SANCTUARY
preserved,"
and
thus
found
'blameless
in
holiness
before
God
at
the
coming
of
our
Lord
Jesus'
(3").
This
supplication
touches
the
ideal
life
in
Christ;
but
it
is
an
ideal
to
the
present
Christian
state,
and
is
not
to
be
relegated
to
the
visionary
or
the
celestial:
'
Faithful
is
he
who
calleth
you;
who
also
will
do
it'
(1
Th
5").
St.
John
does
not
employ
in
his
Epistles
either
'sanctify'
or
'sanctiflcation,'
but
their
whole
sub-stance
is
there.
1
Jn
I"-
and
2"-
recall
the
teaching
of
Hebrews
In
spealsing
of
'the
propitiation'
made
by
our
'Advocate,'
whose
'blood
cleanses
from
all
sin'
and
thus
brings
the
sinner
into
'fellowship
with
the
Father.'
Paul's
doctrine
of
holiness
is
resumed
in
such
passages
as
S*"-
4'"-
5"-
^,
setting
forth
union
with
Christ
through
the
indwelling
Spirit
as
the
spring
of
a
new,
eternal
life
for
the
man,
in
the
strength
of
which
God's
commandments
are
Icept
In
love,
sin
and
fear
are
cast
out,
and
the
world
is
overcome.
G.
G.
Findlat.
SANOTUART.—
See
High
Place
;,Tabehnacle,
11(6)
;
Temple.
SAND.
—
Minute
particles
of
silex,
mica,
felspar,
etc.,
easily
rolled
before
the
wind;
hence,
probably,
its
Heb.
name,
chSl.
It
lies
in
great
stretches
along
the
Palestinian
and
Egyptian
sea-board
—
an
apt
symbol
of
the
incalculably
vast
or
numerous
(Gn
22"
41",
Jer
3322
etc.).
For
'sand,'
in
Job
29",
we
should
probably
read,
with
RVm,
'phoenix.'
However
compact
and
firm,
sand
at
once
becomes
soft
at
the
touch
of
water
(Mt
7"
etc.).
W.
EwiNG.
SANDAL.—
See
Dress,
6.
SAND
FLIES.—
See
Lice.
SAND
LIZARD.—
See
Lizabd.
SANHEDRIM.-
The
Gr.
word
synedrion
(EV
council)
became
so
familiar
to
the
Jews
that
they
adopted
it
in
the
form
of
Sanhedrin,
which
occurs
very
frequently
both
in
Josephus
and
in
the
Talmud.
1.
According
to
Rabbinical
tradition,
the
Sanhedrin
was
originally
created
by
Moses
in
obedience
to
Divine
command
(cf
.
Nu
11"),
and
it
is
taught
that
this
assembly
existed,
and
exercised
judicial
functions,
throughout
the
whole
period
of
Biblical
history
right
up
to
Talmudic
times.
That
this
cannot
have
been
the
case
is
seen
already
in
the
fact
that,
according
to
Biblical
authority
itself,
king
Jehoshaphat
is
mentioned
as
having
instituted
the
supreme
court
at
Jerusalem
(2
Ch
19');
but
that
this
court
cannot
have
been
identical
with
the
Sanhedrin
of
later
times
is
clear
from
the
fact
that,
whereas
the
latter
had
governing
powers
as
well
as
judicial
functions,
the
former
was
a
court
of
justice
and
nothing
else.
It
is
possible
that
the
'elders'
mentioned
in
the
Book
of
Ezra
(5'-
•
6'-
"
10«)
and
'rulers'
in
the
Book
of
Nehemiah
(2'«
4»
<")•
"
('»)
5'
7')
constituted
a
body
which
to
some
extent
corresponded
to
the
Sanhedrin
properly
so
called.
But
seeing
that
the
Sanhedrin
is
often
referred
to
as
a
Gerousia
(.i.e.
an
aristocratic,
as
distinct
from
a
democratic,
body),
and
that
as
such
it
is
not
mentioned
before
the
time
of
Antiochus
the
Great
(B.C.
223-187),
it
is
reasonably
certain
that,
in
its
more
developed
form
at
all
events,
it
did
not
exist
before
the
Greek
period.
The
Sanhedrin
is
referred
to
under
the
name
Gerousia
(EV
senate)
in
2
Mac
1>»
4",
Jth
4'
ll»
15'
and
elsewhere
in
the
Apocr.,
in
Ac
5*',
and
frequently
in
Josephus,
e.g.
Ant.
iv.
viii.
41.
The
Sanhedrin
was
conceived
of
mainly
as
a
court
of
justice,
the
equivalent
Heb.
term
being
Beth
Din,
and
it
is
in
this
sense
that
it
is
usually
referred
to
in
the
NT
(see,
e.g.,
Mt
S»
26",
Mk
15',
Lk
22««,
Jn
11",
Ac
4"
521
612
22™
etc.).
Sometimes
in
the
NT
the
terms
Presbyterion
and
Gerousia
are
used
in
reference
to
the
Sanhedrin
(Ac
5"
22').
A
member
of
this
court
was
called
a
bouleutes
('councillor').
Joseph
of
Arimathaea
was
one
(Mk
15",
Lk
23'»).
The
Sanhedrin
was
abolished
after
the
destruction
of
Jerusalem
(a.d.
70).
2.
As
regards
the
composition
of
the
Sanhedrin,
the
SANHEDRIN
hereditary
high
priest
stood
at
the
head
of
it,
and
in
its
fundamental
character
it
formed
a
sacerdotal
aristocracy,
and
represented
the
nobility,
i.e.
predominantly
the
Sadducsean
interest;
but
under
Herod,
who
favoured
the
Pharisaic
party
in
his
desire
to
restrict
the
power
and
influence
of
the
old
nobility,
the
Sadducaean
element
in
the
Sanhedrin
became
less
prominent,
while
that
of
the
Pharisees
increased.
So
that
during
the
Roman
period
the
Sanhedrin
contained
representatives
of
two
opposed
parties,
the
priestly
nobility
with
its
Sadducsean
sympathies,
and
the
learned
Pharisees.
According
to
the
Mishna,
the
Sanhedrin
consisted
of
seventy-one
members
(Sanhed.
i.
6);
when
a
vacancy
occurred
the
members
co-opted
some
one
'from
the
congregation'
to
fill
the
place
(Sanhed.
iv.
4),
and
he
was
admitted
by
the
ceremony
of
the
laying
on
of
hands.
3.
The
extent
of
the
Sanhedrin'
a
jurisdiction
varied
at
different
times
in
its
history;
while,
in
a
certain
sense,
it
exercised
civil
jurisdiction
over
all
Jewish
communities,
wherever
they
existed,
during
the
time
of
Christ
this
was
restricted
to
Judasa
proper;
it
was
for
this
reason
that
it
had
no
judicial
authority
over
Him
so
long
as
He
remained
in
Galilee.
Its
orders
were,
however,
very
soon
after
the
time
of
Christ,
regarded
as
binding
by
orthodox
Jews
all
over
the
world.
Thus
we
see
that
it
could
issue
warrants
for
the
apprehension
of
Christians
in
Damascus
to
the
synagogue
there
(Ac
9^
22'
26");
but
the
extent
to
which
Jewish
communities
outside
of
Judaea
were
willing
to
submit
to
such
orders
depended
entirely
on
how
far
they
were
favourably
disposed
towards
the
central
authority;
it
was
only
within
the
limits
of
Judaea
proper
that
real
authority
could
be
exercised
by
the
Sanhedrin.
It
was
thus
the
supreme
native
court,
as
contrasted
with
the
foreign
authority
of
Rome;
to
it
belonged
all
such
judicial
matters
as
the
local
provincial
courts
were
incompetent
to
deal
with,
or
as
the
Roman
procurator
did
not
attend
to
himself.
Above
all,
it
was
the
final
court
of
appeal
for
questions
connected
with
the
Mosaic
Law;
its
decision
having
once
been
given,
the
judges
of
the
lower
courts
were,
on
pain
of
death,
bound
to
acquiesce
in
it.
The
NT
offers
some
interesting
examples
of
the
kind
of
matters
that
were
brought
before
it:
Christ
appeared
before
it
on
a
charge
of
blasphemy
(Mt
26",
Jn
19'),
Peter
and
John
were
accused
before
it
of
being
false
prophets
and
deceivers
of
the
people
(Ac
4'B),
Stephen
was
condemned
by
it
because
of
blasphemy
(Ac
7"-
"),
and
Paul
was
charged
with
transgression
of
the
Mosaic
Law
(Ac
22"').
It
had
independent
authority
and
right
to
arrest
people
by
its
own
officers
(Mt
26",
Mk
14",
Ac
4»--Si'-
");
it
had
also
the
power
of
finally
disposing,
tftj,lts^own
authority,
of
such
cases
as
did
not
involve
smtence
of
death
(Ac
4'-2'
5"-'").
It
was
only
in
cases
when
the
sentence
of
death
was
pronounced
that
the
latter
had
to
be
ratified
by
the
Roman
authorities
(Jn
18");
the
case
of
the
stoning
of
Stephen
must
be
regarded
as
an
instance
of
mob-justice.
,
While
the
Sanhedrin
could
not
hold
a
court
of
supreme
jurisdiction
in
the
absence,
or,
at
all
events,
without
the
consent,
of
the
Roman
procurator,
it
enjoyed,
„^
nevertheless,
wide
powers
within
the
sphere
of
its
ex-tensive
jurisdiction.
At
the
same
time,
it
had
some-times
to
submit
to
the
painful
experience
of
realizing
its
dependent
position
in
face
of
the
Roman
power,
even
in
matters
which
might
be
regarded
as
peculiarly
within
the
scope
of
its
own
jurisdiction;
for
the
Roman
authorities
could
at
any
time
take
the
initiative
them-selves,
and
proceed
independently
of
the
Jewish
court,
as
the
NT
testifies,
e.g.
in
the
case
of
Paul's
arrest
(see
also
Ac
23"-
2»-
2»).
4.
The
Sanhedrin
met
in
the
Temple,
in
what
was
called
the
Lishkath
ha-Gazith
(the
'
Hall
of
hewn-stones
')
as
a
general
rule,
though
an
exception
is
recorded
in
Mt
26'™-,
Mk
14"'-.
The
members
sat
in
a
semicircle
in
order
to
be
able
to
see
each
other;
in
front
stood
clerks
of
the
court,
and
behind
these,
three
rows
of
the
disciples
