To God be the Glory…not to Man
“Now, when they were gathered, Pilate said to them, ‘Which would you desire that I should release to you, Jesus Barabbas or Jesus who is called Christ?” For he knew that it was from jealousy that they delivered him.”
(Matthew 27:17-18)
“And Pilate asked them saying, ‘Do you desire that I should release the King of the Jews?’ For he knew that it was out of jealousy that the chief priests had delivered him.”
(Mark 15:9-10)
Again, there is a lot of coverage over this activity and each from a little different angle, yet complimenting one another as they provide a very full picture of the people’s betrayal of Jesus. The point is clear; all involved are guilty — every one. We have discussed the irony of Jesus Barabbas having the same given name as Jesus the Christ and we have discussed the significance of the title: “King of the Jews.” Yet Matthew records Pilate using the word “Christ” of our Lord. So far, we have seen the High Priest using the term as he questioned Jesus, pressing, “Are you the Christ?” but here we find Pilate essentially connecting the term Christ with Jesus, though not as a profession of faith, but simply as a way to harras the Jewish authorities.
Christ is of course the Greek word for Messiah, a Hebrew term that means “the Anointed One.” Many in ancient Israel were called the anointed of God: priests, kings, etc… but in the Old Testament there is also a thread that points to a greater anointed who will redeem the people from oppression. Moses led the people out of slavery to the Egyptians; this messiah needed to be greater than that. Sadly, the people, being focused on the things of this world, saw Rome as that greater enemy while in reality Jesus the Messiah was here to defeat an even greater foe than that — sin and death. The unbelieving priests were so blinded by their jealousy that they could not see the truth written on the wall and sought to destroy this Christ to preserve their own power.
Yet, isn’t that the tactic of the devil through history? Destroy that which could be the Holy One? The trend goes all of the way back to Cain slaying Abel — a prophet of God (Matthew 23:35, Luke 11:51). Yet, in seeking to destroy that which God had anointed, the Devil fell right into God’s design, for to defeat death, the Messiah must die and then be raised from the grave. Thus all of the plans of the enemy would be thwarted just as the enemy felt he had realized his greatest victory. What Satan perceived would be his victory became his utter defeat. Ahh, the grand majesty of God’s sovereign design. And while Satan remains as a menace — a lion roaring in the darkness — he is a defeated foe and has no ultimate power over the elect of God. That, loved ones, is a reality that ought to drive us to worship.
But doesn’t the jealousy of these chief priests hamper us yet today? Or perhaps the kind of jealousy that these priests had? They were jealous of the attention and glory that was being given to Christ. How often the work of Christ is hampered by the egos of people who would rather the glory come to themselves. Sad, isn’t it? Beloved, don’t let this trap befall you in the work you do in Christ’s church and don’t let this trap befall your pastor. We are not building our own kingdoms personally or denominationally; we are building Christ’s kingdom — everything else is secondary.
I love thy kingdom, Lord,
The house of thine abode,
the Church of our blest Redeemer saved
with his own precious blood.
-Timothy Dwight
King of the Jews… An Earthly or Divine King?
“Yet there is a custom with regard to you that I should release one to you during the Passover. Do you desire that I release to you the King of the Jews?”
(John 18:39)
There is a lot of overlap between the different Gospel accounts at this point in the trial, each Gospel writer emphasizing those aspects that the Spirit directed to be most valuable for their respective initial audiences. Though all four writes mention the title, “King of the Jews,” it seems to me that John’s use of the term is the most directed — it is set off in ways that make it more pronounced.
Clearly, Pilate does not see Jesus’ kingship as a threat to his own power or the trial would have been done with already. We have also seen already the conversation that Pilate had with Jesus about the nature of Jesus’ kingdom — that it is a heavenly kingdom, not an earthly one. So why is Pilate continuing to use this language? Clearly he is seeking to taunt the Jewish authorities. What a pathetic king, from a Roman standpoint at least, one whom a mere Roman Governor has the power of life and death over. You can almost see the Priests squirming at this statement and Pilate enjoying every minute of that confrontation. Who is manipulating whom, we might ask as the politics of the event continue to unfold.
Yet, in the midst of the politics, what an appropriate title. Jesus is the King of the Jews from old, he is the one to whom they have always and historically looked as their divine King, and he is the one that all True Israel serves even unto this day, for if we have faith in Jesus Christ, we are children of Abraham. And even today, Jesus sits enthroned on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, worthy of all praise and glory and adoration and honor. Worthy of our obedience and our love.
There will come a day when all nay-sayers will bow their knee before the Lordship of Christ — sadly, for many it will be to their utter condemnation and judgment. Amongst those are this group here who are bickering over who will execute our Lord. While each is trying to ensure that the blood of Christ is on the others hands, by the dynamics that take place, blood is on the hands of all. God’s providence is remarkable…remember what Peter said of this in his sermon at Pentecost:
“Men of Israel — Hear these words! Jesus of Nazareth, a man who was proven by God to you though might and wonders and signs which God did through him in your midst, just as you yourselves know, this one, by the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, was delivered up through the hands of lawless men to be crucified and killed.”
(Acts 2:22-23)
Do you hear what Peter is saying? Who delivered Jesus up? Lawless men did. But lawless men did it because of the definite plan or design and foreknowledge of God. God superintended all of these things from the beginning through miracle and providence to reach this end. An end that will bring salvation to all those who call on Jesus as their Lord and Savior.
In the end, we are left with one question. Which king will you serve? Will you serve a divine one that rules even today? Or will you serve an earthly king who will be here today and gone with the passing of God’s providential design. Pilate and Caesar are dead. Pilate and Caesar have bowed before the crushing foot of God’s justice and are facing judgement in the fires of hell. Jesus sits enthroned. Which king will you follow?
See No Evil…
1/20/14
“And Pilate said to him, ‘What is truth?’ After this he went out again to the Jews and said to them, ‘I find no grounds for a charge in him.’”
(John 18:38)
“Pilate then summoned the chief priests and the leaders and the people, saying to them, ‘You brought me this man as one who was misleading the people, but behold, I have examined him before you and I found no guilt in this man with respect to your charges against him. And neither has Herod, for he sent him back to us. Behold, nothing deserving of death has been done by him. Thus I will punish and release him.’”
(Luke 23:13-16)
There is some overlap here, but Luke is really just providing us with a little more detail on the content of the conversation being had between Pilate and the Jewish authorities. Frankly, Pilate wants nothing to do with this Jesus. The offer to release is an interesting one that we will reflect on further when we approach the tradition of releasing a prisoner at Passover, but one can speculate what was going through Pilate’s mind. Here is an angry mob desiring Jesus’ death, if he releases this man to the mob, what else would he expect apart from the mob’s angry murder of the man? Essentially, he must know that Jesus’ blood will be spilled, the question will be, by whose hands and Pilate wants nothing of it — and neither did Herod, which is (on a human level) why they are passing Jesus back and forth like a hot potato. Of course, in hindsight, we recognize that each player in this account is culpable and the passing back and forth is divinely designed to ensure that all the wicked had a part in this man’s death.
And when speaking of “all the wicked,” that finger needs to be pointed at us as well. It is because of sin that Jesus was sent to die — and it is because of our sin that we need that sacrificial death of our Lord. That means we too are part of that guilty group that would condemn Jesus. We stand guilty with the crowd of shouting, “Crucify!” if only by our actions.
How often, too, we stand with Pilate in wanting to turn a blind eye toward sin and unrighteousness. It is easy to fall into that trap. Somehow we get it in our heads that if we don’t see it, touch it, taste it, smell it, or hear about it (like those five monkeys) we won’t be guilty of it. But what if we know about it? Washing our hands of the act, as Pilate did, does not excuse our guilt. God regularly calls his people to seek to work justice in this world, especially for the poor and outcast — and Jesus qualifies on both levels at this point! So, the sin of omission is just as damning as the sin of commission.
Loved ones, examine your lives and reflect on how God calls you to take a stand in this world. It might not be in a murder trial, but God might be calling you to take a stand against injustice in your local community and not remain silent even if remaining silent is the popular thing to do. Ultimately it is God’s design that our sins would be wiped clean by this work of Christ and the cross to come, but we must understand that we all stand guilty of Jesus’ death because of our sins. Let us live in a way that reflects that knowledge and does not follow the pattern of Pilate and Herod.
What is Truth?
“And Pilate said to him, ‘What is truth?’ After this he went out again to the Jews and said to them, ‘I find no grounds for a charge in him.’”
(John 18:38)
Pilate’s iconic statement, “What is Truth?” is one that not only sets the context of his Roman culture, but speaks across the generations into the world in which we live today. The two dominant philosophical world views of the ancient Roman culture are that of Stoicism and Nominalism. Stoicism is the view that we are really more or less pawns in a much larger game where the gods and the fates control our lives. It is a view that we have limited freedom, but ultimately what is to come to pass will come to pass so there is no reason to get too excited or upset about the events of your life. In this perspective any form of transcendent truth is shadowed and unknowable, held in the hands of fate.
Nominalism follows very naturally with the Stoic view. This is the perspective that there are no such things as absolutes. In ancient times, Plato and Aristotle had argued for the existence of absolute and perfect “forms” that are the basis for all representations we experience on earth. Thus, we may draw a circle on a blackboard, but the circle is not a perfect one — instead it is a representation of the “perfect circle” that exists as a form — or we might say as a definition. The same idea can be applied to trees, dogs, ideas, etc… For Plato, those forms existed in a transcendental, spiritual world. For Aristotle, those forms existed within the thing itself. Either way, forms existed. But as we moved into the rise of Roman thought over Greek thought, the idea of forms was discarded and people held that these forms were simply names (hence nominalism) given to such things. There was no such thing, for example, as an absolute circle from which all circles get their meaning. Instead, circle was just the name we give to things falling within a certain class of entities. And thus, any concept of an absolute Truth was abandoned.
It should be easy to see Pilate’s displeasure at Jesus’ statement that he came to testify to the Truth. “What truth?” “Truth is just a name we give to ideas we prefer.” “If there is such a thing as absolute truth, it is unknowable, so why bother searching for it or listening to it?” One can almost hear the dismissal in Pilate’s tone when he finally responds: “What is truth?” This is not a question seeking an answer, it is a remark of a frustrated governor who is weary of the prospect of rebellious messiah figures, political maneuvering by the Priests, and what he would consider the superstitions of the people. He simply returns to the Jews and essentially says, “Look folks, you haven’t given me any basis on which I can charge him.”
Stoicism and Nominalism have more or less passed out of vogue, but today’s post-modern culture, while rejecting fatalism almost entirely, has embraced a rejection of absolutes. In our culture truth is no longer seen as transcendent and as a result it finds its meaning in the self-definition of every person. This is not an entirely new idea, a contemporary of Plato was a man named Protagorus, sometimes seen as the first humanist, who is best known for his phrase, “man is the measure of all things.” Plato easily demonstrated the foolishness of such a thought, for who is the measure of man? Nevertheless, the words of Pilate are much the same of many in the western world today — what is truth?
The answer to the question is that truth is contained in the mind of God and that we can know truth by his self-revelation (Jesus came to testify to the Truth — the ultimate self-revelation of God!). We find that self-revelation contained in the Bible and contained in the universe around us that testifies to the glory of God (so long as we look at the universe through the lens of scripture). Loved ones, there is Truth and it is accessible to us — Jesus made it so. What is Truth? Look to Christ.
Listening to the Truth
“Then Pilate said to him, ‘Then you are a king!’ Jesus replied, ‘You say that I am a king. For this I was born and for this I came into the world — to testify to the Truth. All who are of the Truth listen to my voice.’”
(John 18:37)
The final clause in this statement deserves deeper reflection. Jesus says that “all who are of the truth listen to my voice.” How convicting that statement is when you get down to it. On the surface it is an easy one to affirm, but how often when applied deeper down, we struggle to live it out? How often do people talk a good talk but when it comes to living in obedience to the voice of Jesus, fall far short.
Jesus never states that his words are suggestions for wise living. No, he says that his words are Gospel, his words are Truth, and anything else that we might listen to is in error and separates us from him. We want to do things “my way” but Jesus plainly says that is not an option for us if we wish to be identified as Christian. We must do things “His way.” All else is sin.
Loved ones, there are many people in our world that call themselves Christians but have no interest in listening to any voice other than their own…or the devil’s. Just like Marlowe’s Faustus, our culture has flirted with the devil in the hopes of prosperity and happiness but failed to see that true happiness and contentment come not from comfort nor from the lusts of the flesh, but they come from Christ himself. The world has proclaimed Jesus’ teachings on peace and loving one’s brothers but have ignored Jesus’ words of sacrifice, judgment, and hell. To whom are they listening? Many claim Jesus just another yoga or wise moral teacher. Again, to whom are they listening? Certainly it is not to Jesus himself. And thus their ideas are neither true nor worthy of attention.
My friends, do not fall into the deceptions of this world. There is Truth and he is absolute. Yet, he has revealed his mind to us in his Word, the Bible, so that it might be preserved for all ages, studied, and obeyed. We are called to listen to Jesus’ voice with the implication that we will obey his wisdom — it is True indeed! Will you do so? If you will be of the truth, listening to (and obeying) the voice of Jesus is not an option.
Jesus’ Kingdom…
“Pilate replied, ‘Am I a Jew? Your people and the chief priests have delivered you to me — what did you do?’ Jesus answered, ‘My Kingdom is not of this world. If my Kingdom were of this world, my subordinates would strive in order that I not be delivered over to the Jews. But at present, my Kingdom is not from here.”
(John 18:35-36)
I want to begin by noting two words in this text that might otherwise be overlooked. The first word is uJphre/thß (huperetes), which refers to an assistant or a subordinate on some level. Typically, the New Testament employs this term to refer to those soldiers serving under some sort of commander. Yet, oftentimes our English Bibles render this as “servants” here, which is not incorrect, but gives the impression that Jesus is referring to the Apostles and the other Disciples who are following in ministry — a group that hardly represents any threat to either the Roman or Jewish authorities. Instead, this likely should be understood in the context of Matthew 26:53 where Jesus, during his arrest, points out to Peter (who has drawn a sword clumsily) that he has the ability to appeal to his Father for 12 legions of angels that would come to his aid. Understood this way, we see the significance of Jesus’ statement here, for this indeed would be the decimation of both the Roman and the Jewish authorities.
The second word to note is the word, nuvn (nun), translated here as “at present.” Many of our translations omit this word as its role is simply to provide a temporal marker. Yet, that omission misses an important piece of theology — Jesus’ kingdom may not have then been part of this world, but it is now and one day it will fully be. After Jesus’ resurrection he ascended to the throne of glory and has had all things in subjection under his feet (Hebrews 1:3; 2:8). He rules as head of his Church (Ephesians 1:22) and though there is much that is still in open rebellion against him today, he is in the process (through the outworking of the Gospel) of putting all things under his subjection (1 Corinthians 15:25-27) so that at one point in the future every knee will bow and tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:10-11)!
Oh, Pilate, do you not understand? Oh, Caiaphas, will you not bow your knee? Oh, Herod, where is your kingdom now and how will your beloved Caesar come to your aid? Those men, working behind the murder of our Lord, did not realize the extent of their sin and Pilate the extent of the one whom he would usher to his throne. These men have indeed bowed before Jesus, though under the crushing foot of the power of he who spoke the universe into existence. Where is your kingdom now, you who persecuted our Lord? And you who have embraced the prince of the power of the air even in our day — your joy will be cut off unless you repent and turn to Jesus for forgiveness and for grace! Here is the judge of the universe being judged by puny men — the irony is staggering…indeed, Jesus’ kingdom was not of this world…at that time. Loved ones, it is now! Beware to whom you bow allegiance!
How lovely on the mountains are the feet of him
Who brings good news, good news;
Announcing peace, proclaiming news of happiness:
Our God reigns, our God reigns!
– Leonard Smith
Where Does Your Understanding of Jesus Come From?
“Then Pilate entered the Praetorium again and questioned Jesus and said to him, ‘Are you the King of the Jews?’ Jesus answered, ‘Do you say this from yourself or has another spoken to you concerning me?’”
(John 18:33-34)
Jesus has thus been returned to Pilate’s custody and now Pilate must decide how to handle the matter. His first question to Jesus returns to the matter of politics — is this man a threat to Rome. While it may be a surprise that Jesus breaks his silence for a moment, it ought to be considered that this is, for the first time, a private audience without the priests screaming false accusations. Here, an honest conversation can take place. More importantly, Jesus uses this opportunity to change the discussion from the earthly to the eternal.
What is striking about this dialogue is its similarity to one that Jesus had with Peter earlier in his ministry, recorded in Matthew 16:15-17. Jesus is asking his disciples who people said he was. Many answers were given and then Jesus made the question more personal and asked Peter who he said that Jesus was. Peter’s response has become the bedrock of the Christian profession of faith — “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God.”
But notice what Jesus says to follow: “flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.” This question of Jesus is a spiritual question. Jesus is asking whether Pilate is saying this because that is what he is thinking or because it has been told by another. The right answer would have been, “because I have been told by the Holy Spirit.” This, of course, was not in Pilate’s vocabulary and thus his response is very different than Jesus‘ — rather than professing Christ, the rock upon which the church is built, he professes that one cannot know anything that is true, but we get ahead of ourselves.
The definition of King and Lord and Savior is radically different depending on the source of that understanding. Many would intellectually call Jesus their Lord or King, but have lives that do not reflect that this is something they really believe. Many call Jesus Savior out of an emotional response, often from an experience during a difficult time in their lives, but when the emotion fades the lifestyle does not reflect the profession. The truest way to test a profession of faith is by watching the person persevere in that faith as they live their life because we can reform our lives for a short time, but lasting change requires a work of the Holy Spirit. Pilate sadly demonstrates the source of his understanding about Jesus (or lack thereof); what is the source of yours?
Friendship with the World
“And there grew a brotherly love for each other between Pilate and Herod on that day. Prior to then, they had enmity toward one another.”
(Luke 23:12)
Friendship probably is not adequate here. History has shown that oftentimes politics makes for strange bedfellows, and indeed, there are few stranger than this. The Galileans, over whom Herod ruled, were known as a rambunctious and wild bunch not suited to civilized society. Herod himself was a kind of Roman “wannabe,” always courting his Roman friends and building great edifices in the Roman style, but he was yet of the Jewish people and not to be fully trusted. He was also known for his crass immorality, something not new to Rome, but on the other hand, immorality always seems worse when someone else is practicing it. Pilate was a Roman overseeing Judea — the heart of Jewish authority and culture. Here was the temple and the place of sacrifice for the people. The Sadducees also made their home here, though there was always a sense of contention between the Roman and the Temple authorities.
Some point to the “enmity” that Luke comments on as reflecting back to the gruesome way that Pilate had executed some Galileans, mingling their blood with their sacrifices (Luke 13:1), but this event was relatively minor in the grand scheme of politics and seems odd to cause “enmity” between these two men, especially in light of Herod’s willingness to execute his own (John the Baptist, for example). It is probably better understood in the context of the resentment that these men felt toward each other. Herod resenting the privilege of the Roman Pilate to rule Jerusalem while he got stuck ruling over people in the “back woods” of Galilee. And Pilate resenting the fact that Herod allowed his people to be such trouble-makers while also seeking to court Caesar’s favor.
Yet, here the enmity ceases and becomes a sort of brotherly affection, though affection also is probably not adequate. Here, there is a mutual enemy, and to quote a Russian proverb, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” The Rabbis have a similar proverb: “When the cat and the weasel marry together, misery becomes increased.” The real question is, “for whom will the misery be increased?” In other words, is the “mutual enemy” Christ or the Temple officials? Christ is certainly no threat to either man. Pilate recognizes Jesus to be innocent of the charges of the Priests and Herod is just disenchanted given that the great miracle worker will perform no signs for him.
While our Lord will suffer the actions of these earthly political powers, it seems almost as if the mutual enemy is the priestly class that rules the temple. One almost can picture Herod saying to Pilate, “How may we frustrate them further.” Evil here has no bounds.
One commentator argued that the wicked are unable to feel love or friendship. I would disagree, but would say that the kind of love and friendship that the wicked feel is wholly different than the love and friendship felt amongst genuine believers in Jesus Christ. The friendship of the wicked is self-serving and arrogant while the love of believers is holy, pure, and seeks the good of the other. The sad thing is that Christians often choose the love of the worldly wicked over the love of brotherhood in Christ. The former is easier and the latter can be costly, but the former is quite short-lived and is shallow in the end. The latter is eternal and is as deep as the oceans are wide. Which, beloved, will you choose? Which will you pursue? Friendship with this world is enmity with God (James 4:4). Something to think about…
Garments of True Splendor
“And the chief priests and the scribes stood there and made impassioned accusations against him. And Herod, along with his soldiers, were showing him contempt and mockingly clothed him in shining garments and sent him back to Pilate.”
(Luke 23:10-11)
And the mocking continues as Jesus refuses to perform the feats that Herod had hoped to see. What is interesting is that Herod does not just have him sent home and put to death — certainly Herod had the blood of John the Baptist on his hands, why not Jesus also? With Pilate giving up jurisdiction, Herod could easily have sentenced the man to death, pleased the priests and perhaps even won him some favor amongst the Jerusalem elite. Herod opts not do to so, and returns Jesus to Herod. Of course, this is a fulfillment of prophesy that Jesus would be hanged on a tree, but from a human perspective, it is fascinating to me to see all of these puzzle pieces laid into place. Certainly Herod, by returning Jesus to Pilate, is no less guilty of Jesus’ death, but perhaps in his own mind he can wash his hands of the man just as Pilate would later do. Perhaps Herod has as much contempt for the priestly establishment as Pilate does and Herod sees this as a way to frustrate them even more as he sees them practically begging for this man’s death. This may be the reason that Luke makes the comment about Herod and Pilate’s friendship that develops over these things in the next verse. Politics often makes strange bed-fellows.
There is another aspect of these verses, that is often overlooked, and that is the garment that is placed on Jesus’ shoulders. Many of our translations will render this word as “an elegant robe” (NIV), “splendid clothing” (ESV), “a gorgeous robe” (KJV & NASB), etc… and perhaps brings to mind the remarkable garment that Joseph was given by his father in the Old Testament. The word that Luke uses here is lampro/ß (lampros), which is the root from which we get the English word, “lamp.” In Greek, we sometimes translate lampro/ß (lampros) as splendid or opulent, but most commonly the term reflects something that is full of light or sparkles. This is the term that is used of the angel that presented himself to Cornelius (Acts 10:30) as well as the angels that John describes in heaven (Revelation 15:6) and the heavenly garment given to the Church as the bride of Christ (Revelation 19:8).
It should be noted the radical difference between that which is glorious of heaven and that which is considered glorious on earth. There is simply no comparison. Once again, Jesus is made to bear the shame of fallen man — this time being arrayed in the best of human making when the best of heaven is that which he rightfully deserves. To take the analogy further, Jesus is clothed in the garments of men so that his bride may be brightly arrayed in the garments of heaven (as we see in Revelation 19:8). It is an exchange that Jesus was pleased to make, but it is an exchange that we do not deserve to receive. One more thought along those lines — the garments with which the bride is to be clothed are described as the “righteous deeds of the saints.” May we always remember that the origin of those deeds is not within us here on earth, but in heaven, for indeed, these works have been prepared for us from before the foundation of the earth (Ephesians 2:10) and done not in our strength, but in the strength of the Spirit (2 Corinthians 12:8-9). Jesus substitutes himself in our place to give us what we could never hope to give ourselves — why then do we so often pursue the splendor of this world when Christ himself offers us the splendor of heaven.
Faithful Obedience, Not Miracles
“When Herod beheld Jesus, he was very pleased for he had wanted, for a long time, to see him because he had heard about him and he hoped that he might do some sign for him. So, he questioned him with many words, but he would not answer him.”
(Luke 23:8-9)
We all want a magic show, don’t we. We want the skies to part and God’s blessed voice to pronounce to us what by faith we ought to embrace. We want rumbles of thunder to accompany our preaching and miracles abounding to attest to our ministry. I had a friend who once told me, “It would be easier for me to believe that God is real if he would just come down from heaven and show me.” The sad thing is that God has done just that and it did not change the unbelief of wicked men. God spoke from heaven at Jesus’ baptism and people wrote it off. Jesus worked numerous miracles during his ministry and people were attracted to the performance. Everyone wanted to see the spectacle…even the jaded Herod…but unbelief is unbelief no matter how many miracles are worked in one’s presence. Judas witnessed many of Jesus’ miracles firsthand, yet still sold his master into the hands of the wicked.
Miracles do not generate faith. Faith is generated by the Holy Spirit as he gives new life to our sin-dead souls. Miracles are meant to confirm faith — to attest to the truth of who Jesus really is — not to set up a circus act. Thus Jesus did no miracles when he was in the midst of his unbelieving home-town and he will do no miracles here in the presence of Herod. Such is the judgment of God — the wicked left in their rejection and wickedness, the blind remaining so.
Pastors and churches, too, often fall into this trap in a different way. They call a new pastor and expect that in a year or so all of the problems of the church will be resolved, it will be growing and thriving, and they will be enjoying the good fruit that is characteristic of a long and enduring ministry. But that is the point, to see the fruit of a long and enduring ministry, the congregation must learn the patience to allow their pastor, barring any major sin, to have a long and enduring ministry while also submitting to his teaching and leadership. The miraculous is not the mark of the true church; faithful obedience to God’s word is.
The Path of Least Resistance
“Finding out that he was under Herod’s authority, he sent him to Herod — who was himself in Jerusalem on that day.”
(Luke 23:7)
We have already alluded to this transition, but it should be noted that Luke, always interested in grounding his Gospel in historical events and names recognized by the Roman people, is the only Gospel writer to include the trial by Herod. This Herod, of course, was the Son of Herod the Great, not the same Herod found in Matthew’s birth account. After the death of Herod (around 4 BC), the Roman Caesar broke up the kingdom of Israel into four portions to better control these otherwise stubborn and rebellious people. This Herod, also known as Antipas, became the “Tetrarch” of Galilee and Perea (a region just east of the Jordan River). Antipas is a shortened form of the Greek, ÔAnti/patroß (Antipatros), meaning “like the father.” And while this Herod may not have been as paranoid as his father was, he certainly was as immoral and allied himself closely with Rome as that suited his political ambitions. Yet, because Jesus grew up in Nazareth in the region of Galilee, he was officially under Herod’s jurisdiction, and this provided Pilate a convenient excuse to shift the burden of Jesus’ sentence upon someone else. Conveniently, Herod was in Jerusalem as well — it was Passover, so anybody that was anybody was in town on that day.
The transfer would simply be a means by which Pilate bought time from having to deal with Jesus’ fate, but I wonder how often we fall into a similar pattern of passing the buck when there are things before us that we just don’t want to weigh in on. That is a practice that we never find Jesus engaging in, though, and that ought to cause us pause. Indeed, as Christians, we are called to act wisely and to pursue justice as well as taking the difficult path — the easy path will only ever lead to destruction — how different that worldview is than the dominant worldview today which advocates taking the road with the least resistance. Interesting…
Jeremiah or Zechariah?
“Then was fulfilled the word of Jeremiah the prophet saying, ‘And they took the thirty silver pieces, the payment paid for the one on whom the Sons of Israel had set such a payment, and they gave it for the field of a potter just as the Lord instructed me.’”
(Matthew 27:9-10)
Oceans of ink have been spilled in wrestling with these words…not so much because the words themselves are overly difficult nor because this being a fulfillment of prophesy should surprise us, but because it seems, at least on the surface, that Matthew is citing a prophesy made in Zechariah, not in Jeremiah. And that becomes troublesome if you are going to hold to an inerrant view of the scriptures. So, did Matthew just make an honest mistake? Likely not, he is being inspired by the Holy Spirit who is God — not one to make a mistake. Is there some passage in Jeremiah that is being overlooked — some textual variant perhaps — that would rectify this difficulty? Not so much. We must remember that Matthew’s original audience was intimately familiar with the writings of the prophets and would have balked were an erroneous rendering to have been made. Matthew clearly intends this, but the question we are then left with is, why?
The passage in Zechariah that is pointed to is this:
“And I said to them, ‘If it is good in your eyes, give me my wages, if not then refrain from doing so.’ And they weighed out my wages: thirty pieces of silver. And Yahweh said to me, ‘Throw it to the potter!‘ — the splendid price which I was prized by them. So, I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them to the potter in the House of Yahweh.’
(Zechariah 11:12-13)
Certainly it is easy to see the connections: there are 30 pieces of silver, a Potter, and the “throwing” of the money in the direction of the potter who is in the temple. One might be tempted to stop there and draw the conclusion that Zechariah is really who Matthew had in mind when he cited this text, but doing so would miss some of the importance of how this citation is made. Interestingly, in the context of Zechariah, one might argue that the parallel is not so much with Judas dying in a Potter’s Field as it is with Judas returning the money to the priests. In fact, in Zechariah’s account, nothing is purchased, the money is simply returned.
Further, in the context of Zechariah 11, Zechariah the prophet has been commanded for a season to shepherd a flock that is doomed for slaughter. Remember, Zechariah is writing after the return of the people to Jerusalem, so he is speaking (in an immediate sense) of the fall of Judah to the Macedonians and then to the Romans — that which will anticipate the eventual coming of Jesus. At the end of that passage (verse 16), God says that he is about to raise up another shepherd who will not care for the people — this condemnation is arguably directed toward the priests of the people. So, Zechariah guards the sheep for a season, there is an account with breaking staffs, and then he quits his job and asks for his payment. They pay him well and God then commands Zechariah to throw the money to the potter in the temple. Again, this is a condemnation of the shepherds over God’s people: the priests.
You should be starting to notice some differences, though, that should be highlighted. We have already mentioned that there is no mention of purchasing a field in the Zechariah account, furthermore, there is a different term employed to refer to this potter. In the Hebrew, the term Zechariah used is rEoØwy (yo’er). When this term was translated into the Greek Septuagint, the word cwneuth/rion (choneuterion) was chosen. These words can be used to refer to a potter, but are also used of those who smelt metals. In fact, in the other two spots in the Old Testament (as well as in the one use of this term in the Jewish Apocrypha) it is translated as having to do with a smelter’s fire.
In Matthew’s account, he uses the term kerameu/ß (kerameus), which is always used of a potter and his clay both in the New Testament (see also Romans 9:21) and the Greek translation of rEoØwy (yo’er) in the Hebrew Old Testament (see Isaiah 41:25 and Jeremiah 18:6). If we follow the use of the term kerameu/ß (kerameus) to Jeremiah, as Matthew suggests, we find ourselves closer to unraveling our mystery.
In Jeremiah 18-19 we have an account that also ties in very closely with what Matthew is recording. The prophet is sent to the house of a potter — kerameu/ß (kerameus) is used — and told to observe the potter making a clay vessel. Part of the way through the process, the potter is unhappy with the developing design, so smashes the vessel down and starts from scratch. God instructs Jeremiah that like this vessel, God is going to smash down Jerusalem and rebuild because of the wickedness of the people. Later, Jeremiah is commanded to buy a flask from the Potter and smash it by the Valley of the Sons of Hinnom — the source of the word, “Gehenna” in the New Testament — to be renamed as “The Valley of Slaughter.”
One might be tempted to say, where does the Potter’s Field play into this account. Potters’ Fields historically were grounds that had such a high clay content that growing crops would be difficult, but as a source of clay for the potter, they were excellent. Furthermore, Jeremiah is told to relate that God is going to make the city of Jerusalem a place like a Valley of Slaughter — a place of death. And here, it seems, our connection with the potter’s field becoming a place for Judas’ death is made. While Jerusalem is thrown down in Jeremiah’s lifetime, it would be rebuilt. Judas’ death is a foreshadowing of another destruction of Israel that would take place during the lifetime of at least some of the Apostles…and this destruction in AD 70 would be permanent.
It is true that there is a modern city of Jerusalem that exists, but it is located just to the west of the original Jewish city, which now lies more or less in ruins and has a Muslim Mosque sitting on the temple mount (preventing another temple from being built — why? Jesus is the Greater temple, why settle for a lesser one?). Judas’ death and spilling of his blood is a fulfillment, then, of what Jeremiah promised. For Jerusalem’s apostasy in the death of Jesus Christ, they would be destroyed and the place would be left a horror for all to see. One need not read much of Josephus’ account of the fall of Jerusalem at the hands of the Romans in AD 70 to see elements of this fulfillment taking place — even to the point of the adults eating the flesh of their children. The testimony is heart-wrenching, but the potter’s vessel (representing the people of Israel) was broken on that day and its pieces scattered. Just as the Jews would flee and be sent into exile in Jeremiah’s day, so too, believers were scattered to the far ends of the earth, but this time with the hope of the Gospel to accompany them. How easily we get attached to a location; God says, “Go!”
The Field of Blood
“So, throwing the silver pieces into the temple, he left and went and hung himself. The chief priests took up the silver pieces and said, ‘It is not authorized that we throw this into the temple treasury because this is a payment for blood.’ And making a plan, they bought with it a field of a potter to bury strangers. Therefore the field is called, “The Field of Blood,” even to this day.”
(Matthew 27:5-8)
“Now this man acquired a piece of land from the wages of his wickedness and falling headlong he burst apart in the middle and all of his entrails poured out. And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their own dialect, ‘Akeldamach,” that is the “Field of Blood.”
(Acts 1:18-19)
Usually, the first thing that people want to know when they put these two passages back to back is, “So how did Judas die? Did he hang himself or did he fall and burst himself open?” The answer to this question is, “yes,” but let us recount the events to put this into perspective.
First, we have already talked about how these events seem to be taking place at about the same time as Jesus is being questioned. Judas realizes that his betrayal is leading to Jesus’ death and he just cannot deal with the matter. His first response is to return the silver — the blood money — to the priests. They reject the return and so we find him throwing it into the temple. Some of our translations render this, “sanctuary,” but that seems unlikely given the structure of the temple courts. Likely he has met with the priests in the outer courts somewhere, perhaps even in one of the many covered porticos along this wall. If closer to the temple, perhaps this conversation took place in one of the many rooms that surrounded the walls of the inner courts. Either way, it seems that since the priests won’t take his money, it is reasonable to assume from the language here that Judas cast the money in the direction of the temple. Then he left.
The priests realized the problem they had on their hands. Judas did not want the money and they could not keep the money, so they decided on purchasing a plot of land that could be used for charity — a place where travelers, aliens in the land, and others who are otherwise unknown or without family to care for their remains, could be buried. Essentially, this was a form of pauper’s graveyard.
Yet, Matthew’s account seems to imply that it was the priests who bought the property while Luke’s account in Acts, implies that it was Judas. The simplest way to rectify this apparent conflict is to see the priests purchasing the field in Judas’ name, thus all public records would indicate that it had been given by Judas. The money belonged to Judas anyhow, so it would not be too much of a stretch to imagine the priests going down and indicating that a sum of money had been given for such a purchase. Their hands were then clean of the blood money and Judas’ name is thus attached to the plot — it was bought on his behalf just like a real estate agent might handle such a transaction today.
Since Judas chose to commit suicide on this plot of ground, it is clear that he was aware of this transaction. It is also very reasonable to assume, realizing what the priests had done with the blood money, that this would provide a good place for him to commit the act of suicide. It could be seen as an act of spite (the priests would find his body and have the guilt of another death on their hands), an act of cursing (as cursed are those who are hanged on a tree — Deuteronomy 21:23), and as a symbol of his own alienation from the people of God (it was aliens, not Jews, that were to be buried here).
But what about the whole bursting and entrails pouring out language? This event took place on the Friday of Passover. The Priests had their hands full with the various services and sacrifices to be made. The following day was the Sabbath where no work could be done. Thus, Judas’ body would reasonably have been left hanging on the tree for a minimum of 48 hours before anything would be done, probably longer. Shortly after death, the bacteria contained within the digestive tract begins the process of decaying the internal organs. This process causes gasses to build up within the body giving it a bloated look over time. Obviously, this process is speeded up the warmer the weather. Early spring in Jerusalem is not overly warm (around 50 during the day), but the process would take place nonetheless. If one presumes the body of Judas to remain unnoticed for several days or a week, it is likely that his body would have become bloated enough that were someone (in disgust) to cut him down from the tree, his torso might burst and his partially liquified entrails would “pour out” like water. It is a disgusting picture, but such is the path into which our sin brings us.
And thus, the field takes on the name, “Akeldamach” — in Aramaic, meaning “The Field of Blood.” How sin consumes when there is no redemption at hand.
Hope or Despair; Life or Death
“Then, when Judas, his betrayer, saw that he was condemned, he had second thoughts and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders saying, ‘I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.’ But they said, ‘What is that to us? Look to yourself.’”
(Matthew 27:3-4)
In the flow of things, this is a little out of order (at least with Matthew’s chronology). The main thing to remember, in this case, is that this event is essentially taking place at the same time as some of the mob demands before Pilate — behind the scenes. Moving it down into this position in the harmonized account, allows for the full story around Pilate to be told and then the comments around Judas’ betrayal.
A contrast takes place here, though, that is very important to note. Here, Judas is called, “the betrayer,” a name that will stick with Judas through the rest of history. The term that is used is paradi/dwmi (paradidomi), which literally means “one who delivers.” In this case, context has clarified how the delivery takes place, for Judas has delivered Jesus into the hands of the wicked. The contrast that takes place, though, is that you have two deliverers at work in this passage — Judas the betrayer, the one who delivers Jesus into the hands of the wicked, and Jesus the deliverer of the elect of God. One a worker of unrighteousness the other the Lord of all righteousness. Indeed, what a sad contrast this is.
We are told that Judas had second thoughts. The term used here is metame/lomai (metamelomai) and it conveys the sense of being sorry for an action, regretting one’s decision, and wishing that it could be undone. We should not see this as repentance, though. Typically the word translated as “repent” is metanoe/w (metanoeo), and refers to a total change in one’s worldview or perspective. Judas felt bad because he realized his betrayal was that of condemning an innocent man to death, but his hard heart did not change (to be evidenced by his suicide to follow). Nevertheless, there is honest grief that is exhibited here.
Judas seeks to undo his actions rather than asking Christ for forgiveness, thinking that if he returns the blood money he won’t be as culpable. Again, this is a sign of a heart that is not regenerate, simply regrets his actions and fears his future condemnation. The priests are unable to accept blood money, but we are getting ahead of ourselves. Notice, though, their response to Judas. “It’s your problem, not ours” is essentially what they tell him. They have what they want and nothing can undo the events that will soon transpire.
The final phrase is translated in a variety of ways, often implying that Judas is responsible for fixing his own mess — “don’t involve us” is implied. I would suggest that is partially true, but misses the force of this statement. They say, “look to yourself” or even “look on yourself” (the verb there is a “middle” form, implying an action that one is doing upon or to oneself). Here’s the thing. Judas is sorry for his actions and is going to the priests. It was the priests whose role was to be the intercessor between God and man for sins. They are basically saying to him that there is nothing they can do, he needs to make atonement by his own works — they demonstrate their own impotence as priests do do what they have been called to do. Judas will not run to Christ, he recognizes he stands condemned, what will be left to do but to take his own life — indeed he will look to himself.
Oh, beloved, the despair that comes from looking upon oneself for your own deliverance. It simply cannot be done. No matter how high and lofty the Christ-less ideals of the unbeliever may sound to our ears, they cannot hope to live them out and will end up in despair…like Judas. There is hope in one name for in only one name is there forgiveness for sins and a promise of deliverance from this body of death. And that name is the name of Jesus Christ! Run to him! Cling to him! And call the world to do the same! For in Him and in Him alone there is life and hope and peace and joy! Oh the sorrows we inflict upon ourselves when we seek to take matters into our own hands; what life there is in the hands of Christ. Choose this day, loved ones, whom you will serve — and do it! Live out your faith in everything you say and do, growing in faith and grace yourself and pointing others to the only hope for this life and for the next. Amen.
Marvelling at Christ
“Then Pilate said to him, ‘Don’t you hear all of the things of which they are accusing you?’ Yet, he gave no answer to him, not even to one word, to the point that the Governor was quite amazed.”
(Matthew 27:13-14)
“And Pilate again asked him, saying, ‘Will you not answer? Look how many charges are against you!’ But Jesus gave no further reply to the point that Pilate was amazed.”
(Mark 15:4-5)
Here we see at least some depth to Pilate’s character. He knows that he has been cornered by the Jewish authorities, but at the same time he has no intention of being their puppet. He wants some sort of defense from Jesus so that he has something with which to work. We will see this move by Pilate several times in this trial and it should not be confused with care for Jesus, but simply seen as a way for Pilate to get this man’s blood off of his conscience and to keep the Jewish officials from running roughshod over him.
Yet, Pilate is amazed at Jesus’ silence. It is interesting to ponder the source of Pilate’s amazement. Often it is understood as Pilate just being astonished or confused that here is a man being accused of something that will possibly put him to death and he won’t answer the charges. Yet, the amazement can be understood in other ways as well. The term qauma/zw (thaumazo) is broad enough that it could refer to Pilate’s own frustration with the situation itself — essentially a sense of amazement that he has been dragged into this mess. At the same time, qauma/zw (thaumazo) is most commonly used to describe people’s reactions in the midst of God’s divine work, so the amazement could also be interpreted as a shudder at whose presence he happens to be in, though this is less likely given Pilate’s treatment of Jesus before him.
Yet, it raises the question for us as to how we respond to God himself. Are we amazed (in the divine sense) at the work of Jesus in our own midst? Do we enter into prayer and worship with reverence and when we do enter into prayer and worship, do we actually expect to find God there? Do we pray in confidence that we are speaking to a God who hears our prayers or do we just drop words into space out of habit? Loved ones, my prayer for you is that this idea of qauma/zw (thaumazo) would capture your spirit and your life as you approach God — not just in the big things, but also in the mundane things of life.
I stand amazed in the presence
Of Jesus the Nazarene,
And wonder how He could love me,
A sinner, condemned, unclean.
O how marvelous! O how wonderful!
And my song shall ever be:
O how marvelous! O how wonderful!
Is my Savior’s love for me!
— Charles Gabriel
Assumptions and Accusations
“But when the charges were made against him by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer.”
(Matthew 27:12)
“And the chief priests brought many charges against him.”
(Mark 15:3)
We have already seen Jesus’ using silence when he is confronted with these false charges. Note that the word here is kathgore/w (kategoreo), which is normally used in a legal context. These charges being lifted against Jesus are not meant as broad accusations, but they are given in a legal context — in this case, to try and have Jesus charged with a capitol offense. Much of Jesus’ silence, then should be seen as an appeal to Jewish law that no one may be put to death on the evidence of a single witness, but that two or three credible witnesses must be present to corroborate the accusations (Numbers 35:30; Deuteronomy 17:6-7; 19:5). And we have already seen that these false witnesses cannot seem to get their stories right. Jesus need not dignify their charges with a reply because there is no legal charge being brought.
As we see this, though, may we remember to look carefully at how we raise objections to those in our midst. How often, on the basis of one “gossipy” witness, we develop an opinion of someone else’s character — an impression that is often very difficult to undo. How often, on the basis of speculation, we jump to conclusions about who did this or that. How often, on the basis of a label, whether political, denominational, or otherwise, we make wrong assumptions about others. How often we are just as guilty of false accusations as these chief priests and officials are — and how often, when those first impressions are proven wrong, we fail to humble ourselves and apologize. May we seek to make amends with those who have remained silent at our false accusations.
Our God is an Awesome God
“But they were persistent, saying, ‘He disturbs the people, teaching through the whole of Judea — starting in Galilee but even here.’ When Pilate heard this, he asked if the man was Galilean.”
(Luke 23:5-6)
Those Galileans were always stirring up trouble for the Roman leaders. This is something that the Priests knew and likely threw in to poison the well some against Jesus. At the same time, this created a bit of a loophole for Pilate to extract himself from the false trial. Galilee was not under his direct authority, but was ruled by Herod Antipas, the local king who ruled over Galilee and Peraea. Herod Antipas was the son of Herod the Great (the Herod who sought to kill the baby Jesus) and a Samaritan woman named Malthace. Needless to say that there was no love lost toward this king of Galilee, especially because he was a Roman collaborator, and the shift of authority, Pilate likely thought, would be a nice poke back at these pesky Jewish priests. And, since it was Passover, it so happened that Herod was in Jerusalem … how very convenient.
What I find interesting as I look over these events is how many people were trying to manipulate the outcome. The Jews wanted Jesus to be executed by the Romans. The Romans did not care either way about the man, Jesus, but did not want to become Jewish puppets, and now Herod will be brought into the picture. Yet, in the midst of all of these schemes of men, God is still sovereignly governing these events to a conclusion that he had so ordained from before the foundation of the earth.
We often sing in church that our God is an Awesome God, but I wonder whether we really live it out. We see from history how God has orchestrated even the smallest events and details to bring about his glory and then we worry about things we cannot control in our own lives. Jesus spoke a great deal about our not worrying, but we do anyway. The pagans, whose gods cannot answer them or affect events, have a right to worry. We do not. Trust God and when things seem to fall apart, instead of worrying or wondering “where God went…” ask yourself the question, “what is a sovereign God teaching me in the midst of this crisis?”
Our God is an awesome God
He reigns from heaven above
With wisdom, power, and love
Our God is an awesome God.
-Rich Mullins
No Basis for a Charge…
“And Pilate said to the chief priests and to the crowds, ‘I find no basis for a charge in this man.’”
(Luke 23:4)
As I read this, I can almost envision Pilate in his frustration kind of thinking to himself, “What now? Here I am, woken up early, trying to get some breakfast, and I have to deal with this. It’s bad enough having Jerusalem so swollen with people due to their Passover celebration, but now I have to deal with this? Can’t these people give me even a little peace?” Perhaps I am reading a bit too much into Pilate’s thought here, but as a pastor, I know that I have had this kind of thought at times… “You guys are angry at each other over what? Did you listen to any of my sermon last week on Philippians 2?” When grown adults who know what the Word of God teaches on matters of dispute can’t seem to act upon the Scripture’s teaching and choose to behave more like Kindergarteners…well, you get the picture.
This is a little different as Pilate is a pagan and much more interested in pragmatic solutions that will preserve the peace in this very turbulent region of the world. Though the Jews were not a mighty military force, their region of the world was historically a difficult one to hold for long periods of time and the Jewish people were notorious for overthrowing larger and more highly trained armies through the use of guerrilla tactics. Pilate had no intention of having such happen on his watch. Even so, he begins at least, with integrity.
Some of our Bibles will render the term ai¡tioß (aitios) as “guilt.” Yet, the term is better translated as “basis for a charge.” Pilate has not examined the man, Jesus, as of yet, so he could not know anything of actual guilt. What he is doing, based on the ramblings of the priests and the shouts of the crowds, is making a kind of preliminary ruling — “you don’t have a basis for a capital case against him” — is essentially what Pilate is saying here. More will develop as the dialogue continues, but for now, Pilate is still insisting that this is a local case to be decided according to local laws. The bottom line is that this is an answer that the Priests could not accept because they wanted to put Jesus to death. If last night was a height of wickedness; this day would see new peaks by its end.
Were you there when they falsely tried my Lord?
Were you there when they falsely tried my Lord?
Oh, Oh, Oh, Sometimes it makes me want to Tremble
Tremble, Tremble…
Were you there when they falsely tried my Lord?
God’s Sovereignty; The Hands of Wicked Men
“Pilate said to them: ‘You take him and, according to your own laws, judge him.’ But the Jews said, ‘We are not permitted to execute anyone.’ This was to fulfill the word of Jesus which he had spoken indicating by what kind of death he was to be executed.’”
(John 18:31-32)
Recognizing that this was not a political matter, Pilate returns the verdict that the Jews should handle this matter on their own. Yet, under Roman rule, local courts were not permitted to practice capital punishment apart from the charge of blaspheming the temple. Execution (apart from this one exception) was something that the Romans kept to themselves. These Jewish leaders, thus desiring to put Jesus to death, recognized that they needed to have Pilate’s blessings and, as mentioned already, they desired to have someone to blame were the people to be upset at this execution. It is sad how often politics shows up in the realm of the church.
This is significant, though, John points out, not just because of the ones who will put Jesus to death, but in terms of the way in which Jesus would die. Typically, Mosaic law demands death by stoning (John 10:31-33); the Romans practiced crucifixion. Jesus had predicted his death by the hand of Gentiles (Matthew 20:19; Luke 18:32) but also that he would be lifted up like Moses did the bronze serpent in the wilderness (John 3:14; 12:32-33). In fact, the Apostle Paul goes as far as to connect Jesus’ execution with Deuteronomy 21:23 which speaks of one who is hung from a tree being cursed by God (Galatians 3:13) — a sign that Jesus bore the curse for us in his death (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Predictions of his own death may seem rather minor to us as we have heard and read these words over and over many times. But Jesus’ predictions of his death are just one more sign that he was actively in control over all aspects of his life and even of his coming death. There were no accidents nor were there any surprises — this is God’s economy, not man’s. As Isaiah wrote, ‘Yahweh delighted to crush him” (Isaiah 53:10). It is God’s design that is ultimately being worked out here, though by the hands of wicked and lawless men (Acts 2:23).
King of the Jews
“And Jesus was placed before the Governor and the Governor inquired of him, saying, ‘Are you the king of the Jews?’ But Jesus said, ‘You say so.’”
(Matthew 27:11)
“And Pilate asked him, ‘Are you the king of the Jews?’ But he answered him saying, ‘You say so.’”
(Mark 15:2)
“And Pilate questioned him saying, ‘Are you the king of the Jews?’ But he answered him saying, ‘You say so.’”
(Luke 23:3)
As the second of the trials begins, the line of questioning shifts somewhat. The Jews were pressing Jesus repeatedly as to whether he was the Christ and the Son of God. Now that the Judge is no longer a spiritual authority but a political one, he begins asking about Jesus’ political office. Now, it should be said that the Messianic office was political in nature — a kingly office — but the Messianic office is also prophetic and priestly, comprising the three spheres of leadership found in Old Testament Israel. Pilate is a Roman Prefect, this idea of Messianic office does not concern him except if it were to encroach on the political realm that he represents — that is of the Roman Empire. And thus, the nature of Pilate’s question.
But just as Jesus responded to the questions about him being the Son of God (Luke 22:70), he responds to Pilate as well, placing the ball back in Pilate’s court. Though some might see this as nothing more than a fancy debating technique, the sheer fact that Pilate is questioning Jesus implies that people think he may genuinely be the “King” of the Jews.
So, what is a king? A king is a ruler, he instructs and gives commands, and he is a protector of his people as well as an avenger with respect to his enemies. A little later, Jesus will speak of the nature of his kingdom — being a heavenly one and not an earthly one — but, from Pilate’s perspective, this ought to give him pause. Yet, what is more important is the language of the Jews. Here there is a bit of confusion. For Pilate, the Jews were ethnic Jewish people who lived within the various territories of the Roman empire (not just the realms of Judea and Galilee) and who practiced their faith in the synagogues and in the temple. Yet, Scripture tells us a different story. Paul writes that it is not the children descended by flesh that are truly Israel, but those descended through the promise — by faith (Romans 9:6-8; Galatians 3:29).
The citizenship of a believer is not on earth (Philippians 3:20), but citizens in heaven — where Christ rules as King and Lord. In this line, the analogy is sometimes made that our churches are outposts or even embassies of heaven in enemy territory — places of refuge from the wickedness of the world and places that represent another kingdom of which we are a part (just one reason the State has no right to make rules concerning the church). Does that mean that Christ has no rights to rule in this world? Not at all, as creator, he is Lord of all his creation, yet fallen creation has entered into rebellion against their rightful Lord and has followed the “prince of the power of the air” — Satan himself. One day, our Lord has promised to return to wipe away his enemies utterly, but not until he brings to himself all of his elect throughout the ages. Once all the elect are gathered into the church and the last martyr dies for their faith, then He will come again and remake heaven and earth free from sin and once again the Kingdom of Heaven and Earth will be one under the single head of Jesus Christ the Lord.
Twisting the Nation
“Then they began to bring charges against him, saying: ‘We have discovered this one twisting our nation and forbidding us to give taxes to Caesar as well as telling us he is himself a Christ — a king.’”
(Luke 23:2)
So why is it that when people want to accuse someone of something or bully another in terms of getting their way, that it is always the money that is threatened. Do people really think that leadership is that shallow? I had a woman come to me once and threaten to stop tithing to the church because she was angry that our churches Session had decided to support a given ministerial need in the community. My response, for better or worse, was to say, “shame on you — shame on you, not because you would give or not give, that is between you and God, but shame on you to think you can use your dollars to manipulate the spiritual leadership of this church.” Perhaps that wasn’t the most gentle way to speak at the given time, but I was convicted at the time that those words were what she most needed to hear. How Pilate must have shook his head when he heard those words — especially in a situation where taxes were coerced by force through a system of “farmers” — essentially money brokers given financial quotas to meet.
The initial charge, though, is that through Jesus’ teaching, he was twisting or perverting the nation of Israel. The term that is being used here is the Greek word diastre/fw (diastrepho), which typically refers to the turning or twisting of moral and spiritual truth. It is the word that the Apostle Paul uses to speak of the perverse generation in which he lived (Philippians 2:15) and the way the Bible describes those false teachers who come in to lead people away from orthodoxy (Acts 20:30) — someone we today would refer to as a heretic. Interestingly, it is the term found in the Greek translation of the Old Testament to translate when Elijah is confronted by Ahab as the “troubler of Israel” and Elijah responds by saying that he has not “twisted” — diastre/fw (diastrepho) — Israel, but instead that Ahab was guilty of doing so given that he had left following the Lord and had followed Baals. Surely the same charge could be waged against the Pharisees and Sadducees on this day as they had turned from following the Lord to following the Baal of their own power and security.
Yet, the one thing that is not being twisted is the statement that Jesus is the Christ — a King. Certainly he is a King in a different way than is understood by either the Jewish officials or Pilate — indeed, if they rightly understood Jesus’ kingship they would have bowed before him and pleaded for mercy. Yet, they condemn and condemn themselves in the process. They are casting to the side the promised Messiah to preserve their status and power — how sad fallen human nature is; how wicked we have become, for is that not what even leadership in the church does when they seek to accommodate the world and not to serve Christ.
Politics…
“Thus Pilate went out to them and said, ‘What charge do you bring against this man?”
(John 18:29)
Interestingly, John is the only one of the four Gospel writers that records this question from Pilate. The other evangelists simply record the Jews coming to Pilate and accusing Jesus, but John inserts the proper protocol in this context — that of waiting for the Roman official to address them before they start spewing forth hatred and lies. There is no question that there is a bit of a political dance that takes place with this trial, with the Jews seeking to manipulate Pilate into serving their ends (and thus in their minds, taking the blood of Jesus off of their own hands).
Certainly news of some sort has preceded the Jewish officials to Pilate and his aides have given him some degree of counsel as to the nature of this mob as they bring Jesus to him. The relationship between the Jews and Rome had always been a trying one and there is no question that Pilate had in the back of his mind ways in which he could maneuver this in his favor — or at least in a way that would maintain the status quo. Either way, politics as usual is about to begin.
The sad thing about political maneuvering is that we find it taking place in the church, not just in the broader culture. People forget that the church does not belong to them, but that instead it belongs to Christ Jesus. How folks fall into the trap of using church to meet their personal needs, to achieve their personal ends, or otherwise to build a reputation for themselves rather than to build a reputation for Christ. How often even pastors fall into the trap of tip-toeing over Truth because they fear it will offend or chase away members or visitors to the congregation. All of these things are no better than what we see Pilate and the Jewish officials engaged in — protocol, perhaps is being met, but personal agendas are being sought. May our lives and our churches seek Christ’s will in life, not our own.
The Preacher's Study 