But at [the] feast he released to them one prisoner, whomsoever they begged [of him].
At the Passover feast the Roman governor let the crowd name one prisoner to set free. Pilate knew Jesus was innocent, so why did he reach for a custom instead of a verdict?
The release was not a random act of goodwill. It fell at the season when Israel remembered God bringing them out of Egypt. One prisoner going free echoed that older rescue.
It helps to understand that there was a custom of remembering how God had stepped in for the nation. Each year they released a prisoner, to recall that God had released Israel long ago.
Pilate wanted two things at once: the crowd's goodwill, and a clear conscience about an innocent man. The custom seemed to give him both.
Pilate knew full well that all the accusations of the Jews carried no real weight as proof of any wrong on Christ's part. So he tried, on one side, to appease the Jews, and on the other, to escape the shame of condemning an innocent person. He did this by falling back on a custom at the Feast of the Passover of releasing "one prisoner for whom they asked." What is more, Pilate's injustice in not releasing an innocent Man at once is made worse by one fact. He was fully aware that these wicked men had bound the Lord and brought Him before the judgment seat out of envy.
Offering Jesus as the crowd's pardon sounds generous. It was not. A pardon assumes guilt, and Pilate had already found none.
At the Passover feast the Roman government had a custom, offered as a flattering concession to the people: it released any prisoner the people chose. So at this same time the crowd began to call for the release of a prisoner. Pilate saw in this a chance to get out of a difficult situation, and proposed releasing the Lord Jesus. In fact this was completely dishonourable. He ought to have released Him quite apart from this custom, for there was no reason for Him to be a prisoner at all.
The prisoner set beside Jesus was no petty offender. Even his name, placed next to the Son of God, points up the contrast.
Barabbas was a terrible character. "Bar" means "son"; "Abbas" means father. Barabbas — "the son of a father"… And here was the Son of God! It was a solemn moment for that nation. Before them stood the Lord Jesus, the Son of God, and this wicked man, the son of his father. One was the Blessed One, the Originator of life. The other was a murderer, the destroyer of life, who had been put in prison for rebellion and murder. It is the choice of the human heart — your heart and mine.
Barabbas was a rebel and a murderer. The feast becomes a picture: one man goes free because another takes his place.
Barabbas appears as a chief of sinners, a rebel and a murderer. For him the feast of redemption offers a possibility of release — but only, on Pilate's alternative, if Jesus is given up. Jesus becomes, as it were, the Substitute for the chief of sinners. To "release Barabbas" is "to destroy Jesus." Why? Because He has done evil? the judge asks in vain; where is it? Look deeper than the wicked wills of men. In the purpose of God we may see that holy Sin-offering, the true passover, that can deliver even a Barabbas. Not for any good in him, for Barabbas shows none. Barabbas is released: Jesus is given up.
There is a reason the custom had to fail for Jesus. Had the crowd chosen Him, He would have left that courtyard with a criminal's pardon stamped on Him.
Their choice confirms the people's guilt. But there is another side: God watches over the scene. He makes sure that His Son is not released as a guilty but pardoned criminal, but is condemned as innocent.
- Custom — The release at Passover recalled God freeing Israel from Egypt. One prisoner walked out free, a reminder of a whole nation set free.
- Compromise — Pilate used the custom to dodge a verdict. He knew envy had brought Jesus to him, and offering a pardon to an innocent man was itself unjust.
- Choice — The nation had two men before them: the Son of God, and "the son of a father," a rebel and murderer. Their choice exposes the human heart — yours and mine.
- Substitute — Barabbas goes free on no merit of his own, only because Jesus is given up. Release for one meant destruction for the other.
- Condemned innocent — God oversaw even this. His Son left the court not as a pardoned criminal but as the innocent One condemned — the true passover that can deliver a Barabbas.
Now there was the [person] named Barabbas bound with those who had made insurrection with [him], [and] that had committed murder in the insurrection.
Mark names one prisoner in the cell: Barabbas, chained with fellow rioters and guilty of murder in the uprising. Within minutes the crowd will ask for him by name, and a guilty man will walk free while an innocent Man is led away.
The other Gospel accounts fill out the man's record. One writer collects the details, and shows what the choice revealed about those who made it:
John 18:40 calls him a "robber," and Matthew 27:16-26 calls him "a notorious prisoner." He had started an uprising and had committed murder. Yet the Jews, led by the chief priests and elders, asked for the release of this man instead of the Lord Jesus. Why they asked for this particular prisoner is not known. But their choice shows their ungodliness in the clearest way: they preferred a man known for his wickedness to the Lord of life and glory, their Messiah. Peter did not fail to press this home on the Jews: "But you denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you." Acts 3:14.
Pilate reached for a holiday custom instead of a verdict. One commentator says this only deepened his guilt, and names the motive Pilate himself had already spotted in the priests:
Falling back on this custom was a mere compromise, and it added to the wickedness of the judge. Pilate knew the blessed Lord was innocent, and a righteous judgment would then demand His release, apart from any custom. What is more, Pilate did not release an innocent Man at once. His injustice grows worse because he knew full well what moved these wicked men: they had bound the Lord and brought Him before the judgment seat out of envy. Envy, or jealousy, whether in a sinner or in a saint, is one of the greatest drivers of evil in the world. Envy led to the first murder, when Cain killed his brother. Envy led to the greatest murder, when the Jews killed their Messiah.
Barabbas was not popular. He was only the alternative, and one writer presses that point:
Urged on by their religious leaders, the people shouted fiercely, "Not this man, but Barabbas." The question this time was clear: "Whom will you RECEIVE?" Sadly, anyone but Jesus was welcome. It is not that the crowd had the slightest regard for Barabbas; the point was that they did not want Jesus.
One writer looks behind the choice Pilate offered, and finds in the prisoner's release the shape of the gospel:
He is seen as a chief of sinners, a rebel and a murderer, for whom the feast of redemption offers a possible release — but only, on Pilate's terms, if Jesus is given up. Jesus becomes, as it were, the Substitute for the chief of sinners. To "release Barabbas" is "to destroy Jesus." Why? Because He has done evil? The judge asks in vain; where is it? Look deeper than the wicked wills of men, and in the purpose of God we may see that holy Sin-offering, the true passover. By that offering even a Barabbas may be delivered — not for any good in him, for Barabbas shows none. Barabbas is released: Jesus is given up.
One writer draws out the pattern of Christ's whole service, and the words Barabbas was then in a position to say:
"So true it was that, even in this last scene, Jesus delivers others at His own cost and in every sense. Just before, He had delivered the disciples from arrest; now He is the means of delivering Barabbas, wicked as he was. He never saved Himself. It was the very perfection of the moral glory of Christ to deliver, bless, save, and in all of it at the expense of Himself" (W. Kelly, Gospel of Mark). Barabbas went free, though guilty and condemned, because the Lord Jesus took his place. Christ was his substitute. Barabbas, once released, could have looked up at Him who hung on the cross and said, "He died for me; He paid my penalty."
- Guilty. Barabbas was a rebel and a murderer, held with others from the same riot. His guilt was never in doubt.
- Envied. Pilate knew envy drove the priests to hand Jesus over. He still hid behind a festival custom instead of freeing an innocent Man.
- Chosen. The crowd had no love for Barabbas. Asking for him was their way of refusing Jesus.
- Exchanged. Barabbas could go free at one price only: Jesus given up in his place.
- Yours. Commentators read the freed prisoner as a picture of the gospel. Christ never saved Himself, but He saved Barabbas — who could have stood at the cross and said, "He died for me."
And the crowd crying out began to beg [that he would do] to them as he had always done.
Pilate has already questioned Jesus and heard the chief priests pour out their charges. He can see there is nothing in them. Now the crowd itself pushes forward and asks him to keep a yearly custom. That one request decides everything. It also raises a question: who really controlled that morning?
The crowd did not invent this request. Rome kept a custom at the feast, and Pilate saw a chance in it.
At the Passover feast the Roman government had a custom. To flatter the people, it would release any prisoner the people chose. So at this same time they began to clamour for the release of a prisoner. Pilate saw in this an opportunity to get out of a difficult situation, and proposed releasing the Lord Jesus. This was thoroughly dishonourable. He ought to have released Him apart from any custom, for there was no reason that He should be a prisoner.
The feast itself was about a release.
This feast marked their release from slavery in Egypt. It was a favour granted to them that at that feast they could release one prisoner.
Mark says the crowd, not Pilate, started this. One writer sees the people lining themselves up behind their leaders.
So it was the crowd that wanted to mark their complete submission to the wicked priests even more. They did it by preferring Barabbas and sealing the death of Jesus. He might still have been set free, but the deluded crowd would not hear of it.
Pilate was not deceived about the motives in front of him. That is what makes his handling of the custom so damaging.
Pilate had enough knowledge to see what lay at the root of all the accusations. He knew that the chief priests had handed Jesus over out of envy. So he made a useless attempt to turn the thoughts of the crowd to Jesus, when the question was which prisoner to release. But the influence of the priests with the people was too much for him. Wanting to please the crowd, Pilate outraged what sense of justice he had.
Once Pilate handed the decision to the people, the loudest voice settled it. The same writer draws a blunt conclusion.
The voice of the people prevailed over the better judgment of Caesar's representative. An old Latin proverb states that the voice of the people is the voice of God. The facts of the crucifixion flatly deny that proverb. Here the voice of the people was the voice of the devil.
Another writer traces the same failure back to the standard Pilate was using to decide anything at all.
After a brief examination of the case, Pilate states that he "finds no fault in this man" (v. 4). This should have settled the matter for him, but we read that the crowd was "the more fierce." This is where a first element of politics becomes visible: what matters is not the correct moral judgement of the issue in question, but the opinion and mood of the crowd.
The custom the crowd asked for ended with one man walking free. Commentators see in that release a picture of the cross.
Barabbas was released, though guilty and condemned, because the Lord Jesus took his place. Christ was his substitute. Barabbas, once released, might have gone out and looked up at Him who hung on the cross. He might have said, "He died for me; He paid my penalty." It is a blessed illustration of the atonement.
Another writer points out that Jesus kept delivering others, and always at His own cost.
Even in this last scene, Jesus delivers others at His own cost and in every sense. He had just before delivered the disciples from being taken; He is now the means of delivering Barabbas himself, wicked as he was. He never saved Himself. It was the very perfection of the moral glory of Christ to deliver, bless, save, and in all at His own expense.
The two names set side by side that morning are not just history. One writer explains the name Barabbas, then turns it on the reader.
"Bar" means "son"; "Abbas" — father. Barabbas — "the son of a father." And here was the Son of God! It was a solemn moment for that nation. They had before them the Lord Jesus, the Son of God, and this wicked man, the son of his father. One was the Blessed One, the Originator of life; the other a murderer, the destroyer of life. It is the choice of the human heart — your heart and mine.
- They asked. At the feast that marked their release from Egypt, the crowd itself called for the yearly favour and set the choice in motion.
- He dodged. Pilate knew envy drove the charges. He still used the custom as an escape instead of freeing an innocent man.
- They decided. The people's voice overruled the judge's own better judgment. Commentators call that voice the devil's, not God's.
- One went free. Barabbas, guilty and condemned, walked out because Jesus took his place. Jesus delivered others at His own cost, and never saved Himself.
- You choose. The two men set side by side that day put the same question to every heart: the Son of God, or the son of his father.
But Pilate answered them saying, Will ye that I release to you the King of the Jews?
Pilate has already questioned Jesus and found no case against Him, yet he still reaches for a holiday custom and offers the crowd a choice. His question raises two problems: why a judge sure of the prisoner's innocence bargains instead of ruling, and what happens when a crowd decides about Christ.
Commentators call the offer itself a failure of justice. An innocent man needs no favour:
At the Passover feast the Roman government had a custom, meant to flatter the people: it would release any prisoner they chose. So at this same time they began to clamour for the release of a prisoner. Pilate saw in this an opportunity to get out of a difficult situation, and proposed releasing the Lord Jesus. In truth, this was completely dishonourable. He ought to have released Him custom or no custom, for there was no reason for Him to be a prisoner.
Pilate tried to satisfy his conscience and the crowd at once. One writer calls that halfway move the fatal step:
Our Lord answers nothing to the charge. Pilate seems already convinced of His innocence. Yet instead of dismissing the case and reprimanding His false accusers, he proposes a compromise. Compromise is always fatal, for evil will not settle for a part. If that is given up, the whole is demanded. Our Lord did not need a pardon on the ground that it was the time of the Passover. Blessed results were indeed to flow from this Passover for many. A prisoner would be set free — but not the One whose love alone made Him a slave, to win liberty for others at infinite cost to Himself.
Pilate does not say "Jesus." He says "the King of the Jews." That title strikes at the people he governed as well as at the prisoner. Writers link it to his scorn for the nation:
He had displayed the typical Roman contempt for Jewish customs. He loved nothing better than to offend the feelings of the people he governed, wherever he could... And on this very morning he did not hide his scorn for this subject people. He examined Jesus in the governor's palace. Then he brought Him out to the people waiting outside the hall, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. It was as if he had said, This is your Prophet, this is your King.
By asking what they want, Pilate moves the decision from the judgment seat to the street. It did not save him:
Now the governor began his failed attempts to release Him. At that feast the custom was to release one prisoner of the people's choosing. Barabbas or Christ — that became the question... Poor Pilate! Wanting to stay in the people's favour while wishing to set the Lord free, he put the issue into their hands and asked them what he should do with Him... Judgment and righteousness were separated that day, to be brought together again when the King returns, as Psalm 94:15 long ago foretold.
The crowd's answer exposes more than one mob in Jerusalem:
Such is the evil of our hearts. We may dislike a murderer and a thief. Yet if the question is Christ or the murderer, apart from the grace of God we will choose the murderer. We take the one who takes life rather than the One who gives life.
Commentators look beneath the injustice to God's purpose. Pilate's offer put one man's freedom and another's death on the same scales:
Barabbas is seen as a chief of sinners, a rebel and a murderer. The feast of redemption offers him a chance of release — but only, on Pilate's terms, if Jesus is given up. Jesus becomes, as it were, the Substitute for the chief of sinners. To "release Barabbas" is "to destroy Jesus."... Look deeper than the wicked wills of men. In the purpose of God we may see that holy Sin-offering, the true Passover, which can set even a Barabbas free — not for any good in him, for Barabbas shows none.
- Duty. Pilate had already found no case. His one honest option was to release Jesus outright, not offer Him as a festival favour.
- Compromise. Reaching for the custom was a halfway measure. Evil never takes a part; give ground, and it demands the whole.
- Title. Pilate used the words "King of the Jews" to scorn the nation, parading their Prophet and King before them in a crown of thorns.
- Choice. Handing the verdict to the crowd did not spare Pilate. It exposed every heart: we take a murderer over the One who gives life.
- Substitute. One man did go free that day — Barabbas, because Jesus was given up. He is the true Passover by which even the worst may go free.
for he knew that the chief priests had delivered him up through envy.
Pilate read the case himself. Behind the charges he saw envy. That raises two questions. What could make religious leaders envy Jesus? And why did a judge who saw through it all still hand Him over?
One writer traces envy through Scripture and finds its worst work here.
In Ezekiel 35:11 we find in the case of Edom that envy leads to HATRED. In the case of Daniel (chapter 6:3, 4) I think it is clear that envy drove the presidents and princes to their cruel plan. It can only be called WICKED and UNSCRUPULOUS. We now pass on to the most fearful thing envy ever accomplished, in Mark 15:10. The chief priests, God's professed servants, handed Jesus, the Son of God, over to Pilate. They acted out of a wretched, miserable envy that had eaten away everything even human in their hearts. Here envy led them to CRUCIFY CHRIST.
Envy needs something to fasten on. Here it was the crowds going after Jesus, while the leaders watched their own standing slip.
The rulers and the Pharisees were jealous of His prestige. "Look, the world has gone after Him," they said, in alarm. They felt that because of Him their own popularity and influence were fading. This is why they took the lead in clamouring for His blood. How different was the spirit of John the Baptist! He said, "He must increase, but I must decrease." He was glad to fade into the background, so that Christ his Lord might, as God intends He shall, "in everything be preeminent."
Pilate's insight did not count in his favour. He could name the motive, so he could not plead confusion.
To fall back on this custom was a mere compromise, and it added to the wickedness of the judge. If the blessed Lord was innocent — and Pilate knew He was — then a righteous judgment would demand His release, custom or no custom. What is more, Pilate's injustice in not releasing an innocent Man at once is worse still, because he knew exactly what drove these wicked men. When they bound the Lord and brought Him before the judgment seat, envy moved them.
Why, then, did he not act on what he knew? One writer finds the answer in what Matthew and Mark report.
Pilate was sure the Lord was innocent of every charge the Jews brought against Him, and he told them so again and again. Why then did he not release Him? Why did he agree to His crucifixion? Both his conscience and his judgment condemned such injustice. From Matthew and from Mark we get the answer. Matthew tells us (27:24) that Pilate saw a riot was starting. So, to stop it and to satisfy the people (Mark 15:15), he released Barabbas and delivered Jesus to be crucified.
The envy is real. Underneath it, one writer sees the purpose of God at work in the choice between Jesus and Barabbas.
Barabbas is seen as a chief of sinners, a rebel and a murderer. The feast of redemption offers him a possible release — but only, on Pilate's terms, if Jesus is given up. Jesus becomes, as it were, the Substitute for the chief of sinners. To "release Barabbas" is "to destroy Jesus." Why? Because He has done evil? The judge asks in vain: Where is it? Look deeper than the wicked wills of men. In the purpose of God we may see that holy Sin-offering, the true passover, by which even a Barabbas may be set free.
The motive Pilate spotted still works today. One writer traces it from the first murder to quarrels among God's people.
Envy led to the first murder in the world, when Cain rose up against his brother and killed him. Envy also led to the greatest murder in the world, when the Jews killed the Prince of life. We read that Pilate "knew that it was out of envy that they had delivered Him up." Will it not be found that envy has been the main cause of all the quarrels among the people of God?
- Envy sees. The leaders watched the crowds go after Jesus. They felt their own popularity and influence fading.
- Envy hides. It came to Pilate dressed as a legal charge, yet the judge saw straight through to the motive underneath.
- Envy spreads. Pilate knew the truth. He still chose to stop a riot and please the people, and the guilt became his.
- Envy kills. The same root that moved Cain against his brother moved religious men to choose a murderer over the Prince of life.
- Envy is overruled. Beneath the wicked wills of men stood God's purpose: the guilty man goes free because Jesus is given up in his place.
But the chief priests stirred up the crowd that he might rather release Barabbas to them.
Pilate had found a way out: a festival custom let him release a prisoner, and he offered them Jesus. The priests shut that door by working on the crowd.
Pilate was not fooled about why Jesus had been handed over to him.
Pilate knew enough to see what lay behind all the accusations: "he perceived that it was out of envy that the chief priests had delivered him up." So he tried to turn the crowd's thoughts toward Jesus, when the question was which prisoner to release. It did not work. The priests had too much influence with the people. Pilate wanted to please the crowd, so he violated what sense of justice he had. He released Barabbas, the rebel and murderer. Then he had Jesus scourged and handed Him over to be crucified.
The men doing the stirring held the religious office.
The world got its choice. Jesus and a robber were placed before the world, and the question was put, "Which will you have?" What was the answer? "Not this man, but Barabbas." … The religious leaders and guides of the people persuaded the poor ignorant crowd to reject the Son of God and accept a robber and a murderer instead! These were the men who ought to have led the people in the right way.
Commentators differ on how much the crowd was misled and how much it wanted this.
So the crowd wanted to show their complete subjection to the wicked priests even more. They did this by preferring Barabbas and sealing the death of Jesus. He might still have been freed, but the crazed crowd would not hear of it… They could find no evil. They only imagined it out of the murderous evil of their own hearts.
Either way, the crowd's voice, not the judge's, settled the case.
The voice of the people won out over the better judgment of Caesar's representative. In other words, one man's rule gave way to the crowd, and the popular vote decided it. An old Latin proverb says that the voice of the people is the voice of God. The facts of the crucifixion flatly deny that proverb. Here the voice of the people was the voice of the devil.
The swap was not between two doubtful cases. One prisoner's record was public and appalling, and the charge stuck to the nation long afterwards.
John 18:40 calls him a "robber." Matthew 27:16-26 calls him "a notorious prisoner." He had started a rebellion and had committed murder. Yet the Jews, led by the chief priests and elders, asked for the release of this man instead of the Lord Jesus. Why they asked for this particular prisoner is not known. But their choice shows their ungodliness in the clearest way. They could pick such a notoriously wicked man over the Lord of life and glory, their Messiah. Peter pressed this home on the Jews: "But you denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you." Acts 3:14.
Pilate's offer forced a swap: Barabbas or Jesus. Under the scheming of men, God had a purpose in it.
Barabbas is seen as a chief of sinners, a rebel and a murderer. For such a man the feast of redemption offers a possible release. But that release comes only, on the terms of Pilate's offer, if Jesus is given up. Jesus becomes, as it were, the Substitute for the chief of sinners. To "release Barabbas" is "to destroy Jesus." Why? Because He has done evil? The judge asks in vain: where is it? Look deeper than the wicked wills of men. In the purpose of God we may see that holy Sin-offering, the true passover. By it even a Barabbas may be set free — not for any good in him, for Barabbas shows none. Barabbas is released: Jesus is given up.
One man could have said this of himself that day.
Barabbas went free, though guilty and condemned, because the Lord Jesus took his place. Christ was his substitute. Once released, Barabbas might have gone out and looked up at Him who hung on the cross. He might have said, "He died for me; He paid my penalty." It is a blessed illustration of the atonement.
- Envy — Pilate saw the real motive behind the charges. But his wish to please the crowd beat his own sense of justice.
- Persuasion — the stirring came from the priests. The men who should have guided the people talked them into rejecting the Son of God.
- Choice — the people preferred a rebel and murderer to the Lord of life. Peter later charged that choice home on the nation.
- Voice — the popular vote decided it. So the cross forever disproves the idea that the voice of the people is the voice of God.
- Exchange — God's purpose ran under their sin. "Release Barabbas" meant "destroy Jesus." The guilty man walked free because Christ took his place.
And Pilate answering said to them again, What will ye then that I do [to him] whom ye call King of the Jews?
Pilate has offered the crowd a choice between Jesus and Barabbas, and they have shouted for the murderer. Now he turns back with a second question. It hands the fate of a man he believes innocent to a mob.
Pilate's job was to weigh the evidence. Instead he asked the crowd what to do.
Poor Pilate! He wanted to stay popular with the people, and he also wanted to set the Lord free. So he put the issue into their hands: "What shall I do with Him?" The answer came from the crowd again, "Crucify Him!" Pilate made his last appeal: "Why, what evil has He done?" They met it with a stubborn demand for His death. The judge had already cleared the Lord in public of any charge deserving death. Now he declared Him innocent of every evil they had accused Him of. Yet, to keep the people happy — unhappy man — he gave in to their noisy demand. That day judgment parted from righteousness. The two will come together again when the King returns, as Psalm 94:15 long ago predicted.
Some have called the wording of Pilate's question clumsy Greek. One commentator answers that charge and explains the sense.
One critic says of "that I do to Him" that the Greek grammar here is incorrect. Such foolishness in a professed scholar is hard to account for. The Greek language was flexible everywhere and at all times. In everyday Greek, "to do good to a man" means to treat him well, and "to do ill to a man" means to treat him badly. So "What shall I do to him?" means "How shall I treat him?" There is no error, no awkwardness in Mark's wording here.
Pilate keeps calling Jesus their king, and the crowd keeps denying it.
They denied Jesus as "King of the Jews." In Mark 15 we read Pilate's questions, and his wording was emphatic, for he had already asked them, "Do you want me to release for you the King of the Jews?"
The crowd's answer came at once. It says something about every human heart, not only theirs.
Pilate may be a hardened man of the world. Still, he made some feeble protest against the condemnation of the One that everyone knew to be innocent. So, if he is to release Barabbas, he asks, "Then what shall I do with the man you call the King of the Jews?" Without any hesitation they cried out, "Crucify Him." We do not care for the company of a rebel and a murderer. But the hostility of our sinful nature to God is such that, if we are left to ourselves and have to choose between a murderer and Christ, we prefer the murderer.
Pilate made it an either/or: one man walks out, the other goes to the cross. Under that bargain lies a picture of the gospel.
Barabbas stands out as a chief of sinners, a rebel and a murderer. The feast of redemption offers him a possible release — but only, as Pilate puts the choice, if Jesus is given up. Jesus becomes, as it were, the Substitute for the chief of sinners. To "release Barabbas" is "to destroy Jesus." Look deeper than the wicked wills of men. In the purpose of God we may see that holy Sin-offering, the true passover, that can set even a Barabbas free — not for any good in him, for Barabbas shows none. Barabbas is released: Jesus is given up.
Pilate tried to free Him and got nowhere. His failure was not an accident.
In all this the Jews are guilty. Of course the Roman governor should have been firm, and acted justly, and not left the Lord exposed to the priests' hatred. In Mark's Gospel, however, all the hatred and hostility against the Lord comes from the priests. They are always and everywhere the enemies of the truth and of Him who is Himself the truth in person. Pilate's resistance had no effect. It was God's will that Jesus should suffer. He had come for this, and it was for this that He gave His life a ransom for many.
The crowd had to decide about Christ, and not one of them spoke up for Him. The same question reaches us now.
Jesus or Barabbas? This was the question which divided them. Surely someone will stand for Jesus. Not one! I can almost hear you say, "I would have, if I had been there." Well, show yourself on His side now.
- The question — "What shall I do?" means "How shall I treat Him?" Pilate is no longer asking about law. He is asking a crowd how to handle a man he has already called innocent.
- The abdication — A judge who hands his verdict to the mob splits judgment from righteousness. The King's return will put the two back together.
- The choice — Offered a murderer or Christ, the crowd took the murderer. Left to itself, the human heart prefers anyone to Jesus.
- The exchange — The guilty man walks free because the innocent One is given up. Barabbas adds nothing to his own release.
- The purpose — Pilate's weakness and the priests' hatred did not overrule God. Christ came to give His life as a ransom for many, and the same question now asks each reader which side to take.
And they cried out again, Crucify him.
Pilate asked the crowd what to do with the man they called King of the Jews. Instead of an answer he got a demand — and it came from His own people, not from Rome. Who put those words in their mouths? What were they asking for? And what was God doing while they shouted?
The voice is the crowd's, but the mind behind it belongs to the religious leaders who had already decided the outcome. One writer shows who was really in control, and what the charge against Jesus rested on:
So the crowd chose Barabbas and sealed the death of Jesus. In this way they showed even more clearly how completely the wicked priests controlled them. He could still have gone free, but the deluded crowd would not hear of it... Pilate, cruel and hardened as he was, still protested: "What evil, then, has He done?" And they cried out even more, "Crucify Him." They could find no evil in Him; they only imagined it out of the murderous evil of their own hearts.
They did not just ask for His death. They named one particular kind:
To crucify was to put a person to death in unending shame and disgrace. The Jews could not crucify; stoning was their way of execution under the law. Nor could the Romans crucify a Roman citizen. This way of executing someone was for slaves and foreign criminals. That is the deep meaning of the cry, "Crucify Him, crucify Him." He must not only die. As far as man was concerned, His death had to carry disgrace, cursing and shame that would never be lifted.
Days earlier the crowd had cheered Him. How did the mood turn so fast?
It is a terrible thing to see how changeable the crowd is. They are just the same today... Within a few days, the same crowd that cried, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" and praised Him to the skies cried with one mouth, "Crucify him, crucify him!" And how did that happen? It was the power of Satan. It was their unbelief, because their applause meant nothing. Applause is only human feeling stirred up for the moment. That feeling can give way to a completely opposite one, and very quickly.
The cry judges more than one crowd. It measures the human heart:
Do we want a perfect standard to measure the world, to measure the human heart, to measure sin? Then we must look at the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ... When the human voice cried out, "Crucify Him! crucify Him!" that voice was the human heart speaking. Nothing else could show so clearly its true condition in the sight of God... When man preferred a robber and murderer to Christ, he proved that he would rather have robbery and murder than light and love.
Barabbas went free instead. Under that exchange lay a purpose the crowd knew nothing about:
Barabbas is seen as a chief of sinners, a rebel and a murderer. The feast of redemption offers him a chance of release — but only, under Pilate's choice, if Jesus is given up. Jesus becomes, as it were, the Substitute for the chief of sinners. To "release Barabbas" is "to destroy Jesus." Look deeper than the wicked wills of men. In the purpose of God we can see that holy Sin-offering, the true passover. By Him even a Barabbas may be delivered — not because of any good in him, for Barabbas shows none.
It is easy to read this scene as a spectator. One writer takes that distance away:
It is no use pleading that we would not have done it if we had been there. True, we will never be able to throw stones at Him in the street, or to cry, "crucify him, crucify him." But everyone has been able to show what they think of Him. Our hearts have been open to every folly, vanity and sin that Satan could put in front of us. Can we deny that they have been completely closed to the beloved Son of the Father?
What did God do with the people who shouted?
"Away with him!" was the world's prayer; His was, "Father, forgive them"... He dies, but He does more than that. When He is risen He tells His disciples to begin at Jerusalem, the place where they had put Him to death. They must go to the very people who had cried, "Crucify him! crucify him!" He tells them to preach the forgiveness of sins through Him — Jesus.
- The cry's source — The words came from the crowd. The will came from the priests. No one could name any evil in Jesus.
- The cry's meaning — They asked for the death kept for slaves and criminals. Not just death, but shame that would never lift.
- The cry's mirror — The human heart chose a robber over Christ. That choice speaks for all of us; none of us watches from outside the crowd.
- The cry's fickleness — Days earlier the same mouths had cheered Him. Applause is feeling, not faith.
- The cry's answer — God's purpose ran under their choice. The guilty man went free, the Substitute took his place, and the first offer of forgiveness came to the city that shouted.
And Pilate said to them, What evil then has he done? But they cried out the more urgently, Crucify him.
The crowd has demanded a crucifixion. Pilate asks them for a reason, and no reason ever comes — only a louder shout.
Pilate was not making a speech. He was asking for evidence. No one gave any, and one commentator traces that silence back to the accusers themselves.
Pilate was cruel and hardened, yet he still protests: "What evil, then, has He done?" And they cried out all the more, "Crucify Him." They could find no evil. They only imagined it out of the murderous evil of their own hearts.
The question also puts Pilate's own verdict on record. He clears the man he is about to sentence.
Pilate makes his last appeal: "Why, what evil has He done?" They meet it with a most persistent demand for His death. The judge had already cleared the Lord in public from any charge worthy of death. Now he declared Him innocent of any evil they had accused Him of. Yet, to content the people — unhappy man — he yielded to their clamouring demand. That day judgment and righteousness came apart. They will come together again when the King returns, as Psalm 94:15 long ago predicted.
The crowd never answers the question. It shouts over it, and one writer asks what the judge should have done.
Pilate tries to reason with a crowd that will not reason. He puts the fitting question: "What evil has He done?" They override the question as unimportant, and cry out more fiercely for His crucifixion. Where was the sober order that belongs in a hall of justice? Where was the control of the judge over his own court? Should he not have silenced the crowd and told them to honour the claims of honest justice?
The crowd had a choice: a rebel and murderer, or Christ. One writer turns that choice on the reader.
Without any hesitation they cried out, "Crucify Him." We do not care for the company of a rebel and a murderer. But the flesh is so hostile to God that, left to ourselves and having to choose between a murderer and Christ, we prefer the murderer.
Pilate looked for a cause and found none. One writer explains where the real cause lay.
And yet, despite His acts of love and His words of grace, they repaid Him evil for good, and hatred for His love (Psalm 109:5). Truly He could say, "They hated me without a cause." There was plenty of cause for hatred, but no cause in Him. No cause in man to call out Christ's love, and no cause in Christ to call out man's hatred.
Barabbas was the prisoner the crowd wanted freed instead of Jesus. One writer looks past the wills of men to God's purpose.
To "release Barabbas" is "to destroy Jesus." Why? because He has done evil? the judge asks in vain; Where is it? Look deeper than the wicked wills of men. In the purpose of God we may see that holy sin-offering, the true passover, which can deliver even a Barabbas — not for any good in him, for Barabbas shows none. So the gospel story is more fully unfolded. Barabbas is released: Jesus is given up.
Shouting settled this verdict, not evidence. One writer asks who carries the guilt for it.
Was there ever such a barefaced travesty of justice? What judge would dare to let the shouting of the accusers settle the verdict? Least of all when the sentence was death. Pilate passed the death sentence while saying that he found no fault in our Lord. That made the Gentiles guilty. The Jews shouted for His death, and that made the Jews guilty.
- No cause. Pilate asks for evidence and gets none. The evil was not in the Prisoner. His accusers imagined it out of their own hearts.
- No answer. The crowd does not answer the question. It shouts louder instead, because it has no evidence.
- No excuse. The judge declares Him innocent and sentences Him anyway. That day judgment and righteousness came apart.
- No neutrality. Given the choice of a murderer or Christ, people chose the murderer — and one writer presses that choice on every reader.
- No accident. Barabbas goes free because they give Jesus up. In that exchange we see God's purpose in the true passover.
And Pilate, desirous of contenting the crowd, released to them Barabbas, and delivered up Jesus, when he had scourged him, that he might be crucified.
Pilate had already said he found no fault in Jesus. Here he hands Him over anyway — one prisoner walks free, and soldiers whip the innocent One and lead Him to a cross.
If Pilate believed Jesus was innocent, why did he not release Him? One writer answers from Matthew and Mark.
He was convinced that the Lord was innocent of every charge the Jews brought against Him, and he said so to them again and again. Why then did he not release Him? Why did he agree to His crucifixion? Both his conscience and his judgment condemned such injustice. From Matthew and from Mark we get the answer. Matthew tells us that Pilate saw a riot was starting. So to stop it, and to satisfy the people, he released Barabbas and delivered Jesus to be crucified.
Going along with the crowd looked like the safe choice. One writer weighs what it cost.
Pilate was not the last who has gone along with what was wrong for the sake of temporal interests. Such a course may look successful at the time. In the end it very often turns out anything but happy for the person. Conscience, at some time or other, will speak and make itself heard... He was weak, and afraid of public opposition or resentment. So he gave way against his conscience and better judgment. "The fear of man lays a snare" (Prov. 29:25). How many since his day have had to reproach themselves bitterly for yielding to that fear!
The word points to a specific Roman punishment, not a general beating.
This was a punishment inflicted by the Romans. They stripped the prisoner, stretched him on a frame with cords or thongs, and beat him with a whip or a rod. From about 300 B.C. Roman citizens were exempt from scourging. Paul claimed this privilege when they were about to examine him under this punishment... The Lord was subject to the pain and indignity of scourging.
In Mark the whipping follows straight after Barabbas walks free. The guilty man goes out; the innocent One takes the lash.
And what did this representative of the Gentile power then do? He was the judge, and he was convinced that there was no fault in Jesus. He deliberately released the robber and murderer. And then what? Was there a little relief now? Was the bruised and beaten prisoner, the declared just One, allowed to rest His weary body a while? The first thing they did was inflict the cruel torment of the Roman lash — a torment that often killed prisoners.
One writer sees an exchange in the choice Pilate offered.
Barabbas's crimes are told out here, as they are not in Matthew. He is seen as a chief of sinners, a rebel and a murderer. For him the feast of redemption offers a possibility of release — but only, according to Pilate's alternative, if Jesus is given up. Jesus becomes, as it were, the Substitute for the chief of sinners. To "release Barabbas" is "to destroy Jesus." Why? Because He has done evil? The judge asks in vain: where is it?... Barabbas is released; Jesus is given up.
Behind the politics, one writer sees God guarding the terms on which His Son would die.
Their choice confirms the people's guilt. But there is another side. God watches over the scene. He makes sure that His Son is not released as a guilty criminal who has been pardoned, but condemned as innocent.
The exchange tells us as much about Christ as about Pilate.
"So true it was that, even in this last scene, Jesus delivers others at His own cost and in every sense. A moment earlier He had kept the disciples from arrest; now He is the means of delivering Barabbas, wicked as he was. He never saved Himself. It was the very perfection of the moral glory of Christ to deliver, bless, save — and in all at the expense of Himself" (W. Kelly). Barabbas was released, though guilty and condemned, because the Lord Jesus took his place. Christ was his substitute. Once released, Barabbas might have gone out and looked up at Him who hung on the cross. He might have said, "He died for me; He paid my penalty." It is a wonderful illustration of the atonement.
Through it all the Lord Himself says almost nothing.
Before Pilate He only makes a good confession — a testimony to the truth where the glory of God required it... To all the rest He answers nothing. He lets them go on... Giving this testimony was the last service and duty He had to perform. He gives it.
- Motive — Pilate acted to please a crowd, not to do justice. His conscience said one thing; his own interests said another.
- Snare — the fear of man decided the verdict, and many since have had to reproach themselves for yielding to that same fear.
- Exchange — by Pilate's own terms, to release Barabbas was to destroy Jesus.
- Substitute — the guilty rebel walked free because the Lord Jesus took his place. Writers call it a picture of the atonement.
- Servant — to the last, He delivered others at His own expense and never saved Himself.