John 18

the Kidron Valley
The translation “the Kidron Valley” here represents the Greek τοῦ χειμάρρου τοῦ Κεδρὼν (tou cheimarrou tou Kedrōn; lit. “the valley of Kidron”). Virtually every time χείμαρρος (cheimarros) appears in the LXX/OG (excepting the apocryphal books), it translates the Hebrew term נַ֫חַל (nahal; “river valley” or “stream”). Significantly, the LXX/OG translators often used χείμαρρος (cheimarros) when referring to the Kidron Valley (Heb. נַחַל קִדְרוֹן; nahal kidron; cf. 2 Sam 15:23; 1 Kgs 2:37; 15:13; 2 Kgs 23:6, 12; 2 Chr 15:16; 29:16; 30:14). The word χείμαρρος (cheimarros) appears in the New Testament only here in John 18:1, but John is clearly using it as part of a proper name like the LXX/OG translators did. Thus, it is appropriate to translate τοῦ χειμάρρου τοῦ Κεδρὼν (tou cheimarrou tou Kedrōn) here as “the Kidron Valley.”

John’s reference to the Kidron Valley here is not merely a geographical marker; it is also theologically significant. The Kidron marked the eastern boundary of Jerusalem, the kingly city. It was associated with treachery, betrayal, and sadness when King David was forced to flee from his own son Absalom out of Jerusalem across the Kidron (cf. 2 Sam 15:23). John’s unique reference to the Kidron Valley, and his description of Jesus crossing to the other side of it, draws upon such Old Testament imagery. The tones of betrayal and sadness are clear as Jesus crosses over to the place where one of His closest friends will give Him over, and where the rest of His disciples will flee from Him. Unlike David though, Jesus does not cross the Kidron Valley to flee Jerusalem, but rather to display His spectacular sovereignty. He is not fleeing because of betrayal. Rather, the true divine King is confidently crossing the Kidron Valley unto betrayal as He freely and sovereignly offers Himself up to save His people.

gathered
The word “gathered” translates the Greek verb συνάγω (synagō) and provides a more consistent gloss for the word than something like “met” (some other English translations). Thus, “gathered” is the preferred translation for the term wherever contextually possible, and such consistency helps the reader to recognize the same term anywhere it appears.

better
The word translated “better” here is συμφέρω (sumpherō), which usually carries the idea of being “profitable,” “beneficial,” or “useful.” However, given the fact that one man is proposed to die “on behalf of” (ὑπὲρ; huper) others, the sense is that the proposed option is “better” than the other. Caiaphas had been in this situation before (cf. 11:50), and there John used the same term to describe Caiaphas’ viewpoint on what is “better” (sumpherō). In chapter 11, Caiaphas argued that it was better for one man to die than the whole nation to perish, and here in chapter 18, John the narrator recalls that event. However, in the context of John’s narration, while the Jewish leaders may have thought Jesus dying was “better” for merely utilitarian reasons (cf. 11:50), God indeed thought it was “better” for the sake of His glory, which explains why Caiaphas is said actually to have prophesied (cf. 11:51). So, by recalling that scene in which Caiaphas counseled what was ultimately God’s will, John gives his readers another opportunity to remember the two planes in which God’s will and man’s will operate. Caiaphas will now sinfully condemn Jesus, but at the same time, God plans Jesus’s death for His greatest glory (cf. Gen 50:20).

servant-girl
“Servant-girl” translates παιδίσκη (paidiskē), which can refer either to a female slave or more generally to a young maid or female servant (see παῖς in NIDNTTE, 3:590). The term is different than (δοῦλος; doulos), which is usually rendered as “slave” in this translation.

Are you not…
This question opens with the Greek negative particle Μή (Mē), which, according to normal Greek usage, sets an expectation of a negative answer. This is why some translations structure the question, “You are not…are you?” However, to avoid adding words which do not appear in the Greek, the rhetorical question is simply translated with a familiar English structure. This way, nothing external is added and the force of the rhetorical question and the expected negative answer remains perfectly intact. Such wording is often used for an accusatory effect, as it implies a negative response while yet suspecting that a positive answer is actually the truth. The fact that a “tag question” (e.g., “You are not…are you?”) is not translated here also helps to bring out the heightened tension when the Greek wording actually does emphasize Peter’s association with Jesus’ disciples to a greater extent (cf. v. 25).

charcoal fire
The word for “charcoal fire” here is the Greek ἀνθρακιά (anthrakia; lit. describing “burning coals” or “embers”). The word appears only two times in the New Testament, here and later in 21:9. John’s use of ἀνθρακιά (anthrakia) in both cases creates a tie between the two passages: just as the scene of Peter’s three-fold denial is set with a charcoal fire, so the scene of Jesus’ restoration of Peter by providing him three opportunities to express his love for the Lord (cf. 21:15ff.) is also begun with the description of a charcoal fire (21:9).

are you?
This translation does not render Greek questions expecting a negative answer with a tag question (cf. v. 17). This allows the occasions when a tag question does appear in the Greek, like here, to stand out. The placement of the verb translated “are you?” (εἶ; ei) as the final word of the question in Greek also portrays heightened tension as this is the second time Peter is asked such a question. It is more accusatory and Peter is placed under greater scrutiny and stress.

from yourself?
The translation “from yourself” literally renders the Greek construction ἀπὸ σεαυτοῦ (apo seautou). While many translations render the phrase differently (e.g., “of yourself,” “on your own initiative”), the preposition ἀπό (apo) is regularly translated as “from.” Furthermore, the reflexive pronoun σεαυτοῦ (seautou) is translated in its literal sense, “yourself.” With this question, Jesus exposes that Pilate has no grounds for accusing Him of anything, but is relying simply on a hostile accusation from others. Jesus’s response also forces Pilate to more carefully assess Jesus’ true identity. Will he make a judgment call based on his own knowledge and understanding of who Jesus is, or will he simply base his judgment on tenuous accusations? Jesus’ response possibly unnerved Pilate, as he then sought more desperately to understand the reason Jesus was being put on trial.

Am I a Jew?
Refer to the discussion on verse 17 above on Μή (Mē). The structuring of this question shows that Pilate feels threatened and thus replies with a defensive retort that expects an answer in the negative.

from here
Some translations render the Greek ἐντεῦθεν (enteuthen) in a more expansive sense (e.g., “of this realm,” “from the world”), but the phrase simply means “from here.” While it is true Jesus’ kingdom is not of the world, this translation’s rendering is closest to the Greek and allows the reader or preacher to draw out the implications of Jesus’ words.