rwp Matthew:26:63-67
rwp@Matthew:26:63 @{Held his peace} (\esipa\). Kept silent, imperfect tense. Jesus refused to answer the bluster of Caiaphas. {I adjure thee by the living God} (\exorkiz se kata tou theou tou zntos\). Songs:Caiaphas put Jesus on oath in order to make him incriminate himself, a thing unlawful in Jewish jurisprudence. He had failed to secure any accusation against Jesus that would stand at all. But Jesus did not refuse to answer under solemn oath, clearly showing that he was not thinking of oaths in courts of justice when he prohibited profanity. The charge that Caiaphas makes is that Jesus claims to be the Messiah, the Son of God. To refuse to answer would be tantamount to a denial. Songs:Jesus answered knowing full well the use that would be made of his confession and claim.
rwp@Matthew:26:64 @{Thou hast said} (\su eipas\). This is a Greek affirmative reply. Mark (Mark:14:62|) has it plainly, "I am" (\eimi\). But this is not all that Jesus said to Caiaphas. He claims that the day will come when Jesus will be the Judge and Caiaphas the culprit using the prophetic language in strkjv@Daniel:7:13| and strkjv@Psalms:109:1|. It was all that Caiaphas wanted.
rwp@Matthew:26:65 @{He hath spoken blasphemy} (\eblasphmsen\). There was no need of witnesses now, for Jesus had incriminated himself by claiming under oath to be the Messiah, the Son of God. Now it would not be blasphemy for the real Messiah to make such a claim, but it was intolerable to admit that Jesus could be the Messiah of Jewish hope. At the beginning of Christ's ministry he occasionally used the word Messiah of himself, but he soon ceased, for it was plain that it would create trouble. The people would take it in the sense of a political revolutionist who would throw off the Roman yoke. If he declined that role, the Pharisees would have none of him for that was the kind of a Messiah that they desired. But the hour has now come. At the Triumphal Entry Jesus let the Galilean crowds hail him as Messiah, knowing what the effect would be. Now the hour has struck. He has made his claim and has defied the High Priest.
rwp@Matthew:26:66 @{He is worthy of death} (\enochos thanatou estin\). Held in the bonds of death (\en, ech\) as actually guilty with the genitive (\thanatou\). The dative expresses liability as in strkjv@Matthew:5:21| (\ti krisei\) and as \eis\ and the accusative (Matthew:5:22|). They took the vote though it was at night and they no longer had the power of death since the Romans took it away from them. Death was the penalty of blasphemy (Leviticus:24:15|). But they enjoyed taking it as their answer to his unanswerable speeches in the temple that dreadful Tuesday a few days before. It was unanimous save that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus did not agree. They were probably absent and not even invited as being under suspicion for being secret disciples of Christ.
rwp@Matthew:26:68 @{Thou Christ} (\Christe\). With definite sneer at his claims under oath in strkjv@26:63|. With uncontrolled glee and abandon like a lot of hoodlums these doctors of divinity insulted Jesus. They actually spat in his face, buffeted him on the neck (\ekolaphisan\, from \kolaphos\ the fist), and struck him in the face with the palms of their hands (\erapisan\, from \rapis\, a rod), all personal indignities after the legal injustice already done. They thus gave vent to their spite and hatred.
rwp@Matthew:26:69 @{Thou also} (\kai su\). Peter had gone within (\es\) the palace (26:58|), but was sitting {without} (\ex\) the hall where the trial was going on in the open central court with the servants or officers (\hupretn\, under rowers, literally, strkjv@26:58|) of the Sanhedrin. But he could possibly see through the open door above what was going on inside. It is not plain at what stage of the Jewish trial the denials of Peter took place nor the precise order in which they came as the Gospels give them variously. This maid (\paidisk\, slave girl) stepped up to Peter as he was sitting in the court and pointedly said: "Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean." Peter was warming himself by the fire and the light shone in his face. She probably had noticed Peter come in with John the Beloved Disciple who went on up into the hall of trial. Or she may have seen Peter with Jesus on the streets of Jerusalem.
rwp@Matthew:26:70 @{I know not what thou sayest} (\ouk oida ti legeis\). It was an affectation of extreme ignorance (Bruce) that deceived no one. It was an easy and ancient dodge and easy subterfuge. Dalman (_Words of Jesus_, 80f.) suggests that Peter used the Galilean Aramaean word for know instead of the Judean Aramaean word which betrayed at once his Galilean residence.
rwp@Matthew:26:71 @{Into the porch} (\eis ton pulna\). But Peter was not safe out here, for another maid recognized him and spoke of him as "this fellow" (\houtos\) with a gesture to those out there.
rwp@Matthew:26:72 @{With an oath} (\meta horkou\). This time Peter added an oath, probably a former habit so common to the Jews at that time, and denied acquaintance with Jesus. He even refers to Jesus as "the man" (\ton anthrpon\), an expression that could convey contempt, "the fellow."
rwp@Matthew:26:73 @{They that stood by} (\hoi hesttes\). The talk about Peter continued. Luke (Luke:22:59|) states that the little while was about an hour. The bystanders came up to Peter and bluntly assert that he was "of a truth" (\alths\) one of the followers of Jesus for his speech betrayed him. Even the Revised Version retains "bewrayeth," quaint old English for "betrayeth." The Greek has it simply "makes thee evident" (\dlon se poiei\). His dialect (\lalia\) clearly revealed that he was a Galilean. The Galileans had difficulty with the gutterals and Peter's second denial had exposed him to the tormenting raillery of the loungers who continued to nag him.
rwp@Matthew:26:74 @{Then began he to curse and to swear} (\tote rxato katathematizein kai omnuein\). He repeated his denial with the addition of profanity to prove that he was telling the truth instead of the lie that they all knew. His repeated denials gave him away still more, for he could not pronounce the Judean gutterals. He called down on himself (\katathematizein\) imprecations in his desperate irritation and loss of self-control at his exposure. {The cock crew} (\alektn ephnsen\). No article in the Greek, just "a cock crew" at that juncture, "straightway" (\euthus\). But it startled Peter.
rwp@Matthew:26:75 @{Peter remembered} (\emnsth ho Petros\). A small thing, but _magna circumstantia_ (Bengel). In a flash of lightning rapidity he recalled the words of Jesus a few hours before (Matthew:26:34|) which he had then scouted with the proud boast that "even if I must die with thee, yet will I not deny thee" (26:35|). And now this triple denial was a fact. There is no extenuation for the base denials of Peter. He had incurred the dread penalty involved in the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:10:33| of denial by Jesus before the Father in heaven. But Peter's revulsion of feeling was as sudden as his sin. {He went out and wept bitterly} (\exelthn ex eklausen pikrs\). Luke adds that the Lord turned and looked upon Peter (Luke:22:61|). That look brought Peter back to his senses. He could not stay where he now was with the revilers of Jesus. He did not feel worthy or able to go openly into the hall where Jesus was. Songs:outside he went with a broken heart. The constative aorist here does not emphasize as Mark's imperfect does (Mark:14:72|, \eklaien\) the continued weeping that was now Peter's only consolation. The tears were bitter, all the more so by reason of that look of understanding pity that Jesus gave him. One of the tragedies of the Cross is the bleeding heart of Peter. Judas was a total wreck and Peter was a near derelict. Satan had sifted them all as wheat, but Jesus had prayed specially for Peter (Luke:22:31f.|). Will Satan show Peter to be all chaff as Judas was?
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}