Descending (Luke 22:47-62)

Luke, as with other Gospel writers when describing the final twenty-four hours of Jesus’ earthly ministry, provided insights into the depths of Jesus’ humiliation. Each of the details that the author mentions was a real experience for the Saviour. We can focus for now on the aspects of his humiliation connected to his betrayal, arrest and treatment he received in the high priest’s palace.

It is important to remember that his humiliation was Jesus’ own choice, and not primarily the choice of his opponents. As Paul says in Philippians 2, Jesus humbled himself to the death of the cross. He made himself of no reputation, and that statement is a helpful guide for enabling us to analyse each stage of the descent. Although initially it may not look like it, Jesus is never a helpless victim of circumstances beyond his control. Rather he is making his way down to the depths of the cross, and there are items in each stage that reveal features of what he experienced as he humbled himself.

The false disciple (vv. 47-49)

The first incident that Luke mentions in this passage is the arrival of Judas. Judas had made his deal with the priests to betray Jesus to them, and he had chosen what he regarded as the easiest location to arrest him. But Jesus had told him in the upper room to do his betrayal quickly, which indicates that the Saviour was in charge somehow.

It must have been a shock to the disciples to see Judas leading the crowd. Yet we know that backsliding, while it often is a process, usually appears sudden to others. A person who used to meet with the people of God does so no longer. Yet all backsliding is a deliberate choice. Sometimes they repent and return, sometimes they don’t. But to make that choice is a slippery slope. Judas would discover that shortly.

Why did Judas want to kiss Jesus? It was not a sign of affection. Rather it was a means of identification, which is a reminder that many people did not know what Jesus looked like. Yet there is a hint of the contempt of hatred presenting itself in the form of a kiss. Judas despised Jesus at that moment. He loathed the most beautiful man who had ever lived. Jesus asked Judas why he betrayed in this manner. We are not told how Judas responded. The silence is meant to speak to us. What could someone say in reply to such a question?

What details of Jesus’ humiliation stand out here? He was not easily recognised, which indicates that he was not as popular as we sometimes imagine. And he was betrayed for a paltry sum and taunted with a kiss of contempt.

The futile defence (vv. 49-50)

Prior coming to the garden, while they were leaving the upper room, Jesus and the disciples had spoken about the use of swords. The disciples were still thinking at the level of earthly rather than heavenly activities, and they possessed two such weapons. We know from other accounts that it was Peter who used a sword at this time.

Peter did possess natural bravery on this occasion because he and the other disciples would have been outnumbered by the men with Judas. He swung his sword in a wild manner and managed to cut off the ear of a servant of the high priest called Malchus. Peter had his attitude towards the opponents, but what was the attitude of Jesus? During his own troubles he healed the damage caused by Peter. Surely, this action by Jesus reveals the greatness of his love for sinners.

Yet we are thinking of his humiliation. Regarding his creatorial power, he gave an example of it when he healed the servant’s ear. What effect did that have on the band of soldiers? None. Although they saw what he could do, they did not admire what he could do. No one stood up for him after he healed the man. No one wondered if he could do something great for them. He was ignored as far as his ability to do good was concerned.

The fierce darkness (vv. 52-53)

We see the calmness of the Saviour in the question he addressed to those leading the arresting party. They had put him at the level of a common criminal. There had been many opportunities to arrest him while he had taught in the temple. They were not prepared to arrest him in daylight, and they had schemed to do so in this manner when darkness had come. He answered his own question by saying that they were not the servants of God but agents of the kingdom of darkness. They had imagined that their scheme was theirs, but they had been led along by a more powerful ruler than Pilate or any other political ruler. Even as they planned to arrest him under the cover of darkness they were the servants of the devil.

What about the humiliation of Jesus? Here are the religious and civil leadership of Israel doing the work of the devil against the Messiah who had been prophesied in the Old Testament, the book by which those men professed to live. They arranged the rituals at the temple, and they interpreted the Bible for the people. Yet they were spiritually blind, unable to recognise that the Saviour was in front of them. Despite the evidence that he had given regarding his identity, they wanted to get rid of him and eagerly grabbed their opportunity. They were glad that their plan was working. Imagine if we can what it would have felt to the Saviour to observe their hatred of him, their determination to reject him and his teaching about the kingdom of God, and their resolve to punish him as an enemy of God. They were taking sides with the enemy of their souls against the only One who could rescue them from his strong grip.

The fear of discovery (vv. 54-62)

Luke omits the detail that the disciples of Jesus then ran away and left him to be arrested by the priests and their gang. Instead, he focuses on the experience of Peter, even describing his contribution by a powerful word picture, when saying that he ‘was following at a distance’.

We know that Peter had been warned earlier about his threefold denial of Jesus, but to begin with he seemed to have forgotten the warning. Instead of keeping to himself, he warmed himself at a communal fire. Three times he was identified as belonging to Jesus and three times he denied it.

First, a servant girl recognised him as a disciple. We don’t know when she had seen him previously, but she was certain about her claim. She seems only to have stated her opinion once (v. 56) and Peter replied to her once (v. 57). The second person to link Peter with Jesus was more persistent because he kept saying to Peter that he was a disciple. Peter in response to him kept on saying that he was not one of them (v. 58).

They were followed by another man about an hour later who was persistent in asserting that Peter was a disciple from Galilee (v. 59). Peter seems only to have answered this man once. Maybe he would have repeated his third denial, but he was interrupted by the crowing of a rooster.

It is obvious that Jesus, although he was being tried inside by the Jewish authorities, was fully aware of Peter’s presence in the courtyard and in his inscrutable providence was able to place himself in a position where he could see Peter and where Peter could see him. Various suggestions are made as people try and work out where each was standing. Suffice to know that Jesus knew when to look and how to look.

What can be said about the look of Jesus? How would we describe it? It was a particular look, preserved only for Peter at that time. It was a probing look because it went through Peter like an arrow and raised in his mind the warning he had received earlier from Jesus about his denial. It was a pained look given to a disciple who had denied him through cowardice despite having been warned about his self-confidence. It was a passionate look which somehow would have assured Peter that the Shepherd still had his eye on his wandering sheep even although he was among wolves. It was also a physician’s look designed to put Peter on the path of spiritual recovery, a journey that he would not have imagined as possible given the nature of his terrible sin against his Master.

What did the look of Jesus do for Peter? It brought a sense of reality into his outlook. Why was he sitting there with the enemies of Jesus, warming himself at their fire? It caused him also to realise the repulsiveness of his proud boastings about his capabilities, his rash dependence on his imagined strength of character. Moreover, it brought about the sorrow of repentance in his heart. There is no benefit in having a sense of reality or of repulsiveness if repentance is absent. Without repentance, there would only be remorse, which would not be much different from what Judas had felt after realising that he had done wrong in betraying Jesus. The one thing that is certain about Peter is that he left the courtyard in a better spiritual state than when he entered it, even although it would not have seemed that way to an onlooker.

What does this tell us about the humiliation of Jesus? It reveals to us that deep waters cannot quench love, that the further he descends he yet maintains his love for his people, and he will continue to do so until he dismisses his spirit after he has paid the penalty on the cross.

The foul derision (vv. 63-65)

Having begun the recovery process of his disciple, Jesus continued along the path of his humiliation in the high priest’s house. The One who could see into the heart of Peter was asked whether he could see those who were hitting him after they blindfolded him. Luke tells us that they blasphemed against Jesus, which means that they were denying his deity. They treated him with contempt, and he allowed it to happen because he knew that he had not yet reached the bottom of the depths of his humiliation. His endurance was a sign of his great love and a restraining of the divine justice that those despising him deserved.

Lessons

As we consider the various stages in the Lord’s humiliation, one feature of him that should focus our minds is his amazing patience and willingness to endure those experiences. He did not walk through them blind, unaware of what was going to happen to him. All the details were known to him, but he was prepared to humble himself in order to pay the penalty for the sins of his people. When we read the account of each stage, we should say to ourselves, ‘He went through this in order for sinners to be saved.’

Obviously, the stage that gets more attention is the one in which Peter played a supporting role. There are many lessons that we can take from it, but for now I would mention two for us to think about.

First, we should affirm that it is amazing how the power of the Lord’s word can speak when we don’t expect it to do so. Peter seems to have forgotten what he had been told about his coming denial. But one glance from Jesus was enough to make that warning echo in his mind very loudly. If we choose to sin against a biblical warning, we should realise that God’s Word will come in power about it, although we cannot predict when that will happen. But it will take place, and when it does it will not be a pleasant experience.

Second, as has often been said in one way or another, if we have sinned like Peter, then we should weep like Peter. The only acceptable response by us to our sins is repentance that is an expression of biblical faith. Repentance should be a common and regular activity by us, but sometimes believers sense the eye of the Lord is on them leading them to grieve over their sins of backsliding. When that happens, they will go and weep bitterly, doing so in the knowledge that Jesus wants them to do so.