Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it, and struck the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. And the name of the servant was Malchus.

Simon Peter therefore, having a sword, drew it, and smote the bondman of the high priest and cut off his right ear; and the bondman's name was Malchus.

Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it, and smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.

Simon Peter, therefore, having a sword, drew it, and struck the chief priest's servant, and cut off his right ear, and the name of the servant was Malchus,

Simon Peter, however, having a sword, drew it, and, aiming at the High Priest's servant, cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.

Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, took it out and gave the high priest's servant a blow, cutting off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.

At this, Simon Peter, who had a sword with him, drew it, and struck the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.

Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it. The Evangelist now describes the foolish zeal of Peter, who attempted to defend his Master in an unlawful manner. Boldly and courageously, indeed, he incurs great risk on Christ's account; but as he does not consider what his calling demands, and what God permits, his action is so far from deserving praise, that he is severely blamed by Christ. But let us learn that, in the person of Peter, Christ condemns every thing that men dare to attempt out of their own fancy. This doctrine is eminently worthy of attention; for nothing is more common than to defend, under the cloak of zeal, every thing that we do, as if it were of no importance whether God approved, or not, what men suppose to be right, whose prudence is nothing else than mere vanity. If we saw nothing faulty in the zeal of Peter, still we ought to be satisfied on this single ground, that Christ declares that he is displeased with it. But we see that it was not owing to him that Christ did not turn aside from death, and that his name was not exposed to perpetual disgrace; for, in offering violence to the captain and the soldiers, he acts the part of a highwayman, because he resists the power which God has appointed. Christ having already been more than enough hated by the world, this single deed might give plausibility to all the calumnies which his enemies falsely brought against him. Besides, it was exceedingly thoughtless in Peter to attempt to prove his faith by his sword, while he could not do so by his tongue. When he is called to make confession, he denies his Master; and now, without his Master's authority, he raises a tumult. Warned by so striking an example, let us learn to keep our zeal within proper bounds; and as the wantonness of our flesh is always eager to attempt more than God commands, let us learn that our zeal will succeed ill, whenever we venture to undertake any thing contrary to the word of God. It will sometimes happen that the commencement gives us flattering promises, but we shall at length be punished for our rashness. Let obedience, therefore, be the foundation of all that we undertake. We are also reminded, that those who have resolved to plead the cause of Christ do not always conduct themselves so skilfully as not to commit some fault; and, therefore, we ought the more earnestly to entreat the Lord to guide us in every action by the spirit of prudence.

See the notes at Matthew 26:51-52.
The servant's name was Malchus - His name is mentioned by neither of the other evangelists, nor is it said by the other evangelists who was the disciple that gave the blow. It is probable that both Peter and the servant were alive when the other gospels were written.

Having a sword - See the note on Luke 22:36.
Cut off his right ear - He probably designed to have cloven his scull in two, but God turned it aside, and only permitted the ear to be taken off; and this he would not have suffered, but only that he might have the opportunity of giving them a most striking proof of his Divinity in working an astonishing miracle on the occasion: see the notes on Matthew 26:51-56 (note).
The other three evangelists mention this transaction; but neither give the name of Peter nor of Malchus, probably because both persons were alive when they wrote; but it is likely both had been long dead before St. John published his history.

(5) Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.
(5) We ought to contain our zeal for God within the bounds of our calling.

Then Simon Peter having a sword,.... Girt about him, which he either wore in common, or particularly at the feast, as the Galilaeans are said to do, to preserve them from thieves and wild beasts by the way; or was one of the two the disciples had with them in the garden; or what Peter purposely furnished himself with to defend his master, taking a hint from what was said by him, Luke 22:36;
drew it; before Christ could give an answer to the question put by his disciples, whether they should smite or not, Luke 22:49; being encouraged thereunto by what Christ said, Luke 22:38; or by what he had just done in, striking the man to the ground; and being provoked by that servant's going to lay hold on Christ, and who it is probable was more forward and busy than any of the rest; for it appears from the other evangelists, that Peter did this, though he is not mentioned by name by any of the rest, just as they were seizing and apprehending Christ:
and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear; he doubtless struck at his head, and intended to have cleaved him down, but missed his aim, and took off his ear: the person is particularly described, that he was a servant, and the servant of the high priest, and he is mentioned also by name;
and the servant's name was Malchus; that if the truth of this relation was called in question, it might easily be looked into and examined, when it would appear that it was perfectly right. All the evangelists give an account of this action of Peter's, but none of them mention his name but this evangelist; perhaps the reason might be, that Peter was alive when the other evangelists wrote, and therefore it was not safe to say who it was that did it, lest he who was the minister of the circumcision, and dwelt among the Jews, should be persecuted for it, or their minds should be prejudiced against him on that account; but John writing his Gospel many years after his death, the reason for the concealment of his name no longer subsisted: nor indeed is the name of the high priest's servant mentioned by any other of the evangelists: John had, or however he writes, a more exact and particular account of this matter. This was a name frequent with the Syrians, Phoenicians, and Hebrews. Jerom (c) wrote the life of one Malchus, a monk or Eremite, who was by nation a Syrian; and Porphyry, that great enemy of Christianity, who was by birth a Tyrian, his original name was Malchus, as was his father's; and "which", in the Syrian, and his country dialect, as he himself (d) and others (e) say, signifies a "king". Josephus (f) speaks of one Cleodemus, whose name was Malchus, that wrote a history of the Hebrews. And some Jewish Rabbins were of this name; hence we read of , "R. Maluc" (g), and of , "R. Malcio" (h); the name is the same with Malluch, Nehemiah 10:4.
(c) Tom. I. fol. 87. (d) Porphyr. vita in Plotin. c. 17. (e) Eunapius in vita Porphyr. p. 16. (f) Antiqu. l. 1. c. 15. (g) T. Hieros. Succa, fol. 53. 3. & Bab. Bathra, fol. 16. 1. (h) T. Bab. Nidda, fol. 52. 1.

Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus--None of the other Evangelists mention the name either of the ardent disciple or of his victim. John being "known to the high priest" (John 18:15), the mention of the servant's name by him is quite natural, and an interesting mark of truth in a small matter. As to the right ear, specified both here and in Luke (Luke 22:50), the man was "likely foremost of those who advanced to seize Jesus, and presented himself in the attitude of a combatant; hence his right side would be exposed to attack. The blow of Peter was evidently aimed vertically at his head" [WEBSTER and WILKINSON].

Then Simon Peter - No other evangelist names him. Nor could they safely. But St. John, writing after his death, might do it without any such inconvenience.