The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 2 — Section 374

also reminds his renrlors once more of the door, and finding Peter there, sprik~ to her Bigniflcanco or ovary step in this tragedy. who kept the door (d. Acts xii. 13). His Ver. 15.-Now. Aftor tho first disperRion 11ppeal mo.y easily he enpplied-and ha or o.11 the disoiplcs, two of them gnthered up brought in Peter. The other evangeliats their courage. Simon Peter wa1 following imply that before Peter woe ~hnllenged the J'e■u1 "o.fo.r off" (so.y all the synoptiste), fire of cools hctd been Iio-hted n.nd that tho ••even up to" E,r, the l'ourt of the high priest" apostle, with the servant~ n.n,I with the rest (say Mntthew and Mnrlc). The o.ccount of of the group who had apprehended Jesus Matthew implies that, hnving come up totho ~athered round it, He !-'laced himself os door, ho wont fo-w, nm\ snt down to see the 1f he were nn unconceme<l spectator irlcn- en<l; he does not so.y how ho wns e.tlmitted, tilied himself, as it were, rather with the though, by the use of the two prepositions, captors than with the Lor,! ; nor is the ho implies there wns a cause. And also narr~tive of John inconsistent with the sy- another I disciple : but that disoiple was noptic etn.tement. In ver. 18 the incident known to the high priest, and therefore to is certainly introduced by the writer after the officials, and went in with J'esus into ~e mention~~ the challenge. Still, he states (,ls.,~,,, right within) the oourt of the high it as a cond1t1on of the denial rather than as priest; for he wo.s well known to be, a.nd from a subsequent event. Matthew describes his the first did not pretend to be anything else position as "without, in the court," not in tbnu, one of the disciples of J esns. From the audience-chamber, but in a court opening the known he.bit of the evangelist in other '.' up'?n" it or "above" it, as Mark (xiv. 66) places, the vnst majority of commento.tors at unphes. Luke tells us he waR "sitting in ouce conclude (see Introduction, p. !iv.) that the midst of the court," with the glow of the the writer designates himself by this refer- burning charcoal on liis face, "he was 1rpbr ence. Godet ood Watkins are disposed to Th ,p&,s," where the maiden mig·ht see him question it, and imngine that it mny have more attentively than when she hurriedly been the author's brother James. With the admitted him. "The other disciple" had absence of the article before li>,l\or, the matter moved swiftly on to some corner where he is left in doubt. But by this supposition much could see and hear nil thnt was happening of the justification is lost, which the writer of to the Master. But Peter's first step down- the Gospel quietly 6llpplies, touching his own wards had been nlready inwardly taken. ability to describe what otherwise would Before he had verbally denied his Lord, he never have entered into the evangelic narra- had acted as though he were indifferent to tive. 'l'he supposition we have made above, the result (see Hanna's 'Last Day of our that Annas and Caiaphas occupied the so.me Lord's Passion,' eh. ii). Matthew's and palace, orditl'erent portions of the same edifice, Mark's accounts represent Pater's first and 1olves the chief difficulty. Annas held his other denials as taking place after th& preliminary unofficial inquiry in his depart- mockery of Jel!Us that followed upon his ment of the building. The difficult question great confession ofMessiahship. Luke places arises whether Annas was assisted or not by them all three together before the formal ex- the reigning "high priest" ic. conducting amination or confession, and before the judicial this examination (see ver. 19). condemnation. John's account throws much Vera. 16, 17.-:Sut Peter was standing at the needed light upon the synoptic narrative, door without. Up to this moment Peter had which is more inconsi:steu t with itself than only pressed as far as to the outer door; the with that of the Fourth Gospel. Matthew•~ other diJJciple had gone bravely in. The hum method of putting together into connected of voices was now deadened by the closed door concurrent groups mirades, events, sayings, dividing Peter from his Lord. The night, or parables which are allied to each other, the cold, the strange blighting of all his will explain the substantially identical expectations, the necessary conviction forced report contained in his and Mark's Gospels. upon him that he had implicated himself by There are with all differences some remark- the assault he had delivel'ed on the servo.nt able coincidences. (I) All four accounts of the high priest, combined to induce a describe our Lord's prediction of Peter's new and desponding mood. All hope had denial. (2) All four evangelists agree to repre- fled. 'fhen John bethought him of the con- sent the first temptation as proceeding from dition of his friend, and so we read tho.t the " a certain maiden," " one of the maids of other disoiple, who was known to the high the high priest," or "a damsel." John's priest, therefore went out to the entrance- Gospel explains the point by saying, the maid who kept the door (/1 9up01p&s) said therefore, , •o, which is found in N", 0, L, and other seeing she had admitted him,not in the rush of uncials, is, on the authority of N*, A, B, D, the other servants, but at tho request of "the and mo.ny others, omitted by Tieohendorf other disciple "-mnsidemble meaning is (8th edit.) and modern editors. Alford thus put into her words, which is lost in J>rnekets it, nnd eo does 'l'regellee. the synoptiste by lack of the hint &head v JOHN,-11. 2C •  BBS 'l'HE GOSPEL AOOOBDI.NG TO BT. JOIIN, [on. xvm. 1-40,