Pilate on Trial (John 18:28-40)

John does not include in his account of the trials of Jesus a description of what took place in the house of Caiaphas nor does he even mention the fact that Pilate sent Jesus to Herod for his opinion. Obviously John had to be selective regarding what he included because, as he wrote in chapter 20, there was a great deal of material he could use. The reason why he included some details is that he was convinced they would lead us to faith, so the question we should be asking ourselves at this time is, ‘What is their about this account that leads me to believe in Jesus?’

The challenge Pilate was posed (vv. 28-32)

Pilate probably was anticipating trouble because it was Passover, an annual date that automatically encouraged Jews to think of freedom from political oppression. So he would have wondered what was so important when it caused the Jewish leaders to arrive early at his headquarters. He discovered that they wanted him to deal with one of their own countrymen. Pilate’s response indicates that he was not aware of Jesus, which suggests that Jesus had not caused any difficulties for the authorities during his three years of public ministry.

Pilate was prepared to adapt himself to Jewish rituals connected to their faith. He knew that they would not want to come into his house on the first day of unleavened bread in case there was some leaven lying around. Their homes would have been checked to ensure that they were leaven-free. So here we have the unusual spectacle of religious leaders attempting to keep the ceremonial law while simultaneously trying to get rid of the lawgiver. Of course, they imagined that Jesus was a heretic.

It looks as if Pilate’s question – ‘What accusation do you bring against this man?’ – must have been slightly sarcastic at least, going by the answer given to him by the Jewish leaders. He knew that they were powerless to inflict capital punishment, but it was their powerlessness that was going to cause problems for him. This initial interaction was the beginning of a process that would soon move far beyond Pilate’s ability to control.

What can we say about the Jewish leaders? They were marked by injustice, intrigue and hatred. Injustice was seen in the way they conducted their trials, intrigue was revealed in how they manipulated Pilate to do what they wanted, and hatred was shown towards Jesus. Although Pilate eventually gave the decision to execute Jesus there is no sign that he hated Jesus. So why did the Jewish rulers detest him? I suppose there was fear in the hearts of the politically minded Sadducees that he would cause them to lose influence with the Roman authorities. There was also hatred in the hearts of the religiously blinded Pharisees because of the way Jesus had refuted their teachings and exposed them as hypocrites on numerous occasions. Neither of those groups had any grasp that they needed to be delivered by a Saviour who would deal with their sins.

How does this section help us have faith in Jesus? The answer is given by John in verse 32: ‘This was to fulfill the word that Jesus had spoken to show by what kind of death he was going to die.’ When did Jesus make this prediction? Matthew records that Jesus said he would be delivered up to the Gentiles and killed (Matt. 20:19). Now the Jews were delivering him to the Romans, and they put him to death. The original readers of John’s Gospel would know that John recorded several references to Jesus being ‘lifted up’, which was an allusion to crucifixion (John 3:14; 8:28; 12:32, 34), and crucifixion was the Roman method of capital punishment. Why did Jesus make this prediction? Here are two possibilities: one was because he knew it was his chosen destiny and the other was to comfort his disciples by the fact that he was not defeated by a stronger power. The fact that he knew his future and embraced it is a very strong reason for believing in him.

The contrast Pilate discovered (vv. 33-38)

Pilate went back in to the place where Jesus was, determined to find out who he was. The interviews give the impression that he did not want to condemn Jesus, perhaps initially because Pilate did not want to please the Jews. Matthew also tells us that Pilate was warned by his wife to have nothing to do with Jesus because of a dream she had about him – this was probably a superstitious reason, but the Romans were very superstitious with regard to dreams.

Pilate asked four sets of questions, although the last – ‘What is truth?’ – is a definite sarcastic comment. He discovered that Jesus was not afraid of him, nor did Jesus ask him to be lenient. Instead he discovered that Jesus spoke to him about the subjects he spoke about with other people – his kingdom and his mission. Pilate deduced from the comments of Jesus that he was not a threat. But John has recorded them so that they will help us believe in Jesus.

His kingdom has another origin and is not dependent on events in this world. Moreover his subjects do not engage in military conflict on behalf of his kingdom (which would have been a powerful encouragement to the Christians John knew who were at the time of his writing facing persecution from the same empire as crucified Jesus). The implication is that his kingdom and his subjects are focused on peace.

Pilate’s derisory comment about Jesus being a king (v. 37) opens the door for Jesus to give further information to Pilate. The speed with which Jesus was able to respond to Pilate is another example of his great wisdom. As a royal visitor, he came to proclaim what the truth is. This is a very big statement, but we can note some things about it. The first deduction we can make is that in the estimation of Jesus truth had to come to us from outside our world. Therefore, the ideas that mark our world fall short of the truth. But it is good to know that there is a place, the one from which Jesus came, which has the truth. Since it is wisdom to attempt to know the truth, this is a reason why we should believe in Jesus.

The second deduction we can make is that Jesus has in mind a comprehensive truth. He does not say that he came to bear witness to truths and then enumerate them. Instead he says to Pilate that the message declared was about the truth. Of course, the readers know that what Jesus means is God’s plan of salvation, truth that could not be discovered by the greatest of earthly minds and a message that is a complete whole in which every aspect of it fits together. It would have been a wonderful answer that Pilate could have had if his question, ‘What is truth?’, had been genuine.

The third deduction that we can make is that those who are affected by this truth will always listen to Jesus. They become affected through the work of the Spirit of truth and he always directs them to Jesus. Pilate made it obvious that he had not been affected. By implication, John is asking his readers if they are affected by the truth.

The choice Pilate offered (vv. 38-40)

While Pilate was not convinced that Jesus was the Saviour, he was convinced that Jesus was innocent of the charges made against him of treason against the Roman authority. Therefore he did not want to condemn Jesus and decided to avail himself of a custom at Passover time that involved setting a prisoner free.

From the point of view of common sense and from the point of view of natural justice, the Jews should have chosen Jesus and Pilate should have set Jesus free without asking the Jews for their opinion. But where hatred and self-promotion exist, common sense and natural justice disappear.

The offer that Pilate made was to choose between an innocent person under Roman law and a guilty robber under Roman law. The choice made by the Jews was to prefer an evil man instead of a good man (they did not believe that Jesus was divine, but they had ample evidence that he was good who loved God’s law). John is asking his readers what choice they would make.

Strangely, the choice that informed readers should make is that Jesus should not go free. This choice is not made because they conclude that Jesus is guilty and deserves to die. Instead they rejoice that Pilate declares that Jesus is innocent, and that he will die as an innocent, perfectly righteous sacrifice and pay the penalty of their sins. They are grieved that their sins brought about his death, but they know from his own words that his death will not be the end. Three days later he will rise again as the King who defeated their enemies – the devil and death, as well as paying the penalty for their sins.

There is one startling fact about Barabbas that we can be certain about and it is that he is the only person in human history whose place on the cross was literally taken by Jesus. Barabbas should have died for his sins. Instead he was set free because another died in his place. Although he was a terrible man, and although we have no evidence that he ever repented of his sins or even gave a second thought to Jesus, Barabbas is an amazing illustration of how a sinner is delivered from the penalty of his sins by God. The innocent (Jesus) took the place of the guilty and suffered the penalty the guilty should have paid.

I wonder what Jesus thought when he heard the contrasts in the offer made to the crowd. Of course, he knew that at that moment he was the willing victim of another court, the heavenly one, and that he was representing millions of sinners, some a lot worse than Barabbas. He also knew that penalty he would pay would not only free people for a few years (as Pilate did Barabbas), but that his death would free his people for eternity.