 |  |
The note of H. A. Meyer is as follows:
"The reigning high priest at that time was Joseph, named Caiaphas . . . . . who had
been appointed by Valerius Gratus, the predecessor of Pontius Pilate (Josephus,
Antiquities of the Jews, Book XVIII, chapter 2). His father-in-law Annas held the office
of high priest some years before, until Valerious Gratus became procurator, when the
office was taken away from him by the new governor, and conferred first on Ishmael,
then on Eleazar (a son of Annas), then on Simon, and after that on Caiaphas . . . . . But
Annas retained withal very weighty influence (John 18:12, 13), so that not only did he, as
did everyone who had been archiereus, continue to be called by the name, but, moreover,
he also partially discharged the functions of high priest."
Either or both of the above suggestions may be true, but it seems fairly obvious from
the N.T. record, that Annas, the ex-high priest, exercised considerable power and
influence. Dean Alford says of him:
"He had influence enough to procure the actual high priesthood for five of his sons,
after his own deposition, (Josephus Antiquities of the Jews, Book XX, chapter 9)."
The character of Caiaphas, son-in-law to Annas, is seen clearly in his unconscious
prophecy concerning the death of Christ for the people:
"And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto
them, Ye know nothing at all; nor consider it is expedient for us, that one man should die
for the people, and that the whole nation perish not" (John 11: 49, 50).
The Sanhedrin had expressed their fear that, "The Romans shall come and take
away both our place and nation" (verse 48) as a result of the following which the Lord
would command, if allowed to continue with his miracles. Such was the attitude of these
self-centred men. But Caiaphas was ahead of them, and saw in "this man" a victim,
albeit innocent, by whom they could appease the suspicion of their conquerors. This
attitude of Caiaphas lays open the character of the man.
To conclude this article on the priesthood, a few words from Smith's Dictionary of the
Bible may serve to emphasize the utter degradation into which the priesthood had come,
shortly before the destruction of the temple by Titus in 70A.D.
"In the scenes of the last tragedy of the Jewish history the order passes away without
honour, `dying as a fool dieth'. The high priesthood is given to the lowest and vilest . . .
other priests appear as deserting to the enemy; it is from the priest that Titus receives the
lamps, and gems, and costly raiment of the sanctuary. Priests report to their conquerors
the terrible utterance, `Let us depart', on the last Pentecost ever celebrated in the Temple.
It is a priest who fills up the degradation of his order by dwelling on the fall of his
country with a cold-blooded satisfaction, and finding in Titus the fulfillment of the
Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament. The destruction of Jerusalem deprived the
order at one blow of all but an honorary distinction."