Mark 14:53-65

The soldiers led Jesus away to the court of Caiaphas, the high priest. On the way, they apparently stopped at the house of Annas, who may have lived near to the Mount of Olives -John 18:13. Annas was a former high priest who seems to have had a great deal of influence on the people of Jerusalem in that day. No doubt Caiaphas expected considerable popular opposition to the crucifixion of Jesus. He probably reasoned that it would do his cause no harm to bring the venerable Annas into the proceedings.

The trial before the Sanhedrin was irregular and illegal in every way, according to Jewish law.

The court could not meet at night, nor could it meet at any of the great feasts. When evidence was taken, witnesses were examined separately and their evidence, to be valid, must agree in every detail. Each individual member of the Sanhedrin must give his verdict separately, beginning with the youngest and going on to the eldest. If the verdict was a verdict of death, a night must elapse before it was carried out so that the court might have a chance to change its mind and its decision towards mercy.

All of these regulations were violated in the trial of Jesus. The Sanhedrin was not at all interested in administering justice. They had already cast their verdict: Jesus must die. Before they could persuade the Roman authorities to authorize his death, they had to discover some charge that was not only a violation of their own religious laws but, no less, a violation of the laws of Rome.

The Sanhedrin was unsuccessful in its efforts to find volunteer witnesses to substantiate the charges against Jesus -Mark 14: 55. The two witnesses who finally took the stand were evidently the hirelings of the court. Even these two could not agree in their testimony -Mark 14: 59. In all of the confusion, Jesus said nothing.

At last Caiaphas hit upon a master stroke. He had heard the common rumor that Jesus had been acclaimed the promised Messiah. IfCaiaphas could get Jesus to agree to this popular acclaim, his case would be made, for the Roman government was already disturbed by the numerous revolts that had recently occurred. Rome was well aware of the persistent hope of the Jews that, some day, a mighty deliverer would arrive to free them from foreign domination. So, Caiaphas clearly put the question: Did Jesus claim to be the Messiah? ~ Mark 14:61.

Up until that moment, Jesus had never made such a claim in so many words. By his triumphant entry into Jerusalem, a few days previously, he had dramatically lent his support to the claim, but the Sanhedrin needed something more specific than that. It was the purpose of Caiaphas to present Jesus with a dilemma. If he were to acknowledge the claim to messiahship, that would seal his doom. That was all the chief priests need to achieve their murderous intentions. If he were to remain silent, the news of his silence would soon resound throughout Jerusalem, and he would be denounced as a pretender.

With quiet deliberation, Jesus frankly acknowledged the claim, using the language of the Old Testament to state it -language with which the members of the Sanhedrin were all well acquainted ~ Mark 14:62.

In a gesture of pretended anger, Caiaphas tore his clothing. The purpose of the trial had been fulfilled. They had the evidence they needed for the Roman court and for their own court. In the eyes of Rome, Jesus could be held guilty of blasphemy. It was a great hour for the Sanhedrin. Long had they waited for it. In a fit of delirium, they spat on Jesus and struck him and mockingly called on him, as a prophet, to give them a sample of his prophecies ~ Mark 14:65.