31

Christ’s Civil Trials—Part 1: Preliminary Hearings Before Pilate and Herod
(Luke 23:1–12)

Then the whole body of them got up and brought Him before Pilate. And they began to accuse Him, saying, “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King.” So Pilate asked Him, saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And He answered him and said, “It is as you say.” Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, “I find no guilt in this man.” But they kept on insisting, saying, “He stirs up the people, teaching all over Judea, starting from Galilee even as far as this place.” When Pilate heard it, he asked whether the man was a Galilean. And when he learned that He belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent Him to Herod, who himself also was in Jerusalem at that time. Now Herod was very glad when he saw Jesus; for he had wanted to see Him for a long time, because he had been hearing about Him and was hoping to see some sign performed by Him. And he questioned Him at some length; but He answered him nothing. And the chief priests and the scribes were standing there, accusing Him vehemently. And Herod with his soldiers, after treating Him with contempt and mocking Him, dressed Him in a gorgeous robe and sent Him back to Pilate. Now Herod and Pilate became friends with one another that very day; for before they had been enemies with each other. (23:1–12)

This passage introduces two more figures of the rogue’s gallery of characters in the unfolding drama of Christ’s death: Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea, and Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee (Luke 3:1). Those two Gentile rulers would conduct the three phases of the Lord’s civil trial.

Both Pilate and Herod were confident in their authority, but in reality neither had power over Jesus except what was granted to them by God. Pilate’s question to the crowds, “What shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?” (Matt. 27:22), presumed that he had authority to sit in judgment on Him. But when Pilate said to Him, “Do You not know that I have authority to release You, and I have authority to crucify You?” (John 19:10), Jesus answered, “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above” (v. 11). Neither Pilate nor Herod was in charge of determining Christ’s destiny. That had been predetermined by God in eternity past (Acts 2:23; 4:27–28). And in fact, Jesus will sit in judgment on them to determine their eternal destinies (John 5:22–30; Acts 10:42; Rom. 2:16; 2 Tim. 4:1, 8).

The Sanhedrin had plotted to kill Jesus (John 11:47–53), and had confirmed that sentence in illegal trials after His initial hearing before Annas. Even so, they did not have the authority to execute Him (John 18:31), and thus were forced to bring Him before Pilate for the death sentence. From their perspective, the Sanhedrin did not want Jesus killed in an act of mob violence, like the stoning of Stephen, but wanted to maintain the veneer of justice. From God’s perspective, Christ had to be executed by the Romans to fulfill prophecy. The language of Psalm 22 makes it clear that Jesus would be crucified. In Matthew 20:18–19 Jesus predicted that “the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn Him to death, and will hand Him over to the Gentiles to mock and scourge and crucify Him, and on the third day He will be raised up” (cf. John 12:32). That He would be lifted up suits the Roman practice of crucifixion. The Jews preferred to execute people by throwing them down off a parapet before stoning them.

In a display of heinous unanimity the whole body of the Sanhedrin got up and brought Jesus before Pilate. They sought by such solidarity to demonstrate the justice of their cause; surely Pilate would not believe that the entire Sanhedrin could be wrong. In truth, that unanimity, as noted in the previous chapter of this volume, was considered evidence of a lack of mercy and rendered their verdict illegal.

Before looking at Christ’s first hearing with Pilate, there is one matter that needs to be concluded: the tragic end of Judas Iscariot. When he left Gethsemane after betraying Christ, Judas evidently made his way to Annas’s house and followed the Lord’s two trials. What he had done was so incalculably wicked and the guilt so unbearable he should have fled, but was drawn to observe the unfolding of his deed, as torturous as it may have been.

Matthew records that when Judas saw that Jesus had been condemned and was being led away to Pilate for trial, “he felt remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders” (Matt. 27:3). His remorse was not true repentance, but mere worldly sorrow. In the volume on 2 Corinthians in this series I wrote the following, contrasting genuine biblical repentance with worldly sorrow:

In desperation, Judas sought to relieve the intense agony his guilt produced by attempting to undo what he had done. He “returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, ‘I have sinned by betraying innocent blood’” (Matt. 27:3–4). Since Judas had been complicit in the plot to kill Jesus, he was in effect a false witness. He approached the Sanhedrin and declared that he had been wrong, and offered new testimony of Jesus’ innocence. By law such testimonies were the court’s duty to consider. Here also was a man suffering the torment of a slaughtered conscience, and as the spiritual leaders of Israel, they should have had compassion on him.

But Judas had served his purpose in their plans, and they had no further use for or interest in him. They callously dismissed him, saying, “What is that to us? See to that yourself!” (Matt. 27:4). Their harsh, uncaring treatment of Judas confirmed Jesus’ characterization of them as those who “tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger” (Matt. 23:4).

After they dismissed him, Judas “threw the pieces of silver into the temple sanctuary and departed” (Matt. 27:5). “Sanctuary” translates the Greek word naos, which refers to the Holy Place, into which only the priests were allowed to enter. Judas forced the priests to take the money back (they used it to buy a field as a burial place; Matt. 27:6–10), but that did nothing to relieve his tormented conscience. Tortured by guilt so intense that death seemed a welcome relief, Judas “went away and hanged himself” (Matt. 27:5).

Meanwhile, Christ’s trial before the Gentile rulers Pilate and Herod, like His Jewish trial before Annas, Caiaphas, and the Sanhedrin, unfolded in three phases. This passage relates the first two of those phases: His preliminary hearings before Pilate and Herod. The elements unfold in six stages: the accusation, the interrogation, the exoneration, the intimidation, the disposition, and the confirmation.

THE ACCUSATION

And they began to accuse Him, saying, “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King.” (23:2)

After formally condemning Jesus in a hearing shortly after dawn, the Sanhedrin brought Him before Pilate at his temporary headquarters (probably either at Fort Antonia or Herod’s palace; Pilate’s permanent location was at Caesarea). Since they had ceremonially cleansed themselves to eat the Passover meal later that day and did not want to become defiled by entering a Gentile dwelling, they refused to go into Pilate’s headquarters (John 18:28).

In deference to their scruples Pilate, in the first lawful behavior so far in any of Christ’s trials, “went out to them and said, ‘What accusation do you bring against this Man?’” (v. 29). Feigning offense, they haughtily “answered and said to him, ‘If this Man were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him to you’” (v. 30). Annoyed by their flippant, arrogant, disrespectful response to his formal request for the charges against Jesus, Pilate fired back at them, “Take Him yourselves, and judge Him according to your law” (v. 31).

Pilate was aware of the events of the week. He knew of the triumphal entry, the cleansing of the temple, and the large crowds who listened to Jesus’ teaching, all of which caused the Jewish leaders to hate and envy Him (Matt. 27:18). But those were all Jewish issues, and no concern of his. He had not yet seen any evidence that Jesus had committed any crime against Rome. Pilate saw that the Sanhedrin wanted him to execute Jesus, but the failure to bring any legitimate charge against Him strongly suggested His innocence.

The Sanhedrin, forced to acknowledge that they had no authority to put anyone to death (John 18:31), and realizing that Pilate would not execute Jesus for blasphemy, a crime under Jewish law, invented false charges of insurrection. They said Jesus was misleading the nation into rebellion, forbidding them to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King. Those were serious crimes which, if true, would have compelled Pilate to take action to protect Rome’s interests. All of them, however, were false. Jesus had never advocated rebellion against Rome. Nor did He teach the people not to pay taxes to Rome; in fact, He taught just the opposite (Luke 20:21–25). While Jesus is a King, His kingdom at His first advent was not an earthly one in opposition to Rome, as He would soon make clear to Pilate. Nor did the Sanhedrin offer any evidence to support those lies; they gave no specific instances of the Lord’s alleged misconduct, called no witnesses, and instead impugned Pilate for questioning the legitimacy of their intent.

THE INTERROGATION

So Pilate asked Him, saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And He answered him and said, “It is as you say.” (23:3)

Pilate was familiar with the vehement protests of innocent men. But to his amazement, while Jesus “was being accused by the chief priests and elders, He did not answer” (Matt. 27:12). Even when “Pilate said to Him, ‘Do You not hear how many things they testify against You?’” (v. 13), the Lord “did not answer him with regard to even a single charge” (v. 14). Leaving the Sanhedrin waiting outside, Pilate went back inside his headquarters and summoned Jesus for a private interrogation (John 18:33).

Incredulous that this man before him could be a king who posed a threat to Rome, Pilate asked … “Are You the King of the Jews?” Before answering that question the Lord proposed a counter question, “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about Me?” (John 18:34), intended to clarify the matter. If the question was Pilate’s, he would be asking whether Jesus was a king in a political, earthly sense. In that case, He could be a potential threat to Rome. Jesus’ answer would then be no; He was not a political or military leader. But Pilate was merely repeating the Sanhedrin’s charge, as his reply, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests delivered You to me” (v. 35), indicates.

However, Pilate was still no nearer to understanding the Jewish leaders’ violent animosity toward Jesus and what, if any, crime He had committed to bring their animosity to this level. Perplexed, he tried once again to grasp the nature of the issue. “What have You done?” he asked Him (v. 35). Since it was obvious that Pilate was repeating the charge of the Jewish leaders, Jesus answered his question accordingly. He was Israel’s true king, but not an earthly one who might threaten Rome’s rule. “My kingdom is not of this world. … My kingdom is not of this realm,” He replied (v. 36). To make certain that he finally understood the issue, “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’” (v. 37). Pilate’s cynical response, “What is truth?” (v. 38) reflects the skeptical and cynical attitude of all who despair of finding the truth. He was, however, satisfied that Christ was not guilty of any crime against Rome.

THE EXONERATION

Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, “I find no guilt in this man.” (23:4)

Satisfied that Jesus was innocent, Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds that had gathered, “I find no guilt in this man” (cf. vv. 14–15; Matt. 27:19, 24; Mark 15:14; John 18:38; 19:4, 6). His official ruling was that the Lord Jesus was not guilty of the crime against Rome the Sanhedrin had leveled against Him (see the discussion of v. 2 above).

THE INTIMIDATION

But they kept on insisting, saying, “He stirs up the people, teaching all over Judea, starting from Galilee even as far as this place.” (23:5)

The Jewish leaders vehemently disagreed with Pilate’s verdict. Driven by vicious hatred of Jesus, they kept on insisting, saying, “He stirs up the people, teaching all over Judea, starting from Galilee even as far as this place.” As far as they were concerned, Pilate’s exoneration of Christ was not the end of the story. They had no interest in justice, but only wanted Pilate to accommodate their hatred. They had no case; there was no valid evidence, and no witnesses. All that was left for them was to try to intimidate Pilate into pronouncing Jesus guilty and executing Him.

Pilate was trapped. He knew Jesus was innocent. He was also afraid of Him because of His supernatural powers (John 19:7–9). But Pilate was clearly intimidated by the possibility that the Jewish leaders would cause him trouble with Caesar—which they would soon threaten to do (John 19:12).

THE DISPOSITION

When Pilate heard it, he asked whether the man was a Galilean. And when he learned that He belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent Him to Herod, who himself also was in Jerusalem at that time. (23:6–7)

The Jews’ reference to Galilee suggested to Pilate a possible way out of his dilemma. Since they had mentioned Galilee, Pilate asked them whether Jesus was a Galilean. When he learned from them that He was and thus belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent Him to Herod, who himself also was in Jerusalem at that time. It was not unusual for one ruler to transfer a prisoner to be tried before another; Festus, one of Pilate’s successors as Roman governor of Judea, brought Paul’s case before another member of the Herod family, Herod Agrippa II (Acts 25:23–27).

THE CONFIRMATION

Now Herod was very glad when he saw Jesus; for he had wanted to see Him for a long time, because he had been hearing about Him and was hoping to see some sign performed by Him. And he questioned Him at some length; but He answered him nothing. And the chief priests and the scribes were standing there, accusing Him vehemently. And Herod with his soldiers, after treating Him with contempt and mocking Him, dressed Him in a gorgeous robe and sent Him back to Pilate. Now Herod and Pilate became friends with one another that very day; for before they had been enemies with each other. (23:8–12)

The account of the Lord’s hearing before Herod appears only in Luke’s gospel. Herod Antipas was one of the sons of Herod the Great, who died after a long rule in 4 B.C. When he died, his kingdom was divided among his sons. Herod Antipas was given Galilee and Peraea, over which he ruled from 4 B.C. to A.D. 39. With the exception of the accounts of Christ’s birth, Antipas is the Herod who appears in the Gospels’ record of Jesus’ life and ministry.

Since Rome was in control of Israel, even though he was appointed ruler by his father, Antipas had to go to Rome to have his appointment confirmed. When he was young, his father, Herod the Great, had sent Antipas to Rome to be educated. Because of his connections in Rome, Antipas was able to secure his appointment.

When he returned to Palestine to begin his rule, the region was in turmoil. Earlier in that same year during the feast of Pentecost, a rebellion broke out, which devastated the area. When Antipas came back, he faced a massive rebuilding project. He built the city of Sepphoris, not far from Nazareth. Completed about A.D. 10, it became one of the chief cities of Galilee. Since Nazareth was only about four miles away, it is possible that Joseph, the husband of Mary the mother of Jesus, may have helped build Sepphoris. Antipas also built the city of Tiberius, in honor of Tiberius Caesar. Eventually the lake became known as the Lake of Tiberius.

Antipas married the daughter of Aretas IV, who ruled over the neighboring realm of Nabatea (the region Paul referred to in Gal. 1:17). This marriage was designed by Rome to unify the area. But while visiting his half-brother Herod Philip I in Rome, Antipas became infatuated with Philip’s wife Herodias and had an affair with her. She was not only Herod Philip’s wife, but was also Antipas’s niece, making their affair not only adulterous, but also incestuous. She agreed to leave her husband and marry Antipas, provided that he divorce Aretas’s daughter. It was for this illicit divorce and marriage to his brother’s wife that John rebuked Antipas, provoking the wrath of Herodias, who eventually had John the Baptist beheaded (Matt. 14:3–11).

Antipas related to Jesus on three occasions. The first came shortly after the death of John the Baptist:

Antipas is also mentioned in connection with Jesus in Luke 13:31–33:

The third time Antipas actually met Jesus in the event recorded here. As noted above Pilate, seeking a way out of his dilemma, sent Jesus to Antipas, since he was the ruler over Galilee. Antipas was very glad when he saw Jesus; for he had wanted to see Him for a long time (cf. Luke 9:9), because he had been hearing about Him and was hoping to see some miraculous sign performed by Him.

But although he questioned Him at some length, Jesus answered him nothing. As He had before Pilate, the Lord also ignored the assaults of the chief priests and the scribes, who were standing there, accusing Him vehemently. This was shocking behavior on the part of someone accused of serious crimes. As noted earlier, such people invariably either loudly protested their innocence, or desperately pled for mercy. It was also an affront to the ruler to pointedly ignore him. But though Jesus “was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He did not open His mouth; like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so He did not open His mouth” (Isa. 53:7).

Having been beaten and abused by the Sanhedrin and their officers (Mark 14:65), Jesus did not look like the man Herod had expected. He certainly did not appear to be a revolutionary; He had no army, no weapons, and no defenders. Finding the accusation unfounded and ridiculous (Luke 23:14–15) Antipas, with his soldiers, after treating Him with contempt and mocking Him, dressed Him in a gorgeous (lit., “brilliant,” “shining,” “radiant”) robe and sent Him back to Pilate.

Luke adds as a footnote that Herod and Pilate became friends with one another that very day; for before they had been enemies with each other. They had clashed on at least two occasions. Not only had Pilate slaughtered some of Antipas’s Galilean subjects (Luke 13:1), but Herod had also gone over Pilate’s head to Caesar to force Pilate to remove some Roman shields from his palace. At this point, however, the two men formed a friendship built around their mistreatment of Jesus and around a common hatred for the intimidating Jewish leaders that they had to deal with.

Herod’s life ended in disgrace:

The story of the Lord’s hearing before Herod serves three important purposes. First, it confirms Pilate’s verdict that Jesus was not guilty of any crime. Second, Herod and Pilate are two witnesses that confirm Jesus’ innocence (cf. Deut. 19:15). Neither of them was biased in His favor; Pilate was indifferent to Him, and Herod had sought to kill Him (Luke 13:31). Finally, it confirms prophecy (Ps. 2:2; cf. Acts 4:25–27).