<p>12:31 <i>Now is the judgment of this world</i>- The coming of the voice was to encourage that crowd that the Lord was indeed of God, and that the Jewish world which had such a pull on them against Him was actually under judgment, just as He had proclaimed. The Lord plainly described His death as &quot;the judgment of this world&quot;. Because there was &quot;no judgment&quot; in the ultimate sense as there was no justice, therefore the Lord Jesus died on the cross (Is. 59:15,16). This was the ultimate judgment of this world. There the Lord God, through His Son, acted as judge in condemning sin (Rom. 8:3).</p><p><i>Now shall the prince of this world be cast out- </i></p><p>The &ldquo;prince of this world&rdquo; is described as being &ldquo;cast out&rdquo;, coming to the Lord Jesus, having no part in Him and being &ldquo;judged&rdquo;, all during the last few hours before Christ&rsquo;s death (Jn.12:31; 14:30; 16:11). All these descriptions seem to fit the Jewish system as represented by the Law, Moses, Caiaphas the High Priest, Judas and the Jews wanting to kill Jesus, and Judas. Note that &ldquo;the prince of this world&rdquo; refers to Roman and Jewish governors in 1 Cor. 2:6,8. At the Lord&rsquo;s death the Mosaic system was done away with (Col. 2:14&ndash;17); the &ldquo;bondwoman&rdquo;, representing the Law in the allegory, was &ldquo;cast out&rdquo; (Gal. 4:30). &ldquo;The prince of this world&rdquo; is described, in the very same words, as being &ldquo;cast out&rdquo; (Jn. 12:31).</p><p><b>Caiaphas?</b></p><p>Wycliffe in archaic English renders Mt. 26:3: &ldquo;Then the princes of priests and the elder men of the people were gathered into the hall of the prince of priests, that was said Caiaphas&rdquo;. The &ldquo;world&rdquo; in John&rsquo;s Gospel refers primarily to the Jewish world; its &ldquo;prince&rdquo; can either be a personification of it, or a reference to Caiaphas the High Priest. Caiaphas&rsquo; equivalent name in Hebrew could suggest &lsquo;cast out&rsquo;; his rending of his priestly clothes at Christ&rsquo;s trial declared him &ldquo;cast out&rdquo; of the priesthood (see Lev. 10:6; 21:10). &ldquo;This world&rdquo; and its &ldquo;prince&rdquo; are treated in parallel by John (12:31 cp. 16:11) &ndash; just as Jesus, the prince of the Kingdom, can be called therefore &ldquo;the Kingdom&rdquo; (Lk. 17:21). Colossians 2:15 describes Christ&rsquo;s ending of the Law on the cross as &ldquo;spoiling principalities and powers&rdquo; &ndash; the &ldquo;prince&rdquo; of the Jewish world being &ldquo;cast out&rdquo; (a similar idea in Greek to &ldquo;spoiling&rdquo;) would then parallel this. The Jews &ldquo;caught&rdquo; Jesus and cast Him out of the vineyard (Mt. 21:39) &ndash; but in doing so, they themselves were cast out of the vineyard and &ldquo;spoiled&rdquo; by Jesus (Col. 2:15).</p><p>If indeed &ldquo;the prince of this world&rdquo; is a reference to Caiaphas, then we have to face the fact that this individual is being singled out by the Lord for very special condemnation, as the very embodiment of &lsquo;Satan&rsquo;, sin and its desires, all that was then in opposition to God. This is confirmed by the Lord&rsquo;s comment to Pilate that &ldquo;he that delivered me unto you has the greatest sin&rdquo; (Jn. 19:11 Gk. &ndash; &ldquo;greater&rdquo; in the AV is translated &ldquo;greatest&rdquo; in 1 Cor. 13:13; Mk. 9:34; Mt. 13:32; 18:1,4; 23:11; Lk. 9:46; Lk. 22:24; Lk. 22:26). It was Caiaphas and the Jews who &ldquo;delivered&rdquo; Jesus to Pilate to execute (Mt. 27:2,18; Jn. 18:30,35 s.w.). But the Lord speaks as if one person amongst them in particular had delivered Him to Pilate &ndash; and that specific individual was Caiaphas. If Caiaphas had the &ldquo;greatest sin&rdquo; in the crucifixion of God&rsquo;s son, we can understand how he is singled out by the Lord Jesus for such description as the &ldquo;prince of this world&rdquo;. A number of expositors have interpreted &ldquo;the Devil... that had the power of death&rdquo; in Heb. 2:14&ndash;17 as an allusion to Caiaphas.</p><p><b>Judas and &ldquo;The prince of this world&rdquo;</b></p><p>There are points of association between &quot;the prince of this world&quot; and Judas; I suggest, because Judas was the agent of Caiaphas and the Jewish world. After Judas left the upper room we get the impression that Jesus started to talk more earnestly and intensely. Immediately after Judas went out Jesus said, &ldquo;<i>Now </i>is the Son of man glorified... Little children, yet a little while I am with you... Hereafter I will not talk much (longer) with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me&rdquo; (Jn. 13:31,33; 14:30). Because He knew Judas would soon return with his men, Christ wanted to give the disciples as much instruction as possible in the time that remained. This would explain the extraordinary intensity of meaning behind the language used in John 14&ndash;17. After He finished, &ldquo;Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, <i>cometh</i>...&rdquo; (Jn. 18:3); &ldquo;The prince of this world <i>cometh</i>&rdquo;, Jesus had prophesied, epitomized in the person and attitude of Judas. Christ had told the disciples that &ldquo;the prince&rdquo; &ldquo;hath nothing (cp. no part) in Me&rdquo; (Jn. 14:30). Not until Judas appeared with the men would the disciples have realized that he was the betrayer (see Jn.18:3&ndash;5). Jesus knew this would come as a shock to them, and would lead them to question whether they themselves were in Christ; therefore He warned them that Judas, as a manifestation of &ldquo;the prince of this world&rdquo;, had no part in Him any longer. For &ldquo;the Devil&rdquo; of the Jewish authorities and system, perhaps Caiaphas personally, had put into the heart of Judas to betray the Lord (Jn. 13:2). The whole Jewish leadership were the &ldquo;betrayers&rdquo; of Jesus (Acts 7:52) in that Judas, the one singular betrayer, was the epitome of the Jewish system and the agent of Caiaphas. The prince having nothing in Christ suggests a reference to Daniel 9:26: &ldquo;And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, and shall have nothing (A.V. margin &ndash; i.e. have no part): and the people of the prince that shall come (the Romans) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary&rdquo;. Thus it was the Jewish world as well as Judas which had nothing in Messiah, and the system they represented was to be destroyed by another (Roman) &ldquo;prince that shall come&rdquo; to replace the (Jewish) &ldquo;prince of this world&rdquo;. The occurrence of the phrase &ldquo;prince&rdquo; and the idea of having nothing in Messiah in both Daniel 9:26 and John 14:30 suggest there must be a connection of this nature.</p><p>Judas betrayed the Lord Jesus because he was bought out and thus controlled by the Jewish &lsquo;Satan&rsquo;. The fact that Judas was &ldquo;one of the twelve&rdquo; as he sat at the last supper is emphasized by all the Gospel writers &ndash; the phrase occurs in Matthew 26:14; Mark 14:20; Luke 22:47 and John 13:21. Thus later Peter reflected: &ldquo;he was numbered with us (cp. &ldquo;one of the twelve&rdquo;), and had (once) obtained <i>part</i> of this ministry&rdquo; (Acts 1:17), alluding back to Christ&rsquo;s statement that &ldquo;the prince of this world&rdquo; ultimately had <i>no </i>part in Him. Similarly 1 John 2:19 probably alludes to Judas as a type of all who return to the world: &ldquo;They went out from us, but they were not of us&rdquo; (cp. &ldquo;Judas, one of the twelve&rdquo;). Judas is described as a Devil (Jn. 6:70), and his leaving the room may have connected in the Lord&rsquo;s mind with &ldquo;the prince of this world&rdquo; being cast out. Those who &ldquo;went out from us&rdquo; in 1 John 2:19 were primarily those who left the Jewish ecclesias (to whom John was largely writing) to return to Judaism, and they who left were epitomized by Judas. 2 Peter 2:13,15 equates the Judaizers within the ecclesias with Balaam &ldquo;who loved the wages of unrighteousness&rdquo;. The only other time this latter phrase occurs is in Acts 1:18 concerning Judas.</p><p><b>&ldquo;Cast out&rdquo;</b><br />Apostate Israel are described in the very language of the adversaries / Satans of God's people. Because they acted like the world around them, from which they had been called out, they were ultimately judged by God as part of that world. Consider all the times when God&rsquo;s apostate people are recorded as acting in terms of their Arab cousins; thus apostate Israel and the Jewish system were to be &quot;cast out&quot; (Jn. 12:31) just as Ishmael had been (Gen. 21:10).</p><p>&ldquo;Cast out&rdquo; in the Old Testament at times refers to Israel being cast out of the land for their disobedience (cp. Lk. 19:45). This was what was to happen to the first century Jews. The Law itself was to be &ldquo;cast out&rdquo; (Gal. 4:30). The idea of being cast out recalls the casting out of Hagar and Ishmael. The Lord commented concerning the end of the Mosaic system: &ldquo;The servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever&rdquo; (Jn. 8:35). The description of apostate Israel as being &ldquo;cast out in the open field&rdquo; with none to pity them except God must have some reference to Ishmael (Ez. 16:5). Galatians 4:29&ndash;30 specifically connects the Law with Hagar, and the source of this passage in Isaiah 54:1&ndash;7 concerning the calling again of a forsaken young wife who had more children than the married wife has similarities with Hagar&rsquo;s return to Abraham in Genesis 16. After Hagar&rsquo;s final rejection in Genesis 21, she wandered through the Paran wilderness carrying Ishmael &ndash; as Israel was carried by God through the same wilderness. The miraculous provision of water for Israel in this place is a further similarity, as is Ishmael&rsquo;s name, which means &lsquo;God heard the cry&rsquo; &ndash; as He did of His people in Egypt. Thus Hagar and Ishmael represent apostate Israel, and both of them were &ldquo;cast out&rdquo;. Romans 9:6&ndash;8 provides more confirmation: &ldquo;For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel... but, in Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God&rdquo;. Paul&rsquo;s reminder that the seed was to be traced through Isaac, and that the apostate Israel of the first century were not the true Israel of God but the children of the flesh, leads us to identify them with Ishmael, the prototype child of the flesh. In the same way, Jeremiah describes wayward Israel as a wild ass (Jer. 2:24), perhaps inviting comparison with Ishmael, the wild ass man (Gen. 16:12).</p>