Lucas 23

Lucas 23

Boice on Pilate - Pilate was not a noble character. In fact, if it were not for his influential connections through marriage, he would never have come even to the relatively insignificant post he held as procurator of Judea. He came from Spain, being a native of Seville. He had joined the legions of Germanicus in the wars on the Rhine. After peace had been secured, he went to Rome to make his fortune. There he met and married Claudia Proculla, the youngest daughter of Julia who was the daughter of the emperor Augustus. From the perspective of Pilate's future this was a wise move. Claudia had connections with the highest levels of Roman government. But morally it was a disgrace; for Julia, who thereby became Pilate's mother-in-law, was a woman of such depraved and coarse habits that even in decadent Rome she was notorious. Augustus, her father, avoided her presence and eventually banished her. It is reported that afterward, whenever someone would mention the name of his daughter to him, Augustus would exclaim, "Would I were wifeless or had childless died!" Unlike Pilate, a man of nobler instincts would not have married into such a family. Nevertheless, through his new connections Pilate applied for and was awarded the procuratorship of Judea, which post he assumed in a.d. 26. He was the sixth procurator (Ed: But see prefect). Those before him were: Sabinus, Caponius, Ambivus, Rufus, and Gratus. (The Gospel of John: Triumph Through Tragedy). Philo, the ancient Jewish scholar from Alexandria, described Pilate: “His corruption, his acts of insolence, his rapine, his habit of insulting people, his cruelty, his continual murders of people untried and uncondemned, and his never-ending gratuitous and most grievous inhumanity.” (Reference - XXXVIII. 299) Pilatos - 55x in 53v - Matt. 27:2; Matt. 27:13; Matt. 27:17; Matt. 27:22; Matt. 27:24; Matt. 27:58; Matt. 27:62; Matt. 27:65; Mk. 15:1; Mk. 15:2; Mk. 15:4; Mk. 15:5; Mk. 15:9; Mk. 15:12; Mk. 15:14; Mk. 15:15; Mk. 15:43; Mk. 15:44; Lk. 3:1; Lk. 13:1; Lk. 23:1; Lk. 23:3; Lk. 23:4; Lk. 23:6; Lk. 23:11; Lk. 23:12; Lk. 23:13; Lk. 23:20; Lk. 23:24; Lk. 23:52; Jn. 18:29; Jn. 18:31; Jn. 18:33; Jn. 18:35; Jn. 18:37; Jn. 18:38; Jn. 19:1; Jn. 19:4; Jn. 19:6; Jn. 19:8; Jn. 19:10; Jn. 19:12; Jn. 19:13; Jn. 19:15; Jn. 19:19; Jn. 19:21; Jn. 19:22; Jn. 19:31; Jn. 19:38; Acts 3:13; Acts 4:27; Acts 13:28; 1 Tim. 6:13 Related Resources: American Tract Society Pilate or Pontius Pilate Easton's Bible Dictionary Pontius Pilate Holman Bible Dictionary Pontius Pilate Hastings' Dictionary of the NT Pilate Pontius Whyte's Bible Characters Pontius pilate NET Note on Pilate - Pilate was the Roman prefect (procurator) in charge of collecting taxes and keeping the peace. His immediate superior was the Roman governor (proconsul) of Syria, although the exact nature of this administrative relationship is unknown. Pilate's relations with the Jews had been rocky (v. 12). Here he is especially sensitive to them. J C Ryle makes an interesting comment - The mere fact that the Jews were obliged to apply publicly to a foreign ruler to carry out their murderous plan was a striking proof that the 'sceptre had departed from Judah' (Genesis 49:10) when the Messiah came. (Luke 23 - Ryle's Expository Thoughts on the Gospels) Pilate's Stone As alluded to above it is clear that Pilate was a historical figure as documented by the Limestone block discovered in 1961 with Pilate's tribute in Latin to Tiberius. The words [...]TIVS PILATVS[...] can be clearly seen on the second line. The translation from Latin to English for the inscription reads: To the Divine Augusti [this] Tiberieum ...Pontius Pilate ...prefect of Judea ...has dedicated [this] Overstreet on Pilate - PILATE'S FOUR MISTAKES IN GOVERNING JUDEA It is clear from historical records that Pilate was the fifth procurator of Judea, appointed by the emperor Tiberius, that he was procurator cum potestate (having civil, military, and criminal jurisdiction), that he held office for ten years (A.D. 26–36), and that in some way, not clearly known, he was subject to the legate of Syria, which was not uncommon at that time. It is also known that Pilate created much antagonism between himself and the Jews on at least four different occasions. (1) The first of these was immediately after his being appointed governor when he and his soldiers brought their standards into Jerusalem, bearing the emperor’s image, and placed them within sight of the Temple. This so enraged the Jews, who regarded it as idolatry, that Pilate yielded to them and had the standards returned to Caesarea. (2) A second occasion is recorded in Luke 13:1+ which states that Pilate apparently killed some Galileans while they were offering sacrifices. (Luke 13:1 - Now on the same occasion there were some present who reported to Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices.) (3) On a third occasion he used revenues from the Temple to construct an aqueduct. The Jews also objected to this sacrilege, but Pilate had his soldiers beat the complainers into subjection with staves. (4) On the fourth occasion he hung golden shields, apparently bearing the name of the emperor as a deity, in Herod’s palace. The Jews objected so strenuously to this that the emperor himself rebuked Pilate and ordered them removed. This event has been dated at A.D. 32. It can thus be seen that Pilate had yielded to Jewish pressures on at least one occasion, and that the emperor himself had intervened to reprimand Pilate on another occasion; this latter event carries special significance since it occurred only about a year before the death of Christ. These historical events form an important background for Pilate’s dealings with Christ. (ED COMMENT: Specifically Pilate could hardly afford to have a major Jewish riot over his handling of Jesus, for to do so would risk Rome removing him from his position as procurator. He had worked too hard to get this position and as we shall see was willing to do whatever it took to preserve that position!) The Governor and Roman Law Four factors have a bearing in Pilate’s dealing with Christ: (1) Pilate’s authority, (2) the rights of Roman citizens in a province contrasted to those of noncitizens, (3) the relationship of Roman law to the local law of provincials, and (4) the punishment for the crime of treason. (1) Local Provincial Law - Generally speaking, Roman law allowed the local law of each province to be exercised without much interference. Kunkel has pointed out that “local administration, the administration of justice as between the natives of the provinces, and many other tasks were in general simply left to the political organs of the subject people.” One significant exception to this was jurisdiction on matters involving capital punishment which was reserved to the procurator. This exception has been set forth by Lyall: “The Romans did, for example, reserve the right to impose capital punishment, as in the case of Christ, but the day to day administration was none of their concern.” (Francis Lyall, “Roman Law in the Writings of Paul—Aliens and Citizens,” The Evangelical Quarterly 48 January-March 1976) This particular exception is critically important in the trial of Christ before Pilate, since the Jews expressly declared, “We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God” (John 19:7); but they also said, “It is not lawful for us to put any man to death” (John 18:31). While it is true that some time later the Jews did exercise the power of capital punishment, illegally, in the stoning death of Stephen (Acts 7:58), there was a great deterrent in the case of Christ, and that was the involvement of Annas (John 18:13, 24). In A.D. 15, while Annas was the Jewish high priest, he led the Sanhedrin to violate this law when there was temporarily no procurator in Judea. That action resulted in his being deposed by Valerius Gratus that same year. It seems reasonable that Annas would have had a great influence on the decision of Caiaphas, the high priest during Christ’s trial, since he was Caiaphas’s father-in-law, and the case of Christ was one that involved great popular opinion. (2) Rights of Individuals - The rights of individuals within a province varied depending on whether the person was a Roman citizen or a noncitizen, an alien. The state of the noncitizen has been explained by Lyall: "The peregrini were subjects of Rome, but not Romans, because they were not citizens. They were not liable to military service, but were subject to supervision, and to the heavy burden of Imperial taxation. In terms of strict Roman law they were rightless and dutiless, existing as objects and not subjects of law." Concerning this same subject Garnsey has given a specific time when citizens were distinguished from aliens in a crucial area, that of corporal punishment. “Corporal punishment was traditionally used against slaves and aliens. This was written into the laws from the early second century, B.C., when a lex porcia granted to Roman citizens the right of appeal against beating as well as execution.” The only time a Roman citizen was supposed to be subject to execution without a properly constituted trial was if he had been declared an enemy of the state. In other instances there was a clear difference between aliens and citizens in the empire. “Discrimination in favour of citizens as opposed to aliens was thus a permanent feature of the Roman judicial system. It was practised in all spheres of law where aliens were technically excluded, as from the ius civile, and where they were not, as in criminal law.“ However, it should also be noted that from the time of the Republic onward aliens were supposed to be allowed “natural principles of equity which are common to all nations.” It may be concluded then that aliens—and Christ was one of these in relation to Roman law—had no direct legal standing at all; however, ethically and morally the natural principles of equity should have been applied to His case, but there was no legal compulsion to do so. (3) Authority of the Governor - Since Judea was a province subject to Rome, “the governor exercised the unlimited jurisdiction of the military imperium.“ The governor of a province like Judea would exercise military, financial, and judicial functions.18 In relation to his judicial functions, the provincial governor “exercised both civil and criminal jurisdiction among Roman citizens, and also among foreigners, so far as such cases came before him by virtue of the province’s statute (leges provinciae) or by the operation of his discretion.” While it is clear that the governor’s judicial activity would mainly concern Roman citizens, it is also clear that “if the interests of Roman sovereignty were involved, no doubt he would also at all times have summoned provincials to his court.” The extent of the governor’s authority is manifested in the types of punishment he could legally mete. There is no question but that he had the power of capital punishment over noncitizens, and he could also “execute humbler citizens or send them to the mines.” Indeed, the evidence indicates that the governor could inflict capital punishment on any Roman citizen, but “custom seems to have directed that the governor should remit capital cases of Roman citizens to the home government.“ It may be concluded, then, that the Roman governor had absolute legal authority to deal with noncitizens, such as Christ, and to prescribe the death penalty, without fear of having his authority challenged. As far as the procedure which a governor would follow is concerned, it is documented that he could “deal with crime inquisitorially, i.e., by investigating on his own initiative and by any means at his disposal.“ It is clear that “judicial administration in the provinces was much less precise and technical than that which was required in Rome itself.“ It is this fact which enables the flexibility and informality in Pilate’s dealings with Christ to be understood. There was nothing improper or unusual about it. (4) Crucifixion as a Punishment Since Christ was crucified as a result of Pilate’s final decision, it is needful to examine this mode of punishment and the people on whom it was used. In general, the mode of crucifixion was adopted by the Romans “to inflict the death penalty upon rebellious slaves and seditious provincials.” Concerning crucifixion, Garnsey wrote, “Crucifixion was the standing form of execution for slaves. Furthermore, in the reign of Nero, Gessius Florus scourged and crucified some Jews in Jerusalem, including some equestrians. On other occasions, Jewish rebels suffered crucifixion. A political charge was at least aired in the trial of Christ.“ It is obvious from the Gospels that Christ was charged with sedition or treason (Luke 23:2; John 19:2). The law on treason was not specifically delineated but was capable of wide interpretation. Indeed, in the time of the empire, “the law was extended not only to all attempts on the life of the reigning prince, but to all acts and words which might appear to be disrespectful to him,” and it was regarded as a capital crime. In the case of Christ, the evidence indicates that He “was on trial for his life before the Roman governor and the basis of the prosecution was his danger to the Roman state. The very means of execution shows that Jesus died as an offender against Rome, not the Jewish nation.”... Overstreet on Pilate's later life - It is known from history that Pilate was removed from his position as governor in A.D. 36. The event that led directly to this was Pilate’s leading his troops against some restless Samaritans on Mount Gerizim, and conducting a needless massacre (ED: HE FALSELY VIEWED THEM AS INSURRECTIONISTS AND KILLED MANY RELIGIOUS PILGRIMS). The Samaritans complained to Vitellius, the legate of Syria (ED: HE WAS PILATE'S IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR), concerning this, and he immediately deposed Pilate and sent him to Rome to answer the accusations before the Emperor Tiberius. However, by the time Pilate had reached Rome, Tiberius was dead, and Caligula was on the throne. What happened to Pilate following this is a matter of some conjecture. Though there are many traditions, Eusebius stated that Pilate committed suicide (ED: BUT THIS IS NOT DEFINITIVE)....Pilate’s character is not to be envied: he appears as a vacillating, compromising individual more concerned with political expediency than with equity at the trial of Christ. His actions may not be condemned because they were illegal; however, his actions may justly be condemned because he acted against his own conscience (Matt. 27:24), and also against what was morally and ethically correct. (Roman Law and the Trial of Christ - R Larry Overstreet) Rich Cathers - If it weren’t for the trial of Jesus, Pontius Pilate would be considered a minor figure in history. He is mentioned by ancient historians Josephus, Philo, and Tacitus, besides the four gospels. Yet sixty years ago, he was considered by some scholars to be nothing more than a myth. In 1961, archaeologists turned over one of the stones in the ancient amphitheater at Caesarea, and found the name of Pilate carves into it. The inscription, translated from Latin, is: “To the Divine Augusti this Tiberieum … Pontius Pilate … prefect of Judea … has dedicated this” Illustration - A Sunday school teacher asked her students to draw a picture of the Holy Family. After the pictures were brought to her, she saw that some of the youngsters had drawn the conventional pictures....the Holy Family and the manger, the Holy Family riding on the mule, etc. But she called up one little boy to ask him to explain his drawing, which showed an airplane with four heads sticking out of the plane windows. She said, “I can understand that you drew three of the heads to show Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. But who’s the fourth head?” “Oh,” answered the boy, “that’s Pontius the pilot!” Rod Mattoon - Some of the frustrating characteristics of our judicial system today are the influences that public opinion and the media will have on the verdict of a case. Threats of rioting or violence tend to pressure or blackmail juries into making a popular decision instead of a just one. The O.J. Simpson case is a classic example of such pressure. The verdict of that case continues to be mocked to this day. It is also frustrating when judges do not abide by the law, but use their authority to hinder or overturn the votes or legislation of a state in order to implement their political preferences. The state of Wisconsin is dealing with this right now. Corrupt judges will ignore or distort the Constitution of the United States and use their bench to legislate, a problem our Founding Fathers cautioned us about and warned us to avoid. What do you think would happen if a famous, well-liked person in this country was tried on national television and declared innocent by the judge, but then, the person was sentenced to death and executed after being declared "Not Guilty" because of public opinion and peer pressure? Do you think people would be a little upset? I would think so. Such actions would be unjust, unfair, and outrageous. This is what we find in this portion of Luke. We come to the trial of the Lord Jesus Christ and find it was a Kangaroo Court. A Kangaroo Court is a court that is characterized by irresponsible, unauthorized, or irregular procedures. The principles of the law and justice are perverted or disregarded. The punishment is given outside legal procedures. This was also a Kangaroo Court because the leaders or judges had Jesus jumping from one court to another. Those who were in charge kept passing the buck when it came to dealing with Jesus because of the fear they had of the opinions of others. This trial will provide insights into what happened to the Lord and practical insights for living the Christian life. . (Treasures from Luke) QUESTION - Who was Pontius Pilate? ANSWER - Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from A.D. 26-36, serving under Emperor Tiberius. He is most known for his involvement in condemning Jesus to death on a cross. Outside of the four Gospels, Pontius Pilate is mentioned by Tacitus, Philo, and Josephus. In addition, the “Pilate Stone,” discovered in 1961 and dated c. A.D. 30, includes a description of Pontius Pilate and mentions him as “prefect” of Judea. Pilate is also mentioned in the apocryphal writings, but these were all written at much later dates. In the Bible, Pontius Pilate is mentioned solely in connection with the trials and crucifixion of Jesus. The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) portray Pilate as reluctant to crucify Jesus. Pilate calls the charges against Jesus “baseless” (Luke 23:14) and several times declares Jesus to be not guilty: “What crime has this man committed? I have found in him no grounds for the death penalty” (Luke 23:22). Pilate’s conscience was already bothering him when his wife sent him an urgent message concerning Jesus. The note begged him, “Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him” (Matthew 27:19). John’s Gospel offers some more detail of the trial, including an additional conversation between Pilate and Jesus. Jesus acknowledges Himself as a king and claims to speak directly for the truth. Pilate responds with the famous question, “What is truth?” (John 18:38). The question intentionally communicated multiple meanings. Here was a situation in which truth was compromised in order to condemn an innocent man. Pilate, who is supposedly seeking the truth, asks the question of the One who is Himself “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6). A human judge, confused about the truth, was about to condemn the Righteous Judge of the world. In the end, Pilate sought a compromise. Knowing Jesus had been handed over by the religious leaders out of envy, he appealed to the crowds at the Passover, asking which “criminal” should be set free, Jesus or Barabbas? The leaders convinced the crowd to cry out for Barabbas (Matthew 27:20–21). Giving in to political pressure, Pilate authorized both the flogging and crucifixion of Jesus: “Wanting to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified” (Mark 15:15). Pilate had the charge against Jesus posted on the cross above Jesus’ head: “THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS” (Matthew 27:37). As soon as Jesus died, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus in order to bury Him, and Pilate granted the request (John 19:38). The last glimpse we have of Pontius Pilate is when he assigns guards for Jesus’ tomb (Matthew 27:64-66). Pontius Pilate’s brief appearance in Scripture is full of tragedy. He ignored his conscience, he disregarded the good advice of his wife, he chose political expediency over public rectitude, and he failed to recognize the truth even when Truth was standing right in front of him. When given an opportunity to evaluate the claims of Jesus, what will we decide? Will we accept His claim to be the King, or will we follow the voice of the crowd?GotQuestions.org Wikipedia Article on Pontius Pilate Luke 23:2 And they began to accuse Him, saying, "We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King." KJV Luke 23:2 And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King. And they began to accuse Him Zechariah 11:8; Mark 15:3-5; John 18:30 We found this man misleading our nation Lk 22:5; 1 Kings 18:17; Jeremiah 38:4; Amos 7:10; Acts 16:20,21; 17:6,7; 24:5 forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar Lk 20:20-25; 1 Kings 21:10-13; Ps 35:11; 62:4; 64:3-6; Jeremiah 20:10; 37:13-15; Mt 17:27; 22:21; 26:59,60; Mark 12:17; 14:55,56; Acts 24:13; 1 Peter 3:16-18 saying that He Himself is Christ, a King Lk 22:69,70; Mark 14:61,62; John 18:36; 19:12 Luke 23 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries See Trial & Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages - to arrange the events chronologically and bring out details unique to each Gospel Note: The following table is an attempt to line up parallel passages from the 4 Gospel accounts on the same row and to identify the passages found only in one Gospel with yellow highlighting. In some cases it is difficult to state with certainty which passage in a particular Gospel comes next in time sequence. If you see a passage you do not think fits in the sequence please send an email with your explanation. From a cursory glance at the table below, it should be apparent that in order to get a complete account of Jesus before Pilate, one must read John's account. See also a related but more complete chart all on one page - Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages MATTHEW MARK LUKE JOHN JESUS' FIRST CIVIL TRIAL BEFORE PILATE INSIDE THE PRAETORIUM (Approximate Time - 6:30 AM) Mt 27:1 Now when morning came, all the chief priests and the elders of the people conferred together against Jesus to put Him to death; 2 and they bound Him, and led Him away and delivered Him to Pilate the governor. (N2) Mk 15:1+ Early in the morning the chief priests with the elders and scribes and the whole Council, immediately held a consultation; and binding Jesus, they led Him away and delivered Him to Pilate. John 18:28 Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas into the Praetorium, and it was early; Jn 18:28b and they themselves did not enter into the Praetorium, so that they would not be defiled, but might eat the Passover. (N1) Mt 27:3-10 PARENTHESIS ONLY MATTHEW DESCRIBES THE FATE OF JUDAS (N) Jn 18:29 Therefore Pilate went out to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this Man?” (N1) (see pix) 30 They answered and said to him, “If this Man were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him to you.” 31 So Pilate said to them, “Take Him yourselves, and judge Him according to your law.” The Jews said to him, “We are not permitted to put anyone to death,” 32 to fulfill the word of Jesus which He spoke, signifying by what kind of death He was about to die, (N3) Lk 23:2 And they began to accuse Him, saying, “We found this man (#1) misleading our nation (#2) and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, (#3) and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King.” THE FIRST CIVIL TRIAL CONTINUES WITH PILATE QUESTIONING JESUS INSIDE THE PRAETORIUM Mt 27:11 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.” Mk 15:2+ Pilate questioned Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And He answered him, “It is as you say.” Lk 23:3+ So Pilate asked Him, saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And He answered him and said, “It is as you say.” Jn 18:33 Therefore Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Jesus and said to Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?” (N4) Jn 18:34 Jesus answered, “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about Me?” 35 Pilate answered, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests delivered You to me; what have You done?” (N5) 36 Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.” 37 Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth (Jn 14:6, cf gospel). Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice (cf Jn 10:27, 8:31-32).” 38 Pilate said to Him, “What is truth?” (Pix) THE FIRST CIVIL TRIAL CONCLUDES PILATE REACHES HIS VERDICT INSIDE THE PRAETORIUM. THEN HE GOES OUT TO THE JEWS TO ANNOUNCE HIS FIRST "NOT GUILTY" VERDICT Lk 23:4+ Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, “I find no guilt in this man.” Jn 18:38b And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and said to them, “I find no guilt in Him. (N6) Mt 27:12 And while He was being accused by the chief priests and elders, He did not answer . 13 Then Pilate said to Him, “Do You not hear how many things they testify against You?” 14 And He did not answer him with regard to even a single charge, so the governor was quite amazed. (N7) Mk 15:3+ The chief priests began to accuse Him harshly (Imperf-repeatedly). 4 Then Pilate questioned Him again, saying, “Do You not answer? See how many charges they bring against You!” 5 But Jesus made no further answer; so Pilate was amazed. Lk 23:5+ But they kept on insisting, saying, “He stirs up the people, teaching all over Judea, starting from Galilee even as far as this place.” THE SECOND CIVIL TRIAL BEFORE HEROD ANTIPAS (Only in Luke) (Approximate Time 7:00 AM) FRIDAY - EARLY MORNING BEFORE 9 AM Lk 23:6 When Pilate heard it, he asked whether the man was a Galilean. 7 And when he learned that He belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent Him to Herod, who himself also was in Jerusalem at that time.... Lk 23:8+ Now 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. 9 And he questioned Him at some length; but He answered him nothing. 10 And the chief priests and the scribes were standing there, accusing Him vehemently. 11 And Herod with his soldiers, after treating Him with contempt and mocking Him, dressed Him in a gorgeous robe and sent Him back to Pilate. (THIS LEADS TO THE THIRD CIVIL TRIAL BELOW) 12 Now Herod and Pilate became friends with one another that very day; for before they had been enemies with each other. THE THIRD CIVIL TRIAL JESUS' SECOND APPEARANCE BEFORE PILATE (Approximate Time: 7:30 AM) Luke 23:13-16+ Pilate summoned the chief priests and the rulers and the people, 14 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. 15 “No, nor has Herod, for he sent Him back to us; and behold, nothing deserving death has been done by Him. 16 “Therefore I will punish Him and release Him.” (See Note) CLICK HERE TO GO TO NEXT SECTION WHO DO YOU WANT ME TO RELEASE? GOSPEL OF JOHN Note 1 - John 18:28 says the Jews "themselves did not enter into the Praetorium so that they would not be defiled." When the Jews brought Jesus to Pilate, it seems clear that Jesus Himself was taken inside the Praetorium to face Pilate, while the Jews remained outside. Then when Pilate went out to them he formally commenced the legal proceedings (the first civil trial) as he asked "What accusation do you bring against this Man?" (see pix) (Jn 18:29). It is interesting that the Jews did not at first give a specific accusation declaring "If this Man were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him to you.” (Jn 18:30) They mistakenly presumed this would be sufficient for Pilate to condemn Jesus to death. For after all Pilate would have had to give the order for a Roman cohort to go with the Jews to arrest Jesus (Jn 18:3). Probably to their shock Pilate told them to judge Him (Jn 18:31). Of course their problem was they wanted Him dead and had no authority to carry out capital punishment. Therefore they came up with three accusations calculated to force Pilate to condemn Jesus to death, for high treason and insurrection. Pilate was a weak man of fickle character but he was still smart enough to discern that the reason the Jews had delivered Jesus into his hand was because of envy! (Mt 27:18). So the Jews in essence forced Pilate's hand with their triple accusation in Lk 23:2. How tragically deceived (and hypocritical) were these "religious" Jewish leaders who regarded ceremonial defilement a much more serious matter than moral defilement! (cf Lk 11:39+) THOUGHT - Are we not often like them, maintaining a "spiritual" exterior, while at the same time internally harboring unclean thoughts, unrepentant sins, etc? O Lord, acquit us of hidden faults and keep us from presumptive sins, lest they come to rule over us. Amen (Ps 19:12-13). Augustine - O impious blindness! They would be defiled, forsooth, by a dwelling which was another's, and not be defiled by a crime which was their own. They feared to be defiled by the praetorium of an alien judge, and feared not to be defiled by the blood of an innocent brother. Matthew Poole "Nothing is more common than for persons overzealous about rituals to be remiss about morals." John