In the morning (). The ratification meeting after day. See on Mt 26:1-5 for details.

Held a consultation ( ). So text of Westcott and Hort (Vulgate consilium facientes), though they give in the margin. The late and rare word is like the Latin consilium. If is the correct text, the idea would be rather to prepare a concerted plan of action (Gould). But their action was illegal on the night before and they felt the need of this ratification after dawn which is described in Lu 22:66-71, who does not give the illegal night trial.

Bound Jesus ( ). He was bound on his arrest (Joh 18:12) when brought before Annas who sent him on bound to Caiaphas (Joh 18:24) and now he is bound again as he is sent to Pilate (Mark 15:1; Matt 27:2). It is implied that he was unbound while before Annas and then before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

JESUS SENT FOR TRIAL BEFORE PILATE V. 1-6

1) “And straightway in the morning,” (kai euthus proi) “And immediately, without delay, early in the morning,” the next morning, when the morning was come, between 3 a.m. and 6 a.m., Mat 27:1; Luk 22:66; Joh 18:28.

2) “The chief priests held a consultation,” (sunboulion hetoirnasantes hoi archiereis) “The preparing administrative priests (arranging) a council,” held a council, for devious death purposes, and condemnatory and death executing design against Jesus, as prophesied Psa 2:2.

3) “With the elders and scribes and the whole council,” (meta ton presubteron kai grammateon kai holon to sunedrion) “With the elders, and scribes and the whole Sanhedrin council,” with whom they had already held a clandestine meeting the previous night, Mar 14:53.

4) “And bound Jesus,” (desantes ton lesoun) ”Then they bound Jesus,” chained Him as if He were an hardened criminal, shackled Him with chains. The Sanhedrin court having “fixed” their case to present to Pilate, then bound Him to lead Him up to the hall of condemnation, to make Him publicly appear to be a notorious criminal, needing chain restraints.

5) “And carried Him away,” (apenegkan) “They led Him away,” from where He had been detained in prison the latter part of the previous night, Joh 8:28. The Sanhedrin council could not under Roman law execute the death penalty. This is why they sought the approval or consent of Pilate.

6) “And delivered Him to Pilate.” (kai parelokan Pilate) ”And they delivered and gave Him over to Pilate,” the Roman Governor of that province, to appear before Pilate in ”the hall of judgement,” Mat 27:2; Luk 23:1; Joh 18:28. But these religious conspirators would not go in “lest they be defiled,” as the passover was at hand.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES

Mar. 15:1. And the whole council.Even the whole Sanhedrin, which consisted of the three classes just namedchief priests, elders, and scribes (1Ma. 14:28).

Mar. 15:2. Thou sayest it. . This is generally taken as a direct affirmationan idiomatic or courteous Yes; but Prof. Thayer seems to have shewn that it is rather an appeal to the questioners own conscience. Art Thou the King of the Jews? asked Pilate, half in scorn and half in amusement. Dost thou say this? is Christs reply; or, as in Joh. 18:34, Sayest thou this of thyself, or did others tell it thee concerning Me? Bee Expository Times, vol. vi. No. 10, pp. 437439.

Mar. 15:3. But He answered nothing.Omit this clause, imported from Mat. 27:12.

Mar. 15:6. Render: Now at feast-time he was wont to release unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired. For , , A, B read , whom they begged off.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Mar. 15:1-15

(PARALLELS: Mat. 27:1-2; Mat. 27:11-26; Luk. 23:1-7; Luk. 23:13-24; Joh. 18:28 to Joh. 19:16.)

Christ and Pilate: the True King and His counterfeit.The so-called trial of Jesus by the rulers turned entirely on His claim to be Messias; His examination by Pilate turns entirely on His claim to be King. The two claims are indeed one; but the political aspect is distinguishable from the higher one, and it was the Jewish rulers trick to push it exclusively into prominence before Pilate, in the hope that he might see in the claim an incipient insurrection, and might mercilessly stamp it out.

I. The True King at the bar of the apparent ruler (Mar. 15:1-6).Pilate holding Christs life in his hand is the crowning paradox of history and the mystery of self-abasing love. One exercise of the Prisoners will and His chains would have snapped and the governor lain dead on the marble pavement. The two hearings are parallel, and yet contrasted. In each there are two stagesthe self-attestation of Jesus, and the accusations of others; but the order is different. The rulers begin with the witnesses, and, foiled there, fall back on Christs own answer. Pilate, with Roman directness and a touch of contempt for the accusers, goes straight to the point, and first questions Jesus. His question was simply as to our Lords regal pretensions. Thou a king?poor, helpless peasant! A strange specimen of royalty this! How constantly the same blindness is repeated, and the strong things of this world despise the weak, and material power smiles pityingly at the helpless impotence of the principles of Christs gospel, which yet will one day shatter it to fragments, like a potters vessel! There are plenty of Pilates to-day who judge and misjudge the King of Israel. The silence of Jesus in regard to the eager accusations corresponds to His silence before the false witnesses. Christ can afford to let many of His foes alone. Contradictions and confutations keep slanders and heresies above water, which the law of gravitation would dispose of, if they were left alone. Pilates wonder might and should have led him further. It was the little glimmer of light at the far-off end of his cavern, which, travelled towards, might have brought him into free air and broad day. One great part of his crime was neglecting the faint monitions of which he was conscious.

II. The peoples favourite (Mar. 15:7-15).Barabbas means son of the father. His very name is a kind of caricature of the Son of the Blessed, and his character and actions present in gross form the sort of Messias whom the nation really wanted. The popular hero is like a mirror which reflects the popular mind. He echoes the popular voice, a little improved or exaggerated. Jesus had taught what the people did not care to hear, and given blessings which even the recipients soon forgot, and lived a life whose beauty of holiness oppressed and rebuked the common life of men. What chance had truth and goodness and purity against the sort of bravery that slashes with a sword, and is not elevated by inconvenient reach of thought or beauty of character above the mob? Even now, after nineteen centuries of Christs influence have modified the popular ideals, what chance have they? Are the popular heroes of Christian nations saints, teachers, lovers of men, in whom their Christlikeness is the thing venerated? That fatal choice revealed the character of the choosers, both in their hostility and admiration; for excellence hated shews what we ought to be and are not, and grossness or vice admired shews what we would fain be if we dared.A. Maclaren, D.D.

A coward, and what became of him.Fix your eyes on Pilate. An oer close contact with an evil world had ploughed furrows across his face; sensuality had left its impress there. He had come up from Caesarea a little while ago to keep peace during the great annual festival, for the Jews were a turbulent race. He made his headquarters at the castle of Antonia, and doubtless kept well indoors; for he was the best-hated man in all Jerusalem, and deserved it. On the morning of this April day he was awakened early by a beating at his gates. He doubtless arose from his couch with reluctance and muttering maledictions on these troublesome Jews. They had brought a prisoner for trial. Last night, at the conclave of the Sanhedrin, He was accused of blasphemy, of making Himself equal with God. But no Roman magistrate would take cognisance of a theological indictment. So they must needs trump up charges against Him. First, He had perverted the nation. Second, He had forbidden payment of tribute to the emperor. Third, He had proclaimed Himself as a king. Pilate must determine upon this case: there was no escape. And you, friend, must also decide what you will do with Jesus who is called the Christ.

I. Now mark the circumstances which aggravated his cowardice

1. He had heard about Jesus and knew Him. His wonderful work and words and name were in the air. He had had, moreover, an interview with Jesus. He had asked Him, Art thou a king? And Jesus answered, Thou sayest it; but My kingdom is not of this worldI am come to reign in the province of truth. So he knew about Him. What will he do with Him?
2. He had been warned concerning Him. Not only had his conscience rung the alarmas conscience warns us allbut a special admonition had been given him. His wife Procula had dreamed in the waking hours of the morningthe hour when Israel thought all dreams came trueand tradition tells us the dream. She saw a conflagration that consumed homes and temples and palaces, licked up forests, and burned the heavens like a parched scroll, so that nothing could extinguish it. There were cries of the homeless and fear-stricken and dying. Then a lamb appeared, and as it lifted its eyes all sounds were hushed. It mounted the flaming pyre; its side was pierced, blood gushed forth, and the fires were quenched. Then the lamb assumed human form, and the appearance was, as the dreamer said,

Of a Man Divine and passing fair,
And like your august Prisoner there.

Therefore she said, Do no harm to that just Man.

3. Pilates cowardice was aggravated by his attempts at evasion and compromise. He entreated the people, Why, what evil hath He done? He might as well have sung a lullaby to a cyclone. Crucify Him! was the answer. Crucify Him! And then he sent Him to Heroda happy thought. But Herod would not be responsible for the decision of this perplexing case; so he sent the Prisoner back. Pilate must judge Him; so must you and I. Here is this Jesus; and what will he do with Him? A great problem confronts him. He said, I will chastise Him and let Him go. Oh, shame upon him for a Roman magistrate! The Man is either guilty or innocent. If guilty, He should die the death; if innocent, let Him go. Compromise never pays. Nothing is settled until it is settled right. No man nor Church, no pastor nor teacher, can afford to split the difference in spiritual things.

II. But what was the occasion of this mans cowardice?

1. To begin with, he was a trifler. He lived in an age of cynicism; the foundations of religion were broken up. He had mingled with the soldiers at the camp-fire, cracking jokes about the gods and making sport of sacred things. And now, facing this Divine Truth-giver, the irony of his retortWhat is truth?was but the outcome of his pernicious habit. Some of you, perhaps, have been wont to trifle in like manner. But we cannot make light of any serious matter without ultimately paying for it.

2. He had no opinions of his own. He went to the people, to his wife, to the priests, for advice. Oh, man, think for thyself! It behoves us to have convictions of our own. Let us live by them, stand for them, and be willing in their defence, if need be, to die. If ever we are in doubt, we have a sure Counsellor (Jas. 1:5).

3. Another reason for Pilates cowardice was his sycophancy. At all hazards he must be Caesars friend. What was the result? A little while after Tiberius was off the throne and Caligula was on. And Caligula said, Go bring me Pilate; he must answer to certain charges concerning an aqueduct, a Roman standard, and a murder at the altar. And a little later Pilate was an exile and a wanderer.

III. Let us not be too hard upon Pilate, for there may be some moral cowards among us. Let me give you a parting word, the motto of the Guthrie family, Sto pro veritate. Let us stand for the truth, the truth against the world. There is nothing better than that We are all in Pilates place. The Lord Jesus stands in judgment before us. What are you going to do with Him? Will you meet Him with mock heroics, admiration of His manhood and rejection of His Divine claim? Out upon all mere sentimentalism! Let us be logical and sensible. Christ was what He claimed to be, or else an impostor who deserved to die.D. J. Burrell, D.D.

Personal conviction and popular clamour.This Jewish scene, so important in the worlds life, introduces us to a very serious subject, involving moral and religious questionsthe rule or prevalence of the majority. The theory that every man has a voice and vote in the arrangement of things, and that that arrangement shall be according to the opinion which combines the greatest number of those votes or voices, is almost universal. It seems to embody the only principle upon which a decision has any justice, or is binding at all. It encourages activity, free thought, and discussion, and the individual personal interests of us all. And yet we are sorely perplexed about it at times. We feel that the voices of the majority often mean nothing at all, and should have no weightthat is, they are mere empty noise, behind which there is no truth, but only ignorance, or only a half-truth, destructive in its mutilated state. When, then, ought the many voices to prevail?

I. When the responsibility of decision and action is to belong to the many whose voices are heard.If a company of travellers are to choose between certain plans or paths of journeying, and no one person has or is to have the responsibility, and the success or disappointment will not be visited upon any one member, but all are interested and will bear the blame or praise of the future action, then a vote of the entire companionship is taken. Their decision may be wrong in itself, but it is right that it should have been so made. Now in the case of our text it was not so. The multitude had nothing to do with the judging or deciding. It was an individual matter between Pilate and Christ. And so it is with each of us. Every quiet moment of conviction, when we stand face to face with Christ and His pure cross-marked religion, and debate anxiously the question, Shall I decide for or against Him? is a reproduction of the interviews of Pilate and Jesus at the inner judgment-seat. We should decide in a moment for Jesus, if it were not that other voices enter in. They control the sentence, and we bear the responsibility and results of it. Oh, think of it! That empty-tongued crowd of fashion or society, which cries down your single hearts voicethat hard-voiced throng of money-seekers, which shames and silences your warm conviction for the Lordthat false, smooth-toned multitude of unbelievers, which surround you and ply you with their infidel voices and sneers and arguments, and chill your spiritual aspirations,you can never fasten the blame upon them. They will only mock at you when the results come. They will say, It is none of our matter. And it will be true.

II. In a matter of fact, in the testimony of experienceThe more witnesses to a fact of experience that can be brought, the better for the truth, whoever has to decide it. But now turn to this story of Pilate again. What sort of voices did he listen to and allow to prevail? Did they bring the overwhelming weight of experience against him? Was that what controlled and turned his decision? No, he knew that those chief priests cried for crucifixion out of envy. He knew that his own experience of Christ, that his comprehension and appreciation of Him, was something of which this crowd had nothing. They should never have prevailed. If you have felt the truth of Christs love to you only for a momentif you have felt His purity by the side of your sin in one quick instant of repentant experienceif you have once felt His gentle yet complete kingliness by the side of false earthly power,there is a voice of experience within you over which all voices of men who have seen and learnt no such facts should never prevail. Oh, if a mans moral self and Gods Spirit insist upon being heard together, and above all else, it is not obstinacy, but firmness of purpose; it is the strongest condition of man; it is the richest of lifes harmoniesmans voice and Gods voice at one.F. Brooks.

OUTLINES AND COMMENTS ON THE VERSES

Mar. 15:1. Activity in evil.While honest men lay them down in peace and take their rest, suspecting no harm because they mean none, thieves and robbers are up and abroad, spreading their nets for the prey and watching to do mischievously. The devils martyrs, saith Bernard, are more swift in running to hell than we to heaven. How slack are we to do God any service! how backward to suffer anything for Him! And how they, on the other side, can bestir them to serve the devil, and be content to suffer a kind of martyrdom in his service! The way, sure, is broad enough and easy enough that leadeth to destruction; yet so much pains is there taken to find it, that I verily believe half the pains many a man taketh to go to hell, if it had been well bestowed, would have brought him to heaven.Bishop Sanderson.

Jesus delivered to Pilate.What a spectacle was that! The heads of the Jewish nation leading their own Messiah in chains to deliver Him up to a Gentile governor, with the petition that He should be put to death! Shades of the heroes and the prophets, who loved the nation and boasted of it and foretold its glorious fate, the hour of destiny has come, and this is the result! It was an act of national suicide. But was it not more? Was it not the frustration of the purpose and the promise of God? So it certainly appeared to be. Yet He is not mocked. Even through human sin His purpose holds on its way. The Jews brought the Son of God to Pilates judgment-seat, that both Jew and Gentile might unite in condemning Him; for it was part of the work of the Redeemer to expose human sin, and here was to be exhibited the ne plus ultra of wickedness, as the hand of humanity was lifted up against its Maker. And yet that death was to be the life of humanity; and Jesus, standing between Jew and Gentile, was to unite them in the fellowship of a common salvation.J. Stalker, D.D.

Why was Jesus taken to Pilate?The common opinion, that the Romans had deprived the Jews of the power to inflict capital punishment, would seem to be erroneous; for we learn from the Acts that the Sanhedrin put St. Stephen and others to death. The truth probably is, that the Pharisees, who were the chief instigators of our Lords death, were averse to the shedding of Jewish blood by the Sanhedrin, and preferred to throw the odium of His execution upon the Romans. The Sadducees, who took the lead in the persecution of the early Christians, had no such scruples.

Mar. 15:2. Avowal and description of kingship.Never answering the dishonest attack, the Saviour always answered the honest inquiry. Here He explicitly avows that He is a kingthe King, according to the fuller reply recorded by John, of more than Jews; and, according to that account, He intimates His kingship (Joh. 18:36) to be other than worldly royalties, not employing force and fighting men, but that His kingship is the royalty which invests all who can testify the truth, and invests Him as the Truth, as the Great Revealer of God, of duty, of mercy, of hope. There is no sort of kingliness like this.R. Glover.

Mar. 15:3-5. The silence of Jesus proceeds from His owning all our crimes before His Father, His only lawful judge. Concern, passion, fear of death, love of reputation, and desire to be justified, make an accused person speak who has nothing at liberty but his tongue; but even the tongue itself of Christ is not at liberty, being under a kind of confinement from His meekness, His patience, His wisdom, His humility, His obedience, and His quality of victim, which make Him even in love with shame and with the Cross.P. Quesnel.

The silence of Jesus.Much is said, and well said, on the teaching of JesusHis manner and method as a speaker; how independent He was of times and circumstances; and how, in His peasants garb, and by the hillside or the river-shore, He forced the confession from His hearers, Never man spake like this man! He was troubled by no interruption. He was always ready to bear questionings, and no teacher was ever so patient to repeat himself so long as repetition promised anything. But there was the limit. When speech was useless, He was silent. The prudence of Jesus is seen in His keeping silence, and never more so than where He answered no more questions or thrusts. And the governor marvelled greatly. Pilate marvelled because he knew Jesus could speak. He knew the power with which He could plead the cause of truth. He knew the influence He had exerted by His eloquence. He knew these accusations came because of the power which the wonderful Teacher had exerted by His speech. He did not keep dumb because He had no words, nor because He was unused to discussion, nor because He could not bear the presence of these ecclesiastical dignitaries. Discussion and they were familiar to Him; but He had to practise the instructions He had given to His disciples. He had forbidden them to throw pearls where they would find no gold setting; and where there was only talk and no heart, He bade them leave the place and go elsewhere. He had not only taught this, but He had practised it. Many instances you will find which illustrate that so soon as He discovered that the disposition of the people was wrong He retired, and in silence found confidence and strength. And there in Pilates hall, accused and scorned, He who could wake the dead and still the sea, who could blast the unproductive fig tree whose life was expressed only in leaves, and who could open the deaf ear and bid the dumb to speakHe in the hour of mortal peril was silent. There He stoodstill as the stars dropping their crystal lightstill as the grass springs and the blossoms unfoldstill as the subtlest forces of nature speed on their waystill as the footsteps of God, when He visits specially the human soulstill as the spirit goes to the resurrection. The example of Jesus in reference to the time to keep silent must not be lost upon us. We sometimes forget that the world is not wholly ruled by talk, that it is not possible at all times to find an unperverting hearing, and we need the discipline of silence. To Jesus let us go for an example in reference to the times and seasons of silence; and then in the difficult passes of life we shall say our word calmly, solemnly, truthfully, and leave the issues with God, not doubting the fidelity of His providence.Henry Bacon.

Silence under misconception.There still are few, even under the tuition of the example of Christ, who can preserve this supreme silence. It is not altogether easy, even for the wisest and the best, to be serenely contented to be misunderstoodto let their thought quietly grow, their good intention gradually become known of all men, their larger plan, their higher purpose, their prophetic anticipation of the world-age next to come, wait its hour, while they themselves may be regarded as unbelievers, or looked upon as visionaries, or hardly tolerated as dangerous Christian teachers; and they themselves may not expect to live to see the larger good in which some day their thought and toil may find beneficent fruitions. And if silence under misconception is no easy virtue always even for the wisest and the best, it is a spiritual gift not even coveted by the great mass of men and women whom the slightest misunderstanding may irritate into bitter speech and the least provocation cause to bristle up in offensive self-assertion. The millennium can hardly be expected to come even to the best society until men and women shall have mastered more humbly and unselfishly the secret of this personal silence of the Christ. His conduct in this particular seems the more remarkable when we consider what powers of commanding speech He possessed, had He been pleased to exercise them in His own behalf. What a vindication, had He pleased, He might have given of His life as the Son of Man, when the Jews falsely accused Him before Pilate of making Himself a king in Caesars place! What glorious argument of His doctrine He might have spoken when Herod asked Him many questions! What sublime apology for His life as the Divine Servant of men He might have left for disciples to publish to the coming ages after He should have suffered a martyrs death! Yet He chose a kinglier silence for His record, and Heavens approval for His crown. He could wait, He alone of the great powers of our human history, until the glory of the Father which He had from the beginning should be manifested, and in His name all be reconciled.N. Smyth, D.D.

Mar. 15:10. The envy of the chief priests.Christs earthly life was in many respects so unenviable that the thought of envy at first occasions surprise. He had no advantage of wealth or station. His limited successes in preaching the gospel of His kingdom were chiefly among poor and despised classes. How came it, then, that rich and haughty Sadducees envied Him? The truth is, that envy is a passion of blacker face than the mere feeling of disquiet at sight of the worldly successes of others. The heart that is apart from God and unreconciled to Him, lacking a worthy object for its affection, is a prey to unrest. Sometimes it must needs be discontented. And then the sight of spiritual peace and happiness in others awakens that sense of lack and that pain of contrast which we call envy. It may be hardly more than a tinge of feeling, or it may grow to be a dominant and malignant passion. Lord Bacon said: A man that hath no virtue in himself ever envieth virtue in others, for mens minds will either feed upon their own good or upon others evil; and who wanteth the one will prey upon the other; and whoso is out of hope to attain anothers virtue will seek to come at even hand by depressing anothers fortune.

The choice of alternatives.Tinworth has graphically reproduced this scene in clay, and called it The Worlds Choice. He thus treats it not only as an historic but also as a typical fact. It expresses the spirit of the world. Note a few of the many elements in it.

1. Hatred of Rome and a desire to perplex Pilate.
2. Sympathy with the man who had lifted up his hand against the hateful rule of Rome and her representatives.
3. Bitter resentment against Christ for His scathing words in cleansing the Temple, and His daring deeds in scourging unholy traffickers.
4. The infectious influence of raging passion, or the feverish and mad frenzy of a crowd.
5. The felt inconvenience of being in the minority.D. Daivies.

The tragedy of Pilates life.There was nothing to signalise him; he was no bad example of an average Roman governor. In a few months he might have retired from his post, to end his days in the merciful obscurity which has closed over the remains of thousands such as he. But the pathetic tragedy of his life lies in this: that suddenly, by accident (as we speak), without any wish or choice or consent of his own, unasked, unwarned, surprised, he is found to be placed at the very hour and centre of the. sharpest and fiercest crisis that the world has ever seen. The heat of the great battle surges with abrupt vehemence, with furious emphasis, round the spot where he happens to stand. It is the hour of all hours, and he is in the very thick of its awful pressure before he is aware of it, before he can take its measure. Unexpected, uncalculated, the eternal war has swung his waythe war between good and evil, God and devilthe death-struggle for the worlds redemption. Round him the forces of the spiritual strife surge and swell. In a moment he is caught up into them, as into a whirlpoolround and round they eddy, they storm, they howl; they clamour for a decision from hima decision swift, momentous, vital. Yes or no.Canon Scott-Holland.

Mar. 15:12. The parting of the ways.It is very easy and respectable to place Pilate in our thoughts upon a pedestal of infamy; but are we sufficiently alive to the fact that our responsibility is as great? We have to pursue a certain course in regard to Christ. There are two main divergent roads, and only two. We must side with the mob, we must belie our own conscience, as Pilate did; or we must yield Him our allegiance, and crown Him with our love. Yet, of course, there are degrees in partisanship. The relations of men to Christ may be more elaborately described.

1. For example, you may put Christ off. Thousands do that without the slightest thought of dying infidels, and finally and deliberately rejecting the Christian gospel. But, oh, remember postponement is distinct action! For the time being it is final.

2. Or you may patronise Him. You may clothe Him in the fine robe of genteel respect; you may support the institutions of religion that bear His name; you may never speak against Himyou may even speak up for His Church. How high a value, think you, does Christ place upon this kind of support?

3. Or, again, you may sell Christ. You love money. But, it may be, you cannot make money as you have been making it and place Him on the throne of your heart. You are in sight of a big success; you have only to square your conscience and the thing will be done. Oh! face the situation boldly, know distinctly what you are going to do with Jesus which is called Christ!

4. Or, once more, you may boycott Him. In your heart of hearts you acknowledge His claim; yet you never seem to know Christ in society. You never speak of Him, you never honour Him, you never stand up for Him, you treat Him like a poor relation of whom you are ashamed. Now, is not each of these expedients the selection of a way? Is it not the adoption of a party? Is it not enlistment on one side of the great struggle? The most obvious and important lesson from this incident in Pilates history is the impossibility of shirking spiritual responsibilities.R. B. Brindley.

A crisis in Pilates life.Quite apart from that which is at stake, it is a terrible picture of a man, by no means all bad, driven by bold, bad men to do a dreadful deed, a deed from which his heart and his conscience and his honour each in turn recoil, a deed which has made the name of Pontius Pilate stand out in lurid letters as no other name ever named among men stands out, as no other name ever can stand out. It was not, you must notice, the first or the second time that Pilate had been defeated in the attempt to carry out his will by the determination of the Jews. He knew well what they were. His was the famous order which sent into the Holy City the standards of the Roman soldiers with the desecrating image of the emperor; and after one device and another had failed, after he had tried persuasion, and had tried the threat and the shew of violence, they made him withdraw the order. He it was who hung up in the palace of the Roman governor shields inscribed with the names of the Roman deities; but here, great as was the outrage to the Jews, he remained firm, and, had to bear the indignity of a special order from Tiberius to remove them. In both of those cases he was wrong from the first and throughout, and he had to give way,in the one case to submit; in the other, in the case which fills our thoughts to-day, he strove to do what was right, and he had to give way, as before. It is a terrible warning to a weak man in a place of responsibility.Canon G. F. Browne.

Pilates weakness.Poor mockery of a ruler, one has said, set by the Eternal to do right upon the earth and afraid to do it! Told so by his own bosom; strong enough in his legions, and in the truth itself, to have saved the Innocent One and kept his own soul,he could only think of the apparently expedient. Type of the politician of all ages who forgets that only the right is the strong or wise.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 15

Mar. 15:3-5. Silence and self-control.Moltke, the great strategist, was a man of lowly habits and few words. He has been described as a man who can hold his tongue in seven languages I

Mar. 15:10. Envy.Dionysius the tyrant, out of envy, punished Philoxenus the musician because he could sing, and Plato the philosopher because he could dispute, better than himself.

Mar. 15:11-14. A change of national sentiment.Englishmen can very well understand what a change of national sentiment meanswhat it is for a ruler to have the confidence of the nation at one time and lose it at another. When that happens, and is proved to have happened by a general election, there need not be any votersthere seldom are more than a few scores or hundredswho actually change sides, who vote one way one time and the opposite way another. But the party that was dominant at one time, that knew what it wanted and meant to get it, is at another time halfhearted and doubtful; if they will not vote against their old party they perhaps do not care to vote at all, or at any rate they do not care to try to convince others, to gain over those who are doubtful, or to urge to activity those who are indifferent, or still more half-hearted than themselves.W. H. Simcox.

Fickleness of popularity.On July 25th, 1553, Northumberland and Lord Ambrose Dudley were brought in from Cambridge, escorted by Grey and Arundel, with four hundred of the Guards. Detachments of troops were posted all along the streets from Bishopsgate, where the duke would enter, to the Tower, to prevent the mob from tearing him to pieces. It was but twelve days since he had ridden out from that gate in the splendour of his power: he was now assailed from all sides with yells and execrations; bareheaded with cap in hand, he bowed to the crowd as he rode on, as if to win some compassion from them; but so recent a humility could find no favour. His scarlet cloak was plucked from his back; the only sounds which greeted his ears were, Traitor I traitor I Death to the traitor I And he hid his face, sick at heart with shame, and Lord Ambrose at the gate of the Tower was seen to burst into tears.J. A. Eroude.

Inherent weakness of human nature.The poet has said, Nature never did betray the heart that loved her. Can you say that of human nature?

Mar. 15:13. The worlds reception of Christ.It is said of Dr. Robertson, the celebrated historian, that, preaching once in the forenoon, he affirmed, in the words of the ancient heathen, that if perfect virtue were to descend to the earth clothed in a human form, all the world would fall prostrate and worship her. In the afternoon Dr. Erskine, his colleague, remarked, on the contrary, that perfect virtue, in the human nature of the Saviour of mankind, had indeed appeared on the earth; but, instead of being universally worshipped, the general cry of His countrymen was, Crucify Him I crucify Him I

Mar. 15:15. Scourging.We cannot tell what that Roman punishment was; we read about it in the olden books, but men do not understand what they read so much as what they feel. The victim was tied by the hands to a post or standard; he was compelled to assume a stooping position; the knotted thong was in the hands of a Roman executioner, and be administered the punishment largely according to his own will or passion. We have heard of the knout in Russia; in our own land we have the cat, so feared by felons; in the Roman law there was this arrangement for scourging, that men might be humbled as well as punished, that the truth might be extorted from them as well as a penalty inflicted, that they might be brought into lowliness of mind and submissiveness of temper, so that the judge could do with them what he pleased. The hands of Christ were tied to the stake, the flagellum was used upon His naked back; He was scourged by Roman hands.J. Parker, D.D.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

5. JESUS BEFORE PILATE 15:1-20

TEXT 15:1-20

And straightway in the morning the chief priests with the elders and scribes, and the whole council, held a consultation, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him up to Pilate. And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering saith unto him, Thou sayest. And the chief priests accused him of many things. And Pilate asked him, saying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they accuse thee of. But Jesus no more answered anything; insomuch that Pilate marvelled.
Now at the feast he used to release unto them one prisoner, whom they asked of him. And there was one called Barabbas, lying bound with them that had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder. And the multitude went up and began to ask him to do as he was wont to do unto them. And Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? For he perceived that for envy the chief priests had delivered him up. But the chief priests stirred up the multitude, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. And Pilate again answered and said unto them, What then shall I do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? And they cried out again, Crucify him. And Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out exceedingly, Crucify him. And Pilate, wishing to content the multitude, released unto them Barabbas, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.
And the soldiers led him away within the court, which is the Praetorium; and they called together the whole band. And they clothe him with purple, and plaiting a crown of thorns, they put it on him; and they began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews! And they smote his head with a reed, and did spit upon him, and bowing their knees worshipped him, And when they had mocked him, they took off from him the purple, and put on him his garments. And they led him out to crucify him.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 15:1-20

866.

Why were the Jews so anxious to bring Jesus before Pilate?

867.

If they had already condemned Jesus why hold another consultation?

868.

Are we to understand from the little expression the whole council in Mar. 15:1 that the whole council was not present at the first meeting?

869.

Why ask about the Lordship of Jesus?

870.

What did the answer of Jesus mean to Pilate?

871.

Of what did the chief-priests accuse Jesus? (Please remember Jesus is before Pilate not Caiaphas)

872.

Why didnt Jesus give answer to the accusations of the chief priests?

873.

The marvelling of Pilatewas it an ordinary thing for this governor of Judea? Why did he marvel?

874.

What feast was about to be held? Cf. Mar. 15:6.

875.

What purpose was served in releasing a prisoner during the feast?

876.

Please mark how completely Barabbas was guilty of everything of which Jesus was accused.

877.

What interest did the multitude have in the release of a prisoner?

878.

Did Pilate believe Jesus was the actual King of the Jews?

879.

Pilate knew the real motive for the arrest of Jesuswhat is meant by the expression for envy the chief priests had delivered Him up?

880.

What do you imagine the chief-priests would say to the multitude to stir them up?

881.

Cf. Mat. 27:1-2; Mat. 27:11-26. Luk. 23:1-25; Joh. 18:28-40; Joh. 19:1 to get a complete record of all the events. Pilate put forth a real effort to save Jesusindicate three attempts.

882.

What was the great sin of Pilate?

883.

Why scourge Jesus? What was involved?

884.

Where was the trial before Pilate held?

885.

Why call together the band or cohort?

886.

Was it customary to mock prisoners? Who did the mocking?

887.

Discuss the details of His sufferingshow how appropriate the method of mockery was as related to His suffering for us as the King of glory.

COMMENT

Time.Friday morning, April 7, A.D. 30, between five and nine oclock.

Place.The last and formal condemnation of the Sanhedrim, described in Luk. 22:66-71, was probably in their usual council chamber, called Gazith, at the southeast corner of one of the courts of the temple; or else in a hall near the gate Shusan, close by the temple. The trial before Pilate was either in the tower of Antonia, near the temple, or at Herods palace, on the northern brow of Mount Zion.

Parallel Accounts.Mat. 27:1-2; Mat. 27:11-26; Luk. 23:1-25; Joh. 18:28-40; Joh. 19:1.

ORDER OF EVENTS AT CHRISTS TRIAL BEFORE PILATE:

1.

Second session of the Sanhedrim (Mat. 27:1; Mar. 15:1).

2.

First application to Pilate (Joh. 18:28-32).

3.

Formal accusation before Pilate (Mat. 27:11; Mar. 15:1-2).

4.

First colloquy between Christ and Pilate (Joh. 18:33-38; Mar. 15:2.)

5.

Acquittal; further charges; Christs silence (Mat. 27:12-14; Mar. 15:3-5; Luk. 23:4-5).

6.

Case sent to Herod (Luk. 23:6-12).

7.

Before Pilate again. Formal acquittal (Luk. 23:13-16).

8.

Jesus or Barabbas (Mat. 27:15-18; Mar. 15:6-10).

9.

Message of warning from Pilates wife (while people are deciding) (Mat. 27:19).

10.

Barabbas chosen. Cries to Crucify him! (Mat. 27:20-22; Mar. 15:11-13).

11.

Efforts of Pilate to save Jesus (Mat. 27:23; Mar. 15:12-14).

12.

Pilate washes his hands (Mat. 27:24-25).

13.

Sentence of crucifixion (Mar. 15:15; Luk. 23:24-25).

14.

Scourging and mockery (Mat. 27:26-30; Mar. 15:16-19; Joh. 19:1-3).

15.

Further efforts to save Jesus (Joh. 19:4-16).

16.

Led away to be crucified (Mat. 27:31; Mar. 15:20).

Outline.1. The Lord Sent to Pilate. 2. Barabbas or Christ. 3. The Lord Delivered to be Crucified.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE LORD SENT TO PILATE, Mar. 15:1-5.

1.

The Sanhedrim Delivers Jesus. Mar. 15:1; Mat. 27:1; Luk. 23:1; Joh. 18:28.

2.

The King of the Jews. Mar. 15:2; Mat. 27:11.

3.

As a Lamb before his Shearers. Mar. 15:3-5; Mat. 27:11; Joh. 19:9; Isa. 53:7.

II.

BARABBAS OR CHRIST, Mar. 15:6-11.

1.

The Custom of the Feast. Mar. 15:6; Mat. 27:15; Luk. 23:17; Joh. 18:39.

2.

Barabbas the Murderer. Mar. 15:7.

3.

Pilates Offer to Release Christ. Mar. 15:9; Mat. 27:15; Luk. 23:17; Joh. 18:39.

4.

Barabbas Chosen, Mar. 15:11; Mat. 27:20; Act. 3:14.

III.

THE LORD DELIVERED TO BE CRUCIFIED, Mar. 15:12-20.

1.

Pilate Importuned to Crucify Christ, Mar. 15:12-24.

2.

Jesus Scourged. Mar. 15:15 ; Mat. 27:26; Joh. 19:1.

3.

Jesus Mocked. Mar. 15:16-20; Mat. 27:27-32; Luk. 23:26.

INTRODUCTION

Though the Sanhedrim had condemned Jesus to death on the charge of blasphemy, they had no power to carry out the sentence and were compelled to carry their prisoner to Pilate, the Roman governor, to secure his sanction. There they charge him with being a malefactor, and Pilate directs them to take him and judge him themselves. As they cannot inflict a capital punishment they bring the charge of sedition; and Pilate, re-entering the judgment hall, and calling Jesus, examines him as to his Messianic claims. Satisfied that he is innocent, Pilate goes out and affirms that he finds no fault in him. The Jews renewing their accusations, to which Jesus makes no reply, and mentioning Galilee, Pilate sends him to Herod, who was then at Jerusalem; but Jesus refuses to answer his questions, and is sent back to Pilate. The latter now resorts to another expedient. He seats himself upon the judgment-seat, and calling the chief priests and elders, declares to them that neither himself nor Herod had found any fault in him. According to custom, he would release him. But the multitude, beginning to cry that he should release Barabbas, not Jesus, he leaves it to their choice. During the interval, while the people were making their choice, his wife sends a message to him of warning. The people, persuaded by the priests and elders, reject Jesus and choose Barabbas, and Pilate makes several efforts to change their decision. At last he gives orders that Jesus be scourged previous to crucifixion. This was done by the soldiers with mockery and abuse, and Pilate, going forth, again takes Jesus and presents him to the people. The Jews continue to demand his death, but upon the ground that he made himself the Son of God. Terrified at this new charge, Pilate again takes Jesus into the hall to ask him, but receives no answer. Pilate strives earnestly to save him, but is met by the cry that he is Caesars enemy, Yielding to fear, he ascends the tribunal, and, calling for water, washes his hands in token of his innocence, and then gives directions that he be taken away and crucified.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

1.

THE LORD SENT TO PILATE.

Mar. 15:1. In the morning the chief priests held a consultation. This was the meeting of the Sanhedrim described by Luke as held at the dawn, to ratify formally what had been done before with haste and informality. The circumstances under which its members had been convened at the palace of Caiaphas sufficiently show that the legal forms, which they were so scrupulous in observing, had not been complied with. The law forbidding capital trials in the night had been broken; the place of session was unusual, if not illegal; perhaps the attendance, so early after midnight, had not been full. On these accounts it was expedient that a more regular and legal sitting should be held as early in the morning as was possible. For a full account of this meeting see Luk. 22:65-71. Carried him away. While the Sanhedrim had power to try those charged with capital offenses, it had no power to execute the sentence of death. It is generally agreed that from the time Judea became a Roman province the authority to punish capitally had been taken away from the Jewish tribunals. Shortly after the death of Herod the Great, Judea was annexed to the great Roman province of Syria, and governed by deputies called Procurators, the fourth of whom was Valerius Gratus, and the fifth Pontius Pilate, appointed in the thirteenth year of Tiberius. Like his predecessors and successors in that office, he resided commonly at Caesarea, but attended at Jerusalem during the great festivals, in order to preserve the peace.

Mar. 15:2. Pilate asked him. The Jews, carefully suppressing the religious grounds on which they had condemned our Lord, had advanced against him a triple accusation of, (1) seditious agitation; (2) prohibition of the payment of the tribute money; and (3) the assumption of the suspicious title of King of the Jews (Luk. 23:2). This last accusation amounted to a charge of treasonthe greatest crime known to Roman law. Of the three points of accusation, (2) was utterly false; (1) and (3), though in a sense true, were not true in the sense intended. Art thou the King of the Jews? The question is asked because the Jews charged that he made such claims. Pilate may well have been perplexed. Christ had claimed to be King; promulgated laws; organized in the heart of Caesars province the germ of an imperishable kingdom; entered Jerusalem in triumph, hailed by the throng as King of the Jews; and his arrest had been forcibly resisted by one of his followers. These facts a wily priesthood could easily pervert and exaggerate so as to give color to their accusation. Thou sayest. This is not to be taken as a doubtful answer, but as a strong affirmation, The answer of defense of Jesus (Joh. 18:34-38) is that he is King, but that his kingdom is not of this world, therefore (it is inferred) the perversion of the people was not a rebellion that threatened the Roman government. The defense was complete, as Pilate admits; I find no fault in him (Luk. 23:4). This is Pilates first emphatic and unhesitating acquittal (Joh. 18:38).

Mar. 15:3. Chief priests accused him. Pilates public decided acquittal only kindled the fury of his enemies into yet fiercer flame. After all that they had hazarded, was their purpose to be foiled by the intervention of the very Gentiles on whom they had relied for its bitter consummation?Farrar. Of many things. Some are given in Luk. 23:2-5 (see under Mar. 15:2). Answered nothing. He had already explained to Pilate the nature of his kingdom, and satisfied him that he is innocent of sedition; after that he keeps silence. He will answer honest perplexity, but not willful slander.

Mar. 15:5. Pilate marveled. Convinced as Pilate was of the innocence of Christ, he was all the more at a loss to understand the forbearance with which he maintained such sublime silence,Meyer.

II. BARABBAS OR CHRIST.

Mar. 15:6. At that feast he released unto them one prisoner. It was a Greek and Roman custom to release prisoners on birthdays of rulers and festive occasions, a custom still followed by rulers. On the jubilee of her coronation, Queen Victoria ordered the prisons of India to be opened. This custom had been introduced into the subject provinces of the Roman Empire and at the passover a prisoner was released in Jerusalem.

Mar. 15:7. There was one named Barabbas. Matthew says he was a notable prisoner. Barabbas was plainly a ringleader in one of those fierce and fanatic outbreaks against the Roman domination, which fast succeeded one another in the latter days of the Jewish commonwealth. Committed murder. In this particular insurrection blood had been shed, and apparently some Roman soldiers had been killed. Note particularly the Revised Version here. It is remarkable that this man Barabbas was confessedly guilty of the very crime with which the priests and rulers had falsely charged Jesusthat of sedition; and no plainer proof of their hypocrisy could be given to the watchful Pilate than their efforts to release the former and condemn the latter.

Mar. 15:8. The multitude . . . began to desire him. Note the wording in the New Version. The mob of the city, pouring from street and alley in the excited Oriental fashion, came streaming up the avenue to the front of the palace, shouting for this annual gift. The cry was for once welcome to Pilate, for he saw in it a loophole of escape from his disagreeable position.Stalker.

Mar. 15:9. Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? The events may be thus arranged: Pilate presents to the people the twoJesus and Barabbasbetween whom they were to choose. A little interval followed, during which he received his wifes message. He now formally asks the people whom they wished to have released (Mat. 27:21; Mar. 15:9; Luk. 23:16-18). They answer, Barabbas, Pilate, hoping that by changing the form of the question he could obtain an answer more in accordance with his wishes, says What shall I do, then, with Jesus, which is called Christ? (Mat. 27:22; Mar. 15:12). To this they reply, Let him be crucified. His use of the term, the King of the Jews, was probably an attempt to enlist the patriotic feeling of the multitude on the side of the prisoner.

Mar. 15:11. Chief priests moved the people. They dared not openly apprehend him, for fear of the people; but, taking him secretly and surrendering him with all the appendages of a culprit guilty of something, the people are induced to consider him as a deceiver and blasphemer and traitor. Doubtless the friends of Jesus were mostly absent, frightened away by this fearful revolution, or ignorant of what was in progress, since not more than six hours had passed since Jesus was seized, and those hours of darkness.

III. THE LORD DELIVERED TO BE CRUCIFIED.

Mar. 15:12. What . . . then that I shall do unto him. That he did not permanently protect him, rose partly from his character, and partly from his past history as procurator. Morally enervated and lawless, the petty tyrant was incapable of a strong impression of righteous firmness, and besides, he dreaded complaints at Rome from the Jewish authorities, and insurrections of the masses in his local government.Geikie. Do unto him. This is remarkable; since it shows that Pilate made, so to speak, a second offer. He was called upon by the people to release one prisoner only at the festival; but his question implies, that, even after their declared preference of Barabbas, he was willing to leave the fate of the man to their decisionCook.

Mar. 15:13. Cried out again. There had been various outcries of the people; and with this fresh outburst of fury there was the demand for death.

Mar. 15:14. Then Pilate said unto them, Why what evil hath he done? The question attested the judges conviction of the innocence of the accused, but it attested also the cowardice of the judge. We find from Luk. 23:22, that he had recourse to the desperate expedient of suggesting a milder punishment, chastising, i.e., scourging; but the suggestion itself showed his weakness. Pilate sought to satisfy all; the people, by releasing him; the priests and elders, by chastising him; and himself, by delivering him from death. But he satisfied none.

Mar. 15:15. Willing to content the people. Observe the pitiful vacillation of a man, devoid of all principle or conscience of duty. Pilate is willing to release Jesus (Luk. 23:20), and Pilate is also willing to content the people. Heaven and hell strive in his bosom for the mastery and the latter gains the victory.

Mar. 15:16. Led him into the hall called Praetorium. The Praetorium, translated hall of judgment, was the headquarters of the Roman military governor, wherever he happened to be. The whole band. The whole band, or cohort, which was gathered to join in the mockery, was the tenth part of a legion, embracing from there three to six hundred men.

Mar. 15:17. Clothed him in Purple. A kind of round cloak, which was confined on the right shoulder by a clasp, so as to cover the left side of the body, worn by military officers, and called paludamentum. Those of the emperors were purple. This cloak or robe, called by Matthew scarlet, is by Mark called purple. The two colors blend into each other, and the words are interchangeable. Platted a crown of thorns. Made of a plant similar to the cactus. What crown could have been imagined for our King Jesus which should have so exactly suited him as this crown of thorns? He who came to obtain for us the blessing bears what the curse-laden earth brings forth, being made a curse for us.

Mar. 15:18. Hail, king of the Jews. The king of the Jews, the title which he had assumed, and which these soldiers, like their commander, thought supremely ridiculous, as borne by such a person. It has been well observed that, as the Jews especially derided his prophetic claims, so the Romans mocked at his regal pretensions.

Mar. 15:19. Smote him on the head. The blow of the reed would have been too light to inflict much pain upon any other part than the head, and there it would aggravate the pain of the thorns. Spit upon him. As their excitement increased, they spat upon him, following the example of the chief priests (Mar. 14:65). It is remarkable that during the whole of this treatment Christ offered no resistance, and uttered no wordhe who with a glance of his eye could have scathed them into ashes.

Mar. 15:20. Put his own clothes on him. He was thus mocked, not in his own clothes, but in anothers, to signify that he suffered not for his own sin. Led him out. That is, from the city; the place of execution was without the city walls (Heb. 13:12). Quesnel says: He suffered without the gate, in order to show us that we are not to expect sanctification by the sacrifices offered within that city; and that he died, not for the Jews only, but for all mankind. Heb. 13:11-14. After the mocking, and before the royal robes were taken off, we have to insert the account which John gives (Joh. 19:4-5) of Pilates last attempt to rescue the just Man whom he had unjustly condemned. He showed the silent Sufferer in the mock insignia of royalty, as if asking them, Is not this enough? The cries of Crucify him! were but redoubled; and once again the cowardly judge took his place in the official chair, and passed the final sentence.

FACT QUESTIONS 15:1-20

1075.

Please read again the order of events at Christs trial before Pilate.

1076.

What was Pilats first reaction to the charge of the Jews that Jesus was a malefactor?

1077.

Why send Jesus to Herod?

1078.

When did Pilates wife send him a message? What did it say?

1079.

What was terrifying in the charge that Jesus made Himself the Son of God?

1080.

What was the cry that caused Pilate to deliver Jesus to be crucified?

1081.

What laws (name two) were broken in the first meeting of the council?

1082.

When did Pilate begin his rule?

1083.

What was the triple accusation against our Lord? Show how they were false.

1084.

How had the wily priesthood perverted the facts so as to perplex Pilate?

1085.

What was the defense of Jesus that satisfied Pilate that he was innocent? Cf. Joh. 18:34-38.

1086.

Pilates public decided acquittal only kindled the fury of his enemieswhy?

1087.

Some things Jesus would answersome things he would notwhat were they?

1088.

Where had the custom of releasing prisoners originated?

1089.

Give three facts about Barabbas.

1090.

What cry of the multitude was far more welcome to Pilate? Why?

1091.

Why ask the second questionwhat shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called Christ?

1092.

Where were the friends of Jesus? Why were they absent?

1093.

Why didnt Pilate permanently protect Jesus if He was innocent?

1094.

What statement of Pilate shows his cowardice?

1095.

Read Luk. 23:22 and tell what desperate expedient Pilate attempted to use.

1096.

Show how heaven and hell strove in the bosom of Pilatewhich won? Why?

1097.

What is the meaning of Praetoriumwhere was it?how many men joined in the mockery of Jesus?

1098.

What is meant by clothed Him in Purple?was the robe purple or scarlet?

1099.

Show how very appropriate it was for Jesus to wear the crown of thorns.

1100.

What was the estimation of Pilate and the soldiers of the title King of the Jews? Why?

1101.

Why didnt Jesus offer resistance to the ridicule?

1102.

Is there some significance in that Jesus suffered in someone elses clothes?

1103.

What was the final attempt of Pilate to release Him? Describe it in your own words.

SUMMARY

14:5315:15

If Jesus had been arrested on some charge of criminal conduct, and if his trial and sentence had been marked by the due forms of justice, these facts would have detracted somewhat from the force of the evidence of his innocence. But the proceedings connected with his arrest and condemnation by the Sanhedrim, and those by which the sentence of death was procured from Pilate, furnish evidence in favor of his claims. It is only when justice is to be perverted, and the innocent condemned, that men resort to practices so corrupt. Though false witnesses were purposely employed in his trial before the Sanhedrim, and though their testimony when presented was contradictory, still the high priest pretended that it contained evidence of guilt (Mar. 14:57-60). Not willing, however, to rest the case on this testimony, Jesus was then called on to testify in his own case, and though his answer was merely a repetition of what he had claimed for himself from the beginning, on this he was pronounced worthy of death (Mar. 14:61-64). After thus condemning him on a false charge of blasphemy, they went before Pilate with an entirely different charge, that of disloyalty to Caesar, a charge of which they had special reasons to know that he was not guilty (Mar. 15:1-2; comp. Mar. 12:13-17). Pilate was now subjected to the alternative of either vindicating the cause of justice, or giving success to the iniquitous prosecution of Jesus. He knew that the chief priests had accused him through envy (Mar. 15:10), and he openly proclaimed that he could find no evil in his conduct (Mar. 15:14) ; yet, to content the people, he released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus to be crucified (Mar. 15:15). Thus the condemnation and the sentence of Jesus, viewed merely in the light of Marks account, contain unmistakable proofs that they were brought about by the employment of such measures, and such only, as are employed in the condemnation and death of innocent persons. (J. W. McGarvey)

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XV.

(1-14) And the whole council.The words in the Greek are in apposition with the chief priests. We do not know of any other elements in the Council or Sanhedrin than the priests, scribes, and elders, and it is possible that the writer may have added the words in the sense of even the whole Council, as giving the collective word for the body of which the three constituent parts had been already named. On the whole section see Notes on Mat. 27:1-2; Mat. 27:11-23.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 15

THE SILENCE OF JESUS ( Mar 15:1-5 )

15:1-5 Immediately, early in the morning, the chief priests, together with the elders and the experts in the law–that is to say, the whole Sanhedrin–held a consultation. They bound Jesus and took him away and handed him over to Pilate. Pilate asked him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” Jesus answered, “It is you who say so.” The chief priests made many accusations against him. Pilate again questioned him, “Have you no answer to make?” he said. “See how many accusations they have made against you.” Jesus answered nothing further, and Pilate was amazed.

As soon as it was light, the Sanhedrin met to confirm the conclusions they had arrived at during their meeting in the night. They themselves had no power to carry out the death penalty. That had to be imposed by the Roman governor and carried out by the Roman authorities.

It is from Luke that we learn how deep and determined the bitter malice of the Jews was. As we have seen, the charge at which they had arrived was one of blasphemy, of insulting God. But that was not the charge on which they brought Jesus before Pilate. They knew well that Pilate would have had nothing to do with what he would have considered a Jewish religious argument. When they brought Jesus to him they charged him with perverting the people, forbidding them to give tribute to Caesar and calling himself a king ( Luk 23:1-2). They had to evolve a political charge or Pilate would not have listened. They knew the charge was a lie–and so did Pilate.

Pilate asked Jesus, “Are you the King of the Jews?” Jesus gave him a strange answer. he said, “It is you who say so.” Jesus did not say yes or no. What he did say was, “I may have claimed to be the King of the Jews, but you know very well that the interpretation that my accusers are putting on that claim is not my interpretation. I am no political revolutionary. My kingdom is a kingdom of love.” Pirate knew that perfectly well. Pilate went on to question Jesus more, and the Jewish authorities went on to multiply their charges–and Jesus remained completely silent.

There is a time when silence is more eloquent than words, for silence can say things that words can never say.

(i) There is the silence of wondering admiration. It is a compliment for any performance or oration to be greeted with thunderous applause, but it is a still greater compliment for it to be greeted with a hushed silence which knows that applause would be out of place. It is a compliment to be praised or thanked in words, but it is a still greater compliment to receive a look of the eyes which plainly says there are no words to be found.

(ii) There is the silence of contempt. It is possible to greet someone’s statements or arguments or excuses with a silence which shows they are not worth answering. Instead of answering someone’s protestations the listener may turn on his heel and contemptuously leave them be.

(iii) There is the silence of fear. A man may remain silent for no other reason than that he is afraid to speak. The cowardice of his soul may stop him saying the things he knows he ought to say. Fear may gag him into a shameful silence.

(iv) There is the silence of the heart that is hurt. When a person has been really wounded he does not break into protests and recriminations and angry words. The deepest sorrow is a dumb sorrow, which is past anger and past rebuke and past anything that speech can say, and which can only silently look its grief.

(v) There is the silence of tragedy, and that is silent because there is nothing to be said. That was why Jesus was silent. He knew there could be no bridge between himself and the Jewish leaders. He knew that there was nothing in Pilate to which he could ultimately appeal. He knew that the lines of communication were broken. The hatred of the Jews was an iron curtain which no words could penetrate. The cowardice of Pilate in face of the mob was a barrier no words could pierce. It is a terrible thing when a man’s heart is such that even Jesus knows it is hopeless to speak. God save us from that!

THE CHOICE OF THE MOB ( Mar 15:6-15 )

15:6-15 At the time of the Feast, it was the custom for the governor to release to the people a prisoner, whom they were accustomed to choose. There was a man called Barabbas, confined with the revolutionaries, who had committed murder during the insurrection. The crowd approached Pilate’s judgment seat and began to request that he should carry out the customary procedure for them. Pilate answered, “Do you wish me to release to you the King of the Jews?” For he knew that the chief priests had handed him over to him through sheer malice. The chief priests stirred up the mob to demand the release of Barabbas all the more. Pilate again asked them, “What shall I do to the man you call the King of the Jews?” Again they shrieked, “Crucify him!” Pilate said to them, “What harm has he done?” They shrieked the more vehemently, “Crucify him!” Pilate wished to please the mob, and he released Barabbas for them, and, when he had scourged Jesus, he handed him over to them to be crucified.

Of Barabbas we know nothing other than what we read in the gospel story. He was not a thief, he was a brigand. He was no petty pilferer but a bandit, and there must have been a rough audacity about him that appealed to the crowd. Perhaps we may guess what he was. Palestine was filled with insurrections. It was an inflammable land. In particular there was one group of Jews called the Sicarii ( G4607) , which means the dagger-bearers, who were violent, fanatical nationalists. They were pledged to murder and assassination. They carried their daggers beneath their cloaks and used them as they could. It is very likely that Barabbas was a man like that, and, thug though he was, he was a brave man, a patriot according to his lights, and it is understandable that he was popular with the mob.

People have always felt it a mystery that less than a week after the crowd were shouting a welcome when Jesus rode into Jerusalem, they were now shrieking for his crucifixion. There is no real mystery. The reason is quite simply that this was a different crowd. Think of the arrest. It was deliberately secret. True, the disciples fled and must have spread the news, but they could not have known that the Sanhedrin was going to violate its own laws and carry out a travesty of a trial by night. There can have been very few of Jesus’ supporters in that crowd.

Who then were there? Think again. The crowd knew that there was this custom whereby a prisoner was released at the Passover time. It may well be that this was a crowd which had assembled with the deliberate intention of demanding the release of Barabbas. They were in fact a mob of Barabbas’ supporters. When they saw the possibility that Jesus might be released and not Barabbas they went mad. To the chief priests this was a heaven-sent opportunity. Circumstances had played into their hands. They fanned the popular clamour for Barabbas and found it easy, for it was the release of Barabbas that that crowd had come to claim. It was not that the crowd was fickle. It was that it was a different crowd.

Nonetheless, they had a choice to make. Confronted with Jesus and Barabbas, they chose Barabbas.

(i) They chose lawlessness instead of law. They chose the law-breaker instead of Jesus. One of the New Testament words for sin is anomia ( G458) , which means lawlessness. In the human heart there is a streak which resents law, which desires to do as it likes, which wants to smash the confining barriers and kick over the traces and refuse all discipline. There is something of that in every man. Kipling makes the old soldier say in Mandalay:

“Ship me somewheres east of Suez, where the best is like the

worst,

Where there aren’t no Ten Commandments an’ a man can raise a

thirst.”

There are times when most of us wish there were no Ten Commandments. The mob was the representative of men when it chose lawlessness instead of law.

(ii) They chose war instead of peace. they chose the man of blood instead of the Prince of Peace. In almost three thousand years of history there have been less than one hundred and thirty years where there has not been a war raging somewhere. Men in their incredible folly have persisted in trying to settle things by war which settles nothing. The mob were doing what men have so often done when they chose the warrior and rejected the man of peace.

(iii) They chose hatred and violence instead of love. Barabbas and Jesus stood for two different ways. Barabbas stood for the heart of hate, the stab of the dagger, the violence of bitterness. Jesus stood for the way of love. As so often has happened, hate reigned supreme in the hearts of men, and love was rejected. Men insisted on taking their own way to conquest, and refused to see that the only true conquest was the conquest of love.

There can be hidden tragedy in a word. “When he had scourged him” is one word in the Greek. The Roman scourge was a terrible thing. The criminal was bent and bound in such a way that his back was exposed. The scourge was a long leathern thong, studded here and there with sharpened pieces of lead and bits of bone. It literally tore a man’s back to ribbons. Sometimes it tore a man’s eye out. Some men died under it. Some men emerged from the ordeal raving mad. Few retained consciousness through it. That is what they inflicted on Jesus.

THE SOLDIERS’ MOCKERY ( Mar 15:16-20 )

15:16-20 The soldiers led Jesus away into the hall, which is the Praetorium, and they called together the whole company. They clad him in a purple robe, and they plaited a crown of thorns and put it on him, and they began to salute him, “Hail! King of the Jews!” And they struck his head with a reed, and they spat on him, and they knelt down before him and worshipped him. And after they had made sport of him, they took off the purple robe, and clad him in his own clothes. And they led him away to crucify him.

The Roman ritual of condemnation was fixed. The judge said Illum duci ad crucem placet), “The sentence is that this man should be taken to a cross.” Then he turned to the guard and said, I, miles, expedi crucem, “Go, soldier, and prepare the cross.” It was when the cross was being prepared that Jesus was in the hands of the soldiers. The Praetorium was the residence of the governor, his headquarters, and the soldiers involved would be the headquarters cohort of the guard. We would do well to remember that Jesus had already undergone the agony of scourging before this horse-play of the soldiers began.

It may well be that of all that happened to him this hurt Jesus least. The actions of the Jews had been venomous with hatred. The consent of Pilate had been a cowardly evasion of responsibility. There was cruelty in the action of the soldiers but no malice. To them Jesus was only another man for a cross, and they carried out their barrack-room pantomime of royalty and worship, not with any malice, but as a coarse jest.

It was the beginning of much mockery to come. Always the Christian was liable to be regarded as a jest. Scribbled on the walls of Pompeii, whose walls are still chalked with coarse jests to-day, there is a picture of a Christian kneeling before an ass and below it is scrawled the words, “Anaximenes worships his God.” If ever people make a jest of our Christianity, it will help to remember that they did it to Jesus in a way that is worse than anything likely to happen to us.

THE CROSS ( Mar 15:21-28 )

15:21-28 And they impressed into service a man called Simon of Cyrene, who was passing by, on his way in from the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, and they made him carry his Cross. So they brought him to the place Golgotha, which means the place of a skull. They offered him wine mingled with myrrh, but he would not take it. They crucified him. And they divided out his garments, throwing dice for them to decide who should take what. It was nine o’clock in the morning when they crucified him. And the inscription of the charge against him was written on the Cross–“The King of the Jews.” With him they crucified two brigands, one on his right hand and one on his left.

The routine of crucifixion did not alter. When the cross was prepared the criminal had himself to carry it to the place of execution. He was placed in the middle of a hollow square of four soldiers. In front marched a soldier carrying a board stating the crime of which the prisoner was guilty. The board was afterwards affixed to the cross. They took not the shortest but the longest way to the place of execution. They followed every possible street and lane so that as many as possible should see and take warning. When they reached the place of crucifixion, the cross was laid flat on the ground. The prisoner was stretched upon it and his hands nailed to it. The feet were not nailed but only loosely bound. Between the prisoner’s legs projected a ledge of wood called the saddle, to take his weight when the cross was raised upright–otherwise the nails would have torn through the flesh of the hands. The cross was then lifted upright and set in its socket–and the criminal was left to die. The cross was not tall. It was shaped like the letter T, and had no top piece at all. Sometimes prisoners hung for as long as a week, slowly dying of hunger and of thirst, suffering sometimes to the point of actual madness.

This must have been a grim day for Simon of Cyrene. Palestine was an occupied country and any man might be impressed into the Roman service for any task. The sign of impressment was a tap on the shoulder with the flat of a Roman spear. Simon was from Cyrene in Africa. No doubt he had come from that far off land for the Passover. No doubt he had scraped and saved for many years in order to come. No doubt he was gratifying the ambition of a lifetime to eat one Passover in Jerusalem. Then this happened to him.

At the moment Simon must have bitterly resented it. He must have hated the Romans, and hated this criminal whose cross he was being forced to carry. But we may legitimately speculate what happened to Simon. It may be that it was his intention when he got to Golgotha to fling the cross down on the ground and hasten as quickly as he could from the scene. But perhaps it did not turn out that way. Perhaps he lingered on because something about Jesus fascinated him.

He is described as the father of Alexander and Rufus. The people for whom the gospel was written must have been meant to recognize him by this description. It is most likely that Mark’s gospel was first written for the Church at Rome. Now let us turn to Paul’s letter to Rome and read Rom 16:13. “Greet Rufus, eminent in the Lord, also his mother and mine.” Rufus was so choice a Christian that he was eminent in the Lord. The mother of Rufus was so dear to Paul that he could call her his own mother. Things must have happened to Simon on Golgotha.

Now turn to Act 13:1. There is a list of the men of Antioch who sent Paul and Barnabas out on that epoch-making first mission to the Gentiles. The name of one is Simeon that was called Niger. Simeon is another form of Simon. Niger was the regular name for a man of swarthy skin who came from Africa, and Cyrene is in Africa. Here it may well be that we are meeting Simon again. Maybe Simon’s experience on the way to Golgotha bound his heart forever to Jesus. Maybe it made him a Christian. Maybe in the after days he was a leader in Antioch and instrumental in the first mission to the Gentiles. Maybe it was because Simon was compelled to carry the Cross of Jesus that the first mission to the Gentiles took place. That would mean that we are Christians because one day a Passover pilgrim from Cyrene, to his bitter resentment at the moment, was impressed by a nameless Roman officer to carry his cross for Jesus.

They offered Jesus drugged wine and he would not drink it. A company of pious and merciful women in Jerusalem came to every crucifixion and gave the criminals a drink of drugged wine to ease the terrible pain. They offered this to Jesus–and he refused it. When Dr. Johnson was ill with his last illness he asked his doctor to tell him honestly if he could recover. The doctor said he could not without a miracle. “Then,” said Johnson, “I will take no more physic, not even opiates, for I have prayed that I may render up my soul to God unclouded.” Jesus was resolved to taste death at its bitterest and to go to God with open eyes.

The soldiers diced for his clothes. We have seen how the prisoner was marched to the place of crucifixion amid the four soldiers. These soldiers had as their perquisite the clothes of the criminal. Now a Jew wore five articles of clothing–the inner robe, the outer robe, the sandals, the girdle and the turban. When the four lesser things had been assigned, that left the great outer robe. It would have been useless to cut it up, and so the soldiers gambled for it in the shadow of the Cross.

Jesus was crucified between two thieves. It was a symbol of his whole life that even at the end he companied with sinners.

THE LIMITLESS LOVE ( Mar 15:29-32 )

15:29-32 Those who were passing by hurled their insults at him, wagging their heads at him. “Aha!” they said, “you who are going to pull down the Temple and build it in three days, come down from the Cross and save yourself!” Even so the chief priests jested with each other, with the experts in the law. “He saved others,” they said, “He cannot save himself. Let this Anointed One of God, this King of Israel, come down from the Cross, so that we may see it and believe.” And those who were crucified with him flung their taunts at him.

The Jewish leaders flung one last challenge at Jesus. “Come down from the Cross,” they said, “and we will believe in you.” It was precisely the wrong challenge. As General Booth said long ago, “It is because Jesus did not come down from the Cross that we believe in him.” The death of Jesus was absolutely necessary and the reason was this. Jesus came to tell men of the love of God; more, he was himself the incarnate love of God. If he had refused the Cross or if in the end he had come down from the Cross, it would have meant that there was a limit to God’s love, that there was something which that love was not prepared to suffer for men, that there was a line beyond which it would not go. But, Jesus went the whole way and died on the Cross and this means that there is literally no limit to God’s love, that there is nothing in all the universe which that love is not prepared to suffer for men, that there is nothing, not even death on a cross, which it will refuse to bear for men.

When we look at the Cross, Jesus is saying to us, “God loves you like that, with a love that is limitless, a love that will bear every suffering earth has to offer.”

TRAGEDY AND TRIUMPH ( Mar 15:33-41 )

15:33-41 When it was twelve o’clock midday, there came a darkness over the whole earth, and it lasted until three o’clock in the afternoon. And at three o’clock Jesus cried with a great voice, “Eloi, Eloi lama sabachthani?” which means, “My God! My God! Why have you abandoned me?” When certain of the bystanders heard it, they said, “See! He is calling for Elijah!” Someone ran and soaked a sponge in vinegar and gave him a drink. “Let be!” he said, “till we see if Elijah is going to come and take him down.” Jesus uttered a great shout–and died. And the veil of the Temple was rent in two from top to bottom. When the centurion who was standing opposite him saw that he died like this, he said, “Truly this man was the Son of God.” There were some women watching from a distance, amongst whom were Mary of Magdala, and Mary the mother of James the little and of Joses, and Salome. They had accompanied him in Galilee and had attended to his needs. And there were many others who had come up with him to Jerusalem.

Here comes the last scene of all, a scene so terrible that the sky was unnaturally darkened and it seemed that even nature could not bear to look upon what was happening. Let us look at the various people in this scene.

(i) There was Jesus. Two things Jesus said.

(a) He uttered the terrible cry, “My God! My God! Why have you abandoned me?” There is a mystery behind that cry which we cannot penetrate. Maybe it was like this. Jesus had taken this life of ours upon him. He had done our work and faced our temptations and borne our trials. He had suffered all that life could bring. He had known the failure of friends, the hatred of foes, the malice of enemies. He had known the most searing pain that life could offer. Up to this moment Jesus had gone through every experience of life except one–he had never known the consequence of sin. Now if there is one thing sin does, it separates us from God. It puts between us and God a barrier like an unscalable wall. That was the one human experience through which Jesus had never passed, because he was without sin.

It may be that at this moment that experience came upon him–not because he had sinned, but because in order to be identified completely with our humanity he had to go through it. In this terrible, grim, bleak moment Jesus really and truly identified himself with the sin of man. Here we have the divine paradox–Jesus knew what it was to be a sinner. And this experience must have been doubly agonizing for Jesus, because he had never known what it was to be separated by this barrier from God.

That is why he can understand our situation so well. That is why we need never fear to go to him when sin cuts us off from God. Because he has gone through it, he can help others who are going through it. There is no depth of human experience which Christ has not plumbed.

(b) There was the great shout. Both Matthew ( Mat 27:50) and Luke ( Luk 23:46) tell of it. John does not mention the shout but he tells us that Jesus died having said, “It is finished.” ( Joh 19:30.) In the original that would be one word; and that one word was the great shout. “Finished!” Jesus died with the cry of triumph on his lips, his task accomplished, his work completed, his victory won. After the terrible dark there came the light again, and he went home to God a victor triumphant.

(ii) There was the bystander who wished to see if Elijah would come. He had a kind of morbid curiosity in the face of the Cross. The whole terrible scene did not move him to awe or reverence or even pity. He wanted to experiment while Jesus died.

(iii) There was the centurion. A hard-bitten Roman soldier, he was the equivalent of a regimental sergeant-major. He had fought in many a campaign and he had seen many a man die. But he had never seen a man die like this and he was sure that Jesus was the Son of God. If Jesus had lived on and taught and healed he might have attracted many, but it is the Cross which speaks straight to the hearts of men.

(iv) There were the women in the distance. They were bewildered, heart-broken, drenched in sorrow–but they were there. They loved so much that they could not leave him. Love clings to Christ even when the intellect cannot understand. It is only love which can give us a hold on Christ that even the most bewildering experiences can not break.

There is one other thing to note. “The curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.” This was the curtain which shut off the Holy of Holies, into which no man might go. Symbolically that tells us two things.

(a) The way to God was now wide open. Into the Holy of Holies only the High Priest could go, and he only once a year on the day of Atonement. But now, the curtain was torn and the way to God was wide open to every man.

(b) Within the Holy of Holies dwelt the very essence of God. Now with the death of Jesus the curtain which hid God was torn and men could see him face to face. No longer was God hidden. No longer need men guess and grope. Men could look at Jesus and say, “That is what God is like. God loves me like that.”

THE MAN WHO GAVE JESUS A TOMB ( Mar 15:42-47 )

15:42-47 When it was now evening, since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathaea, a respected member of the council, and a man who was himself waiting for the Kingdom of God, ventured to go to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Pilate was amazed that he was already dead. He summoned the centurion, and asked if he had been long dead. And when he had learned the facts from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph. And Joseph bought fine linen, and be took him down from the Cross and wrapped him in the linen, and put him in a tomb which had been hewn out of rock, and he rolled a stone against the door of the tomb. And Mary of Magdala and Mary the mother of Joses saw where he had been laid.

Jesus died at three o’clock on the Friday afternoon and the next day was the Sabbath. We have already seen that the new day started at 6 p.m. Therefore when Jesus died, it was already the time of preparation for the Sabbath, and there was very little time to waste, for after 6 p.m. the Sabbath law would operate and no work could be done.

Joseph of Arimathaea acted quickly. It frequently happened that the bodies of criminals were never buried at all, but were simply taken down and left for the vultures and the scavenging wild dogs to deal with. In fact it has been suggested that Golgotha may have been called the place of a skull because it was littered with skulls from previous crucifixions. Joseph went to Pilate. It often happened that criminals hung for days on their crosses before they died, and Pilate was amazed that Jesus was dead only six hours after he had been crucified. But when he had checked the facts with the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph.

Joseph is a curious study.

(i) It may well be that it is from Joseph that all the information came about the trial before the Sanhedrin. Certainly none of the disciples was there. The information must have come from some member of the Sanhedrin, and it is probable that Joseph was the one. If that is so he had a very real share in the writing of the gospel story.

(ii) There is a certain tragedy about Joseph. He was a member of the Sanhedrin and yet we have no hint that he spoke one word in Jesus’ favour or intervened in any way on his behalf. Joseph is the man who gave Jesus a tomb when he was dead but was silent when he was alive. It is one of the commonest tragedies of life that we keep our wreaths for people’s graves and our praises until they are dead. It would the infinitely better to give them some of these flowers and some of these words of gratitude when they are still alive.

(iii) But we cannot blame Joseph overmuch, for he was another of those people for whom the Cross did what not even the life of Jesus could do. When he had seen Jesus alive, he had felt his attraction but had gone no further. But when he saw Jesus die–and he must have been present at the crucifixion–his heart was broken in love. First the centurion, then Joseph–it is an amazing thing how soon Jesus’ words came true that when he was lifted up from the earth he would draw all men to himself. ( Joh 12:32.)

-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)

Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible

For explanation of this chapter, we refer generally to the notes on Matthew 27.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And immediately in the morning the chief priests with the elders and scribes and the whole council, held a consultation and bound Jesus and carried him away and delivered him up to Pilate.’

This parallels Jesus original bringing before the High Priest in Mar 14:53. Once daybreak came the whole Sanhedrin was called together officially, and after discussion and confirmation of what had happened during the night, followed by a guilty verdict, Jesus was handed over to Roman justice. Detail of the discussion is given in Luk 22:66-71. It reached the same conclusion, on a similar basis, as the examination above. But they did not want to deal with Him themselves as they wanted Him convicted on a criminal charge not a charge of blasphemy, and they were aware that the latter charge, and an attempt to carry out a stoning, might fail because of public feeling and the required twenty four hour delay.

‘The whole council.’ There were seventy one members in the Sanhedrin consisting of chief priests, lay elders and scribes. Word would have gone out to those who were not already present to gather for an official council to deal with the matter of Jesus Who had been arrested. Whether they were all there we do not know. Possibly those who would favour Jesus had been ‘unable to be found’.

The impression is given of a quick, cursory meeting. As it was the morning after Passover night no one would want to be detained too long. And all would be assured that the prisoner had been given a fair hearing during the night, and would hear witnesses to His blasphemous statements which ‘they themselves had heard’ which would agree together. Then Luke tells us that they put the same questions themselves. Was He the Son of God? And when He confirmed it they clearly felt that they need look into it no further. Furthermore as the man was to be passed on to Pilate and not sentenced by them a thorough examination might not have been felt so necessary. They could leave that to Pilate. All they were called on to consent to was that the man deserved to be tried by Pilate.

‘Bound Jesus.’ He was treated like a criminal. That was how they wanted Pilate to see Him, a desperate man whose freedom needed to be curtailed.

‘Delivered Him up to Pilate.’ There must have been discussion between the parties earlier for this to be able to happen. The main charge they made against Him was apparent from Pilate’s subsequent question to Jesus. The charge was that He was claiming to be the expected, troublesome, King of the Jews, the Messiah. Compare Luk 23:2. Pilate was the Procurator of Judea from 26-36 AD. He would normally reside at Caesarea but would be in Jerusalem over the feast to keep an eye on the situation for he was aware that at such a time serious trouble could arise.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

‘And immediately in the morning, a council having formed, the Chief Priests, with the Elders and Scribes and the whole Sanhedrin, having bound Jesus, carried Him away and delivered Him up to Pilate.’

This verse is transitional between the previous examinations and the one that would now take place before Pilate. It reminds us that the whole Sanhedrin of the Jews were responsible for delivering Jesus up to Pilate, bound like a violent criminal, having passed their official verdict against Him.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Roman Justice (15:1-20).

Mark’s concern in this narrative is to bring out that there was not really any serious political charge against Jesus, and that that was recognised by the Roman governor, with the result that when he allowed Him to be crucified it was only at the behest of the Jewish leaders and an enraged crowd in order to keep the peace. In essence, says Mark, His conviction was really on a charge of blasphemy, of claiming to be a unique heavenly figure Who would sit at God’s right hand and not for any political reason. In other words Jesus was condemned for being what Mark has all along shown Him to be.

Pilate did not like the Jews, nor did he like making concessions to them as he had proved rather cruelly in the past. But he was wary of them and their sometime influence in Rome and knew he had to tread carefully. The description of him as ‘inflexible, merciless and obstinate’ was a Jewish viewpoint but had some truth in it. He was quite ready to shed blood to have his way. He was a typical Roman procurator, a military man exalted above his rank as a demonstration of favour. But that he had some idea of justice comes out in his dealings with Jesus. That was his job, although it was not sufficient to make him stand firm for justice at cost to himself.

It will be noted that Mark tells us almost nothing about the trial itself. Possibly he did not have access to the details. He covers it briefly in Mar 15:2-5. And even there the emphasis is on the accusations of the Chief Priests. We can in fact be sure that there was a good deal more to it than we have here, or even in the other Gospels, for Pilate would know that he was accountable for what happened, and that a record would be kept. What Mark is more concerned with is the vindictiveness of the Chief Priests, the savagery of the Jerusalem crowd, and Pilate’s continued indication that, after having examined Jesus, he had come to the conclusion that He was completely innocent. He makes clear that Pilate only did what he did because he finally capitulated as a result of the pressure of the crowd.

The existence of Pontius Pilate is confirmed in an inscription discovered at Caesarea which says in Latin, ‘Pontius Pilate, Prefect of Judaea, has presented the Tiberieum to the Caesareans’.

Analysis.

a And immediately in the morning, a council having formed, the Chief Priests, with the Elders and Scribes and the whole Sanhedrin, having bound Jesus, carried Him away and delivered Him up to Pilate (Mar 15:1).

b And Pilate asked Him, “Are you the king of the Jews?” And He answering says to him, “You say it”. And the Chief Priests accused him of many things. And Pilate asked Him saying, “Do you answer nothing? See how many things they accuse you of.” But Jesus no longer made any reply insomuch that Pilate marvelled (Mar 15:2-5)

c Now at the feast he used to release to them one prisoner whom they asked of him. And there was one called Barabbas lying bound with those who had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had killed (Mar 15:6-7).

d And the crowd went up and began to ask him to do as he was wont to do to them (Mar 15:8).

e And Pilate answered them saying, “Do you want me to release to you the king of the Jews?” For he realised that the Chief Priests had delivered Him up out of envy.’

f But the Chief Priests stirred up the crowd that he should rather release Barabbas to them (Mar 15:11).

e And Pilate again answered and said to them, “What then shall I do to Him Whom you call the king of the Jews?” And they again cried out, “Crucify Him” (Mar 15:12-13).

d And Pilate said to them, “Why, what evil has He done?” But they cried out even more forcefully, “Crucify him” (Mar 15:14).

c And Pilate, wishing to make the crowd content, released to them Barabbas and delivered Jesus, when He had scourged Him, to be crucified (Mar 15:15).

b And the soldiers led Him away within the court which is the Praetorium, and they call together the whole band, and they clothe Him with purple, and plaiting a crown of thorns they put it on Him, and they began to salute Him, “Hail, king of the Jews”. And they smote his head with a reed, and spat on Him, and bowing their knees paid Him homage (Mar 15:16-19).

a And when they had mocked Him, they took off from Him the purple, and put on Him His own clothes. And they lead Him out to crucify Him (Mar 15:20).

Note that in ‘a’ Jesus is delivered up to Pilate bound, and in the parallel He is led out to be crucified. In ‘b’ Pilate asks Him if He is the King of The Jews, and having confirmed it to Pilate Jesus makes no reply to His accusers, and in the parallel the soldiers demonstrate their opinion of the King of the Jews and He receives it all in silence. In ‘c’ we learn that it was the practise of Pilate at the Passover to release one prisoner to the crowds, and that there was one such, Barabbas, an insurrectionist accused of murder, and in the parallel Pilate delivers up Barabbas to the crowds and delivers Jesus to be crucified. In ‘d’ the crowd ask Pilate to do as he was wont to do, (with the purpose of having Barabbas the murderer delivered up to them), and in the parallel they call on Pilate to crucify Jesus even though He has done no evil. Note the contrast between their concern for a murderer and their callousness in regard to Jesus Who had done no evil. They were getting what they deserved. In ‘e’ Pilate asks them whether they want Him to free the King of the Jews, and in the parallel he asks them what he should then do with the King of the Jews. Centrally in ‘f’ the Chief Priests stir up the crowds to ask for Barabbas.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Passion and Resurrection of Christ Mar 14:1 to Mar 16:20 gives us the account the Passion and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. This section concludes with Christ’s commission to His disciples to preach the Gospel with signs following.

Outline: Here is a proposed outline:

1. The Betrayal and Arrest Mar 14:1-52

2. The Trial Mar 14:53 to Mar 15:20

3. The Crucifixion and Burial Mar 15:21-47

4. The Resurrection Mar 16:1-13

5. The Commission to Preach Mar 16:14-18

6. The Ascension of Jesus Mar 16:19-20

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Trial of Jesus Mar 14:53 to Mar 15:20 records the trial of Jesus Christ.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. Jesus is Tried Before the Sanhedrin Mar 14:53-65

2. Peter’s Denial of Jesus Mar 14:66-72

3. Jesus Is Tried Before Pilate Mar 15:1-5

4. Jesus Is Sentenced to Die Mar 15:6-15

5. Jesus Is Mocked by the Soldiers Mar 15:16-20

Mar 14:53-65 Jesus is Tried Before the Sanhedrin ( Mat 26:57-68 , Luk 22:54-55 ; Luk 22:63-71 , Joh 18:13-14 ; Joh 18:19-24 ) In Mar 14:53-65 we have the account of Jesus standing trial before the Sanhedrin.

Mar 14:65 Comments The Jewish people had come to recognize Jesus as a prophet. He had also delivered many prophetic sayings during the course of His public ministry.

Mar 14:66-72 Peter’s Denial of Jesus ( Mat 26:69-75 , Luk 22:56-62 , Joh 18:15-18 ; Joh 18:25-27 ) In Mar 14:66-72 we have the account of Peter’s three denials of the Lord Jesus.

Mar 15:1-5 Jesus Is Tried Before Pilate ( Mat 27:1-2 ; Mat 27:11-14 , Luk 23:1-5 , Joh 18:28-38 ) In Mar 15:1-5 we have the account of Jesus standing before Pilate to be tried.

Mar 15:6-15 Jesus Is Sentenced to Die ( Mat 27:15-26 , Luk 23:13-25 , Joh 18:39 to Joh 19:16 ) In Mar 15:6-15 we have the account of Jesus being sentenced to die while the multitudes choose to release Barabbas.

Mar 15:7 Comments – Barabbas was a notable prisoner of the Romans most likely because he has murdered one or more Roman soldiers while leading an insurrection against Roman rule over the Jews.

Mar 15:9-10 Comments Pilate Appeals for Jesus’ Release – Perhaps Pilate thought that the crowd was for Jesus’ release even though the priests and scribes were not. The common people were fearful of these religious leaders.

Mar 15:16-20 Jesus Is Mocked by the Soldiers ( Mat 27:27-31 , Joh 19:2-3 ) In Mar 15:16-20 we have the account of Jesus being mocked by the soldiers.

Mar 15:16  And the soldiers led him away into the hall, called Praetorium; and they call together the whole band.

Mar 15:16 “And the soldiers led him away into the hall, called Praetorium” Comments – The Greek word “praetorium” ( ) (G4232) is translated “judgment hall” in the KJV in Act 23:35. The Enhanced Strong says this word is used 8 times in the New Testament, being translated in the KJV as, “judgment hall 4, hall of judgment 1, common hall 1, praetorium 1, palace 1.” The word “praetorium” is of Latin origin, and according to Lightfoot it properly means, “the general’s tent,” or “the head-quarters in a camp.” [132] BDAG says it originally referred to “the praetor’s tent in camp, with its surroundings,” but that this word was later used to refer to the residence of Roman governor, who presided over a province. The ISBE says that the Romans customarily seized the existing palaces of local kings or princes and made it into their official “praetorium.” According to BDAG, the “praetorium” mentioned in the Gospels where Jesus was tried refers either to Herod’s palace located in the western part of the city of Jerusalem, or “to the fortress Antonia” located “northwest of the temple area.” (see Mat 27:27, Mar 15:16, Joh 18:28 a,b, Joh 18:33; Joh 19:9) In Act 23:35 Paul’s trial would have taken place in Herod’s palace in Caesarea, which was used as the residence of the Roman governor. Thus, these palaces were used to hear disputes by the governor and pass judgment. Regarding the use of this word in Php 1:13, since Paul’s imprisonment is generally believed to be in Rome, Lightfoot supports the popular view that the word “praetorium” refers more specifically to “the imperial guard,” rather than to a building. Lightfoot believes that “in Rome itself a ‘praetorium’ would not have been tolerated.” He thus translates this word as “the imperial guards.” [133]

[132] J. B. Lightfoot, Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians (London: MacMillan and Co., c1868, 1903), 99.

[133] J. B. Lightfoot, Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians (London: MacMillan and Co., c1868, 1903), 101-102.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Trial before Pilate.

Jesus delivered to the Gentiles:

v. 1. And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried Him away, and delivered Him to Pilate.

The account of the events of that memorable Friday morning, as given by Mark, is very brief, since he omits many incidents that do not bear directly upon the Passion story. His account is characterized by the usual vividness and action. Though it must have been some time after midnight before the members of the Sanhedrin left the house of the high priest, there was little rest for them. For without delay, very early in the morning, as soon as the light of the new morning permitted it, they had another meeting. Some commentators state that it was necessary to have a second meeting to ratify a sentence of death, and that this meeting had to be held in the Hall of Polished Stones in the Temple. The importance of the session is indicated by the fact that not only the various groups of the Sanhedrin are mentioned, the high priests, the elders, the scribes, but that their total number is expressly stated to have comprised the chief council. There certainly was need of their coming together for earnest, anxious consultation; for though they had passed the sentence of death, they no longer had the right to carry this into execution. Only the Roman procurator had the power over life and death, and before him they could not urge the fact that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. That was no political offense, no transgression of the laws of the empire. But they finally agreed upon a course of action, and then, having bound Jesus, they led Him away and delivered Him to Pilate, the Roman governor, or procurator, who usually came up to the feast to prevent any disturbances that might arise at such a great concourse of people.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

Mar 15:1

And straightway in the morning the chief priests with the elders and scribes, and the whole council, held a consultation, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him up to Pilate. Straightway in the morning ( ). The proceedings recorded in the last chapter terminated probably between five and six; the cock-crowing helps to fix the time. Now came the more formal trial. The whole Sanhedrim united in consultation. All the proceedings hitherto had been irregular and illegal. Now, for form’s sake, they tried him afresh. But there was another law which was also violated. It was now Friday. In capital cases, sentence of condemnation might not legally be pronounced on the day of the trial. Yet our Lord was tried, condemned, and crucified on the same day. They “hound him,” that he might be impeded in any attempt to escape. They “carried him away” (), with the semblance of force; although we know that he went “as a lamb to the slaughter.” How truly might it be said of these chief priests and elders, “Their feet are swift to shed blood!” And delivered him up to Pilate. Judaea now was added to the province of Syria, and governed by procurators, of whom Pontius Pilate was the fifth. It was necessary for the Jews to deliver Christ over to the Roman power; because the power of life and death had been taken from them since they became subject to the Romans. “It is not lawful for us,” they say (Joh 18:31) “to put any man to death;” that is to say, they could not put to death without the authority of the governor. Our Lord predicted of himself, “They shall deliver him to the Gentiles.”

Mar 15:2

Art thou the King of the Jews? It appears from St. Luke (Luk 23:1-5) that when Pilate demanded particularly what the charges against Jesus were, on account of which the Jews urged that he should be crucified, they alleged these three things:

(1) that he perverted the nation;

(2) that he forbade to give tribute to Caesar;

(3) that he said that he was Christ, a King.

Whereupon Pilate, who had heard by many of the blameless life, the pure doctrine, and the famous miracles of Jesus, goes at once to the point, and asks him, “Art thou the King of the Jews?”a question which, of course, affected the position of Caesar. Our Lord’s answer, Thou sayest ( ), was in the affirmative, amounting to this “Thou sayest that which is true.”

Mar 15:3

And the chief priests accused him of many things. The words in the Authorized Version, “but he answered nothing,” are not to be found here in any of the best manuscripts or versions. But they are to be found in St. Matthew (Mat 27:12); and Pilate’s question in the next verse confirms St. Matthew’s statement, and makes the sentence unnecessary here. Our Lord answered nothing, because all that they had to say against him was manifestly false or frivolous, and unworthy of any reply. St. Augustine says on this, “The Savior, who is the Wisdom of God, knew how to overcome by keeping silence.”

Mar 15:4

It would seem that Pilate had led Jesus out of his palace, into which the Jewish priests could not enter (Joh 18:28), lest they should be defiled by entering a house from which all leaven had not been scrupulously removed. This would have been a violation of their religious scruples; and therefore he went out into the open court, and there heard the accusations of the chief priests. It is supposed that the building occupied by Pilate was the palace built or rebuilt by Herod near the gate of Jaffa, north-west of Mount Zion. It was doubtless occasionally occupied by Pilate, and it was conveniently situated, being near to Herod’s palacethe old palace of the Asmoneans, between it and the temple.

Mar 15:5

Pilate marvelled. He marvelled that the innocent Savior, wise and eloquent, standing before him in peril of his life, should remain silent when thus vehemently accused by the leading men of the Jews. Pilate marvelled at his forbearance, his calmness, his contempt of death; from all of which he argued his absolute innocence and holiness, and resolved to do everything in his power to deliver him. The silence of a blameless life pleads more powerfully than any defense, however elaborate.

Mar 15:6

St. Mark omits here what took place next in the order of events, namely, the sending of our Lord by Pilate to Herod (Luk 23:5). This was Herod Antipas, ruler of Galilee; and Pilate, apparently convinced of our Lord’s innocence, hoped to escape the responsibility of condemning an innocent man, by handing him over to Herod; for Pilate had heard that our Lord was a Galilean. Moreover, he hoped to accomplish another good result, namely, to recover the favor of Herod, which was desirable on political grounds. The first intention failed; for Herod sent our Lord back to Pilate in mockery, “arraying him in gorgeous apparel” ( ). But the second succeeded: “Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day” (Luk 23:12). There was now, however, another resource. At the feast ( )literally, at feast-timehe used to release unto them one prisoner, whom they asked of him ). In St. John (Joh 18:39) we read that Pilate said, “Ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the Passover.”

Mar 15:7

And there was one called Barabbas, lying bound with them that had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder. Pilate appears to have thought of Barabbas, not doubting but that, by limiting their choice between him and Jesus, he would secure the liberation of our Lord. But Pilate little knew the temper of the chief priests and scribes, and their bitter hostility to Christ. The word “Barabbas,” better written “Bar-Abbas,” means “son of father.”

Mar 15:8

And the multitude went up and Began to ask him to do as he was wont to do unto them. Went up (). This is the reading to be preferred to the old reading, “crying aloud” (). The reading is supported by the Sinaitic, the Vatican, and the Cambridge manuscripts; also by the Old Italic, the Gothic, and other versions. The AEthiopic Version combines the two,” going up and crying aloud.” The geographical position of Pilate’s residence quite justifies the use of the term

Mar 15:9

Pilate doubtless hoped that they would ask for Jesus. He knew that the chief priests had delivered our Lord for envy. That he could not help observing, as a shrewd Roman judge, from their gestures and manner. And then he knew also, at least by report, of the purity of Jesus, and of the holy freedom with which he rebuked their vices. So he thought, reasonably enough, that if the chief priests wished to destroy him for envy, the people, who had experienced so many kindnesses from him, would desire that he should live.

Mar 15:10

Envy was the low passion that influenced the chief priests. They saw that Jesus was gaining a great and increasing influence over the people by the sublime beauty of his character, by the fame of his miracles, and the constraining power of his words. And hence they concluded that, unless he was arrested in his course, and put out of the way, their own influence would soon be gone. The whole world was going after him. Therefore he must be destroyed.

Mar 15:11

But the chief priests stirred up the multitude ( ), that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. St. Matthew (Mat 27:20) says, “They persuaded the multitudes” ( ). St. Mark’s word () implies a rousing of their bad passions; agitating them to a blind zeal for his crucifixion.

Mar 15:12

And Pilate again answered and said unto them, What then shall I do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? The word “again” has the support of three great uncials, and the best of the cursives. Pilate did not give way without many an inward struggle. And now at last he puts the matter, so to speak, in their own power; so that it might be an act of their clemency, and that they might have the honor of saving our Lord’s life. But it was all in vain. For the chief priests had resolved to press for his crucifixion, little dreaming that they were doing what “God’s hand and God’s counsel had before determined to be done.” Pilate puts the question before them with much shrewdness and tact. He speaks of our Lord as one whom “they called the King of the Jews.” He appeals to their national pride and their national hopes. Would they degrade themselves, and extinguish their hopes, by giving up to the most ignominious of deaths one who had established such claims upon their reverence and their love?

Mar 15:13

And they cried out again, Crucify him. These words might seem at first to justify the old reading, in Mar 15:8, adopted in the Authorized Version,” crying aloud.” But there the word was , here it is . Moreover, in Mar 15:14, it is not () “the more exceedingly,” but () “they cried exceedingly.”

Mar 15:15

And Pilate, wishing to content the multitude, released unto them Barabbas, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified. St. Luke and St. John are more full in details here. From their narratives it appears that when Pilate found that his attempt to rescue our Lord, by putting Barabbas in contrast with him, had failed, he next hoped to move the multitude to pity by the terrible punishment of scourging, after which he trusted that they would relent. Scourging was a vile punishment, inflicted on slaves. But it was also inflicted upon those who were condemned to death, even though freemen This scourging, which was a part of the punishment of crucifixion, was of frightful severity. Horace speaks of it as “horrible flagellum.” But it appears from St. John (Joh 21:1) that the scourging of Jesus took place before his formal condemnation to be crucified; we may therefore suppose that it was not a part of the ordinary punishment of crucifixion. At all events, there is nothing, upon a careful comparison of the narratives, to lead us to the conclusion that our blessed Lord was scourged twice. In fact, Pilate anticipated the time of the scourging, in the vain hope that he might by this means save our Lord from the capital punishment. A comparison of the narratives of St. Matthew and St. Mark with that of St. John will make this clear; for they all three refer to one and the same scourging. Recent investigations at Jerusalem have disclosed what may probably have been the place of the punishment. In a subterranean chamber, discovered by Captain Warren, on what Mr. Fergusson holds to be the site of Antonia, Pilate’s praetorium, stands a truncated column, no part of the structure itself, but just such a dwarf pillar as criminals would be tied to to be scourged. The chamber cannot be later than the time of Herod (see Professor Westcott on St. Joh 19:1-42.).

Mar 15:16

And the soldiers led him away within the court, which is the Praetorium; and they call together the whole band. This was the principal court of the palace, where a large number of soldiers were always quartered. “The whole band” would be the “cohors praetoria” of Cicero; Pilate’s body-guard.

Mar 15:17, Mar 15:18

And they clothe him with purple, and plaiting a crown of thorns, they put it on him; and they began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews! They clothe him with purple ( ). So also says St. John (Joh 21:2, ). St. Matthew says (Mat 27:28), “They put on him a scarlet robe ( ).” Purple and scarlet are not such very dissimilar colors. Purple is a royal color; and the chlamys of St. Matthew was a short military cloak of scarlet, intended to be a kind of royal livery. St. Cyril says that the purple cloak symbolized the kingdom of the whole world, which Christ was about to receive, and which he was to obtain by the shedding of his most precious blood. It was designed in mockery of his claim to be a King, and it probably bad a reference to his supposed insurrection against Caesar. All this was permitted by Pilate, in order that he might the more easily, after this ignominious treatment, deliver Christ from the extreme sentence. And plaiting a crown of thorns, they put it on him. The crown of thorns was in all probability woven from the Zizyphus spina Christi (the nabk of the Arabs), which grows abundantly in Palestine, fringing the banks of the Jordan. This plant would be very suitable for the purpose, having flexible branches, with leaves very much resembling the ivy leaf in their color, and with many sharp thorns. The pain arising from the pressure of these sharp thorns upon the head must have been excruciating. And they began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews! ( ). This word, , was an ancient form of salutation; here used by the soldiers in bitter mockery of his claim to be a king.

Mar 15:19

And they smote his head with a reedthe same reed, according to St. Matthew (Mat 27:29, Mat 27:30), which they bad first put into his right hand as a scepter, to complete the mocking symbolismand did spit upon him ( ). The verb is in the imperfect; they did it again and again.

Mar 15:20

And when they had mocked him, they took off from him the purple, and put on him his garments. The silence of our blessed Lord during these wanton and aggravated insults is very remarkable, and also the total absence of any legal grounds for his condemnation. And they lead him out to crucify him. Assuming the palace of Pilate to have been near the gate of Jaffa, north-west of Mount Zion, and the place of crucifixion that now assigned to it, within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre,the distance would be about one-third of a mile.

Mar 15:21

And they compel one passing by Simon of Cyrene, coming from the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to go with them, that he might bear his cross. It seems from St. Matthew (Mat 27:32) that our Savior bore his own cross from the palace to the gate of the city. The tablet, with the inscription afterwards attached to the cross, would be carried before him; and a certain number of soldiers would be appointed to go with him to the place of execution, and to see the sentence carried out. Having passed out through the gate of the city, they met one Simon of Cyrene, coming from the country, and they compel him (); literally, they impress him. The Cyrenians had a synagogue in Jerusalem (Act 6:9), and this Simon may probably have been one of those who had come up to keep the Passover. He must have been a Hellenistic Jew, a native of Cyrene, on the north coast of Africa. Alexander and Rufus, his sons, were no doubt, at the time when St. Mark wrote his Gospel, well-known disciples of our Lord. St. Paul, writing to the Romans (Rom 16:13), sends a special salutation to Rufus, “chosen in the Lord, and his mother, and mine;” a delicate recognition by St. Paul of something like maternal care bestowed upon him by the mother of Rufus. It is probable that his father Simon, and perhaps his brother Alexander, may have been dead by this time. Rufus is also honorably mentioned by Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians. There is a tradition, mentioned by Cornelius a Lapide, that Rufus became a bishop in Spain, and that Alexander suffered martyrdom. To go with them, that he might bear his cross. St. Luke (Luk 23:26) adds the touching words, “to bear it after Jesus ( ).”

Mar 15:22

And they bring him (); literally, they bear him. At Mar 15:20 another word has been used “they lead him out.” It seems as though, when they had reached the gate of the city, they saw symptoms that our Lord was fainting under his burden; and so they pressed Simon into the service, that he might be ready to assist. At first our Lord carried his own cross. Tradition says (Cornelius a Lapide) that the cross was fifteen feet long, the transverse limb being eight feet; and that he so carried it that the upper portion rested on his shoulder, while the foot of the cross trailed on the ground. When they saw that he was breaking down under the weight of the cross, they laid it on Simon, that they might the more quickly reach the place of crucifixion. The place Golgotha, which is, being interpreted, The place of a skull. “Golgotha” is a Hebrew, or rather Chaldaic, word, applied to the skull on account of its roundness, that being the idea which lies in the root of the word. The Greek equivalent to the word is ; and this is rendered in the Vulgate, Calvaria, a skull, from calva, bald. St. Luke is the only evangelist in whose Gospel (Luk 23:33) this word is rendered “Calvary.” In the Revised Version it is rendered “the skull” The place was so called, either from its having been the spot where executions ordinarily took place (though in this case we might have expected to find it called rather than ); or, more probably, it was derived from the configuration of the place itself, perhaps a round-like mound, or knoll, sufficiently elevated to be seen at a little distance and by a large number. As to the actual site of Golgotha, recent researches seem to have done much to confirm the ancient tradition. The Bordeaux pilgrim, a.d. 333, says, “On the left side of the original Church of the Holy Sepulchre is the hillock (monticulus) Golgotha, where the Lord was crucified. Hence, about a stone’s throw distant, is the crypt where his body was deposited.” St. Cyril of Jerusalem alludes to the spot frequently, and there was no doubt about it in the time of Eusebius, a.d. 315. Professor Willis says that the rock of Calvary still stands up, some fifteen feet above the pavement. “It appears likely,” he says, “that in its original state this rock was part of a little swell of the ground that jutted out from the slope of Sepulchre Street, and probably always formed a somewhat abrupt view on the west and south sides” (see ‘Speaker’s Commentary’ on St. Matthew). Captain Conder thinks that he shall be able to show that the traditional Golgotha is the site of the original temple of Ashtoreth, and that this temple was the Jebusite sanctuary before David took Jerusalem, and round which the sepulchres of the kings were hewn after the worship of Jehovah had consecrated the temple hill.

Mar 15:23

And they offered him wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not. There were two occasions on which drink was offered to our Lord during the agonies of his crucifixion. The first occasion is that mentioned by St. Matthew (Mat 27:34), when they offered him wine mingled with gall. This was a kind of stupefying liquor, a strong narcotic, made of the sour wine of the country, mingled with bitter herbs, and mercifully administered to dull the sense of pain. This was offered before the actual crucifixion took place. It is to this first occasion that St. Mark here refers. The words in the original are ( ), “they were giving, they offered him.” But he received it not. He would not seek alleviation of the agonies of the crucifixion by any drugged potion which might render him insensible. He would bear the full burden consciously. The second occasion on which drink was offered to him was after he had been some hours on his cross, and when the end was drawing near; and it was then given in answer to his exclamation, “I thirst.” This drink does not appear to have been mingled with any stupefying drug; and we do not read that he refused it. St. Mark does not record this second occasion.

Mar 15:24

And they crucify him ( ,). Such is the most approved reading. The evangelist states the fact without staying to dwell on the painful circumstances connected with the act of nailing him to the cross; and passes on to the mention of other things. They part his garments among them, casting lots upon them, what each should take. The outer robe and the tunic would have been removed previously to the crucifixion. St. John (Joh 21:23) here goes into details. “They took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also the coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top through.. out.” His garments ( ). This would be the loose, flowing outer dress with girdle. The tunic () was a closefitting dress, worn underneath the . There were four soldiers employed for each crucifixion. St. Cyril refers to the clothes of criminals as the perquisite of the executioners. Here was another ingredient of bitterness in our Lord’s cup, that he saw before his eyes his garments torn by the soldiery, and his tunic divided to them by lot. But he divested himself of these garments of mortality, that he might clothe us with life and immortality.

Mar 15:25

And it was the third hour, and they crucified him. The third hour would literally be nine o’clock. But we gather from Mar 15:33 that our Lord was on his cross, and still alive, at the sixth hour, that is, at twelve o’clock. The simplest mode of solving the chronological difficulty seems to be this: The Jews divided their day into four parts, which they called hours, namely, the first, from six to nine; the third, from nine to twelve; the sixth, from twelve to three; and the ninth, from three to six. It was, then, within the third hour, that is, between nine and twelve, that they crucified him; and it was from the sixth to the ninth hour that he was actually upon his cross. St. John employs the Asiatic mode of computing time.

Mar 15:26

And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS. This would probably be the shortest form of inscription, and in Latin, “Rex Judaeorum.” All the evangelists mention the inscription; but no two of them in precisely the same words. It appears by comparison of them that the whole title was, “This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” In the ease of remarkable prisoners the accusation was written on a white tablet, and carried before them as they went to the place of execution. It was then placed over their heads when the cross was erected. St. John tells us that our Lord’s title was written in three languagesHebrew, Latin, and Greek. Such appears to be the proper order of the words, namely, the national, the official, and the common dialect. St. Mark, writing at Rome, would naturally mention the Latin title. It is quite possible that the superscription may have varied in the different renderings in which it was given. It is evident from St. John (Joh 21:19-22) that the title was much canvassed by the Jews and the chief priests. Bode says that this title was fitly placed over his head, because, although he was crucified in weakness for us, yet he shone with the majesty of a King above his cross. The title proclaimed that he was after all a King; and that from henceforth he began to reign from his cross over the Jews. And therefore Pilate was divinely restrained from making any alteration in the title, so that it should mean anything less than this.

Mar 15:27

And with him they crucify two robbers ()not “thieves” (); St. Luke (Luk 23:32) shows that these two robbers formed a part of the procession to Calvary; but they were crucified after our Lordone on his right hand, and one on his left. We know from St. Luke (Luk 23:40) that one of these malefactors was saved; while it would appear that the other died in his sins. And thus Christ upon his cross, between these two men, and with the title of King over his head, presented a striking and awful picture of the final judgment. Such is the view of St. Ambrose on St. Luk 22:1-71., and of St. Augustine, who says,” This cross, if you mark it well, was a judgment-seat. For the Judge being placed in the midst, the one who believed was set free; the other who reviled him was condemned; and thus he signified what he will do with the quick and the dead. Some he will place on his right hand, and some on his left”.

Mar 15:28

This verse is omitted in the oldest manuscripts. It is supposed to have been taken from St. Luke (Luk 22:37).

Mar 15:29, Mar 15:30

And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads. Here was another fulfillment of prophecy, and other aggravation of the misery of Christ. “All they that see me laugh me to scorn they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, He trusted on the Lord that he would deliver him; let him deliver him, seeing he delighteth in him” (Psa 22:7, Psa 22:8). The torment of crucifixion itself was terrible; but it was a still greater torment to the Crucified to be insulted in his agony. Our Lord may well have had these words in his mind, ‘”They persecute him whom thou hast smitten, and they tell of the sorrow of those whom thou hast wounded” (Psa 69:26). They that passed by. Calvary was probably near to one of the thoroughfares leading to the city; so that there would be a continual stream of persons passing to and fro; more especially at this time, when Jerusalem was thronged with visitors. And no doubt the words of the accusation against him in its incorrect form would pass freely from mouth to mouth, Ha! thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If you could make such a boast as this, show your power by coming down from the cross.

Mar 15:31

The chief priests and the scribes are more bitter than the people. In fact they had all along endeavored to rouse the bad passions of the people against our Lord. And now they take advantage of this his present degraded condition to renew the old charge that his miracles of healing had been wrought by Beelzebub, because, if they had been wrought by God, God would have interposed in this his sore extremity and have set him free. He saved others. They cannot deny this fact. But they now try to turn this fact against him, by alleging that he who pretended to work miracles upon others, wrought them, not by the finger of God, but by Beelzebub, seeing that, if they had been wrought by a Divine power, the same power would now be exercised for his deliverance. They desired to take advantage of this public opportunity of exposing him as an impostor, and so they hoped to get rid of him, and at the same time to blot the very name of Christianity from out of the earth.

Mar 15:32

Christ might have come down from the cross; but he would not, because it was his Father’s will that he should die upon the cross to redeem us from death. So he despised the taunts of the wicked, that he might teach us by his example to do the same. If he had chosen to descend from the cross, he would not have ascended. He knew that the death upon the cross was necessary for the salvation of men; and therefore he would go through the whole. He withheld the exercise of his power. His omnipotence restrained the natural longings of his suffering humanity to escape from these unutterable torments. So he would not come down from the cross, although within three days he would rise from the grave. And yet there was no word of indignation against his tormentors. On the contrary, he proclaimed mercy; for as he hung on his cross he said, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”

Mar 15:33

And when the sixth hour was come. This would be midday, twelve o’clock; and the darkness continued until the ninth hour, that is, three o’clock. This supernatural darkness came when the day is wont to be at its brightest. The moon was now at the full, so that it could not have been caused by what we call an eclipse, for when it is full moon the moon cannot intervene between the earth and the sun. This darkness was doubtless produced by the immediate interference of God. An account of it is given by Phlegon of Tralles, a freedman of the Emperor Adrian. Euse-bius, in his records of the year a.d. 33, quotes at length from Phlegon, who says that, in the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad, there was a great and remarkable eclipse of the sun, above any that had happened before. At the sixth hour the day was turned into the darkness of night, so that stars were seen in the heaven; and there was a great earthquake in Bithynia, which overthrew many houses in the city of Nicaea. Phlegon attributes the darkness which he describes to an eclipse, which was natural enough for him to do. The knowledge of astronomy was then very imperfect. Phlegon also mentions an earthquake. This brings his account into very close correspondence with the sacred narrative. There was darkness ever the whole land ( ). “Land” is a better rendering than “earth.” We are not informed precisely how far the darkness extended. Dionysius says that he saw this phenomenon at Heliopolis, in Egypt, and he is reported to have exclaimed, “Either the God of nature, the Creator, is suffering, or the universe dissolving.” St. Cyprian says, “The sun was constrained to withdraw his rays, and close his eyes, that he might not be compelled to look upon this crime of the Jews. To the same purpose St. Chrysostom, “The creature could net bear the wrong done to its Creator. Therefore the sun withdrew his rays, that he might not behold the deeds of the wicked.”

Mar 15:34

Eloi, Eloi, lama sabacthani? St. Mark here uses the Aramaic form St. Matthew refers to the original Hebrew. St. Mark in all probability took his form from St. Peter. It seems from hence that our Lord was in the habit of using the vernacular speech. Why hast thou forsaken me? ( 😉. This might be rendered, Why didst thou forsake me? It is generally supposed that our blessed Lord, continually praying upon his cross, and offering himself a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, recited the whole of the psalm (22.) of which these are the first words, that he might show himself to be the very Being to whom the words refer; so that the Jewish scribes and people might examine and see the cause why he would not descend from the cross; namely, because this very psalm showed that it was appointed that he should suffer these things.

Mar 15:35

Notwithstanding the supernatural darkness, there were those who lingered about the cross. Indeed, the darkness would add greatly to the awfulness of the place. It was out of that darkness that the voice of Jesus was heard; and inasmuch as Elias, or Elijah, was believed to hold some relation to the Messiah, it was natural for some of those who stood by to understand the words to mean that our Lord was actually calling for Elias.

Mar 15:36

There is a slight difference here in the narratives. St. Matthew (Mat 27:49) says, “And the rest said, Let be; let us see whether Elijah cometh to save him.” Here in St. Mark the words are recorded as having been spoken by him alone who offered our Lord the vinegar. According to St. John (Joh 21:1-25 :28), the offering of the vinegar followed immediately upon the words of our Lord, “I thirst.” This drink was not the stupefying potion given to criminals before their crucifixion, to lull the sense of pain, but the sour wine, the ordinary drink of the soldiers, called posen. The reed was most probably the long stalk of the hyssop plant. Dr. J. Forbes Royle, in an elaborate article on the subject, quoted in Smith’s ‘Dictionary of the Bible’, arrives at the conclusion that the hyssop is none other than the caper plant, the Arabic name of which, asuf, bears a strong resemblance to the Hebrew. The plant is the Capparis spinosa of Linnaeus. The apparent difference between the narratives of St. Matthew and St. Mark may be reconciled by weaving in the narrative of St. John with those of the synoptiststhe “Let be” of the soldiers in the one case being intended to restrain the individual from offering the wine; and the “Let be” of the individual, corresponding to our “Wait a moment,” while he answered our Savior’s cry, “I thirst.”

Mar 15:37

And Jesus uttered a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. The three synoptists all mention this cry, which appears to have been something different from the words which he uttered at or about the time of his death. It was evidently something supernatural, and was so regarded by the centurion who stood by; and who had no doubt been accustomed to scenes like these. Usually the voice fails the dying, more especially when the natural forces have been weakened by long agony, as in the ease of our Lord. It seems, therefore, the right conclusion that he cried out, just before he expired, by that supernatural power which his Godhead supplied to him; and thus he showed that, although he had gone through all the pains which were sufficient in ordinary cases to produce death, yet that at length he did not die of necessity, but voluntarily, in accordance with what he had himself said, “No one taketh my life from me I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again” (Joh 10:18). Victor Antiochanus, in commenting upon this chapter, says, “By this action the Lord Jesus proved that he had his whole life, and his death, in his own free power.”

Mar 15:38

And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. There were two veilsone before the holy place, and the other before the holy of holies. The holy place would correspond to what we call the nave of the church, in which the priests were continually present; the holy of holies would correspond to our chancel choirthe holiest part of the building. This was always kept closed; nor might any one enter it but the high priest, and that only once in the year, on the day of expiation. The veil which was rent at our Lord’s death was that which was placed before the holy of holies; it was called the . The outer veil was called . It was the duty of the officiating priest, on the evening of the day of preparation, at the hour of evening prayer, which would correspond to the time of our Lord’s death, to enter into the holy place, where he would of course be between the two curtains, or veils, the outer veil, or , and the inner veil, or It would then be his business to roll back the , or outer veil, thus exposing the holy place to the people, who would be in the. outer court. And then and there they would see, to their amazement, the , the inner veil, rent asunder from the top to the bottom. These veils or curtains, according to Josephus, were each forty cubits in height and ten in breadth, of great substance, very massive, and richly embroidered with gold and purple. Now, this rending of the veil signified

(1) that the whole of the Jewish dispensation, with its rites and ceremonies, was now unfolded by Christ; and that thenceforth the middle wall of partition was broken down, so that now, not the Jews only, but the Gentiles also might draw nigh by the blood of Christ. But

(2) it further signified that the way to heaven was laid open by our Lord’s death. “When thou hadst overcome the sharpness of death, thou didst open the kingdom of heaven to all believers.” The veil signified that heaven was closed to all, until Christ by his death rent this veil in twain, and laid open the way.

Mar 15:39

And when the centurion, which stood by over against him ( ) saw that he so gave up the ghost. The words, “so cried out,” are not in the most important authorities. It was the business of the centurion to watch all that took place, and to see that the sentence was executed. He must have been standing close under the cress; and there was that in the whole demeanour of the dying Sufferer, so different from anything that he had ever witnessed before, that it drew from him the involuntary exclamation, Truly this man was the Son of God. He had observed him through those weary hours; he had noticed the meekness and the dignity of the Sufferer; he had heard those words, so deeply impressed upon the faith and reverence of Christians, which fell from him from time to time as he hung there; and then at last he heard the piercing cry, so startling, so unexpected, which escaped him just before he yielded up his spirit; and he could come to no other conclusion than this, that he was in very deed God’s Son. It has been supposed by some that this centurion was Longiuus, who was led by the miracles which accompanied the death of Christ, to acknowledge him to be the Son of God, and to be a herald of his resurrection, and was ultimately himself put to death for the sake of Christ in Cappadocia. St. Chrysostom repeats the common report, that on account of his faith he was at last crowned with martyrdom.

Mar 15:40

And there were also women holding from afar ( ). St. Matthew (Mat 27:55) says that there were many. Amongst them were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the wife of Clopas, or Alphaeus, and mother of James the less and of Joses, called brethren of our Lord, and the mother of Zebedee’s children, that is, Salerno. The mother of our Lord had been there until the time when, having with St. John crept as near the cross of Jesus as she might venture, she was consigned by our Lord to St. John’s care, and taken away by him. St. Mark mentions this to show the faith and love of these holy women, because in the very presence of the enemies of Christ they dared to stand by his cross, and shrank not from testifying their piety and devotion. St. John says that they stood near. He must have known; for at one time at least he was standing near. St. Matthew and St. Mark speak of them as at a distance. They were at a distance, no doubt, for the most part, as compared with the soldiers, whose duty it was to be in close attendance and to keep the people off. But these devoted women came as near as they could, so as to see and hear their Lord. Perhaps they were sometimes further off and sometimes nearer, as they saw opportunity, or as the humor of the officials suffered them.

Mar 15:41

From this verse we learn that these women followed him, and ministered unto him when he was in Galilee; and that many other women came up with him unto Jerusalem. The sublime beauty of his character, and the spiritual, influence which he wielded, attracted them; and they were able to minister to the various needs of his humanity.

Mar 15:42

And when even was now come. The sabbath commenced on the Friday evening at six o’clock. The evening commenced at three o’clock. Our Lord must be buried before six o’clock.

Mar 15:43

Joseph of Arimathaea. St. Jerome says that this city was called Ramathaim-Zophim (the lofty place), where dwelt Elkanah and Hannah of old, and where Samuel was born. Joseph was most probably a native of Arimathaea; but he was now a citizen and counsellor of Jerusalem. He was an honorable counsellor ( ), a councillor of honorable estate (Revised Version). St. Matthew says he was a rich man. It is evident that he regarded himself as a settled inhabitant of Jerusalem, since he had thus provided himself with a place of sepulture. He was waiting for ()literally, looking forthe kingdom of God. St. Matthew (Mat 27:57) says that he was a disciple of Jesus. These circumstances explain his desire to bury our Lord. He boldly went in ( )literally, he took courage and went inunto Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. A poor man would not have dared to approach Pilate for such a purpose as this. St. Chrysostom says, “The courage of Joseph is greatly to be admired, in that, for the love of Christ, he exposed himself to the danger of death.” The fact that he was “looking for the kingdom of God” explains his conduct. It shows that he believed in Christ, and through his grace hoped for everlasting salvation; and in this hope he thought little of shelving his reverence for Christ, and so” boldly went in unto Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus.”

Mar 15:44

And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead. It must have Been somewhat early in the afternoon, probably not long after three o’clock, when Joseph went. The day being the Preparation, the Jews were anxious to satisfy the letter of the Law (Deu 21:13), and that, more especially, because the coming sabbath was a “high day.” So they had gone early to Pilate to obtain permission to accelerate the deaths of the sufferers by the terrible additional punishment called . This violence was not inflicted upon our Lord, because he was already dead; and so another Scripture was fulfilled, “A bone of him shall not be broken.” But it was necessary that Pilate should be assured of the fact that death had taken place before he gave up the body; and thus, in the providence of God, another evidence was given of the reality of Christ’s death. Joseph asked for the body (). Then Pilate asked the centurion “whether he had been any while dead.” The verb here is in the aorist, and the adverb means “formerly” ( ); literally, if he died some time ago.

Mar 15:45

And when he learned it of the centurion, he granted () the corpse ( ) to Joseph.

Mar 15:46

And he bought a linen cloth (). This was a fine linen garment, or shroud, something like that in which the young man fled the night before. And taking him down ( ). It appears from these words that Joseph himself, assisted probably by Nicodemus and others, actually took the body of our Lord down from the cross. wrapped the sindon round him, and laid him in his own new tomb, which had been hewn out of the rock. The word rendered “tomb” is , as being intended to be a memorial of the departed. And he rolled a stone against the door of the tomb. The door here means “the opening,” or “entrance.” Thus, while our Lord died with the wicked, he was with the rich in his death (Isa 53:9).

Mar 15:47

And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses beheld where he was laid ( ); literally, were beholding where he was laid. These women were two of the group mentioned at Mar 15:40. They remained, after the body of our Lord had been deposited, in sad and silent contemplation. The women appear to have broken up into two groups. One group went alone to purchase spices and ointments, which it was necessary for them to do before six o’clock, when the sabbath commenced; in readiness for the embalming. Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses and Salome appear to have bought them after six o’clock on the Saturday night.

HOMILETICS

Mar 15:1-15

The trial before Pilate.

How true it is that “God spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all”! Jesus was first examined by Annas, then tried before Caiaphas, the high priest, then formally condemned by the Sanhedrim. But these mock-trials, with all their injustice and their indignities, were not enough to exhaust the appointed humiliation and suffering. Christ must needs be brought before the Roman governor, who had come up from Caesarea to Jerusalem to attend the Feast of the Passover. In order that he might endure the curse attaching to every one that hangeth on a tree, in order that he might fulfill his own prediction that he should die by crucifixion, he must needs be sentenced, not merely by a Hebrew, but also by a Roman tribunal. The passage before us exhibits the several agencies by which the condemnation of Christ was brought about.

I. THE MALICE AND ENVY OF THE PRIESTS. Pilate “perceived that for envy the chief priests had delivered him up.” They both hated the spiritual teaching of the Prophet of Nazareth, so much at variance with their own; and they were jealous of the influence which he had acquired over the people, not only in Galilee, but in Judaea. The hatred and envy of the priests, Pharisees, Sadducees, and scribes, had been abundantly shown by their treatment of Jesus for some time past, but was made more apparent by the events of the past night. Their apprehension of him in the garden, their treatment of him before the high priest, had been flagitiously malicious and unjust. And now their charge against him at the bar of Pilatea charge virtually of political treason against the authority of the Roman empirewas a proof of the length to which their hatred and hypocrisy could proceed. They brought this charge, simply because they thought that this would tell most against him in the estimation of the procurator.

II. THE FICKLENESS AND THE UNPRINCIPLED CHOICE OF THE MULTITUDE. But a few days ago the crowds in the streets of Jerusalem had welcomed the Prophet of Nazareth with the cry, “Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Of those who thus hailed the triumphal entry of the Nazarene, probably the greater part were Galileans. And the apprehension of Jesus had been effected at night; the trial of Jesus had been hurried on before the day, probably with this intent, that the pilgrims from the north of Palestine, who were so largely adherents of Jesus, might be prevented from taking any steps to rescue the Prisoner, or at all events from making a demonstration on his behalf. Yet the populace inhabiting and sojourning in the city cannot be acquitted of proverbial fickleness. The minions of the priesthood, no doubt, led the way, and raised the first shouts of popular outcry against Jesus. The multitude were instigated by the sacerdotal party and their adherents to this position of hostility, this ferocious howl for the blood of the Innocent. The infamous choice of the populace, who preferred Barabbas to Jesus, is one of the most distressing incidents of the awful martydom. A rioter and murderer was apparently represented as a champion of national independence, whilst “the Holy One and the Just” was charged with being the enemy of the temple and its services and solemnities. In this way the people were wrought upon to demand the death of the precious and the liberation of the vile.

III. THE WEAKNESS, SELFISHNESS, AND FEAR OF THE ROMAN GOVERNOR. After all, the responsibility of capital punishment lay with Pilate. Had he stood firm for justice and right against lawlessness and violence, Jesus would have been saved. But so it was not to be. The governor’s own conviction of the innocence and excellence of the accused are evident, both from his language, “Why, what evil hath he done?” “I find no fault in him,” and also from his repeated though unsuccessful, because irresolute, efforts to save his life. It is clear that Pilate admired and respected the Prisoner, whilst he despised the accusers and the mob. Yet he yielded to the savage outcry, from a desire to content the Jews, with whom it was his interest to stand well, and from fear lest, if he acquitted the Prisoner, his conduct might be misrepresented to the emperor to his disadvantage, and so might prove the occasion of his ruin. Desire of popularity, fear of the tyrant’s frown,these were the two motives which, in the mind of the cynical and selfish procurator, outweighed all considerations of righteousness and humanity. So it came to pass that Jesus “suffered under Pontius Pilate.”

IV. THE CONFESSION AND THE DEMEANOUR OF CHRIST HIMSELF. The demeanour of Jesus was dignified and honorable, but far from fitted to procure his release. Silence, when false witnesses testified against him, only infuriated his foes. Before the Jewish tribunal he acknowledged that he was the Messiah and the Son of God. Before Pilate he confessed himself a Kinga confession which, however explained as a claim to spiritual dominion, was an embarrassment to his well-wisher and judge. And his reminder that there was a higher, because a Divine, authority, to which all earthly authority is subordinate, was itself irritating to a proud and absolute ruler. There was a marvellous mingling of boldness and meekness in the conduct of the innocent and holy Prisoner. Morally, this demeanour exculpated him; but legally it was to his disadvantage. And his confession of royalty became his sentence of condemnation; written upon his cross for the apparent vindication, but for the real and eternal censure, of those who accused and of him who sentenced him. Thus did Jesus “witness a good confession before Pontius Pilate.”

APPLICATION.

1. Observe the force and virulence of sin taking possession of human nature, and corrupting and degrading it. The malice, bigotry, and falsehood of the priests, the fickleness and unreasoning fury of the mob, the selfishness and cowardice of the governor,all illustrate the length to which sin can go. The innocence and benevolence of the Victim render more conspicuous the enormity of his foes.

2. Observe the faultless and beautiful spirit displayed by the Sufferer, the absence of all resentment or complaint, the meek submission to all that he needs must suffer. A Being so morally perfect demands our admiration and our worship, invites our confidence and our love.

3. Consider the price of our redemption. Jesus bore all this injustice, these insults, for man. He was condemned that we might be acquitted; he was slain that we might live.

Mar 15:16-20

Christ mocked.

During this awful night and morning our Lord thrice underwent the suffering and indignity of public and vulgar derision. First before the high priest, at the hands of the officers and servants of Caiaphas; then again when he was set at nought and mocked by the brutal soldiery of Herod Antipas; and now yet once more, when Pilate delivered him into the keeping of the Roman soldiers, a company of whom were about to lead him forth to crucifixion. Insult was added to insult, and his bitter cup ran over.

I. THE MOCKERS. The whole band or cohort are said to have joined in the ribald sport in the Praetorium. What they did, it must be remembered, they did largely in ignorance. These Roman legionaries knew nothing of a Messiah, and were probably utterly unacquainted with the character and career of him whom Pilate had delivered over to them. Their insensibility to human suffering was equal to their indifference to human innocence and virtue. All they knew was that their master, though professedly convinced of Jesus’ blamelessness, was yet content to give him up into their hands to ill treat and to put to a shameful death. We cannot, therefore, wonder at their insolence and cruelty. Yet we cannot read the sad story without feelings of shame and of sorrow, as we remember that persons belonging to our race, and sharing our nature, should have inflicted such indignities upon “the Holy One and the Just,” upon the world’s Friend and Savior.

II. THE MOCKERIES. These were many, base, and repeated.

1. Jesus was invested with a purple robe. Probably this was a military cloak, whose crimson hue might render it an emblem of the imperial purple.

2. He was crowned with a circlet of thorns, another symbol of royalty, doubtless roughly woven from the stem of a prickly shrub.

3. He was addressed as “King.” Utterly incapable of understanding a moral sovereignty, a spiritual sway, these coarse soldiers, to whom force was all, insulted the meek and unresisting Sufferer by the use of a title which from their lips could be only derisive.

4. He was saluted with the semblance of honor and homage; they” bowed the knee, and worshipped him.”

5. They smote his sacred head with the scepter-reed. How affecting this treatment! The very fact which should have been Christ’s claim to respect, confidence, and adorationhis royal authority over the conscience and heart of humanitywas turned into a ground of reproach and a matter of reviling. Thus men treated their Divine and rightful King.

III. THE STERN REALITY TO WHICH THE MOCKERY WAS A PRELUDE AND A CONTRAST. Knowing what was before the Condemned, decency and humanity should have led them to spare him these insults. But when they were over, there was worse to come. The purple was stripped from his form; his own garments were placed on him; the beam of the cross was laid upon his shoulders; he was thrust into his place in the rude procession; and then was led away to crucifixion.

APPLICATION.

1. Admire the meekness of him “who, when reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, threatened not.” Never was sorrow like his sorrow, and never patience like his patience.

2. Recognize the true royalty which a spiritual judgment may discern underlying the mockery and derision here recorded. See in Jesus a King, though crowned with thorns.

3. Learn to confide in a Savior whose purpose to save was so resolute and so benevolent, as is apparent here. A salvation procured at such a cost is a salvation of which none should hear unmoved, and which none who needs it should hesitate or delay to accept.

Mar 15:21-32

The crucifixion.

The bigots and the mob have gained their end, and now have their own way with “the Holy One and the Just.” The power of Rome is brought into the service of Jewish fanaticism and malice. All evil influences have conspired together. Now is their hour and the power of darkness. The world’s sin has culminated in the rejection of the world’s Savior. All happens as has been foreseen in the counsels of God, and foretold by inspired prophets and by the Son of man himself. The Christ of God is crucified.

I. THE PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRUCIFIXION. The story is very simply told; there is no endeavor to excite feeling by any other means than by the clear and artless relation of the facts. But this is enough to awaken the sympathy of every mind capable of realizing the injustice of Christ’s enemies, and the meekness, compassion, and fortitude of the Sufferer.

1. The bearing of the cross. That Jesus, exhausted by the events of the past night and of this morning, by the wakeful hours, the scourging and the insults he had endured, should now be incapable of carrying the instrument of his final sufferings, is natural enough. The soldiers, indisposed themselves to bear the burden, beneath which they see the Sufferer sinking, impress into the service a Cyrenian Israelite, who has come to the Passover now celebrating at Jerusalem, and who has been sleeping in one of the villages near the city, but is on his way to the scene of the sacred solemnities. What seems to the soldiers and to the mob a degradation, is to become an honorable and happy memory to Simon, whose family is destined in after years to hold a high place in the regard of the Christian community, and whose name is henceforth to be linked with that of the Redeemer by this sacred and touching association.

2. The approach to Golgotha. Imagination has filled the void wisely left by the evangelists; and the via dolorosa has been marked by “stations,” each of which has been signalized by some episode of suffering, mercy, or sympathy. The spot where the execution of the iniquitous sentence took place may have been to the north-west of the city, and the name”the place of a skull”may have been derived from its form, rounded and bare. It needs no fanciful legends to endear a spot so memorable to the heart of Christendom; the pathos of the plain fact is enough. Calvary”lovely, mournful Calvary”was the scene of Immanuel’s passion.

3. The offering of myrrh-mingled wine. The compassion of the ladies of Jerusalem is said to have provided a soporific, stupefying, narcotic draught, to be administered in humanity to the criminals who were condemned to die a painful and lingering death, it seems to have been in conformity with custom and from motives of sympathy that the draught was offered to Jesus.

“Fill high the bowl, and spice it well, and pour
The dews oblivious: for the cross is sharp;

The cross is sharp, and he
Is tenderer than a lamb.”

His refusal was owing to his determination to accept to the full the lot of undeserved pain and anguish appointed for him. “Thou wilt feel all, that thou may’st pity all.” He had already exclaimed, “The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” and it would seem that this cup of woe could not be drunk except by the retention of his faculties to the very last.

4. The parting of his garments. These were the perquisite of the executioners, who divided amongst themselves some of his raiment, and who cast lots for the seamless robe. This was not on]y the fulfillment of a prediction, but it was an element in the humiliation and self-sacrifice of the Son of man.

II. THE CRUCIFIXION AND ITS ACCOMPANYING CIRCUMSTANCES. “They crucified him;” such is the brief notification of the most stupendous crime committed in the history of mankind. Every circumstance recorded in such a connection is worthy of attention.

1. There is a note of time. It was the third hour, i.e. nine o’clock in the forenoon. From this we infer how hurried had been the proceedings since the break of day, and how prolonged were those sufferings, which did not close until three in the afternoon.

2. There is a memorandum of the superscription. This was the accusation, upon which, unproved and misrepresented, Pilate had been induced to sanction this legal murder. A King crucified, and crucified by his subjects; no wonder that such a crime should be disowned, or rather such a stigma resented, by the priests and elders. When Pilate persisted that the inscription should remain, he bore witness unconsciously alike to the spiritual royalty of Jesus and to the flagitious rebellion of the leaders of the Jewish nation. The cross was in truth Christ’s earthly throne, the symbol of a world-wide empire. He had said, “I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.”

3. There is an account of his companions upon the cross. If anything could possibly add to the ignominy of our Savior’s death, it was the society in which he suffered. Barabbas had, indeed, been released; but there were two robbers condemned to death, and awaiting the execution of their sentence. Accordingly, advantage was taken of the opportunity to carry out the sentence against the Christ and the criminals upon the same occasion. Thus was he “numbered with the transgressors,” and an additional stigma attached to him by his association with the vilest of the vile. No wonder that the ignorant and unspiritual made this a ground of reviling against Jesus, and of reproach against his followers.

III. THE MOCKERY THAT FOLLOWED THE CRUCIFIXION. To add to the insults, the jeering, the scoffing, which Jesus had endured during his trials, it was permitted that his dying hours should be disturbed, and his dying agonies intensified, by the mockery of various classes of his foes.

1. The passers-by railed on him. With the customary contempt for the fallen and deserted, those passing in and out of the city insulted the Crucified, with gestures of derision and tones of contempt, recalling the language in which he had asserted his authority, and contrasting it with his pitiable condition, terrible sufferings, and apparent helplessness.

2. The chief priests and scribes, who had been foremost in effecting his downfall, were prominent in glorying over the work of their hands, and in scoffing at him upon whom they had wreaked their vengeance. From their lips came the language which, intended to be a reproach, was really, and has ever been deemed, one of the most glorious tributes ever paid to the Redeemer: “He saved others; himself he cannot save!” When they asked that he should come down from the cross upon which their malice had raised him, and professed their willingness upon such evidence to believe in him, we cannot doubt that their words were hollow, vulgar mockery.

3. That no element of misery might be wanting in the Savior’s anguish, it was permitted that the very thieves should join in the raillery with which Jesus was encompassed and tortured. This, indeed, only gives an additional touch of pathos to the story of the penitent thief which St. Luke tells so exquisitely, and shows, in the brighter colors of contrast, the powerful gentleness and unselfish pity of the dying Savior.

APPLICATION.
1. Admire the submission and meekness of Christ’s demeanour.

2. Consider with gratitude the redemptive purpose which animated and sustained the Sufferer.

3. Learn to glory in that cross, which, from an emblem of shame, has by Christ been transformed into a symbol of salvation.

Mar 15:33-41

The death of Jesus.

Jesus had, in the course of his ministry, raised the dead to life. Three such instances are recorded in the Gospels; and it is intimated that there were other cases which have not been circumstantially related. And now the time came for himself to die, to accomplish at Jerusalem the decease he had foreseen and foretold. That he might have avoided this fate is obvious; and he had himself declared that no man took his life from him. The time, however, had arrived for him to lay down that life of himself, in submitting to be, “by wicked hands, crucified and slain.”

I. The evangelist relates CIRCUMSTANCES PRECEDING CHRIST‘S DEATH.

1. The darkness which brooded over the city, and over the whole land, for the space of three hours, was apparently supernatural, and has usually been regarded as a manifest token of Nature’s sympathy with her Lord. It was an appropriate accompaniment to the sad and awful event that was transpiring.

2. The utterance of desertion and of woe. The dying Savior’s cry has ever been regarded as affording a glance into the innermost, the sacred, the unfathomable mysteries of his soul. Explain it we cannot; disregard it we dare not. Surely, this cannot be regarded as a mere exclamation of distress! Surely, it cannot have been wrung from the Redeemer by the severity of bodily pain and anguish! It has been well said that the sufferings of his soul were the soul of his sufferings. The only explanation of the cry, “My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” is that furnished by the mental agonies which the world’s Redeemer was enduring, which clouded his sense of the Father’s favor. On the one hand, we cannot suppose this language to have been a mere cry of distress; on the other hand, we cannot conceive that the Father had withdrawn his favor from his well-beloved Son, who wan now proving himself to be obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. The fact is that the burden of the world’s sins and sorrows pressed like a dense cloud upon his soul, and obscured from his view the shining of the Father’s face.

3. The ministry of pity. Although at the commencement of the crucifixion Jesus had refused the stupefying draught which had been offered him, now that he had hung six hours upon the cross he was consumed with an intolerable thirst. The expression of his distressing sensation seems to have followed upon the cry of desertion. A bystander, doubtless in pity, offered him a sponge filled with the sour wine which was the soldiers’ ordinary drink, and it would seem that he did not now refuse the alleviation offered. It is not easy to understand who could have so misapprehended his cry as to suppose the dying Sufferer to invoke the ministry of Elijah; though it is easy to believe that some would jeeringly propose to wait for the prophetic intervention.

4. The dying cry. Mark gives no words; but from the other Gospels we learn that, immediately before his expiring, Jesus uttered aloud two ever-memorable sayings: viz. “It is finished!” and “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit!” It is clear, therefore, that the cry was not an inarticulate utterance of pare. There was an expression of his conviction that his ministry of humiliation was ended, that the purpose of his incarnation was completed, that nothing more remained for him to do on earth. And in addition to this utterance, which was ministerial, was another, which was personal. As he had said “My God,” so now he says “Father,” an address which proved his possession of the assurance of his Father’s undiminished and undimmed approval. The hour of agony and dissolution was thus an hour of triumph: Christ’s work was completed, his obedience was perfected, his acceptance was assured, his victory was achieved.

II. The evangelist records THE FACT OF CHRIST‘S DEATH. How simply is it related!”He gave up his spirit.” In one word is recorded, without exaggeration, without a word to heighten the effect, without a comment of any kind, the most stupendous, pathetic, and momentous event which this world has witnessed. The Being who was “the Life” bowed his head in death. He who, whilst his hour was not yet come, had eluded his foes, now submitted to the felon’s doom. The Lord of immortality, who was to hold the keys of death and of the unseen world, saw and tasted dissolution, though not corruption. He knew, though the spectators, friends and foes alike, were ignorant of the fact, that his death was destined to be the life of the world. He had foretold that, when lifted up from the earth, he should draw all men unto himself; that the grain of wheat should fall into the earth and die, and should bring forth much fruit. And the events which have followed have verified the Savior’s words. Even those who have no disposition to regard Christ’s character and work as supernatural cannot be blind to the fact that the cross has proved a tree whose fruits have been for the satisfaction, and whose leaves have been for the healing, of the nations. But, to us Christians, the death of Christ was the redemption of our souls.

“Oh, never, never canst thou know

What then for thee the Savior bore,

The pangs of that mysterious woe

Which wrung his bosom’s inmost core.

“Yes, man for man perchance may brave

The horrors of the yawning grave;

And friend for friend, or son for sire,

Undaunted and unmoved expire,

From love, or piety, or pride;

But who can die as Jesus died?”

III. The evangelist puts upon record CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES FOLLOWING UPON CHRIST‘S DEATH.

1. One incident occurs which is typical of the influence of our Savior’s death upon the elder, the Jewish, dispensation: the rending of the temple veil. This curtain screened off the holiest place, which was representative of the Divine indwelling, and at the same time of the necessity of a mediatorial scheme by which God can admit men to his fellowship and favor. And when this veil was rent, it was signified that by the death of Jesus, the true High Priest, the way was made open into the presence of a holy God. The distinction between Jews and Gentiles was abolished, and a Divine mediation was declared available for all mankind.

2. The witness of the centurion was an earnest of the world’s witness to the crucified Redeemer. It was the manner of Jesus’ deaththe demeanour and the language of the innocent, uncomplaining, forgiving Sufferer, the darkness and the general awewhich together produced upon the mind of this Roman officer the impression that this was, not merely no criminal, but no ordinary mortal; that he had been superintending the crucifixion of a Sonthe Sonof God. It is significant that, in his death, our Lord effected the conversion of a sinful fellow-sufferer, and the enlightenment, to say the least, of one so little likely to be prepossessed in his favor as this Roman officer.

3. Mention is made of the gaze of some of those who had been, and still were, the faithful friends of Jesus. The mother of the Lord had been led away from the painful scene by the disciple to whose care she had been entrusted by her dying Son. But Mary of Magdala, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and Salome the wife of Zebedee, are mentioned as, with others, lingering at some distance from the cross, and yet within sight of it, to behold the end. Whilst their services could be of use to him, they had attended his steps and supplied his wants; and now that they could do no more for their beloved and revered Master, they remained near his dying form, to watch with him, to sympathize with him to the last, to hear his dying words, to keep him in sight until the lifeless body should be disposed of, and hidden from them in the earth. Sweet is the thought that, when his disciples forsook Jesus and fled, when he had to endure the anguish caused by the treachery of one, the denial of a second, and the desertion of others, there were devout and attached women who would not leave the sacred spot, or take their eyes from off the hallowed form. Even by human devotion and love Jesus was not utterly forsaken, was not left utterly alone. Some there were who had proved his kindness, tested his wisdom, profited by his authority during his ministry, whose hearts changed not towards him in the hour of his darkness, anguish, and woe. Memorable is the ministry of those holy and affectionate women, who are recorded to have been “last at the cross, and earliest at the tomb.”

APPLICATION. Christ’s death is:

1. To sinners the means of salvation. The Lord paid on the cross the ransom-price of the souls of sinful men; he bore our sins; he redeemed us with his precious blood. Here is pardon, healing, and life, for those who receive the good tidings with sincere faith.

2. To suppliants the assurance of the gracious answer of Heaven to their prayers. “If God spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, will he not with him also freely give us all things?”

3. To struggling souls the inspiration of resistance and endurance, the earnest and pledge of victory. “Our old nature is crucified with him;” “Reckon ye yourselves dead unto sin.”

4. To Christian teachers and preachers the theme of their ministry. In this Paul is an example to us all, who exclaimed, “We preach Christ crucified;” “God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Mar 15:42-47

The burial of Christ.

The reality of the death of our Lord Jesus has been questioned, at various times and upon various grounds. Some have denied the possibility of a resurrection from the dead, and have absurdly supposed that Jesus only fainted or swooned, and that his recovery from a swoon was reputed among his followers to be a resurrection. Against all such unreasonable and incredible assumptions the record of the evangelists, who relate his burial, and that in the most minute and circumstantial manner, ought to be regarded as definitely and certainly conclusive.

I. THE APPLICATION. Of Joseph of Arimathaea we know only what is recorded in connection with Christ’s interment. In circumstances he was rich. His rank was that of a member of the Sanhedrim; his character is described in the words, “a good man and a just;” his religious position may be inferred from the two facts, that he waited for the kingdom of God and that he was a disciple of Jesus, though secretly, from fear of the Jews, whilst his view of what had taken place with respect to Jesus is expressly put upon record in the statement that he had not consented to the counsel and deed of the priests and elders. His coming forward on this occasion is an instance of the way in which circumstances may bring out virtues, such as courage and fidelity to conviction, which have long been latent.

II. THE APPLICATION. The boldness with which Joseph asked for the body is mentioned as something to his credit, for such a step would certainly not commend him to his fellow-citizens and fellow-councillors. As the Jews approved of the burial of the dead in every case, and as it was not considered decent that the bodies of the crucified should be exposed upon the coming sabbath of Paschal solemnities, there was the more obvious ground for this appeal. And it was seemly and honorable in Joseph to wish to rescue his Master’s corpse from the indignity of a criminal’s interment. The procurator had no ill will to Jesus, and perhaps took a pleasure in what would offend the priests. At all events, he was amenable to bribery. His surprise was excited by the tidings that Jesus had already expired, concerning which he required to be satisfied by an official report. Whether or not he received money from Joseph, he readily gave permission to him to take possession of the body. In the case of Joseph, who begged the body of Jesus, and of Nicodemus, who purchased the spices and aided in the interment, we see a remarkable instance of the power of the cross of the death and love of Jesusto overcome the fears excited by a regard to the world’s opinion, and by a wish to stand well with the world. The cross brings out latent love and undeveloped courage, and leads to boldness and confession.

III. THE ENTOMBMENT. In preparation for this the body was taken down from the cross, was wound in linen bought for the purpose, being enfolded in fragrant myrrh and aloes. Joseph was the owner of a garden near to Calvary, where in the solid rock was hewn a tomb, destined probably for the reception of his own remainswhat we might term a family vault. In this suitable and peaceful sepulcher Joseph, aided (as John tells us) by Nicodemus, laid the sacred form in which the Lord of life and glory had labored and suffered for mankind. Against the entrance of the grave a huge stone was rolled, to secure the resting-place from intrusion. Thus, as in a garden Christ had endured his agony, in a garden he rested in the repose of death. How cherished in the memory and heart of Christendom were and are these sad and sacred scenes, none can be ignorant. Christ’s “precious death and burial” have been celebrated in Christian hymns, commemorated in Christian ordinances, embalmed in Christian liturgies of prayer and intercession. The crucifixion, the descent from the cross, the mourning of the faithful women (the pieta), the entombment of the Savior,all these have been favorite and congenial themes with Christian painters. And of all subjects of Christian preaching, none are so pathetic, so melting, so fitted to awaken contrition for sin, so fitted to produce contempt for the world, as the topics suggested by these mournful incidents. It is solemnly affecting to think of this earth as being, during those sacred hours, the sepulcher of the Son of God.

IV. THE WITNESSES OF CHRIST‘S BURIAL. It is observable that the holy and faithful women, who had ministered to Jesus in his public career, who had stood in the neighborhood of the cross, and who had seen him diethey who were to be the first witnesses of his resurrection,these were present at the entombment, as loth to part from the Lord whom they honored and loved, as lingering for the last look upon the form of him to whose words they had so often listened with joy, and at whose hands they had received blessings priceless and immortal.

APPLICATION.

1. The moment when sin seems triumphant is the moment when Divine Providence is preparing for its confusion and destruction. To Christ’s enemies his death appeared simply the end of his holy ministry, and when his lifeless form was committed to the grave they deemed his influence for ever at an end. Yet, in truth, now was about to commence the reign of him who tasted death for every man, but was about to ascend to the throne of spiritual empire.

2. The burial of our Savior is to us the token of his love and of the completeness of his mediatorial work. That he did not shrink from even the ignominy and the weakness of the grave should be to us an assurance of his perfect humanity, his complete sympathy, and a pledge that the salvation which he did and suffered so much to secure shall be thorough and complete, shall be sure and everlasting.

3. The burial of Christ is to be, in a spiritual sense, shared by all his believing and renewed people. We are one with Christ, in his death and in his resurrection. And, as if to show how thoroughly we participate in our Savior’s death unto sin, we are represented as even buried with him. By baptism or consecration unto his death we are said to enter, as it were, his tomb; that, dying unto sin, we may rise again and live unto righteousness, holiness, and God.

4. The interment of our Lord seems to cast most precious and consolatory light upon our own and our friends’ mortality. That there is naturally a repulsiveness in the grave and in dissolution is not denied. Yet to know that our gracious Lord deigned to taste death for every man, and to be laid to rest in a cave of the earth, is to be fortified against the unpleasing and distressing associations which are all that unbelievers connect with dissolution. When the lifeless form of a good man is borne to the grave, let us think of such an event in close connection with the burial of him who was and is the Lord of life.

5. Secret disciples should take encouragement from the conduct of Joseph and Nicodemus. Remember this, that whilst you have less excuse than they had for concealing your faith and disguising your attachment to Jesus, you have more reasons and stronger inducements to open confession. The Lord Jesus has not hidden his love for you; he has expressed it in words, and proved it by sufferings as well as actions. And he expects that you should boldly avow yourselves his, that you should confess him before men. Then he will not be ashamed of you before his Father and the holy angels.

HOMILIES BY A.F. MUIR

Mar 15:1-5

Jesus at the bar of the Roman power.

In its officers and agents representative of the whole Gentile world; so that the whole human race is involved in his condemnation and death.

I. THE PURPOSE OF THE FURTHER REFERENCE. TO obtain authority for carrying out the death-sentence. This would not be allowed to a simple Jewish tribunal. The step taken was, therefore, a practical abdication of their theocratic pretensions. Hatred drives men into inconsistency and hypocrisy.

II. THE CHARGE MADE. Not the same as that upon which they themselves condemned him, but such an interpretation of it as would most readily render him liable to the judgment of the Roman government.

III. His REPLY TO PILATE. An idiomatic equivalent for “Yes,” “I am so.” The question is understood as an assertion put interrogatively, “Thou art the King of the Jews?” “The rationale of the idiom is that when the interrogative form is withdrawn from the class of interrogations referred to, the saying that remains is the reality“ (Morison). A similar purpose to that which animated the reply to the high priest is here apparent. The Roman world was certified as to the dignity of Christ. In John’s Gospel (Joh 18:36-38) the true interpretation of this title as a moral and spiritual one is recorded as having been given by Christ to Pilate. It involved no treason, therefore, against the Roman power.

IV. THE GENERAL DEMEANOUR OF CHRIST TOWARDS HIS ACCUSERS. Silence.

1. A marvel. The calmness of the Prisoner was unlike the behavior of prisoners generally, and appeared supernatural.

2. It was equivalent to an appeal to a higher tribunal.

3. An impressive moral victory.M.

Mar 15:6-15

Christ or Barabbas.

I. A REVELATION OF THE HATRED OF THE NATURAL MIND FOR TRUTH AND GOODNESS. Several ancient authorities are in favor of readings here and elsewhere which would give us, “Jesus Barabbas” (i.e. son of a father or rabbi), as the full name of the “robber” who was here the favorite of the populace. ]f this be so, there would be two of the name Jesus, and the choice would thus be strikingly emphasized. The character of Barabbas as a rioter and murderer is glossed over by the semblance of patriotism, as he is said to have been engaged in the insurrection caused by Pilate’s appropriation of the corban of the temple for building an aqueduct. In any case the personal character is utterly subordinated, and motives of policy prevail. The season of the Passover recalled the historic sparing of Israel’s firstborn and the destruction of Egypt’s. The positions seemed now to be reversed, or Israel deliberately assumed the character of Egypt, preferring that the guilty should be set free. We have here the self-conviction of:

1. Perverted religious instincts. In the case of the chief priests and people of the Jews. Their whole religious training ought to have prepared them to receive Christ.

2. Popular opinion unguided by the Spirit of God. A prey to unscrupulous influences, to false sentiment, and to passing excitements.

3. Spiritual indifference. In the person of Pilate, in whom it lent itself readily to unprincipled diplomacy and the surrender of innocence.

II. A PARABLE OF THE CHOICE EVERY MAN IS CALLED UPON TO MAKE.

1. In daily life. Minute occurrences in which the contrasts may not seem so striking, or the choice so final. Their ultimate influence in the determination of character and destiny.

2. In the great crises of religious decision. It is well at such times to consider carefully the respective ends of the courses of conduct that present themselves.

III. A SYMBOL OF THE CENTRAL MYSTERY OF REDEMPTION. In the gospel the method of salvation is that the innocent shall suffer for the guilty. Jesus the Christ thus became the substitute of Barabbas the robber. The latter only gained the prolongation of his earthly life thereby; a questionable benefit. But those who believe in Christ as the vicarious Sacrifice and voluntary Self-sacrificer for sinners will receive eternal salvation.M.

Mar 15:16-20, Mar 15:29-32

The mockery of Jesus.

The scene, the courtyard of the governor’s residence; the actors, the Roman soldiery and the Son of God; and the awful fate that awaited the Sufferer, render this mockery one of the most impressive incidents in human history. It was deliberate, brutal, and inhuman.

I. WHAT IT WAS IN HIM THAT WAS MOCKED. The crown and the purple and the sham homage are interpreted by the cry, “Hail, King of the Jews!”

1. It was his kingly pretensions they ridiculed. So the Jews had laughed to scorn his prophetic office. To those Roman soldiers, impressed with the grandeur of the power they themselves represented, the claim to be king of a small and subject land like Palestine was very petty. They could afford, so they thought, to laugh at it; even as Pilate was not afraid to have released him who preferred it.

2. But even more did they despise his title as a theocratic King. How far these citizens of the empire of law were from realizing the true character of the kingdom of righteousness! Had he even been recognized by the Jews themselves as their ruler, the nation was too small, too insignificant in a political or military point of view, to be of any consequence. There was no suspicion in their minds of danger to the Roman empire, or of the influence which his moral and spiritual character was to wield in the new ages of the world. It is, although they knew it not then, by virtue of this same moral majesty and power that he, in turn, has become the Conqueror of mankind, and is maintaining and extending his sway in regions where mouldering ruins and obsolete statutes are all that remain to witness to Rome’s vanished greatness. It is the mockers themselves that are now ridiculous.

II. HOW MEN MAY MOCK HIM STILL. There is a feeling of human tenderness that is outraged as we imagine the meek Sufferer amidst the brutal throng. But the true sentiment that ought to be awakened is that which concerns the principles of righteousness and truth, of which he was the embodiment and representative. It is for them he would have us solicitous even to jealousy. Men still wound and mock Christ:

1. When they reader to him a merely nominal homage. “When we pervert the truth of the Word for our own evil ends, we scourge the Son of man; when to justify our evils we fabricate a system of ingenious error, and thus exalt our own wisdom above the wisdom of Jesus, we plait a crown of thorns and put it on his head; when we substitute our own righteousness for the righteousness of Christ, we clothe him with a purple robe; when we are inwardly worshippers of self and outwardly worshippers of the Lord, our worship of him is a mocking salutation of ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ while every presumptuous sin we commit is a stroke inflicted on the Son of man” (W. Bruce).

2. When they ignore the moral nature of his power, relying on material and external means instead of spiritual. When they use the methods of business in a business spirit, or even the arts of diplomacy, to advance his kingdom. So men clothe Christ in the insignia of Herod. “The kingliest King was crowned with thorns!

3. When they would accept the advantages of his kingdom without observing its conditions. As when persons profess to enjoy the preaching and ordinances of the gospel, but do not carry its doctrines into practice; or when they are “straightway offended” at the tribulations and privations which true discipleship involves.M.

Mar 15:31, Mar 15:32

The Savior’s helplessness.

A paradox. The situation as regarded by those who surrounded the cross was manifestly in contradiction with the pretensions of Jesus. This prima facie impression was not accidentally produced, but belonged, so to speak, to the very essence of the gospel as a “mystery;” and it had its ends to serve in the inscrutable wisdom of God. That it tended at first to conceal the true character of the Savior’s sufferings there can be no doubt; but as certainly it prepared the way for subsequent spiritual revelation. It served

I. TO EXCITE ATTENTION. This apparent self-contradiction in the career of Jesus was a matter of public notoriety. Had it been overlooked by any, the enemies of the truth were eager to point it out. There is something piquant to the curiosity and speculation of men in a matter which wears such an aspect.

II. AS A MEANS OF AVENGING THE TRUTH UPON ITS ADVERSARIES. How quick they were to seize upon it and turn it to the best advantage! For a little while they had it all their own way. So infatuated were they, that they put the seeming contradiction in the strongest possible form; the antithesis is all but perfect. Not quite so, however. They had to confess that he had “saved others.” The monuments of his work remained, and facts are hard to discredit. There was something in the very sound which would recall histories of gracious sympathy and help; miracles of saving power. It was precisely this element of stubborn matter of fact which could not be accounted for on the theory of mere pretension, and which in turn vitiated their argument. A thousand presumptions will not disprove, but must yield to, a single fact. Now, the fact of Christ’s miraculous works is certified to us by those who sought to discredit and disprove them. Out of their own mouths are they condemned. They are self-sentenced to a vicious mill-round of mere logic. The natural man cannot understand the heavenly mystery.

III. AS A MEANS OF DISCIPLINING AND REWARDING FAITH.

1. That the disciples themselves did not comprehend it at first is evident from the Gospel narrative. It must have been hard for them to see what appeared the falsification of their hopes; harder still to be taunted by those who had so cruelly slain their Master. What part may it not have had in the “cup” the Savior himself had to drink?

2. But by this very discipline it prepared them for the inner and spiritual “discerning of the Lord’s body.” Their spiritual susceptibilities were awakened, and they began to realize the meaning of the mystery. Gradually they were to emerge from the bewilderment and perplexity. Peter and the rest of the disciples traveled far ere they reached Pentecost, but each step in the journey of their faith was a revelation of the secret of Jesus. It was not to human force he had submitted, but to his Father’s will. The necessity that bound him to the cross was a spiritual one. It was because he wished to save others absolutely that he would and could not save himself.M.

Mar 15:40, Mar 15:41

Women watching the cross.

The prominence of women in the Gospel narrative suggests the fact that Christianity has done more to awaken the spiritual nature of women, and to furnish them with a sphere for the exercise of their special gifts and graces, than any other religion. For the first time the gospel gave to woman dignity and recognized position in spiritual things. In the gospel, the feminine as well as the masculine aspects and phases of morality are represented. Why were they at the cross?

I. A PROOF OF THEIR ATTACHMENT TO CHRIST.

1. They had already shown this. They were, some of them, of good social standing, and had command of considerable means. This advantage they had employed in the interests of Christ and his work” they ministered unto him” when he was in Galilee. And the service they rendered involved a certain inconvenience and trouble, for they had to follow him almost as much as his apostles.

2. Now they gave even more signal evidence. Modestly retiring to the outskirts of the rabble, they persistently watched him. They might have been excused by ordinary scruples from witnessing the horrible scene, but they could not allow themselves to go away. He still represented their highest spiritual interest, and they were willing to brave anything for his sake.

II. A TRIAL OF THEIR LOVE. It rose into heroic resolution and sacrifice.

1. How typical their experience was of that which their sisters have had to go through in all ages! They stood by helpless, unable to render any further service. It was not for them to attempt a rescue when brave men had forsaken him and fled. But they could show the virtue of passive endurance. They could prove to the Sufferer that their love was unabated, their faith forlorn, but not dead. So many a noble wife, sister, or mother has had to stand by when loved ones have been done to death, or ruined by great concerns in which they might not interfere. They have been able only to trust and wait and pray, to comfort when they could not deliver. One consolation remained to themthey had done what they could.

2. To so try it was the grandest recognition of its genuineness. They were accounted worthy to suffer with Christ. Their affection was to pass through the fires seven times refined. Peter might be faithless, and the rest of the disciples sadly fail, but they could watch with the Savior as his spirit sank beneath its accumulated woe.M.

Mar 15:42-47

The burial of the Crucified.

I. PROVIDED FOR BY GOD. There are several striking proofs of providential arrangement in the burying of the Savior. He never stipulated as to where or how he should be buried; his mind was too much occupied as to how he should die. Yet were great things to turn upon the manner, the time, and the place of his burial. He whose angels hid the grave of Moses, was equally careful to make known the place where his Son lay. The sepulcher was new, and in the midst of a garden, therefore isolated from other graves. The identity of the risen One is thus secured against all possibility of mistake. In inspiring the agents through whom the burial was effected, God fulfilled his own eternal appointment. The death, hastened by the unusual delicacy of the Sufferer, and the intervention of the sabbath, secured on the one hand that “not a bone should be broken,” and, on the other, that he should be buried on the day before the sabbath, his rest in the grave coinciding with the sabbatic rest of the Creator, fulfilling the week, so to speak, of the old economy, and ending with the beginning of the first day of the next week, thus ushering in a new economy, a new creation. The garden-tomb of Joseph a fit resting-place for him who was to be the Firstfruits of the resurrection. If the cross was shameful, the tomb was honorable. “They had appointed him a grave with the despised; and among the honored (did he obtain it) in his death” (Isa 53:9, Lange’s translation).

II. VOLUNTARILY EFFECTED BY MEN.

1. A Victory of faith. A “councillor of honorable estate” is moved by an inward impulse to make this his own special concern. The tragic circumstances of the last few hours had touched his heart and kindled his enthusiasm; and he and his friend Nicodemus”the same who came to Jesus by night”casting off all secrecy or fear of man, vied with one another in paying the last tribute of respect to the illustrious Dead. His simple request was an act of faith; the boldness which rendered it so effectual was a victory of faith. Already the power of the cross was being felt. The centurion, the governor, Joseph, and Nicodemus alike confess to its influence.

2. A tribute of love. How careful are the two in their preparations! The linen cloth and the spices are the offering of affection, which follows its object even to the tomb. As in Mary’s spikenard, the question of expense is put wholly out of sight. The richest and best that they may offer are brought forth for the occasion.

3. In token of undying hope. The spices arrested the process of corruption, and witnessed to the expectation of the resurrection.M.

HOMILIES BY A. ROWLAND

Mar 15:11, Mar 15:12

The foes of Jesus.

It is remarkable that the evangelists speak of their Lord’s enemies with such unruffled calmness. If our dearest friend had been subjected to inhuman treatment, ending in his death, we should have held up the names of his oppressors to the execration of the world. But in the Gospels we look in vain for a strong epithet, or a burst of indignant declamation. This was not because the evangelists were deficient in love to their Lord, but because they had caught something of the spirit of him “who, when he was reviled, reviled not again,” and because they had learnt that amid these strange, sad scenes the Divine purpose was being fulfilled, and that he who was the Victim of sinners was the Sacrifice for sin. Hostility to the Lord Jesus Christ is the irrefragable proof of man’s antagonism to goodness and truth. The cross of Calvary, stained by his blood, is a witness at once to the depravity of man and the infinite love of God. Hatred to goodness was never more pronounced and desperate, for goodness was now both incarnate and aggressive. It was no longer an abstraction, but a Person; no longer inert, but active. The Jews were generally left unmolested, because they were content to dwell as a peculiar and separate people, without assailing idolatry in others. But our Lord and his disciples endeavored to make the truth known and felt. Moses said in effect, “Keep yourselves from surrounding peoples, lest ye be defiled.” Christ said, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” The old economy was represented by the temple, which was compact, perfect, kept free from the defiling tread of the heathen; the new was represented by the mustard seed, which would grow under the open sky till it became a tree, and many nations found rest under its shadow. It was partly because Jesus Christ was aggressive in his work that the world rose in arms against him. Let us study the characteristics of some of his foes, and discover their motives, that we may be on our guard against becoming their modern representatives. In the two verses we have chosen we have glimpses of the priests, of the people, and of Pontius Pilate.

I. THE PRIESTS WERE HOSTILE TO OUR LORD FROM PRIDE. They should have been the first to welcome him. As Jews they were familiar with the utterances of the prophets, and as priests they should have known the meaning of the sacrifices they offered. They had heard the preaching of John when he announced Messiah, and they had again and again had evidence respecting the work and teaching of Jesus. But pride summoned prejudice to build up an obstacle impervious to all assaults. Their social dignity refused to recognize this peasant Teacher; their intellectual culture spurned the utterances of the Prophet of Nazareth; and their ecclesiastical prestige held it to be incredible that a carpenter’s Son should be “the Light of the world.” In our day, too, pride has such disastrous influence. Many admit that Jesus Christ was a pattern of benevolence and of moral purity; but when he declares himself to be an infallible Teacher of Divine truth, when he claims superhuman power, when he demands submission to his will, they rise against him, as those did who once exclaimed, “For good works we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; because thou, being a man, makest thyself God.”

II. PILATE WAS HOSTILE TO OUR LORD FROM POLICY. He saw at a glance the vindictiveness of the priests, and the innocence of him they accused; and, after a few minutes’ conversation, frankly said, “I find in him no fault at all.” But this was followed by a pitiful struggle and fall. He tried to rid himself of responsibility by sending the Galilean to Herod; he offered to release him, not on the ground of innocence, but as an act of grace, usual at the Passover; he cruelly scourged him, in the hope that this would satisfy the bloodthirsty mob. But when these devices failed, and the people threatened Pilate himself, as a traitor to the emperor, he delivered Jesus to be crucified. He fell through moral cowardice, brought about by former crimes, fearing lest he should lose office and honor unless he fell in with the demands of this brutal crowd. Things seen rule the man who has no faith in things unseen. Personal interests seemed more to him than the life or death of one poor Prisoner. He yielded to clamor; and though at the time he knew it not, he crucified the Christ.

III. THE PEOPLE WERE HOSTILE TO OUR LORD FROM PASSION. “The chief priests moved the people.” They would urge that Jesus had been condemned by their own orthodox court, and that it was the duty of every patriot to induce the Romans to support its decisions; and they would further urge that Barabbas, the leader of an insurrection, was a friend of the people and a champion of their liberties, so that he was to be preferred to Jesus of Nazareth. The mass of the people were not intelligently hostile to our Lord. Some knew little of him, and thought that the Sanhedrim was best able to judge of such questions; and others went with the popular current, whether it led them to shout “Hosanna!” or “Crucify him!” Hence they were included with the soldiers in the prayer of our Lord, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”A.R.

Mar 15:33

Darkness around the cross.

When we remember who he was who was dying amidst the mockery of the world he came to save, we are no longer incredulous about this statement. The “Light of the world” was in darkness, the Savior was refusing to save himself, the King of glory was wearing thorns as his crown, and had ascended the cross as his throne. The event referred to in our text is one of many examples of the deep and secret connection existing between the kingdoms of nature and of grace. We believe that the Invisible created the visible, and still acts upon it, producing now and again transmutations of its energies, though never making a break in their continuity, and that when Christ Jesus came forth from the invisible world there was manifested in him a peculiar communication between these two realms. In him was seen the connection which had so often been indicated in the Divine economy, e.g. a curse had accompanied man’s spiritual fall. Promises of temporal good were associated with moral worth. Images drawn from the “desert” and the “trees” and “rivers” by the prophets found their justification in the truth uttered afterwards by St. Paul, “The whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now,” etc. The darkening of the sun was the testimony of Nature to her dying Lord; a hint that creation is dependent on him, that Nature is supported by unseen spiritual powers, and that the fate of the earth is involved in the kingdom of God. It is no meaningless portent described here, but an event which had its teaching both immediate and remote. Consider

I. THE EFFECTS OF THIS DARKNESS ON THOSE AROUND THE CROSS.

1. This supernatural gloom would increase the solemnity of the event. As the darkness grew denser, silence would fall on the gibing tongues and every noisy laugh would be stilled; and as the gloom deepened into unearthly night over the busy streets, the open fields, and the sacred temple, many would ask themselves, “What meaneth this?” Carelessness and flippant scepticism are always out of place in view of the cross. If the narrative be mythical, it should at least be rejected intelligently and seriously; for, if it be true, it involves stupendous issues to us all.

2. It hid his agony from the onlookers. Faithful friends and, above all, the loving mother stood there till they could bear no more; and God would not suffer them to be tried above bearing, so darkness shrouded the Sufferer. And the foes of our Lord were shut out from a scene too sacred for them to witness. Beyond what was necessary, the well-beloved Son should not be exposed to their brutal jeers.

3. It was an admonition to our Lord‘s foes. They were readers of Old Testament Scriptures, and knew well how their fathers had been dealt with. They remembered that in the day of their national deliverance darkness had fallen on Jehovah’s foes, and had proved the precursor of heavier plagues, and therefore we do not wonder that some went home “beating their breasts,” and saying, “What next?” Would that they had turned even then!

II. THE SUGGESTIONS OF THIS DARKNESS TO THE WORLD.

1. It indicated the going out of the world‘s Light. Jesus had plainly declared, “I am the Light of the world;” “Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you.” To some, at least, such words would come back with new meaning and power. To reject Christ is to shut off light from the soul, and become ready for the outer darkness. A Christless world was set forth when the sun was darkened.

2. It suggested the ignorance of the Gentiles and the malignity of the Jews. The soldiers were brutal, yet knew not what they did. Pilate, in political scheming, had lost all sense of righteousness and truth, and so in ignorance delivered Jesus to be crucified. “Darkness covered the earth, and gross darkness the people.” On the other hand, the Jews had in themselves the fulfillment of the words, “The god of this world hath blinded the minds of them that believe not.”

3. It reminded the Church of the mystery of the Atonement. The death of the Lord Jesus had a Godward as well as a worldward aspect. It was to attract human love, but at the same time to reveal Divine love. When the darkness passed away, and the sun shone upon the cross, the returning light was like the bow of promise after the Flooda sign of peace between man and God, and a pledge of “the rainbow round about the throne,” in the land where all give thanks to God and to the Lamb that was slain.A.R.

Mar 15:43

Joseph of Arimathaea.

In comparison with the leading apostles of our Lord Joseph of Arimathaea was not distinguished, lie had not the spirituality of St. John, nor the prominence of St. Peter, nor the world-wide influence of St. Paul. We are consciously turning from the generals of Christ’s army to contemplate one of the ordinary soldiers; but it was he who, when his natural leaders had fallen, stepped to the front and proved himself a hero. We know but little of Joseph beyond such facts as these: he was a rich man, respected by his countrymen as one who was “good and just;” a member of the Sanhedrim, who refused his consent to the resolution passed that Jesus should be put to death; and a resident in Jerusalem, who, having prepared for himself a new grave, dedicated it to his crucified Lord. We may learn valuable lessons from his courage and fidelity, the more so if we blend together all the references made to him by the evangelists.

I. THAT WE OUGHT TO REFUSE OUR CONSENT TO A WRONG, EVEN THOUGH OUR REFUSAL WILL NOT PREVENT ITS ACCOMPLISHMENT. Except for Nicodemus, Joseph stood alone in protesting against the action resolved on by the council against Jesus. He was, no doubt, strongly urged to yield to the majority, so that the council might appear united in the endeavor to put down One who had disregarded its authority. But although his protest was seemingly powerless, he resolutely persisted in it, and to the last he “did not consent to the counsel and deed of them.” lie was an example in this to all who conscientiously object to habits and practices which obtain in their own sphere of activity, be they politicians, men of business, or boys and girls at school. But let all such be sure that a real principle is at stake, not a prejudice, and that they are not moved by self-assertion, obstinacy, or pride.

II. THAT BY BRAVELY DOING WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE RIGHT WE EMBOLDEN AND HELP OTHERS. Joseph required courage on the council, and still more now when he went in to Pilate to beg the body of Jesus. So terrible was the hatred felt against Jesus by the chief priests that the procurator himself had trembled before it, and Peter, with his fellow-disciples, had forsaken the Lord. Yet Joseph stepped to the front as a friend of the crucified One, and Nicodemus followed him. All men of decided convictions thus influence others. Thousands thanked God secretly for the stand which Elijah made on Carmel. Multitudes wait to be led aright by those whose character and ability bring responsibility.

III. THAT IF WE GO RIGHT ONWARD IN THE PATH OF DUTY WE SHALL SUCCEED BETTER THAN WE EXPECT. When Joseph undertook his mission he knew that he might risk his life, or at least his reputation; that he might be called on to pay a heavy and prohibitory ransom as a bribe to the governor; or that he might be refused with scorn and insult. Yet, when he went in boldly to Pilate, to his own amazement, his request was freely granted! Many have had a similar experience: e.g. the Israelites when they obeyed the command, “Go forward,” and saw the sea divide before their advancing footsteps; and Peter, who followed the angel and found the great gate of the prison open of its own accord. Apply this to typical experiences in a Christian’s life.

IV. THAT A CRISIS COMES IN THE HISTORY OF MEN WHICH DETERMINES THEIR WHOLE FUTURE. The crucifixion of Jesus constituted a crisis to Joseph. Under the influence of sorrow and indignation he was prompted to this step, and the future destiny of this secret disciple depended upon his taking it. Such times come to us all. Our spiritual life has not always the same even flow. Occasionally we are strangely, strongly moved to resolve, to speak, or to act, and tremendous issues depend upon our obedience to God-given impulse. If the vessel aground on the harbor bar is not set free when the tide is highest, she will be wrecked in the coming storm.

V. THAT THE MOVING CAUSE OF DECISION FOR GOD IS THE CROSS OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST. Joseph had listened to the teaching of Jesus, and witnessed his superhuman works, but till now had been a disciple “secretly,” for fear of the Jews. That position was a false one, and so long as he was in it he was deficient in gratitude and courage. But when he saw Jesus on the cross he felt as the centurion did when he cried, “Truly this was the Son of God;” and henceforth he was known as the Lord’s disciple and servant. Christ’s death has been to millions the beginning of new life.

VI. THAT GOD WILL FULFILL HIS PURPOSES WHETHER HIS AVOWED SERVANTS ARE LOYAL TO HIM OR NOT. The twelve were scattered and the Church seemed destroyed, when suddenly there came forth from their former obscurity two secret disciples, who took upon themselves the work which others had left. And in all ages God has his faithful ones who are sometimes unrecognized by the Church; yet, filled with his Spirit, they shall aid in establishing the kingdom of the crucified, and now risen, Christ.

HOMILIES BY R. GREEN

Mar 15:6-15

Barabbas; or, the evil choice.

A strange custom prevailed. To appease the anger of the rabble, and to curry favor with them, Pilate was wont, on the recurrence, of certain feasts, to release a prisoner, giving the mob permission to choose who should be the favored one. At this feast “the multitude went up and began to ask him to do as he was wont to do unto them.” Knowing that “for envy the chief priests had delivered him up,” he tested the feeling of the multitude by asking them if he should release “the King of the Jews,” thus giving them the opportunity of repudiating the deed of the priests. The question hangs as in a balance. The voice of a rabble is called upon to decide the fate of “the Son of man. On that voice hinges (apparently) the course of the work of the world’s redemption. The die is cast. The multitude make their election. The choice is proclaimed in a wild, uproarious cry, “Not this man, but Barabbas.” So the besotted rabble declare their spirit, their low moral condition, their attitude towards truth and righteousness. Barabbas, we learn, was “a robber,” and he was cast into prison “for a certain insurrection made in the city, and for murder.” Thus they “denied the holy and righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted unto” them. Nothing could more clearly declare the spirit they were of. Sadly and in silence many pure hearts mourned while the rabble gave vent to their evilness, pouring forth the uttermost malignity as a flood to sweep away “the Prince of life.” The insensate tools of a corrupt, self-condemned priesthood, they, by yielding all too readily to them who should have guided them into the right way, become identified with “the chief priests” in a choice which for ever brands them with the utmost vileness. The spirit of the people must be judged by their attitude towards Jesus on the one hand, and towards Barabbas on the other; and a word is sufficient to declare it. In the one we behold the Teacher of righteousness, who had endeavored to enforce the laws of God. He represented truth. To it he bore witness. He denounced evil in thought, in word, in deed. He opened to the feet of the people the path of virtue; he pointed to the gates of the eternal city, and gave men assurance of immortality. Never had the world looked upon so perfect an embodiment of pure goodness; never will it look upon his like until he himself appear again and every eye beholds him. The other is the embodiment of evil. His name is the synonym of it. The one name men dare not assume from its loftiness; the other they would not from its lowness. But this rabble-host chooses the evil one, and so declares its spirit is in accord with his. It is self-condemned. How painfully we read:

1. The perilous influence which unscrupulous leaders may exert over an undisciplined, untutored mob.

2. How possible it is for the human heart so to deceive itself that the highest representatives of the purest system of truth and morals may be debased into an alliance with the most corrupt and degraded, and may prostitute the holiest functions to the most evil ends. High priests of God may lead men to the service of the devil.

3. The sad consequences of

(1) a blinded intelligence,

(2) an undisciplined moral nature,

(3) a corrupt prejudice.

High priests and people have their way. “Their voices prevailed.” And Pilate, moved with fear, and evidently against his convictions of right, “to content the multitude,” “released him whom they asked for; but Jesus he delivered up to their will.” Thus the world to-day demands its Barabbas and rejects Jesus. Truth, goodness, charity, patience, heavenly mindednessall that is pure and goodis sacrificed, and by “the multitude” still evil is preferred, and they, alas! are “content.”G.

Mar 15:16-32

The crucifixion: the human deed.

To the contemplation of that supreme fact in history, around which the thoughts, the hearts, of men gather more and more, we are directed by the few sad, solemn words, “Pilate delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.” The preliminary incidents are minutely related. They describe the most solemn mockery ever perpetrated. The scourging first. He is stripped to the waist, his hands tied behind him; his bent back is beaten with leathern thongs weighted at the ends with bits of lead or sharpened bone. Bleeding, he is led within the court, “the Praetorium,” where the whole cohort of soldiers vent their ingenuity in exposing their Victim to ridicule. They cast a purple-dyed military cloak over him; with their hard hands they twist twigs of nabk, with its long, hard, sharp spikes or thorns, into a mock-crown, and press it down upon his fever-heated brow. In his yielding hand they thrust a reed, and bow their knees in mock submission and homage, and with coarse gibes hail him “King of the Jews.” Snatching the reed from his hand, they beat him with it on his bleeding head; they strike him with their fists or with rods; and in the direst indignity spit upon him. Then, “wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe,” he is led out. To this uncomplaining Suffererthis smitten and forsaken OnePilate calls the attention of the multitude with words which, like those he wrote, float on through the ages, bearing their different message as the listening ears differed”Ecce homo!” The echoing cry from the mingled voices of “the chief and the officers” arose above all others, “Crucify, crucify!” A miserable squabble between Pilate and the Jews ends in his “Behold your King!” and their reply “Away with him; away with him, crucify him! We have no king but Caesar.” In the temple Judas is casting down “the thirty pieces of silver,” making confession, in a repentance all too late, “I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent blood,” and his agonized spirit seeks a vain relief in a hasty destruction of a life he cannot support Jesus “bearing the cross, is led away to be crucified, when, stoking, exhausted with suffering, beneath its weight, he is relieved by its being laid on “one Simon of Cyrene”the first in a long line of lowly cross-bearers who endure the shame for Jesus’ sake. “And they bring him unto the place Golgotha.” One only spark of humanity is left. “They offered him wine mingled with myrrh.” Then upon a crosssymbol of the uttermost degradation and shame, and more than a symbol of the uttermost sufferingthey stretched his sacred, quivering limbs, piercing his hands and his feet with rough nails. Thus “they crucified him.“ Then from out of the most indescribable agony of body broke forth the gentle murmur of a loving heart in modest prayer, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” Ah! they crushed, they broke that heart; but it sent forth only the sweet fragrance of its love, as a crushed flower its perfume. But he is not alone. “‘With him they crucify two robbers, one on his right hand and one on his left.” Thus is he “numbered with the transgressors.” “Racked by the extremest pain, and covered with every shame which men were wont to heap on the greatest criminals; forsaken and denied by his disciples; no sigh escaped his lips, no cry of agony, no bitter or faltering word; only a prayer for the forgiveness of his enemies. They had acted in blindness, under the influence of religious and political fanaticism; for, to use St. Paul’s words, had they known it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” Surely they could not know, or it would not have to be recorded in one sentence: “And they crucify him, and part his garments among them, casting lots upon them, what each should take.“ So hard, so insensible! In presence of the central fact in the world’s history, men gamble!

Here we must find our lessons, in the contrasted intensity of interest in human salvation which is shown from above, and that careless, blind indifference which marks men “before whose eyes Jesus Christ [is] openly set forth crucified.” The world must see itself represented in the actors on that dread evening; and each of us may see himself in one or other of the many surrounding “the Man“ on that day of darkness, doom, and death. Let each bring himself into presence of that crossthe true judgment-seatof Christ, and there test his heart, and try and prove his life. And further, let each one learn how his hand is not wanting among those rude hands that smote that tender flesh; nor his words from those that fell on that quick ear; nor his sins from those that burdened that too heavy-weighted heart.

“Our sins of spite were part of those that day,

Whose cruel whips and thorns did make him smart;

Our lusts were those that tired him in the way;

Our want of love was that which pierced his heart:

And still when we forget or slight his pain,
We crucify and torture him again.”

Mar 15:33-41

The crucifixions: the Divine words.

Seven words are counted by them who now treasure his sayings, as spoken by Jesus on the cross. Each evangelist contributes his portion towards the little perfect stock.

I. The first was A WORD OF PRAYER FOR FORGIVENESS, itself a forgiveness. “I forgive them: do thou, O Father, forgive.” It was a word of excuse for them who did it ignorantly and in unbelief. “They see only a malefactor: open their eyes that they may see and know.” If the prayer may be offered for them who, with wicked hands, crucified the Lord of glory, because they did it ignorantly, learn we that such a prayer may be offered, and surely will be heard, for all ignorant, blinded ones who, in sinning against the Lord, are sinners against their own souls In proportion as we sin wifully, having knowledge of the truth and of what we do, we put ourselves further and further away from the possibility of forgiveness. How true is it that men to-day sin, not knowing what they do! This prayer covers all sin, for no one knows truly and fully what he does when he sins against Christ.

II. The second word is A WORD OF PROMISE IN RESPONSE TO PRAYER AND CONFESSION. The time was brief; the last moments of the twelfth hour were hurrying past. In the heart of one of the malefactors some early teaching remained to quicken the conscience into life; and the punishment of crime was working its right effect. “We indeed justly we receive the due reward of our deeds.” The word which passed the sacred lips, unmoistened with the stupefying wine, were words of life and healing and promise in response to the prayer, “Jesus, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom.” What faith is here! Faith in the kingdom, in the coming, in the readiness to hear! “Jesus” may not have had the same meaning to him it has to us. The reply to a dying, penitent thief has been a fountain of life to many. “Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.”

III. A third, word was A WORD OF TENDER, FILIAL LOVE. The languid, bloodshot, half-closed eyes turned, and “Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved.” The fountain of love was not stayed; the holy heart was well-nigh breaking, yet it beat truly in all filial affection. From out of his great suffering he thinks of her, and thinks with fervent love. “Hail, thou that art highly favored I” He is still her Son, henceforth to be represented in the “son” who is now to regard her as “mother.” But he makes provision for her future. Ere those lips which spoke so often to the disciple” whom he loved” were closed, he uttered one last word to him, revealing the deep thought of the Sufferer’s heart, and committing to him a sacred charge he would entrust only to one “whom he loved””Behold thy mother.” It is all beautifully human; but as all human deeds, when they are true and beautiful, approach the Divine, so was this beautifully Divine. It was enough. A wish from that heart and those dried lips was sacred. “From that hour the disciple took her unto his own home”took her with the sword piercing through her soul.

IV. A fourth word is FROM THE VERY ABYSS OF SUFFERINGperhaps from a greater depth than any word arose that ever escaped from the lips of man. Darkness was over the land; darkness was over the pure Sufferer’s soul. The words present the deepest of mysteries; we cannot open it. Was it, as has been suggested, the effect of the combination of profound mental anguish with the well-nigh intolerable pangs of dissolution, rendered all the more natural and inevitable in the case of One whose feelings were so deep, tender, and real; whose moral consciousness was so pure, and whose love was so intense? Had his abiding conviction of fellowship with God for the moment given way under the pressure of[extreme bodily and mental suffering? Was it a mere passing feeling, as though he were no longer sustained by the power of the Divine life? Surely more than this. Ah! who can know? It is only as we descend to these depths that we can understand how dark, how colds how sad they are. Mere words can never convey an idea of suffering. The bitterness of this cup he only knows who drinks it. What is the forsaking by the God to whom he still clings”My God, my God”and “why” is he forsaken, remain for us depths into whose darkness we may peer but cannot fathom.

V. A fifth word is FROM THE POOR REVERED FRAME. Fainting from loss of blood, from acute pain, from unrelieved suffering. “I thirst.” Truly he may say, “My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws.” The former cry ascended to heaven; this sinks upon the earth. A moistened sponge on a hyssop rod brought him temporary relief and brought him strength sufficient to utter

VI. A sixth word, uttered with “a loud” (was it a triumphant?) “voice,” declaring, “It is finished.” Yea, all is finished, notwithstanding the efforts of wicked men to prevent it. They unconsciously wrought out that which the Divine “hand and counsel foreordained to come to pass.” “It is finished;” yea, Jesus’ work is finished. The great end is reached. The last supreme act., or consummation of the continuous act of that life which was” one offering of himself,” is now in process of completion. So far as relates to the toil, and service, and sacrifice, and suffering of earth, all is finished; and the last act of the conscious life, the last breath of the living frame, the last word of the lips of truth, seal the whole past.

VII. And in a seventh word, with one supreme effort to that Father from whom he seemed momentarily separated, he yields up himself”gave up his spirit.” Now are the words fulfilled, “I lay down my life, that I may take it again. No one taketh it away from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received from my Father.”G.

Mar 15:42-47

The entombment.

The sabbath hurried onthe day of rest. Joseph of Arimathaea, “a councillor of honorable estate, who also himself was looking for the kingdom of God,” begged permission of Pilate to have the body of Jesus for interment. Pilate, being satisfied of the death of Jesus, “granted the corpse to Joseph.” Then with tender hands he wrapped the body in a linen cloth and laid it in a tomb; “and he rolled a stone against the door of the tomb.” Now the work is complete. The human rage is satisfied. The voice of the accuser is silent. The Divine condescension is perfect. It could descend no lower. The grave is the goal of human weakness. It is the lowest step; then begins the upward ascent. The humiliation being complete, the exaltation begins. The grave is really the pathway to glory and honor. Jesus, who has sanctified every path of life, now sanctifies the grave. He has withdrawn the sting from death; he dissipates the darkness from the tomb. And though we cannot desire the grave, yet it is no longer the repulsive, loathsome place it had ever been. Christ in the tomb of Earth plainly speaks to us many lessons.

I. Concerning him, it teaches us that No DESCENT WAS TOO GREAT FOR HIM TO MAKE IN HIS LOVING SERVICE TO THE CHILDREN OF MEN. He who stooped so low as to be born in a manger, sharing his first bed with lowing oxen, stoops lower still in making ready for the children of men their last sleeping-place. He who washed the feet of his disciples shared the grave with guilty men. Forasmuch as they whom he was not ashamed to call brethren must needs die and be buried, “he also himself in like manner partook of the same;” as “it behoved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren,” he refused not this.

II. Concerning the grave, it is A SANCTIFICATION OF IT. We need not be ashamed to descend into this valley of humiliation, for our “Head” has gone before. If we can endure the sufferings of our cross, we can despise the shame of our tomb. We need not fear to die, for he hath brought “to nought him that had the power of death, that is the devil;” nor need we fear to lie down in the tomb, for Jesus lay there.

“‘Tis now a cell, where angels use
To come and go with heavenly news,
And in the ears of mourners say,
‘Come, see the place where Jesus lay.'”

It is not the final goal of the human feet, as we shall soon learn. Its bolts can be withdrawn; its seal can be broken; its stone can be rolled away. The grave may be the pathway to the throne.

III. But it brings home to our hearts CHRIST‘S CLAIM UPON US FOR OUR UNDYING GRATITUDE. Never shall we repay that debt. Even the bitterest cup he will drink for us; the most laborious service he will undertake for us; the uttermost humiliation he will endure for us. We owe all to him in the constitution of our life and its surrounding conditions; we owe no less the entire redemption of our life from all evils; we owe the smoothing of the rough places of life, our uplifting above the pains of life, and we owe the sanctification and perfecting of life. Truly we owe all. Only by reverent faith, by lowly service, by growing love, can we acknowledge our deep-abiding debt. This we may perfect by a calm and trustful yielding up our life to our Father on high, both in the daily dying to self and in a final committal of all to him, breathing out our life into his hands.

“So, buried with our Lord, we’ll close our eyes
To the decaying world, till angels bid us rise.”

G.

HOMILIES BY E. JOHNSON

Mar 15:1-20

The second trial.

I. IT ELICITED THE INNOCENCE OF JESUS. Charges were made that he had excited sedition through the country, had prohibited the Roman tribute, and had claimed royalty. The last only had any show of plausibility in it. Jesus admitted his kingship, but declared it in immortal words to be the sovereignty of truth over the consciences of men. Reading the narratives of the other evangelists, we gain a clear impression of the innocence of Jesus, as it was exhibited to all who looked on, and defied the inventions of malice. Especially is that innocence reflected from the bearing of Pilate. To him our Lord replied when he asked for information; but met the accusations of the’ priests with a silence equally significant. And Pilate was struck dumb with conviction. Character is self-sufficiency. It is “centrality; the impossibility of being displaced or overset.” Words will not prove innocence; it speaks louder in silence. Passion and unreason illustrate it. We are generally more anxious to avoid misconstruction than to act as we think right. Jesus teaches us to be servants of the truth, and to be indifferent to the constructions of our enemies. God and the angels are the true spectators of our actions; and the judgment of posterity will reflect the judgment of God.

II. IT ELICITED HIS PERFECT LOYALTY. There must come a time when the truths we have professed will demand to be sealed by our action. Christ had taught men to “seek first the kingdom of God;” to postpone everything to duty; to take heed to the light within; to esteem the soul of greater worth than the whole world. His conduct now falls into harmony with his words; and perfect music flows through the world from both. He preferred the fulfillment of duty to the preservation of life.

III. IT ELICITED HUMAN INJUSTICE AND VICE. Socrates told his judges at Athens that it was they who were really on their trial. So it was the Sanhedrim, and also Pilate, who were on this occasion tried and condemned. The ages have since been reverberating their damnation. Expediency and worldly favor were in one scale; right, innocence, truth, in the other. The former dipped. Worldly authority was opposed to spiritual majesty; the former struck a blow at the latter, which recoiled with Divine effect. The condemnation of Christ was an outrage upon the conscience of the world, both Jewish and pagan. Pilate’s illustrious countryman, Cicero, had taught with enthusiasm that the useful and the right form a unity; that the useful can never be put before the right without defeating the social good (‘De Officiis,’ 3.). An action can never be useful unless it is first right. Here was a great reversal of that order. That Jesus should die is expedient, said the Sanhedrim; but not right, said their conscience. On other grounds, Pilate took the same position; while his wife, like a second conscience, would have restrained him. In similar crises of personal experience, let us remember that to subordinate right to expediency is to condemn the Lord of life afresh.

IV. IT ILLUSTRATES THE METHODS OF PROVIDENCE. When innocence suffers and violence prevails, the foundations of moral order seem to be shaken, and the righteous exclaim, “What shall we do?” The face of Providence seems obscured. But God is One who hideth himself. What we call the evil in nature may be the disguise of his wisdom; and not less does he conceal himself behind the evil of men. Here the greatest evil on their part gave occasion for the greatest good.

V. IT ILLUSTRATES THE ILLUSIVENESS OF APPEARANCES. Jesus is insulted by Roman soldiers; himself the spiritual Emperor of mankind. He is mocked with a semblance of royalty; the mocking expresses an eternal fact. “Ridicule is the test of truth.” Beware of mockery and insolence; we may be defying the Spirit of God. Seek below the praise and the blame of men, their applause and their abuse, for the eternal fact. Judge not of Christianity by what men say of it, but by itself. Estimate not its divinity by the worldly honor that attaches to it; but rather by the dishonor of the many, and the loyalty and life of the few. Truth and meekness, truth and spiritual force,these are mightier than all falsehood and scorn.J.

Mar 15:21-32

The Crucifixion.

I. THERE MAY BE A BLESSING IN ENFORCED SERVICE. Simon the Cyrenian is raised into the light of history; perhaps to teach us this. No nobler honor for the Christian than to reflect, “I have been called to bear the cross.” And for some to reflect, “I was forced into carrying the cross I would have refused, or left on the ground.” So with that other Simon, surnamed Peter.

II. PAIN IS RATHER TO BE STRUGGLED WITH THAN ARTIFICIALLY SUPPRESSED, We seek anodynes for our troubles. Jesus teaches us to react against them by the force of faith. In the hour of duty we are to seek presence, not absence, of mind; to collect our faculties, not to distract them.

III. WHAT IS PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE MAY BE MORALLY IMPOSSIBLE. Christ could have come down from the cross in the former sense, could not in the latter. He presents the ideal of suffering service for us, and the revelation of God’s ways. There may be things which God cannot do, in our way of speaking, because he knows they are not well to be done. We, at ]cast, cannot save ourselves at the expense of duty, and must be content to appear foolish or impotent to many. Suffering and salvation are facts eternally wedded and at one.J.

Mar 15:33-39

Death of Jesus.

I. THERE MAY FOR A TIME BE AN ECLIPSE FOR THE FAITHFUL. “No light!” There is an extremity of trial in these words. No hope! The very sun of life seems extinguished, and all worth of existence vanished. Reason can find no foothold in this darkness.

II. YET THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE DARKNESS. Out of it comes the cry of faith. The first words of a long-remembered psalm break from the lips of Jesus; a psalm that rises out of the minor into the major key, from the darkness into the blaze of prophetic vision. Doubtless in that moment the soul of Jesus passed swiftly through the whole scale of that psalmist’s experience, and rose into joy upon the wings of thanksgiving.

III. MAY THE TERMINUS OF LIFE AND OF SERVICE BE IDENTICAL! We may breathe this prayer before the cross of Christ. Our work finishes, what need have we to tarry? Pericles, in his oration over those who fell for Athens’ good, says that, devoting their lives which had been usefully passed in peace on the field, their happiness and their life ended at the same moment. As Christians, our ideal is service, terminable only with life, “Too busy with the crowded hour to fear to live or die.” May we

“Obey the voice at eve obey’d at prime;
Lowly faithful, banish fear,

Right onward drive unarm’d;

The port, well worth the cruise, is near,

And every wave is charm’d.”

IV. FINIS CORONAT OPUS. “Many signs showed that he who died upon the cross was the Son of God.” “Regard the end.” It reflects its light upon the whole course from its beginning. What deep conviction of sin, of righteousness, of judgment; of the frailty of man, the power and wisdom and the love of God, roots itself in the cross of Jesus! It is an end which is a beginning.J.

Mar 15:40-47

The burial.

I. FAITH THRIVES IN SORROW. Remoter disciples draw near, and secret disciples come forth, in the hour of humiliation and defeat. The sun sets, but not their hope; and the stars rise, but their faith is earlier up.

II. LOVE SURVIVES ALL LOSS. Its burning ray, like that of a hidden gem, flashes out in the gloom. The nobleness of Christ had taught them to master selfishness and despair. His form was enshrined in the “amber of memory.” They who had been all eye when he was present, were all recollection now that he was gone.

III. GRIEFS ARE CERTAIN, JOYS COME BY SURPRISE. It was certain that Jesus was dead; and none expected his resurrection. There is change, not loss, in the kingdom of the spirit. God takes away a good to restore it in a new form. Disappointment vacates the heart for higher blessings. His revelation is in light and shadow.J.

HOMILIES BY J.J. GIVEN

Mar 15:1-15

Parallel passages: Mat 27:1, Mat 27:2, Mat 27:11-26; Luk 23:1-7, Luk 23:13-24; Joh 18:28; Joh 19:16.

Judicial processes.

I. JESUS SENT FROM THE SANHEDRIM TO PILATEFROM THE JEWISH TRIAL TO THE ROMAN TRIAL.

1. The first stage of the Jewish trial. After the arrest at Gethsemane, our Lord was conducted back to the city, across the Kidron to the palace-of the ex-high priest Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the actual high priest that same year. The influence of this functionary was very great; his age, astuteness, riches, power, perhaps presidency of the Sanhedrim.all contributed to it. In answer to the inquiries of Annas about our Lord’s disciples and doctrine, the Savior appealed to his teaching in the synagogue, in the temple, always in public; and referred him to his auditors on these occasions. This reply was construed into disrespect towards the ex-high priest., and resulted in the first act of violence, apart from the arrest itself; for one of the officers struck Jesus with the palm of his. hand or with a rod (), as rendered in the margin. This was the first of the three stages of the Jewish trial. Here we remark

(1) that both Jews and Gentiles took part in arresting Jesus and conducting him to the high priest. “The band and the captain,” or chiliarch, that is, tribune, formed the Roman or Gentile element; while the “officers of the Jews” composed the Jewish element. Thus from first to last “the Gentiles and the people of Israel” combined against the Lord and his Anointed. The mention

(2) of both Annas and Caiaphas as high priests by St. Luke (Luk 3:9.) tallies with the fact that, owing to the arbitrary interference of the Romans, there might be several high priests alive at the same time; that is, those who had held the office and been deposed, and the person actually exercising the office. Of course, according to the Law of Moses, there could only be one high priest at a time, and that rightful high priest was the hereditary representative of Aaron. Even in the Roman period the high priesthood had not become a yearly office, though the frequent depositions and displacements occasioned many changes and much confusion. Thus Annas had been deposed in the twelfth year of our era by Valerius Gratus, the immediate predecessor of Pilate in the procuratorship of Judaea; yet, so great was his influence, that he had his own son Eleazar, his son-in-law Caiaphas, and four other sons subsequently appointed to the high priesthood.

(3) The preliminary inquiry before Annas might elicit information with regard to the extent of discipleship, and so of sympathy among the rulers, as in the case of Nicodemus, that might be calculated on; not only so, it would result in a prejudgment of the ease through the shrewdness and influence of the ex-high priest. Further, a higher objectan object most probably not dreamt of by either Annas or Caiaphaswas antitypical. We read in Lev 16:1-34 that on the great day of Atonement, Aaron laid both his hands upon the head of the live, or scape-goat, and confessed over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat; and sent him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness; and the goat bore upon him all their iniquities into a land not inhabited. Similarly, the high priests concerned in this trial were, in the exercise of an analogous function, pronouncing sin to be upon the head of the Victim before he was led forth to crucifixion.

2. The second stage of the Jewish trial. The second stage of the Jewish trial consisted of an informal investigation before Caiaphas, and a committee or commission of the Sanhedrim. In order that a conviction might be obtained, it was necessary to secure two witnesses at least to depose to some definite charge. But while the testimony of some was irrelevant, that of others was self-contradictory. At length two volunteered to testify in the case. For this testimony, such as it was, they were obliged to travel back over a period of some three years. Then, fixing on certain words of our Lord at the first Passover after entering on his public ministry, in reference to the temple, they either misunderstood them, or misinterpreted and consequently misrepresented them. The words in question were constructed into contempt of the temple; this contempt, if fully proved, would have constituted a capital charge, just as, in the case of the protomartyr Stephen, the charge was that he ceased not to speak “blasphemous words against this holy place and the Law.” But this charge was not substantiated; the evidence broke down in consequence of the disagreement of the witnesses. Our Lord had said, “Destroy () this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (, a word quite suitable to resurrection, but no way appropriate to rebuilding); “but he spake of the temple of his body.” One of the witnesses perverted this into, “I wilt destroy () this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build () another made without hands” (Mar 14:58); the other testified, “I can destroy ( ) the temple of God, and build () it in three days” Mat 26:61. Accordingly, St. Mark adds, “Neither so did their witness agree. What our Lord had spoken in a figurative sense they applied literally; for upraising they substituted building; what was really a promise they twisted into a threat; if they themselves destroyed their temple, he promised replacement. The temple had long been distinguished by the Shechinah glory or visible presence of Jehovah, yet was doomed to destruction; the human body of Jesus, in which dwelt the fullness of the Godhead bodily, when raised up would supersede the inhabitation of God in the literal temple.

3. Pretence of legality. What now can the members of the Sanhedrim present on this occasion do? They wish to keep up the semblance of law and justice, but the evidence has signally failed. The condemnation of Jesus is a foregone conclusion, in whatever way it is to be effected, and still the appearance of legality must be maintained. A clever thought occurs to the mind of the high priest, and in default of evidence he resorts to the desperate expedient of causing Jesus to criminate himself. Accordingly, standing up into the midst ( ), and thus passing from his seat to some conspicuous position, as St. Mark graphically describes it, he adjured Jesus most solemnly to declare if he were indeed the Messiah, that is, “the Christ, the son of the Blessed,” viz. if he claimed to be not only the expected Messiah, but also to be a Divine personthe Son and equal of God. Whereupon followed the avowal by which he criminated himself, and gave ground of condemnation. Though he had acknowledged the confession of Peter to the same effect, and even commended it; though he had accepted the same or an equivalent title on the occasion of his public entry into Jerusalem, he had not as yet publicly claimed it. Now, however, he avowed it in the most public manner, in the presence of the high priest and members of council. According to St. Mark, this avowal was expressed by “I am;” according to St. Matthew by “Thou hast said;” while in St. Luke’s report of the third Jewish trial, the two are combined with a trifling variation, namely,” Ye say that I am.”

4. Hypocrisy in high places. If our Lord had remained silent, they would have probably charged him with imposture; now that he confessed his Messiahship and future exaltation, they proceeded to condemn him for blasphemy. The council sought nothing further; they wanted only evidence against himsomething to inculpate, not to exculpate, him. They did not wish to hear the grounds of his claim; they wanted no explanation. With the Jews the setting up of a claim to any Divine’ attribute was regarded as blasphemy; the claim of Christ, according to their opinion of him, came under the Mosaic law of blasphemy. And now the hypocrisy of the high priest is something shocking. As the highest ecclesiastical functionary of the nation, and the principal officer of its great council, his duty surely was to investigate the confession and claim of one who professed to embody the hopes of the nation, and to scrutinize the true nature of that claim, the real meaning of it, the grounds on which it rested, the reasons of it, and the evidence for it. On the contrary, he grasped with avidity at the prospect of a condemnation. His sense of justice was no higher than his sense of religion; on anything that might tend to explain, or extenuate, or exculpate, he shut his eyes and closed his ears. But what is still more disgusting in the conduct of this ecclesiastic was his abominable hypocrisy. He feigned abhorrence at the crime which he was so anxious to establish. Glad as he was to have this constructive crime of blasphemy to allege, he pretended the most extreme horror by tearing his garments from the neck to the waist. Here, indeed, was “spiritual wickedness in high places.”

5. The third stage of the Jewish trial. This was the more formal trial; it was held at dawn of day, and in the presence of the whole Sanhedrim ( ). The previous trial, being held at night, was invalid; besides, it had been conducted only by a representationan influential representation or committee of the Sanhedrim, consisting, it is probable, mainly of the priests. At the present stage the whole council was present, with its three constituent partselders, chief priests, and scribes. This is the meeting of council mentioned in the first verse of the present chapter, and in the parallel verses of St. Matthew and St. Luke, viz. 27:1 of the former, and Luk 22:66 of the latter. The object was to ratify a predetermined decree. They also found it necessary for their purpose to change the charge, and consequently also the venue. It was more, perhaps, with the object of consummating than of ratifying their sentence that this meeting was hastily summoned. The judicial murder which they had decided on was not in their power to carry out. Had it been so, stoning would have been the death-penalty. A deputation of an influential and imposing kind waited upon Pilate, to whom the Prisoner is now transferred, either hoping, through the facile condescension of the procurator, to get the case remitted to themselves for execution, or to devolve it on the Roman governor.

II. THE ROMAN TRIAL, OR TRIAL BEFORE PILATE.

1. Incidents leading to crucifixion. Crucifixion was a mode of death unknown to Jewish law, and unpractised by the Jewish people. It was fearfully familiar as a mode of execution among the Romansthis we learn from their writings; as, “Thou shalt not feed the crows on the cross,” of Horace; “It makes no difference to Theodore whether he rots on the ground or aloft, i.e. on the cross,” of Cicero; also from such expressions as the following:”Go, soldier, get ready the cross;” “Thou shalt go to the cross.” It was not, however, till the Roman period that it was introduced into Judaea. It was only after Jew and Roman had come into collision, and had taken respectively the position of conqueror and conquered, of sovereign and subject, that this cruel mode of death found its way into the Holy Land. And yet, strange to say, long years before the Romans had risen to pre-eminence and power, and centuries before Judaea had been catalogued as a province of their vast empire, it had been foretold that Messiah’s death would be by crucifixion. We refer to the well-known prediction in the twenty-second psalm, where we read, “They pierced my hands and my feet” (“piercing my hands and my feet,” according to Perowne; “geknebelt” [‘fastened,’ as the extremities were in crucifixion] meine Hande und Fusse,” according to Ewald). ‘Before that prophecy was fulfilled a long series of events had to be evolved; dynasties had to rise and fall; a kingdom had to pass through the hands of many successive rulers and become extinct; an empire, the greatest of ancient times, had to rise to unprecedented power; that kingdom had to be absorbed,.and become a province of that empire. In a word, Judaea had to become tributary and Rome triumphant before the event could take place. The facts referred to changed the complexion of our Lord’s trial. Of the many charges they might have manufactured, such as violation of the sabbath law, contempt of oral tradition, purification of the temple, heretical teaching, or esoteric doctrines of a dangerous kind., they elected that of blasphemy, grounded on his own confession of divinity, or of being “the Son of God;” while he strengthens the admission by foretelling that, besides () the verbal avowal, they would have ocular proof when they should see himthe Son of man as well as Son of God”sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” This admission was, as we have seen, extorted after the suborned witnesses had entirely broken down, and the two best of them had shamefully perverted and prevaricated; but, notwithstanding, it was seized by the high priest from his false notions of Messiah as an acknowledgment of the charge preferred. Stoning was the mode of death which the Law appointed for that crime; but though the Jews could pass sentence, they could not execute it. One of the signs of Messiah’s advent thus stared them in the face; “the scepter had [thus] departed from Judah, and a lawgiver from between his feet.” Accordingly, they were obliged to have recourse to the Roman procurator, Pilate; but then they knew that he would not interfere with their religious controversies. What now is to be done? They take new ground; they change the accusation from blasphemy to treason, in order to subject their Prisoner to the secular power.

2. Charges preferred. The charge was really constructive treason, but their indictment as first advanced consisted of three articles. They charged him

(1) with perverting the nation;

(2) with forbidding to give tribute to Caesar; and

(3) with affirming that he himself was Christ, a King.

Pilate pays no attention to the first and second, and only notices the third. His mode of procedure was in accordance with the Roman respect for law and sense of justice. He refused to confirm the sentence of the Sanhedrim, and proceeded to hold a private and preliminary examination (: as we read in Luk 23:14, ), having removed Jesus into the Praetorium, or governor’s palace. This examination Pilate conducted in person, as he had no quaestor; and was satisfied of the harmlessness of the title of King by the Savior’s explanation that his kingdom was not of this world. Pilate was convinced of our Lord’s innocence, but hearing Galilee mentioned, he at once caught at the idea of shifting the responsibility, or at least sharing it with Herod Antipas, and at the same time of conciliating the tetrarch by an act of courtesy; and in consequence remitted () the accused to Herod’s as the higher court, or technically from the court apprehensionis to the court originis. Herod, having been disappointed by seeing no miracle performed by the reputed miracle-worker, and dissatisfied by his dignified silence, sent him back to Pilate, arrayed in a white or gorgeous (, from , to see) robe, thus caricaturing his candidatcship or claim to royalty, and thereby hinting to Pilate that instead of a punishable offense, it was rather a matter of contempt and ridicule. Pilate is perplexed, and no wonder; his vacillation now begins to take effect. He sins against his sense of justice as a Roman magistrate; he sins against conscience; he proposes a most unjust and unlawful compromise, namely, the chastisement () of an innocent person. But this concession, unrighteous as it was, did not satisfy; and again he tried to avail himself of the custom of releasing one at the feast in compliance with the clamor of the multitude; but the cry of the populace, instigated by the agents of the priests, was, “Not this man, but Barabbas.” By a symbolic act, this weak judge seeks to transfer the guilt to the infuriate mob, and still clinging to the hope that the multitude would be content with a compromise, he delivered Jesus to be scourged, and that, not with the rods of the lictors, but with the horrible scourge tipped with bone and lead ().

3. Retrospect at the indignities. The first act of insult and violence was, as we have seen, during the inquisition by Annas, who sought to entangle him by insidious interrogatories, when one of the officers struck Jesus with his hand or with a rod (), as St. John informs us. The next was in the course of the second Jewish trial, which was conducted by Caiaphas, and by which the confession of being “the Christ, the Son of God,” was extorted. In describing this sad scene, no less than five forms of beating are mentioned by the Evangelists Matthew and Mark and Luke. The latter has

(1) , properly to skin or flay, and then beat severely;

(2) , imperfect, they kept smiting him;

(3) , to inflict blows or strike with violence; St. Matthew has

(4) , they buffeted with clenched fist; and

(5) , they struck with open palms or rods; while St. Mark has , they received him with blows of the hands or strokes of rods.

It was on this occasion they did spit in his face and blindfold him, derisively bidding him “prophesy, who is it that smote thee?” with many other vilifications, in some or all of which the members of the council, as well as the menials of the court, took part. We now hasten from such a disgraceful scenefrom the scornful spitting, the shameful scoffing, the savage smiting, the ribald revilings, the shocking cruelties, and the savage barbarities of the miscreants of the Sanhedrimand pass on to his treatment by Herod. He joins with his men of war in setting him at nought and mocking him, and arrays him in a gorgeous robe, as if to caricature his pretensions, or, as some think, a bright or white robe, as though in mimicry of his candidature for royal honors. Thus sent back to Pilate, he is scourged by the procurator’s command. The very thought of that scourging makes the blood run cold and the heart sick. All that preceded, cruel as it was and devilish as it was, caused but little of bodily pain as compared with the scourging. He had indeed suffered dreadfully, in both body and mind. He had been betrayed by one disciple, denied by another; three slept when they should have sympathized; at length all forsook him and fled. He has been hurried from one tribunal to anotherfrom the Sanhedrim to the Roman governor, from the Roman governor to the Tetrarch of Galilee, and from Herod back to Pilate. See him the night preceding in the Garden of Gethsemane, in the midst of his agony, when perspiration bathed his body, and that bloody sweat trickled in big drops down to the ground. See him now in the place where he is scourged, cruelly scourged, his face marred, his body mangled, the quivering flesh fearfully torn with the bits of lead and bone plaited into the leathern thongs, while he is still barbarously smitten, and savage stripes inflicted on him. See him again, surrounded by a band of ruffian soldiersprovincial or rather Roman soldiers, to their disgrace be it recordedwho plait a crown of nabk thorns, and press it down so that the sharp and prickly points more painfully pierce his temples and lacerate his bleeding brows. While his body is still smarting from the wounds made by the scourging, while the blood is still running down on every side from the thorn-crown, while insult is being heaped on insult and added to injury, they smite his sacred head with a reed as if to gash that head more brutally, and leave the thorns yet deeper in the skin. One other act in that bloody tragedy precedes and prepares for the crucifixion itself. Instead of the gorgeous or white robe with which Herod and his men of war had, in their bitter mockery, clothed him, the Roman soldiers of the governor arrayed him with the military scarlet or purple war-cloak, mimicking the imperial purple. He is stripped a second timethe mock-garments are pulled off him, and his own put on; and thus all his wounds are opened afresh and their pain renewed. During the mock-coronation, in which the leaves of thorn burlesqued the imperial wreath of laurel, the reed the royal scepter, and the soldier’s cloak the emperor’s purple, they spat upon him, they smote him on the head,, they bowed the knee in mockery, and they scoffed him, saying,” Hail, King of the Jews!”

4. Pilate‘s last effort to release him. Once more Pilate makes another effort to prevent the crucifixion of Christ. Though scourging was usually the frightful preparation for crucifixion, yet Pilate is most anxious to proceed no further. He seeks to have it regarded, perhaps, in the light of trial by torture without anything worthy of death being elicited, or perhaps he wishes to have it accepted as a sufficient substitute for crucifixion. With some such purposea purpose, as it is generally and properly understood, of commiserationhe exhibits the Savior in that unspeakably sad and sorrowful plightworn, wan, and wasted; his features here befouled with spitting, there besmeared with blood; his face disfigured by blowsmarred more than any man’s and his countenance more than the sons of men; while blood-drops trickle from many a wound down on the tesselated pavement, lie calls their attention to this woebegone and most pitiable spectacle, saying, in words that have thrilled many a heart, and shall thrill thousands in the generations that may be yet to come, “Behold the Man!” But in vain. The only response was a louder, sterner, fiercer cry: “Crucify him! crucify him!” He deserves to die, “because he made himself the Son of God.” Moved to the inmost depths of his being, Pilate struggles on for his release; but, amid the loud clamor for the Victim’s blood, there are ominous growls that boded a possible impeachment on the charge of treason against the governor himself. “If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar’s friend;” “We have no king but Caesar.” Shame upon those bloodthirsty hypocrites who could say so; though they hated Caesar and all his belongings, and ‘were real rebels at heart! And shame upon that cowardly judge, who, as a Roman magistrate, quailed before such cruel clamor, and had not the courage of his own certain convictions!

5. Agencies co-operating to compass the crucifixion. If we glance for a moment at the various influences that were at work to compass our Lord’s death upon the cross, we find in the foreground the envy and malice of chief priests and rulers; the mean-spirited avarice of the wretched traitor Judas; the want of firmness and thorough conscientiousness on the part of Pilate; the fury of a fickle mob misled by designing demagogues; the submission of the soldiers to the orders of their superiors;all obeying the propensities of their own nature, though ignorant of the reason or the results; all fulfilling the predictions of Scripture, though not knowing it; and all accomplishing the purposes of God, though not intending it. But in the background, as we shall see in connection with the crucifixion itself, it was sin on the part of man, and substitution on the part of the Savior. “He bore our sins,” says the apostle, “in his own body on the tree.” It was determinate counsel and foreknowledge on the part of God. In accordance with that counsel and foreknowledge, and in consequence of our sin and the Savior’s substitutionary self-sacrifice, “ought not Christ to suffer these things?” Was it not necessary for him to become “obedient unto death, even the death of the cross”?J.J.G.

Mar 15:16-41

Parallel passages: Mat 27:27-56; Luk 23:26-49; Joh 19:17-37.

The closing scene.

I. THE CRUCIFIXION AND ACCOMPANYING EVENTS,

1. The words of the Creed. The words of the Creed, “crucified under Pontius Pilate,” are familiar to almost every young person who has been trained in the Christian religion. All down the centuries the name of this Roman knight, who was Procurator of Judaea under the Propraetor of Syria, has been associated with the greatest crime that has blotted and blackened the page of history since the beginning of the world. He was a descendant of the great Samnite general, C. Pontius Telesinus, and so belonged to the Pontian gens. His surname, Pilatus, is usually derived from pilum, a javelin, and so means “armed with a javelin;” though others connect it with pileatus, from pileus, a cap worn by manumitted slaves, implying that he had been a freedman, or the son of one. His head-quarters were at Caesarea, on the sea, but during the Jewish feasts, when such crowds assembled in Jerusalem, in discharge of his duty he came up to Jerusalem to keep order. In like manner Herod, whose usual residence was at Tiberias, had come up to Jerusalem to keep the feast, ostensibly in conformity to the Jews’ religion, but more especially to conciliate the favor of the Jewish people. It thus happened that the tetrarch and Roman governor were both at Jerusalem at the same timethe former occupying the old Asmonean palace, and the latter Herod’s Praetorium a palace of Herod the Great, or perhaps a part of Fort Antonia.

2. Pilate’s embarrassment and earnestness to secure the Savior‘s acquittal. He had offended the Jews by bringing the Roman standards to Jerusalem, and had been obliged to retrace this step; he had quarrelled with them about secularizing the corban, or sacred treasury money, to provide a suitable water-supply for Jerusalem; he had been engaged in a deadly feud with the Samaritans; and had mingled the blood of the Galilaeans with their own sacrifices. He was thus on bad terms with the people of every province in the land, and could not, therefore, afford further to provoke their wrath. On the other hand, he had had three warningsthe voice of his own conscience, the dream of his wife, Claudia Procula, and the announcement of Jesus’ mysterious title of “Son of God.” On the one side was the fear of the Jews whom he had so deeply offended, and fear also of compromising himself with the emperor, now that his patron Sejanus had fallen; on the other were his remaining sense of justice, his respect for Jesus as an innocent man, perhaps as something moreso that Tertullian says of him, “Jam pro conscientia Christianus”and the threefold warning already mentioned. In consequence he does his best, in his perplexing circumstances, to have Jesus released; for he sent him to Herod, then offered to release him as a favor, according to an established custom. Next he thought to substitute scourging for crucifixion; and when that had failed, he appealed to their pity. But all to no purpose. What was he to do? Why, assert, as he was bound to do, the power of the Roman law, maintain the cause of justice, and obey the voice of conscience at all hazards. But instead of this he vacillated at the beginning, temporized afterwards, and yielded to his fears in the end. Unhappily, he allowed fear for his personal safety to stifle the voice of conscience.

3. The crucifixion. Crosses were of different sorts and shapes. There was the crux simplex, or simple cross, which was rather a stake on which the body was impaled; there was the crux decussator, or St. Andrew’s cross, in the form of the letter X; there was the crux immissa, or Latin cross, in the form of a dagger with point downward ; there was the cruz commissa, in the form of the letter T. On account of the inscription the form of the cross on which our Lord suffered is generally supposed to have been that of the third sort. And now we are arrived at the last sad scene in that shocking drama. Criminals usually carried their cross, or the cross-beams of it, as they went to execution; hence the term furcifer, or cross-bearer. Jesus, exhausted by all he had previously endured, and crushed beneath that heavy cross, sank by the way. Simon, an African Jew, is impressed into the service (, send out a mounted courier, from the mounted couriers ready to carry the royal despatches in Persia; then force to do service, compel) and compelled to carry the Savior’s cross. Jesus is fastened to that cross; his hands and his feet are pierced with nails; the cross is hoisted, and with a rude and sudden dash it is sunk deep into the earth. There the bleeding Victim hangs, his bones disjointed, his veins broken, his wounds freshened, his skin livid, his face wan, his strength exhausted; blood flows from his head, blood from his hands, blood from his feet, blood from his opened side. There he hangs, wounded, tortured, fainting, bleeding, dying. There he hangs upon that cursed tree, the passers-by reviling him and wagging their heads, soldiers mocking him, rulers deriding him, malefactors railing on him,a fearful fourfold mockery. He is offered vinegar and gall (or wine and myrrh, i.e. wine myrrhed, or made acid), but, in the first instance, will not drink, lest it should blunt the pain of dying or cloud his faculties; “The cup that my Father gave me, shall I not drink it?” He suffers the withdrawment of his heavenly Father’s countenance, and in consequence exclaims, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?””My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” At length, with a loud voice, he cries out, “It is finished!” and bows his head in death. We do not marvel at the accompanying circumstances, strange and marvellous as they were. No wonder the sun drew back from the spectacle, and shrouded his glorious rays in darkness, rather than gaze on such a scene. No wonder that dense darkness settled on the land for three long hours. No wonder earth trembled and quaked in horror at the foul deed that had been done. No wonder that rocks rent and graves opened, and the tenants of the tomb came forth as though in consternation, shocked at human sinfulness, and in sympathy with the heavenly Sufferer. No wonder the veil of the temple, strong and thick, is torn in twain from top to bottom, for the humanity of the Savior is torn with thorns, and smitings, and nails, and spear-thrust; while he is pouring out his life unto death.

4. The inscription. The main part of the superscription, viz. “The King of the Jews,” is found in the record of each evangelistthe same in all and correct in each. In one it is completed by the name, “Jesus,” which a Roman, proud of the purity of his speech, and jealous of preserving it, naturally enough left out of the Latin title; in another it is supplemented by the name of the place, “Nazareth;” while the words “This is” are only introductory. Otherwise the inscription was trilingual, and exactly recorded as written in the three languages by three of the evangelists respectively, while St. Mark records the actual chargethe superscription of his accusation common to them all; and this was the assumption of royalty.

5. The time of the crucifixion. The crucifixion really commenced at 9 a.m. The darkness began at noon; death took place at 3 p.m. The apparent discrepancy between the synoptists and Joh 19:14 is not to be removed by the similarity of the Greek numerals for six and three ( and ) respectively, and the supposed substitution or rather misreading of the former for the latter in the Johannean Gospel. The reconciliation is more probably effected by a difference of time-reckoningthe synoptists adopting the Jewish and St. John the Roman method. Thus the delivery and preparations began at 6 a.m. according to the latter.

II. THE DESIGN OF THE CRUCIFIXION.

1. Not for personal chastisement. The design could not in any sense be for personal chastisement, for Jesus had been holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners;” it is expressly stated, too, that he was “cut off, but not for himself.” Neither could it be as an example, for the example of One perfectly innocent suffering so severely would only discourage the guilty, and might well drive them to despair; for if this were done to a green tree, what would be done to a dryif the guiltless suffered so fearfully, what might the guilty expect? Besides, if Christ suffered as an example, what possible good could his example do to those that lived before his day? Neither was it for confirmation of his teachingto confirm the doctrines which he taught and seal them with his blood; for some of the prophets had done this before him, several of the apostles did so after him, and the martyrs all down the ages have suffered in like manner. And yet, though thus entitled, according to the theory in question, to stand on the same platform with Jesus, of none of them could it ever be asked, with the expectation of an affirmative answer,” Was he crucified for you?” Of no one in all the glorious company of the apostles, or in all the goodly fellowship of the prophets, or in all the noble army of martyrs, or in all the holy Church throughout all the world, could it be said, “He was crucified for you.” How, then, are we to account for the unparalleled sufferings of the Son of God; for the indescribable distress that overwhelmed him during those sufferings? What reason can we render for the transcendent value ascribed to the gift of God’s Sonthat unspeakable gift; for the incomparable worth of the boon, so that all other benefits sink into insignificance when placed beside it? How are we to explain the fact that, amid the utmost chariness of human eulogy, we find the highest praises everywhere throughout this Book lavished on the Son of God? How comes it to pass that while we are instructed to “cease from man, for wherein is he to be accounted of?” we are invited to look up with greatest reverence to the Man Christ Jesus, as placed far above the proudest pinnacle of earthly grandeur, and his name raised high above every name, so that in honor of that name “every knee should bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father’? Even in heaven the Lamb, in the midst of the throne, as he had been slain, is still the marvel of the universe; while the key-note of the song sung by the redeemed in glory, and ever sounding along the arches of the sky, is,” Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing,” What is the solution of all this? We have no doubt, and feel no difficulty in giving a decided and definite answer to all questions of the sort proposed, for Scripture itself supplies that answer. It is because he “came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many;” it is because he “hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for sweet-smelling savor;” it is because he “bare our sins in his own body on the tree,” suffering, “the just for the unjust, to bring us to God;” it is because “he was made sin for us, though he knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him;” it is because in him “we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace,” Why, again, are there so many Scriptures all bearing on this same subject? Just to exhibit it under its various aspects and from sundry standpoints; just to explain it more clearly and enforce it more fully; and, still more, to awaken our liveliest interest in it, and impress us with a due sense of its supreme and paramount importance.

2. The sufferings of the cross vicarious. Objections have been urged against the fairness of the holy suffering in the stead of the unholy, and the objectors strive to explain away the fact of such substitution. – To such objectors we replyIf you object to the fairness of the holy suffering in the room of the unholy, and seek to explain it away, we object to the fairness of what you can never explain awayof what you must admit, however reluctant, and cannot deny, however desirous. If you object to the holy suffering in place of the unholy, we object to the holy suffering at all; and yet you are bound to acknowledge that the Holy One has suffered, and cannot venture, so long at least as you credit the Gospel narrative, to gainsay the historic fact. But perfect holiness is justly entitled to happiness, and by the law of Heaven is (as it should be) entirely exempt from suffering; and therefore, unless the Holy One suffered in the room and stead of the unholy, his sufferings would not only be most unjust, but at the same time altogether meaningless.

3. The doctrine of substitution in both secular and sacred history. Of the very many instances of this doctrine of substitution met with in the pages of both sacred and secular history, a few examples may be here adduced. Judah intreated Joseph that he might be kept instead of Benjamina bondman in his room. After an address of most pathetic and powerful pleading, he says, “Now therefore, I pray thee, let thy servant abide instead of the lad a bondman to my lord; and let the lad go up with his brethren. For how shall I go up to my father, and the lad be not with me? lest peradventure I see the evil that shall come on my father.” In the days of King David an unnatural war broke out. Rebels banded themselves against their sovereign; his son became their leader. A disastrous battle was fought in the wood of Ephraim, and the young man Absalom was slain. One messenger follows on the heels of another, saying, “Tidings, my lord the king;” while his question is once and again the same, “Is the young man Absalom safe?” The king, it is plain, would rather have lost the battle than his son; he would have parted with his kingdom rather than his son; nay, he would have given life itself for his son’s life. For now, when he has learnt at length that that fair and favorite son had fallen by the hand of the martial but merciless Joab, “the king,” we read, “was much moved, and went up to the chamber over the gate, and wept: and as he went, thus he said, O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son!” Even Caiaphas enunciated the doctrine, though ignorant of its true bearing and unconscious of the great truth it involved, when he “gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people.” The sins of the whole people laid on the head of the scapegoat, the sins of the individual person transferred to the head of the sin offering,such acts as these symbolically teach the same. When we turn to the secular classics, we find that one of the sublimest poems and simplest tragedies of antiquity is based on the doctrine of substitution; it represents a deity suffering in the cause of humanity and on account of favors bestowed on man. Another instance, and one containing the most genuine example of conjugal affection in the old Greek drama, represents a wife giving her life a substitute for that of her husband. So familiar was this doctrine to the ancients. The great Theban poet, with wonted power, sketches in a few stirring sentences the loyalty and love of the brave Antilochus defense of his aged parent Nestor, the renowned knight of Pylos. Enfeebled by years and endangered by younger warriors, his horse wounded by the archery of Paris, his chariot impeded, and himself fiercely assailed by the Ethiop Memnon, the old man, in trepidation of spirit, called loudly on his son for succor; nor did he call in vain. Promptly was his call heard and heeded. The faithful son proved his devotion to his sire; he hastened to his side; he defended him from the strong spear of the assailant; he saved that site’s life, but not without the sacrifice of his own; he rescued his parent from ruin, but received his own death-blow; he averted the fate that impended over his father, but at the expense of his own heart’s blood. Hundreds of years have rolled’. away since that deed of daring and devotedness was done, and still it is enshrined in the immortal verse of the Pindaric muse, and the hero’s memory embalmed among the younger men of ancient days as first in affection to his father. Again, we admire the Roman poet’s graphic delineation of the battle-scene in which the gallant son of Mezentius fell. We admire still more the filial affection of that son who, when the deadly blow had been aimed at his father, interposed himself in his father’s stead, received the blow, lost his own life, but saved his father’s. “By thy death I live, my son; by thy wounds I am saved!” the veteran warrior exclaimed. In like manner the Son of God took the sinner’s place, and stood in the sinner’s room; and in the words of inspiration, the sinner who trusts in him can say, “He was wounded for my transgressions, he was bruised for my iniquities: the chastisement of my peace was upon him; and with his stripes I am healed.” For us the Savior hung upon that cross; for us that frame writhed in agony; for us those limbs quivered in torture; for us that ghastly paleness overspread his face; for us those eye-strings broke in death; for us that side was pierced with the rude soldier’s spear; for us he suffered and for us he died.

4. The power of the cross in conversion. The first convert of the Greenland mission was a robber-chief, called Kajarnak. That mission had long been unsuccessful; the missionaries had been sorely tried. At last, disheartened, they were about to leave the country, when one day the bandit, with his followers, came to rob the mission tent. On entering, he saw the missionary writing, and wondered what it meant; the missionary explained to him that, by the marks he was making on the paper, he could tell the thoughts that had passed through the mind of a man called John hundreds of years before. “Impossible I” exclaimed the savage chief. The missionary, who was finishing his translation of the Gospel of St. John, read to these heathen Greenlanders the record of the crucifixion as contained in the nineteenth chapter of that Gospel, on which he was then employed. The chieftain and his men were strangely interested in the narrative. At length Kajarnak, with much emotion, cried out, “What had the man done that they treated him so?” The missionary addressed him in reply, “That man did nothing amiss, but Kajarnak has done much wrong; Kajarnak murdered his wife; Kajarnak has robbed as well as murdered; Kajarnak has filled the land with violence; and that man was bearing the punishment; of Kajarnak’s sins that Kajarnak might be saved.” Tears rolled down the cheek of the rude robber-chief., and he besought the missionary to read him all that over again, “for,” he added, “I too would like to be saved.” We do not wonder that the story of the cross had such a powerful effect on the first convert in Greenland.

5. Christ‘s death on the cross a satisfaction. The death of Christ did not cause God to love us, but, on the contrary, was the expression of that love; it did not originate God’s love to man, but, contrariwise, was the effect and evidence of that love; and in accordance with this we read that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” A mighty debt was due to the government, law, and justice of God, as well as to his truth and holiness and purity; that debt was sin. This huge hindrance barred the way of access to communion and fellowship with God; but God himself appointed, accepted, and applied the means for the removal of that hindrance and the reopening of the way. Again, the sun is always shining, though we do not always see it; either clouds overspread the sky and cover the fair face of day, or earth rolls round upon its axis, and so during the hours of night we are turned away from the sun. Notwithstanding this, the sun is ever sending out his rays; and when the clouds scatter, or the earth rolls round again, his full-orbed brightness beams upon us, we see him in the splendor of his shining; and “a pleasant thing it is for the eyes to behold the sun.” So the face of God is ever shining, but the clouds of sin darken the sky above us and separate between us and our God; by the death of Christ those clouds are driven away, and that severance ceases; we are brought back into the clear light of unclouded day, and bask in the bright effulgence of our heavenly Father’s face. The death of Christ on the cross thus bridged the chasm that sin had made; it spanned the gulf that iniquity had fixed; it opened the new and living way to you bright world above. By the cross is the way of safety and salvation; for by that cross our sins were expiated, by that cross propitiation was effected, by that cross atonement was made. By that cross, moreover, the Creator and his fallen creature were brought together; by that cross man and his Maker were reconciled; by that cross the offended Sovereign and the rebel sinner were set at one again. In that cross we see the vicarious suffering of one for many, the wondrous substitution of the just for the unjust, the punishment of the sinner inflicted on the Savior. Through that cross we see the Law magnified, justice satisfied, truth vindicated, government estab- lished, sin punished, God glorified, our debt cancelled, the handwriting against us blotted out, and the believing sinner saved.

“Thus from the Savior on the cross

A healing virtue flows;

Who looks to him with lively faith

Is saved from endless woes.”

6. Double aspect of Christ‘s death on the cross. The death of Christ on the cross is a purification as well as a propitiation; it is the source of sanctification and the ground of satisfaction. In reply to the question of the elder in Revelation, saying,” What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?” the answer is returned, “These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” So, also, in Heb 9:14,” How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” There is a seeming incongruity in blood purifying. We speak-of being defiled with blood or stained with blood, but Scripture speaks of blood cleansing, which is the opposite. We may to some extent illustrate this by certain ceremonies that had to be gone through in olden times by a person who had committed homicide. Among the ancient Greeks the person in question forfeited life. The soul of the slain was supposed to demand life for life, but that life might be redeemed or bought off by the vicarious substitution of a victim. This victim was usually a ram, the slaying of which symbolically denoted the surrender of the guilty man’s own life. This was the ceremony of atonement to appease the soul of the slain, and was called hilasmoi. But another ceremony was neededa ceremony of purification to fit the man, whose guilt had been atoned by the propitiatory sacrifice just mentioned, for intercourse with his fellow-men. He then stood on the fleece of the ram of atonement or propitiation, in order to come into the closest possible contact and most intimate connection with the victim which had, as we have seen, vicariously represented him, when an animal of another kind was slaughtered as a victim of purification, and slaughtered in such a way that the blood which spurted, from the wound fell upon the hands of the homicide, and thus the human blood which still cleaved to his hands was conceived to be washed away by the blood of this second victim. This process was called katharmoi, and thus was he purified. The custom to which we have alluded, borrowed, like so many other heathen customs, from scattered and distorted fragments of Divine truth, shows, among other things, that the idea of cleansing by means of blood was familiar to the ancients. At the same time that we use this illustration we do not understand the blood of the cross in the gross literal sense, but understand by it the death of Christ upon the cross, and, as that was a bloody one, we are not surprised that it should be called in several Scriptures his blood. The death of Christ

(1) as a propitiation turns away the wrath of God, due to sin, from man: this is its propitiatory efficacy. It turns away man from sin: this is its purificatory effect. God loved us with an everlasting love, but sin he hates with an infinite and everlasting hatred. As a Friend God loves us, but as a Lawgiver he denounces our sin, as a Judge he condemns it, and as a King he must root it out of his dominions altogether. The love of God is like a mighty river. It has flowed from eternity in the majesty of its strength and in the glorious fullness of its stream; but sin rose as a vast. obstruction to the currentit lay like a formidable boom across the stream. At length, in the fullness of time, the cross of Christ broke through the boom, forced aside the obstruction, and opened up the channel; and now the sinner, sheltered beneath the shadow of that cross, can say, “Though thou wast angry with me, thine anger is turned away, and thou hast comforted me.” “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself.” How? “Not imputing unto men their trespasses;” not charging us with those offenses by which we justly incurred his displeasure and merited his wrath; forgiving them, forgetting them, and so reconciled to us, and reconciling us to him, through the blood of the cross. But the death of Christ

(2) is a purification. It purifies the whole man; its purifying influence goes on, and is needed, till death. “The blood of Jesus Christ,” we read, “cleanseth us from all sin.” No doubt it cleanseth as a propitiation from the guilt of sin, but more especially it cleanseth as a purification from the filth of sin. It cleanseth the soul from the love of sin and the body from the practice of it; the faculties from thoughts of sin, the members of the body from works of sin. The hands are purified from deeds of darkness; they are fitted for and filled with works of faith and labors of love on earth, and thus prepared for sweeping the harps of gold and swelling the symphonies of heaven. The eyes are purified; they are cleared of scales, and opened to see the wondrous things of God’s Law, and the gracious things of both Law and gospel. Thus, too, are they prepared for gazing on the radiant splendor of the eternal throne and the glories of the upper sanctuary. The ears are opened to hear what God the Lord says to his servants, and are thus prepared at length for drinking in the music of the skies and for being charmed with the melodies of heaven. The feet are kept back from every false step and every wrong way, and furnished as though with wings to move readily and rapidly in the way of God’s commandments; and thus they are prepared at last to stand upon the glassy sea and tread the golden streets. The head is freed from every iniquitous scheme, and enlightened to comprehend the Divine counsels of mercy; and thus it is prepared to wear a crown, fair in its form, fresh in its coloring, brilliant in its lustre, unfading in its beauty, and amaranthine in its bloom. The heart is purified from every propensity to evil; it overflows with the love of God on earth, and waits to have that love still more intensified amid the raptures and ecstasies of heaven.

III. LESSONS TAUGHT US BY THE CROSS.

1. God‘s hatred of sin is seen in the cross. We trace the wrath of God in the waters of the flood that swept away the antediluvians; in the sin-ruined cities of which few fragments remain to tell where once they were; in the dreary waters that roll over the desolated plain where Sodom and Gomorrah once stood; in the peeled and scattered and sifted race whose fathers’ awful imprecation, “His blood be upon us, and our children,” called down the withering curse of Heaven; in that dark abode where the angels that kept not their first estate are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day; in that region of despair where the finally impenitent are doomed to weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth, and where the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever. And yet the wrath of God, we think, is revealed in clearer light and blazoned in more glaring characters in the sacrifice of the cross, because “God spared not his own Son,” when that Son undertook the penalty of our sin, “but delivered him up for us all.”

2. The highest morality comes from the cross. No theory of morals is so persuasive, no precepts so powerful, as the picture of dying love exhibited in the cross. “The love of Christ constraineth us,” says the apostle; “because we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all died; and he died for all, that they which live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him who for their sakes died and rose again” (Revised Version); and also, “He gave himself for us, to redeem us from all iniquity, and to purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works;” and once more, “The life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” Oh, how can we go on in sin if we reflect, as we ought, that sin crucified the Lord of life and glory; if we reflect that it was sin inflicted those wounds upon him; if we remember that sin caused him that agony of soul as well as anguish of body, when, in the language of the prophet, he might well say, “Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by? behold, and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow, which is done unto me, wherewith Jehovah hath afflicted me in the day of his fierce anger;” if we consider that our sin was laid upon him and borne by him when “he became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross,” and when “he put away sin by the sacrifice of himself”? The way to purify our fallen humanity and elevate the standard of morality is not by moral lessons, however proper and useful in their own place, but by leading sinners to the foot of the cross, and by pointing to that cross as embodying three arguments, than which there is nothing more potent or more powerfully persuasive in all the universe besides. The first argument which the blood that flowed on that cross embodies is the mercy of God the Father, in reopening the channel of his love which sin had dammed up and closed. The second argument is the love of God the Son, in assuming our nature, in agonizing and sweating, in being smitten and scourged and spit upon and scorned, in being cruelly crowned and crucified; and all to “finish transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness.” The third argument is the grace of God the Holy Spirit, in sprinkling the blood thus shed on the conscience, when he brings home the death of Christ, in the power and demonstration of faith, to the sinner’s heart. How is it possible to resist this triple argument? How is it possible to go on in sin, which caused our Lord such suffering, and when such lovethe love of the Trinityis constraining us to abandon it for ever?

3. The innocence of the Sufferer. Heaven and earth attested his innocence. Friend and foe bore witness to it. A noble Roman lady, wife of the governor, warned her lord, saying, “Have thou nothing to do with that just man.” Pilate himself, the judge, informed chief priests and people, “I find no fault in this man.” Again a second time, having assembled chief priests and rulers and people, he affirmed publicly and positively Jesus’ innocence in the following strong terms:“Behold, I, having examined him before you, found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him: no, nor yet Herod: for he sent him back unto us; and behold, nothing worthy of death hath been done by him” (Revised Version). Once more, for the third time, he asserted his innocence, saying, “Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him.” Judas, the traitor, admitted the same thing, saying, “I have betrayed innocent blood.” The Roman centurion, who superintended the execution, cried out, “Certainly this was a righteous man;” and again, after he had seen the earthquake and those things that were done, “Truly this was the Son of God.” One of the malefactors, his companion in suffering, frankly acknowledged, “This man hath done nothing amiss.” The whole record of his trial furnishes the plainest and most positive evidence of his innocence. Satan had tried him, and found nothing in him. God the Father had owned him three times by an audible voice from heaven. He had committed no offense against the religion of the land, no crime against the laws of his country, no sin against God. He went about continually doing good; he was acknowledged to have done all things well; he was “holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners.”

“We held him as condemn’d by Heaven,

An outcast from his God,

While for our sins he groan’d, he bled,

Beneath his Father’s rod.

“His sacred blood hath wash’d our souls

From sin’s polluted stain;

His stripes have heal’d us, and his death

Revived our souls again.”

4. His seven sayings on the cross. Of these three are recorded by St. Luke, other three by St. John, and the remaining one by both St. Matthew and St. Mark. The first of those seven sayings, or seven words, is a prayer for his murderers: “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” There is no doubt that they were acting in ignorance and unbelief; yet they were not excusable on that account, for men are accountable for their belief, and especially so when they have abundant means of rectifying their misbelief or removing their unbelief. The spirit of forgiveness which this prayer breathes is truly wonderful. There is an entire absence of revenge and of all vindictiveness, and yet this was only the negative side; there was the positive feeling of love to his enemies, pity for his murderers, and prayer for those who used him so despitefully. Thus he practiced what he preached, and exemplified what he taught in the condition of the petition, “Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us.” The second of those words is a promise to the penitent sufferer beside him: “To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.” At first it would appear that both malefactors had railed upon him, or the plural is used idiomatically for the singular. One became penitent, rebuking the railing of his fellow-sufferer. By faith he looked to the pierced One at his side, and mourned. His faith became marvelously strong in an incredibly short space. The right rendering of his prayer in the Revised Version makes this more manifest: “Jesus, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom.” The common rendering of into, as if it were with the accusative, would imply that Jesus passed into his kingdom at the hour of his dissolution, so that faith would not have long to wait; but the expression “in thy kingdom” (, with the dative) points not to the immediate future like the former, but to the more distant future when Jesus would come again in his kingdom; and still the faith that prompted the petition patiently looked forward to that far-off day. Thus there is no sinner beyond the reach of mercy; no time too late to seek salvation; and no prayers of faith rejected. The soul united to Jesus is safe in his arms, and admitted to glory soon as separated from the body. The third saying is a provision for his widowed mother in her sore bereavement: “Woman, behold thy son!” and to the disciple he said, “Behold thy mother!” It was to the beloved John the intimation was given to treat the Virgin mother as his own mother, while Mary was to regard and depend on John as her son. The hint was understood by both; the new relationship was accepted, John undertook the responsibility, and Mary confided herself to his care. Jesus, as he hung in agony, was thus mindful of his mother, making careful provision for her. What a lesson of filial love is taught us here! What a lesson of dutifulness to a parent, especially when that parent is bereaved and desolate! The fourth saying is a position of spiritual loneliness: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Here there is faith, but faith wanting the assurance of sense. There is faith in Jesus acknowledging God as his God; but a sense of the Divine presence is absent. The complaint of Divine abandonment is caused by that absence, and the deserted soul is in agony. The condition of the Christian is sometimes similarwhen, like Job, he goes forward, but God is not there; backward, but he cannot perceive him; and when he turns himself to every side, but cannot find him. But oh, how great the difference! Such a season of darkness is for the most part occasioned by sin; so in our Savior’s case it was indeed for sin, but not his own! The fifth is the pain of bodily suffering: “I thirst.” The pain of thirst is worse to bear than that of hunger; when long continued it is distressing in the extreme. Men who have traveled in a desert district or under a tropical sun can realize the severity of this condition. In the case of our Lord there was a peculiar aggravation. Near the cross had been placed a vessel of sour wine (posca) for the use of the soldiers, the sight of which would increase the feeling of thirst and pain on the part of the Sufferer. Nor was that all; among the cruel mocking of our Lord in the earlier stage of the crucifixion was the circumstance that the soldiers tantalized him by raising to his lips their jar or sponge of vinegar, and then suddenly withdrawing it, for we read, “The soldiers also mocked him offering him vinegar.” The sixth is the perfection of his work: “It is finished.” As has been beautifully said,” Finished was his holy life; with his life his struggle, with his struggle his work, with his work the redemption, with the redemption the foundation of the new world.”

“”Tis finished!’ was his latest voice:

These sacred accents o’er,

He bow’d his head, gave up the ghost,

And suffer’d pain no more.

“”Tis finish’d!’ The Messiah dies

For sins, but not his own;

The great redemption is complete,

And Satan’s power o’erthrown.

“”Tis finish’d!’ All his groans are past

His blood, his pain, and toils,

Have fully vanquished our foes,

And crown’d him with their spoils.

“‘Tis finished!’ Legal worship ends,

And gospel ages run;

All old things now are pass’d away,

And a new world begun.”

The seventh is presentation of his spirit to his Father: “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” Many a time have these words waked a corresponding sentiment in the dying Christian’s breast; many a time have they been used by the dying Christian to express his soul’s surrender to God. Similarly the protomartyr’s “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” Likewise in the language of ancient piety, “Into thine hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed me, O Lord God of truth.” Hence too we infer the immateriality of the soul, and its independence of the body. Here also we learn how to die, yielding our soul into the hand of our heavenly Father.J.J.G.

Mar 15:42-47

Parallel passages: Mat 27:57-61; Luk 23:50-56.

The burial.

I. SECRET DISCIPLES. Among secret disciples of our Lord were Joseph of Arimathaea and Nicodemus. The residence of the former was Ramah, or Ramathaim, the name signifying a hill; while some identify it with Ramleh in Dan, others with Ramathaim in Ephraim, and others, again, with Ramah in Benjamin. But the character of the man is of much more importance to us than his place of abode. Accordingly, one evangelist describes him, as has been ingeniously pointed out, according to the Jewish ideal, as a rich man,so St. Matthew; a second according to the Roman ideal, as an honorable () councillor, or councillor of honorable estate (Revised Version),so St. Mark; while a third according, to the Greek ideal, as good and just, somewhat similar to the Greek , implying a person of good social position and respectable culture, and thus presumably of correct morals,so St. Luke. In any case, the third Gospel represents him as a moral man and a religious mantwo characteristics that should never be dissociated. We are further informed that Joseph, being one of the seventy Sanhedrists, protested against the conduct of the Sanhedrim in their condemnation of our Lord. Though it is not expressly stated, we may be sure that Nicodemus, the same who is characterized as coming to our Lord by night, if present, joined him in the protest; but ‘they were a small minority, and so the majority of that body accomplished their counsel and crime. Of Joseph’s discipleship St. Matthew says, “Who also himself was Jesus’ disciple;” and St. Luke, “Who also himself waited for the kingdom of God.” The also in both cases implies that he was a faithful follower of Christ, though in secret, as well as the more open disciples; while St. John tells us the reason of the secrecy in the words, “secretly for fear of the Jews.” He now laid aside his timidity, and proved himself no longer deficient in Christian courage; for he went in boldly () to Pilate and craved the body of his Lord. Though “not many mighty according to the flesh, not many noble,” are called; yet, thank God! there are still some such. Among these, Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, a master in Israel, a Sanhedrist, or member of the great national council, who had absented himself, or at all events refused consent to the condemnation, “brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pound weight,” for his burial. On mention of Nicodemus, it is remarkable we are still reminded of his night interview with our Lord. “He that came to Jesus by night,” says St. John, and again, “which at first came to Jesus by night,” as is added by the same evangelist. know he too has been emboldened by the cross. Joseph, on obtaining the body, laid it in his own new tomb, so that the prediction was fulfilled to the effect that, though his grave was made with the wicked intentionally, that is, according to the intention of his enemies, yet was actually with the rich in his death. Crucified with malefactors, it was intended and expected that he would share their fate in burial. Not so, however; for though he died as a criminal, he was not buried as one.

II. THE SURPRISE OF PILATE. The usual time for death to supervene in the case of persons crucified was some three days, the very shortest a day and a half. Consequently Pilate expresses his astonishment, and requires the evidence of the centurion to satisfy him of Jesus death. He first asks in surprise if he were already dead (), and then, calling the centurion, inquires if he had been any while dead (). Here the accurate use of the Greek tenses is worthy of attention, and brings out the governor’s amazement more clearly. His first inquiry is expressed by the perfect, and refers to the stateif he was already in the state of death; satisfied of that, and not a little surprised, he asks an additional question (,) of the centurion, and in this second inquiry he employs the aorist in relation to the occurrenceif death had occurred any length of time previously, or how long, in any case to make sure it was not a swoon. It has been stated and maintained, on respectable medical authority, that the direct cause of Christ’s death was rupture of the heart. In that case the blood passed from the interior of the heart out into the heart-sac, and, like all extravasated blood, separated into the red clot and watery element. This would agree well with the suddenness of the Savior’s death, after only some six hours on the crossa circumstance which, as we have just seen, took Pilate himself so much by surprise; whereas crucifixion usually caused death by exhaustion, and after many hours’ lingering. This would also agree well with the loud voice of that cry which the Savior uttered when he yielded up the ghost. This would agree well with the quantity of blood shed to fill that fountain, of which the prophet speaks, saying, “In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness;” for in crucifixion the loss of blood is diminished by the nails choking up the wounds they make. This would agree well with such Scriptures as the following:”Reproach hath broken my heart; My heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.” This would, moreover, agree well with the fact that when he poured out his soul unto death, his bodily sufferings, bitter as they were, had less effect than his mental agony in producing that death. This would still further agree well with what occurred when the soldier pierced the Savior’s side with his broad-headed spear. That rude Roman had no command to inflict such a wound; it was mere bootless barbarity on his part. The body was dead; why gash it so, except perhaps to make sure it was death and not syncope? Nevertheless, he fulfilled prophecy without thinking it; he realized the opening of the prophet’s fountain without knowing aught about it. He made a passage for the blood and water already escaped from that broken heart; he helped to open the fountain that cleanseth from all sin.

III. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BLOOD AND WATER. The blood and water that flowed from the fountain thus opened in the Savior’s side are significant of the two great blessings which believers partake through Christ. There was blood for redemption, water for regeneration; blood for remission, water for renewal; blood for pardon, water for purity; blood to put away the guilt of sin, water to purge away its filth; blood for justification, water for sanctification; blood for atonement (and this is the special work of the Son of God), water for purification (and this is the province of the Spirit of God); blood and the sacramental wine is a symbol of it, water and the baptismal element is a sign of it. Thus the two great agents in salvationthe Son of God and the Spirit of God; the two great works they accomplishredemption and regeneration; the two great doctrines of a standing and spiritual Churchjustification and sanctificationare kept fresh in the memory and visible to the eye by the sacramental seals of the covenant. In allusion, probably, to this St. John (1Jn 5:6) says, “This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not with water only, but with the water and with the blood” (Revised Version). These two must always go together; these two flowed forth together from the pierced side of the Savior; these two the apostle has joined together. These two form the streams of the prophetic fountain; and by means of the twofold stream of this fountain “ye are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”

“Rock of ages, cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in thee;
Let the water and the blood,
From thy riven side which flew’d,
Be of sin the double cure,
Cleanse me from its guilt and power,”

IV. THE FUNERAL. The funeral consisted, as far as we can learn, of few persons. There are only four persons named by name as present on the occasiontwo men and two women; though it is probable that a few females besides, who had accompanied him from Galilee, were also at least spectators, as St. Luke tells us that “the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulcher, and how his body was laid.” Joseph wrapped the body in the fine linen he had purchased, and sprinkled the myrrh and aloes among the folds, then laid the body in the rock-hewn tomb, and rolled a stone of large size to close therewith the entrance of the sepulcher. In these several operations, but especially in that of rolling the huge stone, Joseph was assisted, we may be certain, by Nicodemus, and both by their servants or attendants; while Mary of Magdala, and Mary the mother of Joses, and the other women from Galilee, were looking on. They beheld (), carefully observing the place and manner of the sepulcher.J.J.G.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Mar 15:1. And straightway in the morning The horrid transactions of this dismal night being over, it was no sooner day, than the Jews hurried the blessed Jesus away to the Roman governor; for though the Sanhedrim had the power of trying and condemning men for crimes which the Jewish law had made capital; yet, like the court of inquisition, they had not the power of putting such sentences into execution, without the approbation of the civil magistrate, or Roman governor;for nothing but necessity could have brought the Jewish rulers to Pilate on this occasion. They had bound Jesus when he was first apprehended; but perhaps he had been loosed while under examination, or else they now made his bonds stricter than before; the better, as they might think, to secure him from a rescue, as he passed through the public streets in the day-time. See Mat 27:1-2. Doddridge, and Biscoe’s Boyle’s Lectures, p. 113. Instead of, And the whole council, we may read, Even, &c.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mar 15:1 . See on Mat 27:1-2 . Comp. Luk 23:1 .

] on the morning (Mar 13:35 ), i.e. during the early morning , so that expresses the duration stretching itself out. Bernhardy, p. 252. Comp. Act 3:1 ; Act 4:5 . As to . ., comp. on Mar 3:6 . They made a consultation. According to the more significant reading . (see the critical remarks), they arranged such an one, they set it on foot . On what subject? the sequel informs us, namely, on the delivering over to the Procurator.

.] and indeed the whole Sanhedrim . Mark has already observed, Mar 14:53 ( ), that the assembly was a, full one, and with manifest design brings it into prominence once more. “Synedrium septuaginta unius seniorum non necesse est, ut sedeant omnes cum vero necesse est, ut congregentur omnes, congregentur omnes ,” Maimonides, Sanhedr. 3 in Lightfoot, p. 639.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

5. Christ, betrayed to the Gentiles, standing before Pilate at the Tribunal of Temporal Authority: a. The Examination. Christ and the Accusers. The Confession, the Accusations, and the Lords Silence. b. The Judges attempt to deliver. Christ and Barabbas. The Outcry of the Enemy, the Silence of the Lord. The Surrender. The Mocking. Mar 15:1-15

(Parallels: Mat 27:1-26; Luk 23:1-25; Joh 18:1-16.)

1And straightway in the morning1the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes, and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate. 2And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering, said unto him, Thou sayest it. 3And the chief priests accused him of many things; but he answered nothing. 4And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against thee. 5But Jesus yet 6answered nothing: so that Pilate marvelled. Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired. 7And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him,2 who had committed murder in the insurrection. 8And the multitude, crying aloud,3 began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them. 9But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? (10For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy.) 11But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. 12And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews ? 13And they cried out again, Crucify him. 14Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? 15And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him. And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Comp. the parallels in Matthew and Luke.Mark, with Matthew, takes notice of the second formal council-meeting on the morning of the crucifixion: he, like Luke, brings more distinctly into view the circumstance that the whole Sanhedrim led Christ away to Pilate; and with him omits the end of Judas, recorded by Matthew, the dream of Pilates wife, the washing of the hands, and the cryHis blood be on us, and our children. Again, Mark, like Matthew, passes over the fact that Jesus was sent to the bar of Herod, which Luke records; the full examination before Pilate, omitted by all the Synoptics, related by John; and, finally, the repeated hesitations of Pilate in condemning. Mark merely notices what John and Luke relate very fully, that many additional accusations were raised against Jesus, regarding which He maintained an unbroken silence. He limits himself, like Matthew, particularly to the two chief features in the humiliation of Jesus before Pilate: His confession of His Messiahship (King of the Jews), and His being placed side by side with Barabbas. The characterization of Barabbas he gives more accurately, in a manner similar to Luke. He marks the decision of Pilate in a peculiar way, Mar 15:15. It is worthy of note that he, along with Matthew, represents the scourging and mocking of the Lord in Pilates prtorium (Luke, on the other hand, relates the putting to shame of Jesus in the palace of Herod) to be part of the crucifixion-agonies; consequently, the second unsuccessful attempt of Pilate to release Him, which, according to John, he sought to effect by bringing forth the scourged One to the people, is passed over unnoticed. The assembling of the populace before the prtorium, and the more exact designation of the prtorium, are peculiar to Mark.

Mar 15:6. He released unto them one prisoner.This was a voluntary custom of the procurator.

Mar 15:7. In the insurrection.In which he had been captured. One of the numberless Jewish insurrections; not known more exactly. Paulus refers to Joseph. Antiq. 18, 4. Meyer.

Mar 15:8. That had gone up.4The stream of the populace comes, namely, back from the palace of Herod, whither Pilate had sent the Lord. Meanwhile the priests have prepared their people, have instigated and instructed them.

When he had scourged Him, to be crucified.John, viewing matters from the psychological stand-point, mentions the scourging among the acts of Pilate, as the final attempt to deliver Jesus; Mark and Matthew, viewing the events from the historical stand-point, judge from this act that all is decided, and they look accordingly upon the scourging as the opening act in the awful tragedy of the crucifixion, . Both are equally correct points of view. The scourging should have moved the people; it only led them to obduracy. And, as the matter issued, the crucifixion had already begun. In relating this circumstance, Matthew emphasizes the fact that the scourging resulted in the yielding up of Christ to the Jews ( ); Mark points out that the scourging was the opening scene in the crucifixion, and took place in consequence of the surrender.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Comp. Matthew.

2. Christ before Pilate, beside Barabbas, amid the soldiers: a threefold climax in the worlds judgment upon the Judge of the world.
3. Barabbas, the murderer, a representative of the first murderer, the father of lies, as Christ stood there in the name of His Father.The peoples choice between the two: 1. The miscalculated and improper juxtaposition caused by the political party, a self-condemnation of worldly polity; 2. the evil advice of the chief priests, a self-condemnation of the hierarchical guardianship of the people; 3. the horrifying choice, a self-condemnation of the self destroying populace.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

See Matthew.The world assembled to judge the Lord: 1. Jerusalem (the chief council); 2. Rome (Pilate); 3. the whole wide world (the soldiery).Jesus condemned as Messiah, as the Christ of God. As Christ: 1. Condemned by the chief council; 2. given over to judgment by Pilate; 3. mocked by the soldiery.The surrender of the prisoner at the paschal festival (probably a Passover-drama to represent the atonement for the first-born of Israel) is here a judgment upon completed blindness.Barabbas is made by the Jews to represent the first-born of Israel, Christ the first-born of Egypt.Christ justified upon His trial by the hostile judges: 1. By the judge: he seeks to free Him; 2. by the accusers and the people: their petition for the release of Barabbas reveals the bitterness of their hate; 3. by the soldiers, who adorn Him with the symbols of His patience and His spiritual glory.The very mockery of truth must witness, even by its caricatures, to the glorious original.

Starke:When superior judges act unjustly, they accumulate upon their heads much more guilt than the subordinate authorities; for in that case the oppressed have no further appeal.Quesnel:The assembling of the magistrates is orderly and beautiful: but the more proper their appearance, the more sinful the abuse of their authority in the oppression of the innocent.Hedinger:When innocence itself must appear and be accused before the judges, is it anything strange that Thou, precious Jesus, art persecuted by the devil, accused, slandered, and condemned?Nova Bibl. Tub.:Liars mouths can devise much; enough, if thou art guiltless.Envy is hateful in every man, especially in ministers of the Gospel, who should content themselves in God.Quesnel:What envy did here against Christ, the Chief Shepherd, that it does still to His servants, and will not cease to do till the worlds end.Nova Bibl. Tub.:If the rulers among the people, who should put a stop to evil, themselves instigate and make the people sin, then must Christ be crucified.Hedinger:In the last day the heathen will put many Christians to shame.Quesnel:Love of honor and the fear of the world may lead a judge (who is not firmly settled in his love to justice) to many sins.One single sinful passion makes slaves of men.Natural honor a weak shield against temptation.Nova Bibl. Tub.:The King of glory wears a crown of thorns, in order that He may take the curse away from the earth, and gain for us the crown of holiness.The crowns of princes, also, have their thorns. Should they wear these to the honor of the crowned Jesus, then will they discharge aright the duties of their difficult office.Hypocrites and the godless still insult Christ, though they even bow the knee at His name.

Braune:The deeper He went down in suffering, the less He pleased them.All that God did to perplex the enemies of Jesus in their acts, was in vain (Peters tears, the acknowledgment of Judas, the silence of Herod on the chief point, the witness of Pilate, the dream of Procula; the comparison between the insurrectionist and murderer Barabbas, and Jesus in His majesty and tranquil greatness).Brieger:Pilate did not concede the truthfulness of the accusations of the Jews, yet condemned the Son of God to death. He thereby fulfilled in two respects the wisdom of God:First, that the Lord should be crucified, and not stoned; second, that Jews and Gentiles should unite in His death.Bauer:Sad is the scene which here meets our eyes; as it ever is when goodness has to protect itself by the votes of the masses.

Footnotes:

[1][Mar 15:1.Codd. B., C., D., Lachmann, Tischendorf read only .]

[2][Mar 15:7.Codd. B., C., D., Lachmann, Tischendorf read .]

[3][Mar 15:8.Codd. B., D., Lachmann, Tischendorf, instead of .]

[4][Lange adopts the reading in his translation. Luthers version does the same.Ed.]

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

CONTENTS.

The LORD JESUS is here led away to Pilate. He is Condemned, and delivered to be Crucified. His Death and Burial.

AND straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate.

I detain the Reader in the very opening of this chapter, to remark with what hot lust those enemies of CHRIST hastened to suck his blood. It must have been little short of midnight before their assembly broke up; if not, (as confess I am inclined to think,) they sat up all night until the morning; for Matthew in his relation of their proceedings saith, that when the morning was come, they led him away to Pilate. Mat 27:1-2 .

The most profitable view of these solemn transactions will be, I apprehend, to contemplate the sufferings of CHRIST, with an eye to our personal interest in them, and, as I verily, believe, there is hardly a single circumstance, but what hath a mystical meaning, I pray GOD the HOLY GHOST, in his glorifying the LORD JESUS, that he will be graciously pleased to unfold them to our hearts.

And here, in the first instance, as recorded in this chapter, we are told that they bound CHRIST and led him away to Pilate. The binding CHRIST, had certainly a very striking allusion to his Church, for whom CHRIST was bound and crucified. By sin we are all bound over to the just judgment of Almighty GOD. In the captivity of Satan we are also bound, until CHRIST makes us free; and without his deliverance, in becoming sin, and a curse for us, every son and daughter of Adam is like the unprofitable servant spoken of in the parable, concerning whom the LORD saith, take him and bind him hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Mat 22:13 .

Now then, if the LORD JESUS will deliver his people out of captivity, he shall in all points personate those whom he delivers. He shall ex claim as in their person, innumerable evils have compassed me about; mine iniquities have taken hold of me. Psa 40:12 . He shall be bound as a malefactor; yea, crucified between two thieves, as if the greatest of the three, standing as the sinner’s surety: and thus he shall be bound, and led as a sacrifice, as Isaac was bound, and laid upon the altar. Gen 22:9 , and as the sacrifices are supposed to have been bound under the law, so here in this point, as in every other, fulfilling all righteousness. See Lev 4:7 ; Psa 118:27 ; Isa 49:24-25 ; Hos 13:14 .

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

Mar 15:5

There are few tests of a man’s spiritual condition more searching and decisive than the temper with which he bears unmerited insult and railing speech. I do not refer to mere self-command, to the self-respect which forbids an answer in kind, and imposes an external calmness of manner on a swelling indignation within…. The question is not one of self-mastery under, but of superiority to, insult, which feels no anger or resentment at insolence or contempt; and this not from an abject or craven spirit, but from living on a plane of feeling up to which personal insult does not reach. This equanimity in no wise prejudges the question whether injurious language should not be reproved, and in some cases punished; as by a judge for contempt of court. We are only concerned with that serenity of spirit which is not touched or wounded by opprobrious speech, and all will admit it is a very rare gift.

Mr. Cotter Morison’s Service of Man, iii.

Mar 15:11

A certain People, once upon a time, clamorously voted by overwhelming majority ‘Not he; Barabbas! not he! Him, and what He is, and what He deserves, we know well enough; a reviler of the chief priests and sacred chancery wigs; a seditious heretic, physical force chartist, and enemy of His country and mankind: To the gallows and the cross with Him! Barabbas is our man; Barabbas! we are for Barabbas!’ They got Barabbas; have you well considered what a fund of purblind obduracy, of opaque flunkeyism grown truculent and transcendent; what an eye for the phylacteries, and want of eye for the eternal noblenesses; sordid loyalty to the prosperous semblances, and high treason against the supreme Fact, such a vote betokens in these natures? For it was the consummation of a long series of such; they and their fathers had long kept voting so. A singular People, who could both produce such Divine men, and then could so stone and crucify them; a People terrible from the beginning! Well, they got Barabbas; and they got, of course, such guidance as Barabbas and the like of him could give them; and, of course, they stumbled ever downwards and devil-wards, in their truculent, stiff-necked way.

Carlyle, Latter-day Pamphlets, I.

References. XV. 13. J. H. Jellett, The Elder Son, p. 141. XV. 15. J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in Sackville College Chapel, vol. i. p. 266. W. J. Knox-Little, Sunlight and Shadow, p. 242. XV. 15-20. C. Stanford, The Evening of Our Lord’s Ministry, p. 289. XV. 15-39. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xli. No. 2443.

Mar 15:19

Froude, in describing Newman’s preaching at Oxford, tells how once he ‘described closely some of the incidents of our Lord’s Passion; he then paused. For a few moments there was a breathless silence. Then, in a low, clear voice, of which the faintest vibration was audible in the farthest coiner of St. Mary’s, he said, “Now, I bid you recollect that He to Whom these things were done was Almighty God “. It was as if an electric stroke had gone through the church, as if every person present understood for the first time the meaning of what he had all his life been saying. I suppose it was an epoch in the mental history of more than one of my Oxford contemporaries.’

Reference. XV. 20, 21. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxviii. No. 1683.

Simon the Cyrenian

Mar 15:21

I. The greatness of trifles. If he had started five minutes earlier or later, his whole life would have been different.

II. The blessedness and honour of helping Jesus Christ. Let us share His shame and help in carrying out the purposes for which the cross was borne.

III. The perpetual recompense and record of humblest Christian work.

IV. The blessed results of contact with the suffering Christ. We suppose that he yielded to the soul-conquering power of Christ. He was ‘the father of Alexander and Rufus’.

Alexander Maclaren, Contemporary Pulpit, vol. I. p. 878.

Simon of Cyrene

Mar 15:21

There is more than a picture here, there is a parable for the soul. Let us understand not only the honour of the deed, but its blessedness. No one can ever do for Jesus precisely what Simon did. And yet in spirit, in the words and deeds of our daily lives, and preeminently in the greater hours of trial and sorrow, what we are called upon to do is this very thing to walk in the way after Jesus, and to cany His cross.

I. First: Mark the greatness of the service Simon did for Jesus. As often as our thoughts are true and our love to Jesus rises in flood, we all have a blameless envy of those who did Him service. We know no distinction to compare with theirs. The women who ministered to Him; Martha, who made Him a supper; Mary, who poured her spikenard over His head; Joseph, who gave Him a grave, stand out above all the benefactors of men. All the pre-eminences and attainments of time are less than vanity compared to theirs. But if you will give rank to the services rendered to Jesus, if you will pitch upon the greatest deed done for Him next to that supreme office of the woman who nursed Him in her bosom and gave Him suck at her breasts easily first of all is this deed of Simon in bearing His cross.

To this day the greatest service to be done for Christ is to carry His cross.

II. Mark, in the second place, the greatness of Simon’s reward. Christ never allowed any honour paid to Him, or any service done to Him to pass unrewarded. When a village girl asked Him to her wedding feast, He turned the water into wine. When a humble home offered Him hospitality on the Sabbath Day, He touched its mistress, and expelled her fever. When a Samaritan gave Him a draught from the well, He gave her to drink of the Living Water. When a poor, abandoned, city waif stooped to kiss His feet, He sent her out with a blessing of peace. No cup of cold water given to Christ ever lost its reward. And this preeminent service done by Simon enjoyed its great reward.

What was that reward? It was the deepest desire of his heart. Perhaps you say it was his own salvation. There is little doubt that he became Christ’s disciple. It would have been contrary, both to nature and to grace, that any man should come so near Jesus, and should do so much for Him, and not be called into His kingdom. But as I read the Evangelists, I conceive that Simon’s reward was greater than the saving of his own soul. It was the answer of his most instant and constant and urgent prayers. Away in Cyrene this pilgrim to the Holy City had left two little sons, and as he looked upon them, exiles from the land of Israel, as he taught them the fear of the God of Jacob, the very passion of his heart was distilled into prayer, that they might grow in the faith and obedience of God. Christ saw the names Rufus and Alexander graven on Simon’s heart. And the great reward was given to Simon of seeing both his sons known and loved and honoured in the Church of Christ. As I read a father’s heart, I do not know whether he was prouder of the deed done for Jesus, or of the holy fame of being the father of Alexander and Rufus.

III. Mark, in the third place, the greatness of Simon’s opportunity. That Simon should have been coming into the city as Jesus was coming out might be called a strange coincidence. It was more. It was the predestination of God. That was the predestined moment when Simon’s opportunity came to him. It was the moment when he was compelled to be alone with Christ. It was a golden opportunity. How Simon used it we can do more than guess. He might have struggled, like a galled ox, burning with deep resentment at the wrong done to him. He might have carried off his contumely with a bravado which would have appealed to the humour of the crowd. But this devout pilgrim had a spirit prepared for another way. He was precisely the man to profit by being alone with Jesus. We dare not say that any unreported words, or soft whisper, passed from Jesus to Simon. But we can be sure that Jesus turned and looked on Simon a look of human gratitude and of Divine compassion, and of irresistible appeal. He could not resist the Divine look. Simon saw, on the way to Calvary, the light of the knowledge of the glory of God revealed in the face of Jesus Christ. No man ever saw the face of God and lived. And as Simon looked into the face of Christ, the old nature died within him, and he knew the Lord.

W. M. Clow, The Day of the Cross, p. 157.

References. XV. 21. E. B. Spiers, A Present Advent, p. 192. R. F. Horton, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlvii. 1895, p. 392. J. Durran, ibid. vol. lvi. 1899, p. 6. J. Burns, ibid. vol. lxxi. 1907, p. 211. C. Stanford, The Evening of Our Lord’s Ministry, p. 313. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Mark IX.-XVI. p. 237. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxi. No. 1853. XV. 21-39. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Mark IX.-XVI. p. 228.

Christ Refusing the Stupefying Draught

Mar 15:23

The intention of the soldiers was humane. Crucifixion was so lingering and painful that it was customary thus to deaden the consciousness of the criminal.

I. What was the Saviour’s Condition at that Moment? Intense anguish of soul combined with physical suffering.

Christ’s nature was peculiarly sensitive. The sorrow at Gethsemane had already weakened Him.

Now His sorrow had reached its height.

II. Why did He Refuse the Proffered Relief? Not to awaken men’s admiration.

Not to awaken men’s sympathy.

1. Because His sufferings were by Divine appointment; not simply accidental. He would not escape the full force of the penalty which He had undertaken to endure.

2. Because He was unwilling to die without a full consciousness of the conquest which He was achieving over sin and death.

III. What Enabled Him to Dispense with this Stupefying Draught? It was the direct result of His self-surrender to the Father.

He who gives up will, purpose, life, into the hands of God, may expect that God will be all in all to him.

IV. What Lessons does His Refusal Teach Us?

1. His true nobility.

2. Our own duty under trial.

‘The cup which My Father hath given Me, shall I not drink it?’

It is our privilege to accept the Saviour’s love.

He suffered, died, arose, ascended to heaven, and pleads now for us.

F. G. Austin, Seeds and Saplings, p. 19.

Mar 15:23

See Keble’s lines on ‘The Tuesday before Easter’.

‘Johnson,’ says Boswell, ‘with that native fortitude which amidst all his bodily distress and mental sufferings never forsook him, asked Dr. Brocklesby, as a man in whom he had confidence, to tell him plainly whether he could recover. “Give me,” said he, “a direct answer.” The doctor having first asked him if he could bear the whole truth, which way soever it might lead, and being answered that he could, declared that in his opinion he could not recover without a miracle. “Then,” said Johnson, “I will take no more physic, not even my opiates; but I have prayed that I may render up my soul to God unclouded.” In this resolution he persevered.’

In Burnet’s History of My Own Times it is related that of the regicides punished after the Restoration ‘the only one who died dastardly was Hugh Peters, a very vicious man, but a sort of buffoon preacher, who had been serviceable to Cromwell on several accounts, and a fierce instigator of the king’s death. He had neither honesty to repent of his sin, nor strength of mind to suffer for it as the rest had done, but was perpetually drinking some strong cordial liquors to keep up his spirits or make him insensible.’

References. XV. 23. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xli. No. 2443. XV. 25. W. P. Balfern, Lessons from Jesus, p. 220. XV. 31. R. Winterbotham, Sermons Preached in Holy Trinity Church, Edinburgh, p. 148.

Fixing Our Own Evidences

Mar 15:32

‘That we may see and believe:’ here you have a pack of men who are setting up their own standard of evidence. What a proud ‘we’ was that; what a blind ‘see’ was that; what an impossible ‘believe’ was that! Observe their line of reasoning: they charged Jesus Christ to do something of their own fixing in order that they might see and believe. They would arrest the universe in order that they might get a first-class seat upon any chariot that was driving towards the gratification of selfish conceit and desire. Were they so anxious to see and believe that they would call upon God to arrest the sun and the moon upon the hills of time? Certainly not; they were not anxious to believe, they did not want to believe, but they wanted to gratify a conceit or to satisfy a fancy or an ambition; they wanted to create a new anecdote, saying, ‘We said, if He would come down from the Cross we would see it and believe Him’; and God sent upon them a great negative, a contemptuous denial. None can be so deaf as God. We must take care how we set up our own little schools of evidence and our small little bodies of apologies for the deity of Christ and the redeeming efficacy of His Cross.

I. We cannot stop at any one definition of evidence, even if God were to grant it to us. He would not satisfy us, He would awaken and provoke a still keener and fouler temptation.

The eye never saved a soul, the eye is a poor instrument at best; the human may probably be the very poorest of eyes in the higher classes of animals. There is a way which the eagle knoweth not, and there is a path which the vulture’s eye hath not seen, and there are paths and ways and courses of development which no human eye can see; it is the soul that sees.

II. Jesus Christ never did respond to any test set by the enemy, set by anybody. He does not accept suggestions, He reveals truths. Christ never fell into an intellectual man-trap; He laid down the law, He expounded the kingdom, He spoke in the imperative; in the subjunctive or the potential He could not speak, He was free of all that limited and hesitant grammar. Did Jesus Christ accept the suggestion of the enemy in the wilderness? He said what a philosophy it was that He spake in that grand retort ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God’: a new conception of life, an enlargement of our limited view of bread, of substance, of tables and dinings. Christ in effect swept all these out of the way, saying, ‘Man shall live by every word, every kind of method Divinely conceived and Divinely provided: away!’

III. Many have suggested short and easy methods of proving this and that. Jesus Christ never adopted one of them. They treat Jesus Christ as if He knew nothing about these things; whereas He lived before the universe lived. They seem to think that if He would only accept their ideas, their short and easy methods, all would instantly rise and follow Christ, and make the welkin ring with thunderous acclamation. From the beginning man has had everything that was necessary to redemption and salvation. Once a lawyer thought not; he conceived the idea that the Divine revelation would be vexed by cross-examination, and he said, ‘Master, which is the great commandment of the law?’ Jesus answering said unto him, ‘How readest thou?’ The answer was given before the question was asked; there is no need for such questions, they have all been anticipated. ‘Lawyer, how readest thou?’ ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and soul and mind and strength.’ ‘Very good,’ said Christ, ‘I add nothing to it, there is no need to add anything to it; I came to see the law fulfilled, the written law turned into unwritten life. This do, and thou shalt live.’ But the lawyer still thought that his plan was the best; so did they on Calvary, they said, ‘O Thou that destroyest the temple and buildest it in three days, save Thyself and come down from the Cross; we would thus put Thee to the test; Thou claimant of the highest throne in Jewry, come down!’ The suggestion was not accepted; it was like Christ not to answer foolish, frivolous, and conceited questions.

Joseph Parker, City Temple Pulpit, vol. vi. p. 49.

References. XV. 33, 34. J. Hunter, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlv. 1894, p. 187. W. Alexander, Verbum Crucis, p. 65.

Mar 15:34

In the thirty-seventh chapter of Transformation, Hawthorne describes Sodoma’s well-known fresco of the suffering Christ at Siena. ‘It is inexpressibly touching. So weary is the Saviour, and utterly worn out with agony, that His lips have fallen apart from mere exhaustion; His eyes seem to be set; He tries to lean His head against the pillar, but is kept from sinking down upon the ground only by the cords that bind Him. One of the most striking effects produced is the sense of loneliness. You behold Christ deserted both in heaven and earth; that despair is in Him which wrung forth the saddest utterance man ever made, “Why hast Thou forsaken Me?” Even in this extremity, however, He is still Divine. The great and reverent painter has not suffered the Son of God to be merely an object of pity, though depicting Him in a state so profoundly pitiful. He is as much and as visibly our Redeemer, there bound, there fainting and bleeding from the scourge, with the cross in view, as if He sat on the throne of His glory in the heavens.’

Towards the end of her life Mrs. Fry said to a friend: ‘I have passed through deep baptism of spirit in this illness. I may say, unworthy as I am to say it, that I have had to drink in very small measure of the Saviour’s cup when He said, My God! My God! why hast Thou forsaken Me? Some of my friends have thought there was a danger of my being exalted, but I believe the danger has been on the opposite side, of my being too low.’

The Cry of Dereliction

Mar 15:34

The tragedy of the Crucifixion reached its climax at the sixth hour. The Blessed Master had passed through the outer circle of sorrow, and now the pale, bruised Form is lost in the thick darkness which surrounds Him. During the first hours our Blessed Lord reigns as a King interceding, absolving, and commending His loved ones. Now a change passes over Him; His soul enters into a great loneliness. This cry shows that there was something deeper, something more awful, than the fear of death. He must taste death for every man, He must be made perfect through suffering; but the cry we hear from the cross was the cry of a soul which had been faithful, loyal all His life, but from Whom the conscious Presence of God had been withdrawn.

I. Do We ever Feel Forsaken? Such days come to even the best of us days of darkness, days of depression. But here is our comfort When all seems lost in life, when our work never seems to bring success, when we toil without any recognition and without any reward, when there seems for us no comfort in our prayers, when there is no light to gladden our eyes, then it is for us to realize that because of that One’s bitter cry which rang out in the darkness, Jesus is always with us because He knew what it was to be forsaken even by God Himself. So you and I may always know that when this darkness comes upon us we may of a certainty count, because of this bitter cry, that Jesus is always with us. Oh, let us cling to the cross for this our comfort in our time of darkness!

II. The Guilt of Sin. And yet surely it must mean more than this, something deeper than this, for it reveals to us the guilt of sin. He Who knew no sin was made sin for us; He came to make an atonement. ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself.’ What does it all mean? What do you and I mean by that word that is so often on our lips? Let me carry your thoughts back to the old Levitical days when the high priest once in the year made an atonement for the sins of the people. You will remember the ritual of that day. What did it all mean? What was the meaning, then, to the people who saw these acts going on? Surely that sin was something very awful and terrible in God’s sight; that God could not look upon sin; that it must be taken right away, and until this was done the people could not approach God. We all feel its power, do we not? We see its stain. But how few of us recognize its guilt! We cannot think little of sin when you and I realize that it cost the best, the noblest, the purest blood, when we realize that it has cost the Blood of God Himself to take away that sin; that for one great atonement it needed God to come down and live our life, it needed God to be surrounded by the darkness on the cross, to live out His life, as it were, just for a few hours making that atonement, forsaken by God Himself. Can you and I think lightly of sin after that? When we are tempted to call some sins little and some great, as they are reckoned in our social life, let us realize what it meant when our Lord cried from the cross, ‘My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?’

III. The Punishment of Sin. I think we have here not only the revelation of the guilt of sin, but we have more we have a revelation of the punishment of sin. This one hour had loomed before Christ all His life. At this last dread moment we are shown something, only something, but surely sufficient, of what the punishment of sin really is. Our Blessed Master could endure all else but this. The thought of His Father hiding His face, and the thought of entering that darkness, was something which He could not contemplate unmoved. We are inclined are we not? to guess at the future condition of the soul; but after we have stood beneath the Cross, after we have heard this cry, we need not have any further speculation, for sin always means here and there separation from God. No bodily penalty, none of those mediaeval thoughts of hell which we are sometimes inclined to have in our mind, can compare with the awfulness of what it must mean for you and me for God to hide His face. Separation from God does not the sinner know it now? Ah, but the sinner always has a feeling that he can turn to God when he likes; but to realize that sin will bring this separation, entire and complete, from God is the most awful thing that man could contemplate. Today Jesus calls to us, ‘Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by?’ nothing to us who stand by the Cross? Was there ever such sorrow, ever such love?

Let us turn with thoughts of devotion and thoughts of love to behold the Lamb slain as an atonement for sin, to look and live.

References. XV. 34. Selected Sermons of Schleiermacher, p. 52. A. F. Winnington Ingram, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxxiii. 1908, p. 276. A. S. Peake, ibid. vol. lxxiv. 1908, p. 1. G. W. Herbert, Notes of Sermons, p. 92. A. N. Obbard, Plain Sermons, p. 222. Father Bernard Vaughan, Society, Sin, and the Saviour, p. 211. A. G. Mortimer, The Spiritual Life in the Seven Last Words, p. 37. XV. 34-47. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xl. No. 2390.

Misunderstood

Mar 15:35

‘Behold, He calleth Elias.’ They misinterpreted that last drear cry. They thought He was speaking to Elias and not to God. So at the very end, and on the Cross itself, Jesus was misunderstood.

I. I want to follow that misinterpretation into one or two spheres of the earthly life of Jesus, and I notice first that men misunderstood His motives. Think, for example, of His healing miracles ‘He casteth out devils by Beelzebub,’ they said. Or think of His eating with publicans and sinners. That condescension spelled out love Divine, and they thought it was proof positive of guilt.

Men misunderstood the mystical and poetic speech of Jesus. They took Him very prosaically and literally when He only meant to suggest as music does, and so time and again they misconstrued Him. Take, for example, one of His early words, ‘Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again’. So, too, in the sad sweet story of the house at Bethany you recall how Jesus said to His disciples, ‘Our friend Lazarus sleepeth’. They answered at once, ‘Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well,’ and Jesus, with a touch of pity at their dullness, has to tell them plainly that Lazarus was dead.

I think that Jesus is still misunderstood that way. There are men who love Him as these disciples did, and who are striving to serve Him in a life of duty, but they have taken the music of His speech, that was meant to suggest and to lead into the infinite, and they have built their arguments upon the letter of it, forgetting that it is the spirit that giveth life.

II. The world, then, misunderstood the speech of Jesus; but it also misunderstood His silence. And if ever the silence of Jesus was misunderstood, it was by Herod.

Is not Christ’s silence still misunderstood? There is nothing harder for many a mind to grapple with than the apparent silence of our ascended Lord. It is not what God does, it is what He fails to do: it is not what Christ says, it is what He fails to say, that puzzles and perplexes many an earnest soul.

III. ‘ Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani ,’ and when they heard it they said He calleth Elias. Do you see the reason why they misunderstood Him? They had only caught a fragment of His speech.

There never was a time when Christ was more misunderstood than now, for the very reason that we find at Calvary. There was never a time when fragments of the Gospel were proclaimed with such assurance as the whole round truth. To take a part and think it is the whole is the sure way of misunderstanding Christ.

G. H. Morrison, The Unlighted Lustre, p. 244.

Reference. XV. 37, 38. ‘Plain Sermons’ by contributors to the Tracts for the Times, vol. viii. p. 76.

The Roman Centurion

Mar 15:39

One man, and one man only, is wholly competent to tell us the story of the death of Jesus. That man is this Roman centurion. It was he who sent his band across the brook Kedron, in the soft moonlight, to arrest Jesus. It was he who guarded Him as He was led to the house of Caiaphas, and then marched Him as a dangerous rebel to Pilate, and then to Herod, and then back to Pilate again. He overheard the strange parleying between Jesus and Pilate; he superintended the scourging; he looked on when the soldiers mocked Him; and it was by his lips that the message of Pilate’s wife reached the governor’s ears. At his word of command the glittering spears began to move along the way to Calvary; he saw the nails driven in, and then he stood with watchful eye and open ear, in the strength of his Roman discipline, and marked how Jesus died. I cannot tell you, and no man can tell you, the precise state of the blessed dead, but surely for all of us it shall be a state in which many things covered shall be revealed. And when the great multitude of the redeemed shall long to know the whole story of the last great day, we shall press round this Roman centurion, and he will inflame our hearts as he tells us how Jesus loved unto the end.

I. Of this man we know nothing certainly until he stands in the light of the dying face of Jesus. That he was a soldier assures us of an ingrained habit of obedience, a perfect courage, an unflinching loyalty, and an honest and greatly simple heart That he was a Roman soldier tells us that he belonged to the most dauntless army the world has known, whose deeds of valour went back through an almost unbroken record of success through seven centuries. And that he was a centurion tells us that he was a man in middle life, who had seen service, and had risen through merit to his high command. No inexperienced stripling was ever appointed to a Roman post of authority. It may be safely said that among the centurions of the Roman army was to be found the very flower of honour and chivalry. The Roman Empire was already in decline; but, like every great organization, it had begun to die at the heart. And when the pestilence of moral corruption had infected the governors and counsellors of Rome, there were still to be found in its armies men of fearless truth, of fine courtesy, and of incorruptible purity. How the governors in the New Testament stand out in contrast to its centurions! All the four centurions are men of moral, even of spiritual beauty. Of one of them the Jews said, ‘He loveth our nation, and hath built us a synagogue,’ and Jesus said, ‘I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel’. Of another, Cornelius, the record is that ‘he was a just man, and one that feareth God’. The third was Julius, the centurion of Augustus’ band, who ‘courteously entreated Paul, and gave him liberty’. And the fourth was this centurion at the cross, who, as the slow hours of the day passed away, watched Jesus die, and in the few and emphatic words of a soldier’s lips, bore to Him his confident testimony.

II. Now the question this man allows us to answer is what a man of a good and honest heart, with only a Roman’s education, and with Pagan ideas, thought of Jesus when he saw Him die. He knew nothing about the life of Jesus. He was not even familiar with His name. ‘This Man’ was the word that came to his tongue as he looked on His head sunken in death. But as he witnessed the dying of the Lord Jesus, the Roman’s contempt was changed into an adoration that broke out into great and memorable words of suggestive confession.

1. His first witness to Jesus is ‘certainly this was a righteous Man’. It was the innocence, the moral beauty, the unspotted righteousness of Jesus, which dawned upon Him. He broke the stillness of that awful moment with his strong, soldier-like words: ‘Certainly this was a righteous Man’. He had not learned the music of the Hebrew Psalms, but if he had, this wise and true-hearted man could surely have broken out in the fervent words: ‘Thou art fairer than the sons of men. Grace is poured into Thy lips. Therefore God hath blessed Thee for ever.’

2. The centurion was arrested, not only by the character of Jesus, but by the manner of His dying. Jesus died as a hero dies. For as two of the Evangelists report, he cried: ‘Truly this Man was a Son of God’. His primary meaning is that Jesus was plainly no ordinary mortal, no such man as he was himself, cast in a merely earthly mould, but, like the heroes who had done the great deeds of Roman valour, of the lineage of the gods. Such heroism in dying out-distanced all he knew, and he knew well the meaning of heroism. It was a soldier spirit who had witnessed that ‘Never man spake like this Man,’ and this fellow-soldier testified, ‘Never man died like this Man’.

3. On his darkened pagan mind there fell an awe and a sense of having been in the presence of the Divine. He saw the darkened sky, he felt the vibrating earth, he was appalled by the last great cry, and he looked up at the cross, and realized that the Divine Being whom Jesus had called His Father had owned Him for a Son.

III. Now this is what the Roman centurion saw in Jesus as he watched Him die, and when we remember what he was in mind and training, we see that his confession was very great. It had the greatness of sincerity and of fearlessness. And yet, while we commend, we cannot but pity. We cannot refrain from thinking and whispering to ourselves, ‘If thou hadst but known the day of thy visitation’. His eyes were holden. He saw in Jesus only what he had eyes to see.

1. The first defect in the centurion was his want of the sense of sin.

2. The second defect in the centurion was his want of a true conception of God.

3. The third defect in this centurion was his ignorance of a love which will die to redeem.

There are men among us Today, after all the centuries of the light and the teaching of Jesus and His cross, who see no more in Him than was seen by this sincere and honest centurion.

These do not enter into the secret of Jesus. They never see ‘the Lord’. What do they need to cleanse their eyes? They need exactly what this centurion needed. The only evidence which will move mind and heart and will must appeal to the conscience; and the only apologetic which will successfully plead the deity of Jesus must rise above all questions of criticism, must base itself on the history, and prove itself in that experience in which both scholar and peasant have a common ground. Toplady’s ‘Rock of Ages’ is a more convincing and convicting apology than Butler’s noble and unanswerable Analogy. One vivid sight of the print of the nails alone can evoke the rapturous and adoring confession, ‘My Lord and My God’.

W. M. Clow, The Day of the Cross, p. 299.

Joseph of Arimathaea

Mar 15:42-43

It is significant that all the four Evangelists tell the deed of Joseph. We can understand why it was so indelibly imprinted on their memories, and was deemed so worthy of record. The day of Jesus’ death had been one long sorrow and shame. From the midnight hour in Gethsemane until Christ bowed his head in death, there had been the awful contrast between love and constancy and tender pity and holy sacrifice on the one side, and betrayal, denial, desertion, and derision on the other. But then at the close of it all, there is this brave and beautiful deed. It is a touch of tenderness after a day of unrelenting hate and cruel wrong.

I. But now let us look at the doer of this good work on Jesus. His mind and spirit are made very clear to us. Each Evangelist adds some revealing trait Joseph of Arimatha was a man of means, of refined mind, and of high social position. He was a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin, and held in good repute among his fellow-counsellors. He stood marked out from many by his high and serious mind, his incorruptible passion for justice, his native goodness of heart. He wore all through his years ‘the white flower of a blameless life’. He belonged, to use a pardonable analogy, to that class to which our country in the days of her struggle for civil and religious liberty owed so much the class of high-minded, devout, patriotic, country gentlemen.

We are told one very revealing thing about him. ‘He also waited for the kingdom of God.’ The kingdom of God was the phrase into which had been condensed all the high hopes and holy ambitions, all the dreams of a better state, and all the visions of the reign of God among men, foretold by Prophet and Psalmist. To wait for the kingdom of God was to be one of that band of devout and prayerful men and women, who were steeped in the spirit of the Old Testament, who had sure faith in the God of Israel, who waited for the hour to strike when the Messiah would come, and the will of God be done on earth as it was in heaven. It was that kingdom which Simeon and Anna longed to see before death should seal their eyes; before whose narrow door Nicodemus stood and did not know it, or understand its call. It was that kingdom which poor, blinded, reckless Barabbas and his fellow-brigands sought to establish in their mistaken ungodly way. That he ‘waited’ meant that in the heart of Joseph there was a noble discontent with the corruptions and miseries and bondages of the times, and an unquenchable longing for the reign of righteousness, peace, and joy. As he passed through the land and remembered the great days of old, his heart was pained within him. As he walked in the city and saw, as Jesus saw, iniquity infesting it, and the vultures of vengeance hovering over it, his mind was filled with brooding thoughts. And as he sat in the council and looked with his clear, honest eyes into the craft and chicanery of Caiaphas and his tools, hope almost died within him. What could such a man, with his shadowed spirit do, but join these who had lost everything but faith in God, who could only wait and long and pray for the kingdom of God?

Very naturally this man became Jesus’ disciple. Like the iron to its magnet he was drawn to Christ. Like the flower to the sun he turned his face to Jesus.

It was this man, rich, cultured, of conspicuous social position, of holy and blameless character, with his mind already enlightened by Jesus, and His heart drawn to Him, with everything true and just and pure within him, rising up in a moral horror at the wrong which is being done, who stood under the cross of Christ The events of the day had all smitten his troubled, questioning, fearful heart. And as he stood over against the cross, and heard Christ’s words, and at last saw Him die, not only reverence, not only a hot moral anger, not only an afflicting pity, but a victorious and liberating faith and a passion of remorse for his past shrinking smote him, and forthwith heedless of the scornful looks, and of the muttered taunts of scribe and Sadducee, ‘he went in boldly unto Pilate,’ and with the hunger of a man eager to do a service to his Lord, and to atone for days of lost opportunity, he besought the body of Jesus. And then, in his own grave, prepared for his own costly burial, with his own hands, unheeding all thought of defilement, he laid Jesus to His rest.

II. Now very plainly Jesus did more for Joseph of Arimatha on the cross, and by the cross, than by all the words and deeds of His life. With him, as with every other man, the cross was a savour of life unto life, or of death unto death. Let us think of the deep and enduring spiritual changes which passed upon this disciple as he saw Jesus die.

1. The first of these was the perfecting of his religions character.

2. The second spiritual change which passed upon Joseph as he witnessed the cross was an enlightenment as to the use of his wealth.

3. The sight of the cross perfected his religi us character; it enlightened his mind in the use of his wealth. It had a third effect, which was the root and cause of these two great changes it filled him with a penitent shame.

W. M. Clow, The Day of the Cross, p. 341.

References. XV. 42-XVI. 8 . W. H. Bennett, The Life of Christ According to St. Mark, p. 268. XV. 43-46. Spur-geon, Sermons, vol. xxx. No. 1789.

Mar 15:46

Dostoieffsky, in his powerful romance, The Idiot, describes two Russians stopping before Holbein’s picture of Jesus being lowered from the cross, with mangled body, and traces of pain, wounds, and bruises on His limbs. ‘I like looking at that picture,’ says one. ‘That picture!’ exclaims his friend. ‘That picture! Why, some people’s faith is ruined by that picture!’ He goes on to explain that it is a representation of death as a blind, implacable force, working its will on this grand, priceless Being, Himself worth more than all nature and all the earth. Scepticism, he argues, is started by the sight of this huge monster having power to destroy the Christ.

References. XV. 47. R. M. Benson, The Life Beyond the Grave, p. 12. XVI. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlii. No. 2467; vol. xlviii. No. 2780. R. Stier, The Words of the Angels, p. 72.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

XXVII

CHRIST BEFORE PILATE AND HEROD

Harmony, pages 196-206 and Mat 27:3-30 ; Act 1:18-19 ; Mar 15:1-19 ; Luk 23:2-25 ; Joh 18:28-19:16 .

You will understand that our Lord was tried before the Sanhedrin, as we saw in the last chapter, on the charge of blasphemy, penalty for which was stoning. We will find in this discussion that Jesus is first tried before the court of Pilate on the charge of treason, and then differently charged with sedition, the penalty of these two charges being crucifixion, and on the same two charges he was tried before the Galilean court of Herod. We have yet to consider his trial before the court of God on the charge of sin, with the penalty of physical and spiritual death, and finally, we will consider his trial before the court of hell on the charge of sin, with the penalty of passing under the power of the devil.

So that this discussion commences at the last verse on page 196 of the Harmony, Mat 27:2 , “And they bound him, and led him away, and delivered him up to Pilate, the governor”; or, as Mark puts it, Mar 15:1-2 , “They bound Jesus and carried him away, and delivered him up to Pilate”; or, as Luke expresses it, Luk 23:1 , “And the whole company of them rose up, and brought him before Pilate”; or, as John has it, Joh 18:28 , “They led Jesus therefore from Caiaphas into the palace; and it was early.”

We have seen in the preceding discussion that Jesus was tried before the Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish court, on the charge of blasphemy, and condemned. We have seen that in every step of the proceedings they violated their own criminal law. Just now the important thing to note is that they also violate the Roman law. In this particular they had no right to even try a capital offense. Of course, we know that a capital offense is one of which the penalty is death. That is, capital offense comes from the word caput (root, “cap,” connected with kephala) , meaning “the head.” And capital offense is one in which one loses his head. The right to-try-such an-offense Rome never granted to the conquered provinces. The position is untenable that any conquered province might try and condemn, but the Roman representative had to execute.

On this point Mr. Greenleaf says, “If they (the Sanhedrin) had condemned him, they had not the power to pass sentence, this being a right which passed from the Jews by conquest of their country, and really belonged to’ the Romans alone. They were merely citizens of the Roman province; they were left in the enjoyment of their civil laws, the public exercises of their religion, and many other things relating to their police and municipal regulations.” They had not the power of life and death. This was a principal attribute of sovereignty which the Romans took care to reserve to themselves always, whatever else might be neglected. Tacitus says that the imperial right among the Romans was incapable of being transmitted or delegated, and that right was the jurisdiction of capital cases, belonging ordinarily to the Roman governor or general. The word is praeses , answering to our word president, or governor of the province, the procurator, having for his principal duties charge of the annual revenue and the cognizance of capital cases. Some procurators, like Pontius Pilate, had the jurisdiction of life and death, but it could not be expected that Pilate would trouble himself with the cognizance of any matter not pertaining to the Roman law, which consists of an alleged offense against the God of the Jews, and was neither acknowledged nor even respected by the Romans. Of this the chief priests and elders were well aware.

To show that Mr. Greenleaf is right in that contention, I will give three instances from the New Testament upon that point. The first is Act 18 , in the city of Corinth, and under the Roman governor Gallic. When Paul was accused under him, and brought before the judgment seat, Gallic says: “If indeed, it were a matter of wrong or of wicked villainy, O ye Jews, reason would that I should bear with you, but if they are questions about words and names and your own law, look to it yourselves; I am not minded to be a judge of these matters.” So a little later, when the mob treated the chief of the synagogue with indignities, it is said, “But Gallic cared for none of these things,” i.e., as a Roman officer he had nothing to do with them. So it was impossible for Pilate to take cognizance of anything brought against any matter of the Jewish religion, such as the accusation of blasphemy.

The next case that I cite is in Act 23 , where the chiliarch, or military tribune, called Claudius Lysias, writes a letter to Felix, who at that time was governor (Act 23:27 ) : “This man was seized by the Jews, and was about to be slain of them, when I came upon them with the soldiers and rescued him, having learned that he was a Roman. And desiring to know the cause wherefore they accused him, I brought him down into their council; whom I found to be accused about questions of their law, but to have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds.”

The next case that I cite is from Act 25 ) when Festus was governor in place of Felix. So we see we have Pilate, Felix, Festus, and Gallic, all testifying upon the point to which I am now speaking. Festus cited Paul’s case to King Agrippa (Act 25:14 ): “There is a certain man left prisoner by Felix, about whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, asking for sentence against him. To whom I answered, that it was not the custom of the Romans to give up any man, before that the accused have the accusers face to face, and have had opportunity to make his defense concerning the matter laid against him. When, therefore, they were come together here, I made no delay, but on the next day sat on the judgment seat, and commanded the man to be brought. Con-erning whom, when the accusers stood up, they brought no charge of such evil things as I supposed: but had certain questions against him of their own religion.” And he declined to take any jurisdiction of such a question.

Further upon this point, I now give what the great French lawyer, Dupin, says: Let us distinctly establish this point; for here I entirely differ in opinion from Mr. Salvador. According to him (p. 88), “the Jews had reserved the power of trying, according to their law; but it was in the hands of the procurator alone that the executive power was invested; every culprit must be put to death by his consent, in order that the senate should not have the means of reaching persons that were sold to foreigners.” No; the Jews had not reserved the right of passing sentence of death. This right had been transferred to the Romans by the very act of the conquest; and this was not merely that the senate should not have the means of reaching persons who were sold to foreign countries; but it was done, in order that the conqueror might be able to reach those individuals who should become impatient of the yoke. It was, in short, for the equal protection of all, as all had become Roman subjects; and to Rome alone belonged the highest judicial power, which is the principal attribute of sovereignty. Pilate, as the representative of Caesar in Judea, was not merely an agent of the executive authority, which would have left the judiciary and legislative power in the hands of the conquered people he was not simply an officer appointed to give an exequatur or mere approval (visa) to sentences passed by another authority, the authority of the Jews. When the matter in question was a capital case, the Roman authorities not only ordered the execution of a sentence, but also took cognizance ( coynito ) of the crime; it had the right of jurisdiction a pnon, and that of passing judgment in the last resort. If Pilate himself had not had this power by special delegation, vice praesdis, it was vested in the governor, within whose territorial jurisdiction the case occurred; but in any event we hold it to be clear that the Jews had lost the right of condemning to death any person whatsoever, not only so far as respects the execution, but the passing of the sentence. M. DUPIN, Testimony of the Evangelists, pages 601-602.

We must not forget that Judea was a conquered country, and to the Roman governor belonged the right of taking cognizance of capital cases. What then was the right of the Jewish authorities in regard to Jesus? The Jews had not the right reserved of passing sentence of death. This right had been transferred to the Romans by the very act of conquest; and this was not merely that the Roman senate should not have the means of reaching persons who were sold to foreign countries, but that Rome might have charge of all cases of life and death. Pilate, as the representative of Caesar in Judea, was not merely an agent of the executive authority, he having left the judiciary in the hands of the Jews; not simply an officer appointed to execute a Jewish sentence passed by any authority, but when the matter in question was a capital case the Roman authorities could not only order the execution of the sentences, but they also claimed the right of passing upon the crime itself, with the right of jurisdiction over the question, and of passing judgment in the last resort. The Jews had lost the right to try a man for a capital offense, or to condemn to death any person whatever. This is one of the best settled points in the provincial law of the Romans.

If the Jews had the right of trial in capital cases, and the Roman power was exercised merely to execute a Jewish sentence, then when the accusation was brought before Pilate the proceedings would have been after this fashion: “Jesus has violated the Jewish law of blasphemy, and we have condemned him to death, and do bring him to you that you may approve and execute the sentence.” But what are the facts? When they bring Jesus before Pilate they say not one word about the offense of blasphemy, but bring a new charge. Pilate puts the question, “What accusation bring you against this man?” 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.”

That is the charge they prefer against him before the Roman Court. That is the new case. And Pilate examines whether Jesus Christ was guilty of treason against the Roman governor in claiming to be a king. So he examines the case by asking questions of Jesus himself: “Art thou the King of the Jews?” And after Pilate had finished his investigation he brought in his verdict of the case before him. He has heard the people and he has heard Jesus, and now here is his sentence: “And Pilate said unto the chief priests and the multitudes, I find no fault in this man.” (Top of page 200 in the Harmony.) That is the decision.

The decision having been rendered upon that charge of treason, they bring another charge (Luk 23:5 , Harmony page 200) : “But they were the more urgent, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Judea, and beginning from Galilee even unto this place.” This is what we call sedition, that is, stirring up a tumult; so they changed the accusation. When they bring that charge against him before Pilate he merely notes the fact that they have spoken of Galilee, and as Herod, the tetrarch of Galilee, happened to be in Jerusalem at this time, and as the offense, according to this charge, commenced in Herod’s territory, Pilate wishing to avoid the responsibility of deciding the case, refers it to Herod.

We will see how it goes before Herod. On page 201 of the Harmony we find that Herod, after maltreating him, sends him back to Pilate. Page 203 shows that Pilate announces Herod’s verdict: “I, having examined him before you, found no fault in this man touching those things whereof you accused Him; no, nor yet Herod: for he sent Him back unto us; and behold, nothing worthy of death hath been done by Him.” So there we have a double verdict, that under the second charge Herod finds no offense against the Roman law, and Pilate says the same thing that he hath done nothing worthy of death. No fault in him under either of the accusations. So that is the third verdict of equivalence that has been pronounced twice by Pilate and once by Herod.

Pilate now wishes to smooth things, for he knew that the Jews were very turbulent, and that the position of the Roman officer in Judea was always a hazardous one, since accusations could be made against him to Rome. Pilate had been moved by a message from his wife. She had had a dream. So she sends to Pilate while on his judgment throne, and says, “Have thou nothing to do with this man.” Now, the Jews were urging Pilate on from one side, and his wife restraining him on the other. Burns, in “Tam O’Shanter,” says, about the attitude of men toward the good counsel of their wives: Ah, gentle dames! it gars me greet To think how many counsels sweet, How many lengthened, sage advices, The husband frae the wife despises!

Therefore, Pilate proposes an expedient. He says, “There is a custom among you that at feast time some guilty man shall be pardoned. Now, you have a man here, a murderer and a robber, whose name is Barabbas, and it is within my province to pardon a man. Suppose you let me pardon Jesus, or, would you prefer that I pardon Barabbas?” It is a strange thing to the lover of justice that after Pilate had twice acquitted this Man he now proposes to pardon him. He could not pardon a man that had been acquitted. The Jews make their choice; they say: “Not this man, but Barabbas; release that robber to us; don’t you release this man.” Pilate then has Jesus crowned with thorns to show his contempt for their accusation that he would be a king, and invests him with purple, and brings him before the Jews, and exclaims (in words, that, put together, make a great text for a sermon: “Ecce homo”; “Behold the man!” “Ecce Rex!” “Behold the King!” When the Jews persisted that they preferred that Barabbas should be released to them, then Pilate put this question, which has been the theme of many sermons, “What then shall I do with Jesus, who is called the Christ?”

Very many years ago at a meeting of the old General Association, Dr. A. E. Clemmons, pastor at Marshall, Texas, and Shreveport, Louisiana, preached a sermon from that text, and made this stirring application: This question comes to every man. Every man is under obligation to accept Jesus Christ as King, and if he rejects Christ then the question arises, “What shall I do with Jesus? He is in the world; he is preached in ten thousand pulpits; I cannot ignore him; I must make some disposition of him; what shall I do with him? Shall I count him as an impostor, or shall I accept him as my Saviour?”

Having made that point clear, Dr. Clemmons then passed to his last question: “In not trying to dispose of Jesus Christ you reject him. Then later the question will come to you in this form, ‘What will Jesus, who is called the Christ, do with me?’ ” Showing that there would come a time when the despised Nazarene would occupy the throne of eternal judgment, and according to the manner in which you disposed of him when the question was up to you, so will he dispose of you when the question is up to him.

Their answer to the question was, “Crucify him! Away with him! Crucify him!” Pilate says, “Why don*t you take him and crucify him yourselves?” Then they said, “We have no jurisdiction; we have not this power of life and death; you have. We bring the case to you, and we tell you now that we charge him with being an enemy of Caesar, claiming himself to be a King; and if you let this man go, you are not Caesar’s friend.” It was a favorite custom of the Jews to prefer charges against the governors of Judea before the Roman court at Rome itself, and many a governor of Judea was recalled on charges preferred against him at Rome. When Pilate heard that, he was terrified. He knew that it was an easy thing to shake the confidence of Caesar in any of his subordinates, and he was afraid. He therefore fell upon another expedient. He washed his hands, saying, “I am innocent of the blood of this man; I wanted to let him go; you forced me to put him to death; you are responsible.” Then they said, “His blood be on us and on our children.”

When you see Pilate go through that form of washing his hands, as if by washing his hands he could divest himself of the responsibility to render just judgment, you are reminded of the incident in the play of Shakespeare’s Macbeth, in which Lady Macbeth, having instigated the death of the king, Duncan, and stirred up her husband to usurp that king’s throne, her conscience and her imagination were always washing off the blood spots on her hands. The great author relates how she became insane; and she was all the time going to the basin and washing her hands, then looking at them and saying, “This blood on my hands would make the sea red; all of the ocean cannot wash it the stain of blood on this lily-white hand.”

Pilate never recovered from his cowardly betrayal of his trust. History and tradition both tell us that he was pursued by undying remorse, and there is a tradition that when he was banished to the foot of the Alps, every time a storm was about to come a dark mist would gather over a mountain named after Pilate. There is a very thrilling reference to that in one of Scott’s novels. Whenever the people looked up and saw Mount Pilatus wrapped in mist they would cross themselves and say, “Avoid thee, Satan.” So tradition and history have tied the name of Pilate to that cloud-covered mountain.

And Pilate finally signs the death warrant of Jesus of Nazareth, whom he had twice acquitted, and concerning whom he had said, “I find no fault in him; he is guilty of no crime.” On page 206 of the Harmony we have an account of the indignities Christ suffered at the hands of the soldiers. Let the reader study that for himself.

QUESTIONS 1. Who brought the case of Jesus before Pilate and what great illconsistency in the Jews manifested at the palace?

2. In what particular did they violate the Roman law in the trial of Jesus?

3. What was the testimony of Tacitus on this point?

4. Was it the province of Pilate under Roman law to merely execute a sentence of the Sanhedrin concerning an offense against Jewish law or must he assume original and complete jurisdiction and try the case brought before him solely in view of an offense against Roman law?

5. What three special cases in the Acts illustrate this fact and what the point in each case?

6. What was the testimony of Dupin?

7. If the Jews had the right in capital cases, and the Roman power was exercised merely to execute a Jewish sentence, then when the accusation was brought before Pilate, what would have been the proceedings?

8. But what are the facts in the case?

9. What, therefore, was Pilate’s first demand and what was their answer?

10. What was Pilate’s second demand and their reply?

11. Would he have counted within his jurisdiction a charge of blasphemy against the Jewish God?

12. What threefold accusation against Roman law, therefore, did the Sanhedrin substitute for the charge of blasphemy and wherein consisted the atrocious malice of their accusation?

13. What one word covers all these accusations?

14. Was this threefold charge within Pilate’s jurisdiction?

15. What question, therefore, did Pilate ask Jesus, what was his answer, then what question did he ask Pilate and why?

16. What explanation did Christ here make to Pilate as to the nature of his kingdom and what was Pilate’s first verdict in the case?

17. What new charge did his accusers now prefer against him?

18. What was the legal term of this offense, was it a punishable offense against Roman law and was it within Pilate’s jurisdiction?

19. What circumstance in the new charge enabled Pilate to evade trying the case by referring it to another tribunal?

20. In referring a case from one Roman court to another, was it customary and necessary to make a formal statement of the case? (See Act 23:26-30 ; Act 25:25-27 .)

21. Would such a statement in this case include the charge of treason, of which Pilate himself had acquitted Jesus, as well as the new charge of sedition and why?

22. How did Herod receive Christ, what interest did he manifest in our Lord, what was the procedure of the trial before Herod and how did this incident affect the relation of Herod and Pilate?

23. Under Roman law in this case would Herod announce his verdict directly to the Sanhedrin or would he send it through Pilate, and why?

24. What was Herod’s verdict on both counts as announced through Pilate?

25. What was Pilate’s verdict on the new charge?

26. What is now the legal status of the case?

27. What was, therefore, Pilate’s plain duty?

28. What Latin proverb of law would now be violated if the defendant’s life is again placed in jeopardy on either of these adjudicated cases?

29. Why, then, does Pilate hesitate and parley with the accusers?

30. What admonition came to Pilate on the judgment seat?

31. Cite the reference in Burns’ “Tarn O’Shanter” to a husband’s disregard of wifely admonitions.

32. What expedient does Pilate now suggest in order to save the life of Jesus and vet placate his proud accusers?

33. What was the infamy of this proposal?

34. Under Pilate’s proposal what deliberate choice did the Sanhedrin make?

35. How do the apostles subsequently bring home to them with terrific effect this unholy and malicious choice? (See Act 3:14-15 .)

36. How did Pilate again seek to appease their wrath?

37. What text for a sermon cited, what is the application and what was their answer to Pilate’s question?

38. How does the Sanhedrin now confess their mere pretense in making charges against Roman law and terrify Pilate by stating the case under Jewish law?

39. What were the circumstances of Pilate’s reopening of the case, what examination followed, what effort did Pilate again make and what was the result?

40. Why could not Pilate render a formal verdict on this count?

41. To what old charge do the Jews recur and thereby bully the cowardly Pilate into once more occupying the judgment seat, thereby reopening the case under Roman law?

42. What time in the day was it now, reconciling John’s sixth hour with the time in the other Gospels?

43. Why does Pilate now say, “Shall I crucify your king”?

44. By what dramatic form does Pilate now seek to divest himself of responsibility and guilt in the judicial murder of one whom he still declares innocent, but condemns, what incident in the classics referred to, and what the tradition concerning Pilate?

45. In what awful words do the bolder Jews assume the responsibility for Christ’s death?

46. To what indignities was Jesus then subjected?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

XXVI

JESUS BETRAYED, ARRESTED, FORSAKEN; TRIED BY ANNAS, BY CAIAPHAS, AND BY THE SANHEDRIN

Harmony, pages 186-196 and Mat 26:47-75 ; Mat 26:59-75 ; Mat 27:1-2 ; Mar 14:48-15:1 ; Luk 22:47-23:1 ; Joh 18:2-28 .

In the last chapter we considered the sorrow of Christ in Gethsemane, and dipped somewhat into the account of the betrayal of our Lord. Just here we call attention particularly to the supplemental testimony of John’s Gospel that the Roman band or cohort, under its own prefect or miltary tribune, or chiliarch, was present when Jesus was arrested, and participated therein, indeed, themselves arresting, binding, and conducting Jesus to the Jewish authorities. This is a little difficult to understand, but we find no difficulty in the presence of the Temple guard, under the leadership of the Sanhedrin, and the mixed multitude irregularly armed, that came out for the purpose of arresting Jesus. Our trouble is to account for so strong a Roman force, under a high Roman officer, and the part they played in the matter, inasmuch as it was not an arrest for violating a Roman law, nor did they deliver the prisoner to Pilate, but to Annas and Caiaphas. From this supplemental story of John (Joh 18:2-14 ), certain facts are evidenced:

Judas, the betrayer of Christ, and who guided the arresting party, “received the Roman cohort,” usually about 600 men, under its own commanding officers. This could not have been without the consent of Pilate.

They evidently did not go out to make an ordinary arrest under Roman law, else would the prisoner have been delivered to Pilate. Yet the facts show that they did seize and bind Jesus and deliver him to Annas, one of the acting high priests, and thence to Caiaphas. As it was not customary for Roman legionaries in conquered states to act as a constabulary force for local municipal authorities in making an arrest touching matters not concerning the Empire, and as it is evident there were present an ample force of the Jewish Temple guard, besides an irregularly armed Jewish multitude subordinate to the Sanhedrin, then why the presence of this Roman force at all, and more particularly, why their participation in the arrest? The answer is as follows:

First, both the Sanhedrin and Pilate feared tumults at the crowded feasts when the city swarmed with fiery, turbulent Jews gathered from all the lands of the dispersion. Doubtless the Sanhedrin had represented to Pilate the presence in the city of a dangerous character, as they would charge, yet one so popular with the masses they dare not attempt to arrest him in the daytime, and even feared a mob rising in the night.

Second, their presence and intervention was necessary to protect the prisoner himself from assassination or lynch law. When they came to the garden and found Jesus there with a following of at least eleven men disposed to resist the arrest, and when they saw the whole Jewish guard fall before the outshining majesty of the face of Jesus as if stricken by lightning, and when they saw at least one swordstroke delivered in behalf of Jesus, then only, it became proper for the Roman guard to intervene. This necessity might arise from the fact that they could not trust the turbulent Jews with the management of this case. “We will arrest this man and protect him from their violence until delivered to their authorities to be tried for whatever offense with which he may be charged under their laws.” Indeed, humanly speaking, if that Roman cohort had not been present, he would have been mobbed before he reached any kind of a trial. The case of Paul (Act 21:30 ), and the intervention of Lysias, the chiliarch, illustrates the grounds of Roman intervention. It must be borne in mind that the Romans were silent, and did nothing until they saw the Temple guard unable to face the dignity of Jesus, and that a commencement, at least, of the struggle had been made by Peter to resist arrest.

As we are now coming to the climax of our Lord’s earth life, his betrayal, his trials, condemnation, execution, and resurrection, the literature becomes the richest in the world, and the bibliography most important. Particularly do we here find a unique and most powerful literature from the viewpoint of lawyers. They do not intrude into the theological realm to discuss the trial of Jesus as the sinner’s substitute before the court of God on the charge of sin, with the penalty of spiritual death, nor the trial of Jesus as the sinner’s substitute before the court of Satan on the charge of sin, with the penalty of physical death, but they discuss the legal aspects of his trial before the Jewish supreme court, the Sanhedrin, on the charge of blasphemy) with the penalty of stoning, and the trials of Jesus before the Roman courts of Pilate and Herod on the charges of treason and sedition. They answer the question: Under the Jewish law, which was not only civil and criminal, but ecclesiastical, was Jesus legally arrested, legally prosecuted, and fairly condemned, or was the whole case, as tried by the Sanhedrin, a case of malice, violating all the rights of the accused, and culminating in legal murder? In the same way these great lawyers and jurists expound the case before the Roman courts of Pilate and Herod, and from a lawyer’s viewpoint pronounce upon the Judgment of these cases under a judicial construction of the Roman law.

Under this first head of bibliography I give a list of these books by the great lawyers, every one of which ought to be in every preacher’s library. Do not waste money on inconsequential and misleading books. Do not fill your libraries with rubbish. Have fewer and greater books, and study them profoundly.

The Testimony of the Evangelists, by Dr. Simon Greenleaf. He was a law partner of Chief Justice Story, was for quite a while professor of law in Harvard University, and the author of that noted book, The Law of Evidence, which has been accepted in two continents as the highest and safest authority OD this great theme. Indeed, when we consider this splendid contribution by Dr. Greenleaf, we may almost forgive Harvard for its erratic infidel president emeritus, Dr. Charles v. Eliot, and many of its radical critic professors. This book of Greenleaf’s, over 600 pages, is divided into the following distinct parts:

The legal credibility of the history of the facts of the case, as given by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, of which there are no known existing autographs, but only copies. The question he raises is from the lawyer’s standpoint: “Before a human court, could these confessed copies be accepted as legal evidence of the history of the case?” That part of the case he demonstrates affirmatively in the first fifty-four pages.

Then he gives a harmony of these histories, pages 55-503, in order to compare the several histories on each fact given, not only of our Lord’s life and death, but of his resurrection and appearances. The point of this section is to show that the books, having been accepted as legal evidence, then these are a legal harmony of the testimony of the books.

He gives on pages 504-549 Tischendorf’s discussion of the various versions or translations of these histories, with notes of variations from the King James Version, to show that the legal harmony is not disturbed.

Having thus shown the legal credibility of the histories, and their legal harmony as witnesses, he applies the case by giving his account of the trial of Jesus before these three earthly courts, demonstrating that it was a case of legal murder, pages 550-566.

Then on pages 567-574 he gives an account of the trial of Jesus from a Jewish viewpoint. Mr. Joseph Salvador, a physician and a learned Jew, published at Paris a work entitled A History of the Institutions of Moses and of the Jewish People, in which, among other things, he gives an account of the course of criminal procedure in a chapter on the administration of justice, which he illustrates in a succeeding chapter by an account of the trial of Jesus, which he declares to be the most memorable trial in history. This last is the chapter Mr. Greenleaf publishes. Mr. Salvador ventures to say that he shall draw all of his facts from the evangelists themselves, without inquiring whether their history was developed after the event, to serve as a form of new doctrine, or an old one which had received fresh impulse. This was a daring venture on the part of Mr. Salvador. Relying upon these historians Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John for the facts, he contends that Jesus was legally arrested, legally tried, according to all the forms of Jewish law, and legally condemned.

The rest of Mr. Greenleaf’s book, pages 575-603, he gives to a reply to Salvador by the very distinguished French advocate and doctor of laws, M. Dupin, which is a most overwhelming demonstration of the fallacy of Mr. Salvador’s argument. This sixth section of Mr. Greenleaf’s Kook makes it invaluable to a biblical student.

The late Judge Gaynor, a jurist, and who later became mayor of New York City, delivered a legal exposition on the trial of Jesus Christ, purely from a lawyer’s standpoint. His conclusions are in harmony with Dr. Greenleaf and Dr. Dupin.

In two octavo volumes Walter M. Chandler, of the New York bar, has written perhaps the most critical examination of the whole subject from a lawyer’s standpoint. He devotes his first volume to the Jewish trial, and his second volume to the trials before the courts of Herod and Pilate. On all substantial points, and after a most exhaustive investigation of the legal points involved, he agrees substantially with Dr. Greenleaf, Dr. Dupin, and Judge Gaynor.

In only one point would the author think it necessary to criticize this great book by Mr. Chandler, and that does not touch the merits of the law of the case he discusses. I refer to that part of his second volume where, after bearing his most generous testimony to the many excellencies of the Jewish character and its many illustrious men and women in history, whether as prime ministers, financiers, philanthropists, or as contributors to special forms of literature, and after denouncing the persecution to which the Jewish people have been subjected by all nations, except the United States, he then seems to deny national responsibility to God and, particularly, any connection of the worldwide sufferings of the Jews with their national sin of rejecting the Messiah.

All my life shows my abhorrence of the persecutions of Jews and my admiration for their great men and women who have conferred lasting benefits on the race. The only point upon which I would raise a criticism is that he does not write as a lawyer when he seems to deny that nations, like individuals, are under responsibility to God for what is done by them, and through their acknowledged leaders. That part of his book cannot be sustained in either nature, law, or revelation. To sustain his contention on this point he must repudiate the univocal testimony of the entire Jewish Bible, whether law, prophets, or psalms, as well as the entire New Testament, Christ and the apostles, universal history, and nature as interpreted by true science.

Among the general works on the trial of Jesus (i.e., not confined to the legal phases of the case), I commend Edersheim’s Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah , a part of Farrar’s Story of a Beautiful Life, with Broadus’ Commentary on Matthew. It would cover the limits of a whole chapter to even name the books on the cross.

It was a strange episode of the young man in the linen garment: “And a certain young man followed with him, having a linen cloth cast about him, over his naked body: and they lay hold on him; but he left the linen cloth and fled naked” (Mar 14:51-52 ). Commentators have supposed that this young man was John Mark, who alone recounts the fact. They account for his presence and state thus: The upper room in which the Lord’s Supper was established was the house of his mother. When Judas gathered his arresting force he could not yet know that Jesus had left that room, and so first, he led his armed force to that house. This aroused the house, and Mark, himself a Christian, threw a linen robe about him and followed to Gethesame and so was present at the arrest of Jesus.

It is at least worthy of notice, that Melville, a great Scotch preacher, preached a sermon on the passage (Mar 14:51 f), contending that the young man in the linen robe was the antitype of the scapegoat (Lev 16 ). The sermon is a classical model in diction and homiletics, but is absolutely visionary. There is not a hint anywhere in the New Testament that his conjecture is at all tenable. I cite this fact to show you that preachers, in their anxiety to select texts that have the suggestion of novelty in them, will sometimes preach a sermon that will be sensational in its novelty, and yet altogether unscriptural in its matter, and to warn you against the selection of texts of that kind.

The next thought is the manner in which Judas identified the person of Christ, that he might be arrested. They were sure that some of the disciples would be with him, and they wanted to get the right man. So Judas gave this sign: “When we get to them I will step out and kiss the One that we want to arrest: that will be the sign to you. When you see me step out from you and kiss a certain Man in the group, that is the Man you want.” Christ submitted passively to the kissing of Judas, but said to Judas, “Betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?” And that has gone down into history. Traitors betray with a kiss. It is to that incident Patrick Henry refers in his famous speech before the House of Burgesses in Virginia, when he said to them, “Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss,” that the English government would furnish bouquets in compliments, while mobilizing armies and fleets for conquest.

The incident of the sword. Some-find, it difficult to reconcile Luk 22:22 with Mat 26:51-55 ; Luk 22:51 ; Joh 18:10-11 ; Joh 18:24 . The explanation seems to be simple. In his charge (Mat 10 ), while he was alive and they were in his service, they must depend upon him for defense and support. But while he was dead they must defend and support themselves. This, of course, could apply only after his death and until his resurrection. Peter was both too soon to fight, for he was not yet dead, and too late to go back to his fishing, for Christ was then risen.

Only those preachers whose Christ is dead should use the sword or resume self-support.

When Christ was arrested, all the disciples, without any exception (and there were eleven of them), forsook him and fled, and now at midnight he is led through the silent streets of Jerusalem, hemmed in by a cohort of Roman soldiers, who are attended by officers of the Sanhedrin and their servants. They bring him, strange to say, first to the house of Annas. This man Annas is one of the most remarkable men in Jewish history. He had himself been high priest; his son-in-law, Caiaphas, is high priest at this time; six of his sons became high priests. It made no difference to him who was official priest, he, through sons and sons-in-law, was the power behind the throne. He was very wealthy, lived in a palatial home, and was a Sadducee, like Dr. Eliot, and believed in neither angel, spirit, nor resurrection of the dead. He believed also in turning everything over to the Romans. That is, he aligned himself with what is called the “Herod party,” or “Roman party.” The patriot Jews hated him. Josephus draws an awful picture of him.

Mr. Salvador, in alleging that Christ was tried according to the forms of Jewish law, forgets that the Jewish law forbade the employment of spies in their criminal trials, and yet they brought Judas. He forgets that Jewish law forbade a man’s being arrested at night that it forbade any trial of the accused person at night. He forgets that an accused person should be tried only before a regular court. And yet the first thing they did was to bring Jesus to the house of Annas for a private examination, while the guard waited outside at the door till Annas got through with him. On page 190 of the Harmony we have an account of what took place in the house of Annas. The high priest catechised Jesus. Annas is called the high priest as well as Caiaphas. He asked Jesus about his disciples and about his doctrines. Jesus said, “I have spoken openly to the world; I ever taught in synagogues, and in the Temple, where all of the Jews came together; and in secret spake I nothing. Why asketh thou me? Ask them that have heard me.” So to conduct an examination of that kind at all; to conduct it at night; to conduct it not in the presence of a full court; to allow the prisoner to be struck, were all violations of the Jewish law concerning the administration of justice.

Notice what the Jewish trial is. Dr. Broadus shows the preliminary examination before Annas; second, the trial before the Sanhedrin that night, in the house of Caiaphas; third, the meeting of the Sanhedrin the next morning. It was not proper that a man should be tried except in the place of meeting, the Sanhedrin, and in this they violated the law. It was not proper that he should be tried at night, as Jesus is tried this night in the house of Caiaphas.

Let us now see what were the developments that night at the house of Caiaphas. “Annas therefore sent him bound unto Caiaphas, the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were gathered together” (Joh 18:24 ; Mat 26:57 ). That constituted the Sanhedrin chief priests, elders, and scribes. The chief priests were Sadducees; the scribes were Pharisees. The Sanhedrin, according to a Jewish account, consisted of seventy-two twenty-four chief priests, twenty-four elders, and twenty-four scribes. The Sanhedrin was the supreme court in matters ecclesiastical and criminal. They had some lower courts that were appointed by the Sanhedrin. Any town of just 100 or 200 population had a court of three. If it was a larger population it had a court of twenty-three, but the Sanhedrin was the high or supreme court in all matters ecclesiastical and criminal. When the Romans conquered Judea, as was usual with the Romans, they took away from the people the right of putting anybody to death by a sentence of their own courts. They refer to this, saying, “We are not allowed by the Romans to put a man to death under sentence of our law.” That is, when Pilate had said to them, “Why do you not try him before your own law?” they said, “We are not permitted to put a man to death under our law.” That night there were assembled the Sanhedrin, as the record says: “Now the Sanhedrin was seeking [imperfect tense, denoting continued action, not only sought, but were seeking] false witnesses against Jesus.” They were seeking these witnesses with a view to putting him to death. They had previously decreed his death; and now they were simply trying to find somebody that would swear enough to justify them. Not even that Sanhedrin, when they heard the multitude of these false witnesses, could find two of them agreed upon any one point. And the Mosaic law solemnly declared that there must be two witnesses to every fact. But at last there came two false witnesses, and here is what they testified: “We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands.’ “

That is the sum of the evidence, and all the other testimony was thrown out as incompetent. Both these men lied. He never said that, but away back in his early ministry, when he first cleansed the Temple, and when he first came into conflict with these people, he had said these words: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it again.” He was speaking of the temple of his body, but he never said that he would destroy that Temple (of Jerusalem) and in three days build another.

But they were not satisfied with that, so the high priest violated the law by asking Jesus to speak. It was a principle of the Jewish law that one should not be forced to testify against himself. A man might testify for himself) but he is protected by the judge who sits on the bench from giving evidence against himself. Jesus knew all that, so he paid no attention. So the chief priest had to get at that matter in another way He did have a right in certain cases, to put a man on oath before God, and this is what he did: “I adjure thee [which means to swear by the living God, the highest and most solemn form of the judicial oath put thee on thy oath] before the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.” To that Jesus responded.

Under the solemn oath before God he swore that he was the Messiah, and that hereafter that very crowd of people would see him sitting at the right hand of the throne of God in heaven.

I preached a sermon once from this text: “I adjure thee by the living God.” A young lawyer was present. He had never heard such a thing before. In the sermon I presented the character of Christ, against whom no man could prove an accusation; the devil himself found nothing in him; all the enemies of the great doctrines of the New Testament admitted the spotless character of Jesus of Nazareth. And yet this Man swore by the living God that he was the Messiah. All of the latent infidelity in the lawyer disappeared under that sermon. To this day he will testify that there got on his mind in the discussion of that single fact that Jesus was the Son of God. Would such a man swear to a false-hood? Is it credible that he would? He knew what “Messiah” meant that it meant he was the God-anointed One, to be the Prophet, the Sacrifice, the Priest, and the King, and he swore that he was. After his oath they should have tried his claims by the law, the prophets, and the facts of his life.

When he had given that testimony under oath the high priest rent his robe. The law required that whenever they heard a blasphemy they were to rend their clothes, and unless Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God; unless God was his Father, while Mary was his mother; unless he was the God-anointed Prophet, Sacrifice, Priest, and King, then it was blasphemy. And therefore Mr. Greenleaf, who is the author of The Law of Evidence, a law book which passes current in all the law books on this continent and in Europe, in mentioning the trial of Jesus Christ, says, No lawyer of any reputation, with the facts set forth in the Gospels, would have attempted to defend Jesus Christ, except on the assumption that he was the Messiah and divine, because all through the Book that is his claim. If he was not divine, he did blaspheme. Therefore when he took that oath, that court should have investigated the character of his claim as the Messiah, but instead of that they assumed the thing that they should have investigated and called it blasphemy.

Another great violation of the law takes place: “What further need of witnesses have we? We have heard the blasphemy; what think ye?” And now they vote that he is worthy of death; they condemned him to be worthy of death. Their law declared that a vote of condemnation should never be taken the day of the trial. There had to be at least three intervening days, and here at night they pass sentence on no evidence but the oath of Jesus Christ, and that without investigating the matter involved. Then they allowed the following indignities: They spat in his face and buffeted him; they smote him with the palms of their hands after they had blindfolded him. Then one would slip up and slap him, saying, “Prophesy who hit you.”

I shall omit in my discussion here all this testimony concerning the denial of Peter, because I want to bring all of the history of Peter together. I pass that point for the present. I merely remark that the case of Judas and the case of Peter, connected with the arrest and the trial of Jesus Christ, have an immensity of pathos in the tragedy of the twelve the first one and the last one on the list.

That is the Jewish trial except this one additional fact: When it was morning, or as soon as it was day, they held their final meeting, and confirmed their night decision. They had a law that the Sanhedrin must come together for a final meeting in a case of this kind, and that if anybody had voted to acquit in the first meeting he could not change his vote, but if anybody had voted to condemn in this meeting he might ratify or he might change his vote and acquit. There were to be three days between these meetings. Having thus finished the Jewish trial, which was in violation of all the forms of the law, as soon as daylight comes they carry Jesus to Pilate.

The first trial of Jesus, then, was before the Jewish Sanhedrin; the accusation against him was blasphemy; the penalty under that law was to be put to death by stoning, but they had not the power to put to death. So now they must bring the case before the court of Pilate. And here Mr. Salvador says that the Jewish Sanhedrin’s condemnation of Jesus Christ on the charge of blasphemy was confirmed by Pilate. There never was a statement more untrue. Pilate declined to take into consideration anything that touched that Jewish law. When he tried him he tried him ab initio, that is, “from the beginning,” and he did not consider any charge that did not come under the Roman law. Therefore, we see this people, when they bring the case before Pilate, present three new charges. The other case was not touched on at all, but the new charges presented were as follows: First, “he says that he himself is King”; the second is, “he teaches that Jews should not pay tribute to Caesar”; and third, “he stirreth up the people,” which was one of the things that the Roman was always quick to put down anywhere in the wide realm of the Roman world. A man who stirred up the people should be dealt with in a speedy manner. Treason was a capital offense. So they come before Pilate and try him in this court on the threefold charge, viz.: “He says he is King; he forbids this people to pay tribute to Caesar,” interrupting the revenue coming into Rome, which was false, for he taught to the contrary; and “he stirreth up the people.” We have had, then, the history of his case, so far as his trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin is concerned. In the next chapter we will take up his first trial before the court of Pilate.

QUESTIONS 1. What two facts concerning the arrest of Christ are evident from John’s supplemental story?

2. Why the presence of the Roman legionaries and their participation in the arrest of Jesus?

3. What illustration in Acts of the intervention of the chiliarch to protect a prisoner?

4. What unique and powerful literature on the trials of Jesus is mentioned?

5. What question do they answer?

6. What three books from the viewpoint of the lawyer commended?

7. What are the six distinct parts of Greenleaf’s Testimony of the Evangelists?

8. On what one point does the author dissent from Mr. Chandler?

9. What general works on the trials of Jesus commended?

10. Who was the young man spoken of in Mar 14:51-52 , and how do the commentators account for his presence and state on this occasion?

11. What noted Scotch preacher preached a sermon on this incident, what was his interpretation of this young man and what the lesson here for the preacher?

12. How did Judas identify Christ as the one to be arrested, what saying originated from this incident and what reference to it in the early history of our country?

13. How do you reconcile Luk 22:22 with Mat 26:51-55 ; Luk 22:51 ; Joh 18:10-11 ; Joh 18:24 ?

14. Upon Christ’s arrest what prophecy of his was fulfilled?

15. After his arrest where did they lead him, why to him, and what were the characteristics of this man?

16. Of what did the Jewish trial consist?

17. Give an account of what took place at the house of Annas.

18. Where did they take Jesus when they left the house of Annas, by what body was he tried there, of what was that body composed, and what were the limitations of its power under the Roman government?

19. Describe the trial of Jesus before this court.

20. What was the testimony of Jesus under oath, what should have been their course after his oath, what charge did they bring instead, and under what circumstances would their charge have been sustained?

21. What indignities did Jesus suffer in this trial?

22. What two pathetic cases connected with the arrest and trial of Jesus?

23. What the last act of the Jewish trial?

24. After the Jewish trial where did they lead Jesus, how did Pilate try him, what the threefold charge brought by the Jews against Jesus, and what the legal name of these offenses?

25. In what great particulars did the Jews violate their own law in the arrest and trial of Jesus as defined by Mr. Salvador?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

1 And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate.

Ver. 1. And straightway in the morning ] They thought once to have deferred his execution till after the feast,Mar 14:2Mar 14:2 . But their malice was restless, as his was that said he would not away till he saw the martyr’s (the traitor’s he called him) heart out.

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

1 5. ] JESUS IS LED AWAY TO PILATE, AND EXAMINED BY HIM. Mat 27:1-2 ; Mat 27:11-14 .Luk 23:1-5Luk 23:1-5 .Joh 18:28-38Joh 18:28-38 . Our account is very nearly related to that in Matt.: see notes there. The . is a touch of accuracy. From ch. Mar 14:53 we know that were assembled. Lightfoot quotes from Maimonides Sanhedr. 3 b., “Synedrium septuaginta unius seniorum non necesse habet ut sedeant omnes cum vero necesse est ut congregentur omnes, congregentur omnes.”

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mar 15:1-5 . Before Pilate (Mat 27:1-14 , Luk 23:1-10 ).

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mar 15:1 . , , without delay, quam primum , in the morning watch, which might mean any time between three and six, but probably signifies after sunrise. will mean either a consultation or the result, the resolution come to, according as we adopt the reading: (T.R. = [145] [146] ) or ( [147] [148] [149] ). : the simply identifies = even the whole Sanhedrim, and does not imply that, besides the three classes previously mentioned, some others were present ( e.g. , : Luk 22:52 ). This added clause signifies that it was a very important meeting, as, in view of its aim, to prepare the case for Pilate, it obviously was. The Sanhedrists had accomplished nothing till they had got the matter put in such a form that they might hope to prevail with the procurator, with whom lay the jus gladii , to do their wicked will, and of course that Jesus claimed to be the Christ would not serve that purpose. Vide notes on Mt. : without the article in best MSS. on this the first mention; with, in subsequent reference. Mk. does not think it necessary to say who or what Pilate was, not even mentioning, as Mt., that he was the governor.

[145] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[146] Codex Sangallensis, a Graeco-Latin MS. of the tenth century, and having many ancient readings, especially in Mark.

[147] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[148] Codex Ephraemi

[149] Codex Regius–eighth century, represents an ancient text, and is often in agreement with and B.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mark Chapter 15

(Isa 53:3 )

Mar 15:1-5 .

Mat 27:1-14 ; Luk 23:1-4 ; Joh 18:28 .

Next follows the consultation in the morning, after the Lord had been already condemned to “be guilty of death.” The result is that the chief priests, the elders, the scribes, the whole council, and, indeed, the whole people consenting, agreed to deliver Jesus to Pilate, the representative of the civil power. Jesus must be condemned by man in every capacity – the religious and civil – the Jews, under the name of religion, having the chief guilt, and being the instigators of the civil authorities, morally compelling them to yield contrary to conscience, as we find in the mock trial before Pilate. Thus we see He was “despised and rejected of men.” It was not only by one, but by every class of men. We shall find that as the priests, so the people, and as the governor, so the governed, down to the basest of them, all joined in vilifying the Son of God.

“And Pilate asked Him, Art Thou the King of the Jews? And He answering said to him, Thou sayest [it].” It was His good confession. (1Ti 6:11 .) It was the truth; and He came to bear witness of the truth, which is particularly mentioned in the Gospel of John, where we have not merely what Christ was according to prophecy, nor even what He was as the Servant and great Prophet, doing the will of God and ministering to the need of man, but what He was in His own personal glory. Christ alone is the truth in the fullest sense, save that the Holy Ghost is also called “truth” (1Jn 5:6 ), as being the inward power in him that believes for laying hold of the revelation of God and realising it. But God as such is never called the truth. Jesus is the truth. The truth is the expression of what God is and what man is. He who is the truth objectively must be both God and man to make known the truth about them. Neither is the Father ever said to be the truth, but Christ, the Son, the Word. He is not only God, but the special One who makes known God; and, being man, he could make known man – yea, being both, He could make known everything. Thus, we never know what life is fully save in Christ, and we never know what death is save in Christ. Again, who ever knows the meaning of judgment aright save in Christ? Who can estimate what the wrath of God is save in Christ? Who can tell what communion with God is save in Christ? It is Christ who shows us what the world is; it is Christ who shows us what heaven is, and by contrast what hell must be. He is the Deliverer from perdition, and He it is who casts away from His own presence into it. Thus He brings out everything as it is, even that which is most opposed to Himself – Satan’s power and character, even up to its last form, Antichrist. He is the measure of what Jews and Gentiles are in every respect. – This is what some ancient philosophers used to think of man. They said, though falsely, that man is the measure of all things. It is exactly true of Christ, the God-man. He is the measure of all things, though most immeasurably above them, as being supremely God, even as the Father and the Holy Ghost also.

Here, however, before Pilate, our Lord simply owns the truth of what He was according to Jewish expectation. “Art Thou the king of the Jews? And He answering said unto him, Thou sayest [it].” This was all; He had no more to say here. The chief priests accused Him of many things, but He answered nothing. He was not there to defend Himself, but to confess who and what He was. “And Pilate asked Him again, saying, Answerest Thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against Thee.* But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.” His silence produced a far graver effect than anything that could be uttered. There is a time to be silent as there is to speak;tid=44#bkm159- and silence now was the more convincing to the conscience. He was manifestly superior, morally, to His judge. He was manifesting them all, whatever they might say or judge of Him. But in truth they judged nothing but what was utterly false, and they condemned Him for the truth. Whether it was before the high-priest or before Pontius Pilate, it was the truth He confessed, and for the truth He was condemned by man. All their lies availed nothing. Hence it was not on the ground of what they brought forth, but of what He said, that Jesus was condemned. Only in John’s Gospel the Lord states the terrible fact that it was not Pilate himself, but what he was put up to by the Jews. We learn, further, in John that what frightened Pilate specially was that the Jews told him that they had a law, and that by this law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God. His Sonship is affirmed, and Pilate feared it was true. His wife, too, had a dream which added to his alarm, so that God took care there should be a double testimony – the great moral testimony of Christ Himself, and also a sign and token, which suited the Gospel of Matthew, an outward mark given to Pilate’s wife in a dream. Our Gospel is much more succinct, and keeps to the order of facts without detail.

*”Witness against thee”: so A, etc., 33, 69 Syr. Arm., etc. Edd.: “accuse thee of,” as BCD, 1, Ital. Memph. AEth.

Mar 15:6-15 .

Mat 27:15-26 ; Luk 23:16-25 ; Joh 18:29-40 .

The iniquity of the Jews, however, appears everywhere. “But at that feast he used to release to them one prisoner, whomsoever they begged. And there was one named Barabbas, who lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection. And the multitude, crying aloud,* began to beg him [to do] as he had ever done unto them.” So it was the multitude that wished to mark still more their complete subjection to the wicked priests by preferring Barabbas and sealing the death of Jesus. He might still have been delivered, but the infatuated multitude would not hear of it. “But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release to you the King of the Jews? For he knew that the chief priests had delivered Him up through envy. But the chief priests stirred up the crowd that he should rather release Barabbas to them,” or, as John’s Gospel puts it, “Not this man, but Barabbas. Now, Barabbas was a robber.” He was a robber and a murderer – yet such was man’s preference to Jesus. “And Pilate answered and said again to them, What will ye, then, that I shall do to Him whomtid=44#bkm160- ye call [the] King of the Jews? And they cried out again, “Crucify Him.” Pilate, cruel and hardened as he was, still remonstrates: “What evil, then, has He done? And they cried out exceedingly, Crucify Him.” They could find no evil, they only imagined it out of the murderous evil of their own hearts. Pilate, utterly without the fear of God, but “desirous of contenting the crowd, released Barabbas to them, and delivered up Jesus, when he had scourged Him, to be crucified.” So true it was that, even in this last scene, Jesus delivers others at His own cost and in every sense. He had just before delivered the disciples from being taken; He is now the means of delivering Barabbas himself, wicked as he was. He never saved Himself; He could have done it, of course, but it was the very perfection of the moral glory of Christ to deliver, bless, save, and in all at the expense of Himself.

*”Crying aloud”: so corrACN, later uncials, Syr. Arm. Edd. adopt “coming up,” with pmBD, Amiat. Memph. Goth.

“Whom ye call [the]”: so Edd., after AB (without “whom”) C, 1, 33, 69. AD, 1, 69, Ital. Vulg., omit “whom ye call,” whilst some of the later uncials do not show “the.”

Mar 15:16-21 .

Mat 27:27-31 ; Luk 23:26-43 ; Joh 19:1-16 .

But, further, every indignity upon the way was heaped upon Him. “The soldiers led Him away into the court [called] Praetorium, and they call together the whole band. And they clothed Him with purple, and bind round on Him a crown of thorns which they had plaited. And they began to salute Him, Hall, King of the Jews!” There was no contempt too gross for Him. “They struck His head with a reed, and spat on Him, and, bending the knee, worshipped Him. And when they had mocked Him, they took off the purple from Him, and put His own garments on Him, and lead Him out to crucify Him.” And now, in the spirit of the wickedness of the whole scene, “they compel one Simon, a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming from the field, the father of Alexander and Rufus (cf. Rom 16 ),tid=44#bkm161- to carry His cross.” It would appear that these two sons were afterwards well-known converts brought into the Church; hence the interest of the fact mentioned.161 God’s goodness, I suppose, used this very circumstance, wicked as it was on man’s part. He would not allow that even His Son’s indignity should not turn to the blessing of man. Simon, the father of these two, then, was compelled to bear His cross by those who held the truth, if at all, in unrighteousness.

Mar 15:22-32 .

Mat 27:31-44 ; Luk 23:26-43 ; Joh 19:17-27 .

“And they bring Him unto the place Golgotha, which is, being interpreted, Place of a skull. And they offered Him [to drink]* wine medicated with myrrh: but He did not take it.” The object of giving this was to deaden anguish, the excessive lingering pain of the cross, but He refused. “And having crucified Him, they part His garments, casting lots upon them, what each should take.” This, we know from elsewhere, was the distinct accomplishment of Divine prediction, as it was the human sign of one given up to capital punishment. “It was the third hour,tid=44#bkm162- and they crucified Him. And the superscription of what He was accused of was written over, The King of the Jews.” The terms are exceedingly brief in Mark’s Gospel. He only mentions the charge or accusation, not (as I conceive) all the formula. The other Gospels give different forms, and it is possible they were written in various languages – one in one language and one in another. If this be the case, Mark only gives the substance. Matthew would naturally give the Hebrew form, Luke the Greek (his Gospel being for Gentiles, as Matthew’s was for Jews), while John would give the Latin, the form of that empire under which he himself suffered later on. As that kingdom smote the servant, he records what it had done to the Master, and this in the language of the empire. There is a slight difference in each, which may thus arise from the different languages in which the accusation was written. At any rate, we know that we have the full Divine truth in the compared matter; and of all ways of accounting for their shades of distinction, none more unworthy of God, nor less reasonable for man, than the notion that they are to be imputed to ignorance or negligence. Each wrote, but under the power of the Spirit; and the result of all is the perfect truth of God.

*[“To drink”] is in ACcorrD, etc., all cursives, Jerome’s Vulg., Syr. Goth AEth, but is omitted by Edd., with BCpmL Memph.

See “Lectures on Matthew,” p. 551; also note tid=44#bkm163- .

Mark, like Matthew, mentions the robbers (indeed, all do) as a testimony to the complete humiliation of God’s Servant and Son on the cross. Men would not even give Him that place singularly. He was indeed alone in the grace and moral glory of the cross, but to increase the shame of it these two robbers were crucified with Him, one on His right hand, and the other on His left.* Such was its outward appearance; but next, also, His words were turned against Him, not merely on His trial, but in His dying moments. “And they that passed by reviled Him, wagging their heads, and saying, Aha, Thou that destroyest the Temple and buildest it in three days, save Thyself, and come down from the cross.” How little did they know that His very words were now on the point of being completely accomplished!

*B.T.: As the best uncials (Alexandrian, Vatican, Sinai, Rescript of Paris, Beza’s Cambridge, and one now in Munich), with more than forty cursive manuscripts Syrsin), etc., omit verse 28, I do not think any cautious mind can urge its genuineness here. it was probably borrowed from the citation of Isa 53:12 in Luk 22:37 (Revv. as Edd. have rejected the verse which is found in the later uncials, 69, Syrpesch hcl hier Arm. Goth. AEth., and was retained by Lachmann). Cf. “Introductory Lectures,” p. 162.

But the chief priests carried it out farther, as usual. Mocking, they “said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; Himself He cannot save.” A great truth, though not in the sense in which they meant it. Both its parts, rightly applied, are most true; of course, not that He could not, but that He did not, save Himself – yea, could not, if grace were to triumph in redemption. “He saved others; Himself He cannot save.”* It is the history of Christ upon earth; it is the history, above all, of His cross, where the whole truth of Christ comes out more fully, though under the absolute infliction of Divine wrath for our sins, as well as the greatest strain of outward circumstances, but all borne in perfection. The holiness of Christ that at all cost would put away sin to the glory of God, the love of Christ that at all cost to Himself would bring eternal deliverance to others, the grace of God, was fully seen in Him: the righteous judgment, the truth, and the majesty of God. There was nothing that did not stand vindicated on the cross as nowhere else. It was the resurrection, however, that displayed all, publishing what God felt. He was raised from the dead, as it is said, by the glory of the Father. What was done upon the cross was for others; but what was towards Himself, as well as towards others, appeared in the resurrection and setting of Jesus at God’s right hand. But in the mouth of unbelief, the very same expressions bear a totally different character from what they have in the lips of faith. So it is that a worldly man may show that appearance of calm in the presence of death which faith really gives him whose eye is on Jesus: in this one it is peace, in that no better than insensibility. But with ordinary believers, who do not understand the fulness of grace, there are mental anxieties beyond what the unbeliever knows, because the latter does not feel what sin is, and what becomes the glory of God. When a soul believes and yet is not established in grace, it is in trial and trepidation of spirit as to the result, and it ought to be so till the heart is at rest through Christ Jesus.

*See B.T., vol. xxi., p. 307.

How little these chief priests knew the secret of grace! He saved others, said they, and they could not but know it. Himself He would not – did not – save. Nay, in the sense of love and Divine counsel, Himself He could not save. He laid down His life for us – no otherwise could we be saved; and, more than this, obedient to the Father at all cost, determined to carry out His will, even our sanctification. In that sense only He could not save Himself. There was no necessity of death in the nature of the Lord Jesus Christ. All other men had the necessity of death through Adam; Christ had not, though He, the last Adam, Christ, sprang from him through His mother; He did not in Himself underlie the consequences of the first Adam at all, though He in grace bore all the consequences on the cross, but not as one under them: He only bore them for others by God’s will and in His own sovereign love. Therefore, very expressly, as to His death, He says I have power to lay down My life, and I have power to take it again” (Joh 10:18 ). He alone of all men could say so since the world began. Adam in paradise could not speak thus; Christ alone had the title according to the rights of His person. His becoming man did not compromise His Divine glory. His being God did not enfeeble His suffering as man. There was no lowering of deity, but, in result, a very real exalting of humanity. Nevertheless, the Scriptures must be fulfilled: the Anointed One must die; God’s glory must be vindicated; death must be encountered by dying, and its power broken, not by victory, but by righteousness. For this is the wonderful fruit of the death of Christ: the power of death is exhausted by righteousness, He having taken upon Himself the curse, the judgment of sin, so that God might be glorified even herein. Hence the fullness of blessing and peace to the believer. This gives the Atonement its wonderful place in all the truth of God. Nothing can be substituted for it. He in atonement is the substitute for all others, and everything else as claiming to do with offering for sin is vanished away.

But as to these chief priests, they mockingly cried: “Let the Christ the King of Israel come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” Yea, so complete was the spirit of unbelief that they who were crucified, even in the midst of their dying agonies, had time to turn round and add to His sufferings. Mark does not mention the conversion of one of these robbers. Luke does, and we know that afterwards the one who was converted, instead of asking Him to come down from the cross, owned Him to be the King before the kingdom comes, believing thus without seeing. The poor soul, therefore, shone through the grace of God, the more because of his own previous darkness; and the darkness of the chief priests who mocked formed the sombre background which made this robber so conspicuous. In the very circumstances, over which the chief priests gloried as the defeat of Jesus, the thief gloried as deliverance for his own soul. But this falls to the province of Luke, who shows us the mercy of God that visits a sinner in his lowest estate – the Son of man coming to seek and to save that which was lost. This runs through Luke more than through any other Gospel. Consequently, also, he shows us the blessedness of the soul in its separate state. This dying thief, when his soul left the cross, would be at once with Jesus in paradise.

Mark, however, mentions the indignity heaped upon Jesus by the robbers, along with their companions, the chief priests, and others.

Mar 15:33-41 .

Mat 27:45-56 ; Luk 23:44-49 ; Joh 19:28-37 .

“And when [the] sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until [the] ninth hour.” lit was more than human: God caused a witness of that hour that stood out from all before and after. There was darkness; the very world felt it. As the Lord told the Jews, the stones would cry out unless there were a voice from babes and sucklings. As John the Baptist told them, of these stones God could raise up children to Abraham. So here the insensibility of men, the revilings and scoffings from chief priests down to thieves, against the Son of God, were answered on God’s part by the veiling of all nature in presence of the death of Him who created all; there was darkness over the whole land. Above, below, what a scene!

“And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice [saying],* Eloi, Eloi,164 lama sabachthani? which is being interpreted, My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” (Psa 22:1 ) It was no exhaustion of nature. Jesus did not die because He could not live, as all others do. He had still the full energy of life. He died not only in atonement, but to take His life again. How else could He have proved the superiority of His life to death, if He had not died? Still less could He have delivered us. “We were reconciled to God by the death of His Son” (Rom 5:10 ).

*[“Saying”]: so AC, etc., 1, 33, 69, Syrpesch hcl Arm. Goth. Edd. omit, after BDL, Syrsin Memph.

But more than that. His living again, His raising Himself from the grave, His taking life again, proved that He had conquered death, to which He had so entirely submitted for God’s glory. He was put to death. By wicked hands He was crucified and slain; yet it was also entirely voluntary. In every other person death is involuntary. So absolutely is Jesus above mere nature, whether in birth or in death, or all through. Besides, the cry was most peculiar, such as had never been heard from a blessed, holy Man as He was. That which drew it forth was God’s forsaking Him there. It was not a mere manifestation of love, though there never was a time when the Father saw more to love in His Son than at that moment; yea, never did He see before then such moral beauty, even in Him. But if He was bearing sin, He must really endure its judgment. The consequence was to be forsaken of God. God must abandon Him who had taken sin upon Him. And He did take our sins, and endured that forsaking which is the inevitable consequence of sin imputed. He who knew no sin knew the cost to the uttermost when made sin for us.

“And some of those that stood by, when they heard [it], said, Behold, he calls for Elias.” This seems to be mere scoffing again. There is no reason to suppose they did not know that He said, “My God, My God,” not Elias.tid=44#bkm164- “And one ran and filled a sponge full of vinegar, and fixed it on a reed, and gave Him to drink, saying, Let alone, let us see whether Elias comes to take Him down. And Jesus, having uttered a loud cry, expired.”tid=44#bkm165- Now that death was consummated, the only righteous ground of life and redemption, the “veil of the Temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom.” The Jewish system was doomed, and sentence executed upon its characteristic and central feature. The veil was that which separated the holy place from the holy of holies; there was no single point in the Jewish system more emphatic than the veil. For what the veil indicated as a figure was God present, but man standing outside; God dealing with the people, but the people unable to draw near to God, having Him with them in the world, but nevertheless not brought to Himself, not able to look upon His glory, kept at a distance from Him under the law. (Cf. Heb 9:8 , Heb 10:19 , Heb 10:20 .) The rending of the veil, on the contrary, at once pronounced that all was over with Judaism. As the darkness supernatural was one testimony before His death, so this at His death declared the power of Christ’s blood. It was not only God come down to man, but man now, by the blood of Christ, entitled to draw near to God – yea, all who know the value of that blood into the holiest of all. But as far as the Jewish economy was concerned, here was the abolition of it come in principle. The tearing down this chief sign and token was the virtual profaning of the sanctuary, so that now anyone could look into the holiest. It was no longer the high-priest alone venturing within once a year, and that not without blood; but now, because of His blood which they had spilt, little knowing its infinite value, the veil was rent from top to bottom. This was in the first month of the year. The feast in which the high-priest entered was in the seventh month. Thus the destruction of the veil was the more marked now. The truth is that the real application of the day of atonement and the following feast of tabernacles will be when God begins to take up the Jewish people. We are said to have Christ as our Passover; but the day of atonement, viewed as a prophetic type, awaits Israel by-and-by.

Nor was this all. There was a testimony, not only in nature as opposed to the scorn of men and the revilings of the crucified ones that were with Him – not only was there this darkness of nature and rending of the veil for Judaism, but a Gentile was brought forward compelled of God to acknowledge the wonder that was there and then being enacted. “Truly this Man was Son of God.” In all likelihood he was a heathen, and did not mean more than to own that Christ was not a mere man, that He was somehow or other what the Chaldean monarch heard and spoke of in Dan 2:4 . Now, the centurion went farther than they of Babylon. He felt that, though His dwelling was in flesh, yet He was a Divine being, and not the Son of man merely. I do not think that when Nebuchadnezzar says that he saw one like the Son of God, he meant the full truth that we know; for the doctrine of the eternal Sonship was not then revealed, and it could not be supposed that Nebuchadnezzar entered into it, for he was an idolater at that very time. But it was a testimony of his full confidence that it was a supernatural being of some kind,” the Son of God.” At the same time, the Spirit of God could well give the centurion’s or the king’s words a shape beyond what either knew. “Truly this Man was Son of God.”

Mar 15:42-47 .

Mat 27:57-61 ; Luk 23:50-56 ; Joh 19:38-42 .

The disciples were not there. They, alas! forsook Him and fled; at any rate, they are not mentioned. They were so out of their true place that God could say nothing about them. Yet one who up to this time had shrunk back from the due confession of Jesus was now brought forward. “And when it was already evening, as it was [the] preparation, that is, [the day] before a sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, an honourable counsellor, who himself was awaiting the kingdom of God, came, and took courage,tid=44#bkm166- and went in to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus.” The very circumstances that might have been supposed naturally to have filled him with fear of and shrinking from the consequences were, on the contrary, used of God to bring out a boldness that never had visited Joseph’s heart before. He identified himself with Jesus. He had not the precious place of following Him while He was alive, but the death of Jesus brought him to a point, commanded his affections, and made him, therefore, to enter courageously and demand the body of his Master. Pilate, astonished, asks if Jesus was already dead. Naturally, crucifixion is a slow death; people linger sometimes even for days when a person is in ordinary health. But in the case of Jesus it was but for a few hours. There was nothing farther to do. It was not, therefore, a question of mere lingering. Besides, it was the accomplishment of prophecy that not a bone should be broken, which John tells us, who is always occupied with the person of the Lord. It was according to the Scriptures that He should be pierced, but not a bone should be broken; and this most remarkable circumstance John witnessed, and tells us of. Mark does not notice it. Pilate “wondered if He were already dead; and calling to [him] the centurion, he asked him if He had been long dead.” It was the rapid death of Jesus, accompanied by the loud voice, that filled the centurion with amazement. This showed that It was not the death of a mere man. He had power to lay down His life. So when he was certified by the centurion Pilate gives leave.

And Joseph “bought fine linen [and] took Him down, and swathed Him in the fine linen, and laid Him in a sepulchre which was cut out of a rock, and rolled a stone to the door of the sepulchre.” And two of the Marys beheld where He was laid. Here at least, then, we have genuine affection. If there was not the intelligence of faith, there was the love that lingered over the Lord they adored with true feeling – the fruit of faith which thus honoured Jesus even in His death.

NOTES ON Mar 15 .

159 Mar 15:5 . – See note 154.

160 Mar 15:12 . – “That I do to Him,” etc. ( ). On this Wellhausen ventures to say: “In the Greek the accusative after is incorrect.” Such infatuation in a professed scholar is unaccountable. The Greek language was plastic everywhere and at all times. “To do good to a man” is in colloquial Greek , or , to treat well; , to do ill to, to treat amiss. “What shall I do to [him]?” “How shall I treat [him]?” There is no solecism, no awkwardness in the Evangelist’s language here. See Blass, 34, p. 91, at foot.

161 Mar 15:21 . – See note 1.

162 Mar 15:25 . – Cf. Joh 19:14 , and note 142. Mark’s “third hour” is by “critics” set against John’s “sixth hour.” Such do not see that, while the second Evangelist is speaking of the Crucifixion, the fourth refers to the outcry before Pilate (Kelly, “Exposition of John,” p. 392 f.). It is usual for “reconcilers” to suppose that the Synoptists’ statements are based on the strictly Jewish day, those of John on the Roman way of reckoning the civil day. The Jews took the hours from sunrise (our six a.m.), the Romans from midnight, with whom the sixth hour, accordingly, was the same as ours. Then three hours would elapse before the crucifixion (nine a.m.), and these would be taken up by the events recorded in the three first Gospels: the sentence of death, the journey to Golgotha, and the preparations there for the crucifixion. See, however, papers of Sir W. M. Ramsay in the Expositor, referred to by Professor Sanday in “Outlines of the Life of Christ,” p. 147. As to Wieseler’s idea, see Farrer, “Life of Christ,” p. 112 note, where reference is given to Justinian’s “Digest” (xli., Tit 3:6 , Tit 3:7 ). – The present writer believes that it means the third hour after the last watch of the night (Mar 13:35 ).

163 Mar 15:26 . – Cf. Kelly, “Lectures on Matthew,” p. 551, and note 7 above (third illustration).

164 Mar 15:34 f. – Eloi. This is the Aramaic form, Eli in Mat 27:46 the Hebrew, which Wellhausen supposes was that actually used by the Lord, as having a ring more like Elias. As he says, the Jews could not have misunderstood Eloi, their vernacular.

165 Mar 15:37 . – Nowhere in the Gospels is the word “died” used as the result of our Lord’s crucifixion. Here , “expired,” as in Luke, Matthew’s word being .., “dismissed His spirit,” whilst John’s is .., “gave up,” etc. As to these, see “Exposition of John,” p. 398. – The date seems to have been 7 April, A.D. 30.

166 Mar 15:43 . – “Took courage,” etc., . Such is Dr. Field’s rendering, based on that of the “New Translation,” by J. N. Darby, to which the learned editor of the “Hexapla” refers in his “Notes on the Translation of the New Testament” at this passage.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

Mark

CHRIST AND PILATE: THE TRUE KING AND HIS COUNTERFEIT

Mar 15:1 – Mar 15:20 .

The so-called trial of Jesus by the rulers turned entirely on his claim to be Messias; His examination by Pilate turns entirely on His claim to be king. The two claims are indeed one, but the political aspect is distinguishable from the higher one; and it was the Jewish rulers’ trick to push it exclusively into prominence before Pilate, in the hope that he might see in the claim an incipient insurrection, and might mercilessly stamp it out. It was a new part for them to play to hand over leaders of revolt to the Roman authorities, and a governor with any common sense must have suspected that there was something hid below such unusual loyalty. What a moment of degradation and of treason against Israel’s sacredest hopes that was when its rulers dragged Jesus to Pilate on such a charge! Mark follows the same method of condensation and discarding of all but the essentials, as in the other parts of his narrative. He brings out three points-the hearing before Pilate, the popular vote for Barabbas, and the soldiers’ mockery.

I. The true King at the bar of the apparent ruler Mar 15:1 – Mar 15:6.

The contrast between appearance and reality was never more strongly drawn than when Jesus stood as a prisoner before Pilate. The One is helpless, bound, alone; the other invested with all the externals of power. But which is the stronger? and in which hand is the sceptre? On the lowest view of the contrast, it is ideas versus swords. On the higher and truer, it is the incarnate God, mighty because voluntarily weak, and man ‘dressed in a little brief authority,’ and weak because insolently ‘making his power his god.’ Impotence, fancying itself strong, assumes sovereign authority over omnipotence clothed in weakness. The phantom ruler sits in judgment on the true King. Pilate holding Christ’s life in his hand is the crowning paradox of history, and the mystery of self-abasing love. One exercise of the Prisoner’s will and His chains would have snapped, and the governor lain dead on the marble ‘pavement.’

The two hearings are parallel, and yet contrasted. In each there are two stages-the self-attestation of Jesus and the accusations of others; but the order is different. The rulers begin with the witnesses, and, foiled there, fall back on Christ’s own answer, Pilate, with Roman directness and a touch of contempt for the accusers, goes straight to the point, and first questions Jesus. His question was simply as to our Lord’s regal pretensions. He cared nothing about Jewish ‘superstitions’ unless they threatened political disturbance. It was nothing to him whether or no one crazy fanatic more fancied himself ‘the Messiah,’ whatever that might be. Was He going to fight?-that was all which Pilate had to look after. He is the very type of the hard, practical Roman, with a ‘practical’ man’s contempt for ideas and sentiments, sceptical as to the possibility of getting hold of ‘truth,’ and too careless to wait for an answer to his question about it; loftily ignorant of and indifferent to the notions of the troublesome people that he ruled, but alive to the necessity of keeping them in good humour, and unscrupulous enough to strain justice and unhesitatingly to sacrifice so small a thing as an innocent life to content them.

What could such a man see in Jesus but a harmless visionary? He had evidently made up his mind that there was no mischief in Him, or he would not have questioned Him as to His kingship. It was a new thing for the rulers to hand over dangerous patriots, and Pilate had experience enough to suspect that such unusual loyalty concealed something else, and that if Jesus had really been an insurrectionary leader, He would never have fallen into Pilate’s power. Accordingly, he gives no serious attention to the case, and his question has a certain half-amused, half-pitying ring about it. ‘Thou a king? ‘-poor helpless peasant! A strange specimen of royalty this! How constantly the same blindness is repeated, and the strong things of this world despise the weak, and material power smiles pityingly at the helpless impotence of the principles of Christ’s gospel, which yet will one day shatter it to fragments, like a potter’s vessel! The phantom ruler judges the real King to be a powerless shadow, while himself is the shadow and the other the substance. There are plenty of Pilates to-day who judge and misjudge the King of Israel.

The silence of Jesus in regard to the eager accusations corresponds to His silence before the false witnesses. The same reason dictated both. His silence is His most eloquent answer. It calmly passes by all these charges by envenomed tongues as needing no reply, and as utterly irrelevant. Answered, they would have lived in the Gospels; unanswered, they are buried. Christ can afford to let many of His foes alone. Contradictions and confutations keep slanders and heresies above water, which the law of gravitation would dispose of if they were left alone.

Pilate’s wonder might and should have led him further. It should have prompted to further inquiry, and that might have issued in clearer knowledge. It was the little glimmer of light at the far-off end of his cavern, which, travelled towards, might have brought him into free air and broad day. One great part of his crime was neglecting the faint monitions of which he was conscious. His light may have been dim, but it would have brightened; and he quenched it. He stands as a tremendous example of possibilities missed, and of the tragedy of a soul that has looked on Jesus, and has not yielded to the impressions made on him by the sight.

II. The people’s favourite Mar 15:7 – Mar 15:15,

‘Barabbas’ means ‘son of the father,’ His very name is a kind of caricature of the ‘Son of the Blessed,’ and his character and actions present in gross form the sort of Messias whom the nation really wanted. He had headed some one of the many small riots against Rome which were perpetually sputtering up and being trampled out by an armed heel. There had been bloodshed, in which he had himself taken part ‘a murderer,’ Act 3:14. And this coarse, red-handed desperado is the people’s favourite, because he embodied their notions and aspirations, and had been bold enough to do what every man of them would have done if he had dared. He thought and felt, as they did, that freedom was to be won by the sword. The popular hero is as a mirror which reflects the popular mind. He echoes the popular voice, a little improved or exaggerated. Jesus had taught what the people did not care to hear, and given blessings which even the recipients soon forgot, and lived a life whose ‘beauty of holiness’ oppressed and rebuked the common life of men. What chance had truth and kindness and purity against the sort of bravery that slashes with a sword, and is not elevated above the mob by inconvenient reach of thought or beauty of character? Even now, after nineteen centuries of Christ’s influence have modified the popular ideals, what chance have they? Are the popular ‘heroes’ of Christian nations saints, teachers, lovers of men, in whom their Christ-likeness is the thing venerated? The old saying that the voice of the people is the voice of God receives an instructive commentary in the vote for Barabbas and against Jesus. That was what a plebiscite for the discovery of the people’s favourite came to. What a reliable method of finding the best man universal suffrage, manipulated by wirepullers like these priests, is! and how wise the people are who let it guide their judgments, or still wiser, who fret their lives out in angling for its approval! Better be condemned with Jesus than adopted with Barabbas.

That fatal choice revealed the character of the choosers, both in their hostility and admiration; for excellence hated shows what we ought to be and are not, and grossness or vice admired shows what we would fain be if we dared. It was the tragic sign that Israel had not learned the rudiments of the lesson which ‘at sundry times and in divers manners’ God had been teaching them. In it the nation renounced its Messianic hopes, and with its own mouth pronounced its own sentence. It convicted them of insensibility to the highest truth, of blindness to the most effulgent light, of ingratitude for the richest gifts. It is the supreme instance of short-lived, unintelligent emotion, inasmuch as many who on Friday joined in the roar, ‘Crucify Him!’ had on Sunday shouted ‘Hosanna!’ till they were hoarse.

Pilate plays a cowardly and unrighteous part in the affair, and tries to make amends to himself for his politic surrender of a man whom he knew to be innocent, by taunts and sarcasm. He seems to see a chance to release Jesus, if he can persuade the mob to name Him as the prisoner to be set free, according to custom. His first proposal to them was apparently dictated by a genuine interest in Jesus, and a complete conviction that Rome had nothing to fear from this ‘King.’ But there are also in the question a sneer at such pauper royalty, as it looked to him, and a kind of scornful condescension in acknowledging the mob’s right of choice. He consults their wishes for once, but there is haughty consciousness of mastery in his way of doing it. His appeal is to the people, as against the priests whose motives he had penetrated. But in his very effort to save Jesus he condemns himself; for, if he knew that they had delivered Christ for envy, his plain duty was to set the prisoner free, as innocent of the only crime of which he ought to take cognisance. So his attempt to shift the responsibility off his own shoulders is a piece of cowardice and a dereliction of duty. His second question plunges him deeper in the mire. The people had a right to decide which was to be released, but none to settle the fate of Jesus. To put that in their hands was an unconditional surrender by Pilate, and the sneer in ‘whom ye call the King of the Jews’ is a poor attempt to hide from them and himself that he is afraid of them. Mark puts his finger on the damning blot in Pilate’s conduct when he says that his motive for condemning Jesus was his wish to content the people. The life of one poor Jew was a small price to pay for popularity. So he let policy outweigh righteousness, and, in spite of his own clear conviction, did an innocent man to death. That would be his reading of his act, and, doubtless, it did not trouble his conscience much or long, but he would leave the judgment-seat tolerably satisfied with his morning’s work. How little he knew what he had done! In his ignorance lies his palliation. His crime was great, but his guilt is to be measured by his light, and that was small. He prostituted justice for his own ends, and he did not follow out the dawnings of light that would have led him to know Jesus. Therefore he did the most awful thing in the world’s history. Let us learn the lesson which he teaches!

III. The soldiers’ mockery Mar 15:16 – Mar 15:20.

This is characteristically different from that of the rulers, who jeered at His claim to supernatural enlightenment, and bade Him show His Messiahship by naming His smiters. The rough legionaries knew nothing about a Messiah, but it seemed to them a good jest that this poor, scourged prisoner should have called Himself a King, and so they proceed to make coarse and clumsy merriment over it. It is like the wild beast playing with its prey before killing it. The laughter is not only rough, but cruel. There was no pity for the Victim ‘bleeding from the Roman rods,’ and soon to die. And the absence of any personal hatred made this mockery more hideous. Jesus was nothing to them but a prisoner whom they were to crucify, and their mockery was sheer brutality and savage delight in torturing. The sport is too good to be kept by a few, so the whole band is gathered to enjoy it. How they would troop to the place! They get hold of some robe or cloth of the imperial colour, and of some flexible shoots of some thorny plant, and out of these they fashion a burlesque of royal trappings. Then they shout, as they would have done to Caesar, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ repeating again with clumsy iteration the stale jest which seems to them so exquisite. Then their mood changes, and naked ferocity takes the place of ironical reverence. Plucking the mock sceptre, the reed, from His passive hand, they strike the thorn-crowned Head with it, and spit on Him, while they bow in mock reverence before Him, and at last, when tired of their sport, tear off the purple, and lead him away to the Cross.

If we think of who He was who bore all this, and of why He bore it, we may well bow not the knee but the heart, in endless love and thankfulness. If we think of the mockers-rude Roman soldiers, who probably could not understand a word of what they heard on the streets of Jerusalem-we shall do rightly to remember our Lord’s own plea for them, ‘they know not what they do,’ and reflect that many of us with more knowledge do really sin more against the King than they did. Their insult was an unconscious prophecy. They foretold the basis of His dominion by the crown of thorns, and its character by the sceptre of reed, and its extent by their mocking salutations; for His Kingship is founded in suffering, wielded with gentleness, and to Him every knee shall one day bow, and every tongue confess that the King of the Jews is monarch of mankind.

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mar 15:1-5

1 Early in the morning the chief priests with the elders and scribes and the whole Council, immediately held a consultation; and binding Jesus, they led Him away and delivered Him to Pilate. 2Pilate questioned Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And He answered him, “It is as you say.” 3The chief priests began to accuse Him harshly. 4Then Pilate questioned Him again, saying, “Do You not answer? See how many charges they bring against You!” 5But Jesus made no further answer; so Pilate was amazed.

Mar 15:1 “Early in the morning” Mark, like all Jewish writings, does not focus on specific times. It is probable that the Jews of Jesus’ day divided the night and day into twelve hours each (cf. Joh 11:9), with three four-hour segments. The twenty-four hour day comes from Babylon. The Greeks and Jews borrowed it from them. The sundial was divided into twelve segments.

In chapter 15 Mark has several time markers;

1. sunrise, Mar 15:1 (around 6 a.m. depending on the time of the year)

2. third hour, Mar 15:25 (around 9 a.m.)

3. sixth hour, Mar 15:33 (around noon)

4. ninth hour, Mar 15:34 (around 3 p.m.)

5. evening, Mar 15:42 (sunset, around 6 p.m.)

Luk 22:66-71 gives the details of this meeting. This early meeting was held in an attempt to give some legality to their illegal night trial (cf. A. N Sherwin-White, Roman

Society and Roman Law in the New Testament, pp. 24-47). The chronology of Jesus’ trial before Pilate and His crucifixion is:

MatthewMarkLukeJohn

Pilate’s Verdict6th Hour 19:14

Crucifixion 3rd Hour 15:25

Darkness Fell6th-9th Hour 27:456th-9th Hour 15:336th-9th Hour 23:44

Jesus Cried Out9th Hour 27:469th Hour 15:34

When these time designations are compared, two interpretive options arise: (1) they are the same. John used Roman time, counting from 12:00 a.m. (cf. Gleason L. Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, p. 364), and the Synoptics used Jewish time, counting from 6:00 a.m. (2) John is asserting a later time for Jesus’ crucifixion which would be another example of the differences between the Synoptics and John. However, it seems from Joh 1:39; Joh 4:6 that John sometimes uses Jewish time and sometimes Roman time (cf. M. R. Vincent, Word Studies, Vol. 1, p. 403).

The time designations may be symbolic in all the Gospels for they relate to (1) time of daily sacrifices (i.e., the continual) in the Temple (9 a.m. and 3 p.m., cf. Act 2:15; Act 3:1) and (2) just after noon was the traditional time to kill the Passover Lamb on Nisan 14. The Bible, being an ancient eastern book, does not focus on strict chronology as do modern western historical accounts.

“the chief priests with the elders and scribes and the whole Council” See Special Topic: Sanhedrin at Mar 12:13.

“immediately” Mark’s gospel is characterized by action ( “then,” “and,” “immediately”). Jesus is revealed primarily through His actions. The pace of the narrative moves forward through these action words. See note at Mar 1:10.

“and binding Jesus” This may have been a common procedure with criminals or subconsciously it showed their fear of Jesus. Many were afraid He was a magician or sorcerer and that His power was in His hands.

“delivered Him to Pilate” Exactly where this was done is uncertain. Most scholars think Pilate stayed at Herod’s palace when in Jerusalem. His normal residence was Caesarea by the sea, where He used another of Herod’s palaces as the praetorium. Others feel he stayed in the military headquarters, which was the fortress Antionia, next to the temple. The time would be at daybreak, following Roman customs of early court (probably because of the heat). Pilate ruled Palestine as a representative of the Emperor from A.D. 25/26-36/37 and then was removed because of repeated accusations by Vitellius, Legate of Syria.

SPECIAL TOPIC: PONTIUS PILATE

Mar 15:2 “Pilate questioned Him” In what language? The chances of Pilate speaking Aramaic are less than that Jesus could speak Koine Greek. For a good discussion of this see

1. “Did Jesus Speak Greek” by Joseph A. Fitzmeyer, chapter 21, pp. 253-264 in Approaches to the Bible: the Best of Bible Review

2. “The Languages of the New Testament” by J. Howard Greenlee in Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 1, pp. 410-411

“‘Are You the King of the Jews'” “You” is emphatic and sarcastic. Luk 23:1-2 lists the charges of the Sanhedrin. Joh 19:8-19, adds great detail to the conversation between Jesus and Pilate. Pilate was not concerned with the religious aspect of the charge, but the political aspect.

NASB, NKJV”‘It is as you say'”

NRSV, TEV”‘You say so'”

NJB”‘It is you who say it'”

This is literally “you say that I Am,” which may be a Hebraic idiom of affirmation (cf. Mat 26:25; Mat 26:64; Luk 22:70; Luk 23:3) or a cryptic way of answering, implying, “You say so, but implying I am a different kind of king.” This seems to have been a private consultation (cf. Joh 18:33-38) within the Praetorium. Jesus must have told the disciples about it or John was present. The Jews would not have entered because it would have made them ceremonially unclean to eat Passover.

The account of Jesus’ interrogation by Herod Antipas is left out of Mark’s Gospel, but is found in Luk 23:6-12.

Mar 15:3

NASB”began to accuse Him harshly”

NKJV, NRSV”accused Him of many things”

TEV”were accusing Jesus of many things”

NJB”brought many accusations against him”

This is imperfect tense meaning they accused Him again and again. This must have occurred after Pilate had spoken to Jesus privately (cf. Mar 15:4). A list of some of the accusations is found in Luk 23:2.

Mar 15:5 “Jesus made no further answer” This may be a fulfillment of Isa 53:7 (cf. Mar 14:61; Mat 26:63; Mat 27:12; Joh 19:9).

“so Pilate was amazed” Why was Pilate amazed?

1. Jesus spoke in private to him, but would not speak in the presence of His accusers.

2. The High Priest made so many charges against Him and they were so vehement.

3. Jesus did not act like most prisoners who vigorously defended themselves.

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

straightway. See notes on Mar 1:10, Mar 1:12.

in. Greek. epi. App-104. Not the same word as in verses: Mar 15:7, Mar 15:29, Mar 15:38, Mar 7:41, Mar 7:46.

in the morning = any time before sunrise, while yet dark, Compare Mar 1:35; Mar 16:2, Mar 16:9. Joh 20:1. The Lord must have been led to Pilate before our midnight, because it was “about the sixth hour” of the night when Pilate said “Behold your king “(Joh 19:14). It was there fore in the night, at which time it was unlawful to try a prisoner. See the Talmud, Sanhedrin, cApp-4. It was also unlawful on the eve of the Sabbath, and this was the eve of the High Sabbath. See App-165. held a consultation having formed a council. See note on Mat 12:14.

with = in association with. Greek. meta. App-104. Same as in verses: Mar 15:7, Mar 15:28, Mar 15:31. Not the same as in Mar 15:27.

and. Note the Figure of speech Polysyndeton (App-6) to emphasize the fact that it was the act of the whole council.

Jesus. App-98.

carried Him away. Mat 27:2 has apegagon = to lead away what is alive (in contrast with pherein, which is generally used of what is inanimate). Luke has egagon = they led (Luk 23:1). Mark has apenegkun = carried, as though from faintness.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

1-5.] JESUS IS LED AWAY TO PILATE, AND EXAMINED BY HIM. Mat 27:1-2; Mat 27:11-14. Luk 23:1-5. Joh 18:28-38. Our account is very nearly related to that in Matt.: see notes there. The . is a touch of accuracy. From ch. Mar 14:53 we know that were assembled. Lightfoot quotes from Maimonides Sanhedr. 3 b., Synedrium septuaginta unius seniorum non necesse habet ut sedeant omnes cum vero necesse est ut congregentur omnes, congregentur omnes.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Let’s turn to Mark’s gospel chapter 15.

Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane in the evening or late night, and immediately brought before Caiaphas the high priest and some of the rulers where they held an illegal night tribunal. And they tried to develop charges that they could bring against Jesus before the Roman court because they were determined that Jesus must be put to death. But they did not have the power of condemning a prisoner to death. That was Rome’s power. So, their trial against Jesus was basically a religious trial. And they had many witnesses that came; none of them could agree together. And finally, the high priest said directly to Jesus, “I adjure you by the living God, tell us, are you the Son of God?” And Jesus answered in the affirmative and said, “Henceforth you’re not going to see Me until you see Me in the right hand of power.” And the high priest tore his clothes and he said, “What need we of any further witnesses?” In other words, “We don’t need a witness. This guy has witnessed against Himself. What do you think of this?” And they all said, “It’s blasphemy!” “What shall we do to Him?” “Let Him be put to death.” Well, there’s no way the Roman court is going to put a man to death for blasphemy against the Jewish religion. So they had to develop other charges when they brought Jesus before Pilate because their religious charges would not hold any credence in a Roman court. Now,

And straightway in the morning [this trial was at night,] the chief priests [they gathered together the whole council, verse one of chapter 15, and they] held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate. And Pilate asked him ( Mar 15:1-2 ),

Now, no doubt the charges that they brought against Jesus were charges of insurrection against Rome, claiming that He was a king. And they did throw in the charge, though it was a false charge that He said they should not pay taxes to Caesar. So basically, the only charges that they could bring against the Rome court against Jesus would be insurrection against Rome. And these would be capital offenses for which He could be put to death.

“Then Pilate asked Him,”

Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering said unto him, Thou sayest it [You said it]. And the chief priests accused him of many things; but he answered nothing [but he did not make any defense for himself]. And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing [Don’t You answer anything to these charges]? behold how many things they witness against thee. But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marveled. Now at that feast [that is the Feast of the Passover,] he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired [it was a custom of the Roman government to honor the feast by turning free a prisoner unto the people, a prisoner of their choice]. And there there was one [certain prisoner] named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection. And the multitude crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them [as he was accustomed to do, on this particular day of the year, release a prisoner]. But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I [do you want me to] release unto you the King of the Jews? For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy. But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? And they cried out again, Crucify him. Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him. And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified ( Mar 15:2-15 ).

So we find the account of Jesus before Pilate. For many years there were certain Bible critics that found what they felt to be a discrepancy in the scriptural record because of the reference to Pilate. And within the Roman records that have been discovered up to that point, there was no record of any man named Pilate ever being a governor over Judea. And so those Bible critics who are so willing and ready to find some discrepancy in the Bible began to aver with all of their scholastic pomp that the Bible was not a credible record at all because it listed people who never did exist, people whose names were absent from any other record or any other source. And because there was no other source naming Pilate as a Roman governor, then surely the Bible account has to be spurious and you cannot rely or trust in the Bible. And these men gained great notoriety by their proclamations and the papers were only too happy to publish them and their findings. However, when excavations were being done in Caesarea, they happened to cross an interesting stone that had the record of Pilate inscribed upon it, “The Governor of Judea,” and telling a little bit about his office as governor. And so all of the scholars and all of their discrediting of the Bible was, of course, discredited itself and the Bible stood once more as an anvil, as the hammers that were beaten against it were worn out and tossed aside. And now it is thoroughly recognized and there has been much more discoveries by the archaeologists that have proved that Pilate did indeed live and govern over Judea. In fact, we know quite a bit about Pilate’s history now. But it’s interesting how that people are so ready to find fault with the Word of God, or so ready to discredit it. And how much publicity they can get on any statement discrediting the Bible. Yet when they found this stone of Pilate, very little was mentioned about it in the press. You know, the guys just sort of bow their heads and put their tail between their legs and slink away and hope that people will forget their asseverations that Pilate was not a real person.

Jesus is accused of being the King of the Jews. He’s more than that. He’s the King of Glory. But Jesus did not defend Himself. Now in Isaiah it said, “And as the sheep before her shearers is dumb, so He openeth not His mouth.” It is possible that this crowd that had gathered before Pilate had not gathered on the account of Jesus. It is quite possible that the crowd that had gathered was drawn together by Fonda and Hayden in order to have this man Barabbas released. It could be that was the purpose of the crowd being there. Now we find the charge against Barabbas was insurrection. That would not be a bad or evil thing as far as the Jew was concerned. In fact, this was a common problem that Rome had with Judea, the many insurrections. For there were many zealots who hated that Roman occupation of their land. And they were constantly having uprisings against the Roman occupiers. And there was, of course, this man Barabbas. It could be that to the people he was a national hero because he dared to stand up against Rome. So that, it is quite possible that the crowd that was there was not actually there to witness the trial of Jesus, but were there for the purpose of getting the release of Barabbas, to put the pressure on that Barabbas might be released, as sort of a popular hero. And that this trial of Jesus was just something that was thrown upon them. But they themselves actually weren’t too aware of Jesus or who He was. That is a possibility.

There are many times those who say, “Well, now look at the fickleness of the crowd; just the few days before they were saying ‘Hosanna, hosanna! Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’ And now they’re crying, ‘Crucify Him!'” It could be that you’re dealing with two entirely different crowds and not with a fickle condition of the multitude. But those that were there to really see the imposition of death upon Jesus were the high priests, the scribes, and that these other people were actually there and had gathered there on this day in order to help facilitate the release of their popular hero Barabbas. So that we so oftentimes hear Barabbas cast in an evil light, “How would they chose this man who was a murderer and insurrectionist and all?” Well, it’s because he was an insurrectionist that they sort of admired him. And he could have been a real people’s hero as far as insurrection against Rome was concerned. Nonetheless, however it may be, the people chose a lawless man over the law, over a man who was obedient to the law. Their choice was a sad choice indeed, and it so often reflects the attitude of people of choosing lawlessness over the law.

Pilate asked them a question that is a question that is very relevant to each one of us, “What will you then that I shall do unto Him whom you call the King of the Jews? What shall I do with this man?” That’s something that every one of you have to determine in your own hearts. What are you going to do with Jesus who is called the King of the Jews? You see, you’ve got to do something with Him. He is a radical, and as a radical you cannot be neutral towards Him. You’ve got to have some kind of an opinion. You’ve got to do something with Him. And you see, you’ve got to either believe Him or not believe Him. You’ve got to receive Him or reject Him. Now, not to believe in Him is to not believe in Him. In other words, you can’t be neutral; you’ve got to take a stand one way or the other. You either believe or you don’t believe. You can’t be neutral. Not to receive Him is to reject Him. Not to confess Him is to deny Him. And each of you must determine what you are going to do with this man Jesus who is called the King of the Jews. For you either confess or deny, you receive or you reject, you believe or you don’t believe.

Pilate was the judge. He is asking the people to give him direction for his decision, a very unusual move on the part of the judge. But yet, in this case, it’s a significant move because really, it’s the people’s choice. It’s a personal choice. And each man must make the decision for himself; you can’t leave it up to Pilate to make the decision for you. You make the decision for yourself and you are responsible then for that decision that you make.

In a sense, each of you stand as the judge of Jesus Christ. Was He really the Son of God, or was He a charlatan and a fake? Did He really die for the sins of the world? Was He really risen from the dead? Or is it all a farce, a hoax? And each of you must stand as judge of the facts of history to determine whether or not these are accurate or inaccurately reported to you. So you must finally decide and determine what you are going to do with this man Jesus, who is called the Christ, the King of the Jews. But the ironic twist of the whole thing…your being the person who must judge for yourself concerning Jesus Christ, the ironic twist is that your decision concerning Him has absolutely nothing to do with His destiny. Though you have to judge, you are not determining His destiny; but in reality, you are determining your destiny. To believe in Him, to receive Him, to confess Him is to receive eternal life. To not believe in Him is to receive eternal damnation. And thus, you as the judge are determining your own destiny when you make your determination concerning Jesus Christ. It’s a very heavy thing. I am the judge, but yet it is my fate that is being determined by the judgment that I make. What Jesus is, He is. You can’t change it. What He is He has always been and will always be. Your decision concerning Him will not affect Him at all. But it will determine where you spend eternity.

“Pilate, willing to content the people…” This is justice of convenience, which is not true justice. To give in to the will of the people, though you know it is wrong, to yield to the pressure of the crowd, though you know it is wrong, it’s always a hard position to be in. In your heart you know what is true. In your heart you know what is right. In your heart you know what you ought to do. But there is this pressure against you, the pressure to make the wrong decision, to do the wrong thing. And how sad it is when a person yields to that pressure, rather than to stand up for that which he knows to be right and true. Pilate, in order to placate the people, freed Barabbas but delivered Jesus to be crucified.

“And he scourged Him…” Now, we have it only in one word: “scourged Him.” Yet that scourging was one of the cruelest forms of punishment administered by Rome. In fact, it was such a horrible punishment that there was a law that no Roman prisoner being a Roman citizen could be scourged without first of all having a formal trial.

The purpose of scourging was to discover information. You’ve heard of the old third degree, which of course the supreme courts have outlawed now. You know, when they turn the hot lights on and they don’t feed you and they keep asking you questions, and they wear you down mentally until finally you’re ready to sign your confession and all. And where they take the pliers and pull out your fingernails and they pinch your ears and they slap your face…and you know, all of the old third degree thing to get a person to confess. Well, this was the “tenth degree” kind of an exercise of the Roman government, where they would tie the prisoner over a post so that his back was stretched out and exposed. And then they would use this leather whip with sharpened bits of lead and glass tied in it; and it would literally tear the prisoners back to shreds, as they would lay this lash over their back thirty-nine times.

They always had a scribe standing by who was recording the confessions that the prisoner would cry out. And the idea was, as the stripe was laid upon you, you would cry out a crime that you had committed. You confessed to some crime. And that way they would make the next lash a little easier and a little easier. And it was to help the Roman government solve a lot of the unsolved crimes prior to putting the man to death. It was to clear up the police blotter of a lot of the unsolved crimes in the community. And it was very effective. It was so painful that there are records of many men who went insane through the beating, and rarely would a man survive it. Usually, he would die from the loss of blood and just the horrible painfulness of this experience. And many prisoners died during the scourging, many went insane.

“As a lamb before her shearers is dumb, so He opened not His mouth.” As they were scourging Him, He had nothing to confess. And of course, the idea was if there was no confession, then he lays the whip on a little harder and a little harder until you’re forced to confess your sins, your crimes. Having nothing to confess, Jesus took the full brunt of that scourging. But it wasn’t over; it was just the beginning.

And the soldiers led him away into the hall, called the Praetorium; and they called together the whole band [of soldiers] ( Mar 15:16 ).

Now you’re going to have some barracks fun. These Roman soldiers are going to take this man who has been condemned to die, the man who made claim to be the King of the Jews. And they’re going to make fun of Him and have just a ribald type of a time as they mock and make fun of the prisoners.

And they clothed him with purple [the kingly color], and platted [they wove] a crown of thorns, and put it about his head ( Mar 15:17 ),

The King of the Jews, His only crown a crown of thorns. How significant! Where did thorns come from anyhow? Going back to the book of Genesis when Adam rebelled against God and God began to pronounce the curse upon man and upon woman, and God said, “Cursed be the ground; thorns and thistles shall it bring forth.” Those thorns were the result of God’s curse against sin. Here was Jesus ready to bear the curse of sin. How appropriate that they should crown Him with a crown of thorns.

And they smote him on the head with a reed [with a club] ( Mar 15:19 ),

They were just hitting Him on the head. Now, earlier He had been buffeted in the court of Caiaphas. They put a sack over his head and began to beat Him in the face with their fists, plummet Him and then to slap Him and say, “Prophesy! Who is it that hit You?” Now He is scourged, and now He is being hit over the head with a reed.

and did spit upon him, and bowing their knees [mock] worshipped him ( Mar 15:19 ).

You can almost see them; you can almost hear their laughter. They’re not to be blamed too much; theirs isn’t really hatred, theirs is just a big laugh, a lot of fun.

And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple from him, and put his own clothes on him, and led him out to crucify him ( Mar 15:20 ).

Having had their fun, now they get down to business.

And they compel one [a man whose name was] Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his cross ( Mar 15:21 ).

Now, all a Roman soldier had to do is lay his spear on your shoulder, flat side on your shoulder, and tell you what to do, and you had to do it. If you were walking along the path and you came to a Roman soldier who was carrying his gear down the road, he could lay his spear on your soldier and say, “Carry this for me one mile.” And the paths were all marked out with milestones by Rome and you can see these milestones even today. And legally, you were obligated to carry that load for that soldier one mile. He could force you to do it; that was the law of Rome. However, the law of Rome would only compel you to do one mile. You could carry it through one mile, then you could dump it and go. But he had the power to compel you to carry it one mile. Now, that is what Jesus was talking about when He said, “If they compel you to go one mile, go two.” So, they laid the sword on Simon’s shoulder flat side down and they said, “Carry this man’s cross!”

Simon had no doubt come to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover. As the adult male Jews came from all over the world for this particular feast and he just happened to be there and just happened to be the man that the Roman soldier laid his spear on, so that he was forced to carry the cross of Christ. But there is interesting indication that though it is possible he never knew Jesus up to this point, that Simon actually became converted and became a very important part of the early church.

There’s a reference in Act 13:1 to Simeon, who was called the Niger, indicating that he was from Africa, who was among the group of the ordaining elders that sent Paul and Barnabas on the first missionary journey. Rufus and Alexander, being his son’s name, there are references in the Bible to Rufus. And it is quite possible that Mark tells us he is the father of Rufus and Alexander in order identify Simon who was well-known in the early church and became a very vital part of the early church. There are those bits of evidences and there are others in the New Testament that indicate that particular possibility, and it is interesting to speculate.

And they bring him unto the place Golgotha, which is, being interpreted, The place of a skull ( Mar 15:22 ).

Now, it is assumed that it was called the Place of the Skull today because across from the wall of Jerusalem between the Damascus gate and Herod’s gate, there is a barren side of a cliff which was created from an ancient stone quarry, where, as the result of the stones being quarried from there and landslides and so forth, there is definitely the appearance of a skull as you look at the cliff. And it could be that the Golgotha got its name from the appearance of the face of that jagged cliff. It is also possible that it got its name, The Place of the Skull, from the fact that this was perhaps the place where the Romans crucified most of the prisoners. And when they were crucified, they were usually left there on the crosses until they died. And sometimes it took as many as six days for a person to die. He would die by exposure, malnutrition and starvation. And they’d leave them hanging until they died. And then they would oftentimes continue to leave them hanging, or they would just cut them down and the dogs and the birds would come and feed on the bodies. And so it could be that there were just a lot of skulls of men who had been crucified at that place around that had been left after the dogs and the birds had done their job on them. And it is possible that that’s where it received the name The Place of the Skull. My personal opinion, and it is the first, as you go over there today, you can surely see that appearance of a skull on the face of the mountain or on the face of that hillside there. It’s the top of Mount Moriah actually. And there’s a very definite impression or face of the skull upon it. And I believe that that is the actual site of the crucifixion of Jesus.

And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not [would not receive it] ( Mar 15:23 ).

There were a certain group, a society of ladies in Jerusalem, a society of mercy, who would make up this concoction of wine with myrrh that had the effect of an anesthesia and would stupefy the prisoners so that they would not experience so badly the suffering and the pain of crucifixion. And so they would come out when prisoners were ready to be crucified, and they would give them this stupefying drink, so that the person would sort of be out of their head and not experience as badly the terrible pain and suffering of crucifixion. And they offered it to Jesus. But to me it is significant that He refused it, in order that He might taste of death for very man and know what it was.

Many of His followers in time to come were to be crucified also for their belief in Jesus Christ. When Peter was condemned to die by crucifixion, Peter requested that he have the privilege of being crucified upside down, as he was not worthy to be crucified as his Lord. Jesus, no doubt knowing that many of His followers would be stoned to death, would be crucified, would be beaten to death, would be burned to death, refused that stupefying drink in order that He might know and be able to comfort those who later on would go through the same pain and torture for His sake.

And when they had crucified him, they parted his garments ( Mar 15:24 ),

Now, He would have had sandals, He would have had an inner robe, He would have had the sash that they tied their robe with, His turban. And then, that beautiful outer robe that was made by loving hands, a coat that was sewn or an outer robe that was woven without any seams. And so, they parted His garments. One fellow took the sandals and another the sash, another the inner robe, another the turban. But they cast lots for His robe, for they said, “There’s no sense of tearing this thing up; it won’t do anybody any good.” So they threw dice to see who would get that outer coat.

And it was the third hour, [that is nine o’clock in the morning,] and they crucified him ( Mar 15:25 ).

The day began at six o’clock in the morning, the night watch began at six o’clock in the evening, and the day watch began at six o’clock in the morning. So at nine o’clock, the third hour, they crucified Him.

And the superscription of his accusation ( Mar 15:26 )

Now, when a prisoner was condemned to death, they made him, as a rule, carry his own cross to the place of execution. And they would have four Roman soldiers that would be marching with the prisoner in the middle. And one Roman soldier would go in the front with a sign that bore the charges against the prisoner. And they would never walk the shortest route to the place of execution, but would take the longest route through the city, making a lot of clamor and a lot of noise so that the people would have fears struck in their heart against rebelling against Rome or whatever. So the fellow in front would carry the wood with the accusation written, the reason why the prisoner was being crucified. And so they took Jesus through the streets, and finally, when they came to the place of the cross and nailed Him upon the cross and raised it up, they took the charges, “The King of the Jews,” and they nailed it on His cross, the accusations that were made against Him. And so,

And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS. And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left. And the Scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors. And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, Save thyself, and come down from the cross ( Mar 15:26-30 ).

Jesus one day said to them when they asked for a sign, “Destroy this temple and I will build it in three days.” And they thought that He was talking about the temple that Herod had begun construction on. They said, “Forty-seven years have we been building this temple, and You say that You’re going to rebuild it in three days.” But they didn’t realize He was talking about the temple of His body. And they were indeed destroying the temple of His body, but in three days, He was going to raise it up; He was going to rebuild it. He said, “No man takes My life from Me; I give My life. I have power to lay down My life; I have power to take it up again.”

“Wagging their heads…” Get now the mental picture, and you have to almost have visited the East to get the mental picture and to catch the fervor of these people and their temperaments, when you see them on the streets as they are bargaining or dealing with each other as they are expressing their views. They are very demonstrative people. When you go to the sheep market and watch the haggling for goats and sheep and all, you’ll see them yelling at each other. They stomp, they wave their hands, they wag their heads, and they are just very demonstrative that way. And as you stand there listening to them, you swear that they’re going to pull out knives and kill each other. Of course, you can’t understand what they’re saying as they’re yelling at each other and stomping and shaking their heads and everything else. And finally you’ll see them strike their hands and it means, “It’s a deal!” They made a bargain. So the guy will take the goat and give the guy the money and walk off with it. And that’s just a part of their culture, their temperament, their nature. And so you can visualize these fellows just full of emotion, shaking their heads as they yell these taunts at Jesus.

Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save ( Mar 15:31 ).

Two statements: one of them was true; one of them was false. It is true He saved others, and they recognized that. It was an admission that they had to make. People all around them had been saved by Jesus. There were blind people who could see, there were lame people who were walking, there was Lazarus who was raised from the dead. He saved others, that they had to admit. They could not deny the evidence. “He saved others,” an interesting confession of His enemies. The false statement was, “Himself He cannot save.” That is wrong; He could have saved Himself. Actually, He could have appealed to Pilate. Pilate was doing his best to free Jesus. As you get into John’s gospel, he points out even more clearly how anxious Pilate was to set Him free. But Jesus was not cooperative with Pilate at all. Jesus wouldn’t answer him. He could have just said the right thing to Pilate and Pilate would have just said, “Well, you know, you Jews go your way.” I think that Jesus probably could have appealed to the crowd. Emotions were high, but He could have just appealed to the crowd and saved Himself. Or, as He had said to Peter earlier, “Hey, Peter, put away your sword. Don’t you realize that at this moment, I could call for ten legions of angels to deliver me from their hands? The cup that the Father has given Me to drink, shall I not drink it?” He could have saved Himself by calling on the angels to come and deliver Him out of the hands of these wicked men. He could have saved Himself, but He didn’t save Himself.

Now, there’s a bit of irony here. “He saved others; Himself He cannot save.” The whole statement taken as a whole is true as a whole statement. Though a part of it is false, as a whole statement it is true. If He is to save others, He cannot save Himself. You see, if He saves Himself, then He can’t save others. The only way He can save others is by not saving Himself. So, the statement as the whole is true. “He saved others; Himself He cannot save.” You can’t do both. You can’t save yourself and others. You can only save others. He can only save others by giving Himself as a sacrifice.

They said,

Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him ( Mar 15:32 ).

Now Luke’s gospel tells us that later on one of them had a change of heart, and we will get to that when we get to Luke’s gospel.

And when the sixth hour was come ( Mar 15:33 ),

Six hours on the cross…remember it was nine o’clock, the third hour when they put Him on the cross? The sixth hour would be high noon.

there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour [three o’clock in the afternoon] ( Mar 15:33 ).

It became midnight at noon, darkness over the whole land. There is no particular phenomena that you can blame for the darkness. It could not have been an eclipse of the sun, for this was Passover and it was full moon. And the sun and the moon were opposite of each other during the Passover or during full moon, so it’s impossible that it could have been an eclipse. It was as though heaven was veiling itself from this horrible crime that man was committing. This dark shroud covered the earth from the sixth hour, or from twelve o’clock noon until three o’clock in the afternoon.

And at the ninth hour [three o’clock in afternoon] Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? ( Mar 15:34 )

Mark gives the words of Jesus in the language that Jesus spoke them, and very rarely do we have the actual words of Jesus. We have the translation of the words of Jesus, and usually he translates it into Greek and then from Greek to English. But here he gives us the actual words in order that we might understand why some of those who were standing by thought that He was crying for Elijah. “Eloi, Eloi.” They thought He was crying, “Elijah, Elijah.” But in reality He was crying, “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” The answer to it is found in Psa 22:1-31 , which begins, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Why art thou so far from the cry of my roaring? I cry unto thee in the daytime and thou hearest not; and in the night season and I am not silent. But thou art holy, O thou that inhabits the praises of thy people.” It was because of the holiness of God that Jesus was forsaken of God. For sin always separates a man from God, and when the sins of the world were placed upon Jesus, that fellowship that He had experienced, that coexistence, that oneness with the Father was broken. He who had existed with God from the beginning, He who shared the glory of God before the world ever existed was forsaken of God when God laid on Him the iniquities of us all. He tasted of death for every man. He tasted of death for you. He experienced the consequence of sin, spiritual death, separation from God. And thus, the cry, “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” He was forsaken of God in order that you would never have to be forsaken of God.

God help you, that you never echo that prayer of Jesus. Those who live in sin, those who refuse Jesus as their Savior experience separation from God, spiritual death. And the Bible says, “They are dead while they yet live.” But it will eventuate in eternal death, the second death, as Jesus said, “And I will say to those on my left hand, ‘Depart from Me, ye workers of iniquity. Depart from Me.'” Separation from God. I Thessalonians Mar 1:9 speaks again of that eternal separation from God.

And some of them that stood by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calleth Elias [Hey, he’s calling for Elijah]. And one ran and filled a sponge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed and gave him to drink ( Mar 15:35-36 ),

They thought He was getting delirious, the one did. The others said,

[Hey,] let [Him] alone; let us see whether Elias [Elijah] will come to take him down ( Mar 15:36 ).

You know, this might be interesting, exciting.

And Jesus cried with a loud voice ( Mar 15:37 ),

And we are told in the other gospels, the cry was, “It is finished!”

and gave up the ghost ( Mar 15:37 ).

Or, He dismissed His spirit. As He said, “No man takes My life from Me; I give My life. I have the power to lay it down; I have the power to take it up.” That is why it is so wrong that the church for so many years tried to blame the Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus. They’re not responsible; we’re responsible. Jesus gave His life. No man took His life from Him; He gave His life. “He bowed His head and dismissed His spirit.”

And the veil of the temple was rent [torn] in twain [two] from the top to the bottom ( Mar 15:38 ).

At this point, God took the veil of the temple, which some say was eighteen inches thick, woven cloth, and God took the thing and just ripped it from the top to the bottom. What did the veil of the temple represent? The unapproachableness of God by man. Only the high priest dared to go in behind that veil, and he only one day of the year. God was unapproachable by man, by sinful man. But when the death of Christ was accomplished, God ripped that veil of the temple and was in fact declaring, “Now, we may come boldly unto the throne of grace to receive mercy, because Jesus has made the way to God for every man.” God is no longer unapproachable. But you and I can come to God today through Jesus Christ. The veil has been rent; the way has been made. The approach to God is now possible for just the common person like us. Oh, how glorious that we can come into the presence of God through Jesus Christ! And we don’t have to go through a lot of washings and sacrifices and everything else. There has been one sacrifice for all. It’s so complete, it’s so full that it satisfies for all of us and God is now approachable. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth and the life; no man comes to the Father but by Me” ( Joh 14:6 ). But the glorious thing is, we can come to the Father through Him.

And when the centurion, which stood over against him [was standing by], saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost [was able to dismiss his spirit], he said, Truly this man was the Son of God ( Mar 15:39 ).

He saw that He had the power of just saying, “Okay, that’s it; spirit, you can go now.” And he marveled that the Man had the power to lay His life down.

There were also women who were looking on afar off [perhaps over on the city wall, which is not that far away, maybe two hundred feet]: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome ( Mar 15:40 );

Now His mother Mary was standing right there near the cross. She was close enough that Jesus could speak to her from the cross, which He did. John was standing with the mother of Jesus close by the cross. But these other Marys, Mary Magdalene (and she is always identified as that title, Mary Magdalene), a woman from whom Jesus had delivered from seven devils, and Mary the mother of James the Less, so not James and John, but James the Less and Joses, probably the wife of Cleophas, or Altheus. And so, you have in the disciples, James the Less, who is the son of Altheus. So, this is Mary, the wife of Altheus, the mother of James the Less and Joses and Salome.

Who also, when he was in Galilee, [these women] followed him, and ministered unto him; ( Mar 15:41 )

Now, you’ve probably not thought too much about when Jesus was traveling around the country with His disciples and all. They have to eat. If they rip their clothes, they’ve got to be sewn and all. And so, there were the group of women who went around and fixed the meals and ministered to those practical aspects of life, and took care of those things. And so these are three of the women who were following with the disciples and ministering unto Jesus.

and many other women which came up with him unto Jerusalem. And now when the even[ing] was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath ( Mar 15:41-42 ),

Remember, it’s three o’clock in the afternoon that Jesus dismisses His spirit. You have now three hours before the Sabbath begins, sundown. So, they had to prepare for the Sabbath, because you couldn’t cook on the Sabbath Day. You had to get everything all set. So everybody is scurrying. Usually the businesses over there close down Friday afternoon at about one o’clock. And everybody goes home and starts to prepare for the Sabbath Day; get all the food cooked and everything all set, so that you get all the hot plates plugged in so you don’t have to plug anything in on the Sabbath. And you get the whole thing set so you don’t have to kindle any fires or anything on the Sabbath Day. So you have to prepare for the Sabbath. So, time is running out. They didn’t want anybody hanging there on the Sabbath Day, so they had to get the whole thing over before sundown.

And so it was evening, it was the afternoon, preparing for the Sabbath.

Joseph of Arimathea, an honorable counselor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved [or begged for] the body of Jesus. And Pilate marveled if he were already dead ( Mar 15:43-44 ):

He couldn’t believe that He was dead this quickly.

and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead [if Jesus was already dead]. And when he knew it of [found out from] the centurion [that Jesus was dead], he gave the body to Joseph. And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of the rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre. And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses [those who were afar off, they] beheld where he was laid ( Mar 15:44-47 ).

One of the gospel writers tells us that near the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden. And in the garden, there was a tomb that had never been used, and that it was this tomb where Jesus was laid. They have discovered right near Golgotha, in fact just over the edge of Golgotha, the remains of an ancient garden. There are the cisterns there that were used to water the garden. And in this garden, of course, there is a tomb. And it is my feeling, conviction, that this is the actual tomb where Jesus lay for three days and three nights. It’s always a very moving experience to step in that tomb and to look at the slab that is there, and to realize that is probably the place where Jesus’ body lay for three days and three nights. In front of this tomb, there is a track which they often had in front of the tombs, where they would roll these stones along the track and cover the opening into the tomb. There is no stone at this particular tomb, but there is the remains of the track where a stone once rolled.

We are told here that the tomb belonged to Joseph of Arimathea. He was a wealthy man. He begged the body of Jesus. He wrapped it in this fine linen and laid Him in the sepulchre. However, because of the timing, they did not have the opportunity to put the spices and all on the bodies, which they often did. But, He was wrapped carefully. And they wrapped bodies in a scientific way, wrapping around and around this shroud around the body.

“

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Let us read again what we have often read before, that saddest of all stories which, nevertheless, is the fountain of the highest gladness,-the story of our Saviours death, as recorded by Mark.

Mar 15:1. And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate.

The whole council could be there, so early in the morning, for such an evil purpose. Wicked men are very diligent in carrying out their sinful schemes; so, when Christ was to be murdered, his enemies were there, as Luke tells us, as soon as it was day. How much more diligent ought the followers of Christ to be to give him their devoted service! It is a good thing to begin the day with united prayer and holy converse with his people. Let these wicked men, who were so early in the morning seeking to secure the death of Christ, make us ashamed that we are not more diligent in his blessed service.

Mar 15:2-3. And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering said unto him, Thou sayest it. And the chief priests accused him of many things: but he answered nothing.

Silence was the best answer, the most eloquent reply, that he could give to each accusers; they deserved no other answer. Moreover, by his silence, he was fulfilling the prophecy, As a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

Mar 15:4-5. And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against thee. But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.

You will often find that your highest wisdom, when you are slandered, will lie in the imitation of your Lord and Master. Live a blameless life, and it shall be the best reply to the false charges of the wicked.

Mar 15:6-10. Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired. And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection. And the multitude crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them. But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy.

And he therefore hoped that the people, who were not moved by the same envy, would have chosen to have Jesus set at liberty.

Mar 15:11-13. But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? And they cried out again, Crucify him.

This was the very best reply to the charge of high treason; for, if Jesus had really set himself up as a king in the place of Caesar, the people; when they were thus publicly appealed to, would not have cried out, Crucify him. If there had been and truth in the allegation that he was the ringleader of a sedition, the Jews would not have said again and again, Crucify him. Thus Christ gave Pilate a much more effectual answer than if he had himself spoken.

Mar 15:14-16. Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him. And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified. And the soldiers led him away into the hall, called Praetorium;-

The hall of the Praetorian guard;

16; 17. And they call together the whole band. And they clothed him with purple,

The uniform of the Roman soldiers was purple, as if to indicate that they belonged to an imperial master; so, when these soldiers, in mockery put on our Lord the old cloak of one of their comrades, it sufficed to clothe him with the royal purple to which, as King, he was fully entitled.

Mar 15:17-19. And platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head, and began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews! And they smote him on the head with a reed, and did spit upon him, and bowing their knees worshipped him.

All this homage was paid to him in mockery yet what stern reality there was in that mockery! That band of soldiers really preached to Christ such homage as a whole world could give him.

Mar 15:20. And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple from him, and put his own clothes on him, and led him out to crucify him.

They led him out to crucify him. It seems as if Christ had to lean upon those who led him; the word almost signifies as much as that; at least, it might be the word employed concerning anyone leading a child or a sick man who needed support, for the Saviours weakness must have been very apparent by that time. After the agony and bloody sweat in Gethsemane, and the night and morning trials, and scourging, and mockery, and the awful strain upon his mind and heart in being made a sacrifice for sin, it was no wonder that he was weak. Besides, he was not like the rough, brutal criminals that are often condemned to die for their crimes; he was a man of gentle mould and more delicate sensibilities than they were, and he suffered much more than any ordinary man would have done in similar circumstances.

Mar 15:21. And they compel one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his cross.

Christ would not bear it himself; the soldiers saw that he was faint and weary, so they laid the cross, or at least one end of it, on Simons shoulders.

Mar 15:22. And they bring him-

Here the word almost implies that they lifted him, and-carried him, for his faintness had increased. They led him out to crucify him, but now they bear him

Mar 15:22. Unto the place Golgotha, which is, being interpreted, The place of a skull.

We sometimes speak of it as mount Calvary, but it was not so; it was a little rising ground, the common place of execution, the Tyburn or Old Bailey of Jerusalem.

Mar 15:23. And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not.

He did not wish to have his sufferings abated, but to bear them to the bitter end. Christ forbids not that pain should be alleviated, in the case of others, wherever that is possible; but, in his own case, it was not fit that it should be so relieved, since he was to bear the full brunt of the storm of vengeance that was due on account of sin.

Mar 15:24. And when they had crucified him, they parted his garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take.

Christs garments must go to his executioners in order to carry out the full shame associated with his death as well as to fulfill the prophecy, They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

Mar 15:25-27. And it was the third hour, and they crucified him. And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS. And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.

As if, in carrying out that ordinary etiquette which gives the central place to the chief criminal, they gave to Christ the place of greatest contempt and scorn.

Mar 15:28. And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.

You could not count the transgressors on those crosses without counting him, there were three, and the One in the middle could not be passed by as you counted the others.

Mar 15:29-32. And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself, and come down from the cross. Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save. Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe.

That is the worlds way: that we may see and believe. But Christs way is, Believe, and thou shalt see. Christ off the cross is admired by worldlings, but Christ on the cross is our hope and stay, especially as we know that this same Christ is now on the throne waiting for the time when he should return to claim his own, all who have trusted in the Crucified.

Mar 15:32. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.

Out of their black hearts and mouths came words of obloquy and scorn even then.

Mar 15:33. And when the sixth hour was come,–

When the sun had reached the zenith, at high noon,

Mar 15:33-41. There was darkness over the whole land until this ninth hour. And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? And some of them that stood by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calleth Elias. And one ran and filled a spunge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Let alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down. And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God. There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome (who also, when he was in Galilee, followed him, and ministered unto him;) and many other women which came up with him unto Jerusalem.

We can read further about these gracious women if we turn to Luke 8.

This exposition consisted of readings from Mar 15:1-41, and Luk 8:1-3.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible

Mark 15:1-5

12. JESUS ACCUSED BEFORE PILATE

Mar 15:1-5

(Mat 27:1-2; Matthew 11-14; Luk 23:1-5; Joh 18:28-38)

1 And straightway in the morning–The trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin had begun in the night preceding this “morning.”

the chief priests with the elders and scribes, and the whole council, held a consultation,–Matthew (Mat 27:1) says: “Took counsel against Jesus to put him to death.” Luke (Luk 23:1) says: “The whole company of them rose up” together, and he was led away with their council. They desired now to make formally legal in daylight what they had hastily consummated in the illegal night and place.

and bound Jesus,–Rebound him. He had probably been relieved of his fetters while shut up with the officers. They might have simply bound him more securely.

and carried him away,–And delivered him up to Pilate. (Joh 18:12-24.)

and delivered him up to Pilate.–Pilate was the sixth Roman procurator of Judea. He was the supreme authority in the province, but responsible to the governor of Syria. What a beginning for a feast day which celebrated an act of deliverance by God from death! They observe it by an act of deliverance of God’s Son to death. The state has no business to meddle in religion. The church which invites it is apostate. The state has as much business to meddle in religion as the church or an individual Christian has to meddle in politics. There is no Bible authority for either.

2 And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews?–This question indicates that something had been said to Pilate by the Jews touching this point, or he would not have asked this question. This is clearly brought out by John who reports Jesus as saying to Pilate in answer to this question “Sayest thou this of thyself, or did others tell it thee concerning me?” Jesus answered that he was king of the Jews, but explained to Pilate that his kingdom was not of this world, and for this reason was not a rival of any earthly kingdom in the sense of which the Jews would accuse him. It was this statement of Jesus in all probability which enabled Herod and Pilate to decide there was no fault in him. (Luk 23:14-15.)

And he answering saith unto him, Thou sayest.–This was equivalent to “Thou sayest what is true.” It was answering in the affirmative.

3 And the chief priests accused him of many things.–[They were not present in the hall of trial, but laid the accusations against him before Pilate. To none of the accusations did he reply. To none of the questions did he answer save, “Art thou the Son of God?” “Art thou the King of the Jews?” To these he always responded, because they involved the great claims he came to establish; and the belief of these truths is the starting point to eternal life.]

4 And Pilate again asked him, saying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they accuse thee of.–[Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him (Joh 18:33);showing he went out to hear again or confer with the priests and the members of the Sanhedrin concerning the charges they made against him. When he returned he plied Jesus with the same question, showing this was the point on which they relied to extract the sentence of death from Pilate–that he was a rival of Caesar, and disloyal to the Roman government. Jesus, knowing he was prompted by these persons, asked: “Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee concerning me? Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests delivered thee unto me: What hast thou done?” (Joh 18:34-35.) Pilate questioned him as prompted by the Jews, and asked him to state his case. Jesus then answered: “My kingdom is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king, then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end have I been born, and to this end am I come into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth.” Pilate is jealous of any one claiming to be a king, as he is the representative of Caesar the king. Jesus explains that his kingdom is not an earthly kingdom, else his servants would fight. He gave Pilate to understand he was in no sense a rival of Caesar, and that his servants would not engage in carnal war in his behalf. While he explained this to Pilate, against the many accusations of the Jews he answered nothing. It is thought “my servants” refer to the legions of angels at his command to deliver him if he should say the word. (Mat 26:33.) If Jesus would not suffer his servants to enter into carnal warfare to establish and sustain his spiritual kingdom, then he certainly does not expect them to establish and sustain human governments by and through carnal warfare. If they could not fight to establish his own kingdom, surely they cannot to establish one for some one else.

5 But Jesus no more answered anything; insomuch that Pilate marvelled.–[He persisted in silence to all accusations of the Jews, so that Pilate wondered at his persistent silence. The charges were chiefly false, and he could have refuted them, but he resisted not evil. Only when his claims to be the Son of God and the king of the Jews in the high unworldly sense were questioned, did he speak. Luke (Luk 23:4-5) says Pilate at this time said: “I find no fault in this man. But they were the more urgent, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Judaea, beginning from Galilee even unto this place.” Galilee was in Herod’s jurisdiction. When Pilate heard this, he sent him to Herod, who was at Jerusalem at the time. Pilate believed him innocent; he did not wish to offend the Jews; so he thought to shift the responsibility to Herod. (Luk 23:8.) Herod was glad to see him–had long hoped to see him work a miracle. He questioned him in many words, but he answered him nothing. Chief priests and scribes vehemently accused him of many things. Herod, with his men of war, set him at naught, mocked him, dressed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him to Pilate. The same day Pilate and Herod are made friends together; they had been at enmity; but Herod found nothing worthy of death in Jesus. (Luk 23:15.) Jesus courted the favor of none of his judges.]

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

This chapter is one of those that needs little explanation and must ever be read in awe and reverence. Pilate represented the Roman empire, which attempted to secure itself by its ordinary methods of policy and force, and then fell, crushed and broken forever.

Simon was impressed,” that is compelled to His service; but it is most probable that this man became a devout follower of the Master, and that his sons, Rufus and Alexander, also were well known to the early Christians.

We gaze and wonder at the Cross with a great, strange contradiction and combination of emotion-with sadness as we remember that our sin caused Him the pain unutterable, with gladness as we reverently bathe in the river of His grace.

Mark records the great central cry out of the darkness, and we listen and are overawed! Then “the veil of the Temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.” The barrier ‘twixt God and man was destroyed. A new and living way was opened to the presence of God. From that moment the Cross admits to, and excludes from, the Holy Place, according to the relation men bear to Christ.

When Joseph of Arimathea went into the presence of Pilate he contracted defilement, which made it impossible for him to take part in the feast that was approaching. That defilement was made deeper by his contact with the dead. Yet no men had such keeping of the feast as did the two secret disciples, Joseph and Nicodemus, who dared the ceremonial defilement in order with tender hands to care for the Holy One of God, who was never to know corruption.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

JESUS BEFORE PILATE

15:1-15. The Sanhedrim have found in Jesus claim to be the Messiah a basis of procedure against him under Jewish law. The claim they judged to be blasphemy. It appears now that they made use of the same before Pilate. For the first question that Pilate asks is whether Jesus is king of the Jews, evidently reflecting in this the charge on which Jesus has been brought to him. Jesus assents to this, but Pilate is well enough informed about the affairs of his province to know that the claim as made by Jesus does not amount to treason, and involves no harm to the state. Otherwise, the case would have been complete. The chief priests, seeing that it is not, proceed to make various charges, to which Jesus makes no reply. Just how the next step is brought about we are not told, but probably it is a device of Pilates to use the sympathy of the people against the malice of the authorities, and so justify himself in releasing Jesus. In a case like this, it would be the policy of the empire not only to decide the question on its merits, but to conciliate the people. At any rate, the question of releasing to the people a political prisoner being brought up, he asks them if he shall release to them the king of the Jews. But the chief priests, knowing that the hope of the people had been for a political Messiah, and that Jesus had disappointed that hope, found it easy to stir up the crowd to demand the release of Barabbas, who had been in a political plot, and even the crucifixion of Jesus. And Pilate following the Roman policy, acceded to their demand.

1. -And immediately in the morning, having made ready a concerted plan of action. It is evident that their formal procedure had been the night before, resulting in the condemnation of Jesus, 14:64. On the contrary, this morning meeting was an informal gathering to decide on a plan of action before Pilate. with denotes not a consultation, but the result of the consultation, a concerted plan of action.1 This is the reverse of Jewish legal process, which would have allowed the informal gathering at night, but a judicial procedure only during the day.2 Lk. makes this trial in the morning to be the one in which they extract from Jesus the confession that he is the Messiah. In fact, in Mt. and Mk. the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrim is at night, in Lk., on the contrary, it is in the morning.3 . -The AV. translates here so as to make these words a part of those dependent on , with. But they belong with . The RV. translates properly; The chief priests with the elders and scribes, and all the council. -this is the first time that Pilate has been mentioned in Mt. or Mk. Lk. tells us that he was procurator of Juda at the time that John the Baptist began his work,4 and we know from other sources that he had been procurator for three years at that time. Juda had been a part of the Roman province of Syria since a.d. 6, and was governed by a Roman procurator, whose residence was Csarea. Pilate was sixth in the line of these. His presence at Jerusalem was on account of the Passover, and the danger of disturbance owing to the influx of Jews at the feast.

Omit before , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BCDL 46, mss. Lat. Vet. Egyptt. , instead of , Tisch. WH. marg. CL. Internal evidence favors this more difficult reading.

2. ;-Art thou the king of the Jews? The pronoun is emphatic, and probably disdainful. Pilate ridicules the charge. -Thou sayest. A Jewish form of assent. In Luk 22:70, Luk 22:71, this formula is treated by the Sanhedrim as assenting to their questions. And in Mar 14:62, is given as the equivalent of in Mat 26:64. Nevertheless, the of Luk 22:70, and Joh 18:37, , show that it is not the same as if he had merely assented, that the form of assent is such as to admit of adjuncts inappropriate to mere ordinary assent. On the other hand, it does not seem in any of the N.T. passages quoted to differ essentially from assent.5 Here, as in the trial before the Sanhedrim, this is the one question that Jesus answers. It is the only question on which his own testimony is important, and absolutely necessary. Left to the testimony of others, and of his own life, this essential thing, which is the key to the whole situation, would be subject to the ridicule with which Pilate treats it. In spite of all appearances to the contrary, he says, I am King. It is another and entirely different question, whether his kingship interfered with the State, and so made him amenable to its law. And just because that question would have to receive a negative answer, and so would seem to deny kingship in any accepted sense, he had to affirm that claim.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BCD Memph. 1, 127, 209, 258, read .

3. -And the chief priests brought many accusations against him. This was evidently because Pilate was not convinced by their statement that he claimed to be a king. Under the Roman system, the governor of a province was supposed to keep the central government informed of whatever was going on in his jurisdiction, and this system was so perfected that there would be little chance for a work like that of Jesus to go on without the cognizance of the Roman deputies. Pilates whole attitude shows that he understood the case, so that he was not alarmed by a charge, which in any other circumstances he could not have treated so cavalierly. Lk. tells us something about these charges.1 Of course, the principal one was his claim to be a king, the Messianic King, which Jesus admits. To this they added that he stirs up the people, and forbids to pay tribute to Csar. This is what is needed to give a treasonable character to the main charge. If these acts could be proved, they would be overt acts of treason. And the fact that Pilate pays so little attention to them, and does not treat Jesus silence in face of them as an evidence of guilt, proves conclusively that he understood the facts.

4. , () -asked him, (saying) how many charges they bring against you.

, instead of -, Tisch. Treg. WH. BU 13, 33, 69, 124, two mss. Lat. Vet. Harcl. marg. Omit , Tisch. (WH.) * 1, 209, one ms. Lat. Vet. Theb. , instead of , bear witness against, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BCD 1, Latt. Memph.

-no longer answered anything; viz. after the first question. Jesus silence is due to the fact that his life is a sufficient answer to these charges. The fact of his kingship would seem to men to be denied or rendered doubtful by the events of his life, and to that, therefore, he needed to testify. But as to these questions, involving the interference of his kingdom with the State the facts were enough. And Jesus knew, moreover, that Pilate was cognizant of these facts. As to stirring up the people, he had done just the opposite, he had repressed them, and one of the significant facts given to us in the Synoptists is his wise silence in regard to his Messianic claim, lest the people should be stirred up by false hopes. And as to forbidding the payment of tribute to Csar, he had, instead, commanded it. That is, he had used his authority to enforce that of the State, not to overthrow it. Pilates course throughout shows that he appreciated the situation, and that at no time in the trial did he consider the charges against Jesus of any weight whatever. -No wonder that Pilate wondered. It is one of the places where the heavenly way seems not only unaccountable to men, but also somehow admirable. The Sanhedrim, knowing that they were weak on the side of facts, added to these protestations and clamor, and wily personal appeal, intent only on carrying their point. Jesus, strong in his innocence, brings no pressure to bear, beyond that of simply the facts, which he allows to do all the talking for him. There is no doubt which method secures immediate ends in this world. Jesus says about the men who use the worldly way, Verily I say unto you, they have their reward. But neither is there any doubt which secures large ends, and wins in the long run. It is not only the truth, but the method of truth that prevails at last.1

6. -Now at the Feast he was in the habit of releasing. The AV. obscures everything here. This custom is quite probable, and is in line with what we know of Roman policy. It was a part of the Roman administration of conquered provinces, a policy of conciliation. But there is no mention of it elsewhere.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. marg. WH. RV. * AB*

7. -insurgents insurrection. These words tell the story of Barabbas. He was just what the Jews accused Jesus of being, a man who had raised a revolt against the Roman power. He was a political prisoner, and it was only such that the Jews would be interested to have released to them. Their interests and those of Rome were opposed, and a man who revolted against Rome was regarded as a patriot. The fact that they asked for Barabbas shows that they were insincere in bringing charges against Jesus.

, instead of , fellow-insurgents, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BCDK 1, 13, 69, Theb.

8. , -and the crowd, having come up, began to ask (him to do) as he was wont to do for them.

, instead of , having cried out, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BD, mss. Lat. Vet. Vulg. Egyptt. Omit , always, Tisch. WH. RV. B Egyptt.

9. -Do you wish me to release to you the king of the Jews? Pilate has been informed evidently by the chief priests, that it is the people themselves who have invested Jesus with this title, on his entry into Jerusalem. And he uses the term here, expecting their sympathy.1

10. -on account of envy. He knew that it was the popularity of Jesus with the multitudes that had aroused the jealousy of the rulers against him, and he hoped that he could make use of that now to secure his release.

11. , -but the chief priests stirred up the multitude, that he should rather release Barabbas to them. This was the first time in the life of Jesus that the people had turned against him. And while, of course, the fickleness of the crowd is always to be taken into account, there were other elements at work here, which made the people especially pliable. It was a case of regulars against an irregular, of priests against prophet, and popular preference is always evenly balanced between these. But the great thing was the cruel disappointment of the people after the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem. He had raised their hopes to the highest pitch then, only to dash them to the ground again by his subsequent inaction and powerlessness. It was no use for them to ask for the release of a king who had just abdicated.

12. , () () ;-said to them, What then shall I do (do you wish me to do) with him whom you call the king of the Jews? Or, What then do you tell me to do with the king of the Jews? The reading . . so evidently preserves to us an element of the situation, which a copyist would not think of, that it is to be retained. The fact that it was the people themselves who had invested Jesus with this title Pilate would be certain to use here, so that the evidently belongs to this transaction. But it is just the thing that a copyist would lose sight of, as out of harmony with the present hostile attitude of the people. It is because Pilate remembered this, that he still hoped that he might find in the people, if not a demand for the release of Jesus, at least some manifestation of indifference that would show him that the cry for his death was not a popular demand, and then he could afford to go against the rulers. He was evidently determined to yield to nothing except popular pressure, and that he hoped Jesus previous popularity might avert.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. BC Harcl. Omit , WH. RV. BCD 1, 13, 33, 69, Egyptt. Omit before , WH. B Omit , Treg. (Treg. marg.) AD 1, 13, 69, 118, Latt. Theb.

13. -Crucify him. An extreme probably to which they would not have gone except for the instigation of the priests. But having lost their confidence in Jesus, they were ready to follow their accustomed leaders.

14. ;-Why, what evil did he do?1 Pilate still hoped that by this unanswerable question he might confuse the people, and stop their clamor. -they cried vehemently. The previous statement is, they cried. Now, the cry becomes vehement. Pilates endeavor to check it only adds vehemence to it.

, instead of , more vehemently, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. ABCDGHKM

This verse defines exactly the state of the case. Pilate insists so far that the people shall give him some ground for proceeding against Jesus, and even hints that he does not think that there is any good reason for it. That is, up to this point, he acts as the judge. The people, on the other hand, confess judgment by their refusal to answer Pilates question, implying that they have no case. And they fall back on popular clamor, simply reiterating their demand that Jesus be put to death.

15. -wishing to satisfy the multitude. The AV., willing to content the people, is weak, especially in its translation of . 2-having scourged him. This was a part of the procedure in case of crucifixion, and whether its object was merciful or not, its effect was certainly to mitigate the slow torture of crucifixion, by hastening death.3

This statement of Pilates reason is again a reflection of the Roman policy in dealing with the provinces. As a matter of policy,-and this would be the Roman method of dealing with suchs a case,-there would be no reason against the crucifixion of Jesus, now that the people had joined hands with the rulers against him; whereas, the popular clamor would constitute a reason of state which Pilate, under the Roman policy, would be obliged to consider. Pilate, that is to say, lays aside judicial considerations, and deals with it as a matter of imperial policy. So, substantially, Mt. and Lk. According to J. the Jews returned to the political charge, and insisted on the treasonable nature of Jesus claim to be a king.1 The two accounts are inconsistent. According to one, the charges are given up. According to the other, while the attempt to prove them is given up, the political effect of them is insisted on, and it is this which turns the scale against Jesus.

JESUS MOCKED BY THE ROMAN SOLDIERS

16-21. Jesus is delivered up to the Roman soldiers for the execution of the sentence against him. They have learned the nature of the charge against him, and proceed to make sport of it. For this purpose they take him to the palace, and gather the whole cohort on duty in the city at the time. There they clothe him in mock purple, and put a crown made of the twigs of the thorn bush on his head, and pay him mock homage, saying Hail, King of the Jews. Then they put on him his own garments, and lead him out to the place of crucifixion. As Jesus has been exhausted by the scourging, they press into the service one Simon a Cyrenian, the father of Alexander and Rufus,-probably names that afterwards became familiar in the circle of disciples,-and make him carry the cross.

16. -the procurator. Properly, it is the title of the legatus Csaris, the governor of an imperial province. But in the N.T., it is used of the procurator, Grk. , , a subordinate officer of the province, who became practically the governor of the district of the larger province to which he was attached. Juda, being part of the province of Syria, Pilate was properly procurator, or , but the N.T. gives him the title , which belongs strictly to the governor of the whole province.1

-within the palace, which is the residence of the procurator during his stay in Jerusalem. The explanatory clause, which is the prtorium, i.e. the residence of the Roman governor, makes that meaning certain here.2 -this word is used exactly for the Roman cohort, or tenth part of a legion, numbering six hundred men. It accords with this, that , tribune, is used in the N.T. to denote the commander of the .

17. -they put on.3 -Mt. says -a scarlet cloak, and this is probably the more correct account, owing to the military use of the chlamys.4 represents the spirit of the act, to invest Jesus with the mock semblance of royalty: tells us what they used for the purpose. -made of the twigs of the thorn bush, not of the thorns themselves exclusively.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BCDF , 1,13, 69.

18. -to salute. This word, in itself, does not contain the idea of homage, but of greeting. It depends on circumstances what the greeting is. Here, they greeted him with a Hail, King of the Jews.

19. They varied their abuse, sometimes paying him mock homage, and sometimes marks of scorn and abuse. -they did him homage. They paid him mock homage as a king, not mock worship as a God.

20. -And when they had mocked him.5 () -his (own) garments.

, instead of , WH. RV. BC . , Tisch. (282, without ). , instead of -, Tisch. Treg. ACDLNP 33, 69, 245, 252 Omit , Tisch. D 122 ** two mss. Lat. Vet.

-they impress.6 -Cyrene is the city in the north of Africa, opposite Greece, on the Mediterranean. There was a numerous colony of Jews there, and the name Simon shows this man to have been a Jew. It adds nothing to our knowledge of him to call him the father of Alexander and Rufus, except to indicate that these were names known to the early church. It is the height of foolish conjecture to identify this Rufus with the one in Rom 16:13, and especially to take Pauls . as literal, and so make him the brother of Paul. The criminal carried his own cross to the place of execution, but in this case, Jesus was probably so weakened already by his sufferings, as to be unable to carry it himself.

THE CRUCIFIXION

21-41. Arrived at the place of crucifixion, called Golgotha, they gave Jesus wine flavored with myrrh to drink, which he refused. The wine was probably given as a stimulant in his exhausted condition. After the Roman custom, his garments were distributed by lot among the four executioners. The crucifixion took place at nine oclock in the morning. An inscription, The King of the Jews, was placed upon the cross as a statement of the charge against him. Two robbers were crucified with him, one on each side, and joined the crowd and the rulers in taunting him. The people wagged their heads derisively, and challenged him, who was going to destroy and rebuild the temple, to save himself. The rulers taunted him with his miracles, bidding him who had saved others to save himself, and to prove his Messianic claim by coming down from the cross. At twelve oclock, darkness fell over the land until three oclock, when Jesus cried, My God, why didst thou forsake me? The resemblance of the Heb. My God to Elijah led certain to think that he was calling upon Elijah, and one man, having filled a sponge with sour wine which he gave Jesus at the end of a reed, cried out, Let us see if Elijah comes to take him down. Jesus expired with a great cry, and the vail of the temple, which separates between the holy place and the holy of holies, was rent in twain. The centurion in charge of the crucifying party, seeing the portents accompanying his death, said, Truly this was a son of God. The account ends with a statement of the women at the cross.

22. -the place Golgotha. The Hebrew word means, a skull, not the place of a skull. The name probably comes from the shape of the place.

, instead of , Tisch. WH. () , Treg. , BC2 FLN , 13, 33, 69, 124, 127, 131, 346. , BFGKLMNSUV .

23. -And they gave him wine flavored with myrrh.

Omit , to drink, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BC* L , one ms. Lat. Vet. Memph.

-mingled with myrrh. Mt. says, with gall. Myrrh seems to have been used by Greek and Roman women to remove its intoxicating quality. But that could not have been its intention here. The common account seems to be that the myrrh was used as a stupefying drug, but no evidence for this appears. The wine was evidently used as a stimulant, and the myrrh adds to this effect, bracing and warming the system.1

24. , -And they crucify him, and divide.

, , instead of , having crucified him, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BL, mss. Lat. Vet. Egyptt. , instead of , divided, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. ABCDLPX

On the method of crucifixion, see B.D. The cross was generally just high enough to raise the feet above the ground. In this case it must have been higher. See v. 36. The victim was placed upon it before the cross was elevated, his hands and feet being fastened to it by nails, and his body being supported by a peg fastened into the wood between his legs. The dividing of the garments among the soldiers who acted as executioners was customary. J. 19:23, 24 tells the story of the lot differently. According to that, it was only the inner garment, the , over which they cast lots, instead of dividing it, as they did the other garments.

25. , -and it was the third hour, and they crucified him.2 -9 O clock. Mk. is the only one who gives this hour of the crucifixion.

26. -the inscription was inscribed. The prep. does not denote the position of this over his head, but its inscription on the tablet. The EV. conveys a wrong idea, not of the fact, but of the meaning of the words. -The king of the Jews. Verse 14 shows that Pilates verdict was that Jesus was innocent of any crime, and that he only yielded finally to the clamor of the people in sentencing him. But v. 2, 9, 12, 18 show that this claim to be king was the charge on which the authorities asked for sentence. It was, that is to say, a charge of treason.

27. -robbers, not thieves, AV. Men who plundered by violence, not by stealth.

28. Omit. The quotation is from Isa 53:12. Such quotations are not after Mk.s manner.

Omit v. 28, Tisch. WH. RV. (Treg.) ABC* and 3 DX, one ms. Lat. Vet. Theb.

29, 30. These taunts that follow have all the single point that now is the time to test all of Jesus pretensions, especially to supernatural power and aid, and that his powerlessness now at this supreme moment makes these pretensions absurd. ,1 , () , , -Ha, you that destroy the temple, and build it in three days,2 save yourself by coming down from the cross. The part. denotes the manner of . The populace seize on this claim, the only one that Jesus ever made of the same kind, and match its seeming pretentiousness against his powerlessness now.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. ABDgr. L, one mss. Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph.

31. -Likewise also the chief priests mocking to each other. RV. among themselves. The prep. denotes how the mocking was passed from one to another.

Omit , and, after , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. ABC*, LPX , one ms. Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph. Harcl.

These mocking priests and scribes were touching here upon what to all his contemporaries was the great mystery in the life of Jesus, but was really its crowning glory. The great obstacle in the way of human obedience to Divine law is the sacrifice which it involves, especially in a world where everything works the other way. And on the other hand, the value and importance of obedience are enhanced by this sacrifice. But our Lords sacrifice for righteousness sake is magnified again by the contrast stated here. His miracles were a standing proof of his power to save others and himself. But while he used that power in the behalf of others, when the crisis of his own fate came, he was apparently powerless. Evidently, there was no limitation of the power, and so, there must have been a restraint imposed upon himself. He not only would not compromise with evil, he would not resist evil by opposing force to force. The taunt of his enemies meant that here was the final test of his miraculous power, and the proof of its unreality. When that test came, it showed, as they thought, that God was not on his side, else how could his enemies triumph over him? Whereas, everything pointed the other way. His miracles were real, God was on his side, and yet neither he nor God would lift a hand to save him. And the evident reason was that he would not cheapen his righteousness by making it safe. If he lived the righteous life, but did not incur the risks of other men in such living, his righteousness would lose the power to produce righteousness in other men which he sought. And, instead of revealing and furthering Gods ways among men, it would obstruct them by introducing an alien principle at cross purposes with them. Gods way is to establish righteousness by the self-sacrifice of righteous men, and for the one unique and absolute saint to avoid that sacrifice would destroy the self propagating power of his righteousness.

32. . These titles were intended to bring out the contrast between his claims and his situation, and the certainty that if his claims were real, he would be saved from the incongruity and absurdity of that situation. A crucified Messiah, forsooth! Let us hear no more of it. If he is really the Messianic King, let him use his Messianic power, and deliver himself from his ridiculous position by coming down from the cross. He wants us to believe in him, and here is an easy way to bring that about. They could see the apparent absurdity of Jesus position, but not the foolishness of their idea that an act of power is going to change a Pharisee, a narrow-minded, formal, and hypocritical legalist, into a spiritual man, in sympathy with Christs principles and purposes. Here was the irreconcilable opposition; on the one hand, that power can create the Kingdom of God; and on the other, that power is absolutely powerless to do anything but hinder spiritual ends. -And those crucified with him reviled him. So Mt. Lk., however, 23:39-43, says that only one took part in this railing, while the other by his confession of Jesus on the cross performed the most notable act of faith of that generation.1

Insert before , Tisch. WH. BL.

33. , -And the sixth hour having come, darkness came. This darkness was not an eclipse, since it was full moon, but like the earthquake and the rending of the vail of the temple, a supernatural manifestation of the sympathy of nature with these events in the spiritual realm. All the Synoptists relate this darkness.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BDGLMS 1, 28, 33, 69, mss. Lat. Vet. Vulg. Memph. Pesh.

34. , , ;2-And at the ninth hour, Jesus cried with a loud voice, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? The historical meaning of is not to leave alone, but to leave helpless, denoting, not the withdrawal of God himself, but of his help, so that the Psalmist is delivered over into the hands of his enemies. So that, while it is possible to suppose that Jesus is uttering a cry over Gods withdrawal of himself, it is certainly unnecessary. Such a desertion, or even the momentary unconsciousness of the Divine presence on the part of Jesus, makes an insoluble mystery in the midst of what is otherwise profound, but not obscure. Interpreted in the spirit of the original, of the withholding of the Divine help, so that his enemies had their will of him, it falls in with the prayer in Gethsemane, remove this cup from me, and becomes a question, while the cup is at his lips, why it was not removed.

Omit , saying, before , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BDL, mss. Lat. Vet. Memph.

35. , -See, he is calling Elijah. is used here as an interjection, calling attention to what is going on. As Jesus used Aramaic, and as Elijah was unknown to them, this cannot have been the soldiers, but some of the bystanders. And the misunderstanding was impossible, if they heard anything more than merely the name, or even that in any but the most indistinct fashion. The prophetic association of Elijah with the day of the Lord would help this misunderstanding.1

36. , , , , , , etc.-And one ran, and filled a sponge with sour wine,2 which he put on a reed, and gave him drink, saying, Let be; etc. This is evidently a merciful act, and the indicates that there was some opposition to it offered or expected, which this supposed call upon Elijah gave the man a pretext for setting aside. He said virtually, Let me give him this, and so prolong his life, and then we shall get an opportunity to see whether Elijah comes to help him or not. As Mt. tells it,3 these are probably the words with which the bystanders try to restrain his gracious act. They say virtually, Dont interfere; let Elijah help him.

, instead of , the indef., instead of the numeral one, Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BL . Omit , and, before , WH. RV. BL, one ms. Lat. Vet. Memph. Omit after , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BDgr. L 33, 67, Memph.

37. 4-having sent forth, or uttered a great cry. The final cry of his agony, with which he expired.

38. -the vail, or curtain of the sanctuary. is the shrine of a temple, and in the Jewish temple, the Holy of Holies, in which was the Ark of the Covenant. The curtain was that which separated this from the Holy Place. The was the place where God manifested himself, into which the High Priest only had access once a year. The rending of the vail would signify therefore the removal of the separation between God and the people, and the access into his presence. It is narrated by all the Synoptists.

39. 5-centurion. -so expired. The only thing narrated by Mk. to which the can refer is the darkness over all the land. So Lk. Mt. adds to this an earthquake. The portent(s) accompanying the death of Jesus convinced the centurion that he was , not the Son of God, but a son of God, a hero after the heathen conception. Lk. says , a righteous man.

Omit after , Tisch. WH. BL Memph. It changes the statement from he expired with this cry to he so expired. The former would really give no reason for the centurions exclamation.

40. -the Magdalene, the same as we say, the Nazarene. It denotes an inhabitant of Magdala, a town on the W. shore of the Lake of Galilee, three miles north of Tiberias. The only identification of her given in the Gospels is in Luk 8:2, where she is said to be one out of whom Jesus had cast seven devils. There is absolutely no support for the tradition that she was the sinful woman who anointed the feet of Jesus (Luk 7:36 sq.). . -Mary, the mother of James the little, and of Joses. In the list of the apostles, James is called the son of Alphus, while in J. 19:25, the name of one of the women standing by the cross is given as Mary, the wife of Clopas. These coincidences have led to the conjecture that Alphus and Clopas are identical, both being Greek forms of the Aramaic , and that, therefore, this Mary was the mother of the second James in the list of the apostles. The further conjecture that she was the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, is based on the unnecessary supposition that in J. 19:25, is in apposition with . It involves the further difficulty of two sisters of the same name. It is connected, moreover, with the theory that the brothers of Jesus were cousins, the sons of this Mary, and apostles. This theory has against it, the fact that it is in the interest of the dogma of the perpetual virginity of Mary, the mother of Jesus. It also makes the brothers of Jesus apostles, which is clearly against the record.1 -the mother of James and John. This is not directly stated, but it is inferred from a comparison of Mat 27:56 with this passage. A further comparison with J. 19:25 has led to the conjecture that she is the sister of the mother of Jesus mentioned there. This might account for Jesus commending his mother to John, but it is conjecture only, and will remain so. James is called , the little, to distinguish him from the other celebrities of the name. But whether it designates him as less in stature, or in age, or of less importance, there are no data for determining.

Omit after , Tisch. (Treg.) WH. RV. BL, mss. Vulg. Omit before , Tisch. Treg. WH. BCKU * 1, 11. , instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. BDgr. L 13, 33, 69, 346, two mss. Lat. Vet. Memph.

41. , , -who, when he was in Galilee, followed him. These three had been associated with Jesus in his Galilean ministry, and the , ministered, shows that they had been the women who attended to his wants, the women of the family-group surrounding him. Besides these, there were others who had attached themselves to him in the same way, when he came up to Jerusalem.

Omit after , Tisch. (Treg.) WH. RV. B 33, 131, mss. Lat. Vet. Memph. Pesh.

THE BURIAL OF JESUS

42-47. Jesus died at about three in the afternoon, and as the Sabbath began with the sunset, it was necessary that whatever was done about his burial be accomplished before that time. So Joseph of Arimathea, who is represented in this Gospel, not as a disciple, but as somehow in sympathy with him, summoned up courage to go to Pilate, and beg the body of Jesus. Pilate wondered at the short time which it had taken the usually slow torture of crucifixion to do its work, and asked the centurion if he had been dead any length of time. Having got this information, he gave the body to Joseph. He removed the body from the cross, wrapped it in linen, and placed it in a sepulchre hewn out of the rock. As the women were intending to embalm the body after the Sabbath, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses saw where it was laid.

42. -since it was preparation day (for the Sabbath). This gives the reason why Joseph took this step at this time. The removal of the body would have been unlawful on the Sabbath. 1-which is the day before the Sabbath. We are told by Josephus that this preparation for the Sabbath began on the ninth hour of the sixth day. It is not mentioned in the O.T.

43. -Joseph of Arimathea, having come. Arimathea, the Heb. Ramah, was the name of several places in Palestine. Probably, this was the one mentioned in the O.T. as the birthplace of Samuel in Mt. Ephraim.2 Mt. tells us about this Joseph that he was rich, and a disciple of Jesus. Lk., that he was a righteous man, and not implicated in the plot of the Jews against Jesus, and that he was expecting the kingdom of God. J., that he was a secret disciple. 3 -an honorable member of the council (Sanhedrim). -having gathered courage. Having laid aside the fear of the odium which would attach to his act. -This language is inconsistent with the supposition that this account regards him as a disciple of Jesus. It evidently means that he was in sympathy with the disciples in this element of their faith. He was not a follower of Jesus, but in common with him he was awaiting the kingdom of God, and wished to do honor to one who had suffered in its behalf.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. ABCKLMU , Memph. Insert before , Tisch. Treg. WH. BL 33. , instead of , Tisch. WH. AB* D.

44. (-) () -And Pilate was wondering (wondered) if he is already dead, and asked him if it is any while since he died. Generally, death was more lingering, the great cruelty of crucifixion being in its slow torture. The question which Pilate asked of the centurion who had charge of the execution was intended to remove the doubt by showing that sufficient time had elapsed to establish the fact of Jesus death.

, instead of , same authorities as in v. 43. , instead of -, Tisch. D mss. Lat. Vet. Vulg. The impf. is more in Mk.s manner, the aor. more common. , instead of , Treg. WH. RV.marg. BD Memph. Hier. is the more difficult reading to account for, if not in the original.

45. , 1 -And having found out from the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph. The information that he obtained from the centurion was the official confirmation of Jesus death, necessary before the body could be taken down.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BDL.

46. , , , -And having bought a linen cloth, he took him down, wrapped him in the linen cloth, and put him in a tomb. There was no time before the Sabbath for any further preparation of the body for burial.2 J., however, says that he was embalmed at this time.3 The synoptical account is evidently correct.

Omit before , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. BDL Memph. , instead of , Treg. WH. RV. BC2 DL. , instead of , Tisch. WH. B.

47. -And Mary (the) Magdalene, and Mary the mother of Joses, were observing where he was laid. Beheld, EV., is inadequate to translate the verb here, as it leaves out the idea of purpose. It is evident that they constituted themselves a party of observation.

, instead of , Tisch. Treg. WH. RV. c ABCDL 33, 69, 131, 229, 238.

1 See Holtzmann.

2 See Edersheim, Life of Jesus, 2Ch 13:3.

3 Luk 22:66-71.

AV. Authorised Version.

RV. Revised Version.

4 Luk 3:1.

Tisch. Tischendorf.

Treg. Tregelles.

WH. Westcott and Hort.

Codex Sinaiticus.

B Codex Vaticanus.

C Codex Bezae.

D Codex Ephraemi.

L Codex Regius.

Lat. Vet. Vetus Latina.

Egyptt. Egyptian Versions.

marg. Revided Version marg.

5 See Thayer, Art. in Journal Bib. Lit. 1894.

Memph. Memphitic.

1 .Codex Basiliensis

209 An unnamed, valuable manuscript.

1 Luk 23:5.

U Codex Nanianus.

13 Codex Regius.

33 Codex Regius.

69 Codex Leicestrensis.

Harcl. Harclean.

Theb. Thebaic.

Latt. Latin Versions.

1 Cf. Isa 53:7.

A Codex Alexandrinus.

K Codex Cyprius.

Vulg. Vulgate.

Codex Sangallensis

1 So Weiss.

1 On this use of in questions, see Win. 53, 8 c). The answer to the question in such cases is causal with reference to what precedes, here with reference to .

G Codex Wolfi A.

H Codex Wolfi B.

M Codex Campianus.

Codex Petropolitianus

2 The Lat. verb flagellare. The Grk. verb is .

3 Edersheim, Life of Jesus, p. 579.

1 J. 19:12-16.

1 See Thay.-Grm. Lex., B.D. Procurator.

2 On this use of , see Thay.-Grm. Lex.

3 A biblical word.

4 Mat 27:28.

F Codex Borelli.

5 See Burton, 48, 52. This seems to belong to the cases in which B. considers the plup. necessary to the Grk. idiom. The earlier event is necessarily thought of as completed at the time of the subsequent event. Goodwin, Gr. Moods and Tenses, says that the aor. is used, instead of the plup., after particles of time.

N Codex Purpureus.

P Codex Guelpherbytanus.

6 A Persian word, meaning to press into the service of the royal couriers, . See Mat 5:41.

346 Codex Ambrosianus.

S Codex Vaticanus.

V Codex Mosquensis.

Codex Tischendorfianus

1 See Art. Myrrh, Encyclopdia Brit.

2 Meyer cites passages from Xen. and Thuc. to show that it was not uncommon to join a statement of time with the statement of what took place at the time by . But in all the passages which he cites, both the time and the event are additional matter, and may easily be connected in this way, the statement being the same as, when the time came, the event happened. But in this case, the time only is additional matter, the event, the crucifixion, being just mentioned in v. 24, so that this is the same as, it was three ocl. when they crucified him. And for this, the independent statements connected by are not an idiomatic expression.

1 An onomatopoetic word belonging to Biblical Greek, and not found elsewhere in the N.T.

2 See 14:58.

1 Notice how exactly the language of v. 29-32 corresponds to Mat 27:39-42, Mat 27:44.

28 Codex Regius.

Pesh. Peshito.

2 These words are from Psa 22:1. is the Syriac form for the Heb. , , which is the form given by Mat 27:46. is the Chaldaic form for the Heb. azabtani. Mk. reproduces the language of Jesus, which translates the Heb. into the current language. The Grk. , , () ; is from the Sept.

1 See Mal 4:5.

2 The translation vinegar, EV., is incorrect, as it denotes the wine after it has passed the acetous fermentation; but this is simply the ordinary sour wine of the country, which would be procured probably from the soldiers.

3 Mat 27:48, Mat 27:49.

4 Lat. emittere vocem.

5 is the Latin name of the officer in charge of the execution. Mt. and Lk. give the Greek name . The centurion commanded a maniple, or century, sixty of which made up the legion.

1 For statements of the two sides of this question, see B.D. Art. James and Brother

1 A Biblical word, found in the N.T. only here.

2 1 S. 1:1, 19.

3 means primarily elegant in appearance.

Hier. Jerusalem Lectionary.

1 For this word, see on 6:29.

2 See 16:1.

3 J. 19:39, 40.

Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament

the Choice of the Multitude

Mar 15:1-21

The hurried consultation of the evening was followed by the more formal meeting of the early morning; and even the decision made then had no binding force till ratified by Pilate, the Roman governor, who happened at that time to be in Jerusalem. John gives a more detailed account of this memorable interview, Joh 18:33-38. Our Lord did not plead His own cause but committed Himself to the One who judges righteously, 1Pe 2:23. It was only when Pilate asked questions for his own guidance that Jesus sought to help him and then He relapsed into silence. Like a sheep dumb before her shearers, so He opened not His mouth. Men like Barabbas, embodiments of brute force, are ever the darlings of the crowd. By narrowing the peoples choice to the murderer and Jesus, Pilate expected to bring them to demand the release of the lover and helper of men. But he failed to gauge the malice of which men are capable. Perhaps he hoped that the marks of extreme suffering would soften their hatred. As well appeal to a pack of hungry wolves! His purple stood for royalty won by blood; thorns, because His diadem was won by suffering; the reed, because he can wield the frailest life to momentous issues. Happy is the man who shares Christs cross! Simon was an African, probably colored, and this incident changed his life, Rom 16:13.

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

Pilates Court (Mar 15:1-15)

We come now to the great crisis that had been in the mind of our Lord from the beginning of His sojourn here on earth. This crisis had in fact brought Him from the glory that was His with the Father before all worlds began, into this world where sin defiled the fair creation.

Details given in the other Gospels are omitted in Marks account. The scene moves rapidly from the council of the Jewish leaders to Pilates judgment hall and then to the cross. There is no mention of the court of Herod, nor of other matters on which the Spirit of God led the other writers to elaborate.

Early in the morning the high priest summoned the Sanhedrin together and with their endorsement bound Jesus as though He were a dangerous criminal. As soon as Pilate was prepared to hold court they delivered Him up to be judged according to Roman law and executed as an insurrectionist. They knew that the trumped-up charge of blasphemy would mean nothing to the procurator who was acting as representative of the imperial government.

Crafty, self-seeking, and relentlessly cruel, Pilate was a scheming politician who regarded the rights of no man if to maintain them might prove an embarrassment to himself. He was thoroughly convinced of both the innocence of Jesus and the enmity behind the accusation brought by the leaders in Israel. But he quailed before the threat embodied in the words, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesars friend (Joh 19:12). Fearing that his political enemies might misrepresent him before the emperor, Pilate chose to sacrifice the Lord Jesus in order to retain the favor of Rome. (In Pilates eyes Jesus was an unimportant Galilean artisan turned teacher.) Consequently his name has gone down in infamy throughout the centuries, his dishonor embodied in the words of the creed: Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate.

The leaders accused Jesus of proclaiming Himself the rightful King of the Jews and gathering a group of malcontents with the intention of delivering Israel from the Roman yoke. Pilate put the question directly to the prisoner, Art thou the King of the Jews? Jesus replied, Thou sayest it-that is, You have said that which is indeed the truth. For He surely was King of the Jews, though the time had not yet come to claim the throne of David. Vehemently the chief priests shouted out one accusation after another against Jesus, to which He made no reply.

Marveling at the calmness of the lowly man who stood so meekly before him, Pilate asked Him, Answerest thou nothing? Then he added, Behold how many things they witness against thee. But Jesus, as the prophet Isaiah had foretold, opened not his mouth (Isa 53:7).

Pilate was perplexed. He saw through the priests and scribes pretended concern for the honor of the empire. He realized that they were moved by a spirit of envy against this man who had captivated the imagination of so many. There can be no doubt that Pilate had heard much of the sayings and miracles of Jesus, for his agents were everywhere. He knew well why the leaders in Israel hated the Nazarene.

Pilate considered how he might release Jesus without angering these haughty ecclesiastics. He recalled that some time before, Rome had authorized him to release one political prisoner at the Passover season in order to placate the Jews, leaving the choice to them. He thought of an actual insurrectionist who was once followed by many, but who was now awaiting execution, and Pilate decided to offer the people the choice of this malefactor or Jesus.

The name Barabbas means son of the father. Some ancient manuscripts call him Jesus Barabbas. He was well-known as a leader in a revolt against the Roman rule over Palestine and had participated in an insurrection in which he had been guilty of murder. Evidently he was a hero in the eyes of the rabble, for they at once began to cry out, begging Pilate that he would follow the custom referred to above and give them their choice of a prisoner to be released.

Pilate agreed to this, but hoped it would free him from any further responsibility concerning Jesus. So he inquired, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? The title was used by him sardonically, as though he recognized in Jesus a rebel against Rome, for in his heart he knew the real reason back of their hatred for Jesus.

The chief priests moved the people, who were easily swayed in such a scene of excitement, and stirred them to ask for Barabbas, which they did. The choice that was made that day between Jesus and Barabbas is also the choice that the nations have been making all down through the centuries. Thus Barabbas became, as it were, a figure of the antichrist.

What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? Pilate vainly endeavored to forego all responsibility in the matter. He put the question of Jesus fate to them in such a way as to make them feel that the final decision was their own.

They cried out again, Crucify him. These base religious leaders demanded a cruel death for Him who had so often rebuked them for their hypocrisy.

The Roman judge knew Jesus had broken no law of the empire and therefore did not deserve to die. But Pilate was too much afraid of the Jews to take a positive stand against them. The rabble, stirred up by the priests, demanded the crucifixion of the One against whom no evil could be proved.

Pilate should have maintained the right of the innocent but he was more concerned about conciliating the Jews than protecting Christ. So he who had a little while before declared Him a just person (Mat 27:24) sentenced Him to die by crucifixion. If Pilate had been a conscientious judge, he would have refused to countenance the unproved charges of Christs adversaries and set Him free. But God overruled and used him as the instrument to fulfill the prophecy regarding the manner of Christs death.

The Soldiers Cruelty (Mar 15:16-24)

After Pilates pusillanimous behavior in giving in to the chief priests and condemning Jesus, the Lord was led from the judgment hall to the outer court called the Praetorium. There the soldiers subjected the patient sufferer to a season of rude mockery and torture.

They had heard the charge that Jesus claimed to be a king; so with fiendish glee they pretended to acknowledge Him as such, clothing Him with a purple robe as a sign of apparent recognition of His royalty. They pressed on His sacred brow a crown made of the wild thorn bush so common to the countryside. Bowing before Him in mock humiliation they saluted Him: Hail, King of the Jews! To these rude soldiers this was all an absurd jest. In spite of all the barbarities they heaped on Jesus, they were not half as guilty as those of His own people who had demanded His crucifixion.

After satisfying their sadistic desire for pleasure the soldiers divested Jesus of the robe and put His own garments on Him. They proceeded to lead Him out to the place of crucifixion. A heavy cross was placed on His shoulders that He might bear it to Calvary, or Golgotha. Tradition says He fell beneath the weight of it, but there is no such statement in Scripture. We are told only that a Cyrenian named Simon, here designated as the father of Alexander and Rufus, was conscripted to bear the cross and thus relieve the condemned One. The early Christians said that this Cyrenian and his sons all became loyal followers of Jesus in later days. Some identify one of the sons with the Rufus mentioned in Rom 16:13.

The place of a skull. Many believe that this refers to the skull-shaped hill outside Jerusalem, near the Damascus gate. This hill is known as Gordons Calvary. Others understand the words to refer simply to the place of execution. Golgotha, Calvary, the place of a skull-what sacred memories cluster around these words! Before our Lord was crucified they meant nothing to anyone except that they designated a place outside the walls of Jerusalem where criminals-offenders against the laws of mighty Rome-were executed. But for more than nineteen centuries since the Son of man was lifted up, the name Calvary, or its equivalent in other tongues, has stirred the hearts of millions. That name has become the symbol of a love that was stronger than death, a love that the many waters of judgment could not quench.

The soldiers offered the Lord Jesus a drink, but He would not partake of the wine mixed with myrrh. This stupefying draught was prepared in order to assuage the suffering of those dying by crucifixion. He would not accept anything that might hinder His entering fully into all that the cross involved.

They parted his garments, casting lots upon them. In this activity the soldiers were fulfilling unknowingly the prophecy of David, uttered over a thousand years before and recorded in Psa 22:18. A criminals garments were recognized as part of the perquisites of the soldiers officiating at a crucifixion.

From the moment when He came forth from the Father to the stable of Bethlehem, the cross was ever before our blessed Lord. He became man in order that He might be the propitiation for our sins (1Jn 2:2). One of our hymn writers said it well:

His path, uncheered by earthly smiles,

Led only to the cross.

At Calvary the sin question was settled for eternity when He, the sinless One, was made sin-that is, became a sin offering-that we might be made the righteousness of God in him (2Co 5:21).

The Crucifixion (Mar 15:25-39)

Christ was crucified at the third hour, counting according to Roman time from sunrise, which we call six oclock.

His accusation THE KING OF THE JEWS. It was customary to fasten placards above the heads of those crucified to indicate the nature of their offense. Pilate ironically designated Jesus the King of the Jews, assigning Him the crime of rebellion against the Roman authority.

The two thieves who were crucified with Christ were actually guilty of crimes against the law of the land. Seven centuries before Isaiah had written of Christ, He was numbered with the transgressors (Isa 53:12). Now his words were fulfilled literally. The Gospel of Mark records neither the conversation of the crucified men nor the confession of the one who cried to Jesus for deliverance (see Luk 23:39-43).

They that passed by railed on him. With no pity for His grief and agony, the jeering mob distorted His words and flung them in His face. They taunted Him and called on Him to demonstrate His power by descending from the cross if He were indeed the anointed of God. They did not realize that it was their sins that held Him on that tree, not the nails that were driven through His hands and feet.

He saved others; himself he cannot save. The chief priests uttered these words in mockery but they were declaring a tremendous fact. If He would save others He could not save Himself.

Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. In cruel irony they addressed Him by the very titles that were His by right, but He did not respond. To descend from the cross would have meant the eternal doom of all our fallen race.

We note with awe and reverence that for six dreadful hours the Son of God hung on that cross of shame. These six hours are divided very definitely into two parts. From the third to the sixth hour-that is, from what we would call nine oclock in the morning till noon- the sun was shining, and all could see what was transpiring. During those three hours Jesus Christ was suffering at the hands of man. For all their malignancy men have to be judged unless repentance lead them to turn for salvation to the One they crucified (Act 2:23; Psa 69:20-28). Yet it was not what men inflicted upon Him that put away sin (Heb 9:26).

From the sixth to the ninth hour darkness spread over all the scene. No human eye could pierce that gloom. It was then that Messiahs soul was made an offering for sin. As that supernatural darkness covered the scene, a terrible sense of horror must have struck the souls of the ribald multitude. It was in those three hours that the cup of judgment was pressed to the Saviors lips and drained to the dregs, that we might drink of the cup of salvation (Psa 116:13).

Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? The words are Aramaic and are found in Psa 22:1-My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Elizabeth Barrett Browning called these words immanuels orphaned cry. They tell us, as nothing else could, of the awful abandonment of soul into which the Lord Jesus Christ went when He became the great sin bearer. It was then that God, the righteous Judge, dealt with Christ as the surety standing in the sinners stead. Impenitent sinners will yet have to experience this abandonment.

Behold, he calleth Elias. These were the words of one who did not understand the Aramaic and thought the cry Eloi was addressed to the prophet Elijah.

As the darkness passed away Jesus recalled one prophecy yet unfulfilled (Psa 69:21) and He cried, I thirst (Joh 19:28-29). In answer to His cry a sponge filled with vinegar was pressed to His parched lips (Mar 15:36). The Lord Jesus Christ refused the cup of myrrh and wine, but drank of the vinegar. The first was calculated to bring about insensibility. He would not permit this. The other spoke of the sourness and bitterness of mans attitude toward Him. He accepted this without a murmur.

Jesus cried with a loud voice. He did not die from exhaustion. He dismissed His spirit when all was accomplished (Mat 27:50).

Gods hand tore the temple veil in two, signifying that the way into the holiest had now been opened up (Heb 10:19-20). God need no longer dwell in the thick darkness (2Ch 6:1). He could come out in the light, and man could go in to Him because of the cleansing blood of Christ (1Jn 1:7).

Truly this man was the Son of God. Convinced by what he saw and heard, the Roman centurion in charge of the crucifixion declared his personal faith in the supernaturalness of the holy sufferer who had just died on that cross.

The crucifixion of our Lord Jesus was far more than a martyrdom for truth; though it was that too (Joh 18:37). The cross was the display of Gods hatred against sin and His infinite love for lost mankind. We should never think of Calvary as though it simply involved an innocent man dying for guilty men. It was God giving Himself in the person of His Son to bear the judgment that His righteous law declared to be the penalty of sin. There the Offended died to set the offender free. Because of what Christ endured there, expiation has been made for iniquity and now God can be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus (Rom 3:26). God grant that our hearts may ever be tender and that our spirits may be deeply moved as we consider anew the Saviors death on Calvary.

The Burial (Mar 15:40-47)

There is something tenderly pathetic about the little company of faithful women to whom the Lord Jesus Christ was precious. Bewildered and perplexed as they must have been, they stood at some distance, beholding the One whom they had believed to be the Messiah of Israel, Gods anointed King, dying on a cross of shame.

Mark mentioned two women by the name of Mary: Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and of Joses-that is, of James and Jude, two of the apostles. He did not mention Mary the mother of our Lord. We know, however, from Johns account that she stood by the cross until her dying Son commended her to the care of the beloved apostle John.

Salome and some others had come from Galilee to be near Him and hear His gracious messages. What must have been the thoughts of their hearts when they beheld Him apparently powerless in the hand of His enemies! Did they remember what His apostles had forgotten: that He had promised He would rise again the third day? Apparently not, for we find afterward that His resurrection was as great a wonder to these women as it was to any of His other friends.

Isaiah wrote seven hundred years before the crucifixion that Jesus would be with the rich in His death (Isa 53:9). And so when our Lord had given up His life, Joseph of Arimathaea, a member of the high council of Israel, came boldly to Pilate and asked for the body of the crucified Savior. Joseph was a disciple in secret and waited for the kingdom of God, but now he came out into the open identifying himself with the rejected Christ.

Those who were put to death by crucifixion often lingered not only for many hours but even for days on their crosses before death brought relief from their sufferings. So Pilate could hardly believe that Jesus was already dead. He called the centurion who had been in charge of the execution and inquired of him whether Jesus was actually dead. When Pilate was assured that it was indeed true he commanded that the body should be entrusted to Joseph, who reverently and tenderly took the body down from the cross. In accordance with the Jewish burial customs he wrapped the precious form in the fine linen he had bought. He laid the body in his own new tomb, a sepulcher that was hewn out of a rock close by the place of crucifixion. After rolling a great stone across the entrance of the sepulcher, Joseph went his way.

Mary Magdalene and the other Mary stood at some distance looking on, observing where Jesus was laid. It was their thought to come back to the tomb as soon as the sabbath was passed and properly embalm the body that had been so hastily placed in the sepulcher. But this was not to be, for God was about to manifest His power and express His approval of the work of His beloved Son by raising Him in triumph from the tomb.

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

Mar 15:21

How little these people knew that they were making this man immortal. What a strange fate that is which has befallen those persons in the Gospel narratives, who, for an instant, come into contact with Jesus Christ. Like ships passing athwart the white ghostlike splendour of the moonlight on the sea; they gleam silvery pure for a moment, as they cross its broad belt, and then are swallowed up again in the darkness.

Consider some of the lessons that arise from this incident:-

I. The greatness of trifles. If that man had started from the little village where he lived five minutes earlier or later, if he had walked a little faster or slower, if he had happened to be lodging on the other side of Jerusalem, or if the whim had taken him to go in at another gate-then all his life would have been different.

II. Note, further, the blessedness and honour of helping Jesus Christ. Though changed in form very truly and really, in substance this blessedness and honour of helping Jesus Christ is given to us; and is demanded from us, too, if we are His disciples. He is despised and set at nought still, He is crucified afresh still. Let us go forth unto Him without the camp bearing His reproach-the tail end of the Cross. It is the lightest. He has borne the heaviest end on His own shoulders; but we have to ally ourselves with that suffering and despised Christ, if we are to be His disciples.

III. Another lesson which may be drawn from this story is, that of the perpetual recompense and record of the humblest Christian work. Surely the most blessed share in that day’s tragedy was reserved for Simon, whose bearing of the Cross may have been compulsory at first, but became, ere it was ended, willing service. But whatever were the degrees of recognition of Christ’s character, and of sympathy with the meaning of His sufferings, yet the smallest and most transient impulse of loving gratitude that went out towards Him was rewarded then, and is rewarded for ever, by blessed results in the heart that feels it.

A. Maclaren, A Year’s Ministry, 2nd series, p. 45.

Bearing the Cross.

Cross-bearing means now a spiritual action. The only cross in prospect now is a cross for the soul. Such a spiritualisation of the word “cross” began in the teaching of Jesus Christ. In several instances, He said, in various ways, “If a man become My disciple, let him take up his cross and follow Me.”

I. Carrying a cross after Christ means, for one thing, enduring suffering for Christ. “Cross” was the name once given to the most fearful engine of agony for the body; and the words “cross,” “crucial,” “excruciate,” and similar words, have come into our language from that material cross; and they now point, in a general way, to what has now to be suffered, not in the body, but in the soul.

II. To carry a cross for Christ means: To have a great weight on the mind for Christ’s sake. To carry a cross for Christ means that this suffering and heavily weighted condition should be open, not secret; for the cross-bearer is seen.

III. It means: That the man who is willing to carry the cross for Christ is willing to suffer scorn for Christ. No one carried a cross in the old Roman days but one who was the very refuse of society. To be willing to carry a cross for Christ means willingness to suffer ignominy, willingness to go forth without the camp, bearing His reproach.

IV. View the cross-bearing as something practical in distinction from something only emotional, and answer the question: Who is now willing to become a cross-bearer for Christ? There is much that is called religion that is only useless emotion, and that only belongs to a character that is not made of stuff stern enough to carry crosses. Christ said to the weeping daughters of Jerusalem, as they stood by the via dolorosa: “Weep not for Me, but weep for yourselves.”

V. In view of the principle that nothing is accepted by Christ but willingness, I ask: Who is willing this day to become a cross-bearer? Jesus Christ will not have you against your will: if you carry His Cross you must be willing.

VI. In view of the strength Christ gave for this, I ask, Who is willing? As your day your strength will be. Mark the footsteps that are on the road before you. Every cross-bearer found it so. So you will find it.

C. Stanford, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxviii., p. 282.

References: Mar 15:21.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxi., No. 1853; Homiletic Magazine, vol. viii., p. 73.

Mar 15:23

Christ refusing any Alleviation of His Sufferings.

Standing before the scene these words picture, I would ask, devoutly and earnestly: What does it mean? What light does it shed upon Christ? What help does it render us in life? I think it illustrates:-

I. The source of the moral majesty of the Son of Man. In this brief occurrence I read at once the greatness, and the origin, of that majestic character which raises Jesus so immeasurably above all others of the sons of men. He refused to receive a balm for His agony; in that He exhibited a moral strength utterly unparalleled, and in that very refusal we learn from whence His strength came. He received not His strength from man, and from the relief man offered Him He turned away; He received His might from God, and the secret of that might lay in perfect submission to His will.

II. What was the meaning of the consummation of Christ’s sufferings? It has been truly remarked that He drank the last drop of His cup of agony by refusing that which would alleviate its final pangs. We have said that He did not do that for the mere sake of enduring, but in surrender to the will of Heaven. The question comes, What means that will? Christ died, not to reconcile God, nor yet to compensate for so much evil; but to restore the loving spirit of man to the eternal Father. For that restoration two things were requisite; man must learn the majesty of God’s law; and he must be drawn by love to the Divine One. Both these receive glorious illustration from the words before us.

III. We learn, too, from this history, the clearness of Christ’s vision of death. He resolved to die with His mental vision clear and calm. In full self-possession He went to face death’s horror. There is a deep significance in this, in relation to the manner in which Christ conquered death for every man.

IV. The duty of Christ’s disciples. When suffering meets us in the path of obedience, we must not shrink back from its approach; but, trusting in Christ’s strength, calmly, resolutely, fearlessly face it.

E. L. Hull, Sermons, 2nd series, p. 213.

References: Mar 15:23.-Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 233. Mar 15:23-32.-H. M. Luckock, Footprints of the Son of Man, p. 366.

Mar 15:24-41

What took place around the Cross of Christ.

I. Notice what men did during the crucifixion of Christ. (1) The soldiers. They are careless and confident. They cast lots for the clothes of the Lord. Their thoughts are all for this world. So many among ourselves know well the Lord’s mantle, and have it in their hands-namely, His Word and Sacraments, the means of salvation which the Church offers. But the use they make of it is thoughtless and careless. (2) The crowd of Jews. They pass by mocking and shaking their heads; some from malice, others from ignorance and a darkened mind. Many pass the Cross merely as spectators- as if it were possible for any of us to be no more than a spectator of it. We shake our heads doubtfully, we understand the Lord’s words imperfectly or wrongly, and then we complain that they are foolishness. (3) The little group of friends. They stood afar off, beholding-partly from fear of the Jews-partly from fear of the heartrending sorrow of a near approach. So with us. But the nearer to the Cross the richer the blessing. This is well illustrated in the case of the penitent thief.

II. Notice what God did during the crucifixion of Christ. (1) He darkened the sun and made an earthquake. Such phenomena occur also when the Crucified comes near to our spirits, if only we could see them. The life of the senses-formerly so joyous-now loses its charm. We guess then what powers of darkness have been carrying on their work in us. We feel that the decisive hour has come, when light or darkness must win the day. The pillars of our being shake; we feel something beforehand of the day of judgment. (2) The veil of the Temple was rent in twain. On that day heaven and earth were rolled up like worn-out garments, and a new creation began. The way into the holiest of all was opened in the hour that Jesus died. (3) The graves were opened. Thus God showed that the new creation was to be that creation of resurrection and of life for which all saints in the former dispensation had waited. In the hour when Christ comes to us we have this witness also. We feel the dawn of a new day arise, a new life of love and of knowledge. This feeling may pass away, but yet it is like the first coming of spring to our souls; we see the dawn of own resurrection day appear.

R. Rothe, Nachgelassene Predigten, vol. ii., p. 81.

Mar 15:31

In this text a truth is spoken, but it is a truth which the speakers do not know. By this word the railers meant to mock the pretensions of Jesus; by it the Spirit in the Scriptures declares the glory of God in the Gospel of His Son. Like Balaam, these false prophets intended to curse, but their lips were overruled, and framed to express the distinguishing feature of redemption.

I. What the Jewish leaders understood and intended to say is obvious at a glance. They see their Enemy at last in extremities. Now that they have compassed the object of their desire; now that they see Him ready to expire on the Cross, they cannot contain themselves. They must give vent to their exultation. They must triumph over their victory. “He saved others; Himself He cannot save.” When they see Him dying, they deem the sight a proof of His weakness. They think that if He had saved others, He would also have saved Himself; and they flourish the fact of His yielding to death as a proof that His miracles had been impostures.

II. This word may be read in two ways. The one is darkness, the other light. The one is a lie, the other is the truth; the truth on which the saving of the lost depends. The leaders read it thus: “We see He does not save Himself from death, and thence we infer that He has not power; and whatever appearances may be, He cannot have saved others.” The meaning which, under direction of the Spirit, the word of the Scriptures contains for us is, He saved others, as their covenant Substitute, and therefore He cannot also save Himself from the obligation which He undertook as Mediator. He saved others, and therefore Himself He cannot save. His life has been pledged for the life of His people forfeited; they have obtained their life eternal, and therefore His life, so pledged, cannot be saved. If He had saved Himself from humiliation and suffering, we could not have been saved. If the Son of God had treated the world when it fell as the priest and the Levite treated the man who fell among thieves; if He had looked on us and passed by on the other side-we should have all perished in our sins.

W. Arnot, The Anchor of the Soul, p. 229.

References: Mar 15:33.-J. Vaughan, Sermons, 1869, p. 172; B. F. Westcott, Expositor, 3rd series, vol. v., p. 457. Mar 15:33-38.-H. M. Luckock, Footprints of the Son of Man, p. 371. Mar 15:34.-Expositor, 1st series, vol. xii., p. 374.

Mar 15:37-38

Truths taught by the Rending of the Veil.

I. If you look into the account of the arrangements and furniture of the Jewish Temple, you will find that there were two veils: the one at the entrance into the holy place; the other between the holy place or the sanctuary, and the holy of holies. The second veil is always considered to have been that which was rent in twain at the death of our Lord; so that the first thing done through the rending was the throwing open that heretofore invisible and inaccessible place, the holy of holies. As the rent rocks and open graves proclaimed Christ victorious in death, so may the riven veil have declared that He had won for Himself an access into heavenly places, there to perpetuate the work which had been wrought out on Calvary.

II. And there are other intimations which may, perhaps, have been conveyed by the occurrence in question. It is possible, for example, that the abolition of the Mosaic economy was hereby figuratively taught. Christ had come to destroy the law, but only that He might substitute for it a better covenant.

III. The rent veil signifies that through Christ alone we have access to the Father, and that supplies of heavenly things may be expected to descend. The privilege of prayer, the privilege of intercourse with our heavenly Father, has been procured for us exclusively by Christ.

IV. Neither was it only the privilege of access to God while we yet dwell on the earth, which was set forth under the figure of the rent veil of the Temple. I read higher things; I see a title to a heavenly inheritance. It is like an opening in the firmament, through which the eye of faith may gaze on the diadem and the palm which are in store for the faithful. What was to occur after death and the resurrection? The rent veil gives the answer. As the opened graves published the great truth of the abolition of death, so did the riven veil publish that of our being begotten again to an “inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away.” The veil is rent to show that the Mediator hath made for Himself a passage into heaven, but in nothing does He act for Himself alone. We rose with Him; we ascended with Him; and therefore is the rending of the veil as much a pledge of our admission as of His, who by the efficiency of His sacrifice provided for our not only being sons of God, but joint-heirs with Himself.

H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 1,500.

The veil of the Temple was the curtain separating the holy place from the most holy; for Solomon’s Temple, as the Tabernacle of Moses before it, was divided into two several parts or rooms, both holy, but one holier than the other. The veil or curtain itself was made of blue, purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen of cunning work; it was adorned with images of cherubim, and was hung on four pillars, of some precious wood overlaid with gold.

I. What now is the veil, so drawn across as to separate the two kingdoms of God from one another, yet such as to give hope that it may be one day entirely withdrawn, and the two made altogether one? St. Paul tells us in one word that the veil is the blessed body of our Lord Jesus Christ. For, says the Apostle, He hath provided for us a new and living way through the veil, that is, His flesh. The miraculous rending of the veil at the moment of the death of the Son of God, was a token of the rending of our Lord’s blessed body, by the nails and spear, and of the violent parting of His soul and body for a while.

II. As the veil concealed from the eyes of the worshippers the most holy place made with hands, which was but a figure of the true, so the body of our Lord and Saviour was a kind of veil or shadow drawn over His most high Godhead, the open presence of which is that which makes heaven.

III. The veil being rent signifies pardon, through Christ’s sacrificed body, for sins past; but it also signifies communion with Him, through the same body in time to come. The flesh of Jesus, then, His glorified body, offered by Himself as High Priest, is a new and living way, through which believers, baptized persons, drawing near from time to time, may with reverent boldness enter into the holy places; they are invited, exhorted, encouraged, to do so. The mystery of the spiritual or Divine life of a Christian, taught us by the figure of the veil of the Temple, is this: that the only true happiness is partaking of the Divine Nature, as St. Peter calls it-communion with God in the person of His Son; that the way to this Divine communion is communicating with Him, being made members of Him, as man, the Man Christ Jesus; and this must be through His blessed body, and this again through His Holy Sacrament.

Plain Sermons by Contributors to “Tracts for the Times,” vol. viii., p. 76.

References: Mar 15:37, Mar 15:38.-J. Keble, Sermons for Holy Week, p. 139. Mar 15:38.-T. M. Herbert, Sketches of Sermons, p. 106. Mar 15:39-47.-H. M. Luckock, Footprints of the Son of Man, p. 376. Mk 15:42-0.-W. H. Jellie, Christian World Pulpit, vol. vi., p. 285; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. xx., p. 141.

Mar 15:43

The Sanhedrim of Jerusalem consisted of seventy members, of whom twenty-four were the heads of the Priesthood, twenty-four were heads of the tribes of Israel, representing the laity, and twenty-two were Scribes learned in the law. Joseph was no doubt one of the noble representatives of the people; and, as such shared, in the functions of government and was conversant with those sacred Scriptures which formed the basis of the Jewish commonwealth.

I. Arimathea is thought to have been situated on the fertile plain of Sharon, where probably Joseph’s property lay. He also possessed an estate in Jerusalem-possibly a house in the city-certainly a garden in the outskirts. Josephus tells that the Holy City was in those times thickly surrounded by groves and gardens; shady retreats in the heat from the crowded streets of the metropolis. Here, under the shades of trees and umbrageous shrubs, we may think of this honourable counsellor as refreshing his spirit in peaceful meditations by day and night, when his public duties permitted his repose. The garden was large enough to require a gardener, so we read in St. John; and in some retired portion of it, at the end, where the boundary rock rose from the soil, Joseph had excavated a new tomb for himself, in which he would lie down in his death-sleep, when the labours of life were ended. How little can he have dreamed that this tomb of his was to be consecrated by the descent of angels, and by the mighty power of God, in raising up, on the third day, the destroyed temple of the body of Him who should be God manifest in the flesh, who should make His life a sin-offering, yet prolong His days by a marvellous resurrection!

II. Joseph was an honourable counsellor, but we are told by St. John that he was only a secret disciple of Jesus till the hour of His death. Like Nicodemus, the other rich man, who began with a nocturnal visit to the Son of God, he grew bolder when the crisis arrived. Timidity is the common sin and weakness of rich men in the upper classes. It requires heroic resolution to go against the superstitution and fanaticism of the upper mob of souls, whose opinion in spiritual matters is seldom of greater value than that of the lower. “Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on Him?” was regarded as a decisive argument against Jesus Christ by the common people, although, as in this case, the vulgar considerations which determine upper-class opinion in religion, are as ignoble as any which can sway the violence of their inferiors. Let us, then, honour to the world’s end both Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus; their memories are as fragrant as the precious spices which they brought with fine linen for the entombment of their Lord. The courageous avowal of Truth in the hour of its crucifixion, deserves to be crowned along with Truth in the hour of its triumph.

E. White, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxx., p. 162.

References: Mar 15:43-46.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxx., No. 1789. Mar 15:46.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. xii., p. 140. Mar 16:1-6.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. vi., p. 217. Mar 16:1-8.-Ibid., vol. xii., p. 209; H. M. Luckock, Footprints of the Son of Man, p. 381.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

Chapter 15

1. Before Pilate. (Mar 15:1-5. Mat 27:1-14; Luk 23:1-4; Joh 18:28-38.)

2. Barabbas released and the Servant condemned. (Mar 15:6-15. Mat 27:15-26; Luk 23:16-25; Joh 18:39-40)

3. Crowned with thorns and mocked. (Mar 15:16-21. Mat 27:27-32; Luk 23:26-43; Joh 19:1-16)

4. Crucified. (Mar 15:22-32. Mat 27:33-44; Luk 23:26-43; Joh 19:17-27)

5. Obedient unto death, the death of the Cross. (Mar 15:33-41. Mat 27:45-56; Luk 23:44-49; Joh 19:28-37)

6. The Burial. (Mar 15:42-47. Mat 27:57-61; Luk 23:50-56; Joh 19:38-42.)

1. Before Pilate. Mar 15:1-5

The council had condemned Him to death and now the whole council delivered Him into the hands of the Gentiles. First the religious power had condemned the blessed Servant and the civil Power had to do the same. It will be seen that Marks account of our Lords trial before Pilate is the briefest, while Matthews is the longest. Again the Servant witnesses a good confession. But when accused by the chief priests His blessed lips were sealed. He stood there to witness and not to defend Himself. What a gracious example He gives to all His servants. The hatred of the religious leaders of the people is especially emphasized by Mark. For the complete exposition of this trial before Pilate see Exposition of Matthew.

2. Barabbas released; the Servant condemned to be crucified. Mar 15:6-15

The Story of Barabbas and his release is full of helpful instruction. So true it was that, even in this last scene, Jesus delivers others at His own cost and in every sense. He had just before delivered the disciples from being taken; He is now the means of delivering Barabbas, wicked as he was. He never saved Himself. It was the very perfection of the moral Glory of Christ to deliver, bless, save, and in all at the expense of Himself. (Gospel of Mark, W. Kelly) Barabbas was released, though guilty and condemned, because the Lord Jesus took his Place. Christ was his substitute. Barabbas released might have gone out and looked up to Him, who hung on the cross and said, He died for me; he paid my penalty. It is a blessed illustration of the atonement. They ask for the murderer Barabbas and demand the horrible death by crucifixion for Gods perfect Servant and their King. The chief priests had moved the people to make this fatal choice. See the interesting additions in Matthews Gospel on account of its Jewish-dispensational character.

3. Crowned with thorns and mocked. Mar 15:16-21

Oh! the heart piercing scenes of this section of our Gospel! They led Him away to heap the greatest indignities upon the Holy One. That is mans answer to that service of love and power He so unceasingly had rendered. After the cruel scourging they clothed Him with a purple robe in mockery. Matthew reports a scarlet cloak. This is not a discrepancy. A scarlet military robe was made to represent the imperial purple, hence the designation, a purple robe. And because this is the symbolic import of the robe, there is no discrepancy (Lange). The scarlet cloak was used to represent in mockery the imperial purple robe. The crown of thorns was made to inflict cruel pain upon His brow. Thorns came on account of mans sin; they are the signs of the curse. He took the curse upon His own head. Mark tells us most definitely who Simon the Cyrenian was, who was compelled to bear His cross, the father of Alexander and Rufus (see Rom 16:13). God did not forget this service; Simons sons became believers.

4. Crucified. Mar 15:22-32

It is interesting to note here that Mark speaks of bringing Him to Golgotha. The word translated bring really means bear (translated thus in Mar 2:3 and Luk 23:26). And they bear Him unto the place Golgotha. They had to hold Him up. The blessed Servant had spent His strength. What appearance He must have presented after all the scourging and cruel indignities! His face from the awful blows was marred. No wonder that His real human body was weak. But could He succumb? Never. No one could take His life. It could not be touched by man or Satan; death (the result of sin) had no claim on Him. He gave His life for a ransom. Mark also reports exclusively that the wine they offered Him was mingled with myrrh. This was considered an anodyne, to relieve and deaden the pain. The Servant who had come to spend all He had and to give Himself did not need it, but refused the concoction. Mark gives the hour of crucifixion as the third hour. In Johns Gospel (19:14) the sixth hour is mentioned when Pilate said, Behold your King. The critics triumphantly point to this as a discrepancy. But John gives the Roman way of reckoning the civil day and Mark adheres to the Jewish timekeeping.

The superscription on the cross is the briefest in Mark. He gives the substance of the accusation and not the full wording of it. The perfect Servant who had so fully glorified God and given Himself in all His service, hangs between the two thieves, who had robbed God and man. How true it was (though they knew it not), He saved others; Himself He cannot save. He did not save Himself for He came to die. He was obedient unto death.

5. Obedient unto death, the death of the Cross. Mar 15:33-41

What hours those were! What heart can penetrate its deep mysteries or fathom the depths of the sufferings of the Lamb of God, when He was obedient unto death, the death of the Cross! Nature bears witness to it by the supernatural darkness, for the One who created all things suffers for the creatures sin. And what a scene in Heaven, when Gods own hand rested upon that One! Worship, praise and adoration is here more in order than an attempt of explanation. He was forsaken of God; and then He paid our penalty and stood in our stead in the presence of a holy God. Never say He was forsaken by His Father. Read Joh 16:32. The Servants cry with a loud voice shows that no one took His life, but that He gave Himself. And there was the rent veil from top to bottom (rent by Gods own hand). Then came the utterance of the Centurion: a Gentile confessing Him as Son of God. And the women are mentioned, who had ministered unto Him. The men had fled, the feeble women were there. All service now after the great victory He won, must be in weakness, depending on Him alone.

6. The Burial. Mar 15:42-47

Joseph of Arimathea, like Nicodemus, identified himself with Him, who had died on a cross and confessed Him boldly by this action. In Pilates astonishment that He had died so soon we have additional evidence that the Servant gave His life. Death by crucifixion, perhaps so often witnessed by the centurion, is a lingering death. They would have given Him the grave of the wicked, but God had predicted it otherwise (Isa 53:9 read, they appointed His grave with the wicked, but with the rich He was when He had died). The tomb was one in which no other dead had ever been. The one born of a Virgin-womb could only be fittingly honored in a virgin tomb. He who could not see corruption, could not lie in a tomb which corruption had defiled.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

CHAPTER 71

Barabbas

A Picture of Substitution

And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate. And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering said unto him, Thou sayest it. And the chief priests accused him of many things: but he answered nothing. And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against thee. But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled. Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired. And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection. And the multitude crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them. But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy. But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? And they cried out again, Crucify him. Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him. And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.

(Mar 15:1-15)

Mark 15 describes the slaying of the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. Whenever we think about the death of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the cross, we ought to always remember three things.

1.The death of Christ upon the cursed tree was a substitutionary sacrifice. The Lord Jesus Christ did not suffer for any crimes of his own. He did not die because of his own sins. He was not cut off from the land of the living for his own transgressions. The Lord of Glory died upon the cross for our sins, for the transgressions of his people, for the iniquities of Gods elect, which were imputed to him, when he was made to be sin for us (Isa 53:4-6; Isa 53:8; Dan 9:26; 2Co 5:21; 1Pe 3:18)

2.The substitutionary sacrifice and death of our Lord Jesus Christ is the focal point, the essence, and the message of all the Word of God. The law was given at Sinai to show us our need of a substitute. All the sacrifices, rites, rituals, and ceremonies of the Old Testament Scriptures, all the priests, priestly garments, and priestly functions, all the deliverances of Israel from the hands of their enemies, all the services of the tabernacle and the temple, all the psalms, all the prophets, and all the historical narratives, the manna, the rock, the brazen serpent, the pillars of fire and cloud, everything in the Old Testament and in the New was written by inspiration of God the Holy Spirit to reveal Christ, to show us our great, glorious, almighty Substitute (Luk 24:27; Luk 24:44-45; 1Pe 1:23-25; Joh 20:30-31).

3.The cross of Christ, the doctrine of substitution, is both the revelation of the glory of God and the glory of the gospel (2Co 4:4-6; Gal 6:14). The death of Christ upon the cross, the sacrifice of Gods Lamb as our sin-atonement, is the life of our souls. Had the Lord Jesus Christ not died in our stead, the justice of God could never have been satisfied and we would all have perished in our sins forever.

When the apostle Paul thought of these things, he said, Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift! May God the Holy Spirit so graciously flood our hearts and souls with the knowledge of our crucified Substitute that we may ever have our hearts and minds fixed upon our blessed Savior and his great sacrifice of himself for us, and have the apostles words reverberating in our souls. Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift!

A Fulfillment of Prophecy

And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate (Mar 15:1). Why did these chief priests, scribes and elders carry the Lord Jesus to Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea? Why did they not just stone him to death themselves? The reason is obvious. They had no legal, civil authority to do so. They should have known that the time of the Messiah was upon them, because Jacobs prophecy in Gen 49:10 had been fulfilled.

Moreover, they must themselves also fulfill the Scriptures in their deeds; and the Scriptures required that our Redeemer be crucified in a publicly shameful way, not merely stoned to death, as Jewish law would have required (Deu 21:22-23). His body, according to the Old Testament Scriptures, had to be pierced and not a bone of it broken (Zec 12:10; Joh 19:36; Exo 12:46; Num 9:12; 1Co 5:7). Though they were so blinded by their unbelief that they could not see it, the Lords enemies were themselves simply fulfilling the purpose of God to the very letter of Holy Scripture, even in their rage against his dear Son (Act 4:27-28; Act 13:28-29).

How comforting it is to know that wicked men are never out of Gods control. They only do what his hand and purpose have from eternity determined must be done for the salvation of our souls. When Satan roars, when scoffers scoff, when mockers mock, when deceivers deceive, they only perform that which was long ago written in the Scriptures (2Pe 2:3). Man, in the folly of his rebellion and unbelief, and Satan himself, even the demons of hell, all are but the unwitting vassals of the Almighty, our heavenly Father, to serve his purpose of grace toward us.

Bound Jesus If the lord Jesus would set us free, he must be bound. As Isaac and the legal sacrifices were bound and laid upon the altar (Gen 22:9; Leviticus 4:70), so the Son of God, when he was about to be made sin for us, was bound as a criminal, and was bound to the cursed tree for us.

An Example of Patience

When the holy Son of God stood before Pilates bar, he was falsely accused of many evils. The trumped up charges against him were all false. Yet, when he was accused, he answered nothing. What an example he set before us of patience and humility, bowing to the providence and purpose of God.

And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering said unto him, Thou sayest it. And the chief priests accused him of many things: but he answered nothing. And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against thee. But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled (Mar 15:2-5).

We can do nothing more dishonoring to our God and contrary to our faith than grumble and murmur against him when he sends trouble our way. And we never more glorify our God and exemplify the character of Christ than when we bear afflictions, false accusations, and injustices patiently (Isa 53:7; Heb 12:1-3; 1Pe 2:20-24;Psa 39:1).

An Abuse of Power

And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified (Mar 15:15). Pilate knew that the chief priests had delivered the Lord Jesus to him because they envied him (Mar 15:10). He made some feeble attempts to release him and soothe his own conscience; but, in the shameful behavior typical of politicians and political appointees, Pilate was willing to content the people, even if he had to knowingly sacrifice his own conscience and the life of an innocent man to do it!

I mention this, not to stir up more anger and greater disgust toward our president, congressmen, and senators. They are managing that very well on their own. I mention it that we may take a higher road than the rest of the world. Men in high places, without the knowledge of Christ, without even a hint of moral integrity, are to be pitied. They have nothing to restrain them from yielding to every temptation to great evil, except the prayers of Gods saints. Let us, therefore, pray for them, as the Word of God tells us (1Ti 2:1-2).

A Portrait of Depravity

But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? And they cried out again, Crucify him. Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him (Mar 15:11-14).

In these days of universal compromise and ecumenical religion everyone is trying to remove every possible point of offense, take away all guilt and blame, and fix things up so that everybody is saved, and all their works, no matter how vile, if not saintly, are at least excusable. Historians are rewriting history everyday to suit the trends of modern thinking. Theologians are rewriting the Bible to mold it to the opinions of men. But all the rearranging of things by men will never alter facts.

Here is a fact: While Pilate and his soldiers (pagan Gentiles) were the ones who executed the Lord Jesus Christ, the Jews (the religious people, the people who claimed to be Gods servants) were them who cried, Crucify him! Crucify him! Let his blood be upon us and our children!

We marvel at their act. They acted against evidence plainly presented. When they had opportunity given them in the eleventh hour to back away from their rash demands, they stayed their course to the everlasting ruin of their souls, the souls of their children, and of their childrens children.

Even when it meant the release of a known, notorious murderer among their wives and children, they stayed with their decision. They could not be persuaded to change course or alter their decision for good by any moral pressure or sane reasoning. Blindness was never more blind! Folly was never more foolish! Madness was never more mad! How can this be explained?

The only thing on this earth that can explain such behavior is the fact that all men are totally depraved. The heart of man is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. The carnal mind is enmity against God. It is not possible for any man to do anything good, or even to make a good, or even reasonable, decision apart from divine intervention.

Let us not be found following the example of these lost, religious rebels. Let us not choose Barabbas over Christ. Let us not choose wickedness and despise righteousness. Let us not chose the world and reject Christ. Yet, that is exactly what we will do, unless God intervenes and stops us from fulfilling the madness of our own hearts lusts.

A Picture of Substitution (Mar 15:6-15)

Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired. And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection. And the multitude crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them. But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy. But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? And they cried out again, Crucify him. Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him. And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified (Mar 15:6-15).

What a beautiful picture we have here of the gospel. Barabbas, the guilty man, was set free. The Lord Jesus Christ, the holy, innocent Lamb of God, died in his place. A great sinner went free because a great Substitute took his place. Barabbas was spared because Christ died in his place. That is, in its very essence and glory, the gospel of God. It can be summed up in one word Substitution (Rom 3:21-26; Rom 5:6-8; Rom 8:1-4; Rom 8:32-34; Romans 2 Corinthians5:20-21).

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

straightway: Psa 2:2, Mat 27:1, Mat 27:2, Luk 22:66, Act 4:5, Act 4:6, Act 4:25-28

and delivered: Mar 10:33, Mar 10:34, Mat 20:18, Mat 20:19, Luk 18:32, Luk 18:33, Luk 23:1, Luk 23:2-5, Joh 18:28-38, Act 3:13

Reciprocal: Gen 22:9 – bound Exo 12:6 – the whole Dan 6:7 – have consulted Mic 2:1 – when Mat 5:22 – the council Mar 14:53 – and with Mar 15:12 – whom Luk 24:20 – General Joh 18:12 – bound Act 4:27 – Pontius Pilate

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

THE FIRST VERSE of this chapter picks up the thread from Mar 14:65. The Romans had taken away the power of capital punishment from the Jews and vested it wholly in Caesars representative, hence the religious leaders knew they must present Him before Pilate and demand the death sentence upon some ground which appeared adequate to him. Verse Mar 15:3 tells us that they accused Him of many things, but we are not told by Mark what those things were. We are struck however by the way in which one phrase occurs over and over again in the earlier part of the chapter- The King of the Jews (verses Mar 15:2, Mar 15:9, Mar 15:12, Mar 15:18, Mar 15:26). Luke tells us definitely that they said He was forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that He Himself is Christ a King. Marks brief account infers this, though not stating it.

Once more, before Pilate, the Lord confessed who He was. Challenged as to being the King of the Jews He simply answered, Thou sayest it, the equivalent of Yes. For the rest He again answered nothing, for the reason that in all the wild charges of the chief priests there was nothing to answer. It is worthy of note that Mark only records two utterances of our Lord before His judges. Before the Jewish hierarchy He confessed Himself to be the Christ, Son of God and Son of Man: before the Roman governor He confessed Himself to be the King of the Jews. No evidence prevailed against Him; He was condemned because of who He was, and He could not deny Himself.

Moreover Pilate had sufficient knowledge to discern what lay at the root of all the accusations, he knew that the chief priests had delivered Him for envy. This led to his ineffectual attempt to divert the thoughts of the multitude to Jesus, when it was a question of the prisoner to be released. The influence of the priests with the people was too much for him however, and hence, desirous of pleasing the crowd, Pilate outraged what sense of justice he had. He released Barabbas, the rebel and murderer, and scourging Jesus, delivered Him to be crucified.

The voice of the people prevailed over the better judgment of the representative of Caesar: in other words, autocracy on that occasion abdicated in favour of democracy, and the popular vote determined it. An old Latin proverb states that the voice of the people is the voice of God. The facts of the crucifixion flatly deny that proverb. Here the voice of the people was the voice of the devil.

Verses Mar 15:16-32 give us in a very graphic way the terrible circumstances surrounding the crucifixion. All classes combined against the Lord. Pilate already had scourged Him. The Roman soldiers mocked Him in ways that were cruel as well as contemptuous. The ordinary people-just passers-by-railed at Him. The priests mocked Him with sarcasm. The two crucified thieves-representatives of the criminal classes, the very scum of humanity-reviled Him. High-born and low-born, Jew and Gentile, were all involved. Yet in result they were all helping to fulfil the Scriptures, though doubtless unconsciously to themselves.

This is particularly striking if we take the case of the Roman soldiers-men who were unaware of the existence of the Scriptures. Verse Mar 15:28 takes note that the crucifixion of the thieves on either side was a fulfilment of

Isa 53:12, but many other things they did also fulfilled the Word. For instance, His visage was to be marred more than any man, according to Isa 52:14, and there was fulfilment of this in the crown of thorns and the smitings. The Judge of Israel was to be smitten with a rod upon the cheek, according to Mic 5:1; this the soldiers did, as verse Mar 15:19 of our chapter shows. Verse Mar 15:24 records the fulfilment by them of Psa 22:18. They gave Me also gall… and… vinegar, says Psa 69:21, and this also the soldiers did, though the fulfilment is not recorded here but in Matthew. We think we are right in saying that at least 24 prophecies were fulfilled in the 24 hour day when Jesus died.

All men in that hour were displaying themselves in their darkest hue, and in these verses we do not read of one thing that He said. It was just as the prophet had said, As a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so He openeth not His mouth. It was mans hour, and the power of darkness was at its zenith. The perfection of the holy Servant of the Lord is seen in His suffering in silence all that He endured from the hands of men.

That which the Lord Jesus suffered at the hands of men was very great, yet it falls into comparative insignificance when we turn to consider what He endured at the hands of God as the Victim, when made sin for us. Yet all this far greater matter is compressed by Mark into two verses-33 and 34; whereas his account of the lesser master covers 52 verses (Mar 14:53 -Mar 15:32). The fact is, of course, that the lesser could be described, whilst the greater could not be. The darkness which descended at midday hid from mens eyes even the externals of that scene.

All that can be related historically is that for three hours God put the hush of night upon the land and thus blinded mens eyes, and that at the end of the hours Jesus uttered the cry of anguish, which had been written as prophecy a thousand years before, in Psa 22:1. The holy Sin-bearer was forsaken, for God must judge sin and irrevocably banish it from His presence. That utter and eternal banishment we deserved, and it will fall upon all who die in their sins. He endured it to the full, but since He possessed the holiness, the eternity, the infinitude of full Deity, He could emerge from it at the close of the three hours. Yet the cry, that came from His lips as He did so, showed that He felt the full horror of it. And He had a capacity to feel that was infinite.

That which He suffered at the hands of men is not to be thought of lightly. Heb 12:2, says, Who… endured the cross, despising the shame, but we must note the difference between shame and suffering. Many a man of great physical courage would feel the shame more than suffering. He felt the suffering but He despised the shame, inasmuch as He was infinitely above it, and He knew that He was, glorious in the eyes of the Lord (Isa 49:5). We believe that we may say that never was He more glorious in the eyes of the Lord than when He was suffering under the judgment of God as the Sin-bearer. Such was the paradox of Divine holiness and love!

The effect of that cry upon the onlookers is given to us in verses Mar 15:35-36. They would hardly have seen a reference to Elijah in His words if they had not been Jews: but then, how dense and ignorant not to have recognized the cry to God which lay enshrined in their own Scriptures.

The fact of His actual death is given by Mark in the briefest possible fashion. He breathed out His spirit into the hands of God directly after He had cried with a loud voice. What He said is recorded in Luke and John. Here we are simply told the way He said it. There was no gradual failing of strength so that His last words were in a feeble whisper. At one moment a loud voice and the next moment He was dead! His death was so manifestly supernatural as to greatly impress the centurion who was on duty and watching. Whatever may have been, in his own mind, the exact significance of his words, he must have at least felt that he was a witness of the supernatural. We endorse his words and say, Truly this Man was the Son of God, in the fullest sense.

The truth of these words was also borne witness to by the rending of the veil of the temple. This great happening appears to have synchronized with His death. It was the Divine hand that rent it, for any human hand would have had to rend it from the bottom to the top. The elaborate typical system instituted in Israel, in connection with sacrifices and temple, all looked forward to the death of Christ; and, that death accomplished, the Divine hand tore the veil as a sign that the day of the type was over, and the way into the holiest was made manifest.

In every emergency God has in reserve some servant who will come forward and carry out His will. Stones would cry out, or be raised up to become men, if God needed them in an emergency; but they never do, because God is never in an emergency like that. He always has a man in reserve, and Joseph was the man on this occasion. This timid and secret disciple was suddenly filled with courage, and boldly faced Pilate. He was the man born into the world to fulfil in its season the prophetic word of Isa 53:9,- with the rich in His death. Having fulfilled it, he drops completely out of the record.

He missed the opportunity of being identified with Christ in His life, but he did identify himself with Him when He was dead. This is remarkable, for it exactly reversed the procedure of the disciples. They identified themselves with Him during His life, and failed miserably when He died. The apparent defeat of Jesus had the effect of emboldening Joseph. It stirred the smouldering embers of his faith into a sudden blaze. He waited for the kingdom of God, and we may be sure that in the day of the kingdom the faith and the works of Joseph will not be forgotten by God. His kind of faith is just the sort we need today-the sort that blazes up when defeat seems sure.

Josephs action had the effect incidentally of bringing before Pilate the supernatural character of Christs death. No man could take His life from Him; He laid it down by Himself, and that at the suitable moment when all was accomplished. The two thieves, as we know, lingered on for hours after, and their death had to be hastened by cruel means. Pilate marvelled, but the fact being corroborated, he yielded to the request. Thus the will of God was done, and from that moment the sacred body was out of the hands of the unbelievers. Hands of love and faith performed the offices and laid Him in the tomb. Devoted women too had stood as witnesses when even the disciples had disappeared, and they saw where He had been laid.

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

Chapter 15.

The Civil Trial

“And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried Him away, and delivered Him to Pilate. And Pilate asked Him, Art Thou the King of the Jews? And He answering said unto him, Thou sayest it. And the chief priests accused Him of many things: but He answered nothing. And Pilate asked Him again, saying, Answerest Thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against Thee. But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.”-Mar 15:1-5.

The Sport of the Persecutors.

The assembly of the Sanhedrin at which Jesus had been examined and sentenced, the account of which Mark has given us in the previous chapter, was really an informal, not to say illegal, assembly. For this meeting was obviously held in the early hours after midnight, and the Sanhedrin could not hold a legal sitting until daybreak. So, to regularise their proceedings, they seem to have met again in a formal way as soon as day had dawned, and then ratified the decisions they had come to in the small hours of the morning. Probably the meeting did not last many minutes. And if you want to know how these men spent the time that intervened, you have the story told you in Mar 14:65. “And some began to spit on Him, and to cover His face and to buffet Him and to say unto Him, Prophesy; and the officers received Him with blows of their hands.” Priests and elders began the sickening sport and then the servants joined in. Here is an abyss of horror into which we shudder even to look. Do you remember the story Froude tells about the preaching of Newman at Oxford? Froude says that Newman was once describing closely some of the incidents of our Lord’s Passion, the insults and coarse indignities that were heaped upon Him. He then paused. For a few moments there was a breathless silence. Then in a low, clear voice, of which the faintest vibration was audible in the farthest corner of St Mary’s, he said, “Now, I bid you recollect that He to Whom these things were done was Almighty God.” “It was,” says Froude, “as if an electric stroke had gone through the building, as if every person present understood for the first time the meaning of what he had all his life been saying.” And if we, too, would realise the shame and horror of that Mar 14:65, which says how some began to spit on Him, and to cover His face and to buffet Him, and how the officers received Him with blows of their hands, we too must recollect that He to Whom these brutal things were done was Almighty God.

The Resort to Pilate.

But daybreak brought the cruel sport to an end. “Straightway in the morning the chief priests with the elders and scribes and the whole council held a consultation, and bound Jesus and carried Him away and delivered Him up to Pilate.” The formal session of the Sanhedrin was held; the solemn farce was soon over, and a few minutes after daybreak Jesus with arms bound behind Him was on His way, attended by priests and elders en masse, to the palace of Pilate the Governor. The priests and elders would fain have dispensed with the necessity of submitting the case to Pilate at all. They had pronounced Jesus guilty of blasphemy and therefore worthy of death, and they would like to have put an end to Him off-hand. But to Pilate the Governor, much against their will, they had to make their appeal. So with Mar 15:2 in this chapter begins Mark’s account of what we may call the civil trial of Jesus.

The Civil Trial.

Like his account of the ecclesiastical trial, Mark’s account of the civil trial is incomplete. When we compare Gospel with Gospel, we find that in the civil trial, as in the ecclesiastical trial, there were three distinct stages. (1) First of all Christ was taken to Pilate and briefly examined by him, the result being a declaration on Pilate’s part of Christ’s innocence. (2) Then, He seems to have been taken to Herod and tried before him, on the ground that being a Galilean, He belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction. (3) Then, finally, He was brought back to Pilate for another examination. The upshot of it all was that He was condemned to death, not because He was guilty, but to appease the murderous hate of the Jews. Now of these three stages in Christ’s trial, Mark says nothing at all about the second. He satisfies himself with an epitomised account of the two trials before Pilate. It is with the first of these trials the paragraph of the text deals. And even this account is, as I have said, epitomised. If you want to have the full account of what happened at Christ’s first appearance before Pilate, you must supplement what Mark says by what the other evangelists-and especially the fourth-have to say.

The Accusers and the Governor.

The course of events seems to have been something like this. The whole Sanhedrin escorted Jesus to Pilate’s palace. They knew their man. Pilate was a person who could be coerced and frightened. And the size of the deputation was deliberately meant to compel Pilate to yield to their will. They foresaw there would be difficulty in securing the condemnation of Christ. They knew that legally they had no case. By going all together they wanted to make Pilate feel that the demand for the death of Jesus was a national demand, and that, if he refused to yield to it, he would have the entire nation to reckon with. Pilate lived, during his stay in Jerusalem, in the Praetorium, a gorgeous palace, once the residence of Herod the Great. Towards that palace then the crowd tumultuously made its way. But when they reached the palace, they rigidly refused to enter. By entering the palace they might have incurred ceremonial defilement and so excluded themselves from the solemnities of the festal season. What a revelation of perverse religion! What a revelation of a twisted moral sense! These men were afraid, as Dr Glover says, of a little leaven, but they were not afraid of innocent blood; they were scrupulous about entering an unswept room, but they were unscrupulously bent upon the murder of the Holy and the Just; they were punctilious in the observance of religious ritual, but their hearts were aflame with the fires of hell. When religion degenerates into mere ritual it becomes full of deadly peril to the soul. There is something deadening, hardening, morally stupefying in religion, when it ceases to be a spirit, and becomes a set of rules.

The Accusers and their Purpose.

But, to return to the story. Seeing that they refused to enter the palace, Pilate had, however, unwillingly to come out to them. He took his seat beneath one of the porticoes, and Jesus bound was set before him. “What accusation bring ye against this Man?” he asked the mob of priests and elders. Perhaps this was more than they expected. Perhaps they had hoped that Pilate would be content without enquiry just to confirm their sentence. But Pilate, with all his faults, had the Roman sense of justice in him, and if he had to sign the death-warrant he insisted on knowing the crime; he declined to be executioner unless first he had been judge. The priests reply that unless Christ had been a malefactor they would not have brought Him to Pilate. “Very well,” Pilate answers, “take Him and judge Him.” They would gladly have done so; they had indeed already done so-but what they could do to Jesus would not satisfy their hate. They blurted out the truth, saying, “It is not lawful for us to put any man to death.” Death! nothing less would satisfy their hate. That being so, Pilate insists again upon knowing Christ’s crime. The crime of which the Sanhedrin found Christ guilty was the crime of blasphemy. They sentenced Him to death because He said that He was the Son of God. But that was not the charge they brought forward now. They knew Pilate would have brushed such a charge contemptuously aside. So, in accusing Jesus to Pilate, the priests and elders changed their ground. With brazen impudence they charged Him, not with blasphemy, but with treason. They made practically a three-fold charge (judging from Luke’s account). They accused Him first of perverting the nation, secondly, of forbidding the payment of taxes to Caesar, and thirdly, of stating that He Himself was an anointed king.

The Accusers and their Charges.

All this argues almost incredible baseness, for to begin with the charges were outrageously false. Fancy charging Jesus with forbidding to pay tribute to the Emperor in face of that word of His, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.” And they were not only false, but on the lips of the men who made them, they were impudent as well. Pilate knew that, in their heart of hearts, every man in this crowd was a rebel against Rome. Yet now in order to hound Jesus to death they affected an enthusiastic loyalty. In their thirst for the blood of Christ they were ready to trample upon their religious and their national hope. But Pilate was not deceived by this sudden access of enthusiasm for Rome. He knew that for envy they had delivered Him. Now that is the point at which the proceedings had arrived when Mark takes up the story. The priests and elders had just hurled their accusations against Christ, including as the crowning accusation of all, the charge that He made Himself a king. Pilate thereupon withdrew within the palace and took Jesus with him, that he might examine Him quietly as to these charges they brought against Him.

The Kingship of Christ.

And that was the first question he asked, Art Thou the King of the Jews? The form of the question expresses blank incredulity. The Greek brings out the tone of the question much better than our English rendering. “Thou!” so the Greek reads. “Thou! art Thou the King of the Jews.” Thou! He looked at the Christ, and he knew that the charge of treason was absurd. The person he saw before him was poor and worn; He was friendless and alone; He was clothed in peasant garb; His face bore the traces of the foul usage He had endured in the judgment hall. Pilate looked at Him and he knew that here was no rebel against Rome. The charge of aspiring to kingship was, in Pilate’s eyes, plainly absurd. Judge therefore of the surprise he felt when in answer to his question, “Thou, art Thou the King of the Jews?” Jesus replied, “Thou sayest,” or as it might be translated to bring out its full meaning, “It is exactly as you say.” Just exactly as He had avowed Himself the Son of God to Jewish priests and elders, so He avows Himself a king to the Roman Governor. Pilate was to be left without excuse. He was to be under no delusion as to the person with whom he was dealing. Here was no ordinary prisoner; no common malefactor. Here was One Who made the most stupendous claims for Himself. And there was something in the Lord’s bearing that ratified and confirmed His claim. “It is exactly as you say,” said Jesus, and Pilate knew it to be true. It was not in ignorance Pilate crucified the Prince of Life. He knew what He was doing. Christ confessed Himself a king, and Pilate in his heart of hearts admitted the claim to be true. It left his crime without excuse.

-No Threat to Rome.

But while Christ confessed His kingship and so left Pilate in no mistake as to the person with whom he was dealing, He at the same time revealed to him the character of His kingship, so as to make it clear that He in no way threatened Caesar’s rule. His kingdom, He went on to say to Pilate, was not of this world. He was no rival to Tiberius. Had He been a rival to Caesar He would have commanded His servants to fight; instead of that, He had ordered Peter to put his sword back into its sheath. His kingdom was not of this world. Caesar reigned over men’s bodies. Christ wanted to reign in their hearts. Christ was no rival to Caesar, but by this claim He set Himself far above Caesar and every other earthly potentate! He claimed to be King in the realm of the eternal and the spiritual! He claimed to be the supreme Lord of conscience! He claimed to be the final answer of God to the enquiring spirit of man! The Truth! The truth about God, the truth about man, the truth about life and death and the hereafter, it is all in Christ! There may have been other pioneers in the kingdom of truth, other seekers and enquirers-there were prophets and psalmists and philosophers and seers before His day-but in the kingdom of truth He is sole and undisputed King! And the honest soul gladly acknowledges His kingship; the man of sincere and guileless heart does homage to Him; the man who is true and wants to be true bows down to Jesus. “Everyone that is of the truth heareth My voice.”

The Failure of Pilate.

“Everyone that is of the truth heareth My voice,” He said, and in that word there was an appeal to Pilate. The Lord was fighting for the soul of Pilate. Pilate saw the truth, but he was not of it. And so, instead of responding to the Lord’s appeal and manfully taking his stand on the side of truth, he sneered, “What is truth?” and never waited for an answer. That was the moment of Pilate’s collapse, that is the real condemnation of Pilate, he saw the truth and refused to obey it. He saw the gleam and refused to follow it. The truth still confronts us in Christ and claims our allegiance. What do we do with Him? Do we listen to Him? Do we obey Him? Do we follow Him? Christ is still the test of character. He reveals the bias of men’s hearts. If the heart is honest it cannot help but love Him. “Jesus,” it cries, “the very thought of Thee with sweetness fills my breast.” But if the heart repudiates Him, disowns Him, rejects Him, it can only be because the heart is evil. Our attitude towards Christ fixes our place. “Everyone that is of the truth heareth My voice.”

The Silence of Christ.

Pilate’s failure to respond to Christ’s appeal may account for Christ’s subsequent unbroken silence. When Pilate turned on his heel with that sneer on his lips, “What is truth?” and faced the mob outside, it was to tell them bluntly that he found no fault in the prisoner. With his Roman sense of justice, he brought in a verdict, “Not guilty,” and if left to himself would have acquitted Christ on the spot. But the priests and elders did not mean to be baulked of their prey. They began to clamour out one charge after another. “The chief priests accused Him of many things.” And in the midst of the clamour and the tumult Jesus stood there calm, unmoved, silent. Never a word did He attempt to say in reply. Pilate wondered at it. He had never known a prisoner like this. “Answerest Thou nothing?” he asked, “behold, how many things they accuse Thee of.” But Jesus declined to break His peace. “He no more answered anything, insomuch that Pilate marvelled.” This silence of Jesus, what are we to make out of it?

The Silence of Innocence.

(1) It was the silence of conscious innocence and holiness. “Answerest Thou nothing?” asked Pilate in astonishment. There was no need to answer. The accusations fell harmless. Christ stood there clothed in the garb of a holy character, and let the charges refute themselves. Men had but to look at Him, and they knew these charges were absurd, ridiculous, lying. “If you throw plenty of mud,” said Newman when replying to Kingsley, “some of it will stick. Stick,” he said, “yes, but it will not stain.” The mud the priests flung at Christ could not stain Him, did not even stick to Him. His very presence gave the lie to every accusation, He was obviously holy, harmless, undefiled. And not only does His silence testify to His innocence, but also to the calm serenity of spirit. “There are few tests of a man’s spiritual condition more searching and decisive,” says Cotter Morison, “than the temper with which he bears unmerited insult and railing speech.” Christ passed through that searching test in perfect triumph.

The Silence of Judgment.

(2) But it was more than a silence of conscious innocence, I cannot help feeling there was an element of judgment in it. “Jesus no more answered anything.” No more! There had been a time when He had been willing to speak to priests and elders. But a few minutes before He had gladly spoken to Pilate! But high priests and elders had received His declaration of His Messiahship with shouts of “blasphemy,” and Pilate had turned aside His appeal with a sneer, “And Jesus no more answered anything.” They had hardened their hearts, and He ceased to speak. They had refused to listen, and so He became silent. He refused to give that which is holy to the dogs and to cast His pearls before swine.

A Warning.

The silent Christ! The incident is full of solemn teaching and warning. Man is in sore plight when the Lord becomes silent to him! Does He ever become silent? There is a solemn Bible word which says, “My Spirit shall not strive with men for ever,” and it is a tragic fact of experience that men may so harden themselves in sin that conscience shall cease to speak and they shall become impervious to all holy appeals. It is at our peril we neglect and reject the Gospel appeal. For that is when Christ becomes silent, when we refuse to listen. To the listening and responsive soul Christ is never the silent Christ. Before we call He will answer, and while we are yet speaking, He will hear.

Fuente: The Gospel According to St. Mark: A Devotional Commentary

1

In the morning was the day after the scenes in the garden, and the meeting in the palace of the high priest. The Jews had gone as far as they could under the law, so the next step was to take Jesus before Pilate who was the Roman governor.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate.

[In the morning they held a consultation…and the whole council.] “At what time do the judges sit in judgment? The lesser Sanhedrim and the bench of three sit, after morning prayers are ended, until the end of the sixth hour. But the great Sanhedrim sits after the morning daily sacrifice to the afternoon daily sacrifice. And on sabbaths and feast days” [as this day was that is here spoken of], “it sat in Beth-midrash ” (or the chapel ), “in the Court of the Gentiles.”

“The Sanhedrim of one-and-seventy elders, it is not necessary that they all sit in their place, which is in the Temple. But when it is necessary that all meet together, let all meet together (the whole council ).”

“But in other times, he that hath business of his own, let him attend his own business, and then return. With this proviso, that nothing be wanting of the number of three-and-twenty upon the bench continually during the whole time of the session (the consultation ). If any must go out, let him look round, whether his colleagues be three-and-twenty: if they be, let him go out: but if not, let him wait till another enter in.”

Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels

THESE verses begin the chapter in which Mark describes the slaying of “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” It is a part of the Gospel history which should always be read with peculiar reverence. We should call to mind, that Christ was cut off, not for Himself, but for us. (Dan 9:26.) We should remember that His death is the life of our souls, and that unless His blood had been shed, we must have perished miserably in our sins.

Let us mark in these verses, what a striking proof the Jewish rulers gave to their own nation that the times of Messiah had come.

The chapter opens with the fact, that the chief priests bound Jesus and “delivered Him to Pilate,” the Roman Governor. Why did they do so? Because they had no longer the power of putting any one to death, and were under the dominion of the Romans. By this one act and deed they declared that the prophecy of Jacob was fulfilled. “The scepter had departed from Judah, and the lawgiver from between his feet,” and Shiloh the Messiah, whom God had promised to send, must have come. (Gen 49:10.) Yet there is nothing whatever to show that they remembered this prophecy. Their eyes were blinded. They either could not, or would not, see what they were doing.

Let us never forget that wicked men are often fulfilling God’s predictions to their own ruin, and yet know it not. In the very height of their madness, folly, and unbelief, they are often unconsciously supplying fresh evidence that the Bible is true. The unhappy scoffers who make a jest of all serious religion, and can scarcely talk of Christianity without ridicule and scorn, would do well to remember that their conduct was long ago foreseen and foretold. “There shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts.” (2Pe 3:3.)

Let us mark, secondly, in these verses, the meekness and lowliness of our Lord Jesus Christ. When He stood before Pilate’s bar, and was “accused of many things,” He answered nothing. Though the charges against Him were false, and He knew no sin, He was content to endure the contradiction of sinners against Himself, not answering again. (Heb 12:3.) Though he was innocent of any transgression, He submitted to bear groundless accusations made against Him without a murmur. Great is the contrast between the second Adam and the first! Our first father Adam was guilty, and yet tried to excuse himself. The second Adam was guiltless, and yet made no defense at all. “As a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so openeth he not his mouth.” (Isa 53:7.)

Let us learn a practical lesson from our Savior’s example. Let us learn to suffer patiently, and not to complain, whatever God may think fit to lay upon us. Let us take heed to our ways, that we offend not in our tongues, in the hour of temptation. (Psa 39:1.) Let us beware of giving way to irritation and ill temper, however provoking and undeserved our trials may seem to be. Nothing in the Christian character glorifies God so much as patient suffering. “If when ye do well and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. For even hereunto were ye called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example that ye should follow His steps.” (1Pe 2:20-21.)

Let us mark, thirdly, in these verses, the wavering and undecided conduct of Pilate.

It is clear from the passage before us that Pilate was convinced of our Lord’s innocence. “He knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy.” We see him feebly struggling for a time to obtain our Lord’s acquittal, and to satisfy his own conscience. At last he yields to the importunity of the Jews, and “willing to content the people,” delivers Jesus to be crucified-to the eternal disgrace and ruin of his own soul.

A man in high place without religious principles, is one of the most pitiable sights in the world. He is like a large ship tossed to and fro on the sea without compass or rudder. His very greatness surrounds him with temptations and snares. It gives him power for good or evil, which, if he knows not how to use it aright, is sure to bring him into difficulties, and to make him unhappy. Let us pray much for great men. They need great grace to keep them from the devil. High places are slippery places. No wonder that Paul recommends intercession “for kings and for all that are in authority.” (1Ti 2:1-2.) Let us not envy great men. They have many and peculiar temptations. How hardly shall a rich man enter the kingdom of God. “Seekest thou great things for thyself? seek them not.” (Jer 45:5.)

Let us mark, fourthly, in these verses, the exceeding guilt of the Jews in the matter of the death of Christ. At the eleventh hour the chief priests had an opportunity of repenting if they would have taken it. They had the choice given them whether Jesus or Barabbas should be let go free. Coolly and deliberately they persevered in their bloody work. They chose to have a murderer let go free. They chose to have the Prince of Life put to death. The power of putting our Lord to death was no longer theirs. The responsibility of His death they publicly took upon themselves. “What will ye that I shall do unto him?” was Pilate’s question. “Crucify him, crucify him,” was the awful answer. The agents in our Lord’s death were undoubtedly Gentiles. But the guilt of our Lord’s death must always rest chiefly upon the Jews.

We marvel at the wickedness of the Jews at this part of our Lord’s history-and no wonder. To reject Christ and choose Barabbas was indeed an astounding act! It seems as if blindness, madness, and folly could go no further. But let us take heed that we do not unwittingly follow their example. Let us beware that we are not found at last to have chosen Barabbas and rejected Christ. The service of sin and the service of God are continually before us. The friendship of the world and the friendship of Christ are continually pressed upon our notice. Are we making the right choice? Are we cleaving to the right Friend? These are solemn questions. Happy is he who can give them a satisfactory answer.

Let us mark, finally, in these verses, what a striking type the release of Barabbas affords of the Gospel plan of salvation. The guilty is set free and the innocent is put to death. The great sinner is delivered, and the sinless one remains bound. Barabbas is spared, and Christ is crucified.

We have in this striking fact a vivid emblem of the manner in which God pardons and justifies the ungodly. He does it, because Christ has suffered in their stead, the just for the unjust. They deserve punishment, but a mighty Substitute has suffered for them. They deserve eternal death, but a glorious Surety has died for them. We are all by nature in the position of Barabbas. We are guilty, wicked, and worthy of condemnation. But “when we were without hope,” Christ the innocent died for the ungodly. And now God for Christ’s sake can be just, and yet “the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.”

Let us bless God that we have such a glorious salvation set before us. Our plea must ever be, not that we are deserving of acquittal, but that Christ has died for us. Let us take heed, that having so great a salvation we really make use of it for our own souls. May we never rest till we can say by faith, “Christ is mine. I deserve hell. But Christ has died for me, and believing in Him I have a hope of heaven.”

Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels

Mar 15:1. The whole council. Comp. Luk 22:66-71, where the particulars of this morning meeting are given; also Luk 23:1.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

CRUCIFIED AND RISEN

The closing events in Marks Gospel: Jesus before Pilate (Mar 15:1-15); mocked by the soldiers (Mar 15:23); nailed to the cross (Mar 15:24-41); buried in the tomb (Mar 15:42-47); risen from the dead (Mar 16:1-18); ascended to heaven (Mar 16:19-20).

As in other instances, Marks account of the trial before Pilate is the briefest while that of Matthew is the longest in the Gospels. The former, however, especially emphasizes the religious hatred of the people. He also describes more particularly the charge laid against Barabbas (15:7) who was released, though guilty and condemned; and this because Jesus took his place. Christ was his substitute, and Barabbas when released might have looked up at Him on the Cross, and have said, He died for me, he paid my penalty a blessed illustration of the atonement.

Mark says they clothed him with purple (Mar 15:17), but Matthew describes it as a scarlet robe (Mar 15:27-28), the scarlet military robe was meant to represent the imperial robe, and hence called in the symbolic sense purple.

Note how Mark dwells on the personality of Simon the Cyrenian (Mar 15:21). The reason he was drafted to bear the Cross was that Jesus strength was exhausted and He could not himself bear it. This seems implied in the word bring (Mar 15:22). They had to bring, in the sense that they had to bear, or carry, Jesus to Golgotha, they had to hold Him up on the road. As one says, what an appearance He must have presented after all the scourging and other indignities He received! How His face must have been marred by the blows, and how His sacred head must have bled from the cruel crown of thorns! It is Mark only who mentions that the wine (or vinegar) they gave Him was mingled with myrrh, which was considered an anodyne to deaden pain. It was for this reason Jesus refused it. Mark says it was the third hour when they crucified Him, while John says the sixth (Joh 19:14); there is a difficulty here, but the latter alludes to the Roman method of computing time and the former the Hebrew.

Mark mentions the boldness of Joseph of Arimathea in begging the body from Pilate (Mar 15:43). Boldness in the face of the Sanhedrin to which he belonged, and at whose insistence it was that Jesus had been crucified.

One must be a converted Jew in these days and experience his persecution and torture at the hands of his own people, to understand something of what this may have meant to Joseph (compare Isa 53:9).

Coming to the resurrection chapter, we again observe the brevity of Mark compared with Matthew. For the order of events on the resurrection day compare the comments on Matthew 28. Mark especially mentions Peter (Mar 16:7), which is the more noticeable because he also describes Peters denial in the fullest way. The passage from Mar 16:9 to the end of this chapter is not in the two most ancient manuscripts, the Sinaitic and Vatican, and others have it with partial omissions and variations, but it is quoted by some of the fathers of the second and third centuries. The whole church, practically, has accepted it as genuine from that period.

The Great Commission in Mark (Mar 16:15) differs from Matthew. In the former the Kingdom is not in view, but the Servant having given His life as a ransom, the good news is to go forth. Signs were to follow them that believe. These signs did not follow all even in the apostles time, but they did follow some. And if they do not follow now, it is because there are other evidences more suitable for the later periods of Christianity. As a matter of fact, such signs do still follow the preaching of the gospel on foreign mission fields, and doubtless will be practically universal again as the end of the age draws near and the coming of the King.

Mark records the ascension as Matthew does not, and even penetrates the clouds and sees Christ in heaven at the right hand of God. But He sees Him working with His disciples even though He is in heaven (Mar 16:20), and refers to it in a word found nowhere else in the Gospels. How fitting thus the close of that Gospel intended for the active energetic Roman!

QUESTIONS

1. Name the closing events in this Gospel.

2. What illustration of the atonement is found here?

3. Why was Simon drafted to bear Christs Cross?

4. How do you harmonize the two accounts of the hour of the crucifixion?

5. Can you quote Isa 53:9?

6. What do you know about the closing verses of the Gospel?

7. What comment may be made on Mar 16:17-18?

8. What new thought about the life of our ascended Lord does Mark express?

Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary

The foregoing chapter gave us an account of Judas’s treason, in delivering our Saviour into the hands of the chief priests. In this chapter we find our Lord brought by the chief priests unto Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, in order to his condemnation.

Whence observe, That it has been the old policy of corrupt church-governors to abuse the power of the civil magistrate, in executing their cruel and unjust censures and sentences upon holy and innocent persons. The chief priests and elders do not kill our Saviour themselves, for it was not lawful for them to put any man to death, being themselves under the power of the Roman government; accordingly they deliver Christ over to the secular power, and desire Pilate, the civil magistrate, to sentence and condemn him.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Mar 15:1. And straightway in the morning Succeeding the dismal night in which the Jewish rulers had been so busily engaged in the horrid transactions related in the preceding chapter; the chief priests As soon as it was day; held a consultation with the elders and scribes What method they should take to execute the sentence they had passed against Jesus, and how they might contrive to put him to death in the most severe and contemptuous manner. And because the sanhedrim, which, indeed, had the power of trying and condemning men for crimes which the Jewish law had made capital, yet had not the power of putting such sentences in execution without the approbation of the civil magistrate, or Roman governor; therefore they determined to bind Jesus and deliver him to Pilate, which they accordingly did, while it was yet early, Joh 18:28. They had indeed bound him when he was first apprehended, but, perhaps, he had been loosed while under examination, or else they now made his bonds stricter than before; the better, as they might think, to secure him from a rescue as he passed through the public streets in the day-time. See note on Mat 27:1-2. The observation of Theophylact here is worthy of notice. The Jews delivered up our Lord to the Romans, and they, for that sin, were themselves given up into the hands of the Romans!

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

CXXVIII.

THIRD STAGE OF JEWISH TRIAL. JESUS FORMALLY

CONDEMNED BY THE SANHEDRIN AND LED TO PILATE.

(Jerusalem. Friday after dawn.)

aMATT. XXVII. 1, 2; bMARK XV. 1; cLUKE XXII. 66-23:1; dJOHN XVIII. 28.

a1 Now when morning was come, c66 And as soon as it was day, bstraightway cthe assembly of the [702] elders of the people was gathered together, both chief priests and scribes; and they led him away into their council, aall the chief priests and {bwith} the elders aof the people band scribes, and the whole council, held a consultation, and atook counsel against Jesus to put him to death [Since blasphemy was by no means a criminal offense among the Romans, the Sanhedrin consulted together and sought for some charge of which the Romans would take notice. As we follow their course it will become evident to us that they found no new ground of accusation against Jesus, and, failing to do so, they decided to make use of our Lord’s claim to be the Christ by so perverting it as to make him seem to assert an intention to rebel against the authority of Rome]: csaying, 67 If thou art the Christ, tell us. But he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe [as experience had already proven– Joh 8:59, Joh 10:31]: 68 and if I ask you, ye will not answer. [Thus Jesus protests against the violence and injustice of his trial. His judges were asking him whether he was the Christ without any intention of investigating the truth of his claim, but merely for the purpose of condemning him by unwarrantedly assuming that he was not the Christ. They therefore asked in an unlawful spirit as well as in an unlawful manner. Jesus had a good right to ask them questions tending to confirm his Christhood by the Scripture, but had he done so they would not have answered– Mat 22:41-45. Jesus appeals to them to try the question as to who he was, but they insist on confining the inquiry as to who he claimed to be, assuming that the claim was false.] 69 But from henceforth shall the Son of man be seated at the right hand of the power of God. [See p. 698.] 70 And they all said, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. [The Hebrew mode of expression, equivalent to “Ye say it, because I am.”] 71 And they said, What further need have we of witness? for we ourselves have heard from his own mouth. [Thus they unconsciously admit their lack of evidence against Jesus.] [703] 1 And the whole company of them rose up, a2 and they bound bJesus, and carried {aled} him away, d28 They lead Jesus therefore from Caiaphas into the Praetorium: cand brought him before Pilate. band delivered him up to Pilate. athe governor. dand it was early; [The Sanhedrin could try and could condemn, but could not put to death without the concurring sentence of the Roman governor. To obtain this sentence, they now lead Jesus before Pilate in the early dawn, having made good use of their time.]

[FFG 702-704]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

Mark Chapter 15

Before Pilate (chap. 15), He only witnesses a good confession, a testimony to the truth where the glory of God required it, and where this testimony stood opposed to the power of the adversary. To all the rest He answers nothing. He lets them go on; and the evangelist enters into no details. To render this testimony was the last service and duty He had to perform. It is rendered. The Jews make choice of the seditious murderer Barabbas; and Pilate, hearkening to the voice of the multitude, won over by the chief priests, delivers Jesus to be crucified. The Lord submits to the insults of the soldiers, who mingle the pride and insolence of their class with the hard-heartedness of the executioner whose function they performed. Sad specimens of our nature! The Christ who came to save them was, for the moment, under their power. He used His own power, not to save Himself, but to deliver others from that of the enemy. At length they lead Him away to Golgotha to crucify Him. There they offer Him a soporific mixture, which He refuses; and they crucify Him with two thieves, one on His right hand and the other on His left, thus accomplishing (for it was all they did or could do) everything that was written concerning the Lord. It was now the Jews and the priests hour; they had, alas for them! the desire of their heart. And they make manifest, without knowing it, the glory and perfection of Jesus. The temple could not rise again without being thus cast down; and, as instruments, they established the fact which He had then announced. Farther, He saved others and not Himself. These are the two parts of the perfection of the death of Christ with reference to man.

But, whatever might be the thoughts of Christ and His sufferings with regard to men (those dogs, those bulls of Bashan), the work which He had to accomplish contained depths far beyond those outward things. Darkness covered the earth-divine and sympathetic testimony of that which, with far deeper gloom, covered the soul of Jesus, forsaken of God for sin, but thus displaying incomparably more than at any other time, His absolute perfection; while the darkness marked, in an external sign, His entire separation from outward things, the whole work being between Him and God alone, according to the perfectness of both. All passed between Him and His God. Little understood by others, all is between Himself and God: and crying again with a loud voice, He gives up the ghost. His service was completed. What more had He to do in a world wherein He only lived to accomplish the will of God? All was finished, and He necessarily departs. I do not speak of physical necessity, for He still retained His strength; but, morally rejected by the world, there was no longer room in it for His mercy towards it: the will of God was by Himself entirely fulfilled. He had drunk in His soul the cup of death and of judgment for sin. There was nothing left Him but the act of dying; and He expires, obedient to the end, in order to commence in another world (whether for His soul separate from the body, or in glory) a life where evil could never enter, and where the new man will be perfectly happy in the presence of God.

His service was completed. His obedience had its term in death-His obedience, and therefore His life, as carried on in the midst of sinners. What would a life have meant in which there was no more obedience to be fulfilled? In dying now His obedience was perfected, and He dies. The way into the holiest is now opened-the veil is rent from top to bottom. The Gentile centurion confesses, in the death of Jesus, the Person of the Son of God. Until then, the Messiah and Judaism went together. In His death Judaism rejects Him, and He is the Saviour of the world. The veil no longer conceals God. In this respect it was all Judaism could do. The manifestation of perfect grace is there for the Gentile, who acknowledged-because Jesus gave up His life with a cry that proved the existence of so much strength-that the Prince of life, the Son of God, was there. Pilate also is astonished that He is already dead. He only believes it when certified of its truth by the centurion. As to faith-far from grace, and even from human justice-he did not trouble himself at all on that point.

The death of Jesus did not tear Him from the hearts of those feeble ones who loved Him (who perhaps had not been in the conflict, but whom grace had now brought out from their retreat): those pious women who had followed Him and had often ministered to His wants, and Joseph, who, although touched in conscience, had not followed Him, until now, strengthened at the last by the testimony of the grace and perfection of Jesus (the integrity of the counsellor finding in the circumstances, not an occasion of fear, but that which induced him to declare himself)-these women and Joseph are alike occupied about the body of Jesus. This tabernacle of the Son of God is not left without those services which were due from man to Him who had just quitted it. Moreover the providence of God, as well as His operation in their hearts, had prepared for all this. The body of Jesus is laid in the tomb, and they all wait for the end of the sabbath to perform their service to it. The women had taken knowledge of the place.

Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament

CHAPTER 26.

JESUS AT PILATES BAR

Mat 27:1-14; Mar 15:1-5; Luk 23:1-5; Joh 18:28-38. Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas into the judgment-hall.

When I was in Jerusalem last November and December, I went directly from the Sanhedrin hall, on Mount Zion in the west, to Pilates judgment- hall, north-east wall, on the intervening slope between Mount Moriah and Bezetha. And it was morning. Thus Jesus has been up all night, dragged hither and thither, abused and afflicted by His enemies, and must be awfully fatigued and exhausted. And they did not go into the judgment- hall, in order that they may not be polluted, but may eat the Passover. This illustrates the nonsense into which Satan runs religious people when they give him a chance. Here they are so fearful of contracting ceremonial defilement that they will not so much as enter the Gentile judgment-hall; while they are already guilty of the blackest murder ever concocted in the bottomless pit. You must not think that these things are peculiar to the ancient times. The world is full of them now.

Then Pilate came out to them, and said, What accusation do you bring against this Man? They responded and said, If He were not an evildoer, we had not delivered Him to thee. Then Pilate said to them, You indeed take Him, and judge Him according to your law. Then the Jews said to him, It is not lawful for us to kill any one, in order that the word of Jesus may be fulfilled, which He spoke, signifying by what death He was about to die. Very early in our Lords ministry (Joh 3:14), in the case of the brazen serpent, He predicted the manner of His death by crucifixion. This was a Roman punishment, the Jews having no such a law. Consequently He was delivered by the Jews to the Romans for execution. You see here the dilemma in which the Jews were involved.

a. Having condemned Him to die for blasphemy, they now wake up to the fact that Judea is no longer free, but a Roman province, the prerogative of capital punishment having already passed out of the hands of the Jews and become the sole right of the Romans. Consequently they have to take Him to Pilate, the Roman proconsul.

b. By the time they arrive at Pilates judgment-hall, they have awakened to the fact that the Romans have no law against blasphemy, for which they have condemned Jesus to die. Consequently they see that it will be utterly unavailable to bring this charge against Him before a Roman court. Therefore they have no bill of charges to present to Pilate justifying the commitment of a prisoner to his adjudication.

c. Now they find themselves in a serious puzzle, as the overwhelming probability favors the conclusion that if they present to Pilate the prisoner charged with nothing but blasphemy, on which Roman legislation is utterly Silent, Pilate will simply throw the case out of court, refuse to adjudicate, and drive them all away from his tribunal, as Gallio did at Corinth (Acts 18) when Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, brought Paul to him for condemnation, having no charge against him except matters pertaining to their own religion, which the proconsul looked upon as superstition, and consequently, threw it out of court, driving the Jews away from his tribunal, when the Gentile multitude became so disgusted with the foolish persecutions of the Jews against an innocent man that they took Sosthenes and gave him a good thrashing, which seems to have proved a blessing to him, as we only hear of him once more (1 Corinthians 1), when he is associated with Paul in the evangelistic work at Ephesus, having been converted and turned missionary.

d. The final result of all this tergiversation is, that they drop the charge of blasphemy altogether, and take up a new one, on which there had been no action, committing Him to Pilate under the accusation of high treason, claiming to be King of the Jews, and consequently a rival of the Roman emperor.

Luk 23:2. And they began to accuse Him, saying, We found Him revolutionizing the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is, Christ a King. You see how adroitly they manipulated the matter. As the Scriptures denominate Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King, they construe Him as claiming to be King, and consequently a rival of Caesar.

Joh 18:33-38. Then Pilate went again into the judgment-hall, and spoke to Jesus, and said to Him, Art Thou the King of the Jews? Jesus responded to him, Do you speak this of yourself, or did others tell you concerning Me? Pilate responded, Whether am I a Jew? Thy nation and the chief priests delivered Thee to me; what hast Thou done Jesus responded, My kingdom is not from this world , If My kingdom were from this world, My servants would fight for Me, in order that I may not be delivered to the Jews. But now My kingdom is not from thence. This statement of our Savior in reference to His kingdom is frequently quoted as an argument against the coming Millennial Theocracy; but a moments reflection reveals the utter impertinency of such an application. Of course, Gods kingdom is not of this world, but of heaven; but that is no reason why, it should, not bear rule over this world. The kingdom of God is here now; yet it is not of this world. The kingdom of Satan is here; not of this world, but of hell, and a usurpation on the earth. When Satan is east out and imprisoned in hell (Revelation 20), thus all obstructions to the heavenly kingdom being removed, the latter, will, so wonderfully prevail on the earth as to receive a boundless, new impetus, not eliminating grace, but adding to it glory, when

He shall have dominion over river, sea, and shore, Far as the eagles pinion or doves light wing can soar.

Then Pilate said to Him, Art Thou not then a King? Jesus responded, Thou sayest that I am. N.B. This is an Oriental form of positive affirmation, Jesus admitting to Pilate that He is King. For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, that I may witness to the truth. His is significantly a kingdom of truth, in contradistinction to Satans kingdom of falsehood and error. Every one being of the truth heareth My voice. Poor Pilate was not of the truth. He was a corrupt thieving politician, therefore he did not hear the voice of Jesus, but came to a miserable end, dying a suicide in lonely exile, having been degraded and banished by Caligula, the Roman emperor.

Pilate says to Him, What is truth? Pilate took up the idea that He was a dreamy, visionary philosopher, gone wild with hard study, imagining that He was a King, and that He had found out the truth, as so many Greek sages claimed to have done; meanwhile he had no confidence in His claims to have discovered the truth. Consequently, when he asked the question, he goes right away, not waiting for an answer.

Saying this again, he went out to the Jews, and tells them, I find nothing criminal in Him. The Roman Empire had conquered all the world, and was at that time ruling all nations. The very idea that a poor prisoner in bonds, without an army to defend Him, should claim to be King of the Jews was, in Pilates judgment, sheer nonsense. Consequently he looks upon the royal claims of his prisoner as simply a matter of ridicule. Believing Him to be a harmless fanatic, dreaming that He is King of the Jews, therefore he makes short work of the judgment by bringing in a verdict of innocence.

Mat 27:12-14. And while He was being accused by the high priests and elders, He responded nothing. Then Pilate says to Him, Do You not hear how many things they witness against You? And He responded to him not a word, so that the governor was astonished exceedingly. Will you not follow the example of Jesus, when people falsely accuse you, and keep silent? Let them tell; ever so many scandals on you, give them no attention whatever; and they will soon get ashamed and let you alone, and in all probability make a specialty of showing you kindness.

Luk 23:4-5. Pilate said to the chief priests and the multitudes, I find nothing criminal in this Man. And they continued to become more and more uproarious, saying that He revolutionizes the people, teaching throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee even unto this place. The sun having risen about five is rapidly climbing the Oriental skies, and pouring down, the day from the summit of great Mount Olivet. His enemies, having worked hard all night to get Him condemned and killed before day, lest the people rally and fight, for Him, are now in an awful dilemma. They have Him on hand and are determined to kill Him; meanwhile the people are pouring in from all directions, and they awfully fear an outbreak, in which they will very likely be killed.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Mar 15:1. Straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council. , the whole sanhedrim, consisting of seventy, but which must never be less than twenty three, and the highpriest, to form a bench. St. John has the same idea of twenty four elders, clothed in white raiment. Rev 5:4; Rev 5:10. To this assembly it would be recited, that as good and faithful magistrates, when the state is in danger, they had sat up during the night, and tried the deceiver; and that having confessed himself to be the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, they had condemned him to die. To this no doubt they would add, as in Joh 11:48, that the Romans, construing the multitudes that followed him into seditious banditti, would come and utterly destroy the nation. Therefore the danger of the country required this strong measure; but they were specially convened at that unusually early hour to consult on the best means of bringing the governor to ratify and execute the sentence. To this, all instantly consented, excepting three, Joseph, Simon, and Nicodemus, It was then agreed to go in a body to the palace, accompanied with all their rabble, indicative of tumult, and force Pilate to execute their sentence. Oh mystery, tragic mystery of crime, and crime without example!

Mar 15:2. Pilate asked him, Art thou the king of the jews? The governor asked this derisively, the rulers having accused him of high treason. The order of the words in the greek, both here and in Mat 27:11, is, Thou art the king of the jews? To which the answer, thou sayest, is a full assent, while at the same time it saves the speaker from all appearance of egotism. Thus the Redeemer witnessed a good confession before Pontius Pilate, and taught confessors to follow his example. These events are more largely related in Matthew 27.

Mar 15:10. He knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy, the worst vice that can corrode the heart. Here Pilate ceased to be a prince, and became the slave of fear.

Mar 15:15. Pilate delivered Jesus when he had scourged him, to be crucified. Scourging by the Roman lictors was often very severe, tearing away both the skin and the flesh. St. John adds, that Pilate brought the Saviour thus scourged, and crowned with thorns, and arrayed in the purple robe of derision, before the people, in hopes, it would seem, of mitigating their clamours for his blood; having said, I will chastise him, and let him go. But the rulers being now become reprobate, demons cannot be moved to pity.

Mar 15:21. They compelled Simon the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his cross. These were afterwards two very excellent men in the church of Rome. St. Paul salutes Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine; so he claims her, because she had nourished him in the work of the Lord. Rom 16:13. Act 19:33. The conjecture is, that Simon, under the storms of persecution in Judea, had fled to Rome, where his sons, as was usual, had assumed Roman surnames.

Mar 15:25. It was the third hour, when the whole sanhedrim appeared before Pilate. But three hours having been spent in accusations, and in sending the Saviour to Herod, it was the sixth hour when Pilate brought him forth to the people, wearing the crown of thorns, and when he delivered him to be crucified. Joh 19:12-13.

Mar 15:29. They that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads. These were the rabble that had accompanied the priests and scribes, because they had heard misguided witnesses say, that he would destroy the temple and build another in three days. Where can we find a parallel, except in the outrages offered to the ancient prophets, and to the modern martyrs. Where can we go for comfort, but to the prophecies where all those cruelties are foretold and described. Psalms 22, 69. Isaiah 52:13, 14, 53. Here is love, burning love, which all the waters of death could not quench.

Mar 15:31. Likewise the chief priests mocking, said among themselves, He saved others; himself he cannot save. Here was malice, ingenious malice, most of all intolerable and insupportable.

Mar 15:33. There was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour. See on Mat 27:45. Luk 23:44.

REFLECTIONS.

In the counsels of the jews, we see what priests and scribes will do when hardened by rejecting the light, and when irritated by the superior purity of their rivals. They hated the light, they took counsel against Jesus, they stooped to every meanness to effectuate his death; they sat up the whole night, and were never so intent on the consummation of any earthly wish, as on crucifying the Lord of glory. What then must the vengeance be, when the Lord retaliates on the impenitent? He is as much intent on bringing audacious men to punishment, as they are on afflicting his people. How awful the consideration, that those men should studiously reject the mission and mercy of Christ, because it did not please them. Their prejudice in favour of a reigning Messiah, occasioned their stumbling at the poverty of Christ. And how awful that God should blind and harden the men who had wilfully blinded themselves. Thus when he withdraws his grace from the wicked, and suffers them to take their own way, they become the instruments of fulfilling the scriptures, and the subjects of his instructive vengeance.

How deplorable also was the situation of Pilate, coming in contact with the council, and having a governor over him in Csarea. His conduct excites pity, but chiefly contempt. He was devoid of a Roman soul. Why had he not, like Gallio, driven away the jews from his bar, seeing they demanded the life of a subject without adducing a single crime? Justly did he merit the degradations which quickly overtook him.

On the other hand, what a melting scene of tears, what sighs and groans from men, echoed back by the holy women at a distance. What smiting of the breasts. Oh tremendous scene a bleeding Redeemer, a beclouded sky, a trembling earth! All portentous of greater woes. Where can we find relief but in the Saviours tears; where a retreat but in his tomb.

But wait awhile, ye weeping saints; rest on the Hope of Israel. Ask not, oh Zion, in haste and anguish for thunderbolts, nor for Elijahs fire to consume the murderers. Allow the rebels time for recollection and repentance. Let them hear the trumpets joyful sound. Let a church be gathered in, and a remnant saved, whose sons shall be great in all the earth. Then the day of vengeance shall come on the finally impenitent. Then the scenes of mockery shall be reversed. Then the day shall come that shall burn as an oven, and the fathers and the sons, root and branch, shall be burned up. Be calm, oh Zion: in three days thy sun shall rise to set no more, and all thy sorrows shall be changed to joys.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Mar 15:1-15. Jesus before Pilate.A second meeting of the Sanhedrin held in the daylight regularizes the condemnation arrived at overnight. They now take Jesus to Pilate (governor of Juda, A.D. 2636, see p. 653) who was in Jerusalem during the Passover. The narrative is clearly incomplete. No formal accusation by the Sanhedrin is recorded. Pilates conduct throughout is not characteristic of the man of ruthless cruelty, revealed in Philo, and in Luk 13:1. The description of his part is, therefore, doubted by some, who say it is determined by Mk.s desire to make the Jews entirely responsible. The crowd calls out Crucify; Pilate hardly pronounces the sentence. Indeed Pilate recognised the innocence of Jesus and the harmlessness of His followers. But Pilate may have been impressed by Jesus, and his conduct might be determined by a wish to play with the Jewish rulers. This would be quite in keeping with what we know of him.

Mar 15:6. The custom of releasing a prisoner is not otherwise attested (Joh 18:39*). It may have been a practice adopted by Pilate.

Mar 15:7. Barabbas (= son of the teacher, probably) was a fairly common name (Mat 27:16 f.*).

Mar 15:10. Pilate rightly perceived that the priests were mainly responsible.

Mar 15:16. Scourging usually preceded crucifixion (cf. Josephus, Wars, II, xiv. 9).

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 1

Held a consultation; to arrange a plan for taking Jesus before the Roman government, and securing his condemnation there. Either they had not the legal right to inflict a capital punishment, or else, if they had the right, as some have maintained, they may have feared the people, and considered it more prudent to devolve upon the Roman authorities the task of carrying such a sentence into execution.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

(Mark 15) THE CROSS

In the scenes that surround the cross the evil of fallen man is disclosed in all its enormity. Every class is represented – Jews and Gentiles, priests and people, the ruler and his soldiers, the passers by and criminal thieves. However great their political and social distinctions, all are united in their hatred and rejection of Christ (1-32).

When man and all his wickedness is lost to sight in the darkness that covered the land, we are permitted to hear the cry from the Saviour that tells us He was forsaken of God, when, as the Holy Victim, He was made sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him (33-38).

Finally, when the forsaking is past, we have a threefold witness borne to the Lord Jesus by the centurion, some devoted women, and Joseph of Arimathea (39-47).

(Vv. 1-15). Already the Lord has been unjustly condemned by the Jewish council. But all the world has to be proved guilty; therefore, as the perfect Servant of Jehovah, the Lord submits to appear before the judgment seat of the Roman power, only to prove the utter breakdown of government in the hands of the Gentiles.

Before Pilate, the Lord is again challenged as to the truth, for at once Pilate asks, “Art Thou the King of the Jews?” The Lord replies, “Thou sayest it.” As one has said, “Whether it was before the high priest or before Pilate, it was the truth He confessed and for the truth He was condemned by man” (W. K.). To the accusations of the Jews, He answered nothing. In the perfection of His way, He knows when to speak and when to keep silence. For the truth He will speak, but when it is a question of meeting personal malice against Himself, He is silent. Good for us to profit by His perfect example, and follow in the steps of the One who, when He was reviled, reviled not again. There is a time when silence will produce a far greater effect upon the conscience than any word that van be uttered. Nevertheless, such silence is entirely foreign to our fallen nature. Thus, Pilate marvelled at His silence.

Knowing full well that all the accusations of the Jews had no real weight as proving any wrong on the part of Christ, Pilate seeks, on the one hand, to appease the Jews, and on the other hand, to escape the infamy of condemning an innocent person, by falling back on a custom at the Feast of the Passover, of releasing “one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.” At that time there was a notable prisoner, named Barabbas, who lay bound for rebellion and murder. Encouraged by the multitude who were clamouring for this custom to be carried out, Pilate suggests that He should release Jesus, the King of the Jews rather than Barabbas, the murderer.

To fall back on this custom was a mere compromise, and added to the wickedness of the judge; for if, as Pilate knew, the blessed Lord was innocent, a righteous judgment would demand that, apart from any custom, He should have been released. Moreover the injustice of Pilate in not at once releasing an innocent Man is increased by the fact that he was perfectly aware that, in having bound the Lord and brought Him before the judgment seat, these wicked men were moved by envy. Envy, or jealousy, whether in a sinner or in a saint is one of the greatest incentives For evil in the world. It was envy that led to the first murder, when Cain killed his brother: it was envy that led to the greatest murder when the Jews killed their Messiah. Well may the preacher say, “Wrath is cruel, and anger is outrageous; but who is able to stand before envy?” (Pro 27:4). With envy filling their hearts these religious leaders incite the people to choose Barabbas rather than Christ. Moved by envy they reject Christ, the One who is “altogether lovely,” and choose a murderer and a rebel. Well for all believers to take to heart the lessons of this solemn scene, and heed the words of the apostle James when he warns us against allowing “bitter envying and strife” in our hearts. If not judged in the heart it will lead to confusion and every evil work, even in the christian circle (Jam 3:14-16).

Pilate may be a hardened man of the world, but at least he made some feeble remonstrance against the condemnation of the One that all knew to be innocent. Therefore, if he is to release Barabbas he asks, “What will ye then that I shall do unto Him whom ye call the King of the Jews?” Without any hesitation they cried out, “Crucify Him.” We do not care for the company of a rebel and a murderer, but such is the enmity of the flesh to God, that, if left to ourselves, and we have to choose between a murderer and Christ, we prefer the murderer.

Again Pilate asks, “Why, what evil hath He done?” Their only answer is the unreasoning cry of a mob, “Crucify Him.” Willing to content the people, he abandons all show of justice, releases Barabbas, and having scourged the One that he knows to be innocent, delivers Him up to be crucified.

(Vv. 16-20). In the treatment of the Lord at the hand of the soldiers we see the brutality of man that finds its pleasure in outraging a defenceless person. It was no part of a soldier’s duty to maltreat a prisoner, but the lowly grace and perfection of this Holy Prisoner brought God near to them, and this was intolerable to fallen man. The One who will yet be crowned with many crowns at the hand of a righteous God, submits to be crowned with a crown of thorns at the hands of wicked men. He who will rule the nations with a rod of iron, allows poor wretched man to smite Him with a reed. In mockery they bow the knee before the One to whom they will have to bow in the day of judgment.

(V. 21). The violent soldiers, indifferent to the liberty and rights of others, compel one returning from his labours in the field to bear the cross. Simon the Cyrenian had the honour of bearing the actual cross for the One who suffered on the cross for all the world. God, apparently was not unmindful of this small service for the Lord; for we are told that this Simon was the father of Alexander and Rufus. This seems suggestive of the Rufus mentioned in Rom 12:13, and would imply that Alexander and Rufus were well known converts when Mark wrote his gospel.

(Vv. 22-32). No indignity or humiliation is spared the Lord. Having crucified Him in the place of a skull, the soldiers gamble for His clothes. In derision they pour contempt upon the nation by the superscription of His accusation, “THE KING OF THE JEWS,” and at the same time crucifying Him between two thieves. Unknown to themselves they were fulfilling scripture which said, “He was numbered with the transgressors.”

It might be thought that the passers by would at least refrain from taking part in this terrible scene, but even they wag their heads, rail upon Him, misapply His words, and challenge Him to “Save Himself, and come down from the cross.”

The chief priests join with others in mocking the Lord, when they said, ‘He saved others; Himself He cannot save.” This indeed, was true, little as they realised that it was the truth. But what they add is wholly false, for they say, “Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” Faith cometh by hearing not by sight. Moreover, had He come down from the cross belief would have been in vain. We should yet be in our sins.

Finally, the Christ of God is rejected and scorned by the lowest criminals, for we read, “They that were crucified with Him reviled Him.”

(Vv. 33-36). We have seen the Lord rejected by all men from the highest to the lowest, and forsaken by His disciples. Now we are permitted to hear of His far deeper sufferings when forsaken by God. It is no longer he envy, malice, and cruelty of men that He has to bear, but the penalty of sin when delivered up to death by a holy God. Into this solemn scene no man can, or shall intrude. Darkness was over the land. Christ was alone with God hidden from every eye, when He, who knew no sin, was made sin. As made sin He had to endure the forsaking of God. But may we not say that, never was He more precious to God than when in perfect obedience He endured the forsaking of God? He ever glorified the Father, but never in a greater degree than when made sin and forsaken. That such a sacrifice was required magnifies the holy nature of God; that such a sacrifice could be given magnifies the love of God. No less a sacrifice could secure the glory of God or obtain the salvation of men.

But what must it have been to His holy nature to be made sin? Coming into the world He was spoken of as that “Holy Thing”: going out of it He was “made sin.” The One who was the Object of the Father’s delight from all eternity is forsaken. From the Twenty second Psalm, we learn that the One who utters the cry, “My God, my God why hast Thou forsaken me?” alone can give the answer, “Thou art holy, O Thou that dwellest amid the praises of Israel.” If the purpose of the heart of God, to dwell in the midst of a praising people, is to be fulfilled, then the holiness of God must first be met. Nothing can meet the holy requirements of a holy God in respect of sin except the offering of Christ without spot.

(Vv. 37, 38). When all was accomplished, “Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.” His cry with a loud voice proved, indeed, hat His death was not the result of the failure and exhaustion of natural rowers. One has said, “Jesus did not die because He could not live, as all others do.” If the holiness of God was to be met, and salvation to be made possible for sinners, He must die; but no man took His life from Him. He, Himself, gave up His life.

Immediately the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. The veil separated the holy place from the holy of holies. It spoke, indeed, of the presence of God, but man shut out from God. Such was the character of the time of law. God present but man unable to draw near to God. The rending of the veil proclaimed that all was over with Judaism; but more it tells us that God can now in righteousness come out in grace with the good news of forgiveness for man, and that man can draw near to God on the ground of the precious blood.

(V. 39). The great work of the cross being finished, the first voice to be lifted up as a witness to the glory of the Person of Christ, is a Gentile, the harbinger of the new day, when a great host from the Gentiles will confess the Saviour as the Son of God. Doubtless, this centurion had seen many a death on fields of battle, but never a death like that of Christ. He recognises that the One who can, with a loud cry, yield up His spirit, must be more than man. Thus, he can say, “Truly this Man was the Son of God.”

(Vv. 40, 41). Then certain devoted women, who had followed the Lord and ministered to Him of their substance, in the days of His flesh have honourable mention. In love they had followed the Lord in His life of service, they clung to Him in death upon the cross, they behold when His body is laid in the grave. It is easy to dwell upon their lack of intelligence, while falling far behind them in their devoted love.

(Vv. 42-47). If when the disciples had fled, these devoted women shine forth in time of danger, so too an honourable counsellor is emboldened to come forward, and beg the body of Jesus for burial. Though a true believer, who waited for the Kingdom of God, yet his high social position may have hindered him from identifying himself with the lowly Jesus and His humble disciples. But, as so often, the greatness of the evil forces faith to show itself, and those whom we might judge to be spiritually of little account make a firm stand on the side of the Lord, when others that we might expect to take a lead entirely fail.

Thus the word of God is fulfilled that tells us that though men appointed His grave with the wicked, yet He should be with the rich in His death (Isa 53:9 N. Tr.). Thus if men are allowed with every insult to nail Christ to a cross, that the counsel of God may be carried out, care is taken – that great work being finished – that His body shall be buried with due reverence, and without further insults from wicked men.

Fuente: Smith’s Writings on 24 Books of the Bible

CHAPTER XV.

1 Jesus brought bound, and accused before Pilate. 15 Upon the clamour of the common people, the murderer Barabbas is loosed, and Jesus delivered up to be crucified. 17 He is crowned with thorns, 19 spit on, and mocked: 21 fainteth in bearing his cross: 27 hangeth between two thieves: 29 suffereth the triumphing reproaches of the Jews: 39 but confessed by the centurion to be the Son of God: 43 and is honourably buried by Joseph.

Ver. 25. And it was the third hour, and they crucified Him. The third, not beginning, but ending, and going on to the sixth. For that Christ was crucified at the sixth hour, or midday, appears from the 33rd verse. Some suspect that there is an error, and that the sixth ought to be read for the third. For the Hebrews had divided the day and also the night into four parts or hours, each of which contained three of our hours. The first began at sunrise, and lasted for three hours. When they were over, Terce began, and lasted for three hours, or until midday, when Sect began, and ended three hours afterwards, when None began, and lasted till Vespers, or evening. When Sect was beginning, or the sixth hour, Christ was crucified; and when None, or the ninth hour, was beginning, He died.

Ver. 28. And with the wicked he was reputed: Heb. , nimma, i.e., was numbered, was counted. See what I have said on Isa 53:12. The reason is, because Christ took to Himself our place, our account and reckoning. But we were wicked. He therefore was reckoned with the wicked, that He might make us, instead of wicked, just, righteous, and holy.

Ver. 42. Because it was the Parasceve, that is, the day before one Sabbath. The Greek is, which is the Prosabbatum. For Parasceve is the came as Preparation. Friday was so called because food and things needful for the Sabbath were prepared upon it. Hence it was called the Pro-Sabbath, i.e., the day before, or the vigil of the Sabbath. (Top )

Fuente: Cornelius Lapide Commentary

MARK CHAPTER FIFTEEN

THE TRIAL

15.1 And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate. 2 And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering said unto him Thou sayest it. 3 And the chief priests accused him of many things: but he answered nothing. 4 And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against thee. 5 But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.

A meeting of the minds it would seem, the chief priests, elders, scribes and the WHOLE council met to agree to the killing of the Lord. They hauled him off to Pilate and sought His death. There is bravery in crowds to be sure as it seems pictured here. When crowds gather and someone is stirring the pot, often trouble is the result of the situation. No different with the Lord and his accusers or false accusers might we say?

Christ spoke to Pilate but refused to respond to the false accusers. This amazed Pilate. It might be assumed that the amazement arose from the fact that the Jewish leaders were frothing at the mouth with their falsehood and Pilate knew or at least suspected it to be false and was impressed that Christ did not join into their little game of false accusation. The term translated “marveled” has the thought of admiration within its meaning. Pilate was not taken by the Jews, but admired the Lord for His actions.

So it is at times in church situations. You might be falsely accused but to respond will draw you into a fight that is un-win-able. Once falsehood is unleashed it often is impossible to counter even with the truth. False accusation often results in an innocent party being left with mud on their face and a name belittled.

Many years ago in a small town a woman made accusation against her pastor. He was ready to resign when his church board asked him to stay and told him that they were behind him 100%. He remained on for several months but the damage had been done. Rumors continued to circulate even after the woman admitted her sin and falsehood. The man was forced to resign and leave town due to the circumstance of falsehood.

The word translated council is the word we gain the Jewish council “Sanhedrim” from and is simply a council of the leaders. This was the big guns in Israel, the legislature if you will – the ones that caused things to happen in the country spiritually.

Pilate’s question probably was his attempt to find fault with the man. Had Christ said yes, that He was the King of the Jews there would have been grounds for sedition charges against him for attempting to usurp Roman authority. Since the Lord gave an evasive answer Pilate was left to consider Christ based on the lies of the Jews.

Robertson assumes that the Jews had given this as one of the many charges, though we do notknow if that assumption is correct. It would be impossible for Pilate to over look this charge or fact due to the fact that he himself could well be charged for overlooking such a crime against Caesar.

The trip to Pilate was also part of Roman law, Rome held sway over the death penalty so that the Jews could not just kill Jews that were friendly toward Rome.

Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson

15:1 And {1} straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried [him] away, and {a} {a} delivered [him] to Pilate.

(1) Christ being bound before the judgment seat of an earthly Judge, is condemned before the open assembly as guilty unto the death of the cross, not for his own sins (as is shown by the judge’s own words) but for all of ours, that we who are indeed guilty creatures, in being delivered from the guiltiness of our sins, might be acquitted before the judgment seat of God, even in the open assembly of the angels.

(a) It was not lawful for them to put any man to death, for all authority to punish by death was taken away from them, first by Herod the great, and afterward by the Romans, about forty years before the destruction of the temple, and therefore they deliver Jesus to Pilate.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The verdict of the Sanhedrin 15:1 (cf. Matthew 27:1-2; Luke 22:66-71)

Matthew and Mark described this meeting as though it was separate from the earlier one (Mar 14:53-65). They probably did so to bring the reader back from the courtyard to the upper room in Caiaphas’ house. Yet the decision seems to have been a separate one from the conviction for blasphemy. The Roman authorities would not have prosecuted Jesus as a blasphemer. Consequently the Sanhedrin, evidently now at full strength or close to it, decided to charge Jesus with treason against the Roman government. This verse does not explain that decision, but Pilate’s examination of Jesus that follows shows that was the charge the Sanhedrin had made against Him.

"Jesus, who is, indeed, king of the Jews in a deeply spiritual sense, has refused to lead a political uprising. Yet now, condemned for blasphemy by the Jews because of his spiritual claims, he is accused by them also before Pilate by [sic] being precisely what he had disappointed the crowds for failing to be-a political insurgent." [Note: Moule, p. 124.]

Mark did not explain who Pilate was, as Matthew did, evidently because his Roman readers knew about Pilate.

"Pilate belonged to a special group of imperial administrators, consisting of men beneath the rank of senator, the so-called equestrian class or Roman ’knights.’ These magistrates, who owned a moderate minimum of property, were used to govern relatively small areas that required careful supervision. Their official title in the period prior to Claudius was not procurator but prefect (praefectus). . . . Pilate came to Judea in the year A.D. 26 as the fifth of the provincial prefects and remained in office ten years. He showed himself a harsh administrator who despised the Jewish people and their particular sensitivities." [Note: Lane, pp. 548-49.]

When Pilate visited Jerusalem from his provincial capital of Caesarea, he normally stayed in Herod’s palace on the northwest corner of the city or in the Fortress of Antonia just northwest of the temple. [Note: Hiebert, p. 379.] It was apparently to one of these places that the guards led Jesus in the early morning hours of Friday, the fifteenth of Nisan (April 3). Christian tradition favors the Fortress of Antonia, but modern commentators usually favor Herod’s palace.

"As Friday morning arrives and the death of Jesus approaches, Mark will slow time from days to hours. Such slowing of time is yet another way of calling attention to the pivotal importance of Jesus’ death." [Note: Kingsbury, p. 49.]

The Sanhedrin involved the Romans in Jesus’ trial because the Romans did not allow the Jews to execute anyone without their permission, though the Sanhedrin could pass a death sentence. The Jews probably bound Jesus to make Him look like a dangerous criminal. He would not have tried to escape.

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

Chapter 15

CHAPTER 15:1-20 (Mar 15:1-20)

PILATE

“And straightway in the morning the chief priests with the elders and scribes, and the whole council, held a consultation, and bound Jesus, and carried Him away, and delivered Him up to Pilate.”

“. . . And they lead Him out to crucify Him.” Mar 15:1-20 (R.V.)

WITH morning came the formal assembly, which St. Mark dismisses in a single verse. It was indeed a disgraceful mockery. Before the trial began its members had prejudged the case, passed sentence by anticipation, and abandoned Jesus, as one condemned, to the brutality of their servants. And now the spectacle of a prisoner outraged and maltreated moves no indignation in their hearts.

Let us, for whom His sufferings were endured, reflect upon the strain and anguish of all these repeated examinations, these foregone conclusions gravely adopted in the name of justice, these exhibitions of greed for blood. Among the “unknown sufferings” by which the Eastern Church invokes her Lord, surely not the least was His outraged moral sense.

As the issue of it all, they led Him away to Pilate, meaning, by the weight of such an accusing array, to overpower any possible scruples of the governor, but in fact fulfilling His words, “they shall deliver Him unto the Gentiles.” And the first question recorded by St. Mark expresses the intense surprise of Pilate. “Thou,” so meek, so unlike the numberless conspirators that I have tried, — or perhaps, “Thou,” Whom no sympathizing multitude sustains, and for Whose death the disloyal priesthood thirsts, “Art Thou the King of the Jews?” We know how carefully Jesus disentangled His claim from the political associations which the high priests intended that it should suggest, how the King of Truth would not exaggerate any more than understate the case, and explained that His kingdom was not of this world, that His servants did not fight, that His royal function was to uphold the truth, not to expel conquerors. The eyes of a practiced Roman governor saw through the accusation very clearly. Before him, Jesus was accused of sedition, but that was a transparent pretext; Jews did not hate Him for enmity to Rome: He was a rival teacher and a successful one, and for envy they had delivered Him. So far all was well. Pilate investigated the charge, arrived at the correct judgment, and it only remained that he should release the innocent man. In reaching this conclusion Jesus had given him the most prudent and skillful help, but as soon as the facts became clear, He resumed His impressive and mysterious silence. Thus, before each of His judges in turn, Jesus avowed Himself the Messiah and then held His peace. It was an awful silence, which would not give that which was holy to the dogs, nor profane the truth by unavailing protests or controversies. It was, however, a silence only possible to an exalted nature full of self-control, since the words actually spoken redeem it from any suspicion or stain of sullenness. It is the conscience of Pilate which must henceforth speak. The Romans were the lawgivers of the ancient world, and a few years earlier their greatest poet had boasted that their mission was to spare the helpless and to crush the proud. In no man was an act of deliberate injustice, or complaisance to the powerful at the cost of the good, more unpardonable than in a leader of that splendid race, whose laws are still the favorite study of those who frame and administer our own. And the conscience of Pilate struggled hard, aided by superstitious fear. The very silence of Jesus amid many charges, by none of which His accusers would stand or fall, excited the wonder of His judge. His wife’s dream aided the effect. And he was still more afraid when he heard that this strange and elevated Personage, so unlike any other prisoner whom he had ever tried, laid claim to be Divine. Thus even in his desire to save Jesus, his motive was not pure, it was rather an instinct of self-preservation than a sense of justice. But there was danger on the other side as well; since he had already incurred the imperial censure, he could not without grave apprehensions contemplate a fresh complaint, and would certainly be ruined if he were accused of releasing a conspirator against Caesar. And accordingly he stooped to mean and crooked ways, he lost hold of the only clue in the perplexing labyrinth of expediencies, which is principle, and his name in the creed of Christendom is spoken with a shudder –: crucified under Pontius Pilate!”

It was the time for him to release a prisoner to them, according to an obscure custom, which some suppose to have sprung from the release of one of the two sacrificial goats, and others from the fact that they now celebrated their own deliverance from Egypt. At this moment the people began to demand their usual indulgence, and an evil hope arose in the heart of Pilate. They would surely welcome One who was in danger as a patriot: he would himself make the offer; and he would put it in this tempting form, “Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews?” Thus would the enmity of the priests be gratified, since Jesus would henceforth be a condemned culprit, and owe His life to their intercession with the foreigner. But the proposal was a surrender. The life of Jesus had not been forfeited; and when it was placed at their discretion, it was already lawlessly taken away. Moreover, when the offer was rejected, Jesus was in the place of a culprit who would not be released. To the priests, nevertheless, it was a dangerous proposal, and they needed to stir up the people, or perhaps Barabbas would not have been preferred.

Instigated by their natural guides, their religious teachers, these Jews made the tremendous choice, which has ever since been heavy on their heads and on their children’s. Yet if ever an error could be excused by the plea of authority, and the duty of submission to constituted leaders, it was this error. They followed men who sat in Moses’ seat, and who were thus entitled, according to Jesus Himself, to be obeyed. Yet that authority has not relieved the Hebrew nation from the wrath which came upon them to the uttermost. The salvation they desire was not moral elevation or spiritual life, and so Jesus had nothing to bestow upon them; they refused the Holy One and the Just. What they wanted was the world, the place which Rome held, and which they fondly hoped was yet to be their own. Even to have failed in the pursuit of this was better than to have the words of everlasting life, and so the name of Barabbas was enough to secure the rejection of Christ. It would almost seem that Pilate was ready to release both, if that would satisfy them, for he asks, in hesitation and perplexity, “What shall I do then with Him Whom ye call the King of the Jews?” Surely in their excitement for an insurgent, that title, given by themselves, will awake their pity. But again and again, like the howl of wolves, resounds their ferocious cry, Crucify Him, crucify Him.

The irony of Providence is known to every student of history, but it never was so manifest as here. Under the pressure of circumstances upon men whom principle has not made firm, we find a Roman governor striving to kindle every disloyal passion of his subjects, on behalf of the King of the Jews, — appealing to men whom he hated and despised, and whose charges have proved empty as chaff, to say, What evil has He done? and even to tell him, on his judgment throne, what he shall do with their King; we find the men who accused Jesus of stirring up the people to sedition, now shamelessly agitating for the release of a red-handed insurgent; forced moreover to accept the responsibility which they would fain have devolved on Pilate, and themselves to pronounce the hateful sentence of crucifixion, unknown to their law, but for which they had secretly intrigued; and we find the multitude fiercely clamoring for a defeated champion of brute force, whose weapon has snapped in his hands, who has led his followers to the cross, and from whom there is no more to hope. What satire upon their hope of a temporal Messiah could be more bitter than their own cry, “We have no king but Caesar”? And what satire upon this profession more destructive than their choice of Barabbas and refusal of Christ? And all the while, Jesus looks on in silence, carrying out His mournful but effectual plan, the true Master of the movements which design to crush Him, and which He has foretold. As He ever receives gifts for the rebellious, and is the Savior of all men, though especially of them that believe, so now His passion, which retrieved the erring soul of Peter, and won the penitent thief, rescues Barabbas from the cross. His suffering was made visibly vicarious.

One is tempted to pity the feeble judge, the only person who is known to have attempted to rescue Jesus, beset by his old faults, which will make an impeachment fatal, wishing better than he dares to act, hesitating, sinking inch by inch, and like a bird with broken wing. No accomplice in this frightful crime is so suggestive of warning to hearts not entirely hardened.

But pity is lost in sterner emotion as we remember that this wicked governor, having borne witness to the perfect innocence of Jesus, was content, in order to save himself from danger, to watch the Blessed One enduring all the horrors of a Roman scourging, and then to yield Him up to die.

It is now the unmitigated cruelty of ancient paganism which has closed its hand upon our Lord. When the soldiers led Him away within the court, He was lost to His nation, which had renounced Him. It is upon this utter alienation, even more than the locality where the cross was fixed, that the Epistle to the Hebrews turns our attention, when it reminds us that “the bodies of those beasts whose blood is brought into the holy place by the high priest as an offering for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people through His own blood, suffered without the gate.” The physical exclusion, the material parallel points to something deeper, for the inference is that of estrangement. Those who serve the tabernacle cannot eat of our altar. Let us go forth unto Him, bearing His reproach. (Heb 12:10-13).

Renounced by Israel, and about to become a curse under the law, He has now to suffer the cruelty of wantonness, as He has already endured the cruelty of hatred and fear. Now, more than ever perhaps, He looks for pity and there is no man. None responded to the deep appeal of the eyes which had never seen misery without relieving it. The contempt of the strong for the weak and suffering, of coarse natures for sensitive ones, of Romans for Jews, all these were blended with bitter scorn of the Jewish expectation that some day Rome shall bow before a Hebrew conqueror, in the mockery which Jesus now underwent, when they clad Him in such cast-off purple as the Palace yielded, thrust a reed into His pinioned hand, crowned Him with thorns, beat these into His holy head with the scepter they had offered Him, and then proceeded to render the homage of their nation to the Messiah of Jewish hopes. It may have been this mockery which suggested to Pilate the inscription for the cross. But where is the mockery now? In crowning Him King of sufferings, and Royal among those who weep, they secured to Him the adherence of all hearts. Christ was made perfect by the things which He suffered; and it was not only in spite of insult and anguish but by means of them that He drew all men unto Him.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary