the Week of Christ the King / Proper 29 / Ordinary 34
Click here to join the effort!
Read the Bible
New Century Version
Luke 3:2
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- AmericanEncyclopedias:
- InternationalParallel Translations
Annas and Caiaphas were the high priests. During this time, John, the son of Zechariah, was living in the desert, and he received a message from God.
when Anna and Cayphas were the hye prestes: the worde of God came vnto Iohn ye sonne of zacharias in the wildernes.
in the Kohanim Gedolim of Anan and Kayafa, the word of God came to Yochanan, the son of Zekharyah, in the wilderness.
and Annas and Caiaphas high priests, the word of God came to John, the son of Zechariah, in the wilderness.John 11:49,51; 18:13; Acts 4:6;">[xr]
in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John, the son of Zechariah, in the wilderness.
in the highpriesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came to John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas [his son-in-law], the word of God came to John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness.
during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.
in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness.
Annas being the high priest and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness.
during the High-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, a message from God came to John, the son of Zechariah, in the Desert.
vndir the princis of prestis Annas and Caifas, the word of the Lord was maad on Joon, the sone of Zacarie, in desert.
in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.
The Preaching of John the Baptist For fifteen years Emperor Tiberius had ruled that part of the world. Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was the ruler of Galilee. Herod's brother, Philip, was the ruler in the countries of Iturea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was the ruler of Abilene. Annas and Caiaphas were the Jewish high priests. At that time God spoke to Zechariah's son John, who was living in the desert.
in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
When Annas and Caiaphas were high priests, the word of the Lord came to John, the son of Zacharias, in the waste land.
with ‘Anan and Kayafa being the cohanim g'dolim; the word of God came to Yochanan Ben-Z'kharyah in the desert.
in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, [the] word of God came upon John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness.
in the high priesthood of Chanan and of Kaiopha, was the word of Aloha unto Juchanon bar Zakaria in the desert.
in the high priesthood of Annas and of Caiaphas; the word of God was upon John the son of Zachariah, in the wilderness.
Annas and Caiaphas being the high Priests, the word of God came vnto Iohn the sonne of Zacharias, in the wildernesse.
Annas and Caiaphas were the high priests. At this time a message from God came to John son of Zechariah, who was living in the wilderness.
Annas and Caiaphas were the head religious leaders. The Word of God came to John the Baptist, the son of Zacharias. John was in the desert.
during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.
(When Annas and Caiaphas were the hie Priestes) the worde of God came vnto Iohn, the sonne of Zacharias in the wildernes.
During the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John, son of Zacharias, in the wilderness.
in the High-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, came a word of God unto John the son, of Zechariah, in rue desert;
Under the high priests Anna and Caiphas: the word of the Lord was made unto John, the son of Zachary, in the desert.
in the high-priesthood of Annas and Ca'iaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechari'ah in the wilderness;
When Annas and Caiaphas were the hye priestes, the worde of the Lorde came vnto Iohn, the sonne of Zacharias, in the wyldernesse.
and Annas and Caiaphas were High Priests. At that time the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert.
during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, God’s word came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.
Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
in the time of the high priest Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.
upon the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the Word of God came on John the son of Zacharias in the desert.
Annas and Caiaphas being chief priests -- there came a word of God unto John the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness,
when Hannas and Caiphas were hye prestes, the came ye worde of God vnto Ihon the sonne of Zachary in the wyldernes.
under the pontificate of Annas and Caiaphas, JOHN, the son of Zacharias, received his divine commission in the wilderness.
during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.
while Annas and Caiaphas were high priests, [fn] the word of God came to John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
Annas and Caiaphas were the high preachers of the Jews. It was during this time that God came down and spoke to Zechariah's boy, John.
in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness.
during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John, the son of Zechariah, in the wilderness.
Contextual Overview
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
Annas: John 11:49-51, John 18:13, John 18:14, John 18:24, Acts 4:6
the word: Luke 1:59-63, Jeremiah 1:2, Jeremiah 2:1, Ezekiel 1:3, Hosea 1:1, Hosea 1:2, Jonah 1:1, Micah 1:1, Zephaniah 1:1
in: Luke 1:80, Isaiah 40:3, Matthew 3:1, Matthew 11:7, Mark 1:3, John 1:23
Reciprocal: Matthew 21:25 - baptism Matthew 24:26 - he is in the desert Mark 1:4 - did Mark 9:12 - restoreth Luke 7:24 - wilderness John 1:6 - a man Acts 8:26 - desert Acts 13:24 - General
Cross-References
They are like poisonous snakes, like deaf cobras that stop up their ears
Gill's Notes on the Bible
Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests,.... Some difficulty here arises, how these two could be both high priests; when according to the law of God, and the usages of the Jewish nation, there was to be, and was but one high priest at a time: many things are observed by writers, to solve this difficulty: some go this way; that though according to the divine institution, and the practice of former times, there was but one high priest at a time; yet now, through the corruption of the present age, there were two high priests; or at least, which officiated alternately in the same year: but of such a corruption, no instance can be given, even in those corrupt times; and as Maimonides says a, there can be but "one high priest" ××× ××¢×××, "in all the world"; and besides, is contrary to their canons, which were then in being, and still remain; one b of which runs thus, ××× ××× ×× ×©× × ××× ×× ×××××× ×××ת "they do not appoint two high priests at once". Others suppose, that these two annually performed the office of high priests by turns; that Caiaphas was high priest one year, and Annas another: it is true indeed, that through the corruption of those times, this office became venal, hence it is said in the Talmud c,
"because they gave money for the priesthood, they changed it every twelve months.''
And which is more largely expressed by one of their commentators d,
"because the high priests, who were under the second temple, after Simeon the just, gave money to minister in the high priest's office, and because they were wicked, they did not fill up their years, therefore they changed every year.''
But though it is certain, that there were frequent, and sometimes annual changes in the priesthood, hence it is said of Caiaphas,
John 11:49 that he was "high priest the same year", yet it does not appear that he and Annas took it yearly by turns: for Caiaphas continued in that office some years, even till after the death of Christ: and besides, had this been the case, as one of them could be but high priest for the year being, both in one year as here, could not with propriety be said to be high priests. Others take another method, and suppose Caiaphas to be properly the high priest, as he certainly was; and Annas so called, because he had been one formerly, the same with Ananus, the son of Seth; who was put into the priesthood by Quirinius, in the room of Joazar, and was deposed by Valerius Gratus, and Ishmael ben Phabi was put into his room: but though there may be instances of persons being called high priests, who had been in that office, after they were removed from it, yet no reason can be given, why Annas should be peculiarly called so, when there were in all probability several alive, who had been in that office as well as he; as Joazar his predecessor, and Ishmael ben Phabi, who succeeded Joazar, and after him Eleazar, the son of Annas, and then Simeon ben Camhith; nor why he should be put in the annals of the high priests, in a year in which he was not one. It seems most likely therefore, that he was the "Sagan" of the priests, of which office mention is frequently made, in the Jewish writings e; yea, we often read of Chanina, or Chananiah, or Ananias, perhaps the same with this Annas, who is called, ס×× ××× ××, "the Sagan of the priests" f. This officer was not a deputy high priest, or one that was substituted to officiate occasionally, in the room of the high priest, when any thing hindered him, or rendered him unfit for his office; as on the day of atonement, if the high priest contracted any pollution, they substituted another to minister g; which was not the "Sagan", but another priest; and even such an one was called an high priest, as appears from the following story h.
"It happened to Simeon ben Camhith (a predecessor of Caiaphas), that he went out to speak with the king, on the evening of the day of atonement, and the spittle was scattered from his mouth, upon his garments, and he was unclean; and his brother Judah went in, and ministered in his stead in the high priesthood; and their mother saw her "two sons",
×©× × ××× ×× ×××××× ×××× ××× "high priests in one day".''
But the "Sagan" was not an officer pro tempore, or so much under the high priest, and one in his stead, as a ruler and governor over other priests. Maimonides says of him thus i;
"they appoint one priest, who is to the high priest as a second to the king, and he is called "Sagan"; and he is called a ruler: and he stands at the right hand of the high priest continually; and this is an honour to him, and all the priests are under the hand of the Sagan.''
The account given of him in the Talmud k is this;
"in five things the "Sagan" ministers; the "Sagan" says to him, my lord, high priest, lift up thy right hand (i.e. when he took the lots out of the vessel for the goats, on the day of atonement l; which should be slain); the "Sagan" is on his right hand, and the father of the sanhedrim on his left (i.e. when he went to the east of the court and the north of the altar m, where were the two goats, and the vessel in which were the lots); the "Sagan" waved with the veils, or linen clothes; the "Sagan" held him by his right hand, and caused him to ascend (by the steps to the altar); and no man was appointed an high priest, before he was a "Sagan."''
Now these might be as Serojab and Zephaniah, the one chief priest, and the other second priest, Jeremiah 52:24 where the Targum and Jarchi interpret the text, the "Sagan" of the priests. And this being an office of such dignity and authority, supposing Annas in it, though he was not "the" high priest, yet being the head of the other priests, he might be called one, and be joined with Caiaphas, and set before him; not only because he had been an high priest, but because he was his father-in-law:
the word of God came to John the son of Zachariah: a priest of the order of "Abia"; and of Elisabeth, a daughter of Aaron, and cousin of Mary, the mother of Jesus; as it had come formerly to the prophets, and particularly to Jeremiah, who was sanctified from the womb, as the Baptist was: he was blessed with a prophetic spirit, and with the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, and with a wonderful revelation of the Messiah, and of the Gospel dispensation; and was abundantly qualified for the work he was called to, and sent to perform: and this befell him
in the wilderness; that is, of Judea; where he had been brought up and lived, and from whence and where he came, preaching: he had lived a solitary life, and had not learnt his doctrine from men, but had his mission, ministry, and baptism, from heaven.
a In Misn. Menachot, c. 13. sect. 10. b T. Hieros. Sanhedrin, fol. 29. 1. Maimon. Hilch. Cele Hamikdash, c. 4. sect. 15. c T. Bab. Yorma, fol. 8. 2. d Bartenora in Misn. Yoma, c 1. sect. 1. e Targum in 2 Kings xxiii. 4. & xxv. 18. & in Jer. xx. 1. 3. & xxix. 26, & lii. 24. f Misn. Shekalim, c. 6. sect. 1. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 8. 1. Juchasin, fol. 57. 1. g Misn. Yoma, c. 1. sect. 1. h T. Hieros. Yoma, fol. 38. 4. Megilla, fol. 72. 1. Horayot, fol. 47. 4. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 47. 1. Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 2. fol. 180. 3. i Hilch. Cele Hamikdash, c. 4. sect. 16. k T. Hieros. Yoma, fol. 41. 1. l Misn. Yoma, c. 4. sect. 1. m Ib. c. 3. sect. 9.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Annas and Caiaphas being highpriests - There was, properly speaking, but one high priest of the Jews; yet the name of high priest continued to be given to those who had been in that office, and especially when they still possessed some civil office after they had left the high priesthood. In this case it appears that âCaiapasâ was high priest, and Annas âhad been,â but had been dismissed from the office. It is highly probable that he still held an office under the Romans, and was perhaps president of the Sanhedrin. He is mentioned before Caiaphas because he was the father-in-law to Caiaphas, and probably was the eldest, and had been longest in office. Instances similar to this may be found in Josephus.
There is one remark to be made here about the manner in which the gospels are written. They have every mark of openness and honesty. An impostor does not mention names, and times, and places particularly. If he did, it would be easy to ascertain that he was an impostor. But the sacred writers describe objects and people as if they were perfectly familiar with them. They never appear to be âguardingâ themselves. They speak of things most minutely. If, therefore, they had been impostors, it would have been easy to detect them. If, for example, John did not begin to preach in the 15th year of Tiberius - if Philip was ânotâ tetrarch of Iturea - if Pontius Pilate was not governor of Judea, how easy would it have been to detect them in falsehood! Yet it was never done. Nay, we have evidence of that age, in Josephus, that these descriptions are strictly true; and, consequently, the gospels must have been written by people who were personally acquainted with what they wrote, who were not impostors, and who were âhonestâ people. If they were âhonest,â then the Christian religion is true.
Clarke's Notes on the Bible
Verse Luke 3:2. Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests — Caiaphas was the son-in-law of Annas or Ananias, and it is supposed that they exercised the high priest's office by turns. It is likely that Annas only was considered as high priest; and that Caiaphas was what the Hebrews termed ××× ××©× × cohen mishneh, or ס×× ××× ×× sagan cohanim, the high priest's deputy, or ruler of the temple. Matthew 2:4, and John 18:13.
The facts which St. Luke mentions here tend much to confirm the truth of the evangelical history. Christianity differs widely from philosophic system; it is founded in the goodness and authority of God; and attested by historic facts. It differs also from popular tradition, which either has had no pure origin, or which is lost in unknown or fabulous antiquity. It differs also from pagan and Mohammedan revelations, which were fabricated in a corner, and had no witnesses. In the above verses we find the persons, the places, and the times marked with the utmost exactness. It was under the first Caesars that the preaching of the Gospel took place; and in their time, the facts on which the whole of Christianity is founded made their appearance: an age the most enlightened, and best known from the multitude of its historic records. It was in Judea, where every thing that professed to come from God was scrutinized with the most exact and unmerciful criticism. In writing the history of Christianity, the evangelists appeal to certain facts which were publicly transacted in such places, under the government and inspection of such and such persons, and in such particular times. A thousand persons could have confronted the falsehood, had it been one! These appeals are made - a challenge is offered to the Roman government, and to the Jewish rulers and people - a new religion has been introduced in such a place, at such a time - this has been accompanied with such and such facts and miracles! Who can disprove this? All are silent. None appears to offer even an objection. The cause of infidelity and irreligion is at stake! If these facts cannot be disproved, the religion of Christ must triumph. None appears because none could appear. Now let it be observed, that the persons of that time, only, could confute these things had they been false; they never attempted it; therefore these facts are absolute and incontrovertible truths: this conclusion is necessary. Shall a man then give up his faith in such attested facts as these, because, more than a thousand years after, an infidel creeps out, and ventures publicly to sneer at what his iniquitous soul hopes is not true!
The word of God came unto John — That is, the Holy Spirit that revealed to him this doctrine of salvation. This came upon him in the desert, where he was living in such a state of austerity as gave him full right to preach all the rigours of penitence to others. Thus we find that the first preachers, historians, and followers of the doctrines of the Gospel were men eminent for the austerity of their lives, the simplicity of their manners, and the sanctity of their conduct; they were authorized by God, and filled with the most precious gifts of his Spirit. And what are the apostles which the new philosophy sends us? Philosophers full of themselves, not guided by the love of truth or wisdom, but ever seeking their own glory; in constant hostility among themselves, because of their separate pretensions to particular discoveries, of the honour of which they would almost as soon lose life as be deprived. Who are they? Men of a mortified life and unblamable conversation? No - they are poets and poetasters; composers of romances, novels, intrigues, farces, comedies, &c., full of extravagance and impurity. They are pretended moralists that preach up pleasure and sensual gratification, and dissolve, as far as they can, the sacred and civil ties that unite and support society. They are men whose guilt is heightened by their assuming the sacred name of philosophers, and dignifying their impure system with a name at which Philosophy herself blushes and bleeds.
