Mark 14:53–72

In submission to the Father's will, the Lord allows Himself to be led away to appear before the Jewish council.

The Jewish religious authorities all assembled to sit in judgment upon Him. So, as far as they were concerned, this was not done in secret. It shows how deep their feeling ran. A crowded council, and it was at the dead of night!

Their hatred toward the Son of God could not wait to have Him condemned. They had not arrested Him for any accusation of wrong doing, but after arresting Him His enemies try to find some evidence against Him, ready to welcome any false witness.

Here we find a fresh trial… "Now the chief priests and the whole council were seeking testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, but they found none." They found the will, but not the power; readiness to testify, but even in that they could not succeed. Man fails in everything, except in malice against Jesus… So they rejected Jesus, not for the false testimony of man, but on the true testimony of God. It was for His own testimony that they condemned Him.

The prophet Micah had predicted that "the Judge of Israel" would be brought under human judgment. This came to pass. Yet it is most striking: when the great Judge stood before human judges, every effort to convict Him on human evidence failed. All the human witnesses fell into confusion. They condemned Him for the witness He bore to Himself. Even in doing that, they broke the law themselves. It was written: "The priest who is chief among his brothers … shall not … tear his clothes" (Lev. 21:10). The high priest ignored this. He was so agitated in the presence of his Victim, so carried away with anger and hatred.

The speed of the whole trial completely broke Hebrew law. Even trials about money had to be held in the daytime. Trials for life also had to take place during the day. And if the verdict was condemnation, the sentence had to wait until the next day. They condemned the Lord Jesus and declared Him worthy of death, and all before the night of His arrest was over. Their own law also said: "Our law condemns no one to death upon his own confession." So when Caiaphas put the question to the accused and founded a condemnation on the answer, that was the last violation of formal justice.

We see the Servant now handed over to men, and behind them stood Satan. Man's wickedness and Satan's power are there. In the middle of it all, alone and majestic, stands the perfect Servant-Son. Mark alone tells us that the witnesses brought against Him did not agree. The Holy Spirit still holds Him up as the perfect Servant. No one could find a single flaw in His character or His service.

What the Lord Jesus suffered at the hands of men was very great. Yet it becomes small when we consider what He endured at the hands of God as the Victim, when He was made sin for us. Yet Mark compresses all this far greater matter into two verses — Mark 15:33 and 34 — while his account of the lesser matter covers 52 verses. The fact is, of course, that the lesser could be described, while the greater could not be.

In submission to the Father's will, the Lord allows Himself to be led away to appear before the Jewish council. Peter truly loved the Lord, and he "followed Him." But he acted in self-confidence. So he follows without the mind of the Lord, and follows "afar off." It is too often the same with us. Following without divine guidance, he enters into temptation without divine support. There he learns the utter weakness of the flesh.

What steps we see in Peter's downward course, leading to his denial of the Lord he loved! First, he declared he was ready to die for Him. Yet the Lord had just told him that Satan wanted to have him, and that He was praying for him. Next, he slept when he should have been watching. Then he fought when he should have been quiet. Then he followed afar off when he should have been near. And now he sits down, side by side, with the enemies of Christ, warming himself! With such a beginning one can only expect what followed.

Another word is hupēretēs, translated "servant." Two other words, doulos and diakonos, are translated the same way. Doulos is a slave. Diakonos is an ordinary servant, at table and so on. But hupēretēs is more official. The first meaning of the word is a "rower," so it usually means someone who has a distinct service.

Then there is another step. They take the Lord; and then we read that Peter went and sat down in the hall among the enemies of Christ, warming himself by the fire. Think of that! Men are striking the blessed Lord, despising Him, insulting Him and treating Him badly. The enemies of Jesus are expressing the malice of their hearts towards Him. And there is Peter, one of His own loved disciples, sitting down and warming himself by the enemy's fire!

Away from Christ the disciple is always cold. No worldly warmth, no company, no associations, no pleasures can make up for His absence. The heart that prefers the world to Christ must always be cold. Nor did Peter become truly warm until he left the fireside and went out, and there wept bitterly.

What brought him into the judgment hall? Why did he thus "enter into temptation"? — this was entering into temptation. He had not been told to do so. He followed Christ "afar off," and "went in and sat with the servants to see the end." He "entered into temptation." See where he was at that moment. His flesh was unjudged and trusted in. Prayer and watchfulness were missing. A moral distance stood between him and Christ. He had entered temptation and had sought ungodly company. What a fit vessel he was at that moment to be the plaything of Satan.

If Peter had been right, he would not have said, "I am ready." He would have prayed, "Lord, keep me; Lord, help me; Lord, do not let me fall under Satan's power." But he was self-confident. Self-confidence, I believe, is the cause of all our failure. Self-distrust is the secret of getting on with the Lord.

Note, the Lord did not say, "I have prayed for you that you may not fall." No; but "that your faith may not fail" when you have fallen. Precious, matchless grace! This was Peter's resource. He was a debtor to grace from first to last. As a lost sinner, he was a debtor to "the precious blood of Christ"; as a stumbling saint, he was a debtor to the all-prevailing advocacy of Christ. The advocacy of Christ was the basis of his happy restoration. Peter went out as a restored soul to "strengthen his brothers."

In the scene that follows we see, in the chief priests and their council, how low religious flesh can sink. They had already decided to put Christ to death. So the trial that follows was not held to find out whether He had done anything worthy of death. It was a horrible device to cover murder with a show of justice. With malice in their hearts, they look not for the truth, but for witnesses "against Jesus to put Him to death."

"And the chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin sought for witness against Jesus to cause Him to be put to death; and found none." They found the will, but not the power; readiness to testify, but even in that they could not succeed. Man fails in everything, except in malice against Jesus. The witnesses had been bribed, and the judges were ready to condemn. Even so, everything failed. The testimony did not agree. As the law required, there must be two or three witnesses in agreement; but these did not agree.

Moreover, as a nation, Israel was especially guilty of false witness against the Messiah. The Spirit of Christ foreshadowed this sin in the prophets: "False witnesses rise up against me, and men who breathe out cruelty"; "they charged me with things I knew nothing about" (Ps. 27:12; Ps. 35:11, older wording). And so it turned out when in the fullness of time the Anointed One presented Himself to the chosen people. The mob did not do this. The religious leaders of the Jews looked for false witness against Jesus to put Him to death. In this they broke the very law they were appointed to enforce (Ex. 23:1).

There was no thought of an impartial trial. His judges were shamelessly looking for such witness as would let them pronounce the sentence of death on Him. But the power of God was at work behind the scenes, and every attempt to fasten the trumped-up charges on Him came to nothing. They made many efforts, and verse 58 gives us one sample. One accusation after another broke down as the false witnesses fell into confusion and contradicted one another. It seems as though God wrapped their normally sharp minds in a fog of confusion.

Throughout His three and a half years of ministry the Saviour lived under the fierce glare of hostile criticism. He did not live apart from people, as John the Baptist did. The desert was not His home. He moved freely in and out among the people. All the facts of His life were therefore fully known. If His enemies could have found a single flaw in Him, how it would have delighted their evil hearts! But He was God's holy One. The Passover lamb had to be "without blemish". Only such a lamb could picture Him, who was holy in nature and stainless in all His ways. In the end His judge had to say, "I find no guilt in him" (John 19:6).

The Lord's condemnation was a settled thing: the chief men of the Jews were only looking for the means to carry out injustice and murder under a show of law. They sought witness against Him to put Him to death; but it was false, and the witnesses did not agree together. Many were ready to give evidence, but their testimony counted for nothing: the Lord had to be condemned on His own witness. It is painful to look at the enmity of the human heart against the Lord, who had never done anything but good to men.

It is deeply instructive to see how a religion that has fallen away from God always leads the way in insulting God, persecuting His people, and bloodthirsty cruelty. Nothing sears the conscience, hardens the mind, and steels the heart like the form of godliness without the power.

In the scene that follows, the chief priests and their council show how low religious human nature can sink. They had already decided to put Christ to death. So the trial that follows was not an enquiry into whether He had done anything worthy of death. It was a horrible device to cover murder with a show of justice. With malice in their hearts, they seek not the truth, but witnesses "against Jesus to put Him to death." When they could not find any, they fall back on false witnesses. These do not serve their purpose either. The false witnesses condemned themselves by contradicting one another.

They found the will, but not the power; readiness to testify, but even in that they could not succeed. Man fails in everything, except in malice against Jesus. The witnesses gave bribed testimony and the judges were ready to condemn, yet everything failed. The testimony did not agree. As the law required, there must be two or three witnesses in agreement; but these did not agree.

There was no thought of an impartial trial. His judges were shamelessly looking for witnesses who would let them sentence Him to death. But the power of God was at work behind the scenes, and every attempt to pin the invented charges on Him came to nothing. They made many attempts... Accusation after accusation broke down as the perjurers fell into confusion and contradicted one another. It seems as though God wrapped their normally sharp minds in a fog of confusion.

As a nation, Israel was especially guilty of false witness against the Messiah. The Spirit of Christ foreshadowed this sin in the prophets: "False witnesses have risen against me, and they breathe out violence" — "they ask me of things that I do not know" (Ps. 27:12; Ps. 35:11). So when the set time came, the Anointed One presented Himself to the chosen people. It was not the mob but the religious chiefs of the Jews who sought false witness against Jesus to put Him to death. In this they broke the very law they were meant to enforce (Ex. 23:1).

We must understand that the Lord's condemnation was already settled. The chiefs of the Jews were only looking for a way to complete their wickedness and murder under a show of justice. They sought witness against Him to put Him to death; but it was false, and the witnesses did not agree together. Many were ready to give evidence, but their testimony counted for nothing. They could condemn the Lord only on His own witness.

For three and a half years the Saviour served in the fierce glare of hostile criticism... All the facts of His life were therefore fully known. If His enemies could have found a single flaw in Him, how it would have delighted their evil hearts! But He was God's holy One... At the end His judge had to say, "I find no guilt in him" (John 19:6). His enemies could only produce the look of a charge against Him by bribing men to lie under oath in their court.

In front of the high priest, the false witnesses condemn themselves by contradicting each other. They looked for witnesses to serve the purpose already in their hearts. And are not those who bring such testimony usually, if not always, of that spirit? Do they not even dare to search Scripture to justify a condemnation they have already settled on? And yet how often they are forced to throw out their own witnesses! How little they can quote without misquoting.

"Now the chief priests and the whole council were seeking testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, but they found none." They found the will, but not the power; readiness to testify, but even in that they could not succeed. Man fails in everything, except in malice against Jesus.

Only one of the accusations has come down to us. It shows how careful we must be in repeating the words of another person. Misrepresenting what someone said does great harm, even when no harm was meant. "We heard him say," two witnesses claimed, "I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another, not made with hands" (Mark 14:58). What the Lord had said was this: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (John 2:19). Within three days of this examination before Caiaphas those words came true. The Jews put Him to death. They destroyed the temple of His body. On the third day He rose again.

They had to go all the way back to the very beginning of the Lord's public ministry, in John 2. He said, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." They were to do the work of destruction. He would do the restoring and reviving as a Divine Person... But He was speaking about the temple of His body. They implied that He had said He would destroy it. It does not agree at all.

There was no thought of a fair trial. His judges were shamelessly looking for testimony that would let them pass the death sentence on Him. But the power of God was at work behind the scenes, and every attempt to pin the invented charges on Him came to nothing. One accusation after another broke down. The perjurers fell into confusion and contradicted each other. It is as though God wrapped their normally sharp minds in a fog.

They themselves were seeking, even then, to destroy the temple of God, just as His words had implied they would. No one else could replace it, but He would raise it up again.

To man's testimony against Him the Lord gives no answer. Defending Himself was not His object, nor even teaching now. He stood as the willing Victim, as the Lamb for the slaughter. As a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He did not open His mouth.

The testimony did not agree. The law required two or three witnesses to agree, but these did not. So Jesus was rejected, not on the false testimony of men, but on the true testimony of God. It was for His own testimony that they condemned Him. He came bearing witness to the truth, and He bore witness to it to the point of death.

In the scene that follows we see, in the chief priests and their council, how deep religious human nature can sink into wickedness. They had already decided to put Christ to death. So the trial that follows was not to find out whether He had done anything worthy of death. It was a horrible device to cover murder with a show of justice.

There was no thought of a fair trial. His judges were openly looking for any witness who would let them pass the death sentence on Him. But the power of God was at work behind the scenes, and every effort to pin these invented charges on Him came to nothing. They tried many times; verse 58 gives us a sample, and we recognise in it a distortion of what He said in John 2:19. One accusation after another broke down as the perjurers fell into confusion and contradicted each other. It is as though God wrapped their normally sharp minds in a fog.

This is a good illustration of how careful we need to be when repeating a person's words. How much harm is done by misrepresenting what someone said, even unintentionally. What the Lord had said was this: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (John 2:19). Within three days of His examination before Caiaphas those words came true. The Jews put Him to death. They destroyed the temple of His body. On the third day He rose again. The Lord's words and the witnesses' statement were completely different. Yet even their testimony did not agree.

It shows how they had to go right back to the beginning of the Lord's public ministry in John 2. He said, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." They were to do the work of destruction, and He would do the restoring and the raising, as a Divine Person. It is in John that we find this. Usually Scripture says, "God raised Him."… "But He was speaking about the temple of His body." They made out that He had said He would destroy it. It does not agree at all.

The temple at Jerusalem could be corrupted. Nothing could corrupt the temple of the Lord's body, though men could use violence to try to destroy that body. Again and again they tried to stone the Lord, and at last, when the hour had come, they were allowed to "destroy" the temple of His body. Man's wickedness becomes one more occasion for showing His glory as the Son… Man may destroy, but he cannot raise the dead. Christ says, in effect, "When you have done your worst, when you have destroyed the temple of My body, I will raise it up." His resurrection will declare in power that He is the Son of God.

They found the will, but not the power; readiness to testify, but even in that they could not succeed. Man fails in everything except malice against Jesus. They had bought the witnesses, and the judges were eager to condemn. Still everything failed. The testimony did not agree. The law required two or three witnesses to agree, and these did not. The result was that Jesus was rejected, not on the false testimony of man, but on the true testimony of God. It was for His own witness that they condemned Him. He came bearing witness to the truth, and He bore witness to it to the point of death.

In the scene that follows we see, in the chief priests and their council, how deep into wickedness religious human nature can sink. They had already decided to put Christ to death. So the trial that follows was not an enquiry into whether He had done anything worthy of death. It was a horrible device to cover murder with a show of justice. With malice in their hearts, they do not look for the truth. They look for witnesses "against Jesus to put Him to death." When they find none, they fall back on false witnesses. Even these do not serve their purpose, because they condemned themselves by contradicting one another.

False witnesses were of no use — their witness did not agree. At last two men came who claimed to have heard Him themselves: "We heard Him say, 'I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another not made with hands.'" The statement was very definite. Surely such witnesses could be relied on? Yet the inspired historian adds his quiet remark: "Yet even about this their testimony did not agree." To all this the Lord answered not a word. Condemning Him by bribed testimony was impossible.

There was no thought of an impartial trial. His judges were looking, without shame, for witnesses who would let them sentence Him to death. But the power of God was at work behind the scenes. Every attempt to pin the made-up charges on Him came to nothing. They made many efforts. Verse 58 gives us a sample, and there we recognise a twisted version of what He said in John 2:19. One accusation after another broke down. The lying witnesses fell into confusion and contradicted each other. It seems as though God wrapped minds that were sharp at other times in a fog of confusion.

Before the high priest the false witnesses condemn themselves by contradicting each other. And are not those who bring such witness usually, if not always, of that spirit? Do they not even dare to search Scripture to justify the condemnation they have already decided on? And yet how often they are forced to throw out their own witnesses! How little they can quote without misquoting. It was they who at that very moment were seeking to destroy the temple of God, just as His words had implied they would, and no one else could replace it — but He would raise it up again.

They found the will, but not the power; readiness to testify, but even in that they could not succeed. Man fails in everything except malice against Jesus. The witnesses were bribed and the judges were eager to condemn, yet everything failed. The testimony did not agree. As the law required, there had to be two or three witnesses in agreement; but these did not agree. The result was that Jesus was rejected, not for the false testimony of man, but on the true testimony of God. It was for His own testimony that they condemned Him. He came witnessing to the truth, and He witnessed to it to death.

We see the Servant handed over to men, and behind those men stood Satan. In the middle of man's wickedness and Satan's power stands the perfect Servant-Son, alone in His greatness. Mark alone tells us that the witnesses brought against Him did not agree. The Holy Spirit keeps holding Him up as the perfect Servant, in whose character and service not one flaw could be found. But He witnesses the good confession, and on that blessed word of truth from His lips He is condemned.

In front of the high priest the false witnesses condemn themselves by contradicting each other. They looked for witnesses to serve the purpose already in their hearts. ... How little can they quote without misquoting. ... Still there was no agreement. The high priest then turns to Jesus, to make Him answer what needed no answer, and so make something out of nothing. He is therefore silent.

They found the will, but not the power; readiness to testify, yet even in that they could not succeed. Man fails in everything, except in malice against Jesus. ... The testimony did not agree. The law required two or three witnesses to agree; these did not.

Here in this chapter we find the Lord as a lamb that is silent before her shearers. He does not answer the accusation of His enemies. They were there to put Him to death, and He knew it. And He was there to give His life a ransom for many.

In the presence of all this hatred and malice the Lord "remained silent and made no answer." Peter saw these solemn scenes. Years later he could tell us that "when He was reviled" He "did not revile in return." "Like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth" (Isa. 53:7). To the accusations of malice He had nothing to say. But when challenged about the glory of His Person, He witnesses to the truth without hesitation, whatever it costs — the perfect example for all His servants.

The Lord Jesus was always right. There is a time to speak, and a time to be silent. He knew the time. So with us there is a time to be silent when it is a question of ourselves. But there is a time when it would be treason to be silent — when it is a question of the glory of God.

The result was that Jesus was rejected, not on the false testimony of man, but on the true testimony of God. It was for His own testimony that they condemned Him. He came witnessing to the truth, and He witnessed to it unto death.

All the devil managed to do was to bring to light the truth about the glory of the Person of Christ, and to expose the utter wickedness of religious human nature. If that wickedness is allowed to reach its evil ends for a moment, it is still only an instrument carrying out what God has determined beforehand.

The prophet Micah had predicted that "the Judge of Israel" would be made subject to human judgment. This came true. Yet it is striking that when the great Judge stood in a human court, every effort to convict Him on human evidence failed. All human witnesses fell into confusion. They condemned Him on the ground of the witness He bore to Himself; and even in doing this they broke the law themselves. It was written: "The priest who is chief among his brothers ... shall not ... tear his clothes" (Lev. 21:10). This the high priest ignored, so agitated was he in the presence of his Victim, so carried away with anger and hatred.

In the presence of all His accusers His resource was in God. He committed Himself to Him who judges righteously. When falsely accused before the Jewish council, He "remained silent" (Matthew 26:63). ... He was silent before men because He had a resource in God.

Finally the high priest has to appeal to Christ Himself. In the presence of all this hatred and malice the Lord "remained silent and made no answer." Peter, who witnessed these solemn scenes, can tell us years later that "when He was reviled, He did not revile in return." "Like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth" (Isa. 53:7). To the accusations of malice He had nothing to say. But when challenged about the glory of His Person, He witnesses to the truth without hesitation, whatever it costs. He is the perfect example for all His servants.

Still there was no agreement. So the high priest turns to Jesus, to make Him answer what needed no answer, and so make something out of nothing. That is why He is silent.

This lowly One stood bound in their presence. Did the high priest and his associates know that He is the Son of God, the promised Messiah? They knew He had given witness to that effect throughout His public ministry... The high priest knew he would succeed if he put that question about His Sonship to Him. But he little knew what he was doing; false witnesses could not condemn the blessed One. His own confession of who He was — the confession of the truth alone — could bring about His condemnation.

But the direct question He will not fail to answer. He must answer "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" with nothing left unclear. It will give them what they seek against Him. But it will also give rest to those who truly seek the truth, and bring blessing to people through the ages. Yes, He is the Son of the Blessed, while He is the Son of Man as well.

The Son holds no lower or secondary place in Deity, because the whole fullness of the Godhead has a permanent home in Him. It was not an incomplete fullness. It was not just a part of the fullness. It was the fullness in its perfect entirety, with nothing of Deity lacking or reduced in any way, or at any time. He is "the Son of the Blessed," and "God blessed for ever" (Mark 14:61-62; Rom. 9:5).

Here in this chapter we find the Lord as a lamb that is silent before its shearers. He does not answer the accusation of His enemies. They were there intending to put Him to death, and He knew it. He was there to give His life a ransom for many... He is rejected and crucified for His own witness to the truth.

They found the will, but not the power; readiness to testify, but even in that they could not succeed. Man fails in everything, except in malice against Jesus... So they rejected Jesus, not because of man's false testimony, but on the true testimony of God. It was for His own testimony that they condemned Him. He came witnessing to the truth, and He witnessed to it to the point of death... The Lord answers, "I am." He makes a good confession, not only before Pontius Pilate, but before the high priest.

The high priest asked Him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" He received the reply, "I am." He understood the nature of the claim Jesus was making. "And the high priest tore his garments and said, 'What further witnesses do we need? You have heard His blasphemy. What is your decision?' And they all condemned Him as deserving death" (Mark 14:61-64).

Notice what we have here. He was the Christ, the Son of God, as One who had come among the Jews on earth, living among men. Besides that, we have the double position of the Son of man — sitting at the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

He adds a clear, positive declaration. His accusers would yet see not only the Son of God, but the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven. Though being the Son of God, He had come in lowly humility as the Son of Man. But as Son of Man He would come again, no longer in lowliness, but as the Man of God's right hand in power and majesty.

Of this One Daniel had written, and in a vision he had seen Him (Dan. 7:13)... The Lord Jesus also clearly applied this title to Himself, showing that He was the one the prophet had written about (Mark 14:61-62). Stephen now saw Him as the Son of man and in heaven, and there standing in the place of honour — at the right hand of God. Power, then, belongs to the crucified One, and as Son of man He will one day exercise it... Many members of the council had probably been present when the Lord Jesus declared that He was the Son of man. They had a part in judging Him worthy of death for that.

The Son of Man thus stood before the leaders of Israel. What a moment when the leaders of Israel shall stand before the Son of Man.

But He will not fail to answer the direct question. "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" — He must answer that with no ambiguity at all. It will give them what they seek against Him. But it will also give rest to honest seekers, and through the ages it will bring blessing to people. Yes, He is the Son of the Blessed, while He is the Son of man as well.

We must understand that the Lord's condemnation was already settled. The chief men of the Jews were only looking for a way to carry out wickedness and murder while keeping up the appearance of justice. They looked for witnesses against Him to put Him to death. The testimony was false, and the witnesses did not agree with each other. Many were ready to testify, but their evidence counted for nothing. The Lord had to be condemned on His own witness.

The result was that Jesus was rejected, not on the false testimony of man, but on the true testimony of God. It was for His own testimony that they condemned Him. He came bearing witness to the truth, and He bore witness to it to the point of death.

Blasphemy in Holy Scripture, while sometimes used for evil speech against man, also refers to speaking evil against God or about God. The unspoken charge of blasphemy against our Lord on this occasion came from an assumption of the scribes. They held that by pronouncing forgiveness of sins He was taking to Himself one of the attributes of Godhead. The Jews saw His claim to be the Son of God in the same way. As the Lord said to them, "Do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?"

They condemned Him on the ground of the witness He bore to Himself; and even in doing that they broke the law themselves. It was written: "The priest who is chief among his brothers … shall not … tear his clothes" (Lev. 21:10). The high priest ignored this, so shaken was he in the presence of his Victim, so carried away with anger and hatred.

Such words from such lips should have brought the high priest to broken repentance. Instead he put on a shameful, unlawful show of being shocked. He tore his clothes and charged the Lord of glory with blasphemy. He had no interest in asking honestly whether it was true that Jesus was the Son of God.

In his frenzy the high priest tore his clothes. By that act he destroyed his priesthood, and he pronounced the Lord guilty of blasphemy.

In Israel, tearing your clothes was a sign of mourning. Signs of mourning did not fit priestly character, because the priest draws near to God, and mourning has no place in His presence. A priest was never to tear his garments. Caiaphas did this when questioning the Lord Jesus (Matt. 26:65), an offence for which the law demanded the death penalty. For above all, the High Priest is a picture of the Lord Jesus. Will His garments of priestly dignity ever be torn? Absolutely not! That would point to some failure or fault in His priestly work. Thank God this is impossible. He remains faithful and true forever!

It is a solemn thing to think about this — to consider Who He was, while men heaped all these insults on Him! But this is no part of His atoning work. Atonement was made when He suffered at the hand of God. He suffered at the hands of men for righteousness — for God. He suffered at the hand of God for sin — for us.

Man fails in everything, except in malice against Jesus. Bribed testimony from the witnesses, judges ready to condemn — and still everything failed. The testimony did not agree. As the law required, there must be two or three witnesses in agreement; but these did not agree. The result was that Jesus was rejected, not for the false testimony of man, but on the true testimony of God. It was for His own testimony that they condemned Him. He came witnessing to the truth, and He witnessed to it to death.

We must understand that the Lord's condemnation was a settled thing. The chiefs of the Jews were only looking for a way to carry out wickedness and murder while keeping up the appearance of justice.

Blasphemy in Holy Scripture, while sometimes used for evil speech against man, also refers to evil speaking against or about God. The charge of blasphemy brought against our Lord on this occasion came from an assumption of the scribes. They held that by pronouncing forgiveness of sins He was taking to Himself one of the attributes that belong to God alone. The Jews saw His claim to be the Son of God in the same way. As the Lord said to them, "Do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?"

The prophet Micah had predicted that "the Judge of Israel" would be made subject to human judgment. This came to pass. They condemned Him on the ground of the witness He bore to Himself, and even in doing this they broke the law themselves. It was written: "The priest who is chief among his brothers … shall not … tear his clothes" (Leviticus 21:10). The high priest ignored this. He was so agitated in the presence of his Victim, so carried away with anger and hatred.

In his frenzy the high priest tore his clothes. By that act he destroyed his priesthood, and pronounced the Lord guilty of blasphemy. Their verdict recalls the command in Deuteronomy 21 about a man put to death and hanged on a tree: "a hanged man is cursed by God." From then on they were determined that He should be hanged on a tree — the object not only of their accusations but, as they hoped, accursed of God.

In the eyes of these leaders, blinded by unbelief, the truth appears as blasphemy. Without a single dissenting voice "they all condemned Him as deserving death." In perfect submission to the Father's will, He offers no resistance to the outrages of those who spit in His face and strike Him with their hands. Yet He is the One who will soon be exalted to the right hand of power, and come again in glory.

On earth there was a power strong enough to drive away all the effects of sin, for the power of God showed itself in goodness. But this only awakened the natural enmity of the human heart against Him. There was no motive for the death of Jesus; this enmity was the only cause. What took away the terrible effects of sin did not take the sin itself out of man's heart. It revealed God enough to awaken the natural enmity of the heart, and so to show what that heart is.

Goodness in human form had been shamefully betrayed, cruelly treated and rejected. A solemn legal process, religious and civil, condemned Him as worthy of death in its most shameful form. "This is the heir. Come, let us kill him," had been the language of the leaders of the nation. But God "raised him from the dead and gave him glory," and so reversed the verdict of the world.

By condemning the Lord Jesus they had badly broken their own law. Now some of the council, though they sit in the highest court in Israel, lower themselves further and turn to physical abuse, spitting and mockery. They vent their hateful spite against this gentle, faithful, harmless Man of sorrows. This is what moral weakness falls back on — and it comes from men who held the place of religious prominence in the land.

It teaches us much to see that religious apostasy always leads the way in insulting God, in persecuting the people of God, and in bloodthirsty cruelty. Nothing sears the conscience, hardens the mind and steels the heart like the form of godliness without the power. Where grace and truth are not the rest of the mind and the stay of the heart, the fuss and busy activity of outward religious worship and service has always destroyed even the kinder feelings of people.

So they condemned Him to death. They spat on Him and struck Him. They covered His face so that He could not see who was hitting Him. Then they scornfully called on Him to say, as a prophet would, who had struck Him. Mark notes that the officers hit Him with their hands.

All this was outrage and inhuman cruelty and anguish and suffering. Was there no human heart to pity Him or feel for Him? No... But what of Peter, who really loved Jesus in his heart; Peter, who sincerely thought and said he would die for Jesus? What was he doing when brutal men blindfolded Jesus and struck Him cruelly? Hush, while we tell it: he was denying Jesus, with cursing and swearing. Can we want any greater proof that we cannot trust ourselves, or our love, or our promises?

In the eyes of these leaders, blinded by unbelief, the truth looks like blasphemy. Not one voice speaks against it: "they all condemned Him as deserving death." The One who will soon be exalted to the right hand of power, and will come again in glory, submits perfectly to the Father's will. He offers no resistance to those who spit in His face and strike Him with their hands.

The insults of men only served to bring out the perfection of Jesus. It was all met in the spirit of perfect submission. No rebellious word escaped His lips, no angry look clouded the face that man spat upon.

"I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pull out the beard; I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting." How solemn the thought! What a picture of God standing in the presence of man! His humiliation should have made Him infinitely more precious, since it was the unmatched proof of His love. Instead it gave man, led by Satan, the chance he wanted to insult Him to the utmost — and He did not revile in return.

What will those men feel when they stand before Him! "I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting" is the language of the One before whose face earth and heaven flee away in Revelation 20. So glorious is He!... The Lord said to the chief of sinners, "Why are you persecuting me?" There are none too vile and loathsome for a Saviour's grace.

Notice in this corrected version of the various accounts that the word is the high priest's "court," not palace. The word "palace" fits the governor's residence better. Confusion on this point has hidden the truth. Peter was not where they held the first questioning. He was "outside" and "below" in the courtyard.

How solemn is Peter's path in these solemn scenes! Scripture records it not so that we dwell on his failure and belittle a devoted servant of the Lord. It records it so that we may learn the evil of our own hearts and take heed to ourselves. When the Lord warns Peter of his coming denial, Peter, in self-confidence, contradicts the Lord and boasts about how devoted he is. When, a little later, the Lord is watching and praying, Peter is sleeping. When the Lord is silent in the presence of His enemies, like a lamb before her shearers, Peter is actually striking with a sword. When the Lord is making the good confession before the high priest, Peter is denying the Lord before a simple servant girl.

What steps we see in Peter's downward course, leading to his denial of the Lord he loved! First, declaring he was ready to die for Him, although the Lord had just told him that Satan was asking to have him, and that He was praying for him. Next, sleeping when he should have been watching. Then fighting when he should have been quiet. Then following at a distance when he should have been near. And now sitting down side by side with the enemies of Christ, and warming himself! With such a lead-up, one can only expect what followed.

Let us beware of fires, of warmth and comfort and pleasure, created by the enemies of the Lord Jesus. How many young Christians have forgotten this, and paid dearly for it. Peter identified himself with the world. He is now ashamed to identify himself with a rejected Master.

There seemed to be nothing here to cause terror. Yet even this most devoted of the disciples was powerless — the most ardent in his love, at least, and the most eager to show it. He was too powerless to face even the nearness of death. A servant girl's word was enough to bring out his denial of the Lord!

The early church generally accepted that Peter the apostle dictated and approved Mark's Gospel. Where something is to Peter's discredit, as in his denial of Christ, Mark gives the details of his failures — much detail, and no excuse. But Mark passes over anything to Peter's credit. For instance, John says that Peter drew his sword in Gethsemane to defend his Master and struck one of the attacking party. Mark records the event, but does not give Peter's name; he simply says, "one of those who stood by."

He was confident in himself. It was not the crude confidence of an unbeliever, no doubt. But it was still confidence built on his own estimate of what his love for Jesus would let him do or bear... Now, in this way, he was humbled. He had learnt what man is on the one hand, and what God is on the other. If the Lord was to use Peter more than all, it was fitting that Peter should learn by experience, more than any, his own more-than-nothingness.

There he was, among the enemies of the Lord, far away from Jesus. No wonder Satan was too strong for him. If we, who belong to the Lord now, go among worldly people and try to warm ourselves at the world's fire, we can only expect Satan to trip us up too. It was a frightening position for Peter. He was sitting at the fire among the men who had just taken his Master prisoner, tied Him up, and were plotting His death.

His first denial happened when the servant girl let him in through the small gate of the courtyard. John tells us that the girl who kept the door was the first to challenge him. Matthew says she came to him as he sat outside in the courtyard. Both Mark and Luke tell us the first denial took place as he sat by the fire. There is no inconsistency in these statements. The facts, I conclude, are these: the girl began to challenge him at the door, then followed him to the fireplace. There others joined in her taunting.

While the people of Judea looked down on Galilee, the people of Galilee looked down on Nazareth. The "honest" Nathanael, himself a Galilean, said of Jesus in mild contempt, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?"

Here his failure, repeated under pressure, first drew out his shame and fear of confessing Jesus the Nazarene… So he is a self-confident servant who must learn from the only Perfect Servant. By grace he becomes faithful at last.

There seemed to be nothing there to cause terror. Yet this was the most devoted of the disciples — at least, the most ardent in his love and the most energetic in showing it. He was so powerless to face even the nearness of death that one servant girl's word brought out his denial of the Lord!

Step by step he had approached this sad and sorrowful moment. He did not plunge suddenly into the outright denial of the Lord; he never meant to say what he said. Suppose someone had told him, "Peter, you are going to curse and swear, saying, I do not know the man." He would have shuddered in horror and vowed he could never do such a thing. Little by little he moved towards that awful denial. "Watch and pray," the Lord had said, "that you may not enter into temptation." Peter had slept; he had neglected prayer. He could not watch one hour with his Lord. Here he took the first step.

How solemn is Peter's course in these scenes! Scripture records it, not so that we should dwell on his failure and belittle a devoted servant of the Lord. It records it so that we may learn the evil of our own hearts and take heed to ourselves. When the Lord warns Peter of his coming denial, Peter, in self-confidence, contradicts the Lord and boasts of his devotion. When, a little later, the Lord is watching and praying, Peter is sleeping. When the Lord is silent before His enemies, like a lamb before her shearers, Peter is actually striking with a sword. When the Lord is making the good confession before the high priest, Peter is denying the Lord before a simple servant girl.

It is a question of the high priest's "court," not palace. The word "palace" fits the governor's residence better... Confusion on this point has hidden the truth. Peter was not where the first questioning took place. He was "outside" and "below" in the courtyard.

In Peter's case the stages of decline are clearly marked. First, boasting in his own strength. Second, sleeping when he should have been praying. Third, drawing his sword when he should have been bowing his head in meekness. Fourth, following at a distance. Fifth, making himself comfortable among the open enemies of Christ.

However sincere a man may be, he must come to recognise his utter weakness. It is a humbling lesson, but a very useful one, and it makes the Lord's grace and patience shine out. It is very important to remember — and we learn it clearly here — that sincerity is not enough to keep us right. It is quite a human quality! We also need the Lord's strength against the schemes of the devil and the fear of the world. If the Lord is not there, a young girl can upset an apostle. The fear of man is a dreadful snare for the soul, and this fear worked powerfully in Peter's heart.

Peter saw the net of evidence closing in around him with its fine mesh. So his denials became more violent. First, a pretence that he did not understand. Second, a flat denial. Third, a claim that he did not even know the Lord, along with curses and swearing.

Still, he could not stay in the presence of his own falsehood. He goes out into the porch: "and the rooster crowed." This was the Lord's warning to him... There was nothing there to cause terror. Yet even this most devoted of the disciples — or at least the most eager in his love and the most forceful in his declarations — was so powerless to face death even close at hand that a servant girl's word was enough to bring out his denial of the Lord!

In the account of Peter's fall, Mark has noted that the Lord said to His self-confident disciple, "Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times." He has also noted how it came true. A rooster crowed just after Peter's first denial. About an hour later the rooster crowed a second time, just after Peter had denied his Master for the third time. Peter, we read, remembered the words and wept.

Peter should have remembered the word that Jesus had said to him, and been warned by it. I ask you, my Christian reader: is the rooster crowing for you today? That is, is the Word of the Lord speaking home to you today about something? If so, pay attention to it, get nearer to Jesus... Peter paid no attention to the first crowing of the rooster, but went on to deny Him again, with oaths and curses.

It is always the word of the Lord that produces real repentance, whether in a saint or a sinner. It is not human feeling, nor shame, nor the fear of being found out... Had Peter believed Christ's word about his own complete weakness, he would have been kept. But he did not believe it. "Even though they all fall away," he said, "I will not."

When a girl says plainly that he too had been with Jesus of Nazareth, he denies it just as plainly. The words of a girl defeat the courage of this bold, strong fisherman. Then another girl told those standing nearby that Peter was one of them. It seems they took this up and spoke to Peter himself about being a disciple of Jesus (John 18:25). Having once given in to his fear, what could he do now but deny it a second time?

The word "again" certainly seems to belong to "began" in any case. How little poor Peter gained by having the fire, and going out into the porch! It is no use.

Matthew speaks of another servant girl. Mark speaks of the same girl as before (the doorkeeper of John). Luke speaks of "another," but a "man." John gives the key to all this with moral certainty by his use of the plural — "they said therefore." He clearly shows, even to a doubter, that what each of the three writers says may be all and equally authentic... The two girls and a man may have taken part in what the fourth Gospel sums up this way. Matthew and Mark make it plain that the second charge was made in front of several bystanders on the spot, probably the porch or forecourt where Peter had gone out. And Peter's denial was then repeated — not a single act like the first.

What steps we see in Peter's downward course, leading to his denial of the Lord he loved! First, he declared he was ready to die for Him — and the Lord had just told him that Satan was asking to have him, and that He was praying for him. Next, he slept when he should have been watching. Then he fought when he should have been quiet. Then he followed far off when he should have been near. And now he sits down side by side with the enemies of Christ, warming himself! With such a start one can only expect what followed.

Peter's total failure as a servant comes out in detail, while Christ's grace toward him shines to the end all the more brightly... Here his repeated failure under pressure first drew out his shame and his fear of confessing Jesus the Nazarene. Only here do we find the Lord's warning in its most exact form (Mark 14:30), and here too its no less exact fulfilment (verses 68, 72). How gracious of the Master! How base in the servant — only to find His goodness still more abundant! Truly, where sin increased, grace abounded all the more!

It has been well said, "Watchfulness and prayer are always needed. But only one person will be blameless, shameless, and without offence: the one who walks in the solemn conviction that he has to fear the outbreak of the foulest sins, unless his soul is occupied with Jesus."... The One who searches and knows is the One who alone is able to keep us from falling, and restore us when we fall.

When a girl says firmly that he too had been with Jesus of Nazareth, he denies it just as firmly. The words of a girl defeat the courage of this bold, strong fisherman. Then another girl told the people standing nearby that Peter was one of them. They clearly took this up and spoke to Peter himself about being a disciple of Jesus. Once he had given way to his fear, what could he do now but deny it a second time?

The Galileans probably pronounced words differently. Or the language spoken in Galilee was not as polished as the language spoken in Jerusalem. Either way, Peter's speech gave him away. But the voice of that same Peter, under the power of God, was mighty on the day of Pentecost — even though his hearers said, "Are not all these who are speaking Galileans?" (Acts 2:7)

There was nothing there to cause terror. Yet even this most devoted of the disciples — or at least the warmest in his love and the most eager to show it — was completely powerless. He could not face even the nearness of death. A servant girl's word was enough to bring out his denial of the Lord! … But the more they pressed the truth on him, the more he backed away, and in his utter fear he began to curse and to swear.

The Lord was silent in grace in the face of His enemies' malice. Peter was silent in fear as he warmed himself at the world's fire, among the Lord's enemies. When the Lord speaks, He confesses the truth. When Peter speaks, he denies it.

Think of the sad steps that led to his open denial of his Lord: the sleep in the garden, the following far behind, the sitting down in the judgment hall to warm himself at a fire lit by Christ's enemies. Let us beware of fires — of warmth and comfort and pleasure made by the enemies of the Lord Jesus. Many young Christians have forgotten this and paid dearly for it. Peter identified himself with the world. He is now ashamed to identify himself with a rejected Master.

In truth Peter had fallen before he ever got into the high priest's palace. Self-confidence was his ruin. … These were boastful words, and he meant them at the time, for Peter was plainly no hypocrite. But his self-confidence threw him off his guard and took him away from Christ. "Let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall" had no place in his mind. He failed to pray that he might not be led into temptation, though the Lord had told him to. So he slept when he should have been gathering strength.

Peter was as truly a saint of God in the high priest's palace as on the mountain where he saw the Lord's glory. But he had to learn what he was, through a process as humbling and painful as any soul could pass through. … We do not know what we may do until we are in the situation. The great thing for all of us is to walk humbly with our God day by day. We should stay deeply aware of our own complete weakness, and cling to Him who is able to keep us from falling.

Real repentance always comes from the word of the Lord, whether in a saint or a sinner. It does not come from human feeling, or shame, or the fear of being found out. The word Jesus spoke did the work inside him. … The word of the Lord does two things: it convicts and it heals. … If Peter had believed Christ's word about his own complete weakness, he would have been kept.

"I do not know this man of whom you speak." Yet "this man" was his Saviour, and he knew it — too well, and too little. What a contrast now! "Who do you say that I am?" Jesus had asked him long before. His answer was, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Now he says, "I do not know this man." Jesus to him now was a mere man, unknown to Peter.

It was first a simple denial, in answer to the challenge of the maid who kept the high priest's door (Matthew 26:69-70). In answer to the questions of several in the porch, he added an oath to his second denial. Then a relative of the man whose ear he cut off in the garden recognised him (John 18:26). He broke out into a whole volley of oaths and curses. "I do not know this man of whom you speak" (Mark 14:71). Only the first two Gospel writers record the cursing and swearing. Luke and John are content with the denial itself.

He did not believe our Lord's warning. If he had, he would not have entered into temptation. He would have watched, prayed, and been kept through faith. He must therefore learn by bitter experience what the flesh is... He was confident in himself. It was not the crude confidence of an unbeliever, no doubt. But it was still confidence built on his own estimate of what his love for Jesus would enable him to do or bear.

When the Lord warns Peter of his coming denial, Peter, in self-confidence, contradicts the Lord and boasts of his devotion. When, a little later, the Lord is watching and praying, Peter is sleeping. When the Lord is silent before His enemies, like a lamb before her shearers, Peter is actually striking with a sword. When the Lord is making the good confession before the high priest, Peter is denying the Lord before a simple servant girl.

Does the reader feel inclined to doubt that Peter was, despite all this, a genuine saint of God? Some do question it, but their questioning is a serious mistake... Peter was as truly a saint of God in the high priest's palace as he was on the mount of transfiguration... We do not know what we may do until we are in the circumstances. The great thing for us all is to walk humbly with our God day by day, deeply aware of our own utter weakness.

The real Gospel of Peter is the one that stands in our Bibles with the title "Mark": at least that view was generally accepted in the early church, by men who regarded the Gospel by Mark as dictated and approved by Peter the apostle. Besides the historical evidence, there is this. Where anything discreditable to Peter comes up, as in his denial of Christ, Mark gives the particulars of his failure with much detail and no excuse. But anything to Peter's credit he passes over.

It is always the word of the Lord that produces real repentance, whether in a saint or a sinner. It is not human feeling, nor shame, nor the fear of being found out — it was the word Jesus had spoken, working within him... The word of the Lord does two things: it convicts and it heals.

Why did Peter say to the enemies of his Lord, "I do not know this man of whom you speak"? To save his life. He then felt, "If I own Him, I shall die." And so to save his life he denied Him. "Now," says Christ, "you shall get another opportunity of glorifying God."

I do not say that his repentance was complete. You will find that the Lord touched the deepest part of him some time afterwards. Still, there was genuine feeling of his sin, shame, and anguish of spirit... It is always the word of the Lord that produces real repentance, whether in a saint or a sinner. It is not human feeling, nor shame, nor the fear of being found out — it was the word that Jesus spoke, working within. The word of the Lord does two things: it convicts and it heals. Had Peter believed Christ's word about his own complete weakness, he would have been kept. But he did not believe it.

We exercise our minds when we use them for reflection and meditation... We do not often think of Peter as a man given to reflection, yet twice we find him so engaged at critical moments in his life. "Peter called to mind the word Jesus said to him… and when he thought about it he wept" (Mark 14:72). "While Peter thought (or pondered) on the vision, the Spirit said to him, Behold, three men are seeking you" (Acts 10:19).

"Wept," or "kept weeping" (imperfect tense).

Mark gives what the other two Gospel writers leave out: the rooster crowing twice. The lessons from Peter's fall are simple. He had to go through this terrible experience so that he would break down and learn his own weakness. And how we all need to know that in ourselves we are good for nothing.

The real Gospel of Peter is the one that stands in our Bibles under the title "Mark"... many in the early church regarded it as dictated and approved by Peter the apostle... Whenever Mark mentions something that puts Peter in a bad light, such as his denial of Christ, he gives the details of the failure in full, with no excuse. But anything to Peter's credit he leaves out.

Repentance did its proper work in his soul, as he saw his folly and sin in the light of his Lord's love. Here is the difference between repentance and remorse. Repentance is the judgment I form of my sin in the light of love and grace known. Remorse comes from viewing the sin only in the light of its probable results. Repentance gives birth to hope; remorse leads only to despair... Judas, who did not know what grace was, went out and hanged himself in remorse over his terrible wickedness. Peter, who did know what grace was, and who knew then better than ever how deeply the Lord loved him, went out and wept bitterly. The last thing Peter had done was to deny his Master, and the next thing his Master did was to die for Peter.

Peter has broken down; but the Lord remains, and the Lord is the same. He was rejected by the nation, betrayed by a false disciple, denied by a true disciple, and forsaken by all. None of these sufferings could turn the Lord from His own or dry up the love of His heart... The words Jesus had spoken broke poor Peter's heart and led to tears of repentance... The One who searches and knows is the One who alone is able to keep us from falling, and to restore us when we fall.