Study the Bible
      with Pastor Gregory
      ByronBible Home

      Would you like to ask Pastor Gregory a question?



      "The Case for False Arrest"
      John 18:19-24
      Theme: Jesus’ death resulted from His own love, not from any personal indictability.

        1. The Antagonism Exposed by Christ – 18:19-21

          1. The Illegitimacy of the Trial – v. 19

            1. In the middle of John’s account of Peter’s denial, we find Jesus dragged before the corrupt High Priest – Annas for the first of the examinations by the so called authorities:
              1. Annas (the true High Priest) – the corrupt and political "Godfather" of the Temple extortion.
              2. Caiaphas (the politically correct High Priest) – the corrupt and hypocritical businessman who was merchandising the Temple.
              3. Herod (the King of Judea) – the immoral and ambitious king who couldn’t come to any decision about Christ.
              4. Pilate (the Roman ruler in Palestine) – the superstitious representative of Rome who was seeking his own well being above justice.
            2. This first phase of the "Ecclesiastical" trial was a complete farce – violating so many of the laws that it merits the status of the worst travesty of jurisprudence ever!
              1. No capital offense could be tried at night.
              2. The arrest was made on the basis of a bribe.
              3. Jesus was asked to incriminate himself.
              4. There was a requirement of a one-day period between verdict and sentencing in a capital case.
            3. In reality, the verdict had been pronounced already – at least a week earlier – that Jesus had to die – cp. John 11:49-50
            4. Thus, when Jesus was dragged before Annas, the religious leaders were attempting to find some basis for their charges – "The high priest then questioned Jesus about His disciples and about His teaching."
              1. Annas’ interest in the disciples was not identity, but how many – in order to use the information as part of the case that Jesus was attempting to establish a kingdom rivaling Rome (to use in gaining Rome’s blessing on the execution of Jesus).
              2. His questions re: "His teaching" was motivated to find somewhere that Jesus violated the law as defined by the Pharisees to justify the accusation that Jesus should be killed (to gain the Jew’s blessing on the execution)
            5. The bottom line is that it was illegitimate and motivated out of envy and was thus nothing short of murder.

          2. The Illumination of the Tactics – vv. 20-21

            1. Jesus – being the Son of God – understood exactly what was happening; however, He was unwilling to hinder the process since going to the cross was what He was committed to doing.
            2. However, Jesus would maintain the stature of righteousness throughout the ordeal – here by making sure that the illegality of what was happening was noted.
            3. He responds to Annas’ demand for self-incrimination: "Jesus answered him, ‘I have spoken openly to the world; I always taught in the synagogues and in the temple, where all the Jews come together, and I spoke nothing in secret."
            4. Are you able to see the contrast between the clandestine activities of the religious leadership as they attempt to accuse, try, and execute Jesus under the cover of darkness; and the open a free way by which Jesus had conducted Himself.
            5. The point essentially being that the truth has nothing to hide or of which to be ashamed.
            6. He then goes even further in the exposure of the antagonisms of the Jews by suggesting that he ask the people (from whom Jesus knows they are trying to hide what they are doing) what it is they understood that Jesus taught – "Why do you question Me? Question those who have heard what I spoke to them, they know what I said."
            7. Essentially, Jesus is suggesting in a very subtle – yet direct – way that Annas crawl out from under the shadows and deal with Jesus in the open.

        2. The Abuse Endured by christ – 18:22

          1. It Revealed the Incomprehension of Sin
            1. Sinners become so disoriented by sin that they believe that good is evil and evil is good.
            2. With tremendous hostility and presumption, "one of the officers standing nearby struck Jesus, saying, ‘Is that the way You answer the high priest’?"
            3. The confusion that is here revealed demonstrates the problem with sin – the discernment of sinners is so corrupted by depravity that it will always chose against God in favor of the flesh.
            4. When the man ought to have been appalled that the Son of God, the true Messiah, was being illegally tried and accused, he was offended that Jesus dared impugn the motives of the High Priest.
            5. Essentially, Jesus is abused by a man who is attempting to defend the indefensible – an occasion that is dependent on hostility and brutality.
          2. It Fulfilled the Insights of Scripture
            1. We are told here that Jesus was struck in the face with a stick (presumably a night stick carried by the officer who hit him) – the essential meaning of the term used here for "struck" [rJavpisma]
            2. However, even in this most insignificant detail, the sovereign plan of God is ratified by the prophets – cp. Micah 5:1
            3. This is the first of many physical abuses and pains that Jesus will endure this day – he was willing to endure it for us.
            4. Note the treachery of the High Priest allowing the Messiah to be bound and brought before him and accused of sins against God and man only to be brutalized while defenseless.

        3. The Appeal Expressed by Christ – 19:23-24

          1. The Appeal for Justice – v. 23

            1. Jesus, although willing to endure countless indignities at the hands of men, responds to the hostilities of the officer and the high priest but confronting the injustice of what is occurring.
            2. Jesus immediately seeks to focus the problem – "Jesus answered him, ‘If I have spoken wrongly, testify of the wrong …" – essentially asking for a clarification what what inaccurate or inappropriate in what He said.
            3. Jesus essentially states that it’s easy to brutalize, but can it all be substantiated by any rational evidence?
            4. He then confronts the injustice further – "but if rightly, why do you strike Me?"

          2. The Alternatives for Judgment – v. 24

            1. Annas stands with the officer who struck Jesus while he was under Annas’ authority, thus Annas was party to it.
            2. You can imagine the stare down that is occurring between Annas and Jesus, that is broken by the decision by Annas to send him to the politically acceptable high priest – "So Annas sent Him bound to Caiaphas the high priest."
            3. Annas essentially decides that he’s up against someone far superior to him who has been under interrogation for only a few minutes and already has the upper hand.
            4. As will be evident throughout the way to the cross, none of those who accused him could come up with anything of substance against Christ – cp. John 15:25 ("they hated me without cause").
            5. Jesus endured these indignities and mock trials for one reason alone – to bring glory to the Father by laying down His life to save us by dying in our place.

        BCBC Home Page