THE LAST WEEK OF JESUS' PUBLIC MINISTRY AND HIS CRUCIFIXION

The Second Stage of the Jewish Trial - Before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin at Night

Matthew 26:57, 59-68; Mark 14:53, 55-65; Luke 22:54, 63-65; John 18:24

-“The appearance before Annas was a preliminary one and without legal or official significance.

 It was held for the purpose of seeking sufficient grounds for condemnation which might then be

 produced and used in the trial to follow.  It was wholly unproductive of the hoped-for results and

 Annas, smarting under the sting of the Lord’s rebuke and likely embarrassed by the illegal and

 unjustified attack on Jesus by the officer, terminated the interview and sent him bound to

 Caiaphas” (Woods, pg 380).

-Jesus now stood before the Sanhedrin.  “Caiaphas was the high priest.  Those assembled with

 him were the chief priests.  These, with the elders of Israel and scribes, constituted the Sanhedrin -

 the Jewish high court.  After the destruction of the national independence it remained as the

 highest tribunal of justice among the Jews” (Dorris, pg 346).

            -Due to Jesus’ complete innocence, the Sanhedrin had absolutely nothing to hold against Him. 

             How frustrated they must have been!  They had tried and tried and tried to find something

             against Him.  Over and over again they had attempted to entrap Him in His words.  Each time

             they had failed.  Yet, His innocence was not going to stand in the way of their deep hatred

             against Him and their desires to have Him executed.  Therefore, the efforts of fabricating

             false charges began.

            -Dorris makes an interesting observation regarding the Sanhedrin’s attempt to find false

             witnesses and then correlate their untrue stories:  “Why are they seeking witnesses now?  Why

             did they not have them ready, such as they intended to accept?  The explanation is found in the

             suddenness with which they had decided upon the arrest.  They had intended to postpone it until

             after the feast (Mark 14:1,2), but when Judas came rushing to them the evening before, they

             yielded to his urgency and resolved to avail themselves of the opportunity of Gethsemane.  They

             must now hunt their witnesses.  Matthew (26:59) says they ‘sought false witness’” (pg 347).

 -The Law plainly taught that any accusations had to be established and correlated by at

 least two witnesses (Deut. 17:6, 19:15).

            -The required number was not a problem for “many false witnesses came” (Matt. 26:60).

             Yet, their fabricated stories did not agree with one another.  Even when it appeared for

             a moment that two witnesses - corrupting Jesus’ words recorded in John 2:19 - might

             finally be in agreement with one another, the hopes of the Sanhedrin once again fell

             when “not even in this respect was their testimony consistent” (Mark 14:59, NIV).

-Perceiving the ineffectiveness of the proceedings and undoubtedly bothered by Jesus’ abiding

 silence, Caiaphas interjects with his own questioning.  Unable to formulate any charges, the

 high priest gets right to the point of contention amongst the Jewish leaders - that being the

 identity of Jesus.  “I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ,

 the Son of God” (Matt. 26:53).

            -“No man can be compelled to testify against himself, but he knew the claims of Jesus, and

             realized that if Jesus repudiated them he would be shamed forever, and if he asserted them he

             could be charged with blasphemy.  Taking advantage, therefore, of the situation, Caiaphas put

             the question with the usual formula of an oath, thus adding moral power to it, for, under

             ordinary circumstances, one was held guilty if he refused to answer when thus adjured

             (Lev. V. I.).  When their own witnesses failed these rulers called the ‘faithful witness’ -

             I Tim. vi. 13; Rev. v. I.” (McGarvey/Pendleton, pg 698).

-Jesus plainly confirmed His identity with the words, “I am” (Mark 14:62).  In addition, Jesus

 indicated that the time would come when they would see Him in His position of power and

 authority and in the role of Judge.

            -In regards to Jesus’ use of the expression, “the Son of man sitting on the right hand of

             power,” Dorris noted that these words “...would remind these rulers of the expression of

             Daniel, where ‘there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man.’  But their

             intentions were so determined on putting the accused to death that meekness, innocence,

             and scripture all pass for nothing...Jesus had now said all and more than his enemies could

             desire.  He had proclaimed himself the Messiah of the prophets, the Son of man of Daniel,

             and the actual Son of God and sharer of his authority” (pg 350).

            -Regarding the phrase, “coming in the clouds of heaven,” Henry made an interesting

             observation:  “...this refers to another prophecy concerning the Son of man (Dan 7:13-14),

             which is applied to Christ (Luke 1:33), when he came to destroy Jerusalem; so terrible was the

             judgment, and so sensible the indications of the wrath of the Lamb in it, that it might be called a

             visible appearance of Christ; but doubtless it has reference to the general judgment; to this day

             he appeals, and summons them to an appearance, then and there to answer for what they are now

             doing.”

-Caiaphas, having heard the very words he hoped to hear, hypocritically acted out as if he was

 grieved by them.  He called an end to the proceedings at that time, called out the charge of

 blasphemy and asked for the verdict.  The response:  “He is guilty of death” (Matt. 26:66).

            -“This was not the final, formal sentence, but the mere determination of the council at the

             preliminary hearing” (McGarvey/Pendleton, pg 699).

-Following this unjust declaration, Jesus was blindfolded, physically abused, spat upon and mocked. 

 (For the Jews, as for others, to spit in one’s face was a severe insult and display of deep disrespect.)

 “And they said many other things against him, blaspheming him” (Luke 22:65, ESV).

            -“Especially reprehensible in this glimpse of the mockeries provided by Luke, since it took

             place in the court of the high priests of Israel, was the fact of its being promulgated, or at least

             allowed, by the religious leaders of the Jews.  It might have been expected at the hands of

             the Roman soldiery, long accustomed to deeds of blood and violence; but it was

             especially shameful that the priests would have condoned such a thing” (Coffman, Luke,

             pg 482).

-“Jesus, having stood out for examination, is now given back to the officers to be led away into the

 council chamber.  These officers received Jesus with many indignities.  They seek to make his high

 claims contemptible, and to make it appear that instead of being divine he is hardly worthy to be

 regarded as human” (McGarvey/Pendleton, pg 699).

            -“He suffered as a lamb yet conquered as a lion.  He is overcome and yet he is the victor”

             (Dorris, pg 352).