JESUS
CHRIST
presence
of
the
Father
(le'^).
'Every
night
he
went
out,
and
lodged
in
the
mount
that
is
called
the
mount
of
Olives'
(Lk
21").
He
probably
spent
the
night
in
the
open
air
and
gave
hours
of
vigil
to
the
duty,
wliich
He
now
so
earnestly
enforced,
of
watching
and
praying.
It
was
to
look
around
and
before,
and
to
look
upward
to
the
Father,
that
He
left
the
supper-room
and
'went
unto
a
place
called
Gethsemane'
(Mk
1432-'s).
It
may
well
be
that
there
were
many
thoughts
that
burdened
His
mind
in
the
Agony,
but
the
plain
sense
of
the
narra-tive
is
that
He
prayed
that
He
might
be
enabled,
in
some
other
way
than
through
shame
and
death,
to
accomplish
the
work
which
had
been
given
Him.
Being
truly
man.
He
could
shrink
from
the
impending
ordeal
of
humiliation
and
suffering,
and
ask
to
be
spared;
being
the
perfect
Son,
He
added,
'
howbeit
not
what
I
will,
but
what
thou
wilt'
(v.«).
'To
such
a
prayer
the
only
possible
answer
waa
that
He
received
from
the
Father
the
assurance
that
according
to
His
holy
and
loving
counsel
there
was
no
other
possible
way
'
(Weiss,
ii.
500).
Then
He
arose
and
went
forward
to
meet
the
armed
band
which
Judas
had
guided
through
the
dark-ness
to
His
retreat.
15.
The
Passion.
—
The
order
of
events.—
The
arrest,
in
Gethsemane
on
the
Thursday,
some
time
before
midnight
(Mk
14<-S2
Mt
26"-".
Lk
22"-«,
Jn
IS'-'^).
Removal
to
the
palace
of
the
high
pries
t,
private
examina-tion
by
Annas
(Jn
IS'^ff-)
Trial
in
the
eariy
morning
before
the
Sanhedrin.
meeting
in
the
high
priest's
palace,
and
presided
over
by
Caiaphas,
condenmation
and
buffeting
(Mk
14S'-«»,
Mt
26^'
»»,
Lk
22M-"),
Peter's
denial
(Mk
14«-"1|).
Trial
before
Pilate
at
daybreak,
probably
in
the
Fort
of
Antonia
(Mk
15'-»,
Mt
27"-'«,
Lk
23",
Jn
18»-'S).
Jesus
before
Herod
(Lk
23»-i2).
The
Roman
trial
resumed,
the
sentence,
the
mocking,
and
the
scourging
(Mk
15«-2»,
Mt
27"-3",
Lk
23"-'»,
Jn
18"
19").
The
journey
to
the
Cross
(Mk
15»-2ii,
Mt
27"
-«,
Lk
23!»-=«,
Jnl9"").
The
Crucifixion,
beginning
at
9
a.m.
(Mk
16®),
or
after
noon-day
(Jn
19"');
death
and
burial
(Mk
15"-<',
Mt
27«
",
Lk23"-s«,
Jnl9«"«).
The
primary
source
is
the
narrative
in
Mk.,
which,
however,
becomes
meagre
and
somewhat
external
in
its
report
of
the
events
subsequent
to
Peter's
fall.
The
author
of
the
Fourth
Gospel
claims
to
have
had
oppor-tunities
for
a
more
intimate
view
of
things
(Jn
18"),
and
as
a
fact
gives
illuminating
information
about
the
more
secret
proceedings
of
the
authorities.
Lk.
adds
some
incidents,
notably
the
appearance
before
Herod.
(1)
The
trials.
—
In
the
Jewish
trial
there
are
usually
distinguished
two
stages
—
a
private
examination
before
Annas
(Jn
18"*).
and
the
prosecution
before
the
San-hedrin
under
the
presidency
of
Caiaphas
(Mk
14").
There
is,
moreover,
reason
to
suppose
that
the
second
of
these
was
a
meeting
of
a
committee
of
the
Sanhedrin
held
during
the
night,
or
of
the
Sanhedrin
meeting
as
a
committee,
and
that
it
was
followed
by
a
regular
session
of
the
Council
at
daybreak,
at
which
the
pro-visional
finding
was
formally
ratified
(Mk
15').
(i)
The
examination
before
Annas.
—
Annas,
who
had
been
deposed
from
the
high
priesthood
twenty
years
before,
continued
to
be
the
de
facto
leader
of
the
Council,
and
it
was
natural
for
him
to
wish
to
see
Jesus,
with
a
view
to
putting
matters
in
train.
In
reply
to
his
question
about
His
disciples
and
His
teaching,
Jesus
asked
him
to
call
his
witnesses
—
the
point
being
that
according
to
Jewish
law
a
man
was
held
to
be
innocent,
and
even
unaccused,
until
hostile
witnesses
had
stated
their
case.
(ii)
The
trial
before
the
Sanhedrin.
—
At
the
subsequent
meeting
of
the
Council
the
ordinary
procedure
was
followed,
and
the
indictment
was
made
by
witnesses.
The
charge
which
they
brought
forward
was
a
con-structive
charge
of
blasphemy,
founded
on
the
state-ment
that
He
had
attacked
sacred
institutions
in
threatening
to
destroy
the
Temple
(Mk
14").
The
evidence
not
being
consistent
(v."),
the
high
priest
JESUS
CHRIST
appealed
directly
to
Jesus
to
say
if
He
claimed
to
be
the
Christ
(v.").
Though
this
question
was
contrary
to
law,
which
forbade
any
one
to
be
condemned
to
death
on
his
own
confession,
Jesua
answered
'I
am.'
The
supernatural
claim
was
forthwith
declared,
with
signs
of
horror
and
indignation,
to
amount
to
blasphemy,
and
He
was
'condemned
to
be
worthy
of
death'
(v.").
That
a
formal
meeting
of
the
Sanhedrin
was
thereafter
held
to
ratify
the
judgment
is
implied
in
Mk
1S>,
and
was
probably
necessary
to
regularize
the
proceedings,
as
capital
trials
might
be
begun
only
in
the
daytime.
(On
this
and
cognate
points,
see
Taylor
Innes,
The
Trial
of
Jesus
Christ,
1905.)
(iii)
The
Roman
trial.
—
It
is
not
quite
certain
whether
the
Sanhedrin
had
the
right
of
trying
a
person
on
a
capital
charge;
in
any
case,
a
death-sentence
required
to
be
endorsed
by
the
Roman
governor.
The
Jews
obviously
took
the
position
that
in
a
case
of
the
kind
it
was
the
duty
of
the
governor
to
give
effect
to
their
judgment
without
going
into
its
merits;
but
Pilate
insisted
on
his
right
to
make
a
full
review
of
the
charge
and
its
grounds.
In
this
situation,
against
which
they
protested,
they
felt
the
difficulty
of
securing
sentence
on
the
religious
charge
of
blasphemy,
and
accordingly
fell
back
on
the
political
charge
of
treason.
'
They
began
to
accuse
him,
saying.
We
found
this
man
perverting
our
nation,
and
forbidding
to
give
tribute
to
Csesar,
and
saying
that
he
himself
is
Christ
a
king'
(Lk
23^).
In
reply
to
Pilate's
question,
Jesus
claimed
to
be
a
king,
but
doubtless
dis-armed
the
governor's
suspicion
by
some
such
addition
as
that
He
was
a
king
in
the
realm
of
the
truth
(Jn
18'»).
Then
follow
three
devices
of
Pilate
to
evade
responsibiUty
—
the
remand
to
the
tribunal
of
the
vassal-prince
of
Galilee,
Herod
Antipas
(Lk
238«')
;
the
proposal
to
scourge
Him
and
release
Him
(v.");
and
the
reference
to
the
multitude
(Mk
15=*).
Foiled
in
each
attempt,
he
still
hesitated,
when
the
accusers
put
the
matter
in
a
light
which
overwhelmed
his
scruples.
They
threatened
to
complain
that
he
had
not
supported
them
in
stamping
out
treason
(Jn
19'2).
Tiberius
was
known
to
be
peculiarly
sensitive
on
the
point
of
laesa
majestas,
while
Pilate's
hands
were
not
so
clean
that
he
could
welcome
any
investigation;
and
he
therefore
pronounced
Him
guilty
of
sedition
as
the
pretended
king
of
the
Jews,
and
delivered
Him
to
be
crucified
(v.'s).
He
was
then
scourged,
dressed
with
mock
emblems
of
royalty,
treated
with
derision
and
insult,
and
led
forth
to
the
place
of
execution
(Mk
15''*).
The
action
of
the
judges.
—
There
has
been
considerable
discussion
of
the
action
of
the
judges
of
Jesus
from
the
point
of
view
of
Jewish
and
Roman
law.
That
the
pro-cedure
and
verdict
of
the
Jewish
authorities
were
according
to
the
law
which
they
were
set
to
administer
has
been
ably
argued
by
Salvador
(Hist,
des
Iristitutions
de
Mo'is^.
1862),
but
it
seems
to
have
been
shown
that
in
the
proceedings
the
mostaacredprinciplesof
Jewish
jurisprudencewere
violated,
and
that
'
the
process
had
neither
the
form
nor
the
fairness
of
a
judicial
trial'
CTaylor
Innes,
op.
cit.).
It
has
also
been
argued
that,
in
view
of
the
requirements
of
the
Roman
law,
and
of
the
duties
of
his
position.
Pilate
was
right
in
passing
sentence
of
death
(Fitzjames
Stephen,
Liberty,
Equality,
Fraternity).
On
this
it
must
be
said
that
as
Pilate
did
not
believe
Jesus
to
be
guilty
of
the
crime
imputed
to
Him,
he
must
be
held
to
have
transgressed
the
spirit
of
Roman
justice.
On
the
other
hand,
itis
true
that
'the
claim
of
Jesus
was
truly
inconsistent
with
the
claim
of
the
State
which
(IlaEaar
represented.'
and
that
in
sentencing
Jesus
to
death
Pilate
faithfully,
if
unconsciously,
interpreted
the
antagonism
of
the
Roman
Empire
and
the.Christian
religion
(Taylor
Innes,
op.
dt.
p.
122).
(2)
The
disciples
in
the
crisis.
—
The
disciples
made
no
heroic
figure
in
the
catastrophe.
They
took
to
fiight
at
the
arrest
(Mk
14"i),
and
Peter,
who
followed
afar
off,
denied
his
Master
with
curses
(v."").
It
is
also
signifi-cant
that
no
attempt
was
made
to
capture
the
Apostles;
apart
from
Jesus
it
was
evidently
thought
that
they
were
quite
negligible.
In
fairness
it
should,
however,
be
remembered
that
the
two
opportunities
which
they
might
have
had
of
showing
their
courage
were
denied
