The Forgotten Trial Of Jesus Series

- Talk about how this is the forgotten part of the trial, as well as the overall pieces of the trial.

- There are basically three pieces to the religious trial and three pieces to the civil trial:

1. Religious trial.

a. Here before Annas.

b. Before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 22:54).

c. After sunrise confirming the decision (Matthew 27:1; Mark 15:1; Luke 22:66-71).

2. Civil trial.

a. Before Pilate (Matthew 27:2, 11-14; Mark 15:1-5; Luke 23:1-5; John 18:28-38).

b. Before Herod (Luke 23:6-12).

c. Before Pilate again (Matthew 27:15-26; Mark 15:6-15; Luke 23:13-25; John 18:39-19:16).

- It’s worth noting that John is the only one who mentions this brief interaction with Annas, so it’s only in one of the gospels.

- Further, this interaction is intertwined in the text with the three denials of Peter. When preachers preach this larger passage, they tend to preach on that aspect of the passage because it’s an important and renowned incident. When that happens, though, the details about Annas usually get passed over.

- For both of those reasons, I think it’s fair to say that this passage is the “forgotten trial of Jesus” (or, at least, the forgotten part of the trial of Jesus).

- I want to deal with the denials of Peter in a separate sermon. This morning I just want to focus on Annas and this forgotten interaction. What can we learn from it? Well, it turns out that digging into it focuses on an issue that is still as relevant today as it was two thousand years ago: power.

WHAT WE SEEK: Many make power their religion.

- John 18:12-14, 19-24.

- As you dig into this passage (which we are going to do), it’s all about power and the manifestations of power.

- Before we get into that subject, we need to start with Annas. Who is he and why is he the first person that they bring Jesus to?

- First, we start with the fact that at this moment Annas doesn’t hold office. Of course, we know that there is a difference between having a title and having power.

- Second, he had been the high priest until he was deposed by the Romans in around 15 A.D. The role of high priest was supposed to be a position that was held for life. There was a lot of resentment among the Jewish people that Annas had been removed from his office.

- Third, he had several of his relatives who held the role of high priest, including some of his sons. Here Caiaphas is high priest and v. 13 tells us that he is Annas’ son-in-law. So you get a picture of him as the power behind the throne, making sure there were people who were serving that he had control over. In fact, in Luke 3:2, it says that during the time of John the Baptist Annas and Caiaphas were ruling as high priest. There are alternate ways to take that reference, but the most likely explanation is that everyone knew who the power “behind the throne” was.

- Fourth, Annas was largely the one responsible for the compromise of the Temple. He was instrumental in forcing people to buy overpriced animals for sacrifice and the exorbitant fees for exchanging money. No doubt he personally profited handsomely from those practices. This would mean that the incidents where Jesus overturned the tables and drove out those turning the Temple into a place for profit would have been very offensive personally to Annas.

- When you add all this up, the picture becomes clearer. Yes, Annas doesn’t hold office at this moment, but he is the quite possibly the most powerful man in Jewish religious circles. So they bring Jesus to the power center first and then everyone else follows.

- I’m reminded of a story I heard years ago of a young pastor. There was some significant change he wanted to make in the church, so he spent hours and hours talking to key people in the congregation and getting their support. When it came for the business meeting, he was confident it would sail smoothly through but almost no one voted for it. He just couldn’t understand. Afterward he asked someone what had happened. It turned out there was an old man in the church who no longer held any offices but who had been the power center in the church for decades. He sat toward the front in business meetings and if he didn’t want people to vote for something, he would just raise his arms out to each side and place them on the top of the pews. That was the sign that he didn’t support what was being voted on. Few would vote against him. The pastor had talked to everyone in the church with a title and a position, but hadn’t talked to the one who actually held power in the church.