“So the band of soldiers and their captain and the officers of the Jews arrested Jesus and bound him. First they led him to Annas, for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. It was Caiaphas who had advised the Jews that it would be expedient that one man should die for the people. Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. Since that disciple was known to the high priest, he entered with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest, but Peter stood outside at the door. So the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the servant girl who kept watch at the door, and brought Peter in. The servant girl at the door said to Peter, ‘You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?’ He said, ‘I am not.’ Now the servants and officers had made a charcoal fire, because it was cold, and they were standing and warming themselves. Peter also was with them, standing and warming himself. The high priest then questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. Jesus answered him, ‘I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together. I have said nothing in secret. Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me what I said to them; they know what I said.’ When he had said these things, one of the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand, saying, ‘Is that how you answer the high priest?’ Jesus answered him, ‘If what I said is wrong, bear witness about the wrong; but if what I said is right, why do you strike me?’ Annas then sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest. Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. So they said to him, ‘You also are not one of his disciples, are you?’ He denied it and said, ‘I am not.’ One of the servants of the high priest, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, asked, ‘Did I not see you in the garden with him?’ Peter again denied it, and at once a rooster crowed.”

“Actions speak louder than words.” It’s an old, old quote, often cited back to the writing of John Pym in 1628, who wrote, “actions are more precious than words.” But what does the Bible say regarding this matter? James 2:14–17, while dealing with the matter of faith and works, shows us that words alone, a verbal expression of faith with no backing action is worthless,

“What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and filled,’ without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.”

In a similar fashion, 1 John 3:18 simply says,

“Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth.”

But then we also have passages like Proverbs 18:21, which says,

“Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruits.”

As well as James 3:2–5, which tells us,

“For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body. If we put bits into the mouths of horses so that they obey us, we guide their whole bodies as well. Look at the ships also: though they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are guided by a very small rudder wherever the will of the pilot directs. So also the tongue is a small member, yet it boasts of great things. How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire!”

This means that you’re not free to say the right thing, but behave wrongly, or conversely, act in a way that is right while lying. True speech, that from a heart that is changed by God, is the small rudder that steers the ship in the right path. Truth is Truth – it’s not malleable or subjective, but is perfect, and set, and manifest in the Living Word of God. And so we cannot betray Truth in word or deed, but must honor It and resist all forms of lies. If we look at today’s passage, we see vivid and varied responses to the Truth. We can see what it looks like to burn, bright and hot, standing and shining like a beacon for what is right and true. We can see what it looks like to be dark and cold, opposing with is true with deception and violence. But we also get to see what it looks like to stand in the middle, to find yourself neither hot nor cold, but lukewarm and stagnant. Peter’s positioning in the passage, his behavior, and his denials paint a picture of what it looks like to be caught in the middle, contradicting yourself in the hour of crisis. I say this not to belittle or mock a beloved Apostle, church founder, and brother in Christ. Peter stumbled and fell – as we all have. We have all sinned and fallen short, there is no one righteous. What’s more, toward the end of John’s gospel we see that he is restored, not by his own power, but in the same way that we all have been restored and redeemed – by the hand of Jesus. So let’s delve into today’s passage and see the example that Peter provides, and how his stumble can help us see how to walk in Christ.

The Hot, the Cold, and the Lukewarm

1. “Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God?”

Something I’m struck by, and I’m sure I can’t be the only on to have ever worded it this way, is how efficient John’s gospel is. Coming so many years after Matthew, Mark, and Luke, John presents the same good news of Christ’s death and resurrection, but without rehashing many of the same details. We spent so many chapters in the upper room, hearing words from Jesus that the other gospels hadn’t recorded, gaining this deeper insight into the Spirit of peace that indwells us in the face of a hostile world – but then we depart from the upper room, and Gethsemane, which had already been covered so effectively in the synoptic gospels seemed to pass in the blink of an eye. While we haven’t arrived at the cross yet, it’s in sight. The crowing of the rooster that concludes today’s passage heralds the sunrise, and before it has set, Jesus will have endured the wrath of God and given up His life on the cross. Moving on from the prayers in the Garden of Gethsemane, and shedding new light on the interaction between Jesus and those who came to arrest him, John now gives us new details around Jesus’ time in the custody of the ruling Jews.

“So the band of soldiers and their captain and the officers of the Jews arrested Jesus and bound him. First they led him to Annas, for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year.”

In looking into the hearts and motives of the enemies of Christ, those who are cold in their enmity with God, it helps to understand the twisted dynamic that led the captors to Annas to begin with. It can be easy to get turned around in this section, because here we see Annas identified as the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who is the acting high priest. But about halfway through the passage it says,

“The high priest then questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching.”

This identifies Annas as the high priest. When Jesus answers him, standing in the truth of His testimony and attesting to the openness and lack of secrecy in His ministry, one of the officers strikes Him, saying,

“Is that how you answer the high priest?”

And then, just to keep the wires crossed, later in the passage, after Annas has questioned Jesus,

“Annas then sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.”

… So, who’s the high priest here? Is it Annas? Is it Caiaphas? Are they both high priest? Exodus 28-29 shows the establishment of Aaron as the first high priest, along with his sons as priests under him. Numbers 8:23–26 speaks of the time of service for those of the tribe of Levi, saying,

“And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, ‘This applies to the Levites: from twenty-five years old and upward they shall come to do duty in the service of the tent of meeting. And from the age of fifty years they shall withdraw from the duty of the service and serve no more. They minister to their brothers in the tent of meeting by keeping guard, but they shall do no service. Thus shall you do to the Levites in assigning their duties.’”

This gives us a window of service, a sort of retirement age for those serving in the tent of meeting. But we don’t see this applied to the position of high priest, which is accepted as a lifelong duty. Numbers 20 shows that on the day of Aaron’s death, the garments and role of high priest were passed to his son, Eleazar, which illustrates a line of succession. Now applying this information to today’s passage, Annas is not the acting high priest, but is the former high priest. It seems that, given the weight and authority of the station, even once he was no longer in power, Annas still held considerable sway with the Jews. However, it is his son-in-law, Caiaphas who is actually the acting high priest. By the era in which Jesus was in flesh upon the earth, the station of high priest (as with the temple and the Law itself) was not what it was intended to be. You became and remained high priest under the governance of Rome. It seems that any given high priest served for a few years and was then deposed by the Roman authority and replaced by whichever candidate they deemed fit. Caiaphas was unique in that he was high priest for approximately eighteen years, which is interpreted by most commentators to mean that he was exceptionally skilled at cooperating with the Roman government. This swapping out of sacred roles is not as God intended, and helps us see again just how far the Jewish rulers had strayed from their origins. It’s ironic that those who were so tyrannical and rigid when it came to the Law had compromised one of the highest stations given by God so that they might cling to their own power. It’s also fascinating to see that, even as distorted as things had become, God still allowed the role of high priest to mean something. We see in today’s passage,

“It was Caiaphas who had advised the Jews that it would be expedient that one man should die for the people.”

This takes us back to Caiaphas’ seemingly accidental prophecy – not knowing the true implications of his words, yet prophetic nonetheless. As the council plots against Jesus, fretting over the Roman’s eventual response to Him after the resurrection of Lazarus, Caiaphas says to them in John 11:49–50,

“… You know nothing at all. Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.”

This follows the same logic that Gamaliel used, when he advised the council to leave the Apostles alone, saying in Acts 5:35–39,

“… Men of Israel, take care what you are about to do with these men. For before these days Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing. After him Judas the Galilean rose up in the days of the census and drew away some of the people after him. He too perished, and all who followed him were scattered. So in the present case I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or this undertaking is of man, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!…”

But Caiaphas’ reasoning stops short of Gamaliel’s, as he shows no consideration for what work God may be doing behind the scenes. He looks only to past movements and revolutions among the Jewish people, and how the death of their leaders dispersed the followers. It’s tragic to see that, entrenched in worldliness, he was blessed to speak prophetic truth, yet his goal had nothing to do with honoring God, with the good of the world, or even his own people, but to maintain the station afforded to him under Rome’s authority and under the Sanhedrin’s twisted interpretations of the Law.

We’ll look at what Jesus has to say throughout this process later, but next I want to draw attention to the response of the officer present, as well as what John doesn’t cover. What Jesus says is the Truth. What’s more, it’s peaceful. While He’s firm and resolute in His message, this isn’t the dressing down He gives the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23. Yet the response is violence, and an ideological allegiance to a man wielding the authority of his former title. We leave Jesus with Him bound and heading to Caiaphas, but John doesn’t cover the sham trials carried out by the Sanhedrin, rather when we next see Jesus He’s heading from Caiaphas’ house to Pilate at the governor’s headquarters. Matthew 26:59–68 (as well as Mark 14:53-65, and Luke 22:63-71), shows us how the questioning of Jesus unfolded before the council of the Sanhedrin,

“Now the chief priests and the whole council were seeking false testimony against Jesus that they might put him to death, but they found none, though many false witnesses came forward. At last two came forward and said, ‘This man said, “I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to rebuild it in three days.’ And the high priest stood up and said, ‘Have you no answer to make? What is it that these men testify against you?’ But Jesus remained silent. And the high priest said to him, ‘I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.’ Jesus said to him, ‘You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.’ Then the high priest tore his robes and said, ‘He has uttered blasphemy. What further witnesses do we need? You have now heard his blasphemy. What is your judgment?’ They answered, ‘He deserves death.’ Then they spit in his face and struck him. And some slapped him, saying, ‘Prophesy to us, you Christ! Who is it that struck you?’”

This is what it means to choose enmity with God, to remain cold, and hardened before the Truth of the gospel. To be in love with the world is to respond to the Truth with violence. What’s strange is that, while there’s only suffering and destruction at the end of this road, we can see a sense of certainty in those embarking on the path of wickedness. Cut from a similar cloth as the false teachers that Peter writes about when he says in 2 Peter 2:12–13,

“But these, like irrational animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and destroyed, blaspheming about matters of which they are ignorant, will also be destroyed in their destruction, suffering wrong as the wage for their wrongdoing. They count it pleasure to revel in the daytime. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their deceptions, while they feast with you.”

The death that is the payment for their sin will come one day, and utter destruction will follow. But it seems until that time, those who have made themselves enemies of the Living God do not carry the weight of indecision that we see from the lukewarm. Their course is the wrong one, yet it’s a certain course, and though it leads to ruin, there is foolish confidence in their rebellion.

• “The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.”

“The high priest then questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. Jesus answered him, ‘I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together. I have said nothing in secret. Why do you ask me? Ask those who have heard me what I said to them; they know what I said.’”

Contrasted against the cold and dark of worldly wickedness, we have the spotless Lamb of God, the bright and shining Light of the world. What’s interesting is that while we see Peter outright lie in this passage (which we’ll discuss more later), Jesus, in His position, doesn’t immediately shout the truth about who He is, but says little. Jesus teaches in Matthew 7:6,

“Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.”

Here, as well as in Matthew’s account of the corrupt trial, Jesus shows that there is a time to remain silent, to not offer up the wisdom of Truth to ears you know are hostile to it – but there is not a time to lie. Knowing all things that will happen to Him, knowing the false witnesses that will come forward, knowing that these men do not seek truth, but rather look for an opportunity to twist His words and put Him to death, Jesus is perfectly measured in what He says, and doesn’t say. But this isn’t new – since His statement in John 5:17,

“My Father is working until now, and I am working.”

Jesus has been in a slow, perfectly controlled dance with the religious rulers. They want to kill Him, but He stands in the authority of the Truth that He embodies, and the crowds are enamored with Him. He teaches publicly, He rebukes the ruling Jews, He refuses to play the games of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and scribes, teaching directly from the Law and prophets, and leaving them speechless. Jesus has remained in control throughout this entire process, knowing their hearts, and knowing His mission must end on the cross. At any point Jesus could have (in theory), lied. He could have abandoned the mission, yielded to the temptation to save His flesh from ultimate agony, and told those who opposed Him exactly what they wanted to hear. But the Light does not yield before the darkness, and what we see in today’s passage is that the Light doesn’t have to justify itself to the darkness. When the officer strikes Jesus, He responds,

“If what I said is wrong, bear witness about the wrong; but if what I said is right, why do you strike me?”

What we don’t see is a reply from the officer. Because there is no answer. The violence is entirely without cause, entirely because they hate Him, and none of His accusers can truly answer because none of them understand. They are the irrational animals, the howling mob, with no peace, or wisdom, or reason among them. The darkness can’t stand before the Light, the darkness cannot comprehend the Light. Despite the plans of the wicked, despite worldly schemes, the Light of Christ is eternal, the burning Spirit of the Living God will shine forever, outlasting the darkness, granting victory over the world.

• “No servant can serve two masters.”

Before we get into discussing Peter (and I very much want to discuss Peter), I want to touch on the unnamed disciple in this passage, the one who gets Peter admitted to the courtyard of the high priest. I admit, when I read through today’s section to start the outlining process, I was deeply curious as to who this other disciple, the one “known to the high priest” was. In digging into commentaries, I quickly discovered that we simply don’t know their identity – at least not with absolute certainty. While the Bible doesn’t name this disciple, there are a number of theories, the most logical of which, I think, is that this is John. This seems to be the most widely accepted theory, and it seems to fit, as throughout his gospel, John consistently does not name himself, while he identifies others. He’s also the one disciple present at the cross when Jesus is crucified, and so it’s logical to think that he remained somewhat close throughout the process of Jesus’ arrest and the sham trials. I’ve also come across theories that hold significantly less water. I’ve read cases for Nicodemus or Joesph of Arimathea that lean very heavily on their positions in the Sanhedrin and therein having access to the high priest, but completely ignores the fact that prior to the crucifixion they were secret disciples. I read one that said the unnamed disciple could have been Mary Magdalene – with literally no basis. It was thrown out like a, “what if” scenario with zero evidence to support why. Lastly, I ran across the theory that this disciple was Judas Iscariot… That one made some wild leaps, and treated the theory that Judas was the only one of the twelve to come from Judea, while the rest were from Galilee (which is just a theory) as if it were cold hard fact. As I read, things started to feel more and more like wild speculation and grasping rather than anything that’s supported Biblically. And then I realized something – it doesn’t actually matter. It’s certainly interesting, it’s worth speculating over, but the identity of this disciple doesn’t need to be known for us to understand what’s happening here – if that information were necessary, then Scripture would contain it. It’s enough to understand that there was a disciple with a foot in each world – this is not to say that they were disloyal to Jesus as Judas was, but simply that culturally, socially, they were both a follower of Jesus, and known somehow to the head of the Sanhedrin, and this allowed them to enter the property of Caiaphas. It was by this person that Peter also gained entry into the courtyard – Peter was known by his association with this person, who was known by their association with Jesus. And now we can talk about Peter, because his means of entry to the courtyard shows us just how illogical Peter’s first denial was (not that they become more logical as things progress). By all accounts, Peter’s in a bit of a whirlwind at the moment. Over the Passover meal, when Jesus began to speak of leaving, Peter declares that he will lay down his life for Jesus, only to be gently rebuked and told of his soon to come denials. In the garden, when the soldiers and officers come to arrest Jesus, Peter tries to act in defense of his Lord, but runs into the same problem he did right after confessing Jesus as the Christ in Matthew’s gospel. Coming off of this pivotal moment, and being told by Jesus that he’s been blessed to receive divine understanding, Matthew 16:21–23 says,

“From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, ‘Far be it from you, Lord! This shall never happen to you.’ But he turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.’”

Peter drawing his sword and attacking those who’d come to arrest Jesus was the move of a man with his eyes set on the world. He has heard, but has not received or understood the teaching that Jesus is going to die, and after three days He is going to rise again. After doing what he thinks is right, and in many respects trying to make good on his claim that he would die for Jesus, Peter is rebuked. Last week’s passage showed Jesus tell him,

“Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?”

It is by Jesus’ command that the disciples are allowed to flee, and so it seems unwise that any of them follow after Him, but Peter and probably John both do. Based on context, we can assume that the unnamed disciple’s familiarity with the high priest may offer some protection from arrest, but Peter doesn’t have this. While the unnamed disciple enters freely, Peter is left awkwardly, and obviously standing outside. And here we see Peter’s first denial, and how disjointed his reasoning must be. The servant girl knows the unnamed disciple, and knows that he’s one of Jesus’ followers. Peter is being granted entry entirely on the basis that this person is vouching for him, and when it’s assumed that he’s also a disciple of Jesus, he just flat out denies it. And then, just to make things even more glaringly obvious, rather than keep to himself, he succumbs to the cold and huddles up with the servants and officers around their fire. I saw a picture recently of a flock of black ducks with white bills. In the middle of the ducks, with its head and neck poking up out of the water was a black lab, holding a white badminton birdie in its mouth so that it covered its nose. The caption read, “Day 21, no one suspects a thing.” I can’t help but think of that picture as I contemplate Peter, tucked in alongside the servants and guards of the high priest, acting like that’s where he’s supposed to be. But that’s the problem with being in the middle, with becoming lukewarm as Peter has – you don’t know where to be because you don’t quite know who you are. If you stand in the Truth then you stand in the Light. If you oppose the Truth, then you stand in the dark – but to be unmoored, just drifting and undecided is the worst. You don’t know what’s going to happen next, but given that you’re not aiming up toward the highest good, toward the face of God, you can rest assured it’s not going to be good. We can see that Peter’s untethered as his denials grown more and more forceful. We know he loves Jesus, we know he’s been a faithful follower, but his eye was so fixed on the flesh, on the here and now that what is unfolding – Jesus arrested and heading for the cross, has him at a complete loss for what to do with himself. If we look across all the gospels, we can see how insane Peter’s denial becomes – he’s near the others, close to their fire, the light of which only makes him more visible. He’s recognized as one of the men who was with Jesus, he’s marked by his accent as a Galilean, and he’s seen by a relative of Malchus – the guy who’s ear he just cut off. And he denies. Three times, becoming more forceful, making oaths and curses that he doesn’t even know Jesus. And after the third denial, the rooster crows, and Jesus’ words come rushing back,

“Will you lay down your life for me? Truly, truly, I say to you, the rooster will not crow till you have denied me three times.”

And Peter is crushed under the weight of the realization of what he’s done. Luke’s gospel adds another layer to this, saying in Luke 22:61–62,

“And the Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered the saying of the Lord, how he had said to him, ‘Before the rooster crows today, you will deny me three times.’ And he went out and wept bitterly.”

I think it’s pretty common when praying for others to seek their comfort. I don’t want anyone to have any harder of a time, or to go through any more pain than necessary, but I don’t pray for everyone to have sunshine and rainbows all the time. I ask God to lift up those who need to be lifted up, and break those who need to be broken. That if suffering is what’s required to draw someone closer to Him, then suffering is what is brought to bear – no more than is necessary, and no less than to bring them to the Truth. I pray this for others, because I’ve lived this myself, and to be broken down and drawn closer to my God has been the greatest blessing of my life. Jesus says to the Church at Laodicea in Revelation 3:15–16,

“I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.”

But He goes on to say in verses 19–20,

“Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.”

Peter had his eye aimed improperly, and in a moment of crisis, he forgot who he was as a disciple of Christ, he lost the connection with who he was in the Light. He drifted, and when met with resistance, he lied. He lied foolishly, obviously, and aggressively – and he was broken for it, left to flee and to weep bitter tears in the realization of what he had done. Later we’ll read in John 21, how Jesus restores Peter, how He doesn’t leave him broken and suffering. This is an example of the hope Peter would go on to write of in 1 Peter 5:6–7,

“Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you.”

There is death, agony, and separation in the darkness. There is life, hope, and joy in the Light. The vague in between of a lukewarm faith will only leave you drifting, detached from your identity in Christ, and eventually you’ll end up in the dark, not fully understanding how you got there. The path to the Light is exceptionally straightforward, Jesus lays it out in two words, after He has restored Peter in John 21,

“Follow me.”

Pastor Chris’s sermon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Rnl3trUsQ