Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 15:6
Now at [that] feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.
6. Now at that feast ] Rather, at festival time. There is no article in the Greek (or in Luk 23:17; Mat 27:15), and the apparent limitation of the custom to the Feast of the Passover is not required by the original words, or by the parallel in Joh 18:39. It seems to have been a custom, the origin of which is unknown, to release to the people on the occasion of the Passover and other great Feasts any prisoner whom they might select. The custom may have been of Jewish origin, and had been continued by the Roman governors from motives of policy. Even the Romans were accustomed at the Lectisternia and Bacchanalia to allow an amnesty for criminals.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Mar 15:6
He released unto them one prisoner whomsoever they desired.
Barabbas or Christ
It affords the most vivid illustration in the New Testament of just two great moral lessons: Pilates behaviour shows the wicked wrong of indecision, and the chief priests choice of Barabbas release shows the utter rain of a wrong decision. These will become apparent, each in its turn, as we study the story.
I. Earliest of all, let us group together the incidents of the history, so that their order may be seen.
1. Observe the rapid action of the priests (Mar 15:1). It must have been very late on Thursday night when the great council finished the condemnation of Jesus. But the moment that was over, the priests hurried Him at dawn into the presence of the Roman governor. Their feet ran to evil, and they made haste to shed innocent blood (Isa 59:7).
2. Now comes the providential moment for Pilate. For the wisdom of God so orders it that this man shall be able to meet his tremendous responsibility unembarrassed by a mob for his audience. These zealots, like all creatures who have the form of godliness but deny the power thereof, are so emphatically pious that even in the midst of murder they pause on a punctilio; they will not enter the judgment hall lest they should be so defiled that they could not eat the passover (Joh 18:28). This left Pilate the chance calmly to converse with Jesus alone.
3. Then succeeds the pitiable period of subterfuge which always follows a shirked duty. Convinced of our Lords innocence, Pilate proposed that his official authority should just be counted out in this matter. He bade the chief priests take their prisoner themselves, and deal with Him as they pleased. To this he received a reply which showed their savage animosity, and at the same instant disclosed the use they meant to make of his power. They cried out that the only reason why they had consulted him at all was found in the unlawfulness of killing a man without due form of procedure (Joh 18:30-31).
4. Next to this is recorded the attempt of the governor to shift his responsibility. Pilate learned from the mere chance use of a word that Jesus was from Galilee; and as this province was in the jurisdiction of Herod, the titular monarch of the Jews, he sent his prisoner under a guard over to the other palace (Luk 23:7). The king was quite glad to see this Nazarene prophet, and tried to get Him to work a miracle, but did not succeed in evoking so much as a word from His lips (Isa 53:7). But before the return, he put a slight on Jesus kingly claims, so that Pilate might know how much in derision he held them. The soldiers mocked Him, arraying Him in a gorgeous robe, and then led Him back into the presence of the governor again.
5. At his wits end, Pilate at last proposes a compromise. He remembered that there was a custom, lately brought over from Italy into Palestine, of freeing someone of the States prisoners every year at Passover as a matter of proconsular clemency (Mar 15:6). He offered to let Jesus go under this rule. Such a procedure would be equivalent to pronouncing him technically a criminal, but thus His life would be spared. But the subtle priests put the people up to refuse this favour flatly.
6. The governors wife now meets him with a warning from a dream. He had returned to the judgment seat, and was just about to pronounce the decision. His wife interrupted: Have thou nothing to do with that just man (Mat 27:19). This threw Pilate into a frantic irresolution once more. A second time he left the room, and went forth to reason and expostulate with the infuriated crowd at the door. With renewed urgency he pressed upon their consideration the half-threat that he would let loose on them this wretch Barabbas, if they persisted in demanding Jesus death (Luk 23:18). This only exasperated them the more.
7. Finally, this bewildered judge gave his reluctant consent to their clamours. But in the act of condemnation he did the foolishest thing of all he did that awful day. He took water and washed his hands before the mob, declaring thus that he was innocent of the blood of the just person he was delivering up to their spite (Mat 27:24).
II. So we reach the crisis of events in the spiritual career of that ruler and of that nation.
1. Observe the singular picture. It is all in one verse of the Scripture (Mar 15:15). Two men, now in the same moment, appear in public on the steps of the Praetorium: Jesus and Barabbas. One of them was the Son of God, the Saviour of men. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man! (Joh 19:5). Art has tried to reproduce this scene. Dore has painted the whole of it; Guido Reni has painted the head with thorns around the forehead. Others have made similar attempts according to their fancy or their ability. It is a spectacle which attracts and discourages. Beyond them all, however, lies the fact which each Christian will be likely to fashion before his own imagination. Jesus comes forth with His reed and His robe: Ecce Homo! Barabbas alongside! This creature has never been a favourite with artists. He was a paltry wretch any way, thrust up into a fictitious importance by the supreme occasion. We suppose him to have been quite a commonplace impostor. Bar means son; Abba, which some interpret as father. Very likely he chose his own name as a false Messiah, Son of the Father; indeed, some of the ancient manuscripts call him Jesus Barabbas. He does not poise picturesquely; look at him!
2. The moral of this scene turns upon the wilful choice made between these two leaders, the real and the pretended Christ. Now let it be said here that the whole history is often repeated even in these modern times. It is unwise to lose the lesson taught us by rushing off into pious execration of those bigoted Jews. Men had better look into their own hearts. In his introduction to the study of metaphysics, Malebranche remarks very quietly, It is not into a strange country that such guides as these volumes of mine will conduct you; but it is into your own, in which, not unlikely, you are a stranger. It will be well to bear in mind that the decision is offered and made between Jesus and Barabbas whenever the Lord of glory is represented in a principle, in an institution, in a truth, in a person.
3. So let us pause right here to inquire what this decision involves for those who make it. The illustration is helpful, and we can still employ it. Dwell a moment upon the deliberateness of the choice which the multitude made that day. The exhibition was perfectly intelligible: it always is. There is Barabbas! there is Christ! When a sharp moral crisis is reached, men generally know the side they ought to choose. Right and wrong, truth and error, sin and holiness, the world or God-this is just the old Jerusalem scene back again. Such a choice fixes character. As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he. When one wills strongly, he moulds himself in the likeness of the thing he chooses. The old Castilian proverb says, Every man is the son of his own work. Then observe the responsibility of the choice between Barabbas and Christ. The chief priests declared they would take it (Mat 27:25). Pilate could ruin no soul but his own. In the end Jesus blood rested upon the nation that slew Him. Oh, what a history! a land without a nation-a nation without a land! All the vast future swung on the hinge of that choice. Note, therefore, the reach of this decision. It exhausted all the chances. Once-on that Friday morning early-those two men stood side by side, and Pilate asked the question, Whether of the twain? (Mat 27:21). It was never possible after that to traverse the same spiritual ground of alternative again. Whoever chooses the wrong must go and fare for good or ill with the thing he has chosen. The thief becomes master, the murderer lord.
III. We are ready now to receive the full teaching of the story: our two lessons appear plainly.
1. We see the wicked wrong of indecision. We are agreed that Pilate wished to let Jesus go. But when he gave Him up to the spite of His murderers, he himself consented and so shared the crime (Psa 50:18). Thus he destroyed his character. Trimming, injustice, cruelty: step by step he went down, till he added a scourging which nobody demanded. The facility with which we commit certain sins, says Augustine, is a punishment for sins already committed. Thus he also destroyed his reputation. One man there has been whose name was put in an epistle just for a black background on which to write a name that was white (1Ti 6:13). The same was put in the Apostles Creed that all Christendom might hold it in everlasting fame of infamy: crucified under Pontius Pilate.
2. We see also the utter ruin of a wrong decision. Do not waste any more thought on Pilate or the Jews. Think of yourself. See life and death, blessing and cursing; choose life (Deu 30:15; Deu 30:19). Do not forfeit what may be your souls last chance. (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)
Not Barabbas but Jesus
Tremellius was a Jew, from whose heart the veil had been taken away, and who had been led by the Holy Spirit to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of God. The Jews who had condemned our Saviour had said, Not this man, but Barabbas; Tremellius, when near his end, glorying in Christ alone, and renouncing whatever came in competition with Him, used very different words, Not Barabbas, but Jesus. (Baxendales Dictionary of Anecdote.)
Barabbas preferred to Christ
I. This implies a history.
II. It records a choice. The choice involves two things-first, what was repudiated; next, what was approved. Here was the repudiation of One who was absolutely faultless. Here was the repudiation by the world of One who had wrought for the world the greatest wonders of material kindness. Here was the repudiation of One who loved them, knowing their lack of love to Himself. Here was the repudiation of One who had at His command power destroy as well as to save. From what was repudiated, turn to what was approved, Not this man, but Barabbas.
III. It suggests a parallel. If you prefer any passion or habit, any thing or man, any person or personification, to Christ, that is your Barabbas. If you prefer any treasure to Him wile is value, that is your Barabbas. If you prefer any company to His company, any love to His love, that object of preference is your Barabbas. If you prefer any given sin to the grace that would conquer it, that sin is your Barabbas. If, though you ought to know that this sin is destructive, that the blood of souls is on it, that it is a robber, and that it still lurks in darkness to rob you of your nobility, of your peace, of your spiritual sensitiveness, of your liberty to have fellowship with the Infinite One, and still refuse to give the vile thing up to be crucified, but will rather give up Christ, that vile thing is your Barabbas. If, refusing Christ, you trust something else to be the Jesus of your souls, that false righteousness, false foundation, false comfort, false hope, is your Jesus Barabbas. Of all the faculties with which God has enriched man, there is not one so mysterious in its nature and awful in its working as the choosing faculty. (Charles Stanford, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Now at that feast,…. The feast of the passover, which was at that instant; see Joh 18:39. The Syriac, Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic versions read, “at every feast”; as if the following custom was used at every feast in the year, at the feasts of pentecost and tabernacles, as well as at the passover; whereas it was only at the latter:
he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired; of this custom [See comments on Mt 27:15].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Used to release (). Imperfect tense of customary action where Mt 27:15 has the verb (was accustomed to).
They asked of him (). Imperfect middle, expressing their habit also.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “Now at that feast,” (kata de heorten) “Now at a feast,” each year, a feast of unleavened bread, Mat 27:15. When the Paschal Supper was over, a notable prisoner was released during the festival that followed, annually.
2) “He released unto them one prisoner,” (apeluen autois hena desmion) ”He released to them one chained prisoner,” a felon, an indicted and imprisoned, chain-held criminal, as a custom of good-will from the Roman Governor to the Jews, Luk 23:17.
3) “Whomsoever they desired.” (hon paretouton) “Whom they begged,” to be released or whom they chose, by custom, Joh 18:39.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(6) He released . . . whomsoever they desired.Both verbs are in the tense which implies custom.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
6. He released unto them one prisoner John says it was a custom. No traces of this custom appear in history, classical or Jewish. It may have been first adopted as a custom by Pilate himself, to ingratiate himself with the people. But the custom had become so fixed that, though not established by law, it is styled by Luke a necessity.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘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.’
The custom of releasing an as yet unconvicted prisoner at the Passover seems to have been Pilate’s own (‘he used to release’) and is not evidenced outside the Gospels. But there is nothing intrinsically unlikely in it and there is evidence elsewhere of examples where prisoners were released to please crowds, and of amnesties given. It was therefore not unusual. It was regularly seen as a way of gaining popularity. He would see it as a sop to the people, and as an aid to maintaining the public peace. And the ensuing events support the idea of such a custom for it explains the presence of a crowd who had probably come for this very purpose. They would not have known about Jesus’ arrest but they would certainly have known about the bound insurrectionists. The crowd would therefore appear to be of a type supportive of them, which helps to explain what follows.
‘There was one called Barabbas.’ This is an unusual Greek phrase as it stands, for we would have expected another name prior to it (compare Mat 26:3; Joh 9:11 but note Luk 22:47, although there it is specific). In Mat 27:16-17 some authorities add the name Jesus to Barabbas, and Origen (who rejected it on theological grounds) refers to very early manuscripts which contained it. The unlikelihood of this finding its way into a text, and the extreme likelihood that it would be excised by devout Christian copyists, is in its favour and it may well be that originally this read ‘Jesus who is called Barabbas’. But there is no evidence for it ever having been in Mark in the manuscript that we possess.
It is made clear that Barabbas and his fellow-insurrectionists were murderers, probably seen as patriots by certain of the Jews as they would be seen as having acted against the Romans in the name of God. It was from such as these that many expected the Messiah to come. They would thus have a certain amount of popular support among the more belligerent. And this crowd were mainly of that type.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Pilate’s attempt to release Jesus:
v. 6. Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.
v. 7. And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.
v. 8. And the multitude crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them.
v. 9. But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews?
v. 10. For he knew that the chief priests had delivered Him for envy.
v. 11. But the chief priests moved the people that he should rather release Barabbas unto them.
v. 12. 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?
v. 13. And they cried out again, Crucify Him!
v. 14. Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath He done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify Him!
What a picture the evangelist paints here! The surging mob before the Praetorium, rabble, for the most part, but reinforced by the friends of the Jewish councilors; the weak, vacillating procurator, helpless before the bloodthirstiness of the multitude, now appearing on the platform before them, then disappearing for a while, racking his brains for some way out of the difficulty; the high priests and the members of the Sanhedrin, circulating around through the mob, holding the excitement at its highest pitch, since their understanding and consequent use of mob psychology enabled them to dominate the situation. Pilate had introduced the custom of giving some prisoner his liberty on this feast, the one whose release the people desired being usually set free. This custom had now practically become an obligation. The people expected this boon at Easter; and both he and they thought of this fact. Pilate believed that he could still save the situation by giving the people the choice between Jesus and Barabbas. For the latter was an exceptionally fierce criminal. As the leader or one of the foremost in a band of rebels, in one of the many insurrections that were troubling the government, he had committed a murder. He had been caught with his accomplices and was now awaiting his punishment, bound in jail. The governor felt that no people could be so depraved as to ask for such an outcast of society. But hardly had he made up his mind just how to manage the affair, when the people, surging forward, began to demand that he do according to custom, that he grant them that which he had always given them. Their request was accompanied by loud bellowing of the rabble, who instinctively felt that they had the situation in their hands.
The weak proposal of Pilate confirmed them in their belief: Is it your wish and desire, shall I release to you the King of the Jews? His choice of names for Christ at that moment was probably most unfortunate, for its very use was a challenge and an insult to the members of the Sanhedrin. Ordinarily this scheme of playing off the people with their champion, whom they had hailed with such shouts of joy a few days before, against the priests, whose rule was not always relished by the common members of the Jewish Church, might have been successful. For Pilate rightly surmised, and was being confirmed in his belief with every new move of the accusers, that jealousy, envy, was the real reason for delivering Jesus to the jurisdiction of his court. But the priests had been too successful in stirring up, in exciting, in instigating the people. There was no longer even the faintest resemblance to an orderly trial with cool and sensible leads on both sides. The people, under the careful prompting of the high priests, were fully convinced in their own minds that they actually, for their own persons, preferred to have Barabbas released to them. Another appeal of Pilate: What, then, is your wish that I should do with Him you call King of the Jews? The repetition of the hated title was again a foolish move on Pilate’s part. Lashed to a perfect spasm of fury, the people, led by the high priests, yelled: Crucify Him! Pilate’s weak remonstrance as to any guilt on His part was like the chirping of a cricket in the midst of a tornado. For with mounting rage the bellowing cry rolled out through the narrow streets over the city: Crucify Him! The time for reason and sense had gone by. The unleashed rage of the rabble wanted blood, and Pilate, although convinced of Christ’s innocence, knew that the situation was beyond him, for this cry that arose from the people, beyond all measure, showed him that it was too late to insist upon justice. Many a so-called man of the world, that thinks he is neutral with regard to Christianity and believes in letting well enough alone, since undoubtedly the Christian Church is doing much for the community, has followed the example of Pilate in a crisis. Feeling that his original conviction was the right, the correct one, he yet, in times of popular agitation and demonstration, has joined the rank of the rabble that cheer today and curse tomorrow, that cry “Hosanna” on Sunday and bellow a hoarse “Crucify Him!” on the following Friday.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Mar 15:6. Now at that feast , after the manner, or according to the nature of that feast. See Rom 3:5. Gal 3:15. 1Co 3:3. Now the least of the passover being celebrated bythe Jews in memory of their release from Egypt, it was agreeable to the nature of the feast to make this release at that time, and therefore customary. See Whitby, and on Mat 27:15.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mar 15:6-14 . See on Mat 27:15-23 . Comp. Luk 23:13-23 .
Mar 15:6 . ] “Imperfectum ubi solere notat, non nisi de re ad certum tempus restricta dicitur,” Hermann, ad Viger. p. 746.
] quem quidem (Klotz, ad Devar. p. 724), the very one whom they , etc.
Mar 15:7 . ] with his fellow-insurgents . occurs again only in Josephus, Antt. xiv. 2. 1. In the classical writers it is (Herod, v. 70. 124; Strabo, xiv. p. 708).
] in the insurrection in question , just indicated by . It is hardly assumed by Mark as well known; to us it is entirely unknown. [174] But Bengel well remarks: “crimen Pilato suspectissimum.”
Mar 15:8 . What Matthew represents as brought about by Pilate, Mark makes to appear as if it were suggested by the people themselves. An unessential variation.
] having gone up before the palace of Pilate (see the critical remarks).
, ] so to demand, as , to institute a demand accordingly, as, i.e. according to the real meaning: to demand that, which . See Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 427; Schaef. O. C. 1124.
Mar 15:9 . . .] not inappropriate (Kstlin), but said in bitterness against the chief priests, etc., as Joh 18:39 .
Mar 15:10 . ] he perceived; Matthew has , but Mark represents the matter as it originated .
Mar 15:11 . ] aim of the (comp. Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 204 [E. T. 236]), in order that he (Pilate) rather , etc., in order that this result might be brought about.
Mar 15:13 . ] supposes a responsive cry already given after Mar 15:11 on the instigation of the chief priests. An inexact simplicity of narration.
[174] If it was not the rising on account of the aqueduct (comp on Luk 13:1 ), as Ewald supposes.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
(6) Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired. (7) And there was one named. Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection. (8) And the multitude crying aloud, began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them. (9) But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the king of the Jews? (10) For he knew that the chief priests had de livered him for envy. (11) But the chief priests moved the people that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. (12) 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? (13) And they cried out again, Crucify him. (14) Then Pilate said unto them, Why what evil hath he done? and they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him.
Here is a beautiful meaning also, in allusion to the great purposes of redemption. The lot was to fall on Jonah, an eminent type of CHRIST, and he the only Israelite at that time in the ship, from Joppa. Jon 1:7 . The lot for the Scape Goat, was also determined the same way. Lev 16:8 . And JESUS being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of GOD, shall be the one, on whom the whole voice of the people shall decide. Rev 13:8 . What striking allusions of a mystical nature are there in all these things!
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
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.
6 Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.
Ver. 6. Now at the feast ] Or, at each great feast, , viz. at the Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. The reason of this custom: See Trapp on “ Mat 27:15 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
6 15. ] BARABBAS PREFERRED TO HIM. HE IS DELIVERED TO BE CRUCIFIED. Mat 27:15-26 . Luk 23:17-25 .Joh 18:39-40Joh 18:39-40 . Our account is nearly cognate to, but distinct from that of Matt., where see notes. The principal points of distinction will be noticed.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
6. ] ‘imperfectum ubi solere notat, non nisi de re ad certum tempus restricta dicitur,’ Herm. ad Viger. p. 745.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mar 15:6-15 . Jesus or Barabbas? (Mat 27:15-26 , Luk 23:16-25 ).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Mar 15:6 . , imperfect = Mt.’s , pointing to a practice of the governor at passover season; on which vide on Mt. , “whomsoever they desired,” A. V [150] The R. V [151] adopts the reading preferred by W.H [152] , , and translates “whom they asked of him”. It is difficult to decide between the two readings, as the might easily be changed into , and vice vers . In favour of the T.R. is the fact that ordinarily in N. T., as in the classics, means to refuse, and also that very strongly emphasises the finality of the popular choice they might ask the release of any one, no matter whom such is the force of ; it would be granted. On these grounds Field ( Otium Nor. ) decides for the T. R.
[150] Authorised Version.
[151] Revised Version.
[152] Westcott and Hort.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mar 15:6-15
6Now at the feast he used to release for them any one prisoner whom they requested. 7The man named Barabbas had been imprisoned with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the insurrection. 8The crowd went up and began asking him to do as he had been accustomed to do for them. 9Pilate answered them, saying, “Do you want me to release for you the King of the Jews?” 10For he was aware that the chief priests had handed Him over because of envy. 11But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to ask him to release Barabbas for them instead. 12Answering again, Pilate said to them, “Then what shall I do with Him whom you call the King of the Jews?” 13They shouted back, “Crucify Him!” 14But Pilate said to them, “Why, what evil has He done?” But they shouted all the more, “Crucify Him!” 15Wishing to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas for them, and after having Jesus scourged, he handed Him over to be crucified.
Mar 15:6 “the feast” This refers to the Passover. Scholars have often debated the length of Jesus’ public ministry. The only reason church tradition affirms a three-year public ministry is because of the three Passovers mentioned in John’s Gospel. However, in John there is a mention of “the feast,” as here, which implies another Passover. I think Jesus may have had a four-year or possibly five or six-year public ministry. It is obvious the Gospel writers were not concerned with chronology per se, but theology. The Gospels are not western histories, but eastern theological accounts. They are neither biographies or autobiographies. They are a genre to themselves. Gospel writers, under inspiration, had the freedom to select, adapt, and rearrange the words and actions of Jesus to present Him to their target audiences. I do not believe they had the freedom to put words in His mouth; however, eyewitness material written down at a much later time, along with the theological purposes and differing target audiences, answers the questions about why the four Gospels differ.
“he used to release for them any one prisoner whom they requested” This seems to have become an annual Roman tradition in Palestine of Jesus’ day. There is no historical corroboration for this except Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 20:9:3. Pilate was trying to get the crowd to feel sympathy for Jesus so that he could let Him go free (cf. Mar 15:14; Luk 23:14-16; Joh 18:38-39; Joh 19:4).
Mar 15:7 “Barabbas” This name is a combination of Bar = “son of” and Abbas = “father.” The non-canonical Gospel of Hebrews has Bar Rabbas, “son of Rabbi.” Several Greek MSS of Mat 27:16-17 have “Jesus Barabbas,” which is an attempt at irony based on both being called “Jesus,” who was truly “the Son of the Father.”
“with the insurrectionists” The man the crowd wanted released was the very type of person they were accusing Jesus of being. What irony!
Mar 15:8 “The crowd” Some think Barabbas’ friends were waiting for this annual opportunity. Others feel the crowd was made up not of pilgrims, but of the false witnesses and others involved in the night trials. These had nothing in common except that they both wanted Barabbas released, but for very different reasons.
The city was full of pilgrims, many from Galilee, but they would not have been up this early, nor at Pilate’s court.
NASB, NJB”went up”
NKJV”crying aloud”
NRSV”came”
TEV”gathered”
The Greek words “go up” (anabain) and “cry aloud” (anaboa) are spelled and pronounced similarly, which means they were easily confused by the ancient method or making copies of the NT by one scribe reading the text aloud and several others making copies. The Greek manuscript tradition is split:
1. “went up” aorist active participle in MSS *, B, and the Vulgate.
2. “cried aloud” aorist active participle in MSS cf8 i2, A, C, W, and the Peshitta.
“Cried aloud” is not found in Mark in any other place, but “went up” is found nine times for:
1. things growing (Mar 4:7)
2. boarding a ship (Mar 6:51)
3. going up (Mar 15:8)
Probably NASB and NJB are correct.
Mar 15:9 Mark, like Luke (i.e., in both his Gospel and Acts), writes to show that Christianity was no threat to the Roman authorities.
Mar 15:10 “because of envy” Pilate understood the motives of the Sanhedrin (cf. Mat 27:18), but refused to act in justice!
Jealousy is surely a possible motive of the Jewish leadership, but I am surprised that their theological and political motives were not also obvious to Pilate (i.e., Luk 23:2). It is also possible that Pilate had heard of Jesus through spies or informants (or even his wife, cf. Mat 27:19).
Mar 15:12 “‘Him whom you call the King of the Jews'” Joh 19:15 records that this mob of Jews (i.e., insurrectionists and Jewish leaders) said “We have no King but Caesar.” What irony!
Mar 15:13
NASB, NRSV,
TEV, NJB”they shouted back”
NKJV”they cried out again”
The Greek term palin is interpreted as “back” by modern translations. Both “again” and “back” are standard translation options in Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich and Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 606. The context here demands “back.”
Mar 15:14 “‘what evil has He done'” John’s Gospel parallels this statement of Pilate three times in Joh 18:38; Joh 19:4; Joh 19:6. Pilate tried to gain sympathy for Jesus and release Him (cf. Joh 18:38; Joh 19:6; Joh 19:12), but this biased crowd would not have it!
Mar 15:15
NASB, NRSV”wishing to satisfy the crowd”
NKJV”wanting to gratify the crowd”
TEV”wanted to please the crowd”
NJB”anxious to placate the crowd”
For Pilate civil order was more important than justice. These Jewish leaders had succeeded in intimidating Pilate (cf. Joh 19:12). Pilate had been accused of many things to the authorities in Syria and Rome. He could not afford more charges. They knew this and used it!
Several modern linguists note that the Greek words hikanon poisai are a Latin idiom (i.e., Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich, p. 374; Moulton and Milligan, p. 302; C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom Book of the New Testament Greek, p. 192). This is significant because Mark has so many Latin words, phrases, and idioms, probably because it was written to witness to Romans.
“scourged” This is a fulfillment of Isa 53:5. Flogging was the standard Roman preliminary procedure for those being crucified. It was a horrible beating. A man was bent over and his hands tied to a low stake. Then two soldiers, one on each side, beat him with whips made out of nine leather straps with some hard objects attached to each of the strap’s ends. Often prisoners died just from this beating.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
at. Greek. kata App-104.
that feast = a feast: i.e. any of the three great feasts.
he released = he used, or was wont, to release. Imperf. Tense.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
6-15.] BARABBAS PREFERRED TO HIM. HE IS DELIVERED TO BE CRUCIFIED. Mat 27:15-26. Luk 23:17-25. Joh 18:39-40. Our account is nearly cognate to, but distinct from that of Matt., where see notes. The principal points of distinction will be noticed.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mar 15:6-15
13. BARABBAS PREFERRED AND JESUS REJECTED
Mar 15:6-15
(Mat 27:15-26; Luk 23:13-25; Joh 18:39-40)
6 Now at the feast he used to release unto them one prisoner, whom they asked of him.–This was a humane and beneficent usage, but it was terribly abused on this occasion when wicked men made it tributary to their diabolical hatred, killing the Prince of life and desiring a murderer to be granted unto them. (Act 3:14.) [The Passover feast was the most sacred of the Jewish feasts. Pilate was the Roman ruler of the Jews. They were restive under the rule of foreigners, and he was disposed to show personal kindness and favor to them as a people, that he might as far as possible reconcile them to their condition. On their great feast day he was accustomed to let them select one of their prisoners, whom he would release to them.]
7 And there was one called Barabbas, lying bound with them–He, together with other notorious characters, was bound in some way, in addition to being in prison. This, of course, was to keep them from escaping prison.
that had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder.–He was “a robber” (Joh 8:40), and had excited insurrection in the city (Joh 8:40), and as we here learn a murderer. So he was a robber, an insurgent, and a murderer. These facts account for Matthew’s statement that he was a “notable prisoner.”
8 And the multitude went up and began to ask him to do as he was wont to do unto them.–This suggested to Pilate another way out of the difficulty, for he plainly saw the motives of the Sanhedrin, and that Jesus had committed no crime. When, therefore, they came marching back with Jesus, he addressed them with the people, declaring that he found no political fault in Jesus worthy of death, and neither had Herod.
9 And Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews?–This was to the people. [Pilate seized the request to again press on them that they should agree to the release of Jesus. He thought this was an opportunity to be just to Jesus.]
10 For he perceived that for envy the chief priests had delivered him up.–[Yes, the chief priests had through envy made him a prisoner, but as the release of one prisoner was to be left to the voice of the people and not alone to the priests, it was hoped on the part of Pilate that the people who had been so greatly benefited by Christ and whose safety had been imperiled by Barabbas would certainly give Jesus the advantage, but these people like many others could be influenced by designing politicians. It was apparent from the many false charges made, and from the bitter feeling shown, that there were no good grounds for his arrest; that he was guilty of no treason against Caesar, and that he was not a disturber of the peace of the country. They knew the charges they made were groundless. They knew he exercised divine power, and that he was a man of goodness and mercy to the afflicted; but he condemned them in their course, so that his success would be the overturning of the order of things of which they were the head, and would strip them of their power and authority. It so infuriated them that nothing short of his death would satisfy them. Pilate was disposed to let him go free. His judgment was that way, and he wanted to be just if it did not cost him too much. “While he was sitting on the judgment-seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that righteous man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.” (Mat 27:19.) She knew something of Jesus doubtless, and had learned to respect him. Then supernatural influences were exerted. She had a dream that troubled her, and she sent and asked her husband not to have anything to do with punishing that righteous man. “And Pilate called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people, and said unto them, Ye brought unto me this man as one that perverteth the people and: 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 bath been done by him. I will therefore chastise him, and release him.” (Luk 23:13-16.) This was the formal, official decision of the case by Pilate on the charges and the testimony presented by his accusers. It is a strange and inconsistent sentence: I find no fault in him, yet will chastise him. Why chastise a man without fault? It was a proposition to wrongly inflict degrading punishment on Jesus to please the Jews. It was an effort to compromise with sin and wickedness. It was one step in the path of conscious wrong on the part of Pilate as judge, and one step taken opens the way for and necessitates another and another. This does not mean a man must not be kind and forbearing with those who do not fully see the truth, and encourage and lead them kindly in the right way; but he must be firm for that truth, and uncompromising in holding to the right.]
11 But the chief priests stirred up the multitude, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them.–As the people were to choose which one should be released, these malicious priests in ceaseless efforts plead with them to choose Barabbas instead of Jesus. [The people seem to have been willing to listen to Pilate in his proposition. They were more just than the leaders. But the chief priests and scribes stirred them up, and encouraged and excited them to demand of Pilate that he release Barabbas (the robber) and leave Jesus in prison, trusting yet to induce Pilate to sign his death warrant. To compromise with wrong is to betray God–is to serve the evil one.] Rather the devil than Christ. Bad enough to thus choose, but how frightful the character of him who influences others to choose thus.
12 And Pilate again answered and said unto them, What then shall I do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? –[Knowing Jesus was innocent, he asked this question. This was half yielding to their cries. He showed it was against his will, in that he taunted them, “Ye call [him] the King of the Jews.” But he surrendered his prerogative to decide, gave up what was his duty, and pandered to what he knew to be unjust demands to follow them.]
13 And they cried out again, Crucify him.–They were fully determined to put him to death; to call their attention to Jesus was but an occasion to cry again, “Crucify him.” They had by this time influenced the people to join them in their request.
14 And Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done?–This was a hard question. The most effective answer they could give is one reported in John’s account: “If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar’s friend.” These Jews knew exactly how to reach the governor. It was to intimate that he would lose his governorship if he did not condemn Jesus. The hour for argument or reasoning was gone by. They were determined to achieve their deadly purpose by clamor.
But they cried out exceedingly, Crucify him.–When the evil spirit takes possession of a human heart, the tendency is to wax worse and worse. As the matter was again and again referred to them, they grew more vehement and boisterous each time. There is nothing more terrible than the fierce outcry of an infuriated mob. Pilate now performed a symbolic action. This was a Jewish custom, which he adopted, the better to impress them that they must take the whole responsibility. He had water brought and washed his hands, saying, “I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man; see ye to it. And all the people answered and said, His blood be on us, and on our children,” the awful self-imprecation that has been so terribly filled in the history of the Jewish nation.
15 And Pilate, wishing to content the multitude,–It was no love of the people but a desire to have the support of the people to his office that caused Pilate to please them in this instance. What was one poor lowly man by the side of the rage and clamor of a whole populace, which might reach the ears of the Roman authorities?
released unto them Barabbas,–The bloodstained robber, who had opposed the Roman government, who was an enemy to Caesar. These hypocritical chief priests, who had “no king but Caesar,” were demanding the release of Caesar’s enemy.
and delivered Jesus,–By delivering Jesus to the Sanhedrin, Pilate sacrificed his lofty and independent position, as a secular judge and representative of Roman law, to the religious fanaticism of the Jewish hierarchy. The state became a tool in the hands of an apostate and bloodthirsty religious institution. How often has this fact been repeated in the history of religious persecution! By this act Pilate condemned himself and gave additional force to his previous testimony to the innocence of Christ, showing that this was dictated neither by fear nor favor, but was the involuntary expression of his remaining sense of justice from the judgment seat.
when he had scourged him, to be crucified.–The scourging was preparatory to the crucifixion, but was not an essential part of it. Washing his hands in water in the presence of the accusers, indicating that he was innocent of Jesus’ death, did not exonerate Pilate from blame, but his act and deed had clothed his name with infamy and shame that will endure to eternity. A timeserver, a cowardly spirit that would deliver to death the innocent Lamb of God rather than run the risk of losing his office. His name should in itself be an everlasting warning to office seekers and panderers to public favor who will sacrifice truth and justice for self-aggrandizement. Politicians today are just as ready to please the people by releasing wrong and scourging right as in the days of Jesus. Religious politicians are no better. The Roman scourging was much more severe than the Jewish. The Jews numbered the lashes, the Romans laid them on without number or mercy.
[When a man for the sake of popularity, worldly honor, and ease turns from the truth of God and leaves it to be abused by its enemies, what differs his course and character from that of Pontius Pilate? If his course and character are the same, his destiny must be the same. Often now are the same scenes reenacted with reference to the spiritual, more sacred body that were enacted with reference to the fleshly body by Judas and Pilate. It is often done unconsciously, because we do not see the elements of character that are condemned in them.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Mat 26:2, Mat 26:5, Mat 27:15, Luk 23:16, Luk 23:17, Joh 18:39, Joh 18:40, Act 24:27, Act 25:9
Reciprocal: Luk 23:25 – whom
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Chapter 16.
Barabbas or Christ?
“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.
The Final Stage of the Trial.
The third and final stage in our Lord’s trial was the most protracted of the three. Mark does not tell the whole story here. Pilate tried one device after another to escape from the necessity of condemning an innocent man, and yet to avoid coming into open conflict with the priests and the Jerusalem mob. His struggles were as hopeless and as pitiable as those of a bird caught in a net. I need not rehearse the story of his shifts and evasions. You can read it for yourself in the pages of the other Gospels. Mark contents himself with noting just one of the stratagems to which Pilate resorted. He records this particular one because it really marks the crisis of the trial. When this failed Pilate had no expedient left. He knew himself doomed to defeat. He realised that he could not stand against the relentless hate of priests and people. The end of the story has all the tragic inevitability of a fate when you know the actors in it. Here is the pitiful heartbreaking end, “And Pilate wishing to content the multitude released unto them Barabbas, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged Him, to be crucified.”
The Passover Prisoner.
And now for the particular episode that Mark here narrates. It appears that it was the custom of the Roman Governor at Passover time to release a prisoner, and to allow the people to choose the prisoner to be so released. Some think that this was a custom that had come down from Maccabean times, but most probably it was introduced by the Romans themselves to conciliate the goodwill of the Jewish people. Just exactly as European monarchs celebrate their marriage day or their coronation day by remitting sentences and extending free pardons, so the Roman Governors honoured the great feast day of the Jews by making it the occasion of extending the imperial pardon to some one prisoner whom the people were allowed to select. While Pilate was on the judgment seat, telling the accusing priests that he could find no fault in Jesus, and proposing to chastise Him (as a sop to his accusers) and then to release Him, the crowd came up to the palace gates begging Pilate to grant them the usual Passover boon. Pilate welcomed the interruption, it opened to him another door of escape from the odious necessity of condemning Jesus.
Barabbas.
There happened to be lying in prison at the time a criminal named Barabbas, or to give him his full name (as tradition records it) Jesus Barabba. Now Barabba means simply “Son of the Father.” And “father” was a title in those days given to the Rabbis, as today it is given to the Roman priests. He was, therefore, a man of good family who had fallen into ways of crime. The probability is that he belonged to one of those fanatical parties which swarmed in Judaea at this time, and were continually stirring up revolt against the Roman power. In one of these insurrections this Jesus, the son of the Rabbi, had committed murder, and had been caught red-handed in the crime. He had been flung into prison to await the arrival of the Governor for judgment. For such a crime there could be but one penalty, and that was death. It is very likely that a desperado of this kind would enjoy a certain popularity with the crowd; who would think of him not as a murderer but as one who was doomed to die for his devotion to his country’s cause. But while willing to admit that Barabbas may have enjoyed a certain undeserved popularity, I question very much whether they had decided to ask for Barabbas’ release when they surged up to Pilate’s gates. What they clamoured for was that the usual boon should be granted them.
Pilate’s Offer and its Reception.
Pilate at once fell in with the crowd’s humour and suggested that Jesus, “the King of the Jews,” as he called Him, should be the prisoner to be released. That would be killing two birds with one stone-granting a favour to the crowd and at the same time escaping the necessity of condemning Jesus. And against the idea of condemning Jesus Pilate’s whole soul rebelled. “He perceived that for envy the chief priests had delivered Him up.” But the chief priests were not to be baulked of their prey in this fashion. They stirred up the crowd to demand Barabbas. Possibly they painted him as a kind of national hero. Note again the hypocrisy of the whole proceeding. What was the accusation the priests brought against Jesus? The accusation of treason. But Barabbas had been guilty of the very crime of which they had falsely accused Jesus. Barabbas had committed insurrection and involved himself in the crime of murder in the process.
Pilate’s Struggle.
Pilate was staggered by the demand for Barabbas. He imagined that given the choice between Jesus the son of the Rabbi and Jesus the King of the Jews, they would not have hesitated an instant. “What then,” he asked in remonstrance, “shall I do with Him Whom ye call the King of the Jews?” And the cry rang out, “Crucify Him!”-give to Him the punishment intended for Jesus the son of the Rabbi. Pilate was shocked. His moral sense was outraged. “Why,” he asked, “what evil hath He done?” But the only answer to his, “Why?” was another angry shout, “Crucify Him!”
Pilate’s Surrender.
To that menacing and bloodthirsty crowd, Pilate made a weak surrender. No apologies can wipe out the stain of that crime. The chief priests and scribes must bear their burden; but their cruelty is no excuse for Pilate’s cowardice. He washed his hands before the crowd, as if to repudiate all responsibility for the crime. But the formality of washing his hands before the multitude has not washed out the bloodstains. You remember Macbeth’s pitiful cry after the murder of Duncan-
“Will all great Neptune’s ocean wash this blood
Clean from my hand? No, this my hand will rather
The multitudinous seas incarnadine, making the green one red.”
It is so with Pilate. The whole sea would avail nothing to wash out his bloodstains. His name and his crime are inseparably associated together, “Crucified under Pontius Pilate.”
Perhaps the easiest and clearest way of summarising the lessons of this tragic episode is to consider briefly the conduct of the actors in the scene: Pilate, the chief priests, and the Jerusalem mob.
The Priests and their Crimes.
First, consider the conduct of the priests. No one can read the story of the Passion without feeling that it is at their door and not at that of the Roman Governor that the responsibility for the murder of the Christ primarily lies. On them Peter, at the first appearance before the Sanhedrin, lays the blame. He never mentions Pilate. The men whom he saw before him were the real murderers. “Jesus Christ of Nazareth Whom ye crucified.” Ye! The word is emphatic. Perhaps he recalled the scene (for if he had not witnessed it, he had heard about it); how these people, when Pilate washed his hands, had cried, “His blood be upon us and upon our children.” In their rage and fury, they were willing to take the responsibility and the blame. Later they sought to shift the blame on to Pilate’s shoulders. The high priest, when Peter appeared before the Sanhedrin the second time, made it a ground of complaint that the Apostles were holding himself and his colleagues responsible for the death of Christ. “Ye have filled Jerusalem,” he said, “with your teaching, and intend to bring this Man’s blood upon us.” But it was no case of intending. His blood was upon them. Peter bluntly repeated the charge. “The God of our Fathers,” he replied, “raised up Jesus, Whom ye slew hanging Him on a tree.”
The Root of their Crime.
What was it moved these men to this black deed of blood? Probably many things combined. Possibly they never forgave Christ for the public rebuke He inflicted when He swept the Temple clean of the mob of traffickers in whose gains they shared; they hated Him because He threatened their “vested interests.” No doubt they smarted under the humiliation of repeated defeats, when they came to Him seeking to catch Him with their questions. But Mark mentions none of these things; he fastens upon one motive which perhaps was the mightiest and most potent motive of all. He says that Pilate perceived it was for envy the chief priests had delivered Him up. Trace this crime to its root and you find it sprang from envy. These men, the nominally religious leaders of the people, were envious of Christ’s power and popularity with the people, they were envious of His obvious and unchallengeable goodness. “A man that has no virtue in himself, ever envieth virtue in others,” says Bacon. And these men, where piety was a cloak, who were like whited sepulchres, envied Jesus because of His very goodness and purity and truth.
The Power of Envy.
Do you imagine that in tracing the crime back to envy we are assigning an insufficient motive? That is because you have not really thought upon the malignity of this evil passion. “It is also the vilest affection and the most depraved,” says Bacon, once again, “for which cause it is the proper attribute of the devil himself.” There is no crime to which envy will not resort. It is as cruel as the grave. Do you remember how envy and murder are coupled together in Scripture? In Romans, Paul describing the people of reprobate mind describes them as full of “envy, murder.” Envy… murder, they are akin, and there is but a step from the one to the other. I do not know that we are as afraid of envy as we should be. It finds a lodging in most of our hearts more or less. I know of no surer evidence of depravity of human nature than this, that we can scarcely hear even of a friend’s success without a pang! At the back of all our slandering and detracting, and backbiting, lies this evil spirit. Fear it! It is the very spirit of murder! Let us ask for the love which envieth not.
The Crowd.
And now for a minute let me turn from the priests to consider the conduct of the crowd. The commentators tell us that we are not to identify this crowd with the throngs which escorted Christ into Jerusalem in lowly triumph a few days before, crying, “Hosanna to the Son of David.” The applauding crowd of the Sunday, they say, was a Galilean crowd; the mob that clamoured for His death on the Friday was a Jerusalem mob, and upon the mob in Jerusalem Jesus had but little influence. That may be so. And yet I am not sure. The fickleness of crowds is proverbial. The hero of one day is the object of their fury the next. The London mob went frantic over Wellington when he came home after Waterloo; a few years later they were thirsting for his blood. So there would be nothing incredible in the assertion often made in popular sermons that it was the same crowd who shouted, “Hosanna” on the Sunday that cried, “Crucify Him” on the Friday. But for the credit of human nature let us accept the commentators’ verdict and believe that this was another and a different crowd. This was the Jerusalem proletariat let us say.
Democracy Fallible.
What a hint, then, we get here as to the tragic mistakes a democracy may commit. Pilate set Jesus of Nazareth, and Jesus the son of the Rabbi, a robber and a murderer, side by side, and the Jerusalem mob chose Barabbas! There is an old Latin phrase, very popular in these days, “Vox populi, vox Dei” “The voice of the people is the voice of God.” But, popular though the phrase may be, is it true? There is an old story told of John Wesley and his sister (a woman of intellectual gifts not unworthy of her two great brothers), who were discussing this very point. John Wesley, to bring the discussion to an end, laid the law down rather imperatively by saying, “I tell you, sister, the voice of the people is the voice of God.” “Yes,” replied his sister, “it cried, ‘Crucify Him, crucify Him.'” In these democratic days, when in our own land the people are rising to a sense of their power, it is well we should be reminded that the democracy may make the most tragic mistakes. I do not say this by way of disparagement of the democracy. I do not say this with any intention of criticising the democratic form of Government. As a matter of fact, as far as the crucifixion of Christ is concerned, the aristocracy of Judaea stand in exactly the same condemnation with the democracy. I say it only to guard against the fallacy that democratic government necessarily means the beginning of the millennium. The mob may go as fatally wrong as a monarch. Here is the staggering proof of it, they chose Barabbas rather than Christ. No! there is no divine right in democracy as such. Crowds may be blinded by prejudice and passion just as easily as kings.
Contrasted Ideals.
Barabbas and Christ! They stood for different ideals. Both had a kingdom in their minds-but the kingdoms differed in nature. Barabbas dreamed of a temporal kingdom to be established by violence; Christ aimed at a kingdom of righteousness and peace and joy to be established by a change of heart. Barabbas stood for faith in the sword, Christ stood for faith in character and goodness. And the Jerusalem crowd said, “Not this Man but Barabbas.” Get down to the essential meaning of the choice and it means this, they believed more in violence than they did in love, they had more faith in the sword than they had in character. They thought their kingdom was likely to be advanced by Barabbas’ method rather than by Christ’s. Every nation, and every class within a nation, is confronted with the same choice. It may say, “might is right” or it may say, “right is might.” There is a God that judges in the earth, and the only way in the long run for a nation, or a class within a nation, to be strong is for it to be strong in Him.
The Abiding Choice.
Barabbas or Christ? Pilate offered the crowd the option, and they chose Barabbas and rejected Christ. In a different form the same option is presented to every one of us. It is true we have not to choose between some red-handed robber and the Lord. Something else takes Barabbas’ place. But in every case there is a choice. That is always how Christ presents Himself to us-as an alternative. We have to choose between Him and the world, in one or other of the many forms it assumes-between Him and a life of pleasure, between Him and Mammon, between Him and self. And the choice is as critical for us as it was for this Jerusalem crowd. Our eternity depends upon it. Do not think that none have said, “Not this Man but Barabbas,” since that fatal Friday. They are saying it continually, for they are choosing self and sin and the world, and saying of Christ, “We will not have this Man to reign over us,” and so they crucify the Son of God afresh and put Him to an open shame. The choice presents itself to us. Barabbas or Christ? God help us to choose the better part, which shall not be taken away from us; to go outside the camp with Christ bearing His reproach, to be willing to suffer with Him that we may hereafter be glorified together.
Fuente: The Gospel According to St. Mark: A Devotional Commentary
6
It was customary to celebrate that feast with the release of a prisoner to be selected by the people, not the officers or priests.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.
[At that feast he released, etc.] the Syriac reads,…; and so the Arab, every feast; Beza, at each of the feasts; which pleases me not at all. For it is plainly said by Pilate himself, “that I should release unto you one at the Passover,” Joh 18:39; and the releasing of a prisoner suits not so well to the other feasts as to the Passover; because the Passover carries with it the memory of the release of the people out of Egypt: but other feasts had other respects…according to the nature and quality of the feast; which was a monument of release…
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
Mar 15:6. He released. The original implies habitual action.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Now at that feast, that is, at the feast of the passover, which by way of eminency is called the feast, the governor used to release a prisoner; possibly by way of memorial of their deliverance out of Egypt; accordingly Pilate makes a motion that Christ may be the prisoner set at liberty in honour of their feast; for he was sensible that what they did was out of envy and malice.
Observe here, 1. What were the sins which immediately occasion the death of Christ; they were covetousness and envy. Covetousness caused Judas to sell him to the chief priests, and envy caused the chief priests to deliver him up to Pilate to crucify him. Envy is a killing and murdering passion; Envy slayeth the silly one Job 5:2, That is, it slayeth the silly person who harbours this petilent lust in his breast and bosom; being like a fire in his bones, continually preying upon his spirits; and it is also the occasion of slaying many an holy and innocent person; for who can stand before envy? The person envying wishes the envied out of his way, yea, out of the world; and if need be, will not only wish it, but lend a lift upon occasion towards it also. Witness the chief priests here, whose envy was so conspicuous and barefaced, that Pilate himself takes notice of it; he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy.
Observe, 2. How unwilling, how very unwilling, Pilate was to be the instrument of our Saviour’s death. One while he expostulates with the chief priests, saying, What evil hath he done? Another while he bids him while he bids them, Take him, and judge him according to their law. Nay St. Luke says, that Pilate came forth three several times, professing, That he found no fault in him, Luke 23.
From whence note, That hypocrites within the visible church may be guilty of such tremendous acts of wickedness, as the consciences of infidels and pagans without the church may boggle at, and protest against. Pilate a pagan, absolves Christ, whilst the hypocritical Jews, that heard his doctrine, and saw his miracles, do condemn him.
Observe, lastly, How Pilate suffers himself to be overcome with the Jews importunity, and, contrary to the light of his own reason and judgment, delivers the holy and innocent Jesus, first to be scourged, and then crucified, It is a vain apology for sin, when persons pretend that it was not committed with their own consent, but at the instigation and importunity of others; such is the frame and constitution of man’s soul, that none can make him either wicked or miserable without his own consent. Pilate, willing to content the people, When he had scourged Jesus, delivered him to be crucified.
Here observe, That as the death of the cross was a Roman punishment, so it was the manner of the Romans first to whip their malefactors and then crucify them. Now the manner of the Romans scourging is said to be thus: “They stripped the condemned person, and bound him to a post; two strong men first scourged him with rods of thorns, then two others scourged him with whips of cords full of knots, and last of all two more with whips of wire, and therewith tore off the very flesh and skin from the malefactor’s back and sides.”
That our blessed Saviour was thus cruely scourged by Pilate’s command, seems to some not improbable, from that of the psalmist, The ploughers ploughed upon my back, and made long furrows Psa 129:3 : which if spoken prophetically of Christ, was literally fulfilled in the day of his scourging. But why was the precious and tender body of our holy Lord thus galled, rent, and torn with scourging? Doubtless to fulfil that prophecy, I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that pluck off the hair; that by his stripes we might be healed Isa 50:6;
and from his example, learn, Not to think it strange, if we find ourselves scourged with the tongue, with the hand, or with both, when we see our dear Redeemer bleeding by stripes and scourges before our eyes.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Mar 15:6-10. Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner The passover being celebrated by the Jews in memory of their deliverance from Egypt, it was agreeable to the nature of the feast to make this release at that time, and therefore customary. See Whitby, and note on Mat 27:15-18. There was one named Barabbas, bound with them that had made insurrection A crime which the Roman governors, and Pilate in particular, were more especially concerned and careful to punish; who had committed murder in the insurrection He seems to have been the head of the rebels. The multitude, crying aloud, &c. Greek, , With great clamour, the multitude demanded of Pilate what he used to grant them. So Campbell. But Pilate answered, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? If Pilate made this proposal with a view to preserve the life of Jesus, it is hard to say which he discovers most, his want of justice, or of courage, or of common sense. While in a most mean and cowardly manner he sacrifices justice to popular clamour, he enrages those whom he seeks to appease, by unseasonably repeating that title, The King of the Jews, which he could not but know was highly offensive to them. For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him To be put to death, not from a regard to justice, but merely for envy at his popularity and goodness; and that these things, and no crime of his, either real or suspected, had made them his enemies. Pilate ought, therefore, certainly rather to have lost his own life than to have delivered Jesus to their will. See note on Mat 27:24-25.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
CXXXI.
THIRD STAGE OF THE ROMAN TRIAL. PILATE
RELUCTANTLY SENTENCES HIM TO CRUCIFIXION.
(Friday. Toward sunrise.)
aMATT. XXVII. 15-30; bMARK XV. 6-19; cLUKE XXIII. 13-25; dJOHN XVIII. 39-XIX 16.
a15 Now at the feast [the passover and unleavened bread] the governor was wont {bused to} release unto them athe multitude one prisoner, whom they would. {bwhom they asked of him.} [No one knows when or by whom this custom was introduced, but similar customs were not unknown elsewhere, both the Greeks and Romans being wont to bestow special honor upon certain occasions by releasing prisoners.] a16 And they had then b7 And there was aa notable prisoner, bone called Barabbas, lying bound with them that had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder. [710] [Josephus tells us that there had been an insurrection against Pilate’s government about that time caused by his taking money from the temple treasury for the construction of an aqueduct. This may have been the affair here referred to, for in it many lost their lives.] 8 And the multitude went up and began to ask him to do as he was wont to do unto them. [It was still early in the morning, and the vast majority of the city of Jerusalem did not know what was transpiring at Pilate’s palace. But they came thither in throngs, demanding their annual gift of a prisoner. Pilate welcomed the demand as a possible escape from his difficulties.] c13 And Pilate called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people [He did not wish to seem to take advantage of our Lord’s accusers by releasing him during their absence. Possibly he knew of the triumphal entry the Sunday previous, and thought that the popularity of Jesus would be such that his release would be overwhelmingly demanded, and so called the rulers that they might see that he had released Jesus in answer to popular clamor. If he had such expectations, they were misplaced], b9 And a17 When therefore they were gathered together, bPilate answered them, saying, {c14 and said} unto them, bWill ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? cYe brought unto me this man, as one that perverteth the people: and behold, I having examined him before you, found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him: 15 no, nor yet Herod: for he sent him back unto us; and behold, nothing worthy of death hath been done by him. d39 But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: c16 I will therefore chastise him, and release him. dWill ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews? aWhom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ? 18 For he knew {bperceived} athat for envy they bthe chief priests had delivered him up. [Though Jesus had been declared innocent on the joint finding of himself and Herod, [711] Pilate did not have the courage to deliberately release him. He sought to please the rulers by scourging him, and the multitude by delivering him to them as a popular favorite, and himself by an adroit escape from an unpleasant situation. But he pleased nobody.] c18 But they cried out all together, saying, Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas:– 19 one who for a certain insurrection made in the city, and for murder, was cast into prison. [We see from Matthew’s account that though the people had a right to name their prisoner, Pilate took upon himself the liberty of choosing which one of two it should be. By doing so he complicated matters for the Jewish rulers, asking them to choose between Jesus, who was held on an unfounded charge of insurrection, and Barabbas, who was notoriously an insurrectionist and a murderer and a robber as well. But the rulers were not to be caught in so flimsy a net. Without regard to consistency, they raised their voice in full chorus for the release of Barabbas and the crucifixion of Jesus.] a19 And while he was sitting on the judgment-seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that righteous man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him. [This message of Pilate’s wife suggests that the name and face of Jesus were not unknown to Pilate’s household. Pilate would be much influenced by such a message. The Romans generally were influenced by all presages, and Suetonius tells us that both Julius and Augustus Csar attached much importance to dreams.] b11 But a20 Now the chief priests and the elders persuaded {bstirred up} the multitude, {amultitudes} bthat he should rather release Barabbas unto them. athat they should ask for Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. 21 But the governor answered and said unto them, Which of the two will ye that I release unto you? And they said, Barabbas. d40 They cried out therefore again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber. c20 And Pilate spake unto them again, desiring to release Jesus; [712] b12 And Pilate again answered and said {asaith} unto them, What then shall I do unto Jesus who is called Christ? bhim whom ye call the King of the Jews? c21 but {b13 and} they cried out {cshouted} bagain, csaying, Crucify, crucify him. aThey all say, Let him be crucified. b14 And Pilate said unto them, cthe third time, Why, what evil hath this man {ahe} done? cI have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him and release him. aBut they cried out exceedingly, saying, bCrucify him. aLet him be be crucified. [Finding the mob cruelly persistent, Pilate boldly declines to do its will and turns back into the Prtorium declaring his intention to release Jesus. But he retires with the demands of the multitude ringing in his ears.] d1 Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him. [Carrying out the program which he proposed, Pilate had Jesus removed from the Prtorium to the place of scourging, and inflicted that punishment upon him. We learn from Josephus and others that the law required that those about to be crucified should first be scourged. But Pilate hoped that scourging would suffice. He believed that the more moderate would take pity upon Jesus when they viewed his scourged body, for scourging was so cruel a punishment that the condemned person often died under its infliction. The scourge was made of thongs loaded at the extremity with pieces of bone or metal. The condemned person was stripped and fastened to a low post, this bending the back so as to stretch the skin. Blood spurted at the first blow.] 2 And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and arrayed him in a purple garment; 3 and they came unto him, and said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they struck him with their hands. [The soldiers had no special malice against Jesus, but the Roman military system made men hard of heart. The occasion gave to these foreign legionaries a much-enjoyed opportunity to show their contempt for the Jews by mocking Jesus as their King. It is not known which one of the many thorny plants of Palestine [713] was used to form the Lord’s crown. See Act 22:24). If Pilate had found Jesus guilty, he would have condemned him at once. As it was, he sought to return Jesus to the Sanhedrin as having committed no crime of which the Roman law could take note.] 5 Jesus therefore came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple garment. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold, the man! [It was Pilate’s original proposition to scourge Jesus and let him go ( Luk 23:16). Having already scourged him, he now hoped to effect his release. Presenting our Lord in this state of abject humiliation, he feels that he has removed him from every suspicion of royalty. He speaks of Jesus as no longer a king, but a mere man. Pilate’s words, however, have a prophetic color, somewhat like those uttered by Caiaphas. All those of subsequent ages have looked and must continue to look to Jesus as the ideal of manhood. The “Ecce Homo” of Pilate is in some sense an echo of the words of the Father when he said, “This is my Son, my chosen: hear ye him.” In Jesus we behold the true man, the second Adam.] 6 When therefore the chief priests and the officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him! [Thus Pilate’s expectation came to naught, for not one of the Jewish rulers ever wavered in their demand for crucifixion.] Pilate saith unto them, Take him yourselves, and crucify him: for I find no [714] crime in him. [In this sentence, “ye” and “I” are both emphatic; for Pilate wishes to draw a contrast between himself and the Jewish rulers. His words are not a permission to crucify, but a bit of taunting irony, as if he said: “I the judge have found him innocent, but ye seem to lack the wit to see that the case is ended. If ye are so much superior to the judge that ye can ignore his decision, proceed without him; crucify him yourselves.”] 7 The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. [Perceiving that Pilate was taunting them, and practically accusing them of attempting to put an innocent man to death, they defended themselves by revealing the fact that in addition to the charges that they had preferred against Jesus, they had found him clearly guilty and worthy of death on another charge; viz.: that of blasphemy ( Lev 24:16). They had made no mention of this fact because Pilate was under no obligation to enforce their law; but they mentioned it now to justify their course. They probably felt sure that Jesus himself would convince Pilate of the truth of this latter accusation if Pilate questioned him.] 8 When Pilate therefore heard this saying, he was the more afraid [The words of Jesus at John xviii. 37 (see Joh 18:2, Joh 18:5 (the same word being translated both “betrayed” and “delivered”), but Judas did not deliver to Pilate, so Caiaphas as the representative of the Sanhedrin is here meant; and Pilate’s sin is contrasted with that of the rulers. Both of them sinned in abusing their office (the power derived from above– Psa 75:6, Psa 75:7, Isa 44:28, Rom 13:1); but Pilate’s sin stopped here. He had no acquaintance with Jesus to give him the possibility of other powers–those of love or hatred, worship or rejection. The members of the Sanhedrin had these powers which arose from a personal knowledge of Jesus, and they abused them by hating and rejecting him, thereby adding to their guilt. Pilate condemned the innocent when brought before him, but the Sanhedrin searched out and arrested the innocent that they might enjoy condemning him.] 12 Upon this Pilate sought to release him [As we have seen, Pilate had before this tried to win the consent of the rulers that Jesus be released, but that which John here indicates was probably an actual attempt to set Jesus free. He may have begun by unloosing the hands of Jesus, or some such demonstration]: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar’s friend: every one that maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar. [716] [Whatever Pilate’s demonstration was it was immediately met by a counter one on the part of the rulers. They raise a cry which the politic Pilate can not ignore. Taking up the political accusation (which they had never abandoned), they give it a new turn by prompting Pilate to view it from Csar’s standpoint. Knowing the unreasoning jealousy, suspicion and cruelty of the emperor, Pilate saw at once that these unscrupulous Jews could make out of the present occasion a charge against him which would cost him his position, if not his life.] 13 When Pilate therefore heard these words, he brought Jesus out, and sat down on the judgment-seat at a place called The Pavement, but in Hebrew, Gabbatha. [Pilate had already again and again declared Jesus innocent. He now mounts the judgment-seat that he may formally reverse himself and condemn him. The apostle as an eye-witness fixes by its two names the exact spot where this awful decision was rendered.] 14 Now it was the Preparation of the passover [see 1Sa 12:12), their faithful prophet, Samuel, warned them what the king of their choice would do, and what they should suffer under him. Thus Jesus also foretold what this Csar of their choice would do to them ( Luk 19:41-44, Luk 23:27-31). They committed themselves to the [717] tender mercies of Rome, and one generation later Rome trod them in the wine-press of her wrath.] c23 But they were urgent with loud voices, asking that he might be crucified. And their voices prevailed. [They overcame Pilate’s weak resistance by their clamor.] a24 So when Pilate saw that he prevailed nothing, but rather that a tumult was arising, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man; see ye to it. 25 And all the people answered and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. [Pilate’s act was symbolic, intended to show that he regarded the crucifixion of Jesus as a murder, and therefore meant to wash his hands of the guilt thereof. The Jewish law made the act perfectly familiar to the Jews ( Deu 21:1-9). Had the Jewish rulers not been frenzied by hatred, the sight of Pilate washing his hands would have checked them; but in their rage they take upon themselves and their children all the responsibility. At the siege of Jerusalem they answer in part for the blood of Christ, but God alone determines the extent of their responsibility, and he alone can say when their punishment shall end. But we know that it ends for all when they repentantly seek his forgiveness. The punishments of God are not vindictive, they are the awards of Justice meted out by a merciful hand.] b15 And Pilate, wishing to content the multitude, cgave sentence that what they asked for should be done. a26 Then released he unto them Barabbas; chim that for insurrection and murder had been cast into prison, whom they asked for; but Jesus he delivered up to their will. d16 Then therefore bJesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified [Mark mentions the scourging to show that it preceded the crucifixion, but we see from John’s account that the scourging took place somewhat earlier in the proceeding], bhe delivered him unto them to be crucified. [Pilate delivered Jesus to their punishment, but not into their hands; he was led forth and crucified by Pilate’s soldiers, who first mocked him, as the next paragraph shows.] b16 And [718] a27 Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus, bled him away within {ainto} the court, which is the Praetorium; and they called together aand gathered unto him the whole band. 28 And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe. b17 And they clothe him with purple, a29 And they platted {bplatting} a crown of thorns, [and] they put it on him; aupon his head, and a reed in his right hand; and they kneeled down before him, and mocked him, b18 and they began to salute him, asaying, Hail, King of the Jews! 30 And they spat upon him, and took the reed b19 And they smote his head {aand smote him on the head.} bwith a reed, and spat upon him, and bowing their knees worshipped him. [After the sentence of death the soldiers take Jesus back into the Prtorium, and renew the mockeries and indignities which had been interrupted that Pilate might exhibit Jesus to the people, as John shows us. Moreover, the whole band, or cohort, are now gathered, where at first but a few took part. It is likely that the mock robe and crown were removed when Jesus was brought before Pilate to be sentenced, for it is highly improbable that a Roman judge would pronounce the death sentence while the prisoner was clothed in such a manner.]
[FFG 710-719]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
PILATE SEEKS TO RELEASE HIM IN LIEU OF BARABBAS
Mat 27:15-26; Mar 15:6-15; Joh 18:39-40; Luk 23:13-25. And Pilate, having called together the high priests, rulers, and the people, said to them, You have brought to me this Man as revolutionizing the people; and, behold, I, having judged Him in your presence, found nothing in this Man criminal of those things which you accuse against Him; neither did Herod; for I sent you to him, and, behold, nothing worthy of death has been done by Him. Therefore, having scourged Him, I will release Him. The cruelty of the Roman punishments actually beggars all description. This scourging which Pilate mentions was horrific in the extreme. Previously to the crucifixion of a man, they beat his naked body with thongs of rawhide, having in them steel points, which lacerated his flesh most excruciatingly, so that it was nothing uncommon for the poor victim to die during the scourging. Pilate, however, lights upon this as a dernier ressort to save the life of Jesus, thinking that a punishment so awful administered to an innocent man would certainly produce a reaction on the part of His enemies, constraining them to relax their apparently implacable animosity toward Him, so that they would consent to His release. Pilate, though a corrupt heathen ruler, in this matter underestimated the diabolical malice and hellish venom which was at that time the controlling principle of the big preachers and ruling elders, who were determined to have Him put to death. When the devil gets possession of religious people, they have in all ages proved more demoniacal than the wicked people of the world.
Mar 15:6-12. But during the feast he was accustomed to release unto them one prisoner, whom they demanded. There was one called Barabbas, having been bound along with the insurrectionists, who had committed murder in the insurrection. The rabble, roaring, began to ask as he was always accused to do unto them. Pilate responded to them, saying, Do you wish that I shall release unto you the King of the Jews? For he knew that the high priests had delivered Him through envy. It is said that Josephs brethren sold him to the Ishmaelites through envy. He was a beautiful type of Christ, sold for money, and suffered seven years in the loathsome State prison, thus vividly symbolizing Jesus, in His first coming, to suffer and to die. Finally, when promoted to the throne of Egypt, the ruling kingdom of the world, invested in royal robes, riding in a golden chariot, fifty couriers running before him, shouting, Bow the knee for the king cometh, how vividly does he emblematize our glorious King Jesus in His second advent, accompanied by the mighty angels, and crowned King of kings and Lord of Lords! Pilate is so anxious to release Jesus that he restricts their choice to the two Jesus and Barabbas. Then, coming before them, he seeks to forestall their verdict by shouting aloud, Shall I release unto you the King of the Jews?
Mat 27:19. He, sitting upon his tribunal, his wife sent to him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that Righteous One; for I suffered many things this day in a dream on account of Him. In common parlance, the day includes the night. Of course, the woman had the dream during the night. Tradition has given us the character of this dream. It is said that when the courier arrived from their suburban home at Bethany, bringing a letter from Lucia Metella, the governors wife, in the midst of this momentously exciting trial, Pilate took it hurriedly, and aiming to read inaudibly, was so excited that his tremulous utterances were overheard. My Dear Husband, Be sure that you have nothing to do with that Righteous One; for this very day I saw Him, in a vision seated on high Olympus, and all the gods and goddesses hurling their crowns at His feet! I tell you, my husband, He is one of the gods. Of course, she and Pilate were Romans, believing in the many gods of the Roman Empire.
Luk 23:8-23. And the whole: multitude cried out saying, Take Him away; but release unto us Barabbas, who , on account of a certain insurrection and murder in the city, had been cast into prison, and Barabbas was a formidable robber chief, who had given them awful trouble, the Roman guards with difficulty having finally succeeded in arresting him, and thus breaking up his robber band. Then Pilate again called to them, wishing to release Jesus. And they continued to cry out, saying, Crucify Him! crucify Him! And the third time he said to them, For what evil has He done? I have found nothing worthy of death in Him; therefore, having scourged Him, I will release Him. You see Pilates plan was to move their sympathies and mitigate their cruel wrath by scourging Him, thinking they would then consent to His release.
And they continued to lie on, with great voices demanding that He should be crucified; and the voices of them and the high priests continued to wax stronger and stronger. As they were disappointed in their plan of killing Him in the night, and it is now eight oclock, the news flying on the wings of the wind, and all who hear of it rushing to the scene of action, crowding the streets and alleys and the flat roofs of the houses all around Pilates judgment-hall, the high priests, Sanhedrin, and ruling elders feel that the crisis is on them, and if some-thing is not done quickly, the mob will rise and take Him out of their hands. Hence they roar and roar as if they would split their throats, demanding of the governor His crucifixion.
Mat 27:24-26. And Pilate, seeing that he profits nothing, but the more is the uproar, taking water, washed his hands in presence of the multitude, saying, I am innocent, from the blood of this Just One; you shall see to it. And all the people, responding, said, His blood be upon us and our children. Then he released unto them Barabbas.
Luk 23:24-25. And Pilate decided that the request should be granted, and he released unto them the one who on account of sedition and murder had been cast into prison, and he delivered Jesus according to their choice. Contemporary history says that Pilate had but few soldiers in Jerusalem at that time comparatively with the ordinary force which he kept on hand, having recently been under the necessity of sending away a large detachment to quell an insurrection in Syria. He was therefore apprehensive of a bloody revolution, surging like the waves of the stormy sea, and every moment threatening to break out, deluge the judgment-hall in blood, blockade the streets with the slain, and wrap Jerusalem in a terrible civil war. Consequently, resorting to a principle long rulable, especially in Oriental despotisms, that one innocent man would better die than for many to lose their lives, and having repeatedly pronounced Jesus innocent, he signs His death-warrant as a mere peace measure, in order to prevent a bloody conflict, in which many would certainly perish.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 6
He released; he was accustomed to release.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
THE SENTENCE
6 Now at [that] feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired. 7 And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection. 8 And the multitude crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them. 9 But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? 10 For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy. 11 But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them. 12 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? 13 And they cried out again, Crucify him. 14 Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him. 15 And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.
Possibly I read too much into this text but it crossed my mind that they were willing to kill the true Messiah, the one that would set up their kingdom, and instead cry for the release of that one who fought the Roman’s. They truly did not understand their Messiah expected. They wanted freedom from Rome more than their Messiah. Not uncommon for lost man I suppose. Reject truth while embracing falsehood.
America today is embracing every falsehood set before them and love it since it feeds their personal desires. The truth of the Word is not to be had since it feeds the spiritual those negative messages of do not or do that, or do this – no do’s and don’ts for us.
The passage mentions that Pilate knew the Jews had brought Christ due to “envy.” Now that portion of the equation has not come forth before, though it was pretty obvious as a good part of the Jewish leadership’s problem with Him. He could draw the crowds; He had the pizzazz needed to be a leader at this time in Israel’s life. Of course they were envious of His ability to draw followers. Followers that were no longer listening to the Jewish leaders, followers that were probably no longer giving to the leaders and followers that were finding truth in what the man said. Yes, envy must have been a factor. Even a lost Roman leader could see the inner workings of this mob.
Envy is a terrible thing. It not only causes problems for the one envied but it causes the envier to sin within and often to sin without with overt actions to get back at the envied.
Having been asked as a young seminarian to teach a senior adult class I dove in with all the gustopossible. I had taught the class several weeks and one Sunday I was speaking of service in the church. One of the elders asked what they could do in the church. I responded as devil’s advocate challenging them to tell me what they, the old timers, the has-beens, could do in the church.
The class responded with several dozen items that they were sure that they could do for the Lord in that church body.
No one told me before I took the class that the class was a bunch of do nothings that would balk at any suggestion that they do anything. I went to the pastor with my list with all the excitement of a young person expecting a good response from the pastor.
He looked at me for a long time after he snidely snickered and said that bunch will never to anything and you are foolish to think they will. I protested but was sharply cut off by the pastor and dismissed from his presence.
Within a few hours I was also dismissed from my teaching position and one of the deacons read me the riot act for being one of “Those young seminarians that is going to change the world.” I was out of line for stirring the older folks up and a litany of other accusations fit for a young seminarian.
We left the church quite disheartened at our failure – till a few months later when we learned of another “young seminarian” that had been run off from the church for the same reasons. Then in another month or two someone informed us of the three other “young seminarians” that had been run off by the pastor and elders before I stumbled into the church.
Each “young seminarian” had crossed the line with some group in the church – they had started to have a rapport with the folks and were ministering to them. It seemed that the pastor could not stand to have anyone but him minister to the people. His envy was eating him alive. His church did not grow over the years in fact it dwindled to nothing. Yes, envy affects both parties if not contained within.
The saddest part of the entire story is that the pastor was a wonderful pastor, a great Bible teacher and he never realized how important he was to the church body.
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
15:6 Now at [that] feast he {b} released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.
(b) Pilate used to deliver.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Jesus’ second appearance before Pilate 15:6-15 (cf. Matthew 27:15-26; Luke 23:13-25; John 18:39-19:16)
Mark’s brief account of Jesus’ arraignment and sentencing concentrates on Pilate’s offer to release Jesus or Barabbas.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Evidently this custom served to improve relations between the Roman ruler and his subjects. Dictatorial governments such as Rome sometimes imprison popular rebel leaders. The Roman governor of Egypt practiced a similar custom. [Note: Taylor, p. 580.]
"Amnesties at festival times are known in many parts of the world and in various periods." [Note: S. E. Johnson, A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Mark, p. 249.]
"Two forms of amnesty existed in Roman law, the abolitio or acquittal of a prisoner not yet condemned, and the indulgentia, or pardoning of one already condemned. What Pilate intended in the case of Jesus, who at this stage of the proceedings had not yet been sentenced by the court, was clearly the first form." [Note: Lane, p. 552.]
"The historicity of the paschal amnesty has been disputed often, primarily because Josephus offers no evidence that such a custom ever existed. There is, however, a parallel in Roman law which indicates that an imperial magistrate could pardon and acquit individual prisoners in response to the shouts of the populace." [Note: Ibid., pp. 552-53.]