The combined record of
the gospels indicate that Jesus was judged guilty in the house of Caiaphas, but
that at dawn there was a formal judgment issued by the Sanhedrin as Luke’s
gospel records. We are told of the ploy
used by the high priest to get something they could use to get a majority vote
from the council. Jesus did not answer
the trumped up charges. But He could not
deny Himself.
Ø
First He was asked, are you the Christ? He did
not deny it and, in fact, He gave a strong answer. Son of
Man is terminology from the Prophets and is a reference to the Messiah
(Dan. 7:13). Jesus is saying that
Messiah, the Son of Man, will be in the Godhead, as the right hand of the power
of God. The leaders know what He is
saying and that He has claimed throughout His ministry to be the Son of Man,
the Christ.
Ø
Thus they ask a follow-up question: are you then the Son of God? Jesus’ answer, You say that I am, is not a tricky answer; it is a way of stating
the affirmative. We know this because of
the response of his questioners. He is
charged with blasphemy. Blasphemy will get a majority vote on
the council but, of course, will not be a charge that will bring the Romans to
crucify Jesus; the high priest will have to try some other trickery for that.
The chief priests and elders of the people
bind Jesus and take Him to Pilate, the Roman governor over Judea. It seems this event triggers Judas’ remorse
over what he had done; Judas seemed surprised.
Some think Judas thought Jesus would use the opportunity to lead an
insurrection but there is really no evidence of that. It makes more sense, again from the context,
that Judas regretted what he had done
by betraying innocent blood. Remorseful
(Grk. metamelo) is not repentance (metanoieo) but expresses regret over
consequences. Judas is not turning to
God; that is evident in the fact that he hung himself. This is not the godly sorrow of which we spoke in the case of Peter.
[Note on Matt.
27:9-10: This passage is said to have been spoken by Jeremiah the prophet but actually is from Zech. 11:13. While some try to resolve this by claiming a
possible error by a copyist, we believe it is better understood that the entire
prophetic section of the OT was often referred to as “Jeremiah” by the Jewish
scholars.]
The response of the
chief priests would be laughable if it were not such an evil situation. Their words are, It is not lawful to put them into the treasury. How strange that these who violated so many
statutes in the condemnation of our Lord were concerning about what to do with
the blood money of Judas. The potter’s field is called Akeldama in Ac. 1:19, meaning field of blood.
There is something we
often think about with respect to this decision of the Sanhedrin to condemn
Jesus and take Him to Pilate. We know
that there were at least two men who voted against the majority: Nicodemus and
Joseph of Arimathea. It is doubtful they
had much opportunity to argue. The
impression we get is that this was a rush
to “justice” and that the decision was already made when it was brought for a
vote. Yes it was already made. Let us conclude our study with the words of Peter
on the Day of Pentecost, words inspired by God that explain what is happened in
this story.
Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man
attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through
Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know – Him, being delivered by the
determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands,
have crucified, and put to death; whom God raised up, having loosed the pains
of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it. (Acts
2:22-24)
No comments:
Post a Comment