The Trial of Jesus Christ

Six Infractions of Jewish Law

— Homer Hamlin, researched by attorney Howard Rankin

Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death.—Matthew 26:59

In the proceedings before the Sanhedrin there was no prosecutor or district attorney as we know him today. The charge was made and proved by the complaining witnesses themselves, and the members of the court were denied the right to actively interrogate or prosecute the accused. Jesus was accused of sedition, seeking to tear down or destroy the Hebrew religion. The two witnesses accused Jesus of saying he would tear down the temple and rebuild it in three days. We know from John 2:21 that "he spake of the temple of his body." However, they believed he intended the literal temple, which had taken more than forty years to build. Since there were only two witnesses, and they were not in complete agreement, Caiaphas realized he would lose this particular charge, so he took control of the prosecution contrary to the Code. This was the an infraction of Jewish law..

Finding that he was not able to establish the allegation of sedition, Caiaphas changed the charge in the middle of the trial, a proceeding that would not be permitted today. He changed the charge to blasphemy. This was a crime in which the accused allegedly claims to himself a spark of divinity, either that he is divine or that he is the Son of God. This was another violation.

Jesus declined to answer the charges of Caiaphas, which he was legally permitted to do, until Caiaphas pulled a master stroke. He said to Jesus (Matthew 26:63) "I adjure you ... " The word occurs only seven times in the Bible. It was a solemn and seldom used Hebrew oath, going beyond our present day oaths "So help me God," for in addition to requiring one to answer truthfully, it also compels him to answer. In today's language, Jesus could not take the 5th amendment. Jesus recognized the solemnity of this oath, and when he was asked "I adjure you by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God" Jesus said "Thou hast said, nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven" (Matthew 26:63, 64). With this testimony from Jesus that he indeed was the Christ, the Son of the living God, Caiaphas closed the testimony and asked for an immediate vote, after literally condemning Jesus before a vote was even taken (verse 65). This was a gross violation of Jewish Law, number three.

Under the Jewish Code, at the conclusion of the testimony of a capital crime, the judges were directed, in the language of the code, to return home, and there to eat light foods and drink light wine, then sleep well for two days and two nights, and then to return, ONLY THEN, to vote, after again hearing the testimony against the accused. Caiaphas also asked for a simultaneous or voice vote, which was the eighth flagrant violation of their code. The code expressly provided that the vote should be cast one at a time, beginning with the youngest member, and then ascending in seniority until the oldest and most mature had voted, since only in this manner would the vote of the junior member not be influenced by that of the elder and more wise. The fourth violation!

They all voted that Jesus was guilty. Under the Jewish Code a unanimous verdict of guilty was a verdict of acquittal. The seeming paradox is explained by the belief of the Judeans that unless the accused had secured the sympathy and belief in his innocence by at least one member of the court, he had been denied a fair trial. A unanimous verdict would raise the possibility of a purely emotional decision, possibly indicating "mob psychology." In their code a verdict of guilty must be one less than all, but more than half. They all voted guilty. Flagrant violation number five

As mentioned previously, it was not lawful for the Jews to put anyone to death (John 18:31). So they took Jesus to Pilate. It seems clear that Pilate followed each of the four steps of the Code of Criminal Procedure: accusation, interrogation, defense and verdict, for he first said as he came out of the palace "What accusation do you bring against this man?" They answered "If he were not a malefactor we would not have delivered him unto thee" Then Pilate replied "Take him, and judge him according to your law" They replied "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." We cannot apply this particular act to a specific law, but it is a clear case of verdict before trial, and we may properly call this violation number six.

Excerpted from "The Trial of Jesus Christ" in Beauties of the Truth, May 1997