The Illegal Trial and Crucifixion of Christ, Part 1
By Pastor Hal Mayer
Dear friends,
Welcome to Keep the Faith Ministry once again. Today, we’re going to begin a series on the trial and crucifixion of Christ and the events surrounding it. The crucifixion was the centerpiece of the ages. But, if you think the events were unique and only happened at the time of Christ, you are mistaken. We are going to review them and apply them to our time, for they are prophetic. The enemy despises Christ, but he can no longer access Him. So, he attacks His followers in the same way and using the same methods.
So, let’s begin with prayer. Father in heaven, how grateful we are for the magnificent sacrifice you have made for our salvation, my salvation. Without Jesus and His sacrifice, humanity would be without hope. Please help us understand and prepare for the great trial that is going to come to all of us that are living at the end of time. The abuse that was heaped upon Christ also abused the Law of God. In order to get Christ, the Sanhedrin had to go through extraordinary measures to condemn Him. Help us to understand that this is the enemy’s battle plan and his operating procedure. We are much weaker than Christ for we have sinned and sinned greatly and repeatedly. Please give us the spirit of repentance and forgive our sins. Please help us to know that with Christ by our sides we can withstand the enemy’s worst accusations and treatment as well as overcome our sins. Please be with us today as we study, in Jesus name, amen.
As we begin, let me quote a short, inspired statement from the Bible Commentary, Vol 5, page 1105.
“The scene in the judgment hall in Jerusalem is a symbol of what will take place in the closing scenes of this earth’s history.”
What took place at the arrest, trial, and crucifixion of Christ will be demonstrated again in the courts, the judgment, and treatment of God’s people in these last days. If you thought that it was going to be easy to navigate this time, think again. A symbol or a type is a form of prophecy that will certainly come true. If a type or symbol is worth anything, it will happen again. Again, the world will accept Christ, the truth, or they will accept Satan, the liar, the first great rebel, the thief, apostate, and murderer. The world is full of lies these days, but this is only a prelude to the lies that will be believed and seal the destiny of millions who will prefer lies to the truth. Let us read another passage from Patriarch and Prophets, page 64.
“When His mission as a teacher should be ended, He must be delivered into the hands of wicked men and be subjected to every insult and torture that Satan could inspire them to inflict. He must die the cruelest of deaths, lifted up between the heavens and the earth as a guilty sinner. He must pass long hours of agony so terrible that angels could not look upon it, but would veil their faces from the sight. He must endure anguish of soul, the hiding of His Father’s face, while the guilt of transgression—the weight of the sins of the whole world—should be upon Him.”
Will God’s people have to endure anger, insult, torture and injustice, similar to Christ? Are they ready for that? Turn with me in your Bibles to the gospel of Matthew. We will begin with chapter 26:3-5. Jesus is in the garden of Gethsemane. His disciples are with Him except Judas. Jesus has prayed and agonized with God until great drops of sweat mingled with blood came down His face. A mighty angel was sent to minister to Christ. Gabriel, who stands in God’s presence, and who took Lucifer’s place was the one who encouraged Christ that He could conquer the great enemy of mankind. Christ was strengthened to face the ordeal of injustice and abuse on every hand and be murdered by the very people He came to minister unto and save.
“Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people.”
The chief priests, scribes and elders had determined that they would have to kill Christ if they were going to retain their influence, power, and authority and not have their evil deeds exposed. This is more than cancel culture. It was more than marginalizing His influence. It was deadly animosity. They were so angry with Christ over the fact that He claimed to be the son of God and had given evidence to prove it, that they were determined to kill Him. Jesus was gaining influence daily with the people and the whole world as it were going after Him. This was a massive existential threat to their corporate structure. Their corruption was exposed, and this could not be tolerated in any form.
This will be repeated again in the soon-coming crisis. Listen to this from Great Controversy, page 607.
“As the controversy extends into new fields and the minds of the people are called to God’s downtrodden law, Satan is astir. The power attending the message will only madden those who oppose it. The clergy will put forth almost superhuman efforts to shut away the light lest it should shine upon their flocks. By every means at their command they will endeavor to suppress the discussion of these vital questions. The church appeals to the strong arm of civil power, and, in this work, papists and Protestants unite. As the movement for Sunday enforcement becomes more bold and decided, the law will be invoked against commandment keepers. They will be threatened with fines and imprisonment, and some will be offered positions of influence, and other rewards and advantages, as inducements to renounce their faith. But their steadfast answer is: “Show us from the word of God our error”—the same plea that was made by Luther under similar circumstances. Those who are arraigned before the courts make a strong vindication of the truth, and some who hear them are led to take their stand to keep all the commandments of God. Thus light will be brought before thousands who otherwise would know nothing of these truths.”
This extreme decision of the Sanhedrin was the result of the conflict between authoritarianism, which removes transparency, and accountability. The Sanhedrin knew that if this were done in the light of day, they would be opposed by the people and even some members of the Sanhedrin. So, it had to be done in a way that was secret, and quickly, before the people could react. Does this sound familiar? Do we have such behavior in our day? Do you think this kind of behavior will increase?
In Judaism in the time of Christ, the law required that everything be done in the light of day to prevent a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, in capital cases (cases where the death penalty could be inflicted), all judicial proceedings by night were prohibited by an inflexible rule of Hebrew law. It was not just that the trial itself could not be done at night, but all proceedings including arrests, preliminary examinations, or anything else, were to be done in the light of day. This rule was followed in the arrest of Peter and John on another occasion in Acts 4:1-3.
“And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them, being grieved that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead. And they laid hands on them, and put them in hold unto the next day: for it was now eventide.”
This tells us that the Sanhedrin did not want to proceed at night probably because they knew that it would further decrease their credibility. Peter and John were arrested sometime in the early evening and held overnight in the jail until the next day when they could be legally arraigned. But the scriptures are clear that this was not followed in the case of Christ, as evidenced by the fact that those who captured Him bore “lanterns and torches and weapons.” Let’s read it from John 18:3.
“Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.”
Also, when Judas left the Last Supper the scriptures tell us that it was night. While we recognize the spiritual darkness that was in the heart of Judas, the verse clearly tells us that it was indeed night. If the Sanhedrin had obeyed the law, they would not have sent a band with Judas to arrest Christ. They would have waited until the next day to arrest Him.
Imagine Judas coming to Gethsemane at midnight leading a mob of quite a mixture of the sophisticated and the rabble. This great multitude was a fulfillment of scripture. It was an interesting mix of Roman soldiers, who were gentiles, a number of priests, including the High Priest, Caiaphas, and the elders, and the servants of the High Priest, all Jews. They had all come to make certain that Jesus would be taken into custody. Psalm 3:1, 2 foretold this event.
“LORD, how are they increased that trouble me! many are they that rise up against me. Many there be which say of my soul, there is no help for him in God.”
Desire of Ages, page 695 explains what happened.
“When the mob entered the garden, [Judas] had led the way, closely followed by the high priest.”
Caiaphas was so vested in this arrest that he actually came personally with the mob and followed closely behind Judas to make sure that it happened. He apparently left his priestly dignity at his palace to attend the arrest.
The arrest was also illegal because Jewish law forbade any friend or former associate turned traitor or informer to be involved, for there is a risk of enmity that could bias the judges. Therefore, Judas could not be the one, according to ancient Jewish law, to be involved in the arrest of Jesus. But all that did not matter to Caiaphas. This shows how quickly rules of justice can be cast aside when there is extreme animus toward the accused. In the case of Christ there was no lack of hostility toward Him from Caiaphas and from the Sanhedrin, and there was no lack of violating the rules. They had suddenly become merely suggestions. Do you think this is the way God’s people will be treated at the end of time? Do you sense that a society will tolerate injustice when they’re very angry at the accused? What happened after 9/11? Was there concern about the human rights of the terrorists? No there wasn’t. They were held in secret prisons and black op sites where they were tortured by waterboarding, and other painful cruelties. I would suggest that you get your mind ready for a complete overthrow of justice and equity. Over the last few years we have seen many cases of methods used that would never have been allowed in less dramatic times.
It is clearly evident from the scriptures that the arrest of Jesus would not have taken place on the occasion of the Passover, and therefore probably not at all, if Judas had not deserted and betrayed Him. After all, the Savior had appeared and preached in the temple, and every opportunity was afforded to effect a legal arrest on legal charges with a view to a legal determination. But the enemies of Jesus did not want this. They were waiting to affect His capture in some out of the way place at the dead of night, when His friends could not defend Him and their murderous proceedings would not reach the eye and ear of the public. This could not be accomplished as long as His intimate friends were faithful to Him. So, it was a happy surprise to the members of the Sanhedrin when they learned that Judas was willing to betray his master.
Now Judas was leading the mob and was the first to act. He tried to separate himself from the rabble and pretended to have nothing to do with them. But Jesus saw through this ruse and asked him if he was betraying the Son of Man with a kiss.
Judas had never really grasped or remotely appreciated the spiritual grandeur of Christ even though he was associated with Him for three years. Selfishness had so blinded his eyes and steeled his heart that he did not have the capacity to see Christ for what He was. In contrast, John understood that Christ was God. And he never really wavered in this conviction even though his actions motivated by fear didn’t align with his belief. Judas on the other hand, always had questions about the claims of Christ. Those little doubts were fanned into disbelief by his selfishness and petty greed.
The picture that we have of Judas is a tragedy that has been repeated many times over and over again in the history of the world. While everyone that claims to be a Christian has probably betrayed Christ time and time again, it is not so much the betrayal that is to be condemned by heaven, as evil and contemptible as it is, it is the obstinate and determined resistance, the hardening of the heart to repentance that ultimately condemns a man.
While Judas was attracted to Christ and charmed by Him, he never really placed Christ above humanity. He saw Him as a superior politician to any that had ever existed and a leader and successful revolutionary. He saw His miraculous power as very useful to the cause. But Judas doubted that Christ was indeed God. His betrayal of Christ was done to see if His claims were valid and force Christ to act on His own behalf. He had convinced himself that if Christ delivered Himself and declared His right to the throne of David, he would believe. If not, he would be justified in his unbelief. Judas could see that the revolution that he was hoping for was not proceeding in the way he thought it should. Disaffection and treachery began to grow in his heart, especially after Jesus was deserted by many of His followers at Capernaum.
Another illegality was also in play. Ancient Jewish law also forbade arrests made without a court order. No court had ordered the arrest of Jesus and therefore it could not be done legally. Consequently, it had to be done secretly. Now let us turn to John 18:12, 13.
“Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him, and led him away to Annas first; for he was father-in-law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year.”
Twenty-three years before the death of Christ, when He was about 10 years old, the Romans took over the appointment of the High Priest. Leading up to this time the high priesthood increasingly became a political position and less and less a spiritual one. But when Rome seized control it rendered it a political position only. And it certainly took on the characteristics of a political appointment. And those who attained it were wealthy, used their wealth to get the appointment and then they used the appointment to increase their wealth. Much evil was the result from this. The jockeying for the position among the priests was shocking and even descended to subtlety and murder. The one who was the High Priest had to have “eyes in the back of his head” so to speak, to watch his back lest an enemy’s dagger would assassinate him. Consequently, the High Priest had to make sure that those around him benefited from their friendship with him and would have no reason to be disaffected from him.
Jesus was first sent to a corrupt and political Annas who was the head of the controlling and officiating family in Jerusalem at the time. The people recognized him as the high priest, though he was deposed from the position a number of years prior by the Roman proconsul. But his counsel was still sought and carried out as if it was the voice of God. Through the hushed and darkened streets, the noisy mob rushed Jesus to Annas.
Annas, the ex-high priest, was the father-in-law of Caiaphas and was very experienced in the politics of the church. You ought to know a little about his character. He held the office of High Priest for seven years. But even though he was the ex-high priest at the time of Christ’s trial and crucifixion, he was power behind Caiaphas. And he wielded that power very effectively. He always got his way, especially with those who he thought were rather rogue or politically incorrect. He was consulted on all matters of grave importance.
Prior to his time in office, the High Priest’s position was very unstable because of “Roman interference.” But Annas alone, a political animal, preserved all its authority, except tokens that the Romans demanded. For 50 years this high office remained without interruption in the Annas family. Five of his sons successfully assumed its dignity. His family was even known as the “sacerdotal family,” as if this office had become hereditary. This could not have been without Annas powerful and persuasive influence. He was very well connected both within the politics of the Jews in Jerusalem and with the Roman authorities. He was well-known to Pilate. Annas was in charge of the important duties of the temple, but his spirit and the spirit of his family was haughty, audacious, and cruel.
Annas was cunning and shrewd and was very experienced and skillful in the methods to be used to secure Christ’s condemnation. And he was determined to do so. This was too important of a prisoner for him to take a casual interest. He must be present for the examination of the prisoner. He feared that the less experienced Caiaphas might fail of securing the condemnation of Christ.
I will just mention a few other High Priests around this time that participated in the trial of Jesus. Joazer was High Priest for six years in the latter days of Herod the Great and the first years of Archaeus. He was a son of one Simon, a citizen of Jerusalem, the son of Boethus, a very prominent priest in Alexandria at the time. Boethus’ family had been the dynasty in control of the High Priesthood prior to Annas family. At the time of the trial Joazer was already an old man, and very experienced in the politics of the church.
Acts of the Apostles 4:6 informs us of some of the other members of the Great Sanhedrin.
“And Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem.”
John and Alexander were common priests, as was Ananias Ben Nebedeus Who was also a member of the Sanhedrin. Helcias too was a simple priest and was the treasurer of the temple. He was probably the one who gave Judas Iscariot the 30 pieces of silver for Christ’s betrayal. Sceva was one of the principal priests. He is spoken of in Acts 19 referring to his seven sons who gave themselves up to witchcraft.
The priests were formidable and were ruthless rulers with little sympathy for common people. They were the wealthy elite power brokers in Jerusalem. Will God’s few faithful people face these kind of leaders in the end of time? Of course, they will. Expect no mercy. We are advised that some of our worst enemies will be former friends and even colleagues. Here it is from Great Controversy, page 608.
“As the storm approaches, a large class who have professed faith in the third angel’s message, but have not been sanctified through obedience to the truth, abandon their position and join the ranks of the opposition. By uniting with the world and partaking of its spirit, they have come to view matters in nearly the same light; and when the test is brought, they are prepared to choose the easy, popular side. Men of talent and pleasing address, who once rejoiced in the truth, employ their powers to deceive and mislead souls. They become the most bitter enemies of their former brethren. When Sabbathkeepers are brought before the courts to answer for their faith, these apostates are the most efficient agents of Satan to misrepresent and accuse them, and by false reports and insinuations to stir up the rulers against them.”
These men had left the faith although they were still members of the church and were leaders attached to the Sanhedrin. As mentioned earlier, the office of High Priest, which led to a seat with the Great Sanhedrin had become no more than a political position, and was no longer a spiritual office as directed by God through Moses. The priesthood ordained by Moses was after the order of Aaron, known as the Aaronic priesthood. The title of High Priest was merely a designation of the chairman, if you will, of the Sanhedrin who presided over them. From documents that exist, such as Josephus, some of these men were personally dishonorable. They obtained and maintained the office of High Priest in utter disregard of the order established by God and were but wicked intruders. Now they had become persecutors of Christ and condemned anyone that sided with Him.
Will some leaders leave the faith today but still be members of the church been in leadership positions? It is almost unbelievable that men of such noble “priestly” positions could act with such despicable behavior. These men, though descendants of Aaron, and appointees of Rome to govern the affairs of the Jews had taken holy positions originally given by Moses, and completely debased them by their greed, their love of notoriety, and power. These were men who were no more holy than the gentiles for whom they had complete disdain. Such was the spirit of equity and kindness that characterized the chief judges of Christ. The Talmud actually breaks out in a damning expression of these families.
“What a plague is the family of Simon Boethus; cursed be their lances! What a plague is the family of Ananos (or Annas); cursed be their hissing of vipers! What a plague the family of Cantharus (scribes); cursed be their pens! What a plague is the family of Ishmael Ben Phabi; cursed it be their fists! They are high priests themselves, their sons are treasurers, their sons-in-law are commanders, and their servants strike the people with staves.”
Listen to this statement from the Review and Herald, December 17, 1872.
“The priesthood had become so corrupt that the priests had no scruples in engaging in the most dishonest and criminal acts to accomplish their designs. Those who assumed the office of high priest prior to, and at, the time of Christ’s first advent, were not men divinely appointed to the sacred work. They had eagerly aspired to the office through love of power and show. They desired a position where they could have authority, and practice fraud under a garb of piety, and thereby escape detection. The high priest held a position of power and importance. He was not only counselor and mediator, but judge; and there was no appeal from his decision…. Men of corrupt hearts sought the distinguished office of high priest, and frequently obtained it by bribery and assassination.”
No wonder the people were cowed and controlled by the priests. Do you think that since the scenes in the judgment hall in Jerusalem is a symbol of what will take place at the end of time, that we will have those that stand in the sacred desk that will be just as corrupt and evil as the Sanhedrin in Christ day? Could there be men that hold high positions in the church that will have wicked hearts and will be as much under the control of Satan as the Jewish council? Do you think that the antitype is being formed right now and is even beginning to act like these men who condemned Christ? Have we not seen this spirit acted out toward those who promote the truth and follow Christ’s counsel in modern times?
Caiaphas was High Priest and the presiding officer of the Sanhedrin. His was a relatively long reign being 17 or 18 years. He was a Sadducee and was obviously one of the bitterest enemies of Jesus. His heart was full of wickedness and he was acting under the inspiration of Satan. Under a gorgeous priestly dress, he was fulfilling the work of the enemy of God. The religion of Caiaphas was a sham and a pretense. He interpreted gain to be godliness. Thus, he was ambitious, corrupt, proud, arrogant, overbearing and intolerant, but weak and vacillating in character. Listen to these comments from Desire of Ages, page 539, 540, 703.
“Caiaphas was a proud and cruel man, overbearing and intolerant. Among his family connections were Sadducees, proud, bold, reckless, full of ambition and cruelty, which they hid under a cloak of pretended righteousness… Even if Jesus were innocent, urged the high priest, He must be put out of the way. He was troublesome, drawing the people to Himself, and lessening the authority of the rulers. He was only one; it was better that He should die than that the authority of the rulers should be weakened. If the people were to lose confidence in their rulers, the national power would be destroyed.”
“He himself, though wanting in force of character, was fully as severe, heartless, and unscrupulous as was Annas. He would leave no means untried to destroy Jesus.”
And listen to this from the Bible Commentary, page 1105.
“The position of priest was bought and sold like goods of merchandise. Thus it was that Caiaphas obtained the office…. He was bought and sold to work wickedness. He never knew what it was to be obedient to God. He had the form of godliness, and this gave him the power to oppress.”
“With Caiaphas the Jewish high priesthood ended. The service had become base and corrupt. It had no longer any connection with God. Truth and righteousness were hateful in the eyes of the priests. They were tyrannical and deceptive, full of selfish, ambitious schemes. Such ministration could make nothing perfect; for it was itself utterly corrupt. The grace of God had naught to do with it.
“Virtually Caiaphas was no high priest. He wore the priestly robes, but he had no vital connection with God. He was uncircumcised in heart. Proud and overbearing, he proved his unworthiness ever to have worn the garments of the high priest. He had no authority from heaven for occupying the position. He had not one ray of light from God to show him what the work of the priest was, or for what the office was instituted.”
One author writes,
“It was a sorer offense to teach things contrary to the ordinances of the scribes, then to teach things contrary to the written Law.” (Bevan)
Thus, Jesus could say that they set aside the Law of God and substituted the commandments of men in its place, such as in Matthew 15:9.
“But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
Jesus said words that exposed the hypocrisy and greed of the priests and the Sanhedrin. His words were sharper than a two-edged sword and cut them deeply. He publicly unmasked them, for which they never forgave Him. Hypocrisy never forgives that. Can we be astonished at the murderous hatred which these false and ambitious men held against Christ? When He exposed the corrupt interior of these whited sepulchers wearing this semblance of piety, the hatred that they already cherished for Him grew into a frenzied intensity. Such were the men composing the council of priests when the Sanhedrin assembled to judge Jesus Christ the Messiah and Son of God!
The charges were numerous against Jesus. From the Sanhedrin’s perspective, His offenses were exaggerated. He had been divisive. He had flattered the poor and railed against the rich. He denounced whole cities such as Capernaum, Bethsaida and Chorazin. He hung out with publicans, harlots, and drunkards, under the pretense of reforming them. He subverted the laws and institutions of the Mosaic Commonwealth and substituted an unauthorized legislation of His own. He commended the idolatrous Samaritan as of greater worth than the holy priest and the pious Levite. He pretended to work miracles but refused to do them when requested by the priests and rabbis. He had condemned the solemn sanctions of their holy religion and had sat down to eat with publicans and sinners with unwashed hands. He had disregarded the obligations of the Sabbath and had not attended the Jewish feasts with any regularity. He had declared that God could be worshipped in any other place as well as the holy temple, which was one of His most serious offenses. And if that wasn’t bad enough, He had openly and violently interfered with the sacred temple services by driving away the vendors of animals gathered there for holy sacrifices. He had claimed to be able to destroy the holy temple and then to rebuild it in three days. And worst of all, He had blasphemed by claiming to be akin to God.
We understand these charges as outrightly false, or partial, one-sided truths, but that was the way the Sanhedrin perceived them. They were charged with preserving and defending the institution of the church from any and all threats. And Jesus had threatened their little empire with His public biting criticisms.
When a group of people in authority are challenged to be accountable by someone that is not in authority, they bring all their petty grievances and pile on them as if they are substantive and adds weight to the issues that they will use against the challenger, who is, of course, absent. These petty grievances are meant to bias the members of the group and harden them against the challenger. These grievances, though in the background, enter into their reckoning of the verdict. It can get quite seedy and negative. Those in authority try to avoid any light shone on their actions and they resist accountability. I would ask, have you seen these kinds of behavior in recent times? Here is a statement from Great Controversy, page 607.
“As the people go to their former teachers with the eager inquiry, are these things so? the ministers present fables, prophesy smooth things, to soothe their fears and quiet the awakened conscience. But since many refuse to be satisfied with the mere authority of men and demand a plain “Thus saith the Lord,” the popular ministry, like the Pharisees of old, filled with anger as their authority is questioned, will denounce the message as of Satan and stir up the sin-loving multitudes to revile and persecute those who proclaim it.”
Authority of religious leaders seems to be at the center of the conflict both in Jesus day and in our day. Underneath authority is accountability. Leaders don’t like their authority questioned nor their lack of accountability exposed. Church leaders will do anything to avoid exposure of their lack of accountability. They will offer inducements and other rewards, incentives and advantages to silence the voice of protest. Quite frankly, that happens all the time today. If that doesn’t work, they will threaten members with church punishment. If that doesn’t work, they will try to cancel them or marginalize them and remove them from church offices or positions. The worst punishments are reserved for pastors who are generally conservative, and are not in line with the dominant narrative. Often these pastors try to do things in their churches and with their churches that are out of the common order of things and maybe even unconventional (but in harmony with the Spirit of God). They will be removed from being delegates to official meetings, or from being on committees. They will even go so far as to relieve them of their pastoral post. They will use the church manual when it serves their purpose, but they will work outside of the church manual if it doesn’t. The trial of Jesus was illegal. Likewise, church leaders will abuse members and abuse the process and work outside of the church manual. The same principle is at play in our day. Sadly, in this way leaders will eventually work to limit the Holy Spirit and resist Him.
Though the multitude of charges against Christ were, no doubt, in the minds and hearts of the members of the Sanhedrin, only two of them could be brought to the trial as having any direct connection with the case; His claim about destroying and rebuilding the temple and His claim to kinship with God. The rest could only be considered as circumstantial and not worthy of death in a capital trial. However, they influenced and prejudiced the minds of the members of the Sanhedrin against Christ.
This is very common today. The church is considered to be the voice of God. So, it has a leg up on any issue they want to prosecute. There is first an attempt to discredit him so that others of his judges are predisposed before they hear the case. It also helps them to feel justified in the miscarriage of justice. And the accused is hit with a bewildering and confusing array of accusations, some of which he has never even countenanced in his mind let alone carried out. If taken one at a time and duly considered, many accusations have answers that the accusers don’t want to hear and would fall as trivial to the ground. Also, there is mischaracterization or misinterpretations of the realities, designed to exaggerate the case. These are also piled on the accused without question as to their veracity. This kind of behavior was not allowed in Jewish law, and likewise it is not allowed in courts of justice today. But it happened in ancient Judea, and it happens today, nevertheless, if not in courts, in organizations and institutions. And with the media accomplices today the effect is heightened. Thus, justice is trampled upon and the innocent is condemned. Will this become a feature of end-time trials and persecution? Certainly. When people are frightened, they look for a scapegoat or a common enemy. He is demonized and due process is truncated. What happened to Christ is a prophetic prototype of what will happen to His faithful people in the last great conflict.
There is another principle that is continually upheld in ancient Hebrew Scriptures and law. These were related to the conditions allowed to the accused. They were publicity of the proceedings and liberty of the accused. An accused man was never subjected to private or secret examinations, lest, in his perplexity, he provided damaging testimony against himself. Thus, the law required there to be a public hearing. The reason for this rule was to protect the accused. The preliminary examinations of Christ by Annas and Caiaphas were illegal for a second reason. They were conducted at night, and they were only preliminary examinations designed to find a reason to condemn Christ to death. This was forbidden in Jewish law. A further violation of definite and unbending Hebrew code was that Christ was not at liberty, he was bound. He was under the control of His judges before he was condemned.
Desire of Ages, page 698 tells us about why Jesus was taken before Annas first.
“Annas was the head of the officiating priestly family, and in deference to his age he was recognized by the people as high priest. His counsel was sought and carried out as the voice of God. He must first see Jesus a captive to priestly power. He must be present at the examination of the prisoner, for fear that the less-experienced Caiaphas might fail of securing the object for which they were working. His artifice, cunning, and subtlety must be used on this occasion; for, at all events, Christ’s condemnation must be secured.”
The illegality is everywhere in this statement. It also shows us that the examination was illegal because they were trying to draw from Christ some statement that they could use against Him. Annas assumed Him to be guilty before there was a preponderance of evidence that showed his guilt from other sources. This was a principle of the inquisition in the Middle Ages. A person arraigned before the inquisition was assumed guilty of some violation. It was the job of his interrogators to draw from him the evidence. This was absolutely banned in ancient Hebrew law and it is absolutely banned today. But sometimes it happens.
Can you imagine standing before a judge that is trying to find a reason to condemn you rather than listen to evidence that defends you? With our understanding of modern principles of British and American law, we will find this rather exasperating and quite unfair. But somehow Annas and Caiaphas didn’t think so. They felt justified in treating this particular prisoner in this way. They trampled on many of His rights and on the law itself.
It reminds me of some comparatively recent events after 9/11. Prisoners on terrorism charges were held without a hearing indefinitely. They were subjected to methods of torture and coercion in order to find reasons to condemn them as well as collect information on others. I’m not defending or justifying the terrorists. But at the end of the time, God’s faithful people will be subject to this kind of treatment. Here it is from Great Controversy, page 581.
“God’s word has given warning of the impending danger; let this be unheeded, and the Protestant world will learn what the purposes of Rome really are, only when it is too late to escape the snare. She is silently growing into power. Her doctrines are exerting their influence in legislative halls, in the churches, and in the hearts of men. She is piling up her lofty and massive structures in the secret recesses of which her former persecutions will be repeated. Stealthily and unsuspectedly she is strengthening her forces to further her own ends when the time shall come for her to strike. All that she desires is vantage ground, and this is already being given her. We shall soon see and shall feel what the purpose of the Roman element is.”
Before Annas Jesus was asked about His disciples and His doctrine. His response reminded Annas that He knew His rights. We will read it from John 18:19-23.
“The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?”
Jesus understood that He could not be used to condemn Himself, but that witnesses were to accuse Him. He planted Himself squarely upon His legal rights as a Jewish citizen. This was the voice of pure Hebrew justice, founded upon the broad principles of their judicial procedure and essentially telling the unjust judge that the first duty of his office was to follow the law and judge righteously. Even when He was slapped, He appealed for protection to the procedure designed to safeguard His rights as a prisoner. A prisoner was not to be abused or tortured in an effort to get evidence from him. While Jesus should not, and did not demand His rights, He reminded His judge that He was responsible to act righteously according to the law. This is akin to Jesus asking “Why am I to incriminate myself when the law forbids such a thing? Why not call witnesses as the law requires? Let them testify of any wrongdoing. That way I will be legally condemned and convicted. If I am not guilty of a crime, why am I thus mistreated.” But His judges were not interested in justice, they were only interested in His condemnation. Whatever means used to get that condemnation were justifiable in their eyes. Does this sound familiar?
Do you remember the comment in Desire of Ages that Annas had to use cunning and subtlety to get the condemnation of Christ? Let’s read it again from page 689.
“His artifice, cunning, and subtlety must be used on this occasion; for, at all events, Christ’s condemnation must be secured.”
Christ was the greatest challenge to his authority and purposes that Annas had ever met. Christ had many times silenced the priests and scribes with their subtle and deceptive questioning, much to their chagrin. Annas knew Christ could read his inmost soul, though he could never admit it publicly. So, he had to use his cunning skills to unite the Sanhedrin against Christ. But Annas was silenced by Christ’s decisive answer.
Christ suffered keenly under abuse and insult at the hands of those who He had created and for whom He was making an infinite sacrifice. But He never expressed anger or retaliated against His accusers. Christ did nothing and said nothing that could give His accusers an advantage; yet He was bound, signifying that He was condemned. This was illegal under Jewish law. Yet there must be a pretense of justice.
Do we have similar circumstances today? Is there a pretense of justice in the way church leaders sometimes act regarding those who they consider to be rogue? Do they pile on accusations against those who expose their motives too much?
Eventually, Jesus was sent to Caiaphas. Next month we’ll explore more of the trial of Christ to understand a little of what we will face in the coming crisis which is near at hand.
Let us pray. Our Father in heaven, we are astonished when we read about the trial of Christ and we’ve only scratched the surface. Please help us to live our lives in harmony with Christ so that we may be pure and holy. And when the crisis does come, please stand with us. Help us to not say anything that would condemn Christ before our enemies. Also, please help us to understand and perceive those whom we can trust and those whom we can’t. Let us not speak a foolish word or make a foolish statement. But send Your Holy Spirit to us that we may discern what the real issues are and can speak to them. And thank you, in Jesus name, amen.
