Critics often assume that the Gospels depict an official, full meeting of the entire Sanhedrin in the middle of the night at the house of the High Priest. This impression is derived from an overly literal reading of Mark 14:55 and Matthew 26:59, which state that 'the whole Sanhedrin' was looking for evidence against Jesus. Critics then use later Rabbinic rules (from the Mishnah) to argue that such a trial was grossly illegal and therefore historically fabricated.

This impression of a trial before the entire Sanhedrin is a misunderstanding. Stating that 'the whole Sanhedrin' was present should no more be taken to mean that every single member was there than saying that someone who testified before Congress had the exclusive attention of all 535 members. If it had been a full meeting, dissidents like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus would have been present and would not have voted for conviction.

For Mark and Matthew, the presence of the chiefs of the Sanhedrin (or a quorum) meant that the vested power of that body was there. In their everyday view of justice, this constituted a formal action. The phrase is indicative of typical Semitic hyperbole (i.e., 'They were all out to get Jesus') or a literary effort to portray Jesus standing alone against all adversaries. Luke and John provide the more precise historical details, revealing that the nighttime gathering was an informal interrogation and fact-finding inquiry by the High Priest, designed to frame a political charge to bring before Pilate the next morning.