With Dale Ratzlaff
John 18:18-27
18 Now the slaves and the officers were standing there, having made a charcoal fire, for it was cold and they were warming themselves; and Peter was also with them, standing and warming himself.
The “officers” mentioned here are the Jewish temple guards. Doubtless, after Jesus was arrested and bound, the Roman cohort had nothing further to do and went back to their station. As is often the case in the Gospel of John, we see evidence of an eyewitness. It was a cold night, and slaves and temple guards were warming themselves around a charcoal fire. During this time, the focus is moved from Peter to the questioning of Jesus.
19 The high priest then questioned Jesus about His disciples, and about His teaching.
John states that Annas, who had held the office of the high priest and was now acting as the high priest, questioned Jesus about His disciples and His teachings. However, it appears that only Jesus’ teachings are referenced. Annas was to extract information from Jesus that could be used against Him in His trial before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin.
20 Jesus answered him, “I have spoken openly to the world; I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all the Jews come together; and I spoke nothing in secret.
The way Jesus answered Annas shows that He was still protecting His disciples. “I have spoken…,” “I always taught…” “I spoke nothing…” Jesus wanted all the attention to be on His actions. He knew the fear in the hearts of the disciples, and He loved them to the end.
What did Jesus mean when He said he spoke nothing in secret? All the gospels record private conversations Jesus had with His disciples. What Jesus means is that the thrust and themes of His conversations in His teachings in the synagogues and the temple were the same He had with the Twelve. In private, Jesus explained in more depth what He taught in public. He was not preaching the good news to the multitudes, and at the same time, training His men to start an insurrection.
The interrogation by Annas was not legal for several reasons. First, Jewish law provided safeguards so that a person could not be forced into self-incrimination; but that is precisely what Annas, and later Caiaphas tried to do. Second, witnesses were to be called to establish the facts of the case. No witnesses were called by Annas. Third, Jewish law prohibited the opening of a trial at night (https://www.answers.com/Q/How_many_Jewish_Laws_where_broken_during_the_trial_of_Jesus).
Fourth, an innocent person was not to be punished. Jesus, knowing these things pointed Annas in the direction of the law. Instead of asking Jesus, the legal process would have been to bring witnesses who could give testimony.
21 “Why do you question Me? Question those who have heard what I spoke to them; they know what I said.” 22 When He had said this, one of the officers standing nearby struck Jesus, saying, “Is that the way You answer the high priest?” 23 Jesus answered him, “If I have spoken wrongly, testify of the wrong; but if rightly, why do you strike Me?”
When one of the temple guards struck Jesus, He again moved the conversation to what was legal and right. Now, not only had Annas violated Jewish law, but also the temple guard had illegally struck Jesus without a cause. Jesus had done nothing deserving such treatment and told the guard of his error in striking Jesus.
In his comments on this section, Martin Luther draws out principles that Christians can apply in similar circumstances. He references Matthew 5:39 where Jesus says,
But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also (Mt. 5:39).
You are to understand that a great difference exists between these two: holding out the other cheek and rebuking with words the one who strikes us. Christ is to suffer, and yet the word is placed into this mouth that he is to speak and to reprove what is wrong. Therefore I am to distinguish between the mouth and the hand. The mouth I am not to yield to condone the wrong, but the hand I am to hold still and not avenge myself. We are not only to allow ourselves to be struck on the cheek, but are to allow ourselves to be burned for the sake of the truth. But that I should say to the judge, ‘Dear judge, you are certainly doing right to burn me.’ This would be to betray and to deny Christ as well as that for which I did… For why should I bid knaves and ruffians do injustice? Why should I say to the thief, ‘Sir, come and steal my coat’? Christ does not ask this, but Christ says, “Whoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” This means to say, “if one wills to smite thee, do not resist, do not take revenge, do not repay evil with evil’ ( As quoted in R.C.H. Lenski, Commentary on the New Testament, John, p. 1203).
Annas now realizes that his preliminary examination has failed. Jesus has pointed out to him that he is not following the law.
24 So Annas sent Him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.
As mentioned before, Annas was the elder high priest, but Caiaphas, his son-in-law, was the official high priest at the time. John now takes us back to Peter.
25 Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. So they said to him, “You are not also one of His disciples, are you?” He denied it, and said, “I am not.”
This time it is not just one servant girl that accuses Peter of being a disciple of Christ, but several accuse him.
26 One of the slaves of the high priest, being a relative of the one whose ear Peter cut off, said, “Did I not see you in the garden with Him?”
The accusations by credible witnesses against Peter’s denial keep growing. John seems well acquainted with the people there. Now the slave of the high priest and relative of the one whose ear Peter cut off speaks up. “Did I not see you in the garden with him.” Peter recognizes that he is boxed in with the evidence against him, yet he stridently continues his lie. Once the lie has been set, then the lie takes its own power and controls the lier.
27 Peter then denied it again, and immediately a rooster crowed.
John does not mention how Peter responded to the crowing rooster. Matthew records it like this.
Then he began to curse and swear, “I do not know the man!” And immediately a rooster crowed. And Peter remembered the word which Jesus had said, “Before a rooster crows, you will deny Me three times.” And he went out and wept bitterly (Mt. 26:74-75).
Application
- The number of detailed facts in John’s account is evidence of an eyewitness who was well acquainted with what happened that night as well as his knowledge of the people involved. These include a charcoal fire; it was cold, identifying the person who struck Jesus as one of the temple guards. The detailed questioning of Peter and his blatant denial that he was a disciple of Jesus.
- The response of Jesus to Annas’ questions are, as Luther explained, a pattern for Christians to follow when falsely accused and persecuted. We are to speak the truth, but not retaliate to physical abuse.
- We must recognize our weaknesses. Peter thought he was the most loyal of the twelve. Yet, He was the very one who blatantly denied Christ.
- We must never compromise the truth to avoid adverse circumstances.
- When one lie is told, the falsehood soon takes on a life of its own and controls the liar. Avoid the first lie.
Prayer
Father, thank you for the example of Jesus and how he answered Annas. May I speak the truth and not retaliate to those who would harm me. Help me to be steadfast in my commitment to follow the truth of the gospel. Keep me from saying things that may be untrue.
In Jesus name.
- Did Paul Misunderstand Jesus? - October 24, 2024
- Why do you persist in publishing against Adventism and the Sabbath? - September 26, 2024
- We Can Trust the Bible - September 19, 2024