The Adventure Link
CSI: Jerusalem
A Family Plot
We now continue our series on the investigation into the murder of Jesus where we left off last time. In the last edition we noticed that the kangaroo court had been assembled to begin the trial of Jesus. Lets investigate the participants and the trials to see what we can uncover.
The fact that those who arrested Jesus first brought Him to Annas proves that Annas himself was the ultimate power behind the plot to kill Jesus. He ultimately had to authorize the deed, and without his sanction the evil plot never would have gone forward. Also, the fact that the conspirators took Him to Annas before they went to Caiaphas reveals the true nature of Caiaphas’s high priesthood. He was virtually a puppet, under his father-in-law’s control.
The hearing at Annas’s house was evidently held for one purpose: to trump up a specific charge against Jesus. The plan was for Annas to listen to Jesus give an account of His teaching, and then Annas would decide what kind of charge to file. He had several options at his disposal. He could charge Jesus with blasphemy, a crime punishable by death under Jewish law. Since Jesus had said many things in His public ministry that the Jewish leaders deemed blasphemous, that seemed the most likely charge.
But the Romans, who must authorize and carry out all executions, rarely approved of the death penalty for blasphemy. For that reason Annas might also look for a way to charge Jesus with sedition or insurrection. Understandably, Rome was not inclined to be merciful to anti-Roman agitators.
While Jesus was taken before Annas, Caiaphas would have time to gather the Sanhedrin at his house for the impromptu trial (Matthew 26:57). The speed with which he was able to do this reveals the entire council’s eagerness to do away with Jesus.
John records that Annas “asked Jesus about His disciples and His doctrine” (John 18:19). In effect, Jesus was being arraigned (brought before a court to answer charges), even though He had not yet been indicted (formally charged with a specific offense). This was completely out of order and contrary to every standard of fair jurisprudence. Moreover, Annas was in effect trying to get Jesus to implicate Himself—and that was also contrary to the principles of justice that were supposed to govern the Sanhedrin.
But Jesus’ reply subtly exposed the illegality of Annas’s line of questioning: “I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing. Why do you ask Me? Ask those who have heard Me what I said to them. Indeed they know what I said” (John 18:20–21). He was not being impertinent. He had no legal obligation to testify against Himself, particularly before any charges were filed against Him. Annas was supposed to state the charges against Jesus before he could cross-examine Him in a hearing of this sort. Since no specific charges had been brought against Him, it was not Jesus’ obligation to supply Annas with information he might later employ to incriminate Him. Annas, of course, knew this.
Nonetheless, “when He had said these things, one of the officers who stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, ‘Do You answer the high priest like that?’ ” (v. 22). The officer’s action was probably meant to cover the high priest’s embarrassment. It may also have been a deliberate attempt to rankle Jesus, to try to goad Him into an angry retort that could be used against Him.
But Jesus retained His composure perfectly. “[He] answered him, ‘If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why do you strike Me?’ ” (v. 23). If Jesus had spoken blasphemy or tried to foment revolution, it was His accusers’ responsibility to give a detailed account and proof of His wrongdoing. If they had no knowledge of any crimes He could be charged with, they had no right to hold Him, much less strike Him.
Annas was clearly embarrassed by Jesus’ response. Christ had exposed the high priest’s ruse without giving him any information that would help in the trumping up of charges. Exasperated and still unable to find anything he could charge Jesus with, Annas finally had Him bound and sent Him to Caiaphas’s house, where members of the Sanhedrin were already assembled for the trial. (We will have to examine this as well)
The homes of Annas and Caiaphas apparently shared a common courtyard. It was typical in that culture for sons and sons-in-law to build homes adjacent to or attached to the parents’ home. Between the homes would be a courtyard, and apparently it was in such a courtyard that Peter and John stood, warming their hands on a fire of coals while waiting to see the results of the hearing (John 18:15–18). John “was known to the high priest” (v. 16), which probably reflects his family’s social status. John therefore gained admittance to the courtyard for Peter as well. So when Matthew reports that Peter was in Caiaphas’s courtyard with the servants, awaiting the outcome of the trial (Matthew 26:58), it is probably the same place John spoke of next to Annas’s house where the servants had built a coal fire. That also means when Annas sent Jesus bound to Caiaphas, it was a very short procession—probably taking Jesus through the very same courtyard where Peter and John were waiting.
The fact that formal charges had not yet been filed against Jesus was probably an embarrassment and surely a frustration to the council, but it was ultimately no deterrent to their plans. They already had a bundle of false witnesses who were prepared to testify against Jesus.
The adventure and investigation continues....
