Why would he do such a thing? Some have suggested that Judas wasn't happy with how things were unfolding and wanted to force a conflict between the Temple authorities and Jesus—and if he could financially benefit from doing so, even better.
This might explain why Judas was so full of remorse when, instead of displaying His power and might, Jesus was arrested and condemned to death. This doesn't seem to be the outcome Judas expected. It also helps explain why Judas immediately went to return the money he took for betraying the Lord and went off to hang himself Matthew —5.
We may never know how Judas justified his betrayal, but we do know that there were other factors at work. Luke's version of Judas's treachery reads this way:. Now the Festival of Unleavened Bread, called the Passover, was approaching, and the chief priests and the teachers of the law were looking for some way to get rid of Jesus, for they were afraid of the people.
Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. And Judas went to the chief priests and the officers of the temple guard and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus.
They were delighted and agreed to give him money. He consented, and watched for an opportunity to hand Jesus over to them when no crowd was present Luke —6, emphasis added.
Luke wants us to understand that there were supernatural forces at play here. In fact, the last time we saw Satan in Luke's Gospel, he was tempting Jesus in the desert. When Jesus passed his test, Luke tells us that, "When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time" Luke As it turns out, Judas's character provided the opportunity the devil was looking for.
To add heartbreaking insult to injury, Judas brought the chief priests and guards into the garden. He had arranged a signal with them that they should arrest the man he greeted with a kiss. Jesus, knowing why Judas was there, remarked on this fact, "Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss" Luke ? Judas used this act of intimacy to entrap the Lord. When everything was said and done, Judas's reputation was lost.
The other disciples never looked back at him as a misunderstood figure who required compassion. Toward the end of John's Gospel, Jesus prays to God to protect the disciples. He makes this observation:. While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled John , emphasis added.
In the Greek, the words translated as "the one doomed to destruction" are literally "the son of destruction" or "son of lawlessness. Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction 2 Thessalonians Judas allowed himself to be used by the devil to fulfill wicked goals, and Judas will never be known as anything but a traitor.
There's no question that Peter was an integral disciple. Along with James and John, Peter was part of Jesus's inner circle. And Peter publicly recognized that Jesus was the long-awaited Messiah. So how is it that Peter ended up betraying his Lord? It starts at a dinner celebrating the Passover just before Jesus was arrested. Toward the end of the dinner, they have this exchange:. Then Jesus told them, "This very night you will all fall away on account of me, for it is written:.
Peter replied, "Even if all fall away on account of you, I never will. But Peter declared, "Even if I have to die with you, I will never disown you. As was typically the case with Peter, he leads with his heart here , refusing to entertain the idea that Jesus is right. Peter cannot imagine a situation in which he'd ever disown his Lord.
But the Scriptures must be fulfilled. When they seized him, 52 he fled naked, leaving his garment behind. There he sat with the guards and warmed himself at the fire. What do you think? Commentaries for Mark Luke Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.
But this is your hour—when darkness reigns. Peter followed at a distance. Commentaries for Luke John The other disciple, who was known to the high priest, came back, spoke to the servant girl on duty there and brought Peter in. Peter also was standing with them, warming himself. I said nothing in secret. Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me? A desire to love Jesus better and more completely is a longing to love Him as He deserves to be adored by His redeemed people.
The way to love Jesus more fully is to spend time with Him since we long to be with those we love. Let us be eager to open up the Word of Christ and be fervent in the opening of our hearts in prayer. There Jesus told them to be alert and prayerfully while He went off to pray by Himself.
When Jesus returned to them, He found the disciples sleeping. Jesus warned Peter to stay awake and pray because the spirit was willing, and the flesh was weak. Peter, despite this warning, fell asleep, and by the time the soldiers had come to arrest Jesus, it was too late to pray for the strength to endure the trial ahead. Later, after Peter was restored, he urged Christians to be alert in 1 Peter Even though all the other disciples fled Mark to his credit, Peter still followed Jesus after his arrest, at a distance Mark From the courtyard, Peter watched Jesus being falsely accused, beaten, and insulted Mark Peter was afraid Jesus would die, and now he was fearful for his life.
Peter quickly would learn he was not as courageous nor as bold as he had proclaimed, and he denied Jesus three times. As David was going across the Kidron towards the Mount of Olives, Ittai asked him where he was going and whether he could come with him, much as Peter asked Jesus where he was going and whether he could go with him. But the parallel is even stronger with the example of Hushai, whom David sent back to Jerusalem until he could return.
Similarly, Peter could not follow Jesus at that time but was of more use to his Lord there. Here Peter seems to be purposefully echoing the words of Jesus in the Discourse on the Good Shepherd see John as he affirms his willingness to die for Jesus. In the first place Peter was not really ready, as the sequel would show. And in the second Jesus was about to lay down his life for Peter. While the discussion of these words and their grammatical forms can be somewhat technical, it is important for assessing claims made regarding what Jesus may or may not have intended when he told Peter that he would deny the Savior that night.
The possibility that Jesus might have been commanding or directing Peter to deny knowing him is an attractive idea to those desiring to somehow excuse or better understand why Peter acted as he did that night.
The natural sense of the future here is a predicative future, meaning that Jesus was foreseeing or prophesying what Peter would do. Some seeking to excuse Peter, however, have wondered whether this future might, as can happen in English, have had in addition the sense of a command. This sense is, in fact, possible in some periods of Greek. Furthermore, the future imperative often follows a preceding imperative verb for example, as in Genesis rather than occurring in isolation.
Such a usage is rarer in the New Testament itself, but when it appears it is usually quoting the LXX or otherwise imitating the legal language of the Old Testament. Moreover, in the Sermon on the Mount the independent injunctions of Jesus i.
Most problematic for the future-command argument, however, is the fact that it is only a possibility in two of the four prediction accounts—and in only one of three if, in fact, Matthew is following Mark. On the other hand, neither the Lucan nor the Johannine accounts allow the verb to be a future. As a result, the future form, which can be either predicative or imperatival, appears in only two of our four Greek sources and Matthew may only be following the earlier Marcan version, leaving the future in only one of three sources.
But in the end, this grammatical possibility in two of our four texts is not conclusive, because Jesus would presumably have been speaking to Peter in Aramaic, not Greek. In other words, arguments based upon the Greek grammar in all probability only represent the understanding of what the evangelists or their sources thought Jesus meant or intended when he originally spoke in Aramaic.
Attempts to get close to what his original saying might have been are not only difficult, [38] their results sometimes end up being as ambiguous as the Greek they are trying to clarify. The imperfect in these Semitic languages can serve as both a future and an imperative, much as the Greek future can represent either futurity or in some instances a command.
Accordingly, while arguments based upon grammar remain inconclusive, they incline against the possibility that Jesus had issued a command to Peter. As Elder Jeffrey R. He then retreats from the court into the porch, presumably to get away from his accuser. At this point a rooster crows once, something that only happens in the Marcan account at this point.
This renunciation leads into the cursing and swearing katathematizein kai omnyein that Matthew, like Mark, has accompanying the third denial, when Peter once again denies knowing Jesus. The final denial, in which Peter again says that he does not know Jesus, is then in public, made with cursing and swearing that might imply a formal renunciation of his association with Jesus and even possibly numbering himself among those who curse him. While it likewise takes place in the courtyard of the high priest, all three Lucan denials take place beside the fire without Peter withdrawing to the porch.
More significantly, however, Luke differs in the order of the denials and in two cases even to whom they are made. The third denial, made to a second man allos , which is also masculine , [48] is, in fact, the softest: it is simply that he does not know what the man is talking about Luke —60 , which is the first denial in Mark and Matthew, and in Luke this denial does not include any cursing or swearing.
As expected, the Johannine fulfillment account differs considerably from the synoptic accounts. First, rather than following from a distance on his own, Peter is actually accompanied by another, unnamed disciple who is known to the high priest and manages to get admission for both of them to his palace John — This other disciple is frequently identified with the main source and possible author of the Gospel, the figure of the Beloved Disciple, who has been traditionally identified with John himself.
0コメント