Just a little interesting thought about the variations within the garden-o-Geth. scenes in the Gospels. Wells in his book Jesus of the Early Christians poses an interesting possibility that oral or early written tradition was being interpreted differently by Mark , Matt (26:52) and John (18:11)and Luke (22:51). The famous episode where someone in Jesus group strikes a servant of the Hp and takes off his ear is followed by a comment to the effect that the SWORD should be replaced to it's place in Matt and John yet in Luke the ear is replaced. Mark says nothing about it. WHY? possibly the expression in the early tradion was vague. Saying something ambiguous like " Let it be restored to it's place". Mark was unsure how to understand it so ommitted the whole comment, Matt understands it to be about the sword while Luke understandis it to be abou the lost ear. John may have been influenced by Matt.