Mark Bradford's Bible Blog

Jesus Before Pilate and Herod

¹Then the whole assembly rose and led him off to Pilate. ²And they began to accuse him, saying, “We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Christ,^[a] a king.”

³So Pilate asked Jesus, “Are you the king of the Jews?”
“Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied.

⁴Then Pilate announced to the chief priests and the crowd, “I find no basis for a charge against this man.”

After their abbreviated trial of Jesus, the entire Sanhedrin went as a group to Pilate, expecting to have no trouble getting him to execute Jesus. Pilate was a cruel governor who killed many Jews during his time. Pilate was well known for his disdain for Jewish customs and beliefs, and in this case, it worked in Jesus’ favor, at least for a little while. Because of his lack of respect for Jews, Pilate was suspicious of the Sanhedrin’s motives. Here were these well dressed men of Jewish nobility accusing a beaten and bloodied peasant of claiming to be a king. I don’t think Jesus looked much like a king at that point. He looked like a victim. Their charges against Jesus were outright lies. The thing they thought they had gotten Jesus to confess to, blasphemy, would mean nothing to Pilate. So they made up charges that he had opposed paying taxes to Rome and that he claimed to be the Messiah King. In fact, Jesus had said just the opposite. When asked about paying taxes, he had said, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” (Luke 20:25) When asked if he was the Christ, the Messiah King, just moments before, instead of taking on that title, Jesus called himself the Son of Man from Daniel 7:13-14. The religious leaders couldn’t come up with legitimate charges against Jesus, so they simply made some up.

Pilate’s question to Jesus strikes me as sarcastic, especially considering what Jesus’ appearance must have been like.. Pilate didn’t take the Sanhedrin’s charges seriously, as we can see from his many attempts to set Jesus free. There is some debate about Jesus’ answer to Pilate. Some think it’s not as positive a response as the NIV makes it seem, but an answer more like, “You said it.” But the words are the same as Jesus’ answer to the Sanhedrin, which the Amplified Bible again translates, “[It is just as] you say. [I AM.]” But neither response would have been heard as a confession by Pilate. The use of the name I AM, while considered blasphemous by the religious leaders, would have gone right over Pilate’s head. The Sanhedrin’s plan was not working as they hoped it would. Pilate finds Jesus innocent of any charge deserving death.

⁵But they insisted, “He stirs up the people all over Judea^[b]by his teaching. He started in Galilee and has come all the way here.”

⁶On hearing this, Pilate asked if the man was a Galilean. ⁷When he learned that Jesus was under Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who was also in Jerusalem at that time.

⁸When Herod saw Jesus, he was greatly pleased, because for a long time he had been wanting to see him. From what he had heard about him, he hoped to see him perform some miracle. ⁹He plied him with many questions, but Jesus gave him no answer. ¹⁰The chief priests and the teachers of the law were standing there, vehemently accusing him. ¹¹Then Herod and his soldiers ridiculed and mocked him. Dressing him in an elegant robe, they sent him back to Pilate. ¹²That day Herod and Pilate became friends—before this they had been enemies.

Neither Mark or John mention Jesus being handed over to Herod. See my post on Jesus’ trial before Pilate in Mark and John here. Herod Antipas was the son of Herod the Great, who was petty king of Galilee and Perea under Roman rule at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 1:5). The Herods were given some power and a small detachment of troops. Herod Antipas is the same one who beheaded John the Baptist (Luke 9:9). When Pilate found out Jesus was from Galilee, he was happy to hand Jesus over to Herod. I’m sure he thought he had seen the last of Jesus at that point. Herod was delighted at the opportunity to see Jesus, who he had been wanting to see for a long time. Cuza, the manger of Herod’s household, was married to Joanna, a financial supporter of Jesus’ ministry (Luke 8:3). Probably because of this, Herod heard many stories about Jesus’ miracles, and wanted to see one for himself (Luke 9:7-9). But Herod was not really interested in Jesus, he just wanted to be entertained. There are many in the church like that today. They enjoy the music, multimedia, and preaching, but aren’t really interested in knowing Jesus.

Herod is the only one to try Jesus that Jesus gives no answer to. Jesus answered the chief priests and Pilate, but gave Herod no answer. Jesus answered those who were doing their best to kill him, but said nothing to the shallow man who only wanted entertainment. Throughout his ministry, Jesus ignored those who only wanted to see signs and wonders, but shared everything with those who wanted to know him and hear his teachings. What should that tell us about our desire to be entertained today? After getting no response from Jesus, Herod dressed him in a robe and mocked him, then sent him back to Pilate. But Herod appreciated the gesture from Pilate. Pilate was only trying to avoid making a decision about Jesus, but Herod saw the act of sending Jesus to him as an acknowledgment of his authority. This was a politically shrewd move on Pilate’s part, and he gained an ally by doing it.

¹³Pilate called together the chief priests, the rulers and the people, ¹⁴and said to them, “You brought me this man as one who was inciting the people to rebellion. I have examined him in your presence and have found no basis for your charges against him. ¹⁵Neither has Herod, for he sent him back to us; as you can see, he has done nothing to deserve death. ¹⁶Therefore, I will punish him and then release him.”^[c]

¹⁸With one voice they cried out, “Away with this man! Release Barabbas to us!” ¹⁹(Barabbas had been thrown into prison for an insurrection in the city, and for murder.)

²⁰Wanting to release Jesus, Pilate appealed to them again. ²¹But they kept shouting, “Crucify him! Crucify him!”

²²For the third time he spoke to them: “Why? What crime has this man committed? I have found in him no grounds for the death penalty. Therefore I will have him punished and then release him.”

²³But with loud shouts they insistently demanded that he be crucified, and their shouts prevailed. ²⁴So Pilate decided to grant their demand. ²⁵He released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, the one they asked for, and surrendered Jesus to their will.

When Jesus is brought back before Pilate, Pilate repeats his verdict that Jesus is innocent, and thinks he can placate the crowd by having Jesus scourged and then released. He sees an opportunity to let Jesus go free by using the custom of releasing a prisoner at Passover. But there’s one problem. The crowd that had assembled was there for the purpose of demanding the release of Barabbas. They were aware of the custom as well, and they knew who they wanted released. Plus, the chief priests and elders were stirring up the crowd against Jesus. Barabbas was exactly what they were accusing Jesus of being, a rebel against Rome, leader of an insurrection. Pilate’s pleas fell on deaf ears. More than anything, Pilate was afraid of a riot, and the crowd was turning ugly. If there was a riot, Pilate could well be fired and called to stand before Caesar, which he was 4 years later, after the needless slaughter of some Samaritans.

I feel the need to again address the assertion we sometimes hear that the crowd that shouted “Crucify him!” at Jesus’ trial was the same crowd that shouted “Hosanna!” at the Triumphal Entry. Not true. The crowd that shouted “Hosanna!” was a crowd that followed Jesus on the road to Jerusalem, and entered the city with him from Jericho. The Triumphal Entry, as we think of it, happened before Jesus actually entered the city proper (Luke 19:28-44, blog). The crowd at his trial was probably a crowd of supporters of Barabbas who were there to seek his release, and supporters of the chief priests. They were completely different crowds. The crowd that followed Jesus to Jerusalem and shouted praises to the Son of David were hiding right then.

So Pilate handed Jesus over to be scourged, then crucified. Scourging was an extremely brutal punishment. I quote here from David Guzik’s Commentary:

The victim of a Roman scourging was tied against a post, and struck with a whip that had bits of glass, sharp rock, and metal tied to the end of leather cords. The whip would be struck at the top and dragged down the back, until the victim’s entire back was a bloody, open wound. Many people died just from this scourging.

Keep in mind that Jesus had not slept for at least 24 hours. He was already in a weakened physical state from exhaustion and the beating he had taken at the hands of the temple guard. The 39 lashes with the jagged whip must have put him in a state of shock. Also keep in mind that he could have stopped this at any time, but he let it go on out of love for us. But even this torture and the crucifixion to follow was not the source of his greatest agony. That came from drinking the cup of his Father’s wrath, from carrying the weight of all of our sin. As Oswald Chambers said in My Utmost For His Highest, (paraphrasing) “The reason salvation is so easy for us to achieve is that it cost God so much.”

Mark Bible Herod, Luke, Pilate, trial of Jesus

The Guards Mock Jesus

⁶³The men who were guarding Jesus began mocking and beating him. ⁶⁴They blindfolded him and demanded, “Prophesy! Who hit you?” ⁶⁵And they said many other insulting things to him.

Jesus was actually tried three times before the Jewish leaders. Immediately after his arrest, he was brought before Annas, who was the ex-high priest and father-in-law of the current high priest, Caiaphas. (John 18:12-14, 18:19-23). Annas was the “power behind the throne” to Caiaphas, who was a mere figurehead. Then Jesus was taken to the home of Caiaphas, where the illegal night trial described in Mark 14:53-65 took place. See my post on that passage here. That trial happened while Peter waited outside and denied knowing Jesus. Luke skips over those two trials and goes straight to this beating, which happened after the second trial at the home of the high priest (Mark 14:63-65).

Jesus was blinded by the temple guards and beaten with clubs, sticks, and fists. Maybe the high priest was not satisfied with what he had gotten during the night trial and instructed the guards to “soften him up” for the official trial at dawn. Jesus was blindfolded and asked to “prophesy” as to who had hit him. Aside from being cruel mockery, this was also a misunderstanding of what prophecy is. It’s not fortune telling. It’s not necessarily telling the future. It’s delivering the Word of the Lord. These men were Levites who worked in the temple, and should have known better. I’m sure it was considered a great honor to have that job. It was their responsibility to keep the unclean from entering the temple, and here they were, acting as thugs, beating up an innocent man. As we all unfortunately know, there is no shortage of people who do very bad things, even among those who work in the church. For those who are in a position of power and authority in God’s house to use that power and authority to abuse others is the worst sort of crime against God.

Jesus before the Council

⁶⁶At daybreak the council of the elders of the people, both the chief priests and teachers of the law, met together, and Jesus was led before them. ⁶⁷“If you are the Christ,^[d]” they said, “tell us.”

Jesus answered, “If I tell you, you will not believe me, ⁶⁸and if I asked you, you would not answer. ⁶⁹But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God.”

This was an abbreviated version of the illegal trial held during the night. They needed to do this because it was illegal under Jewish law to hold trials at night. The previous trials had no legal standing. They also had to do this as soon as the sun came up because Roman trials were held early in the morning. They had to try and convict Jesus very quickly so they could get him to Pilate and have him executed before the Sabbath began at sundown.

The Sanhedrin asked Jesus the same question they had asked the night before, when they had finally gotten something they felt they could condemn him for (Mark 14:61-63). No more messing around with false witnesses who couldn’t get their story straight. They went right to the key question, knowing Jesus would give the same answer. Jesus did give them that answer, but first said, “If I tell you, you will not believe me, and if I asked you, you would not answer.” That strikes me as a way of saying, “Didn’t we just have this conversation?” Jesus had already told them who he was, and they didn’t believe him. But they wanted him to say it again “officially”, so they could convict him and send him on his way.

Once again, Jesus refers to himself as the “son of man” and quotes from Daniel 7:13-14. This was a way of answering their question, but differently than they wanted. They were asking if Jesus was the Messiah who would free Israel from the Romans and restore David’s kingdom. Jesus answered by saying he was the Son of Man prophesied in Daniel, who would be given all authority by the Ancient of Days and rule over all people forever. Our ideas of who God is are so much smaller than the reality of who he is.

⁷⁰They all asked, “Are you then the Son of God?”
He replied, “You are right in saying I am.”

⁷¹Then they said, “Why do we need any more testimony? We have heard it from his own lips.”

The Sanhedrin’s concept of the term “Son of God” was different from ours. We’re used to the idea of Jesus as God the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity. But of course, Jews of that time had no concept of the Trinity. They didn’t know about God the Son, and the Holy Spirit had not yet been given. To them, the term “Son of God” sometimes referred to angels (Genesis 6:2) or kings (2 Samuel 7:14; Psalm 2:7; 89:26-27). The Sanhedrin was probably using the term to ask if Jesus was the Messiah King. Again, Jesus gave them a bigger answer than they were looking for. The NIV’s translation of his answer, “You are right in saying I am”, is not completely accurate. The Amplified Bible translates his answer as: “It is just as you say; I AM.” Jesus had given the same answer the night before, in Mark 14:62. Jesus is saying, “I’m not just God’s son the way you think of it, a king anointed by God to rule over Israel. I’m God himself, who rules over all things, including you. I AM.” That answer gave the Sanhedrin the ammunition they needed to turn Jesus over to Pilate, where the next phase of his trials took place.

Mark Bible Luke, trial of Jesus

¹²Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him ¹³and brought him first to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year. ¹⁴Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it would be good if one man died for the people. (John 18:12-14, NIV)

The Jewish leaders bear the most blame for the death of Jesus. They instigated his arrest and the charges against him. But they were not just defending the status quo, and their own position. It was their job to keep potential troublemakers in line. If they let an insurrection get too far out of hand, the Romans would come down on the whole nation like a ton of bricks, and many would die. I don’t think this was the first time someone spoke out against the established order, gained a following, and the religious leaders tried to quash it in order to keep the peace. I’m sure Jesus seemed like the most dangerous one yet to them, after what he had done the past 3 years, and after the crowds had lined the streets calling him the Messiah just a few days before.

⁵³They took Jesus to the high priest, and all the chief priests, elders and teachers of the law came together. ⁵⁴Peter followed him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest. There he sat with the guards and warmed himself at the fire. (Mark 14:53-54, NIV)

This trial of Jesus was illegal under Jewish law. Jewish law had many protections for the rights of the accused, much like the American legal system, but all of those protections were ignored by those who simply wanted Jesus dead. Peter seemed to be inviting discovery, since he followed right into the courtyard area. Much of the crowd that came to Gethsemane to arrest Jesus must have been there by the fire. It would make sense that most of those who went to Gethsemane with swords and clubs would not have been allowed into the trial itself, but told to wait outside in the courtyard. Yet Peter went in there, even after cutting off the ear of the High Priest’s servant! If he didn’t want to be recognized, why even go in there? It seems that in spite of the danger, he wanted to be near Jesus. He had to know what was happening to him.

Note: In order to focus on the trials of Jesus, and to save space in an already very long blog post, I am skipping over Peter’s denials. If you’re interested in my post on Peter denying Christ in Mark 14:66-72, you can read that here.

¹⁹Meanwhile, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching.

²⁰“I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. ²¹Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said.”

²²When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby struck him in the face. “Is this the way you answer the high priest?” he demanded.

²³“If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?” ²⁴Then Annas sent him, still bound, to Caiaphas the high priest. (John 18:19-23, NIV)

Here is another example of the illegality of this “trial”. It was the High Priest’s duty to call forth the witnesses first, beginning with those for the defense. These basic legal protections for the accused under Jewish law were not observed in the trial of Jesus. By telling Annas to ask those who heard him teach, Jesus wasn’t being uncooperative, only asserting His legal right. There was to be no formal charge until witnesses had been heard and been found to be truthful.

⁵⁵The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for evidence against Jesus so that they could put him to death, but they did not find any. ⁵⁶Many testified falsely against him, but their statements did not agree.

⁵⁷Then some stood up and gave this false testimony against him: ⁵⁸“We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this man-made temple and in three days will build another, not made by man.’ ” ⁵⁹Yet even then their testimony did not agree. (Mark 14:55-59, NIV)

One would think that the chief priests would have gotten their act together enough to have their false witnesses get their stories straight, but apparently not. Under Jewish law, no one could be convicted of a crime unless two or three witnesses testified against him, and there were severe penalties for bearing false witness (Deut. 19:15-19). The accusation against Jesus in verse 58 is a reference to what Jesus said in John 2:18-21, where Jesus was clearly talking about his own body. It’s a classic case of being misquoted. They may have been purposely misquoting Jesus in order to try to convict him, but they may also have just misunderstood what he said, and were very offended by it. The temple was the pride of Israel, and throughout the Greco-Roman world, destruction of places of worship was a capital offense. They may well have been confusing what Jesus said in referring to his body as “this temple” and what he had predicted about the destruction of the temple in Mark 13:2. It wouldn’t have been the first or last time someone was falsely accused because of a misunderstanding.

⁶⁰Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” ⁶¹But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.
Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ,^[f] the Son of the Blessed One?”

⁶²“I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” (Mark 14:60-62, NIV)

For the high priest to stand and approach Jesus was a desperation move. Normally the high priest would remain seated and render judgment, but all the evidence they had put up against Jesus had gone nowhere. At that point, the only way to convict Jesus was to try to bully him into making some sort of confession, to try to get him to say something they could condemn him for. So the high priest asked Jesus straight out if he was the Messiah. If Jesus says yes, they can accuse him of blasphemy. If he says no, they can accuse him of being a false prophet and have him stoned.

Jesus could have mounted a magnificent defense of all he had done, the people he had healed, the dead he had raised, and all the rest, but he did not. It’s not surprising to me that Jesus did not respond to the false accusations, because they were not worthy of a reply. The fact that the high priest had to get up and confront Jesus showed that. But when the high priest asked him this question, Jesus responds by first saying, “I AM”, using the same words God used to identify himself to Moses (Exodus 3:14). He’s literally saying “The I Am is here” or “I Am the Lord”. Then he quotes from Psalm 110:1 and Daniel 7:13, both of which were well known as Messianic prophecies. What Jesus is saying back to the high priest is, “I not only am the Messiah you seek, I am the Lord. You may think you judge me, but in reality I come to judge you”.

⁶³The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. ⁶⁴“You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?”

They all condemned him as worthy of death. ⁶⁵Then some began to spit at him; they blindfolded him, struck him with their fists, and said, “Prophesy!” And the guards took him and beat him. (Mark 14:63-65, NIV)

If Jesus had said, “Let me make a deal with you. You know I’m the best candidate for Messiah you’ve seen. You’ve seen the throngs who follow me, and you know the good work I’ve done. Why don’t you just proclaim me Messiah and king, and together we’ll rid Israel of our Roman oppressors and the corrupt reign of Herod”, this whole episode might have ended differently. But Jesus had no interest in self preservation. Jesus gave them the excuse they needed to have him executed. He could have saved himself, but instead he chose to endure what he knew was coming in order to save us.

Jesus Before Pilate

²⁸Then the Jews led Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness the Jews did not enter the palace; they wanted to be able to eat the Passover. ²⁹So Pilate came out to them and asked, “What charges are you bringing against this man?”

³⁰“If he were not a criminal,” they replied, “we would not have handed him over to you.”

³¹Pilate said, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.”

“But we have no right to execute anyone,” the Jews objected. ³²This happened so that the words Jesus had spoken indicating the kind of death he was going to die would be fulfilled. (John 18:28-32, NIV)

The hypocrisy of the religious leaders is laid bare in this passage. They were worried about ceremonial uncleanness, but they were more than willing to execute an innocent man. If the Jews had executed Jesus, he would have been stoned. But that would not have fulfilled what Jesus had said about “the kind of death he would die”, as it says in verse 32. In John 3:14-15, Jesus said that he “must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.” Since only the Romans could crucify, this prophecy could only be fulfilled by turning Jesus over to them.

The Romans had made it illegal for the Jews to execute criminals in 7 A.D. Stonings still happened from time to time, as in the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:54-60), but since Jesus was so popular with the people, if the Jewish leaders put Jesus to death themselves, the crowds might have turned against them. By having the Romans do it, they could always blame the Romans. The reason the chief priests had to have their trial of Jesus in the wee hours of the night, before the rooster crowed, was because Roman trials were held early in the morning, just after sunrise. If they wanted Jesus executed on Friday, they had to hand him over to Pilate early Friday morning. Jesus had been up all night. He endured everything he went through on Good Friday without having slept the night before.

³³Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?”

³⁴“Is that your own idea,” Jesus asked, “or did others talk to you about me?”

³⁵“Am I a Jew?” Pilate replied. “It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?”

³⁶Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

³⁷“You are a king, then!” said Pilate.
Jesus answered, “You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.”

³⁸“What is truth?” Pilate asked. With this he went out again to the Jews and said, “I find no basis for a charge against him. (John 18:33-38, NIV)

When Pilate asked, “What is truth?”, I wish Jesus had answered him. Maybe he did, and the gospels don’t record it. We know from what Jesus said elsewhere that he is the truth, the way, and the life. Truth is God’s very nature. We have lost the idea of absolute truth in this culture. But science and mathematics are full of absolute truth. The speed of light is an absolute, immutable fact, not subject to anyone’s opinion or perception. If you think 2 + 2 = 5, you may have a right to that opinion, but you’re wrong. And if absolute truth exists in the physical realm, then it must also exist in the spiritual realm, because both come from the Creator.

²“Are you the king of the Jews?” asked Pilate.
“Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied.

³The chief priests accused him of many things. ⁴So again Pilate asked him, “Aren’t you going to answer? See how many things they are accusing you of.”

⁵But Jesus still made no reply, and Pilate was amazed. (Mark 15:2-5, NIV)

The primary charge against Jesus was that he called himself King of the Jews, that he held himself up as a king in opposition to Rome. This charge was completely false, but it was one that would get Pilate’s attention. Jesus claiming he was God would not have mattered at all to Pilate. The Romans had hundreds of gods. One more would not have mattered to them. But if he claimed to be king, that was a problem. There was only one king, and that was Caesar. Jesus’ response in Mark 15:2 was not a straight out “yes”. The “yes” that’s in the NIV in verse 2 is not in other translations. His actual answer was something more like, “You said it”. If he had responded by saying, yes, he was King of the Jews, he would have been calling himself Israel’s true king, and the trial would have been over then and there. That would have been treason against Rome. Pilate was used to men groveling before him, begging for their lives. That’s why he was so amazed that Jesus would not defend himself.

⁶Now it was the custom at the Feast to release a prisoner whom the people requested. ⁷A man called Barabbas was in prison with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the uprising. ⁸The crowd came up and asked Pilate to do for them what he usually did.

⁹“Do you want me to release to you the king of the Jews?” asked Pilate, ¹⁰knowing it was out of envy that the chief priests had handed Jesus over to him. ¹¹But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to have Pilate release Barabbas instead.

¹²“What shall I do, then, with the one you call the king of the Jews?” Pilate asked them.

¹³“Crucify him!” they shouted.

¹⁴“Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate.
But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!”

¹⁵Wanting to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified. (Mark 15:6-15, NIV)

Th crowd that gathered that morning was there because of the custom of releasing a prisoner, and they were probably all supporters of Barabbas. They had gone there with intention of asking for his release. But Pilate, not satisfied that Jesus was guilty of anything, saw this as a way to release an innocent man. But he had two things working against him. First, the crowd was there to get Barabbas released, not Jesus. Second, it was a Jewish crowd, and the Jewish leadership was stirring them up against Jesus. The Jews hated Pilate, so of course they would side with their own religious leaders against whatever Pilate wanted. Though reluctant to execute an innocent man and release Barabbas, a real enemy of Rome, Pilate was afraid of a riot breaking out, which would get him into a lot of trouble with his superiors. History shows that Pilate was a cruel governor who crucified hundreds, if not thousands of Jews during his time. So in the end, he relented and did as the crowd demanded.

All too often I have heard it said that the same crowd that was cheering him during his Triumphal Entry was shouting “crucify him” at his trial. There is no evidence for this assertion. Jerusalem was a large city, even then, and there were thousands of pilgrims there for Passover from other places. Sometimes I think people say that because they have to use the same crowd in their church Easter productions, so they say it was the same crowd in Jerusalem. But the Bible never says that, so please stop saying it when you don’t know that it’s true. If it was the same crowd, why were the Jewish leaders afraid to execute Jesus themselves? Why were they afraid to arrest him in broad daylight? It’s much more likely that they were completely different crowds.

I don’t want to get into the gory details of the flogging of Jesus. We’ve all heard about this many times, and I’ve sure you’ve all seen The Passion Of The Christ. That movie goes overboard on that, by the way. I thought Mel Gibson did an excellent job with that movie, although he did take some liberties, which artists always do. I’m OK with most of the liberties he took, except for the scourging. He went too far with that, way beyond what the Bible says. Roman law stated that only 39 lashes were allowed with the lead and bone tipped whip, and in the movie, there are over 100 lashes, which no one could survive. I counted. There’s no way Jesus could still have been conscious after a beating like that to go back to Pilate, have a conversation with him, and then carry his cross. He would have been dead right there, and the crucifixion would never have happened. I think Mel Gibson was trying to emphasize the brutality of what Jesus went through, because that had not been given its due in previous Jesus films, even the ones by Christan studios. But he went too far with it. What the Bible describes is bad enough. There’s no need to exaggerate it. But 39 lashes were enough to rip Jesus’ back to shreds, and put him in a state of shock. After scourging, most did not survive the cross for long. Keep in mind that Jesus had the power to stop this at any time, but he did not, for one reason. He let it continue out of love for us. It was the only way he could save us.

Mark Bible Jesus, John, Mark, Pilate, trial of Jesus

Jesus Before Pilate

¹Very early in the morning, the chief priests, with the elders, the teachers of the law and the whole Sanhedrin, reached a decision. They bound Jesus, led him away and handed him over to Pilate.

After having put Jesus through an illegal trial and beaten him up, the Jewish high council bound him and handed him over to Pilate. Why didn’t they simply kill him themselves? First, the Romans had made it illegal for them to do so in 7 A.D. Stonings still happened from time to time, as in the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:54-60), but since Jesus was so popular with the people, if the Jewish leaders put Jesus to death themselves, the crowds might have turned against them. By having the Romans do it, they could always blame the Romans. The reason the Jews had to have their trial of Jesus in the wee hours of the night, before the rooster crowed, was because Roman trials were held early in the morning, just after sunrise. If they wanted Jesus executed on Friday, they had to hand him over to Pilate early Friday morning.

²“Are you the king of the Jews?” asked Pilate.
“Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied.

³The chief priests accused him of many things. ⁴So again Pilate asked him, “Aren’t you going to answer? See how many things they are accusing you of.”

⁵But Jesus still made no reply, and Pilate was amazed.

Luke and John record much more of this trial before Pilate than Mark does. We know that Jesus was actually tried by Pilate twice, plus once by Herod. But since I’m commenting on the Book of Mark, I’ll stick with what Mark says about it. The primary charge against Jesus was that he called himself King of the Jews, that he held himself up as a king in opposition to Rome. This charge was completely false, but it was one that would get Pilate’s attention. Jesus claiming he was God would not have mattered at all to Pilate. The Romans had hundreds of gods. what’s wrong with one more? But if he claimed to be king, that was a problem. There was only one king, and that was Caesar. Jesus’ response was not a straight out “yes”. The “yes” that’s in the NIV in verse 2 is not in other translations. His actual answer was something more like, “You said it”. If he had responded by saying, yes, he was King of the Jews, he would have been calling himself Israel’s true king, and the trial would have been over then and there. That would have been treason against Rome. Pilate was used to men groveling before him, begging for their lives. That’s why he was so amazed that Jesus would not defend himself.

⁶Now it was the custom at the Feast to release a prisoner whom the people requested. ⁷A man called Barabbas was in prison with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the uprising. ⁸The crowd came up and asked Pilate to do for them what he usually did.

⁹“Do you want me to release to you the king of the Jews?” asked Pilate, ¹⁰knowing it was out of envy that the chief priests had handed Jesus over to him. ¹¹But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to have Pilate release Barabbas instead.

¹²“What shall I do, then, with the one you call the king of the Jews?” Pilate asked them.

¹³“Crucify him!” they shouted.

¹⁴“Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate.
But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!”

¹⁵Wanting to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

Th crowd that gathered that morning was there because of the custom of releasing a prisoner, and they were probably all supporters of Barabbas. They had gone there with intention of asking for his release. But Pilate, not satisfied that Jesus was guilty of anything, saw this as a way to release an innocent man. But he had two things working against him. First, the crowd was there to get Barabbas released, not Jesus. Second, it was a Jewish crowd, and the Jewish leadership was stirring them up against Jesus. The Jews hated Pilate, so of course they would side with their own religious leaders against whatever Pilate wanted. Though reluctant to execute an innocent man and release a real enemy of Rome, Barabbas, Pilate was afraid of a riot breaking out, which would get him into a lot of trouble with his superiors. History shows that Pilate was a cruel governor who crucified hundreds, if not thousands of Jews during his time. So in the end, he relented and did as the crowd demanded.

All too often I have heard it said that the same crowd that was cheering him during his Triumphal Entry was shouting “crucify him” at his trial. There is no evidence for this assertion. Jerusalem was a large city, even then, and there were thousands of pilgrims there for Passover from other places. Sometimes I think people say that because they have to use the same crowd in their church Easter productions, so they say it was the same crowd in Jerusalem. But the Bible never says that, so please stop saying it when you don’t know that it’s true. If it was the same crowd, why were the Jewish leaders afraid to execute Jesus themselves? Why were they afraid to arrest him in broad daylight? It’s much more likely that they were completely different crowds.

I don’t want to get into the gory details of the flogging of Jesus. We’ve all heard about this many times, and I’ve sure you’ve all seen The Passion Of The Christ. That movie goes overboard on that, by the way. Roman law stated that only 39 lashes were allowed with the lead and bone tipped whip, and in the movie, there are over 100 lashes. I counted. But 39 were enough to rip Jesus’ back to shreds, and put him in a state of shock. After scourging, most did not survive the cross for long. Keep in mind that Jesus had the power to stop this at any time, but he did not, for one reason. He let it continue out of love for us. It was the only way he could save us.

Mark Bible Bible, Jesus, Mark, Pilate, trial of Jesus

Before the Sanhedrin

⁵³They took Jesus to the high priest, and all the chief priests, elders and teachers of the law came together. ⁵⁴Peter followed him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest. There he sat with the guards and warmed himself at the fire.

This trial of Jesus was illegal under Jewish law. Jewish law had many protections for the rights of the accused, much like the American legal system, but all of those protections were ignored by those who simply wanted Jesus dead. Peter seemed to be inviting discovery, since he followed right into the courtyard area. Much of the crowd that came to Gethsemane to arrest Jesus must have been there by the fire. It would make sense that most of those who went to Gethsemane with swords and clubs would not have been allowed into the trail itself, but told to wait outside in the courtyard. Yet Peter went in there, even after cutting off the ear of the High Priest’s servant! If he didn’t want to be recognized, why even go in there? It seems that in spite of the danger, he wanted to be near Jesus. He had to know what was happening to him.

⁵⁵The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for evidence against Jesus so that they could put him to death, but they did not find any. ⁵⁶Many testified falsely against him, but their statements did not agree.

⁵⁷Then some stood up and gave this false testimony against him: ⁵⁸“We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this man-made temple and in three days will build another, not made by man.’ ” ⁵⁹Yet even then their testimony did not agree.

One would think that the chief priests would have gotten their act together enough to have their false witnesses get their stories straight, but apparently not. Under Jewish law, no one could be convicted of a crime unless two or three witnesses testified against him, and there were severe penalties for bearing false witness (Deut. 19:15-19). The accusation against Jesus in in verse 58 is a reference to what Jesus said in John 2:18-21, where Jesus was clearly talking about his own body. It’s a classic case of being misquoted. They may have been purposely misquoting Jesus in order to try to convict him, but they may also have just misunderstood what he said, and were very offended by it. The temple was the pride of Israel, and throughout the Greco-Roman world, destruction of places of worship was a capital offense. They may well have been confusing what Jesus said in referring to his body as “this temple” and what he had predicted about the destruction of the temple in Mark 13:2. It wouldn’t have been the first or last time someone was falsely accused because of a misunderstanding.

⁶⁰Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” ⁶¹But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.
Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ,^[f] the Son of the Blessed One?”

⁶²“I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

For the high priest to stand and approach Jesus was a desperation move. Normally the high priest would remain seated and render judgment, but all the evidence they had put up against Jesus had gone nowhere. At that point, the only way to convict Jesus was to try to bully him into making some sort of confession, to try to get him to say something they could condemn him for. So the high priest asked Jesus straight out if he was the Messiah. If Jesus says yes, they can accuse him of blasphemy. If he says no, they can accuse him of being a false prophet and have him stoned.

Jesus could have mounted a magnificent defense of all he had done, the people he had healed, the dead he had raised, and all the rest, but he did not. It’s not surprising to me that Jesus did not respond to the false accusations, because they were not worthy of a reply. The fact that the high priest had to get up and confront Jesus showed that. But when the high priest asked him this question, Jesus responds by first saying, “I AM”, using the same words God used to identify himself to Moses (Exodus 3:14). He’s literally saying “The I Am is here” or “I Am the Lord”. Then he quotes from Psalm 110:1 and Daniel 7:13, both of which were well known as Messianic prophecies. What Jesus is saying back to the high priest is, “I not only am the Messiah you seek, I am the Lord. You may think you judge me, but in reality I come to judge you”.

⁶³The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. ⁶⁴“You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?”

They all condemned him as worthy of death. ⁶⁵Then some began to spit at him; they blindfolded him, struck him with their fists, and said, “Prophesy!” And the guards took him and beat him.

If Jesus had said, “Let me make a deal with you. You know I’m the best candidate for Messiah you’ve seen. You’ve seen the thongs who follow me, and you know the good work I’ve done. Why don’t you just proclaim me Messiah and king, and together we’ll rid Israel of our Roman oppressors and the corrupt reign of Herod”, this whole episode might have ended differently. But Jesus had no interest in self preservation. Jesus gave them the excuse they needed to have him executed. He could have saved himself, but instead he chose to endure what he knew was coming in order to save us.

He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth. (Isaiah 53:7)

And so the incredible physical abuse of Jesus, culminating in the cross, began.

Mark Bible Bible, Mark, trial of Jesus