The Priest's Conspiracy Against Jesus

(Gospel of John 11:45 - 11:57)

Many of the Judeans who had been visiting Mary came to believe in Jesus when they witnessed what had happened.  Some, though, went to the Pharisees to report to them what Jesus had done.  As a result, the chief priests and the Pharisees convened the Sanhedrin, the religious council.  "What are we going to do?" they asked each other.  "This man is performing a lot of miracles.  If we let him continue, everyone will believe in him.  Then the Romans will come and destroy not only our Temple, but our nation as well."

One of the priests, Caiaphas, who was the high priest that year, disagreed, "You know nothing at all about it!  Can't you see, it's better that one man may die, than the whole nation destroyed."  He did not mention it, but upon becoming high priest, Caiaphas prophesied that Jesus would die not only for the sake of the nation, but for the sake of bringing together the scattered followers of the Hebrew god and uniting them in solidarity.  Therefore, from that time on they conspired to bring about Jesus' death.

Because of this, Jesus no longer appeared in public among the Judeans, but exiled himself to the village of Ephraim near the desert and remained there with his disciples.

As the time for the celebration of the Hebrew Passover drew near, many people from all parts the country came to Jerusalem to undergo purification rituals prior to the Passover.  Those who gathered in the Temple courtyard kept looking for Jesus and asked themselves, "What do you think?  Will he come here for the Passover or not?"  The chief priests and Pharisees ordered that anyone learning the whereabouts of Jesus report it, so he could be arrested.

Notes
1.  The religious establishment, who are already threatened by Jesus and his beliefs, are fearful that if the populace accepts Jesus, it will have dire political consequences.  These do not seem obvious.  But one assumes this scenario: If the Judean people hail Jesus as the Messiah, they may regard him not only as a spiritual leader, but as a temporal one, one who will lead them against the Roman governor in a war of independence.  Rome will respond to any act of rebellion by crushing it militarily, destroying the Temple, denying the people the religious freedom they now enjoy, perhaps even obliterating the political identity of the Hebrew people.   Such would be the fear of the priesthood, who had considerable power under Roman authority and had a vested interest in preserving the status quo.   And the writers of the Gospels would know this as a reality, for a Jewish rebellion did occur and the Temple destroyed by 70 AD, only a few decades after Jesus’ time.

2.  The high priest Caiaphas puts down the other priests and tells them how stupid they are, yet, oddly, in his remarks, he seems to agree with them.  Claiming that Jesus must be sacrificed for the well-being of the country, he presents himself as a patriot, rather than a priest merely defending his authority and striving to preserve the orthodox creed. 

3.  Before he became high priest, Caiaphas prophesied that Jesus would not only save his country, but more: his death would somehow encourage a return of emigrants of Hebrew extraction who had left Palestine to settle elsewhere, and perhaps achieve greater comity between the Hebrew people who live in Galilee, Samaria, and Judea.  He wants to use Jesus and the passion he has engendered in his followers to further his own political agenda, greater unity among Hebrew peoples, either in a political or religious sense -- goals which are by no means ignoble.

4.  His life threatened, Jesus has gone to ground, but people are still talking about him and wondering when he will make his next public appearance.  The impression is given all through the Gospels that Jesus was a significant national figure.  However, save for the Gospels, which are, of course, religious propaganda and written more than a generation after his death, historical sources are silent about him and give no credit even to his existence.

5.  The impression is given here that those who held the office of high priest were selected or appointed yearly.  This is inaccurate and makes one suspect the author’s common knowledge of Judaic affairs.  Caiaphas, or, more properly Joseph ben Caiaphas, mentioned by the historian Flavius Josephus, served continuously as high priest for almost two decades.  He was appointed high priest by the Roman governor of Iudea, Valerius Gratus, in 18 AD.  He was retained by his successor, Pontius Pilate, but was removed by the governor of Roman Syria Lucius Vitellius in 37 AD.  Members of his family also served in the office and he was a son-in-law of the high priest Annas, who may have exercised considerable power even while Caiaphas was officially high priest.  He was obviously of the wealthy Judean elite and must have maintained a congenial working relationship with the Roman government.

6.  The Sanhedrin, a council and a court, actually met every day.  It would not have been convened merely to discuss the fate of the troublesome evangelist Jesus.  This particularly Sanhedrin had 23 members.  The high priest would not have served as its chairman, a post held by an independent officer known as a nasi.  However, the Gospels give an opposite impression.

7.  It is not certain where the town of Ephraim was or its precise identification.  At the edge of the desert, it was probably no farther than 15 east of Jerusalem.