Luke Chapter 22

Luke 22:1-2Matthew 26:1-5; Mark 14:1f.

The end approaches, with all its solemn and momentous issues, which our Evangelist relates after his wonted manner, adhering to moral connection rather than illustrating dispensational change, or the series of facts in His ministry, or the glory of His person.

Luke 22:3-6.

Matthew 26:14-16; Mark 14:10f.

"Now the feast of unleavened [bread] which [is] called passover was drawing nigh,528 and the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how they might kill him, for they were afraid of the people. And Satan entered into Judas Who is called* Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve; and he went away and spoke with the chief priests and captains529 as to how he should deliver him up to them. And they rejoiced and engaged to give him money; and he agreed fully,530 Was seeking an opportunity to deliver him up to them away from [the] crowd." When the will is thus engaged on the one side and on the other nearness to the Lord was enjoyed without self-judgment, nay, in conscious hypocrisy and the habitual yielding to covetousness; Satan readily found means to, effect his own designs, as a liar and murderer, against the Son of God. Yet how reassuring it is to observe that both man and the devil were powerless till the due moment came for the execution of God's purposes, which their malice even then only subserved, unconsciously and in a way which they counted most sure to hinder and nullify them. But He catcheth the wise in their own craftiness.

*"Called": so BDLX, 69, Memph. Arm. "Surnamed" is found in ACPR, etc., Syrsin.

It may be well here to note that the English Version misleads if it be inferred from verse 3 that it was at this time Satan entered into Judas; for we know from John 13:27 that it was only after the sop, the latter Gospel also distinguishing this full action of the enemy from the earlier occasion when he had put it into the betrayer's heart. The truth is that Luke has no expression of time here, using only a particle of transition, and therefore contents himself with the broad fact without entering into the detail of its successive stages, which found their fitting place with him whose task of love was to linger on the person of the Lord.

Luke 22:7-23.

Matthew 26:17-29; Mark 14:12-25.

"And the day of unleavened [bread]"' came, in which the passover was to be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare the passover for us, that we may eat. But they said to him, Where wilt thou that we prepare? And he said to them, Behold when ye have entered into the city, a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; 532 follow him into the house where he goeth in; and ye shall say to the master of the house, The Teacher saith to thee, Where is the guest-chamber where I may eat the passover with my disciples? And he will show you a large upper room furnished; there make ready. And they went away and found as he had said to them; and they prepared the Passover."533 There is no ground of difficulty here for him who believes the Word of God. He who beforehand could describe thus minutely the person, place, time, and circumstances was in communion with the Divine power and grace which controlled the heart of the Jewish householder, even though a stranger hitherto, and made him heartily acquiesce in the Lord's using it for the paschal feast with His disciples. That God should thus order all in honour of His Son for the last Passover seems to me beautifully in keeping as a testimony in Jerusalem where the religious chiefs, and even a disciple, with the mass were hardening themselves to their destruction in His rejection and death.

"And when the hour was come, he took his place, and the* apostles with him.534 And he said to them, With desire I desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer, for I say unto you that I will not any more† at all eat it until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And having received a‡ cup, he gave thanks and said, Take this and divide it among yourselves; for I say unto you, I will in no wise drink 535 henceforth§ of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God 136 come." What an expression of tender love for the disciples! For the last time He would eat it with them, not at all more. As to the cup of the Passover,537 they were to take and divide it among themselves, not He with them. The Passover was to be fulfilled in the kingdom of God; and of the fruit of the vine He would in no wise drink henceforth till the kingdom of God come. It is the sign of the passing away of the old system.

*Before "apostles" T.R. has "twelve," from ACEPRΔ, etc., Amiat. Memph. Edd. omit, after BD, Syrsin Old Lat.

†"Not . . . any more" (οὐκέτι): so Weiss and Blass, after Ccorr DP, etc., Syrrcu sin Aeth. Arm. W. H. omit οὐκέτι after ABCpm HL. It can scarcely, however, have been added from Mark (Meyer, Weiss).

‡"A": so Edd. with BCEGH, etc., most cursives. AD, etc., have "the."

§"Henceforth": so Edd. after BDGKLMΠ, 1, Syrcu Egyptians, Arm. Omitted in AC, etc., most cursives, and Old Lat.

Next, the Lord institutes the new thing538 in a foundation sign of it. "And having taken a loaf with thanksgiving he broke and gave [it] to them, saying, This is my body which is given 539 for you;* this do in remembrance of me.540 In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup [is] the new covenant in my blood541 which is poured out for you."* It was a better deliverance on an infinitely better ground, as the cup Was the new covenant in His blood, not the old legal one guarded by penal sanction in the blood of accompanying victims. What immeasurable love breathes in "my body, Which is given for you," "the new covenant in my blood," etc.!542 It will be observed that Luke presents a more personal bearing of the Lord's words here, as in the great discourse of Luke 6. Matthew gives rather the dispensational change in consequence of a rejected Messiah.

*"Which is given for you . . . poured out for you." These words, accepted by Lachm. Tisch. Treg. and Alford, no less than by Wordsworth, as being in all uncials except D, the whole of the cursives and versions except Old Lat. and Syrcu, which last omits verse 20 (in Syrsin it is merely a question of arrangement), are on the "one cup" theory, discredited by W. H. (preceded by Dean Blakesley), Weiss and Blass. The English critics' case against this alleged "interpolation" (from 1 Corinthians 11:24f.) would be found stated in W. H., Vol. II., App., p. 63f. In defence of the title of the words to a place in Luke's text, see Scrivener, Vol. II., p. 351ff., and Expositor, March-April, 1908. See, further, note 539 in Part II. of this volume.

Luke 22: 24.543

Luke 22:25f.

Matthew 20:5-27; Mark 10:42-44.

"But, behold, the hand of him that delivereth me up [is] with me on the table; and* the Son of man indeed goeth according to that which is determined, but woe unto that man by whom he is delivered up! And they began to question together among themselves who then it could be of them who was about to do this. And there was also a strife (and emulation) among them which of them should be accounted greater. But he said to them, The kings of the nations rule over them, and they that exercise authority over them are called benefactors.544 But ye [shall] not [be] so; but let the greater among you be as the younger, and the leader as he that serveth. Luke 22:27-30. - For which [is] greater, he that is at table, or he that serveth? [Is] not he that is at table? But I am among you as he that serveth. But ye are they who have persevered with me in my temptations.545 And I appoint unto you as my Father appointed unto me, a kingdom, that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom546 and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." The Lord announces the betrayer's presence at that last feast of love. How perfect the grace which knew but never once by behaviour made known the guilty soul! How consummate the guile of him who had so long heartlessly companied with such a Master! Now when His death in all its ineffable fragrance and power for them is before Him, and as a sign little then appreciated by them, He tells out the sad secret which lay on His heart, a bitter burden He felt for him who as yet felt it not at all. And the disciples question who it could be, but none the less strive for the greater place. How humbling for the twelve, especially at such a moment in presence of Him, of the supper before them, and of the cup before Him alone! But such is flesh, in saints of God most of all offensive when allowed to work. No good thing dwells in it. Tenderly but in faithful love the Lord contrasts the way of men with that which He would cultivate and sanction in His own. The condescension of patronage is too low for saints. It is of earth for Nature's great ones. He would have them to serve as Himself. In a ruined, wretched world what can the love that seeks not its own do but serve? The greatest is he that goes down the lowest in service. It is Christ: may we be near Him! Then He turns to what they had been in view of His disposal of the Kingdom according to the Father's mind, and puts the highest value on all they had done. Matchless love surely this. which could thus interpret His calling and keeping them as their continuing with Him in His temptations ' But such is Jesus to us as to them, while in the day of glory each will have his place, yet all according to the same rich, unjealous grace.

*"And": so A, etc., Syrcu sin and Vulg. Edd. follow BDLT, Memph. "for."

Luke 22:31-34.

Matthew 26:31-35; Mark 14:27-31; John 13:36-38.

But the Lord* makes a special appeal to one while warning all of a common danger. "Simon, Simon, behold Satan has begged.547 for† you to sift as wheat, but I have besought for thee that thy faith fail not, and thou, when once turned back 548‡ establish (confirm) thy brethren.549 And he said to him, Lord, with thee I am ready to go both to prison and to death. And he said, I tell thee, Peter,550 [the] cock shall not crow today before that thou hast thrice denied that thou knowest me." Love not only brings into what itself possesses, but holds out and provides against the greatest possible strain where every appearance must condemn the object loved. Yet it was no lack of love that exposed Peter to the sin of denying his Master, but his self-confidence made shipwreck of his faithfulness. Through grace alone his faith failed not utterly. We see it not only in the tears of bitter self-reproach, but yet more in the earnest ardour after the Lord which went into the tomb whither John had outrun him. But we see the grace of the Lord, which here supplicated beforehand, still shining after all in the message to "the disciples and Peter," in His early appearing to him by himself, and in his later more than re-instatement when all his failure was traced and judged to the root. What can we express but our shame and sorrow that such is nature even in the most zealous, when put to the test, and above all when the Word of the Lord is practically slighted? If we believe not His admonition of our own weakness, we are on the point of proving its truth, perhaps to the uttermost.

*The words "And the Lord said," are in ADQ. Edd. omit, following BLT, Syrsin and Egyptian versions. A precarious omission with no more than three uncials. (B.T.)

†"Has begged for." It is a mistake that ἐξαιτέομαι means always "to have prevailed," though it sometimes bears this force. But it is often no more than begging off, or to have in one's power, as here. "Obtain by asking" (Alford) is clean contrary to the context, and, indeed, to the truth generally. (B.T.)

‡"When once turned back." The verb επιστρέφω is used both for the first turning to the Lord, and for turning back if one have wandered, as here. (B.T.) See, further, note 548 at end of this volume.

Luke 22:35-38.

The Lord now prepares the disciples for the great change at hand. He contrasts their past experience with that which was coming. "And he said to them, When I sent you without purse and wallet 551 and sandals, did ye lack anything? And they said Nothing. He said therefore to them, But now he that hath a purse [pouch], let him take [it] and likewise his wallet, and he that hath none, let him sell his garment and buy a sword. For I say unto you, that this which is written must yet* be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among lawless. [men]: for also the things concerning me have an end."552 Thus the changes to them depended on Him. Jesus was about to be given up into the hands of wicked men; the protection thrown around Him, as around them, was now to be withdrawn. Clearly this is no question of atonement, though of suffering and rejection in which others could have communion, as the apostle expressly teaches in Php 3:10. Jesus was despised and rejected of men, yea, given up to it finally of God; besides He "who knew no sin" was about to be "made sin" for us.

*"Yet": so Blass (omitting ὅτι, that), with ΔΛΠ, Syrcu Vulg. Arm. Other Edd. omit, after ABDHL, etc., 1, Memph.

Little did the disciples understand their Master. Indeed, flesh and blood can never relish suffering, more especially suffering such as His, where man proves his vileness and opposition to God to the uttermost. Even saints are slow to enter in. They necessarily feel the value of atonement; for otherwise they have no standing-place, not even a well-grounded hope of escape as sinners before God. "And they said, Lord, behold here [are] two swords. And he said to them, It is enough"553 - a correction of their thought, however mild. For had it been a question of the literal use of the sword in self-defence, two must have proved a wholly inadequate means of protection. The Lord had employed the sword, purse, and wallet as symbolic of ordinary means on which the disciples would henceforward be thrown, but certainly not to abandon personally the ground of grace in presence of evil, even to the last degree of insult and injury, on which He had insisted at the beginning of their call and charge as apostles. No more, however, is said; the true sense is left for that day when the Holy Spirit being given would lead them into all the truth. Alas! Christendom has lost the faith of the Spirit's presence as well as the certainty of the truth, into which grace alone has been leading back a feeble remnant as they wait for the return of the Lord Jesus. Truths such as this cannot be appreciated unless we go forth unto Him without the camp bearing His reproach.

Luke 22: 39-46.554.

Matthew 26:30; Mat 26:36-46; Mark 14:26; Mar 14:32-42.

But now we approach what is still more solemn and sacred ground. "And going out he proceeded according to his custom to the Mount of Olives, and the* disciples also followed him. And when he was at the place, he said to them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's throw, and, having knelt down, he prayed, saying, Father,555 if thou wilt, remove this cup from me, but then, not my will but thine be done." It was, indeed, no wonted occasion even for Him, but the awful moment of the enemy's return, who had departed for a season after his old defeat in the wilderness. But this garden was to behold an equally decisive defeat of the enemy as became the Second man, the Lord from heaven. It was no longer Satan seeking to draw away from the path of obedience by what was desirable in the world. He sought now, if he could not drag Jesus out of the path of obedience, to fill Him with alarm and to kill Him in it. But Jesus shrank from no suffering and weighed before God all that was before Him. He watched and prayed and suffered, being tempted. The disciples failed to pray and entered into temptation, so that nothing but grace delivered them.

*"The": so Edd., following ABDL, etc., Amiat. "His" (T.R.) is the reading of EQΔpm, etc., 69, Syrrcu sin pesch.

The Holy Spirit does not give us the detail of the three prayers of the Lord as in Matthew, but rather a summary of all in one. In both we see His dependence in prayer and His tried but perfect submission to the will of His Father. Here, however, we have what is characteristic of our Evangelist, both in the angelic succour which was sent Him, and in the bloody sweat that accompanied His conflict. It is well known that many Fathers, Greek and Latin, have cast a doubt upon verses 43 and 44. "And an angel appeared to him from heaven strengthening him. And being in conflict he prayed more intently, and his sweat became as clots of blood falling down upon the earth." Several of the more ancient MSS. indeed also omit them, as the Alexandrian, Vatican, and others, beside ancient versions; but they are amply verified by external witnesses, and the truth taught has the closest affinity to the line which Luke was given to take up.* The true humanity and the holy suffering of the Lord Jesus stand out here in the fullest evidence.556

*Cf. "Lectures on Gospels," p. 383f. Besides All, corrRT, and Akhmim MS., the Sinaitic Syriac omits these verses; whilst pm DFGHKLM, etc., most cursives, Syrrcu pesch hcl hier, ancient Armenian attest them, as do Old Lat. also Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Gregory Nazianzen, Jerome, Augustine, etc. After Lachmann, W. H. (see their App., p. 64ff.) and Weiss question; but Blass, after Treg. Tisch. Meyer, Alford, etc., upholds them. Cf. Scrivener, Vol. II., p. 353ff., and see note 557 in App. Their omission is explicable from lectionary arrangements.

Here again, however, observe that the suffering differs essentially from atonement. For not only does He speak out of the full consciousness of His relationship with the Father but He has also the angelic help which would have been wholly out of season when forsaken of God because of sin-bearing. All was most real. It is not meant that His sweat fell merely like great drops of blood, but that it became this as it were; that is, the sweat was so tinged with blood which exuded from Him in His conflict that it might have seemed pure blood.557 "And rising up from his prayer, he came to the* disciples and found them sleeping from grief. And he said to them, Why sleep558 ye? Rise up and pray that ye enter not into temptation." We shall see presently the result of their sleeping instead of praying. Not only did the absent Judas betray, but all forsook, and even the most prominent of the three chosen to be nearest the Lord denied Him with oaths, denied Him thrice before the cock crew. They entered into temptation and utterly failed. We can only be kept by watching and prayer. Evil is not judged aright save in the presence of God. There the light detects and His grace is sufficient, even for us. But man has no strength against Satan. It must be His light and His grace; without the power of His might we enter only to dishonour our Master, Leaning upon Him, the weakest of saints is more than conqueror. Thus only is the devil resisted and he flees from us.

*"The": so Edd. after BDQRT, Arm. The "his" of T.R. (Elzevir) came from 1, Latt. Syrrcu sin Memph. Aeth.

Luke 22:47-53.

Matt. 25: 47-56; Mark 14:43-50; John 18:3-11.

"As* He was yet speaking, behold, a crowd and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went on before them and drew near to Jesus to kiss him. And Jesus said to him, Judas, deliverest thou up the Son of man with a kiss?"558a How gracious, but how terrible the words of Jesus to him who knew his Master and his Master's haunts enough to deliver Him thus to His enemies! "And those around him, seeing what was about to happen, said,† Lord, shall we smite with [the] sword? And a certain one from among them smote the bondman of the high priest and took off his right ear.558b And Jesus answering said, Suffer thus far; and having touched the ear, he healed him."‡ He could still work miraculously by the Holy Ghost. Indeed, we know from John 18: that He could and did cast them all down to the ground by the power of His name; but here it is the witness of His grace to man, even at such a moment, rather than of His own personal majesty, which was about to be east off and to suffer on the cross. Each incident is of the deepest interest and eminently suited to the Gospel in which it occurs.

*"As," etc.: DE, etc., have "But as." Edd., however, reject the δέ, following ABLRTX, etc., 1, 69, Amiat.

†"Said": AERΔ, etc., 1, 69, Syrr. Amiat. add "to him," which Edd. omit, according to BLTX, Memph.

‡Blass follows D: "And stretching forth his hand, he touched him, and his ear was restored."

"And Jesus said to the chief priests559 and captains of the temple and elders, who had come against him, Have ye come out as against* a robber with swords and sticks? When I was day by day with you in the temple, ye did not stretch out your hands against me; but this is your hour and the power of darkness." God was giving up the Lord Jesus to men before He was forsaken in accomplishing the work of redemption.

*"Against": so most Edd., with BDL, etc. Tisch.: "to," as GH, etc.

Luke 22: 54-62.560

Matthew 26:57f., 69-75; Mark 14:53f., 66-72; John 18:12-18; Joh 18:25-27.

"And having apprehended him, they led and introduced* [him]† into the house of the high priest. And Peter followed afar off. And having lit a fire in the midst of the court, and sat down together, Peter sat among them. And a certain maid, having seen him sitting by the light fixed her eyes upon him and said, And this [man] was with him. But be denied [him],‡ saying, Woman, I do not know him. And after a short while another561 seeing him, said, And thou art of them. But Peter said, Man, I am not. And after the lapse of about one hour, another stoutly maintained, saying, In truth this [man] also was with him, for he is a Galilean too. But Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he was yet speaking, a§ cock crew. And the Lord turned round and looked upon Peter562 and Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he said to him, Before [the] cock crows today,"" thou shalt deny me thrice. And Peter, going forth without, wept "bitterly."¶ We see here the worthlessness of natural courage in the saint and the weakness of one's own love when relied on. Only God can sustain, and this, too, in exercised distrust of self, when the Word is received by faith and the heart abides in dependence on God. A servant-girl frightens an apostle, and the first false step involves others deeper and farther, if possible, from God; for what is our consistency if we be not consistent with the Cross? The unbelief which refuses the humiliating warning of the Lord works out the accomplishment of His Word. But the Lord never fails, and as He had not in faithfulness beforehand, so, after the fact, He does not hide His face from Peter, but turns round and looks at him. His own sufferings did not preoccupy the Lord to the extent of forgetting Peter, and Peter's guilt and shame in no way turned the Lord from him, but rather drew His look towards him. "and Peter remembered the word of the Lord," and his sorrow worked repentance, though the Lord carried it farther still, as we know, after He rose from the dead; for the root of evil must be judged as well as the fruit, if we are to be fully blessed and would know how to hell,) others, as Peter was called to do and did.

*"introduced": so most of the authorities. Blass follows DT, Syrrcu sin, and some Old Lat. with Aeth. in the omission of εἰσήγαγον.

†["Him"]: so EXΔ, etc., 69, Memph. Edd. omit, as ABDKLM, etc., Old Lat.

‡["Him"]: so ADpm EGH, etc., most cursives (69), Amiat. Edd. omit, as BKLM, etc., Syrrcu sin pesch, most Old Lat. and the Egyptian versions.

§"A": so all authorities, except a few of the minuscules, Syrsin and Sah., which have "the."

"""Today": so most Edd., after BKLMT, Syrsin Aeth. Blass omits, as ADΓΔΛ, nearly all cursives, and copies of Old Lat. Syrcu Arm.

¶Verse 62, which W. H. bracket, Blass omits entirely because the verse is absent from some copies of the Old Lat. and he supposes was inserted from Matthew. It is in Syrsin as in all Greek MS., "Peter": so A, etc., Syrr. Vulg. Aeth. Edd. omit, as BDKLM, etc., Syrrcu sin Memph. Arm.

Luke 22:63-65.

Matthew 26:67f.; Mark 14:65.

Then follows the sad tale of men's insolence and blasphemy towards the Lord. "And the men who held him,* mocked him, beating him, and covering him up,† asked him, saying, Prophesy who is it that struck thee? And many other things they were saying blasphemously to Him." Such was the rude evil of the underlings. The chiefs might act with more seeming decorum, but with no less unbelief and scorn of His claims.

Luke 22: 66-71.564

Matthew 26:59-66; Mark 14:55-64.

"And when it was day, the elderhood of the people, both chief priests and scribes, were gathered together, and led him into their‡ council, saying, If thou art the Christ,565 tell us. And he said to them, If I tell you, you will not at all believe; and if I should ask, ye would not at all answer.§ But"" henceforth shall the Son of Man be sitting on the right hand of the power of God. And they all said, Thou, then, art the Son of God? And He said to them, Ye, say that I am. And they said, What need have we of witness further? For we have ourselves heard from his mouth." There was lying testimony brought against Jesus; but it failed. He was condemned for the truth, which man believed not. He declined to speak of His Messianic dignity, which was already rejected by man, and was about to be replaced by His position as Son of man on the right hand of the power of God. If they all infer that He is the Son of God, say it or gainsay it whoever will, He acknowledges and denies not, but acknowledges that truth which is eternal life to every believer.

*"Him": so Edd., with BDLM, etc., Syrsin Old Lat. Memph. "Jesus" is the reading of AEXΔ, etc., 1, 69, the other Syrr.

†After "covering him up," AXΓΔΛ, etc., most cursives, Amiat., add "smote his face and," which Edd. omit, after BKLM, Syrrcu sin and Egyptians.

‡After "their," ΔΛ, 1, 69, add "own," which is omitted by Edd. as not in BDLT, etc.

§AD, all later uncials, most cursives. Syrr. (including sin.) Old Lat. here add "nor let me go," which Edd. omit, as BLT, Memph.

"""But": so Edd. with ABDLTX, Old Lat. ED, etc., omit. Syrrcu sin have "for."

NOTES ON THE TWENTY-SECOND CHAPTER.

528Luke 22:1. - "Which is called Passover." Cf. Joseph. "Antiqq.," xiv. 2, 1, from which we learn that the name was by this time applied to the whole season. The Paschal Feast and the Feast of Unleavened Bread had long been blended. Cf. Leviticus 23:5 f. and Numbers 28:16 f., where they are distinguished, with Deuteronomy 16:1; Deu 16:3 in which they coalesce, as here.

The words of Mark, "after two days," and "not on the feast day" (14: 16), Wellhausen considers Luke left out in order to avoid contradiction with that which had actually happened. The simple truth of the matter, whether critics will recognize it or not, is that the plan of the Jewish leaders was frustrated.

The "difficulties" felt in connection with the Evangelists' several accounts of this celebration - in particular, the circumstance that the Lord observed the Passover before the Judean conventional hour - have been discussed in note 142 on Mark, and in notes 336, 346 on John. Here may be added that the different ways of determining the new moon, of which Khodadad in his pamphlet speaks (p. 21), occasioned letters of Gamaliel the Elder to the Galileans, referred to in "Tosefta: Sanhedrin," chapter ii. Cf. notes 531, 533.

529Luke 22:4. - "Captains." For these στρατηγοί, cf. John 18:12; and see Schürer, 11. i. 265, or Edersheim, "The Temple, etc.," p. 389 ff.

530Luke 22:6. - "Agreed fully." Field, "fully consented."

531Luke 22:7. - "The day of unleavened [bread]." Provision of ἄζυμα (Exodus 23:15) began, as we should say, with 6 p.m. (cf. verse 14) on the Thursday, when the 14th Nisan set in (cf. Matthew 26:17; Mark 14:12), i.e., the Eastern Friday eve, but our Thursday night. The theory, occasioned by comparison with the Fourth Gospel, that the Lord anticipated the ceremony by one whole day (Neander, Godet, Westcott, etc.) seems to be already excluded by the Evangelist's words "the day . . . in which the passover had to be killed." It was simply the darkness of one half of the technical day that divided the Lord's celebration from that of the Jerusalemites in general.

532Luke 22:10. - As to such an unwonted sight, see Schor, p. 43.

533Luke 22:13. - "Prepared the passover," i.e., the initial Paschal meal. This preparation must not be confounded with the παρασκεύη, a word of different formation, spoken of in Luke 23:54 in closest connection with the Sabbath, although it was a name given to the whole time between one sunset and the next succeeding in each recurring week. Cf. note concerned on chapter 23.

534Luke 22:14. - The disciples, observe, did not on this notable occasion partake of the Paschal feast with their families, "showing how they had forsaken all for Christ" (Carr).

535Luke 22:16. - "I will in no wise drink." Apparently, so far as regards the present occasion, because the cup of which He must drink is to be that of God's wrath against sin, in contrast with the joy symbolized by the ritual of the Passover. This will be celebrated throughout the Millennium (Ezekiel 45:21).

Burkitt would extend the Lord's words here into meaning that the meal described was not a Passover at all (The Journal of Theological Studies, July, 1908, pp. 569-571), thus understanding the opening words, of deep Hebrew colouring, in a scarcely natural way. Although Harnack and Ramsay have lent their support to this idea (Journal of Theological Literature, 1909, col. 49 f.), writers of the most opposite schools combine in treating it as a Passover. Such it was at any rate in the sense of the Mosaic ordinance. Our Lord, however, seems not to have partaken of any cup, as an accretion (see Stuart, p. 254 ff.)

536 The "Kingdom of God," the Father's Kingdom, Matthew 26:29, or "Kingdom of Heaven," yet future. Cf. Revelation 19:9.

537Luke 22:17 - "A cup," viz., the first of four used in the historical ceremony (Khodadad, p. 27). Some suppose that for the second of such cups was substituted that used in the institution of the Supper (Carr). Whilst the Lord is said by Luke to have "received" (δεξάμενος) the Passover cup (cf. note 535), Matthew speaks of His spontaneously having "taken" (λαβών) - used in institution of His Supper.

538Luke 22:19 f. - The LORD'S SUPPER, κυριακὸν δεῖπνον (1 Corinthians 11:20). Until the discoveries of Papyri, within the last twenty years, it was supposed that the word κυριακόν (cf. κυριακή of the Lord's Day, in Revelation 1:10) was coined for the purpose; but it is now known that the word belonged to the Greek language of everyday life in that period, being used in the sense of "imperial," or "royal."

Besides this designation of the ordinance, Scripture sanctions "the breaking of bread" (Acts 2:42, Acts 20:7), "the Communion" (1 Corinthians 10:16) and "the Eucharist" or "Thanksgiving" (1 Corinthians 11:24, 1 Corinthians 14:16).

539 "This is My body given for you." The unleavened cake declared His sacrificial death. Cf. 1 Corinthians 11:29, the Lord's "body," which cannot mean the Church, described in Scripture as the "body of Christ." Tertullian uses the words against Marcion (book iv., chapter xl.) by saying, "That is, the figure of My body. . . . It would not contribute very well to the support of Marcion's theory of a phantom body, that the bread should have been crucified." This was before the days of Transubstantiation!

The form of words used by a father in family celebration of the Passover has been strangely neglected by Catholic writers. The "is" could only so mean represents.

"Given," διδόμενον. Catholic commentators avail themselves of the present participle for their theory that "the sacrifice was in the Eucharist itself, not on the Cross only" (Darby-Smith). Cf. the "Explanatory Catechism," Nos. 278-280. But all that is really meant is that the Lord's body was on the point of being given for them, just as He was on the point of going to the Father: see the present tense of John 17:11.

Since the Reformation the great Anglican divine Hooker has written that the virtue resides in the recipient: his wise language is borne out by Mark 14:23 f., for it was when the disciples had already drunk of the cup, that our Lord addressed to them the words of verse 24 there.

The present High Anglican view may be seen in Sadler, "Commentary on Luke," pp. 555-563. Canon (since Bishop) Gore, in revolt from the idea of worship of dead elements, has had recourse to a theory that the communion is with the glorified body of the Lord ("The Body of Christ," p. 66). But where would be the "remembrance" of words spoken by the historical JESUS before He suffered? If it is His death which governs the ordinance, all must be in keeping with that; whilst the Bishop, on that page of his book, directs the mind of the reader to Christ in His heavenly condition, and not as the earthly Speaker. lt is impossible to think of the Saviour as dead and alive at the same time (Revelation 1:18). Eucharistic doctrine developed from the "Mysteries" is accountable for such dilemmas.

That the mediaeval idea of eating a Divine being ("Theophagy"), to which official Catholicism still adheres, was a survival of pagan thought (Reinach, p. 26) seems to be undeniable. The attempt made, even by some Protestant "critics," to saddle it on the Gospels, must ever be resisted. Bousset, indeed, has to own (on 1 Corinthians 10:22) that, however it may have been in the hands of Paul, in the Gospels there is not the least tendency to sacramentalism discernible. It behoves every Christian to view the rite as it came from the Lord's own lips. The Apostle cites, and does not enlarge upon, His words when 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 is rightly understood.

540 "This do in remembrance of Me." As to the omission of these words, with the rest of verse 19 after "body" and the whole of verse 20 in the "Western" text, see, besides references in critical footnote, Zahn, "Introduction," ii. 357-359 (German edition).

For memorial before God, see Leviticus 24:7, etc., with which compare 1 Corinthians 11:26, as to the voice of this ordinance to men in general.

Luke's words, "this cup . . . shed," it will be found, combine those of Matthew, Mark, and Paul. It is because of their special relation to the Apostle's statement in 1 Corinthians 11:24 that some suppose there is an interpolation in Luke's text. Yet it is Codex D in particular, elsewhere prone to harmonize, which omits them. The effect of supposing interference with the Evangelist's primitive text is, of course, questioning, so far as the Gospel records are concerned, that the Lord Himself instituted the ecclesiastical "Breaking of Bread" (Acts 2:42; Act 2:46) as a permanent rite; for it is in the Third Gospel alone that the words "Do this, etc.," appear. As confirming their rejection of the ordinance, "Friends" naturally hail this view (see British Friend, 1908), represented by writers such as Jülicher (Essay, 1892) in Germany, Gardner ("The Origin of the Lord's Supper," 1893) in England, and McGiffert in America. The last-named scholar remarks: "Expecting to return at an early day (Mark 14:25), Jesus can hardly have been solicitous to provide for the preservation of His memory" ("Apostolic Age," p. 69). The assumption here expressed has already been dealt with in note 524. Reference might further be made to Sanday, art. "Jesus Christ," in Hastings' "Dict. of the Bible," vol. ii., p. 638).

Paul says that he "received of the Lord" the account which he gives, covering the injunction. Although Sir W. M. Ramsay does not seem right in treating the Apostle's statement as meaning that the record contained in 1 Corinthians had been handed down to Paul by tradition (Expository Times, April, 1908, p. 296 f.), the Church must have had a true instinct in continued observance of the Supper, which forms part of the historical evidence of the Faith; but the way in which the "Holy Communion" has been used as an instrument of oppression has doubtless counteracted its function in this respect, so great has been the corruption or defacement by which it is marred. Happily, the day is fast running out when men, because of doctrinal differences, hesitate to partake in common of these symbols of love and unity, so much needed for the realization of our Lord's High-priestly Prayer. Cf. note on John 17:21.

541 For wine as a figure of blood, Tertullian (loc. cit.) refers to Isaiah 63:1 and Genesis 49:11.

In Hebrews 10:19 we have the "blood of Jesus": in 1 Peter 1:19, "the blood of Christ" in 1 John 1:7, the "blood of Jesus Christ." What "higher criticism" is sufficient for these things?

Albert Ritschl, by whom many living German theologians have been influenced, in his work on "Justification and Reconciliation" (vol. iii., p. 568, of E. T.), has expressed repugnance to such hymns, dear to every spiritual mind, as the notable one by Bernard of Clairvaux (Trench, "Sacred Latin Poetry," p. 139 ff.; cf. "Hymns Ancient and Modern," No. 111); and, in his "History of Pietism," of the like compositions of Paul Gerhardt (see "Lyra Germanica," Newnes' ed., pp. 60-63), which visualized the bleeding Saviour on the Cross for the comfort of the dying, but are often discredited as voicing unpopular "blood theology." Nevertheless, in his own last hours, the Göttingen professor requested his son to recite to him Gerhardt's soul-stirring lines (Gerok's edition, p. 63), not excepting certain verses which, in his writings, he had singled out for animadversion.

As to redemptive significance of the Death of Christ, see recent works of the Scottish professors Stalker and Denney; also articles in Hastings' one vol. Bible Dictionary on Atonement, Mediation, Redemption, and Salvation, all by Prof. Orr. The late Dr. N. M. Adler, British Chief Rabbi, stated that "For the modern Jew there is no Atonement. . . . He believes that he obtains forgiveness simply by repentance"; and he went on to quote Exodus 32:30, maintaining that Jehovah's answer there shows that He did not accept the idea of Atonement.

542 Stalker has happily remarked: "The essence of this ordinance is . . . God giving Himself to man, and man giving Himself to God" (p. 193). Cf. Jeremiah 31:33.

As to remission of sins (Matthew 26:28), see note below on Luke 24:47, and as to the word "covenant," note 149 on Mark, besides papers of Carr in the Expositor.

Luke 22:23 shows that Judas partook of the Supper.

543Luke 22:24. - "Should be held": American Revv., "Was accounted." The order here is peculiar to Luke. According to his Gospel, the disciples must have had this contention twice over: see 9: 46. In the shibboleth of critics, it is a "doublet."

544Luke 22:25. - Such were Philip of Macedon and Alexander "the Great," Ptolemy III. and Antigonus.

545Luke 22:28. - "Temptations," e.g., such as described in John 6:15. Our blessed Lord was ever sinless: 1 John 3:5.

546Luke 22:29 f. - "I appoint," διατίθεμαι. Not "I bequeath": cf. Jeremiah 31:31 in the LXX. Wills are believed to have been unknown to the Jews at the time the Gospel of Luke and the Epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews 9:15 f.) were first circulated. Cf. paper of Carr in Expositor, April, 1909.

We have here a New Testament version of the "Messianic banquet" in Isaiah 45:6, Isaiah 49:12. Cf. Luke 13:28 f.; in connection, not merely with the Passover celebration, but with the institution of "Breaking of Bread." It sets before us "the time of Regeneration," spoken of in Matthew 19:28 (the "restoration" of Acts 3:21). To it refer the words, "Many are called, but few chosen" (Matthew 22:14; Mat 20:16), with which contrast the statement of Revelation 7:9.

Wellhausen's comment on βασιλεία, first without and then accompanied by the article, is that the one expresses "sovereignty," the other the "Kingdom." But what about Revelation 1:6?

A leading idea of all Millenarians may be expressed in the words of one amongst the Germans: "The whole congregation of the faithful rule and judge mankind for 1,000 years" (Hofmann, "Prophecy and Fulfilment," ii. 373).

The future aspect of the Kingdom comes out conspicuously in this last reference to it in our Gospel. It is this dominating aspect to which recent German literature (surveyed by Schweitzer) has been addressed. Thus Wernle speaks of "the centre of gravity of the Christian faith transferred to its Eschatology" ("Beginnings," i. 140). Schweitzer's own position is preposterous: the Lord died, he says, for the Apocalyptic idea, but by His death sounded its death-knell! Facts, however, are still more stubborn than theories: and the fact here is that, "not only in later Jewish and early Christian history, but right down through the Middle Ages, Apocalyptic Eschatology has been a constantly recurring phenomenon" (B. H. Streeter, in Interpreter, Oct., 1911, p. 38). The topic, nevertheless, has been until recently much more cultivated in this country than in Germany, where the influence of Bengel was largely ephemeral, and scarcely revived by such as Auberlen in the nineteenth century. Cf. note 282.

As for the relation of the Second Coming of Christ to the Kingdom, with the exception of Origen and the few who rejected the "Apocalypse" as apostolic, all primitive expositors - Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Hippolytus, etc. - were premillenarians; that is, held that the Lord's Second Advent will precede the Millennium: see Gibbon, "Decline and Fall, etc.," chapter 15, comparing Elliott, "Horae Apocalypticae," iv p. 310. "The expectation," remarks Wernle, "of the Kingdom of God upon earth and of the resurrection of the dead, the two thoughts least Greek in character, stand at the centre of the Christian Hope." To this the same writer devotes his chapter 13. "Even so educated a Christian as Justin," he says, "was a convinced Millenarian. The process of Hellenization set in about the end of the second century" (ii., p. 133), that is, in Origen's youth. Augustine did the disservice of following in the wake of the allegorizing of that erratic theologian: see the celebrated Latin Father's "City of God," in particular book x., §7. Gibbon observes that "Agreement of the Fathers went by the board;" that the Apocalyptic Kingdom "came to be treated as the invention of heresy and fanaticism." J. H. Newman, naturally, in his Oxford sermons, through his, incipient Catholicism - that farrago of ideas - discredited the Patristic Millennium indiscriminately. And so Bishop Christopher Wordsworth, in his "Lectures on the Apocalypse" (1848), as to whose views see criticism by B. W. Newton in "Aids to Prophetic Inquiry," pp. 310-386 (3rd ed., 1881). The darkening of counsel seems complete when an esteemed writer like the Protestant Bishop Martensen is found attaching a symbolic meaning, derived from 2 Peter 3:8, to the "thousand years" of Revelation 20:4.

On the other hand, leading expositors of such different schools as Godet, Alford, Sadler, and W. H. Simcox have resolutely maintained that there can be no honest escape from the conclusion that the classical passage of the Apocalypse shows a thousand years' reign of Christ upon earth (pace Kennett, in Interpreter: see note 509). "The plain meaning of the words," says Simcox, "is that after the overthrow of Antichrist the martyrs and other most excellent saints will rise from the dead; the rest of the dead, even those finally saved, will not rise till later. But at last, after the Millennium, and after the last short-lived assault of Satan, all the dead, good and wicked, will arise" ("Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges: The Revelation of St. John the Divine," Appendix, p. 237). The belief of W. Kelly - founded upon a now much-received interpretation of 1 Thessalonians 4:13 ff. - diverged from this statement so far as to view all "saints" as rising before the ἐπιφάνεια of the παρουσία (see note 524), and so, before the revelation of Antichrist (2 Thessalonians 2:8); and, further, to see only the wicked dead in those standing before the "Great White Throne" of Revelation 20:11-15. Cf. his last "Exposition of the Revelation" (3rd ed., 1904). Simcox continues: "Any view but the literal seems exposed to insuperable exegetical difficulties. If the true sense be not the literal one, it is safest to regard it as being as yet undiscovered." To realise the force of these words one has only to study the later expositions of the Apocalypse by Bousset and J. Weiss, partly on the lines laid down by Gunkel, who plumes himself on having "discovered" by critical acumen the clue to that book in Babylonian mythology! A humiliating circumstance here is, that this grotesque theory has been acclaimed by some in England.

The Kingdom in its present aspect has been discussed from various points of view, in England by Whately, Maurice, Seeley, Bruce, Horton, etc.; in America by Stevens and others; and in Germany by writers of the Ritschlian school, so ably represented by Harnack. Its eschatological character has been taken up also by, amongst others, the last-named scholar in the "Encyclopaedia Biblica," and during recent years in this country by Charles.

547Luke 22:31 f. - "Has begged," etc. The ἐκ of ἐξῃτήσατο denotes vehemence, importunity. See, however, Field's note, and Burton, § 35.

548 "When once turned back," ἐπιστρέψας. Cf. the LXX. at Psalm 51:13, ἐπιστρέψουσι, for Hebrew yashubu, "shall return," and P. B. version of Psalm 23:3, "He shall convert my soul." See also Field ad loc. on the present passage, as to "convert" (act.) and "conversion" on man's part, which answers to God's grace in quickening - to regeneration as used conventionally in the sense of being "born again." The learned writer of "Otium Norvicense" would, of course, not have questioned the Psalmist's "Turn us again," which has doubtless given rise, since the days of Wesley, to the now current use of the word "conversion."

Dr. Arnold has preached from this passage, on Conversion ("Sermons," iii., 173).

549 With verse 32 cf. 1 Peter 1:17, 1 John 2:1, each time "the Father," before whom the Advocate pleads.

Reference should here be made to the Catholic Catechism, No. 91.

550Luke 22:34. - "Peter." Cf. verse 31, "Simon." Wellhausen "cannot see" any reason for the change. Was it not now to say, Strong as he was (Matthew 18:18) he needed reminding of his weakness? (Farrar, apparently after Godet).

As to the σήμερον here, see notes 142, 151 on Mark (14: 30). Matthew and Mark give the prediction as if said on the way to Gethsemane; Luke and John as though pronounced in the upper room; so that it is probably referable to both connections divisibly, to which the account of Matthew and Mark itself lends support. The added assurance of the other disciples, uttered with raised voice, could scarcely have been given in public.

551Luke 22:35. - "Without purse," etc., words used to the Seventy (Luke 10:4).

552Luke 22:37. - "Have an end." Field: "are being fulfilled." The quotation is from the Hebrew.

553Luke 22:38. - For the idea of "saying no more about it," cf. Deuteronomy 3:26.

Upon the words of this verse was founded the Bull of Pope Boniface VIII. ("Unam Sanctam") - the two swords, spiritual and civil.

554Luke 22:39-46. - This section definitely introduces the last day (Friday) of the Lord's life on earth.

The AGONY. Cf. John 12:27, as of course the parallels in Matthew and Mark. Pfieiderer speaks of "The preceding predictions of passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus" being "not historical; otherwise the struggle in Gethsemane could not have taken place" (i., p. 389). But Fairbairn: "Few incidents have been more utterly misunderstood than this. . . . The antecedent of the agony was not the idea of death, but the feeling as to its means and agents" (op. cit., pp. 426-431). Cf. note 152 on Mark.

A difficulty has been manufactured out of no man hearing the utterances of the Lord on this occasion. As to such objections, see note on the Temptation.

555Luke 22:42. - Observe that our Lord says, "Father"; on the Cross, "My God" (Matthew 27:46: cf. Psalm 40:8).

556Luke 22:43 f. - The Gospel of Peter (Docetic) says that JESUS on the Cross "held His peace, as in nowise having pain"! (Orr, "New Testament Apocryphal Writings," p. 73). On Divine suffering, Caird has said: "Separation of Divine from human acts and experiences is really the dissolving or rending in twain of the unity of Christ's person and life. It virtually asserts that He was not always, throughout His whole life, the God-Man, but only now the God, and now the man," etc. Again: "Incapacity to suffer is not a sign of largeness, but of littleness" (Gifford "Lectures," vol. ii., pp. 108, 142).

We meet here with an experience of the "reasonable soul" of our Lord. Cf. Matthew 26:38; John 12:27.

Conflict, ἀγωνία, an "agony of fear" (Field). Burgon has referred to Psalm 55:4-6.

"Appeared," ὤφθη: cf. 1 Timothy 3:16.

557 As to doctrinal repugnance to the admission of such records into Scripture, Plummer writes, "There is not any tangible evidence for the excision of a considerable portion of narrative for doctrinal reasons at any period of textual history." It is, however, just such evidence which resists detection and is difficult to obtain: repugnance works silently as well as ostensibly.

558Luke 22:45. - There are two distinct words for "sleep" used in this verse, κοιμᾶσθαι (as in 1 Thessalonians 4:13 f.) and καθεύδειν (as in 1 Thessalonians 5:6-7; 1Th 5:10). Two distinct classes of mankind are concerned in these chapters of 1 Thessalonians.

558a Luke 22:47 f. - Tholuck has preached on these verses.

558b Luke 22:50. - Cf. John 18:10. "Suffer thus far" would be said to the soldiers.

559Luke 22:52. - "Chief priests," it will be observed, is peculiar to Luke's account.

"Power." The Greek is ἐξουσία, "authority."

For hands not being laid on the Lord until His voluntary submission, cf. John 8:20.

560Luke 22:54-60. - Cf. John 18:12-18, the informal investigation before Annas. For "laid hold on Him," cf. Acts 2:23.

561Luke 22:58. - Luke: a man, the second time; Matthew, "another maid." See note 156 on Mark, in which Gospel the two other accounts coalesce. There is a helpful analysis of Peter's denials in Stuart, pp. 269, 271.

562Luke 22:61-65. - The Lord is here before Caiaphas and a committee of the Sanhedrin (John 18:24; Mark 14:55-65; Matthew 26:59-68).

"The Lord turned," peculiar to this Gospel.

"Looked," i.e., fixedly, is a form of ἐυβλέπω, used in John 1:42 of the Lord's gaze then at Peter, as already of the Baptist's at Himself (verse 36).

563Luke 22:62. - "Wept," or "sobbed," ἔκλαυσεν.

564Luke 22:65-71. - This is the third trial, before the whole Sanhedrin (Matthew 27:1; Mark 15:1), merging in appearance before Pilate, 23: 1.

Cf. John 18:13, which is accounted for by Luke's record - an interval between the arrest and the Council's meeting.

Fairbairn: "The elders are Israel as a State; the chief priests, Israel as a Church; the scribes, Israel as possessed of the oracles of God" (op. cit., p. 398).

"Ye say that I am." American Revv., "Ye say (it) because I am."

565Luke 22:67-70. - See note 154 on Mark. In each of the Synoptics is brought out the contrast between "the Christ" of the high priest and "the Son of Man" in the Lord's answer. Cf. note 127.

With verse 69 cf. Psalm 80:17.

For the now ordinary Jewish idea of Messiah, see Montefiore, vol. i. pp. 50, 100 f.