The Condemnation of Innocence

About this sermon

Introduction: By the time we get to the scene that Mark presents to us — a scene following the arrest of Jesus in garden of Gethsemane – Jesus has already been questioned. Before Jesus is led to the high priest, Caiaphas, he taken to the high priest’s father-in-law — a man by the name of Annas. Annas was the high priest from A.D. 6-15, when Pilate’s predecessor, Valerius Gratus, had him removed from office. That removal from office didn’t result in a removal of influence. In the time of Christ, the office of high priest had become highly politicized. It wasn’t about godliness; it was about power and influence. And Annas had influence. After being removed from office, he still had his hands on the office. From A.D. 16-17 his son Eleazar held the office. From 18-36 it was his son-in-law Caiaphas From 37-41 it was his son Theophilus In A.D. 42 it was his son Matthias In A.D. 61 it was his son Annas And in A.D. 65-66 it was his grandson Matthias No one knows for certain when Annas died. Some speculate around the year A.D. 40. So at least until then, Annas was the influencer behind the high priest. He and his sons had a grip on the lucrative business that was represented at the Temple in the exchange of money and the selling of sacrificial animals. It’s been referred to as the Bazaars of the sons of Annas. Luke 3:2 is interesting, when you consider the political landscape of Jerusalem at this time. It says: ESV Luke 3:2 during athe high priesthood of Annas and bCaiaphas, cdthe word of God came to dJohn the son of Zechariah in ethe wilderness. Darrell Bock – “What is Luke suggesting by his use of the singular ἀρχιερέως? He is communicating that actual power was really shared and that the religious authority of the region was really a two-man affair, with Annas exercising great power behind the scenes (Ellis 1974: 88; Marshall 1978: 134). The picture of John 18:13–27 confirms this description and shows the accuracy of Luke’s reference (on Caiaphas, see Acts 4:6; John 11:49; Bovon 1989: 168–69… Thus, Luke accurately gives insight into the real power structure of religious Judaism in Jerusalem.” Josephus – “but as for the high priest Ananias, he increased in glory every day, and this to a great degree, and had obtained the favor and esteem of the citizens in a signal manner; for he was a great hoarder up of money; he therefore cultivated the friendship of Albinus, and of the high priest [Jesus], by making them presents; (206) he also had servants who were very wicked, who joined themselves to the boldest sort of the people, and went to the threshing floors, and took away the tithes that belonged to the priests by violence, and did not refrain from beating such as would not give these tithes to them. (207) So the other high priests acted in the like manner, as did those his servants without anyone being able to prohibit them; so that [some of the] priests, that of old were wont to be supported with those tithes, died for want of food.” Well, it’s this Annas that Jesus stands before prior to the scene recorded in Mark. ESV John 18:13 First they aled him to bAnnas, for he was the father-in-law of cCaiaphas, who was high priest that year. 14 It was Caiaphas who had advised the Jews athat it would be expedient that one man should die for the people.

Topics

• Hell & Judgment