Not My Will

Not My Will

Luke Chapter 22

Judas

Chapter 22 is lengthy and packed with action and meaning. It is enough material for many lessons. In this lesson, we will concentrate on some of the main characters: Judas, Jesus, and Peter. To do this, we will not be following the verses of the chapter consecutively, but will be considering the verses fires that deal with Judas, then with Jesus, and then the remaining verses.

In vv. 1-6, Luke beings by telling us the timing of these events and the role Judas played in them. The account begins before Passover, which occurred at the beginning of the Feast of Unleavened Breads. Judas consulted with the chief priests and other officials, who were concerned about the crowd, and well their concern was well placed. All Jewish men within 15 miles of Jerusalem were bound by law to attend Passover in the city, and it was, and still is, the ambition of every Jewish male in every part of the world to attend Passover in Jerusalem at least once in his life. The Roman guard was increased in number and diligence during this time, and it was not a time for any trouble.

From Mathew, Mark, and Luke, we know nothing about Judas except that he was one of the twelve who betrayed Jesus. Matthew makes it clear (Matthew 26:14-16) that Judas went to the chief priests in order to get money. Mathew further tells us that when the disciples were questioning among themselves who might betray Jesus, Judas asked him if it were he and Jesus answered him directly (Matthew 26:25).

John tells us something more. First, he tells us that Judas was a thief. Luke has a story (Luke 7:36-50) of Jesus being anointed by an unidentified woman at the house of a Pharisee, presumably sometime early in his ministry. This story is not in the other Gospels. Perhaps because of that, Luke does not include the very similar story of Mary anointing Jesus at Bethany, which the other Gospels have occurring at this time. Matthew (Matthew 26:6-13) and Mark (Mark 14:3-9) say some people, generally, rebuked Mary for the extravagance of her gesture, but John (John 12:1-8) says it was Judas who complained, and he did it because he wanted the money to go to the treasury, because he was the treasurer, and he stole from the treasury.

How could this be? How could one of the Twelve -- one trusted with the treasury -- have been stealing from them without their knowledge? We might, more importantly, ask how one so close to Jesus could have been a betrayer without their knowledge. John tells us that even after Jesus had publicly confronted him (John 13:25-30) the disciples did not understand what Judas was about. And it is hard to understand. How could he have done such a thing, and what was it he did?

To answer the first question, the Gospels unanimously say that “Satan entered into him.” But what does that mean? Had this become some supernatural struggle between Good and Evil, with God in Jesus and Satan in Judas? There is a clue to understanding this in Matthew 16:23, where Jesus calls Peter “Satan” because he is “not on the side of God, but of men.” The timing of this statement is important to note. Peter had just made his great confession that Jesus was the Christ and Jesus began to talk about his suffering and death. Peter objected and said that could not happen. This is the way with humans. We want to have a god, but we want that god in our image. To give in to that desire is the way of Satan.

In vv. 47-53, we see something of the role of Judas. The leaders of the Jews wanted to find Jesus away from the crowd, and Judas took their gang to him. Also, Judas gave them the sign of the kiss. It was traditional for the pupil to offer the rabbi a kiss of greeting, and Matthew (26:48) and Mark (14:44) both point out that Judas had arranged that those with him would use this as a sign. But why did they need Judas for either of these? Jesus seems to have been a well known character, and Luke says (21:37) that he made a habit of staying on the Mount of Olives at night.

It is not clear why they needed him, except that they wanted to do wrong, and he decided to do it. Only Matthew tells us (27:1-10) tells us that Judas knew he had done wrong. He returned to the chief priests and said that he had sinned. In a rare flash of wisdom, they told him they could do nothing for him.

Jesus

In vv. 7-20, Luke gives us his account of the last supper. In it, Jesus tells the disciples how much meaning this final supper has for him. It has begun with some kind of advance preparation. Jesus tells Peter and John to follow a man carrying water. Carrying water was a woman’s job, and to see a man carrying water would be an instantly recognizable sign for them. Jesus said the man would lead them to a place where they would find everything they needed.

There are many aspects of the supper we could discuss, but there is one aspect which will take some consideration: the new covenant. What is the covenant, and what was new about it? We often think that God established the old covenant and it involved the law, but since it was impossible for man to be guiltless under the law, Jesus came to free us from the law. We need to think about this carefully.

First, Jesus was God. We know this from Paul, for example in Philippians (2:5-8) and John (1:1-2, 14) and from the words of Jesus himself (John 10:30). So, the first thing we need to be careful of is characterizing God as the hard, Old Testament God who set us up, and Jesus as the New Testament Savior. We must remember that “The Son can do nothing by himself; he can only do what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does” (John 5:19b). So, God established the old covenant, and God established the new covenant.

What about the law? It is certainly true from the Old Testament that God expected his people to abide by his commandments. That is true, even now. The difference is in the conception that the commandments were a means to God. I am not a theologian, but I believe that Hosea 6:6 and 2 Chronicles 7:14 are evidence that God wants a covenant relationship with us, not to establish a roadblock for us. We were the ones who set the law up to be more than it was, and God became a man to free us from our own enslavement.

And he made a new covenant. God made a new covenant with Noah, and with Abram, and with Jacob, and with the nation of Israel, and has made a new covenant with us. What is new about it? He is the same God. The terms of the covenant are the same: that we should be his people, and he should be our God. What is new, is that he makes us new. In Revelation 21:3-5, John writes of the day when we will truly be his people, and he will be our God, and God says “Behold, I make all things new.”

In vv. 39-46, Jesus goes away by himself to pray. Luke’s version is shorter than the more familiar account from Matthew or Mark. I must note, without drawing any conclusion, that verses 42 and 43, with the ministering angel and the drops of blood, are not in all the early manuscripts. As with the supper, there is much to consider, even in this short passage. We will concentrate on the prayer Jesus prayed.

First, we might wonder what the cup was he did not want to drink. He was a man in his prime, of course, and perhaps he simply did not want to die. But was there more than that? He is the Good Shepherd, and his flock was about to be scattered and slaughtered. He was the Prince of Peace, and he was to be followed by the Crusades and the Inquisition. Peter says (1 Peter 3:18-20) that Jesus went to preach to those that had long since been dead, so perhaps the cup represents something of which we are simply not aware.

However, we must also note that it shows the free will of Jesus. Though he knew for some time (we have no way of knowing how long) what the Father expected of him up to the very end he had his own desires and when to the Fater with them. We know from many passages in the Old and New Testaments that Jesus was blameless. It is no sin to want what we want, or to take these desires to the Father, but Jesus gave us the model when he prayed “not my will, but thine be done.”

Peter

In the long passage in vv. 21-34, Jesus announces that there is a betrayer at the very table with them. This causes confusion among them, which quickly sank into a dispute over which was the greatest. Possibly this was touched off by their elaborate notion of table arrangements. In all the Gospels, Jesus’ announcement is met by confusion and denial. Since he asks that we observe the supper in remembrance, it is good for me to remember that, as often as I am at his table, his betrayer is there.

Luke does not have Peter’s first statement, and the other Gospels do not have what appears to be Jesus’ reply to him, but it seems as though, put together, it must have gone this way. Jesus made his statement that a betrayer was with him at the table. The group generally began to murmur in response, but among themselves. Bold Peter stood up and spoke, and Jesus, as he often did, spoke to the group through him.

When Jesus says “Satan has asked to sift you” he is speaking to the group. The Greek word translated “you” is plural. When Jesus says “when you have turned back” he is saying that Peter will deny him. He may be speaking of the literal denial, or of Peter’s failure to expect the resurrection, or of something else about which we are unaware, but he is saying that they would all be tempted, and it would seem that even Peter would be taken from them, but he would return to strengthen them.

Peter, of course, says flatly that he would never deny Jesus, and Jesus says he would. What must Peter have been feeling? We know he did not approve of the plan Jesus had chosen. And then, to be told he would back down, and be disloyal – it must have been disturbing. But then, Jesus, the man who had told them to turn the other cheek, began at last to talk about swords. They had two. We know from John (18:10-11) that Peter had one of them, and it was he, thinking it was about time for some action, who in the verses we already read, struck the ear of the servant of the high priest.

This, of course, was not Jesus’ plan, and in vv. 54-65, the man of action is left to lurk in the shadows while Jesus is inside being mocked and beaten. And then it happens, just as Jesus said it would, he denied Jesus three times. What should he have done? Should he have stayed away? Should he have said that he not only knew Jesus, but was one of his closest confidants? What would have happened to him if he had?

It is important to remember that Jesus did not pray that he should avoid it, or tat he should fight it, but that, ultimately, his faith should not fail. We should not read too much into this. It is not that our sin is predestined and therefore inescapable. It is not sinning and returning that makes us stronger. It is faith that makes us stronger, and we do not have to sin to have faith.

Not My Will

Judas made his decision. He wanted what he wanted, and he wanted the things of man, not the things of God. Jesus had his own will, and how bad could it have been? Sight to the blind, freeing the oppressed, feeding the hungry – what could be wrong with that? Whatever it was that Jesus wanted, it was not the complete will of God, and Jesus submitted himself to that will.

Peter stood on the cusp. He was fiercely devoted to Jesus, but Jesus was not the Messiah he wanted him to be. Even as we hear him say “I will never” (Matthew 26:33) we know that it is the will of Peter that concerns him, not the will of God.

What sort of God is it that requires us to bend our will to his? Not a God of tyranny, but a God of love. It is not enslavement he asks, but relationship. We must remember that he has also bent his will to us, to allow us the right to choose, otherwise this would be just some elaborate pantomime, and he himself has been human, to show us the way.