Strong’s Greek 1455 designates individuals clandestinely inserted into a group for hostile or manipulative ends. The focus is not on reconnaissance alone but on covert participation with the purpose of betrayal or entrapment.

Key Occurrence (Luke 20:20)

The only New Testament use appears in Luke 20:20. The religious leadership “sent spies who pretended to be righteous in order to trap Him in His words”. These men secretly join the crowds around Jesus, feigning discipleship to secure evidence that could be used against Him before Roman authority. The verse reveals four traits of such infiltrators:

1. Commissioned by hostile powers (“sent”).
2. Skilled in camouflage (“pretended to be righteous”).
3. Intent on verbal entanglement (“trap Him in His words”).
4. Serving a larger political agenda (“hand Him over to the authority and power of the governor”).

Historical Context

First-century Palestine was a tinderbox of political suspicion. Religious leaders feared Roman reprisal if messianic hopes stirred the populace (John 11:48). Employing undercover operatives was a common tactic among both Roman officials and Jewish authorities. The term therefore evokes the atmosphere of political espionage rather than ordinary temple policing.

Old Testament and Intertestamental Parallels

• Numbers 13:17; Joshua 2:1 – spies sent into Canaan reveal that espionage was already part of Israel’s history, though originally for divinely sanctioned reconnaissance, contrasting sharply with Luke 20’s malicious intent.
• Psalm 41:6-9 – David laments treacherous visitors who “speak falsehood” and “whisper together,” prefiguring the betrayal motif.
• The intertestamental period saw sectarian strife (Josephus, Antiquities 12.5.3) where informants within rival groups reported to foreign powers.

New Testament Echoes of Covert Infiltration

• Galatians 2:4 – “false brothers secretly brought in,” paralleling the hidden entry of 1455.
• Jude 4 – “certain men have crept in unnoticed.”
• Matthew 7:15 – “wolves in sheep’s clothing” expresses the same duplicity.

Though the vocabulary differs, the phenomenon is identical: clandestine actors masquerading as believers to disrupt, enslave, or accuse.

Theological Themes

1. Hypocrisy Exposed – Jesus’ repeated denunciation of hypocrisy (Luke 12:1) climaxes in Luke 20:20, showing the moral bankruptcy of religious leadership willing to employ deception.
2. Sovereign Oversight – Even as enemies plot covertly, divine foreknowledge turns their schemes toward the redemptive plan (Acts 2:23).
3. Discernment in Community – The narrative warns disciples to cultivate spiritual perception (Philippians 1:9-10). False appearances are inevitable; preparedness is imperative.

Ministry and Discipleship Implications

• Vigilance – Church leaders must recognize that opposition can arise from within as well as without (Acts 20:29-30).
• Integrity – The antidote to secret manipulation is transparent righteousness (2 Corinthians 4:2).
• Pastoral Care – Sheep disturbed by betrayal narratives need reassurance that Christ, who endured the ultimate infiltration, empathizes and safeguards His flock (Hebrews 2:18).
• Evangelistic Wisdom – Engaging a skeptical or hostile culture may involve encounters with planted antagonists. Imitating Jesus, believers answer with truth, patience, and confidence in God’s timing (Luke 20:26; 1 Peter 3:15-16).

Summary

Strong’s 1455 highlights the reality of covert adversaries within religious settings. Luke records it once, yet its implications reverberate through Scripture: God’s people must be discerning, upright, and unafraid, knowing that hidden schemes cannot hinder His sovereign purposes.