Taught by
Stephen ArmstrongAccess all of our teaching materials through our smartphone apps conveniently and quickly.
Taught by
Stephen ArmstrongWe return to Jesus’ trial before the Jewish authorities, with Jesus in the home of Caiaphas, the second high priest He’s stood before that night
The religious leaders have long sought to discredit Jesus by trapping Him in violation of some rule of the Mishnah
Once found in violation of the rabbinical code book, they assumed the people would lose interest in Jesus’ ministry
But Jesus did something they hadn’t expected…He declared the Mishnah to be invalid and not binding on Him
And the people loved it when Jesus thumbed His nose at the pompous and hypocritical Pharisees
So then these leaders turned to seeking a way to charge Jesus either with blasphemy or insurrection, both of which carried the death penalty
Blasphemy was punishable by death under Jewish law, while insurrection carried the death penalty under Roman Law
And now finally, the Jewish authorities led by the high priest believe they’ve caught Jesus in blasphemy
Last week we studied how two so-called witnesses claimed that Jesus said He could tear down the temple and rebuild it in three days
Though tearing down a Roman building would have violated Roman law, that wasn’t a credible charge
So the high priest is looking for more, something that incurs the death penalty under Jewish law
And the easiest way to trap Jesus in a capital crime is under the charge of blasphemy
So back in v.64 the high priest placed Jesus under oath and compelled Jesus to answer whether He was the Son of God
The high priest expected Jesus to say something that would give him reason to charge Jesus and Jesus complied
Jesus affirmed that He was the Son of God, the Messiah of Israel
And Jesu said in a day to come, these men would see Him sitting at the right hand of the Power, meaning God the Father
Now moving forward, notice the high priest’s response to Jesus’ testimony
In response to Jesus’ words, the high priest tore his robes, which is a traditional Eastern way (and very Jewish way) of showing distress
And when the high priest tore his clothes, it sent shock waves through the people of Israel
So naturally, it was highly prejudicial for a high priest presiding in a court case to tear his robes at hearing the accused’s testimony
Imagine how a jury would react today if a judge suddenly shouted “this is absurd” during the defendant’s testimony?
Based on the judge’s reaction, the jury would be influenced into thinking that the accused was lying
For that very reason, Jewish law prohibited a high priest from tearing his robes during a court proceeding
The only exception to that rule was in the case of blasphemy during trial
If blasphemy was spoken in trial, then the high priest was permitted to tear his clothes
And that’s the excuse the high priest cites now as he tears his clothes…in v.66 he says that Jesus has spoken blasphemy
He was probably referring to both Jesus’ statement that He was the Messiah and His promise to be seated at God’s right hand
But looking at both those statements closely, Jesus never commits blasphemy according to Jewish law
Blasphemy is speaking in a way that dishonors or diminishes the name or character of God
In fact, just mentioning the name of God could be cause for a charge of blasphemy under certain circumstances
But in this case, nothing Jesus says dishonored the name or character of God
In the first case, Jesus didn’t diminish God’s name or character by claiming to be the One through Whom God keeps His promises
And that’s especially true when you truly are the Messiah!
And in the second case, Jesus said He would be seated next to God, which is also true and not a diminishment of God in any way
In fact, Jesus never even used the name of God
Notice in v.64 Jesus said He would sit at the right hand “of power” which is clearly a reference to God and it glorifies God as well
But God’s name is not “power,” so Jesus has very clearly avoided any type of blasphemy
Nevertheless, this is close enough for the high priest and closest thing he will get that night to proof of a crime
So with that he charges Jesus with blasphemy and asks the jury, why have further need for witnesses?
He makes the statement as if to say we don’t even need our many witnesses to convict Jesus
But in reality, the so-called witnesses hadn’t been any help, and in fact he had no witnesses to verify the charge of blasphemy
The high priest just wants to end the trial and move to the penalty phase, so he calls for a vote from the counsel members present
Demanding such a quick verdict was yet another violation of Jewish court law, and the offenses just keep adding up
In fact, there were so many violations of Jewish law that this trial was the greatest miscarriage of justice in all history
This is the only time in history when a sinless human being stood trial, and of course the only just outcome was exoneration
God Himself was on trial, and God’s people found Him guilty of blaspheming God…how does something so ridiculous happen?
He was convicted in the only way possible: everyone else involved has to engage in endless corruption and sin while calling it justice
Which makes this trial a perfect illustration of how sin and depravity distort our view of self and God
The Bible describes that state of every human being’s heart this way:
The heart of man is so desperately wicked that Solomon describes it as a an “insanity” of the heart
In our natural state, we are literally incapable of knowing or loving God and that condition lasts throughout our lives
That’s why the Bible says there are none who seek after God, and none who do good, meaning none who know and obey God
It’s not even a matter of choice… we have a spiritual birth defect that prevents us from doing otherwise
We are programmed from birth to sin and to disobey and to hate God yet all the while calling it “good"
It’s spiritual insanity and there is no cure apart from an act of God to change us from within
Only if we are born again by the Spirit of God do we gain the ability to know, love, honor and obey God truly
But unless and until that time arrives for a person, he or she will see all that God does as evil and all that he or she does as good
Unbelievers see themselves self-righteously and they treat God as an enemy and you see that clearly here in this trial
That’s why these men, who are supposedly priests of God and experts in the Law, can condemn God Himself through a kangaroo court of injustice
They scheme and lie to find fault with an obviously innocent man, and the more Jesus acts righteously, the more their insanity increases
So that by the end, they are acting irrationally in trying to find cause against Jesus
Jesus Himself explains this phenomenon in John 3
Jesus is the Light that came into the world, and Light is a metaphor for truth, righteousness and the love of God
The world He entered was filled with darkness, which stands for sin, evil and hatred toward God
Light came in as if a spotlight, piercing through the darkness, but Jesus said men loved the darkness more than light
In fact, everyone who does evil hates light, because light exposes the sinful deeds done in darkness
This statement is both literally and figuratively true…literally, evil people prefer to practice their evil deeds under cover of darkness
That’s why we install security lights on homes and businesses
The light chases away the criminal who prefers darkness
But it’s also true figuratively speaking, because the light of God’s word declares what is right and true, and it exposes what is sinful and false
So when God brings the light of His word into that darkness, evil people will hate the exposure
They will seek to put out that light, just as these evil leaders in Israel were seeking to put out Jesus’ light
The truth of His words exposed the evil in their hearts and they could not stand for it
But notice they didn’t view the situation in that way…they weren’t acknowledging what was really happening
None of the leaders said, “Boy, we really hate the way this righteous man makes us feel convicted for being so evil”
No, they were suffering spiritual insanity, which led them to explain away their conviction
Earlier, the high priest Caiaphas said this about Jesus
The high priest himself acknowledged Jesus was performing many signs…why didn’t that cause him to step back?
Why didn’t he consider what those signs meant and then respond in accepting Jesus’ claims?
The answer again is spiritual insanity…he acts in a crazy way fighting against the obvious truth because he’s programmed by sin to do so
He loved darkness and therefore he could not enter the light…not without God’s help
And God was obviously not inclined to help Caiaphas
That’s what you’re studying here…the Light of the World rejected by the darkness because they did not want their evil deeds exposed
The only way any human being overcomes their spiritual insanity is if God brings them the cure…a new heart
When a person is born again, they receive a new spirit that no longer fears the Light because it agrees with the Law of God
And in that agreement, it no longer fears judgment or death, and so Light is no longer a threat
Moreover, darkness no longer appeals because the believer has nothing in common with darkness any longer
So the high priest demands an immediate guilty verdict without deliberation, and the rest of the counsel members in attendance agree
They all state that Jesus deserves death, which results in more violations of Jewish law
Under Jewish law the sentence could not be pronounced on the same day as the trial verdict
A span of at least three days must separate the two, but these men aren’t interested in justice…just revenge
And a Sanhedrin trial could not end with a unanimous verdict, because 70 Jewish men could not be expected to agree
At least one man must vote not guilty if a person was to be convicted
So as the Jewish trial ends, it doesn’t settle the issue because the Jews do not possess the power to carry out the verdict
Rome reserved the “right of the sword” only for the procurator of Judea, the Roman official who governed this province for Rome
The procurator was Pilate (Pilatos), a politician appointed by the Roman Senate and responsible for keeping the peace
The Jewish leaders will need to bring their case before Pilate in the hope of convincing him that Jesus needed to die
And if Pilate agreed, then he would do the Jewish leaders’ dirty work by condemning Jesus and putting Him to death
As I mentioned last week, this hand-off was intended by God to ensure both Jews and Gentiles played a role in Jesus’ death
Neither group can claim they had no blood on their hands, so that truly everyone was responsible for Jesus dying
And God can say His Son died for the sins of the world
Now Jesus will be handed over, but before they transfer custody to the Romans, the leaders want one last chance to abuse the man they have hated for so long
Now the physical torture of Jesus begins while He is in the custody of the Jews at Caiaphas’ home
So again, both Jew and Gentile abused our Lord physically
And in light of all that Jesus eventually suffers, these assaults may not seem like much
But the offenses listed here represent some of the worst possible ways one Jew could treat another
First, they spit in Jesus’ face, and spitting was a particularly humiliating way for one Jew to show contempt to another
In fact, even today it’s customary for orthodox Jews to spit on the ground merely at the mention of Jesus’ name
Which shows you how badly they saw the act of spitting
Secondly, they slapped Jesus with an open palm across the face, and again that may not seem like much
A slap was among the greatest rebukes for a Jew, and it was preferred since there would be little evidence of the abuse
But imagine the hardest slap you’ve ever seen, and that’s how a Jew conducted this form of abuse
The point was to inflict as much pain as possible without leaving a mark…and the stinging blow would take your breath away
Finally, they blindfolded Jesus and beat his body with their fists while mocking Him by saying tell us who hit you
You blindfold someone to prevent them from knowing where the blow was coming from, so the person couldn’t anticipate it
When you see a blow coming, you can move to protect yourself or at least steel yourself to absorb the blow
But being blindfolded, Jesus couldn’t know what was coming
But as it turns out, Jesus wasn’t doing anything to protect Himself anyway
Isaiah tells us exactly how Jesus faced this moment
Isaiah says explicitly that the Messiah did not become disobedient by turning back
In v.6 it says He did not cover His face to the spitting or slapping
He set His face like flint, a very hard rock, meaning He did absolutely nothing to soften or avoid the blows
And we learn that Jesus endured another painful insult not recorded in Matthew…they plucked out Jesus’ beard
If you’ve ever pulled out a hair, then you know how much that can sting, but Jesus stood by while they ripped out handfuls
Was Jesus showing He was too tough for them? Not at all, and in fact Isaiah acknowledges it was humiliating
And throughout the New Testament we find references to Jesus’ suffering during these early moments of His passion
So Jesus felt the pain just as you would, but unlike you Jesus was determined to obey the Father by not resisting in any way
In other words, Jesus accepted His torture as according to the will of the Father, and therefore He didn’t resist it for to do so would be to disobey
This shows you how determined Jesus was to remain a sinless substitute for our sake that He would not even protect His body
And that made His suffering all the worse
The writer of Hebrews tells us this:
Notice the writer says Jesus “endured” the cross and Jesus “despised” the shame
Jesus despised everything He experienced, meaning He could barely stand to bear it
And yet, Jesus went through with it as a matter of obedience and for the opportunity to achieve something eternally important
And of course the writer of Hebrews reminds us to carry the same attitude as we face various trials and suffering
Remain obedient to God though you despise your circumstances because you know eternal things are on the line
And the worst of Jesus’ pain and humiliation were still yet to come…things just go from bad to worse for Jesus
The whole experience lasted about 12 hours from start to finish, but it must have seemed like an eternity to Jesus
And as we come to understand just how hard this experience was for Him, it begs a question:
Why did the Father want Jesus to suffer so much?
I’ve asked the question this way before: we know Jesus had to die for our sins, but why did the Father require Jesus to suffer first?
Why couldn’t Jesus just die in His sleep, or perhaps Jesus could have been executed an easier way like beheading or stoning?
I think it’s safe to say that virtually ANY other method of execution would have been better than the one Jesus endured
The point is that Jesus’ sufferings on the way to the cross were just as important to God’s plan of redemption as the death itself
So why did the Father require Jesus to experience such a cruel, slow and painful death in our place?
What purposes did His suffering serve in the plan of redemption?
We’ll answer this question in two parts during the course of our study of the crucifixion, one now and one later
Answer 1 comes from Peter
Peter says that not only did Jesus die to save us, but Jesus also suffered for us to set an example for how to receive suffering
The Father in Heaven determined that Jesus needed to suffer in the course of His death so Jesus accepted it obediently
Resisting the suffering would mean disobeying God, and if Jesus had disobeyed then His suffering would have been for nothing
And that’s the example we’re supposed to learn here
Sometimes God brings suffering into our lives for good purposes, but if we resist the suffering, we lose the benefit
And that’s often the hardest part of enduring a trial, because when we feel unfairly treated, we naturally defend ourselves
But Peter tells us that is not the way we should respond, but instead we should follow Jesus’ example
And Jesus above all people had reason to defend Himself
Quoting from Isaiah 53, Peter says Jesus was completely innocent and had done absolutely nothing wrong
Nevertheless, Jesus didn’t fight back or defend Himself when attacked by unholy and evil men
Jesus didn’t even utter a word in His own defense
Jesus did nothing to stop or lessen the suffering that the Father planned to bring against Him because He knew it was God-ordained
And His attitude was to be an example for us to follow
Living righteously isn’t just a matter of living justly…it’s also a matter of how we respond when we are treated unjustly
And the godly response to injustice is to endure it patiently knowing God is in control and has allowed it for some good purpose
Listen to what Peter also says
When we suffer unrighteously, as Jesus did, we are walking in His footsteps in a sense
We are being asked by God to endure suffering, to endure harsh treatment with patience, just as Jesus did
And we may say to ourselves, but I did nothing wrong so I have the right to fight back and make accusations and defend myself
But the Bible says it’s not about your rights…it’s about your obedience to God
And if you do what is right (i.e., don’t sin), and if you suffer anyway at the hands of unkind or evil people, then endure it
That will find favor with God, because you are following in Jesus’ footsteps
And if God the Father could turn Jesus’ suffering into so much good, then He can certainly do the same with your patience
So the first reason Jesus suffered on the way to His death was to set an example of how we respond to persecution and suffering, which all believers will know
And it’s particularly ironic that Peter should teach us this important biblical truth at this point in the story
Because it was also Peter who showed us how not to respond to suffering and persecution
Earlier we looked at Peter’s denials of Jesus when we studied Jesus foretelling they would happen during the Last Supper
So today we will simply look at how Peter’s three denials take place
They happen over a very brief period of time, almost one right after another while Peter is in and around the courtyard
First, in v.69 Peter is recognized by one of the high priest’s servant girls
Remember, Peter was in this courtyard because John knew the high priest’s family and was able to gain Peter entrance
Being so close is what allowed Peter to be recognized, and I wonder if Peter was staying so close precisely so he could disprove Jesus’ words
Jesus said Peter would abandon Him, so maybe Peter stayed close to show Jesus He was wrong
So how ironic is it that Peter’s pride gave opportunity for the three denials to take place?
That’s a reminder that once God’s word has gone forth, it will not return without having accomplished what He sent it out to do
It’s also a reminder that our pride goes before our fall
So the servant-girl casually remarks to Peter that he too was with Jesus the Galilean
Peter quickly denies it saying I don’t know what you’re talking about, and with that he’s made his first denial
Her comment causes Peter to leave the courtyard, but before he even gets past the gate, another servant girl recognizes him
She then announces to the courtyard that Peter had been with Jesus, to which Peter more forcefully says I do not know Him
This time Peter says it with an oath, which was a statement made before God
Finally, a few moments later some in the courtyard who heard this exchange find Peter and make a third accusation
They say surely you were with Jesus, since you have a Galilean accent
Apparently, the Galilee was Israel’s version of the Deep South and Peter’s accent gave him away
At that Peter loses it, and he begins cursing and swearing that, “I do not know the man”
And with his third denial, Peter’s attention is suddenly drawn to a rooster crowing somewhere nearby in the yard
And immediately, Peter remembered Jesus' prophecy and so he leaves to weep bitterly over what he had done to Jesus
What’s so sad about Peter’s denials is that he never needed to deny Christ, because there was no indication Peter was at risk
Remember, John was there with Peter the whole time and no one threatened John, and John never denied knowing Christ
In fact, John is present while Jesus is hanging on the cross
Obviously, the Lord didn’t intend for John or Peter to be persecuted during this time, and that was never something Jesus said would happen
The Lord had simply said that His disciples would scatter, but Peter pridefully denied that this prophecy would apply to him
And that statement triggered Jesus to declare that Peter would deny Christ personally
The Lord was forced to make Peter an example to expose his bravado and show that God’s word would be found true
If Peter had simply remained quiet in that earlier moment, perhaps he never would have experienced these denials
So what do we make of these denials? Remember, in our earlier lesson I explained that Peter’s denials were not a repudiation of his faith in Jesus
They were exactly what they appear to be: a scared man saying stupid things without thinking in order to save his own skin
And if you wonder how Peter could do this, consider that as Peter was speaking, he could see and hear inside the house
He saw Jesus being mercilessly beaten, and he heard the slaps and body blows, Jesus gasping for breath and perhaps moaning in pain
And Peter knew the counsel declared Jesus would die
If you had heard and seen those same things, you might very well have done the same even three times
So maybe we aren’t so different from Peter after all, and if that’s true, then there is hope for all of us…how?
Because remember the same Peter who swore and cursed and angrily denied ever knowing Jesus is the man who wrote this
We all could do much worse than to be like Peter