The Verdict on Jesus
Notes
Transcript
Sermon Tone Analysis
A
D
F
J
S
Emotion
A
C
T
Language
O
C
E
A
E
Social
PRAY
INTRO: Truth is not pliable. Truth is not simply relative to your perspective. Truth is truth. Truth is not something to be twisted for your own purposes.
Similarly, justice is not merely a tool to be wielded in the hands of those in political power. Justice is a righteous judgment based on what is right and what is wrong.
Truth is truth, and justice is justice.
[Review where we are in Luke’s Gospel: prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane, followed by betrayal and arrest (betrayed, denied, mocked).] We now come to scenes where Jesus is on trial, basically for being who he is.
When day came, the assembly of the elders of the people gathered together, both chief priests and scribes. And they led him away to their council, and they said, “If you are the Christ, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I tell you, you will not believe, and if I ask you, you will not answer. But from now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God.” So they all said, “Are you the Son of God, then?” And he said to them, “You say that I am.” Then they said, “What further testimony do we need? We have heard it ourselves from his own lips.” Then the whole company of them arose and brought him before Pilate. And they began to accuse him, saying, “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king.” And Pilate asked him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” And he answered him, “You have said so.” Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, “I find no guilt in this man.” But they were urgent, saying, “He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judea, from Galilee even to this place.”
What is the essence of what takes place in the Jewish phase of the trial of Jesus?
On trial before the Sanhedrin, Jesus is convicted of blasphemy for admitting the truth of who he is. (Luke 22:66-71)
On trial before the Sanhedrin, Jesus is convicted of blasphemy for admitting the truth of who he is. (Luke 22:66-71)
When day came, the council officially convened. - This gives us a hint that all of the questioning at night was not precisely legal (although many members seem to have been present), so they would have needed a formal convening and decision. Luke emphasizes the official decision. As they question Jesus, Luke is here providing either a summary of the Jewish phase of the trial, or more likely the last part of that trial with questions that were repeated in the daytime to elicit the answers necessary to reach the desired ruling.
Similar things were already asked and answered during the dark morning hour interrogations (as we see in parallel accounts), but this at day break was the formal proceeding required. Even then it’s merely a veiled effort to follow the law, since Jesus is convicted on his own testimony rather than that of other witnesses (which the law required), and because they really had already made their decision at night…
Then the high priest tore his robes and said, “He has uttered blasphemy. What further witnesses do we need? You have now heard his blasphemy. What is your judgment?” They answered, “He deserves death.”
In fact, Luke has been telling us that they’ve been after this goal of getting rid of Jesus, of putting him to death, for quite some time. They are simply seeking some semblance of sufficient cause to turn him over to the Roman authorities, who can authorize capital punishment.
The council was made up 71 members from three groups: the chief priests, some elders of the people, and some of the scribes of the Pharisees. (While they often were competing factions among themselves, here they are united against Jesus.)
When asked if he is the Christ (the Messiah), Jesus doesn’t give a direct answer. Instead, he draws attention to their unbelief and their refusal to answer his questions. First, their minds are already made up, and Jesus knows it. (You can probably relate to that experience of being asked a question when the questioner’s mind is clearly already made up.) And secondly, Jesus has proven that they are unwilling to accept what the evidence plainly suggests, first about John (“from heaven or from man?” Lk 20:3-8), and similarly (to an even greater degree) that Jesus’ own authority is clearly from God and not from man.
The Messiah is the “anointed one” sent from God. Who has demonstrated greater authority from heaven in his teaching and healing than Jesus? This is blatant refusal to believe and to give a necessary response to who Jesus is? The question isn’t, Is he the Christ? The question is, Why do you refuse to believe the plain evidence that Jesus is the Christ? Jesus hits the nail exactly on the head. It’s not that he has given any untrue indication about himself, but that they refuse to believe the evidence.
In his answer to the question, Jesus turns the tables on these men who think that they sit in judgment over him. (And this is a unique contribution of Luke’s account.) —> v. 69! - Jesus’ authority will be vindicated “from now on” because of his innocent sacrificial death and resurrection from the grave and exaltation by the Father. This very path of suffering that he willingly walks will provide the vindication of who he is.
Who is really in the position of authority here? Where will the Son of Man be seated after he has walked this path of sacrificial death that leads to vindication in victory? To be seated at the right hand of the power of God is to say that he will receive the highest place of honor and authority.
Point of application here: It should be a great comfort and encouragement, and also a motivator, to know that God’s justice is perfect and that he is the ultimate judge. If we should suffer injustice, especially for the cause of Christ, but really this is true of any injustice of any kind… we know that perpetrators of injustice sit under the judgment of God. And if we hold a position of authority, the kinds of judgments we make are subject to and measured by the justice and mercy of God.
So the judgments that these religious authorities have made concerning Jesus are not based upon the evidence of who Jesus is and where his authority comes from, or even whether or not what he is doing is truly harmful to people or to the name of God. They have made their judgment about Jesus concerning what is religiously and politically expedient for themselves and their own power and authority.
The religious leaders understand the implications of his reference to being the cosmic ruler (Son of Man) prophesied in Daniel 7:13-14, and they understand that being elevated to the right hand of power would be the highest place of honor and authority. So this leads them to a followup question (also only recorded in Luke), and apparently it elicits an emotional response from the whole group, as they are “all” asking him, Are you the Son of God, then?
Since men can sometimes be called sons of God, the qualifier here is the definite article, “the.” They are asking Jesus if he is claiming to have some kind of unique relationship to God, essentially putting himself on equal footing with God (to sit next to God as virtual equal), for what mere man could possibly sit at the right hand of God?
Jesus’ response is enigmatic to us because it is not something that we have an exact translation for in our language. I mean, we have translated it literally, but the way it is used in their language and culture is not something that we do in ours. “You say that I am,” or “You have said so,” is like a qualified affirmation that deflects responsibility for the way it is being stated back on the speaker, but without denying that their is some accuracy in it.
Jesus said something similar to Judas in Mt 26:25 when he asked if it was he who would betray, and to Caiphas when he asked hours earlier at night if Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God (Mt. 26:63-64). Luke records Jesus saying it here again and yet again in response to Pilate. The point seems to be that Jesus is saying that they are correct, even if he might have said it differently, but that the questioner himself is the one responsible for the measure of truth coming out of his own mouth.
The irony is thick, then, because at the very moment in which Jesus is telling them that they themselves are speaking the truth, it is at this point that they also conclude Jesus has convicted himself from his own lips. v. 71 (which they consider blasphemy: Mt. 26:65)
REVIEW:
Q1: Just tell us plainly if you are the Christ (the Messiah).
A1: I won’t answer that again, because you have proven that your minds are made up. … But I will tell you this, you have two things backwards: who the real authority is here, and what this will accomplish.
Q2: Are you claiming a unique relationship to God?
A2: Your own mouths convict you for making the connection that I am the unique Son of God.
Jesus speaks the truth, and his reply about his identity ends up being the cause of his own conviction. Is Jesus the promised Messiah? Yes. Is Jesus the Son of Man, the authoritative and divine cosmic ruler prophesied in Daniel? Yes. Is Jesus the unique Son of God? Yes. But because they have concluded that Jesus cannot be who he must be in order for these things to be true, the leaders of the Jews bring Jesus to Pilate because they want him executed.
Luke’s conclusion, which he desires for the reader to come to share, is that Jesus is who he says he is. What is your conclusion about Jesus? … Or are you more resolved as to the identity of Jesus?
Now the focus shifts from the Jewish phase of the trial to the Roman phase, where Jesus is… (brought before pilate on charges of insurrection, of which he is clearly innocent. Yet Jesus willingly suffers this injustice to accomplish something bigger: salvation)
Brought before Pilate on charges of insurrection, Jesus is plainly innocent but willingly suffers injustice. (Luke 23:1-5)
Brought before Pilate on charges of insurrection, Jesus is plainly innocent but willingly suffers injustice. (Luke 23:1-5)
So the Sanhedrin has given their verdict that Jesus deserves death (Mt. 26:66), which was really their intent all along (John 11:53, Luke 22:2). But they are not supposed to exercise the death penalty, because the Romans closely guarded that privilege for themselves throughout the empire. (Which makes sense because they can’t have their subjects killing one another, especially if a sub-leader in a region should decide to kill some of their more loyal supporters!)
There is also a second reason that the Jews would want to do this. You’ll recall that they fear the people, so while they might get away with something like stoning him to death (as they did to Stephen in Acts) because the Romans might decide to overlook it and avoid further trouble, this would further provide them some buffer for ultimate responsibility for Jesus’ death. (We know that God is providentially at work, for Jesus himself had prophesied by what kind of death he would be executed. Jn 18:31-32)
To show how serious they are, and to apply a lot of pressure on Pilate, the whole group of the Sanhedrin brings Jesus before Pilate. (This could be the full number of 71 members of the council, but we know that at least one of them, Joseph of Arimathea, was a dissenter in this verdict and pressure on Pilate to put Jesus to death. Lk 23:50-51)
The Jews come before Pilate because they need him in this case, not because of any affinity for Pilate, who is remembered in history as being insensitive to Jewish faith, greedy for personal gain, and sometimes ruthless in his actions toward them (Lk 13:1). In fact, Pilate, whose normal seat of government was in Caesarea on the Mediterranean coast, would have been in Jerusalem for the purpose of trying to prevent any rebellious activities when Jews were gathered together there in such large number.
The Jewish leaders go to Pilate now only because it serves their own purposes. And in order to serve their purposes, they must shift the accusation concerning Jesus from something religious to something political. The charge of blasphemy would be of no concern to Pilate, but if they could paint Jesus as an insurrectionist in danger of stirring up a revolution, they could get Pilate to act.
So they accuse Jesus before Pilate of three things: 1. Misleading our nation (by which they probably intend for Pilate to hear as him attempting to turn Jewish loyalties away from Rome), 2. Forbidding people to pay taxes to Caesar (this second accusation is a blatant lie, since Jesus had given the opposite answer in Luke 20:20-26), and 3. claiming to be Christ… and this is important, being Messiah would mean he’s a king.
Now Luke’s readers can see quite plainly that the substance of these accusations is false. Jesus told them to pay taxes, he had never said anything about rising up against Rome, and his intent with his kingship was not at this time to set up any kind of political kingdom.
So when Jesus answers Pilate’s question about his kingship, Jesus again gives that qualified answer: “You have said so,” meaning I cannot say that you are wrong, but that isn’t precisely the way that I would explain it.
While Luke gives Jesus’ first short answer to this question from Pilate (or just that single answer as a summary — all of this is shorter in Luke than in the other Gospels), John’s Gospel gives further detail in response to Pilate continuing to probe with this question about Jesus’ kingship:
So Pilate entered his headquarters again and called Jesus and said to him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” Jesus answered, “Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?” Pilate answered, “Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you over to me. What have you done?” Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” Then Pilate said to him, “So you are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.”
In other words, I am not political threat, if that’s what you are asking. My kingdom at present is a spiritual one with spiritual purposes. While Pilate is far from understanding Jesus’ spiritual purpose for coming into the world to bear witness to the truth of who God is, and who we are, and how we need Jesus to be made right with God… Pilate does not have ears to hear that spiritual truth. But what he does hear is that Jesus is no threat. He is certainly not an insurrectionist. In fact, he perceived accurately enough, Mark tells us, that the chief priests had handed Jesus over to him out of envy (Mk 15:10).
So Pilate goes back to them, v. 4, which includes the members of the Sanhedrin and apparently many other spectators who have joined in (“the crowds”), answering, “I find no guilt in this man.” In other words, you have broughtJesus to me on charges of some kind of insurrection, of being a revolutionary, but of that he is most definitely innocent. Pilate could not see any way that Jesus was a political threat to Rome.
Now of course, they already knew that these were trumped up charges and that they just wanted to be rid of Jesus because they perceived him as a threat to their position & authority and to their own definitions of living lives that are pleasing to God. Jesus was a threat to them to their way of doing life and a threat to their authority in Israel. So they insist to Pilate, “but he stirs up trouble, and he teaches everywhere.” This is only the beginning of their insistence that Pilate must not release Jesus! What is true and just is no longer the issue for them: Jesus must die.
Conclusion:
What About Truth and Justice?
What About Truth and Justice?
What hope is there for mankind if truth is ignored and justice is not served?
Jesus is God’s grace & truth incarnate.
Jesus is God’s grace & truth incarnate.
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’ ”) For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.
Truth is not thwarted in this trial. Truth is being revealed in the innocent sacrifice of Jesus.
Jesus satisfies God’s perfect justice.
Jesus satisfies God’s perfect justice.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.
but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
PRAY
---