←
Explanation for:
Matthew
26
:
3
Then were gathered together the chief priests and ancients of the people into the court of the high priest, who was called Caiphas:
12
more explanations
& daily audio-books
spoken by
– enjoy in Theosis App –
Start your
Bible-journey
with explanations
& daily audio-books
only 4$* per month
{"arr":[{"author-name":"Jerome of Stridon","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88dcd3432c6dd41375498_Jerome%20of%20Stridon.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":4,"exegesis-text":"At the approaching Passover celebration, those responsible for preparing the sacrifices, cleansing the temple, mopping the floors, scrubbing the utensils, and purifying them according to the established rituals of the law gathered together to discuss how they could bring about the Lord's death. Their intentions were not driven by a fear of betrayal, as their open discussions reveal, but rather out of caution that He might be rescued from their grasp through the support of the people."},{"author-name":"John Chrysostom","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88ea76859f9f8e2ffd3ee_John%20Chrysostom.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":4,"exegesis-text":"Do you notice the remarkable chaos in the situation of the Jewish people? They approach the high priest to engage in unlawful acts, seeking approval where they should encounter obstacles. How many high priests were there? The law stipulates that there should be only one, yet there were many. This indicates that the governance of the Jewish people was deteriorating at this moment. As previously mentioned, Moses instructed that there should be only one high priest, and upon his death, another should take his place, with the duration of the first's life dictated by the exile of those who committed unintentional manslaughter. Why then did they have numerous high priests? Because in later times they were appointed annually. This point is illustrated by the Evangelist, who notes concerning Zacharias that he was “of the division of Abijah” (Luke 1:5). Hence, this references those high priests who had previously held the office. \\n\\nWhat was the subject of their discussions? Was it about secretly apprehending Jesus or plotting His death? It was both. They feared the crowd, which is why they postponed their plans until after the feast, saying, “Not during the feast.” The adversary wanted to prevent Christ from enduring His suffering during Passover, fearing that His agony might become public knowledge, and they were concerned about popular outrage. Their fear was not of God’s judgment, nor did they worry that the holy time might amplify their iniquity, but rather they were wary of the dangers posed by people. \\n\\nYet, consumed by wrath, they shifted their resolve once more. Initially declaring that they would not act on the feast day, once they identified the betrayer, they did not delay but committed the murder during the holy celebration. Why did they seize Him at this moment? Because their rage blinded them and they hoped to encounter Him then, acting irrationally in every respect. It is true that He utilized their malice to accomplish His mission; however, their choice does not absolve them, for they deserve endless torment due to their own intentions. At a time when they should have granted freedom to all, even to those guilty, they unjustly killed the Innocent One, who had bestowed upon them countless mercies and who, for their sake, refrained from judging the Gentiles until the proper time."},{"author-name":"Theophylact of Bulgaria","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c8989296bafed9104677d7_Theophylact%20of%20Bulgaria.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":11,"exegesis-text":"Despite the law’s instruction that a single bishop should serve a lifelong term, the Jewish leaders, in contradiction to this decree, appointed numerous bishops, changing them every year. Consequently, those tasked with punishing the wrongdoers gathered to consult the bishop of that year. The Evangelist refers to those who had completed their one-year tenure as bishops. In their intent to carry out a heinous act, they held no reverence for God but were apprehensive of the public. They feared that if they executed Christ during the festival, the people might retaliate or that their actions could divert the populace from the lawful offerings, depriving themselves of the benefits from these sacrifices. Additionally, they were concerned that Christ's death would gain renown if it occurred on a holy day, and they sought to eradicate His memory. Thus, plotting prior to the feast, they resolved to eliminate Him afterward. However, He demonstrated that His suffering would not align with their timing but would occur according to His own will, allowing them to seize Him on the eve of Passover, so that the great transformation signified by Passover would coincide with the realization of the true Passover. It is also important to note how they corrupted themselves through murder. They were averse to killing Him on the holy day, yet upon discovering the traitor, they proceeded to murder Him solely to satisfy their desires, disregarding the populace entirely."},{"author-name":"Euthymios Zigabenos","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":11,"exegesis-text":"While the Law prescribed that a single high priest ought to serve for the entirety of his life, with succession only occurring after his death, the Jews chose to disregard this command and limited the tenure of the high priest to just one year. Consequently, it was common for several high priests to have served by that time, which the evangelist refers to as bishops. The scribes are identified as the legal experts, the teachers of the Law are noted, and the elders are recognized as the most senior and knowledgeable individuals. Together, they convened in council under Caiaphas, who, at that moment, occupied the position of high priest, intending to strip him of the initial incentive to commit murder, a action they should have actively discouraged. Through flattery or deception, he refers to this covert plot, as they were cautious of openly acting due to his disciples and followers present in other regions."},{"author-name":"Bogolepow D.P.","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"In the account according to the Hebrew Matthew, Jesus Christ concluded His prophetic teachings concerning the final days of both Jerusalem and the world with a foretelling of His imminent sufferings during the upcoming Passover, which was merely two days away. Since these prophetic discourses were delivered on the evening of Tuesday, as noted in Luke 21:37-38, Jesus imparted this forewarning of His sufferings to His disciples that same evening. The convening of the Sanhedrin could not have occurred until the following morning, which would be Wednesday. However, because the Jewish method of timekeeping deemed Tuesday evening as the beginning of Wednesday, the Evangelist continues by stating that “then the chief priests were assembled,” and so forth."},{"author-name":"Michail (Lusin)","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c89550c567e172d15b3055_Michail%20(Lusin).png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"As Christ engaged in profound discussions with His disciples, a sorrowful turn of events unfolded. The chief priests and scribes, as noted in Matthew 2:4, alongside the elders of the community—who were not only respected figures in governance but were also prominent elders from various locales—gathered. This assembly was likely comprised not of all elders but specifically those who were aligned with the adversaries of Jesus Christ, having made the determination to condemn Him while they were in Jerusalem.\\n\\nThe meeting took place in the courtyard of the high priest, a space enclosed by the structures associated with him. In the Eastern tradition, courtyards often served as venues for public matters. The gathering among the chief priests, scribes, and elders at Caiaphas' residence was certainly a convening of the Sanhedrin; however, it was not a typical official assembly, which usually occurred in the temple’s buildings. Instead, it was an extraordinary and clandestine meeting convened for urgent deliberations. This initial secret yet significant agreement among the leaders and representatives against the Lord reflected a coalition of zealots and skeptics who united in their animosity towards the Righteous One. Their animus was likely intensified by Christ’s actions since His royal entry into Jerusalem.\\n\\nCaiaphas was the commonly used name for the high priest, while his given name was Joseph. The name Caiaphas, denoting oppression or rock, served as a nickname or familial title. He assumed the high priesthood through Valerius Gratus, the Roman governor of Judea, around 25 A.D., and held this position until 36 A.D. Following him, Vitellius, the Roman proconsul, succeeded him, leading to Jonathan, the son of the previous high priest Annas or Ananus, who was also Caiaphas' father-in-law."},{"author-name":"Philaret (Gumilevski)","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c896f4b6fd32caa244b5d7_Philaret%20(Gumilevski).png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":19,"exegesis-text":"According to the narrative provided by St. John, following the miracle of Lazarus' resurrection, the Sanhedrin resolved to eliminate Jesus. They issued commands to seek out and capture the Nazarene Teacher; however, the Lord concealed Himself to avoid premature danger. This occurred one week prior to the Passover (John 11:53, 55, 57; John 12:11). The Sanhedrin convened with the intent to implement their verdict against Him. They first chose to plot in secrecy, and secondly, they resolved that His execution should not take place during the Passover celebration (Mark 14:2). What motivated the Sanhedrin to pursue Jesus in this manner? They wished to prevent any rumors among the populace, as the people held Him in high regard (Luke 22:2). A clear conscience fears nothing, while the wicked flee even when there is no pursuit (Psalm 13:5; cf. Proverbs 28:1). Although the Sanhedrin was intimidated by the admiration Jesus received from the crowd, their fear ultimately proved to be unfounded. A clear conscience engages in transparency; it exercises appropriate caution but does not shy away from others out of fear, nor does it resort to deceptive schemes. The Sanhedrin recognized that their actions were far from those of a clear conscience and felt compelled to resort to flattery and deceit. They devised a plan regarding their course of action. Were they able to see their intentions through? How could those wielding substantial power fail to act on their motives? Yet, the outcome was quite the opposite. How could this be? Because prior to their decision-making, the One sent by the Father declared, ‘The Passover shall be in two days, and the Son of Man shall be delivered up to be crucified.' This illustrates how the designs of men are thwarted when they do not align with divine counsel. Men, against their own desires and to their own detriment, engage in actions they previously considered unwise and did not wish to pursue—this occurs solely because it has been ordained by God's will."},{"author-name":"Abbot Panteleimon about the Trinity","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"In their shared animosity towards Jesus Christ, they set aside all their differences: the Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, priests, scribes, elders, the shrewd and ruthless Annas, and the subservient Caiaphas all stood united. St. John Chrysostom observes that they engaged in unrighteous acts as they approached the high priest, seeking permission where one would expect barriers. According to the Law, there must be a single high priest, and upon his death, another should arise. However, during that time, there were numerous high priests, as they had been appointed annually; thus, referencing \\"the high priests\\" indicates the former high priests. Innocent, Archbishop of Kherson, notes that following the resurrection of Lazarus, the leaders of the Judean people faced a choice: either to honor the Prophet of Galilee as the Messiah, a position already held by many among the populace and some members of the Sanhedrin, or, opposing Him, to implement decisive actions to halt His growing influence through teaching and miracles. Following Christ’s triumphant entry into Jerusalem, which exposed the weaknesses of all Jewish sects and the Sanhedrin, particularly after His impactful final sermon in the Temple that weighed heavily on the leaders, the chief priests viewed the Prophet from Galilee as their most formidable adversary, against whom they felt justified in employing every resource: legal strategies, civil authority, deceit, and force."},{"author-name":"Gladkow B.I.","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88bf0ceef8c96e09a6521_Gladkow%20B.I..png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"At that time, the chief priests, Pharisees, scribes, and elders gathered in Jerusalem at the residence of Caiaphas, the high priest. Their discussion centered on the plans for the execution of Jesus. This decision had been made long ago, and they had instructed that anyone who discovered His location should report it to the Sanhedrin. Thus, the only matter left to determine was the timing and method of carrying out this sentence. The events that had unfolded that day in the temple, particularly Jesus's public rebuke of them, led to this urgent assembly of the Sanhedrin, where they meticulously deliberated on the sensitive issues at hand."},{"author-name":"Lopuchin A.P.","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c891400ee1341634d2276d_Lopuchin%20A.P..png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"While the upright rested, the wicked conspired malevolently. On Wednesday evening, the Sanhedrin convened in the residence of Caiaphas, the high priest, and fervently debated their course of action regarding the Galilean, whom they deemed a threat. Their attempts to apprehend Him in the temple or incite the populace against Him, as well as to arouse the suspicions of the Roman authorities, proved futile, thwarted by the devotion of His faithful followers and by His own wisdom, which dismantled their most treacherous schemes. There may have been voices advocating for allowing Him to continue unhindered until His mission and teachings were fully revealed. However, the opposing faction gained the upper hand; the council determined that He must die—if not openly, then through treachery and stealth. Yet, how would they execute this plan? As they pondered this dilemma, word came that one of Jesus of Nazareth's closest disciples intended to deliver a significant message to them."},{"author-name":"Makkaveiski N.K.","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"A few days prior to the trial of Jesus Christ, the Sanhedrin convened once again in the residence of the high priest Caiaphas. On this occasion, the Evangelist states, \\"then gathered the chief priests and the scribes and the elders of the people into the court of the high priest, named Caiaphas.\\" If the term \\"into the court\\" (εἰς τήν αὐλήν) does not refer broadly to a house or palace, then it likely denotes the second courtyard previously mentioned. Regardless, it is important to note that the trial of Jesus did not occur in this location, as referenced in Matthew 26:57."},{"author-name":"Paul Matwejewski","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c8969f5be0d592d5a10576_Paul%20Matwejewski.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"In the final days, the bitter adversaries of the Lord were once again reminded of the despised Prophet from Galilee. Shortly before this, they had determined to eliminate Him and commanded that anyone aware of His location should inform them for subsequent directives (John 11:53, 57). When the moment arrived for the fulfillment of the divine decree aimed at humanity's salvation, and the appointed hour from Heaven came (7:6, 30), the Lamb of God, who bears away the sins of the world (1:29, 36), willingly yielded Himself to sinful hands (Matt. 26:45). Triumphantly, as the spiritual Sovereign of the eternal realm, He entered Jerusalem, approached the temple as its Lord, performed miracles, preached to the people, and condemned the iniquities of the scribes and Pharisees one last time, while disclosing the impending fate of the city, the Jewish nation, and all of creation. Jesus Christ's appearance in Jerusalem amidst the throngs of worshipers who had gathered at the temple for the feast stirred His foes into action. The chief priests, scribes, and elders of the people, tainted by the duplicity and malice of their leaders, convened an assembly in the courtyard of Joseph Caiaphas, the high priest, who was then actively serving under the direction of the Roman governor Valerius Gratus, succeeding his father-in-law Annas. The shrewd leader of the Sanhedrin had previously suggested that the sacrifice of Jesus was for the common good, and the council members had concurred with him at that time (John 11:47-53). At the present gathering, an even less favorable resolution was anticipated: they resolved to seize Jesus through deceit and put Him to death, but they stated, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people.” St. Luke notes (22:2) that they were apprehensive about the populace, fearing that the people might rally to defend their sole Benefactor; any unrest could lead to the kind of riots that were common in Judea, often resulting in bloodshed as the iron fist of the Romans subdued the people's passions. As the final symbolic Passover approached, the circumstances had been divinely orchestrated so that our true Passover—Christ—would be sacrificed for us (1 Cor. 5:7). Although His enemies desired to wait until after the festive period, it was not within their control: the Lord, in His own sovereign will, chose to endure His crucifixion on the very day of Easter, for He Himself was the true Pascha."}]}
Support this project and get full access for only 4$/month
Commentarie text can’t be scrolled on PC at the moment. Please use your phone. We’re working on a fix.
