Sects that suddenly showed up in the New Testament:


PHARISEES [FARE uh sees] (separated ones) — a religious and political party in Palestine in New Testament times. The Pharisees were known for insisting that the law of God be observed as the scribes interpreted it and for their special commitment to keeping the laws of tithing and ritual purity.

The Pharisees had their roots in the group of faithful Jews known as the Hasidim (or Chasidim). The Hasidim arose in the second century b.c. when the influence of Hellenism on the Jews was particularly strong and many Jews lived little differently than their Gentile neighbors. But the Hasidim insisted on strict observance of Jewish ritual laws.

When the Syrian King Antiochus IV tried to do away with the Jewish religion, the Hasidim took part in the revolt of the Maccabees against him. Apparently from this movement of faithful Hasidim came both the Essenes—who later broke off from other Jews and formed their own communities—and the Pharisees, who remained an active part of Jewish life. Indeed, during the period of independence that followed the revolt, some of the Greek rulers who controlled Palestine favored the Pharisaic party.

As a result of this favoritism, Pharisees came to be represented on the Sanhedrin, the supreme court and legislative body of the Jews. At times, the Pharisees even dominated the assembly. In New Testament times, Pharisees, though probably in the minority, were still an effective part of the Sanhedrin.


One distinctive feature of the Pharisees was their strong commitment to observing the law of God as it was interpreted and applied by the scribes. Although the priests had been responsible for teaching and interpreting the Law (Lev. 10:8–11; Deut. 33:8–10) in Old Testament times, many people had lost all respect for the priests because of the corruption in the Jerusalem priesthood. They looked to the scribes instead to interpret the Law for them. Some scribes were priests; many were not. Still, they lived pious, disciplined lives; and they had been trained to become experts in the Law. It was natural, then, for people to follow their leading rather than that of the priests.

The way in which the Pharisees spelled out the meaning of the Mosaic Law, the ways in which they adapted that Law to suit the needs of their day, the time-honored customs they endorsed—all these became a part of the “tradition of the elders” (Mark 7:3).


Although these traditions were not put into writing, they were passed on from one scribe to another and from the scribes to the people. From this tradition, they claimed, the Jewish people could know the way God’s law should be observed. The Pharisees agreed, and they were known for supporting and keeping the “tradition of the elders.”


The Pharisees also believed it was important to observe all the laws of God, which they taught were 613 in all. But they were especially known for their commitment to keep the laws of tithing and ritual purity.


According to the New Testament, the Pharisees were concerned about strictly interpreting and keeping the law on all matters (Acts 26:5), including the Sabbath (Mark 2:24), divorce (Mark 10:2), oaths (Matt. 23:16–22), the wearing of Phylacteries and Fringes (Matt. 23:5), and so on. But they showed special zeal in insisting that laws of tithing and ritual purity be kept (Matt. 23:23–26; Mark 7:1–13; Luke 11:37–42; 18:12).

Since Pharisees found that other Jews were not careful enough about keeping those laws, they felt it was necessary to place limits on their contacts with other Jews as well as with Gentiles. For example, they could not eat in the home of a non-Pharisee, since they could not be sure that the food had been properly tithed and kept ritually pure.

Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees did believe in the resurrection of the dead. On this point, they were on common ground with the early Christians (Acts 23:6–9). The scribe in Mark 12:28 who thought that Jesus had answered the Sadducees well concerning the Resurrection was probably a Pharisee.

The Pharisees and their scribes enjoyed a good deal of popular support. In one way this is surprising, since the Pharisees kept apart from other Jews. They always seemed to be ready to criticize others for not keeping the laws, and they often looked down on “sinners” who showed no interest in God’s law (Mark 2:16; Luke 7:39; 15:2; 18:11).

Still, unlike the Sadducees, who were mostly rich landowners and powerful priests, many Pharisees were ordinary people. And even though other Jews could not be bothered with observing all the details of the Law, they respected the Pharisees for making the effort. Even Paul credited unbelieving Jews with having a “zeal for God” (Rom. 10:2)—even though it was misguided. He probably was thinking primarily of the Pharisees when he wrote these words.

In the New Testament, the Pharisees appear frequently in the accounts of Jesus’ ministry and the history of the early church. In these passages a number of the typical failings of the Pharisees are evident. Of course, not all Pharisees failed in all these points—and the same failings can be found among religious people of any age.

Pharisees observed the Law carefully as far as appearances went, but their hearts were far from God. Their motives were wrong because they wanted human praise (Matt. 6:2, 5, 16; 23:5–7). They also had evil desires that were hidden by their pious show (Matt. 23:25–28). That is why Pharisees are often called hypocrites: their hearts did not match their outward appearance.

The Pharisees thought they could match God’s standards by keeping all the outward rules. Luke 18:9 says they “trusted in themselves that they were righteous.” This can easily happen when people think God’s will is the same thing as their list of what they can and cannot do. Their desire to keep all of God’s laws was commendable, but sometimes they put the emphasis on the wrong places. Minor details became a major preoccupation, and they forgot the more important things (Matt. 23:23).

Finally, because Pharisees thought they were doing their best to keep God’s laws while others were not, they often looked down on such “sinners”—especially people like tax collectors and prostitutes. Religious people need to remember that they, too, are sinners in God’s eyes, and that Christ died for everyone.[1]



SADDUCEES [SAJ uh seez] — members of a Jewish faction that opposed Jesus during His ministry. Known for their denial of the bodily resurrection, the Sadducees came from the leading families of the nation—the priests, merchants, and aristocrats. The high priests and the most powerful members of the priesthood were mainly Sadducees (Acts 5:17).

Some scholars believe the name “Sadducees” came from Zadok, the high priest in the days of David (2 Sam. 15:24) and Solomon (1 Kin. 1:34–45). Many wealthy laypeople were also Sadducees. This may be the reason why the Sadducees gave the impression of wanting to preserve things as they were. They enjoyed privileged positions in society and managed to get along well under Roman rule. Any movement that might upset order and authority was bound to appear dangerous in their eyes.


The Sadducees rejected “the tradition of the elders,” that body of oral and written commentary that interpreted the law of Moses. This automatically placed them in direct conflict with another Jewish group, the Pharisees, who had made the traditions surrounding the Law almost as important as the Law itself.


The Sadducees insisted that only the laws that were written in the law of Moses (the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Old Testament) were really binding. The Sadducees thought this way because of religious practices that had taken place for several centuries.


For many years the priests were in charge of teaching the law of God to the Israelites; they were the authorities to go to for interpretation or application of the law (Deut. 17:8–13). Unfortunately, the leading priests lost the respect of the people by becoming corrupt. When this happened, many Jews began to respond to the Scribes, people who had become experts in God’s law and who usually lived pious, disciplined lives, although many of them were not priests. People began to follow the teaching of the scribes and to let the scribes interpret the law of God for them. The “tradition of the elders” that followed was made up of customs, rulings, and interpretations that the scribes passed on as the authoritative way in which God’s law should be applied.


The Sadducees rejected this approach to authority in favor of the written law of Moses. They felt the original law alone could be trusted. Naturally, they felt Sadducean priests should be the ones to serve as the law’s interpreters.


The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead or the immortality of the soul, since these doctrines are not mentioned in the law of Moses. Neither did they believe in rewards or punishments handed out after death, as in the doctrines of heaven and hell. Acts 23:8 indicates that they did not believe in angels or spirits, either.


The Sadducees believed in free will—that people are responsible for their own prosperity or misfortune. They interpreted the law literally and tended to support strict justice as opposed to mercy toward the offender.


Only a few references are made to the Sadducees in the New Testament. They opposed the early church (Acts 4:1–3; 5:17–18), much more so than even the Pharisees (Acts 5:34–39; 15:5; 23:6–9). Since the chief priests usually came from among the Sadducees, it is clear that they played a major role in the arrest of Jesus and the preliminary hearing against Him (Mark 14:60–64), and that they urged Pilate to crucify Him (Mark 15:1, 3, 10–11). Jesus warned His disciples about the “leaven”—the “doctrine” or teaching—of the Sadducees (Matt. 16:1–12). John the Baptist was suspicious of their supposed “repentance” (Matt. 3:7–12).

One incident when Jesus clashed with the Sadducees is recorded in all three of the synoptic gospels (Matt. 22:23–33; Mark 12:18–27; Luke 20:27–40). Apparently one of the favorite sports of the Sadducees was to make fun of their opponents by showing how their beliefs led to ridiculous conclusions. They approached Jesus with a “what if” question, designed to show the absurd consequences that can arise from believing in the resurrection of the dead. “Suppose,” they asked, “a woman had seven husbands in this life, and each of them died without leaving children? Whose wife would she be in the world to come?”

Jesus replied with a two-part answer. First, He said that they were wrong to suggest that earthly relationships, such as marriage, will continue after the resurrection. Second, Jesus pointed out that they were wrong in not believing in the resurrection at all: “Have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living” (Matt. 22:31–32; also Ex. 3:6, 15–16).

Jesus’ argument was that God told Moses that He was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Of course, these three men had died long before the time of Moses. Yet, if they were not “alive” at the time of Moses (that is, if they did not live on after their deaths), then God would not have called Himself their God, for “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob must live on if God is still their God; therefore, it is wrong to deny life after death and the resurrection of the dead.

After posing His reasons, Jesus stated that the Sadducees were “greatly mistaken” in their beliefs (Mark 12:27). The multitude who heard Jesus’ argument were “astonished at His teaching” (Matt. 22:33) and the Sadducees were “silenced” (Matt. 22:34).[2]


SCRIBESmembers of a learned class in ancient Israel through New Testament times who studied the Scriptures and served as copyists, editors, and teachers.


In the Old Testament the Hebrew word translated as scribe identified a person who numbered or mustered the troops (Jer. 52:25). Such a steward controlled the access of the people to the throne rooms of David and Solomon (2 Sam. 8:17). Gradually, the word came to refer to those who chose a profession of literary studies.

Hezekiah, king of Judah, chose a body of men who transcribed the ancient records for preservation, including the proverbs of Solomon (Prov. 25:1). The nature of the scribe’s work had changed by this time. He was no longer an officer of the king’s court; he had become a person who interpreted the Scriptures. The scribes soon became known for their study and knowledge of the Mosaic Law.


After the Jews returned from the Captivity in Babylon, the era of the scribes began. The reading of the Law before the nation of Israel by Ezra (Nehemiah 8–10) signaled the nation’s return to exact observance of all the laws and rites that had been given. Following the Law and the traditions that had grown up around it became the measure of devotion and spirituality.

At first the priests were responsible for the scientific study and professional communication of this legal code. But this function eventually passed to the scribes. Their official interpretation of the meaning of the Law eventually became more important than the Law itself.

This position of strength allowed these early scribes to enforce their rules and practices with a binding authority. To speak of the scribes as interpreters of Scripture means that they provided rules for human conduct out of their study.


By the time of Jesus, the scribes were a new upper class among the Jewish people. Large numbers of priests in Jerusalem before a.d. 70 served as scribes. One of these was Josephus, the Jewish historian. Some scribes came from among the Sadducees. Others came from the ordinary priestly ranks. But the largest group of scribes came from among every other class of people, including merchants, carpenters, flax combers, tentmakers, and even day laborers, like Hillel, who became a famous Jewish teacher.

The young Israelite who devoted his life to become a scribe went through a set course of study for several years. Josephus began his preparation when he was 14. Students were in continual contact with the teacher, listening to his instruction. The disciple-scribe first had to master all the traditional material and the unique method of interpretation of the Jewish Halakah. The aim was to give the apprentice competence in making decisions on questions of religious legislation and penal justice.

According to the tradition of the scribes, there were “secrets” of interpretation, forbidden degrees of knowledge, that were not to be expounded before three or more persons. Some chapters in the Bible were to be explained only to sages (2 Esdras 14:1–5).

The apocalyptic writings of late Judaism contained great theological systems that were understood only by the specially initiated. This was left to the confidential teaching of the scribes. They believed that God intended to leave the mass of people ignorant of His reasons for requiring certain things under the Law. These truths were hidden from the masses because they could not be trusted to understand and apply the Law.

The city of Jerusalem was the center of this scribal knowledge and interpretation of the Law. Only ordained teachers could transmit and create the tradition; this was the matter studied to perfection by students often beginning at age 14.


When they completed their study at the age of 40, they could be ordained. As members with full rights, they could act as judges, be called rabbis, and occupy positions in administration of justice, government, and education. They joined the chief priests and aristocratic families who made up the Sanhedrin. The scribes were held in greatest esteem by the people.

Sometimes the gospels refer to the scribes as lawyers (Matt. 22:35; Luke 7:30)—a title that identifies them as experts in the Mosaic Law. This Law was regarded as the sole civil and religious authority governing Jewish life. In Jesus’ day, the scribes were usually associated with the Pharisees (Matt. 12:38; Mark 7:5; Luke 6:7; teachers of the law, NIV). In the gospels, they are sometimes called “the scribes of the Pharisees” (Mark 2:16, NRSV, NASB; the teachers of the law who were Pharisees, NIV). This phrase identifies scribes who were members of the Pharisaic party.

Many of the scribes were members of the Sanhedrin, the highest legal and administrative body in the Jewish state in Roman times. Gamaliel was one of these (Acts 5:34), as was Nicodemus (John 3:1). They sat as administrators of the Law “in Moses’ seat” (Matt. 23:2). This administration intensified after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.

Since a scribe was not paid for his services, he had to earn a livelihood in another way. This rule may have been enforced to keep down the problem of bribery among the scribes in their application of the Law. The scribes often developed attitudes based on their professional privileges, and this often resulted in pride (Matt. 23:5–7). Jesus warned against these excesses, and He boldly attacked the religious hypocrisy of the scribes (Matthew 23).[3]



ESSENES [ESS seenz]a religious community that existed in Palestine from the second century b.c. until the Jewish war with Rome (a.d. 66–73). The Essenes were noted for their strict discipline and their isolation from others who did not observe their way of life.

Although the Bible never mentions the Essenes, they are described by several ancient historians. The Essenes are an important part of the background to the New Testament, showing the beliefs and practices of one Jewish religious group at the time of John the Baptist and Jesus. People have been especially interested in the Essenes since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran. The people who lived at Qumran probably were a group of Essenes.

Individual Essenes did not own any private property. Instead, they shared all their possessions with others in their community. They avoided any show of luxury and ate very simple meals. They wore simple clothes.

The Essenes were also known for their careful observance of the laws of Moses as they understood them. They were stricter about keeping the Sabbath than any other Jews, even the Pharisees. They were concerned about being ritually clean themselves and about eating food that was ritually pure.

Essenes lived in the towns of Palestine in the days of Jesus. They were famous for their hospitality. An Essene traveling from one place to another knew he would be looked after by other Essenes, although he had never met them. The Essenes were also known for taking care of the sick and elderly. They were interested in medicines; in fact, some people think that the name Essenes means “healers.”

The Essenes would arise before sunrise for prayer. Then they would work until about midday, when they would bathe—to make sure they were ritually clean—before eating. Afterwards they would work again until the evening meal.

Anyone who wanted to become an Essene was required to hand over all he owned to the community. He would then be given the typical Essene white robe. Only after he had shown that he was trustworthy for a full year would he be allowed to use the community’s water for purification. And he had to prove that he was reliable for two more years before he could become a full member. Then, after promising to keep the Essene rules, he became a member and was allowed to take part in the community meals. But if he should break the Essene rule, he would be expelled from the community.

The Essenes believed that the souls of people were immortal and would be rewarded or punished after death. They had a special interest in angels, and some were known for making accurate predictions about the future. They avoided taking part in the services of the Temple in Jerusalem. Instead, they worshiped God in their own communities.

Some of the Essenes’ beliefs and practices are similar to those in parts of the New Testament. The ritual washings of the Essenes bring to mind the baptism preached and practiced by John the Baptist. But John baptized people only once, while the Essenes’ washings took place every day. And Jesus told his followers not to use oaths, just as the Essenes avoided oaths.

The Essenes’ practice of Community of Goods is also similar to what happened in the early church in Jerusalem (Acts 2:44–45). But again there is a difference. Christians sold their property of their own free will, while this was a requirement in the Essene community. Like the Essenes, the early Christians were soon known for their generous hospitality. A major difference was that the early Christians did not practice all the rules about the Sabbath and ritual purity that were so important to the Essenes. Above all, Christians believed that Jesus was the Messiah and Lord; the Essenes as a group rejected Jesus and continued to wait for God’s salvation.[4]



ZEALOT [ZELL uht] (devoted supporter) — a nickname given to Simon, one of Jesus’ twelve apostles (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), perhaps to distinguish him from Simon Peter. Simon the Zealot is also called Simon the Canaanite (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:18; Cananaean, NRSV; Simon the Zealot, REB). The Aramaic form of the name means “to be jealous” or “zealous.”

Simon was given this name probably because he had been a member of a Jewish political party known as the Zealots. A Zealot was a member of a fanatical Jewish sect that militantly opposed the Roman domination of Palestine during the first century a.d. When the Jews rebelled against the Romans in a.d. 66 and tried to gain their independence, the “Zealots” were in the forefront of the revolt. They thought of themselves as following in the footsteps of men like Simeon and Levi (Gen. 34:1–31), Phinehas (Num. 25:1–13), and Elijah (1 Kin. 18:40; 19:10–14) who were devoted supporters of the Lord and His laws and who were ready to fight for them.

Like the Pharisees, the Zealots were devoted to the Jewish law and religion. But unlike most Pharisees, they thought it was treason against God to pay tribute to the Roman emperor, since God alone was Israel’s king. They were willing to fight to the death for Jewish independence.

The Zealots eventually degenerated into a group of assassins known as Sicarii (Latin, daggermen). Their increasing fanaticism was one factor that provoked the Roman-Jewish war. The Zealots took control of Jerusalem in a.d. 66, a move that led to the siege of Jerusalem and its fall in a.d. 70. The last stronghold of the Zealots, the fortress of Masada, fell to the Romans in a.d. 73. Also see Zelotes.[5]



SANHEDRIN [SAN hee drun] (a council or assembly) — the highest ruling body and court of justice among the Jewish people in the time of Jesus. Headed by the high priest of Israel, the Sanhedrin was granted limited authority over certain religious, civil, and criminal matters by the foreign nations that dominated the land of Israel at various times in its history. The Sanhedrin was exercising this limited power when it charged Jesus with the crime of blasphemy but then sent him to Pilate, the Roman official, for a formal trial and sentencing.

The word “Sanhedrin” is not found in the NKJV; instead the word “council” is used. Usually the assembly itself is meant, although the word may also refer to the assembly meeting (John 11:47) or to the place where the assembly met (Luke 22:66; Acts 4:15). The same word is also used for smaller, local courts of justice (Matt. 10:17; Mark 13:9). The Sanhedrin is also implied in Bible passages that mention a meeting of the various groups that made up the council: the chief priests, the elders, and the scribes (Mark 14:53–55). Sometimes some of the members of the Sanhedrin are simply called rulers (Luke 24:20; Acts 4:5).

The Sanhedrin had 71 members. The New Testament mentions some of them by name: Joseph of Arimathea (Mark 15:43), Gamaliel (Acts 5:34), Nicodemus (John 3:1; 7:50), the high priests Annas and Caiaphas (Luke 3:2) and Ananias (Acts 23:2). The high priest was always president of the Sanhedrin. Some scholars suggest that the apostle Paul was a member of the Sanhedrin before his conversion to Christianity, but this is not known for sure.

The Sanhedrin grew out of the council of advisors for the high priest when the Jewish people lived under the domination of the Persian and Greek empires. In the beginning, the council was made up of the leading priests and the most distinguished aristocrats among the laypeople. Later, however, as the influence of the scribes grew, they were also given some positions on the Sanhedrin. In this way, the Sanhedrin came to include both Sadducees—or “chief priests” and “elders”—and Pharisees or scribes. These were the two main groups within Judaism, and the Sanhedrin usually tried to maintain a balance of power between them. But Acts 23:1–10 shows that the Sanhedrin would sometimes divide along party lines. As he stood before the Sanhedrin, the apostle Paul was shrewd enough to pit the Pharisees against the Sadducees to his own advantage.

After a.d. 6 the official authority of the Sanhedrin extended only to the province of Judea in southern Palestine. Still, Jews living elsewhere respected the Sanhedrin highly and would often be guided by its decisions. Within the province of Judea, which included the city of Jerusalem, the Romans left most of the business of governing the Jews to the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin even had its own police force, or Temple police, so it could make arrests on its own. This is the force that arrested Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark 14:43; Acts 4:1–3).

The Sanhedrin also served as the supreme court of the Jews. This does not mean that people who were dissatisfied with the verdict of the lower court could appeal to the Sanhedrin for a different decision. But matters of special importance and other matters that lower courts were unable to resolve were brought to the Sanhedrin. The Roman rulers did, however, reserve the right to interfere with what the Sanhedrin was doing, as happened in the case of Paul (Acts 23:10; 24:7), but this probably happened very seldom. The Romans denied the power of capital punishment to the Sanhedrin. This is why the Jews said to Pilate after they had tried Jesus, “It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death” (John 18:31).

In the New Testament the Sanhedrin was involved in hearings against Jesus (Matt. 26:59; Mark 14:55), Peter and John and the other apostles (Acts 4:1–23; 5:17–41), Stephen (Acts 6–7), and Paul (Acts 22–24). Jesus probably was not officially tried by the Sanhedrin. It is more likely that He was given a preliminary hearing to establish the charges against Him and then taken to Pilate. It is also not clear whether Stephen was officially condemned and executed by the Sanhedrin or simply was stoned by an angry mob without due process of law (Acts 7:54–60).[6]


J. Jesus Before the High Priest (Mark 14:53, 54)

The record of the ecclesiastical trial extends from verse 53 to 15:1 and is divided into three parts: (1) Trial before the high priest (vv. 53, 54); (2) Midnight meeting of the Sanhedrin (vv. 55–65); (3) Meeting of the Sanhedrin in the morning (15:1). [7]

14:53 It is generally agreed that Mark here records the trial before Caiaphas. The trial before Annas is found in John 18:13, 19–24.

14:54 Peter trailed the Lord Jesus to the courtyard of the high priest, following at what he thought would be a safe distance. Someone has outlined his downfall as follows:

1. He first fought—misdirected enthusiasm.

2. He then fled—cowardly withdrawal.

3. Finally he followed afar off—half-hearted discipleship by night.

He sat by the fire with the officers, warming himself with the enemies of his Lord.

K. Jesus Before the Sanhedrin (14:55–65)

14:55–59 Although it is not specifically stated, v. 55 seems to begin the account of a midnight meeting of the Sanhedrin. The body of seventy-one religious leaders was presided over by the high priest. On this particular night, the Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes and elders who comprised the Sanhedrin showed an utter disregard for the rules under which they operated. They were not supposed to meet at night or during any of the Jewish feasts. They were not supposed to bribe witnesses to commit perjury. A death verdict was not to be carried out until a night had elapsed. Unless they met in the Hall of Hewn Stone, in the temple area, their verdicts were not binding.

In their eagerness to do away with the Lord Jesus, the religious authorities did not hesitate to stoop to breaking their own laws. Their determined efforts produced a group of false witnesses but they failed to produce united testimony. Some misquoted the Lord as threatening to destroy the temple made with hands, and within three days, to rebuild another, made without hands. What Jesus actually said is found in John 2:19. They purposely confused the temple in Jerusalem with the temple of His body.

14:60–62 When the high priest first questioned Him, Jesus did not reply. But when asked under oath (Matt. 26:63) whether He was the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed, the Savior replied that He was, thus acting in obedience to Leviticus 5:1. Then, as if to remove any doubt as to who He claimed to be, the Lord Jesus told the high priest that he would yet see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming back to earth with the clouds of heaven. By this He meant that the high priest would yet see Him openly manifested as God. During His First Advent, the glory of His deity was veiled in a human body. But when He comes again in power and great glory, the veil will be removed and everyone will know exactly who He is.

14:63, 64 The high priest understood what Jesus meant. He tore his clothes as a sign of his righteous indignation against this supposed blasphemy. The one Israelite who should have been most ready to recognize and receive the Messiah was loudest in his condemnation. But not he alone; the entire Sanhedrin 23 agreed that Jesus had blasphemed, and condemned Him to be deserving of death.

14:65 The scene that followed was grotesque in the extreme. Some members of the Sanhedrin began to spit on the Son of God, to blindfold Him, and to challenge Him to name His assailants. It is almost incredible that the worthy Savior should have to endure such contradiction of sinners against Himself. The officers (temple police) joined in the scandal by hitting Him with the palms of their hands. [8]



[1]Youngblood, Ronald F. ; Bruce, F. F. ; Harrison, R. K. ; Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Nashville : T. Nelson, 1995

[2]Youngblood, Ronald F. ; Bruce, F. F. ; Harrison, R. K. ; Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Nashville : T. Nelson, 1995

[3]Youngblood, Ronald F. ; Bruce, F. F. ; Harrison, R. K. ; Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Nashville : T. Nelson, 1995

[4]Youngblood, Ronald F. ; Bruce, F. F. ; Harrison, R. K. ; Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Nashville : T. Nelson, 1995

[5]Youngblood, Ronald F. ; Bruce, F. F. ; Harrison, R. K. ; Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Nashville : T. Nelson, 1995

[6]Youngblood, Ronald F. ; Bruce, F. F. ; Harrison, R. K. ; Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Nashville : T. Nelson, 1995

[7]MacDonald, William ; Farstad, Arthur: Believer's Bible Commentary : Old and New Testaments. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1995, S. Mk 14:53

 23 (14:63, 64) Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus are believed to have been absent from this illegal meeting.

[8]MacDonald, William ; Farstad, Arthur: Believer's Bible Commentary : Old and New Testaments. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1995, S. Mk 14:53