Discard the idea that because Jesus was divine He really did not experience as much torment as we would have under the same circumstances. He felt more, much, much more. He emptied Himself of divine rights, surrendering glory, power, His own life and, cruelest of all, His fellowship with the Father. The Father — and in fact the totality of God, the Godhead – had been one with Jesus from Jesus’ conception in Mary’s womb. It was a unique bond of love and fellowship and the two (Jesus and the totality of God) had been inseparable. But Jesus was now tainted with the loathsomeness of sin and had become, by a voluntary substitution, identified with the same loathsome sin that the Father abhorred. The Father had to totally reject Him. At this point Jesus was a Man being torn in two. His very Person was being wrenched apart. It was for Jesus a horrible brush with hell.
I have been questioned on the belief that Jesus could promise the dying thief that he the thief would be in paradise that selfsame day with Jesus although Jesus was immediately plunged into the torments of hell. This is my answer: As God could not die but Jesus could and did die, so God could not suffer in hell after a death that was totally impossible to His divinity, but the human Jesus (who voluntarily became sin for us all) could and would yet experience the torments of hell.
We have concluded previously in this discourse that there is no dichotomy (split) within the Godhead. But the human side of Jesus was fully human and consequently He could both suffer and die. Therefore, when the humanity of Jesus deliberately took on Himself the sins of mankind, the divinity of Jesus (Father. Word or Logos and Holy Spirit) could no longer reside within the human Jesus: He was now blackened by sin. They rejected the human Jesus. It was all part of an eternally conceived plan, sponsored in love, to save mankind.
A vast chasm was now in the process of opening up between Jesus and the Father. Such a blackness and horror and emptiness could be known only by this one supreme Person being riven within Himself by the abomination of sin.
They led Jesus, bloodstained and bedraggled, from the garden to a succession of “hearings” before Annas, the former high priest; Caiaphas, the present high priest; the Sanhedrin; and finally to Pilate, the Roman Procurator of Judea. The meeting with Annas was brief. (John 18:13-23) The former high priest questioned Jesus about His disciples and His teachings.
“I spoke openly to the world,” Jesus said, “in the synagogues and in the Temple. Why ask me? Ask them who heard me.”
One of the officers standing by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, exclaiming, “Is that any way to answer the high priest?”
“If I have spoken wrongly, bear witness to it,” Jesus retorted. “But if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me?” Annas then sent Jesus to Caiaphas.
During the time Jesus had been on His way to Annas, Peter and John, having overcome their first unseemly panic, followed Jesus and His captors at a distance. John, who was known to the high priest, entered the courtyard in which Annas’ residence was located. Peter meanwhile waited outside at the entrance. John spoke to the maid who kept the door and she let Peter in while John went farther into the courtyard. The maid looked closely at Peter.
“Aren’t you also one of this man’s disciples?”
“I am not,” Peter stated as positively as he could; and off in the distance a cock crowed. What must Peter have thought at this time? Jesus had told Peter that he would deny Jesus three times before the cock crowed. Matthew, Luke and John all say “before the cock crows,” meaning one time (Matthew 26.33, 34; Luke 22.33, 34; John 13.37, 38). Only Mark has Jesus saying, “before the cock crows twice you shall deny me thrice.” The NIV also informs us concerning the passage in Mark, “Some early manuscripts do not have twice.”
Peter had so strongly declared he would never do such a thing. But now he had already denied his Lord the first time! His heart smote him as he sought some way to make himself as inconspicuous as possible.
Mat. 26:57-68; Mark 14:53-65; Luke 22:54,63-65; John 18:24
The council had already assembled informally at Caiaphas’ house by the time Jesus was brought there from His appearance before Annas. Caiaphas’ house, along with that of Annas, was more than likely one of a cluster of buildings surrounding a common courtyard. Jesus was a forlorn, battered figure as he stood silent before Caiaphas and the scribes and elders. This surely could not be the Lord of glory, the King of the Jews; not the Messiah! If there was anything aesthetic or beautiful about the entire panorama that unfolded slowly from the Garden of Gethsemane to the cross, it certainly was not in the physical appearance of Christ. Nor was it in the damning evidence of human callousness and depravity the panorama revealed. The beauty could be found only in the love that looked beyond such moral bankruptcy and perceived the wretchedness and dire need of all men.
The witnesses they produced against Jesus could not get their lies to agree until two of them brought forth the true statement Jesus had made: “I will destroy this Temple that is made with hands and in three days I will build another not made with hands.” But neither did their stories fully agree.
The high priest stood up with a gesture of impatience and demanded of Jesus, “Have you no answer to make? What is this they’re saying about you?”
Jesus answered not a word. But then Caiaphas asked Jesus a question that was certain to get a response: “I adjure you by the living God that you tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.”
It could be that Caiaphas, by some devilishly ingenious reasoning, assumed that Jesus would never deny this charge, which was a claim for Himself that He had made or implied in His teachings. Jesus did not disappoint him.
“You have said so,” He said, meaning, in the Jewish idiom, Yes. “And I tell you that hereafter you will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
The high priest tore his robe in horror at such supposed blasphemy. “He has spoken blasphemy! What do we need with more witnesses?”
Turning to the council, Caiaphas asked them, “What is your opinion?”
“He is guilty of death!” they cried in unison.
Then, in their trumped-up fervor (some of them surely knew Jesus spoke truth) they buffeted Jesus and spit on Him. That was not enough for them; they had to humiliate Him further. Covering His face, they slapped the Lord of glory and said in derision, “Prophesy to us now and tell us who struck you!” The servants even joined in the sacrilegious scene, smiting Jesus along with the others.
Mat. 26:69?75; Mark 14:66?72; Luke 22:55?62; John 18:25?27
Down in the courtyard, Peter, the erstwhile staunch disciple who had already fled from his Master’s side and denied Him once, had gone into the forepart of the courtyard. There a maid once again alerted the others to him: “This man is one of them!”
Peter felt all eyes turn toward him and, as before, his courage melted away. “I swear I am not one of them!” We can only guess at what turbulent thoughts were going through Peter’s mind after this second shameful denial of his Friend and Master who would never, never have turned His back on Peter.
About one hour later, a kinsman of the servant whose ear Peter had cut off, said to Peter, “Didn’t I see you in the garden with this Jesus?”
“No; not at all.” Peter was becoming alarmed for his safety.
“You ARE one of them. We can tell by your speech you’re a Galilean!”
Losing whatever little loyalty he might have had at this point under a cascade of fear, Peter swore that he did not know Jesus, and even called a solemn curse upon himself if he were not telling the truth. Immediately a cock crowed (again?) somewhere in the chilly night. Peter had now completely disowned Jesus and in so doing had fulfilled the dismal prophecy Jesus had made concerning him.
Jesus, still standing before His adversaries in a room looking out on the courtyard, turned at this moment and looked down across the milling throng straight into Peter’s eyes. It was a damning look, not because Jesus’ eyes had the intensity of judgment in them. Quite the contrary: they were eyes filled with a love and pain that Peter’s conscience could not endure. The look burned into Peter’s soul and the enormity of his defection flooded over him. This strong surge of emotion had to have an outlet and Peter’s eyes became blinded with sudden-springing tears of remorse. Peter groped his way out of the courtyard into outer darkness where he could weep freely in the bitter anguish of his soul.
About Aaron Smith
Speak Your Mind