Betrayal in the Garden

Welcome to Halting Toward Zion, the podcast where we limp like Jacob to the Promised Land and talk about life, the universe, and everything along the way. I’m Emily Maxson here with Greg Uttinger and Rachel Voytek, and we have been walking through the ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have approached the Garden of Gethsemane. I don’t think we’ve gotten quite into the garden, or maybe to the garden or into the garden.

We did have Mark flee the garden with nothing on.

Poor John Mark.

And I think we did start talking some about the Lord praying for the cup to pass.

Yes, because we did talk about the high priestly prayer last time.

This is his prayer to his Father for himself, and I suppose that’s where we pick up.

Yes, they got to Gethsemane. Gethsemane means ‘oil press,’ an appropriate figure for what’s going to happen here. The Lord is going to be pressed beyond measure, and the fruit of his sufferings will be the work of the Holy Spirit in us eventually, but the cross lies beyond.

He drops most of the disciples someplace near the gate and he goes on a little further and leaves James, John, and Peter, his three wingmen, and tells them to pray – not for him but for themselves as they enter into temptation. Then he goes a stone’s throw further on, falls on his knees and begins to pray to his Father.

As Matthew records it he says this –

O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

This is one of the key passages in helping us to see our Lord’s true humanity. Here he looks at what he believes he understands of the Father’s will. Now, as God he knows everything. As God he decreed the end from the beginning. He knows exactly where this is leading, but in his humanity he is not omniscient and there are things that are hid from him. For instance, in the Olivet Discourse as recorded in Mark he said he didn’t know the time of his own second coming. So as he looks at the cross he’s asking, “Have I missed something? Is there another way?”

It's easy to look at this and to think, “Well, he’s afraid of dying. That’s kind of wimpy. A lot of people have died.” Yes, a lot of people have gone to certain death out of love for family or friends or religion or country. None of this is what Jesus is thinking about. He has always loved and been loved by his Father, and he knows that if he goes to the cross that fellowship is going to be broken, that in his human nature he will be cut off from the Father, from all the comfort and resources of the Spirit, and he will not only be alone but it will be God’s own wrath that will make his soul a sacrifice for sin.

This is something that no human being has ever been asked to face, except Jesus himself. So it is not surprising that he asks, “Have I missed something? Is there another way? Not that I don’t want to do whatever you want.” He’s very clear about that – “Nevertheless not as I will, but as you will.” So we have here proof and evidence of his own human will, which comes to terms with the Father’s will, not because there’s conflict but because there’s ignorance. “Did I miss something? Have I not understood the prophecies correctly? Is there something wrong here that I’ve missed?”

There is no voice from heaven. There is no audible answer. We’re told this in Luke’s gospel –

And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

Whether or not the blood vessels in his face were actually breaking and producing blood, or whether the sweat was just so heavy it looked like blood we’re not told, nor does it matter a great deal. It was intense agony.

The writer of Hebrews talks about this incident

Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared. Though he were a son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered. And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him.

Though he were a son, yet learned he obedience – it’s one thing to obey when everything is nice and cushy and there are puppy dogs and rainbows and ice cream sodas. It’s something else when you’re going to go through hell. Jesus had to face this and he did. It cost him greatly. The suffering in the garden, the struggle in prayer was intense, but at no point did he turn away from his Father’s will.

When he rises from that he comes back to his disciples, and they’re asleep. He wakes them up and says to Peter, “Could you not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation.” The ye is plural, “Pray for yourselves, each of you, and pray for one another and pray for the others out at the gate. Your souls are in danger here as well.”

I wanted to insert something on the end of the previous verse, 41, that I noted from when David was preaching through Mark. Spirit in that verse should be capitalized, that it’s not our spirit but rather the Holy Spirit is ready and able to assist us in the hour of need, but it is our flesh as one of our enemies that is weak.

Think of Romans 7 and 8, the Spirit vs the flesh. So it’s not just that we want to but we can’t or we won’t, but rather the Lord is always ready and able to help us, which is an affirmation here for Christ that even now he has the Spirit empowering him as the anointed one.

Yes, and so he continues. He’s not done praying. He goes away the second time and his words are a little different.

O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done.

The content is the same but the phrasing is different. There’s more of an acceptance of “…and if this cup is…” and of course it’s talking about his sufferings, it’s talking about the cross… “If I have to drink this to the dregs and there’s no other way, then your will be done.”

And he left them, and went away again and prayed the third time, saying the same words.

So apparently no progress beyond that. He’s still wrestling. But when he comes forth he is victorious. Though he were a son, learned he obedience. The Father saved him from dying there so that he could die a little later. He comes to his disciples and says –

Sleep on now and take your rest.

He’s actually saying, “Fine, sleep. I’ll stand guard.” But no sooner does he say this than he hears the noise of a crowd approaching.

Before we go on, can I get your feedback on a possible interpretation. I remember thinking of this when I heard a sermon not too long ago from Mark on the Garden of Gethsemane and specifically the point of Jesus asking his disciples to watch. I remember a considerable part of the sermon was spent on “What is he asking them to watch for?”

The pastor did a great job presenting the different interpretations and presenting what he thought was the best, but he didn’t address one that seemed pretty apparent to me, looking at the text. I don’t know if nobody has said it because it’s insane and wrong or if it’s just that nobody has said it yet. There’s a way out for Jesus. The Romans can’t kill him if he’s already dead.

This sounded to me like him asking his friends to be on suicide watch for him. If that is a viable interpretation, I think it’s a great encouragement to those who have been in that frame of mind of, “This is an option on the table,” and knowing that the Lord did experience that temptation along with all the other temptations that we encounter as sinful humans. Again it seemed to spring from the text as I was reading it, but I didn’t hear anybody else saying anything like that.

What did the pastor give as his preferred interpretation?

I wish I could remember. Again I was just kind of – not aghast, because that’s too strong a word, but I was just surprised. It just seemed really surface level to me that my thoughts were not mentioned, and of course my thoughts are the most important, you know. I think it might have been that he was asking them to watch for the approaching soldiers or something?

In the overall context Jesus does know the soldiers are coming. His whole thing has been to control the timing of that. His emphasis to them is, “Pray that you enter not into temptation.” He is not concerned that they be concerned about him. They’ve been told he’s going to die. They don’t know what’s going on here. He knows. He’s probably assuming the mood of “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death,” so there may be that depression and that tiredness.

We’re past midnight now. You’ve been up all day. There’s been a lot of stuff that’s happened. The master seems depressed. He’s sad and he tells us to pray for ourselves and to watch – For one another? For the guards that are coming? To be alert and awake? To be on guard? This is one of the defining moments in human history and in God’s relationship with man.

I would be slow to say that Jesus is contemplating suicide or that he wants them to consider that as a possibility. Is there a way out? Yeah. I pray to the Father and he sends me 12 legions of angels. But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled?

His own prayers do not seem to be, “Take me now. Take me without losing contact with you.” It seems simply to be, “Have I got it right? Is this your will? Is this the road?” and each time he prays he comes better to terms with it, as we’ll see as we go a little bit further. So that’s my response insofar as I have one.

He is interrupted.

Behold, the hour is at hand and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going. Behold, he is at hand that doth betray me. And while he yet spake, lo, Judas, one of the twelve, came and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and elders of the people.

Now he that betrayed him gave them a sign, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he. Hold him fast. And forthwith he came to Jesus and said, Hail, master, and kissed him. And Jesus said unto him, Friend, wherefore art thou come?

One of the other gospels says Judas betrays now the Son of Man with a kiss. And then other things happen, but a couple remarks just in passing here. One is kind of personal. “Rise, let us be going.” This is not the first time this has been said in scripture. Trivia hour – do either of you recognize the first time it was said?

Was it at the end of Judges?

Yes, because there the Levite abandons his bride. He’s ready to leave the violence and the danger, and looks down at her. She’s fallen at the threshold of the house he’s staying in, and simply says, “Rise, let us be going.” None of this, “Dear, are you alright?” It’s just, “C’mon, let’s go.”

Without noticing that she has been raped to death. She is dead.

Yes. I have used that expression a few times, and eventually my wife caught where it was from and didn’t like that I was using it, and I can understand why. But then one or both of us said, “But wait, look, these are the very words that Jesus uses.”

He takes that and turns it inside out and upside down. He’s going to protect his bride. He’s going to make sure they all get out of this not only alive, but with their souls. He’s going to make sure the shepherd loses none of his sheep, so he does use the same words but he gives them a completely different meaning.

So Judas comes, and we’re all familiar with the Judas kiss and all that. The question is why. The Pharisees and Sadducees had tried to lay hands on Jesus before, and in some very obscure passages we’re simply told that Jesus passed on or passed through. The idea seems to be that he vanished into the crowd.

Apparently, Jesus looks like everybody else. There was nothing like, “Look for the 6’5” surfer dude.” No, they were afraid that at night with all the hustle and bustle with so many people there it would happen again. They wanted to make sure they got the right guy because they had screwed this one up before.

This is actually used in a modern book where the protagonist looks so ordinary that he can’t be gotten in trouble for his crimes. It’s The Mysterious Benedict Society, which is a charming book.

I think my daughter taught that at school this year, after getting rid of other things.

I know at least one of your daughters loves the whole series because she was lending me the books.

Yes, and she finally got it into school and replaced other classic books that were boring kids to death.

Tell me it was Hans Brinker & the Silver Skates.

I believe it was, actually.

Good. Caddie Woodlawn would have been my next choice.

We already got rid of that one.

Good, I’m so glad.

My daughters tend to be iconoclasts in that regard. Although they appreciate classic literature as much as anyone, they also are willing to say, “And that book is boring. Let’s get something better.”

Switching over to John’s gospel now, John tells us something the others don’t.

Of course, typical of John.

That’s his job. First of all, the question is what’s this crowd doing there? Judas knows that this is where Jesus often goes in the nights to pray or maybe even to camp out.

And Judas also, which betrayed him, knew the place for Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with his disciples.

Probably it belongs to some other disciple that they all know, perhaps Joseph of Arimathea. If this is the site of Calvary he owns the tomb.

Judas then, having received a band of men and officers [Roman soldiers] from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.

The Romans are getting in on the action here. They’re being included. It’s a nice ‘spread the guilt around’ kind of ploy.

Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him…

At this point his Father has made clear to him where this is going.

…went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?

It’s hard to know at which point some of these things happened. It sounds like this may have happened before Judas kissed him. Anyway, Jesus confronts them. “Whom do you seek?”

They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth.

Jesus answers them, “I am [he]” – the word ‘he’ has been supplied by the translators. He speaks the divine name, Yahweh, Jehovah, I am.

And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.

So he revealed enough of his divine majesty in those two little words, or one little word probably in Greek, that they all got blasted backward on their backs and onto their behinds. They get back up eventually, or think about it, and Jesus said – “Whom seek ye?” and they said, “Jesus of Nazareth.” He answered –

I have told you that I am he. If therefore ye seek me, let these go their way, that the saying might be fulfilled which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none.

The issue seems to be more than just they’re not going to die, because in time all of these men except John will die for the gospel, will die for Jesus, but it may be that more than one of them at that point didn’t fully, or something is hanging in the balance. Anyway, Jesus is not content to let them die now, for their souls’ sake and for the church’s sake.

One of the things that David also pointed out in preaching through this is the way in which Jesus is purposeful in being alone in his suffering and his death, because there is no one that can say they contributed to what he did to accomplish for us. There are ways in which he is purposely putting them from himself, and saving them and protecting them.

Even him going forth, it could have been really easy to have them huddle around him and he could have disappeared really easily, but instead he walks forward. He basically puts himself between his people and the Roman soldiers. In all of these things his concern is always for them. He’s praying for them, he’s protecting them, he’s going on the path for them.

Yes, excellent.

I was going to add it’s two words in the Greek – igo eimi.

Yes, igo is “I” and eimi is “I am.”

The igo is unnecessary. It’s emphatic.

Is that where we get the word ego?

Yes.

Greg:

Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.

The other gospels have told us that one of the disciples drew the sword. It said earlier in the upper room that they had two swords. Apparently Peter had one of them, but Matthew, Mark, and Luke don’t tell us who drew it, for whatever reasons.

John to this point has always put himself in the shadows – “that other disciple,” “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” If he didn’t name this disciple everyone would think it was him. Maybe there’s something there, I don’t know. But he puts his finger on Peter.

A couple things here. First of all, “the servant’s name was Malchus.” John knows the name of the servant of the high priest. John is intimately familiar with the high priest’s household, which would explain how he gets Peter into the priestly compound a little bit later, and adds a few other things.

Now we remember with the context of the prayers in Gethsemane –

Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath. The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

There’s the third, and this time it’s, “Of course I’m going to drink of it.” First it was, “Is there some other way?” Then it’s, “If there’s no other way then your will be done.” And now, “Of course I’m going to drink of it. This is the path my Father has chosen.”

Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him and led him away to Annas first.

Before this is over, Jesus is going to go through six trials – three Jewish, three Roman. The first one is before Annas, then Caiaphas, then in the early wee hours of the morning the whole Sanhedrin, or as much of the Sanhedrin as the conspirators could trust to meet together, and then before Pilate, and then Pilate will send Jesus briefly to Herod, then Herod will send him back, so six trials, and it’s the sixth day of the week and the final verdict will be given on the sixth hour.

Annas was the father-in-law of Caiaphas. By Jewish tradition he was in some measure the lawful high priest, or at least the one they were used to, but the Romans controlled who got to be high priest because if you were the high priest you control the temple and you got all the revenue or at least a substantial part of all the revenue that passed through the temple. In other words, you got rich real fast, and the Romans wanted to control who had that kind of wealth flowing into their pockets. They generally didn’t let anyone stay in that office for more than a year or so.

Annas had been high priest but they had removed him and put his son-in-law Caiaphas there, but Annas is like the legendary spider in the shadows pulling all the strings. He knows about everything. He’s the mob boss. He’s the godfather. You’ve got to kiss up to him and you’ve got to get his approval. He wants to have a final say in everything. So before Jesus stands before Caiaphas, who is the high priest according to Roman law, he’s going to go stand before Annas. And Peter follows afar off. The other disciples fled, and we’ve already talked about John Mark being in the garden and running away himself.

I don’t know about you ladies, but when I when I was a little kid we heard lots of sermons and Bible lessons about, “Yes, Peter followed – afar off.” But he followed.

There’s a strategy to that, right? You’re following someone and you don’t want to be noticed. You don’t stay right on their heels. Not that Peter doesn’t have his moments of stupidity. My maiden name is Peterson and I always resonated with Peter and his moments of big mouth and all that, but I don’t think this is one of those moments, personally.

In NCIS, Jethro Gibbs has a list of rules and one of them is there are two ways to follow somebody, so that you’re never seen or so that you’re always seen. I don’t know what that means, but it comes back to me sometimes. Peter in any case picks the following afar off.

What we’re told just in passing, though, is that, “And so did another disciple.” This one doesn’t say afar off, it’s just that Peter followed and so did another disciple.

That disciple was known unto the high priest and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest.

At this point every time there’s been this unknown disciple it’s always been John, and there’s no reason to think it’s not John, except the presumption that John was just a fisherman so how would he know the high priest?

One thing is that he’s already told us he knows the name of the high priest’s servant. We also know that he has a house in Jerusalem because when he takes Mary away from the cross, he takes her to his house, so apparently his father’s fishing business was very profitable and probably provided food for the high priest’s table.

Anyway, it seems that the high priest, or at least his household, knew John well enough that John was able to say, “Hey, miss! Let that guy in. He’s with me,” and it worked and nobody questioned it. What John did we don’t know except insofar as we can assume that possibly some of this is eyewitness testimony from John. He never comes back and tells us what he was doing or anything, but he’s there someplace.

Peter is in the outer courtyard. Apparently the complex is rather large with a kind of courtyard in-between. Annas has his residence in one, then Caiaphas in the other, so they’re very close to each other.

At this point I’m simply going to read.

But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake unto her that kept the door and brought in Peter. Then saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not thou also one of this man's disciples? He saith, I am not. And the servants and officers stood there, who had made a fire of coals, for it was cold, and they warmed themselves. And Peter stood with them and warmed himself.

So on the one hand we have Peter in the outer court, and now, perhaps because John went in and saw this, or perhaps because someone there eventually came to Christ, or maybe Jesus himself after his resurrection said, “Look guys, there are some things you need to know that happened while you weren’t available,” – anyhow, this is first-hand testimony of some sort.

The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples and of his doctrine.

He’s fishing. He’s looking for something, because although they had planned this, they had not planned very well. They don’t really know what they’re going to accuse him of. They just figured, “Oh, how hard can it be? He ticked us off. Surely there’s something there.”

But they’re suddenly realizing, “We need something that’s a capital offense, something we can shove through,” even though charging someone with a capital offense and executing them the next day is strictly against Jewish law. “We also have to have something that the Romans are going to buy into, because we don’t have the authority to execute people. That’s a Roman thing.” How hard can it be to get Jesus tangled up? Have they not been listening all week? Anyway, he asked, and Jesus said –

I spake openly to the world. I ever taught in the synagogue and in the temple whither the Jews always resort, and in secret have I said nothing.

There’s no esoteric teaching, no secret knowledge that only the few initiates get to hear. It’s a public testimony, a public revelation of his Father. “Ask anybody. Everyone knows what I’ve been saying.” Whether they understood it is something else, but there are no secret words.

Why askest thou me? Ask them which heard me what I have said unto them. Behold, they know what I said. And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?

This trial is full of illegalities from beginning to end. You don’t hit somebody who is innocent, who has not been proven guilty according to the laws of God.

And they have to have a second witness. You can’t convict anyone without the second witness, and that’s what he’s demanding here, or suggesting – it depends on the tone, whether it was a demand.

But if Jesus has just committed a crime, well then – “Isn’t that what you’re looking for? Go on record. Testify that I did something evil, that I broke the law. If not, what’s this all about?” And we’re not told that the man was able to answer him.

Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest.

So when Annas was done with him and apparently not gotten anything out of him that was remotely useful, but at least had played his part as godfather of the situation, he sends him across the compound to Caiaphas, and Peter apparently moves down to that end of things.

And Simon Peter stood and warmed himself. They said therefore unto him, Art not thou also one of his disciples? He denied it and said, I am not. One of the servants of the high priest, being his kinsman whose ear Peter cut off, saith, Did not I see thee in the garden with him?

Again notice, John recognizes not only Malchus, but recognizes that this is Malchus’s cousin or nephew or something.

Peter then denied again, and immediately the cock crew.

Jesus had said, “Before the cock crows you’ll deny me three times.” We’re told, I believe it’s in Luke, that at this point Peter had a visual on Jesus. He was able to see him, and Jesus simply turned and looked at Peter and made eye contact. The message is, “I warned you. You weren’t ready. I wish I could help you. I’m kind of busy right now. Remember my words. Remember my promises,” and Peter goes out and weeps bitterly.

Going back now to Matthew – and again, if you’re going to do any kind of serious study of these passages, you need to have them all open in front of you. You effectively need four Bibles or the equivalent of computer software so you can look at them side-by-side.

And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled.

It’s not the whole Sanhedrin. They won’t get there until the morning, but enough of them are there to give the thing some kind of air of some kind of legality.

But Peter followed him afar off unto the high priest's palace, and went in and sat with the servants, to see the end.

Now the chief priests and elders and all the council sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death, but found none. Yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses and said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days.

That seems straightforward, except Mark tells us what the other witness said. The other witness said –

We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands, but neither so did their witness agree together.

Even when they paid false witnesses they couldn’t get their testimony straight. This goes all the way back to the early chapters of John, where Jesus was asked, “By what authority are you cleansing the temple?” He referred to, “Destroy this temple and I’ll raise it in three days” speaking of the temple of his body.

They still remembered that, they just didn’t remember it very well. They weren’t quite sure what he meant, but there was something in those words that were significant. They were sure of that. They just didn’t agree on what exactly he said, so this went nowhere.

The high priest now is getting desperate and frustrated. Back to Matthew 26:62 –

And the high priest arose and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? What is it which these witness against thee?

It’s a good question, whether or not Jewish law allows you to compel testimony. You certainly couldn’t compel it with torture. Torture is right out, and so presumably Jewish law was along the lines of American law, that if you are accusing somebody you can’t force them to testify against themselves. This trial is already so illegal, they don’t really care. We already have the judges paying false witnesses.

Jesus refuses to answer, going as it were as a lamb to the slaughter, “as a sheep before is dumb and opens not its mouth” –

I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

He puts Jesus under oath. “Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?” but this wasn’t a willing one. This was an imposed oath, and both the law and the book of Proverbs warns about one who hears the voice of swearing – that is the handing down of an oath - and refuses to tell the truth in the wake of such an oath.

Jesus probably didn’t have to because they shouldn’t be imposing this on an accused person. Nonetheless, he looks at this and thinks, “I am not ashamed of who I am. They’re asking. Okay.”

Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said…

It’s very similar to our “You said it,” but it’s more like, “The words are correct but you don’t know what you’re talking about. Those words did not mean what you think they mean. Yes, the words are correct. You have no idea what you’re dealing with, though. So yes, as far as I understand what in the world you’re talking about.”

Nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter [the Greek word is ‘from now on’] shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

The reference is to Daniel 7:13-14 –

Behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him.

Jesus is saying in effect, “You sit here presuming to judge me. From here on you’re going to see my judgments as I come in the clouds of wrath against Jerusalem.” Noting, “you shall see.” It’s not some future generation, not some generation 2,000 years from now or more, “You’ll all hear. You’re going to see me coming in judgment as the reigning king.” It’s a threat against Jerusalem and the temple and everything wrapped up in the Old Testament economy. All the high priest sees is that he just got what he needs.

Then the high priest rent his clothes [something else it was illegal for him to do], saying, He hath spoken blasphemy. What further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. What think ye? They answered and said, “He is guilty of death.” Then did they spit in his face and buffeted him, and others smote him with the palms of their hands saying, “Prophesy unto us, thou Christ. Who is he that smote thee?”

Again, any semblance of order breaks down. Even a condemned man is to be treated with respect, and he’s not offering any kind of insult or insolence to the court. He’s just probably standing there, and they’re buffeting him and cursing him and spitting at him.

Now backing up with Peter a little bit –

Now Peter sat without in the palace, and a damsel came unto him, saying, Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee, but he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest. And when he was gone out into the porch, another maid saw him and said unto them that were there, This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth. And again he denied with an oath [swore by Jehovah], I do not know the man. And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech bewrayeth thee.

“You have a Galilean accent, bud, so you must be with the Galilean in there.”

Then began he to curse and to swear.

That doesn’t mean he was using 4-letter words. It was like “The Lord do so to me and more also if I have ever…” while making the appropriate hand gestures across his throat or abdomen or whatever.

I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew. And Peter remembered the word of Jesus which said unto him, Before the cock crows, thou shalt deny me thrice, and he went out, and wept bitterly.

When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death.

So this skeleton version of the Sanhedrin has already decided that Jesus is guilty of blasphemy. As far as they’re concerned, that’s going to be the charge. They still are not thinking very well. They should know that that’s not going to go anywhere with the Roman governor, especially if you ask for details, but they haven’t thought that far.

The next step is to get the whole Sanhedrin together. Apparently at least two people were missing – Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, but they got together everyone they could trust. They waited until the sun was peeking over the horizon because any capital sentence given before sun-up was invalid by legal definition, so they do it again. They just rush this one through. “We’ve already decided. Everyone vote.” So they decided as a body to put him to death.

And when they had bound him, they led him away and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor.

And so we come to the end of the Jewish trials – one before Annas, one before Caiaphas, and one before the whole Sanhedrin – and their hatred for Jesus is obvious. Their contempt of the law is obvious. Their desire to preserve their own status and position is obvious. Their envy against Christ is obvious. Even Pilate will figure that one out. What’s not obvious is how in the world they’re going to get this through a Roman trial.

Yes, what have they found him guilty of? So far it’s building the temple, the true temple of God, being the sinless Christ, and being the Son of Man promised in Daniel.

So once they get there they don’t have a slam-dunk case, and that’s what we’ll pick up with next time, and find out how in the world are they going to make this thing work?

That’s a good point to stop for tonight, so we will pick up here next week. Before we go, let’s leave some recommendations for our listeners. I went first last time so I’m not going to go first this time.

I will recommend, in light of things that are coming, Josh McDowell’s little book The Resurrection Factor. Josh McDowell is a Godly Christian leader who has done a great many good things. He is an evidentialist, which in case you don’t know means that he relies heavily on historical evidence to show that the gospel’s interpretation of what happened is the only rational one. There are problems with that.

Using historical methods of proof – not that evidence is wrong, but that the standards that are set up in academia are not the word of God.

Yes, they’re not the word of God, and a lot of things are easier to say, “Well, you’ve given us a choice of either this incredible coincidence, this incredible thing that could not happen, or the Bible is true. We’re going with the impossible because of Sherlock Holmes or whatever.” When the impossible is ruled out, which would be resurrection from the dead, then whatever is left – somewhere in there there’s got to be a solution. He doesn’t come to terms with that as well as he should.

Having said that, he’s a good simple writer, very energetic, and he has done his homework. He puts together a lot of the things that went into the trial, that went into what Jesus suffered, finally into the crucifixion, into his burial and the historical facts as far as we have them from the gospels surrounding the resurrection, and the testimony of other historical sources.

It is worth reading, even though I think there’s a flaw in his method. That does not mean there’s not much you can learn from it, and it’s a fairly short book with a lot of good historical citations. That’s Josh McDowell and The Resurrection Factor.

I’m going to recommend a YouTube channel called The Reformed Mythologist. I know I have referenced Nate Morgan Locke’s work before. He did the Popcorn Parenting podcast with James Cary some time ago. A lot of that content has migrated to the Reformed Mythologist channel.

I actually got a shout-out from him. He read one of my comments in his videos. I was out at coffee today and our friend Rebekah sent me a message, “Did you see this video from Reformed Mythologist?” and I was like, “No,” and she sends me a time stamp. I’m like, “Oh no.” He said, “I have a nice little comment here from Emily Maxson about Jane Eyre” and I felt very flattered.

He talks about biblical imagery and stories a lot. I was talking with another one of our friends recently about a Christian conservative commentator who was noting that Disney princesses and heroes tend to have dead parents, and the insinuation was kind of like that this is some kind of anti-family propaganda. Our friend and I were like, “Maybe that’s because our first parents died. There might be some reason that the parents are dead in all these stories.”

I was actually going to go for another possibility. If the parents are alive, they’re going to solve the kid’s problem. You can’t have the kids going out and adventuring as kids if there are parents there. The parents will send the kids to their room and the parents will go deal with the problem.

I’ve talked with David Farschman about this in terms of role-playing scenarios. “Why are all my characters orphans?” “Because otherwise your parents would be solving this for you.” But I think you have a good point there.

For another angle on the whole fairy tale imagery thing, I do recommend Reformed Mythologist because he’s got the biblical imagery angle. We had reached out to him a long time ago to talk about maybe doing a collab about Beauty and the Beast or something, and then I had a baby and our scheduling was all out of whack so we never made that happen. But that should not stop anyone from enjoying his channel.

Very nice. My recommendation is maybe a little more general, which is to think about books that you have read before and re-read some of them, particularly novels. Both David and I have been re-reading novels that we hadn’t read in a while. I’m reading an Agatha Christie mystery and I’ve forgotten enough of it that while I know the solution I don’t know the path there, so it’s very enjoyable to be back in the world with characters that I know but have not got to, in a sense, visit. He's re-reading The Lord of the Rings, which is one that I think everybody should re-read every 5 or 10 years.

Or every election year. That’s my policy going forward.

Yes. There’s a lot of fun going back to stories that you actually already know, because you also find new things in them. So that’s my recommendation.

That’s a wonderful recommendation.

Thank you both so much for this conversation. It’s been a delight, as always.

A big thank you also to David, our producer and my lawfully-wedded husband. Thank you to you, Dear Listener, for being here and tuning in, especially if you support us financially. We really appreciate you keeping the show rolling, getting us that good editing software that makes David’s life so much easier.

Thank you to anyone who has shared our podcast with someone you know, either in person or on social media. We appreciate that. I said once that we never paid for advertising. Apparently, that was not quite true. We kicked like $10 into Facebook one time or something, but that’s the scale we’re on with our advertising budget, so we really appreciate you spreading the word if you enjoy the podcast. If it’s a blessing to you, I hope it will be a blessing to someone else that you know.

This is a production of Diecast Media Group. We’ll see you next time.