The Christian faith finds one of its supremely divine moments in a capital trial gone wrong

The use and misuse of capital punishment has a long history. Ironically, the Christian faith finds one of its supremely divine moments in a capital trial gone wrong. Jesus’ death on the cross was not only foretold, but also necessary for the forgiveness of sins. The innocent Christ would be put to death unjustly, yet through the mystery of salvation, that punishment would become just when He accepted the sins of the world on His own body.

As Christians address the issue of the death penalty, they have a pivotal case to inform their thinking. There could be only one innocent Christ to die for sins, but preventing the death of other innocent people wrongly accused was of paramount importance to Jews of Jesus’ day, as it should be to people today. John MacArthur’s commentary on Matthew (from his New Testament Commentary series) provides a revealing look at the betrayal of due process.

When the Great Sanhedrin gathered the night of Jesus’ trial, they should have followed specific judicial procedures to ensure fairness, objectivity, and a high respect for life. Instead, a prideful agenda replaced any pretense of a fair hearing. The first problem was the “jury” itself. Sanhedrin members were to be chosen for their track record of wisdom and leadership. (By Christ’s time, it had become a system of political favoritism.) What’s more, Mosaic Law guaranteed the accused a right to a public trial, to defense counsel, and conviction only on the testimony of at least two reliable witnesses. Witnesses found perjuring themselves received the same punishment as the accused — in a capital case that meant death. Rabbinical law also required a three-day waiting period before the sentence could be carried out. Members of the jury had to fast until the third day. This provided additional time for evidence to be brought forth and for jury members to reconsider their decisions. The system was weighted toward the defendant in that members could change their guilty verdicts to acquittals, but not the reverse.

 

In his book Testimony of the Evangelists, Simon Greenleaf cites the lawyer Joseph Salvador, who has researched proper Sanhedrin trial procedure. Salvador indicates that a defendant was protected against self-incrimination because his confession was not sufficient in itself for conviction. The Sanhedrin could not initiate charges but only consider charges brought before it by an outside party. No trial could be held at night, and capital trials had to be held in the temple. The property of an executed criminal could not be confiscated and must be passed on to heirs. A unanimous decision for death set the defendant free because it was presumed the slightest bit of mercy was lacking.

 

Those condemning Christ proceeded to violate every safeguard of their own system. A night trial in private quarters with lying witnesses, no charges, and no waiting period did not interfere with the already decided outcome. Surely many lessons could be lifted from the trial of Jesus, but one thing is glaringly obvious: Imperfect systems - especially corrupt ones — should not be allowed to operate out of sight of constant and rigorous scrutiny. Life is too precious for politics.