Luke 22:49-51 - Joseph Benson’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

When they which were about him saw what would follow That the band was just going to seize Jesus, or had already seized him, and were about to lead him away; they said, Lord, shall we smite with the sword? Thou didst allow us to have two swords, shall we now make use of them? Surely never can there be a greater occasion for doing it: and we doubt not but, few as we are, thou canst render us victorious over this armed multitude. They did not wait for an answer from Jesus, but one of them Namely, Peter, immediately smote the servant of the high-priest One who, it is probable, was the forwardest, and seemed peculiarly officious in seizing Christ. Peter struck full at his head, intending to cleave him down, but the stroke glanced a little on one side, so that he only cut off his right ear. Jesus said, Suffer ye thus far Let me go to the wounded man, and have my hands at liberty, while I do one more act of mercy. And he touched his ear, and healed him Putting the ear on again, which was cut off, or creating a new one in the place of it. It may not be improper to observe, that two other interpretations are given of the clause, Suffer ye thus far. “All antiquity,” says Dr. Campbell, “seems agreed in understanding our Lord's expression as a check to his disciples, by intimating that they were not to proceed further in the way of resistance, as it was not to such methods of defence that he chose to recur: and what is recorded by the other evangelists, as likewise said on the occasion, strongly confirms this explanation.” Dr. Whitby thinks that Christ spake thus to the soldiers, desiring them thus far to suffer the rash opposition of his disciples, and not to proceed to violence against them, on account of the assault made, and injury done by one of them, which he would immediately repair; for it follows, and he healed him. “And this,” adds the doctor, “he said and did partly to show, that he, who had such power to heal, and (Joh 18:6) to throw down his enemies, was taken willingly, and not for want of power to preserve himself: and partly to preserve his apostles from their assaults.” It must be acknowledged that all these interpretations are plausible; but the first, which is adopted by Elsner, Doddridge, Macknight, Wesley, and many others, seems as probable as either of the others, and certainly exhibits the mercy and benevolence of our Lord in the most amiable and striking point of view. And one would have thought, that such a generous piece of kindness to his enemies would have so overcome them, that they would have proceeded no further against him. But, alas! their hearts were hardened! How illustriously did our Lord now exemplify his own rule of doing good to them that hate us, as he afterward did that which enjoins us to pray for them that despitefully use us and persecute us.