Section 125 &126, The Jewish Trial

Section 125 
FIRST STAGE OF JEWISH TRIAL
EXAMINATION BY ANNAS
(Friday before dawn)
JOHN 18:12-14, 19-23

Jesus faced six trials in all: three before Jewish officials, and three before Roman officials (see the list of these trials at Mat_26:57-58).-BKC

Jesus is taken first to Annas:

"We should note that John calls Annas high priest. The high priesthood was a life office. According to Moses, Annas was high priest, but the Romans had given the office to Caiaphas, so that Annas was high priest de jure, but Caiaphas was so de facto. As high priest, therefore, and as head of the Sadducean party, the people looked to Annas before Caiaphas, taking Jesus to him first. The influence of Annas is shown by the fact that he made five of his son and sons-in-law high priests. Annas is said to have been about sixty years old at this time. He questioned Jesus for the purpose of obtaining, if possible, some material out of which to frame an accusation."-Fourfold

Jesus stands up for himself against the accusations and one of the officers strikes him.

Section 126
SECOND STAGE OF JEWISH TRIAL
JESUS CONDEMNED BY CAIAPHAS AND THE SANHEDRIN
(Palace of Caiaphas. Friday.)
MATT. 26:57, 59-68
MARK 14:53, 55-65
LUKE 22:54, 63-65
JOHN 18:24

Jesus went from Annas to Caiaphas, the Sanhedrin also gathering there. They brought false witnesses to testify against him, but even the witnesses did not agree on their accounts.

"The council of the elders (also known as the Sanhedrin) was the Jewish nation’s official judicial body. This council was their final court of appeals. If the council found Jesus guilty, it was the last word - the nation found Him guilty. They met at daybreak since it was illegal to assemble at night."-BKC

"The purpose of Jesus’ trials was to find some legal basis on which to condemn Him to death. Judas’ testimony was crucial to the religious leaders’ case, but he was nowhere to be found. As a result witnesses were sought against Jesus, a highly unusual court procedure, attempting to find anything that would make Him worthy of death. While many false witnesses volunteered, none of them could agree on anything against Jesus." BKC

"Jesus refused to answer any of the charges brought against Him because He was never officially charged with any crime." -BKC

"The high priest Caiaphas asked Jesus two questions to get information that could be used against Him. In Greek the first question expects a positive answer: “You are going to answer Your accusers, aren’t You?” The second question expected an explanation from Him: “What is the meaning of the charges these witnesses are making against You?” But Jesus remained silent and gave no defense (cf. Isa_53:7). His silence frustrated the court and brought its proceedings to a standstill." -BKC

"When he had said these things, one of the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand, saying, “Is that how you answer the high priest?” Jesus answered him, “If what I said is wrong, bear witness about the wrong; but if what I said is right, why do you strike me?” John 18:22-23

"It was easier to evade the truth or to silence the One who spoke the truth than to attempt to answer the truth. Truth has a self-evident power of persuasion and those who oppose it find it difficult to deny. Jesus pressed this point and exposed their hypocrisy. They knew the truth but loved error." -BKC


Regarding the phrase "Son of God"

"But Jesus remained silent. And the high priest said to him, “I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.” Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”  Matthew 26:63-64

"Originally the Messiah was recognized as the Son of God (Ps. 2:7), but if the Jews had ever generally entertained such an idea, they had lost it before Jesus' day, The Messiah might of course be called the Son of God in that secondary sense in which Adam was thus called (John 1:49; Luke 3:38). But Jesus had used the term in an entirely different sense, and his usage had been extremely offensive to the Jews (John 5:17, 18; 10:30-39; Matt. 22:41-46). Caiaphas evidently wished Jesus to answer this question in that new sense which the Lord had given to the words. Caiaphas had no legal right to ask either of these questions. No man can be compelled to testify against himself, but he knew the claims of Jesus, and realized that if Jesus repudiated them he would be shamed forever, and if he asserted them he could be charged with blasphemy. Taking advantage, therefore, of the situation, Caiaphas put the question with the usual formula of an oath, thus adding moral power to it, for, under ordinary circumstances, one was held guilty if he refused to answer when thus adjured (Lev. 5:1)." -Fourfold Gospel

Regarding the priest tearing his clothes:

"This symbolic expression of horror and indignation was required of the high priest whenever he heard blasphemy. His reaction also expressed relief since Jesus’ self-incriminating answer removed the need for more witnesses."-BKC