The King s Trial, pt. 1 Matthew 26:57 68

CORNERSTONE BIBLE CHURCH February 8, 2015 The King s Trial, pt. 1 Matthew 26:57 68 Introduction: Famous Trials Do you remember what happened on October 3, 1995? It was wife s birthday. Do you remember what else happened? It was the day the verdict was announced against OJ Simpson. I remember very clearly where I was when it was announced. I was in college at Moody Bible Institute and there was one TV in the lounge of our dorm and it was packed as hundreds of college students waited to hear the verdict. If you can remember back this far, you will recall that the OJ Simpson trial was a media frenzy. But just imagine what it would be like if it happened today. Back in 1995, there was no Facebook, no Twitter... there was hardly even email. Now we live in this social network age. Can you imagine what your Facebook feed would look like if there was a trial that grips the hearts of Americans like that one did? Crazy. If we were to put it on a media spectrum, the complete opposite of the OJ Simpson Trial would be the trial of Jesus Christ. It was not on TV. No social media. No public displays for people to see. It was not heralded as a great event. No national or world news events. It was an event that was pushed through the system in the middle of the night for the sole purpose of finding Him guilty. Now when we turn to the Scriptures to learn about the trial of Jesus Christ, no gospel writer gives us the entire picture. They each write a portion of what happened. It is left up to us to piece together the details of the trial through all their writings. And it takes some work. But before we get there, I feel we need to do some work on the historical context in which this trial took place in the world at the time. You see, at this time in history, the Roman Empire is at its height. It was expanding and progressing as one of the great powers in the world. Under Roman Rule, they would allow local governments to continue to exercise a degree of authority. So for instance, in Israel at this time, they would allow the Jews to exercise a degree of authority as long as there is no rebellion or outcry from the people. But the one thing they did hold onto was the final authority for major things, like the death penalty. 1

And so when it comes to a situation like that of Jesus Christ, the Jews are going to accuse Him of a religious crime (claiming to be God). The Jews would say that this is deserving of death, but this religious crime is not really that big of a deal to the Romans. And since the Romans hold the key to execution of the death penalty, the Jewish leaders are going to need to show that Jesus claim of being Messiah is a political move trying to overthrow Rome s place of authority. I say all of this because what we find when we turn to the gospel writers are two different types of trials. We have the Jewish trials where the Jewish leaders are trying to prove Jesus as a blasphemer by saying He is God. And then we see the Roman trials where the Jewish people are trying to get them to execute the death sentence on Jesus. If the Jewish religious leaders would have been content with something less than death, they could have easily taken care of that themselves. For instance, if they simply want to put Jesus in prison for life, they could probably take care of that without going to the Romans. But they are not satisfied with that. They want Him dead and because of this, they must get the Romans involved. In a few weeks, we will study the account of Jesus before Pilate the Roman Trial. But in our text this morning, we are going to see part of the Jewish trial of Jesus Christ. One more preliminary thing. Probably a bit like us in America, the Jews were famous for how serious they take their legal system. There are several guarantees that are granted everyone who is accused of a crime. According to Jewish Law, They Are Guaranteed The Right of a Public Trial. There were to be no secret trials. This was to ensure that it was fair in front of people. Because of this, the trial was not allowed to take place during the night, but only during the day. In addition, a proper trial was not to take place in someone s house, but in the Judgment Hall. Why? To ensure that the trial was to be public. Second, They Are Guaranteed The Right to Self-Defense. There was to be a defender assigned to their case. Everyone was to be rightly represented by a public defender, per say. Third, They Are Guaranteed The Right to Hear Witnesses. In order to be convicted, the person must be rightly accused by at least 2 3 witnesses. No person could testify against himself and on that basis alone be found guilty. It was not enough to have just one witness against someone, but there had to be at least two. 2

Fourth, They Are Guaranteed The Right to Due Process. What I mean is that the verdict of conviction could not be made the same day as a trial. The first day of the trial was for testimonies. The second day was for fasting and pondering the evidence. The third day is for sentencing and execution of the punishment. This was done in order to protect someone from being rushed to judgment and being sentenced without careful consideration. Sounds like something we would be in favor of, doesn t it? The only problem is that these and many other Jewish laws were not followed in the trial of Jesus. Without a doubt, the arrest, trial, and execution of Jesus Christ was the most unfair event in the history of our world. Hold this thought, for we will come back to it once we have looked at it in detail. In our study of the book of Matthew, we find ourselves on Thursday night of what we now refer to as Passion Week. Jesus has a meal with the disciples and then goes out into the garden to pray alone. In the middle of the night Judas comes and betrays Him with this kiss and the soldiers take Him away. According to John 18:13 24, the first place they take Jesus is to Annas, the father-in-law to Caiaphas. Annas is a very influential former high priest. They probably think that Annas might be able to obtain some more information from Jesus, but it does not happen. After not getting anything out of Jesus, Annas sends Him to Caiaphas, which is where we pick up the account in Matthew 26. Vs. 57 58 Jesus is now led to Caiaphas, the high priest at the time. What s interesting about this and what I just mentioned about Annas, is that according to the Jews, the high priest is a lifetime commitment. But the Romans took it upon themselves to appoint and remove the high priest because they saw it as more than simply religious; they saw it as political. Under Roman rule, not many high priests lasted very long, except for Caiaphas. This tells us one important thing about Caiaphas. He is motivated politically and not just spiritually. It is his goal to keep the Romans happy so that he can keep his position of authority. When Jesus comes before him for trial, he knows that he wants Jesus dead, but he needs to make the case politically before the Romans and make sure it is not just a spiritual issue. 3

We are also told that Peter follows at a distance. I just wonder if Peter is curious as to what is happening. It doesn t seem like he is there to rescue Jesus, but to be a spectator of what is going to happen to Him. And so when Jesus is taken into the house of Caiaphas, Peter goes as far as the courtyard and sits with the guards to see what is going to happen on this strange night. Vs. 59 63a These religious leaders, probably the Sanhedrin (which is the 71 highest ranking religious leaders in Israel), bring Jesus in, not to investigate Him, but to seek to condemn Him. They already have their mind made up that He is guilty. They just need to find something they can accuse Him of that will stick to Him. They are not interested in facts, but in anything they can use to put Him to death. Therefore, they are open to false testimony against Jesus. Unfortunately, they are not able to find the sort of indictments on Jesus that they need. They can t even find anyone to make accusations against Jesus that will stick. Why are they so concerned about finding these witnesses? Well, according to the Mosaic Law, there had to be at least two or more witnesses to accept an accusation against a person. Deuteronomy 19:15 A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established. Numbers 35:30 If anyone kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the evidence of witnesses. But no person shall be put to death on the testimony of one witness. They are so strict on this that according to the Jewish Talmud, if in a case of immorality, only one witness comes forward to accuse someone, it was regarded as sinful on the part of the one who brings the accusation. So you had better make sure you have your facts straight with multiple witnesses before coming forward. In fact, the witnesses are so important in this process that if the person is convicted and is to receive the death penalty, according to Deuteronomy 17:7, it is the witnesses that take the primary responsibility of putting them to death. Now that s serious. God takes this so serious that we are told in Proverbs 6 that He hates the false witness who breathes out lies. According to Deuteronomy 4

19:16 21, if it is found out that someone lies about their testimony, then the right thing to do is to do to them what they wanted done to the other person. Can you imagine that? You would think that would curb lying on the stand, but not so much. In Jesus case, the religious leaders set aside their desire for truth and integrity, with only a laser focus on what they need so they can put Him to death. The purpose of the Sanhedrin was always to preserve life, to be concerned with justice. Their motto was to save, not destroy life except in this situation. They allow many false witnesses to come forward, but unfortunately to them, none that would say the right things against Jesus that would allow them to go to the Romans to ask for the death penalty. Why is that? Well, simply because Jesus is innocent of any wrongdoing. And so if they are going to get any accusation to stick, it is going to have to be false. A lie. A misrepresentation of the truth. And that is what happens when two men step forward to reiterate some things Jesus said about the temple. They claim that Jesus said that He would destroy the temple of God and then rebuild it in three days. Does this sound like something Jesus said? Be careful here, for we learn a bit about what it means to slightly manipulate the facts to be in our favor. The gospel of John records what Jesus actually said. John 2:18 19 So the Jews said to him, What sign do you show us for doing these things? Jesus answered them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. What s different from what Jesus said to what they said He said? To be very clear, Jesus never said that He was going to destroy the temple. They were asking for a sign and He told them, Destroy (understood You) this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. They are asking for a sign, and Jesus is inviting them to destroy the temple and He would raise it up in three days. They take what He says and slightly twist them and then misrepresent them to the religious leaders. Of course, we know from the gospel of John that what Jesus meant is that if they destroy Him (by killing Him), then He will raise after three days. But the religious leaders don t seem too concerned with what Jesus meant by this statement. They don t seem concerned that these statements are taking out of context. Their only concern is whether they 5

could use this statement to say that Jesus may be a terrorist, and therefore, dangerous to Rome so that they can justify His capital punishment. In the Gospel of Mark, we are told: even about this their testimony did not agree. That happens when you twist facts. Their stories didn t quite line up. They would have been attacked under cross-examination, if there were any. And so the high priest looks at Jesus and asks Him to respond. To which Jesus says nothing. Quiet. I can t help but to stop here for a minute to drive home a point for us. Please note what is happening here. False witnesses are taking the words of Jesus and twisting them to make Him look bad. And His response? Nothing. He doesn t go to great lengths to defend Himself. Listen, if anyone ever had the opportunity to set someone straight and the right to do so, it was Jesus in this situation. But what does He do? He remains quiet. I have to wonder if we are much to quick to defend ourselves in times when we are misrepresented. Think about it, when someone says something against us, why are we so quick to defend ourselves? Could it be pride? Could it be that we just don t want to be looked down upon? And so we are quick to defend ourselves from being misunderstood instead of trusting God to be our judge in those moments. Let s take it even one step further. It even seems like it is a good time to ask this question: How do you respond when you are treated unfairly? If you are a parent, you have heard this often, haven t you? It s not fair! I ve told you my normal response to that statement is to say, Hell is fair, is that what you want? That seems to quiet them. But it still rages in their heart. More importantly, it rages in my heart when things happen to me that I don t think I deserve. When someone says something; when someone misrepresents me; when someone does something to me that I don t think I deserve... I am quick to point it out and defend myself. The reality is that life outside of the garden is designed to fail. It is filled with unfair people and situations. I have no doubt that it happens at your office, at your school, and in your home. People treat you differently than they treat others. Friends misrepresent you before other friends. And when this happens, instead of responding in self-defense, 6

maybe we should respond with thinking what is the best way to image Jesus most clearly. Maybe there is something to be learned here of how to handle things that we are being accused of that we did not do. Maybe we are too quick at defending ourselves and the best thing we can do is remain silent. Isaiah 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth. If we want to image Jesus, do you know how He ultimately deals with this unfairness? Do you want to know what He does when people mistreat Him? How does He respond to false accusations? The way He deals with it is by going to the cross and paying the eternal penalty for it! He gives in this moment. He doesn t defend, even though He could, He trusts in the Lord to be His judge of those things, and He pursues what is best for the other person through His dying on the cross for them. The silence of Jesus irritates Caiaphas to the boiling point. He wants answers. So much so that he now puts Jesus on the witness stand. Vs. 63b 64 Caiaphas has had enough. It s time to get to the real issue. Jesus, tell me very plainly, are you the Christ, the Son of God. He wants Jesus on record. And he knows at this point it is going to be hard to get the capital punishment he wants from these witnesses, so He wants first hand confession from Jesus that He is the Christ, the Son of God. This is when Jesus breaks the silence. You have said so. When Jesus answers this, it is as if He is saying, Yes, I am the Messiah, but not in the sense that you think of the Messiah. I am the One the OT pointed to. In fact, in the future, you are going to see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven. Jesus is very clear that He is the Messiah. He is God. At this point, a good high priest should have probably done some research. Okay, so this man claims to be the Messiah. Well, what do we know of the Messiah from the OT. Where is He going to come from? How will we know Him? You would think that someone would investigate these claims. And if he would have taken the time, he would 7

have discovered some amazing things about Jesus. What would he have learned? 1. According to the Scriptures, the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem; Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2; Luke 2:1 7). 1 2. The Messiah was to be born of a virgin and Jesus was born of Mary, a virgin (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:24 25; Luke 1:26 30). 3. The Messiah was to be of the line of David and Jesus was a clear descendent from King David (2 Samuel 7:12; Isaiah 11:1 2; Matthew 1:1 16; Luke 3:23 37). 4. The Messiah was to be preceded by someone like Elijah and John the Baptist clearly fulfilled that role (Malachi 3:1; 4:5; Matthew 17:12 13; John 1:19 23). 5. The Messiah was to do great works and Jesus performed them (Isaiah 61:1 2; Matthew 11:1 6; Luke 4:16 21). 6. The Messiah was to make a public entry into Jerusalem riding on a donkey and Jesus had just done this the previous week (Zechariah 9:9; Matthew 21:1 11). 7. The Messiah was to be betrayed by a close friend and Judas, one of the twelve, just betrayed Jesus (Psalm 41:9; Matthew 26:14 15; 27:3 8). 8. The Messiah was to be despised and rejected by his people and would experience suffering and they way they are treating Jesus proves it (Isaiah 53:2 3). The evidence is overwhelming. But Caiaphas isn t interested in the truth. He isn t interested in pursuing the truth. And neither do countless millions of people today. Why? Why are so many people so reluctant to investigate whether what Jesus claims to be true is indeed true? I think the only real answer to that is fairly simple. If Jesus is who He claims to be, then that means that you need to submit your life to Him. Better to live in ignorance than lose control of your life! Vs. 65 69 Upon hearing Jesus affirm that He is the Messiah, Caiaphas tears His robe. This is a sign of disgust. It is an official act expressing indignation to what Jesus admits. And he affirms that Jesus utters blasphemy. This is one more illustration of a falsehood. According to Jewish law, it was not blasphemous to say that you are the Messiah. It happened often. To be considered blasphemous a person had to use the name of Yahweh of himself. 1 Boice, James Montgomery. The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 2. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2006), 587. 8

Jesus isn t above this as He equated Himself with Yahweh earlier in His ministry. But here, He doesn t do it. But it is based on this, that the rest of the religious leaders call for His death. After all, Leviticus 24:16 says that the one who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death. But after all of this, the situation takes a turn south. They spit in His face. They strike him. Some slap Jesus. They ridicule Him by asking Him to prophecy who it was that hit Him. This shows the debase nature of these men and their hatred for Christ. It is hard to imagine a situation in which a judge or someone of religious authority would lower themselves to such behavior as spitting and slapping and mockery. But it shouldn t surprise us that they do this against Jesus. It just expresses their hatred for Him. And because of this, let us never be surprised when it happens to us. Let us never be surprised if we must endure mockery or ridicule because of our connection with Jesus Christ. Matthew 10:24 says that a disciple is not above his master. If they ridiculed Him, let s not be surprised when they ridicule us. Let us not be surprised when people make up things about us because they hate our Lord. If anything, it should surprise us when we are not ridiculed. Maybe that means we are not as bold for our faith as Jesus was. The disciples ran away, but after the resurrection, they are emboldened with a faith in Christ unlike before. And they took His message to the dying world; the dying world that hated Jesus. And that message was met with hostility and contempt. I hardly doubt any of us will be put on trial because of our love for Jesus Christ. But what if we were? Conclusion: 9