Conservative Friends Bible Study of The Gospel of John #30

 John 18:11-40

We read John 18 closely, tracing how the Gospel portrays Jesus as calm and purposeful during arrest, interrogation, and the first steps toward crucifixion. We test translations and historical context to see how small word choices shape big theological claims about truth, power, and an inward kingdom.
• Rereading the garden arrest and the meaning of “I am he”
• Debating why the arresting party falls to the ground and what that signals about control
• Unpacking first-century naming conventions behind “Jesus of Nazareth”
• Asking why John names Malchus and what that suggests about sources and memory
• Clarifying Simon, Peter, disciple, and key Greek terms tied to learning and identity
• Examining the Annas and Caiaphas exchange as an example of coercive authority
• Discussing Ioudaios and how translation choices can fuel anti-Semitic misreadings
• Following Peter’s denials and the narrative weight of the cockcrow
• Exploring Pilate, Roman power, “What is truth,” and basileia as realm or inward state
• Rethinking Barabbas as an insurrectionist rather than a mere robber

The quote in our introduction is from Chapter IV of Penn's No Cross, No  Crown.

A complete list of our podcasts,  organized into topics, is available on our website.

We will be publishing video interviews with Conservative Friends on YouTube.  See our YouTube channel.  The first interview is with Susan Smith. 

To learn more about Ohio Yearly Meeting (Conservative) of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), please visit  ohioyearlymeeting.org.

Those interested in exploring the distinctives of Conservative Friends waiting worship should consider checking out our many Zoom Online Worship opportunities during the week here. All are welcome! 

We also have several Zoom study groups.  Check out the Online Study and Discussion Groups on our website.   

Advices read in these podcasts can be found on page 29 in our Book Of Discipline.

We welcome feedback on this and any of our other podcast episodes.   Contact us through our website.

Transcript

Welcome And Reading Setup

Henry Jason 0:02

This is the OYM, Ohio Yearly Meeting, Greek Bible Study. This is session number 30 of our reading and discussion of the Gospel according to John. We left off at chapter 18, verse 11, but I don't think we perhaps finished saying what needed to be said about that first paragraph of chapter 18. So I'm going to reread that again, starting from verse 1 and go from there.

Reading John 18 In The Garden

Henry Jason 0:33

After Jesus had spoken these words, he went out with his disciples across the Kidrum valley to a place where there was a garden, which he and his disciples entered. Now Judas, who betrayed him, also knew the place because Jesus often met there with his disciples. So Judas brought a detachment of soldiers together with police from the chief priests and the Pharisees, and they came there with lanterns and torches and weapons. Then Jesus, knowing all that was to happen to him, came forward and asked them, Whom are you looking for? They answered, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus replied, I am he. Judas, who betrayed him, was standing with them. When Jesus said to them, I am he, they stepped back and fell to the ground. Again he asked them, Whom are you looking for? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus answered, I told you that I am he. So if you are looking for me, let these men go. This was to fulfill the word that he had spoken. I did not lose a single one of those whom you gave me. Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it, struck the high priest's slave, and cut off his right ear. The slave's name was Malchus. Jesus said to Peter, Put your sword back into its sheath. Am I not to drink the cup that the Father has given me?

Why The Arresting Party Falls

Henry Jason 2:01

First of all, any further comments on what we read last time two weeks ago or on this passage that we just reread? Who fell to the ground? That is an interesting question. I've often wondered exactly what that was referring to. It's not mentioned at all in the other gospels. And what was the significance of that? I know what some commentaries say, but I I question why they say what they say.

SPEAKER_01 2:34

This is Sarah. I'm I've taken it as a sign on the part of the people who came with Judas that they were the ones that fell to the ground and that they were showing their cowardice.

Henry Jason 2:47

I'm pretty sure it is the people that the police or the guards who fell to the ground. But why is not clear. I know some people think it's because of some kind of more awareness of Jesus and his divinity, but I don't think that makes any sense in actuality here.

SPEAKER_02 3:07

It seems to me that it's showing that he's in control, even though he's outnumbered and he knows he's going to be arrested and he knows what's going to happen. He's calm and he's he's in charge. And the way the text shows that is by showing the people who are assaulting him in uh a weak position. They fall to the ground, they fall backwards.

Henry Jason 3:33

Yeah, I mean, that's that's I've I've read that explanation. It may be true, it's a little strange though, and that's why I just wonder what the real significance of it is.

SPEAKER_03 3:45

I would take it as and and have always seen it as the way that Pat said that well, God is actually in control, and and they felt that power when he said that and that realization. But he was ready to I've heard that explanation.

Henry Jason 4:04

On the other hand, the whole scene, not just this, but the following day, it appears that Satan is in control, basically, in terms of the arrest, the scourging, the crucifixion until the resurrection. And that's why I'm a little surprised at this is here, but it may be that.

Names And Sources Behind The Text

Henry Jason 4:23

One other thing, to change the subject here a bit, in my translations as Jesus of Nazareth, or literally Jesus uh the Nazarene. Of course, they didn't have family names, surnames at this time, so you were known in one of two ways. You were known being the son of so-and-so, Jesus, son of Joseph, or the town you were from, Jesus the Nazarene from Nazareth, or Jesus of Nazareth. That was the normal way of saying that, using a patronymic being son of someone or the town. We often have names uh in English that end in T-O-N, like Newton, the city of Newton or the town of Newton. Well, that T-O-N actually is an abbreviation for T O W N. Paul Newton was Paul from the town of Newtown. And the same thing with son, you know, you have Johnson and Thompson and all those S-O-Ns. That's the same thing we have in a number of English names. So you were named after your father, son of. And that's the normal way you actually continue to address someone in Russian. You use the first name and the father's name in addressing someone. That's a polite way of saying uh Mr. So-and-so or Mrs. So-and-so. The last name, the surname is much more formal, that's for formal kinds of things. But like my father's name is Henry, so I'd be called Genri Genrivich, Henry, son of Henry. I know in the Icelandic language, you also use daughter of, Mary, daughter of Paula, or something like that. But that's what you see here, Judas, Iscariot, where they're from, or Simon of Site, you know, of Cyrene, or things like that, when you get names like that. Distinguish them from other people with the same first name.

SPEAKER_00 6:18

I have a question that's related to a name, and it's in uh verse 10. I don't know that any of the other gospels give the name of the slave whose ear was cut off, but here it gives Malchus.

Henry Jason 6:30

Right.

SPEAKER_00 6:31

And I'm just wondering what we might infer from this, if anything, and I put a parenthesis here and go back to a recent study I've had in Mark, chapter 15, where it gives the names of Simon of Cyrene's sons, Alexander and Rufus. And I thought that must indicate that they were known to the early church. So I don't know why Malchus's name might be put in here of all the people who were part of that crowd.

Henry Jason 7:01

It's not mentioned anywhere else, as I can recall. And that's interesting because this whole what we call the passion narrative, everything that we're starting to read here about um Jesus's passion and death, resurrection, uh, appears to be from a different source than what you see in Mark, and then following Mark, both Luke and Matthew. Uh, so Malchus is not mentioned there. Probably the oral source or wherever this came from originally, they knew stuff that the others didn't know because it's pretty clear to biblical scholars that the gospels, according to Matthew and Luke, already knew of Mark's gospel and used it in writing their own gospels, Matthew and Luke. Uh, on the other hand, the gospel according to John basically does not show any use of those other gospels, as far as I'm aware, of anyone saying that, that it's really from a completely different source and clearly a good source. In actuality, you really have two sources, Mark and John, as primary sources. And then Matthew and Luke use Mark with some other stuff that they have from other sources. John is so different, and not having the very many miracles and parables about the kingdom of God, you a very different kind of source. The intention, too, is different in all these gospels. If you recall, the gospel according to Luke was probably an influential magistrate, probably a Greek or Roman. And so Luke is explaining to him what he knows about Jesus and answering whatever questions that magistrate had. The Gospel according to John, on the other hand, in the written version we have, is probably the last of these four major gospels to be written, and probably written in the last decade of the first century. So there's much more time to think about what had happened during the ministry and passion and death and resurrection. So you have much more fully developed theological understanding here. Again, it's a bit different than the other three gospels. And they talk about the Johannine churches, which appeared to have been somewhat different from the other churches that were there that started off. Eventually, they may have all amalgamated later. But the purpose of writing the gospel, according to John, in part was to refute some of the issues that were coming up with this heretical sect that are called the Sodocetists. And so you have a focus in that direction. And we do know, as we will see in the last chapter of John, that this gospel went through more than one edition, because at the very end it talks about who the source was, and that uh we'll get there when we get there. I've I pointed that out already a couple of times. Any other comments or questions in this first section? Simon in Hebrew is Shimon. If you remember, there was a prime minister of Israel, modern prime minister, Shimon Perez, and that's Simon is Shimon. Peter is the transliteration from a Greek word petros, P-E-T-R-O-S. Petra is the Greek word for a rock, but we're talking about a big rock, like the rock of Gibraltar. Okay. And in talking about Peter, the name becomes Tetros, which is a masculine form. And so that's Peter or the Rock. And the Hebrew is Kephah, I believe. So Peter the Rock, apparently a nickname. You know, we've got the name Rocky. You've probably met somebody, but that name somewhere in your lives. So anyway, Simon the Rock or Simon Rocky, Rocky Simon. I don't remember if I mentioned about here Peter cutting off the ear of the uh slave, Malchus. There is a passage we'll come to very soon when Peter is following, is you know, trying to see what happens to Jesus in the courtyard. He's allowed in because a disciple was known to the high priest, an unnamed disciple is known to the high priest, and he was able to come in and then to get someone to allow Peter to come in. But that doorkeeper, whoever that woman was, thought she recognized Peter. But then, of course, he denies being recognized as a disciple of Jesus. And as I've mentioned before, the word disciple in Greek means matetos. Mateus, which means a student, a pupil, a disciple. And that's how I know it's translated into Russian as učinique, which means a pupil. It is exactly from the verb mantano, which means I learn. And we get our English word mathematics from that word. And this word mathe still exists in modern Greek and it still means a pupil. It's pronounced differently, mathitis, but it has the same meaning as it did in ancient Greek.

Jesus Questioned And Peter Denies

Henry Jason 12:28

Okay, going to continue reading. So the soldiers, their officer, and the Jewish police arrested Jesus and bound him. First they took him to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year. Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it was better to have one person die for the people. Simon Peter and another disciple followed Jesus. Since that disciple was known to the high priest, he went with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest. But Peter was standing outside at the gate. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out, spoke to the woman who guarded the gate, and brought Peter in. The woman said to Peter, You are not also one of this man's disciples, are you? He said, I am not. Now the slaves and the police had made a charcoal fire because it was cold, and they were standing around it and warming themselves. Peter also was standing with them and warming himself. If you recall from the other gospels, there's a comment about the fact that his accent was that of a northerner, a Galilean. He spoke with a Galilean accent. So that too seemed to be a proof to the woman that he was a disciple, a student of Jesus. Of course, Jesus was a rabbi, and rabbi means basically teacher. It's the form of address for a teacher. Then the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and about his teaching. Jesus answered, I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all the Jews come together. I have said nothing in secret. Why do you ask me? Ask those who heard what I said to them. They know what I said. When he had said this, one of the police standing nearby struck Jesus on the face, saying, Is that how you answer the high priest? Jesus answered, If I have spoken wrongly, testify to the wrong. But if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me? Then Anna sent him bound to Caiophas, the high priest. I've also had this word pronounced Caiaphas. I'm not sure which is the more common pronunciation, Caiaphas or Caiaphas.

SPEAKER_01 14:59

June, you said Caiaphas, I thought Caiaphas.

Henry Jason 15:03

Yes, I think Caiaphas is what I most likely would pronounce it, but I'm just looking at the pronunciation guide in this particular Bible, and it says Caiaphas. Perhaps that's a British pronunciation. I don't know. Because I know we say Isaiah, but the Brits say Isaiah. And uh also for some of these names, the Catholics have slightly different spellings of these words, of some of them.

SPEAKER_00 15:29

Is it clearly a Jewish name?

Henry Jason 15:31

Hold on a second. I'm just looking at the Greek here. It looks like a Greek name to me, but it could be both.

SPEAKER_07 15:38

Was it common for Jews to take Greek names?

Henry Jason 15:42

I don't think so. It sure looks weak. I think they they perhaps sometimes did, but that would I would expect. I'll be outside of Palestine, outside of Israel. Just like in this country, in the United States, I live in California, and there is a huge Chinese population here. And oftentimes a number of Chinese I've met and known will have an American English name in addition to their original Chinese name. That's fairly frequent here. I'm thinking even someone like Paul switched his name from Saul, which was originally Shaul in uh Arabic. Paul, Paulus, what does Paulus mean? Um Latin word, I think it means small, if I'm not mistaken, something like that. Diminutive, small, paulus. So I could just see that Aramaic and Hebrew is so different from Greek and Latin that perhaps they did this on purpose, just like oftentimes here, Chinese will also have an English-sounding name for the benefit of English speakers. Oh, one thing I did want to say in verse 20, Eudaios. I've mentioned this before, but it's good to refresh everyone's memory. This is the word that gets translated as a Jew, but it's very important to understand when you're reading, especially the gospel according to John, it has two senses. One is the normal sense of anyone who is Jewish. But the second sense that had grown up by the end of the century, especially by then, was it referred to any anti-Christian authority or follower who were opposed to Christians, those who saw Jesus as the Christ, as the Messiah. So, on one sense, you need to decide when you're reading this gospel whether it refers to Jews ethnically as a people, or if it also has that other sense of this anti-Christian Jew, anti-Christian authorities. Because of this confusion, there's been this huge anti-Semitic bias because of not understanding that distinction that was made. Both meanings occur here in this gospel and elsewhere in the New Testament. But it's very important to understand which is being said, which is which is the meaning of this here. In this case, obviously, in verse 20, it's the ethnic Jew, anyone who is Jewish. But of course, elsewhere, as we'll come across it, I think soon, it is referring to those anti-Jewish authorities.

SPEAKER_02 18:21

I think that for the Quakers, it doesn't really relate to either one of those. It indicates the kind of the inward orientation of the person. I believe it's Paul who says he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, but he is a Jew who is one inwardly. And the Quakers picked up on that, that a person is identified by what is in their heart, not by their ethnicity.

Henry Jason 18:56

But I'm thinking he Paul is also using it to refer to ethnic Jews, because ethnic Jews, of course, clearly saw themselves as something as people very different from the other worldly nations, the Gentiles, as they would be called, or Goyim in Hebrew, the Goy, Goyim, which is a somewhat derogatory term. But even there, it has kind of both senses. You can be talking about these nations, but it's not a positive term at times.

SPEAKER_02 19:25

For the Quaker, the issue is what is in the heart, not oh, yes, yeah.

Henry Jason 19:30

Right, what Paul is saying. Yeah, absolutely. That's what matters, the inward versus the outward. You know, whatever you are outwardly, Jewish, Chinese, Russian, Greek, whatever, what matters is the inward.

SPEAKER_00 19:46

I'm trying to make sense of this exchange between Annas and Jesus. First, there's a little confusion about who is the high priest. In uh 12 and 13, it says that Annas was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was the high priest that year. But then in this back and forth about what was Jesus teaching, and the uh the soldier, whatever guard, uh slaps him, says, Is that the way you answer the high priest? So it looks like the real high priest that year, as it says earlier, is Caiaphas and not Annas. But maybe you keep calling the person high priest even when they've left the office, like some people will still refer to uh number five as president.

Henry Jason 20:32

Yeah, I mean, you know, President Carter, president, you know, yes. I think that would be my understanding also. The next governor would be still governor, even though he's no longer in office, that sort of understanding.

SPEAKER_00 20:45

So I'm trying to understand what, if any, judicial propriety there is here. Because it doesn't look like this is a formal trial, it's sort of a pre-trial thing. I don't think that he has the authority to do anything, he's just having an interrogation. But Jesus's answer seems to be not only reasonable, but not disrespectful. And yet he is slapped because you know, is that any way to talk to the high priest? I just am not following that. Maybe it's all case.

Henry Jason 21:15

I end I think I follow that completely. I mean, in any authoritarian kind of situation, you got to remember that these people have much more control than they might in a democratic society. And then I they just want to do something like that. There doesn't have to be something, a rational connection between why they slapped him for something that really didn't shouldn't have elicited anything like that whatsoever.

SPEAKER_02 21:37

He's refusing to answer their question. So he's refusing to take a subservient position of answering the question that he's being asked. And instead, he's saying, Go ask somebody else. They know what I said. And he's sort of rubbing it in that the people that he's spoken to are going to retain his teaching. Matter what they do to him, his teaching is going to survive. So he's letting them know that he's in charge again. And that's why he gets slapped down because they don't like that attitude.

Henry Jason 22:14

I think they want a very subservient kind of response from him. And Jesus is being honest, but they're not going to take that.

SPEAKER_07 22:22

When he starts out with, why are you asking me this? It has a pretty disrespectful tone to it. What are you stupid? Why are you asking me this?

Henry Jason 22:30

He knows and they know what they're doing. I mean, that this is kind of a kangaroo court that we're about to have here. Totally illegal. But of course, at this time, it's fairly clear that, as it says, that it was the Roman governor, Pilate, who really had the final say in terms of executing him. They had to get permission from Pilate. We're not talking about extra-legal kinds of things like a vigilante mob stoning Stephen to death or something like that. That's something a bit different.

SPEAKER_02 23:02

Jesus is also showing them that he's not intimidated by them. And he's the reader is also seeing that Jesus feels confident about his position. He isn't really threatened by what's happening to him.

Henry Jason 23:17

Yeah, he didn't do anything wrong.

SPEAKER_02 23:20

No, he just knows that he didn't do anything wrong, but he also knows that he has to go through this, that this is expected of him by the father.

Henry Jason 23:29

He knows what's happening. I mean, we have so many examples of this happening just a few decades ago, you know, in East Europe under the Soviet Union's domination over Eastern Europe, and of course, Mao Zedong's China. And you had these fake trials over and over again, trumped up charges of this and that. And of course, Jesus is executed on trumped-up charges that he wanted to be a king. There was only one king in the empire, and that was Caesar. So you just don't have another king unless that king is appointed king over a province or whatever, a kingdom within the empire.

SPEAKER_04 24:04

It's often the point that they it's not that they care that you do what they tell you to do, it's that they want you to be obedient.

Henry Jason 24:11

That's right. That's it. Okay, uh, let's go on a bit here. Now, Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. They asked him, You are not also one of his disciples, are you? He denied it and said, I am not. One of the slaves of the high priest, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, asked, Did I not see you in the garden with him? Again, Peter denied it. And at that moment the cock crowed. One thing I don't recall if I mentioned a couple of weeks ago, that word for ear is a diminutive form of the word for ear, oteon. And we're not clear if it means just the ear lobe or the whole ear. And the word for sword here, makaira, I think it is in Greek, makaira, uh, is probably one of those short swords that are curved. Like uh, yeah, let me just look that up. I don't recall at the moment. I mean, of course, there are all kinds of swords in those days, and swords were carried because of wild animals, of course. Okay, makaira, uh makaira, a relatively short sword or other sharp instrument, a sword, a dagger. Well, a dagger wouldn't be bent or wouldn't be curved. I was thinking of it being bent, but you know, there could be a dagger or something. And again, what did he cut off? It doesn't mention Jesus's healing of this ear or earlobe or whatever that was cut off in this gospel. But just looking here, this word also just refers to a violent death. It's the same word that's used for the sword of the spirit, where that's referred to. It also can be used to refer to the power of authorities to punish evildoers, Romans 13, 4. Oh, yeah, and the word for ear here is the diminutive form. The normal word for ear is just oos. Okay.

SPEAKER_07 26:18

Isn't it otarion?

Henry Jason 26:20

I think you're right. What verse was that in? Okay. Otarian, that's right. You may as well check on that meaning in this dictionary. Okay, Otarion. It's the diminutive of oos. Okay, so it's a diminutive form of ooze, you know, a small ear, R, and but equivalent to it in later Greek is the outer ear. Oh, there is a word oteon. Is this I also was correct, but I had a different word here for what I had put down earlier. That also is true, and that's the outer ear, a human or animal's ear. But the word in this text is the first one, Otarion. In verse 27, it says, At that moment the cock crowed. I believe I probably mentioned this when we were reading Mark, that the night was divided by the Romans into these different time periods that were called cock crows, when the rooster crowed. And if I recall correctly, that was their three-hour period. Because roosters were not allowed within the city limits of Jerusalem at that time. Perhaps we can understand why. When I lived in East San Jose, there was a neighbor who had a rooster, which was allowed because it wasn't in the city limits. And I think he got very confused by the street lights at three in the morning or five in the morning. And it was their crowing is distinctive and very loud. Okay, anything further on that? Okay, let's go on.

Pilate Confronts Truth And Kingdom

Henry Jason 28:06

This is verse 28. Then they took Jesus from Caiaphas to Pilate's headquarters. It was early in the morning. They themselves did not enter the headquarters so as to avoid ritual defilement and to be able to eat the Passover. So Pilate went out to them and said, What accusation do you bring against this man? They answered, If this man were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you. Pilate said to them, Take him yourselves and judge him according to your law. The Jews replied, We are not permitted to put anyone to death. This was to fulfill what Jesus had said when he indicated the kind of death he was to die. Of course, that was death on a cross. If the Jews were going to kill him, they probably would have stoned him to death.

SPEAKER_07 28:59

Why do they say it's unlawful to put any man to death if they can stone a man to death?

Henry Jason 29:05

I don't think they could. I know there's some question among scholars as to just what were the limits that the Romans put on executions. They weren't going to have someone under them kill someone for any old reason. It's clear that that did happen, but perhaps in this more kind of legal kind of thing, this kangaroo court sessions we're having here, that they felt it had to be within the Roman law.

SPEAKER_07 29:32

So this is a Roman saying that the Jews can't put people to death.

Henry Jason 29:37

Right. Of course, kings that were appointed by or allowed to be kings in the empire, I'm thinking of Herod and others, did put people to death. But the extent and how and where and when seems to may have varied. Did I mention it here that even within, maybe not in this study in this group, that we do have an archaeological find showing uh part of an inscription in Greek saying that the Greeks, the non-Jews, could not go past a certain part of the temple there, otherwise, they would be essentially executed. They could only go in the part reserved for Gentiles, that outermost part of the temple. And of course, as you went further in, you you eventually ended up at the Holy of Holies, which the priests, the high priest only could enter once a year.

SPEAKER_00 30:28

It seems that there were a number of exemptions that the Roman Empire gave to the Jewish state and its rulers, maybe to keep down the possibility of yet another violent revolt. I think that they said, no, you can have a special coinage that does not have the image of the emperor on it. I forget what the other exceptions were. But I think that they may have wanted to keep to themselves the power of life and death in at least official judicial proceedings.

Henry Jason 30:59

Well, of course, they had the final say in anything, even making exceptions. It was clear Caesar was in charge.

SPEAKER_02 31:06

In 32, it says that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die. That again underscores that it's Jesus who's in control. He knows what's going to happen, and things are proceeding just as he said they would.

Henry Jason 31:26

My understanding is that Jews never crucified anyone, as far as I can recall. The only people that could crucify would be the Romans. I don't even remember if the Greeks ever did that.

SPEAKER_02 31:39

My point is that throughout this chapter, so much of the information we're given is to underscore that Jesus is in control of what is happening.

Henry Jason 31:51

I see it as Jesus knew what was going to happen. I mean, he he knew, he clearly knew.

SPEAKER_06 31:57

Crucifixion was a very cruel way to kill people.

Henry Jason 32:01

But what we're having here, I think, is a show trial.

SPEAKER_06 32:07

It was cruel and it was meant to kill body and soul both.

Henry Jason 32:12

And it was meant especially to be an example to anyone else if they did whatever the criminal was being executed for. Of course, it was horrible. There are many other things going on here, of course, that we'll talk about. For one thing, you were completely stripped of clothing, you were crucified totally naked. You see these images of Jesus wearing a loincloth. That wasn't the case. You were completely naked, which again was a horrible shame for a Jew.

SPEAKER_02 32:42

I was just thinking what the spiritual lesson that we're being taught here is that even in the worst circumstances, in the most cruel, soul-defying action that is being perpetrated upon him, in the end, he is stronger, he is risen. So they're taking the worst possible situation and showing how the spiritual power which he receives from God is stronger than the worst the world can throw at him. And I think that's a significant lesson that we are to take away from this.

Henry Jason 33:23

I think that lesson, though, is a lesson of complete obedience to the Father as a model. Yes, uh, Albert.

SPEAKER_07 33:31

Yeah, that verse 32 makes me think that it's not Jesus who is in control, but the prophecy that was given concerning him. And he's just following along with what had to be. Makes him more human, to my understanding. Is that Isaiah?

SPEAKER_04 33:49

I mean, he suffered terribly as a man. You know, he may have overcome spiritually, but he still suffered horribly as a human.

Henry Jason 33:57

Okay, let's see if we can maybe go through the last this next chapter, the next uh paragraph. Then Pilate entered the headquarters again, summoned Jesus, and asked him, Are you the king of the Jews? Jesus answered, Do you ask this on your own, or did others tell you about me? Pilate replied, I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests have handed you over to me. What have you done? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my followers would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not from here. Pilate asked him, So you are a king? Jesus answered, You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I came into the world to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice. Pilate asked him, What is truth? After he had said this, he went out to the Jews again and told them, I find no case against him, but you have a custom that I release someone for you at the Passover. Do you want me to release for you the king of the Jews? They shouted in reply, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a bandit. I have talked about this a number of times regarding the word for kingdom in Greek Basileia, more often does not refer to an actual physical kingdom. It refers to something more inward, a state, a state of being, the domain in which a king reigns, rather than the actual kingdom that we think of kingdom when we hear the English word kingdom. The Greek word is basileia. And there's a lot of confusion that occurs without realizing it because this English word kingdom does not have that same sense that this Greek word basileia has. As I said, when we think of kingdom, we basically think of something political, something social, whereas basilea has that meaning, but more often it does not refer to that political entity, that territory, that country. It's much more something we would say is inward, a state, a domain, a realm. And that is important because when Jesus says the kingdom of God is within you, we're talking about this state of being, this domain of God, this divine state. And that's, I think, essential to realize.

SPEAKER_00 36:44

I have a comment on verse 40. Yes. Several translations say either that Barabbas was a robber or a bandit. Ah, I was gonna get there right now. Okay, because I think there's a better one.

Henry Jason 37:00

Yes, uh, this word has two meanings. It can mean bandit, robber, but it also has another meaning, which is really the correct meaning here, and that is a revolutionary, an insurrectionist. So it actually has both meanings, and this makes much more sense that it really should be translated as an insurrectionist, because if you recall, Jesus was crucified with two other people, and I think it refers to them as bandits. I'm not sure if it's in this gospel or in the others.

SPEAKER_06 37:37

I thought it was malfactors.

Henry Jason 37:39

No, it's lay stays, lay sty there. I wouldn't translate it as that because it's a much stronger word. But the reason you would give this sentence, this most horrible form of execution, was to show that you just do not oppose the Roman emperor, you do not oppose Roman rule, and so you got this worst of all forms of execution. And so these two insurrectionists were crucified with Jesus, and the charge against Jesus was a political charge. If you recall, as we'll get to it, the charge that was put on top of his cross was king of the Jews. That is, his charge was that he said he was in opposition to Roman rule, and so he should be executed, and that's why he's made an example to everyone, all the other Jews, that you just don't oppose Roman rule, period. And so I think it's really a mistake to translate it as bandit or robber. Now, of course, insurrectionists and revolutionaries lived often by robbing people as bandits to survive in such a country that was under Roman rule here. And in 70 AD, you had the first Jewish war, and that was horrible. Just hundreds of people were crucified. Anyway, I'm seeing it's getting quite late. So uh maybe we'll get back to this last section here, but it's clearly said here that Jesus is clearly saying, My kingdom is an inward kingdom, a spiritual kingdom. It's not a physical, a worldly kingdom, it's not a physical political state, it's a divine state, a spiritual state, a state that is within you, as it's

Goodnight And Next Time

Henry Jason 39:20

said in Luke chapter 17, verses 2021, in the correct translations. So we will come back to this next time, I think. Okay, I think I will say goodnight or the evening and um.