|
|
Luke
22 – 66
These notes were made after a brief study of the trial of Jesus. Readers
are encouraged to make their own study. There is always more to be discovered in
the Scriptures – no Christian has all the truth to be found there.
Normal
procedure at one of these trials was seldom if ever as quick is it happened with
Jesus, First, the prosecution first had to bring their case to the High Priest,
who would take some time to hear and consider it, and then sanction its hearing
- or allow the prosecution to repeat the case again more publicly. The
witnesses, being no fewer than two, had to agree on all points, and in the case
of a CAPITAL offence, had to be prepared to cast the first stones at the
accused. Any witnesses found to be lying or inconsistent in their testimony were
put to death instead of the accused.
The
procedure which followed a conviction was also time-consuming. All the judges
(which might have numbered 71 or 72) had to retire for a whole day for prayer,
fasting and meditation on the matter- A quorum was a minimum of 23 members of
the Sanhedrin. Any fewer and the case could not be considered.
After
the day of fasting and meditation, a unanimous vote had to be arrived at - if
even one man disagreed, an acquittal was granted. Luke 22:16 is explained more
clearly by Mat, 27:1 "all the chief priests and elders of the people took
counsel AGAINST Jesus to put him to death". The decision was already made beforehand,
which enabled the 'trial' to be rushed through without the usual care and
attention.
23:2
Josephus says that the power of condemning to death was taken from the Jews 40
years before the Temple was destroyed (the 'trial' took place about 30 AD), and
the Sanhedrin was not allowed to meet without permission. Both these laws were
broken at the 'trial' of Jesus. Because of this predicament, the Sanhedrin
abandoned all hope of having Jesus put to death on religious grounds, and raised
instead accusations - three of them - based on political grounds.
v-23:7
Herod Antipas was Caesar's spy, and so, when Jesus met Pilate, the procurator
realised he would have to deal very carefully with Jesus, or Herod would report
back to Caesar about some supposed Injustice' or 'undue cruelty' - so Pilate
sent Jesus to Herod, to avoid giving Herod something to write to Caesar about.
That way, if Herod condemned Jesus, he wouldn't be able to criticise Pilate. But
Herod saw the 'joke' and had Jesus dressed up royally, making fun of him, then
he sent Jesus back to Pilate - Luke 23:11.
23:14-16
When Pilate pronounced sentence, prior - to the final judgement, he was
all set to release Jesus, but he remembered the custom of releasing someone at
the Feast. It probably didn't occur to him that the crowd would even waver in
their choice between a hardened criminal, Barabbis, and the harmless dreamer
Jesus.
Barabbis
actually comes from Bar (son of) Rabbis (the Rabbi). The religious choice over
the true spiritual choice. People have always chosen the son of the Rabbi,
religion, in preference to the real Way, Jesus.
The
Jewish proceedings, whatever their true character, were overshadowed and
dominated by the fact that before they commenced, the members of the judging
crowd had already pre-determined the result, namely, death for the Accused. But
here is the irony. The rulers of the Jews desired above all else to destroy the
credibility of Jesus. They attacked his claims by putting on a grand show of
judicial authority. They wanted to secure the support of the whole Jewish
nation. To do this, they had to put aside their personal hostilities and focus
more on things which most Jews would understand.
The
Pharisees hated Jesus because he exposed their hypocrisy, their pettiness, their
lack of balanced judgement, they lack of mercy and faith. They hated him because
he exposed their political, worldly ambitions, and their greed for wealth and
power. He drove the buyers and sellers from the Temple and showed them their
lip-service to God.
Charges
against Jesus - He was accused of being a:
1.
false prophet
2.
sorcerer
3.
teacher of a new religion
4.
an underminer of the national religious institutions
5.
false claimant to being the Messiah
6.
a blasphemer in his claim to being God's Son
7.
an insulter of the One True God.
Added
together, the result is a charge of gross blasphemy, because Jewish Law covered
such things, the verdict of "high treason" was the logical
outcome.
John
18: 36, 37
When
Jesus appeared before Pilate the charge of "blasphemy" was abandoned,
and the one of "high treason" against Caesar was substituted. To the
charge, Jesus entered a plea known to English lawyers as "Confession and
Avoidance". He confessed that he did indeed claim to be a king, but he
denied the innuendoes which his accusers drew from this claim. He denied that he
was the sort of king which his accusers accused him of being - Pontius Pilate
was convinced that Jesus' kingdom was "not of this world" so he
formally declared him "not guilty". It was the thought that he himself
might be accused of treason which made him reverse his decision. To save his own
skin, he condemned to death a man whom he believed to be innocent.
Despite
his hand-washing, Pilate was never "free from the blood of this man".
History judges Pilate guilty of miscarriage of justice, cowardice and duplicity.
History might have recorded his name as the man who refused to bow to
pressure, or Herod, or Caesar or face-saving, or demotion from his position of
power and wealth, and perhaps even died for doing what was right. He could
have gone down as one of history’s greatest men of principle, but, like Judas,
his name is now connected with ignominy and shame.
Barabbis
actually comes from Bar (son of) Rabbis (the Rabbi). The religious choice over
the true spiritual choice. People have always chosen the son of the Rabbi,
religion, in preference to the real Way, Jesus.
The
Jewish proceedings, whatever their true character, were overshadowed and
dominated by the fact that before they commenced, the members of the judging
crowd had already pre-determined the result, namely, death for the Accused. But
here is the irony. The rulers of the Jews desired above all else to destroy the
credibility of Jesus. They attacked his claims by putting on a grand show of
judicial authority. They wanted to secure the support of the whole Jewish
nation. To do this, they had to put aside their personal hostilities and focus
more on things which most Jews would understand.
The
Pharisees hated Jesus because he exposed their hypocrisy, their pettiness, their
lack of balanced judgement, their lack of mercy and faith. They hated him
because he exposed their political, worldly ambitions, and their greed for
wealth and power. He drove the buyers and sellers from the Temple and showed
them their lip-service to God. He demonstrated the very things which they lacked
and with this double-edged sword he convicted them of gross sin and neglect. The
very men who claimed to represent od actually represented God’s worst enemies.
Charges
against Jesus - He was accused of being a:
1.
false prophet
2.
sorcerer
3.
teacher of a new religion
4.
an underminer of the national religious institutions
5.
false claimant to being the Messiah
6.
a blasphemer in his claim to being God's Son
7.
an insulter of the One True God.
Added
together, the result is a charge of gross blasphemy, because Jewish Law covered
such things, the verdict of "high treason" was the logical outcome.
John
18: 36, 37
When
Jesus appeared before Pilate the charge of "blasphemy" was abandoned,
and the one of "high treason" against Caesar was substituted. To the
charge, Jesus entered a plea known to English lawyers as "Confession and
Avoidance". He confessed that he did indeed claim to be a king, but he
denied the innuendoes which his accusers drew from this claim. He denied that he
was the sort of king which his accusers accused him of being-Pontius Pilate was
convinced that Jesus' kingdom was "not of this world" so he formally
declared him "not guilty". It was the thought that he himself might be
accused of treason which made him reverse his decision. To save his own skin, he
condemned to death a man whom he believed to be innocent.
Despite
his hand-washing, Pilate was never "free from the blood of this man".
History judges Pilate guilty of miscarriage of justice, cowardice and duplicity.
History might have recorded his name as the man who refused to bow to
pressure, or Herod, or Caesar or face-saving, or demotion from his position of
power and wealth, and perhaps even died for doing what was right.
Note
on Jewish Courts:
The
Jewish communities everywhere, in Jesus' day, were governed by local Sanhedrins.
The Mishna, a book of the Talmud, says that there were 3 Courts of Law in
Jerusalem:
1.
The Greater Sanhedrin,
2.
The Lesser Sanhedrin,
3.
The Inferior Court.
The
Sanhedrins were also places where ecclesiastical and administrative work took
place.
The
three Sanhedrins:
1.
The 71 Judges, or the Supreme Court of Appeal. The Mishna says "A tribe, a
false prophet, or a High Priest may not be tried save by the court of one and
seventy . . ." This was why Jesus was tried by the Sanhedrin, because he
was considered to be a false prophet.
2.
23 judges, who tried cases which were sometimes punishable by death.
3.
3 judges, who tried cases concerning property, theft, or personal injury and the
like. (The Mishna. Sanhedrin 1:5, 1:4, 1:11)
The
one great irony about the trial of Jesus was the fact that by taking the claims
of Jesus seriously, his enemies actually established his credibility. By way of
illustration, take for example the claims of a fool. He may tell people he is
someone great, but sensible people will only laugh and ignore the claims. To
take the claims of a fool seriously is to give the fool a credibility he does
not deserve.
If the Jewish leaders had really wanted to dismiss the claims of Jesus as
irrelevant and foolish, they should have discounted his claims. Their reaction
confirmed Jesus as a serious threat to their system. By passing sentence on him
they showed that they exposed themselves to the question: “If he is not the
Messiah, why are you so worked up about him?” Their attempts to discount his
miracles, his power, his resurrection, and his status as God’s Son are all
strong witnesses to his reality. History records the Jewish accusations, thereby
establishing the claims which Jesus made for himself.
If Jesus was not the Son of God, why even bother with a trial at all?