What Do We Know About The Jewish Supreme Court? by Gary Fiscus

What Do We Know About the Jewish Supreme Court?

By Gary L. Fiscus

The Larger Court:

Was the apostle Paul a member of the Sanhedrin Court? What was the Sanhedrin? What was their function and purpose? Does it exist today? Did God approve of or sanction its existence and objectives?

The term Sanhedrin is from a Greek word that means assembly or council. It dates from what is called The Hellenistic Period. Hellenes or Hellenists were people of various cultures who adopted the ways of the Greeks. This designation came from a man by the name of Isocrates, (not Socrates). Isocrates lived in the 4^th century B.C. A quotation from him reads, “And if a man should partake of our [Greek] culture, let him be called Hellene.”

As Bible students we first become acquainted with the word Hellenist as it is used at Acts 6:1. The American Standard Version, (ASV) translates this as, “Now in these days, when the number of the disciples was multipl-ying, there arose a murmuring of the Grecian Jews [i.e., Greek-speaking Jews, Hellenists], against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.”

Since the history of Hellenism was introduced circa 300-400 B.C. it falls in the area of what we call The Silent 400 Years, i.e., that period of time of no biblical records between Malachi and Matthew. Consequently, Hellenist is not mentioned in the OT.

The Sanhedrin was the Great Court of Judaism. With both strict- adhering-to-the-Torah* Hebrews and Greek-speaking Jews (Hellenists) together the Sanhedrin settled political, cultural, and partisan issues. (*The term orthodox Jews was not used until 1795 A.D. and its purpose was to separate the traditionalists from the enlightenment movement, or more modern-thinking Hebrews).

In all fairness I need to mention just here the Hasmonean Court. As to the Hasmoneans, their dynasty ran from 140 B.C. to 37 B.C. Their allegiance also Hellenism provided a segway into Judah, the Hebrew peoples and the religious practices of the land. This would have been during the Hellenistic times of the Second Temple period. We are told that from 140-116 B.C. the Hasmoneans shared the rule of Judean Empire with the Seleucids. The Seleucid dynasty began to crumble. Judea gained further independence. She extended her territory into Perea, Samaria, Idumea, Galilee and Iturea. Do those places sound familiar? Of course, they do. By the time of Paul’s preaching journeys all of these cities and/or territories are listed in Luke’s book of Acts, e.g., chapter 14.

Back to the beginnings of the Sanhedrin, and recalling the statements written above on the Hasmonean Court, we note that the initial council legal was presided over by Alexander Jannaeus, king of Judea until 76 BCE. Jannaeus’ wife, Salome Alexandra followed his reign. This began in 76 or 75 B.C. She and all her entourage practiced total Hellenistic procedures. The royalty, ministers, courtiers and bodyguards were all Hellenists, (i.e., Hebrews practicing Greek teachings). What had been the Council of Elders in that administration was renamed Sanhedrin or Synhedrion.

We usually try to parallel the Sanhedrin with the Supreme Court of the United States. While there are some similarities between the two bodies, there are also differences. The Hebrew Court lasted from biblical times until the fifth century, A.D. We still have even now the Supreme Court in the U.S.

One resemblance in the two courts is that they both have lower benches to argue, settle, appeal, (i.e., appellate court) and practice jurisprudence. We call this procedure an integral part of our Judicial System.

Back to our questions, “What was the Sanhedrin?” Our English term “Sanhedrin” is the transliteration of the Greek, “sunedrion,” which literally means “sitting together.” A related word is “synagogue.” The King James scholars (KJV) rendered sunedrion as “council” in all cases.

The word “Sanhedrin” can be used two ways:

The large, Jerusalem court
The smaller or local Jewish courts.

According to Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, the great Sanhedrin of Jerusalem consisted of 71 members:

Scribes, or Hebrew Bible copyists and teachers

Elders, i.e., older men

Members of the high priestly families

The high priest who served as president

Why 71 you may ask? God had told Moses, “Gather for Me 70 men from the elders of Israel,” (Num. 11:16, 24; Ezek. 8:11). The text continues, “And they shall stand there with you [Moses].” Seventy judges plus Moses equals seventy-one.

When Moses passed, Joshua took his place as leader and led them into the Promised Land. The Bible explains that the Hebrews soon forgot about Jehovah. When Joshua and his peers died, the nation began worshiping other gods, pagans. At Judg. 2:10 we point out, “And also all that generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there arose another generation after them, that knew not Jehovah, nor yet the work which he had wrought for Israel.” The Hebrew identity and fidelity had been lost.

The Hebrew basis for the Sanhedrin, however, is predicated on the Mosaic formula prescribed by Jehovah in the above-mentioned Numbers and Ezekiel passages. Tradition also states that “of the remaining council the judge with the most knowledge became chief. This man was called nasi and he was seated at the head of the court. To his right sat the av be din, i.e., patron of the court, as second in command. The 69 judges left were seated according to age and stature. So, the wiser the judge, the closer he would sit to the nasi.” (Chabad.org, Essays on the Rabbinic Period).

Thayer adds, “The more important cases were brought before this court, inasmuch as the Roman rulers of Judaea had left to it the power of trying such cases, and also of pronouncing the sentence of death. That a capital sentence pronounced by the Sanhedrin was not valid unless it were confirmed by the Roman procurator.” Notice that at Jn. 18:31 it is written, “Pilate therefore said unto them, take him yourselves, and judge him according to your law. The Jews said unto him, it is not lawful for us to put any man to death.” Punishment by death had to be authorized by the Roman government.

Logistically, the Sanhedrin was always located close to the Tabernacle or the Temple. In Moses’ time it was near the entrance to the Tabernacle. In later times it was given a special chamber in the Temple compound. By the end of the Second Temple, A.D. 70, the Sanhedrin met in other locations. They continued to function until about the 5^th century A.D.

Having listed above several historical and scriptural points let us add five more scriptural passages that consider the process of legal philosophy in the Sanhedrin Court:

“From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day,” 16:21.
“And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again,” 8:31.
“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…” 26:3.
“…[T]he chief priests and the scribes and the elders,” 14:43.
“And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes,” 14:53.

With these verses, therefore, we have a solid foundation on which to build a better understanding of the Sanhedrin Court. Consider the following scriptures and those involved in the court system. You will notice that the term “whole council” is interpreted in all these passages as “Sanhedrin Court.”

During the Jewish phase of His trial, the Lord Jesus Christ stood before the Sanhedrin with Caiaphas as chairman. In Matt. 26:59, “Now the chief priests and the whole council sought false witness against Jesus, that they might put him to death.” Mk. 14:55 says, “Now the chief priests and the whole council sought witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found it not.” Mk. 15:1 relates, “And straight-way in the morning the chief priests with the elders and scribes, and the whole council, held a consultation, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him up to Pilate.”

The physician Luke wrote at 22:66, “And as soon as it was day, the assembly of the elders of the people was gathered together, both chief priests and scribes; and they led him away into their council…” Here we have entire clauses specifying the people and the august body they composed.

After healing the lame man at the Temple, the apostles Peter and John were brought before this council/court. At Acts 4:1, 5-6, 15, 23 respectively, “And as they spake unto the people, the priests and the captain of the temple and the Sadducees came upon them, And it came to pass on the morrow, that their rulers and elders and scribes were gathered together in Jerusalem; and Annas the high priest was there, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest. But when they had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred among themselves, And being let go, they came to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and the elders had said unto them.” These verses alone corroborate our statements above concerning the composition of this political/religious body.

Another group of individuals who stood before the Sanhedrin were the twelve apostles. This was after these men began performing miracles. At Acts 5:17, “But the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him (which is the sect of the Sadducees), and they were filled with jealousy,” v. 21, “And when they heard this, they entered into the temple about daybreak and taught. But the high priest came, and they that were with him, and called the council together, and all the senate of the children of Israel, and sent to the prison-house to have them brought.” v 24, “Now when the captain of the temple and the chief priests heard these words, they were much perplexed concerning them whereunto this would grow.” V 27, “And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest asked them,” v 34, “But there stood up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in honor of all the people, and commanded to put the men forth a little while.” V 41, “They therefore departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the Name.” Can you imagine the faith, courage and strength that it took for these God-appointed men to stand before the Hebrew Supreme Court and preach Jesus?

Stephen is sometimes referred to as the first Christian martyr, (see Acts 7). He, like the apostles was filled with the Holy Ghost. He was brought before the Sanhedrin to stand trial. We read of this situation in Acts 6:12, 15, “And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and seized him, and brought him into the council,” “And all that sat in the council, fastening their eyes on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel.” In this case the Sanhedrin served as judge, jury and executioner. Was this what some might call a kangaroo court? Was it an illegal procedure commissioned by a legal body? Again, can you image the fidelity and spiritual fortitude of gospel preacher Stephen, standing before the highest officials and telling them that they were wrong because they did not understand the plans of Jehovah?

The Apostle Paul stood before the Sanhedrin according to the latter part of Acts. At 22:30; 23:10,15,20,28; 24:20 we have written correspondingly, “But on the morrow, desiring to know the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews, he loosed him, and commanded the chief priests and all the council to come together, and brought Paul down and set him before them. And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should be torn in pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go down and take him by force from among them, and bring him into the castle. Now therefore do ye with the council signify to the chief captain that he bring him down unto you, as though ye would judge of his case more exactly: and we, before he comes near, are ready to slay him. And he said, The Jews have agreed to ask thee to bring down Paul tomorrow unto the council, as though thou wouldest inquire somewhat more exactly concerning him. And desiring to know the cause wherefore they accused him, I brought him down unto their council: Or else let these men themselves say what wrongdoing they found when I stood before the council.”

Two more members of the Sanhedrin that played a prominent role in the ministry and work of Jesus were Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. Jn. 3:1 in the beginning of a discourse with the Lord it is said, “Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews.” The phrase, “a ruler of the Jews” implies his membership in the high court. Four chapters later we learn in this context the following: Jn. 7:45, “The officers therefore came to the chief priests and pharisees…” At 7:48 the questions is asked, “Hath any of the rulers believed on him, or of the Pharisees…” Note v 50-51, “Nicodemus saith unto them (he that came to him before, being one of them), Doth our law judge a man, except it first hear from himself and know what he doeth?” Both Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were secret disciples of Christ; yet they were members of the Sanhedrin.

In the New Testament, the Sanhedrin is best known for their part in the series of mock trials that resulted in the crucifixion of Jesus. The Sanhedrin began with an informal examination of Jesus before Annas, the acting high priest (John 18:12-14, 19-23), followed by a formal session before the entire Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:57-68). There the decision was made to turn Jesus over to the Roman authorities to be tried and crucified.

In the final analysis of this part of examining and defining the Sanhedrin we want to note:

The unbelief by this so-called religious body.
The court trials and actions were corrupt.
Politics played a dominant part in the court’s proceedings. (History tells us that it was common for the position of high priest to go for the highest dollar).
They were intensely opposed to Jesus and all His followers.
One participant in this eminent body was the Sadducees who denied resurrection. At Matt. 22:23; Mk. 12:18, “On that day there came to him Sadducees, they that say that there is no resurrection...”
Add to this mix another participant, the Pharisees and their contrasting doctrine with the Sadducees. Acts 23:8, “For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.”
Luke tells us that the high priest was a Sadducee, Acts 5:17, “But the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him (which is the sect of the Sadducees), and they were filled with jealousy.”
Statistically, we are told that the Sadducees formed about 90% of the court.
The Sanhedrin was an allegedly religious body that was intensely opposed to Jesus as the Christ, His followers, His disciples, His apostles, and His teaching of a resurrection of the dead.

The Lower Courts

I would be remiss if I did not address to some degree the smaller, lower or local Sanhedrin, (council, court). These district assemblies handled the lesser important issues. They are mentioned twice in the KJV:

10:17, “But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues.”
13:9, “But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testi-mony against them.”

Merriam-Webster defines synagogue as “a Jewish congregation, the house of worship and communal center of a Jewish congregation.”

We mentioned above the Num. 11:16 passage where God commanded Moses, “bring me seventy of Israel’s elders who are known to you as leaders and officials among the people. Have them come to the Tent of Meeting, that they may stand there with you.” Let us add to these instructions what Jehovah continued to say in Deut. 16:18, “You shall appoint for yourselves judges and officers in all your towns which the Lord your God is giving you, according to your tribes and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment.” These village courts had been ordained by the Lord and subsequently where there were towns there were courts.

We learn from secular history that if there were 120 men as heads of families (tribes) in that community there would be established a lower court, (separate from the High Court, i.e., the Sanhedrin). We are also told that if there were less than 120 heads of families in a village there was an alternate plan:

There were three judges if the town was very small, 10 men
There were seven judges in larger towns. Those judges composed the judge and jury to settle legalities.

Other secular sources say there were 23 judges in the lesser Sanhedrin. The Bible teaches that each community has the right to vote for both conviction and pardon. At Num. 35:24-25, “then the congregation shall judge between the smiter and the avenger of blood according to these ordinances; and the congregation shall deliver the manslayer out of the hand of the avenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to his city of refuge, whither he was fled: and he shall dwell therein until the death of the high priest, who was anointed with the holy oil.”

Further teachings, e.g., The Mishna, Rabbinical teachings, writes that the minimum size of a community is 10 men. Again, the Bible teaches that a simple majority could not convict, Ex. 23:2, “Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to wrest justice.” This then required an additional judge. Finally, The Mishna again says that a court should have an odd number of judges to prevent deadlocks, e.g., 23 rather than 22.

The End

The last binding decision of the Sanhedrin was in 358 A.D. The Hebrew calendar was adopted. The Sanhedrin was dissolved after continued persecution by the Roman Empire. Over the centuries, there have been attempts to revive the institution, such as the Grand Sanhedrin convened by Napoleon Bonaparte.

The Great Sanhedrin ceased to exist in Jerusalem after the disastrous rebellion against Rome in ad 66–70. A Sanhedrin, history tells us, was assembled at Jabneh, This city was located on the northern coastal plain of Judah. It is listed in the scriptures as Jabneel, Josh. 15:11, “and the border went out unto the side of Ekron northward; and the border extended to Shikkeron, and passed along to mount Baalah, and went out at Jabneel; and the goings out of the border were at the sea.” It was also one of the Philistine cities as were Gath and Ashdod. 2 Chron. 26:6 states that King Uzziah “… went forth and warred against the Philistines, and brake down the wall of Gath, and the wall of Jabneh, and the wall of Ashdod; and he built cities in the country of Ashdod, and among the Philistines.” Some scholars believe the Sanhedrin was continued in still other cities. The fact is the Sanhedrin does not exist today as the politico-religious body of the Hebrew cultures.