Read Matthew 27:1-10, Mark 15:1, Luke 22:66-23:1, Acts 1:18-19 and John 18:28. Jesus has spent a good part of the night being interrogated first by Annas then by Caiaphas and part of the council at the house of Caiaphas. Now when morning breaks, as early as it is possible, Caiaphas has Jesus taken into the council room and convenes the whole council. This was done to meet the letter of the law which stated that the trial must be during the day in the council room by the full council. All that had taken place before this was illegal. But having decided how they were going to proceed they now needed the council to rubber stamp their decision before they take Him to Pilate who has the authority to pass a death sentence.
1. Matthew’s account states Judas returned the money then went out and hanged himself. Acts states he acquired a field and fell face first with the result he was disemboweled and died. How are these accounts to be reconciled; or are there errors at this point?
There are certainly no errors since Luke in all likelihood knew of Matthew’s account. Matthew is writing to a Jewish audience and therefore includes the fact that Judas returned the money, that the religious leaders saw ceremonial issues with keeping it and therefore removed it from the temple treasury using it to purchase this field where Judas died, in order to bury strangers, probably in his name not wanting to associate themselves with this. Although Matthew records this all for us at this one point, the events no doubt played out over a longer period of time, this record by Matthew being a summary. Luke writing to a Gentile simply indicates that Judas had acquired a field and does not record that it was done indirectly, through the actions of the religious leaders after Judas returned the money and had committed suicide. Matthew simply states Judas hanged himself; Luke, being a physician more interested in the medical details, explains that he fell face first, no doubt when the rope broke, rupturing his abdominal cavity. Matthew’s account indicates the name, The Field of Blood, was given because blood money, i.e. money used to betray our Lord. Luke’s account seems to indicate the name was given because of the blood associated with Judas’ death. Both names apply. For those who knew the circumstances of its purchase it meant one thing; for most who only knew a man died here it meant another.
Read Matthew 27:11-26, Mark 15:2-15, Luke 23:2-25 and John 18:29-19:16. Matthew, Mark and John combine both times Jesus was before Pilate into one account omitting the events that took place before Herod. Perhaps these three writers omit it because Herod was detested by most Jews even more so than Pilate or other Roman appointees and because Pilate not Herod was the authority that ordered the crucifixion of our Lord.
2. During his interrogation of our Lord what amazed Pilate?
He was amazed that our Lord did not respond to the charges made against Him by the Jewish leaders.
3. What is the only question asked by Pilate to which our Lord gives an answer?
The question answered by our Lord was if he claimed to be the king of the Jews?
4. John gives more detail about our Lord’s answer to Pilate. What did He tell Pilate about being the King?
He states three main points: First, He agreed He was a king. Second, His kingdom was not of this world. If it were, His servants would be up in arms (They were not!). Third, as a king His purpose was to witness to the truth.
5. When our Lord states that His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36) does this imply there was not going to be a millennial kingdom on earth, only a spiritual one in heaven or one in the hearts of believers? Explain.
Not at all. There are too many other passages, the Olivet discourse and the Book of the Revelation for instance, which speak of a literal earthly kingdom. What our Lord is telling Pilate is that He is indeed a king. But His kingdom was not going to be established on the earth (at that time). His purpose at that time was to witness to the truth, not foment a rebellion.
6. What reason impelled Pilate to condemn Jesus to be executed by crucifixion?
Pilate did not condemned Jesus because he was guilty of any capital crime for the text states several times, he found no offense worthy of death. Indeed, he probably would have liked to release Him just to spite the religious leadership. What prompted him to accede to the demands of the Jewish council was pressure from the crowds. Pilate was already in trouble politically with the Roman Emperor Tiberius. A riot in Jerusalem would not speak well of his ability to keep the peace. The tipping point came when the crowds shouted out, “If you release this Man, you are no friend of Caesar; everyone who makes himself out to be a king opposes Caesar.” To be a friend of Caesar was to be politically correct, a member of those who held the favor of the Roman Emperor. Having already been reprimanded once by Tiberius, Pilate did not wish to incur any further displeasure. Pilate had many who would not hesitate to accuse him of being disloyal. Although he was convinced of the innocence of our Lord, and no doubt wanted to release him, if only to antagonize the Jewish leaders whom he detested, he did not want to risk the accusation that he was disloyal and therefore he ordered our Lord’s crucifixion.
Read Matthew 27:27-32, Mark 15:16-21, Luke 23:26-31 and John 19:2-3. After agreeing to release Barabbas and crucify Jesus, Pilate hands Him over to the soldiers who beat and mock Him before putting Him into the procession to make their way to Golgotha, the area where Roman executions were carried out.
7. What does that fact that the Romans had to find another person to carry the cross for our Lord imply about the treatment He had already received?
That He was too weak at this point to carry the cross tells us the torture He had received earlier at the hands of the religious leaders and the Romans was brutal.
8. Of what does Jesus warn the women who followed the process weeping?
He tells them to not to weep for Him but for themselves and their children because of a coming time when things will be far worse. This statement has a near and far fulfillment. The near or immediate fulfillment will come about A.D. 70 when Rome invades and completely destroys Jerusalem. The far or climatic fulfillment will come during the Tribulation in the seven years preceding the return of our Lord to establish the kingdom. If they do this now, think of how bad it will be when the enemy Satan is in almost total control of the earth.
The Applications:
What are the applications of these passages to our lives today? Identify as many as you are able.
1. The Pharisees were more concerned with the outward appearance of righteousness, decorum and the letter of the Law rather than any inward righteousness having to do with their attitudes and motives and spirit and intent of the law. This is witnessed by the fact that they had already determined that Jesus was to be executed. The trails held at night were only instruments used to find an excuse to charge Him with a capital crime. Official capital trials could not be held at night; they had to be in the day before the full assembly. Indeed those judging such cases had to hear the charges then sleep on them before passing judgment the next day. The point of this was to insure they did not make a hasty decision and that the accused was justly treated having received the benefit of a well-reasoned verdict. These leaders had already decided upon His fate, and they only met in the morning before the full assembly so that they could say they met the requirements of the law and were righteous in their judgment. They were concerned with the outward letter of the law rather than its spirit and intent.
These leaders would not enter the Praetorium where Pilate held court because this would render them ceremonially unclean for the Passover. They were not at all concerned that their motives, attitudes and actions in condemning an innocent man to die would make them unclean. They were more concerned with looking good outwardly before others than being clean inwardly before God.
How often do we try to display our goodness and spirituality outwardly and ignore the inward attitudes and motives? Why do we attend church for example? Do we do this because this is what we are supposed to do as good Christian people. (Heavens! what would others think of us if we only attended occasionally, or not at all?) Do we go because it’s enjoyable to meet and talk with friends who also attend? (Not a bad motive insofar as it goes. But is that our only reason?) Do we attend because our parents make us go? (That’s the law so I obey. But what is the intent of that family law?) Do we realize that the purpose we are to assemble together is to worship God and to build up, strengthen and encourage one another by the exercise of our spiritual gifts? If that is not our purpose in attending then we are adhering to the outward form and appearance but, just like these religious leaders, have missed the real spirit and intent of going to church.
2. Pilate was more concerned about keeping his standing with the emperor Tiberius rather than doing what was right. His operating ethic was do what is best for himself rather than do what was right to do. He chose to select the safest course of action for himself rather than choosing to do what was right. We, too, are faced with choices almost every day in which we must choose between doing what is right or doing what is convenient for ourselves. For example, we get home from shopping, and we discover that the clerk neglected to charge us for a $10.00 item that was in our cart. It is really inconvenient to go back to the store and pay for the item. It was their error after all, so what do we do? Do we do what is right or do we do the convenient thing? How often do we not do something we really know we should have done because it was the right thing to do? How often do we exercise the ethic of Pilate?