Art Thou the King of the Jews - Matt 27:2,11; Mark 15:1-2; Luke 23:1-3; John 18:28-35

After having carefully considered all possible consequences, the chief priests decide that Jesus does in fact have to die, but don’t want it to be a Jewish matter for which He could become a martyr. They’ve devised a plan to get the Roman to put Jesus to death, thereby controlling any possible outcry from the people. At this point, I feel like the Roman are pretty liberal with their executions, so I don’t think that the Jewish leadership thought that there would have been any problem getting Jesus crucified. Their plan doesn’t go off without a hitch though, because they do run into some problems.

The first problem that they run in to is that in order to take Jesus to be tried by the Roman governor of Judea, Pilate, those Jews would have had to enter into a gentile establishment, the “judgment hall” which would render then “unclean” and they wouldn’t be able to participate in the Passover ceremony scheduled for the next day. So they bring Jesus to Pilate but “went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover. Pilate them went out unto them.” I’m sure that Pilate was not pleased with them at that point. They want him to kill a man, but they are so steeped in their religious dogma that they won’t even bring the prisoner into him, he has to come out. Even though I’m sure he was irritated, Pilate did come out to speak to them concerning the matter. The IM says, “The hypocrisy of the Jewish leaders was put on display when they led Jesus to Pilate to be judged. They would not enter into the hall of judgment, which was a Gentile structure, because doing so would make them ritually unclean and they desired to eat the Passover meal the next day. Yet at the same time, they were willing to falsely accuse Jesus before Pilate and seek His death.”

The “whole multitude” of Jewish leaders and, I assume, their servants, friends and families, waited outside for Pilate and when he arrived they tell him, “We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King.” The IM says, “Luke 23:2 contains three charges the Jews were bringing against the Savior: ‘perverting’ or causing disruption to the nation, teaching Roman subjects not to pay tribute to Caesar, and claiming to be a king of a competing earthly kingdom. These would have been considered acts of treason, for which the penalty was death. Jesus Christ, of course, was innocent of these trumped-up charges.” All three of these charges are false, Christ didn’t “pervert” the nation, he taught peace and love, which is the opposite of pervert. He taught “render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s and unto God the things which are God’s.” He told people that they should pay their taxes, he himself paid his taxes. And third, he never called himself a king, he said that he was the Messiah, there to save all mankind, but he repeatedly said that he was not any king in this world.

Pilate must have heard of Jesus before now, being that he had a large following of Jews, who Pilate was supposed to rule over. Finally having him standing in his presence, Pilate asks, “Art thou the King of the Jews?” Jesus asks an interesting question in response, “Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?” There must have been a context in which “art thou the King of the Jews?” must be more of a statement than an inquiry. Maybe it’s the title of “King” that is making the difference here. If Jesus has never called himself a king, then maybe he’s just trying to clarify if he’s being accused of trying to take over the kingdom from Rome. I don’t really understand this part. But Pilate is not pleased with the question, answering, “Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?” He’s asking why the Jewish leadership wants Jesus dead.