And the whole multitude of them, rising up, led him to Pilate.
The council has finished with Jesus, and now the whole body of them takes Him to the Roman governor. Two questions shape what follows: why did they need Pilate at all, and why does Luke stress that the whole company went?
Why did the council need Pilate at all?
The trial of our Lord — if such a mockery can be called a trial — divides into two parts. The first was before the high priest: the religious side. The second was before Pilate: the political side. The Jews had no power to carry out the death penalty; that rested in the hands of the Romans. This explains why the Jews, after condemning the Lord, brought Him before the Gentile power.
Every kind of authority now shares the guilt.
Jesus had to be condemned by man in every capacity — religious and civil. The Jews, under the name of religion, carried the chief guilt. They stirred up the civil authorities and morally forced them to give way against their conscience. We see this in the mock trial before Pilate. So we see that He was "despised and rejected by men." It was not by one class only, but by every class. We shall find priests and people, governor and governed, right down to the lowest of them. All joined in insulting the Son of God.
The accusers do not repeat before Pilate what they said in the council.
How skilfully they adapted themselves to the moment! When He was before the Jews, they charged Him with making Himself the Son of God. Before the Roman governor, they charge Him with making Himself a King. He had a right to both of these titles. Both claims were brought forward and challenged in a human court. So everything has been contradicted, and everything will be vindicated. We see Him standing challenged before man; we find Him soon afterwards vindicated before God.
Pilate examined the case and found no crime. The outcome did not follow his finding.
After a brief examination of the case, Pilate states that he finds "no guilt in this man" (v. 4). That should have settled the matter for him. But we read that the crowd only grew fiercer. Here a first element of (democratic) politics becomes visible. What matters is not the correct moral judgment of the case, but the opinion and mood of the crowd. As people live in a moral vacuum (Scripture calls this darkness), judgment is handed over to the masses. As a result, the Man who "went about doing good" was put to death "by hanging him on a tree" (Acts 10:38, 39). We do well to respect the old warning: "You shall not fall in with the many to do evil" (Ex. 23:2).
The pressure on Pilate came from men who claimed to speak for God.
The civil power must give in to the wilful evil of God's apostate people. This is the history of the world, and of the two, the religious side is always nearest to Satan. The chief priests showed their hatred by an accusation designed to arouse the governor's jealousy. What they charged Christ with about Caesar was entirely false. Yet it rested on the subtle groundwork of something they knew He could not deny, since they counted on His truthfulness.
Peter prayed about this scene, and traced it back to God's own hand.
Peter does not only bring this home to Israel while preaching at Pentecost. He delights to say it to God: "for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place" (Acts 4:27-28). To fulfil God's counsel, Christ had to die. God used the occasion of man's rejection of His Son to carry out this great work. It would secure His glory and be the basis for accomplishing all His purpose.
- Handover. The council had no power to execute, so it moved Jesus from its own courtroom to the Roman governor's.
- Every capacity. That handover spread the guilt: religious and civil, leaders and people, all condemned Him.
- Every title. They accused Him as Son of God before the Jews and as King before Pilate — both titles truly His.
- Every pressure. The verdict followed the mood of the crowd, not the evidence. Scripture warns us not to join the many in doing evil.
- Every step foreseen. What man did in hatred, God had already planned, to secure His glory and accomplish all His purpose.
And they began to accuse him, saying, We have found this [man] perverting our nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ, a king.
The council has finished with Jesus and hands Him to Pilate. The charge changes with the court: blasphemy moved the priests, but only treason would move Rome.
Before the council, the claim that He was the Son of God had convicted Him. Here the accusers drop it, and commentators explain why.
They laid no charge about anything He had done. They did not even charge Him with saying He was the Son of God, because Roman law would never condemn a man for that. So they made the vague accusation that they found Him perverting the people. This was no charge for a court of law, so they added a false charge that He forbade paying tribute to Caesar... They also charged Him with saying He was the Christ, a King. This might make Pilate think He was challenging the authority of Caesar.
The tribute charge was not a mistake. They had already heard His own answer on that point. And their record under Roman rule made this sudden loyalty absurd.
These men were truly restless under Roman rule, and broke out from time to time into violent opposition. Yet here they were eager to put on a show of loyalty. But this was a small thing compared with the blindness of unbelief — which denied their own Messiah. No charge could be more false. He had withdrawn from them when they wanted to make Him a king. Just before this He had plainly told them to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's. And just as much, to give God the things that are God's.
The last part of the accusation was not invented. That is what made it dangerous.
There was a measure of truth in what they said, and yet it was false in the way it was presented. Many a word spoken in this world is true, and people press it into the service of falsehood. How often a person tells the truth to hide the truth! ... It was perfectly true that Christ was a King. He is the King of kings... Their aim was to bring forward His royal titles and glories as if He were claiming them to overthrow Roman power. That is where the untruth lay.
The switch from blasphemy to kingship was not confusion. It was calculation.
It was they who denounced Christ, saying that He made Himself the Son of God. Now it is they who cry before the Romans that He says He is a King. This, they know, is the point Pilate will take most seriously. Oh, the subtlety of the human heart! How cunningly it fits every occasion to its own wicked ends! ... It is a solemn fact that there is no hatred in this world equal to religious hatred; no hatred so bitter, blind and relentless.
They built the accusation on something they were sure He would not deny. That calculation both condemned them and gave the world an official verdict on His innocence.
The wickedness of the chief priests was clear in their accusation. It was designed to stir up the governor's jealousy. What it said about the tribute was completely untrue. But they mixed it with a groundwork they knew Jesus could not deny, since they counted on His truthfulness. This proved their complete and hardened wickedness. The evangelist then gives us, by the Spirit, His good confession before Pontius Pilate. Then Pilate declares that he finds no fault in Him. This was so that the guilt of the Jews might be complete, and the guilt of the Gentile civil power too.
The false charge was about paying tax to a foreign ruler. That raises a question for believers under any government.
It is very helpful for us as Christians to see that there is no power in this world except what God has ordained... It is not a question of whether the power is good or bad. The Christian's place is to be in subjection to the civil magistrate. Why? Because there is no authority except from God, the source of all power... "Whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment." ... Roman rule came on the Jewish people as part of God's government of them. So for Christ to use His own authority to set aside Roman power would have been to deny the very thing He was insisting on. He was still a King, but His kingdom was not of this world, and the time for Him to wear the crown had not yet come.
- Swapped charge. Blasphemy convinced the council. It would never move Rome, so they built a political charge for Pilate.
- Known lie. The tribute charge went against His own plain teaching. They knew it was false when they made it.
- Half-truth. He truly was King. The lie lay in presenting that title as a plot against Rome — people press truth into the service of falsehood.
- Real motive. Behind the careful wording was religious hatred. It fits every occasion to its own ends.
- God's reversal. The charge they knew He would not deny became His good confession. Pilate then gave the verdict that he found no fault in Him.
And Pilate demanded of him saying, Art *thou* the king of the Jews? And he answering him said, Thou sayest.
Jesus has been moved from the Jewish court to the Roman one, and the charge has changed with the room. Pilate asks whether He is a king. The short answer He gives is the one claim He will never withdraw.
The accusers chose the charge that would move a Roman governor.
How skilfully they adapted themselves to the moment! When He was before the Jews, they brought a charge of making Himself the Son of God. Before the Roman governor, they bring a charge of making Himself a King. He had a right to both of these titles. We see Him standing as one challenged before man; we find Him later vindicated before God.
The charge was false, and the men bringing it had no real loyalty to Rome.
These men could not bear Roman rule. From time to time they broke out in violent opposition. Yet here they were eager to look loyal. But this was a small thing compared with the blindness of unbelief — which denied their own Messiah. Nor could any charge be more false. He had left them when they wanted to make Him a king. Only shortly before, He had plainly commanded them to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.
The wording can sound evasive to a modern reader.
When Pilate examined Him in front of the crowd, Jesus said only two words in the original, "You have said so." They mean the same as the single English word "Yes." He confessed that He really was the King of the Jews. That was the exact charge laid against Him in the presence of the Roman power. Matthew, Mark and Luke all agree on this point.
One word taken back would have ended the trial.
Pilate would have had no reason to fear his master's displeasure or the people's uproar. He could have done as he pleased and released his prisoner. He needed only one thing: that the blessed Confessor would change the word that had left His lips and withdraw His claim to be a King. But Jesus answered, "You say that I am a King." From this claim there could be no drawing back. Here was His "good confession before Pontius Pilate." Though His own did not receive Him, still He was theirs; though the world did not know Him, still it was made by Him.
He owned the title, though nothing about Him looked royal.
Now when Pilate raises the question, "Are you the King of the Jews?" He answers, "You have said so." It is a beautiful thing to carry conscious glory in a hidden form. He owned Himself a King when He was asked. It was a glory He carried constantly, but constantly hid. We should be aware of honours that would outshine the glories of the world. But the world is in such a moral state that we cannot display them. That was the life of Jesus. He was consciously a vessel of glory, but morally obliged to hide it.
He owned the authority of the court that judged Him. Those who follow Him walk the same road.
The Lord acknowledged the authority God had put in place, however much He might suffer under it. This is the true safeguard of faith, however unfaithful the authority may be. We are called to walk in His steps. We are not of the world, just as He is not of the world. By and by we shall reign with Him and shall judge the world; we shall judge even angels. All the more, then, we are called in spirit above the world, and still to be subject to God's authority within it. But we must obey God rather than man. So we suffer wherever His will and the world's authority clash.
His accusers built their case on the one thing they knew He would not deny.
The wickedness of the chief priests was clear in their accusation. It was designed to stir the governor's jealousy. What they said about the tax was entirely contrary to the truth. Yet they mixed it with a foundation they knew Jesus could not deny, because they counted on His truthfulness. This proved their complete and hardened wickedness. The Gospel writer then gives us, by the Spirit, His good confession before Pontius Pilate. And Pilate declares that he finds no fault in Him. So the guilt of the Jews was made complete, and the guilt of the civil power among the Gentiles too. That testimony came from the authority God had appointed, and against their own will.
- The charge — before the Jewish court He was accused of claiming to be the Son of God; before Rome, of claiming a throne. He had a right to both titles.
- The confession — "You have said so" means "Yes." Before the Roman governor He owned what He was.
- The cost — one word taken back would have freed Him. He would not take it back, and He made His good confession knowing the price.
- The concealment — He carried real glory the whole time and kept it hidden. He owned His kingship only when Pilate asked. Those who follow Him carry honours the world will not let them display.
- The consequence — His truthfulness exposed the hardened wickedness of His accusers. Pilate's own "no fault" verdict then sealed the guilt of Jew and Gentile alike.
And Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds, I find no guilt in this man.
Luke moves from the council of the chief priests to the Roman governor, where the leaders bring a political charge against Jesus. Pilate answers it from the bench in one sentence — a verdict of acquittal — and the trial carries on anyway.
Luke records the exact charge the leaders brought. He also shows how little the governor thought of it.
Jesus stood before Caesar's judgment seat, since the Roman governor represented the emperor. Luke tells us what the charge was, and perhaps its exact wording: "We have found this one perverting our (not, the) nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that He Himself is Christ, a King." But Pilate was in no mood to take the accusation seriously. He asked the Lord whether He was the King of the Jews, and He admitted it to Pilate. Still, there was nothing here for him to judge. So he said to the chief priests and the crowd, "I find no guilt in this man." He knew, as both Matthew and Mark tell us, that the chief priests had handed Him over out of envy. So he tried several times to escape the responsibility of condemning the Lord to death.
The charge took something true about Jesus and bent it into a crime against Rome.
There was some truth in what they said, and yet the way they presented it was false. Many a word spoken in this world is true, and yet it is put to work in the service of a lie. How often a person tells the truth to hide the truth!... It was completely true that Christ was a King. He is the King of kings... It was completely false that He was pressing His claims as King at that time to set aside the Roman government.
"I find" is not a private opinion. It is the language of a courtroom, still used in that sense today.
"Find." This is the legal use of the word, which we still keep today; compare 2 Corinthians 5:3, Philippians 3:9, 2 Peter 3:14. For the full account of the examination before Pilate, see John 18:33 onwards.
Pilate did not say this only once. He gave the same verdict again and again, and one writer sees God's hand in that repetition.
First, there is abundant witness that Jesus was faultless. Pilate had said so during the earlier examination (verse 4). Now he repeats it twice (verses 14, 22), and he states it a fourth time as Herod's verdict (verse 15). God took care that this witness should be full and official.
Israel's sacrifices had to be animals with nothing wrong with them. That is why this verdict matters.
The Jews had to search carefully for their sacrifices, to find animals without a blemish or a spot. They might look over many creatures before they found a spotless one, and only such an animal could be used in the service of the sanctuary... Wicked Pilate declared again and again before all the people that he found "no guilt in Him". The traitor, condemned by his own words, said he had "betrayed innocent blood."... The thief on the cross, dying beside Him, cried out, "This man has done nothing wrong."
Pilate gave this verdict as the authority Rome had put in place. His words did more than clear Jesus.
The gospel writer then gives us, by the Spirit, His good confession before Pontius Pilate. And Pontius Pilate declares that he finds no guilt in Him. So the guilt of the Jews was made complete, and so was the guilt of the ruling power among the Gentiles. This was testimony given against their own will, by the authority God had appointed.
Pilate's conscience pulled one way. The world pulled the other. One writer turns that into a question for the reader.
Is there not many a person here in the same moral position as Pilate? Your conscience touches you. You would like to be on the side of the Lord Jesus Christ... You would like to stand up for Him, to be His friend, to be on His side. But then there is the world. You cannot give up the world. You cannot break with it... They cannot give up their Caesar. "If you let this Man go, you are not Caesar's friend."... The moment Pilate heard that word, his choice was made.
- Charge. The accusation twisted a true thing — that Jesus is King — into a false claim that He was undermining Rome.
- Verdict. "I find" is courtroom language. The governor examined the case and found nothing against Him.
- Witness. Pilate says it four times in this chapter. God made sure the record of Jesus' faultlessness was official.
- Lamb. Israel searched hard for a sacrifice without a blemish. Here a judge, a traitor and a dying thief all say this One had no fault.
- Failure. Pilate had the right verdict and still gave Him up. He would not lose Caesar. That is the warning for anyone convinced about Christ but unwilling to break with the world.
But they insisted, saying, He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judaea, beginning from Galilee even on to here.
The Roman governor has just called the prisoner innocent, and the accusers only press harder. Their new charge is political: a teacher who stirs up crowds across the whole country sounds like a public danger.
Pilate's verdict should have ended the matter. One writer notes the pretended loyalty of the accusers, and where the Lord's honest answer really hurt Him:
The accusers were restless under Roman rule and broke out from time to time into open revolt, yet here they were quick to pretend loyalty... It is striking to see that the Lord's confession of the truth did no damage to His cause before the Roman governor. He really was the King of the Jews. It damaged Him only with His own people, who were blinded against the truth... Satan was pushing the unbelief of Israel to the last extreme. It is always so in the end with his victims. Christ, in the fullness of His grace and truth, thoroughly brings out what is in man, because He brings in God.
They built the charge for a Roman ear. It mixed a lie with something they knew Jesus would not deny:
The wickedness of the chief priests was clear in their accusation. It was designed to arouse the governor's suspicion. It charged Christ with something completely untrue about the tribute. But they mixed it with a foundation of truth they knew Jesus could not deny, because they counted on His truthfulness. This proved their complete and hardened wickedness... The Jews persist in their wrongdoing. They say, "He stirs up the people." They play on the suspicion of a known government toward a known people.
One writer grants the fact behind the charge and corrects its meaning:
Here they changed their ground completely, and charged Him with being a rebel and a rival to Caesar... The accusation, "He stirs up the people," was indeed true. But He stirred them up towards God, and not against Caesar.
Older translations call the region here "Jewry." In the New Testament the name does not always cover the same ground:
In the New Testament the name sometimes refers to a much larger district... Rome divided the land this way, with Samaria in the centre and Galilee in the north... The context will almost always show the extent of the district intended. It is called JEWRY in Luke 23:5; John 7:1.
So the charge covers the whole land, from Galilee in the north down to where they now stand.
The accusers named Galilee to show how widespread the trouble was. Pilate heard something else in it:
The offence happened in Judaea, so Pilate had ground to take up the charge. But their mention of Galilee gave him, he thought, an opening to get rid of the case. Was He a Galilean? If so, they should go to Herod.
Two escape routes now lay before a judge who did not want to judge:
There were two back doors, as it were, open before Pilate. One was Galilee. He heard that Christ was a Galilean. He says, in effect: I will keep my friendship with Caesar and pass Him over to Herod. He belongs to Herod's authority. And here is the Passover coming too. I must release one prisoner then. Shall I set free Barabbas or Jesus?
The complaint did not end at the cross. The same accusation follows those who carry His message:
This is an old accusation, and it always comes from the wrong side. Pontius Pilate could find no fault in Jesus. Even so, the priests and the rulers insisted all the more: "He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judea, from Galilee even to this place." What do they say against Paul and Silas at Philippi? "These men are Jews, and they are disturbing our city." And at Thessalonica? "These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also."
The advice that follows is simple: keep walking, and remember where such charges come from:
I urge those who are simple not to be uneasy about a political principle or any other. Let them follow calmly and firmly the path in which the Holy Spirit leads them, walking by faith. And let them remember that in the Bible these accusations always come from the enemies of the truth. See how precious the way is in which the word provides for every need of God's children!
- Stirred: the charge was true in fact and false in meaning. He did move the crowds — toward God, not against Caesar.
- Sharpened: the verdict of innocence did not soften the accusers. It made them press harder. Christ brings out what is in man.
- Structured: they shaped their words for a Roman ear. They mixed a lie about the tribute with a claim they knew He would not deny.
- Stretched: "all Judea… from Galilee" covers the whole land, north to south.
- Sidestepped: the word "Galilee" gave Pilate a back door to Herod. It was one of two he tried instead of freeing an innocent man.
But Pilate, having heard Galilee [named], demanded if the man were a Galilaean;
Pilate has just heard that the trouble began in Galilee, and one word in the charge catches his ear. His question sounds like a point of law. It is really a search for a way out.
Pilate had already found nothing to charge Him with. He still did not set Him free.
The Lord stood at Caesar's judgment seat, since the Roman governor represented the emperor... Pilate asked the Lord whether He was the King of the Jews. He admitted it to Pilate. Yet nothing called for a legal ruling, for Pilate told the chief priests and the crowd that he found no fault in this man... The offence was committed in Judaea, and that gave Pilate ground to hear the charge. But their mention of Galilee gave him, he thought, an opening to get rid of the case. Was He a Galilean? If so, they should go to Herod.
The move was politics, not law. It follows a pattern that did not end with Pilate.
Pilate finds himself in what we would call a political dilemma: the crowd is pushing him against the right course of action. As a 'good' politician, he makes a 'clever' political move. When 'Galilee' is mentioned, Pilate at once sees a way of escape... This shows another principle of politics. When a matter is clear, but the right course is unpopular, the matter is either not dealt with at all or passed to someone else. We do have to admit that in some cases a person is not able, or not the right person, to deal with a matter, and so has to pass it on. But the aim should be to handle the matter in the best possible way, not to get rid of an unpopular task.
Matthew and Mark leave this out. Luke alone follows the question through to what it produced.
Before Pilate the Son of Man is accused of misleading the nation and of being an enemy of the Roman government... Luke tells us what Matthew and Mark leave out: that Pilate sent Him to Herod. The silence of the Son of Man as He stood before that wicked king is very solemn. Then Herod and his soldiers mock Him. Herod and Pilate became united in rejecting Christ. See how this fact is used in the first prayer meeting after the church was formed. Acts 4:23-30.
The prisoner comes straight back. Sending Him away settles nothing.
Only in this Gospel do we see the useless effort of poor Pilate to rid himself of responsibility by handing our Lord over to king Herod, who ruled Galilee and so had authority over Him. Herod and his men join in the mockery the Lord meets everywhere, while He, in the meekness of holiness, stays silent through it all. Herod sends Him back to Pilate, who cannot escape responsibility this way.
The escape route ends where it began, and the judge is left with what he tried to avoid.
The man proven guilty of sedition against the government and of murder was released, while He whom the judge declared three times to be without fault was condemned to crucifixion! It seems inevitable that Pilate would be left for the rest of his life with a torturing, burning conscience.
Pilate's question sets up the meeting of two men who could not stand each other, and they part as allies.
Luke records how both he and Herod buried their hostility that day in condemning Him. The same tragedy has often been repeated since. Men of completely different character and outlook have found a point of unity in rejecting Christ. Herod had given himself up to his pleasures and did not care at all. Pilate had some sense of what was right, but he bent with the times and was ready to do wrong for the sake of popularity. Yet here the two agreed.
Another writer asks what it was that brought them together.
If we turn to Luke 23:12 we find that on that same day Pilate and Herod became friends. What were they made friends about? They wanted to put out the light of grace and truth that shone in the Person of the Lord's anointed. That shared wish brought them together and made friends of men who had been enemies.
- One word. "Galilee" was thrown in as an accusation; Pilate heard it as a legal loophole and asked at once whether the prisoner was a Galilean.
- One escape. The offence in Judea was his to judge, but a Galilean belonged to Herod — so the case could be sent away rather than settled.
- One failure. Handing the matter to another court did not remove the responsibility; Jesus came back, and Pilate still had to decide.
- One silence. Before Herod the Lord answered nothing, while a king given over to his own pleasures mocked Him.
- One union. The move ended by making two enemies friends. Nothing joined them but their shared rejection of Christ, and that has happened again and again since.
and having learned that he was of Herod's jurisdiction, remitted him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem in those days.
Pilate has just heard the charge that Jesus stirs up the people "from Galilee even to this place." One word in that charge gives him a way out. Galilee was Herod's territory, and Herod was in Jerusalem at the time. So the governor passed his prisoner on instead of judging him.
The accusers meant "Galilee" as proof that the trouble was widespread. Pilate heard it as a jurisdictional loophole.
Pilate clearly was in no mood to take the accusation seriously. He asked the Lord if He was the King of the Jews. The Lord admitted it to Pilate. Yet there was nothing here that called for his judicial action. Addressing the chief priests and the crowd, he said, "I find no guilt in this man"... so he tried several times, as the history shows, to escape the responsibility of condemning the Lord to death... The offence was committed in Judaea, and that gave Pilate ground to hear the charge. But their mention of Galilee gave him, he thought, an opening to get rid of the case... Yet Pilate gained nothing by it. Herod, with his soldiers, treated Him as nothing, mocked Him, dressed Him in a splendid robe, and sent Him back to the Roman governor. Herod and Pilate became friends, but Pilate's difficulty was in no way lessened.
Pilate had already said the prisoner was innocent. The honest course was release, not transfer. Sending the case to Herod was one of several moves to keep his hands clean. It cost him in the end.
Pilate was not the last who has gone along with what was wrong for the sake of temporary advantage. Such a course may look successful at the time. Very often it turns out anything but happy for the person in the end. Sooner or later, conscience will speak and make itself heard. And the people he tried to please at the expense of righteousness may in the end turn round and attack the one who acted to satisfy them. Pilate found this out... Weak, and afraid of popular opposition or resentment, he yielded against his conscience and better judgement. "The fear of man lays a snare" (Proverbs 29:25).
The verse reads like an administrative detail. In practice, soldiers marched the bound prisoner across the city again, to stand before a cruel king.
Pilate hears He is from Galilee. He tries to escape his difficulty by sending Him to Herod, who happened to be in Jerusalem at this time. Yes, they must heap every possible insult on the Lamb of God. They must lead Him again through the dark streets of Jerusalem to stand before the wicked Herod — the self-indulgent, cruel murderer. And this wicked man was glad, and hoped to have his curiosity satisfied. Not a single word of complaint, even now, escapes the holy lips of Jesus. "He made no answer." Blessed Jesus, may we learn from You!
Pilate wanted the case off his desk. Instead he added a second court — and a second official verdict of innocence, which he later quoted back to the crowd.
First, there is abundant witness that Jesus was faultless. Pilate had said this during the earlier examination (verse 4). Now he repeats it twice (verses 14, 22). He states it a fourth time as Herod's verdict (verse 15). God took care that there should be abundant and official witness to this.
Sending Jesus to Herod put two rival powers on the same side. The first Christians later read that day in the light of Psalm 2.
This alliance in opposition appeared when the Son of God came into the world the first time... The troubled assembly poured out their hearts and reminded God of this psalm (Acts 4:23-31). "For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel." How solemn! Pilate and Herod, who had been enemies, could bury their hatred and be at one over the rejection of the Son of God... Satan is well able to bring about unity for the carrying out of his dreadful purposes.
Commentators differ on how deep the two men's hostility to Christ went. One writer says it was not hatred at all, but indifference:
They are often described as united by their common hatred of Christ; but hatred is too strong a word. He had not in fact mattered enough to them even to draw out hatred. To them, as to so many, He was just an incident in a day's history. To Pilate an annoying one. To Herod, possible material for amusement that had failed to deliver.
- Loophole. The word "Galilee" gave Pilate someone else to hand the case to. He used it instead of releasing the man he had just called innocent.
- Evasion. Passing a case on is not the same as deciding it. Pilate tried to compromise with his conscience, and the fear of man trapped him.
- Silence. Led once more through the city to a king who wanted entertainment, Jesus made no complaint and no answer.
- Verdict. God overruled the evasion. A second court meant more official witness that Jesus was faultless — stated four times over.
- Alliance. The day ended with enemies made friends over the rejection of Christ. That is the Psalm 2 scene the first believers prayed through in Acts 4.
And when Herod saw Jesus he greatly rejoiced, for he had been a long while desirous of seeing him, because of hearing many things concerning him, and he hoped to see some sign done by him;
Pilate wanted to be rid of an awkward case, so he sent Jesus to Herod, and Herod was delighted — though what he wanted was a show. So what happens to a man who is glad to see Christ but has no need of Him?
Herod's wish was old, and he had heard plenty about Jesus. But one thing was missing.
He wished to see the One who could raise the dead, cleanse the leper, and give sight to the blind. But there was no sense of need in Herod's soul. He did not know that it was far better to see the Saviour Himself than to see any miracle performed by Him.
Herod had not always been so relaxed about Jesus. He had beheaded John the Baptist, and news of Jesus once unsettled him.
You see in him the first movements of terror and fear and slavish horror when his sins have found him out. But notice what happens afterwards — how all that is lulled into quiet and into rest. And then what takes its place? Curiosity! First fear; and when fear is drugged or rocked to sleep in the devil's cradle, then curiosity. There is so much curiosity today! Men who were once afraid are now curious.
Herod hoped for a sign. That hope showed what he took Jesus to be — not someone to trust, but a talent to sample.
Herod has got over his fear of Christ and is glad of the chance to see Him, hoping even to see Him do some "sign" in his presence. His evil course had hardened his conscience more and more. He clearly sees the Lord as nothing but a magician, like Simon the sorcerer in Samaria later on. Such a man would be sure to take the chance to impress an audience like this with proofs of his power.
This demand was not new. Jesus had met it before, and from a worse source.
We should note the difference between miracles and magic. Our Lord and His disciples worked miracles and exposed magic... Herod looked for a display of that sort, some sensational feat (Luke 23:8), and here the devil suggests the same thing.
Herod questioned Jesus and got nothing back. Still, he saw something — not what he had asked for.
He does find a sign, though not the one he looked for. He finds a Man silent and unmoved. Jesus answers nothing to his questions, and nothing to the chief priests and scribes, who accuse Him fiercely for fear of the effect on Herod. There is not even a word of warning or rebuke, only that unbroken silence, so much more terrible.
The silence is not neutral. Jesus answered Pilate and Caiaphas. Herod alone got no word.
It is a terrible thing for God to be silent. It is better that He should be speaking to us by chastenings. "O LORD... be not deaf to me, lest, if you be silent to me, I become like those who go down to the pit" (Psalm 28:1). The silence of God is as if you put a man into a pit. "Ephraim is joined to idols; leave him alone" (Hosea 4:17). The dealings between Herod and the Lord illustrate this.
The wish began in fear, and the silence will not last.
He hears people speak of Jesus and His miracles. "John, whom I beheaded, has been raised," he says. He seeks to see Jesus because he wants to be rid of that vague terror — the fear of meeting again the man he had put to death. But the uncertainty stays. When at last Herod sees the Saviour, he can neither see His miracles nor hear Him. He meets on earth a silent Christ, whose voice he will not hear until later, when he will see Him as Judge.
This hearing left its mark on two men, not one.
In Luke 23 Jesus stands not only before Pilate, but before Herod. The two men had hated each other until now. Here they are reconciled, once it is a question of rejecting Jesus. It is only Luke who gives us this touch. What a league of peace over the rejection of the Saviour!
- Fear fades. Herod once trembled over John's death. Then the devil rocked that alarm to sleep, and curiosity took its place.
- Curiosity asks. He wanted a sign, not a Saviour — no sense of need, and no idea that seeing Christ Himself was worth more than any miracle.
- Curiosity misjudges. A hardened conscience saw only a magician, and wanted the same display the devil had once suggested.
- Curiosity gets silence. Herod did receive a sign — a Man who answered nothing, not even a rebuke, which is the most solemn answer of all.
- Silence ends in judgment. The voice he refused on earth he will hear from the Judge. His one gain that day was a friendship with Pilate, sealed over the rejection of Christ.
and he questioned him in many words, but *he* answered him nothing.
Herod had Jesus standing in front of him at last, and he filled the room with questions. He got no answer at all. Commentators read that silence as a judgment heavier than any word.
Herod's questions came from curiosity, not from any sense of his own need.
He wished to see the One who could raise the dead, cleanse the leper, and give sight to the blind; but there was no sense of need in Herod's soul. He did not know that it was far better to see the Saviour Himself than to see any miracle performed by Him. He sees Jesus, he questions Him, but notice the dignity of the Lord: He answers the usurper nothing.
Herod kept at it, and got nowhere.
The Lord stayed completely silent, despite the many questions Herod asked Him. What a sight! The questioning king probably shifted his questions in every direction, hoping to get some answer.
Herod hoped for a miracle. He got a sign of a different kind.
He does find a sign, but not the one he had looked for. He finds a Man silent and unmoved. This Man answers nothing to his questions, and nothing to the accusations of the chief priests and scribes, who accuse Him fiercely because they fear the effect on Herod. There is not even a word of warning or rebuke, but only that unbroken silence, so much more terrible.
Jesus was not silent through the whole trial. He spoke to the Roman governor Pilate, and He spoke to Caiaphas the high priest. Herod alone got nothing.
Herod was wicked through and through. He did answer Pilate, because there was no hatred in Pilate's heart. He answered Caiaphas for the sake of the oath of God, by which he put Him under oath (Matt. 26:63); but as for Herod, He has not a word for him. He passes from before him without opening His mouth. It is a terrible thing for God to be silent. It is better that He should be speaking to us through discipline. "Do not be deaf to me, lest, if you are silent to me, I become like those who go down to the pit" (Ps. 28:1). The silence of God is as if you put a man into a pit. "Ephraim is joined to idols; leave him alone" (Hosea 4:17).
The silence did two things at once.
The silence of the Lord was a very solemn condemnation of Herod. At the same time it gave the fullest opportunity for the rude insolence of his followers and of the accusers.
One writer links this silence to Isaiah 53 and notes how unnatural it is.
Isaiah 53:7 emphasises His silence before His accusers. When men are oppressed and treated wrongly, protest is natural and usual. So His silence went against all experience. The Gospels note it — Matthew 27:11-14; Mark 15:3-4; Luke 23:9; John 19:9. A sheep really is silent before the shearers, as anyone can see today by standing and watching them at work. But He was not like a sheep under the shears. He was like a lamb led to the slaughter. He was indeed "the Lamb of God," as John the Baptist proclaimed, yet no word of protest escaped His lips.
Christ's silence is not only something to admire. One writer sets it out as steps for us to walk in.
If we are called to be with Christ in glory, we are also called to follow His steps on the way there. The Apostle gives us three of His steps. First, He did no sin, and there was no deceit in His mouth. Second, He suffered: He was insulted and threatened. Third, when He was insulted, He took it patiently; He did not insult back, and He did not threaten. In the presence of all His accusers His resource was in God. He committed Himself to Him who judges righteously. When falsely accused before the Jewish council, He "remained silent" (Matthew 26:63). When the Jews accused Him in front of Pilate, "He gave no answer." To Pilate himself He "gave no answer, not even to a single charge" (Matt. 27:12-14). The mocking Herod questioned Him at some length, "but He made no answer" (Luke 23:9). He was silent before men because He had a resource in God.
- Curiosity. Herod wanted a miracle, not a Saviour. He had no sense of need, and he got no answer.
- Sign. He did get a sign — an unmoved Man who would not speak. No warning, no rebuke, only unbroken silence, and that made it worse.
- Selective. Christ answered Pilate and Caiaphas but not Herod; commentators read this as the mark of a heart set in hatred.
- Sentence. Silence from God is itself a verdict — worse than discipline, like being left alone in a pit.
- Steps. His silence rested on His resource in God, and we are called to follow His steps: when insulted, take it patiently and do not insult back.
And the chief priests and the scribes stood and accused him violently.
Pilate has sent Jesus to Herod, and the chief priests and scribes follow Him there to press their charges. Why do accusers who already have the upper hand need to shout so loudly?
The accusers are not Rome's officials. They are Israel's religious leaders, and one commentator sees a pattern in that: the civil power follows where religion leads.
Religious evil now only had to lead the world on to finish the wickedness in which it had led the way. The civil power must give in to the wilful evil of God's people, who had turned away from Him. This is the history of the world, and of the two, the religious side is always nearest to Satan. The chief priests showed their enmity by their accusation. It was designed to stir up the jealousy of the governor. They charged Christ with something entirely false about Caesar, but they built it on a subtle groundwork of what they knew He could not deny, because they counted on His truthfulness.
Herod was hoping for a sign, not a conviction. The accusers feared what he might do, and that fear explains the heat in their voices:
He does find a sign, though not the one he was looking for: a Man silent and unmoved. He answers nothing to his questions, and nothing to the accusations of the chief priests and scribes. They accuse Him violently because they are afraid of the effect on Herod. There is not even a word of warning or rebuke, only that unbroken silence, so much more terrible.
Their charge was political, and it was false. One writer traces how their words escalate:
Then we see the poison of snakes in the Jew. With false witnesses and false words they slander the Lord, and try to poison Pilate's mind against Him. They said, "We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding us to give tribute to Caesar." From slander they move to cursing and bitterness. We read, "The chief priests and the scribes stood by, vehemently accusing Him." And it is only a short journey they take from anger to murder, for they said, "Let him be crucified."
Against all this noise, Jesus says nothing. One writer points out that Jesus answered His other judges, but not this one:
So Pilate sent Him to Herod, and before Herod He never spoke a word. Herod was wicked through and through. He did answer Pilate, because there was no enmity in his heart. He answered Caiaphas for the sake of God's oath, when Caiaphas put Him under oath (Matt. 26:63); but for Herod He has not a word. He passes from in front of him without opening His mouth. It is a terrible thing for God to be silent. It is better that He should speak to us through discipline. The silence of God is like putting a man into a pit.
Another writer notes the effect His refusal to answer had on the court, and its cost to Him:
Here again the chief priests and scribes vehemently accused Him. But Jesus answered nothing in the presence of that wicked man, whom He had earlier called "that fox." His dignified silence only moved Herod and his soldiers to drop all pretence of justice. They sank to mockery and ridicule.
Herod's mockery went a step further. One commentator sees God turning that insult into testimony:
Let us notice here how God overruled all the malice and mockery of men. He turned it into the fulfilment of prophecy and a testimony to His Son — the very opposite of what they intended… In Herod's palace He wore a "gorgeous" (white or shining) robe, and it testified to His sinless character. The priests and scribes who had followed might stand and "vehemently accuse" Him. He stood in front of them wearing what spoke of perfect innocence.
- Lead — the accusers are the religious leaders, not Rome. The civil power only follows where they lead.
- Fear — they accuse Him violently because they are afraid of what Herod might do.
- Slide — the same tongues move from slander, to cursing and bitterness, to "Let him be crucified." It is a short road from anger to murder.
- Silence — He answered Caiaphas and He answered Pilate. To Herod He gives not one word, and God's silence is the most terrible reply of all.
- Reversal — God turned the mocking robe into a witness. While they stood accusing, He stood dressed in what spoke of perfect innocence.
And Herod with his troops having set him at nought and mocked him, having put a splendid robe upon him, sent him back to Pilate.
Pilate has sent the prisoner on to Herod. The ruler who long wanted to see Jesus now has Him standing silent in front of him. What Herod does with that silence — contempt, a robe, and a return delivery to Pilate — says more about the men judging Christ than any verdict could.
The word Luke uses for Herod's treatment of Jesus turns up elsewhere in the New Testament. One writer traces it through the Gospels and Acts:
He was "treated with contempt" by men (Mark 9:12), by Herod's soldiers (Luke 23:11), and by the religious leaders in Acts 4:11. The verb here means "utterly worthless" — contemptible! So man, who seeks his own glory, has no appreciation of the One whose every motive, every word and every action had the glory of God in view.
Herod had hoped for a miracle to entertain him. Instead he met a silence he could not break:
He does find a sign, but not the one he looked for: a Man silent and unmoved. He answers nothing to Herod's questions. He answers nothing to the chief priests and scribes, who accuse Him fiercely, afraid of the effect on Herod. There is not even a word of warning or rebuke — only that unbroken silence, which is far more terrible.
The splendid clothing was not a gift. The same writer reads the robe and the return trip as one gesture of mockery:
The unhappy man answers it only with mockery. He dresses Him in a brilliant robe, perhaps the robe of a candidate for honours. Then he sends the Lord back to Pilate, as if to suggest that such claims as these deserved no serious attention.
One writer points out where those mock honours will end:
Herod's troops mock the Son of Man by putting a shining or "splendid robe" on Him, in the Gospel that shows Him as the perfect Man (Luke 23:11). Then they send Him back to Pilate… His sinful creatures put royal, imperial and universal honours on the rejected Messiah in mockery. But God will see to it that those honours shall one day be truly His.
Herod had met a prophet before. One writer sets his treatment of John the Baptist beside his treatment of Jesus:
Herod was a man of extreme but shallow feeling. He was happy to hear John, though the prophet condemned the sin he was guilty of… When Pilate sent Jesus to Herod he was glad, "very glad," to see Him (Luke 23:8). But that meeting only showed the hard cruelty of his nature… For all his sorrow, Herod killed the servant in Galilee. For all his gladness, he mocked the Master at Jerusalem.
The verse ends with Jesus sent back to Pilate. One writer follows what happened between the two rulers next:
The silence of the Lord was a very solemn condemnation of Herod. At the same time it gave full room for the rude insolence of Herod's followers and of the accusers… The Spirit of God does not fail to notice the strange moral character of what happened here. There had been a feud between the Governor and the King. But "Pilate and Herod became friends with one another that very day, for before this they had been enemies." So Satan works to unite the world against Christ, as the grace of God unites people by Him and for Him.
The mockery is not the last word on His clothing. One writer looks ahead to the day God honours Him in public:
Praise God, the One once refused, despised and crucified will yet wear the royal robe of glory… He once wore the mocking robe and the cruel crown. He will be welcomed with praise when God sets Him forth with the crown of pure gold on His matchless brow. "He shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon His throne" (Zechariah 6:13).
- Worthless — the word for Herod's treatment means "utterly worthless." Man seeks his own glory, so he has no eye for the One who lived for God's glory.
- Silence — Herod wanted a miracle. He got a sign he never asked for: a Man unmoved, with not even a rebuke, only unbroken silence.
- Robe — the splendid garment was Herod's verdict. He dressed Jesus as a candidate for honours, to say such claims deserved no serious hearing.
- Character — the man who was happy to hear John still killed him. The man glad to see Jesus still mocked Him. Strong feeling changed nothing.
- Reversal — Satan unites enemies against Christ. But the One dressed in the mocking robe will wear the royal robe of glory and rule upon His throne.
And Pilate and Herod became friends with one another the same day, for they had been at enmity before between themselves.
Two rulers who had been enemies became friends on the day they both had Jesus in their hands. What kind of peace grows out of rejecting the Son of God?
One commentator weighs what kind of peace this was.
In Luke 23 Jesus is found not before Pilate only, but Herod; and the two men who up to then hated each other are here reconciled, now that it is a question of rejecting Jesus. It is only Luke who gives us this touch. What a league of peace over the rejection of the Saviour!
The Bible never says what had divided them. One writer passes on a guess others had made: Pilate had interfered with people under Herod's rule.
The Galileans were Herod's subjects (Luke 3:1). It has therefore been supposed that this interference by Pilate caused the quarrel between him and Herod, which we read of in Luke 23:12.
One writer sets this new friendship beside the union God is building.
The Spirit of God does not fail to notice here the moral peculiarity of the transaction. There had been a feud between the Governor and the King. But now "Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day, for before this they had been at enmity with each other." So Satan builds his union in the world against Christ, while the grace of God builds its union by Him and for Him.
Herod and Pilate were nothing alike, and one commentator says the same pattern keeps returning.
Luke puts on record how both he and Herod buried their enmity that day in condemning Him. The same tragedy has often been repeated since. Men of completely different character and outlook have found a point of unity in their rejection of Christ. Herod was given over to his pleasures and utterly indifferent. Pilate, though he had some sense of what was right, served the moment and so was ready to do wrong for the sake of popularity. But they came to an agreement here.
Commentators differ on what these two men actually felt about Christ.
They are often described as united by their shared hatred of Christ; but hatred is too strong a word. He had not in fact meant enough to them even to draw out hatred. He was to them, as He is to so many, only an incident in a day's history. To Pilate He was an annoying one. To Herod He was possible material for amusement, and it had failed to deliver. Their friendships were probably much less real than their quarrels.
Believers in Acts later prayed about this alliance and found it written long before.
The Spirit asks, "Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD and against His Anointed" (Psalm 2:1-2). This alliance in opposition appeared when the Son of God came into the world the first time... The distressed gathering reminded God of this psalm in their remarkable outpouring of heart in Acts 4:23-31: "For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel." How solemn! Pilate and Herod, who had been enemies, could bury their hatred and be at one over the rejection of the Son of God... Satan is well able to produce unity for the carrying out of his dreadful purposes.
One writer sees the same combination forming whenever the real Christ appears.
The world has power to combine very different elements when an unworldly Christ stands out as a common enemy. Herod and Pilate were made friends together. There may be the secular and the religious, even the unbeliever and the superstitious. But let an unworldly Christ appear, and they will all challenge Him as the object of their common hatred.
One writer follows this new friendship past the day it was made.
That day they were made friends over the settled slaughter of the Son of God! Dreadful thought!... Those two newly made friends will find themselves side by side through a long, endless eternity. And where? Do not spend your eternity with those who murdered the Son of God.
- Cause. Christ was the one point Pilate and Herod could agree on, and the agreement was to be rid of Him.
- Combination. Satan builds his unions against Christ; the grace of God builds its union through Him and for Him.
- Contrast. The two men shared no character, no outlook, no interest — only their treatment of Jesus. Commentators differ on whether that was hatred or cold indifference.
- Confirmation. Acts 4 reads this alliance as Psalm 2 coming true: kings gathered against the Lord's anointed.
- Consequence. Friendships formed over the rejection of Christ hold, past this life into the next. Choose your company accordingly.