Welcome to Day 2179 of Wisdom-Trek, and thank you for joining me.

This is Guthrie Chamberlain, Your Guide to Wisdom

The Gospel of John – 37 – Truth on Trial – Daily Wisdom

Putnam Church Message – 10/30/2022

The Gospel of John – Part 5: Vindication Of The Word – Truth On Trial

  Today we continue our series on the Good News according to John the Apostle. Last week, Jesus continued His prayer for all believers from that day forward until Christ returns to earth to restore God’s kingdom, the Global Eden. In John 17:24, Jesus said,  ²⁴ “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world. Our scripture for today is John 18:1-27, starting on page 1681 in the Pew Bible. According to John the Apostle, we begin the Good News's final significant segment, ‘Vindication of the Word.’ We see Jesus, the truth made flesh, Enduring Injustice With Grace in a message titled ‘Truth on Trial.’  Jesus Arrested 18 When he had finished praying, Jesus left with his disciples and crossed the Kidron Valley. On the other side there was a garden, and he and his disciples went into it. ² Now Judas, who betrayed him, knew the place, because Jesus had often met there with his disciples. ³ So Judas came to the garden, guiding a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and the Pharisees. They were carrying torches, lanterns and weapons. ⁴ Jesus, knowing all that was going to happen to him, went out and asked them, “Who is it you want?” ⁵ “Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “I am he,” Jesus said. (And Judas the traitor was standing there with them.) ⁶ When Jesus said, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground. ⁷ Again he asked them, “Who is it you want?” “Jesus of Nazareth,” they said. ⁸ Jesus answered, “I told you that I am he. If you are looking for me, then let these men go.” ⁹ This happened so that the words he had spoken would be fulfilled: “I have not lost one of those you gave me.”^{[a] 10} Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant, cutting off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.) ¹¹ Jesus commanded Peter, “Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?” ¹² Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him ¹³ and brought him first to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year. ¹⁴ Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jewish leaders that it would be good if one man died for the people. Peter’s First Denial ¹⁵ Simon Peter and another disciple (John) were following Jesus. Because this disciple was known to the high priest,(Annus), he went with Jesus into the high priest’s courtyard, ¹⁶ but Peter had to wait outside at the door. The other disciple, who was known to the high priest, came back, spoke to the servant girl on duty there and brought Peter in. ¹⁷ “You aren’t one of this man’s disciples too, are you?” she asked Peter. He replied, “I am not.” ¹⁸ It was cold, and the servants and officials stood around a fire they had made to keep warm. Peter also was standing with them, warming himself. The High Priest Questions Jesus ¹⁹ Meanwhile, the high priest (Annus) questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. ²⁰ “I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. ²¹ Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said.” ²² When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby slapped him in the face. “Is this the way you answer the high priest?” he demanded. ²³ “If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?” ²⁴ Then Annas sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest. Peter’s Second and Third Denials ²⁵ Meanwhile, Simon Peter was still standing there warming himself. So they asked him, “You aren’t one of his disciples too, are you?” He denied it, saying, “I am not.” ²⁶ One of the high priest’s servants, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, challenged him, “Didn’t I see you with him in the garden?” ²⁷ Again Peter denied it, and at that moment a rooster began to crow. VINDICATION OF THE WORD (JOHN 18:1–21:25) Truth on Trial JOHN 18:1–27   —18:1— As Jesus concluded His prayer (17:1–26), His words undoubtedly felt like a warm blanket (wrapped in a blanket) around the disciples as they came to terms with His imminent departure. They were indeed eternally secure in the sovereign care of God, but they scarcely realized the horrific evil mounting against the Lord that very moment. Even as the remaining eleven men trusted their Master to fulfill His promises, Judas had slipped into the dark of night to betray Him. The temple officials were organizing a raiding party of combined Roman and Jewish troops, soon to surround Jesus and haul Him before six criminal hearings.   Probably around midnight, the men started for Gethsemane. Some expositors interpret 14:31 to mean they departed the upper room for the garden as Jesus continued His discourse en route (15:1–17:26). However, I find it difficult to imagine Jesus concluding this intimate discussion with such a solemn prayer while walking through the city or down the slope of the Kidron Valley. The construction of this sentence (literally, “When he had finished praying, Jesus left” suggests that although the men had left the upper room, they did not set out for the garden until Jesus had finished praying. Perhaps Jesus concluded His “farewell discourse” in a courtyard outside the residence where they had eaten … or under torchlight on the southern steps of Herod’s temple. (Bulletin Insert – top picture) After supper, the men most likely exited Jerusalem through an eastern gate, and traveled. Jesus led His disciples past the great temple, across the Kidron Valley, and up the western slope of the Mount of Olives to a familiar retreat. Although John does not name the place, we know from Matthew 26:36 and Mark 14:32 that the garden was called Gethsemane.   —18:2–3— (Bulletin – bottom picture) Their destination was their customary retreat (18:2), a walled garden on the Mount of Olives, perhaps on the western slope overlooking the Holy City. The other Gospels tell us that He went there to pray and to prepare Himself for the awful ordeal He was about to endure (Matt. 26:36–46; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–46). John’s readers knew this part of the story well, so he probably didn’t see any added benefit to including the details in his narrative.   John completely leaves out the details of Jesus’s prayer and the disciples' failure to stay awake. According to Matthew, Jesus prayed for approximately three hours (Matt. 26:40, 42, 44). When Jesus finished praying, Judas arrived with a small army of Roman soldiers and temple guards. At the time of Jesus,/ a Roman “cohort” consisted of 480 fighting men, /not including officers and support personnel. The fact that they came with lanterns and torches tells us the mountain was shrouded in darkness, perhaps around three or four in the morning.   Since there are several olive groves with gardens on the Mount of Olives, they never would have known His whereabouts were it not for Judas. The temple officials had tried to seize Jesus on several other occasions, but He eluded their grasp in the temple, or multitudes of witnesses discouraged His would-be abductors, or He kept His movements a secret. However, they could seize Him privately once they found an inside man willing to betray Jesus.   Had they been successful earlier, the temple authorities might have simply ambushed and murdered Jesus, and few would have noticed Him missing. But just days earlier, Jesus had entered the city with multitudes shouting, “King of Israel!” and “Hosanna!” which means “Save [us] now!” To murder Him would implicate them in wrongdoing and turn Jesus into a martyr. He had become too popular. So now they would first need to discredit Him and turn the commoner against Him. A carefully chosen accusation and the appearance of correctness would turn the public to their side against Jesus. The scheme had the added benefit of solidifying the Sadducees’ hold on political power. Caiaphas saw killing Jesus as a means of demonstrating goodwill toward Rome, saying in effect, “See how well we keep the peace? You can trust us to keep a lid on Jewish uprisings!” (John 11:49–51; 18:14). —18:4–9— The soldiers undoubtedly surrounded the garden perimeter wall to prevent any escaping, but Jesus wasn’t running; He knew they were coming for Him long before they arrived. He called into the darkness the simple question,  “Who is it you want?” When the commander answered, “Jesus the Nazarene,” the Lord confirmed who he was with the divine proclamation, “I am he!”  At this, the soldiers “drew back and fell to the ground” (18:6). John rarely includes details unless they have theological significance. Jesus again employed the highly significant self-designation egō eimi, “I AM” (4:26; 8:24, 28, 58; 13:19; cf. Exod. 3:14). He used this culturally and biblically loaded terminology to identify Himself as deity. John then uses “drew back and fell to the ground” to describe the men’s response, which is also culturally and biblically significant. At Gethsemane, the enemies of God shrank before the presence of the Almighty, foreshadowing their posture at the end of time (Isa. 45:23; Rom. 14:11; Phil. 2:10–11; Rev. 3:9). Romans 14:11 For the Scriptures say, “‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, ‘every knee will bend to me, and every tongue will declare allegiance to God.’” The initial reaction of the cohort offers a little comic relief: Six hundred well-armed men terrified of a single rabbi and his eleven followers; only one that we know of carried a weapon!   Jesus, always the selfless leader, asked for the release of His disciples, which John noted was a literal fulfillment of the Lord’s earlier statement to the Father (John 17:12; see also 6:39).   —18:10–11— Peter had earlier stated that he was ready to fight with the Lord and give his life (13:37; cf. Matt. 26:33–35). He obviously meant what he said. He was ready to wield a metal sword to help Jesus take the throne by force and then institute His new kingdom. One man with a short sword against six hundred! That’s Peter. Brash, impulsive, passionate, brave … but earthly-minded. John includes the detail that Peter cut off the right ear of the high priest’s servant, Malchus (“kingly one”).   Because John typically includes details for their symbolic value, it’s likely Peter aimed for the man’s right ear for the express purpose of leaving an insulting injury. Malchus was an emissary of the high priest, representing his authority. Cutting off an ear or a nose was considered particularly humiliating, especially since Jews barred maimed individuals from serving in the temple. Moreover, Jewish tradition prescribed higher restitution for organs and extremities on the right side of the body.   Jesus rebuked Peter for behaving like a nonbeliever and failing to see God's plan unfolding, despite Jesus’ many predictions. The “cup” of which Jesus spoke was a well-known expression for His crucifixion in the other Gospels (Matt. 20:22; 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42).   —18:12–14— To arrest Jesus, the soldiers undoubtedly followed Roman procedure by pulling His arms behind His back, placing them in irons, or binding them tightly with rope. (Chains and collar) We may assume He remained tied with a noose around His neck throughout His ordeal. Then Jesus was taken to the highest Jewish power in Israel, Annas. Although Caiaphas officially held the office of the high priest, many recognized his father-in-law, Annas, as the true authority in Jerusalem and the final voice in every matter concerning the temple.   —18:15–18— The disciples scattered immediately after the arrest in the garden (Matt. 26:56); however, Peter and John returned to follow the Lord’s movements from a safe distance. When the soldiers had taken Jesus to the house or residence of Annas—around three or four o’clock in the morning—John was permitted inside. His acquaintance with Annas most likely came from his family’s wealth and social status.   As I mentioned when we studied Jesus driving out the sellers and money changers in the Courtyard of the Gentiles, (Annus’s Bazaar), although Caiaphas was the high priest at this time, his father-in-law Annus, was the Godfather of Jerusalem. He controlled the priesthood, and its lucrative trading. During the first century, the office of high priest in Israel was essentially the same as king; however, his appointment had to be approved by Rome, and he governed under the authority of the Roman ruler. Though Caiaphas officially held the office, many recognized his father-in-law, Annas, as the true power behind the throne. A casual observer at the second trial might have been impressed by the religious zeal of Caiaphas, who “tore his robes and said, ‘He has blasphemed!’ ” (Matt. 26:65) when Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. In reality, though, he and Annas wanted Jesus dead for two other reasons. First, He dared to defy the high priest’s sovereign control over the temple. Second—and more importantly—He was terrible for business.   As Peter entered the great hall of Annas’s residence for the first of six trials, the doorkeeper recognized him as a disciple. His denial of Jesus would be the first of three the Lord had predicted earlier (John 13:38).   Take note of John’s detail concerning the fire. In the NLT, it is described as a charcoal fire. John includes this seemingly insignificant feature to imprint on the readers’ minds the image of Peter looking across a fire and denying His Master. Later, John will recall this image around another charcoal fire where Jesus was cooking fish for breakfast (21:9).   —18:19–21— The Six Trial of Jesus (Bulletin Insert) Some experts have called into question the historicity of the Gospel accounts, noting that the trials of Jesus before the Jewish authorities didn’t fit the established protocol. However, the illegality of the trials is precisely the point in the Gospels. Jewish tradition carefully regulated the conduct of criminal trials, even more so than civil cases. No trial was to be held secretly or at night, and the only proper place to hear criminal cases was the “Hall of Judgment” in the temple. Furthermore, when hearing evidence, the accused could not be compelled to testify in his case. All charges had to be substantiated by multiple corroborating witnesses.   Annas broke Sanhedrin rules by asking Jesus directly about His followers and teaching, hoping to hear something incriminating. At first blush, Jesus’ response appears insolent; however, He merely pointed out the proper procedure. In a present-day American courtroom, the council for the defense might have said, “Objection! According to Mishnah: Sanhedrin 3:3–4, the accused may not be compelled to present evidence against himself; furthermore, the presiding judge may not examine a witness (or the accused).”   Jesus then called for witnesses to testify. Everything He had said and done took place in the presence of multitudes. According to Jewish custom, conflicting testimonies could not condemn the accused, only acquit him. Jesus knew that a fair polling of witnesses would either exonerate Him of all charges or cancel the false testimony of the religious leaders.   —18:22–24— Brutality was not permitted in the courtroom, yet one of the guards stepped in front of Jesus and punched His face. Jesus maintained perfect composure and responded with a reasonable request. He said, in effect, “If My objection should be overruled, state the legal precedent. I should not be punished for being right if it should be sustained.”   Having established that no one had testified against Him and that He wasn’t guilty of anything more than allowing Annas to make a fool of himself, the old high priest had nothing more to say. The object of the trial was not to discover the truth; that is why Jesus had refused to cooperate. Without another word,  Then Annas sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest. (18:24). He had hoped Jesus would make things easier by implicating Himself, but the Lord deftly applied the Sanhedrin’s own rules of jurisprudence and