Matthew 26 3

Matthew 26:3 kjv

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,

Matthew 26:3 nkjv

Then the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders of the people assembled at the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas,

Matthew 26:3 niv

Then the chief priests and the elders of the people assembled in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas,

Matthew 26:3 esv

Then the chief priests and the elders of the people gathered in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas,

Matthew 26:3 nlt

At that same time the leading priests and elders were meeting at the residence of Caiaphas, the high priest,

Matthew 26 verses

Matthew 26 3 Meaning

This verse opens the narrative of the religious leaders' conspiracy against Jesus, immediately following Jesus' prophecy of His impending crucifixion. It identifies the specific powerful factions of the Sanhedrin – the chief priests, scribes, and elders – as assembling at the high priest Caiaphas's official residence. This gathering signifies a formal and unified plot by the highest Jewish religious and civil authorities to apprehend Jesus.

Matthew 26 3 Context

Matthew 26:3 follows Jesus' direct prophecy to His disciples concerning His betrayal and crucifixion, linking the divine plan with human malice. The verse precedes the anointing at Bethany, Judas's offer to betray Jesus, the Passover meal, the institution of the Lord's Supper, the agony in Gethsemane, Jesus' arrest, and His trial before Caiaphas. This assembly of the Sanhedrin at Caiaphas's palace signifies the shift from verbal opposition and challenges to an active, orchestrated plot to eliminate Jesus. Historically, the Sanhedrin was the supreme Jewish religious and civil council, composed of Chief Priests (mostly Sadducees, powerful priestly families, wealthy and aristocratic, guardians of the Temple cult), Scribes (Torah experts, often Pharisees, concerned with interpreting and enforcing Mosaic Law and tradition), and Elders (leading lay members of society, heads of families or prominent citizens). Their collective fear stemmed from Jesus' growing popularity, His challenge to their authority, and their concern that He might provoke a Roman intervention, jeopardizing their political and religious standing. Caiaphas, serving as High Priest for an extended period (c. AD 18-36), was known for his political pragmatism and cooperation with Roman authorities.

Matthew 26 3 Word analysis

• Then (Τότε - Tōte): Marks a sequential transition, indicating that what follows occurs immediately after the previous statement (Jesus' prophecy about His crucifixion). It links the divine prediction to human action.
• assembled together (συνήχθησαν - synēchthēsan): From "synagō," meaning "to bring together" or "to assemble." This aorist passive verb indicates that these groups formally gathered or were convened. It implies a deliberate, intentional meeting of high-ranking individuals to confer, rather than a chance encounter.
• the chief priests (οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς - hoi archiereis): Refers to the powerful priestly aristocracy, primarily Sadducees. These were descendants of Aaron who administered the Temple services, held significant wealth, and had political influence through their association with the Roman governors. Their authority was primarily tied to the Temple system.
• and the scribes (καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς - kai hoi grammateis): Experts in the Jewish Law, trained in its interpretation and teaching. They were often Pharisees and deeply respected by the people for their knowledge. Their opposition to Jesus frequently stemmed from His disregard for their oral traditions and interpretations.
• and the elders of the people (καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι τοῦ λαοῦ - kai hoi presbyteroi tou laou): Represents the prominent lay leaders within the community, often heads of leading families or influential citizens. This collective (chief priests, scribes, elders) constituted the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish religious and judicial body, indicating the unanimous, institutional opposition to Jesus.
• unto the palace (εἰς τὴν αὐλήν - eis tēn aulēn): "Aulē" can mean a courtyard, hall, or a magnificent residence. Here, it signifies the official residence of the High Priest, indicating a formal, high-level meeting. It was the center of priestly power and likely where important judicial decisions were made.
• of the high priest (τοῦ ἀρχιερέως - tou archiereōs): The supreme religious authority in Judaism. At this time, the High Priest was largely a political appointee by Rome, chosen for loyalty and ability to maintain order. He presided over the Sanhedrin.
• who was called Caiaphas (τοῦ λεγομένου Καϊάφα - tou legomenou Kaiapha): Joseph Caiaphas, the son-in-law of Annas (a previous High Priest). He served as High Priest from AD 18 to 36, an unusually long tenure under Roman prefects, demonstrating his political acumen and collaboration. His long service highlights his stability and influence in Jewish-Roman relations. His name specifically mentioned sets him as a central figure in the coming events, particularly Jesus' trial (Matt 26:57).

Words-group by words-group analysis

• "Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people": This phrase precisely identifies the three components of the Jewish Sanhedrin, highlighting the complete and authoritative nature of the gathering. It underscores that the opposition to Jesus was not just from a faction but from the highest collective religious and civil power of the Jewish people, a concerted, institutionalized effort against the Messiah. This alliance shows how diverse religious and political ideologies could converge in their shared goal to eliminate Jesus, uniting those with vested interests in the status quo.
• "unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas": This designates the official, sacred, and authoritative venue for the meeting, indicating its formal nature. The mention of "Caiaphas" personalizes the authority behind this hostile action, identifying the specific High Priest who would lead the charges against Jesus, thus highlighting the gravity of the conspiracy originating from the very heart of the Jewish religious establishment.

Matthew 26 3 Bonus section

• The Sanhedrin's decision to meet in secret at night or just before dawn was likely to avoid public disruption, especially with the impending Passover feast. Their aim was to seize Jesus without drawing the attention of His large following (Matt 26:5).
• The high priestly family, particularly Annas and Caiaphas, held significant power and influence, almost operating as a dynastic authority due to Roman favor. Caiaphas being Annas's son-in-law signifies a continuation of this influential priestly network.
• This verse starkly contrasts with God's ultimate sovereignty. While human leaders plot, they are unknowingly fulfilling divine prophecy and a pre-ordained plan for redemption (Acts 2:23; 4:27-28).

Matthew 26 3 Commentary

Matthew 26:3 dramatically sets the stage for Jesus' passion, contrasting His serene knowledge of His fate with the feverish machinations of the religious leadership. This verse pinpoints the source of the human plot against the Son of God: the full, unified force of the Jewish Sanhedrin, gathered in their center of power, the High Priest's residence. This was not a spontaneous decision but a deliberate, coordinated effort by those who represented the highest religious authority, fueled by fear of losing their power and status due to Jesus' growing influence. Caiaphas's extended tenure as High Priest under Roman rule suggests his pragmatic and possibly ruthless nature, prioritizing political stability over justice or truth, and ultimately seeing Jesus as a threat to that stability and his own position. This clandestine meeting, seeking to ensnare Jesus "by craft," unveils a stark spiritual opposition: a supposed council of God's chosen leaders conspiring to shed innocent blood.For practical usage, this can serve as a reminder that institutional power, even religious, can become corrupted and oppose divine truth when self-preservation and earthly power overshadow spiritual calling. It underscores that true spiritual insight is not necessarily found in positions of authority but in obedience to God's will.