Luke 22:63

And the men that held Jesus mocked him, and smote him.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(63-73) And the men that held Jesus . . .—See Notes on Matthew 26:59-68; Mark 14:55-65. The verbs “mocked” and “smote” are both in the tense that implies continued action.

Benson Commentary

Luke 22:63-65. And the men that held Jesus mocked him — What has just been related concerning Peter, passed while the priests examined Jesus, of which examination, before Luke gives an account, he mentions the following remarkable circumstance, namely, that the men who held Jesus mocked him and smote him. And when they had blindfolded him, struck him on the face — These circumstances are placed by Matthew and Mark after the council’s condemning him. Perhaps he was abused in the same manner both before and after his condemnation. Certainly “his judges and their retinue were abundantly capable of being thus unjust and barbarous toward him. Nevertheless, what Luke has said here, does not necessarily oblige us to suppose this. He might conclude his account of Peter’s denials with relating what followed upon our Lord’s being condemned, because it happened immediately after the last denial; and to show what a load of indignity was laid at once on the Son of God; namely, that while the most zealous of all his disciples was denying him with oaths and imprecations, the servants and others were insulting him in the most barbarous manner.” — Macknight. Saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote thee? — “This usage of Christ,” says Dr. Hammond, “refers to that sport so ordinary among children, called μυινδα, in which it is the manner, first to blindfold, then to strike, (Luke 22:63,) then to ask who gave the blow, and not to let the person go till he had named the right man who had struck him. It was used on this occasion to reproach our blessed Lord, and to expose him to ridicule.” Many other things spake they blasphemously against him — The expression is remarkable. They charged him with blasphemy, because he said he was the Son of God: but the evangelist fixes that charge on them, because he was really so.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

22:63-71 Those that condemned Jesus for a blasphemer, were the vilest blasphemers. He referred them to his second coming, for the full proof of his being the Christ, to their confusion, since they would not admit the proof of it to their conviction. He owns himself to be the Son of God, though he knew he should suffer for it. Upon this they ground his condemnation. Their eyes being blinded, they rush on. Let us meditate on this amazing transaction, and consider Him who endured such contradiction of sinners against himself.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

See the notes at Matthew 26:57-68.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

Lu 22:63-71. Jesus Condemned to Die and Shamefully Entreated.

(See on [1730]Mr 14:53-63; [1731]Joh 18:19, &c.; and [1732]Lu 22:55-62.)

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Ver. 63-65. Concerning these abuses offered to our Saviour. See Poole on "Matthew 26:67". See Poole on "Matthew 26:68". See Poole on "Mark 14:65".

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

And the men that held Jesus,.... Whilst he was before the sanhedrim; and were either the Roman soldiers, or the servants of the high priest, who kept hold of him all the while, lest he should get away; though there was no reason for it; his time was come, nor would he escape out of their hands, though he could easily have rescued himself:

mocked him; insulted him, and gave him very opprobrious language, and used him in a very scurrilous way, and even spit upon him;

and smote him. This clause is left out in the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions; the word used, signifies plucking off the skin; they pinched him, and tore off his flesh with their nails; they plucked the hairs of his beard, and the skin of his cheeks along with them, and so fulfilled Isaiah 50:6.

Geneva Study Bible

{20} And the men that held Jesus mocked him, and smote him.

(20) Christ bore the shame that was due for our sins.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Meyer's NT Commentary

Luke 22:63-65. See on Matthew 26:67 f.; Mark 14:65. Luke follows an entirely different tradition—different in respect of the time, the place, and the persons who were engaged in the mockery. The same characteristic ill-treatment (smiting—demand for prophecy), the original connection of which is in Matthew and Mark (in opposition to Schleiermacher), had arranged itself variously in tradition. Against the supposition of many times repeated mockery must be reckoned the identity and peculiarity of its essential element (in opposition to Ebrard and others).

δέρειν and παίειν are distinguished as to scourge (Jacobs, Del. Epigr. vi. 63) and to smite in general.

Expositor's Greek Testament

Luke 22:63-65. Indignities (Matthew 26:67-68, Mark 14:65). In Mt. and Mk. these come after the trial during the night which Lk. omits. In his narrative the hours of early morning spent by Jesus in the palace of the high priest are filled up by the denial of Peter and the outrages of the men who had taken Jesus into custody (οἱ συνέχοντες αὐτὸν).

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

63. smote him] No less than five forms of beating are referred to by the Evangelists in describing this pathetic scene—derontes here (a general term); etupton, ‘they kept smiting;’ paisas in the next verse, implying violence; ekolaphisan, ‘slapped with the open palm,’ Matthew 26:67; errapisan, ‘smote with sticks’ (id.); and rapismasin eballon, Mark 14:65. See the prophecy of Isaiah 1:6. The Priests of that day, and their pampered followers, were too much addicted to these brutalities (Acts 21:32; Acts 23:2), as we learn also from the Talmud.

63-65. The First Derision.

Hanan had simply tried to entangle Jesus by insidious questions.

The course of the trial before Caiaphas was different. The Priests on that occasion “sought false witness,” but their false witnesses contradicted each other in their attempt to prove that He had threatened to destroy the Temple. Since Jesus still kept silence, Caiaphas rose, walked into the midst of the hall, and adjured Jesus by the Living God to say whether He was “the Christ, the Son of God.” So adjured, Christ answered in the affirmative, and then Caiaphas, rending his robes, appealed to the assembly, who, most illegally setting aside the need of any further witnesses, shouted aloud that He was ‘A man of Death’ (ish maveth), i.e. deserving of capital punishment. From this moment He would be regarded by the dependents of the Priests as a condemned criminal.

Bengel's Gnomen

Luke 22:63-64. [Οἱ συνέχουτες, who held fast) during the whole night.—V. g.]—δέροντες· ἔτυπτον· παίσας) Δέρειν is used of beating the whole body; τύπτειν, of striking a part; παίειν, of smiting or wounding with violence, and so as to give pain. [No one of mortal men, not even the direst of malefactors, ever endured so great wantonness as Christ, the Just One, suffered to the utmost.—Harm., p. 540.]

Pulpit Commentary

Verses 63-65. - After the second examination, the officials of the Sanhedrin mock and ill treat Jesus as one doomed to death. Verse 63. - And the men that held Jesus mocked him, and smote him. The position of the Redeemer when the cruelties took place, described in this and the two following verses, was as follows: After the arrest in Gethsemane, the guards, Jewish and Roman, escorted the Prisoner to the palace of the high priest in Jerusalem. There both Annas and Caiaphas apparently lodged. In the first instance, Jesus was brought before Annas, who was evidently the leading personage of the Sanhedrin of that day. Details of the preliminary examination are given apparently by John 18:13, 19-24. In this first and informal trial Caiaphas was evidently present, and took part (ver. 19). At the close of this unofficial but important proceeding, Annas sent him to Caiaphas. The true reading in John 18:24 is ἀπέστειλεν οϋν, "Annas therefore sent him." That is, at the close of the first unofficial examination, which took place in Annas's apartments in the palace of the high priest, Annas sent him to be examined officially before Caiaphas, the reigning high priest, and a committee of the Sanhedrim This, the second trial of Jesus, is related at some length by St. Matthew (Matthew 26:59-66) and St. Mark (Mark 14:55 64). The priests on that occasion sought false witnesses, but their witness did not, we know, agree. Jesus kept silence until Caiaphas arose, and with awful solemnity adjured him to say whether he was the Christ, the Son of God. So adjured, Jesus answered definitely in the affirmative. Then Caiaphas rent his robe, and appealed to the assembly, who answered the appeal by a unanimous cry," He is guilty of death." After this hearing before Caiapnas and a committee of the Sanhedrin, the condemned One was conducted before the full assembly of the Sanhedrim While being led across the court, he heard Peter's third denial. It was during the interval which elapsed before the great council assembled, that the mocking related in these verses (63-65) took place. Luke 22:63

Vincent's Word Studies

Smote (δέροντες)

Originally to flay; thence to cudgel. Compare our vulgarism, to tan or hide.