Part Two of a study of the trials of Jesus, which looks at Jesus’ appearances before Pontius Pilate and Herod Antipas
Fourth Trial – The first appearance before Pontius Pilate
Pontius Pilate, the prefect or governor of Judea, was usually based in Caesarea, not Jerusalem. He was in Jerusalem with his soldiers to keep order during the Passover. This must have been convenient for the Sanhedrim who wanted Jesus executed quickly rather than keeping him in prison until Pilate showed up sometime later.
In every movie about Jesus, from Ben Hur to Passion of the Christ to Life of Brian, the Roamn soldiers are portrayed as Latin-speaking Roman Legionaries. They weren’t. Pilate was an equestrian governor. (An equestrian was the equivalent of a knight.) He was not important to be assigned Legions. His soldiers were auxiliary troops which most likely came from Syria (Christopher Zeichmann, The Roman Army in the New Testament, Lexington Books, Lanham, 2018, pp. 1-4).
The traditional site of Jesus’ trial before Pilate was believed to have in the Antonia Fortress at the north east corner of the Temple. The modern consensus is that the trial was held in Herod’s Palace, next to the western wall of Jerusalem (Paul Barnett, The Trials of Jesus, Eerdmans, Michigan, 2024, p.148).
In his book Zealot, Reza Aslan doubts there ever was a trial before Pilate as described in the Gospels,
“In his [Pilate’s] ten years as governor of Jerusalem, he had sent thousands upon thousands to the cross with a simple scratch of his reed pen on a slip of papyrus. The notion that he would even be in the same room as Jesus, let alone deign to grant him a “trial”, beggars the imagination. Either the threat posed by Jesus to Jerusalem is so great that he is only one of a handful of Jews to have the opportunity to stand before Pilate and answer for his alleged crimes, or else the so-called trial before Pilate is a fabrication.” (Reza Aslan, Zealot, The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth, Allen and Unwin, Sydney, 2013, p. 148)
The Romans ruled Judea, not the Sanhedrin. Pilate was not going to execute someone just because the Sanhedrin demanded that he do it. The Sanhedrin accused Jesus of saying He was the Messiah who would overthrow Roman rule. Pilate would have wanted to know how serious a threat Jesus was. Was Judea on the verge of a revolt?
Matthew and Mark briefly describe Jesus’ first appearance before Pilate. He sked Jesus if He was “the king of the Jews”, trying to work out if He was a political threat and guilty of sedition. Jesus replied, “You have said so.” (Matthew 27:11-14, Mark 15:2-5)
Luke goes into more detail about the charges which the Sanhedrin brought against Jesus to Pilate, “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king” (Luke 23:2, ESV) and “He stirs up the people , teaching throughout all Judea, from Galilee even to this place” (Luke 23:5, ESV). They appear to be saying that Jesus is guilty of being a “seducer of the people” and His teachings have been found to be false (Eckhard Schnabel, Jesus in Jerusalem, The Last Days, Eerdmans, Michigan, 2018, p. 247)
Pilate probably did not care if Jesus said He was the Son of God. The pagan Greeks and Romans had lots of gods and sons of gods. One more would not have made much difference. However, the Sanhedrin accused Jesus of saying He was the Messiah, the king of the Jews who would overthrow the Romans, and He was misleading and stirring up the people, saying they should not pay taxes to Rome. That would have gotten Pilate’s attention.
John goes into greater detail about Jesus’ first appearance before Pilate. First, Pilate questioned the Jews about the charges against Jesus outside. Pilate told them to judge Him by their own law, but they said, “It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death” (John 18:31, ESV).
This was not actually true. In The Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus, David Chapman and Eckhard Schnabel write,
“It appears that the Roman administration in Judea allowed jurisdiction in cases in which the sanctity of the Jerusalem Temple had been violated, evidently permitting executions in such cases. The conclusion of R. E. Brown summarizes the view of most New Testament scholars. The Romans permitted the Jews to execute for certain clear religious offenses, e.g. fr violating the prohibitions against circulating in certain quarters of the Temple, and perhaps for adultery.” (David Chapman and Eckhard Schnabel, The Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus, Mohr Siebeck, Germany, 2015, p. 16)
The Sanhedrin could have executed Jesus, but as I said in Part One, they did not want to, because they were afraid of a backlash from the people.
Pilate and Jesus then went back inside where Pilate continued to question Jesus. He explained that He was a king, but Hs kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36-37). Pilate apparently understood that Jesus was speaking in spiritual terms and did not constitute a political threat.
In the Gospels, Pilate is reluctant to execute Jesus. Perhaps, like the Sanhedrin, he did not want to kill a popular religious figure during the Passover. Both parties wanted the other one to do it. Matthew and Mark say that Pilate was “amazed” at Jesus (Matthew 27:14, Mark 14:5), suggesting that Jesus made an impression on him. Matthew records that Pilate’s wife had a bad dream about Jesus and warned Pilate to “have nothing to do with that righteous man” (Matthew 27:19, ESV). Or maybe Pilate did not like the Jews telling him what to do, and making him have to deal with a trial first thing in the morning.
Fifth Trial – Jesus before Herod Antipas
Only Luke records that when Pilate learned that Jesus was from Galilee and belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent Him to Herod Antipas who was also in Jerusalem at the time (Luke 23:6-8). Pilate did not have to do this. He could have still tried Jesus. It looks like he was trying to fob responsibility for Jesus off to somebody else.
Luke says that “the chief priests and the scribes” were also there, accusing Jesus, but Jesus said nothing. Herod and his soldiers dressed Jesus up, mocked Him and sent Him back to Pilate (Luke 23:9-11).
Luke adds, “And Herod and Pilate became friends with each that very day, for before this they had been at enmity with each other.” (Luke 23:12, ESV)
Sixth Trial – The second appearance before Pilate and the release of Barabbas
Herod sent Jesus back to Pilate who addressed the crowd, “You brought me this man as one who was misleading the people. And after examining him before you, behold, I did not find this man guilty of any of your charges against him” (Luke 23:1, ESV).
Pilate did not think Jesus was a threat to Roman rule. He said he would punish Jesus and then release Him (Luke 23:16). If Jesus was innocent, there was no need to punish Him at all. Pilate was apparently trying to placate the crowd. As mentioned in Part One, Pilate “perceived that it was out of envy that the chief priests had delivered him up” (Mark 15:10, ESV). The Sanhedrin wanted Jesus dead, regardless of whether or not He was legally guilty of anything.
All four Gospels say there was a custom to release a prisoner during the Passover (Matthew 27:15, Mark 15:6, Luke 23:18, John 18:39). Some critics argue this custom was not historical because the Jewish historian Josephus and other ancient Jewish sources do not mention it. They seem to forget that our knowledge of Second Temple Judaism is incomplete and we cannot say with certainty that there was no such custom.
This custom should be regarded as historical because it meets the criterion of multiple attestation. It is mentioned in all four Gospels. There are more references to it than to a lot of events in the ancient world. Setting a prisoner free during the Passover makes sense and is consistent with the message of the Passover of Israel being redeemed and liberated from bondage in the original Passover. There is no reason why the Gospel writers would make up this story about a non-existent Passover custom. It contributes nothing to the overall Passion Narrative which would be the same if it were not there.
Mark records that “the chief priests stirred up the crowd to have him release for them Barabbas” (Mark 15:11, ESV).
After Barabas was released, Pilate handed Jesus over to the Roman soldiers who mocked and beat Him (Matthew 27:27-31, Mark 15:16-21, John 10:1-3). Matthew, Mark and Luke mention an earlier beating after Jesus’ appearance before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, presumably by the Temple guards (Matthew 26:67-68, Mark 14:65, Luke 22:63-65). John skipped this trial so he did not mention this incident. Luke does not mention the second beating by the Roman soldiers. Matthew and Mark describe both.
Jesus was dressed up as a king with a robe, a crown of thorns and a red as a staff, and the soldiers mocked and beat Him. Philo of Alexandria (c. 20 BC – 50 AD) described a similar incident. Around 38 AD, when Herod Agrippa (not to be confused with Herod Antipas) visited Alexandria, some anti-Jewish Greeks grabbed a local mentally ill person called Carabbas or Karabbas. The also dressed him up as a king with a fake crown, robe and staff, and mocked him (Philo, Flaccus, 36-38).
Seventh Trial – Jesus’ third appearance before Pilate
Most Bible scholars believe that Jesus experienced six trials, three before the Jews and three before the Gentiles. However, after the Roman soldiers had mocked and beaten Jesus (Matthew :27-31, Mark 15:16-20, John 19:1-3), John clearly records a seventh trial, another appearance before Pilate (John 19:4-11), which is not recorded in the other Gospels. Pilate was still reluctant to execute Jesus. He gave the Sanhedrin permission to do it themselves (John 19:6), but neither wanted the responsibility for killing Jesus. Pilate gives in and sends Jesus to be crucified after the crowd says, “If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend. Everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar” (John 19:12, ESV).
Some historians have a problem with the way Pilate is portrayed in the Gospels. According to ancient Jewish writers, Josephus and Philo, Philo was a cruel and repressive ruler. In Embassy to Gaius, Philo described Pilate as “a cruel man of very inflexible disposition, and very merciless, as well as well as very obstinate” (Philo, Embassy to Gaius, 301), and “his corruption, and his acts of insolence, and his rapine, and his habit of insulting people, and his cruelty, and his continual murder of people untried and uncondemned, and his neverending, and most gratuitous, and most grievous inhumanity” (Embassy to Gaius, 302) and “being exceedingly angry, and being at all times a man of most ferocious passions” (Embassy to Gaius, 303).
In contrast, Pilate in the Gospels comes across as a bit of a wimp who caves in to the Jews’ demands and has Jesus crucified even though he thought He was innocent. In Zealot, Rez Aslan describes this as “pure fiction” (Zealot, p. 47).
In fact, Pilate’s apparent weakness can be explained. Lucius Aelius Sejanus (b. 20 BC) was the prefect (commander) of the Praetorian Guard, the Emperor Tiberius’ bodyguard. After Tiberius withdrew from Rome to the island of Capri in 27 AD, Sejanus controlled the flow of information to Tiberius, began to eliminate his rivals and was on his way to controlling the Empire. In 31 AD, Tiberius realized what was going on and had Sejanus arrested and executed. He began a purge and had Sejanus’ supporters and family executed.
Sejanus may have appointed Pilate to his position in Judea in 26 AD (Paul Barnett, The Trials of Jesus, Eerdmans. Michigan, 2024, p.4). Sejanus and Pilate may have had a patron/client relationship. Sejanus (the patron) promoted and appointed Pilate (the client). In return, Pilate would be expected to be loyal to and support Sejanus. After Sejanus was executed and the purging of his supporters, Pilate would have been in a very vulnerable position, under suspicion of disloyalty. He may have been able to survive on the edge of the Empire, but not in Rome.
Even if Pilate had not been Sejanus’ client, with all the purges, it was not a good time to be accused of being loyal to Tiberius. When the crowd said that if Pilate released Jesus who claimed to be a king against Tiberius (John 19:12), they were threatening Pilate, saying they would report him to Rome for being disloyalty and he probably would have been executed. So Pilate had Jesus crucified, even though he doubted He was guilty, to save his own skin, and a Roman official who died two years earlier was a factor in Jesus’ crucifixion.
Conclusion
The Jews have been blamed for killing Jesus for nearly 2000 years. The Romans killed Jesus but the Sanhedrin and the Jewish mob pressured him into doing it. As I mentioned in an earlier blog When was Jesus crucified?, there were about 400,000 Jews (both locals and pilgrims) in Jerusalem for the Passover. It has been estimated that about 1000 people could have fitted into the courtyard at Herod’s Palace and called for Jesus to be crucified (Eckhard Schnabel, Jesus in Jerusalem, The Last Days, Eerdmans, Michigan, 2018, p. 270). This would mean that 99.75% of the Jews in Jerusalem at the time had nothing to do with the death of Jesus.
Historians talk about the quest or search for the historical Jesus, which is the debate about how accurate the portrayal of Jesus in the Gospels really is. Many historians say that Jesus did not say He was the Messiah. He was only an itinerant rabbi or a prophet who got rewritten by the Gospel writers.
However, the Romans did not crucify people for being rabbis or prophets or saying, “Blessed are the meek.” They crucified people for sedition, rebelling against Rome (as well as for being escaped slaves, criminals and deserters).
By claiming to be the Messiah, the king of the Jews, Jesus was technically guilt of sedition and even if Pilate did not really believe He was a threat, he could legally crucify Jesus. On the other hand, if Jesus really was a rebel and the leader of a considerable band of rebels, as some historians have claimed, Pilate would not only crucified Jesus. He would have crucified His disciples and other followers as well. He would not have killed the leader of the rebels and left the rest of them. They would have found a new leader and continued to be a threat.
The portrayal of Jesus in the Gospels is logical and fits the evidence. The Romans crucified Jesus because He said He was the Messiah, but He was a different kind of Messiah who was not really a rebel or a political threat to Rome
Malcolm Nicholson 