Continuing a Bible study of the Gospels:
(Luke 23:1) And the whole multitude of them arose and led Him to Pilate.
At the end of the last chapter, the Sanhedrin had met it seems rather secretly at the high priest's house and had found Jesus guilty of blasphemy that was punishable by death. Their Sanhedrin was an ecclesiastical court and they had no authority to put Him to death, so they took Him to Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor.
(2) And they began to accuse Him, saying, "We found Him perverting the nation and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that He Himself is Christ, a King."
The members of the Sanhedrin who had taken Jesus to Pilate put forth their accusations against Him. First they said He was perverting the nation, which was a very broad accusation, and if meant perverting the religion of the Jews, I'm sure Pilate couldn't have cared less. So then they lied and said that Jesus had forbidden people to pay tribute to Caesar which was of course not at all what He taught (Matthew 22:21). The reason they gave for His forbidding tribute to Caesar was that He said He was Himself King. They figured that the last part would certainly rile the Roman governor.
(3) And Pilate asked Him, saying, "Are You the King of the Jews?" And He answered Him and said, "You say."
Pilate then asked Jesus point blank if He was the King of the Jews, to which Jesus answered, "You say." Once again, I find translations and commentaries adding to what Jesus said, declaring that He had said something to the effect of, "You speak rightly," or "It is as you say." In the original text, Jesus said only, "You say." Pontius Pilate would declare it himself when he would later put a sign over Jesus saying, "King of the Jews." I truly believe Jesus and the Holy God's point was to have His accusers themselves state that they were indeed killing the Son of God and the King of the Jews.
(4) Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the people, "I find no fault in this man."
Apparently, people had gathered around the governor's palace by that time, and Pilate said to them and to the members of the Sanhedrin that he found no fault in Jesus. He had done nothing against Caesar or the government, and he didn't consider claiming He was King of the Jews to be an offense worthy of punishment.
(5) And they were more fierce, saying, "He stirred up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry beginning from Galilee to this place."
However, the members of the Sanhedrin did not want to accept that answer and began arguing more fiercely. The best they could come up with was that He stirred up the people with His teaching throughout all Judea.
(6) When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the Man was a Galilean.
When Pilate heard them speak of Galilee, he then asked if Jesus was a Galilean. Even though Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, He was brought up in Nazareth in Galilee, so everyone thought of Him as a Galilean.
(7) As soon as he knew that He belonged to Herod's jurisdiction, he sent Him to Herod, who himself was also at Jerusalem at the time.
Obviously getting an answer in the affirmative, Pilate sent Jesus to Herod as He would be considered within Herod's jurisdiction. Herod was also in Jerusalem at the time.
(8) And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceedingly glad for he was long desirous to see Him because he had heard many things of Him, and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by Him.
Herod was very glad to see Jesus as he had long heard many things about Him and had desired to see Him. When Herod first heard about Jesus, he thought He must be John the Baptist coming back to haunt him because he had had John beheaded. Herod hoped to see Jesus and to witness a miracle performed by Him to satisfy his curiosity.
(9) Then he questioned Him with many words, but He answered him nothing.
Herod questioned Jesus but we aren't told exactly what he asked. We can gather from Jesus's non-response that Herod's questions were not from a genuine interest in the truth about Jesus, but rather merely out of curiosity. He probably thought that now that he had Jesus before him in bonds that he could demand a miracle, but just as Jesus was unwilling to play prophecy games when the soldiers were hitting Him in the head and asking who it was who hit Him, He would not say anything to Herod or perform a cheap trick for him.
(10) And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused Him.
Meanwhile, the chief priests and scribes of the Sanhedrin intensely made their accusations against Jesus.
(11) And Herod with his men of war treated Him contemptibly like He was nothing and mocked Him and arrayed Him in a gorgeous robe and sent Him again to Pilate.
Herod and his men, we see from this Herod's true thoughts about Jesus. He thought of Him as nothing of any importance, only to be mocked by him and his men. They put Him in a robe, mocking Him as King, and sent Him back to Pilate. The word translated as "gorgeous" actually means more precisely "bright, shining, gleaming white." The Romans had mocked Him as King in a purple robe. Jewish kings wore brilliant white robes, so now they put a white robe on Jesus in pure mockery, not realizing the symbolism of the pure and innocent Christ King.
(12) And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together, for before they were at enmity with each other.
Apparently, Pilate and Herod had been at odds with one another, but through their likely communications about Jesus, they had common ground that brought them together. Neither saw Jesus as any threat.
(13) And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people, (14) Said to them, "You have brought this man to me as one who perverted the people, and behold, I, having examined Him before you, have found no fault in this man concerning those things of which you accuse Him."
Having Jesus back before him, Pilate called together the chief priests and the rulers and all the people who were there to tell them that he had found no fault in Jesus. Although they had said that He had perverted the people, Pilate had examined Him before them and didn't find Him guilty of any of the things of which they had accused Him.
(15) "No, not even Herod, for I sent you back to him, and lo, nothing worthy of death has been done by Him."
Pilate told the chief priests and rulers that even Herod had found no fault in Jesus, certainly nothing worthy of death.
(16) "I will therefore chastise Him and release Him."
Therefore, Pilate said he would release Jesus after he chastised Him. Isn't it interesting that he would chastise someone in whom he had found no fault? Chastise Him for what?
(17) (For of necessity he must release one to them at the feast.)
This was a parenthetical statement that may have been added by someone who transcribed scripture as it is said that it was excluded from some old manuscripts. It had become a custom to release one prisoner at Passover, and the people expected it, so Pilate felt obliged to do it.
(18) And they cried out all at once, saying, "Away with Him and release to us Barabbas!"
It seems beyond belief that all the people could clamor for Jesus to be punished when they had so recently exalted Him in His entrance into the city. The account in Matthew stated that the chief priests and elders had stirred up the people against Him. People have never changed; to this day they can be so easily manipulated by people in power. The people asked for a prisoner named Barabbas to be released instead of Jesus.
(19) (Who for a certain sedition made in the city and for murder, was cast into prison.)
Luke made a parenthetical statement explaining who Barabbas was. He had been found guilty of sedition and murder and had been thrown into prison.
(20) Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spoke again to them.
However, Pilate preferred to release Jesus and spoke again to the people.
(21) But they cried, saying, "Crucify Him! Crucify Him!"
Again, because he found no fault in Jesus and preferring to release Him rather than Barabbas, Pilate appealed to the people for Jesus's release. It is so unbelievable and heartbreaking that people could be so cruel to not only imprison someone with whom no fault had been found, but also to see Him crucified! That would be sad if it were any innocent person, but it being the most innocent and pure and also so loving a person to ever live on earth makes it unbearable. I think it illustrates just how deplorable we people are, but because He loved us filthy unlovable lot so much, He willingly gave His life to save us. No greater love has there ever been! This crucifixion of Jesus was a true historical event; how could anyone deny Jesus and His loving gift to them?
(22) And he said to them a third time, "Why? What evil has He done? I have found no cause for death in Him. I will therefore chastise Him and let Him go."
A third time Pilate pleaded for Jesus, saying he had found no fault in Him that warranted death. He even asked the people to tell Him what evil He had done. He declared again that he would chastise Jesus and then let Him go free.
(23) And they were insistent with loud voices requiring that He be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.
However, the people and the chief priests were insistent and shouted loudly that Jesus should be crucified. And it seems they prevailed:
(24) And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.
Pilate gave the death sentence to Jesus as the people required. I find Pilate to be a most weak man. Perhaps it was necessary for him to release the prisoner of the people's choosing at Passover, but I don't believe there was anything in the law that said the people had the right to choose who should be crucified. Pilate could have released Barabbas and imprisoned Jesus for a while without sentencing Him to death, but he was a weak ruler who feared the wrath of the people.
(25) And he released to them him who for sedition and murder had been cast into prison, whom they had desired, but he delivered Jesus to their will.
Pilate released Barabbas, a murderer, but delivered up an innocent man to be crucified according to the will of the people. I'm sure that the will of the people was not the normal law of the Roman government, but so weak a ruler that Pilate was, he gave in to the people. The account in Matthew stated that Pilate washed his hands before the crowd and said he was innocent of Jesus's blood and that the people bore the responsibility, but I'm sorry, I can't see it that way. Pilate could have easily in his position as governor saved an innocent life, but chose not to for fear of the people. However, we know that it had to be done for the salvation of the world, and only God truly knew the heart of Pilate and He is the righteous judge.
(26) And as they led Him away, they laid hold of one Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country, and on him they laid the cross that he might bear it behind Jesus.
As they led Jesus out of Pilate's court, they took hold of Simon, a Cyrenian, who was coming into the city from the country and laid Jesus's cross upon him to carry behind Jesus. In reading commentaries on this verse, I am very offended by Albert Barnes's commentary. He said it was because Jesus was feeble that they compelled Simon to help Him. The Catholic church of my youth always taught me that Jesus fell down and that is when they compelled Simon to carry His cross. Neither is found in scripture! I'm sure that Albert Barnes probably just meant that Jesus was weak from all the beating He had received before this point, but still scripture said nothing about that being the reason they forced Simon to carry His cross. And who knows why the Catholic church said that Jesus fell down when scripture does not say that He did, but I find they way too often diminish the deity of Jesus in some way or another. Even in my own study, I added to scripture myself when I studied the account in Matthew. I believed that Jesus carried His cross for a while, as stated in John, but then His tortured and beaten body could do it no more. Scripture didn't say that! I believe the purpose in Simon carrying the cross was a more spiritual one and symbolic of following Jesus. First, Cyrene was a country in Africa; Simon was a foreigner, a Gentile. But here he took up the cross and followed Jesus, a beautiful picture of discipleship and the fact that it is given to all people to be a disciple of Jesus.
(27) And there followed Him a great company of people, and of women who also mourned and lamented Him.
A crowd of people followed Jesus and among them were women who cried for Jesus. Some of these were surely His friends and followers, but I imagine that some women of the general public mourned for Him because they had compassion for Him because of the unjust cruelty they had witnessed. It proves that not everyone was hellbent on seeing Jesus crucified.
(28) But Jesus turning to them, said, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for Me, but weep for yourselves and for your children."
However, Jesus turned to them and told them not to weep for Him, but that they should weep for themselves and for their children. He willingly went to give His life to save all people. He called them daughters of Jerusalem, and of course, He referred to what was to happen to Jerusalem because of the people's rejection of Him and His blood on their heads and that is why they should weep for themselves and their children.
(29) "For behold, the days are coming in which they shall say, 'Blessed the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed.'"
I know Jesus's human body was tortured and weak at this point, but there is nothing feeble about Him. He was in complete control and willingly went to His death, and He had the complete presence of mind to tell these women about their fate to come. There was coming a time when it would be more blessed to be barren and to have never born children that would have to endure what was in store for them.
(30) "Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, 'Fall on us,' and to the hills, 'Cover us.'"
Jesus told the women that the days that were coming would be so terrible that people would wish for mountains to fall upon them and kill them rather than be subject to the terrors and complete destruction facing them.
(31) "For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?"
Jesus's words were metaphoric. If such a green fruitful life such as His, completely innocent, can be killed in such a brutal abhorrent way, what could dry unfruitful sinful people expect? If the Romans punished Jesus in such a manner as this, what would they do to the entire Jewish nation? The Romans would be used by God to punish Israel. Sure, they were guilty of evil, too, and persecuted the Jews, but it was not the Roman rulers who condemned Jesus to crucifixion and death. It was the Jewish people, God's chosen people, who condemned Him. They were the dry useless chaff that would be burned and destroyed. I know that God is just and that He can punish anyone or show mercy to anyone as He pleases, but I always think that God doesn't have to personally punish, although He has every right to, but I know all He has to do is turn His back and the wicked world will do it for Him.
Again, I have to ask Mr. Barnes if this sounds like a feeble man. I know he meant no disrespect and Jesus's human body had indeed been horribly tortured and weakened, and it pains me to think of the pain He endured, but I know He was a triumphant King who willingly did all this to defeat Satan and death and to bring all of us to Him in eternal life. He was always in control and teaching to His last moments on earth.
As this is a rather long chapter, I will end this post with this and continue chapter 23 in the next post.
No comments:
Post a Comment