Feb 28, 2004 20:02
John 18:15-18, 25-27
This passage alternates between Jesus being questioned by the authorities and Peter being questioned being a follower of Jesus. Jesus had foretold that Peter would deny being a follower three times before the night was over. It is comforting that an apostles shortcoming is not held against him. It was not Peter's time to die. Christians were never meant to be a pack of prosecutors seeking to enumerate everyone's shortcomings.
Did the questioning of Jesus by the authorities have the same stigma of a religious leader today being arrested and brought before a judge? He was not being accused of a minor offense like jay walking, but rather a capital crime -- impiety. Could there have been anything more scandalous than a religious leader being accused of blasphemy?
John 18:28-40
This passage gives the recipe on how to so pervert the legal institutions anyone could be charged with a capital crime and killed.
Pilate asked the police what accusation was being brought against Jesus. They responded, "If this man were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you." Anyone can be convicted of a crime when the respectability of the prosecution becomes more important than the evidence against the accused. Americans as well as Jews emphasize the respectability of the state when they prosecute the accused.
The police and judicial authorities told Pilate that Jesus was being brought to him because Jewish law would not allow Jews to impose the death penalty on Jesus and that is the punishment that was appropriate. Anyone can be convicted of a crime when punishment is stressed over rehabilitation and justice. Americans as well as Jews have emphasized punishment over any desire to rehabilitate or give the accused another chance.
Pilate said, "I find no case against him" and then proceeded to hand Jesus over to be killed by others. Anyone can be convicted of a crime when judicial officials continue the prosecution of those accused of crimes even though there is not sufficient evidence. Anyone controversial person can be convicted of a crime if the case is put up to a popular vote. American judges as well as Jewish judges are reluctant in dismissing groundless charges instead of allowing a jury to deliberate on weak cases.