Friedrich Spitta (Zur Geschichte und Litteratur des Urchristentums, i. 157 ff.) believes that the second section of this chapter has been accidentally dislocated, and that its original order was as follows: (1) 12, 13, Jesus is brought: to Annas; (2) 19–23, He is examined before the high priest; (3) 24, 14, He is passed on to Caiaphas; (4) 15–18, 25b–27, the triple denial of Peter; (5) 28, Jesus is sent to the Praetorium.
But this arrangement also has its difficulties. It requires us to suppose that Caiaphas had come to the house of Annas and conducted the examination recorded in 19–23, and that when it is said that Annas sent the prisoner to Caiaphas, after this examination, it is only meant that he sent Him to the house or palace of Caiaphas where the Sanhedrim sat.
John 18:1. Having finished His prayer and His discourse, Jesus , “went out” from the city, as is suggested by , “to the other side of the torrent,” cf.John 6:1. sc. , a stream that flows in winter, a torrent; of Jabbok, Genesis 32:22; of Kidron, 2 Samuel 15:23. , “the Kidron,” described in Henderson’s Palestine, 90. “where was a garden,” in Mark 14:32, described as (a country place, or estate), and called . The owner was probably a friend of Jesus. Into this garden He went with His disciples.
John 18:1-12. The arrest of Jesus.
John 18:2. . “And Judas also knew the place, because Jesus and His disciples had frequently assembled there” on previous visits to Jerusalem, Luke 21:37. This is inserted to account for what follows, and to remind the reader of the voluntariness of the surrender. There was no attempt to escape or hide.
John 18:3. ’ . (Spira, anything rolled up or folded together), a Roman cohort (Polyb., xi. 23, 1) or tenth part of a legion, and therefore containing about 600 men. The cohort denotes the garrison of the castle Antonia, which, during the Passover, was available to assist the Sanhedrim in maintaining order. Part of it was now used in case “the servants of the Sanhedrim,” ’ , should not prove sufficient. A considerable body of troops would obviate the risk of a popular rising, John 7:32-49, John 12:42; especially Mark 14:2. They were furnished with . was a link or torch, consisting of strips of resinous wood tied together, and in late Greek was used for , a lantern; was the open torch. See Rutherford’s New Phryn., p. 131, and Wetstein. Both open lights and lanterns were in use in the Roman army, and would be at hand. “The soldiers rushed out of their tents with lanterns and torches.” Dion. Hal., John 11:5. It was new moon, but it might be cloudy, and it would certainly be shady in the garden.
John 18:4. Jesus, then, not with the boldness of ignorance, but knowing , “all that was coming upon Him,” cf.Luke 14:31, , “went out” from the garden, or more probably, John 18:26, from the group of disciples, “and says, Whom seek ye?” to concentrate attention on Himself and prevent a general attack.
John 18:5. “Jesus the Nazarene,” cf.Acts 24:5, occurs Mark 14:67, etc. , “I am He”. He had already been identified by Judas’ kiss, Matthew 24:47, but Jesus wished to declare Himself as one who did not fear identification. That the kiss was superfluous is, however, no proof that it was not given. ’ This remark is inserted not to bring o t that Judas fell to the ground with the rest (Holtzmann), but to point out that Judas had not only given directions, but had actually come, and now confronted his Lord and companions.
John 18:6. The immediate effect of His calm declaration was: , “they went backwards and fell to the ground”. Job 1:20, ; similarly used by Homer, etc., as = . This might have been considered a fulfilment of Psalms 27:2, ’ . The recoil, which necessarily causes stumbling and falling in a crowd, was natural, especially if the servants here employed were the same as those who had been sent to take Him on a former occasion, John 7:46. No one wished to be the first to lay hands on Him. Similar effects were produced by Mohammed (when Durthur stood over him with drawn sword), Mark Antony, Marius, Coligny. But the object in narrating the circumstance may have been to illustrate the voluntariness of Christ’s surrender.
John 18:7. Declaring His identity a second time, Jesus explicitly reminds the officials that by their own acknowledgment they are instructed to arrest none but Himself, ’ . In thus protecting His companions, Jesus, according to John, fulfils John 17:12; although here the fulfilment is more superficial than that which was intended. (Cf.2 Samuel 24:17.)
John 18:10. Peter did not wish to be thus dissociated from the fate of his Master, John 13:38, and thinks a rescue possible, as only the Sanhedrim officials would enter the garden, leaving the soldiers outside. , “having a sword,” “pro more peregrinantium in iis locis,” Grotius, and cf. Thucyd., i. 6; Luke 22:36. He struck , “the high priest’s servant”. The are distinguished from the , John 18:18. John, being acquainted with the high priest’s household, both identified the man and knew his name, which was a common one, see Wetstein, and cf.Nehemiah 10:4; also, Porphyry, Life of Plotinus, 17. “In my native dialect I (Porphyry) was called Malchus, which is interpreted, king.” . In Mark 14:47 . indicates eye-witness or subsequent intimate knowledge. Peter meant, no doubt, to cleave the head.
John 18:11. Peter’s action, however, was not commended. ’ . “Res evangelica non agitur ejusmodi praesidiis.” Erasmus. , a receptacle; sometimes ; usually . ’ . For the figure of the cup, see Ezekiel 23:31-34; Matthew 20:22; Matthew 26:39. Shall I refuse the lot appointed me by the Father?
John 18:12. ’ . The Roman soldiers, , under the orders of their Chiliarch (Tribune, Colonel), abetted the officers of the Sanhedrim, , in the apprehension of Jesus. As a matter of course and following the universal practice , “they bound Him,” with His hands shackled behind His back.
John 18:13. , “and they led Him to Annas first”. refers to the subsequent examinations, John 18:24; John 18:28. The reason for taking Him to Annas first was that he was father-in-law of the actual high priest, Caiaphas, and was a man of commanding influence. He had himself been high priest from A.D. 7–14, while five of his sons occupied the office in succession. Caiaphas held office till 37 A.D. On see John 11:49.
John 18:13-24. Examination before Annas.
John 18:14. The attitude Caiaphas was likely to assume towards the prisoner is indicated by his identification with the person who uttered the principle, John 11:50, ’ .
John 18:15. ’ . “There followed Jesus Simon Peter”—with whom the narrative is now concerned—“and another disciple,” in all probability John. He is mentioned to explain how Peter found access to the high priest’s residence. “That disciple was known to the high priest,” i.e., probably to Caiaphas, and accordingly went in with Jesus , “into the palace (or court) of the high priest”. , originally the court or quadrangle round which the house was built, was used of the residence itself. Apparently, and very naturally, Annas had apartments in this official residence now occupied by Caiaphas.
John 18:16. Peter, not being known to the household, was excluded and stood outside at the door, , cf.John 20:11. John, missing him, spoke to the doorkeeper and introduced him. , female doorkeepers appear 2 Samuel 4:6, Acts 12:13, and see Wetstein.
John 18:17. Naturally he concluded from John’s introducing him that Peter was also a disciple, and as a mere innocent and purposeless remark says: ’ ; “Are you also one of this man’s disciples?” He says, , “I am not”.
John 18:18. ’ . The household servants and the Sanhedrim servitors had made a fire in the open court of the house and were standing round it warming themselves. Peter, unabashed by his lie, joined himself to this group and stood in the light of the fire. Cf.Luke 22:56, . Jerusalem, lying 2500 feet above sea-level, is cold at night in spring.
John 18:19. ’ “The high priest then interrogated Jesus about His disciples and about His teaching,” apparently wishing to bring out on what terms He made disciples, whether as a simple Rabbi or as Messiah. But Jesus answered: ’ . The high priest’s question was useless. Jesus had nothing to tell which He had not publicly and frequently proclaimed. Similarly Socrates replied to his judges (Plato, Apol., 33), “If any one says that he has ever learned or heard anything from me in private which the world has not heard, be assured he says what is not true”. “without reserve,” rückhaltslos, Holtzmann. , “to everybody,” to all who cared to hear; cf. Socrates’ . “I always taught in synagogue and in the temple”; the article dropped as we drop it in the phrase “in church”; “where,” i.e., in both synagogue and temple, “all the Jews assemble”.
John 18:21. “Why do you interrogate me? Ask those who have heard, what I said to them.” Similarly Socrates appeals to his disciples. The might be construed as if Jesus looked towards some who were present.
John 18:22. ’ ; . The older meaning of was “to strike with a rod” sc. ; but in later Greek it meant “to give a blow on the cheek with the open hand”. This is put beyond doubt by Field, Otium Noru., p. 71; cf. Rutherford’s New Phryn., p. 257. R.V marg. “with a rod” is not an improvement on R.V text.
 Revised Version.
 Revised Version.
John 18:23. The calmness and reasonableness of Jesus’ retort to this blow impressed it on the memory of John, whose own blood would boil when he saw his Master struck by a servant.
John 18:24. As nothing was to be gained by continuing the examination, Jesus is handed on to Caiaphas, ’ .
John 18:25 resumes the narrative interrupted at John 18:18-19, and resumes by repeating the statement that Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. While he did so the servants and officers, John 18:18, who were round the fire said, ’ “Are you also of His disciples?”
John 18:26. ’ , “one of the servants of the high priest, who was a kinsman of him,” etc., “a detail which marks an exact knowledge of the household (John 18:15),” Westcott.
John 18:27. ’ ’ A cock crew, the dawn approaching, and the warning of John 13:38 was fulfilled. See on John 13:38.
John 18:28 to John 19:16. Jesus before Pilate.
John 18:28. , “They lead,” i.e., the Sanhedrists who had assembled lead: in Luke 23:1, . . Field prefers translating “from the house of Caiaphas,” cf.Mark 5:35; Acts 16:40. , praetorium, lit. “the general’s tent”; here probably the governor’s quarters in Antonia, but possibly the magnificent palace of Herod used by the Roman governor while in Jerusalem; see especially Keim, Jesus of Nazareth, vi. 79 E. Tr. ’ “It was early morning (the fourth watch, from 3 to 6 A.M., see Mark 13:35; see on John 13:38) and they themselves entered not into the palace that they might not be defiled but might eat the passover.” The dawning of the day seems to have reminded them of its sacred character. To enter a house from which all leaven had not been removed was pollution. Probably too the mere entrance into the house of a Gentile was the gnat these men strained at. The plain inference from the word is that the Paschal Supper was yet to be eaten. But see Edersheim’s Life of Jesus, ii. 566.
John 18:29. ’ The examination began therefore in the open air in front of the building; cf.John 19:13. Pilate opened the case with the formal inquiry, . . .; To this reasonable demand the Sanhedrists evasively and insolently reply (John 18:30): “Had He not been a we should not have delivered Him to you”. It appears therefore that having already condemned Him to death (see Matthew 26:60. . Mark 14:64) they handed Him over— —to Pilate, not to have their judgment revised, but to have their decision confirmed and the punishment executed. is found in Arist., Eth., iv. 9, Polybius, and frequently in 1 Peter.
John 18:31. This does not suit Roman ideas of justice; and therefore Pilate, ascribing their reluctance to lay a definite charge against the prisoner and to have the case reopened to the difficulty of explaining to a Roman the actual law and transgression, bids them finish the case for themselves, ’ cf.Acts 18:14.
John 18:32. This, however, they decline to do, because it is the death penalty they desire, and this they have no right to inflict: . In the Roman provinces the power of life and death, the jus gladii, was reserved to the governor. See Arnold’s Roman Prov. Administration, pp. 55, 57; and Josephus, Bell. Jud., ii. 8, 1, who states that when the territory of Archelaus passed to the provincial governor, Coponius, the power of inflicting capital punishment was given to him, . See also Stapfer’s Palestine, p. 100. By being thus handed over to the Roman magistrate it came about that Jesus was crucified, a form of capital punishment which the Jews never inflicted even when they had power; and thus the word of Jesus was fulfilled which He spake intimating that He would die by crucifixion, John 12:32-33.
John 18:33. Pilate, being thus compelled to undertake the case, withdraws within the Praetorium to conduct it apart from their prejudices and clamours. He calls Jesus and says to Him, ; How did Pilate know that this was the against Jesus? John omits the information given in Luke 23:2 that the Sanhedrists definitely laid this accusation. And the answer of Jesus implies that He had not heard this accusation made in Pilate’s presence. The probability therefore is that Pilate had privately obtained information regarding the prisoner. There is some contempt as well as surprise in Pilate’s . “Art Thou,” whose appearance so belies it, “the king of the Jews?”
John 18:33-37. Jesus examined by Pilate in private.
John 18:34. Jesus answers by asking: ’; Pilate’s reply, “Am I a Jew?” precludes all interpretations, however inviting (see especially Alford and Oscar Holtzmann), but the simple one: “Do you make this inquiry from any serious personal interest and with any keen apprehension of the blessings attached to the Kingdom of God, or are you merely echoing a formal charge brought against me by others?”
John 18:35. To this Pilate with some heat and contempt replies: ; “Am I a Jew?” How can you suppose that I have any personal interest in such a matter?— ’ . “Your own nation and the chief priests handed you over to me.” It is their charge I repeat. ; “what hast Thou done?” He scouts the idea that he should take any interest in the Jewish Messiah, and returns to the practical point, “what have you done?”
John 18:36. But Jesus accepts the allegation of the Jews and proceeds to explain in what sense He is king: . . . My kingdom is not of a worldly nature, nor is it established by worldly means. Had it been so, my servants would have striven to prevent my being surrendered to the Jews. But as things are, , since it is indisputable that no armed resistance or rescue has been attempted, it is put beyond question that my kingdom is not from hence. “The substitution of ‘hence’ for ‘of this world’ in the last clause appears to define the idea of the world by an immediate reference to the representatives of it close at hand.” Westcott. Perhaps this rather limits the reference. Jesus uses as one who has other worlds than this in view.
John 18:37. Pilate understands only so far as to interrupt with ’ ; “So then you are a king?” On see Klotz’s Devarius, p. 173. To which Jesus replies with the explicit statement: ’ . “Thou sayest.” This, says Schoettgen (Matthew 26:25), is “solennis adfirmantium apud Judaeos formula”; so that must be rendered with R.V marg. “because” I am a king. Erasmus, Westcott, Plummer, and others render, “Thou sayest that I am a king,” neither definitely accepting nor rejecting the title. But this interpretation seems impossible in the face of the simple of the synoptists, Matthew 27:2, Mark 15:2, Luke 23:3. We must then render, “Thou art right, for a king I am”. In what sense a king, He explains: . . . “For this end have I been born, and for this end am I come into the world;” the latter expression, by being added to the former, certainly seems to suggest a prior state. Cf.John 1:9. The end is expressed in , “that I might witness to the truth,” especially regarding God and His relation to men. The consequence is that every one who belongs to the truth (moral affinity expressed by ) obeys Him, in a pregnant sense, cf.John 10:8-16. They become His subjects, and form His kingdom, a kingdom of truth. For which Pilate has only impatient scorn: ;—“Tush, what is Aletheia?” It was a kingdom which could not injure the empire. What have I to do with provinces that can yield no tribute, and threaten no armed rebellion?
 Revised Version.
John 18:38. Pilate waited for no reply to his question, but , . The noting of each movement of Pilate suggests the eye-witness, and brings out his vacillation. ’ “I for my part find no fault, or ground of accusation in Him.” Naturally, therefore, Pilate will acquit and dismiss Him; but no. He attempts a compromise: “You have a custom,” of which we have no information elsewhere; although Josephus (Antiq., xx. 9, 3) relates that at a passover Albinus released some robbers. Analogies in other countries have been produced. This custom Pilate fancies they will allow him to follow in favour of Jesus: ’ ; , aorist subjunctive; cf.Matthew 13:28, ; Luke 9:54, ; ; , etc., commonly occur in Aristophanes and other classical writers. ’ , , “They shouted,” showing their excitement: , previous shoutings have not been mentioned by John, but this word reflects light on the manner in which the accusations had been made. . Bar-Abbas, son of a father, or of a Rabbi, . In Matthew 27:16, Origen read ., but added “in multis exemplaribus non continetur”. He found a mystery in the circumstance that both prisoners were called “Jesus, the Son of the Father”. Barabbas is designated , or, as Luke (Luke 23:19) more definitely says, he had been imprisoned for sedition in the city and for murder. John does not bring out the irony of the Jews’ choice, which freed the real and crucified the pretended mover of sedition.
John 18:38-40. Pilate declares the result of his examination.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Nicol, W. Robertson, M.A., L.L.D. "Commentary on John 18". The Expositor's Greek Testament. https://www.studylight.org/
the Second Week of Lent