Mark Chapter 14
Jesus’ Betrayal, Arrest, and Trial
A. Preparations for death.
1. (Mark 14:1-2) The rulers resolve to kill Jesus.
“After two days it was the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. And the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take Him by trickery and put Him to death. But they said, ‘Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar of the people.’”
The timing of this plot is deeply significant. Mark notes that it was only two days before the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Passover was one of the holiest and most important feasts in the Jewish calendar, commemorating Israel’s deliverance from Egypt when the blood of the lamb shielded their households from judgment. This festival naturally carried deep messianic expectation, as many longed for God to once again send a Deliverer who would free them from foreign oppression. The city of Jerusalem would have been crowded with pilgrims, filled with anticipation, and buzzing with political and religious fervor.
The religious authorities, however, were not caught up in hopeful expectation of the Messiah, but rather in schemes of murder. The chief priests and scribes sought to kill Jesus, not by any legitimate process of justice, but “by trickery,” exposing their utter corruption. They feared neither God nor the guilt of shedding innocent blood. Their concern was purely political: “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar of the people.” They feared man’s reaction more than God’s judgment.
The irony is profound. These men meticulously observed outward ritual purity for the feast, yet plotted the vilest sin of all: the betrayal and crucifixion of the Son of God. Their scruples over timing reveal not piety but hypocrisy. They did not want a riot during the feast, but in God’s sovereign design, the crucifixion would take place at the very moment Passover lambs were slain. Jesus, the true Lamb of God, would fulfill what Passover had always pointed to.
Historical background further highlights the weight of this scene. Every male Jew within fifteen miles of Jerusalem was required to attend the Passover, and many more came from far beyond—especially from Galilee, where Jesus’ ministry had gained tremendous popularity. In preparation for this holy time, the people of Jerusalem even whitewashed tombs so pilgrims would not accidentally become ceremonially defiled. For a month prior, synagogues taught and explained the meaning of Passover so that all were prepared. Yet in the midst of this season of heightened devotion, Israel’s leaders conspired to kill the very One who was the ultimate fulfillment of the feast.
Though they attempted to manipulate circumstances to serve their agenda, it was God’s plan that prevailed. John 11:57 indicates that originally the authorities intended to arrest Jesus during the feast. They later altered their scheme because of His rising popularity following the triumphal entry and His authoritative cleansing of the temple. Yet when Judas offered to betray Jesus privately, their plans shifted again, bringing everything back into alignment with God’s sovereign timing. As Peter would later declare, “Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death” (Acts 2:23). Man plotted in darkness, but the light of God’s eternal purpose guided every detail.
This passage reminds us that no scheme of men can thwart the will of God. The religious leaders thought themselves clever in their secrecy and political maneuvering, yet all they managed to do was fulfill prophecy and accomplish God’s redemptive plan. What they intended for evil, God ordained for the salvation of the world.
2. (Mark 14:3) What the woman did: Jesus is anointed with perfume.
“And being in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper, as He sat at the table, a woman came having an alabaster flask of very costly oil of spikenard. Then she broke the flask and poured it on His head.”
This scene takes place in Bethany, at the house of Simon the leper, a man evidently healed by Jesus and no longer contagious, yet still remembered by the stigma of his past affliction. The home setting reflects fellowship and gratitude, and into this moment enters a woman with an act of devotion so extravagant that it has echoed through church history.
John’s Gospel identifies this woman as Mary of Bethany, the sister of Martha and Lazarus (John 12:1-8). This immediately distinguishes the event from an earlier anointing by a sinful woman in Luke 7:36-50. That earlier occasion was marked by overwhelming repentance and gratitude for forgiveness, expressed through tears and devotion at Jesus’ feet. In contrast, Mary of Bethany’s act in Mark 14 was not born out of sorrow for sin but out of adoration for the majesty and worth of Christ Himself. She was not focused on herself or her past but on Jesus alone, acknowledging His glory and anticipating His death. It is one thing to love Jesus for what He has done for us, but it is a greater maturity of devotion to love Him simply for who He is in His wonder and majesty.
The gift itself was staggering in value. The alabaster flask held pure oil of spikenard, an aromatic perfume imported from the Himalayan regions of India, preserved in alabaster to protect its fragrance and potency. Pliny the Elder observed that the best ointments were preserved in alabaster, attesting to the importance and cost of such a vessel. Many scholars believe that such perfume was often a family heirloom, passed from mother to daughter, not merely for its beauty but as a form of financial security, functioning like a small, portable investment. By using it all at once upon Jesus, Mary offered up what may have been her family’s wealth, her security, and her inheritance, laying everything at His feet in total devotion.
Mark notes that “she broke the flask and poured it on His head.” The breaking of the flask’s thin neck meant she committed the entire contents to Jesus, with no holding back. This act went far beyond custom. In that culture, a dab of oil might be applied to a guest’s head as a gesture of honor, but Mary’s action was lavish and total. She poured out the whole flask, drenching Him in costly fragrance.
This action carried prophetic symbolism. Jesus had just entered Jerusalem as a King, and Mary’s act corresponded with the anointing of a King. While the disciples failed to grasp the significance of His entry and the reality of His impending death, Mary discerned it. She seemed to perceive, in a way that others did not, that Jesus’ time was short and that His burial was near. Her act was both an acknowledgment of His kingship and a preparation for His death, a blending of coronation and burial anointing in a single act of love.
Notably, Mary did this silently. While her sister Martha is remembered for her words and busyness, Mary is remembered for her worshipful actions. She did not announce her intentions beforehand, nor narrate them while carrying them out, nor seek to justify herself afterward. She simply acted. Her silence intensified the beauty of her worship, for she sought no recognition or approval. She acted out of sheer devotion to Christ, unconcerned with the opinions of men.
Charles Spurgeon insightfully observed that true devotion does not seek to catch the eye of man but to please the Lord alone. If we could learn to “do more and talk less” in our service to Christ, focusing on hidden obedience rather than public recognition, our service would be richer. Mary exemplified this principle. When she had finished, she did not look around to see who approved. She sought no human applause. Spurgeon applied this lesson further, warning believers not to rest in past accomplishments or in the praise of others but to continue on in faithful service, for so much work remains for the Lord.
Mary’s action therefore stands as a timeless example of total devotion. She gave without reserve, without hesitation, and without concern for what others thought. Her love for Jesus was expressed not in words but in costly sacrifice. The fragrance of her worship filled the house that day, and her act continues to fill the church with its testimony, for Jesus Himself declared it would be remembered wherever the gospel is preached.
(Mark 14:4-9) The reaction to what the woman did.
“But there were some who were indignant among themselves, and said, ‘Why was this fragrant oil wasted? For it might have been sold for more than three hundred denarii and given to the poor.’ And they criticized her sharply. But Jesus said, ‘Let her alone. Why do you trouble her? She has done a good work for Me. For you have the poor with you always, and whenever you wish you may do them good; but Me you do not have always. She has done what she could. She has come beforehand to anoint My body for burial. Assuredly, I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be told as a memorial to her.’”
a. Some who were indignant: John gives us the fuller account of who led this criticism. In John 12:1-8, we read that it was Judas Iscariot who was indignant over this act of devotion. John 12:6 explains his true motive, saying, “This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the money box; and he used to take what was put in it.” His concern was not genuine compassion for the poor, but greed. This exposes the heart of Judas, who cloaked his covetousness under a false pretense of piety.
i. They criticized her sharply: Mark makes it clear that Judas’ voice of discontent quickly influenced others. Soon the other disciples joined in the criticism. This is a sobering reminder that spiritual coldness and murmuring can spread quickly among the brethren. Mary’s act of love was met with rebuke, as they deemed it an extravagant waste. In reality, their indignation revealed their own spiritual dullness. Often, as believers, we may be quick to criticize those who show greater devotion to Christ than we ourselves are willing to display.
ii. Judas may have been the ringleader, but the text emphasizes that “they criticized her sharply.” The plural shows this was not limited to Judas alone but became a group consensus. Each disciple looked at the oil poured upon Jesus and inwardly calculated its financial worth, viewing it as squandered. Mary, in that moment, likely wrestled with doubt—was her act of love actually wrong? Yet Christ’s defense silenced their misguided reasoning.
iii. The word “waste” in Mark 14:4 is significant. The Greek term is apōleia, which is elsewhere translated as “perdition.” In John 17:12, Jesus referred to Judas as “the son of perdition.” This is a striking irony: Judas accused Mary of waste, yet Judas himself wasted his entire life. He considered Mary’s offering wasteful, while he squandered the greatest opportunity ever given to man, namely fellowship with the Son of God.
b. It might have been sold for more than three hundred denarii: Judas, and the disciples who echoed him, evaluated this flask of pure nard as worth nearly a year’s wages for a laborer. To them, the monetary value outweighed its spiritual worth. Charles Spurgeon insightfully remarked, “I shall always feel obliged to Judas for figuring up the price of that box of costly nard. He did it to blame her, but we will let his figures stand, and think the more of her the more he put down to the account of waste. I should never have known what it cost, nor would you either, if Judas had not marked down in his pocket-book.”
c. Let her alone. Why do you trouble her? She has done a good work for Me: Jesus’ defense of Mary shows His acceptance of her offering. While the disciples deemed it waste, He called it “a good work.” The Greek word here is kalos, meaning not only good but beautiful, noble, and lovely. It carries the sense of something attractive and winsome. This was not simply a morally right deed (agathos), but a radiant act of beauty. Mary’s gift reflected her heart of love, and Jesus recognized it as such.
i. Jesus gave Mary the highest commendation: “She has done what she could.” This phrase carries weight. God does not expect from us what we cannot do, but He does expect faithfulness in what we can. Mary was not called to preach like Peter or to write Scripture like Paul, but she offered the costly treasure she had in love and faith. To do what one can, wholeheartedly and sacrificially, is the greatest service one can render Christ.
ii. Ironside observed, “There can be no higher commendation than this. All cannot do great things for Christ, but it is well if each one does what he can as unto the Lord Himself.” The danger lies in excusing ourselves into inactivity, thinking that our little is insignificant. Mary’s little was much in the eyes of Christ because it was offered with love.
d. She has come beforehand to anoint My body for burial: This detail reveals Mary’s spiritual sensitivity. Her act was deliberate and prepared beforehand. Unlike the disciples, who resisted the thought of Christ’s suffering and death, Mary seems to have accepted His words and acted in anticipation. She believed what Jesus had taught about His coming passion, and her devotion reflected it.
i. The disciples often dismissed or resisted Christ’s predictions of His death. Peter even rebuked Him for speaking of it (Mark 8:32-33). Mary, however, did not seek to argue with Christ’s words but instead turned them into an opportunity to express devotion. She chose to honor Him while she could, before the cross would claim Him.
ii. Spurgeon applied this devotion practically: “Nothing puts life into men like a dying Savior. Get you close to Christ, and carry the remembrance of Him about you from day to day, and you will do right royal deeds. Come, let us slay sin, for Christ was slain. Come, let us bury all our pride, for Christ was buried. Come, let us rise to newness of life, for Christ has risen. Let us be united with our crucified Lord in His one great object. Let us live and die with Him, and then every action of our lives will be very beautiful.”
e. Wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world: Jesus, though on the eve of His betrayal and death, spoke with unshaken confidence. He knew He would rise, that His gospel would go forth into all the world, and that Mary’s deed of devotion would be told as part of that testimony. This was a prophecy of the global spread of Christianity. What seemed in the moment like a small, personal act would be remembered until the end of the age.
f. As a memorial to her: The disciples desired greatness, influence, and recognition. Ironically, Mary achieved an eternal memorial without ever seeking it. Her love, poured out in simple devotion, secured her a place in the gospel record for all generations. This was not won by striving for position but by humbly serving Christ.
i. Spurgeon insightfully noted that Mary’s devotion was not prompted by command but by creativity of love. “There is a tendency within us all to look at this story and to say, ‘I love Jesus also. Tell me what I should do to show it.’ But part of the woman’s great love was displayed in the fact that she came up with the idea to express her love for Jesus in this way. If there was a command to do this, it would never be this precious.” True devotion is not mechanical obedience but Spirit-led, creative expression flowing out of love for Christ.
4. (Mark 14:10-11) Judas agrees to betray Jesus, changing the plans of the Jewish rulers.
"Then Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, went to the chief priests to betray Him to them. And when they heard it, they were glad, and promised to give him money. So he sought how he might conveniently betray Him."
a. Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve: The mention that Judas was “one of the twelve” highlights the depth of his treachery. This was not an outsider or a casual follower, but a man handpicked by Jesus to be part of His inner circle. The gravity of this betrayal is underscored by the privileged position Judas abandoned. The Scriptures consistently portray Judas not as a victim of circumstance, but as a willing participant in Satan’s schemes. John 13:27 states, “Now after the piece of bread, Satan entered him. Then Jesus said to him, ‘What you do, do quickly.’” Judas was not coerced by God into sin but acted out of his own corrupt heart. His betrayal was the fruit of an unbelieving and hardened spirit that had long resisted the truth of Christ.
i. Many speculate on Judas’ motives. Perhaps his feelings were wounded when Jesus rebuked him after Mary’s costly anointing in Bethany (John 12:4–8). Perhaps greed was his primary driver, since John 12:6 makes clear that Judas “did not care for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the money box; and he used to take what was put in it.” Matthew 26:15 records that Judas himself initiated the deal, saying, “What are you willing to give me if I deliver Him to you?” The price agreed upon was thirty pieces of silver, the prophetic amount Zechariah 11:12 foresaw: “So they weighed out for my wages thirty pieces of silver.” Thus, Judas fulfilled prophecy while acting according to his own covetous heart.
ii. Some have speculated that Judas hoped to force Jesus into an open Messianic confrontation, thinking that betrayal would compel Jesus to reveal His power and overthrow the Romans. If so, this would show Judas’ utter blindness to Christ’s mission and his self-serving desire for political glory. Yet even if this theory holds, Judas was still culpable. Whatever Judas’ motive, it was his motive. God sovereignly used the wicked work of Satan through a willing Judas, but He did not tempt Judas to sin. James 1:13 affirms, “Let no one say when he is tempted, ‘I am tempted by God’; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.” Judas’ betrayal demonstrates the mystery of divine sovereignty and human responsibility: God ordained the crucifixion from before the foundation of the world, yet Judas acted of his own will and bore the guilt.
b. When they heard it, they were glad: The religious leaders had long desired to destroy Jesus. Mark 3:6 states, “Then the Pharisees went out and immediately plotted with the Herodians against Him, how they might destroy Him.” Yet they feared the crowds and sought a way to arrest Him quietly (Mark 14:1–2). The approach of Judas solved their dilemma. His insider knowledge would allow them to apprehend Jesus privately, away from the multitudes who admired Him. Thus, Judas’ treachery not only betrayed his Lord, but it also gave Christ’s enemies the very opportunity they had been waiting for. Their gladness shows the depravity of their hearts: rejoicing not in righteousness, but in wickedness, celebrating the chance to put the Son of God to death.
c. Promised to give him money: Luke 22:5 emphasizes, “And they were glad, and agreed to give him money.” The religious leaders did not offer Judas riches or position, only silver—the price of a slave (Exodus 21:32). This reveals both the cheapness of their estimation of Christ and the baseness of Judas’ greed. For the cost of a common slave, Judas sold the Lord of glory. Peter would later reflect on this in Acts 1:18, where he recounts Judas’ demise: “Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out.” The “wages of iniquity” led only to destruction.
d. So he sought how he might conveniently betray Him: From this moment forward, Judas’ heart and mind were consumed with finding an opportunity. Luke 22:6 adds, “So he promised and sought opportunity to betray Him to them in the absence of the multitude.” Judas’ treachery was not impulsive but deliberate and calculated. He looked for the most advantageous moment to carry out his plan, preferring secrecy and convenience over confrontation. The irony is profound: while Judas schemed in darkness, Jesus remained in the light, fully aware of Judas’ intentions yet moving steadily toward the cross in obedience to the Father’s will.
B. Jesus’ Final Passover with His Disciples.
1. (Mark 14:12-16) Preparation for Passover; the feast remembering Israel’s redemption.
“Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they killed the Passover lamb, His disciples said to Him, ‘Where do You want us to go and prepare, that You may eat the Passover?’ And He sent out two of His disciples and said to them, ‘Go into the city, and a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him. Wherever he goes in, say to the master of the house, “The Teacher says, ‘Where is the guest room in which I may eat the Passover with My disciples?’” Then he will show you a large upper room, furnished and prepared; there make ready for us.’ So His disciples went out, and came into the city, and found it just as He had said to them; and they prepared the Passover.”
The timing is important. Mark notes this took place on “the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they killed the Passover lamb.” The Feast of Unleavened Bread and Passover were closely connected, often spoken of together. Passover itself commemorated God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt, when the blood of the lamb spared the firstborn (Exodus 12:12-14). Every detail of this feast pointed forward to Christ, the true Passover Lamb. As Paul later declared, “For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us” (1 Corinthians 5:7).
a. A man carrying a pitcher: This was a striking and unusual detail. Typically, women carried water in pitchers, while men used animal skins for transporting liquids. The appearance of a man carrying a pitcher would therefore stand out immediately to the disciples, making it an unmistakable sign. This illustrates how Christ, in His omniscience, arranged even the smallest details. Nothing was left to chance.
b. The Teacher says, “Where is the guest room”: The discreet instructions emphasize secrecy. Jesus deliberately concealed the location from the wider group, including Judas, to prevent premature betrayal. He desired to spend these final hours teaching His disciples, instituting the Lord’s Supper, and preparing them for what was to come. The quiet arrangement also shows Christ’s authority. He did not ask but simply stated, “The Teacher says,” and the room was freely given. This suggests the householder was a follower of Jesus, one of His many unnamed disciples who willingly served when called upon. “The Lord must have had many unknown disciples, upon whom He could rely at such moments to render unquestioning service.”
c. And they prepared the Passover: The disciples’ task was practical, but deeply symbolic. They cleansed the room, set the table, and arranged the feast. Yet the true preparation was Christ Himself, who would soon fulfill the meaning of Passover. This meal was not just a remembrance of past redemption from Egypt, it pointed to the greater redemption that was about to take place through His blood.
There has long been discussion about the timing. The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) suggest Jesus celebrated the Passover meal with His disciples on the evening before His crucifixion. John, however, appears to emphasize that Jesus was crucified on the very day of Passover, at the same time lambs were being slain in the temple (John 18:28; 19:14). The best resolution is that differing calendars were in use. It is possible that Jesus observed Passover according to one reckoning, while the official temple observance occurred the next day. This would mean He both ate the Passover with His disciples and also died as the true Passover Lamb at the appointed hour.
It is also noteworthy that none of the synoptic writers mention a lamb at this meal. Many believe this was deliberate, emphasizing that the Lamb was present at the table in the person of Jesus Christ. The omission underscores that He Himself was the fulfillment of the feast. The very next day, His blood would be shed as the true covering for sin.
Thus, this simple upper room in Jerusalem became the setting of the most significant Passover ever celebrated. What began in Exodus as deliverance from bondage in Egypt now reached its climax in Christ, who delivers from the bondage of sin and death.
2. (Mark 14:17-21) Jesus gives Judas a chance to repent.
“In the evening He came with the twelve. Now as they sat and ate, Jesus said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, one of you who eats with Me will betray Me.’ And they began to be sorrowful, and to say to Him one by one, ‘Is it I?’ And another said, ‘Is it I?’ He answered and said to them, ‘It is one of the twelve, who dips with Me in the dish. The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had never been born.’” (Mark 14:17-21 NKJV)
a. He came with the twelve:
This is the last Passover meal Jesus would share with His disciples. At the first Passover in Egypt, the instructions were specific: “And thus you shall eat it: with a belt on your waist, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand. So you shall eat it in haste. It is the LORD’s Passover” (Exodus 12:11 NKJV). This posture of readiness symbolized Israel’s imminent deliverance. Yet here, the disciples reclined at the table with Jesus, because they were no longer slaves in Egypt but in the land of promise. By this time, reclining had become the common custom of Passover, signifying freedom and rest. In this context, however, the disciples reclined in the presence of the true Passover Lamb, who was about to bring ultimate deliverance, not from Egypt, but from sin and death.
b. “One of you who eats with Me will betray Me”:
This declaration must have struck like a thunderbolt. Jesus had often foretold His betrayal (Mark 9:31; Mark 10:33-34), but now He revealed that it would come from among His closest circle of disciples. Table fellowship in Jewish culture was a sign of deep friendship and loyalty. To betray someone after eating with them was an act of the greatest treachery. Psalm 41:9 foreshadowed this moment: “Even my own familiar friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted up his heel against me.” The fulfillment of this prophecy showed the depth of Judas’ sin. The disciples’ response was not pride or accusation but sorrow and self-examination, each asking, “Is it I?” Their hearts were troubled at the thought that they could be capable of such treachery.
c. “It is one of the twelve, who dips with Me in the dish”:
Jesus did not identify Judas by name but by a shared act at the table. All of the disciples dipped with Him, which on one level concealed Judas’ identity. Yet Judas was sitting near Jesus, in a position of honor, and would have received the dipped morsel as a mark of friendship (John 13:26). The irony is sharp: the one who shared the place of honor, treated with friendship and kindness, would betray his Lord. To betray one’s host after such an act was viewed in that culture as the vilest form of treachery. Judas’ sin was not merely against Christ, but against the very grace shown to him.
d. “The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man”:
Here Jesus affirmed both divine sovereignty and human responsibility. His betrayal was written in Scripture (Psalm 41:9; Zechariah 11:12-13), and the cross was foreordained by God’s eternal plan (Acts 2:23). Yet this did not absolve Judas of his guilt. He acted freely, driven by greed, envy, and the influence of Satan (John 13:2). The sovereignty of God never excuses the sin of man. Judas’ betrayal was real, personal, and damnable. Jesus declared, “Woe to that man… it would have been good for that man if he had never been born.” Such a pronouncement underscores the eternal horror of Judas’ fate. While some argue this refers only to temporal regret, it is best understood as pointing to the eternal torment of hell. Judas’ remorse (Matthew 27:3-5) was not repentance, and his final destiny is described by Jesus Himself as one of unparalleled loss.
e. Jesus’ love even toward Judas:
Even in this moment of exposure, Jesus extended a chance for Judas to repent. His words carried both warning and love. He gave Judas the opportunity to confess and turn, but Judas hardened his heart. This reveals the tragic reality of rejected love. Jesus’ love was real, offered even to His betrayer, but it was spurned. The same sun that melts the wax hardens the clay. The grace Judas rejected stands as a warning to all who hear the gospel and refuse it.
Application:
This passage highlights several truths. First, the depth of human depravity: Judas walked with Christ, heard His teaching, saw His miracles, and yet betrayed Him. Second, the sovereignty of God: the betrayal fulfilled prophecy and advanced the plan of redemption, yet without excusing the sin. Third, the unmatched love of Christ: He warned Judas in love, even as Judas prepared his treachery. Finally, it reminds us of the seriousness of apostasy. To reject Christ after walking in the light is not a small matter; it is eternally damning.
(Mark 14:22-25) The Last Supper
Scripture
“And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them and said, ‘Take, eat; this is My body.’ Then He took the cup, and when He had given thanks He gave it to them, and they all drank from it. And He said to them, ‘This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many. Assuredly, I say to you, I will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.’”
Commentary
At this climactic moment in the Passover meal, Jesus gave new meaning to the bread and the cup. When the bread was lifted up at the Passover, the head of the meal would traditionally say, “This is the bread of affliction which our fathers ate in the land of Egypt. Let everyone who hungers come and eat; let everyone who is needy come and eat the Passover meal.” Every element on the Passover table carried symbolism. The bitter herbs reminded Israel of the bitterness of slavery, the salt water recalled the tears shed under bondage, and the lamb, freshly slain for each household, was not merely symbolic of Egyptian suffering, but of the sin-bearing substitute which secured deliverance through the blood of the covenant.
Here, however, Jesus reinterpreted these symbols in Himself. The bread now represented His body, soon to be broken, and the cup His blood, soon to be shed. The focus shifted from Israel’s historical deliverance out of Egypt to the eternal deliverance from sin accomplished by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
The Bread and the Cup
The words “This is My body” and “This is My blood of the new covenant” have been the subject of centuries of theological debate. The Roman Catholic Church holds to transubstantiation, teaching that the bread and wine become the literal body and blood of Christ. Martin Luther taught consubstantiation, meaning the elements remain bread and wine yet carry Christ’s real presence. John Calvin affirmed that Christ’s presence is real, but spiritual, not physical. Zwingli saw them as symbolic memorials. However, when examined in light of Scripture, the bread and cup are more than bare symbols. They are living testimonies of Christ’s sacrifice, pictures through which believers truly commune with Christ by faith.
Take and Eat
Jesus commanded His disciples not only to interpret but to participate. “Take” means it must be received willingly; no one can have Christ forced upon them. “Eat” signifies necessity, intimacy, and inward reception. Just as food sustains physical life, so Christ sustains spiritual life. To refuse Him is to perish. To receive Him is to take Him into one’s innermost being, securing eternal life.
The New Covenant
The most remarkable declaration in this passage is Christ’s institution of the new covenant. No mere man could establish a covenant between God and man, but Jesus, being the God-man, had the authority. Just as the old covenant was inaugurated with blood (Exodus 24:8), so too was the new covenant, but with infinitely greater efficacy. The new covenant is characterized by complete forgiveness, as God declared, “For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more” (Jeremiah 31:34). It is defined by internal transformation: “I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts” (Jeremiah 31:33). Above all, it is marked by intimate relationship: “I will be their God, and they shall be My people” (Jeremiah 31:33).
The Awaited Fulfillment
Jesus then promised, “I will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” This statement points forward to the consummation of all things, when Christ will celebrate with His redeemed at the marriage supper of the Lamb. Revelation 19:9 declares, “Blessed are those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb!” This will be the great fulfillment of the Passover and the Lord’s Supper, when the Bridegroom and His bride, the Church, will sit down together in joy. Until that day, the Lord’s Supper is both a memorial of Christ’s sacrifice and a foretaste of the kingdom banquet yet to come.
Mark 14:26–31
“And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. Then Jesus said to them, ‘All of you will be made to stumble because of Me this night, for it is written: “I will strike the Shepherd, And the sheep will be scattered.” But after I have been raised, I will go before you to Galilee.’ Peter said to Him, ‘Even if all are made to stumble, yet I will not be.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Assuredly, I say to you that today, even this night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.’ But he spoke more vehemently, ‘If I have to die with You, I will not deny You!’ And they all said likewise.”
a. When they had sung a hymn:
It is striking to consider that Jesus sang on the night of His betrayal. Though He faced imminent suffering, He lifted His voice in worship to God the Father. Singing here is not merely a ritual conclusion to the Passover meal, it demonstrates Christ’s perfect trust and submission to the Father. Worship was not suspended by the shadow of the cross; rather, it was deepened by it.
This underscores the place of song in the life of the believer. The Apostle Paul later exhorts, “speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord” (Ephesians 5:19). Jesus Himself modeled this worship. His singing anticipates the future heavenly scene in which His redeemed people will sing the new song of redemption (Revelation 5:9–10).
Spurgeon observed, “What! A Christian silent when others are praising his Master? No, he must join in the song. Satan tries to make God’s people dumb, but he cannot, for the Lord has not a tongue-tied child in all His family.” Even in sorrow, praise is fitting, for it proclaims faith in God’s sovereignty.
b. Sung a hymn:
The hymn was most likely the conclusion of the Passover liturgy, the Hallel Psalms (Psalms 113–118). These Psalms celebrate God’s covenant faithfulness, deliverance, and triumph over enemies. Significantly, Psalm 118 contains the words, “The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. This was the Lord’s doing; It is marvelous in our eyes” (Psalm 118:22–23). Christ sang these words knowing He was the rejected stone about to be vindicated in resurrection.
Thus, His final song before the cross was not a dirge of defeat, but a declaration of God’s sure victory. It reveals how Christ endured the cross: His heart was strengthened by the Word of God sung in worship.
c. They went out to the Mount of Olives:
After the meal and discourse of John 13–17, Jesus and His disciples crossed the Kidron Valley to the familiar slopes of the Mount of Olives. This setting was prophetically significant. Zechariah 14:4 declares, “And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Jerusalem on the east.” The same mountain where Jesus would be arrested is the place from which He will one day return in glory.
Jesus’ deliberate movement shows He was not avoiding His captors but walking steadily into the Father’s plan. John 18:4 confirms this: “Jesus therefore, knowing all things that would come upon Him, went forward and said to them, ‘Whom are you seeking?’” His submission was active, not passive.
d. All of you will be made to stumble because of Me this night:
Quoting Zechariah 13:7, Jesus revealed the scattering of the disciples was a fulfillment of prophecy: “Strike the Shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.” This was not a random failure of human weakness but part of God’s sovereign plan. Jesus’ words were not meant to condemn but to prepare them, so that when they remembered their desertion, they would know it had been foretold.
The word “stumble” here comes from skandalizo, meaning to fall into sin, to be ensnared, or to take offense. Their faith would falter under pressure, yet not utterly fail. This reminds us of Christ’s intercession for His disciples, especially Peter, in Luke 22:32: “But I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail; and when you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren.”
e. But after I have been raised, I will go before you to Galilee:
Here Jesus looked beyond the cross to the resurrection. His promise reveals both His foreknowledge and His shepherdly care. Despite their coming failure, He assured them of restoration, for He would regather His scattered sheep.
Hebrews 12:2 reminds us, “looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” The joy before Him included not only glorification with the Father but also reunion with His disciples in Galilee.
f. Even if all are made to stumble, yet I will not be:
Peter’s response reflects both devotion and pride. He overestimated his strength and underestimated the spiritual battle. He evaluated his resolve by feelings of loyalty, not by dependence upon God’s sustaining grace. His boast exemplifies Proverbs 16:18: “Pride goes before destruction, And a haughty spirit before a fall.”
Maclaren insightfully noted that sometimes it is easier to bear a great test than a small one. Many can imagine heroic sacrifice for Christ but falter in everyday pressures such as mockery, rejection, or small temptations. Peter’s failure reminds us that without Christ we can do nothing (John 15:5).
g. Assuredly, I say to you that today, even this night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times:
Jesus’ warning to Peter was precise, gracious, and solemn. He revealed not only the denial but its timing, giving Peter a clear opportunity to take heed. Yet Peter dismissed the warning and instead protested with greater vehemence.
Here we see how overconfidence blinds us to danger. Paul later warned in 1 Corinthians 10:12, “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.” The believer must never presume upon his own strength but must rely wholly on the Lord.
Peter’s boldness in word but weakness in deed serves as a cautionary tale. Jesus knew Peter better than Peter knew himself. Yet His foreknowledge of Peter’s denial was matched by His foreknowledge of Peter’s restoration, proving that God’s grace overrules even the failures of His children.
C. Jesus’ prayer and arrest in Gethsemane.
1. (Mark 14:32-36) Jesus’ prayer of distress.
Then they came to a place which was named Gethsemane; and He said to His disciples, “Sit here while I pray.” And He took Peter, James, and John with Him, and He began to be troubled and deeply distressed. Then He said to them, “My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even to death. Stay here and watch.” He went a little farther, and fell on the ground, and prayed that if it were possible, the hour might pass from Him. And He said, “Abba, Father, all things are possible for You. Take this cup away from Me; nevertheless, not what I will, but what You will.”
a. Gethsemane: This garden was located east of Jerusalem, across the Kidron Valley, on the lower slopes of the Mount of Olives. The name means “olive press,” a fitting image of what was about to happen. Just as olives were crushed in the press to bring forth oil, Jesus would be pressed under the weight of the sin of the world, crushed for our transgressions. Isaiah 53:10 says, “Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand.” Gethsemane, the place of pressing, became the scene of Christ’s greatest spiritual agony.
b. He began to be troubled and deeply distressed… My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even to death: Jesus knew the Father’s will and had come into the world for this very hour, yet His humanity recoiled at the horror before Him. He was not an unknowing sacrificial animal, nor a victim of circumstances. He willingly laid down His life, but here He fully tasted the weight of that decision.
i. His agony was not primarily about physical torture, as horrific as crucifixion was, but about the spiritual reality of becoming sin. As Paul wrote, “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21). To the sinless, holy Son of God, bearing the wrath of His Father was the source of His greatest distress.
ii. Hebrews 5:7–8 adds, “Who, in the days of His flesh, when He had offered up prayers and supplications, with vehement cries and tears to Him who was able to save Him from death, and was heard because of His godly fear, though He was a Son, yet He learned obedience by the things which He suffered.” Jesus prayed with intensity, His anguish producing sweat like drops of blood (Luke 22:44), showing the depth of His submission to the Father’s will.
iii. Ironside insightfully wrote, “His holy soul shrank from the awfulness of being made sin upon the tree. It was not death, but the divine anger against sin, the imputation to Him of all our iniquities that filled His soul with horror. There was no conflict of wills.”
c. Abba, Father: In His most agonizing moment, Jesus addressed God with intimacy and trust. “Abba” was the tender Aramaic word children used for their fathers, much like “Daddy.” This shows that though Jesus bore the weight of coming judgment, He did not feel separated from His Father in Gethsemane. His confidence was rooted in relationship, even as He prepared to bear the wrath of God.
d. Take this cup away from Me: The “cup” is a frequent Old Testament symbol of divine wrath and judgment. Psalm 75:8 says, “For in the hand of the LORD there is a cup, and the wine is red; it is fully mixed, and He pours it out; surely its dregs shall all the wicked of the earth drain and drink down.” Isaiah 51:17 calls it “the cup of His fury,” and Jeremiah 25:15 says, “Take this wine cup of fury from My hand, and cause all the nations, to whom I send you, to drink it.” Jesus, the sinless Son, would take this cup, drinking every last drop of God’s wrath so that we who believe would never have to.
i. At that moment, Jesus became, in a sense, the enemy of God, judged in our place. Galatians 3:13 says, “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’).” This reality was the source of His agony.
ii. Matthew 20:22–23 shows that even His followers would share in suffering: “But Jesus answered and said, ‘You do not know what you ask. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?’ They said to Him, ‘We are able.’ So He said to them, ‘You will indeed drink My cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with.’” Spurgeon rightly observed, “In any case, our cup can never be as deep or as bitter as was his, and there were in his cup some ingredients that never will be found in ours. The bitterness of sin was there, but he has taken that away for all who believe in him. His Father’s wrath was there, but he drank that all up, and left not a single dreg for any one of his people.”
e. Nevertheless, not what I will, but what You will: Here Jesus came to the decisive moment of surrender. It was not that He had resisted before, but that Gethsemane was the climactic point of decision. At the cross, He physically bore the wrath of God, but in Gethsemane, He spiritually embraced that mission. The victory of Calvary was won in the garden.
i. This crushing of His will under the Father’s plan was essential to redemption. If He had failed here, He would have failed at the cross. Because He submitted here, He triumphed there.
f. If it were possible: This was not a plea for humanity to perish without salvation. Jesus asked if there was any other way to redeem mankind apart from the cross. His prayer reveals the exclusivity of the gospel. If salvation could come by the Law, or by good works, or by another religion, then Calvary was unnecessary. The Father’s silence showed that there was no other way. As Peter later declared, “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
g. Not what I will, but what You will: Far from being a weak prayer, this is the highest prayer of faith. To resign one’s will fully to the Father is the greatest expression of trust. If such a prayer were faithless, then Jesus Himself would have been faithless at His most crucial hour, which is impossible. Instead, He modeled for believers the perfect surrender of faith, trust, and obedience.
(Mark 14:37–42) The Sleeping Disciples
“Then He came and found them sleeping, and said to Peter, ‘Simon, are you sleeping? Could you not watch one hour? Watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.’ Again He went away and prayed, and spoke the same words. And when He returned, He found them asleep again, for their eyes were heavy; and they did not know what to answer Him. Then He came the third time and said to them, ‘Are you still sleeping and resting? It is enough! The hour has come; behold, the Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going. See, My betrayer is at hand.’” (Mark 14:37–42, NKJV)
At this climactic moment, when Jesus bore the weight of Gethsemane’s agony, He returned from prayer to find His closest companions sleeping. In the hour when He sought their spiritual vigilance, He instead found their frailty laid bare.
a. He came and found them sleeping
Jesus’ sorrow was compounded by His disciples’ inability to share His burden. The text highlights not only their physical exhaustion but also their spiritual dullness. Though their failure was to their shame, it served the divine plan. Christ had to endure His suffering alone, with no human intercessor beside Him. Salvation would be wrought not through human partnership, but through His solitary obedience to the Father’s will.
This scene fulfills the words of Isaiah: “I have trodden the winepress alone, and from the peoples no one was with Me” (Isaiah 63:3, NKJV). The disciples’ sleep revealed that redemption could not come from man’s faithfulness, but from the faithful Son of God.
b. “Simon, are you sleeping?”
Jesus addressed Peter not by his new name, but by his old one: “Simon.” This was a stinging reminder of his frailty. The one who had boasted in loyalty was now too weak even to stay awake. Jesus’ tone, however, was not one of harsh anger, but of compassionate understanding. He knew their hearts, that their intentions were good though their flesh failed.
This reveals the reality of sanctification. Even the most devoted disciples falter when depending upon their own strength. Without reliance upon God, the strongest resolve crumbles.
c. “Watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation”
Jesus gave them the remedy for weakness: watchfulness and prayer. Prayer fortifies the spirit before the trial comes. Peter would fail in the courtyard later that night precisely because he failed in Gethsemane. Victory in temptation is secured in advance by cultivating communion with God.
As Paul later exhorts: “Watch, stand fast in the faith, be brave, be strong” (1 Corinthians 16:13, NKJV). And again, “Pray without ceasing” (1 Thessalonians 5:17, NKJV). The disciples’ negligence illustrates how neglect in prayer leads inevitably to defeat.
d. Jesus prayed the same words again
Christ’s repetition demonstrates that persistence in prayer is not a lack of faith but an act of surrender. He exemplified importunity, much like the widow in Luke 18:1–7 who cried continually until justice was granted. In repeating His petition, He revealed the depth of His submission, willing to bear the cup unless the Father decreed otherwise.
This rebukes shallow views of prayer as mere ritual. Genuine prayer wrestles with God, aligns our will with His, and prepares us for obedience regardless of the outcome.
e. Three times asleep, three times rebuked
The disciples failed repeatedly, unable to recognize the magnitude of the moment. Their eyes were heavy, both from sorrow (Luke 22:45) and from the weakness of the flesh. They did not know how to respond, their silence reflecting their shame.
Their neglect was grievous. If they could not watch for their own sake, they should have done so for the sake of their Lord. Fellowship in prayer is one of the greatest ministries believers can render one another. As Paul wrote: “Brethren, pray for us” (1 Thessalonians 5:25, NKJV). Yet here, Jesus bore the burden alone.
f. “It is enough!”
This was not irritation but divine resolve. The time for intercession had passed. The appointed hour of betrayal had arrived. Jesus did not need their prayers to endure the cross—He was sufficient in Himself—but they needed prayer to endure their own trials. Because they had failed in prayer, they would soon fail in courage.
The phrase “The hour has come” echoes His earlier declaration in John 12:23: “The hour has come that the Son of Man should be glorified” (NKJV). The “hour” was not a random tragedy but the precise fulfillment of the Father’s redemptive plan.
Theological Implications
This passage underscores the necessity of spiritual vigilance. The disciples, though willing in spirit, were overcome by weakness of flesh. This tension between willingness and weakness is a universal human condition. Yet Jesus provides the remedy: watching and praying.
For believers today, the lesson is clear. Spiritual battles are won or lost in the secret place of prayer long before external temptations come. Neglect of prayer leaves the soul defenseless, while watchfulness anchors us in the will of God.
Christ’s example also reveals the uniqueness of His redemptive mission. Though He desired companionship, He needed no human strength to accomplish salvation. Alone, He bore the cup of wrath. Alone, He faced betrayal, arrest, and crucifixion. The disciples’ slumber magnifies His solitary obedience, making clear that redemption is of the Lord alone.
(Mark 14:43-52) The Arrest of Jesus of Nazareth in the Garden of Gethsemane
Text (Mark 14:43-52, NKJV):
“And immediately, while He was still speaking, Judas, one of the twelve, with a great multitude with swords and clubs, came from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders. Now His betrayer had given them a signal, saying, ‘Whomever I kiss, He is the One; seize Him and lead Him away safely.’ As soon as He had come, immediately he went up to Him and said to Him, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi!’ and kissed Him. Then they laid their hands on Him and took Him. And one of those who stood by drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear. Then Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Have you come out, as against a robber, with swords and clubs to take Me? I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and you did not seize Me. But the Scriptures must be fulfilled.’ Then they all forsook Him and fled. Now a certain young man followed Him, having a linen cloth thrown around his naked body. And the young men laid hold of him, and he left the linen cloth and fled from them naked.”
a. Whomever I kiss:
The signal chosen by Judas is both ironic and cruel. A kiss, normally an expression of loyalty, brotherhood, and affection, is weaponized here as a mark of treachery. Judas’s words, “Rabbi, Rabbi!” were words of respect, yet his actions were hypocritical, masking betrayal with the language of devotion. The psalmist foresaw such treachery in Psalm 55:12-14, which says, “For it is not an enemy who reproaches me; then I could bear it. Nor is it one who hates me who has exalted himself against me; then I could hide from him. But it was you, a man my equal, my companion and my acquaintance. We took sweet counsel together, and walked to the house of God in the throng.” This Scripture, though originally lamenting David’s betrayal by Ahithophel, finds its ultimate fulfillment in Judas’s kiss of betrayal.
It is also worth noting that Jesus was so ordinary in appearance that Judas had to point Him out to the soldiers. This reminds us that there was nothing physically extraordinary about Christ’s outward appearance. Isaiah 53:2 says, “For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant, and as a root out of dry ground. He has no form or comeliness; and when we see Him, there is no beauty that we should desire Him.” Judas’s sign reinforced this truth: Jesus did not stand out physically, but by His words and works.
b. One of those who stood by drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest:
John’s Gospel identifies the swordsman as Peter and the servant as Malchus (John 18:10). Peter, zealous yet misguided, thought he could defend the Lord with physical force. Yet all he accomplished was to cut off a man’s ear. This is a picture of the futility of human strength when used in the flesh. When Peter later preached the Word of God at Pentecost, men’s hearts were pierced and brought to repentance (Acts 2:37). The Word of God, wielded under the Spirit’s power, accomplishes what the sword of man never can.
Luke adds that Jesus immediately healed Malchus (Luke 22:51). This act of mercy not only spared Peter from immediate arrest but also demonstrated Christ’s compassion even toward His enemies. Without that healing, Peter might have been seized and crucified alongside Christ, possibly resulting in four crosses at Calvary instead of three. Jesus again proved His sovereignty, protecting His disciples and keeping them from premature death so that His mission could be fulfilled (John 18:8-9).
c. But the Scriptures must be fulfilled:
Jesus reminded His captors that their actions, while wicked, were still under the sovereign plan of God. They came with clubs and swords as if arresting a violent criminal, yet He had been openly teaching in the temple without resistance. This shows both the cowardice of the leaders and the hypocrisy of their methods.
Jesus was not taken because He was overpowered, but because He voluntarily submitted to fulfill prophecy. Isaiah 53:7 prophesied, “He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not His mouth.” Likewise, Zechariah 13:7 foretold, “Strike the Shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.” These Scriptures were unfolding in real time as Jesus yielded Himself.
d. They all forsook Him and fled:
At the critical moment, all of His disciples abandoned Him. Even Peter, who had boldly claimed he would never forsake Jesus (Mark 14:31), fled in fear. Their desertion fulfilled Jesus’ earlier words in Mark 14:27, “All of you will be made to stumble because of Me this night, for it is written: ‘I will strike the Shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.’”
The disciples’ failure reveals the weakness of human resolve when not empowered by the Spirit. Later, after Pentecost, these same men would boldly stand for Christ in the face of imprisonment and death. But here, in the flesh, they were too weak to stand by Him. Their abandonment highlights the absolute loneliness of Christ in His suffering.
e. Now a certain young man… fled from them naked:
This brief and unusual detail is unique to Mark’s Gospel. The young man, clothed only in a linen cloth, fled when seized, leaving the cloth behind. Since the earliest days of church history, many commentators have believed this young man was Mark himself, inserting his own testimony in humble acknowledgment of his failure. If so, it is Mark’s subtle confession of his own weakness and cowardice that night.
Acts 12:12 tells us that the disciples often met in the house of Mary, the mother of John Mark. If the Last Supper took place in her home, Judas and the arresting party may have first gone there before heading to Gethsemane. Mark, hastily awakened and wrapping only a linen cloth around himself, may have followed in curiosity or concern. Yet in the panic, he too abandoned Christ and fled naked, symbolizing the shame of discipleship without full commitment.
Spurgeon insightfully notes that this account is like Mark admitting, “Peter failed, but so did I.” It is a picture of the universal weakness of all disciples that night. The detail also emphasizes the utter abandonment of Jesus. Even the youngest and least significant follower fled in fear, leaving Him entirely alone.
D. The trial before the Sanhedrin
Mark did not record the preliminary trial before Annas, who was the real power behind the high priest’s office. John wrote, “Then the detachment of troops and the captain and the officers of the Jews arrested Jesus and bound Him. And they led Him away to Annas first, for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas who was high priest that year. Now it was Caiaphas who advised the Jews that it was expedient that one man should die for the people” (John 18:12-14). Later in the passage John adds, “The high priest then asked Jesus about His disciples and His doctrine. Jesus answered him, ‘I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing. Why do you ask Me? Ask those who have heard Me what I said to them. Indeed they know what I said.’ And when He had said these things, one of the officers who stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, ‘Do You answer the high priest like that?’ Jesus answered him, ‘If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil, but if well, why do you strike Me?’” (John 18:19-23). Mark also does not record the second, official daylight trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin, which Luke carefully documented: “As soon as it was day, the elders of the people, both chief priests and scribes, came together and led Him into their council, saying, ‘If You are the Christ, tell us.’ But He said to them, ‘If I tell you, you will by no means believe. And if I also ask you, you will by no means answer Me or let Me go. Hereafter the Son of Man will sit on the right hand of the power of God.’ Then they all said, ‘Are You then the Son of God?’ So He said to them, ‘You rightly say that I am.’ And they said, ‘What further testimony do we need? For we have heard it ourselves from His own mouth’” (Luke 22:66-71).
a. There are similarities between these trials because the same people were involved and the goal was the same, to condemn Jesus of Nazareth to death. In total, there were six phases of Jesus’ trial: three before Jewish authorities and three before Roman authorities. First, Jesus was taken before Annas, then before an illegal night court of the Sanhedrin, then before the official daylight session of the Sanhedrin. After that He was sent to Pilate, then to Herod Antipas, and finally back to Pilate, who condemned Him to crucifixion.
b. This chain of trials reveals the determination of both Jewish and Roman leadership to put Jesus to death at any cost, even if justice and legal procedure had to be trampled. What happened here was not justice but a prearranged plan, confirming what Peter would later preach: “Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death” (Acts 2:23).
2. (Mark 14:53-59) Jesus is accused before the Sanhedrin.
“And they led Jesus away to the high priest; and with him were assembled all the chief priests, the elders, and the scribes. But Peter followed Him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest. And he sat with the servants and warmed himself at the fire. Now the chief priests and all the council sought testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, but found none. For many bore false witness against Him, but their testimonies did not agree. Then some rose up and bore false witness against Him, saying, ‘We heard Him say, “I will destroy this temple made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.”’ But not even then did their testimony agree.”
a. “They led Jesus away to the high priest”: This nighttime trial of Jesus was utterly illegal according to Jewish law. The Mishnah itself, reflecting Jewish legal tradition, required trials to be held in daylight and not on feast days. Capital cases could not be decided in haste, but had to allow time for sober deliberation. The accused was to be given a defender, and the witnesses were to be examined with precision. Yet all of these safeguards were discarded because the Sanhedrin was determined not to give Jesus justice but to find a way to condemn Him. Their conduct reflected the warning of Isaiah 59:14, “Justice is turned back, and righteousness stands afar off; for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.”
b. “We heard Him say, ‘I will destroy this temple’”: Here the false witnesses distorted what Jesus had actually said. In John 2:19, Jesus had declared, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” John explains clearly that He spoke of the temple of His body, a prophetic reference to His death and resurrection. But His enemies twisted His words, making it appear as if Jesus had threatened the temple itself, which in Jewish and Roman law was considered a grave crime. Their phrasing, “this temple made with hands,” was an invention, not His words.
i. This was a profoundly serious accusation. In the Greco-Roman world, desecration or destruction of a temple was a capital offense. In Acts 19:35, the town clerk of Ephesus defended Paul and his companions, saying, “Men of Ephesus, what man is there who does not know that the city of the Ephesians is temple guardian of the great goddess Diana, and of the image which fell down from Zeus?” To attack such a place of worship was to attack the very identity of a people. To accuse Jesus of threatening the temple was to brand Him a terrorist against the nation.
ii. This demonstrates Satan’s strategy of using half-truths. As one commentator said, “A lie that is all a lie may be met and fought outright; but a lie that is partly the truth is a harder matter to fight.” Jesus had indeed spoken of the destruction of a temple and of rebuilding in three days, but His meaning was spiritual and prophetic, not political or violent.
c. “But not even then did their testimony agree”: The false witnesses could not present a coherent case. According to the Law of Moses, a matter could only be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses in agreement (Deuteronomy 19:15). Yet, even in their scheming, they could not synchronize their lies. This reveals the futility of opposing God’s truth. Proverbs 19:21 says, “There are many plans in a man’s heart, nevertheless the Lord’s counsel—that will stand.”
i. It was harder for them to agree upon a lie than it would have been to simply testify to the truth. Their disunity in falsehood was itself a testimony that Jesus was innocent. But in their blind hatred they pressed on, showing that the Sanhedrin had abandoned both law and righteousness in order to accomplish their goal.
3. (Mark 14:60-62) Jesus testifies at His own trial.
And the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” But He kept silent and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”
a. And the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus: The high priest’s rising in agitation shows the desperation of the Sanhedrin. Having failed to present consistent or credible witnesses, he attempted to provoke Jesus into condemning Himself by His own words. One scholar observes, “For greater solemnity he arose to make up by bluster the lack of evidence.” (Robertson). Another adds that this act of leaving his seat and moving toward Jesus was “the action of an irritated, baffled man” (Bruce). The scene underscores that the trial, up to this point, had been a complete failure, with no lawful grounds for condemnation.
Charles Spurgeon rightly noted: “It was a tacit confession that Christ had been proved innocent up till then. The high priest would not have needed to draw something out of the accused one if there had been sufficient material against him elsewhere. The trial had been a dead failure up to that point, and he knew it, and was red with rage. Now he attempts to bully the prisoner that he may extract some declaration from him which may save all further trouble of witnesses, and end the matter.”
b. But He kept silent and answered nothing: Jesus fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah 53:7, which says, “He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not His mouth.” In this silence we see His submission to the will of the Father. Jesus could have offered a masterful defense, calling witnesses of His miracles, His teachings, and even the testimony of demons who recognized Him as the Son of God (Mark 1:24). He could have summoned Lazarus, whom He raised from the dead, or Bartimaeus, who regained sight, as living testimonies of His power and divinity. Yet, He remained silent because the cross was His purpose, and He willingly endured the injustice that we might be justified before God.
c. “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” Here the high priest directly confronted Jesus with the ultimate question. “The Blessed” was a Jewish reverent title for God, avoiding pronouncing His holy name. Thus, Caiaphas demanded a confession of Messiahship and divine Sonship.
d. Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” This statement is one of the clearest self-declarations of deity in the Gospels. By saying, “I am,” Jesus not only affirmed that He is the Messiah and Son of God, but also invoked the very name of God revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14, where God said, “I AM WHO I AM.”
Jesus then referenced Psalm 110:1, “The LORD said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool,’” and Daniel 7:13-14, “I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed.”
By combining these Scriptures, Jesus testified that though He now stood before their judgment seat, the day would come when they would stand before His. He would be exalted to the Father’s right hand, possessing authority, power, and dominion.
i. This was not simply a claim to be the Messiah in a nationalistic sense, but a declaration of His divine nature and universal reign. The Sanhedrin wanted a manageable Messiah who would overthrow Rome, but Jesus declared Himself to be the eternal Son of God and the Judge of all the earth.
ii. In this exchange, the roles were reversed. Though Jesus was being judged, in reality the Sanhedrin was on trial before Him. They would soon crucify Him, but in doing so they fulfilled God’s redemptive plan. Their rejection of Christ did not thwart God’s purposes; it accomplished them.
iii. This moment also speaks to us: every man is on trial before Jesus Christ. We will all be held accountable for what we have done with Him. As John 3:18 declares, “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”
4. (Mark 14:63–65) The Sanhedrin condemns Jesus to death.
Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy! What do you think?” And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death. Then some began to spit on Him, and to blindfold Him, and to beat Him, and to say to Him, “Prophesy!” And the officers struck Him with the palms of their hands.
a. The high priest tore his clothes… You have heard the blasphemy!:
This act of tearing his garments was a traditional Jewish expression of outrage or grief, but here it was a display of false piety and theatrical indignation. The high priest was not genuinely horrified at blasphemy, for their hearts were already hardened against Christ. Instead, this was a manipulative act designed to sway the council into condemning Jesus without further deliberation. Ironically, in tearing his priestly garments, the high priest symbolically disqualified himself, since Levitical law forbade the high priest from tearing his robes (Leviticus 21:10). This moment marks the passing away of the Levitical priesthood, for the true and eternal High Priest, Jesus Christ, was now present and would soon offer Himself once for all (Hebrews 7:26–27).
The charge of blasphemy was not because Jesus spoke against God, but because He declared Himself to be the Son of God and the rightful Judge of all (Mark 14:61–62). To the Sanhedrin, this was intolerable, yet it was the very truth that secured our redemption.
b. And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death:
The verdict was unanimous among the council, though it was based on false pretenses. They had previously sought false witnesses but failed to convict Jesus (Mark 14:55–59). When truth could not condemn Him, they twisted His own testimony to secure His death. The leaders condemned the Author of life (Acts 3:15) because He threatened their power and exposed their hypocrisy.
Here we also see the fulfillment of prophecy. Psalm 2:2 declared, “The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against His Anointed.” Their hatred of Jesus was not merely human malice, but the outworking of satanic opposition to God’s redemptive plan.
c. Then some began to spit on Him, and to blindfold Him, and to beat Him:
This degrading mockery shows the depths of man’s depravity. Spitting upon Jesus was the ultimate act of contempt, a physical sign of rejection (Isaiah 50:6: “I gave My back to those who struck Me, and My cheeks to those who plucked out the beard; I did not hide My face from shame and spitting.”). Blindfolding Him and demanding that He prophesy was meant to ridicule His divine authority, reducing the Lord of glory to a sideshow for their cruelty.
i. The officers struck Him with the palms of their hands:
The blows were not random, but calculated acts of humiliation. These men had no personal reason to despise Jesus; they did it only because they were following orders and enjoyed the power of cruelty. This highlights the wickedness of sin that delights in evil simply because righteousness is despised (John 3:19–20).
Spurgeon rightly observed the horror: “Be astonished, O heavens, and be horribly afraid. His face is the light of the universe, His person is the glory of heaven, and they ‘began to spit on Him.’ Alas, my God, that man should be so base!”
d. Three applications from Jesus’ humiliation:
We should bravely bear pain and humiliation for Jesus’ sake.
If our Lord endured such reproach, we should not be surprised if the world mocks us for His name. As Peter wrote, “Beloved, do not think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened to you; but rejoice to the extent that you partake of Christ’s sufferings, that when His glory is revealed, you may also be glad with exceeding joy” (1 Peter 4:12–13). To suffer reproach for Christ is not shameful, but honorable.We should be diligent to praise and glorify Jesus.
If His enemies were so eager to put Him to shame, how much more should His people be eager to bring Him glory. Our worship, our obedience, and our sacrifices should be offered with zeal, not cold formality. As Paul exhorted, “Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10:31).We should have greater assurance in His finished work.
Every insult, every strike, and every false accusation that Jesus endured was part of His atoning suffering. Because He bore our shame, we are clothed in His righteousness. Because He was condemned, we are justified. As Paul declared, “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1). His humiliation guarantees our salvation.
(Mark 14:66-72) Peter’s Denial
Now as Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant girls of the high priest came. And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked at him and said, “You also were with Jesus of Nazareth.” But he denied it, saying, “I neither know nor understand what you are saying.” And he went out on the porch, and a rooster crowed. And the servant girl saw him again, and began to say to those who stood by, “This is one of them.” But he denied it again. And a little later those who stood by said to Peter again, “Surely you are one of them; for you are a Galilean, and your speech shows it.” Then he began to curse and swear, “I do not know this Man of whom you speak!” A second time the rooster crowed. Then Peter called to mind the word that Jesus had said to him, “Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.” And when he thought about it, he wept.
Peter’s denial unfolds with painful detail, and Mark records it in a way that contrasts sharply with Jesus’ bold confession before the high priest. Whereas Jesus declared the truth under trial, Peter denied Him under the questioning of a servant girl. The narrative demonstrates the weakness of man apart from God’s strength and shows how even the most devoted follower can stumble when relying on the flesh rather than the Spirit.
Peter’s downfall began long before the words of denial left his lips. In Mark 14:54, we are told that Peter followed Jesus at a distance. This distance, both physical and spiritual, made him vulnerable. When we fail to walk closely with Christ, compromise creeps in, and our courage falters at the moment of testing. Next, Peter sat with the servants of the high priest and warmed himself by their fire. These were the very ones who struck and mocked Jesus (Mark 14:65). Associating himself with the enemies of Christ left him spiritually exposed, and he sought comfort where he should have fled.
When confronted, Peter denied his Lord, saying, “I neither know nor understand what you are saying.” His words were not merely casual but a formal legal denial, similar to language used in rabbinical courts. At first, his denials may have seemed small or insignificant, but compromise always grows. Soon Peter found himself cursing and swearing, insisting that he did not even know Jesus. Such language was not only an attempt to distance himself further but also a betrayal of his own character as one of Christ’s disciples.
The root of Peter’s failure was fear. He feared man more than he feared God, and this fear drove him to deny Christ in the presence of the lowliest of people. It was not the high priest, not the Roman governor, but a servant girl who caused the “rock” to crumble. How many denials of Christ since that day have likewise been born out of the fear of man rather than open hostility from the powerful?
When the rooster crowed the second time, Peter remembered the words of Jesus: “Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.” His denial was complete, and the realization of his failure broke him. Mark tells us that he wept, while Matthew and Luke describe it as bitter weeping (Matthew 26:75, Luke 22:62). His tears were not merely of shame but of deep repentance.
The difference between Peter and Judas is critical. Judas betrayed Jesus and hardened his heart, ending in destruction. Peter denied Jesus, but his heart was broken, and that brokenness opened the door for restoration. After the resurrection, Jesus restored Peter both privately (Luke 24:34) and publicly (John 21:15-19). This shows us that no failure is beyond the grace of Christ when there is true repentance.
We can draw several lessons from Peter’s denial. First, spiritual failure often begins in subtle ways, such as following Jesus from a distance or seeking comfort among the ungodly. Second, the fear of man is a snare, leading even the strongest disciple to compromise if not guarded against. Third, restoration is always possible through repentance. The same Lord who prophesied Peter’s denial also ensured his restoration, showing us that God’s grace abounds even in our greatest failures.
