19
What Shall I Do with Jesus?
(27:11–26)
Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor
questioned Him saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And Jesus
said to him, “It is as you say.” And while He was being accused
by the chief priests and elders, He made no answer. Then Pilate said
to Him, “Do you not hear how many things they testify against You?”
And He did not answer him with regard to even a single charge, so
that the governor was quite amazed. Now at the feast the governor was
accustomed to release for the multitude any one prisoner whom they
wanted. And they were holding at that time a notorious prisoner,
called Barabbas. When therefore they were gathered together, Pilate
said to them, “Whom do you want me to release for you? Barabbas, or
Jesus who is called Christ?” For he knew that because of envy they
had delivered Him up. And while he was sitting on the judgment seat,
his wife sent to him saying, “Have nothing to do with that
righteous Man; for last night I suffered greatly in a dream because
of Him.” But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the
multitude to ask for Barabbas, and to put Jesus to death. But the
governor answered and said to them, “Which of the two do you want
me to release for you?” And they said, “Barabbas.” Pilate said
to them, “Then what shall I do with Jesus who is called
Christ?” They all said, “Let Him be crucified!” And he said,
“Why, what evil has He done?” But they kept shouting all the
more, saying, “Let Him be crucified!” And when Pilate saw that he
was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he
took water and washed his hands in front of the multitude, saying, “I
am innocent of this Man’s blood; see to that yourselves.” And all
the people answered and said, “His blood be on us and on our
children!” Then he released Barabbas for them; but after having
Jesus scourged, he delivered Him to be crucified. (27:11–26)
Jesus Christ makes a claim on every human heart, and
every heart must decide what to do with Him. The most important and
inescapable question every human being faces is the one that Pilate
asked in this passage: “What shall I do with Jesus who is called
Christ?”
Scripture clearly proclaims Jesus as being fully God.
Long before His birth it was divinely predicted that He would be
called Immanuel, which means “God with us” (Matt. 1:23; cf. Isa.
7:14). He was called by divine names, such as “the Holy and
Righteous One” (Acts 3:14). It declares that to know Jesus is to
know God the Father (John 8:19; 14:7), to hate Him is to hate the
Father (15:23), and to believe in Him is to believe in the Father
(Matt. 10:40; John 12:44; 14:1). It affirms that to see Him is to see
the Father (John 14:9), to honor Him is to honor the Father (5:23),
and to receive Him is to receive the Father (Mark 9:37). It proclaims
that Jesus is omnipotent (Matt. 28:18), omnipresent (Matt. 28:20),
changeless (Heb. 13:8), creator of the world (John 1:3), able to
forgive sin (Mark 2:5–10), and is to be worshipped as God (Phil.
2:9–11; cf. Matt. 28:9; Heb. 1:6).
Yet Scripture also declares that Jesus was fully human.
He was born into the world just as every other infant, He was
circumcised, He grew in body and mind, and He experienced hunger,
thirst, pain, weariness, temptation, and death.
The Old Testament gave precise details about the coming
of the Savior-King. Among many other things, it predicted that in His
human life He would be supernaturally conceived (Isa. 7:14), born in
Bethlehem (Mic. 5:2), be Semitic in the line of Abraham and of David
(Gen. 9:26; 22:18; 2 Sam. 7:13), be of the tribe of Judah (Gen.
49:10), and would perform miracles (Isa. 35:5–6). In His death He
would be executed by rulers (Ps. 2:1–2), forsaken by God (Ps.
22:1), betrayed by a friend for thirty pieces of silver (Ps. 41:9;
Zech. 11:12), and have His beard plucked out and be spit upon (Isa.
50:6). In His resurrection He would rise in three days (Hos. 6:2),
would not experience decay of His flesh (Ps. 16:10), and would
conquer death (Isa. 25:8).
Scripture declares that Jesus Christ is perfectly holy,
perfectly loving of His heavenly Father and of the world He came to
redeem, perfectly forgiving of sins and merciful to those who come to
Him, perfectly compassionate, perfectly faithful, and perfectly
prayerful. He is the central theme of Scripture, both in the Old and
New Testaments. And, whether men recognize it or not, He is the
dominant figure in all human history and the determiner of the
destiny of every human being.
It is on that incalculably crucial issue that Matthew
27:11–26 focuses.
After reporting Judas’s suicide, Matthew resumes the
account of Jesus’ trial, which began its secular, Roman phase when
the Jewish leaders bound Jesus “and led Him away, and delivered Him
up to Pilate the governor” (27:2).
Having failed to find a legitimate charge against Jesus,
the Sanhedrin had falsely accused Him of blasphemy and being worthy
of death when He truthfully acknowledged He was “the Christ, the
Son of God” (26:63–66; cf. Luke 22:70). But because they did not
have the authority to exact the death penalty themselves (John
18:31), the Jewish leaders were forced to ask permission of the Roman
governor, Pontius Pilate.
Most of Palestine was under the nominal monarchial
dominion of three sons of Herod the Great. Herod Antipas ruled
Galilee and Perea, Philip ruled the sparsely populated northeast
area, and Archelaus ruled Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. But the supreme
Roman official over Judea was the procurator, or governor, who also
had command of the Roman troops.
In reporting Jesus’ Roman trial, Matthew continues to
exalt Christ as the sinless, pure, sovereign, and glorious King. Like
the Jewish religious leaders, the Roman political leaders could find
no fault in Him. Even with all their efforts, the courts of men
failed to produce a legitimate indictment against the perfect Son of
God. The record stands in Scripture for men and women of all ages to
discover that Jesus Christ was put to death for no crime or sin of
His own but by the hatred of sinful men.
In 27:11–26 Matthew presents four elements in Jesus’
trial before Pilate that demonstrate His innocence and His
perfection.
The Accusation of the Jews
Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor
questioned Him saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And Jesus
said to him, “It is as you say.” And while He was being accused
by the chief priests and elders, (27:11–12a)
The first element demonstrating Jesus’ perfection and
innocence is the negative accusation of the Jewish religious leaders.
When the chief priests and elders first brought Jesus to Pilate
(Matt. 27:1–2), it was still very early on Friday morning, probably
around five o’clock. John reports that “they led Jesus therefore
from Caiaphas into the Praetorium, and it was early; and they
themselves did not enter into the Praetorium in order that they might
not be defiled, but might eat the Passover” (John 18:28). The
Praetorium was the governor’s residence in Jerusalem and was
probably located in the Fortress of Antonia, which was just north of
the Temple. The Praetorium also served as a judgment hall, where the
governor adjudicated matters brought before him.
As mentioned in previous chapters, although northern
Jews, including those from Galilee such as Jesus and the disciples,
had celebrated the Passover on the previous day, the southern Jews,
which included the vast majority of the religious leaders, celebrated
it a day later, which in that year was Friday. The members of the
Sanhedrin therefore had not yet offered their sacrifices or eaten the
Passover meal, and because rabbinical tradition taught that entering
a Gentile home or building was ceremonially defiling, they refused to
enter the Praetorium.
The extreme of their wicked hypocrisy is seen in their
knowingly making false accusations against Jesus while in the very
process of transgressing both scriptural law and their own standards
regarding judicial process. They were meticulous about observing
man-made restrictions regarding supposed ceremonial contamination but
were totally insensitive to the demands of simple justice. They
maintained fastidious commitment to a foolish, arrogant superstition
while resolutely seeking the execution of the Son of the living God
(cf. Matt. 23:23).
We can be sure that Pilate was more than a little
perturbed at being roused at such an early hour, but he was even more
concerned about raising the ire of the Jewish leaders, especially in
the midst of their great religious festival, when Jerusalem was
swelled to bursting with pilgrims. And because they would not come in
to him, the governor “therefore went out to them,” probably on a
porch or balcony, “and said, ‘What accusation do you bring
against this Man?’ ” (John 18:29). That question was perhaps the
first and only legal act in the trial of Jesus. Before the governor
would hear the case, he insisted that a formal indictment be
presented.
Doubtlessly taking full advantage of the leverage they
had over Pilate because of his fear of political trouble, the Jewish
leaders responded with arrogance and sarcasm. They self-righteously
asserted, “If this Man were not an evil-doer, we would not have
delivered Him up to you” (John 18:30). In effect, they rebuked the
governor for indirectly impugning their integrity. But it was not
their intent for Pilate to give Jesus a fair hearing but simply to
approve and administer the death sentence they had already decreed.
Pilate was already aware of who Jesus was and of the
animosity the Jewish leaders had for Him. Because their concerns were
purely religious, the governor had no desire to become involved and
therefore told them, “Take Him yourselves, and judge Him according
to your law” (v. 31). In saying that, Pilate gave tacit, if not
explicit, permission for Jesus’ execution, because he knew that,
according to their laws, the most serious religious offenses were
punishable by death.
The Sanhedrin made no effort to secure Roman permission
for execution when they stoned Stephen (Acts 6:12–15; 7:54–60) or
when, some years later, they plotted Paul’s death (23:12–15).
Their telling Pilate, “We are not permitted to put anyone to death”
(John 18:31b) was duplicitous. Their design was not simply to
have Jesus put to death but to avoid responsibility for it, and
possible reprisal from their own people, by having the Romans execute
Him for a supposed political offense.
But overshadowing that satanic plan was the divine plan
of God, who used the adversary’s destructive scheme to fulfil His
own redemptive purpose. By demanding a Roman execution, the Jewish
leaders unwittingly made certain that “the word of Jesus might be
fulfilled, which He spoke, signifying by what kind of death He was
about to die” (John 18:32).
In order to satisfy Pilate’s demand for a specific
charge and to secure Jesus’ conviction under Roman law, the chief
priests and other leaders fabricated the allegation of sedition. That
charge, of course, had nothing to do with the supposed blasphemy for
which they had just sentenced Jesus to death. “We found this man
misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar,” they
lied, “and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King” (Luke 23:2).
They charged Jesus with being an insurrectionist, of undermining
Roman taxation, and even of claiming to be a competing political
ruler.
Had Jesus been guilty of any one of those allegations,
Pilate would have known of it and would long since have arrested and
executed Him. As virtually every Jew and many Gentiles in Palestine
well knew, however, Jesus was a man of peace and was in total
submission to Roman political authority. He willingly paid taxes and
taught His followers to do likewise. He even taught that if a soldier
commanded a person to carry his gear for a mile, which by Roman law
he was permitted to do, the person should carry it two miles (Matt.
5:41). Jesus not only did not rebel against the emperor but had
publicly declared that citizens should “render to Caesar the things
that are Caesar’s” (Matt. 22:21). And when His admirers had
wanted to make Him king by force He had disappeared from their midst
(John 6:15). The accusations against Jesus were such obvious lies
that one wonders what sort of fool the Jewish leaders thought Pilate
to be.
In response to the indictments, as Jesus stood before
the governor, … the governor questioned Him saying, “Are You the
King of the Jews?” Pilate knew full well that the charges were
spurious, and his question to Jesus was merely procedural. In light
of Rome’s absolute intolerance of insurrection, Pilate’s
indifferent reaction served to dramatically underscore his awareness
of the preposterousness of the Sanhedrin’s allegations.
Jesus’ first response to Pilate was a counter
question: “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did
others tell you about Me?” (John 18:34). Surprised and taken aback,
the governor retorted, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and
the chief priests delivered You up to me; what have You done?” (v.
35). To which Jesus replied, “My kingdom is not of this world. If
My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting,
that I might not be delivered to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom
is not of this realm” (v. 36).
It was perhaps at this point that Jesus said, “It
is as you say.” Commenting further about the true nature of His
kingship, He said, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I
have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear
witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice”
(John 18:37). Although he admitted to having no comprehension of what
Jesus meant by “truth,” Pilate “went out again to the Jews, and
said to them, ‘I find no guilt in Him.’ ” (v. 38).
In this context, “find” represented a judicial
verdict. Pilate acquitted Jesus of any civil or criminal wrongdoing.
In modern parlance, He threw the case out of court for lack of
evidence. He exercised “summary judgment.”
Not only were the charges patently false, but Pilate
knew that the Jewish leaders themselves hated Rome passionately. Had
Jesus actually been an insurrectionist, they would have supported Him
and sought to protect Him, not brought Him before a Roman court and
demanded His execution. He knew quite well that “it was for envy”
of Jesus, not loyalty to Rome, that “they had delivered Him up”
(Matt. 27:18).
The high priests, chief priests, elders, scribes,
Pharisees, and Sadducees all hated Jesus because He undermined their
religious influence with and stature before the people. He exposed
their sinfulness, hypocrisy, and doctrinal error. He was popular,
whereas they were not. He could heal, whereas they could not. He
taught truth, whereas they did not. Their true motivation was
transparent even to a pagan politician. The governor probably
suspected something of what they were up to when they requested the
escort of Roman soldiers in arresting Jesus. But he already knew that
Jesus was no danger to Rome and probably thought that, after
condemning and flogging Jesus in their own court, the Jewish leaders
would be satisfied and that His threat to them would end.
But the Council leaders would not be put off by Pilate’s
verdict of innocent. As he stood before them again on the balcony of
the Praetorium, Jesus continued to be accused by the chief priests
and elders. Luke reports that “they kept on insisting, saying,
‘He stirs up the people, teaching all over Judea, starting from
Galilee, even as far as this place’ ” (23:5). They increased the
pressure on the governor as they desperately grasped for a charge
that would arouse his concern. All this failing effort emphasizes the
perfect virtue of the Savior.
The Attitude of the Lord
He made no answer. Then Pilate said to Him, “Do you
not hear how many things they testify against You?” And He did not
answer him with regard to even a single charge, so that the governor
was quite amazed. (27:12b–14)
The second element in this account that demonstrates the
perfection and innocence of Christ was His own attitude. To Pilate’s
consternation, Jesus made no answer to the intensified
accusations of the chief priests and elders.
The Jewish leaders had already rendered their
predetermined verdict of guilty, and the governor his verdict of not
guilty, declaring, “I find no guilt in Him” (John 18:38). He knew
that the original charges against Jesus not only were religious
rather than political but were spurious and made out of envy. He also
knew that the charges they had just made regarding insurrection, not
paying taxes, and claiming to be a king were manufactured solely for
his benefit, in order to give a political basis for judgment against
Him.
Pilate knew the truth, and the Jews were opposing the
truth. The Jews had unjustly convicted Him, and Pilate had justly
exonerated Him. Jesus therefore refused to say anything else because
there was nothing more to say.
Hoping that Jesus would come to His own defense and help
expose the duplicitous Jewish leaders, Pilate said to Him, “Do
you not hear how many things they testify against You?” But
again Jesus did not answer him with regard to even a single
charge. Understandably, the governor was quite amazed.
Pilate had confronted hundreds of accused men, most of whom loudly
protested their innocence and were willing to say or do anything to
save themselves. Many of them doubtlessly made countercharges against
their accusers or else passionately pled for mercy. A person who said
nothing in his own defense was unheard of and astounding. But Jesus’
innocence was so obvious that it demanded no defense on His part.
“Where is the revolutionary who opposes Rome, the
tax-dodging protester, and the rival to Caesar’s throne?” Pilate
must have mused. The Man who stood before him was calm, serene,
undefensive, and completely at peace. As Isaiah had predicted some
seven centuries earlier, although “He was oppressed and He was
afflicted, yet He did not open His mouth; like a lamb that is led to
slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so He
did not open His mouth” (Isa. 53:7).
Pilate not only was amazed but in a quandary. He was
convinced of Jesus’ innocence and was repulsed by the chicanery of
the chief priests and elders. Yet he did not dare offend them,
because his own position with Rome was now precarious due to the
contemptuous miscalculations he had previously made regarding Jewish
religious convictions.
He had governed Judea for some four or five years, but
his rule had been marked by several serious misjudgments that
threatened his office and even his life. First, he had deliberately
offended the Jews by having his soldiers carry ensigns into Jerusalem
that carried the likeness of Caesar. Because the Jews considered such
images to be idolatrous, previous governors had carefully avoided
displaying the emblems in public, especially in the holy city of
Jerusalem. When a delegation of Jews persistently asked Pilate to
remove the ensigns, he herded them into an amphitheater and
threatened to have his soldiers cut off their heads if they did not
desist. When the group bared their necks and threw themselves to the
ground, defiantly asserting their willingness to die, Pilate withdrew
both his threat and the ensigns. He had been sent to Palestine to
keep the peace, not foment a revolution, which a massacre of those
men would surely have precipitated.
A short while later, Pilate forcefully took money from
the Temple treasury to erect an aqueduct. When the Jews again openly
rioted, Pilate sent soldiers disguised as civilians among them to
brutally slaughter many of the unsuspecting and unarmed protesters.
Luke’s reference to “the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had
mingled with their sacrifices” (13:1) may relate to an additional
cruel facet of that massacre.
Pilate’s third public offense against the Jews was
almost his undoing. He had special shields made for his guard at Fort
Antonia and, no doubt intending to gain favor with the emperor,
ordered likenesses of Tiberius engraved on the shields. This time the
Jewish leaders appealed directly to Caesar, and Pilate’s scheme
backfired. Tiberius was more concerned about the genuine prospect of
rebellion than the insincere flattery of Pilate, and he demanded that
the shields be removed immediately.
Pilate was now justifiably afraid that another riot by
the Jews would cost him his procuratorship. His brutal and senseless
ambush of some Samaritan worshipers a few years later brought exactly
that result. When the Samaritans appealed to the governor’s
immediate superior, the legate of Syria, that official ordered Pilate
to Rome to explain his actions. His political career was ended, and
tradition holds that he eventually committed suicide in Gaul, to
which he had been banished.
We learn from Luke that when Pilate heard the Jewish
leaders say Jesus was stirring up the people, “starting from
Galilee, even as far as this place,” he asked if Jesus were a
Galilean. When told that Jesus was indeed from that region, he felt
certain he had found a solution to his dilemma. He immediately sent
Jesus to Herod Antipas, who ruled Galilee but was visiting in
Jerusalem at the time (Luke 23:5–7). With His appearance before
Herod, the second phase of Jesus’ political trial began.
For his own perverse reasons, “Herod was very glad
when he saw Jesus; for he had wanted to see Him for a long time,
because he had been hearing about Him and was hoping to see some sign
performed by Him” (Luke 23:8). Because Antipas had beheaded John
the Baptist, Jesus had never visited the tetrarch’s capital city of
Tiberias in Galilee, and the ruler had never seen Him. Herod desired
to meet Jesus purely out of curiosity, hoping to see this famous
miracle-worker perform for his private benefit.
Although Herod “questioned Him at some length,”
Jesus “answered him nothing. And the chief priests and the scribes
were standing there, accusing Him vehemently” (Luke 23:9–10).
Luke does not mention what Herod asked Jesus about, but based on what
is known of that ruler, his questions were utterly superficial. Jesus
therefore had even less to say to him than to Pilate. He owed the
tetrarch no explanation of His teaching or His activities, about
which Herod was probably well informed or easily could have been.
Whatever else Herod may have known or believed about
Jesus, he knew He was no political threat to himself or to Caesar. By
this time Jesus had already been beaten by the Sanhedrin, and His
face was bruised, bleeding, and covered with spittle. The accused,
silent prisoner appeared anything but regal or dangerous.
But resentful of Jesus’ silence and probably hoping to
mollify the howling, infuriated Jews, “Herod with his soldiers,
after treating Him with contempt and mocking Him, dressed Him in a
gorgeous robe and sent Him back to Pilate” (Luke 23:11). The word
rendered “gorgeous” literally means bright and resplendent,
suggesting the royal apparel that had often been worn by Jewish kings
at their coronations.
Although Herod did not declare Jesus not guilty, as
Pilate had done, he acknowledged no charge against Him, and once
again Christ’s innocence was manifested. The tetrarch mocked and
mistreated Christ, but he could find no fault in Him.
The Animosity of the Crowd
Now at the feast the governor was accustomed to
release for the multitude any one prisoner whom they wanted. And they
were holding at that time a notorious prisoner, called Barabbas. When
therefore they were gathered together, Pilate said to them, “Whom
do you want me to release for you? Barabbas, or Jesus who is called
Christ?” For he knew that because of envy they had delivered Him
up. And while he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent
to him saying, “Have nothing to do with that righteous Man; for
last night I suffered greatly in a dream because of Him.” But the
chief priests and the elders persuaded the multitude to ask for
Barabbas, and to put Jesus to death. But the governor answered and
said to them, “Which of the two do you want me to release for you?”
And they said, “Barabbas.” Pilate said to them, “Then what
shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?” They all said, “Let
Him be crucified!” And he said, “Why, what evil has He done?”
But they kept shouting all the more, saying, “Let Him be
crucified!” (27:15–23)
The third element in this narrative that demonstrates
Jesus’ perfection and innocence was also the third phase of His
political trial. The first two ended in acquittal, one by specific
declaration and the other by default.
Had he had the courage to do it, Pilate could have ended
the trial after Jesus’ first appearance before him, and he could
have ended it now. But with his own career and perhaps his life in
jeopardy, he could not directly defy the Jewish establishment without
risking a riot during the most tumultuous week of the year in
Jerusalem.
Christ therefore stood once again before the governor,
who at this time “summoned the chief priests and the rulers and the
people, and said to them, ‘You brought this man to me as one who
incites the people to rebellion, and behold, having examined Him
before you, I have found no guilt in this man regarding the charges
which you make against Him. No, nor has Herod, for he sent Him back
to us; and behold, nothing deserving death has been done by Him’ ”
(Luke 23:13–15).
Having failed in passing off responsibility to Herod and
in convincing the Jewish leaders of Jesus’ innocence, Pilate
discovered another possible way to avoid executing this obviously
guiltless man. When “the multitude went up and began asking
[Pilate] to do as he had been accustomed to do for them” (Mark
15:8), he remembered that at the feast of the Passover the
governor was accustomed to release for the multitude any one prisoner
whom they wanted.
As an act of diplomacy and to help reduce tension and
bitterness in the subjected nation of Israel, a custom had begun,
probably before Pilate took office, of releasing any one prisoner
during the Passover celebration. Because they were holding at that
time a notorious prisoner, called Barabbas, the governor probably
expected the common people, who were known to have acclaimed and
admired Jesus, to choose His release above that of Barabbas.
If the multitude demanded Jesus’ release, the Jewish leaders could
not blame Pilate.
Little is known about Barabbas except that he was
a robber, murderer, and insurrectionist (Luke 23:25; John 18:40). He
was probably not a Zealot but an independent rogue who fought Rome
more for personal gain than patriotism. This arch-criminal was as
great a threat to his fellow countrymen as to their oppressors.
Because of the severity of his crimes, he was doubtlessly scheduled
for execution, and Jesus probably was crucified on the cross
originally constructed for Barabbas.
It was now “about the sixth hour” (John 19:14),
which by Roman reckoning would be 6:00 a.m. By this time a throng of
Jews had assembled in front of the Praetorium, attracted by the large
gathering of religious leaders as well as by the specific summons of
Pilate (Luke 23:13). When therefore they were gathered together,
Pilate said to them, “Whom do you want me to release for you?
Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?” Although he despised
the Jews, the governor had learned enough about their practices and
beliefs to know that they looked forward to a promised deliverer,
whom they called Christ, or Messiah. He also knew that many
Jews had ascribed that title to Jesus. And he could hardly
have failed to know of Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem a few
days earlier and His boisterous acclamation by the multitudes.
Pilate knew that because of their envy of
Jesus, the religious leaders had delivered Him up, and by
pitting the people against those leaders, he hoped to safely release
Him.
While he was sitting on the judgment seat,
Pilate’s deliberation was interrupted when his wife sent to him
saying, “Have nothing to do with that righteous Man; for last night
I suffered greatly in a dream because of Him.” It was surely
not her practice to interrupt her husband when he was in the midst of
a trial, especially one so sensitive as this. To be sitting on the
judgment seat was to be acting in the official capacity of judge,
and not even a governor’s wife would have dared intrude on such
proceedings except in a serious crisis. She knew what Pilate’s
original verdict had been but was afraid that the Jewish leaders
would coerce him into changing his mind.
It is possible that Pilate and his wife already had
discussed Jesus many times that week. His triumphal entry was common
knowledge, as were His healing miracles, including the recent raising
of Lazarus just outside Jerusalem. They knew of His daring and
dramatic cleansing of the Temple and probably laughed over the
consternation He caused the chief priests and the Temple merchants by
that act.
Whatever the wife’s personal understanding of
righteous may have been, she was correct in her assessment of
this Man, and she suffered greatly because of that
awareness. Matthew does not explain the source of her dream,
and there is no justification in insisting it was given directly by
God. Everything that happened here was according to “the
predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God” (Acts 2:23). But
although God worked supernaturally through the dream, Pilate’s wife
may simply have been convinced of Jesus’ innocence in her own mind
and had the dream as a result of that concern. In any case, she was
frightened for her husband and insisted that he have no part in
Jesus’ condemnation or punishment. In doing so, she added her
attestation to Jesus’ perfection and innocence.
Pilate’s problem was now compounded. Pressures both to
release and to condemn Jesus were increasing, and he was caught in
the middle. While the messenger was relaying the message of caution
from Pilate’s wife, the chief priests and the elders took
advantage of the opportunity and persuaded the multitudes to ask
for Barabbas, and to put Jesus to death. The governor realized
that he had again underestimated the craftiness of the Jewish leaders
and overestimated the convictions of the fickle multitudes.
Unaware of what the leaders had managed to accomplish
among the crowd while his attention was turned to his wife’s
warning, the still-hopeful governor answered and said to them,
“Which of the two do you want me to release for you?” Without
hesitation and seemingly with one voice, they said, “Barabbas.”
Because Jesus had been declared not guilty under Roman
law, Pilate was now legally free to release Him as well as Barabbas.
He realized, however, that the sole purpose of the crowd in asking
for Barabbas’s release was to compel him to condemn Jesus.
Nevertheless, in a final effort to render justice, the bewildered
Pilate said to them, “Then what shall I do with Jesus who is
called Christ?” Again without hesitation and with one voice,
they all said, “Let Him be crucified!”
The multitude clearly wanted blood, not justice, and
even to the hardened, pagan mind of Pilate their vicious response
must have been blood chilling. “Why, what evil has He done?”
he rebutted, again proclaiming the Lord’s innocence before the
world. As he should have known, that question only inflamed the mob
to greater frenzy, causing them to keep shouting all the more,
saying, “Let Him be crucified!” Just as they had done before
Herod, but with even greater vehemence, they demanded nothing less
than Jesus’ death.
The Acquiescence of the Governor
And when Pilate saw that he was accomplishing
nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he took water and
washed his hands in front of the multitude, saying, “I am innocent
of this Man’s blood; see to that yourselves.” And all the people
answered and said, “His blood be on us and on our children!” Then
he released Barabbas for them; but after having Jesus scourged, he
delivered Him to be crucified. (27:24–26)
The fourth element in this account that demonstrates
Jesus’ perfection and innocence was the acquiescence of the Roman
governor to the will of the multitude, which had been incited against
Christ by the Satan-led religious leaders. It did not matter to them
that not a single accusation against Him had stood before Annas,
before Caiaphas, before the entire Sanhedrin, before Herod, or before
Pilate. In their willful spiritual blindness they had no concern for
truth, for justice, or for righteousness. They rather pursued
unfounded and irrational vengeance on an innocent man who not only
had never done them harm but who had healed their diseases and
offered them eternal life.
Therefore, when Pilate saw that he was accomplishing
nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he took water and
washed his hands in front of the multitude, saying, “I am innocent
of this Man’s blood; see to that yourselves.” Finally
realizing that no amount of reasoning or evidence would prevail with
the obsessed mob, the governor made public testimony that he did not
concur with their decision and that he disavowed any complicity in
it.
Pilate could not afford another Jewish riot. As
noted above, the last riot had brought severe censure by Caesar
himself. Another uprising would end his career and quite possibly his
life. The mob was totally out of control, and it was clear that their
only pacification would be Jesus’ crucifixion.
Pilate had never been known for mercy or diplomacy.
Herod Agrippa I is reported to have said that Pilate was “naturally
inflexible-a blend of self-will and relentlessness” (Philo of
Alexandria in the Legatio ad Gaium [38]). It was his previous
cruel indifference to the people under his jurisdiction that had
gotten him into so much trouble.
Yet he did have a sense of justice. Had he been able to
discover the least evidence that Jesus was guilty of a capital crime,
he would have been greatly relieved and more than willing to grant
His execution. That would have been by far the easier route. He had
condemned many men to death and had no compunction about executing
one more. But the fact that he unwaveringly maintained Jesus’
innocence, rendering at least five public verdicts of not guilty,
testifies to his inability to find any guilt in Him. He therefore
repeatedly appealed to the Jewish leaders and to the multitudes to
relinquish their demand for Jesus’ death. But he was not courageous
enough to risk his own welfare to protect Christ’s life.
It was ironic, and doubtlessly intentional, that the
governor chose a Jewish ritual to depict his renunciation of
responsibility for Jesus’ fate. If the ruling elders of a city were
not able to determine the identity of a murderer, the Mosaic law
provided that they could publicly wash their hands, pray to God, and
thereby absolve themselves of any guilt regarding their inability to
render justice. Using a modified form of that Jewish ceremony which
he had heard of, Pilate proclaimed he was innocent of this
innocent Man’s blood.
Doubtlessly with a tone of both dismay and disgust, the
governor then said, “See to that yourselves.” And when he
gave them what they wanted, the people gave him what he
wanted. If he would permit Jesus’ death, they would assume all
blame. “His blood be on us and on our children!” they
shouted. That declaration did not, of course, absolve Pilate of
guilt, but it did proclaim for all time the people’s acknowledgment
of their own guilt. They soon forgot that assumption of guilt,
however, and not many months later the Sanhedrin self-righteously
rebuked the apostles for holding them accountable for Christ’s
blood (Acts 5:28).
The multitude of perhaps several thousand Jews who stood
outside the Praetorium made their verdict in behalf of all Israel. It
was that verdict, acknowledged by all the other unbelieving Jews
through their silence, that caused the branch of Israel to be broken
off the tree of God’s redemptive blessing (Rom. 11:17). It is no
wonder that since that fearful day, as a nation and as individuals,
unredeemed Jews have been under the chastening hand of God.
At the end of Jesus’ second hearing before Pilate, the
governor’s intent had been to “punish Him and release Him”
(Luke 23:16). But the Jews would not settle for mere punishment, no
matter how severe. They insisted on death. Therefore, after he
released Barabbas according to the wishes of the crowd, Pilate
had Jesus scourged and delivered … to be crucified.
The whip used for scourging had a short wooden handle,
to the end of which were attached several leather thongs. Each thong
was tipped with very sharp pieces of metal or bone. The man to be
scourged was tied to a post by the wrists high over his head, with
his feet dangling and his body taut. Often there were two scourgers,
one on either side of the victim, who took turns lashing him across
the back. Muscles were lacerated, veins and arteries were torn open,
and it was not uncommon for the kidneys, spleen, or other organs to
be exposed and slashed. As would be expected, many men died of
scourging before they could be taken out for execution. We do not
know the full extent of Jesus’ wounds, but He was so weakened by
them that He was not able to carry His own cross (Mark 15:21).
Despite the accusatory verbiage of that tragic night, it
was not really Jesus who was on trial, but the rest of the world. The
Jewish religionists condemned themselves as they viciously demanded
His crucifixion. The fickle multitudes condemned themselves as they
mindlessly went along with their leaders. Herod condemned himself as
he mocked the King of kings. Pilate condemned himself as he willingly
allowed an innocent man to be put to death, choosing the world above
the Son of God.
And through that ridicule, scorn, and blood, the sinless
Son of God was still further exalted.
201
Jesus
Faces Pilate
11 Now Jesus stood before the governor. And
the governor asked Him, saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?”
Jesus said to him, “It is as you say.” 12
And while He was being accused by the chief priests and elders, He
answered nothing.
13 Then Pilate said to Him, “Do You not
hear how many things they testify against You?” 14 But
He answered him not one word, so that the governor marveled greatly.
—Matthew 27:11–14
In
Jesus’ trial before Pilate, or mistrial as it should be called,
there are five brief scenes: the accusation (vv. 11–14), the
contrast with Barabbas (vv. 15–18), the interruption by Pilate’s
wife (v. 19), the question concerning Jesus (vv. 20–23), and
Pilate’s wash basin (vv. 24–26). Matthew omits the interlude
before Herod (Luke 23:6–12). This section deals with the first
scene, the accusation of Jesus as claiming to be a king, a claim that
was against Rome. Pilate’s question is in response to the
Sanhedrin’s charge (Luke 23:2–3). Jesus’ answer was made with
the same reserve and courtesy that he had shown before the Sanhedrin
(26:64), yet it was clearly unambiguous. John shares a brief
interchange between Jesus and Pilate which adds another dimension to
Jesus’ answer, for He confronted Pilate with a different
understanding of kingship. Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this
world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants
fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my
kingdom not from hence” (John 18:36, kjv). This is doubtless one of
the more basic affirmations at the trial, the distinction between the
kingdom of God and the political kingdoms of this world. This
distinction precipitates our theology of separation of church and
state. Paul emphasizes this in Romans 13, seeing the work of God
always on a level above the power of the state, for God ordains
government. The state is on another level, at best operating by God’s
providence, but on the basis of the franchise of the people.
Further charges were made against Jesus by the priests
but Jesus did not answer them. Pilate was amazed at His poise, but
evidently disappointed in His not having a defense that would allow
him to release Jesus. He was aware that these leaders were envious of
Jesus’ popularity and were threatened by His success. In The
Grand Inquisitor, Dostoevski has the ecclesiastical prelate
asking the Christ to “get out” because He challenged the whole
religious bureaucracy.
The
Choice Between Jesus and Barabbas
15 Now at the feast the governor was
accustomed to releasing to the multitude one prisoner whom they
wished.
16 And at that time they had a notorious prisoner called Barabbas. 17 Therefore, when they had gathered together, Pilate said to them, “Whom do you want me to release to you? Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?” 18 For he knew that they had handed Him over because of envy.
16 And at that time they had a notorious prisoner called Barabbas. 17 Therefore, when they had gathered together, Pilate said to them, “Whom do you want me to release to you? Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?” 18 For he knew that they had handed Him over because of envy.
19 While he was sitting on the judgment seat,
his wife sent to him, saying, “Have nothing to do with that just
Man, for I have suffered many things today in a dream because of
Him.”
20 But the chief priests and elders persuaded
the multitudes that they should ask for Barabbas and destroy Jesus.
21 The governor answered and said to them, “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?”
21 The governor answered and said to them, “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?”
They said, “Barabbas!”
22 Pilate said to them, “What then shall I
do with Jesus who is called Christ?”
They all said to him, “Let Him be crucified!”
23 Then the governor said, “Why, what evil
has He done?”
But they cried out all the more, saying, “Let Him be
crucified!”
24 When Pilate saw that he could not prevail
at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed
his hands before the multitude, saying, “I am innocent of the blood
of this just Person. You see to it.”
25 And all the people answered and said, “His
blood be on us and on our children.”
26 Then he released Barabbas to them; and
when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered Him to be crucified.
—Matthew 27:15–26
Pilate
is called the governor, the Latin word being “procurator,” the
person sent by Rome to keep order in Judea. The Jews did not like
Pilate because of the manner in which he disregarded their religious
rites. He had deliberately brought the Roman ensigns to the temple
and had placed the Roman eagle there as a symbol of the sovereignty
of Rome. Josephus relates that he then went off to Caesarea to his
summer quarters by the sea, to be surprised by five thousand Jewish
men who came to petition him to remove the symbols. Calling in his
militia, he was further surprised to see these Jewish men bow to the
ground and bare their necks, saying, “You can cut off our heads,
but don’t desecrate our Temple.” Pilate backed off. Now he was
caught between the pressure of the Jewish Sanhedrin and the position
of Rome on seeking justice. As a way out, Pilate proposed a trade. If
they were concerned to not have their relation with Rome threatened
by an insurrectionist, he would substitute an actual insurrectionist,
Barabbas, arrested for the very crime which they were attributing to
Jesus. Following a Roman custom, he offered to release one of the two
as a goodwill gesture accompanying this high feast occasion. He was
again thwarted in his maneuvering, for after he had conferred with
the leaders of the Jews (v. 17), they immediately incited the crowd
to ask for Barabbas (vv. 20–23). Pilate subsequently released
Barabbas and delivered Jesus to be crucified. Note that the name
Bar-abbas means “son of a Father.” The Jews would have
been conscious of the play on words in light of Jesus’ claim.
Matthew alone records the incident of Pilate’s wife
having sent him a message to avoid involvement with this “just
Man” (v. 19). Pilate had been called early to the judgment
seat, and evidently his wife awakened later from a horrible dream and
sent a message at once to him. Whether she had any contact with the
disciples of Jesus is unknown. Early tradition suggests that she
later became a Christian.
This section concludes with Pilate’s last act before
sentencing Jesus being the farce of washing his hands. He tried to
withdraw from moral responsibility for a sentence which he knew to be
unjust. Beckoning for an attendant to bring a bronze basin and a
bronze pitcher with water, he held his hands over the basin and
washed them as the water was poured over them—a symbol to the Jews
that he carried no responsibility for what they were doing. But one
cannot be neutral in relation to God, and since He has come to us in
Jesus one cannot be neutral in relation to Christ. I have frequently
preached a sermon on “Decision between Two Wash Basins,”
contrasting Pilate’s wash basin with the basin Jesus used in the
upper room when He washed the disciples’ feet. Using John 18:36 to
set the stage, the points are as follows: (1) the setting of the
basins is the concept of two kingdoms; (2) Pilate’s wash basin is
the modus operandi of the status-seeker; (3) Jesus’ wash basin is
the modus operandi of the servant of God.2
Pilate (Matt. 27:6–11)
Pontius Pilate was the sixth Roman procurator to serve
in Judea. He was not liked by the Jews because he did things that
deliberately violated their Law and provoked them. He was not above
killing people to accomplish his purposes (Luke 13:1). Pilate’s
position was always rather precarious because of his bad relationship
with Israel and because of Rome’s changing policy with the Jews.
The Jewish leaders accused Jesus of three crimes. They
claimed that He was guilty of misleading the nation, forbidding the
paying of taxes, and claiming to be a king (Luke 23:2). These were
definitely political charges, the kind that a Roman governor could
handle. Pilate focused on the third charge—that Jesus claimed to be
a king—because this was a definite threat to Rome. If he could deal
with this “revolutionary” properly, Pilate could please the Jews
and impress the Emperor at the same time.
“Are You the King of the Jews?” Pilate asked. Jesus
gave him a clear reply: “It is as you say.” However, Jesus then
asked Pilate a question about his question (John 18:34–37). Was
Pilate thinking of “kingship” in the Roman sense? If so, then
Jesus is not that kind of a king. Jesus explained to the governor
that His kingdom was not of this world, that He had no armies, that
His followers did not fight. Rather, His kingdom was a reign of
truth.
This conversation convinced Pilate that Jesus was not a
dangerous revolutionary. “I find no fault in Him,” was Pilate’s
decision. But the Jewish rulers were insistent that Pilate condemn
Jesus. They repeated their charges and, as they enlarged on them,
mentioned that Jesus was from Galilee. When Pilate heard that, he saw
a way out of his dilemma, since Galilee was under Herod’s
jurisdiction. It is possible that Herod was displeased with Pilate
because Pilate had slain some of Herod’s citizens (Luke 13:1). This
would have been an opportunity for Pilate to become reconciled to
Herod.
Matthew did not record the trial held before Herod
Antipas (Luke 23:6–12). Herod was the one who had murdered John the
Baptist and had threatened to kill Jesus (Luke 13:31–32). Jesus was
silent before Herod, for Herod had silenced the voice of God. All the
king could do was mock Jesus and send Him back to Pilate. If Pilate
had hoped to get rid of the problem, he was disappointed. However,
this maneuver did patch up the quarrel between the two rulers.
Pilate wanted to solve the problem but not make any
definite decision about Jesus. As a Roman governor, he was pledged to
uphold the law. But as a politician, he knew he had to get along with
the people. Every decision Pilate made forced him to make another
decision, until he was the prisoner of his own evasions. He
questioned Jesus further, but He made no reply.
Pilate had one more scheme: He would follow the
tradition of releasing a prisoner. Instead of selecting some unknown
prisoner, Pilate deliberately chose the most notorious prisoner he
had, Barabbas. This man was a robber (John 18:40) and a murderer
(Mark 15:7). Pilate reasoned that the crowd would reject Barabbas and
ask for Jesus to be released, for who wants a convicted murderer and
robber turned loose into society?
But Pilate was wrong. In spite of the fact that Jesus
had ministered by healing the sick and even raising the dead, the
people rejected Him and chose a murderer to be released. Pilate
realized that a riot was in the making, and he could not afford to
let this happen. The very thing the rulers wanted to prevent—a riot
at Passover season (Matt. 26:5)—they engineered themselves in order
to force Pilate to act. The governor did act, purely out of
expediency and not on the basis of integrity. He released a guilty
man and condemned an innocent Man, and that innocent Man is the Son
of God.
Pilate took three steps in an attempt to exonerate
himself. First, he washed his hands and declared that he was innocent
of any guilt. Second, he stated clearly that Jesus was a just person,
that is, not worthy of death. Third, he offered to punish Jesus and
then release Him, but the rulers would accept no compromise. Finally,
the religious rulers used the one weapon against which Pilate had no
defense: “If you release this Man, you are no friend of Caesar;
everyone who makes himself out to be a king opposes Caesar” (John
19:12, nasb). At this, Pilate capitulated, had Jesus scourged, and
delivered Him to be crucified.
Since the Jews could not execute criminals, it was
necessary for the Roman officials to assist; and Pilate issued the
order. Of course, all of this was in fulfillment of prophecy. The
Jews did not crucify; they used stoning to execute criminals. Psalm
22, written by a Jew, is a vivid picture of crucifixion. “They
pierced my hands and my feet” (Ps. 22:16). Jesus was made a curse
for us, for “cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree” (Deut.
21:23; Gal. 3:13). But still God was at work in fulfilling His divine
purposes.
Pilate knew what was right, but refused to do anything
about it. He was “willing to please the people” (Mark 15:15).
Judas yielded to the devil in his great sin (John 13:2, 27);
Peter yielded to the flesh when he denied his Lord; but Pilate
yielded to the world and listened to the crowd. Pilate looked
for the easy way, not the right way. He has gone down in history as
the man who condemned Jesus.3
In the first chapter of his epistle to the Romans, the
Apostle Paul speaks of the wrath of God being revealed from heaven
against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men (v. 18). The
principal act of evil that the Apostle has in view is the suppression
of the truth of God. Paul goes on to say that God has revealed
Himself clearly through the things He has made, so that everyone on
this planet knows that He exists and knows His eternal power and
deity, which leaves them without excuse (v. 20). No one will ever be
able to say, “We weren’t atheists, O God; we were just agnostic,
without knowledge.” The plea of ignorance will not stand at the
last judgment.
But Paul goes on to say that God is angry not only
because people have rejected this manifestation of Him, but “because,
although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were
thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish
hearts were darkened” (v. 21). The primary sin of the human race is
the refusal to give glory to God. It is, in other words, a refusal to
worship Him. Secondary to that sin is ingratitude. Every good thing
we have received in our lives has come from the hands of the
benevolent God, yet no person is adequately grateful, because our
fallen nature induces us to think that we have a cosmic entitlement,
that God owes us the gifts we receive from Him. We fail to see the
things that God gives us as utterly gracious. Because of these twin
sins of refusing to glorify God and be thankful to Him, people’s
thinking is futile and their foolish hearts are darkened.
It gets even worse: “Professing to be wise, they
became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an
image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals
and creeping things” (vv. 22–23). The ultimate insult to God is
idolatry. In our fallen condition, we are mass producers of idols,
because idolatry is not atheism; it is false religion, a swap. We
trade the glory of the true God for the corruption of that which is
creaturely. As Paul puts it, we exchange the truth of God for the lie
(v. 25). That is our nature.
I do not believe this picture of humanity was ever more
clearly displayed than that day in Jerusalem in front of the
governor’s place, when the people had an opportunity to make an
exchange. Tragically, they swapped the Son of God for a hardened
criminal. They traded the only begotten of the Father for a
pretender, the Son of the Father for the son of the father.
Many people have said to me: “If you believe in
Christ, that’s fine for you. I respect your views. However, I don’t
feel the need for Jesus.” Here is a clear case of the mind being
darkened into foolishness. I do not think any human being could ever
make a more foolish statement. There is nothing people need more than
Jesus. Every human being without Jesus is destined to face the full
measure of the wrath of the Creator, and apart from Jesus and His
saving work, they will have no plea.
When someone says, “I don’t feel the need for
Jesus,” he really is saying, “I don’t want Jesus.” That is
why such a person refuses to believe in Jesus and follow Him. And why
does he not want Jesus? It is because he does not like Him. Sinful
creatures do not like the holy God. Nothing is more repugnant to
fallen humanity than a sinless Redeemer.
Given these truths, it is much less shocking that the
people chose Barabbas. It would have been foolish to waste time
taking a poll before that election was decided, because Barabbas was
the people’s choice. But what we need to understand is that in our
natural condition, our unregenerate state, their choice is our
choice. I can see myself standing in that crowd, screaming at the top
of my lungs: “Give us Barabbas! Give us anyone except Jesus.”
May that not be the choice of your heart. May you cry
with all of your strength, “Give me Jesus, lest I die!”
1264
3
Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The
Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 1, pp.
100–101). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
No comments:
Post a Comment