“It is Better that One Man Die for the People”

a The First Sunday of Lent a

John 11:45-52

We have before us today a perfect example of what is called “situation ethics.” Situation ethics is the
proposition that there is no real ethical norm or standard, but that essentially, every situation determines the ideas
and actions that are right or wrong. The practice of situation ethics is always subjective and has been used in the
past to justify criminal behavior, all because the situation dictated its necessity.
Caiaphas, the High Priest at the time of Jesus’ ministry applies “Situation ethics” to Jesus, justifying the
mistreatment and execution of Jesus because of its political necessity, so that Caiaphas and the other Sadducees
could keep their lofty positions by keeping peace with their Roman occupants. Today, we begin a Lent-long
weekend sermon series where we will examine some of the striking words of Jesus’ enemies, specifically on this day,
the sermon by Joseph Caiaphas, the high priest, who said of the Christ, “It is better that one man die for the
people.” While it is true that these words were spoken literally by Caiaphas in a political sense, that it would be
better for the Sanhedrin if Jesus would just die so that they, the Sanhedrin could continue to benefit from the
Romans, these words are truly a glorious prophecy of Messianic truth in which we find comfort for our salvation.
Today, we will examine the glorious irony of Caiaphas’ words: that it is better for us that one man, Jesus, die for the
sins of the world, than for the whole world to die in their sins.
The role of the high priest in Israel certainly had changed over the years. When the Lord established the
priesthood in the wilderness at Sinai, the high priest was supposed to be the one who not only would oversee the
worship life of the people, but would serve at the intermediary between God and the people. The people would
bring their requests to God through prayer and sacrifice, and the high priest would bring back to the people the
blessing of their God, assuring them of the forgiveness that was theirs through the Messianic sacrificial Lamb, in
whom they trusted and to whom all the sacrifices of the tabernacle and temple pointed.
By the time that Caiaphas was in office as the high priest, though, the position was much more political in
nature. In Jesus’ day, the high priest was often appointed by the Roman government who occupied the territory.
And whenever a high priest caused any kind of upheaval, the Romans would come in and depose them. By the time
Jesus was functioning in his public ministry, the high priest had become literally a cultural attaché and political
liaison to Rome. Thus, yes, Joseph Caiaphas was in charge of the worship life of the people, but also, in the
absence of a king during the Roman occupation, he was also the political ruler, which was appropriate, seeing as he
was a Sadducee.
The Sadducees themselves were sharply political in nature. They were a group of politically minded priests
who denied the importance of tradition, denied the existence of spirits, denied the existence of angels or demons,
denied the existence of life after death and resurrection, a group that had in mind the advancement and enrichment
of the literal nation of Israel, and ultimately themselves, instead of the building up of the kingdom of God.
We see that improper emphasis in the way that Caiaphas, the Sadducee high priest approached the growing
“problem” of Jesus. Word had spread concerning his raising of Lazarus from the dead. Some of his own Sadducee
advisors had come to him with the report that, yes, Jesus was doing many miraculous things, that he raised Lazarus
from the dead and that if he continues to do such things, the whole world would end up following him. And in the
mind of Caiaphas, who was earthly-minded and certainly not heavenly-minded, if Jesus had a big enough following,
the people in Israel would make him King, and there would be all out war with the Romans, and the Sadducees
would lose their cushy political positions, which the Romans had given to them.
So, Jesus had to go! “47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin. “What are we
accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many miraculous signs. 48 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.” 49 Then one of them,
named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is better
for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”
In other words, it’s better for the Sadducees and the Pharisees, who by the way, hated one another, but were
united in their common hatred of Jesus, it’s better for them that Jesus die, so that their temple business, shady as it
was and lucrative as it was, could continue; so that their cherished positions in government and authority would not
be lost in a war with the Romans; so that they would remain in control of Jerusalem and continue to benefit
financially and corporately from their political alliance with Rome. Yes, Jesus would have to go if all of those things
were to remain in place!
Modern man shares that sentiment. For within the heart of every single person here today and in this world
in which we live, is a Sadducee, a Pharisee, who sees the world they could have or the life they could enjoy and the
sins they could keep indulging in if only Jesus would just go away! What freedom we would have, our sinful heart
convinces us, what freedom to do whatever we want. No more restrictions, no more boundaries, no more thinking
about what we’re doing, just “living life to the fullest,” acting in the moment, living on the edge, enjoying all the
fare that the world has to offer...if only Jesus would go away! Oh, how I would never have to worry about sin, about
judgment, about feeling sorry for what I’ve thought, said and done, if only Jesus would go away!
What a chilling mindset, and a surreal reminder that within us still exists that old sinful nature which is at
war against our new man of faith, that sinful nature that wars against God’s Word, wars against God’s will, wars
against God’s Kingdom! Caiaphas, as a political pawn of the Romans, and as one who enjoyed all of the fringe
benefits that came with being a cultural and political attaché to Rome, gave into that warring sinful Adam within
him and by just a few words set in motion the events that would ultimately lead to Jesus being arrested, handed over
to Roman soldiers and crucified, all in the name of political peace and prosperity, all justified by “situation ethics,”,
“It is advantageous for us that one man die for the people so that that whole nation does not perish!”
Little did Joseph Caiaphas realize that what he was speaking in reference to the political realm and his
relationship with Rome, God was actually speaking through him in reference to the fulfillment of Scripture. In
those few ugly words of Caiaphas, showing man’s cold heart toward the Savior, we find the beautiful promises of the
gospel, and God’s unending and unfathomable love for the crown of his creation.
It is better that one man die for the people. Truer words were never spoken by the High Priest, though we
learn that it was God himself who was speaking through the called servant, corrupt as he was, and using him as his
mouthpiece to proclaim salvation to the world. “50 You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the
people than that the whole nation perish.” 51 He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that
Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52 and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring
them together and make them one.”
Jesus was not sent into this world to be some political pawn or to be used as a political martyr to further the
earthly livelihood of a select few. He was sent by the Father into this world, into the flesh so that he would
overcome Satan, sin, death and hell in the place of and for the sake of God’s people, so that they may live in his
name by grace through faith. Without that divine intervention of Jesus, every single human being would die
eternally in their sins. And so, with Caiaphas, and yet in a much different spirit, our confession is: Yes, it is better
that one man die for us! 1,000,000 deaths of sinners doesn’t even begin to serve the sentence that our crimes against
God’s holiness and God’s name deserve. It is better that Jesus, the unblemished sacrificial Lamb, pour out his blood
unto death on Calvary’s holy hill, so that all who trust in his atoning sacrifice receive the forgiveness of all sins and
eternal life in heaven.
Today, I want you to see the irony of those words which boisterously exploded from the heart and mouth of
Joseph Caiaphas the High Priest. How ironic that the High Priest, whose function it was to offer sacrifices on
behalf of the people, who worked in a realm of the divine spiritual ratio of “one for the many,” failed to see the
connection between his daily duties of sacrifice and the Lamb of God whose sacrifice would atone for the sins of
world, yours and mine!
How ironic! How ironic that these words which were spoken initially in hatred of Jesus communicate God’s
love so clearly and simply to us today. It is better than one man die for the people. As we travel towards Calvary’s
Holy Hill this Lent, let us travel with Jesus with our hearts open to him, with our sins exposed, with a spirit of
repentance, seeing every step of the way how necessary it is that for us and for our salvation, one man has died for
the people, for us! Amen.