Matthew 26:57  “…to Caiaphas the high priest…”
John in his gospel tells us that Jesus was first led to Annas, previous high priest and father-in-law to the current high priest, Caiaphas.  That little meeting with Annas probably served to allow Annas to feel important as well as give him an opportunity to try to find something with which to accuse Jesus before the larger group of conspirators.  Totally a political situation.

57  “…where the scribes and the elders were assembled”
It was against the law for them to be meeting at night to condemn someone.  It is assumed that the entire assembly probably wasn’t there, only the ones who were against Jesus.  They brought accusations and witnesses against Him until dawn so they could then condemn Him legally.

60  “…Even though many false witnesses came forward, they found none…”
Even the false witnesses couldn’t get their stories straight or they couldn’t make them believable enough to fool anyone.

63  “…the Christ, the Son of God”
The Messiah is the Son of God which would make Him God Himself.  That seems to be a big point of misunderstanding when it comes to those who question Jesus’s claims about being God or divine.  This is one reason I stress the phrase only begotten Son of God instead of the new translation one and only Son of God.  Jesus was and is God, He is part of the essence that is God.  Not a separate part, but a distinct one.  He was begotten of God, He came from Him as the Son, which would make Him God.  Can get very confusing when using earthly or human terms, but it’s as close as we can get.  Just have to accept the modification of the ideas to understand.  At any rate, Jesus was completely human and completely divine.  Man and God, not part of each, but totally each.  Hard to know what it was about the accusation regarding destroying the temple and rebuilding it that led to Caiaphas jumping to whether Jesus was God.  Can only speculate it was a statement of power that only God would have.  They missed the meaning of His actual words, but were only looking for something with which to accuse Him anyway.

64  “Jesus said to him, “It is as you said…”
Some say that Jesus never actually claimed to be God or the Messiah.  He did so on several occasions, and here is clear evidence of it.

66  “…He is deserving of death”
Foregone conclusion.  The whole point of this charade was to find something, any little thing which could give them legal reason to kill Him.

74  “…I do not know the Man…”
The exact steps of how Peter’s denial occurred are slightly different in the gospels, but the story is basically the same.  He was confronted three times about being a disciple, and he denied it each time.  Afterward a rooster crowed.  One wonders why this little side drama of Peter’s faithfulness or lack thereof.  Why so elaborate.  I think it was to emphasize the point, to Peter and to us.  His betrayal was deliberate and obvious, yet he was able to repent and return to Jesus.  Normally when a person makes an example of someone, it ends on a negative.  Here it’s for the positive.  If Peter can be forgiven and return to Jesus, there’s no reason why any of us can’t do the same thing.  Paul is a good example of conversion.  Peter is a good example of restored fellowship.

75  “…he went out and wept bitterly”
Which led to repentance and return.  Contrasted with the actions of Judas who felt remorse, but went out and hanged himself.  Judas saw only himself, how he had failed, and how he had nothing left.  So he took it upon himself to end his life.  Peter may not have understood everything, but his actions showed a surrender of himself.  He faced total failure just like Judas, but he didn’t act on his behalf.  He allowed Jesus to determine his course.

I hope you enjoy reading and studying His word.  May it accomplish what He desires.  Please feel free to comment or post questions.  Thanks for reading!

Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson. Used by permission. All rights reserved.