We'll be reading from John's
Gospel chapter 11. We'll begin in verse 47, our
text run through verse 54. You know, of course, that John
11's taken up almost exclusively with a matter of the death and
the resurrection of Lazarus. Thy Lord friend died and then
the Lord came and raised him back to life again. We're going
to begin in verse 47. You can tell by that, by the
words there, then gathered the chief priest. that this is related
to something that has happened, and in relation to something
that they are opposing, and so we see that sometimes religion,
and we say politics, or spiritual and civic, sometimes get mixed
up together, and one affects the other. Sometimes politics
comes against religion, and this is one of those cases I want
to title my message this afternoon, Political Expediency and Religious
Hypocrisy. And I think we'll see it in this
passage of the scripture that we're about to read. John 11,
47 through 54. Here is our text today. Then gathered the chief priests,
and the Pharisees, and the council, and said, What do we? For this man does many miracles. If we let him alone, all will
believe on him, and the Romans shall come and take away both
our place and nation. One of them, Caiaphas, being
the high priest that year, said unto them, You know nothing at
all, nor consider that it is expedient for us that one man
should die for the people and that the whole nation perish
not. And this spake he not of himself,
of being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should
die for that nation. Now, that's going to make our
text complicated. And not for that nation only,
but that he also should gather together in one the children
of God that were scattered abroad. Then from that day forth, they
took counsel together to put him to death. Jesus therefore
walked no more openly among the Jew, and went thence unto a country
near to the wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there
continued with his disciples. Now, there are three people in
the New Testament that we read about that our Lord resurrected
again from the dead. There are three of them that
are recorded in the Gospels, and our Lord was pleased to go
where they were after their death and raise them back unto life
again. They are the young daughter of
Jarius. I believe the scripture tells
us she was about 12 years old, and the Lord raised her again
on the day that she died. And the second one would be the
widows of Nain's only son. And the Lord met the funeral
procession on the way to the graveyard to put him away and
raised him back together, back to life even there. And then,
of course, the third one is Lazarus. And it's given a lot of print
in the scripture. It's given a lot of writing.
There is a lot about it. And I think that Lazarus is the
most amazing of all of these three that we read about, and
that for several reasons. Because Lazarus was not dead
that day or that morning, but Lazarus was dead into the fourth
day and already buried in the grave. And his sisters were under
the fear that corruption had already began to advance in him. That's in verse 39. Still, the
Lord, our blessed Savior, who said, I am the resurrection,
went out to that grave. He called Lazarus by name, called
him forth out of the grave. He came forth bound hand and
foot, and the Lord said, loose him and let him go. And Lazarus
lived again after the fourth day. Now, this is the leading. This is the call. This is the
background of the passage that we have read this evening. We see the result of the miracle,
first of all, upon Lazarus. Look at verse 45 and verse 46. Then many of the Jews which came
to Mary and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on
it. But some of them went their way
to the Pharisees and told them what things Jesus had done. Now this was almost always the
case and the situation. There was almost always a dual
reaction to anything that our Lord did. Whether it was his
teaching or whether it was a miracle, his interpretation of the scripture. Some would see or hear and be
convinced this is he, this is the son of God, this is he that
was talked about by Moses, and they would praise him, they would
believe on him, and they would begin to word it about. But others would see him as an
imposter, some kind of a acting contrary to Moses, tearing down
the Mosaic law, and Judaism to its very foundation. So we should
point out, I think, that not a few people there were who were
with Mary and Martha at the very time that our Lord raised Lazarus
again back unto life. This is proven in chapter 11
by verse 31, 33, 36, 45. All of these declare that a great
many were there as witnesses. And the raising of Lazarus, therefore,
was witnessed by many. It was not done in secret. or
under night, or in a corner. And they went out to the grave
with the Lord. They heard him call out. They
saw Lazarus come forth in resurrection. They heard the command of the
Lord. Remove the grave clothes, loose him, and let him go. And
this made believers out of many of them who saw. They believed
on the Lord. In fact, they believed him to
be the Christ, not just the great prophet, but the very Christ
himself. And they confessed him to be
so. And they convinced by the great
resurrection of Lazarus, which they had just seen. You know,
we might paraphrase the word what manner of man is it that
even death obeys him? But there were others in verse
46 the doubtless unbelievers who went over to the Pharisees,
like some kind of a tattletale, virtual enemies of the Lord,
these Pharisees were in most cases, and they reported the
matter unto them, what had happened and what was occurring. Not just
that the Lord had raised a man up who had been dead after four
days and corrupting yonder in the grave. But the most concern
with their, what most that they were concerned with is in verse
45. And that is that many Jews believed on him. Many are believing. They confessed him to be the
Messiah. They take him to be the son of
God and the true Messiah. That he is coming from God. And
therefore he is gaining followers by the day and by the week. He is gaining more that are following
his teaching and are becoming his disciple and are confessing
him. And among some of those were
those of the ruler. Now they resented this when they
heard it, and in verse 47, notice they convened a council for to
consider this matter. This might have been, probably
was, a special called session of the Sanhedrin court. most
agree that the Jewish Sanhedrin court was the most powerful one
ruling and exercising authority over the Jew in that particular
time and in regard to their religion especially. One called the Sanhedrin
court, quote, the supreme theocratic hierarchical court of the Jewish
resident at Jerusalem, unquote. It was made up, so they say,
of 71 members consisting of priests, of elders, and of scribes who
sat on the court. and they held ordinary meetings
from time to time, scheduled and ordinary meeting, with the
exception of the Sabbath day in which they didn't meet. Emergency
meetings, however, on the other hand, were called when some urgent
matter came up that needed their attention and their ruling. Now, the high priest of Israel
usually, or ordinarily, acted as the presiding officer or the
head of the Sanhedrin court. And the high priest at this time,
we learn, was a man by the name of Caiaphas. And in Acts chapter
5, and verse 17 may have been a Sadducee rather than a Pharisee. And it should be remembered that
the Pharisee and the Sadducee were deeply divided on this very
matter that we're reading about in John chapter 11, on the matter
of the resurrection. The Sadducee and the Pharisee
were not in agreement about it. The Pharisees confessed that
there was such a thing as the resurrection of the dead, and
the Sadducees denied it altogether. Acts chapter 23 and verse 8.
Now, this displays two facts about the enemies of the gospel. I read J.C. Ryle. First of all,
J.C. Ryle expressed it. Ecclesiastical
rulers are often the foremost enemies of the gospel, unquote. Isn't that true when we look
out even in our day that those potentates and leaders of religion
are often the enemy, the open enemy, of our Lord and Savior. And the second thing is, former
enemies, those who are enemies in themselves, usually, or at
times, will band together to form a union against the Word
of God, against the Christian faith, and against the Church
of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, John takes us inside of
the Council, where the great concern is expressed concerning,
quote, this man, unquote. Some render it even this fella,
this fella. Something has to be done about
this fella. He is making converts at an alarming
pace. And they made a self-condemning
admission in the Sanhedrin. This man or this fella does many
miracles. Not only that, he's backing it
up with miracles. He is doing things that we cannot
deny. They do not say, this is the
Christ, but they say, this man, this fella is doing miracles. And verse 48 expresses their
fear If we let him alone, if we leave him as he is, if we
let him have free access to the people and work miracles and
such in their sight, then he keep on raising the dead, keep
on doing these things. For he has this, that he does
mighty and wonderful works and this we cannot deny. Now verse
48. All they fear will believe on
him. That is, many more will defect
away from Judaism over unto him. There will be a controversy among
them. It will cause political problems. It will cause problems with Rome
and with the government of Rome. It will affect our standing with
Rome if all of these people follow over whom the Lord Jesus Christ
and so they reason we need to nip this in the bud and if we
do not nip this in the bud before it gets out of hand if not they
say the Romans will come against us and they will come and and
crush our nation. Notice how it is here. Take away
our place and our nation. They would not tolerate that
much of an uproar over religion and therefore would come down
upon the people from whence it did arrive. But the chief fear
of this band of scoundrels, if I may call them that, was the
loss of their position and of their prestige and of their leadership
and authority. That such a breakup of the Roman
world or of the Roman Empire would mean the end of their ecclesiastical
tyranny over the people of Israel. Like the silversmith, if you
remember Demetrius in the book of Acts in the city of Ephesus,
they had a concession on the goddess of Diana. They were selling
little shrines and doing quite well about it. When Paul came
and cast them out and upset their apple cart and ruined their business,
in fact. So the rascals here in John chapter
11 are well described. And I like to use the words of
Calvin, if I might. Quote, they double their wickedness
by a believable disguise the zeal for public good." Oh, that's
something we have to ever be on the watch out for. Lord in
heaven does know what wickedness has been done by politicians
and by leaders, what freedoms have been eroded away, taken
away by the government under the disguise of public good. This is for the public good or
the public safety. The seal of the hypocrite in
John 11. Pretend to be concerned for the
temple and the worship of God when in fact they're concerned
for their own self and position. How ignorant their argument. If we leave him alone, if we
let him live among the people, If we delay till many believe
on him and if we let him succeed it could lead to the ruin and
the destruction of our place and of our nation. Their solution
was to kill him in verse 50 and verse 53. when in fact it was
their rejection and crucifixion of the Lord that actually led
to the ruin of their city and of their place. It was their
behavior, it was their treatment of Christ that actually brought
the judgment of God down upon them. the burning of their city,
and as in verse 48, this place and their nation. When by the
crucifixion of the Lord they filled up the measure of the
cup of iniquity of their father and the judgment of God came
in 70 AD. But come with me now to verse
49 and verse 50. Evidently, there had been so
much dissension and disputing, some suggestions and opinion
had been offered and such like. When Caiaphas, the high priest,
takes the floor, we want to be real careful from here on. With
all the callousness of a resurrection-denying infidel, a Christ-hating rebel,
he proposes to them the solution to their problem and how it should
best be handled to their good. He says to save our nation from
ruin at the hands of the Romans and that the whole nation be
not crushed, their temple raised under the wrath of the Romans.
Caiaphas, therefore, proposes to let expediency solve the problem. Let expediency take its course
and solve the problem. And he rebukes them in the council. Ye know nothing. You don't know
a thing, nothing at all. You empty-headed ignoramuses,
as if to say unto them. Then he says to them, consider,
that is reason, Bring your thoughts together. Let us think on this
matter. It is expedient. It is profitable. It is advantageous that one man,
and he means the Lord Jesus Christ, should die to prevent the ruin
and the loss of the whole nation. Now, mind you, Caiaphas here,
in making these statements, does not refer to Christ making a
vicarious propitiation. It is not that his death will
save them from sin, not to such a death as will save the soul. That's not the kind of death
that's in the mind of Caiaphas. He is simply and only following
political expediency, if I may call it that. Let this one says
Caiaphas, who is the source of the problem. Let this one who
is the cause of this contention, let this one who has brought
this upon us and has done this in our midst, let him be the
one therefore that should die. David Brown wrote, the way to
prevent the apprehended ruin of the nation was to make a sacrifice
of the disturber of the peace, unquote. And in that, they referred
to the Lord Jesus Christ. So let this man die, and it will
take this away, the issue will end, and our nation, our place,
and our people will be spared and will be saved. J.C. Ryle
again observed, Caiaphas argues, that Christ's death would be
a public benefit while sparing him might bring the whole nation
down to ruin, unquote. They do not argue the question
of guilt or innocence. This is not a matter when they
come or bring Christ before them. They're not arguing the guilt
or the innocence, but the effect that it might have upon their
nation. His death would avoid a lot of
trouble. So they imagined and the gathering
storm, but in fact the last feeling of their cup of iniquity was
their act against the Lord Jesus Christ." There's a man, a commentator
of old, Matthew Poole was his name. He commented on this text
that Caiaphas did not say, it is lawful that he should die,
but it is expedient. He did not say he deserves to
die, but he said it is expedient that this man die. It was not
necessarily a matter of right at all, but of expediency, of
convenience, of a matter of a problem at hand. And Poole wrote, quote,
Never was anything more diabolically spoken like a wretched politician."
He would suffer an innocent man to be put to death, innocently
to die, to be killed, to be murdered, to preserve his own position
and the religion of the Jew in that day and time. When corrupted,
Nothing is worse than religion, I guess we could say. When it
is corrupt, when you mix religion and polity and the corruption
of them both, it is amazing and astounding. But now, Look at
verse 51 and verse 52. The text really begins to get
interesting here, so let me reread it if I might. Verse 51 and 52. And this spake he not of himself,
but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should
die for that nation, not for that nation only, but that also
he should gather together in one the children of God that
are scattered abroad. Now the first thing to notice
here is these two verses are one of the explanatory clauses
of John, the author of this gospel. He's famous for that. It is characteristic
John to explain something that we might better understand. Now
John calls the words of Caiaphas prophetic. That's amazing in
light of his intention and the text. And connects it to the
high priesthood. Note it. Being high priest that
year, he prophesied. Or coming from the mouth of the
high priest, it carried more weight perhaps than an ordinary
Jew or another. But look what John interjects
here. This spake he not of himself. Now, it is not that John intends
to bring or to deny that Caiaphas is not to deny that he willingly
and voluntarily brought forth these words as a part of his
devious plan, for he did. He did say, it is profitable
that one man die for the whole nation, that it perish not. But it was not his intention
to have it be understood as a spiritual prophecy. He meant it as a means
to get around a potential and impending political firestorm
that he feared was about to break upon their heads. His death,
he thinks, will spare us from the wrath of the Roman government. And so it's expedient that one
man should die and not the whole people. But John tells us something
here. Let's don't miss it. He tells
us that a secret providence is overruling what the man is saying. Cause the words to also form
or assume the words of a prophecy. A prophecy true indeed. They
were capable of another meaning. Unintended, however, by Caiaphas. He unconsciously spoke words
capable of a higher meaning. Now, if you'd like it, we have
an example. that other places in our scripture,
for example in Numbers chapter 23 and chapter 24. Remember Pharaoh also in Exodus
chapter 10 verse 28 and verse 29, who in defiance of the Almighty
God spoke, though he meant it in another way. One Caiaphas
called words and an involuntary prophecy, an involuntary prophecy
made by Caiaphas. J.C. Ryle wrote in his Expository
Thoughts of the Gospel, the name of his commentary, quote, Caiaphas
meant nothing. but to advise the murder of Christ."
That's what he meant by it. His intent was also clearly attached
that the death of the controversial one would spare the nation and
the people a judgment. But John would have his readers
to consider and to understand that God's sovereignty had caused
this wretched priest to speak words capable of a spiritual
meaning. If not then, we have to believe
that Caiaphas spoke of putting Christ to death on the cross
as a vicar, and he certainly did not. That the words of Caiaphas
came true. but not in the way that he had
insisted or had hinted. For John sees in it the overwhelming,
ruling providence of God Almighty, putting words, as it were, in
the mouth of Caiaphas that prophesied the redemption of mankind in
the death of him that would die upon the cross, him that was
about to die. and not confined to the nation
of Israel, but also the children of God scattered abroad, that
is, Gentiles as well. Now this saying of Caiaphas was
wondrously fulfilled, though no thanks unto him, and can be
applied to the death of Christ, that he died to save sinners
in every place, every race, every tribe, every nation. So if I
might, because this is kind of hard, let me share some of the
comments of Calvin on this passage of the scripture with you. He
said of Caiaphas, at this time, and this time only, quote, was,
as it were, two-tongued, unquote. That with two tongues and the
same set of words. Two tongues, one set of words,
and one set only. Caiaphas did both blaspheme and
prophesy, as he made the statement. But the blind Jews see not the
prophecy, and they adopt the blasphemy and the counsel of
this man instead. But his spiritual John, our beloved
writer, tells of the real purpose and course of the death of the
Lord Jesus Christ, verse 51, 52. He prophesied that Jesus
was about to die for that nation, that is, the Jew. That not every
individual of the nation, but for that nation. Not for that
nation only, but that he should gather together in one the children
of God that are scattered abroad. To me, 1 John chapter 2, 1 and
2 resembles this, if you should read it. Not for our sins only,
but also for the whole world. But John adds that the benefit
of the death of the Lord extended beyond Israel and includes the
nation or the Gentiles as well. Lightfoot insisted in some of
his writing on giving emphasis to the fact Caiaphas Caiaphas
this old high priest being priest that same year as literally the
great good reason that John insists in verse 53 and 54 from that
day and of course from the council and Caiaphas they embodied by
emboldened by the high priest and his word and took counsel,
they plotted together, they planned together, they confederated together
against the Lord and against his anointed, against thy holy
child Jesus whom thou has anointed. And from here forward, for example,
listen, John 5, 18, because he said God was his father, they
would kill him. John 7 and 19, Why go ye about
to kill me, the Lord asked. John 8, 59. They took up stones
to stone him. John 10, 39. They sought again
to take him. John 11 and 8. The Jews of late
sought to stone thee. But now they pursue their intention
to put the Lord Jesus Christ to death with a fresh determination
emboldened by the a position of Caiaphas, the priest. They want to see him dead. They
want to see him gone. They want to see him out of their
way. They blame him for all of their trouble and their impending
trouble, and so they are willing to put him to death, and they
seek the best time and the best means to do it. For they needed
both a sanction and a majority of the Jew and the Roman authority
to put someone unto death. And like a corrupt prosecutor,
they must win a conviction upon two fronts to put our Lord to
death. With a Jew, they must convince
he's a blasphemer, he's an imposter. They don't charge him with a
political crime before the Jew. They charge him with a transgression
of the law of Moses. Then they come before the government.
And it's not a religious charge. It's a political charge. We heard
this man plotting to overthrow Caesar. So you see their corruption. To gain a conviction with a Jew,
he's a blasphemer. He's an imposter. He's an enemy
of Moses. That carried no weight with Pilate.
So there they said he's an insurrectionist. He wants to overthrow Caesar.
He said he's a king. You better do something about
it. Thus the intention of man. and the purpose of God met in
the death of Christ, that the two diverse intentions, the sovereign
purpose of God, however, carried the day, and our Lord died as
our sin bearer. Now, our situation, I'll just
say this in closing, is reversed somewhat. I think we may be,
or Christianity may be in danger. Some are in the process of taking
over the nation religiously. That's not going to be good.
Strain religions are out against to strangle Christianity in our
day and time, to take away the liberty that we have in the Lord
Jesus Christ. And I think that it is cause
for concern, but we won't get into that today.