John Kilgallen, «Jesus First Trial: Messiah and Son of God (Luke 22,66-71)», Vol. 80 (1999) 401-414
Luke, according to the Two-Source Theory, read Mark. At the first trial of Jesus, that before the Sanhedrin, Mark has together, "Messiah, Son of God". Luke has intentionally separated the two titles. The present essay finds the explanation for separating Son of God from Messiah in the Annunciation scene of the Gospel. It is Lukes intention that the reader understand Son of God in a way that admittedly the Sanhedrin did not. The laws of narratology indicate that Luke 1,35, a part of the Lucan introduction, be used by the reader to interpret Son of God at Luke 22,70.
the present goal of the Sanhedrin is not an unbiased or impartial determination as to whether or not Jesus is Messiah or has made that claim at an earlier time; rather the goal seems to be to get Jesus to admit now that he is Messiah. Nothing else matters; "the high priests and scribes were seeking how they could bring Jesus to death" (Luke 22,2) apparently they had decided that the key to bringing him to death was his condemning himself "out of his own mouth". In any event, they themselves were not ignorant of the Messianic/Kingly claim about Jesus; they had heard the shouting: "Blessed is the one coming, the king, in the name of the Lord" (Luke 19,38)17.
The Messiah, The King the Sanhedrin is looking for Jesus word by which he condemns himself according to this title. The first demand, that Jesus say if he is Messiah, fails to achieve its goal. But18, when Jesus describes himself as Davids lord seated at the right hand of the Power, the Sanhedrin realizes that it has heard the claim to Messiahship19. To repeat and to finish, the Sanhedrin uses the term Son of God as a synonym for Messiah; it understands no more exalted meaning in this title, and so does not accuse Jesus of blasphemy.
Luke and the Son of God
But, if the Sanhedrin understands Son of God to be synonymous with Messiah, what does Luke understand by the title20?