It is difficult to perceive what was said and done by people two thousand years ago. How can we identify their "character" and "personality?" People in modern times surprise us by acting "out of character." What motivates people to do what they do at any given time? Could someone have an off day? Could someone of usually mean character have a "good moment" when they feel benevolent or philosophical. How is it for us, thousands of years later, to characterize an individual like Pontius Pilate to the extent that we can determine what he would or would not have said or done. "Out of character??" Perhaps, but not that unlikely.
If Jesus was not the Christ, then this would have been an ordinary man brought before Pilate. If your argument is, "the story of the Son of God being treated by a ruthless Pilate in such a manner could not be true because it would have been out of character for Pilate" does not hold weight because if Pilate was indeed faced with the Messiah, his demeanor may very well have changed. By those of faith, if the story is true, God can cause people to do and say things they might not ordinarily. Jesus certainly could have had a profound effect on Pilate upon their meeting.
Mark 15:4 And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against thee.
Mark 15:5 But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marveled.
I have been around many modern day Judges, and even those with the most ill disposition will occasionally see a defendant that intrigues them. They hear the same cases, the same arguments, and the same excuses over and over, case after case. Once in awhile, they marvel at a new approach, or unique defense.
It is not beyond reason to believe that Pilate was tired from his journeys, and had pressures from Rome, and was fed up with the Sanhedrin attempting to use him to do their dirty work. Pilate would have expected Jesus, were he an ordinary prisoner, to argue, plead for his life, or deny the charges.
It would not have been inconceivable that Pilate would have marveled when Jesus stood calm, quiet, and refused to answer. For all we know, Pilate may have had a moment of doubt that this could be the Messiah. His faith may have been shaken, and his spirit stirred in the presence of Jesus.
Pontius Pilate is depicted in the gospels is thoroughly un-historical. He is painted as calm, reasonable, conciliatory, and genuinely benevolent; he doesn't want to be involved with this whole let's-crucify-Jesus business at all. In reality, of course, Pilate had a reputation as a bloodthirsty and viscious ruler, widely despised by the Jewish people.
Where does this "reputation" of Pilate's come from, and how accurate can we be sure it is? Could it be that he had multiple sides to his personality depending on the day, who he was dealing with, and what his mood was? The bible does not "paint him as calm, reasonable, conciliatory, or genuinely benevolent." There is no fact in that assessment. Reading the scriptures you get words, which are not much different than reading words posted in these internet threads. How often do people reading other's posts get the wrong impression of tone, or intention. Pilate may very well have been angry, and speaking in a loud, authoritarian voice when he questioned Jesus. However, he might have been just as angry at the Sanhedrin for bothering him with their petty problems.
You speak of politics of the day? I see Pilate's actions as being very consistent with his job, his reputation, and the politics of the time. For those who have never seen the movie, I suggest watching "Jesus of Nazareth" staring Robert Powell as Jesus, Anne Bancroft, Ernest Borgnine, James Earl Jones, James Mason, Sir Laurence Olivier, Christopher Plummer, Anthony Quinn, Michael York, and many other famous movie stars. It is one of the best depictions which present scenes like the ones with Pilate as being reasonable for the motives of each character.
Pilate had a job to do. He had to answer to Rome if there was unrest in these regions. Kings, like Herod, had limited power, because they too had to answer to Rome. However, for the zealots, and other mobs that opposed Rome, and the presence of Roman soldiers and Roman authority in their villages, Pilate knew that an unwise decision would likely cause an uprising. Any kind of violence could cause Pilate problems when reporting to Caesar.
Pilate would not have wanted to take this case of Jesus, who proclaimed himself to be the Son of God, because it was a religious matter, and we all know how much those issues can get out of control. Pilate would have been persuaded to at least hear the case on the charge that Jesus claimed to be "King of the Jews," which would have violated Roman Law. The Sanhedrin attempted to present Jesus as the leader of a rebellious group that could cause an uprising.
When Pilate met Jesus, he saw that he was a peaceful man and posed no threat to Rome, thus he told them to deal with him themselves. However, the Sanhedrin convinced Pilate that they themselves would not be happy, and much unrest would occur if Jesus were left to preach his gospel. They reminded Pilate that they
would execute Jesus under their own laws of Blasphemy, but Rome forbade them to execute anyone.
Pilate knew that if he released Jesus, he would have rebellion by those who wanted him dead, and if he executed him, he would have rioting by those who were his followers. The only safe, political thing to do, was to use the excuse of an ancient custom of the local people to have one prisoner released during passover. If he made the decision to release Jesus, Rome would be resented more, and he would be blamed for any uprisings. There would be bloodshed, and Caesar would likely not be happy. However, if he presented two accused criminals to a crowd of people, in an open public square, and they decided who was to be released, then he could wash his hands of the whole incident.
Now, of course, the reason for this is to cast 100% of the blame on the Jews (which becomes far more evident in the later pro-Rome Gospel of Luke). That simply points to the fact that the gospel authors were writing at a time when "Jew" and "Christian" were two clearly delineated groups (i.e., Christians had been expelled from the synagogues), placing them no early than 90 CE.
The two delineated groups were well established during the times of John the Baptist, before Jesus arrived. When the Pharisees questioned John, he clearly drew a line between the Jewish religious leaders who believed they were righteous, and those who were to believe in the one who would later follow him (Jesus).
Matthew 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them,
O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Matthew 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves,
We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
And Jesus certainly established himself (being the founder of the Christian Church) to be on the opposite side of the scribes, Pharisees, and Jewish religious leaders.
Matthew 23:13 But
woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
Matthew 23:14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
Matthew 23:15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
Matthew 23:16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
Matthew 23:17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
Matthew 23:18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.
Matthew 23:19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
Matthew 23:20 Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.
Matthew 23:21 And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.
Matthew 23:22 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.
Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
Matthew 23:24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
Matthew 23:25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
Matthew 23:26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
Matthew 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Matthew 23:28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
Matthew 23:29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
Matthew 23:30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Matthew 23:31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
Matthew 23:32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
Matthew 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Matthew 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Matthew 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Matthew 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
Matthew 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Matthew 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Matthew 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Anyone who thinks the gospel stories aren't neck-deep in the politics of the day are, quite frankly, deluding themselves.
You are right! Although the gospel was about the
Jesus and his message to the world, the people of his time were "neck-deep" in politics. Not just in 90CE and later, but
during the life of Jesus. The Gospel reflects the fact that the Pharisees and Leaders of the Sanhedrin rejected John the Baptist, and did not accept Jesus as the Messiah, and the Jewish religious leaders turned him over to Pilate.
Last Fearner
THanks! :asian:
