Pilate therefore went out to them, and said: What accusation bring you against this man?
εξηλθεν ουν ο πιλατος προς αυτους και ειπεν τινα κατηγοριαν φερετε κατα του ανθρωπου τουτου
11 Church Fathers comment on this verse
Do you see how alien he was to their love of power and envy?
Although Christ had been bound and brought by such a multitude, he did not regard this as certain proof of guilt. Instead he asks, recognizing as unjust that they had claimed the judgment for themselves and left him punishment without trial.
Pilate acts somewhat more justly. He himself goes out. And although he saw the Lord bound, he did not consider this sufficient for an accusation against Christ, but asks why He is bound.
They avoid, as they thought, defilement from stones and walls. But Pilate comes out and asks the reason for their coming to him, demanding that they state the charge against the One brought to trial.
At the same time he indirectly condemns the teachers of the Jews. Though of another race, he respects the Law of the Jews and shows reverence toward the custom that prevailed among them.
Contrary to custom, he went out of the praetorium. By this very action he as though told the Jews that the Law ought to be observed.
But they, thinking what is contrary to the divine commandments and caring nothing for the ordinances of Moses, contrive an unjust murder. Meanwhile the one outside their law, the pagan Pilate, wishes to know the crimes and inquires into the charge.
By this he indicates that it is unlawful to hand over to judgment, and to demand punishment for, those who have done no wrong.
But they have nothing to say in accusation of Christ. They bring Him as though He were one of the fiercest robbers.
Therefore it is most justly said to the synagogue of the Jews: "Sodom was justified more than you" (cf. Ezek 16:52).
And Christ Himself, accusing the frenzy of the Israelites in this matter, says in one place: "You have not even acted toward Me according to the judgments of the Gentiles" (Ezek 5:7).
This word is true. Even the Greeks would not offer their customary sacrifices to stones and trees, which they considered gods, with polluted and unclean hands.
Nor would they put anyone to death who had not been convicted of the gravest crimes. But these, while intending to sacrifice the Passover to the true God, present their soul as guilty of innocent blood.
They strive unjustly to put to death Him who was a stranger to every sin.
Let those delivered from an unclean spirit be questioned and give answer. Let those healed of paralysis, cleansed of leprosy, the deaf who received hearing, the mute who spoke, the blind who saw, and the dead who rose answer.
Above all, let fools who received understanding answer whether Christ was a criminal. But this was said by those of whom He Himself foretold through the prophet: "They repay me evil for good" (Ps 34:12).
You will find the explanation of all this in the interpretation of the words, "Now Jesus stood before the governor" (Mt 27:11).
But why was Jesus Christ silent when the Jews said that He was a criminal? Since He was not asked about this, He only listens patiently.
Pilate went out to the Sanhedrin on the platform before his palace, in the middle of which was the judgment seat. This place was called in Greek Lithostroton (Jn 19:13), and there, under the open sky, Pilate held court.
Coming out to the Lithostroton, Pilate asked the chief priests, "What accusation do you bring against this Man?"
"Miserable people! Blind fanatics!" so the proud Roman surely thought, sensitive to the fact that his subjects considered his house so unclean and offensive to God that they feared to enter it.
But Roman authority always spared the prejudices of conquered peoples. Pilate immediately appeared on the Lithostrotos.
The chief priests briefly declared why they had come and what they required. They hoped Pilate would not compel them to litigate with a criminal condemned by the whole Sanhedrin.
But to Pilate such haste and insistence were suspicious. The deputy of Caesar was least of all disposed to serve as a blind instrument of Caiaphas' treachery.
As though not noticing that the accusers were in great haste and desired the Accused One's destruction with all their heart, the Roman nobleman assumes the calm tone of an impartial judge.
He asks, "What accusation do you bring against this Man?" To hear the accusation, and not to condemn the guilty without examining the case, was a distinctive feature of Roman justice (Acts 25:15-16).
The priests and teachers of the people, who strictly observed their national customs, could not enter this pagan hall during the whole sacred week of Passover.
The Roman, with his Roman smile, willingly removed this difficulty by going out himself beyond the gates with his soldiers and lictors. When Pilate's gaze fell on the Prisoner standing before him with bound hands, the ruler's first words were these:
"What accusation do you bring against this Man?" Here we immediately recognize the authentic voice of Roman justice. Without doubt, these words directly indicated Pilate's own right and authority to reexamine the case.
They cannot be understood otherwise. They also recall the noble statement of Pilate's successor in this seat: "It is not the custom of the Romans to give up any man to death before the accused meets the accusers face to face.
He must have liberty to defend himself against the charge" (Acts 25:16). Thus even the worse Roman governors always spoke, though neither Pilate nor Festus belonged to the better ones.
They spoke from the instinct and tradition of justice, which did not leave them even among treacherous tribes.
At that time the procurator was Pontius Pilate, from A.D. 26 to 36. By rank he was, so to speak, a governor entrusted with the administration of Judea and Samaria.
These formed a separate district as part of the large province of Syria, which was under the administration of a proconsul. The latter's rank may be compared with that of a governor-general.
Procurators, or in Greek hegemons, meaning rulers, usually came from the class of Roman equites. Besides maintaining general order and obedience, they were especially responsible for collecting revenues from the districts entrusted to their administration.
They also managed the judicial matters connected with these districts. In certain cases, when the general condition of a district suggested significant political dangers, some proconsular rights were granted to procurators.
In such cases they had considerable detachments of troops at their disposal and could decide even criminal cases at their own discretion. Yet they always remained in some subordination to the proconsul of the province.
Such rights were granted precisely to the procurators of Palestine. They constantly had to struggle with serious political difficulties, namely outbreaks and rebellions of the Jewish people.
This people was dissatisfied and unrestrained in its political dreams. From its midst there continually arose desperate zealots, who considered the overthrow of the Gentile yoke their duty before the law and Jehovah.
To restrain and suppress such fanaticism, the procurator had to have troops at hand. These occupied the fortified tower of Antonia in Jerusalem.
From there, at any moment, upon a signal, the necessary detachment of well-armed legionaries could be summoned. In view of this situation, men of known military experience were chiefly appointed procurators of Judea.
The very surname of Pontius, Pilatus, meaning spear-thrower, indicates that he had once commanded a special detachment of spear-throwers. Such a position required particular courage and military experience.
The Pontii traced their origin to an ancient Samnite family. In Roman history, besides Pontius Pilate, Pontius Aquila, one of Caesar's assassins, is also known.
So too are Gaius Pontius, leader of the Samnites at Caudium, Pontius Telesinus, the Samnite commander, and others.
Judging by the fact that Pilate obtained the extremely profitable position of procurator through the patronage of Sejanus, one may infer something about him.
Sejanus was the fierce and insatiably ambitious favorite who held Rome in his hands under Tiberius. Pilate probably owed such exceptional patronage to qualities that made him, in miniature, a second Sejanus.
Indeed, he was an extremely arrogant, power-loving, and greedy man. He treated the people entrusted to his administration with extreme contempt.
He regarded them only as a source for the state treasury and for his own personal enrichment. It is not surprising that, with such a character and view of the governed people, Pontius Pilate soon had unpleasant clashes with the Jews.
They involuntarily felt how offensive such an attitude toward them was to their self-love, especially from a foreign pagan ruler. They became extremely irritated by every measure of the procurator that was more or less unpleasant to them.
During Pilate's ten years of service in Palestine there were several such clashes. For the most part they ended with the painfully proud Roman being forced to retreat before the fanaticism of an enraged people.
They bared their breasts to the points of Roman swords, tore their hair in frenzy, howled wildly, and shouted threats of complaints and denunciations to Tiberius over all the lawless acts committed by his procurator.
It is clear what bitter sediment such clashes must have left in the soul of the Roman hegemon. In any case, they sharpened to the utmost his relations with the leaders of the people he hated.
Only for the sake of preserving his profitable position did he maintain toward them the bearing of a coldly arrogant dignitary. Beneath the mask of external propriety he barely restrained his inner hatred.
For the dignity of a representative of Roman authority, the demand of the Jewish leaders was certainly not especially pleasant. They required him, out of regard for ritual subtleties of a religion barely intelligible to him, to come out of the palace.
They wanted him to hear their statement in the open air. But Pilate had already learned by bitter experience how dangerous it was to touch the religious prejudices of the Jews.
Therefore he did not delay in coming out of the praetorium. Roman custom, moreover, had no objection to the broadest publicity in the hearing of judicial and governmental matters.
Roman rulers, and after them the semi-pagan Herods, set up their tribunals indifferently before the palace, in the market, in the theater, in the circus, and on the great roads.
They did this wherever there was immediate need to hear one case or another. Therefore Pilate ordered his curule chair to be brought out of the judgment hall and placed on a special elevation.
This elevation was called Gabbatha, meaning the high place, or in Greek Lithostroton, meaning the mosaic pavement. It was made of multicolored stones, as was customary among the Romans.
They liked the curule chair of Roman rulers and dignitaries always to stand on some height above those around them. This served as a visible sign of the greatness of Roman authority.
It also enabled a greater number of those present to hear directly the decrees and decisions of that authority. It is known of Caesar that even on campaigns he took with him not only a curule chair, but also a mosaic platform for it.
In this case it was most probably a permanent elevation deliberately arranged for such occasions. One may think that, in keeping with the luxury of the palace, Gabbatha shone with the elegance and beauty of multicolored marbles.
Herod the Great, the lover of refined luxury and architectural beauty, had more than once set his tribunal on them.
When the curule chair had been set on Gabbatha, there was enough space also for assistants, who were unavoidable under the requirements of Roman legal procedure.
The chair was usually made of ivory and was essentially a stool on crossed legs. Then from the depths of the palace, with his usual solemn gravity, the hegemon appeared and took his place.
Since procurators were not entitled to the usual lictors, who belonged only to higher dignitaries such as consuls and praetors, he was preceded by legionaries and accompanied by assistants.
At the foot of his seat, but still above the surrounding people, several honored attendants of the procurator took their places.
In ordinary procedure, seats before the judge's tribunal were also assigned to the accusers and even to the accused himself. But in Judea, whose people the Romans generally treated with extreme contempt, this custom was often not observed.
It is hard to imagine that it was observed now. The accusers were in a state of extreme agitation and were occupied with a single thought.
They wanted somehow to secure as quickly as possible their bloodthirsty goal, namely the confirmation of their death sentence upon the Condemned One.
In conquered provinces, interpreters were usually appointed at trials. In this case, however, apparently there were none, since both Pilate and the Jewish leaders surely knew Greek.
Greek was the language of education and of all international relations. Most likely the divine Prisoner also knew this language, since in Galilee it was very widespread in His time.
A detachment of Roman soldiers, guarding the procurator's tribunal from the pressure of the crowd, completed the external setting of this Roman court in Palestine.
Having taken his place and surveyed the gathering with his penetrating gaze, Pilate immediately noticed amid the excited crowd the infinitely meek Sufferer. Pointing to Him, he asked sternly and briefly:
"What accusation do you bring against this Man?"
After the death of Herod the Great, the first foreigner on David's throne, Palestine was divided among his three sons. Herod Antipas took Galilee and Perea, the Transjordan region fell to Philip, and Archelaus became ruler of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria.
As he died, Herod dreamed of founding a Jewish dynasty. He therefore bequeathed his royal title to Archelaus. Yet this testament was not confirmed by the Roman emperor. Augustus refused to recognize Archelaus with this title until he proved his loyalty to Rome and his ability to govern the people.
With the title of ethnarch, Archelaus governed Judea for nine years. Then, after provoking the emperor's displeasure by his inability to restrain rebellious elements in the land, he was banished to Gaul. His possessions were made a Roman province and joined to the Syrian prefecture.
Now Jerusalem was governed neither by a king of David's house nor by one from Herod's palace on Mount Zion. It was ruled by a provincial governor appointed by Rome, who corresponded with the metropolis through the governor of Syria. The latter bore the title legatus Caesaris and lived in Antioch.
The Romans left the Jews their native supreme court, the Sanhedrin, but limited its judicial authority. The ruler of Judea whom they appointed was procurator cum potestate. He possessed civil, judicial, and military power.
This is why contemporary writers give the procurator of Judea such titles as hegemon, epitropos, and epimeletes. By virtue of his powers he could also be called praefectus.
He commanded the troops stationed in Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. He cared for the finances of these regions. He judged cases that exceeded the authority left to the Sanhedrin. Among these were the review, confirmation, or annulment of death sentences issued by the Sanhedrin.
His usual residence was Caesarea. Herod the Great had named this city in honor of Augustus. Its strong tower, built on the western rocky cliff that projects into the Mediterranean, gave it another name, Caesarea Stratonis.
At the great Jewish feasts, however, the procurator came to Jerusalem. His presence was necessary because of possible disorders when the people gathered in great numbers.
This political order of Judea took shape in the first years of the earthly life of the Lord Jesus Christ. It remained unchanged in the year of His death. Only five procurators had succeeded one another. The ruler of Judea was now Pontius Pilate, successor of Valerius Gratus.
The time and place of Pilate's birth, and the circumstances of his life before entering this office, are unknown. Pontius Pilatus, whose family and homeland are hidden, was commonly thought to be Roman, or at least Italian.
Without doubt, Pilate had no special significance in Roman history proper. His name appears only beside the name of Judea. Nevertheless, the family of the Pontii must have enjoyed some renown in Rome. It gave the Roman state more than one senator and tribune of the people.
L. Pontius Aquila is known as a friend of Cicero and one of Caesar's assassins. The judge of the Lord Jesus Christ also belonged to this ancient Samnite family.
The beginning of his ten-year rule over Judea falls in the year 26 after Christ. His predecessor, Valerius Gratus, was probably sent as ruler of Judea in the second year of Tiberius, that is, in 15 after Christ. He held the office for eleven years.
This agrees fully with Eusebius, who places Pilate's arrival in Judea in the twelfth year of Tiberius. That is 26 after Christ.
This was the period when Jewish dissatisfaction with Roman rule reached an extreme development. It gave birth to all the later disturbances and wars that ended with the destruction of Jerusalem.
Under the pressure of surrounding calamities, the people chosen by Jehovah remembered with special force their former greatness and happiness. They hoped for an even greater future after divine deliverance from foreign rule.
From this came zeal in fulfilling all the prescriptions of the Mosaic Law, on the one hand, and hatred of the enslaving Romans, on the other. Wherever these foreign robbers of freedom dared to intrude into Jewish religious life and offend it, that hatred passed every limit.
It is therefore understandable how hard and difficult the position of the Roman ruler in Judea was at that time. Only a correct understanding of Jewish national character, and especially of its present mood, could partly help the Roman procurators.
They had to understand what this enslaved and oppressed people now lived by. Unfortunately, they not only did not strive for this. On the contrary, they felt only contempt and hatred for the conquered people.
The fifth procurator was no exception. To characterize Pilate it would be enough to say that, in his post as ruler of Judea, he was the creature of that cunning and treacherous Sejanus who made both emperor and senate tremble in Rome.
Indeed, bribery, violence, robbery, frequent executions without trial, and endless dreadful cruelties marked his rule, according to Philo. These words are not Philo's own, but belong to Agrippa I, whose letter Philo records.
However skeptical we may be toward this description of Pilate from an opponent's mouth, its fairness is confirmed by real facts from the history of the procuratorship of the judge of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Yet Pilate, cunning, ingratiating, and cruel to the point of bloodthirstiness, was in a decisive moment the most indecisive and wavering of men. He belonged to those natures which pursue a plan firmly, yet lack the persistence to carry it through.
Hardly had he taken office when he ordered his soldiers to bring by night from Caesarea to Jerusalem the small girdle-images of the emperor which adorned the military standards of his legions.
This action touched the most sensitive side of Jewish nationality: its revulsion from all sacred images of pagans. The Jews saw in it an unlawful violation of their religious privileges and a pagan defilement of the holy city.
They went to Caesarea and besieged the procurator there for six days. With stormy threats and gentle entreaties they urged him to remove the images from Jerusalem.
On the seventh day Pilate lost patience. He ordered soldiers to surround the rebels and threatened them with death on the spot unless they quietly returned home.
But the Jews lay down on the ground, bared their necks, and firmly declared that they would rather die than permit an insult to their Law. Such steadfastness forced the procurator to abandon his decision. By his order the images were returned to Caesarea.
This event shows from the outset how little Pilate understood the people entrusted to his rule. It also served as a test for the Jews. They now formed a correct idea of their new ruler's irresolution and pliability in extreme cases.
Josephus also relates a Jewish uprising caused by Pilate's construction of a new aqueduct. Philo tells of a third disturbance over gilded shields dedicated to Tiberius, which the procurator displayed in Herod's palace in Jerusalem. Compare Lk 13:1.
All these facts confirm Philo's testimony about the fifth procurator. They also show very clearly how far Pilate was from being in his proper place in Judea.
In the year of the death of the Lord Jesus Christ, as in the earlier years of his procuratorship, Pilate came to Jerusalem for the feast of Passover. Where did he establish his residence this time?
The question of the location of Pilate's praetorium on the day of the trial of the Lord Jesus Christ is so important for our inquiry that we must dwell on it somewhat more fully.
In the northwestern corner of ancient Zion, or the upper city, where once the palace of the king and prophet David had stood, there stood in the days of the Savior's earthly life the most splendid building in Jerusalem.
Herod the Great, a passionate admirer of Greek architecture, spent much energy and taste on its construction. He used everything Judea and the neighboring regions could provide. According to Josephus, the beauty of the palace that bore his name surpassed all description.
A circular wall thirty cubits high, with beautiful towers built at equal intervals from one another, enclosed the outer space of the palace. Only on the northern side were there no such towers.
There rose three mighty towers, Hippicus, Phasael, and Mariamne. They strengthened the northern wall of the upper city, which passed there.
Charming groves with bronze statues near fountains, and towers for tame doves, enchanted the visitor with a picture of luxuriant nature amid a burning city.
Varied marble columns, joined into graceful peristyles and majestic porticoes, opened the entrance into the palace interior. There was everything in abundance that the taste of Rome and Antioch could devise.
Beautiful ceilings astonished by the length of their beams and by intricate, skillful carving. The walls were decorated with fanciful variety. The floors were mosaics laid artistically with multicolored marble.
Many beautiful statues stood in wall niches. Rich silver and gold table service belonged to the many halls of this palace, each furnished with luxury and convenience according to its purpose.
Yet amid this general splendor and magnificence two halls stood out: the Caesareum and the Agrippeum. Only the temple could bear comparison with their magnificence.
There can be no doubt that this splendid palace of Herod the Great, which had served as Archelaus' residence before his exile, was seized by the Roman rulers. Such a seizure was not an exceptional local phenomenon. It was customary and followed from the princely position of the provincial governor.
The latter took possession of the ancient royal castle so that he might appear the direct successor of his predecessor. So it was in Syracuse, Carthage, Alexandria, and other cities of the Roman Empire that had been royal residences before their conquest by Rome.
In Caesarea Philippi we see the Apostle Paul, under the procurator Felix, kept under guard in the former Herodian praetorium. He was not held in some new house of the provincial governor, Acts 23:35.
So it was, of course, in Jerusalem. The Roman governors, disposing of the luxurious halls of Herod's palace as their own property, could choose them as their standing residence during visits to Jerusalem.
There they could also arrange their praetorium for the examination of all cases exceeding the judicial authority of the great Sanhedrin. The palace, with its many chambers and courts, undoubtedly offered every convenience for this.
Yet the question that concerns us is not so easily resolved. In Jerusalem there was not one palace, but three, and all became Roman property. Besides the splendid Herodian palace, there was the palace in the fortress Antonia and the palace of the Maccabees.
Bira is the Hebrew name of the Antonia fortress, found in the Mishnah. It corresponds to the Greek Baris and denoted any fortified place. In Palestine large houses surrounded by walls on all sides are still so called.
The fortress stood on a rocky hill at the northwestern corner of the temple mount. Perhaps already in the time of the first temple the house of the temple police was there, Jer 20:2.
But the fortress that later received the name Antonia owed its origin to the time of the Maccabees. Josephus says that John Hyrcanus ordered a tower built near the temple. It then served as his permanent residence and as the place where his high-priestly garments were kept.
The hill itself, however, was so convenient for a fortress that the brothers Jonathan and Simon, skilled in war, could hardly have ignored it. The former already intended to rebuild the ruined city walls, restore the destroyed part of the temple, and fence it with high towers.
He consulted with the people about this. Therefore there can hardly be doubt that, if not he, then his brother Simon began to build upon and fortify the hill which nature itself had destined for a fortress.
John Hyrcanus completed the work begun by his predecessors.
John's narrative of the Lord's trial before Pilate is more detailed than that of the first three Evangelists. Omitting some things described by them, John supplements their accounts with many particular indications and sets forth more precisely the very order of the judicial proceeding.
Pilate came out to them. Since those who brought the Lord to Pilate did not enter the judicial chamber of the pagan, the representative of Roman policy, which usually spared harmless prejudices of conquered peoples, went out to them himself.
He came out to the Lithostrotos, the open raised place before the procurator's residence; cf. Jn 19:12; Mt 27:19 and the note.
"What accusation do you bring against this Man?" The first two Evangelists begin the description of Pilate's trial with his interrogation of the Lord.
The third begins with the accusations against the Lord by those who brought Him. John begins with Pilate's question to those who brought the Lord.
Thus John begins from the beginning and, throughout the whole description, follows more closely the gradual order of the trial of the Lord.
The Roman prefect who governed Judea had undoubtedly long heard about Jesus, for all Palestine was filled with reports of Him.
Pilate undoubtedly also knew of the events of the previous night, of Jesus' arrest and of the trial over Him in the palace of Caiaphas. The Roman guard had taken part there.
He knew fully what kind of men had come to him. He even knew that the Jewish nobility hated Jesus for personal reasons (Mt 27:18).
He also remembered how strict Roman laws were toward a negligent judge.
Therefore, by his very first question he lets the Sanhedrin understand that he does not believe in the justice of its judgment. Nor does he intend to fulfill its wishes as quickly as the Sanhedrin expected.
He demands that they prove Jesus' guilt to him.
Passages read together with this verse.
Greek text, 16 words with lemma, transliteration and Strong’s number. Tap to expand.
THEOSIS