Matthew 26

Now it happened
The phrase “Now it happened” translates the formulaic introductory phrase Καὶ ἐγένετο (kai egeneto). Though often absent from modern English translations, this phrase is frequently used at the outset of a literary unit in order to draw attention to a larger episode comprised of several smaller events (cf. Matt 7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1). When used in the middle of an episode, the phrase functions as a marker, indicating either a pause in the flow of the story, or a point of emphasis to which the author is drawing the reader’s attention. In like fashion to other uses in Matthew, its use at the beginning of this narrative is in keeping with the ebb and flow of Matthew’s alternations between discourse and narrative, transitioning the reader from the last major discourse to the final narrative segment.

the Passover
This is the Greek word πάσχα (pascha), which is related to the Hebrew word פֶּסַח (pesach; “Passover”). Depending on the context, this word can refer to the Passover festival (as it does here), the Passover meal (e.g., Matt 26:19), or even the Passover lamb (e.g., Mark 14:12; cf. 1 Cor 5:7b).

delivered over
The verb παραδίδωμι (paradidōmi) at its most basic literal meaning is to “give over” or “hand over.” It is used in a variety of contexts with different emphases, and thus cannot be translated the same way everywhere. Its specific meaning in each case is dependent upon its surrounding context, and the burden of translation is to give the specific meaning intended by the author. The term plays a key role in the narrative of Jesus being delivered over to death through betrayal as Jesus passes through the chain of custody from Judas to the Jewish leaders to the Romans. The term here is translated as “deliver” to capture the image of Jesus being given over to death (cf. Matt 17:22; 20:19; 24:9).

lest
The term “lest” translates the Greek construction ἵνα μὴ (hina mē). The phrase could literally be translated “so that…not”; but in this case, the English term “lest” supplies the equivalent meaning and clarifies how the Jewish leaders are plotting their capture of Jesus in a way that avoids a riot.

when the disciples saw…saying
The phrases “when the disciples saw” and “saying” reflect the structuring of the participles that Matthew used to construct this verse. This structure captures the fact that what the disciples were saying expressed their indignation. Grammatically, the primary verb is “they were indignant” (ἠγανάκτησαν; hēganaktēsan) and the other two verbs, “when the disciples saw” (ἰδόντες; idontes) and “saying” (λέγοντες; legontes), serve to modify that main verb, both by giving it context (in the case of their seeing) and by giving it detail (in the case of their speaking).

deliver
Refer to the discussion on verse 2 above. In this verse, παραδίδωμι (paradidōmi) is translated “deliver” because this is the beginning of the fulfillment of Jesus’ prediction in verse 2 that He would soon be “delivered over” for crucifixion. Further, Judas likely meant to use this word in its more basic sense of “delivering” rather than “betraying.” It is unlikely that he would have referred to his act of giving Jesus over as high-handed betrayal, though that was certainly the case, as Matthew describes in the following verse.

betray
Refer to the discussion on verses 2 and 15 above. In this case, Matthew, as the narrator, is exposing Judas and describing what is truly happening rather than recording direct speech. Thus, the context of betrayal leads to the translation of παραδίδωμι (paradidōmi) as “betray.”

saying
The term “saying” translates the Greek participle λέγοντες (legontes). Since the participle modifies the primary verb, “came,” the translation “saying” reflects the Greek sentence structure more precisely than “and said.” This translation therefore demonstrates how the disciples’ message is treated as a feature or subset of their arrival before Jesus.

the Passover
Refer to the discussion on verse 2 above. Depending on the context, this can refer to the Passover festival (as earlier in v. 2), the Passover meal (as it does here), or even the Passover lamb (e.g., Mark 14:12; cf. 1 Cor 5:7b).

betray
Refer to the discussion on verses 2, 15, and 16 above.

answered and said
The phrase “answered and said” is translated here just like it is in verse 25. The consistency in translation highlights how Matthew puts the spotlight on the words of Jesus in response to the statement of the disciples in verse 22, and, later, how the spotlight shifts to Judas’ response to the statement of Jesus.

betray
Refer to the discussion on verses 2, 15, and 16 above.

betrayed
Refer to the discussion on verses 2, 15, and 16 above.

betraying
Refer to the discussion on verses 2, 15, and 16 above.

answered and said
Refer to the discussion above on verse 25.

Surely not I
The phrase “Surely not I” (Μήτι ἐγώ εἰμι; mēti egō eimi) appears in this verse just as it does in verse 22 (Μήτι ἐγώ εἰμι; mēti egō eimi). Consistent translation of this phrase in both verses highlights the distinction in the disciples calling Jesus “Lord” in verse 22 and Judas calling Jesus “Rabbi” in verse 25. Noting that Judas is described here as the one “who was betraying Him,” it is worthy of mention that in verse 49, Judas later greets Jesus as “Rabbi” when he appears in the garden to betray Him.

answered and said
Refer to the discussion on verses 23, 25 above. With the same phrase being used now for Peter’s response to the claim of Jesus, readers can detect a parallel in the responses of Peter (v. 33), Judas (v. 25), and Jesus (v. 23, in reference to Judas).

betrayed
Refer to the discussion on verses 2, 15, and 16 above.

betrays
Refer to the discussion on verses 2, 15, and 16 above.

And
The conjunction “And” (Καὶ; kai) that begins this verse has been translated and helps to tighten the connection between the previous section and this one.

and with him
Some render this phrase “accompanied by,” but the literal translation is “and with him” (καὶ μετʼ αὐτοῦ; kai met’ autou). This phrasing highlights Judas’ role as the primary adversary in view while he is nonetheless connected to a hostile crowd. More specifically, the phrase “with him” has been used to designate Jesus’ relationship with His disciples on several occasions (vv. 36, 38, 40). The fact that Jesus’ adversaries are here described as those who are “with” Judas shows that Judas is truly in another camp altogether.

betraying
Refer to the discussion on verses 2, 15, and 16 above.

Greetings
The word used here (Χαῖρε; Chaire) represents a common friendly greeting often used at the time. Some translations use the interjection “hail,” but the word “greetings” communicates well the meaning to the modern reader.

stretched out his hand
The phrase “stretched out his hand” gives a literal rendering of the Greek phrase ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα (ekteinas tēn cheira). As in other cases (e.g., Matt 8:3; 12:49), highlighting this action of stretching out one’s hand serves to dramatize the scene.

Therefore
The logical conjunction οὖν (oun) is typically translated as “therefore.” Its placement in the sentence renders it as a postpositive, meaning it is the second term in the Greek sentence but is understood as the beginning of the clause in English (cf. Matt 24:42; 25:13).

Sanhedrin
The word “Sanhedrin” here represents the Greek term συνέδριον (synedrion), which most English translations render as “council” or “court.” While this accurately describes what the Sanhedrin was, it was more specific in the Jewish mind. It referred not just to any court, but the supreme court of the Jews in Jerusalem, before which the most serious cases would be decided.

sanctuary
The word for “sanctuary” here is νάος (naos). It is an important and specific word in the New Testament referring to the innermost and most sacred part of the temple. As such, it is more specific than the term ἱερόν (hieron; “temple”), which refers to the entire temple complex. Thus, the translation “sanctuary” accurately captures the meaning of νάος (naos) and properly differentiates it from ἱερόν (hieron).

What are these men testifying
The translation “What are these men testifying” (τί οὗτοί…καταμαρτυροῦσιν; ti houtoi…katamartyrousin) better captures the Greek phrase than the English “What is it that these men are testifying.” Because there is no “be” verb in the sentence, the question “what” is better attached directly to the verb “testifying.” This translation helps to simplify the question in English. Beyond that, by giving less space to the content of the false charges, readers can better see the characters involved, namely, Jesus and His opponents the Sanhedrin.

I put You under oath
“Put under oath” is a clearer and more specific translation of the Greek word ἐξορκίζω (exorkizō) than an alternative translation, “adjure,” which simply means to request strongly. Ἐξορκίζω (exorkizō) is more emphatic, requiring someone to solemnly swear. The same word is used in the LXX translation of Genesis 24:3, where Abraham makes his servant swear under oath not to take a wife for Isaac from among the Canaanites.

the Christ
“The Christ” (ὁ χριστὸς; ho christos; “the Anointed One”) is the Greek expression of the Hebrew הַמָּשִׁיחַ (ha-mashiach; “the Messiah” or “the Anointed One”). The question here is whether Jesus truly claims to be this promised Messiah of whom the Old Testament had foretold.

garments
While sometimes translated “robes,” the Greek word ἱμάτιον (himation) is more general semantically, referring literally to “garments.” Thus, it is translated as “garments” here. Ἱμάτιον (himation) is consistently translated as “garment” throughout the New Testament (excepting two occurrences [John 19:2, 5] where it specifically describes the purple “robe” put mockingly on Jesus).

Christ
“Christ” (χριστὸς; christos; “Anointed One”) is the Greek expression of the Hebrew מָשִׁיחַ (mashiach; “Messiah” or “Anointed One”). Here the Jews use the title mockingly as they abuse Jesus, who claims (falsely, they contend) to be the promised Messiah foretold in the Old Testament.

oath
Refer to the discussion on verse 63 above. There, an intensified verbal form of the word for “oath” (ἐξορκίζω; exorkizō) was used. Here it is the noun (ὅρκος; horkos). Translating these cognates consistently helps to show the connection that the seriousness with which Peter denied Christ here was the same as that with which the high priest expected Jesus to testify in court.