Teks -- Luke 3:2 (NET)

3:2 during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.

Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Kata/Frasa (per frasa)

Robertson: Luk 3:2 - The Word of God came unto John

The Word of God came unto John ( egeneto rhēma theou epi Iōanēn ).

The great epoch marked by egeneto rather than ēn . Rhēma theou is some particular utterance of God (Plummer), common in lxx, here alone in the N.T. Then John is introduced as the son of Zacharias according to Chapter 1. Matthew describes him as the Baptist, Mark as the Baptizer. No other Gospel mentions Zacharias. Mark begins his Gospel here, but Matthew and Luke have two Infancy Chapters before. Luke alone tells of the coming of the word to John. All three Synoptics locate him "in the wilderness"(en tēi erēmōi ) as here, Mar 1:4; Mat 3:1 (adding "of Judea").

Vincent: Luk 3:2 - Came

Came ( ἐγένετο )

Lit., arose, or came to pass.

Vincent: Luk 3:2 - John

John

The Synoptists introduce him under different titles. Here, the son of Zacharias ; Matthew, the Baptist ; Mark, the Baptizer.

Wesley: Luk 3:2 - Annas being high priest, and Caiaphas

There could be but one high priest, strictly speaking, at once. Annas was the high priest at that time, and Caiaphas his sagan or deputy.

JFB: Luk 3:1-2 - the fifteenth year of Tiberius

Reckoning from the period when he was admitted, three years before Augustus' death, to a share of the empire [WEBSTER and WILKINSON], about the end of the year of Rome 779, or about four years before the usual reckoning.

JFB: Luk 3:1-2 - Pilate . . . governor of Judea

His proper title was Procurator, but with more than the usual powers of that office. After holding it about ten years he was ordered to Rome, to answer to charges brought against him, but ere he arrived Tiberius died (A.D. 35), and soon after Pilate committed suicide.

JFB: Luk 3:1-2 - Herod

(See on Mar 6:14).

JFB: Luk 3:1-2 - Philip

A different and very superior Philip to the one whose wife Herodias went to live with Herod Antipas. (See Mar 6:17).

JFB: Luk 3:1-2 - Iturea

To the northeast of Palestine; so called from Ishmael's son Itur or Jetur (1Ch 1:31), and anciently belonging to the half tribe of Manasseh.

JFB: Luk 3:1-2 - Trachonitis

Farther to the northeast, between Iturea and Damascus; a rocky district, infested by robbers, and committed by Augustus to Herod the Great to keep in order.

JFB: Luk 3:1-2 - Abilene

Still more to the northeast, so called from Abila, eighteen miles from Damascus [ROBINSON].

JFB: Luk 3:2 - Annas and Caiaphas . . . high priests

The former, though deposed, retained much of his influence, and, probably, as sagan or deputy, exercised much of the power of the high priesthood along with Caiaphas (Joh 18:13; Act 4:6). Both Zadok and Abiathar acted as high priests in David's time (2Sa 15:35), and it seems to have become the fixed practice to have two (2Ki 25:18). (Also see on Mat 3:1.)

JFB: Luk 3:2 - word of God came unto John

Such formulas, of course, are never used when speaking of Jesus, because the divine nature manifested itself in Him not at certain isolated moments of His life. He was the one everlasting manifestation of the Godhead--THE WORD [OLSHAUSEN].

Clarke: Luk 3:2 - Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests

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 כהן משנה cohen mishneh , or סגן כהנים sagan cohanim , the high priest’ s deputy, or ruler of the temple. See the note on Mat 2:4, and on Joh 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

Clarke: Luk 3:2 - The word of God came unto John

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 honor 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, etc., 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.

Calvin: Luk 3:2 - Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests // The word of the Lord came upon John

Luk 3:2.Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests It is certain, that there never were two persons who held the office of high priest at the same time. Josephus states, that Valerius Gratus made Caiaphas high priest, a short time before he left the government. During the time that Pilate was governor of Judea, Josephus does not speak of him as having made any change in this respect; ²⁴⁴ but, on the contrary, states that, when Pilate had been recalled from the government, and sent to plead his cause at Rome, Vitellius, who was at that time governor of Syria, reduced Caiaphas to a private rank, and transferred the high priesthood to Jonathan, the son of Ananus, (Ant. 18:4:3.) When Luke says that there were two high priests, we must not understand him to mean, that both held the same title, but that the honor of the priesthood was partly shared with him by Annas his father-in-law. Luke’s narrative indicates such a state of trouble and confusion, that, though there was not more than one person who was actually high priest, the sacred office was torn in pieces by ambition and tyranny.

The word of the Lord came upon John Before relating, as the other Evangelists do, that John began to exercise his office of teaching, Luke asserts that he was divinely called to that office: and he does so, in order to assure us, that the ministry of John carried undoubted authority. Why the interpreters have chosen to translate the word, ἐπὶ ᾿Ιωάννην, UPON John, instead of TO John, I do not see: but because there is no ambiguity as to the meaning, that this commission was entrusted to him, and that he received a command to preach, I have followed the received version. Hence infer, that there are no regular teachers, but those on whom God has conferred the office; and that it is not enough to have the word of God, if there be not likewise a special calling.

Matthew and Mark do not speak of the preaching of John as extending beyond the wilderness, while Luke says, that he came into all the country around Jordan These statements may be reconciled by observing, that John discharged the office of teaching among the neighbors, with whom he dwelt; but that his Gospel spread more widely, and became known in many places, so that the report of it, in a short time, reached Jerusalem. Indeed, the whole of that tract of the Jordan might be called a wilderness: for the word does not mean “a solitude,” but “a rough, and mountainous, and thinly inhabited district.”

Defender: Luk 3:2 - came unto John

This call to John the Baptist came about sixteen to eighteen years after the events associated with the previous verses. Tiberius had succeeded Augustus as emperor (Luk 3:1) and continued in power through all the rest of the events described in the four gospels. To show that John's ministry was in fulfillment of prophecy, Luke quotes (in Luk 3:4-5) more of Isaiah's prophecy (Isa 40:3-4) than any of the other three writers, though all refer to it. John was obviously a preacher with great courage (Luk 3:7-14), no matter who was present."

TSK: Luk 3:2 - Annas // the word // in

Annas : Joh 11:49-51, Joh 18:13, Joh 18:14, Joh 18:24; Act 4:6

the word : Luk 1:59-63; Jer 1:2, Jer 2:1; Eze 1:3; Hos 1:1, Hos 1:2; Jon 1:1; Mic 1:1; Zep 1:1

in : Luk 1:80; Isa 40:3; Mat 3:1, Mat 11:7; Mar 1:3; Joh 1:23

Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Kata/Frasa (per Ayat)

Lightfoot: Luk 3:2 - Annas and Caiaphas being high priests

Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.   

[Annas and Caiaphas being high priests.] They do constitute two high priests at one time. True indeed: but they promoted a sagan; together with a high priest.  

The 'sagan,' as to his degree, was the same to the high priest, as he that was next or second to the king.   

They substituted, indeed, on the vespers of the day of expiation, another priest to the high priest, that should be in readiness to perform the office for the day, if any uncleanness should by chance have befallen the high priest.  

"It is storied of Ben Elam of Zipporim, that when a gonorrhea had seized the high priest on the day of expiation, he went in and performed the office for that day. And another story of Simeon Ben Kamith, that as he was walking with the king on the vespers of the day of expiation, his garments were touched with another's spittle, so that Judah his brother went in and ministered. On that day the mother of them saw her two sons high priests."  

It is not without reason controverted, whether the sagan were the same with this deputed priest: the Jews themselves dispute it. I would be on the negative part: for the sagan was not so much the vice high priest; as (if I may so speak) one set over the priests. The same with the ruler of the temple; of whom we have such frequent mention among the doctors: upon him chiefly did the care and charge of the service of the temple lie.  

" The ruler of the temple saith to them; Go out and see if it be time to slay the sacrifice." " The ruler saith; Come and cast your lots who shall slay the sacrifice, who shall sprinkle the blood," etc. The Gloss is, the ruler is the 'sagan.'   

He is commonly called the 'sagan' of the priests; which argues his supremacy among the priests, rather than his vicegerency under the high priest.  

"When the high priest stands in the circle of those that are to comfort the mourners, the sagan and he that is anointed for the battle, stand on his right hand; and the head of the father's house; those that mourn, and all the people stand on his left hand."  

Mark here the order of the sagan; he is below the high priest, but above the heads of all the courses.  

2Ki 23:4; the priests of the second order: Targum, the 'sagan' of the priests. And 2Ki 25:18, Zephaniah the second priest; Targum, Zephaniah 'the sagan' of the priests.  

Caiaphas therefore was the high priest, and Annas the sagan or ruler of the temple; who, for his independent dignity, is called high priest as well as Caiaphas; and seems therefore to be named first, because he was the other's father-in-law.   

There was a dissension between Hanan and the sons of the chief priests; etc. It was in a judicial cause, about a wife requiring her dower, etc. Where the scruple is, who should these chief priests be? whether the fathers and heads of the courses, or the high priest only and the sagan. It was a council of priests; which we have already spoken to at Mat 26:3. Now the question is, whether by the "sons of the chief priests," be meant the sons of the fathers of courses, or the fathers of courses themselves, or the sons of the high priest and the sagan; where the high priest in that court was like the prince in the Sanhedrim; and the sagan the father of the Sanhedrim.  

"Moses was made a sagan to Aaron. He put on his garments, and took them off [viz. on the day of his consecration]. And as he was his sagan in life, so he was in death too."

Haydock: Luk 3:2 - Under the high priests, Annas and Caiphas

Under the high priests, Annas and Caiphas. There was properly but one high priest at a time; and Caiphas had this office and title all the ten years that Pilate governed Judea. See Josephus, lib. xviii. Antiq. chap. iii. ---

In these short notes I shall not pretend to examine the chronological difficulties, as to Christ's birth, death, &c. (Witham)

Gill: Luk 3:2 - Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests // the word of God came to John the son of Zachariah // in the wilderness

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" בכל העולם, "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, אין ממנין שני כהנים גדולים כאחת "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, Joh 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, סגן כהנים, "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", שני כהנים גדולים ביום אחד "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, Jer 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.