Chapter 279 of 404

Involvement from the Jewish Elite?

Although Gentile soldiers executed Jesus at Pilate’s orders, involvement by the Jerusalem elite is also likely. Contrary to some detractors, this claim can hardly be viewed as anti-Semitic. As we have noted, it appears in Josephus.¹⁷⁵ Moreover, later rabbis attribute Jesus’ trial and execution solely to Jewish rather than Roman authorities,¹⁷⁶ though the Gospels’ picture of Roman crucifixion is far more plausible.

While it is true that Rome’s soldiers attacked eschatological prophets and their followings in the wilderness without explicit involvement from the priestly elite, such cases are not very comparable, and Jesus “did not die on the battlefield.”¹⁷⁷ Jesus’ actions more closely resemble John — martyred by Herod Antipas¹⁷⁸ — or the later beating of Joshua ben Hanania, initially detained by the chief priests for prophesying the temple’s destruction before being handed over to the governor.¹⁷⁹ True, it was Rome that counted “king of the Jews” a seditious claim; but who framed Jesus’ nonviolent activities in such a manner for the Romans?¹⁸⁰ Rome would normally expect members of Jesus’ own people (especially elite members, who would have the greatest hearing) to perform the function of delatores, or accusers, to charge him with sedition.¹⁸¹ The substance of the events even in John’s account matches historical expectations; “It begins with a formal delation . . . and ends with a formal condemnation pro tribunali” (Jn 18:29; 19:13).¹⁸²

Together the cleansing of the Temple (which would offend the Sadducean aristocracy) and crucifixion by the Romans suggest the intermediary step of arrest by the priestly authorities; as Sanders observes, conflict with the Romans, crowds, or Pharisees would not explain subsequent events, but the continuing enmity of the chief priests against Jesus’ followers (e.g., Acts 4:1-7; 5:17-18; 9:1-2) points to the priestly aristocracy as the main source of opposition.¹⁸³ Given high priestly involvement, the Gospel writers are probably not so generous as to have alleged even the pretense of a hearing if in fact they had no tradition that one occurred. Like most modern preachers, the Gospel writers were more interested in applying their text than in creating a wholly new source to be applied. The tradition of Jewish involvement in Jesus’ death is also multiply attested as early as what is probably our first Christian document (1 Thess 2:14-15; cf. 1 Cor 1:23).

Some believe that the Romans would have acted without a session from leaders of the municipal aristocracy,¹⁸⁴ but this expectation does not fit the usual Roman manner of delegating preliminaries to local officials. Detractors sometimes protest that if the Sanhedrin genuinely tried Jesus, they would have executed him themselves, avoiding a Roman cross. This objection rests, however, on the highly improbable notion that the Sanhedrin had legal capital authority or, if not, would have lynched a popular prophet during a festival with the governor in town. On local elites’ lack of capital authority in the Roman Empire, see Appendix 7.

↑ Back to top