April 17, 2016 John 19:4-22
Download discussion questions: John 19_4-22 crucified
[Sixteen inches of show at our house, a downed tree of significant size, and a power outage at the church building – the result was that I was not at our group this week. I’m not sure how many others were. This blog entry consists of my own thoughts about the passage without the benefit of our usual lively discussion.]
Pilate’s part in the story God is telling through John continues from the previous passage. For the third time the Roman governor tells the Jewish leaders that he finds no guilt in the Man they have brought to him (19:6; cf. 18:37 and 19:4). John continues showing Pilate’s attempt to avoid executing an obviously innocent prisoner. The guilt is on others – the Jews who brought Him and specifically on Judas the betrayer, “the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin” (v. 11). Pilate was not guiltless, but John makes it clear that he did not bear the primary responsibility.
One of the topics of our discussion on the previous passage was the question of Pilate’s shifting attitude. My suggestion is that his opinion of Jesus went through a number of changes. He started by exploring the accusation he had heard from others, “Are you the King of the Jews?” (18:33) Then, when the conversation might have turned more personal, he avoided that uncomfortable situation with a philosophical diversion: “What is truth?” (18:38)
John gives us a clue about the changes in Pilate’s mood when he tells us that “he was even more afraid” (19:8). The implication would be that at least part of the foundation of Pilate’s actions was an underlying fear that was intensified by the added accusation of the Jews, “He made Himself out to be the Son of God” (19:7). Pilate was presumably a pagan. He may or may not have taken the Roman polytheism seriously. Now he is faced with an innocent prisoner who is said to have made divine claims.
About fifty translations render the Jewish accusation as a claim to be “the Son of God.”[1] But the wording of the text could also be translated “son of god” or “a son of a god” (huion theou, υἱὸν θεοῦ) since there is no capitalization and no indefinite article (“a” or “an”). John uses forms of the phrase nine times in his Gospel account. The most frequent and unambiguous form for “the Son of God” (meaning the unique only begotten of the only true God) is ho uios tou theou, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, lit. “the Son of the God” (e.g. John 1:34, 49; 3:18; 5:25; 11:4,27; 20:31). The Jews seemed to make that claim much more vague. Perhaps the Jews didn’t want to suggest any association between what Jesus had been saying and their restricted ideas about God. They consistently rejected what Jesus had said about His unique relationship with the Father. Maybe their description to Pilate was their best understanding of what Jesus had been claiming. Even that was enough for them to demand His execution.
Pilate’s growing fear prompted a different line of questioning: “Where are You from?” (v. 9). The divine claim made Pilate wonder about Jesus’ origin. And He declined to answer. A reasonable question (that our group would have discussed if we had met!) would be, Why not? Jesus had responded to Annas the high priest (and been slapped for it). He had engaged Pilate in several exchanges of questions and answers. Why not answer this question? Wasn’t Pilate opening an opportunity for Jesus to explain exactly who He was? Maybe the answer was much too complicated for the increasing intensity of the situation. He was from Nazareth. He was also from before the foundation of the world. Pilate’s frame of mind may also have limited his ability to understand. Fear is not a great mindset for clear comprehension.
When Jesus chose not to answer, Pilate’s attitude changed again. As often happens, fear turned quickly to angry threatening or even bullying. Pilate tried to intimidate Jesus with his absolute (he thought) authority. The threat of crucifixion (what C.S. Lewis accurately described as “jeered at, manhandled by the Police, and execution by torture”[2]) was probably very effective in previous conversations Pilate had with others. Not this time. Jesus makes it unmistakable that God’s providence is responsible for whatever authority Pilate thinks he has. Pilate’s very real threat is only possible because of its part in the story God is telling.
That sobering revelation once again changes Pilate’s indecision: “As a result of this [Jesus’ words about authority] Pilate made efforts to release Him” (v. 12a). Once again he looks for ways to free Jesus. He had tried to take advantage of the Passover custom (18:39). Later it seems he had Jesus brutally flogged hoping that such severe punishment would satisfy the Jews (19:5). Pilate seems desperate to find a resolution to the situation without executing Jesus.
Then the Jews find his true vulnerability: “If you release this Man, you are no friend of Caesar” (19:12b). The compassion and philosophizing and superstition are all overshadowed by political reality. Pilate was the representative of Caesar in Palestine. If Pilate believed he had life and death authority over Jesus (v. 10), he knew that Caesar had that authority over him. One who was “no friend of Caesar” might find himself on trial, facing a cross for treason or sedition. That was the tipping point for Pilate, the “Therefore” in verse 13 that marks the end of any attempt to let Jesus live. The conversation was over, and Pilate became the presiding officer at the sentencing, sitting in the official seat. Pilate seems to take the opportunity to deflect any thought of disloyalty in his actions, referring to Jesus repeatedly as “your King” (vv. 14-15). He wanted the record to show that all the talk about “another King” was only for the Jews, not for him as a loyal Roman civil servant. Even after the sentencing (v. 16), Pilate continued that theme. The inscription on the cross (v. 19) served two purposes: it reaffirmed the indictment of insurrection (verifying what a good “friend of Caesar” Pilate really was), and the inscription also provided a subtle retaliation against the Jews who had forced him into the predicament. The second goal was certainly met as shown by the annoyance of the chief priests (v. 21).
If it is true that John was interested in showing that Pilate was not the primary villain of this part of the story, it seems equally certain that the apostle was putting that blame on the Jews. Their response to Pilate’s last appeal is shocking: “We have no king but Caesar” (v.17b). Even as the words were spoken some in the group must have thought immediately of Israel’s history. Once before they had desired a king, which God described as their rejection of Him, forsaking Him to serve other gods (1 Samuel 8:4 – 9). The words “we have no king but Caesar” seem to echo the earlier demand: “Appoint a king for us to judge us like all the nations” (1 Samuel 8:5). Didn’t any of them see the parallel, accepting an earthly king and rejecting God, in this case God incarnate? Apparently not.
Two words in particular stand out in this passage. “King” (or kingdom) is used seven times in this passage (a total of fifteen times if we include last week’s passage of Jesus before Pilate). “Crucify” or “cross” is used eleven times. Neither word has the impact in our culture that it would have had for John’s original readers. We understand the definition of “king” from the dictionary, but we (at least most of us) have never lived under an absolute ruler who had life and death power over us. Crosses are made of gold or silver as ornaments, not made of rough wood stained with blood and who knows what else. John’s readers would have understood both words intimately from their everyday experience. But putting the two words together might have seemed odd to them: a crucified King. One with absolute authority (beyond anything Pilate could have imagined) died a death of the lowest, most degraded and humiliated criminal. And, as John’s account makes clear, He went to that death calmly and willingly. The Jew’s anger and misplaced loyalty, Pilate’s hesitancy and indecision – all the participants fell under God’s providence leading to the intended outcome: the crucified King.
[1] https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/John%2019:7
[2] C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (San Francisco: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 2000), 180.