Expediency or Faithfulness?
by Rev. David Silversides
The following is the substance of a sermon on the words in John
11:47-53 which record the debate within the Jewish Sanhedrin on what to
do with Jesus Christ. It is used here by kind permission of Mr.
Silversides, a minister in the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland
at Loughbrickland, Co. Down. We are challenged to faithfulness to the
Word of God as the great need of the present hour.
Published in the
Presbyterian Standard, Issue No. 14, April-June 1999.
"Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said,
What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. 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. And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the
high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye 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: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus
should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also
he should gather together in one the children of God that were
scattered abroad. Then from that day forth they took counsel together
for to put him to death." —
John 11:47-53.
O
UR theme is the difference between doing what looks as though it will
achieve the desired result even though it is wrong, in contrast to
doing what appears to be disastrous because God says it is right.
Not all expediency is sinful, but when biblical principle is put to one
side it is. We see this sinful expediency practised constantly in the
political field, the business world and, alas, even in the professing
Church of Jesus Christ.
In this passage
of Scripture, the Lord Jesus had just raised Lazarus from the dead. Yet
even among those who witnessed this there were those whose hatred for
Christ only increased. This reminds us that the reason men do not
believe the gospel is not due to some merely intellectual difficulty or
a lack of adequate 'proof'. It is because the will is in bondage to
sin. Men love darkness rather than light. And so some "went their way
to the Pharisees to tell them what things Jesus had done" (v.46). This
resulted in a meeting of the Sanhedrin, or at least a committee of that
body.
1. THE SANHEDRIN'S SELF-CENTRED UNFAITHFULNESS (vv.47-48)
The Sanhedrin was made up of scribes and elders along with the chief
priests. Although the High Priest presided, it was essentially an
eldership body, indeed it was the highest such body in Israel, rather
like a General Assembly or Synod of a presbyterian church. It was a religious body. Until the New
Testament age, Israel was the professing Church of God though now very
corrupt. At this point, then, the Sanhedrin was a Council or Synod of
the Church of God. Let us notice:—
Their admission
— "many miracles" (v.47). How desperately they had interrogated
the man born blind to find an alternative explanation as to how he
could see! (John 9:17, 19, 24, 26). Now he had raised Lazarus from the
dead. They conceded he had done many miracles. They had no choice. Yet,
they did not acknowledge him as the Messiah.
Their fear
— "all men will believe" (v.48). To them this would be a
disaster. They could not endure that their prestige and comfortable
position should be endangered. Later on, even Pilate knew that their
motive was envy (Matt. 27:18).
Their excuse
— "and the Romans will come and take away both our place and
nation" (v.48). To what extent they really thought the stir about Jesus
would attract the attention of the Roman authorities and even result in
the destruction of the Temple and the city is difficult to know. They
certainly wanted to put the noble face of patriotism on their malice.
Hypocrites keep up appearances even among themselves and even convince
themselves that there is genuine substance to their excuses. Sin gives
us great potential for wishful thinking.
Their guiding rule
— "if" (v.48). The basis on which they worked was unprincipled
expediency or pragmatism. The Word of God was not referred to although
it made an unwelcome appearance through Caiaphas when he said, "It is
expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the
whole nation perish not." In the face of Christ's miracles which they
ignored, they said they were afraid of the Romans and so fought against
God.
This happened
in the Sanhedrin of Israel, not some pagan nation. A church governed by
unprincipled expediency (that is trying to achieve what it wants by
wrong methods) destroys itself.
2. CAIAPHAS'S WICKED SOLUTION AND GOD'S RIGHTEOUS PURPOSE (vv.49-52)
Caiaphas arrogantly dismisses his colleagues as capable of only
incompetent waffle — "Ye know nothing at all" (v.49). He was the
man to get things done. He then indicates his wicked application of the
Sanhedrin's guiding principle: "one should die for the people" (v.50)
Irrespective of
right or wrong, he wants results. National security demands that this
man die. Never mind doing what is right and leaving the consequences in
the hand of God. Unbelievers must resort to pragmatism (i.e. what will
apparently work), not principle (i.e. what is right before God). Only
belief in an absolutely sovereign God can prevent this.
Nevertheless,
just as God used wicked Balaam to prophesy truth despite himself, so
God caused his truth to be heard via the mouth of Caiaphas. Caiaphas
meant it for evil, but God meant it for good. God was causing the truth
of Christ as the substitute for sinners to be heard in this
unprincipled court of a decaying Church. Christ would redeem a people
by bearing the sins of the elect of God from all nations (vv.51-52). In
Christ, the Lamb of God, God would show himself a just God and Saviour
(Isa. 45:21), just as one day he will vindicate his Lordship in that
same Jesus (Isa. 45:23; Phil. 2:9-11). In Christ, God is "faithful and
just" (1 John 1:9) in forgiving the sins of those who call upon him.
Righteousness and salvation go together with God (Psa. 85:10-11, 98:2;
Isa. 46:13, 51:5-8, 62:1).
3. GOD'S VERDICT ON A WORLDLY-WISE DECISION (V.53)
In v.53 the decision is made — Jesus must die. In v.48 they had
expressed their fear of the Romans and so took the unprincipled path to
avoid disaster. But did they avoid it? In A.D. 70, in fulfilment of
Christ's word of prophecy (Matt. 24:1-2), the Romans did destroy
Jerusalem and its Temple. Sometime later, as a result of a Jewish
revolt, they finished the job by flattening the city and building a
Roman city in its place and forbidding Jews to go anywhere near it.
The Sanhedrin
had adopted a selfcentred policy to avoid trouble but in due time God
brought that very trouble upon them in his righteous judgment.
4. A LESSON IN FAITHFULNESS FROM ACTS 15
After the resurrection of Christ, the Sanhedrin continued to 'play
Church' until God's judgment fell. But in that same city another synod
met. This was a synod of the continuing Church of God. Some of its
leading members had been fishermen. But they had followed the Lord
Jesus and through them God had caused the New Testament Church to
emerge into a separate existence from the largely apostate Israel. It
was to this continuing Church, pruned of unbelieving Jewish branches,
that the Gentile wild branches were to be ingrafted and Jewish natural
branches re-ingrafted when they are turned to Christ (Rom. 11:16-26).
There is one continuous Church from the Old into the New Testament age.
In Acts 15 God had already begun adding Gentile converts to the Jewish
nucleus of the Church, especially through the preaching of a converted
Pharisee, Saul of Tarsus. A problem had arisen in Antioch. False
teachers were insisting that circumcision was essential to salvation
and that the Gentile converts must conform to the Old Testament
ceremonies abrogated in Christ. They attacked the gospel of grace and
so the apostles and elders met to deal with the matter (Acts 15:1-2).
The differences
between this synod and the Sanhedrin are very obvious. They gloried in
the grace of God rather than their own importance (Acts 15:11). They
openly referred to the Word of God (vv.14-18). Instead of delighting in
imposing their own ideas they were restrained in their use of
authority. They imposed only those "necessary things" which seemed good
not only to themselves but to the Holy Ghost (v.28). How different!
Instead of committing ecclesiastical suicide by resorting to man-made
expedients, they faced the problem on the basis of God's Word, and on
the basis of that Word and within its limits they exerted their
authority. The sequel was that the churches were strengthened (Acts
15).
The lesson for
us is clear. Illegitimate expediency does not pay in the long run. We
see that in civil and national life where issues are fudged and
eventually the chickens come home to roost.
In the life of
the Church, in congregations or in presbyteries and synods, do we
really need more clever schemers and manoeuverers or is not
faithfulness to the Word of God the need of the hour? If God is in
charge of the outcome of events, surely this must be so.
In our personal
lives as Christians we are also constantly faced with conflicting
options are we not? Often we can do the apparently safe things through
compromising our Christian principles or else do what seems to be
fraught with trouble in loving obedience to our Lord and Saviour.
Will the Lamb
in the midst of the throne, the one who is Head over all things for the
good of His Church, ultimately cause us to 'lose out' by being
faithful? Was Caleb rather unwise to follow the Lord fully? Is this not
what our sluggishness tells the world, that Christ is a poor master and
that serving him wholeheartedly is a mistake? Is the truth not
otherwise, that as we by grace are enabled to serve him, he more than
compensates for all the contempt and scorn of the ungodly? "Rejoicing
that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name" (Acts
5:41).
But perhaps you
are not a Christian at all, though you have some idea of what a
Christian is. You know that being a real Christian would involve you in
loss of popularity and in ridicule. And so you are quietly 'looking
after number one'. Your lifestyle is respectable and church-going.
Essentially, however, you do not want any ripples on your tranquil
existence. Your motive is self-love. This is the height of
short-sightedness and sinful expediency. You must repent and turn to
Christ. Your self-preservation policy leads to eternal ruin. "There is
a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways
of death" (Prov. 14:12). Turn to Christ, the great sin-bearer, who died
the just for the unjust. Do so before God in his wrath brings down his
judgment on your self-love.
"For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" (Mark 8:36).
|