John 18:39 Kommentar

Hitherto this evangelist has recorded little of the history of Christ, only so far as was requisite to introduce his discourses; but now that the time drew nigh that Jesus must die he is very particular in relating the circumstances of his sufferings, and some which the others had omitted, especially his sayings. So far were his followers from being ashamed of his cross, or endeavouring to conceal it, that this was what, both by word and writing, they were most industrious to proclaim, and gloried in it. This chapter relates, I. How Christ was arrested in the garden and surrendered himself a prisoner (Joh 18:1-12). II. How he was abused in the high priest's court, and how Peter, in the meantime, denied him (Joh 18:13-27). III. How he was prosecuted before Pilate, and examined by him, and put in election with Barabbas for the favour of the people, and lost it (Joh 18:28-40).

When Jesus had spoken these words,.... Referring either to his discourses in Joh 14:1, in which he acquaints his disciples with his approaching death; comforts them under the sorrowful apprehension of his departure from them; gives them many excellent promises for their relief, and very wholesome advice how to conduct themselves; lets them know what should befall them, and that things, however distressing for the present, would have a joyful issue: or else to his prayer in the preceding chapter, in which he had been very importunate with his Father, both for himself and his disciples; or to both of these, which is highly probable: he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron; the same with "Kidron" in Sa2 15:23; and elsewhere: it had its name, not from cedars, for not cedars but olives chiefly grew upon the mount, which was near it; and besides the name is not Greek, but Hebrew, though the Arabic version renders it, "the brook" , "of Cedar": it had its name either from the darkness of the valley in which it ran, being between high mountains, and having gardens in it, and set with trees; or from the blackness of the water through the soil that ran into it, being a kind of a common sewer, into which the Jews cast everything that was unclean and defiling; see Ch2 29:16. Particularly there was a canal which led from the altar in the temple to it, by which the blood and soil of the sacrifices were carried into it (m). This brook was but about three feet over from bank to bank, and in the summer time was quite dry, and might be walked over dry shod; and is therefore by Josephus sometimes called the brook of Kidron (n), and sometimes the valley of Kidron (o): in this valley were corn fields; for hither the sanhedrim sent their messengers to reap the sheaf of the firstfruits, which always was to be brought from a place near to Jerusalem (p); and it is very likely that willows grew by the brook, from whence they might fetch their willow branches at the feast of tabernacles; for the Jews say (q), there is a place below Jerusalem called Motza, (in the Gemara it is said to be Klamia or Colonia,) whither they went down and gathered willow branches; it seems to be the valley of Kidron, which lay on the east of Jerusalem, between that and the Mount of Olives (r); it had fields and gardens adjoining to it; see Kg2 23:4. So we read of a garden here, into which Christ immediately went, when he passed over this brook. The blood, the filth and soil of it, which so discoloured the water, as to give it the name of the Black Brook, used to be sold to the gardeners to dung their gardens with (s). It was an emblem of this world, and the darkness and filthiness of it, and of the exercises and troubles of the people of God in it, which lie in the way to the heavenly paradise and Mount of Zion, through which Christ himself went, drinking "of the brook in the way", Psa 110:7; and through which also all his disciples and followers enter into the kingdom of heaven: it may also be a figure of the dark valley of the shadow of death, through which Christ and all his members pass to the heavenly glory. And I see not why this black and unclean brook may not be a representation of the pollutions and defilements of sin; which being laid on Christ when he passed over it, made him so heavy and sore amazed in the human nature, as to desire the cup might pass from him. Once more let it be observed, that it was the brook David passed over when he fled from his son Absalom; in this David was a type of Christ, as in other things: Absalom represented the people of the Jews, who rejected the Messiah, and rebelled against him; Ahithophel, Judas, who betrayed him; and the people that went with David over it, the disciples of our Lord; only there was this difference; there was a father fleeing from a son, here a son going to meet his father's wrath; David and his people wept when they went over this brook, but so did not Christ and his disciples; the sorrowful scene to them both began afterwards in the garden. This black brook and dark valley, and it being very late at night when it was passed over, all add to that dark dispensation, that hour of darkness, which now came upon our Lord; yet he went forth over it of his own accord, willingly and cheerfully; not being forced or compelled by any; and his disciples with him, not to be partners of his sufferings, but to be witnesses of them, and to receive some knowledge and instruction from what they should see and hear: where was a garden into which he entered; and his disciples: there were no orchards nor gardens within the city of Jerusalem, but rose gardens, which were from the times of the prophets (t); all others were without; and this was a very proper place for gardens, where so much dung was near at hand. Whether this garden belonged to one of Christ's friends, is not certain; but since he often resorted hither, no doubt it was with the leave, and by the consent of the proprietor of it. However, so it was, that as the first Adam's disobedience was committed in a garden, the second. Adam's obedience to death for sin, began here; and as the sentence of death, on account of sin, was passed in a garden, it began to be executed in one. (m) Misn. Middot, c. 3. sect. 2. Meila, c. 3. sect. 3. & Bartenora in ib. Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Zebachim, c. 8. 7. & Temura, c. 7. sect. 6. (n) Antiqu. l. 8. c. 1. sect. 5. (o) Ib. l. 9. c. 7. sect. 3. & de Bello Jud. l. 5. c. 4. sect. 2. & c. 6. sect. 1. (p) Misna Menachot, c. 10. sect. 2, 3. (q) Misna Succa, c. 4. sect. 5. (r) Jerom de locis Hebraicis, fol. 92. C. (s) Misn. Yoma, c. 5. sect 6. Maimon. Meila, c. 2. sect. 11. (t) T. Bab. Bava Kama, fol. 82. 2. Abot. R. Nathan, c. 35. Maimon. Beth Habbechira, c. 7. sect. 14. Moses Kotsensis Mitzvot Torn praecept. Aff. 164.

But ye have a custom,.... Not a law, either of God or man's, but a custom; and which was not originally observed at the feast of the passover, and perhaps was not of any long standing; but what the Roman governors, by the order of Caesar, or of their own pleasure, had introduced to ingratiate themselves into the affections of the people; and being repeated once and again, was now looked for: that I should release unto you one at the passover; which was at this time; and more than one it seems it was not customary, to release: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews? who they had said called himself so, and was so accounted by others, and which Pilate says, in a sneering, sarcastic way; though he was heartily willing to release him, and was in hopes they would have agreed to it, since nothing could be proved against him; however, he proposes it to them, and leaves it to their option.

Do not wonder that the Roman government, holding sway over the Jews who had recently become their subjects, thought it was appropriate to grant them something acceptable at the feast of the Passover. They allowed them to ask for anyone they wanted [to be freed] even though he might appear guilty of many murders. For in this way nations sometimes grant favors to those whom they have conquered, until their rule is established. Yet this custom of releasing a prisoner existed at one time among the Jews also. … Let us inquire whether anything like this may take place also in God’s judgment where the whole church may ask for any sinner to be released from the condemnation of sin especially if, while having other evil works, he is eager to do good for the church.

"What is truth?" But for the present he applieth himself to what was pressing, for he knew that this question needed time, and desired to rescue Him from the violence of the Jews. Wherefore he went out, and what said he? "I find no fault in him." Consider how prudently he acted. He said not, "Since he hath sinned, and is deserving of death, forgive him on account of the Feast"; but having first acquitted Him of all guilt, he asks them over and above, if they were not minded to dismiss Him as innocent, yet as guilty to forgive Him on account of the time. Wherefore he added, "Ye have a custom that I should release unto you one at the Passover"; then in a persuasory way, "Will ye therefore that I release the king of the Jews? Then cried they all, Not this man, but Barabbas."

(Tr. cxv) After Pilate had asked, What is truth? he remembered a custom of the Jews, of releasing one prisoner at the passover, and did not wait for Christ's answer, for fear of losing this chance of saving Him, which he much wished to do: And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews. (Tr. cxv) He could not dismiss the idea from his mind, that Jesus was King of the Jews; as if the Truth itself, whom he had just asked what it was, had inscribed it there as a title.

As I was considering and meditating in my mind how the custom arose for the Jews to ask for one man to be released to them (a robber, it might be, or a murderer), the idea occurred to me that they no longer regulated their actions altogether according to the Law, but, choosing rather to use their own customs, they fell into a decayed state of manners not altogether in agreement with the law of Moses. But while I was searching the divine Scriptures and hunting everywhere for the origin of this custom, I came on one of the divine dictates that caused me to suspect that when the Jews sought the release of a malefactor, they were, in fact, in however mistaken a way, fulfilling one of the customs of the Law. At the end of the book called Numbers we find recorded the law concerning voluntary and involuntary homicide. When the penalty in the case of premeditated murder has been clearly laid down, the book goes on to speak of involuntary homicide, and, after other remarks, makes the following declaration: “But if he stabbed him suddenly without enmity, or hurled anything on him without lying in wait or used a stone, by which a man may die, and without seeing him cast it on him, so that he died, though he was not his enemy and did not seek his harm, then the congregation shall judge between the manslayer and the avenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to the city of his refuge, to which he had fled.”Since this was the written commandment when any, as it happened, were involved in such a calamity, the Jews, when they were congregated together (and so that they might not appear altogether to neglect this enactment), sought the release of one of them. For the Law laid down that it was to be the act of the entire assembly. Since, then, they were permitted by the Law to ask for the release of a prisoner, they make this request of Pilate. For after they had once accepted the Roman yoke, from then on they were, for the most part, ruled by their laws in the administration of their affairs. We might say even further that, although it was lawful for them to put to death anyone convicted of a crime, they brought Jesus to Pilate as a criminal, saying, “It is not lawful for us to put any man to death.” For, though they alleged as a plea their purification by the sacrifice of the Passover, yet they showed themselves flatterers of Rome in entrusting to the laws of the Romans the duty that the divine commandment from heaven laid on themselves.

When he called Jesus king of the Jews, he spoke in jest and tried to abate by ridicule the anger of the furious mob. He also clearly showed that this particular accusation was brought in vain. A Roman officer would never have thought a man condemned of plotting for a kingdom and revolution against Rome worthy to be released. He bore witness, then, to Jesus’ utter innocence by the very reasons he gave for Jesus’ release.

This custom was not commanded in the law, but had been handed down by tradition from the old fathers, viz. that in remembrance of their deliverance out of Egypt, they should release a prisoner at the passover. Pilate tries to persuade them: Will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews.

It is worthy of investigation on what occasion the custom arose among the Jews of releasing one prisoner for Passover. To this one may say, first, that those who teach "as doctrines the commandments of men" (Mark 7:7) introduced very much from their own reasoning, yet did not keep the commandments of God. So too they introduced this without any rational basis, while in other matters they neglected the rites prescribed by the law. Then, one may say that in Scripture there is also found a similar legal provision, from which they could have taken occasion to introduce into custom such releases of condemned persons. For concerning involuntary murder it is written: "If someone, not out of enmity and without particular intent, causes harm to his neighbor, throws a vessel or a stone, and the fallen object strikes a passerby, and that person dies, then such a killer is involuntary. The whole synagogue (assembly) shall judge concerning this, and they shall free him from death, for he did not kill with malicious intent, but they shall place him in a city of refuge, that is, punish him with exile." From this, perhaps, as we conjecture, they took occasion and introduced such a custom of releasing one of those condemned for murderous intent. The law prescribes that this matter be conducted by the Jewish synagogue, but since the Jews were under the authority of the Romans, the right to release prisoners they also yielded to Roman governors, as now to Pilate. For he did not say "although He has sinned and is worthy of death, yet for the sake of the feast forgive Him," but first declared Him free from all guilt, and only then proposed to them His release as well. Therefore, if Jesus is released, He owes them nothing at all, for they released an innocent man. If they condemn Him, their malice will be proven by this, because they condemned an innocent man. Look: even the title "King of the Jews" has a certain meaning of its own. By this, Pilate evidently expresses that Jesus is not at all guilty, but that they accuse Him in vain, as though He were seeking kingship. For one who proclaims himself king and rises up against the dominion of the Romans, a Roman governor would not have released. Therefore, by saying "I will release the King of the Jews," Pilate declares Jesus to be utterly innocent and mocks the Jews, speaking as if to say: "The One against Whom you bring false accusations that He proclaims Himself king, the One you call an insurgent and rebel—Him I find it necessary to release, evidently because He is not such a person."

When then He says, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? he clears Jesus of all guilt, and mocks the Jews, as if to say, Him whom ye accuse of thinking Himself a King, the same I bid you release: He does no such thing.

2368 Accordingly he says, But you have a custom that I should release one man for you at the Passover. First, he offers to release Christ; secondly, the Evangelist gives the reply of the Jews. 2369 This practice was started by Pilate or some other Roman governor as a favor to the people. Wishing to free Christ using this custom Pilate said, Will you have me release for you the King of the Jews? He did not call him this as if this were a crime, but to heighten their malice. It was like saying: Even if he is the king of the Jews, which is not your role to judge, but mine, still, if you want me to, I will release him for you.

Jesus passes the brook Cedron, and goes to the garden of Gethsemane, Joh 18:1. Judas, having betrayed him, comes to the place with a troop of men to take him, Joh 18:2, Joh 18:3. Jesus addresses them, and they fall to the ground, Joh 18:4-6. He addresses them again, and Peter smites Malchus, Joh 18:7-11. They seize him and lead him away to Caiaphas, Joh 18:12-14. Peter follows to the palace of the high priest, Joh 18:15-18. The high priest questions Christ concerning his doctrine, and Jesus answers, and is smitten, Joh 18:19-23. Peter denies his Lord twice, Joh 18:24-27. Jesus is led to the judgment hall, and Pilate and the Jews converse about him, Joh 18:28-32. Pilate converses with Jesus, who informs him of the spiritual nature of his kingdom, Joh 18:33-37. Pilate returns to the Jews, and declares Christ to be innocent, Joh 18:38. He seeks to discharge him, and the Jews clamor for his condemnation, Joh 18:39, Joh 18:40.

But ye have a custom - Nothing relative to the origin or reason of this custom is known. Commentators have swam in an ocean of conjecture on this point. They have lost their labor, and made nothing out: see the notes on Mat 27:15; Luk 23:17.

BETRAYAL AND APPREHENSION OF JESUS. (Joh 18:1-13) over the brook Kedron--a deep, dark ravine, to the northeast of Jerusalem, through which flowed this small storm brook or winter torrent, and which in summer is dried up. where was a garden--at the foot of the Mount of Olives, "called Gethsemane; that is, olive press (Mat 26:30, Mat 26:36).

But ye have a custom that I should release one unto you at the passover, &c.--See on Mar 15:7-11. "On the typical import of the choice of Christ to suffer, by which Barabbas was set free, see the sixteenth chapter of Leviticus, particularly Lev 16:5-10, where the subject is the sin offering on the great day of atonement" [KRAFFT in LUTHARDT]. Next: John Chapter 19