John 18.12-14, 19-24.
In
Backstory time. Shortly after
Once the Romans took Judea from the Herods, they did the same thing. Annas was the 11th appointed head priest since Herod took over. (He’s actually the ninth guy to hold the job. Some previous head priests had non-consecutive terms.) Annas was appointed by the Syrian legate Publius Sulpicius Quirinius in the year 6, and stayed in office till the year 15. He’s a descendant of King John Hyrcanus, and while he was still in the royal family, he wasn’t actually a contender for the throne.
Bible commentators aren’t always aware Herod and the Romans kept swapping out head priests, and assume Annas was the hereditary head priest, like all the head priests before Herod. So they aren’t so surprised when Annas’s five sons, son-in-law, and grandson become head priest after him: Isn’t it supposed to be a hereditary job? And yeah, originally it was… but in Jesus’s time it wasn’t, and hadn’t been for decades. So the fact Annas managed to keep his family in power for nearly 60 years is mighty impressive.
Annas’s successors include:
- Eleazar, his son (16-17
CE ) - Joseph bar Caiaphas, his son-in-law (18-36)
- Jonathan, his son (36-37)
- Theophilus, his son (37-41)
- Matthias, his son (43)
- Jonathan again (44)
- Annas 2, his son (63)
- Mattathias, his grandson (65-66)
Annas wasn’t the only guy with a political dynasty though. Four sons and a grandson of Boethus, another descendant of Aaron, were also head priest. Including Joazar bar Boethus, Annas’s direct predecessor.
Since Annas’s family kept holding the office of head priest, clearly Annas had a lot of influence in Judea. The Judeans certainly thought so. Not for nothing do two of the gospels treat Annas kinda like he’s still head priest. John straight-up calls him the head priest in verse 19 of today’s passage, and Luke also calls him the head priest when he’s nailing down the time John the baptist’s ministry began:
Luke 3.2 KJV - Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
The bible indicates there’s only one head priest (and currently it’s Jesus,
And even though the head priest wasn’t king anymore, he was still functionally Judea’s head of state. The Roman emperors were off in Rome having orgies (no seriously; Cæsar Tiberias was a big orgy guy), and the Roman procurators only worried about keeping down insurrections. So the actual running of Judea was left to his his nation’s freedoms, remain in power, and feather his own nest.
So if Jesus is Messiah, this was an utter threat to his power. So naturally Annas wanted to check out this reported Messiah for himself. After all, what if he was Messiah? What if he actually, suddenly called down 12 legions of angels
Annas grills Jesus.
In the other gospels Jesus keeps his mouth shut while his accusers make a ruckus. In John he’s mighty talky. So here’s John’s description of what went down.
John 18.12-14 KWL 12 The mob, the chief, and Judean police- then arrest Jesus and bind him.
13 They first bring Jesus to Annas,- for he’s the father-in-law of Joseph bar Caiaphas,
- who’s head priest that year.
14 Bar Caiaphas is the one who recommended to the Judeans- for one person to die, rather than all the people.
Lemme skip over what Simon Peter was doing in Annas’s courtyard.
John 18.19-24 KWL 19 The former head priest then asks Jesus about his students,- and about his instruction.
20 Jesus answers him, “I’ve freely spoken to the world.- I always teach in synagogue and in temple,
- where all the Judeans come together.
- I never spoke in private.
21 Why do you ask me this?- Ask those who’ve listened to what I speak to them.
- Look, they’ve known what I say.”
22 Once he says this, one of the bystanding police- gives Jesus a slap, saying,
- “This you answer the head priest?”
23 Jesus answers him, “If I speak evil, testify about the evil.- If good, why beat me?”
24 So Annas sends Jesus away,- having bound him for Bar Caiaphas the head priest.
Annas’s question, and Jesus’s answer to the question, have to do with why the Judeans had arrested Jesus: They were alarmed ’cause the public was calling him Messiah. We think of “Messiah” as a religious word. Ancient Israelis most definitely did not think of it as religous; it meant “king” to them, and that’s a problem when the self-proclaimed Messiah isn’t actually on the throne. It means the would-be Messiah wanted that throne. It meant people were gonna die.
’Cause every time the Judeans previously encountered a self-proclaimed Messiah, it was typically an insurrectionist who wanted to overthrow the Romans and take over the country, exactly like Judas Maccabee overthrew the Seleucids. Who thought God would empower him to do it. Only God didn’t, because that guy wasn’t Messiah. So the Romans would kill him, then crucify a bunch more people while they were at it.
Since Annas was secretly running Judea for them, if he knew about this pretender to the throne but did nothing about it, what were the chances Annas would get in big big trouble with the Romans? Heck, even if Annas wasn’t in trouble, just to be on the safe side they might march a few legions to Jerusalem and flatten it like they did Carthage.
John 11.47-48 KJV 47 Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles.48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
Hence Annas questioned Jesus: Exactly what have you been telling people about yourself?
When Jesus tells Annas, “I never spoke in private,” you might be thinking, “Wait, what about all the times he interpreted his parables for his kids?
Second, Annas specifically meant was Jesus telling people in private he’s Messiah, and planning armed rebellion. And no, Jesus did no such thing. All his proclaimations are public and above-board. And he wasn’t there to plot agaisnt the Roman Empire and overthrow it with swords and soldiers. He was there to overthrow it with grace and love. That’s what he openly taught. Taught it so plainly, it alienates those who prefer swords and soldiers. Heck, he taught it while they were arresting him!
Everybody could confirm this is precisely what Jesus taught: He had no secret revolutionary agenda which he only discussed in dark places. He boldly, openly proclaimed God’s kingdom. And less boldly, less openly, let slip he happened to be its Messiah/king. But everything he did wasn’t gonna bring down the Romans upon Judea.
In fact what did bring the Romans upon Judea, when it gets right down to it, is the fact the Judeans rejected Jesus as Messiah. Which opened the door for various new fake Messiahs to rise up, run wild, lead the people astray, and start a real war with the Romans that’d get them all killed.
As if Annas cared to hear Jesus.
Jesus’s reply suggests a level of frustration on his part. Closed-mindedness always annoys him.
Still didn’t believe him though. The priests already had their minds made up: Jesus was a fake Messiah, and they needed to be rid of him. That’s why Annas’s underlings had no qualms about slapping him: He’s a nobody, and there’ll be no repercussions of giving him a slap. He’s never gonna be exalted to a position where his name’s above every other name, and every knee in the cosmos bows to him.
Because the priests had their minds made up, it’s a lot of the reason Christians tend to call Jesus’s trial a show trial, kangaroo court, mockery, farce, hypocrisy, rigged: When judges are already decided about a verdict before they ever hear testimony, what’s the point of any trial? They’re just going through the motions to make everything appear proper. Annas’s behavior exposes what was really going on: Jesus was already judged, and doomed.
If Jesus had any questions about whether he’d get a fair hearing, Annas’s pre-trial interview answered them. No wonder he didn’t bother to speak up when he later stood before the senate: No point. He’d just suffer in silence, and await
