Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 27:12
And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.
When he was accused … – To wit, of perverting the nation, and of forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, Luk 23:2, Luk 23:5. Probably this was done in a tumultuous manner and in every variety of form.
He answered nothing – He was conscious of his innocence. He knew that they could not prove these charges. They offered no testimony to prove them, and, in conscious innocence, he was silent.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 12. He answered nothing.] An answer to such accusations was not necessary: they sufficiently confuted themselves.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Mark saith much the same, Mar 15:3-5. These things were before Pilate went out to the people, and told them that he found no fault in him at all, and offered to release Barabbas unto them. Then seemeth to me to follow in order what we have in Luk 23:5-17, in these words: And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place. The constant charge which, we shall observe, was laid upon all the ministers of the gospel from Christs time. Tertullus the Roman advocate thus charged Paul, &c. When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the man were a Galilean. And as soon as he knew that he belonged to Herods jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time. After the death of Herod the Great, who died soon after our Saviour was born, (as we heard before), the sceptre departed from Judah, there were no more kings. The government of Jewry was turned into a tetrarchy, divided into four provinces, each of which had a governor, who was called the tetrarch of that province. You have the division and the names of the tetrarchs, Luk 3:1, where you will find that Herod was tetrarch of Galilee. Our Saviour being taken within the jurisdiction of Pilate, it seemeth not to have been necessary for Pilate to have sent him to Herod, but a compliment to satisfy his curiosity. For, saith Luke, when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him. Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing. And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused him. And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate. And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves. This is now all historical, and hath in it nothing difficult. Christ had spent most of his time in Galilee, (which was Herods tetrarchy), though Herod had not seen him, yet he had heard much of him, and had the curiosity to desire to see him, hoping that our Saviour would have wrought some miracle before him. But he failed in his expectation. He propounds several questions to him. Our Saviour being not before a proper judge, answereth him nothing. So as there was nothing done, only the chief priests and scribes followed him with incessant clamours. Herod and his guard vilify and mock him, put him on a gorgeous robe, and send him back to Pilate. All the effect of this was, Herod was pleased with Pilates compliment, and from that day was reconciled to Pilate, though there had been a former enmity betwixt them; only, as we shall hear hereafter, Herod decreeing nothing against Christ, Pilate made some use of it, in his endeavours to have delivered our Saviour.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders,…. As that he was a perverter of the people, a stirrer of sedition, discord, and rebellion among them; that he taught them not to give tribute to Caesar, and set up himself for a king; all which he had done not in one place only, but throughout all the land of Judea, from Galilee to Jerusalem; see Lu 23:2,
he answered nothing; the things laid to his charge being notoriously false, and known to be so by all the people; and the evidence with which they were supported being so slender, the judge could never receive it; he therefore judged it unnecessary, and not worth a while to return an answer to them: besides, he knew they were bent upon his death, and that, should he set aside these charges, as he easily could, they would invent new ones, and so increase their sin, and their condemnation: but the chief reason of all, of his silence, was, he had the sins of his people to answer for, and the time of his dying for them was now come, and for which he was ready; and therefore would say nothing to remove these false charges, and retard his death.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
12 He answered nothing. If it be asked why the Evangelists say that Christ was silent, while we have just now heard his answer from their mouth, the reason is, that he had a defense at hand, but voluntarily abstained from producing it. And, indeed, what he formerly replied about the kingdom did not arise from a desire to be acquitted, but was only intended to maintain that he was the Redeemer anciently promised,
before whom every knee ought to bow, (Isa 45:23.)
Pilate wondered at this patience; for Christ, by his silence, allowed his innocence to be suspected, when he might easily have refuted frivolous and unfounded calumnies. The integrity of Christ was such that the judge saw it plainly without any defense. But Pilate wished that Christ might not neglect his own cause, and might thus be acquitted without giving offense to many people. And up to this point, the integrity of Pilate is worthy of commendation, because, from a favorable regard to the innocence of Christ, he urges him to defend himself.
But that we may not, like Pilate, wonder at the silence of Christ, as if it had been unreasonable, we must attend to the purpose of God, who determined that his Son—whom he had appointed to be a sacrifice to atone for our sins—should be condemned as guilty in our room, though in himself he was pure. Christ therefore was at that time silent, that he may now be our advocate, and by his intercession may deliver us from condemnation. He was silent, that we may boast that by his grace we are righteous. And thus was fulfilled the prediction of Isaiah, (Isa 53:7,) that he was led as a sheep to the slaughter.
And yet he gave, at the same time, that good confession, which Paul mentions, (1Ti 6:12,) a confession not by words, but by deeds; not that by which he consulted his own advantage, but that by which he obtained deliverance for the whole human race.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(12) He answered nothing.Here, as before in Mat. 26:63, we have to realise the contrast between the vehement clamour of the accusers, the calm, imperturbable, patient silence of the accused, and the wonder of the judge at what was so different from anything that had previously come within the range of his experience.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
‘And when he was accused by the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.’
The prosecutors, and the witnesses for the prosecution then brought their case before Pilate. The responsibility is again laid directly on the Chief Priests and Elders. But to Pilate’s amazement Jesus made absolutely no reply. The more they screamed the louder was Jesus’ silence. It was as though this battered and bound prisoner was looking at His accusers with disdain because He was fully aware that all their accusations were false. He certainly did not give the appearance of being either a fervent insurrectionist, or a truculent wrongdoer. And Pilate who was experienced in such matters, also recognised the weakness of their case. He was fully aware of the kind of people that they were, having almost certainly noted which members of the Sanhedrin were actively present, something which probably told him a great deal. And he was aware that they had not gone to all this trouble against other insurrectionists. But he still could not understand why Jesus said nothing. Before him people were not in the habit of standing there in dignified silence. They usually cringed and pleaded.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
12 And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.
Ver. 12. He answered nothing ] Here the nimble lawyer would have presently argued, as the pope’s legate did at the meeting of the princes at Smalcaldia in Germany. He brought letters from the pope to the elector of Saxony; and because the elector gave him not a present answer, he inferred, Qui tacet consentire videtur. Melancthon being by, made answer, Hoc est sophisticum; est regula iuris, sed non valet inconiecturalibus. Nam dicit, videtur, et argumentum videtur; solvitur per non videtur. a Christ therefore answered nothing, because they alleged nothing but notorious lies, and such as he saw well the governor himself saw through, and therefore tried so many policies to set him free.
a Joh. Manl. loc. com. p. 406.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
12 14. ] This part of the narrative occurs only in Mark besides, but is explained by Luk 23:5 . The charges were, of exciting the people from Galilee to Jerusalem. On the mention of Galilee, Pilate sent Him to Herod , Luk 6:1-49 ; Luk 7:1-50 ; Luk 8:1-56 ; Luk 9:1-62 ; Luk 10:1-42 ; Luk 11:1-54 ; Luk 12:1-59 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 27:12 . he accusations here referred to appear to have been made on the back of Pilate’s first question and Christ’s answer. Mark indicates that they were copious. In Luke the charge is formulated before Pilate begins to interrogate (Mat 23:2 ). The purpose of their statements would be to substantiate the main charge that Jesus claimed to be King of the Jews in a sense hostile to Roman supremacy. What were the materials of proof? Possibly perverse construction of the healing ministry, of the consequent popularity, of Christ’s brusquely independent attitude towards Rabbinism, suggesting a defiant spirit generally. (note use of 1st aorist middle instead of the more usual ). Jesus made no reply to these plausible mendacities, defence vain in such a case.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
of = by. Greek. hupo. App-104. Not the same as in verses: Mat 27:9, Mat 27:21.
nothing. Note the occasions of the Lord’s silence and speech.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
12-14.] This part of the narrative occurs only in Mark besides, but is explained by Luk 23:5. The charges were, of exciting the people from Galilee to Jerusalem. On the mention of Galilee, Pilate sent Him to Herod, Luk 6:1-49; Luk 7:1-50; Luk 8:1-56; Luk 9:1-62; Luk 10:1-42; Luk 11:1-54; Luk 12:1-59.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 27:14, Mat 26:63, Psa 38:13, Psa 38:14, Isa 53:7, Mar 15:3-5, Joh 19:9-11, Act 8:32, 1Pe 2:23
Reciprocal: 1Sa 10:27 – he held his peace Psa 39:2 – I was Psa 69:12 – They Amo 5:13 – the prudent Zec 11:13 – Cast Mat 16:21 – chief priests Mat 26:62 – Answerest Mar 14:61 – he held Act 8:33 – judgment
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
7:12
He answereth nothing. This fulfilled Isa 53:7, “As a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.”
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 27:12. Accused. When they sought to establish their charge.
He answered nothing, as before Caiaphas. An answer would not have convinced them, nor furthered Pilates wish to release Him.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Mat 27:12-14. When he was accused of the chief priests, &c., he answered nothing In consequence of the conversation that took place between Jesus and Pilate, referred to in the preceding note, Pilate was inclined to acquit Jesus, declaring he found in him no fault at all; but the priests were not disconcerted, nor abashed by the public declaration which the governor, in obedience to conscience and truth, made of the prisoners innocence; for they persisted in their accusations with more vehemence than before, affirming that he had attempted to raise a sedition in Galilee; see Luk 23:5. To this heavy charge Jesus answered nothing. Nay, he continued mute, notwithstanding the governor expressly desired him to speak in his own defence, saying, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? Yes, he did hear, and still hears all that is witnessed unjustly against his truth and ways; but he keeps silence because it is the day of his patience, and does not answer as he shortly will, Psa 50:3. In answering nothing to the accusations of the witnesses, Jesus fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah, chap. Isa 53:7. But a conduct so extraordinary, in such circumstances, astonished Pilate exceedingly, for he had good reason to be persuaded of Christs innocence. Indeed, his humble appearance was a sufficient refutation of the charge which the Jews brought against him, and his silence served instead of the most elaborate defence; and possibly he might decline making any public defence, lest the common people, moved by what he must have said, should have asked his release, and prevented his death; in which respect he showed his followers a noble example of courage and submission to the divine will. Besides, the gross falsehood of the accusation, known to the chief priests themselves, and to all the inhabitants of Galilee, rendered any reply needless.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Having responded to the charge against Him, Jesus made no further attempt to defend or clear Himself (cf. Mat 26:63). Pilate could hardly believe that Jesus would not try to defend Himself. Obviously Jesus was not trying to avoid the Cross (cf. Isa 53:7). Such an attitude led Pilate to conclude that Jesus was either foolish or crazy.
Only Luke reported that now Pilate sent Jesus to Herod Antipas for questioning (Luk 23:6-12). Herod then returned Jesus to Pilate.