arose and brought him before Pilate (v. 1), reference of course is to the chief priests and the principal

Jesus Delivered by Pilate to the Will of His Enemies (Lk 23.1-25) WestminsterReformedChurch.org Pastor Ostella August 11, 2013 Then the whole company of them arose and brought him before Pilate. 2 And they began to accuse him, saying, "We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king." 3 And Pilate asked him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" And he answered him, "You have said so." 4 Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, "I find no guilt in this man." 5 But they were urgent, saying, "He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judea, from Galilee even to this place." 6 When Pilate heard this, he asked whether the man was a Galilean. 7 And when he learned that he belonged to Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him over to Herod, who was himself in Jerusalem at that time. 8 When Herod saw Jesus, he was very glad, for he had long desired to see him, because he had heard about him, and he was hoping to see some sign done by him. 9 So he questioned him at some length, but he made no answer. 10 The chief priests and the scribes stood by, vehemently accusing him. 11 And Herod with his soldiers treated him with contempt and mocked him. Then, arraying him in splendid clothing, he sent him back to Pilate. 12 And Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day, for before this they had been at enmity with each other. 13 Pilate then called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people, 14 and said to them, "You brought me this man as one who was misleading the people. And after examining him before you, behold, I did not find this man guilty of any of your charges against him. 15 Neither did Herod, for he sent him back to us. Look, nothing deserving death has been done by him. 16 I will therefore punish and release him." 17 18 But they all cried out together, "Away with this man, and release to us Barabbas"-- 19 a man who had been thrown into prison for an insurrection started in the city and for murder. 20 Pilate addressed them once more, desiring to release Jesus, 21 but they kept shouting, "Crucify, crucify him!" 22 A third time he said to them, "Why, what evil has he done? I have found in him no guilt deserving death. I will therefore punish and release him." 23 But they were urgent, demanding with loud cries that he should be crucified. And their voices prevailed. 24 So Pilate decided that their demand should be granted. 25 He released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, for whom they asked, but he delivered Jesus over to their will. (Luke 23:1-25 ESV) Introduction We come this morning to the trial of Jesus in the legal system of Rome, Luke 23.1-25. It is difficult to break up this section into smaller sermon units because it begins and ends with the actions of Pilate in an uneasy relationship with Israel. When it says that the whole company of them arose and brought him before Pilate (v. 1), reference of course is to the chief priests and the principal men of Jerusalem that represent Israelites of both Galilee (where Jesus is from) and Judea (where the capital city, Jerusalem is located). They present their case against Jesus in the Roman court because they do not have the power of execution and that is clearly what they are seeking in their claims against our Lord. Luke presents us with three main points that can be put into a single sentence: Pilate declares that Jesus is King of the Jews and that He is innocent; but overwhelmed by the mob-like crowds he capitulates and gives Him over to their will for crucifixion. I. Pilate declares that Jesus is King of the Jews This declaration emerges from a context of judicial accusation and questioning. A. Accusations brought to Pilate The leading men of Jerusalem who represented the people of God acted in solidarity in bringing Jesus before Pilate. The whole company of them brought Him for trial before this infamous Roman official (23.1). As readers of the Gospel of Luke, it is of great interest to see how the Lord Jesus (who went everywhere doing good) could be accused as a criminal, even as one worthy of capital punishment. They try to make a plausible case saying, We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king (23.2). The idea of a capital offense begins with the charge of misleading the nation. Such action is what false prophets do and in Israelite law they are thus worthy of death. According to Deuteronomy 13, He is to be killed by stoning (8-11). They did not believe that Jesus spoke for the God of Israel. In their view, His reforms in the temple were misguided. However, we know better: His teachings undermined their place, status, and authority and thus their power and wealth. Next is the charge of forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar. Nonpayment of tribute to Caesar was an act of treason that was severely punished with death under Roman rule; that is part of the story of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. There is a slim hint of truth here because Jesus

2 did forbid paying tribute to Rome as an ultimate and unbreakable duty. He taught that people should only give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God (Lk 20.20-26). Taxes and tributes of honor belong to Caesar, but in a subordinate way. Thus, these pious men distort the fact that the ministry of Jesus had nothing to do with establishing a competing political power. His kingdom had nothing to do with the overthrow of Rome by revolution or insurrection. His goals were politically innocuous. As readers we know this: recall the two swords teaching that the disciples misunderstood, and in close association with it, recall the disciple that added misapplication to misunderstanding by cutting off the ear of a servant of the high priest. Pointedly, Jesus countered the violence by rebuke and by healing the man s ear. His kingdom is not of this world and it has ultimate priority. By contrast, the Jews reject the coming of the kingdom of God while they submit to the kingdom of Rome. Declaring half truths to be whole truths distorts the truth. That is what happens in the charge that Jesus proclaimed Himself to be Christ, a King, which they explain for Pilate. To be the Messiah is to be a King. This is further misrepresentation since Jesus did not go around making this proclamation about Himself. Instead, He demonstrated its truth and drew the testimony to His messiahship from those He taught, as in Peter s confession, while often telling those He healed to tell no man. Their accusations lead to Pilate s examination. B. Pilate questions Jesus Pilate seems skeptical of their charges that come together in the idea of civil disobedience. So, the focus of his interrogation (23.3a) is on the matter of kingship that includes the other ideas with it: And Pilate asked him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" Jesus responds with only two words ( You say ) and these are the only words from our Lord that Luke records in this entire account (more was said, as the other Gospels make clear): And [Jesus] answered [Pilate], "You have said so (23.3b, ESV; the KJV has you say it ). This is similar to the five words of reply to the leaders in 22.70: you say that I am. Again, Jesus is purposely ambiguous, but as earlier to the Sanhedrin, He gives a veiled yes. How does Pilate speak as Jesus states it? He utters the words, You are the King of the Jews, in a question, not in a statement, but it mirrors the Jewish accusation and has all the baggage that goes with it. Like with the Jews, Jesus is telling Pilate: the way you phrase your question, you are saying that I am the King of the Jews. Moreover, the present tense, you are saying it, suggests that Jesus is telling Pilate that he continues to say it: you say it and continue to do so. This puts the question back in Pilate s court. Notably, he does not challenge Jesus for being ambiguous. Nor does he dismiss the idea that he, Pilate, says this about Jesus. Pilate declares that Jesus is King of the Jews implicitly by not picking up on the counter thrust of Jesus. It does not matter to Him that he is saying that Jesus is the King of the Jews. You, Jesus, are admitting to (the accusation of) being the King of the Jews and you state that fact by reference to my words. Okay. That means nothing to me. In the mirror of the answer from Jesus, Pilate states that Jesus is the King of the Jews and without qualification says to the accusers, I find no guilt in this man. Pilate doesn t care that he says that Jesus is the King of the Jews (in his question as pushed back to him by Jesus). Therefore, the idea of Jesus being King of the Jews is not something that he finds worthy of punishment. Pilate silently complies and thoughtlessly acknowledges: I say it; you are King of the Jews, so what? II. Pilate also declares that Jesus is innocent It seems best to take this declaration to be the major point of the record of Pilate s actions. He defaults to the idea that Jesus is the Israelite King, but regarding the innocence of

3 Jesus, He argues (insists, wills, challenges, and defends). It comes out in three ways: in the provisional verdict, in the confirmation of Herod, and in the dialogue with the Jews. A. The provisional verdict (declares innocence) Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, "I find no guilt in this man" (23.4). The charge of insurrection gets nowhere with Pilate. Finding no guilt means no liability to punishment, especially to the punishment of death. At the very beginning of Pilate s official examination of Jesus, he declares His innocence, at least provisionally. It is provisional because the religious leaders react and press their charges more insistently: But they were urgent, saying, "He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judea, from Galilee even to this place" (23.5). They put a bad spin on a positive reality. Jesus did stir things up all over the place wherever He went. The accusers twist this to mean that He incited the people against Rome. Their accusations are negative testimony affirming the ministry of Jesus. The rumblings and turmoil of the trial push Pilate into a state of indecision. He thus takes the course of political expediency, which at the least delays confrontation with the Jews: 6 When Pilate heard this, he asked whether the man was a Galilean. 7 And when he learned that he belonged to Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him over to Herod, who was himself in Jerusalem at that time (23.6-7). B. The confirmation by Herod (declares innocence) Things are left hanging in midair as the narrative shifts from the hearing of Jesus before Pilate to the hearing before Herod. Why does Pilate send Jesus to Herod? He is not relinquishing judicial authority to Herod. That is not stated and that is not what occurs. It does involve further examination of the case against Jesus by one who has a closer view of the goings on in Galilee. Surely, in one way or another, Herod will be a help in moving this case forward with minimal social upheaval. So, Luke takes us with Jesus and His accusers into the presence of Herod (23.8-10): 8 When Herod saw Jesus, he was very glad, for he had long desired to see him, because he had heard about him, and he was hoping to see some sign done by him. 9 So he questioned him at some length, but he made no answer. 10 The chief priests and the scribes stood by, vehemently accusing him. Herod questioned Jesus at some length (v. 9) no doubt regarding both His miracle working power and the accusations of the religious leaders engaged in passionate finger pointing. Quite a picture and quite a contrast to Jesus who, in this context, gave Herod neither a miracle nor a word of testimony. He stood in complete silence while the chief priests and scribes were vehemently accusing him (v. 10). In the end, Herod sent Jesus back to Pilate but not without first joining with his soldiers in a show of disrespect to our Lord as someone worthless (they treated Him with contempt). Then for fun, they mocked Him by dressing Him in the clothing of a King. This form of mockery reflects the core accusation against the Lord. If we wonder why Luke records this digression from Pilate to Herod, then we have to go to verse 12 for our answer: And Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day, for before this they had been at enmity with each other. The move to Herod seems like an unnecessary interruption in the story of the trial of Jesus before Pilate. Moreover, the comment about the healed relationship of Herod and Pilate seems even farther away from the main story line. However, the removal of a longstanding hostility between them underscores their combined testimony on record regarding the innocence of Jesus. They are on the same page; no disagreement exists between them regarding Jesus (i.e. Jesus is innocent). Luke does not digress. The details about Herod add to the weight of this confirmation. Herod is the one who had John killed. He sought the same for Jesus for a time. Here, he is disappointed by Jesus with no miracle and not even a word of information or self-defense. He has no fun and no answer. He uses Jesus for sport. He is not pro-jesus in any way. Yet, as to the judicial and formal setting, he returns Jesus to Pilate in the context of a new friendship and thus

4 in agreement on the innocence of Jesus. Even the mockery testifies to his judgment that Jesus is no threat as a King. In his eyes, Jesus is hardly a revolutionary deserving of capital punishment. C. The dialogue with the Jews (declares innocence) So, Pilate now gathers the leaders and the people of Jerusalem (v. 13) to bring the trial of Jesus to a close. Without comment, Luke now shows us that the people have been turned against Jesus; they act more like a mob than the people of God. There are three stages in which he seeks to release Jesus; and each time the Jews disapprove with increasing insistence that He be crucified. 1. Stage One: Pilate emphasizes the results of his and Herod s examination Pilate then called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people, 14 and said to them, "You brought me this man as one who was misleading the people. And after examining him before you, behold, I did not find this man guilty of any of your charges against him. 15 Neither did Herod, for he sent him back to us. Look, nothing deserving death has been done by him. 16 I will therefore punish and release him" (23. 13-16). Notably, he cites the earlier examination that produced a verdict of innocence saying, behold, I did not find this man guilty of any of your charges against him (v. 14). He adds the testimony of Herod who likewise did not find this man guilty of any of your charges. So, he concludes pointedly, Look, nothing deserving death has been done by him (15b). Then, when Pilate proposes to flog and release Jesus (16), the Jews are outraged. Therefore, they reject his proposal, vie for the crucifixion, and make a proposal of their own, namely that Barabbas be released instead of Jesus. Our narrator makes the comment that Barabbas is a man who had been thrown into prison for an insurrection started in the city and for murder (v. 19). Luke drives home the point of innocence by the contrast that exists between Jesus and Barabbas. 2. Stage Two: here Luke emphasizes Pilate s desire Pilate is not quoted but his desire is cited: Pilate addressed them once more, desiring to release Jesus (v. 20). Addressing the people once more, Pilate pressed for the release of Jesus repeating, no doubt, the theme of innocence. The reaction of the Jews continues to boil: but they kept shouting, "Crucify, crucify him!" (v. 21). 3. Stage Three: Pilate repeats his desire and emphasizes his basis with a question A third time he said to them, "Why, what evil has he done? I have found in him no guilt deserving death. I will therefore punish and release him" (v. 22). We ask the same question. Pilate puts all the charges in the dustbin and searches for something else, for something that Jesus has done that is the opposite of good, something bad. The language suggests an innocence of a morally good life beyond the legal realm. Thus, Pilate restates the verdict of not guilty and his resolve to flog and release Jesus: I have found in him no guilt deserving death. I will therefore punish and release him. This was totally unacceptable to the leaders and people who in unison urged and demanded the crucifixion of Jesus: But they were urgent, demanding with loud cries that he should be crucified (23a). Because they appear to be on the verge of a riot, their voices prevailed (23b), that is, their clamoring overpowered the will of Pilate. III. Pilate capitulates to the will of the people Therefore, the governor decided to grant their demand regarding both Barabbas and Jesus: 24 So Pilate decided that their demand should be granted. 25 He released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, for whom they asked, but he delivered Jesus over to their will (24-25). Even in the capitulation, the goodness of Christ shines for the character of Barabbas puts the innocence of Christ into an even brighter light. Accordingly, surprisingly, and clearly in an unusually unjust way, Pilate delivered Jesus to the will of His accusers.

5 Final thoughts It is difficult to get our arms around this trial. It is hard to fathom the reality that the Son of Man and Son of God was subjected to the judgments of men, not only by the evil eldership of Israel, but by the people of God, and by a pagan governor. In the end, Jesus was delivered by Pilate with classic injustice to the will of His enemies. What does the hearing before Pilate teach us? There are three basics. First, it fixes the blame for the death of Christ squarely on the shoulders of the Jewish leaders and people who had to work hard to overcome the reluctance of Pilate. Second, in his exchange with Jesus, Pilate declares His kingship as the Messiah, even as He suffers degrading and cruel humiliation. Third, most importantly, Pilate firmly and repeatedly proclaims the innocence of Jesus as he gives Him up to crucifixion. Therefore, we have the profound irony of this event, the unspeakable irony, that Jesus was crucified because He was innocent (I will therefore punish...him; therefore crucify Him). It is outrageous. Pilate unwittingly says, Because Jesus is the King of the Jews, let Him be mocked, flogged, and crucified. Because I find no guilt in Him for any of the charges, because Herod finds nothing worthy of death in His conduct as a miracle worker, and because you are so insistent on His crucifixion, therefore, I turn Him over to your will. So, Pilate released a man guilty of insurrection and murder instead of releasing Jesus and thus highlighted the holiness of this King. In turn, this showed that His death is not the death of a convicted criminal and it is not the fulfillment of Israel s will. Instead, the death of Jesus is a holy and blameless sacrifice by the will of God, the righteous in place of the unrighteous. It pleased the Lord to bruise Him and put Him to grief for sin, not His own, but for the sin of His brothers and sisters to bring them to glory. These truths make me feel like a man in a rowboat in an ocean with eighty-foot waves. It is overwhelming; such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high and I cannot attain unto it. May we fall down in worship before the majesty of Jesus Messiah who submitted Himself to the righteous Judge of heaven and earth, and who is the holy, wise, uncomplaining, righteous, obedient, and willing servant of the Lord; He is worthy of all our praise because He endured the deepest humiliation and now sits at the right hand of the majesty on high in resurrection exaltation; to the triune God be all glory, now and forever, amen.