You can turn in your Bibles to John 18 as we continue through John's passion narrative. John 18, I'll begin reading in verse 28. This is the time when they present Jesus to Pontius Pilate. They deliver Him over to Pilate's hand as he had authority to carry out the death penalty.
So John 18, beginning in verse 28. Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium, and it was early morning. But they themselves did not go into the praetorium, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover. Pilate then went out to them and said, What accusation do you bring against this man?
They answered and said to him, If he were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered him up to you. Then Pilate said to them, You take him and judge him according to your law. Therefore the Jews said to him, It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death, that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled which he spoke, signifying by what death he would die. Then Pilate entered the praetorium again, called Jesus, and said to him, Are you the king of the Jews?
Jesus answered him, Are you speaking for yourself about this, or did others tell you this concerning me? Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you 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 fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews. But now my kingdom is not from here. Pilate therefore said to him, Are you a king then?
Jesus answered, You say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears my voice. Pilate said to him, what is truth?
And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and said to them, I find no fault in him. Amen. Well, let us pray. Our father, we thank you for your written word.
We thank you for the revelation of the incarnate word, and we give all praise to you again for his mission on behalf of needy sinners. We ask that Your Spirit would guide us as we consider this passage to see the great lengths our Savior went through in His love for us and His obedience to the Father. And we ask, God, that we would just stand in awe of so great a salvation. Forgive us now for all sin and unrighteousness, and we pray in Jesus' name.
Amen. Well,
Introduction: The Passion Timeline
remember the particular timeline that I gave you in terms of all the events leading up to the actual crucifixion. You have a preliminary hearing recorded here in John's gospel before Annas, and then there's this trial before the Sanhedrin, which we're going to take some time on in just a moment, and then they send him to Pontius Pilate, which we just read of here, and he appears before Herod at a certain point, and then we see the decision of Pontius Pilate rendered, and then the crucifixion comes. If you look back with me at chapter 18, specifically in verse 24, at the conclusion of this preliminary hearing, We read, Then Annas sent and bound to Caiaphas the high priest. Now John does not report what happens in terms of this trial before the Sanhedrin.
His emphasis is particularly upon Pontius Pilate. So
The Trial Before the Sanhedrin
turn with me to Matthew chapter 26 as we consider the trial before the Sanhedrin in Matthew 26, 57 to 67, and then we'll pick up in John 18 again. the deliverance of Jesus to Pilate. We'll not deal with the entirety of the narrative concerning Pilate. We'll just take up the first half in verses 28 to 32. But as I said, let us look at the trial before the Sanhedrin.
Notice in Matthew 26, beginning in verse 57, and I'll read. And those who had laid hold of Jesus led Him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled. But Peter followed Him at a distance to the high priest's courtyard, and he went in and sat with the servants to see the end. Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, but found none.
Even though many false witnesses came forward, they found none. But at last two false witnesses came forward and said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days. And the high priest arose and said to him, You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against you?
But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to him, I put you under oath by the living God. Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus said to him, it is as you said, nevertheless I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the power and coming on the clouds of heaven.
Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, He has spoken blasphemy. What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard his blasphemy. What do you think?" They answered and said, "'He is deserving of death.' Then they spat in his face and beat him, and others struck him with the palms of their hands, saying, "'Prophesy to us, Christ, who is the one who struck you?' So again, this wedges nicely in before the section that we see in John 18 when they deliver Jesus up to Pilate after this particular appearance of Jesus before the Sanhedrin.
So
Setting and Witnesses Sought
I want you to first notice the setting in verses 57 and 58. Those who had laid hold of Jesus led Him away to Caiaphas, the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled, just as we saw in John 18. He goes first to Annas. And then he is sent, according to John 18, 24, to Caiaphas, the high priest.
Notice as well, we see the denial by Peter in verse 58. Peter followed him at a distance to the high priest courtyard, and he went in and sat with the servants to see the end. Not the denial per se or properly, that's going to come later, but the same setup that John gives us in John 18. Notice then as well,
The Demand for Witnesses
they search for witnesses. You can't put a man to death without two or three witnesses. The Bible demands that. Their own law required that.
Numbers 35, Deuteronomy 17, and Deuteronomy 19. You cannot move in a capital crime on the basis of one testimony. You must have two or three witnesses. That's why it was requisite for them to get witnesses.
And notice specifically in verse 59, Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put him to death. What an indicting statement that is, to find a false testimony in order to put someone to death. They're acting completely contrary to the law. They have rejected the law, they have despised the law, and they have brought great reproach upon their name.
Seeking out false testimony is bad enough, but seeking out false testimony in a capital crime is doubly bad because the particular emphasis is on the execution of the one who is found guilty. And notice as well, it must be false testimony because there would be no true testimony of Jesus ever having committed sin. The apostle tells us in the book of Hebrews that he was holy, harmless, and undefiled. Our salvation hinges upon the reality of the act of obedience and the passive obedience of our Lord Jesus.
If he sinned, if he committed crime, then we are hell bound forever and ever, world without end. Amen. We rejoice in the reality of the sinless Savior, so they have to try to invoke false witnesses in order to carry out the death penalty against Him. So then notice in verse 16, but they found none, even though many false witnesses came forward, they found none.
Again, a terrible indictment upon the human condition. Many false witnesses come to testify against the only innocent man that has ever walked the face of the earth. If you ever wonder how bad really man is, well, Matthew chapter 26 tells you. This is wretched.
This is vile. This is an expression of what John tells us in his prologue. Jesus came to his own and his own received him not. Not only did they not receive him, not only did they not confess him, not only did they not believe in him, they actually mount up an active campaign to take him down. to destroy him.
It's Psalm 2, the nation's raging, the people plotting of vain things against Yahweh and against his Christ. The wretchedness and the apparent evil of man is on full display in this trial before the Sanhedrin.
The False Testimony About the Temple
Notice then in verses 60 and 61, it says, but at last two false witnesses came forward and said, this fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days. So they finally have something. They finally have a particular offense. They finally have a particular crime.
Remember, they're doing the background work. They've got to deliver them up to Pontius Pilate so that Pilate can give the kill order. So they have to make or present a case to Pilate. Now, in terms of the gravity of the charge, even pagans didn't take kindly to people who destroyed temples.
Remember that even the pagan Romans made sure there were extra troops in Jerusalem during the Passover feast. Why? So they could crush any attempt at rebellion. So they could crush any rising up on the part of the people.
In other words, the Romans wanted peace. They wanted some degree of stability in their political order. So it's a grave charge. I would suggest the background of the charge is quite interesting.
The prophet Jeremiah, in Jeremiah chapter 26, gives a second temple sermon. And in that second temple sermon, while standing in the temple, he prophesies concerning the destruction of the temple. He says that your house is going to be destroyed. And of course the religious leaders don't take kindly to that and they want to kill him, they want to crucify, well not literally crucify him but they want to destroy Jeremiah the prophet for making such a prophecy.
Finally saner heads prevailed and they invoked the prophet Micah from Moresheth and said that Micah prophesied similar things and he wasn't brought up on charges, he wasn't put out to die, he wasn't treated the way that we're treating the prophet Jeremiah. But nevertheless, that is precisely what Jeremiah prophesied. And as history has demonstrated to us, that is precisely what happened when Nebuchadnezzar led the Babylonians into Jerusalem. They sacked the temple.
They sacked the city. They led the Judahites off into exile. It was historical. It was a reality.
It was what was. And so Jesus is similar in nature to what you find in the Old Testament prophet Jeremiah. As well, Jesus stresses his preeminence over the temple in Matthew chapter 12 at verse 6. He cleanses the temple in Matthew chapter 21.
He laments over Jerusalem generally and over their temple in particular in Matthew 23, 33 to 37. He says, your house is left to you desolate. He is speaking about the temple. So there is that in terms of prophecy and in terms of lament.
And then, of course, in Matthew 24, he makes the clear prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. So Jesus had taught this, but that's not what they are alleging here. Notice the problem with the charge. They say, this fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days.
That is not what he said. In fact, turn to John chapter 2. John chapter 2. specifically at verse 19. This is after the cleansing of the temple.
And in verse 19, Jesus answered and said to them, destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up. He does not say, I will destroy this temple. He does not say, I am able to destroy this temple. And he's not even talking about the earthly dwelling place called temple.
He's talking about his body. Notice the theological commentary in verses 21 and 22. But he was speaking of the temple of his body. Therefore, when he had risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this to them, and they believed the scripture and the word which Jesus had said.
So had Jesus talked about the temple in Jerusalem? Yes. Had Jesus prophesied its destruction? Yes.
But does Jesus say that He, according to His humanity, is going to charge it with C4 and blow it into smithereens? No. He says the Roman armies are going to do it. When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near in Luke chapter 21, which is parallel to Matthew 24.
So the false witnesses are portraying Jesus as a physical temple destroyer, which was in fact a capital offense. Jesus is being pictured here as a revolutionary. Jesus is being pictured here as one that's going to subjugate the Roman authority by force. And that is precisely not what happened.
The false witnesses misquote Jesus. Jesus says, destroy this temple. And again, with reference to himself, he doesn't say, I will or I am able to destroy this temple. And the false witnesses misinterpreted Jesus, as Gil says.
And so they perverted his sense as well as his misrecited, as well as misrecited his words. Now, the persistence of this charge is intriguing. Look at chapter 27 in Matthew at verse 40. Matthew 27 at verse 40 and saying, you who destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself.
If you are the son of God, come down from the cross. One other passage to see its persistence is Acts 6. If I asked you tonight before the service, what do Stephen, Jesus, and Jeremiah all have in common? Godly, faithful men, upright servants of the Most High.
They all found themselves between a temple and a hard place. Notice in Acts 6 at verse 13, they also set up false witnesses who said, this man does not cease to speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the law. For we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs which Moses delivered to us. And all who sat in the council, looking steadfastly at him, saw his face as the face of an angel.
So going back to Matthew chapter 26, they've got the false witnesses, they've got the indictment, and now
The Examination and Christ's Confession
notice the examination in verses 62 to 64. And the high priest arose and said to him, Do you answer nothing? What is it these men testify against you? But Jesus kept silent, and the high priest answered and said to him, I put you under oath by the living God.
Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God. The silence of Jesus is pretty loud here. The silence of Jesus invokes the prophet Isaiah. For in Isaiah 53, 7, we read, he was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth.
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth. So Jesus silenced there in verse 62 and 63. But then notice the high priest putting Jesus under an oath and what it is particularly. I put you under oath by the living God.
Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God. Not, are you going to destroy our temple? Do you have C4 in your backpack? Are you a revolutionary?
Are you going to bring great reproach upon us with reference to our relationship to the Romans? No, the answer or the problem rather for the Sanhedrin was always Jesus' maintenance of the fact that he was the Son of God incarnate. This is the rub with these religious leaders. They reject the Old Testament scriptures.
They reject the claim of our Lord Jesus Christ. They reject the claim of the apostles. They reject the miracles that He performed. They reject it all.
And so the issue for them is specifically, are you the Christ, the Son of God? Now notice Jesus' response in verse 64. He affirms it. Jesus said to him, it is as you said, nevertheless, I say to you hereafter, you will see the son of man sitting at the right hand of the power and coming on the clouds of heaven.
It is as you said. That's unequivocal, isn't it? Notice Jesus doesn't say, can you repeat the question? Not sure I get the gist.
I'm not sure I get what you're after. Are you the Christ, the son of God? It is as you said. Listen to Ryle.
The unconverted Jew can never tell us at the present day that his forefathers were left in ignorance that Jesus was the Messiah. Those who come to the New Testament and say that Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah are on a fool's errand. Jesus always claimed to be the Messiah. The apostolic authors always linked Jesus to the messianic scriptures of the Old Testament.
Of course Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. Of course Jesus is the Messiah in accordance with the prophecies in the Old Testament. Of course, it is as you said. And then he amplifies that and then reaches back to the prophet Daniel, Daniel 7, 13, and 14, and he says, Hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the power and coming on the clouds of heaven.
You are going to witness a display of the power of the Son of Man in such a particular way. And I believe specifically he is speaking here concerning the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Now, in terms of formal charges, if you turn back or rather continue here and in Chapter 26,
The Charge of Blasphemy
notice that they they accuse him or rather charge him with blasphemy. Verse 65, Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, He has spoken blasphemy. Not he has fomented revolution against the Roman state, not he's got a satchel full of C4 and he's gonna bomb the temple. No, it's blasphemy.
It's a blasphemous statement for the Lord Jesus to claim to be the Son of God sent by the Father in accordance with the prophets. That was the rub. So the charge of blasphemy with reference to the Sanhedrin, and then the charge of civil crimes. Turn to Luke 23.
Again, before we get to pilot proper, look at Luke 23. They've got to build their case. They've got to make sure they've got a package. They've got to make sure they have documentation.
They've got to make sure that they can get pilot, sway pilot rather, to deliver the verdict that they want. The verdict that they demand, the verdict that they will not leave without. They have been about the killing of Jesus from early on in Matthew's gospel. Notice in Luke chapter 23, specifically at verses Verse 1, then the whole multitude of them arose and led him to Pilate, and they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ the king.
And Pilate asked him, saying, Are you the king of the Jews? He answered him and said, It is as you say. So Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowd, I find no fault in this man. But they were the more fierce, saying, He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee to this place.
So you see, in terms of the Sanhedrin, it's blasphemy. This is why we deliver him up to Pontius Pilate. When he gets to Pontius Pilate, what's the indictment? He's a perverter of the nation.
This man is dangerous. He's a threat to your well-being. He forbids paying taxes. Man, if ever you want to get a civil magistrate mad at you, don't pay taxes.
That's a surefire way to draw the animus of the civil state. As well, saying, claiming that he's a king, and then just generally stirring up the people. So
The Delivery to Pilate
when we get now to Pilate in John 18, you can turn back there. There's two specifics we need to observe with reference to the deliverance of Jesus to Pilate in verses 28 to 32. The wickedness of man and the decree of God. The wickedness of man and the decree of God.
The wickedness of man is in verses 28 to 31. And here it's not primarily Pilate man. It's Sanhedrin men. I would submit you see the hypocrisy of the Sanhedrin in verse 28, the lawlessness of the Sanhedrin in verses 29 and 30, and then ultimately their impotence in verse 31.
But
The Hypocrisy of the Sanhedrin
note their hypocrisy in verse 28. Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium, and it was early morning. But they themselves did not go into the praetorium, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover." Absolute, utter, despicable hypocrisy. Brethren, a little bit of encouragement to you.
If you find yourself about to break the Sixth Commandment, You say, oh wait, I want to make sure that I don't defile myself by not tithing before I break the sixth commandment. You're in a bad place. They're fastidious about not defiling themselves during the Passover feast. What would be the defilement?
Well, going into a pagan palace, going into the praetorium. We'll contract defiledness, we will be unclean, we'll be rendered unfit to celebrate the Passover. You're on an errand to murder the only innocent man that has ever lived. This is hypocrisy, a fastidious detail to the jots and tittles of ceremonial law, all the while trampling on the weightier matters of the law.
It's not accidental that Jesus upbraids them in Matthew 23 when he pronounces woes upon the scribes and the Pharisees and calls them hypocrites. Why? Because you tithe the mint, the anise, and the cumin. Fastidiously, these are not big things.
Mint, anise, and cumin, tithing means 10%. I think it probably takes more time to make sure you've got 10% of mint, 10% of anise, and 10% of cumin than to just grab a bunch and throw it in the plate. Could you imagine sitting at a scale, weighing your mint? Can you imagine sitting at a scale looking detailed like at Uranus?
Making sure that your coumadin is not 9% and it's not 11% but it's right there at 10%. Could you imagine having that sort of a fastidiousness relative to tithing law and all the while you are there to deliver up the only innocent man to be executed by the civil state? The hypocrisy is loud here. Calvin says, these hypocrites, though they are so full of malice, ambition, fraud, cruelty, and avarice, that they almost infect heaven and earth with their abominable smell, are only afraid of external pollutions.
So then it is an intolerable mockery that they expect to please God, provided that they do not contract defilement by touching some unclean thing, though they have disregarded true purity. What do they think? We're going to deliver up Jesus, the Son of God, to be executed for crimes He did not commit, for crimes that we alleged, crimes that we can't prove, and let's go ahead and enjoy the Passover feast. Is this really where they had fallen to?
Well, the text is specific and the text tells us that, yeah, that's where they had fallen to. But intriguingly, you know, we as Christian readers and interpreters of Holy Writ understand what they're doing. I mean, it's hypocrisy. It's wretched.
Calvin's right. The smell is just, it's gross. But what are they doing? They're carrying out the decree of God.
They're bringing the Passover sacrifice. They are unwittingly and unbeknownst to them, the very vehicle for the Passover lamb that was sacrificed for us. Now, I'm not suggesting therefore it's okay, but that's exactly what it is they're doing. Then
The Lawlessness of the Sanhedrin
notice their lawlessness in verses 29 and 30. Pilate then went out to them and said, what accusation do you bring against this man? They answered and said to him, if he were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered him up to you. So the question, what accusation do you bring against this man?
This is a good question, by the way. This is a good question. And the tension that the text presents with reference to Pontius Pilate is pretty amazing. He knows he's innocent.
He ends up blackmailed to carry it out. I mean, I'm not here to say poor pilot, but man, that's a man in a rock and a hard place. But notice, he had already participated, at least in some small sense. Notice in 1803.
Judas having received a detachment of troops and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees came there with lanterns, torches, and weapons. So there was already participation on the part of the civil state, most likely Pilate, even if he was just looped in in terms of the correspondence regarding this detachment. But then notice specifically he's doing his due diligence as a judge. That's better than what we found in the Sanhedrin.
How does the trial before the Sanhedrin start? Hey guys, go find some false witnesses. Go find some guys that are gonna put together quite the tale so that we can get this man put to death. Do you see what the author is showing us here?
There's a diabolical nature to this. At least Pontius Pilate doing jurisprudence says, well, what accusation do you bring against this particular man? Now notice their response in verse 30. They answered and said to him, if he were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered him up to you.
Oh, well then, ready the cross, get the soldiers and nail him to it. Notice they don't present any evidence. Notice that there is no opportunity for the accused to face his accuser, which was part of Roman jurisprudence, by the way, in Acts 25 at verse 16. Festus to Agrippa.
It is not the custom of the Romans to deliver any man to destruction before the accused meets the accusers face to face and has opportunity to answer for himself concerning the charge against him. Without a formal charge, there can be no due process. So Pilate asks for a formal charge, and what does the Sanhedrin do? They beg the question.
Well, he's evil. And how do we prove that? Because if he wasn't evil, we wouldn't bring him to you. Oh, okay.
Notice that Pilate doesn't budge here. Pilate does not accept this. He doesn't say, well, okay, I just assume that you guys are always telling the truth, because that's what all men everywhere do. No, no, no, no, no.
But that is reprehensible. Men who say that they're skilled in the books of Deuteronomy and Numbers, men who put phylacteries on their upper arms and on their foreheads, men who recite Torah, men who claim to be descendants of Moses, according to the law, certainly Abraham according to the flesh, Not that Moses was outside that train of flesh, but they prided themselves on being Moses-like. This is reprehensible. This is vile.
If he were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered him up to you. Imagine your children trying this. Dad, Mom. Johnny's guilty.
Okay, why? Because if he wasn't guilty, I wouldn't rat him out. What parent says, oh, of course, baby. Yes, of course Johnny's guilty.
It's folly, isn't it? When you look at this, when you see this and you analyze it from the vantage point of the wickedness of man, it's pretty wicked what is happening in this particular instance. They assume the truth of their conclusion. He's guilty.
We know it. We wouldn't have brought him to you if he wasn't. So what? Kill him.
That's some pretty rapid steps to a capital punishment when you've not presented one iota of proof that this man has actually done anything wrong. And then
The Impotence of the Sanhedrin
notice their impotence in verse 31. Then Pilate said to them, you take him and judge him according to your law. You see a similar instance again in Acts, Acts 18, Galileo doesn't want to involve himself in theological disputes amongst Jews and Christians. So he says, you guys go deal with this.
That's essentially what Pilate is doing here. You guys deal with this. This doesn't involve the civil state. This isn't something that necessitates this kind of a response.
You guys are invoking the nuclear option against this man that you disagree with, with reference to theology. You want him to be crucified? You want him to be nailed to a cross? You want him to be destroyed in the most vile and abhorrent way because you differ with him on interpretation of your sacred texts?
I think that's precisely what Pilate's doing. According to verse 31, you take him and you judge him according to your law. I don't disagree with Pilate here. Pilate's like, this ain't my circus, ain't my monkeys.
You guys go find somewhere else to deal with this and adjudicate this. Again, Galileo in Acts 18 does something similar. Then notice, therefore the Jews said to him, it is not lawful for us to put anyone to death. They had a restriction under Roman jurisdiction and they had a restriction just under their own law.
They didn't have that authority, again, without competent witnesses to just go ahead and kill Jesus. And then
The Decree of God
that brings us to the decree of God. I think 32, verse 32 is theological commentary by John. That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spoke signifying by what death he would die. It's almost as if John wants us to be reminded Yeah, I get it.
The Sanhedrin is acting atrociously with their hypocrisy. They don't want to defile themselves for the Passover by entering a pagan palace, but they'll go ahead and, you know, break the sixth commandment, murder the only innocent man that's ever been. I get that they're being lawless. I get that they're like a train off of its track.
But John reminds us this is all planned, purposed, carried out, and executed by the decree of God. In other words, it's kind of like John saying, just hold on, just ride it out, just see where it goes, and understand that God's got this. Maybe this is why the psalmist says in Psalm 76, even the wrath of man shall praise him, If ever there was wrath that results in praise, it's this. They are wrathful, vengeful, hypocritical, lawless, murderers.
And what does that result for us? Praise God for the sending of the son of his love, sinners to save. So the words of Jesus are invoked here that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spoke signifying by what death he would die. Jesus, according to his human nature, studied the Old Testament scriptures.
Jesus understood the mission of Jesus from the Old Testament. He understood Genesis 315. He understood the typology of Genesis 22. He understood that he was, in fact, the suffering servant of Isaiah.
He understood that he was the man cut off and the Messiah cut off in Daniel 9 in the prophecy of the 70 weeks. Jesus knew that according to his human nature and along the way with his apostles, he told them, I must go to Jerusalem. I must be tried at the hands of godless men. I must be delivered up and I must be crucified.
So John in the midst of this depravity, John in the midst of this despicable activity, John is telling us, dear reader, this is all according to the plan and purpose of the Most High. Jesus understood it. Jesus embraced it. And Jesus had told his disciples about it.
In other words, this in all of its gross detail is the purpose of God for the saving of us, for the salvation of us. The governor will ultimately declare his innocence. The governor will ultimately attempt to release him. The governor will deliver him up to crucifixion and the governor and the Jews are ultimately subject to God's sovereignty.
Note 1911. 1911, Jesus before Pilate, you could have no power at all against me unless it had been given you from above, therefore the one who delivered me to you has the greater sin. All through the passion narrative of John, you see these reminders, you see these emphases that this is it, this is the plan. How do you think we get from Isaiah 53 to the saving of our souls? When Isaiah 53 talks about a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, when Psalm 22 says, my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Or Psalm 88, a psalm of utter darkness. How do we get there? Well, this is it. This is the path.
This is the trajectory. It involved wicked, vile, evil men ultimately doing the will and purpose of Almighty God. So Jesus had said this. Jesus was ultimately over this.
So
Application: Pilate in the Creed
in conclusion, before we move to the sacrament, have you ever noticed that Pontius Pilate has creedal status? It's pretty amazing, right? The Apostles' Creed, don't we say? He suffered under Pontius Pilate.
Wow. You think Pilate ever thought he'd get into a creed called the Apostles' Creed? Do you think that Pilate ever thought that he would be recited or remembered by a bunch of Christians in the 21st century who happened to recite the Apostles' Creed? Why creedal status for Pontius Pilate?
Well, I think in the first place, it underscores the historicity of the narrative. This isn't in a land far away where you've got unicorns and fairies. This is history. Pontius Pilate was a real man.
Pontius Pilate really governed Judea. Pontius Pilate was a breathing human. And so when we confess that Jesus suffered under Pontius Pilate, that roots our religion in history. I would suggest secondly, when we cite he suffered under Pontius Pilate, we affirm with Pilate the innocence of our Lord.
The innocence of our Lord. Pilate will affirm that in 1838, 1904, and 1906. It's a beautiful thing. Pilot.
You would come to a text like this that was, you know, what are we going to do with this man who claims to be the Messiah of Israel? You would just assume the Israelites would take his side and that the Romans would despise and hate him. But the exact opposite is what's going on. They only see evil in him.
Pilate only sees innocence in him. And Pilate understands it's envy that drives the Sanhedrin. So thus we confirm that Jesus was condemned for our sake. If even a man like Pilate can say thrice that there is no guilt in this man, there is no fault in this man, that affirms to us that Jesus isn't going through the hypocrisy, the lawlessness and the impotence of the Jews for his sake.
I mean, it is according to his humanity and according to what his mission is, but he's doing this for us. He's going to these lengths for us. and the confirmation that Jesus was crucified in accordance with the Old Testament prophecies. And a prophecy that I think is very appropriate and very fitting is the Shiloh prophecy of Genesis 49, 10. The scepter shall not depart from Judah nor a lawgiver from between his feet until Shiloh comes and to him shall be the obedience of the people.
The promised royal line belongs to Judah. David, then Jesus, he's the subject, the object of the Shiloh prophecy, and he is the one in whom all the promises of God are yea and amen. I would suggest as well, not only with reference to the role of Pontius Pilate, but the deliverance to death by man. It describes or displays or evidences or shows their utter wretchedness.
You don't want to camp on this too much, but we need to understand what our Savior went through. I mean, we get bent out of shape if somebody doesn't smile at us. And Jesus went through this? The sinfulness is seen in their already agreed upon verdict prior to even having a hearing.
Well, if he wasn't guilty, we wouldn't have brought him here, so therefore kill him. I'm not a lawyer, the son of a lawyer, but if you ever had to look at that as a lawyer, you'd say, what happened there? I think Pilate at certain points, if we could have got him off to the side, would probably say, what is happening here? These men are filled with envy.
These men are filled with rage. These men are inciting the multitudes to cry out, away with him, away with him, crucify him. And I haven't seen any evidence whatsoever of any fault whatsoever. So the sinfulness, as well, is seen in the willingness of the Sanhedrin to violate their own law, seeking out false testimony in order to get a death penalty.
And the sinfulness is seen in the united effort of both Jews and Gentiles in the crucifixion of the Son of God. Psalm 2, 1 to 3, why do the nations, plural, rage, why do the peoples, plural, plot a vain thing against Yahweh and against His Christ? Luke 23, 12, that very day Pilate and Herod became friends with each other, for previously they had been in enmity with each other. Acts 4, 25 to 28, this united front was ultimately under the decree of God, to do whatever your hand and your purpose determined before to be done for the salvation of His people.
Brethren, the wickedness of man is in sharp relief to the sovereign decree of God, and we know it was according to the Old Testament Scriptures. I already mentioned Genesis 3.15, Genesis chapter 22, the prophets, the Psalter, all of that converges to tell us that what is happening here, what Jesus is subject to, yes, the wickedness of man, but the plan and purpose and decree of His Father, in order that He may save His people from their sins. Well, let us pray.
Closing Prayer
Our Father in Heaven, we thank You for our Lord Jesus Christ, and certainly when we come to passages like these, we are reminded afresh at what He had gone through for for us men and for our salvation. We bless you for such a glorious Savior. We thank you for such a glorious mediator, such a glorious Christ. And we pray that as we eat this bread and we drink this cup, we proclaim His death until He comes.
And we look forward to that coming again in glory to judge the living and the dead. And we pray in Jesus' name. Amen.