29Jesus Before Pilate—Part 1: Phase One of the Civil Trial  (John 18:28–38)

Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas into the Praetorium, and it was early; and they themselves did not enter into the Praetorium so that they would not be defiled, but might eat the Passover. Therefore Pilate went out to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this Man?” They answered and said to him, “If this Man were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him to you.” So Pilate said to them, “Take Him yourselves, and judge Him according to your law.” The Jews said to him, “We are not permitted to put anyone to death,” to fulfill the word of Jesus which He spoke, signifying by what kind of death He was about to die. Therefore Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Jesus and said to Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?” Jesus answered, “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about Me?” Pilate answered, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests delivered You to me; what have You done?” Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.” Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” Pilate said to Him, “What is truth?” And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and said to them, “I find no guilt in Him.” (18:28–38)

The trials of the Lord Jesus Christ are history’s most egregious miscarriage of justice. In them the friend of sinners (Luke 7:34) faced the hatred of sinners; the Judge of all the earth (Gen. 18:25) was arraigned before petty human judges; the exalted Lord of glory (1 Cor. 2:8) was humiliated by being mocked, spit upon, and beaten; the Holy and Righteous one (Acts 3:14) was treated as a vile sinner; the One who is the truth (John 14:6) was impugned by evil liars.

But shining forth out of the satanic darkness of His trials is the absolute innocence of Jesus Christ. The evil efforts of His accusers are turned upside down so as to actually confirm His blamelessness. During His earthly ministry, He challenged His opponents, “Which one of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak truth, why do you not believe Me?” (John 8:46; cf. 14:30). In the Old Testament, Isaiah prophesied concerning Him,

The angel who foretold His birth called Him “the holy Child” (Luke 1:35); His betrayer lamented that he had “sinned by betraying innocent blood” (Matt. 27:4); one of the criminals crucified with Him declared of Him, “This man has done nothing wrong” (Luke 23:41); and the Roman centurion in charge at His execution said of Him, “Certainly this man was innocent” (v. 47). Paul said that He “knew no sin” (2 Cor. 5:21); the writer of Hebrews affirmed that He “has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15), and is “holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners” (7:26); and Peter wrote that He “committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth” (1 Peter 2:22).

The cast of characters in the gospel accounts of Jesus’ trials includes most of the rulers and important men in Israel. Annas, the former high priest and still the real power behind the scenes, was there. So was Caiaphas, the current high priest and son-in-law of Annas. Along with them were the members of the Sanhedrin, the ruling body (under the Romans) of Israel. Pilate, the Roman governor, played a major role; Herod Antipas, ruler of Jesus’ home region of Galilee, had a cameo role; and the extras included various unnamed false witnesses along with the crowds that would scream for Him to be crucified. But throughout the six phases (three religious, three civil) of His trials, the Lord Jesus Christ occupies center stage.

John did not record the second and third phases of the Lord’s religious trial, though he mentioned that Annas sent Jesus to Caiaphas (18:24). The Sanhedrin had met at Caiaphas’s house during the night (Matt. 26:57–68) and decided that Jesus should die (Matt. 26:66). Then in a nod to legality (since Jewish law did not permit capital trials to be held at night), the Sanhedrin reconvened after daybreak and formally pronounced sentence (Matt. 27:1). John picked up the story at that point, noting that they led Jesus from Caiaphas into the Praetorium, Pilate’s headquarters (probably either at Fort Antonius or Herod’s palace) where he stayed when he visited Jerusalem (Pilate’s permanent headquarters were in Caesarea).

The Jewish leaders’ motive for bringing Jesus before Pilate was obvious. Out of envy, jealousy, and hatred, they had been plotting to kill Him for a long time (cf. 5:18; 7:1; 11:53). Their murderous designs had been frustrated until now because “His hour had not yet come” (7:30; 8:20). At last, in God’s timing, with the help of the traitor Judas Iscariot, they had managed to seize Jesus. After giving Him a sham trial, they had sentenced Him to death. But having done so, they were powerless to carry out that sentence; the Romans did not permit them to execute anyone (18:31). That was standard Roman policy in the territories they ruled; they did not want nationalists executing those who were loyal to Rome.

Early Jewish sources differ as to when Rome removed the right of capital punishment from the Jews. The first-century Jewish historian Josephus states that it was in A.D. 6 when Judea became a Roman province. The Talmud (second century), however, dates it about forty years before the destruction of the temple (i.e., about A.D. 30). Perhaps, as F. F. Bruce suggests, “it may be that the remembrance persisted of a situation around A.D. 30 when the deprivation of this right was of special significance” (The Gospel of John [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983], 351).

By way of further setting the scene, John noted that it was early. Prōi, early, refers technically to the fourth watch of the night (3:00–6:00 A.M.), though it can also be used in a more general sense. Roman officials often began their duties at dawn and finished by late morning, so there is no reason why the Jewish leaders could not have brought Jesus to Pilate before 6:00 A.M. Their goal was to have him rubber-stamp their decision to kill Jesus, and carry out the execution before the crowds were aware of what was happening.

When they arrived at Pilate’s headquarters, the Jewish leaders remained outside and did not enter into the Praetorium so that they would not be defiled, but might eat the Passover. They had ceremonially cleansed themselves in preparation for the Passover meal they would eat later that day (Friday; for a discussion of how Jesus and the disciples could have eaten the Passover meal on Thursday night, see the exposition of 13:1 in chapter 6 of this volume), and could not risk a defilement that would bar them from that important meal. Most likely, the defilement they feared was contamination from a dead body, which would render them unclean for seven days (Num. 19:11, 14, 16). That concern stemmed from the common Jewish belief that Gentiles disposed of aborted or stillborn babies by throwing them down the drains (Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, The New International Commentary on the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979], 763, n. 59). Thus, the Mishnah declared all Gentile homes to be unclean (Morris, John, 763, n.58). Entering the colonnade or courtyard outside Pilate’s residence, however, would not defile them.

Illustrative of the twisted devotion of religious legalists, the Jewish leaders expected to please God through their legalism expressed in physical separation from a Gentile house, while at the same time illegally murdering God’s Son. They fastidiously avoided any superficial ceremonial defilement, but cared nothing about the profound moral defilement they incurred from rejecting and condemning the Holy Son of God to death. “The Jews take elaborate precautions to avoid ritual contamination in order to eat the Passover, at the very same time they are busy manipulating the judicial system to secure the death of him who alone is the true Passover” (D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991], 589).

John’s account of this phase of Jesus’ trial unfolds in three acts: the accusation, the interrogation, and the adjudication.

THE ACCUSATION

Therefore Pilate went out to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this Man?” They answered and said to him, “If this Man were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him to you.” So Pilate said to them, “Take Him yourselves, and judge Him according to your law.” The Jews said to him, “We are not permitted to put anyone to death,” to fulfill the word of Jesus which He spoke, signifying by what kind of death He was about to die. (18:29–32)

In deference to their religious scruples, Pilate went out to meet the Jews outside his residence. Their refusal to enter the Praetorium forced him to shuttle back and forth from inside the building, where Jesus was, to outside, where His accusers stood.

Pontius Pilate had been appointed the fifth governor of Judea by Emperor Tiberius in A.D. 26 and held that position for about ten years. Both the Gospels and extrabiblical sources portray him as proud, arrogant, and cynical (cf. 18:38), but also as weak and vacillating. His tenure as governor was marked by insensitivity and brutality (cf. Luke 13:1). Reversing the policy of his predecessors, Pilate had sent troops into Jerusalem carrying standards bearing images that the Jews viewed as idolatrous. When many of them vehemently protested against what they saw as a sacrilege, Pilate ordered them to stop bothering him on pain of death. But they called his bluff, and dared him to carry out his threat. Unwilling to massacre so many people, Pilate gave in and removed the offending standards. The story highlights his poor judgment, stubborn arrogance, and vacillating weakness. Pilate further angered the Jews when he took money from the temple treasury to build an aqueduct to bring water to Jerusalem. His soldiers beat and slaughtered many Jews in the riots that followed.

But the incident that led to Pilate’s downfall involved not the Jews, but their hated rivals the Samaritans. A group of them planned to climb Mt. Gerizim in search of golden objects allegedly hidden on its summit by Moses. Viewing the Samaritans as insurrectionists, Pilate ordered his troops to attack, and many of the pilgrims were killed. The Samaritans complained about Pilate’s brutality to his immediate superior, the governor of Syria. He removed Pilate from office and ordered him to Rome to be judged by Emperor Tiberius. But Tiberius died while Pilate was en route to Rome. Nothing is known for certain about Pilate after he reached Rome. Some accounts claim he was banished; others that he was executed; still others that he committed suicide.

Pilate’s question, “What accusation do you bring against this Man?” formally opened the legal proceedings. The Jewish leaders had undoubtedly already communicated with him about this case, since Roman troops took part in Jesus’ arrest. They evidently expected him to rubber-stamp their judgment and sentence Jesus to death. Instead, exercising his prerogative as governor, he ordered a fresh hearing over which he would preside. But the last thing the Jewish leaders wanted was a trial. They wanted a death sentence; they wanted Pilate to be an executioner, not a judge. They knew that their charge against Jesus, that He was guilty of blasphemy because He claimed to be God incarnate, would not stand up in a Roman court.

The Jews’ peremptory reply, “If this Man were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him to you,” was not only insulting, but also skirted the issue. Their false (cf. 8:46), blasphemous assertion that He was an evildoer was an assault on His character, but not an accusation of a specific legal violation. Quite unintentionally, their utter inability to bring one legitimate charge against Him affirmed Jesus’ innocence. Still, they made it clear that they expected Pilate simply to confirm their decision and sentence Jesus to death.

Stung by their haughty, disrespectful, disdainful treatment of him, Pilate fired back a barb of his own. “Take Him yourselves,” he taunted them, “and judge Him according to your law.” Pilate knew full well that they wanted him to execute Jesus. But as the Jews were forced to acknowledge to him, “We are not permitted to put anyone to death.” Though he would soon cave in to their demands, Pilate initially stood his ground. “If [the Jews] expected a capital sentence to be handed down they were going to have to speak up and convince him, since, as they themselves conceded, they could not legally proceed without him” (Carson, John, 591).

But there was a deeper significance to the exchange between Pilate and the Jews. The wicked scheming of the Jewish leaders and the cowardly connivance of Pilate merely served to fulfill the word of Jesus which He spoke, signifying by what kind of death He was about to die. Jesus had predicted that Gentiles would be involved in His death. “Behold,” He told the disciples,

The Lord had also predicted the form His execution would take. In 3:14; 8:28; and 12:32 He spoke of being “lifted up,” which He said “to indicate the kind of death by which He was to die” (12:33; cf. Ps. 22:6–18). Had the Jews executed Him, they would have thrown Him down and stoned Him (as they did Stephen; Acts 7:58–60). But the Lord’s prediction was about to be fulfilled, as He was “lifted up” on the cross, a distinctively Roman kind of execution. God providentially controlled the events of Jesus’ trial to ensure that His prophetic words would come to pass.

THE INTERROGATION

Therefore Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Jesus and said to Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?” Jesus answered, “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about Me?” Pilate answered, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests delivered You to me; what have You done?” Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.” Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” Pilate said to Him, “What is truth?” (18:33–38a)

Leaving the Jewish leaders standing outside, Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Jesus. Luke 23:2 provides the background to his question, “Are You the King of the Jews?” Realizing that they had to come up with a charge that would impress a Roman judge, the Jewish leaders “began to accuse [Jesus], saying, ‘We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King.’” The charges, of course, were completely false; Jesus had actually said the opposite: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s” (Matt. 22:21). Their goal was to portray Him as an insurrectionist, bent on overthrowing Roman rule and establishing His own.

Pilate could not overlook such a threat to Roman power. His question, “Are You the King of the Jews?” was in effect asking Jesus whether He was pleading guilty or not guilty to the charge of insurrection. “Pilate’s question seeks to determine whether or not Jesus constituted a political threat to Roman imperial power” (Andreas J. Köstenberger, John, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004], 527). In all four gospel accounts this is the first question Pilate asks Jesus, and in all four the pronoun “You” is emphatic. The Greek text literally reads, “You, are You the King of the Jews?” Pilate was incredulous; from a human perspective, Jesus did not look like a king. And if He was a king, where were His followers and His army? And how was He a threat to Rome?

Jesus could not answer Pilate’s question with an unqualified “Yes” or “No” without first defining exactly what His kingship entails. His counterquestion, “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about Me?” was intended to clarify the issue. If Pilate was saying this on his own initiative, he would be asking if Jesus was a king in the political sense (and hence a threat to Rome). Jesus’ answer in that case would be no; He was not a king in the sense of a military or political leader. He had earlier rejected the crowd’s attempt to make Him such a king (6:15). But neither could the Lord deny that as the Messiah He was Israel’s true king.

Pilate’s sharp retort, “I am not a Jew, am I?” reflects both his disdain for the Jewish people, and his growing exasperation with the frustrating, puzzling ethnic case set before him. His further elaboration, Your own nation and the chief priests delivered You to me, makes it clear that the governor was merely repeating the charge leveled against Jesus by the Jewish leaders; the accusation was theirs, not Rome’s. Exactly why they had done so still eluded Pilate. He knew perfectly well that the Jews would not have handed over to him someone hostile to Rome unless they stood to gain from doing so.

Attempting once again to get to the bottom of things, Pilate asked the question that he should have asked at the outset: what have You done? Unlike Jewish practice (see the discussion of 18:19 in the previous chapter of this volume), Roman legal procedure allowed the accused to be questioned in detail (Köstenberger, John, 527). Pilate understood that the Jewish leaders had handed Jesus over to him because of envy (Matt. 27:18). What he still did not understand was what Jesus had done to provoke such vehement hostility from them and what, if any, crime He had committed.

Since it was now clear that Pilate was merely repeating the charge of the Jewish leaders, Jesus answered his question. He was a king, but not a political ruler intent on challenging Rome’s rule. “My kingdom is not of (Greek ek; “out from the midst of”) this world,” He declared. Its source was not the world system, nor did Jesus derive His authority from any human source. As noted earlier, He had rejected the crowd’s attempt to crown Him king. He also passed up an opportunity to proclaim Himself king at the triumphal entry, when He rode into Jerusalem at the head of tens of thousands of frenzied hopefuls.

To reinforce His point, Jesus noted that if His kingdom were of this world, then His servants would be fighting so that He would not be handed over to the Jews. No earthly king would have allowed himself to have been captured so easily. But when one of His followers (Peter) attempted to defend Him, Jesus rebuked him. The messianic kingdom does not originate from human effort, but through the Son of Man’s conquering of sin in the lives of those who belong to His spiritual kingdom.

Christ’s kingdom is spiritually active in the world today, and one day He will return to physically reign on the earth in millennial glory (Rev. 11:15; 20:6). But until then His Kingdom exists in the hearts of believers, where He is undisputed King and sovereign Lord. He was absolutely no threat either to the national identity of Israel, or to the political and military identity of Rome.

That the Lord spoke of being handed over to the Jews is significant. Far from leading them in a revolt against Rome, Jesus spoke of the Jews (especially the leaders) as His enemies. He was a king, but since He disavowed the use of force and fighting, He was clearly no threat to Rome’s interests. The Lord’s statement rendered the Jews’ charge that He was a revolutionary bent on overthrowing Rome absurd.

Jesus’ description of His kingdom had left Pilate somewhat confused. If His kingdom was not an earthly one, then was Jesus really a king at all? Seeking to clarify the issue, Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus’ answer was clear and unambiguous: “You say correctly that I am a king.” The Lord boldly “testified the good confession before Pontius Pilate” (1 Tim. 6:13). Unlike earthly kings, however, Jesus was not crowned a king by any human agency. For this I have been born, He declared, and for this I have come into the world. Jesus had not only been born like all other human beings, but also had come into the world from another realm—heaven (cf. 3:13, 31; 6:33; 8:23; 17:5). Taken together, the two phrases are an unmistakable reference to the preexistence and incarnation of the Son of God.

Jesus’ mission was not political but spiritual. It was to testify to the truth by “proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom” (Matt. 4:23). Christ proclaimed the truth about God, men, sin, judgment, holiness, love, eternal life, in short, “everything pertaining to life and godliness” (2 Peter 1:3). What people do with the message of truth Jesus proclaimed determines their eternal destiny; as He went on to declare, “Everyone who is of the truth hears (the Greek word includes the concept of obedience; cf. Luke 9:35) My voice.” Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through [Him]” (14:6). In 10:27 He added, “My sheep hear My voice and I know them, and they follow Me.” Only those who continue in His Word are truly His disciples; only those who are truly His disciples will know and be set free by the truth (8:31–32).

Jesus’ words were an implied invitation to Pilate to hear and obey the truth about Him. But they were lost on the governor, who abruptly ended his interrogation of Christ with the cynical, pessimistic remark, “What is truth?” Like skeptics of all ages, including contemporary postmodernists, Pilate despaired of finding universal truth. This is the tragedy of fallen man’s rejection of God. Without God, there cannot be any absolutes; without absolutes, there can be no objective, universal, normative truths. Truth becomes subjective, relative, pragmatic; objectivity gives way to subjectivity; timeless universal principles become mere personal or cultural preferences. All fallen mankind has accomplished by forsaking God, “the fountain of living waters,” is “to hew for themselves cisterns, broken cisterns that can hold no water” (Jer. 2:13). Pilate’s flippant retort proved that he was not one of those given by the Father to the Son, who hear and obey Christ’s voice.

THE ADJUDICATION

And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and said to them, “I find no guilt in Him.” (18:38b)

Having finished interrogating Jesus, Pilate pronounced his verdict. He went out again to the Jews and said to them, “I find no guilt in Him.” He understood enough to realize that Jesus posed no threat to Roman rule. He made it clear that Jesus was innocent of the charges of sedition and insurrection leveled against Him by the Jewish leaders (Luke 23:2).

No valid indictment of Him at the beginning; no conviction of Him at the end. The Lord of glory was maligned, hated, and falsely accused, but nevertheless found to be perfect, faultless, and innocent.