PDA

View Full Version : Pilate's Choice For The Crowd


bar Jonah
January 30th 2003, 02:59 PM
Pilate’s Choice For The Crowd
The Shocking Truth

by Jim Schofield


What Christian isn't familiar with the story of how Roman governor Pontius Pilate allowed the crowd of Jews the choice of who would be crucified and who would go free? But let's back up a bit and take a look at a story that you probably THOUGHT you knew...

A revolutionary leader had appeared on the scene named Jesus, stirring up the people, promising to set them free. Jesus moved from town to town, teaching revolutionary ideas and causing an uprising among the people, inspiring them to change their lives, even risk death for what they believed! Many saw this man as someone who would liberate them from oppression, set them free through some kind of revolution. And now he would suffer on the cross for his attempt to be a revolutionary leader of the Jews. He was to be crucified.

And that fateful day came when Pilate stood before the crowd, and asked them who they wanted to crucify and who should be set free, for it was a custom for the Roman governor to set free one man on this day every year, in honor of Passover. The Passover feast celebrated the day that death passed over a people who were rebellious and sinful and deserving of death, spared only by their God's mercy and grace. Perhaps the real purpose of this tradition was an attempt by the Romans to replace the Hebrew God with their own authority, by being the new source of mercy and grace to one prisoner every year. It would have been a brilliant propaganda ploy, to be sure.

And now, Pilate presented the choice to the people, and they shouted their answer! And Jesus... was released and walked away free.

What? Yes, you heard me. Jesus was released, and he lived.

Here is the scripture you are familiar with, from the gospel of Matthew.


[i]NKJV
Matthew 27:15-23
Now at the feast the governor was accustomed to releasing to the multitude one prisoner whom they wished. And at that time they had a notorious prisoner called Barabbas. Therefore, when they had gathered together, Pilate said to them, "Whom do you want me to release to you? Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?" For he knew that they had handed Him over because of envy.

While he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent to him, saying, "Have nothing to do with that just Man, for I have suffered many things today in a dream because of Him." But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitudes that they should ask for Barabbas and destroy Jesus. The governor answered and said to them, "Which of the two do you want me to release to you?"

They said, "Barabbas!"

Pilate said to them, "What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?"

They all said to him, "Let Him be crucified!"

Then the governor said, "Why, what evil has He done?"

But they cried out all the more, saying, "Let Him be crucified!"


Some may note that Pilate says something odd here. Why would he, of all people, refer to Jesus as "Christ?" Did he have a particularly good reason? But what if I told you this isn't a completely accurate translation. Translators have intentionally removed a shocking word. Remember the back-story... Barabbas was a thief and a murderer, and a leader in a failed attempt of some Jews to rise up against the Roman occupation. Many saw this man as a person who would liberate them from oppression, set them free through some kind of revolution. And now he would suffer for his attempt to be a revolutionary leader of the Jews. He was to be crucified.

But what most don't realize is that Barabbas wasn't his first name. It was his surname. The prefix "bar-" means "son of..." (A man named Bar-Jonah was the son of Jonah.) And "abbas" meant "father," but in this particular form, it referred to a Hebrew "cohen" or priest, who were commonly called "father" by Jewish believers.

Yes, Barabbas' name meant "son of a priest." A priest's son! You know, it's not uncommon for some to note even today that when a preacher's child rebels, they tend to REALLY rebel. And this is evident in the life of ____ Barabbas.

But what was his real first name? Do you know... that it's right there in the gospel of Matthew? But guess what? The problem is... the translators leave it out! And this is quite strange, because his name was... Jesus.

His name was Jesus, "son of the father." And the crowd shouted for Pilate to set him free.


STRONG'S LITERAL
Matthew 27:15-17
15. at And a feast was accustomed the Governor to release one to the crowd prisoner, whom they wanted.
16. they had And then a prisoner notable called Jesus-Barabbas.
17. having assembled Then they said to them Pilate, Whom do you want I should release for you -- Jesus-Barabbas or Jesus called Messiah?
18. he knew For that through envy they had delivered him.
19. sitting And he on the tribunal sent to him the wife of him, saying, Nothing to you and to just one that! many things For I suffered today by a dream through him!
20. the But most important priests and the elders persuaded the crowds that they should ask for - Barabbas, and Jesus to destroy.
21. answering And the Governor said to them, Which do you want from the two {that} I should release to you? they And said, - Barabbas!
22. Says to them, Pilate, What then should I do {to} Jesus called Messiah? They say all, Let him be crucified!
23. the But {Governor} said, what For crime did he? they But more cried out, saying, Let him be crucified!


A revolutionary leader had appeared on the scene named Jesus, stirring up the people, promising to set them free. Jesus moved from town to town, teaching revolutionary ideas and causing an uprising among the people, inspiring them to change their lives, even risk death for what they believed! Many saw this man as someone who would liberate them from oppression, set them free through some kind of revolution. And now he would suffer on the cross for his attempt to be a revolutionary leader of the Jews. He was to be crucified.

Many people assume that Jesus-Barabbas was there on the balcony with Pilate and Jesus the Christ. But in fact, historical records show he was being kept in a jail not far from there. Although he surely couldn't have heard Pilate's words to the crowd, he definitely would have been able to hear the crowd's responses. And he knew he was slated for execution. And he probably knew that something was going on over there, something about the fate of himself and another prisoner. He knew the annual tradition. And when he heard Pilate shout... something to the crowed, he surely heard them respond, "BARABBAS!!!"

And moments later, he surely heard them cry out, "CRUCIFY HIM!!!" And again, they shouted it with even greater fervor.

And a shudder must have moved along his spine at the sound of that. His impending doom... sealed by his own people. His surprise must have been great when they came to set him free and told him what had really happened!

Scripture is silent on what follows, but it isn't difficult to imagine this criminal, this broken man, now set free... finding his way to the Cross, kneeling and looking up at the other prisoner who shared his name, and who now took his place on the cross. The cross that should have born the man named Jesus-Barabbas.

smilax
January 30th 2003, 04:53 PM
Hmm, I've seen this before. Two comments:

1. "Jesus" before "Barabbas" isn't actually present in all the manuscripts. The translators weren't trying to cover something up.

2. A bit much is made of the name "Barabbas," which was in fact quite a common name and doesn't necessarily mean anything about his father's profession.

GrayPilgrim
January 30th 2003, 05:11 PM
Hey Jaltus, I'm not up on my NT text criticism, could you enlighten us on this one. Other than that some manuscripts lack it that's about as far as I can make of it, although NA27 does put it in the text, and not just in the apparatus.

Jaltus
February 1st 2003, 02:56 PM
IHSOUN is missing in nearly all the major manuscripts that have this passage. In fact, the only ones that have it are Theta, family 1, a few other Byzantine texts, and some late translations from other languages. I am surprised it is in the text at all.

The external considerations show that it is EXTREMELY unlikely to be in the text. However, one must wonder why any text would have such an addition.

It is due to the internal considerations that it is kept, namely how unlikely it is to have been added by a scribe.

In fact, the passage stays true in both 16 and 17, as every manuscript is consistent with itself (though some include and article and some do not).

I would say that this additional IHSOUN is unlikely to be original, but it is too difficult to completely rule out.

Jillyn'Toast
February 17th 2003, 12:59 PM
Hm... This post really interests me. I have been studying the book of John and have recently reached the chapters where John gives his account of this choice of Pilate's. Now, I'm not at all familiar with Greek and Hebrew, and I'm no authority on this whatsoever. But what interested me was your saying "Some may note that Pilate says something odd here. Why would he, of all people, refer to Jesus as 'Christ?' Did he have a particularly good reason?" This may be going off subject... But while I was studying it seems to me that John gives an impression that Pilate thought Jesus may have in fact been the Christ. John 19:12 says Pilate tried to set Jesus free, and of course both chapters 18 & 19 give conversations between Jesus and Pilate. However, 19:16-22 also gives a quick story that I thought was interesting. When they had crucified Jesus and Pilate had the notice prepared and fastened to the cross that read "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews", the Jews objected that the notice should read that this man only claimed to be King of the Jews. Here is when Pilate refuses to change it saying "What I have written, I have written." Was Pilate contemplating that Jesus was the Christ, was he merely worn out by the Jews persistence with crucifying this man, or perhaps he was showing his power by not changing an order he had already put out?

GrayPilgrim
February 17th 2003, 01:32 PM
Jill Pole:
Hm... This post really interests me. I have been studying the book of John and have recently reached the chapters where John gives his account of this choice of Pilate's. Now, I'm not at all familiar with Greek and Hebrew, and I'm no authority on this whatsoever. But what interested me was your saying "Some may note that Pilate says something odd here. Why would he, of all people, refer to Jesus as 'Christ?' Did he have a particularly good reason?" This may be going off subject... But while I was studying it seems to me that John gives an impression that Pilate thought Jesus may have in fact been the Christ. John 19:12 says Pilate tried to set Jesus free, and of course both chapters 18 & 19 give conversations between Jesus and Pilate. However, 19:16-22 also gives a quick story that I thought was interesting. When they had crucified Jesus and Pilate had the notice prepared and fastened to the cross that read "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews", the Jews objected that the notice should read that this man only claimed to be King of the Jews. Here is when Pilate refuses to change it saying "What I have written, I have written." Was Pilate contemplating that Jesus was the Christ, was he merely worn out by the Jews persistence with crucifying this man, or perhaps he was showing his power by not changing an order he had already put out?


Good points! I have always understood Pilate as an illustration of the parable of the sower (even though it is not recorded in John). That is, he sees the and hears the good word but is like the seeds sown in rocky soil, so that he allows the cares and worries of this life to drive choke out his ability to put his faith in the Son of God.

Jaltus
February 17th 2003, 10:19 PM
Both of you are missing the point of this section if you think Pilate actually believes Jesus is the Christ. Remember, Pilate HATED the Jews. He was doing anything he could to anger them. THerefore, he named Jesus anything that would annoy the Jewish leaders. Thus, his offer to release a prisoner was a ploy. He assumed, due to Jesus tremendous following, that the crowds would chant for Jesus to go free. However, we know from the synoptics that the Jewish leaders had "paid off" the crowd. Much of what was going on was politically motivated, not spiritually.

ih8censorship
March 9th 2003, 03:36 PM
the romans had more than one god and blasphamy wasent possible so pilate dident think he was guilty of it

Goochdad
March 10th 2003, 01:41 PM
01-30-2003 @ 12:59 PM
RightIdea:



Many people assume that Jesus-Barabbas was there on the balcony with Pilate and Jesus the Christ. But in fact, historical records show he was being kept in a jail not far from there.

Whoa there. Which 'historical records? Care to provide those? A reference, maybe? These are what, secular Roman records from that time? This ought to rock the world of biblical scholarship if you actually have some such record.

I'll be waiting....

dizzle
March 10th 2003, 08:10 PM
Hey all you guests reading this thread, what are you waiting for??? Register already and join in with us!! We would love to have you.

bar Jonah
March 14th 2003, 06:16 PM
GoochDad, sorry for the delay. I didn't even see your post for a good while, as I was for some reason not notified this thread had more posts. (Most of the time, I don't check up on old threads, I rather concentrate on threads I get notifications for.) And since I got your PM a couple days ago, I have been very busy, among other things helping my friend Adam in his newly-opened Christian used books store.

You seem to be working from a mistaken assumption -- that this essay is some kind of scholarly theological thesis or dissertation, or an exerpt from a history textbook. You'll notice there is no list of attributed sources, nor are their attribution footnotes within the text.

This is something along the lines of an inspirational piece, focusing on how Christ takes our place on the cross by using the illustration of Jesus taking the place of Jesus (-Barabas) on the cross. The story's impact comes from it being not about a million people but about one man with the same name, at that place and time.

I'm sorry you missed the point of my essay.

No, I don't have a source for you. A friend of mine heard that statement on Christian talk radio, from an apologist. This was a few months ago, and we discussed the whole story at length at that time. If the apologist lied and there is no such "ancient record," or if you simply wish to automatically doubt the claim, then feel free to do so. Again, that's not the point of the story.

I'm sorry I can't be more helpful. That's the best I can do for you.

Goochdad
March 14th 2003, 06:40 PM
So it is OK to make up supposed 'facts' in order to make your story sound like actual history?

Yes, the apologist lied. There are no such historical records. I'll stand by that.

bar Jonah
March 15th 2003, 02:52 AM
And we should just take your word for it rather than a professional apologist/theologian?

Here's a thought... Is it more likely that such a person would lie on national Christian radio? Or that you might simply be unaware of such a historical document?

I'll be honest. I don't know which is the fact. But if asked which I put more credence in, I'd have to choose the theologian. No offense.

Goochdad
March 17th 2003, 03:09 PM
RightIdea, you're welcome to believe anyone you choose, but this is a discussion board, and you need to back up your assertions with evidence.

There are no secular records referring to any event of Jesus' life, from the actual time Jesus lived. The fact that apologists make so much of the Josephus quote, when Josephus wasn't even born until 47 CE (IIRC) proves my point.

There is no secular record of Barabbas being tried by Pilate. You tossed out a quote from some supposed theologian, I called you on it, and you can't back it up. Which means it is an unsupported claim.

I'll say it again. That theologian lied.