Who was Caiaphas?
First, let me introduce you to the central player in this drama – a man named Caiaphas.
According to Josephus (Antiquities, XVIII, iv, 3), Caiaphas was appointed High-Priest of the Jews by the Roman procurator Valerius Gratus, the predecessor of Pontius Pilate, about A.D. 18 (Ant., XVIII, ii, 2), and removed from that office by the procurator Vitellius, shortly after he took charge of affairs in Palestine, A.D. 36 (Ant., XVIII, iv, 3) So he was High Priest for about 18 years.
Born of the tribe of Levi, he’d married the daughter of the High Priest, Annas. But because the Romans had become disenchanted with Annas, Rome offered the office to the highest bidder every year. The winner this year was Caiaphas (John 11:51). And although he was the official High Priest, Annas continued to be the power behind the throne.
He belonged the party of the Sadducees, and the Sadducees were a very secular group.
A little detail about the Sadducees.
During the time of Christ and the New Testament era, the Sadducees were aristocrats. They tended to be wealthy and held powerful positions, including that of chief priests and high priest, and they held the majority of the 70 seats of the ruling council called the Sanhedrin. They worked hard to keep the peace by cooperating with the decisions of Rome, and they seemed to be more concerned with politics than religion. Because they were accommodating to Rome and were the wealthy upper class, they did not relate well to the common man, nor did the common man hold them in high opinion. The common man related better to those who belonged to the party of the Pharisees. Though the Sadducees held the majority of seats in the Sanhedrin, history indicates that much of the time they had to go along with the ideas of the Pharisaic minority, because the Pharisees were popular with the masses.
Religiously, the Sadducees were conservative in one main area of doctrine. The Pharisees gave oral tradition equal authority to the written Word of God, while the Sadducees considered only the written Word to be from God. The Sadducees preserved the authority of the written Word of God, especially the books of Moses . While they could be commended for this, they definitely were not perfect in their doctrinal views. The following is a brief list of beliefs they held that contradict Scripture:
1. They were extremely self-sufficient to the point of denying God's involvement in everyday life.
2. They denied any resurrection of the dead (Matthew 22:23; Mark 12:18-27; Acts 23:8).
3. They denied any afterlife, holding that the soul perished at death, and therefore denying any penalty or reward after the earthly life.
4. They denied the existence of a spiritual world, i.e., angels and demons (Acts 23:8).
Because the Sadducees were more concerned with politics than religion, they were unconcerned about Jesus until they became afraid He might draw unwanted Roman attention. It was at this point that the Sadducees and Pharisees united and conspired to put Christ to death (John 11:48-50; Mark 14:53; 15:1). Other mentions of the Sadducees are found in Acts 4:1 and Acts 5:17, and the Sadducees are implicated in the death of James by the historian Josephus (Acts 12:1-2).
The Sadducees ceased to exist after A.D. 70. Since this party existed because of their political and priestly ties, when Rome destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70, the Sadducees ceased to exist.
So, we can see that Caiaphas was somewhat religious but he was not spiritual.
We shall go into some detail regarding Caiaphas.
On several occasions Caiaphas is referred to as a “high priest” (Mt. 26:3,57; Jn. 11:49; 18:13). On the other hand, Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas (Jn. 18:13), is also called a “high priest” (Acts 4:6). Curiously, Luke states that John the Baptizer was preaching in the wilderness “in the priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Lk. 3:2). He held this office during the whole of Pilate's administration. Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin had no power to inflict the punishment of death, and therefore Jesus was sent to Pilate, the Roman governor, that he might duly pronounce the sentence against him (Matt. 27:2; John 18:28). This was to fulfill prophecy indicating the type of death he would undergo - John 18: 29-30. At a later period his hostility to the gospel is still manifest (Acts 4:6).
Annas had been high priest (A.D. 7-15) until he was removed by the Roman procurator, Valerius Gratus. It is likely that the Jewish people still regarded him as the legitimate holder of the office, which according to the Law of Moses was for life. Thus, even though he was out of office, Annas played a major role in the religious affairs of Israel and in Jesus' trial.
Function of the High Priest.
(a) The High Priest served as the Jew's representative to God. The high priest was the supreme religious leader of the Israelites. He led the people in worship and performed religious rituals in strict obedience to the Mosaic law.
(b) The most important duty of the high priest was to conduct the service on the Day of Atonement, the tenth day of the seventh month of every year. Only he was allowed to enter the Most Holy Place behind the veil to stand before the Arc of the Covenant.. Having made a sacrifice for himself and for the people, he then brought the blood into the Holy of Holies and sprinkled it on the mercy seat (Leviticus 16:14-15). He did this to make atonement for himself and the people for all their sins committed during the year just ended (Exodus 30:10). It is this particular service that is compared to the ministry of Jesus as our High Priest (Hebrews 9:1-28).
(c)The High Priest was also in charge of the temple treasury, controlled the temple police and lower ranking priests and attendants, and served as president of the Sanhedrin.
(d) The high priest had another, more controversial function in the first-century Jerusalem: He served as a liaison between the Romans and the Jewish population. Rome decided it was beneficial to allow the people they conquered to continue to worship their god(s). But this was a right they could always revoke. So Rome looked to the High Priest and the Sanhedrin to keep the Jewish population in line. Although little is known of Caiaphas’ tenure as High Priest, he must have worked well with the Roman authority to remain as high priest for 18 years.
Why did Caiaphas condemn Jesus.
There were many reasons that the Jewish leaders including Caiaphas wanted Jesus dead. These include:-
a) The claims He made
b) The Miracles He performed
c) His teachings.
d) His popularity among the people as a result
e) His lack of respect for their religious traditions
f) The threat he posed to their way of life.
The claims He made:
The scribes and Pharisees opposed Jesus in relation to His claims of being equal with God, and they objected to every claim that He made about His being equal with the Father:
1) They objected to His use of the title “Son of God” for Himself. The Pharisees and scribes knew their theology well. When Jesus called God His Father, they knew what He meant was being of the same nature as God; i.e., equal with God, or God Himself:
He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.” For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God (John 5:17-18)
At another occasion where Jesus again asserted His deity by calling Himself equal with God, the Jews picked up stones, accusing Him of blasphemy:
“My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.” The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God” (John 10:29-33).
2) They also objected to His using the title “Messiah” or “Christ.” Again, they knew their theol-ogy and rightly understood that by using this title Jesus was claiming Himself to be the promised heir of David, who will sit on David’s throne and rule for eternity. As the Gospel of Mark notes:
"Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” And Jesus said, “I am; and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with clouds of heaven.” And tearing his clothes, the high priest said, “What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy; how does it seem to you?” And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death" (Mark 14:61-64; also Matthew 26:63-66; Luke 22:67-71).
Another Messianic title that has been used for Jesus is “the Son of David.” It has been used 15 times in the 3 Synoptic gospels. Although Jesus Himself never used this title for Himself, the Pharisees and the scribes objected to other people using it for Him. During the triumphal entry, the crowd shouted “Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord” (Matthew 21:9). Matthew notes,
“But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonderful things that He had done, and the children who were crying out in the temple and saying, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David,’ they be-came indignant and said to Him, ‘Do You hear what these are saying?’” (Matthew 21:15, 16a).
What they meant to tell Him was that "calling 'You the Son of David' is blasphemy; why don’t You stop them?"
3) The Pharisees and scribes objected to His claim of supremacy over and existence before Abraham. This was another occasion when they picked up stones to stone Him:
“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it, and was glad.” The Jews therefore said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I AM.” Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple (John 8:56-59).
4) They objected to Jesus’ claim to have authority to forgive sins. Again, the scribes and the Pharisees knew their theology well. They rightly understood that only God, against Whom every sin is committed, has the right to forgive sins and anyone who claims to have that right, or who tries to exercise that right, makes himself equal with God.
In the incident of the healing of the paralytic man, instead of telling him to rise up and walk, Jesus told him, “Your sins are forgiven you.” At this the scribes and the Pharisees began murmuring, Who can forgive sins, but God alone?” And Jesus’ response was, “But in order that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins ” (Matthew 9:6; also Mark 2:7-10; Luke 5:21-24) He told the paralytic, “Get up, pick up your mat, and go home.” And he got up and went home. When the crowds saw this, they were awestruck and gave glory to God who had given such authority to men.
Jesus did not observe their traditions.
Another issue the Pharisees and the scribes raised in opposition to Jesus was that in His social relations He did not observe their traditions. When they saw some of the disciples eating bread without first washing their hands according to the Jewish tradition, the Pharisees and the scribes questioned Jesus, “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the traditions of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?” (Mark 7:5).
On one occasion when Jesus was invited to the home of a Pharisee and He began to eat with-out first washing His hands, “when the Pharisee saw it, he was surprised that He had not ceremonially washed before the meal” (Luke 11:37-38).
When the Pharisees saw the disciples pick heads of grain and eat on a Sabbath day, they ques-tioned Jesus, “Behold Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath” (Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 6:1-5).
3) He violated their Sabbath views. Many of His miracles of healing were performed on Sab-baths, and the religious leaders saw in it the blatant disregard to the sacred Law.
When they saw a man with a withered hand in the synagogue, they asked Jesus, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath? – in order that they might accuse Him” (Matthew 12:10). Jesus’ answer was:
"What man shall there be among you, who shall have one sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it, and lift it out? Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep! So then, it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:11-12).
On another occasion when Jesus was teaching in one of the synagogues on a Sabbath day and healed a woman, “who for eighteen years had a sickness caused by a spirit; and she was bent double and could not straighten up at all,” Luke notes:
"And the synagogue official, indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, began saying to the multitude in response, “There are six days in which work should be done; therefore come during them and get healed, and not on the Sabbath day. But the Lord answered him and said, “You hypocrites, does not each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or his donkey from the stall, and lead him away to water him? And this woman, a daughter of Abraham as she is, whom Satan has bound for eighteen long years, should she not have been released from this bond on the Sabbath day?” (Luke 13:14-16).
At one time Jesus healed a man on a Sabbath day even at the house of one of the leaders of the Pharisees:
"And it came about when He went into a house of one of the leaders of the Pharisees on the Sabbath to eat break, that they were watching Him closely. And there, in front of Him was a cer-tain man suffering from dropsy. And Jesus answered and spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath, or not?” But they kept silent. And He took hold of him, and healed him, and sent him away. And He said to them, “Which one of you shall have a son or an ox fall into a well, and will not immediately pull him out on a Sabbath day?” And they could make no reply to this" (Luke 14:1-6).
The man lying sick at the pool of Bethesda was also healed on a Sabbath day and John notes, “For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath” (John 5:16).
The healing of the man born blind was performed on a Sabbath day (John 9:14), and some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath” (John 9:16).
Jesus threatened Caiaphas' relationship with Rome
Caiaphas' power base was the Sanhedrin, the supreme council of Jews which controlled civil and religious law. It had 70 members and Caiaphas presided over its deliberations.
But, of course, the Sanhedrin only ruled because the Romans allowed them to and the way to keep the Romans happy was to maintain order in society. Caiaphas himself was a Roman appointee, so he needed to maintain good relationship with the governor if he wanted to stay in power and preserve his luxurious way of life.
So if Jesus was making trouble, he was making trouble for both Caiaphas and Pilate - and trouble for Pilate was still trouble for Caiaphas.
Jesus was undoubtedly a threat; the public liked him, and Jesus was getting more popular with the common people because of how he taught and also the miracles He performed Also the people may have been paying more attention to Jesus than to the priests, and the public were listening to his condemnation of what he saw as wrong in the religious establishment.
The raising of Lazarus from the dead was the turning point for Caiaphas and the Jewish lead-ers.
This miracle also was a prelude of Jesus’ own death and resurrection, just days away. We read from John 11: 43: Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth!" 44 And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with grave cloths, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, "Loose him, and let him go." 45 Then many of the Jews who had come to Mary, and had seen the things Jesus did, believed in Him. 46 But some of them went away to the Pharisees and told them the things Jesus did.”
The reaction of some of the people and of the leadership is difficult to understand. Here is someone raised from the dead - Lazarus was dead for 4 days - why did they disbelieve?
The answer to this is found in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus narrated in Luke 16:19-23.
The Rich Man and Lazarus - Luke 16:19-31.
“There was a rich man who would dress in purple and fine linen, feasting lavishly every day. But a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, was left at his gate. He longed to be filled with what fell from the rich man’s table, but instead the dogs would come and lick his sores. One day the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham’s side.5 The rich man also died and was buried. And being in torment in * Hades, he looked up and saw Abra-ham a long way off, with Lazarus at his side. ‘Father Abraham! ’ he called out, ‘Have mercy on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this flame! ’ “ ‘Son,’ Abraham said, ‘remember that during your life you received your good things, just as Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here, while you are in agony. Besides all this, a great chasm has been fixed between us and you, so that those who want to pass over from here to you cannot; neither can those from there cross over to us.’ “ ‘Father,’ he said, ‘then I beg you to send him to my father’s house — because I have five brothers — to warn them, so they won’t also come to this place of torment.’ “But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.’ “ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said. ‘But if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’ “But he told him, ‘If they don’t listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded if someone rises from the dead.’ ”
I remember the first time I read this I was a little confused. How can anyone not believe if they see someone rise from the dead? Surely this is a mistake! But then we come to the story of a different Lazarus who actually does rise. Now surely no one who saw the real Lazarus rise from the dead will reject Jesus, will they?
John 11: 46 “But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Je-sus had done. ” They did not believe . Why?
We have the answer in the parable:- ‘They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.’ If they don’t listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded even if some-one rises from the dead.’ ” Luke 16:29-31. So if they do not believe the scriptures they will not believe even if someone raises from the dead. Miracles by themselves will not convince people of the truth. The scriptures have to be understood and accepted for the miracles to be believed. The common people accepted what it meant but not the leadership. Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead and many people believed on Him because of it, but not everyone was impressed. There was a deliberate rejection from the unbelievers.
Those who witnessed this miracle reach two different conclusions. Many find the evidence compelling, believing in Jesus as the promised Messiah; but some do not. The response of the people and the Jewish leaders to this miracle is quite different from the response of the Jews to our Lord’s healing of the man born blind in John chapter 9. In the case of the blind man’s healing, the Jews sought to convince themselves that there was no miracle, because the man was not really blind John 9:18 .
In chapter 11, on the other hand no one disputes that it is indeed Lazarus who has been raised from the dead. No one even attempts to challenge the claim of those present that he has really died and been dead for four days, after which he is raised. No one challenges the fact that it is Jesus who raises him. The facts are clear and unquestionable; but the conclusions reached are dramatically different.
This resurrection foreshadowed His own resurrection, made a profound impression in Jerusalem, and in contrast, brought the wrath of the Sanhedrin to a head, stirring them to decide to kill Jesus.
John’s Gospel reports: “The chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the Sanhedrin together and began to say: ‘What are we to do, because this man performs many signs? If we let him alone this way, they will all put faith in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.’” (John 11:47, 48) The Sanhedrin saw Jesus as a threat to the authority of the religious establishment and to public order, for which Pilate held them responsible. Any popular movement that the Romans might interpret as seditious could provoke their intervention in Jewish affairs—something that the Sanhedrin wanted to avoid at all costs. Also the Jewish leaders had already decided not to acknowledge that Jesus was the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament. And that any Jew who believed that Jesus was the Christ was excommunicated - John 9: 22.
The words that the Jewish Leadership speak are incredible, almost beyond belief. Their is little doubt about the power of our Lord, or the legitimacy of the signs He has performed. They do not deny that the evidence in support of His claims is piling up. In fact, they virtually admit that it is all true. At the beginning of Jesus' ministry they attributed His power to Beelzebub - the Prince of Demons - Matt 12:24; Mark 3:23; Luke 11:15. But Jesus using 3 examples - 1. kingdom, 2. House and 3. strong man's house in Matt. 12: 25 - 29 and simple logic disproves their false claims.
But in spite of all this evidence, they refuse to accept that Jesus was the promised messiah.. All of them on that committee knew their scriptures well and also their theology. But this knowledge did not help them at all. Because they acknowledge that if Jesus is not put to death, the entire nation will believe in Him. This may be an exaggeration but they know they are rapidly losing ground. They must act decisively, and they must act fast. They fear that if the entire nation acknowledges Jesus as the King of Israel, this will precipitate a strong reaction from Rome, which will end the “good times” for them.
These words of the High Priest and the decision of the Sanhedrin are amazing. They are almost beyond belief. Jesus has just raised a man from the dead, and so they decide the best way to counteract our Lord’s ministry is to kill Him.
For that matter how could Caiaphas acknowledge and explain the raising of Lazarus? As a Sadducee, Caiaphas did not even believe in the resurrection!—Acts 23:8.
Caiaphas told his fellow rulers: “You do not reason out that it is to your benefit for one man to die on behalf of the people and not for the whole nation to be destroyed.” The account continues: “This, though, he did not say of his own originality; but because he was high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was destined to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that the children of God who are scattered about he might also gather together in one. Therefore from that day on they took counsel to kill [Jesus].”—John 11:49-53.
Remember, Caiaphas is more a politician than he is a godly High Priest.
And, so (as a politician) he sees this as a political issue. Political issues call for political solutions. This enemy must be destroyed. So Caiaphas calms his audience with these words:
“You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.” John 11:50
The imagery which Caiaphas uses reminds us of the Old Testament scapegoat, given to spare the sins of Israel on the Day of Atonement. “Azazel” or “the scapegoat” is mentioned in Leviticus 16 as part of God’s instructions to the Israelites regarding the Day of Atonement. On this day, the high priest would first offer a sacrifice for his sins and those of his household; then he would perform sacrifices for the nation. “From the Israelite community [the high priest was instructed] to take two male goats for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering” (v. 5). The priest brought the animals before the Lord and cast lots between the two goats – one to be a sacrifice and the other to be the scapegoat. The first goat was slaughtered for the sins of the people and its blood used to cleanse the Most Holy Place, the tent of meeting and the altar (v. 20).
After the cleansing, the live goat was brought to the high priest. Laying his hands on the scapegoat, the high priest was to “confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites – all their sins – and put them on the goat’s head. He shall send the goat away into the wilderness in the care of someone appointed for the task. The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a re-mote place; and the man shall release it in the wilderness” (vv. 21-22).
Symbolically, the scapegoat took on the sins of the Israelites. (v. 10).
From this day forward, Caiaphas goes after Jesus with a intensity and a ruthlessness that would make mortal men quake in their sandals. When he finally get his hands on Jesus…
¨ Caiaphas holds an unlawful night trial in his own home
¨ Has false witnesses brought before him to testify
¨ Has Jesus blindfolded and beaten before being taken away to Pilate for judgment.
Caiaphas is a heartless, unprincipled, ungodly and an illegitimate High Priest. And yet, God uses this man to declare a prophecy. That doesn’t make any sense at all. Why would God use Caiaphas to make this prophecy about Jesus?
Looking into the scriptures we find that God uses the wicked for His purposes. Think of Balaam and how God spoke through that wicked man to bless His people and rebuke the wicked king -Numbers 23:1-12 ; Numbers 23: 13-26 ; 24:1-9 . Pharaoh was raised up for God’s glory - Exodus 9:16 ; 14:4,17,31. In First Kings 22:18-23 God sent a lying spirit in the mouths of the king’s prophets so he would die. They are created for that purpose and fashioned after His desire. Also God used a donkey to speak to Balaam - Numbers 22:21-41 and a rooster to speak to Peter -Matt. 26:31-35, 26:69-75. They were used by God but non of them were spiritual.
The Chief Priests and the Pharisees are the first to vocalize that Jesus was a threat to their power and authority.
They say: "Here is this man performing many miraculous signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation." (John 11:47-48)
They’re scared. And they have good reason to be. Rome could be a benevolent master. But it didn’t take kindly to anything or anyone who would threaten their authority. Roman soldiers could be ruthless when putting down anything that looked like insurrection
Conclusion
Caiaphas was very shrewd - he had to be so in order to be a high High Priest under the Romans. Like every Jew , he would begin a prayer with "Hear O' Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One . . ." Deut 6:4, a scripture that differentiates Judaism from other religions which believe in numerous gods. So, when faced with Jesus, who Caiaphas thought was a man, and who claimed equality with God when He declared "I and my Father are One," what were his options? " This man must be a blasphemer, claiming to be God as a man when God is infinite and One. "The fact that God took on human form to enter history for a brief moment does not enter his mind - he sees Jesus claiming to be God as a threat to Israel's very existence because of the unrest and division that He creates among the people and even in the Sanhedrin.
We find in Matthew 16:1-4 when the Pharisees and Sadducees asked Jesus for a sign. Jesus replied "....You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the sign of the times." John the Baptist's disciples were told " Go back and report to John what you hear and see.. The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised and the good news is preached to the poor." Matt. 11:2-6. John the Baptist understood and interpreted these signs but not Caiaphas. Because he did not want to accept these signs as proof that Jesus was the Messiah promised from the Old Testament times.
He knew the scriptures but he did not allow the scriptures to lead him to Jesus.
Caiaphas then prophesies that it is better for one man to die than for an entire nation to perish, underlining his fear of the brutal Roman reaction to unrest. So, then, what did he do? - Israel was prohibited from exercising capital punishment, but Jesus had to be silenced. and silenced permanently. So he sent Jesus to the Romans with the false accusation that he had spoken against Caesar in order to have the Romans execute Jesus for him.
The deception of Caiaphas and the priests preserved their lives, but at what cost? Look to the Scriptures to see what had happened in Israel's past as they repeatedly wandered away from God . In the time of the Judges, when Israel turned their backs on God, God delivered them to their enemies. Under the oppression of their enemies, Israel repented and cried out to God for help, and God sent a Judge to deliver them. This cycle is repeated many times.
Now, with the deception of Caiaphas, denying that Jesus is the Messiah, the Jewish people once again turned their back on God, to reject Jesus as Messiah. Caiaphas and the Jewish leaders believed that the nation’s acceptance of Jesus as their Messiah would bring about the downfall of the nation, but it was not so, it was on the other hand their rejection of Jesus as God’s Messiah that brought about their downfall. In a few years time, the Jews who told Pilate ," We have no king but Caesar" John 19:15, rebelled against this Caesar. Rome sent its army against this nation , captured Jerusalem, destroyed the temple, and the daily sacrifice ended which was prophesied by Jesus in Mark 13, Matthew 24 and Luke 21.
When the temple was destroyed, the Jewish form of worship of God (centered around the temple) also ended. Also the Romans killed countless Jews, and brought to an end the ministry of the Temple priests and also of the party of the Sadducees. And all this is because Israel rejected her Messiah.
Yes Caiaphas was one of the many who led Israel away from the Lord and brought judgment upon her.
