And Annas the high priest and Caiphas and John and Alexander: and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest.
και ανναν τον αρχιερεα και καιαφαν και ιωαννην και αλεξανδρον και οσοι ησαν εκ γενους αρχιερατικου
7 Church Fathers comment on this verse
Again they assemble together. Among their other evils was this too, that the ordinances of the Law were no longer observed. Again they give the assembly the appearance of a court, so as to accuse them by an unjust judgment. Again there is an assembly in Jerusalem, and blood is shed there. They were not even ashamed before the city.
Besides their other injustices toward the Apostles, they did not even observe the requirements of the Law. Notice, for example, the multitude of high priests, though according to the Law there ought to be one while he lives. On this occasion too they gave the matter the form of a trial, so as to demand an answer from the Apostles before an unjust court. They inquired, "By what power or by what name?" Yet they themselves knew, because they had detained the Apostles precisely because they were burdened by their preaching of the Resurrection in Christ.
Thus the community of believers, with its members also in other places of Palestine, in Samaria and Galilee (Acts 9:31), increased daily in Jerusalem. Soon the Jewish priests themselves began to pass over into it (Acts 6:7).
The Sanhedrin no longer wished to leave the matter of Christianity without attention. Peter and John healed the lame man at the temple and then preached to the people about Christ crucified and risen, by whose power they had performed the healing.
Then the priests, with the followers of the Sadducean sect, took them into custody, so that they might present them to the Sanhedrin in the morning.
The next day they were indeed presented to the Sanhedrin together with the healed man. There sat the same Annas and Caiaphas who had judged Jesus.
The Apostles were asked, "By what power, or by whose name, have you done this?" Perhaps they did not expect them to dare to speak before the Sanhedrin as openly as before the common people.
Yet the Apostles declared without hesitation that the lame man who had lain at the temple was raised up by them in the name of Jesus, whom they had crucified, that is, by the decree of the Sanhedrin.
They added that this Jesus, as He Himself had declared to them, truly is the stone rejected by the builders, but become the head of the corner.
They were recognized: John was known to one of the chief priests. Their boldness astonished the members of the Sanhedrin. Yet the miracle could not be denied.
The people were on their side, since they were not disposed toward the Sadducees. Therefore they decided only to forbid them to preach any longer to anyone "in this name."
Peter and John answered that they had to obey God rather than men. They were only threatened and released with the same prohibition.
The arrest of the Apostles took place already in the evening (v. 3). Therefore their trial was postponed until morning. On the next day the members of the Sanhedrin assembled.
Everything indicates that this was an extraordinary meeting. Consequently, the Apostles' preaching about Christ produced strong agitation among the murderers of Jesus.
The question they first considered it necessary to put to the Apostles concerned precisely the Person, the Name, by whom they had performed the healing and whom they preached.
They wanted to conduct a detailed interrogation of the Apostles. Therefore they begin not with their teaching in the temple, but with an investigation of the miracle of healing that preceded it.
The judges wished to notice contradictions and inconsistencies in the Apostles' answers. On that basis they could reject the miraculous character of the lame man's healing and prove the action of deception or cunning.
Probably for this purpose the Sanhedrin arranged that the healed man himself be present at the interrogation (v. 14), although it was mistaken in its calculation.
The council consisted of the chief authors of Christ's death, the high priests Annas and Caiaphas. Now they had to feel with dismay that, in crucifying Jesus, they had not crucified His work.
Annas, or Anan, the high priest, was Caiaphas's father-in-law. He was not ruling at that time, but had great influence (cf. Lk 3:2; Jn 11:49; 18:12).
Caiaphas was then holding the high-priestly office (cf. Mt 26:3; Lk 3:2; Jn 11:49 and parallels). Both were the Lord Jesus' fiercest enemies, who had delivered Him to death.
John and Alexander are members of the high-priestly family unknown from history. Yet at that time they evidently had power in the Sanhedrin, perhaps precisely as relatives of the high priests. Otherwise there would have been no reason to mention them.
The session of the Sanhedrin was formal and more than full (cf. Mt 2:4). At that time Caiaphas was high priest (cf. Mt 26:3; Lk 3:2; Jn 11:49).
Yet Annas, or Anan, the high priest and father-in-law of Caiaphas, was also present, as were their other relatives. They were evidently influential and known to all, and for this reason are named: John and Alexander.
All were evil enemies of Christ (cf. Lk 3:2; Jn 11:49; 18:12). The dominant party in the Sanhedrin then was the Sadducean party, which did not believe in the future life or resurrection.
Therefore the aim of the session was obvious: to erase everything as though it had never happened. Some suppose that the Alexander mentioned here, surnamed Lysimachus, was the brother of the famous Jewish scholar Philo.
Philo carefully applied Greek philosophical views to the whole history of Hebrew life and to all the teaching of the Old Testament. Yet he did not treat anything Hebrew with contempt.
Perhaps Alexander too was disposed in the same conciliatory way. Annas the high priest is mentioned first by the writer of Acts as an older and more influential man.
Yet the presidency in the trial undoubtedly belonged to the same Caiaphas. So recently he had judged Christ Himself with such bad faith. In general, he yielded nothing in hypocrisy to his father-in-law.
The Apostle Paul boldly called that father-in-law a whitewashed wall (cf. Acts 23:3). No less were the other judges of the Apostles insensible and deaf walls: the elders and scribes.
Before their eyes Jesus Christ Himself had performed many manifest miracles. They had the shamelessness and audacity to explain these sometimes by the power of Beelzebul, sometimes by other similar satanic influences.
They themselves were in satanic pride and hardness of heart. They had departed from the true spirit of life according to God and lifelessly performed all sorts of rites, especially petty ones.
They counted these important, while leaving mercy and justice aside (cf. Mt 23:23-24).
Passages read together with this verse.
Greek text, 16 words with lemma, transliteration and Strong’s number. Tap to expand.
THEOSIS