The Bible teaches us that God is righteous and just. God will not condemn someone for a sin he has not committed. For example, when Abraham plead with God to spare Sodom he said, “…Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Genesis 18:23-25 NIV)
In light of this it was the height of hypocrisy for religious leaders who claimed to represent and serve God to, themselves, break the law and violate justice when they put Jesus on trial. In chapter 14, verses 53 through 65 of the Gospel which bears his name, Mark tells us what happened:
“They led Jesus away to the high priest. All the chief priests, the elders, and the scribes came together with him. Peter had followed him from a distance, until he came into the court of the high priest. He was sitting with the officers, and warming himself in the light of the fire. Now the chief priests and the whole council sought witnesses against Jesus to put him to death, and found none. For many gave false testimony against him, and their testimony didn’t agree with each other. Some stood up, and gave false testimony against him, saying, “We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands.’” Even so, their testimony didn’t agree. The high priest stood up in the middle, and asked Jesus, “Have you no answer? What is it which these testify against you?” But he stayed quiet, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” Jesus said, “I am. You will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of the sky.” The high priest tore his clothes, and said, “What further need have we of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy! What do you think?” They all condemned him to be worthy of death. Some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to beat him with fists, and to tell him, “Prophesy!” The officers struck him with the palms of their hands.”
In three different places in this book Mark wrote that the religious authorities were already seeking an opportunity to kill Jesus. The purpose of the court they convened was not to serve justice, or even to uncover the truth, but to find a pretext to accuse Jesus of a capital crime. To put it another way, the religious authorities had already determined the outcome of Jesus’ trial and merely needed a way to give their decision to put Him to death the appearance of legality.
Though the authorities wanted to cover their decision with the cloak of legality they did not hesitate to break the Law in order to obtain the outcome they wanted. It is unjust to accuse someone of wrongdoing until a crime has been committed. The purpose of a trial is to determine whether the accused person has, in fact, committed the crime. However, in Jesus’ case, the authorities turned things around. Instead of starting with a crime and trying to find who had perpetrated it, they began with the man they wanted to destroy and went looking for a crime with which to accuse him.
The authorities’ plot fell apart. The Law of Moses clearly states, “On the testimony of two or three witnesses a man shall be put to death, but no one shall be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.” (Deuteronomy 17:6 NIV) The requirement for two or three witnesses did not apply only to capital crimes. In another place the Law says, “One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.” (Deuteronomy 19:15 NIV)
Even though the authorities brought out many false witnesses to accuse Jesus, none of their accounts matched. No case could be made on the basis of their testimony. Finally, two of these false witnesses claimed that they heard Jesus threaten the Temple. This was a misrepresentation of a statement Jesus had made some three years in the past. The temple Jesus referred to was His own body, not the Temple in Jerusalem where the Jews made their sacrifices. Even so, the witnesses’ statements did not agree. Their testimony was not legally valid even if the judges let stand the distortion of what Jesus actually said.
To salvage the case the High Priest turned to Jesus and asked Him to respond to the testimony. Jesus did not fall into the trap; He remained silent. To have said anything – even to dispute the testimony – would have been to acknowledge that it was admissible. Jesus’ silence only highlighted the fact that the testimony against Him had no legal standing.
With the case in jeopardy the High Priest abandoned altogether his strategy of calling witnesses and questioned Jesus directly. By doing so he threw away all pretense of acting as an impartial judge and became a prosecuting attorney. However, the question he asked went right to the core issue of Jesus’ identity and the authorities’ main objection to Jesus. Was Jesus the Christ, that is, the Son of God?
Up to this point Jesus had remained silent, but for Him to remain silent now would have been to deny His own identity. So, He boldly and forcefully asserted that He was, indeed, the Christ. Not only was He the Christ, His accusers would personally witness how God would exalt Him. While making this astonishing statement Jesus also identified Himself as the ‘Son of Man’ foretold by the prophet Daniel, whose kingdom will never be destroyed. By His own confession, Jesus is the ‘Son of Man,’ the ‘Son of God’ and the Christ. To reject any of these titles is to call Jesus a liar.
Jesus’ answer was exactly what the High Priest wanted. He accused Jesus of blasphemy which carried the death penalty. Overthrowing normal court procedure he called for a voice vote from the other members of the court. They joined in condemning Jesus rather than accepting the truth of His identity. Then they did something which demonstrated how corrupt their court was: They spit at Jesus, blindfolded Him, struck Him and demanded that if He were a prophet to tell them who hit Him. After they had their fun they turned Jesus over to the guards for another beating.