Sermon Tone Analysis

! \\ Jesus Taken to Annas

/ /

/12 //Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus.

They bound him 13 and brought him first to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, *the high priest that year*.

14 Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it would be good if one man died for the people.

/

/ /

!

The High Priest Questions Jesus

/ /

/19 //Meanwhile, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching.20

“I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied.

“I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together.

I said nothing in secret.

21 Why question me?

Ask those who heard me.

Surely they know what I said.”

22 When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby struck him in the face.

“Is this the way you answer the high priest?” he demanded.

23 “If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong.

But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?” 24 Then Annas sent him, still bound, to Caiaphas the high priest.//a//

//*[1]*// John 18:12-24 (NIV) \\ \\ /

Is there such a thing as a “good” or “bad” Pharisee?

When it comes to the bad boys of NT scripture, I certainly think of them first.

I would have to say, my mind tells me that there would have been few good things about being a Pharisee.

I suppose, compared to stereotypical Pharisaism, that some might have been better than others.

But really, being good or less Pharisaic would have made them a bad Pharisee.

Conversely there were certain others who took Pharisaism to new depths of despicability.

Annas and Caiaphas, godfathers in law are too shady characters who emerge in the crucifixion story.

Actually they were Sadducees.

Different from the Pharisees in the following ways:

 

| */Pharisees/* | */Sadducees/* |

| Achieved prominence through study of the law.

| Aristocratic, chief priests |

| Resented Roman domination | Politically connected |

| Interpreted the law to fit the situation.

| Fundamentalists |

| Accepted OT scriptures in entirety.

| Only accepted books of Moses |

| Belief in resurrection | No belief in resurrection |

| Belief in the spirit world | No belief in the spirit world |

| From the Levitical line | No necessary connection with Levitical line |

 

The Sadducees were in many ways less lenient than the Pharisees.

They were Judaistic fundamentalists.

The books of Moses were the only accepted scriptures for them and they took them literally without any attempt to further interpret them.

They were highly respected among their peers, and they were “bad” men.

They orchestrated and contrived the execution of the Son of God.

They were holy “hit men”.

And when it came to Pharisaism, they personified and defined it.

The badder they were the better they were.

That’s what makes a good Pharisee and an even better Sadducee.

Why would we take time to talk of the dastardly duo today?

Simply because that type of contrivance can imperceptibly become a part of us, like the dust that Christ would have us shake off our feet.

/5 //If people do not welcome you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave their town, as a testimony against them.”//*[2]*/

*Annas* was installed as high priest by Quirinius in a.d.

6, after the latter deposed Joazar.

Annas held the post until a.d.

15, when he was deposed by Valerius Gratus.

Annas’s family was wealthy and influential, and five of his sons, as well as his son-in-law Joseph Caiaphas, attained the office of high priest.**[3]**

*Caiaphas*, Joseph, son-in-law and eventual successor of Annas as high priest, attaining the position in a.d.

18 and holding it until he was deposed by Vitellius, Pontius Pilate’s successor, in the year 36-37.

He was, therefore, high priest at the time of the trial of Jesus (Matt.

26:3, 57; John 18:13, 24).**[4]**

 

/1.

//They were politically appointed./

·         They were compromised by their connections.

According to Old Testament Law, the high priest was to serve until death.

But when the Romans took over the nation of Israel, they made the high priesthood an appointed office.

This way they could be certain of having a religious leader who would cooperate with their policies.

Next to the procurator, the High Priest was the most powerful and influential figure in the nation.

Annas served as high priest from a.d.6 to a.d.

15, and five of his sons, as well as Caiaphas his son-in-law succeeded him.

Caiaphas was high priest from a.d.

18–36, but Annas was still a power behind the throne (see Luke 3:2).

[5]

 

This political connection was vital to the High Priest.

A person can easily become addicted to power or position or a place of privilege.

Whenever something arises that threatens that addiction, there is an adverse reaction.

Jesus was no “new” problem.

Look with me back in John 11.

 

/The Plot to Kill Jesus /

/ /

/45 //Therefore many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did, put their faith in him.

46 But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done.

47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.

“What are we accomplishing?” they asked.

“Here is this man performing many miraculous signs.

48 *If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place*/*/a/**/ and our nation.”

/*/49 //Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”

51 He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52 and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one.

53 So from that day on they plotted to take his life.

//*[6]*// /John 11:45-53 (NIV)

 

Jesus was already on the “hit list”, an active threat to the spiritual aristocracy.

He was to be “managed” if they were to remain in good standing with the Romans.

His fate was a foregone conclusion as so many political decisions always are.

He wasn’t being dealt with in the interests of the nation but in other interests.

The church is more in danger from the “favor” that government grants it than it is from the freedoms that it restricts.

Governmental favor is given to corrupt and control, to create obligation.

And it’s not just systems that manipulate others through reward and punishment.

There are various sorts of relationships that can be favor based.

Do you have any influences in your life currently that cause you for a promise to minimize your faith.

Just be a little more discreet, there is something in it for you.

And what do you plan to do about it?

Stay where you are, earn a living, God will understand.

2.

/They had personal agendas that were in conflict with Christ./

·         They were sold to their self-interests.

As I studied this week, I discovered a disappointing connection that I had never seen before.

It was the high priestly family that managed the “temple business.