Caiaphas, Pontius Pilot

by Ian Lithgow, Innerleithen, Scotland | Category: Lives As Lessons | May 1996

Caiaphas and Pilate share the ignominious distinction of being representative of the rulers who condemned the Lord Jesus to death in the days of His flesh.

CAIAPHAS:

The introduction to Caiaphas is found in Luke's Gospel, where the narrative indicates a joint priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas (3:2). From Josephus and others a picture emerges of a dynasty related to Annas and his family, who had obtained the priesthood as a favour from Rome. Annas himself held the office of high priest about A.D. 6 - 15, but was deposed by the Roman authorities. The priesthood still remained within his control as it was passed on to five of his sons in succession and then to Caiaphas his son-in-law. This man features in the biblical record as the high priest who condemned the Son of God to death.

Consider Israel's first high priest robed in holy garments for glory and beauty (Ex. 28:2). Aaron brought the people to God as he ministered on their behalf. Contrast this with Caiaphas, who was a disgrace to that divinely appointed office. No garments he ever wore would endear him to God. The only occasion of divine control during the priesthood of Caiaphas is found in John 11:47-52, where he utters the prophecy that Jesus should die for the nation and that through His death there would be a gathering together into one of the children of God. We might find it strange that God should speak through one who was so far removed from the things of God. There is no honour being paid here by God, but according to His sovereignty chose to speak through Caiaphas, which reveals to us the fact that God was still in control of this nation.

From the house of Annas the Lord was sent to Caiaphas where the scribes and elders were gathered together, 'Against the Lord, and against His Anointed' (Acts 4:26). Central to the proceedings was Caiaphas the high priest of Israel. Was he dressed in those garments of glory and beauty which adorned the men who filled that office? We are not told, but there is no beauty in the scene described in Matthew 26:57-68. Lies abounded, words were taken out of context and misconstrued; Caiaphas stood up and demanded an answer from Jesus regarding the charges against Him. But in the midst of the clamour, 'Jesus held His peace'. The voice of adjuration broke His silence as Caiaphas demanded 'Tell us whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of God'. The Lord Jesus knew that His reply would bring condemnation. He answered in the affirmative, which caused the high priest to tear his garments. The Greek word that describes what Caiaphas did expresses the vehemence of his action. We picture him exploding with rage, expressed in his statement, 'He hath spoken blasphemy ... what think ye?' They all replied, 'He is worthy of death'. What an insult to justice! In their hatred of Jesus they proceeded to spit in His face and buffet Him. It is not a pleasant sight to contemplate, but through it all we see the noble dignity of the Son of God, 'Who, when He was reviled, reviled not again; when He suffered, threatened not' (1 Pet. 2:23).

Our final view of Caiaphas is found in Acts 4:5-22, when he is still in opposition to the purposes of God.

PONTIUS PILATE:

In the world's estimation of things, here was a man who held high office, but when we look at the list of names recorded in Luke 3 verses 1 and 2 we note that God by-passes all mentioned there until He comes to John the Baptist. In verse 2 we read that the word of God came to John in the wilderness. Does this not remind us of the scripture that says there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last? (Luke 13:30). Pilate's posting was not one which made for tranquillity at Jerusalem, which was constancy a hot-bed of political and religious trouble. The indigenous population did not conceal their contempt for the authority that Rome imposed on them (e.g. John 11:48,

50). It all leaves us with the picture of a man who neither had many friends, nor was he held in esteem. An incident recorded in Luke 13:1-3 portrays Pilate in an unfavourable light, for it appears he dealt in a very heavy-handed way with some who were causing trouble at the Temple in Jerusalem.

To each individual there comes a time when brought face to face with the claims of the Son of God. For most, that occasion is not recorded, but for Pilate the event is open to public scrutiny as each of the four Gospels bears testimony to the day Pilate the judge met Jesus the accused. Many had been the times when Pilate exercised his authority in his judicial role as the administrator of Roman law. What did he think of the bruised Man before him? Here was One whom the whole nation spoke about, and now He was in the palace awaiting sentence.

The first question that Pilate asked Jesus was, 'Art Thou the King of the Jews?' Thou is the emphatic personal pronoun, and when so used indicates that emphasis is being placed on the individual. Pilate was out to belittle Christ, but he did not expect the reply, 'Sayest thou this of thyself, or did others tell it thee concerning Me?' (John 18:34). The inquisitor had himself been asked a searching question that caused him to go on the defensive. He was soon to realize that before him stood a Man who was very different from those he was usually called on to interrogate. Pilate soon discerned that the trumped up charges that the accused was an evil-doer (John 18:30), perverting the nation and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar (Luke 23:2), were as false as the men who brought them. He was more interested in the Lord's claim to kingship, as it brought into sharp conflict the claim that there was only one king, namely Caesar (see Acts 17:7). Pilate appeared shaken in his own beliefs when the Lord said to him, 'Every one that is of the truth heareth My voice'. Pilate replied, 'What is truth?' (John 18:37,38). He had never been engaged in a question and answer session such as this.

Pilate now sought to release the prisoner, and on three separate occasions said, 'I find no crime in Him' (John 18:38; 19:4,6). This verdict found no acceptance with the Jews who demanded that the accused receive the death penalty for claiming to be the Son of God. This new charge struck terror into Pilate's superstitious mind, causing him to be more afraid. He then pressed for an answer to his question, 'Where are You from?' (John 19:9 NKJV).

Do not these events reveal to us the sifting ways of God with Pilate? The governor Rome had placed in power could not come to terms with all that he had heard, and the quiet dignity of this most extraordinary prisoner was

causing him deep disquiet. His wife entreated him, 'Have nothing to do with that righteous Man' (Mat. 27:19). God was speaking to him, but Pilate did not listen. He was in a quandary because of the pressure he was under, knowing that it was for envy the Jews had delivered Him up (Mat. 27:18). But they had proved shrewd in their demand by pitting His claim to kingship against that of Caesar's. Pilate acted to satisfy the mob, because his own position would be under threat if Caesar's honour was not upheld (John 19:12, 13). He also felt he had to do something that would salve his conscience regarding Jesus. He passed the sentence of death by crucifixion on the prisoner and washed his hands in water declaring 'I am innocent of the blood of this righteous Man' (Mat. 27:24). In this action a parallel may be drawn between the action of Pilate and the statement of Job who knew the futility of self-acquittal when he wrote, 'I know that Thou wilt not hold me innocent... if I wash myself with snow water, and make my hands never so clean' (Job 9:28,30).

Pilate's action of hand-washing is reflected today in many who seek to wash their hands of responsibility for Christ's death. Yet to sinful mankind comes the gracious entreaty of God to look to the Cross where Jesus shed His blood in sacrifice for sin.

Ian Lithgow, Innerleithen, Scotland | May 1996
Lives As Lessons