Read Matthew 26:57, Mark 14:53, Luke 22:54 & John 18:12-14. Our Lord’s trials before the Jewish courts and the Roman courts now begin. Matthew states He was led away to Caiaphas while John states He was taken first to Annas, who was the father-in-law to Caiaphas. It helps to understand a little about the Jewish high priesthood at this point. The high priest was the top religious leader in Judea. He held great power and wielded much influence. He was the head of the Sanhedrin, which was the Jewish high court. This council or court was the last appeal for those accused of crimes. The only thing that the Sanhedrin could not pass on was capital crimes, those which merited the death penalty. Rome reserved that power for herself. The position of the high priest was not only a religious office; it was a political office appointed by the Roman authorities. Annas was appointed high priest in 6 B.C. but was removed by Rome in A.D. 15. Although he was removed, he remained the power behind the high priesthood for the next half-century, being succeeded in office by five of his sons and a son-in-law. Caiaphas was the high priest at this time, but the real power behind the office, the one making the decisions, was Annas. Because of this, Annas is still called a high priest even though his son-in-law held that office, as is seen in Luke 3:2. Thus Jesus was first taken to Annas, and then he sent Him to Caiaphas, his son-in-law.
1. John relates that Caiaphas was the one who said it was expedient for one man to die for the people. This is a reference to an earlier statement he made in John 11:49-53:
“But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation does not perish.” Now he did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. So from that day on they planned together to kill Him.”
How is it that an unbeliever can be a prophet?
God in His sovereignty can use anyone, believer or not, to declare His message. Witness His use of the false prophet Balaam in Numbers 22. Caiaphas was undoubtedly thinking we must get rid of this man Jesus before the Romans come in and destroy the whole nation because He is inciting insurrection. But God led him to say what he said as a prophecy of the sacrificial atonement for sin. One wonders if God has so spoken elsewhere, even today, through the mouths of unbelievers.
Read Matthew 26:58, 69-70; Mark 14:54, 66-68; Luke 22:54-57 and John 18:15-18. Peter and John followed the crowd that had arrested our Lord back to Caiaphas’ house. Peter stopped by the gate to the courtyard, but John was allowed inside the courtyard because he personally knew Caiaphas and was recognized by the servant-girl in charge of the gate. When John went out and vouched for Peter, he came in and sat by the fire which had been built to keep the staff warm. This servant-girl then approached Peter and accused him of being one of Jesus’ disciples, whereupon Peter denied the accusation.
2. Contrast Peter’s actions when face to face with a servant-girl who accused him of being a follower of Jesus with his actions recorded in John 18:10 when face to face with at least 600 armed and trained Roman soldiers.
In the latter instance, when faced with the Roman cohort, he exhibited extreme bravery but little thinking when he drew his sword and attacked the servant of the high priest. Having had time to consider the situation and the consequences, this unarmed girl evoked no bravery but a lie.
Read John 18:19-24. Annas questions our Lord first. John did not stay with Peter in the courtyard but approached to within earshot at least of where Jesus was being questioned by Annas. No doubt this is why He records the events taking place here while the other Gospel writers do not. This questioning was done at night. It was not performed by a full council but by one person. Our Lord was struck by one of the officers of the high priest, although that was prohibited by Jewish law. No witnesses were called to testify. Indeed, this was not an official trial. Instead, it was an attempt by Annas to find something upon which to hang an accusation warranting a death sentence.
3. Concerning what two areas did the high priest (Annas) question Jesus?
a. His disciples
b. His teachings
4. What did our Lord tell Annas about His disciples? What did He tell Him about His teachings?
a. He did not say anything about His disciples.
b. Concerning His teachings, He told Annas that what He taught was taught openly in public places and that Annas should ask those who heard Him what He had taught.
Read Matthew 26:59-66, Mark 14:55-64 and John 18:24. Annas then sends Jesus on to Caiaphas and the elders. They are still meeting in the house of Caiaphas, and it is night. From Luke’s account, we know that the questioning took place somewhere visible from the courtyard since our Lord turns and looks at Peter after his last denial. According to Jewish law, any criminal trials had to be done by the full council in the council room during the day. This again was not the official trial but a preliminary one to decide how they could justify the death sentence on which they had already agreed.
5. What was the purpose of this meeting with Jesus?
Their purpose was to find some evidence or create it, true or false, upon which they could declare Him guilty of capital punishment.
6. How successful were they in obtaining false testimony?
They were very unsuccessful. Their witnesses were inconsistent.
7. How did our Lord respond to the religious leaders when they questioned Him about these false witnesses?
He did not respond. This was consistent with Jewish law, which said He was not compelled to testify.
8. What question did Caiaphas finally ask our Lord?
He asked Him if He were the Messiah. The formula by which he asked Jesus, “I adjure You by the living God,” was one to which any religious Jewish person, upon hearing, would respond.
9. How did Jesus answer?
He said, “I am.” He also told Caiaphas and those with him that they would see Him sitting at the right and of power, that is, at God, the Father’s right hand and returning in the clouds.
Read Matthew 26:67-68 & 71-75, Mark 14:65 & 69-72, Luke 22:58-65 & John 18:25-27. After Caiaphas declared that our Lord had blasphemed by claiming to be the Messiah, ritually tearing his clothing, and getting the rest of those present to agree to the accusation, Jesus was turned over to His guards.
10. Peter’s second and third denial of our Lord take place sometime during the period Jesus was being questioned by Caiaphas. Why do you suppose Peter used cursing in his last denial?
He probably felt that using this language would help convince those to whom he spoke that he was one of them and not one of the Lord’s followers.
The Applications:
What are the applications of these passages to our lives today? Identify as many as you are able.
1. Peter’s reactions at the arrest and trial of our Lord are interesting. On the one hand, he takes a sword and attacks a member of the party that came to arrest our Lord. He did this in spite of the fact that there are at between 600 and 420 well-armed and trained Roman soldiers who would not hesitate at all to eliminate him as a threat. On the other hand, he is cowed by a servant-girl when he is identified as one of our Lord’s disciples. Yet this is not inconsistent with Peter’s impetuous personality. He acts in the first instance without thinking; he doesn’t consider the circumstances or the consequences. He just acts. In the second, he’s had time to reflect on the possible results, and this scares him.
How often do we react in similar ways? All too often, we act without thinking, speak without first engaging our minds! Too often do we think about possible consequences and results. The more we dwell upon such things, the timider and more frightened we become! Our example is to be our Lord, who was in control of His actions and words throughout the trials He endured. He carefully and prayerfully considered the circumstances through which He was about to go. His words were few but to the point. He did not say anything which would endanger His disciple, yet He gave to Caiaphas the answer for which the high priest was hoping, the one they would use to justify His execution, knowing full well that this would be the outcome of that answer.
2. Peter and John both followed our Lord after His arrest. Matthew, Mark and Luke state Peter followed at a distance. Peter stopped outside the courtyard and then entered it when John came back out and vouched for him with the gatekeeper. While we are not told how close John followed, he was no doubt closer than Peter. John’s account states that he went in right with Jesus to where Annas was holding court. Why did Peter lag behind? No doubt he was frightened and did not wish to be arrested and share the persecution with our Lord. This is also what impelled him to deny our Lord on three occasions.
Peter accentuated the third of these denials of our Lord with cursing. His purpose probably was to try to blend in with the rest of those around him and not stand out as a disciple of our Lord. If I appear to be one of them, his thinking was, they will not persecute me. How often do we seek to blend in with those around us in our dress, in our actions and in our words so that we do not appear to be different and stand out when it is standing out and appearing different is the very thing we ought to do? However, we should realize that the difference should not just be in outward appearance, but deep down in our very character.
That difference in essential inner character, produced by the working of the Spirit of God, then will be evidenced in outward manifestations. The language we use with those around us will have a different flavor. It will be positive building people up rather than tearing them down. It will not be crude or coarse. We will not match our language to those around us to blend in and hide the fact that we are a follower of our Lord.
Let’s ask ourselves, are we following our Lord, as did Peter, at a distance trying to disguise the fact that we are a follower of the Lord. Do our language and actions conform to those around us so we will blend in and be accepted by them, or do they reflect the fact that we are different, changed people, a true follower of Jesus Christ?