It will be seen that at these different sessions of the Sanhedrin in the
six months preceding the regular trial the judges had resolved that
Jesus should be done away with at the first convenient opportunity. In
short, and in fact, their hatred was formed and their determination
fixed in the matter of the proceedings to be instituted against Him.
Were they, then, legally qualified to act as His judges?
Again, besides prejudging Him to death had they not demonstrated their
total unfitness for any righteous administration of justice by seeking
false witnesses against Him? Hebrew law forbade them to seek for
witnesses of any kind. They were the defenders of the accused and, under
the Hebrew system, were required to search for pretexts to acquit and
not for witnesses to condemn.[318] It was a maxim that "the Sanhedrin
was to save, not to destroy life."[319] Much more were they forbidden to
seek for false witnesses. Hebrew law denounced false witnesses and
condemned them to the very punishment prescribed for those whom they
sought to convict.
"And the judges shall make diligent inquisition; and, behold, if the
witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his
brother; then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to do unto his
brother.... And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life,
eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot."[320]
But here we find the judges actually seeking testimony which the law
pointedly prohibited. This matter alone establishes their utter
unfitness to try Jesus, and is explicable only on the ground of the
degradation into which they had fallen at the time of Christ and on the
hypothesis that their burning hatred had overwhelmed their judgment and
sense of justice.
If it be objected that the points of disqualification above alleged were
not applicable to all the judges, a single sentence of Scripture meets
the objection: "And the chief priests and _all the council_ sought for
witness against Jesus to put Him to death."[321] The fact that "all the
council" were willing to outrage a provision of the fundamental law is
sufficient proof that they were all disqualified to try Christ.
Another conclusive proof of the total unfitness of the members of the
Sanhedrin to try Jesus is the fact that they so far forgot themselves
that they abandoned all sense of self-respect and judicial dignity by
brutally striking Him and spitting in His face. We would like to believe
that this outrageous conduct was limited to the servants of the priests,
but the Gospel of St. Mark, Chap. xiv., verse 65, clearly indicates that
the judges themselves were also guilty.
POINT XII
THE CONDEMNATION OF JESUS WAS ILLEGAL BECAUSE THE MERITS OF THE DEFENSE
WERE NOT CONSIDERED
LAW
"Then shalt thou inquire, and make search, and ask
diligently."--DEUTERONOMY xiii. 14.
"The judges shall weigh the matter in the sincerity of their
conscience."--MISHNA, Sanhedrin IV. 5.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account