Our decision as to a second and distinct session of the Sanhedrin
will mainly depend upon the place we give to the account in Luke
xxii. 66-71. Is this examination of Jesus identical with that first
session of Matthew xxvi. 57-68, and of Mark xiv. 53-65? Against
this identity are some strong objections: First, The mention of
time by Luke: "As soon as it was day." This corresponds well to the
time of the morning session of Matthew and Mark, but not to the
time when Jesus was first led before the Sanhedrin, which must have
been two or three hours before day. Second, The place of the
meeting: "They led Him into their council," [Greek: anêgagon auton
eis to synedrion heautôn]. This is rendered by some: "They led Him
up into their council chamber," or the place where they usually
held their sessions. Whether this council chamber was the room
Gazith at the east corner of the court of the temple, is not
certain. Lightfoot (on Matthew xxvi. 3) conjectures that the
Sanhedrin was driven from this its accustomed seat half a year or
thereabout before the death of Christ. But if this were so, still
the "Tabernæ," where it established its sessions, were shops near
the gate Shusan, and so connected with the temple. They went up to
that room where they usually met. Third, The dissimilarity of the
proceedings, as stated by Luke, which shows that this was no formal
trial. There is here no mention of witnesses--no charges brought to
be proved against Him. He is simply asked to tell them if He is the
Christ ("If thou art the Christ, tell us," R. V.); and this seems
plainly to point to the result of the former session. Then, having
confessed Himself to be the Christ, the Son of God, He was
condemned to death for blasphemy. It was only necessary now that He
repeat His confession, and hence this question is put directly to
Him: "Art thou the Christ? tell us." His reply, "If I tell you, ye
will not believe; and if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor
let me go," points backward to his former confession. To His reply
they only answer by asking, "Art thou then the Son of God?" The
renewed avowal that He is the Son of God, heard by them all from
His own lips, opens the way for His immediate delivery into
Pilate's hands. Fourth, The position which Luke gives (xxii. 63-65)
to the insults and abuse heaped upon Jesus. There can be no doubt
that they are the same mentioned by Matthew and Mark as occurring
immediately after the sentence had been first pronounced.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account