Jesus answered him, “If what I said is wrong, bear witness about the wrong; but if what I said is right, why do you strike me?”
Jesus has just told the high priest to ask the people who heard Him teach in public. An officer answers with a blow to the face, and Jesus replies with a question that puts the court itself on trial.
Insult in place of an answer
The men whose job was to keep order in the court were the ones who broke it.
Hamilton SmithThe high priest has only to ask those who had heard Him, and they would bear witness to His teaching. No one could answer the Lord's reply. But, as so often when an argument has no answer, the opponent falls back on insult and abuse. So the officers, whose job was to keep order, strike the Lord. The Lord meets these insults with righteous and fearless dignity.
A demand for evidence
He was struck without any charge, so He asks for the one thing a court must produce: evidence.
L. M. GrantAn officer struck the Lord with the palm of his hand. He was annoyed that the Lord had seen through the high priest's breach of court procedure. But evil could not draw from the Lord of glory any resentful, bitter response. Instead He asks: if He had spoken evil, let the officer bear witness of the evil, which is the only proper procedure in court. But if He had spoken well, why this violence? Again, only the Lord acts with the calm, judicial fairness of a righteous judge.
The blow came after a rebuke the court could not shake off.
J. T. MawsonThe whole court must have felt the power and justice of that rebuke, despite its excitement at its own injustice and its success so far. The Lord's quiet answer to that blow showed that a hearing without witnesses was illegal.
The challenge no one could take up
He can safely ask for evidence, because there is none to find.
F. B. HoleThe reply of Jesus was conclusive. There was no evil to which any could bear witness: no one could convince Him of sin.
Compared with Paul before the council
Paul later stood before a high priest who ordered him struck. Even he did not answer like his Master.
J. N. DarbyBrought before the Council, the apostle begins by declaring his innocence. "And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth." This was violence, certainly. But it came from Paul's own self-justification, not from testimony borne to Christ. Paul replies with an insult, calling the high priest a "whitewashed wall." The man had deserved it, true. But such an answer did not show the meekness of Christ. When he is reproved, Paul owns his fault.
Turning the other cheek
Some argue from this verse that Jesus did not keep His own teaching about not resisting evil. What happened to Him later that night answers them.
William KellySome people pare down and whittle away His words. They are not ashamed to argue that He did not mean them literally. Their reason: when He was struck on the face for His answer to the high priest, He protested calmly while bowing to the insult. Was this paying evil back in its own coin? On the contrary, it was One who committed no sin, and no deceit was found in His mouth. When He was reviled, He did not revile in return. When He suffered, He did not threaten. In fact He offered far more than the other cheek. They spat in His face, beat Him, and struck Him with their hands with the utmost contempt. No! the Lord yielded to wrong instead of resisting it; and such is the true calling of the Christian.
He did rebuke the officer — but only with a question, and He said nothing about the rest.
Arend RemmersBut the Lord Jesus put His justified rebuke in the form of a mere question, and bore all other abuses silently. … As Christians, God has delivered us out of this present evil world, as Galatians 1:4 says. So we are not called to seek justice for ourselves. Of course, we must not drop our duty toward others if the authorities ask for it (as a witness in court, for example).
Summary
- Witness asked. Jesus taught in the open, so He sent His judges to the people who heard Him. The evidence was there for the asking.
- Witness refused. The officer had no answer, so he gave a blow instead. Insult is where opposition goes when the argument runs out.
- Witness demanded. His reply asks the court to name the wrong and prove it. That court was striking a man it could not charge.
- Witness impossible. No one could produce any evil, because there was none. The challenge still stands unanswered.
- Witness followed. He protested, bowed to the insult, and yielded to wrong instead of resisting it. That is the calling of those who follow Him.