Matthew 26:3-5

Matthew 26:3-5

[3] Then  assembled together  the chief priests,  and  the elders  of the people,  unto  the palace  of the high priest,  who  was called  Caiaphas,  [4] And  consulted  that  they might take  Jesus  by subtilty,  and  kill  [5] But  Not  on  the feast  there be  an uproar  among  the people. 

What does Matthew 26:3-5 Mean?

Contextual Meaning

Opposition to Jesus had been rising for some time (cf. Matthew 12:14; Matthew 21:45-46). Matthew"s mention of this plot"s advance toward its climax following Jesus" prediction ( Matthew 26:2) has the effect of showing that His enemies" conspiracy was ultimately a result of Jesus" sovereign authority. He was not a powerless pawn under their control. He was really orchestrating His own passion.
The chief priests and elders represented the clerical and lay members of the Sanhedrin respectively (cf. Matthew 21:23). At this time Rome appointed Israel"s high priest. Annas had been the high priest until A.D15 when the Romans deposed him and set up his son Eleazar in his place. Eleazar served for about two years (A.D16-17) until the Romans replaced him with Joseph Caiaphas in A.D18. Caiaphas held the office until his death in A.D36. [1] His unusually long tenure reflects his political skill and his acceptability to the Roman prefects.
The Old Testament regarded the high priest as high priest until his death. Consequently the Jews still viewed Annas as the high priest. This probably explains why Matthew and John spoke of Caiaphas as the high priest ( John 11:49), but Luke said Annas was the high priest ( Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6). Annas was Caiaphas" father-in-law and continued to exercise much power even after the Romans forced him out of office.
The Jewish leaders plotted to execute an innocent man in the very place where justice should have been strongest. The spiritual leader of Israel, the high priest, took a leading role in this travesty. Matthew"s original Jewish readers could not help marveling at this injustice. However the chief priests and elders were representatives of the people, so the people shared part of the blame. The leaders resorted to deceit because they could not trap Jesus with questions and turn the crowds against Him or take Him by force.
"In portraying the leaders throughout the passion, Matthew orchestrates numerous variations both on this theme of "deception" and on the related theme of "self-deception."" [2]
Jerusalem"s population swelled with pilgrims during Passover season. Since Jesus had a large following, especially among the Galileans, the leaders realized that they had to plan to do away with Him secretly and carefully lest popular sentiment turn against them. They did not know how to solve their problem until Judas volunteered to hand Jesus over to them privately.