that συντριψασα does not signify that she brake
the vessel, but only that she shook it, so as to break the coagulative parts of the
rich balsam, and bring it to such a liquidity, that it might be fit to be poured out.
Dr. Doddridge, however, and others think the original does not so naturally
express this, and therefore they imagine that the woman broke off the top of the
vessel in which the balsam was contained. See the note on Matthew 26:7 and
Stockius on the word συντυριβω .
COFFMAN, “JESUS WAS ANOINTED FOR HIS BURIAL
This is a second anointing of Jesus, the other being recorded in Luke 7:37-50;
but "it is absurd to represent the two anointings as the same."[1] Simon, a leper
had been healed by Jesus; but he retained the name to distinguish him from
other Simons, that being a very common name. Simon evidently made this dinner
in honor of the Lord.
A woman having an alabaster cruse ... This was Mary, the sister of Lazarus and
Martha. All of the synoptics refrained from any publicity for this family,
perhaps out of respect for the desire of the family for privacy following the
31

32. resurrection of Lazarus. Such a conclusion is mandatory from the facts: (1) of
the Lord's prophecy that this deed would be an everlasting memorial for Mary;
(2) which would have required publishing her name; and yet (3) her name was
conspicuously omitted until the publication of John. For a number of critical
questions arising from variations in the sacred accounts, see under parallels in
Matthew and John in this series of commentaries.
ENDNOTE:
[1] A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels (New York: Harper and
Brothers, 1922), p. 187, footnote.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:3-9
Tribute of grateful love.
A singular interest attaches to this simple incident in Christ's private life. Proud
and foolish men have tried to turn it into ridicule, as unworthy of the memory of
a great prophet. But they have not succeeded. Our Lord's own estimate of
Mary's conduct is accepted, and the world-wide and lasting renown promised by
Jesus has been secured. The record of the graceful act of the friend of Jesus is
instructive, touching, and beautiful. And the commendation which the Master
pronounced is an evidence of his human and sympathizing appreciation of
devotion and of love.
I. THE ACCEPTABLE MOTIVE TO CHRISTIAN SERVICE IS HERE
REVEALED. Mary was prompted, not by vanity and ostentation, but by
grateful love. This had been awakened both by his friendship and teaching, and
by his compassionate kindness in raising her brother from the dead. What Jesus
appreciated was Mary's love. Services and gifts are valuable in Christ's view, not
for themselves, for he needs them not, but as an expression of his people's
deepest feelings. Let Christians consider what they owe to their Savior—
salvation, life eternal. They may well exclaim, "We love him, because he first
loved us." Acceptable obedience does not come first, for in such case it would be
a form only; but if love prompts our deeds and services, they become valuable
oven before Heaven.
II. THE NATURAL MODES OF CHRISTIAN SERVICE. These are severally
exemplified in this incident.
1. Personal ministry. Mary did not send a servant; she came herself co minister
to Jesus. There is some work for Christ which most Christians must do by
deputy; but there is much work which may and should be done personally. In
the home, in the school, in the Church, in the hospital, we may individually,
according to opportunity and ability, serve the Lord Christ. What is done for his
"little ones" he takes as done for himself.
2. Substance. Mary gave costly perfume, estimated to have cost upwards of ten
pounds of our money. She had property, and therefore gave. All we have is his,
32

33. who, when he purchased us with his blood, purchased all our powers and
possessions. It is a precious privilege to offer him his own. "It is accepted
according to what a man hath."
3. Public witness. Mary anointed the Master's feet in the presence of the
company, and thus declared before all those assembled her devotion to him. It is
good for ourselves that we should witness to our Savior, and it is good for others
who may receive our testimony. It is a disgrace to professing Christians when
they are ashamed of the Lord who redeemed them.
III. THE TRUE MEASURE OF CHRISTIAN SERVICE. She did, it is recorded,
what she could; she gave what she had to give. This is an example worthy of
universal imitation. We are reminded, as it were paradoxically, of two
apparently opposed characteristics of Christian action and liberality.
1. How much devoted friends of Christ may do! Men may do much for harm and
evil; and, on the other hand, what good even one person has sometimes
accomplished in private life! What can be done should be done.
2. Yet, how limited are men's powers! If Christians could do more than they do,
how vast a field of labor stretches around them! We are limited in our powers
for usefulness. Our means may be small, our circle of influence restricted. Our
powers of body and of mind are often a restraint upon us; our life is brief, even
at the longest. The sister of Bethany could not do what others might;
nevertheless, what she could do she did. And we are never to rest in inactivity
and indolence, because the claims are so many, and our powers are so small, and
our opportunities so few.
IV. THE APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF CHRISTIAN SERVICE.
1. The Lord accepts what his friends bring to him, as the expression of their love,
in proportion to their means and powers. He is not influenced by men's regards.
Good men as well as bad men often disapprove wise and benevolent actions. He
judgeth not as man judgeth.
2. The Lord rewards the grateful and devoted friends who minister unto him. He
enlarges their opportunities of usefulness and service here. "To him that hath
shall be given." And he will hereafter recompense them in the resurrection of the
just, when he shall say, "Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord."
APPLICATION.
1. Let Christians give love its way, and follow where it leads. There is no danger
of our loving our Savior too ardently, or of our serving him too zealously.
2. If your means of showing devotion be but few, fret not; only let it be said,
"They have done what they could."
33

34. 4 Some of those present were saying indignantly
to one another, “Why this waste of perfume?
GILL, "And there were some that had indignation within themselves,....
The Syriac version reads, "some of the disciples": agreeably to Mat_26:8, particularly
Judas, and others might be incensed by his means:
and said, why was this waste of the ointment made? See Gill on Mat_26:8.
HENRY, "Now, (1.) There were those that put a worse construction upon this
than it deserved. They called it a waste of the ointment, Mar_14:4. Because they
could not have found their hearts to put themselves to such an expense for the
honouring of Christ, they thought that she was prodigal, who did. Note, As the vile
person ought to be called liberal, nor the churl said to be bountiful (Isa_32:5); so the
liberal and bountiful ought not to be called wasteful. They pretend it might have
been sold, and given to the poor, Mar_14:5. But as a common piety to the corban will
not excuse from a particular charity to a poor parent (Mar_7:11), so a common
charity to the poor will not excuse from a particular act of piety to the Lord Jesus.
What thy hand finds to do, that is good, do it with thy might.
JAMIESON, "And there were some that had indignation within
themselves and said — Matthew says (Mat_26:8), “But when His disciples saw it,
they had indignation, saying,” etc. The spokesman, however, was none of the true-
hearted Eleven - as we learn from John (Joh_12:4): “Then saith one of His disciples,
Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, which should betray Him.” Doubtless the thought
stirred first in his breast, and issued from his base lips; and some of the rest,
ignorant of his true character and feelings, and carried away by his plausible speech,
might for the moment feel some chagrin at the apparent waste.
Why was this waste of the ointment made?
CONSTABLE, "Apparently Judas Iscariot voiced the disciples' violent objection
(Gr. embrimaomai, cf. Mark 10:14) to Mary's act of loving sacrifice (Matthew
26:8; John 12:4-5). Customarily Jews gave gifts to the poor the evening of
Passover. [Note: Wessel, p. 756.] Mary's gift to Jesus was worth a year's wages.
The disciples could see no reason for this "waste" because they did not
understand that Jesus' death was imminent. Their concern for the poor contrasts
with her concern for Jesus.
SBC, "Wherever anything of the love of God exists there must be a desire to sacrifice
some considerable portion of our worldly goods to Him; and the most ordinary way
of doing so is by giving to the poor, in whom Christ has promised that He Himself
34

35. shall be found, and that He will consider such gifts as given to Himself.
I. But then the question arises, Will this be acceptable to Him? He loves a spiritual
worship and the care of the poor, but does He love also external and outward signs of
our love and reverence? To this, I think, we shall find a most satisfactory answer in
that most interesting incident which is recorded of the good Mary pouring the
precious ointment on our blessed Saviour’s feet, and His most gracious acceptance of
it. Why was this good deed so exceedingly pleasing to Christ and honoured by Him?
It was not that He who, in every sense, loved poverty cared for such things. What was
the precious ointment to Him who is the Maker and Preserver of all things? It was
because it was the manner in which love to Him was shown. She did what she could;
she had been at what was to her great cost, because she loved much.
II. The Almighty has so appointed it that the true service of Him is the best cure for
the diseases of our sick souls; to pray to Him, to praise Him, to worship, is the
medicine of our hearts. Now the disease with which this country is sick to the very
heart is the love of money. A nation hurrying to and fro with the love of mammon, so
as to be the very spring of life to it, as the heart is to the body, this would lead one to
fear that God is preparing for judgment. What, then, is the cure for all this? Why,
surely, to make ourselves friends of the unrighteous mammon, that when God visits
us we may be received into everlasting habitations. Unless persons are disposed to
make far greater sacrifices to Almighty God, than Christians now usually are, their
religion must be something very different from what Christianity used to be. Let
every one do something; do not hide under a stone, and hoard up for the moth and
rust; do not spend what you have on your own pride and comfort, but be content
with that most blessed and good Mary to be accounted a fool in this world, that, at
any cost, you may win Christ.
Plain Sermons by Contributors to "Tracts for the Times," vol. x., p. 98.
References: Mar_14:6.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxi., No. 1834; Ibid., Christian
World Pulpit, vol. 27; p. 254.
5 It could have been sold for more than a year’s
wages[a] and the money given to the poor.” And
they rebuked her harshly.
BARNES, "Three hundred pence - About forty dollars (or 9 British pounds).
See the notes at Mat_26:7.
CLARKE, "It might have been sold - το µυρον, This ointment, is added by
ABCDKL, thirty-five others, Ethiopic, Armenian, Gothic, all the Itala except one.
Griesbach has received it into the text. The sum mentioned here would amount to
nearly 10£ sterling.
35

36. GILL, "For it might have been sold for more than three hundred pence,....
Which, was to the value of our money nine pounds, seven shillings, and sixpence:
and given to the poor; which was thought to be a better way of expending it, than
by pouring it on the head of Christ:
and they murmured against her: that she should lavish so much money away in
such an imprudent manner; they reproved her for it, expressed much resentment at
it, and were very angry with, her upon the account of it; See Gill on Mat_26:8, Mat_
26:9.
HENRY, "They pretend it might have been sold, and given to the poor, Mar_14:5.
But as a common piety to the corban will not excuse from a particular charity to a
poor parent (Mar_7:11), so a common charity to the poor will not excuse from a
particular act of piety to the Lord Jesus. What thy hand finds to do, that is good, do it
with thy might.
JAMIESON, "For it might have been sold for more than three hundred
pence — between nine and ten pounds sterling.
and have been given to the poor. And they murmured against her —
“This he said,” remarks John (Joh_12:6), and the remark is of exceeding importance,
“not that he cared for the poor but because he was a thief, and had the bag” - the
scrip or treasure chest - “and bare what was put therein” - not “bare it off” by theft, as
some understand it. It is true that he did this; but the expression means simply that
he had charge of it and its contents, or was treasurer to Jesus and the Twelve. What a
remarkable arrangement was this, by which an avaricious and dishonest person was
not only taken into the number of the Twelve, but entrusted with the custody of their
little property! The purposes which this served are obvious enough; but it is further
noticeable, that the remotest hint was never given to the Eleven of his true character,
nor did the disciples most favored with the intimacy of Jesus ever suspect him, till a
few minutes before he voluntarily separated himself from their company - for ever!
COFFMAN, "There is a glimpse here of the concern that Jesus and the Twelve
had for the poor; because, judging from this verse and from John 13:29, it is
clear that help of the poor was a project frequently engaged in by the sacred
company.
The value of the ointment is seen in the fact that the shilling, worth
approximately 17 cents, was considered to be an adequate day's wages in that era
(Matthew 20:9).
They murmured ... Their attitude may be expressed as indignation and
frustration that so great a sum had been "wasted" in a purely emotional gesture
toward the Lord. However, Mary's gift had a practical value that Jesus would
shortly explain. Also, there was the providential use of the incident to bring
about the fulfillment of the prophecies regarding the betrayal by Judas, etc.
36

37. 6 “Leave her alone,” said Jesus. “Why are you
bothering her? She has done a beautiful thing to
me.
GILL, "And Jesus said, let her alone,.... Jesus knowing the secret indignation of
some of his disciples, and their private murmurings at the woman, and their
continual teasings of her, because of the expense of the ointment, said to them, as the
Arabic and Ethiopic versions read; or "to the disciples", as the Persic, let the woman
alone, cease to chide and reprove her for what she has done;
why trouble ye her? why do you grieve her, by charging her with imprudence and
extravagance, as if she had been guilty of a very great crime? she is so far from it, that
she hath wrought a good work on me; she has done me an honour; expressed
faith in me, and shown love to me, and ought to be commended, and not reproved;
See Gill on Mat_26:10.
JAMIESON, "And Jesus said, Let her alone; why trouble ye her? she
hath wrought a good work on me — It was good in itself, and so was acceptable
to Christ; it was eminently seasonable, and so more acceptable still; and it was “what
she could,” and so most acceptable of all.
COFFMAN, "She hath wrought a good work ... The definition of what Christ
considers "good work" is evident here. A spontaneous, lavish gift, poured out
upon the Lord's body, as given by Mary, has its counterpart in the same manner
of giving to the church, the Lord's spiritual body. Money given to the church and
prompted by motives of love and spirituality may be classified as "good work."
This cannot mean that other types of service do not also qualify for such a
commendation; but it does mean that the people who pay the bills are also
"doing something."
MACLAREN, "THE ALABASTER BOX
John’s Gospel sets this incident in its due framework of time and place, and tells us
the names of the actors. The time was within a week of Calvary, the place was
Bethany, where, as John significantly reminds us, Jesus had raised Lazarus from the
dead, thereby connecting the feast with that incident; the woman who broke the box
of ointment and poured the perfume on the head and feet of Jesus was Mary; the first
critic of her action was Judas. Selfishness blames love for the profusion and
prodigality, which to it seem folly and waste. The disciples chimed in with the
objection, not because they were superior to Mary in wisdom, but because they were
inferior in consecration.
John tells us, too, that Martha was ‘amongst them that served.’ The characteristics of
the two sisters are preserved. The two types of character which they respectively
represent have great difficulty in understanding and doing justice to one another.
Christ understands and does justice to them both. Martha, bustling, practical,
37

38. utilitarian to the finger-tips, does not much care about listening to Christ’s words of
wisdom. She has not any very high-strung or finely-spun emotions, but she can busy
herself in getting a meal ready; she loves Him with all her heart, and she takes her
own way of showing it. But she gets impatient with her sister, and thinks that her
sitting at Christ’s feet is a dreamy waste of time, and not without a touch of
selfishness, ‘taking no care for me, though I have got so much on my back.’ And so, in
like manner, Mary is made out to be a monster of selfishness; ‘Why was not this
ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?’ She could not serve,
she would only have been in Martha’s road if she had tried. But she had one precious
thing which was her very own, and she caught it up, and in the irrepressible burst of
her thankful love, as she saw Lazarus sitting there at the table beside Jesus, she
poured the liquid perfume on His head and feet. He casts His shield over the poor,
unpractical woman, who did such an utterly useless thing, for which a basin of water
and a towel would have served far better. There are a great many useless things
which, in Heaven’s estimate, are more valuable than a great many apparently more
practical ones. Christ accepts the service, and in His deep words lays down three or
four principles which it would do us all good to carry with us into our daily lives. So I
shall now try to gather from these utterances of our Lord’s some great truths about
Christian service.
I. The first of them is the motive which hallows everything.
‘She hath wrought a good work on Me.’ Now that is pretty nearly a definition of what
a good work is, and you see it is very unlike our conventional notions of what
constitutes a ‘good work.’ Christ implies that anything, no matter what are its other
characteristics, that is ‘on’ Him, that is to say, directed towards Him under the
impulse of simple love to Him, is a ‘good work’; and the converse follows, that
nothing which has not that saving salt of reference to Him in it deserves the title. Did
you ever think of what an extraordinary position that is for a man to take up? ‘Think
about Me in what you do, and you will do good. Do anything, no matter what,
because you love Me, and it will be lifted up into high regions, and become
transfigured; a good work.’ He took the best that any one could give Him, whether it
was of outward possessions or of inward reverence, abject submission, and love and
trust. He never said to any man, ‘You are going over the score. You are exaggerating
about Me. Stand up, for I also am a Man.’ He did say once, ‘Why callest thou Me
good?’ not because it was an incorrect attribution, but because it was a mere piece of
conventional politeness. And in all other cases, not only does He accept as His
rightful possession the utmost of reverence that any man can do Him, and bring
Him, but He here implies, if He does not, as He almost does, specifically declare, that
to be done for His sake lifts a deed into the region of ‘good’ works.
Have you reflected what such an attitude implies as to the self-consciousness of the
Man who took it, and whether it is intelligible, not to say admirable, or rather
whether it is not worthy of reprobation, except upon one hypothesis-’Thou art the
everlasting Son of the Father,’ and all men honour God when they honour the
Incarnate Word? But that is aside from my present purpose.
Is not this conception, that the motive of reverence and love to Him ennobles and
sanctifies every deed, the very fundamental principle of Christian morality? All things
are sanctified when they are done for His sake. You plunge a poor pebble into a
brook, and as the sunlit ripples pass over its surface, the hidden veins of delicate
colour come out and glow, and the poor stone looks a jewel, and is magnified as well
as glorified by being immersed in the stream. Plunge your work into Christ, and do it
for Him, and the giver and the gift will be greatened and sanctified.
But, brethren, if we take this point of view, and look to the motive, and not to the
38

39. manner or the issues, or the immediate objects, of our actions, as determining
whether they are good or no, it will revolutionise a great many of our thoughts, and
bring new ideas into much of our conventional language. ‘A good work’ is not a piece
of beneficence or benevolence, still less is it to be confined to those actions which
conventional Christianity has chosen to dignify by the name. It is a designation that
should not be clotted into certain specified corners of a life, but be extended over
them all. The things which more specifically go under such a name, the kind of things
that Judas wanted to have substituted for the utterly useless, lavish expenditure by
this heart that was burdened with the weight of its own blessedness, come, or do not
come, under the designation, according as there is present in them, not only natural
charity to the poor whom ‘ye have always with you,’ but the higher reference of them
to Christ Himself. All these lower forms of beneficence are imperfect without that.
And instead of, as we have been taught by authoritative voices of late years, the
service of man being the true service of God, the relation of the two terms is precisely
the opposite, and it is the service of God that will effloresce into all service of man.
Judas did not do much for the poor, and a great many other people who are sarcastic
upon the ‘folly,’ the ‘uncalculating impulses’ of Christian love, with its ‘wasteful
expenditure,’ and criticise us because we are spending time and energy and love upon
objects which they think are moonshine and mist, do little more than he did, and
what beneficence they do exercise has to be hallowed by this reference to Jesus
before it can aspire to be beneficence indeed.
I sometimes wish that this generation of Christian people, amid its multifarious
schemes of beneficence, with none of which would one interfere for a moment, would
sometimes let itself go into manifestations of its love to Jesus Christ, which had no
use at all except to relieve its own burdened heart. I am afraid that the lower motives,
which are all right and legitimate when they are lower, are largely hustling the higher
ones into the background, and that the river has got so many ponds to fill, and so
many canals to trickle through, and so many plantations to irrigate and make
verdant, that there is a danger of its falling low at its fountain, and running shallow in
its course. One sometimes would like to see more things done for Him that the world
would call ‘utter folly,’ and ‘prodigal waste,’ and ‘absolutely useless.’ Jesus Christ has
a great many strange things in His treasure-house-widows’ mites, cups of water,
Mary’s broken vase-has He anything of yours? ‘She hath wrought a good work on
Me.’
II. Now, there is another lesson that I would gather from our Lord’s
apologising for Mary, and that is the measure and the manner of
Christian service.
‘She hath done what she could’; that is generally read as if it were an excuse. So it is,
or at least it is a vindication of the manner and the direction of Mary’s expression of
love and devotion. But whilst it is an apologia for the form, it is a high demand in
regard to the measure.
‘She hath done what she could.’ Christ would not have said that if she had taken a
niggardly spoonful out of the box of ointment, and dribbled that, in slow and half-
grudging drops, on His head and feet. It was because it all went that it was to Him
thus admirable. I think it is John Foster who says, ‘Power to its last particle is duty.’
The question is not how much have I done, or given, but could I have done or given
more? We Protestants have indulgences of our own; the guinea or the hundred
guineas that we give in a certain direction, we some of us seem to think, buy for us
the right to do as we will with all the rest. But ‘she hath done what she could.’ It all
went. And that is the law for us Christian people, because the Christian life is to be
ruled by the great law of self-sacrifice, as the only adequate expression of our
39

40. recognition of, and our being affected by, the great Sacrifice that gave Himself for us.
‘Give all thou canst! High Heaven rejects the lore
Of nicely calculated less or more.’
But whilst thus there is here a definite demand for the entire surrender of ourselves
and our activities to Jesus Christ, there is also the wonderful vindication of the
idiosyncrasy of the worker, and the special manner of her gift. It was not Mary’s
mé´©er to serve at the table, nor to do any practical thing. She did not know what
there was for her to do; but something she must do. So she caught up her alabaster
box, and without questioning herself about the act, let her heart have its way, and
poured it out on Christ. It was the only thing she could do, and she did it. It was a
very useless thing. It was an entirely unnecessary expenditure of the perfume. There
might have been a great many practical purposes found for it, but it was her way.
Christ says to each of us, Be yourselves, take circumstances, capacities,
opportunities, individual character, as laying down the lines along which yon have to
travel. Do not imitate other people. Do not envy other people; be yourselves, and let
your love take its natural expression, whatever folk round you may snarl and sneer
and carp and criticise. ‘She hath done what she could,’ and so He accepts the gift.
Engineers tell us that the steam-engine is a very wasteful machine, because so little of
the energy is brought into actual operation. I am afraid that there are a great many of
us Christian people like that, getting so much capacity, and turning out so little work.
And there are a great many more of us who simply pick up the kind of work that is
popular round us, and never consult our own bent, nor follow this humbly and
bravely, wherever it will take us. ‘She hath done what she could.’
III. And now the last thought that I would gather from these words is as
to the significance and the perpetuity of the work which Christ accepts.
‘She hath come beforehand to anoint My body to the burying.’ I do not suppose that
such a thought was in Mary’s mind when she snatched up her box of ointment, and
poured it out on Christ’s head. But it was a meaning that He, in His tender pity and
wise love and foresight, put into it, pathetically indicating, too, how the near Cross
was filling His thought, even whilst He sat at the humble rustic feast in Bethany
village.
He puts meaning into the service of love which He accepts. Yes, He always does. For
all the little bits of service that we can bring get worked up into the great whole, the
issues of which lie far beyond anything that we conceive, ‘Thou sowest not that body
that shall be, but bare grain . . . and God giveth it a body as it hath pleased Him.’ We
cast the seed into the furrows. Who can tell what the harvest is going to be? We know
nothing about the great issues that may suddenly, or gradually, burst from, or be
evolved out of, the small deeds that we do. So, then, let us take care of the end, so to
speak, which is under our control, and that is the motive. And Jesus Christ will take
care of the other end that is beyond our control, and that is the issue. He will bring
forth what seemeth to Him good, and we shall be as much astonished ‘when we get
yonder’ at what has come out of what we did here, as poor Mary, standing there
behind Him, was when He translated her act into so much higher a meaning than she
had seen in it.
‘Lord! when saw we Thee hungry and fed Thee?’ We do not know what we are doing.
We are like the Hindoo weavers that are said to weave their finest webs in dark
rooms; and when the shutters come down, and not till then, shall we find out the
meanings of our service of love.
Christ makes the work perpetual as well as significant by declaring that ‘in the whole
40

41. world this shall be preached for a memorial of her.’ Have not ‘the poor’ got far more
good out of Mary’s box of ointment than the three hundred pence that a few of them
lost by it? Has it not been an inspiration to the Church ever since? ‘The house was
filled with the odour of the ointment.’ The fragrance was soon dissipated in the
scentless air, but the deed smells sweet and blossoms for ever. It is perpetual in its
record, perpetual in God’s remembrance, perpetual in its results to the doer, and in
its results in the world, though these may be indistinguishable, just as the brook is
lost in the river and the river in the sea.
But did you ever notice that the Evangelist who records the promise of perpetual
remembrance of the act does not tell us who did it, and that the Evangelists who tell
us who did it do not record the promise of perpetual remembrance? Never mind
whether your deed is labelled with your address or not, God knows to whom it
belongs, and that is enough. As Paul says in one of his letters, ‘other my fellow-
labourers also, whose names are in the Book of Life.’ Apparently he had forgotten the
names, or perhaps did not think it needful to occupy space in his letter with detailing
them, and so makes that graceful, half-apologetic suggestion that they are inscribed
on a more august page. The work and the worker are associated in that Book, and
that is enough.
Brethren, the question of Judas is far more fitting when asked of other people than of
Christians. ‘To what purpose is this waste?’ may well be said to those of you who are
taking mind, and heart, and will, capacity, and energy, and all life, and using it for
lower purposes than the service of God, and the manifestation of loving obedience to
Jesus Christ. ‘Why do ye spend money for that which is not bread?’ Is it not waste to
buy disappointments at the price of a soul and of a life? Why do ye spend that money
thus? ‘Whose image and superscription hath it?’ Whose name is stamped upon our
spirits? To whom should they be rendered? Better for us to ask ourselves the
question to-day about all the godless parts of our lives, ‘To what purpose is this
waste?’ than to have to ask it yonder! Everything but giving our whole selves to Jesus
Christ is waste. It is not waste to lay ourselves and our possessions at His feet. ‘He
that loveth his life shall lose it, and he that loseth his life for My sake, the same shall
find it.’
7 The poor you will always have with you,[b]
and you can help them any time you want. But
you will not always have me.
GILL, "For ye have the poor with you always,.... See Gill on Mat_26:11;
and whensoever ye will ye may do them good; by feeding them when hungry,
clothing them when naked, and supplying them with the necessaries of life:
but me ye have not always; meaning, with respect to his bodily presence, which,
in a short time, would be removed from them, and they would have no opportunity of
showing him any such outward respect personally; See Gill on Mat_26:11.
41

42. JAMIESON, "For ye have the poor with you always — referring to Deu_
15:11.
and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not
always — a gentle hint of His approaching departure, by One who knew the worth of
His own presence.
COFFMAN, "Whensoever ye will ... These words are found only in Mark. They
show that it was no part of Jesus' purpose to restrict or prohibit help of the poor,
a duty always capable of fulfillment through the projected existence of the poor
throughout the ages. Human nature being what it is, there is no system,
environment, or government with the power to eliminate poverty. Commendable
as efforts to do so assuredly are, they invariably find frustration in the
terminator of human nature.
PULPIT, "Far ye have the poor always with you, and whensoever ye will ye can
( δύνασθε) do them good: but me ye have not always. The little clause,
"whensoever ye will ye can do them good," occurs only in St. Mark. It is as
though our Lord said, "The world always abounds with poor; therefore you
always have it in your power to help them; but within a week I shall have gone
from you, after which you will be unable to perform any service like this for me;
yea, no more to see, to hear, to touch me. Suffer, then, this woman to perform
this ministry now for me, which after six days she will have no other opportunity
of doing."
8 She did what she could. She poured perfume
on my body beforehand to prepare for my
burial.
BARNES, "She hath done what she could - She has showed the highest
attachment in her power; and it was, as it is now, a sufficient argument against there
being any “real” waste, that it was done for the honor of Christ. See this passage
explained in the notes at Mat. 26:1-16.
CLARKE, "To anoint my body to the burying - Εις τον ενταφιασµον, against,
or in reference to, its embalmment, thus pointing out my death and the embalmment
of my body, for the bodies of persons of distinction were wrapped up in aromatics to
preserve them from putrefaction. See on Mat_26:12 (note).
42

43. GILL, "She hath done what she could,.... What she had in her heart, and in the
power of her hands to do; she hath done according to her ability, and her good will;
and if she had not done it now, she could not have done it at all.
She is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying; or, "as if it was to
bury me", as the Syriac version renders it. Christ signifies by this, that he should
shortly die, and that this woman came before hand to anoint him, and, as it were, to
perform the funeral rites before he was dead; it being revealed to her by the Spirit,
that Jesus would quickly die, and she should not be able to perform this good work
when dead, and therefore came to do it before; or, at least, she was directed by the
Spirit of God, because she would be prevented doing it afterwards; See Gill on Mat_
26:12.
HENRY, "(2.) Our Lord Jesus put a better construction upon it than, for aught
that appears, was designed. Probably, she intended no more, than to show the great
honour she had for him, before all the company, and to complete his entertainment.
But Christ makes it to be an act of great faith, as well as great love (Mar_14:8); “She
is come aforehand, to anoint my body to the burying, as if she foresaw that my
resurrection would prevent her doing it afterward.” This funeral rite was a kind of
presage of, or prelude to, his death approaching. See how Christ's heart was filled
with the thoughts of his death, how every thing was construed with a reference to
that, and how familiarly he spoke of it upon all occasions. It is usual for those who
are condemned to die, to have their coffins prepared, and other provision made for
their funerals, while they are yet alive; and so Christ accepted this. Christ's death and
burial were the lowest steps of his humiliation, and therefore, though he cheerfully
submitted to them, yet he would have some marks of honour to attend them, which
might help to take off the offence of the cross, and be an intimation how precious in
the sight of the Lord the death of his saints is. Christ never rode in triumph into
Jerusalem, but when he came thither to suffer; nor had ever his head anointed, but
for his burial.
JAMIESON, "She hath done what she could — a noble testimony,
embodying a principle of immense importance.
she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying — or, as in John
(Joh_12:7), “Against the day of my burying hath she kept this.” Not that she, dear
heart, thought of His burial, much less reserved any of her nard to anoint her dead
Lord. But as the time was so near at hand when that office would have to be
performed, and she was not to have that privilege even after the spices were
brought for the purpose (Mar_16:1), He lovingly regards it as done now. “In the act
of love done to Him,” says Olshausen beautifully, “she has erected to herself an
eternal monument, as lasting as the Gospel, the eternal Word of God. From
generation to generation this remarkable prophecy of the Lord has been fulfilled; and
even we, in explaining this saying of the Redeemer, of necessity contribute to its
accomplishment.” “Who but Himself,” asks Stier, “had the power to ensure to any
work of man, even if resounding in His own time through the whole earth, an
imperishable remembrance in the stream of history? Behold once more here the
majesty of His royal judicial supremacy in the government of the world, in this,
‘Verily I say unto you.’”
PULPIT, "She hath done what she could. She seized the opportunity, which
might not occur again, of doing honor to her Lord by anointing him with her
43

44. very best. Our Lord might have excused this action, and have praised it as a
practical evidence of her gratitude, her humility, and her love for him. But
instead of dwelling on these things, he said, She hath anointed my body
aforehand for the burying. Our Lord here, of course, alludes to the spices and
ointments with which the Jews wrapped up the bodies of their dead before their
burial. Not that this was what Mary intended. She could hardly have dreamed of
his death and burial so near at hand. But she was moved by the Holy Spirit to do
this, at this particular time, as though in anticipation of his death and burial.
SBC, "On doing what we can.
I. Nobody is idle in the kingdom of our Lord. Even the babes and sucklings have
something to do. But so just is the King that He will not have any of His servants do
more than they can. He expects us to do only what we can.
It was this which pleased Him so well in the service which Mary of Bethany did; she
did what she could. She greatly loved the Lord, He had often spoken to her about His
Father; He had raised her brother Lazarus from the dead. And she wanted to show
her love. To look at, her act was not so much as if she had built a church, or a school,
or a hospital. It was only pouring some sweet perfume on the head and feet of the
Saviour she loved. But this was just the thing she could best do, and what she could
she did.
II. When years had gone past and Jesus was gone back to heaven, many other
disciples showed their love to Him by doing what they could. Some sold their
possessions and gave the money they got for them to the poor. Some went about the
world preaching Jesus. Some opened their houses to receive the preachers. Some
spent hours in prayer, asking God to bless the preaching. Some, more noble than
others, searched the Bible besides, to know what God would have them to do.
III. Sometimes we can only sing a psalm, or offer a prayer, or speak a kind word, or
give a tender look, or a warm grasp of the hand. It is enough in the eyes of the just
Saviour that we do things as little as these, if these should be the only things we can
do.
IV. No one is so humble, or poor, or weak as not to be able to do something. Even a
child may serve the Lord. It is wonderful how much can be done, and what things
great in God’s sight, if people would only do the little things they can.
A. Macleod, The Gentle Heart, p. 47.
I. It is allowable for women openly to show their attachment to Christ and His cause.
Many modes of influence and usefulness are open to them, just as, in the sacred
history we find in many ways, both in the lifetime of our Lord and afterwards, the
agency of woman was permitted or required. As in early times, she was to be
honourably distinguished who was well reported of for good works, in that she had
washed the saints’ feet, or been actively hospitable to missionaries and ministers—so
in the present day there is still opportunity for the thoughtful kindness of woman’s
calling, in relation to those, or to their families and their representatives, who, at
home or abroad, are devoted to and are doing the work of God.
II. Women may sometimes show their regard for Christ in a way very startling to
others—not approved by them—and that may be thought extravagant or wrong.
44

45. Whenever there is very deep, strong, and impulsive religious feeling—the notion that
the ideal of the Christian mind ought to be embodied in facts and actions—the
chances are that something will be projected, attempted, or done, which the Church
generally will not go along with. The penitent may be repelled by the self-righteous,
the munificent libelled by the churl—nobody can please all; while high, unwonted
forms of action will run the risk of displeasing most.
III. The act, that may be thus misunderstood, may be acceptable to, approved, and
honoured by Christ. In the case before us Mary obtained a double reward: (1) She
found that she had done a thing far greater than she intended, she had anointed His
body for the burial; (2) Jesus said that her action should be talked of, written about,
read everywhere the world over—always, while there is a Gospel to be preached or
men to hear it.
IV. This misapprehension on the part of some, this approval of Christ and predicted
reward of Mary’s service, all sprang from her having done what she could. She put
her whole ability to tribute or rather to the test, and resolved to do all and everything
it was capable of effecting. She devised liberal things, she purposed in her heart,
planned with her head, put to her hand, pushed on, persevered, prayed and toiled
day by day, exerting the utmost of her power, that she might accomplish all that was
in her will, and she has done it. Gabriel could do no more, nor any of the highest
creatures of God.
T. Binney, King’s Weigh-House Chapel Sermons, 2nd series, p. 188.
Notice:—
I. The costliness of this offering. A contemporary writer, complaining of the luxury
and wastefulness of his age, specifies the extravagant prices paid for unguents in
proof of his assertion; and then mentions four hundred pence as a proof of the
recklessness of the rich. Here, then, was a woman—not rich certainly—possessing
herself of the costliest offering she could procure. As nearly as one could reckon the
sum she paid for it would be about thirty pounds—according to the present value of
money among ourselves. And I think we shall all admit that although the sum is not
what a rich person would call a large one, it is what we should call a very noble
offering indeed, if offered by a person in humble life, especially if offered in this
particular way. I mean offered without any particular, immediate, visible,
commensurate object. She was not buying a burial-place for her Lord’s body, or
providing for His embalming, or for His entombment; or doing any other similar
necessary and abiding act. No; she merely wanted to show her love, her soul’s
devotion, the largeness of her affectionate reverence towards that mysterious Being
whose discourse was sweeter to her than honey or the honey-comb—whose strong
voice had broken the gates of death; in whom she recognised the Author of all her
purest joy. She pours the costly unguent on His sacred head, and spreads what she
lets fall upon His feet with her hair. And she earns for herself thereby the praise of
the eternal God and a place in the everlasting Gospel of Christ.
II. The commendation which our Savour bestowed upon the act of this pious woman
is very striking; for who was ever modest, self-denying, humble-minded, regardless
of luxury, pomp, and worldly honours, if not our Saviour, the meek, lowly-hearted
One who proposes Himself in this very respect as a model to us all? And yet, it is He
who commends so highly Mary’s costly offering now; for our sakes He did it, and it is
to show us that He approves, and will to the end of time approve, all similar ventures
45

46. of faith and love. These words of Christ are the commendation, the eternal praise, of
lavish outlay and costly expenditure made for Christ’s sake and in Christ’s honour; It
is the praise won by every one of whom that may be truly said which was once spoken
of Mary: "She hath done what she could."
J. W. Burgon, Ninety-one Short Sermons, No. 36
The Insight of Love.
Note:—
I. The inherent difficulty which besets all questions of casuistry that rise under the
laws or precepts of natural morality. The rules or precepts of morality are easy for the
most part; it is only their application to particular cases that are difficult. Thus, if the
woman had been asking how she could use her box of ointment so as to do most good
with it, she would either have fallen into utter doubt and perplexity, or else she would
have taken up the same conclusion with Judas, and given it to the benefit of the poor.
However perfect and simple the code of preceptive duty the applications of it will
often be difficult and sometimes well-nigh impossible, without some better help than
casuistry.
II. This better help is contributed by Christ and His Gospel. Begetting in the soul a
new personal love to Himself, Christ establishes in it all law, and makes it gravitate,
by its own sacred motion, towards all that is right and good in particular cases. This
love will find all good by its own pure affinity apart from any mere debate of reasons,
even as a magnet finds all specks of iron hidden in the common dust. Thus, if the race
were standing fast in love, perfect love, that love would be the fulfilling of the law
without the law, determining itself rightly by its own blessed motions, without any
statutory control whatever. The wise male brethren who stood critics round this
woman had all the casuistic, humanly assignable reasons plainly enough with them.
And yet the wisdom is hers without any reasons. She reaches farther, touches the
proprieties more fully, chimes with God’s future more exactly than they do, reasoning
the question as they best can. It is as if she were somehow polarised in her love by a
new Divine force, and she settles into coincidence with Christ and His future, just as
the needle settles to its point without knowing why. To bathe His blessed head with
the most precious ointment she can get, and bending low to put her fragrant homage
on his feet, and bind them in the honours of her hair, is all that she thinks of; and be
it wise or unwise it is done. By a certain delicate affinity of feeling, that was equal to
insight, and almost to prophecy, she touches exactly her Lord’s strange unknown
future, and anoints Him for the kingdom and the death she does not even think of or
know. Plainly enough no debate of consequence could ever have prepared her for
these deep and beautifully wise proprieties.
H. Bushnell, Christ and His Salvation, p. 39.
GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, "A Ministering Woman and a Grateful
Saviour
She hath done what she could.—Mar_14:8.
1. The pathetic story of the woman and the alabaster box of ointment is related
46

47. by three out of the four Evangelists by way of introduction to the record of the
Passion of Christ. It has always kept a peculiarly strong hold upon Christian
thought and sentiment, partly because of the beauty and pathos and unique
character of the incident itself, partly because the woman’s act won for her a
commendation such as no other person ever received from Him, when He
declared that her story should be told throughout the whole world wherever His
Gospel should be preached.
We have a word in our language called “unction.” It signifies thorough
devotedness and enthusiasm of heart, incited by the outpouring of God’s Spirit;
and it effects spiritually what the ointment poured over the body does naturally.
Unction and the act of anointing, in their primary meaning, are the same. Mary’s
anointing of our Lord was figurative of the unction of her own heart which led
her to break the alabaster vase, and scatter its perfumes round. There are many
others who, like her, in the unction and devotion of their hearts, have their vase
to break, and their perfume to shed around. Do not, then, coldly scorn in the
present that which you applaud in the past.1 [Note: J. C. M. Bellew.]
2. The incident was the very beginning of the end. The public ministry of our
Lord closes with the twenty-fifth chapter of St. Matthew: “When Jesus had
finished all these words, he said unto his disciples, Ye know that after two days
the passover cometh, and the Son of man is delivered up to be crucified” (Mat_
26:1-2). Then the Evangelist lets us look forth from the quiet home in Bethany to
see the dreadful forces that are at work. “Then were gathered together the chief
priests, and the elders of the people, unto the court of the high priest, who was
called Caiaphas; and they took counsel together that they might take Jesus by
subtilty and kill him.”
3. The darkness of that hour begins to creep over Him with its exceeding sorrow.
He looks upon the disciples and sighs—they all are to be offended because of
Him. There is Peter, who shall deny his Lord thrice. There is Judas, counting up
how much he can make out of his Master. And Jesus with all His sensitiveness,
shrinking from that awful loneliness, looks into the deep dark gulf that yawned
at His feet. Is there no love that discerns His grief; no tender sympathy that
makes haste to minister to it? The disciples are stunned and bewildered by His
words; and they are afraid to ask Him what they mean. Martha is busy about the
housework; so large a company arriving from Jerusalem needs much providing
for. She wishes Mary were more handy and useful. And Mary sits and sees it all
with the clear sight of her great love. Her Lord must go to be betrayed! He must
die! And she, what can she do?
One thing she has—it had been a treasure, but her great love sees it now as poor
indeed—an alabaster box of very precious unguent. And now she comes hiding
her gift, and hastens to the side of her Lord, and ventures reverently to pour it
on His head.
Judas frowned, and said what others thought, “What waste!” To these simple
fishermen it was a fortune, enough to keep a poor man’s household for a year.
And, adds St. Mark, “they were angry with her,” and their murmurings broke
47

48. out on every side. Poor Mary! condemned by these indignant looks and words,
she sank down beside her Lord and hid her face afraid. Was He angry with her?
Was her love so clumsy that it but added to His grief? No, indeed, His hand is
lovingly laid upon her. He saw her meaning. “Let her alone,” said He; “why
trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me. She hath done what she
could: she hath anointed my body aforehand for the burying.”1 [Note: Mark
Guy Pearse.]
She hath done what she could. She never preached; she never wrought any
wonderful work; she never built a church, or endowed a hospital, or founded a
mission. What then hath she done? She hath loved her Lord with a deep, tender
devotion that gladdened and strengthened and comforted Him. He who is love
sets most store by love. Love that delights in Him; love that communes with Him;
love that is ever seeking to bring Him its best and richest; love that finds its
heaven in His pleasure, its hell in His grief, its all in His service; love that blesses
Him with adoring joy for His great love; that rests triumphantly in His presence,
and wanders restlessly if He be gone—this is to Him earth’s richest gift.1 [Note:
Mark Guy Pearse.]
The subject is a Ministering Woman and a Grateful Saviour. The text contains
these three topics:—I. Our Lord’s Recognition of Mary’s Service; II. The
Character of Mary’s Service; III. The Perfected Service of the Future Life.
I
Our Lord’s Recognition of Mary’s Service
1. This saying, with the occasion of it, stands out as one of the most noticeable
among the few instances, each of them strongly and distinctly marked, on which
our Lord vouchsafed to utter words of personal praise to individuals in their
own hearing. There are some ten or twelve such instances, five of which relate to
women, and two of the five to Mary of Bethany, the sister of Lazarus. Of her, in
her hearing, Christ had said some time before, “Mary hath chosen the good part,
which shall not be taken away from her.” Now He says: “She hath wrought a
good work on me. She hath done what she could. Verily I say unto you,
Wheresoever the gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, that also
which this woman hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.” O blessed
woman! To be so spoken of by Him who shall come to be her Judge, the Judge of
us all! To be assured out of His own mouth that she was not deceiving herself,
that the part which she was professing to have chosen was really the good part!
That she had really chosen it, and that it should never be taken away from her!
What would any one of us poor uncertain backsliders give to be quite sure of
having pleased our Lord in but one action of our lives; as sure as Mary of
Bethany was in pouring the ointment on His head?
Could I have sung one Song that should survive
The singer’s voice, and in my country’s heart
48

49. Find loving echo—evermore a part
Of all her sweetest memories; could I give
One great Thought to the People, that should prove
The spring of noble action in their hour
Of darkness, or control their headlong power
With the firm reins of Justice and of Love;
Could I have traced one Form that should express
The sacred mystery that underlies
All Beauty; and through man’s enraptured eyes
Teach him how beautiful is Holiness,—
I had not feared thee. But to yield my breath,
Life’s Purpose unfulfilled!—This is thy sting, O Death!1 [Note: Sir Noël Paton.]
2. “That which this woman hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.”
Mary had been attacked and needed defence. It was not the first time that her
actions had been criticised. Before, it had been her own sister who found fault,
now it was Judas Iscariot, backed up by some other or others of the disciples;
but both times it was the same kind of censure, though passed on her by very
different persons, and with very different intentions. There was plausibility
enough in what they alleged to disturb a mind in the least degree scrupulous.
What sort of devotion is this, which leaves a sister to serve alone? which lays out
on ointments and perfumes, offered to Him who needs them not, a sum of money
which might go a good way in feeding the hungry or clothing the naked? Who
can say that there is nothing in such a remonstrance? But He that searches the
hearts interfered,—as He never fails to do sooner or later, on behalf of His
humble and meek ones,—and spoke out words of wisdom and power which have
settled the matter for ever to her and to the whole Church. Twice He spoke: once
to the traitor and once to those whom the traitor was misleading. To Judas apart,
Do thou “let her alone. Against the day of my burying hath she kept this”; by His
manner and look as well as His words, speaking to what was in His betrayer’s
conscience, and startling him, it may be, with the thought, “Surely this thing is
known.” To the rest, “Let her alone: why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a
good work on me”: to all, “For ye have the poor always with you, and
whensoever ye will ye can do them good: but me ye have not always.”
He whom no praise can reach, is aye
Men’s least attempts approving:
49

50. Whom Justice makes All-merciful,
Omniscience makes All-loving.
Yes, they have caught the way of God
To whom Self lies displayed
In such clear vision as to cast
O’er others’ faults a shade.
A bright horizon out to sea
Obscures the distant ships:—
Rough hearts look smooth and beautiful
In Charity’s Eclipse.1 [Note: F. W. Faber.]
3. What, then, is the lesson or true import of this so much commended example?
What but this?—do for Christ just what is closest at hand, and be sure that thus
you will meet all His remotest or most unknown times and occasions. Or, better
still, follow without question the impulse of love to Christ’s own person; for this,
when really full and sovereign, will make your conduct chime, as it were,
naturally with all God’s future.
It is on personality that religion rests. This is why Jesus Christ, building
Christianity upon Himself, commended Mary’s act of loving self-devotion. Had
He merely taught the philosophy of religion—had He simply inculcated, however
persuasively, the principles of theism and morality, warning men against vice
and painting bright pictures of virtue—He would have been no more than one of
those many teachers who have enlightened but not saved the world. But He was
more than a teacher, more than a philosopher; He was a living and loving
Person, the magnet of the human soul, drawing men irresistibly to Himself.
St. Paul says, “To me to live is Christ.” There are those who affect to think that
so long as the principles and moral ideas of religion are well understood and
clearly enforced, and the general tone of society has a colouring of Christianity,
the person of Christ may be allowed, without much loss, to fall into the
background. Such a belief seems to take little account of the actual facts of
human life, or of the way in which experience shows that character is usually
influenced and developed. Philosophy, after all, is not enough to save men; what
they know to be right, it does not follow (as even the Roman poet saw) that they
50

51. will straightway go and do; for persons, far more than principles or ideas, move
us both to good and to evil. “Ideas,” says George Eliot, “are often poor ghosts;
our sun-filled eyes cannot discern them; they pass athwart us in their vapour,
and cannot make themselves felt. But sometimes they are made flesh; they
breathe upon us with warm breath, they touch us with soft, responsive hand,
they look at us with sad, sincere eyes, and speak to us in appealing tones; they
are clothed in a living human soul, with all its conflicts, its faith, and its love.
Then their presence is a power, then they shake us like a passion, and we are
drawn after them with gentle compulsion, as flame is drawn to flame.” What
men need to help them is the force of personality, the example of wife or husband
or friend, the sight and touch of another person, human like themselves, yet still
hoping, still aspiring, still rising on the stepping-stones of a dead past. Persons,
not principles, count for most in the great struggle.1 [Note: S. A. Alexander.]
Do you say with a sigh, “Oh, if I had nothing to do but just to be with Christ
personally, and have my duty solely as with Him, how sweet and blessed and
secret and free would it be!” Well, you may have it so; exactly this you may do
and nothing more. Come, then, to Christ, retire into the secret place of His love,
and have your whole duty personally as with Him. Then you will make this very
welcome discovery, that as you are personally given up to Christ’s person, you
are going where He goes, helping what He does, keeping ever dear bright
company with Him in all His motions of good and sympathy, refusing even to let
Him suffer without suffering with Him. And so you will do a great many more
duties than you even think of now; only they will all be sweet and easy and free,
even as your love is. You will stoop low, and bear the load of many, and be the
servant of all, but it will be a secret joy that you have with your Master
personally. You will not be digging out points of conscience, and debating what
your duty is to this or that, or him or her, or here or yonder; indeed, you will not
think that you are doing much for Christ at all—not half enough—and yet He
will be saying to you every hour in sweetest approbation, “Ye did it unto me.”1
[Note: Horace Bushnell.]
4. In praising Mary’s act, Christ not only accepts her personal service, but
through her He graciously accepts and welcomes the service of women. From the
very beginning of the Gospel, our gracious Master has condescended to make use
of women’s work in preparing men’s hearts for His Kingdom, and in promoting
it when the time came. It is observable how from time to time, doubtless not
without a special providence, women were selected to be His agents on occasions
for new steps to be taken, new doors to be opened in the progress and diffusion
of His marvellous mercy. Thus when He would shew Himself to the Samaritans,
half heathen as they were, and prepare them for the coming of His Spirit, He
drew a certain woman to Jacob’s well, and caused her to inquire of Him the best
way and place of worship. Thus a woman was His first messenger to that
remarkable people, though He afterwards sent His Evangelist to convert and His
Apostles to confirm them. To a woman was given, in reward of her faith and
humility, the privilege of being the first to have revealed to her the healing—
might we not say the sacramental?—virtue which abode in the very hem of His
garment, to meet the touch of faith. Women, as far as we are told, were the first
who had the honour allowed them of ministering to Him of their substance. In
51

52. His last journey from Galilee to Jerusalem, in His lodging at Bethany, on His
way to Calvary, around His cross both before and after His death, beside His
grave both before and after His resurrection, we all know what a part women
took, and how highly they were favoured. The narrative in the Acts clearly
implies that the Holy Spirit actually descending, found the women praying with
the Apostles with one accord in one place, and made them partakers of Himself,
sealing them with His blessings, variously, according to the various work He had
prepared for them. Thenceforward the daughters as well as the sons began to
prophesy, the handmaidens as well as the servants had the Spirit poured out
upon them.
It takes a woman disciple after all to do any most beautiful thing; in certain
respects, too, or as far as love is wisdom, any wisest thing. Thus we have before
us here a simple-hearted loving woman, who has had no subtle questions of
criticism about matters of duty and right, but only loves her Lord’s person with
a love that is probably a kind of mystery to herself, which love she wants
somehow to express.1 [Note: Horace Bushnell.]
She brought her box of alabaster,
The precious spikenard filled the room
With honour worthy of the Master,
A costly, rare, and rich perfume.
O may we thus, like loving Mary,
Ever our choicest offerings bring,
Nor grudging of our toil, nor chary
Of costly service to our King.
Methinks I hear from Christian lowly
Some hallowed voice at evening rise,
Or quiet morn, or in the holy
Unclouded calm of Sabbath skies,—
I bring my box of alabaster,
52

53. Of earthly loves I break the shrine,
And pour affections, purer, vaster,
On that dear Head—those feet of Thine.
What though the scornful world, deriding
Such waste of love, of service, fears,
Still let me pour, through taunt and chiding,
The rich libation of my tears.
I bring my box of alabaster,—
Accepted let the offering rise!
So grateful tears shall flow the faster
In founts of gladness, from my eyes!2 [Note: C. L. Ford, Lyra Anglicana, 24.]
II
The Character of Mary’s Service
Do we wonder why Christ selected Mary for this special praise? Evidently there
was something about her action which touched His heart. We cannot but
conclude that He set His mark upon it simply because it was the expression of the
deepest personal love towards Himself.
A service which springs from love finds many outlets. Such service may be
characterised in various ways.
1. It is Spontaneous.—No service is so beautiful as the spontaneous. We cannot
subscribe to the doctrine that men are not to do good unless their heart is free to
do it. Wesley called that “a doctrine of devils.” We must do good when it goes
against the grain, when our heart most vehemently protests. We must give when
the coins are glued to our fingers, sacrifice when nature urges that we cannot
afford it, forgive when we feel vindictive. Such service as this—unwilling,
ungracious—God will not reject. But, after all, spontaneous service is the best—
that which springs unforced, uncoerced, cheerfully from the heart.
In the intellectual sphere we know that splendid masterpieces are unforced,
53

54. unlaboured; they are marked by perfect ease and spontaneity. We feel sure that
Shakespeare wrote the “Tempest” as a flower opens to the kiss of the sun; that
Shelley wrote the “Skylark” freely as the bird itself sings from the cloud; that
Mozart’s music flowed from his mind as the wind makes music among the
branches; that Turner’s grand pictures sprang out of his brain as a rainbow
springs out of a shower. Plodding workers, overcoming difficulties with
determination and fag, do respectable and valuable work, but it is still true that
the grandest works cost the least. The spontaneous is more than the correct,
inspiration is more than elaboration, a fountain has a glory beyond a pump.
Mary’s act was of the sublimest: it came welling forth from the depths of her
soul, born of a love of the purest, the divinest.1 [Note: J. Pearce.]
Love much. There is no waste in freely giving,
More blessed is it, even, than to receive.
He who loves much alone finds life worth living;
Love on, through doubt and darkness; and believe
There is no thing which Love may not achieve.2 [Note: Ella Wheeler Wilcox,
Poems of Love and Life.]
2. It is Self-Sacrificing.—It is marvellous how vital contact with Jesus will bring
out the best that is in man or woman. Mary had already loved the Master, for
sitting at His feet she had chosen that good part which was not to be taken away
from her. His power had stirred her life to its very depths. Can she express the
gratitude that is flowing like a flood through her heart? Her act may well be
called “the extravagance of gratitude.” That the disciples considered it wastefully
extravagant is proved by their criticism of her act, as the prosaic mind has
always considered all great sacrifice.
But sincere gratitude is always utterly unreasonable. It will go to any length in
seeking full expression. It never stops to reason concerning the wisdom of
sacrifice. The cost of real sacrifice is never, can never, be counted. Its only
question here is, “What can I do for Him who has done so much for me?”
In the cheaper meaning sacrifice is giving up; it is suffering; it may be the
suffering of real pain for some one or something. And this is sacrifice, let it be
said. In the deeper, richer meaning there is suffering too; but that is only part;
and, however keen and cutting, still the smaller part. Sacrifice is love purposely
giving itself, regardless of the privation or pain involved, that thus more of life’s
sweets may come to another. Sacrifice is love meeting an emergency, and singing
because able to meet and to grip it.
A lady was calling upon a friend whose two children were brought in during the
call. As they talked together the caller said eagerly, and yet with evidently no
thought of the meaning of her words, “Oh! I’d give my life to have two such
children.” And the mother replied, with a subdued earnestness, whose quiet told
54

55. of the depth of experience out of which her words came, “That’s exactly what it
costs.” Yet there was a gleam of light in her eye, and a something in her manner,
which told more plainly than words that though she had given much, she had
gotten more, both in the possession of the children, and in the rare enrichment of
her spirit.1 [Note: S. D. Gordon, Quiet Talks on Home Ideals, 161.]
Do we want an illustration of self-sacrificing love in our own time? We may fall
abashed before the high-born, gifted, and admired English girl who came to
Kaiserswerth as a pupil, and then reproduced the same wonders of consolation
and healing for sick and destitute governesses, not amidst the rural quiet and
sweet verdure of her own paternal home in Hampshire, but in a dismal street in
London. Yet we ought all to remember that Florence Nightingale, too, only did
what she could; that, if we do that, God’s honours are impartial; that if we do
not that, then ours is indeed the shame of the shortcoming. We follow this
minister of angelic mercy along the horrid and bloody path of war to the banks
of the Bosphorus, and read how, in the hospital of Scutari,
Through miles of pallets, thickly laid
With sickness in its foulest guise,
And pain, in forms to have dismayed
Man’s science-hardened eyes,
A woman, fragile, pale, and tall,
Upon her saintly work doth move,
Fair or not fair, who knows? but all
Follow her face with love.
While I bow with reverent confession before this transcendent realised vision of
celestial pity, I still believe we ought not to forget that God may have, that He
asks, that He requires of us that there shall be servants of His love as self-
denying, as heroic, as resolute, of whom hospital never knew and poetry never
sang, here in these homely houses and these prosaic streets. For the hour will
come when every soul that hath done what that soul could, shall be seen on the
right hand of the throne of God.1 [Note: F. D. Huntington.]
3. It is Singular and Courageous.—Mary’s was a new type of ministry. The
disciples had their own ways of ministering, which were more servile and
stereotyped. “Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence and given
to the poor?” Poor blind critics! They could see only one way in which money
could be wisely expended—their eyes were holden. They needed an example like
Mary’s to make their scales fall. She was not indifferent to the necessities of the
55

56. poor—but she was not tied down to just one way of doing good. She was original
and creative, not slavishly imitative. She conceived a new way of serving Christ,
and fearlessly carried out her programme. It was love—a warm heart—that
made her thus inventive, and gave a note of distinction to her ministry. Love is
always thoughtful and creative; it must strike out new paths for itself, must
clothe itself in new forms. Love cannot be commonplace; it delights in
innovations, surprises, singularities, felicities. It is impossible to put love in
fetters, dictate its course, or rule it by convention. It stores away the vase until
the opportune moment arrives for dispensing its contents—and then it
confounds us with its goodness.
It was early in September a good many years ago. The winter storms had begun
early that year. One morning, after a wild night, Grace Darling heard human
voices mingling with the voices of the storm. And going out, she saw a vessel on
the rocks of the farthest island. What was she that she should bestir herself at
such a time? A feeble girl, with the seeds of an early death at work on her
already! But she roused her father and pointed out the wreck. Were the human
beings clinging to it to be allowed to perish? The old man saw no help for them.
He shrank from the entreaty of his daughter to go out to them. It seemed to him
certain death to venture on such a sea. The brave girl leaped into the boat of the
lighthouse and would go alone; and then the old man’s courage was roused. And
so, on the morning of that sixth day of September, those two, risking their lives
for mercy, pulled through the tempest to the wreck. Nine human beings were
there, in the very grasp of death. And these nine, one by one, this brave girl and
her father, going and coming, rescued and carried to the lighthouse, and nursed
them till help came. O! the land rang with praises of this heroic maiden. And
poets sang these praises. And royal people sent for her to their houses to see her.
But this was her glory in the sight of God, that she had made beautiful for
evermore, so that it shines to this day in the memory of men, the lonely and
humble lot in which God had placed her.1 [Note: A. Macleod, Talking to the
Children, 171.]
4. It is Timely.—Blessed are the ministries which are not mistimed. How oft,
alas! the kindnesses of people come too late! Instead of acting like Mary,
aforehand, too many act like Joseph and Nicodemus, who brought their sweet
spices when the Saviour was in His garden grave. There is something peculiarly
sad about these belated kindnesses. If we have flowers to give, why not give them
to our friends ere they enter on the long sleep?2 [Note: J. Pearce.]
Mary anointed her Lord aforehand. Too many alabaster boxes are sealed up and
put on the top shelf at the back. They are reached down only at funerals. It was
said concerning the monument erected to Burns, “He asked of his generation
bread, and after he was dead they gave him a stone.” George Eliot pathetically
says—
Seven Grecian cities vied for Homer dead
Through which the living Homer begged for bread.
56

57. After his wife’s death Carlyle wrote in his diary—“Oh, if I could but see her
once more, were it but for five minutes, to let her know that I always loved her
through it all. She never did know it—never!” Think of it! That splendid
alabaster box of a great man’s love sealed up for twenty years.1 [Note: H. Cariss
J. Sidnell.]
’Tis easy to be gentle when
Death’s silence shames our clamour,
And easy to discern the best
Through memory’s mystic glamour.
But wise it were for me and thee,
Ere love is past forgiving,
To take this tender lesson home—
Be patient with the living.
III
The Perfected Service of the Future Life
Perfect service may be said to comprise three things: willingness, activity, and
completeness.
1. Willingness.—Our Lord’s words to Mary, “She hath done what she could,” at
once suggest the reflection that all our service here must be more or less limited.
Imperfections will mark our work. “The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.”
Christ’s praise of Mary’s simple act announces the great principle that ability is
the measure of responsibility, and the practical outcome of this principle is a
readiness to use the “several ability” which we possess.
It is the duty of every Christian to do something for Christ, something for His
honour, His cause, or His servants. Neutrality is antagonism. To stand, doing
nothing, is to be obstacles in the way of those who work. Not to “hold forth the
word of life,” not to “shine as a light in the world,” is to lie in the way, a big
opaque stone, through which the beams of truth cannot pierce.
But it is a very serious subject of thought, that there are so many of those who do
something that never exert the half of their ability. They do not honestly do what
they can. Obligation and capacity are commensurate. God does not desire “to
reap where he has not sown, nor to gather where he has not strawed,” but where
He has given “much,” of them He will expect “the more.” He does not expect
from a brute the service of a man, or from a man the obedience of an angel; He
does not expect from him that has one talent the results of five, or from him that
57

58. has five the results of ten; but He does expect everywhere, and from all beings,
that each shall serve according to his actual and several ability.
Young men, try to serve God. Resist the devil when he whispers it is impossible.
Try, and the Lord God of the promises will give you strength in the trying. He
loves to meet those who struggle to come to Him, and He will meet you and give
you the power that you feel you need.1 [Note: Bishop Ryle.]
There is a fable which says that one day a prince went into his garden to examine
it. He came to the peach tree and said, “What are you doing for me?” The tree
said, “In the spring I give my blossoms and fill the air with fragrance, and on my
boughs hang the fruit which men will gather and carry into the palace for you.”
“Well done,” said the prince. To the chestnut he said, “What are you doing?” “I
am making nests for the birds, and shelter cattle with my leaves and spreading
branches.” “Well done,” said the prince. Then he went down to the meadow, and
asked the grass what it was doing. “We are giving up our lives for others, for
your sheep and cattle, that they may be nourished”; and the prince said, “Well
done.” Last of all he asked the tiny daisy what it was doing, and the daisy said,
“Nothing, nothing. I cannot make a nesting place for the birds, and I cannot give
shelter to the cattle, and I cannot give food for the sheep and the cows—they do
not want me in the meadow. All I can do is to be the best little daisy I can be.”
And the prince bent down and kissed the daisy, and said, “There is none better
than thou.”2 [Note: F. B. Cowl.]
If you cannot on the ocean
Sail among the swiftest fleet,
Rocking on the highest billows,
Laughing at the storms you meet,
You can stand among the sailors,
Anchored yet within the bay,
You can lend a hand to help them,
As they launch their boats away.
If you are too weak to journey
Up the mountain steep and high,
You can stand within the valley,
58

59. While the multitudes go by.
You can chant in happy measure,
As they slowly pass along;
Though they may forget the singer,
They will not forget the song.
2. Activity.—Love is active; men prove their love not so much by their words as
by their actions. Work is the way to strength. Inactivity is the way to infirmity.
The running water clears itself; the still water becomes stagnant. The active soul
serves its Master; the idle soul is the devil’s workshop. How can you better
honour the Bridegroom than by honouring the Bride?
All activity out of Christ, all labour that is not labour in His Church, is in His
sight a “standing idle.” In truth time belongs not to the Kingdom of God. Not,
How much hast thou done? but, What art thou now? will be the question of the
last day; though of course we must never forget that all that men have done will
greatly affect what they are.1 [Note: Archbishop Trench.]
O the rare, sweet sense of living, when one’s heart leaps to his labour,
And the very joy of doing is life’s richest, noblest dower!
Let the poor—yea, poor in spirit—crave the purple of his neighbour,
Give me just the strength for serving, and the golden present hour!
3. Completeness.—Here notice two things—
(1) Our life here is only the beginning. In order to serve Christ acceptably we
have neither to revolutionise our lot, nor to seek other conditions than those
which Providence supplies. The place is nothing, the heart is all. Obscurity,
weakness, baffled plans—a thousand nameless limitations of faculty, of
opportunity, of property—all these are witnesses of silent but victorious faith. In
all of them God is glorified, for in all of them His will is done. Out of all of them
gates open into heaven and the joy of the Lord.
(2) All “work” here is wrought with “labour,” but we have a vision which
reaches beyond: “And I heard a voice from heaven saying, Write, Blessed are the
dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: yea, saith the Spirit, that they may
rest from their labours; for their works follow with them.” At the very heart of
this word “labours” there is a sense of faintness and exhaustion. It is a tired
word which has lost its spring. But when we are told that the dead in Christ “rest
59

60. from their labours,” we are not to take it as meaning that they rest from their
work, but from the weariness of work, which is a far nobler emancipation. To
take away the faintness is infinitely more gracious than to take us out of the
crusade. The redemption of our blessed dead is entry into the tireless life. “They
serve him day and night in his temple.”1 [Note: J. H. Jowett, Our Blessed Dead,
19.]
So we too may say, in the spirit of Mary, who brought her best to Christ
aforetime: “I would not seek heaven because I despaired of earth; I would bring
my earthly treasures into heaven. I would not fly to Thee in the winter of my
heart. I would come when my heart is summer—when its leaves were green. I
would bring Thee the full-blown rose, the ripest fruit, the finest songs of the
grove. I would break the alabaster box for Thee, not when it was empty, but
when it was laden with perfume. I would make my sacrifice a sacrifice of
praise.”2 [Note: G. Matheson, Times of Retirement, 186.]
We have read of the young artist, wearied and discouraged, who slept by the
picture which he had done his best to perfect and complete. The master quietly
entered the room and, bending over the sleeping pupil, unfolded on the canvas
with his own skilful hand the beauty which the worn artist had striven in vain to
portray. And when we, tired and spent, lay down earth’s toil, our own great
Master will make perfect our picture for the Father’s many-mansioned house.
From our life’s service He will remove every stain, every blemish, and every
failure. To our life’s service He will give the brightest lustre and His highest
honour. Shall we not then bring our best to the One who can make it better?
Rouse to some work of high and holy love,
And then an angel’s happiness shalt thou know,
Shalt bless the earth, while in the world above;
The good begun by thee shall onward flow
In many a branching stream, and wider grow;
The seed that in these few and fleeting hours
Thy hands unsparing and unwearied sow,
Shall deck thy grave with amaranthine flowers,
And yield thee fruits divine in Heaven’s imperial bowers.
A Ministering Woman and a Grateful Saviour
9 Truly I tell you, wherever the gospel is
60

61. preached throughout the world, what she has
done will also be told, in memory of her.”
BARNES, "Verily I say unto you,.... And you may assure yourselves of the truth
of it:
wheresoever this Gospel, of the death and resurrection of Christ,
shall be preached throughout the whole world, as it shall be,
this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her; in
remembrance of her, and her work, and in commendation of her faith, love, and
duty; See Gill on Mat_26:13.
GILL, "Verily I say unto you,.... And you may assure yourselves of the truth of it:
wheresoever this Gospel, of the death and resurrection of Christ,
shall be preached throughout the whole world, as it shall be,
this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her; in
remembrance of her, and her work, and in commendation of her faith, love, and
duty; See Gill on Mat_26:13.
HENRY, " He recommended this piece of heroic piety to the applause of the
church in all ages; Wherever this gospel shall be preached, it shall be spoken of, for a
memorial of her, Mar_14:9. Note, The honour which attends well-doing, even in this
world, is sufficient to balance the reproach and contempt that are cast upon it. The
memory of the just is blessed, and they that had trial of cruel mockings, yet obtained
a good report, Heb_11:6, Heb_11:39. Thus was this good woman repaid for her box
of ointment, Nec oleum perdidit nec operam - She lost neither her oil nor her labour.
She got by it that good name which is better than precious ointment. Those that
honour Christ he will honour.
SBC, "Love to the Christ as a Person.
I. Looking at this incident closely, we find as its main characteristic that it was the
expression of a feeling, and that it was intensely personal. This woman had come
under a great sense of gratitude to Christ. He had become enshrined in her soul
almost as God; nay, all her thoughts of Him were like her thoughts of God, except
that their dread was softened by a human grace. It is not true, it is not an idea, that
inspires her, but this Jesus Himself; and so upon Jesus Himself she lavishes her
tribute of reverent love.
II. But this is a gospel to be preached in all the world; how shall it preach to us? We
have no seen and present Lord to receive the raptures and gifts of our love. The
outward parallel is not for us, but the inward parallel sets forth an unending relation
and an unfaltering duty. Christ asked from men nothing of an external nature, but He
steadily required their personal love and loyalty. He did not ask of any a place to lay
61

62. His head, it mattered little if Simon asked Him to his feasts, but once there, it did
matter whether Simon loved Him or not. Waiving all personal ministration, He yet
claims personal love.
III. Let us see if Christ was mistaken in planting His system upon personal love and
devotion to Himself. Or, more broadly, Why does this faith, that claims to be the
world’s salvation, wear this guise of personal relations? Simply because in no other
way can man be delivered from his evil. In the ideas that the loud-voiced wisdom of
the age would have Us believe to be the salvation of the world, God is driven farther
and farther into unknowable heavens, the Christ is made to figure only on a dim and
blurred page of history. The Faith that is to redeem the world must have a surer
method, it must have a vitalising motive, and such a motive can proceed only from a
person using the strongest force in a person—love. The love we now render is the
fidelity of our whole nature, the verdict of our intelligence, the assent of our
conscience, the allegiance of our will, the loyalty of sympathetic conviction all-
permeated with tender gratitude; but it is still personal, loving Him who loved us and
gave Himself for us.
T. T. Munger, The Freedom of Faith, p. 109.
I. One lesson of this incident is, that we should not grudge any outlay where God and
His glory are concerned; that we should be on our guard against a captious,
withholding temper; against that temper which the disciples showed in their remark
upon Mary’s offering: "Why was this waste of the ointment made?"
II, Note the sense which Christ Himself entertains of such acts of devotion: "She hath
wrought a good work on Me," etc. This, remember, is not the judgment of man. It is
Christ’s own view of an act which His disciples blamed as extravagant. He
pronounces it a good act, and He declares the praise of it shall endure. And His
words on this subject reach even to us. What He spoke of Mary’s homage, He
speaks—doubt it not—of all like generous free-giving in all after times. To such
conduct He awards an everlasting memorial, a remembrance of the doers when they
are dead, living on, age after age, in the hearts and on the lips, of their fellow-men. A
life that never goes beyond the level of common practice, that is never quickened by
any effort of unusual charity, or unusual self-denial; a life that even in its religion is a
selfish life, that seeks its own and not the things which are Jesus Christ’s, that knows
nothing of His constraining love, that never contemplates the giving up of field, or
house, or ease, or pleasure, or natural inclination, or party views, the better to
advance His cause in the world; such a life is not, surely, the life that we can be
content to lead. Certainly it is not the life exhibited for our pattern in the Gospel. It
may be that the utmost we can accomplish will be small; it may be that our poor
efforts to serve the Lord Christ will show as nothing, compared with what some of
our kind have wrought; but this need not dishearten us. If we have done our best,
"what we could," we shall have the seal of His approval; we shall have been faithful in
our few things; and that fidelity—we have His word for it—will gain for us admission
into the joy of our Lord.
R. D. B. Rawnsley, Sermons preached in Country Churches, p. 95.
COFFMAN, "This verse requires important deductions: (1) Christ did not
believe that the end of all things would occur at some near time in the future, this
verse envisaging a worldwide proclamation of the gospel throughout the ages. (2)
62

63. That this memorial "of her" intrinsically demanded the publication of her name
is evident; and therefore the silence of the synoptics regarding it must be
accounted for by supposing that it was deliberately concealed for a long while
afterward, perhaps during the lifetime of Lazarus and his sisters. John, writing
long afterward, supplied the name of Mary (John 12:3). (3) This has the effect of
all three synoptics corroborating the gospel of John regarding the resurrection of
Lazarus from the dead, their silence regarding the name of Mary having no
other reasonable explanation except upon the premise that such a resurrection
had indeed occurred and that the privacy of the family demanded her name's
omission in the earlier gospels. One may read a library of comments and find no
other reasonable explanation of such an omission (in the face of the Saviour's
command) except that inferred here.
JUDAS' BETRAYAL
Stung by Jesus' rebuke, the traitor, already out of sympathy with the spiritual
nature of Christ's kingdom, decided to take matters into his own hands.
PULPIT, "Wheresoever the gospel shall be preached throughout the whole
world, that also which this woman hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial
of her ( εἰς μνημόσυνον αὐτῆς). "Mnemosyne was the mother of the Muses, and
so called because, before the invention of writing, a retentive memory was of the
utmost value in every effort of literary genius". When our Lord delivered this
prediction, none of the Gospels had been written; nor bad the gospel been
preached at this time throughout the then known world. Now it has been
published for more than eighteen centuries; and wherever, it is proclaimed, this
deed of Mary's is published with it, in continual memory of her, and to her
lasting honor.
BI, 9-11, "And Judas Iscariot.
Mary and Judas
As these verses, and especially the narrative of the Fourth Gospel, place in
juxtaposition the grandest act of Mary and the vilest deed of the son of Iscariot, let us
take this opportunity of contrasting the one with the other, that the brightness of the
one character may allure us into the path which she trod, and that the baseness of the
other may determine us with all speed to shun all sin, that we may not be destroyed
by its plagues.
I. We here have Mary’s love for her Lord arriving at its loftier elevation, pouring its
costly treasure on those feet at which she was wont to sit with so much reverence,
and learn lessons whose value is beyond rabies. It was not at first that she wrought
this deed of munificence, the fame of which shall be coeval with the duration of the
world which now is, but after continuing to receive and to profit by the instructions
and works of her Lord for some time; the gracious impression on her mind and heart
toward her Lord, once in its infancy, is full-fledged and full-grown; now the little
leaven has leavened the whole lump.
II. Now let us glance at him who was called to be on earth one of the twelve, and
called in heaven to sit on an apostolic throne; but who became covetous, and, in
consequence, stole from the poor, and sold the Lord for thirty pieces of silver. He was
63

64. not all this at once, even as Mary did not break her alabaster box the first time she
saw Jesus, but the last, immediately before His death and burial. Judas Iscariot erred
by allowing a creaturely thing, even mammon, to have an undue place first in his
thoughts and then in his heart. Jesus was the object of Mary’s regard, her thoughts
were ever running after Him, until her heart was filled and ruled by His love, so that
she would consider it a little thing to be allowed to pour a fortune down at His feet.
She was spiritually-minded, and in that she found rest to her soul; Judas was
carnally-minded, and he fearfully proved that to be so is death.
III. These opposites serve to show that a continued course of virtue or sin will lead to
extraordinary acts of goodness or crime when opportunity or temptation arises.
While the love of Christ leads to constant acts of beneficence for Christ, and
extraordinary acts on great occasions, as with Mary, so, on the other hand, the
disciple who allows himself to indulge at first in lesser acts of delinquency, waxes
gradually worse and worse, becomes so habituated to wander from the straight line,
that he is prepared to commit under strong temptation the greatest enormity, to do
that of which at one time he would have cried with horror, “Is thy servant a dog, that
he should do this thing?” Nip sin in the bud; cease from it at once, for you little know
to what height of crime and depth of shame it may conduct; seek, by God’s help, to
eject from the heart the little leaven of perverseness ere the whole heart and life be
corrupted and misguided thereby; the beginning of sin is as the letting out of water,
there is the trickling stream at first, the overwhelming flood afterwards.
IV. We have the Lord’s commendation of the one and condemnation of the other.
How contrary his fate on earth to that of the woman of Bethany! Thus, the one who
forgot self and thought only of her Lord, and gloried that she might become poor if
He might but be honoured, the fragrance of her name fills the whole world with a
sweet perfume, even as the ointment filled the house with a grateful odour; while the
other, who, yielding to temptation, did not care that His Lord should be destroyed if
he might be enriched and aggrandized, his fate is to stand forth among men as most
destitute and desolate, cursed of God and man. And where are they now-the Christ-
loving one and the money-loving one-brought into contact for a moment under this
roof? The distance between them, the moral distance, has been widening ever since,
and will evermore and evermore; the one has been soaring always nearer to the
throne of infinite love and truth, following the Lamb whithersoever He goeth,
increasing in likeness and devotedness to her Lord; the other, cut off from all sources
of restoring life, and only exposed to what is evil, is always plunging into a lower
depth of corruption, wandering ever to greater distances from his Father’s house, his
Shepherd’s fold; it had been good for that man if he had never been born. A few
lessons suggested by this subject:
1. We have a terrible lesson read to us here against the sin of covetousness. It is
not necessary to have large sums of money entrusted to us to be covetous. No one
can sin exactly as he did by selling again his Saviour for money, but professors, if
not watchful, may allow their supreme love to wander from Christ, and to
concentrate itself on earthly treasure, be it equal in value to five pounds or fifty
thousand; the sin is not in the quantity of wealth which is preferred to the
Saviour, but in giving to wealth or anything else our highest love instead of to
Jesus. Those who do this are as guilty of soul-destroying idolatry as ever Judas
was. Take heed and beware of covetousness; all the more need to beware thereof
because it comes to us in such specious forms, and assumes such deceptive titles,
as economy, carefulness, prudence, honesty, provision for the future, provision
against old age; it is a sin which among men is treated with respect, and not held
in abhorrence, as are sins of murder, adultery, and theft; and yet it has been the
millstone which has sunk many besides Judas among the abysses of the
64

65. bottomless pit; it is idolatry, says the Word of God; and we know that no idolator
hath place in the kingdom of heaven.
2. The only safeguard against this and every other evil besetment is to imbibe the
spirit and track the steps of Hazy. Her heart was full of Christ. Let Him have your
heart, that He may wash it from all sin in His blood, and fill it with His perfect
love. Regard Him as your one thing needful, the only one absolutely essential to
your well-being. Having given Him your heart, and fastened its strongest love on
Him, all boxes and bags containing treasure will be forthcoming at His demand;
and in life, in death, in eternity, like Mary, you will be infinitely removed from
Judas and all who are like-minded. Well, my fellow sinners, do you choose with
Judas or with Mary? Not with Judas, you say. You would not, if you could, betray
the Holy One and the Just. But his original offence, the root of the great betrayal
sin, consisted in allowing something in preference to Christ to engage his
thoughts and affections, even money, until he became wholly absorbed thereby;
there was the seat of the mischief. As long, then, as anything has your heart, be it
money, be it a fellow creature, be it a sensual indulgence, a carnal gratification, be
it anything else, you do choose with Judas and not with Mary. You give your
heart, like the apostate, to some creaturely thing or other, and as long as you do
your soul is in danger of eternal ruin; that one sin of yours, unless it be
abandoned, will destroy you. Oh, choose with the sister of Martha and Lazarus,
and give the whole heart to Jesus. (T. Nightingale.)
Remembering the poor but not Christ
On a cold winter evening, I made my first call on a rich merchant in New York. As I
left his door, and the piercing gale swept in, I said, “What an awful night for the poor
1” He went back, and bringing to me a roll of bank bills, he said, “Please hand these,
for me, to the poorest people you know.” After a few days, I wrote to him the grateful
thanks of the poor whom his bounty had relieved, and added: “How is it that a man
so kind to his fellow creatures has always been so unkind to his Saviour as to refuse
Him his hearty” That sentence touched him to the core. He sent for me to come and
talk with him, and speedily gave himself to Christ. He has been a most useful
Christian ever since. (Dr. Cuyler.)
Helping the poor
On one occasion only did I hear Jenny Lind express her joy in her talent and self-
consciousness. It was during her last residence in Copenhagen. Almost every evening
she appeared either in the opera or at concerts; every hour was in requisition. She
heard of a society, the object of which was to assist unfortunate children, and to take
them out of the hands of their parents, by whom they were misused and compelled
either to beg or steal. “Let me,” said she, “give a night’s performance for the benefit of
these poor children; but we will have double prices.” Such a performance was given,
and returned large proceeds. When she was informed of this, and that by this means
a number of poor children would be benefited for several years, her countenance
beamed, and the tears filled her eyes. “Is it not beautiful,” said she, “that I can sing
so?” Through her I first became sensible of the holiness there is in art; through her I
learned that one must forget one’s self in the service of the Supreme.” (Hans
Christian Andersen.)
65

66. The treachery of Judas
Judas and Mary are at the two poles of human possibility. Perhaps in their earlier
years both seemed equally promising. But now how vast the interval! Little by little
Mary has risen by following God’s light, and little by little Judas has fallen by
following Satan’s temptation.
1. Many begin well who perish awfully.
2. Self is the destruction of safety and sanctity alike.
3. Greed leads to much inward backsliding, and to much open apostasy.
4. There is meanness and cowardice in all evil. Evil lays plots and practises
deceit, ashamed and afraid to act in the open.
5. The goodness of good men makes bad men worse when it fails to wake
repentance in them.
6. The world thinks as Judas thought, that the lack of money is the root of all
evil; but God says what Judas forgot, that the love of money is so.
7. To get one-third of the sum Mary had spent on ointment, Judas sides with the
foes of Jesus, and becomes a traitor to his Saviour.
8. They who plot against the Saviour plot against themselves. It was Judas, not
Christ, who was destroyed.
9. Beware of half-conversion and the blending, of worldliness and discipleship,
for such mixtures end badly. The thorns springing up, choke fatally the grace that
seemed strong and healthy. (R. Glover.)
Policy of Judas
I do not think that Judas meant to betray Jesus to death. He sold Him for about £3
16s. He meant, no doubt, to force His hand-to compel Him to declare Himself and
bring on His kingdom at once. Things, he thought, ought now to come to a crisis;
there could be no doubt that the great Miracle Worker would win if He could only be
pushed into action, and if just a little money could also be made it would be smart,
especially as it would come out of the enemy’s pocket. That was Judas all over. His
character is very interesting, and I think much misunderstood. The direct lesson to
be learnt is generally the danger of living on a low moral plane. It is like a low state of
the body-it is not exactly disease, but it is the condition favourable to all kinds of
disease. Dulness to fine feeling, religion, truth, leads to self-deception-which leads to
blindness of the worst kind, and then on to crime. Nothing is safe but a high Ideal,
and it cannot be too high. Aim at the best always, and keep honour bright. Don’t
tamper with truth-don’t trifle with affection-and, above all, don’t be continually set
on getting money at all risks and at any sacrifice. We may all look a Judas and learn
that. (H. R. Haweis, M. A.)
The sin of covetousness
Learn from this the greatness and danger of the sin of covetousness, the cause and
root from which spring many other sins (1Ti_6:10). A mother sin, having many
cursed daughters like itself. A stock upon which one may graft any sin almost. Hence
come fraud, injustice, and all kinds of oppression both open and secret; cruelty and
66

67. unmerciful dealing; lying, swearing, murder, etc.
1. It withdraws the heart from God and religion, hindering our love to God, and
delight in His service; quenching our zeal for His glory; causing men to set their
hearts upon worldly wealth and gain, which so takes them up that they cannot be
free to love God, and to delight in His service as they ought to do (Mat_6:24;
Luk_14:1-35).
2. It chokes the seed of God’s Word in the hearts of those who hear it, so that it
cannot bring forth fruit in them (Mat_13:22; Eze_33:31).
3. Grievous judgments are threatened in Scripture against this sin (Isa_5:8;
Hab_2:9; Jas_5:1; Luk_6:24).
4. It is a sin very hard to be repented of. When other sins leave a man, e.g., in old
age, this only clings faster to him. He that will follow Christ, and be a true
Christian, must forsake all things in this world (at least in heart) to follow Him.
But how difficult is this for the covetous man to do. Besides, such have many
pretences and excuses for their sin: as, that hard times may come; and, “He that
provides not for his own,” etc., which is one main cause why it is so hard for such
to repent. (George Petter.)
Covetousness not confined to the rich
The poor may think they are free from this sin, and in no danger of falling into it. But
(1) look, does not the love of money or riches possess thy soul? If so, then,
though thou be poor, yet thou mayest be in danger of this sin; yea, thou
mayest be deeply tainted with it-if thy heart be in love with worldly wealth; if
thou eagerly desire to be rich, and esteem wealth too highly, thinking only
those who have it happy.
(2) If discontented with thy present estate, it is a sign thou art covetous.
(George Petter.)
Remedies against covetousness
1. Remember, that we are in Scripture plainly forbidden to desire and seek after
worldly wealth (Pro_23:4; Mat_6:1-34).
2. Consider the nature of all worldly wealth and riches. It is but this world’s
goods (as the Apostle calls it), which serves only for maintenance of this present
momentary life, and is in itself most vain and transitory; being all but perishing
substance. Gold itself is but “gold that perisheth” (1Pe_1:7; 1Ti_6:17; Pro_23:5;
Luk_12:20).
3. Consider how vain and unprofitable to us all worldly wealth is, even while we
enjoy it: not being able of itself to help or do us good (Luk_12:15). The richest
men do not live longest. All the wealth in the world cannot prolong a man’s life
one hour. It cannot give us ease in pain; health in sickness; but most unable it is
to help or deliver us in the day of God’s wrath. Think of these things, to restrain
and keep us from the love and inordinate desire of this world’s goods. One main
cause of covetousness is a false persuasion in men’s hearts touching some great
excellency in riches, that they will make one happy; but it is not so; rather the
contrary.
67

68. 4. Consider the account to be given hereafter to God, of all wealth here enjoyed;
how we have used it, well or ill: for we are not absolute owners of that we have,
but stewards only, entrusted by God with earthly substance to use it to His glory
and the good of others. Think of this well, and it will be a means to curb the
inordinate love and desire of worldly wealth.
5. Labour for faith in God’s providence; to depend on His Fatherly care for things
of this life. This will cut off covetous desires, which are fruits of infidelity and
distrust of God’s Providence (Mat_6:30; Mat_6:32; Rom_8:32; Psa_55:22).
6. Labour for contentedness with present condition. This is true riches (Heb_
13:5; Php_4:11; 1Ti_6:8).
7. Labour to make God our portion and treasure. Let thy heart go chiefly to Him,
and be chiefly set on Him: thy love, joy, delight. Then thou art rich enough. In
Him thou hast all things. (George Petter.)
The Church injured
I. That a too intimate connection between a professing Christian and the world is
injurious to the Church.
II. That the hypocrite is more injurious to the Church than a non-professor.
1. The world depends upon him for an opportunity. To the chief priests all plans
and proposals failed, until Judas’s came.
2. Hypocrites are the leaders of the enemies after abandoning Christ. Examples:
Judas, Alexander the coppersmith, etc.
3. They have a knowledge of the failures of Christian brethren. A fortress
attacked-an enemy disguised enters-has intelligence of the weakness of the
fortification-joins the army outside-leads the assault to the weakest place. Zion
trusts in the Lord.
4. They are too near to be seen. Gold and copper cannot be distinguished when
held so closely as to touch the eye.
III. That a feeble moral character is injurious to the Church.
IV. That the world’s joy and the Church’s grief may often be attributed to the same
cause. “And when they heard it they were glad;” and “they were exceeding sorrowful.”
The same cause-how different the effects! Dismembering, abandonment of God, etc.,
produce similar effects. “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in
heaven is perfect.” (William Nicholson.)
Modern apostasies
The Rev. W. Archer Butler remarks: “The apostasies of the table, the fireside, and the
market may be as bad as those of Judas, Julian, or Demas.” And is it not so? If, for
some petty advantage-some poor worldly enjoyment-our religious duties are
neglected, do we not thereby appear to acknowledge that Christ is of less esteem to
us? If, for example, we forsake our public or private devotions to attend social parties
and engagements, fearing lest we may be otherwise censured for not uniting in them,
is not this one mode of slighting Christ for the world? Or, if we allow the pursuits of
money getting or private pleasure to absorb our lives, or leave us but the narrowest
margin for the service of Jesus and the promotion of His kingdom, is not this also, in
68

69. no imaginary sense, “selling Him for silver?” Then what will the end be if this sin
shall remain unrepented of and persisted in.
Traitors despised by their employers
When Graveston, who betrayed the Spaniards at Bergen-op-Zoom to Queen
Elizabeth, came to England to give her Majesty an account of his success, and to
claim the reward, the queen gave him a thousand crowns, but said to him at the same
time, “Get you home, that I may know where to send when I want a thorough-faced
villain.”
Money that profits not
Three men who were travelling together found a treasure and divided it. Then they
continued on their journey discussing of the use that they would make of their riches.
Having eaten all the food which they had taken with them, they concluded to go away
into the city to purchase some and charged the youngest with this errand, so he set
out on his journey. While on the way he said to himself: “How rich I am! but I should
be richer, did I only have all of the treasure. Those two men have robbed me of my
riches. Shall I not be able to revenge them? That could be easily done, for I should
have only to poison the food which I am commissioned to purchase. On my return I
will tell them that I have dined in town. My companions will partake of the food
without suspicion, and die, then I shall have all the riches, while I have now only a
third.” During this time his two companions said to each other: “We have no need
that this young man associate with us; we have been obliged to divide our riches with
him; his portion would increase ours, and we should be truly rich. He is coming back,
we have good daggers, let us use them.” The youth returned with the poisoned food;
his fellow travellers assassinated him, then partook of the food direct, and the
treasure belonged to no one.
10 Then Judas Iscariot, one of the Twelve, went
to the chief priests to betray Jesus to them.
GILL, "And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve,.... Apostles of Christ; who was
the principal person that had indignation at the woman, and murmured against her,
for the profusion of the ointment:
went unto the chief priests; as soon as this affair was over, and Christ had
defended the woman's conduct to his shame and silence: he immediately went out of
the house, where they were, and set out from Bethany to Jerusalem; and
understanding the chief priests were in consultation together at Caiaphas's house,
how to apprehend Jesus, and put him to death, went directly to them, unsent for, and
unthought of by them:
to betray him unto them; which Satan had put into his heart, and what his
avarice and revenge for the late action of the woman, and Christ's defence of it,
prompted him to; See Gill on Mat_26:14.
69

70. HENRY, " Judas, his disguised enemy, contracted with them for the betraying of
him, Mar_14:10, Mar_14:11. He is said to be one of the twelve that were Christ's
family, intimate with him, trained up for the service of the kingdom; and he went to
the chief priests, to tender his service in this affair.
(1.) That which he proposed to them, was, to betray Christ to them, and to give
them notice when and where they might find him, and seize him, without making an
uproar among the people, which they were afraid of, if they should seize him when
he appeared in public, in the midst of his admirers. Did he know then what help it
was they wanted, and where they were run aground in their counsels? It is probable
that he did not, for the debate was held in their close cabal. Did they know that he
had a mind to serve them, and make court to him? No, they could not imagine that
any of his intimates should be so base; but Satan, who was entered into Judas, knew
what occasion they had for him, and could guide him to be guide to them, who were
contriving to take Jesus. Note, The spirit that works in all the children of
disobedience, knows how to bring them in to the assistance one of another in a
wicked project, and then to harden them in it, with the fancy that Providence favours
them.
(2.) That which he proposed to himself, was, to get money by the bargain; he had
what he aimed at, when they promised to give him money. Covetousness was Judas's
master - lust, his own iniquity, and that betrayed him to the sin of betraying his
Master; the devil suited his temptation to that, and so conquered him. It is not said,
They promised him preferment (he was not ambitious of that), but, they promised
him money. See what need we have to double our guard against the sin that most
easily besets us. Perhaps it was Judas's covetousness that brought him at first to
follow Christ, having a promise that he should be cash-keeper, or purser, to the
society, and he loved in his heart to be fingering money; and now that there was
money to be got on the other side, he was as ready to betray him as ever he had been
to follow him. Note, Where the principle of men's profession of religion is carnal and
worldly, and the serving of a secular interest, the very same principle, whenever the
wind turns, will be the bitter root of a vile and scandalous apostasy.
(3.) Having secured the money, he set himself to make good his bargain; he sought
how he might conveniently betray him, how he might seasonably deliver him up, so
as to answer the intention of those who had hired him. See what need we have to be
careful that we do not ensnare ourselves in sinful engagements. If at any time we be
so ensnared in the words of our mouths, we are concerned to deliver ourselves by a
speedy retreat, Pro_6:1-5. It is a rule in our law, as well as in our religion, that an
obligation to do an evil thing is null and void; it binds to repentance, not to
performance. See how the way of sin is down-hill - when men are in, they must be
on; and what wicked contrivances many have in their sinful pursuits, to compass
their designs conveniently; but such conveniences will prove mischiefs in the end.
JAMIESON, "And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, went unto the chief
priests, to betray him unto them — that is, to make his proposals, and to
bargain with them, as appears from Matthew’s fuller statement (Mat_26:14, Mat_
26:15) which says, he “went unto the chief priests, and said, What will ye give me,
and I will deliver Him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of
silver.” The thirty pieces of silver were thirty shekels, the fine paid for man- or maid-
servant accidentally killed (Exo_21:32), and equal to between four and five pounds
sterling - “a goodly price that I was prized at of them!” (Zec_11:13).
70

71. CONSTABLE, "Verse 10-11
Judas' betrayal of Jesus 14:10-11 (cf. Matthew 26:14-16; Luke 22:3-6)
If the preceding incident happened on Saturday evening and Judas betrayed
Jesus on Wednesday, Mary's act of extravagance did not lead Judas to betray
Jesus immediately. The Gospel writers did not explain Judas' reasons for
betraying Jesus explicitly. It was evidently Judas' initiative in offering to betray
Jesus that led the Sanhedrin to move up their timetable for Jesus' execution. If
Judas handed Jesus over to them, they could avoid the hostility of the crowds (cf.
Mark 14:2; Luke 22:6).
Even though Mary's act of devotion is the high point of this section, providing an
excellent example for disciple readers, the dark undercurrent of betrayal is its
dominant feature. The religious leaders, Judas, and even the disciples manifested
opposition to glorifying Jesus. This attitude was a source of suffering for the
Servant.
BURKITT, "Observe here, 1. The person betraying our blessed Redeemer:
Judas, Judas a professor; Judas, a preacher; Judas, an apostle; and one of the
twelve whom Christ had chosen out of all the world to be his dearest friends, his
family and household; shall we wonder to find friends unfriendly or unfaithful to
us, when our Saviour had a traitor in his own family!
Observe, 2. The heinous nature of Judas's sin, he betrayed Jesus; Jesus his
Maker, Jesus his Master. It is no strange or uncommon thing for the vilest of
sins, and most horrid impieties, to be acted by such persons, as make the most
eminent profession of holiness and religion.
Observe, 3. What was the occasion that led Judas to the commission of this sin: It
was his inordinate love of money. I do not find that Judas had any particular
malice, spite, or ill will, against our Saviour, but a base and unworthy spirit of
covetousness possessed him, and this made him sell his Master. Covetousness is
the root-sin. An eager and insatiable thirst after the world, is a parent of the
most monstrous and unnatural sins; for which reason our Saviour doubles his
caution, Take heed, and beware of covetousness Luke 12:15. It shews us both the
danger of the sin, and great care we ought to take to preserve ourselves from it.
BARCLAY, "THE TRAITOR (Mark 14:10-11)
14:10-11 Judas Iscariot, the man who was one of the Twelve, went away to the
chief priests to betray Jesus to them. When they had listened to his offer, they
were delighted, and they promised to give him money. So he began to search for
a convenient method of betraying him.
It is with consummate artistry that Mark sets side by side the anointing at
Bethany and the betrayal by Judas--the act of generous love and the act of
terrible treachery.
There is always a shudder of the heart as we think of Judas. Dante sets him in
the lowest of all hells, a hell of cold and ice, a hell designed for those who were
not hot sinners swept away by angry passions, but cold, calculating, deliberate
71

72. offenders against the love of God.
Mark tells the story with such economy of words that he leaves us no material
for speculation. But at the back of Judas' action we can distinguish certain
things.
(i) There was covetousness. Matthew 26:15 actually tells us that Judas went to
the authorities and asked what price they were prepared to pay and drove a
bargain with them for thirty pieces of silver. John 11:57 drops a hint. That verse
tells us that the authorities had asked for information as to where Jesus could be
found so as to arrest him. It may well be that by this time Jesus was to all intents
and purposes an outlaw with a price upon his head, and that Judas knew it and
wished to acquire the offered reward. John is quite definite. He tells us that
Judas was the treasurer of the apostolic band and used his position to pilfer from
the common purse (John 12:6).
It may be so. The desire for money can be a terrible thing. It can make a man
blind to decency and honesty and honour. It can make him have no care how he
gets so long as he gets. Judas discovered too late that some things cost too much.
(ii) There was jealousy. Klopstock, the German poet, thought that Judas, when
he joined the Twelve, had every gift and every virtue which might have made
him great, but that bit by bit he became consumed with jealousy of John, the
beloved disciple, and that this jealousy drove him to his terrible act. It is easy to
see that there were tensions in the Twelve. The rest were able to overcome them,
but it may well be that Judas had an unconquerable and uncontrollable demon
of jealousy within his heart. Few things can wreck life for ourselves and for
others as jealousy can.
(iii) There was ambition. Again and again we see how the Twelve thought of the
Kingdom in earthly terms and dreamed of high position in it. Judas must have
been like that. It may well be that, while the others still clung to them, he came to
see how far wrong these dreams were and how little chance they ever had of any
earthly fulfilment. And it may well be that in his disillusionment the love he once
bore to Jesus turned to hate. In Henry the Eighth Shakespeare makes Wolsey say
to Thomas Cromwell:
"Cromwell, I charge thee, fling away ambition;
By that sin fee the angels; how can man then,
The image of his Maker, hope to win by it?
Love thyself last."
There is an ambition which will trample on love and honour and all lovely things
to gain the end it has set its heart upon.
(iv) Minds have been fascinated by the idea that it may be that Judas did not
72

73. want Jesus to die at all. It is almost certain that Judas was a fanatical nationalist
and that he had seen in Jesus the one person who could make his dreams of
national power and glory come true. But now he saw Jesus drifting to death on a
cross. So it may be that in one last attempt to make his dream come true, he
betrayed Jesus in order to force his hand. He delivered him to the authorities
with the idea that now Jesus would be compelled to act in order to save himself,
and that action would be the beginning of the victorious campaign he dreamed
of. It may be that this theory is supported by the fact that when Judas saw what
he had done he flung the accursed money at the feet of the Jewish authorities and
went out and hanged himself. (Matthew 27:3-5). If that is so, the tragedy of
Judas is the greatest in history.
(v) Both Luke and John say quite simply that the devil entered into Judas (Luke
22:3, John 13:27). In the last analysis that is what happened. Judas wanted Jesus
to be what he wanted him to be and not what Jesus wanted to be. In reality
Judas attached himself to Jesus, not so much to become a follower as to use Jesus
to work out the plans and desires of his own ambitious heart. So far from
surrendering to Jesus, he wanted Jesus to surrender to him; and when Jesus
took his own way, the way of the Cross, Judas was so incensed that he betrayed
him. The essence of sin is pride; the core of sin is independence; the heart of sin
is the desire to do what we like and not what God likes. That is what the devil,
satan, the evil one stands for. He stands for everything which is against God and
will not bow to him. That is the spirit which was incarnate in Judas.
We shudder at Judas. But let us think again--covetousness, jealousy, ambition,
the dominant desire to have our own way of things. Are we so very different?
These are the things which made Judas betray Jesus, and these are the things
which still make men betray him.
BENSON, "Mark 14:10-16. Judas went unto the chief priests, &c. —
Immediately after this reproof, having anger now added to his covetousness. See
these verses explained in the notes on Matthew 26:14-19. There shall meet you a
man bearing a pitcher of water — It was highly seasonable for our Lord to give
them this additional proof, both of his knowing all things, and of his influence
over the minds of men; follow him — If our Lord meant that the man would be
coming out of the city as the disciples were going in, his order implied, that they
were to turn back with him, the house whither he was carrying the water being
somewhere in the suburbs; but if he meant that the man would meet them at the
crossing of a street, or the turning of a corner, they were to go with him perhaps
farther into the city. The expression used by Luke, συναντησει υμιν, seems to
favour this supposition. Say ye to the good man of the house — To the master of
the family; The Master saith, Where is the guest-chamber, &c. — Commentators
on this passage tell us, from the Talmudists, that in Jerusalem, at the passover,
the houses were not to be let, but were of common right for any one to eat the
passover in them. He will show you a large upper room furnished — Greek,
εστρομενον, stratum, spread, namely, with a carpet; and prepared — Having
beds or couches placed to recline on. “The English word,” says Dr. Campbell,
“which comes nearest the import of the Greek, is carpeted. But when this term is
used, as here, of a dining-room, it is not meant only of the floor, but of the
73

74. couches, on which the guests reclined at meals. On these they were wont, for the
sake both of neatness and of conveniency, to spread a coverlet or carpet. As this
was commonly the last thing they did in dressing the room, it may not
improperly be employed to denote the whole.” There make ready for us — There
provide the unleavened bread, the lamb, and the bitter herbs, and make all
things ready against the time of our coming. Christ does not order one or both of
these disciples to return and inform him and the others where they had made
this preparation, and to direct them to the house. This was unnecessary; for the
same prophetic gift which enabled Jesus to predict these circumstances, would
easily guide him to the house; and it is a beautiful modesty in the sacred
historian not to notice it. His disciples went forth — After our Lord had given
these particular instructions, the two disciples whom he sent went out from
thence, came into the city, and found all the circumstances as Jesus had
predicted. It is justly observed by Mr. Scott here, that “nothing could be less the
object of natural sagacity and foresight than the events here mentioned. Had the
two disciples come to the place specified rather sooner or later than they did, the
man bearing the pitcher of water would either not have arrived, or would have
been gone. But our Lord knew that the owner of a certain commodious house in
Jerusalem favoured him; he foresaw that at a precise time of the day he would
send his servant for a pitcher of water; that the disciples would meet him just
when they entered the city; that by following him they would find out the person
whom he intended; and that by mentioning him as the master, or the teacher, the
owner of the house would readily consent to accommodate them in an upper
chamber. When the disciples found all these circumstances so exactly accord to
the prediction, they could not but be deeply impressed with a conviction of their
Lord’s knowledge of every event, and of his influence over every heart.”
COFFMAN, “With a member of the group of the apostles in their power, the
chief priests immediately revised their strategy and opted for a public trial and
execution, thinking, no doubt, that Judas would swear to anything they
suggested. This must have looked like a windfall situation to Jesus' foes; but it
was exactly the opposite, proving to be the very thing that spread the whole ugly
record of their shameful campaign against Christ upon the open records of all
subsequent history.
That he might deliver him ... With the aid of Judas, they could look forward to a
positive identification of the Lord, and they readily consented to pay for his
services.
PULPIT, "And Judas Iscariot, he that was one of the twelve ( ὁ εἷς τῶν δώδεκα),
went away unto the chief priests, that he might deliver him unto them. The
betrayal follows immediately after the anointing by Mary. We may suppose that
the other disciples who had murmured on account of this waste of the ointment,
were brought to their senses by our Lord's rebuke, and felt its force. But with
Judas the case was very different. The rebuke, which had a salutary effect on
them, only served to harden him. He had lost one opportunity of gain; he would
seek another. In his cupidity and wickedness he resolves to betray his Master,
and sell him to the Jews. So while the chief priests were plotting how they might
destroy him, they found an apt and unexpected instrument for their purpose in
74

75. one of his own disciples. Judas came to them, and the vile and hateful bargain
was concluded. It marks the tremendous iniquity of the transaction that it was
"one of the twelve" who betrayed him—not one of the seventy, but one of those
who were in the closest intimacy and nearness to him.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:10, Mark 14:11
The traitor.
That there should be a traitor in the camp of our Lord's followers and professed
friends, may be regarded as an instance of the Divine forbearance, which
tolerated one so unworthy, and also as a fulfillment of the predictions of
Scripture. The fact is, however, one which is fraught with instruction and
warning to every disciple of the Lord.
I. THE AGGRAVATIONS OF THE TRAITOR'S GUILT. These are to be
recognized in two circumstances which have been recorded regarding Judas
Iscariot.
1. He was not only a disciple and follower of Jesus; he was actually one of the
twelve. These were admitted to an especial intimacy with Jesus; they knew his
movements, they shared his privacy, they heard his language of friendship and
partook his counsels. All this made the treachery of one of this select band the
more guilty and reprehensible.
2. He was entrusted with office in the little society to which he belonged. The
treasurer of the twelve—although, doubtless, their means were always small—
Judas bare the bag, and made the purchases necessary for the wants of the
companions, and even gave from the general poverty for the relief of those
poorer than they. He was accordingly a trusted official, who abused the
confidence reposed in him.
II. THE MOTIVES TO THE TRAITOR'S GUILT. These were probably two.
1. Judas was dissatisfied with his Master's methods. Doubtless his expectations
were of a carnal character; he wished Jesus to declare himself a King, and to
assign to his twelve friends posts honorable and lucrative in this new kingdom. It
may have been to hasten on this catastrophe that the Iscariot acted as he did.
2. Judas was covetous, and was prompted in his treason by the love of money. He
secured from the chief priests the thirty shekels which formed the customary
price of a slave—"the price of him that was valued!" Surely it is a warning
against avarice and covetousness, to find a professed friend of Jesus misled by
these degrading vices!
III. THE OUTCOME OF THE TRAITOR'S GUILT.
1. It might have been difficult for our Lord's enemies to have seized him had they
not been in the confidence of one of his companions. There were obvious reasons
75

76. why the arrest could not have taken place at Bethany or iu Jerusalem. It was the
duplicity and treachery of Judas that suggested the garden of prayer as the scene
of this disgraceful apprehension.
2. To Judas the consequences were terrific. In remorse and despair he
afterwards took his life.
3. Yet how was all this overruled for wise and gracious ends! The treachery of
the Iscariot was the occasion of the crucifixion of Jesus, and this was the means
of the salvation of the world!
11 They were delighted to hear this and
promised to give him money. So he watched for
an opportunity to hand him over.
CLARKE, "They were glad - The joy that arises from the opportunity of
murdering an innocent person must be completely infernal.
GILL, "And when they heard it, they were glad,.... That such an opportunity
offered, and from such a quarter, by one of his own disciples; so that it might be done
more secretly and effectually, and with less blame to themselves:
and promised to give him money; any sum he should ask; and what was agreed
upon were thirty pieces, or shekels of silver; and so the Ethiopic version here, instead
of money, reads, "thirty pieces of silver"; See Gill on Mat_26:15.
And he sought how he might conveniently betray him; after this promise,
and upon this agreement: henceforward he sought the most fitting opportunity, and
the best season of betraying his master into the hands of these men, when he was
alone, and the multitude absent, and there was no danger of a tumult, or a rescue;
See Gill on Mat_26:16.
HENRY, " Having secured the money, he set himself to make good his bargain; he
sought how he might conveniently betray him, how he might seasonably deliver him
up, so as to answer the intention of those who had hired him. See what need we have
to be careful that we do not ensnare ourselves in sinful engagements. If at any time
we be so ensnared in the words of our mouths, we are concerned to deliver ourselves
by a speedy retreat, Pro_6:1-5. It is a rule in our law, as well as in our religion, that an
obligation to do an evil thing is null and void; it binds to repentance, not to
performance. See how the way of sin is down-hill - when men are in, they must be
76

77. on; and what wicked contrivances many have in their sinful pursuits, to compass
their designs conveniently; but such conveniences will prove mischiefs in the end.
JAMIESON, "And when they heard it, they were glad, and promised to
give him money — Matthew alone records the precise sum, because a remarkable
and complicated prophecy, which he was afterwards to refer to, was fulfilled by it.
And he sought how he might conveniently betray him — or, as more fully
given in Luke (Luk_22:6), “And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray Him
unto them in the absence of the multitude.” That he should avoid an “uproar” or
“riot” among the people, which probably was made an essential condition by the
Jewish authorities, was thus assented to by the traitor; into whom, says Luke (Luk_
22:3), “Satan entered,” to put him upon this hellish deed.
COFFMAN, "Mark made no mention of the exact time of payment, but the fact
of Judas' returning it that same night shows that there was no long time-lapse,
perhaps only time enough for the priests to be sure that Judas would keep his
part of the bargain. Regarding the amount and disposition of the thirty pieces of
silver and the fulfillment of prophecy connected with this incident, see my
Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 26:14.
And they were glad ... Thinking they were then completely in charge of events,
they changed their strategy from that of secret assassination to judicial murder.
The strategy of the priests required that Christ be seized when the multitudes
were not present; and it was natural that Judas would have counted upon his
knowledge of some rendezvous on the slopes of Mount Olivet where Jesus might
be spending the night.
PULPIT, "And they, when they heard it, were glad, and promised to give him
money. And he sought ( ἐζήτει)—he was seeking; he made it his business to
arrange how the infamous plot might be managed—how he might conveniently
deliver him unto them ( πῶς εὐκαίρως αὐτὸν παραδῷ); literally, how at a
convenient season he might betray him. And they,when they heard it, were glad;
glad, because they saw the prospect of the accomplishment of their wishes; glad,
because it was "one of the twelve" who covenanted to betray him. They promised
to give him money. St. Matthew (Matthew 26:15) tells us the amount, namely,
thirty pieces of silver, according to the prophecy of Zechariah (Zechariah 11:12),
to which St. Matthew evidently refers. These pieces of silver were shekels of the
sanctuary, worth about three shillings each. This would make the whole amount
about £4 10s. of our money; less than half the value of the precious ointment with
which Mary had anointed him. Some commentators, however, think that this
was only an instalment of what they promised him if he completed his
treasonable design. How he might conveniently deliver him unto them. St. Luke
(Luke 22:6) explains this by saying, "in the absence of the multitude;" that is,
when the people were not about him, and when he was in private with his
disciples. And so he betrayed him at night, when he was alone with his disciples
in the Garden of Gethsemane.
77

78. The Last Supper
12 On the first day of the Festival of Unleavened
Bread, when it was customary to sacrifice the
Passover lamb, Jesus’ disciples asked him,
“Where do you want us to go and make
preparations for you to eat the Passover?”
BARNES, "They killed the passover - The “paschal lamb,” which was slain in
keeping the Passover.
Go and prepare - Go and provide a lamb, have it roasted, and properly prepared
with the usual things to eat with it.
GILL, "And the first day of unleavened bread,.... Being come, which was the
fourteenth of Nisan:
when they killed the passover; that is, "the Jews", as the Syriac and Persic
versions supply; for any Israelite, that not a priest, might slay it: their canon runs
thus (x),
"an Israelite kills (the passover), and a priest receives (the blood), and gives it to his
neighbour, and his neighbour to his neighbour, and he receives (the basin) full, and
returns it empty; the priest that is near to the altar sprinkles it, at one sprinkling,
over against the bottom of it.''
Upon which the commentators (y) observe, that the slaying of the passover by
strangers; that is, such as are not priests, lawful. And so Philo the Jew, speaking of
the passover, says (z);
"at which time the common people do not bring their sacrifices to the altar, and the
priests slay; but by the command of the law, συµπαν το εθνος, "the whole nation",
does the work of a priest; every one particularly bringing the sacrifices for himself,
and then slaying them with his own hands.''
But then it was always killed in the court of the temple, and after the middle of the
day; See Gill on Mat_26:17;
his disciples said unto him, where wilt thou that we go and prepare, that
thou mayst eat the passover: for it was now Thursday morning, and the passover
was to be slain after the middle of the day, between the two evenings, and eaten in
Jerusalem at night; and they were now at Bethany, near two miles from the city; and
it was usual for servants to get ready the passover for their masters; See Gill on Mat_
26:17.
78

79. HENRY, "In these verses we have,
I. Christ's eating the passover with his disciples, the night before he died, with the
joys and comforts of which ordinance he prepared himself for his approaching
sorrows, the full prospect of which did not indispose him for that solemnity. Note,
No apprehension of trouble, come or coming, should put us by, or put us out of
frame for, our attendance on holy ordinances, as we have opportunity for it.
1. Christ ate the passover at the usual time when the other Jews did, as Dr. Whitby
had fully made out, and not, as Dr. Hammond would have it, the night before. It was
on the first day of that feast, which (taking in all the eight days of the feast) was
called, The feast of unleavened bread, even that day when they killed the passover,
Mar_14:12.
JAMIESON, "Mar_14:12-26. Preparation for, and last celebration of, the
Passover - Announcement of the traitor - Institution of the Supper. ( = Mat_
26:17-30; Luk_22:7-23, Luk_22:39; Joh_13:21-30).
See on Luk_22:7-23; see on Luk_22:39; and see on Joh_13:10, Joh_13:11; see on
Joh_13:18, Joh_13:19; see on Joh_13:21-30.
BARCLAY, "PREPARING FOR THE FEAST (Mark 14:12-16)
14:12-16 On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when they were
sacrificing the Passover Lamb, Jesus' disciples said to him, "Where do you wish
us to go and make the necessary preparations for you to eat the Passover?" He
despatched two of his disciples, and said to them. "Go into the city, and there
will meet you a man carrying an earthen pitcher of water. Follow him, and
wherever he enters in, say to the householder, 'The teacher says, "Where is my
room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?"' He will show you a
large upper room, furnished and prepared. There get things ready for us." So
the disciples went away, and they came into the city, and found everything just
as he had told them. And they got everything ready for the Passover Feast.
It may seem an unusual word to use in connection with Jesus, but, as we read the
narrative of the last week of his life, we cannot help being struck with his
efficiency of arrangement. Again and again we see that he did not leave things
until the last moment. Long before, he had arranged that the colt should be
ready for his ride into Jerusalem; and here again we see that all his
arrangements had been made long beforehand.
His disciples wished to know where they would eat the Passover. Jesus sent them
into Jerusalem with instructions to look for a man carrying an earthen pitcher of
water. That was a prearranged signal. To carry a water-pot was a woman's duty.
It was a thing that no man ever did. A man with a water-pot on his shoulder
would stand out in any crowd as much as, say, a man on a wet day with a lady's
umbrella. Jesus did not leave things until the last minute. Long ago he had
arranged a last meeting-place for himself and for his disciples, and had arranged
just how it was to be found.
The larger Jewish houses had upper rooms. Such houses looked exactly like a
smaller box placed on top of a bigger box. The smaller box was the upper room,
79

80. and it was approached by an outside stair, making it unnecessary to go through
the main room. The upper room had many uses. It was a storeroom, it was a
place for quiet and meditation, it was a guest-room for visitors. But in particular
it was the place where a Rabbi taught his chosen band of intimate disciples.
Jesus was following the custom that any Jewish Rabbi might follow.
We must remember the Jewish way of reckoning days. The new day began at 6
p.m. in the evening. Up until 6 p.m. it was 13th Nisan, the day of the preparation
for the Passover. But 14th Nisan, the Passover day itself, began at 6 p.m. To put
it in English terms, Friday the 14th began at 6 p.m. on Thursday the 13th.
What were the preparations that a Jew made for The Passover?
First was the ceremonial search for leaven. Before the Passover every particle, of
leaven must be banished from the house. That was because the first Passover in
Egypt (Exodus 12:1-51 ) had been eaten with unleavened bread. (Unleavened
bread is not like bread at all. It is like a water-biscuit.) It had been used in Egypt
because it can be baked much more quickly than a loaf baked with leaven, and
the first Passover, the Passover of escape from Egypt, had been eaten in haste,
with everyone ready for the road. In addition leaven was the symbol of
corruption. Leaven is fermented dough, and the Jew identified fermentation with
putrefaction, and so leaven stood for rottenness. The day before the Passover the
master of the house took a lighted candle and ceremonially searched the house
for leaven. Before the search he prayed,
"Blessed art thou, Jehovah, our God, King of the Universe, who
hast sanctified us by thy commandments, and commanded us to
remove the leaven."
At the end of the search the householder said,
"All the leaven that is in my possession, that which I have seen
and that which I have not seen, be it null, be it accounted as the
dust of the earth."
Next, on the afternoon before the Passover evening, came the sacrifice of the
Passover Lamb. All the people came to the Temple. The worshipper must slay his
own lamb, thereby, as it were, making his own sacrifice. But in Jewish eyes all
blood was sacred to God, because the Jew equated the blood and the life. It was
quite natural to do so because, if a person or an animal is wounded, as the blood
flows away, so does life. So in the Temple the worshipper slew his own lamb.
Between the worshippers and the altar were two long lines of priests, each with a
gold or silver bowl. As the lamb's throat was slit the blood was caught in one of
these bowls, and passed up the line, until the priest at the end of the line dashed
it upon the altar. The carcase was then flayed, the entrails and the fat extracted,
80

81. because they were part of the necessary sacrifice, and the carcass handed back to
the worshipper. If the figures of Josephus are anywhere nearly correct, and there
were more than a quarter of a million lambs slain, the scene in the Temple courts
and the blood-stained condition of the altar can hardly be imagined. The lamb
was carried home to be roasted. It must not be boiled. Nothing must touch it, not
even the sides of a pot. It had to be roasted over an open fire on a spit made of
pomegranate wood. The spit went right through the lamb from mouth to vent,
and the lamb had to be roasted entire with head and legs and tail still attached to
the body.
The table itself was shaped like a square with one side open. It was low and the
guests reclined on couches, resting on their left arms with their right arms free
for eating.
Certain things were necessary and these were the things the disciples would have
to get ready.
(i) There was the lamb, to remind them of how their houses had been protected
by the badge of blood when the angel of death passed through Egypt.
(ii) There was the unleavened bread to remind them of the bread they had eaten
in haste when they escaped from slavery.
(iii) There was a bowl of salt water, to remind them of the tears they had shed in
Egypt and of the waters of the Red Sea through which they had miraculously
passed to safety.
(iv) There was a collection of bitter herbs--horse radish, chicory, endive, lettuce,
horehound--to remind them of the bitterness of slavery in Egypt.
(v) There was a paste called Charosheth, a mixture of apples, dates,
pomegranates and nuts, to remind them of the clay of which they had made
bricks in Egypt. Through it there were sticks of cinnamon to remind them of the
straw with which the bricks had been made.
(vi) There were four cups of wine. The cups contained a little more than half a
pint of wine, but three parts of wine were mixed with two of water. The four
cups, which were drunk at different stages of the meal, were to remind them of
the four promises in Exodus 6:6-7,
"I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians.
I will rid you of their bondage.
I will redeem you with an outstretched arm.
I will take you to me for a people, and I will be your God."
Such were the preparations which had to be made for the Passover. Every detail
81

82. spoke of that great day of deliverance when God liberated his people from their
bondage in Egypt. It was at that feast that he who liberated the world from sin
was to sit at his last meal with his disciples.
BURKITT, "The time for the celebration of the passover being now at hand,
Christ sends two of his disciples to Jerusalem to prepare things necessary in
order thereunto.
And here we have observable, 1. An eminent proof of Christ's divine nature, in
telling them all the particulars which they should meet with in the city, as A man
bearing a pitcher of water, &c.
2. How readily the heart of this householder was disposed to receive our Saviour
and his disciples, and to accommodate them with all things needful upon this
occasion. Our blessed Saviour had not a lamb of his own, and peradventure no
money wherewith to buy one, yet he finds as excellent accommodations in this
poor man's house, as if he had dwelt in Ahad's ivory palace, and had the
provision of Solomon's table.
When Christ has a passover to celebrate, he will dispose the heart to a free
reception of himself. The room which Christ will enter into, must be a large
room, an upper room, furnished and prepared; a large room, is an enlarged
heart, enlarged with love and thankfulness; an upper room, is an heart exalted,
not puffed up with pride, but lifted up by heavenly-mindedness; a room
furnished, is a soul adorned with the graces of the Holy Spirit; into such an
heart, and only such, will Christ enter.
COFFMAN, “On the first day of unleavened bread ... The Jewish Passover
always began at sundown on the 14th of Nisan, the following day, the 15th of
Nisan, actually being the Passover day. The first day of unleavened bread was
the preceding day, the 13th of Nisan (beginning at sundown on the 12th of
Nisan). Since Christ died at the same hour the paschal lambs were being slain,
that is, at 3:00 p.m. on the 14th, the event Mark mentioned here took place on
the afternoon of daytime Nisan 13. Of course the meal that followed those
preparations took place after sunset (the beginning of a new day by Jewish
reckoning) and therefore on Nisan 14.
For a detailed chronological list of events comprising this exceedingly important
week, see my Commentary on Luke under Luke 22:2. In the Hebrew method of
counting time, the Last Supper, all events of the long night following and the
crucifixion itself all occurred on the same day!
Where wilt thou that we eat the passover ...? From this, it has long been alleged
that the meal of the Last Supper was actually eaten on the Passover, Nisan 15th;
but there is no way this can be correct. The soldiers were ordered to break Jesus'
legs to prevent his being on the cross upon that holy day; and, if the Lord had
eaten the passover meal the night before, no such precaution would have
occurred. Therefore, the Last Supper was called by Mark "the passover,"
because it took the place of the passover and so nearly resembled it. See article
82

83. below.
WAS THE LAST SUPPER ON THE PASSOVER?
The answer to this question must be in the negative for the following reasons:
(1) Christ was taken down from the cross and buried before sundown on the day
the Passover officially began, that being the purpose of the breaking of the legs of
the thieves and of the order that Jesus should have received the same treatment.
(2) Note that it was not Christ, but the disciples, who mentioned eating the
passover, and that Christ referred rather to "keeping" it, a far different thing
(Matthew 26:18). Christ kept it by the solemn observance of the Last Supper, a
full 24 hours before the actual passover.
(3) All of the gospels represent Jesus and his disciples as "reclining" for the
meal; and, if it was indeed the passover supper, their actions would have been
contrary to the commandment of God that it should be eaten "standing up"
(Exodus 12:11). It is true, of course, that the chief priests of Israel had changed
God's ordinance and that in the times of Christ it was customary to eat the
passover lying down, or reclining; but how can a child of God believe that the
Son of God consented to such a categorical contradiction of sacred law? Would
Jesus have been any more inclined to accept their traditions in this matter than
he was to allow their traditions in regard to the sabbath? This student cannot
believe that the Christ accepted any such change by the Pharisees in God's law.
The unanimous record of the gospels to the effect that the Last Supper was eaten
in a reclining position was their way of saying that it was not the passover at all.
(4) There was no lamb eaten at the Last Supper, at least none being mentioned;
and, if there had been, it is inconceivable that the Lamb of God who taketh away
the sin of the world would not have mentioned it.
(5) Mark's statement here that the meal was "on the first day of unleavened
bread" is not the same as saying it was on the Passover. As Dummelow said:
In strict usage "the first day of unleavened bread" meant the first day of the
Passover festival, which began with the paschal supper. But it is
possible that the day before this, when the paschal lambs were sacrificed, and all
leaven was expelled from the houses, was popularly spoken of as "the first day of
the unleavened bread."[2]SIZE>
It is the conviction here that this popular usage of the expression was made in
Mark's record here. Only by contradicting the Gospel of John can anything else
be maintained.
(6) Christ's death at 3:00 o'clock in the afternoon before the Passover began with
the paschal supper after sundown that same day corresponded with the time of
sacrificing the paschal lambs, as required of the anti-type fulfilling the type.
83

84. (7) The fact of the temple guard, accompanied by the priests and soldiers
supplied by Pilate, bearing arms on the night Jesus was betrayed (after the Last
Supper), proves that it was not Passover. They would never have engaged in such
a mission, bearing arms, on such a holy day as the Passover.
(8) Joseph of Arimathea and others would not have prepared spices and have
taken the body of Jesus to the tomb on Passover.
(9) There is no way that an apostle could have referred to the day Jesus was
crucified as "The Preparation" (John 19:31), if it had been actually the Passover.
From these and many other considerations, it is evident that the day spoken of
by Mark in verse 12 was after sundown of Nisan 13, counted the 14th.
ENDNOTE:
[2] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan
Company, 1937), p. 709.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:12-26
The Paschal supper.
The Lord's Supper is a distinctively Christian ordinance. Yet this record shows
us that it was our Lord's design that it should be linked on to an observance with
which his disciples were already familiar. He thus took advantage of a principle
in human nature, and connected the associations and recollections which to the
Hebrew mind were most sacred, with what was to be one of the holiest and most
pathetic engagements of his people throughout all time.
I. THE OCCASION AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE INSTITUTION OF
THE LORD'S SUPPER,
1. The place in which this festival was first celebrated was provided by willing
friendship. The circumstantial narrative points to the high probability that some
wealthy friend of the Lord Jesus placed the guest-chamber of his house at
Jerusalem at the disposal of the Master whom he honored. There was something
very appropriate in the consecration in this manner of the offices of human love.
2. The time is very instructive and pathetic. It was evening; it was the last
evening of rest and peace our Lord should enjoy; it was the evening which
preceded the day of his sacrifice.
3. The company consisted of the twelve favored companions of Jesus. Judas was
at the meal, but retired before the institution of the Eucharist. How sacred and
congenial a gathering! How sweet and touching this calm which came before the
bursting of the storm!
4. The occasion was the observance of the Paschal meal. Thus the light of the
84

85. Hebrew Passover was shed upon the Christian sacrament and Eucharist. Thus it
was suggested to the apostle that "Christ our Passover was slain for us."
II. THE TROUBLE WHICH SADDENED THE SUPPER. Evidently this made a
deep impression upon all who took part in the meal. They saw that their Master
was distressed, and they felt with him the touching sorrow. The treachery of
Judas was known to him who needed not to be told what was in man. The grief
which weighed down the heart of the Lord was communicated by him to all the
sympathizing members of the group. The sin which was bringing Jesus to the
cross was gathered up and made visible and palpable in the conduct of the
traitor. And the sensitive nature of our High Priest was affected and oppressed
by it.
III. THE SPIRITUAL IMPORT OF THE SUPPER.
1. It was a commemoration of the Lord's sufferings and death. The broken bread
was intended to keep in perpetual memory the body which was broken; the wine
poured out to recall to Christian hearts throughout all time the blood which was
shed.
2. It was a symbol. Here is the explanation of the Lord's own words concerning
eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the Son of man. Thus are we taught
and helped to feed on him by faith who is the Bread of life.
4. THE PROPHECY AND PROMISE OF THE SUPPER. It had a first chief
bearing upon the past, yet it pointed on to the future; it prefigured the marriage
supper of the Lamb. In the kingdom of God the heavenly wine should be
quaffed; in the upper temple the plaintive hymn of the sacrament should be
exchanged for the triumphal anthem of the glorified, immortal host and choir.
APPLICATION.
1. The blood was shed for many; have we shown our consciousness that it was
shed for us?
2. Let every communicant tremble lest he betray the Lord, and ask with concern
and contrition, "Lord, is it I?"
MACLAREN, "A SECRET RENDEZVOUS
This is one of the obscurer and less noticed incidents, but perhaps it contains more
valuable teaching than appears at first sight.
The first question is-Miracle or Plan? Does the incident mean supernatural
knowledge or a preconcerted token, like the provision of the ass at the entry into
Jerusalem? I think that there is nothing decisive either way in the narrative. Perhaps
the balance of probability lies in favour of the latter theory. A difficulty in its way is
that no communication seems to pass between the two disciples and the man by
which he could know them to be the persons whom he was to precede to the house.
There are advantages in either theory which the other loses; but, on the whole, I
85

86. incline to believe in a preconcerted signal. If we lose the supernatural, we gain a
suggestion of prudence and human adaptation of means to ends which makes the
story even more startlingly real to us.
But whichever theory we adopt, the main points and lessons of the narrative remain
the same.
I. The remarkable thing in the story is the picture it gives us of Christ as
elaborately adopting precautions to conceal the place.
They are at Bethany. The disciples ask where the passover is to be eaten. The easy
answer would have been to tell the name of the man and his house. That is not given.
The deliberate round-aboutness of the answer remains the same whether miracle or
plan. The two go away, and the others know nothing of the place. Probably the
messengers did not come back, but in the evening Jesus and the ten go straight to the
house which only He knew.
All this secrecy is in strong contrast with His usual frank and open appearances.
What is the reason? To baffle the traitor by preventing him from acquiring previous
knowledge of the place. He was watching for some quiet hour in Jerusalem to take
Jesus. So Christ does not eat the passover at the house of any well-known disciple
who had a house in Jerusalem, but goes to some man unknown to the Apostolic
circle, and takes steps to prevent the place being known beforehand.
All this looks like the ordinary precautions which a man who knew of the plots
against him would take, and might mean simply a wish to save his life. But is that the
whole explanation? Why did He wish to baffle the traitor? (a) Because of His desire
to eat the passover with the disciples. His loving sympathy.
(b) Because of His desire to found the new rite of His kingdom.
(c) Because of His desire to bring His death into immediate connection with the
Paschal sacrifice. There was no reason of a selfish kind, no shrinking from death
itself.
The fact that such precautions only meet us here, and that they stand in strongest
contrast with the rest of His conduct, emphasises the purely voluntary nature of His
death: how He chose to be betrayed, taken, and to die. They suggest the same
thought as do the staggering back of His would-be captors in Gethsemane, at His
majestic word, ‘I am He. . . . Let these go their way.’ The narrative sets Him forth as
the Lord of all circumstances, as free, and arranging all events.
Judas, the priests, Pilate, the soldiers, were swept by a power which they did not
know to deeds which they did not understand. The Lord of all gives Himself up in
royal freedom to the death to which nothing dragged Him but His own love.
Such seem to be the lessons of this narrative in so far as it bears on our Lord’s own
thoughts and feelings.
II. We note also the authoritative claim which He makes.
One reading is ‘my guest-chamber,’ and that makes His claim even more emphatic;
but apart from that, the language is strong in its expression of a right to this
unknown man’s ‘upper room.’ Mark the singular blending here, as in all His earthly
life, of poverty and dignity-the lowliness of being obliged to a man for a room; the
royal style, ‘The Master saith.’
So even now there is the blending of the wonderful fact that He puts Himself in the
position of needing anything from us, with the absolute authority which He claims
86

87. over us and ours.
III. The answer and blessedness of the unknown disciple.
(a) Jesus knows disciples whom the other disciples know not.
This man was one of the of ‘secret’ disciples. There is no excuse for shrinking from
confession of His name; but it is blessed to believe that His eye sees many a ‘hidden
one.’ He recognises their faith, and gives them work to do. Add the striking thought
that though this man’s name is unrecorded by the Evangelist, it is known to Christ,
was written in His heart, and, to use the prophetic image, ‘was graven on the palms
of His hands.’
(b) The true blessedness is to be ready for whatever calls He may make on us. These
may sometimes be sudden and unlooked for. But the preparation for obeying the
most sudden or exacting summons of His is to have our hearts in fellowship with
Him.
(c) The blessedness of His coming into our hearts, and accepting our service.
How honoured that man felt then! how much more so as years went on! how most of
all now!
Our greatest blessedness that He does come into the narrow room of our hearts: ‘If
any man open the door, I will sup with him.’
Mark 14:12-26
THE NEW PASSOVER
This passage falls into three sections-the secret preparation for the Passover (Mar_
14:12-17), the sad announcement of the betrayer (Mar_14:18-21), and the institution
of the Lord’s Supper (Mar_14:22-26). It may be interesting to notice that in the two
former of these Mark’s account approximates to Luke’s, while in the third he is
nearer Matthew’s. A comparison of the three accounts, noting the slight, but often
significant, variations, should be made. Nothing in the Gospels is trivial. ‘The dust of
that land is gold.’
I. The secret preparation for the Passover.
The three Evangelists all give the disciples’ question, but only Luke tells us that it was
in answer to our Lord’s command to Peter and John to go and prepare the Passover.
They very naturally said ‘Where?’ as they were all strangers in Jerusalem. Matthew
may not have known of our Lord’s initiative; but if Mark were, as he is, with apparent
correctness, said to have been, Peter’s mouthpiece in his Gospel, the reticence as to
the prominence of that Apostle is natural, and explains the omission of all but the
bare fact of the despatch of the two. The curiously roundabout way in which they are
directed to the ‘upper room’ is only explicable on the supposition that it was intended
to keep them in the dark till the last moment, so that no hint might leak from them to
Judas. Whether the token of the man with the waterpot was a preconcerted signal or
an instance of our Lord’s supernatural knowledge and sovereign sway, his
employment as a silent and probably unconscious guide testifies to Christ’s wish for
that last hour to be undisturbed. A man carrying a water-pot, which was woman’s
special task, would be a conspicuous figure even in the festival crowds. The message
to the householder implies that he recognised ‘the Master’ as his Master, and was
ready to give up at His requisition even the chamber which he had prepared for his
87

88. own family celebration of the feast.
Thus instructed, the two trusted Apostles left Bethany, early in the day, without a
clue of their destination reaching Judas’s hungry watchfulness. Evidently they did
not return, and in the evening Jesus led the others straight to the place. Mark says
that He came ‘with the twelve’; but he does not mean thereby to specify the number,
but to define the class, of His attendants.
Each figure in this preparatory scene yields important lessons. Our Lord’s earnest
desire to secure that still hour before pushing out into the storm speaks pathetically
of His felt need of companionship and strengthening, as well as of His self-forgetting
purpose to help His handful of bewildered followers and His human longing to live in
faithful memories. His careful arrangements bring vividly into sight the limitations of
His manhood, in that He, ‘by whom all things consist,’ had to contrive and plan in
order to baffle for a moment His pursuers. And, side by side with the lowliness, as
ever, is the majesty; for while He stoops to arrange, He sees with superhuman
certitude what will happen, moves unconscious feet with secret and sovereign sway,
and in royal tones claims possession of His servant’s possessions.
The two messengers, sent out with instructions which would only guide them half-
way to their destination, and obliged, if they were to move at all, to trust absolutely to
His knowledge, present specimens of the obedience still required. He sends us out
still on a road full of sharp turnings round which we cannot see. We get light enough
for the first stage; and when it is traversed, the second will be plainer.
The man with the water-pot reminds us how little we may be aware of the Hand
which guides us, or of our uses in His plans. ‘I girded thee, though thou hast not
known Me,’-how little the poor water-bearer knew who were following, or dreamed
that he and his load would be remembered for ever! The householder responded at
once, and gladly, to the authoritative message, which does not ask a favour, but
demands a right. Probably he had intended to celebrate the Passover with his own
family, in the large chamber on the roof, with the cool evening air about it, and the
moonlight sleeping around. But he gladly gives it up. Are we as ready to surrender
our cherished possessions for His use?
II. The sad announcement of the traitor (Mar_14:18 - Mar_14:21).
As the Revised Version indicates more clearly than the Authorised, the purport of the
announcement was not merely that the betrayer was an Apostle, but that he was to be
known by his dipping his hand into the common dish at the same moment as our
Lord. The prophetic psalm would have been abundantly fulfilled though Judas’s
fingers had never touched Christ’s; but the minute accomplishment should teach us
that Jewish prophecy was the voice of divine foreknowledge, and embraced small
details as well as large tendencies. Many hands dipped with Christ’s, and so the sign
was not unmistakably indicative, and hence was privately supplemented, as John
tells us, by the giving of ‘the sop.’ The uncertainty as to the indication given by the
token is reflected by the reiterated questions of the Apostles, which, in the Greek, are
cast in a form that anticipates a negative answer: ‘Surely not I?’ Mark omits the
audacious hypocrisy of Judas’s question in the same form, and Christ’s curt, sad
answer which Matthew gives. His brief and vivid sketch is meant to fix attention on
the unanimous shuddering horror of these faithful hearts at the thought that they
could be thus guilty-a horror which was not the child of presumptuous self-
confidence, but of hearty, honest love. They thought it impossible, as they felt the
throbbing of their own hearts-and yet-and yet-might it not be? As they probed their
hearts deeper, they became dimly aware of dark gulfs of possible unfaithfulness half
visible there, and so betook themselves to their Master, and strengthened their
loyalty by the question, which breathed at once detestation of the treason and
88

89. humble distrust of themselves. It is well to feel and speak the strong recoil from sin of
a heart loyal to Jesus. It is better to recognise the sleeping snakes, the possibilities of
evil in ourselves, and to take to Christ our ignorance and self-distrust. It is wiser to
cry ‘Is it I?’ than to boast, ‘Although all shall be offended, yet will not I.’ ‘Hold Thou
me up, and I shall be safe.’
Our Lord answers the questions by a still more emphatic repetition of the distinctive
mark, and then, in Mar_14:21, speaks deep words of mingled pathos, dignity, and
submission. The voluntariness of His death, and its uniqueness as His own act of
return to His eternal home, are contained in that majestic ‘goeth,’ which asserts the
impotence of the betrayer and his employers, without the Lord’s own consent. On the
other hand, the necessity to which He willingly bowed is set forth in that ‘as it is
written of Him.’ And what sadness and lofty consciousness of His own sacred
personality and judicial authority are blended in the awful sentence on the traitor!
What was He that treachery to Him should be a crime so transcendent? What right
had He thus calmly to pronounce condemnation? Did He see into the future? Is it the
voice of a Divine Judge, or of a man judging in his own cause, which speaks this
passionless sentence? Surely none of His sayings are more fully charged with His
claims to pre-existence, divinity, and judicial authority, than this which He spoke at
the very moment when the traitor’s plot was on the verge of success.
III. The institution of the Lord’s Supper (Mar_14:22 - Mar_14:26).
Mark’s account is the briefest of the three, and his version of Christ’s words the most
compressed. It omits the affecting ‘Do this for remembering Me,’ which is pre-
supposed by the very act of instituting the ordinance, since it is nothing if not
memorial; and it makes prominent two things-the significance of the elements, and
the command to partake of them. To these must be added Christ’s attitude in
‘blessing’ the bread and cup, and His distribution of them among the disciples. The
Passover was to Israel the commemoration of their redemption from captivity and
their birth as a nation. Jesus puts aside this divinely appointed and venerable festival
to set in its stead the remembrance of Himself. That night, ‘to be much remembered
of the children of Israel,’ is to be forgotten, and come no more into the number of the
months; and its empty place is to be filled by the memory of the hours then passing.
Surely His act was either arrogance or the calm consciousness of the unique
significance and power of His death. Think of any mere teacher or prophet doing the
like! The world would meet the preposterous claim implied with deserved and
inextinguishable laughter. Why does it not do so with Christ’s act? Christ’s view of
His death is written unmistakably on the Lord’s Supper. It is not merely that He
wishes it rather than His life, His miracles, or words, to be kept in thankful
remembrance, but that He desires one aspect of it to be held high and clear above all
others. He is the true ‘Passover Lamb,’ whose shed and sprinkled blood establishes
new bonds of amity and new relations, with tender and wonderful reciprocal
obligations, between God and the ‘many’ who truly partake of that sacrifice. The key-
words of Judaism-’sacrifice,’ ‘covenant,’ ‘sprinkling with blood’-are taken over into
Christianity, and the ideas they represent are set in its centre, to be cherished as its
life. The Lord’s Supper is the conclusive answer to the allegation that Christ did not
teach the sacrificial character and atoning power of His death. What, then, did He
teach when He said, ‘This is My blood of the covenant, which is shed for many’? The
Passover was a family festival, and that characteristic passes over to the Lord’s
Supper. Christ is not only the food on which we feed, but the Head of the family and
distributor of the banquet. He is the feast and the Governor of the feast, and all who
sit at that table are ‘brethren.’ One life is in them all, and they are one as partakers of
One.
The Lord’s Supper is a visible symbol of the Christian life, which should not only be
89

90. all lived in remembrance of Him, but consists in partaking by faith of His life, and
incorporating it in ours, until we come to the measure of perfect men, which, in one
aspect, we reach when we can say, ‘I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.’
There is a prophetic element, as well as a commemorative and symbolic, in the Lord’s
Supper, which is prominent in Christ’s closing words. He does not partake of the
symbols which He gives; but there comes a time, in that perfected form of the
kingdom, when perfect love shall make all the citizens perfectly conformed to the
perfect will of God. Then, whatsoever associations of joy, of invigoration, of festal
fellowship, clustered round the wine-cup here, shall be heightened, purified, and
perpetuated in the calm raptures of the heavenly feast, in which He will be Partaker,
as well as Giver and Food. ‘Thou shalt make them drink of the river of Thy pleasures.’
The King’s lips will touch the golden cup filled with un-foaming wine, ere He
commends it to His guests. And from that feast they will ‘go no more out,’ neither
shall the triumphant music of its great ‘hymn’ be followed by any Olivet or
Gethsemane, or any denial, or any Calvary; but there shall be ‘no more sorrow, nor
sin, nor death’; for ‘the former things are passed away,’ and He has made ‘all things
new.’
BI, "When they killed the Passover.
The Passover, a typical observance
No other festival was so full of typical meaning, or pointed so clearly to “good things
to come” (Heb_10:1).
I. It was a feast of redemption, foreshadowing a future and greater redemption (Gal_
4:4-5).
II. The victim, a lamb without blemish and without spot, was a striking type of “the
Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world” (Joh_1:29; 1Co_5:7; 1Pe_1:19).
III. Slain, not by the priest, but by the head of the Paschal company, the blood shed
and sprinkled on the altar, roasted whole without the breaking of a bone, it
symbolized Him who was put to death by the people (Act_2:23), whose blood during
a Paschal festival was shed on the altar of His cross, whose side the soldier pierced,
but break not His legs (Joh_19:32-36).
IV. Eaten at the sacrificial meal (peculiar to the peace offering) with bitter herbs and
unleavened bread (the symbol of purity), it pointed to that one oblation of Himself
once offered, whereby Christ has made us at peace with God (Eph_2:14-15), in which
whosoever truly believes must walk in repentance and sincerity and truth (1Co_
5:7-8).
V. It was at a paschal supper that its antitype, the Christian eucharist, was instituted
by our Lord (Mat_26:17). (G. F. MacLean, D. D.)
The Passover
The Passover, commemorating the exodus of the children of Israel from Egypt, was
the annual birthday of the Hebrew nation. Its celebration was marked with a popular
joy and impressiveness suited to its character. The time of its observance was the
fourteenth of the month Abib, called Nisan after the Babylonish captivity. It
corresponded to that part of our year included between the middle of March and the
middle of April. It is the fairest part of the year in Palestine. Fresh verdure covers the
fields, and innumerable flowers of brightest tint and sweet perfume bedeck the
90

91. ground. The fields of barley are beginning to ripen, and are almost ready for the
sickle. To crown all, the moon, the Paschal moon, is then at the full, and nightly
floods with splendour the landscape. As early as the first of the month, Jerusalem
showed signs of the approaching feast. Worshippers from all parts of Palestine and
other countries began to arrive, in increasing numbers, down to the very day of the
Passover. They came in companies of various sizes, in family groups, in
neighbourhood groups, in bands of tens, twenties, and hundreds. The city was filled
to overflowing, and thousands encamped in tents in the environs. Josephus says that
more than two-and-a-half millions of people gathered at Jerusalem in the time of
Nero to attend the Passover. Universal hospitality was shown. Wherever a guest
chamber could be found, it was thrown open. The only recompense allowed or taken
was that the occupant of the apartment might leave behind for their host the skin of
the Paschal lamb and the earthen vessel used at the meal. (A. H. Currier.)
Significance of the Passover
I. Considering the events and circumstances attending its original institution (Exo_
12:1-51) we may say, in general, that it signified deliverance through the lamb. The
angel of death entered not where its blood was sprinkled. It declared that the
corruption incurred in Egypt was expiated.
II. But the meaning of the Passover was not exhausted in the idea of atonement. For
it consisted not only in the slaying of the lamb and the offering of his blood, but in
the joyful eating of it. The wine at the feast was a symbol of its blood. The quaffing of
this as a cup of refreshment, and the feeding upon the savoury flesh, expressively
indicated that it was the privilege of God’s reconciled people not only to be saved
from death by the lamb, but to receive from it conscious satisfaction, joy, and
strength. They felt the benefit of His surrendered life in all their renewed and
quickened powers.
III. Leaven, as producing fermentation, was a symbol to the Jews of corruption. It
represented the influence of idolatrous Egypt, which they were utterly to put away.
Unleavened bread, therefore, was an emblem of purity. It signified that they who ate
it had put away sin.
IV. The bitter herbs are emblematical of the trials and discipline which form an
essential and wholesome part of the Christian life. Such trials are shadows made by
the light. They are inseparable accompaniments of the gospel in its work of subduing
the world to submission to Christ. (A. H. Currier.)
13 So he sent two of his disciples, telling them,
“Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of
water will meet you. Follow him.
91

92. BARNES, "The city - The city of Jerusalem. They were now in Bethany, about 2
miles from the city.
A man bearing a pitcher of water - This could have been known only by the
infinite knowledge of Christ. Such a thing could not have been conjectured, nor was
there any concert between him and the man that “at that time” he should be in a
particular place to meet them, for the disciples themselves proposed the inquiry. If
Jesus knew a circumstance like that, then he in the same way must have known all
things; then he sees “all” the actions of men - hears every word, and marks every
thought; then the righteous are under his care, and the wicked, much as they may
wish to be unseen, cannot escape the notice of his eye.
CLARKE, "Bearing a pitcher of water - How correct is the foreknowledge of
Jesus Christ! Even the minutest circumstances are comprehended by it! An honest
employment, howsoever mean, is worthy the attention of God; and even a man
bearing a pitcher of water is marked in all his steps, and is an object of the merciful
regards of the Most High. This man was employed in carrying home the water which
was to be used for baking the unleavened bread on the following day; for on that day
it was not lawful to carry any: hence they were obliged to fetch it on the preceding
evening.
GILL, "And he sendeth forth two of his disciples,.... Peter and John, as
appears from Luk_22:8;
and saith unto them, go ye into the city; the city of Jerusalem; for there only
the passover might be eaten, Deu_26:2;
and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water; a servant of the
master of the house that was sent for water, to mix with the wine, at the passover:
follow him; into the house to which he goes.
HENRY, "2. He directed his disciples how to find the place where he intended to
eat the passover; and hereby gave such another proof of his infallible knowledge of
things distant and future (which to us seem altogether contingent), as he had given
when he sent them for the ass on which he rode in triumph (Mar_11:6); “Go into the
city (for the passover must be eaten in Jerusalem), and there shall meet you a man
bearing a pitcher of water (a servant sent for water to clean the rooms in his
master's house); follow him, go in where he goes, enquire for his master, the good
man of the house (Mar_14:14), and desire him to show you a room.” No doubt, the
inhabitants of Jerusalem had rooms fitted up to be let out, for this occasion, to those
that came out of the country to keep the passover, and one of those Christ made use
of; not any friend's house, nor any house he had formerly frequented, for then he
would have said, “Go to such a friend,” or, “You know where we used to be, go thither
and prepare.” Probably he went where he was not known, that he might be
undisturbed with his disciples. Perhaps he notified it by a sign, to conceal it from
Judas, that he might not know till he came to the place; and by such a sign to
intimate that he will dwell in the clean heart, that is, washed as with pure water.
Where he designs to come, a pitcher of water must go before him; see Isa_1:16-18.
CONSTABLE, "Verses 13-16
92

93. The two disciples were Peter and John (Luke 22:8). Normally women carried
water, so a man carrying a water jar would not be hard to find. Perhaps the man
carrying a water jar was a prearranged signal. Obviously Jesus had made
arrangements to provide for His disciples' needs, but the Twelve had certain
responsibilities in addition, namely, the preparation of the food.
"He Who was born in a 'hostelry'-Katalyma-was content to ask for His last Meal
in a Katalyma." [Note: Edersheim, The Life . . ., 2:483.]
The whole record shows Jesus' sovereign control over the destinies of Himself
and His disciples. Even as He approached the Cross Jesus was aware of and
caring for His disciples. Nevertheless they had responsibilities as well. All of this
is instructive for the teachable disciple who reads this account.
COKE, "Mark 14:13. There shall meet you a man, &c.— This is set in opposition
to the good-man, or master of the house, Mark 14:14 and consequently means a
servant of the lowest rank, or a slave, (Luke 12:36.) it being a servile office to
draw water, as appears from Deuteronomy 29:11. Joshua 9:21. As Samuel,
having anointed Saul, for the confirmationofhisfaithgavehimseveral predictions
relating to some very contingent occurrences that he was to meet with in his
journey (see 1 Samuel 10:2-7.); so our Lord seems by these predictions to have
intended thesame with regard to his disciples; and also to give them a most
important hint, that he foresaw all the particular circumstances which were to
befal him at Jerusalem, when he went up thither for the next and last time before
his sufferings. The sending them to Jerusalem in this manner seems to intimate,
that he did not go thither himself that morning; so that it is probable he spent
most of the day in retirement, for meditation and prayer.
COFFMAN, “These two disciples were Peter and John (Luke 22:8), and here is
evident the fact that Mark never mentioned Peter any more than was necessary,
a reticence which must be traced to Peter himself, and which also explains the
apostolic modesty also evidenced in the gospel of John.
Bearing a pitcher of water ... That this pitcher of water was in some way
connected with the observance of the passover meal, and that the man bearing it
was doing so in such a connection is unreasonable. If indeed there was such a
"pitcher carrying" in connection with the passover meal, there would have been
thousands of others doing the same thing, and such a "sign" would have been
useless. Those who find here a proof that this was Passover find what is not in it.
PULPIT, "And he sendeth two of his disciples. St. Luke (Luke 22:8) informs us
that these two were Peter and John. It is characteristic of St. Mark's Gospel
throughout that Peter is never mentioned oftener than is necessary. Go into the
city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water. The bearing of
the pitcher of water was not without its meaning. It was a solemn religious act
preparatory to the Passover. This man bearing a pitcher of water was not the
master or owner of the house. The owner is distinguished afterwards by the
name οἰκοδέσποτης, or "goodman of the house." The owner must, therefore,
have been a man of some substance, and probably a friend if not a disciple of our
Lord. Tradition says that this was the house of John whose surname was Mark;
93

94. and that it was in this house that the disciples were assembled on the evening of
our Lord's resurrection, and where, also, they received the miraculous gifts of
the Holy Spirit, on the day of Pentecost. It was to this house that Peter betook
himself when he was delivered by the angel out of prison. Hence it was known, as
one of the earliest places of Christian worship, by the name of "Coenaculum
Sion; "and here was built a church, called the Church of Sion. It was the oldest
church in Jerusalem, and was called by St. Cyril, "the upper church of the
apostles."
BI, "Go ye into the city.
The finding the guest chamber
We might expect that Christ, knowing to how great effort the faith of His followers
was about to be called, would, in His compassionate earnestness for their welfare,
keep their faith in exercise up to the moment of the dreaded separation. He would
find or make occasions for trying and testing the principles which were soon to be
brought to so stern a proof. Did He do this? And how did He do it? We regard the
circumstances which are now under review, those connected with the finding the
guest chamber in which the last supper might be eaten, as an evidence and
illustration of Christ’s exercising the faith of His disciples. Was it not exercising the
faith of Peter and John-for these, the more distinguished of the disciples, were
employed on the errand-to send them into the city with such strange and desultory
directions? There were so many chances, if the word may be used, against the guest
chamber being found through the circuitous method prescribed by our Lord, that we
could not have wondered had Peter and John showed reluctance to obey His
command. And we do not doubt that what are called the chances were purposely
multiplied by Christ to make the finding the room seem more improbable, and
therefore to give faith the greater exercise. Again, there would have been risk enough
of mistake or repulse in accosting the man with the pitcher; but this man was only to
be followed; and he might stop at many houses before he reached the right. But
Christ would not be more explicit, because, in proportion as He had been more
explicit, there would have been less exercise for faith. And if you imagine that, after
all, it was no great demand on the faith of Peter and John that they should go on so
vague an errand-for that much did not hinge on their finding the right place, and
they had but to return if anything went wrong-we are altogether at issue with you.
There was something that looked degrading and ignoble in the errand, which
required more courage and fortitude than to undertake some signal enterprise. And
the apparent meanness of an employment will often try faith more than its apparent
difficulty; the exposure to ridicule and contempt will require greater moral nerve
than the exposure to danger and death. We believe that it is very frequently ordered
that faith should be disciplined and nurtured for its hardest endurances, and its
highest achievements, through exposure to petty inconveniences, collisions with
mere rudeness, the obloquy of the proud, the sneer of the supercilious, and the
incivility of the ignorant. Nowhere is faith so well disciplined as in humble
occupations; it grows great through little tasks, and may be more exercised by being
left to the menial business of a servant than by being summoned to the lofty standing
of a leader. And we do earnestly desire of you to bear this in mind; for men, who are
not appointed to great achievements and endurances, are very apt to feel as though
there were not enough in the trials and duties of a lowly station for the nurture and
exercise of high Christian graces. Whereas, if it were by merely following a man
bearing a pitcher of water that apostles were trained for the worst onsets of evil, there
may be no such school for the producing strong faith as that in which the lessons are
94

95. of the most everyday kind. But there is more than this to be said in regard of the
complicated way in which Christ directed His disciples to the guest chamber where
He had determined to eat the last supper. He was not only exercising the faith of the
disciples by sending them on an errand which seemed unnecessarily intricate, and to
involve great exposure to insult and repulse-He was giving strung evidence of His
thorough acquaintance with everything that was to happen, and of His power over
the minds whether of strangers or of friends. You must consider it as a prophecy on
the part of Christ that the man would be met bearing a pitcher of water. It was a
prophecy which seemed to take delight in putting difficulties in the way of its own
precise accomplishment. It would not have been accomplished by the mere finding
the house-it would have been defeated had the house been found through any other
means than the meeting the man, or had the man been discovered through any other
sign than the pitcher of water; yea, and it would have been defeated, defeated in the
details, which were given, as it might have seemed, with such unnecessary and
perilous minuteness, if the master of the house had made the least objection, or if it
had not been an upper room which he showed the disciples; or if that room had not
been large; or if it had not been furnished and prepared. And whatever tended to
prove to the disciples their Master’s thorough acquaintance with every future
contingency, ought to have tended to the preparing them for the approaching days of
disaster and separation. Besides, it was beautifully adapted to the circumstances of
the disciples that Christ showed that His foreknowledge extended to trifles. These
disciples were likely to imagine that, being poor and mean persons, they should be
overlooked by Christ when separated from them, and, perhaps, exalted to glory. But
that His eye was threading the crowded thoroughfares of the city, that it was noting a
servant with a pitcher of water, observing accurately when this servant left his
master’s house, when he reached the well, and when he would be at a particular spot
on his way back-this was not merely foreknowledge; this was foreknowledge applying
itself to the insignificant and unknown. Then, again, observe that whatever power
was here put forth by Christ was put forth without His being in contact with the party
on whom it was exerted. Christ acted, that is, upon parties who were at a distance
from Him, thus giving incontrovertible proof that His visible presence was not
necessary in order to the exercise of His power. What a comfort should this have
been to the disciples. It is easy to imagine how, when His death was near at hand,
Christ might have wrought miracles and uttered prophecies more august in their
character. He might have darkened the air with portents and prodigies, but there
would not have been in these gorgeous or appalling displays the sort of evidence
which was needed by disquieted and dispirited men. But to ourselves, who are
looking for the guest chamber, not as the place where the Paschal lamb may be eaten,
but as that where Christ is to give of His own body and blood, the pitcher of water
may well serve as a memento that it is baptism which admits us into Christian
privileges; that they who find a place at the supper of the Lord must have met the
man with the water, and have followed that man-must have been presented to the
minister of the Church, and have received from Him the initiatory sacrament, and
then have submitted meekly to the guidance of the Church, till introduced to those
deeper recesses of the sanctuary where Christ spreads His rich banquet for such as
call upon His name. Thus may there have been, in the directions for finding the guest
chamber, a standing intimation of the process through which should be sought an
entrance to that upper room, where Christ and His members shall finally sit down,
that they may eat together at the marriage supper. (H. Melvill, B. D.)
Providential meetings
95

96. There are no chance meetings in this world. They all are providential. They are in
God’s plan. On many of them great possibilities hinge. You enter a railroad car, and
take your seat among strangers. A proffered courtesy brings you into conversation
with a fellow traveller. An acquaintance is the result. Years of helpful Christian co-
work follow in the train of that first meeting. You visit a place of winter resort for
health seekers. At the dinner table you meet a man unknown to you until then. An
entire change in the aim and conduct of his life is one consequence of that meeting;
and his labours for good may be far more effective than yours in your whole lifetime.
You look in upon a celebrated preparatory school, where two hundred young men are
at their studies. One face impresses you. Your meeting with him affects your course
and his for all time, and involves the interests of a multitude. Your meeting of
another young man in a Sunday school where you are present only for that one
session has more influence over his life than all other agencies combined-and
scarcely less over yours. You may even meet on the street one whom you wished not
to see, one whom at that moment you were seeking to avoid; and as a result more
lives than one are affected in all their human course, and in their highest spiritual
interests. All these illustrations are real incidents; and there are thousands like them.
It behooves us to consider well our duty in every meeting with another. We can fail to
improve our opportunity and lose a blessing. We can fill our place just then, and have
reason to rejoice eternally that we did so. Lord, what wilt thou have me to do-when
next I meet one whom thou hast planned for me to see? (Sunday School Times.)
The Master’s question
“The Master saith!” Has the charm of the Master’s name vanished in these latter
days? Are we, men and women of the nineteenth century, children of a modern life
and civilization which is ever extending itself with feverish restlessness and painful
throes of new birth, are we grown familiar with strange voices, with forces unknown
in that ancient world, and those ancient days spent under the blue Syrian sky; are we
become superior to the claims, the force, the beauty, and the authority of a great
personal life? Have we relegated Jesus of Nazareth merely to a place, however great,
in the development of history? Is He merely the product of social forces and political
and historical traditions? “The Master saith!” Being dead, doth He yet speak; yet so
as through the faint vibrations of memory-of memory which grows weaker as the
ages roll behind us into the eternity of the past; or is it a living voice still which I
hear-a voice which no results of time can shake with the tremulousness of age? Do
not our own hearts-we who have become disciples, we who, constrained by a force
which we could not resist, have exclaimed, “Master, Thou art the Christ who hast
conquered me, Thou art the Christ who hast died for me”-do not our own hearts
passionately exclaim, “He liveth still to make intercession for us, and to rule us with
the supremacy of perfect love”? Will ye also admit the Master within? Will ye hear
Him? Will ye let Him talk with you? This night, as a disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ,
I bring the word to you also: “The Master saith!” The voices of all His disciples are
but weak echoes of the mightier and abiding voice which is His. “The Master saith!”
But where? Hath His voice a local habitation and a name? Doth He reach me through
the channel of my senses, or how doth He touch my living spirit? It is here that “the
Master saith!”-even now. These poor temples of ours, they are for the most part but
shapeless structures of stone and lime, yet they are clothed with the spiritual and
unfading beauty of a Divine guest chamber; a voice which is not my voice overpowers
my struggling will, subdues by gentle and beautiful processes my efforts to make my
own will my law and arbiter of duty, and speaks through me. And most of all is it of
infinite moment to know that there is one called “Master,” and who does speak. This
96

97. is what I need to know and feel. In Jesus of Nazareth life and duty are reconciled. In
Him I recognize the Master whom I need. To Him, in whom gentleness was so
perfectly blended with strength, I come, craving to touch but the hem of His garment,
contented in that I have seen my Lord. “The Master saith!” If His voice is the voice of
an authority, sublimely enforced through self-denial, patience, gentleness, suffering,
and death, why should I crave more? Shall I not say, It is enough; He calleth me, and
I must answer? He bids me arise, and I must arise. For me the highest virtue is
obedience, for it is the Master who saith. (J. Vickery.)
14 Say to the owner of the house he enters, ‘The
Teacher asks: Where is my guest room, where I
may eat the Passover with my disciples?’
BARNES, "The goodman of the house - This signifies simply the “master” of
the house. The original word expresses nothing respecting his character, whether it
was good or bad.
The guest-chamber - A chamber for guests or friends - an unoccupied room.
CLARKE, "Say ye to the good man of the house - ειπατε τሩ οικοδεσποτᇽ -
Say ye to the master of the house. The good man and the good woman mean, among
us, the master and mistress of the house. A Hindoo woman never calls her husband
by his name; but simply, the man of the house.
Where is the guest chamber? - Respectable householders, says Mr. Ward,
have a room which they call the strangers’ room, (utit' hu-shala), which is especially
set apart for the use of guests. This appears to have been the custom in Judea also.
GILL, "And wheresoever he shall go in,.... Into whatsoever house he shall
enter, go in after him:
and say ye to the good man of the house; the owner, and master of it, who
might be Nicodemus, or Joseph of Arimathea, or some man of note and wealth in
Jerusalem, that might have some knowledge of Christ, and faith in him, though he
did not openly profess him; since by only saying what follows, he would at once, as he
did, direct them to a suitable and convenient room;
the master saith. The Syriac and Persic versions read, our master saith: he that is
yours, and ours, our master Jesus; though that is not expressed, yet it was
understood by the master of the family; which confirms the above conjecture, that he
was a secret disciple of Christ.
Where is the guest chamber; the chamber provided for guests that might be
expected at the passover:
97

98. where I shall eat the passover with my disciples? where it might be done
conveniently, and in a proper and comfortable manner; See Gill on Mat_26:18.
15 He will show you a large room upstairs,
furnished and ready. Make preparations for us
there.”
BARNES, "A large upper room - The word used here denotes the upper room
devoted to purposes of prayer, repose, and often of eating. See the notes at Mat_
9:1-8.
CLARKE, "Furnished - Spread with carpets - εστρωµενον - so this word is often
used. See Wakefield. But it may also signify the couches on which the guests reclined
when eating. It does not appear that the Jews ate the passover now, as their fathers
did formerly, standing, with their shoes on, and their staves in their hands.
GILL, "And he will show you a large upper room,.... A room in the highest
part of the house, large enough for such a company, for thirteen persons, which was
the number of Christ and his disciples:
furnished and prepared; with a table, and a sufficient number of couches to sit,
or lie upon, and with all proper vessels necessary on such an occasion:
there make ready for us; the passover.
HENRY, " He ate the passover in an upper room furnished, estrōmenon - laid
with carpets (so Dr. Hammond); it would seem to have been a very handsome
dining-room. Christ was far from affecting any thing that looked stately in eating his
common meals; on the contrary, he chose that which was homely, sat down on the
grass: but, when he was to keep a sacred feast, in honour of that he would be at the
expense of as good a room as he could get. God looks not at outward pomp, but he
looks at the tokens and expressions of inward reverence for a divine institution,
which, it is to be feared, those want, who, to save charges, deny themselves decencies
in the worship of God.
COFFMAN, "They made ready the passover ... These were preparations
necessary to the observance of the feast, but only certain of the total preparations
were made, the proof of this being in the fact that during the ensuing meal, when
Judas left, following Christ's commandment, "What thou doest do quickly," "No
man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him, for some thought,
98

99. because Judas had the bag, that Jesus said unto him, Buy what things we have
need of for the feast (the passover)" (John 13:27-29). Therefore, the meal that
followed that evening was not the passover meal, for the excellent reason that
there were still some things needed, and as yet not even purchased, that would
have been required for the passover.
BI, "Go ye into the city.
The finding the guest chamber
We might expect that Christ, knowing to how great effort the faith of His followers
was about to be called, would, in His compassionate earnestness for their welfare,
keep their faith in exercise up to the moment of the dreaded separation. He would
find or make occasions for trying and testing the principles which were soon to be
brought to so stern a proof. Did He do this? And how did He do it? We regard the
circumstances which are now under review, those connected with the finding the
guest chamber in which the last supper might be eaten, as an evidence and
illustration of Christ’s exercising the faith of His disciples. Was it not exercising the
faith of Peter and John-for these, the more distinguished of the disciples, were
employed on the errand-to send them into the city with such strange and desultory
directions? There were so many chances, if the word may be used, against the guest
chamber being found through the circuitous method prescribed by our Lord, that we
could not have wondered had Peter and John showed reluctance to obey His
command. And we do not doubt that what are called the chances were purposely
multiplied by Christ to make the finding the room seem more improbable, and
therefore to give faith the greater exercise. Again, there would have been risk enough
of mistake or repulse in accosting the man with the pitcher; but this man was only to
be followed; and he might stop at many houses before he reached the right. But
Christ would not be more explicit, because, in proportion as He had been more
explicit, there would have been less exercise for faith. And if you imagine that, after
all, it was no great demand on the faith of Peter and John that they should go on so
vague an errand-for that much did not hinge on their finding the right place, and
they had but to return if anything went wrong-we are altogether at issue with you.
There was something that looked degrading and ignoble in the errand, which
required more courage and fortitude than to undertake some signal enterprise. And
the apparent meanness of an employment will often try faith more than its apparent
difficulty; the exposure to ridicule and contempt will require greater moral nerve
than the exposure to danger and death. We believe that it is very frequently ordered
that faith should be disciplined and nurtured for its hardest endurances, and its
highest achievements, through exposure to petty inconveniences, collisions with
mere rudeness, the obloquy of the proud, the sneer of the supercilious, and the
incivility of the ignorant. Nowhere is faith so well disciplined as in humble
occupations; it grows great through little tasks, and may be more exercised by being
left to the menial business of a servant than by being summoned to the lofty standing
of a leader. And we do earnestly desire of you to bear this in mind; for men, who are
not appointed to great achievements and endurances, are very apt to feel as though
there were not enough in the trials and duties of a lowly station for the nurture and
exercise of high Christian graces. Whereas, if it were by merely following a man
bearing a pitcher of water that apostles were trained for the worst onsets of evil, there
may be no such school for the producing strong faith as that in which the lessons are
of the most everyday kind. But there is more than this to be said in regard of the
complicated way in which Christ directed His disciples to the guest chamber where
He had determined to eat the last supper. He was not only exercising the faith of the
99

100. disciples by sending them on an errand which seemed unnecessarily intricate, and to
involve great exposure to insult and repulse-He was giving strung evidence of His
thorough acquaintance with everything that was to happen, and of His power over
the minds whether of strangers or of friends. You must consider it as a prophecy on
the part of Christ that the man would be met bearing a pitcher of water. It was a
prophecy which seemed to take delight in putting difficulties in the way of its own
precise accomplishment. It would not have been accomplished by the mere finding
the house-it would have been defeated had the house been found through any other
means than the meeting the man, or had the man been discovered through any other
sign than the pitcher of water; yea, and it would have been defeated, defeated in the
details, which were given, as it might have seemed, with such unnecessary and
perilous minuteness, if the master of the house had made the least objection, or if it
had not been an upper room which he showed the disciples; or if that room had not
been large; or if it had not been furnished and prepared. And whatever tended to
prove to the disciples their Master’s thorough acquaintance with every future
contingency, ought to have tended to the preparing them for the approaching days of
disaster and separation. Besides, it was beautifully adapted to the circumstances of
the disciples that Christ showed that His foreknowledge extended to trifles. These
disciples were likely to imagine that, being poor and mean persons, they should be
overlooked by Christ when separated from them, and, perhaps, exalted to glory. But
that His eye was threading the crowded thoroughfares of the city, that it was noting a
servant with a pitcher of water, observing accurately when this servant left his
master’s house, when he reached the well, and when he would be at a particular spot
on his way back-this was not merely foreknowledge; this was foreknowledge applying
itself to the insignificant and unknown. Then, again, observe that whatever power
was here put forth by Christ was put forth without His being in contact with the party
on whom it was exerted. Christ acted, that is, upon parties who were at a distance
from Him, thus giving incontrovertible proof that His visible presence was not
necessary in order to the exercise of His power. What a comfort should this have
been to the disciples. It is easy to imagine how, when His death was near at hand,
Christ might have wrought miracles and uttered prophecies more august in their
character. He might have darkened the air with portents and prodigies, but there
would not have been in these gorgeous or appalling displays the sort of evidence
which was needed by disquieted and dispirited men. But to ourselves, who are
looking for the guest chamber, not as the place where the Paschal lamb may be eaten,
but as that where Christ is to give of His own body and blood, the pitcher of water
may well serve as a memento that it is baptism which admits us into Christian
privileges; that they who find a place at the supper of the Lord must have met the
man with the water, and have followed that man-must have been presented to the
minister of the Church, and have received from Him the initiatory sacrament, and
then have submitted meekly to the guidance of the Church, till introduced to those
deeper recesses of the sanctuary where Christ spreads His rich banquet for such as
call upon His name. Thus may there have been, in the directions for finding the guest
chamber, a standing intimation of the process through which should be sought an
entrance to that upper room, where Christ and His members shall finally sit down,
that they may eat together at the marriage supper. (H. Melvill, B. D.)
Providential meetings
There are no chance meetings in this world. They all are providential. They are in
God’s plan. On many of them great possibilities hinge. You enter a railroad car, and
take your seat among strangers. A proffered courtesy brings you into conversation
100

101. with a fellow traveller. An acquaintance is the result. Years of helpful Christian co-
work follow in the train of that first meeting. You visit a place of winter resort for
health seekers. At the dinner table you meet a man unknown to you until then. An
entire change in the aim and conduct of his life is one consequence of that meeting;
and his labours for good may be far more effective than yours in your whole lifetime.
You look in upon a celebrated preparatory school, where two hundred young men are
at their studies. One face impresses you. Your meeting with him affects your course
and his for all time, and involves the interests of a multitude. Your meeting of
another young man in a Sunday school where you are present only for that one
session has more influence over his life than all other agencies combined-and
scarcely less over yours. You may even meet on the street one whom you wished not
to see, one whom at that moment you were seeking to avoid; and as a result more
lives than one are affected in all their human course, and in their highest spiritual
interests. All these illustrations are real incidents; and there are thousands like them.
It behooves us to consider well our duty in every meeting with another. We can fail to
improve our opportunity and lose a blessing. We can fill our place just then, and have
reason to rejoice eternally that we did so. Lord, what wilt thou have me to do-when
next I meet one whom thou hast planned for me to see? (Sunday School Times.)
The Master’s question
“The Master saith!” Has the charm of the Master’s name vanished in these latter
days? Are we, men and women of the nineteenth century, children of a modern life
and civilization which is ever extending itself with feverish restlessness and painful
throes of new birth, are we grown familiar with strange voices, with forces unknown
in that ancient world, and those ancient days spent under the blue Syrian sky; are we
become superior to the claims, the force, the beauty, and the authority of a great
personal life? Have we relegated Jesus of Nazareth merely to a place, however great,
in the development of history? Is He merely the product of social forces and political
and historical traditions? “The Master saith!” Being dead, doth He yet speak; yet so
as through the faint vibrations of memory-of memory which grows weaker as the
ages roll behind us into the eternity of the past; or is it a living voice still which I
hear-a voice which no results of time can shake with the tremulousness of age? Do
not our own hearts-we who have become disciples, we who, constrained by a force
which we could not resist, have exclaimed, “Master, Thou art the Christ who hast
conquered me, Thou art the Christ who hast died for me”-do not our own hearts
passionately exclaim, “He liveth still to make intercession for us, and to rule us with
the supremacy of perfect love”? Will ye also admit the Master within? Will ye hear
Him? Will ye let Him talk with you? This night, as a disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ,
I bring the word to you also: “The Master saith!” The voices of all His disciples are
but weak echoes of the mightier and abiding voice which is His. “The Master saith!”
But where? Hath His voice a local habitation and a name? Doth He reach me through
the channel of my senses, or how doth He touch my living spirit? It is here that “the
Master saith!”-even now. These poor temples of ours, they are for the most part but
shapeless structures of stone and lime, yet they are clothed with the spiritual and
unfading beauty of a Divine guest chamber; a voice which is not my voice overpowers
my struggling will, subdues by gentle and beautiful processes my efforts to make my
own will my law and arbiter of duty, and speaks through me. And most of all is it of
infinite moment to know that there is one called “Master,” and who does speak. This
is what I need to know and feel. In Jesus of Nazareth life and duty are reconciled. In
Him I recognize the Master whom I need. To Him, in whom gentleness was so
perfectly blended with strength, I come, craving to touch but the hem of His garment,
101

102. contented in that I have seen my Lord. “The Master saith!” If His voice is the voice of
an authority, sublimely enforced through self-denial, patience, gentleness, suffering,
and death, why should I crave more? Shall I not say, It is enough; He calleth me, and
I must answer? He bids me arise, and I must arise. For me the highest virtue is
obedience, for it is the Master who saith. (J. Vickery.)
16 The disciples left, went into the city and
found things just as Jesus had told them. So
they prepared the Passover.
GILL, "And his disciples went forth,.... The two disciples, as the Arabic version
has it, Peter and John, set out from Bethany to Jerusalem directly:
and came into the city; the city of Jerusalem:
and found as he had said unto them; a man bearing a pitcher of water, whom
they followed to the house he went into, and addressed the master of the house, as
Jesus had bid them; when he showed them an upper room, very commodious and fit
for the purpose, as Christ had said; and which is a considerable proof of the
prescience of Christ:
and they made ready the passover; they bought a lamb; they had it killed in the
temple, according to rule; and they brought it to the house, where they were to sup,
and got it roasted; and provided unleavened bread, and wine, and bitter herbs, and
every thing that was proper for the feast; See Gill on Mat_26:19.
17 When evening came, Jesus arrived with the
Twelve.
GILL, "And in the evening he cometh with the twelve. In the afternoon, as it
is very reasonable to suppose, Christ set out from Bethany with the rest of the twelve,
with the other nine, and came to Jerusalem; where they were joined by Judas, who
had covenanted with the chief priests to betray him, and by Peter and John, who had
been sent before to prepare the passover; and when it was night, when the second
evening had took place, he went with all twelve of them to the house, where the
provision to eat the passover together was made for them; See Gill on Mat_26:20.
BARCLAY, "LOVE'S LAST APPEAL (Mark 14:17-21)
102

103. 14:17-21 When it was evening, Jesus came with the Twelve. As they were
reclining at table and eating, Jesus said, "This is the truth I tell you--one of you
will betray me, one who is eating with me," They began to be grieved, and to say
to him, one by one, "Surely it cannot be I?" He said to them, "One of the Twelve,
one who dips his hand with me into the dish. The Son of Man goes as it stands
written about him, but woe to that man through whom the Son of Man is
betrayed. It had been good for him, if that man had not been born."
The new day began at 6 p.m., and when the Passover evening had come, Jesus sat
down with the Twelve. There was only one change in the old ritual which had
been observed so many centuries ago in Egypt. At the first Passover Feast in
Egypt, the meal had been eaten standing (Exodus 12:11). But that had been a
sign of haste, a sign that they were slaves escaping from slavery. In the time of
Jesus the regulation was that the meal should be eaten reclining, for that was the
sign of a free man, with a home and a country of his own.
This is a poignant passage. All the time there was a text running in Jesus' head.
"Even my bosom friend in whom I trusted, who ate of my bread, has lifted his
heel against me." (Psalms 41:9.) These words were in his mind all the time. We
can see certain great things here.
(i) Jesus knew what was going to happen. That is his supreme courage, especially
in the last days. It would have been easy for him to escape, and yet undeterred he
went on. Homer relates how the great warrior Achilles was told that if he went
out to his last battle he would surely be killed. His answer was, "Nevertheless I
am for going on." With a full knowledge of what lay ahead, Jesus was for going
on.
(ii) Jesus could see into the heart of Judas. The curious thing is that the other
disciples seem to have had no suspicions. If they had known what Judas was
engaged on, it is certain that they would have stopped him even by violence. Here
is something to remember. There may be things we succeed in hiding from our
fellow-men. But we cannot hide them from Jesus Christ. He is the searcher of the
hearts of men. He knows what is in man.
"Our thoughts lie open to thy sight;
And naked to thy glance.
Our secret sins are in the light
Of thy pure countenance."
Blessed indeed are the pure in heart.
(iii) In this passage we see Jesus offering two things to Judas.
(a) He is making love's last appeal. It is as if he is saying to Judas, "I know what
you are going to do. Will you not stop even yet?"
103

104. (b) He is offering Judas a last warning. He is telling him in advance of the
consequences of the thing that it is in his heart to do. But we must note this, for it
is of the essence of the way in which God deals with us--there is no compulsion.
Without a doubt Jesus could have stopped Judas. All he had to do was tell the
other eleven what Judas was planning, and Judas would never have left that
room alive.
Here is the whole human situation. God has given us wills that are free. His love
appeals to us. His truth warns us. But there is no compulsion. It is the awful
responsibility of man that he can spurn the appeal of God's love and disregard
the warning of his voice. In the end there is no one but ourselves responsible for
our sins.
In Greek legend two famous travellers passed the rocks where the Sirens sang.
The Sirens sat on these rocks and sang with such sweetness that they lured
mariners irresistibly to their doom. Ulysses sailed past these rocks. His method
was to stop the sailors' ears so that they could not hear and order them to bind
himself to the mast with ropes so that, however much he struggled, he would not
be able to answer to that seductive sweetness. He resisted by compulsion. The
other traveller was Orpheus, the sweetest musician of all. His method was to play
and sing with such surpassing sweetness as his ship passed the rocks where the
Sirens were, that the attraction of the song of the Sirens was never even felt
because of the attraction of the song he sang. His method was to answer the
appeal of seduction with a still greater appeal.
God's is the second way. He does not stop us whether we like it or not, from sin.
He seeks to make us love him so much that his voice is more sweetly insistent to
us than all the voices which call us away from him.
BENSON, "Mark 14:17-25. In the evening he cometh with the twelve — See
notes on Matthew 26:20-29. This is my blood of the new testament — Or,
covenant; that is, this I appoint to be a perpetual sign and memorial of my blood,
as shed for establishing the new covenant, that all who shall believe in me, may
receive all its gracious promises. I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine,
&c. — That is, I shall drink no more before I die: the next wine I drink will not
be earthly, but heavenly.
BURKITT, "Observe here, 1. The unexampled boldness of this impudent traitor
Judas; he presumed, as soon as he had sold his Master, to sit down at the table
with him, and did eat the passover with the disciples: had the presence of Judas
polluted this ordinance to any but himself, doubtless our Saviour would ever
have suffered him to approach unto it.
But hence we learn, 1. That nothing is more ordinary than than for unholy
persons to press in unto the holy ordinances of God, which they have no right,
while such, to partake of.
2. That the presence of such persons doth pollute the ordinance only to
104

105. themselves; holy persons are not polluted by their sins, therefore ought not to be
discouraged from coming by their presence there.
Observe, 2. What a surprising and astonishing word it was which dropt from our
Saviour's mouth amongst his disciples; One shall betray me; yea, one of you;
shall betray me. Can any church upon earth expect purity in all its members,
when Christ's own family of twelve had a traitor and devil in it?
Yet though it was very sad to hear of one, it was matter of joy to understand that
there was but one. One hypocrite in a congregation is too much, but there is
cause of rejoicing if there be no more.
Observe, 3. Christ did not name Judas, and say, "Thou O perfidious Judas! art
the traitor, but one of you shall betray me," Doubtless it was to draw him to
repentance, and to prevent the giving him any provocation.
Lord! how sad is it for any of thy family who pretend friendship to thee, to
conspire with thine enemies against thee! for any that eat of thy bread to lift up
their heel against thee!
Observe, 4. The disciples sorrow uponn these words of Christ, and the effect of
that sorrow. Their sorrow was (as well it might be) exceeding great; well might
innocent disciples be overwhelmed with sorrow, to hear that their Master should
die, that he should die by treason, that the traitor should be one of themselves.
But though their sorrow was great, yet was the effect of their sorrow very good,
it wrought in them an holy suspicion of themselves, and caused every one to
search himself, and say, Master, Is it I?
Learn hence, That it is possible for such secret wickedness to lodge in the heart
as we never suspected, till time and temptation draw it forth. None of the
disciples suspected, nay, Judas himself never apprehended that depth of iniquity
and hypocrisy which was found lodging in him.
Yet note, That though the disciples were jealous and suspicious, yet was it of
themselves, not of one another; nay, not of Judas himself: everyone said, Master,
Is it I? Not, Master , Is it Judas? True sincerity and Christian charity will make
us more suspicious of ourselves than of any other: it hopes the best of others, and
fears the worst of ourselves.
Observe, 5. That though Judas sees himself pointed at by our Saviour, and hears
the dreadful threatenings denounced against him, that it had been better for him
that he had never been born, yet he is no more blanked than innocence itself.
Resolute sinners run on desperately in their evil courses, and with open eyes see
and meet their own destruction, without being either dismayed at it, or
concerned about it.
This shameless man had the impudence to say to our blessed Saviour, Master, Is
it I?
105

106. Our blessed Saviour gives him a direct answer. Thou sayest it.
Did not Judas, think we, blush extremely, cast down his guilty eyes, and let fall
his drooping head, at so galling an intimation? Nothing less, we read of nothing
like it.
Lord! how does obduracy in sin steel the brow, and make it incapable of all
relenting impressions!
Observe lastly, How our Saviour prefers non-entity before damnation; It had
been better for that man he had never been born. A temporal, miserable being, is
not worse than no being; but eternal misery is much worse than non-entity;
better to have no being, than not to have a being in Christ, It had been better for
Judas that he had never been born, than to lie under everlasting wrath.
COFFMAN, “And as they sat ... The Greek word here is "reclined."
And were eating ... Mark did not say, "eating the passover," but eating, that is,
having a meal together the night before the paschal supper, in a room where
preparations were only partially complete for the solemn beginning of Passover
festival the next night.
One of you shall betray me ... John has a full account of the conversations and
events leading up to this, but Mark abbreviated it. Judas, of course, was the one
indicated. Regarding the prophetic identification of the traitor, see parallels in
John and Matthew in this series.
18 While they were reclining at the table eating,
he said, “Truly I tell you, one of you will betray
me—one who is eating with me.”
GILL, "And as they sat and did eat,.... Or "as they lay along"; for such was their
posture at the eating of the passover; See Gill on Mat_26:20,
Jesus said, verily I say unto you, one of you which eateth with me shall
betray me; See Gill on Mat_26:21.
HENRY, "They were pleasing themselves with the society one of another, but
Christ casts a damp upon the joy of that, by telling them, One of you that eateth with
me shall betray me, Mar_14:18. Christ said this, if it might be, to startle the
conscience of Judas, and to awaken him to repent of his wickedness, and to draw
back (for it was not too late) from the brink of the pit. But for aught that appears, he
106

107. who was most concerned in the warning, was least concerned at it. All the rest were
affected with it. (1.) They began to be sorrowful. As the remembrance of our former
falls into sin, so the fear of the like again, doth often much embitter the comfort of
our spiritual feasts, and damp our joy. Here were the bitter herbs, with which this
passover-feast was taken. (2.) They began to be suspicious of themselves; they said
one by one, Is it I? And another said, Is it I? They are to be commended for their
charity, that they were more jealous of themselves than of one another. It is the law
of charity, to hope the best (1Co_13:5-7), because we assuredly know, therefore we
may justly suspect, more evil by ourselves than by our brethren. They are also to be
commended for their acquiescence in what Christ said; they trusted more to his
words than to their own hearts; and therefore do not say, “I am sure it is not I,” but,
“Lord, is it I? see if there be such a way of wickedness in us, such a root of bitterness,
and discover it to us, that we may pluck up that root, and stop up that way.”
CONSTABLE, "Originally the Jews ate the Passover standing (cf. Exodus
12:11). However in Jesus' day they customarily reclined to eat it. [Note: Mishnah
Pesachim 10:1.]
"To betray a friend after eating a meal with him was, and still is, regarded as the
worst kind of treachery in the Middle East [cf. Psalms 41:9]." [Note: Wessel, p.
759.]
The disciples heard for the first time that one of them would betray Jesus.
Mark's account stresses Jesus' identification of His betrayer as one of the
Twelve.
PULPIT, "Verily I say unto you, One of you shall betray me, even he that eateth
with me ( ὁ ἐσθίων μετ ἐμοῦ). Much had doubtless happened before our Lord
said this; but St. Mark only records the important circumstances. These words of
our Lord were uttered with great solemnity. The presence of the traitor was a
burden upon his spirit, and cast a gloom over this usually joyous festival. A
question here arises whether Judas remained to partake of the Holy Communion
when our Lord instituted it. The greater number of the Fathers, and amongst
them Origen, St. Cyril, St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, and Bede, consider that he
was present; and Dionysius says that our Lord's words to him, "That thou doest,
do quickly," were intended to separate him from the rest of the twelve as one
who had partaken unworthily; and that then it was that Satan entered into him,
and impelled him onwards to this terrible sin.
BI 18-19, "Shall betray Me.
The betrayal
What think you, my brethren, if a similar declaration were made in regard to
ourselves? Should we sorrowfully ask, “Lord, is it I?” Should we not be more likely to
ask, “Lord, is it this man?” “Lord, is it that man?” Would not Peter be more ready to
say, “Is it John?” and John, “Is it Peter?” than either, “Is it I?” It is a good sign when
we are less suspicious of others than of ourselves, more mistrustful of ourselves than
of others in regard of the commission of sin; as indeed we ought always to be, for we
have better opportunities of knowing our own proneness to evil, our own weakness,
our own deceitfulness, than we can have of that of others; and therefore we have far
more cause to ask, “Is it I?”-the question showing that we dare not answer for
107

108. ourselves,-than, “Lord, is it my neighbour?”-the question indicating that we think
others capable of worse things than ourselves. Peter was safe when asking, “Lord, is
it I?” but in sore danger when he exclaimed, “Although all shall be offended because
of Thee, yet will not I.”
I. Suppose Judas to have been aware, as he might have been, both from ancient
prophecy, and from the express declarations of our Lord Himself, that Jesus, if He
were indeed the Christ, must be delivered to His enemies, and ignominiously put to
death-might he not, then, very probably say to himself, “After all, I shall only be
helping to accomplish what has been determined by God, and what is indispensable
to the work which Messiah has undertaken?” I do not know any train of thought
which is more likely to have presented itself to the mind of Judas than this. “The Son
of man goeth as it is written of Him.” But this determination, this certainty, left
undiminished the guiltiness of the parties who put Christ to death. They obeyed
nothing but the suggestions of their own wilful hearts; they were actuated by nothing
but their desperate malice and hatred of Jesus, when they accomplished prophecies
and fulfilled Divine decrees. Therefore was it no excuse for them that they were only
bringing to pass what had long before been ordained. The whole burden of the crime
rested upon the crucifiers, however true it was that Christ must be crucified. It did
not make Judas turn trailer that God foreknew his treason, and determined to render
it subservient to His own almighty ends. God, indeed, knew that Judas would betray
his Master, but God’s knowing it did not conduce to his doing it. It was certain, but
the foreknown wickedness of the man causes the certainty, and not the fore-ordained
performance of the deed, Oh! the utter vanity of the thought that God ever places us
under a necessity of sinning, or that because our sins may turn to His glory they will
not issue in our shame.
II. And now let us glance at another delusion to which it is likely that Judas gave
indulgence. This is the delusion as to the consequences, the punishment of sin, being
exaggerated or overstated. It may be that Judas could hardly persuade himself that a
being so beneficent as Christ would ever wholly lay aside the graciousness of His
nature, and avenge a wrong done by surrendering the doer to intense and
interminable anguish. But, in all the range of Scripture, there is not, perhaps, a
passage which sets itself so decisively against this delusion as the latter clause of our
Saviour’s address in the text-“It had been good for that man if he had not been born.”
There is nothing in the Bible which gives me so strong an idea of the utter moral
hardness in which a man is left who is forsaken by the Spirit of God, as the fact that
Judas’s question, “Lord, is it I?” followed immediately on Christ’s saying, “Woe unto
that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed;” and that his going forth to fill his
accursed compact with the priests was on the instant of his having been told that
Christ knew him for the traitor. I pause on the word “then,” and I am tempted to ask,
could it, oh! could it have been “then?” Yes, “then” it was that, with the words, “It had
been good for that man if he had not been born,”-words vocal of an eternity of
unimagined woe-then it was that, with these words rung out to him as the knell of his
own doomed spirit, Judas proceeded to address Christ with a taunting and insolent
inquiry, and then went out to accomplish the traitorous purpose which had called
forth the tremendous denunciation. With what earnestness should we join in that
prayer in the Liturgy, “Take not Thy Holy Spirit from us!” (H. Melvill, B. D.)
Judas and the disciples
There will be many that were gallant professors in this world wanting among the
saved in the day of Christ’s coming; yea, many whose damnation was never dreamed
of. Which of the twelve ever thought that Judas would have proved a devil? Nay,
108

109. when Christ suggested that one among them was naught, they each were more afraid
of themselves than of him. (Bunyan.)
Judas as he appeared to the other apostles.
You will observe that the character of Judas was openly an admirable one. I find not
that he committed himself in any way. Not the slightest speck defiled his moral
character so far as others could perceive. He was no boaster, like Peter; he was free
enough from the rashness which cries, “Though all men should forsake Thee, yet will
not I.” He asks no place on the right hand of the throne, his ambition is of another
sort. He does not ask idle questions. The Judas who asks questions is “not Iscariot.”
Thomas and Philip are often prying into deep matters, but not Judas. He receives
truth as it is taught him, and when others are offended and walk no more with Jesus,
he faithfully adheres to Him, having golden reasons for so doing. He does not indulge
in the lusts of the flesh or in the pride of life. None of the disciples suspected him of
hypocrisy; they said at the table, “Lord, is it I?” They never said, “Lord, is it Judas?”
It was true he had been filching for months, but then he did it by littles, and covered
his defalcations so well by financial manipulations that he ran no risk of detection
from the honest unsuspecting fishermen with whom he associated. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Judas unsuspected to the last
A secret sin works insidiously, but with wondrous quiet power. Its hidden ravages are
awful, and the outward revelation of their result and existence may be
contemporaneous. Until that revelation was made, probably no one ever suspected
the presence in the man of anything but a few venial faults which were as mere
excrescences on a robust character, though these growths were something rude.
Oftentimes a large fungus will start from a tree, and in some mysterious manner will
sap the life power on the spot on which it grows. They were like that fungus. When
the fungus falls in the autumn, it leaves scarcely a trace of its presence, the tree being
apparently as healthy as before the advent of the parasite. But the whole character of
the wood has been changed by the strange power of the fungus, being soft and cork-
like to the touch. Perhaps the parasite may fall in the autumn, and the tree may show
no symptoms of decay; but at the first tempest it may have to encounter, the trunk
snaps off at the spot where the fungus has been, and the extent of the injury is at once
disclosed. As long as any portion of that tree retains life, it will continue to throw out
these destructive fungi; and even when a mere stump is left in the ground, the fungi
will push themselves out in profusion. (Scientific Illustrations and Symbols.)
The treason of Judas foreshown by Christ
I. The first is, the fact specified. “The Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.” Do any
ask, as those of old did, “Who is this Son of man?” This Son of man is none other
than the very person, of whom the apostle spake as possessing in Himself “the great
mystery of godliness;” He is “God manifest in the flesh.” There is, first, the heinous
character of the traitor that betrayed Him; secondly, the importance of hunting out
and exposing the imitators of his black deed in the present day-and, God helping me,
I mean to be faithful here; and then, in the third place, the sufferings of Him who was
betrayed and crucified. Let me invite you to pray over these three things.
1. The heinousness of the traitor. He had made a glaring profession. He had
109

110. attached himself to the disciples of Christ; he had become a member of the purest
Church that ever was formed upon earth-the immediate twelve around our Lord.
He was looked up to, a leading man. I beseech you, weigh this solemn fact-for a
solemn one it is-that neither profession, nor diligent exertion, nor high standing
among professors, so as to be beyond even suspicion, will stand in the stead of
vital godliness. And there may be Judases even now, and I believe there are not a
few, that are as much unsuspected as Judas Iscariot was. So artful was his
deception, that none of the disciples suspected him. Nay more; the first feature of
his character that is developed, the first view we have of him in his real character,
is, that he was the last to suspect himself. All the others had said, “Lord, is it I?”-
and last of all, Judas drawls it out, “Master, is it I?” Yet after all the standing he
gained, after all the miracles he observed, after all the attachment he professed,
this wretch, for thirty pieces of silver, is content to betray his Lord. Ah! only put a
money bait in the way of the Judases, and you soon find them out; that will find
them out, if nothing else will. Of course, His enemies are glad to have Him seized;
but who would believe it possible, especially among those who have such a high
opinion of the dignity of human nature, that this wretch, after eating and
drinking with Christ, after following Him all His ministry through, can go and
betray Him with a kiss? can say, in the very act of betraying Him, “Hail, Master?”-
carrying on his devilism to the last.
2. But I want a word of interrogation with regard to imitators of Judas in the
present day. Have you thrown “the bag” away? Have you done with carnal objects
and pursuits? Do you scorn the idea of marketing about Christ, and selling Him-
bartering Him? Are you really and honestly concerned about the truth of Christ,
the interests of His cause, the purity of His gospel, the sacredness of His
ordinances? Oh I try, try these matters. I would not for the world have a single
masked character about me, of the Judas-like breed.
3. Let me now invite your attention for a moment to the other point-the
sufferings of this betrayed and murdered Lord. “The Son of man is betrayed to be
crucified.” Is not this enough to make a man hate sin? If you do not hate sin in its
very nature, you have never been to Calvary, and you have never had fellowship
with a precious Christ. Wherever the blood of atonement is applied, it produces
hatred of sin: oh that you and I may live upon Calvary, until every sin shall be
mortified, subdued, and kept under, and Christ reign supreme!
II. I pass on to the second feature in our subject: the official announcement of this
fact by the sufferer himself.
III. I pass on to the third particular of our subject-the result. “The Son of man is
betrayed to be crucified;” but the matter did not end there. “The Son of man is
betrayed to be crucified;” and then the powers of darkness have done their worst.
“The Son of man is betrayed to be crucified;” and even death shall lose its sting, hell
shall lose its terrors for all Mine elect, Jehovah shall get the glory of His own name,
and I shall go through the valley of the shadow of death to My exaltation. To be brief
I will just name three things as the result anticipated; for you know it is said, that “for
the joy that was set before Him, He endured the cross.” And what was it? The
redeemed to be emancipated; Christ to be exalted; and heaven to be opened and
peopled. These are the results; and I said, when I gave you the plan of my sermon,
that He should not be disappointed in any of them; nor shall He. (J. Irons, D. D.)
Treachery to Christ
110

111. Wrongs and indignities may be offered to Christ still, in sundry ways.
1. In His person. By vilifying Him, as do Turks, Jews, and heathen. Also, when
any deny or oppose His Nature-either the Godhead or the Manhood, as do
heretics. Also, when any profane the blood of Christ, by remaining unrepentant,
or turning apostate.
2. In His office, as Mediator; putting any person or thing in His place.
3. In His names or titles; using them profanely.
4. In His saints and faithful members; wronging or abusing them.
5. In His messengers and ministers (Luk_10:16).
6. In His holy ordinances; the Word, sacraments, etc. (1Co_11:27). By this we
may examine whether the love to Christ which we profess is true and sincere.
Does this child love his father, or that servant his master, who can hear him
abused and reproached? (George Petter.)
Latent possibilities of evil
There is latent evil lurking in all our hearts, of which we are not aware ourselves. We
do not know how many devils of selfishness, sense, and falsehood are hiding
themselves in the mysterious depths of our souls. If we do not learn this through that
noble Christian humility which “still suspects and still reveres itself,” we must learn it
through the bitter experience of failure and open sin. How many examples there are
to prove the existence of this latent evil! We have seen a young man go from the pure
home of his childhood, from the holy influences of a Christian community. As an
infant his brow had been touched with the water of baptism amid the prayers of the
Church; as a child his feet had been taught the way to the house of God; in his home
his parents had prayed for him that he might be an honest and useful man, whether
he was to be poor or rich, learned or ignorant. He leaves his home and comes to the
city to engage in business. He trusts in his own heart, in his own upright purpose, in
his own virtuous habits. But there is latent evil in his heart, there is a secret
selfishness, which is ready to break out under the influences which will now
surround him. He becomes a lover of pleasure; he attends balls and theatres; he rides
out with gay companions: he acquires a taste for play, wine, and excitement. He
determines to make money that he may indulge these new tastes, and he devotes all
his energies to this pursuit. In a year or two, how far has he gone from the innocent
hopes and tastes of his childhood? His serene brow is furrowed with worldly lines;
his pure eye clouded with licentious indulgence. The latent evil that was in him has
come out under the test of these new circumstances … The moral of it all is, “Keep thy
heart with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of life.” But how can we keep our
heart? We can keep our hands, by an effort, from wrong actions, and force them to do
right ones. We can keep our lips from saying unkind or hasty words, though that is
sometimes hard enough. But how keep our heart? How make ourselves a right spirit,
a good temper? That seems simply impossible. How direct those tendencies which
are hidden even from ourselves? Here, it seems to me, is the place and need of
religion. If it be true that our soul lies open inwardly to God, and that we rest on
Him, then is it not possible, is it not probable, that if we put our heart into His hands
He will guide it? And the experience of universal man, in all ages, all countries, all
religions, teaches this value of prayer. It is taught by Socrates and Seneca, no less
than by Jesus Christ. Here is the place of religion: this is its need. We do not need to
pray to God for what we can do ourselves. But what we cannot do for ourselves is to
guide and keep and direct this hidden man of the heart. We have a right to come
111

112. boldly to God for this; asking His spirit, and expecting to receive it. This is a promise
we can trust in, that God will give His Holy Spirit to those who ask Him. (J. Freeman
Clarke.)
The question that went round the table
I. Look at the question, “Lord, is it I?”
II. Look at this question in connection with the remark that called it forth. What did
Judas sell Christ for? The old German story reports that the astrologer Faustus sold
his soul to the evil one for twenty-four years of earthly happiness. What was the
bargain in this case? The auctioneer had tempting lists to show; what was it that
tempted Judas? He sold his Lord for thirty somethings. What things? Thirty years of
right over all the earth, with all the trees of the forests, all the fowls of the mountains,
and the cattle upon a thousand hills? For thirty armies? Or thirty fleets? Thirty stars?
Thirty centuries of power, to reign majestically on hell’s burning throne? No, for
thirty shillings!
III. Look at the question in connection with the simple unsuspecting brotherliness it
revealed in those to whom it was spoken. When Christ’s declaration was made. “One
of you shall betray Me,” it would not have been wonderful, judging by a common
standard, if such words as these had passed through various minds-“It is Judas; I
always thought him the black sheep of the fold; I never liked his grasp of that bag; I
never liked the mystery of that missing cash; I never liked the look of him; I never
liked his fussy whisper.” No such thoughts were in open or secret circulation. The
disciples already exemplified the principle, and carried in their hearts the Divine
music of the language, “Love suffereth long, and is kind … is not easily provoked,
thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all
things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.” With lips that
were tremulous, and cheeks that were blanched, each one said, not, “Lord, is it he?”
but, “Lord, is it I?”
IV. Look at this question in connection with the fear for himself, shown by every one
who asked it. A preacher in a certain village church once gave easy lessons in
Christian ethics through a scheme of illustration taken from the letters of the
alphabet. Rebuking his hearers for their readiness to speak evil of their neighbours,
he said that, regarding each letter of the alphabet as the initial letter of a name, they
had something to say against all the letters, with one exception. His homily was to
this effect. “You say, A lies, B steals, C swears, D drinks, F brags, G goes into a
passion, H gets into debt. The letter I is the only one of which you have nothing to
say.” No rustics can require such elementary education more than do some keen
leaders of society. Pitiless detectors of sin in others, begin at home. Think first of that
which is represented by the letter I. It is a necessary word, for you can never get
beyond it, never do without it, while you live, or when you die. It is a deep word, for
who can sound the sea of its deep significance? It is an important word, for of all
words which can lighten us with their flash, or startle us with their blow, there is no
more important” word to us than this. Who is there? “I.” Who are you? Conjure up
this mystery-this “you,” symbolized by the letter “I.” Face it, speak to it, challenge it,
and know if all is right with it. If indeed you can say, “I am a Christian”; “I believe,
help, Lord, mine unbelief;” “I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me;” still you feel that
two natures for the present war within you, and have need to offer Augustine’s
prayer, “Lord, deliver me from the wicked man, myself.” When the wind is rising, and
the waves are treacherous, it is good for each man to look to his own ship, to his own
ropes, to his own sails; not first to stand and speculate on the seaworthiness of other
112

113. ships.
V. Look at this question in connection with the love that worked in the heart of the
questioner. Not one of them ever knew before how much he loved his Lord, but this
shock brought the love out.
VI. Look at this question in connection with the answer to it. “Thou hast said.” You
can read what is on the open page, Jesus can look through the lids of the book, and
read off the sheet-in print. You can see the whited sepulchre; He can see the skeleton
within. You can see the fair appearance, He can see the wolf under the borrowed
fleece. You can see the body, He can see the soul. Now the secret had come to light, as
one day all secrets will.
VII. Look at this question in other possible applications. “One of you will go out of
this place a lost spirit.” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you, having refused the Divine love
before, will refuse it again!” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you will go out with a harder heart
than when he came in.” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you, a waverer now, will be a waverer
still.” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you, now almost persuaded to be a Christian, will still
remain only almost persuaded.” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you, already a true disciple,
will refuse, as you have refused before, to confess your faith!” “Lord, is it I?” Let us
think, on the other hand, of certain happy possibilities in the fair use of these words.
There will come a time, beyond what we now call time, when, in the rapture of
immortality, and in the language of heaven, you will say, “Have I in reality come
through death? Am I on the other side? Can it be that I am glorified at last? This, so
wonderful beyond language to express, so bright beyond the most enchanted fancy to
picture, what is it? Is it solid? Or is it a glory of dreamland? I used to sin, I used to be
slow, I used to be weary, I used to have dim eyes, and dull ears! Now I see! Now I
love! Now I can fly like the light! Lord, is it I?” (Charles Stanford, D. D.)
The history of Judas
Of Judas this fearful sentence is uttered by the Lord.
I. But before entering into the particulars of his history, a few general remarks are
pertinent.
1. There is no evidence that Judas Iscariot was a man of bad countenance. Most
men are much influenced by looks, and many think they can tell a man’s
character by the physiognomy. This may often be true, but there are many
exceptions.
2. There is no evidence that, up to his betrayal of his Lord, his conduct was the
subject of censure, complaint, jealousy, or of the slightest suspicion. His sins
were all concealed from the eyes of mortals. He was a thief, but that was known
only to Omniscience.
3. There is no evidence that, during his continuance with Christ, he regarded
himself as a hypocrite. Doubtless he thought himself honest.
4. Let it not be supposed that Judas ought not to have known his character. He
shut his eyes to the truth respecting himself. The aggravations of the sin of
betraying Christ were many and great. The traitor was eminent in place, in gifts,
in office, in profession; a guide to others, and one whose example was likely to
influence many.
II. The lessons taught us by the life and end of Judas are such as these-
1. Though wicked men do not so intend, yet in all cases they shall certainly glorify
113

114. God by all their misdeeds (Psa_76:10). The wickedness of Judas was by God
over-ruled to bring about the most important event in man’s salvation. The
wicked now hate God, but they cannot defeat Him.
2. Nor shall God’s unfailing purpose to bring good out of evil abate aught of the
guilt of those who work iniquity (Act_2:28; Act_4:27-28).
3. From the history of Judas we also learn that when a man is once fairly started
in a career of wickedness, it is impossible to tell where he may stop. In the next
world surprise awaits all the impenitent.
4. All men should especially beware of covetousness (1Ti_6:10).
5. Did men but know how bitter would be the end of transgression, they would at
least pause before they plunge into all evil. Oh! that men would hear the warning
words of Richard Baxter, “Use sin as it will use you: spare it not, for it will not
spare you; it is your murderer and the murderer of the world. Use it, therefore, as
a murderer should be used.”
6. How small a temptation to sin will at last prevail over a vicious mind. For less
than twenty dollars Judas sold his Lord and Master. Those temptations
commonly esteemed great are not the most sure to prevail.
7. Nothing prepares a man for destruction faster than hypocrisy or formality in
actions of a religious nature. The three years which Judas spent in the family of
our Lord probably exceeded all the rest of his life in ripening him for destruction.
We should never forget that official character is one thing, and moral character
another thing. All official characters may be sustained without any real grace in
the heart.
8. The history of Judas shows us how man will cling to false hopes. There is no
evidence that during years of hypocrisy he ever seriously doubted his own piety.
9. If men thus self-confident forsake their profession, and openly apostatize, we
need not be surprised.
10. Thus, too, we have a full refutation of the objection made to a connection
with the visible church because there are wicked men in her communion. The
apostles certainly knew that among them was one bad man; but they did not
therefore renounce their portion among Christ’s professed friends.
11. How difficult it is to bring home truth to the deceitful hears of man.
Hypocrites are slow to improve close, discriminating preaching. They desire not
to look into their real characters.
12. The case of Judas discloses the uselessness of that sorrow of the world which
worketh death, hath no hope in it, and drives the soul to madness. It is not
desperation, but penitence, that God requires. Regrets without hatred of sin are
useless, both on earth and in hell. (W. S. Plumer, D. D.)
Terrible result of the secret working of sin
There once sailed from the city of New Orleans a large and noble steamer, laden with
cotton, and having a great number of passengers on board. While they were taking in
the cargo, a portion of it became slightly moistened by a shower of rain that fell. This
circumstance, however, was not noticed; the cotton was stowed away in the hold, and
the hatches fastened down. During the first part of the voyage all went well; but, far
out towards the middle of the Atlantic ocean, all on board were one day alarmed by
114

115. the fearful cry of “Fire!” and in a few moments the noble ship was completely
enveloped in flames. The damp and closely-packed cotton had become heated; it
smouldered away, and got into a more dangerous state every day, until at last it burst
out into a broad sheet of flame, and nothing could be done to stop it. The passengers
and crew were compelled to take to the boats; but some were suffocated and
consumed in the fire, and many more were drowned in the sea. Now, the heated
cotton, smouldering in the hull of that vessel, is like sin in the heart of a man. All the
while it is working away according to its own nature, but no one perceives it or knows
anything about it. The man himself may wear a smiling face; he may in appearance
be making the voyage of life smoothly; he may seem to be happy. His family and
friends may see nothing wrong about him; he may see nothing wrong about himself.
But the evil spirit within may be growing stronger and stronger, and spreading wider
and wider, until, in an unexpected moment, it breaks out into some awful deed of
wickedness, which in former days would have made him start back with horror.
Beware, then, of this fatal cheat. “Take heed,” as the apostle says in another place,
“lest any of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.” It may smile bewitchingly
before your eyes; it may promise the most grateful sweetness to your taste. But, oh I
put no trust in it; at the last it will bite like a serpent and sting like an adder. (Edgar
Breeds.)
Mark 14:18-21
And as they sat and did eat.
The company makes the feast
The ingredients of this meal were few and simple, but the presence of Christ made it
more than royal. It is not what men have to eat, but the company that makes a meal
delightful. Agassiz, when a young man travelling in Germany, visited Oken, the
eminent zoologist. “After I had delivered to him my letter of introduction,” he says,
“Oken asked me to dine with him. The dinner consisted only of potatoes boiled and
roasted, but it was the best dinner I ever ate, for there was Oken. The mind of the
man seemed to enter into what we ate socially together, and I devoured his intellect
while eating his potatoes.” So the presence of Christ as the realized embodiment of
the Passover, and His Divine discourse, made that Paschal meal the most memorable
ever eaten. It is a feast, moreover, whose solemn delight is a perpetual heritage of the
Christian Church. Christ made it so by erecting upon it the sacrament of His supper,
the equivalent in the new kingdom of God to the Passover in the old, and making its
recurring celebration, there enjoined, the means of preserving the memory of all that
then transpired. (A. H. Currier.)
The bad among the good
1. In the holiest society on earth, the unholy may have a place.
2. The highest goodness may fail to win to the obedience of faith.
3. There may be moral wrong without present consciousness.
4. The knowledge and appointment of God do not hinder the freedom and
responsibility of man. (J. H. Godwin.)
115

116. The treachery of Judas foretold
I. A fearful announcement. Christ had already more than once predicted that He
would be betrayed; but now He adds to the intimation the terrible news that it would
be by one of themselves. A little of the horror of thick darkness which His words
spread over them still pervades our hearts. The fact is more than anything else,
suggestive of all that is dark and pitiful in human nature. It shows-
1. How measureless may be the evil a man may reach by simply giving way to
wrong.
2. No privileges, no light, no opportunity, can bless a man without his own
cooperation.
3. Privileges, if unimproved, injure the soul.
4. Without self-surrender to God, every other religious quality and tendency is
insufficient to save the soul. Judas only lacked this one thing.
5. As the existence of a pure soul is itself a proof and a prediction of heaven, so
such a soul seems to prove and predict a hell.
II. Christ’s reasons for making this fearful announcement.
1. Perhaps to cure the pride of the disciples. The announcement that one of them
will betray will help to abate their vehemence in seeking to know “who shall be
greatest.”
2. To give Judas a glimpse of the perdition before him, and thus awake
repentance.
3. To intimate to him that, though the Saviour might die by his craft, it was with
His own knowledge and consent. (R. Glover.)
BI 18-19, "Shall betray Me.
The betrayal
What think you, my brethren, if a similar declaration were made in regard to
ourselves? Should we sorrowfully ask, “Lord, is it I?” Should we not be more likely to
ask, “Lord, is it this man?” “Lord, is it that man?” Would not Peter be more ready to
say, “Is it John?” and John, “Is it Peter?” than either, “Is it I?” It is a good sign when
we are less suspicious of others than of ourselves, more mistrustful of ourselves than
of others in regard of the commission of sin; as indeed we ought always to be, for we
have better opportunities of knowing our own proneness to evil, our own weakness,
our own deceitfulness, than we can have of that of others; and therefore we have far
more cause to ask, “Is it I?”-the question showing that we dare not answer for
ourselves,-than, “Lord, is it my neighbour?”-the question indicating that we think
others capable of worse things than ourselves. Peter was safe when asking, “Lord, is
it I?” but in sore danger when he exclaimed, “Although all shall be offended because
of Thee, yet will not I.”
I. Suppose Judas to have been aware, as he might have been, both from ancient
prophecy, and from the express declarations of our Lord Himself, that Jesus, if He
were indeed the Christ, must be delivered to His enemies, and ignominiously put to
death-might he not, then, very probably say to himself, “After all, I shall only be
helping to accomplish what has been determined by God, and what is indispensable
116

117. to the work which Messiah has undertaken?” I do not know any train of thought
which is more likely to have presented itself to the mind of Judas than this. “The Son
of man goeth as it is written of Him.” But this determination, this certainty, left
undiminished the guiltiness of the parties who put Christ to death. They obeyed
nothing but the suggestions of their own wilful hearts; they were actuated by nothing
but their desperate malice and hatred of Jesus, when they accomplished prophecies
and fulfilled Divine decrees. Therefore was it no excuse for them that they were only
bringing to pass what had long before been ordained. The whole burden of the crime
rested upon the crucifiers, however true it was that Christ must be crucified. It did
not make Judas turn trailer that God foreknew his treason, and determined to render
it subservient to His own almighty ends. God, indeed, knew that Judas would betray
his Master, but God’s knowing it did not conduce to his doing it. It was certain, but
the foreknown wickedness of the man causes the certainty, and not the fore-ordained
performance of the deed, Oh! the utter vanity of the thought that God ever places us
under a necessity of sinning, or that because our sins may turn to His glory they will
not issue in our shame.
II. And now let us glance at another delusion to which it is likely that Judas gave
indulgence. This is the delusion as to the consequences, the punishment of sin, being
exaggerated or overstated. It may be that Judas could hardly persuade himself that a
being so beneficent as Christ would ever wholly lay aside the graciousness of His
nature, and avenge a wrong done by surrendering the doer to intense and
interminable anguish. But, in all the range of Scripture, there is not, perhaps, a
passage which sets itself so decisively against this delusion as the latter clause of our
Saviour’s address in the text-“It had been good for that man if he had not been born.”
There is nothing in the Bible which gives me so strong an idea of the utter moral
hardness in which a man is left who is forsaken by the Spirit of God, as the fact that
Judas’s question, “Lord, is it I?” followed immediately on Christ’s saying, “Woe unto
that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed;” and that his going forth to fill his
accursed compact with the priests was on the instant of his having been told that
Christ knew him for the traitor. I pause on the word “then,” and I am tempted to ask,
could it, oh! could it have been “then?” Yes, “then” it was that, with the words, “It had
been good for that man if he had not been born,”-words vocal of an eternity of
unimagined woe-then it was that, with these words rung out to him as the knell of his
own doomed spirit, Judas proceeded to address Christ with a taunting and insolent
inquiry, and then went out to accomplish the traitorous purpose which had called
forth the tremendous denunciation. With what earnestness should we join in that
prayer in the Liturgy, “Take not Thy Holy Spirit from us!” (H. Melvill, B. D.)
Judas and the disciples
There will be many that were gallant professors in this world wanting among the
saved in the day of Christ’s coming; yea, many whose damnation was never dreamed
of. Which of the twelve ever thought that Judas would have proved a devil? Nay,
when Christ suggested that one among them was naught, they each were more afraid
of themselves than of him. (Bunyan.)
Judas as he appeared to the other apostles.
You will observe that the character of Judas was openly an admirable one. I find not
that he committed himself in any way. Not the slightest speck defiled his moral
character so far as others could perceive. He was no boaster, like Peter; he was free
117

118. enough from the rashness which cries, “Though all men should forsake Thee, yet will
not I.” He asks no place on the right hand of the throne, his ambition is of another
sort. He does not ask idle questions. The Judas who asks questions is “not Iscariot.”
Thomas and Philip are often prying into deep matters, but not Judas. He receives
truth as it is taught him, and when others are offended and walk no more with Jesus,
he faithfully adheres to Him, having golden reasons for so doing. He does not indulge
in the lusts of the flesh or in the pride of life. None of the disciples suspected him of
hypocrisy; they said at the table, “Lord, is it I?” They never said, “Lord, is it Judas?”
It was true he had been filching for months, but then he did it by littles, and covered
his defalcations so well by financial manipulations that he ran no risk of detection
from the honest unsuspecting fishermen with whom he associated. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Judas unsuspected to the last
A secret sin works insidiously, but with wondrous quiet power. Its hidden ravages are
awful, and the outward revelation of their result and existence may be
contemporaneous. Until that revelation was made, probably no one ever suspected
the presence in the man of anything but a few venial faults which were as mere
excrescences on a robust character, though these growths were something rude.
Oftentimes a large fungus will start from a tree, and in some mysterious manner will
sap the life power on the spot on which it grows. They were like that fungus. When
the fungus falls in the autumn, it leaves scarcely a trace of its presence, the tree being
apparently as healthy as before the advent of the parasite. But the whole character of
the wood has been changed by the strange power of the fungus, being soft and cork-
like to the touch. Perhaps the parasite may fall in the autumn, and the tree may show
no symptoms of decay; but at the first tempest it may have to encounter, the trunk
snaps off at the spot where the fungus has been, and the extent of the injury is at once
disclosed. As long as any portion of that tree retains life, it will continue to throw out
these destructive fungi; and even when a mere stump is left in the ground, the fungi
will push themselves out in profusion. (Scientific Illustrations and Symbols.)
The treason of Judas foreshown by Christ
I. The first is, the fact specified. “The Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.” Do any
ask, as those of old did, “Who is this Son of man?” This Son of man is none other
than the very person, of whom the apostle spake as possessing in Himself “the great
mystery of godliness;” He is “God manifest in the flesh.” There is, first, the heinous
character of the traitor that betrayed Him; secondly, the importance of hunting out
and exposing the imitators of his black deed in the present day-and, God helping me,
I mean to be faithful here; and then, in the third place, the sufferings of Him who was
betrayed and crucified. Let me invite you to pray over these three things.
1. The heinousness of the traitor. He had made a glaring profession. He had
attached himself to the disciples of Christ; he had become a member of the purest
Church that ever was formed upon earth-the immediate twelve around our Lord.
He was looked up to, a leading man. I beseech you, weigh this solemn fact-for a
solemn one it is-that neither profession, nor diligent exertion, nor high standing
among professors, so as to be beyond even suspicion, will stand in the stead of
vital godliness. And there may be Judases even now, and I believe there are not a
few, that are as much unsuspected as Judas Iscariot was. So artful was his
deception, that none of the disciples suspected him. Nay more; the first feature of
his character that is developed, the first view we have of him in his real character,
118

119. is, that he was the last to suspect himself. All the others had said, “Lord, is it I?”-
and last of all, Judas drawls it out, “Master, is it I?” Yet after all the standing he
gained, after all the miracles he observed, after all the attachment he professed,
this wretch, for thirty pieces of silver, is content to betray his Lord. Ah! only put a
money bait in the way of the Judases, and you soon find them out; that will find
them out, if nothing else will. Of course, His enemies are glad to have Him seized;
but who would believe it possible, especially among those who have such a high
opinion of the dignity of human nature, that this wretch, after eating and
drinking with Christ, after following Him all His ministry through, can go and
betray Him with a kiss? can say, in the very act of betraying Him, “Hail, Master?”-
carrying on his devilism to the last.
2. But I want a word of interrogation with regard to imitators of Judas in the
present day. Have you thrown “the bag” away? Have you done with carnal objects
and pursuits? Do you scorn the idea of marketing about Christ, and selling Him-
bartering Him? Are you really and honestly concerned about the truth of Christ,
the interests of His cause, the purity of His gospel, the sacredness of His
ordinances? Oh I try, try these matters. I would not for the world have a single
masked character about me, of the Judas-like breed.
3. Let me now invite your attention for a moment to the other point-the
sufferings of this betrayed and murdered Lord. “The Son of man is betrayed to be
crucified.” Is not this enough to make a man hate sin? If you do not hate sin in its
very nature, you have never been to Calvary, and you have never had fellowship
with a precious Christ. Wherever the blood of atonement is applied, it produces
hatred of sin: oh that you and I may live upon Calvary, until every sin shall be
mortified, subdued, and kept under, and Christ reign supreme!
II. I pass on to the second feature in our subject: the official announcement of this
fact by the sufferer himself.
III. I pass on to the third particular of our subject-the result. “The Son of man is
betrayed to be crucified;” but the matter did not end there. “The Son of man is
betrayed to be crucified;” and then the powers of darkness have done their worst.
“The Son of man is betrayed to be crucified;” and even death shall lose its sting, hell
shall lose its terrors for all Mine elect, Jehovah shall get the glory of His own name,
and I shall go through the valley of the shadow of death to My exaltation. To be brief
I will just name three things as the result anticipated; for you know it is said, that “for
the joy that was set before Him, He endured the cross.” And what was it? The
redeemed to be emancipated; Christ to be exalted; and heaven to be opened and
peopled. These are the results; and I said, when I gave you the plan of my sermon,
that He should not be disappointed in any of them; nor shall He. (J. Irons, D. D.)
Treachery to Christ
Wrongs and indignities may be offered to Christ still, in sundry ways.
1. In His person. By vilifying Him, as do Turks, Jews, and heathen. Also, when
any deny or oppose His Nature-either the Godhead or the Manhood, as do
heretics. Also, when any profane the blood of Christ, by remaining unrepentant,
or turning apostate.
2. In His office, as Mediator; putting any person or thing in His place.
3. In His names or titles; using them profanely.
119

120. 4. In His saints and faithful members; wronging or abusing them.
5. In His messengers and ministers (Luk_10:16).
6. In His holy ordinances; the Word, sacraments, etc. (1Co_11:27). By this we
may examine whether the love to Christ which we profess is true and sincere.
Does this child love his father, or that servant his master, who can hear him
abused and reproached? (George Petter.)
Latent possibilities of evil
There is latent evil lurking in all our hearts, of which we are not aware ourselves. We
do not know how many devils of selfishness, sense, and falsehood are hiding
themselves in the mysterious depths of our souls. If we do not learn this through that
noble Christian humility which “still suspects and still reveres itself,” we must learn it
through the bitter experience of failure and open sin. How many examples there are
to prove the existence of this latent evil! We have seen a young man go from the pure
home of his childhood, from the holy influences of a Christian community. As an
infant his brow had been touched with the water of baptism amid the prayers of the
Church; as a child his feet had been taught the way to the house of God; in his home
his parents had prayed for him that he might be an honest and useful man, whether
he was to be poor or rich, learned or ignorant. He leaves his home and comes to the
city to engage in business. He trusts in his own heart, in his own upright purpose, in
his own virtuous habits. But there is latent evil in his heart, there is a secret
selfishness, which is ready to break out under the influences which will now
surround him. He becomes a lover of pleasure; he attends balls and theatres; he rides
out with gay companions: he acquires a taste for play, wine, and excitement. He
determines to make money that he may indulge these new tastes, and he devotes all
his energies to this pursuit. In a year or two, how far has he gone from the innocent
hopes and tastes of his childhood? His serene brow is furrowed with worldly lines;
his pure eye clouded with licentious indulgence. The latent evil that was in him has
come out under the test of these new circumstances … The moral of it all is, “Keep thy
heart with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of life.” But how can we keep our
heart? We can keep our hands, by an effort, from wrong actions, and force them to do
right ones. We can keep our lips from saying unkind or hasty words, though that is
sometimes hard enough. But how keep our heart? How make ourselves a right spirit,
a good temper? That seems simply impossible. How direct those tendencies which
are hidden even from ourselves? Here, it seems to me, is the place and need of
religion. If it be true that our soul lies open inwardly to God, and that we rest on
Him, then is it not possible, is it not probable, that if we put our heart into His hands
He will guide it? And the experience of universal man, in all ages, all countries, all
religions, teaches this value of prayer. It is taught by Socrates and Seneca, no less
than by Jesus Christ. Here is the place of religion: this is its need. We do not need to
pray to God for what we can do ourselves. But what we cannot do for ourselves is to
guide and keep and direct this hidden man of the heart. We have a right to come
boldly to God for this; asking His spirit, and expecting to receive it. This is a promise
we can trust in, that God will give His Holy Spirit to those who ask Him. (J. Freeman
Clarke.)
The question that went round the table
I. Look at the question, “Lord, is it I?”
120

121. II. Look at this question in connection with the remark that called it forth. What did
Judas sell Christ for? The old German story reports that the astrologer Faustus sold
his soul to the evil one for twenty-four years of earthly happiness. What was the
bargain in this case? The auctioneer had tempting lists to show; what was it that
tempted Judas? He sold his Lord for thirty somethings. What things? Thirty years of
right over all the earth, with all the trees of the forests, all the fowls of the mountains,
and the cattle upon a thousand hills? For thirty armies? Or thirty fleets? Thirty stars?
Thirty centuries of power, to reign majestically on hell’s burning throne? No, for
thirty shillings!
III. Look at the question in connection with the simple unsuspecting brotherliness it
revealed in those to whom it was spoken. When Christ’s declaration was made. “One
of you shall betray Me,” it would not have been wonderful, judging by a common
standard, if such words as these had passed through various minds-“It is Judas; I
always thought him the black sheep of the fold; I never liked his grasp of that bag; I
never liked the mystery of that missing cash; I never liked the look of him; I never
liked his fussy whisper.” No such thoughts were in open or secret circulation. The
disciples already exemplified the principle, and carried in their hearts the Divine
music of the language, “Love suffereth long, and is kind … is not easily provoked,
thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all
things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.” With lips that
were tremulous, and cheeks that were blanched, each one said, not, “Lord, is it he?”
but, “Lord, is it I?”
IV. Look at this question in connection with the fear for himself, shown by every one
who asked it. A preacher in a certain village church once gave easy lessons in
Christian ethics through a scheme of illustration taken from the letters of the
alphabet. Rebuking his hearers for their readiness to speak evil of their neighbours,
he said that, regarding each letter of the alphabet as the initial letter of a name, they
had something to say against all the letters, with one exception. His homily was to
this effect. “You say, A lies, B steals, C swears, D drinks, F brags, G goes into a
passion, H gets into debt. The letter I is the only one of which you have nothing to
say.” No rustics can require such elementary education more than do some keen
leaders of society. Pitiless detectors of sin in others, begin at home. Think first of that
which is represented by the letter I. It is a necessary word, for you can never get
beyond it, never do without it, while you live, or when you die. It is a deep word, for
who can sound the sea of its deep significance? It is an important word, for of all
words which can lighten us with their flash, or startle us with their blow, there is no
more important” word to us than this. Who is there? “I.” Who are you? Conjure up
this mystery-this “you,” symbolized by the letter “I.” Face it, speak to it, challenge it,
and know if all is right with it. If indeed you can say, “I am a Christian”; “I believe,
help, Lord, mine unbelief;” “I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me;” still you feel that
two natures for the present war within you, and have need to offer Augustine’s
prayer, “Lord, deliver me from the wicked man, myself.” When the wind is rising, and
the waves are treacherous, it is good for each man to look to his own ship, to his own
ropes, to his own sails; not first to stand and speculate on the seaworthiness of other
ships.
V. Look at this question in connection with the love that worked in the heart of the
questioner. Not one of them ever knew before how much he loved his Lord, but this
shock brought the love out.
VI. Look at this question in connection with the answer to it. “Thou hast said.” You
can read what is on the open page, Jesus can look through the lids of the book, and
read off the sheet-in print. You can see the whited sepulchre; He can see the skeleton
within. You can see the fair appearance, He can see the wolf under the borrowed
121

122. fleece. You can see the body, He can see the soul. Now the secret had come to light, as
one day all secrets will.
VII. Look at this question in other possible applications. “One of you will go out of
this place a lost spirit.” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you, having refused the Divine love
before, will refuse it again!” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you will go out with a harder heart
than when he came in.” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you, a waverer now, will be a waverer
still.” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you, now almost persuaded to be a Christian, will still
remain only almost persuaded.” “Lord, is it I?” “One of you, already a true disciple,
will refuse, as you have refused before, to confess your faith!” “Lord, is it I?” Let us
think, on the other hand, of certain happy possibilities in the fair use of these words.
There will come a time, beyond what we now call time, when, in the rapture of
immortality, and in the language of heaven, you will say, “Have I in reality come
through death? Am I on the other side? Can it be that I am glorified at last? This, so
wonderful beyond language to express, so bright beyond the most enchanted fancy to
picture, what is it? Is it solid? Or is it a glory of dreamland? I used to sin, I used to be
slow, I used to be weary, I used to have dim eyes, and dull ears! Now I see! Now I
love! Now I can fly like the light! Lord, is it I?” (Charles Stanford, D. D.)
The history of Judas
Of Judas this fearful sentence is uttered by the Lord.
I. But before entering into the particulars of his history, a few general remarks are
pertinent.
1. There is no evidence that Judas Iscariot was a man of bad countenance. Most
men are much influenced by looks, and many think they can tell a man’s
character by the physiognomy. This may often be true, but there are many
exceptions.
2. There is no evidence that, up to his betrayal of his Lord, his conduct was the
subject of censure, complaint, jealousy, or of the slightest suspicion. His sins
were all concealed from the eyes of mortals. He was a thief, but that was known
only to Omniscience.
3. There is no evidence that, during his continuance with Christ, he regarded
himself as a hypocrite. Doubtless he thought himself honest.
4. Let it not be supposed that Judas ought not to have known his character. He
shut his eyes to the truth respecting himself. The aggravations of the sin of
betraying Christ were many and great. The traitor was eminent in place, in gifts,
in office, in profession; a guide to others, and one whose example was likely to
influence many.
II. The lessons taught us by the life and end of Judas are such as these-
1. Though wicked men do not so intend, yet in all cases they shall certainly glorify
God by all their misdeeds (Psa_76:10). The wickedness of Judas was by God
over-ruled to bring about the most important event in man’s salvation. The
wicked now hate God, but they cannot defeat Him.
2. Nor shall God’s unfailing purpose to bring good out of evil abate aught of the
guilt of those who work iniquity (Act_2:28; Act_4:27-28).
3. From the history of Judas we also learn that when a man is once fairly started
in a career of wickedness, it is impossible to tell where he may stop. In the next
122

123. world surprise awaits all the impenitent.
4. All men should especially beware of covetousness (1Ti_6:10).
5. Did men but know how bitter would be the end of transgression, they would at
least pause before they plunge into all evil. Oh! that men would hear the warning
words of Richard Baxter, “Use sin as it will use you: spare it not, for it will not
spare you; it is your murderer and the murderer of the world. Use it, therefore, as
a murderer should be used.”
6. How small a temptation to sin will at last prevail over a vicious mind. For less
than twenty dollars Judas sold his Lord and Master. Those temptations
commonly esteemed great are not the most sure to prevail.
7. Nothing prepares a man for destruction faster than hypocrisy or formality in
actions of a religious nature. The three years which Judas spent in the family of
our Lord probably exceeded all the rest of his life in ripening him for destruction.
We should never forget that official character is one thing, and moral character
another thing. All official characters may be sustained without any real grace in
the heart.
8. The history of Judas shows us how man will cling to false hopes. There is no
evidence that during years of hypocrisy he ever seriously doubted his own piety.
9. If men thus self-confident forsake their profession, and openly apostatize, we
need not be surprised.
10. Thus, too, we have a full refutation of the objection made to a connection
with the visible church because there are wicked men in her communion. The
apostles certainly knew that among them was one bad man; but they did not
therefore renounce their portion among Christ’s professed friends.
11. How difficult it is to bring home truth to the deceitful hears of man.
Hypocrites are slow to improve close, discriminating preaching. They desire not
to look into their real characters.
12. The case of Judas discloses the uselessness of that sorrow of the world which
worketh death, hath no hope in it, and drives the soul to madness. It is not
desperation, but penitence, that God requires. Regrets without hatred of sin are
useless, both on earth and in hell. (W. S. Plumer, D. D.)
Terrible result of the secret working of sin
There once sailed from the city of New Orleans a large and noble steamer, laden with
cotton, and having a great number of passengers on board. While they were taking in
the cargo, a portion of it became slightly moistened by a shower of rain that fell. This
circumstance, however, was not noticed; the cotton was stowed away in the hold, and
the hatches fastened down. During the first part of the voyage all went well; but, far
out towards the middle of the Atlantic ocean, all on board were one day alarmed by
the fearful cry of “Fire!” and in a few moments the noble ship was completely
enveloped in flames. The damp and closely-packed cotton had become heated; it
smouldered away, and got into a more dangerous state every day, until at last it burst
out into a broad sheet of flame, and nothing could be done to stop it. The passengers
and crew were compelled to take to the boats; but some were suffocated and
consumed in the fire, and many more were drowned in the sea. Now, the heated
cotton, smouldering in the hull of that vessel, is like sin in the heart of a man. All the
while it is working away according to its own nature, but no one perceives it or knows
123

124. anything about it. The man himself may wear a smiling face; he may in appearance
be making the voyage of life smoothly; he may seem to be happy. His family and
friends may see nothing wrong about him; he may see nothing wrong about himself.
But the evil spirit within may be growing stronger and stronger, and spreading wider
and wider, until, in an unexpected moment, it breaks out into some awful deed of
wickedness, which in former days would have made him start back with horror.
Beware, then, of this fatal cheat. “Take heed,” as the apostle says in another place,
“lest any of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.” It may smile bewitchingly
before your eyes; it may promise the most grateful sweetness to your taste. But, oh I
put no trust in it; at the last it will bite like a serpent and sting like an adder. (Edgar
Breeds.)
Mark 14:18-21
And as they sat and did eat.
The company makes the feast
The ingredients of this meal were few and simple, but the presence of Christ made it
more than royal. It is not what men have to eat, but the company that makes a meal
delightful. Agassiz, when a young man travelling in Germany, visited Oken, the
eminent zoologist. “After I had delivered to him my letter of introduction,” he says,
“Oken asked me to dine with him. The dinner consisted only of potatoes boiled and
roasted, but it was the best dinner I ever ate, for there was Oken. The mind of the
man seemed to enter into what we ate socially together, and I devoured his intellect
while eating his potatoes.” So the presence of Christ as the realized embodiment of
the Passover, and His Divine discourse, made that Paschal meal the most memorable
ever eaten. It is a feast, moreover, whose solemn delight is a perpetual heritage of the
Christian Church. Christ made it so by erecting upon it the sacrament of His supper,
the equivalent in the new kingdom of God to the Passover in the old, and making its
recurring celebration, there enjoined, the means of preserving the memory of all that
then transpired. (A. H. Currier.)
The bad among the good
1. In the holiest society on earth, the unholy may have a place.
2. The highest goodness may fail to win to the obedience of faith.
3. There may be moral wrong without present consciousness.
4. The knowledge and appointment of God do not hinder the freedom and
responsibility of man. (J. H. Godwin.)
The treachery of Judas foretold
I. A fearful announcement. Christ had already more than once predicted that He
would be betrayed; but now He adds to the intimation the terrible news that it would
be by one of themselves. A little of the horror of thick darkness which His words
spread over them still pervades our hearts. The fact is more than anything else,
suggestive of all that is dark and pitiful in human nature. It shows-
124

125. 1. How measureless may be the evil a man may reach by simply giving way to
wrong.
2. No privileges, no light, no opportunity, can bless a man without his own
cooperation.
3. Privileges, if unimproved, injure the soul.
4. Without self-surrender to God, every other religious quality and tendency is
insufficient to save the soul. Judas only lacked this one thing.
5. As the existence of a pure soul is itself a proof and a prediction of heaven, so
such a soul seems to prove and predict a hell.
II. Christ’s reasons for making this fearful announcement.
1. Perhaps to cure the pride of the disciples. The announcement that one of them
will betray will help to abate their vehemence in seeking to know “who shall be
greatest.”
2. To give Judas a glimpse of the perdition before him, and thus awake
repentance.
3. To intimate to him that, though the Saviour might die by his craft, it was with
His own knowledge and consent. (R. Glover.)
19 They were saddened, and one by one they
said to him, “Surely you don’t mean me?”
CLARKE, "And another said, Is it I? - This clause is wanting in BCLP,
seventeen others, Syriac, Persic, Arabic, Coptic, Ethiopic, Vulgate, and four of the
Itala. Griesbach leaves it doubtful: others leave it out.
GILL, "And they began to be sorrowful,.... And were so, all but Judas, at this
saying of Christ's:
and to say unto him, one by one; even till it came to Judas himself,
is it I? that shall betray thee;
and another said, is it I? This clause is wanting in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac,
Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic versions, and in two of Beza's copies; and indeed seems
to be redundant, since the disciples are said before to express themselves in this
manner, one by one; See Gill on Mat_26:22.
HENRY, " They were pleasing themselves with the society one of another, but
Christ casts a damp upon the joy of that, by telling them, One of you that eateth with
me shall betray me, Mar_14:18. Christ said this, if it might be, to startle the
conscience of Judas, and to awaken him to repent of his wickedness, and to draw
125

126. back (for it was not too late) from the brink of the pit. But for aught that appears, he
who was most concerned in the warning, was least concerned at it. All the rest were
affected with it. (1.) They began to be sorrowful. As the remembrance of our former
falls into sin, so the fear of the like again, doth often much embitter the comfort of
our spiritual feasts, and damp our joy. Here were the bitter herbs, with which this
passover-feast was taken. (2.) They began to be suspicious of themselves; they said
one by one, Is it I? And another said, Is it I? They are to be commended for their
charity, that they were more jealous of themselves than of one another. It is the law
of charity, to hope the best (1Co_13:5-7), because we assuredly know, therefore we
may justly suspect, more evil by ourselves than by our brethren. They are also to be
commended for their acquiescence in what Christ said; they trusted more to his
words than to their own hearts; and therefore do not say, “I am sure it is not I,” but,
“Lord, is it I? see if there be such a way of wickedness in us, such a root of bitterness,
and discover it to us, that we may pluck up that root, and stop up that way.”
PULPIT, "They began to be sorrowful, and to say unto him one by one, Is it I?
The disciples were naturally disposed to be joyful at this great festival. But their
Master's sorrow and his words, and the solemnity with which they were uttered,
cast a shadow over the whole company; and the disciples began to be sorrowful.
The words, "And another said, Is it I?" are omitted by the best authorities.
20 “It is one of the Twelve,” he replied, “one
who dips bread into the bowl with me.
CLARKE, "That dippeth with me in the dish - In the east, persons never eat
together from one dish, except when a strong attachment subsists between two or
more persons of the same caste; in such a case one invites another to come and sit by
him and eat from the same dish. This custom seems to have existed among the Jews;
and the sacred historian mentions this notice of our Lord’s, It is one of the twelve,
that dippeth with me in the dish, to mark more strongly the perfidy of the character
of Judas.
GILL, "And he answered and said unto them,.... In order to relieve their
minds, and point out the particular person:
it is one of the twelve, that dippeth with me in the dish; just at that very
instant; See Gill on Mat_26:23.
HENRY, " He ate it with the twelve, who were his family, to teach those who have
the charge of families, not only families of children, but families of servants, or
families of scholars, or pupils, to keep up religion among them, and worship God
with them. If Christ came with the twelve, then Judas was with them, though he was
126

127. at this time contriving to betray his Master; and it is plain by what follows (Mar_
14:20), that he was there: he did not absent himself, lest he could have been
suspected; had his seat been empty at this feast, they would have said, as Saul of
David, He is not clean, surely he is not clean, 1Sa_20:26. Hypocrites, though they
know it is at their peril, yet crowd into special ordinances, to keep up their repute,
and palliate their secret wickedness. Christ did not exclude him from the feast,
though he knew his wickedness, for it was not as yet become public and scandalous.
Christ, designing to put the keys of the kingdom of heaven into the hands of men,
who can judge only according to outward appearance, would hereby both direct and
encourage them in their admissions to his table, to be satisfied with a justifiable
profession, because they cannot discern the root of bitterness till it springs up.
II. Christ's discourse with his disciples, as they were eating the passover. It is
probable that they had discourse, according to the custom of the feast, of the
deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, and the preservation of the first-born, and were as
pleasant as they used to be together on this occasion, till Christ told them that which
would mix trembling with their joys.
1. They were pleasing themselves with the society of their Master; but he tells
them that they must now presently lose him; The Son of man is betrayed; and they
knew, for he had often told them, what followed - If he be betrayed, the next news
you will hear of him, is, that he is crucified and slain; God hath determined it
concerning him, and he agrees to it; The Son of man goes, as it is written of him,
Mar_14:21. It was written in the counsels of God, and written in the prophecies of
the Old Testament, not one jot or tittle of either of which can fall to the ground.
PULPIT, "And he said unto them, It is one of the twelve, he that dippeth with me
in the dish. St. Mark here uses the present participle ( ὁ ἐμβαπτόμενος), bringing
the action close to the time when he was speaking. St. Matthew (Matthew 26:23)
has ( ὁ ἐμβάψας) "he that dipped his hand," using the aorist form. St. Mark's
form is the more graphic. The dish probably contained a sauce called charoseth,
into which they dipped their food before eating it. The following appears to have
been the order of the events:—First, our Lord, before he instituted the Holy
Sacrament of the Eucharist, foretold that he would be betrayed by one of his
disciples but only in general terms. Then came the eager question from them, "Is
it I?" Then Christ answered that the traitor was he who should dip his hand
together with him in the dish. But this did not bring it home to the individual,
because several who sat near to him were able to dip with him in the dish. So
that our Lord had as yet only obscurely and indefinitely pointed out the traitor.
Then he proceeded to institute "the Lord's Supper;" after which he again
intimated (Luke 22:21) that "the hand of him that betrayed him was with him on
the table." Upon this. St. Peter hinted to St. John, who was "reclining in Jesus'
besom," that he should ask him to say definitely and by name who it was that
should betray him. Our Lord then said to St. John, "He it is, for whom I shall
dip the sop, and give it him" (John 13:26). Our Lord then dipped the sop, and
gave it to Judas Iscariot. Then it was that our Lord said to Judas, "That thou
doest, do quickly" ( ὅ ποιεῖς ποίησον τάχιον) (John 13:27). Then Judas went
straightway to the house of Caiaphas, and procured the band of men and officers
for the completion of his horrible design.
127

128. 21 The Son of Man will go just as it is written
about him. But woe to that man who betrays the
Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had
not been born.”
GILL, "The son of man indeed goeth,.... Out of this world by death,
as it is written; both in the book of God's decrees, and in the Scriptures of the Old
Testament;
but woe to that man by whom the son of man is betrayed! whose sin will not
be excused, nor lessened by fulfilling the decrees of God, and by accomplishing the
prophecies of the Bible:
good were it for that man if he had never been born; so aggravating will be
his crime, so dreadful his punishment; See Gill on Mat_26:24.
HENRY, "II. Christ's discourse with his disciples, as they were eating the
passover. It is probable that they had discourse, according to the custom of the feast,
of the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, and the preservation of the first-born, and
were as pleasant as they used to be together on this occasion, till Christ told them
that which would mix trembling with their joys.
1. They were pleasing themselves with the society of their Master; but he tells
them that they must now presently lose him; The Son of man is betrayed; and they
knew, for he had often told them, what followed - If he be betrayed, the next news
you will hear of him, is, that he is crucified and slain; God hath determined it
concerning him, and he agrees to it; The Son of man goes, as it is written of him,
Mar_14:21. It was written in the counsels of God, and written in the prophecies of
the Old Testament, not one jot or tittle of either of which can fall to the ground.
SBC, "I. When we consider by whom these words were spoken, and when we also
think steadily of what is contained in them, they are, I think, altogether one of the
most solemn passages to be found in the whole of the Scriptures. For they declare of
an immortal being that it would have been good for him if he had never been born.
Now consider what immortality is, and it will be plain that if it were good for a man
that his never-ending being should never have been begun, it can only be because it
will be to him a being of never-ending misery. For, let the misery last ever so long, yet
if it has any end at all, the eternity of happy existence which follows that end must
make it not bad, but infinitely good, for us to have been born. Thousands on
thousands of years of suffering, if that suffering is to end at last, must be infinitely
less to an immortal being, infinitely more vain, infinitely more like a dream at
waking, than one single second of suffering compared to threescore years and ten of
perfect happiness.
II. There is no occasion to dwell on the particular sin of him of whom the words in
the text were spoken; for we know that except we repent we shall all likewise perish.
The state on which this fearful doom was pronounced Was the state of one who, with
128

129. many opportunities long offered to him, had neglected all; who had brought himself
to that condition that he might despair, but could not repent. Now, if this condition
were wholly ours, then it were vain to speak of it; if we had so long and so obstinately
hardened our hearts that there was no place for repentance; then, indeed, we might
sit down and cross our arms as helplessly as the boatman, when he feels himself
within the sure indraught of the cataract and that no human aid can save him from
being swept down the fearful gulf. But if the boat be not so surely within the grasp of
the current; if yet, though it be fast hurrying downwards, it may by a vehement effort
be rescued; if the shore of certain safety be not only near, but by possibility
accessible; who cannot conceive the energy with which we should struggle under
such circumstances?—who cannot feel of what intense efforts we would then be
capable, when on the issue of a few moments of greater or less exertion, life or death
were hanging?
T. Arnold, Sermons, vol. vi., p. 149.
CONSTABLE, "Jesus explained that His betrayal was part of divine purpose
that the Old Testament had predicted (e.g., Psalms 22; Isaiah 53). Nevertheless
the betrayer would bear the responsibility for his deed and would pay a severe
penalty.
"The fact that God turns the wrath of man to his praise does not excuse the
wrath of man." [Note: Cranfield, The Gospel . . ., p. 424.]
The seriousness of Judas' act was in direct proportion to the innocence of the
person he betrayed (cf. Mark 14:9). "By whom the Son of Man is betrayed"
(NASB) views Judas as Satan's instrument.
COFFMAN, “All theories regarding the possible salvation of Judas are
frustrated by the Saviour's pronouncement here. That fate which is worse than
never having been born cannot, by any device, be made equivalent to eternal life.
Also, there is the necessary deduction from this word of the Master that the fate
of the wicked is something other than mere annihilation, but something far more
dreadful.
SBC, "I. When we consider by whom these words were spoken, and when we also
think steadily of what is contained in them, they are, I think, altogether one of the
most solemn passages to be found in the whole of the Scriptures. For they declare of
an immortal being that it would have been good for him if he had never been born.
Now consider what immortality is, and it will be plain that if it were good for a man
that his never-ending being should never have been begun, it can only be because it
will be to him a being of never-ending misery. For, let the misery last ever so long, yet
if it has any end at all, the eternity of happy existence which follows that end must
make it not bad, but infinitely good, for us to have been born. Thousands on
thousands of years of suffering, if that suffering is to end at last, must be infinitely
less to an immortal being, infinitely more vain, infinitely more like a dream at
waking, than one single second of suffering compared to threescore years and ten of
perfect happiness.
II. There is no occasion to dwell on the particular sin of him of whom the words in
the text were spoken; for we know that except we repent we shall all likewise perish.
The state on which this fearful doom was pronounced Was the state of one who, with
many opportunities long offered to him, had neglected all; who had brought himself
129

130. to that condition that he might despair, but could not repent. Now, if this condition
were wholly ours, then it were vain to speak of it; if we had so long and so obstinately
hardened our hearts that there was no place for repentance; then, indeed, we might
sit down and cross our arms as helplessly as the boatman, when he feels himself
within the sure indraught of the cataract and that no human aid can save him from
being swept down the fearful gulf. But if the boat be not so surely within the grasp of
the current; if yet, though it be fast hurrying downwards, it may by a vehement effort
be rescued; if the shore of certain safety be not only near, but by possibility
accessible; who cannot conceive the energy with which we should struggle under
such circumstances?—who cannot feel of what intense efforts we would then be
capable, when on the issue of a few moments of greater or less exertion, life or death
were hanging?
T. Arnold, Sermons, vol. vi., p. 149.
PULPIT, "For the Son of man goeth ( ὑπάγει)—goeth, departeth from this
mortal scene: the reference is, of course, to his death—even as it is written of
him; as, for example, in Psalms 22:1-31 and Isaiah 41:1-29 It was foreordained
by God that he was to suffer as a victim for the sins of the whole world. But this
predestined purpose of God did not make the guilt any the less of those who
brought the Savior to his cross. Good were it for that man if he had not been
born. The Greek is καλὸν ἦν αὐτῷ εἰ οὐκ ἐγεννήθη ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος: literally,
good were it for him, if that man had not been born. Better not to have lived at
all than to have lived and died ill. Existence is no blessing, but a curse, to him
who consciously and wilfully defeats the purpose of his existence. St. Matthew
(Matthew 26:25) here introduces Judas as asking the question, "Is it I, Rabbi?"
And our Lord answers him affirmatively, "Thou hast said." This was probably
said in a low voice. Had it been said so as to be heard by others, such as Peter
and John, they might have risen at once to inflict summary vengeance upon the
apostate traitor.
22 While they were eating, Jesus took bread,
and when he had given thanks, he broke it and
gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take it; this is
my body.”
CLARKE, "Eat - This is omitted by many MSS. and versions, but I think without
reason. It is found in the parallel places, Mat_26:26; 1Co_11:24. See the subject of
the Lord’s Supper largely explained on Mat_26:26 (note), etc.
GILL, "And as they did eat,.... The paschal lamb, and the unleavened bread, just
130

131. at the conclusion of that feast:
Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it; beginning and instituting a new
feast, to be kept in aftertimes, in commemoration of his sufferings and death, now
near at hand;
and gave to them, the disciples,
and said, take, eat: the word eat is not in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Arabic, Persic,
and Ethiopic versions, and is wanting in some copies:
this is body; a figure and representation of it; See Gill on Mat_26:26.
HENRY, "III. The institution of the Lord's supper.
1. It was instituted in the close of a supper, when they were sufficiently fed with the
paschal lamb, to show that in the Lord's supper there is no bodily repast intended;
to preface it with such a thing, is to revive Moses again. But it is food for the soul
only, and therefore a very little of that which is for the body, as much as will serve for
a sign, is enough. It was at the close of the passover-supper, which by this was
evangelized, and then superseded and set aside. Much of the doctrine and duty of the
eucharist is illustrated to us by the law of the passover (Ex. 12); for the Old
Testament institutions, though they do not bind us, yet instruct us, by the help of a
gospel-key to them. And these two ordinances lying here so near together, it may be
good to compare them, and observe how much shorter and plainer the institution of
the Lord's supper is, than that of the passover was. Christ's yoke is easy in
comparison with that of the ceremonial law, and his ordinances are more spiritual.
2. It was instituted by the example of Christ himself; not with the ceremony and
solemnity of a law, as the ordinance of baptism was, after Christ's resurrection (Mat_
28:19), with, Be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, by a power given to Christ in
heaven and on earth (Mat_28:18); but by the practice of our Master himself, because
intended for those who are already his disciples, and taken into covenant with him:
but it has the obligation of the law, and was intended to remain in full force, power,
and virtue, till his second coming.
3. It was instituted with blessing and giving of thanks; the gifts of common
providence are to be so received (1Ti_4:4, 1Ti_4:5), much more than the gifts of
special grace. He blessed (Mar_14:22), and gave thanks, Mar_14:23. At his other
meals, he was wont to bless, and give thanks (Mar_6:41; Mar_8:7) so remarkably,
that he was known by it, Luk_24:30, Luk_24:31. And he did the same at this meal.
4. It was instituted to be a memorial of his death; and therefore he broke the
bread, to show how it pleased the Lord to bruise him; and he called the wine, which
is the blood of the grape, the blood of the New Testament. The death Christ died was
a bloody death, and frequent mention is made of the blood, the precious blood, as the
pride of our redemption; for the blood is the life, and made atonement for the soul,
Lev_17:11-14. The pouring out of the blood was the most sensible indication of the
pouring out of his soul, Isa_53:12. Blood has a voice (Gen_4:10); and therefore
blood is so often mentioned, because it was to speak, Heb_12:24. It is called the
blood of the New Testament; for the covenant of grace became a testament, and of
force by the death of Christ, the testator, Heb_9:16. It is said to be shed for many, to
justify many (Isa_53:11), to bring many sons to glory, Heb_2:10. It was sufficient for
many, being of infinite value; it has been of use to many; we read of a great
multitude which no man could number, that had all washed their robes, and made
them white in the blood of the Lamb (Rev_7:9-14); and still it is a fountain opened.
131

132. How comfortable is this to poor repenting sinners, that the blood of Christ is shed for
many! And if for many, why not for me? If for sinners, sinners of the Gentiles, the
chief of sinners, then why not for me?
5. It was instituted to be a ratification of the covenant made with us in him, and a
sign of the conveyance of those benefits to us, which were purchased for us by his
death; and therefore he broke the bread to them (Mar_14:22), and said, Take, eat of
it: he gave the cup to them, and ordered them to drink of it, Mar_14:23. Apply the
doctrine of Christ crucified to yourselves, and let it be meat and drink to your souls,
strengthening, nourishing, and refreshing, to you, and the support and comfort of
your spiritual life.
SBC, “Christ and the Communion.
I. This service carries us back over dim tracks of time to the beginning of the Gospel.
We think of scattered bands of our ancient brethren, in the midst of surrounding
heathenism, gathering as we do now around the Table of our Lord. They regard the
crucified Jesus as the Son of God, and the Saviour of the world. It is not altogether
difficult to place ourselves in the position of those ancient saints, and to enter into
their state of heart as they gathered round the Lord’s Table. There was an
unconscious recognition—all the more profound and joyful that it was unconscious—
of their being one through the love that embraced them all. It was not, however, that
their minds were occupied about one another. It was the Lord Himself whom they
thought upon; His holy form it was that rose up before the eye of faith; the festival
was one of love, and memory, and hope, bringing up to faith the sacred Person of the
Lord, and kindling all blissful emotions. In such experiences believing men may
share today, to the same extent as believing men of the first century.
II. What is this communion to our Saviour? What was in His heart when He
established this ordinance? The answer rises to our lips at once. (1) There was
undying love to His own. That love is the abiding mystery of the Gospel. Never before
did it get such utterance; never before did it appear so tender and intense, so full and
overflowing. (2) There is another thing beyond even this. It tells out His desire for
fellowship with His own—just as when He took Peter and James and John with Him
into the garden, and said, "My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death; tarry ye
here and watch with Me." There is unfathomable mystery here—that He, so to speak,
should lean on us, but it is part of the blessed mystery of His brotherhood.
Brotherhood is no mere name with Him; but a blissful verity. In all, save sin, His
heart was like our own; and just as we have pleasure in the love that our friends bear
toward us, and in knowing that we live in their memory, so does He delight in the
love with which saved men love Him. It is part of the reward of His sorrows, part of
the joy that was set before Him, for which He endured the Cross, despising the
shame.
J. Culross, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxii., p. 245.
CONSTABLE, "The bread Jesus ate would have been the unleavened bread that
the Jews used in the Passover meal. The blessing Jesus pronounced was a prayer
of thanksgiving to God for the bread, not a consecration of the bread itself.
People, not places or things, are always the objects of blessings in the Bible.
Jesus' distribution of the bread to the disciples was more significant than His
breaking of it. By passing it to them He symbolically shared Himself with them.
When Jesus said, "This is my body," He meant the bread represented His body
(cf. Luke 12:1; John 6:32-35). The disciples could hardly have eaten the literal
132

133. flesh of Jesus since He was standing among them. Moreover the Jews abhorred
eating human flesh and did not drink even animal blood much less human blood
(cf. Leviticus 3:17; Leviticus 7:26-27; Leviticus 17:10-14). [Note: Riddle, p. 194.]
"The bitter herbs served to recall the bitterness of slavery, the stewed fruit,
which possessed the consistency and color of clay, evoked the making of bricks as
slaves, while the paschal lamb provided a reminder of God's gracious 'passing
over' of Israel in the plague of death that came to Egypt." [Note: Lane, p. 505.]
BARCLAY, "THE SYMBOL OF SALVATION (Mark 14:22-26)
14:22-26 As they were eating, Jesus took a loaf and gave thanks for it, and broke
it and gave it to them and said, "Take this. This is my body." And, after he had
given thanks, he took a cup and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. And
he said to them, "This is the blood of the new covenant which is being shed for
many. Truly I tell you, I will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine, until that
day when I drink it new in the Kingdom of God." And, after they had sung the
Psalm, they went out to the Mount of Olives.
We must first set out the various steps of the Passover Feast, so that in our
mind's eye we can follow what Jesus and his disciples were doing. The steps
came in this order.
(i) The cup of the Kiddush. Kiddush means sanctification or separation. This was
the act which, as it were, separated this meal from all other common meals. The
head of the family took the cup and prayed over it, and then all drank of it.
(ii) The first hand washing. This was carried out only by the person who was to
celebrate the feast. Three times he had to wash his hands in the prescribed way
which we have already described when studying Mark 7:1-37 .
(iii) A piece of parsley or lettuce was then taken and dipped in the bowl of salt
water and eaten. This was an appetizer to the meal, but the parsley stood for the
hyssop with which the lintel had been smeared with blood, and the salt stood for
the tears of Egypt and for the waters of the Red Sea through which Israel had
been brought in safety.
(iv) The breaking of bread. Two blessings were used at the breaking of bread.
"Blessed be thou, O Lord, our God, King of the Universe, who bringest forth
from the earth." Or, "Blessed art thou, our Father in heaven, who givest us to-
day the bread necessary for us." On the table lay three circles of unleavened
bread. The middle one was taken and broken. At this point only a little was
eaten. It was to remind the Jews of the bread of affliction that they ate in Egypt
and it was broken to remind them that slaves had never a whole loaf, but only
broken crusts to eat. As it was broken, the head of the family said, "This is the
bread of affliction which our forefathers ate in the land of Egypt. Whosoever is
hungry let him come and eat. Whosoever is in need let him come and keep the
Passover with us." (In the modern celebration in strange lands, here is added the
famous prayer, "This year we keep it here, next year in the land of Israel. This
year as slaves, next year as free.")
133

134. (v) Next came the relating of the story of deliverance. The youngest person
present had to ask what made this day different from all other days and why all
this was being done. And the head of the house had thereupon to tell the whole
story of the history of Israel down to the great deliverance which the Passover
commemorated. The Passover could never become a ritual. It was always a
commemoration of the power and the mercy of God.
(vi) Psalms 113:1-9; Psalms 114:1-8 were sung. Psalms 113:1-9; Psalms 114:1-8;
Psalms 115:1-18; Psalms 116:1-19; Psalms 117:1-2; Psalms 118:1-29 are known
as the Hallel (Hebrew #1984), which means the praise of God. All these psalms
are praising psalms. They were part of the very earliest material which a Jewish
boy had to commit to memory.
(vii) The second cup was drunk. It was called the cup of Haggadah (compare
Hebrew #5046), which means the cup of explaining or proclaiming.
(viii) All those present now washed their hands in preparation for the meal.
(ix) A grace was said. "Blessed art thou, O Lord, our God, who bringest forth
fruit from the earth. Blessed art thou, O God, who has sanctified us with thy
commandment and enjoined us to eat unleavened cakes." Thereafter small pieces
of the unleavened bread were distributed.
(x) Some of the bitter herbs were placed between two pieces of unleavened bread,
dipped in the Charosheth and eaten. This was called the sop. It was the reminder
of slavery and of the bricks that once they had been compelled to make.
(xi) Then followed the meal proper. The whole lamb must be eaten. Anything left
over must be destroyed and not used for any common meal.
(xii) The hands were cleansed again.
(xiii) The remainder of the unleavened bread was eaten.
(xiv) There was a prayer of thanksgiving, containing a petition for the coming of
Elijah to herald the Messiah. Then the third cup was drunk, called the cup of
thanksgiving. The blessing over the cup was, "Blessed art thou, O Lord, our
God, King of the Universe, who hast created the fruit of the vine."
(xv) The second part of The Hallel (Hebrew #1984)--Psalms 115:1-18; Psalms
116:1-19; Psalms 117:1-2; Psalms 118:1-29 --was sung.
(xvi) The fourth cup was drunk, and Psalms 136:1-26 , known as the great Hallel
(Hebrew #1984), was sung.
(xvii) Two short prayers were said:
"All thy works shall praise thee, O Lord, our God. And thy saints,
134

135. the righteous, who do thy good pleasure, and all thy people, the
house of Israel, with joyous song, let them praise and bless and
magnify and glorify and exalt and reverence and sanctify and
scribe the Kingdom to thy name, O God, our King. For it is good
to praise thee, and pleasure to sing praises to thy name, for from
everlasting unto everlasting thou art God."
"The breath of all that lives shall praise thy name, O Lord, our
God. And the spirit of all flesh shall continually glorify and
exalt thy memorial, O God, our King. For from everlasting unto
everlasting thou art God, and beside thee we have no king,
redeemer or saviour."
Thus ended the Passover Feast. If the feast that Jesus and his disciples sat at was
the Passover it must have been items (xiii) and (xiv) that Jesus made his own, and
(xvi) must have been the hymn they sang before they went out to the Mount of
Olives.
Now let us see what Jesus was doing, and what he was seeking to impress upon
his men. More than once we have seen that the prophets of Israel resorted to
symbolic, dramatic actions when they felt that words were not enough. That is
what Ahijah did when he rent the robe into twelve pieces and gave ten to
Jeroboam in token that ten of the tribes would make him king (1 Kings
11:29-32). That is what Jeremiah did when he made bonds and yokes and wore
them in token of the coming servitude (Jeremiah 27:1-22 ). That is what the
prophet Hananiah did when he broke the yokes that Jeremiah wore (Jeremiah
28:10-11). That is the kind of thing that Ezekiel was continually doing (Ezekiel
4:1-8, Ezekiel 5:1-4). It was as if words were easily forgotten, but a dramatic
action would print itself on the memory.
That is what Jesus did, and he allied this dramatic action with the ancient feast
of his people so that it would be the more imprinted on the minds of his men. He
said, "Look! Just as this bread is broken my body is broken for you! Just as this
cup of red wine is poured out my blood is shed for you."
What did he mean when he said that the cup stood for a new covenant? The
word covenant is a common word in the Jewish religion. The basis of that
religion was that God had entered into a covenant with Israel. The word means
something like an arrangement, a bargain, a relationship. The acceptance of the
135

136. old covenant is set out in Exodus 24:3-8; and from that passage we see that the
covenant was entirely dependent on Israel keeping the law. If the law was
broken, the covenant was broken and the relationship between God and the
nation shattered. It was a relationship entirely dependent on law and on
obedience to law. God was judge. And since no man can keep the law the people
were ever in default. But Jesus says, "I am introducing and ratifying a new
covenant, a new kind of relationship between God and man. And it is not
dependent on law, it is dependent on the blood that I will shed." That is to say, it
is dependent solely on love. The new covenant was a relationship between man
and God not dependent on law but on love. In other words Jesus says, "I am
doing what I am doing to show you how much God loves you." Men are no
longer simply under the law of God. Because of what Jesus did, they are forever
within the love of God. That is the essence of what the sacrament says to us.
We note one thing more. In the last sentence we see again the two things we have
so often seen. Jesus was sure of two things. He knew he was to die, and he knew
his Kingdom would come. He was certain of the Cross, but just as certain of the
glory. And the reason was that he was just as certain of the love of God as he was
of the sin of man; and he knew that in the end that love would conquer that sin.
PULPIT, "The last clause of this verse should be read thus: Take ye: this is my
body ( λάβετε τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά μοῦ). The institution of this Holy Sacrament
took place at the close of the Paschal supper, but while they were yet at the table.
The bread which our Lord took would most likely be unleavened bread. But this
does not surely constitute a reason why unleavened bread should be used
ordinarily in the celebration of the Holy Communion. The direction of the
Prayer-book of the English Church is wise and practical, "It shall suffice that the
Bread be such as is usual to be eaten." This is my body; that is, sacramentally.
St. Augustine says, "How is the bread his body? and the cup, or that which the
cup contains, how is that his blood? These are, therefore, called sacraments,
because in them one thing is seen while another thing is understood".
COFFMAN, “THE INSTITUTION OF THE LORD'S SUPPER
In context, here was a mighty declaration of the godhead of Jesus. On the
morrow, he would die; but on that night he instituted a memorial looking to the
centuries afterward, a memorial in which his body and blood were offered in the
symbols chosen as the soul's true food. The full meaning of this sacred memorial
was to be more fully discernible in the gospel of John; but here the basic facts of
it were clear enough.
BURKITT, "Immediately after the celebration of the passover, our Lord
institutes his holy supper; in which institution, we have observable the author,
the time, the elements, and ministerial actions.
Observe here, 1. The author of this new sacrament: Jesus took bread.
Note thence, That to institute a sacrament is the sole prerogative of Jesus Christ.
The church has no power to make new sacraments: it is only her duty to
136

137. celebrate those which our Saviour has made.
Observe, 2. The time of the insitution, the night before his passion; The night in
which he was betrayed, Jesus took bread.
Learn thence, That it is very necessary when sufferings are approaching, to have
recourse to the table of the Lord, which affords both an antidote against fear,
and is a restorative to our faith.
Observe, 3. The sacramental elements, bread and wine; bread representing the
body, and wine the blood, of our dear Redeemer.
Observe, 4. The ministerial actions, The breaking of the bread, and the blessing
of the cup.
As to the bread, Jesus took it; that is, set it apart from common use, and
separated it for holy ends and purposes. He blessed it; that is, prayed for a
blessing upon it, and brake it; thereby shadowing forth his body broken upon
the cross for the redemption and salvation of a lost world; Do this in
remembrance of my death.
As to the cup, Christ having set it apart by prayer and thanksgiving, he
commands his disciples to drink all of it; and accordingly they all drank of it,
says this evangelist; and our Saviour gives his reason for it, For this is my blood
of the New Testament, which is shed for the remission of sins Mark 14:24; that
is, the wine in this cup represents the shedding of my blood, by which this new
covenant between God and man is ratified and confirmed.
Whence we gather, That every communicant hath as undoubted a right to the
cup as to the bread, in the Lord's supper; Drink ye all of this, says Christ;
therefore to deny the cup to the common people, is sacrilege, and directly
contrary to our Saviour's institution. And Christ calling the cup the fruit of the
vine, affords a strong argument against the doctrine of transubstantiation; thus:
"That which after consecration remains the fruit of the vine, is not substantially
changed into the blood of Christ. But Christ called the wine in the cup the fruit
of the vine after consecration; therefore that which Christ gave the apostles to
drink, was not substantially changed into his blood. Wine is metaphorically
called the blood of the grape; why may it not, by a like metaphor, be styled the
blood of Christ?
After the celebration was over, our Saviour and his disciples sung an hymn, as
the Jews were wont to do at the passover, the six eucharistical psalms, from the
113th to the 119th psalm.
From Christ's example, we may gather, how suitable it is to sing a psalm after
the celebration of the Lord's, supper; how fit it is that God be glorified in his
church, by singing of psalms; and in particular when the Lord's supper is
celebrated: When they had sung an hymn, they went into the Mount of Olives.
137

138. 23 Then he took a cup, and when he had given
thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank
from it.
GILL, "And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks,.... Over it, and
for it, by blessing it, and appropriating it to the present use and service:
he gave it to them; his disciples,
and they all drank of it; Judas, as well as the rest, as he bid them do; See Gill on
Mat_26:27.
HENRY, "It was instituted with blessing and giving of thanks; the gifts of
common providence are to be so received (1Ti_4:4, 1Ti_4:5), much more than the
gifts of special grace. He blessed (Mar_14:22), and gave thanks, Mar_14:23. At his
other meals, he was wont to bless, and give thanks (Mar_6:41; Mar_8:7) so
remarkably, that he was known by it, Luk_24:30, Luk_24:31. And he did the same at
this meal.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 23-24
The common cup likewise symbolized Jesus' sharing Himself with the disciples
and their unity as disciples. Judas had apparently left the upper room before the
institution of the Lord's Supper. Jesus' viewed His blood as the ratifying agent of
the New Covenant (cf. Jeremiah 31:31-34), as animal blood had made the Old
(Mosaic) Covenant valid (Exodus 24:8). The Greek word translated "covenant"
is diatheke, a word that describes an agreement made by one person for others.
A different word, syntheke, describes an agreement that two parties made in
which both had obligations to each other. The diluted wine in the cup was also a
reminder of the covenant's existence. [Note: Taylor, p. 546.] Jesus' blood poured
out is an obvious allusion to His death. "For" translates the Greek preposition
hyper meaning "in behalf of" or "instead of," a clear reference to vicarious
atonement (cf. Matthew 26:28). "Many" means all (cf. Mark 10:45; Isaiah
53:11-12).
"By the word many he means not a part of the world only, but the whole human
race." [Note: Calvin, 3:214.]
COFFMAN, “The gospel records leave no doubt of the perpetual obligation
imposed upon his followers by this sublime memorial, composed not of stones, or
towers, but of bread and wine, such humble, commonplace articles being
transmuted by the Saviour's employment of them into the most sacred symbols
of Christianity and the vicarious sufferings of the Son of God. Note that not
138

139. bread alone, nor the cup alone, but both together comprise the privilege and
duty of them that follow Jesus. No man can be true to Christ and faithless with
regard to observance of the Lord's Supper.
24 “This is my blood of the[c] covenant, which is
poured out for many,” he said to them.
GILL, "And he said unto them,.... Not after they had drank of it, but before, and
as he gave it to them:
this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many; in Matthew
it is added, "for the remission of sins"; See Gill on Mat_26:28.
CALVIN, "Mark 14:24.This is my blood. I have already remarked that, when we
are told that the blood is to be shed —according to the narrative of Matthew —
for the remission of sins, these words direct us to the sacrifice of the death of
Christ, without the remembrance of which the Lord’s Supper is never observed
in a proper manner. And, indeed, it is impossible for believing souls to be
satisfied in any other way than by being assured that God is pacified towards
them.
Which is shed for many. By the word many he means not a part of the world
only, but the whole human race; for he contrasts many with one; as if he had
said, that he will not be the Redeemer of one man only, but will die in order to
deliver many from the condemnation of the curse. It must at the same time be
observed, however, that by the words for you, as related by Luke — Christ
directly addresses the disciples, and exhorts every believer to apply to his own
advantage the shedding of blood Therefore, when we approach to the holy table,
let us not only remember in general that the world has been redeemed by the
blood of Christ, but let every one consider for himself that his own sins have
been expiated. (197)
Of the new testament. Luke and Paul (1 Corinthians 11:25) express it differently,
the new testament in my blood, but the meaning is the same; for it is only by a
spiritual drinking of blood that this covenant is ratified, so as to be firm and
stable. Yet it may easily be inferred from it, how foolishly superstitious the
Papists and others of the same stamp are in rigidly adhering to the words; for,
with all their bluster, they cannot set aside this exposition of the Holy Spirit, that
the cup is called blood, because it is the new testament in blood. But the same
argument applies to the bread; from which it will follow that it is called the
body; because it is the testament in the body They have no right now to contend
that we ought to rely on the simple words of Christ, and shut our ears against
139

140. expositions from without. It is Christ himself that speaks, and surely they will
not deny that he is well qualified to interpret his own words. Now Christ openly
declares that he called the bread his body, for no other reason than because he
has made with us an everlasting covenant, that, the sacrifice having been once
offered, we may now be spiritually fed.
There are two things here which deserve our attention; for from the word
testament, or covenant, ( διαθήκη,) we infer that a promise is included in the
Holy Supper. This refutes the error of those who maintain that faith is not aided,
nourished, supported, or increased by the sacraments; for there is always a
mutual relation between the covenant of God and the faith of men. By the epithet
New he intended to show that the ancient figures now cease, and give way to a
firm and everlasting covenant. There is an indirect contrast, therefore, between
this mystery and the shadows of the law; from which it is evident how much
better our condition is than that of our fathers, since, in consequence of the
sacrifice which was completed on the cross, we possess the truth in perfection.
COFFMAN, “The covenant ... means "the new covenant," that which supplanted
the institution of Moses; and concerning which, Hebrews 9 and Hebrews 10 give
a full discussion. Christ's is the blood which purifies from sin, which is poured
out for many, without which there is no remission of sins. The very fact of
Christ's associating these symbols of the Lord's Supper with so sacred a thing as
his blood is a testimonial of its relevance and importance to all who would be
saved.
25 “Truly I tell you, I will not drink again from
the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink
it new in the kingdom of God.”
GILL, "Verily I say unto you,.... This seems, to have been said after the eating of
the passover, according to Luk_22:18, but was, in reality, not till after the Lord's
supper was ended, and the last cup was drank, which was wont to be drank at the
passover:
I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine; that is, wine,
until that day that I drink it new; in a figurative and mystical sense; by which
are meant the joys of heaven:
in the kingdom of God; Father, Son, and Spirit, upon the general resurrection of
the dead, when the kingdom of the Mediator will be delivered up, and there will be no
distinction of government; but God, Father, Son, and Spirit, will be all in all, and
shall reign in the saints, and they with them, to all eternity; See Gill on Mat_26:29.
140

141. HENRY, "6. It was instituted with an eye to the happiness of heaven, and to be an
earnest and fore-taste of that, and thereby to put our mouths out of taste for all the
pleasures and delights of sense (Mar_14:25); I will drink no more of the fruit of the
vine, as it is a bodily refreshment. I have done with it. No one, having tasted
spiritual delights, straightway desires sensitive ones, for he saith, The spiritual is
better (Luk_5:39); but every one that hath tasted spiritual delights, straightway
desires eternal ones, for he saith, Those are better still; and therefore let me drink no
more of the fruit of the vine, it is dead and flat to those that have been made to drink
of the river of God's pleasures; but, Lord, hasten the day, when I shall drink it new
and fresh in the kingdom of God, where it shall be for ever new, and in perfection.
CONSTABLE, "The phrase "the fruit of the vine" may have been a liturgical
formula describing wine used at a feast. [Note: Wessel, p. 761.] In any case Jesus
was saying He would not drink wine again until He did so in the kingdom. Jesus
was anticipating the messianic banquet at the beginning of His kingdom (cf.
Isaiah 25:6). This was a welcome promise in view of Jesus' announcement of His
coming death.
"The cup from which Jesus abstained was the fourth, which ordinarily
concluded the Passover fellowship. The significance of this can be appreciated
from the fact that the four cups of wine were interpreted in terms of the four-
fold promise of redemption set forth in Exodus 6:6-7 : 'I will bring you out ... I
will rid you of their bondage ... I will redeem you ... I will take you for my people
and I will be your God' (TJ Pesachim X. 37b)." [Note: Lane, p. 508.]
"Jesus seldom spoke of His death without also speaking of His resurrection
(Mark 8:31; Mark 9:31; Mark 10:34)." [Note: Hiebert, p. 355.]
"New" or "anew" means in a qualitatively different way (Gr. kainon). Now
Jesus and the disciples anticipated suffering and death, but then they would
anticipate joy and glory.
COKE, "Mark 14:25. I will drink no more, &c.— "From this instant I will no
more drink of the passover-cup, nor have that commemorative and typical
ordinance continued any longer in my church, than till it be suppressed and
fulfilled (Luke 22:16.) by the greatsalvationwhichIshallbringintothegospel-
kingdomuponmy resurrection from the dead, and which is to be afterwards
commemorated by a new use of wine in the supper that I have nowinstituted; nor
will I so familiarly commune with you again, as I do now in this New Testament
ordinance, till we shall have the most intimate fellowship together, in the more
excellent entertainments of the heavenly state; which, for their superior and
always fresh delight, may in the language of a festival be called new wine." See
Guyse, and the note on Matthew 26:29.
PULPIT, "I will no more, drink ( οὐκέτι οὐ μὴ πίω) of the fruit of the vine, until
that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God. It is observable that our
Lord here calls the wine "the fruit ( γέννημα) of the vine," after be has spoken of
it as sacramentally his blood. Our Lord here refers to the time of the
regeneration of all things, when the heavenly kingdom shall appear in the
fullness of its glory; and when his disciples, who now feed upon him
sacramentally and by faith, shall then eat at his table in his kingdom, and drink
of the river of his pleasures for ever.
141

142. 26 When they had sung a hymn, they went out
to the Mount of Olives.
GILL, "And when they had sung an hymn,.... The Hallell, used at the passover:
they went out into the Mount of Olives; Christ, and eleven of his disciples; for
Judas now separated from them, and went to the chief priests to acquaint them how
things were, where Jesus was going, and where they might apprehend him; See Gill
on Mat_26:30.
HENRY, "7. It was closed with a hymn, Mar_14:26. Though Christ was in the
midst of his enemies, yet he did not, for fear of them, omit this sweet duty of singing
psalms. Paul and Silas sang, when the prisoners heard them. This was an evangelical
song, and gospel times are often spoken of in the Old Testament, as times of
rejoicing, and praise is expressed by singing. This was Christ's swan-like song, which
he sung just before he entered upon his agony; probably, that which is usually sung,
Psa_113:1-9 to 118.
IV. Christ's discourse with his disciples, as they were returning to Bethany by
moonlight. When the had sung the hymn, presently they went out. It was now near
bedtime, but our Lord Jesus had his heart so much upon his suffering, that he would
not come into the tabernacle of his house, norgo up into his bed, nor give sleep to his
eyes, when that work was to be done, Psa_132:3, Psa_132:4. The Israelites were
forbidden to go out of their houses the night that they ate the passover, for fear of the
sword of the destroying angel, Exo_12:22, Exo_12:23. But because Christ, the great
shepherd, was to be smitten, he went out purposely to expose himself to the sword,
as a champion; they evaded the destroyer, but Christ conquered him, and brought
destructions to a perpetual end.
CALVIN, "Mark 14:26.When they had sung a hymn. Our three Evangelists
leave out those divine discourses, (198) which John relates to have been delivered
by our Lord, both in the house and on the road. For, as we have elsewhere
stated, their object was rather to embrace the history of our Lord’s actions than
his doctrine. They glance only at the fact, that he went out of his own accord
where Judas was to come; and their object is to inform us that he made such an
arrangement of his time, as willingly to meet him who betrayed him.
CONSTABLE, "The hymn was probably the second part of the Hallel (lit.
praise, Psalms 115-118) that the Jews sang antiphonally at the end of the
Passover. The other evangelists recorded more that Jesus said and did in the
upper room (e.g., John 13-16). By the time they left, it was probably quite late at
night.
142

143. "When Jesus arose to go to Gethsemane, Psalms 118 was upon his lips. It
provided an appropriate description of how God would guide his Messiah
through distress and suffering to glory." [Note: Lane, p. 509.
COKE, "Mark 14:26. They went out— At the conclusion of the supper, Jesus
and his disciples sung a proper Psalm or song of praise together, as was
customary at the close of the passover, and then he set out for the mount of
Olives; choosing to retire thither that he might prevent a riot in Jerusalem, and
bring no trouble upon the master of the house where he celebrated the passover.
BENSON, "Mark 14:26-31. And they went out into the mount of Olives — At the
conclusion of the supper; Jesus and his disciples sung a proper psalm, or song of
praise, together, as was customary at the close of the passover, and then he set
out for the mount of Olives, choosing to retire thither, that he might prevent a
riot in Jerusalem, and bring no trouble upon the master of the house where he
celebrated the passover. Jesus said, All ye shall be offended this night — See the
notes on Matthew 26:30-35. The Jews, in reckoning their days, began with the
evening, according to the Mosaic computation, which denominated the evening
and the morning the first day, Genesis 1:5. And so, that which after sunset is
here called this night, is, Mark 14:30, called this day, or, to-day, as σημερον
should rather be translated. The expression there is peculiarly significant: Verily
I say unto thee, that thou — Thyself, confident as thou art; to-day — Even
within four and twenty hours; yea, this night — Before the sun be risen; nay,
before the cock crow twice — Before three in the morning; wilt deny me thrice.
Our Lord, doubtless, spake so determinately as knowing a cock would crow once
before the usual time of cock-crowing. By Mark 13:35, it appears, that the third
watch of the night, ending at three in the morning, was commonly styled the
cock-crowing. Dr. Owen, in his Observations on the Four Gospels, p. 56,
observes, that as the Jews, in the enumeration of the times of the night, took
notice only of one cock- crowing, which comprehended the third watch, so
Matthew, to give them a clear information that Peter would deny his Master
before three in the morning, needed only to say, that he would do it before the
cock crew; but the Romans, (for whom, and the other Gentiles, Mark wrote his
gospel,) reckoning by a double crowing of the cock, the first of which was about
midnight, and the second at three, stood in need of a more particular
designation; and therefore Mark, to denote the same hour to them, was obliged
to say, before the cock crew twice. Juvenal uses exactly the same phrase to
specify the same hour. Sat. 1. ver. 107.
PULPIT, "And when they had sung a hymn, they went out unto the mount of
Olives. Some suppose that this was one particular hymn out of the Jewish
service-books appointed for use at the close of the Paschal supper. The word in
the Greek is simply ὑμνήσαντες. What they sang was more probably the Hallel,
consisting of six psalms, from Psalms 108:1-13, to Psalms 118:1-29, inclusive.
They went out unto the Mount of Olives. It was our Lord's custom, in these last
days of his earthly life, to go daily to Jerusalem, and teach in the temple, and in
the evening to return to Bethany and sup; and then after supper to retire to the
Mount of Olives, and there to spend the night in prayer (Luke 21:37). But on this
occasion he did not return to Bethany. He had supped in Jerusalem. Besides, he
143

144. knew that his hour was come. So he voluntarily put himself into the way of the
traitor (John 18:2).
BI, “And when they had sung an hymn.
The best harmony
Jesus sung an hymn, and when before was heard music so pleasing to God, so grand
and beautiful to listening angels? We know not what harmonies from the power of
sound the Creator produces for the ceaseless joy of His intelligent creatures who fill
the vast amplitudes of the sky. We know not what sublime, and to us, inconceivable
realities are expressed by those descriptions given by that apostle who leant on
Jesus’s bosom, and heard with prophetic ear the voice as of many waters, as of a
great thunder, and the voices of harpers harping with their harps; but sure am I that
there was a harmony and a glory in this hymn they never heard before. For the
beauty of its harmony was moral; it was harmony from the inner spirit of man; it was
harmony between man and Christ; it was the melody of meekness, of obedience, of
peace and joy; it was like the music of law and order from those glittering stars of
night beneath which they sung-such a harmony as the character of Christ forever
sounds in the ears of God. (N. Macleod, D. D.)
Value of forms of prayer and praise
One of the commonest objections to the constant use of stated forms of common
prayer is, that at times they must inevitably jar upon our feelings, compelling us, for
example, to take words of joy and praise on our lips when our hearts are full of grief,
or to utter penitent confessions of sin and imploring cries for mercy when our hearts
are dancing with mirth and joy. But if we mark the conduct of our Lord and His
disciples, we cannot say that even this objection is final or fatal. He and they were
about to part. He was on His way to the agony of Gethsemane and the shame of the
cross. Their hearts, despite His comforting words, were heavy with foreboding and
grief. Yet they sang the Hallel, used the common form of praise, before they went
out,-He to die for the sins of the world, and they to lose all hope in Him as the
Saviour of Israel. No Divine command, nothing but the custom of the Feast, enjoined
this form upon them; yet they do not cast it aside. And this “hymn” was no dirge, no
slow and measured cadence, no plaintive lament, but a joyous song of exultation.
Must not these tones of irrepressible hope, of joyous and exultant trust, have jarred
on the hearts of men who were passing lute a great darkness in which all the lights of
life and hope and joy were to be eclipsed? If our Lord could look through the
darkness and see the joy set before Him, the disciples could not. Yet they too joined
in this joyous hymn before they went out into the darkest night the world has ever
known. With their example before us, we cannot fairly argue that settled forms of
worship are to be condemned simply because they jar on the reigning emotion of the
moment. We must rather infer that, in His wisdom, God will not leave us to be the
prey of any unbalanced emotion; that, when our hearts are most fearful, He calls on
us to put our trust in Him; that when they are saddest He reminds us that, if we have
made Him our chief good, our chief good is still with us, whatever we may have lost,
and that we may still rejoice in Him, though all other joy has departed from us. And
when He bids us trust in Him in every night of loss and fear, and even to be glad in
Him however sorrowful our souls may be,-O how comforting and welcome the
command should be! for it is nothing less than an assurance that He sees the gain
which is to spring from our loss; it is nothing short of a pledge that He will turn our
sorrow into joy. (S. Cox, D. D.)
144

145. Place of forms in religion
Religion is a thing of principles, not of forms; spirit, not letter. It is a life, a life which
reveals itself in various ways under all the changes of time, a life which consecrates
every faculty we possess to the service of God and man. It uses forms, but is not
dependent on them. It may modify them in a thousand different ways, to suit them to
the wants, emotions, aspirations of the soul. There was a most true and sincere
religious life, for example, among the Hebrews, and under the laws of Moses.
Worship then took the form of offerings and sacrifices, fasts and feasts. All these, in
so far as they were Hebrew, and were specially adapted to Hebrew life, have passed
away; but the religious life has not passed with them. It has clothed itself in simpler
and more universal forms. Our worship expresses itself in prayers, hymns,
sacraments, and above all in the purity and charity which bids us visit the poor and
needy in their affliction, and keep ourselves unspotted from the world. In due time,
these forms may be modified or pass away. But the life which works and speaks
through them will not pass away. It will simply rise into higher and nobler forms of
expression. No man, therefore, can live and grow simply by adhering to forms of
worship and service, let him be as faithful and devoted to them as he will. They may
feed and nourish life, but they cannot impart it. They will change and pass, but the
life of the soul need not therefore suffer loss. If that life has once been quickened in
us through faith and love, it will and must live on, for it is an eternal life, and
continue to manifest itself in modes that will change and rise to meet its new
necessities and conditions. Religion accepts us as we are, that it may raise us above
what we are; it employs and consecrates all our faculties, that our faculties may be
refined, invigorated, enlarged in scope. If we can speak, it bids us speak. If we can
sing, it bids us sing. If we can labour and endure, it bids us labour and endure. If we
can only stand and wait, it teaches us that they also serve who only stand and wait.
Whatever we can do, it bids us do heartily, as unto the Lord, and not unto men, and
yet do for men, that it may be unto the Lord. If we really have this life, it will reveal
itself in us as it did in Him who is our life-in a love too profound and sincere to be
repelled by any diversities of outward form; in a spirit of praise too pure and joyous
to be quenched by any of the changes and sorrows of time; and in an earnest
consecration of our every capacity and power to the service of Him who loved us, and
gave Himself for us, and for all. (S. Cox, D. D.)
Singing in heaven
For one I would not rid myself of the hope that we shall sometimes-perhaps on great
anniversaries commemorative of earthly histories-literally sing, in heaven, the very
psalms and hymns which are so often the “gate of heaven” to us here. It would be
sadder parting with this world than we hope it will be when our time comes, if we
must forget these ancient lyrics, or find our tongues dumb when we would utter
them. How can we live without them? Are they not a part of out very being? Take
them away, with all the experiences of which they are the symbol, and what would
there be left of us to carry into heaven? (Prof. Austin Phelps.)
The Jewish Psalms
The Jewish Psalms, in which is expressed the very spirit of the national life, have
furnished the bridal hymns, the battle songs, the pilgrim marches, the penitential
145

146. prayers, and the public praises of every nation in Christendom, since Christendom
was born. It is a sentence from the Jewish Psalm book, which we have written over
the portico of the chief temple of the world’s industry and commerce, the London
Exchange. These psalms have rolled through the din of every great European
battlefield, they have pealed through the scream of the storm in every ocean highway
of the earth. Drake’s sailors sang them when they clove the virgin waves of the
Pacific; Frobisher’s, when they dashed against the barriers of the Arctic ice and night.
They floated over the waters on that day of days, when England held her Protestant
freedom against Pope and Spaniard, and won the naval supremacy of the world. They
crossed the ocean with the Mayflower pilgrims; they were sung around Cromwell’s
camp fires, and his Ironsides charged to their music; while they have filled the
peaceful homes of England and of Christendom with the voice of supplication and
the breath of praise. In palace halls, by happy hearths, in squalid rooms, in pauper
wards, in prison cells, in crowded sanctuaries, in lovely wildernesses, everywhere
these Jews have uttered our moan of contrition and our song of triumph, our tearful
complaints and our wrestling, conquering prayer. (J. Baldwin Brown, B. A.)
The love of singing sanctioned by Jesus
At a gathering of children one Christmas Day a gentleman present related the
following very interesting incident: A little girl, only three years of age, was very
curious to know why Christmas evergreens were so much used, and what they were
intended to signify. So Mr. L-told her the story of the Babe of Bethlehem, the child
whose name was Jesus. The little questioner was just beginning to give voice to the
music that was in her heart; and after Mr. L-concluded the narrative, she looked up
in his face and asked, “Did Jesus sing?” Who had ever thought of that? The text is
almost conclusive proof that our Lord did sing; it is, at any rate, quite conclusive
proof that He sanctioned the use of song on the part of His disciples.
Singing in prospect of death
Jerome, of Prague, bound naked to the stake, continued to sing hymns with a deep
untrembling voice. (A. W. Atwood.)
Soothing influence of hymn singing
I remember a remarkable instance which occurred in my father’s lecture room during
one of those sweet scenes which preceded the separation of the Presbyterian Church
into the old and new schools. At that time controversy ran high, and there were fire
and zeal and wrath mingled with discussion; and whoever sat in the chair, the devil
presided. On the occasion to which I refer an old Scotchman, six feet high, much bent
with age, with blue eyes, large features, very pale and white all over his face, and
bald-headed, walked up and down the back part of the room, and as the dispute grew
furious he (and only he could have done it) would stop and call out, “Mr. Moderator,
let us sing ‘Salvation’;” and someone would strike up and sing the tune, and the men
who were in angry debate were cut short; but one by one they joined in, and before
they had sung the hymn through they were all calm and quiet. When they resumed
the controversy, it was in a much lower key. So this good old man walked up and
down, and threw a hymn into the quarrel every few minutes, and kept the religious
antagonists from absolute explosion and fighting. It is the nature of hymns to quell
irascible feeling. I do not think that a man who was mad could sing six verses
through without regaining his temper before he got to the end. (H. W. Beecher.)
146

147. The power of a hymn
On one of the days that President Garfield lay dying at the seaside, he was a little
better, and was permitted to sit by the window, while Mrs. Garfield was in the
adjoining room. Love, hope, and gratitude filled her heart, and she sang the beautiful
hymn, commencing, “Guide me, O Thou great Jehovah!” As the soft and plaintive
notes floated into the sick chamber, the President turned his eyes up to Dr. Bliss and
asked, “Is that Crete?” “Yes.” replied the Doctor; “it is Mrs. Garfield.” “Quick, open
the door a little,” anxiously responded the sick man. Dr. Bliss opened the door, and
after listening a few moments, Mr. Garfield exclaimed, as the large tears coursed
down his sunken cheeks, “Glorious, Bliss, isn’t it?”
The power of a hymn
A little boy came to one of our city missionaries, and holding out a dirty and well-
worn bit of printed paper, said, “Please, sir, father sent me to get a clean paper like
this.” Taking it from his hand, the missionary unfolded it, and found it was a paper
containing the beautiful hymn beginning, “Just as I am.” The missionary looked
down with interest into the face earnestly upturned to him, and asked the little boy
where he got it, and why he wanted a clean one. “We found it, sir,” said he, “in sister’s
pocket after she died; she used to sing it all the time when she was sick, and loved it
so much that father wanted to get a clean one to put in a frame to hang it up. Won’t
you give us a clean one, sir?”
GREAT TEXTS, “When they had Sung a Hymn
And when they had sung a hymn, they went out unto the mount of Olives.—
Mar_14:26.
1. With this statement the first two of the Evangelists conclude their narrative of
the institution of the Lord’s Supper. Our blessed Lord had acted as President in
the observance of the Jewish Feast of the Passover, and had engrafted the new
Christian rite upon the Paschal celebration. That venerable ordinance,
commemorative of the redemption from the bondage of Egypt, has now served
its purpose and found its full meaning. The lamb of which Jesus and His
disciples partook in the upper room was, as it were, its last victim: the true
Passover, “the Lamb of God,” is to be “sacrificed for us” to-morrow on Calvary.
2. The Jews had long ago, with the change of outward circumstances, departed
from the original form of observing their great feast. On the night of the Exodus
they had eaten the Paschal meal in haste,—sandals on feet, staff in hand,—and
with the same eager hurry as is shown in our day by passengers in the restaurant
of a railway station. But in our Lord’s time they partook of the feast at leisure,
reclining at the table upon couches. On the first occasion the lamb had been
eaten only with unleavened bread and bitter herbs; but now there was red wine
on the table, and the custom was for even the poorest Israelite to drink four cups
of it. In the Books of Moses there is no mention of any service of praise at the
Passover; but now all devout Jews sang at the table the series of six Psalms called
“the Hallel” (that is, Hallelujah), from Psalms 113 to Psalms 118 inclusive,—very
much as the Scottish Church has been in the habit of singing Psalms 103 at the
147

148. Communion Table.
There was no Divine authority for the changed observance. It was simply that
the natural feeling of the nation brought into it this element of thanksgiving.
Even the Pharisees and Scribes, who strangled the Jewish religion with red tape,
and literalness, and rigid precision, themselves thus kept the feast. And the Lord
Jesus fell in with the custom, and Himself thus celebrated the Passover.
Long years ago I happened to be crossing the Simplon on the day of some great
Church festival. The bell of the little chapel had tolled for the service, and the
simple peasants were gathering for worship. I looked into the church and stood
with rigid Protestant defiance. But as I watched the devout congregation, I
thought that they were worshipping my Lord and my God—and I knelt with
them and gave myself up to a season of communion with God. Then I walked
away alone over the Pass, yet not alone; with such a joyous sense of God’s
presence that few places or days have come to be more memorable than that
June day amidst the glorious mountains. I have sometimes thought that its
influence has never died out of my life.1 [Note: M. G. Pearse.]
I
Jesus Singing a Hymn
1. Jesus Singing.—It is good to think of our Blessed Master singing. He who
taught us to pray, and who spake as never man spake, says, “Let us sing.” Music
has a new meaning and singing a richer charm since He sang. He who sang at
such an hour surely loves to hear us sing as we gather at His table. Since the
Master sang a hymn, let us be like Him. I am sorry for those who cannot sing,
and sorrier still for those who can sing and do not. Whatever else you do, do
sing. Prayer is needful, but prayer itself will one day die. And preaching is
needful, but let us thank God that there are no preachers in heaven. But singing
will last for ever and ever. Everybody there is in the choir. And Heaven’s highest
bliss will surely be to sing with Him, in sweeter strains than earth can hear, the
new song at the marriage supper of the Lamb.2 [Note: Ibid.]
We sometimes think of Jesus as an austere man. In Quentin Matsy’s masterpiece
He is represented with dishevelled locks, hollow cheeks, eyes dimmed and brows
overarched with anguish—a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief. He was,
however, no cynic, no anchorite, but a man among men. It is not recorded that
He ever laughed, yet His heart must have been full of laughter; for, seeing the
sorrow of the world, He saw the joy beyond it. All men laugh unless they are
stolid or dyspeptic, and He was neither. On this occasion He was passing into the
dark shadow of the cross, yet He joined in the great Hallel, “Oh give thanks unto
the Lord, for he is good, for his mercy endureth for ever.”1 [Note: D. J. Burrell.]
Why should not Jesus sing?
(1) His heart was in sympathy with all things pure and lovely and of good report.
The town where He spent His boyhood is overlooked by a precipitous hill six
148

149. hundred feet above the level of the sea. It is not to be doubted that oftentimes He
climbed up yonder to commune with God. The mountain flowers were about His
feet, and every one of them was like a swinging censer full of perfume. All about
Him were orchards and vineyards and verdant pastures, and every grass-blade
was inscribed with His Father’s name. He watched the eagles poising in the
cloudless azure, and heard the hum of busy life in the village below; saw Tabor
to the eastward clothed with oak and terebinth, and beyond the western hills the
mists rising from the Great Sea; to the south lay the plain of Esdraelon, scene of
a hundred battles, and far beyond were the gleaming domes of the Holy City. His
heart gave thanks with the leaping of the brooks; the birds sang and He sang
with them.
(2) Why should not Jesus sing? He had a clear conscience, of all living men the
only one who knew no sin. He alone could go to His rest at eventide with no cry,
“Have mercy on me, O God! against thee have I sinned and done evil in thy
sight.” For Him there were no vain regrets, no “might have beens.” There was no
guile in His heart, no guile on His lips. He was conscious of no war in His
members, His soul was set on the discharge of duty.
(3) Why should not Jesus sing? He clearly foresaw the ultimate triumph of truth
and goodness. “For the joy that was set before him he endured the cross,
despising the shame.” He knew that, whatever rebuffs and reverses there might
be, truth and righteousness were sure to triumph in the end.
The eternal step of Progress beats
To that great anthem, strong and slow,
Which God repeats.
There would be martyr-fires and persecutions, and the souls of the faithful
would tremble within them, but His trembled not.
Take heart, the waster builds again;
A charmed life old Goodness hath.
The tares may perish, but the grain
Is not for death.
He knew that through all the vicissitudes of history the irresistible God would sit
upon His throne, that everything would be overruled to His ultimate glory. Oh, if
we could only perceive this! If only we had somewhat of the Master’s faith!
God works in all things; all obey
His first propulsion from the night;
149

150. Wait thou, and watch, the world is gray
With morning light.
2. The Hymn.—The “hymn” here spoken of by Matthew and Mark was
probably the second portion of the Hallel. The first part, consisting of Psalms
113, 114, was commonly sung before the meal; and the second part, comprising
Psalms 115-118, after the fourth cup of wine. The Jews chanted these holy songs
at the paschal table as their eucharistic hymn; and to truly devout souls they
were laden with Messianic music.
What a peculiar interest gathers round these particular Psalms, when we
remember that they were sung on that memorable night by the human heart and
the human lips of Jesus! And how pregnant with meaning must many of the
verses have been both to Himself and the disciples! For example: “The sorrows
of death compassed me, and the pains of hell gat hold upon me: I found trouble
and sorrow. Then called I upon the name of the Lord; O Lord, I beseech thee,
deliver my soul.” “What shall I render unto the Lord for all his benefits toward
me? I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the Lord.” Again,
“Thou hast thrust sore at me that I might fall: but the Lord helped me. The Lord
is my strength and song, and is become my salvation.” “The stone which the
builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. This is the Lord’s doing;
it is marvellous in our eyes.” “God is the Lord, which hath shewed us light: bind
the sacrifice with cords, even unto the horns of the altar.”1 [Note: C. Jerdan.]
The word “hymn” has a different meaning from “psalm.” In the margin we have
“psalm.” But according to the highest authorities, from Augustine down to our
day, there is a distinct difference—though it is not always easy to define it—
between the word translated “psalm” and that translated “hymn.” We have
those two words and one other word used together in Paul’s Epistle to the
Colossians and his Epistle to the Ephesians (Col_3:16; Eph_5:19)—“psalms and
hymns and spiritual songs,” or “odes.” The Apostle attached a special
significance to each of these words. It has been noted as a striking fact that in the
Old Testament there is no general Hebrew word for the Psalms; but the
translators of the Old Testament into the Greek, in the Septuagint, in referring
to the songs of David and others, use the word “psalm.” That word denotes
primarily a “touching” or “twanging”; then the harp; and, finally, the song that
was sung to the accompaniment of the harp or lyre. Hence the word first of all
means a “touching,” then that which is touched, and then the music which comes
out as a result of the touching with the finger or the ancient plectron. Therefore,
the word “psalm” denotes any spiritual song that is sung to the accompaniment
of an instrument. Then there comes the word “hymn.” While the psalm, as
Archbishop Trench reminds us, may be a “De profundis,” the hymn is always a
“Magnificat.” It is pre-eminently a song of praise. The ancient Greeks sang
hymns of praise of their gods and heroes; hence apparently the long time that
was allowed to pass before the word “hymn” became a familiar one in the
Christian Church. The Greeks would naturally understand it to be an ascription
of praise to some one other than the true God; but gradually it gained a
prominent place in Christian phraseology. Augustine asserted that a hymn first
150

151. of all must be a song; in the second place it must be praise; and in the third place
it must be praise to God. Accepting this definition, a hymn, while it may be a
psalm, is a psalm of a particular kind—it is an ascription of praise to God.2
[Note: D. Davies.]
O to have heard that hymn
Float through the chamber dim,
Float through that “upper room,”
Hushed in the twilight gloom!
Up the dark, starry skies
Rolled the deep harmonies;
Angels, who heard the strain,
How ran the high refrain?
How rose the holy song?
Triumphant, clear, and strong
As a glad bird uplift
Over the wild sea-drift?
Or was its liquid flow
Reluctant, sad, and slow,
Presage and prophecy
Of lone Gethsemane?
Was it a lofty psalm,
Foretelling crown and palm?
Soared it to heights of prayer
151

152. On the still, vibrant air?
When the last feast was spread,
And the last words were said,
Sang the Lord Christ the hymn
In the old chamber dim?1 [Note: Julia C. R. Dorr.]
II
The Occasion of the Hymn
It is a striking fact that here and in the parallel passage in the Gospel according
to St. Matthew we have the only recorded instance of Christ and His disciples
singing. It is extremely probable that they sang on many occasions; but it is
specially recorded now because of its exceptional significance.
1. We are apt to marvel, indeed, that the Redeemer was able to sing at all at such
a time. He has bidden His sorrowful disciples farewell, and uttered the words—
“Arise, let us go hence.” He and they sing the Hallel immediately after they have
risen from the table, but before they go out into the night. Jesus is on His way to
Gethsemane, and Gabbatha, and Golgotha. He is about to be betrayed by Judas
and condemned by Pilate. He has immediately before Him His agony and bloody
sweat, His cross and Passion, His physical anguish and desolation of soul upon
the accursed tree. He is the “Man of Sorrows,” about to be “wounded for our
transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities”; and yet on the way to His doom
He “sings a hymn”! This fact shows us how pure His faith was, and how
unflinching His courage. It proves to us how whole-hearted He was in His work,
and how absolute was His devotion to His Father’s will. He has been saying for
some time past, “For this cause came I unto this hour. Father, glorify thy name.”
It is a singular incident in the life of the God-fearing Jehoshaphat, that he (2Ch_
20:21), before the commencement of a decisive engagement, placed a band of
singers at the head of his army, that they might “praise the beauty of holiness,”
and go forth to fight as to a festival; but what was this contest compared with
that which awaited the Saviour? Yet He too goes forth to meet the insolent foe
with the hymn of praise upon His lips; and when the hymn was ended, He calmly
steps across the threshold which divides the hall from the street, security from
danger, life from death.1 [Note: J. J. van Oosterzee.]
2. What did the singing of the hymn signify?
(1) It meant the fulfilment of the Law.—Because it was the settled custom in
Israel to recite or sing these Psalms, our Lord Jesus Christ did the same; for He
would leave nothing unfinished. Just as, when He went down into the waters of
baptism, He said, “Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness,” so He seemed
to say, when sitting at the table, “Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness;
152

153. therefore let us sing unto the Lord, as God’s people in past ages have done.”
(2) It meant surrender to the Father’s Will.—If you knew that at—say ten
o’clock to-night—you would be led away to be mocked, and despised, and
scourged, and that to-morrow’s sun would see you falsely accused, hanging, a
convicted criminal, to die upon a cross, do you think that you could sing to-night,
after your last meal? I am sure you could not, unless with more than earth-born
courage and resignation your soul could say, “Bind the sacrifice with cords, even
unto the horns of the altar.” You would sing if your spirit were like the Saviour’s
spirit; if, like Him, you could exclaim, “Not as I will, but as thou wilt”; but if
there should remain in you any selfishness, any desire to be spared the bitterness
of death, you would not be able to chant the Hallel with the Master. Blessed
Jesus, how wholly wert Thou given up! how perfectly consecrated! so that,
whereas other men sing when they are marching to their joys, Thou didst sing on
the way to death; whereas other men lift up their cheerful voices when honour
awaits them, Thou hadst a brave and holy sonnet on Thy lips when shame, and
spitting, and death were to be Thy portion.
Thus the first thing Jesus did was to set His great sorrow and Passion to music.
Burdened, as the world’s Saviour, with the weight of the world’s sin, He
nevertheless made all His sorrow and even His agony harmonious. We have read
in the Psalms about singing the statutes of the Lord in the days of our
pilgrimage. That is the highest spiritual attainment when we not merely obey
God but make obedience musical, when we get praise out of our very service and
suffering for God’s sake. It is there that the Saviour, as in so many other
instances, has become our great example.1 [Note: D. Davies.]
(3) It meant the sacrifice of Himself on behalf of the work given Him to do.—He
has a baptism to be baptized with, and He is straitened until it be accomplished.
The Master does not go forth to the agony in the garden with a cowed and
trembling spirit, all bowed and crushed in the dust; He advances to the conflict
like a man who has his full strength about him. Taken out to be a victim (if I may
use such a figure), not as a worn-out ox that has long borne the yoke, but as the
firstling of the bullock, in the fulness of His strength, He goes forth to the
slaughter, with His glorious, undaunted spirit fast and firm within Him, glad to
suffer for His people’s sake, and for His Father’s glory.2 [Note: C. H. Spurgeon.]
(4) It meant the assurance of victory.—The death-song of Jesus is a song of
triumph uttered before the agony came. He knew absolutely that the Father
would not fail Him, that evil could not prevail, and that the sacrifice would be a
great victory. But mark this: He could not see beyond Calvary. He knew, but He
could not see. Faith never can do otherwise than that; it knows, but it cannot see.
Two great mysteries stand out here. First, the mystery of His agony. As a Roman
Catholic theologian has put it, the agony in the garden and the dereliction on
Calvary present to the gaze an ocean of sorrow on the shores of which we may
stand and look down upon the waveless surface, but the depths below no created
intelligence can fathom. Never speak lightly of the agony of Christ, for you do
not know what it was, or how terrible, or how overwhelming even to the Divine
153

154. Son of God. The second mystery is the mystery of His deliverance. He saw
through the first mystery, but not the second. He saw the agony as we never can
see it, but He did not see beyond. We see the second, but not the first. We never
can look on Calvary except over the empty tomb. We see on this side of the
Cross; Christ looked on the other. Think, then, of the grandeur and the
magnificence of that august Figure, standing pathetic and lonely in the upper
room, singing, “Bind the sacrifice with cords, even unto the horns of the altar.…
O give thanks unto the Lord, for he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever.”
About the close of the Civil War in America some Confederate officers were once
listening to some Union officers singing the songs that were most popular in the
camps of the Northern army during the Civil War. After the singing had gone on
for some time, one of the Confederate officers said, “If we had had your songs we
could have defeated you. You won the victory because you had the best songs.”
A little while ago, when the most notorious infidel of this century lay dead in his
home on the shores of the Hudson, the telegraph which bore the message to the
ends of the earth, when telling of the kind of funeral service that would be held
over the body, said: “There will be no singing.”1 [Note: L. A. Banks.]
The hymn, “Fear not, O little flock,” is known as the hymn of Gustavus
Adolphus. In Butterworth’s The Story of the Hymns, the following graphic
incident is told of the battle of Lützen: As we read the stirring lines a vision rises
before us of two mighty hosts encamped over against each other, stilled by the
awe that falls on brave hearts when momentous events are about to be decided.
The thick fogs of the autumn morning hide the foes from each other; only the
shrill note of the clarion is heard piercing through the mist. Then suddenly in the
Swedish camp there is a silence. With a solemn mien Gustavus advances to the
front rank of his troops, and kneels down in the presence of all his followers. In a
moment the whole army bends with him in prayer. Then there bursts forth the
sound of trumpets, and ten thousand voices join in song:
Fear not, O little flock, the foe
Who madly seeks your overthrow,
Dread not his rage and power.”
The army of Gustavus moved forward to victory, an army so inspired with
confidence in God could not but be victorious: but at the moment of triumph a
riderless horse came flying back to the camp—it was that of the martyred king.
III
The Disciples Singing with Him
It was wonderful that the disciples could sing on such a night as this. It had been
to them a night of perplexity, and awe, and wonder. Their Master had been
saying and doing things most solemn and strange. There had been the feet-
154

155. washing, the disclosure of the traitor, the institution of the Sacrament, the eager
questions, the deep discourse, and the farewell greeting. What a night of emotion
and expectation! Only with sad countenances and in muffled tones could the
Eleven, when their Lord is on the point of leaving them, join in the refrain of the
Hallel—“O give thanks unto the Lord; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for
ever.”
How much it meant for them! The solace of that song, and the voice of their Lord
blending with their voices, was the most tender and effectual way of comforting
them. It was as the mother soothes her little one by singing. Could they fear since
He sang? For them too the words were a strength as well as a solace.
Take, Shepherd, take Thy prize,
For who like Thee can sing?
No fleece of mingled dyes,
No apples fair, I bring;
No smooth two-handled bowl,
Wrought with the clasping vine—
Take, take my heart and soul,
My songs, for they are Thine!
Oh, sing Thy song again,
And these of mine may pass
As quick as summer rain
Dries on the thirsty grass.
Thou wouldst not do me wrong,
Thou wilt not silent be;
Thy one, Thy only song,
Dear Shepherd, teach to me!1 [Note: Dora Greenwell.]
1. They were Israelites.—Remembering the fact commemorated by the Paschal
supper, they might well rejoice. They sang of their nation in bondage, trodden
beneath the tyrannical foot of Pharaoh; they began the Psalm right sorrowfully,
155

156. as they thought of the bricks made without straw, and of the iron furnace; but
the strain soon mounted from the deep bass, and began to climb the scale, as they
sang of Moses, the servant of God, and of the Lord appearing to him in the
burning bush. They remembered the mystic rod, which became a serpent, and
which swallowed up the rods of the magicians; their music told of the plagues
and wonders which God had wrought upon Zoan; and of that dread night when
the first-born of Egypt fell before the avenging sword of the angel of death, while
they themselves, feeding on the lamb which had been slain for them, and whose
blood was sprinkled upon the lintel and upon the side-posts of the door, had been
graciously preserved. Then the song went up concerning the hour in which all
Egypt was humbled at the feet of Jehovah; whilst as for His people, He led them
forth like sheep, by the hand of Moses and Aaron, and they went by the way of
the sea, even of the Red Sea. The strain rose higher still as they tuned the song of
Moses, the servant of God, and of the Lamb. Jubilantly they sang of the Red Sea,
and of the chariots of Pharaoh which went down into the midst thereof, and the
depths covered them till there was not one of them left. It was a glorious chant,
indeed, when they sang of Rahab cut in pieces, and of the dragon wounded at the
sea, by the right hand of the Most High, for the deliverance of the chosen people.
2. They sang with a New Meaning.—For Jesus had set ancient words to new
harmonies. The very words which had been sung often before, and which had
profound meaning on the lips of ancient saints, had never such a meaning on
human lips as they had this night. There are some words of God—some
extraordinary utterances—that go on disclosing new depths of meaning
throughout the ages, and are set to music now and again; but no music to which
they are set can give expression to the fulness of their meaning.
It was so with regard to the great Hallel and other inspired utterances. David
and others had first uttered them, and ancient saints had repeated them. As the
ages moved, they seem to have accumulated meaning; but not until the Christ
Himself came to utter the words did they find full and adequate expression. For
instance, “The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the
corner,” Christ had said in so many words before, but He had not sung it until
now. “The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the
corner. This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvellous in our eyes. This is the day
which the Lord hath made”—so true of many other days, but not so true of any
day as this. “We will rejoice and be glad in it.” What! be glad in it! Under the
very shadow of the Cross, with all the agony and the shame before Him; and we
know by the record how keenly He felt all.
In Wesley’s whole life there was perhaps nothing that made so deep an
impression on him as, when crossing the Atlantic in a great storm, the ship’s sails
blown away and the seas breaking over the ship, and everybody else screaming
in terror, the simple Moravians gathered together with their women and
children and sang a hymn of praise to God. It was what Luther always did when
evil tidings reached him and things looked threatening.
156

157. Jesus Predicts Peter’s Denial
27 “You will all fall away,” Jesus told them, “for
it is written:
“‘I will strike the shepherd,
and the sheep will be scattered.’[d]
GILL, "And Jesus saith unto them,.... As they were going to the Mount of
Olives. The Persic version reads, in this place; meaning the Mount of Olives, having
got thither:
all ye shall be offended because of me this night; See Gill on Mat_26:31;
for it is written in Zec_13:7,
I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: Christ is meant
by the shepherd, and the apostles by the sheep. The Syriac version reads, "his sheep".
HENRY, "1. Christ here foretels that in his sufferings he should be deserted by all
his disciples; “You will all be offended because of me, this night. I know you will
(Mar_14:27), and what I tell you now, is no other than what the scripture has told
you before; I will smite the shepherd, and then the sheep will be scattered.” Christ
knew this before, and yet welcomed them at his table; he sees the falls and
miscarriages of his disciples, and yet doth not refuse them. Nor should we be
discouraged from coming to the Lord's supper, by the fear of relapsing into sin
afterward; but, the greater of our danger is, the more need we have to fortify
ourselves by the diligent conscientious use of holy ordinances. Christ tells them that
they would be offended in him, would begin to question whether he were the Messiah
or no, when they saw him overpowered by his enemies. Hitherto, they had continued
with him in his temptations; though they had sometimes offended him, yet they had
not been offended in him, nor turned the back upon him; but now the storm would
be so great, that they would all slip their anchors, and be in danger of shipwreck.
Some trials are more particular (as Rev_2:10, The devil shall cast some of you into
prison); but others are more general, an hour of temptation, which shall come upon
all the world, Rev_3:10. The smiting of the shepherd is often the scattering of the
sheep: magistrates, ministers, masters of families, if these are, as they should be,
shepherds to those under their charge, when any thing comes amiss to them, the
whole flock suffers for it, and is endangered by it.
157

158. JAMIESON, "Mar_14:27-31. The desertion of Jesus by His disciples and the fall
of Peter, foretold. ( = Mat_26:31-35; Luk_22:31-38; Joh_13:36-38).
See on Luk_22:31-46.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 27-28
We should understand the meaning of "fall away" (Gr. skandalisthesesthe, cf.
Mark 4:17; Mark 6:3; Mark 9:42-47) in the light of the prophecy that Jesus said
predicted it (Zechariah 13:7). Zechariah did not mean that the sheep would
abandon the shepherd permanently much less that they would cease to be what
they were. He pictured the flock fleeing from the shepherd because someone
attacked him. That is precisely what the disciples did when the authorities
arrested and executed Jesus. Later those sheep rallied around the Shepherd.
Jesus announced His leading them as a shepherd to Galilee later (Mark 14:28).
Again He spoke of His resurrection immediately after announcing His death
(Mark 14:24-25).
Jesus attributed the Shepherd's striking to God. He changed the Zechariah
passage slightly. Clearly Jesus viewed Himself as God's Suffering Servant (Isaiah
53:4-6). This point would have helped the disciples accept Jesus' fate.
BARCLAY, "THE FAILURE OF FRIENDS (Mark 14:27-31)
14:27-31 Jesus said to them, "You will all fall away from me, for it stands
written, 'I will smite the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered.' But after I
have been raised to life again, I will go before you into Galilee." Peter said to
him, "All the others may fail away from you, but I will not." Jesus said to him,
"This is the truth I tell you--today, this night, before the cock crows twice you
will deny me three times." Peter began to insist vehemently, "If I must die with
you I will not deny you." So, too, they all said.
It is a tremendous thing about Jesus that there was nothing for which he was not
prepared. The opposition, the misunderstanding, the enmity of the orthodox
religious people, the betrayal by one of his own inner circle, the pain and the
agony of the Cross--he was prepared for them all. But perhaps what hurt him
most was the failure of his friends. It is when a man is up against it that he needs
his friends most, and that was exactly when Jesus' friends left him all alone and
let him down. There was nothing in the whole gamut of physical pain and mental
torture that Jesus did not pass through.
Sir Hugh Walpole wrote a great novel called Fortitude. It is the story of one
called Peter, whose creed was, "It isn't life that matters, but the courage you
bring to it." Life did everything that it possibly could to him. At the end, on his
own mountain top, he heard a voice, "Blessed be pain and torment and every
torture of the body. Blessed be all loss and the failure of friends and the sacrifice
of love. Blessed be all failure and the ruin of every earthly hope. Blessed be all
sorrow and torment, hardships, and endurances that demand courage. Blessed
be these things--for of these things cometh the making of a man." Peter fell to
praying, "Make of me a man...to be afraid of nothing, to be ready for everything.
158

159. Love, friendship, success...to take it if it comes, to care nothing if these things are
not for me. Make me brave. Make me brave."
Jesus had supremely, more than anyone who ever lived, this quality of fortitude,
this ability to remain erect no matter with what blows life assaulted him, this
serenity when there was nothing but heartbreak behind and torture in front.
Inevitably every now and then we find ourselves catching our breath at his sheer
heroism.
When Jesus foretold this tragic failure of loyalty, Peter could not believe that it
would happen. In the days of the Stewart troubles they captured the Cock of the
North, the Marquis of Huntly. They pointed at the block and the axe and told
him that unless he abandoned his loyalty he would be executed then and there.
His answer was, "You can take my head from my shoulders but you will never
take my heart from my king." That is what Peter said that night.
There is a lesson in the word that Jesus used for "fall away." The Greek verb is
skandalizein (Greek #4624), from skandalon (Greek #4625) or skandalethron
which meant the bait in a trap, the stick on to which the animal was lured and
which snapped the trap when the animal stepped on it. So the word skandalizein
(Greek #4624) came to mean to entrap, or to trip up by some trick or guile. Peter
was too sure. He had forgotten the traps that life can lay for the best of men. He
had forgotten that the best of men can step on a slippery place and fall. He had
forgotten his own human weakness and the strength of the devil's temptations.
But there is one thing to be remembered about Peter--his heart was in the right
place. Better a Peter with a flaming heart of love, even if that love did for a
moment fail most shamefully, than a Judas with a cold heart of hate. Let that
man condemn Peter who never broke a promise, who never was disloyal in
thought or action to a pledge. Peter loved Jesus, and even if his love failed, it rose
again.
PULPIT, "All ye shall be offended. The words which follow in the Authorized
Version, "because of me this night," are not to be found in the best manuscripts
and versions. They appear to have been imported from St. Matthew. Shall be
offended ( σκανδαλισθήσεσθε); literally, shall be caused to stumble. Our Lord
was to prove "a stone of stumbling" to many, not excluding his own disciples.
Even they, under the influence of terror, would for a time lose confidence and
hope in him. For it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be
scattered abroad. This is a quotation from Zechariah (Zechariah 13:7), "Awake,
O sword, against my Shepherd, and against the man that is my Fellow, saith the
Lord of hosts: smite the Shepherd." This passage brings out in a remarkable
manner the Divine agency in the death of Christ. The sheep shall be scattered
abroad. The disciples all forsook him and fled, when they saw him actually in the
hands of his enemies. They felt doubtful for the moment whether he was indeed
the Son of God. "They trusted that it was he who should redeem Israel;" but
now their hopes gave way to fear and doubt. They fled hither and thither like
frightened sheep. But God gathered them together again, so that when our Lord
rose from the dead, he found them all in the same place; and then he revived
their faith and courage. Our Lord and his disciples had no settled home or
159

160. friends in Jerusalem; so they had no other place to flee to than that upper
chamber, where, not long before, Christ had kept the Passover with them. The
owner of that house was a friend; so thither they went, and there Christ
appeared to them after his resurrection.
COFFMAN, “PETER'S DENIAL WAS PREDICTED
The Lord was about to foretell the denial of Peter and the flight of the Twelve,
but he began by appealing to the prophecy here quoted from Zechariah 13:7.
God had revealed himself in the Old Testament under the extensive use of the
metaphor of "the shepherd of Israel" (Psalms 23; Ezekiel 16, etc.); but here it
was stated that the Shepherd would smite the Shepherd, thus God laid upon
himself, in the person of the Son, the iniquity of us all. Inherent in this was the
failure of all human support.
BURKITT, "Observe here, 1. The warning that our Saviour gives his disciples of
their forsaking of him in the the time of his sufferings; All ye shall be offended
because of me this night.
Learn, That Christ's dearest friends forsook and left him alone, in the midst of
his greatest distress and danger.
Observe, 2. What was the cause of their flight; it was their fear, the weakness of
their faith, and the prevalency of their fear.
O! how sad and dangerous is it for the best of men to be left under the power of
their own fears in the day of temptation!
Observe, 3. Notwithstanding our Saviour's prediction, St. Peter's presumption of
his own strength and standing; Though all men forsake thee, yet will not I.
Learn thence, That self-confidence, and presumptuous opinion, of their own
strength, is a sin very incident to the holiest and best of men. This good man
resolved honestly, no doubt; what a feather he should be in the wind of
temptation, if once left to the power and prevalency of his own fears. None are so
near falling, as those who are the most confident of their own standing; if ever
we stand in the day of trail, it is the fear of falling that must enable us to stand.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:27-31
Anticipation.
Long before had our Lord clearly realized what would be the end of his ministry
of benevolence and self-denial. The prospect of ungrateful violence leading to a
cruel death had not deterred him from efforts for the good of those whom he
loved and pitied. And now that the blow was just about to fall upon him, his
mind was no less steadfast, although his heart was saddened.
I. JESUS ANTICIPATES HIS OWN SUFFERINGS, AND THE
160

161. RESURRECTION WHICH SHOULD FOLLOW HIS DEATH.
1. He foresaw that, as the Good Shepherd, he should be smitten. He was to lay
down his life for the sheep, that they might be saved and live.
2. He foretold that he should rise, and should be found in Galilee in an appointed
place. This assurance gives us an insight into the considerate kindness of the
Redeemer, who not only resolved to triumph for mankind, but took care for his
own friends that their solicitude might be relieved, and that his intimacy with
them might be renewed.
II. JESUS ANTICIPATES THE CONFUSION AND UNFAITHFULNESS OF
HIS DISCIPLES. Sorely as this prospect must have distressed his heart, he was
not by it to be deterred from his purpose. He foretold to his friends how they
were about to act, that they might learn a lesson of their own frailty and
dependence upon unseen aid.
1. Offence and scattering were foretold concerning all. This, as the record
informs us, came to pass; for in the hour of his apprehension "they all forsook
him, and fled."
2. The denial of the foremost and the boldest of the twelve was also foretold.
Peter loved Christ, had displayed a remarkable insight into Christ's nature, and
now professed, in the ardor of his attachment, a readiness to die for his Lord. It
was as though nothing that could distress the Divine Savior should be wanting to
his sufferings and sacrifice; he consented even to be denied by the foremost of
the select and beloved band.
3. Jesus knew the hearts of his disciples better than they knew their own. They
vehemently asserted their attachment, their devotedness, their unswerving
fidelity. But he knew the underlying nature which afforded at present no
foundation for their resolutions and protestations. And he was evidently
prepared for what actually happened; it did not take him by surprise. Only after
his ascension, and the baptism with the Spirit, could the apostles withstand the
onset of the foe, the rage of the persecutor.
PRACTICAL LESSONS.
1. Learn the frailty and feebleness of human nature.
2. Learn the steadfastness and the love of the Savior.
3. Learn the necessity of dependence upon Divine grace to keep from falling.
BI, “I will smite the shepherd.
Why Christ is called a Shepherd
1. As descending from ancient patriarchs who were shepherds. They were types
of Him.
161

162. 2. He knows His sheep, and marks them for His own (Joh_10:3; Joh_10:14).
God sets His seal on them (2Ti_2:19).
3. He feeds their souls and bodies in green pastures (Psa_23:1-6) and drives
them to the sweet streams and waters of comfort, by the paths of grace and
righteousness.
4. He defends them from the wolf and enemies; they being timorous, simple,
weak, shiftless creatures, unable to fly, resist, or save themselves.
5. He nourishes the young and tender lambs.
6. He seeks them when they go astray, and rejoices to find them.
7. He brings them to the fold.
(1) The fold of grace.
(2) The fold of glory. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Comfort in Christ, our Shepherd
In that Christ is our Shepherd, we may comfort ourselves in-
1. His love. More love is included in the title “Shepherd,” than if He should call
Himself our father, brother, kinsman. The good Shepherd gives His life for the
sheep, which every father or brother will not do.
2. His care. The sheep need care for nothing but the Shepherd’s presence (Psa_
23:1). (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Christ smitten, an example to us
In that Christ was smitten with the sword, let us learn patience in affliction of every
kind.
1. He suffered for no necessity or desert, but by voluntary humility, whereas we
deserve fiery trials.
2. He suffered not for His own cause, but ours; and shall not we for His?
3. He despised the shame; and why should not we?
4. The end of His cross was the exaltation at God’s right hand; and we expect the
same. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Comfort because God is the smiter
Though Christ was smitten, it was not by chance, fortune, or altogether by malice of
wicked men; but all by the counsel and decree of God. If thou art smitten, comfort
thyself.
1. It is God’s hand.
2. God intends by this means to bring about some good purpose in thee.
3. God not only sends thy trouble, but also regulates and checks it. (Dr. Thomas
Taylor.)
162

163. The scattering
Why were the disciples thus scattered?
1. Their own weakness and carnal fear made them fly to save themselves. They
had not counted the cost of their profession. Nor had they yet received the Holy
Spirit, which afterwards kept them strong and stedfast.
2. God in His wisdom would have Christ deserted, because He was to be known
to tread “the winepress of God’s wrath alone.”
3. Thus it behoved the Scripture to be fulfilled, in regard of Christ Himself, who
voluntarily undertaking the grievous burden of our sin, must be forsaken by all
for the time.
4. To teach us, that all our safety depends on our relation to the chief Shepherd.
Without Christ we lie dispersed, ungathered, and forlorn. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
28 But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you
into Galilee.”
GILL, "But after that I am risen,.... From the dead, which, for their comfort, he
assures them of; though they would be offended and discouraged at the seizing, and
condemning, and crucifixion of him:
I will go before you into Galilee; the place of their nativity, and where he had
often conversed with them; See Gill on Mat_26:32.
HENRY, "But Christ encourages them with a promise that they shall rally again,
shall return both to their duty and to their comfort (Mar_14:28); “After I am risen, I
will gather you in from all the places wither you are scattered, Eze_34:12. I will go
before you into Galilee, will see our friends, and enjoy one another there.”
2. He foretels that he should be denied particularly by Peter. When they went out
to go to the mount of Olives, we may suppose that they dropped Judas (he stole away
from them), whereupon the rest began to think highly of themselves, that they stuck
to their Master, when Judas quitted him. But Christ tells them, that though they
should be kept by his grace from Judas's apostasy, yet they would have no reason to
boast of their constancy. Note, Though God keeps us from being as bad as the worst,
yet we may well be ashamed to think that we are not better than we are.
BI, “I will go before you into Galilee.
Voices from Galilee
It is quite certain that, in the manhood of Christ, there was, in a very large degree, the
163

164. truest poetry of the heart. His sympathies with nature-His love of the beautiful
everywhere-His tenderness to childhood and to weakness-the delicacy of His action-
the play of His fancy-all show that vivid imagination, and fervent glow, and quiet
sensibility, and creative habit, and deep perception which, I speak it humanly, always
make life a poem. Can we wonder that to such a mind as His, that country, so
endeared, so sanctified,-lovely in nature, but lovelier still in all its sacred
recollections-should have such an attraction that He could scarcely consent even to
go to heaven without another look at its beauty, and a last taste of its sweetness! And
did my Saviour-did He-even thus? Then forever He has consecrated the pious
memories of early years, and the yearnings of our manhood after the sacredness of
the past!
II. But, as far as we may presume to judge, this was not the only feeling which led the
risen Jesus back to Galilee. We know, indeed, from St. Peter’s words to Cornelius,
that when “God raised up Jesus, the third day, He showed Him openly indeed, but
not to all the people, only to chosen witnesses, chosen before of God, who did eat and
drink with Him after He rose from the dead.” Indeed we know that “He appeared to
above five hundred brethren at once,” and this manifestation was most probably on
that mountain in Galilee, where He had made such a special appointment for the
reunion. We may well believe-and it is in complete accordance with the whole mind
of Christ-that He went down to Galilee for this very object-to gather, and assure, and
comfort, and strengthen those to whom His miracles and teaching had been already
blessed in that part of Palestine. And it was only like our dear Master, and consistent
with all His faithful love, that He should thus pause, before He went on further-to
reassure and bless His own in distant places.
III. And of this, more and more, be quite sure, that Christ will always come back to
His own work in the soul which He has once made His own. And this blessed lesson
again I read in that loving journey to Galilee. Whom Christ calls, to them He returns.
No time dims, no changes reach, no distance appals, that love!
IV. I see, too, in the visit to Galilee, a probation and discipline to His own more
immediate followers. They were to have the joy of His presence, but they must make
an effort. They must show their constancy and their faith by an act of toil and trust.
They must go-at His word-all the way to meet Him in Galilee. “He went before them.”
He always goes before His people. And sometimes precedence looks like desertion.
Obey and believe, and the recompense will be a full and mantling cup. “Go where I
send you;”-this is His constant language-“Go where I send you; I shall be there.”
V. One, and perhaps the greatest, cause why He passed those “forty days” on earth-
after He had finished His great work-was to show and prove His identity; to
demonstrate that the Risen was the Crucified; that nothing was changed of His love
and being. He was the same! the same Man! the same Brother! the same Saviour! the
same God! And there were the very wounds to bear their evidence! This visit to
Galilee was singularly fitted to evidence the oneness. He goes the very same journey
which He had taken often before, to the same places, where He had spent the greater
part of His life, and where the witnesses to the identity would be the greatest in
number, and the most competent to attest. He seeks the same lake, which He had
made the centre of His previous ministry. He stands with His disciples-on the very
shore where He had spoken to them and called them. The voice, the accent, the
manner, the spirit are the same, They recognize it in a moment. He eats food, where
He had so often eaten it before. And how much we owe to that identity, I need not
say. The Man of Weakness is the God of Power. The Crucified is the Intercessor. Sure
proof that the ransom is accepted, and the whole debt is paid by Christ! Positive
evidence that we have now a God in sympathy. And one more voice I hear from
Galilee. The risen Christ walked the whole land-from Dan to Beersheba: He revealed
164

165. His authority: He showed His power: He made all His own! An earnest of that day
when He shall come and “reign in Mount Sion and in Jerusalem, and before His
ancients gloriously;” and “His feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives;” and then
“there shall be one Lord, and His name One,” and “all Israel shall be saved.” (James
Vaughan, M. A.)
Consoling promises
Such a promise as was never heard of before-that a dead man shall rise within a few
days, and promise to do so. Note the consolations with which our Lord sustains His
disciples.
1. That there shall be a certain end of this evil ready to swallow them up.
2. That there shall be a short end after a few days; three or four.
3. That there shall be a happy end. For
(1) Christ should rise again from the dead with power and glory.
(2) Whereas they have run away from Him, He will come to them again.
(3) Though they have left their Shepherd, yet He will become their Shepherd
again, and guide them as a shepherd goes before his sheep. (Dr. Thomas
Taylor.)
The promised meeting in Galilee
Why in Galilee?
1. That our Lord and His disciples may more surely enjoy one another without
fear of the Jews; and that He may instruct them in the things concerning the
kingdom of heaven.
2. Because Christ had more disciples and favourites in Galilee to whom He would
familiarly offer Himself, and manifest His resurrection, than in Judea.
3. His disciples belonged to Galilee, and He would bring, them to the place where
He found them.
4. They must follow their calling till Christ came, and for the time before they can
get into Galilee, He will be there before them, waiting for them (Dr. Thomas
Taylor.)
29 Peter declared, “Even if all fall away, I will
not.”
GILL, "But Peter said unto him,.... Being greatly moved at what Christ had said,
that all of them would be offended with him that night, and run away from him, and
165

166. be scattered from him, and one another:
although all shall be offended, yet will not I; though all the rest of the
disciples, the other ten, should do as Judas had done, should fall off from Christ, and
either betray him, or deny him, or, at least, turn their backs on him, yet he would do
neither; See Gill on Mat_26:33.
HENRY, "(1.) Peter is confident that he should not do so ill as the rest of his
disciples (Mar_14:29); Though all should be offended, all his brethren here present,
yet will not I. He supposes himself not only stronger than others, but so much
stronger, as to be able to receive the shock of a temptation, and bear up against it, all
alone; to stand, though nobody stood by him. It is bred in the bone with us, to think
well of ourselves, and trust to our own hearts.
(2.) Christ tells him that he will do worse than any of them. They will all desert
him, but he will deny him; not once, but thrice; and that presently; “This day, even
this night before the cock crow twice, thou wilt deny that ever thou hadst any
knowledge of me, or acquaintance with me, as one ashamed and afraid to own me.”
CONSTABLE, "Verse 29-30
Peter refused to allow the possibility that he would forsake Jesus even though the
other disciples might (cf. John 21:15). Jesus informed Peter that his defection
would really be worse than that of the other disciples. He introduced His
warning with the customary solemn affirmation and explained that the denial
was not only certain but imminent. Furthermore Peter would utter it three times
in spite of the rooster's double warning. Mark alone referred to the second
crowing, probably because of Peter's recollection of the event. The word Jesus
used for "deny" or "disown" (Gr. aparnese) is a strong one meaning "deny
utterly."
COKE, "Mark 14:29. Although all shall be offended,— It is most probable that
Judas by this timehad slipped away from the disciples, to fulfil his vile contract
with the sanhedrim; and Peter missing him vaunted, that though all his fellow-
apostles should follow Judas's example; he would stand by his Lord. We may
observe, that if St. Mark's Gospel was dictated or reviewed by St. Peter, as the
ancients affirm, the latter, out of his deep penitence, represents the event with
the highest aggravations; for nothing can be stronger than the expressions in
Mark 14:31.
COFFMAN, “Peter was not alone in rejecting the idea of their failure, for both
Mark and Matthew relate how "all the disciples" made the same affirmation of
loyalty. What none of them realized was that the source of true spiritual strength
had not yet been provided through the death of the Christ, and that it was
therefore impossible for them to have stood without that strength. Peter, more
vehement than the rest, and, as always, the spokesman, was in the forefront here.
PULPIT, "But Peter said unto him, Although all shall be offended, yet will not I.
Our Lord had just distinctly stated that they would all be offended, and
therefore these words of St. Peter were very presumptuous. Conscious of his own
infirmities, he ought to have said, "I know that through my own infirmity this
may easily happen. Nevertheless, I trust to thy mercy and goodness to save me."
166

167. Just such is the Christian's daily experience. We often think that we are strong in
the faith, strong in purity, strong in patience. But when temptation arises, we
falter and fall. The true remedy against temptation is the consciousness of our
own weakness, and supplication for Divine strength.
BI, “Although all shall be offended, yet will not I.
Peter’s aim was a threefold one
It consisted in-
1. His vehement contradiction of the words of Christ.
2. His preferring himself to and putting himself above the rest of the apostles.
3. His self-confidence and boastfulness of his own strength. The remedy against
temptation is such a knowledge of our own natural weakness, as may lead us to
distrust ourselves, to rely on God, and to seek His protection in all things. (W.
Denton, M. A.)
Peter’s rash zeal
Peter’s action in this instance was at the same time commendable for some things
and faulty for others.
I. Commendable in the following particulars.
1. His purpose and resolution of mind, not to take offence at Christ, which
purpose and resolution he professes sincerely and from his heart, speaking as he
really thought.
2. It is also commendable in him, that he was so zealous and forward above the
other disciples to show his love to Christ
II. Yet he was at fault in being so confident.
1. In that he directly contradicts the express words of Christ, whereby He had
plainly told him and the rest, that they should all be offended at Him.
2. In presuming rashly and confidently upon his own strength or ability to hold
out constantly, and to stick close to the Saviour in the time of trouble and danger
now at hand.
3. In arrogantly preferring himself to his fellow disciples, affirming that though
all should be offended, yet he would not. (George Petter.)
Enthusiasm
Enthusiasm is the glow of the soul; it is the lever by which men are raised above their
average level and enterprise, and become capable of a goodness and benevolence
which, but for it, would be quite impossible. There is not too much enthusiasm of any
sort or for any object, in a world like ours, and Christians had better not join in
sneering at a force, which, in its purest form, founded and reared the Church of Jesus
Christ. True, enthusiasm often loses its way, spends itself on mistaken causes, on
imperfect systems, on worthless ideals, but that is no reason for saying that all
enthusiasm is bad. Mistaken enthusiasm, like Peter’s, will in time be rudely tested by
experience; and meanwhile those who have any reason to hope that their enthusiasm
167

168. is not mistaken, can afford to be generous and hopeful about others. He that is not
against us is, unconsciously perhaps, on our side. (Canon Liddon.)
Peter’s rashness
Here we have an instance (as many elsewhere) of Peter’s temerity and rashness, not
well considering his weakness, and what spirit he was of. He betrays great infirmity,
arrogating much more than was in him.
1. He directly contradicts his Lord, who said, “All ye;” Peter says, “No, not all”-he
will not; not this night-no, never.
2. He believes not the oracle of the prophet Zechariah (Zec_13:7), but would shift
it off with pomp of words, as not concerning him; he was not one of the sheep
that should be scattered, though the Pastor was smitten.
3. He presumes too much upon his own strength, and of that which is out of his
own power, never mentioning or including the help and strength of God, by
whom alone he could stand. He neither considers his own frailty, which will
overthrow him, nor yet the power of God, which can sustain and uphold him.
4. He sets himself too much above other men; as if all men were weak in
comparison with Peter, and Peter the champion.
5. He is bold, hardy, and vainly confident in a thing yet to come, in which he has
never tried his strength. Knowing his present affection, he will take no notice of
his future peril; nay, he disclaims and almost scorns the danger, little thinking
how close it is to him. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Self-deception
Louis XV, in his disgusting depravity, exposed himself to the smallpox, then the
dread of all society. Though flattered for a time into the belief that there was no
danger, he was at length undeceived; but, owing to the prevalence of court intrigue,
the information was only conveyed to him at the latest possible moment. He caused
his guilty companions to be sent away, telling them that he would recall them should
he recover from his disorder. Just before dismissing one of the most degraded among
them, he said: “I would fain die as a believer, and not as an infidel. I have been a
great sinner, doubtless; but I have ever observed Lent with a most scrupulous
exactitude; I have caused more than a hundred thousand masses to be said for the
repose of unhappy souls; I have respected the clergy, and punished the authors of all
impious works; so that I flatter myself I have not been a very bad Christian.”
Extreme self-dependence
There is a famous speech recorded of an old Norseman thoroughly characteristic of
the Teuton. “I believe neither in idols nor demons,” said he; “I put my sole trust in
my own strength of body and soul.” (S. Smiles.)
Danger of presumption
A scientific gentleman, deputed by the Government, was, not many years ago,
examining the scene of a fatal explosion. He was accompanied by the underviewer of
the colliery, and as they were inspecting the edges of a goaf (a region of foul air), it
168

169. was observed that the “Davy” lamps which they carried were afire. “I suppose,” said
the inspector, that there is a good deal of fire damp hereabouts. “Thousands and
thousands of cubic feet all through the goaf,” coolly replied his companion. “Why,”
exclaimed the official, “do you mean to say that there is nothing but that shred of
wire gauze between us and eternity?” “Nothing at all,” replied the underviewer, very
composedly. “There’s nothing here where we stand but that gauze wire to keep the
whole mine from being blown into the air.” The precipitate retreat of the Government
official was instantaneous. And thus it should be with the sinner: his retreat from the
ways of sin-those “goafs” of poisonous air-should be instantaneous. Sir Humphrey
Davy’s lamp was never designed, as a substitute for caution if accidentally or
unknowingly carried into foul air, whereas many do so knowingly and habitually.
30 “Truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “today—
yes, tonight—before the rooster crows twice[e]
you yourself will disown me three times.”
CLARKE, "That Thou - Συ is added by ABEGHKLMS - V, eighty-eight others,
Syriac, Arabic, Persic, Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Slavonic, Vulgate, Saxon,
Theophylact, and Euthymsus. It adds much to the energy of the passage, every word
of which is deeply emphatical. Verily, I say unto thee, that Thou, This Day, in This
Very Night, before the cock shall crow Twice, Thou wilt deny Me.
GILL, "And Jesus saith unto him, verily I say unto thee,.... As confident as
thou art of standing by me, and abiding with me;
that this day, which was then begun; for the Jews reckoned their days from
evening, as in Gen_1:5;
even in this night; this night to be observed, this night of the passover, before it is
past:
before the cock crow twice; for there was a first and second cock crowing, the
one at midnight, and the other near break of day, and which last is properly the cock
crowing: the word "twice" is left out in the Ethiopic version:
thou shalt deny me thrice; as he did; See Gill on Mat_26:34.
HENRY, " Christ tells him that he will do worse than any of them. They will all
desert him, but he will deny him; not once, but thrice; and that presently; “This day,
even this night before the cock crow twice, thou wilt deny that ever thou hadst any
knowledge of me, or acquaintance with me, as one ashamed and afraid to own me.”
169

170. COKE, "Mark 14:30. Before the cock crow twice,—thou shalt— Thou wilt. See
the note on Matthew 26:33; Matthew 26:75. Dr. Owen, in his Observations on
the four Gospels, p. 56 has observed further, that as the Jews, in the enumeration
of the times of the night, took notice only of one cock-crowing, which
comprehended the third watch, (see on chap. Mark 13:35.) so St. Matthew, to
give them a clear information that Peter would deny his Master thrice before
three in the morning, needed only to say, that he would do it before the cock
crew; but the Romans, for whom, and the other Gentiles, St. Mark wrote his
Gospel, reckoning by a double crowing of the cock,—the first of which was about
midnight, and the second at three,—stood in need of a more particular
designation; and therefore St. Mark, to denote the same hour to them, was
obliged to say, before the cock crew twice. Juvenal uses exactly the same phrase
to specify the same hour. Sat. 9: ver. 107.
COFFMAN, “Peter denied Christ three times, later confessing his love three
times, as recorded in John.
Before the cock crow twice ... is a variation from Matthew's "cock crow," thus
giving the skeptics another pseudocon. Matthew referred to the event of the
cock-crow, a phenomenon taking place every morning, and Mark had reference
to the beginning of a cock-crow, which always starts by one or two roosters
leading all the rest. See my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 26:34. Matthew
did not refer to the number of crowings in a cock-crow.
PULPIT, "Verily I say unto thee, that thou to-day, even this night, before the
cock crow twice, shalt deny me thrice. The day had begun. It began at six in the
evening. It was already advanced. This second crowing of the cock is mentioned
by St. Mark only; and it forms an additional aggravation of Peter's sin. The
"cockcrowing" was a term used for one of the divisions of the night. But it
appears that there were three times at which the cock-crowing might be
expected—namely,
The two cock crowings here referred to would be the two last of the three here
mentioned. It would probably be about 2 a.m., when the first trial of our Lord
took place in the house of Caiaphas.
BI, “Thou shall deny Me thrice.
Danger of self-ignorance
“The Dougal, an old line of battle ship, which has been lying in Portsmouth Harbour
since her return from a cruise on the China station, in 1871, has been recently docked
for the purpose of alterations, so as to fit her for taking the place of the Vernon,
torpedo and depot ship. During an examination of her interior, one of the workmen
came across a live shell in a disused corner of the ship. The projectile must have lain
where it was found for over fourteen years.” This was a startling discovery; but had
no examination of the interior been required, the missile would not even now have
been found. How forcibly the story illustrates the need we have for careful and
frequent search into our own hearts! Possibly the projectile had been placed in the
“disused corner of the ship” by an enemy; or, on the other hand, it may have been
concealed ready to hurl at the foe. Anyhow, it was a dangerous thing to have stowed
170

171. away, for at any moment it might have exploded, and destroyed the vessel. Self-
examination is ever beneficial, and often leads to the startling discovery of some most
dangerous evil that lay long concealed in the disused corners of the heart. That we
may be fitted to take our right place in God’s service, and go forth to our work with
His approval, let a thorough examination be made, and let all evil be removed.
(Robert Spurgeon.)
Good resolutions soon forgotten
Note how suddenly even a good man is turned from good resolutions, if but a little
left to himself, or if he remit but a little of his own watchfulness. In a few hours this
confident disciple, who scorned to think of denying his Master, denies and forswears
Him too.
1. We stand by grace, which, if not every moment renewed, we must needs fall; as
in the case of a man supported by a crutch-remove the crutch, and he falls down;
or set a staff upright, withdraw the hand, and you need not push it down, it goes
of itself.
2. The suddenness of the temptation, which comes like lightning, and our
proneness to be kindled with it.
3. The freedom of the Spirit, who comes and goes at His own pleasure.
(1) This should keep us humble, no matter how holy a state we get into. The
gun may at any time suddenly disappear under a cloud.
(2) Let us watch our graces well, and forecast temptation.
(3) Let us depend on the Spirit of God to perfect and accomplish His own
good motions, and leave us not to ourselves, who can quickly quench them.
4. No wonder if the righteousness of hypocrites be as the morning dew (Hos_
6:4). (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
31 But Peter insisted emphatically, “Even if I
have to die with you, I will never disown you.”
And all the others said the same.
GILL, "But he spake the more vehemently,.... With a louder voice; with more
spirit and eagerness; in a more peremptory and self-confident way.
If I should die with thee, I will not deny thee in any wise. The Syriac version
adds, "O my Lord", my dear Lord, I will never deny thee upon any consideration
whatever; and the Persic version, O Lord:
likewise also said they all; as he said, so said "all the disciples", as the Syriac
version reads it; See Gill on Mat_26:35.
171

172. HENRY, " He stands to his promise; “If I should die with thee, I will not deny
thee; I will adhere to thee, though it cost me my life:” and, no doubt, he thought as he
said. Judas said nothing like this, when Christ told him he would betray him. He
sinned by contrivance, Peter by surprise; he devised the wickedness (Mic_2:1), Peter
was overtaken in this fault, Gal_6:1. It was ill done of Peter, to contradict his Master.
If he had said, with fear and trembling, “Lord, give me grace to keep me from
denying thee, lead me not into this temptation, deliver me from this evil,” it might
have been prevented: but they were all thus confident; they who said, Lord, is it I?
now said, It shall never be me. Being acquitted from their fear of betraying Christ,
they were now secure. But he that thinks he stands, must learn to take heed lest he
fall; and he that girdeth on the harness, not boast as though he had put it off.
SBC, “Religious Emotion.
To mistake mere transient emotion, or mere good thoughts, for obedience, is a far
commoner deceit than at first sight appears. How many a man is there, who, when
his conscience upbraids him for neglect of duty, comforts himself with the reflection
that he has never treated the subject of religion with open scorn—that he has from
time to time had serious thoughts—that he has had, accidentally, some serious
conversation with a friend? No one, it is plain, can be religious without having his
heart in his religion; his affections must be actively engaged in it; and it is the aim of
all Christian instruction to promote this. But, if so, doubtless there is great danger
lest a perverse use should be made of the affections. In proportion as a religious duty
is difficult, so is it open to abuse. Doubtless it is no sin to feel at times passionately on
the subject of religion; it is natural in some men, and under certain circumstances it
is praiseworthy in others. But these are accidents. As a general rule, the more
religious men become, the calmer they become; and at all times, the religious
principle viewed by itself, is calm, sober, and deliberate.
I. The natural tempers of men vary very much. Some men have ardent imaginations,
and strong feelings; and adopt, as a matter of course, a vehement mode of expressing
themselves. Such men may, of course, possess deep-rooted principle. All I would
maintain is, that their ardour does not of itself make their faith deeper and more
genuine, and that they must not think themselves better than others on account of it.
II. Next, there are, besides, particular occasions On which excited feeling is natural,
and even commendable; yet not for its own sake, but on account of the peculiar
circumstances under which it occurs. For instance, it is natural for a man to feel
especial remorse at the thought of his sins, when he first begins to think of religion;
he ought to feel bitter sorrow and keen repentance. But all such emotion is evidently
not the highest state of a Christian’s mind; it is but the first stirring of grace in him.
III. And further, the accidents of life will occasionally agitate us:—affliction and pain;
bad news; though here, too, the Psalmist describes the higher excellence of the mind,
namely, the calm confidence of the believer, who will "not be afraid of any evil thing,
for his heart standeth fast, and believeth in the Lord." The highest Christian temper
is free from all vehement and tumultuous feeling.
J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. i., p. 177.
CONSTABLE, "Jesus' reply should have caused Peter to realize his weakness
and seek help. Instead he dug in his heels and virtually told Jesus that he would
die to prove Him wrong. He kept affirming excessively (Gr. ekperissos, used only
172

173. here in the New Testament) that he would definitely not deny Jesus. Peter did
not know how weak he was, a problem most disciples of Jesus share with him.
He would have to learn the hard way, through failure. Peter led the other
disciples in denying that they would deny Jesus. [Note: W. N. Clarke,
"Commentary on the Gospel of Mark," in An American Commentary, p. 214.]
Later he denied Jesus with the same vehemence with which he professed that he
would not.
This pericope is a strong warning for all disciples. When facing persecution for
one's allegiance to Jesus, one should not trust in the strength of his or her
commitment. He or she should trust in God who can supply the grace needed to
remain faithful (cf. Mark 9:14-29).
PULPIT, "But he spake exeseding vehemently ( ἐκπερισσῶς ἐλάλει), If I must
die with thee ( ἐάν με δέρ), I will not deny thee. The right reading ( ἐλάλει,
imperfect) implies that he kept asserting over and over again. He was, no doubt,
sincere in all this, but he had vet to learn his own weakness. St. Hilary says on
this, "Peter was so carried away by the fervor of his zeal and love for Christ, that
he regarded neither the weakness of his own flesh nor the truth of his Master's
word."
BI, “I will not deny Thee in any wise.
Peter’s denial of Christ
I. We may learn from this transaction not to be too forward in our professions, or too
confident in our own strength, lest confidence should at last increase the guilt and
shame of failure; and in the event of nonperformance, our professions be turned to
our reproach. The chief of the apostles mistook the firmness of his own spirit. In the
day of peace it is easy to form good resolutions, and to be confident that we shall
perform them. To resolve in private and act in public are very different things,
requiring very different degrees of firmness, both in exerting the powers of the
understanding and in regulating the affections of the heart. Rash resolutions are
foolish, and rash vows cannot be innocent. Yet our weakness is itself the decisive
proof that vows and resolutions ought to be made. But let them be made as reason
and duty require-deliberately not ostentatiously; not so much to be heard as to be
kept; not so much to man as to God.
II. To hope the best, and to depend the most upon those whose tempers are not so
warm and forward, but mild, and cool, and firm. In St. John we find no forward
professions, no hasty declarations of invincible spirit. He was firm and faithful, but
meek and unoffending. His zeal united gentleness. Zeal should be with moderation.
The passions must not rule the conduct. The feelings of a good man are ruled by his
religion. “Every thought should be brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.”
Without such guidance feeling is bold, forward, and capricious, liable to error, and
will involve us in sin; but conviction and principle are steady and permanent; truth
and right are forever the same.
III. That if we be surprised into any failure in our duty we may be forgiven upon
repentance and reformation. But this great privilege must not be allowed to relax our
care, or encourage our presumption. St. Peter delayed his repentance only till he
knew his fault. Hand-in-hand with conviction came contrition. (W. Barrow, LL. D.)
173

174. Peter and the rest
The text shows St. Peter exercising the supreme influence.
I. Here is Peter’s undoubted supremacy. History circles around great names. Men are
not all original. The apostles could not do without Peter.
II. This supremacy was intellectual, moral, spiritual; not economical, legal, or merely
official. His supremacy rose out of qualification. There are no spiritual leaderships
which can be irrespective of character. A true man must always influence others
powerfully.
III. The value of such characters as that of Peter in the Church. Each age needs men
who can call onward and upward because they are beyond and above.
IV. Here is noble purpose and noble feeling coming short in action. The sequel is,
“they all forsook Him and fled.” Not even the grandest human inspirations have
staying virtues in them. These must be sought from the Holy Spirit. (The Preacher’s
Monthly.)
Presumption
I stand on a mountain in Colorado six thousand feet high. There is a man standing
beneath me who says: “I see a peculiar shelving to this rock,” and he bends towards
it. I say: “Stop, you will fall.” He says: “No danger; I have a steady head and foot, and
see a peculiar piece of moss.” I say: “Stand back”; but he says: “I am not afraid”; and
he bends farther and farther, and after a while his head whirls and his feet slip-and
the eagles know not that it is the macerated flesh of a man they are picking at, but it
is. So I have seen men come to the very verge of New York life, and they look away
down in it. They say: “Don’t be cowardly. Let us go down.” They look farther and
farther. I warn them to stand back; but Satan comes behind them, and while they are
swinging over the verge, pushes them off. People say they were naturally bad. They
were not! They were only engaged in exploration. (Dr. Talmage.)
Fatal presumption
The present Eddystone Lighthouse stands very firmly, but that was not the character
of the first structure that stood on that dangerous point. There was an eccentric man
by the name of Henry Winstanly, who built a very fantastic lighthouse at that point in
1696, and when it was nearly done he felt so confident that it was strong, that he
expressed the wish that he might be in it in the roughest hurricane that ever blew in
the face of heaven. And he got his wish. One November night, in 1703, he and his
workmen were in that light house when there came down the most raging tempest
that has ever been known in that region. On the following morning the people came
down to see about the lighthouse. Not a vestige of the wall, not a vestige of the men.
Only two twisted iron bolts, showing where the lighthouse had stood. So there are
men building up their fantastic hopes, and plans, and enterprises, and expectations,
thinking they will stand forever, saying: “We don’t want any of the defences of the
gospel. We can stand for ourselves. We are not afraid. We take all the risks and we
defy everything;” and suddenly the Lord blows upon them and they are gone. Only
two things left-a grave and a lost soul. (Dr. Talmage.)
174

175. Accumulated sin
Peter, instead of being humbled and made self-distrustful by our Lord’s warning, as
he ought to have been, only heaps up more sin against himself by persisting in
contradicting the Lord. Let us take note from this that the child of God, through
strength of his corruption, may fall often into the same sin, notwithstanding good
means against it.
1. It is a very hard thing to lead people out of themselves. Almost nothing but
experience of former falls brings them to see their folly.
2. Till their mind is changed their action will be the same.
3. Weakness of grace causes even the best to fall over and over again into the
same sins.
4. The same reason remains still which may move the Lord to leave His children
to themselves; to try, excite, humble them, work more serious sorrow, make them
more watchful, etc. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Repetition strengthens
Every repetition of sin makes sin the stronger; for as the body, the more it is
nourished and fed, the stronger it grows, so with sin in the soul; every new act is an
addition of strength till it comes to a habit. Pluck up a twig, then, before it grows up
into a plant. Dash out the brains of every sin in infancy. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Gethsemane
32 They went to a place called Gethsemane, and
Jesus said to his disciples, “Sit here while I
pray.”
GILL, "And they came to a place which is named Gethsemane,.... At the
foot of the Mount of Olives, where the olives, which grew in great plenty on the
mount, were pressed: and where our Lord began to be bruised, for our sins:
and be saith to his disciples: to eight of them:
sit ye here while I shall pray; at some distance from hence; See Gill on Mat_
26:36.
175

176. HENRY, "Christ is here entering upon his sufferings, and begins with those which
were the sorest of all his sufferings, those in his soul. Here we have him in his agony;
this melancholy story we had in Matthew; this agony in soul was the wormwood and
the gall in the affliction and misery; and thereby it appeared that no sorrow was
forced upon him, but that it was what he freely admitted.
I. He retired for prayer; Sit ye here (saith he to his disciples), while I go a little
further, and pray. He had lately prayed with them (Jn. 17); and now he appoints
them to withdraw while he goes to his Father upon an errand peculiar to himself.
Note, Our praying with our families will not excuse our neglect of secret worship.
When Jacob entered into his agony, he first sent over all that he had, and was left
alone, and then there wrestled a man with him (Gen_32:23, Gen_32:24), though he
had been at prayer before (Mar_14:9), it is likely, with his family.
JAMIESON, "Mar_14:32-42. The agony in the garden. ( = Mat_26:36-46; Luk_
22:39-46).
See on Luk_22:39-46.
CONSTABLE, "Verses 32-34
Jesus apparently took His inner circle of disciples (cf. Mark 5:37; Mark 9:2) with
Him to teach them about suffering and to receive help from their intercession for
Him (cf. Matthew 26:38). The other disciples were to pray as well (Luke 22:40).
This was apparently a favorite place that Jesus and the disciples had visited
previously (cf. Luke 22:39; John 18:2).
The words "distressed" (Gr. ekthambeisthai) and "troubled" (Gr. ademonein)
together "describe an extremely acute emotion, a compound of bewilderment,
fear, uncertainty and anxiety, nowhere else portrayed in such vivid terms as
here." [Note: R. G. Bratcher and E. A. Nida, Translator's Handbook on Mark, p.
446.] The prospect of bearing God's wrath for the world's sins and experiencing
separation from His Father grieved Jesus deeply (Gr. perilypos, cf. Mark 6:26).
This was much more than any mere martyr has ever had to endure.
BARCLAY, "THY WILL BE DONE (Mark 14:32-42)
14:32-42 They came to a place the name of which is Gethsemane. Jesus said to
his disciples, "Sit here while I pray." He took Peter and James and John with
him, and began to be in great distress and trouble of mind. He said to them, "My
soul is sore grieved even to death. Stay here and watch." He went on a little
farther and fell on the ground and prayed that, if it was possible, this hour might
pass from him. He said, "Abba, Father, everything is possible to you. Take this
cup from me--but not what I wish, but what you wish." He came and found them
sleeping and he said to Peter, "Simon, are you sleeping? Could you not stay
awake for one hour? Watch and pray lest you enter into some testing time. The
spirit is willing but the flesh is weak." And again he went away and prayed in
the same words. And again he came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were
weighed down with sleep. And they did not know how to answer him. And he
came the third time and said to them, "Sleep on now. Take your rest. It is
enough. The hour has come. See! The Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of
sinners. Rise! Let us be going! He who betrays me has come!"
176

177. This is a passage we almost fear to read, for it seems to intrude into the private
agony of Jesus.
To have stayed in the upper room would have been dangerous. With the
authorities on the watch for him, and with Judas bent on treachery, the upper
room might have been raided at any time. But Jesus had another place to which
to go. The fact that Judas knew to look for him in Gethsemane shows that Jesus
was in the habit of going there. In Jerusalem itself there were no gardens. The
city was too crowded, and there was a strange law that the city's sacred soil
might not be polluted with manure for the gardens. But some of the rich people
possessed private gardens out on the Mount of Olives where they took their rest.
Jesus must have had some wealthy friend who gave him the privilege of using his
garden at night.
When Jesus went to Gethsemane there were two things he sorely desired. He
wanted human fellowship and he wanted God's fellowship. "It is not good that
the man should be alone," God said in the beginning. (Genesis 2:18.) In time of
trouble we want someone with us. We do not necessarily want him to do
anything. We do not necessarily even want to talk to him or have him talk to us.
We only want him there. Jesus was like that. It was strange that men who so
short a time before had been protesting that they would die for him, could not
stay awake for him one single hour. But none can blame them, for the excitement
and the tension had drained their strength and their resistance.
Certain things are clear about Jesus in this passage.
(i) He did not want to die. He was thirty-three and no one wants to die with life
just opening on to the best of the years. He had done so little and there was a
world waiting to be saved. He knew what crucifixion was like and he shuddered
away from it. He had to compel himself to go on--just as we have so often to do.
(ii) He did not fully understand why this had to be. He only knew beyond a
doubt that this was the will of God and that he must go on. Jesus, too, had to
make the great venture of faith, he had to accept--as we so often have to do--what
he could not understand.
(iii) He submitted to the will of God. Abba (Greek #5) is the Aramaic for my
father. It is that one word which made all the difference. Jesus was not
submitting to a God who made a cynical sport of men. Hardy finishes his novel
Tess, after telling of her tragic life, with the terrible sentence, "The President of
the Immortals had finished his sport with Tess." But Jesus was not submitting to
a God who was an iron fate.
"But helpless pieces of the game he plays,
Upon this chequer board of nights and days,
Hither and thither moves and checks and slays--
177

178. And one by one back in the closet lays."
God was not like that. Even in this terrible hour, when he was making this
terrible demand, God was father. When Richard Cameron, the covenanter, was
killed, his head and hands were cut off by one Murray and taken to Edinburgh.
"His father being in prison for the same cause, the enemy carried them to him, to
add grief unto his former sorrow, and inquired if he knew them. Taking his son's
head and hands, which were very fair (being a man of a fair complexion like
himself) he kissed them and said, 'I know them--I know them. They are my
son's--my own dear son's. It is the Lord. Good is the will of the Lord, who cannot
wrong me nor mine, but hath made goodness and mercy to follow us all our
days.'" If we can call God father everything becomes bearable. Time and again
we will not understand, but always we will be certain that "The Father's hand
will never cause his child a needless tear." That is what Jesus knew. That is why
he could go on--and it can be so with us.
We must note how the passage ends. The traitor and his gang had arrived. What
was Jesus' reaction? Not to run away, although even yet, in the night, it would
have been easy to escape. His reaction was to face them. To the end he would
neither turn aside nor turn back.
BENSON, “Mark 14:32-38. They came to Gethsemane — For an explanation of
these verses see the notes on Matthew 26:36-39. And began to be sore amazed —
Greek, εκθαμβεισθαι, to be in a consternation. The word implies the most
shocking mixture of terror and amazement: the next word, αδημονειν, which we
render, to be very heavy, signifies to be quite depressed, and almost
overwhelmed with the load: and the word περιλυπος, in the next verse, which we
translate exceeding sorrowful, implies, that he was surrounded with sorrow on
every side, breaking in upon him with such violence, that, humanly speaking,
there was no way to escape. Dr. Doddridge paraphrases the passage thus: “He
began to be in very great amazement and anguish of mind, on account of some
painful and dreadful sensations, which were then impressed on his soul by the
immediate hand of God. Then, turning to his three disciples, he says, My soul is
surrounded on all sides with an extremity of anguish and sorrow, which tortures
me even almost to death; and I know that the infirmity of human nature must
quickly sink under it without some extraordinary relief from God. While,
therefore, I apply to him, do you continue here and watch.” Dr. Whitby
supposes, that these agonies of our Lord did not arise from the immediate hand
of God upon him, but from a deep apprehension of the malignity of sin, and the
misery brought on the world by it. But, considering how much the mind of
Christ was wounded and broken with what he now endured, so as to give some
greater external signs of distress than in any other circumstance of his sufferings,
there is reason to conclude, there was something extraordinary in the degree of
the impression; which in all probability was from the Father’s immediate
agency, laying on him the chastisement of our peace, or making his soul an
offering for our sins. See Isaiah 53:5; Isaiah 53:10. He went forward a little —
Luke says, about a stone’s cast, and fell on the ground — Matthew, fell on his
face, and prayed that the hour might pass from him — That dreadful season of
178

179. sorrow, with which he was then almost overwhelmed, and which did pass from
him soon after. And he said, Abba, Father — That is, Father, Father: or,
perhaps, the word Father is added by Mark, by way of interpreting the Syriac
word, Abba. All things are possible unto thee — All things proper to be done.
Take away this cup from me — This cup of bitter distress. Nothing is more
common than to express a portion of comfort or distress by a cup, alluding to the
custom of the father of a family, or master of a feast, sending to his children or
guests a cup of such liquor as he designed for them. Nevertheless, not what I will,
but what thou wilt — As if he had said, If thou seest it necessary to continue it,
or to add yet more grievous ingredients to it, I am here ready to receive it in
submission to thy will; for though nature cannot but shrink back from these
sufferings, it is my determinate purpose to bear whatsoever thine infinite wisdom
shall see fit to appoint. And he cometh, &c. — Rising up from the ground, on
which he had lain prostrate: he returns to the three disciples; and findeth them
sleeping — Notwithstanding the deep distress he was in, and the solemn
injunction he had given them to watch; and saith unto Peter — The zealous, the
confident Peter! Simon, sleepest thou? — Dost thou sleep at such a time as this,
and after thou hast just declared thy resolution to die with me? dost thou so soon
forget thy promise to stand by me, as not so much as to keep awake and watch
one hour? Hast thou strength to die with me, who canst not watch so little awhile
with me? Watch ye and pray — Ye also, who were so ready to join with Peter in
the same profession; lest ye enter into temptation — Lest ye fall by the grievous
trial which is now at hand, and of which I have repeatedly warned you. Observe,
reader, watching and praying are means absolutely necessary to be used, if we
wish to stand in the hour of trial. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is
weak — I know your mind and will are well inclined to obey me, but your
experience may convince you, that your nature is very weak, and your
resolutions, however sincere and strong, easily borne down and broken. Every
one is apt to flatter himself, when he is out of danger, that he can easily
withstand temptations; but without prayer and particular watchfulness the
passions are wont to prevail over reason, and the flesh to counteract the motions
of the Spirit. It is justly observed by Archbishop Tillotson, (Sermons, vol. 2. p.
435,) that “so gentle a rebuke, and so kind an apology as we here read, were the
more remarkable, as our Lord’s mind was now discomposed with sorrow, so that
he must have had the deeper and tenderer sense of the unkindness of his friends.
And, alas! how apt are we, in general, to think affliction an excuse for
peevishness, and how unlike are we to Christ in that thought, and how unkind to
ourselves, as well as our friends, to whom, in such circumstances, with our best
temper, we must be more troublesome than we could wish.”
PULPIT, "And they come ( ἔρχονται)—here again St. Mark's present gives force
to the narrative—unto a place which was named Gethsemane. A place ( χωρίον)
is, literally, an enclosed piece of ground, generally with a cottage upon it.
Josephus tells us that these gardens were numerous in the suburbs of Jerusalem.
St. Jerome says that "Gethsemane was at the foot of the Mount of Olives." St.
John (John 18:1) calls it a garden, or orchard ( κῆπος). The word "Gethsemane"
means literally "the place of the olive-press," whither the olives which abounded
on the slopes of the mountain were brought, in order that the oil contained in
them might be pressed out. The exact position of Gethsemane is not known;
179

180. although there is an enclosed spot at the foot of the western slope of the Mount of
Olives which is called to this day El maniye. The real Gethsemane cannot be far
from this spot. Our Lord resorted to this place for retirement and prayer, not as
desiring to escape the death that awaited him. It was well known to be his
favourite resort; so that he went there, as though to put himself in the way of
Judas, who would naturally seek him there. Sit ye here, while I pray. St.
Matthew (Matthew 26:36) says, "While I go yonder and pray."
COFFMAN, AGONY IN GETHSEMANE
The awful scene of the Saviour's anguish was not viewed by all the Twelve, only
Peter, James, and John being the witnesses. Having already seen the
transfiguration of Christ, their faith could withstand the shock of that tearful
garden, but it might have proved too much for the others at that time; thus, the
Lord chose three who would be able to see it and tell others of the sorrow that
crushed the Lord that night. Here God laid upon him the iniquity of US all; here
it pleased God to bruise him; here the pressure upon him was so great that he
would have died under the weight of it had not the angels come to strengthen and
support him.
BURKITT, "Our blessed Saviour being now come with his disciples into the
garden, he falls there into a bitter bloody agony, in which he prayed with
wonderful fervency and importunity to his heavenly Father; his sufferings were
now coming a great pace, and he meets them upon his knees, and would be found
in a praying posture.
Learn thence, That prayer is the best preparative for, as well as the most
powerful support under, the heaviest sufferings that can befal us.
As to the prayer of our Saviour in the garden, many things are very observable;
as first, The place where he prayed, the garden. But why went Christ thither?
Not, with our first parents, to hide himself there amongst the trees of the garden,
from the notice and observation of his enemies; but as a garden was the place
where our misery began, as the first scene of human sin and misery was acted in
a garden, so does our Lord choose a garden as the place for his agony and
satisfactory pains to begin in.
Again, this garden was a place of privacy and retirement, where our Lord might
best attend the offices of devotion preparatory to his passion: That Jesus oft-
times resorted to this garden with his disciples, and Judas well knew the place
John 18:2. It is evident then that Christ went not into the garden to shun his
sufferings, but to prepare himself by prayer to meet his enemies.
Observe, 2. The time when he entered into the garden for prayer, it was in the
evening before he suffered; here he spent some hours in pouring forth his soul to
God; for about midnight Judas with his black guard came and apprehended him
in a praying posture.
Our Lord teaching us by his example, That when imminent dangers are before
180

181. us, especially when death is apprehended by us, to be very much in prayer to
God, and very fervent in our wrestlings with him.
Observe, 3. The matter of our Lord's prayer: That if possible the cup might pass
from him; and he might be kept from the hour of suffering, that his soul might
escape that dreadful wrath at which he was so sore amazed.
"But what! did Christ then begin to repent of his undertaking for sinners? Did
he shrink and give back when it came to the pinch?" No, nothing less; but as he
had two natures, being God and man, so he had two distinct wills: as a man, he
feared, and shunned death! as a God-man, he willingly submitted to it. The
divine nature, and the human spirit of Christ, did now assault each other with
disagreeing interests.
Again, this prayer was absolute, but conditional. If it be possible, Father; if it
may be; if thou art willing, if it please thee, let this cup pass; if not, I will drink it.
The cup of sufferings we see is a very bitter and distasteful cup; a cup which
human nature abhors, and cannot desire, but pray against; yet God doth put this
cup of affliction into the hands oft-times of those whom he doth sincerely love,
and when he doth so, it is their duty to drink it with silence and submission, as
here their Lord did before them; Father, let the cup pass; yet not my will but
thine be done.
Observe, 4. The manner of our Lord's payer in the garden; and here we may
remark,
1. It was a solitary prayer; he went by himself alone, out of the hearing of his
disciples. The company of our best and dearest friends is not always seasonable;
there is a time to be solitary as well as to be sociable; there are times and cases
when a Christian would not be willing that the most intimate friend he has in the
world should be with him, to hear what passes in secret between him and his
God.
2. It was an humble prayer, that is evident by the postures into which he cast
himself, sometimes kneeling, sometimes lying prostrate upon his face: He lies in
the very dust, and lower he cannot lie; and his heart was as low as his body.
3. It was a vehement, fervent, and most importunate prayer; such was the
fervour of our Lord's spirit, that he prayed himself into an agony.
O let us blush to think how unlike we are to Christ in prayer, as to our praying
frame of spirit. Lord! What deadness and drowsiness, what stupidity and
formality, what dulness and laziness, is found in our prayers! How often do our
lips move, when our hearts stand still!
4. It was a reiterated and repeated prayer; he prayed the first, second, and third
time, for the the passing of the cup from him; he returns upon God over and over
again, resolving to take no denial.
181

182. Let us not be discouraged, though we have sought God often for a particular
mercy, and yet no anwer has been given in unto us. A prayer put up in faith,
according to the will of God, though it may be delayed it shall not be lost.
Our Saviour prayed the first, second, and third time for passing of the cup; and
although he was not heard as to support under suffering.
Observe, 5. The posture the disciples were found in when our Saviour was in this
agony, praying to his Father, They were fast asleep.
Good God! Could they possibly sleep at such a time as that was, when Christ's
soul was exceeding sorrowful! Could their eyes be thus heavy!
Learn thence, That the best of Christ's disciples may be, and oft-times are,
overtaken with infirmities, with great infirmities, when the most important
duties are performing; He cometh to his disciples, and finds them sleeping.
Observe, 6. The mild and gentle reproof which he gives his disciples for their
sleeping; "Could ye not watch with me one hour?" Could ye not watch when
your master was in such danger? Could ye not watch with me when I am going
to deliver up my life for you? What! not one hour? And that the parting hour
too? After this reprehension , he subjoins an exhortation, Watch and pray, that
ye enter not into temptation; and superadds a forceable reason, for though the
spirit be willing yet the flesh is weak.
Thence learn, That the holiest and best-resolved Christians, who have willing
spirits for Christ and his service, yet in regard of the weakness of the flesh, or
frailty of human nature, it is their duty to watch and pray, and thereby guard
themselves against temptation; Watch and pray, that ye enter not into
temptation: for though the spirit is willing, yet the flesh is weak.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:32-42
Gethsemane.
How pathetic is this scene! Here we are in the presence of the sorrow of the Son
of man; and there is no sorrow like this sorrow. Here we see Christ bearing our
griefs, carrying our sorrows—a load beneath which even he almost sinks! It is
not to us a spectacle merely of human anguish; we are deeply and personally
interested in the agony of the Son of God. It was for our sake that the Father
spared not his own Son. It was for our sake that Jesus, our High Priest, offered
up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto God, and learned
obedience by the things which he suffered. The last quiet evening of fellowship
has been passed in the upper room at Jerusalem by Jesus and the twelve. The
last discourse—how full of encouragement and consolation!—has been delivered.
The last, the most wonderful and precious, prayer has been offered by the
Master for his disciples. Instead of returning, as on the earlier evenings of the
week, to the seclusion of hospitable Bethany, the little company proceed to a spot
where Jesus was wont to retire, from the excitement of the city ministry, for
182

183. meditation and for prayer. By the light of the Paschal moon they pass through
the open gate, and, leaving the city walls behind them, descend into the valley of
the Kedron. Every heart is full of the sacred words which have just been spoken,
and silence falls upon the pensive group. On the slope of Olivet they halt at an
enclosure, where aged olive trees cast a sombre shade, and the rocks offer in
their recesses a meet scene for lonely prayers. It is the garden of the olive-press,
well known to every member of the band. Leaving the rest behind him, Jesus
takes with him the favored three, who are witnesses to the awe and deadly
sorrow that come upon him. He entreats their sympathy and watchfulness, and
then withdraws to a spot where in solitude he pours out all his soul in prayer.
The hour indeed has come. The ministry of toil is over, and the ministry of
suffering and of sacrifice only now remains. He is straitened until the last
baptism be accomplished. The shadow of the cross has often before darkened his
holy path; the cross itself is just upon him now. Hitherto his soul has been almost
cloudlessly serene; in this hour the tempest of sorrow and of fear sweeps over
him and lays him low. There is no resource save in prayer. Earth rejects him,
man despises him. So he turns to heaven; he cries to the Father. He is feeling the
pressure of the world's sin; he is facing the death which that sin, not his, has
merited. It is too much, even for Christ in his humanity, and he implores relief.
"Oh that this cup may pass untasted!" Yet, even with this utterance of natural
feeling, there is blended a purpose of submission: "Not my will, O my Father,
but thine, be done!" It is the crisis of agony, unexampled, never to be repeated!
An agony of grief, an agony of prayer, an agony that finds its vent in every pore.
Angelic succor strengthens the fainting and exhausted frame. Is there human
sympathy with the Sufferer? Surely the dear friends and scholars—they are
praying with and for him! His craving heart draws him to the spot, to find them
neither watching nor praying, but asleep! He treads the winepress alone! It is an
added drop of bitterness in the bitter cup. "What, could ye not—not even
Peter—watch with me—not for one short hour?" Alas! how feeble is the flesh,
even though the spirit be alert and active! The prayer of Jesus, repeated with
intensest fervor, gains in perfectness of submission. Thrice he retires to renew his
supplication, with a growing acquiescence in the Father's will; thrice he
approaches his chosen friends, each time to be disappointed by their apathy. But
now the victory has been won. Jesus has wrestled in the garden that he may
conquer on the cross. He leaves his tears and cries behind. For the eleven there is
no further opportunity for sympathy; for the Master there is no more hesitation,
no more outpouring of personal distress. He loses himself in his work. With the
cross before him, a former exclamation seems to arise from the depths of his
spirit: "For this cause came I unto this hour." He goes forward to meet the
betrayer and his band. "Rise up, let us go; behold, he is near who betrays me!"
I. OUR SAVIOR'S SUFFERINGS IN HIS OWN SOUL. It is noticeable that, up
to this point in his earthly career, Jesus had maintained singular tranquility of
soul and composure of demeanor. He had been tempted by the devil; he had been
calumniated by his enemies; he had been disappointed in professed friends; but
his calm seems to have been unruffled. And it is also noticeable that, after his
agony in the garden, he recovered his equanimity; and both in the presence of
the high priest and of the governor, and (generally speaking) when enduring the
agonies of crucifixion, showed the self-possession, the dignity, the uncomplaining
183

184. resignation, which have been the occasion of world-wide and enduring
admiration. But this hour in Gethsemane was the hour of our Lord's bitter grief
and anguish, when his true humanity revealed itself in cries and tears, in prayers
and prostration, in agony and bloody sweat. How is this to be accounted for?
That his nature was pre-eminently sensitive we cannot doubt. Never was a heart
so susceptible to profound emotion as the heart of the High Priest who is touched
with the feeling of our infirmities, because he had been in all points tried and
tempted even as we are, though without sin. But what occasioned, in this hour,
feeling so deep, anguish so poignant? To a certain extent we can clearly
understand his sorrows, but there is a point here at which our finite
understanding and our imperfect human sympathies necessarily fail us. It is
clear that Jesus foresaw what was approaching. He was not ignorant of the
hostility of the Jewish leaders, of the treachery of Judas, of the fickleness of the
populace, of the timidity of his own disciples. And, by his Divine foresight, he
knew what the next few, awful hours were to bring him. There awaited him
bodily pain, scourging, and crucifixion; mental distress in the endurance of the
insults of his foes, the desertion of his friends, the ingratitude of the people for
whom he had labored and whom he had benefited. All this we can understand;
but what careful reader of the narrative can deem even all this a sufficient
explanation for woe unparalleled? It is, indeed, true that the sufferings and
death of Jesus were undeserved; but this fact, and his own consciousness of
innocence, might rather relieve than aggravate his distress. The fact is that, when
we read of his being amazed and appalled—"exceeding sorrowful unto death,"
and asking that if possible he might be spared the approaching experience of
shame and anguish—we are compelled to regard our Savior in the light of our
Representative and Substitute. His mind was, in a way we cannot understand,
burdened with the world's sin, and his body was about to endure death which he
did not deserve, but which he consented to pass through that he might be made
perfect through sufferings, and that he might give his life a ransom for many. In
the garden of the olive-press the Redeemer endured the unprecedented pressure
of human sin and human woe!
II. OUR SAVIOR'S PRAYER TO THE FATHER. The words of Jesus are
reported somewhat differently by the several evangelists, from which we may
learn that it is not so much the language as the meaning which is important for
us.
1. Observe the address: "Abba, Father!" It is clear that our Lord was conscious
of the personal favor and approval of him to whom he was rendering obedience,
never so acceptable as in the closing scenes of the earthly ministry.
2. The petition is very remarkable: it was that the hour might pass, and that the
cup might be taken away untasted. We are admitted here to witness the workings
of Christ's human nature. He shrank, as we should do, from pain and insult,
from slander and cruelty. Although he had forewarned his disciples that there
was a baptism for him to endure, a bitter cup for him to drink, now that the time
approached, the trial was so severe, the experience so distressing, that had he
been guided by his individual feelings he would fain have avoided a doom so
unjust and so overwhelming.
184

185. 3. The qualification, added explains what would otherwise be inexplicable. Jesus
did not absolutely ask for release; his condition was, "If it be possible," and his
conclusion, "Not my will, but thine, be done!" There was no resistance to the
Father's appointment; on the contrary, there was perfect submission. Not that
the Father took pleasure in the Son's sufferings, but the Father appointed that
the ransom should be paid, that the sacrifice should be offered.
III. OUR SAVIOR'S CLINGING TO HIS DISCIPLES. Very touching is our
Lord's attachment to the eleven; "he loved them unto the end;" he took them
with him to the garden. And very touching is his craving for human sympathy.
Although his anguish could be best endured alone, he would have the little band
not far off, and the favored three he would have close by him. If they would
watch with him one hour, the one only, the one last remaining hour of
fellowship—if they would pray for themselves, perhaps for him—it would be a
solace to his tender soul; to be assured of their sympathy, to be assured that,
even on earth, he was not alone; that there was, even now, some gratitude, some
love, some sympathizing sorrow, left on earth. Why Jesus should have gone
thrice to see whether his three nearest friends were watching with him in the
hour of his bitter woe, seems only to be explained by considering his true
humanity, his heart yearning for sympathy. Even his prayers, fervent though
they were, were interrupted for this purpose! There is a tone of reproach in his
final permission, "Sleep on now!"—now that the glimmering of the torches is
seen through the olive boughs as their bearers cross the deep ravine, now that
the step of the traitor falls upon the ear of the betrayed. A sad reminder of "the
irreparable past;" an everlasting expostulation, again and again in coming years
to ring in the ear of each slumberous, unsympathizing disciple, and rouse to
diligence, to watchfulness, to prayer.
IV. OUR SAVIOR'S RESIGNATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE FUTURE
BEFORE HIM. His bodily weakness was supported by angelic succor. His spirit
was calmed by prayer, and by the final assurance that from the cross there was
no release, except at the cost of the abandonment of his work of redemption.
From the moment that the conflict was over, and his mind was fully and finally
made up to accept the Divine appointment—from that moment his demeanor
was changed. Instead of seeking sympathy from his disciples, he spoke words of
authority and encouragement to them, in their weakness and their panic. Instead
of falling upon his knees or upon his face, in agony and tears, he went forward to
meet his betrayers. Instead of seeking release from the impending fate, he offered
himself to his foes. He put forth his hand to take the cup from which he had so
lately shrunk. He boldly met the hour which, in the prospect, had seemed almost
too awful to encounter. He had now no will but his Father's, no aim but our
salvation. Even now he saw "of the travail of his soul, and was satisfied." "For
the joy that was set before him, he endured the cross, despising the shame!" The
unity of the Savior's sacrifice is thus apparent. He was obedient unto death; and
the triumph of the spirit in Gethsemane was part of his filial and perfect
obedience. Indeed, it would seem that the price of our redemption was paid,
spiritually, in the garden; and, in the body, upon the cross!
185

186. APPLICATION.
1. This representation of our Savior's character is peculiarly fitted to awaken our
reverence, gratitude, and faith. As we trace our Savior's career of active
benevolence, our minds are constantly impressed with his unselfishness and pity,
his willingness and power to relieve the wants, heal the disorders, pardon the
sins, of men. But when we behold him in suffering and anguish, and remember
that he conseated to this experience for our sake, for our salvation, how can our
hearts remain untouched? The innocent suffers in the place, and for the benefit
of, the guilty. If we are the persons benefited, how sincere should be our
thanksgiving, how lowly our adoration, how ardent our faith, how complete our
devotion!
2. In the demeanor of our Savior in the garden there is much which we shall do
well to imitate. His patient endurance of grief and trouble encountered in the
path divinely appointed, the absence of any hatred or vindictiveness towards his
foes, his forbearance with his unsympathizing friends, and, above all, his
submissive prayer offered to the Father,—all these are an example which all his
followers should ponder and copy. Whilst we cannot suffer as he did for the
benefit of the whole human race, our patience under trouble, our perseverance in
resignation, and consecration to the will of God, are qualities which will not only
prove serviceable to ourselves, but helpful and advantageous to some at least
over whom our influence may extend.
3. Nothing is more fitted to deepen our sense of the enormity of human sin,
nothing is more fitted to bring our sinful hearts to penitence, than the
contemplation of the dread scenes of Gethsemane. Jesus was oppressed by a
burden of sin—the sin of others, which we may take as an example of the sins of
mankind, and ourselves—all of which he then bore. The coldness and callousness
of the eleven, the treachery of Judas, the cowardice of Peter, the malice of the
priests, the fickleness of the multitude, the injustice of the Roman governor, the
unspiritual and unfeeling insolence of the rulers,—all these in this awful hour
pressed heavily upon the soul of Jesus. But these were only samples of the sins of
humanity at large, of the sins of each individual in particular. He took all upon
his own great heart, and bore them, and suffered for them, and on the cross
submitted to that death which was their due penalty. In what spirit should we
contemplate these sufferings of our Redeemer? Surely, if anything is adapted to
bring us in lowly contrition before the feet of God, this scene is pre-eminently so
adapted. Not indeed in abject, hopeless, terror, but with humble repentance and
confidence. For the same scene that reminds us of our sins, reminds us of Divine
mercy, and of the Being through whose sacrifice that mercy is freely extended to
every contrite and believing suppliant. This is the language of every Christian
who is a spectator of these unparalleled woes: "He loved me, and gave himself
for me!"
4. And what more fitted to awaken within the breast of every hearer of the gospel
a conviction of the greatness and sufficiency of the salvation which is by Christ
unto all who believe? There is no extenuation of the seriousness, the almost
desperateness, of the sinner's case; for sin evidently needed, if this record be
186

187. true, a great Savior and a great salvation. The means used were not trivial to
bring sinners to a sense of their sin and need, to make it consistent with the
Divine character to pardon and accept the contrite sinner. "Ye were redeemed
… with the precious blood of Christ!" Therefore, without hesitation or
misgiving, receive Jesus as your Redeemer; "be ye reconciled to God!"
MACLAREN 32-42, “‘STRONG CRYING AND TEARS’
The three who saw Christ’s agony in Gethsemane were so little affected that they
slept. We have to beware of being so little affected that we speculate and seek to
analyse rather than to bow adoringly before that mysterious and heart-subduing
sight. Let us remember that the place is ‘holy ground.’ It was meant that we should
look on the Christ who prayed ‘with strong crying and tears,’ else the three sleepers
would not have accompanied Him so far; but it was meant that our gaze should be
reverent and from a distance, else they would have gone with Him into the shadow of
the olives.
‘Gethsemane’ means ‘an oil-press.’ It was an enclosed piece of ground, according to
Matthew and Mark; a garden, according to John. Jesus, by some means, had access
to it, and had ‘oft-times resorted thither with His disciples.’ To this familiar spot,
with its many happy associations, Jesus led the disciples, who would simply expect to
pass the night there, as many Passover visitors were accustomed to bivouac in the
open air.
The triumphant tone of spirit which animated His assuring words to His disciples, ‘I
have overcome the world,’ changed as they passed through the moonlight down to
the valley, and when they reached the garden deep gloom lay upon Him. His
agitation is pathetically and most naturally indicated by the conflict of feeling as to
companionship. He leaves the other disciples at the entrance, for He would fain be
alone in His prayer. Then, a moment after, He bids the three, who had been on the
Mount of Transfiguration and with Him at many other special times, accompany
Him into the recesses of the garden. But again need of solitude overcomes longing for
companionship, and He bids them stay where they were, while He plunges still
further into the shadow. How human it is! How well all of us, who have been down
into the depths of sorrow, know the drawing of these two opposite longings!
Scripture seldom undertakes to tell Christ’s emotions. Still seldomer does He speak
of them. But at this tremendous hour the veil is lifted by one corner, and He Himself
is fain to relieve His bursting heart by pathetic self-revelation, which is in fact an
appeal to the three for sympathy, as well as an evidence of His sharing the common
need of lightening the burdened spirit by speech. Mark’s description of Christ’s
feelings lays stress first on their beginning, and then on their nature as being
astonishment and anguish. A wave of emotion swept over Him, and was in marked
contrast with His previous demeanour.
The three had never seen their calm Master so moved. We feel that such agitation is
profoundly unlike the serenity of the rest of His life, and especially remarkable if
contrasted with the tone of John’s account of His discourse in the upper room; and,
if we are wise, we shall gaze on that picture drawn for us by Mark with reverent
gratitude, and feel that we look at something more sacred than human trembling at
the thought of death.
Our Lord’s own infinitely touching words heighten the impression of the Evangelist’s
‘My soul is exceeding sorrowful,’ or, as the word literally means, ‘ringed round with
sorrow.’ A dark orb of distress encompassed Him, and there was nowhere a break in
187

188. the gloom which shut Him in. And this is He who, but an hour before, had
bequeathed His ‘joy’ to His servants, and had bidden them ‘be of good cheer,’ since
He had ‘conquered the world.’
Dare we ask what were the elements of that all-enveloping horror of great darkness?
Reverently we may. That astonishment and distress no doubt were partly due to the
recoil of flesh from death. But if that was their sole cause, Jesus has been surpassed
in heroism, not only by many a martyr who drew his strength from Him, but by many
a rude soldier and by many a criminal. No! The waters of the baptism with which He
was baptized had other sources than that, though it poured a tributary stream into
them.
We shall not understand Gethsemane at all, nor will it touch our hearts and wills as it
is meant to do, unless, as we look, we say in adoring wonder, ‘The Lord hath made to
meet on Him the iniquity of us all.’ It was the weight of the world’s sin which He took
on Him by willing identification of Himself with men, that pressed Him to the
ground. Nothing else than the atoning character of Christ’s sufferings explains so far
as it can be explained, the agony which we are permitted to behold afar off.
How nearly that agony was fatal is taught us by His own word ‘unto death,’ A little
more, and He would have died. Can we retain reverence for Jesus as a perfect and
pattern man, in view of His paroxysm of anguish in Gethsemane, if we refuse to
accept that explanation? Truly was the place named ‘The Olive-press,’ for in it His
whole being was as if in the press, and another turn of the screw would have crushed
Him.
Darkness ringed Him round, but there was a rift in it right overhead. Prayer was His
refuge, as it must be ours. The soul that can cry, ‘Abba, Father!’ does not walk in
unbroken night. His example teaches us what our own sorrows should also teach us-
to betake ourselves to prayer when the spirit is desolate. In that wonderful prayer we
reverently note three things: there is unbroken consciousness of the Father’s love;
there is the instinctive recoil of flesh and the sensitive nature from the suffering
imposed; and there is the absolute submission of the will, which silences the
remonstrance of flesh. Whatever the weight laid on Jesus by His bearing of the sins
of the world, it did not take from Him the sense of sonship. But, on the other hand,
that sense did not take from Him the consciousness that the world’s sin lay upon
Him. In like manner His cry on the Cross mysteriously blended the sense of
communion with God and of abandonment by God. Into these depths we see but a
little way, and adoration is better than speculation.
Jesus shrank from ‘this cup,’ in which so many bitter ingredients besides death were
mingled, such as treachery, desertion, mocking, rejection, exposure to ‘the
contradiction of sinners.’ There was no failure of purpose in that recoil, for the cry for
exemption was immediately followed by complete submission to the Father’s will. No
perturbation in the lower nature ever caused His fixed resolve to waver. The needle
always pointed to the pole, however the ship might pitch and roll. A prayer in which
‘remove this from me’ is followed by that yielding ‘nevertheless’ is always heard.
Christ’s was heard, for calmness came back, and His flesh was stilled and made ready
for the sacrifice.
So He could rejoin the three, in whose sympathy and watchfulness He had trusted-
and they all were asleep! Surely that was one ingredient of bitterness in His cup. We
wonder at their insensibility; and how they must have wondered at it too, when after
years taught them what they had lost, and how faithless they had been! Think of men
who could have seen and heard that scene, which has drawn the worshipping regard
of the world ever since, missing it all because they fell asleep! They had kept awake
long enough to see Him fall on the ground and to hear His prayer, but, worn out by a
188

189. long day of emotion and sorrow, they slept.
Jesus was probably rapt in prayer for a considerable time, perhaps for a literal ‘hour.’
He was specially touched by Peter’s failure, so sadly contrasted with his confident
professions in the upper room; but no word of blame escaped Him. Rather He
warned them of swift-coming temptation, which they could only overcome by
watchfulness and prayer. It was indeed near, for the soldiers would burst in, before
many minutes had passed, polluting the moonlight with their torches and disturbing
the quiet night with their shouts. What gracious allowance for their weakness and
loving recognition of the disciples’ imperfect good lie in His words, which are at once
an excuse for their fault and an enforcement of His command to watch and pray! ‘The
flesh is weak,’ and hinders the willing spirit from doing what it wills. It was an
apology for the slumber of the three; it is a merciful statement of the condition under
which all discipleship has to be carried on. ‘He knoweth our frame.’ Therefore we all
need to watch and pray, since only by such means can weak flesh be strengthened
and strong flesh weakened, or the spirit preserved in willingness.
The words were not spoken in reference to Himself, but in a measure were true of
Him. His second withdrawal for prayer seems to witness that the victory won by the
first supplication was not permanent. Again the anguish swept over His spirit in
another foaming breaker, and again He sought solitude, and again He found
tranquillity-and again returned to find the disciples asleep. ‘They knew not what to
answer Him’ in extenuation of their renewed dereliction.
Yet a third time the struggle was renewed. And after that, He had no need to return
to the seclusion, where He had fought, and now had conclusively conquered by
prayer and submission. We too may, by the same means, win partial victories over
self, which may be interrupted by uprisings of flesh; but let us persevere. Twice
Jesus’ calm was broken by recrudescence of horror and shrinking; the third time it
came back, to abide through all the trying scenes of the passion, but for that one cry
on the Cross, ‘Why hast Thou forsaken Me?’ So it may be with us.
The last words to the three have given commentators much trouble. ‘Sleep on now,
and take your rest,’ is not so much irony as ‘spoken with a kind of permissive force,
and in tones in which merciful reproach was blended with calm resignation.’ So far as
He was concerned, there was no reason for their waking. But they had lost an
opportunity, never to return, of helping Him in His hour of deepest agony. He
needed them no more. And do not we in like manner often lose the brightest
opportunities of service by untimely slumber of soul, and is not ‘the irrevocable past’
saying to many of us, ‘Sleep on now since you can no more do what you have let slip
from your drowsy hands’? ‘It is enough’ is obscure, but probably refers to the
disciples’ sleep, and prepares for the transition to the next words, which summon
them to arise, not to help Him by watching, but to meet the traitor. They had slept
long enough, He sadly says. That which will effectually end their sleepiness is at
hand. How completely our Lord had regained His calm superiority to the horror
which had shaken Him is witnessed by that majestic ‘Let us be going.’ He will go out
to meet the traitor, and, after one flash of power, which smote the soldiers to the
ground, will yield Himself to the hands of sinners.
The Man who lay prone in anguish beneath the olive-trees comes forth in serene
tranquillity, and gives Himself up to the death for us all. His agony was endured for
us, and needs for its explanation the fact that it was so. His victory through prayer
was for us, that we too might conquer by the same weapons. His voluntary surrender
was for us, that ‘by His stripes we might be healed.’ Surely we shall not sleep, as did
these others, but, moved by His sorrows and animated by His victory, watch and pray
that we may share in the virtue of His sufferings and imitate the example of His
189

190. submission.
33 He took Peter, James and John along with
him, and he began to be deeply distressed and
troubled.
GILL, "And he taketh with him Peter, and James, and John,.... Who were
witnesses of his transfiguration on the mount, and now of his sorrows in the garden:
and began to be sore amazed; to be in great consternation and astonishment, at
the sight of all the sins of his people coming upon him; at the black storm of wrath,
that was gathering thick over him; at the sword of justice which was brandished
against him; and at the curses of the righteous law, which, like so many thunderbolts
of vengeance, were directed at him: no wonder it should be added,
and to be very heavy: both with sin and sorrow; See Gill on Mat_26:37.
HENRY, "II. Even into that retirement he took with him Peter, and James, and
John (Mar_14:33), three competent witnesses of this part of his humiliation; and
though great spirits care not how few know any thing of their agonies, he was not
ashamed that they should see. These three had boasted most of their ability and
willingness to suffer with him; Peter here, in this chapter, and James and John
(Mar_10:39); and therefore Christ takes them to stand by, and see what a struggle he
had with the bloody baptism and the bitter cup, to convince them that they knew not
what they said. It is fit that they who are most confident, should be first tried, that
they may be made sensible of their folly and weakness.
III. There he was in a tremendous agitation (Mar_14:33); He began to be sore
amazed - ekthambeisthai, a word not used in Matthew, but very significant; it
bespeaks something like that horror of great darkness, which fell upon Abraham
(Gen_15:12), or, rather, something much worse, and more frightful. The terrors of
God set themselves in array against him, and he allowed himself the actual and
intense contemplation of them. Never was sorrow like unto his at that time; never
any had such experience as he had from eternity of divine favours, and therefore
never any had, or could have, such a sense as he had of divine favours. Yet there was
not the least disorder or irregularity in this commotion of his spirits; his affections
rose not tumultuously, but under direction, and as they were called up, for he had no
corrupt nature to mix with them, as we have. If water have a sediment at the bottom,
though it may be clear while it stands still, yet, when shaken, it grows muddy; so it is
with our affections: but pure water in a clean glass, though ever so much stirred,
continues clear; and so it was with Christ. Dr. Lightfoot thinks it very probable that
the devil did now appear to our Saviour in a visible shape, in his own shape and
proper colour, to terrify and affright him, and to drive him from his hope in God
(which he aimed at in persecuting Job, a type of Christ, to make him curse God, and
die), and to deter him from the further prosecution of his undertaking; whatever
hindered him from that, he looked upon as coming from Satan, Mat_16:23. When
190

191. the devil had tempted him in the wilderness, it is said, He departed from him for a
season (Luk_4:13), intending another grapple with him, and in another way; finding
that he could not by his flatteries allure him into sin, he would try by his terrors to
affright him into it, and so make void his design.
PULPIT, "It appears that our Lord separated himself from all the disciples
except Peter and James and John, and then the bitter agony began. He began to
be greatly amazed, and sore troubled ( ἐκθαμβεῖσθαι καὶ ἀδημονεῖν). These two
Greek verbs are as adequately expressed above as seems possible. The first
implies "utter, extreme amazement;" if the second has for its root ἄδημος, "not
at home," it implies the anguish of the soul struggling to free itself from the body
under the pressure of intense mental distress. The three chosen disciples were
allowed to be witnesses of this awful anguish. They had been fortified to endure
the sight by the glories of the transfiguration. It would have been too much for
the faith of the rest. But these three witnessed it, that they might learn
themselves, and be able to teach others, that the way to glory is by suffering.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:43-52
Betrayal and arrest.
The agony and the betrayal are most closely related. Neither can be understood
apart from the other. Why did Jesus so suffer in the garden, and endure sorrow
such that there was none like it? Doubtless it was because he was anticipating the
approaching apprehension, and all the awful events which it involved. His soul
was darkened by the knowledge that the Son of man was about to be betrayed
into the hands of sinners. And how came Jesus, when the crisis arrived, to meet
his foes so fearlessly, and to bear his pain and ignominy with patience so
inimitable, so Divine? It was because he had prepared himself in solitude, by
meditation, prayer, and resolution; so that, upon the approach of his foes, his
attitude was one of meekness and of fortitude. We observe here—
I. AN EXHIBITION OF HUMAN SIN. It seems as if the iniquity of mankind
reached its height at the very time when the Savior bore it in his own body, in his
own soul. As the awful and sacred hour approached when the Good Shepherd
should lay down his life, sin appeared almost omnipotent; the Lord confessed as
much when, upon his apprehension, he said to his captors, "This is your hour,
and the power of darkness." Observe the combination of the various forms of sin
manifested on this occasion.
1. The malignity of the conspirators is almost incredible. The chief priests,
scribes, and elders had long been plotting the death of the Prophet of Nazareth.
It had all along been the case that his truthful and dignified assertion of his just
and lofty claims, and the performance of his best deeds, excited their worst
feelings. They had especially been angered by his miracles of healing and help;
both because they led the people to regard him with favor, and because they
were a rebuke to their own indifference to the people's welfare. And it was
probably the raising of Lazarus which determined them, at all hazards, to
attempt the destruction of the Holy One and Just. Their own deeds were evil,
191

192. and they hated the light. Hence their hateful and cruel conspiracy.
2. The baseness of the authorities. The Sanhedrim leagued itself with the Roman
governor. With the temple servitors and officers were conjoined the band from
Antonia. Discreditable to the Roman authorities, and disgraceful to the Jewish,
was this leaguing together for a purpose so unjustifiable. Ecclesiastical and civil
authorities concurred in reversing the true canon: they were a praise to evil-
doers, and a terror to those who did well.
3. The treachery of the betrayer. Whatever may have been the motive of Judas,
his action was traitorous and flagitious. Pretending still to be Jesus' friend, he
conspired with his enemies against him, took their money to betray him, and
even used to his disadvantage the knowledge his intimacy gave him of his
Master's habits of devotion. Unparalleled was the baseness with which the
traitor betrayed the Son of man with the kiss of the seeming friend. In suffering
all this, our Lord showed his readiness to submit for our sake to the uttermost
humiliation, to the keenest anguish of soul.
4. The cowardice apparent in the time, place, and manner of the Lord's
apprehension. His indignation with these circumstances the Lord did not
conceal. Why did not his enemies seize him in the temple, instead of in the
garden? when teaching in public, instead of when praying in private? by day,
instead of in the partial darkness of the night? Why did they come armed as
against a robber, when they knew him to be peaceable and unresisting? If all this
shows some consciousness of our Lord's majesty and authority, it certainly
reveals the depth and degradation of the iniquity which could work deeds at
once so foul and so cowardly.
5. The timidity and desertion of the disciples. Shall we call this excusable
weakness? If so, it is because we feel that we might have acted as they acted had
we been in their place. But, in truth, it was sin. They could not watch with him
when he prayed, and they could not stand by him when he was in danger and
encompassed by his foes. There is something infinitely pathetic in the simple
statement, "They all left him, and fled." Even Peter, who had protested so lately
his readiness to die with him; even John, who had so lately reclined upon Jesus'
breast; even the young man whose affectionate curiosity led him to join the sad
procession, as it passed through the still streets of Jerusalem!
II. A REVELATION OF CHRIST'S DIVINELY PERFECT CHARACTER.
Circumstances of trial prove what is in men. When the sea is smooth and the
wind is still, the unsound vessel seems as stout and as safe as that which is
seaworthy; the tempest soon makes the difference manifest. Even our sinless,
holy Lord shines out more gloriously in his adversity, when the storm breaks
upon his head.
1. We recognize in him a calm and dignified demeanor. He had been disturbed
and distressed in his solitude, and his feelings had then found vent in strong
crying and tears. But his agitation has passed away, and his spirit is untroubled.
He meets his enemies with unquailing boldness of heart and serenity of mien.
192

193. 2. We are impressed with his ready, uncomplaining submission to his fate. He
acknowledges himself to be the One whom the high priest's myrmidons are
seeking; he offers no resistance, and forbids resistance on the part of his
followers; he acts as One who knows that his hour has come. There is a marked
contrast between the action of our Lord on this and on previous occasions.
Before, he had eluded his foes, and escaped from their hands; now, he yields
himself up. His conduct is an illustration of his own word: "No one taketh my life
away from me; but I lay it down of myself."
3. We remark his compassion exercised towards one of his captors. The
impetuous Peter aims a blow at one of the attendant and armed bondsmen; but
Jesus rebukes his friend, and mercifully heals his foe. How like himself, and how
unlike all beside!
4. We admire his willingness to fulfill the Scriptures and the will of God. It was a
moment when, in the case of an ordinary man, self would have asserted its
claims, and the purposes of Heaven would probably have been lost sight of. It
was not so with Jesus. The word of the Father, the will of the Father,—these
were pre-eminent in their authority.
III. A STEP TOWARDS CHRIST'S SACRIFICE AND MAN'S REDEMPTION.
If the whole of our Savior's career was part of his mediatorial work, the closing
stages were emphatically the sacrifice. And it was in Gethsemane that the last
scene opened; now was the beginning of the end.
1. We discern here conspicuous self-devotion. Jesus appears as One baring his
breast for the blow. From this moment he has to suffer, and of this he is evidently
clearly conscious, and for this prepared.
2. His action is evidently in obedience to the Father; he treads the path the
Father marks out, and drinks the cup the Father presents to his lips.
3. He already stands in our place. The innocent and holy One submits to be
treated as a guilty offender; the most benevolent and selfdenying of all beings
allows himself to share the contumely and the doom of the criminal. He is
"numbered with the transgressors." Unmerited sufferings and insults are
endured for our sake by the very Son of God.
4. Titus he prepares for death. "He is led as a lamb to the slaughter." He is
bound as a victim, to be laid upon the altar. His sensitive nature tastes, in
anticipation, the agonies of the cross. Already he is taking to himself, that he may
bear it and bear it away, the sin of the world.
APPLICATION How deserving is such a Savior as this narrative portrays of the
faith of every sinner, and of the love and devotion of every believer! His
forbearance, patience, and compassion show the tenderness of his heart, and the
firmness of his purpose to save. This may well justify the confidence of every
poor, sinful, helpless heart. His love, his sacrifice, demand our grateful trust.
193

194. And to such a Savior what adequate offering can be presented by those who
know his power and feel his grace?
34 “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the
point of death,” he said to them. “Stay here and
keep watch.”
GILL, "And saith unto them,.... The above three disciples;
my soul is exceeding sorrowful unto death: he was surrounded with sorrow,
and it pressed him so hard, and close, on every side, that he was just ready to die with
it:
tarry ye here, and watch: in Matthew it is added, "with me": See Gill on Mat_
26:38.
HENRY, "IV. He made a sad complaint of this agitation. He said, My soul is
exceeding sorrowful. 1. He was made sin for us, and therefore was thus sorrowful;
he fully knew the malignity of the sins he was to suffer for; and having the highest
degree of love to God, who was offended by them, and of love to man, who was
damaged and endangered by them, now that those were set in order before him, no
marvel that his soul was exceeding sorrowful. Now was he made to serve with our
sins, and was thus wearied with our iniquities. 2. He was made a curse for us; the
curses of the law were transferred to him as our surety and representative, not as
originally bound with us, but a bail to the action. And when his soul was thus
exceeding sorrowful, he did, as it were, yield to them, and lie down under the load,
until by his death he had satisfied for sin, and so for ever abolished the curse. He now
tasted death (as he is said to do, Heb_2:9), which is not an extenuating expression,
as if he did but taste it; no, he drank up even the dregs of the cup; but it is rather
aggravating; it did not go down by wholesale, but he tasted all the bitterness of it.
This was that fear which the apostle speaks of (Heb_5:7), a natural fear of pain and
death, which it is natural to human nature to startle at.
Now the consideration of Christ's sufferings in his soul, and his sorrows for us,
should be of use to us,
(1.) To embitter our sins. Can we ever entertain a favourable or so much as a slight
thought of sin, when we see what impression sin (though but imputed) made upon
the Lord Jesus? Shall that sit light upon our souls, which sat so heavy upon his? Was
Christ in such an agony for our sins, and shall we never be in an agony about them?
How should we look upon him whom we have pressed, whom we have pierced, and
mourn, and be in bitterness! It becomes us to be exceeding sorrowful for sin,
because Christ was so, and never to make a mock at it. If Christ thus suffered for sin,
let us arm ourselves with the same mind.
(2.) To sweeten our sorrows; if our souls be at any time exceeding sorrowful,
194

195. through the afflictions of this present time, let us remember that our Master was so
before us, and the disciple is not greater than his Lord. Why should we affect to
drive away sorrow, when Christ for our sakes courted it, and submitted to it, and
thereby not only took out the sting of it, and made it tolerable, but put virtue into it,
and made it profitable (for by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made
better), nay, and put sweetness into it, and made it comfortable. Blessed Paul was
sorrowful, and yet always rejoicing. If we be exceeding sorrowful, it is but unto
death; that will be the period of all our sorrows, if Christ be ours; when the eyes are
closed, all tears are wiped away from them.
V. He ordered his disciples to keep with him, not because he needed their help, but
because he would have them to look upon him and receive instruction; he said to
them, Tarry ye here and watch. He had said to the other disciples nothing but, Sit ye
here (Mar_14:32); but these three he bids to tarry and watch, as expecting more
from them than from the rest.
COFFMAN, "Jesus did not meet death with the joyful attitude of some of the
martyrs, nor in the gay serenity of Socrates, but with overwhelming sorrow,
convulsive grief, and with the sweat of blood. Why? (1) Satan was particularly
active in the assault upon the Prince of Life (John 12:31), every demonic device
in the arsenal of the evil one being employed against the Saviour. (2) Perhaps
even more important, there was the burden of human transgression that he bore.
God made him to be sin upon our behalf (2 Corinthians 5:21). He bore our sins
in his body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24). (3) The Saviour's supernatural knowledge
of the fate evil men were bringing upon themselves was complete; and the
knowledge that the chosen people, through their leaders, were bringing upon
that beloved people the full wrath of Almighty God was a fact of inexpressible
horror to Jesus who "had compassion" on the multitudes. Martin Luther said,
"No one ever feared death so much as this man!"[3] It was what Jesus knew of
death and its cause and consequences that released that awful sorrow within his
soul. (4) Before Christ, death involved a separation from God, the most awful
part of it for Jesus. In the case of the martyrs, such a separation was no longer a
part of death; and as for Socrates, he had none of the knowledge that broke the
Saviour's heart that awful night. (5) The temporary triumph of Satan in the act
of "bruising" the "Seed of Woman" was also a dreadful thing for Christ. In the
wilderness Jesus had met and overcome Satan; but now, Satan had returned
with the full complement of his human servants and in his full majesty as the
prince of this world. As Barth put it, "The bill was being presented!"[4] In
Gethsemane, the prospect of seeing Satan victorious (from the worldly point of
view) was utterly repugnant to the Son of God. Strong cryings with tears marked
our Saviour's human response to such a repulsive situation (Hebrews 5:7).
[3] C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel according to St. Mark (Cambridge: The
University Press, 1966), p. 431.
[4] Ibid., p. 432.
PULPIT, "None but he who bore those sorrows can know what they were. It was
not the apprehension of the bodily torments and the bitter death that awaited
him, all foreknown by him. It was the inconceivable agony of the weight of the
195

196. sins of men. The Lord was thus laying "upon him the iniquity of us all." This,
and this alone, can explain it. My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death.
Every word carries the emphasis of an overwhelming grief. It was then that "the
deep waters came in," even unto his soul. "What," says Cornelius a Lapide,
"must have been the voice, the countenance, the expression, as he uttered those
awful words!"
35 Going a little farther, he fell to the ground
and prayed that if possible the hour might pass
from him.
GILL, "And he went forward a little,.... About a stone's cast, Luk_22:41,
and fell on the ground, and prayed; he fell on his face to the ground, which was
a praying posture. One of the Jewish canons concerning it, is this (a):
"worshipping, how is it done? after a man has lifted up his head; he bows it five
times, he sits upon the ground, and "falls upon his face", ‫,ארצה‬ "to the ground", and
supplicates with whatsoever supplication he pleases: worshipping, or bowing, is the
stretching out of hands and feet, until a man is found cast upon his face to the
ground.''
See Gill on Mat_26:39. The supplication Christ made in this posture was,
that, it were possible, the hour might pass from him; the time fixed and
agreed upon for his sufferings and death; that is, that it might pass without his
enduring them, if there was any possibility of excusing him, and of his people's being
saved without them; See Gill on Mat_26:39.
HENRY, "VI. He addressed himself to God by prayer (Mar_14:35); He fell on the
ground, and prayed. It was but a little before this, that in prayer he lifted up his eyes
(Joh_17:1); but here, being in an agony, he fell upon his face, accommodating
himself to his present humiliation, and teaching us thus to abase ourselves before
God; it becomes us to be low, when we come into the presence of the Most High. 1.
As Man, he deprecated his sufferings, that, if it were possible, the hour might pass
from him (Mar_14:35); “This short, but sharp affliction, that which I am now this
hour to enter upon, let man's salvation be, if possible, accomplished without it.” We
have his very words (Mar_14:36), Abba, Father. The Syriac word is here retained,
which Christ used, and which signifies Father, to intimate what an emphasis our
Lord Jesus, in his sorrows, laid upon it, and would have us to lay. It is with an eye to
this, that St. Paul retains this word, putting it into the mouths of all that have the
Spirit of adoption; they are taught to cry, Abba, Father, Rom_8:15; Gal_4:6. Father,
all things are possible to thee. Note, Even that which we cannot expect to be done for
us, we ought yet to believe that God is able to do: and when we submit to his will, and
refer ourselves to his wisdom and mercy, it must be with a believing acknowledgment
196

197. of his power, that all things are possible to him. 2. As Mediator, he acquiesced in the
will of God concerning them; “Nevertheless, not what I will, but what thou wilt. I
know the matter is settled, and cannot be altered, I must suffer and die, and I bid it
welcome.”
CONSTABLE, "Verse 35-36
The Jews did not address God with "Abba" (lit. Daddy) because they considered
such intimacy disrespectful. Jesus used the word because He as the Son of God
was on intimate terms with the Father (cf. Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6). Jesus
evidently prayed for the better part of an hour (Mark 14:37) though Mark only
recorded the essence of His request (cf. Hebrews 5:7). In the ancient world
almost everyone prayed aloud, and this is how Jesus probably prayed. [Note:
Lane, p. 515.] His submission to His Father here recalls Genesis 22:7 where Isaac
addressed his father Abraham in a very similar situation quite near this place.
[Note: See Joseph A. Grassi, "Abba, Father (Mark 14:36): Another Approach,"
Journal of the American Academy of Religion 50:3 (September 1982):449-58.]
Jesus expressed faith in God with whom all things consistent with His nature are
possible (cf. Mark 9:23). The unclear issue to the God-man, who voluntarily
limited His knowledge in the Incarnation, was not God's ability but God's will.
"It is this complete dependence on God for his own salvation which is the source
of Jesus' courage to renounce himself, be least, and lose his life." [Note: Rhoads
and Michie, p. 108.]
Jesus referred to the Cross as the "hour" and the "cup." The first expression
includes everything involved in the Cross (cf. John 7:30; John 8:20; et al.). The
"cup" figuratively particularized God's judgment in the Cross (cf. Mark
10:38-39; Mark 14:29). Jesus' human will was distinct from the Father's will but
never opposed to it.
COFFMAN,"Jesus did not meet death with the joyful attitude of some of the
martyrs, nor in the gay serenity of Socrates, but with overwhelming sorrow,
convulsive grief, and with the sweat of blood. Why? (1) Satan was particularly
active in the assault upon the Prince of Life (John 12:31), every demonic device
in the arsenal of the evil one being employed against the Saviour. (2) Perhaps
even more important, there was the burden of human transgression that he bore.
God made him to be sin upon our behalf (2 Corinthians 5:21). He bore our sins
in his body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24). (3) The Saviour's supernatural knowledge
of the fate evil men were bringing upon themselves was complete; and the
knowledge that the chosen people, through their leaders, were bringing upon
that beloved people the full wrath of Almighty God was a fact of inexpressible
horror to Jesus who "had compassion" on the multitudes. Martin Luther said,
"No one ever feared death so much as this man!"[3] It was what Jesus knew of
death and its cause and consequences that released that awful sorrow within his
soul. (4) Before Christ, death involved a separation from God, the most awful
part of it for Jesus. In the case of the martyrs, such a separation was no longer a
part of death; and as for Socrates, he had none of the knowledge that broke the
Saviour's heart that awful night. (5) The temporary triumph of Satan in the act
of "bruising" the "Seed of Woman" was also a dreadful thing for Christ. In the
197

198. wilderness Jesus had met and overcome Satan; but now, Satan had returned
with the full complement of his human servants and in his full majesty as the
prince of this world. As Barth put it, "The bill was being presented!"[4] In
Gethsemane, the prospect of seeing Satan victorious (from the worldly point of
view) was utterly repugnant to the Son of God. Strong cryings with tears marked
our Saviour's human response to such a repulsive situation (Hebrews 5:7).
[3] C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel according to St. Mark (Cambridge: The
University Press, 1966), p. 431.
[4] Ibid., p. 432.
36 “Abba,[f] Father,” he said, “everything is
possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not
what I will, but what you will.”
BARNES, "ᅒββα Abba This word denotes “father.” It is a Syriac word, and is used
by the Saviour as a word denoting filial affection and tenderness. Compare Rom_
8:15.
CLARKE, "Abba, Father - This Syriac word, which intimates filial affection and
respect, and parental tenderness, seems to have been used by our blessed Lord
merely considered as man, to show his complete submission to his Father’s will, and
the tender affection which he was conscious his Father had for him, Abba, Syriac, is
here joined to ᆇ πατηρ, Greek, both signifying father; so St. Paul, Rom_8:15; Gal_4:6.
The reason is, that from the time in which the Jews became conversant with the
Greek language, by means of the Septuagint version and their commerce with the
Roman and Greek provinces, they often intermingled Greek and Roman words with
their own language. There is the fullest evidence of this fact in the earliest writings of
the Jews; and they often add a word of the same meaning in Greek to their own term;
such as ‫קירי‬ ‫,מרי‬ Mori, κυριε my Lord, Lord; ‫שער‬ ‫,פילי‬ pili, πυλη, shuar, gate, gate: and
above, ‫,אבא‬ πατηρ, father, father: see several examples in Schoettgen. The words ‫אבי‬
and ‫אבא‬ appear to have been differently used among the Hebrews; the first Abbi, was
a term of civil respect; the second, Abba, a term of filial affection. Hence, Abba, Abbi,
as in the Syriac version in this place, may be considered as expressing, My Lord, my
Father. And in this sense St. Paul is to be understood in the places referred to above.
See Lightfoot.
GILL, "And he said, Abba, Father,.... In the original text, the former of these is a
Syriac word, and the latter a Greek one, explanative of the former, as in Rom_8:15
198

199. and Gal_4:6 or the repetition is made, to express the vehemency of his affection, and
his strong confidence in God, as his Father, amidst his distress, as the Syriac version
renders it, ‫אבי‬ ‫,אבא‬ "Abba, my Father": or "my Father, my Father"; and so the
Ethiopic version:
all things are possible unto thee; so Philo the Jew (b), taking notice of Isaac's
question about the burnt offering, and Abraham's answer to it, represents the latter
as adding, in confirmation of it,
"all things are possible to God, and which are both difficult and impossible to be
done by men;''
suggesting, that God could easily provide a lamb for a sacrifice; and Christ here
intimates, that every thing consistent with his perfections, counsels, and covenant,
were possible to be done by him; and how far what he prays for, was agreeable to
these, he submits to him, and to his sovereign will:
take away this cup from me; nevertheless, not what I will, but what thou
wilt: See Gill on Mat_26:39.
HENRY, "We have his very words (Mar_14:36), Abba, Father. The Syriac word is
here retained, which Christ used, and which signifies Father, to intimate what an
emphasis our Lord Jesus, in his sorrows, laid upon it, and would have us to lay. It is
with an eye to this, that St. Paul retains this word, putting it into the mouths of all
that have the Spirit of adoption; they are taught to cry, Abba, Father, Rom_8:15;
Gal_4:6. Father, all things are possible to thee. Note, Even that which we cannot
expect to be done for us, we ought yet to believe that God is able to do: and when we
submit to his will, and refer ourselves to his wisdom and mercy, it must be with a
believing acknowledgment of his power, that all things are possible to him. 2. As
Mediator, he acquiesced in the will of God concerning them; “Nevertheless, not what
I will, but what thou wilt. I know the matter is settled, and cannot be altered, I must
suffer and die, and I bid it welcome.”
COFFMAN, "Of course, God could have removed the cup; but to have done so
would have enthroned Satan as the Lord of man, and the destruction of all men
would have resulted at once. Reading the character of Satan in both the Old
Testament and the New Testament, one is compelled to see the destruction of
God's human creation as a prime objective of Satan, reaching all the way back to
Eden; and, if Christ's redemptive death had been aborted, absolutely nothing
would have stood in the way of Satan's total achievement of his goal. See my
Commentary on Hebrews, Hebrews 2:14.
Howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt ... At such overwhelming cost to
himself, the Lord consented to the Father's will, despite the agony within himself.
Here, in the garden, the human nature of our Lord was, for a time, in the
ascendancy; and the final put-down of the flesh was achieved at the price of the
agony detailed in the Gospels.
PULPIT, "And he said, Abba, Father. Some commentators suppose that our
Lord only used the Hebrew or Aramaic word "Abba," and that St. Mark adds
the Greek and Latin synonym ( πατὴρ) for the benefit of those to whom he was
199

200. writing. But it is far more natural to conclude that St. Mark is here taking his
narrative from an eye and ear witness, St. Peter; and that both the words were
uttered by him; so that he thus, in his agony, cried to God in the name of the
whole human family, the Jew first, and also the Gentile. We can quite
understand why St. Matthew, writing to Jews, gives only the Hebrew word. All
things are possible unto thee. Speaking absolutely, with God nothing is
impossible. But the Deity is himself bound by his own laws; and hence this was
impossible, consistently with his purposes of mercy for the redemption of the
world. The Lord himself knew this. Therefore he does not ask for anything
contrary to the will of his Father. But it was the natural craving of his humanity,
which, subject to the supreme will of God, desired to be delivered from this
terrible load. Remove this cup from me. The "cup," both in Holy Scripture and
in profane writers, is taken to signify that lot or portion, whether good or evil,
which is appointed for us by God. Hence St. John is frequently represented as
holding a cup. Howbeit, not what I will, but what thou wilt. Our Lord has no
sooner offered his conditional prayer than he subordinates it to the will of God.
St. Luke (Luke 22:42) here says, "Nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done."
Hence it appears that there was not, as the Monothelites taught, one will, partly
human and partly Divine, in Christ; but there were two distinct wills, one human
and the other Divine, both residing in the one Christ; and it was by the
subjecting of his human will to the Divine that he wrought out our redemption.
GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, "The Prayer in Gethsemane
And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; remove this cup
from me: howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt.—Mar_14:36.
At the close of his account of the Temptation, St. Luke tells us that then the devil
left our Lord for a season. Doubtless there was no time throughout His life—
which indeed was one victory over evil—in which that great adversary left Him
wholly unassailed; but the words lead us to look for some special manifestation
of his malice,—some sequel to his first desperate attempt,—some last struggle
with his Conqueror. Nor is the expectation vain. The Agony in the garden is in
many respects the natural correlative to the Temptation. In this we see Christ’s
human will proved to be in perfect harmony with the righteous will of God, just
as in that His sense and soul and spirit were found subjected to the higher laws
of life and devotion and providence. The points of similarity between them are
numerous and striking. The Temptation occurred directly after the public
recognition of our Lord’s Messiahship at His Baptism: the Agony was separated
only by a few days from His triumphal entry into the Holy City. The Temptation
preceded the active work of our Lord’s prophetic ministry: the Agony ushered in
the final scenes of His priestly offering. The Temptation was endured in the
savage wastes of the wilderness: the Agony in the silent shades of the night.
Thrice under various pleas did Satan dare to approach the Saviour: thrice now
does the Saviour approach His Father with a prayer of unutterable depth. When
the Temptation was over, angels came and ministered to Him who had met Satan
face to face: during the Agony an angel was seen strengthening Him who fought
with death, knowing all its terrors. But there are also differences between the
two events which give to each their peculiar meaning and importance for us,
200

201. though they are thus intimately connected. At the first our Lord was led up by
the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted: at the last He retired into the garden
to seek the presence of God. At the first He went alone to meet man’s enemy: at
the last He takes with Him three loved disciples to watch and pray while He
approaches His Father. At the first Satan lures Him to gratify each element of
His nature: at the last he endeavours to oppress Him by fear. At the first our
Lord repels the Tempter with the language of invincible majesty: at the last He
seems to sink under a burden—like the cross which He soon carried—too heavy
for Him to bear.
The prayer contains:—
I. His Assurance of the Father’s Ability
II. His Petition
III. His Acceptance of the Father’s Will
It is introduced by the invocation, “Abba, Father”; and it leads to a
consideration of Christ in Prayer.
The Invocation
“Abba, Father.”
1. The combination, “Abba, Father,” occurs three times in the New Testament,
with a meaning which is the same every time but is not fully understood until the
three occasions are studied separately and then brought together. The three
occasions are these: (1) By Jesus in Gethsemane. The words are: “And he said,
Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; remove this cup from me:
howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt” (Mar_14:36). (2) By St. Paul, in
writing to the Galatians. The words are: “But when the fulness of the time came,
God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, that he might
redeem them which were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of
sons. And because ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our
hearts, crying, Abba, Father” (Gal_4:4-6). (3) By St. Paul, to the Romans. The
words are: “For ye received not the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but ye
received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father. The Spirit himself
beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God: and if children, then
heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him,
that we may be also glorified with him” (Rom_8:15-17).
Take the thoughts in order—
(1) Here are all the persons concerned in redemption: (a) the Father, to whom
the cry is made; (b) the Son, who makes the cry for Himself in Gethsemane; (c)
the Spirit of the Son, who makes it in the heart of the other sons; (d) the sons
themselves, who, under the power of the Spirit, cry, “Abba, Father.”
201

202. (2) The cry is the cry of a son to a father. That in every case is the whole point
and meaning of it. In one case it is the cry of the Only-begotten Son; in the other
cases it is the cry of the adopted sons. But it is always the cry of a son who has
the heart of a son. An adopted son might not have the heart of a son. But in each
case here the Father says, “My beloved son”; and the son responds, crying,
“Abba, Father.”
(3) The true heart of a son, whereby we cry, “Abba, Father,” is due to the gift of
the Spirit. Look at St. Paul’s argument to the Galatians. There he states two
things: first, that when the fulness of time came, God sent forth His Son into the
world; second, that because we are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into
our hearts.1 [Note: Expository Times, xx. 358.]
2. Our Lord’s appeal to God as “Father” was evidence that He was not, even
then, forsaken in His humanity. He experienced the deep depression, the
spiritual eclipse, the midnight darkness, under which we may speak as if utterly
desolate. But a, feeling of forsakenness is no proof of the reality. As the sun is not
altered when eclipsed, so God was as near in Gethsemane as on the Mount of
Transfiguration. The Sufferer expressed this confidence when calling on Him as
“Father.” God has forsaken no one who utters this cry. The appeal is the
response to His own call. If as a child I say, “My Father,” He as Father has
already said, “My child.” Mourning after an absent God is an evidence of love as
strong as rejoicing in a present one.
Speak to me, my God;
And let me know the living Father cares
For me, even me; for this one of His choice.
Hast Thou no word for me? I am Thy thought.
God, let Thy mighty heart beat into mine,
And let mine answer as a pulse to Thine.
See, I am low; yea, very low; but Thou
Art high, and Thou canst lift me up to Thee.
I am a child, a fool before Thee, God;
But Thou hast made my weakness as my strength.
I am an emptiness for Thee to fill;
My soul, a cavern for Thy sea.
“Thou makest me long,” I said, “therefore wilt give;
202

203. My longing is Thy promise, O my God.”1 [Note: George Macdonald.]
I
His Assurance of the Father’s Ability
“All things are possible unto thee.”
The words are without reservation and they must be accepted unreservedly. All
things are possible to God always. There is no question of His power under any
circumstances. The only question is as to His will. “All things are possible unto
thee.”
It was so with our Lord on earth. “If thou wilt,” said the leper, “thou canst make
me clean.” His answer was, “I will.” Whereupon the leprosy departed from the
man.
This is a most comfortable doctrine. There is nothing impossible with God. We
never have to do with a baffled, helpless God. He is always able. And so, as the
only doubt we can ever have about Him is His willingness, we know that
whatever we do not receive is something that would not be good for us to receive.
For we know that His will is to do us good. We know that He will never withhold
any good thing from them that love Him.
The cup which was put into the hands of our Lord in Gethsemane was so bitter
that if He had not known absolutely that all things are possible to God, He would
have thought that the Father could not help offering it. And that is actually how
we look upon it. There was no other way, we say. We limit God’s resources. We
curtail God’s power. We may say that there was no better way; for that is self-
evident. He took this way of redeeming us because it was the best way—the way
of love. But if it were not that His will always is for the best—the best for us and
the best for our Saviour—who can tell that He would not have chosen another
way than this strange way of agony and bitter tears?
It was the best way for our Saviour. When He was able to say, “Not my will but
thine,” He entered into rest. He despised the shame. And it is the best way for us.
“Father, if it be possible,” we say. But let us never, never end with that. For it is
possible if it is His will. Let us always add—“Nevertheless, not my will but thine
be done.”
II
His Petition
“Remove this cup from me.”
What was the Cup? In considering this question, says E. L. Hull, we have to take
account of two things at the outset:
203

204. (1) On the one hand, we must never forget that the suffering of Christ is a
mystery too profound for us ever fully to understand. The very fact that the
Divine One could suffer is, in itself, beyond our comprehension. The fact that
Christ’s sufferings were vicarious, invests them with still deeper darkness. That
in Christ the Divine was manifested in a human form, and was thus connected
with the human, is the source of the profoundest mystery in His sufferings. We
know that in man the soul and body mysteriously affect each other; that the
agony of the spirit will, by some inexplicable method, shatter the material frame;
but what effect the manifestation of Divinity had on a frail human body we can
never understand. Thus it must not be forgotten that the sufferings of Christ as
the Divine Man are veiled in impenetrable darkness, and form a subject which
must be approached with deepest awe. The man who boldly speculates on this
has lost all reverence, while he who stands before it in reverential love will be
able partly to comprehend its mystery.
(2) The second point is, that while the sufferings of Christ are awfully
mysterious, we may obtain some dim insight into their character and source by
considering that, though Divine, Christ was also perfectly human—subject to all
the sinless laws of our nature. We are spirits in human forms; we know how the
spiritual can suffer in the material, and have thus one requisite for forming a
feeble conception of the source of the Saviour’s sufferings.
Luther was once questioned at table concerning the “bloody sweat” and the
other deep spiritual sufferings which Christ endured in the Garden. Then he
said: “No man can know or conceive what that anguish must have been. If any
man began even to experience such suffering, he must die. You know many do
die of sickness of heart! for heart-anguish is indeed death. If a man could feel
such anguish and distress as Christ felt, it would be impossible for him to endure
it, and for his soul to remain in his body. Soul and body would part. To Christ
alone was this agony possible, and it wrung from Him ‘sweat which was as great
drops of blood.’ ”1 [Note: Watchwords from Luther, 17.]
1. Was the Cup the physical pain of His sufferings? He endured physical anguish
to a degree inconceivable by us; for if it be true that the more sensitive the spirit
the more it weakens the bodily frame—that intense and protracted thought
diminishes its vigour—that mental labours waste its energy and render it
susceptible of the keenest suffering, then we may well suppose that Christ in the
agony of the garden and the cross endured physical suffering to an inconceivable
degree. But apart from the frequent occasions on which He showed that His
spirit was troubled, we may perhaps perceive that bodily suffering was not the
chief source of His sorrow, from one fact, namely, that physical suffering is
endurable, and by itself would not have overwhelmed Him. Man can bear bodily
anguish to almost any degree. Granting the consciousness of rectitude, you can
devise no pain which cannot be borne by some men.
I have been struck lately, in reading works by some writers who belong to the
Romish Church, with the marvellous love which they have towards the Lord
Jesus Christ. I did think, at one time, that it could not be possible for any to be
204

205. saved in that Church; but, often, after I have risen from reading the books of
these holy men, and have felt myself to be quite a dwarf by their side, I have said,
“Yes, despite their errors, these men must have been taught of the Holy Spirit.
Notwithstanding all the evils of which they have drunk so deeply, I am quite
certain that they must have had fellowship with Jesus, or else they could not have
written as they did.” Such writers are few and far between; but there is a
remnant according to the election of grace even in the midst of that apostate
Church. Looking at a book by one of them the other day, I met with this
remarkable expression, “Shall that body, which has a thorn-crowned Head, have
delicate, pain-fearing members? God forbid!” That remark went straight to my
heart at once.1 [Note: C. H. Spurgeon.]
2. Was the Cup the fear of Death? We cannot conceive that the overwhelming
sorrow of Jesus arose from the prospect of His approaching dissolution. For the
suffering of men through fear of death may be ascribed to two causes,—either
the sense of sin, or a doubt regarding the nature of the future life. We can well
conceive how a man who has a half dread lest death may be the extinction of
being, or who knows not whether futurity will bring him blessedness or woe,
should be overcome with a strange horror of dying. To such a man the
uncertainty is terrible, as he feels death may be but the escape from ills that are
bearable to ills that may be infinite. But we cannot suppose that anything like
doubt or a fear of the change of death for one moment overshadowed Jesus
Christ. For, take one illustration out of many, and compare the language of
Christ with that of the apostle Paul in prospect of dying, and we shall perceive
that dread of the mere change of death could not have affected Jesus. Paul on the
very threshold of martyrdom wrote, “I am ready to be offered.”
Celsus and Julian the Apostate contrasted Jesus, sorrowing and trembling in the
garden, with Socrates, the hero of the poison cup, and with other heroes of
antiquity, greatly, of course, to the disadvantage of the former. “Why, then,” said
Celsus, scornfully alluding to Jesus’ conflict in the garden, “does He supplicate
help, and bewail Himself and pray for escape from the fear of death, expressing
Himself in terms like these, ‘O Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from
me’?” The Emperor Julian, quoted by Theodore of Mopsuestia, uses, if possible,
still more scornful language: “Jesus presents such petitions as a wretched mortal
would offer when unable to bear a calamity with serenity, and although Divine,
He is strengthened by an angel.” To these heathen philosophers Jesus, trembling
and agonised in Gethsemane, seemed to come far short of the great men of classic
antiquity.1 [Note: A. B. Cameron.]
Whence did the martyrs draw their fortitude? Where did they find their strength
to meet death so bravely? Why could they look the great enemy in the face
without flinching, even when he wore his grimmest aspect? They were “strong in
the Lord, and in the power of his might.” His example was before them, His
spirit within them, His face above them. They saw Him standing at the right
hand of God, the Victor in His glory. They knew Him as the conqueror of death
and the great ravisher of the power of the grave. They passed into the valley
treading in the footprints He had left; they looked up through its darkness at
their Leader on the mountain-top. “The Breaker had gone up before them,”
205

206. leaving the gates open for them to pass through.2 [Note: G. A. Sowter.]
Thus every where we find our suffering God,
And where He trod
May set our steps: the Cross on Calvary
Uplifted high
Beams on the martyr host, a beacon light
In open fight.
To the still wrestlings of the lonely heart
He doth impart
The virtue of His midnight agony,
When none was nigh,
Save God and one good angel, to assuage
The tempest’s rage.
Mortal! if life smile on thee, and thou find
All to thy mind,
Think, who did once from Heaven to Hell descend
Thee to befriend;
So shalt Thou dare forego, at His dear call,
Thy best, thine all.
“O Father! not my will, but Thine be done”—
So spake the Son.
Be this our charm, mellowing earth’s ruder noise
206

207. Of griefs and joys;
That we may cling for ever to Thy breast
In perfect rest!1 [Note: J. Keble, The Christian Year, 85.]
3. There are several ingredients in the Cup. They may not be all equally evident,
and when we have considered them all we may still be far from the bottom of this
mystery of mysteries. But it is helpful to consider them, if it is done reverently
and self-reproachfully.
(1) The Cup was the necessity of coming into closest relations with sinners, the
exceeding guilt of whose sin He alone was able to understand. Like the dwellers
in a city slum, they were unaware of the foul air they were breathing, they were
ignorant of the uncleanness of their lives. He came from the purity and holiness
of God’s throne. How could He breathe in this atmosphere? How could He touch
these defiled garments? Yet He must come into the very midst of it. His
sympathy for the sinner is not less than His loathing for the sin.
We know that the sympathy which a human spirit has with man is in proportion
to the magnitude of that spirit’s powers, and the depth of its emotional nature. It
is impossible for a human soul to sympathise with all humanity, but the men of
greatest genius and profoundest feeling have the strongest sympathy with the
race. Men of feebler and narrower natures care but little for those beyond the
circle of their own friends, while the heart of the patriot beats in sympathy with
the sorrows of a nation and measures the wrongs of an age. Christ’s sympathy as
the Divine Son of Man was wide as the world. On all who lived then, on the men
of the past, on the generations of the future, He looked. For all He felt. The pity
of the Infinite One throbbed in His heart. To His ear the great cry of the world
was audible, and to His eye all the woes of humanity were clear. Rise a step
higher, and consider that Jesus saw the deep connection between suffering and
sin—saw men being driven like slaves in the chains that connect the sin with the
suffering, and at the same time blinded by their own evil. He saw in sorrow more
than sorrow. Every tear of the weeping world and every death that broke the fair
companionships of earth, touched His sympathy, not simply by their agony, but
because they were the fruits of sin. Here we find the meaning of the sighing and
sadness with which He looked on suffering, for, while He denounced the narrow
notion that each man’s suffering springs from his own sin, yet suffering and
death were to Him the signs of man’s universal wandering from God. Rise one
step higher—a mighty step, yet one the extent of which we may faintly
apprehend. Christ knew the power of sin just because He was free from it. He
entered into the very awfulness of transgression because of His perfect sympathy
with man. Does this seem perplexing? Do we not know that the purest and most
compassionate men ever have the keenest perception of the sins of their brethren,
and feel them like a burden on their own hearts? Must not Christ, the Perfect
One, have felt the evil of the world’s sin, as it pressed against His soul, most
profoundly because He was sinless?1 [Note: E. L. Hull.]
207

208. (2) This Cup of suffering was embittered by the behaviour of those for whom He
was suffering. As the wretched victims of debauchery will sometimes refuse the
sympathy and help of those who seek to restore them to a better life, so Christ
was despised and rejected by those whom He desired to redeem. The Gentiles
crucified Him; the rulers of His people condemned Him to death; His disciples
forsook Him and fled; one of them betrayed Him. He that ate bread with Him
lifted up his heel against Him.
This is a grief which strikes deeply and keenly into the soul, in proportion to its
own elevation and purity. Such souls care not for the opposition and for the
obloquy of the stranger, or the worldly, or of those from whom nothing better
can be expected. But the real keen and piercing grief of noble minds is when they
feel that the familiar friend in whom they trusted has turned against them, that
the leader and companion on whom they leaned, as on a part of themselves, has
given way. This is, indeed, agony. Of all the dreadful experiences of human life is
not this one of the darkest, the moment when the truth may have first flashed
upon us that some steadfast character on whom we relied has broken in our
hand; that in some fine spirit whom we deeply admired has been disclosed a
yawning cavern of sin and wickedness? Such was His feeling when He saw that
Judas could no more be trusted; when He saw that Peter and James and John,
instead of watching round Him, had sunk into a deep slumber—“What, could ye
not watch with me one hour?”
(3) This want of understanding of even His own disciples drove Him into a
solitude that at such a time and to such a nature must have been very hard to
bear. Notice the words, “He went a little further.” Do you not already feel the
awful loneliness conveyed by these words: the sense of separation, the sense of
solitude? Jesus is approaching the solemn climax of His life, and as He draws
near to it the solitude deepens. He has long since left the home of His mother and
His brethren, and will see it no more. He has but recently left the sacred home of
Bethany, that haven of peace where He has often rested, and where the hands of
Mary have anointed Him against His burial. He has even now left the chamber of
the Paschal supper, and the seal of finality has been put upon His earthly
ministry in the drinking of the cup when He said to His disciples, “Remember
me.” He has just left eight of His disciples at the outer gate of Gethsemane,
saying, “Stay ye here while I go and pray yonder.” A few moments later, and He
parts from Peter and James and John, saying, “Tarry ye here and watch with
me,” and He went a little further. It was but a stone’s throw, says St. Luke, and
yet an infinite gulf now lay between Him and them.
This loneliness of life in its common forms we all know something about. We
know, for instance, that the parting of friends is one of the commonest
experiences of life. People come into our lives for a time; they seem inseparable
from us, and then by force of circumstances or by some slowly widening
difference of temper or opinion, or by one of those many social forms of
separation of which life is full, they slowly drift out of our touch and our life.
“We must part, as all human creatures have parted,” wrote Dean Swift to
Alexander Pope, and there is no sadder sentence than that in human biography.
It strikes upon the ear like a knell.1 [Note: W. J. Dawson.]
208

209. But no boldness of thought and no heroism of conduct will ever be possible to us
until we have learned to stand alone and to go “a little further.” You remember
that the favourite lines of General Gordon, which he often quoted in those
splendid lonely days at Khartoum, were the lines taken from Browning’s
“Paracelsus”—
I see my way as birds their trackless way.
I shall arrive! what time, what circuit first,
I ask not: but unless God send His hail
Or blinding fireballs, sleet or stifling snow,
In some time, His good time, I shall arrive:
He guides me and the bird.
4. But there is a greater sorrow here. In some way, mysterious but most assured,
He had to make the guilt of the sin of mankind His own. He had to take the
sinner’s place—his place as a sinner—and accept the burden of his sinfulness.
His agony becomes intelligible only when we accept His own explanation of all
His suffering and woe, that He had come to give His life a ransom for many, and
to shed His blood for the remission of their sins. In other words, He had come to
make the sins of others His own, and to suffer and die as if He had committed
them, and as if the guilt and the penalty of them were His.
How Jesus could assume and have this personal relation to sins not His own is
the real mystery here. It must ever be, like much else in His Divine human being,
largely beyond our finite thought. It goes so far to explain it that He was the Son
of Man, and that in this unique character He could be for men what no other
could possibly be. As the God-man He was related to humanity, to its burden
and its destiny, as no other could be. He was its head and representative. As such
He could, while sinless Himself, make the sin, the agony, and the conflict of our
fallen race His own. The suffering and the death which this involved He as the
second Adam underwent, not for His own sake, but for the sake of humanity,
that all might issue in salvation. Thus far the Incarnation throws light upon
Gethsemane and Calvary. It did not merely add another to the number of our
race, but it gave a new Divine centre or head to it, and one in whose personal
history the agony and conflict of humanity because of sin might be endured and
brought to the victory of redemption.
It affords us, also, a new revelation of God, showing Him in the glory of His
grace. We can understand charity and self-denying beneficence meeting the
results of evil in this world—the poverty, misery, and suffering it has caused—
with their bounty and all the services and forms of self-sacrifice possible to them;
but here is philanthropy on the Son of Man’s part going so far as to deal with the
evil itself and all its demerit and guiltiness, its relations to the moral order of the
209

210. universe, and to the claims and glory of God. For Divine love to relate itself to
human need and suffering, and to multiply its offices of charity in relieving them
is a great thing; but for Divine love to clothe itself with the shame and guilt of the
sufferers and make their cause its own is another and an infinitely greater thing.
For God’s Son to come into the midst of suffering men that He might share their
ills and sorrows, and provide them with comforts and abatements, would reveal
a beautiful compassion and beneficence. But for Him to descend from His Divine
throne, step into the sinner’s place, and suffer Himself to be numbered with the
transgressors, bearing their burden and blame—this is grace beyond all we can
conceive of grace.
5. But what is it that makes it so hard for Him to have to take the sinner’s place?
It is that the sinner is an outcast from God. Sin has broken the communion. And
now He who was spoken of as the beloved Son has to bear the Father’s
displeasure and feel the unutterable pain of separation. No wonder He prayed,
“Father, glorify thou me with the glory which I had with thee before the world
was.” For that glory was to be loved by the Father: “For thou lovedst me before
the foundation of the world.” The Father loves Him still and will glorify Him
again. But now He feels that He is about to be separated. One with the sinner in
his sin, He must feel that He is separate from the Father in His holiness. The
Agony in the Garden is the cry on the cross—“My God, my God, why hast thou
forsaken me?” It casts its dark shadow before. If He accepts the Cup now He will
go through it all, even though when the moment comes that cry may yet be
wrung from Him.
Imagine the evil of the world being felt by Him as a mighty burden, and that
feeling gathering and deepening until over His frail humanity it rolled like a
flood,—the sense of the world’s sin cleaving to Him, the sense of the world’s woe
rousing Him to compassion till its mighty mass seemed to be tearing Him from
God, and the awful cry came at last, “Why hast thou forsaken me?” Add to this
the mystery of His Divinity—the Divine capacity of sorrow within the human
form—and who can tell what suffering His soul knew? Who can tell the horror
of darkness and the shuddering agony of pity that thrilled Him as the cry burst
forth, “O my Father, let this cup pass from me”?
To bear the weight of sin, and by it to feel cut off from the communion with God
which is Life Eternal—this is the one thing absolutely unbearable. We sinners
know it, if ever we have felt what men call remorse for our own sin, or for its
consequences, which we would give worlds to undo—if ever we know what it is
to struggle with all our might against the bondage of conscious sinfulness, and to
struggle in vain. The sense that sin has gained an absolute mastery over us, and
that in the darkness of its bondage God’s face of love is hidden from us for ever,
and the unwilling terrors of His wrath let loose upon our unsheltered heads—
which of us would not count light in comparison the very keenest agony of body
and soul? You remember how St. Paul cries out under it, “O wretched man that
I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” But this sense of our
own sin is but a faint shadow of the burden on our Lord’s spirit of bearing, in
the mysterious power of Atonement, the sins of the whole world—“made” (as St.
Paul boldly expresses it) “sin for us,” entering even into the spiritual darkness
210

211. which cries out, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”1 [Note: Bishop
Barry.]
Into the woods my Master went,
Clean forspent, forspent;
Into the woods my Master came,
Forspent with love and shame.
But the olives they were not blind to Him,
The little grey leaves were kind to Him,
When into the woods He came.
Out of the woods my Master went,
And He was well content;
Out of the woods my Master came,
Content with death and shame.
When death and shame would woo Him last,
From under the trees they drew Him last;
’Twas on a tree they slew Him—last
When out of the woods He came.2 [Note: Sidney Lanier.]
III
His Acceptance of the Father’s Will
“Howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt.”
1. Not what I will.—It was His meat and drink, as He Himself has told us, to do
His Father’s will and to finish His work. We can understand Him doing the will
of His Father with gladness when, in accordance with it, He had miracles to
perform, Divine blessings to spread abroad, and His own perfectly pure and
good life to live. We can also understand Him bravely doing it when, with His
soul which loathed evil and every kind of wrong, He bore up unflinchingly
against the wrongs and the evils with which He was Himself assailed. But Jesus’
subjection went far beyond this when He took the cross from His Father’s hand,
211

212. and meekly said as He did so in Gethsemane, “Not what I will, but what thou
wilt.”
The consent of His will was absolutely necessary. So He said Himself of His life,
“I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.” That consent,
again, was needed at every point. At any moment His own words might have
been realised, “Cannot I pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more
than twelve legions of angels?” That consent, further, had to be given under a
perfect fore-knowledge of all that it implied—every pang of suffering, every
cruelty of triumphant evil. In these points, as in all others, His was the one
perfect sacrifice, laying a will, itself absolutely free, at the feet of His Father.
Doubtless we may follow Him—we must follow Him—but it is afar off.
We read of a martyr of the English Reformation, before whose eyes at the stake
was held up the pardon which awaited his recantation; and who cried out in an
agony which he found fiercer than the fire itself, “If ye love my soul, away with
it.” And the secret of such agony, as also the essence of sacrifice, lies in the
submission of the will—in the subjection of that mysterious power, which in
man, weak and finite as he is, can be (so God wills it) overcome by no force
except its own. “Sacrifice and burnt offering thou wouldest not. Then said I, Lo!
I come to do thy will, O God.” I am content to do it.1 [Note: Bishop Barry.]
What a contrast within the space of a few hours! What a transition from the
quiet elevation of that, “he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father! I will,”
to that falling on the ground and crying in agony, “My Father! not what I will.”
In the one we see the High Priest within the veil in His all-prevailing
intercession; in the other, the sacrifice on the altar opening the way through the
rent veil. The high-priestly “Father! I will,” in order of time precedes the
sacrificial “Father! not what I will”; but this was only by anticipation, to show
what the intercession would be when once the sacrifice was brought. In reality it
was that prayer at the altar, “Father! not what I will,” in which the prayer
before the throne, “Father! I will,” had its origin and its power. It is from the
entire surrender of His will in Gethsemane that the Hight Priest on the throne
has the power to ask what He will, has the right to make His people share in that
power too, and ask what they will.
2. What Thou wilt.—Out of that agony—borne through the power of intense
prayer of supplication—came forth submission to the will of the Father. Not the
acceptance of an inevitable fate, against which it is vain, and therefore foolish to
strive—such as a mere Fatalist or Cynic might show. But the submission, first, of
a perfect faith—sure that whatever our Father ordains must be well—sure that
He will not suffer one tear or pang that is not needed for Salvation—sure that
whatever He lays on us, He will give us comfort and strength to bear. “Not my
will, but Thine be done—Thine the all-wise—Thine the all-merciful—Thine the
almighty will.” But, even beyond this, there is the submission of love. There is an
actual delight in sacrifice of self for those we love, which, in the world as it is,
makes men count inevitable suffering as joy, and, out of that suffering for others,
actually begets a fresh access of love to them, which is itself an exaltation and a
comfort.
212

213. Christ’s prayer was not for the passing of the cup, but that the will of God might
be done in and by Him, and “He was heard in that he feared,” not by being
exempted from the Cross, but by being strengthened through submission for
submission. So His agony is the pattern of all true prayer, which must ever deal
with our wishes, as He did with His instinctive shrinking,—present them
wrapped in an “if it be possible,” and followed by a “nevertheless.” The meaning
of prayer is not to force our wills on God’s, but to bend our wills to His; and that
prayer is really answered of which the issue is our calm readiness for all that He
lays upon us.1 [Note: A. Maclaren.]
3. It is best so. The cup did not pass from Him because it was not possible; but
yet in two ways, far above our ways, His prayer was granted. It was granted first
of all—(the whole history of the Passion proves it)—it was granted in the
heavenly strength that was given to Him to bear all the pains and sorrows that
were laid upon Him. As afterwards He said to His great Apostle, “My grace is
sufficient for thee,” so, now, God’s grace was sufficient for Him. There appeared,
we are told, an angel from heaven strengthening Him; and in the power of that
strength He rose from His knees, no longer sorrowful, no longer bowed down
with terror and trouble, but calm and cheerful, ready to go forth and meet His
enemies, ready to bear all the taunts and pains of His trial and crucifixion, ready
to answer a good confession before Pontius Pilate, and to pray for His brothers,
and to think of His mother and friend, and of His companions in woe, and to
look back on the finishing of His mighty work, and to commend His soul to His
Father—more majestic, more adorable, more Divine than He had ever seemed
before.
Let us fix our thoughts on that second and yet grander mode in which our Lord’s
petition was answered, even according to those sacred words of His own, which
are the model of all prayer, which are the key and secret of this Divine tragedy—
“Nevertheless, not my will but thine be done.” That is the sum and substance of
the whole narrative of the Passion. Not the substitution of the will of Christ for
the will of the eternal God, but the substitution of the will of the eternal God for
the will even of His most dearly beloved Son.
There is a friend of mine, a dear and brilliant friend, whose name would be
honoured by you all if I were free to mention it. He told me the other day the
darkest chapter of his life. He told me how his whole life lay suddenly broken off
in disaster: his work ended, his heart broken, himself in hospital suffering cruel
pain. And then he said: “Oh, Dawson, what visions of God I had as I lay in
hospital! what a sense of eternity, and the reality of things spiritual! I tell you, if
I knew to-day I could gain such visions of God and truth only by repeating my
sufferings, I would crawl upon my hands and knees across this continent to get
that disease!” Ah! there lies the justification of our Gethsemanes. We need the
utter loneliness, we need the separation from friend and lover, to make us sure of
God. “And Jacob was left alone,” says the older record: “and there wrestled a
man with him till the breaking of the day.” Even so—till the breaking of the day,
for the divinest of all dawns shines in the Gethsemane of sacrifice.1 [Note: W. J.
Dawson.]
213

214. 4. How blessed was the Result. He prayed His way to perfect calm, which is ever
the companion of perfect self-surrender to God. They who cease from their own
works do “enter into rest.” All the agitations which had come storming in massed
battalions against Him are defeated by it. They have failed to shake His purpose,
they now fail even to disturb His peace. So, victorious from the dreadful conflict,
and at leisure of heart to care for others, He can go back to the disciples.
And so you find that from this moment Jesus moves to His end in majestic calm.
The agony is passed, and it is passed for ever; He knows the darkness to be but
the shadow of God’s wing. He speaks henceforth as one who sees the dawn, and
has the light of dawn upon His brow.
And how great is the Encouragement. Christ’s agony is the very consecration of
human suffering, the fresh spring of human hope. There is no depth into which
we can be plunged that He has not fathomed, no gloom into which we can be cast
that He has not illumined. There are trials harder to bear even than death itself,
but Christ has known their bitterness, and if we recognise the source of sin from
which they first flowed, He can turn those bitter waters into rivers of comfort.
We very properly distinguish in ourselves two wills, the one of natural
inclination, the instinctive will, if you please; the other the deliberate purpose
and choice of the moral and rational nature. Our first effort must be the
complete surrender of our deliberate rational will to God, to work ever in
submission to His gracious ordering for our lives. Then the constant discipline of
the Christian life becomes the stern struggle to subdue the will of natural
inclination and to bring it a captive to our Lord. This is the sacrifice we have to
offer Him, a feeble counterpart in our small way, of the heroic self-sacrifice He
offered that day in Gethsemane.1 [Note: A. Ritchie.]
I know, O Jesus, in the bitter hour
Of human pain, that Thou hast felt the power
Of deeper anguish, and my lips are still,
Because in silence Thou hast borne God’s will.2 [Note: E. H. Divall, The Ways of
God, 22.]
Christ in Prayer
What is prayer? It is to connect every thought with the thought of God. To look
on everything as His work and His appointment. To submit every thought, wish,
and resolve to Him. To feel His presence, so that it shall restrain us even in our
wildest joy. That is prayer. And what we are now, surely we are by prayer. If we
have attained any measure of goodness, if we have resisted temptations, if we
have any self-command, or if we live with aspirations and desires beyond the
common, we shall not hesitate to ascribe all to prayer.
214

215. 1. Christ is an Example in prayer. There is many a case in life, where to act
seems useless—many a truth which at times appears incredible. Then we throw
ourselves on Him—He did it, He believed it, that is enough. He was wise, where I
am foolish. He was holy, where I am evil. He must know. He must be right. I rely
on Him. Bring what arguments you may; say that prayer cannot change God’s
will. I know it. Say that prayer ten thousand times comes back like a stone. Yes,
but Christ prayed, therefore I may and I will pray. Not only so, but I must pray;
the wish felt and not uttered before God, is a prayer. Speak, if your heart
prompts, in articulate words, but there is an unsyllabled wish which is also
prayer. You cannot help praying, if God’s spirit is in yours.
2. Christ’s Prayer is an Example of what prayer is. A common popular
conception of prayer is, that it is the means by which the wish of man determines
the Will of God. This conception finds an exact parallel in those anecdotes with
which Oriental history abounds, wherein a sovereign gives to his favourite some
token, on the presentation of which every request must be granted. As when
Ahasuerus promised Queen Esther that her petition should be granted, even to
the half of his kingdom. As when Herod swore to Herodias’ daughter that he
would do whatever she should require.
(1) Try this conception by four tests:
(a) Try it by its incompatibility with the fact that this universe is a system of
laws. Things are thus, rather than thus. Such an event is invariably followed by
such a consequence. This we call a law. All is one vast chain, from which if you
strike a single link you break the whole. It has been truly said that to heave a
pebble on the seashore one yard higher up would change all antecedents from
the creation, and all consequents to the end of time. For it would have required a
greater force in the wave that threw it there—and that would have required a
different degree of strength in the storm—that again, a change of temperature all
over the globe—and that again, a corresponding difference in the temperaments
and characters of the men inhabiting the different countries. So that when a
child wishes a fine day for his morrow’s excursion, and hopes to have it by an
alteration of what would have been without his wish, he desires nothing less than
a whole new universe.
(b) Try it next by fact. Ask those of spiritual experience. We do not ask whether
prayer has been efficacious—of course it has. It is God’s ordinance. Without
prayer the soul dies. But what we ask is, whether the good derived has been
exactly this, that prayer brought them the very thing they wished for? For
instance, did the plague come and go according to the laws of prayer or the laws
of health? Did it come because men neglected prayer, or because they disobeyed
those rules which His wisdom has revealed as the conditions of salubrity? And
when it departed was it because a nation lay prostrate in sackcloth and ashes, or
because it arose and girded up its loins and removed those causes and those
obstructions which, by everlasting Law, are causes and obstructions? Did the
catarrh or the consumption go from him who prayed, sooner than from him who
humbly bore it in silence? Try it by the case of Christ—Christ’s prayer did not
succeed. He prayed that the cup might pass from Him. It did not so pass.
215

216. (c) Try it by its assumptions. To think that prayer changes God’s will, gives
unworthy ideas of God. It supposes our will to be better than His, the
Unchangeable, the Unsearchable, the All-Wise. Can you see the All of things—
the consequences and secret connections of the event you wish? And if not, would
you really desire the terrible power of infallibly securing it?
(d) Try it by its results. If we think that answered prayer is a proof of grace, we
shall be unreasonably depressed and unreasonably elated—depressed when we
do not get what we wish, elated when we do; besides, we shall judge uncharitably
of other men. Two farmers pray, the one whose farm is on light land, for rain;
the other, whose contiguous farm is on heavy soil, for fine weather; plainly one
or the other must come, and that which is good for one may be injurious to the
other. If this be the right view of prayer, then the one who does not obtain his
wish must mourn, doubting God’s favour, or believing that he did not pray in
faith. Two Christian armies meet for battle—Christian men on both sides pray
for success to their own arms. Now if victory be given to prayer, independent of
other considerations, we are driven to the pernicious principle that, success is the
test of Right. From all which the history of this prayer of Christ delivers us. It is
a precious lesson of the Cross, that apparent failure is Eternal victory. It is a
precious lesson of this prayer, that the object of prayer is not the success of its
petition; nor is its rejection a proof of failure. Christ’s petition was not gratified,
yet He was the One well-beloved of His Father.
(2) The true efficacy of prayer is found in the words, “As thou wilt.” All prayer is
to change the will human into submission to the will Divine. Trace the steps in
this history by which the mind of the Son of Man arrived at this result. First, we
find the human wish almost unmodified, that “That cup might pass from Him.”
Then He goes to the disciples, and it would appear that the sight of those
disciples, cold, unsympathetic, asleep, chilled His spirit, and set in motion that
train of thought which suggested the idea that perhaps the passing of that cup
was not His Father’s will. At all events He goes back with this perhaps, “If this
cup may not pass from me except I drink it, thy will be done.” He goes back
again, and the words become more strong: “Nevertheless, not as I will, but as
thou wilt.” The last time He comes, all hesitancy is gone. Not one trace of the
human wish remains; strong in submission, He goes to meet His doom—“Rise,
let us be going; behold he is at hand that doth betray me.” This, then, is the true
course and history of prayer.1 [Note: F. W. Robertson.]
He prayed, but to his prayer no answer came,
And choked within him sank his ardour’s flame;
No more he prayed, no more the knee he bent,
While round him darkened doubt and discontent;
Till in his room, one eve, there shone a light,
216

217. And he beheld an angel-presence bright,
Who said: “O faint heart, why hast thou resigned
Praying, and no more callest God to mind?”
“I prayed,” he said, “but no one heard my prayer,
Long disappointment has induced despair.”
“Fool!” said the angel, “every prayer of thine,
Of God’s immense compassion was a sign;
Each cry of thine ‘O Lord!’ itself contains
The answer, ‘Here am I’; thy very pains,
Ardour, and love and longing, every tear
Are His attraction, prove Him very near.”
The cloud dispersed; once more the suppliant prayed,
Nor ever failed to find the promised aid.2 [Note: Jalaluddin Rumi, in Claud
Field’s A Little Book of Eastern Wisdom, 49.]
37 Then he returned to his disciples and found
them sleeping. “Simon,” he said to Peter, “are
you asleep? Couldn’t you keep watch for one
hour?
GILL, "And he cometh and findeth them sleeping,.... His three disciples,
Peter, James, and John:
and saith unto Peter; particularly, he having so lately asserted, with so much
confidence, his love to Christ, and close attachment to him:
Simon, sleepest thou? Christ calls him by the name he first went by, and not by
that which he had given him, Cephas, or Peter; he not now having that firmness and
constancy, though he boasted of it, which answers to that name:
217

218. couldst thou not watch one hour? The Arabic and Persic versions add, with me;
and so does the Complutensian edition; See Gill on Mat_26:40.
HENRY, "VII. He roused his disciples, who were dropped asleep while he was at
prayer, Mar_14:37, Mar_14:38. He comes to look after them, since they did not look
after him; and he finds them asleep, so little affected were they with his sorrows, his
complaints, and prayers. This carelessness of theirs was a presage of their further
offence in deserting him; and it was an aggravation of it, that he had so lately
commended them for continuing with him in his temptations, though they had not
been without their faults. Was he so willing to make the best of them, and were they
so indifferent in approving themselves to him? They had lately promised not to be
offended in him; what! and yet mind him so little? He particularly upbraided Peter
with his drowsiness; Simon, sleepest thou? Kai su teknon; - “What thou, my son?
Thou that didst so positively promise thou wouldest not deny me, dost thou slight me
thus? From thee I expected better things. Couldest thou not watch one hour?” He did
not require him to watch all night with him, only for one hour. It aggravates our
faintness and short continuance in Christ's service, that he doth not over-task us, nor
weary us with it, Isa_43:23. He puts upon us no other burthen than to hold fast till
he comes (Rev_2:24, Rev_2:25); and behold, he comes quickly, Rev_3:11.
As those whom Christ loves he rebukes when they do amiss, so those whom he
rebukes he counsels and comforts. 1. It was a very wise and faithful word of advice
which Christ here gave to his disciples; Watch and pray, lest ye enter into
temptation, v. 38. It was bad to sleep when Christ was in his agony, but they were
entering into further temptation, and if they did not stir up themselves, and fetch in
grace and strength from God by prayer, they would do worse; and so they did, when
they all forsook him, and fled. 2. It was a very kind and tender excuse that Christ
made for them; “The spirit truly is willing; I know it is, it is ready, it is forward; you
would willingly keep awake, but you cannot.” This may be taken as a reason for that
exhortation, “Watch and pray; because, though the spirit is willing, I grant it is (you
have sincerely resolved never to be offended in me), yet the flesh is weak, and if you
do not watch and pray, and use the means of perseverance, you may be overcome,
notwithstanding.” The consideration of the weakness and infirmity of our flesh
should engage and quicken us to prayer and watchfulness, when we are entering into
temptation.
CONSTABLE, "Perhaps Jesus spoke specifically to Peter in Mark 14:37 because
Peter had boasted that he would never deny Jesus (Mark 14:29; Mark 14:31).
Jesus' use of the name "Simon," Peter's original name, may imply his natural
weakness. Peter was not living up to the meaning of his new name; he was not
behaving like a rock.
"True friendship as we experience it-the sharing of inmost thoughts, the
exchange of feelings, hopes, sorrows, joys-was a reality that Jesus seems not to
have enjoyed, with any continuity, with the Twelve." [Note: Lane, p. 518.]
PULPIT, "And he cometh, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter,
Simon, sleepest thou? Couldest thou not watch one hour? St. Luke says (Luke
22:45) that they were "sleeping for sorrow." So on the Mount of Transfiguration
he says (Luke 9:32) that they were "heavy with sleep." This rebuke, which St.
Mark tells us here was pointedly addressed to Peter, seems to glance at his
218

219. earnest protestations of fidelity made not long before. And our Lord calls him by
his old name of Simon. In St. Matthew (Matthew 26:40) it is less pointed; for
there, while our Lord looks at Peter, he addresses them all. "He saith unto Peter,
What, could not ye watch with me one hour?" This is just one of those graphic
little incidents which we may suppose St. Mark to have received directly from St.
Peter.
38 Watch and pray so that you will not fall into
temptation. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is
weak.”
GILL, "Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation,.... Of denying
Christ, and falling off from him, which would quickly offer to them, when they should
see him apprehended, bound, and led away.
The spirit truly is ready. The Persic version renders it, "my mind"; as if the Spirit
or soul of Christ was meant; whereas it is either to be understood of the evil spirit,
Satan, who was disposed to attack them, and especially Peter, whom he desired to
have, and sift as wheat; or else the spirit of the disciples, their renewed spirit, which
was ready and disposed watching and praying, and willing to abide by Christ:
but the flesh is weak; they were but flesh and blood, and so not a match of
themselves for so powerful an adversary as Satan, and therefore had need to watch
and pray; or "their body", as the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions render it, was
weak, and subject to drowsiness and sleep; and especially they were weak and feeble,
and very unequal of themselves for spiritual exercises, as they had flesh, or a corrupt
nature in them; See Gill on Mat_26:41.
CONSTABLE, "Jesus then addressed all three disciples. He commanded them to
be watchful (Gr. gregoreite, cf. Mark 13:34-35; Mark 13:37) and to pray (Gr.
proseuchesthe, the general word for prayer). These activities are necessary to
overcome temptation. This use of "flesh" is probably literal (i.e., the body)
rather than metaphorical (i.e., the sinful human nature) since it contrasts with
the human spirit (i.e., man's volitional powers; cf. Psalms 51:12).
Mark wrote that Peter was asleep three times (Mark 14:37; Mark 14:40-41), and
later he wrote that Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:68; Mark 14:70-71).
The disciples should have been praying for themselves as well as for Jesus in
view of what Jesus had told them was coming.
"In the passion account, the disciples are ironic figures: Because of their
incomprehension, they badly misconstrue the true nature of things. Thinking
themselves to be astute, courageous, and loyal, they are in reality imperceptive,
cowardly, and faithless. Entering upon the passion, the disciples yet follow Jesus
219

220. in commitment to him. As events unfold, however, they will renounce their
commitment through word or deed and apostatize." [Note: Kingsbury, p. 111.]
"Spiritual wakefulness and prayer in full dependence upon divine help provide
the only adequate preparation for crisis (cf. Ch. Mark 13:11)." [Note: Lane, p.
520.]
PULPIT, "Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation. The great
temptation of the disciples at that moment was to deny Christ under the
influence of fear. And so our Lord gives here the true remedy against temptation
of every kind; namely, watchfulness and prayer—watchfulness, against the craft
and subtlety of the devil or man; and prayer, for the Divine help to overcome.
The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. Here our Lord graciously finds
excuses for them. It is as though he said, "I know that in heart and mind you are
ready to cleave to me, even though the Jews should threaten you with death. But
I know also that your flesh is weak. Pray, then, that the weakness of the flesh
may not overcome the strength of the spirit." St. Jerome says, "In whatever
degree we trust to the ardor of the spirit, in the same degree ought we to fear
because of the infirmity of the flesh."
BI, “The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak.
1. I think, will some say, that my sin is a sin of infirmity because it is but small.
But if you look into 1Sa_15:1-35, you may read that Saul’s sin, for which the Lord
rejected him, was of no great outward bulk; for he spared the fatlings that he
might sacrifice thereby. A great many small sins may make as great a bulk as one
gross sin; yea, possibly there may be much sinfulness and evil in committing of a
small sin; for as amongst men, it is the greatest incivility to break with another
for a small matter; so with God, to break with God for a small thing; and much
skill may be seen in a small work; a little watch, etc. So your skill in sinning may
be seen in a small sin; his sin is never small that thinks it small.
2. But I think my sin is a sin of infirmity because I am tempted to it, and because
I am drawn on by others. But, I pray, was not Adam tempted unto the eating of
the forbidden fruit by Eve? And was not Eve tempted by Satan? And will you call
that a sin of infirmity that condemned all the world as Adam’s sin did?
3. But I think my sin is a sin of infirmity because I do strive against it. And, I
pray, did not Pilate strive against the crucifying of Christ? Possibly therefore a
man may strive against his sin, and yet the sin be no sin of infirmity.
4. But my sin is a sin of infirmity because I am troubled after it. And was not
Esau troubled after he had sold his birth-right for a mess of pottage; did he not
seek it with tears? I do strive against it, and though I am troubled after it, yet it
may be no sin of infirmity.
But as some are mistaken on the left hand, thinking that their sins ale sins of
infirmity, when indeed they are not: so others on the right hand are mistaken, and
think that their sins are not sins of infirmity, but of a worse nature, when indeed they
are: and that upon these accounts:
1. Oh, saith one, I fear my sin is no sin of infirmity, for I sin knowingly, and with
deliberation; I sin against my knowledge, and against my conscience, and
therefore my sin can be no sin of infirmity. But for answer hereunto, you must
know, it is one thing for a man to sin knowingly, and another thing for a man to
sin out of knowledge, or against his knowledge. A man sins ignorantly when
220

221. ignorance is the companion of his sin only: a man sins out of ignorance, when
ignorance is the only cause of his sin, and not the companion only.
2. Oh, but I fear that my sin is no sin of infirmity, because I fall into it again and
again, and do lie in it. But do ye know what it is to lie in sin? There is much
mistake about lying in sin. Now if you do thus keep and lie in your sin, why do
you so complain? this your complaining argues that there is some purging out,
and therefore you do not lie in sin.
3. Oh, but I fear my sin cannot be a sin of infirmity, because I fall into it after I
have been admonished of the evil of it. To that I say no more, but desire you to
consider the instance that is here before you. The disciples slept, our Lord and
Saviour Christ comes and wakens them; yea, and He chides them too: “What
(saith He) cannot ye watch with Me one hour I watch and pray;” and yet they
clapt again: and He comes and wakens them again, and admonisheth them again,
and yet they slept again. Possibly, therefore, a man may fail into the same sin
again and again, yea, even after admonition, and yet it may be a sin of infirmity.
Yet how many poor souls are there, that are mistaken here on the right hand, and
do think that their sins are no sins of infirmity, when indeed they are. But if there
be such mistakes, how shall we then know whether our sins be sins of infirmity
1. Negatively, That is no sin of infirmity, which is a gross, foul, scandalous sin,
committed with deliberation and consultation.
2. If the sin be a ringleader unto other foul sins, it is no sin of infirmity. The ring-
leading sin is the most heinous sin. And you see how it is amongst men; if there
be a rebellion or insurrection, they take the ringleader and bang up him, for say
they, This is the great transgressor, for he is the ringleader. So amongst sins, the
great sin is the ringleader; and therefore if your sin be a ringleader unto other
foul sins, it is not a sin of infirmity.
3. A sin of presumption is not a sin of infirmity. Sins of presumption and sins of
infirmity are set in opposition one to the other in Num_15:1-41 and Psa_19:1-14.
And when a man doth therefore sin the rather because God is merciful, or
because the sin is but a sin of infirmity, or because he hopes to repent afterward,
or because his sin may and can stand with grace; this is a sin of presumption, and
is no sin of infirmity: sins of presumption are no sins of infirmity.
4. Again, If the sin be a reigning sin, then it is no sin of infirmity, for when sin
reigns, grace doth not; therefore saith the apostle (Rom_6:1-23), “Let not sin
have dominion over you, for ye are not under the law but under grace;” and when
sin reigns it is in its full strength.
But how shall we know, then, affirmatively, whether our sin be a sin of infirmity?
1. Thus: If it do merely proceed from want of age in Christianity, then it is,
without doubt, a sin of infirmity. Babes are weak and full of weaknesses.
2. If it be no other sin than what is incident unto all the saints, then it is a sin of
infirmity; for that sin which is committed by all the saints, is no reigning sin, but
a sin mortified.
3. If it be such a sin as you cannot avoid, which breaks in upon you before you are
aware, even before you can call in for help from your reason and consideration,
and which the general bent and frame of your heart and soul is against, then it is
a sin of infirmity, for then it doth arise from want of strength to resist, and not
from will to commit. This was the case of Paul (Rom_7:1-25) when evil was
present with him, being against the general bent and frame of his soul; for saith
he, “I delight in the law of God after the inward man, and yet the thing that I
221

222. would not do, that do I.”
4. An infirmity will hardly acknowledge itself to be a sin of infirmity; but the
person in whom it is, fears lest it should be worse. If your sin do arise chiefly
from some outward cause, it is a sin of infirmity; for than it is not so much from
will to commit, as from want of strength to resist. The sin which the apostle
speaks of (Gal_6:1) is a sin of infirmity, and the man that commits it is said to be
overtaken. Now when a man is upon his journey travelling and is overtaken by
another person, his inward inclination and disposition was not to meet the other:
so when a man is overtaken by sin, it argues that his sin doth proceed from some
outward cause; and when it doth proceed from some outward cause, then he is
truly said to be overtaken with it.
5. Infirmity loves admonition: I mean, the person that sins out of infirmity, loves
to be admonished, takes admonition kindly, and doth bless God for it.
6. An infirmity discovers good, though it be in itself evil; it is an ill sin, but a good
sign. The thistle is an ill weed, yet it discovers a fat and a good sell; smoke is ill,
but it discovers fire.
7. Sins of infirmities are servants and drawers of water unto your graces; though
in themselves evil, yet through the overruling hand of God’s grace, they will make
you more gracious another way. Ye know how it is with a young tradesman, who
hath but a small stock; he keeps his shop diligently, and will not spend as others
do. If you ask him the reason, saying, Such and such men are of your trade, and
they will spend their shilling with us, and their time with us; why will you not do
as they? He answers presently, True, they do so, and they may do so, their estate
will bear it; but as for me, my stock is small, very little, therefore I may not do as
they do, but I must be diligent, and a good husband; I am but a young beginner,
and have little skill in the trade, therefore it behoves me to be diligent. His very
weakness is the cause of his diligence. So here, the more infirmities that a
gracious soul labours under, the more diligent he will be; and if you ask him, Why
do you take so much pains in following the means, and the like? he answers, Alas,
I am a poor weak creature: such and such an one there is that hath an excellent
memory, all that ever he reads or hears is his own; but my memory is naught, my
head and heart is naught, and therefore by the grace of God I will take the more
pains in following after Christ. Thus his very infirmity is a provocation unto all
his diligence.
8. Infirmity doth constantly keep a man’s heart low, down, and humble. If one
have an infirmity in his speech, he will not be so forward to speak as others are;
but being conscious of his own infirmity, he is always low, and afraid to speak. So
spiritually. But suppose that my sin be no other than a sin of infirmity, what
then? The third particular answers you. Then, your sin being but an infirmity,
Christ will never leave you for it, nor east you off for it; but if you sleep, He will
waken you; and if you sleep again, He will waken you again. Oh, what sweet grace
is this. Is there no evil then in this sin of infirmity? Yes, much, very much: for
though it be a drawer of water to your grace, yet it is a Gibeonite, a native, a
Canaanite, that will upon all occasions be ready to betray you, and to open the
door unto greater thieves, and will always be a thorn and goad in your sides; and
though it do not put out your light, yet it is a thief in your candle, which may
smear out much of your comfort, and blemish your duty. Ye know how it is with a
good writing pen; if there be a small hair in it, though the hair be never so little a
thing, yet if it be not pulled out, it will blot and blemish the whole writing
sometimes. So may the sin of infirmity do; your whole duty may be blotted and
blemished by this small hair, and although God can and doth make use of your
222

223. infirmities for to keep your graces, yet they are but your lees and dregs, whereas
your graces should be all refined. Oh, what an evil thing therefore is it, for a man
to be unrefined. And although Christ will not cast you off for a sin of infirmity, yet
you may provoke Him thereby to chide you, and to be angry with you. The
unbelief of the disciples was but their infirmity, yet Christ did upbraid them
because of their unbelief. Thirdly, Though there be much evil in this sin, Christ
will not cast you off for it. For it is an honour to a man to pass by infirmities, saith
Solomon; much more is it for the honour of Christ to pass by the infirmities of
His people. The saints and people of God are in covenant with God by Jesus
Christ, and that covenant is a conjugal covenant (Hos_2:1-23). But what husband
will put away his wife for her infirmities? That covenant is a paternal covenant,
and what father will thrust his child out of doors for his infirmities? A child,
though deformed, is more pleasing to the father, because the child is his own,
than another beautiful child that is not his own. If a master should turn away his
servant for every failing and weakness, who would serve him? Now, saith Luther,
what man will cut off his nose because there is filth in it? yea, though the nose be
the sink of the brain, yet because it is a member a man will not cut it off. And will
Christ cut off one of His members, because there is filth in him, or some
weakness and infirmity in him? What father will knock his child on the head,
because a wart grows on his forehead? These infirmities in the saints and people
of God, are their warts, which grow in the face of their conversation: the blessed
martyrs themselves had these warts: Hierom of Prague had a great wart upon
him, Cranmer another, Jewel another; yea, if we look into that little hook of
Chronicles, I mean Heb_11:1-40, what saint is there mentioned upon record, but
had one wart or another? Had not Abraham his wart, in saying, that Sarah was
his sister? Had not Sarah hers in laughing? Had not Jacob, Isaac, and Joseph
theirs? Moses, Rahab, Samson, Jephthah, and David theirs? Luther had his, and
our reformers theirs; yet God owned, used, and honoured them. Surely therefore,
though there be much evil in a sin of infirmity, especially if a man fall into it again
and again; yet Christ will not leave a man, or east him off for it. If these things be
true, then what necessity is upon us, and what great cause have we to examine
ourselves, and to consider seriously, what sort of sins those sins are, which we
labour under.
But it seems that all the sins of the godly are not sins of infirmity, and God will not
cast off a godly man for any sin: what advantage, therefore, hath this sin of infirmity
above other sins; or what disadvantage do the other sins of the godly labour under,
which this sin of infirmity doth not?
1. Much, very much: for though my sin be great; yet if it be a sin of infirmity, it
shall not hinder the present acceptance of my duty.
2. Although my sin he great, yet if it be but an infirmity, it shall not hinder the
sense of my justification.
3. Though my sin be great, yet if it be but an infirmity, there is a pardon that lies
in course for it; and though it be good to repent of every sin, with a distinct, and
particular repentance, yet it is not necessary that there should he a particular
repentance for every sin of infirmity.
4. Though a man’s sin be great, yet if it be but an infirmity, it shall never bring a
scourge upon his family. And though my sin be great, yet if it be but a sin of
infirmity, it shall never spoil my gifts, nor make them unprofitable: if a man have
great gifts, praying, exercising gifts, and his life be scandalous, what saith the
world? But suppose that upon due search and examination, I find that my sin is
no other than a sin of infirmity, which will not cast me off, although through my
223

224. weakness, I do fall into it again and again, what then?
Then several duties follow, and accordingly you are to take up these, and the like
gracious resolutions.
1. If my sin be a sin of infirmity, and no other, then through grace will I observe
what God’s design is, in suffering and leaving such infirmities in me, and will
labour what I can and may, to promote and advance that design.
2. If my sin be but a sin of infirmity, and God will not cast me off for it, then
through the grace of God, will I never believe these false reports of Christ, and
those misrepresentations of Him which Satan would put upon Him, whereby he
would persuade me and others, that our Lord Christ is a hard master.
3. If the Lord Christ will not cast me off foe my sins of infirmity, then, through
the grace of God, I will not question my spiritual estate and condition for every
sin; I will grieve for every sin of infirmity because it is a sin, but I will not
question my condition, because it is but a sin of infirmity.
4. Then will not I cast off myself and others for the sins of infirmities. Shall
Christ’s eye be good and shall my eye be bad?
5. Then will not I cast off the things of Christ because of any infirmity that may
adhere to them, or the dispensation of them. When Christ took our nature on
Him, His deity was veiled under our humanity, His excellency under our infirmity
So now, His grace and His dispensations are veiled under the infirmity of our
administrations: as for example: preaching is an ordinance of Christ, yet the
sermon may be so delivered, with so much weakness of the speaker, that the
ordinance of Christ may be veiled under much infirmity.
6. And if the Lord will not cast me off for my infirmities, then, through grace, I
will never be discouraged from the performance of any duty. I will pray as I can
and hear as I can, and though I be not able to pray as I would, I will pray as I am
able; and though I am not able to examine mine own heart as I would, yet I will
do what I am able, for the Lord will not cast me off for infirmities, and therefore I
will not cast off my duties because of them.
7. And, lastly, if the Lord Jesus Christ will not cast me off for mine infirmities,
then will I never sin because the sin is but a sin of infirmity. (W. Bridge, M. A.)
Watch and Pray
Two points specially claim our attention here.
I. The command given-“Watch and pray.”
1. Watch. The word is very simple. A physician watches a sick man. A porter
watches a building. A sentinel watches on a city’s wall.
(1) To watch implies not to be taken up with other things.
(2) To watch implies to expect the enemy’s approach.
(3) Watching also includes an examination of the points of attack. The
physician will observe what course the disease is taking, what organs it is
likely to touch. Thus he watches.
2. Pray.
(1) This seems to refer to a habit of prayer. Not a wild cry in danger or
224

225. sorrow.
(2) Special prayer with reference to temptation is also implied. Prayer to be
delivered from the presence of temptation, prayer for victory in temptation.
II. The suitability of the command to those exposed to temptation.
1. The two parts together form the safeguard. Watching supplies materials for
prayer. Prayer makes watching effectual. To pray only is presumption. To watch
only is to depend on self.
2. The command also suits us because of the enemy’s subtlety. We need to
discover his wiles by watching. We pray for wisdom to discern his specious
assaults.
3. And because of our own weakness. (Compare verses 29, 31, with 67, 68).
4. It is also suitable in consequence of our Lord’s appointment. The battle is His.
He appoints its laws. And He has said, “Watch and pray.” The command speaks
thus to true disciples. What does it say to those who are careless and unbelieving?
(W. S. Bruce, M. A.)
Prayer all comprehensive
Prayer is not only request made to God, but converse had with Him. It is the
expression of desire to Him so as to supply it-of purpose so as to steady it-of hope so
as to brighten it. It is the bringing of one’s heart into the sunshine, so that like a
plant, its inward life may thrive for an outward development.” It is the plea of one’s
better self against one’s weaker self. It utters despondency so that it may attain
confidence. It is the expression and the exercise of love for all that is good and true. It
is a wrestle with evil in the presence of Supreme Goodness. It is the ascent of the soul
above time into the freedom of eternity. (Christian World Pulpit.)
The need for watchfulness
It seems as though there were no word so far reaching as the word “watch.” Vigilance
is the price of everything good and great in earth or heaven. It was for his faithful
vigilance that the memory of the Pompeian sentinel is embalmed in poetry and
recorded in history. Nothing but unceasing watchfulness can keep the heart in
harmony with God’s heart. It was a stormy, boisterous night. The dark clouds hung
over us, and the wind came with tenfold fury. The sea roiled in mountains, and the
proud ship seemed but a toy amid those tremendous billows. Far up on the mast, on
the look out, the sailor was heard to cry, “An iceberg on the starboard bow.” “An
iceberg on the larboard bow!” The deck officer called to the helmsman, “Port the
helm steadily!” and the sailors at the wheel heard and obeyed. The officers were
aroused, for there was danger on board to three hundred precious souls. The captain
spent a sleepless night, pacing the deck or cabin. Gigantic icebergs were coming
against the vessel, and eternal vigilance was the price of our safety in that northern
sea. And so it is all through human life. (Anon.)
Watchfulness
Watching is never pleasant work; no soldier really likes it. Men prefer even the
excitement and danger of the battlefield to the long weeks of patient vigilance, which
225

226. nevertheless may do quite as much as a victorious battle to decide the issues of a
campaign. Now it is just so in the spiritual war. The forces of civilization rendered
our soldiers more than a match for all the barbarous courage of their swarthy foes,
provided only by constant vigilance they were in a position to use those forces; and
even so the omnipotence of God renders the true Christian more than a match for all
the forces of hell, provided only he too is sufficiently vigilant to detect the approach
of the foe, and sufficiently wise to confront him with the courage of faith when his
approach is detected; but if he walks carelessly, or fails to exercise proper vigilance,
the battle will be lost almost before the danger is realized, and Faith will forfeit her
victory just because she was not ready to put forth all the supernatural powers that
she may command. It is, alas! not an uncommon thing to meet with Christian souls
that seem to know something of the life of faith, and yet, to their great surprise, find
themselves overcome when they least expect it. We observe sometimes a certain tone
of petulance in these admissions of failure, as if in their heart of hearts some sort of
implication were cast upon the faithfulness of God, although they would shrink from
expressing this in so many words. Now, clearly the cause of all such failures must lie
with us, and it will be our wisdom to endeavour to discover it; while it is the worst of
folly to charge God with unfaithfulness. What are we placed in this world for?
Obviously that we may be trained and developed for our future position by exposure
to the forces of evil. Were we so sheltered from evil as that there should be no need
for constant watchfulness, we should lose the moral benefit which a habit of constant
watchfulness induces. We know that it is a law of nature, that faculties which are
never employed perish from disuse; and, on the other hand, faculties which are fully
and frequently employed acquire a wonderful capacity. Is not this equally true in the
spiritual world? We are being trained probably for high and holy service by-and-by,
in which we shall need all those faculties that are now being quickened and trained
by our contact with danger, and our exposure to apparently hostile conditions of
existence. We are to be trained, by learning quickness of perception of danger here,
to exercise quickness of perception in ministry and willing service yonder. Besides,
Watchfulness continually provides opportunities for faith, and tends to draw us the
closer, and keep us the closer, to Him by whom alone we stand. Were we to be so
saved from evil by a single act, as that we should have no further need of
Watchfulness, should we not lose much that now makes us feel our dependence on
Him who is our constant safety? Have we not to thank God for the very daggers that
constrain us to keep so near Him if we are to be safe at all? Let us point out what
Watchfulness is not before we go on to consider what it is. And
I. Watchfulness is something quite distinct from nervous timidity and morbid
apprehensiveness-the condition of a man who sees an enemy in every bush, and is
tortured by a thousand alarms and all the misgivings of unbelief. David did not show
himself watchful, but faithless, when he exclaimed, “I shall now one day perish by the
hands of Saul;” and we do not show ourselves watchful when we go on our way
trembling, depressed with all sorts of forebodings of disaster. Let me offer a homely
illustration of what I mean. I was amused the other day at hearing a soldier’s account
of a terrible fright that he had during the time of the Fenian scare a few years ago. It
fell to his lot one dark night to act as sentinel in the precincts of an important
arsenal, which it was commonly supposed might be the scene of a great explosion any
night. The fortress was surrounded by a common, and was therefore easy to be
approached by evil-disposed persons. The night, as I have said, was as dark as a night
could be, and he was all alone, and full of apprehensions of danger. He stood still for
a moment fancying he heard something moving near him, and then stepped
backwards for a few paces, when he suddenly felt himself come into violent contact
with something, which he incontinently concluded must be a crouching Fenian. “I
was never so frightened,” he said, “before or since in my life, and to tell you the truth,
226

227. I fell sprawling on my back. Imagine my feelings when I found that the thing that had
terrified me beyond all description was only a harmless sheep that had fallen asleep a
little too near my beat.” Now, dear friends, I think that this soldier’s ridiculous, but
very excusable, panic may serve to illustrate the experience of many timid,
apprehensive Christians. They live in a state of chronic panic, always expecting to be
assailed by some hostile influence, which they shall prove wholly incompetent to
resist. If they foresee the approach of any circumstances that are likely to put their
religion to a test, they at once make up their mind that fiasco and overthrow are
inevitable; and when they are suddenly confronted by what seems an adverse
influence, or promises to be a severe temptation, they are ready to give all up in
despair. They forget that our Lord has taught us to take no anxious thought for the
morrow, and has assured us that sufficient for the day is the evil thereof.
II. Nor again does watchfulness consist in morbid introspectiveness, or in a
disposition to charge ourselves with all sorts of imagined forms of evil. To their
morbid sensibility everything has depravity in it; good and generous actions only
spring from self-seeking; every natural affection is inordinate; every commonplace
gratification a loving of pleasure rather than God. It is surely possible, believe me,
dear Christian friends, to emulate the exploits of a Don Quixote in our religious life,
and to run a tilt at any number of spiritual windmills, but this is not watchfulness. A
clerical brother of mine, alarmed from his slumbers by a policeman who reported his
church open, imagined that he had captured a burglar by the hair of his head in the
tower of his church, when he had only laid violent hands in the darkness upon the
church mop! It is quite possible to convert a mop into a burglar in our own spiritual
experiences. Just once more let me ask you to bear in mind that Watchfulness does
not consist in, and is not identical with, a severe affectation of solemnity, add a pious
aversion to anything like natural mirth or cheerful hilarity. I have before my eyes at
this moment the recollection of a dear and honoured brother, who, when something
amusing had been related at his table, suddenly drew himself up when he was just
beginning to join in the hearty laugh, and observed to me with much seriousness, “I
am always afraid of losing communion by giving way to levity.” I confess I admired
the good man’s conscientiousness, which I am sure was perfectly sincere, but I could
not help thinking that he was confusing between sombreness and sobriety.
III. But having pointed out certain forms or habits of conduct which are not be
mistaken for Watchfulness, though they often are, let us proceed to inquire what
watchfulness is; we have seen what it is not. And here it may be well to notice that
two distinct words, or perhaps I should say sets of words, in the Greek, are translated
in our version by the one word-watch. The one set of terms indicates the necessity of
guarding against sleep, and the other the necessity of guarding against any form of
moral intoxication and insobriety. Both these ideas are presented to us together in a
single passage in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians: “Let us not sleep as do others;
but let us watch and be sober. For they who sleep sleep in the night: and they that be
drunken are drunken in the night.” Here the two dangers arising-the one from sleep,
and the other from drunkenness-are brought before us at once; and the two words,
which are each of them usually translated by the English word-watch, are employed
to guard us against these dangers. “Let us watch and be sober.” These dangers seem
to be in some respects the opposites of each other-the one springs from heaviness
and dullness of disposition, and the other from undue excitability. The one is the
special danger incidental to monotonous routine and a dead level of quiet regularity,
the other is the danger incidental to a life full of stir and bustle-a life where cares and
pleasures, successes and failures, important enterprises and stunning
disappointments, bringing with them alternating experiences of elation or
depression, are only too apt to prove all-engrossing, and to exclude the vivid sense of
227

228. eternal realities. The one danger will naturally specially threaten the man of
phlegmatic temperament and equable disposition, the other will more readily assault
the man whose nervous system is highly strung, whether he be of sanguine or
melancholic habit. In the present passage the call to watch is coupled with the
exhortation to pray, and similarly St. Peter warns us “to be sober and watch unto
prayer.” This suggests to us that Watchfulness needs first of all to be exorcised in the
maintenance of our proper relations with God. If only these be preserved inviolate,
everything else is sure to go well with us; but where anything like coldness settles
down upon our relations with God, backsliding has already commenced, and unless it
be checked we lie at the mercy of our foe. Oh, Christian soul, guard with jealous care
against the first beginnings of listlessness and coldness and unreality in thine
intercourse with God! Not less, perhaps even more, do we need to watch in the other
sense which, as I have pointed out, the word bears in New Testament Scripture. Let
us not only keep awake, but let us be sober. We need to remember that we are in an
enemy’s land, and that unless we are constantly breathing the atmosphere of heaven,
the atmosphere of earth, which is all that we have left, soon becomes poisonous, and
must produce a sort of moral intoxication. How often have I seen a Christian man
completely forget himself under the influence of social excitement! But I hasten to
say, Do not let us fall into the mistake of supposing that it is only the light-hearted
and the pleasure loving that need to be warned against the danger of becoming
intoxicated by worldly influences. The cares and even the occupations of life may
have just as deleterious an effect upon us in this respect as the pleasures. Many a
man of business is just as much intoxicated with the daily excitements arising from
the fluctuations of the market or of the Stock Exchange, and just as much blinded to
higher things by the absorbing interests connected with money making or money
losing as the votary of pleasure can be at the racecourse or in the ballroom. Yet again,
Watchfulness is to be shown not only in maintaining our relations with God, in
resisting any disposition to be drowsy, and in guarding against the intoxicating
influence of worldly excitement; it is also to be shown in detecting the first approach
of temptation, or the first uprisings of an unholy desire. The careful general feels his
enemy by his scouts, and thus is prepared to deal with him when the attack takes
place. Even so temptation may often be resisted with ease when its first approach is
discerned; but it acquires sometimes an almost irresistible power, if it be allowed to
draw too near. But I spoke a few moments ago of the importance of watching, not
only against the beginning of temptation without, but also against any disposition to
make terms with temptation within. Here, I am persuaded, lies, in most instances,
the secret cause of failure. Balaam was inwardly hankering after the house full of
silver and gold at the very moment when he affected to despise it. But there is a
danger on the other side, against which we have to guard with equal watchfulness.
And it is the danger of incipient self-complacency. (W. H. Aitken.)
Advantage of knowing one’s weak point
It is the interest of every man not to hide from himself his ailment. What would you
think of a man who was sick, and attempted to make himself believe that it was his
foot that was ailing, when it was his heart? Suppose a man should come to his
physician and have him examine the wrong eye, and pay for the physician’s
prescription, founded on the belief that his eye was slightly but not much damaged,
and should go away, saying, “I am a great deal happier than I was,” although the
doctor had not looked at the diseased eye at all? If a man should have a cancer, or a
deadly sore, on one arm, and should refuse to let the physician see that, but should
show him the well arm, he would imitate what men do who use all deceits and
228

229. delusions to hide their moral sores and weaknesses and faults, as far as possible,
from themselves, from all persons, and then congratulate themselves that they are
not in danger. Watchfulness requires that a man should be honest, and should know
where he is, and where his danger is. Let others set their watch where they need it,
and you set yours where you need it. Each man’s watchfulness should be according to
his temperament and constitution. (H. W. Beecher.)
Watching-a military figure
Undoubtedly this is a military figure; although watching may be a domestic figure,
ordinarily it is military. A tower, a castle, a fort, is not content with simply the
strength of its walls, and its various defences. Sentinels are placed all round about it,
and they walk both night and day, and look out on every side to descry any
approaching danger, that the soldiers within may put themselves at once in a
condition to receive attack. Still more are a moving army watchful, whether upon the
march or in the camp. They throw out advanced guards. The picket line is established
by night and by day. Men are set apart to watch on purpose that no enemy may take
them unawares; that they may constantly be prepared for whatever incursion the
chances of war may bring upon them. It is here taken for granted that we are making
a campaign through life. The assumption all the way through is, that we are upon an
enemy’s ground, and that we are surrounded, or liable to be surrounded, with
adversaries who will rush in upon us, and take us captive at unawares. We are
commanded, therefore, to do as soldiers do, whether in fort or in camp-to be always
vigilant, always prepared. (H. W. Beecher.)
Each to guard against his own temptations
Your excess of disposition, your strength of passion, and your temptableness are not
the same as your neighbour’s. Therefore it is quite foolish for you to watch as your
neighbour watches. Every man must set his watch according to his own disposition,
and know his own disposition better than anybody else knows it. If a fort is situated
so that the weakest side is on the east, the commander, if he is wise, will set his watch
there. He says, “I believe that if I defend this point, nothing can do me any harm,”
and sets his watch there. But suppose the commander of a fort, whose weak place
was on the west side, should put his force all on the other side! If he would defend his
fort successfully, he should put his soldiers where it is weak. Here is a man who
watches against pride; but your temptation is on the side of vanity. It will not do for
you to watch against pride, because pride is not your besetting sin. There is many a
man who flatters himself, that because his neighbour has corrected his faults by
gaining a victory over pride, all he himself needs to do is to gain a victory over pride.
He has no difficulty in that, because he is not tempted in his pride. It is very easy to
watch against an enemy that does not exist. It is very easy to gain a victory where
there is no adversary. (H. W. Beecher.)
Watch against times of temptation
Every man should know what are the circumstances, the times, and the seasons in
which he is liable to sin. To make this matter entirely practical, there are a great
many who neglect to watch until the proper time and seasons for watching have
passed away. Suppose your fault is of the tongue? Suppose your temper takes that as
a means of giving itself air and explosion? With one man it is when he rises in the
229

230. morning, and before breakfast he is peculiarly nervous and susceptible. It is then that
he is irritable. It is then that things do not look right. And it is then that his tongue,
as it were, snaps, and throws off sparks of fire. With another man it is at evening,
when he is jaded, and wearied with the care and labour of the day. He has emptied
himself of nervous excitement, and left only excitability. And then is the time when
he is liable to break down in various ways. Men must set their watch at the time when
the enemy is accustomed to come. Indians usually make their attack at three or four
o’clock in the morning, when men sleep soundest; and that is the time to watch
against Indians. There is no use of doing it at ten o’clock in the morning. They do not
come then. If it be when you are sick that you are most subject to malign passions,
then that is the time when you must set your watch. Or, if it be when you are well that
the tide of blood swells too feverishly in you, then that is the time when you must set
your watch. If, at one time of the day more than another, experience has shown that
you are liable to be tempted, then in that part of the day you must be on your guard.
Everybody has his hours, his times and seasons, and his circumstances; and every
man should learn them for himself; and every man should set his watch then and
there. And frequently, by watching at the right time, you can easily carry yourself
over all the rest of the day. (H. W. Beecher.)
The danger of dallying with temptation
There is such a thing as dallying with temptation. Many a maiden will insensibly, and
step by step, allow herself to be led to things that, if not wrong, are yet so near it that
they lie in its very twilight and she is all the time excusing to herself such permissions
and such dalliance, Baying, “I do not intend to do wrong; I shall in due time recover
myself.” There is many a man who takes the serpent into his hand, because it is lithe’,
and graceful, and burnished, and beautiful, and plays with that which in some
unguarded moment will strike him with its poison fangs; and it is poor excuse, when
this dalliance has led him to the very edge of temptation, and has struck the fatal
poison into him, for him to say, “I did not mean to.” The mischief is done. The
damnation is to come. And it is poor comfort to say, “I did not mean to.” Pass by it;
come not near it; keep far from it, and then you will be safe. But it is not safe for
innocent, or inexperienced, or unconscious, or Inconsiderate virtue, to go, by
dalliance, near to things that carry in them the very venom of Satan. What should you
think of a man who, coming down to New York, should say, “I have had quite an
experience this morning. I have been up to one of the shambles where they were
butchering; and I saw them knock down oxen, and saw them cut their throats, and
saw the blood flow in streams from the great gashes. I spent a whole half-day there,
looking at men killing, and killing, and killing.” What would you say of a man who
said, “I have been crawling through the sewers under the street; for I want to know
what is at the bottom of things in this city?” What kind of curiosity would that be?
What would you think of a man who went where he could see the offal of hospitals
and dissecting rooms, and went wallowing in rottenness and disease, because he
wanted to increase his knowledge of things in general? And yet, here are men who
take things more feculent, more fetid, more foul, more damnable and dangerous-the
diseases, the ulcers, the sores, and the filth of the appetites and the passions; and
they will go wading and looking at things that a man should shut his eyes on if they
were providentially thrown before him. Why, there are some things that it is a sin to
look at twice. And yet there are men who hunt them up! Then again, there are men
who live so near to cheating that, though they do not mean to cheat, circumstances
cannot bend them without pushing them over. There are many men who are like an
apple tree in my garden, whose trunk and roots, and two-thirds of the branches, are
230

231. in the garden, and one-third of whose branches are outside of the garden wall. And
there are many men whose trunk and roots are on the side of honesty and
uprightness, but who are living so near the garden wall that they throw their boughs
clear over into the highway where iniquities tramp, and are free. It is never safe for a
man to run so near to the line of right and wrong, that if he should lose a wheel he
would go over. It is like travelling on a mountain road near a precipice. You should
keep so far from the precipice, that if your waggon breaks down there is room enough
between you and the precipice. Otherwise, you cannot be safe. (H. W. Beecher.)
GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, "
Watch and Pray
Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation.—Mar_14:38.
These words of Jesus, spoken in the Garden of Gethsemane, by their very
association with His tragic experience in that place, have an extraordinary
impressiveness. That solemn night and that succession of memorable events—the
Supper at which bread and wine became sacramental and symbolical with an
imperishable meaning; the walk from the city across the brook Kedron, along a
way here, perhaps, illumined by the pale light of a waning moon, there darkly
shadowed by massive wall or thick-leaved olive tree; the pause in the Garden of
Gethsemane, and the Master’s withdrawal and mysterious agony; the flaring
torches and multitudinous tread of the Temple police, accompanied by the
Roman cohort which Judas guided; the arrest, the hurried mockery of a trial,
and the overwhelming fear and doubt, sickening into despair, that oppressed the
disciples as the strange drama hastened to its close in the Crucifixion—these are
inseparably associated with these words: “Watch and pray, that ye enter not into
temptation.” Their setting makes them vivid and unforgettable. It gives them,
too, an added urgency, as if something of the anguish that wrung the praying lips
of Christ still clung to His speech.
How sad the Saviour’s heart was under the olive trees the disciples could not
know; but the sadness was deepened when, coming back to them for a moment,
He found them so little like Himself as to be all asleep. A sin of infirmity, no
doubt; but what a revelation of the infinite distance separating them from Him!
This sleep could perhaps be explained, naturally enough, by reaction of mind
after the tense excitement of the day—the passover and supper in the upper
room, the long discourse, the wonderful prayer they heard Him offer, the hymn
they had sung together, the walk in the darkness to the garden, and the
slumberous murmurs of the night wind in the olive trees; and yet it takes us by
surprise. We could have expected something better than this. The Master
evidently expected something better too. Even His generous excuse for them does
not hide His disappointment. Even the palliation that they were “sleeping for
sorrow” does not hide it either, for there is an accent of surprise in His words,
“Why sleep ye?” “Simon, sleepest thou?”
The words are very sorrowful and touching. They show an ineffable depth of
tenderness and compassion. He uttered no reproach, no sharp complaint, at their
unseasonable slumber; but only, “What, could ye not watch with me one hour?”
231

232. and He turned away all thought from Himself to them; and, for their own sakes,
bade them “watch and pray,” for that their trial was at hand. In this we have a
wonderful example of the love of Christ. How far otherwise we should act in
such a case, we all well know. When any seem to us to be less keenly awake to the
trial we may happen to be undergoing, we are above measure excited, as if some
great wrong were done to us. There is nothing we resent so much as the collected
manner of those who are about us in our afflictions. If they still seem the same
when we are so changed—even if they can still be natural, feel common interests,
and take their wonted rest, we feel exceedingly aggrieved, and almost forget our
other trial, in the kindling of a sort of resentment.
I
Temptation
The word “temptation” has come to be associated exclusively with that which is
evil. We seldom speak of tempting a man to good. There is a colloquial use of the
word, as when the lady of the house, presiding over her dinner-table, on which,
more as an adornment than for use, are various mysterious confections, asks her
guest, “Cannot I tempt you with a little of this soufflé?” in which case the word
has a suggestion in it that there is a debate in the mind of her guest as to the
wisdom of making an experiment with something of doubtful and mysterious
character. Ordinarily, however, the word temptation conveys the idea of
inducement in the direction of that which is evil.
The exhortation to watch and pray implies that there is danger. And danger
there is on all sides of us. There is (1) the danger of letting our opportunities
slip—our opportunities of improvement, our opportunities of laying up treasure
in heaven, our opportunities of benefiting those we love, our opportunities of
promoting our Master’s glory—and therefore we must watch. There is (2) the
danger of our being corrupted, and of the Church being corrupted, by false
teachers—the danger of false doctrine arising and spreading, and we are to
watch and stand fast in the faith. There is (3) the danger of being drawn away of
our own lust and enticed, and we are to watch—keeping our hearts with all
diligence, and keeping under the body. There is (4) the danger of becoming
wordly-minded—the danger of being overcharged with the cares of this life, of
being deceived by riches, of giving our hearts to the world, and we are to watch.
There is (5) the danger of being deceived and overcome by the many spiritual
enemies who compass us about, and the danger of being devoured by the great
adversary who goeth about like a roaring lion, and therefore we are to be
vigilant—we are to watch. And lastly and chiefly, there is (6) the danger of being
found unprepared by our Master at His coming, and we are exhorted again and
again to watch for His return.
1. The need of Watchfulness comes from the subtlety and the surprise of
temptation. Opportunities of promoting our own spiritual progress, the good of
others, and God’s glory, often present themselves unexpectedly, and just as
unexpectedly pass away, and therefore we must watch. Errors in doctrine or in
practice frequently arise from a very small beginning, and from what appears
232

233. harmless in itself, and often have taken deep root and spread widely before men
have discovered their true nature; and therefore we must watch. Very
frequently, too, temptation presents itself at an unexpected time, and in an
unexpected form, and we must watch. And then our enemies are ever surprising
us. They come suddenly and without the slightest note of warning. They may
attack us on our right hand or on our left, and that at any moment, for we see
them not. And then they come ever in disguise, and are constantly approaching
us in some new dress. Their weapons, too, they are constantly changing, and
their mode of attack; and they are ever watching for favourable opportunities,
and are constantly attacking us when we are least prepared for them. And they
are many—their name is legion; they are powerful—they are subtle—they are
malignant—they are unsparing. Surely we ought to watch—not being ignorant
of Satan’s devices. He seizes upon every favourable opportunity, and we ought to
watch. Esau was returning from the field, faint, for he had long fasted; he saw
his brother preparing pottage, and thought not of an enemy; but the enemy was
there, and, taking advantage of this opportunity, with his brother’s tongue asked
him to sell his birthright. He sold it—and then he felt that an enemy, the great
enemy, had done it. But his birthright was gone—for ever gone. He sought to
have it restored, but never could regain it, though he sought it carefully and with
tears.
I suppose all you boys have read Baxter’s Second Innings. In that fascinating
little book every boy is represented as a batsman who is being bowled at with
various sorts of bowling—“swifts,” “slows,” and “screws.” The object is, of
course, to find out where is his weak point, to get past his defence, and lay low
his wickets, which are honour, truth, and purity. The boy’s only chance of
playing a strong sound game is to watch every ball very closely. The danger is
always that he will get careless and slack; and then, in the moment when he is
taking it easy, in comes a swift ball when he was counting on a slow one, and in
consequence he comes to grief. You remember the illustration which Henry
Drummond gives, in the book, of a boy who, being off his guard for a moment,
yields to a swift and sudden temptation, and says what is not true. Sometimes a
false word slips off the tongue in this way, which you would give a whole term’s
pocket-money to recall. You did not remember to do what the Bible suggests—
put a watch upon the lips.1 [Note: C. S. Horne.]
Sometimes boys and girls, and men and women, keep steady watch against the
big faults, but let the little ones go unheeded. Do you remember Baxter’s surprise
when his captain reminds him that he has to guard something besides wickets.
“What?” says Baxter. “Bails,” says the captain. Now, bails are very little things;
but if the bowler succeeds in removing a bail the batsman has come to grief as
much as if his middle stump had been uprooted. You must not talk as if the little
faults do not matter. They do. They are “the little foxes that spoil the vines.” You
must try to guard all your life from temptation. Blessed is he that watcheth and
prayeth; that never sleeps at his post; that never suffers, and causes others to
suffer, from his neglect of duty.1 [Note: C. S. Horne.]
One time, when our soldiers were fighting against Indians in America, a sentry
at a very important point was found one morning dead at his post. The guard
233

234. had heard no sound, and they could not imagine how any one could have come so
close to the sentry as to kill him. They thought he must have fallen asleep at his
post. Another man was put in his place, and next morning he too was found dead
there. So the officer selected a sharp man, and said to him: “Now, let nothing
escape you. Shoot at anything that moves. If a dog goes by, shoot him.” For an
hour or two the man heard nothing stirring. But at last a little twig snapped, and
it seemed as if something were softly treading on dry leaves. The sentry’s heart
beat fast, and he strained his eyes, but could see nothing. After a second or two
he was certain something was coming near to him. He called out, “Who goes
there?” but no one answered. The next moment he saw something black and was
going to fire, but noticed that it was a small bear moving near a bush a few yards
off. So he lowered his rifle, and was going to laugh at himself at the thought of
how near he had been to raising an alarm about a little bear. But suddenly the
sentry remembered the words, “Shoot anything that moves, whatever it is!” and
he lifted his rifle and let go at the bear. The bear fell, and the guard ran to where
they had heard the report. On examining the bear they found it was a bear’s
skin. with a wounded Indian inside it. This Indian, night after night, had
approached the sentry, crawling along the ground in the dark skin of the bear,
and when near enough had suddenly sprung up and killed him.2 [Note: S.
Gregory.]
I remember a storm that raged over the country some years ago, and that tore up
by the roots and levelled to the ground thousands upon thousands of trees in the
central counties of Scotland. And the strange thing about it was this: that,
although the wind was undoubtedly very strong, yet it was not one bit stronger
than the wind of many a previous storm which these trees, now so numerously
uprooted, had successfully withstood. Why, then, did they fall on this occasion?
The answer is, that the wind came from an unusual quarter. It was a storm from
the north-west, a direction from which a gale comparatively rarely blows. Had it
come from any other quarter of the compass, these trees, accustomed to it, would
have remained firmly fixed in the soil; but it assailed them on a side on which
they had not sufficiently rooted, and so had not sufficiently guarded themselves.1
[Note: J. Aitchison.]
2. The need of watchfulness and prayer springs from the manifoldness as well as
the subtlety of temptation. Temptation is made possible by what is in a man, and
it is made real by what is about a man. The susceptibilities to it live within him;
the incitements, provocations, inducements, live around him, as it were, in the
very air he breathes. It is the adaptation of the outer to the inner, and the
openness or sensibility of the inner to the outer, that constitutes the strength of
temptation and creates the need of watchfulness. The sentinel eye must be at
once outward and inward, prospective and introspective, jealous lest the inner
and the outer enemy secretly meet, suddenly agree, and immediately seize and
defile the citadel of the soul. The inner conditions that make it possible and the
outer forms that make it actual may be reduced to three classes or kinds—social,
moral, and intellectual.
(1) It is a fact of experience, if anything is, that while there are many temptations
which beset us all, there is generally one which our own individual nature is
234

235. specially inclined to; which, if we give way to it, seems, as it were, to swallow up
all other temptations. At least, if we examine the other temptations, they seem all
to converge on the one point; their distinctive character is lost in that of the
“besetting sin,” just as when the plague raged at Athens, all other diseases, we
are told, seemed to lead up to and to end in it. What that besetting sin is, each
must find out for himself and, having found it out, watch.
The temptations which we encounter vary according to our temperament and
situation. Some seem to seek us, as if there were a diabolical intention lurking in
our environment. It is not difficult to account for man’s belief in a personal devil
and evil spirits. Some temptations seem to rise within us out of the darkness that
underlies consciousness. We cannot account for them. They grapple us
unawares. They are like foes that fire upon us from some hiding-place within our
citadel. Bunyan’s description of an experience which Christian had while passing
through “the valley of the shadow of death,” while exaggerated and almost
fantastic, has in it, nevertheless, a note of reality. “I took notice,” he says, “that
now poor Christian was so confounded that he did not know his own voice; and
thus I perceived it: Just when he was come over against the mouth of the burning
Pit, one of the wicked ones got behind him, and stept up softly to him, and
whisperingly suggested many grievous blasphemies to him, which he verily
thought had proceeded from his own mind. This put Christian more to it than
anything he had met with before, even to think that he should now blaspheme
Him that he loved so much before; yet if he could have helped it, he would not
have done it. But he had not the discretion neither to stop his ears nor to know
from whence those blasphemies came.”1 [Note: P. S. Moxom.]
Enter not— åἰóÝëèçôå —suggests a territory of temptation to be specially
avoided, where the force of allurements to sin is particularly felt, and where the
flesh is peculiarly weak. The petition, “Lead us not into temptation,” suggests a
similar thought, as also the language about our Lord’s being led up or driven
into the wilderness to be tempted, as though even He would not venture
unbidden upon such dangerous ground. There certainly is such territory, and it
is found wherever the world, the flesh, or the devil is specially prominent and
dominant. Hence the emphatic warnings against these three foes.2 [Note: A. T.
Pierson.]
Lead me, O Lord,
In still, safe places;
Let mine eyes meet
Sweet, earnest faces;
Far from the scenes
Of wordly fashion,
Of faithless care,
235

236. And noisy passion.3 [Note: M. F. Butts.]
(2) Again, experience has taught us that in the spiritual combat we cannot be too
watchful against those sins which we think we have no temptation to commit. It
is by these that the penitent too often falls. St. Peter knew he was impetuous and
impulsive and impatient; but unfaithful to his Lord he could not be. “Though I
should die with Thee, yet will I not deny Thee.” And ere the cock crowed, he
wept bitterly over a bitter fall. Satan may be a very wicked being, but he is a
wonderfully good general. He is neither omnipotent nor omniscient, nor
omnipresent, but he can use his opportunities. He will not long waste his power
on the part which you know is weak, where all your sentries have been doubled,
but he will turn to that where you think yourself secure, where you never have
been attacked. So it was that the virgin fortress of Babylon fell before the
conquering Cyrus. The walls were manned, the sentinels were at their posts,
every attack failed; yet secretly—no watch was set where Euphrates and the
brazen gates seemed to mock at danger—the enemy entered and surprised the
citadel.1 [Note: A. L. Moore.]
There are temptations that we seek. We put ourselves in their way, either
perversely and with the nascent intention to indulge in sin; or, since they lie in
the pathway of some worthy enterprise, with the determination to take the risk
for the sake of the end; or, ignorantly and heedlessly, with our foolish eyes closed
to danger.2 [Note: P. S. Moxom.]
“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” This was spoken in reference to a
nation, but it is also applicable to him who seeks to be God’s free man in earth or
heaven. We cannot train our spiritual eyes too keenly to see the danger in
supposedly unimportant things, which may open the doors of temptation and
lead to ruin. In training the inner eye we should learn to observe that which is
significant in a reconnoitre and relate it to our safety. A young Western farmer
frequented the village bar-room and hitched his team by the saloon. After his
conversion he never visited the bar-room, but continued to hitch his team in the
same place. The trained and watchful eye of a good old deacon noticed this, and
after congratulating the youth upon his conversion said: “George, I am a good
deal older than you, and will be pardoned, I know, if I make a suggestion out of
my wider Christian experience. No matter how strong you think you are, take
my advice and at once change your hitching-post.”3 [Note: C. R. Ross.]
(3) Again, experience has taught us to be especially watchful when any special
effort has been made, or any victory won by the power of God in us, when we
have felt God’s nearness, and been for the moment lifted up above the ordinary
life of conflict. Our greatest sins often follow closely on our highest resolutions,
simply because new efforts against the enemy always stir up the enemy to new
efforts against us. The very making of a resolution, and offering it to God, is an
appeal against the strong one to Him who is “stronger than the strong.” Even in
our Blessed Lord’s case, there seems to have been a mysterious connection
between His fasting and His temptation. For fasting, self-restraint, self-discipline,
is a preparing the soul for fight, a strengthening it against the moment of trial,
236

237. and the devil fears it—feels that each act of self-restraint gives strength to what
he would overcome, and his only hope is in immediate attack. The soul that
fights may be overcome; the soul that prays, never. The sinner who loves his sin
is safe in the bondage of evil,—the sinner who resolves in God’s strength to fight,
has already struck a blow for liberty.
It is strangely full of warning to me that the three men who here could not watch
for one hour were the same three who had been, more closely than any,
associated with the Master many times before: who, alone of the band, had been
with Him on the holy Mount, and had seen His glory there; who alone had been
witnesses of His power in raising the daughter of Jairus to life; one of them, too,
the man who had made loudest profession of willingness to die for Him; another,
the man who most profoundly loved Him, and at the supper leaned upon His
breast.1 [Note: G. H. Knight.]
II
Watchfulness
There is no commandment of Jesus which seems to be more frequently on His
lips than this: Watch. If the reader will be at the pains to read the following
passages in succession; Luk_21:34-36; Mar_13:33-37; Luk_12:35-40; Luk_21:8;
Mat_26:40-41; Mar_14:37-38; Mat_24:42; Mat_25:1-13; he will be sufficiently
impressed with the insistence which the Master lays upon this difficult duty. On
this occasion the command took the form: “Watch and pray, that ye enter not
into temptation.” In the other instances it applies to that Parousia which He
foretold as a certain, though indefinite, fact.
Let us see (1) What watching demands of us; and (2) How we may watch most
successfully.
i. What is it to Watch?
1. It is to learn. One of a man’s first duties is to get acquainted with himself, to
find out his tendencies and his peculiar weaknesses, and thus, his chief danger.
Learn your temptabilities. Many fall because they do not know the peculiar
infirmities of their own natures. Not all are tempted by the same enticements to
evil or in the same degree. What tempts one may but slightly or not at all tempt
another. Much of our misjudgment of men and of our lack of sympathy with
them arises from our failure to recognise clearly differences of temperament and
circumstances. Some men are specially vulnerable on the fleshly side. They may
have generous natures, full of kindly impulses and much love of the beautiful
and the good, but they are strongly sensuous and passionate. In that direction
lies their chief danger. They are never tempted to be deceitful or cruel, but they
are constantly tempted to be lustful. Other men are comparatively free from
sensual tendencies, but they have an instinctive greed for money, and money-
getting is, for them, a perilous business. They are tempted by avarice.
Unconsciously they are yielding, day by day, to impulses that at last will make
their hearts as hard as flint. Others are susceptible on the side of jealousy and
237

238. envy, and the victories over them of their peculiar temptation are making them
cruel and bitter, and driving out of their natures all love and sweetness. Here is a
man who has a fiery temper. This is his vulnerable side. He lacks self-control. He
is like a tinder-box, ready at a touch to burst into flame. He never premeditates
evil to his fellow-men, but temptation comes, and instantly he utters the stinging
word, or gives the swift blow that wounds a fellow-creature sometimes past
healing. There is a woman who is weak in the instinct of truthfulness. She
exaggerates easily. She does not mean to lie, but she is tempted, and almost
involuntarily her tongue weaves falsehood. The wisdom born of experience says:
Learn your peculiar weakness and guard that. He is not watchful who does not
watch himself. Do nothing simply because others do it. Many have sunk into
moral ruin because they failed to keep the solid ground of individual safety.
2. To watch is to avoid. We cannot avoid all temptations; nor, probably, would it
be best for us if we could. St. James says: “My brethren, count it all joy when ye
fall into divers temptations.” This is heroic doctrine, but, evidently, by
“temptations” the apostle means not merely enticements to evil, but also other
forms of trial; for he goes on to show that trials develop patience, or patient
endurance ( ὑðïìïíÞ ), and patience, when it is perfect, produces a fully matured
character. There is a powerful ministry of good in trial. It is to character what
fire is to oil, what drill and discipline are to an army. But the trials that develop
character will come without our seeking. We may let Providence take care of
that. The part of wisdom for us is to avoid temptations—to utter the prayer and
to live in the line of its suggestion: “Lead us not into temptation.” Many
temptations we can avoid; and, when we are bidden to “watch and pray, that we
enter not into temptation,” we are bidden to shape our course, to choose our
business, to elect our companions, to control our pleasures, our reading, and our
thoughts, with a view to our peculiar tendencies or susceptibilities, so that we
shall not encounter unnecessary and probably disastrous enticements to sin.
One dark night I had to cross the Irish Sea. As the steamer drove along over the
waves I walked the deck talking to the seamen and looking out across the dark
water. One of the men told me of the great care taken to prevent accident, and he
said, “At the present moment there are nine men on the look out on this vessel.”
Nine men were—watching!1 [Note: S. Gregory.]
3. To watch is to resist. Obviously, when temptation is felt and recognised, we
should resist. But how many fall who meant to resist simply because they are not
prompt in resisting. They dally with temptation when deliberation is both
treason against God and their own souls and an invitation to defeat. He is
already half conquered who begins to consider and argue. Safety lies in instant
action. Never attempt to argue down a temptation. Take it by the throat, as you
would a venomous serpent. Have no parleys with the tempter. Instant decision
saves many a man, who, if he think the matter over, yields and is undone. It is in
vain that you watch, unless you fight when the enemy comes. It is but mockery
for you to post sentinels to guard the approaches to the citadel if, when the foe
approaches, you pause with wide open gates to talk, for while you are debating
he seizes your weapons and binds you hand and foot.
238

239. Dangers are no more light, if they once seem light; and more dangers have
deceived men than forced them: nay, it were better to meet some dangers half-
way, though they come nothing near, than to keep too long a watch upon their
approaches; for if a man watch too long, it is odds he will fall asleep.1 [Note:
Francis Bacon.]
ii. The Conditions of Success in Watching
1. Live habitually in the Presence of God.—There is an Oriental story of a
contest between two spirits, one of the upper and the other of the lower world. So
long as the conflict was maintained in the air, the evil genius lost his strength,
and was easily mastered; but as soon as, in the various fortunes of the fight, he
touched the earth, his strength returned, he rose to a gigantic size, and the
heavens grew dark with his power. It is so with us in our conflict with evil. We
do not long resist temptation when we carry on the conflict on its own ground;
our spasmodic efforts then soon yield to its persistent pressure. It is by rising to a
higher level that we gain strength, while the temptation is weakened. It is by
living on this higher plane of thought, and moral purpose, that we are prepared
to encounter temptation. In the season when you are led astray, had you been
watching with Christ, had your mind been occupied by better thoughts and
purposes, the temptation would hardly have risen up to that higher region to
assail you. While the vivid apprehension of God’s presence is in the mind, we are
not likely to yield to the sin. Who is there that can consciously and deliberately
step over that one thought into a sin? Before we commit the wrong, that thought
is put aside, and we descend to the lower level, where the temptation has its
home, its associations, and its strength.
2. Occupy yourself with His Service.—It is said that whenever any one
consecrates himself to the worship of a certain Hindu deity, the priest does a very
cruel thing. He severs the nerve that enables the worshipper to shut his eyes, so
that his eyes ever after remain open. It is a cruel thing to do, for God intended
that the eye should have rest and that the eyelid should cover and shield it in the
hour of weariness; but there is, nevertheless, a meaning in the action of the
priest. It is that those who are consecrated to the service of that particular god
should always be watchful and on the alert in his service. We might well learn
that lesson in the service of Christ without submitting to any such treatment.
And everywhere, here and always,
If we would but open our eyes,
We should find through these beaten footpaths
Our way into Paradise.
Dull earth would be dull no longer,
The clod would sparkle—a gem;
239

240. And our hands, at their commonest labour,
Would be building Jerusalem.
III
Prayer
Jesus conquered His temptation in the garden by meeting it with prayer. The
disciples succumbed to their temptation because they met it without prayer. In a
temptation to rebellion against the Father’s will, the Lord’s resource was prayer.
In a temptation to cowardice, that ought to have been theirs. Prayer would have
made them conquerors, as it made Him; and therefore when temptation of any
kind, from any quarter, in any form, at any time, comes to me, I will listen to my
Master’s voice, “Why sleepest thou? Rise and pray.”1 [Note: G. H. Knight.]
1. Prayer offers many advantages. Relating to temptation, two are prominent.
(1) The first advantage is not a direct answer to prayer but is found in the fact
that during the prayer-moment one has time to mobilise his moral forces for
battle. In the heat of temptation the fate of a character hangs on seconds. The
prayer-moment offers an opportunity in which all our moral reinforcements may
rush to our aid and save the day. The youth who prays before he touches his lips
to the wine finds that the prayer-moment has given him a great advantage, for all
the spiritual reserves within him rush forth to defend his honour. The value of
the time element in the critical moment of temptation cannot be computed.
(2) The second advantage is a direct answer to prayer. In response to our request
God sends us spiritual forces, for He is aware we may fall before the allurements
of sin. He who walks the highway of righteousness must have Divine support.
Spiritual leaders insist that too great stress cannot be placed on prayer during
severe strain. Nevertheless, many who succeed in business ventures by their own
ability consider themselves able to face any proposition; therefore they eliminate
God and confront temptation alone. No greater mistake is possible.
Have you and I to-day
Stood silent as with Christ, apart from joy, or fray of life, to see His face;
To look, if but a moment, in its grace,
And grow, by brief companionship, more true,
More nerved to lead, to dare, to do
For Him at any cost? Have we to-day
Found time, in thought, our hand to lay
240

241. In His, and thus compare
His will with ours, and wear
The impress of His wish? Be sure
Such contact will endure
Throughout the day; will help us walk erect
Through storm and flood; detect
Within the hidden life sin’s dross, its stain;
Revive a thought of love for Him again;
Steady the steps which waver; help us see
The footpath meant for you and me.
2. We need to cultivate the habit of praying, with special reference to temptation.
It is not enough that we pray when the agony of strife is upon us; we should
make our special weakness the subject of constant confession and prayer. No one
is so secure as he who knows his frailty, and brings it often before God in earnest
petition. The lips that are most accustomed thus to pray will most quickly find
utterance for the urgent cry that marks the crisis of moral struggle.
3. But prayer is more than petition; it is also communion and companionship
with the Divine. It promotes familiar companionship with Christ, and this shuts
out evil. Temptation has no prevailing power with him who makes every day of
life a humble yet friendly walk with his God.
Regarding prayer not so much as consisting of particular acts of devotion, but as
the spirit of life, it seems to be the spirit of harmony with the will of God. It is the
aspiration after all good, the wish, stronger than any earthly passion or desire, to
live in His service only. It is the temper of mind which says in the evening, “Lord,
into Thy hands I commend my spirit”; which rises up in the morning “To do Thy
will, O God”; and which all the day regards the actions of business and of daily
life as done unto the Lord and not to men,—“Whether ye eat or drink, or
whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God.” The trivial employments, the meanest
or lowest occupations, may receive a kind of dignity when thus converted into
the service of God. Other men live for the most part in dependence on the
opinion of their fellow-men; they are the creatures of their own interests, they
hardly see anything clearly in the mists of their own self-deceptions. But he
whose mind is resting in God rises above the petty aims and interests of men; he
desires only to fulfil the Divine Will, he wishes only to know the truth. His “eye is
single,” in the language of Scripture, and his whole body is full of light. The light
of truth and disinterestedness flows into his soul; the presence of God, like the
sun in the heavens, warms his heart. Such a one, whom I have imperfectly
241

242. described, may be no mystic; he may be one among us whom we know not,
undistinguished by any outward mark from his fellow-men, yet carrying within
him a hidden source of truth and strength and peace.1 [Note: Benjamin Jowett.]
IV
Watch and Pray
We are commanded both to watch and to pray. And there are some people who
believe in doing one thing, but not the other. They believe in watching, but not in
praying. These are so-called men of the world. They go to business every day,
and are very keen in dealing with others. They are always on their guard against
being taken in, and pride themselves on their watchfulness. When they retire at
night, I have no doubt that they rejoice over the fact that no one has been able to
take them in, and sometimes, I fear, they pride themselves in having watched
their opportunity and taken somebody else in. There are many who believe in
watching in that sense.
Then there are those who believe in praying, but not watching. They do not
believe in being on the alert, and thus using the power of watchfulness which
God has given them; but they can pray by the hour. Now, our Lord would have
these two things united, “Watch and pray.” There is, no doubt, much need of
watchfulness in life, for there are dangers on every hand, and if there is need of
watchfulness in daily life, there is still more need of it with regard to our
spiritual life.1 [Note: D. Davies.]
Prayer without watching is hypocrisy, and watching without prayer is
presumption.2 [Note: W. Jay.]
He who watches constantly looks out for danger, and avoids the way that leads to
it. He who prays looks up for higher help and strength.3 [Note: A. T. Pierson.]
A man who had been a missionary in Asia once told me this incident. One day,
while travelling over a desolate stretch of country, he observed, just beyond an
abrupt bend of the road before him, a flock of sheep huddled about a shepherd
so close that they pressed against his legs. My friend was puzzled by the sight at
first, but as he passed a large mass of rock that had obstructed his gaze, he saw,
at a little distance down the road, a huge Asiatic wolf, gaunt and hungry, that
looked with greedy eyes on the sheep, but shrank back in fear of the shepherd
with his knotty staff. The trembling flock knew the place of safety.4 [Note: P. S.
Moxom.]
A pupil was remarkable for repeating her lessons well. Her schoolfellow, rather
idly inclined, said to her one day, “How is it that you always say your lessons so
perfectly?” She replied, “I always pray that I may say my lessons well.” “Do
you?” said the other; “well then, I will pray, too”: but alas! the next morning she
could not repeat even a word of her usual task. Very much confounded, she ran
to her friend, and reproached her as deceitful: “I prayed,” said she, “but I could
not say a single word of my lesson.” “Perhaps,” rejoined the other, “you took no
242

243. pains to learn it.” “Learn it! Learn it! I did not learn it at all,” answered the
first. “I thought I had no occasion to learn it, when I prayed that I might say it.”
Work while it is called to-day,
Watch and pray!
With both thine hands right earnestly,
As in sight of God most high,
Thy calling ply.
Watch! it is the Master calls thee;
Pray! it is His ear that hears;
Up! shake off thy chilly fears!
Mindful that whate’er befalls thee
Leaves thee further on thy way,
Watch and pray.
Watch! for demons haunt around thee,
Sin and harm beset thy path;
Yet be sure that nothing hath
Power to hinder or confound thee,
So thou faithfully alway
Watch and pray.
Pray! lest watching make thee weary;
Praying thou shalt never fail,
Though the night be long and dreary,
Though the dawn be faint and pale,
Brightens fast the perfect day:
Watch and pray.1 [Note: H. G. Tomkins.]
243

244. 39 Once more he went away and prayed the
same thing.
GILL, "And again he went away,.... To the same place, or at much such a
distance from them, as before:
and prayed and spake the same words; or word, that is, the same matter; for
λογος, here, answers to ‫,דבר‬ which signifies a thing, or matter, as well as word: Christ
prayed to the same effect, for matter and substance the same as before, though not in
the same express words, as is clear from Mat_26:39.
HENRY, "VIII. He repeated his address to his Father (Mar_14:39); He went
again, and prayed, saying, ton auton logon - the same word, or matter, or business;
he spoke to the same purport, and again the third time. This teaches us, that men
ought to pray, and not to faint, Luk_18:1. Though the answers to our prayers do not
come quickly, yet we must renew our requests, and continue instant in prayer; for
the vision is for an appointed time, and at the end it shall speak, and not lie, Hab_
2:3. Paul, when he was buffeted by a messenger of Satan, besought the Lord thrice,
as Christ did here, before he obtained an answer of peace, 2Co_12:7, 2Co_12:8. A
little before this, when Christ, in the trouble of his soul, prayed, Father, glorify thy
name, he had an immediate answer by a voice from heaven, I have both glorified it,
and I will glorify it yet again; but now he must come a second and third time, for the
visits of God's grace, in answer to prayer, come sooner or later, according to the
pleasure of his will, that we may be kept depending.
BENSON, "Mark 14:39-42. And he went away and spake the same words — It is
plain, by comparing Mark 14:35-36, with Matthew 26:42, that the words were
not entirely the same; and it is certain that λογος, here rendered word, often
signifies matter. So that no more appears to be intended than that he prayed to
the same purpose as before. Sleep on now, &c. — Dr. Waterland and some
others read this interrogatively, Do ye sleep on still and take your rest? The
passage, however, may be read with propriety agreeably to our own version; (see
the note on Matthew 26:42-45;) as much as to say, My previous conflict is now
over, and you may sleep on, because I have no further occasion for your
watching. It is enough, or rather, as Campbell renders απεχει, All is over, or, it is
done. the time is expired. The intention of the phrase was manifestly to signify,
that the time wherein they might have been of use to him, was now lost; and that
he was, in a manner, already in the hands of his enemies. Rise up, let us go — See
notes on Matthew 26:46-49.
BI, “And prayed, and spake the same words.
Perseverance in prayer
244

245. We may learn from this what we are to do in time of distress and affliction; we are
not only to go to God by prayer for help, comfort, and deliverance; but we are to go to
Him again and again: yea, often to call upon Him, and seek to Him in our distress, to
be instant and importunate with Him; and so to continue as long as the affliction
presses us.
I. Prayer is a duty and service which we owe to God and which we ought constantly
to perform in obedience to His will commanding it, though otherwise we should reap
no benefit by it to ourselves, nor even obtain the things we ask. And here the very
doing of our duty in uprightness of heart must comfort us (2Co_1:12).
II. Although God does not at once grant our petitions, yet He takes notice of our
prayers and is well pleased with them.
III. There are just causes why God does not always hear our prayers at first or
speedily; but delays, sometimes for long.
1. To exercise and try our faith, hope, patience, and obedience in waiting upon
Him.
2. To make us more fervent in prayer.
3. That the things we have asked, being for a time delayed, may be the more
prized by us when we get them.
IV. The reason why God does not hear us at first, or so soon as we desire, may be and
often is in ourselves, viz., in the faultiness of our prayers. Either we ask such things
as God does not see fit for us to obtain, and then it is a mercy in Him to deny them to
us; or else we ask not in due manner, we pray not in faith, or not with such feeling
and fervour as we ought; or else we are living in some sin unrepented of, which
hinders the fruit of our prayer (Jas_4:2-3; Jas_5:16; Psa_66:18).
V. Though God has promised to hear our prayers, and to grant our petitions, so far
as is good for us, and is according to His will; yet He will not have us limit Him a time
in which to do so: nor is it fit for us so to do, but we are to wait His leisure, convinced
that by so doing we shall lose nothing (Isa_28:16; Psa_40:1).
VI. God hears our prayers in divers ways.
1. By giving us the things we ask. Hannah, a child; Solomon, wisdom etc.
2. By giving us something as good, or better for us than that we ask; e.g. patience
in time of trouble, and strength to bear it (2Co_12:7-10).
3. By giving us inward comfort, by and in our prayers, and after them (Psa_
35:13).
4. By accepting our prayers as a service pleasing to Him. Now although God often
delays to hear us the first way, yet He always hears us one of these ways, and that
as soon as we pray to Him, if we pray in due manner, and as we ought; which
being so, must encourage us to persevere, and hold out in prayer, when we do not
immediately obtain those petitions which we ask of God. (George Petter.)
Lawfulness of set forms of prayer
Hence we may gather, that it is lawful for us to use a set form of prayer: not only to
ask the same petitions of God in effect and substance of matter at sundry times, but
also in the same form of words, or well near the same: yea, that this may be done
even in private prayer alone by ourselves, for such was this prayer now made by our
245

246. Saviour. And if in private prayer alone by ourselves (where usually more liberty may
be taken to vary the form of words in our prayers), then much more when we pray
with others, especially in public, it must needs be lawful to use a set form of words,
and to ask the same petitions in the same words. Our Saviour taught His disciples a
set form of prayer, which is that we call the Lord’s Prayer, appointing both them and
us to use it in the very same form of words in which it is framed (Luk_11:2)…And
what are sundry of David’s Psalms, but set forms of prayer, used by the Church in
those times?…The Church of God has always used set forms of prayer in public and
solemn meetings, nor was the lawfulness of this practice ever questioned till of late
times by Anabaptists, Brownists, and such like. (George Petter.)
40 When he came back, he again found them
sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. They
did not know what to say to him.
BARNES, "Neither wist they ... - Neither “knew” they. They were so conscious
of the impropriety of sleeping at that time, that they could not find any answer to give
to the inquiry why they had done it.
GILL, "And when he returned, he found them asleep again,....
Notwithstanding the expostulation he had used with them, the exhortation he had
given them, and the danger he had suggested to them:
for their eyes were heavy: with sleep and sorrow:
neither wist they what to answer him; partly through confusion and shame, not
knowing how to excuse themselves; and partly, through their being stupefied with
sleep and grief.
HENRY, "IX. He repeated his visits to his disciples. Thus he gave a specimen of
his continued care for his church on earth, even when it is half asleep, and not duly
concerned for itself, while he ever lives making intercession with his Father in
heaven. See how, as became a Mediator, he passes and repasses between both. He
came the second time to his disciples, and found them asleep again, Mar_14:40. See
how the infirmities of Christ's disciples return upon them, notwithstanding their
resolutions, and overpower them, notwithstanding their resistance; and what clogs
those bodies of ours are to our souls, which should make us long for that blessed
state in which they shall be no more our encumbrance. This second time he spoke to
them as before, but they wist not what to answer him; they were ashamed of their
drowsiness, and had nothing to say in excuse for it. Or, They were so overpowered
with it, that, like men between sleeping and waking, they knew not where they were,
or what they said.
BI, “He found them asleep.
246

247. Power of sleep
The most violent passion and excitement cannot keep even powerful minds from
sleep; Alexander the Great slept on the field of Arbela, and Napoleon upon that of
Austerlitz. Even stripes and torture cannot keep off sleep, as criminals have been
known to give way to it on the rack. Noises, which at first serve to drive it away, soon
become indispensable to its existence; thus a stagecoach, stopping to change horses,
wakes all the passengers. The proprietor of an iron forge, who slept close to the din of
hammers, forges, and blast furnaces, would wake if there was any interruption to
them during the night, and a sick miller, who had his mill stopped on that account,
passed sleepless nights until the mill resumed its usual noise. Homer, in his Iliad,
elegantly represents sleep as overcoming all men, and even the gods, except Jupiter
alone. (Christian Journal.)
41 Returning the third time, he said to them,
“Are you still sleeping and resting? Enough!
The hour has come. Look, the Son of Man is
delivered into the hands of sinners.
BARNES, "It is enough - There has been much difficulty in determining the
meaning of this phrase. Campbell translates it, “all is over” - that is, the time when
you could have been of service to me is gone by. They might have aided him by
watching for him when they were sleeping, but now the time was past, and he was
already, as it were, in the hands of his enemies. It is not improbable, however, that
after his agony some time elapsed before Judas came. He had required them to
watch - that is, to keep awake during that season of agony. After that they might have
been suffered to sleep, while Jesus watched alone. As he saw Judas approach he
probably roused them, saying, It is sufficient - as much repose has been taken as is
allowable - the enemy is near, and the Son of man is about to be betrayed.
GILL, "And he cometh the third time,.... After he had prayed a third time, to
the same purport as before:
and saith unto them, sleep on now, and take your rest; which words are
spoken ironically:
it is enough; or "the end is come"; as the Syriac and Arabic versions render it, of
watching and praying:
247

248. the hour is come, behold the son of man is betrayed into the hands of
sinners; both Jews and Gentiles, by one of his own disciples; See Gill on Mat_26:45.
HENRY, "But, the third time, they were bid to sleep if they would (Mar_14:41);
“Sleep on now, and take your rest. I have now no more occasion for your watching,
you may sleep, if you will, for me.” It is enough; we had not that word in Matthew.
“You have had warning enough to keep awake, and would not take it; and now you
shall see what little reason you have to be secure.” Apekei, I discharge you from any
further attendance; so some understand it; “Now the hour is come, in which I knew
you would all forsake me, even take your course;” as he said to Judas, What thou
doest, do quickly. The Son of man is now betrayed into the hands of sinners, the
chief priests and elders; those worst of sinners, because they made a profession of
sanctity. “Come, rise up, do not lie dozing there. Let us go and meet the enemy, for
lo, he that betrayeth me is at hand, and I must not now think of making an escape.”
When we see trouble at the door, we are concerned to stir up ourselves to get ready
for it.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 41-42
Mark alone recorded that Jesus made three separate forays into the depths of the
garden to pray.
"The Temptation of the Garden divides itself, like that of the Wilderness, into
three acts, following close one on another." [Note: G. F. Maclear, "The Gospel
According to St. Mark," in Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, p. 163.]
Jesus' perseverance in prayer demonstrated the extent of His dependence on the
Father. Jesus' question convicted the disciples again. He probably intended His
words as an ironic command rather than as a question or simply to express
surprise (cf. Matthew 26:45).
Less clear is the meaning of, "It is enough." [Note: Cranfield, The Gospel . . .,
pp. 435-36, listed eight different interpretations.] He could have meant that
Judas had received the betrayal money from the chief priests since the Greek
word apechei can mean "he has received it." Another possibility is that He
meant that He now understood that the Cross was inevitable. Perhaps Jesus
meant the disciples had had enough sleep and it was time to wake up. Fourth, He
may have meant that He had finished His praying. I prefer the third and fourth
views because they are the simplest explanations and because they make good
sense.
The hour that had come was the time of Jesus' arrest and death (cf. Mark 14:35).
The sinners in view were Satan's agents who would slay Jesus. Jesus' short
sentences reflect the tension and urgency of the moment. [Note: Hiebert, p. 362.]
Mark described Jesus' movements in a somewhat chiastic form. Jesus came to
the garden with His disciples, left most of them evidently at the entrance, took
three of them farther, and proceeded even farther into its depths alone. Then He
withdrew. At the center Jesus communed with His Father. The center of the
garden and the center of the pericope correspond to the center of His spiritual
conflict. This description helps the reader identify Jesus' praying as at the very
248

249. heart of His preparation for the Cross. It accounts for the remarkable poise with
which Jesus handled Himself throughout the tumultuous events that followed.
"Perhaps the most commonly recognized pattern of narration in Mark is the
threefold repetition of similar actions and events.... Some series are obvious
because they occur in direct sequence: at Gethsemane, Jesus returns from prayer
three times to find the disciples sleeping; Peter denies Jesus three times; Pilate
asks the crowd three leading questions, each of which is rejected; and the
narrator recounts events of the crucifixion at three, three-hour intervals (nine
o'clock, noon, and three o'clock." [Note: Rhoads and Michie, p. 54.]
Here, "This threefold pattern of narration underscores the definitive failure of
the disciples." [Note: Ibid.]
COKE, "Mark 14:41. Sleep on now, &c.— Some commentators read this
interrogatively, Do you sleep on still, and take repose? The passage, however,
may be read with propriety agreeable to our version; as much as to say, "My
previous conflict is now over, and you may sleep on, because I have no farther
occasion for your watching. It is enough; the time is expired in which your
watching would have been of any service tome."Theoriginal word απεχει,
sometimes signifies an acquittal, or discharge from anydebt or duty, and implies
our Saviour's discharging his disciples from the duty and obligation of watching
at that time, which he had laid them under by his commands, ch. Mark 13:33;
Mark 13:37. See Mill's Greek Testament.
PULPIT, "And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and
take your rest: it is enough ( ἀπέχει); the hour is come. Some have thought that
our Lord here uses the language of irony. But it is far more consistent with his
usual considerate words to suppose that, sympathizing with the infirmity of his
disciples, he simply advised them, now that his bitter agony was over, to take
some rest during the brief interval that remained. It is enough. Some
commentators have thought that the somewhat difficult Greek verb ( ἀπέχει)
would be better rendered, he is at a distance; as though our Lord meant to say,
"There is yet time for you to take some rest. The betrayer is some distance off."
Such an interpretation would require a full. stop between the clause now
rendered, "it is enough," and the clause, "the hour is come;" so that the passage
would read, "Sleep on now, and take your rest; he (that is, Judas) is yet a good
way off." Then there would be an interval; and then our Lord would rouse them
up with the words, "The hour is come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into
the hands of sinners." This interpretation all hangs upon the true rendering of
the word ἀπέχει, which, although it might be taken to. mean "he," or "it is
distant," is nevertheless quite capable of the ordinary interpretation, "it
sufficeth." According to the high authority of Hesychius, who explains it by the
words ἀπόχρη and ἐξαρκεῖ, it seems safer on the whole to accept the ordinary
meaning, "It is enough."
BI, “Sleep on now and take your rest.
The night scene in Gethsemane
1. The first thought suggested by this text is that the Son of Man may even now be
249

250. betrayed into the hands of sinners. Men are apt to imagine that had they lived in
the time of Christ they would not thus and thus have treated Him. But they who
despise Him unseen would have spurned Him to His face. The enemies of Christ’s
Church are the enemies of Christ. Even in our own day Christ may be betrayed.
He may be betrayed by His own disciples. The disposition to surrender Him to
enemies may still exist; a disposition to secure the favour of the world at His
expense. In this sense, for example, it may well be said that the Son of Man is
betrayed into the hands of sinners when the truth respecting Him is given up to
errorists, or cavillers, or infidels; when His divinity is called in question; when
His eternal Sonship is degraded or denied; when the sinless perfection of His
human nature is tainted by the breath of dubious speculation; when His
atonement is disfigured or perverted; when the value of His cross and bloody
passion is depreciated; when His place in the system of free grace is taken from
Him and bestowed on something else. To mention one other example; Christ is
betrayed into the hands of sinners when His gospel is perverted; His example
dishonoured; and Himself represented as the Minister of sin. O Christian! have
you ever thought that every inconsistent and unworthy act of yours is one step
towards betraying Him whom you profess to love?
2. Another thought which I suggest is, that when the cause of Christ is about to
be betrayed into the hands of sinners, His disciples are to watch unto prayer, lest
they enter into temptation.
3. Another thought, and that a melancholy one, is, that when Christ’s disciples
are thus left to watch, whilst He is interceding with the Father, they too often fall
asleep. Some, in the touching language of the gospel, may be “sleeping for
sorrow.” But oh! how many others sleep for sloth and spiritual indifference. It is
no time to sleep. The Church, Christ’s weeping bride, and the dying souls of men
are at your pillow, shrieking in your ears, like the shipmaster in the ears of Jonah,
“What meanest thou, O sleeper? Arise; call upon thy God, if so be that God will
think upon us, that we perish not.”
4. But, alas! this warning voice is often heard in vain. Amidst a world lying in
wickedness, amidst the untold miseries produced by sin, amidst the fierce attacks
of open enemies on the Son of Man, His friends, His chosen friends, sleep on.
And that sleep would prove to be the sleep of death, if we had not an High Priest
who can be touched with the sense of our infirmities, and when He sees us thus
asleep, comes near and arouses us. There may be some before me now, who,
though sincere believers, have been overcome by sleep. Your senses and your
intellects may be awake, your conscience has its fitful starts and intervals of
wakefulness when scared out of its slumbers by terrific dreams. But your
affections are asleep. You hear the gospel, but it is like the drowsy lull of distant
waters, making sleep more sound; you see its light, but with your eyelids closed,
and so subdued is its splendour that it only soothes the sense and deepens its
repose. If this is your experience, I appeal to you, and ask you whether, even in
this dreamy state, you have not felt the gentle hand of Christ at times upon you.
Has not your house been visited by sickness? But it is not only in personal
afflictions that the Saviour rouses you. Have you not felt His hand in public
trials? Have you not felt it in the trials of the Church? Have you had no signal
mercies since you fell asleep? Besides the voice of personal afflictions, and of
public trials, and of private mercies, there is a voice in public mercies too. But
when our Lord had for the third time fallen prostrate and arisen, when He came a
third time to His friends, and found them sleeping, He no longer expostulated;
He no longer asked whether they could not watch with Him one hour. There is
something far more awful in this mild but significant permission to sleep on, than
250

251. in all the invectives or reproofs He could have uttered. “Sleep on henceforth, and
take your rest.” That this may not prove to be indeed the case, we must arise and
call upon our God; we must come up to the help of the Lord against the mighty.
But, oh! remember, that the weapons of our warfare are not carnal. When the
presumptuous Simon was at last aroused, and saw his Master’s danger, he
thought to atone by violence for past neglect. And many a modern Simon does
the same. When once aroused they draw the sword of fiery fanaticism. But is
there no danger from an opposite direction? Is it any consolation that the sword
is in its scabbard, if the bearers of the sword are fast asleep instead of watching?
(J. A. Alexander, D. D.)
42 Rise! Let us go! Here comes my betrayer!”
GILL, "Rise up let us go,.... To meet the enemy and the danger; for there is no
escaping;
lo, he that betrayeth me is at hand; Judas, that he had hinted at supper should
betray him, was now about doing it; and was just now coming upon him, in order to
deliver him into the hands of the Jews, and the Roman band of soldiers; See Gill on
Mat_26:46.
HENRY, "“Come, rise up, do not lie dozing there. Let us go and meet the enemy,
for lo, he that betrayeth me is at hand, and I must not now think of making an
escape.” When we see trouble at the door, we are concerned to stir up ourselves to get
ready for it.
JAMIESON, "Mar_14:32-42. The agony in the garden. ( = Mat_26:36-46; Luk_
22:39-46).
See on Luk_22:39-46.
Jesus Arrested
43 Just as he was speaking, Judas, one of the
Twelve, appeared. With him was a crowd armed
with swords and clubs, sent from the chief
priests, the teachers of the law, and the elders.
251

252. GILL, "And immediately, while he yet spake,.... The above words:
cometh Judas one of the twelve: apostles of Christ, and which was an
aggravation of his wickedness; the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic,
versions add, "Iscariot"; and so it is read in one of Beza's copies. The Ethiopic version
reads, "one of the ten", very wrongly:
and with him a great multitude; a band of men and officers, with many of the
chief priests and captains of the temple, and elders of the people, that mixed
themselves with the crowd, to see how things would issue:
with swords and staves; which they intended to make use of, should any
resistance be made in apprehending him, or any attempt to rescue him:
from the chief priests, and the Scribes, and the elders; from the Jewish
sanhedrim, which consisted of these; See Gill on Mat_26:47.
HENRY, "We have here the seizing of our Lord Jesus by the officers of the chief
priests. This was what his enemies had long aimed at, they had often sent to take
him; but he had escaped out of their hands, because his hour was not come, nor
could they now have taken him, had he not freely surrendered himself. He began first
to suffer in his soul, but afterward suffered in his body, that he might satisfy for sin,
which begins in the heart, but afterwards makes the members of the body
instruments of unrighteousness.
I. Here is a band of rude miscreants employed to take our Lord Jesus and make
him a prisoner; a great multitude with swords and staves. There is no wickedness so
black, no villany so horrid, but there may be found among the children of men fit
tools to be made use of, that will not scruple to be employed; so miserably depraved
and vitiated is mankind. At the head of this rabble is Judas, one of the twelve, one of
those that had been many years intimately conversant with our Lord Jesus, had
prophesied in his name, and in his name cast out devils, and yet betrayed him. It is
no new thing for a very fair and plausible profession to end in a shameful and fatal
apostasy. How art thou fallen, O Lucifer!
II. Men of no less figure than the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders, sent
them, and set them on work, who pretended to expect the Messiah, and to be ready
to welcome him; and yet, when he is come, and has given undeniable proofs that it is
he that should come, because he doth not make court to them, nor countenance and
support their pomp and grandeur, because he appears not as a temporal prince, but
sets up a spiritual kingdom, and preaches repentance, reformation, and a holy life,
and directs men's thoughts, and affections, and aims, to another world, they set
themselves against him, and, without giving the credentials he produces an impartial
examination, resolve to run him down.
JAMIESON, "Mar_14:43-52. Betrayal and apprehension of Jesus - Flight of his
disciples. ( = Mat_26:47-56; Luk_22:47-53; Joh_18:1-12).
See on Joh_18:1-12.
BARCLAY, "THE ARREST (Mark 14:43-50)
14:43-50 And immediately, while he was still speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve
arrived, and with him a crowd with swords and cudgels from the chief priests,
252

253. and the experts in the law, and the elders. The betrayer had given them this sign.
"Whom I shall kiss," he said, "that is he. Seize him and take him away
securely." So when he had come, immediately he stepped forward. "Rabbi!" he
said--and kissed him as a lover would. They laid hands on him and seized him.
One of those standing by drew his sword and struck the High Priest's servant
and cut off his ear. Jesus said to them, "Have you come out with swords and
cudgels to arrest me as you would come against a brigand? Daily I was with you
teaching in the Temple precincts, and you did not seize me--but, let it be, that the
scriptures may be fulfilled." And they all left him and fled.
Here is sheer drama and, even in Mark's economy of words, the characters stand
out before us.
(i) There is Judas, the traitor. He was aware that the people knew Jesus well
enough by sight. But he felt that in the dim light of the garden, with the darkness
of the trees lit in pools of light by the flare of the torches, they needed a definite
indication of who they were to arrest. And so he chose that most terrible of
signs--a kiss. It was customary to greet a Rabbi with a kiss. It was a sign of
respect and affection for a well-loved teacher. But there is a dreadful thing here.
When Judas says, "Whom I shall kiss, that is he," he uses the word philein
(Greek #5368) which is the ordinary word. But when it is said that he came
forward and kissed Jesus the word is kataphilein (Greek #2705). The kata-
(Greek #2596) is intensive and kataphilein (Greek #2705) means to kiss as a lover
kisses his beloved. The sign of the betrayal was not a mere formal kiss of
respectful greeting. It was a lover's kiss. That is the grimmest and most awful
thing in all the gospel story.
(ii) There is the arresting mob. They came from the chief priests, the scribes and
the elders. These were the three sections of the Sanhedrin and Mark means that
they came from the Sanhedrin. Even under Roman jurisdiction the Sanhedrin
had certain police rights and duties in Jerusalem and had its own police force.
No doubt an assorted rabble had attached itself to them on the way. Somehow
Mark manages to convey the wrought-up excitement of those who came to make
the arrest. Maybe they had come prepared for bloodshed with nerves taut and
tense. It is they who emanate terror--not Jesus.
(iii) There is the man of the forlorn hope who drew his sword and struck one
blow. John (John 18:10) tells us that it was Peter. It sounds like Peter, and Mark
very likely omitted the name because it was not yet safe to write it down. In the
scuffle no one saw who struck the blow; it was better that no one should know.
But when John wrote forty years later it was then quite safe to write it down. It
may be wrong to draw a sword and hack at a man, but somehow we are glad
that there was one man there who, at least on the impulse of the moment, was
prepared to strike a blow for Jesus.
(iv) There are the disciples. Their nerve cracked. They could not face it. They
were afraid that they too would share the fate of Jesus; and so they fled.
(v) There is Jesus himself. The strange thing is that in ill this disordered scene
253

254. Jesus was the one oasis of serenity. As we read the story it reads as if he, not the
Sanhedrin police, was directing affairs. For him the struggle in the garden was
over, and now there was the peace of the man who knows that he is following the
will of God.
BENSON, “Mark 14:43-45. Immediately, while he yet spake — And gave his
disciples the alarm just mentioned; Judas came, and with him a great
multitude — Persons of different stations and offices in life, sent with authority
from the chief priests, with swords and staves — Or clubs, as it seems ξυλων
ought here to be rendered. “A staff, in Greek, ραβδος, is intended principally to
assist us in walking; a club, ξυλον, is a weapon both offensive and defensive. To
show that these words are, in the gospels, never used promiscuously, let it be
observed, that, in our Lord’s commands to his apostles, in relation to the
discharge of their office, when what concerned their own accommodation in
travelling is spoken of, the word παβδος is used by all the three evangelists,
Matthew, Mark, and Luke, who take particular notice of that transaction. But,
in the account given by the same evangelists of the armed multitude sent by the
high-priests and elders to apprehend our Lord, they never employ the term
παβδος, but always, ξυλον.” — Campbell.
PULPIT, "And straightway, while he yet spake, cometh Judas, one of the twelve.
How the stupendous crime is here marked! It was so startling a fact that "one of
the twelve" should be the betrayer of cur Lord, that this designation of Judas
became linked with his name: "Judas, one of the twelve." He comes not only as a
thief and a robber, but also as a traitor; the leader of those who were thirsting
for Christ's blood. St. Luke (Luke 22:47) says that Judas "went before them," in
his eagerness to accomplish his hateful errand. And with him a multitude (not a
great multitude; the word πολὺς has not sufficient authority). But though not a
great multitude, they would be a considerable number. There would be a band of
soldiers; and there would be civil officers sent by the Sanhedrim. Thus Gentiles
and Jews were united in the daring act of arresting the Son of God. St. John
(John 18:3) says that they had "lanterns and torches;" although the moon was at
the full.
BURKITT, "The hour is now almost come, even that hour of sorrow which
Christ had so often spoken of, Yet a little while, and the Son of man is betrayed
into the hands of sinners; for while he yet spake, cometh Judas with a band of
soldiers to apprehend him: it was the lot and portion of our dear Redeemer, To
be betrayed into the hands of his mortal enemies, by the treachery of a false and
dissembling friend.
Here we have observable,
1. The traitor. 2. The treason. 3. The manner how. 4. The time when this
treasonable design was executed.
Observe, 1. The traitor, Judas. All the evangelists carefully describe him by his
name, Judas; by his sirname, Judas Iscariot; lest he should be mistaken for Jude,
the brother of James. Almighty God takes great care to preserve the names of his
254

255. upright-hearted servants. He is further described by his office, one of the twelve.
The eminency of his place and station was an high aggravation of his
transgression.
Learn hence, That the greatest professors had need be very jealous of
themselves, and suspicious of their own hearts, and look well to the grounds and
principles of their profession; for a profession begun in hypocrisy, will certainly
end in apostacy.
Learn farther, That person are never in such imminent danger, as when they
meet with temptations exactly suited to their master-lusts. Covetousness was
Judas's master-sin; the love of the world made him a slave to Satan, and the devil
lays a temptation before him exactly suited to his temper and inclination; and it
constantly overcomes him.
O! pray we, that we may be kept from a strong and suitable temptation; a
temptation suited to our inclination and predominant lust and corruption.
Observe, 2. The treason of this traitor Judas: he led on an armed multitude to
the place where Christ was, gave them a signal to discover him by, and bids them
lay hands upon him, and hold him fast. Some conjecture, that when Judas bade
them hold Christ fast, he thought they could not do it; but that as Christ had at
other times conveyed himself from the multitude, when they attempted to kill or
stone him, so he would have done now: but his hour was now come, and
accordingly he suffers himself to be delivered by the treachery of Judas into his
enemies' hands. And this his treason is attended with these hellish aggravations;
he had been a witness to the miracles which our Saviour had wrought by his
divine power, and therefore could not sin out of ignorance: what he did was not
at the solicitation and persuasion of others, but he was a volunteer in this service;
the high priests did not send to him, but he went to them, offering his assistance;
no doubt it was a matter of surprise to the chief priests to find one of Christ's
own disciples at the head of a conspiracy against him.
Lord! how dangerous is it to allow ourselves in any one secret or open sin! none
can say how far that one sin may in time lead us. Should any have told Judas,
that his love of maoney would at last make him sell his Saviour, he would have
said with Hazael, Is thy servant a dog, that he should do this thing? That soul
can never be safe that harbours one sin within its breast.
Observe, 3. The manner how this hellish plot was executed; partly by force, and
partly by fraud: by force, in the Judas came with a multitude armed with swords
and staves; and by fraud, giving a kiss, and saying, Hail Master. Here was honey
in the lips, but poison in the heart.
Observe, 4. The time when, the place where, and the work which our Saviour
was about, when this treasonable design was executed: he was in the garden with
his disciples, exhorting them to prayer and watchfulness, dropping heavenly
advice and comfort upon them. While he yet spake, lo! Judas came. Our Saviour
was found in the most heavenly and excellent employment when his enemies
255

256. came to apprehend him.
Lord, how happy is it when our sufferings find us in God's way, engaged in his
work, and engaging his assistance by fervent supplication! Thus did our Lord's
sufferings meet him: may ours in like manner meet us!
Observe, 5. The endeavours used by the disciples for their Master's rescue; one
of them (Saint Matthew says it was Peter) draws his sword and cuts off the ear of
Malchus, who probably was one of the forwardest to lay hands on Christ.
But why did not Saint Peter draw upon Judas rather than Malchus?
Because, though Judas was more faulty, yet Malchus was more forward to arrest
and carry off our Saviour. How doth a pious breast swell with indignation at the
sight of any open affront offered to its Saviour! Yet though St. Peter's heart was
sincere, his hand was rash; good intentions are no warrant for irregular actions;
and accordingly Christ, who accepted the affection, reproves the action: Put up
thy sword; for they that take the sword, shall perish by the sword.
Christ will thank no man to fight for him without warrant and commission from
him. To resist a lawful magistrate in Christ's own defence, is rash zeal, and
discountenanced by the gospel.
Observe, lastly, The effect which our Saviour's apprehension had upon the
apostles; they all forsook him, and fled. They that said to Christ a little before,
Though we should die with thee, yet will we not deny thee; do all here desert and
cowardly forsake him, when it came to the trial.
Learn hence, That the best and holiest of men know not their own hearts, when
great temptations and trials are before them, until such time as they come to
grapple with them. No man knows his own strength till temptation puts it to the
proof.
MACLAREN, “THE CAPTIVE CHRIST AND THE CIRCLE ROUND HIM
A comparison of the three first Gospels in this section shows a degree of similarity,
often verbal, which is best accounted for by supposing that a common (oral?)
‘Gospel,’ which had become traditionally fixed by frequent and long repetition,
underlies them all. Mark’s account is briefest, and grasps with sure instinct the
essential points; but, even in his brevity, he pauses to tell of the young man who so
nearly shared the Lord’s apprehension. The canvas is narrow and crowded; but we
may see unity in the picture, if we regard as the central fact the sacrilegious seizure of
Jesus, and the other incidents and persons as grouped round it and Him, and
reflecting various moods of men’s feelings towards Him.
I. The avowed and hypocritical enemies of incarnate love.
Again we have Mark’s favourite ‘straightway,’ so frequent in the beginning of the
Gospel, and occurring twice here, vividly painting both the sudden inburst of the
crowd which Interrupted Christ’s words and broke the holy silence of the garden, and
Judas’s swift kiss. He is named-the only name but our Lord’s in the section; and the
256

257. depth of his sin is emphasised by adding ‘one of the twelve.’ He is not named in the
next verse, but gibbeted for immortal infamy by the designation, ‘he that betrayed
Him.’ There is no dilating on his crime, nor any bespattering him with epithets. The
passionless narrative tells of the criminal and his crime with unsparing, unmoved
tones, which have caught some echo beforehand of the Judge’s voice. To name the
sinner, and to state without cloak or periphrasis what his deed really was, is
condemnation enough. Which of us could stand it? Judas was foremost of the crowd.
What did he feel as he passed swiftly into the shadow of the olives, and caught the
first sight of Jesus? That the black depths of his spirit were agitated is plain from two
things-the quick kiss, and the nauseous repetition of it. Mark says, ‘Straightway . . .
he kissed Him much.’ Probably the swiftness and vehemence, so graphically
expressed by these two touches, were due, not only to fear lest Christ should escape,
and to hypocrisy overacting its part, but to a struggle with conscience and ancient
affection, and a fierce determination to do the thing and have it over. Judas is not the
only man who has tried to drown conscience by hurrying into and reiterating the sin
from which conscience tries to keep him. The very extravagances of evil betray the
divided and stormy spirit of the doer. In the darkness and confusion, the kiss was a
surer token than a word or a pointing finger would have been; and simple
convenience appears to have led to its selection. But what a long course of hypocrisy
must have preceded and how complete the alienation of heart must have become,
before such a choice was possible! That traitor’s kiss has become a symbol for all
treachery cloaked in the garb of affection. Its lessons and warnings are obvious, but
this other may be added-that such audacity and nauseousness of hypocrisy is not
reached at a leap, but presupposes long underground tunnels of insincere
discipleship, through which a man has burrowed, unseen by others, and perhaps
unsuspected by himself. Much hypocrisy of the unconscious sort precedes the
deliberate and conscious.
How much less criminal and disgusting was the rude crowd at Judas’s heels! Most of
them were mere passive tools. The Evangelist points beyond them to the greater
criminals by his careful enumeration of all classes of the Jewish authorities, thus
laying the responsibility directly on their shoulders, and indirectly on the nation
whom they represented. The semi-tumultuous character of the crowd is shown by
calling them ‘a multitude,’ and by the medley of weapons which they carried. Half-
ignorant hatred, which had had ample opportunities of becoming knowledge and
love, offended formalism, blind obedience to ecclesiastical superiors, the dislike of
goodness-these impelled the rabble who burst into the garden of Gethsemane.
II. Incarnate love, bound and patient.
We may bring together Mar_14:46, Mar_14:48-49, the first of which tells in
simplest, briefest words the sacrilegious violence done to Jesus, while the others
record His calm remonstrance. ‘They laid hands on Him.’ That was the first stage in
outrage-the quick stretching of many hands to secure the unresisting prisoner. They
‘took Him,’ or, as perhaps we might better render, ‘They held Him fast,’ as would
have been done with any prisoner. Surely, the quietest way of telling that stupendous
fact is the best! It is easy to exclaim, and, after the fashion of some popular writers of
lives of Christ, to paint fancy pictures. It is better to be sparing of words, like Mark,
and silently to meditate on the patient long-suffering of the love which submitted to
these indignities, and on the blindness which had no welcome but this for ‘God
manifest in the flesh.’ Both are in full operation to-day, and the germs of the latter
are in us all.
Mark confines himself to that one of Christ’s sayings which sets in the clearest light
His innocence and meek submissiveness. With all its calmness and patience, it is
majestic and authoritative, and sounds as if spoken from a height far above the
257

258. hubbub. Its question is not only an assertion of His innocence, and therefore of his
captor’s guilt, but also declares the impotence of force as against Him-’Swords and
staves to take Me!’ All that parade of arms was out of place, for He was no evil-doer;
needless, for He did not resist; and powerless, unless He chose to let them prevail.
He speaks as the stainless, incarnate Son of God. He speaks also as Captain of ‘the
noble army of martyrs,’ and His question may be extended to include the truth that
force is in its place when used against crime, but ludicrously and tragically out of
place when employed against any teacher, and especially against Christianity. Christ,
in His persecuted confessors, puts the same question to the persecutors which Christ
in the flesh put to His captors.
The second clause of Christ’s remonstrance appeals to their knowledge of Him and
His words, and to their attitude towards Him. For several days He had daily been
publicly teaching in the Temple. They had laid no hands on Him. Nay, some of them,
no doubt, had helped to wave the palm-branches and swell the hosannas. He does
not put the contrast of then and now in its strongest form, but spares them, even
while He says enough to bring an unseen blush to some cheeks. He would have them
ask, ‘Why this change in us, since He is the same? Did He deserve to be hailed as
King a few short hours ago? How, then, before the palm-branches are withered, can
He deserve rude hands?’ Men change in their feelings to the unchanging Christ; and
they who have most closely marked the rise and fall of the tide in their own hearts
will be the last to wonder at Christ’s captors, and will most appreciate the gentleness
of His rebuke and remonstrance.
The third clause rises beyond all notice of the human agents, and soars to the divine
purpose which wrought itself out through them. That divine purpose does not make
them guiltless, but it makes Jesus submissive. He bows utterly, and with no
reluctance, to the Father’s will, which could be wrought out through unconscious
instruments, and had been declared of old by half-understanding prophets, but
needed the obedience of the Son to be clear-seeing, cheerful, and complete. We, too,
should train ourselves to see the hand that moves the pieces, and to make God’s will
our will, as becomes sons. Then Christ’s calm will be ours, and, ceasing from self, and
conscious of God everywhere, and yielding our wills, which are the self of ourselves,
to Him, we shall enter into rest.
III. Rash love defending its Lord with wrong weapons (Mar_14:47).
Peter may have felt that he must do something to vindicate his recent boasting, and,
with his usual headlong haste, stops neither to ask what good his sword is likely to
do, nor to pick his man and take deliberate aim at him. If swords were to be used,
they should do something more effectual than hacking off a poor servant’s ear. There
was love In the foolish deeds and a certain heroism in braving the chance of a return
thrust or capture, which should go to Peter’s credit. If he alone struck a blow for his
Master, it was because the others were more cowardly, not more enlightened. Peter
has had rather hard measure about this matter, and is condemned by some of us who
would not venture a tenth part of what he ventured for his Lord then. No doubt, this
was blind and blundering love, with an alloy of rashness and wish for prominence;
but that is better than unloving enlightenment and caution, which is chiefly solicitous
about keeping its own ears on. It is also worse than love which sees and reflects the
image of the meek Sufferer whom it loves. Christ and His cause are to be defended by
other weapons. Christian heroism endures and does not smite. Not only swords, but
bitter words which wound worse than they, are forbidden to Christ’s soldier. We are
ever being tempted to fight Christ’s battles with the world’s weapons; and many a
‘defender of the faith’ in later days, perhaps even in this very enlightened day, has
repeated Peter’s fault with less excuse than he, and with very little of either his
258

259. courage or his love.
IV. Cowardly love forsaking its Lord (Mar_14:50).
‘They all forsook Him, and fled.’ And who will venture to say that he would not have
done so too? The tree that can stand such a blast must have deep roots. The Christ
whom they forsook was, to them, but a fragment of the Christ whom we know; and
the fear which scattered them was far better founded and more powerful than
anything which the easy-going Christians of to-day have to resist. Their flight may
teach us to place little reliance on our emotions, however genuine and deep, and to
look for the security for our continual adherence to Christ, not to our fluctuating
feelings, but to His steadfast love. We keep close to Him, not because our poor
fingers grasp His hand-for that grasp is always feeble, and often relaxed-but because
His strong and gentle hand holds us with a grasp which nothing can loosen. Whoso
trusts in his own love to Christ builds on sand, but whoso trusts in Christ’s love to
him builds on rock.
V. Adventurous curiosity put to flight (Mar_14:51 - Mar_14:52).
Probably this young man was Mark. Only he tells the incident, which has no bearing
on the course of events, and was of no importance but to the person concerned. He
has put himself unnamed in a corner of his picture, as monkish painters used to do,
content to associate himself even thus with his Lord. His hastily cast-on covering
seems to show that he had been roused from sleep. Mingled love and curiosity and
youthful adventurousness made him bold to follow when Apostles had fled. No effort
appears to have been made to stop their flight; but he is laid hold of, and, terrified at
his own rashness, wriggles himself out of his captors’ hands. The whole incident
singularly recalls Mark’s behaviour on Paul’s first missionary journey. There are the
same adventurousness, the same inconsiderate entrance on perilous paths, the same
ignominious and hasty retreat at the first whistle of the bullets. A man who pushes
himself needlessly into difficulties and dangers without estimating their force is
pretty sure to take to his heels as soon as he feels them, and to cut as undignified a
figure as this naked fugitive.
VI. Love frightened, but following (Mar_14:54).
Fear had driven Peter but a little way. Love soon drew him and John back. Sudden
and often opposite impulses moved Ms conduct and ruffled the surface of his
character, but, deep down, the core was loyal love. He followed, but afar off; though
‘afar off,’ he did follow. If his distance betrayed his terror, his following witnessed his
bravery. He is not a coward who is afraid, but he who lets his fear hinder him from
duty or drive him to flight. What is all Christian living but following Christ afar off?
And do the best of us do more, though we have less apology for our distance than
Peter had? ‘Leaving us an example, that ye should follow His steps’ said he, long
after, perhaps remembering both that morning and the other by the lake when he
was bidden to leave other servants’ tasks to the Master’s disposal, and, for his own
part, to follow Him.
His love pushed him into a dangerous place. He was in bad company among the
inferior sort of servants huddled around the fire that cold morning, at the lower end
of the hall; and as its light flickered on his face, he was sure to be recognised. But we
have not now to do with his denial. Rather he is the type of a true disciple, coercing
his human weakness and cowardice to yield to the attraction which draws him to his
Lord, and restful in the humblest place where he can catch a glimpse of His face, and
so be, as he long after alleged it as his chief title to authority to have been, ‘a witness
of the sufferings of Christ.’
259

260. 44 Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with
them: “The one I kiss is the man; arrest him
and lead him away under guard.”
GILL, "And he that betrayed him had given them a token,.... A common
sign, in which they agreed; and so this same Greek word is used by the Jews (c):
"said R. Phinehas in the name of R. Reuben, did you ever see one man go out of the
north, and another from the south, and meet each other, except they made, ‫,סימנא‬ "a
common sign", between them.''
Such an one the traitor gave his company;
saying, whomsoever I shall kiss, the same is he; Jesus of Nazareth; who was
to be delivered to them:
take him, and lead him away safely; with care and caution, lest he should get
out of their hands, and make his escape, as he had sometimes done: the word
"safely", is omitted in the Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic versions. The Vulgate Latin
renders it "cautiously", and so does the Syriac version, which joins it to the words,
"take him"; See Gill on Mat_26:48.
45 Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, “Rabbi!”
and kissed him.
BARNES, "Master, Master - As if expressing great joy that he had found him
again.
GILL, "And as soon as he was come,.... To the place where Jesus was:
he goeth straightway to him; alone; as if he had nothing to do with the company
behind, and as if he was his friend, and concerned for his safety:
and saith, Master, Master; expressing great affection for him, and respect to him,
by repeating this word. The Ethiopic version has it but once, and so two exemplars of
Beza's; and the Vulgate Latin reads, "hail, Master", as in Mat_26:49.
260

261. and kissed him; See Gill on Mat_26:49.
HENRY, "III. Judas betrayed him with a kiss; abusing the freedom Christ used to
allow his disciples of kissing his cheek at their return when they had been any time
absent. He called him, Master, Master, and kissed him; he said, Rabbi, Rabbi, as if
he had been now more respectful to him than ever. It is enough to put one for ever
out of conceit with being called of men Rabbi, Rabbi (Mat_23:7), since it was with
this compliment that Christ was betrayed. He bid them take him, and lead him away
safely. Some think that he spoke this ironically, knowing that they could not secure
him unless he pleased, that this Samson could break their bonds asunder as threads
of tow, and make is escape, and then he should get the money, and Christ the honour,
and no harm done; and I should think so too, but that Satan was entered into him, so
that the worst and most malicious intention of this action is not too black to be
supposed. Nay, he had often heard his Master say, that, being betrayed, he should be
crucified, and had no reason to think otherwise.
PULPIT, "And when he was come, straightway he came to him, and saith,
Rabbi; and kissed him ( κατεφίλησεν αὐτόν); literally, kissed him much. The kiss
was an ancient mode of salutation amongst the Jews, the Romans, and other
nations. It is possible that this was the usual mode with which the disciples
greeted Christ when they returned to him after any absence. But Judas abused
this token of friendship, using it for a base and treacherous purpose. St.
Chrysostom says that he felt assured by the gentleness of Christ that he would
not repel him, or that, if he did, the treacherous action would have answered its
purpose.
BI 45-46, “He that betrayeth Me is at hand.
The betrayer
I. We see in him what religious privileges and advantages it is possible to enjoy and
yet be destitute of vital piety. How impressively does the fatal example of Judas
admonish the hearers of the gospel, the members of Christian churches, and
especially the junior members of Christian families. Value your privileges, but do not
rest in them. Improve them, profit by them; but do not confide in them. Say not, “We
have Abraham to our father;” “the temple of the Lord are we.”
II. We see in Judas what melancholy consequences the indulgence of one sinful
propensity may involve. Most men have some easily besetting sin; some propensity
which is more powerful, some passion which more readily than others overcomes
them. Let the young, especially, endeavour to ascertain what that is, each in his own
case. The besetting sin of Judas was avarice. Notwithstanding his association with
that purest, loveliest one, whose peerless elevation of character and disinterested
benevolence appeared in all He said and did, Judas caught no portion of his
magnanimity; there was in him none of the nobleness of mind which distinguished
His master. His was always a mean, sordid, grovelling spirit. He was one of those
grubs with whom you sometimes meet in society, who will do anything, bear
anything, sacrifice anything for money; who have no idea of worth but wealth; who
reverence none but those who bear the bag; whose reverence increases as the purse
distends; if, indeed, they do not envy still more than they reverence even these. You
may know them by their gait. There is always something low, shuffling, tortuous,
sinister in their looks, and in their movements. They have generally one hand in the
261

262. pocket, fingering about their silver or their copper gods. Their eyes are almost always
cast on the ground, as Milton saw that Mammon, the meanest of all the devils, had
his eye fixed on the golden pavement of the nether world. But though his besetting
sin was avarice, Judas does not seem to have been aware of it, or he did not watch
against it; and, as it often happens, he was placed in a situation which tended to draw
it out, and to strengthen it. He was the treasurer of the little society with which he
was connected. He kept the bag, and had the management of their pecuniary matters.
His hand was often in that money bag; his eye was almost constantly upon it; and his
heart was always with it. The melancholy effect of this was, that avarice soon grew
into thievishness; the temptations presented by his office, though in themselves
exceedingly trifling, were too powerful for his avaricious propensities to resist. What
an idea of the character of Judas, this transaction gives us!-Of his meanness, his low,
sordid avarice! This is seen in the paltry sum which he agreed to take as a sufficient
recompense for so foul a deed. For a few pieces of silver he would deliberately clothe
himself with everlasting shame.-Of his hardness of heart. This is seen in the time
during which he maintained his resolution. This fearful deed was not done in the
hurry of a moment; it was a deliberate act, it was Wednesday when he made the
agreement with the chief priests; it was Friday morning before it was carried into
execution. During that time he repeatedly saw his Lord. How could he meet His eye?
He was present at the last supper; and when Jesus said, “One of you shall betray Me,”
he inquired, as welt as the rest, “Is it I?” His callousness appears also in the manner
in which he betrayed the Redeemer-with the very token of affection; and he did it in
the presence of his brethren. Lord, what is man? Such were some of the melancholy
consequences of indulging, instead of watching against and subduing, his easily
besetting sin. To derive from his example the instruction it is calculated to yield, we
must endeavour to enter into his views and feelings; to understand how he felt and
how he reasoned. A remark or two may assist us here. It is evident we observe, in the
first place, that he had not the slightest apprehension of the serious consequences of
his treachery. It was not his wish to inflict any pain on the Redeemer, or to do Him
any injury; and nothing was farther from his thoughts than that he was delivering
Him up to death. He was not a cruel monster who thirsted for human blood, and
laughed at human woe. He belonged not to the savages of the French revolution, nor
to the ferocious men of our own country, whose deliberate murders attained for them
considerable notoriety some few years since. He was a poor despicability, who loved
money above all things, and cared not to what meanness he submitted in order to
secure it; but he had no sympathy with deeds of cruelty and blood. It would appear
that he was as fully persuaded of the Messiahship of Jesus as any of the apostles; but
in exact proportion to the strength of this conviction would be his confidence that
Jesus could not suffer; as in common with the rest of his nation, he believed that the
Christ would continue forever. It is also possible that, in making the offer to deliver
his Master into the hands of the chief priests and rulers, he may have been influenced
in some measure by resentment. While at supper in the house of Simon the leper, a
pious woman anointed our Lord with very precious ointment. This conduct was
censured by Judas and his brethren as an act of useless prodigality, but was
vindicated and commended by our Lord as an act of piety which should receive
honourable mention wherever the gospel was known. This incident may have greatly
displeased Judas, for he appears to have gone directly from the house of Simon to the
palace of the high priest; and it is not impossible that, in taking this step, avarice was
quickened by resentment. But, as we bare repeatedly intimated, the prevailing motive
was love of money By the habitual indulgence of his avariciousness, he had become
the blind slave of that sordid passion. All generosity of sentiment, all nobility of
mind, all sense of integrity and honour, had become extinct. In our own day persons
have been known to perpetrate, with their own hands, the most atrocious murders
262

263. under the sole influence of cupidity. It was not that their victims had done anything
to offend them; it was not that they regarded them with any feelings of hostility; and
yet they watched them carefully for successive days, drew them into their meshes,
and then deliberately, and without the slightest compunction, murdered them. Like
Judas, they did it for what they could get by it; and, in some instances, the wages of
their iniquity were not greater than his. It is, we believe, an undeniable fact, that
certain persons, well known to those who require their services, and to others
connected with them, may be hired at any time, in the metropolis of England, for
half-a-crown, deliberately to perjure themselves. It is not that they have any interest
in the ease, or that they have any wish to injure one party, or to benefit another; like
Judas, they do it simply for what they can get by it. These illustrations, it must be
confessed, are taken from the very dregs of society-the lowest depths of social
degradation. But if we look to higher regions, we shall find illustrations in
abundance, and of a character scarcely less affecting. It is, we believe, a fact, that
there are persons employed in Christian England in casting idols for the Indian
market. Christian people make these gods and ship them out to India for sale. There
they work amongst the teeming millions of that vast continent, deceiving, degrading,
destroying the souls of men. It is not that these idol makers have any faith in the gods
which they make; it is not that they have any interest in the prevalence of idolatry, or
any wish that it should continue to curse the world; as in the case of Judas, their only
object is what they can get by it. Take, for instance, the case when a question of vital
interest is agitated, the constituency of the country is appealed to, the happiness of
millions is involved in the issue, and how do many of our electors act? Some do not
concern themselves in the least about the merits of the question; but make it known
that their suffrages are in the market, and that the highest bidder may secure them
Others have their opinions, but lures are presented, promises are made if they will
vote in opposition to their convictions; and they do it. They thus sacrifice what they
believe to be the truth, and the best interests of their country, at the shrine of
mammon. It is not that they hate their fellow men: it is not that they wish to injure
their country; but they act as Judas did; he sold his Master for thirty pieces of silver,
and they sell their country for what they can get for it. Very much of this spirit is
found amongst professedly religious people. Many are influenced in their selection of
the place of worship they attend, or the church they join, chiefly by the prospect of
gain which it holds out to them. If there be in a congregation one or two wealthy and
benevolent families, you are almost sure to find many there; some because it is
respectable, and others because there is something to be got by it. We once heard a
Christian pastor relate the following:-N.S. and his wife were members of the church
at-; they avowed great attachment to the church, and great affection for the pastor,
from whose ministry they professed to derive much good. They removed on account
of business to some distance, where they had the advantage of attending a very
faithful ministry and of associating with a united flock. But that church was not like
their own; it was not home to them, and the preaching was not like that of their
minister. Often did they come a considerable distance, and at no small
inconvenience, to enjoy the privilege of a Sabbath day amongst their own friends.
After some time they were brought back again to their old neighbourhood; and now
everything was so delightful-Sabbaths, week-day services, intercourse with friends-it
was all so good. A few months passed away, and it was observed that N.S. and his
wife had lost much of the ardour of their zeal, and had grown slack in their
attendance. Their pastor called on them one day to inquire of their welfare. N.S.
seemed low, and had very little to say; he did remark, however, that he had received
very little encouragement from his own friends and fellow members in the way of
business, but that Mr. L.T. (a leading man in another community) had been very kind
to him, that his bill for the last quarter amounted to the sum of £-. A word to the wise
263

264. is enough. Tile minister remarked when he left the house, “The bait has taken; N.S.
will soon find some pretext for leaving us, and will go over to the-.” And so it was. Oh,
Judas, thou art not dead; thy spirit lives, and works amongst us in ten thousand
ways. “Every man looketh for his gain from his quarter.”
III. The character of Judas is still further instructive to us, as it shows how deeply
men may sorrow for sin and yet be destitute of genuine contrition. We remark
further that the repentance of Judas led him to make every reparation in his power.
His sorrow was sincere, inward, deep; and he did not keep it to himself. Judas not
only confessed his sin, but he also honoured, publicly honoured Him who suffered
through his treachery; “I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood.”
And this is not all; Judas not only honoured the Redeemer who suffered through his
treachery, but he also threw back the wages of iniquity: “He cast down the pieces of
silver in the temple, and departed.” The price of innocent blood he could hold no
longer. This indicates a great change in his views and feelings. His repentance,
therefore, seems not only to come exceedingly near to that which is spiritual and
saving, but absolutely to include its great elements. (J. J. Davies.)
The possibilities of a human life illustrated by the downfall of the traitor
The career of Judas is simply-
I. An example of the meaning of temptation. Man is under no iron law which
compels him to sin. He does as he does, not because he has to, but because he wills
to. The stress of habit may become desperate, but it is the sinner’s own act that has
brought him into such a state. So it was with Judas. Intelligently, deliberately had he
leaned the whole weight of his obdurate heart against that door of mercy which the
Saviour would have opened to him. In the very face of his destiny, with its notes of
doom sounding louder and louder, like the peals of distant bells as one approaches
the town, he went straight on to his deed. In selfishness and avarice he has cherished
base suggestions, till they fastened their ruinous hold upon him. A pilferer, grown to
be a thief, soon became a monster, balancing an innocent life against thirty denarii.
II. The society of the worthy does not insure likeness to them. The lion will crave
blood wherever he is, and the buzzard be scenting carrion in every breeze. There is no
salvation in friendships. There may be restraints, there is no certainty.
III. Treachery always fails to make good its pledges. Falseness never pays. Judas was
promptly given his price; but with it a burden, whose nature he little divined at the
first. So long as he must carry this, his treasure was cankered. He thought by giving it
back to find relief; but none was there. He could not imagine he should soon be
seeking to hang himself, rather than prolong the moments that he might enjoy
abundance. Whatever our infidelity, whether financial or social or religious, we must
reap as we have sown. Condemnation is certain. There is only One whose voice can
silence it. Confession of Him means everything. Betrayal of Him involves the loss of
all hope and well-being. Repentance may not be possible for such. Repentance would
have sent the guilty out by himself to weep bitterly; but remorse could find no
stopping place short of the halter. (De Witt S. Clark.)
The traitor
1. Observe here Christ’s meekness. He requires us to submit to the blows of our
enemies. He submitted even to their kiss. How gracious the self-control that
264

265. could allow such a liberty!
2. Apostasy should be very earnestly guarded against. When we fall, we fall not
merely to the level we left, but to one much lower.
3. The very manner in which Christ was betrayed commends Him and condemns
Judas. For is not the kiss itself an acknowledgment that love and homage were
the things to which the Saviour was entitled? And if his act admits Christ’s worth,
how self-condemned he stands for practising treason against One whose right is
love.
4. The cause of Christ is frequently betrayed still, with a kiss. Deadly attacks on it
often contain complimentary acknowledgments of its worth. Sometimes the
wicked life can adopt a bearing of punctilious respectfulness to everything
religious. (R. Glover.)
Foes within the fold the most dangerous
Natural, domestic, and home-bred enemies, are of all other the most hurtful and
dangerous enemies of Christ and of His Church. I say, of Christ and of His Church,
because there is the same reason of both; for such as are enemies of Christ, are also
enemies of His Church, and so on the contrary. Judas was the worst and most
dangerous enemy of all those that came to apprehend our Saviour; he did more than
all the rest toward the effecting of this wicked plot against Christ; he was a guide to
them all, and the very ringleader in this enterprize. He had opportunity and means to
do that against our Saviour, which all the rest without him could not have done; that
is, to entrap and betray Him. He knew the place where our Saviour used to resort,
and at what time usually; he knew where and when to find Jesus, viz., in the garden
at Gethsemane (Joh_18:2). Besides, he being so well acquainted with Him, was
better able than all the rest of the company to discern our Saviour, and to descry Him
from all others in the dark. And, lastly, he by reason of his familiarity with Christ,
might have access to Him to salute Him with a kiss (as the manner of those times
was), and to betray Him. So that by all this it appears that Judas, being one of our
Saviour’s own disciples, was in that respect the most dangerous enemy to our Saviour
of all those who came to take Him. And as it was with Christ the Head of the Church,
so is it with the Church itself, and all true members of it. Their worst and most
dangerous enemies are commonly intestine and home-bred enemies, which he hid
amongst them, and are near them in outward society, and join in outward profession
with them. These are usually worse than open and professed enemies, who are out of
the Church. In the times of the Old Testament, the false prophets and counterfeit
priests, and other close hypocrites which arose and sprang up in the Church itself,
did more harm in it than the open and professed enemies of God’s people. So in the
time of the New Testament, the false apostles, heretical teachers, and false brethren,
did more hurt the Church than cruel tyrants and open persecutors of the Church. As
Luther used to say, “Tyrants are bad, heretics worse, but false brethren worst of all.”
As they are commonly most malicious, so they have most opportunity to do hurt.
And as ii is in the Church of Christ in general, so also in Christian families (which are,
or ought to be, as little churches), commonly a man’s worst and most dangerous
enemies are those of his own house, if it so fall out that these turn against him.
(George Petter.)
The Judas-spirit still rife
265

266. We may see in Judas a true pattern and lively image of hypocritical, false, and
counterfeit Christians, who make a show of love to Christ, and of honouring Him,
when in reality they are enemies and despisers of Him. These salute Christ by calling
Him, “Master, Master,” and by kissing Him; and yet betray Him, at one and the same
time, as Judas did. Many such dissembling and hypocritical Christians there are, and
always have been, in the Church.
1. Such as make outward show of holiness and religion in their conduct before
men, and yet live in secret sins unrepented of. These by their outward show of
holiness seem to kiss and embrace Christ, but by their unreformed lives betray
Him (Mat_23:28; 2Ti_3:5).
2. Such as profess Christ and the gospel of Christ, and yet live profanely,
wickedly, loosely, or scandalously, to the dishonour of Christ’s name, and the
disgrace of the gospel which they profess, causing it to be evil spoken of (Luk_
6:46; Rom_2:24).
3. Such as pretend love to religion, and yet are secret enemies to it at heart,
seeking to undermine it.
4. Such as make show of love to good Christians, but oppose them underhand
and seek to bring them into trouble and disgrace (Gal_2:4; 2Co_11:26). Let us
take heed we be not in the number of these false-hearted Christians; and to this
end we have need diligently to examine ourselves, touching the truth and
sincerity of our love to Christ and His members, and whether our hearts be
sincere and upright in the profession of Christ’s name and truth. Also, whether
our life and practice be answerable to the profession we make; for, otherwise, we
are no better than Judas, kissing Christ and yet betraying Him. We speak much
against Judas, and many cry out against him for his treachery in betraying Christ
with a kiss; but take heed we be not like unto him, and as bad as he, or worse in
some respect. (George Petter.)
The betrayal
I. The person. Judas: praise. One of the chosen twelve. Our Lord must have foreseen
this when He called him. The call of Judas facilitated fulfilment of Scripture. Called
“the traitor” (Luk_6:16); “son of perdition” (Joh_17:12). Avaricious; dishonest in
choice of means for securing what he may have deemed a lawful end.
II. The motive. Various motives have been imputed.
1. Sense of duty in bringing Jesus to justice. But consider Act_4:15; Act_4:23;
Act_5:27-40; where the high priests, etc., are silent when they might have
repeated the charges of Judas. Especially note Mat_27:4.
2. Resentment (comp. Mat_26:8-17; Joh_12:4-5). But two days elapsed before
the deed was executed. Resentment would have subsided.
3. Avarice (Mat_26:15). But had this been the chief motive, he would surely have
bargained for a larger sum, and not have sold his Master for less than £4, as he
did, nor would he afterwards have returned it.
4. Ambition (consider Joh_7:31; Mat_16:16; Mat_19:28), by some thought to be
the true motive. To him Jesus was King. He would force Jesus to declare Himself.
If Jesus were made a king, what might not he (Judas) become? He knew the
power of Jesus, and thought that, at the worst, Jesus would escape from danger
(Luk_6:30; Joh_8:59; Joh_10:39), hence Mat_26:48 was ironical. He believed
266

267. the Messiah would never die (Joh_12:34). Contrast the ambition of Judas with
the lesson of humility he had heard.
5. Demoniacal possession (Joh_13:27).
III. The time. Significant-the Feast of Passover. Type and anti-type. Multitudes at
Jerusalem. Witnesses of these things (Act_2:5-36). Many had beheld His miracles
and heard of His fame in other parts. Night-a fit time for a dark deed (Joh_3:19).
IV. The manner-a kiss. Perhaps Judas was sincere, after all, and meant this as a
friendly act to force Jesus into an avowal of His kingship. If so, then one may be
wrong though sincere, and mere sincerity will not save (Pro_16:25).
V. The effect.
1. To Judas.
2. To Jesus.
3. To ourselves.
Learn-
1. God maketh the wrath of man to praise Him.
2. Official standing, a power for evil in the hands of the unprincipled and
ignorant.
3. Shows of friendship may be tricks of treason (Pro_27:6).
4. Seek to be not only sincere, but right.
5. The fulfilment of Scripture, a proof of the Messiahship of Christ.
6. If He be the only and true Saviour, have we accepted Him? (J. Comper Gray.)
Our Lord’s apprehension
I. The time of Christ’s apprehension. “While He yet spake.” The Saviour was
preparing Himself by fasting and prayer. He was exhorting and strengthening His
disciples against the scandal of the cross. Now He was determined to be taken. Note
here the incomprehensible providence of God, in that all the powers of the world
could not apprehend Him till this time.
II. The person apprehending.
1. His name. A good name; signifying blessing or praise. Yet what a wretch was
he! what a discredit to his name!
2. His office. One of twelve. A disciple turned traitor.
(1) Christ had admitted him not His presence only, but to His near fellowship
and society.
(2) Not to that only, but to apostleship.
(3) He had made him steward of His house and treasurer of His family; for
He entrusted him with the bag.
(4) He had conferred on him high gifts of knowledge and power to work
miracles. What ingratitude, then, was his!
3. His attendants.
267

268. (1) A great company of soldiers.
(2) To these were joined captains of the temple, and some of the chief priests
and elders.
(3) There were gathered to him also a great many of the priests’ and elders’
servants.
4. The originators of the attack. The scribes and Pharisees.
III. The manner of the apprehension. A kiss.
1. Pre-arranged.
2. Executed. What treachery! The salutation of friendship debased to such a
purpose! (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
The mystery of the call of Judas to the apostleship
With reference to the call of Judas to the apostleship, we look upon it as only one of
the innumerable mysteries in God’s moral government, which no system of
philosophy can solve at all, and which even Christianity solves but in part, reserving
the final answer for a higher expansion of our faculties in another world. It involves
the whole problem of the relation of God to the origin of sin, and the relation of His
foreknowledge and foreordination to the free agency of man. The question why
Christ called and received Judas into the circle of His chosen twelve, has received
three answers, none of which, however, can be called satisfactory.
1. The view held by Augustine and others, namely, that Christ elected him an
apostle not, indeed, for the very purpose that he might become a traitor, but that,
through his treason, as an incidental condition or necessary means, the
Scriptures might be fulfilled, and the redemption of the world be accomplished.
This view, as Dr. Schaff observes, although it contains an element of truth, seems,
after all, to involve our Lord in some kind of responsibility for the darkest crime
ever committed.
2. The Rationalistic view, which is incompatible with our Lord’s Divine foresight,
that Jesus foresaw the financial and administrative abilities of Judas, which
might have become of great use to the Apostolic Church, but not his thievish and
treacherous tendencies, which developed themselves afterwards, and He elected
him solely for the former. We cannot see how this view can be held by anyone
who believes in our Lord’s divinity.
3. The view held by Meyer and many others, namely, that Jesus knew the whole
original character of Judas from the beginning, before it was properly developed,
and elected him in the hope that the good qualities and tendencies would, under
the influence of His teaching, ultimately acquire the mastery over the bad. But
this implies that our Lord was mistaken in His expectation, and is therefore
inconsistent with His perfect knowledge of the human heart. Alford despairs of
solving the difficulty.
Two things are clear from this sad subject:
1. The absolute necessity of a change of heart; without this, privileges, however
great, may be abused to one’s destruction: and
2. The danger of covetousness, or love of the world. This seems to have been the
cause of Judas’s ruin. For the rest, we must leave it to the light of a higher state of
existence. (Christian Age.)
268

269. Incidents of the arrest
I. The arrival on the scene of judas and his companions. While Judas believed that
Jesus was shortly to appear in great glory as the predicted King of the Jews, he
followed Him loyally. “Hephestion,” said a certain great personage of history, “loves
me as Alexander, but Craterus loves me as king.” So we may venture to say Judas did
once upon a time love Jesus, not, indeed, as Jesus, but as king. “He was the father of
all the Judases,” remarks a Puritan, “who follow Him, not for love, but for loaves; not
for inward excellencies, but for outward advantages; not to be made good, but to be
made great.”
II. The panic. How are we to explain it? Was it the power of the human eye, like that
by which the lion tamer quells the lion? This has been suggested by a modern critic.
Was it magic? This was said by an ancient reviler. Was it all in the mere fancy of the
simple folk who told the tale? This notion has found much popular favour. For my
own part, believing, as I do, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, this phenomenon
does not strike me as unlikely or unexpected. Pat out your hand, man, and arrest the
locomotive when it comes thundering into the station, making the ground tremble;
arrest the shot as it bursts blazing from the lip of the cannon; arrest the lightning as
it stabs the cloud before it strikes the tree; arrest a ray of light, catch it and turn it out
of its course; arrest the tidal wave, as King Canute essayed to do; arrest the force now
travelling under ground, and which, as the scientific prophet tells us, is next year to
burst out in many earthquakes I If you really could succeed in these arrests, and turn
back these natural powers, could you arrest their Lord Himself?
III. the capture.
IV. A blow struck for Jesus-“And behold one of them which were with Jesus
stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest’s
and smote off his ear.”
V. The appearance of a young man in a linen cloth next claims consideration.
VI. The great forsaking-“Then all the disciples forsook Him and fled.” You pardon a
politician when he forsakes a cause that he once thought perfect, because he has now
found out its glaring imperfections: you pardon a theorist when he forsakes a theory
that he once thought perfect, because he has now found out its fallacies; you pardon a
merchant when he forsakes a concern that he once thought perfect, because he has
now found out that it is hollow: you pardon one man when he forsakes another as his
own confidential friend, though once, thinking him perfect, he had been ready to do
anything or bear anything for him, with no incentive but a wish, and no reward but a
smile; if now he has found him out to be a person not safe, not true, not to be trusted.
But he who forsakes Christ forsakes perfection. We can challenge any man to say that
he thought Him perfect once, but that he has now found stains on that snow, spots in
that sun. (Charles Stanford, D. D.)
46 The men seized Jesus and arrested him.
269

270. GILL, "And they laid hands on him, and took him. After Christ had said to
Judas, "friend, wherefore art thou come?" as in Matthew; and also, "Judas, betrayest
thou the son of man with a kiss?" as in Luk_22:48; See Gill on Mat_26:50.
HENRY, "IV. They arrested him, and made him their prisoner (Mar_14:46); They
laid their hands on him, rude and violent hands, and took him into custody;
triumphing, it is likely, that they had done that which has been often before
attempted in vain.
SBC, “Incidents of our Lord’s Arrest.
Note:—
I. The Arrival upon the scene of Judas and his companions. His very name has often
come to the memory like a shock. When the soldiers, under his direction, not
knowing Jesus, asked him for some sign by which He might be distinguished, he
said, "Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is He; hold Him fast." Of all preconcerted
signals possible, this was the one selected; as if to show what sin has in it, and what
sin can do; as if to show its impudence, its brass, its black ingratitude, its hell-fire. In
Judas the sin of humanity culminates; in him sin reaches its high fever of crime; and
if it had not been for him we should not have known the depth of degradation to
which through sin the soul can sink.
II. The Panic. The Lord, clothed though He was in the garment of mortality, was still
the Lord. Arrest Him, Judas and your company; place Him at the bar; nail Him on a
cross. Not without His will. His object is not to strike you back blasted; this is but a
thrill from His life, a momentary play of His latent Omnipotence; though it shakes
you down flat—it is a touch, merely—just as a commentary on, in confirmation of His
own royal word: "No man taketh My life from Me;" and just to show that if arrested,
it is not in consequence of your mastery, but by the permission of His own will.
III. The Capture. The kiss of Judas removed whatever awe might have stricken the
soldiers, and whatever reluctance they might have felt to going on with their task.
They instantly laid their hands on Him who had been thus indicated, and began to
bind Him in their own merciless fashion.
IV. The Great Forsaking "Then all the disciples forsook Him and fled." He who
forsakes Christ forsakes perfection. It was not out of calm, set, deliberate purpose
that they forsook their Lord. They were in a brief madness, and knew not what they
did. Their souls were suddenly stormed, and the strength by which they had hitherto
been kept was for the moment, and for their eventual good, withdrawn. "Let him that
thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall."
C. Stanford, Evening of Our Lord’s Ministry, p. 191.
47 Then one of those standing near drew his
sword and struck the servant of the high priest,
cutting off his ear.
270

271. GILL, "And one of them that stood by,.... One of the disciples that stood by
Jesus, as Judas was betraying him, and the soldiers were laying hold on him, Peter by
name:
drew a sword, and smote a servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear;
his right ear; the servant's name was Malchus; See Gill on Mat_26:51.
HENRY, "V. Peter laid about him in defence of his Master, and wounded one of
the assailants, being for the present mindful of his promise, to venture his life with
his Master. He was one of them that stood by, of them that were with him (so the
word signifies), of those three disciples that were with him in the garden; he drew a
sword, and aimed, it is likely, to cut off the head, but missed his blow, and only cut
off the ear, of a servant of the high priest, Mar_14:47. It is easier to fight for Christ,
than to die for him; but Christ's good soldiers overcome, not by taking other people's
lives, but by laying down their own, Rev_12:11.
CONSTABLE, "Perhaps shame led Mark to conceal the fact that it was Peter
who cut off Malchus' ear, evidently in a misdirected attempt to cut off his head
(cf. John 18:10). Peter's lack of prayer resulted in a lack of poise that contrasts
sharply with Jesus' behavior. He had not only boasted too much (Mark 14:29;
Mark 14:31) and prayed too little (Mark 14:37; Mark 14:40-41), but he also
acted too violently.
PULPIT, "But a certain one of them that stood by drew his sword, and smote the
servant of the high priest, and struck off his ear ( ἀφεῖλεν αὐτοῦ τὸ ὠτίον). We
learn from St. John (John 18:10) that this was Peter. St. John also is the only
evangelist who mentions the name (Malchus) of the high priest's servant.
Malchus would probably be prominent amongst them. St. Luke (Luke 22:51) is
the only evangelist who mentions the healing of the wound by our Lord.
48 “Am I leading a rebellion,” said Jesus, “that
you have come out with swords and clubs to
capture me?
GILL, "And Jesus answered and said unto them,.... To the chief priests, and
captains of the temple, and the elders, that came with the band and officers, as
appears from Luk_22:52. The Persic version reads, "to the multitude":
are ye come out as against a thief, with swords and with staves, to take
me? See Gill on Mat_26:55.
271

272. HENRY, "VI. Christ argues with them that had seized him, and shows them the
absurdity of their proceedings against him. 1. That they came out against him, as
against a thief, whereas he was innocent of any crime; he taught daily in the temple,
and if he had any wicked design, there it would some time or other have been
discovered; nay, these officers of the chief priests, being retainers to the temple, may
be supposed to have heard his sermons there (I was with you in the temple); and had
he not taught them excellent doctrine, even his enemies themselves being judges?
Were not all the words of his mouth in righteousness? Was there any thing froward
or perverse in them? Pro_8:8. By his fruits he was known to be a good tree; why then
did they come out against him as a thief? 2. That they came to take him thus
privately, whereas he was neither ashamed nor afraid to appear publicly in the
temple. He was none of those evil-doers that hate the light, neither come to the light,
Joh_3:20. If their masters had any thing to say to him, they might meet him any day
in the temple, where he was ready to answer all challenges, all charges; and there
they might do as they pleased with him, for the priests had the custody of the temple,
and the command of the guards about it: but to come upon him thus at midnight,
and in the place of his retirement, was base and cowardly. This was to do as David's
enemy, that sat in the lurking places of the villages, to murder the innocent, Psa_
10:8. But this was not all. 3. They came with swords and staves, as if he had been in
arms against the government, and must have the posse comitatus raised to reduce
him. There was no occasion for those weapons; but they made this ado, (1.) To secure
themselves from the rage of some; they came armed, because they feared the people;
but thus were they in great fear, where no fear was, Psa_53:5. (2.) To expose him to
the rage of others. By coming with swords and staves to take him, they represented
him to the people (who are apt to take impressions this way) as a dangerous
turbulent man, and so endeavored to incense them against him, and make them cry
out, Crucify him, crucify him, having no other way to gain their point.
CONSTABLE, "Verses 48-50
Jesus' reply pointed out that He was not a dangerous criminal. The Sanhedrin's
action was totally unjustified and indefensible. Nevertheless it fulfilled prophecy.
The Scriptures Jesus referred to included Isaiah 53:3; Isaiah 53:7-9; Isaiah 53:12
and Zechariah 13:7 (cf. Mark 14:27). Mark 14:50 documents the failure of the
disciples, including Peter, and their abandonment of Jesus to preserve their own
safety. The writer's interest was the disciples' action more than that of the mob.
COFFMAN, "Such incongruous and malappropriate actions by the
establishment of priests were an index of their fear and hatred of the Lord.
When one goes out to take a lamb, it is hardly necessary to recruit the militia.
Christ's amazement was further explained by his words in the next verse.
PULPIT, "We learn from St. Matthew (Matthew 26:52) that our Lord rebuked
his disciples for their resistance; after which he proceeded to rebuke those who
were bent upon apprehending him. Are ye come out, as against a robber ( ὡς ἐπὶ
λῃστὴν), with swords and staves to seize me? The order of events in the betrayal
appears to have been this: First, the kiss of the traitor Judas, by which he
indicated to those who were with him which was Jesus. Then follows that
remarkable incident mentioned only by St. John (John 18:4-6), "Jesus … went
forth, and saith unto them, Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of
Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him,
was standing with them. When therefore he said unto them, I am he, they went
272

273. backward, and fell to the ground." The presence of Christ in his serene majesty
overpowered them. There was something in his looks and manner, as he repeated
these words," I am he," words often used before by him, that caused them to
retreat backwards, and to prostrate themselves. It was no external force that
produced this result. The Divine majesty flashed from his countenance and
overawed them, at least for the moment. At all events, it was an emphatic
evidence, both to his own disciples and to this crowd, that it was by his own will
that he yielded himself up to them. Perhaps this incident fired the courage of St.
Peter; and so, as they approached to take our Lord, he drew his sword and
struck off the ear of Malchus. Then our Lord healed him. And then he turned to
the multitude and said, "Are ye come out as against a robber, with swords and
staves, to seize me?"
49 Every day I was with you, teaching in the
temple courts, and you did not arrest me. But
the Scriptures must be fulfilled.”
GILL, "I was daily with you in the temple,.... That is, for several days past; ever
since he made his public entry into Jerusalem:
teaching; the people, in a public manner:
and ye took me not; did not attempt to lay hands on him, seize him, and carry him
away; which he signifies might have been easily done; See Gill on Mat_26:55.
But the Scriptures must be fulfilled: which spoke of the betraying him by
Judas; and of their taking him in this private and secret manner; and of the flight of
the disciples from him next mentioned; See Gill on Mat_26:56.
HENRY, "VII. He reconciled himself to all this injurious, ignominious treatment,
by referring himself to the Old Testament predictions of the Messiah. I am hardly
used, but I submit, for the scriptures must be fulfilled, Mar_14:49. 1. See here what a
regard Christ had to the scriptures; he would bear any thing rather than that the
least jot or tittle of the word of God should fall to the ground; and as he had an eye to
them in his sufferings, so he has in his glory; for what is Christ doing in the
government of the world, but fulfilling the scriptures? 2. See what use we are to make
of the Old Testament; we must search for Christ, the true treasure hid in that field:
as the history of the New Testament expounds the prophecies of Old, so the
prophecies of the Old Testament illustrate the history of the New.
COFFMAN, "Here is corroboration of the extensive ministry in Jerusalem; and
note that this is not at all "a hint" of such a ministry, but a definitive statement
that it occurred in dimensions that were fully commensurate with the marvelous
273

274. deeds and teachings recorded in John.
That the scriptures might be fulfilled ... The evil throng carrying out the arrest of
Christ were fulfilling Scripture, but they knew it not. It is of singular importance
that many of the prophecies fulfilled during that eventful week were fulfilled by
the Lord's enemies. As to what Scriptures are meant here, there were many,
among them Zechariah 13:7; and the next verse shows that Jesus had that one in
mind.
PULPIT, "But this is done that the Scriptures might be fulfilled. This, as it
stands in the original, is an incomplete sentence; in St. Matthew (Matthew 26:56)
the sentence occurs in its complete form. In both cases it has been questioned
whether the words are those of our Lord, or whether they are the comment of
the evangelist. On the whole, it would seem more probable that they are our
Lord's words, which seem almost required to conclude what he had said before.
50 Then everyone deserted him and fled.
GILL, "And they all forsook him and fled. That is, his disciples, as the Vulgate
Latin, Syriac, Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic versions read; and who seem to have
transcribed it from Matthew, and lest it should be thought, that the multitude whom
Christ addressed, were intended.
HENRY, "VIII. All Christ's disciples, hereupon, deserted him (Mar_14:50); They
all forsook him, and fled. They were very confident that they should adhere to him;
but even good men know not what they will do, till they are tried. If it was such a
comfort to him as he had lately intimated, that they had hitherto continued with him
in his lesser trials (Luk_22:28), we may well imagine what a grief it was to him, that
they deserted him now in the greatest, when they might have done him some
service - when he was abused, to protect him, and when accused, to witness for him.
Let not those that suffer for Christ, think it strange, if they be thus deserted, and if all
the herd shun the wounded deer; they are not better than their Master, nor can
expect to be better used either by their enemies or by their friends. When St. Paul
was in peril, none stood by him, but all men forsook him, 2Ti_4:16.
COFFMAN, "Peter's rash attack upon Malchus was rebuked by Jesus, and the
excised ear was restored. In the face of his enemies, Jesus proclaimed himself as
God, "I AM" (John 18:8); from the sudden outflashing of his divine power, the
soldiers faded backward and lay prostrate. Having shown the completeness of
his power, the Lord required the arresting group to refrain from taking the
Twelve into custody (John 18:8f), thus revealing the wonder that had just taken
place as a work wrought, not upon his own behalf, but upon theirs. The apostles,
true to the Lord's prophecy, and perhaps totally bewildered by the complexity of
events which they, at that time, only partially understood, forsook him and fled.
This action on their part was probably necessary for the preservation of their
274

275. lives, because there is every reason to believe that the hierarchy would have liked
nothing better than to have had the whole group in custody.
BI, “And they all forsook Him and fled.
The deserters
We may take three views of the desertion of our Lord on this occasion; that event
may be considered with reference to the deserters, to the deserted, and to ourselves.
I. The desertion of our Lord may be considered with reference to the apostles. In this
view it affords an affecting instance of the inconstancy of man. The desertion of our
Lord by the apostles affords also a proof of the melancholy consequences of the
adoption of false notions. Men are sometimes found, it is true, both better and worse
than their respective creeds; but it is undeniable that, whatever sentiment we really
embrace, whatever we truly believe, is sure to influence our spirit and conduct. The
apostles, in common with the Jews generally, had fully adopted the notion of a
personal reign of the Messiah, of a temporal and worldly kingdom. Hence, ambition,
of a kind (in their circumstances) the most absurd and unnatural, took full
possession of their minds. They expected to be the chief ministers and counsellors of
state of the largest, and, in every respect, the greatest empire in the world, an empire
which was destined to absorb all others, and to become universal. Think of such a
notion as this, for a few illiterate fishermen of one of the obscurest provinces of the
civilized world! I do not say that it would have been otherwise-that they would
steadfastly have adhered to their Lord, and have gone with Him to prison and to
death, if they had been entirely quit of their false notions, and had had right views of
the spiritual nature of His kingdom; for temptation, danger, fear, may overcome the
strongest convictions; but it is easy to perceive that their false notions contributed to
render them an easy prey to the enemy, while more correct views would have tended
to prepare their minds for the trial, and to fortify them against it. We may learn from
this how important it is that we should take heed what we believe. Let us prove all
things, and hold fast that which is good.
II. The desertion of Christ by the apostles may be considered with reference to our
Lord Himself; and here it may be viewed in two aspects: as an aggravation of His
sufferings, and as a proof of His love.
1. As an aggravation of His sufferings. It should not be forgotten that our Lord
was made in all points like unto His brethren. He had all the affections, passions,
feelings, of human nature just as we have; the great difference being that, in us
they are constantly liable to perversion and abuse, while in Him their exercise
was always healthful and legitimate. In the language of prophecy, also, He
complains of the desertion of His friends: “I looked for some to take pity, but
there was none, and for comforters, but I found none.” “Of the people there was
none with Me.” As “bone of our bone,” as subject to all the sympathies of our
common humanity, He felt it deeply, and on many accounts, when Judas came,
heading a band of ruffians, and betrayed Him with the very token of affection. He
felt it deeply when Peter denied Him in His very presence with oaths and curses.
He felt it deeply when “they all forsook Him and fled.”
2. This melancholy event may be considered further as a proof of the greatness of
the Saviour’s love. He met with everything calculated not only to test His love, to
prove its sincerity and its strength; but also to chill, and to extinguish it. But as it
was self-moved, it was self-sustained. Many waters could net quench it. All the
ingratitude of man could not destroy it; all the powers of darkness could not
damp its ardour. “Having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to
275

276. the end.” Perhaps the unfaithfulness of the apostles was permitted, that Jesus
might taste of every ingredient of bitterness which is mingled in man’s cup of
woe; that, being tempted in all points like unto His brethren, He might be able to
sympathize with, and to succour them in their temptations. It may have been
permitted also, in order to show that there was nothing to deserve His favour in
the objects of His love. Say not that your sins are too great to be forgiven, or your
heart too depraved to be renewed. Only trust Him: His grace is sufficient for you.
And let this encourage the unhappy backslider, notwithstanding his frequent
desertion of his Lord, to return to Him. Jesus did not disown the apostles, though
they deserted Him in His distress; but after His resurrection He sent to them, by
the faithful women, messages of tenderness and love: “Go,” said He to Mary
Magdalene, “go to My brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto My Father and
your Father; to My God, and your God.” And to the other women, “Go, tell My
brethren that I go into Galilee, and there shall they see Me.”
III. We proceed to consider this melancholy event with reference to ourselves. We
may learn not a little from it. We may use it as a mirror in which to see ourselves.
Some may see in it, perhaps, the likeness of their own conduct to their fellow men.
When you thought they did well for themselves, then you blessed them. When you
knew they did not need you, you followed them, and were at their service. When all
praised them, you also joined in the laudation. But circumstances changed with
them; and you changed too. The time came when you might really have served them,
but then you withdrew yourself. Others may see in the desertion of the apostles, the
likeness of their own conduct to the Saviour. Oh! how many desert Him in His poor,
calumniated, persecuted brethren? How many desert Him in His injured, oppressed
interest! Many will befriend and applaud a mission, a religious institution, a
Christian church, a ministry, while it receives general commendation and support;
but let the great frown upon it, let the foul breath of calumny pass over it and dim its
lustre, let the bleak winds of adversity blow upon it, and blast it; and where are they
then? They are scattered, and gone everyone to his own. We may learn from this
event to solace ourselves under some of the severest trials which can befall us in the
present world. Surely there are few things more bitter than this-to be deserted, when
we most need their assistance, by those on whose friendly offices we are entitled to
rely. But we may learn from this event not to wonder at it; it is no strange thing. We
must not wonder, then, if when we are most deeply interested in any great
undertaking, if when our labours and sacrifices for the good of our fellow creatures
are most abundant, or when our afflictions and sufferings are most severe, that is to
say, if when we most need the sympathy and support of our friends, we should be left
most entirely to ourselves. Let us solace ourselves in God. “Yet I am not alone, for the
Father is with me.” Let us live more in communion with Him. Let us look less to
creatures, and more to the Creator. Let us depend less on outward things, and more
on God. Finally, let us learn to anticipate the hour in which our most faithful friends
must leave us. Oh! to have the great and good Shepherd with us then!” Though I walk
through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; Thou art with me; Thy
rod and Thy staff they comfort me.” (J. J. Davies.
51 A young man, wearing nothing but a linen
garment, was following Jesus. When they seized
276

277. him,
BARNES, "A certain young man - Who this was we have no means of
determining, but it seems not improbable that he may have been the owner of the
garden, and that he may have had an understanding with Jesus that he should visit it
for retirement when he withdrew from the city. That he was not one of the apostles is
clear. It is probable that be was roused from sleep by the noise made by the rabble,
and came to render any aid in his power in quelling the disturbance. It is not known
why this circumstance is recorded by Mark. It is omitted by all the other evangelists.
It may have been recorded to show that the conspirators had instructions to take the
“apostles” as well as Jesus, and supposing him to be one of them, they laid hold of
him to take him before the high priest; or it “may” have been recorded in order to
place his conduct in strong and honorable contrast with the timidity and fear of the
disciples, who had all fled. Compare the notes at Mat_26:56.
A linen cloth cast about his naked body - He was roused from sleep, and
probably threw around him, in his haste, what was most convenient. It was common
to sleep in linen bed-clothes, and he seized a part of the clothes and hastily threw it
round him.
The young men - The Roman soldiers. They were called “young men” because
they were made up chiefly of youth. This was a Jewish mode of speaking. See Gen_
14:24; 2Sa_2:14; Isa_13:18.
Laid hold on him - Supposing him to be one of the apostles.
CLARKE, "A certain young man - Probably raised from his sleep by the noise
which the rabble made who came to apprehend Jesus, having wrapped the sheet or
some of the bed-clothing about him, became thereby the more conspicuous: on his
appearing, he was seized; but as they had no way of holding him, but only by the
cloth which was wrapped round him, he disengaged himself from that, and so
escaped out of their hands. This circumstance is not related by any other of the
evangelists.
GILL, "And there followed him a certain young man,.... Some think this was
John, the beloved disciple, and the youngest of the disciples; others, that it was
James, the brother of our Lord; but he does not seem to be any of the disciples of
Christ, since he is manifestly distinguished from them, who all forsook him and fled:
some have thought, that he was a young man of the house, where Christ and his
disciples ate their passover; who had followed him to the garden, and still followed
him, to see what would be the issue of things: but it seems most likely, that he was
one that lived in an house in Gethsemane, or in or near the garden; who being
awaked out of sleep with the noise of a band of soldiers, and others with them, leaped
out of bed, and ran out in his shirt, and followed after them, to know what was the
matter:
having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; which was either his shirt in
which he lay, or one of the sheets, which he took and wrapped himself in, not staying
to put on his clothes: though the word "Sindon", is used both by the Targumists (d)
277

278. and Talmudists (e) for a linen garment; and sometimes even for the outer garment,
to which the fringes were fastened (f); and he might take up this in haste, and slip it
on, without putting on any inner garment: the word "body", is not in the text, and the
phrase επι γυµνου, may be rendered, "upon his nakedness"; and answers to ‫,ערות‬ in
Gen_9:23 and Lev_20:11, and the meaning be, he had only a piece of linen wrapped
about his middle, to cover his nakedness; and in this garb ran out, to see what was
doing:
and the young men laid hold on him. The Roman soldiers, who were commonly
so called: so David's soldiers are called "young men", that were with him, 1Sa_21:4;
these attempted to lay hold on this young man, taking him to be a disciple of Christ,
or one at least affected to him, and did take hold of his linen cloth. The Vulgate Latin,
Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions, leave out the words, "the young men". The design
of Mark in relating this incident, is to show the rage and fury of these men; who were
for sparing none that appeared to be or were thought to be the followers of Christ; so
that the preservation of the disciples was entirely owing to the wonderful power of
Christ.
HENRY, "IX. The noise disturbed the neighbourhood, and some of the
neighbours were brought into danger by the riot, Mar_14:51, Mar_14:52. This
passage of story we have not in any other of the evangelists. Here is an account of a
certain young man, who, as it should seem, was no disciple of Christ, nor, as some
have imagined, a servant of the house wherein Christ had eaten the passover, who
followed him to see what would become of him (as the sons of the prophets, when
they understood that Elijah was to be taken up, went to view afar off, 2Ki_2:7), but
some young man that lived near the garden, perhaps in the house to which the
garden belonged. Now observe concerning him,
CALVIN, "Mark 14:51.And a young man. How some persons have come to
dream that this was John (221) I know not, nor is it of much importance to
inquire. The chief point is, to ascertain for what purpose Mark has related this
transaction. I think that his object was, to inform us that those wicked men — as
usually happens in riotous assemblies stormed and raved without shame or
modesty; which appeared from their seizing a young man who was unknown to
them, and not suspected of any crime, so that he had difficulty in escaping out of
their hands naked. For it is probable that the young man, who is mentioned, had
some attachment to Christ, and, on hearing the tumult by night, without
stopping to put on his clothes, and covered only with a linen garment, came
either to discover their traps, or, at least, that he might not be wanting in a duty
of friendship. (222) We certainly perceive — as I just now said — that those
wicked men raged with cruel violence, when they did not even spare a poor
young man, who had left his bed, almost naked, and run, on hearing the noise.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 51-52
Only Mark recorded this strange event. He described the young man (Gr.
neaniskos, between 24 and 40 years old) as one who was following Jesus. This
description could mean he was one of the Twelve or simply someone who was
sympathetic with Jesus. He was wearing a rather costly linen outer garment (Gr.
sindon) without an undergarment (Gr. chiton). It may have been his sleeping
garment. Perhaps he had been in bed in Jerusalem when he heard the mob
278

279. leaving the city talking about arresting Jesus and decided to go along. When one
of the soldiers seized him, he was so intent on abandoning Jesus that he was
willing to run through the crowd naked rather than staying with Jesus. This
man's action further illustrates how eager Jesus' followers were to save their own
skins at the cost of Jesus' safety and companionship. His naked condition
highlights his fear and embarrassment (cf. Amos 2:16).
This incident makes little contribution to the story of Jesus' arrest, apart from
illustrating that everyone fled. Therefore some of the church fathers and most of
the modern commentators have concluded that the young man was Mark, the
writer of this Gospel. However there is no solid evidence for this. [Note: See
Abraham Kuruvilla, "The Naked Runaway and the Enrobed Reporter of Mark
14, 16 : What Is the Author Doing with What He Is Saying? Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 54:3 (September 2011):527-45.]
BARCLAY, "A CERTAIN YOUNG MAN (Mark 14:51-52)
14:51-52 And a certain young man was following him, clothed in a linen sheet
over his naked body. And they tried to seize him, but he left the linen sheet and
escaped naked.
These are two strange and fascinating verses. At first sight they seem completely
irrelevant. They seem to add nothing to the narrative and yet there must be some
reason for them being there.
We saw in the introduction that Matthew and Luke used Mark as the basis of
their work and that they include in their gospels practically everything that is in
Mark. But they do not include these two verses. That would seem to show that
this incident was interesting to Mark and not really interesting to anyone else.
Why then was this incident so interesting to Mark that he felt he must include it?
The most probable answer is that the young man was Mark himself, and that
this is his way of saying, "I was there," without mentioning his own name at all.
When we read Acts we find that the meeting place and head-quarters of the
Jerusalem church was apparently in the house of Mary, the mother of John
Mark (Acts 12:12). If that be so, it is at least probable that the upper room in
which the Last Supper was eaten was in that same house. There could be no
more natural place than that to be the centre of the church. If we can assume
that there are two possibilities.
(i) It may be that Mark was actually present at the Last Supper. He was young,
just a boy, and maybe no one really noticed him. But he was fascinated with
Jesus and when the company went out into the dark, he slipped out after them
when he ought to have been in bed, with only the linen sheet over his naked
body. It may be that all the time Mark was there in the shadows listening and
watching. That would explain where the Gethsemane narrative came from. If the
disciples were all asleep how did anyone know about the struggle of soul that
Jesus had there? It may be that the one witness was Mark as he stood silent in
the shadows, watching with a boy's reverence the greatest hero he had ever
known.
279

280. (ii) From John's narrative we know that Judas left the company before the meal
was fully ended (John 13:30). It may be that it was to the upper room that Judas
meant to lead the Temple police so that they might secretly arrest Jesus. But
when Judas came back with the police, Jesus and his disciples were gone.
Naturally there was recrimination and argument. The uproar wakened Mark.
He heard Judas propose that they should try the garden of Gethsemane. Quickly
Mark wrapped his bed-sheet about him and sped through the night to the garden
to warn Jesus. But he arrived too late, and in the scuffle that followed was very
nearly arrested himself.
Whatever may be true, we may take it as fairly certain that Mark put in these
two verses because they were about himself He could never forget that night. He
was too humble to put his own name in but in this way he wrote his signature,
and said, to him who could read between the lines, "I, too, when I was a boy, was
there."
COFFMAN, "These verses, peculiar to Mark, are presumed by many to be a
narrative of what happened to Mark himself; and there is general consent that
this is the case. It cannot be proved, of course; but the supposition fits all the
facts. As to the reason for his inclusion of this incident in a gospel that omits so
many weightier matters, it has been alleged that this may be construed as a kind
of signature to the Gospel. It is the conviction here, however, that the significance
of it lies in the fact that as soon as the arresting group had Jesus in their power
they began also to arrest his followers. Certainly, they did lay hold on the young
man here; and the parallel fact of their not taking any of the Twelve gives
powerful inferential corroboration of the Johannine account of Jesus' forcing an
exemption of the apostles from that arrest.
PULPIT, "And a certain young man followed with him, having a linen cloth cast
about him, over his naked body: and they lay hold on him. St. Mark is the only
evangelist who mentions this incident; and there seems good reason for
supposing that he here describes what happened to himself. Such is the mode in
which St. John refers to himself in his Gospel, and where there can be no doubt
that he is speaking of himself. If the conclusion in an earlier part of this
commentary be correct, that it was at the house to which John Mark belonged
that our Lord celebrated the Passover, and from whence he went out to the
Mount of Olives; what more probable than that Mark had been with him on that
occasion, and had perhaps a presentiment that something was about to happen
to him? What more likely than that the crowd who took Jesus may have passed
by this house, and that Mark may have been roused from his bed (it was now a
late hour) by the tumult. Having a linen cloth ( σινδόνα) cast about his naked
body. The sindon was a fine linen cloth, indicating that he belonged to a family in
good circumstances. It is an unusual word. In every other place of the New
Testament where it is used it refers to the garment or shroud used to cover the
bodies of the dead. The sindon is supposed to take its name from Sidon, where
the particular kind of linen was manufactured of which the garment was made.
It was a kind of light cloak frequently worn in hot weather.
280

281. COKE, "Mark 14:51-52. There followed him a certain young man, &c.— Bishop
Pococke, in describing the dresses of the people of Egypt, observes, "that it is
almost a general custom among the Arabs and Mohammedan natives of the
country, to wear a large blanket, either white or brown, and in summera blue or
white cotton sheet; which the Christians constantly wear in the country. Putting
one corner before over the left shoulder, they bring it behind and under the right
arm, and so over their bodies, throwing it behind over the left shoulder, and so
the right arm is left bare for action. When it is hot, and they are on horseback,
they let it fall down on the saddle round them; and about Faiume I particularly
observed,that young people especially, and the poorer sort, had nothing on
whatever, but this blanket; and it is probable the young man was clothed in this
manner, who followed our Saviour when he was taken, having a linen-cloth cast
about his naked body; and when the young men laid hold on him, he left the
linen-cloth, and fled from them naked." See his Description of the East, vol. 1: p.
190.
"I am very much disposed," says the author of the Observations on Scripture,
"to think as theBishop does upon this point; and as he has made this remark, I
should not have thought of noting it, had I not apprehended some additional
observations might not be altogether useless. The account here given relates to
Egypt; but Egmont and Heyman inform us, that the inhabitants of Palestine are
as slightly clothed now as these Egyptians, and we may believe were so anciently.
They observe, that they saw several Arabian inhabitants of Jaffa (called Joppa in
the New Testament) going almost naked, the greatest part of them without so
much as a shirt or drawers, though some wore a kind of mantle: as for the
children there, they run about almost as naked as they were born, though they
had all little chains about their legs, as an ornament, and some of silver." The
ancients, or at least many of them, supposed that the young man here mentioned
by St. Mark, was one of the apostles; though Grotius wonders how they could
entertain such an idea; and apprehends that it was some youth who lodged in a
country-house near the garden of Gethsemane, who ran out in a hurry to see
what was the matter, in his night vestment, or in his shirt, as we should express
it. But the word Σινδον, used to signify what he had upon him, denotes also such
a cloth as they wrapped up the dead in, and occurs in no other sense in the Old
Testament: but the Eastern people do not lie like corpses wrapped up in a
winding-sheet, but in drawers, and one or two waistcoats, at Aleppo; and those
who go without drawers (as the Arabs of Barbary do, according to Dr. Shaw,
and many of the Holy Land, if we believe Egmont and Heyman) sleep in their
raiment; and the hyke, which they wear by day, serves them for a bed and
covering by night. It might as well then be an apostle in his day-dress, as an
ordinary youth wrapped up in that in which he lay; and it is rather to be
understood of an apostle in his common clothing, than of a person of figure in his
drawers and waistcoat, in which such persons now lay; and which we maybelieve
that Dionysius Alexandrinus meant by εν λινω εσθηματι, in his epistle quoted by
Grotius. A late commentator takes notice, that though this youth is said to
flyaway naked upon his leaving the linen cloth in the hands of those that secured
him; yet it is by no means necessary to suppose that he was absolutely naked;—
which is indeed very true: is not this precisely the thing, however, that the
evangelist designs to intimate,—in order to mark out the extreme fear of this
281

282. young man, who rather chose to quit his hyke than run the risk of being made a
prisoner; though, by doing this, he became entirely exposed? Dr. Lightfoot
supposes, as I do, says this author, that he had nothing on under this linen cloth;
which he inclines to attribute to mortification or a superstitious austerity. But if
he was not an apostle, yet he must be understood to have been a disciple of Jesus,
or he needed not to have been afraid. And from ch. Mark 2:18 we learn, that
though the disciples of John followed a rigorous institute, those of Christ did not.
See the Observations, p. 403, &c. instead of young men at the end of Mark 14:51.
Dr. Heylin reads soldiers, as the original word frequently signifies in the best
writers.
BENSON, “Mark 14:51-52. There followed him a certain young man — The
ancients, or at least many of them, supposed, that the young man here mentioned
by Mark was one of the apostles; though Grotius wonders how they could
entertain such an idea, and apprehends it was some youth who lodged in a
country-house, near the garden, who ran out in a hurry to see what was the
matter, in his night vestment, or in his shirt, as we should express it. Dr.
Macknight thinks it might be “the proprietor of the garden, who, being
awakened with the noise, came out in 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.” And the young men — οι ανεανισκο, a common
denomination for soldiers, among the Greeks. “Though this incident, recorded
by Mark, may not appear of great moment, it is, in my opinion,” says Dr.
Campbell, “one of those circumstances we call picturesque, which, though in a
manner unconnected with the story, enlivens the narrative. It must have been
late in the night when (as has been very probably conjectured) some young man,
whose house lay near the garden, being roused out of sleep by the noise of the
soldiers and armed retinue passing by, got up, stimulated by curiosity, wrapped
himself (as Casaubon supposes) in the cloth in which he had been sleeping, and
ran after them. This is such an incident as is very likely to have happened, but
most unlikely to have been invented.” Laid hold on him — Who was only
suspected to be Christ’s disciple; but were not permitted to touch them who
really were so!
BURKITT, "Here we have the history of our Saviour's examination before the
high-priest and council, who set up all night to arraign and try the holy and
innocent Jesus; for, lest his death should look like a downright murder, they
allow him a mock-trial, and abuse the law by perverting it to injustice and
bloodshed. Accordingly false witnesses are suborned, who depose that they heard
him say, he would destroy the temple, and build it again in three days.
It is not in the power of the greatest innocence to protect the most innocent and
holy person from slander and false accusation; yea, no person is so innocent and
good, whom false witnesses may not condemn.
Observe, 2. Our Lord's meekness and patience, his silence under all these wicked
suggestions and false accusations: Jesus held his peace, and answered nothing,
Mark 14:61.
282

283. Guilt is naturally clamorous and impatient; but innocency is silent, and careless
of misreports.
Learn hence, That to bear the revilings, contradictions, and false accusations, of
men with a silent and submissive spirit, is an excellent and Christ-like temper.
Our Lord stood before his unjust judge, and false accusers even as a sheep
before the shearer, dumb, and not opening his mouth; even then when a trial for
his life was managed most maliciously and illegally against him: When he was
reviled, he reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not.
May the same humble mind and forgiving spirit be in us, which was also in
Christ Jesus!
Observe, 3. That although our Saviour was silent, and made no reply to the false
witnesses; yet now, when the question was solemnly put by the high-priest, Art
thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? He answered I am.
Thence learn, That although we are not obliged by every ensnaring question to
make answer, yet we are bound faithfully to own, and freely to confess, the truth,
when solemnly called thereunto: when our silence will be interpreted a denial of
the truth, a dishonour to God, a reproach and scandal to our brethren, it will be
a great sin to hold our peace; and we must not be silent, though our confession of
the truth hazards our liberty, yea, our life. Christ knew that his answer would
cost him his life, yet he durst not but give it: Art thou the Son of the Blessed?
Jesus said, I am.
Observe, 4. The crime which the high-priest pronounces our Saviour to be guilty
of that of blasphemy; He hath spoken blasphemy. Hereupon the highpriest rends
his clothes: it being usual with the Jews so to do, both to show their sorrow for it,
and great detestation of it, and indignation against it.
Observe, 5. The vile affronts and horrid abuses which the enemies of our Saviour
put upon him, they spit in his face, they blindfold him, they smite him with their
hands, and in contempt and mockery bid him prophesy who it was that smote
him. Verily, there is no degree of contempt, no mark of shame, no kind of
suffering, which we ought to decline, or stick at for Christ's sake, who hid not his
face from shame and spitting upon our account.
Observe, 6. The high priest rends his clothes at Christ's telling him, Ye shall see
the Son of man sitting on God's right hand, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Mark 14:62. And well might his clothes and his heart rend also. It was as if our
Lord had said, "I that am now your prisoner, shall shortly be your judge. I now
stand at your bar; and, ere long, you must stand at my tribunal. Those eyes of
yours that now see me in the form of a servant, shall behold me in the clouds, at
the right hand of your God, and my Father."
BI 51-52, “And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.
Haste in religion
283

284. It strikes me that this “certain young man” was none other than Mark himself. He
was probably asleep; and, aroused by a great clamour, he asked what it was about.
The information was speedily given-“The guards have come to arrest Jesus of
Nazareth.” Moved by sudden impulse, not thinking of what he was doing, he rises
from his bed, rushes down, pursues the troopers, dashes into the midst of their
ranks, as though he alone would attempt the rescue, when all the disciples had fled.
The moment they lay hold upon him his heroic spasm is over; his enthusiasm
evaporates; he runs away, leaves the cloth that was loosely wrapped about his body
behind, and makes his escape. There have been many who acted like Mark since then.
First, however, you will say, “Why suppose it to be Mark?” I grant you it is merely a
supposition, but yet it is supported by the strongest chain of probabilities. It was
common among the evangelists to relate transactions in which they themselves took
part without mentioning their own names. Whoever it was, the only person likely to
know it was the man himself. I cannot think that anyone else would have been likely
to tell it to Mark. Again, we know that such a transaction as this was quite in keeping
with Mark’s common character: the evangel of Mark is the most impulsive of all the
evangels. He is a man who does everything straightway; full of impulse, dash, fire,
flash; the thing must be done, and done forthwith. Once more: the known life of John
Mark tends to make it very probable that he would do such a thing as is referred to in
the text. As soon as ever Paul and Barnabas set out on their missionary enterprise
they were attended by Mark. As long as they were sailing across the blue waters, and
as long as they were in the island of Cyprus, Mark stuck to them. Nay, while they
travelled along the coast of Asia Minor, we find they had John Mark to be their
minister; but the moment they went up into the inland countries, among the robbers
and the mountain streams-as soon as ever the road began to be a little too rough,
John Mark left them. His missionary zeal had oozed out. For these reasons, the
supposition that it was John Mark appears to me not to be utterly baseless.
I. Here is hasty following. John Mark does not wait to robe himself, but just as he is,
he dashes out for the defence of his Lord. Without a moment’s thought, taking no
sort of consideration, down he goes into the cold night air to try and deliver his
Master. Fervent zeal waited not for chary prudence. There was something good and
something bad in this, something to admire as well as something to censure. Beloved,
it is a good and right thing for us to follow Christ, and to follow Him at once; and it is
a brave thing to follow Him when His other disciples forsake Him and flee. Would
that all professors of religion had the intrepidity of Mark! The most of men are too
slow; fast enough in the world, but, ah! how slow in the things of God! Of all people
that dilly-dally in this world, I think professed servants of God are the most drowsy
and fuddling. How slothful are the ungodly, too, in Divine things; tell them they are
sick, they hasten to a surgeon; tell them that their title deeds are about to be
attacked, and they will defend them with legal power; but tell them, in God’s name,
that their soul is in danger, and they think it matters so little, and is of so small
import, that they will wait on, and wait on, and wait on, and doubtless continue to
wait on till they find themselves lost forever. The warnings of the gospel all bid you
shun procrastination. I do beseech you fly to Jesus, and fly to Jesus now, though even
it should be in the hurry of John Mark. I change my note. There is a haste that we
most reprove. The precipitate running of Mark suggests an admonition that should
put you on your guard. I am afraid some people make a hasty profession through the
persuasion of friends. Nor are there a mere few who get their religion through
excitement. This furnishes another example of injudicious haste. Many profess Christ
and think to follow Him without counting the cost. They had never sought God’s
strength; they had never been emptied of their own works and their own conceits;
consequently, in their best estate they were vanity; they were like the snail that melts
as it crawls, and not like the snowflake upon the Alps, which gathers strength in its
284

285. descent, till it becomes a ponderous avalanche. God make you not meteors or
shooting stars, but stars fixed in their places. I want you to resemble, not the ignis
fatuus of the morass, but the steady beacon of the rock. There is a phosphorescence
that creeps over the summer sea, but who is ever lighted by it to the port of peace?
And there is a phosphorescence which comes over some men’s minds. Very bright it
seems, but it is of no value; it brings no man to heaven.
II. It remains for me to notice the hasty running away. Some who run well at first
have hardly breath enough to keep the pace up, and so turn aside for a little
comfortable ease, and do not get into the road again. There are two kinds of desertion
which we denounce as hasty running away; the one temporary, the other final. Think
what a fool Mark made of himself. Here he comes; here is your hero. What wonders
he is going to do! Here is a Samson for you. Perhaps he will slay his thousand men.
But, no; he runs away before he strikes a single blow. He has not even courage
enough to be taken prisoner. How everybody in the crowd must have laughed at the
venturesome coward-at the dastardly bravo! Therefore abstain from these
inconsistencies for your own character’s sake. Besides, how much damage you do the
Church! And think what must be the dying bed of an apostate. Did you ever read of
“the groans of Spira”? That was a book circulated about the time of the Reformation-
a book so terrible that even a man of iron could scarcely read it. Spira knew the
gospel, but yet went back to the Church of Rome. His conscience woke on his dying
bed, and his cries and shrieks were too terrible to be endured by his nurses; and as to
his language, it was despair written out at full length in capital letters. My eminent
predecessor, Mr. Benjamin Keach, published a like narrative of the death of John
Child, who became a minister of the gospel, but afterwards went back to the Church
from which he seceded, and died in the most frightful despair. May God deliver you
from the death bed of any man who has lived a professed Christian, and dies an
apostate from the faith! But what must be the apostate’s doom when his naked soul
goes before God? (C. H. Spurgeon.)
52 he fled naked, leaving his garment behind.
CLARKE, "And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked - It has
often been intimated, by the inhabitants of India, that a European in strait clothes
must be in great danger when his clothes take fire. From their loose clothing they can
suddenly disengage themselves. When two Hindoos are engaged in a violent quarrel,
and one seizes the clothing of the other, often the latter will leave his clothes in the
hands of his opponent, and flee away naked. This seems to have been the case with
the person mentioned above. See Ward’s Customs.
GILL, "And he left the linen cloth,.... "In their hands", so the Persic version
renders it; just as Joseph left his garment in the hands of his mistress, Gen_39:12;
and fled from them naked; to the house from whence he came. The Syriac,
Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic versions, leave out the words "from them".
285

286. HENRY, "1. How he was frightened out of his bed, to be a spectator of Christ's
sufferings. Such a multitude, so armed, and coming with so much fury, and in the
dead of night, and in a quiet village, could not but produce a great stir; this alarmed
our young man, who perhaps thought they was some tumult or rising in the city,
some uproar among the people, and had the curiosity to go, and see what the matter
was, and was in such haste to inform himself, that he could not stay to dress himself,
but threw a sheet about him, as if he would appear like a walking ghost, in grave
clothes, to frighten those who had frightened him, and ran among the thickest of
them with this question, What is to do here? Being told, he had a mind to see the
issue, having, no doubt, heard much of the fame of this Jesus; and therefore, when all
his disciples had quitted him, he continued to follow him, desirous to hear what he
would say, and see what he would do. Some think that his having no other garment
than this linen cloth upon his naked body, intimates that he was one of those Jews
who made a great profession of piety that their neighbours, in token of which, among
other instances of austerity and mortification of the body, they used no clothes but
one linen garment, which, though contrived to be modest enough, was thin and cold.
But I rather think that this was not his constant wear.
2. See how he was frightened into his bed again, when he was in danger of being
made a sharer in Christ's sufferings. His own disciples had run away from him; but
this young man, having no concern for him, thought he might securely attend him,
especially being so far from being armed, that he was not so much as clothed; but the
young men, the Roman soldiers, who were called to assist, laid hold of him, for all
was fish that came to their net. Perhaps they were now vexed at themselves, that they
had suffered the disciples to run away, and they being got out of their reach they
resolved to seize the first they could lay their hands on; though this young man was
perhaps one of the strictest sect of the Jewish church, yet the Roman soldiers made
no conscience of abusing him upon this occasion. Finding himself in danger, he left
the linen cloth by which they had caught hold of him, and fled away naked. This
passage is recorded to show what a barbarous crew this was, that was sent to seize
Christ, and what a narrow escape the disciples had of falling into their hands, out of
which nothing could have kept them but their Master's care of them; If ye seek me,
let these go their way, Joh_18:8. It also intimates that there is no hold of those who
are led by curiosity only, and not by faith and conscience, to follow Christ.
JAMIESON, "
PULPIT, "But he left the linen cloth, and fled naked. This somewhat
ignominious flight is characteristic of what we know of St. Mark. It shows how
great was the panic in reference to Christ, and how great was the hatred of the
Jews against him, that they endeavored to seize a young man who was merely
following with him. It shows also how readily our Lord's enemies would have
seized his own disciples if they had not taken refuge in flight.
Jesus Before the Sanhedrin
53 They took Jesus to the high priest, and all the
286

287. chief priests, the elders and the teachers of the
law came together.
GILL, "And they led Jesus away to the high priest,.... Caiaphas, as is added in
the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions. This was done, after they had took Jesus and
bound, him, and after they had had him to Annas, who sent him bound to Caiaphas;
see Joh_18:12;
and with him, the high priest Caiaphas,
were assembled all the chief priests, and the elders, and the Scribes; even
the whole sanhedrim, who met at Caiaphas's house, and were waiting there for Jesus;
whom Judas with his band of soldiers and others, were gone to secure, and brng
before them; See Gill on Mat_26:57.
HENRY, "We have here Christ's arraignment, trial, conviction, and
condemnation, in the ecclesiastical court, before the great sanhedrim, of which the
high priest was president, or judge of the court; the same Caiaphas that had lately
adjudged it expedient he should be put to death, guilty or not guilty (Joh_11:50), and
who therefore might justly be excepted against as partial.
I. Christ is hurried away to his house, his palace it is called, such state did he live
in. And there, though, in the dead of the night, all the chief priests, and elders, and
scribes, that were in the secret, were assembled, ready to receive the prey; so sure
were they of it.
JAMIESON, "Mar_14:53-72. Jesus arraigned before the Sanhedrim, condemned
to die, and shamefully entreated - The fall of Peter. ( = Mat_26:57-75; Luk_
22:54-71; Joh_18:13-18, Joh_18:24-27).
Had we only the first three Gospels, we should have concluded that our Lord was
led immediately to Caiaphas, and had before the Council. But as the Sanhedrim could
hardly have been brought together at the dead hour of night - by which time our Lord
was in the hands of the officers sent to take Him - and as it was only “as soon as it
was day” that the Council met (Luk_22:66), we should have had some difficulty in
knowing what was done with Him during those intervening hours. In the Fourth
Gospel, however, all this is cleared up, and a very important addition to our
information is made (Joh_18:13, Joh_18:14, Joh_18:19-24). Let us endeavor to trace
the events in the true order of succession, and in the detail supplied by a comparison
of all the four streams of text.
Jesus is brought privately before Annas, the father-in-law of
Caiaphas (Joh_18:13, Joh_18:14).
Joh_18:13 :
And they led Him away to Annas first; for he was father-
in-law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same
year - This successful Annas, as Ellicott remarks, was appointed high
priest by Quirinus, a.d. 12, and after holding the office for several
287

288. years, was deposed by Valerius Gratius, Pilate’s predecessor in the
procuratorship of Judea [Josephus, Antiquities, 18.2.1, etc.]. He
appears, however, to have possessed vast influence, having obtained
the high priesthood, not only for his son Eleazar, and his son-in-law
Caiaphas, but subsequently for four other sons, under the last of
whom James, the brother of our Lord, was put to death [Antiquities,
20.9.1]. It is thus highly probable that, besides having the title of “high
priest” merely as one who had filled the office, he to a great degree
retained the powers he had formerly exercised, and came to be
regarded practically as a kind of rightful high priest.
Joh_18:14 :
Now Caiaphas was he which gave counsel to the Jews,
that it was expedient that one man should die for the
people. See on Joh_11:51. What passed between Annas and our Lord
during this interval the beloved disciple reserves till he has related the
beginning of Peter’s fall. To this, then, as recorded by our own
Evangelist, let us meanwhile listen.
Mar_14:53, Mar_14:54. Peter obtains access within the quadrangle of the High
Priest’s residence, and warms himself at the fire.
And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and with him were
assembled — or rather, “there gathered together unto him.”
all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes — it was then a full and
formal meeting of the Sanhedrim. Now, as the first three Evangelists place all Peter’s
denials of his Lord after this, we should naturally conclude that they took place while
our Lord stood before the Sanhedrim. But besides that the natural impression is that
the scene around the fire took place overnight, the second crowing of the cock, if we
are to credit ancient writers, would occur about the beginning of the fourth watch, or
between three and four in the morning. By that time, however, the Council had
probably convened, being warned, perhaps, that they were to prepare for being called
at any hour of the morning, should the Prisoner be successfully secured. If this be
correct, it is fairly certain that only the last of Peter’s three denials would take place
while our Lord was under trial before the Sanhedrim. One thing more may require
explanation. If our Lord had to be transferred from the residence of Annas to that of
Caiaphas, one is apt to wonder that there is no mention of His being marched from
the one to the other. But the building, in all likelihood, was one and the same; in
which case He would merely have to be taken perhaps across the court, from one
chamber to another.
BARCLAY, "THE TRIAL (Mark 14:53; Mark 14:55-65)
14:53,55-65 They took Jesus away to the High Priest, and all the chief priests and
experts in the law and elders assembled with him.... The chief priests and the
whole Sanhedrin were trying to find some evidence against Jesus, in order to put
him to death, and they could not find any, for there were many who bore false
witness against him, but their evidence did not agree. Some stood up and bore
false witness against him. "We heard him saying," they said, "'I will destroy this
Temple made with hands and in three days' time I will build another not made
with hands'." But not even so did their evidence agree. So the High Priest stood
up in the midst and questioned Jesus. "Do you give no answer?" he said. "What
is the evidence that these men are alleging against you?" Jesus remained silent
288

289. and gave no answer. Again the High Priest questioned him, and said to him,
"Are you God's Anointed One, the Son of the Blessed One?" Jesus said, "I am,
and you will see the Son of Man seated on the right hand of power, and coming
with the clouds of heaven." The High Priest rent his garments. "What need," he
said, "have we of witnesses? You have listened to blasphemy. How does it seem
to you?" And they all adjudged him to be liable to death. And some began to spit
upon him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say to him,
"Prophesy!" And the servants received him with blows.
Things were moving quickly to their inevitable end.
At this time the powers of the Sanhedrin were limited because the Romans were
the rulers of the country. The Sanhedrin had full power over religious matters. It
seems also to have had a certain amount of police court power. But it had no
power to inflict the death penalty. If what Mark describes was a meeting of the
Sanhedrin it must be compared to a Grand Jury. Its function was not to
condemn, but to prepare a charge on which the criminal could be tried before
the Roman governor.
There is no doubt that in the trial of Jesus the Sanhedrin broke all its own laws.
The regulations for the procedure of the Sanhedrin are in one of the tractates of
the Mishnah. Naturally enough some of these regulations are rather ideals than
actual practices but, even allowing for that, the whole procedure of this night
was a series of flagrant injustices.
The Sanhedrin was the supreme court of the Jews and was composed of seventy-
one members. Within its membership there were Sadducees--the priestly classes
were all Sadducees--Pharisees and Scribes, who were experts in the law, and
respected men who were elders. It appears that any vacancies in the court were
filled by co-option. The High Priest presided over the court. The court sat in a
semi-circle in such a way that any member could see any other member. Facing it
sat the students of the Rabbis. They were allowed to speak on behalf of the
person on trial but not against him. The official meeting place of the Sanhedrin
was the Hall of Hewn Stone which was within the Temple precincts, and the
decisions of the Sanhedrin were not valid unless reached at a meeting held in
that place. The court could not meet at night, nor could it meet at any of the
great feasts. When evidence was taken, witnesses were examined separately and
their evidence to be valid must agree in every detail. Each individual member of
the Sanhedrin must give his verdict separately, beginning from the youngest and
going on to the eldest. If the verdict was a verdict of death, a night must elapse
before it was carried out, so that the court might have a chance to change its
mind and its decision towards mercy.
It can be seen that on point after point the Sanhedrin broke its own rules. It was
not meeting in its own building. It was meeting at night. There is no word of
individually given verdicts. A night was not allowed to elapse before the penalty
of death was inflicted. In their eagerness to eliminate Jesus, the Jewish
authorities did not hesitate to break their own laws.
289

290. At first the court could not get even false witnesses to agree. The false witnesses
accused Jesus of having said that he would destroy the Temple. It may well be
that someone had overheard him speaking as he did in Mark 13:2, and had
maliciously twisted the saying into a threat to destroy the Temple. There is an
old legend which tells how the Sanhedrin could get plenty of the kind of evidence
they did not want, for man after man came forward saying, "I was a leper and
he cleansed me. I was blind and he made me able to see. I was deaf and he made
me able to hear. I was lame and he made me able to walk. I was paralysed and he
gave me back my strength."
At last the High Priest took the matter into his own hands. When he did, he
asked the very kind of question that the law completely forbade. He asked a
leading question. It was forbidden to ask questions by answering which the
person on trial might incriminate himself. No man could be asked to condemn
himself, but that was the very question the High Priest asked. Bluntly he asked
Jesus if he was the Messiah. Clearly Jesus felt that it was time that the whole
wretched business was ended. Without hesitation he answered that he was. Here
was a charge of blasphemy, insult against God. The Sanhedrin had what it
wanted, a charge which merited the death penalty, and they were savagely
content.
Once again we see the two great characteristics of Jesus emerge.
(i) We see his courage. He knew that to make that answer was to die, and yet
unhesitatingly he made it. Had he denied the charges they would have been
powerless to touch him.
(ii) We see his confidence. Even with the Cross now a certainty, he still continued
to speak with complete confidence of his ultimate triumph.
Surely it is the most terrible of tragedies to see him who came to offer men love
denied even bare justice, and humiliated by the crude and cruel horse-play of the
Sanhedrin servants and guards.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 53
B. The Servant's endurance of suffering 14:53-15:47
Jesus' sufferings until now had been anticipatory and psychological. Now He
began to experience physical pain resulting from His trials and crucifixion. As
the faithful Servant of the Lord who came to do His Father's will, His sufferings
continued to increase.
Jesus underwent two trials, a religious one before the Jewish leaders and a civil
one before the Roman authorities. This was necessary because under Roman
sovereignty the Sanhedrin did not have the authority to crucify. The Sanhedrin
wanted Jesus to suffer crucifixion (John 18:31). Each trial had three parts.
Jesus' Religious Trial
Before Annas
John 18:12-14; John 18:19-24
290

291. Before Caiaphas
Matthew 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 22:54; Luke 22:63-65
Before the Sanhedrin
Matthew 27:1; Mark 15:1; Luke 22:66-71
Jesus' Civil Trial
Before Pilate
Matthew 27:2; Matthew 27:11-14; Mark 15:1-5; Luke 23:1-5; John 18:28-38
Before Herod Antipas
Luke 23:6-12
Before Pilate
Matthew 27:15-26; Mark 15:6-15; Luke 23:13-25; John 18:39 to Joh_19:16
Verse 53
The high priest in view here was Caiaphas. Interestingly Mark never mentioned
him by name. He was the high priest that the Romans had appointed in A.D. 18,
and he served in this capacity until A.D. 36. He seems to have been the person
most responsible for the plot to do away with Jesus.
This was an unscheduled meeting of the Sanhedrin since Jewish law required
that official meetings take place during the daytime. It transpired before dawn
on Friday, the fifteenth of Nisan, a feast day. Normally the Sanhedrin did not
conduct hearings of this type on a feast day. The Jewish leaders probably met at
this unorthodox hour because the Romans conducted their civil trials shortly
after sunrise. The Sanhedrin wanted to deliver Jesus over to Pilate for a hasty
trial before public sentiment built in favor of Jesus. Normally the Sanhedrin did
not pass sentence on an accused capital offender until the day following his trial.
They made an exception in Jesus' case. Usually the Sanhedrin met in a hall on
the west side of the temple enclosure. [Note: Josephus, Antiquities of . . ., 5:4:2.]
However now they met in Caiaphas' house or palace (Luke 22:54). "All" the
Sanhedrin may mean every one of its 71 members or, probably, all that were
necessary for a quorum, at least 23. [Note: Mishnah Sanhedrin 1:1.]
PULPIT, "And they led Jesus away to the high priest. This high priest was
Caiaphas. But we learn from St. John (John 18:13) that our Lord was first
brought before Annas, the father-in-law of Caiphas. Annas and his five sons held
the high priesthood in succession, Caiaphas, his son-in-law, stepping in between
the first and the second son, and holding the office for twelve years. It is
supposed that it was in the house of Annas that the price of the betrayal was paid
to Judas. Annas, though not then high priest, must have had considerable
influence in the counsels of the Sanhedrim; and this will probably explain the
291

292. fact of our Lord having been first taken to him.
BENSON, “Mark 14:53-54. And they led Jesus away to the high-priest — To
Annas first, who had been high-priest, and afterward to his son-in-law,
Caiaphas, who then sustained the office. And with him were assembled all the
chief priests, the elders, and the scribes — Or the chief persons of the sanhedrim,
with their proper officers, convened by Caiaphas on this important occasion.
And Peter followed him afar off — Though he had at first forsaken Christ, and
shifted for himself, as the rest of his companions did, yet afterward he and John
bethought themselves, and determined to return, that they might see what would
become of him: even unto the palace of the high-priest — See on Matthew 26:57.
It appears, from the circumstance of Peter and John’s being ready to go into
Caiaphas’s house with the band which conducted Jesus, that they had quickly
recovered themselves after their flight.
COFFMAN, "JESUS' TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN
This was the second of Jesus' six trials, the first having been the arraignment
before Annas, perhaps in the same palace where apartments for both Annas and
Caiaphas were located around the courtyard. For detailed account of the entire
six trials of Jesus, see my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 26:57ff. The
meeting of the Sanhedrin was probably not at full strength, its more noble
members, such as Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, having already
withdrawn. Also, such an all-night session of so august a body doubtless found
many of their members at home in bed. It may well be doubted that even a
quorum was present; but, on the other hand, it may be assumed that every effort
was made to attain one.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:53-65
The trial before Caiaphas.
Surely this is the most amazing scene in the long history of humanity! The
Redeemer of mankind upon his trial; the Savior at the bar of those he came to
save;—there is in this something monstrous and almost incredible. But the case is
even worse than this. The Lord and Judge of man stands at the tribunal of those
who must one day appear before his judgment-seat. They judge him in time
whom he must judge in eternity. It is a spectacle the most affecting and the most
awful this earth has ever witnessed.
I. THE TRIBUNAL. Jesus has already been led before the crafty and
unrighteous Annas. He is now led into the presence of the high priest, the
Caiaphas (son-in-law to Annas) who has declared that it was good that one man
should perish for the people; which meant, that it was better that the innocent
Jesus should die, rather than that the ruler's influence with the people should be
imperilled by the prevalence of the spiritual teaching of the Prophet of Nazareth.
With Caiaphas are associated, first informally, and then in something like legal
fashion, the chief priests, elders, and scribes. It appears that these are mainly of
the Sadducees, of the party who aimed at political power. The tribunal before
292

293. which Jesus is arraigned is composed of the Sanhedrim, so far as it may be said
to exist at this time. It is observable, accordingly, that the accusers of Jesus are
his judges. These are the men who sent down spies into Galilee, to lay in wait and
tempt Jesus, and catch him in his speech. These are the men who instigated the
cavillers who, in the public places of Jerusalem, opposed the teaching of the Lord
with foolish questions, uncandid criticisms, unfounded calumnies. These are the
men who, after the raising of Lazarus, plotted against the mighty One, and
resolved that they would have his life. These are the men who themselves sent out
the band that apprehended Jesus in the garden. He appears, therefore, at the bar
of those who have watched and pursued him with eager malice, who have
persecuted him with unscrupulous hatred, and who have now got him within
their toils. Such was the court before which Jesus appeared. From a tribunal like
this there was no prospect, no expectation, no possibility, of justice. This Jesus
had long foreseen, and for the consequences Jesus was perfectly prepared.
II. THE EVIDENCE. When the judges condescend to become the accusers, it is
no wonder that they seek evidence against the accused. In such circumstances
Jesus must be obviously, undeniably innocent, if no charge can be substantiated
against him. False witnesses appear; but so flagrantly inconsistent are their
unfounded accusations, that even such a court, so prejudiced, cannot condemn
upon testimony so mutually destructive. At length, however, false witnesses stand
up, who distort a memorable saying of Christ into what may be construed as a
disparagement of the national temple which all Jews regard with pride. Jesus,
speaking of the temple of his body, had said, "Destroy this temple, and in three
days I will rear it again." This saying is misrepresented, and made to appear the
utterance of an intention to destroy the sacred and noble edifice. Even so,
however, the witnesses agree not. If this is the worst charge that can be brought
against Jesus, and if even this cannot he substantiated; if no remembered words
can be twisted so as to give some color for condemnation before a tribunal so
constituted and so prejudiced; then this is certain, that the ministry of Jesus
must have been discharged with amazing wisdom and discretion. At the same
time, the sin of the Lord's enemies appears the more enormous and the more
inexcusable. Jesus was not condemned upon any evidence, any testimony, against
him.
III. THE APPEAL AND ADJURATION.
1. The president of the court, stung with disappointment, springs from his seat,
indignant at the silence and calmness of the accused; and, with most unjudicial
unfairness, interposes, and endeavors to provoke Jesus into language which may
inculpate himself. But he is met with a dignified demeanor and with continued
silence.
2. This effort being in vain, the high priest adjures the accused, and requires him
to say whether or not he persists in the-claims which he has made in the course of
his ministry to be the Messiah, and the Son of the Blessed. Let him say "No," and
he is for ever discredited and powerless; let him say "Yes," and then his
admission may be construed into a claim which may be represented to the
Roman procurator as a treasonable assumption of royal power. The intention of
293

294. the judge in this proceeding was evil; but an opportunity was thus given for the
great Accused publicly to put himself right with the court and with the world.
IV. THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND DECLARATION. Our Lord does not
think it worth while to refute witnesses who have refuted themselves and one
another. But now that the ruler of the people puts him upon his oath, and
requires of him a plain answer to a plain question, Jesus breaks his silence.
1. He acknowledges what he has often asserted before, that no claim can be too
high for him to make with truth. If he is to die-and upon that he has resolved—
Jesus will die, witnessing to the truth and for the truth. He is the foretold
Deliverer, the anointed King, the only Son of the Blessed and Eternal. This he
will not conceal; from this avowal nought shall make him shrink.
2. He adds that his high position and glorious office shall be one day witnessed
by his persecutors and judges, as well as by all mankind. There is true sublimity
in such an avowal, made in such circumstances and before such an assembly. To
the view of man Jesus is the culprit, powerless before the malice and the injustice
of the mighty, and in danger of a cruel and violent death. But in truth the case is
otherwise. He is the Divine King, the Divine Judge. His glory is concealed now,
but it shall shine forth in due time and ere long. Men on earth shall bow in his
Name, receive his laws, and place themselves beneath his protecting care. The
world shall witness his majesty, and all nations shall be summoned to his bar,
and heaven shall crown him "Lord of all." What striking harmony there is
between this profession and expectation of Christ on the one hand, and on the
other that wonderful statement of an apostle, "For the joy that was set before
him, he endured the cross, despising the shame"
V. THE SENTENCE.
1. The avowal is treated as a confession. No witnesses are now needed. From his
own mouth he is judged. The charge, which Jesus' own language is held to justify
and substantiate, is one of blasphemy. And, if Christ were a mere man, this
charge was just.
2. The whole court concurs in the judgment. The president is eager to condemn,
but not more eager than his assessors. One mind moves them all-a mind of
malice and hatred, a mind rejoicing in iniquity, grasping at the fulfillment of
base hopes.
3. The sentence is death. It was a foregone conclusion. The destruction of Jesus
had been resolved upon long since. Death for the Lord of life; death for the
Benefactor of mankind; death for the innocent but willing Victim of human
ferocity and human sin!
VI. THE INSULTS. Again and again, in the course of that awful night, that
awful morning, was the Lord of glory treated with derision, ignominy, and
contempt. The record is almost too distressing to be read. We can read of the
agony in the garden, of the anguish of the cross, but we scarcely know how to
294

295. read of the treatment our Savior met with from our fellow-men, from those he
came to save and bless. The spitting, the buffeting, the mockery, the blows,—
those will not bear to be thought upon. We may believe, we cannot realize, the
record!
APPLICATION.
1. Here we behold sin at its height, raging and seemingly triumphant. Whether
we look at the witnesses who maligned Jesus, the court which condemned him, or
the officers who abused him, we are confronted with appalling proofs of the
flagitiousness of human sin.
2. Here we behold innocence in its peerless perfection. No fault is found in Jesus.
Even his demeanor, amidst all this injustice, is consummate moral beauty. His
unruffled calm, his Divine dignity, his immovable patience,—all command the
profoundest reverence of our heart.
3. Here we behold a willing Sacrifice. Jesus is "obedient unto death, even the
death of the cross." With these stripes we are healed. These are a part of the
suffering Jesus bore for us. That we may be freed from condemnation, he is
condemned; that we may live, he is delivered unto death.
4. A glorious example is here presented for our imitation. "Christ also suffered
for you, leaving you an example, that ye should follow in his steps … who, when
he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, threatened not; but
committed himself to him that judgeth righteously."
BI, “And they led Jesus away to the High Priest.
Christ before the priests
I. Give attention to the two high priests with whom the trial of Jesus began.
II. The midnight council of triers. For blind men to be fair critics of Turner, for bats
to be fair critics of sunshine, for worms to be fair critics of the open air, would be
more conceivable than the possibility of men like these being fair judges of Jesus!
How could such sinners understand the Holy One of God? Besides their unfairness
from natural unfitness, there was unfairness from the fact that they were desperate
conspirators, plotting against His life.
III. How He was tried. (Charles Stanford, D. D.)
54 Peter followed him at a distance, right into
the courtyard of the high priest. There he sat
with the guards and warmed himself at the fire.
295

296. CLARKE, "Peter followed - On Peter’s denial, see Mat_26:57, etc.
At the fire - Προς το φως, literally, at the light, i.e. a fire that cast considerable
light, in consequence of which, the maid servant was the better able to distinguish
him: see Mar_14:67.
GILL, "And Peter followed him afar off,.... And did another disciple, perhaps
John; Joh_18:15, who having somewhat recovered themselves from their fright,
turned back, and followed Jesus, and the company that led him away; keeping at
some distance, that they might not be observed, and exposed to danger; and
proceeded till they came to Jerusalem, and to the place where the sanhedrim were
convened; and the other disciple went in along with Jesus; and Peter afterwards, by
his means, got in:
even into the palace of the high priest; being let in by her that kept the door, at
the motion of the other disciple
and he sat with the servants; as if he was one of them, and had no concern with
Jesus:
and warmed himself at the fire; or "light", as the Greek word signifies, and
answers to the Hebrew word ‫,אור‬ by which both: light and fire are expressed; of
which, take an instance or two, in the room of many (g):
"a murderer that strikes, his neighbour with a stone, or with iron, and plunges him
into water, or into ‫,האור‬ "fire", so that he cannot get out, and dies, is guilty.''
Again (h), a
"book which ‫,האור‬ "fire", takes hold upon on one side, he puts, water on the other;
and if it is quenched, it is quenched; if the "fire" takes hold on both sides, he opens it,
and reads in it; and if it is quenched, it is quenched: a cloak which "fire" takes hold
upon on one side, he puts water on the other side; and if it is quenched, it is
quenched; if the "fire" takes hold on it on both sides, he takes, it and wraps himself in
it, and if it is quenched, it is quenched.''
So we read (i) of ‫גיהנם‬ ‫של‬ ‫,אור‬ "the fire of hell"; and Ur of the Chaldees has its name
from the fire, that was worshipped there, as a symbol of the sun: and fire was the ‫,אור‬
or "light", created on the first day, Gen_1:3; See Gill on Mat_26:58.
HENRY, ". Peter followed at a distance, such a degree of cowardice was his late
courage dwindled into, Mar_14:54. But when he came to the high priest's palace, he
sneakingly went, and sat with the servants, that he might not be suspected to belong
to Christ. The high priest's fire side was no proper place, nor his servants proper
company, for Peter, but it was his entrance into a temptation.
296

297. JAMIESON, "And Peter followed him afar off, even into — or “from afar,
even to the interior of.”
the palace of the high priest — “An oriental house,” says Robinson, “is usually
built around a quadrangular interior court; into which there is a passage (sometimes
arched) through the front part of the house, closed next the street by a heavy folding
gate, with a smaller wicket for single persons, kept by a porter. The interior court,
often paved or flagged, and open to the sky, is the hall, which our translators have
rendered ‘palace,’ where the attendants made a fire; and the passage beneath the
front of the house, from the street to this court, is the porch. The place where Jesus
stood before the high priest may have been an open room, or place of audience on the
ground floor, in the rear or on one side of the court; such rooms, open in front, being
customary. It was close upon the court, for Jesus heard all that was going on around
the fire, and turned and looked upon Peter (Luk_22:61).”
and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire — The
graphic details, here omitted, are supplied in the other Gospels.
Joh_18:18 :
And the servants and officers stood there - that is, in the hall,
within the quadrangle, open to the sky.
who had made a fire of coals - or charcoal (in a brazier
probably).
for it was cold - John alone of all the Evangelists mentions the
material, and the coldness of the night, as Webster and Wilkinson
remark. The elevated situation of Jerusalem, observes Tholuck,
renders it so cold about Easter as to make a watch fire at night
indispensable.
And Peter stood with them and warmed himself - “He went
in,” says Matthew (Mat_26:58), “and sat with the servants to see the
end.” These two minute statements throw an interesting light on each
other. His wishing to “see the end,” or issue of these proceedings, was
what led him into the palace, for he evidently feared the worst. But
once in, the serpent coil is drawn closer; it is a cold night, and why
should not he take advantage of the fire as well as others? Besides, in
the talk of the crowd about the all-engrossing topic he may pick up
something which he would like to hear. Poor Peter! But now, let us
leave him warming himself at the fire, and listening to the hum of talk
about this strange case by which the subordinate officials, passing to
and fro and crowding around the fire in this open court, would while
away the time; and, following what appears the order of the
Evangelical Narrative, let us turn to Peter’s Lord.
Jesus is interrogated by Annas - His dignified reply - Is treated
with indignity by one of the officials - His meek rebuke (Joh_
18:19-23).
We have seen that it is only the Fourth Evangelist who tells us that
our Lord was sent to Annas first, overnight, until the Sanhedrim could
be got together at earliest dawn. We have now, in the same Gospel, the
deeply instructive scene that passed during this non-official interview.
Joh_18:19 :
297

298. The high priest - Annas.
then asked Jesus of His disciples and of His doctrine -
probably to entrap Him into some statements which might be used
against Him at the trial. From our Lord’s answer it would seem that
“His disciples” were understood to be some secret party.
Joh_18:20.
Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world - compare
Joh_7:4. He speaks of His public teaching as now a past thing - as
now all over.
I ever taught in the synagogue and in the temple, whither
the Jews always resort - courting publicity, though with sublime
noiselessness.
and in secret have I said nothing - rather, “spake I nothing”;
that is, nothing different from what He taught in public: all His private
communications with the Twelve being but explanations and
developments of His public teaching. (Compare Isa_45:19; Isa_
48:16).
Joh_18:21 :
Why askest thou Me? ask them which heard Me what I
have said to them - rather, “what I said unto them.”
behold, they know what I said - From this mode of replying, it
is evident that our Lord saw the attempt to draw Him into self-
crimination, and resented it by falling back upon the right of every
accused party to have some charge laid against Him by competent
witnesses.
Joh_18:22 :
And when He had thus spoken, one of the officers which
stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying,
Answerest Thou the high priest so? - (see Isa_50:6). It would
seem from Act_23:2 that this summary and undignified way of
punishment what was deemed insolence in the accused had the
sanction even of the high priests themselves.
Joh_18:23 :
Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil - rather, “If I
spoke evil,” in reply to the high priest.
bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou
Me? - He does not say “if not evil,” as if His reply had been merely
unobjectionable; but “if well,” which seems to challenge something
altogether fitting in the remonstrance. He had addressed to the high
priest. From our Lord’s procedure here, by the way, it is evident
enough that His own precept in the Sermon on the Mount - that when
smitten on the one cheek we are to turn to the smiter the other also
(Mat_5:39) - is not to be taken to the letter.
298

299. Annas sends Jesus to Caiaphas (Joh_18:24).
Joh_18:24.
Now Annas had sent Him bound unto Caiaphas the high
priest - On the meaning of this verse there is much diversity of
opinion; and according as we understand it will be the conclusion we
come to, whether there was but one hearing of our Lord before Annas
and Caiaphas together, or whether, according to the view we have
given above, there were two hearings - a preliminary and informal
one before Annas, and a formal and official one before Caiaphas and
the Sanhedrim. If our translators have given the right sense of the
verse, there was but one hearing before Caiaphas; and then Joh_18:24
is to be read as a parenthesis, merely supplementing what was said in
Joh_18:13. This is the view of Calvin, Beza, Grotius, Bengel,
Deuteronomy Wette, Meyer, Lucke, Tholuck. But there are decided
objections to this view. First: We cannot but think that the natural
sense of the whole passage, embracing Joh_18:13, Joh_18:14, Joh_
18:19-24, is that of a preliminary non-official hearing before “Annas
first,” the particulars of which are accordingly recorded; and then of a
transference of our Lord from Annas to Caiaphas. Second: On the
other view, it is not easy to see why the Evangelist should not have
inserted Joh_18:24 immediately after Joh_18:13; or rather, how he
could well have done otherwise. As it stands, it is not only quite out of
its proper place, but comes in most perplexingly. Whereas, if we take it
as a simple statement of fact, that after Annas had finished his
interview with Jesus, as recorded in Joh_18:19-23, he transferred
Him to Caiaphas to be formally tried, all is clear and natural. Third:
The pluperfect sense “had sent” is in the translation only; the sense of
the original word being simply “sent.” And though there are cases
where the aorist here used has the sense of an English pluperfect, this
sense is not to be put upon it unless it be obvious and indisputable.
Here that is so far from being the case, that the pluperfect “had sent”
is rather an unwarrantable interpretation than a simple translation of
the word; informing the reader that, according to the view of our
translators, our Lord “had been” sent to Caiaphas before the interview
just recorded by the Evangelist; whereas, if we translate the verse
literally - “Annas sent Him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest” - we
get just the information we expect, that Annas, having merely
“precognosced” the prisoner, hoping to draw something out of Him,
“sent Him to Caiaphas” to be formally tried before the proper tribunal.
This is the view of Chrysostom and Augustine among the Fathers; and
of the moderns, of Olshausen, Schleiermacher, Neander, Ebrard,
Wieseler, Lange, Luthardt. This brings us back to the text of our
second Gospel, and in it to
CONSTABLE, "This notation helps the reader understand that Peter was in the
high priest's residence throughout Jesus' trial there. It prepares us for the
account of Peter's denial (Mark 14:66-72) that happened while the Sanhedrin
was examining Jesus. It also helps us appreciate the fact that Peter's desertion of
Jesus was only temporary. The synoptic evangelists did not mention that another
disciple accompanied Peter into the courtyard (John 18:15). The officers would
299

300. have been the temple police since the Roman soldiers would not have guarded
the high priest's palace.
COFFMAN, "The use of the past perfect tense, "had followed," shows that
Mark's account here is retrogressive in part. Having introduced the illegal, all-
night convention of the Sanhedrin, he returned to relate Peter's denial earlier
that night in the court of the high priest. It is likely that this "court" was the
official residence of both Annas and Caiaphas. (See comments on the parallel
account in my Commentary on John.) The scene here is not the usual meeting
place of the Sanhedrin, just off the court of women, but the official residence of
the high priests (the legal high priest Caiaphas, and the man regarded by the
Jews as the rightful high priest, Annas).
Warming himself ... Peter's association with the Lord's enemies, his participating
in benefits they made available, and his desire to remain unrecognized were
factors entering into his denial. (See my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew
25:57ff). Closely associated with Peter as Mark was, he nevertheless did not
soften this account of Peter's shameful failure.
BARCLAY, "COURAGE AND COWARDICE (Mark 14:54; Mark 14:66-72)
14:54,66-72 And Peter followed him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the
High Priest's house, and he was sitting there with the servants, warming himself
at the fire.... When Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the maidservants of
the High Priest came up, and when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked
closely at him. "You, too," she said, "were with the Nazarene, with Jesus." He
denied it. "I do not know," he said, "or understand what you are saying." He
went out into the porch, and the cock crew. The maidservant saw him and again
began to say to the bystanders, "This man was one of them." But he again denied
it. Soon afterwards the bystanders said to Peter, "In truth you are one of them,
for you are a Galilaean." He began to curse and to swear, "I do not know the
man you are talking about." And immediately cockcrow sounded. And Peter
remembered the word, how Jesus had said to him, "Before the cock crow twice
you will deny me three times." And he flung his cloak about his head and wept.
Sometimes we tell this story in such a way as to do Peter far less than justice. The
thing we so often fail to recognize is that up to the very last Peter's career this
night had been one of fantastically reckless courage. He had begun by drawing
his sword in the garden with the reckless courage of a man prepared to take on a
whole mob by himself. In that scuffle he had wounded the servant of the High
Priest. Common prudence would have urged that Peter should lie very low. The
last place anyone would have dreamed that he would go to would be the
courtyard of the High Priest's house--yet that is precisely where he did go. That
in itself was sheer audacity. It may be that the others had fled, but Peter was
keeping his word. Even if the others had gone he would stick to Jesus.
Then the queer mixture of human nature emerged. he was sitting by the fire, for
the night was cold. No doubt he was huddled in his cloak. Maybe someone poked
the fire or flung a fresh log upon it, and it flared up with a fitful flame and Peter
was recognized. Straightway he denied all connection with Jesus. But--and here
300

301. is the forgotten point--any prudent man would then have left that courtyard as
fast as his legs could carry him--but not Peter. The same thing happened again.
Again Peter denied Jesus and again he would not go. It happened once more.
Again Peter denied Jesus, Peter did not curse Jesus' name. What he did was to
swear he did not know Jesus and to call down curses on himself if he was not
telling the truth. Still it seems he did not mean to move. But something else
happened.
Very probably it was this. The Roman night was divided into four watches from
6 p.m. to 6 a.m. At the end of the third watch, at three o'clock in the morning, the
guard was changed. When the guard was changed there was a bugle call which
was called the gallicinium, which is the Latin for the cockcrow. Most likely what
happened was that as Peter spoke his third denial, the clear note of the bugle call
rang out over the silent city and smote on Peter's ear. He remembered and his
heart broke.
Make no mistake--Peter fell to a temptation which would have come only to a
man of fantastic courage. It ill becomes prudent and safety-seeking men to
criticize Peter for falling to a temptation which would never, in the same
circumstances, have come to them at all. Every man has his breaking-point. Peter
reached his here, but nine hundred and ninety-nine men out of every thousand
would have reached theirs long before. We would do well to be amazed at Peter's
courage rather than to be shocked at his fall.
But there is another thing. There is only one source from which this story could
have come--and that is Peter himself. We saw in the introduction that Mark's
gospel is the preaching material of Peter. That is to say, over and over again
Peter must have told the story of his own denial. "That is what I did," he must
have said, "and this amazing Jesus never stopped loving me."
There was an evangelist called Brownlow North. He was a man of God, but in his
youth he had lived a wild life. One Sunday he was to preach in Aberdeen. Before
he entered the pulpit a letter was handed to him. The writer recounted a
shameful incident in Brownlow North's life before he became a Christian and
stated that if he dared to preach he would rise in the church and publicly
proclaim what once he had done. Brownlow North took the letter into the pulpit
with him. He read it to the congregation. He told them that it was perfectly true.
Then he told them how through Christ he had been forgiven, how he had been
enabled to overcome himself and put the past behind him, how through Christ
he was a new creature. He used his own shame as a magnet to draw men to
Christ. That is what Peter did. He told men, "I hurt him and I let him down like
that, and still he loved and forgave me--and he can do the same for you."
When we read this passage with understanding, the story of Peter's cowardice
becomes an epic of courage and the story of his shame becomes a tale of glory,
PULPIT, "And Peter had followed him afar off, even within, into the court ( εἰς
τὴν αὐλὴν) of the high priest. This court was the place where the guards and
servants of the high priest were assembled. Our Lord was within, in a large
301

302. room, being arraigned before the council. St. John informs us (John 18:15) that
he himself, being known to the high priest, had gone in with Jesus into the court
of the high priest; and that he had been the means of bringing in Peter, who had
been standing outside at the door leading into the court. We now see Peter
among the servants, crouching over the fire. The weather was cold, for it was
early springtime; and it was now after midnight. Peter was warming himself in
the light of the fire ( πρὸς τὸ φῶς), and so his features were clearly seen in the
glow of the brightly burning charcoal.
BI, “And Peter followed Him afar off.
Following afar off
A young man, it is told, was for several months in a backsliding state, which
manifested itself in the usual way,-of conformity to a fashionable and unholy course
of life, and a neglect of the ordinances and institutions of the house of God. During
this time he called on a deacon of the church, who was a watchmaker, and asked him
to repair his watch. “What is the difficulty with your watch?” said he. “It has lost time
lately,” said the young man. The deacon looked at him with a steady and significant
eye, and said, “Haven’t you lost time lately?” These few words brought the backslider
to repentance, to the church, and to duty.
Peter’s fall: its lessons
I. Who followed Him afar off? “Peter.”
1. Then seniority and leadership in the church are no guarantee against falling
into sin. In the order of choice, Peter was the oldest of the apostles. He was also
their recognized leader. Peter is the last man that should have “followed afar off,”
both because of seniority and leadership, and the blighting influence that would
naturally and inevitably result from his conduct. The power of leadership involves
tremendous responsibility.
2. Then a man may backslide while blessed with the most faithful and efficient
gospel teaching. Peter’s experience shows that a man may sin shamefully while
blessed with the most perfect gospel teaching.
3. Then a man may backslide while blessed with the most affectionate pastoral
care. Jesus foresaw his dangers; told him of the enemy’s purpose; warned him of
this very fall, and in the true pastoral spirit bore him to God in prayer: “I have
prayed for thee.” Surely no man was ever blessed with such pastoral solicitude
and fidelity, and yet, in spite of it all, Peter fell.
4. Then high professions of loyalty and love are not always to be relied upon.
Peter’s assurances partook somewhat of the nature of boasting. Great natures
never burden you with vows and assurances. They are the product and sign of a
weak; unreliable character. Peter soon found out, however, that it is one thing to
make vows in the heavenly atmosphere of the upper room, but quite another
thing to pay those vows amid the provocation of Gethsemane, and the excitement
of the judgment hall. I have heard of a little boat that carried such an immense
whistle that it took all the steam to blow it; so, whenever it whistled it stopped
running. Too many in our churches are like that little boat; the whistle of their
profession is too big for their supply of steam. It takes all their energy to blow it,
to tell of their attainments, and what wonders they are going to do. (T. Kelly).
Following Christ afar off
302

303. I. Let us inquire, in the outset, concerning the significance of this action of Simon.
1. The facts are very simple. When Christ retrieved the folly which this impetuous
disciple had committed, and healed the ear of Malchus, it does not appear that
the magnanimity of the Master had any effect in mitigating the malignity of the
mob. Simon’s stroke with his unusual weapon, instead of checking those
belligerent people bearing swords and staves, came very near exasperating them.
He simply put himself and his friends to flight, and then the crowd had it all their
own way. It is a mournful record to read: “They all forsook Him and fled.” But
now, after this sudden and useless panic, it appears that at least two of our Lord’s
followers rallied their courage a little. They turned upon their flying footsteps,
and started after the melancholy train. These were Peter and John. And the whole
force of the dramatic incident we are studying is disclosed in the contrast of their
behaviour. John ran with a will. As in the race afterwards for Christ’s sepulchre
he easily distanced Peter (Joh_20:4), so now he arrived first in the palace.
Moreover, he soon showed how brave he was, and how much in earnest to
retrieve his temporary defection he was, by urging his way directly through all
obstacles into the very apartment where Jesus had been taken for trial; he “went
in with Jesus, but Peter stood at the door without” (Joh_18:15-16).
2. The meaning of all this is what makes it so important. One has no need of
being deceived ever as to the exact commencement of any defection from Christ.
Backsliding is earliest in the “heart,” then it shows itself in one’s “ways” (Pro_
14:14). Absalom was a rebel while as yet he made no overt attack on his father’s
throne. The younger son was a prodigal before he started for the far country.
Peter was a renegade and a poltroon from the earliest instant in which, listless
and halting, he had begun to follow Jesus only “afar off.” For an analysis of his
experience would have disclosed three bad elements.
1. There was petulance in it. Simon’s self-love was wounded when Jesus
administered the somewhat extensive rebuke he had received (Mat_26:52-54).
He felt himself aggrieved. His defection began with sullenness. We cannot doubt
that his countenance fell; he wore an injured expression.
2. There was distrust in his experience. We have seen that there was some reason
for all the disciples to apprehend violence, instantaneous and passionate. Peter
was fully responsible for that. The immediate result of his rashness was danger
rather than deliverance. But could not Jesus be relied upon for rescue? Was not
John fully protected afterwards?
3. There was unbelief in his experience. This disciple evidently had become
ashamed of his adhesion to Jesus as the Messiah. An omnipotent Son of God was
in his estimation for the moment letting things go too far, when He suffered
Himself to be apprehended by a rabble and maltreated in this way without a
word. Perhaps Simon lost confidence in His cause. If the words of Matthew are to
be taken literally (Mat_26:58), this disciple did not follow Jesus, even afar off, so
much from affection as from curiosity; he went into the palace not to see Jesus,
but to “see the end.”
II. Let us go a step farther now, and inquire concerning the results of this behaviour
of Peter.
1. It took him away from Christ’s personal presence. There was always to this
disciple a peculiar exhilaration and help in the companionship of his Divine Lord.
Under the shining of His countenance he constantly grows humble, gentle, and
affectionate. Just as Mercury, that feeblest of all the planets in our solar system,
seems most brilliant when likeliest to disappear, because nearest the sun, so
303

304. Simon actually appears at his best when he is the most outshone; and the
moment he wanders, he wanes. Duty is to most of us what this personal
leadership was to the disciples. If we follow our religious duties close up, they will
bring us near Jesus.
2. Again, this behaviour separated Peter from the sympathy of Jesus’ adherents.
In union there is strength. Those disciples ought not to have allowed themselves
to be scattered during the trials of that passover night. For together they would
have helped each other very much. Now we do not know what became of any of
them except John. If Peter had been sitting by John’s side he certainly would
have been safer. He was easily influenced, and the beloved disciple soon
recovered his courage and loyalty. Whenever professed Christians are seen to be
falling away from each other by following the Master afar off, there is reason for
alarm in reference to their spiritual interests. Only sin is solitary, and only guilt
loves to live alone. Hence there is vast wisdom in the ancient counsel that
believers should not forsake the assembling of themselves together, as the
manner of some is (Heb_10:25).
3. Moreover, this behaviour threw Peter hopelessly into the companionship of his
enemies. Peter fell into bad company the instant he fell out of good.
III. It is time for us to inquire concerning the real cause of Simon Peter’s defection
that night.
1. It would not be enough to ascribe it just to a sudden fright of alarm.
2. It was because his piety, at that period of his history, was fashioned more by
feeling than by principle. Peter’s spirituality blew in a gusty sort of way because
his theological groundwork was faulty. We remember more than one occasion
when he deliberately interfered with our Lord’s communication of the doctrine of
the atonement. As a master, a teacher, a leader, he loved Jesus personally; there
he rested. Jesus away, he failed. Soft gales do not always waft to the heaven; they
the rather often aid in an unperceived drift towards the open sea. Simon loved to
have all things beautiful and serene. He was the man who grew ecstatic on the
mount of transfiguration, and proposed that Jesus should stay there. His
sensibilities were so shocked at the thought of the Saviour’s maltreatment, that
he protested against the official act of sealing the covenant of redemption with
blood. The words were characteristic: “This shall not be unto Thee” (Mat_16:22).
Now let it be remembered that for nobody is there any hope of standing firm
under stress of opposition, if his piety has been nurtured only in tender hours of
emotional enjoyment. Spiritual impulses will be dangerously irregular and
intermittent unless they have the help of steady purpose underneath. Carpenters
never cut ships’ knees from tropical palms. The grand doctrines of the cross must
be wrought into the very fibre of one’s soul, as the granite soil and the winter
tempests of the mountains are wrought into the gnarls of the oak which the
shipwright loves. That is to say, Christian character is reared out of a determinate
wrestle with sin.
IV. Finally, let us inquire concerning the admonition which is suggested by this
behaviour of Peter.
1. How can this sin be repeated in our time? We follow Jesus afar off when we
refuse to defend the doctrines of redemption before unbelievers who scoff at a
blood atonement-when we allow the rules and institutions of the Christian
Church to be derided or belittled in our hearing-when we neglect the ordinances
of God’s house and refuse the fixed practice of family devotion-when we strain
Christian liberty to see how much of indulgence in worldliness an unattacked
304

305. church membership will bear. There is no difficulty whatever in modern
experience in the way of repeating Peter’s wrong.
2. It is a better question to ask, How can this sin of following Christ afar off be
avoided in our time? John, and not Peter, is our pattern. The way to escape the
taunts of maidservants in the hall is to go right up the steps into the presence of
Jesus. It touches us to the heart to read the words which show how well Simon
understood all his cowardice and folly long years afterwards (1Pe_5:6-10). (C. S.
Robinson, D. D.)
55 The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin
were looking for evidence against Jesus so that
they could put him to death, but they did not
find any.
GILL, "And the chief priests, and all the council,.... Especially the former,
who were of all most busy and active in this matter:
sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; on which they were
determined, right or wrong; in this they went contrary to one of their own canons,
which runs thus (k):
"in pecuniary causes, they begin either for absolution, or condemnation; but in
capital causes, they begin for absolution, and do not begin for condemnation.''
That is, they begun with such evidences as tended to acquit a man, and not with such
as served to condemn him; whereas this court was only seeking for such evidence to
begin with, that they might condemn Jesus to death:
and found none; that would answer their purpose; See Gill on Mat_26:59.
HENRY, "III. Great diligence was used to procure, for love or money, false
witnesses against Christ. They had seized him as a malefactor, and now they had him
they had no indictment to prefer against him, no crime to lay to his charge, but they
sought for witnesses against him; pumped some with ensnaring questions, offered
bribes to others, if they would accuse him, and endeavored to frighten others, if they
would not, Mar_14:55, Mar_14:56. The chief priests and elders were by the law
entrusted with the prosecuting and punishing of false witnesses (Deu_19:16, Deu_
19:17); yet those were now ringleaders in a crime that tends to overthrow of all
justice. It is time to cry, Help, Lord, when the physicians of a land are its troublers,
and those that should be the conservators of peace and equity, are the corrupters of
both.
305

306. JAMIESON, "Mar_14:55-64. The judicial trial and condemnation of the Lord
Jesus by the Sanhedrim.
But let the reader observe, that though this is introduced by the Evangelist before
any of the denials of Peter are recorded, we have given reasons for concluding that
probably the first two denials took place while our Lord was with Annas, and the last
only during the trial before the Sanhedrim.
And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against
Jesus to put him to death — Matthew (Mat_26:59) says they “sought false
witness.” They knew they could find nothing valid; but having their Prisoner to bring
before Pilate, they behooved to make a case.
and found none — none that would suit their purpose, or make a decent ground
of charge before Pilate.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 55-56
Even though this hearing, or grand jury investigation, took place at night, the
Sanhedrin found witnesses against Jesus. It seems that they had been planning
their case for the prosecution carefully. However the witnesses, who testified
separately in Jewish trials, contradicted each other. Consequently their
testimony was useless (cf. Numbers 35:30; Deuteronomy 17:6; Deuteronomy
19:15).
"It is harder to agree on a consistent lie than to tell the simple truth." [Note:
Cole, p. 226.]
BENSON, “Mark 14:55-59. And all the council sought for witness against Jesus
to put him to death — Which they were determined to do. They had seized him
as a malefactor; and now they had him, they had no indictment to prefer against
him, no crime to lay to his charge: but they sought for witnesses against him.
They artfully sifted some by sly interrogatories, offered bribes to others to
prevail on them to accuse him, and endeavoured by threats to compel other, to
do it. The chief priests and elders were, by the law, intrusted with the
prosecuting and punishing of false witnesses, Deuteronomy 19:16, yet they were
now ringleaders in a crime that tended to the overthrow of all justice. Deplorable
is the condition of a country, when those that should be the conservators of peace
and equity are the corrupters of both! And found none — What an amazing
proof of the overruling providence of God, considering both their authority, and
the rewards they could offer, that no two consistent witnesses could be procured
to charge him with any gross crime! Their witness, their evidences, agreed not
together — So also the Vulgate, Convenientia testimonia non erant. But the
Greek words, ισαι ουκ ησαν, which, literally rendered, are, were not equal, are
understood by many to signify, Not equal to the charge of a capital crime. So Dr.
Hammond; they did not accuse him of that upon which a sentence of death might
be founded; no, not by the utmost stretch of their law. Dr. Campbell, who
considers the phrase in the same light, renders it, Their testimonies were
insufficient; observing, “On a doubtful point, where the words appear
susceptible of either interpretation, we ought to be determined by the
circumstances of the case. Now there is nothing in the whole narrative that
insinuates the smallest discrepancy among the witnesses. On the contrary, in the
gospels the testimony specified is mentioned as given by all the witnesses. The
306

307. differences in Matthew and Mark, one saying, I will rebuild, another, I can
rebuild; one adding, made with hands, another omitting it; not only are of no
moment in themselves, but are manifestly differences in the reports of the
evangelists, not in the testimony of the witnesses; nor are they greater than those
which occur in most other facts related from memory. What therefore perplexed
the pontiffs and the scribes was, that, admitting all that was attested, it did not
amount to what could be accounted a capital crime. This made the high-priest
think of extorting from our Lord’s mouth a confession which might supply the
defect of evidence. This expedient succeeded to their wish; Jesus, though not
outwitted by their subtlety, was no way disposed to decline suffering, and
therefore readily supplied them with the pretext they wanted.” The same
expression is used in the 59th verse. See the note on Matthew 26:59-61. There
arose certain, and bare false witness — There is no wickedness so black, no
villany so horrid, but there may be found among mankind fit tools to be used in
it: so miserably depraved and vitiated is human nature! Saying, We heard him
say, I will destroy this temple, &c. — It is observable, that the words which they
thus misrepresented were spoken by Christ at least three years before, (John
2:19.) Their going back so far to find matter for the charge was a glorious,
though silent attestation, of the unexceptionable manner wherein he had
behaved, through the whole course of his public ministry.
COFFMAN, "What happened to their traitor-witness, Judas? During the night,
Judas had heard of developments, and the next morning, after Jesus was bound
over to the governor, he flung the money at the feet of the high priest, confessed
his sin of betraying innocent blood; and, from the total lack of any testimony
from Judas at the trials, it may be assumed that he refused to aid the campaign
against Christ any further. He died the same day, a suicide.
The whole council ... has been interpreted as suggesting the scene of the
daybreak meeting; but the long and extensive search for witnesses indicates the
all-night preliminary trial in the palace of the high priests. We may explain it by
assuming that most of the council were present at both trials.
PULPIT, "Now the chief priests and the whole council sought witness against
Jesus to put him to death, and found it not. Their supreme object was to put him
to death; but. they wished to accomplish their object in a manner consistent with
their own honor, so as not to appear to have put him to death without reason. So
they sought for false witnesses against him, that they might deliver the Author of
life and the Savior of the world to death. For in real truth, although they knew it
not, and were the instruments in his hands, he had determined by the death of
Christ to bestow on us both present and eternal life.
MACLAREN 55 -65, “THE CONDEMNATION WHICH CONDEMNS THE
JUDGES
Mark brings out three stages in our Lord’s trial by the Jewish authorities-their vain
attempts to find evidence against Him, which were met by His silence; His own
majestic witness to Himself, which was met by a unanimous shriek of condemnation;
and the rude mockery of the underlings. The other Evangelists, especially John,
307

308. supply many illuminative details; but the essentials are here. It is only in criticising
the Gospels that a summary and a fuller narrative are dealt with as contradictory.
These three stages naturally divide this paragraph.
I. The judges with evil thoughts, the false witnesses, and the silent Christ
(Mar_14:55).
The criminal is condemned before He is tried. The judges have made up their minds
before they sit, and the Sanhedrim is not a court of justice, but a slaughter-house,
where murder is to be done under sanction of law. Mark, like Matthew, notes the
unanimity of the ‘council,’ to which Joseph of Arimathea-the one swallow which does
not make a summer-appears to have been the only exception; and he probably was
absent, or, if present, was silent. He did ‘not consent’; but we are not told that he
opposed. That ill-omened unanimity measures the nation’s sin. Flagrant injustice
and corruption in high places is possible only when society as a whole is corrupt or
indifferent to corruption. This prejudging of a case from hatred of the accused as a
destroyer of sacred tradition, and this hunting for evidence to bolster up a foregone
conclusion, are preeminently the vices of ecclesiastical tribunals and not of Jewish
Sanhedrim or Papal Inquisition only. Where judges look for witnesses for the
prosecution, plenty will be found, ready to curry favour by lies. The eagerness to find
witnesses against Jesus is witness for Him, as showing that nothing in His life or
teaching was sufficient to warrant their murderous purpose. His judges condemn
themselves in seeking grounds to condemn Him, for they thereby show that their real
motive was personal spite, or, as Caiaphas suggested, political expediency.
The single specimen of the worthless evidence given may be either a piece of
misunderstanding or of malicious twisting of innocent words; nor can we decide
whether the witnesses contradicted one another or each himself. The former is the
more probable, as the fundamental principle of the Jewish law of evidence (‘two or
three witnesses’) would, in that case, rule out the testimony. The saying which they
garble meant the very opposite of what they made it mean. It represented Jesus as
the restorer of that which Israel should destroy. It referred to His body which is the
true Temple; but the symbolic temple ‘made with hands’ is so inseparably connected
with the real, that the fate of the one determines that of the other. Strangely
significant, therefore, is it, that the rulers heard again, though distorted, at that
moment when they were on their trial, the far-reaching sentence, which might have
taught them that in slaying Jesus they were throwing down the Temple and all which
centred in it, and that by His resurrection, His own act, He would build up again a
new polity, which yet was but the old transfigured, even ‘the Church, which is His
body.’ His work destroys nothing but ‘the works of the devil.’ He is the restorer of the
divine ordinances and gifts which men destroy, and His death and resurrection bring
back in nobler form all the good things lost by sin, ‘the desolations of many
generations.’ The history of all subsequent attacks on Christ is mirrored here. The
foregone conclusion, the evidence sought as an after-thought to give a colourable
pretext, the material found by twisting His teaching, the blindness which accuses
Him of destroying what He restores, and fancies itself as preserving what it is
destroying, have all reappeared over and over again.
Our Lord’s silence is not only that of meekness, ‘as a sheep before her shearers is
dumb.’ It is the silence of innocence, and, if we may use the word concerning Him, of
scorn. He will not defend Himself to such judges, nor stoop to repel evidence which
they knew to be worthless. But there is also something very solemn and judicial in
His locked lips. They had ever been ready to open in words of loving wisdom; but
now they are fast closed, and this is the penalty for despising, that He ceases to
speak. Deaf ears make a dumb Christ, What will happen when Jesus and His judges
change places, as they will one day do? When He says to each, ‘Answerest thou
308

309. nothing? What is it which these, thy sins, witness against thee?’ each will be silent
with the consciousness of guilt and of just condemnation by His all-knowing justice.
II. Christ’s majestic witness to Himself received with a shriek of
condemnation.
What a supreme moment that was when the head of the hierarchy put this question
and received the unambiguous answer! The veriest impostor asserting Messiahship
had a right to have his claims examined; but a howl of hypocritical horror is all which
Christ’s evoke. The high priest knew well enough what Christ’s answer would be.
Why, then, did he not begin by questioning Jesus, and do without the witnesses?
Probably because the council wished to find some pretext for His condemnation
without bringing up the real reason; for it looked ugly to condemn a man for claiming
to be Messias, and to do it without examining His credentials. The failure, however,
of the false witnesses compelled the council to ‘show their hands,’ and to hear and
reject our Lord solemnly and, so to speak, officially, laying His assertion of dignity
and office before them, as the tribunal charged with the duty of examining His
proofs. The question is so definite as to imply a pretty full and accurate knowledge of
our Lord’s teaching about Himself. It embraces two points-office and nature; for ‘the
Christ’ and ‘the Son of the Blessed’ are not equivalents. The latter title points to our
Lord’s declarations that He was the Son of God, and is an instance of the later Jewish
superstition which avoided using the divine name. Loving faith delights in the name
of the Lord. Dead formalism changes reverence into dread, and will not speak it.
Sham reverence, feigned ignorance, affected wish for information, the false show of
judicial impartiality, and other lies and vices not a few, are condensed in the
question; and the fact that the judge had to ask it and hear the answer, is an instance
of a divine purpose working through evil men, and compelling reluctant lips to speak
words the meaning and bearing of which they little know. Jesus could not leave such
a challenge unanswered. Silence then would have been abandonment of His claims.
It was fitting that the representatives of the nation should, at that decisive moment,
hear Him declare Himself Messiah. It was not fitting that He should be condemned
on any other ground. In that answer, and its reception by the council, the nation’s
rejection of Jesus is, as it were, focused and compressed. This was the end of
centuries of training by miracle, prophet and psalmist-the saddest instance in man’s
long, sad history of his awful power to frustrate God’s patient educating! Our Lord’s
majestic ‘I am,’ in one word answers both parts of the question, and then passes on,
with strange calm and dignity, to point onwards to the time when the criminal will be
the judge, and the judges will stand at His bar. ‘The Son of Man,’ His ordinary
designation of Himself, implies His true manhood, and His representative character,
as perfect man, or, to use modern language, the ‘realised ideal’ of humanity. In the
present connection, its employment in the same sentence as His assertion that He is
the Son of God goes deep into the mystery of His twofold nature, and declares that
His manhood had a supernatural origin and wielded divine prerogatives. Accordingly
there follows the explicit prediction of His assumption of the highest of these after
His death. The Cross was as plain to Him as ever; but beyond it gleamed the crown
and the throne. He anticipates ‘sitting on the right hand of power,’ which implies
repose, enthronement, judicature, investiture with omnipotence, and administration
of the universe. He anticipates ‘coming in the clouds of heaven,’ which distinctly
claims to be the future Judge of the world. His hearers could scarcely fail to discern
the reference to Daniel’s prophecy.
Was ever the irony of history more pungently exemplified than in an Annas and
Caiaphas holding up hands of horror at the ‘blasphemies’ of Jesus? They rightly took
His words to mean more than the claim of Messiahship as popularly understood. To
say that He was the Christ was not ‘blasphemy,’ but a claim demanding examination;
309

310. but to say that He, the Son of Man, was Son of God and supreme Judge was so,
according to their canons. How unconsciously the exclamation, ‘What need we
further witnesses?’ betrays the purpose for which the witnesses had been sought, as
being simply His condemnation! They were ‘needed’ to compass His death, which the
council now gleefully feels to be secured. So with precipitate unanimity they vote.
And this was Israel’s welcome to their King, and the outcome of all their history! And
it was the destruction of the national life. That howl of condemnation pronounced
sentence on themselves and on the whole order of which they were the heads. The
prisoner’s eyes alone saw then what we and all men may see now-the handwriting on
the wall of the high priest’s palace: ‘Weighed in the balance, and found wanting.’
III. The savage mockers and the patient Christ (Mar_14:65).
There is an evident antithesis between the ‘all’ of Mar_14:64 and the ‘some’ of Mar_
14:65, which shows that the inflictors of the indignities were certain members of the
council, whose fury carried them beyond all bounds of decency. The subsequent
mention of the ‘servants’ confirms this, especially when we adopt the more accurate
rendering of the Revised Version, ‘received Him with blows.’ Mark’s account, then, is
this: that, as soon as the unanimous howl of condemnation had beep uttered, some of
the ‘judges’(!) fell upon Jesus with spitting and clumsy ridicule and downright
violence, and that afterwards He was handed over to the underlings, who were not
slow to copy the example set them at the upper end of the hall.
It was not an ignorant mob who thus answered His claims, but the leaders and
teachers-the crème de la crème of the nation. A wild beast lurks below the Pharisee’s
long robes and phylacteries; and the more that men have changed a living belief in
religion for a formal profession, the more fiercely antagonistic are they to every
attempt to realise its precepts and hopes. The ‘religious’ men who mock Jesus in the
name of traditional religion are by no means an extinct species. It is of little use to
shudder at the blind cruelty of dead scribes and priests. Let us rather remember that
the seeds of their sins are in us all, and take care to check their growth. What a
volcano of hellish passion bursts out here! Spitting expresses disgust; blinding and
asking for the names of the smiters is a clumsy attempt at wit and ridicule; buffeting
is the last unrestrained form of hate and malice. The world has always paid its
teachers and benefactors in such coin; but all other examples pale before this
saddest, transcendent instance. Love is repaid by hate; a whole nation is blind to
supreme and unspotted goodness; teachers steeped in ‘law and prophets’ cannot see
Him of and for whom law and prophets witnessed and were, when He stands before
them. The sin of sins is the failure to recognise Jesus for what He is. His person and
claims are the touchstone which tries every beholder of what sort He is.
How wonderful the silent patience of Jesus! He withholds not His face ‘from shame
and spitting.’ He gives ‘His back to the smiters.’ Meek endurance and passive
submission are not all which we have to behold there. This is more than an
uncomplaining martyr. This is the sacrifice for the world’s sin; and His bearing of all
that men can inflict is more than heroism. It is redeeming love. His sad, loving eyes,
wide open below their bandage, saw and pitied each rude smiter, even as He sees us
all. They were and are eyes of infinite tenderness, ready to beam forgiveness; but they
were and are the eyes of the Judge, who sees and repays His foes, as those who smite
Him will one day find out.
BI, “All the council sought for witness against Jesus.
The Council-Jesus before the Jewish Council
The world, in its best moods, exalts justice; and, in its worst moods, defeats it.
310

311. Everything depends on the mood for the time being. Multitudes on the first day of
Holy Week strewed the way with their clothes for their king to ride over; it was their
mood. Only five days later a mob, bearing lanterns and torches, sought Him as if He
were a thief, and led Him a prisoner over that same highway. The mood had changed.
Mob law prevailed.
I. The tribunal. No gathering of star chamber was ever more lawless.
1. The law decreed that no court should sit before sunrise; this trial followed
immediately upon the midnight arrest-while Jerusalem was asleep.
2. The law required that anyone accused should have an advocate; here the
Nazarene stood alone, with none to question in His behalf.
3. The law demanded that witnesses should be summoned for every prisoner;
here no one was called to testify.
4. The judge of that court was Caiaphas, who had already declared the necessity
of the death of Jesus, in order that the factions of the people might be
harmonized.
5. Like a travesty reads the record: “The chief priests and all the council sought
for witness against Jesus to put Him to death.” Their aim was to establish guilt,
not to find justice.
6. It was the law that no sentences of death should be passed upon the same day
as the trial; yet, in spite of their subterfuge, declaring the sentence of death just
after sunrise, it was on the same day, since the Jewish day began at evening.
II. The indictment. Full of flaws. Hopelessly confused. Even the testimony of bribed
witnesses was too inconsistent to be of any use. The only seeming ground for a
charge was a distortion of a saying in His earlier ministry concerning the destruction
of the temple which He called His body, but which they declared was the pride of
Jerusalem; but even this was no crime, as even His judges knew. Their case had
failed. Their miserable charges were not sustained.
III. The prisoner. The one sinless Person among men. No enemy has ever found a
flaw in His pure character. No charge, even of haste or imprudence, has ever been
preferred. By His greatness and goodness, He throws all other human attainments
into obscurity.
1. The best character is no protection against human hatred. The higher the
character the more isolated it stands. The treatment accorded the Master will be
meted out to His disciples. Persecution for righteousness’ sake is a natural
outcome of being righteous.
2. The best character does not always command friendship in the time of trial. It
is not an infallible mark of piety to be always surrounded with friends.
IV. The sentence. Death, that cry of assassins; death, cold and cruel, blanching in a
moment the ruddiest face; death, the breaking down of human life; death, the
guardian of the cross; this was the word they hissed out-“He is guilty of death.” To
beckon such a death the laws of Moses and of the Romans were torn to shreds;
mockery clothed itself in ermine; Pilate washed his guilty hands; and priests and
rabble shouted themselves hoarse. (David O. Mears.)
The Sanhedrin
The Council of the Jews, commonly called the Sanhedrin, was composed of seventy-
311

312. one persons. It consisted of three Courts or Houses,-the Sopherim, or Teachers of the
Law, the College of the High Priest, and the house of the Elders. The president, or
head of the Council, bore the title of Nasi, and was not necessarily the High Priest. In
Num_11:16, we read that God commanded Moses to call together seventy of the
Elders of Israel, and to put his spirit upon them. The Council was composed in like
manner of seventy, to represent these Elders, chosen and ordained by Moses, and the
seventy-first, the president, represented Moses; but as the Council was summoned by
Moses, and not by Aaron, the High Priest was not necessarily the head of it. This
president, or Nasi, was also called the Prince of Israel, and must be of the house of
David, and the once became for many generations an inheritance of the family of
Hillel, which descended from David. The First, or Upper House, was the House of the
Lawyers, and it had originally supreme control of life and death. But when the
Romans conquered Palestine, and converted Judea into a Roman Province, then this
power was taken from them, and all those cases which had been tried by the Court of
the Lawyers were heard by the Roman Prater. This House accordingly was practically
dissolved; it had nothing to do, the sceptre was taken from it, and its lawgiver was
divested of all power. The Second House was that of the Chief Priests; at the head of
it sat the High Priest, and it was made up of the heads of the twenty-four priestly
families and of the heads of the departments connected with the ministry in the
Temple. The members all bore the title of “Chief Priests” (ᅊρχιερεሏς). They decided in
all spiritual matters, as to faith and heresy. This House remained in full activity after
the practical abrogation of the First, and thus the High Priest became the virtual
head of the Jewish Council. The Third House was that of the Elders, and was made
up of representatives of the great Jewish families and of Rabbis of note. They went by
the name of the “Elders,” and continued to sit along with the Second House. (S.
Baring Gould, M. A.)
56 Many testified falsely against him, but their
statements did not agree.
GILL, "For many bare false witness against him,.... The word "false", is not
expressed in the Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions: which only signify, that they
bore witness against him, accused him of, and laid many things to his charge:
but their witness agreed not together; which showed it to be false, and so not to
be admitted; for witnesses were to be as one in their testimony, or not to be received:
the, rules concerning them with the Jews, are these (l);
"the tradition is, for ever let not their testimony be joined together, unless they both
see, ‫,כאחד‬ "as one": says R. Joshua ben Korcha, even one after another; and their
testimony is not ratified in the council, until they both witness "as one".''
Though this is not much the sense of the passage here; it was not the falsehood of
their testimony, which this council was unconcerned about, or the contradiction that
was in it, which does not appear; but their testimonies were not, ισαι, "equal", or
312

313. answerable to the wishes of the council; they were not sufficient to prove a capital
crime upon him, in order to, put him to death, which was what they wanted: they
only respected some light and trivial matters, and did not amount to a charge of
blasphemy, or sedition.
JAMIESON, "For many bare false witness against him — From their
debasing themselves to “seek” them, we are led to infer that they were bribed to bear
false witness; though there are never wanting sycophants enough, ready to sell
themselves for naught, if they may but get a smile from those above them: see a
similar scene in Act_6:11-14. How is one reminded here of that complaint, “False
witnesses did rise up: they laid to my charge things that I knew not” (Psa_31:11)!
but their witness agreed not together — If even two of them had been
agreed, it would have been greedily enough laid hold of, as all that the law insisted
upon even in capital cases (Deu_17:6). But even in this they failed. One cannot but
admire the providence which secured this result; since, on the one hand, it seems
astonishing that those unscrupulous prosecutors and their ready tools should so
bungle a business in which they felt their whole interests bound up; and, on the other
hand, if they had succeeded in making even a plausible case, the effect on the
progress of the Gospel might for a time have been injurious. But at the very time
when His enemies were saying, “God hath forsaken Him; persecute and take Him; for
there is none to deliver Him” (Psa_71:11), He whose Witness He was and whose work
He was doing was keeping Him as the apple of His eye, and while He was making the
wrath of man to praise Him, was restraining the remainder of that wrath (Psa_
76:10).
57 Then some stood up and gave this false
testimony against him:
GILL, "And there arose certain,.... Two false witnesses, as in Mat_26:60, who
stood up in court; for witnesses were obliged to stand, whilst they gave in their
testimony:
"says R. Bo, in the name of R. Hona, witnesses ought ‫,לעמוד‬ "to stand", whilst they
bear witness; as it is said, Deu_19:17. "Both the men shall stand" (m), &c.''
And bare false witness against him, saying; as follows.
HENRY, "IV. He was at length charged with words spoken some years ago, which,
as they were represented, seemed to threaten the temple, which they had made no
better than an idol of (Mar_14:57, Mar_14:58); but the witnesses to this matter did
not agree (Mar_14:59), for one swore that he said, I am able to destroy the temple of
God, and to build it in three days (so it is in Matthew); the other swore that he said, I
will destroy this temple, that is made with hands, and within three days, I will build
not it, but another made without hands; now these two differ much from each other;
oude isē ēn hē marturia - their testimony was not sufficient, nor equal to the charge of
313

314. a capital crime; so Dr. Hammond: they did not accuse him of that upon which a
sentence of death might be founded, no not by the utmost stretch of their law.
JAMIESON, "And there arose certain, and bare false witness against
him — Matthew (Mat_26:60) is more precise here: “At the last came two false
witnesses.” As no two had before agreed in anything, they felt it necessary to secure a
duplicate testimony to something, but they were long of succeeding. And what was it,
when at length it was brought forward?
saying — as follows:
CONSTABLE, "Verses 57-59
These verses provide a specific example of what Mark just described generally.
Evidently the witnesses misunderstood Jesus' statements about the destruction of
the temple (Gr. naos, temple building) of His body (John 2:19) and the future
destruction of the Jerusalem temple (Mark 13:2). Anyone who destroyed a
temple in the ancient world was subject to capital punishment (cf. Jeremiah
26:1-19). [Note: Josephus, Antiquities of . . ., 10:6:2.] This was evidently one of
the most serious charges against Jesus (cf. Mark 14:61; Mark 15:29).
COFFMAN, "This testimony was untruthful. Jesus actually said, "(You) destroy
this temple (referring to his body), and in three days I will raise it up (that is, rise
from the dead)" (John 2:19). In context, Jesus' words were a prediction that the
religious leaders would take his life and that he would rise from the dead three
days later. There was no suggestion whatever of such a thing as the false
witnesses alleged.
Even such a misrepresentative and malicious garbling of Jesus' words, however,
was useless to the chief priests, because there was no coherent account of such an
alleged statement. One said one thing; another declared something else. All night
long, the preliminary investigation had gone forward, and nothing had come of
it. In desperation, Caiaphas, who was beginning to find the judge's bench a very
uncomfortable place, forsook the judicial status, usurped the role of a
prosecutor, placed Jesus under oath, and demanded an answer; but he would
ask a question first.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:57, Mark 14:58
And there stood up certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, We heard
him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I
will build another made without hands. St. Matthew (Matthew 26:60) says that
they were two. What our Lord had really said was this—we read it in St. John
(John 2:19)—"Destroy this temple; and in three days I will raise it up." These
words the false witnesses perverted; for they assigned to Jesus the work of
destruction which he left to the Jews. He did not say," I will destroy;" but "Do
ye destroy, and I will rebuild." Nor did he say, "I will build another;" but "I will
raise it up," that is, from the dead; for St. John tells us that "he spake of the
temple of his body," in which, as in a temple, there dwelt the fullness of the
Godhead.. He might have said plainly, "I will rise from the dead;" but he chose
to speak as in a parable. According to their witness, however, our Lord's words
314

315. would appear as little more than an empty boast, certainly not as anything on
account of which such a charge as they desired could be brought against him.
58 “We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this
temple made with human hands and in three
days will build another, not made with hands.’”
GILL, "We heard him say,.... In a discourse of his, recorded in Joh_2:19,
I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days
I will build another made without hands; which was a very false testimony; for
Christ did not say be would destroy any temple at all, only put the Jews on doing it;
much less did he point at, or design the temple of Jerusalem, but his own body; nor
did he use the distinction of a temple, made with and without hands; nor did he
affirm that he would build another; only said, he would raise up in three days, that
which they should destroy. By this testimony these witnesses would suggest, that
Christ had a design upon their temple to demolish it, and that he must be a sorcerer,
or a magician, to pretend to build a temple without hands in three days time; See Gill
on Mat_26:61.
JAMIESON, "We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made
with hands, and within three days I will build another made without
hands — On this charge, observe, first, that eager as His enemies were to find
criminal matter against our Lord, they had to go back to the outset of His ministry,
His first visit to Jerusalem, more than three years before this. In all that He said and
did after that, though ever increasing in boldness, they could find nothing. Next, that
even then, they fix only on one speech, of two or three words, which they dared to
adduce against Him. Further, they most manifestly pervert the speech of our Lord.
We say not this because in Mark’s form of it, it differs from the report of the words
given by the Fourth Evangelist (Joh_2:18-22) - the only one of the Evangelists who
reports it all, or mentions even any visit paid by our Lord to Jerusalem before His
last - but because the one report bears truth, and the other falsehood, on its face.
When our Lord said on that occasion, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will
raise it up,” they might, for a moment, have understood Him to refer to the temple
out of whose courts He had swept the buyers and sellers. But after they had
expressed their astonishment at His words, in that sense of them, and reasoned upon
the time it had taken to rear the temple as it then stood, since no answer to this
appears to have been given by our Lord, it is hardly conceivable that they should
continue in the persuasion that this was really His meaning. But finally, even if the
more ignorant among them had done so, it is next to certain that the ecclesiastics,
who were the prosecutors in this case, did not believe that this was His meaning. For
in less than three days after this they went to Pilate, saying, “Sir, we remember that
that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, after three days I will rise again” (Mat_
27:63). Now what utterance of Christ known to His enemies, could this refer to, if not
to this very saying about destroying and rearing up the temple? And if so, it puts it
315

316. beyond a doubt that by this time, at least, they were perfectly aware that our Lord’s
words referred to His death by their hands and His resurrection by His own. But
this is confirmed by Mar_14:59.
59 Yet even then their testimony did not agree.
GILL, "But, neither so did their witness agree together. Their witness did
agree together, for they both witnessed the same thing; but not so as to found upon it
the charge of a capital crime against him; their witness was not so, ιση, "equal", was
not answerable to their desires, nor sufficient to convict him of a capital crime, for
which they could condemn him to death, as before observed on Mar_14:56.
JAMIESON, "But neither so did their witness agree together — that is,
not even as to so brief a speech, consisting of but a few words, was there such a
concurrence in their mode of reporting it as to make out a decent case. In such a
charge everything depended on the very terms alleged to have been used. For every
one must see that a very slight turn, either way, given to such words, would make
them either something like indictable matter, or else a ridiculous ground for a
criminal charge - would either give them a colorable pretext for the charge of impiety
which they were bent on making out, or else make the whole saying appear, on the
worst view that could be taken of it, as merely some mystical or empty boast.
60 Then the high priest stood up before them
and asked Jesus, “Are you not going to answer?
What is this testimony that these men are
bringing against you?”
GILL, "And the high priest stood up in the midst,.... Of the sanhedrim, of
which he was now president: he sat at the head of them, and Ab Beth Din, or the
father of the council, at his right hand; and the rest of the council sat before him, in a
semicircular form, as the half of a round corn floor, so that the president, and the
father of the council, could see them (n); for they were all before him, he being
situated in the middle, right against them; so that when he stood up, he might be said
to stand in the midst of them:
and asked Jesus, saying, answerest thou nothing? For he had made no reply
to the several witnesses, that came against him:
316

317. what is it which these witness against thee? Is it true, or false? See Gill on
Mat_26:62.
HENRY, "V. He was urged to be his own accuser (Mar_14:60); The high priest
stood up in a heat, and said, Answerest thou nothing? This he said under pretence of
justice and fair dealing, but really with a design to ensnare him, that they might
accuse him, Luk_11:53, Luk_11:54; Luk_20:20. We may well imagine with what an
air of haughtiness and disdain this proud high priest brought our Lord Jesus to this
question; “Come you, the prisoner at the bar, you hear what is sworn against you;
what have you now to say for yourself?” Pleased to think that he seemed silent, who
had so often silenced those that picked quarrels with him. Still Christ answered
nothing, that he might set us an example, 1. Of patience under calumnies and false
accusations; when we are reviled, let us not revile again, 1Pe_2:23. And, 2. Of
prudence, when a man shall be made an offender for a word (Isa_29:21), and our
defence made our offence; it is an evil time indeed when the prudent shall keep
silence (lest they make bad worse), and commit their cause to him that judgeth
righteously. But,
JAMIESON, "Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness
against thee? — Clearly, they felt that their case had failed, and by this artful
question the high priest hoped to get from His own mouth what they had in vain
tried to obtain from their false and contradictory witnesses. But in this, too, they
failed.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 60-61
Apparently Caiaphas decided to question Jesus hoping to get Him to incriminate
Himself since he could not get two witnesses to agree against Jesus. Jesus did not
need to respond to the high priest's first question. No one had offered any real
proof against Him.
"His [Jesus'] resolute silence loudly declared to the Sanhedrin His disdain for
their lying efforts to establish a charge against Him." [Note: Hiebert, p. 371.]
Then Caiaphas, trying a new strategy, asked if Jesus was the Messiah. "The
Blessed One" is a synonym for God that the Jews used instead of the holy name
of God. [Note: Mishnah Berachoth 7:3.] The popular Jewish concept of Messiah
was that he would be a human descendant of David. Caiaphas was not asking if
Jesus claimed to be God, only a human Messiah.
"In the formulation 'the Messiah, the son of the Blessed One,' the second clause
stands in apposition to the first and has essentially the same meaning. In Jewish
sources contemporary with the NT, 'son of God' is understood solely in a
messianic sense. Jewish hopes were situated in a messianic figure who was a
man." [Note: Lane, p. 535.]
"A Messiah imprisoned, abandoned by his followers, and delivered helpless into
the hands of his foes represented an impossible conception. Anyone who, in such
circumstances, proclaimed himself to be the Messiah could not fail to be a
blasphemer who dared to make a mockery of the promises given by God to his
people." [Note: Ibid., p. 536.]
BENSON, “Mark 14:60-62. The high-priest stood up in the midst, &c. — See
317

318. notes on Matthew 26:62-64, where this paragraph is largely explained. Art thou
the Christ, the Son of the Blessed — Here one of the peculiar attributes of the
Deity is used to express the divine nature. Supreme happiness is properly
considered as belonging to God: and as all comfort flows from him, suitable
ascriptions of praise and glory are his due. But this form of speech was
conformable to the ancient custom of the Jews, who, when the priest in the
sanctuary rehearsed the name of God, used to answer, Blessed be his name for
ever. The title of the Blessed One, signified as much as the Holy One; and both,
or either of them, the God of Israel. Hence such expressions are frequent in the
rabbis. See also Romans 1:25; 2 Corinthians 11:31. “This is a very sublime and
emphatical method of expressing the happiness of God. It conveys such an idea
of the divine blessedness, that, comparatively speaking, there is none happy but
he.” — Macknight.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:60, Mark 14:61
And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest
thou nothing?… But he held his peace, and answered nothing. The high priest
would naturally be seated at the top of the semicircle, with the members of the
Sanhedrim on either side of him, and the Accused in front of him. Now he rises
from his seat, and comes forward into the midst ( εἰς τὸ μέσον), and demands an
answer. But Jesus answered nothing. It would have been a long and tedious
business to answer such a charge, which involved a garbled and inaccurate
statement of what he had said. It would have answered no good purpose to reply
to an accusation so vague and inaccurate. Our Lord knew that, whatever his
answer was, it would be twisted so as to make against him. Silence was therefore
the most dignified treatment of such an accusation. Besides, he knew that his
hour was come. The high priest now asks him plainly, Art thou the Christ, the
son of the Blessed? Here he touches the point of the whole matter. Christ had
frequently declared himself to be such. Caiaphas, therefore, now asks the
question, not because he needed the information, but that he might condemn
him.
61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no
answer.
Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the
Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”
CLARKE, "Of the Blessed? - Θεου του ευλογητου, Or, of God the blessed one.
318

319. Θεου, is added here by AK, ten others, Vulgate, and one of the Itala. It might be
introduced into the text, put in Italics, if the authority of the MSS. and versions be
not deemed sufficient. It appears necessary for the better understanding of the text.
The adjective, however, conveys a good sense by itself, and is according to a frequent
Hebrew form of speech.
GILL, "But he held his peace, and answered nothing,.... Knowing it would be
to no purpose, and signifying hereby, that the things alleged against him were
unworthy of an answer:
again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, art thou the Christ,
the Son of the Blessed? The Vulgate Latin adds, "God": in Matthew it is "God"
only, Mat_26:63. This is one of the names and epithets of God, with the Jews;
nothing is more common in their writings, than this abbreviature, ‫,הקבה‬ which is,
‫הוא‬ ‫ברוך‬ ‫,הקדוש‬ "the holy blessed he"; who is blessed in himself, and the fountain of all
blessedness to his creatures, and who is blessed and praised by angels and saints; See
Gill on Mat_26:63.
HENRY, "VI. When he was asked whether he was the Christ, he confessed, and
denied not, that he was, Mar_14:61, Mar_14:62. He asked, Art thou the Son of the
Blessed? that is the Son of God? for, as Dr. Hammond observes, the Jews, when they
named God, generally added, blessed for ever; and thence the Blessed is the title of
God, a peculiar title, and applied to Christ, Rom_9:5. And for the proof of his being
the Son of God, he binds them over to his second coming; “Ye shall see the Son of
man sitting on the right hand of power; that Son of man that now appears so mean
and despicable, whom ye see and trample upon (Isa_53:2, Isa_53:3), you shall
shortly see and tremble before.” Now, one would think that such a word as this which
our Lord Jesus seems to have spoken with a grandeur and majesty not agreeable to
his present appearance (for through the thickest cloud of his humiliation some rays
of glory were still darted forth), should have startled the court, and at least, in the
opinion of some of them, should have amounted to a demurrer, or arrest of
judgment, and that they should have stayed process till they had considered further
of it; when Paul at the bar reasoned of the judgment to come, the judge trembled,
and adjourned the trial, Act_24:25. But these chief priests were so miserably blinded
with malice and rage, that, like the horse rushing into the battle, they mocked at fear,
and were not affrighted, neither believed they that it was the sound of the trumpet,
Job_39:22, Job_39:24. And see Job_15:25, Job_15:26.
JAMIESON, "But he held his peace, and answered nothing — This must
have nonplussed them. But they were not to be easily balked of their object.
Again the high priest — arose (Mat_26:62), matters having now come to a
crisis.
asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the
Blessed? — Why our Lord should have answered this question, when He was silent
as to the former, we might not have quite seen, but for Matthew, who says (Mat_
26:63) that the high priest put Him upon solemn oath, saying, “I adjure Thee by the
living God, that Thou tell us whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of God.” Such an
adjuration was understood to render an answer legally necessary (Lev_5:1). (Also see
on Joh_18:28.)
319

320. COKE, "Mark 14:61. The Son of the Blessed?— This is a very sublime and
emphatical method of expressing the happiness of God. It conveys such an ideaof
the divine blessedness, that, comparatively speaking, there is none happy but he.
Seethe note on Matthew 26:62-63. It is plain from the parallel passage, Luke
22:67 that the answer of our Saviour, set down by St. Mark as well as St.
Matthew, is an answer only to this question, Art thou the Son of God? and not to
that other, Art thou the Christ, or the Messiah? which preceded, and which he
had answered before; and though St. Matthew and St. Mark connect them
together, as if making but one question, and omit all the intervening discourse,
yet it is plain from St. Luke, that they were two distinct questions, to which Jesus
gave two distinct answers; in the first whereof, according to his usual caution, he
declined saying in plain and express words that he was the Messiah, though in
the latter he owned himself to be the Son of God: which, though they, being
Jews, understood to signify the Messiah, yet he knew could be no legal or
weighty accusation against him before a heathen; and so it proved. There was,
however, a great deal of craft in the question, which consisted in this, that if
Jesus answered in the affirmative, they were ready to condemn him as a
blasphemer; but if in the negative, they proposed to have him punished as an
impostor, who, by accepting the honours and titles of the Messiah from the
people, had deceived them. See Locke's Reasonableness of Christianity, p. 154.
COFFMAN, "Answered nothing ... Jesus did not need to reply. Everyone knew
that no offense had been proved against Jesus, Caiaphas himself being painfully
aware of this.
Again the high priest asked him ... This is a reference to repeated questions
regarding Christ's identity. In Mark's word "again," it is evident that more than
one question and more than one reply came out of this confrontation. Thus, we
may dispose of all alleged discrepancies regarding the reply quoted by Matthew
and the one here quoted by Mark. The replies have exactly the same meaning;
but in the reply quoted by Mark, there was not the slightest trace of ambiguity.
Art thou the Christ the Son of the Blessed ... Mark omitted the adjuration as
given in Matthew, that being the formal placement of the Saviour upon oath.
Since the adjuration was omitted here, it is possible that, following the reply
recorded in Matthew, Caiaphas here repeated the question without mention of
the oath, that having already been administered. This was precisely the question
which the Pharisees had so long attempted to force Jesus to answer; but Christ,
until this hour, had refused them, since to have answered sooner would have
been premature. Now that no insurrection could be alleged against him, now that
the other-worldly nature of his kingdom had been established, now that the
whole sacred court of the Hebrews was in session, he would answer. He would,
by such an answer as he would give, force their condemnation of him to rest
upon their denial of the sacred truth that he was indeed the divine Messiah. All
other charges had been disposed of. They did not, on this solemn occasion,
accuse him of breaking the sabbath day; they had long ago lost that argument.
They did not accuse him here of casting out demons by the power of the devil.
Even that canard about destroying the temple was left out of sight. One charge
alone they had God's permission to use, and Christ promptly gave it to them.
320

321. BI, “But He held His peace.
Eloquent silence
There is a silence which is often more eloquent than speech, means more than any
words, and speaks ten times more powerfully to the heart. Such, for example, is the
silence when the heart is too full for utterance, and the organs of speech are choked
by the whelming tide of emotion. The sight of a great man so shaken, and quivering
with feeling, that the tongue can give no voice to what the heart feels, is of all human
rhetoric the most potent. Such, also, is the silence of a wise man challenged to speak
by those whom he feels unworthy of his words. The man who can stand and listen to
the language of stolid ignorance, venomous bigotry, and personal insult, addressed to
him in an offensive spirit, and offers no reply, exerts a far greater power upon the
minds of his assailants, than he could by words however forceful. His silence reflects
a moral majesty, before which the heart of his assailants will scarcely fail to cower.
Such was the silence which Christ now maintained in this hall. (Homilist.)
62 “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son
of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty
One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
GILL, "And Jesus said, I am,.... That is, the Son of God; in proof of which he
adds,
and ye shall see the son of man sitting on the right hand of power; that is,
of God, who is all power, the Lord God Almighty:
and coming in the clouds of heaven; either at the destruction of Jerusalem, or
at the last day, referring to the prophecy in Dan_7:13; See Gill on Mat_26:64.
JAMIESON, "And Jesus said, I am — or, as in Matthew (Mat_26:64), “Thou
hast said [it].” In Luke, however (Luk_22:70), the answer, “Ye say that I am,” should
be rendered - as Deuteronomy Wette, Meyer, Ellicott, and the best critics agree that
the preposition requires - “Ye say [it], for I am [so].” Some words, however, were
spoken by our Lord before giving His answer to this solemn question. These are
recorded by Luke alone (Luk_22:67, Luk_22:68): “Art Thou the Christ [they asked]?
tell us. And He said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe: and if I also ask
[interrogate] “you, ye will not answer Me, nor let Me go.” This seems to have been
uttered before giving His direct answer, as a calm remonstrance and dignified protest
against the prejudgment of His case and the unfairness of their mode of procedure.
But now let us hear the rest of the answer, in which the conscious majesty of Jesus
breaks forth from behind the dark cloud which overhung Him as He stood before the
Council. (Also see on Joh_18:28.)
and — in that character.
321

322. ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and
coming in the clouds of heaven — In Matthew (Mat_26:64) a slightly different
but interesting turn is given to it by one word: “Thou hast said [it]: nevertheless” -
We prefer this sense of the word to “besides,” which some recent critics decide for - “I
say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sit on the right hand of power,
and coming in the clouds of heaven.” The word rendered “hereafter” means, not “at
some future time” (as to-day “hereafter” commonly does), but what the English word
originally signified, “after here,” “after now,” or “from this time.” Accordingly, in
Luk_22:69, the words used mean “from now.” So that though the reference we have
given it to the day of His glorious Second Appearing is too obvious to admit of doubt,
He would, by using the expression, “From this time,” convey the important thought
which He had before expressed, immediately after the traitor left the supper table to
do his dark work, “Now is the Son of man glorified” (Joh_13:31). At this moment,
and by this speech, did He “witness the good confession” emphatically and properly,
as the apostle says in 1Ti_6:13. Our translators render the words there, “Who before
Pontius Pilate witnessed”; referring it to the admission of His being a King, in the
presence of Caesar’s own chief representative. But it should be rendered, as Luther
renders it, and as the best interpreters now understand it, “Who under Pontius Pilate
witnessed,” etc. In this view of it, the apostle is referring not to what our Lord
confessed before Pilate - which, though noble, was not of such primary importance -
but to that sublime confession which, under Pilate’s administration, He witnessed
before the only competent tribunal on such occasions, the Supreme Ecclesiastical
Council of God’s chosen nation, that He was THE MESSIAH, and THE SON OF THE
BLESSED ONE; in the former word owning His Supreme Official, in the latter His
Supreme Personal, Dignity.
CONSTABLE, "Previously Jesus had veiled His messiahship because publicly
claiming to be the Messiah would have precipitated a premature crisis (cf. Mark
1:43-44; Mark 8:29-30; Mark 9:9; Mark 11:28-33; Mark 12:12). Now He openly
admitted His messiahship because the time for crisis had arrived. Matthew may
have given us Jesus' exact words (Matthew 26:64) and Mark their substance.
Jesus added that He was not just a human Messiah but the divine Son of Man.
The passages He claimed to fulfill predicted His enthronement in heaven
following His resurrection (Psalms 110:1) and His return to earth with God's
authority to establish a worldwide kingdom (Daniel 7:13-14; cf. Mark 8:38;
Mark 13:24; Mark 13:26; Revelation 1:7). As such He was claiming to be the
Judge of those who sat to judge Him. Jesus knew that this confession would seal
His conviction. "Power" was a recognized circumlocution for "God." [Note:
Ibid., p. 537.]
COFFMAN, "When this writer was a boy 15 years of age, he received from his
mother a copy of the New Testament as a birthday gift, and the thrill of this
verse is remembered from that day. I read the New Testament through, but there
was wonderment about the passages in Matthew where Jesus had said, "Thou
hast said"; and then came the reading of this majestic reply and the flood of
tears that followed. God spoke to me in this verse!
I AM ... These words affirm Christ's deity, the same as in John 18:8; and here
also is the explanation of the different form of reply here, as compared with
Matthew 26:83. There the question was indirectly stated, "Tell us whether, etc.,"
322

323. and could not be answered by the majestic I AM, as here. Not only Mark's
"again" in Mark 14:61, but the fact of Caiaphas' first question being indirect,
and the question here being direct, afford undeniable proof of the multiple
nature of the questions and replies in these passages. Christ's I AM here lays
claim to Godhead.
Sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven ... refers
to the final judgment when all men shall stand before the throne of God for
sentencing. It was astounding that Christ would here transfer the thought from
that prejudiced and corrupted court to the Great Assize where all shall receive
justice and they that are Christ's shall receive mercy.
Ye shall see ... The Sanhedrin, along with all who ever lived, shall see the event
foretold by Jesus. The ridiculous notion that Jesus here envisioned some sudden
glorious coming that would "convince" these hypocrites, and that he predicted
that they would, in their lifetime, see such a thing has utterly no foundation in
this passage. As Cranfield saw the meaning here:
They will see the Son of Man when he comes as Judge - possibly indeed during
their lifetimes, but equally possible after their deaths, when they are raised up
for the last judgment ... Henceforth they will not see him at all till they see him in
his glory.[5]
ENDNOTE:
[5] Ibid., p. 445.
PULPIT, "To this question our Lord returns a plain and candid answer, out of
reverence for the Divine Name which, as St. Matthew and St. Luke tell us, had
been invoked by the high priest, and also respect for the office of the high priest,
by whom he had been put upon his oath. St. Chrysostom says that our Lord
answered thus that he might leave without excuse all those who listened to him,
who would not hereafter be able to plead in the day of judgment that, when our
Lord was solemnly asked in the council whether he was the Son of God, he had
either refused to answer, or had answered evasively. This answer of our Lord is
full of majesty and sublimity. He is arraigned as a criminal, standing in the midst
of the chief priests and scribes, his bitter enemies; and it is as though he said,
"You, O Caiaphas, and you the chief priests and elders of the Jews, are now
unjustly condemning me as a false prophet and a false Christ; but the day is at
hand when I, who am now a prisoner at your judgment seat, shall sit on the
throne of glory as the Judge of you and of all mankind. You are now about to
condemn me to the death of the cross; but I shall then sit in judgment upon you,
and condemn you for this terrible guilt of slaying me, who am the true God and
the Judge of the world."
63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we
323

324. need any more witnesses?” he asked.
GILL, "Then the high priest rent his clothes,.... As was usual upon hearing
blasphemy; which he now supposed the case, or at least would have it so thought:
and saith, what need we any further witnesses? or trouble ourselves to see for
any more, or to hear and take the depositions of any others; See Gill on Mat_26:65.
HENRY, "VII. The high priest, upon this confession of his, convicted him as a
blasphemer (Mar_14:63); He rent his clothes - chitōnas autou. Some think the word
signifies his pontifical vestments, which, for the greater state, he had put on, though
in the night, upon this occasion. As before, in his enmity to Christ, he said he knew
not what (Joh_11:51, Joh_11:52), so now he did he knew not what. If Saul's rending
Samuel's mantle was made to signify the rending of the kingdom from him (1Sa_
15:27, 1Sa_15:28), much more did Caiaphas's rending his own clothes signify the
rending of the priesthood from him, as the rending of the veil, at Christ's death,
signified the throwing of all open. Christ's clothes, even when he was crucified, were
kept entire, and not rent: for when the Levitical priesthood was rent in pieces and
done away, This Man, because he continues ever, has an unchangeable priesthood.
JAMIESON, "Then the high priest rent his clothes — On this expression of
horror of blasphemy, see 2Ki_18:37.
and saith, What need we any further witnesses? (Also see on Joh_18:28.)
SBC, “The Godhead of Christ.
I. On a certain most important occasion, Christ Himself asserted His Godhead in a
manner which could not possibly be misunderstood. He allowed Himself to be put to
death on a charge of blasphemy. At a most solemn juncture, and under the most
solemn circumstances, He accepted a title, the acceptance of which, as He well knew,
would be considered and treated as blasphemous. The conclusion is inevitable. If
Christ be God, the whole procedure is in accordance with the facts of the case, and
with the position He assumed. If Christ be not God, I must leave you to form your
own opinion of His character.
II. A denial of the Godhead of Christ involves consequences from which we should
most of us shrink—consequences which affect the nature and the character of Deity
itself. (1) On the supposition that Christ was a mere man, or a created being, who
allied himself with human nature, the further supposition becomes inevitable, that in
the bygone eternity God dwelt in a lonely and uncompanionable isolation. (2) The
denial of the Godhead of Christ limits and impairs the Divine capability of
manifesting love to man. If Jesus Christ were just a perfect man, and not the eternal
Son of the Father, what did it cost God to part with Him? nothing, that I can see. The
self-sacrifice consisted in the surrender of His Son. (3) If Christ be not God, I cannot
avoid the inference that God has done everything in His power to transfer my
affection from the Creator to the creature. I read in the Bible that God is a jealous
God; and that the honour which is His own He will not permit to be given to another;
and what has He done? In those Scriptures, which are the revelation of His mind and
will, He has taken all the grand titles which belong to Himself, and has laid them
324

325. upon Christ. Everything is done to make the tendrils of my human affection twine
round Jesus Christ. The heart must be chilled towards God, which does not recognise
in Jesus Christ the eternal Son of the eternal Father.
G. Calthrop, Penny Pulpit, new series, No. 798.
CONSTABLE, "Verse 63-64
Rending one's garments expressed indignation or grief (cf. Genesis 37:29; Judges
14:19; 2 Kings 18:37). It had become the high priest's traditional response to
blasphemy (cf. Acts 14:14). [Note: Mishnah Sanhedrin 7:5.] However it was
illegal for the high priest to rend his garments (Leviticus 21:10). The hypocrisy of
the religious leaders is clear throughout their trial of Jesus. The Jews regarded
blasphemy as any serious affront to God, not just speech that reviled Him (cf.
Mark 2:7 : Mark 3:28-29; John 5:18; John 10:33). At this time, blasphemy
consisted of claiming for oneself a unique association with God, reflected in
sitting at God's right hand, not just misusing God's name. [Note: See Darrell L.
Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism and the Final Examination of Jesus,
pp. 30-183.] The Mosaic Law prescribed death by stoning for blasphemers
(Leviticus 24:14), but this was not bad enough for Jesus. Jesus had foreseen this
and had predicted death at the hands of the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Mark
10:33).
BENSON, “Mark 14:63-65. Then the high-priest rent his clothes — Rending of
clothes was an expression sometimes of deep grief, sometimes of holy zeal. The
precepts, Leviticus 10:8; Leviticus 21:10; forbidding the high-priest to rend his
clothes, relate only to the pontifical garments and to private mourning: that is,
mourning on account of the calamities befalling himself or friends. Griefs of this
kind the chief minister of religion was not to make public by any outward sign
whatever. But it was neither unlawful nor unusual for him to rend his ordinary
garments on account of public calamities, or instances of gross wickedness, as a
testimony of his grief for the one and abhorrence of the other. See 1 Maccabees
11:71. That the high-priest was clothed in his ordinary apparel on this occasion,
appears from Exodus 29:29-30, where the pontifical garments are ordered to
descend from father to son; and therefore were to be worn only at their
consecration, and when they ministered. And saith, What need we any further
witnesses — Namely, of his being guilty of blasphemy. Ye have heard the
blasphemy: what think ye? — What punishment do you judge him to have
deserved? They all condemned him, to be guilty of death — Namely, all present;
for it is probable Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, and some more, who were his
disciples, or favourably disposed toward him, were not present: or if they were,
they doubtless remonstrated against the iniquity of this sentence. And some
began to spit on him — See note on Matthew 26:67-68.
COFFMAN, "This was quite an act on the part of Caiaphas; how noble he would
have men suppose that he was; how outrageous it was to such a righteous one as
he pretended to be that the exalted Christ should bear witness of the truth in his
presence!
Rent his clothes ... This was unlawful for the high priest to do. God had
specifically commanded even Aaron and his sons:
325

326. Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes, lest ye die, and lest wrath
come upon all the people (Leviticus 10:6).
As Bickersteth said:
Some of the Fathers think that by this action Caiaphas involuntarily typified the
rending of the priesthood from himself and from the Jewish nation.[6]
What Caiaphas doubtless intended here was to dramatize his shock at the
alleged "blasphemy" of Jesus' testimony; but his actions were as phony and
illegal as the subornation he had been engaged in all night.
ENDNOTE:
[6] E. Bickersteth, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1962), Vol. 16. p. 238.
COFFMAN, "And the high priest rent his clothes ( διαῤῥήξας τοὺς χιτῶνας);
literally, his tunics.; St. Matthew (Matthew 26:65) has τὰ ἱμὰτια literally, his
garments. None but people of rank wore two tunics. The Greek verb here
rendered "rent" implies violent dramatic action. The Jewish tunic was open
under the chin, and large enough to receive the head, so that it could easily be
placed over the shoulders, by inserting the head. When the wearer wished to give
this sign of indignation or grief, he would seize the garment at this opening with
both hands, and violently tear it asunder down to the waist. But it was unlawful
for the high priest to do this in a private grief (Le Matthew 10:6). Some of the
Fathers think that by this action Caiaphas involuntarily typified the rending of
the priesthood from himself and from the Jewish nation.
64 “You have heard the blasphemy. What do
you think?”
They all condemned him as worthy of death.
GILL, "Ye have heard the blasphemy,.... The "manifest" blasphemy, as the
Arabic version renders it; and "out of his own mouth", as the Syriac version adds,
agreeably to Luk_22:71,
what think ye? what sentence is to, be passed upon him?
And they all condemned him to be guilty of death; excepting Joseph of
Arimathea, Luk_23:51; See Gill on Mat_26:66.
326

327. HENRY, "VIII. They agreed that he was a blasphemer, and, as such, was guilty of
a capital crime, Mar_14:64. The question seemed to be put fairly, What think ye? But
it was really prejudged, for the high priest had said, Ye have heard the blasphemy;
he gave judgment first, who, as president of the court, ought to have voted last. So
they all condemned him to be guilty of death; what friends he had in the great
sanhedrim, did not appear, it is probable that they had not notice.
JAMIESON, "Ye have heard the blasphemy — (See Joh_10:33). In Luke
(Luk_22:71), “For we ourselves have heard of His own mouth” - an affectation of
religious horror. (Also see on Joh_18:28.)
what think ye? — “Say what the verdict is to be.”
they all condemned him to be guilty of death — or of a capital crime, which
blasphemy against God was according to the Jewish law (Lev_24:16). Yet not
absolutely all; for Joseph of Arimathea, “a good man and a just,” was one of that
Council, and “he was not a consenting party to the counsel and deed of them,” for
that is the strict sense of the words of Luk_23:50, Luk_23:51. Probably he absented
himself, and Nicodemus also, from this meeting of the Council, the temper of which
they would know too well to expect their voice to be listened to; and in that case, the
words of our Evangelist are to be taken strictly, that, without one dissentient voice,
“all [present] condemned him to be guilty of death.”
COFFMAN, "Through his illegal and violent behavior in rending his garments,
the sacred garments of the high priest, he had already announced the court's
decision; and what he called for here was an assent to his self-proposed verdict.
The conduct of Caiaphas in this scene dramatizes the claim of Christ as being
equal to God. Skeptics who deny that Christ made such a claim are left without
any explanation at all of what this unbelieving high priest did on that occasion.
What think ye ... There is no way that Cranfield's unsupported opinion that
"they were not pronouncing a sentence but rather giving a legal opinion"[7] can
be correct. Instead of putting the matter to secret ballot, required by every
capital case, Caiaphas here was procuring a death sentence against the Lord of
Life by acclamation. The words have the equivalent meaning of "All in favor say
Aye!"
This was the official condemnation by the chosen people of their Lord and
Messiah, and the most phenomenal results would immediately flow out of it.
Before the day was ended, they would renounce God himself as their king, long
the vaunted glory of Israel, and shout, "We have no king but Caesar" (John
19:15). That this was indeed an official condemnation is inherent in their
immediate march upon Pilate with a demand for his crucifixion, in whose
presence it was finally resolved that the only grounds they had for demanding
Jesus' death was that "he made himself the Son of God" (John 19:7).
ENDNOTE:
[7] C. E. B. Cranfield, op. cit.
327

328. 65 Then some began to spit at him; they
blindfolded him, struck him with their fists, and
said, “Prophesy!” And the guards took him and
beat him.
GILL, "And some began to spit on him,.... The men that held him, Luk_22:6,
fulfilling the prophecy in Isa_50:6;
and to cover his face; with a veil, or linen cloth, to blindfold: him, as a person
unworthy to behold the light: or rather, in order to make sport with him:
and to buffet him; with their double fists;
and to say unto him, prophesy. The Arabic version adds, "unto us, O Christ, who
it is that hath buffeted thee now?" that gave thee the last blow? and to the same
purpose the Ethiopic. The Persic version adds, "and deliver thyself";
and the servants did strike him with the palms of their hands. The Syriac
version renders it, "on his cheeks": they gave him slaps on the face. These were the
officers of the high priest, that used him in this indecent manner. This clause is
omitted in the Ethiopic version.
HENRY, "IX. They set themselves to abuse him, and, as the Philistines with
Samson, to make sport with him, Mar_14:65. It should seem that some of the priests
themselves that had condemned him, so far forgot the dignity, as well as duty, of
their place, and the gravity which became them, that they helped their servants in
playing the fool with a condemned prisoner. This they made their diversion, while
they waited for the morning, to complete their villany. That night of observations (as
the passover-night was called) they made a merry night of. If they did not think it
below them to abuse Christ, shall we think any thing below us, by which we may do
him honour?
JAMIESON, "Mar_14:65. The Blessed One is now shamefully entreated.
Every word here must be carefully observed, and the several accounts put together,
that we may lose none of the awful indignities about to be described.
And some began to spit on him — or, as in Mat_26:67, “to spit in [into] His
face.” Luke (Luk_22:63) says in addition, “And the men that held Jesus mocked
him” - or cast their jeers at Him. (Also see on Joh_18:28.)
to cover his face — or “to blindfold him” (as in Luk_22:64).
to buffet him — Luke’s word, which is rendered “smote Him” (Luk_22:63), is a
stronger one, conveying an idea for which we have an exact equivalent in English, but
one too colloquial to be inserted here.
began to say unto him, Prophesy — In Matthew (Mat_26:68) this is given
328

329. more fully: “Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote Thee?” The
sarcastic fling at Him as “the Christ,” and the demand of Him in this character to
name the unseen perpetrator of the blows inflicted on Him, was in them as infamous
as to Him it must have been, and was intended to be, stinging.
and the servants did strike him with the palms of their hands — or
“struck Him on the face” (Luk_22:64). Ah! Well did He say prophetically, in that
Messianic prediction which we have often referred to, “I gave My back to the smiters,
and My cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not My face from shame and
spitting!” (Isa_50:6). “And many other things blasphemously spake they against
Him” (Luk_22:65). This general statement is important, as showing that virulent and
varied as were the recorded affronts put upon Him, they are but a small specimen of
what He endured on that dark occasion.
CONSTABLE, "Having judged Jesus guilty, some of the Sanhedrin members
vented their anger by attacking Him bodily. The temple guards present joined
them in beating Jesus. Spitting and hitting were traditional Jewish ways of
expressing repudiation (cf. Numbers 12:14; Deuteronomy 25:9; Job 30:10; Isaiah
50:6). Even today spitting in someone's face is one of the grossest forms of
personal insult. Evidently they blindfolded Jesus and challenged Him to identify
His assailants because of a belief that Messiah did not need to see but could
judge by smell (Isaiah 11:2-4). [Note: Lane, p. 540.] The Old Testament
predicted this type of abuse for Messiah (Isaiah 53:5; Isaiah 53:7-8; Isaiah
53:10). [Note: See Laurna L. Berg, "The Illegalities of Jesus' Religious and Civil
Trials," Bibliotheca Sacra 161:643 (July-September 2004):330-42.] Peter
recorded that through all this suffering Jesus did not protest or retaliate (1 Peter
2:21-23; cf. Isaiah 53:7).
COFFMAN, "Such mockery was unworthy even of a pagan court; and such
malicious treatment of any prisoner, even a guilty one, was a shameful blot upon
the history of Israel. Mockery by the pagan soldiers of Herod was in keeping
with the sadistic nature of the times; but mockery in the confines of the palace of
God's high priest was particularly shameful. For fuller discussion of each set of
mockeries, see under the parallel accounts in Matthew and in John in this series
of commentaries.
PETER'S DENIAL RELATED
Mark, having reached the climax of the all-night trials, returned to events earlier
in the evening, which were marked by Peter's denial of the Lord.
Peter Disowns Jesus
66 While Peter was below in the courtyard, one
of the servant girls of the high priest came by.
329

330. GILL, "And as Peter was beneath in the palace,.... Not at the lower and
further end of the room, but in the lower part of it; that part in which Jesus and the
sanhedrim were, being upon an advanced ground, with steps ascending to it:
there cometh one of the maids of the high priest; the same that kept the door,
and let him in. The Ethiopic version renders it, "a daughter of the high priest".
HENRY, "We have here the story of Peter's denying Christ.
1. It began in keeping at a distance from him. Peter had followed afar off (Mar_
14:54), and now was beneath in the palace, at the lower end of the hall. Those that
are shy of Christ, are in a fair way to deny him, that are shy of attending on holy
ordinances, shy of the communion of the faithful, and loth to be seen on the side of
despised godliness.
2. It was occasioned by his associating with the high priest's servants, and sitting
among them. They that think it dangerous to be in company with Christ's disciples,
because thence they may be drawn in to suffer for him, will find it much more
dangerous to be in company with his enemies, because there they may be drawn in to
sin against him.
JAMIESON, "Mar_14:66-68. Peter’s First Denial of his Lord.
And as Peter was beneath in the palace — This little word “beneath” - one of
our Evangelist’s graphic touches - is most important for the right understanding of
what we may call the topography of the scene. We must take it in connection with
Matthew’s word (Mat_26:69): “Now Peter sat without in the palace” - or
quadrangular court, in the center of which the fire would be burning; and crowding
around and buzzing about it would be the menials and others who had been admitted
within the court. At the upper end of this court, probably, would be the memorable
chamber in which the trial was held - open to the court, likely, and not far from the
fire (as we gather from Luk_22:61), but on a higher level; for (as our verse says) the
court, with Peter in it, was “beneath” it. The ascent to the Council chamber was
perhaps by a short flight of steps. If the reader will bear this explanation in mind, he
will find the intensely interesting details which follow more intelligible.
there cometh one of the maids of the high priest — “the damsel that kept
the door” (Joh_18:17). The Jews seem to have employed women as porters of their
doors (Act_12:13).
CONSTABLE, "Verses 66-68
Peter's presence was a testimony to His love for Jesus. Unfortunately his love
could not stand the test of fear. [Note: Wessel, p. 771.] The girl's description of
Jesus ("that Nazarene, Jesus") made it clear that Peter was among enemies. She
had probably seen Peter with Jesus in the temple or the city during that week.
Peter denied being one of Jesus' disciples "using the form common in rabbinical
law for a formal, legal denial." [Note: Lane, p. 542.] Peter then left the warmth
and light of the fire in the center of the courtyard and sought refuge in the
shadows of the archway that led into the street.
330

331. Some later manuscripts add "and a cock crowed" at the end of Mark 14:68.
Probably scribes added these words in view of Jesus' prediction in Mark 14:30
and the fulfillment in Mark 14:72.
BENSON, “Mark 14:66-72. And as Peter was beneath in the palace — This
whole paragraph respecting Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ is explained at
large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75. When he thought thereon he wept — In
the original it is, και επιβαλων εκλαιε, which words are interpreted very
differently by different commentators. Dr. Whitby thinks our translation of the
words may be maintained; “for though Casaubon,” says he, “gave no instance of
this signification of the word, Constantine proves, out of Philoponus, Dionysius,
and Basil, that it signifies κατανοειν, to consider of, and ponder, or fix the mind
upon a thing. So Eustathius; ‘the word επιβαλλω, respects either the action, and
then it signifies exactly to take it in hand, or the mind, and then it signifies to
consider of it, as we are able;’ or as Phavorinus interprets it, επιβαλως νοειν,
aptly and wisely to consider of it.” Dr. Campbell, also, after a critical
examination of the text, and of the different interpretations which learned men
have given of it, says, “I think, with Wetstein, that the sense exhibited by the
English translation is the most probable.” Dr. Macknight, however, gives it as his
opinion, that the original expression should be rendered, and throwing his
garment (that is, the veil which the Jewish men used to wear) over his head, he
wept; “For the expression,” says he, “is elliptical, and must be supplied thus,
επιβαλων ιματιον τη κεφαλη αυτου, as is evident from Leviticus 19:19, LXX.
Besides, it was the custom of persons in confusion to cover their heads, Jeremiah
14:3-4.” Thus also Elsner, Salmasius, Bos, and Waterland understand the words.
It may not be improper to mention one more interpretation of the passage,
adopted by Raphelius and some other learned critics, which is, throwing himself
out of the company, namely, in a passionate manner, (which it is very probable
he did,) he wept. This exposition, it must be acknowledged, makes Mark’s words
agree in sense with those of the other evangelists, who say, He went forth and
wept; and “plain it is,” says Dr. Whitby, “that in the book of Maccabees the
word often signifies, irruens, or se projiciens, rushing, or, casting one’s self out.”
COFFMAN, "One may well sympathize with Peter. It was none of that maid's
business whether Peter was or was not a disciple of Jesus; and Peter's purpose
was clearly that of observing the proceedings unrecognized; but now this nosey
maid was blabbering about his being a follower of Jesus. It is evident that Peter
only wanted to get her to shut up. It was thus only a little deception that he
proposed at first; but once a leak in the dyke appeared, the flood quickly
overwhelmed him.
Peter tried to avoid further questioning by going out on the porch; but the maid
saw him. As the devil's particular servant in that hour, she made it her business
to run him down and pin the truth on him.
Hearing the cock crow while he was on the porch did not help Peter's nerves at
all; and he returned to the unequal contest with the maid. She, on her part,
sounded the alarm and appealed to everybody present. From John, it is plain
that a relative of Malchus whose ear Peter had cut off was in the assemblage, and
331

332. he took up the questioning also. This explains the fear and panic which came
upon Peter and issued in his triple denial of the Lord.
BURKITT, "This last paragraph of the chapter gives us an account of the fall
and rising of Peter; of his sin in denying Christ, and of his recovery by
repentance. Both are considered distinctly in the notes of Matthew 26:69. that
which is here farther to be taken notice of, is as followeth.
Observe, 1. That amongst all the apostles and disciples of Christ, we meet not
with any so extraordinary, either for faith or professor, Matthew 4:18 and a
glorious confessor, Matthew 16:16. Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living
God. Which be the foundation of the gospel church in all ages: and Christ was
pleased to put that honour upon Peter, as to use his ministry, in first laying the
foundation of a Christian church among the Jews and Gentiles, he being the first
preacher to them of that faith which he did here confess.
To the Jews, Acts 2. where we read of three thousand souls converted and
baptized; and to the Gentiles, Acts 10. in the conversion of Cornelius and his
friends, whom God directed to send, not to Jerusalem for James, not to
Damascus for St. Paul, but to Joppa for Peter; whom Christ had appointed for
that work, that he might tell him words by which he and his household should be
saved.
Observe, 2. The great and mighty courage which was found in St. Peter.
1. At the command of Christ he adventures to walk on the waves of the sea,
Matthew 14:28. being firmly persuaded, that whatsoever Christ commanded his
disciples to do, he would give them strength and ability to perform.
And, 2. It was a noble courage which enabled him to say, Thou I die with thee,
yet will I not deny thee. No doubt the good man really resolved to do as he said,
little suspecting that he should, with horrid oaths and bitter imprecautions, deny
and abjure his dying Master.
"Lord! how prone are we to think our hearts better than they are! our grace
stronger than it is! Not all the instances we have of human frailty in ourselves, or
all the scars, marks, and wounds, upon some of the best and holiest of men, by
reason of their sad and shameful falls, will sufficiently convince us of our
wretched impotency, and how unable we are to do good or resist evil, by our own
shattered and impaired strength."
3. An undaunted courage, and heroic greatness of mind, appeared in this apostle,
when he told the Jews to their faces that they were guilty of murder, and must
never expect salvation any other way, than by faith in that Jesus whom they had
ignominioiusly crucified, and unjustly slain. Nor did St. Peter say this in a
corner, or behind the curtain, but in the sanhedrin, that open court of
judicature, which had so lately sentenced and condemned his Lord and Master.
Observe, 3. St. Peter's profound humility and lowliness of mind: it was a mighty
332

333. honour that Christ put upon him in making use of his ministry, for laying the
foundation of a Christian church, both among Jews and Gentiles.
And, accordingly, Cornelius, Acts 10 would have entertained him with
expressions of more than ordinary honour and veneration, falling down at his
feet, and ready to adore him; but this humble apostle was so afar from
complying with it, that he plainly told him that he was no other than such a man
as himself. And when our Lord, by a stupendous act of condescension, stooped so
low as to wash his disciple's feet, St. Peter could by no means be persuaded to
admit of it neither could be introduced personally to accept it, till Christ was in a
sort forced to threaten him into obedience, and a compliance with it, John 13:8.
Observe, How admirable was his love unto, and how burning his zeal for, his
Lord and Master, insomuch that he could and did appeal to his omnisciency for
the truth and sincerity of it; Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I
love thee.
It was love that caused him to draw his sword in his Master's defence against a
band of soldiers, and an armed multitude.
It was love that caused him to adventure on the greatest difficulties, and to
expose his life to the greatest hazards.
It was love that caused him to engage so deep, as to suffer and die, rather than
deny him.
These were his exemplary virtues. His failings were these:
First, too great a confidence of his own strength, notwithstanding Christ had
particularly told him that Satan had desired to winnow him as wheat. None are
so likely to be overcome by a temptation, as those who are least afraid of it; none
so ready to fall, as those that think it impossible to fall. It is a dangerous thing to
believe, that because we have long kept our innocence, we can never lose it; and
to conclude, because we have been once or twice victorious over temptations, we
must be ever conquerors, Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall
1 Corinthians 10:12 : that is, let him keep a jealous eye upon the weakness and
inconstancy of his nature, and with a believing eye look up to the power and
promise of God, that he may be preserved from falling, and presented faultless in
the day of Christ.
Secondly, His fears overcame his faith. The insolent affronts offered to his
injured Master caused him to forget his former resolutions, and instead of being
a valiant confessor, he turns a shameful renegado, renouncing him for whom a
little before he resolved to die.
Learn hence, That slavish fear is a most tumultuous and ungovernable passion;
its powerful assaults not only vanquish the strongest reason, but sometimes
overcome the strongest faith. It is a weapon which the tempter uses, to the
discomfort of some, and destruction of others, and therefore ought to be guarded
333

334. against by those who set any value on the peace and comfort of their souls.
Thirdly, One sin drew on another; his sinful equivocation in saying, I know not
the man, prepared him for a downright denial, and that for an abjuration of
him, with an imprecation and an anathema, swearing that he knew not the man.
"Ah Peter! is this thy owning thy Lord? Is this thy not being offended, though all
should be offended? Is this thy dying with him, rather than deny him? What!
hast thou forgot all thy promises and engagements to him, and all the dear and
sweet pledges of his love, so lately shown to thee? Surely I have learnt from thy
example, that it is as dangerous to trust an heart of flesh, as to rely upon an arm
of flesh; for had not thy denied and forsaken Master prayed for thee, and timely
succoured thee, Satan would not only have winnowed thee like wheat, but
ground thee to powder."
Fourthly, Observe how many complicated sins were included in this sin of
Peter's. The highest ingratitude to his Master; unpardonable rashness, in
venturing into such company, tarrying there so long, and without a call, making
bold with a temptation; and for a time there was impenitence and hardness of
heart.
It is holy and safe to resist the beginnings of sin; if we yield to Satan in one
temptation, he will certainly assault us with more and stronger.
Peter proceeded here from a denial to a lie, from a lie to an oath, from an oath to
a curse. Let us resist sin at first: for then have we most power, and sin has least.
And the Lord looked on Peter, and Peter remembered the word of the Lord, and
went out, and wept bitterly.
Observe, If Christ had not looked towards Peter, Peter would never more have
looked after Christ; nor was it barely the turn of Christ's bodily eye that
wrought this disciple to a sorrowful remembrance of his sin; had not this
outward look been accompanied with the inward and secret influences of his
Spirit, it had certainly proved ineffectual.
Christ looked on Judas after his treason; aye, and reproved him too: but neither
that look nor that reproof did break his heart. As the sun with the same beams
softens wax and hardens clay, so a look from the same Christ leaves Judas hard
and impenitent, and melts down Peter to tears.
Though none can say, that tears are always a sign of true repentance, yet
certainly when they flow from a heart duly sensible of sin, and deeply affected
with sorrow, it administers matter of hope that there is sincere repentance. Peter,
after he had wept bitterly for sin, never more returned to the after-commission of
sin; but he that was before timorous as an hare became afterward bold as a lion.
He that once so shamefully denied, nay, abjured, his Master, afterwards openly
confessed with his blood.
It is usually observed, that a broken bone once well set, never more breaks again
334

335. in the same place; a returning backslider, when once restored, contracts such an
hatred of former sins, as never more to run into the commission of them.
Let St. Peter;s fall then be a warning to all professors against presumptuous
confidence, and his restoration be an encouragement to all backsliders to renew
their faith and repentance. Amen.
PULPIT, "Mark 14:66-72
Peter's denial.
The story of our Savior's humiliation and suffering is a story not only of the
malice and the injustice of his enemies, but of the frailty and unfaithfulness of his
professed friends. It is true that the priests and elders apprehended him with
violence and condemned him with unrighteousness; and that the Roman
governor, against his own convictions, and influenced by his weakness and his
selfish interests, condemned him to a cruel death. But it is also true, that of the
twelve chosen and intimate associates one betrayed him and another denied him.
I. THIS CONDUCT WAS AT VARIANCE WITH PETER'S USUAL
PRINCIPLES AND HABITS. No candid reader of the Gospel narrative can
doubt either the faith or the love of this leader among the twelve. His confidence
in the Master and his attachment to him were thoroughly appreciated by Christ
himself. Had not Jesus named him the Rock? Had he not, upon the occasion of
his memorable confession that Jesus was the Son of God, warmly exclaimed,
"Blessed art thou," etc.? A warm and eager nature had found a Being deserving
of all trust, affection, and devotion; and the Lord knew that in Peter he had a
friend, ardent, attached, and true. He admitted the son of Jonas into the inner
circle of three; he was one of the elect among the elect.
II. THIS CONDUCT WAS AT VARIANCE WITH PETER'S PREVIOUS
INTENTION AND PROFESSION. When the seizure and capture were
approaching, the Lord warned his servant that he would be found unfaithful.
Peter's declaration had been, "I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and
to death;" "If I must die with thee, I will not deny thee." And he was no doubt
sincere in this bold and confident declaration. But sincerity is not enough; there
must be stability as well. The professions of the ardent, experience teaches, must
not always be taken with implicit trust. Time tries all; and endurance in trial is
the true test of character. Peter's fall is a lesson of caution to the confident and
the ardent.
III. THIS CONDUCT WAS FORESEEN AND FORETOLD BY THE LORD
JESUS. The Master knew his servant better than he knew himself. In warning
him of his impending fall, Christ had assured Peter that only his prayers should
secure him from moral destruction.
IV. THIS CONDUCT MUST BE EXPLAINED BY THE COMBINATION IN
PETER'S MIND OF LOVE AND FEAR. It was his affection for Jesus which led
this apostle to enter the court, and to remain in the neighborhood of the Lord
335

336. during his mock-trial. The others had forsaken their Master, and had fled; John
only, being known, and Peter, being introduced by his friend, clung thus to the
scene of their Master's woe. Peter, like John, felt unable to desert his Lord.
Strange that he should feel able to deny him. He felt for his Master, but he feared
for himself. Cowardice for the time overpowered the course which first brought
him to the spot and then deserted him.
V. THIS CONDUCT IS AN INSTANCE OF THE TENDENCY OF SIN TO
REPEAT ITSELF. A single falsehood often brings on others in its train. To get it
believed, the liar lies again, and confirms his falsehood with oaths. Peter found
himself in a position in which he must either repeatedly deny his Lord, or else
expose his own falseness, and run into the very danger which he had sinned to
escape. Ah! how slippery are the paths of sin! How easy it is to go wrong, and
how difficult to recover the right way! Who knows, when once he lies, or cheats,
or sins in any way, where, if ever, he shall stop? How needful the prayer, "Hold
up my goings in thy paths, that my footsteps slip not"!
VI. THIS CONDUCT COULD NOT ENDURE THE REBUKE OF
CONSCIENCE AND THE REPROACH OF CHRIST. There was inconsistency
between what Peter felt in his inmost heart, between the prayers which he was
wont to offer, and what in this night he did and said. The falsehood and the fear
were on the outside of his nature; below, there was a sensitive conscience and a
loving heart. It was the look of the Master, as he was led through the open court,
and met his faithless servant's eye, which melted Peter's heart, recalling in a
moment the warning which had been disregarded and the profession which had
been belied. If there had not been a heart, a conscience, responsive to the appeal
and the reproach conveyed in that look, those eyes would have met in vain. All
Christ's servants are liable to temptation, and it is possible that any one among
them may be betrayed into faithlessness towards Christ; but it is only where
there is true love that there is susceptibility to the Savior's tender expostulation
and affectionate rebuke. It is thus that the Lord makes manifest who are his; he
shames them because of their own weakness and cowardice, and awakens what is
best within them to a sense of personal unworthiness, and to a desire of
reconciliation and renewal.
VII. THIS CONDUCT WAS THE OCCASION OF SHAME AND
CONTRITION. "When he thought thereon, he wept." Thought, reflection,
especially upon the words of Jesus, are fitted to bring the misguided soul to itself.
It is the haste and hurry of men's lives which often hinder true repentance and
reformation. "They that lack time to mourn lack time to mend." These tears
were the turning-point, and the earnest and the beginning of better things.
Another evangelist relates to us at length the restoration of Peter to favor, and
his new commission of service. But the simple words with which this narrative
closes furnish the key to what follows, to the rest of Peter's life. Judas's sin led
him to remorse; Peter's sin led him to repentance. The root of the difference lay
in the two men's distinct and opposed characters. Judas's principle was love of
self; Peter's was love of Christ. The recovery, which was possible for the one, was
therefore morally impossible for the other.
336

337. APPLICATION.
1. A warning against self-confidence.
2. A suggestion as to the spirit in which to encounter temptation: Watch and
pray; look to Jesus!
3. An encouragement to true penitents.
BI, “And as Peter was beneath in the palace.
The High Priest’s palace
The palace of the High Priest was in all probability built much in the Roman style.
There was what was called the vestibulum, an entrance adorned with pillars; in this
was the ostium, or entrance hall, closed with doors. On one side lived the porter. This
hall gave admission to the atrium, called in a Greek house the aule, a square or
oblong apartment, open in the middle to the sky, with, in Roman houses, a small
water tank in the middle, and beside it the image of the tutelary god and a small altar
on which incense was burnt. At the further end of this great hall was a large and
handsome room, opening to it by steps, called the tablinum. It was the grand
reception room, and was richly adorned. In the tablinum, which was sometimes
square, sometimes semi-circular, the court was held in the house of Caiaphas.
Without, below the marble steps in the atrium, were the servants of the house. There
was no image of a god there, but there was a brazier in the place of the altar of
incense. That there was an impluvium or tank is likely enough; as so much
importance was ascribed to washings, and water had been conveyed throughout
Jerusalem by means of subterranean canals and aqueducts. Out of the tablinum
sometimes a door opened into a small bedroom, which was without a window. It was
in this little room that the false witnesses were kept concealed till summoned to
appear. They were perfectly in the dark, and could not be seen, whereas Christ was
visible distinctly because of the torches held, as Jewish law required, before Him to
make His face clearly distinguishable. In the tablinum were also seats or benches, of
marble, of alabaster, or costly woods. On these benches sat the council. Whilst the
trial was going on in the tablinum, another trial was going on in the atrium, a step or
two below the tablinum. The Master was tried in the upper court, and found guilty,
though innocent. The disciple was tried in the lower court, and found guilty by his
own conscience, or rather, let me say, by that Master who was receiving sentence a
few steps above him. Both were irradiated by the red light of fire in the midst of the
prevailing darkness. Probably the only lights then burning were the fire of charcoal in
the brazier on the edge of the water tank, and the torches held aloft by the serjeants
of the guard before Jesus. Very generally, the tablinum opened into a garden behind,
so that those in the atrium or hall looked through it into the garden, which was
surrounded by a colonnade. When this was the case, the seats were between the steps
from the atrium and the garden door, and the little bedroom door was opposite the
seats. Now, perhaps, you can picture the scene. In the foreground are the servants
and soldiers moving about the hall, women bringing bundles of thorn, or shovels of
charcoal to the fire in the brazier. Beyond, raised like a low stage of a theatre, is the
tablinum, with the judges seated on the right. On the left, peering out of the dark
door, are the evil faces of the hired spies and witnesses. A little forward, on a small
raised platform, is Christ, with bound hands, and on either side stands an officer
holding a flaring torch. Behind, like the scene in a theatre, is the garden, with the
setting moon casting long shadows from the black cypresses over the gravel and high
337

338. aloft in the sky twinkles one star. (S. Baring Gould, M. A.)
67 When she saw Peter warming himself, she
looked closely at him.
“You also were with that Nazarene, Jesus,” she
said.
GILL, "But he denied.
The foulness of Peter’s sin
1. He denies flatly and peremptorily.
2. He gives a double denial; implying more resolution. And both his denials are
distinct and manifest lies.
3. He denies Christ before a multitude.
(1) Bad enough to have denied Christ before one witness. How much worse
before so many?
(2) He who denies Christ before any man, shall be denied by Him before the
Father. What a great sin to deny Him before all men!
(3) In so great a company were a number of wicked men, and now Peter
exposes the name of Christ to all their scorn and opprobrium. He animates
and hardens them, and takes part with them in the rejection of Christ.
(4) There were also some weak ones and well-wishes to Christ. Peter’s action
weakens and scandalizes these, and perhaps prevents some of them coming
forward in defence of the Lord. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
It is hard to confess Christ in danger
1. Because of Satan’s malice. He will do all in his power to keep men from
confessing Christ openly, and to make them deny Him.
2. The strength of our natural corruption makes it difficult to resist Satan’s
attacks.
3. Weakness of faith and graces.
(1) Think it not an easy thing to confess Christ in trial, nor a thing to be
performed by our own power; but pray for the “Spirit of strength.”
338

339. (2) Pray for wisdom when and how to confess.
(3) Pray for faith. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
The porch of sin
Many step out of the midst of sin but hang about the porch. They would not be
outrageous sinners, but retain a snatch or taste; not open adulterers, but adulterous
eyes, thoughts, and speeches; not noted drunkards, but company keepers and
bibbers; not blasphemous swearers by wounds and bloods, but by faith, troth, God,
etc. All this is to remain in the porch of sin. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Difficult to quit bad company
In that Peter sticks in the porch, and comes back among those whom he had
forsaken, learn how difficult it is for a man who has been long used to bad company
and courses, to be brought to leave it altogether. He will either look back, or else tarry
in the porch. Sin and sinners are like bird lime. The more Peter strives to get out, the
more he finds himself limed and entangled. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Why God did not prevent Peter’s fall
1. He would give us and the whole Church an example of infirmity and weakness,
by the fall of such a man.
2. The strongest must learn fear and watchfulness, and while they stand take
heed lest they fall, lest the enemy suddenly overcome them as he did Peter.
3. To crush men’s presumption, and teach them to attribute more to the word of
Christ than their own strength. Had Peter done this, he had not so shamefully
fallen.
4. To take away all excuse for men in after ages setting up Peter as an idol. (Dr.
Thomas Taylor.)
To avoid sin, avoid occasions
He that would avoid sin must carefully avoid occasions, which are the stronger
because of our own natural inclination to evil. He that would not be burnt must not
touch fire, or go upon the coals. Beware of evil company. Consider thine own
weakness, and the power of evil to seduce. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
To avoid sin, keep close to God’s Word
He that would avoid occasion of sin, must hold himself to God’s commandment, and
within the limits of his own calling. If Peter had done this, he had not fallen so foully.
Christ having expressed His will and pleasure, he should not have so much as
deliberated upon it, much less resolved against it. But he forgets the word and
commandment of Christ, and so falls into sin. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
339

340. How we are to show love to a friend
Here is a notable rule to be observed in friendships. Examine the love thou showest
to thy friend, by the love of God.
1. Take heed thy love be subordinate to the love of God; so that, if thou canst not
please both, thou please not thy friend at the cost of God’s displeasure (Mat_
10:37). Peter should first have loved Christ as his Lord, and then as his friend.
Had he so done, he would have kept His word.
2. Love the Word better than thy friend. Peter should have stuck to Christ’s road,
instead of His person.
3. See thy love to thy friend be not preposterous, that thy affection destroy him
not. The subtlety of Satan creeps into our friendships and fellowships, so that by
our improvidence, instead of helping, we hurt them more than their enemies
could do. We must pray for wisdom and judgment, that neither willingly nor
unawares we either council or lead them into any sin, or uphold any sin in them,
or hinder in them any good. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
The corrupting influence of bad company
See how soon even God’s children are corrupted with wicked company. Even Peter, a
great and forward disciple of Christ, full of zeal and courage, who will pray, profess,
and immediately before draw the sword in Christ’s quarrel, now can deny Him
among persecutors. Great is the force of wicked company to pervert even a godly
mind.
1. There is a proneness in godly men to be withdrawn by evil company. As the
body is infected by pestilential air, so the mind by the contagion of bad company.
2. There is a bewitching force in evil company to draw even a good mind beyond
his own purpose and resolution. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Reasons for avoiding evil company
1. There cannot be true fellowship with God and His enemies too.
2. Every man’s company tells what he is. Ravens flock together by companies;
and so do doves. The good man will not willingly stand in the way of sinners.
3. The practice of wicked men should make good men shun their company; for
wherein are their sports and delights, but in things which displease God and
grieve His Spirit, and the spirits of all who love God and His glory? What can a
good man see in such company, but must either infect him, or at least offend him
in almost everything? (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
Godly company the best
It seems very sweet to sit warm among wicked men, to eat and drink and be jovial
with them; but there is a bitter sauce for such meats. On the contrary, in company of
godly men thou art under the shadow of God’s mercy for their sakes. God loves His
children and their friends. For Lot’s sake His family was saved. (Dr. Thomas Taylor.)
340

341. The fall of Peter
A great study in human nature is here presented.
I. The origin of Peter’s fall. Do not overlook-
1. The quarrel in Peter’s heart with Christ’s methods. Christ’s plan was to
conquer by suffering; Peter’s to conquer by resisting. This inward divergence
produced the outward separation. Beware of quarrelling with God’s dealings, or
methods, or demands; the most common of all sources of backsliding.
2. Peter’s pride helped his fall.
II. The process of Peter’s fall.
1. Following Christ “afar off” (Luk_22:54)-half-heartedly, not close, not to testify
to the Sanhedrin for Him, but simply to see the end (Mat_26:58). Close to Christ
in the path of duty you are kept warm; sluggish and distant, the heart chills and
grows feeble.
2. He entered into temptation.
3. A subtle snare is laid for him. If the three challenges had taken place in a
reversed order, probably Peter would not have fallen by them. Had the men come
first, his manhood might have risen to meet the challenge. But a housemaid does
not put him on his mettle. Thrown off his guard, he tells his first lie, and it has
afterwards to be backed up by more falsehoods and deadlier denials, putting a
gulf between himself and Christ which, but for Christ’s grace, would have been
eternal.
III. The commonness of similar transgression. Not a question of who is guilty, but
who is guiltless of this fault. All hiding of the face from Christ, all secrecy of fear,
which leads people to assume we have nothing to do with Christ, all leaving Him
unowned and undefended, is a sin identical in