‘Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, saying, “Are you the King of the Jews?” And Jesus said to him, “It is you who say” ’

It is made clear here in what terms the Chief Priests and Elders have brought their charge. It is on the basis that He is claiming to be ‘the King of the Jews’. This was the kind of claim that Pilate would be interested in, a political charge of prospective treason. As we have already seen it parallels the title given by the Magi in Mat 2:2. See also Mat 27:29; Mat 27:37 which reveal what an impact this title had had on him. The people of Israel did not speak of themselves as ‘Jews’. They were ‘Jews’ to outsiders. But the title carries within it the idea of the Expected One seen from a Gentile point of view. It thus carried within it intrinsically a threat to law and order, and the peace of the realm.

So when Pilate asks Jesus if He is, as His accusers have stated that He has claimed, the King of the Jews, His reply is again, ‘It is you who have said it’ (compare Mat 26:64). Once more it is not a denial but an indication that He is being misrepresented. He is in a sense the King of the Jews, but not in the sense in which His accusers have used the term. In Joh 18:34 He puts it this way, ‘do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about Me?’ The quiet way in which Jesus replies carries with it its own indication of innocence. Pilate would have expected a vociferous denial, or a belligerent and snarling agreement. What he was not expecting from this bound and disreputable looking figure (made disreputable looking by the treatment that He had received) was a reasoned reply.

‘The Governor.’ Pilate was strictly a Praefectus (testified to by an inscription that has been discovered), a military man put in charge of overseeing the running of a state where trouble might be expected. It was his responsibility to oversee the governing of the state and maintain its peaceful state without necessarily himself being directly involved in running it on a continual basis. As long as peace was maintained and taxes were paid they could run themselves, apart from when he felt it necessary to step in. All major decisions, however, lay in his hands, especially decisions concerning treason, and he could go about dealing with them almost as he would, as long as he maintained the peace. Thus this was a decision which very much depended on him. But first he had to be sure of the nature of the charge. And while outwardly it appeared quite simple (Jesus was setting Himself up as a king) it was clear to him that neither side were quite saying what he would normally have understood by the charge. On the one hand it was clear that the rulers of the Jews had religious motives for their action, and on the other there was nothing about Jesus that suggested the revolutionary. Furthermore he must have had some previous intelligence about Jesus. What had been going on in Jerusalem would not have been totally ignored by his spies and informers, and he had good cause to know that Jesus was not an insurrectionist. Thus he was baffled, and yet very much impressed with Jesus.

But he was a man on a knife edge. While he disliked the Jewish rulers, and despised them, there was on the other hand the sad fact that certain complaints had gone to Tiberius Caesar about him in the not too distant past so that he had fairly recently suffered a rebuke at Caesar’s hands. Thus while he did not necessarily want to do what the Jews were asking of him unless they could demonstrate their case, and would indeed have gained some pleasure from thwarting them, he knew that he could not afford to have another complaint made against him on a doubtful matter. And his problem was increased further by Jesus’ unwillingness to defend himself openly. Roman custom laid much emphasis on the right of a man to defend himself, and His silence thus presented him with another difficulty. For while he could see that the prisoner was not anything like He was portrayed as being, that would not be obvious in any report reaching Caesar. All that that would say was that the prisoner had offered no defence. The conclusion would be obvious. This explains the ambivalent attitude that he displays.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Examination Before Pilate (27:11-14).

The examination before Pilate is described with remarkable conciseness. Matthew feels that he has already made clear the nature of the charges against Jesus (for a summary of them see Luk 23:2). The main difference lies in the fact that instead of the charge being that He is the Messiah, the Son of God, it is that He is declaring Himself to be ‘the King of the Jews’. The religious charge has become a political, one that should concern Pilate. He is said to be claiming to be a self-appointed King over against the ruler appointed by Caesar. But as we have already learned in Mat 2:2 ‘King of the Jews’ is the Gentile name for the Expected One. Thus Jesus will not deny being the King of the Jews. But He will deny having any intention of seeking to oppose Caesar.

Once again, however, in the face of the charges brought by the Chief Priests and Elders He says nothing. His dignified silence brings home their guilt, and He leaves them to condemn themselves, while at the same time impressing Pilate. ‘As a sheep before his shearers is dumb, so He opened not His mouth’ (Isa 53:7). We are left recognising that something like Joh 18:33-38 is required in order to give us the full picture. Jesus would not deign to answer the false charges of ‘the shearers’, a vivid picture of those who sought to tear away His innocence, but He was quite willing to speak with Pilate alone. For the false rulers of the Jews He had no time. They had revealed themselves for what they were.

Analysis.

a Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, saying, “Are you the King of the Jews?” And Jesus said to him, “It is you who say” ’ (Mat 27:11).

b And when he was accused by the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing (Mat 27:12).

c Then says Pilate to him, “Do you not hear how many things they witness against you?” (Mat 27:13).

b And he gave him no answer, not even to one word (Mat 27:14 a).

a Insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly (Mat 27:14 b).

Note that in ‘a’ He stands before the Governor, who asks Him concerning His status, and in the parallel the Governor marvels. In ‘b’ He gives no reply to the Chief Priests and Elders, and in the parallel He gives no answer to Pilate concerning what they have said. Centrally in ‘c’ we have a description of the charges which have been heaped up on the basis of insufficient evidence, bringing home the perfidy of the Chief Priests and Elders.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Testimony of Pontius Pilate ( Mar 15:2-15 , Luk 23:3-5 ; Luk 23:13-25 , Joh 18:33 to Joh 19:18 ) In Mat 27:11-26 Pontius Pilate declares the innocence of Jesus as He is under trial, yet without the remorse demonstrated by Judas Iscariot. As Jesus stands before Pontus Pilate, the focus of this passage is the development of a confession from the governor regarding the innocence of Jesus (Mat 27:14; Mat 27:24). The governor marvels at Jesus’ composure (Mat 27:14); his wife pleads has a dream regarding His innocence (Mat 27:19); the governor symbolically washes his hands and declares His innocence.

Mat 27:11  And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.

Mat 27:11 “Art thou the King of the Jews” Comments – Jesus is the King. This is the theme of the book of Matthew. But He is not the earthly king that many Jews believed that He would be. King Herod was greatly troubled at wise men’s saying, which was a foreshowing these events.

Mat 2:2-3, “Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him. When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.”

Mat 27:11 “And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest” Comments – In December 2002, I was station manager of a Christian television station in Uganda. One particular client wanted me to give him a large advertising campaign and let him pay after it was over. I knew that this person was not reliable, so I required him to pay up front. He called me after he was told this news and began to ask me to give him a change. When I did not, he began to accuse me of not trusting him, of considering him a liar and a dishonest person. As I listened to him, I realized that his own words condemned him, and that I did not have to say a word of explanation. This is how Jesus was responding to Pilate, who declared that Jesus was King of the Jews out of his own mouth.

Mat 27:14 Comments Perhaps Pilate expected an insurrectionist to be vocal and defend his views. In contrast, Jesus offered no defense. Jesus did not behave as a typical Jewish rebel.

Mat 27:19 Comments – In her book Caught Up Into Heaven Marietta Davis devotes a chapter describing this particular dream that Pilate’s wife dreamed. It says that she was caught up into Paradise beholding its beauty when an angel explained to her that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. The angel warned her to tell her husband named Pilate about this dream and warn him not to condemn this Just Man. [680]

[680] Marietta Davis, Caught Up Into Heaven (New Kensington, Pennsylvania: Whitaker House, 1982), 136-9.

Mat 27:24 “he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent” Comments – Pilate was following Jewish tradition by washing his hands before the Jews as a method of declaring his innocence in a that they understood. The Jews clearly understood his message because the following they say in the following verse, “His blood be on us, and on our children.” Note these Old Testament references to the washing of innocent hands:

Deu 21:6-7, “And all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley: And they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it.”

Psa 26:6, “ I will wash mine hands in innocency : so will I compass thine altar, O LORD:”

Psa 73:13, “Verily I have cleansed my heart in vain, and washed my hands in innocency .”

Josephus cites Deu 21:6-7.

“then the priests and Levites, and the senate of that city, shall take water and wash their hands over the head of the heifer; and they shall openly declare that their hands are innocent of this murder, and that they have neither done it themselves, nor been assisting to any that did it.” ( Antiquities 4.8.16)

The Talmud makes a reference to this ceremony:

“They then break its neck with a hatchet from behind. The site may never be sown or tilled, but it is permitted to card flax and chisel stones there. The elders of that city then wash their hands with water in the place where the heifer’s neck was broken and declare, our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it.” ( Sotah folio 45b) [681]

[681] Isidore Epstein, ed., Contents of the Soncino Babylonian Talmud, trans. Jacob Shachter and H. Freedman (London: The Soncino Press) [on-line]; accessed 3 July 2010; accessed from http://www.come-and-hear.com; Internet.

However, it is important to note that there are numerous examples of ceremonial washings in classical literature, which means it was an ancient tradition outside of Judaism.

“Now while Croesus was busied about the marriage of his son, there came to Sardis a Phrygian of the royal house, in great distress and with hands unclean. This man came to Croesus’ house, and entreated that he might be purified after the custom of

the country; so Croesus purified him (the Lydians use the same manner of purification as do the Greeks)” ( Herodotus 1:35) [682]

[682] A. D. Godley, Herodotus, vol. 1, in The Loeb Classical Library, eds. T. E. Page, E. Capps, and W. H. D. Rouse (London: William Heinemann, c1920, 1975), 43.

“But I go my way

To the sea baths and meadows by the beach,

That I may there assoil me and assuage

The wrathful goddess, having purged my sin.” (Sophocles, Ajax 654-656) [683]

[683] F. Storr, Sophocles, vol. 2, in The Loeb Classical Library, eds. T. E. Page, E. Capps, and W. H. D. Rouse (London: William Heinemann, c1913), 57.

“For me, retreating from so great a war

And recent blood, to touch them were a crime,

‘Till I have lav’d me in the living stream.” (Virgil, Aeneid 2.999-1001) [684]

[684] Rann Kennedy and Charles Rann Kennedy, trans., The Works of Virgil, vol. 1 (London: Stevens and Co., 1849), 239.

“The son of Amphiaraus said to the Naupactan Achelous, ‘absolve me of my guilt.’ Whereupon he did absolve him of his guilt. Ah! too credulous mortals, who imagine that the guilt of bloodshed can be removed by the waters of the stream.” (Ovid, The Fasti 2.42-46) [685]

[685] Henry T. Riley, trans., The Fasti, Tristia, Pontic Epistles, Ibis, and Halieuticon of Ovid (London: George Bell and Sons, 1881), 48.

Mat 27:24 “see ye to it” – Comments – That is, “you take care of the matter yourself.”

Mat 27:24 Comments – It is interesting to note that Eusebius tells us that Pilate eventually committed suicide. Perhaps this was an omen of his lack of innocence in this crime.

“It is worthy of note that Pilate himself, who was governor in the time of our Saviour, is reported to have fallen into such misfortunes under Caius, whose times we are recording, that he was forced to become his own murderer and executioner; and thus divine vengeance, as it seems, was not long in overtaking him. This is stated by those Greek historians who have recorded the Olympiads, together with the respective events which have taken place in each period.” ( Ecclesiastical History 2.7)

Mat 27:25  Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

Mat 27:26  Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

Mat 27:26 “and when he had scourged Jesus” – Comments – Why did Jesus go to the whipping post before a crucifixion? So that we might have healing. The same faith and confession in Calvary that brings salvation also works with Jesus’ scourging. When we believe and confess that we have healing and health by His scourging, we receive healing, just the same way we received salvation, by our confession of faith. Note:

1Pe 2:24, “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Trial before Pilate.

The beginning of the trial:

v. 11. And Jesus stood before the governor; and the governor asked Him, saying, Art Thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.

v. 12. And when He was accused of the chief priests and elders, He answered nothing.

v. 13. Then said Pilate unto Him, Hearest Thou not how many things they witness against Thee?

v. 14. And He answered him to never a word, insomuch that the governor marveled greatly.

Matthew’s story of the events of this Friday morning brings out very strongly the dignity, the divinity, the deity of the Lord, accused before the governor as being a criminal. Upon the question of the procurator as to His being the King of the Jews, He gives him an emphatic answer in the affirmative, explaining incidentally to the unappreciative Pilate the nature of His kingdom, Joh 18:33-37. But with reference to all the other charges which the chief priests invented against Him, the Lord maintained a baffling silence. “The accusations were by His silence stamped as groundless, and this majesty of silence filled Pilate with wonder and amazement. ” All the efforts of the governor to make Him answer the taunts of the Jews availed him nothing. Why waste breath when the Jews and Pilate knew very well that the charges were altogether unfounded! The wonder, but also the superstition of Pilate grew apace in the course of the trial.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Mat 27:11. And Jesus stood, &c. See Joh 18:29; Joh 18:40 and Luk 23:2 for a more full account of our Saviour’s appearance before Pilate.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mat 27:11 f. Continuation, after the episode in Mat 27:3-10 , of the narrative introduced at Mat 27:2 . The accusation preferred by the Jews, though not expressly mentioned, may readily be inferred from the procurator’s question. See Luk 23:2 . In appearing before Pilate, they craftily give prominence to the political aspect of the Messianic pretensions of Jesus.

] There is nothing ambiguous in such a reply (which was not so framed that it might be taken either as an affirmative or as equivalent to , , Theophylact), but such a decided affirmative as the terms of the question: Art thou , etc., were calculated to elicit, Joh 18:37 . Comp. Mat 26:64 .

.] Comp. on Mat 26:62 . The calm and dignified silence of the true king.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

NINTH SECTION
JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS, BEFORE PILATESS BAR; OR, CHRIST EXAMINED BY THE CIVIL AUTHORITY; INSULTINGLY PUT BESIDE BARABBAS; STILL MORE INSULTING REJECTED, AND, IN SPITE OF THE MOST DECISIVE PROOFS OF HIS INNONENCE, CONDEMNED, DELIVERED TO BE CRUCIFIED, MOCKED

Mat 27:11-31

(Mar 15:2-20; Luk 23:2-25; Joh 18:28 to Joh 19:16.)

11And Jesus stood [was placed]15 before the governor: and the governor asked [questioned]16 him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest [it].17 12And when he was accused of [by] the chief priests and [the] elders, he answered nothing. 13Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things 14[what things, ]18 they witness against thee? And he answered him to never a word [and he answered him not a word];19 insomuch [so] that the governor marvelled 15[wondered] greatly. Now at that [the] feast20 the governor was wont to release unto the people a prisoner, whom they would. 16And they had then a notable [notorious ],21 prisoner, called Barabbas.22 17Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas,8 or Jesus which [who] is called Christ? 18For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.

19When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things [much] this day in a dream because of him.

20But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask [for] Barabbas, and [should] destroy Jesus. 21The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain [Which of the two] will ye that I release unto you? They 22said, Barabbas. Pilate said unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which [who] is called Christ? They all say unto him,23 Let him be crucified. 23And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.

24When Pilate saw that he could prevail [avail] nothing,24 but that rather a tumult was [is] made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person:25 see ye to it. 25Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. 26Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he [but Jesus he scourged and, ] delivered him to be crucified. 27Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall [Prtorium],26 and gathered unto him the whole band of 28, soldiers.27 And they stripped him,28 and put on him a scarlet robe. 29And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand:29 and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! 30And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head. 31And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

General View.Matthew describes the sufferings of Christ chiefly from the theocratic point of view. Hence, under the general head of a theocratic reference, we would group the silence of Jesus before Pilate, after He had declared that He was the Messiah; His being put upon an equality with Barabbas; the testimony of the wife of Pilate, and the testimony of Pilate himself (following that of Judas); the cry of the Jews: His blood, etc.; and the detailed narration of the mocking Christ in His kingly nature, on the part of the soldiers. The events, according to the Evangelists, occurred in the following order:At first Pilate wished to hand Jesus over to the Jewish court, that is, to receive a simple ecclesiastical censure. Then he sent Jesus to Herod, to get rid of the difficulty. Thereupon occurred the presentation of Christ along with Barabbas, and, after the failure of that device, the significant hand-washing. Then, the presentation of Jesus to the people, after He had been scourged: Ecce homo. Finally, the scornful treatment of the Jews by Pilate, designed to veil his own disgrace.30

Mat 27:11. Art Thou the King of the Jews?For the circumstances leading Pilate to put this question, see John 18 Mat 27:29 ff. From the same passage, Mat 27:34-37, we learn that Jesus, before replying in the affirmative, asked whether Pilate used the expression, King of the Jews, in a Roman or a Jewish sense. The chief point for Matthew was, that Jesus, even before Pilate, the civil ruler, declared Himself explicitly to be the Messiah. Theophylact has, without reason, interpreted as an evasive answer.

Mat 27:12. He answered nothing.After He had, according to Joh 18:37, declared that He was the Messiah, and in what sense, He made no answer to the most diverse accusations and questions, and spake not till Pilate cast in His teeth the taunt, Knowest Thou not that I have power to crucify Thee, and have power to release Thee? Joh 19:10. The accusations were by His silence stamped as groundless, and this majesty of silence filled Pilate with wonder and amazement.

Mat 27:15. Now at the feast.Annually, at the Passover. The Passover was the Jewish feast , and the connection shows that to this festival reference is here made. The antiquity of this custom is unknown. The Talmud makes no allusion to it; but that is in all likelihood an intentional over sight. Grotius says, this custom was introduced by the Romans for the purpose of flattering the Jews. Braune: The Roman and Greek custom of releasing prisoners upon the birthdays and festive seasons of the emperors, and upon days of public rejoicing, had been undoubtedly introduced among the Jews before the time of Pilate, to soften the Roman yoke. Meyer: We must not overlook a reference to the significance of the Passover. Hence our thoughts are carried back to the free escape of the Israelitish, first-born. Looked at in this light, the release of the prisoners at the Passover reminds us of the Good Friday dramas of southern Roman Catholic countries. The custom, as a Jewish custom, was improper, and was opposed to the law, especially in such a case as the present, Exo 21:12. Barabbas had been arrested for sedition and murder, Luk 23:19.

Mat 27:16. They had then a notorious prisoner.The wardens of the jails, in which were confined those who had committed offences against the Roman laws.

Called Barabbas.Several cursive MSS., versions, scholiasts, and also Origen, read Jesus Barabbas. See note appended to the text. Barabbas,= , which appears frequently, according to Lightfoot, in the Talmud, means the fathers son. Ewald says: He was the son of a rabbi. Theophylact saw in it an allusion to Antichrist, the son of the devil. On the contrary, Olshausen makes it refer to the Son of God, and finds in it a play of divine providence, according to the proverb: Ludit in humanis divina potentia rebus. De Wette terms this a very improper play of pious wit; and yet he must acknowledge it to be possible that Barabbas, being a mover of sedition (Luk 23:19), might have played the part of a false prophet, or a messiah. The objection, that he would not have committed a murder had he been representing himself as a messiah, is of no weight. Let us now conceive to ourselves the whole state of matters: a Jesus Barabbas, the son of the father, a pseudo-messiah, is presented to the Jews along with Jesus Christ. Surely in all this may easily be seen a striking sport of so-called chance. And why should the supposition that providence controlled the similarity and difference between the two names, be so senseless? It is conceivable, however, that the Christian tradition removed the name Jesus, out of reverence.

Mat 27:17. When they were gathered together.Pilate had by this time discovered how matters stood. In his crooked policy, accordingly, he calculated upon certain success, when he should place the notorious or distinguished criminal side by side with Jesus, for the Jews to choose which of the two should be released. Besides, he appears to have waited cunningly till the people had reassembled in very large numbers before his palace on the Antonia, after having gone and returned with the train which conducted Jesus to Herod. Because, according to Luke, this train had gone off before the events here recorded occurred. Pilate knew by this time how envious the members of the Sanhedrin were of Jesus, and must from this conclude that he stood high in the favor of the people.

Mat 27:18. For envy.The Evangelist mentions here, in a historical connection, envy as the cause of all the hostility manifested against Jesus, as if it were something well understood.

Mat 27:19. When he was set down on the judgment-seat.The people had a moment for consideration, and Pilate regards the issue as one of such certainty, that he ascends the seat of judgment to receive the decision of the people, and to pronounce judgment accordingly. The judge was required to pronounce judgment from a lofty seat of authority, from his chair of office. This stood usually upon a stone pavement (Lithostroton, in Hebrew, Gabbatha, Joh 19:13).31

His wife sent to him.This fact is found in Matthew only. As formerly, according to Matthew, the spirit of truth had in visions of the night borne witness for the new-born Jesus, and as the testimony of the heathen magi had in the day-season confirmed this witness, so on this occasion is the solemn, political testimony of Pilate on behalf of the suffering Jesus strengthened by a witness speaking out of the dream-life of his wife. Thus it is that each Evangelist selects out of the store of facts those which accord best with his views and purpose. From the time of Augustus, it became usual for the Roman governors to take their wives along with them into the provinces, though the custom was attacked down till the age of Tiberius: Tacit. Annal. iii. 33. Pilates wife, according to a tradition, given in Niceph. Hist. Eccles. 1:30, was called Claudia Procula or Procla, and was, according to the Gospel by Nicodemus, , i.e., a proselyte of the gate, and perhaps one who revered Jesus. The Greek Church has canonized her.

Have nothing to do with that just man. She designates Jesus the Just, and hints that Pilate, by injuring Him, may subject himself to the divine punishment.For I have suffered much.An ordinary dream would not be spoken of in this way, as a dream of bitter agony. Nor would such a dream have led a Roman wife to send a dissuasive message to her husband when seated upon the judgment-seat. Some apparition, something supernatural, awful, must be here understood. Hence many have attributed this dream to a direct interposition of God, especially32 Origen, Chrysostom, Augustin; othersnamely, Ignatius (Epist. ad Phil. cap. 4), Beda, Bernard, also the old Saxon Gospel-Harmony, Heliandascribe the dream in a naive way to the devil, who wished in this way to prevent the redeeming death of Jesus. Of course the dream may have arisen quite naturally, as de Wette and Meyer hold. The governors wife knew something of the mission of Jesus; and the night before, the Sanhedrin had in all probability alarmed the procurators household, coming to demand a guard. But this view does not militate against divine interposition, although the Evangelist makes no allusion to such intervention. The dream was a morning dream, hence according to the Roman time-division, from twelve at midnight Klopstock makes Socrates appear in the dream to the wife of Pilate (in the seventh Song of the Messias).

[It is a remarkable fact that a woman, and she a heathen, should be the only human being who had the courage to plead the cause of our Saviour during these dreadful hours when His own disciples forsook Him, and when the fanatical multitude cried out. Crucify Him, crucify Him! It is equally remark able that she should call Him , that just man, and thus remind one of the most memorable unconscious prophecy of heathenism, viz., Platos description of the perfect , who, without doing any wrong, may assume the appearance of the grossest injustice ( ); yea, who shall be scourged, tortured, fettered, deprived of his eyes, and, after having endured all possible sufferings, fastened to a post, must restore again the beginning and prototype of righteousness (see Plato, Politia, vol. iv. p. 74 sqq.; ed. Ast, p. 360 sq., ed. Bip., and my History of the Apostolic Church, p. 433 sq.). Aristotle, too, says of the perfectly just man, that he stands so far above the political order and constitution as it exists, that he must break it, wherever he appears. The prophecies of Greek wisdom and the majesty of the Roman law here unite in a Roman lady, the wife of the imperial representative in Jerusalem, to testify to the innocence and mission of Christ. It is very likely that the wife of Pilate was one of those God-fearing heathen women, who, without embracing the Jewish religion, were longing and groping in the dark after the unknown God.P. S.]

Mat 27:20. But the chief priests and the elders persuaded.The members of the Sanhedrin availed themselves of the delay during which Pilate was occupied in receiving this message, to canvass the people and obtain their support. The two warnings which came, the one from the thoughtful presentiment of a pious spirit to Pilate, the other from the tortured conscience of Judas to the priestsproved fruitless; indeed, the first occasioned only a delay which the enemies of Jesus turned to their account. Nevertheless the testimony of his wife was not wholly lost on Pilate, for it reacted upon his own later solemn testimony.

Mat 27:21. But he answered, .Meyer properly explains, He replies to these preparations on the part of the Sanhedrin, which he overhears from his chair, by asking the people again, and more definitely: Which of the two, etc., and so puts a stop to this canvassing of the priests.

Mat 27:22. Let Him be crucified, .They might have asked simply that he would confirm the condemnation for blasphemy, and sentence Jesus to the Jewish mode of execution by stoning; but they go further, and demand his active cooperation in the judgment. They wished Jesus to be executed as an insurrectionist, and hence to be crucified according to the Roman custom. They sought by this extreme penalty and this deepest disgrace to annihilate the memory of Jesus, and to stake the Roman might against faith in Him. Thus, in their senseless, self-destructive fanaticism, they consigned to the Roman cross their own Messianic idea; for the accusation, that Jesus was a mover of sedition, was only an inference which they deduced from the Messianic dignity claimed by Jesus.

Mat 27:23. What evil then hath He done? T ;then, , implies that they must be able to give positive reasons for His death. The Evangelist passes by, however, the further special points, and represents only the effect of the uproar, which threatened to become an insurrection.

Mat 27:24. Washed his hands.A symbolical act of Jewish custom (consult Deu 21:6; Sota, 8, 6), by which one frees oneself solemnly from guilt. Pilate adopted a Jewish custom, to make himself from their own stand-point fully understood, and probably also to make a final attempt to dissuade them from the course they were pursuing. The heathen practice of cleansing the hands to clear them from the guilt of murder after it had been committed, might, from its analogy, have led to the adoption of the Jewish custom. Meyer. The matter, however, was important enough to call for a peculiar symbolic expression. [Pilate washed his hands, but not his heart, and in delivering up Christ, whom he pronounced innocent, he condemned himself. Sense of guilt made him a coward.]

Mat 27:25. His blood be on usThat is, the punishment for His death, if He be guiltless. That Matthew is the only one who records this act of self-cursing on the part of the people, cannot throw any doubt upon the truthfulness of the same, when we remember that he wrote for Jewish Christians, and brought, in this declaration, the saddest truth before his nation. The early Christians had reason to see in the speedily following downfall of the Jewish state a fulfilment of this imprecation. [The history of the Jews for these eighteen hundred years is a continued fulfilment of this daring and impious imprecation, this fearful legacy bequeathed by the murderers of Jesus to their posterity. Yet for repenting and believing Jews, this curse is turned into a blessing; the blood of Jesus which cleanseth from all sin, and speaketh better things than that of Abel, comes upon them as a cleansing and healing stream, and may yet come upon this whole race, after the fulness of the Gentiles has been saved, Rom 11:25-26.P. S.]

Mat 27:26. But Jesus he (caused to be) scourged.33The Roman scourging, of which mention is here made, was much more severe than the Jewish. According to the latter, only the upper part of the body was bared; according to the former, the entire body. The Jews numbered the lashes (2Co 11:24); the Romans laid them on without number or mercy. Besides, the Roman scourge was more excruciating. None but slaves were subjected to this flogging, Act 22:25. Little value was attached to a slaves life, much less his feelings. It is a matter of controversy whether bones, iron teeth, or leaden balls, were inserted among the thongs of the lash (see Heubner, p. 435). That such lashes are mentioned, is not to be doubted; one of such a description was called , a knout with bones woven to the end of the thongs, from , a joint of the back-bone, then dice, talus. The Romans scourged in two different ways. Those who were condemned to be crucified were flogged after one fashion. This scourging was so cruel, that the criminals died frequently while undergoing the punishment. Another kind of scourging was inflicted upon delinquents who were not condemned to capital punishment, for the purpose either of extorting a confession from them, or to punish them for a crime. This was the kind of scourging to which Pilate subjected Jesus. It was no less cruel than the other, inasmuch as it lay entirely in the hands of the judge to declare how far the punishment was to be carried.See Friedlieb, p. 114.De Wette: Matthew and Mark represent Jesus as suffering the scourging which the Romans inflicted upon those condemned to the cross. (Liv. 32:36; Joseph. Bell. Judges 5, 11, 1; Hieron. ad 27:34) According to Luke, Pilate merely proposes to punish, that is, to scourge, Jesus, and then release Him; but from his account (Mat 23:16) it would appear that there had been no actual infliction of scourging. From Joh 19:1, it seems that Pilate caused Jesus to be really scourged, hoping thus to satisfy the Jews, and to awaken their sympathy. Paulus holds Johns account to be the decisive one, and hence falsely explains our passage: after having already previously caused Him to be scourged.35 Strauss (2:525) considers that the Synoptists give the more correct and earlier account. It is manifest that Johns narrative is the most exact. The scourging which Pilate inflicted was employed, it would seem, as a punishment of Him whom he considered innocent, in order to satisfy the accusers, and to move them to compassion. It was a police correction, and the right of inflicting it rested upon the right to employ torture. In this sense it was that Pilate had long ere this, according to Luke, proposed to scourge Jesus, hoping by this act to work upon the feelings of the people, and to influence them in their choice between Barabbas and Christ. Hence Luke considers it superfluous to record the later, actual chastisement. Matthew presents the scourging in its significance as an actual fact, which, in his eyes, was the transition from trial to crucifixion, the first act in the crucifixion agonies. He might all the more properly view the scourging in this light, inasmuch as Pilate sought to effect, in his hesitation, a twofold object. At one moment it seemed as though he would himself take the initiative in the crucifixion; again, as though he would craftily overmaster the Jews.It was usually lictors that scourged; but Pilate, being only sub-governor, had no command over lictors, and so handed Jesus over to the soldiers. Hence it is probable that Jesus was not beaten with rods, but scourged with twisted thongs of leather. Friedlieb, p. 115. Those who were flogged were tied to a pillar; generally they were bound in a stooping posture to a low block, and so the skin of the naked back was stretched tight, and fully exposed to the fearful lashes. The whips were either rods or thongs, to the ends of which lead or bones were attached, to increase the tension of the lash, and render the blow the more fearful. The backs of the prisoners were completely flayed by this process. They frequently fainted, and sometimes died. The soldiers would not inflict the punishment mildly, for they were the cruel ones who mocked Him afterward. It was, moreover, the policy of Pilate that Jesus should be perfectly disfigured.

Mat 27:26. He delivered Him to be crucified.The actual decision succeeded the presentation of Jesus, after His being scourged and crowned with thorns. The history which Matthew gives of these circumstances is quite systematic. The matter was now as good as settled. The form of the sentence was not prescribed, but must be short and valid. It was commonly: Ibis ad crucem. By the time these transactions were over, it was already, as John informs us, the sixth hour, toward mid-day.

[By delivering Jesus to the Sanhedrin, Pilate sacrificed his lofty and independent position as a secular judge and representative of the Roman law, to the religious fanaticism of the Jewish hierarchy. The state became a tool in the hands of an apostate and blood-thirsty church. How often has this fact been repeated in the history of religious persecution! By this act Pilate condemned himself, and gave additional force to his previous testimony of the innocence of Christ, showing that this was dictated neither by fear nor favor, but was the involuntary expression of his remaining sense of justice from the judgment-seat.P. S.]

Mat 27:27. Into the prtorium or governors house.Luther translates by Richthaus (common hall). Its original meaning is the tent of the general in the Roman camp: then it came to signify the residence of the provincial ruler (prtor, proprtor), where the court of justice likewise was held. The prtorium is consequently the residence of a military, or a civil and military magistrate; and hence it is connected with the main guard-house, and equally with the state-prison (Act 23:35). Already existing palaces were employed as prtoria in the provincial towns; and we see from Joseph. Bell. Judges 2, 14, 8, that the procurators of Juda, when they were in Jerusalem, converted the palace of Herod into a prtorium. Winer. Is it certain, however, that the palace of Herod was always so used? According to tradition, the governor lived in the lower city, and, as some more definitely assert, in the fortress Antonia. Winer is of opinion, that Pilate would find the empty, waste-standing palace of Herod the most convenient residence. But where, in that case, would Herod Antipas, who had come up to the feast, dwell? There is nothing certain to be made out. The following fact, however, speaks in support of the fortress Antonia. The scourging had taken place in from of the prtorium. Then Christ was handed over to the soldiers; and they, instead of leading Jesus away immediately, commenced to mock and make a sport of Him. To carry this mockery on undisturbed, they conducted Jesus into the court of the prtorium. In this conduct, the soldiers followed the excitement of the capital in its hate against Jesus, continuing the godless sport, which Herod had begun when he invested the Lord in a white robe, the token of candidateship, and so make a mock of His claim to the throne. Pilate had, however, the double design, either to mollify the Jews by the sight of the derided Jesus, or to mock them through Him, should his cunning plan fail.

And gathered unto him the whole band.This is conclusive for the place being the fortress Antonia: , the tenth of a legion, from 400 to 600 men.36

Mat 27:28. And they stripped Him.Meyer adopts the reading , they clothed Him, and explains that His clothes had been torn off to scourge Him, and were now again put on. But the clothing is silently impliedmention being made here of a new maltreatment. Perhaps they may have first put on again the white dress in which Herod had caused Him to be clothed, to mark Him out as a candidate for royal honors, and then taken it off in order to invest Him with the scarlet robe, the sign of His having attained to kingly dignity. The drama would thus be complete. They, accordingly, again stripped off His outer garment, and, instead of it, put on a scarlet military cloak, sagum, which was intended to represent the imperial purple; for even kings and emperors wore the sagum (only longer and finer). Meyer. The mantle was a pallium dyed with cochineal The epithets, purple, purple robe, used by Mark and John, are explained by the fact, that they had before them the ironical import of the cloak.

Mat 27:29. A crown of thorns.It is impossible to settle accurately what particular kind of thorns was employed to crown Jesus. Paulus assumes, without good reason, that the crown was made of blooming branches of the hedge-thorn (Michaelis, of bears wort). Meyer: A wreath of young, supple thorn-twigs, with which they would caricature the bay crown, as they did the sceptre by the reed. Their object is not to occasion pain, but to mock. Why thorns then? Consult Winer, art. Dorn, as to the plentiful supply of thorns in Palestine. Hug considers it was the buckthorn. Braune: Perhaps the crown was made from the supple twigs of the Syrian acacia, which had thorns as long as a finger.

And a reed in His right band.John omits this point, from which we might suppose that the reed had not remained in His hand. Probably a so-called Cyprian (we say now Spanish) reed. Sepp, iii. 516. De Wette says, , does not agree with . His does not agree, however, with the idea of a hand, which did not need to close on receiving the reed.

And they bowed the knee.After they clothed Him, they began their feigned homage, bowing the knee, and greeting, according to the usual form: Hail, King of the Jews!

[On the symbolical meaning of this mock-adoration, Wordsworth observes: All these things, done in mockery, were so ordered by God as to have a divine meaning. He (Christ) is clothed in scarlet and purple, for He is a military (?) conqueror and King; He is crowned with thorns, for He has a diadem won by suffering, the diadem of the world; He has a reed in His hand, for He wields a royal sceptre, earned by the weakness of humanity (see Php 2:8-11). The cross is laid on His shoulder, for this is the sign of the Son of Man, the trophy of His victory, by which He takes away sin and conquers Satan; His titles are inscribed upon the cross: King of the Jews, for He is the sovereign Lord of Abraham and all his seed. In all these circumstances, as St. Hilary says, He is worshipped while He is mocked. The purple is the dress of royal honor; His crown of victory is woven with thorns. As St. Ambrose says (in Luk 23:31): illudentes, adorant.P. S.]

Mat 27:30. And they spit upon Him.Their cruelty, and the intoxication of wickedness, keep them from carrying out to the close the caricature exactly. The satanic mockery changes into brutal maltreatment.

Mat 27:31. And after they had mocked Him.And after the presentation to the people, Joh 19:5, had taken place,Pilates last attempt to deliver Him. After the final decision, they clothed Jesus in His own garments, to lead Him away.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Jesus, the longed-for Messiah of the Jews, abandoned by His people to the detested Gentiles. Christ, the desire of the old world, driven out by that old world, as if He were the old arch-enemy. Or, the condemnation of the world converted through His victorious patience into the worlds redemption.
2. Christ before the judgment-seat of Pontius Pilate.When He stood before the judgment-seat of Caiaphas, He pronounced in spirit judgment upon the hierarchy of the old world; but in that He Himself bore this condemnation, He atoned for us. So here, standing before Pilate, He represents the judgment of God upon the old world, its civilization and arts; but, on the other had, He takes upon Himself this judgment, and makes an atonement for that world. Here, too, He stood the real judge Himself: here, too, did He suffer Himself to be judged.

3. The hierarchy, the peoples uproar (revolution), the secular government, and the soldiery of the old world, are all involved in the common guilt of the maltreatment and execution of Christ, though the degree of their guilt diners.
4. Christs threefold silence, before Caiaphas, before Herod, and before Pilate, not a silence of contrition because of well-grounded accusations, but an atoning silence of majesty, because of the worthlessness of those courts, which had sunk into the very depths of guilt. In this light, the contrast between the moments of silence and of reply is most significant.
5. On one side, the testimony of Pilates wife to the Lord stands most closely connected with Pilates own; but, on the other, is strongly opposed. The pious spirit; the political time-server. It is by no means unusual to see noble, pious women go along side by side with vain, worldly men, like anxious guardian angels, and in moments most fraught with danger, step in their way, and dissuade them from sin. (From the authors Leben Jesu, ii. 3, p. 1517.)

6. Persuaded the people (Mat 27:20).The members of the Sanhedrin stirred up undoubtedly the fanaticism of the people. They would say, Jesus had been condemned by the orthodox court. Barabbas was, on the contrary, a champion of freedom; that Pilate wished to overthrow their right of choice, their civil rights, their spiritual authority, to persecute the friend of the people, etc. And so Barabbas would be gradually made to appear to the people by the statements of these demons of seduction as a Messiah, and the Messiah a Barabbas.

7. Crucify Him.The State was here dethroned, and made subservient to the Church. Later, again, it became the slave of the heathen, Roman hierarchy, which hated and persecuted Christianity, till the days of Constantine. Again, the hierarchy of the Middle Ages ruled the State in the persecution of heretics. (Even the Emperor Frederic II.37 pronounced sentence of outlawry upon all who were excommunicated from the Church, unless they speedily made their peace with her.) Finally, the reform-detesting hierarchy is seen again and again, in the histories of Roman Catholic states, overriding the civil power. Even at the present day, France, though revolutionized three times, will not suffer a person who has retired from the priesthood to marry. In Austria, a monk can obtain from the civil authorities no defence against a persecution by his superiors, as bitter as the Inquisition of the Middle Ages (at least, it was so till very recently).The old wound will take long to heal.

8. The crowd of those who cried Hosanna, are driven into the background by the crowd crying: Crucify Him. Hence contradiction. And yet agreement. The same people. The weakest and most cowardly, who ever swim with the stream, allowed themselves to be borne along with both streams.

9. The self-imprecation of the Jewish people, a satanic prediction of the people of the prophets, which was the last evidence and extinction of their prophetic gift. The final prediction of Judaism was a cursing of themselves.

10. Pilates total want of character in contrast to the perfect character (Heb 1:3, ).

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The apparent reconciliation of the Jews and the Gentiles: 1. In its deformity: (a) the priests seducers of the worldlings, the Jews seducers of the Gentiles, who hate them; (b) the Roman State made to be the executioner of the decrees of that Judaism which it despises and humbles; (c) both combined against the king of humanity. 2. The awful results of this reconciliation: (a) the rejection of Christ; (b) the new separation, which appears even before the crucifixion, and culminates in the Jewish war; (c) the downfall of Judaism; (d) the heavy guilt and deep uneasiness of the Gentile world. 3. The significant signs in this apparent reconciliation: (a) a caricature; but also, (b) a presage, though not pattern, of the true reconciliation, which Christ instituted by His death, between Jews and Gentiles, Eph 2:14.The judge of the world before the bar of the old world.The courageous confession and witness of Christ before Pilate (1Ti 6:13; Rev 1:5).The calm consciousness of Christ in His last victorious moments (calm before Caiaphas, Herod, Pilate).The threefold silence of Christ, a majestic testimony: 1. To the eternal discourse of His life; 2. to the emptiness of His enemies replies; 3. to His certainty of a different judgment from God.What were the motives leading Christ one time to speak, again to keep silence, before the ?Judges 1. He speaks first to preserve His self-consciousness by confession; second, to save His enemies by a great, solemn warning. 2. He makes no reply to the futile, the ambiguous, the confused, which must overthrow itself, confute itself, and reveal its own falsity; above all, He is silent before the unworthy and mean, especially before Herod.Christ, at the bar of the world, acquitted and yet condemned.Christ was put to death, not so much in consequence of the condemnation of the civil authority, as in consequence of the hierarchical revolution.And this revolution was the most disgraceful of all.Yet was this first year of this disgrace of man made by Gods rule to be the first year of mans salvation.Christ and His surrounding company at His trial: 1. The accusers; 2. His partner in trial, Barabbas; 3. the witnesses (Pilate and his wife); 4. the judge.Notwithstanding the greatest promise of His release, nothing in the world could save Him, because the world was to be saved through His death.The three arch-enemies of Christ upon His trial, and His impotent friends: 1. Against Him: (a) the envy of the priests; (b) the ingratitude of the people; (c) the unbelief of Pilate. 2. For Him: (a) a witty comparison (with Barabbas); (b) a pious dream; (c) an ineffective ceremony (washing of the hands).The full powers of bell, and Gods full power to decide and save, were at work in the death of Christ; and yet human freedom was in no respect affected.The worlds judgment of rejection, as concerns Christ, and Christs judgment of salvation, as concerns the world.Christ and His accusers, and Barabbas, and Pilates wife, and Pilate, and the people, and the men of war.Pilate, the judge of Christ, fallen under judgment. 1. His picture: with full understanding of the circumstances, conscious, warned, anxious, and yet succumbing. 2. The lessons taught by the picture. So fell the ecclesiastical judges of Jesus before him; so will all fall after him who presume to judge the Lord.Pilate knew that for envy, etc.Envy, which stirred Cain up against pious Abel, reaches its maturity in Christs crucifixion.The Wis 2:24 : Through envy of the devil came death into the world.The Spirits voice in the night-visions a witness from the Lord: 1. At the birth of Christ; 2. at his death.The significance of the courtesies of hierarchical pride: 1. A sign that it seeks associates to carry out its enmity against Christ. 2. A mask. It appears friendly to government, and says: Christ stirs up the people; friendly to the people, and says: The government encroaches on the freedom of election, upon your rights; friendly to the world, and says: It is possible to live with Barabbas, but not with Christ.Barabbas; or the peoples misguided selection.The Hosanna and the Crucify Him: 1. The contrast: (a) the contrast of the two days; (b) the contrast of opinions; (c) the contrast of the criers. 2. The bond of unity: (a) Palm Sunday must lead to Good Friday; (b) enthusiasm for the Lord must excite hells opposition; (c) not the same persons, but the same people; and we may suppose some individuals had taken part in both.Fickleness in the opinions of a people.Revolution as an instrument used by cunning tyrants, and the powers of darkness.The instigators of the people in hypocritical attire.Pilate, frightened by the threat of an insurrection, becomes the murderer of Christ: a lesson to the world for all time.Pilate washing his hands: 1. A testimony to the Lord; 2. a testimony against himself, against Rome, and against the old world.His blood be on us! or, the impenitent make the blood of atonement their own condemnation.The marks of the Jew ever more and more manifest in the Israelite, as he is putting his Christ to death.The old curse and the eternal atonement.The policy which would protect the Lord by evil means, only prepares for Him torment and shame without redress.What means should Jesus, the worlds Saviour, employ, according to the worlds wisdom, to preserve His life? 1. An evil custom (the release of a criminal at the Passover); 2. a false title (as one whom the people had begged off and released); 3. an improper joke and comparison (being put side by side with Barabbas); 4. a futile ceremony on the part of the judge (to wash the hands, and, where needed, to lift them).Pilate, the impotent saviour and deliverer: 1. In spite of his perception of what is justice, of the legions, of power, of policy, of haughty authority; 2. and exactly because he employed all these to wrest justice.Then released he Barabbas, but Jesus he caused to be scourged: an old, but ever fresh, picture of the world.Jesus scourged: 1. Who? The glorious body, the pure soul, the divine spirit. 2. By whom? By barbarism (barbarous, nameless soldiers); by worldly culture and civil power; by the sin of the world and all sinners.The torture and its midnight history in the world and the Church.The scourge (knout) is no standard of justice.The twofold signification of the Lords scourging: 1. It was to have saved Him; 2. it was the introduction of His death, not only in a literal, but also spiritual sense.Jesus given over to the wautonness of (the soldiery.The repeated mutilation of the image of Christ in war, and by soldiers.The mocking of the Lord in His Messianic royal character.The brightness of heaven with which Christ emerges from all this worlds scorn.The irony of the Spirit and of Divine Providence at the miserable mockery of this world, Psalms 2.The view of Christ clothed in shame; the cure for all the vanity and pride of the world.Christ, the true King in the realm of suffering.So perfected as the King of glory.Therefore hath God exalted Him, etc. At His name every knee shall bow, Php 2:9-10.The patience of Christ triumphantly sustained: 1. Imperturbable, yet disturbing all; 2. paling all the worlds glory in its own glory; 3. supremely edifying, and yet awing.

Starke:When we stand before godless judges, we must nevertheless answer them and honor them, Rom 13:1.He answered nothing. To atone for our loquacity, which led to the first sin.The Patient One committed all to God, 1Pe 2:23.Hedinger: Blind judges in matters of faith are not worth answering, Mat 7:6.Christ, even in His silence, worthy of admiration, Isa 53:7.Osiander: It is an ill-timed grace, when wicked persons are spared, in such a way that honest and quiet people are brought into danger.Luthers margin: They would sooner have asked the release of the devil, than they would have allowed Gods Son to have escaped. This is the case even now, and will ever be.There are degrees in sinfulness as in holiness, Joh 19:11.Canstein: Straightforwardness is best. When we seek to make the truth bend, it usually breaks.Quesnel: More truth is at times found among civil magistrates, than among those persons from whom we had a right to expect more.A pious heathen is often more compassionate toward a poor sufferer than depraved Christians and priests, Luk 10:32-33.Christ was reckoned with the greatest transgressors, and we seek always to be reckoned among the best and most pious, Isa 53:12.Pilate did not act like a wise diplomatist, who might have easily known how far envy will lead a man.Canstein: The most implacable foe is envy, and especially among the members of the so-called spiritual profession, Ecc 4:4.Quesnel: Many console themselves with the thought, that they appear to the world wholly de voted to the service of justice and truth; but if we watch them closely, we see they are slaves of injustice and envy.Wives have nothing to do in official concerns, but they may and should warn their husbands.God warns man before he falls.Canstein: In a corrupted Church, the ministers are ever the most corrupted; and corruption issues forth from them, polluting others, Jer 23:15.Quesnel Faithless teachers seduce the people from Christ, and teach them to prefer Barabbas.Cramer: Is that not the Antichrist, which can willingly endure brothels and usurers, etc., but which would expel the gospel, and purge their land from it by fire and sword?Hedinger: The world has ever robbed Christ; it likes Him not.Murderers, fornicators, adulterers, drunkards, can be tolerated; Christian teaching and living never, Joh 15:19.Canstein: Carnal wisdom may lead a man, when he despises conscience, departs from the right path, and betakes himself to by-paths, into such snares as he would have gladly shunned.Ungrateful man wheels like a weathercock.Conscience often struggles long, ere a man sins against his better knowledge; but the guilt is so much the greater.The stubbornness of the wicked is more constant than an intention to act right (arising from worldly reasons).Pilates testimony, the most glorious testimony to the innocence of Jesus: 1. Not from favor; 2. a judges testimony; 3. a testimony of Pilate against himself. His blood be on us. They act as if they had a good conscience: but it was mere false, assumed ease (impudence).The Romans soon made them realize this curse: they still feel it. Yet it will one day cease.Luthers margin: Believers convert this curse into a blessing.Zeisius: Accursed parents, who rashly precipitate their children with themselves into ruin!The just for the unjust, 1Pe 3:18.Gaze on, O sinner, ecce homo!Zeisius and others against extravagance in dress.38Christ has borne all manner of shame and contempt, that we may attain to the highest honor.

Gossner:39Yes, they probably said, Barabbas is a villain, but he is no heretic. He destroyed only bodies, but Jesus of Nazareth destroys souls.The devil may be sure of this, that the people will blind themselves by a fair show.Whoso sitteth in an official chair must not regulate his conduct by the cries of the multitude.

Lisco:Pilate, a natural man of the world: 1. Not insensible to divine influences; 2. but sunk down into the then existing scepticism of the world; 3. bound by worldly considerations of all sorts; 4. making his conscience a sacrifice to circumstances, which are his gods.

Gerlach:Mocking, they made him king; but it was really by virtue of His humiliation that Jesus received His kingdom.

Heubner:Christ retained His dignity even in the deepest humiliation, where His claims appeared as madness or fanaticism.The custom of releasing one: injustice trying to support itself by injustice.A Christian wife should be the guardian angel of her husband.Dreams, too, often deserve attention.How easily can the people he misled!40The placing of Jesus side by side with Barabbas is one of the mysteries of His humiliation. So is it often in the world: there, truth and falsehood, innocence and guilt, honor and dishonesty, worth and worthlessness, righteous leaders and seducers, the Prince of Peace and the great rebel, the fountain of life and the murderer, are often set side by side. The future will resolve all this confusion.Innocence is dumb, guilt cries out.The consequences of the choice: The Barabbas spirit, the devilish, the intoxicating passion for licentious freedom, entered like an evil spirit into the people, inflamed their hatred still more and more against the Romans, swept them with resistless sway beyond all prudence, and precipitated them at last into the pit of destruction. This spirit has entered into their posterity, leading them still to reject Jesus, and give heed to many false messiahs.Jesus is our consolation, whenever in this world of imperfection the worthy and unworthy are classed together, yea, the former subordinated to the latter.Such a choice as that of Barabbas is by no means uncommon: 1. In respect of faith; unbelief instead of belief in Jesus, etc. 2. In regard to our lives and acts; rather an unbridled, unfettered life, than a stern, moral regulation and life. 3. As regards civil government; rather obey demagogues than the soft words of Jesus.What shall I do, etc.? Many know not what to do with Jesus.Was the adage true here: vox populi, vox Dei?In one sense do the people demand the crucifixion: God had decreed it in another.The name of Pilate is preserved among the Christians, but as a name of disgrace: here, and in the Apostles Creed, it is the name of a coward, who wished to release Jesus, and yet surrendered Him,who knew Him in some degree, and yet feared to confess Him.His blood. Already we see the fruit of their choice of Barabbas: blind presumption, blasphemy, mockery of Gods justice.If the Jews were not so blinded, they must see clearly that their fathers had committed a greater sin than had been ever perpetrated, when they had been punished before with a captivity of 70 years, and are now enduring one of 1800.God has preserved them as a witness to the truth of the gospel.As Christs high-priestly (prophetic) dignity had been mocked before the ecclesiastical tribunal, so was His kingly before the civil.

Rambach:Thou must, my Redeemer, atone for the shame of my nakedness, and regain for me the robe of innocence which I had lost.Consolation for derided saints.Christ fled from a worldly crown; He took the thorny crown, to indicate that His kingdom was not of this world.It is no true love, which is not willing to endure thorns.The thorns of love are: hostile opposition, ingratitude, derision, insult.The crown of thorns which we have plaited for ourselves: lusts, earthly cares, pangs of conscience. Christ has made atonement for this.The rod with which Christ will feed His sheep (the rod of gentleness, the rod of affliction).The court of justice, the liberty-hall of innocence, converted into a place of injustice.This robing of Christ was full of shame and disgrace.

Braune:The third hour was the hour at which the Roman judge took his seat in the place of judgment: on this occasion Pilate is forced to begin three hours earlier, in consequence of the wrath of the priests, and their feigned piety.Barabbas: that is a horrifying deception, fearful, surpassing all others.Pilates wife: no woman was found among Jesus enemies. The maid who forced Peter on to his denial stands alone there, in her forward character.Peters sermon on this text, Act 3:13-21.

Grammlich:Daily is blessing or curse (Christ or Barabbas) set before thee, my soul!

F. W. Krummacher:The crown of thorns calls for repentance, gratitude, submission.

[Burkitt:

Mat 27:11-14. The silence of Christ is to be imitated when our reputation is concerned; the confession of Christ, when the glory of God and the interests of truth are at stake.He knew that for envy they had delivered Him (Mat 27:18). As covetousness sold Christ, so envy delivered Him. Envy is a killing and murdering passion. Envy slayeth the silly one, Job 5:2.

Mat 27:19. Several kinds of dreams, natural, moral, diabolical, and divine. That of the wife of Pilate was from God. When all Christs disciples were fled from Him, when none of His friends durst speak a word for Him, God raises up a woman, a stranger, a pagan, to give evidence of His innocency. At our Saviours trial, Pilate and his wife, though Gentiles, are the only ones who plead for Christ and pronounce Him righteous, whilst His own countrymen, the Jews, thirst after His innocent blood.Hypocrites within the visible Church may be guilty of acts of wickedness which the conscience of pagans and infidels protests against.

Mat 27:25. What the Jews with a wicked mind put up as a direful imprecation, we may with a pious mind offer up to God as an humble petition: Lord, let Thy Sons blood, not in the guilt and punishment, but in the efficacy and merit of it, be upon us and upon our posterity after us, for evermore.Thomas Scott:If Christ were now to appear on earth in disguise, He would meet with no better treatment.There are still enough of hypocritical Pharisees and high-priests, ungodly Pilates, unstable multitudes, and hardened scoffers, to persecute, mock, and crucify the Lord of glory.Barabbas is preferred to Jesus whenever the offer of salvation is rejected.We are all chargeable with the guilt of crucifixion, as He was wounded for our transgressions.All who delight in anathemas and imprecations will find that they rebound upon themselves.All which has been admired in the suffering and death of heroes and philosophers is no more comparable to the conduct of Christ, than the glimmering taper is to the clear light of day.We are called to do good, and to suffer evil, in this present world, after the pattern of Christ.All our sufferings are light and trivial compared with His.Ph. Doddridge:How wisely was it ordained by divine Providence that Pilate should be obliged thus to acquit Christ, even while he condemned Him; and to pronounce Him a righteous person in the sane breath with which he doomed Him to the death of a malefactor! And how lamentably does the power of worldly interest over conscience appear, when, after all the convictions of his own mind, as well as the admonitions of his wife, he yet gave Him up to popular fury! O Pilate, how ingloriously hast thou fallen in the defence of the Son of God! and how Justly did God afterward leave thee to perish by the resentment of that people whom thou wast now so studious to oblige!P. S.]

Footnotes:

[15]Mat 27:11.Lachmann and Tischendorf read [for ], according to B., C., L., [also Cod. Sinait, which generally agrees with Cod. Vaticanus. Meyer and Alford regard as a correction to suit the sense better.P. S.]

[16]Mat 27:11.[ is a part of the formal judicial inquisition; hence, questioned.P. S.]

[17]Mat 27:11.[So Coverdale and Conant, who insert it. Others insert right or truly. , like in Mat 26:25, is a form of affirmative answer, common in Rabbinic writers (solennis affirmantium apud Judos formula, as Schttgen says); the object of the verb being implied.P. S.]

[18]Mat 27:13.[So Dr. Lange: welche Dinge. Also Dr. Conant, who refers the word , quantus, how great, not so much to the number of the offences charged upon Him, as to their magnitude; and in this sense the reader naturally understands the word what in this connection.P. S.]

[19]Mat 27:14.[Coverdale renders : not one word; Conant: not even to one word; Lange: nicht auf irgend ein Wort; Meyer: auf nicht einmal ein einziges Wort, i.e., not even to one inquisitorial question. P. S.]

[20]Ver 15.[At the feast, at every passover. See Exeg. Notes.P. S.]

[21]Mat 27:16.[The word is here used in a bad sense, as in Joseph. Antiq. v. 7,1, and Euripides, Orest. 289; hence, notorious (Rhemish Version, Symonds, Norton), or famous (Wiclif, Campbell, Scrivener), or noted (Conant); in German: berchtigt (de Wette, Lange, etc.). The term notable, which dates from Tyndale, and was retained by Cranmer, the Genevan, and the Authorized Version, is now generally employed in a good sense. The Latin Vulgate, however, translates: insignis, and Ewald: berhmt.P. S.]

[22]Mat 27:16-17.Fritzsche and Tischendorf read , following some cursive Codd, the Syriac and other versions, and Origen. Meyer thinks the sacred name was left out through reverence. De Wette supports this reading. [In his large critical edition of 1859 Tischendorf omits , and defends the usual reading: see his critical note. So also Alford, who thinks that some ignorant scribe, unwilling to ascribe to Barabbas the epithet , wrote in the margin . This is doubtful. The insertion cannot be satisfactorily explained, and I am disposed to agree with Meyer, that is genuine. It makes the contrast still more striking.P. S.]

[23]Mat 27:22.The of the Recepta, according to the best testimonies, is to be omitted.

[24]Mat 27:24.[The older English Versions and Campbell take personally. So also Alfora, the Latin Vulgate, the German Versions, Lange (dass er nichts ausrichte), and Meyer (dass er nichts ntze). But Beza, Ewald, Norton, and Conant translate it impersonally= , dass es nichts ntze, that it avails nothing.P. S.]

[25]Mat 27:24.The words [before ] are wanting in B., D. But Cod. A. reads: . Lachmann puts them in brackets, Tischendorf omits them [so also Alford]. The omission is more difficult to account for than the insertion. [Cod. Sinait. differs here from the Vatican Cod. and sustains the text. rec.: .P. S.]

[26]Mat 27:27.[The scourging took place outside of the , which is the official palace of the Roman Procurator, or the the governors house, as the margin of the Authorized Version explains. Comp. Mar 15:16 : .P. S.]

[27]Mat 27:27.[The interpolation: of soldiers, is a useless repetition. for is meant the whole cohort (the tenth part of a legion) then on duty at the palace.P. S.]

[28]Mat 27:28.Several Codd., B., D., etc., read [having clothed Him, By ]. Lachmann adopts it, but regards this reading as an old writing error. [Lachmanns object, it should be remembered, is not to establish the most correct, but the most ancient text attainable, as it stood in the fourth century. Tischendorf and Alford retain . See the Exeg. Notes.P. S.]

[29]Mat 27:29.The best supported reading: [for the lect. rec.: , represents the conduct of Christ more passive, and is more suitable. [Cod. Sinait. reads , and for .P. S.]

[30][In German: Schliesslich eine hhnische Behandlung der Juden, die seine (viz., Pilates) Schmach verhllen sollte. Dr. Lange refers evidently to the mockery of the Jews by Pilate related in Joh 19:14-15; Joh 19:20; Joh 19:22. The Edinb. edition entirely misunderstands this sentence in translating: The conclusion of all being the ironical conduct of the Jews, as if they wished to throw a cloak over His indignities. Here the word Behandlung was probably mistaken for Handlung, and the subject changed.P. S.]

[31][The Edinb. translation reads: This stood, unfortunately, upon a stone foundation. It is as difficult to see the connection of the German blicher Weise (usually) with unfortunately, as the connection of misfortune with a stone foundation, unless some one happens to fall on it. It is hardly conceivable that the translator should have derived so plain a word as blich, customary, usual, from Uebel, evil, instead of ben, to practise.P. S.]

[32][Not: namely, as the Edinb. translation reads, which uniformly confounds namentlich (especially) with nmlich (namely), although in this case the preceding many (viels in German, for which the Edinb. trsl. substitutes some) should have prevented the mistake.P. S.]

[33][The verb , which occurs twice in the N. T., here and Mar 15:15, and the noun , which occurs once, Joh 2:15, are Latin terms (flagello, flagellum), introduced into the later Greek for the more usual or , and or (a whip, a scourge). Luke (Mat 23:16) uses in this connection the more general term , having chastised Him, John (Mat 19:1), the more usual word , scourged Him.P. S.]

[34][Jerome says on Mat 27:26 : Sciendum est Romanis eum (Pilatum) legibus ministrasse, quibus sancitum est, ut qui crucifigitur, prius flagellis verberetur. Traditus est itaque Jesus militibus verberandus, et illud sacratissimum corpus pectusque Dei capa ftagella secuerunt, etc. He then says this was done that by His stripes we might be healed (Isa 53:5).P. S.]

[35][This sentence, as well as the whole quotation, and the following passage, is entirely mistranslated in the Edinb. edition: and so he rejects the statement here contained as false. De Wette (on Mat 27:26) as here quoted by Lange (and correctly quoted), ascribes to Paulus of Heidelberg no denial of the fact of scourging asserted by Matthew, but a false interpretation of as expressing an action which occurred at a previous stage according to Joh 19:1. He says: Paulus halt den Bericht des Johannes fr maassgebend und erklrt daher unsere Stella (i.e., Mat 27:26) falsch: nachdem er ihn vorher schon hatte geisseln lassen. The words in italics are quoted from Paulus. Some commentators assume that Jesus was scourged twice: but this is improbable and unnecessary, as the chronological difficulty can be satisfactorily accounted for in the manner proposed by Dr. Lange in the text.P. S.]

[36][The Edinb. translation magnifies the company to 4,606 men! The original has 4600 Mann; the dash being always employed in such cases for bis, to. The number of men constituting a Roman legion varied at different times and according to circumstances from 3,000 to 6,000 or more. Consequently a (spira),or cohort, which was the tenth part of a legion, embraced from 300 to 600 men or more. In Joseph. Bell. Jdg 3:4; Jdg 3:2, of eighteen five are said to contain each 1,000 men, and the others 600. But in Polybius is only the third part of a cohort, a maniple, manipulns. Sec Classical Dictionaries.P. S.]

[37][Not: Charles the Fifth, as the Edinb. translation reads; for he belongs no more to the middle ages, but to the modern age, being a contemporary of the Reformation. Dr. Lange means Frederic II. German emperor of the famous house of Hohenstanfen in Wrtemberg, who conquered Jerusalem, but quarrelled with Pope Gregory ix., was twice excommunicated by him, and deposed by the council of Lyons, and was supposed to be an unbeliever, although he died reconciled to the Church, A. D. 1250.P. S.]

[38][In the original: wider die Kleiderpracht, which the Edinb. edition turns into: upon the clothing of Jesus.P. S.]

[39][Gossner was originally a Roman Catholic priest, and suffered much persecution for his evangelical opinions. P. S.]

[40][In German: Wie ist das volk so verfhrbar! The Edinb. edition turns this again into the opposite meaning: How misleading are the masses. It probably confounded verfhrbar with verfhrerisch. But the connection plainly shows that the Jewish hierarchy are here meant as the Instigators and seducers who led the people astray. The masses never lead, but are generally under the control of a few, as the body is ruled by the head. Hence the vox populi is not always the vox Dei, but, when influenced by political demagogues or apostate priests, it is the vox Diaboli Witness the Crucify Him of the Jews, the popular outcry of the Athenians against Socrates, the mad fury of the French during the reign of terror, etc. Then the people are tamed into a lawless mob with which it would be vain to reason, although it can be intimidated by brute force. Yet even in such cases the voice of the people is overruled for good by an all-wise Providence. So the crucifixion of Jesus became the salvation of the world.P. S.]

[41]Mat 27:32.[This is the proper translation of the Greek verb , which, like the noun a mounted, courier, is of Persian origin, and is a technical term for pressing horses or men into public service by authority Comp. Crit Note on Mat 5:41, p. 118. The escort was under the command of a Roman officer who had official authority for this act according to Roman law. The Authorized Version makes the act falsely appear as an arbitrary assumption of power.P. S.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

“And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest. (12) And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. (13) Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? (14) And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly. (15) Now at that feast the governor was wont to release unto the people a prisoner, whom they would. (16) And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas. (17) Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ? (18) For he knew that for envy they had delivered him. (19) When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him. (20) But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. (21) The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas. (22) Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified. (23) And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified. (24) When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. (25) Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. (26) Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.”

We here enter upon the wonderful scene of Christ’s trial. And here stands the Lord of life and glory, the judge both of quick and dead, before the unjust judge Pilate, to witness a good confession. 1Ti 6:13 . Every incident is of the highest moment to be regarded, and may the Lord, the Holy Ghost, open to both Writer and Reader, the marvellous things which the Evangelist hath here recorded.

The court before which Jesus had stood the night before, was, or should have been, the Sanhedrim, that is, Seventy Elders of Israel; men in whom the spirit of God was, for so was the original appointment of this court. See Num 11:16-17 . But in the time when Jesus stood before it, it appears that this court, was composed of Scribes and Pharisees, whom our Lord (who knew the heart of men) declared to be hypocrites. At the head of this council now presided as High Priest, Caiaphas. A man who had little of the fear of God before his eyes, that in order to curry favor with the Romans, to whom Juda was at this time under tribute, he very freely gave counsel, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people: lest the Romans should come and take away both the place and nation. So that this time-serving man, made no scruple to say, that the life of any individual was of no consequence, if by the sacrifice, the peace of the Romans could be obtained! And though we perfectly well know, that it was God the Holy Ghost prompted this High Priest, as High Priest, to utter these words in a way of prophecy, and in a very different sense from what the unfeeling speaker meant (and a most blessed prophecy it became, for the joy and comfort of the Church in all ages); yet they serve to shew at once the awfulness of his character. See Joh 11:47-53 . compared with Gen 49:10 .

But the power of the Sanhedrim was now, and for a considerable time before had been, abridged, (Josephus, the Jewish historian, saith, that Herod in the beginning of his reign had taken it away,) they were obliged to have recourse to the judgment seat of Pilate, for sentence of death upon the Lord Jesus; for as they told Pilate, it was not lawful for them to put any man to death. Joh 18:31 . Pilate’s conscience, as we perceive in the account here given by the Evangelist, was dreadfully alarmed, at this business. His wife also sent to tell him of her alarms. Luke in his relation of this history saith, that, in order to get rid of it, he sent Christ to Herod. Luk 23:6-7 . And when the Lord was brought back to him again, Pilate tried and tampered with the Chief Priests and Elders all he could, to gain their favor, and yet be spared from the murder of Christ. And when nothing would do, but he must consent to the deed; with all the marks of horror, unable to conceal what passed within, he took water to wash his hands, as if to shew that he bore no part in the cruel transaction: and in the very moment he passed sentence of death on Jesus, proclaimed his innocence. Was there ever an instance in history of such conduct?

It is time, however, to leave the unjust judge, and the awful Sanhedrim to themselves. Our meditation should be wholly directed to the Lord, in those solemn seasons here recorded. For in the history of Jesus, in every minute transaction of his life and death, for the salvation of his people, there is enough to employ our thoughts until we behold him coming in the clouds to judgment. Rev 1:7 . But there is one thought which ariseth out of what is here said by the people, and which is so intimately connected with the view of Jesus, that I would beg the Reader’s patience, while I detain him for offering it. When Pilate said, I am innocent of the blood of this just person, see ye to it: Then answered all the people and said: His blood be upon us and on our children. They said it, no doubt, in a way of defiance: but like the speech of Caiaphas, which the Lord over-ruled to a very different purpose; did not the Lord, here also, answer it in mercy? Are we not told that after the descent of the Holy Ghost, on the day of Pentecost, when Peter charged the men of Israel with having by wicked hands, crucified and slain him, whom God had made both Lord and Christ; they were pricked in the heart, and said unto Peter and unto the rest of the Apostles: men and brethren what shall we do? And do we not read, that a saving work of grace immediately passed upon some of them. And was not then the blood of Christ, though in a very different sense from what they meant, truly upon them? Yea, was not the very first prayer of Jesus on the cross to this purpose, when he said, Father! forgive them, for they know not what they do? And thus between the intercession of Christ and the gifts of God the Holy Ghost there is a beautiful and gracious correspondence. Reader! do not overlook these things. Even the Jerusalem sinners, who embrued their hands in the blood of Christ are made partakers in the blessedness of salvation in his blood. What a thought to encourage every poor conscious sinner. See those scriptures: Joh 6:37-64 ; Act 2:22 to the end.

But while we look at the bright side of this cloud, it is proper to meditate a moment on the reverse. Is not the Jewish nation even at this hour, as a nation reeking under the awful imprecation: His blood be on us and on our children? Lord I would say! Look upon thine ancient people the Jews, and in mercy hasten that long promised day, when the Deliverer shall arise out of Zion to turn away ungodliness from Jacob. Rom 11:26 .

We ought not to overlook the patience and silence of Jesus, under the various provocations shewn to his sacred person, during the process of this part of the trial we have read. In the after circumstances of the Lord’s sufferings, to which these were but the prelude, much shall we have to observe on this account, but for the present, it should not be passed by unnoticed, how the Lamb of God stood surrounded by those wolves of the night, waiting to suck his blood; and yet stood silent and answered nothing. It was predicted of him, that he was oppressed and he was afflicted; yet he opened not his mouth: he was brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. And what a correspondence between the prediction and the event? Isa 53:7 .

But let us prosecute the solemn account. The cloud becomes more and more gloomy. When Pilate had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

11 And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.

Ver. 11. And Jesus stood before the governor ] The best therefore and most innocent may be brought before magistrates, and accused of high treason, which ever was, as Lipsius observeth out of Tacitus, Unicum crimen eorum qui crimine vacabant. Elijah was held the king’s enemy. Jeremiah laid by the heels for a traitor to the State. Paul styled a pest. Luther a trumpet of rebellion. Beza a seedsman of sedition, &c. Christ’s accusers here shamelessly appeal him of matters that were evidently untrue. This Pilate saw, and therefore sought so many ways to deliver him.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

11 14. ] HE IS EXAMINED BY PILATE. Mar 15:2-5 .Luk 23:2-5Luk 23:2-5 .Joh 18:29-38Joh 18:29-38 . Our narrative of the hearing before Pilate is the least circumstantial of the four having however two remarkable additional particulars, Mat 27:19 ; Mat 27:24 . John is the fullest in giving the words of our Lord. Compare the notes there.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

11. ] Before this Pilate had come out and demanded the cause of his being delivered up; the Jews not entering the Prtorium.

The primary accusation against Him seems to have been that He . This is presupposed in the enquiry of this verse.

is not to be rendered as a doubtful answer much less with Theophylact, as meaning, ‘ Thou sayest it, not I :’ but as a strong affirmative . See above on ch. Mat 26:64 .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mat 27:11-26 . Jesus before Pilate (Mar 15:2-15 , Luk 23:2-7 ; Luk 23:13-25 ).

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mat 27:11 . : resumes an interrupted story (Mat 27:2 ). , etc.: Art Thou the King of the Jews? The question reveals the form in which the Sanhedrists presented their accusation. They had translated “Christ” into “King of the Jews” for Pilate’s benefit, so astutely giving a political aspect to what under the other name was only a question of religion, or, as a Roman would view it, superstition. A most unprincipled proceeding, for the confession of Jesus that He was the Christ no more inferred a political animus than their own Messianic expectations. = yes. One is hardly prepared for such a reply to an equivocal question, and there is a temptation to seek escape by taking the words interrogatively = dost thou say so? or evasively, with Theophy. = you say, I make no statement. Explanations such as are given in Joh 18:33-37 were certainly necessary.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 27:11-14

11Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor questioned Him, saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And Jesus said to him, “It is as you say.” 12And while He was being accused by the chief priests and elders, He did not answer. 13Then Pilate said to Him, “Do You not hear how many things they testify against You?” 14And He did not answer him with regard to even a single charge, so the governor was quite amazed.

Mat 27:11 “Are You the King of the Jews” This was the question which implied treason against Rome. It was the political issue that concerned Pilate.

Mat 27:11

NASB, NKJV”It is as you say”

NRSV”You say so”

TEV”So you say”

NJB”It is you who say it”

Jesus’ answer was an enigmatic phrase which implied, “Yes!” but with qualification (cf. Joh 18:33-37), which shows His kingdom was not earthly.

Mat 27:12 “accused” See Luk 23:2.

“He did not answer” This relates to the Messianic prophecy of Isa 53:7. He answered Pilate in private, but would not address the charges in the presence of the Jewish leaders or Herod.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Thou sayest = Thou thy self sayest [it]. A Hebraism.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

11-14.] HE IS EXAMINED BY PILATE. Mar 15:2-5. Luk 23:2-5. Joh 18:29-38. Our narrative of the hearing before Pilate is the least circumstantial of the four-having however two remarkable additional particulars, Mat 27:19; Mat 27:24. John is the fullest in giving the words of our Lord. Compare the notes there.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Mat 27:11. , the King of the Jews) Jesus before Caiaphas confesses Himself to be Christ, before Pilate, King.- , thou sayest) An open and holy confession.[1180] Jesus shows that His subsequent silence would not be from want of freedom of speech, and immediately answers Pilate, after having previously informed the Jews when adjured by Caiaphas. St Mark and St Luke also record the expression, Thou sayest; and this is clearly the sum of all that St John records to have been said by our Lord to Pilate in ch. Joh 18:34; Joh 18:36-37.[1181]

[1180] Cf. 1Ti 4:13.-E. B.

[1181] Mat 27:12. , answered nothing) As the accusers brought forward nothing new, the silence of Jesus was a subsequent confirmation of those things which He had already said.-Harm., p. 547.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Mat 27:11-26

4. JESUS BEFORE PILATE

Mat 27:11-26

11-14 Now Jesus stood before the governor.-Parallel records are found in Mar 15:2-5; Luk 23:3-4; and Joh 18:33-38. It was now probably between 6:30 and 8:30 Friday morning. By the law (Num 19:22) whoever touched any unclean person, among whom the later Jews reckoned Gentiles, was unclean, and unable to celebrate the Passover. (Act 10:28.) The Jews on this account would not go into the castle of Antonia, which was occupied by Pilate; to accommodate them, a sort of court of judgment seat had been prepared outside the walls of the castle, called in Hebrew “Gabbatha,” or the pavement (Joh 19:13), probably a raised space, paved with stones. The seat for Pilate was fixed here and a door leading into the inner hall; Jesus was carried within, and arraigned before the Romans; Pilate came to hear the accusations against Jesus, and after hearing them he went in and examined Jesus. He asked him, “Art thou the King of the Jews?” This qustion Pilate asked after hearing the accusation of the Jews. (Joh 18:28; Joh 18:40.) As the Messiah, Jesus claimed to be King; but his kingdom could not in any way disturb the lawful temporal authorities of the Roman government. The charge made against him rested on this claim, which the priests knew he would not deny. The Jews also falsely added that Jesus had forbidden to pay tribute to Caesar. (Luk 23:2.) Jesus answered Pilate, “Thou sayest.” This meant “thou sayest what I am”; it meant yea, it is so. Jesus then explained to him that his kingdom was “not of this world.” (Joh 18:36.) Pilate seems thereupon to have taken something like a right view of the case, thinking Jesus a teacher of truth, and fond of using royal titles to enhance the dignity of his teaching. Pilate was fully satisfied of the innocency of Jesus. (Joh 18:38.)

And when he was accused by the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.-He made no reply to idle clamors against him; there was true wisdom in the course he pursued. Jesus answered Pilate when questioned and satisfied him of his innocence; but he did not plead for his life against the accusations of the Jews; he saw that there was no use to answer the Jews who were determined to have him put to death. Pilate asked him why he did not reply to the Jews when “they witnessed” against him. Pilate marveled at his manner, so gentle, firm, suffering, meek, so devoid of impatience, anger, haste, or any human infirmity. Pilate could not understand why he did not make reply to the accusations that his own people made against him. Jesus’ silence and lack of fear, his open, ready confession of their main charge that he was a King in the realm of truth were a full and entire refutation. He submitted, as to the will of God, with a truly royal patience. Jesus ignored the many charges that they brought against him. (Mar 15:3.) Jesus knew that Pilate did not believe the charges that the Jews brought against him, hence he was silent. We are not to understand that Jesus appeared in any degree sullen, but that he did not pretend to refute the charges brought against him; he replied readily to all proper questions.

15-18 Now at the feast the governor was wont to release Jesus, because he couldn’t find reason to charge Him with any crime. Further details of this event are found in Mar 15:6-14; Luk 23:13-19; and Joh 18:39-40. Pilate did not understand the silence of Jesus; he was perplexed and at this juncture he learned that Jesus had lived in Galilee which was under the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas. Herod was at Jerusalem at this time hence, Pilate in order to escape from a difficulty, and at the same time pay a mark of respect to Herod, sent Jesus to Herod. (Luk 23:5-12.) This was the first step to Pilate’s fall-a compromise with conscience. After Herod had returned him it was more difficult for Pilate to make his decision. Jesus was silent before Herod, and Herod sent him back to Pilate. Pleased with the mutual compliment, these rulers made a peace contract.

“Now at the feast,” which was the Passover Feast. It was the custom to release some prisoner on the petition of the Jews; this was done during the feast in order to secure popularity and give importance to the visit which Pilate made to Jerusalem. In a conquered country there would always be political prisoners and others who were held in high esteem by the conquered people. To release one of these would be an act of grace especially pleasing to the people. There was “a notable prisoner, called Barabbas.” He was well known for his hold, seditious spirit, and rendered notorious for a particular act of rebellion; his crimes were popular. (Luk 23:19.) He had led a rebellion against the Romans, and in the confusion resulting, had committed murder. He is stamped by inspiration as a “robber.” If the Jews had written Barabbas’ biography, perhaps they would have pronounced a eulogy upon him; but inspiration calls him a robber. Pilate put the question directly to the Jews, “Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?” Pilate saw clearly that every accusation against Jesus was groundless. His first experiment of sending Jesus to Herod had failed; he now proposes a new plan. This was his second compromise with his conscience. He ought at once to have given him his freedom and rebuked the Jews for their false charges against him. The priests went among the people and persuaded the people to vote for Barabbas’ release. “Jesus who is called Christ” is the mildest title that he could use without exciting further prejudice against Jesus. Afterwards to annoy the priest, he gave Jesus the royal title of King of the Jews. Pilate’s error lay in not foreseeing that in giving the choice to the multitude he in a measure lost it himself. “For he knew that for envy they had delivered him up.” The word “envy” in ancient writings implies somewhat more than it does now. It signified all those hostile feelings which are included under the general term “unpopularity.” Fear of his power with the people, jealousy at his purity, his wisdom and miracles, a mean desire to crush a good and great man, with all the wicked, malicious feelings of a fickle multitude are ranked under the word “envy” as used here. John explains what their envy was when he says, “Behold how ye prevail nothing; lo, the world is gone after him.” (Joh 12:19.) Again they said, “If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him.” (Joh 11:48.) We find here that the subjects dictate to their conqueror; the people prefer a murderer to the Son of God. In their blind rage and determination to put Jesus to death the Jews work out the plan of salvation for others-of ruin to themselves.

19-23 And while he was sitting on the judgment-seat.-The seat or throne erected in the open court for judgment is here meant. Pilate had thus far passed in and out before the people in an informal and friendly manner; he now assumes the seat of power, and by the act shows that he proceeds to a regular trial. At this juncture he received word from his wife telling him to “have thou nothing to do with that righteous man.” Pilate’s wife was named Procula; tradition relates that she was led by her dream to become a Christian. She warns her husband, Pilate, the governor, to have nothing to do with the condemnation of Jesus as he is a righteous man. It is probable that Pilate would have heeded this warning had he not already compromised with the enemies of Jesus. His wife added the reason for sending the warning as she had “suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.” Dreams were considered by all the ancient nations as indications of the divine pleasure in difficult cases. Among the Jews it was one mode of revelation. (1Sa 28:6; 1Sa 28:15; Dan 2:1-2.) In the New Testament, the angel of the Lord is said to have appeared in dreams to Joseph. (Mat 1:20; Mat 2:12.) This dream of Pilate’s wife was correct, and Pilate believed it to be a true admonition.

Now the chief priests and the elders persuaded the multitudes that they should ask for Barabbas, and destroy Jesus.- The Jewish rulers understood the intention of Pilate; they saw that he was seeking to release Jesus; they were as determined that he should not do this; therefore they persuaded the multitude to cry for the release of Barabbas. It seems that Pilate had not taken into consideration that he had yielded his right to decide when he put the matter to the Jews as to which they desired him to release. He gave the multitude the right to decide and bound himself to abide by their judgment. Pilate now saw this and was terrified by the consequence of his own compromise, by the admonition of his wife, by the innocence of Jesus, and threatened by the mob with present sedition, and future complaint to the arbitrary tyrant Tiberius, Pilate wavered and yielded. The multitude through the influence of the leader was now ready, and when Pilate asked the question which he should release, they answered at once “Barabbas.” Next, Pilate asked what should be done with “Jesus who is called Christ?” The leaders and multitude were ready and made reply, “Let him be crucified.”

Why, what evil bath he done?-This question was asked of them three times; Pilate was so anxious for the escape of Jesus, yet so intimidated by the dilemma in which he had placed himself that he was ill at ease. He offered another compromise with them, that he would scourge Jesus and let him go; but the passions of the crowd gained impetus by Pilate’s indulgence. “Let him be crucified” was the shout which went up from the multitude which had a few days before shouted Hosanna. Crucifixion was perhaps the punishment due to Barabbas, and the offer of his name may have suggested it. At least the leaders had led the multitude to demand the release of Barabbas and the crucifixion of Jesus.

24-26 So when Pilate saw that he prevailed nothing.-Pilate now makes another appeal to the feelings of the Jews; what follows is not so much a trial of Jesus as it is a battle between Pilate and the Jews. Pilate tried several expedients by which he hoped to avoid the responsibility of doing the right thing, namely, that of releasing Jesus. His expedients were as fol-lows: (1) Sending Jesus to Herod to avoid making a decision himself , (2) summoned not only the rulers, but the people to hear the report from the court of Herod; he declared that Herod agreed with his former declaration that Jesus was in-nocent (Luk 23:13-15); (3) he proposed to scourge Jesus in the hope that the Jews would accept that punishment as a substitution for the penalty of death; (4) to follow his custom of releasing a prisoner at their feast with the hope of releasing Jesus; (5) by attempting to throw all the responsibility on the Jews after pronouncing him innocent; (6) finally after scourging him by bringing him before them while he was still suffering and bleeding from the scourging calculated to excite their pity for him and saying, “Behold, the man!” (Joh 19:5-6.)

Pilate called for a basin of water, and in the presence of the crowd he washed his hands, saying that he was not responsible for the death of Jesus, and placing the responsibility on the Jews. Pilate did everything that he could do to release Jesus but the right thing, which was to declare him innocent and by the authority by which he had enforced his verdict. He was too weak to do this. The Jews washed their hands with water in case of suspected murder to declare their innocence. (Deu 21:6.) Pilate was the judge and was bound either to condemn or pardon Jesus; he attempted to do neither. Certain responsibilities cannot be put away. The Jews replied, “His blood be on us, and on our children.” They said that they would take the responsibility and the penalty it was an awful imprecation, and was fearfully answered. Jesus had said that on that generation should come all the righteous blood shed on the earth. (Mat 23:35.) The Jews blinded by prejudice called down the curse upon themselves. Barabbas was released, “but Jesus he scourged and delivered to be crucified.” He ordered Jesus to be scourged. Scourging increased the pains of that mode of death; it was termed “the horrible scourge” from its severity. The scourge was made of several thongs with a handle; the thongs were made rough with bits of iron or bone, for tearing the flesh, and has been called “a scorpion.” The last argument that Pilate had was given he had left the choice with the people and there was nothing further that he could do but deliver Jesus into the hands of the executioners. This he did. In doing this he gave the sentence that he had tried so hard to avoid giving. We now behold Pilate as a judge who condemned a man whom he knew to be innocent.

In the providence of God we see Jesus condemned to death, while at the same time he is declared by Pilate, Herod, Procula, Judas, the Roman centurion, and one of the thieves on the cross as innocent.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Barabbas or Christ?

Mat 27:11-21

The vacillation of Pilate made him a criminal. Weakness becomes sin. At first he evidently meant to release Jesus, but instead of saying so outright, he strove to bring about His release by indirect means and without committing himself.

First, he sent Him to Herod, Luk 23:17, thinking that a Jew would view favorably the position of a fellow-Jew. Then he sought to touch the springs of pity by the anguish of scourging. Finally, he gave the people the choice between Barabbas and Christ, feeling sure that they must choose the liberation of a lover of men rather than that of an outlaw.

None of these expedients succeeded, and he drifted into the very act which his conscience had condemned from the first. He is a specimen of those weak men who want the right thing to be done, but will not adventure their own interests to get it done. There is no chance of such men coming out right. The one hope for us all is to declare ourselves for the right and true, at once and from the start.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Chapter 85

Our Saviors Mock Trial

And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest. And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly. Now at that feast the governor was wont to release unto the people a prisoner, whom they would. And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas. Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ? For he knew that for envy they had delivered him. When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him. But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas. Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified. And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

(Mat 27:11-26)

Here the Judge of all the earth stood before wicked men to be judged by them! He that shall soon judge the world in righteousness was judged most unrighteously. He that shall one day set upon the throne of judgment with ten thousands of his saints and angels stood as a prisoner before the bar of reprobate men. Never in the pages of history was justice so violently and deliberately abused. The Son of God was denied the rights of justice given to a common thief or murderer. Before one witness was produced to testify against him, before any evidence was weighed, the Lord of glory was beaten, mocked, stripped, and abused by vile, God hating men. Who can comprehend the depths of humiliation endured by the God-man? That one Who, being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God, now made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, ever the death of the cross.

Judas made good on his bargain to betray our Lord. No sooner did he kiss the Savior than the high priests had his hands bound and led him away. These wolves of the night were thirsty, longing to be sucking the blood of the Lamb of God. Their revenge and malice would not allow any delay. They could not sleep until they had his precious, innocent blood. Therefore, they resolved to kill him as soon as possible. But, so that it would not look like downright murder, they formalized it with a mock trial.

The Background

You are familiar with the story. Let me just remind you of the events of that night. Our Redeemer was arrested in the garden and hurried along the road which crosses the brook of Kidron, like David before him, who passed over that brook, weeping as he went. The brook Kidron was that into which all the filth of the temple sacrifices was thrown. Our blessed Savior was led to that black stream, as though he were some foul and filthy thing. He was led into Jerusalem by the sheep-gate, the gate through which the passover lambs were led.

Little did those men understand that they were fulfilling to the very letter those types which God had ordained by the law of Moses. These wicked men led the Lamb of God to slaughter. May the Lord himself sanctify our hearts as we follow our Redeemer through his trial and cruel mockery. First, they led Immanuel to the house of Annas, the ex-high priest, to gratify that bloodthirsty wretch with the sight of his victim. Then, they hurriedly brought the Son of God to the house of Caiaphas, where the members of the Sanhedrim were assembled, to take counsel against the Lord and against his Anointed. Next, they took the Lamb of God through the streets to Pilates judgment hall. There they sought a legal sentence of execution to be pronounced upon Gods Holy One. Pilate sent the bloodthirsty mob to Herod, the governor of Galilee. Finally, the Lord of Glory is returned to Pilates judgment hall, where he is tried, beaten, mocked, and sentenced to die. This is where we find him in the passage before us. Though nothing worthy of bonds or of death could be found in him, our Lord Jesus Christ was condemned to be nailed to a cross and there to hang until he died.

Innocence Proved

It was the intention of these wicked men to make it appear that Jesus Christ was a sinful man, worthy of death. But, by their deeds, God proved his complete innocence, and showed beyond every shadow of doubt that our Lord Jesus Christ is holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners.

Remember, our Lord was about to be offered up as the Lamb of God, a Sacrifice for Sin. The sacrificial lamb must be examined to be sure that it had no blemish. So it was necessary that the Lamb of God be found by those who crucified him to be a Lamb without blemish and without spot. The over-ruling hand of God so ordered the events of his trial that even when his enemies were his judges, they could find no fault and prove nothing against him.

The Son of God was examined on three separate occasions. They took him from one judge to another, from one court to another, seeking some grounds for putting him to death. He was first examined by an ecclesiastical court in the house of Caiaphas the high-priest.

The court here was the Jewish Sanhedrim. They were the most honored and respected men of the nation. They were supposed to be a court of seventy honorable, sober, learned, and faithful men (Num 11:16-17). But it was now reduced to a pack of malicious Scribes and Pharisees. Over this mob of bloodthirsty, self-righteous men, Caiaphas was the head. It was Caiaphas who led the examination. They questioned the Savior about his doctrine and his assertions that he is both the Messiah and God the Son. And they sought false witnesses against him. When he gave answer, they began to mock him, spit on him, and beat him. (Mar 14:61-65).

It was at this point, which they rebelled. These Jews would gladly have received Christ as a savior to deliver them from Roman bondage; but they would not worship him as God and bow to him as Lord. That is still the point of mans rebellion (Luk 14:25-33).

There are multitudes who pretend to honor our Savior as a good, moral man and a good religious teacher, while denying his eternal deity as God the Son. But, surely, if he were not the Son of God, if the Jews had misunderstood his claims, he would have said so here!

Caiaphas

Caiaphas was a self-serving religious leader, the high priest in Israel, who curried favor with the Romans. It was Caiaphas who gave counsel that it was expedient for one man to die for the nation, lest the Romans destroy the whole nation. He considered the sacrifice of a mans life a matter of insignificance, if by the sacrifice Romans were pacified.

We know, of course, that it was God the Holy Spirit who compelled him to speak prophetically (Joh 11:47-53). Yet, his words display clearly the character of the man himself. At the same time, they show us that the time had come that was prophesied in Gen 49:10. The scepter of civil government had now departed from Judah, because Shiloh, the Messiah, had come.

The Sanhedrim was now nothing but an insignificant band of Jewish religious leaders, who had no legitimate authority or power to judge anything. Herod took all authority from them in the beginning of his reign. So they were compelled to seek a death sentence against the Lord Jesus at Pilates judgment hall. This fact they stated plainly in Joh 18:31, saying to Pilate, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death.

Pilate

Still, in their pretense of righteousness, the Jews would not enter Pilates house, lest they should defile themselves on the passover. So Pilate came out on the pavement to them to examine the Lamb of God (Joh 18:28-29). The Jews brought three charges against our Redeemer: (1.) They accused him of refusing to pay tribute to Caesar. (2.) They accused him of stirring up sedition. (3.) They accused him of blasphemy. But they could produce no proof of their charges.

Then Pilate personally examined the Savior. He asked him about his claims as King of the Jews. And he asked the Savior, What is truth? (Joh 18:38). Perhaps he said this in sarcasm. But the Truth was standing before him; and he knew it. Pilate then sent the Lord Jesus to Herod. There again, our Lord was examined; but nothing was found against him. Herod and his soldiers mocked and beat Gods eternal Son, and sent him back to Pilate.

Matthew here describes the scene of our Saviors mock trial before Pilate. Pilate had the immaculate Lamb of God severely beaten, humiliated, mocked, and scourged. He hoped by this means to satisfy the anger of the mob; but it would not do. Finally, the verdict was passed. Immanuel was found innocent of all charges. But these men cared nothing for that. Pilate then presented the Lord Jesus to the crowd proclaiming, Behold Your King (Joh 19:14).

Can you get the picture? There is the bleeding Lamb of God. A crown of thorns is upon his head. A reed is in his hand. A mock robe is on his back. And Pilate says, Behold your King! He is, indeed, the King. But these wicked men despised Gods anointed King. They clamored for his blood, crying, Crucify him! Crucify him! And they assumed full responsibility for the shedding of Immanuels blood, saying, His blood be upon us and upon our children.

It appears that Pilates conscience was alarmed by the things that transpired before him. His wife was alarmed as well. She had a fearful dream concerning the matter. So Pilate tried to reason with the chief priests and elders, hoping to spare himself from murdering the Christ of God. But the Jews could not be pacified. At last, Pilate consented to the will of the Jews. Obviously horrified and unable to conceal the wickedness of ordering the crucifixion of a completely innocent man, he publicly washed his hands, as if to show that he bore no responsibility for what he was about to do. Then, probably as he was drying his hypocritical hands, he pronounced the sentence of death against the Savior and proclaimed his innocence! What a mockery!

Sweet Consolation

Yet, this proof of our Lords innocence ought to be a sweet consolation and comfort for our hearts. We should be deeply thankful that our great Substitute was in all respects proved to be perfect and innocent, that our Surety was pronounced faultless by the very man who ordered his crucifixion.

Who among us can number his sins? We leave undone the things we ought to do and do the things we ought not to do every day of our lives. But here is our comfort. Jesus Christ the righteous stood in our place to pay the debt we owed and fulfill the law we have broken. He fulfilled the law completely. He satisfied all its demands. He accomplished all its requirements. He was the last Adam, who had clean hands and a pure heart, and could therefore enter with boldness into Gods holy hill. He is our Righteousness. In him Gods elect have perfectly fulfilled all the law. The eyes of a holy God beholds us in Christ, clothed with Christs perfect righteousness, and made the righteousness of God in him. For Christs sake, God can now say of the believing sinner, I find no fault in him at all.

Truly, the Son of God, our Substitute, knew no sin. And God compelled those who crucified him to confess his perfect innocence. The Lamb of God was examined publicly and privately, and he was without blemish and without spot. It must be so, because he who undertakes to be a Substitute for sinners must be sinless.

Mercy and Judgment

I cannot avoid directing your attention to the great mercy of our great God and Savior toward men who shed his blood. When Pilate said, I am innocent of the blood of this just person, see ye to it: Then answered all the people and said: His blood be upon us and on our children. The Jews defiantly pronounced Gods judgment upon themselves. Yet, our Savior sent great mercy to many of those very men. In Acts 2, when the enthroned Christ poured out his Spirit on the day of Pentecost, Peter declared that the men of Israel had with wicked hands crucified and slain Jesus of Nazareth, whom God had made both Lord and Christ. When they heard Peters message, they were pricked in the heart, and cried, Men and brethren what shall we do? Upon many of those present, the Lord God performed his great work of grace. And the precious blood of Christ graciously put upon them sprinkled their hearts to the purging of their consciences by the Spirit of God.

The very first word spoken by the Lord Jesus Christ from the cross was for them. He prayed, Father! forgive them, for they know not what they do. In Acts 2 the Lord graciously answered his prayer on their behalf. There is always a perfect and gracious correspondence between the intercession of Christ and the gifts of God the Holy Spirit. Robert Hawker wrote, Even the Jerusalem sinners, who imbrued their hands in the blood of Christ are made partakers in the blessedness of salvation in his blood. That fact should be a great encouragement to sinners everywhere to come to him who has promised, Him that cometh unto me I will in no wise cast out (Joh 6:37-45)

Yet, upon others the Lord God poured out his furious wrath. The Jewish nation is to this day a nation reeking under the judgment of God. The guilt of Immanuels blood is still upon the children of those who crucified him! As it is written, God has mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Salvation is his sovereign prerogative (Rom 9:11-24).

Depravity Displayed

The innocence of Christ had no bearing with the angry mob. They wanted his blood. So the death sentence was passed upon him, proclaiming the guilt and depravity of man. And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required. As Luke tells us, Pilate delivered Jesus to their will (Luk 23:25). The crowd cried, Crucify him! Crucify him! And Pilate, willing to please the crowd, sentenced our Redeemer to die upon the cursed tree.

I am confident that Pilate knew what he was doing. There, standing before him, was the embodiment of meekness, innocence, love, and purity. Pilate tried in vain to wash his hands of the innocent blood. I expect that those bloodstained hands still torment his conscience in hell. But he gave the sentence. Jesus of Nazareth must be nailed to a cross and hung up to die. This was the most unjust and unrighteous sentence ever passed. It was an indescribably cruel sentence. The Lamb of God was sentenced to die a violent, cruel, tormenting death. It was as merciless as it was unjust.

Never was there such a glaring display of the guilt and depravity of the human heart! The Pharisees and the Roman soldiers, Jews and Gentiles, Pilate and Herod were all of one mind in this matter; they hated the Son of God, and determined to murder him. We all had a hand in the crucifixion of Christ. Those men are true representations of humanity. Every rebel sinner continues to cry, Crucify him! Crucify him! Let his blood be upon me and upon my children, by his willful unbelief. Unbelief is but mans continual repetition of this hellish crime! Unbelief declares that Christ our God is a liar (1Jn 5:10), the assertion that he deserved to be crucified, trampling under foot the blood of the Son of God! Unbelief is the relentless cry of mans wicked free-will, Crucify him! Crucify him! We will not have this man to rule over us!

Gods Purpose

Still, we must never forget that, though they knew it not, these men were under the dominion and control of that One whom they sentenced to die. They fulfilled the very words of Holy Scripture, doing no more and no less than was ordained by him whom they executed (Act 4:26-28; Act 13:27-29). By their wicked hands, with all the malice of their wicked will, they did exactly what our Lord had declared they would do (Dan 9:26; Isa 53:1-12). Our Lord’s tormenters used the very words and performed the very deeds he had predicted by his prophets. A casual reading of the 22nd Psalm alone will demonstrate this fact. Those very words used by wicked men in the betrayal, shame, mockery, deceit, and cruelty heaped upon the Lord Jesus were but the fulfillment of the Old Testament Scriptures (See Psalms 22, 40, 69). The Son of God did not die as a helpless victim of circumstances. He did not die because the Jews would not let him be their king! He died by his own, voluntary will, accomplishing the eternal purpose of the triune God, as the Surety and Substitute for his people.

Substitution Portrayed

By the arrangement of divine providence, a substitution was made, portraying the nature of Christs atonement. Pilate released unto them Barabbas. He condemned the innocent and released the guilty. That is a picture of real Substitution. It wonderfully portrays the nature of our Lords sacrifice. The innocent One died in the place of the guilty and the guilty one went free.

Barabbas was a justly condemned man. He was guilty. He was sentenced to die. But the Lord Jesus Christ took his place on the cursed tree. He took Barabbas shame and torment. He died in Barabbas place. He died in Barabbas stead. And Barabbas went free.

That is exactly what the Son of God did for us. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him (2Co 5:21). Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree (Gal 3:13). We were guilty. Christ took our place. He died in our stead under the furious wrath of God. Now we go free!

Who can imagine the depths of our Saviors humiliation? What infinite love is the love of Christ for us! O the blessedness of substitutionary redemption! Because the Son of God was arraigned and condemned before Pilates bar, and before the bar of divine justice, no believer shall ever be arraigned, or condemned, or even charged with sin before the bar of God! As Augustus Toplady wrote

If Thou hast my discharge procured,

And freely in my room endured

The whole of wrath divine,

Payment God cannot twice demand,

First at my bleeding Surety’s hand,

And then again at mine.

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

Jesus: Pilate: Barabbas

Mat 27:11. And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.

Jesus did not look much like a king as he stood before Pilate; there was little enough of the robes of royalty about his simple apparel. Yet even in his humiliation there must have been so much of majesty that even the governor was prompted to ask, “Art thou the King of the Jews?” There was no longer any reason why the King should conceal his true position, so he answered, “Thou sayest.” “It is even as thou sayest, I am the King of the Jews.” The Jews rejected their King: “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” Yet was he their King although they refused to bow before his sceptre of grace and mercy.

Mat 27:12-14. And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly.

This was the time for Jesus to bo dumb, “like a sheep before her shearers.” His silence astonished Pilate, as his speech had before overawed the officers sent to arrest him (Joh 7:45-46). Jesus answered nothing, for he was there as his people’s representative; and though he had not sinned, they were guilty of all that was falsely laid to his charge. He might have cleared himself of every accusation that was brought against him, but that would have left the load of guilt upon those whose place he came to take; so he answered never a word. Such silence was sublime.

Mat 27:15-18. Now at that feast the governor was wont to release unto the people a prisoner, whom they would. And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas. Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ? For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.

Pilate was really anxious to deliver Christ from his cruel enemies; but, like most wicked men, he was a great coward, so he attempted to gain his end by a crafty artifice. He knew that for envy they had delivered him; and he may have hoped that Jesus was so popular among the people that an appeal to the masses would result in a verdict in Christ’s favour, especially as the choice of one to be released lay between “the King of the Jews “and a notoriously wicked man, Barabbas. Surely they would ask for their King to be set at liberty! Pilate little knew the sway the chief priests had over the populace, nor the fickleness of the crowds, whose jubilant cry of “Hosanna! “would so soon be changed to hoarse shouts of “Away with him! Crucify him!”

Mat 27:19. When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.

Here was an unlooked-for witness to the innocence of Christ. “Whether the dream of Pilate’s wife was a divine revelation of Christ’s glory or not, we cannot tell; but the message sent by her to the governor must have made him even more anxious than before to release Jesus.

Mat 27:20-22. But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas. Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.

Now the die is cast, the choice of the multitude is made; Barabbas is preferred before Jesus. The Lord of glory had been sold by Judas for the price of a slave; and now a robber, a murderer, and a leader in sedition, is a greater favourite with the people than the Prince of life. Were there no voices raised in Christ’s favour? Were there none out of all that multitude whose sick he had healed, whose hunger he had satisfied, who would remember him in that day, and ask that he might be spared? No, not one; there were none in the crowd silently sympathising with the Saviour; they all said, “Let him be crucified.”

Mat 27:23. And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.

A blind, unreasoning hate had taken possession of the people. They gave no answer to Pilate’s wondering enquiry, “Why, what evil hath he done? ” for he had done nothing amiss; they only repeated the brutal demand, “Let him be crucified.”

The world’s hatred of Christ is shown in similar fashion today. He has done no evil, no one has suffered harm at his hands, all unite to pronounce him innocent; and yet they practically cry, “Away with him! Crucify him!”

Mat 27:24. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

Ah! Pilate, you need something stronger than water to wash the blood of that just person off your hands. You cannot rid yourself of responsibility by that farce. He who has power to prevent a wrong is guilty of the act if he permits others to do it, even though he does not actually commit it himself.

Pilate joined with all the other witnesses in declaring that Jesus was “just” or “righteous.” He even went so far as to declare, “I find in him no fault at all” (Joh 18:38).

Mat 27:25. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

All the people willingly took upon themselves the guilt of the murder of our dear Lord: “His blood be on us, and on our children.” This fearful imprecation must have been remembered by many when the soldiers of Titus spared neither age nor sex, and the Jewish capital became the veritable Aceldama, the field of blood. That self-imposed curse still rests upon unbelieving Israel; and till she accepts the Messiah whom she then rejected, the brand will remain upon the besotted nation’s brow.

Mat 27:26. Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

The Roman scourging was one of the most terrible punishments to which anyone could be subjected. The Jewish beating with rods was a mild chastisement compared with the brutal flagellation by the imperial lictors; yet even this our Lord endured for our sakes. These were the stripes by which we were healed (1Pe 2:24). Yet the scourging was but the beginning of the awful end: When he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified. Knowing him to be innocent, Pilate first scourged him, and then gave him up to the fury of his fanatical foes.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s The Gospel of the Kingdom

Jesus stood: Mat 10:18, Mat 10:25, Mar 15:2, Luk 23:3, Joh 18:33-36

Thou sayest: Mat 26:25, Mat 26:64, Mar 14:62, Joh 18:37, 1Ti 6:13

Reciprocal: Luk 23:1 – General Luk 23:38 – General Joh 1:49 – the King Act 4:27 – Pontius Pilate

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

7:11

Thou sayest is equivalent to giving an affirmative answer. This conversation is referred to by Paul in 1Ti 6:13 in which it is called “a good confession.” This indicates that the confession required of men may be made in any form of speech that amounts to such a profession of faith.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Mat 27:11. How Jesus stood before the governor. In the judgment hall (Joh 18:28), which the Sanhedrin did not enter for the fear of defilement. Failing to get Pilates consent without inquiry, they charge Jesus with saying, that he himself is Christ a king (Luk 23:2).

Art thou the king of the Jews? They had condemned Him for blasphemy, but they bring a political accusation now, since Pilate would probably not take notice of the religious one (see Joh 18:31).

Thou sayest, i.e., yes. He first inquires in what sense Pilate puts the question, and then explains the nature of His kingdom (Joh 18:34-37). This is implied here. Had Pilate understood it in the political sense, he would not have been so anxious to release Him.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Observe here, 1. That our Saviour readily anwsers Pilate, but refuses to answer the chief priests, and to all that they laid to his charge before Pilate. Pilate asks him, Art thou the king of the Jews? Jesus readily answers, Thou sayest; or, it is as thou sayest. But to all the accusations of the chief priests, and to all that they laid to his charge before Pilate, our Saviour answered never a word: probably for these reasons; because his innocency was such as needed no apology; because their calumnies and accusations were so notoriously false, that they needed no confutation; to show his contempt of death, and to teach us, by his own example, patience and silence, when for his sake we are slandered and traduced.

Learn thence, that although we are not obliged to answer every captious and ensnaring question, nor to refute every slander and false accusation, yet are we bound faithfully thereunto. Our Saviour, as a deaf man, hears not, answers not the calumnies of the chief priests; but when Pilate asks him, Art thou the king of the Jews? or as St. Mark has it, Art thou the Son of the Blessed? Jesus said, I am; though he knew that answer would cost him his life.

Hence the apostle, says That Christ before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession. 1Ti 6:13. Teaching us sometimes to hold our peace when our reputation is concerned; but never to be silent when the honour of God, the glory of his truth, the edification and confirmation of others, may effectually be promoted by our open confession: then must we with Christ give a direct, plain, and sincere answer. For whoever denies him, or any truth of his, knowingly and wilfully, him will Christ deny in the presence of his Father, and before all his holy angels.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Mat 27:11. And Jesus stood before the governor As a prisoner before the judge. Little did the governor imagine, says Bishop Porteus, who it was that then stood before him. Little did he suspect that he himself must one day stand before the tribunal of that very person whom he was then about to judge as a criminal. Observe, reader, we could not have stood before God because of our sins, nor have lifted up our face in his presence, if Christ had not thus been judged and condemned, and thereby made a sin- offering for us. He was arraigned that we might be discharged. For a more full account of our Lords appearance before Pilate, see Joh 18:29, &c., and Luk 23:2, &c. And the governor asked him, Art thou the king of the Jews? From Pilates asking our Lord this question, we must suppose that the priests explained their accusation by telling him that Jesus had travelled continually through the country, and everywhere had given himself out for the Messiah; and that even during his trial before them, he had been so presumptuous as to assume that dignity in open court. Without some information of this kind, the governor would hardly have put such a question to Jesus, no prisoner being obliged to accuse himself. And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest That is, according to the Hebrew idiom, It is as thou sayest. John tells us that our Lord added, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? that is, Dost thou ask this question of thine own accord, because thou thinkest that I have affected regal power, or, dost thou ask it according to the information of the priests, who affirm that I have acknowledged myself to be a king? Jesus undoubtedly knew what had happened, but he spake to the governor after this manner, because, not being present when the priests accused him, he had not heard what they said. Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? dost thou think that I am acquainted with the religious opinions, expectations, and disputes of the Jews? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me, as a seditious person. What hast thou done to merit such a charge? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world. See on Joh 18:35.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

CXXIX.

FIRST STAGE OF THE ROMAN TRIAL. JESUS

BEFORE PILATE FOR THE FIRST TIME.

(Jerusalem. Early Friday morning.)

aMATT. XXVII. 11-14; bMARK XV. 2-5; cLUKE XXIII. 2-5; dJOHN XVIII. 28-38.

dand they themselves entered not into the Praetorium, that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover. [See Joh 12:33, Joh 12:34), but he also gave the details of his trial– Mat 20:18, Mat 20:19, Mar 10:33, Mar 10:34.] c2 And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this man perverting our nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ a king. [The Jews now profess to change their verdict into a charge, they themselves becoming witnesses as to the truth of the matter charged. They say “We found,” thereby asserting that the things which they stated to Pilate were the things for which they had condemned Jesus. Their assertion was utterly false, for the three things which they now mentioned had formed no part whatever of the evidence against Jesus in their trial of him. The first charge, that Jesus was a perverter or seducer of the people, was extremely vague. The second, that he taught to withhold tribute from Csar, was a deliberate falsehood. See Joh 6:15.] d33 Pilate therefore entered again into the Praetorium, and called Jesus, a11 Now Jesus stood before the governor [Jesus is called from the guards who have him in custody and stands alone before Pilate that the governor may investigate his case privately]: b2 And Pilate athe governor [705] asked him, dand said unto him, {asaying,} Art thou the King of the Jews? [The Gospels are unanimous in giving this question as the first words addressed by Pilate to Jesus. The question expresses surprise. There was nothing in the manner or attire of Jesus to suggest a royal claimant. The question was designed to draw Jesus out should he chance to be a fanatical or an unbalanced enthusiast.] And Jesus banswering saith {canswered him and said,} bunto him, Thou sayest. dSayest thou this of thyself, or did others tell it thee concerning me? [Using the Hebrew form of affirmative reply (see Joh 12:19). They objected to his kingly claims ( Mat 21:15, Mat 21:16, Luk 19:38, Luk 19:39), but Jesus shows Pilate that these kingly claims, however distasteful to the Jews, were no offense to or menace against the authority of Rome. Further than this, Jesus did not define his kingdom, for Pilate had no concern in it beyond this. It was sufficient to inform him that it made no use of physical power even for purposes of defense. Such a kingdom could cause no trouble to Rome, and the bare fact stated by Jesus proved that it was indeed such a kingdom.] 37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. [See Joh 19:7, Joh 19:8.] 38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? [This question has been regarded as an earnest inquiry (Chrysostom), the inquiry of one who despaired (Olshausen), a scoffing question (Alford), etc. But it is evident that Pilate asked it intending to investigate the case of Jesus further, but, suddenly concluding that he already knew enough to answer his purpose as a judge, he stifles his curiosity as a human being and proceeds with the trial of Jesus, leaving the question unanswered.] And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, cunto the chief priests and the multitudes, I find no fault in this man. dno crime in [707] him. [The pronoun “I” is emphatic; as if Pilate said, “You, prejudiced fanatics, demand his death, but I, the calm judge, pronounce him innocent.”] b3 And the chief priests accused him of many things. a12 And when he was accused by the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. [When Pilate left the Prtorium to speak with the Jewish rulers, it is evident that Jesus was led out with him, and so stood there in the presence of his accusers.] b4 And a13 Then bPilate again asked him, {asaith unto him,} bsaying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they accuse thee of. aHearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? b5 But Jesus no more answered anything; a14 And he gave him no answer, not even to one word: binsomuch that Pilate athe governor bmarvelled. agreatly. [Pilate was irritated that Jesus did not speak in his own defense. He had already seen enough of our Lord’s wisdom to assure him that it would be an easy matter for him to expose the malicious emptiness of these charges–charges which Pilate himself knew to be false, but about which he had to keep silent, for, being judge, he could not become our Lord’s advocate. Our Lord’s silence was a matter of prophecy ( Isa 53:7). Jesus kept still because to have successfully defended himself would have been to frustrate the purpose for which he came into the world– Joh 12:23-28.] c5 But they were the more urgent, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Judaea, and beginning from Galilee even unto this place. [The Jews cling to their general accusation of sedition, and seek to make the largeness of the territory where Jesus operated overshadow and conceal the smallness of their testimony as to what his operations were.] [708]

[FFG 704-708]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

Mat 27:11-26. Jesus before Pilate (Mar 15:1-15*, Luk 23:1-3; Luk 23:18-27).Mt. follows Mk. closely, but has an additional source of information on which he draws for Pilates wifes dream and Pilates handwashing. This source may also be the origin of the reading Jesus Barabbas (Mat 27:16, Syr. Sin. and Origen), a reading which gives point to Pilates question in Mat 27:17 (Jesus Barabbas or Jesus Messiah?). Such a name would be quite natural. In place of Mk.s information about Barabbas, Mt. simply says he was a notable prisoner; he also makes Pilate anticipate the demand for a release.Jesus who is called Christ (Mat 27:17; Mat 27:22) is a phrase which would be more natural on the lips of an early Christian than on Pilates. The whole narrative intensifies the guilt of the Jews; there is little doubt that Mat 27:25 has been largely responsible for the malignity with which Christian communities and individuals long pursued Jews.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 11

Art thou the King, &c. They had changed the accusation. Pilate, they knew, would pay no attention to the charge of blasphemy which they had brought against Jesus before the Sanhedrim. They, therefore, changed the issue, and accused him now of treasonable designs against the Roman government. John (John 18:33-38) records the Savior’s triumphant defence against this charge, by which defence Pilate was satisfied of his innocence.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

27:11 {2} And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.

(2) Christ holds his peace when he is accused in order that we may not be accused: acknowledging our guiltiness, and at the same time his own innocence.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The trial before Pilate 27:11-26 (cf. Mar 15:2-15; Luk 23:3-25; Joh_18:33 to Joh_19:16)

Pilate was a cruel ruler who made little attempt to understand the Jews whom he hated. [Note: Hoehner, Herod Antipas, pp. 172-83.] He had treated them unfairly and brutally on many occasions, but recently Caesar had rebuked him severely. [Note: Idem, Chronological Aspects . . ., pp. 105-14.] This probably accounts for the fairly docile attitude he displayed toward the Sanhedrin in the Gospel accounts. He wanted to avoid another rebuke from Caesar. However, his relations with the Jews continued to deteriorate until A.D. 39 when Caesar removed him from office and banished him. In the Gospels Pilate appears almost for Jesus, but he was probably favorable to Jesus because he hated the Sanhedrin that opposed Him. Pilate may also have dealt with Jesus as he did because Jesus posed no threat whatsoever to him from his viewpoint. Conviction by both the Sanhedrin and Pilate were necessary to condemn Jesus. These inveterate enemies united against Him. [Note: See also The New Bible Dictionary, 1962 ed., s.v. "Pilate," by D. H. Wheaton.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

The location of this trial is uncertain. It probably took place in Herod’s former palace (cf. Mat 27:2). Another less probable site is the Antonia Fortress. This fortress was the site of Peter’s later imprisonment and miraculous release (Act 12:3-11) and Paul’s defense before the people of Jerusalem and his imprisonment (Act_21:27 to Act_23:30).

Pilate’s question grew out of Jesus’ claim to be Israel’s Messiah (Mat 26:64) that the Sanhedrin undoubtedly reported to Pilate (cf. Mat 2:2). This was a political charge whereas the charge that Caiaphas had brought against Jesus had been religious (Mat 26:61; Mat 26:63). Jesus responded to Pilate’s question with the same affirmative but qualified statement that He had formerly given Judas (Mat 26:25) and the Sanhedrin (Mat 26:64). He was the King of the Jews (cf. Mat 2:2) but not in the way that Pilate would have thought of such a person. Only non-Jews used this title of Jesus. Herod the Great had been the last official king of the Jews, before the Romans had assumed sovereign control of them. Jesus was not a military rebel come to throw off Rome’s yoke violently. Matthew recorded Jesus’ claim to be the Messiah again.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)