We are now going to move on to the 6 trials that Jesus went through. I don’t really have much to lead in to this and we have just about everyone one peripheral to this story located. So we are going to follow Jesus trial in a chronological order reading parallel scripture when there is any. This means that parts aren’t in all 4 gospels although all of them have parts and many overlap. Let’s start in John 18:12-14

John then talks of Peter’s denial and picks up the story in verse 19-24

Verse 19 confused me because Caiaphas is high priest so I did a little research Annas had been high priest until he was removed from office by Valorous Gratus who was Pilot’s predecessor. I got that information from the MacArthur study bible. So I draw this conclusion that the title of high priest must stick to someone like president does here in the USA. If Bill Clinton or George Bush were to walk in calling either one mister president would be appropriate. If someone said “I was speaking to the president” you would need to from the context of their words or other information learn whom they are speaking of. So we know that here it is Annas.

So I learned something new and I am wondering who here knows why what Jesus said in response to Annas would be considered rude enough to get a man slapped.

What is the rule in jewish law when giving testimony of someones doings? There must be two or more witnesses. Jesus is only one witness. It was improper for him to answer Annas. So Jesus instead of answering the questions corrects Annas and tells him what he is doing wrong. Jesus then looks at the one who strikes him and does what? Enforces his argument. So if Jesus had responded at this point what would have happened? Those that were there at the questioning could have then witnessed his statements in court. By the way this questioning before Annas would not have been a legal trial as they are not before the Sanhedrin. So no we move on to the second trial before the current high priest Caiaphas. John does not record this trial so we will go to Matthew 26:57-67

Mark 14:53-65

So Caiaphas attempts to do a somewhat proper trial and call witnesses. What is interesting even the ones giving false testimony can’t get their stories straight enough to be considered accurate witnesses. Jesus never responds to any of His accusers. While He never responds to any of those accusations He does respond to Caiaphas’ question. I always wondered why. In fact even these two witnesses didn’t have enough evidence in agreement to put Jesus to death so if Jesus had not responded He wouldn’t have been. At the same time for Him to purposefully respond in such a way to cause His death would undermine the injustice of the situation. Caiaphas was high priest and we see that he was performing the role properly enough to be used by God as a prophet. John 11:51 shows that if you ever want to look it up. So this is a man of authority and Jesus did what was proper and answer the question. Jesus admits that He is God and this is the evidence that they use to condemn Him.

Interestingly though they can’t condemn Him. Can anyone answer the question as to why? I am not talking about the reason they take Him before Pilot but the question is why is this an illegal trial? The Sanhedrin meet in the temple not in Caiaphas home and during the day not at night. This is still before the rooster crows. Mark 15:1
Matthew 27:1-2

Before we get to Luke we have a bit of Foretellings that have been at least partially fulfilled to look at. Isaiah 50:6

Isaiah 53:7

Alright now Luke 22:63-71

So in Mathew and Mark we have Jesus before Caiaphas admitting He is God then being told to prophesy who hit him then there are mentions of a consultation then He is sent to Pilot. Now here in Luke He is brought to Caiaphas’ house He undergoes the beating mentioned after the trial at Caiaphas’s then He is taken to the Sanhedrin for the legal trial. This is done in the legal place and during the legal time. This is all nice and proper but also very short. Jesus is asked the same question gives the same answer confirmed as guilty and they move on to finding someone to kill Him for them as they aren’t allowed to do it themselves.

Jesus comes before Pilot Matthew 27:11-14

Mark 15:2-5

John 18:28-38 Can you believe that to enter a building will make you unclean for the passover meal but to plot to kill someone plan it execute the plan and succeed doesn’t! This comes back to what I was talking about with the concern for being clean for the passover I mentioned last week.

You can see the difference in John’s telling of events as an eyewitness and being able to see what the others had written before him(John we know was there with Peter at Annas’ place and I expect Caiaphas’ I am assuming he followed along with the group as they went to Pilot and Herod). The first meeting of Jesus and Pilot is much fuller you can almost feel Pilot’s amazement at Jesus seemingly lack of concern for the accusations made against Him. Also we have a better understanding of why the governor doesn’t fear Jesus kingship as others have in the past. It is explained to Him how Jesus is king at this point of time. Pilot decides that Jesus is too hot of a political football and tries to get rid of Him instead of dealing with the situation and sends Him to his political enemy. Luke 23:1-12

I find it interesting that Jesus is dressed in a gorgeous, elegant, elaborate, king costume of a robe with what is coming up next. And all those descriptors are used in translating that word in different versions of the bible. It is to bad Herod didn’t get to meet Jesus earlier he may have gotten some questions answered but now is not the time and instead he just gets frustrated because he doesn’t get the side show entertainment he wanted and sends the football back to Pilot. Pilot must have respected him for it because they become friends. Let’s read on Luke 23:13-25

Matthew 27:15-26

Mark 15:6-15

I find this of particular interest Jesus is dressed up richly and Pilot has Him in custody He is accused by the Sanhedrin as a blasphemer and Pilot calls Him the king of the Jews to the crowd asking if they want their seemingly impotent useless leader released to them. I know that the Jewish leaders insight the people to it but Jesus would be an embodiment of their frustration of being ruled over once again by another country what good does He do them. So who do they ask for instead a man who has been arrested for his insurrection and leading people to fight the Romans. The people chose the man who was fighting the Romans over the one who seemed to be taking the Roman rule peaceably.

John 18:39-40

Pilot does what is expedient for him politically. He uses Jesus to calm the crowd so as to not have difficulty with them. I have heard people talk of Pilot as some sort of monster. I think he would have been just as happy to let Jesus go if the crowds hadn’t freaked out calling for Jesus persecution. Pilot did what was politically expedient and maybe a bit lazy.

2 weeks and we will look at the scourging and the cross

closing prayer