The final four chapters centre on Jesus Christ; He is seen as fully in charge of each development. Certain events, described in the other gospels, are omitted here, or simply referred to. In particular, references to the disciples are omitted;
- before the last supper, there is no mention of the disciples fetching the donkey, or preparing the room, or arguing about greatness;
- at the last supper itself, there are no references to Christ's body and blood;
- after the supper, there is no description of the Gethsemane prayer and of the disciples sleeping.
Christ bore the burdens alone; the burden of preparing the disciples, and the burden of men's scorn. He went where others could not follow (13.36).
The other gospels do, of course, fit in with these things, there being no contradiction between them.
v1: Jesus crossed over the Kidron valley into Gethsemane. Jesus prayed before entering the garden (ch 17), as well as in the garden.
v2: Jesus' plans were open. He went to a place where He often prayed. There was no deceit, no fear.
v3: Judas, having gone out at night (13.30) now betrayed Jesus at night. Here his true loyalty was seen, as he stood with Christ's enemies.
v4-5: The events did not surprise Jesus. He had predicted that He would be betrayed and arrested, and doubtless He knew when and where.
v6: Even in the darkness, Jesus authority had to be recognised, "every knee must bow" whether in faith or in fear. Here was authority absent in any other religious leader.
v7-9: Even in His darkest hour, Christ maintained a concern for His disciples, making sure they were kept safe. In our trials, we often struggle to consider others.
v10-11: Peter's willingness to help was met with a mild rebuke from the Lord. He was on the way to the cross, and that had to happen. Even if all the disciples were armed, it is hard to see them fighting off a band of soldiers.
Jesus had a cup of suffering to drink, and that was at Calvary.
v12-14: See 11.49-53, where Caiaphas prophesied Jesus' death for the people. Jesus' first trial was before the Sanhedrin, apparently convened late at night just before the Passover, see v28.
v15-16: The "other disciple" was almost certainly John. As usual, he does not mention his own name; 13.23; 21.20.
v17-18: Peter's first denial was before a servant girl. He denied his Lord before ordinary people; had he been brought before the religious leaders, he would have boldly defended Jesus. Our witness should be more open before ordinary people.
v19-21: The high priest began by a general question about Jesus' teaching. Since Jesus had taught openly to the people, he could have asked the people.
v22-24: One of the officials took this answer as an affront, and assaulted Jesus. His own response was clear, "If I said something wrong" ('If I have spoken evil'); to which there was no response. No man could truly accuse Jesus of speaking evil things. This is significant, for His enemies had diligently sought such an accusation against Him.
Contrast Acts 23.5, where Paul apologised for criticising the high priest; Christ had no need to.
The reference to two high priests, Annas and Caiaphas, follows from the time of Samuel and David, when the two lines of high priests began.
v25-27: John records Peter's second and third denials. He knew that the third denial was before a relative of the high priest, such was his detailed knowledge.
v28-29: The custom was that animals to be sacrificed were examined in early morning before being offered. So, Caiaphas unwittingly fulfilled this, bringing Christ for examination. The lamb was being brought to be slaughtered; see Is 53.7.
The Jews' hypocrisy; they avoided the defilement of entering the Praetorium, yet ignorant of the defilement in their own hearts. This required Pilate to come out to speak with them, before returning to question Jesus.
v30: Their accusation was that Jesus was a criminal, an evil-doer.
v31-32: Under the Roman authority, the Jews could not put Jesus to death. They therefore had to find an accusation by which the Romans would condemn Him to death. Jesus' manner of death had to be crucifixion, not stoning; in fulfilment of the Scriptures.
v33-35: Pilate was hopelessly out of his depth. He had little understanding of Jewish ways; he had no grasp of the significance of the prisoner before him.
v36: Jesus was never subject to any earthly court, or human judgment. He chose to make Himself subject to them, being willing to undergo the indignity of this ill-treatment.
'His meaning could only have been that He held a conception of authority, that is, power in the political sense, whch was essentially "other" than that which Pilate held.' (Jesus and the Gospel in Africa, page 103) - see also 19.8.
Some argue that wars are frequently triggered by 'religion.' David Devenish (Demolishing Strongholds) points out; 'the far worse record of the atheistic rulers of the twentieth century: Hitler, Stalin, and Mao alone have cuased unprecedented human suffering and death through wars and appalling abuses of human rights and by their oppressive regimes.'
v37: Jesus the king, and Jesus the truth.
v38-39: Pilate recognised Jesus' innocence, and suspected the high priests' scheme. He therefore offered to have Jesus released, as his custom was.
v40: The high priests' preference was Barabbas, a robber and murderer.