www.biblestudiesonline.org.uk
The Gospel of Luke Chapter 23:1–31 Jesus Taken Before Pilate 23:1 Then the whole group of them rose up and brought Jesus before Pilate.1 Even though the Sanhedrin had condemned Jesus for blasphemy, they had no power to administer the death sentence. Their plan was to accuse Jesus to the Roman governor; and so the whole Sanhedrin led him before Pilate. 23:2 They began to accuse him, saying, "We found this man subverting our nation, forbidding us to pay the tribute tax to Caesar and claiming that he himself is Christ, a king." The charges they brought against Jesus were as follows2: firstly, that he was misleading the people; that is, he was turning the nation of Israel away from obedience to Roman authority. Secondly, and similarly, that he was encouraging the people not to pay taxes to Caesar; and finally that he was proclaiming himself to be the Messiah, a King. All these (false) charges were carefully worded in order to persuade Pilate that he had committed crimes worthy of death under Roman law. They knew that Pilate would not be interested in any of their Jewish laws being broken. 23:3 So Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?" He replied, "You say so." In fact, the only charge which concerned Pilate was the charge that Jesus had claimed to be a king, as to claim this without Imperial recognition would be to rebel in opposition to Caesar. So Pilate asked Jesus if he truly was the king of the Jews. The Lord's enigmatic reply meant that Pilate had spoken the truth (Isa. 9:6–7). 23:4 Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, "I find no basis for an accusation against this man." 3
1
About this, all the gospel writers agree: c.f. Matt. 27:1–2; Mark 15:1; John 18:28 Only Luke elucidates the tribute money charge against Jesus. All the gospel writers tell us Pilate examined Jesus about his claim of being King of the Jews (Matt. 27:11; Mark 15:2, Luke 23:3; Jn. 18:33), and Matthew, and Mark relate that many accusations were placed before Pilate (Matt. 27:12; Mark 15:3), but only Luke lists subversion over the issue of Roman taxes as being one of the charges. John discusses the more general accusation that Jesus, by being proclaimed king, was guilty of leading an insurrection against Caesar (Jn. 19:12, 15). 3 Luke and John detail the formal decision of Pilate that Jesus was not guilty of the charges against him (see Jn. 18:38). Matthew has Pilate’s wife declare Jesus innocent (Matt. 27:19), followed by the statement of the hand-washing Pilate that he would have no part in the death of an innocent man (Matt. 27:24). Similarly, Mark only alludes to Pilate’s belief in Jesus’s innocence, not to his giving Jesus a formal acquittal (Mark 15:14). John, of course, introduces to Pilate the charge of his claim to be the son of God (Jn. 19:7)—something which shakes Pilate, who would not have had an OT etymological view of the title. 2
Although Jesus had confessed to being a rightful king of the Jews, notice that he made no defiance against Rome. As a result, Pilate felt no interest in pursuing the matter, proclaiming to the chief priest and those with them that he found Jesus innocent of any crime. Matthew and Mark tell us that Pilate perceived the chief priests had handed Jesus over to him because of envy (Matt. 27:18; Mark 15:10). 23:5 But they persisted in saying, "He incites the people by teaching throughout all Judea. It started in Galilee and ended up here!" The chief priests, however, were not easily dissuaded, and vehemently insisted to Pilate that Jesus had stirred the people to rebellion throughout all Judea and Galilee by his teaching. 23:6 Now when Pilate heard this, he asked whether the man was a Galilean. Despite his reluctance, Pilate had no option but to take such a charge seriously. But having heard that Jesus had begun his ministry in Galilee, he thought he had found a way out of the situation—which must have seemed to him like a Jewish nuisance. If Jesus was a Galilean, then he came under Herod’s authority. The chief priests assumed that Jesus was born in Galilee because He was brought up in Nazareth; he was in fact a Judean, born in Bethlehem. 23:7 When he learned that he was from Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him over to Herod, who also happened to be in Jerusalem at that time. And as soon as he knew that He belonged to Herod's jurisdiction, Pilate sent Him to Herod, who was also in Jerusalem at that time; probably not so much so as to keep the Passover as to overawe discontent. Only Luke mentions Jesus’s trial before Herod.
Jesus Transferred to Herod then Back to Pilate 23:8 When Herod saw Jesus, he was very glad, for he had long desired to see him, because he had heard about him and was hoping to see him perform some miraculous sign. When Herod saw Jesus he was overjoyed, since he had heard about him and had wanted an opportunity to see him for some time. He hoped that Jesus might ‘perform’ a miracle before him (Luke 9:7–9). 23:9 So Herod questioned him at considerable length; Jesus gave him no answer. Yet although Herod persisted in questioning Jesus for some time, he was not able to elicit a response. God had already spoken his final word to Herod, as he had murderously silenced John the Baptist (Matt. 14:10; Mark 6:16; Luke 9:9). Herod would be granted no more opportunities for repentance—but Jesus would achieve his goal (Luke 13:31–32). 23:10 The chief priests and the experts in the law were there, vehemently accusing him. Even though the chief priests and scribes continually shouted out their accusations against Jesus, he remained silent; this was in fulfilment of Isaiah 53:7. 23:11 Even Herod with his soldiers treated him with contempt and mocked him. Then, dressing him in elegant clothes, Herod sent him back to Pilate. Herod became irritated by Jesus's silence (did he understand what it meant?) and so turned on him, setting his soldiers on him and treating him with scorn. They mocked him by putting a royal robe on him—no doubt Herod’s own—and sent him back to Pilate.
23:12 That very day Herod and Pilate became friends with each other, for prior to this they had been enemies. Although previously Pilate and Herod had been antagonists, Pilate’s recognition of Herod's authority in the matter of Jesus’s trial led to better relations between them.
The Choice is Made 23:13–15 Then Pilate called together the chief priests, the rulers, and the people, and said to them, "You brought me this man as one who was misleading the people. When I examined him before you, I did not find this man guilty of anything you accused him of doing. Neither did Herod, for he sent him back to us. Look, he has done nothing deserving death. Pilate summoned the members of the Sanhedrin and some of the people in order to announce his verdict. The only charge against Jesus which concerned Pilate was that he was inciting the people to rebel against Caesar. Following his hearings by both Pilate and Herod, Jesus was pronounced innocent of this charge. Luke is making his point clear from this that—despite the rhetoric of the Pharisees recorded in John 11:48—Jesus was not perceived to be a political threat. 23:16 I will therefore have him flogged and release him." Even though Pilate had declared him innocent of any charge, Jesus was not a Roman citizen. Since he had no protection under Roman law, Pilate could do whatever he wished with Jesus; and so in order to placate the Jewish leaders he offered to punish Jesus by flogging—thus humiliating him—prior to release. 23:17 for it was necessary for him to release one to them at the feast. (NKJVTM) 4 Part of the Roman policy aimed at keeping peace in Jerusalem was that of honoring the Jewish feast of Passover with the release of a Jewish prisoner. It would appear that this practice had been in place prior to Pilate’s taking up office. As was customary—that is, as was the practice of former governors—it would be expected that Pilate should release one prisoner. 23:18–19 But they all shouted out together, "Take this man away! Release Barabbas for us!" (This was a man who had been thrown into prison for an insurrection started in the city, and for murder.) 5 Perhaps Pilate thought that despite the envy of the religious leaders, the common people would want Jesus to be set free. But if such were the case, then Pilate had miscalculated, for they joined their leaders in crying out for Jesus to be crucified and Barabbas released. This man Barabbas had been put in prison for taking part in an uprising against Roman authority in Jerusalem and for murder. 23:20 Pilate addressed them once again because he wanted to release Jesus. It may have been more because of the risk of upsetting his own soldiers by releasing Barabbas—a man who had killed one of their own—than any attempt of getting justice for Jesus that Pilate attempted a second time to secure Jesus’s release. 23:21 But they kept on shouting, "Crucify, crucify him!" The chief priests, rulers and the crowd of people continued to fiercely cry out in unison ‘Crucify Him’. They did not want Jesus to be merely flogged and released; they were determined that he should die. 4
All the gospel writers agree about this custom (c.f. Matt. 27:15; Mark 15:6; Jn. 18:39) Again, all the gospel writers agree about the people’s call for the release of Barabbas in preference to Jesus (c.f. Matt. 27:21; Mark 15:11; Jn. 18:40). Matthew and Mark tell us that it was the chief priests who persuaded the people to make this decision (Matt. 27:20; Mark 15:11). 5
23:22–25 A third time he said to them, "Why? What wrong has he done? I have found him guilty of no crime deserving death. I will therefore flog him and release him." But they were insistent, demanding with loud shouts that he be crucified. And their shouts prevailed. So Pilate decided that their demand should be granted. He released the man they asked for, who had been thrown in prison for insurrection and murder. But he handed Jesus over to their will.6 Pilate’s appeal this third time could be taken as more like a genuine appeal to the crowd’s humanity and reason. Pilate was thought of as a brutal ruler—he would show no mercy to rebels, or to those who made war against Rome—yet here he seems genuinely dismayed by the idea of condemning an innocent man, who wasn’t even a slave, for no legitimate reason. ‘Why should he crucified, what wrong had he done?’ Rome prided itself in own brand of justice which it exported to the world. But despite insisting that he would act with final authority, the crowds worked themselves into such a frenzy that Pilate found it more advisable to give in to the crowds so as to prevent rioting. He sentenced Jesus to be crucified. They people had made their choice: Barabbas, a criminal, was to be set free whilst Jesus, the Son of God who knew no sin (2 Cor. 5:21), was to be put to death for the sins of the whole world (1 Jn. 2:2). This happened according to the choice they had made, and yet it had been ordained as God’s plan before the foundation of the world (Acts 2:23; 1 Pet. 1:20). As in the life of Joseph, the people meant it for evil, but God meant it for good (Gen. 50:20), to bring about the salvation of the world (Jn. 3:16; 1 Jn. 2:2)
The King of Kings on the Cross 23:26 As they led him away, they seized Simon of Cyrene, who was coming in from the country. They placed the cross on his back and made him carry it behind Jesus. The other gospel writers tell us that Jesus was first flogged 7 and then led away to Calvary bearing his own cross on his shoulders. Having suffered terribly from the flogging, he was too weak to carry it all the way to his execution, and so the Roman soldiers took hold of a man who was coming into the city from the country, Simon a Cyrenian, 8 and forced him to carry the cross walking behind Jesus. 23:27 A great number of the people followed him, among them women who were mourning and wailing for him. As was normally the case when a crucifixion was taking place, a large crowd of people followed the condemned man—a public execution was quite a spectacle. Among the crowd were women who wept and mourned in pity for Jesus—not necessarily his followers. 23:28 But Jesus turned to them and said, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. Although Jesus had previously spoken of the destruction of Jerusalem (Matt. 24:19; Mark 13:17; Luke 21:23– 24) only Luke tells us that Jesus reminded those who had gathered to see his crucifixion of this imminent event. Because of his compassion for the people, it seems that Jesus viewed this event in terms even more terrible than his own death. Even his victorious resurrection could not repeal Jerusalem’s fate—her final decision had been made, she had rejected God’s Son and judgment would swiftly come. That is why he turned
6
c.f. Matt. 27:26; Mark 15:15; Jn. 19:16 Matthew, Mark and John tell us (Matt. 27:26; Mark 15:15; Jn. 19:1) that Pilate ordered Jesus to first be flogged before turning him over to his soldiers to be crucified; although John tells us Pilate had hoped the flogging would be enough blood-letting for the crowds – see John 19:5–6). Luke does tell us about Jesus’s flogging (Luke 18:33; 23:16, 22), but for some reason omits details of it here. 8 c.f. Matt. 27:32; Mark 15:21. Only John omits this. 7
to the women lamenting his death9 and told them not to weep for him but to weep for themselves and their children. 23:29 For this is certain: The days are coming when they will say, 'Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore children, and the breasts that never nursed!' This would be during the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. Those who have never had children will be considered blessed in that day for they will not see their children starved to death and put to the sword. 23:30 Then they will begin to say to the mountains, 'Fall on us!' and to the hills, 'Cover us!' So great will be the anguish of that time that they will cry out for the mountains to fall upon them and bury them. Even though this may have been the cry in AD 70, it is re-appropriated by the writer of the Apocalypse to refer to humanity’s call to be spared the final judgment—albeit a call which is made in vain (Rev. 6:16–17). 23:31 For if such things are done when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?" Adam Clarke says ‘this seems to be a proverbial expression’; if a tree which has an abundance of fruit and foliage is cut down, what will be done to a tree that has died and is rotting away? Jesus Christ was, like such a tree, being cut off from the land of the living (Isa. 11:1; 53:8), and yet worse times were ahead. © Derek Williams & Mathew Bartlett 2015 Bible Studies Online UK www.biblestudiesonline.org.uk You may copy, print or distribute our studies freely in any form, just so long as you make no charges. Sign up today for our FREE monthly Bible study magazine “Living Word” Scriptures taken from the NET Bible www.bible.org
9
(the ‘daughters of Jerusalem’—a clear allusion to the sacking of Jerusalem in the days of Jeremiah? c.f. Lam. 2:13–15)