The Trail of the King

 Ariel New ZealandApril 10, 2020

From: Yeshua The Life of Messiah from a Messianic Jewish p557-589
By Dr Arnold Fruchtenbaum

The Pharisees rejected Yeshua as the Messiah of Israel because He repudiated their Mishnaic Law. Ironically, the Pharisees broke 22 of their own rules and regulations concerning arrests and trials in order to expedite Yeshua’s trial and death.

Table of Contents

List of Rules

  • A. The Arrest
    • 1. Judas
    • 2. The Arresting Forces
    • 3. The Great I Am
    • 4. Peter’s Impetuous Swing

B. The Religious Trial1. The Trial before Annas2. The Trial Before Caiaphasa. The Search for Witnesses

  • b. Caiaphas Takes Charge

c. The Verdict and Sentence3. The Denial by Peter

  • 4. The Mockery and Beating
    • 5. The Condemnation by the Sanhedrin
  • C. The Death of Judas
        • 1.Resolving Two Alleged Contradictions
      • 2. Jeremiah or Zechariah?

D. The Civil Trial 1. The First Trial Before Pilate

  • a. Attempts to Find an Accusation

b. Sedition

  • c. The Conversation with Pilate
    • d. Declarations of Innocence

2. The Trial before Herod Antipas

  • 3. The Second Trial before Pilate
        • a. Yeshua Bar Abba
        • b. The Chastisement
      • c. A New Charge
      • d. Behold Your King
      • 4. The Mockery

List of Rules

Rule 1: There was to be no arrest by religious authorities that was effected by a bribe.
This was based on Exodus 23:8.
Rule 2: No steps of criminal proceedings were to occur after sunset.
This was to avoid the possibility of conspiracy, especially one that would be carried out using the cover of night. Once the sun had officially set, the authorities were not to proceed with any form of criminal proceedings. By Jewish reckoning, the sun officially sets once three stars are visible.
Rule 3: Judges or members of the Sanhedrin were not allowed to participate in an arrest.
The purpose was to ensure their neutrality. If they participated in the arrest, it meant they had already taken sides.
Rule 4: There were to be no trials before the morning sacrifice.
All of the daily morning rituals in the Temple had to be completed before
any trial could be conducted.
Rule 5: There were to be no secret trials, only public.
In keeping with the second rule, secret trials were forbidden in order to
avoid the possibility of conspiracy.
Rule 6: Sanhedrin trials could only be conducted in the Hall of Judgment
of the Temple compound.
Since all trials had to be public, the people would have to know where to
go to observe a trial. Sanhedrin trials, therefore, had to be held only in
this room, the Hall of Judgment in the Temple compound. It was known
in Hebrew as the Lishkat ha-Gazit, the Chamber of Hewn Stones.
Rule 7: During the trial, the defense had the first word before the
prosecutors could present the accusations.
This is the reverse of the western system. The defense provided all
reasons why the accused could not be guilty of anything and presented
character witnesses. Then the two or three witnesses for the prosecution officially presented the accusation.
Rule 8: All could argue in favor of acquittal, but all could not argue in
favor of conviction.
It was permissible under Jewish criminal law to “stack the deck” in favor
of the accused, but not against him. It was permissible for everyone to
argue only for acquittal, but it was not permissible for everyone to argue
only for conviction. The accused had to have at least one defender.
Rule 9: There were to be two or three witnesses, and their testimony had
to agree in every detail.
This rule was based on Deuteronomy 19:15.
Rule 10: There was to be no allowance for the accused to testify against
himself.
This was to avoid two possible situations.
First, a man might be suicidal and so confess to a crime he did not commit.
Second, he might be trying to protect someone else who was guilty and so confess to a crime he did not commit. Therefore, the individual himself could not be counted among the two witnesses that were minimally required for a court case to be heard.
Rule 11: The high priest was forbidden to rend his garments.
This rule was based on Leviticus 21:10. In a Jewish context, the tearing
of garments was a sign of the emotions. For example, if a family member
died, the relatives would tear their clothing. This also happened if a
family member married a Gentile or became a believer in Yeshua.
Because the trial had to be decided based on the facts presented by two
or three witnesses, not on the basis of emotions, the high priest could
not tear his clothing during the trial.
Rule 12: Judges could not initiate the charges; they could only investigate
charges brought to them.
Like the third rule, this law was supposed to keep judges neutral. If they
originated the charge, it would mean that they had already taken sides.
Rule 13: The accusation of blasphemy was only valid if the name of God
itself was pronounced.
In Hebrew, the name of God is comprised of four letters that correspond
to the Latin letters YHWH or YHVH. Unless a person actually pronounced
this four-letter name of God, they could not technically be accused of
blasphemy.
Rule 14: A person could not be condemned solely on the basis of his own
words. This rule emphasized the necessity of having two witnesses.
Rule 15: The verdict could not be announced at night.
This rule was to avoid a rush to judgment. It might have been a very long
day with many witnesses being questioned, arguments back and forth,
and people getting tired and edgy. To avoid a rush to judgment, once the
night had come (meaning once three stars were visible), the judges had
to wait until the next day to announce the verdict, even if they knew
what it would be.
Rule 16: In the case of capital punishment, the trial and guilty verdict
could not occur at the same time, but had to be separated by at least 24
hours.
The purpose of this law was to permit more time for information to
become available which might favor the accused.
Rule 17: Voting for the death penalty had to be done by individual count,
beginning with the youngest, so the young would not be influenced by
the elders.
Rule 18: A unanimous decision for guilt showed innocence, since it is
impossible for 23 to 71 men to agree without plotting.
The figure 71 is the full membership of the Sanhedrin. Not all the
members needed to be present, but there had to be a minimum of 23.
However, even with the minimum, it was inconceivable in a Jewish
context that all 23 men could agree on one issue, unless there was a plot
involved. This came from the observation that Jews enjoy arguing among
themselves, as noted earlier in the discussion on the school of the
Sopherim.
Rule 19: The sentence could only be pronounced three days after the
guilty verdict.
The trial and the verdict had to be separated by 24 hours, but three more
days had to pass before pronouncing the sentence, for the same reason:
to allow more time for information to come forth that would favor the
accused.
Rule 20: Judges were to be humane and kind.
Rule 21: A person condemned to death was not to be scourged or beaten
before his execution.
Rule 22: No trials were allowed on the eve of the Sabbath or on a feast
day.

Content retrieved from: https://ariel.org.nz/the-trail-of-the-king/?fbclid=IwAR2anVtBC8aqyCq3PMXd4owxFBSE49D1DE-qOGewy4j_-3EzWAkUx9nyCTU.