John identified the aggressor as Peter and the wounded man as Malchus ( John 18:10). Some have taken the description of this man as "the slave of the high priest" as indicating that he may have been the leader of the soldiers. [1] Perhaps the other evangelists did not record Peter and Malchus" names to focus attention on Jesus. His control of this situation, even though He was the one being arrested, is an obvious emphasis of Matthew"s. Peter"s response was predictable in view of his earlier protestations ( Matthew 26:33-35). Peter"s courage was admirable if misdirected. He rushed in to defend Jesus. However, Jesus" prohibition of violence and His submission to arrest made Peter look foolish. Evidently the disciples had brought two swords with them in view of Jesus" predictions ( Luke 22:38). Probably Judas" guards did not restrain Peter because Jesus did. [source][source][source]
"Peter had argued with the Word, denied the Word, and disobeyed the Word (when he went to sleep). Now he ran ahead of the Word." [2][source]
Jesus" words to Peter in Matthew 26:52 showed that violence in defense of Himself was not proper. Jesus did not mean that violence in any situation is wrong. [3] Jesus had at His disposal more than six thousand angels to assist Him and each of His11faithful disciples ( Matthew 26:53). He did not need Peter"s help. [source][source][source]
"It is characteristic of this gospel that the authority and kingly majesty of Jesus should be suggested at a moment when every hope seemed to have perished." [4][source]
It was necessary for Jesus to experience arrest to fulfill many Scriptures, all that pertained to His death and resurrection. Jesus again voiced His commitment to the Father"s will ( Matthew 26:54; cf. Matthew 26:39; Matthew 26:42). [source][source][source]