Jesus in Jerusalem: The Last Days

By Eckhard Schnabel and Craig A. Evans

This is the first book to describe and analyze, sequentially and in detail, all the persons, places, times, and events mentioned in the Gospel accounts of Jesus’s last week in Jerusalem.

Part reference guide, part theological exploration, Eckhard Schnabel’s Jesus in Jerusalem uses the biblical text and recent archaeological evidence to find meaning in Jesus’s final days on earth. Schnabel profiles the seventy-two people and groups and the seventeen geographic locations named in the four passion narratives. Placing the events of Jesus’s last days in chronological order, he unpacks their theological significance, finding that Jesus’s passion, death, and resurrection can be understood historically as well as from a faith perspective.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Eerdmans
• Release date: Sep 18, 2018
• ISBN: 9781467450621

Book preview

cvr

JESUS IN JERUSALEM

THE LAST DAYS

Eckhard J. Schnabel

WILLIAM B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING COMPANY

GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN

Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

4035 Park East Court SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546

www.eerdmans.com

© 2018 Eckhard J. Schnabel

All rights reserved

Published 2018

27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 181 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ISBN 978-0-8028-7580-8

eISBN 978-1-4674-5062-1

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Schnabel, Eckhard J., author.

Title: Jesus in Jerusalem : the last days / Eckhard J. Schnabel.

Description: Grand Rapids : Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2018. | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2018002537 | ISBN 9780802875808 (hardcover : alk. paper)

Subjects: LCSH: Jesus Christ—Biography—Passion Week. | Jesus Christ—Friends and associates. | Jesus Christ—Travel. | Israel—Description and travel. | Jesus Christ—Chronology.

Classification: LCC BT414 .S34 2018 | DDC 232.96—dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018002537

For Richard Bauckham, Darrell Bock, and Craig Evans,

who have contributed much to Gospel research

and to our understanding of the life of Jesus Messiah

CONTENTS

Foreword by Craig A. Evans

Tables

Figures

Excursuses

Abbreviations

Introduction

1.People

1. Jesus. 2. The Twelve. 3. The Eleven. 4. Two Unnamed Disciples. 5. Simon Peter. 6. Andrew. 7. James son of Zebedee. 8. John son of Zebedee. 9. Thomas. 10. Philip. 11. Judas son of James. 12. Judas Iscariot. 13. Nathanael. 14. Lazarus. 15. Simon the Leper. 16. Cleopas. 17. Nicodemus. 18. Joseph of Arimathea. 19. Unnamed Disciple from Emmaus. 20. Two Anonymous Disciples. 21. Owner of a Colt in Bethphage. 22. Man with Water Jar in Jerusalem. 23. Owner of House in Jerusalem. 24. Young Man in Gethsemane. 25. Women Disciples. 26. Martha from Bethany. 27. Mary from Bethany. 28. Mary the Mother of Jesus. 29. Mary the Wife of Clopas. 30. Mary from Magdala. 31. Mary the Mother of James and Joseph. 32. Mother of James and John. 33. Salome. 34. Joanna. 35. Acquaintances of Jesus. 36. Pilgrims. 37. Crowds. 38. Tax Collectors. 39. Prostitutes. 40. Vendors, Customers, and Moneychangers on the Temple Mount. 41. Blind and Lame. 42. Children. 43. Gentiles/Greeks. 44. Rich People. 45. Widow. 46. Members of the Sanhedrin. 47. Chief Priests. 48. Sadducees. 49. Experts of the Law. 50. Lay Aristocrats. 51. Pharisees. 52. Annas, Former High Priest. 53. Caiaphas, High Priest. 54. Malchus, Slave of Caiaphas. 55. Malchus’s Relative. 56. Two Female Slaves of Caiaphas. 57. Retainers. 58. Officers of the Jewish Executive. 59. Jewish Security Forces and Their Captain. 60. Witnesses. 61. Herodians. 62. Herod Antipas. 63. Soldiers of Herod Antipas. 64. Pontius Pilate. 65. Pontius Pilate’s Wife. 66. Soldiers of Auxiliary Troops. 67. Centurion. 68. Barabbas. 69. Simon of Cyrene. 70. Women of Jerusalem. 71. Two Criminals. 72. Man with Sponge at Golgotha.

2.Places

1. Jerusalem. 2. Temple Mount. 3. Mount of Olives. 4. Bethany. 5. Bethphage. 6. Gethsemane. 7. Akeldama. 8. House of Jesus’ Last Supper. 9. Residence of Annas. 10. Residence of Caiaphas. 11. The Sanhedrin Building. 12. Praetorium. 13. The Lithostrotos. 14. Residence of Herod Antipas. 15. Golgotha. 16. Jesus’ Tomb. 17. Emmaus.

3.Timelines

1. The Year AD 30. 2. Saturday–Sunday, Nisan 9 (April 2–3). 3. Sunday–Monday, Nisan 10 (April 3–4). 4. Monday–Tuesday, Nisan 11 (April 4–5). 5. Tuesday–Wednesday, Nisan 12 (April 5–6). 6. Wednesday–Thursday, Nisan 13 (April 6–7). 7. Thursday–Friday, Nisan 14 (April 7–8). 8. Friday–Saturday, Nisan 15 (April 8–9). 9. Saturday–Sunday, Nisan 16 (April 9–10). 10. Saturday–Sunday, Nisan 23 (April 16–17).

4.Events

1. The Anointing in Bethany. 2. Jesus’ Approach to Jerusalem. 3. Jesus’ Prophetic Action on the Temple Mount. 4. The Jewish Authorities’ Scheme to Eliminate Jesus. 5. The Lesson of the Withered Fig Tree. 6. Controversies and Jesus’ Public Teaching on the Temple Mount. 7. The Greeks Seek Jesus and the Unbelief of the People. 8. The Jewish Authorities’ Planning of Jesus’ Arrest. 9. The Betrayal by Judas Iscariot. 10. Prophecy of the Destruction of Jerusalem, of the End, and of His Return. 11. Preparations for Passover. 12. The Last Supper in Jerusalem. 13. Arrest in Gethsemane. 14. Preliminary Interrogation before Annas and Peter’s First Denial. 15. The Trial before the Sanhedrin with Caiaphas Presiding and Peter’s Denials. 16. Transfer of Jesus’ Case to Pontius Pilate. 17. The Trial before the Roman Prefect with Pontius Pilate Presiding. 18. The Walk to Golgotha. 19. Jesus’ Crucifixion. 20. Jesus’ Burial. 21. The Death of Judas Iscariot. 22. The Guards at the Tomb. 23. The Empty Tomb and Jesus’ Appearance to the Women. 24. Jesus’ Appearances to the Disciples.

5.Significance

1. Jesus Is the Messiah, the King of the Jews. 2. Jesus and the Temple. 3. Jesus’ Death. 4. Jesus’ Resurrection. 5. Jesus’ Mission and the Mission of His Followers.

Notes

Bibliography

Index of Authors

Index of Subjects

Index of Scripture References

Index of Other Ancient Writings

FOREWORD

Professor Eckhard Schnabel, Mary F. Rockefeller Professor of New Testament at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, has emerged as one of the world’s foremost New Testament scholars. Evidence for this opinion is seen in his magisterial Urchristliche Mission, which appeared in 2002 and runs to more than eighteen hundred pages. It has appeared in English translation in two hefty volumes. In 2012 Professor Schnabel published his commentary on Acts for the Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament series. This weighty tome runs to more than eleven hundred pages! He has also written the commentary on Mark for the Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. And finally, in 2015 Professor Schnabel co-authored a detailed study of the trial and crucifixion of Jesus—yet another major work running to some nine hundred pages.

I mention these previous publications because they testify to Professor Schnabel’s skill and dedication with respect to scholarship in general but also to the knowledge and ability required to write a book such as Jesus in Jerusalem. This book, like the others I have mentioned, is lengthy, learned, and filled with useful information and sound judgment.

No stone is left unturned in this remarkable book, which focuses on Passion Week, from Palm Sunday, when Jesus entered Jerusalem, to Easter Sunday, when Jesus was resurrected. Professor Schnabel considers what can be known of some seventy-two persons and groups, starting with Jesus and the Twelve and concluding with the named and unnamed men and women who in one way or another were involved in the crucifixion. He reviews no fewer than seventeen villages and places where events took place. Of the events themselves Professor Schnabel identifies and discusses twenty-four. Ten different aspects of chronology and timelines are also examined. Nothing of importance is omitted.

Professor Schnabel brings this excellent study to a conclusion by addressing the significance of his findings, which are summed up under five headings: the messianic identity of Jesus, Jesus and the temple, the death of Jesus, the resurrection of Jesus, and Jesus’ mission and the mission of his followers. By probing the significance of these topics Professor Schnabel does what historians are supposed to do: He establishes the factual data as best as possible and then looks for the meaning of these data.

The result is a truly stimulating and satisfying study. Every reader will be impressed by the depth of learning reflected in this comprehensive, encyclopedic book. To write an informed and edifying account of Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, one needs to know a great number of ancient texts, preserved in several languages, as well as the geography and topography of first-century Israel, the relevant archaeological discoveries, and an almost endless number of publications in several modern languages. Professor Schnabel demonstrates throughout that he has control of these complex subdisciplines and that he has what it takes to sift it carefully and present a satisfying and illuminating study of what many will agree was the most important week in human history.

CRAIG A. EVANS

John Bisgno Distinguished Professor of Christian Origins

Houston Baptist University

TABLES

1.Named Persons in the Accounts of Jesus’ Last Week

2.The Names of Jesus’ Twelve Disciples

3.The Genealogy of Jesus

4.The Genealogy of Naqdimon/Nicodemus

5.The Names of Jesus’ Women Disciples

6.The Events of Nisan 13

7.The Events of Nisan 14

8.The Chronology of Jesus’ Last Week in Jerusalem

9.The Events of the Last Supper

10.Jesus’ Words during the Last Supper

11.The Arresting Squad

12.The Jewish Trial before the Sanhedrin

13.The Roman Trial before the Roman Prefect

14.The Charges against Jesus

15.Jesus’ Crucifixion

16.The Gospel Accounts of the Women and the Empty Tomb

17.Reconstruction of Events on the Early Morning of Nisan 16

18.Geographical Movements on Easter Morning (Scenario 1)

19.Geographical Movements on Easter Morning (Scenario 2)

20.Geographical Movements on Easter Morning (Scenario 3)

21.Jesus’ Appearances to the Disciples

FIGURES

1.Jerusalem AD 30 (Model)

2.Jerusalem AD 30 (Drawing)

3.Temple Mount Complex (Model)

4.Palatial Mansion (Reconstruction)

5.Sanhedrin Building (Model)

6.Praetorium (Model)

7.The Lithostrotos (Gabbatha)

8.Golgotha and Tomb (Church of the Holy Sepulchre)

9.Jesus’ Movements on Nisan 14

10.Reconstruction of Crucifixion

11.Movements on Nisan 16 (Scenario 2)

EXCURSUSES

Excursus 1: The Hour of Jesus’ Crucifixion

Excursus 2: Cursing of the Fig Tree

Excursus 3: Historicity of Annas’s Interrogation of Jesus

Excursus 4: Peter’s Denials of Jesus

Excursus 5: Communal Reproof and Legal Accusation in Palestine

Excursus 6: Staff of the Prefect

Excursus 7: Crimes against the Emperor

Excursus 8: The Passover Pardon and Roman Legal Precedent

Excursus 9: Carrying the Crossbeam in Greco-Roman Sources

Excursus 10: Jesus’ Shout in Greco-Roman Perspective

Excursus 11: Hyssop

Excursus 12: The Nazareth Inscription

Excursus 13: The Ending of Mark

ABBREVIATIONS

INTRODUCTION

If Jesus’ life was of eminent significance, his death and his resurrection were even more significant—thus the conviction of the earliest Christians. Jesus’ death cannot be understood apart from his ministry in Galilee and, especially, the last week of his life when he taught in Jerusalem. This book will trace the events of Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem, focusing on the people mentioned for this time period in the Gospel accounts, the places that he visited or was taken to during this time, chronological markers in the accounts, the events that took place, and the significance of these events for the earliest followers of Jesus and for the church today.

The outline of the book follows a simple but essential approach to help readers understand narrative texts—identifying and analyzing people, places, times, events, and significance. While there are further matters that one needs to study in order to properly understand a text—the genre or type of the text, the context of the text, information about the meaning of words and phrases used by the author, the structure of the text, Jewish and Greco-Roman traditions and realities mentioned or implied in the text—these five questions that are put to the text are foundational: Which persons are mentioned, and what do we know about them? Which geographical places are mentioned or presupposed, and what do we know about them? Are there time indicators in the text that help us understand the progression of events? Which events are described, and what are their causes and effects? What is the significance of the events as perceived by the participants, by the authors who recorded the events, and by later readers, that is, the early church and the church today?

Thus, in the first chapter we will discuss the seventy-two individuals and groups of people that the four Gospels’ writers mention in their accounts of Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem, thirty of which are named (twenty-two men and eight women). For some persons or groups we have very little information, while for others we have a wealth of information that has prompted monographic treatments, for example, in the case of Peter, Judas Iscariot, Mary, or the Pharisees. In the second chapter we will investigate the seventeen specific places that are mentioned in the accounts of Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem, both inside the city of Jerusalem (Temple Mount, house of Jesus’ Last Supper, residence of Annas, residence of Caiaphas, Sanhedrin, Praetorium, residence of Herod Antipas, Lithostrotos) and outside (Mount of Olives, Bethphage, Bethany, Gethsemane, Akeldama, Golgotha, Jesus’ tomb, Emmaus). The discussion includes a review of traditional identification of sites in Jerusalem as well as recent archaeological discoveries that further our knowledge in many cases. The third chapter treats the chronological markers in the accounts in an attempt to provide a chronology of events of Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem. The fourth chapter provides a succinct analysis of the twenty-four events that took place during Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem, with a focus on their connection with Jesus’ trial and death. The final chapter considers the significance of the events of Jesus’ final week in Jerusalem, as seen both by the participants in these events and by the earliest followers of Jesus after Easter.¹

The study of the life of Jesus of Nazareth has been carried out in the context of methodological presuppositions and historical-critical practices that have often led to a deep skepticism concerning what we can know with certainty about Jesus.² The form criticism (or rather form history, which is a more accurate translation of the German term Formgeschichte) of Martin Dibelius and Rudolf Bultmann claimed not only that the Jesus traditions preserved in the Gospels passed through the filter of the believing communities but also that the Jesus traditions were in fact created by the needs of the early church. This view led to a thoroughgoing skepticism. Not a few critics believed that one can list the authentic words and deeds of Jesus on a postcard,³ with the result that the quest for the Jesus of history was deemed impossible. Some critics claimed that the description of the historical Jesus, a figure reconstructed by modern scholars, does not affect the biblical Christ who is believed to be the Savior and Son of God in the church. It was unavoidable, albeit rarely acknowledged, that in the context of this disjunction between historical descriptions of Jesus and his ministry and the response of faith, the "actual earthly or risen Jesus threatened to disappear from view into a sort of noumenal no-man’s-land.⁴ For scholars who eschew the extreme skepticism of some critics, the question of Jesus’ identity is not an archaeological expedition to establish reliable information about Jesus but a journey where we may begin our treks from differing locations using varying equipment but with the hope of converging at a common destination.⁵ However, as Bockmuehl argues, if salvation matters to history and if history matters to salvation, then to seek to understand them both becomes a sacred obligation."⁶ The task of seeking to understand Jesus’ actions and words during his last week in Jerusalem in AD 30 must be conducted with seven considerations in mind.

First, attempts to reconstruct the historical Jesus behind the Gospels using various criteria of authenticity⁷ have been characterized by a methodological skepticism, as John Meier avers, by purely scientific means: empirical data from ancient documents, sifted by human minds operating by inference, analogy, and certain specific criteria.⁸ Analyses of sources, traditions, and redactional accretions aim at reconstructing the actual historical events of Jesus’ life. Such reconstructions of Jesus’ actions and sayings have produced very different results.⁹ Some have judged the historical value of the Gospels to be minimal, some maximal. But all reconstructions provide, whether consciously or not, an alternative to the Gospels’ accounts of Jesus and more often than not resemble the philosophical, theological, and social presuppositions and concerns of the scholar who produced the reconstruction of Jesus’ words and deeds. Certainly, a historian can legitimately attempt to reconstruct a life of Jesus from the Gospel accounts with critical historical methods. However, the history of Jesus research demonstrates that such reconstructions cannot provide, as Richard Bauckham states, the kind of access to the reality of Jesus that Christian faith and theology have always trusted we have in the Gospels.¹⁰ One reason for this is the fact that critics who work on such reconstructions generally disregard the possibility of God intervening in historically observable ways, particularly in Jesus’ miracles,¹¹ or the possibility of Jesus’ divine identity.¹²

Second, the traditional criteria used to establish the authenticity of the actions and words of Jesus leave us at best with degrees of probabilities, with the result that some critics want to jettison the criteria of authenticity altogether.¹³ While the critique of these criteria as the basis for reliable knowledge about Jesus is important, this does not mean that none of them can be employed to demonstrate the historicity of some traditions.¹⁴ For example, the criterion of embarrassment rightly suggests that it is difficult to imagine a scenario in which the early Christians would have invented a disciple (Judas) whom Jesus would invite to be a member of his inner circle of followers only to have him betray Jesus to those intent on eliminating Jesus (the chief priests in Jerusalem). The role of memory and memorization and the significance of the testimony of eyewitnesses attest to the plausibility of accepting the testimonies of the Gospel writers as reliable accounts of the life of Jesus (see further point six below).

Third, the flight from history seen in several approaches to the Gospels is both unhelpful and unrealistic. The existentialist position advocated by Rudolf Bultmann claimed that we can know next to nothing about the Jesus of history, prompting scholars to limit historical questions to the reconstruction of transmission processes. In literary studies scholars focus on how the text of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John works within itself and in relation to its readers¹⁵ and how the authors use their (assumed) sources, with the actual events of Jesus’ life and ministry more often than not deliberately ignored.¹⁶ In narrative approaches to the Gospels, historical questions are often deliberately, sometimes unwittingly, disregarded in an attempt to analyze the Gospels as literature, using criteria such as plot development and characterization. When historical texts are treated as merely narrative, facts can all too easily disappear in the narrative, and all we have at the end is a story that may or may not be true. The appearance of the word post-factual¹⁷ indicates that this is a wider problem beyond narrative criticism. In reader-response readings, the modern reader creates meanings independently of the text. When critics treat historical texts as autonomous from their authors and from the realities they describe—in the case of the Gospels the reality of the life of Jesus—they erroneously assume that meaning can be independent of historical context. Authors of modern texts who adopt such approaches and who want to insist that what they write should be taken seriously and is worthwhile knowing deny that very courtesy to the authors of the ancient texts. The claim that all data in the Gospels are social constructs and the claim that all statements attributed to Jesus need to be held with suspicion¹⁸ are themselves no more than social constructs which can be dismissed if one so chooses.

Fourth, the view that all historical data are perspectival and thus subjective and the concomitant conclusion that the endeavor to describe the Jesus of history is an impossible undertaking¹⁹ correspond to a postmodern agenda that few professional historians subscribe to. Biblical scholars should note that, as Behan McCullagh has emphasized, very few practicing historians are impressed by philosophical objections to the possible truth of history. They continue examining evidence and drawing conclusions about the past from it as usual.²⁰ When historians of classical antiquity write biographies of Julius Caesar and Augustus,²¹ or accounts of the principate of Tiberius,²² or analyses of the religious policies of Claudius,²³ they trust the available sources in a general but basic manner, so much so that even the authors of large historical biographies and monographs do not see the need to discuss their historiographical approach, in contrast to books on Jesus which are often prefaced with several hundred pages discussing sources and methods.²⁴ It is salutary to quote Helga Botermann, a German historian of classical antiquity, who writes, I have been shocked for many years concerning the manner in which New Testament scholars treat their sources. They have managed to question everything to such a degree that both the historical Jesus and the historical Paul are hardly discernible any longer. If classical scholars were to adopt their methods, they could take their leave immediately. They would not have much left to work with. . . . If classical scholars analyzed their sources as ‘critically’ as most New Testament theologians do, they would have to close the files on Herodotus and Tacitus.²⁵

Fifth, the Gospels are biographies of Jesus, sharing many of the characteristics of ancient biographies (bioi).²⁶ The genre of biography implies a historical interest of the Gospel writers, evident in the consistent focus on the deeds and words of Jesus as the subject of their work. In addition, there is an interest in providing examples that readers can emulate, in preserving the subject’s memory, and in defending and promoting the subject’s reputation,²⁷ which are also characteristics of ancient Greek and Roman biographies. The fact that the Gospels are also expressions of the faith of the earliest followers of Jesus and that they contain material used in early Christian preaching does not disprove their biographical character—ancient biographies were not dispassionate accounts of the life of the subject whose life they describe. Readers of the Gospels would expect the narratives to provide information about the real past, or, as we would say today, the historical activities of Jesus, without confusing them with the present, as relevant for the present as they may be.

Sixth, the Gospels present the testimony of eyewitnesses.²⁸ The concept of testimony—an utterance, or a series of statements, or a report that asks to be trusted—is basic for all history, and it allows us to read the Gospels in a consistently historical manner while recognizing the theological meaning of the history of Jesus. As Richard Bauckham asserts, testimony is a reputable historiographic category for reading the Gospels as history, and also a theological model for understanding the Gospels as the entirely appropriate means of access to the historical reality of Jesus.²⁹ Samuel Byrskog has demonstrated that Greek and Roman historians wrote their historical accounts with the conviction that a good historian who was not himself a participant in the events that he describes should not rely primarily on written sources but on eyewitnesses whose participation in the events enabled them not only to report the events but to understand them and interpret their significance; the only kind of history that should be written was history within living memory, that is, contemporary history.³⁰ Building on and pushing beyond the work of Birger Gerhardsson,³¹ Kenneth Bailey,³² James Dunn,³³ and Byrskog, Bauckham has demonstrated the significance of eyewitnesses for the transmission of the reports of Jesus’ actions and words that the Gospel authors report: 1. The relative frequency of personal names in the Gospels and Acts corresponds to a remarkable extent to the relative frequency of personal names in Jewish literary and non-literary sources.³⁴ 2. This correspondence is particularly remarkable since most if not all of the Gospels and Acts were written outside Palestine where naming practices among Jews were very different from those in Palestine; for example, the male names Jairus, Nathanael, Malchus, Jonah, and Nicodemus and the female names Susanna and Elizabeth are not attested in the diaspora, while names such as Julius, Eusebius, Samuel, Leontius, Isaac, Eirene, and Sarah, which were the most popular names in the Jewish diaspora, do not appear in the Gospels.³⁵ The use of personal names in historiographical texts is increasingly recognized as an important and sophisticated . . . control on the accuracy and authenticity.³⁶ The prejudice against eyewitnesses that is en vogue among some New Testament scholars derives from the legal courts where the hard evidence of DNA tests is preferred. By contrast, modern journalists privilege the eyewitness account, as John Simpson writes: Eyewitness journalism is in one sense the purest and most decent work we can do. It has the power to settle part of the argument, to close down propaganda, to challenge myth making.³⁷

While memorization³⁸ and perhaps private notebooks³⁹ would have played a role as controls of the oral tradition, eyewitnesses were regarded as decisive by the early Christians, as Papias (writing around AD 110–150) confirms. He belonged to the third generation of Christians and thus to a generation that was still in touch with the first generation of Christians. Papias is not interested in anonymous community traditions but in traditions formulated and transmitted by the disciples of Jesus, transmitted in turn by teachers in the churches in Asia Minor who knew Jesus’ disciples.⁴⁰ Of particular importance must have been the members of the Jerusalem church who were eyewitnesses of Jesus’ life and ministry: Luke mentions in the book of Acts Peter, James and John (the sons of Zebedee), the rest of the original Twelve (minus Judas Iscariot), Matthias, Joseph Barsabbas, Mary the mother of Jesus, James the brother of Jesus, Barnabas, Mnason, Silas.⁴¹ The lists of the Twelve in the Gospels (see Table 2) and the special role of the Twelve as official witnesses depicted by Luke in the book of Acts suggest, according to Bauckham, that we should probably envisage a carefully compiled and formulated collection of Jesus traditions, incorporating other important eyewitness testimony as well as that of the Twelve themselves, but authorized by the Twelve as the official body of witnesses.⁴² Paul’s comment in 1 Cor 15:6 regarding the more than five hundred believers to whom the risen Jesus appeared—that most of [them] are still alive, though some have died—takes for granted and emphasizes the continuing accessibility and role of the eyewitnesses, even extending to a very large number of minor eyewitnesses as well as to such prominent persons as the Twelve and James.⁴³

Applying the criteria that studies of recollective memory have established⁴⁴ for the Gospels, Bauckham concludes: The memories of eyewitnesses of the history of Jesus score highly. . . . The eyewitnesses who remembered the events of the history of Jesus were remembering inherently very memorable events, unusual events that would have impressed themselves on the memory, events of key significance for those who remembered them, landmark or life-changing events for them in many cases, and their memories would have been reinforced and stabilized by frequent rehearsal, beginning soon after the event.⁴⁵ Trusting the testimony of eyewitnesses is not naive but, rather, a function of the everyday experience in which we rely on facts for which we only have the testimony of others, whether the words of experts or the words of ordinary conversation partners. The individualism of the philosophy of the Enlightenment minimized the reliance on other people for the determination of what is true by insisting on other forms of knowledge than the testimony of others, despite the fact that trusting the testimony of others is a pervasive, ubiquitous reality in all areas of human experience—testimony as trust, albeit not uncritical trust, is a justified source of knowledge.⁴⁶ Regarding the credibility of testimony, C. A. J. Coady asserts:

When we believe testimony we believe what is said because we trust the witness. This attitude of trust is very fundamental, but it is not blind. As [Thomas] Reid noted, the child begins with an attitude of complete trust in what it is told, and develops more critical attitudes as it matures. None the less, even for adults, the critical attitude is itself founded upon a general stance of trust, just as the adult awareness of the way memory plays us false rests upon a broader confidence in recollective powers. . . . We may have no reason to doubt another’s communication even where there is no question of our being gullible; we may simply recognize that the standard warning signs of deceit, confusion, or mistake are not present. This recognition incorporates our knowledge of the witness’s competence, of the circumstances surrounding his utterance, of the consistency of the parts of his testimony, and its relation to what others have said on the matter.⁴⁷

When Greek and Roman historians relied on the testimony of eyewitnesses, they did not do so uncritically; they questioned their reports when they met them as they wrote the history of the time in which they lived.⁴⁸ The critical tools that modern historians employ were largely developed for the study of more distant historical periods, when the testimony of eyewitness had long been replaced by the works of other historians whose assertions needed to be assessed as to their historical truthfulness or plausibility. Bauckham asserts that as the Greco-Roman historians remained within their competence, writing about events in living memory attested by eyewitnesses that could be interrogated, they achieved results that we should not be too ready to suppose a historian equipped with modern historical methods could easily have surpassed.⁴⁹ While this cannot be falsified, it appears plausible. What is true with regard to testimony generally is also valid with regard to the testimony of the Gospel writers: their testimony should be treated as reliable until proved otherwise.⁵⁰ The testimony of the Gospel writers has been compared with the testimony of Holocaust survivors: both experienced what Paul Ricoeur has called uniquely unique events;⁵¹ both recount events that often are scarcely credible as they defy standard human experience and traditional categories of historical explanation.

Reading the canonical Gospels as historical biographies of the life of Jesus that are based on the testimony of eyewitnesses and treating them as good historical sources is neither gullible nor uncritical. Rather, it is the only really plausible response to the fact that the canonical Gospels are the only accounts that provide us with sustained information about Jesus, given that there are no convincing reasons for doubting the general reliability of the eyewitnesses or the teachers and authors who recorded their stories.⁵² Of course the Gospels are narratives that were written with literary and rhetorical artistry and a theological agenda (as were Greek and Roman biographies and histories), but that does not make them poor historical sources for the life of Jesus.

Seventh, the earliest tradition about the canonical Gospels was convinced that two of the four canonical Gospels were written by eyewitnesses and that the two other Gospels were written by authors who were in direct contact with eyewitnesses. Papias asserts that Matthew wrote the Gospel attributed to him,⁵³ an attribution that some scholars continue to find convincing.⁵⁴ Matthew is mentioned as one of Jesus’ disciples in the lists of the Twelve in the Gospels and in Acts. The Gospel of John states that it was written by the disciple who appears at key points in the Gospel as the disciple Jesus loved,⁵⁵ traditionally identified with John son of Zebedee, one of Jesus’ twelve disciples, following Papias.⁵⁶ The tradition that the Gospel of John was written by an eyewitness has been vigorously defended,⁵⁷ as also the tradition that the author was John son of Zebedee.⁵⁸ The testimony of the Gospel of Mark, probably the first Gospel to be written—some scholars argue for an early date around AD 35–45, 40, 45, 53–54, or 55⁵⁹—is based on the eyewitness testimony of Peter, as Papias asserts and the content of the Gospel suggests.⁶⁰ Luke states in the preface of his Gospel that his account of Jesus is derived from the testimony of eyewitnesses.⁶¹

There is no doubt that the authors of the four Gospels seek to consolidate and promote faith in Jesus, confessed by his followers to be Messiah and Kyrios. But there is also no doubt that all four Gospels convey historical information: they are not writing theological expositions of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, nor homilies, but biographies. There is a tendency, especially among younger New Testament scholars, to avoid historical questions and pursue literary approaches to the New Testament texts, focusing on narrative and plot development, character studies, rhetorical investigations, discourse analyses, and intertextual studies discovering allusions to and echoes of Old Testament, Jewish, or Greco-Roman texts. Such approaches have often contributed to our understanding of New Testament texts. However, the fact that the four Gospels are essentially biographies of Jesus elevates the significance of historical questions, which include the social dimension of Roman Judea, above that of other approaches. This study presents an integrated approach that draws from a wide array of specialized approaches. The result is not as methodologically pure as, for example, a serial investigation of the relevant characters in the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John⁶² or a serial exegesis of the relevant texts in the four Gospels (as exemplified by the magisterial study of Raymond Brown)⁶³ would be. Since space and time is limited, and since very few read multivolume books, a concise integrative presentation of the relevant material is more than justified. It is impossible to refer to all scholars who have written about Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem, and it is impractical to interact with the multitude of suggestions concerning major and minor matters related to Jesus’ trial.

Finally, a few comments on technical details. More technical matters are discussed in sections printed in a smaller font or have been relegated to the notes, allowing them to be skipped more readily by readers who want to focus on the larger picture. I have decided to use endnotes rather than footnotes. While this may be frustrating for those who want to see the documentation of primary sources and the interaction with other scholars on the same page, this allowed me to include some extended quotations from primary sources, discussion of other viewpoints, and bibliographical references in longer notes that would have made the book not only more intimidating to read but also aesthetically unattractive. Greek and Hebrew words are cited in transliteration. The translation used is the New Revised Standard Version, unless otherwise indicated.

Michael Thompson, Senior Acquisitions Editor at Eerdmans, showed an early interest in the project, for which I am very grateful. I am immensely grateful to Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary for a research position that allows bountiful time for writing. I thank Professors Craig Evans, Edward Cook, and Henry von Siebenthal who answered queries. I thank Kelly Ray Bailey, my assistant, who read the manuscript with unfailing dedication and a sharp eye for syntactical and orthographical infelicities; as a lawyer with many years of experience, he took a special interest in this project. My son Benjamin Schnabel has again helped with the editing of the images with his usual expertise and good humor. I thank Linda Bieze, Senior Project Manager at Eerdmans, for guiding the manuscript expeditiously through the editorial process; Andrew Langford for his work as copyeditor; and Maria denBoer and Timothy Muether for compiling the indexes. As always, I am deeply grateful for the unstinting love and support of my wife Barbara. I dedicate this book to Richard Bauckham, Darrell Bock, and Craig Evans, who for several decades have contributed much to Gospels research and to our understanding of the life of Jesus Messiah.

Students in theology departments at universities, in theological colleges, and in seminaries study the Gospels, often with particular attention given to the passion narratives. Pastors preach on texts from the passion and resurrection narratives every year. Christians who attend the five and a half million congregations worldwide⁶⁴ celebrate Jesus’ death and resurrection in late spring every year. It is my hope that this book will help readers understand the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem from fresh perspectives on the basis of relevant information (for example, concerning legal matters related to criminal cases in Roman Judea) and that it will help believers grasp in fresh ways what it means to be a follower of Jesus, who was crucified in Jerusalem in AD 30 and whom God raised from the dead on the third day.

ECKHARD SCHNABEL

Good Friday, Nisan 14, 5777

April 14, anno Domini 2017

CHAPTER ONEPEOPLE

1. Jesus. 2. The Twelve. 3. The Eleven. 4. Two Unnamed Disciples. 5. Simon Peter. 6. Andrew. 7. James son of Zebedee. 8. John Son of Zebedee. 9. Thomas. 10. Philip. 11. Judas son of James. 12. Judas Iscariot. 13. Nathanael. 14. Lazarus. 15. Simon the Leper. 16. Cleopas. 17. Nicodemus. 18. Joseph of Arimathea. 19. Unnamed Disciple from Emmaus. 20. Two Anonymous Disciples. 21. Owner of a Colt in Bethphage. 22. Man with Water Jar in Jerusalem. 23. Owner of House in Jerusalem. 24. Young Man in Gethsemane. 25. Women Disciples. 26. Martha from Bethany. 27. Mary from Bethany. 28. Mary the Mother of Jesus. 29. Mary the Wife of Clopas. 30. Mary from Magdala. 31. Mary the Mother of James and Joseph. 32. Mother of James and John. 33. Salome. 34. Joanna. 35. Acquaintances of Jesus. 36. Pilgrims. 37. Crowds. 38. Tax Collectors. 39. Prostitutes. 40. Vendors, Customers, and Moneychangers on the Temple Mount. 41. Blind and Lame. 42. Children. 43. Gentiles/Greeks. 44. Rich People. 45. Widow. 46. Members of the Sanhedrin. 47. Chief Priests. 48. Sadducees. 49. Experts of the Law. 50. Lay Aristocrats. 51. Pharisees. 52. Annas, Former High Priest. 53. Caiaphas, High Priest. 54. Malchus, Slave of Caiaphas. 55. Malchus’s Relative. 56. Two Female Slaves of Caiaphas. 57. Retainers. 58. Officers of the Jewish Executive. 59. Jewish Security Forces and Their Captain. 60. Witnesses. 61. Herodians. 62. Herod Antipas. 63. Soldiers of Herod Antipas. 64. Pontius Pilate. 65. Pontius Pilate’s Wife. 66. Soldiers of Auxiliary Troops. 67. Centurion. 68. Barabbas. 69. Simon of Cyrene. 70. Women of Jerusalem. 71. Two Criminals. 72. Man with Sponge at Golgotha.

The four Gospel accounts of Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem, including his trial, crucifixion, and resurrection, mention a total of seventy-two individuals or groups of people.¹ Of the forty-three individual persons, thirty are mentioned by name—twenty-two men² and eight women.³ Of the thirteen unnamed individuals, ten are men and three are women.⁴ Eight of Jesus’ twelve disciples are mentioned by name: Peter, Andrew, James, John, Thomas, Philip, Judas, and Judas Iscariot. Six other male followers of Jesus are mentioned by name: Nathanael, Lazarus, Simon the Leper, Cleopas, Joseph of Arimathea, and Nicodemus. Unnamed male disciples and followers are the two disciples who requisition the colt, the owner of the colt in Bethphage, the owner of the house in Jerusalem in which Jesus and the Twelve celebrated the Last Supper, and a disciple from Emmaus. Eight female followers of Jesus are mentioned by name: Mary from Bethany, Martha from Bethany, Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary from Magdala, Mary the wife of Clopas, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, Salome, and Joanna. One is unnamed (the mother of the sons of Zebedee, James and John). Seven further individuals, all males, are mentioned by name: Annas, Caiaphas, Malchus, Herod Antipas, Pontius Pilate, Barabbas, and Simon of Cyrene.

If we break down the evidence in terms of the individual Gospels, the following picture emerges. Matthew mentions forty-eight individuals and groups of people, thirteen by name: four of Jesus’ twelve disciples, two male followers of Jesus, three female followers, and four further individuals. Mark mentions forty-seven individuals and groups of people, sixteen by name: five of Jesus’ twelve disciples, two male followers, three female followers, and six further individuals. Luke mentions forty-seven individuals and groups of people, fourteen by name: three of Jesus’ twelve disciples, two other male followers, three female followers, and six further individuals. John mentions forty-two individuals and groups of people, twenty-two by name: eight of Jesus’ twelve disciples, four male followers, five female followers, and five further individuals.

Table 1: Named Persons in the Accounts of Jesus’ Last Week

Matthew, Mark, and Luke mention approximately the same number of individuals by name (thirteen, sixteen, and fourteen, respectively), while John mentions distinctly more individuals by name (twenty-three). A plausible argument can be made that the named persons—with the exception of Old Testament persons, names in the two genealogies of Jesus, and public persons—were involved in the early Christian movement and well-known figures in the early church.⁵ If this is correct, Matthew mentions eight eyewitnesses who were involved in the early church, Mark ten, Luke eight, and John sixteen; eyewitnesses that the first three (Synoptic) evangelists mention are Peter, John, Joseph of Arimathea, and Mary from Magdala, Mary the mother of James, and Simon of Cyrene; eyewitnesses that all four Gospel writers mention are Peter, John, Joseph of Arimathea, and Mary from Magdala. All four evangelists mention Judas Iscariot, Caiaphas, Pontius Pilate, and Barabbas (named in John). All four Gospels mention the chief priests,⁶ the high priest (Caiaphas),⁷ the experts of the law (scribes),⁸ the lay aristocrats (elders, leaders),⁹ the Pharisees,¹⁰ the Sadducees,¹¹ and the Sanhedrin¹² as opponents who engineer Jesus’ elimination; all four Gospels mention Judas Iscariot,¹³ the disciple who delivered Jesus to the Jewish authorities, and all four Gospels mention Pontius Pilate.¹⁴

The following description of these individuals and groups begins with Jesus and the Twelve, followed by other male and then female disciples of Jesus, and lastly by further individuals and groups more or less in the sequence in which they appear in the Gospels.

1. Jesus

It is not a surprise that Jesus is the most frequently mentioned person in the Gospels’ accounts of Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem. After all, the Gospels are biographical accounts of Jesus’ ministry,¹⁵ with a focus on his last week in Jerusalem, the latter comprising approximately a third of the material in the Gospels.¹⁶ The Greek name Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous) occurs 214 times in the Gospel writers’ accounts of Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem, with a particularly high frequency in John and Matthew.¹⁷ The Greek form of the name reproduces the Hebrew name יֵשׁוּעַ (Yeshuaʿ), which is a later form of the Hebrew name יְהוֹשׁוּעַ (Yehoshuaʿ, in English rendered as Joshua), meaning Yahweh saves or Yahweh is salvation. The name Jesus was popular among Jews: among the ninety-nine most popular male names among Palestinian Jews before AD 200, Jesus is sixth (after Simon, Joseph, Lazarus, Judas, and John).¹⁸ Josephus mentions nineteen individuals with the name Jesus.

Jesus is identified with reference to his place of origin—Jesus the Nazarene, or Jesus of Nazareth—by the arrest party (John 18:5, 7), by a slave girl of Caiaphas (who first identified him as Jesus the Galilean; Matt 26:69, 71), by Pontius Pilate (John 19:19), by the angel in the empty tomb (Mark 16:6), and by Cleopas who is on the way to Emmaus (Luke 24:19; earlier in the Gospels: Mark 1:24, 10:47; Luke 4:34, 18:37). Jesus’ mother was Mary, and Luke emphasizes in his account and in his genealogy of Jesus that Jesus’ birth is the result of a direct creative act of God (Luke 1:26–38, 3:23–38). According to Matthew 1:16, Jesus’ grandfather was Jacob, and Eli (Heli) according to Luke 3:23. Julius Africanus, in his Letter to Aristides known through Eusebius (written in the second quarter of the third century AD), harmonizes the two names of Joseph’s father in the following manner: Jacob and Eli were half brothers, with different fathers but the same mother; Eli died without children, then Jacob married Eli’s widow in a levirate marriage which produced Joseph. Thus, Eli was the legal father of Joseph, Jacob the biological father. While this explanation may sound much too ingenious to be true, it should be noted that Julius Africanus attributes this explanation to Jesus’ relatives: he says specifically that the tradition goes back to Joseph’s grandmother Estha, and that the tradition was handed down by the family of Jesus.¹⁹ Matthew and Mark relate that Jesus had four brothers: James, Joses, Judas, and Simon; the reference to sisters indicates that there were at least two sisters (Matt 13:55–56 // Mark 6:3). The suggestion of Jerome that brother means cousin here is implausible since Mark surely would have used the standard Greek term for cousin (ἀνεψιός, anepsios) if the four named men were not children of Joseph or Mary. Epiphanius’s suggestion that the four brothers were sons of Joseph from an earlier marriage and thus could be called Jesus’ stepbrothers is not impossible.²⁰ This is the earliest view unambiguously attested before Tertullian, and receives plausibility from the fact that Jesus is called son of Mary. This is significant since the Old Testament repeatedly distinguishes a man’s sons by one wife from his sons by another wife,²¹ which may suggest that Mary was not the biological mother of the four brothers. However, since neither Matthew, Mark, or Luke indicates that Joseph was previously married, it seems best to understand the term brother in the most common sense of a full brother, an opinion held by the church father Helvidius.²² For Jesus’ family tree see chapter 1, section 16 (1.16). Since the use of Greek was widespread in Galilee and many Jews living in Galilee were bilingual, it is possible that Jesus could have known Greek.²³

In their accounts of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee, Matthew, Mark, and Luke focus on Jesus’ message that God is now fulfilling his purpose of the messianic deliverance of Israel and, ultimately, of the world—the kingdom of God has come near, and people should therefore repent and believe in the good news (Matt 4:17, Mark 1:14–15; cf. Luke 4:43–44). Jesus calls disciples in order to train them to fish for people (Matt 4:18–22, Mark 1:16–20). He teaches in synagogues and in the open air, before small and large crowds. He heals the sick and exorcizes evil spirits. He argues with sympathizers, skeptics, and opponents. Toward the later part of his ministry, when his disciples have recognized and acknowledged that he is the Messiah,²⁴ Jesus instructed his disciples about the connection between himself, his proclamation of the kingdom of God, and his violent death and resurrection, a connection which affects the values and modes of their own behavior (see Mark 8:22–10:52).

All four Gospels agree that the opposition to Jesus began early in his public ministry. Some law experts in Capernaum accused Jesus of blasphemy when he healed the sick, drove out evil spirits, and claimed to have the divine authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:6–7). Luke specifies that this charge was leveled against Jesus by Pharisees and law experts who had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem (Luke 5:17, 21). Pharisees accused him of breaking the Sabbath law.²⁵ Representatives of religious and political groups plotted Jesus’ elimination when he healed on the Sabbath—Mark 3:6 mentions Galilean Pharisees and the Herodians as Jesus’ early opponents (cf. Matt 12:14 and Luke 6:11 mentioning the Pharisees). John relates that when Jesus placed his healing activity on the Sabbath on the same level as the creative activity of God (who, as the Creator, sustains the world on the Sabbath as he does on the other days of the week), the Jews, here the Jerusalem authorities, plotted to kill Jesus (John 5:18).²⁶ Some Pharisees concluded that Jesus was demon-possessed and that his authority to drive out evil spirits was inspired by the devil (Matt 9:34). Law experts from Jerusalem who evidently traveled to Galilee on a fact-finding mission concerning Jesus’ ministry arrived at the same conclusion (Mark 3:22).²⁷ In a foundational parable—the parable of the four soils, traditionally referred to as the parable of the sower²⁸—Jesus expounded his teaching of the kingdom of God in terms of mystery and explained both the enthusiastic response and the opposition to his ministry. Another delegation from Jerusalem consisting of Pharisees and law experts challenged Jesus regarding his view and practice of ritual purity demanded by the law (Matt 15:1–2, Mark 7:1–5). Pharisees challenged Jesus concerning his view of divorce, evidently with the intention to establish that he contradicted Moses, who allowed divorce (Matt 19:3, Mark 10:2).²⁹ Eventually Jesus predicted that the religious and lay aristocratic authorities would reject him, arrest him, and kill him.³⁰

According to John it was the raising of the deceased Lazarus that prompted the chief priests and the Pharisees—John’s expression for the ruling group in Judea³¹—to convene a meeting of the Sanhedrin (John 11:46–53). In a session of the supreme council in Jerusalem, the high priest Caiaphas advised the elimination of Jesus in order to avoid the destruction of the temple and of the Jewish people, with the result that the council members planned from that day on to put Jesus to death (John 11:53). The raising of Lazarus was a key event in leading to Jesus’ prosecution and execution.³²

Jesus is mentioned in all pericopes that narrate his last week in Jerusalem. Jesus is explicitly active in the earlier events of the week, demonstrated by the fact that he is often the subject of the verbs, while he is more often passively present in the later events, seen in the fact that he is often mentioned as the object of the verbs that report the actions of the chief priests or their retainers and of Pontius Pilate and his soldiers. Jesus’ actions and teaching will be treated in chapter 4.

2. The Twelve

Matthew, Mark, and Luke report that Jesus called twelve followers to be his companions during his travels through Galilee and beyond, to be trained to do what he himself was doing. They are called the twelve disciples (οἱ δώδεκα μαθηταί, hoi dōdeka mathētai),³³ twelve apostles (οἱ δώδεκα ἀπόστολοι, hoi dōdeka apostoloi),³⁴ and, most frequently, simply the Twelve (οἱ δώδεκα, hoi dōdeka).³⁵ Despite the skepticism of some critics, the historicity of a group of twelve disciples whom Jesus called to travel with him and whom Jesus commissioned to carry on what he had been doing is firmly rooted in the tradition.³⁶ Jesus’ call and commission is recounted for five of the core disciples—Peter and Andrew, James, John, and Matthew/Levi.³⁷ The lists of the disciples divide the names of the twelve disciples into three groups of four names.³⁸ Peter always heads the first group, Philip the second, and James son of Alphaeus the third group. In the first group, Matthew and Luke keep the two pairs of brothers together (Simon and Andrew, and James and John), while Mark may have wanted to place in first position the names of the three disciples to whom Jesus gave nicknames and who form the inner circle of the Twelve.³⁹ In the book of Acts, Luke places Peter and John first as the leading members of the Twelve.⁴⁰ In the third group, Thaddaeus is probably identical to Judas son of James.⁴¹

Table 2: The Names of Jesus’ Twelve Disciples