Chapter 20 John's Gospel, the Gnostics and Supplimenting

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Chapter 20 John's Gospel, the Gnostics and Supplimenting CHAPTER 20 JOHN’S GOSPEL, THE GNOSTICS AND SUPPLIMENTING THE SYNOPTICS The History and the Dating of John’s Gospel The records of the historians are consistent with one another. According to the Old Latin Prologue to John, Bishop Papias of Hierapollis (60-138) related that he had written the Gospel as John had dictated it to him (RO 150). This claim may have been concerning the last chapter only. Papias said John had composed it at the request of the bishops of Asia against Cerinthus and other heretics, especially the Ebionites. Papias added that John knew the other three gospels and had written to supplement them. (RO 151). Irenaeus (120-180) wrote: ‘Later on too, John, the disciple of the Lord, who had even reclined on his bosom, he too brought out a Gospel while he was dwelling in Ephesus of Asia’. (RO 129). [Present day Turkey] A long fragment of the Muratorian Canon was discovered in 1740 by Cardinal Muratori in the Ambrosian library at Milan. Internal evidence shows it was composed between 141- 155 AD. Some attribute its authorship to Hippolytus. The Latin text, confirmed by other finds, appears to have been translated from the Greek. (RO 138-139) It explains that John wrote: at the insistence of his fellow-disciples and bishops. John agreed and asked them “to fast with him for three days, and what shall have been revealed to each let us, relate to one another”. That same night it was revealed to the Andrew, one of the Apostles, that whatever came to the minds of them all, John, in his own name, should write it all down. (EH 6:14, 5-7 and RO 139). Clement of Alexandria (150-215) mentioned that John wrote the forth Gospel after being urged by his friends (EH 6:14 and CCHS 777a). The Anti-Marcionite Prologue of John: says the bishops of Asia [present day Turkey] asked the Apostle John to answer Cerinthus and other heretics, and this was the reason why John wrote his gospel ((AMJ and RO 151- 2)). At one time it was accepted that John wrote his gospel about 96AD. ((CCHS 781j)). But recently, Tresmontant ((CTH 324)), Thied ((CTR xii)), Orchard ((BOO 18)) and Robinson ((JATR 311)) separately concluded that the first twenty chapters were written prior to 70AD with chapter 21 added about 95AD. In the first 18 verses, John gave a theological answer to the Gnostic challenge and then turned to comment on specific subjects. The Gnostic Challenge The Gnostic belief, that men were good immortal spirits imprisoned in evil bodies, was widespread in various forms throughout the Greek-speaking world. This imprisonment led to a battle between light and dark, spirit and flesh. While its influence may be seen in much of pagan and non-canonical early Christian literature, we do not posses coherent statements of the beliefs of its various sects. The word ‘Gnostic’ meant ‘knowledge’, but heretics used it to mean ‘secret knowledge’. In his Epistle to the Colossians Paul writes: “See that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceits,… according to the elemental spirits of the universe” (Col. 2:8). It is widely accepted, that this letter was sent while Paul was in prison earlier than 70 AD. In 1st.Timothy 6: 20 we read: “Avoid the godless chatter and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge, …” Pope John Paul II considered Paul was here referring to Gnostic teachings ((JPFR 4:37)). In the Apocalypse (2:6 and 15) we read a warning regarding the Nicolaites, a Gnostic sect. In the second century, the Gnostics became more organised, but their ideas were causing problems for Christians much earlier. Ireneaus described the beliefs of Cerinthus before he described those of the Ebionites. He accused the Ebionites of ‘worshipping Jerusalem’. This indicates the Ebionites, and therefore the Cerinthians, were active prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. Irenaeus records that John had in mind: ‘the errors sown by Cerinthus and earlier still by those called Nicolaites’ ((IAH 3: 11, 1 and CCHS 778h)). The Gnostics claimed to be ‘the knowing men of light and knowledge’. Irenaeus and others made many references to the Gnostics, and Henry Owen in 1764 used this information to construct an outline of their teachings. The following is based on the work of Owen, but it needs to be remembered that the Nicolaites, Cerinthians, Ebionites and many more sects, varied from one another in their precise beliefs. The Unknown most high God lived in heaven with the chief spirits or Aeons. He generated an only-begotten son, called MONOGENES, who begat the inferior LOGOS [The Greek for WORD]. There were two high Aeons called LIFE and LIGHT. From these Aeons proceeded inferior orders of spirits, including CHRIST and DEMIURGUS. It was DEMIURGUS who created this visible world out of eternal matter. This DEMIURGUS was ignorant of the supreme God and much lower than the invisible Aeons. He was protector of the Israelites and sent Moses to them with laws of perpetual obligation. [Many of the heretical sects observed Jewish traditional laws]. Jesus was a mere man, the real son of Joseph and Mary. But CHRIST descended on him in the form of a dove when he was baptised. CHRIST revealed to him the unknown Father and empowered him to work miracles. Similarly the Aeon, LIGHT, entered into John the Baptist. As LIGHT was superior to CHRIST, John the Baptist was in some respects to be preferred to Jesus. After Jesus had propagated the knowledge of God, he came to suffer. So CHRIST left him and fled to the uppermost heaven. It was Jesus only who suffered. CHRIST would return to reign for a thousand years, with humanity the slave of lust and pleasure ((EH 3: 28)). Some groups denied that Christ had risen and there would be a resurrection of the dead ((HO 92)). Knowing this background, we are able to understand the early words of John’s gospel. John says that CHRIST is the LOGOS [The WORD] of God (John 1: 1). The WORD and MONOGENES [the only begotten son of God] are one and the same person (1: 14). CHRIST, or The WORD, is not an inferior Aeon, but God (1: 1). Christ was not ignorant of God, but knew him always and perfectly in heaven (1: 18). Christ is not to be distinguished from the DEMIURGUS for he is the creator of the whole world (1: 10). LIFE and LIGHT are not particular and separate spirits, but the same as the LOGOS and CHRIST (John 1: 4, 7-9). So John is saying that CHRIST, the LOGOS [The WORD], LIFE, LIGHT and MONOGENES (the only-begotten) are not distinct Aeons [Spirits], but one and the same Divine person. John says that an Aeon, LIGHT, did not enter into John the Baptist and communicate to him supreme knowledge of the Divine Will. He was a mere man and though inspired, much inferior to Jesus being only the forerunner of him (John 1: 6, 8, 15). John explains that the Supreme God was not entirely unknown before the time of Christ. Men were enlightened in their own consciences, but they did not want to know him (1: 9-10). The Jews were not the particular people of an inferior god, DEMIURGUS, but of CHRIST, himself the only-begotten son of God (1: 11). Eventually he became man (1: 14) and fulfilled the Law of Moses, which was only a shadow of good things to come, and instituted its fullness. CHRIST came for all men not for the Jews only (1: 12-13). Jesus was Son of the Father (1: 14). In his following verses and chapters, John selected incidents and miracles to support what he had affirmed. John refutes the idea that John the Baptist, by preaching the Law of Moses, was superior to CHRIST (John 1: 15-34). John showed Christ was superior to John the Baptist. The passages above show that Irenaeus was correct in the reason he gave why this Gospel was written. So it is logical to accept him as being correct when naming John the Apostle as its author. Some Markan priorists claim Cerinthus did not live until after John had died. But according to Eusebius, Cerinthus founded his religion ‘at the time under discussion’ ((EH 3: 28, 1)). As he had just been writing about the Ebionites this must have been very early. We also have a graphic story recorded by Irenaeus: ‘The apostle John once went into a bath- house to wash, but when he knew Cerinthus was within, leapt out of the place and fled from the door, for he did not endure to be even under the same roof with him, and enjoined on those who were with him to do the same, saying “Let us flee, lest this bath-house fall in, for Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.” Irenaeus added that he had obtained this story from bishop Polycarp, who had known John personally. ((EH 3: 28, 6)). We also read: “At his time, too, there existed for a short time the heresy of the Nicolaitans of which the Apocalypse of John [Apoc. 2: 6 and 15] also makes mention”. ((EH 3: 29, 1)). So we see again that Irenaeus was writing about a very early period. John Supplementing and clarifying the Synoptic Gospels In his gospel, John does not repeat details already to be found in the three existing gospels. If he had written without knowledge of the existing gospels, it would be incredible that he could so successfully have avoided repeating so much contained in them, such as: The Transfiguration and Christ’s confession of divinity before Caiaphas ((CCHS 778h)).
Recommended publications
  • Lesson 4 Introduction 1. Lesson 1 Was Devoted to the Prayers of Jesus In
    "Scripture taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE®, © Copyright 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation Used by permission." (www.Lockman.org) Lesson 4 Introduction 1. Lesson 1 was devoted to the prayers of Jesus in Gethsemane. 2. Lesson 2 discussed the arrest of Jesus and He being bound over to Annas in the middle of the night. 3. Lesson 3 was a discussion of His illegal trial before Annas the former high priest, and the fact no formal charges were made against Him. 4. This lesson will be a discussion of His Pre-Dawn Trial Before Caiaphas And The Sanhedrin. Pre-Dawn Trial Before Caiaphas And The Sanhedrin 1. Jesus was first tried before Annas. (Jn. 18:12-13, 24). JOH 18:12 So the Roman cohort and the commander, and the officers of the Jews, arrested Jesus and bound Him, JOH 18:13 and led Him to Annas first; for he was father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. JOH 18:24 Annas therefore sent Him bound to Caiaphas the high priest. 2. He will now be tried before the Sanhedrin and Caiaphas the current high priest. (Jn. 18:13, 24). 3. There will be later a post-dawn trial before Sanhedrin and after that a trial before Pilate the Roman governor. 4. The gospel writers all mention this pre-dawn trial before Caiaphas. (Matt. 26:57; Mk. 14:53; Lk. 22:54; Jn. 18:24). MAT 26:57 And those who had seized Jesus led Him away to Caiaphas, the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were gathered together.
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus: His Life from the Perspectives of Mary and Caiaphas (Pt. 2)
    Digital Commons @ George Fox University Faculty Publications - College of Christian Studies College of Christian Studies 2019 Jesus: His Life from the Perspectives of Mary and Caiaphas (Pt. 2) Paul N. Anderson Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ccs Part of the Christianity Commons News and Interpretations on the Bible and Ancient Near East History. "Jesus: His Life from the Perspectives of Mary and Caiaphas" (Pt. 2) By Paul N. Anderson George Fox University Newberg, Oregon April 2019 Following on the first two episodes of the History Channel’s “Jesus: His Life,” focusing on perspectives of Joseph and John the Baptist, the second installment continues the hybrid approach, reflecting on the life of Jesus from the perspectives of Mary and Caiaphas. The opening episode features Jesus visiting Jerusalem as a twelve-year old, as portrayed in Luke 2. Beginning with Mary and her memory of the infancy and childhood of Jesus, things move forward quickly into the story of his engaging the Jewish authorities in the temple. While nothing else is known about the childhood and early adulthood of Jesus, the memory of his engaging religious authorities in Jerusalem must have influenced Mary’s impression of his mission and special calling in life. The episode tracks with the traditional view that Joseph may have died before the ministry of Jesus began, which would have led to his working as a carpenter to support the family. Along these lines, several conjectures of tensions between Jesus and his brother are presented. First, his brothers may have resented his ministry-related departure—imposing on them to provide for the family’s welfare.
    [Show full text]
  • From Hades to Hell Christian Visions of the Underworld (2Nd–​5Th Centuries Ce)
    Chapter 13 From Hades to Hell Christian Visions of the Underworld (2nd– 5th centuries ce) Zissis D. Ainalis When men and women of the Graeco- Roman world in the first century got word about the resurrection of Jesus Christ, something about that story rang a bell. After all, some of the greatest heroes of their literature and their reli- gion had gone to the Underworld and returned alive. Odysseus and Aeneas, Herakles and Orpheus – they all went to Hades in search of the dead. Glen Bowersock is certainly right when he insists that the great difference between Jesus and all the others was that he was dead, that he really died and was resurrected, and that the notion of resurrection was strange and absurd to Graeco- Roman perception.1 However, this central event of Christianity inev- itably called to mind the great characters of the Graeco- Roman tradition and, in this sense, eased the way for the acceptance of this new Semitic religion by Graeco- Roman society. This process will here be primarily illustrated by three texts: the Gospel of Nicodemus, the Vision of Paul and the Life of Saint Macarius the Roman. While these works belong in different centuries and to some extent in different literary traditions, they all display the way in which the Graeco- Roman heritage was recognized, used and developed in the Late Antique and early Byzantine tradition. The Gospel of Nicodemus From early on, Christians started to speculate about the passage of Jesus to the Kingdom of Death. Initially it may have been a taboo to call it Hades, but custom and tradition eventually prevailed.
    [Show full text]
  • A Biographical Study of Caiaphas
    Scholars Crossing New Testament Biographies A Biographical Study of Individuals of the Bible 10-2018 A Biographical Study of Caiaphas Harold Willmington Liberty University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/nt_biographies Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Willmington, Harold, "A Biographical Study of Caiaphas" (2018). New Testament Biographies. 36. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/nt_biographies/36 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the A Biographical Study of Individuals of the Bible at Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in New Testament Biographies by an authorized administrator of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Caiaphas CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY I. Caiaphas and Christ A. The plotter—“Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people” (Matt. 26:3-5). B. The prosecutor 1. The harassment by Caiaphas—“And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? What is it which these witness against thee?” (Matt. 26:62). 2. The hypocrisy of Caiaphas—“Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witness? Behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy” (Matt. 26:65). C. The prophet 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Gabriel's Episcopal Church
    Saint Gabriel’s Episcopal Church Fourth Sunday of Easter April 25, 2021 We’re glad you have joined us! Come find your part in our mission: St. Gabriel’s Church is a community of faith celebrating and sharing Christ’s love. Prelude Andante Pastorale Charles E. Stephens Processional Hymn 199 Come, ye faithful, raise the strain St. Kevin Come, ye faithful, raise the strain of triumphant gladness! God hath brought his Israel into joy from sadness: loosed from Pharaoh’s bitter yoke Jacob’s sons and daughters, led them with unmoistened foot through the Red Sea waters. ’Tis the spring of souls today: Christ hath burst his prison, and from three days’ sleep in death as a sun hath risen; all the winter of our sins, long and dark, is flying from his light, to whom we give laud and praise undying. Now the queen of seasons, bright with the day of splendor, with the royal feast of feasts, comes its joy to render; comes to glad Jerusalem, who with true affection welcomes in unwearied strains Jesus’ resurrection. Neither might the gates of death, nor the tomb’s dark portal, nor the watchers, nor the seal hold thee as a mortal: but today amidst thine own thou didst stand, bestowing that thy peace which evermore passeth human knowing. Salutation Celebrant Alleluia! Christ is risen. People The Lord is risen indeed. Alleluia! Collect for Purity Celebrant Almighty God, to you all hearts are open, all desires known, and from you no secrets are hid: Cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of your Holy Spirit, that we may perfectly love you, and worthily magnify your holy Name; through Christ our Lord.
    [Show full text]
  • Truth and Consequences I. Selective Morality
    Truth and Consequences 28 Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the Praetorium, and it was early morning. But they themselves did not go into the Praetorium, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover. 29 Pilate then went out to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this Man?” 30 They answered and said to him, “If He were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him up to you.” 31 Then Pilate said to them, “You take Him and judge Him according to your law.” Therefore the Jews said to him, “It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death,” 32 that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled which He spoke, signifying by what death He would die. 33 Then Pilate entered the Praetorium again, called Jesus, and said to Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?” 34 Jesus answered him, “Are you speaking for yourself about this, or did others tell you this concerning Me?” 35 Pilate answered, “Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered You to me. What have You done?” 36 Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.” 37 Pilate therefore said to Him, “Are You a king then?” Jesus answered, “You say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth.
    [Show full text]
  • NARRATOR: Then They Brought Jesus from Caiaphas to the Praetorium. It Was Morning
    NARRATOR: Then they brought Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium. It was morning. And they themselves did not enter the praetorium, in order not to be defiled so that they could eat the Passover. So, Pilate came out to them and said, SPEAKER: “What charge do you bring against this man?” NARRATOR: “If he were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you.” SPEAKER: “Take him yourselves and judge him according to your law.” NARRATOR: The Jews answered him, “We do not have the right to execute anyone,” in order that the word of Jesus might be fulfilled that he said indicating the kind of death he would die. So, Pilate went back into the praetorium and summoned Jesus. SPEAKER: “Are you the King of the Jews?” JESUS: “Do you say this on your own or have others told you about me?” SPEAKER: “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests handed you over to me. What have you done?” JESUS: “My kingdom does not belong to this world. If my kingdom did belong to this world, my attendants would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not here.” SPEAKER: “Then you are a king?” JESUS: “You say I am a king. For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.” SPEAKER: “What is truth?” NARRATOR: When he had said this, he again went out to the Jews and said to them, SPEAKER: “I find no guilt in him.
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus As Priest in the Gospels Nicholas Perrin
    Jesus as Priest in the Gospels Nicholas Perrin Nicholas Perrin is the Franklin S. Dryness Chair of Biblical Studies at Wheaton Grad- uate School and the former Dean of Wheaton Graduate School at Wheaton College. He earned his PhD from Marquette University. Most recently, he is the author of Jesus the Priest (SPCK/Baker Academic, 2018) and will also be publishing The Kingdom of God (Zondervan) in early 2019. A husband and the father of two grown sons, Dr. Perrin is a teaching elder in the Presbyterian Church in America. To the extent that New Testament (NT) Theology is concerned to convey the theologies of the NT writings as these have been critically interpreted, the project by nature entails a good deal of interpretative retrieval, that is, an up-to-date recounting of standard arguments and familiar paradigms for understanding the discrete canonical texts. One such “familiar paradigm,” easily demonstrable from the past hundred years or so of scholarly literature, holds that the Epistle to the Hebrews is unique by virtue of its emphasis on Jesus’ priesthood. From here, especially if one prefers to date Hebrews after the destruction of the temple, it is a straightforward move to infer that the concept of Jesus’ priesthood was entirely a post-Easter theologoumenon, likely occasioned by the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, and almost certainly limited in importance so far as first-century Christian belief was concerned. Whatever factors “in front of” the biblical text may have helped pave the way for this recurring interpretative judgment (here one may think, for example, of the fierce anti-sacerdotal character of so much nineteenth- and twenti- eth-century Protestant theology), it almost certainly mistaken.
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus Through the Eyes of Caiaphas and Pilate Matthew 26-27 “Then The
    Jesus through the Eyes of Caiaphas and Pilate Matthew 26-27 “Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, ‘He has blasphemed!’” “But he gave him no answer, not even to a single charge, so that the governor was greatly amazed.” Caiaphas and Pilate. Priest and politician. Religion and politics. I think it no coincidence that, in Matthew’s Gospel, the hearing Jesus is given before the Sanhedrin (the religious council) mirrors the one-man trial he is given before Pilate, religion and politics being two sides of the coin of unbelief. In the house of Caiaphas, where the Sanhedrin has gathered, Caiaphas says to Jesus, “Have you no answer [to your accusers]? What is it that they testify against you?” Jesus is silent. Then the high priest asks him directly if he is the Messiah, the Son of God. Jesus responds, “You have said so.” Caiaphas is enraged. In the praetorium, the order is reversed. Pilate asks Jesus, “Are you the King of the Jews?” Jesus responds, “You say so.” Then Pilate asks Jesus, “Do you not hear how many accusations they make against you?” Jesus is silent. Pilate is amazed until he is afraid. To ask how Caiaphas saw Jesus is to ask how religion (our seeking God) sees revelation (God seeking us). From the standpoint of revelation, religion is a human assumption and assertion that contradicts revelation. Therefore when revelation comes to us, we do not believe. If we did, we would listen, but in religion we talk. If we did, we would let God claim us, but in religion, we grasp at God.
    [Show full text]
  • Caiaphas Caiaphas Pattern for One 8”X12” Finished Block
    Boys of the Bible PATTERN SERIES Block 84: Caiaphas Caiaphas Pattern for one 8”x12” finished block. All seams are 1/4”. Pressing directions are indicated. Fabric Requirements & Cutting instructions Fabric 1 Fat 1/8th or scrap Shown Gray (1) 5-1/4” square, cut twice diagonally (4) 2-7/8” squares, cut once diagonally Fabric 2 Fat 1/16th or scrap Shown (2) 2-1/2”x8-1/2” rectangles Brown Fabric 3 Fat 1/8th or scrap Proverbs 10:12 Shown Black (1) 5-1/4” square, cut twice diagonally (4) 2-7/8” squares, cut once diagonally "Hatred stirs up conflict.”Prov- Contrast Fat 1/16th or scrap erbs 10:12 Turquoise (1) 2-7/8” square, cut once diagonally As high priest of the temple of Jerusalem, Caiaphas was the Jew’s representative to God. Caiaphas, alone, was responsible for making annual sacrifices to God in the temple. Caiaphas was also in charge of the tem- ple coffers, temple guards and lower-ranking priests. Appointed to the position by his father-in-law, Caia- phas was power hungry and had a good thing going — a good thing going, until Jesus entered the scene and put a wrench in the works… Caiaphas hated Jesus. HATED Him! When Jesus drove the money changers out of the temple, Caiaphas lost a significant source of revenue. When Jesus taught in the temple, many Jews began switching their alliance to Jesus rather than Caiaphas. When Jesus started performing miracles, Jesus continued to whittle away at Caiaphas’s leadership. So when Jesus resurrected Lazarus, Caiaphas was fed up! Worried that the Jews would universally rise up to follow Jesus, Caiaphas feared that the Roman emperor would become angered if the taxes and assessments were not paid in full.
    [Show full text]
  • “Jesus Or Barabbas?” Luke 23:13-25; Matthew 27:15-23; Mark 15:6-14; John 18:39,40
    The Six Trials of Jesus: The Sixth Trial before Pilate: “Jesus or Barabbas?” Luke 23:13-25; Matthew 27:15-23; Mark 15:6-14; John 18:39,40 Introduction The previous five trials of Jesus have been shown to be a sham, an enormous miscarriage of justice. The first three religious trials had Jesus before Annas, Caiphas, and the Sanhedrin, where false charges abounded. The last three trials took place before the officials of Rome, Pilate, then Herod, then Pilate again. Both Pilate and Herod had concluded that Jesus was not guilty. Yet, because of the pressure from the religious leaders and the people, Pilate gave in to the demands for Jesus to be nailed to the cross. The enormity of evil set against the grace of God is the story of our salvation through the blood of Jesus Christ. Trial #1: Jesus was taken to Annas, father-in-law of Caiaphas, high priest John 18:12-24 Trial #2: Jesus taken Caiaphas in the night Matthew 26:59-66; Mark 14:55-64 Trial #3: Because Jewish regulations forbade trying a prisoner at night, Caiaphas convened an early morning meeting of the Sanhedrin to have them declare Jesus guilty Luke 22:66-71; Matthew 27:1; Mark 15:1 Trial #4: Jesus was taken for the first meeting with Pilate Matthew 27:2,11-14; Mark 15:1-5; Luke 23:1-5; John 18:29-38 Trial #5: Pilate sent Jesus to Herod Luke 23:6-12 Trial #6: Jesus before Pilate for a second trial, with chief priests, rulers, and people Luke 23:13-25; Matthew 27:15-23; Mark 15:6-14; John 18:39,40 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Was Responsible for the Crucifixion Ofjesus?
    C HAPTER 10 Who Was Responsible for the Crucifixion ofJesus? CAIAPHAS, PONTIUS PILATE, AND THE HERODS he question of who is responsible for putting Jesus to death has been argued and re-argued on a regular basis. Those who read the gospel T accounts literally assign the blame largely to the Jews, led by Caiaphas, and see Pilate as someone who unwillingly went along with their demands. Current scholarship points toward Pilate and the Romans who were seeking to prevent a riot, though Caiaphas and the other Jewish leaders might have encouraged such a view.1 Herod is mentioned in the gospels in relation to Jesus’ death only because Pilate sees him as a way to avoid responsibility. Historically, Herod probably had nothing to do with Jesus’ death, though he did put John the Baptist to death, whether to prevent a rebellion or because of John’s criticism of his marriage. The books of three of the five authors here—Burgess, Ricci, and Kazantzakis—divide the blame between the Romans, led by Pilate, and the Jews, led by Caiaphas. Mailer’s novel puts the burden completely on the Jews, while Ricci’s does the same for the Romans. All five writers draw on the gospels and noncanonical writings and legends in crafting their characterizations of Caiaphas, Pilate, and Herod. CAIAPHAS Burgess’ novel develops Caiaphas much more fully than do any of the other books. The novels by Kazantzakis, Ricci, and Saramago barely mention him, as does Mailer’s, though Mailer’s lack of mention means much more than those of the others.
    [Show full text]