Thursday 9 April 2020


If  you click your mouse over the underlined words, you will get more info.

After Jesus was seized by the guards of the temple, he was taken to to the house of Caiaphas who was the current High Priest of Judea where the scribes and religious leaders (the Sanhedrin)  were present.

He was charged in this “ecclesiastical” trial with blasphemy for  claiming to be the Son of God and being the expected Messiah and   xorcising people by the power of demons. The penalty for blasphemy in those days in Judea was death. 

As an interesting aside, many years ago, the crime of blasphemy was in the Canadian Criminal Code but later that particular crime was removed from the Criminal Code.

Jesus was a learned prophet and he knew the laws of Judea and he also knew that trials could not legally be conducted in the dark of night and yet, he was prepared to let the trial take place even though  the trial  at night was illegal. All he had to say was that his  trial coldn’t be conducted at night.

It is my honest opinion that the illegality of his trial wasn’t a problem to him. He wanted to be crucified because it would be the only way that he and everyone else would know for sure that he really was the Son of God and the expected Messiah.  He wasn’t absolutely sure  that  he  really was the Son of God that is why he asked one of his disciples if he thought that Jesus was the son  of God and the expected Messiah as forecasted in the scriptures.

However, if God actually did send an army of angels  to the site of Jesus’ crucifixion  to rescue him while he was on the cross, then the proof of the belief’s of  his followers   would  be confirmed. 

Jesus was generally quiet when  being accused  of   the crimes of                               violating the Sabbath law (by healing on the Sabbath), threatening to destroy the Jewish Templesorcery, exorcising people by the power of demons and claiming to be both the Messiah and the Son of God.

Not surprisingly, Jesus didn’t offer a defense, and he rarely responded to the accusations so he was condemned by the Jewish authorities in the house of Caiaphas for the crimes he was accused of having committed.  

Joseph of .Arimathea and Nicodemus dissented from those  decisions a however,  not all the members of the Sanhedrin were present at at that time.

Meanwhile, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. "

Jesus replied. replied “I have spoken openly to the world," Jesus replied. "I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said."

When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby slapped him in the face. "Is this the way you answer the high priest?" he demanded. "If I said something wrong," Jesus replied, "testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?" "testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strikeme?"

zit was then that Caiaphas sen Jesus to Annas

Because Peter who was Jesus’ senior disciple was known to the high priest, Peter waited outside at the door of the courtyard. One of the other disciples, who was also known to the high priest, spoke to the servant girl on duty while in the courtyard  there and she brought Peter in. 1"You aren't one of this man's disciples too.

He replied, "I am not." It was cold, and the servants and officials stood around a fire they had made to keep warm. Peter also was standing with them, warming himself. The servant girl asked the question two more times and Peter denied being Jesus’ each time he was asked.

Luke 22:61 states that as Jesus was bound and standing in the courtyard of the priest's house. Peter was also in the courtyard. Jesus "turned and looked straight at him", and Peter remembered the words Jesus had spoken to him earlier in the previous evening.  "Before the rooster crows today, you will disown me three times.”

The guards  and the chief captain, and his  officers, seized Jesus and bound him and took  him to Annas who  was the father in law to Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. 

 [You  should know that John calls Annas has the high priest. The high priesthood was a life office. According to Moses, Annas was the real high priest, but the Romans had given that office to Caiaphas, so that Annas was high priest de jure, but Caiaphas was so de facto. As high priest, therefore, as head of the Sadducean party, the people looked to Annas before Caiaphas, therefore  Jesus was taken to him first. The influence of Annas is shown by the fact that he made five of his sons and sons-in-law high priests. Annas is said to have been about sixty years old at this time. He questioned Jesus for the purpose of obtaining, if possible, some material out of which to frame an accusation against Jesus.

The high priest therefore asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his teachings.

“Why askest thou me? Ask them that have heard me, what I spake unto them: behold, these know the things which I said. 

Jesus indeed spoke some things privately for the  the purposes of concealment said that he was Jesus was the light of the world when addressing his teachings to all who c me to listen to hikm.  He  chose the most public places to utter them--places, however, dedicated to the worship of the true God. He who had said that heaven and earth would pass away, but that his word would not pass away, did not suffer his teaching to be held in contempt. He  did not permit it to be made matter for cross examination. On the contrary, it was to be taken cognizance of among the things universally known and understood. The very officers who had arrested him could tell about it.

when he had said this, one of the officers standing nesrby, struck Jesus with his hand, saying, “Answer 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 was then under arrest, and as the trial had not yet opened there was ample time to add a new matter to the charges against him. If, in addressing the high priest, he had just spoken words worthy of punishment, the officer who struck him should, instead, have preferred charges against him and had him punished in a legal manner. If the officer could not do this (and the point is that he could not), he was doubly wrong in striking him. Thus Jesus  calmly rebuked the wrong-doer. Compare his conduct with that of Paul under somewhat similar circumstances exemplified his teachings.

During the  two trials the priests nothing that they could use to condemn Jesus of blasphemy.

Tomorrow, (Friday) I will yell  you  more about his appearances before Pilate and Jesus’ crucifixion.


No comments: