Luke 20:7
And they answered, that they could not tell whence it was.
Original Language Analysis
καὶ
And
G2532
καὶ
And
Strong's:
G2532
Word #:
1 of 5
and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words
ἀπεκρίθησαν
they answered
G611
ἀπεκρίθησαν
they answered
Strong's:
G611
Word #:
2 of 5
to conclude for oneself, i.e., (by implication) to respond; by hebraism (compare h6030) to begin to speak (where an address is expected)
μὴ
not
G3361
μὴ
not
Strong's:
G3361
Word #:
3 of 5
(adverb) not, (conjunction) lest; also (as an interrogative implying a negative answer (whereas g3756 expects an affirmative one)) whether
Historical Context
The Sanhedrin's role included evaluating prophetic claims and protecting Israel from false prophets (Deuteronomy 13:1-5, 18:20-22). Their profession of inability to judge John's ministry was an admission of failure. In first-century Judaism, discerning true from false prophets was a core responsibility of religious leadership. Their evasion wasn't humble agnosticism but abdication of duty, revealing that political expedience had replaced spiritual discernment as their operating principle.
Questions for Reflection
- How does claiming uncertainty about clear truth become a form of moral cowardice?
- What does this evasion teach about the relationship between intellectual honesty and spiritual authority?
- In what situations are Christians today tempted to claim uncertainty rather than speak costly truth?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
And they answered, that they could not tell whence it was—The Greek οὐκ εἰδέναι (ouk eidenai, "not to know") reveals their cowardly evasion. This wasn't honest uncertainty but deliberate refusal to state the obvious. They claim ignorance about what they actually knew, choosing the safety of agnosticism over the risk of truth. Their "we cannot tell" is intellectual dishonesty masquerading as judicious caution.
This response reveals the moral dimension of truth-seeking. They possessed sufficient evidence to judge John's ministry—crowds, prophecies fulfilled, powerful preaching, holy lifestyle. Their profession of uncertainty wasn't lack of evidence but lack of courage. By refusing to commit, they thought to escape Jesus' trap, but instead they disqualified themselves as judges of His authority. If they couldn't discern John's obvious prophetic credentials, they had no standing to evaluate Jesus. Their evasion exposed their incompetence or dishonesty—either way, they lost authority to question Him.