The Innocent Found Guilty

PDF

You know, I was thinking this week as we anticipated looking at God's Word together, as we anticipated looking at the realities of the resurrection, that in recent years a trend has become increasingly clear. Every Christmas and Easter, various media outlets join with secular and liberal religious voices to launch a kind of all-out attack on the Christian faith. They do it under the guise of sort of focusing on the Christian holiday and helping us all worship. Experts are marshaled who reject the biblical record, and who spin their own ideas as if they were in fact historical reality. Turn on the television. Look at the TV Guide of all of the options that are available, and you'll see program after program listed that is supposedly about the real Jesus. Go to the magazine stand and look at the magazines and there you'll find the same thing. There will be countless illustrations of programs and articles designed to assault the Christian faith.

Let's be clear about the New Testament record of Jesus' life and ministry. There is more manuscript and supporting historical evidence for the gospel accounts than any other ancient document without exception. Not only that, the manuscripts that we have of the New Testament events go back closer to those events than those records of any other ancient event or ancient document - more than Socrates, more than Plato, more than Aristotle, more than any other document. So, the evidence for what actually happened in the life and ministry of Jesus is overwhelming and it can only be rejected in the face of the evidence.

More than 30% of the gospel record takes us to just one week in the life of our Lord - the last week before His crucifixion and including His resurrection. And when you take those various accounts (that 30% of the gospel record) and you weave it together, it really presents a cohesive picture of what happened that week especially starting at midnight on Thursday, when Jesus is arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane, leading through the end of Sunday, the day of His resurrection.

After Jesus' arrest, about 12 midnight on Thursday, there are a series of hearings and trials that take place. The first set of trials are Jewish and religious. The second set of trials are Roman and civil. With the religious leaders of Israel, there are three separate phases of their trying of Jesus. Only John records the first phase.

The Roman soldiers, when they bring Jesus from Gethsemane, they take Him directly to the house of the most powerful man - the most powerful Jewish man in all of Israel in the first century. His name was Annas. Annas had served as high priest for some six years. But then, five of his sons were to serve as the high priest of Israel. And his son-in-law, Caiaphas, was at that time the high priest. He was a force to be reckoned with. And that's where the Roman soldiers delivered Jesus first and apparently most of them, if not all of them, return to the fortress Antonia.

Annas held a sort of brief preliminary hearing of Jesus in his courtyard, perhaps while the rest of the Sanhedrin came together, because the second phase of the Jewish trial recorded by Matthew, Mark, and Luke is that, immediately following that preliminary hearing with Annas, all of the Sanhedrin assemble in the house of Caiaphas, the high priest. He probably shared a courtyard with his father-in-law, Annas. Their homes were very close together. And so, this would have been all in very close proximity to each other.

The third phase of the Jewish trial also reported by Matthew, Mark, and Luke occurred just after dawn on Friday morning, probably around 5:30 AM. It was a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin in its normal meeting place in the temple courts. Those three Jewish trials are quickly followed by three Roman trials, between daybreak (about 5:30 in the morning and 9:00 o'clock) because at 9:00 AM Jesus is crucified.

The first Roman trial is with Pilate at the praetorium. He then sends him off to Herod where Herod tests Jesus and tries to find something against Him. He sends Him back then to Pilate. Finding nothing, he sends Him back to Pilate for the third phase of the Roman trials. And at that third phase, Pilate restates the charges against Jesus, reaffirms his own decision that Jesus is innocent, and even mentions that Herod found no fault in Jesus. In the Roman trials, the charge was sedition - that Jesus was somehow inciting rebellion or insurrection against the Roman authority. Pilate doesn't believe that. He does everything he can to see Jesus released. Here's the important point. Listen carefully. Jesus was found by the Roman authorities to be completely innocent of sedition - the charge that was brought against Him in the Roman courts. So, in reality then, Jesus was put to death because of what happened in the Jewish trials.

Now, in the first of those Jewish trials, the one with Annas (that preliminary hearing), Annas simply inquired about His disciples and His teaching. And in the third Jewish trial, the one that came just after daybreak, that was just kind of a formality to formalize what had already been decided in the early hours of the morning. The real trial of Jesus, in the record of the second Jewish trial (the one that occurred about 2:00 AM on Friday morning), there in that record you find the real reason that Jesus was killed - the real reason He had to die. And not only is it forcefully stated about the reason He died, but there are significant implications for His resurrection as well, which is why it's appropriate for us to look at this morning.

I want you to turn with me to Matthew 26. In Matthew 26, Matthew records that second Jewish trial, the one held in the house of Caiaphas, the one that matters. Matthew 26:57. Remember now, Jesus has been delivered from Gethsemane to Annas, just across the courtyard. There, in the courtyard, He's been delivered to Annas, who enquires about His teaching and His disciples. And then, this occurs. Verse 57: "Those who had seized Jesus led Him away to Caiaphas, the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were gathered together. But Peter was following Him at a distance as far as the courtyard of the high priest, and entered in, and sat down with the officers to see the outcome."

This was a meeting of most of the Sanhedrin. I say most because we're told the entire council gathered. We know at least two probably weren't there - Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, both of whom had become followers of Jesus secretly and who did not consent to His death. And later, that same day, would try to get His body and would, and would be involved in His burial. But most of the Sanhedrin is there.

It was the highest court of the Jews, the highest political authority in the nation under the Romans. It had arisen during the period of the Greeks, between our old and new testaments. It was made up of 71 men, composed of the chief priests of Israel, the elders, that is the leading lay people of the land, and the scribes or the teachers of the law. And the high priest, in this case Caiaphas, was usually the one who was elected to preside as president over the Sanhedrin. He was the 71st member.

This group now convenes in the middle of the night. Remember on Wednesday, they had arranged with Judas for the betrayal and, undoubtedly, they had some window of time when they expected Jesus to be arrested, and they had already decided to convene this meeting. So, word spreads. They know to come. They gather at the house of Caiaphas.

Although the disciples had initially fled at Gethsemane - you remember all of them had fled, two of them, Peter and John, rallied their courage and followed Jesus to the home of the high priest. John, apparently, went into the hearing and it's through him and Jesus Himself that we know what happened there. Peter is outside in the courtyard. In the account that follows, under the inspiration of the Spirit of God, we are allowed to listen in to what happened there that night at 2:00 AM in the house of Caiaphas.

In this second phase of the Jewish trial of Jesus Christ, there are three parts or three movements I want you to see this morning. The first part of the trial is the case against Jesus - the case against Jesus. Look at verse 59: "Now the chief priests and the whole Council kept trying to obtain false testimony against Jesus, so that they might put Him to death." In other words, it was clear from the beginning that this was to be a kangaroo court - a mock court set up in violation of established legal procedure that had no desire for justice whatsoever. The outcome had already been decided. They would have been thrilled to have had legitimate witnesses against Jesus. Matthew makes it clear that, in the end, that didn't really matter whether they were legitimate or not. They had already decided what they were going to do with Jesus. In fact, two months before this night, back in February of the year 30AD, they had determined to kill Jesus. It was after the raising of Lazarus from the dead and Caiaphas had led a discussion in which he said, "Look, if we don't do something about Jesus, we're going to lose our place and our position and maybe even our nation. It's expedient for one man to die instead of all the people." And He said that, we're told, as a prophet - pointing to the reality that Jesus would die in the place of his disciples, those who believe in Him. And so, they had determined what to do about Jesus. They knew what needed to happen. The decision had been made that He needed to die.

And the reason was transparently obvious to everyone, even to Pilate. If you look over just another page to Matthew 27:18, Pilate wanted to release Jesus because he knew that because of envy, they had handed Him over. He knew what was going on. You see, they envied Jesus, and from the very beginning, they looked for a way to incriminate Him. From the very beginning of His ministry, they began to track His steps. They had spies in place, watching and listening for anything that would incriminate Him as a lawbreaker. And even a couple of days before this trial, on Tuesday of the Passion Week, you remember they had come to Jesus, one group after another, and asked a series of questions designed to trap Him in His words. But they, after all of that effort, had nothing on Jesus. So now in desperation, they kept trying to find some testimony, however suspect, that would allow them to convict Jesus for a capital offense.

Verse 60 tells us: "They did not find any, even though many false witnesses came forward." As there always is around the seat of power, there are always hangers-on, always brownnosers, in this case, religious interns - people looking to advance their careers who were eager to oblige the wishes of their leaders. You want accusations against Jesus? You want testimony that will incriminate Him? Here it is. They came forward with many accusations. Mark adds, "For many were giving false testimony against Him, but their testimony was not consistent." One of the greatest principles of Jewish law was that for someone to be put to death, there had to be at least two witnesses. Deuteronomy 17:6 had said that it could be established in the mouth of two or more witnesses but if there was only one, then the person could not be put to death. And they couldn't find two witnesses who agreed, even among those bringing false accusations.

Look at verse 60: "But later on two came forward, and said, 'This man stated, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God and to rebuild it in three days.''" That was a stretch. Three years before this, in the early days of His ministry, you remember, Jesus had gone to the temple. And there in the temple courts, was this lucrative financial industry that this very group had created. If you came from outside of Jerusalem, you came for one of the feasts, you wouldn't want to bring your own lamb because it might be injured in the trip. And so, instead, you would bring money. And when you arrived, you discovered there on the temple precincts that your money was not good at the temple. You had to instead exchange your money for money that was good at the temple. And the exchange rate was mercenary. Then you took that money, that you had just purchased, and you took it over to another booth. And there you purchased your dove or your lamb or whatever it was that you were going to sacrifice. And, of course, the prices were highly elevated so that it had become, as Jesus said, a den of robbers. They were stealing and raping the people with this scheme they had put together. And Jesus took a bundle of cords and bound them together. And He drove them out. And He turned the tables of the moneychangers over and He poured out their money. And He chased them off. And you remember what the leaders came to Him and said, "By what authority do You do this?" And He said this to them, "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up." John says, "But He was speaking of the temple of His body." And now that comes back up. Jesus had said, "If you destroy this temple..." Now the accusation is that He said He was going to destroy the temple - a fabricated charge.

It's possible that, like in Acts 6 when the leaders then suborn perjury against Stephen - it's possible that's what's happening here. We don't know. But, regardless, these two men are unable to get their stories straight. That was important. The Mishnah required that witnesses be separately asked a series of seven questions about the circumstances of their alleged - the alleged offense. And that was done in order to validate their testimony. The two were questioned separately and their answers had to agree. That didn't happen in this case. Mark reports not even in this respect was their testimony consistent. Now, that was a very serious thing. To lie in a case that demanded the death penalty in first century Israel, was to invite the death penalty yourself. But they apparently had no concern here; they're protected by the authorities. Here's the big picture though. What Matthew wants us to see is that the entire case against Jesus Christ is nothing. They watched and scrutinized Him for three years, looking for something that would incriminate Him, and when it came to that night, this was the best that His enemies could do. This was the best case they could build against Jesus. The complete misrepresentation of something He'd said three years before.

You know with this does? This stresses the innocence of the Son of God. Imagine someone scrutinizing Your life for three years and having absolutely nothing, no grounds, on which to accuse you of anything in a religious court. There were no legitimate witnesses against Him, and even the false witnesses couldn't come up with a convincing story.

Verse 61, verse 62 rather, says, "The high priest stood up and said to Him, 'Do You not answer? What is it that these men are testifying against You?'" Jewish law prescribed that the person accused of the crime be allowed an opportunity to defend themselves and, here, the high priest gives Jesus that opportunity.

Verse 63 says, "But Jesus kept silent." He didn't take the opportunity to defend Himself. Jesus realized, I'm sure, that these men were not interested in the truth. They were not interested in justice. And the charge they were making against Him was so ridiculous as to hardly merit a response. But Jesus could have spoken up in His own defense. He could have spoken up and explained that He never threatened to destroy the temple in Jerusalem, that He had been speaking metaphorically of His own body. But He chose not to do that. He chose to remain silent.

You know, this is a big point that's made in all of the gospel accounts. And not just of this trial, but of almost all the trials in which Jesus appeared. There's a great point made that He remained silent. The reason for that is imagine the normal response of someone accused of a capital offense, someone facing the death penalty. What is going to be the natural and human response? It's to speak up constantly in your defense - "I didn't do it. I'm innocent." We hear that all the time. And yet here Jesus remains silent because while He was personally innocent, it was important for Him to be declared guilty for us. It brings up the words of Isaiah 53: "He was oppressed and He was afflicted, / Yet He did not open His mouth; / Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, / And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, / So He did not open His mouth."

Caiaphas comes to the realization that all of this is going nowhere in a hurry. And so, Caiaphas was a sly and cunning man. And he decides to take an altogether different tact. He decides to throw caution to the wind and to stake everything in this trial on one bold frontal assault. He knew that Jesus had never been one to mince words, and so, He decides to ask Jesus in this legal setting a very straightforward question about His claims. We've seen the case against Jesus. It was nonexistent. Even the false witnesses couldn't agree.

So, that brings us, secondly, to the claims of Jesus: the claims of Jesus. Verse 63, the middle of the verse says, "And the high priest said to Him, 'I adjure You by the living God..." Adjure is not a word we use very often. The Greek word that's translated adjure literally means "to put under oath". Now in our culture, we are not put under oath, or I should say we are put under oath by what we say. If you are in a courtroom, you can only be put under oath if you agree to be put under oath. You go up - and we've all seen the courtroom scenes or perhaps you've been there yourself - and you raise your right hand, and you say something like this, "I do solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God." Only when you have said that, are you under oath. You put yourself under oath. But in that culture, you weren't put under oath by what you said, but by what the legal authority said to you. What Caiaphas does here, is put Jesus under oath. And it was the most serious oath possible for an Israelite. He says, "I put You under oath by the living God. I call You to witness, to tell the truth, in the presence of the true and living God of Israel." This was a sober, serious moment in the life of that trial and in the life of Jesus.

Verse 63: "I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God." "Do You claim to be the Christ?" Christ is the English word that comes from the Greek word Christos, and the word Christos simply is the translation of the Hebrew word Hamaschiach, the Messiah. "Do You claim to be the Messiah the Old Testament promised, the One who was coming, the Anointed One? Is that who You claim to be? And do You claim to be the Son of God? I put You under oath. Tell us the truth before God."

What's remarkable about this question to me is that this is the very question I would want asked. Is Jesus claiming these things? Because so many critics of Jesus Christ accuse us, as Christians, of inflating His claims. So many of them say, "Listen, you know, Jesus was a good Jewish teacher. He was a good man, taught people to love God, but He never claimed the things you Christians say He claimed." But here, the head of the nation, the high priest of Israel, the president of the Sanhedrin, puts Jesus under oath before God. So, here is Jesus' own testimony under oath about His claims.

Verse 64: "Jesus said to him, 'You have said it yourself..." You'll notice in the New American Standard the word "yourself" is in italics, which means it's not in the original text. Jesus simply said, "You have said it". Now, to us, that could sound perhaps like a potential vagarity, an intentional dodge or equivocation but, as you'll see in a moment from the response of the Sanhedrin, they all understood Jesus' answer to be, "Yes!" - a definite yes. And, in fact, Mark leaves no doubt because in Mark 14:62, to this question, he says, "And Jesus said, 'I am..." "Is that what You're claiming? Are You the Messiah, the One promised? Are You the Son of God?" "I am". And just to make sure that they understood what it was He was claiming, Jesus adds (verse 64 [he meant verse 62]): "[nevertheless I tell you, hereafter] and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.'" Most translations make it clear that Jesus is quoting the Old Testament here. Perhaps yours does as well. Specifically, He is quoting two Old Testament passages - Psalm 110 and Daniel 7. And both of those passages were considered to be about Israel's Messiah. So, without question, Jesus was unequivocally claiming to be Jesus, to be the Messiah, to be Israel's Messiah.

But there's an even more important reason that Jesus quotes those two passages, because there might be some misunderstanding on the part of the Sanhedrin about who the Messiah was to be. There might be differing opinions about what it means to be a Son of God. Maybe they took it in a human sense, as the way we are sons of God. And so, Jesus wants to make it crystal clear. Both of these passages He quotes make it clear that the Messiah was to be more than simply a human being. In Psalm 110:1 David wrote this, "The Lord [Yahweh] says to my Lord: / 'Sit at My right hand / Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.'" On Tuesday of the Passion Week, Jesus had raised a question about that very passage with these same leaders. And He had made the point that although Messiah would be a son of David, that is, He would be a descendant of David, He would be far exalted beyond David. David here calls Him "My Lord". He would share the rule with God Himself. He would sit at God's right hand. He would share God's throne. This is more than any human being.

But the Daniel 7 passage is even more shocking. I want you to turn there with me and see it in its context. Daniel 7. Because in Daniel 7, Daniel is given a vision of human history. He's given a vision of human history in a progression of beasts that are progressively more powerful. And then he explains how human history will end. Verse 9: "I kept looking / Until thrones were set up, / And the Ancient of Days took His seat..." This is obviously a picture of God Himself. And then in verse 13: "I kept looking in the night visions, / And behold, with the clouds of heaven / One like a Son of Man was coming, / And He came up to the Ancient of Days [God Himself] / And was presented before Him. / And to Him [that is, to the Son of Man] was given dominion, / Glory and a kingdom, / That all the peoples, nations and men of every language / Might serve [worship] Him. / His dominion is an everlasting dominion / Which will not pass away; / And His kingdom is one / Which will not be destroyed." Wow! Jesus was claiming to be that person, the divine Son of Man, the divine ruler with an eternal kingdom, who is worthy of worship as God Himself is.

Jesus, earlier that same week, had connected this very passage, in what we call the Olivette Discourse, with His return back in verse 13: "And behold, with the clouds of heaven / One like a Son of Man was coming." So, when Jesus quotes Daniel 7 to them in the trial, He is both claiming to be God's divine Son and He is issuing them a threat, a threat that He will return and when He returns, it will be in judgment. So, under oath, Jesus affirmed that He claimed to be the Messiah, the Son of God. And by adding these two Old Testament passages, He claimed to be more than merely human. He claimed to be divine. He claimed to be God. Those were the claims of Jesus Christ.

That brings us to the third part of the trial: the conviction of Jesus. Verse 65: "Then the high priest tore his robes and said, 'He has blasphemed! What further need do we have of witnesses? Behold, you have now heard the blasphemy..." Listen, the high priest knew exactly what Jesus was claiming. And as an expression of shock and horror, he did what was not lawful for Him to do except in the most extreme cases - he tears his robe, his high priestly robe. And then, he made a formal charge against Jesus: "He has blasphemed!" No further witnesses are needed. The entire Sanhedrin, almost 70 people, has just heard what He claimed.

And Caiaphas is so certain of the outcome, that instead of taking the usual vote in the Sanhedrin... The usual vote was one person at a time for the death penalty, starting with the youngest member (so that he would not be intimidated by the vote of the oldest members), they would work all the way through the Sanhedrin voice at a time. But in this case, it appears that he is so certain of the outcome, having just heard Jesus' claims, that He calls for a voice vote. And they all answer together. But notice what he says. He uses, in verse 66, the typical language "What do you think?" That was the exact expression that was always used by the high priest to call for a vote in the Sanhedrin. This is a formal vote of Jesus' guilt or innocence. And they answered, "He deserves death!"

Of those who were there, Mark says, it was unanimous. Jesus is guilty, guilty of a capital offense, because blasphemy was a capital offense in Israel. The Old Testament was clear. Leviticus 24:16. The Lord Himself spoke to Moses and said this: "Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the Lord [Yahweh] shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death." And so, Caiaphas calls for the vote. The voice vote is taken. It is a unanimous "Guilty!", deserving of death.

As soon as the vote to convict Jesus has finished, the whole atmosphere in Caiaphas' house changes. All semblance of dignity and solemnity is gone, and the abject hatred these men feel for Jesus begins to flow out of them and express itself in outrageous behavior. Look at verse 67: "Then they spat in His face and beat Him with their fists; and others slapped Him, and said, 'Prophesy to us, You Christ; who is the one who hit You?'" At best, this is some sort of sarcastic test of His claims to be the Messiah, intended to publicly shame Him. And, at worst, it is simply the brutalizing of a prisoner, a helpless prisoner, by authorities who have been outraged by His behavior. Just on Monday, Jesus had said plenty to outrage these men. He had called them a bunch of robbers because on Monday of the Passion Week Jesus, for the second time in His ministry, had cleansed the temple - turned over the tables, chased out a group of crooks. These men were the ones who profited financially from those schemes, and He called them a bunch of robbers. He pronounced a series of eight woes upon them (eight) calling down God's judgment upon them 8 times publicly and in their presence. He called them hypocrites, blind guides, fools, full of robbery and indulgence, whitewashed graves, sons of hell. And now that He is in their power and now that they have convicted Him of a capital offense, they carry out their anger against Him by spitting in His face, by taking their fist and pummeling Him, by slapping Him, and mocking Him. The gospel accounts make it clear that the officials were the ones who were doing most of this but that some of the Sanhedrin members themselves participated in this mockery and in this physical abuse.

Folks, when You look at this trial, there were a number of irregularities about this trial that were out of step with rabbinic law regarding a case involving the death penalty. It was held at night (2 AM in the morning) which was not allowed. It was not convened in the normal meeting place, in the temple precinct. It was the day before a festival (Passover) which was not allowed by law. It did not begin with a defense of the accused. The defendant was asked to incriminate himself. The verdict was rendered the same day as the trial. In capital cases in Israel, there had to be a second vote taken the next day and those who had voted guilty had the opportunity to change their vote to innocent - a chance to sleep on their decision. None of that was done here. William Hendrickson writes, "In the annals of jurisprudence, no travesty of justice ever took place that was more shocking than this one. This is, in reality, no trial at all; it is murder." But on the basis of what had transpired in this kangaroo court, the full Sanhedrin would meet shortly after daybreak (sometime around 5:30 that morning) and formalize the sentence officially that they had decided in the night. And then, because they had no authority under the Romans to carry out the death penalty, they would drag Jesus off to Pilate.

Folks, the Jewish leaders were responsible for Jesus' death. The Romans were responsible for Jesus' death. Pilate knew He was innocent. Herod knew He was innocent and yet allowed Him to be put to death. Ultimately, God was responsible for Jesus' death. Acts 2, Peter says on the sermon on the day of Pentecost, by the predetermined plan of God He was delivered over. But really, ultimately, you and I are responsible for His death because He would not have had to die if it were not for our sins.

What Matthew makes very clear here, is that Jesus was convicted and killed for one thing and one thing only. He made the incredible claim to be Israel's long-awaited Messiah and nothing less than the divine Son of God. Even with Pilate this real issue comes out. You remember after Pilate says He's innocent of sedition ("I find no guilt in Him"), the religious leaders in John 19:7 say to Pilate, "We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God." Here is the historical fact: Jesus made these remarkable claims, and they will not go away.

So, there are only three options. Either Jesus was a liar, that is, He knew these things weren't true and He said them anyway. Or He was a lunatic - He thought they were true, even though they weren't. Or He is Lord - He is everything He claimed to be. And if He is who He claimed to be, then the reason He said He came is also true. In Mark 10 He said the Son of Man has come to give His life a ransom for many. Jesus came to die in the place of everyone who will repent of their sins and believe in Him. It's equally true that what He said will happen to those who don't repent and believe, will happen as well. They will die in their sins, and they will face God's eternal wrath and anger. That's what Jesus said. So, Jesus made these claims.

But how do we know His claims are true? We know we made the claims. He made them under oath. He made them in front of His enemies, and they confirmed that He made them, but how do we know they're true? They rejected them. So, how do we know that He was telling the truth? Well, there was a hint, even in this trial, by the false witnesses, you remember. In their testimony, they misquoted Jesus. They misquoted what He had said when He was asked early in His ministry by what authority He cleansed the temple? And He said, "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up." You know what Jesus was saying? He's talking about His body. He was saying, "I'll tell You the authority I do this. I'm staking everything I do and everything I say on My resurrection." In other words, His resurrection from the dead would be the great proof that everything He did and everything He taught and everything He claimed was in fact true. The resurrection is proof that His claims under oath at 2:00 AM that Friday morning, were true. Do you understand that what we celebrate today looks back at everything Jesus did and everything He said and everything He claimed and stamps it with the approval of God and says, "It's true! Believe it!"?

But the resurrection is also proof of what's still coming. Paul made this point in Acts 17, on Mars Hill, there in Athens. Listen to what He said, "God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead." Jesus' resurrection proves that one day He who was judged will be the judge. If you will not accept Him as Lord now, you will face Him as judge then. Jesus described what that would be like on that awful day to John the Apostle in Revelation 20. He describes it as a great white throne on which He will sit, and He will judge all of those who have rejected Him.

Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, God's Son, sent to rescue all of those who would follow Him. How are you going to respond? Are you going to reject Him outright, reject His claims like the Sanhedrin did? Or are you going to be like those in His earthly ministry who said they believed what He said and didn't do it. Jesus said there'll be many like that that'll show up at the judgment day: "Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, didn't we do this and do that?' And I will say to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness.'" Are you going to become a lifelong follower and disciple of Jesus Christ? Let me ask you today: what are your intentions? What are you going to do with Jesus? You can't just ignore Him and hope He goes away. He made these claims. You can't ignore them. Today, you are the judge. You will decide what you are going to do with Jesus. But don't ever forget that someday the roles will be reversed, and He will decide what to do with you.

If you're here this morning and you're already a believer in Jesus Christ, you've already repented of your sin, you've received Him as Your Lord, this passage should be a great encouragement to you. Your faith, Christian, isn't based on some misunderstanding of Jesus. It isn't based on some fabrication of His followers. Even Jesus' enemies agreed that He claimed to be Israel's Messiah and the Son of God. They rejected those claims and put Him to death for them, but they agreed that He made those claims. And His claims were forever proven by the resurrection.

So, what we celebrate today is proof and complete confirmation of everything we believe. Our lives, our faith, our eternity, are built on Jesus' claims to be the Son of God, God the Son, sent to die for our sins. And in a remarkable mystery of God's providence, the entire Jewish Sanhedrin, His vowed enemies, validated that Jesus made those claims. And His resurrection proves that they're true.

In Romans 1:4, Paul puts it like this: "who [Jesus Christ] was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead..." His claims were forever affirmed as true. That's our faith.

Let's pray together.

Our Father, thank You so much for this amazing account that details for us who Jesus claimed to be. As under oath, in the most solemn of moments, He made it clear that He was claiming to be Your Anointed One, Your unique Son, the One who rules with You and will through all eternity. Father, we thank You that You validated those claims by raising Him from the dead. The fact that there is no empty... that there is no tomb today filled with His body, that the tomb is empty, only makes it clear that He was everything He claimed. And that someday, He will come again to receive us who believe in Him to Himself and to sit as the judge of those who will not. Father, I pray for the Christians here today who know and love You through Your Son. May this passage be a great source of encouragement. And Father for those who aren't believers, perhaps who know they're not, who come even with a rebel heart, I pray that today would be the day they would acknowledge the claims of Jesus Christ on their lives. But Father for those who come perhaps with some thought that they're a Christian because they simply don't reject Jesus outright, I pray Father that You would help them to see that that will situate them no better before Jesus as their judge than those who reject Him outright. Father, help them today to become true followers of Jesus Christ, to bow before Him as Lord and Savior. We pray that You would do this work for the glory of Your risen Son, in whose name we pray, Amen!