Surprisingly, John’s narrative doesn’t offer any details about Jesus’ interrogation before the high priest in the Sanhedrin. Instead, John mentions only Jesus’ interrogation by Annas, before the actual trial before the Sanhedrin. The Great Sanhedrin was the high court of the Jews and was located within the Temple compound, being part of the north wall. The building was half in and half outside the compound, and it was referred to as the Hall of Hewn Stones.[1] It was here that court cases were heard, when the lower courts (also called sanhedrins) couldn’t make a satisfactory decision. The lower courts were composed of twenty-three Jewish men of rank, but the Great Sanhedrin was composed of three courts of twenty-three for a total of sixty-nine members, plus the high priest who presided over the whole court, seventy in all. They acted as the Jews’ supreme court. Read the rest of this entry »
Jesus and his disciples were about to leave the upper room at this point (cp. John 14:31). However, before doing so Jesus had a few concluding remarks. He told his disciples that he had told them these things being yet with them. If we begin “these things” with the exit of Judas (John 13:30), then the things Jesus had in mind begin with the New Commandment he had given his disciples to love one another (John 13:31). These things would also include Jesus’ going away to the Father, but they weren’t able to go with him, but they would follow later (John 13:36). The things Jesus referred to also consisted of their being the new abiding place of God, vis-à-vis the Temple or House of God (cp. John 14:2, 23). They were its rooms! Read the rest of this entry »
Before we go on in the study of John’s Gospel narrative, we need to ask ourselves: “Does John have it correctly, or does he misplace the Temple Cleansing, as is presumed by some critics?” The Synoptics have Jesus cleansing the Temple late in his ministry. In fact, they put it during the final week of Jesus’ ministry, but John puts it during the first year of Jesus’ three-and-a-half-year public ministry. Who is correct, and how do we know? The facts, according to the Bible are that Jesus cleansed the Temple at least four times during his public ministry. If there were others, they are not recorded. However, each of the Gospel narrators record a different Temple cleansing, but the critics like to keep things neatly in a package without getting too complicated, but life isn’t always neat and readily understandable. Things get complicated and easily misunderstood, much to the critics’ chagrin. Read the rest of this entry »
Probably, the greatest problem evil men have, when confronting a righteous man, is his integrity. This is especially so, if the righteous person lived a public life, whereby many are witnesses of the man’s integrity. For evil men to prosper, the righteous must be eliminated or compromised in some manner that takes away their influence with the people. Such was the problem facing the chief priests and the other Jewish authorities making up the Sanhedrin council (Mark 14:55). Knowing they couldn’t legally arrest Jesus, they sought to do so through trickery, but without arousing the ire of the people (Mark 14:1-2). Read the rest of this entry »
After the betrayal took place, the disciples fled, and the servants of the high priest led Jesus away to the house of the high priest, where there were a number of councilors waiting. Thus, we are able to understand that this was a conspiracy, and it was conducted under the cover of darkness, while most of the people in Jerusalem slept. The Synoptics sorta-kinda agree that Jesus was taken immediately to high priest. Matthew claims he was taken to Caiaphas (Matthew 26:57). Nevertheless, Mark says only that he was taken to the high priest (Mark 14:53), which can be an important distinction, since the word for high priest (G749) is the same for all who ever officiated that office (like former Presidents of the USA are all called President so and so). All these men were assembled and waiting for Jesus. Luke merely claims Jesus was taken to the high priest’s house (Luke 22:54). However, John tells us that Jesus was taken to Annas, Caiaphas’ father-in-law (John 18:13), who sent him to Caiaphas only after he had first interrogated him (John 18:24). Read the rest of this entry »
Comments Off on Contradictions and Jesus’ Illegal Trial!
Presently, we are involved in a study of the Challenge of Christ, which is found in John 10:37-38. There Jesus told his listeners, many of whom were his enemies, in the context of whether or not he was the Messiah (John 10:24-25), Jesus told them: look, don’t simply believe my words. Instead, believe my works! If my works, which the Father sent me to do, aren’t demonstrably his works, DON’T BELIEVE ME! But, if my works are the Father’s works, then you can believe what I say, that I am in the Father and the Father is in me. In essence, this is Jesus’ claim to his being the Messiah or the Christ (Greek for Messiah), i.e. the Anointed One of the Lord. If Jesus didn’t do what he said he would do, then we shouldn’t believe he is the Christ. It is just that simple and that powerful a challenge. Did Jesus do what he said he came to do? If not, he isn’t the Messiah, the Christ, the Anointed One of God, and that is Jesus’ own statement about his identity. Read the rest of this entry »
Comments Off on The Last Days and the Day of the Lord
In closing, the Elder told Gaius that he wanted to tell him many things, but he wouldn’t put it down in pen and ink (3John 1:13; cp. 2John 2:12). Paul wrote many epistles some very long (Romans, the letters to the Corinthians and Hebrews etc.) and some very short (Philemon, and his letters to the Thessalonians), but 2nd and 3rd John are the shortest in the Bible. It may appear that 3rd John is larger than 2nd John, but the additional 14th verse of 3rd John is deceiving. There are actually 249 Greek words in 2nd John to only 219 Greek words in 3rd John.[1] Philemon and Jude come in next with 339 words and 454 words respectively. While there is valid purposes for writing short letters (Philemon and Jude), I have to wonder why the Elder thought it necessary to keep from writing down all he would have liked to tell his recipients, the Elect Lady (2nd John) and Gaius (3rd John). Both Paul and Jude seem to have communicated all they wished to say to their recipients in their short letters, but not so John. Why might that be? Read the rest of this entry »
Comments Off on I Don’t Wish to Write with Pen and Ink
The apostles wrote of the last time or the last days as though they referred to a season that would occur in their expected lifetimes. Were they wrong? If they were wrong about how soon Jesus would return, how are we able to conclude that anything they claimed about Jesus is true? James wrote of the last days as days of judgment (James 5:1-5). Peter spoke of our eternal inheritance, which concerned the Lord giving us eternal life, and this was reserved for us in heaven and was ready to be unveiled in the last time (1Peter 1:4-5, 20). Just before his death, Peter spoke of scoffers who would deny Christ, and they were then present in what Peter referred to as the last days (2Peter 3:1-5). Jude, the brother of James, wrote of ungodly men who had already crept into the church pretending to be brethren, but they loved this world and sought to take advantage of and separate the brethren for their own gain. Jude wrote of his days being prophesied as the last time (Jude 1:3-4, 15-19). Read the rest of this entry »
Comments Off on The Epistles of John and the End Times
James addressed his letter to the twelve tribes scattered abroad. Although gentile believers would be affected by what James wrote, we need to keep in mind that James’ main consideration was believing Jews, because the persecution that came after Paul’s imprisonment was aimed at these believers. Knowing this, some of what James said was probably encoded to keep the enemies of the Gospel from understanding the true intent of this epistle. Moreover, it is probably true that James was executed by Ananias, the high priest and son of Annas (cir. 62-63 AD), for writing this very letter, and his stoning took place not long after Paul left for Rome in chains. Therefore, his letter had to have been written before this time, but probably closer to James’ death than nearer to Paul’s arrest. Read the rest of this entry »
I believe the epistle of James was written at least partially in code, and this was done for the safety of many of the believers still living in Jerusalem, Judea and Galilee. If Annas was indeed behind an empire wide effort to destroy the nascent church, he would have been given a copy of James’ letter by one of the false brethren Annas had planted in the churches abroad.[1] Notice that James had sent his letter during a time of trial (James 1:2). James’ letter comes at a time when some very impressive men had arisen within the churches, in the form of converts or perhaps visitors (James 2:1-3). In any event, James reminded believers that it was such as these who had oppressed them in the past, and had charged them of wrongdoing in the courts. What seems to have occurred was: these high ranking Jews (visitors or recent ‘converts’) were being favorably treated above the faithful who were not so highly recognized in Jewish society. Read the rest of this entry »
Was James the author of an epistle of straw? Martin Luther thought so, but I have to say, however highly one might esteem Luther, I believe he misunderstood this epistle. As I hope to show, James lost his life, probably due to his writing what has been labeled an epistle of straw. If one’s enemies judge what one writes to be harmful to their cause, and they seek your life because of it, how could what you write be of little worth? Moreover, before we decide whether or not Luther’s evaluation of James was correct, let’s consider how Paul reacted to his enemies during his ministry, for understanding the events surrounding some of his epistles may be a window into the reason why James wrote his. Read the rest of this entry »
In 2Thessalonians 2:8 Paul mentions, when that wicked one would be revealed, the Lord would destroy him. He says that the Lord would destroy him with the spirit of his mouth (KJV) and this would be done at the brightness of his coming (KJV), the brightness of **whose** coming? The problem of interpretation is that Paul begins the next verse by referring to the coming (parousia, G3952) of the ‘wicked one’ (cp. 2Thessalonians 2:9). So, is Paul referring to the Lord’s coming (parousia, G3952) in verse-8 or the coming (parousia, G3952) of the wicked one, i.e. the man of sin? In other words, is the man of sin / wicked one destroyed at his own coming or ‘manifestation’ or is he destroyed at the Lord’s coming or manifestation? Read the rest of this entry »
Under the Old Covenant the Levitical priesthood would offer the same sacrifices to God perpetually to no avail (Hebrews 10:11-12), but under the New Covenant Christ offered himself and rested from his redemptive labor by sitting down at the right hand of God (Psalm 110:1-4). Thus, showing that his single sacrifice was perpetually effective to redeem man and wash his conscience of sin guilt. Read the rest of this entry »
Comments Off on Enemies of Christ Made His Footstool!
According to Paul, Christ has come as a High Priest of good things to come (Hebrews 9:11). Some important ancient texts read mellonton (G3195), which means about to come, and the NASB, NKJV, NJB and the NET follow these texts. The word has the idea of ‘expectation, according to Strong’s Concordance, and means about to be, or about to do… Other equally important texts read genomenon (G1096), meaning that are come, and the RSV, NEB, TEV and the NIV follow these. So, from our point of view, it doesn’t seem to matter which is correct. If the ‘good things’ were about to come then they would have come in the first century AD. On the other hand, if Paul wrote the ‘good things’ are come then they were already present when he wrote his epistle in the first century AD. It is for us, therefore, to simply enjoy those good things. Read the rest of this entry »
Comments Off on The Good Things of the New Covenant
According to Paul, we need a High Priest “who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens” (Hebrews 7:26). But, what exactly does this mean? First of all, Jesus was holy (G3741). The Greek word means, according to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, “undefiled by sin, free from wickedness, religiously observing every moral obligation, pure holy, pious.” Therefore, it simply wasn’t possible for death to hold Jesus, once he was crucified (Acts 2:24), because the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:29), but, since Jesus was holy (G3741), God raised him from the dead (Acts 2:27). Read the rest of this entry »
Smoodock's Blog 