bok 1603992753 by Unknown

Author:Unknown
Format: epub
Published: 2016-03-29T16:00:00+00:00

Plotting to Kill Jesus (John 11:45-57)

Verse 45 recalls previous examples in John of a signs-based faith, not all of which have proved long-lasting (cf. esp. 8:30). But that many of the observers of Lazarus' resurrection would have begun to believe in some way is entirely credible. Others, however, report Jesus to the authorities (vv. 46-47a). Here is the first and only mention of the Sanhedrin in John (but cf. Mark 14:55 pars., 15:1; Matt. 5:22; and the use of the plural 'sanhedrins' for lesser courts in Matt. 10:17 and Mark 13:9). That it was composed primarily of chief priests (largely Sadducees) and Pharisees is historically accurate. All four Gospels agree by referring more to the priests and less to the Pharisees as the primary Jewish instigators of Jesus' crucifixion, from this time onward, even though the Pharisees (and scribes) were his primary opponents earlier in his ministry. This shift fits the fact that Sadducees dominated the Sanhedrin and Jerusalem in Jesus' day and further demonstrates that the Gospel writers are not simply lumping the religious authorities together indiscriminately (cf. Morris 1995:501). The council described here may be a formally convened meeting of the Jewish high court, in which its members passed a resolution to pursue Jesus (Bammel 1970; J. A. T. Robinson 1985:223-224). Inclusion of this account here could explain why John felt free to refer to Jesus' trial before Caiaphas later on in as abbreviated a form as he did (18:24, 28).

The catch-22 situation in which the authorities find themselves (vv. 47b-48) foreshadows a similar dilemma that the Synoptics describe when Jesus asks them whether John the Baptist was from God or not (Mark 11:29-33 pars.). The tenuous relation with Rome reflected here matches what we know from other ancient documents. 'There is evidence from Jewish sources that the authorities were rather nervous for some time before the Jewish War. Thus Josephus speaks of all manner of portents that occurred in Jerusalem (Bell. 6.288ff)' (Morris 1995:502, n. 103). For earlier fears, compare Antiquities 14.163-184. The use of 'place' for 'temple' agrees with Old Testament usage, as in Jeremiah 7:14 and Nehemiah 4:7.

Verse 49a introduces us to Caiaphas, the 'high priest that year'. This information agrees with the Synoptics (Matt. 26:3, 57; Luke 3:2), Acts (4:6), and Josephus (Ant. 18.35, 95), from whom we also learn that he173 occupied the office from AD 18-36. What is odd is the reference to 'that year', as if he ruled for only twelve months or so. Prior to Caiaphas' long tenure, the Romans had installed and deposed high priests often enough that the office might have seemed to have become an annual appointment, even when extensions could be granted (Beasley-Murray 1987:197).[253]Thus Witherington (1995:205) thinks the reference is a beautiful stroke of sarcasm, inasmuch as Rome had the power to make or unmake a high priest in an instant.Most commentators, however, follow Origen (c. AD 200) and understand 'that year' to mean something like 'that fateful year in which Jesus died'. Caiaphas' sentiments form a classic example of Johannine irony (vv.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.