Beginning in Mark 14:43 we shift from Jesus being the source of the action to Him being acted upon by others. He becomes very passive except at a few key moments, on His way to the cross. In a way, what we see in this portion of Mark 14 is the failure of mankind. In several key ways, man abandons God—why? So that God shows the futility of man’s efforts to better himself or save himself and we see that that God is the sole source of our rescue. Jesus came into the scene of humanity as the ultimate, and only, real action hero. We rejected Him. He rescued us anyway—alone.
43
Mark returns to his use of action words: “suddenly”. You get the picture that the serene sorrowful scene of prayer is instantly turned into confusion as a “mob” arrives carrying swords and clubs. This wasn’t an orderly arrest by a dignified group representing Israel and Yahweh, it was an unruly mob out for blood. At the front of the group is Judas, who must identify Jesus in the darkness. There were not photographs so it was important that someone who knew Jesus point Him out among the disciples. Judas gives them a sign—pointing even more to His utter lack of devotion to the Lord.
44 – 47
A kiss was a common greeting and was probably on the cheek. Unusual here because it is the only time a disciple is recorded as having greeted Jesus in this way. He used the term “Rabbi” which was a term of great respect, but in what Judas was doing there was no respect, only contempt. John tells us that it was Peter who reacted, trying to come to Jesus’ defense, by cutting of the ear of Malchus, the High Priest’s slave. Jesus healed the man. Jesus didn’t need defending, but it shows the utter futility of man thinking he can do anything for himself or for God.
48 – 50
Jesus had committed no crime and they all knew it. This was simply raw jealousy and hatred. Jesus wants them to know that He knows their actions are unsupported and that the only reason He is allowing it is to fulfill God’s Word. Sometimes when injustice happens to us because we are Christians our response should be like Jesus (and later Peter, Paul and others): to help clarify for the accuser why this is happening, and then submit to God’s will in fulfillment of His Word. In Matthew 26, by the way, Jesus said that the Father had 92,000 angels on hot standby in case they were needed. The sad note at the end of verse 50, of course, is that all deserted Him, just as Jesus predicted.
51 – 52
This is an odd little detail only found in Mark. Tradition says this was Jon-Mark, the writer of this gospel. If so, and if the Last Supper occurred in his home, Mark would have perhaps gone to sleep and realized the group had left. Maybe then he followed them to the Garden – or perhaps was even going to warn Jesus about the plot because perhaps Judas had been at the Last Supper and then gone to tell the religious authorities but arrived back after the group left, thus giving Mark warning. So Mark may have gotten up so quickly that all he had was his sheet covering him. At the arrest scene they tried to nab Mark, perhaps as a witness or co-conspirator, but he left the sheet behind in order to escape.
53 – 54
What Mark records here is really the second hearing – taking place at the current high priest’s house: Caiaphas. Annas, his father, had been a popular high priest deposed by the Romans. Many considered him still the high priest (an office given for life) so Jesus was first taken there for a preliminary hearing (John 18:12-24).
The fact that the high priest, the chief priests, elders, and scribes had all gathered indicated this was a meeting of the Sanhedrin—the ruling council of Israel. This trial was at night and was illegal. (see this excellent and well researched article about this by Biblestudy.org). Here is another good article about the subject.
Peter had run away but was following at a distance. John tells us that his family knew the high priest’s family and got Peter access to the courtyard. Sitting (John has him standing) with the temple police was a risky thing, but we see here Peter’s incredible loyalty to the Lord, fighting against the human nature for self-preservation.
55 – 59
What makes this a sham right off is that a trial is supposed to ascertain the facts and render a judgment. The religious leaders had already rendered their judgment and were looking for facts to support it! Be careful when you reach a conclusion about something and then look for ways to support your position. Instead, let God’s Word give you the truth and let that form your judgment.
The term “kangaroo court” comes to mind here. I’m sure that the religious leaders had gone around interviewing people, trying to build some sort of case to try to legitimize the killing of Jesus. They had heard about Jesus’ statements and took them completely out of context. What Jesus actually said was “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” Destroying temples was illegal all over the Roman Empire but Jesus never said “I will destroy the temple.” Actually, of course, He was talking about His body. Not only had they misunderstood His remarks, but you can tell it was false because no two could agree! Bearing false witness, of course, violated God’s Law.
60 – 61
At this point Caiaphas was getting frustrated. He tried to trick Jesus into answering a false accusation. But Jesus didn’t buy the premise so why would He answer? So Caiaphas tries his next ploy. Matthew tells us that the high priest put Jesus under oath and forced Him to answer the pivotal question: are you the Messiah. It was illegal for him to do this (self incrimination?) but that didn’t bother Caiaphas.
Jesus answers the question directly—and this probably set them back a bit since the Lord had evaded pretty much every question asked up to that point.
62
In the absolutely clearest terms possible, Jesus finally openly declares that He is the Messiah. I love how He uses the term “I am” of course that being the covenant name of God to the Jews. It was time to provoke just the response Jesus got so that they would condemn him. Jesus’ prophecy basically put them on notice that He would be the real power in the universe, not them. These were Messianic prophecies as well.
63 – 65
Tearing of the clothing was to signify astonishment and grief at blaspheme. They didn’t need any more witnesses because Jesus was either blaspheming or telling the truth. Because they had already rejected Him they saw no other conclusion. To spit on someone was the ultimate insult. The Jewish leaders were rejecting their Messiah. Some suggest that the Messiah was supposed to be able to see what was going on without sight (Isaiah 11:2-4) so that may be why they blindfolded Him.
66 – 72
This records Peter’s worst hour. He can’t escape who he is, though he tries desperately. Peter was afraid. In the dark courtyard it was only by the firelight that people began to recognize him. Peter was ready to fight with a sword but when it came to this interaction he simply lied, then he escalated it beyond what was needed. The first rooster crowing probably didn’t catch his attention so on his third denial, which included calling a curse down on himself from God, another crowing brought him to his senses.
Conclusions
As I mentioned, this portion of Mark 14 shows man’s utter failure when it comes to relating to God from a human perspective. We start with a kiss and a term of respect that is not really that at all, even as mankind tries to pretend that can love and serve God on our own but in reality the inner man is corrupt and interested only in the self.
Mark focuses a lot of Peter here and the process of Peter’s denial: curiosity about who would betray at the Last Supper (“surely not I?”, hubris on the way to the Garden (“Even if I have to die …”), weakness hinted at while asleep in the Garden “Couldn’t you stay awake one hour?”, making up by lashing out “one of those who stood by drew his sword”, running away (“they all deserted Him and ran away”), to outright denial (“I don’t know this man”), to weeping (“he began to weep”)
Though Mark focuses on Peter, there is a pattern of behavior that in general shows man’s abandonment of God’s Messiah:
Betrayal (Judas)
Abandonment (the disciples)
Accusation (religious leaders)
Denial (Peter)
Attack (temple police)
What was the response? Judas skulked away to self-destruction, the disciples cowered in fear, the religious leaders pressed the attack further and condemned Him—but Peter—the one who denied Him—wept. This is the correct reaction to our failing God—realize what we have done and repent. We can’t make it right, but we know we have failed.
The good news is that though we failed God, God did not fail us!
