People34

Jn 18:12-13 Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him and brought him first to Annas , who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year.

We now move to consider dark times and those involved in them. Yes, these are people who met Jesus but not in good circumstances. The first mention of Annas in the Gospels is in Luke as an historical marker for John the Baptist: “during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas.” (Lk 3:2) Caiaphas was the official high priest and he was son-in-law of Annas who had been deposed by the Romans in AD15, yet it was supposed by the Jews that the high priesthood was supposed to be held for life. Thus it is that we find both of these men being referred to as the High Priest. The position was that of the highest religious leader and was very powerful.

It is significant that the arresting party took Jesus first to Annas for the old man was obviously the ‘power behind the throne'. Annas is going to present the first line of questioning in this dubious series of events. Throughout the preceding week Jesus had been in Jerusalem teaching and healing and had clearly received opposition from each of the religious groupings including the priests, those who attended the Temple in Jerusalem as officials of Judaism. He had clearly upset the religious establishment. It had been after the raising of Lazarus that it had come to a head: “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. 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 and our nation.” (Jn 11:47,48) ‘Our place' that they referred to was, of course, the Temple. They feared that Jesus' activity would stir up the people to revolt and, in the brutal suppression that would follow, the Temple would be destroyed. Of course that is exactly what happened in AD70.

Annas sees his role as protecting Judaism – by whatever means. He therefore heads up the first inquisition: “Meanwhile, the high pr iest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. "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. Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said." 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. "If I said something wrong," Jesus replied, "testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?" Then Annas sent him, still bound, to Caiaphas the high priest.” (Jn 18:19-24)

He demands that Jesus tell him what he has been teaching the people, for he is looking for an excuse to condemn Jesus for false teaching, but Jesus will have none of it: I have been teaching openly and you know it and you know what I have been saying and you know there is nothing to criticise (implied). One of the other officials resorts to violence and then Jesus is sent to Caiaphas. Later on it is clear that Annas is included in the all-embracing language of condemnation: “Early in the morning, all the chief priest s and the elders of the people came to the decision to put Jesus to death. They bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate, the governor.” (Mt 27:1,2)

What is so terrible about this is that this is THE classic example of institutional religion standing against God! Whenever we institutionalize religion we create man-centred and man-focused religion that at times actually opposes God. False religion had often reared its head in Israel and it still did. This lifeless orthodoxy was a poor representation of the life of God and yet, I am sure, if you had questioned these leaders they would have been totally sincere – and yet sincerely wrong! The apostle Paul was a similar example of a sincere man but who was sincerely wrong until he met the risen Christ. When it comes to institutional religion the word ‘expediency' enters the vocabulary as we'll see in the next meditation. Religious leaders who are also political have to consider what is expedient for the protection of the institution, not what is the will of God. Perhaps that is one of the reasons why religion should never be institutionalized!

In this man's hands was terrible power. He could have ended this fiasco then and there and released Jesus, but he is driven by fear that his precious institution will be harmed and he cannot let that happen. As we just suggested, the will of God doesn't come into it – because he believes protecting the institution is the will of God and so Jesus (the Son of God) must die. How terrible! This must surely have been THE worst misjudgment of history, yet God knew that this is how it would work out so that His Son could be sacrificed for the sins of the world.

What happened to Annas? Well he was still there in Acts: “Annas the high priest was there, and so were Caiaphas, John, Alexander and the other men of the high priest's family.” (Acts 4:6). There were a number of men abusing their positions of power at this time. This was one of them. God's word has a number of warnings against those who misused their authority. Annas should have heeded those warnings. May any of us in such positions, similarly be warned.