The incident of Peter cutting off the ear of Malchus is described in all four Gospels (Matthew 26:51-54, Mark 14:47, Luke 22:50-51, John 18:10-11). Here is a summary of what happened:
Jesus and his disciples had gone to the Garden of Gethsemane to pray on the night before his crucifixion. While they were there, a crowd sent by the chief priests and elders came to arrest Jesus. This crowd included temple guards, as well as some Roman soldiers. The Gospels specifically mention that one of the men was named Malchus.
When the crowd arrived to seize Jesus, Simon Peter drew his sword and struck Malchus, cutting off his right ear. John’s Gospel identifies Peter explicitly as the one who cut off Malchus’s ear. The other Gospels simply refer to one of the disciples doing it.
Jesus immediately told Peter to stop and said “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword” (Matthew 26:52). He then touched Malchus’s ear and miraculously healed him.
So in summary, the biblical account shows that:
- Peter reacted hastily and violently when he saw a crowd coming to arrest Jesus
- He cut off the ear of Malchus, one of the men in the crowd
- Jesus rebuked Peter for this and undid the damage by healing Malchus
The big question is – why did Peter do this in the first place? Here are some potential reasons proposed by Bible scholars:
1. Peter was trying to protect Jesus
Peter had committed to defend and protect Jesus no matter what. Just hours earlier at the Last Supper, Peter declared “Even if I must die with you, I will not deny you!” (Matthew 26:35). When he saw the armed crowd coming to seize Jesus, his instinct was to defend his master.
Peter was a former fisherman who likely had experience handling a sword. In a hastily formed plan, he may have decided that wounding one of the men would slow down the crowd and allow Jesus to escape arrest. Of course, given the size of the crowd, this was an unrealistic plan.
Nonetheless, Peter’s intentions seem to have been good – he loved Jesus deeply and was willing to risk his own life for his teacher. Cutting off Malchus’s ear was a misguided attempt to protect someone he cared about.
2. Peter was rebelling against Jesus’ sacrificial mission
However, there may have also been a less noble motive behind Peter’s actions. Over the past few days, Jesus had repeatedly told his disciples that he would be betrayed, arrested, and crucified in Jerusalem. He explained that this was necessary to fulfill God’s plan of salvation (see Matthew 16:21, Matthew 20:18-19, etc).
The disciples struggled to accept this news that their Messiah must die. They were likely still hoping that Jesus would overthrow the Romans and establish an earthly kingdom. Peter himself even took Jesus aside to rebuke him for talking of being killed (Matthew 16:22).
So when the crowd came to arrest Jesus, Peter may have taken matters into his own hands to resist God’s will. Instead of accepting that Jesus had to die on the cross, Peter tried to fight against it. Cutting off Malchus’s ear could have been an act of rebellion or frustration at Jesus’ refusal to defend himself.
Of course, Jesus immediately corrected Peter and submitted himself to the Father’s plan. But Peter’s rash actions suggest he was not fully embracing Christ’s sacrificial mission at this point.
3. Peter was giving in to human weakness
A third perspective is that Peter’s attack simply demonstrated his human weaknesses. Throughout the Gospels, we see glimpses of Peter’s personality – he was eager and impulsive, often speaking or acting rashly (see Matthew 14:28, Matthew 16:22, Matthew 26:33-35).
While Peter sincerely loved Jesus, he struggled with impatience, pride, and reliance on his own strength. As an exhausted man in a tense situation, Peter gave in to these weaknesses. Instead of awaiting Jesus’ instructions, he took matters into his own hands, with violent results.
Many believers can relate to Peter – we strive to serve Christ, yet stumble due to our sinful human nature. When under stress, we can make foolish choices that dishonor God. Peter’s mistake reminds us to seek the Spirit’s help in overcoming our weak flesh.
Of course, Jesus did not reject Peter for his failure. The gospels show Jesus forgave and restored Peter, eventually commissioning him to lead the early church. God understands our frailty and is at work to transform us into the image of Christ (Philippians 1:6).
4. The attack fulfilled biblical prophecy
While Peter likely acted in the heat of the moment, his attack on Malchus fulfilled at least two prophetic Scriptures about the Messiah:
Isaiah 50:6 – “I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pull out the beard; I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting.”
Isaiah 53:7 – “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth.”
By preventing Jesus from being struck or harmed, Peter was interfering with these prophecies about the Messiah’s suffering. Jesus stopped Peter’s attack because he was fully committed to undergoing his Passion to fulfill God’s word.
While Peter didn’t realize it, his act of violence threatened to disrupt God’s sovereign plans made long ago. This event shows that even opposition to Jesus followed the trajectories set by Scripture.
5. The scene symbolized Christian pacificism
Finally, some scholars see deeper theological symbolism in this confrontation between Peter and the crowd sent to arrest Jesus.
Peter’s quick use of the sword represented a worldly instinct to retaliate with force. By contrast, Jesus’ rebuke and healing of Malchus modeled a Christian response of nonviolence and forgiveness.
In fact, Luke’s Gospel includes an additional detail – when Jesus restored Malchus’s ear, he said “No more of this!” This phrase implies that Jesus was instructing his disciples to cease fighting (Luke 22:51).
The scene encapsulates a central message of Christ’s kingdom – instead of meeting violence with violence, turn the other cheek and love your enemies. Jesus was about to let himself be killed to save sinners, including those arresting him.
Peter’s attack providing a vivid backdrop against which Jesus’ self-sacrificing love shone even more brightly.
6. The act revealed Peter’s future denials
While Peter was bold enough to strike with his sword, the Gospels go on to show that his courage failed as events unfolded. After Jesus’ arrest, Peter ended up denying even knowing Christ three times out of fear (Luke 22:54-62).
Perhaps Peter’s attack on Malchus was an instance of false bravado. When it came down to it, he could not follow through on his commitment to stick by Jesus even unto death.
The impulsive violence in the garden anticipated Peter’seven greater failure. His weakness for hiding the truth foreshadowed his coming denials. This makes Peter’s follow-up restoration even more powerful.
God did not judge Peter by this incident but transformed him into an apostle who would serve with true devotion. The Malchus event became a crucial step in Peter’s spiritual growth.
7. The scene revealed the true threat to Jesus
Looking at the big picture, Peter’s hasty attack did little to truly endanger Jesus. After all, Jesus promptly healed Malchus and prevented further violence against the crowd.
The real danger to Jesus was not from those arresting him, but rather the spiritual powers of darkness operating behind the scenes. The hour of Jesus’ death was, as He declared, “the hour of darkness” (Luke 22:53).
Jesus explained to Pilate that the true guilt lay with those who had handed him over (John 19:11). Jesus submitted freely for he recognized that God’s authority ruled over all earthly powers (John 19:11).
Peter drew a literal sword, but Jesus faced a far more powerful spiritual battle against sin and death. By going willing to the cross, Jesus conquered the forces of evil and opened the way to eternal life.
The brief scuffle in the garden paled in comparison to the cosmic spiritual contest underway. Jesus called Peter to put away his weapon and let God’s redemptive plan unfold.
8. Peter’s act revealed his lack of understanding
Overall, Peter’s rash attack highlights his lack of comprehension of Jesus’ true mission and identity at this point. On a human level, Peter sincerely wanted to defend his master. But he failed to grasp the big picture of Christ’s purpose.
Just a short time earlier, Peter had declared Jesus to be the Messiah and Son of God (Matthew 16:16). Yet here he was trying to prevent the Messiah from completing his God-ordained task!
Peter had not yet received the indwelling Holy Spirit, who would empower him later to boldly proclaim the Gospel. His faith remained imperfect at this stage.
When Jesus told Peter to put away his sword, he was calling Peter to trust in God’s plans instead of taking matters into his own hands. Only later would Peter’s faith mature to embrace fully Christ’s suffering path.
9. The act served as a warning to persecutors
A final perspective is that while Peter’s attack was misguided, it served as a warning to the crowd arresting Jesus. This man who had come in apparent weakness had divine power and devoted followers ready to defend him.
Peter’s unexpected strike made it clear that this rabbi had supernatural resources he could draw upon. Had Jesus allowed it, Peter might have called upon angelic hosts to defeat the crowd.
Of course, Jesus had no intention of resisting arrest or harming the crowd. Nonetheless, the incident gave a brief glimpse of Christ’s true glory and power.
The crowd was hereby on notice – if they persisted in injustice towards Jesus, they would face consequences far beyond what any human army could bring about.
Peter’s attack served as a reminder that Jesus was no mere victim of circumstance, but rather the Lord God Almighty. Even an impulsive act by a lone disciple carried divine weight.
10. The act highlights God’s sovereignty
Ultimately, Peter’s attack and Jesus’ response underscore God’s sovereignty over the events unfolding. Jesus declared that he could ask the Father for legions of angels if he so chose (Matthew 26:53).
No matter how fiercely Peter fought, the Roman cohort succeeded because God allowed it to happen. No matter how powerful the religious leaders thought they were, they could do nothing outside of God’s supreme will.
Jesus permitted these events, even predicted them ahead of time, because they were integral to God’s plan of redemption. What looked to mortals like a tragic defeat was in fact part of the Creator’s divine strategy.
Peter’s impetuous actions could not derail God’s purposes. In fact, they played right into the Father’s designs. All of history – even apparent tragedies – unfolds according to heaven’s intentions.
As Peter learned, the path of wisdom is to accept rather than fight against God’s mysterious ways. His attack was rendered powerless because God’s strength was being perfectly fulfilled through weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9).
Conclusion
Peter’s cutting off the ear of Malchus was a dramatic event on the last night of Jesus’ earthly ministry. At first glance the attack may seem merely an impulsive mistake by a devoted follower trying to defend his master.
But exploring potential motivations behind Peter’s behavior yields deeper insights into his character, Jesus’ mission, and God’s sovereign plan. This incident encapsulates timeless truths about human weakness versus divine power; earthly force versus heavenly love.
Rather than focus on Peter’s failure, we do well to emulate Jesus’ example of forgiving even those who persecute us. For Jesus conquered not through might or coercion, but through laying down his life for all. The sword that struck Malchus’ ear could not stop the striking of the Savior for the sins of the world.