The Arrest of Jesus

(Gospel of John 18:1 - 18:27)
After he had finished praying, Jesus departed with his disciples, crossing the brook in the Valley of Kidron and entering the olive orchard that lay on the other side.  This was a place known well to the betrayer Judas, for Jesus had met there with his disciples many times.  Therefore, Judas came there, accompanied by a detachment of Roman soldiers and Temple guards given to him by the chief priests and Pharisees.  They entered the grove carrying torches and lanterns -- and weapons.

Jesus, who was aware of what was about to happened, stepped forward and asked them, "Who is it you're looking for?"

"Jesus of Nazareth," they responded.

"I am he," Jesus told them.

Judas, who had betrayed Jesus, was standing amongst them.  When Jesus identified himself, they all stepped back and fell to the ground.  Jesus asked them again, "Who are you looking for?"

Again they said, "Jesus of Nazareth."

"I already told you I am he," Jesus said. "Since I'm the one you want, let these others go."  (He did this to fulfill his claim that he lost none of those given to him by the Father.)

At this point, Simon-Peter, who was carrying a sword, drew it and with it attacked a slave of the high priest, slashing off his right ear.  (The name of this slave was Malchus.)

But Jesus bid Peter, "Sheath your sword!  Should I not drink from the cup the Father has offered me." 

At the behest of their commander, Jesus was then arrested and tied up by the soldiers and the Temple guards.  They brought him first to Annas, the father-in-law of the priest for that year, Caiaphas.  (Caiaphas was the one who had advised the religious leaders that it was better that one man die for the people.)

Simon-Peter and another of the disciples followed Jesus.  Since that other disciple was acquainted with the high priest, he was allowed enter the courtyard of the high priest, while Peter was left standing outside the gate.  But the aforementioned disciple spoke to the woman who watched the gate and availed upon her to let Peter in.  The porteress then asked Peter, "You're not one of his disciple's, too, are you?"

"No," he replied, "I am not."

Because it was cold, a charcoal fire had been lit and the household slaves and guards stood around it, warming themselves.  Peter did likewise.

Meanwhile, the high priest (sic) was interrogating Jesus concerning his disciples and his teachings.

Jesus answered, "I have spoken openly to the world, always teaching in the synagogues and in the Temple, places where Judeans regularly congregate.  I have said nothing in secret.  But why do you ask me.  Ask those who heard me speak.  They know what I said to them."

When he said this, one of the guards standing near Jesus slapped him alongside the face and berated him, "Is that the way you answer the high priest?"

Jesus protested.  "If I said anything untruthful, you must prove it.  But if I'm speaking the truth, then why are you beating me?"

Annas then had Jesus bound and sent him to see Caiaphas, the current high priest.

Simon-Peter was still warming himself by the fire.  One of the others there asked him, "You're not one of his disciples, too, are you?"

Peter denied it, insisting, "No, I'm not."

One of the high priest's household slaves, who happened to be a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, questioned him further, "Didn't I see you at the olive orchard with Jesus?"

Again Peter denied Jesus.  At once a cock began to crow.

Notes
1.  Judas had apparently left the dinner and gone straight to the authorities, the Judean religious authorities, not the secular Roman government.  Apparently he had offered to bring in Jesus, arrest him for them provided he would be given a detachment of guards and soldiers.  He knew where Jesus might be, in the olive orchard of Kidron (just east of Jerusalem).  He found him there.  Judas was not the one to arrest Jesus, but he hovered in the background and let the armed men do the dirty work. 

2. Jesus, by going to a place familiar to Judas, was obviously making no attempt to avoid arrest, but was willingly submitting himself to it.  This is confirmed when he is about to be arrested and says, “Should I not drink from the cup the Father has offered me.”  The arrest almost seems like a set-up arranged by Jesus.  (In which case, Judas is not a traitor at all, but was doing his master’s bidding.)

3.  When Jesus first responds to the soldiers and identifies himself, they step back and fall to the ground.  Why?  Were they somehow awed by a man who has consistently been described as very ordinary?  If they were cowed or moved to reverence, why did they then not demur to tie him up?

4.  Jesus asks that the disciples not be arrested but remain free.  He does so not out of any concern for the health and well being of his disciples, but merely to give the appearance of fulfilling some supposed scriptural prophecy.  There is no evidence that anyone had any intention of arresting his disciples.

5.  Simon-Peter, acting either out of instinct or from a poorly conceived plan, decides to take violent action to prevent the arrest of his master.  He draws his sword and slashes off the ear of a slave.  It is a rather feeble and ineffectual display of bravado.  One wonders if the slave was even armed.  In any case, the violence ceases when Jesus indicates he will submit to arrest.  The hot-headed Peter sheaths his sword.  No concern is expressed for the plight of the earless slave who was probably just doing what he was told.

6.  It seems incongruous that one of the disciples would carry a sword.  Wasn't Jesus a preacher of peace?  Why would arms be carried by a follower of the Son of God, who could surely guard his crew from any danger through whatever sort of miracle was demanded?  Why would any be necessary?  Surely a sword would not, on the outskirts of Jerusalem be need for protection against wild animals or even be the proper weapon to do so.  Modern sensibilities make one suspicious of men of God who pack heat.  In all times and places the religious rarely bear arms; Friar Tuck of Robin Hood's crew, a skilled swordsman, is one of the few exceptions that spring to mind, and he was a part of a band of thieves.

7.  The name used for the commander of the soldiers is chiliarch, who would be the commander of a thousand men.  This is patently absurd.  A thousand men would not crowd into an orchard to arrest one unarmed man.  Probably the author of John was ignorant of Roman military terms or he wanted exalt the reputation his Messiah by claiming that it took what would be for us a very large battalion to bring him in.   If the latter is the case, one may ask how many other gross exaggerations have made it into the narrative.

8.  When he is arrested, Jesus is bound, probably nothing more elaborate than having his hands tied with a rope or strip of cloth.  Apparently the restraints were at some point unfastened, since after his interrogation session with Annas, he is bound again and taken to see Caiaphas.  It is likely, then, that when was Jesus as struck by Annas’ guard, his hands were free.  Significantly, Jesus did not strike back, nor did he turn the other cheek, but naturally complained about his unfair treatment.

9.  It is historically accurate that Annas, a high priest, was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest, but the author of John evinces an incomplete understanding of Temple practices of the time.  As has been mentioned before, high priests were not chosen on a yearly basis.  Caiaphas served as high priest for almost twenty years, holding the office under Pontius Pilate's governorship.  The narrative refers to Annas as a high priest.  Technically, he was a former high priest, but might have been called high priest as a courtesy title.  Annas could probably be described as a high priest emeritus and probably had considerable clout even during his son-in-law's term.  It seems a presumption and a breach of protocol, however, that he should see and question Jesus before the current high priest had done so.  And why Jesus was brought to him and not to Caiaphas first is an unanswered question.  (Caiaphas was out to lunch -- or rather, breakfast?)  Peter and the other disciple go to house of Caiaphas, probably not aware that Jesus had been taken instead to Annas’ house.  It is possible, though, that Annas and Caiaphas, being in-laws, might have lived in the same residence or in adjacent homes, or had offices in the same building.

10.  Jesus is insufficiently respectful to Annas and merits a slap on the face for his cheekiness.  He is not uncooperative, but expresses an attitude of defiance that obviously did not set well with the religious authorities.  There is, of course, a history of animosity between the two parties.

11.  Peter famously denies Jesus three times.  (The third denial might be excusable: if he admitted to cutting off an ear, he would place himself in legal jeopardy.)  He has the courage to draw and use his sword, but is a coward about admitting his relationship to Jesus, a man now in trouble with the law.  Why would he not boast about being a follower of the Son of God?  Did he have doubts?  Was he just thinking about his own hide?  If so, why did he bother to follow Jesus in the first place and go to seek him when he was arrested?  Peter gives the impression, at least at this point in his life, of being an impulsive man of bold bluster who is, at heart, a weasel.

12.  It is interesting that the name of the slave whose ear was lopped off by Peter is given, but not the name of the disciple who accompanies him when they seek information about Jesus’ arrest.