The Trial of Jesus Christ
Each year, as we celebrate the Memorial of Jesus’ death, we are brought closer to Him through the realization of what he suffered during that last day which ended in his death. Nothing that is recorded of his life has such an impact on our appreciation of the magnitude of his suffering and sacrifice on our behalf.
At the conclusion of the celebration of the Passover, April 2, AD 33, Jesus instituted the Memorial of his death, a ceremony properly celebrated by Bible Students on the anniversary of that date each year. At the conclusion of the partaking of the bread and the wine, Jesus and the Apostles went out to the garden of Gethesemane. Jesus was already aware that he was to be betrayed by one of his own Apostles, Judas, and thus began the World’s Greatest Trial.
We will understand the trial better if we know something about the characters involved, other than Jesus. The most important of these was Annas, for he was directly responsible in ordering the death of Jesus. He was considered by some to be the uncrowned king of Judea; he was the wealthiest and most influential man in the entire province. Probably it was he who directed Caiaphas in telling the people that it was expedient that one man should die for the people. How right his words, and how terribly evil his motives! (John 18:14). There is no question that Annas masterminded the proceedings that led to Jesus’ crucifixion. Annas had been Chief Priest for seventeen years, and then had appointed each of his six sons to the office, and deposed them in succession, finally appointing Caiaphas, his son-in-law. Annas controlled the money changers in the temple, probably making a substantial profit. When Jesus drove the money changers from the temple he struck at the very heart of Annas’ wealth and power (Mark 11: 15-17), and in effect signed his own death warrant. It is evident that Annas served only his own interests, and had little or no regard for the Law.
The next character in our story is Pontius Pilate, who was born in what today is Barcelona, Spain. He would probably have remained an unknown had he not managed to marry Claudia, granddaughter of Caesar. For this conquest Pilate was elevated to the rank of Roman General and was given as his first assignment the governorship of Judea. He seems not to have been qualified either morally or intellectually for a responsibility of such magnitude, although, as we will see later, he did show a positive sense of justice in his handling of Jesus’ trial. His early experience in Judea was noted for the imposition of certain rules and regulations which denied some religious rights, which led to riots and insurrections, requiring the Romans to call in troops from other areas.
Another actor in our story who presided over one of Jesus’ trials was Herod, probably the grandson of the Herod who slew the infants when Jesus was a young child. Herod was the Vice-Tetrarch of Galilee, and the one who ordered the beheading of John the Baptist. Herod had heard much regarding Jesus and hoped that he would provide entertainment of some kind for his court. Jesus referred to Herod as “that Fox” one of the very few personal derogatory remarks he ever made.
Finally, there was Barabbas. Being a conquered people was as unpleasant and distasteful to the Judeans in AD 33 as it would be to people of today. The burning ambition in many in that day was to drive the hated Romans from their soil, and to restore their government and political independence as a nation. Barabbas was the insurrectionist, revolutionist hero of his day. He was the popular hero who sought to organize sufficient arms and forces to reestablish the kingdom. Even Jesus’ own disciples had thought that this was what he would do! (Luke 24:21)
Today we can study the Jewish Code and the Roman Law as they existed in Jesus’ time. By applying the facts reported in these trials, all of which took place within six hours, we can arrive at certain conclusions regarding the legality of these events. Numerous errors at law occurred during these trials, and had Jesus the right of appeal almost any one of these would have sufficed to release him. Sometimes we in America suppose we were the first to become deeply concerned with the rights and liberties of the individual, but not so. The Judeans (Jews) were deeply concerned about such rights, and they established greater safeguards and more elaborate procedures to insure them than we possess today. A son of Abraham must under no circumstances be put to death unjustly or wrongly.
MARK 14:43-46 recounts the betrayal and arrest of Jesus. Here was the first of the errors against the law. Jesus was arrested on the information of an accomplice, a co-criminal, his disciple, Judas Iscariot. Under the Jewish Code a co-criminal or conspirator was not considered a credible witness; therefore his word was insufficient under their law to justify the arrest of another.
Jesus was arrested at about the hour of midnight, in the garden, as the soldiers and the multitude sent by the High Priest came with their swords, staves and torches. The Jewish Code prohibited the arrest of one accused of a capital crime in which his life might be in forfeit after the hour of sunset and before the hour of sunrise. Their belief was that one who was taken away from his family, friends and neighbors during the hours of darkness might in some manner be denied his legal rights. Yet Jesus was arrested in the middle of the night. This was the second infraction of the law.
The Crown of Thoms
JOHN 18:12, 13 records the third error of Jesus’ trial. Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, had no legal authority to try or even interrogate Jesus. He was not then an officer of the court, and the Jewish Code did not provide for a one man court anyway, the smallest number being three, and then 23, and finally 73. They believed a one-man court was insufficient, for one judge could be partial and might not adequately protect the rights of the accused.
Evidently Jesus, this son of a carpenter, this uneducated person (John 7:15) knew his legal rights. He knew he did not have to testify against himself, and that they must bring forth two or three witnesses to prove their case (Deuteronomy 19:15). Jesus knew that as long as he taught openly in the temple, the synagogues and in the fields, he had done nothing wrong, for he never taught secretly. He knew that they must prove their case against him according to the law, but they failed to do so. Annas’ attempt to interrogate Jesus was a clear violation of law.
JOHN 18:19-24 relates that Jesus was sent to Caiaphas and interrogated regarding his disciples and his doctrine. Jesus had refused (rightly so) to answer Annas, and was then sent, bound, to Caiaphas, High Priest and evidently chairman of the Greater Sanhedrin. He had convened the Sanhedrin shortly after midnight, although under their Jewish Code it could not be convened between sunset and sunrise, for the Judeans believed the judges of the Sanhedrin could not intelligently, alertly and accurately hear the testimony against a man accused of a capital crime during the hours of darkness. Yet they tried Jesus shortly after midnight. This was the fourth infraction of their own law!
MATTHEW 26:57-61 records Jesus’ questioning before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin; the effort to find false witnesses, resulting in only two charging him with the claim that he would destroy and rebuild the temple in three days; and then the adjuring by Caiaphas as to whether he was the Christ.
In the proceedings before the Sanhedrin there was no prosecutor or district attorney as we know him today. The charge was made and proved by the complaining witnesses themselves, and the members of the court were denied the right to actively interrogate or prosecute the accused. Jesus was accused of sedition, seeking to tear down or destroy the Hebrew religion. The two witnesses accused Jesus of saying he would tear down the temple and rebuild it in three days. We know from John 2:21 that “he spake of the temple of his body.” However, they believed he intended the literal temple, which had taken more than forty years to build. Since there were only two witnesses, and they were not in complete agreement, Caiaphas realized he would lose this particular charge, so he took control of the prosecution contrary to the Code. This was the fifth infraction.
Finding that he was not able to establish the allegation of sedition, Caiaphas changed the charge in the middle of the trial, a proceeding that would not be permitted today. He changed the charge to blasphemy. This was a crime in which the accused allegedly claims to himself a spark of divinity, either that he is divine or that he is the Son of God. This was violation number six.
Jesus declined to answer the charges of Caiaphas, which he was legally permitted to do, until Caiaphas pulled a master stroke. He said to Jesus (Matthew 26:63) “I adjure you … “ The word occurs only seven times in the Bible. It was a solemn and seldom used Hebrew oath, going beyond our present day oaths “So help me God,” for in addition to requiring one to answer truthfully, it also compels him to answer. In today’s language, Jesus could not take the 5th amendment. Jesus recognized the solemnity of this oath, and when he was asked “I adjure you by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God” Jesus said “Thou hast said, nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven” (Matthew 26:63, 64). With this testimony from Jesus that he indeed was the Christ, the Son of the living God, Caiaphas closed the testimony and asked for an immediate vote, after literally condemning Jesus before a vote was even taken (verse 65). This was a gross violation of Jewish Law, number seven.
Under the Jewish Code, at the conclusion of the testimony of a capital crime, the judges were directed, in the language of the code, to return home, and there to eat light foods and drink light wine, then sleep well for two days and two nights, and then to return, ONLY THEN, to vote, after again hearing the testimony against the accused. Caiaphas also asked for a simultaneous or voice vote, which was the eighth flagrant violation of their code. The code expressly provided that the vote should be cast one at a time, beginning with the youngest member, and then ascending in seniority until the oldest and most mature had voted, since only in this manner would the vote of the junior member not be influenced by that of the elder and more wise. The ninth violation!
They all voted that Jesus was guilty. Under the Jewish Code a unanimous verdict of guilty was a verdict of acquittal. The seeming paradox is explained by the belief of the Judeans that unless the accused had secured the sympathy and belief in his innocence by at least one member of the court, he had been denied a fair trial. A unanimous verdict would raise the possibility of a purely emotional decision, possibly indicating “mob psychology.” In their code a verdict of guilty must be one less than all, but more than half. They all voted guilty. Flagrant violation number ten.
As mentioned previously, it was not lawful for the Jews to put anyone to death (John 18:31). So they took Jesus to Pilate. It seems clear that Pilate followed each of the four steps of the Code of Criminal Procedure: accusation, interrogation, defence and verdict, for he first said as he came out of the palace “What accusation do you bring against this man?” They answered “If he were not a malefactor we would not have delivered him unto thee” Then Pilate replied “Take him, and judge him according to your law” They replied “It is not lawful for us to put any man to death.” We cannot apply this particular act to a specific law, but it is a clear case of verdict before trial, and we may properly call this violation number eleven.
On hearing the accusation of the Jews, Pilate took Jesus into the palace and followed the second step, that of interrogation and examination. (John 18:28, 38 records this part of the trial.) Pilate asked Jesus
“Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus then entered a defence, the third step, being one of justification. “My kingdom is not of this world [age]: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence” Being satisfied with that defence, and the obvious fallacy of the charges, Pilate returned his verdict to the Jews. “I find in him no fault at all.” Pilate seems to have understood justice!
In the meantime, the Chief Priest, the scribes and the Pharisees, in cooperation with the soldiers, were stirring up the multitude to demand the crucifixion of Jesus. Pilate sought in some way to avoid this responsibility, and when they said (Luke 23:5) “… He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place” Pilate seized upon this information as a possible solution. If he were a Galilean he belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction, so Pilate had Jesus sent to Herod. Today this would be called a change of venue on the judge’s own motion. However, Jesus would not answer Herod’s questions so they mocked him, arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him back to Pilate (Luke 23:11).
For the second time Pilate took Jesus into the palace and said to him “Whence art thou?” but Jesus did not answer (John 19:9-11). Pilate asked why Jesus did not answer, knowing that he had the power to either release Jesus or crucify him. To this Jesus replied that Pilate only had power from God, and that those who had delivered him had the greater sin. Then Pilate went again to the crowd and said “I find no fault with this man.” The crowd cried out “Crucify him, crucify him” and Pilate replied “But why, why, what crime has he done?”
Pilate, knowing the innocence of Jesus, made one more effort to release him as he recalled it was the custom at the beginning of the feast of Passover for the governor to release from the crowd any one prisoner then held captive (Matthew 27:20-22). When Pilate asked them whether he should release Jesus or Barabbas, the Chief Priests and elders persuaded the people to demand Barabbas and to crucify Jesus. Since Pilate could find no guilt in Jesus he demanded (verse 23) of the chief priest a reason for their charges. When Caiaphas saw that there might be a release of Jesus he played his master stroke – he changed the alleged crime from a Jewish crime to a Roman crime, one that Pilate would find almost impossible to resist: that of treason against Caesar, for any man who makes himself a king sets himself against Caesar. Probably Pilate reasoned that if he were to do nothing about someone who claimed to be a king, and Caesar heard of this, it might go hard for him. And Jesus HAD acknowledged that he was a king Nevertheless, Pilate tried to release Jesus by saying to them (John 19:15) “Shall I crucify your king?” The chief priests answered “We have no king but Caesar.” And so, realizing the innocence of Jesus, but the impossibility of resisting the priests, Pilate washed his hands of the matter and delivered Jesus to be crucified.
One of the amazing features of Jesus’ trials is the almost total absence of his disciples, the most prominent one being his betrayer, Judas, and then the denial of Jesus by the Apostle Peter. What a heartbreaking experience for our Lord this must have been.
When Jesus was delivered to be crucified he was compelled to carry his own cross until he could no longer carry the burden. Then came the degrading and painful crucifixion, along with two common criminals. But in spite of the pain and anguish Jesus instructed John to take care of Mary, his mother, even as he suffered on the cross.
The suffering of Jesus on behalf of the church, and for the entire human race, is still so vivid even after 1950 years that we can shed our tears of love and sympathy for that greatest gift ever given in this vast universe. Further it is the greatest and most precious gift that will ever be given!
But there on the crude cross, pierced with nails and wounded in his side, Jesus’ death was not the end, but the beginning His death as the Ransom for all, to be testified in due time, was the crowning glory of the fulfillment of the Law, the perfect man’s life sacrificed for Adam’s forfeited perfect life. Thus the fulfilling of that Law went infinitely beyond anything that was then expected by the Jews of Jesus’ time. But for us at this end of the age, the Scripture 1 Corinthians 15:22 becomes all meaningful: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” This becomes a vital and guaranteed promise, since Jesus has accomplished his Divine Purpose, assuring the promised blessing of all the families of the earth.
— Homer Hamlin, researched by attorney Howard Rankin