Hot answers tagged

10

The phrase in question is «Ἰησοῦν τὸν λεγόμενον Χριστόν». It does not mean that Pilate himself was confessing Jesus to be “the Christ.” Rather, the expression is commonly used in the NT to describe what people are generally called or named by others.1 For example, Matt. 1:16 Ἰησοῦς ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστός — Jesus who is called Christ Matt. 4:18 Σίμωνα τὸν ...


6

The members of the Sanhedrin are here blackmailing Pilate by saying that they will spread rumors about him or even directly inform the Emperor that he released the enemy of the Rome who claimed illegitimately that he was the king of Jews. The releaser of a political enemy would automatically be considered as a complacent to this enemy and thus also a co-...


5

The stoning of Stephen, the execution of James (the brother of John) and the seizing of Peter with a view to his, also, execution ; all happened in the aftermath of Jesus' crucifixion at the hands of the Romans, facilitated by the Jews, and in the aftermath of Jesus' death as he voluntarily expired. Until then, they feared the people (who would have urged ...


5

Important note about this question: this is not a question about all Jews at the time or all Jewish people in general. This is a question about why the interactions between a handful of very specific people - the Sanhedrin and Pilate - played out the way they did. I'm not sure you can skip the context. You really need the full picture here to see why it ...


5

Pilate was not a very smart man (according to the historical records we have) and here he makes a token gesture at justice. The Sanhedrin hated Jesus but the people loved Him. It was the people who had hailed Jesus as king of the Jews and Messiah less than a week earlier at the triumphal entry to Jerusalem. Thus, Pilate attempts to appeal to the masses as ...


5

They may well have considered trying again to stone him Some consider Sanhedrin 43a to preserve an arrest warrant for Jesus, in which it is indicated that Jesus was to be arrested for sorcery and put to death by stoning. Historian Paul Maier examines the evidence here and suggests this was originally written before Jesus' death (since afterwards it was well-...


4

Previously they saw each other as a threat to their ruling authority. By sending Jesus back and forth they essentially recognized each others authority. Pilate, having Roman religious beliefs, was afraid to condemn Jesus to death. The Romans believed the gods had children with women. To Pilate that would explain Jesus' miracles. While Herod thought ...


4

The surrounding verses provide valuable context: 15 Now at the feast the governor was accustomed to release for the crowd any one prisoner whom they wanted. 16 And they had then a notorious prisoner, called Barabbas. 17 So when they had gathered, Pilate said to them, “Whom do you want me to release for you, Barabbas or Jesus who is called Christ?” 18 For he ...


3

It appears that Jesus the Christ and Barabbas shared the same name: Jesus. I can think of a few line of 'evidence' for this. Manuscripts The first is that some of the earliest manuscripts actually had "Jesus Barabbas." So if it wasn't original to the text itself, it seems nonetheless to have been an accepted tradition, explaining its inclusion in ...


2

Why were Pilate and Herod Antipas upset with each other? We don't really know. Barnes' Notes on the Bible What had been the cause of their quarrel is unknown. It is commonly supposed that it was Pilate's slaying the Galileans in Jerusalem, as related in Luke 13:1-2. The occasion of their reconciliation seems to have been the civility and respect which ...


2

Was Pilate alluding to Jesus being the Son of Man? Answer: No. Pilate had tried multiple times to free what he knew was an innocent man in Jesus. Even his wife warned him about these circumstances: Matthew 27:19: While [Pilate] was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent him a message, saying, "Have nothing to do with that righteous Man; for last ...


2

I think it very unlikely. Pilate did not demonstrate a terribly deep understanding of or appreciation for Judaism - though he knew enough to make them mad (e.g. the sign on the cross). Allowing that the Son of Man is a reference to the Book of Daniel (widely but not unanimously held), I can't imagine Pilate had ever read the prophecy, much less appreciated ...


2

This interpretation is based on the hypothesis that the identifier Pilate added to Jesus’ name represents the charge or the accusation against him. Asking the crowd to choose which person they wanted to release, Pilate distinguished Jesus by the charge that was made against him, i.e., that he was called Christ. Barabbas was a “notorious prisoner”; the ...


2

Ok, I'll answer my own question. I really appreciate Perry Webb for compiling the relevant verses that have helped me think through this, though I think something deeper is going on than Pilate and Herod recognizing each other's authority. It's entirely possible that they both already recognized each other's authority (coming from the emperor of Rome) but ...


1

The setting was in Luke 23: 1 Then the whole assembly rose and led him off to Pilate. 2And they began to accuse him, saying, “We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Messiah, a king.” 3 So Pilate asked Jesus, “Are you the king of the Jews?” “You have said so,” Jesus replied. Then Pilate sent ...


1

This is a very thought-provoking question. I doubt Pilate was aware of the significance of his words, yet the three-fold description of Jesus parallels somewhat the prophecy given in Isaiah 9:6. "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The ...


1

It appears to me your asking two questions? First, "Why did the Jews stone Jesus one more time?" Second, "Why did the Jews send Jesus to Pilate?" The Jews accused Jesus of blasphemy and wanted to stone Him at John 5:17-18. John 8:56-59. At John 10:30-39. Please notice what verse 31 states, The Jews took up stones "AGAIN" to ...


1

The best explanation is provided by Ellicott (see below) to which the weak, vacillating, sycophantic Pilate was highly susceptible. If thou let this man go, thou art not Cæsar’s friend. . . .—There was another weapon left in the armoury of their devices, against which no Roman governor was proof. The jealous fear of Tiberius had made “treason” a crime, of ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible