John 11 and The Sanhedrin Council

Question

John is very specific in his writings about the Sanhedrin's plot to kill Jesus. Yet John was not in those meetings. So how could he know what exactly was discussed?

Answer 1

The most probable explanation for what John tells us in his chapter 11 is that was handed down to him, whether from eyewitnesses or second-hand. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were both members of the council. Both were either sympathizers or secret believers. Moreover, John 7:49-51 tells us that Nicodemus successfully prevented the Sanhedrin from convicting Jesus at an earlier attempt. Luke 23 says that Joseph, too, though a member of a council, was not part of the plot to kill Jesus.

50 Now there was a virtuous and righteous man named Joseph who, though he was a member of the council, 51 had not consented to their plan of action.

Finally, we should be aware that John's account does not say that Jesus was ever convicted by an actual trial before the Sanhedrin. Rather, he was sent to the high priest (not the council) after a private hearing at the home of the former high priest. The Sanhedrin is not mentioned in this chapter.

The band of soldiers, the tribune, and the Jewish guards seized Jesus, bound him, 13 and brought him to Annas first. He was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year... 19 The [former] high priest [Annas] questioned Jesus about his disciples and about his doctrine... 24 Then Annas sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest... 28 Then they brought Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium.

Conclusion: John says in his chapter 7 that Nicodemus thwarted an earlier attempt to convict Jesus in the Sanhedrin. In chapter 11, a plot against Jesus by council members is described. In the end, John tells us that the purpose of the plot succeeded, but not by an act of the Sanhedrin. In any case, Nicodemus or Joseph of Arimathea are John's most likely informants about the plot mentioned in chapter 11. However this information could easily have been reported by anyone present, or by second- and third-hand accounts.

Answer 2

The most likely answer is:

Eyewitness testimony:

There were members of the Sanhedrin who were sympathetic to Jesus. It's also likely that some later became followers of Christianity. If this is indeed the case, then they may have shared what transpired in those meetings.

Take one example, where Nicodemus, a member of the Sanhedrin, showed interest in Jesus’ teachings.

There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 2 This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.” (John 3:1-2)

See John 3:1-10. Nicodemus later helped prepare Jesus’ body for burial (John 19:39-42).

If not that, then it is probable that some of the Christians had connections to the Sanhedrin or had been privy to its discussions. If this information circulated it could have reached John.

Answer 3

The short answer to this question is: We are not told so we do not know. However, there are, based on the rest of scripture two plausible explanations for John's non-eye-witness account of the proceedings of the Sanhedrin

1. John was a prophet and an author of five NT books. As such, he was inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:19-21, 2 Tim 3:16, 17); thus, John may have been given the information by direct, divine revelation.
2. There were members of the Sanhedrin who were sympathetic to Jesus and His disciples such as Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. These and/or others may have reported to John what went on.

Both these possibilities are equally possible. It may also have been a combination of both. However, we are not told.