Then Pilate therefore took Jesus and scourged [him].
Pilate has already told the crowd he finds no guilt in Jesus, and the next thing he does is hand Him over to the whip. It raises the sharpest question of the trial. How does a judge who believes his prisoner is innocent order him flogged?
The word joining Pilate's verdict to his action is the moral centre of the verse. One writer traces it back to what Pilate had just said in Luke's account, and finds the logic monstrous:
What did that "therefore" point back to? May we join it to Pilate's verdict of not guilty? I think we may. That is exactly how Luke puts it. Pilate said, "After examining him before you, behold, I did not find this man guilty of any of your charges against him… I will therefore punish and release him." Whatever excuse we may find for Pilate, his decision was wickedly callous and brutally unjust. It was as though a judge in a modern court said, The prisoner is absolutely innocent of the crime. I will therefore sentence him to twenty strokes of the lash.
The flogging was not a legal step toward crucifixion. It was Pilate's attempt to give both sides something and keep his own hands clean:
His conclusion must surprise the unbiased observer: "I will therefore punish and release him." Pilate shaped this verdict to serve his own aims and the crowd's at the same time. On the one hand, it would let him release Jesus, as he knew he should. On the other hand, it would appease the crowd by declaring the Lord guilty in two ways. He would be punished — which meant the cruel procedure of scourging (John 19:1). And He would be released, not on the grounds of innocence, but because Pilate had to release a criminal at the feast. When people are ready to compromise their principles they will soon resort to the principle of compromise.
John's account points to more than cold calculation. The scourging follows the crowd's cry for Barabbas:
It was at the cry of the Jews, "Not this man," that Pilate took Jesus and scourged Him. These Jews were challenging his verdict. His honour and the dignity of his office were at stake. He was an angry man, and on whom should he vent his rage?
Commentators differ on whether Pilate acted by calculation or in anger.
Modern readers hear "flogged" and think of a beating. The reality was a punishment men did not always survive:
And what did this representative of Gentile power do next? He was a judge, and he was convinced that there was no fault in Jesus. He deliberately released the robber and murderer. And then what? Was the bruised and beaten prisoner, the declared just One, allowed to rest His weary body a while? The first thing they did was to inflict the cruel torment of the Roman lash — a torment under which prisoners often died. Pilate has Him stripped and scourged.
Nothing here caught Him by surprise. The same writer sets the scene beside words written centuries earlier:
Isaiah, more than 600 years before, had described this scene. He who clothes the heavens said, "I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pull out the beard; I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting" (Isaiah 50:6). And again: "He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth" (Isaiah 53:7).
His silence was not helplessness. Another writer, on that same line from Isaiah, shows where the control lay:
"I gave my back to the smiters." They could not touch Him till He permitted them.
Some teach that Isaiah's promise of healing through His wounds points to this moment under Pilate's whip. One writer rejects that reading, starting from the word itself:
The proof relied on is that "with his stripes we are healed" refers to His scourging by Pontius Pilate. The claim is that He was judged before a human court, to match our being charged as guilty before God. The word "stripes" does not even mean scourging, but the discoloured marks left by blows.
(The ESV of Isaiah 53:5 reads "with his wounds we are healed." Older translations say "stripes," the wording this writer discusses.)
The distinction matters. It guards what saves us:
These insults from violent men are terrible for those who worship the Lord to think about. But they are not the stripes that healed us. On the Holy Sufferer there came a smiting by God as well as a smiting by man.
- Verdict — Pilate flogged a man he had just declared innocent. The verse's "therefore" ties the two together. It is the logic of a judge who has given up on justice.
- Compromise — the whipping was meant to satisfy the crowd without a conviction. Bend your principles once, and compromise becomes the rule.
- Cruelty — prisoners often died under the Roman lash, and it fell on the one man there proven guilty of nothing.
- Consent — Isaiah described the scene six hundred years earlier. He gave His back to it, and no one could touch Him until He allowed it.
- Healing — the whipping post is not where our healing was bought. Behind the smiting by men lay a smiting by God, and that is what heals us.
And the soldiers having plaited a crown of thorns put it on his head, and put a purple robe on him,
Roman soldiers turn a prisoner into a joke. They twist a crown out of thorns and drape Him in purple. Commentators see two things at once here: the cruelty of men, and a crown and a robe that are signs of a curse and a kingdom.
One writer traces Pilate's thinking. He let his soldiers loose on a man he had already declared innocent.
Pilate hoped that Jesus would bear this cruel mockery and scourging without complaint before their eyes. That might move the crowd and its leaders to pity. At the same time, the royal claims of Jesus would look empty, and that would stir their contempt. Both effects would serve his own aim: to release the prisoner in whom, by his own word, he saw no guilt at all. But no! Every one of them had to show their true colours: priests and people, learned and unlearned, civilians and soldiers, judge and prisoner. It was their hour, and the power of darkness. Yet if man and Satan were there, so was God, weighing them all by the One they misjudged.
Of all the plants around them, the soldiers chose thorns. One writer explains what that plant has stood for since the beginning.
The world belonged to Him, for He made it. As the eternal Son He was the Heir to it. But it was under the curse. Man's disobedience had brought the curse on it. Thorns were the product and lasting evidence of that curse. He had come to redeem the world, to remove the curse and bring in the blessing, and to do this He must bear the curse... the original curse fell upon Him, and the sign of it was the crown He wore. What shame and what glory! Shame to man, who crowned Him — to us all, for we all had our part in it — but glory to Him.
There were other crowns within reach. The same writer explains why He took this one.
He was sinless. He was holy... so the curse had no reference to Him personally. But having taken up the cause of the ruined race, He must bear the curse. Otherwise He would have remained a solitary man for ever... Satan hoped to hold mankind under God's perpetual curse, so he offered Jesus every crown under the sun. Men too would have made Him king when He fed them with bread. But He would take no crown from Satan or from men — only this crown, the crown of thorns. Every other crown was tarnished... The earth could give only one crown that He could take. If He was to be the Blesser, He must bear the curse.
The colour of the robe carried a meaning of its own.
Purple stands for the royalty of the Gentile nations. The Gospel of John gives an example. The soldiers, with coarse brutality, were mocking the claims of Jesus to be the King, and they put a purple robe on Him.
The Gospels do not all name the same colour. One writer takes that up.
In Matthew the robe is scarlet (Matthew 27:28); in John it is purple. There is no contradiction here, but a divine reason. It is quite likely that these wretched soldiers put different robes on Him, to pour out all their scorn. Herod also dressed Him in splendid clothing (Luke 23:11).
The story does not stop at the mockery.
Still, we know that God is not indifferent to the insults heaped on His Son. Men crowned Him with a crown of thorns and mocked Him as the King of the Jews. The day will come when He comes out wearing many crowns, as the King of kings. The One whom men clothed with a purple robe will come to earth "clothed in a robe dipped in blood." The One whom men struck with their wicked hands will strike the nations with a rod of iron.
- Curse. Thorns came into the world through man's disobedience. The crown on His head was the sign of the curse He came to carry away.
- Choice. He turned down every crown Satan and men offered Him. This was the one crown earth had that He could take.
- Cost. The curse had no claim on Him, for He was sinless. He bore it because He had taken up the cause of a ruined race.
- Colour. The purple robe mocked a royal claim. Matthew names scarlet and John purple; one writer sees no contradiction, but a divine reason.
- Crowns. The One crowned with thorns will yet appear wearing many crowns. God will answer the mockery in full.
and came to him and said, Hail, king of the Jews! and gave him blows on the face.
The soldiers' greeting is a coronation played as a joke: a title spoken as a taunt, a salute followed by blows. Yet each part of it — the crown, the robe, the royal title — proves truer than the men who staged it knew.
Pilate had already said he found no guilt in Jesus. The beating in his courtyard was not justice. It was strategy. One writer traces the double calculation behind letting the soldiers have their sport.
Pilate probably hoped for two things at once. He hoped that seeing Jesus bear such cruel mockery and scourging without complaint might move the crowd and its leaders to pity. He also hoped that the exposed emptiness of His royal claims would stir their contempt. Either way he came closer to what he wanted: to let go a prisoner in whom he openly saw no guilt at all. But no! Everything had to come out in its true colours. That went for priests and people, learned and unlearned, civilians and soldiers, judge and prisoner.
The scene follows an order. Crown, robe, salute, then blows. The soldiers used the props of royalty to insult Him, then turned their contempt on His body.
The soldiers mocked Him, and, having twisted together a crown of thorns, put it on His head. Then, dressing Him in a purple garment, they saluted Him in mockery as King. "Hail, King of the Jews!" were their words. And to show their contempt of Him, they struck Him with their hands; and, as we read elsewhere, spat upon Him.
The soldiers chose thorns to hurt Him and to ridicule Him. But thorns carry a meaning older than that Roman courtyard. The One they crowned is the Maker of the world He came into.
The world belonged to Him, for He made it. As the Son who has always been at the Father's side, He was the Heir to it. But it was under the curse. Man's disobedience had brought that curse on the world, and thorns were the product and lasting evidence of the curse. He had come to redeem the world, to remove the curse and bring in the blessing, and to do this He must bear the curse... the original curse fell upon Him, and the sign of this was the crown that He wore... Oh, the shame and the glory of it! Shame to man, who crowned Him — and to us all, for we all had our part in it. But glory to Him, who in divine compassion for God's glory and our salvation took the curse upon Himself, so that by His death He might remove it.
Before the purple went on, His own clothing came off. One writer sees the change of clothes as a picture of what men took from Him — and of what He will wear one day.
They had robbed Him of His own garments. This suggests how men driven by Satan attacked our Lord, robbing Him of the glory due to Him. The soldiers dressed Him in the purple robe in mockery... though men dressed Him in cruel mockery, He shall yet wear the imperial purple.
Pilate misjudged the crowd in front of him. He also misjudged himself.
Sadly, Pilate understood the depth of hatred in the hearts of the Jews as little as he understood the utter depravity of his own heart and that of the Gentiles.
The soldiers meant their salute as a lie. Faith takes up the same words and means them.
We take up those very words which they spoke in blasphemy, and make them the expression of what is divinely true. He is a crowned King; the crown of thorns is the crown of glory now.
The men who bent the knee for a joke will meet Him again. Then the robe, the crown and the bowing will all be real.
What will the feelings of these wicked men be when they see Jesus in His glory? Instead of the purple robe, He will wear garments of heavenly glory. Crowns of majesty will rest on His brow. Their knees will bow, but not in mockery, before Him whom the angels and all created beings own as Lord of all.
- Compromise — Pilate allowed the mockery, hoping pity or contempt would end the case. Instead it exposed judge, priests, people and soldiers alike.
- Crown — thorns are the product and proof of the curse on the world; the King who came to remove that curse wore it on His head first.
- Robe — stripped of His own garments and dressed in purple as a joke, He will yet wear real royal purple.
- Blows — the soldiers struck Him with their hands, and the scene exposed the hatred of the Jews and the depravity of the Gentiles.
- Title — what they shouted in scorn was fact. Believers say the same words in earnest, and one day those same knees will bow for real.
And Pilate went out again and says to them, Lo, I bring him out to you, that ye may know that I find in him no fault whatever.
Pilate goes back out to the crowd and declares Jesus innocent in public, though he had just ordered Him whipped. That raises one question: if the judge finds nothing against this prisoner, why is the prisoner still on trial?
Verse 1 has the whipping. Verse 4 has the acquittal. One writer links the two through the word "therefore" that older translations carry in verse 1, and measures the gap in a modern courtroom.
"Then Pilate therefore took Jesus and whipped Him." What was that "therefore" pointing back to? May we connect it with Pilate's verdict of not guilty? I think we may. In fact, that is exactly how Luke puts it. Pilate said, "I have examined Him before you and found no guilt in this man about the charges you bring against Him… I will therefore punish Him and release Him." Whatever excuse we make for Pilate, his decision was callous, brutal and unjust. It was as though a judge in a modern court said, The prisoner is absolutely innocent of the crime. I will therefore sentence him to twenty strokes of the whip.
Pilate's words are not a narrow ruling on the morning's charges — and he says them more than once.
Pilate had already given the verdict of "No fault" about Jesus. But the Jews shouted for Barabbas and rejected Him, so he took Him and whipped Him. Every attempt at ordinary human justice went out the window, and all public decency was outraged… Yet the hand of God was so much over even Pilate that a second and then a third time he had to pronounce the verdict of "No fault" over the Lord. That statement went far wider than saying He was not guilty of the particular charges brought against Him.
Bringing the prisoner out was a calculated move. Pilate wanted the crowd to see a beaten man and drop the case.
The Roman saw through the baseness of the people. He saw through the craft and deadly malice of the religious chiefs. So he seems to have used the unjust policy of whipping the Lord, followed by the mockery of the soldiers, as a way of satisfying the Jews and letting Jesus go. Against truth and righteousness, he would indulge their feelings against Jesus. But he wanted to save an innocent man, if he could do it without cost to himself… It was the place of judgment, but wickedness was there; and the place of righteousness, but iniquity was there. There was not one spark of conscience in the judge. There was none in the accusers either, and none in the crowd, now completely carried away.
Pilate meant his repeated verdict to end the case. It ended up serving a purpose he never intended.
At first Pilate draws back from going this far. For the fourth time he tries to escape from this wickedness, saying, "Take Him yourselves and crucify Him, for I find no guilt in Him." This is the third time he has used these words. So he gives a threefold witness to the perfection of Jesus, and to the breakdown of government in the hands of the Gentiles.
The verdict does not clear the judge who gave it. It fixes guilt on both sides of the trial.
Was there ever such a bare-faced travesty of justice? What judge would dare let the shouting of the accusers settle the verdict, when the sentence was death? Pilate passed the death sentence while saying he found no fault in our Lord. That made the Gentiles guilty. The Jews shouted for His death, and that made the Jews guilty.
One writer sets the scene beside the Passover lamb, which Israel kept and watched for four days before killing it.
In Exodus 12, the Israelites had to take a lamb on the tenth day of the month and kill it on the fourteenth. For four days it lived with them in the house that its blood would shelter from judgment. It was there before their eyes all that time… This is how the Lamb of God is set before us in this Gospel. We watch Him as He walks, without spot or blemish. In this Gospel He could challenge His enemies, "Which one of you convicts me of sin?" (chapter 8:46). And even the heartless pagan judge had to admit three times over that he could find no fault in Him (chapter 18:38; 19:4, 6).
- Verdict. "No fault" goes wider than an acquittal on the day's charges. It is a clean sheet, and God's hand made Pilate say it three times.
- Contradiction. The same judge who cleared Him had already whipped Him — a sentence passed on a man he had just called innocent.
- Motive. Pilate led Jesus out to satisfy the crowd. He hoped to save an innocent man at no cost to himself.
- Guilt. The verdict fixed the guilt on both sides. Pilate's sentence condemned the Gentiles; the crowd's shouting condemned the Jews.
- Lamb. The threefold "no fault" from a hostile judge joins the witness that this is the Lamb without spot or blemish.
(Jesus therefore went forth without, wearing the crown of thorn, and the purple robe.) And he says to them, Behold the man!
Pilate has already declared Jesus innocent. Even so, he has Him scourged, lets the soldiers dress Him as a mock king, and leads Him out to the crowd. Two words from a Roman governor carry far more than he intended.
The scourging and the mockery were a political move. The judge wanted the crowd satisfied and the prisoner released. One writer weighs his motive.
Against truth and righteousness, he would give in to their feelings against Jesus. Yet he wanted to save an innocent man, if he could, at no cost to himself... There was not one spark of conscience in the judge, and none in the accusers, or in the crowd now completely carried away... Pilate probably hoped that seeing Jesus bear such cruel mockery and scourging without complaint would move the crowd and its leaders to pity. He also hoped that the royal claims of Jesus, now made to look empty, would stir their contempt. Either way, it would help him do what he wanted: let go a prisoner in whom he openly saw no guilt at all.
Some have asked whether it is Jesus who says "Behold the man." The sentence structure settles it.
But the whole context shows it is Pilate. As to the form of the sentence, the words "So Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe" are a parenthesis. They sit inside Pilate's own speech: he goes out, tells the crowd he finds no guilt in Jesus, and then says, "Behold the man!"
Pilate's words echoed an old prophecy. And notice who does the moving here.
Pilate used the very phrase we read in the prophet Zechariah, "Behold the Man." In verse 5 we read that Jesus came out. It does not say that Pilate brought Him out, and the soldiers did not force Him forward. In verse 17 we read that He went out bearing His cross. In John's Gospel we see the Lord bearing the cross; the other Gospels show us what men did to Him. Here we see Him moving toward the cross of His own will.
Thorns are not a random insult. They have a history.
The world belonged to Him because He made it. As the eternal Son He was the Heir to it. But it was under the curse. Man's disobedience had brought the curse on it, and thorns were the product and lasting evidence of that curse.
The same writer sets this crown beside every other crown offered to Him.
Satan offered Jesus every crown under the sun, hoping to hold mankind under the lasting curse of God. Men would have made Him king when He fed them with bread. But He would take no crown from Satan or from men — only this crown, the crown of thorns. Every other crown was tarnished. There was no kingdom of righteousness on earth for Him to reign over. If He was to be the Blesser He must bear the curse.
Each Gospel records a different garment, and the purple one belongs to John's account.
The scarlet robe of Matthew would speak of the Son of David. The splendid robe of Luke, sometimes translated white, speaks of His inward purity. But here it is the Emperor character, the Son of Man. He comes out in that purple robe and the crown of thorns, bearing the curse. He bears it so that God might be glorified for ever, and weak sinful man brought back for the pleasure of God.
What did Pilate mean by the words? And what did the crowd do with the sight?
They put the crown of thorns, the emblem of the curse of sin, on His holy brow. The sin-bearer wore that crown for us, so that we might wear a crown of glory. When He comes again, He comes with many crowns. Was Pilate's word pity or contempt? Most likely both. But what a sight! To see Him, who is the Life and the Light, the Holy One, the Creator, treated like this by the creature of the dust! Satan's power energized the chief priests and officers, and the answer they give as they look at "the Man of Sorrows" is "Crucify Him!"
Pilate was pointing at a prisoner. John's readers see more.
He did not know what he said, but we know, for then there came forth the representative Man, the Son of Man, our Substitute. He had spoken this way of Himself: "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up." Now we "Behold the Man," set apart for our cause and crowned with our curse.
- The curse — man's disobedience brought thorns into the world. The crown pressed on His head is that curse, worn by the one Man who never earned it.
- The choice — the verse says He came out. Pilate did not drag Him, and soldiers did not push Him; He moved toward the cross by His own will.
- The crown — He refused every crown Satan and men offered. The only crown earth could give Him that He could take was made of thorns.
- The robe — purple is the emperor's colour. John shows the mock emblem of empire on the Son of Man, who will come again wearing many crowns.
- The cry — Pilate's word was pity, contempt, or both. The crowd answered "Crucify." Yet the words stand over the whole story: behold the Man who bore the curse so He could be the Blesser.