History of the Sanhedrin

SANHEDRIN

The Greek word ‘sunedrion’, translated council is referred to in the New Testament as “the Great Law-Court”, “the Court of Seventy-One”, and “the rulers and elders and scribes”. It was the supreme theocratic court of the Jews and reflected the local autonomy which the Greek and Roman powers granted the Jewish nation. Its origin can be traced back as far as 200 B.C. The council had 70 members plus the ruling high priest. Three professional groups composed the council: high priests (the acting high priest and former high priests) and members of the chief-priestly families; elders (tribal and family heads of the people and the priesthood); and scribes (legal professionals). At the time of Jesus two religio-political parties within Judaism were represented in this membership: the Sadducees of the majority and the Pharisees of the minority. Caiaphas the high priest was a Sadducee. Most of the scribes were Pharisees. The presiding officer of the council was usually the high priest.

The council was connected with the minor courts, being the highest court of appeal from these. The Sanhedrin’s authority was broad and far-reaching, involving legislation, administration, and justice. There was religious, civil, and criminal jurisdiction. However, during the time of Jesus, the council had lost to the Roman governor the power of capital punishment. The council met daily, except on Sabbath and feast days, in a session room adjoining the temple. In extraordinary cases, the council met at the house of the high priest. One of the responsibilities of the Sanhedrin was the identification, and confirmation of the Messiah. The gospel writers identify a delegation from the council going out to question John the Baptist as to whether he was the Messiah. There were about a dozen false Messiahs running around during the first part of this century deceiving the people, and it was the responsibility of the council to identify and denounce them. This is why Jesus had to eventually come into conflict with them.

Although the minority party within the council was the Pharisees, they were the majority party outside the council. During the first century, Philo tells us they numbered six thousand. They were highly respected among the people, operating principally in the synagogues. The typical Jewish boy would have received his religious training from a Pharisee. Their name meant “separated ones” and they kept themselves pure of any corrupting influence, including Greek or Roman influences. They first appeared more than a century before Jesus though by this time had little interest in politics. They had a highly developed system of rabbinic tradition which sought to apply the Biblical Law to a variety of circumstances. They held to three doctrines that the Sadducees did not: the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the body, and angels and demons. This they had in common with Jesus, and it should be noted that these were devout laymen, not priests. Where they conflicted with Jesus was the charge that in their over attention to the tradition of men concerning the minutiae of the Law, they had largely neglected the real intention of the Law. Numbered among the Pharisees were Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, the great teacher Gamaliel, and his student Saul of Tarsus, also named Paul.

The Sadducees seem to have gotten their name from “zaddikim” the righteous ones. They had little in common with the Pharisees except their antagonism toward Jesus. They represented the Jewish aristocracy and the high priesthood. They had made their peace with the political rulers and had attained positions of wealth and influence. Temple administration and ritual was their specific responsibility. Being well educated and wealthy, they held themselves aloof from the masses and were unpopular with them. They were externally religious and were very political, seeing Jesus as a threat to the status quo. Unlike the Pharisees, the Sadducees held only to the written Law, specifically the first five books of Moses, the Torah.

The New Testament calls two men high priest, Annas and Caiaphas. It turns out that Caiaphas was actually the current high priest at this time, though there are a number of reasons why Annas was called high priest. He was the father-in-law of Caiaphas and had been high priest from A.D. 6-15, when he had been deposed by the Roman governor, Valerius Gratus, shortly after the governor took office. The governor tried three more high priests within the next three years until he appointed Caiaphas, in A.D. 18, a man he found cooperative. Nevertheless, Annas was the patriarch and real power behind the high priesthood. While the title was used later for Annas as an honorific, the Jews still saw the high priesthood as an office for life, whether the Romans felt that way or not. He was the senior ex-high priest and may have presided over the council at times. This is why Jesus was first brought to him during his trial.

Bill Petro, your friendly neighborhood historian
www.billpetro.com

from Paul L. Maier’s In the Fullness of Time

0 comments… add one

Leave a Comment

Copyright © 1984-2017 · Bill Petro. All rights reserved, unless otherwise stated.
Powered by WordPress, the Thesis theme, and Promo skin.
%d bloggers like this: