Lange Commentary - Luke 23:13 - 23:25

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Lange Commentary - Luke 23:13 - 23:25


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

c. FRUITLESS ENDEAVORS OF PILATE TO LIBERATE JESUS (Luk_23:13-25)

(Parallel with Mat_27:15-26; Mar_15:6-15; Joh_18:39-40.)

13And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people, 14Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth [turneth away] the people [i.e., from Cesar]; and, behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him: 15No, nor yet [even] Herod: for I sent you to him; and, lo, nothing worthy of death is [has been] done unto [by] him. 16I will therefore chastise him, and release 17him. (For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.) 18And they cried out all at once [ ðáíðëçèåß ], saying, Away with this man, and release unto us 19Barabbas: (Who for a certain sedition made in the city, and for murder, was [hadbeen] cast into prison.) 20Pilate therefore, willing [wishing] to release Jesus, spake again to them. 21But they cried [against it, ἐðåöþíïõí ], saying, Crucify him, crucify him. 22And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him. and let him go. 23And they were instant [urgent, ἐðÝêåéíôï ] with loud voices, requiring [demanding] that he might be crucified: and the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed. 24And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required [their demand should go into effect]. 25And he released unto them [om., unto them] him [the one] that for sedition and murder was [had been] cast into prison, whom they had desired; but he delivered Jesus to their will.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Luk_23:13. And Pilate, when he had called together … the people.—It is not enough for Pilate to communicate his peculiar views merely to the Sanhedrists. He calls also the people together, the number of whom has considerably increased during the sending of our Lord back and forth, and who take a lively interest in the matter. He assembles them in order to communicate to them also his mind and will, which he wished to be regarded as definitive. He introduces his communication now by a more or less official address, in which the motives of the sentence to be uttered are stated. The judge sums up the acta before he declares them concluded. He comes back to the first charge (Luk_23:2), that this man perverts the people ( ὡò ἀðïóôñÝöïíôá ). On this charge he had heard Him in their presence. See Luk_23:3; comp. Mat_27:12-14; Mar_15:3-5, which is not in conflict with Joh_18:38 seq. (De Wette, Meyer), if only we distinguish between the private interview and the public audience, of which latter Pilate here speaks. They see, therefore, that he has taken up the matter in earnest, but in direct opposition to their åὕñïìåí , Luk_23:2, he is obliged to declare himself, for his part, to have found nothing which could be maintained before the secular judge, as legal ground of an accusation. Respecting the peculiar construction of this passage, see Meyer. Nay, not even Herod, who, as Tetrarch of Galilee, would yet undoubtedly have known if there had existed ground for a serious accusation, not even he has been able to discover anything tenable in their charge. On the contrary, they are both convinced that, whatever reports may have been circulated abroad, this man has, in fact, neither committed anything ( ðåðñáãìÝíïí ) nor brought about anything that could be called criminal. After this introduction, there appears to be scarcely any other final judgment possible than a simple release, but—“hic cœpit nimium concedere Pilatus.” Bengel.

Luk_23:16. Chastise Him and release Him.—“Chastise.” Although the word “scourge” is not yet uttered, Pilate can scarcely have had any other chastisement in mind. He makes this proposition that he may not, on the one hand, too heavily load his own conscience, on the other hand, because he must not let the Jews go wholly unsatisfied. A light punishment of the kind, at all events, the enthusiast probably deserves in his eyes, who, harmless as He is for the Roman authority, has yet given Himself out for a King. The alleged confusion with Joh_19:1-4 (De Wette) is by no means real, but Luke in his summary notices, relates only a plan of the scourging, the execution of which the three other Evangelists relate. It is remarkable, moreover, how in the connection of the two words: Chastise and Release, Pilate begins already evidently to show either that he is disposed to do too much or too little. Hitherto he has done three good things: he began a careful investigation, he has made a solemn declaration of Jesus’ innocence, he has taken an admissible way to gain more particular information. The word “release” would set the crown on all this, if it were not that the illegal chastisement announced simultaneously with this prepared the way for three opposite measures, by which his weakness passes over into crime. A dishonoring comparison, a painful scourging, a mournful spectacle (Mat_27:24) are the steps which make way for that most unrighteous judgment. Luke has only described the first.

Luk_23:17.For of necessity he must release one.—Although it is unquestionably possible that this verse was omitted quite early, because it appeared to be placed with more or less incorrectness, and interrupted the course of the narrative (De Wette), it is, however, more probable that it is not genuine. It is wanting in A., B., K., L., [retained by Cod. Sin., see notes on the text.—C. C. S.] Copt., Sahid., Vers., and is placed after Luk_23:19, by D., Æth., Cant., while, besides this, many variations appear in the details. It appears, therefore, after having seemed suspicious to Griesbach and Lachmann, to have been omitted with reason by Tischendorf, although the clause must be tolerably old, since it has found its way into by far the greatest number of manuscripts and versions. But, however this may be, the fact itself, namely, that the governor at the Passover was under obligation to release a prisoner, cannot be doubted, although the origin of this usage is veiled in obscurity. To us everything appears to favor the opinion that this had grown up rather on Jewish than on heathen soil. Even the expression of Pilate, ἔóôé äὲ óõíÞèåéá ὑìῖí , Joh_18:39, appears to point to the former; the connection of this custom with the Passover was far more likely to be a Jewish than a heathen idea. The coincidence with the Roman Lectisternia and [the Greek] Thesmophoria, which are referred to, is exceedingly slight, and it was much more in the spirit of the Roman policy to leave the inhabitants of a province in possession of a national privilege than to press on them a foreign benefit, especially when they had such an aversion to foreign manners as the Jews. They could the more easily assume to themselves the jus gladii if they still at least one day of the year, did not bestow, but left yet with the nation, a seemingly free disposal over life and death. And although the Scripture, no more than the Talmud, brings this usage into connection with the signification of the Passover, yet with a people who, like the Jewish, were accustomed to symbolical actions, this connection struck the eye at once. In this manner it is, at the same time, intelligible why the people attached so great a value to this their prerogative, Mar_15:6-8, that it was from them first that the demand proceeded, which gave Pilate occasion to the most dreadful comparison. Finally, this voice of the people furnishes one convincing proof the more, that to-day was really already the first day of the Passover, since the prayer would have come very much out of season if the feast had not yet had a beginning.

Luk_23:18. Away with this man.—Here, also, we first gain a clear conception of the fact, when we complement Luke from the other gospels. The wild cry áῖ ̓ ñå presupposes that our Lord already stands before the eyes of the multitude, together with the hideous Barabbas. But how matters had gone so far is described especially by Mark, while Matthew, by the narrative of the dream of Pilate’s wife, solves for the reader the difficulty how it had been possible that the people in so short a time could have been filled with so fanatical a fury. The short absence of the Procurator is used by the priests most energetically to work the people over to their mind, and very soon does the clue to this labyrinth slip out of Pilate’s hands.

Luk_23:19. Who for a certain sedition.—Respecting the character of Barabbas, see Lange on the parallel in Matthew. In all the gospels, but especially in Luke, Luk_23:19; Luk_23:25, there is expressed the deepest displeasure at the blindness and hardened temper of the Jews, who could make such a choice. An echo of this tone of righteous resentment we still hear in the declaration of Peter, Act_3:14.

Luk_23:20. Spake again to them, ðñïóåöþíçóå , which is used, Act_21:40, of a longer address, here, however, probably consisted only of a few words, and those not essentially different from the ones which are communicated to us a little before and a little later. In all this the good intention of Pilate cannot possibly be entirely lost sight of. His proposal had sprung from a laudable principle, had a laudable end in view, and appeared, at the same time, to offer for its accomplishment an exceedingly fitting means. In the persuasion that personal hatred impelled the chief priests, he seeks to win the voice of the people in favor of Jesus, and believes that he may expect nothing else than that the result will fully correspond to his wishes. But still his conduct remains worthy of reprobation, not only before the judgment-seat of strict righteousness, but even before that of wise considerateness. All the words with which he now, after this, seeks to conjure down the rising storm, signify little or nothing, because he does not yet come to the one act which he has already indicated as his purpose— ἀðïëýóù !

Luk_23:21. Crucify Him, Crucify Him.—For the first time the terrible cry is here heard, which, as the secret wish and thought of the chief priests, is now by these placed upon the people’s lips, and with fanatical rage raised by these. According to John, Luk_18:40, they cry again, ðÜëéí : “Not this man but Barabbas” must be released, although the Evangelist has not mentioned a previous cry,—a new proof how admissible and necessary it is to complement the statements of the fourth Evangelist from the narratives of the Synoptics, which were familiar to him. This cry was the direct answer to the question which Mat_27:22, and Mar_15:12, communicate.

Luk_23:22.The third time.—To Luke alone we owe the remarkable, and of itself probable, account, that the governor at this point of the trial raises for the third time his voice in favor of our Lord. No wonder, he feels that if he here gives way, the death of Jesus is as good as decided, and that all further endeavors which he might, perhaps, yet make for the discharge of his official duty, would, after this great concession, be fruitless. He repeats, therefore, essentially what he has already said, Luk_23:14; Luk_23:16, and assumes outwardly a demeanor so much the firmer the more he is inwardly beginning to waver.

Luk_23:23. And they.—It is as if the one word, “Release,” which he has once more ventured to utter, filled them with all the more furious rage. Now the chief priests also join in the impetuous cry of the raging people for blood. “Etiam decori immemores cum plebe clamabant.” Bengel. These voices obtain the upper hand, êáôßó÷õïí . The same word which, Mat_16:18, is used of the gates of hell over against the church.

Luk_23:24. And Pilate gave sentence, ἐðÝêñéíåí , 2Ma_4:47. In contrast with the provisional judgment which the Sanhedrim had already passed, the final judgment is here spoken of, without our, however, being required by Luke to understand a formally uttered sentence. On the contrary, the distinction in the demeanor of Pilate in reference to Barabbas and Jesus is not to be mistaken. The former—Luke, in righteous displeasure, does not even mention his name, but only discloses to us a view into the disgraceful history of Barabbas—he expressly releases: apparently the murderer is unfettered before his eyes, so that he after a few moments hastens free through the streets of Jerusalem. The other he delivers up, ðáñὲäùêåí , not by a solemn ibis ad crucem, but by simply letting go the weak hand with which he had hitherto vainly sought to protect the victim of priestly hate. Not to the will of the judge or the requirement of the law, but to the judgment of the people, ôῷ èåëÞìáôé áὐôῶí , is the Prisoner surrendered. On this account, also, it is not even necessary to inquire into the genuineness of the old record of the sentence: Jesum Nazarenum, subversorem gentis, &c., which Adrichomius, Theatr. terrœ sanctœ, Colon.1593, p. 163, has, it is said, taken from old annals, and which Friedlieb, ad loc., communicates in a note entire.

Since we here have to do, not with the history of the Passion in general, but with the narrative which Luke has given us of the same, we also pass over the particulars which he does not communicate expressly. As respects, however, the sequence of the different scenes in the trial before Pilate, we believe that a correct harmony requires the following arrangement: 1. The Leading Away to Pilate, which Luke relates with its particulars; 2. The First Public (Synoptics), and immediately after that the First Private (John), Examination of our Lord by the Procurator; 3. More Vehement Accusation by the Jews after Pilate’s first declaration of innocence, followed then by the sending to Herod; 4. First Decision of Pilate, in which his wavering first becomes visible (Luk_23:13-16); 5. His proposal to select Barabbas or Jesus (all the Evangelists); 6 Delay by the communication of the dream of Pilate’s wife (Matthew), during which the people are persuaded over; 7. Decision of the question, “Barabbas or Jesus,” in favor of the former (all the Evangelists); 8. The Scourging, as the customary, yet not indispensably necessary, preliminary of crucifixion, which, however, according to Luke, is used as a measure of compromise, as well as in order, by presentation of the pitiably maltreated Prisoner, to dispose the people to compassion (John); 9. In consequence of this, the Crucifixion decidedly refused, and a new accusation brought up by the disappointed priests (Joh_19:6-7); 10. Further, but fruitless, endeavors even yet to deliver Jesus (Joh_19:6-12); 11. The Washing of Pilate’s hands (Mat_27:24-25), which Matthew, in view of his objective representation of the Scourging as the preparation for Crucifixion (which it, considered a posteriori, in fact became), places before this maltreatment, but which, as evidently appears, has only sense and significance if we conceive it as a concluding act; finally, 12. The scene described in Joh_19:13-16, for which we may with more right assume a place after than before the washing of the hands (as is proposed by Sturm). Immediately after this, the Leading Away to Calvary, which Luke communicates most in detail.—It appears, therefore, that Luk_23:24-25 cannot be attached immediately to the choice of Barabbas, but is to be regarded as the concluding act of the trial before Pilate, some intervening scenes of which Luke has passed over. As to the actual point of time of our Lord’s Delivery to Crucifixion, which Luke also leaves unmentioned, comp. also Lange on Matt., ad loc., and on Mar_15:25. It is noticeable that Luke, with the exception of Luk_23:44, refrains in his account of the Passion from almost any attempt to give any particular notes of time.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. By the unequivocal declaration of Pilate after our Lord’s return from Herod, not only did His innocence appear in the most brilliant manner, but it thereby, at the same time, became evident also how unreasonable the opinion of Christians and theologians was, who, like the older Deists and Rationalists, ventured to invent for our Lord political views. Pilate and Herod do not yet know anything of that which in the last century was hatched out by the Wolfenbüttel Fragmentist concerning this. Even the Jews are not able to destroy Him by political charges. They must immediately, Joh_19:7, proceed further to an accusation founded on religious grounds.

2. The sad observation how Pilate with every moment sinks deeper and deeper, gives us a powerful contribution to Anthropology and Hamartology; but at the same time, there is implied therein, not less than in the direct testimonies borne to the innocence of our Lord, a striking argument for the immaculate purity of Jesus. Soon, also, does it appear that weakness, as well as hatred, may mislead man to the most terrible crime. Pilate, who first only becomes Herod’s friend, will at last also remain Tiberius’ friend, and becomes therewith a confederate of the chief priests and of the people, nay, the accomplice of Caiaphas. Then how is the truth of the saying here proved: “He that is not with Me is against Me.”

3. In the transaction respecting the choice between Jesus and Barabbas, it appears very plainly how dangerous it is to let the popular voice decide upon the highest questions of life, upon truth and right. The history of the Passion raises a terrible protest against the familiar maxim: Vox populi, vox Dei; while, on the other hand, it powerfully confirms the truth of the poet’s sentence:—

Was ist Mehrheit? Mehrheit ist ein Unsinn,

Verstand ist stets bei Wen’gen nur gewesen;

Der Staat muss untergehn, früh oder spät,

Wo Mehrheit siegt und Unverstand entscheidet.

[What is majority? Majority is absurdity. Understanding has ever been with few only; the state must perish early or late, where majority prevails and folly decides.] In church history, also, we see how often ecclesiastical and political democracy have led to genuine Parabbas-choices. Compare the admirable dissertation by Ullmann, Die Geltung der Majoritäten in der Kirche, Hamburg, 1850.

4. For the typical significance of that which here took place with Barabbas, the Mosaic law, Lev_16:6-10, must, in particular, be compared. The importance of this part of the history of the Passion is only comprehended perfectly when we find represented to the very sight therein, in historical symbols, the idea of representation, and behold in the released Barabbas the image of the sinner, who, in consequence of the death of this immaculately Holy One ὑðὲñ áὐôïῦ , is acquitted of the guilt and punishment of sin. [The release of a murderer, without the slightest sign that he was changed for the better, is a rather equivocal type of the justification of the sinner.—C. C. S.] In this way, moreover, we learn also to understand the significance of the unshaken silence which our Lord in these awful moments of decision, during which He remains so entirely passive, maintains. It is here, in the full sense of the word, the silence of the Lamb of God, on whom the sins of the world were laid, Isa_53:6.

5. The choice between Jesus and Barabbas is the striking type of the choice which, through all the centuries, is proposed to mankind, the choice, namely, between life and death, between blessing and cursing, Gen_2:16-17; Deu_30:18-19; Jos_24:16, &c. The motives which here misled the people to so perverted a choice are the same as those which now, as ever, induce most of men to choose the appearance instead of the reality, and the curse instead of the blessing.

6. The moment of the popular choice between Jesus and Barabbas is the decisive moment, not only in the history of the Passion, but also in the history of Israel and the world, Rom_9:30-33.

7. “It is something yet other and worse to reject the Lord after He was there rejected, and first became the foundation of our salvation. These Jews had, at all events, at that time not yet rejected Him who in infinite love had ascended the cross for our redemption. Woe to the betrayers of the Crucified!”

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established, 2Co_13:1, even where our Lord’s innocence is declared.—Whoever complains that Christ and the gospel pervert the world in a political respect, stands in principle even below Pilate and Herod.—Pilate the man who wishes to serve two masters.—The false lust of compromise condemned in the person of Pilate.—The mournful triumph of persistent wickedness over hesitating weakness.—Jesus over against Barabbas a picture of universal history.—The fatal choice of the Jews a primitive and yet eternally new history.—Whoever prefers sin to Christ, he chooses like them: 1. A robber instead of the wealthiest Distributor of grace; 2. a rebel instead of the King of peace; 3. a murderer instead of the Prince of life.—The choice of the service of the world instead of the service of Christ, how it: 1. Bears the same character; 2. betrays the same origin; 3. deserves the same judgment; 4. needs the same atonement, as the fatal choice of the Jews.—The fatal choice even yet, as then, a fruit: 1. Of heedlessness; 2. of misleading influence; 3. of weakness; 4. of the enmity of the flesh.—The inconstancy of popular favor and of human honor [There is no certainty that the masses who hung on Jesus’ lips as He taught were the same that here demanded His blood. There were surely men enough in Jerusalem to furnish crowds for this purpose, without of necessity involving one of those who had so recently heard Him with delight.—C. C. S.].—The cry of Crucify Him ! over against the Hosannas of the throngs.—The first cry for murder considered in reference: 1. To the judge who elicits it; 2. to the people that utter it; 3. to the Saviour who hears it; 4. to the Father who accepts it; 5. to the world which yet in all manner of forms repeats it.—“O, My people, what have I done unto thee? and wherein have I wearied thee?” Mic_6:3.—The highest activity of the love of Christ in the midst of seemingly complete passivity.—The murder of Messiah the suicide of Israel.—Whither concessions and compromises may at last lead.—The blind policy of Pilate, who will: 1. Deliver our Lord by evil means; 2. give up our Lord to save himself.—Jesus: 1. Reckoned with the transgressors, Isa_53:12; Isaiah 2. humbled among the transgressors; 3. by that very means given up for transgressors, 2Co_5:21.—Jesus most deeply humiliated: 1. By comparison with a malefactor; 2. with a malefactor like Barabbas; 3. with a malefactor that, moreover, is preferred to Him.—The diverse departure of the Prince of life and of the murderer from Gabbatha.—The fearful defeat of wickedness even in a seeming victory.—For every man there appears, as once for Pilate, an hour when he must decide for or against Christ.

Starke:—Brentius:—Christ had to pass from one unrighteous judge to another; be content, my brother, if without cause the like of this befalleth thee, 1Pe_2:21.—Cramer:—The gospel of Christ must be true, for the heathen, His enemies, testify of His innocence.—Christ’s innocence has given to the whole Passion the just weight before the judgment of God, Heb_7:26.—Nova Bibl. Tub.:—Innocence at last breaks through all imputations.—Sinful and evil usages must not be furthered by the magistrate, but disregarded, especially when they take place on Sundays and feast days.—A malefactor who, according to God’s law, has deserved death, must be allowed right and judgment.—Unrighteous judgment of the world: the murderer shall live, the Prince of life die.—Canstein:—The world loveth her own, it is a den of murderers.—Human wisdom goes with the tide and is partial.—Nova Bibl. Tub.:—Hatred and envy is something utterly devilish.—Of evil things, too, there are wont to be three, Luk_23:22 [an allusion to the German proverb, Aller guten dinge sind drei, “All good things go in threes.”—C. C S.]—“I will, I will,” is indeed the speech of godless people too, but woe to them if they rest satisfied therewith.—Where the people have more power than the government, there is a dish spoiled and a most unhappy state.—The world judges not according to right, but according to favor.—Osiander:—It is nature’s view of the world for the vicious to escape punishment and the innocent to be punished, Psa_73:12.—Brentius:—The issue demonstrates ever how far human wisdom reaches, and what we can promise ourselves therefrom.—Arndt:—The choice between Jesus and Barabbas; 1. What determines Pilate to this choice; 2. on what rock it splits; 3. how it turns out for the salvation of the world.—Krummacher:—Pilate our advocate, who frees us from the threefold imputation of seditious tendencies, of senseless teachings, and exaggerated consolations.—Jesus and Barabbas, the great picture.—The release of Barabbas: 1. How this was effected; 2. how the joyful tidings was received on the part of Barabbas.—The conclusion of the process.—Tholuck:—The dreadful illusion which unbelieving Israel is under, inasmuch as it, instead of Jesus the Son of God chooses Jesus Barabbas; 2. which the unbelieving world is under, inasmuch as it, instead of Jesus the Son of God and man, chooses Jesus the child of man (Predigten, i. p. 127 seq., together with an appendix very well worth reading, p. 156). [Calmet has this statement: “Origen says that in many copies Barabbas is called Jesus likewise. The Armenian has the same reading: ‘Whom … will ye that I deliver unto you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?’ This gives additional spirit to the history, and well deserves notice.”—C. C. S.]—In Barabbas Pilate released the murderer of his soul; in the Lord Jesus he rejected the deliverer of his soul.

Luk_23:15.—The ἀëë ̓ ïὺäÝ implies that if even Herod, though well acquainted with the Jewish law, and, as the sovereign of the accused, especially solicitous that he might not be allowed to stir up the people against the Romans, Herod’s patrons, if even he could find no matter of complaint, the case might be looked upon as decided. Herod, it is true, does not appear to have instituted any formal inquiry, but Pilate is willing so to represent it, to support his intended release of the prisoner by Herod’s authority.—C. C. S.]

Luk_23:17.—Respecting the grounds on which the genuineness of this verse is doubtful, see Exegetical and Critical remarks. [Omitted by A., B., K., L.; retained by Cod. Sin. Omitted by Tischendorf, Meyer, Tregelles; bracketed by Lachmann; approved by Bleek; retained by Alford.—C. C. S.]

Luk_23:18.— Áῖ ̓ ñå “Make away with,” “E medio tolle.”—C. C. S.]

Luk_23:19.— Ὅóôéò ἧí , ê . ô . ë .,quippe qui as Meyer remarks, not equivalent to the simple qui, but, as ὅóôéò always denotes category, “a man of such a sort as to have been,” &c.; the form of the relative reflecting unconsciously the indignation of the Evangelist at so hideous a preference.—C. C. S.

Luk_23:25.—The áὐôïῖò , which Griesbach adds to the ἀðÝëõóå , is from Matthew and Mark.

[A crime which was forced on a populace that, left to itself, would not have committed it, by a corrupt and implacable aristocracy, is a curious text for this diatribe against popular government. However, this, like all similar expressions of our author, must be judged in view of the dislike which he has to a democracy so deeply infected with infidelity as the European democracy, even though that infidelity is in no small measure owing to the tyrannies and frauds of priests and Most Christian kings. Dr. Van Oosterzee, however, has expressed his most unqualified sympathy with our national cause.—C. C. S.]