Chaos, Confusion, then Clarity

 

After two days He will revive us; on the third day He will raise us up, that we may live in His sight. (Hosea 6:2)

If you've ever played the game Clue, you know that each player has a little bit of knowledge, just one piece of evidence that is not enough to win the game. All the players can see the board, but they need more information before they can come up with a working theory. Only after more evidence is collected can they solve the case and come to the correct conclusion. The more intuitive a player is, the faster they can know the answer.

As we read John's gospel account of the first witnesses to the Resurrection, we see three people: Mary Magdalene, Simon Peter, and John the Beloved Disciple. We also see that each person had a different level of perception, given the evidence that they encountered. The truth begins to dawn on them, but only one puts the pieces together correctly, using evidence, intuition, and faith.

Now on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. Then she ran and came to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and said to them, "They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him." Peter therefore went out, and the other disciple, and were going to the tomb. So they both ran together, and the other disciple outran Peter and came to the tomb first. And he, stooping down and looking in, saw the linen cloths lying there; yet he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; and he saw the linen cloths lying there, and the handkerchief that had been around His head, not lying with the linen cloths, but folded together in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who came to the tomb first, went in also; and he saw and believed. For as yet they did not know the Scripture, that He must rise from the dead. Then the disciples went away again to their own homes. (John 20:1-10).

A bit of background may be helpful here. First, in the previous chapter we saw that Jesus' body had been prepared for burial by Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. It is likely that Mary Magdelene, along with Jesus' mother Mary and Salome (the three of them were going to the tomb together, according to the other Gospels) knew this. Either the women assumed, or they were told, that the task could not be completed before sundown on Friday. They wanted to honor Jesus by fully preparing His body for burial, and they took with them additional oils and spices. 

Second, the tomb was sealed with a heavy round stone. William Barclay notes, "Tombs in ancient times were not commonly closed by doors. In front of the opening was a groove in the ground; and in the groove ran a stone, circular like a cartwheel; and the stone was wheeled into position to close the opening. Further, Matthew tells us that the authorities had actually sealed the stone to make sure that no one would move it (Matthew 27:66)." The women, as they walked, were discussing among themselves how they migh be able to remove the stone and gain access to the body of Jesus.

Third, the tomb was large enough for both Peter and John to get in. David Guzik writes, "A typical rich man’s tomb of that time would be large enough to walk into, with a place to lay out the body on one side and a bench for mourners on the other side. The entrance might be an opening only 3 feet (1 meter) high and 2.5 feet (.75 meters) wide. It was large enough to get into, yet there was a bit of bowing and turning necessary."

With that background in mind, let's take a closer look at the three witnesses, how they obtained the evidence, and the conclusions that they drew.

First was Mary Magdalene. As she (and presumably the other women) came close enough to see that the stone had been rolled away, they stopped. They did not go any further. The first thought that came to them was graverobbers. This is why, after running back to the house where Peter and John were staying, she said, "They have taken away the body of our Lord, and we don't know where they have taken Him." The unknown person or persons who rolled the stone away must have stolen Jesus' body. That was what made sense with the evidence on hand at the time.

I'm sure the men questioned Mary extensively. Did you look inside? Was the body actually missing? Where were the guards? Was the Roman seal broken? Think, woman, think! Mary had no answers, because the information that she had was incomplete.

Second was Peter and John. John was younger than Peter, and likely in much better shape, so he arrived at the tomb first. He didn't dare go in. He stooped and looked. He confirmed that there was no one else in the tomb--nobody there who might have seen anyone, no one who might have witnessed the body being taken away. Then he saw the graveclothes lying there, kind of hollowed out and sunken in. There was no body.

Before John could make heads or tails of what he saw, Peter rushed up to the scene. Without stopping at the doorway, Peter entered the tomb. He saw the graveclothes that John had seen, sans Jesus' body. He also saw that the head covering was neatly folded and set aside, apart from the other linens. Peter immediately came to the conclusion that Mary was wrong. The body had not been stolen. Nobody in their right mind would take the body but leave the covering behind. Then he noticed something else. Barclay sums it up nicely:

Then something else struck him--the graveclothes were not disheveled and disarranged. They were lying there still in their folds--that is what the Greek means--the clothes for the body where the body had been; the napkin where the head had lain. The whole point of the description is that the graveclothes did not look as if they had been put off or taken off; they were lying there in their regular folds as if the body of Jesus had simply evaporated out of them. 

Third was John, who, came after Peter and surveyed the scene. After seeing all of the evidence, he concluded that Jesus had risen from the dead. This conclusion was not from any prophecy or Scriptural prediction, for the text here is clear--"They did not know the Scripture, that He must rise from the dead." The only evidence that John had was what he could plainly see in front of him.

Without getting too far in the weeds here, I want to point out that there are three different Greek words here that are translated "see".

The first is blepo, and it means simply "to look" or "to use the eyes." It has the connotation of physical vision, or giving attention to. This word is used when Mary saw that the stone had been rolled away. It is also used of John when he first arrived at the tomb, stooped, and looked in.

The second Greek term is theoreo. It is where we get the English word "theory" or "theater". It means "to observe" or "to focus on"--not just seeing, but discerning, considering, or finding meaning in what is seen. This is the word used to describe Simon Peter when he entered the tomb and encountered the empty graveclothes left behind. It may have been just dawning on Peter what all of this meant.

The third Greek term used in this passage is horao, meaning "to perceive with the eyes." The nuance here is that of discernment or recognition of the object seen. It can extend to spiritual or inner perception. This word is used when John comes into the tomb and believes. He has faith that Jesus was resurrected, and that though dead, He is now alive.

You will recall that John referred to himself as "the disciple whom Jesus loved." Barclay expands on this here:

The part that love plays in this story is extraordinary. It was Mary, who loved Jesus so much, who was first at the tomb. It was John, the disciple whom Jesus loved and who loved Jesus, who was first to believe in the Resurrection. That must always be John's great glory. He was the first man to understand and to believe. Love gave him eyes to read the signs and a mind to understand.

Warren Wiersbe, in The Bible Exposition Commentary, says this:

The resurrection is an essential part of the gospel message (1 Corinthians 15:1-8) and a key doctrine in the Christian faith. It proves that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (Acts 2:32-36; Romans 4:24-25). The empty cross and the empty tomb are God's "receipts" telling us that the debt has been paid. Jesus Christ is not only the Savior, but He is also the Sanctifier (Romans 6:4-10) and the Intercessor (Romans 8:34). One day He shall return as Judge (Acts 17:30-31). 

My prayer for you is that you will not simply see the words in this passage, nor that you would theorize that this was all made up by the disciples or the Gospel writers. I would hope that you might be able to discern the truth contained in this passage, namely that Jesus died and rose again for the forgiveness of sin so that we might die to ourselves and live again in Him. Don't be like Mary, who glossed over the scene and came to the wrong conclusion. Don't be like Peter who saw but could not comprehend. 

We must be like John who loved firmly, saw fully, and believed faithfully. 

An unmarked grave

And they made His grave with the wicked--but with the rich at His death, because He had done no violence, nor was there any deceit in His mouth. (Isaiah 53:9)

Have you ever heard of Richard Trevithick?  This British-born mechanical engineer and inventor, born in 1771, should be a lot more famous. Instead, he’s more likely to pop up on an episode of Jeopardy.

For the record, Trevithick constructed the first steam locomotive, an invention which made him a very wealthy man. Unfortunately, dubious business decisions cost him dearly — though others managed to make a pretty penny off his genius ideas — and he would die penniless in 1833 and was placed in an unmarked grave.

Probably more familiar to us is musical composer and conductor Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. He passed away in 1791 at the age of 35 from rheumatic fever. Although he performed for kings and princes, he died penniless and was buried in a pauper's grave.

When Jesus died, He did not leave behind wealth or riches. He was the son of a carpenter, and tradition tells us that his father had died some time before Jesus was crucified. Instead of taking over the family business, Jesus became an itinerant preacher, going from town to town and village to village, presumably relying on charitable gifts of His followers for living expenses. This may explain why his brothers resented Him so--because it was left to them to support their families and their widowed mother.

By all rights, Jesus should have been buried in a pauper's grave (if He was buried at all).

The Romans that crucified Him would have been content to leave His body on the cross. Only criminals and enemies of the State were sentenced to die in this way. Their bodies were generally left hanging as a form of crime deterrence.

The Jewish leaders did not want their Passover celebration marred by the sight of crucified criminals left in public places. They wanted to take down the bodies, not to honor the dead, but so that their city would not be desecrated during the high holy week. Charles Spurgeon wrote, “Their consciences were not wounded by the murder of Jesus, but they were greatly moved by the fear of ceremonial pollution. Religious scruples may live in a dead conscience.”

The friends of Jesus were poor and needy. They would not have had the means to give Jesus a proper burial. However, John's gospel gives us a surprise account of two secret friends who came forward at the last minute.

After this, Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly, for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus; and Pilate gave him permission. So he came and took the body of Jesus. And Nicodemus, who at first came to Jesus by night, also came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds. Then they took the body of Jesus, and bound it in strips of linen with the spices, as the custom of the Jews is to bury. Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid. So there they laid Jesus, because of the Jews' Preparation Day, for the tomb was nearby. (John 19:38-42).

Both Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus were wealthy members of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish counsel. They had been dissenting voices at the trial of Jesus; when the Sanhedrin sentenced Jesus to death, these two men defended Him. Now that He was dead, their desire was to honor Him as they would honor royalty.

NT Wright points out the extravagant amount of sweet-smelling spice that Nidocumus brought. "A hundred pounds of spices: a hundred times the amount that Mary had poured over Jesus in Bethany (12:3), and that had caused people to grumble at the extravagance. It was the kind of quantity (and quality, for that matter) that you might use for a king."

Think about that for a minute. These men were described as secret followers of Jesus, yet they asked to take down His body so that it would not be desecrated, either torn apart by wild animals or mauled by men who rejected His message. 

Not only that, but they were willing to forego their ritual purification for the most important Jewish celebration of the year. Touching a dead body would make them ceremonially unclean, unfit to take the Passover. This did not matter to them. Honoring Jesus was more important than their ritual purification.

They were willing to get their hands dirty.

By all accounts, these rich men had many servants. They could have ordered others to take down the body and prepare it for burial. The Jewish custom at the time was that the body would be washed and then wrapped in linen with the spices in the folds of the cloth to cover the smell of decay. This was normally women's work. However, there is no indication that these men ordered servants to do this task for them. They appear to have done it themselves.

Nicodemus brought the extravagant gift of spices with which to wrap the body. Joseph offered an extravagant gift of a brand-new tomb that had never been used. Wiersbe points to John's gospel where it said the tomb was nearby to theorize that he'd had the tomb specially made just for Jesus. He speculates that since Joseph was wealthy, he could afford a tomb anywhere he wanted; so why would he want a tomb in the shadow of Golgotha (The Place of the Skull)? Aside from having to leave the city, Wiersbe says, any visitor to the gravesite would potentially be overwhelmed by the sight, sound, and smell of a public execution.

Another problem with this theory is that Joseph and Nicodemus were under time constraints. They had to hurry to get the body buried between 3 p.m. when Jesus died and sundown, which would begin the Jewish Sabbath. Unless Joseph hurriedly purchased a tomb already hewn out of the stone, there would not have been time to buy and build a new sepulcher.

What we do know is that the tomb was owned by Joseph and offered to Jesus. Many sermons are spoken calling this a "borrowed tomb." Jesus didn't own it, it was supplied to Him, and He didn't need it for very long, so He could give it back when He was done with it. 

There was a significant reason that the tomb had never been used. The Jewish rabbis would have been familiar with the Scriptural account of a dead man being revived when he came into contact with the bones of the prophet Elisha. We read about it in 1 Kings 13:20-21. 

If Jesus had been laid in a tomb containing ossuaries with bones of people who had died before Him, and come back to life, some Jewish mystics might have argued that those bones had belonged to a great prophet who came before Him. They would have denied the deity of Christ, saying that He had not raised Himself, but that He had been raised by another. Jesus Himself said in John 10:17-18 that He had the authority to lay down His life and to take it up again.

There will be more on the resurrection of the dead in future posts, God willing. For now, we must focus on the care that these two men bestowed, the cost to their reputation, and the confirmation that Jesus was in fact dead.

The care with which they treated the body of Jesus was on display for all to see. No longer could they be secretive in their devotion to Jesus. When Jesus had shed tears at the grave of Lazarus, the people said, "See how He loved him." Anyone who saw the actions of Joseph and Nicodemus would have said the same of them, that their love of Jesus was on full display.

The cost that these men incurred in this activity went beyond the extravagant purchase price of the spices and the tomb. There was a cost associated with following Jesus. They almost certainly forfeited their position in the Sanhedrin. They would have been shunned from the synagogue. As we saw with the blind man that Jesus had healed, their own families may have disowned them because of their devotion to Jesus. 

The confirmation of Jesus' death was of secondary importance, but was important, nonetheless. Having handled the body, these men confirmed that Jesus had in fact died. People don't bury live bodies. You don't throw someone you love in the ground and walk away. These were religious leaders of their day--they would not lie.

So, what can we take away from this passage? How can we apply it to our lives today? 

First, I think it is important to point out that we must be "all in" when it comes to our relationship with Jesus. We cannot long remain "secret saints." Eventually someone will call our hand on this issue, and we must come clean.

Second, I believe that we must be ready to roll up our sleeves and get our hands dirty with the work God calls us to. Obedience is where the rubber meets the road. We can't delegate the work of Christ to someone else.

Finally, I think it is important to realize that everyone has blood on their hands. The blood of Jesus stains us all, for good or for bad. Either you had a hand in His crucifixion and death, or you will embrace Him for all eternity. Either you spat upon Him, lashed Him with whips, and drove the nails in His hands, or you knelt in obedience at the foot of the cross, asked for His forgiveness, and were covered by His blood.

"Thanks be to God for His inexpressible gift!" (2 Corinthians 9:15).

Washed by the water and the blood

 

And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they have pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn...In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness (Zechariah 12:10, 13:1).

I am not a doctor.

However, after more than 35 years of working in insurance claims, I have become pretty familiar with medical terminology, having read thousands of medical reports describing injuries, pre-existing medical conditions, and post-injury complications.

I am not a theologian.

However, having received a Religious Education degree from a Baptist Seminary, and after studying Scripture and attending church services for most of my 65 years of life, I have become fairly familiar with the spiritual significance of events and of the power of fulfilled prophecy.

I have great respect for both doctors and theologians. As we study John's account of the events immediately following the death of Jesus, I hope to confirm His humanity and His physical death, as well as point to some of the prophesies fulfilled in the death of Jesus.

Then the Jews, because it was the day of Preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. So the soldiers came, and broke the legs of the first man and of the other who was crucified with Him; but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. And he who has seen has borne witness, and his witness is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. For these things came to pass in order that the Scripture would be fulfilled, "NOT A BONE OF HIM SHALL BE BROKEN." And again another Scripture says, "THEY SHALL LOOK ON HIM WHOM THEY PIERCED" (John 19:31-27, LSB).

 Of the gospel writers, Luke was a physician. However, Luke was not an eyewitness to the crucifixion, so his account does not go into the medical detail that John's does. John was there, an eyewitness to the events. His is a trustworthy account, because he wants the truth to be known. There may have been rumors or speculations spreading around that Jesus didn't truly die. Skeptics even today try to discount the accounts of Jesus' death, saying that He swooned or fainted, and that He revived only after being placed in a cool, dark environment like a rock-hewn tomb. By the time John wrote his account, perhaps people were repeating these very same objections.

John's account strikes down this argument in two ways.

First, he explains that since the Sabbath would begin at sundown, and that this particular Sabbath was a high holy day, the religious leaders demanded that the Romans take away the disgusting sight of three crucified men. The Romans would not remove the bodies until they were sure that they were dead, so measures were taken to hurry the process along.

Men on the cross would struggle to breathe. As their upper body strength left them, they would push themselves up, placing their weight on the iron spike nailed through the feet. One way to keep them from doing so would be for the Romans to break the legs of the crucified men. This meant that they could no longer push themselves up to take in gasping breaths, and as a result they would suffocate. The Jews asked that Pilate order the Roman soldiers to break their legs, so that they would die sooner, and therefore their bodies could be removed before sundown. 

Deuteronomy 21:22-23 specifically states, "If a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by God. You shall not defile your land that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance."

So the Roman soldiers took a mallet or a club and broke the legs of the two thieves hanging on either side of Jesus. However, when they looked at Jesus, they saw that He was already dead. Leaving aside the fact that these were executioners and professional killers, and that they would be able to discern if a man was dead or was merely faking death, one of them thrust his spear between the ribs of Jesus' lifeless body. What they saw confirmed that Jesus was no longer alive.

Medical textbooks today state that there is a lining around a human heart called the pericardium. When fluid fills the pericardium, the heart must work that much harder to pump blood through the body. This is a condition called pericardial effusion leading to cardiac tamponade. Without immediate medical attention, this condition is fatal.

Medical students may be familiar with a case study of a male in his mid-thirties who fell 30 feet from a platform or scaffold. Due to the chest wall trauma, this individual developed a pericardial rupture. "Pericardial rupture is a rare complication of blunt chest trauma," the case study reads, and "a subsequent cardiac herniation with dextrocardia through the pericardial tear is even a rarer and often fatal condition." 

I have heard too many preachers romanticize the symptoms, summing up by saying, "Jesus died of a broken heart." No, Jesus died of a pericardial effusion with possible pericardial rupture suffered either pre- or post-mortem. Could it be that when Jesus stumbled and fell under the weight of the cross He carried, that the Roman soldier kicked Him in the ribs to motivate Him to get up? We are not told of this, but it is not improbable. What we are told is that the Roman soldier who did not break His legs did thrust a spear into His ribs, possibly puncturing the pericardial lining and maybe even the chambers of the heart itself, which would be the source of both water and blood. If Jesus was not dead before the spear pierced His pericardium, He certainly was after.

Another possible medical explanation is this:

Those who were flogged would often go into hypovolemic shock, a term that refers to low blood volume. In other words, the person would have lost so much blood he would go into shock. The results of this would be:

1) The heart would race to pump blood that was not there.
2) The victim would collapse or faint due to low blood pressure.
3) The kidneys would shut down to preserve body fluids.
4) The person would experience extreme thirst as the body desired to replenish lost fluids.

There is evidence from Scripture that Jesus experienced hypovolemic shock as a result of being flogged. As Jesus carried His own cross to Golgotha (John 19:17), He collapsed, and a man named Simon was forced to either carry the cross or help Jesus carry the cross the rest of the way to the hill (Matthew 27:32–33; Mark 15:21–22; Luke 23:26). This collapse indicates Jesus had low blood pressure. Another indicator that Jesus suffered from hypovolemic shock was that He declared He was thirsty as He hung on the cross (John 19:28), indicating His body’s desire to replenish fluids. (www.gotquestions.org/blood-water-Jesus.html)

 If you have ever wondered why Jesus died so quickly relative to the others who were crucified that same day, the answer lies in the physical torture He sustained during the hours leading up to the crucifixion. There was severe physical trauma, and it resulted in the physical death of our Lord. There are enough details in John's gospel to verify this. NT Wright, in his commentary John for Everyone, writes:

But of course, at this moment of all moments, none of this is simply told for the sake of historical detail, vital though that is (the WORD really did become flesh, not a phantom!). John has left us in no doubt that all these details, too, though from one point of view "accidental" (nobody could have guessed what the soldiers might do next), were all to be seen as heaven-sent signs of what it all meant. We only have to think back through the gospel, to all the occasions where water or blood are mentioned, to realize that again and again they point to Jesus as the source of life, cleansing and purification. 

Charles Spurgeon said, "Take all the types of the Old Testament together, and you will gather this, that the purification of sin was typically set forth by blood and water. Blood was conspicuous always, you have no remission of sin without it: but water was exceedingly prominent also." Spurgeon also said, “One of these old divines says that Jesus Christ was typified by our first father, Adam. As Adam fell asleep, and out of his side Eve was taken, so Jesus slept upon the cross the sleep of death, and from his side, where the spear was thrust, his Church was taken.” 

Wright continues:

All these themes come together at this moment. And, in particular, they all point to Jesus as the true Passover lamb. At the moment when the lambs are being killed in the Temple, Jesus Himself is the true Passover Lamb, who takes away the sin of the world. The Passover regulations specified that no bone of the lamb should be broken (Exodus 12:46, Number 9:12). At the same time--here, as so often in John, two themes are combined--Jesus dies as the true Messiah, bearing the sorrow and shame of Israel and hence the world. "They shall look on the One whom they have pierced"; this is a quotation from Zechariah 12:10, a passage which speaks, darkly to our minds but powerfully in Jesus' day, about the time of great suffering and mourning which will come upon Jerusalem, through which God will bring about redemption, rescue, and deliverance. The immediate result of the piercing and mourning, according to the prophet, is that a fountain will be opened for the house of David and the people of Jerusalem, a fountain which will cleanse them from sin and impurity (Zechariah 13:1).

There is one more point I want to make before taking leave of this passage. Warren Wiersbe points out in his The Bible Exposition Commentary that when Jesus was seen with Moses and Elijah in the transfiguration in Luke 9:28-31, the three of them were speaking to Him about His departure. The KJV and NKJV translate the word departure as decease, meaning that He would die. However, the actual Greek word they used is the word for exodus, "suggesting the Passover lamb and the deliverance from bondage."

God planned the exodus of the people of Israel, commissioning Moses to lead them out of bondage and slavery, and into the Promised Land. Elijah was sent by God to preach to the people a message of repentance, urging them to turn from idolatry and return to covenant faithfulness to the one true God. Jesus came do both--to lead God's people out of slavery to sin and toward a heavenly hope, and to preach a covenant relationship with God founded on faithfulness.

This word exodus is found only two other places in the New Testament. One is found in Hebrews 11, the chapter described as the "Hall of Fame of Faith", when Joseph, looking forward to his brethren returning to the Promised Land, urged them to take his remains with them after he died. The other is found in 2 Peter 1:15, where Peter says he knows that he will pass away soon, but that he wants his readers to remember his message of Jesus Christ, the hope of glory.

This exodus, this passing from one life to the next, is our destiny. We will either enter Heaven, the place prepared for us by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, by faith in Him alone; or we will enter Hell, a place of unspeakable and eternal torment, similar to the torment that Jesus experienced in our place and on our behalf. If our faith is in Jesus, then He took our torment and grants us His peace. If not, then His sacrifice is of no account for you, for you are dead in your sins and will receive a just punishment for those sins.

Ephesians 5:25-26 describes Christ as a husband to His bride the church, who "loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word." Hebrews 9:22 says that all things are cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin. We are either washed, or we are not. Wiersbe concludes, "It will take an eternity to reveal all that happened when Jesus Christ died on the cross."

Done and Dusted

 

I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do.      --John 17:4

If you are a fan of British television, as my wife and I are, then you are familiar with the phrase, "Done and dusted." It is a phrase used to express that a task or situation has been fully completed.  It means that something is completely finished, finalized, or decided, with no further action needed. The phrase indicates total completion. It is commonly used in both formal and informal contexts to show that a project, deal, or task is fully wrapped up. Dictionaries define it as "finished or decided, with nothing more to be said or done." The expression likely originated in Britain, possibly linked to dusting powder used to finish documents (by drying the ink), symbolizing a final touch.

This is the meaning of the Greek word tetelestai, which Jesus shouted triumphantly from the cross as He drew His final breath. We will speak more of this in a moment, but in the beginning of today's Scripture passage, there appears to be some unfinished business that Jesus needs to be taking care of.

Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, "Woman, behold your son!" Then He said to the disciple, "Behold your mother!" And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home. After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, said, "I thirst!" Now a vessel full of sour wine was sitting there; and they filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a hyssop, and put it to His mouth. Wo when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit (John 19:25-30).

Four women stood at the foot of the cross. One was Mary the mother of Jesus. The unnamed woman is identified in the other Gospels as Salome, wife of Zebedee, and mother of James and John (who were cousins of Jesus). Very little is known of the third woman, identified as Mary the wife of Clopas; this is the one and only time she is mentioned, unless she is the "other Mary" who brought spices to prepare the body of Jesus for burial. The fourth woman mentioned is Mary Magdalene, whom we know as a close follower of Jesus after He had delivered her from seven demons (Mark 16:9; Luke 8:2).

As Mary's firstborn, Jesus felt a responsibility for the welfare of His mother. "The first time we meet Mary in the gospel of John, she is attending a wedding (2:1-11); now she is preparing for a burial. The hour had come! She was experiencing 'the sword' that had been predicted years before (Luke 2:35)" (Warren Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary).

William Barclay writes, "In this passage there is something which is surely one of the loveliest things in all the gospel story. When Jesus saw His mother, He could not but think of the days ahead. He could not commit her to the care of His brothers, for they did not believe in Him yet (John 7:5). And, after all, John had a double qualification for the service Jesus entrusted to him--he was Jesus' cousin, being Salome's son, and he was the disciple whom Jesus loved."

Having tied up the loose end of how His mother would be taken care of, Jesus then turned His attention to fulfilling prophecy. Psalm 22:15 says, "My tongue clings to My jaws; You have brought Me to the dust of death." The Jewish leaders would be thinking of this passage because Jesus had already quoted from this Psalm when He said, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me." Another Messianic Psalm is Psalm 49, and we see in verse 21, "They gave Me gall for My food, and for My thirst they gave Me vinegar to drink."

So Jesus fulfilled this Scripture when He said, "I thirst." 

One commentary I read gave a completely different take on this passage, one that gives us pause. In the New Cambridge Bible Commentary, John Neyrey writes that when Jesus said "I thirst," He was not speaking to the crowds or to His disciples or even to the soldiers who tried to give Him drink. He was praying to God.

Just as the bystanders utterly misunderstood Jesus' statement "My God, my God..." and thought that He called Elijah to rescue Him, so, too, the soldiers here take Jesus' words literally and offer Him a drink. The meaning, however, lies elsewhere. One should link Jesus' "thirst" with His claim that others who drink of His water will never thirst again (4:13-14; 6:35; 7:37); just as "drink" has a literal and spiritual meaning, so, too, does "thirst." The "cup" He drinks, we are told, is that presented by the Father (18:11). If so, it expresses Jesus' full obedience to drink that cup, obey the divine will, and achieve the work for which He was sent.

In other words, when Salome, the mother of James and John, asked Jesus to allow the sons of Zebedee to sit at His right hand and His left in His kingdom, what did He ask them? "Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?" He went on to say that they would in fact drink that same cup, which symbolizes the suffering and trials that that God may bring upon them. Therefore, it could be interpreted that when Jesus said, "I thirst," He was acknowledging that He was ready, willing, and able to drink of the cup that the Father had ordained for Him to drink. Even though He Himself knew no sin, He was willing to suffer and die for the sins of others.

In John's gospel, you find a number of pictures of our Lord's death: the slaying of the lamb (1:29); the destroying of the temple (2:19); the lifting up of the serpent (3:14); the shepherd laying down his life for the sheep (10:11-18); and the planting of the seed in the ground (12:20-25). These pictures make it clear that Jesus' death was not an accident; it was divine appointment. He was not murdered in the strictest sense: He willingly gave His life for us. His death was an atonement, not just an example. He actually accomplished the work of redemption on the cross (Wiersbe).

(Here) is another of John's hidden things. He tells us that it was on a hyssop reed that they put the sponge containing the vinegar. Now a hyssop reed is an unlikely thing to use for such a purpose, for it was only a stalk, like strong grass, and at the most two feet long. So unlikely is it that some scholars have thought that it is a mistake for a very similar word that means lance or spear. But it was hyssop which John wrote and hyssop which John meant. When we go centuries back to the first Passover when the children of Israel left their slavery in Egypt, we remember how the angel of death was to walk abroad that night and to slay every first-born son of the Egyptians. We remember how the Israelites were to slay the Passover lamb and were to smear the doorposts of their houses with its blood so that the avenging angel of death would pass over their houses. And the ancient instruction was: "Take a bunch of hyssop and dip it in the blood which is in the basin and touch the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood which is in the basin" (Exodus 12:22). It was the blood of the Passover lamb which saved the people of God; it was the blood of Jesus which was to save the world from sin. The very mention of hyssop would take the thoughts of any Jew back to the saving blood of the Passover lamb; and this was John's way of saying that Jesus was the great Passover Lamb of God whose death was to save the whole world from sin (Barclay).

After accomplishing all this, Jesus gave a triumphant shout. "IT IS FINISHED."  NT Wright, who is British and would have used the phrase "done and dusted" many times in his life, wrote in his commentary John for Everyone:

Jesus gives one last cry. "It's finished." "It's all done." "It's complete!" He has finished the work that the Father had given Him to do (17:4). He has loved "to the very end" His own who were in the world (13:1). He has accomplished the full and final task. The word translated "It's all done!" is actually a single word in the original language. It's the word that people would write on a bill after it had been paid. The bill is dealt with. It's finished. The price has been paid. Yes, says John: and Jesus' work is now complete, in that sense as in every other. It is upon this finished, complete work that His people from that day to this can stake their lives.

Bible scholar David Guzik writes, "A single word can change everything. 'Not guilty' in a court of law changes everything. 'Fair' on the playing field changes everything. When a woman says 'Yes' to a marriage proposal it changes everything. 'Goodbye' can change everything. Yet, there has never been a single word said that has impacted history than what Jesus said in John 19:30." Spurgeon said, “It was a Conqueror’s cry; it was uttered with a loud voice. There is nothing of anguish about it, there is no wailing in it. It is the cry of One who has completed a tremendous labor.”

It was all finished, paid in full, accomplished.

• >The types, promises, and prophecies were finished.
• >The sacrifices and ceremonies of the priesthood were finished.
• >His perfect obedience was finished.
• >The satisfaction of God’s justice was finished.
• >The power of Satan, sin, and death was finished.

When Jesus tasted death, as all men must do, He did so with the peaceful confidence of obedience to the Father, and the full knowledge that He had accomplished all that He was sent to do.

I told you so

 

And he said, "Yes, it was written long ago that the Messiah would suffer and die and rise from the dead on the third day." (Luke 24:46 NLT)

 Last week there were headlines about a potential public execution in the United States. The man known as "The Fort Hood Shooter" has been sentenced to death for his crimes. Since he was a member of the military when the crimes were committed, the military has decided that his execution should be done in a very military fashion: he must stand before a firing squad.

Neither the death sentence nor the method of execution is news. What grabbed the headlines last week was the notion that the execution should take place in front of a camera, and that the images be live streamed so that the public could witness the event. Apparently, the government official who had proposed the first public execution in the US since 1936 thought that it would serve as a deterrent to those who might wish harm to the service men and women who serve this country with distinction.

Due to public outcry, and the idea that the live stream may backfire and may motivate our enemies to commit more acts of violence against US citizens, the execution will not be broadcast in this way. The perpetrator will perish for his purported crimes, but it will no longer be public.

Throughout history, however, public executions were common. They were thought to deter crime, but they were definitely a public spectacle. In the days before television and movies, people would gather in the public square to observe hangings, beheadings, and yes, even crucifixions. The charges filed against the accused would either be read aloud or written on a placard and prominently placed, so that all would know their crimes.

We see this play out in the 19th chapter of John's gospel, where the public crucifixion of Jesus was described.

And He, bearing His cross, went out to a place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha, where they crucified Him, and two others with Him, one on either side, and Jesus in the center. Now Pilate wrote a title and put it on the cross. And the writing was: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Then many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. Therefore the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,' but, 'He said, "I am the King of the Jews."'" Pilate answered, What I have written, I have written." Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments and made four parts, to each soldier a part, and also the tunic. Now the tunic was without seam, woven from the top in one piece. They said therefore among themselves, "Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be," that the Scripture might be fulfilled which says: "They divided My garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots." Therefore the soldiers did these things (John 19:17-24).

Commentator David Guzik writes, "According to Roman custom Jesus carried His cross from the place of sentencing to the place of crucifixion." This had been foreshadowed in the Old Testament, when Abraham was commanded by God to sacrifice his son Isaac. Abraham told Isaac that there would be a sacrifice, and it was Isaac who carried the wood for the fire.

The thieves crucified alongside Jesus were likely associates of Barabbas, whose place Jesus had taken. In this way, Jesus was identified with sinners in His death. One commentator wrote, "The whole of humanity was represented there: the sinless Savior, the saved penitent, and the condemned impenitent." 

Historians say that Crucifixion was the appropriate punishment for slaves (Cicero), bandits (Josephus), prisoners of war (Josephus), and revolutionaries (Josephus). Jesus could not be accused of being a disobedient slave, although He came as a Servant (Mark 10:45; Matthew 20:28). He was not accused of being a common thief, although He had stolen attention away from the high priests and Pharisees. He was definitely not a prisoner of war, although the Jews in Rome were treated as a conquered race of people. The only accusation that Pilate could level against Jesus that would justify a Roman crucifixion was public insurrection. This may be why Pilate wrote the charge against Him as, "King of the Jews." NT Wright puts it this way:

When Pilate places a notice above Jesus' head on the cross [it was meant to] rub in the point to the people who were watching: that's what will happen if you get up to this sort of thing. 'The sort of thing' in question was actions or teachings which the government interpreted as being revolutionary. Sometimes condemned Roman prisoners carried the notice around their neck on the way to the place of execution, so that all the more people could see, and take warning. The notice itself is full of irony. The chief priests are furious with Pilate. He doesn't believe Jesus is the King of the Jews any more than they do, and they don't want him making fun of them in this way. Pilate, of course, is getting back at them. It's a calculated snub. "You wanted Him crucified, didn't you?" we can feel him thinking. "Well, I've done it. And I reserve the right to say what I want on the public notice. As far as I'm concerned, He really is 'The King of the Jews'--the only sort of king you crazy people deserve! This is what I've done to Him, and this is what I'd be happy to do to the whole lot of you!"

Wright continues:

Once again we must listen to what John is telling us, as Jesus goes to His death. Remember how Caiaphas had said more than he had known when he spoke, callously, about one man dying for the people (John 11:49-50). Remember how Jesus had been approaches by some Greeks, and how in His comment on their request He had said that when He was "lifted up from the earth" He would "draw all people to Himself" (John 12:32). Remember how Peter had declared that he would lay down his life for Jesus, and how Jesus had gently questioned whether he'd got that idea the right way round (John 13:37-38). Bring all that together, stand at the foot of the cross and look up at the notice that Pilate had written. What do you see?

Warren Wiersbe, in his The Bible Exposition Commentary, answers that question this way: "Pilate wrote a "gospel tract" when he prepared this title, for one of the thieves discovered that Jesus was King, and he asked entrance into His kingdom."

The second part of this narrative describes the soldiers gambling for Jesus' belongings. A Roman squad of four soldiers was responsible for overseeing the crucifixion. William Barclay writes, "Every Jew wore five articles of apparel--his shoes, his turban, his girdle (or belt), his tunic and his outer robe. There were four soldiers and there were five articles. They diced for them, each had his pick and the inner tunic was left. To have cut it into four pieces would have been to render it useless, and so they diced again to see who would possess it."

An astute student of Scripture will immediately see a fulfillment of the prophecy in Psalm 22. Centuries before the Jewish people had even heard of crucifixion, David wrote these words: "They pierced My hands and My feet; I can count all My bones. They look and stare at Me. They divide My garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots" (Psalm 22: 16b-18).

Do you see the theme here? All throughout Scripture there are clues, snippets of things to come, predictions of suffering and death, all culminating in the death of God's own Son. I think William Barclay puts it best:

But there is something half-hidden here (in John's account). Jesus' tunic is described as being without seam, woven in one piece from top to bottom. That is the precise description of the linen tunic which the High Priest wore. Let us remember that the function of the priest was to be a liaison between God and man. The Latin for priest is pontifex, which means bridge-builder, and the priest was to build a bridge between God and man. No one ever did that as Jesus did. He is the High Priest through whom men come to God. Again and again we have seen that there are two meanings in so many of John's statements, a meaning which lies on the surface, and a deeper inner meaning. When John tells us of the seamless tunic of Jesus it is not just a description of the kind of clothes that Jesus wore; it is something which tells us that Jesus is the perfect priest, opening the perfect way for all men to the presence of God.

When the Jews protested to Pilate to change the wording on the charge, he refused. Pilate said, "I have written what I have written." From this side of history, we can hear the Word of God echoing through time, "I told you so."

NT Wright says this:

John doesn't need to do more than give the briefest description of the gambling at the foot of the cross, and to draw our attention to the psalm in question. He leaves us to think through the implication. Jesus is the fulfillment of prophecy and sacred song. He is the righteous sufferer. He is the true King. He is the one through whose shameful death the weight of Israel's sin, and behind that the sin of the whole world, is being dealt with. The King of the Jews is God's chosen sacrifice, not merely to rule the world but to redeem it.

This is what is meant by the words Lamb of God. John's gospel begins by describing Jesus as the Word. He quotes John the Baptist as saying of Jesus, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world." A lamb is born for sacrifice. God sent His own Son to be that sacrifice for us. We need only to place our faith and trust in Him to save us from our sins.

Jesus was crucified between two sinners. One believed and was saved. The other ridiculed and was lost for all eternity. These two men represent all of humanity. Which one are you?

They made a mockery of Him in a spirit of fear

 

Will it be well when He searches you out? Or can you mock Him as one mocks a man? (Job 13:9)

Once, there was a boy who thrived on being the loudest in the room. Let's call him Pip. He enjoyed teasing classmates, making fun of their mistakes, and mocking their habits. Pip believed his humor was sharp and that no one would ever notice how he made them feel.

One day, during a school event, Pip targeted a quiet, kind student who had recently struggled with a personal loss. The student's name was Jesse. Pip made a cruel joke about Jesse’s situation, expecting laughter and a quick escape from the awkwardness. Instead, Jesse’s friends stepped in, and Pip’s own friends, who had been quietly watching, began to turn against him.

The mockery spread like wildfire — not because the joke was funny, but because it was unfair. Pip’s reputation took a hit, and he found himself isolated. Jesse, the student he mocked, later approached Pip, not with anger, but with a calm reminder. “Respect is earned, not taken,” Jesse said.

Today we will read a similar story in Scripture. Pilate resorts to mockery, and it backfires. Unlike our story, however, the people who mocked Pilate did not come to the defense of Jesus, but sentenced Him to be crucified.

The Jews answered him (Pilate), "We have a law, and according to our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God." Therefore, when Pilate heard that saying, he was the more afraid, and went again into the Praetorium, and said to Jesus, "Where are You from?" But Jesus gave no answer. Then Pilate said to Him, "Are You not speaking to me? Do You not know that I have power to crucify You, and power to release You?" Jesus answered, "You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin." From then on Pilate sought to release Him, but the Jews cried out, saying, "If you let this Man go, you are not Caesar's friend. Whoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar." When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus out and sat down in the judgement seat in a place that is called The Pavement, but in Hebrew, Gabbatha. Now it was the Preparation Day of the Passover, and about the sixth hour. And he said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" But they cried out, "Away with Him, away with Him! Crucify Him!" Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar!"  Then he delivered Him to them to be crucified. So they took Jesus and led Him away. (John 19:7-16)

 We have seen from the Scriptures prior to this passage that Pilate was quickly losing control of the situation. "That's the feeling we get at verse 12 in this passage," writes NT Wright. 

"Pilate is in charge. He's the governor. His word is law. He can kill people if he wants to; he can let them go if he wants to. He could order the troops to kill the chief priests themselves, if he thought he could get away with it. And when he decides that he really does want to let Jesus go, we assume he is going to be able to do it. But the one constraint on Pilate is what people think of him back in Rome. Roman governors down the years were regularly prosecuted for maladministration. Provinces and cities would take their case to Rome, insisting on justice against the man who had been ruling them in Rome's name. There were famous instances of ex-governors paying heavy penalties. Under the empire, if the emperor decided someone was a nuisance, or surplus to requirements, he was quite capable of sending a message advising the man to commit suicide, to save his soldiers the bother of killing him themselves."

With this constraint to his absolute power in the back of his mind, Pilate now hears from the Jews that this Jesus had claimed to be the Son of God. Theologian Leon Morris wrote, "He can scarcely be called a religious man, but the news that his prisoner had made divine claims scared the governor…every Roman of that day knew of stories of the gods or their offspring appearing in human guise.” 

Pilate had commanded that Jesus be flogged, and now he learns that Jesus had made a claim of divinity? Was this truly a son of the gods? Pilate was terrified upon hearing this. Quaking in his boots, he went back into the palace and demanded to know where Jesus had come from.

Jesus made no response. He didn't have to. Despite all of Pilate's bravado, putting up a brave front, he knew in his heart of hearts that Jesus was in control of the situation here. Pilate presses on. "Are You not speaking to me? Don't You know that I have the power in this situation?" Jesus probably smiled a wry smile at this. "You have no power here," He said. "You can only do what God has prescribed." 

Warren Wiersbe writes, "Fear and anger often go together. When we are afraid we are weak, we go to the other extreme and try to appear strong. This is what Pilate did as he reminded Jesus of his Roman authority. But his statement did not demonstrate his power; it demonstrated his weakness. For if he had the authority to release Jesus, why did he not do it? He condemned himself with his own boastful words."

At this moment, Pilate was no longer acting as judge. He began acting as a prosecutor. However, he was not prosecuting Jesus; instead, Pilate began to pillory the priests who accused Jesus. Pilate showed his true feelings, not only for the high priests, but for all the Jews.

He began to mock them.

Pilate had already allowed his soldiers to place a royal robe on Jesus. They had also placed a makeshift crown on His head, albeit not one of honor, but of torture. Pilate then takes Jesus out to the seat of judgement. William Barclay writes:

The scene comes to an end by saying that Pilate brough Jesus out; as we have translated it, and as the Authorized Version and Revised Standard translate it, Pilate came out to the place that was called the Pavement of Gabbatha--which may mean the tessellated pavement of marble mosaic--and sat upon the judgement seat. This was called the bema, on which the magistrate sat to give his official decisions. Now the verb to sit is kathisein, and that maybe either intransitive or transitive; it may mean either to sit down oneself, or to seat another. Just possibly it means here that Pilate with one last mocking gesture brought Jesus out, clad with the terrible finery of the old purple robe and with his forehead girt with the crown of thorns and the drops of blood the thorns had wakened, and set Him in the judgement seat, and with a wave of his hand said: "Am I to crucify your king?" The apocryphal Gospel of Peter says that in the mockery, they set Jesus on the seat of judgement and said: "Judge justly, King of Israel." Justin Martyr too says that, "They set Jesus on the judgement seat, and said, 'Give judgement for us'." It may be that Pilate jestingly caricatured Jesus as judge. If that is so, what dramatic irony is there. That which was a mockery was the truth; and one day those who had mocked Jesus as judge would meet Him as judge--and would remember.

Instead of calling out Pilate for blasphemy or hypocrisy, the Jews answered politically. "We have no king but Caesar," they said, reminding Pilate that he was being watched carefully from Rome. In doing so, the Jews wounded the heart of God yet again. Wiersbe writes:

When Israel asked to have a king, and God gave them Saul, the nation rejected God the Father (1 Samuel 8:5-7). When they asked for Barabbas, they rejected God the Son. Today, they are rejecting the pleading of God the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51; Romans 10:21). Yet there will come a day when they shall see their King, believe, and be saved (Zechariah 12:10-11; Matthew 24:30; Revelation 1:7).

What will you do with the claims of Christ? Will you crown Him King of your life, or will you hold him in derision? Will you mock Him, or make Him Lord? Many will take the politically correct line, looking over their shoulder at their cohorts, their careers, or their cultures, fearing rejection by the world's standards. Others may hold to their religious background or heritage, rejecting Jesus as just another false god. I pray that you, dear reader, may embrace Christ as Lord and Savior, and follow Him whatever the cost may be. No matter the consequences in this life, we will receive our reward in heaven.

 

Behold the Man

Many a crown has been secured by blood, and so is this, but it is his own blood; many a throne has been established by suffering, and so is this, but he himself bears the pain. --Charles Spurgeon

On first reading, it appears in the biblical account that Pontius Pilate was weak. He appears unable to make a decision, finally washing his hands of the entire process of the prosecution and execution of Jesus. He seems to bow to the will of the people, even though he clearly believed Jesus to be innocent of all charges. As we shall see in our study today, Pilate appears to promote a policy of appeasement rather than take a stand and exercise his authority as a Roman ruler and representative of Caesar. 

History tells a different story. His contemporaries called him "inflexible, harsh, and obdurate." During his ten years as governor of Judea, there were three defining conflicts with the Jewish people that he governed.

The first was on his initial visit to Jerusalem. In Roman thought, the Emperor was considered a god, and the Jews despised all gods but Yahweh. All of Pilate's predecessors had made the soldiers that accompanied them remove the image of the Emporer from their standards. Pilate refused to do so. Commentator William Barclay says, "Pilate was adamant; he would not pander to the superstitions of the Jews. He went back to Caesarea. The Jews followed him. They dogged his footsteps for five days. They were humble, but determined in their requests." Pilate asked the Jews to meet him in the amphitheater. When they arrived, Pilate had them surrounded by armed soldiers, telling them that if they did not stop their requests, that he would have them killed right then and there. In response, the Jews bared their necks and invited the soldiers to strike. "Not even Pilate would massacre defensless men like that," says Barclay. He finally agreed to remove the images from the standards.

The second incident involved the water supply in Jerusalem. Pilate wanted to build a new aqueduct, but he raided the Temple treasury to do it. Though the Jews enjoyed the new water source, they resented Pilate for having stolen the funds from them. The Jews staged a riot. Pilate responded by having Roman soldiers wear plain clothes and disperse themselves among the crowds. When the command was given, the soldiers attacked the people. Many Jews were stabbed or clubbed to death that day. This caused him to be reported to his superiors in Rome.

The third incident was much like the first. Pilate had a number of decorative shields made. On these shields he had inscribed the name TIBERIUS. The decorative shields were devoted to the honor and memory of the Emperor. Again, the Roman ruler was considered to be a god in the culture of Rome; the Jews hated that the name of a false god was inscribed and reverentially displayed in the holy city of Jerusalem. "The people were enraged; the greatest men, even his closest supporters, besought Pilate to remove them. He refused. The Jews reported the matter to Tiberius the Emporer, and he ordered Pilate to remove them" (Barclay).

Given this background, let's take a look at the text in John's gospel. You remember that Pilate had interviewed Jesus, and came out to the people, saying to them, "I find no fault in Him at all."

"But you have a custom that I should release someone to you at the Passover. Do you therefore want me to release to you the King of the Jews?" Then they all cried again, saying, "Not this Man, but Barabbas!" Now Barabbas was a robber. So then Pilate took Jesus and scourged Him. And the soldiers twisted a crown of thorns and put it on His head, and they put on Him a purple robe. Then they said, "Hail, King of the Jews!" and they struck Him with their hands. Pilate then went out again, and said to them, "Behold, I am bringing Him out to you, that you may know that I find no fault in Him." Then Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. And Pilate said to them, "Behold the Man!" Therefore, when the chief priests and officers saw Him, they cried out, saying "Crucify Him, crucify Him!" Pilate said to them, "You take Him and crucify Him, for I find no fault in Him." The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and according to our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God." (John 18:39-19:7)

In this passage, Pilate tried three different times to appease the Jews. Why did he go to such lengths? Why didn't he make a decision and stick with it? The answer may be found in John 19:12. "From then on Pilate sought to release Him, but the Jews cried out, saying, "If you let this Man go, you are not Caesar's friend." Remember the background we learned earlier about Pilate, that he had been reported to Emperor Tiberius Caesar twice before for making bad governing decisions. Any new accusation that made its way to Rome would be Pilate's third strike; he could be removed from office, and another would be appointed to take his place.

How did Pilate try to appease the crowd? First, he offered to free Jesus in accordance with Passover tradition. Once a year the governor would grant clemency to a man condemned to die. Pilate offered to grant clemency to Jesus, in honor of this custom.

The Jews would have nothing of it. They demanded the release of a man they called Barabbas. Commentators say that during this time period people did not have surnames like they do now. My last name is Stewart, as was my father's. In the first century, people were known by their fathers' name, as well. In Matthew 16:17, Jesus addresses Simon Peter as "Simon bar Jonah," or Simon, son of Jonah. In this passage, the thief whom the crowd wanted released was either known as "bar-Abbas" or "bar-Rabbas". That is, either he was known as "son of his father," meaning that his dad was also an insurrectionist, or he was called "son of the Rabbi." This second possibility may imply that Barabbas was a Zealot, a member of a militant sect who wanted to see the overthrow of Roman oppression. His acts of insurrection could have been on behalf of the Jewish people, meaning that he could have been a local hero to the Jews. In either instance, it would make sense that the cross upon which Jesus died was originally meant for him.

That, in essence, is the gospel message. Jesus did not deserve such torture, as He was without sin. We, on the other hand, deserve the beatings and scourging and death that He endured for us, because we are sinful creatures.

The second act of appeasement that Pilate tried was to have Jesus scourged. In this process, a man would be tied to a stake, forced into a stooping position with his back to the torturer. The scourge was a leather whip with sharp stones, shaped bones, and jagged bits of metal embedded into the ends. Each time the victim was whipped, he would endure deep lacerations. Barclay wrote, "It literally tore a man's back into strips. Few remained conscious throughout the ordeal; some died, and many went raving mad." It was said that forty lashes with a scourge would surely kill a man, so the punishment would stop at 39 lashes.

Old Testament prophet Isaiah wrote, "He was wounded for our transgression, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed" (Isaiah 53:5). This does not mean, as some might suggest, that God's will is that His people would be healed of all diseases and infirmities. Instead, it describes the atonement; Jesus took on our punishment, so that we could be saved.

Now, when Pilate brought out Jesus, bleeding from the head and face from the crown of thorns they had pressed down upon His head, and with His back in tatters, he may have thought that the crowd would have compassion on Jesus. Maybe this level of punishment would be enough for them, that they might let Jesus live. Thus, when Pilate said, "Behold the Man," he wanted the Jews to take a good look at Jesus. Hadn't He suffered enough?

The Jews were not satisfied. They wanted Pilate to finish Him off. "Crucify Him," they cried. Their blood lust was not satisfied. Their appetite for revenge had barely been whetted.

Pilate made a third attempt. "I find no fault in Him," he said. "If you want Him crucified, you do it." Maybe putting the responsibility of this Man's death on the Jewish religious leaders would make them re-think their position. After all, was Judaism considered a peaceful religion? Weren't they all preparing for Passover, a religious feast commemorating an animal sacrifice that satisfied the Angel of Death from killing their firstborn sons? Perhaps placing that responsibility squarely on their heads would remind them that Jesus was the firstborn of His mother, that lambs were at that very minute being prepared for slaughter to commemorate the "passing over" of the angel of death, would make them choose life.

Last week we saw that the Jews were hiding their true motives for wanting to see Jesus dead. They brought civil charges against Him, charges that Pilate had already ruled were insufficient for the death penalty. Now, having seen Pilate's willingness to spill Jesus' blood, reveal their true motivation. "He deserves to die," they said, "because He claims to be the Son of God."

God had created man in His image, to remind us that we are His. Man corrupted that image, and God threw him out of the Garden. Did you know that there were no thorns in Eden? Thorns were only introduced as a result of man's sin. And now, God sent a perfect Man into the world, One without sin. Commentator NT Wright says this:

Now at last, with Roman emperors and creation stories in our heads, we find ourselves on a Friday morning, on the sixth day of the week, looking at the Roman governor and his peculiar new prisoner. He lets the soldier dress Him up as a king--of sorts: the crown of thorns, and the slapping about the face, tell you what they thought of such a claim. And Pilate says the words that still haunt us: "Look! Here's the Man!" Here is the true image of the true God. Here is the One who has brought God's wisdom into the world. Here is the living embodiment of God, the One who has made the invisible God visible. Here is the King. Here is the breathing statue of the Emperor-of-All, placed within the emperor's world so that people could see who was their true master. And all his rebel subjects can do is mock, and slap, and scream for His blood. He's made Himself God's Son, they say. Well, John's reader knows by now that Jesus has indeed behaved as the One who, as of right, reflects God into the world. His own intimate knowledge of the Father, and the sharing of that with His friends, is either a pack of lies, or it's true. But--and here's the new thing, the thing not mentioned in Genesis 1--this, too, this misrepresentation, these accusations, this crown of thorns (the sharp bits of creation, we note, drawing blood from creation's Lord), and the rest: all this is part of what it means to be God's image, planted in territory which belongs to God but which is in rebellion against Him. "He was in the world." Now we have learned what John means by "the world", that little sentence says it all.

John 1:10-12 says, "He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name." 

Are you a child of God? Do you believe in His name, in His work, in His saving power, in His forgiveness, and in His mission?