Luke 22 commentary

LUKE 22 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus
1 Now the Festival of Unleavened Bread, called
the Passover, was approaching,
CLARKE, "The feast of unleavened bread, etc. - See this largely explained,
Exo_23:14 (note); Leviticus 23:2-40 (note), and on Mat_26:2 (note).
GILL, "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh,.... Which lasted seven
days; during which the Jews eat their bread without leaven, in commemoration of
the haste in which they went out of Egypt; being such, that they had not time to
leaven their dough, but took it with their kneadingtroughs along with them, as it was;
and as figurative of the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, with which the
Gospel feast is to be kept; see Exo_12:34.
Which is called the passover; because the Lord passed over the houses of the
Israelites, when he slew all the firstborn in Egypt; now the time of this feast drew
near, when the conspiracy was formed against the life of Christ: Matthew and Mark
are more precise, and suggest, that it was two days before the passover; see Mat_
26:2.
HENRY, "The year of the redeemed is now come, which had been from eternity
fixed in the divine counsels, and long looked for by them that waited for the
consolation of Israel. After the revolutions of many ages, it is at length come, Isa_
63:4. And, it is observable, it is in the very first month of that year that the
redemption is wrought out, so much in haste was the Redeemer to perform his
undertaking, so was he straitened till it was accomplished. It was in the same month,
and at the same time of the month (in the beginning of months, Exo_12:2), that God
by Moses brought Israel out of Egypt, that the Antitype might answer the type. Christ
is here delivered up, when the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, Luk_22:1.
About as long before that feast as they began to make preparation for it, here was
preparation making for our Passover's being offered for us.
JAMISON, "
BARCLAY, "AND SATAN ENTERED INTO JUDAS (Luke 22:1-6)
22:1-6 The Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover, was near,
and the chief priests and the scribes searched to find a way to destroy Jesus, for
they were afraid of the people. And Satan entered into Judas, who was called
Iscariot, who belonged to the number of the Twelve. So he went away and
discussed with the chief priests and captains how he might betray Jesus to them.
1

They were glad and they undertook to give him money. So he agreed, and he
began to look for a suitable time to betray him, when the mob were not there.
It was at Passover time that Jesus came to Jerusalem to die. The Feast of
Unleavened Bread is not, strictly speaking, the same thing as the Passover. The
Feast of Unleavened Bread lasted for a week, from 15th to 21st Nisan (April),
and the Passover itself was eaten on 15th Nisan. It commemorated the
deliverance of the people of Israel from their slavery in Egypt (Exodus 12:1-51 ).
On that night the angel of death smote the first-born son in every Egyptian
family; but he passed over the homes of the Israelites, because the lintels of their
doors were smeared with the blood of the lamb to distinguish them. On that
night they left so quickly that, at their last meal, there was no time to bake bread
with leaven. It was unleavened cakes they ate.
There were elaborate preparations for the Passover. Roads were repaired;
bridges were made safe; wayside tombs were whitewashed lest the pilgrim
should fail to see them, and so touch them and become unclean. For a month
before, the story and meaning of the Passover was the subject of the teaching of
every synagogue. Two days before the Passover there was in every house a
ceremonial search for leaven. The householder took a candle and solemnly
searched every nook and cranny in silence, and the last particle of leaven was
thrown out.
Every male Jew, who was of age and who lived within 15 miles of the holy city,
was bound by law to attend the Passover. But it was the ambition of every Jew in
every part of the world (as it is still) to come to the Passover in Jerusalem at least
once in his lifetime. To this day, when Jews keep the Passover in every land they
pray that they may keep it next year in Jerusalem. Because of this vast numbers
came to Jerusalem at the Passover time. Cestius was governor of Palestine in the
time of Nero and Nero tended to belittle the importance of the Jewish faith. To
convince Nero of it, Cestius took a census of the lambs slain at one particular
Passover. Josephus tells us that the number was 256,500. The law laid it down
that the minimum number for a Passover celebration was 10. That means that on
this occasion, if these figures are correct, there must have been more that
2,700,000 pilgrims to the Passover. It was in a city crowded like that that the
drama of the last days of Jesus was played out.
The atmosphere of Passover time was always inflammable. The headquarters of
the Roman government was at Caesarea, and normally only a small detachment
of troops was stationed at Jerusalem; but for the Passover season many more
were drafted in. The problem which faced the Jewish authorities was how to
arrest Jesus without provoking a riot. It was solved for them by the treachery of
Judas. Satan entered into Judas. Two things stand out.
(i) Just as God is ever looking for men to be his instruments, so is Satan. A man
can be the instrument of good or of evil, of God or of the devil. The Zoroastrians
see this whole universe as the battle ground between the god of the light and the
god of the dark, and in that battle a man must choose his side. We, too, know
that a man can be the servant of the light or of the dark.
2

(ii) But it remains true that Satan could not have entered into Judas unless Judas
had opened the door. There is no handle on the outside of the door of the human
heart. It must be opened from within.
To every man there openeth
A high way and a low;
And every man decideth
The way his soul shall go.
It is our own decision whether we will choose to be the instrument of Satan or a
weapon in the hand of God. We can enlist in either service. God help us choose
aright!
BENSON, "Luke 22:1-6. Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh — Being
to be celebrated within two days after our Lord had delivered the prophecies and
admonitions recorded above. Concerning this feast, see on Matthew 26:2. The
chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him — See on Matthew
26:3-5. But they feared the people — Lest, if they seized him openly, a tumult
should be raised among them, either to rescue him out of their hands, or to
avenge his death. Then entered Satan — For he is never wanting to assist those
whose hearts are bent upon mischief; into Judas — Being one of the twelve. This
was a circumstance of such high aggravation, that it is observable each of the
evangelists has marked it out in this view. See on Matthew 26:14-16, and Mark
14:10. He went — He went from Christ and his company, who were at Bethany,
in the house of Simon, to the house of Caiaphas, the high-priest, whom he knew
to be a most inveterate enemy to his Master, and having found means of
introducing himself, and communicating his general design, communed, or
conversed, with the chief priests and captains — Called captains of the temple,
Luke 22:52. They were Jewish officers, who presided over the guards which kept
watch every night in the temple. The result of their communing is not mentioned,
only by the sequel it appears, that he informed the priests of the place where his
Master used to spend the nights, and undertook to conduct a band of armed men
thither, who, in the absence of the multitude, might easily take him. And, because
none of them were so well acquainted with Jesus as to be able to distinguish him
from his disciples, in the darkness of the night, he agreed to point him out to
them by kissing him. And they were glad — When they heard his proposal, they
thought it very practicable, and rejoiced at so unexpected an offer from one of
his disciples, to facilitate their measures. And covenanted to give him money —
As a reward for that service. See on Matthew 26:4-16. And he promised — To
attend particularly to the affair; and sought opportunity to betray him — To put
him into their hands in as private a manner as possible; in the absence of the
multitude — That, knowing nothing of what was done, they might not raise a
tumult, and rescue him out of the hands of those that seized him.
COFFMAN, "The magnificent drama of our Lord's Passion rapidly unfolds in
3

this chapter. The Passover came on (Luke 22:1-2); Judas bargained to betray the
Saviour (Luke 22:3-6); the last Supper was eaten (Luke 22:7-23); the apostles
disputed about rank (Luke 22:24-30); Peter's denial was foretold (Luke
22:31-34); the changed condition of the apostles was announced (Luke 22:35-38);
an angel strengthened the Lord in Gethsemane (Luke 22:39-46); Jesus was
arrested (Luke 22:47-53); Peter denied him at the arraignment (Luke 22:54-62);
the Lord was mocked (Luke 22:63-65); he was condemned to death by the
Sanhedrin (Luke 22:66-71).
Now the feast of the unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.
And the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might put him to death; for
they feared the people. (Luke 22:1-2)
Feast of unleavened bread ... the Passover ... The terminology used here is strictly
in keeping with the common usage of those times; but it is nevertheless rather
loosely used. As Boles said:
The Passover, as used here, means either the meal, the feast day, or the whole
period of time. "Eat the passover" refers to the meal, as here, or to the whole
period of celebration in John 18:28.[1]
Furthermore, "the feast of unleavened bread" was used in several senses:
The feast of unleavened bread was the day the Passover lamb was slain.
According to Mosaic law, this was called the Passover and was followed by seven
days of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Leviticus 23:5,6). But at this time the
whole period was known by this name. Josephus says: "We keep a feast for eight
days, which is called the feast of unleavened bread."[2]
Gilmour, referring to the latter seven days of the feast said:
The feast of unleavened bread at sundown on Nisan 14 (which was) the
beginning of the fifteenth day by Jewish reckoning, and lasted for a period of
seven days (Leviticus 23:5,6). The Passover coincided only with its first day. The
Paschal lambs were slaughtered on the afternoon of Nisan 14, and the solemn
meal itself was eaten during the evening that constituted the beginning of the
fifteenth day.[3]
The following chronological arrangement of the events of this exceedingly
important week is adapted from J. R. Dummelow, with the changes required by
understanding the crucifixion to have been on the 14th of Nisan, the same day
the Paschal lambs were slain, and the same day when the Passover meal was
eaten after sundown (technically the fifteenth of Nisan), that fourteenth of Nisan
having been a Thursday. See my article, "What Day Was Jesus Crucified?" in
my Commentary on Mark, under Mark 15:42.
A.D. 30
Sabbath, Nisan 9th ... Jesus arrived at Bethany (John 12:1), supper in the
evening (John 12:2-8; Matthew 26:6-13).
Sunday, Nisan 10th ... triumphal entry (Matthew 21:1), children's Hosannas,
4

healings in temple (Matthew 21:14-16), return to Bethany (Matthew 21:17).
Monday, Nisan 11th ... return from Bethany (Matthew 21:18), withering fig tree
(Matthew 21:19), cleansing temple (Matthew 21:12), retires to Bethany (Mark
11:19), conspiracy of his enemies (Luke 19:47).
Tuesday, Nisan 12th ... they find fig tree withered (Mark 11:20), his authority
challenged, tribute to Caesar, brother's wife, first commandment of all, and
"What think ye of Christ?" (Matthew 21-22). Woes on Pharisees (Matthew 23),
Jesus in treasury, the widow's mite (Mark 12:41), visit of Greeks (John 12:20),
final rejection (John 12:37), triple prophecy of fall of Jerusalem, Second Advent
and final judgment (Matthew 24-25), Counsel of Caiaphas (Matthew 26:3).
Wednesday, Nisan 13th ... in the afternoon preparations for the last supper
(Matthew 26:17), that night (technically the 14th of Nisan), the last supper with
the Twelve in the upper room (Matthew 26:20), the foot washing (John 13:2),
departure of Judas, institution of the Lord's Supper (Matthew 26:26), farewell
discourses, the true vine, Comforter promised, intercessory prayer (John 13:31
through John 17), Gethsemane and the one-hour agony (Matthew 26:27; Mark
14:87).
Thursday, Nisan 14th ... midnight arrest (Matthew 26:47), before Annas (John
18:18), Peter's denials about 3:00 A.M. (John 18:27), before Caiphas (John
18:24), before Sanhedrin about 4:00 A.M. (Matthew 27:1), sent to Pilate at 6:00
A.M. (Matthew 27:2), from Pilate to Herod, and back to Pilate (Luke 28:7,11),
delivered to be crucified (John 19:16) Jesus crucified at 9:00 A.M. (Mark 15:25),
darkness from 12:00 to 3:00 P.M. (Matthew 27:45), death of Jesus at 3:00 P.M.
(Matthew 27:50).
The paschal lambs were being sacrificed at this hour (John 19:36). Jesus was
buried about sundown. That night was the Jewish Passover meal, Jesus having
eaten it by anticipation 24 hours earlier. Burial of Jesus (Matthew 27:57).
Friday, Nisan 15th ... Jesus was in the tomb.
Saturday, Nisan 16th ... Jesus was in the tomb.
Sunday, Nisan 17th ... Jesus rose from the dead.[4]
In the above understanding of the day our Lord was crucified, it is not necessary
to suppose Wednesday as having been "a day of retirement,"[5] or that
Wednesday, a day of rest, was apparently spent with the disciples at
Bethany."[6] The New Testament says nothing of any day of rest or retirement;
but, on the contrary, it is repeatedly stated that he was "daily in the temple"
(Luke 22:53). "Every day he was teaching in the temple" (Luke 21:87); and there
is no way such expressions can mean that Jesus ran off and hid for a whole day.
The following diagram will reveal the reason why "the third day" is frequently
used by sacred authors to designate the day our Lord rose from the dead. Jesus'
5

own promise that he would be in the heart of the earth "three days and three
nights" (Matthew 12:40) could not have been fulfilled in its entirety except by his
resurrection at sunset on Sunday, which would have given three full days and
three full nights in the grave; however, Jesus said that he would rise "the third
day," meaning that he would not be in the grave but two days. Now look at the
chart. He was buried at sunset on Thursday and rose very early on Sunday, the
first day of the week.
<MONO><SIZE=2>Thursday Night Friday Night Saturday Night Sunday
period in the tomb -> 1st day 2nd day 3day beginsSIZE>MONO>
The arguments in favor of viewing Friday as the day our Lord suffered have
been thoroughly studied by this writer; and there seems to be no way that they
can harmonize with "what is written" in the word of God. We believe that Jesus
was in the heart of the earth "three days and three nights," rising on the third
day.
Sought how they might put him to death ... The death of Jesus had long ago been
determined by the hierarchy, and the thing in view here was merely the manner
of their bringing it about. From Matthew 26:1-5 it is learned that they actually
preferred to kill him secretly, because of their fear of the people, as mentioned
here. However, the treachery of Judas induced them to change their plans.
[1] H. Leo Boles, Commentary on Luke (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company,
1940), p. 411.
[2] Charles L. Childers, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City, Missouri:
Beacon Hill Press, 1964), Matthew, p. 233.
[3] S. MacLean Gilmour, The Interpreter's Bible (New York: Abingdon Press,
1952), Vol. VIII, Luke, p. 373.
[4] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan
Company, 1937), p. 692.
[5] Ibid.
[6] A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels (New York: Harper and
Brothers, 1922), p. 189.
BURKITT, "This chapter gives a sad and sorrowful relation of the chief priests'
conspiracy against the life of our blessed Saviour, in which we have three
particulars observable: 1. The person making this conspiracy, the chief priests,
scribes, and elders, that is, the whole Jewish Sanhedrin, or general council; they
all lay their malicious heads together to contrive the destruction of the holy and
innocent Jesus.
Thence learn, that general councils have erred, and may err fundamentally, both
6

in matters of doctrine and practice; so did this general council at Jerusalem,
consisting of chief priests, doctors, and elders, with the high priest their
president. They did not believe Jesus to be the Messiah, after all the miracles
wrought before their eyes, but ignominiously put him to death.
Observe, 2. The manner of this conspiracy against the life of our blessed Saviour,
it was clandestine, secret, and subtle: They consulted how they might take him
by craft, and put him to death.
Learn thence, that Satan makes use of the subtilty of crafty men, and abuses
their parts as well as their power for his own purposes and designs: the devil
never sends a fool on his errand.
Observe, 3. The circumstances of time, when this conspiracy was managed, At
the feast of the passover. It was a custom among the Jews to execute malefactors
at their solemn feasts, at which time all the Jews came up to Jerusalem to
sacrifice, then put the malefactors to death, that all Israel might see and fear, and
not do so wickedly. Accordingly the feast of the passover was waited for by the
Jews as a fit opportunity to put our Saviour to death.
The only objection was, that it might occasion a tumult and uproar amongst the
people, there being such a mighty concourse at that time in Jerusalem; but Judas
making them a proffer, they readily comply with the motion, and resolve to take
the first opportunity to put our Saviour to death.
PETT, "Verse 1-2
‘Now the feast of unleavened bread drew near, which is called the Passover, and
the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might put him to death, for they
feared the people.’
Day by day the Passover or Feast of Unleavened Bread (the two feasts were seen
as one and could be called by either name, as we also discover from Josephus,
compare also Matthew 26:17) drew nearer, and day by day the Chief Priests and
Scribes sought ways of getting rid of Him. Note how it is emphasised that it was
those who had special religious interests, and who were in direct conflict with
each other, who were seeking to get rid of Him. They were each out to defend
their own interests, but common interest had brought them together. On the
other hand, they were afraid of the people. The situation was very tricky.
Emotions, which were always high in Galilee and Judea, were at this time
especially high, and any suggestion of the possibility of a disturbance had to be
avoided. That would only bring the Roman authorities down on them, and they
would be blamed for it. And then something happened that altered the whole
picture. It must have seemed to them like a gift from Heaven, although as Luke
makes clear, it was in fact a gift from Hell.
‘The chief priests and the scribes sought how they might put Him to death.’ We
must assume here that an official decision had been reached. Jesus was now seen
as a false prophet and must die. The only question therefore was how to bring it
about without causing a riot. Yet their dishonesty comes out in that they wanted
7

to put all the blame on Pilate, and avoid an execution for blasphemy, the very
charge that they held against Him. For they knew how the people felt about the
death of John the Baptiser, and they did not want any reaction against
themselves. They wanted Pilate to take any backlash.
‘The people.’ This would be mainly the huge numbers of Galileans and Peraeans
who were present at the Feast, among whom He was exceedingly popular and
highly revered. And they would no doubt also include some Judeans and
Jerusalemites who had witnessed His ministry.
‘The Passover.’ Elaborate preparations were always made for this feast so as to
ensure the arrival of travellers in a fit religious state for it. Roads would be
repaired, bridges made safe, and tombs whitewashed (so that they could be
avoided, thus preventing religious defilement). Teaching about the Passover
would be given in the synagogues from up to a month beforehand, and every
male Jew within fifteen miles of Jerusalem who was thirteen years old or
upwards would be required to attend. But many would flock from farther afield,
and it was the ambition, even of those in the Dispersion, scattered around the
world, to attend at least once in their lifetime. And, as a time when all Israel was
gathered, it was a time for exposing false prophets (compare Deuteronomy
17:13). So this was not just any occasion. It was central in the nation’s life. Here
at this time ‘the congregation of Israel’ was gathered together.
Verses 1-53
Jesus Is Crucified And Rises Again (22:1-24:53).
We now come to the final Section of Luke which is also in the form of a chiasmus
(see analysis below). Central in this final chiasmus is the crucifixion of Jesus.
This brings out how central the crucifixion is in the thinking of Luke. As the
Servant of the Lord He is to be numbered among the transgressors for their
sakes (Luke 22:37). This is indeed what the Gospel has been leading up to,
something that is further demonstrated by the space given to Jesus’ final hours.
He has come to give His life in order to redeem men (Luke 21:28; Luke 22:20;
Luke 24:46-47; Acts 20:28; Mark 10:45), after which He will rise again, with the
result that His disciples are to receive power from on high (Luke 24:49) ready for
their future work of spreading the word, so that through His death repentance
and forgiveness of sins should be preached in His name to all nations beginning
from Jerusalem (Luke 24:46-47). Note especially how closely the forgiveness of
sins is connected with His suffering, death and resurrection. This belies the
argument that Luke does not teach atonement, for without atonement there can
be no forgiveness, and why else is it so closely connected with His suffering and
death?
But another emphasis raises its head here. Right from the commencement of
Jesus’ ministry Satan, the hidden but powerful cosmic adversary, had sought to
destroy His ministry (Luke 4:1-13), and having failed in that he will now seek to
destroy both Jesus Himself, and the band of twelve whom He has gathered
around Him. Luke wants us to see that there are more than earthly
considerations in view. To him this is a cosmic battle.
8

This final section may be analysed as follows:
a Satan enters into Jesus’ betrayer who plots His betrayal in return for silver
(Luke 22:1-6).
b Jesus feasts with His disciples (Luke 22:7-22).
c They discuss who is the greatest, but learn that they are rather to be servants,
for which reason they will sit at His table with responsibility for His people
(Luke 22:23-28).
d Jesus comes to the Garden of Gethsemane where He shuns what He has to face
but submits to His Father’s will. In contrast Peter is revealed to be empty and as
lacking the power that will later come in fulfilment of Christ’ words (Luke
22:29-62).
e Jesus is exposed to the mockery of the soldiers and the verdicts of the
chief priests and then of Pilate and Herod (Luke 22:63 to Luke 23:25).
f Jesus is crucified (as the King of the Jews, the Messiah) and judgement is
forecast on Jerusalem (Luke 23:26-33).
e Jesus is exposed to the mockery of the chief priests (the rulers) and to the
verdicts of the two thieves and the Roman centurion ( Luke 23:34-49).
d Jesus is brought to the Garden where He is buried, but defeats death, the tomb
when opened proving to be empty in fulfilment of Christ’s words (Luke 23:50 to
Luke 24:10).
c The risen Jesus sits at table with two of His disciples a prelude to their future
(Luke 24:11-35).
b The risen Jesus feasts with His disciples (Luke 24:36-47).
a God’s Power will enter into His faithful disciples and they are to be His
witnesses to His glory and triumph (in contrast with Satan entering His betrayer
who sought His downfall) (Luke 24:48-53).
· ‘And they returned to Jerusalem with great joy and were continually in
the Temple, blessing God’ (Luke 24:53).
Note how in ‘a’ Satan enters into Judas to empower him to betray Jesus, and in
the parallel the Holy Spirit will enter the other Apostles to empower them to be
witnesses to Jesus. Judas is His betrayer, the others are His witness. In ‘b’ Jesus
feasts with His disciples before He dies and shows them the bread and the wine,
in the parallel He feasts with His disciples after the resurrection and shows them
His hands and His feet. In ‘c’ they are to sit at His table, and in the parable two
of His disciples sit with Him at table, symbolic of their future. In ‘d’ Jesus enters
a Garden which will lead to His death, in the parallel He is brought into a
Garden which will lead to His resurrection. In ‘e’ Jesus is exposed to the verdicts
of the chief priests and rulers, and in the parallel He is exposed to the mockery of
the chief priests and the thieves. But central to all in ‘f’ is His crucifixion as King
of the Jews and Messiah.
The drama is in three stages:
· The time of preparation of His disciples for the future before His trial and
crucifixion.
· The trial and crucifixion itself.
· The resurrection and preparation for the sending forth of His disciples to
9

all nations.
This will be followed in Acts by a description of this outreach until it reached
Rome itself. We would surely therefore expect that in this first part His words
will include words of preparation for that future. That should be kept in mind in
all our interpretation.
2 and the chief priests and the teachers of the
law were looking for some way to get rid of
Jesus, for they were afraid of the people.
CLARKE, "They feared the people - The great mass of the people seem to
have been convinced that Christ was at least a prophet sent from God; and it is likely
they kept steady in their attachment to him. The multitude, who are represented as
clamouring for his blood at the crucifixion, appear to have been a mere mob, formed
out of the creatures of the chief priests and Pharisees.
GILL, "And the chief priests and Scribes,.... Matthew adds, "and the elders of
the people"; which made up the great sanhedrim and council of the nation; these met
together, not in their usual place the temple, but at the palace of Caiaphas, the high
priest; see Mat_24:3.
And sought how they might kill him; that is, "Jesus", as the Vulgate Latin and
Ethiopic versions read; they had determined before, upon the advice of Caiaphas, to
put him to death, and very likely had fixed what kind of death he should die; see
Joh_11:49 and now they consult together, of the manner of bringing it about, and at
what time; and the majority were not for doing it on a feast day, when there was a
great concourse of people, but with more privacy:
for they feared the people: which were now in great multitudes with him, who
came along with him, from Galilee, and other parts; and had hosanna'd him into the
city, and still abode with him, and their numbers were increasing; and the sanhedrim
were aware, that at the passover there would be still a greater company of people
from all parts of the land; and they might conclude, that he would have a large
number of his friends come out of Galilee, where he had been for the most part
teaching, and working miracles; and they were afraid, should they lay hold on him
publicly, the people would rise and stone them; at least would rescue him out of their
hands, and disappoint them of their designs.
HENRY, "I. His sworn enemies contriving it (Luk_22:2), the chief priests, men of
10

sanctity, and the scribes, men of learning, seeking how they might kill him, either by
force of fraud. Could they have had their will, it had been soon done, but they feared
the people, and the more for what they now saw of their diligent attendance upon his
preaching.
JAMISON, " His sworn enemies contriving it (Luk_22:2), the chief priests, men
of sanctity, and the scribes, men of learning, seeking how they might kill him, either
by force of fraud. Could they have had their will, it had been soon done, but they
feared the people, and the more for what they now saw of their diligent attendance
upon his preaching.
3 Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one
of the Twelve.
BARNES, "Then entered Satan into Judas - It is not necessary to suppose
that Satan entered personally into the body of Judas, but only that he brought him
under his influence; he filled his mind with an evil passion, and led him on to betray
his Master. The particular passion of which Satan made use was “avarice” - probably
the besetting sin of Judas. To show its exceeding evil and baseness, it is only
necessary to say that when it produced its “appropriate” effect in this case, it led to
the betraying and crucifixion of the Son of God. We may learn, also, that when Satan
“tempts” people, he commonly does it by exciting and raising to the highest pitch
their native passions. He does not make them act contrary to their nature, but leads
them on to “act out” their proper disposition.
Satan - This word properly means an adversary or an accuser. It is the name
which in the Scriptures is commonly given to the prince or leader of evil spirits, and
is given to him because he is the “accuser or calumniator” of the righteous (see Rev_
12:10; compare Job_1:6-9), as well as because he is the “adversary” of God.
Being of the number of the twelve - One of the twelve apostles. This greatly
aggravated his crime. He should have been bound by most tender ties to Jesus. He
was one of his family - long with him, and, treated by him with every mark of
kindness and confidence; and nothing could more enhance his guilt than thus to
make use of this confidence for the commission of one of the basest crimes.
CLARKE, "Then entered Satan into Judas - The devil filled the heart of
Judas with avarice; and that infamous passion led him to commit the crime here
specified. This at once accounts for the whole of this most unprincipled and
unnatural transaction. None but a devil, or he who is possessed by one, could have
been guilty of it: - let the living lay this to heart. A minister of the Gospel, who is a
lover of money, is constantly betraying the interests of Christ. He cannot serve two
masters; and while his heart is possessed with the love of self, the love of God and
zeal for perishing souls cannot dwell in him. What Satan could not do by the envy
and malice of the high priests and Pharisees, he effects by Judas, a false and fallen
minister of the Gospel of God. None are so dangerous to the interests of Christianity
as persons of this stamp.
11

GILL, "Then entered Satan into Judas,.... At the same time that the sanhedrim
were sitting, and consulting about the death of Christ, Satan, or the adversary, as the
word signifies, the devil, who is the enemy of the Messiah, the woman's seed, entered
into Judas; not corporeally, as he did into those that were possessed by him; but he
entered "into his heart", as the Ethiopic version renders it; he put it into his heart to
betray him, as it is said in Joh_13:2 he stirred up, and worked upon the corruptions
of his heart; suggested evil things to his mind, and baited his temptations agreeable
to his malice and covetousness: and this man was
surnamed Iscariot; to distinguish him from another apostle of the same name;
concerning this his surname; see Gill on Mat_10:4, See Gill on Joh_13:2.
Being of the number of the twelve; apostles, or disciples of Jesus, as the Persic
version reads, and which is an aggravation of his sin: now this being two days before
the passover, shows, that the sop which Judas took, after which the devil entered into
him, Joh_13:27 could not be the passover sop, but was the sop he ate at the supper in
Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, so long before it.
HENRY, "II. A treacherous disciple joining in with them, and coming to their
assistance, Judas surnamed Iscariot. He is here said to be of the number of the
twelve, that dignified distinguished number. One would wonder that Christ, who
knew all men, should take a traitor into that number, and that one of that number,
who could not but know Christ, should be so base as to betray him; but Christ had
wise and holy ends in taking Judas to be a disciple, and how he who knew Christ so
well yet came to betray him we are here told: Satan entered into Judas, Luk_22:3. It
was the devil's work, who thought hereby to ruin Christ's undertaking, to have
broken his head; but it proved only the bruising of his heel. Whoever betrays Christ,
or his truths or ways, it is Satan that puts them upon it. Judas knew how desirous the
chief priests were to get Christ into their hands, and that they could not do it safely
without the assistance of some that knew his retirements, as he did. He
JAMISON, "Then entered Satan, etc. — but not yet in the full sense. The
awful stages of it were these: (1) Covetousness being his master - passion, the Lord
let it reveal itself and gather strength by entrusting him with “the bag” (Joh_12:6), as
treasurer to Himself and the Twelve. (2) In the discharge of that most sacred trust he
became “a thief,” appropriating its contents from time to time to his own use. Satan,
seeing this door into his heart standing wide open, determines to enter by it, but
cautiously (2Co_2:11); first merely “putting it into his heart to betray Him” (Joh_
13:2), suggesting the thought to him that by this means he might enrich himself. (3)
This thought was probably converted into a settled purpose by what took place in
Simon’s house at Bethany. (See Mat_26:6, and see on Joh_12:4-8.) (4) Starting back,
perhaps, or mercifully held back, for some time, the determination to carry it into
immediate effect was not consummated till, sitting at the paschal supper, “Satan
entered into him” (see on Joh_13:27), and conscience, effectually stifled, only rose
again to be his tormentor. What lessons in all this for every one (Eph_4:27; Jam_4:7;
1Pe_5:8, 1Pe_5:9)!
BURKITT, "Observe here, 1. The person betraying our blessed Saviour, Judeas.
Judas a professor, Judas a preacher, Judas an apostle, and one of the twelve,
12

who Christ had chosen out of the world to be his dearest friend, one of his family
and household: shall we wonder to find friends unfriendly or unfaithful to us,
when our Saviour had a traitor in his own family?
Observe, 2. The heinous nature of Judas' sin: he betrayed Jesus; Jesus his
Maker, Jesus his Master. It is no strange or uncommon thing for the vilest of
sins, and the most horrid impieties, to be acted by such persons as make the most
eminent profession of holiness and religion.
Observe, 3. What was the occasion that led Judas to the commission of this sin; it
was his inordinate love of money. I do not find that Judas had any particular
malice, spite, or ill-will against our Saviour; but a base and unworthy spirit of
covetousness possessed him, and this made him sell his master.
Covetousness is the root of sin; an eager and insatiable thirst after the world is
the parent of the most monstrous and unnatural sins, for which reason our
Saviour doubles his caution, Take heed and beware of covetousness; Luke 12:15
It shows us both the great danger of the sin, and the great care that we ought to
take to preserve ourselves from it.
PETT, "But in the camp of Jesus there was treachery afoot. It was actively
caused by Satan (compare John 13:2; John 13:27). For Satan entered one of His
disciples, who was called Judas Iscariot, one of the favoured Twelve (compare
Luke 6:16). Outwardly his thoughts of treachery were possibly stirred because
he was approached by adherents of the authorities, who probably similarly
sounded out all the Apostles with a view to offering bribery. But Luke lets us
know that the real reason for his treachery was that Satan had been allowed to
enter his heart. In the section chiasmus outlined above this is placed in
contrasting parallel with the Holy Spirit Who will later come in power on the
other Apostles. Judas had to choose between two ‘spirits’ and he opted foolishly
because his eyes were blinded by the thought of wealth, by ‘the deceitfulness of
riches’ (Mark 4:19). While the others were learning about the coming of the Holy
Spirit, He was opening himself to the spirit of Satan, and the key that was being
used was Mammon. How powerful a grip Mammon has on the hearts of men.
For ‘Satan’ see Luke 10:18; Luke 11:18; Luke 13:16; Luke 22:31. He was a
powerful evil spirit, a spiritual outcast, who had fallen from Heaven (Luke
10:18). He was in direct opposition to Jesus (Luke 11:18; Luke 11:22). He bound
unfortunate men and women by possessing and enslaving them (Luke 13:16). He
sought to put men and women to the test so as to prove their fallibility (Luke
22:31). In Acts he would fill the heart of Ananias with greed as he had Judas
(Acts 5:3), and he was the one who held the world in his power (Acts 26:18),
mainly by the same means. Luke also speaks of him as ‘the Devil’ (Luke 4:2-13;
Luke 8:12), in which guise he put Jesus to the test (Luke 4:2-13) and seeks to
remove the word that is sown in men’s hearts (Luke 8:12). In Acts the Devil
oppresses men by possession (Acts 10:38) and is the source of magic and sorcery,
the father of all who do evil and try to turn men from the truth (Acts 13:10).
What he is, is indicated by his name. Satan means ‘adversary’, and reminds us
that he is both God’s adversary and ours. His main purpose under this title is to
13

thwart God and act against men and women. ‘Devil’ (diabolos) means
‘slanderer’, which connects him with the temptation of men with the aim of
being able to slander them before God, and he attempts to remove God’s
influence from men’s hearts. But the two ideas overlap. Satan is the great
adversary and slanderer. For the further idea of Satanic influence in men’s
hearts see John 14:30; 1 Corinthians 2:8; 2 Corinthians 4:4; 1 John 5:19.
There is an interesting indication here that Satan thought that by this man’s
action he could somehow thwart God’s plans through Jesus, plans which he
clearly did not understand (see 1 Corinthians 2:8). The thought of such love as
God was revealing would have been beyond him. He was as frightened as the
chief priests and scribes at the success of Jesus. And it is ironic that, like them
(Acts 3:17; Acts 4:28), unknown to himself, he was thus actually spurring on
God’s plan. He was simply speeding Jesus on to the very place where he himself
would be defeated. But he was clearly unaware of that fact. He foolishly thought
that he could thwart God’s plans.
Some ask why God allows Satan such sway? As well ask why He allows us such
sway. For in our own way, once we are in rebellion against God we are ourselves
little satans (adversaries). What right then has one to survive above another? But
He allows it all in His own purposes that He might triumph in the hearts of those
who respond to Him and are saved, who would otherwise have had to be
destroyed along with the rest, and so that He can lead them to triumph through
afflictions. It is of His goodness that He has allowed the world and the Devil to
continue, so that by all means He may save some from among them.
BI 3-6, “Then entered Satan into Judas
Progressive wickedness
Men do not become great villains at once.
Souls are not like meteoric bodies, that are blazing amongst the stars at one moment,
and the next in some dark pit on earth, wrapped in a noxious and sulphurous smoke.
They are rather like trees, they fall by degrees. See that great monarch of the forest!
For years disease has been in its roots, and a long succession of foul insects have been
gnawing at its vitals. Slowly and silently the decline goes on. At first the outward
symptoms are scarcely visible. A few withered leaves on one of its branches on a
certain spring are first noticed by the old woodman. The next spring, and not only
withered leaves are seen, but perhaps a leafless branch or: two. Thus through many a
long year the deterioration proceeds, until at last it is rotten to the core, and only
awaits some slight breeze blowing in the right direction to strike it down. One
morning a gentle gust of air sweeps through the wood, the tree falls with a crash that
shakes its neighbours, vibrates through the forest, and appals the district with its
boom.
4 And Judas went to the chief priests and the
officers of the temple guard and discussed with
14

them how he might betray Jesus.
BARNES 4-6, "Chief priests and captains - See the notes at Mat_26:14. See
the account of the bargain which Judas made with them explained in the Mat_
26:14-16 notes, and Mar_14:10-11 notes.
Absence of the multitude - The multitude, “the people,” were then favorable to
Jesus. He had preached in the temple, and many of them believed that he was the
Messiah. It was a hazardous thing, therefore, to take him by force, and in their
presence, as they might rise and rescue him. Hence, they sought to take him when
“he” was away from the multitude; and as Judas knew of a place where he could be
found “alone,” they were glad of the opportunity of so easily securing him.
CLARKE, "And captains - Among the priests who were in waiting at the
temple, some were appointed φυλακες, for a guard to the temple; and over these were
̣ρατηγοι commanding officers: both sorts are mentioned by Josephus, War, b. vi. c.
5. s. 3. Bp. Pearce, See another sense of captains, in the note on Mat_27:65 (note).
Dr. Lightfoot supposes these to have been the captains over the watches; for in three
places the priests kept watch and ward in the temple, viz. in Beth Abtenes, in Beth
Nitsots, and in Beth Mokad. The Levites also in twenty-one places more, Middoth,
chap. i. Though these watches consisted of several persons in each, there was one set
over them, as the captain or head of that watch. He thinks that Matthew, Mat_27:65,
refers to one of these: Ye have a watch of your own; let some of them be sent to guard
the sepulchre. The captain of the temple, he supposes to have been the chief or head
of all these watches; and thus he was captain of the captains. In the same Talmudical
tract it is said, The ruler of the mountain of the temple (i.e. captain of the temple)
takes his walks through every watch with torches lighted before him: if he found any
upon the watch, that was not standing on his feet, he said, Peace be with thee: but if
he found him sleeping, he struck him with a stick, and he might also burn his clothes.
And when it was said by others, What noise is that in the court? the answer was, It is
the noise of a Levite under correction, whose garments they are burning, because he
slept upon his watch. This custom casts light on Rev_16:15 : Behold, I come as a
thief: blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and
they see his shame. It is easy to distinguish this captain of the mountain of the
temple from the ruler of the temple, or sagan: the former presided over the guards;
the latter over the whole service of the temple. We have them both distinguished,
Act_4:1 : there is the captain of the temple; and Annas, who was the sagan. See
Lightfoot.
GILL, "And he went his way,.... From Christ, and the rest of the apostles, out of
Bethany; and when it was night, about two miles from Jerusalem, whither he went
directly:
and communed with the chief priests and captains; that is, of the temple, as
in Luk_22:52 and so the Persic version reads, "the militia of the temple"; and the
15

Syriac version renders it, "the captains of the militia of the temple"; instead of
captains, the Ethiopic version, reads "Scribes", and so does the Arabic, and which,
adds, "and the soldiers"; but these captains were not Roman officers, or soldiers, but
ecclesiastical persons, who presided in the temple, and were heads and governors,
over bodies of men employed there, of which sort were the following (i):
"there were fifteen, ‫,ממונין‬ presidents, or governors in the sanctuary, and so they were
appointed for ever over each of these fifteen things, one governor; and they are these:
one was over the times, or solemn seasons; the second, over the shutting of the gates:
the third, over those that kept watch; the fourth, over the singers; the fifth, over the
cymbal, with the rest of the singing instruments; the sixth, over the lots; the seventh
over the nests (of doves); the eighth, over the seals, or tickets; the ninth, over the
drink offerings; the tenth, over the sick (priests); the eleventh, over the waters; the
twelfth, over the business of the shewbread; the thirteenth, over the business of the
incense; the fourteenth, over the business of the vail; and the fifteenth, over the
business of the priests' garments; and every one of these governors had under him
"abundance of men", that so they might prepare the business they presided over.''
These seem rather to be meant, than the watch in the temple; which, though kept in
several places, there was but one single person that presided over it; as appears from
the above account, and from what follows; and who was called the man of the
mountain of the house, or the governor of the temple (k):
"in three places the priests kept watch in the sanctuary, in the house of Abtines, and
in the house of Nitzotz, and in the house of Moked, and the Levites in twenty and one
places--the man of the mountain of the house, went round every ward with torches
burning before him, and every one that was not standing, he said unto him, peace be
on thee; and if he found he was asleep, he struck him with his staff, and had power to
burn his garments.''
Whence it does not appear to me, that there were heads or captains over every ward,
as Dr. Lightfoot suggests, but one over them all; perhaps these captains may be the
same with the governors of the temple, as in 1 Esdras:
And Helkias, Zacharias, and Syelus, the governors of the temple, gave to the priests
for the passover two thousand and six hundred sheep, and three hundred calves. (1
Esdras 1:8)
Did very carefully oversee the holy works, assisting the ancients of the Jews and
governors of the temple. (1 Esdras 7:2)
But be these who they will, Judas it seems was informed where, and upon what they
were met together, and he went to them, and conversed with them:
how he might betray him unto them; in the most secret manner, and with, the
least noise and disturbance.
HENRY, " He therefore went himself, and made the motion to them, Luk_22:4.
Note, It is hard to say whether more mischief is done to Christ's kingdom by the
power and policy of its open enemies, or by the treachery and self-seeking of its
pretended friends: nay, without the latter its enemies could not gain their point as
they do. When you see Judas communing with the chief priests, be sure some
16

mischief is hatching; it is for no good that they are laying their heads together.
COKE, "Luke 22:4. And captains— The captains with whom Judas communed,
are here and elsewhere called captains of the temple, (see Luke 22:52.) and are
joined with the priests as their companions; a circumstance, which proves that
they were Jews, and not heathens. See Acts 4:1. From David's time the priests
and Levites kept watch, first in the tabernacle, and then in the temple, night and
day, as appears from 2 Chronicles 8:14. The guards of priests were stationed at
three places; but those of the Levites at one-and-twenty. The Levites, while they
performed this office according to their courses, under the first temple, were
called porters, 2 Chronicles 8:14 and each of the watches had a chief or
captain,— στρατηγος ; and over then all was one called, by way of eminence,
αρχηγος, the chief leader or captain. That these names of military men should
have been given to the priests and Levites, who were no soldiers, neither had
soldiers under them, will not seem strange, when it is remembered, that the
attendance of the Levites is called the warfare of the service; (see Numbers
8:24-25 in the original;) and that they performed all the offices of soldiers in
garrisons. They kept guard at the gates of the temple, preserved the peace within
its precincts, and brought such as were disorderly before the high-priests and
council. But besides the Levite porters, there was another guard belonging to the
temple, namely, the Roman garrison, in the tower or castle of Antonia, which
was built very near the temple. Of this castle or garrison there is mention made,
Acts 21:31-34. St. Matthew calls a detachment from it, appointed to guard our
Lord's sepulchre, by the word κουστωδια, which was the proper name of such a
body of Roman soldiers. But was not with the captains of the garrison of Antonia
that Judas bargained to deliver up his Master; neither were they the persons to
whom Jesus spake, when he addressed them who came to apprehend him, Luke
22:52. In both passages these captains are called by the name στρατηγοι ;
whereas the captains of garrisons are termed by Josephus φρουραρχοι, and by
St. Luke, Acts 21, 22. χιλιαρχοι. Besides, no heathens were ever admitted into the
supreme ecclesiastical court of the Jews; not to mention that the latter shunned
the company of the former as much as possible. It is plain therefore that the
persons with whom Judas communed, and who are called the captains, and
captains of the temple, were the priests who commanded the temple guard, and
who were at the devotion of the high-priest and council, to execute whatever
orders they thought fit to give them.
ELLICOTT, "(4) Chief priests and captains.—The latter term is used by St.
Luke, and by him only in the New Testament, of the officers who presided over
the Levite guardians of the Temple. Here and in Luke 22:52 it is used in the
plural. In Acts 4:1; Acts 5:24, we read of “the captain of the Temple,”
presumably the chief officer in command. Such was in earlier times Pashur, the
“governor of the house of the Lord” (Jeremiah 20:1). As watchmen the Levite
sentinels carried clubs, and would use them freely against any sacrilegious
intruder. The attempt to seize our Lord, recorded in John 7:32, shows why Judas
applied to these officers as well as to the priests.
PETT, "No doubt responding to promises and assurances from those who had
contacted him, Judas sought out the chief priests and captains of the Temple
17

guard. And there, in return for the offer of money, he discussed with them how
he might assist them in handing Jesus over to them at a time when He was not
surrounded by crowds. His own familiar friend in whom He trusted, the same
was lifting up his heel against Him (Psalms 41:9). They were, of course,
delighted. It presented them with an undreamed of opportunity. And they
promised to pay him blood money once the matter was resolved.
‘Captains (strategois).’ In this case the leaders of the Temple guard. They would
mainly be Levites. Compare Acts 4:1; Acts 5:24 for their leader (strategos).
5 They were delighted and agreed to give him
money.
CLARKE, "They - covenanted to give him money - Matthew says thirty
pieces, or staters, of silver, about 4£. 10s. English, the common price of the meanest
slave. See the note on Mat_26:15.
GILL, "And they were glad,.... For nothing could be more opportune and
agreeable to them, than that one of his disciples should meet them at this juncture,
and offer to put him into their hands in the most private manner;
and covenanted to give him money. The Ethiopic version read, "thirty pieces of
silver"; which was the sum they agreed to give him, and he accepted of; see Mat_
26:15.
HENRY, "III. The issue of the treaty between them. 1. Judas must betray Christ
to them, must bring them to a place where they might seize him without danger of
tumult, and this they would be glad of. 2. They must give him a sum of money for
doing it, and this he would be glad of (Luk_22:5): They covenanted to give him
money. When the bargain was made, Judas sought opportunity to betray him.
Probably, he slyly enquired of Peter and John, who were more intimate with their
Master than he was, where he would be at such a time, and whither he would retire
after the passover, and they were not sharp enough to suspect him. Somehow or
other, in a little time he gained the advantage he sought, and fixed the time and place
where it might be done, in the absence of the multitude, and without tumult.
JAMISON, "money — “thirty pieces of silver” (Mat_26:15); thirty shekels, the
fine payable for man- or maid-servant accidentally killed (Exo_21:32), and equal to
between four and five pounds of our money - “a goodly price that I was priced at of
them” (Zec_11:13). (See on Joh_19:16.)
18

6 He consented, and watched for an opportunity
to hand Jesus over to them when no crowd was
present.
CLARKE, "And he promised - That is, to do it - εξωµολογησε: or, He accepted
the proposal. See Wakefield.
GILL, "And he promised,.... He undertook to deliver him into their hands; he laid
himself under obligation to do it; he faithfully promised he would. The Arabic version
renders it, he gave thanks; for the money he received, being well pleased he had
made such a bargain; and so the word here used sometimes signifies; and indeed
commonly either to confess; or to give thanks, in which latter sense it is used, in
Mat_11:25 but here rather it is to be understood in the sense of promising:
and sought opportunity; the two days following before the passover:
to betray him unto them in the absence of the people: when they were gone
from him, and he was alone; but found no opportunity of doing it this way, which
they had agreed upon with him, and he had promised, until the night of the passover,
when he was alone in the garden with his disciples.
HENRY, "Probably, he slyly enquired of Peter and John, who were more intimate
with their Master than he was, where he would be at such a time, and whither he
would retire after the passover, and they were not sharp enough to suspect him.
Somehow or other, in a little time he gained the advantage he sought, and fixed the
time and place where it might be done, in the absence of the multitude, and without
tumult.
PETT, "Judas accepted their terms, and from that moment on looked for an
opportunity to deliver Jesus to the authorities when the crowds were absent. It
was clear that it would have to be at night, for during the daytime Jesus was
constantly surrounded by people who had come to hear Him and who revered
Him. Judas is a pathetic figure, but before we sympathise with him too much we
have to consider how hardened his heart must have become, in order for him to
be able to go through all the experiences of the Upper Room, including Jesus’
gentle words to him, and still carry through his plan. For while Satan could
prompt him and urge him, he could not force him to do what he did. Judas was
still finally free to do his own thing. And he hardened his heart and did it of his
own free choice.
19

There can be no doubt that the choice of Judas as one of the twelve and his
subsequent betrayal of Jesus presents a problem to our human understanding.
But it is really no greater problem that that of the idea of God’s sovereignty and
free will. No man who wants to respond to Christ will ever be rejected, and yet,
in spite of His attractiveness, the Bible tells us that only those who are chosen
come to Him. No one will ever be able to say, ‘I wanted to come to Christ but He
would not accept Me’, for ‘whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved’.
And yet those who will be saved have been chosen in Him before the foundation
of the world (Ephesians 1:4) and have their names permanently recorded in the
Lamb’s book of life from the foundation of the world. Their names are written in
Heaven (Revelation 13:8; Revelation 21:27). By this we recognise that God’s
sovereignty and man’s freewill move in parallel. God does not make history
happen, but He makes it go according to His will. The cruelties of man are not
God’s doing. But He utilises them in His purposes, as He did with both
Sennacherib and Nebuchadnezzar, and as He does with all evil men.
Jesus did not choose the eager young Judas in order that he might be there as the
betrayer. He chose one who was insistent on being a disciple, and who revealed
his good qualities. One who showed especial determination. He chose him that he
might serve like the others, and enjoy the same privileges. But gradually He
began to realise that there was a lack in Judas’ character, so that He was forced
to declare, ‘Have I not chosen you, twelve, and one of you is a devil?’ (John
6:70). Yet He would not cast him off. He would give him the full opportunity to
prove Him wrong. Judas would never be able to say, ‘You did not give me my
chance.’
What was it that Jesus saw in Judas that made Him in the end realise what
Judas was? Perhaps it was his love for money. He gave Judas plenty of warning
about that. Possibly it was because, unlike the others, he did not respond to
Jesus’ moulding. Perhaps he continued in what would one day be called the way
of Zealotry, and insisted in his own heart on a military solution to the problems
of Jewry and somehow hoped that, once His enemies faced up to Him, Jesus
could be stirred up to go along with it, and use His powers to that end. But Jesus
gave much teaching concerning this as well. Judas thus really had no excuse for
being in doubt on how things were, and it should be remembered that it was
always open to him to withdraw, as other had done (John 6:66). Indeed the
moment that he realised that he was out of step with Jesus, that is what he should
have done, and no one would have blamed him. His crime was that he continued
pretending to be a disciple when at length he knew that Jesus and he could never
see eye to eye, to such an extent that he was willing to be a betrayer. He made all
his choices himself, and broke every rule of honour of his background, for he ate
at table with Jesus and pretended to be His friend, while plotting against Him.
This would be a heinous crime in the eyes of every Easterner. Jesus was not to
blame for this. He merely graciously put up with him even when He knew that
his character was doubtful and was aware of what he might do. Indeed He
appealed to him to the last. And yet in it all it was God’s will that was done and
His purposes that were accomplished. And it must be remembered in it all that
Judas did not have the last word. For Jesus did not go helplessly to the cross. At
20

every step that He took, twelve legions of angels waited in order to snatch Him to
safety (Matthew 26:53). They waited eagerly and only needed His signal. But it
never came. And so it was Jesus Who made the final choice to die alone, as He
cried, ‘Your will, not Mine be done’.
The Last Supper
7 Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on
which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.
CLARKE, “The passover - Πασχα, Luk_22:1, is the name of the festival; το
πασχα here is supposed to be the name of that on which they feasted, viz. the
sacrificed paschal lamb. But see the notes on Matthew 26 (note), and especially the
observations at the end of that chapter, (Mat_26:75 (note)).
GILL, "Then came the day of unleavened bread,.... The first of them, the
fourteenth day of the month Nisan:
when the passover must be killed; that is, the passover lamb, as the Persic
version renders it; and which, according to the law in Exo_12:6 was to be done
between the two evenings; See Gill on Mat_26:17.
HENRY, "What a hopeful prospect had we of Christ's doing a great deal of good
by his preaching in the temple during the feast of unleavened bread, which continued
seven days, when the people were every morning, and early in the morning, so
attentive to hear him! But here is a stop put to it. He must enter upon work of
another kind; in this, however, he shall do more good than in the other, for neither
Christ's nor his church's suffering days are their idle empty days. Now here we have,
I. The preparation that was made for Christ's eating the passover with his disciples,
upon the very day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed according
to the law, Luk_22:7. Christ was made under the law, and observed the ordinances of
it, particularly that of the passover, to teach us in like manner to observe his gospel
institutions, particularly that of the Lord's supper, and not to neglect them.
JAMISON, “Luk_22:7-38. Last Passover - Institution of the Supper - Discourse
at the table.
the day of unleavened bread — strictly the fifteenth Nisan (part of our March
21

and April) after the paschal lamb was killed; but here, the fourteenth (Thursday).
Into the difficult questions raised on this we cannot here enter.
BARCLAY, "THE LAST MEAL TOGETHER (Luke 22:7-23)
22:7-23 There came the day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, on which the
Passover had to be sacrificed. Jesus despatched Peter and John. "Go," he said,
"and make ready the Passover for us that we may eat it." They said to him,
"Where do you want us to make it ready?" "Look you," he said to them, "when
you have gone into the city, a man will meet you, carrying a jar of water. Follow
him to the house into which he enters; and you will say to the master of the
house, 'The Teacher says to you, "Where is the guest room that I may eat the
Passover with my disciples?"' And he will show you a big upper room, ready
furnished. There, get things ready." So they went away and found everything
just as he had told them; and they made ready the Passover.
When the hour came he took his place at table, and so did his disciples. "I have
desired with all my heart," he said to them, "to eat this Passover with you before
I suffer, for I tell you that I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of
God." He received the cup, and gave thinks, and said, "Take this and divide it
among yourselves. For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of
the vine until the kingdom of God has come." And he took the bread, and gave
thanks, and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body which is
being given for you. Do this so that you will remember me." In the same way,
after the meal, he took the cup saying, "This cup is the new covenant made at the
price of my blood, which is shed for you. But--look you--the hand of him who
betrays me is on the table with me, for the Son of Man goes as it has been
determined. But woe to that man by whom he has been betrayed"; and they
began to question one another which of them it could be who was going to do
this.
Once again Jesus did not leave things until the last moment; his plans were
already made. The better class houses had two rooms. The one room was on the
top of the other; and the house looked exactly like a small box placed on top of a
large one. The upper room was reached by an outside stair. During the Passover
time all lodging in Jerusalem was free. The only pay a host might receive for
letting lodgings to the pilgrims was the skin of the lamb which was eaten at the
feast. A very usual use of an upper room was that it was the place where a Rabbi
met with his favourite disciples to talk things over with them and to open his
heart to them. Jesus had taken steps to procure such a room. He sent Peter and
John into the city to look for a man bearing a jar of water. To carry water was a
woman's task. A man carrying a jar of water would be as easy to pick out as, say,
a man using a lady's umbrella on a wet day. This was a prearranged signal
between Jesus and a friend.
So the feast went on; and Jesus used the ancient symbols and gave them a new
meaning.
22

(i) He said of the bread, "This is my body." Herein is exactly what we mean by a
sacrament. A sacrament is something, usually a very ordinary thing, which has
acquired a meaning far beyond itself for him who has eyes to see and a heart to
understand. There is nothing specially theological or mysterious about this.
In the house of everyone of us there is a drawer full of things which can only be
called junk, and yet we will not throw them out, because when we touch and
handle and look at them, they bring back this or that person, or this or that
occasion. They are common things but they have a meaning far beyond
themselves. That is a sacrament.
When Sir James Barries mother died and they were clearing up her belongings,
they found that she had kept all the envelopes in which her famous son had
posted her the cheques he so faithfully and lovingly sent. They were only old
envelopes but they meant much to her. That is a sacrament.
When Nelson was buried in St. Paul's Cathedral a party of his sailors bore his
coffin to the tomb. One who saw the scene writes, "With reverence and with
efficiency they lowered the body of the world's greatest admiral into its tomb.
Then, as though answering to a sharp order from the quarter deck, they all
seized the Union Jack with which the coffin had been covered and tore it to
fragments, and each took his souvenir of the illustrious dead." All their lives that
little bit of coloured cloth would speak to them of the admiral they had loved.
That is a sacrament.
The bread which we eat at the sacrament is common bread, but, for him who has
a heart to feel and understand, it is the very body of Christ.
(ii) He said of the cup, "This cup is the new covenant made at the price of my
blood." In the biblical sense, a covenant is a relationship between man and God.
God graciously approached man; and man promised to obey and to keep his law.
The whole matter is set out in Exodus 24:1-8. The continuance of that covenant
depends on man's keeping his pledge and obeying this law; Man could not and
cannot do that; man's sin interrupts the relationship between man and God. All
the Jewish sacrificial system was designed to restore that relationship by the
offering of sacrifice to God to atone for sin. What Jesus said was this--"By my
life and by my death I have made possible a new relationship between you and
God. You are sinners. That is true. But because I died for you, God is no longer
your enemy but your friend." It cost the life of Christ to restore the lost
relationship of friendship between God and man.
(iii) Jesus said, "Do this and it will make you remember me." Jesus knew how
easily the human mind forgets. The Greeks had an adjective which they used to
describe time--"time," they said, "which wipes all things out," as if the mind of
man were a slate and time a sponge which wiped it clean. Jesus was saying, "In
the rush and press of things you will forget me. Man forgets because he must,
and not because he will. Come in sometimes to the peace and stillness of my
house and do this again with my people--and you will remember."
23

It made the tragedy all the more tragic that at that very table there was one who
was a traitor. Jesus Christ has at every communion table those who betray him,
for if in his house we pledge ourselves to him and then by our lives go out to deny
him, we too are traitors to him.
BENSON, "Luke 22:7-13. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the
passover must be killed — They called the day on which the passover was killed,
one of the days of unleavened bread, and the first day thereof, because it was
preparatory to that feast; though, properly speaking, the first day began with the
passover-supper. This appears likewise from Josephus, who, making use of the
vulgar computation, tells us, that the feast of unleavened bread lasted eight days;
whereas, in the law, it was ordered to be kept only seven days. Thus Exodus
12:19 : Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses. He sent Peter
and John — From the place where he had spent the night before in retirement
with them; saying, Go and prepare us the passover — Go, buy a lamb for us, and
get it killed and roasted, and make the other preparations, that we may, once
more, eat it together. They said, Where wilt thou that we prepare? — See on
Matthew 26:17, and Mark 14:10-16 : where this paragraph is considered at
large.
BURKITT, "The time for the celebration of the passover being now at hand,
Christ sends two of his disciples, Peter and John, to Jerusalem, to prepare what
was needful in order thereto.
And here we have we have observable, 1. An eminent proof and evidence of
Christ's divinity, in foretelling his disciples all the particular occurences and
circumstances which they should meet with in the city; as, a man bearing a
pitcher of water, etc.
Observe, 2. How readily the heart of the householder was disposed to receive our
Saviour and his disciples, and to accommodate them with all things needful upon
this occasion. Our blessed Saviour had not a lamb of his own, and peradventure
no money wherewith to purchase one; yet he finds a more agreeable
accommodation in this poor man's house, than if he had dwelt in Ahab's ivory
palace, and had the provisions of Solomon's table. When Christ has a passover to
celebrate, he will dispose the hearts of his children and servants to a free
reception of himself.
The room that Christ will enter into must be a large room, an upper room, a
room furnished and prepared: a large room, is the emblem of an enlarged heart,
enlarged with love, with joy and thankfulness; an upper room, is an heart
exalted, not puffed up with pride, but lifted up by heavenly meditations; and a
room furnished, is a soul adorned with all the graces of the Holy Spirit: into such
an heart does Christ enter, and there delights to dwell: Here is my rest for ever,
says Christ; here will I dwell, for I have a delight therein.
PETT, "Verse 7
‘And the day of unleavened bread came, on which the passover must be
24

sacrificed.’
Note here how Passover can be called ‘the day of unleavened bread’ even though
it is the day before ‘the Feast of Unleavened Bread’ began. This was because it
was the day for removing unleavened bread from their houses. On this day they
would ensure that any remaining leavened bread had been removed, so that the
period of being free from leaven could begin. Luke is thus stressing the
connection of the Feast with what is about to happen. The sinless Lamb of God
Who had come to take away the sins of the world (John 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:7)
had come to be offered up. His hour had come.
Verses 7-38
Jesus Advances To The Guest-chamber (22:7-38).
It is no coincidence that near the beginning of Luke’s Gospel there was no room
for Jesus in the ‘kataluma’ (Luke 2:7 - place to stay, guestchamber), but now
that He is to be offered up, such a room (kataluma) is to be made available for
Him (Luke 22:11-12 below). He is advancing, from the manger to the cross. He is
coming towards the fulfilment of His lifework, and in this guestchamber He will
participate in His last Passover which will be for ever the symbol of His death,
and will prepare His disciples for what lay ahead.
It was now 14th of Nisan, the day of the sacrifice of the Passover lamb, and Peter
and John were to prepare for the Passover, which would require the provision of
bread and bitter herbs, of suitable wine and the necessary slaughter of the lamb
in the Temple, which would then be brought to the kataluma to be roasted and
eaten. Most of these provisions would possibly in this case be provided by the
room owner who would receive the fleece and vessels used at the Feast as
‘payment’ for his kindness for allowing the use of the room for the feast. It
would not be seen as appropriate for the room to be paid for when it was being
used for such a sacred purpose. Rent could not be charged for such usage in
Jerusalem during the Passover. But whatever service he performed the slaying of
the Passover lamb had to be carried out ‘personally’ on behalf of the group on
whose behalf it was offered, which was why the two leading Apostles were called
on to do it.
Some see here a conflict with John’s Gospel, which they claim teaches that this
meal did not occur on Passover eve, but on the previous evening. But that is due
to their misinterpretation of certain language of John which is ambiguous. Once
his language is understood John in fact also teaches that the last supper was the
Passover meal. We shall now consider this in an Excursus for those who are
concerned about it.
EXCURSUS.
The Passover - Was the Last Supper the Passover Meal?
The Passover was the great Jewish festival which commemorated the slaying of
the firstborn in Egypt, and the following exodus from Egypt of the Israelites
25

(Exodus 12:24-27), together with those who joined themselves with them (the
‘mixed multitude’) and became Israelite by adoption (Exodus 12:38). The
passover lambs/kids were slain on the afternoon of the 14th Nisan (roughly
March/April), after the daily sacrifice, which was normally offered in mid-
afternoon. But by the time of Jesus this offering was put back towards noon on
the day of the Passover in order to leave time for the slaying of the passover
lambs, which had to be slain in the Temple area in great numbers. The Passover
meal was eaten in the evening (the commencement of 15th Nisan, for the Jewish
day began at sunset). There was a specific pattern followed at the meal, although
variations within that pattern were allowed. The celebration of the Passover was
connected with the seven day feast of Unleavened Bread which by this time was
so closely linked with the Passover that the whole eight days of the feast could be
called either The Passover (Luke 22:1) or Unleavened Bread (Mark 14:12). This
specific link with the Passover, which was there from earliest times, is confirmed
by Josephus, the Jewish first century AD historian.
It was celebrated in Jerusalem in smallish groups (ten males or more) in
individual houses within the city bounds, each group having a lamb. (Bethphage
was one of the places that marked the outer limit). The lambs were slain within
the Temple area, which confirms that they were sacrificial offerings. Movement
during the evening was restricted to a limited area, although Gethsemane came
within that area. Jews living within a reasonable distance were expected to
gather in Jerusalem for the feast, and even those who lived far afield among the
Gentiles (the Dispersion) made great efforts to attend. Thus Jerusalem might
contain around 200,000 or more people at Passover time (Josephus’ estimate of
3,000,000 is almost certainly exaggerated. It would not have been possible to
sacrifice sufficient lambs to meet his figures within the restricted Temple area in
such a short time).
The Passover meal would begin with the ritual search by lamplight for any
leavened bread which may have been overlooked (leaven was forbidden at the
feast) and the Passover meal would then be eaten reclining. It included the
symbolic elements of roasted lamb, unleavened bread, bitter herbs, some other
condiments and four cups of red wine mixed with water, each coming at specific
points. The first cup was drunk with a blessing (Luke 22:17 probably refers to
this cup, although some refer Luke’s reference to the second cup), followed by
the washing of hands by dipping in water. Some of the herbs would then be
dipped in salt water and given out After this the eating surface would be cleared,
and the second cup would be filled. This too would be blessed.
Before the drinking of the second cup the story of the original Passover was
recounted in a dialogue between father and eldest son (or if necessary suitable
substitutes). At this stage the Passover meal would be brought back to the table
and each of its constituents explained. It is quite possible that one question would
be (as it was later) ‘what means this bread?’ The reply was ‘this is the bread of
affliction which our fathers ate when they were delivered from the land of
Egypt’.
After these explanations the second cup would be drunk, accompanied by the
26

singing of part of the Hallel (special Psalms), and then there would be a further
dipping of the hands in water. After this came the breaking of one or two of the
unleavened cakes, which wasfollowedby the giving of thanks. Pieces of the
broken bread with bitter herbs between them were dipped in a mixture and
handed to each of the company (see John 13:26), and it would appear that then
the company would themselves dip bread and herbs into the mixture (Matthew
26:23; Mark 14:20). This was the real beginning of the actual Passover meal. The
Passover lamb would now be eaten. Nothing was to be eaten thereafter, although
in later times the eating of a final piece of unleavened bread followed. After a
third dipping of hands in water the third cup was drunk, again accompanied by
a blessing. This cup was considered of special importance. The singing of the
Hallel was completed with the fourth cup (see Matthew 26:30; Mark 14:26), and
this was followed by prayer. It must be remembered that this was a feast and not
a service so that eating and general conversation would be taking place
throughout, except at the solemn moments.
It is quite clear that the first three Gospels (the Synoptic Gospels) show the Last
Supper of Jesus to be the Passover meal. Jesus sent two of His disciples (Peter
and John - Luke 22:8) to ‘prepare the Passover’ (the lamb, the unleavened
bread, the bitter herbs, the wine, etc), so that He could ‘eat the Passover with His
disciples’ (Mark 14:12-15 and parallels). It was probably one of these who went
to the Temple area with the lamb for slaying. The room was ‘furnished and
ready’ which may mean that the owner had provided what was necessary. We
are told that they ate the meal reclining (Matthew 26:20; John 13:23) as would
be expected at the Passover meal.
It is possible that the breaking of bread by Jesus ‘after He had given thanks’ was
the same as the breaking of bread at the feast but if so it is noticeable that Jesus
gave thanks beforehand because He was enduing it with a new meaning . It
could, however, have been that Jesus introduced a second breaking of bread,
establishing a new pattern with a new significance. ‘This is my body’ parallels
‘this is the bread of affliction which our fathers ate’. In the latter case it was
clearly symbolic, a partaking with the fathers, as it were, in their affliction, but
with a real sense of participation. Thus the former is also to be seen as symbolic,
a partaking with Jesus, as it were, in His sufferings and their consequence, again
with a real sense of participation. The wine which Paul calls the ‘cup of blessing’
(1 Corinthians 10:16), was probably the third cup given a new significance.
Some have argued that it could not have been the Passover meal. They have
argued:
1) A trial would not have been held on Passover night.
2) The disciples would not have borne arms on that night.
3) Simon of Cyrene would not have been ‘coming in from the country’ the
following morning.
4) Some Synoptic passages are inconsistent with it e.g. Mark 14:2
However these arguments are not convincing, because 1) Passover time, while the
pilgrims were still in the city, might be considered precisely the time when a
‘false prophet’ should be executed in order that ‘all Israel might hear and fear’
27

(Deuteronomy 17:13). It would be seen as a sacred duty to do it at such a time,
and to contribute to the feast, which may well have been why the opposition had
hotted up. And as far as they were concerned it was also the best time for
involving the secular authorities with their Roman soldiery so as to cover
themselves in the eyes of the people, for at Passover extra soldiers were in
attendance in Jerusalem. Furthermore the whole affair was to be carried out in
haste because Judas’ information made it possible for it to be done secretly while
Jesus was there available. They had been seeking such an opportunity for some
time, and dared not miss it.
2) Mark 14:2 merely expresses the plan of the authorities. Like all plans it was
subject to change if circumstances demanded. All good plans are subject to
alteration due to circumstances. Mark may simply have been bringing out that in
the end they were powerless to do it in the way that they wanted. Furthermore
some suggest translating ‘feast’ as ‘festal crowd’ rather than ‘feast day’ which is
quite possible, which then removes the supposed problem altogether.
3) There was no prohibition of arms being carried at the Passover.
4) ‘Coming in from the country’ need not necessarily indicate that Simon had
been outside the prescribed limits, and indeed he may not have been a Jew.
Besides it would always be possible that he had been delayed by some cause
beyond his control so that he had arrived late for the Passover, which could be
why it was mentioned
But this immediately faces us with a further problem. It is argued that John
18:28 (‘so that they might not be defiled but might eat the Passover’) seems to
suggest that Jesus died at the same time as the Passover sacrifice because his
enemies had not yet eaten the Passover. That would mean that the scene in John
13 occurred on the night before the Passover feast. Yet as we have seen the other
Gospels make clear that Jesus officiates at the Passover feast (Mark 14:12; Luke
22:7), and there can be no doubt that both are depicting the same feast.
However what must be borne in mind here is that John 18:28 may be speaking of
‘the Passover’, not as meaning the Passover feast itself on the evening of the 15th
of Nisan, but in a general sense as including the whole seven day feast (compare
Luke 2:23 where ‘the feast of the Passover’ is clearly the seven days of the feast
and Luke’s use in Luke 22:1), so that ‘eating the Passover’ may refer to
celebrating the whole eight days, and to participating in other special sacrifices,
as well as to the continual feasting during the week (unleavened bread had to be
eaten throughout the week and there would be thank-offerings as well). It may
well therefore not refer to the actual Passover celebration, in which case there is
no contradiction. They would need to be ritually pure in order to continue
enjoying the remainder of the feast.
We can compare with this how in 2 Chronicles 30:22 the keeping of the Feast of
the Unleavened Bread (Luke 22:13), which includes the Passover (Luke 22:15), is
described as ‘eating the food of the festival for seven days’.
28

Against this, however we should note that ‘to eat the Passover’ does at least
include eating the Passover supper in the Synoptics (Matthew 26:17; Mark
14:12; Mark 14:14; Luke 22:8; Luke 22:11; Luke 22:15). However, that does not
necessarily tie the escorts of Jesus to using it in the same way after the Passover
supper has passed.
Alternately it has been suggested that in fact the men involved had been so taken
up with the pursuit of Jesus into the night as a result of Judas’ unexpected offer
to lead them to Jesus in a place where he could be taken without fear of the
people, that they had not yet had time to complete their Passover meal. We only
have to consider the facts of that night to recognised how involved their night
had been! They may well have been disturbed in the middle of their Passover
meal and have convinced themselves that such a delay was justified in order to
deal with Jesus at what was clearly a crucial moment. The false prophet had to
be dealt with. Once they had dealt with Him they could then go home to finish
eating their Passover, which had been suddenly delayed for reasons of state and
religion, with contented minds. Thus they would need to retain their ritual purity
both for that day and for the remainder of the week.
In the same way John’s reference to ‘the preparation of the Passover’ or ‘the
Friday of the Passover’ (paraskeue tou pascha can mean either) (Luke 19:14) can
equally be seen as referring to the ‘preparation’ for the weekly Sabbath
occurring during Passover week, i.e. the Friday of Passover week at whichever
point it occurred, as it certainly does in verse Luke 19:31. This would mean that
it did not necessarily refer to the day of the preparation of the Passover feast
itself. Basically the word paraskeue did mean ‘Friday’ as well as ‘preparation’
(as in Greek it still does) and the term Passover (pascha) was used to describe the
whole festival. If this be the case by ‘the Friday of Passover week’ John is not
necessarily suggesting that Jesus died at the same time as the Passover lamb.
Another alternative answer works on the basis that not all Jews celebrated the
Passover on the same day. We do know, for example, that the Essenes had their
own calendar to which they rigidly adhered, and forbade their members to
follow the orthodox calendar, and they would therefore celebrate the Passover on
a different day from the priests. And there are some grounds for suggesting that
Galileans, an independent lot who were looked on by Judeans as somewhat
unorthodox, may well have celebrated the Passover a day earlier than Judeans.
Thus it may be that Jesus and His disciples, who were Galileans, followed this
Galilean tradition, if it existed, and celebrated the Passover a day earlier than the
Judeans.
A further possibility that has been suggested is that in that particular year the
Pharisees observed the Passover on a different day from the Sadducees, due to a
dispute as to when the new moon had appeared that introduced Nisan, with
arrangements being made for Passover sacrifices on both days. This is thought to
have happened at least once around this time. If this were the case Jesus would
have been able to observe the feast of the Passover with His disciples and then
die at the same time as the Passover sacrifices.
29

The suggestion that John was either mistaken or changed the day for theological
purposes is the least likely of any explanation. The early church was far too well
aware of the fact that the Last Supper was ‘the Passover feast’ for such a change
to be accepted. It would have become a firm part of the tradition, and John
would no doubt have had this firmly pointed out to him by his ‘backers’ if they
had thought that he was saying otherwise (Luke 21:24-25). We must not assume
that the leaders of the early church were gullible and unwilling to speak their
minds, even to John. Nor does John emphasise anywhere in his Gospel that Jesus
died at the same time as the Passover lamb. Had this been his intention he would
surely have drawn attention to it more specifically.
It thus seems clear that the suggestion of a contradiction between the Synoptics
and John’s Gospel in the end simply arises from a misunderstanding of
Johannine terminology.
End of EXCURSUS.
Having examined the Passover problem in the excursus we will now return to the
passage in hand. In this passage Jesus gives directions for the preparation of the
Passover feast.
Analysis of 22:7-13.
a The day of unleavened bread came, on which the passover must be sacrificed
(Luke 22:7).
b And He sent Peter and John, saying, Go and make ready for us the passover,
that we may eat (Luke 22:8).
c And they said to Him, “Where will you that we make ready?” (Luke 22:9).
d And He said to them, “Behold, when you are entered into the city, there a man
will meet you bearing a pitcher of water, follow him into the house into which he
goes” (Luke 22:10).
c “And you shall say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says to you, Where
is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with My disciples?’ ” (Luke
22:11).
b “And He will show you a large upper room furnished, there make ready”
(Luke 22:12).
a And they went, and found as He had said to them, and they made ready the
passover (Luke 22:13).
Note how in ‘a’ the day came on which the Passover was to be sacrificed, and in
the parallel they made ready the Passover. In ‘b’ they were to go and make
ready, and in the parallel the room is described where they are to make ready. In
‘c’ they question Jesus as to where they are to make ready, and in the parallel
they question the master of the house as to where they are to make ready.
Centrally in ‘d’ they find the place by following a man carrying a pitcher of
water.
This central placing brings out that this symbol is intended to be significant.
Only women and the lowest of slaves carried pitchers of water. Thus they are to
follow one who is represented as the lowest of slaves, but who is bearing the
30

water of life. In the context of what Jesus is about to say (Luke 22:26-27) the
symbolism is clear. The One Who supplies living water (Isaiah 55:1-2) is also the
humble Servant of the Lord (Isaiah 52:13 to Isaiah 5:12). As a result of what
Jesus will do, just as they follow this man, walking in humility and bearing
water, so are they also to follow Jesus, both in humble service and in bearing the
water of life. For there was a very real sense in which life would flow from that
room where the new covenant was proclaimed (compare Ezekiel 47).
MACLAREN, “THE LORD'S SUPPER
Paul had his account of the Last Supper direct from Christ. Luke apparently had his
from Paul, so that the variations from Matthew and Mark are invested with singular
interest, as probably traceable to the Lord of the feast Himself. Our passage has three
sections-the preparation, the revelation of Christ’s heart, and the institution of the
rite.
I. The Preparation.-
Peculiar to Luke are the names of the disciples entrusted with it, and the
representation of the command, as preceding the disciples’ question ‘Where?’ The
selection of Peter and John indicates the confidential nature of the task, which comes
out still more plainly in the singular directions given to them. Luke’s order of
command and question seems more precise than that of the other Gospels, as making
our Lord the originator instead of merely responsive to the disciples’ suggestion.
How is the designation of the place which Christ gives to be understood? Was it
supernatural knowledge, or was it the result of previous arrangement with the
‘goodman of the house’? Most probably the latter; for he was in so far a disciple that
he recognised Jesus as ‘the Master,’ and was glad to have Him in his house, and the
chamber on the roof was ready ‘furnished’ when they came. Why this mystery about
the place? The verses before our passage tell the reason.
Judas was listening, too, for the answer to ‘Where?’ thinking that it would give him
the ‘opportunity’ which he sought ‘to betray Him in the absence of the multitude.’
Jesus had much to say to His disciples, and needed the quiet hours in the upper
room, and therefore sent away the two with directions which revealed nothing to the
others. If He had told the group where the house was, the last supper might never
have been instituted, nor the precious farewell words, the holy of holies of John’s
Gospel, ever been spoken. Jesus takes precautions to delay the Cross. He takes none
to escape it, but rather sets Himself in these last days to bring it near. The variety in
His action means no change in His mind, but both modes are equally the result of His
self-forgetting love to us all. So He sends away Peter and John with sealed orders, as
it were, and the greedy ears of the traitor are balked, and none know the appointed
place till Jesus leads them to it. The two did not come back, but Christ guided the
others to the house, when the hour was come.
II. Luk_22:14 - Luk_22:18 give a glimpse into Christ’s heart as He partook,
for the last time, of the Passover.
He discloses His earnest desire for that last hour of calm before He went out to face
the storm, and reveals His vision of the future feast in the perfect kingdom. That
desire touchingly shows His brotherhood in all our shrinking from parting with dear
ones, and in our treasuring of the last sweet, sad moments of being together. That
was a true human heart, ‘fashioned alike’ with ours, which longed and planned for
one quiet hour before the end, and found some bracing for Gethsemane and Calvary
31

in the sanctities of the Upper Room. But the desire was not for Himself only. He
wished to partake of that Passover, and then to transform it for ever, and to leave the
new rite to His servants.
Our Lord evidently ate of the Passover; for we cannot suppose that His words in
Luk_22:15 relate to an ungratified wish, but, as evidently, that eating was finished
before He spoke. We shall best conceive the course of events if we suppose that the
earlier stages of the paschal ceremonial were duly attended to, and that the Lord’s
Supper was instituted in connection with its later parts. We need not discuss what
was the exact stage at which our Lord spoke and acted as in Luk_22:15-17. It is
sufficient to note that in them He gives what He does not taste, and that, in giving,
His thoughts travel beyond all the sorrow and death to reunion and perfected festal
joys. These anticipations solaced His heart in that supreme hour. ‘For the joy that
was set before Him’ He ‘endured the Cross,’ and this was the crown of His joy, that all
His friends should share it with Him, and sit at His table in His kingdom.
The prophetic aspect of the Lord’s Supper should never be left out of view. It is at
once a feast of memory and of hope, and is also a symbol for the present, inasmuch
as it represents the conditions of spiritual life as being participation in the body and
blood of Christ. This is where Paul learned his ‘till He come’; and that hope which
filled the Saviour’s heart should ever fill ours when we remember His death.
III. Verses 19 and 20 record the actual institution of the Lord’s Supper.
Note its connection with the rite which it transforms. The Passover was the memorial
of deliverance, the very centre of Jewish ritual. It was a family feast, and our Lord
took the place of the head of the household. That solemnly appointed and long-
observed memorial of the deliverance which made a mob of slaves into a nation is
transfigured by Jesus, who calls upon Jew and Gentile to forget the venerable
meaning of the rite, and remember rather His work for all men. It is strange
presumption thus to brush aside the Passover, and in effect to say, ‘I abrogate a
divinely enjoined ceremony, and breathe a new meaning into so much of it as I
retain.’ Who is He who thus tampers with God’s commandments? Surely He is either
One having a co-ordinate authority, or—? But perhaps the alternative is best left
unspoken.
The separation of the symbols of the body and blood plainly indicates that it is the
death of Jesus, and that a violent one, which is commemorated. The double symbol
carries in both its parts the same truth, but with differences. Both teach that all our
hopes are rooted in the death of Jesus, and that the only true life of our spirits comes
from participation in His death, and thereby in His life. But in addition to this truth
common to both, the wine, which represents His blood, is the seal of the ‘new
covenant.’ Again we mark the extraordinary freedom with which Christ handles the
most sacred parts of the former revelation, putting them aside as He wills, to set
Himself in their place. He declares, by this rite, that through His death a new
‘covenant’ comes into force as between God and man, in which all the anticipations of
prophets are more than realised, and sins are remembered no more, and the
knowledge of God becomes the blessing of all, and a close relationship of mutual
possession is established between God and us, and His laws are written on loving
hearts and softened wills.
Nor is even this all the meaning of that cup of blessing; for blood is the vehicle of life,
and whoso receives Christ’s blood on his conscience, to sprinkle it from dead works,
therein receives, not only cleansing for the past, but a real communication of ‘the
Spirit of life’ which was ‘in Christ’ to be the life of his life, so as that he can say, ‘I live;
yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.’ Nor is even this all; for, as wine is, all the world
over, the emblem of festivity, so this cup declares that to partake of Christ is to have a
32

fountain of joy in ourselves, which yet has a better source than ourselves. Nor is this
all; for ‘this cup’ is prophecy as well as memorial and symbol, and shadows the new
wine of the kingdom and the marriage supper of the Lamb.
‘This is My body’ could not have meant to the hearers, who saw Him sitting there in
bodily form, anything but ‘this is a symbol of My body.’ It is but the common use of
the word in explaining a figurative speech or act. ‘The field is the world; the tares are
the children of the wicked one; the reapers are the angels,’-and so in a hundred cases.
Luke alone preserves for us the command to ‘do this,’ which at once establishes the
rite as meant to be perpetual, and defines the true nature of it. It is a memorial, and,
if we are to take our Lord’s own explanation, only a memorial. There is nothing here
of sacramental efficacy, but simply the loving desire to be remembered and the
condescending entrusting of some power to recall him to these outward symbols.
Strange that, if the communion were so much more, as the sacramentarian theory
makes it, the feast’s own Founder should not have said a word to hint that it was.
And how deep and yet lowly an insight into His hold on our hearts the institution of
this ordinance shows Him to have had! The Greek is, literally, ‘In order to My
remembrance.’ He knew that-strange and sad as it may seem, and impossible as, no
doubt, it did seem to the disciples-we should be in constant danger of forgetting
Him; and therefore, in this one case, He enlists sense on the side of faith, and trusts
to these homely memorials the recalling, to our treacherous memories, of His dying
love. He wished to live in our hearts, and that for the satisfaction of His own love and
for the deepening of ours.
The Lord’s Supper is a standing evidence of Christ’s own estimate of where the centre
of His work lies. We are to remember His death. Why should it be selected as the
chief treasure for memory, unless it was something altogether different from the
death of other wise teachers and benefactors? If it were in His case what it is in all
others, the end of His activity for blessing, and no part of His message to the world,
what need is there for the Lord’s Supper, and what meaning is there in it, if Christ’s
death were not the sacrifice for the world’s sin? Surely no view of the significance and
purpose of the Cross but that which sees in it the propitiation for the world’s sins
accounts for this rite. A Christianity which strikes the atoning death of Jesus out of
its theology is sorely embarrassed to find a worthy meaning for His dying command,
‘This do in remembrance of Me.’
But if the breaking of the precious alabaster box of His body was needed in order that
‘the house’ might be ‘filled with the odour of the ointment,’ and if His death was the
indispensable condition of pardon and impartation of His life, then ‘wheresoever this
gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there,’ as its vital centre, shall His death
be proclaimed, and this rite shall speak of it for a memorial of Him, and ‘show the
Lord’s death till He come.’
BI 7-13, “Go and prepare us the passover
Preparation for the Last Supper
Passover just at hand.
Day of preparation. The Lamb to be offered is Himself. “Go and prepare—get ready—
for Me; let it be heart-preparation.”
1. This preparation was general. All Old Testament teachings, histories,
prophecies, and events were a preparation for the death on the cross. “Go,
prepare to meet Me around that table of commemoration.”
33

Luke 22 commentary

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Destacado

Destacado (15)

Similar a Luke 22 commentary

Similar a Luke 22 commentary (20)

Más de GLENN PEASE

Más de GLENN PEASE (20)

Último

Último (20)

Luke 22 commentary