Luke

22:63-23:25

Culmination of Messiah's mission, 19:45-24:53

2. The meaning of Messiah's death, 22:1-23:25

vi] The trial of Jesus

Synopsis

Although Luke doesn't record an initial informal interrogation of Jesus at the home of the high priest, it is likely that one takes place, and it is here where Jesus is assaulted by the temple police. Early in the morning, Jesus is brought before a formal gathering of the the Sanhedrin where he is questioned and charged with blasphemy. Jesus is then led to Pilate, although the charge against him is now one of insurrection. Pilate quickly ascertains that the issue is theological, and not political, and so sends him off to Herod. Herod is far too cunning to get into a dispute between the religious authorities and the followers of a messianic pretender, and so, after a few games, he sends him back to Pilate. Pilate, recognising Jesus' innocence, attempts to have Jesus released, but pressure from the religious authorities forces him to comply with their demands. Out of expediency, Pilate sentences Jesus to death.

 
Teaching

God's messiah, the Suffering Servant, stands innocent of any crime.

 
Issues

i] Context: See 22:1-6.

 

ii] Background: See The trials of Jesus, 22:54-62.

 

iii] Structure: The trial of Jesus:

Jesus' interrogation and assault, 22:63-65;

The hearing before the Sanhedrin, v66-71;

The hearing before Pilate, 23:1-5;

The hearing before Herod, v6-12;

The final hearing and judgment before Pilate, v13-25:

Pilate sentences Jesus, v13-16;

The religious authorities demand the death penalty, v17-23;

Pilate chooses the path of political expediency, v24-25.

 

iv] Interpretation:

"In the attitude of each person on that spring day, the Evangelist implies, every man in some measure can see himself reflected: unbelief in Jesus' message, hatred of the light, curious minds, indifference, expediency, and fear", Ellis. The divine imperative in messiah's condemnation by his own testimony stands in stark contrast to the human condition. In contrast to the human condition, insulting and indifferent at best, there stands the Son of Man. All these so-called authorities stand in judgement over God's messiah, but he is himself the one who will exercise true authority. The one and only innocent man who has ever lived is about to exercise judgment at the right hand of God, ruling a kingdom not of this world. It is he who will determine guilt and innocence, and do so for all humanity.

 

Ellis notes two apologetic aspects of Luke's account of Jesus' trial. Luke does not record a guilty verdict either by the Sanhedrin (although it is assumed), Herod, or by Pilate. Jesus dies an innocent man; he is no rebel against Rome. And when it comes to those responsible for the death of this innocent man, Luke lays the blame squarely on Israel's religious leaders. Of course, Luke doesn't suggest that the Roman governor is without blame. Pilate acts out of political expediency, yielding Roman justice to the will of a corrupt religious elite. The guilt for this crime rests on religious Israel.

Bock particularly notes the way Luke's account draws out how the "movement is orchestrated by the one on trial, the one with true authority", and that this orchestration proceeds with divine intent. "The passion took place because it was foretold in Scripture, and it was foretold in Scripture because it was the divine plan from the beginning", Stein.

As the events proceed to their inevitable conclusion, the reader feels like urging Jesus to declare himself. Jesus is evasive, but he doesn't deny that he is the messiah, in fact, he provides his accusers with enough ammunition to take him down. Jesus is who he is, but "the real question, he insists, is about the faith and integrity of his questioners, and whether they are prepared to recognise the work of God", Nolland.

 

v] Synoptics:

See 3:1-20. For notes on the synoptic treatment of the interrogation and trial of Jesus, see "Synoptics", 22:54-62. As already indicated, unlike the other gospels, Luke places these events in the early morning gathering of the Sanhedrin, rather than the informal interrogation conducted at the home of the high priest. Fitzmyer suggests that this is historically more likely. It is interesting to note that with the interrogation of Jesus, Luke agrees with Matthew on a number of occasions. Luke, like Matthew, provides an elusive answer to the high priest's question. Luke, like Matthew, has the phrase "tell us who hit you?" The most interesting similarity between Matthew and Luke is Matthew's ap arti, "from now on", and Luke's apo tou nun, "from now on." This supports the theory that all three synoptic gospels are working off their own Semitic oral tradition, a tradition already well established in the early church.

Jesus' trial before Pilate, 23:1-5, 13-25, is paralleled in Mark, 15:1-15; Matthew 27:1-2, 11-14; John 18:28-38. Again, there is substantial agreement between the synoptic gospels, but note that unlike both Mark and Luke, Matthew adds the dream of Pilate's wife and Pilate's hand-washing. Luke, with Matthew and John, identifies the man released instead of Jesus with the name Barabbas. Unlike the other synoptists, Luke provides the actual charge laid before Pilate, 23:2. Again, scholars are divided as to whether Luke is redacting Mark, or drawing from his own L source.

Only Luke records the hearing before Herod, 23:6-12. Some scholars argue that the story is a Lukan fabrication, but there is no reason to assume that it is anything other than part of his own received tradition.

In Luke's construction of these events, the trial of Jesus is held in four closed sessions, attended only be officialdom; it is likely that at no point the trial is public. Jesus' accusers before Pilate and Herod are Israel's religious leaders. The public only get involved as Jesus is led away from the final session held before Pilate, and, unlike the religious authorities, their response is positive, cf., v26-27.

 

v] Homiletics: The death of an innocent man

A saying used by chippies (carpenters) when they make a mistake: "There was only ever one perfect carpenter."

 
Text - 22:63

The trial of Jesus, 22:63-23:25: i] The interrogation and assault of Jesus, v63-65. Luke only records the assault of Jesus at the home of the high priest, and not his interrogation. An informal interrogation may have taken place, but as Fitzmyer notes, Luke's record of events before the Sanhedrin likely reflects what actually happened.

oiJ suneconteV (sunecw) pres. part. "who were guarding" - [and men] the ones constraining [him]. The participle is adjectival, attributive, limiting "men", as NIV.

autw/ dat. pro. "-" - [were ridiculing, mocking] him. Dative of direct object after the en prefix imperfect verb "to ridicule." The use of the imperfect may imply an inceptive sense, "began to ridicule him."

deronteV (derw) pres. part. "and beating" - beating him. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to ridicule; "flogged him and made fun of him", Moffatt. Possibly adverbial, temporal, "as they beat him", ESV.

 
v64

This incident is not recorded in Mark, but is found in Matthew. Possibly part of Jesus' interrogation, but it seems likely that, at this point, the temple police are passing the time, enjoying themselves at Jesus' expense. Obviously, the temple police are aware of the commonly held view that Jesus is a prophet.

perikaluyanteV (perikaluptw) aor. part. "they blindfolded" - [and] having covered = blindfolded [him they were questioning him]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to cover." Possibly adverbial, temporal, so Culy.

legonteV (legw) pres. part. "-" - saying. Attendant circumstance participle, expressing action accompanying the participle "having covered", "they blindfolded him and kept saying", ESV.

oJ paisaV (paiw) aor. part. "hit" - [prophesy,] the one hitting you [is who]? The participle serves as a substantive, nominative subject of the verb to-be. The interrogative pronoun tviV serves as a predicate nominative.

 
v65

Only Luke records this detail. Interestingly, in Mark, Jesus is accused of blasphemy, here Jesus is blasphemed - probably all part of Jesus' informal interrogation. The verb blasfhmew, "to blaspheme", can mean "to verbally abuse, insult, slander", and that may be the sense here, but a religious sense may also be intended, namely, in deriding Jesus' they are deriding oJ kurioV, "the Lord".

blasfhmounteV (blasfhmew) pres. part. "insulting" - [and they were saying] blaspheming [many other things]. The participle is adverbial, modal, expressing the manner of the action of the imperfect verb "to say." Culy suggests that the use of the imperfect here brings the scene to a close. The accusative "many other things" is probably an adverbial accusative modifying the participle "blaspheming."

eiV + acc. "to [him]" - into [him]. Here expressing opposition; "against him."

 
v66

ii] The hearing before the Sanhedrin, v66-71. Luke describes the sunedrion, "council", as the meeting of the presbuterion tou laou, "gathering of elders of the people". The Sanhedrin was a seventy-member religio-political administrative body made up of elders, priests and scribes. They met in a semi-circle, so we can well imagine where Jesus was placed for his inquisition.

wJV "at [daybreak]" - [and] as = when [it became day]. Temporal use of the conjunction serving to introduce a temporal clause.

tou laou (oV) gen. "of the people" - [the meeting of elders] of the people [were gathered together]. The genitive is adjectival, idiomatic / subordination; "over the people."

te .... kai "both ...... and" - both [chief priests] and [scribes]. Forming a coordinate construction which stands in apposition to "the meeting of the elders of the people."

eiV + acc. "before [the council]" - [and they led him] into [the council of them]. Identifying the direction of the action and arrival at. Nolland opts for causative action, "had him brought." The sense here of sunedrion, "council", may be "the council meeting", but also possibly "the council chamber / meeting place."

 
v67

Luke stays clear of the side issue of the desecration of the temple, and goes to the heart of the matter, namely, Christ's messianic status. Unlike both Matthew and Mark, Luke has Jesus provide an evasive yes/no answer. The problem lies in the popular messianic expectation of religious Israel - Jesus is not the messiah of popular expectation; his kingdom is not of this world. Even now, he could take time out to explain the difference between their messiah and God's messiah, Jesus, the Son of Man / Son of God, but they wouldn't believe him anyway.

legonteV (legw) "they said" - saying. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to lead away", a redundant Semitic construction introducing direct speech; "they led him away to their council and said." For the classification, adverbial, manner, "saying", see legwn, 4:35.

ei + ind. "if" - if, as is the case for arguments' sake, [you are the christ, messiah, then say to us]. Introducing a first class conditional clause where the proposed condition is assumed to be true, for arguments' sake.

autoiV dat. pro. "[answered]" - [but/and he said] to them. Dative of indirect object.

ean "if" - if, as may be the case, [i say to you, then]. Introducing a third class conditional clause where the proposed condition has the possibility of coming true.

ou mh pisteushte (pisteuw) aor. subj. "you will not answer me" - no no = by no means [you may believe]. Subjunctive of emphatic negation. "You will not believe any statement I make", Barclay.

 
v68

The sense here of the verb erwtaw, "to ask", is "to discuss." There is no point Jesus trying to initiate a debate with the religious authorities because they have no interest in debating with him; they have long made up their minds that he is a false prophet who should be disposed of.

ean + subj. "if" - [but/and] if, as may be the case, [i ask, then]. Introducing a third class conditional clause where the condition has the possibility of coming true.

ou my apokriqhte (apokrinomai) aor. subj. "you would not answer" - no no = by no means [you may answer]. Subjunctive of emphatic negation.

 
v69

All three synoptic gospels record this Son of Man saying, although Luke leaves out "coming in the clouds of heaven." For Mark and Matthew, the statement follows a clear confession: "I am" / "Thou hast said." In Luke, Jesus doesn't claim the status of Son of Man in the presence of the religious authorities, but he is certainly defining his understanding of the messiah, as against theirs. The words identify the Son of Man's divine authority and sovereignty. The two-part allusion in Matthew and Mark describes the same status. The Son of Man is "sitting", he is "at my right side, until I make your enemies into a footstool for you", Ps.101:1. And the Son of Man is "coming", "presented to the Ancient of Days", "crowned king and given power and glory", Dan.7:13-14. The eschatological sense of the word "coming" always confuses because it is so often seen in the terms of movement rather than action. Luke may be aware of this confusion. The word "coming" is used in the terms of reigning. Both "sitting" and "coming" describe the same activity, that of judging, of cursing and blessing under divine authority - the act of reigning on high at God's right hand. As for the exercise of this authority, it is "at hand" / upon us / now / apo tou nun, "from now on" - the kingdom is about to be realised. See The eschatology of Jesus, 17:20-37.

apo + gen. "from" - [but/and] from [now]. Temporal use of the preposition.

tou anqrwpou (oV) gen. "[the Son] of Man" - [the son] of man. The genitive is adjectival, relational. For "Son of Man", see oJ uiJoV tou anqrwpou, 5:24.

kaqhmenoV (kaqhmai) aor. mid. part. "seated" - [will be] sitting. The participle with the future verb to be estai forms a future periphrastic construction; "shall be seated."

ek + gen. "at" - from [right hand]. This preposition primarily expresses separation, but when used with dexiwn, "right hand", the sense is spatial, "at"; "at the right hand of power."

thV dunamewV (iV ewV) gen. "of the mighty [God]" - of the power [of god]. Out of respect for God, the word is used instead of the divine name, so technically the genitive is adjectival, possessive, ie., "seated at God's right hand." Luke adds the genitive "of God" for his Gentile readers, explaining the sense of "the power", such that "of God" stands in apposition to "of power"; "the right hand of power, namely, God." The NIV goes to the sense of the phrase.

 
v70

Unlike Matthew and Mark, Luke has the religious authorities draw a logical conclusion from what Jesus says (gar, "therefore"), namely that he is referring to himself, but it remains unclear to them whether he is actually claiming to be the messiah. So, the authorities ask Jesus explicitly whether he claims to the Son of God, ie., the messiah. Commentators are divided on the nature of Jesus reply:

•iJesus' words may be a strong outright affirmation; "It is you yourselves (by using the terms 'Son of God') who have said exactly what (taking oJti as oJ tiv, "that which") I am", Evans.

•iJesus' answer may be evasive, but ultimately affirmative; "affirmative in content, and reluctant or circumlocutory in formulation", Catchpole, "The answer of Jesus to Caiaphas", NTS 17; so Marshall, Bock, ....

•iThe answer may be a non-answer, a kind of "Whatever you say! Nothing I say is going to make much difference with you lot." The reader knows the answer, but the religious authorities are left with no clear answer.

The third option seems best, but irrespective of the sense of Jesus' answer, there is nothing that will get in the way of the murderous intent of Israel's religious leaders. Their trumped-up charge of blasphemy stands unproved, and so it is their guilt that is confirmed. For Luke, Jesus' trial is a sham.

oun "then" - [but/and everyone said,] therefore [are you the son of god]? Inferential, drawing a logical conclusion. For "Son of God" see tou qeou, 4:41.

oJ de "-" - but/and he [he said]. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from the religious authorities to Jesus.

proV + acc. "-" - toward [them]. The preposition is used here to introduce an indirect object rather than by the use of a dative.

uJmeiV pro. "you" - you [you are saying]. Emphatic by position and use; "You, not I, are saying that I am the messiah."

oJti "that" - that [i am]. Introducing an object clause / dependent statement of indirect speech expressing what the authorities are saying; "It is you who say that I am", Cassirer. The egw eimi, "I am", is a nice touch, probably serving to allude to the great "I AM." Note Nolland's suggestion that the clause is actually in the form of a question, "Are you saying that I am?"

 
v71

Unlike Matthew and Mark, in Luke's account there is no official determination of guilt by the Sanhedrin; Jesus remains an innocent man set upon by corrupt religious leaders.

oiJ de "then" - but/and they [they said]. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from Jesus to the religious authorities.

tiv pro. "why" - why [still]. Interrogative pronoun introducing an indirect question.

marturiaV (a aV) gen. "testimony" - [do we have need] of witnesses. Genitive complement of the noun creian, "need, use."

gar "-" - because [we = ourselves we heard from the mouth of him]. Introducing a causal clause explaining why the authorities feel no need to ascertain Jesus' guilt by further examination and witness testimony, "because" "we've all heard him as good as say it himself", Peterson (Not really, but it will do!!!).

 
23:1

iii] The hearing before Pilate, v1-5. As Roman governor, Pilate would normally reside at Caesarea, but it is Passover, and if there is to be trouble in Jerusalem, this is when it will occur. With Pilate presently residing in Jerusalem, the religious authorities bring Jesus to him, along with their trumped-up charges. Luke spells out the charges: political subversion; opposing Roman taxation; claiming to be basilea, "a king", apart from Caesar. There is no mention of blasphemy. Pilate is unimpressed.

anastan (anisthmi) aor. part. "rose [and led]" - [and] having arisen. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to lead"; "the whole company arose and brought him before Pilate", ESV.

autwn gen. pro. "-" - [the whole crowd] of them [led him upon = before pilate]. The genitive is adjectival, partitive / wholative.

 
v2

The charges brought before Pilate are a lie. Jesus has never encouraged insurrection against Rome - his teachings are not seditious; he has never spoken against paying taxes to Rome, in fact he has taught the opposite; and he has never claimed to be an "anointed king" in political terms ("My kingdom is not of this world") - Pilate would understand criston, "messiah" to mean "anointed".

kathgorein (katagorew) pres. inf. "to accuse" - [and they began] to accuse, reproach. The infinitive is complementary, completing the sense of the verb "to begin."

autou gen. pro. "him" - him. Genitive of direct object after the kata prefix verb "to accuse."

legonteV (legw) pres. part. "saying" - As for legonteV 22:67.

diastrefonta (diastrefw) pres. part. "subverting" - [we found this man] perverting, misleading [the nation]. The participle, as with kwlunta, "forbidding", and legonta, "saying", serves as the accusative complement of the direct object touton, "this man", standing in a double accusative construction and asserting a fact about the object.

kai "-" - and. The NIV treats this conjunction as epexegetic, specifying the subversion as opposing the payment of taxes and claiming to be an anointed king, so giving us one primary charge specified in two parts. The syntax implies three separate charges, so making kai coordinate.

didonai (didwmi) pres. inf. "payment [of taxes]" - [forbidding] to be paid. Introducing an object clause / dependent statement of indirect speech expressing what Jesus is supposed to have forbidden.

Kaisari (ar oV) dat. "to Caesar" - [tribute, taxes] to caesar. Dative of indirect object.

legonta (legw) pres. part. "claims" - [and] saying = calling [himself to be messiah, anointed]. See diastrefonta above. The same recitative infinitival construction is assumed as for didonai.

 
v3

Pilate's question is the same in all three gospels, as is Jesus' answer. Jesus' answer is evasive, much like his answer to the religious authorities. If Jesus was answering in the affirmative, Pilate would be forced to take immediate action and have him executed for sedition, but he quickly concludes that Jesus is innocent of the charge - Jesus doesn't claim to be the anointed king of the Jews in opposition to Herod. The charge detailed on the titulus attached to the cross of Jesus, doesn't imply that Pilate actually believed it. His unwillingness to change the charge to "claimed to be King of the Jesus" is nothing more than a poke in the eye to the religious authorities. So, Jesus' reply is non-committal, so Cullmann, Christology, a reply something like the NIV; "You say so", NRSV. See Bock who argues for a qualified endorsement.

oJ de "so" - but/and he [pilate asked him]. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from the religious authorities to Pilate.

legwn (legw) pres. part. "-" - saying. As for legonteV, 22:67 above.

twn Ioudaiwn (oV) gen. "[king] of the Jews" - [are you the king] of the jews? The genitive is adjectival, descriptive, idiomatic / subordination; "king over the Jews." The use of the pronoun su, "you", is emphatic by position and use.

oJ de "-" - but/and he. As above.

apokriqeiV (apokrinomai) aor. part. "[Jesus] replied" - having answered [he said to him, you are saying]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to say"; "he answered and said to him". See apokriqeiV 1:19 for this common construction.

 
v4

In Matthew and Mark, the religious authorities heap further charges on Jesus, but Luke focuses on Pilate's conclusion that Jesus is innocent of the charge of sedition, of claiming that he is "King of the Jews", and of stirring the people up to revolt. Of course, the reader knows that Jesus is indeed a king with authority transcending anything that Pilate could ever imagine.

oJ de "then" - but/and he [pilate]. Transitional, change in subject from Jesus to Pilate.

proV + acc. "to [the chief priests]" - [said] toward [the chief priests and the crowds]. See proV, 22:70 above.

en + dat. "against" - [i find no guilt] in [this man]. Adverbial use of the preposition, probably reference / respect, "with respect to this man"; "in the case of this man", TH. "As far as I can see, there is no crime for which this man can be charged", Barclay.

 
v5

oiJ de "but" - but/and they. Transitional, change in subject from Pilate.

legonteV (legw) pres. part. "-" - [they were urging, insisting] saying. As for legonteV, 22:67 above.

oJti "-" - that. Introducing an object clause / dependent statement of direct speech expressing what they were saying.

kaq (kata) + gen. "all over" - [he incites the people] according to = throughout. Here taking a spatial sense, "down from, throughout."

thV IoudaiaV (a) gen. "Judea" - all [of judea]. The genitive is adjectival, partitive / wholative.

didaskwn (didaskw) pres. part. "by his teaching" - teaching. The participle is adverbial, instrumental, expressing means, as NIV.

kai "-" - and. Possibly epexegetic, specifying "all of Judea"; "he has done this .......", Culy. "He has been spreading his propaganda all over Judea; it started in Galilee and now it has spread all the way to here."

arxamenoV (arcw) aor. mid. part. "he started" - having begun. The participle is adverbial, modal, expressing manner, or instrumental, expressing means.

apo + gen. "-" - from [galilee]. Here expressing separation, "away from." Culy suggests that here the preposition is used to indicate a starting point, cf., BDAG 105.2.a.

e{wV w|de "all the way here" - up to, as far as here. Spatial construction indicating an end point.

 
v6

iv] The hearing before Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee, v6-12. Only Luke records Herod's meeting with Jesus. The Hasmonean palace in Jerusalem was situated just west of the temple, and obviously Herod is in residence to celebrate the Passover. Pilate's motive for sending Jesus off to Herod is unclear. It may be an example of buck-passing, or maybe Pilate is trying to find a way to secure Jesus' release without political damage. The move certainly gains Pilate political advantage with Herod, cf., v12. Either way, for Luke, the episode further demonstrates Jesus' innocence, while at the same time, reflecting messiah's path of suffering, cf., Psalm 2:1-2.

akousaV (akouw) aor. part. "hearing" - [but/and] having heard this. The participle is adverbial, best treated as temporal; "When Pilate heard this ...."

ei "if" - [pilate asked] if = whether [the man is a galilean]. Here as an interrogative, introducing an indirect question. "He asked whether this man was a Galilean", ESV.

 
v7

The action anapempw, "to send", implies a sending to a higher authority, an action which gains Pilate brownie-points with Herod.

epignouV (epiginwskw) aor. part. "when he learned" - [and] having known. The participle is adverbial, best treated as temporal, as NIV.

oJti "that" - that. Introducing an object clause / dependent statement of perception expressing what Pilate had learned.

ek + gen. "under" - [he is] from [a region under the authority of herod]. Expressing source / origin.

onta (eimi) pres. part. "who was" - [he sent him toward herod] being [and = also in jerusalem]. Although anarthrous, the participle is probably adjectival, attributive, limiting Herod, as NIV; "who himself was in Jerusalem during those days", Moffatt.

en + dat. "at [that time]" - in [these days]. Temporal use of the preposition, as NIV.

 
v8

Obviously, Herod's initial fear that Jesus was some kind of reincarnated version of John the Baptist had long past, and now he just wanted to see if he would perform some of his tricks.

idwn (oJraw) aor. part. "when [Herod] saw" - [but/and he herod] having seen [jesus, rejoiced greatly]. The participle is adverbial, best treated as temporal, as NIV.

gar "for" - because. Introducing a causal clause explaining why Herod is happy.

ex (ek) + gen. "for [a long time]" - from = since [sufficient time]. Temporal use of the preposition, "from a long time ago"; "he had long wanted to see him", Moffatt.

h\n ... qelwn (qelw) pres. part. "he had been wanting" - he was wanting. The present participle with the imperfect verb to-be forms an imperfect periphrastic construction, possibly emphasising durative aspect.

idein (oJraw) aor. inf. "to see" - to see [him]. Complementary infinitive, completing the sense of the verb "to will, wish."

dia to + inf. "from what [he had heard]" - because of [the to hear]. The preposition dia + the articular infinitive serves to introduce a causal clause; "because of the things he heard about him."

idein (oJraw) aor. inf. "to see" - [and he was hoping] to see. Complementary infinitive, completing the sense of the verb "to hope." As with the verb qelw, "to wish", the verb elpizw, "to hope", is a cognitive verb, and as such, it may also be classified as introducing a dependent statement of perception expressing what is "willed / hoped"; "he hoped that he might see ....."

ginomenon (ginomai) pres. part. "perform" - [a certain sign] performed. The participle serves as the accusative complement of the object "a certain sign", standing in a double accusative construction and asserting a fact about the object; "he was hoping to see some sign done by him", ESV.

uJp (uJpo) gen. "-" - by [him]. Instrumental, expressing agency.

 
v9

Jesus is in control of the situation and so he chooses not to answer Herod's questions, as if by answering them the cup of suffering could be avoided. Jesus' silence reflects the actions of the Suffering Servant, cf., Isaiah 53:7

en + dat. "with" - [but/and he asked = questioned him] in [many words]. Adverbial use of the preposition, instrumental, expressing means, "by many words"; "he questioned him at length", ESV.

autw/ dat. pro. "him" - [but/and he answered nothing] to him. Dative of indirect object.

 
v10

Obviously, Pilate sends the accusers, along with the accused, to Herod. The religious authorities don't hold back, presumably with the same charges as in v2, and they do so eutonwV, "strongly, vigorously, vehemently" (adverb of manner).

kathgorounteV (kathgorew) aor. part. "accusing" - [but/and the chief priests and the scribes stood] accusing [vigorously]. The participle is adverbial, best treated as modal, expressing the manner of the action of the religious authorities standing before Herod; "they stood by accusing him vehemently."

autou gen. pro. "him" - him. Genitive of direct object after the kata prefix verb "to accuse."

 
v11

The stone the builders rejected (Ps.117:22) is despised, or here exouqenhsaV, "ridiculed, treated with contempt", and empaixaV, "mocked." For sport, they dress Jesus in royal robes described as lampoV, "bright", probably with the sense "magnificent".

exouqenhsaV (exouqenew) aor. par. "ridiculed" - [but/and and = even herod with the soldiers of him] having treated with contempt [him and having mocked him, having clothed him with a magnificent robe, they sent him to pilate]. The main verb is anepemyen, "they sent [him] back", is modified by three participles, prompting numerous translations, all with a similar meaning. There is no definitive way of handling the three participles, but the second option below is as good as any. The first participle, as with empaixaV, "having mocked", is adverbial, temporal; "After treating him with contempt and mocking him", NASB. The third participle, peribalwn, "having clothed", is attendant on the main verb, "to send back"; "they dressed him in a magnificent robe and sent him back to Pilate."

Thompson lists 5 possible ways to handle the participles:

•iAll three are temporal;

•iThe first two temporal and the third attendant circumstance, as above;

•iAll three are attendant circumstance;

•iThe first two temporal, the third instrumental expressing means;

•iAll three are temporal, but the third identifies the beginning of the action; "Then, when Herod, along with his soldiers, had treated him with contempt and ridiculed him, after putting a splendid garment upon [him], he sent him [back] to Pilate", Nolland.

 
v12

By recognising Herod's authority, Pilate is treating Herod as an equal, and in the Hellenistic world, this serves as the basis of a friendship. Luke does not explain why they were once enemies. Bock, referencing Tannehill, notes that "Ironically, this trial provides a reconciliation very different from the one that Jesus will achieve by going to the cross."

en + dat. "[that day]" - [but/and] on [this day]. Temporal use of the preposition.

te .... kai "-" - both [herod] and [pilate became friends]. Coordinate construction.

met (meta) + gen. "-" - with [one another]. Expressing association / accompaniment.

gar "-" - for. Here more reason than cause; explanatory - background information.

o]nteV (eimi) pres. part. "they had been" - [they were existing previously] being. A rather strange imperfect periphrastic construction. In a normal construction, the verb "to exist previously" would be the participle, and the participle would be the imperfect verb to-be. Anyway, the sense is "they were previously."

en + dat. "[enemies]" - in [enmity, hatred]. Adverbial use of the preposition, modal, expressing the manner of their previous relationship; "they were previously enemies".

proV + acc. "-" - toward [themselves]. Here used to indicate the direction of the action. "Up to that time they had been hostile to one another", Cassirer.

 
v13

v] The final hearing and judgment before Pilate, v13-25. a) Pilate sentences Jesus, v13-16 - these verses have no parallel in the other gospels: Again, Luke reinforces his main point, namely that both Herod and Pilate decide that Jesus is innocent of any charges and so they seek to release him. "Jesus' crucifixion therefore had nothing to do with personal guilt or culpability (Deut. 19:15)", Stein.

de "-" - but/and. Transitional, indicating a step in the narrative; "Then Pilate called together the ......"

sugkalesamenoV (sunkalew) aor. mid. part. "called together" - [pilate] having called together [the chief priests and the authorities and the people]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to say", v14; "Pilate called together ....... and said to them."

 
v14

Pilate summarises the charge laid in v2, of diastrefonta to eqnoV, "turning away" = "misleading / subverting the people" - inciting subversion. The religious authorities may have eu{ramen, "found" Jesus guilty of their charges, but Pilate ouqen eu|ron, as well as Herod, "finds nothing" against him.

proV + acc. "to" - [said] toward [them]. As with proV, 22:70 above.

moi dat. pro. "me" - [you brought this man] to me. Dative of indirect object.

wV "as" - as [the one subverting the people]. The comparative particle is used here to express a characteristic quality. Jesus is not like someone who subverts the people, but is such a person (according to the religious authorities).

anakrinaV (anakrinw) aor. part. "have examined" - [and behold, i] having examined him [before you, have found nothing]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to find", as NIV, Moffatt, .... The ESV opts for adverbial, temporal; "after examining him before you, behold, I did not find ....."

en + dat. "-" - in [this man]. Adverbial use of the preposition, reference / respect; "concerning this man."

w|n gen. pro. "-" - [responsible, culpable of these things] which [you make accusations]. Marshall suggests that there is an assumed toutwn (epexegetic genitive), "of these things" = "of the crimes", to which w|n is attracted.

kat (kata) "against" - according to [him]. Here expressing opposition.

 
v15

"I have examined this man in your presence and I have found him innocent of all the charges that you have levelled against him, and so has Herod, who understands your concerns better than I do, for he has sent him back to me as an innocent man."

all oude "neither" - but neither. Strong adversative standing in a counterpoint construction; "I ..... have found no basis ...... but neither has Herod found no basis". The double negative giving the positive sense, "I .... have found no basis ...... and neither has Herod found any basis; "Neither has Herod", Fitzmyer. Marshall suggests that oude here is ascensive, "but/and not even Herod". If we accept an ascensive sense it implies that Herod's judgment on the matter is a greater confirmation of Jesus' innocence.

gar "for" - because [he sent up him toward us]. Introducing a causal clause explaining why Pilate holds the view that Herod also regards Jesus innocent of the charges brought against him by the religious authorities.

estin pepagmenon (prassw) perf. mid. part. "he has done" - [nothing] is having been done. The perfect participle with the present verb to-be forms a perfect periphrastic construction, possibly emphasising aspect - Jesus has never done anything deserving of death.

autw/ dat. pro. "-" - by him. The dative is instrumental, here used to express agency.

qanatou (oV) gen. "[to deserve] death" - [worthy of = deserving] death. Genitive complement of the adjective axion, "worthy", which takes a genitive of the thing of which one is worthy.

 
v16

To placate the religious authorities, Pilate suggests a good whipping to settle matters. The paideuw, "discipline", would not go as far as scourging. Scourging is a severe form of whipping administered as part of the punishment of crucifixion.

oun "therefore" - therefore. Inferential, drawing a logical conclusion.

paideusaV (paideuw) aor. part. "I will punish" - having disciplined [him, i will release him]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the future verb to release; "Therefore, I will flog him and release him." Possibly adverbial, temporal, so Culy, or modal, expressing manner, "So, I shall release him with a whipping", Moffatt.

 
v17

b) The religious authorities demand the death penalty, v17-23 - covered in more detail by Matthew, cf., Matt.27:17-23: The murderous intent of the religious authorities continues unabated, with Luke continuing to emphasise Jesus' innocence. Of the synoptists, only Luke has Pilate, not only pronounce Jesus innocent three time, but also has him attempting to release him three times, cf., John18:38, 19:4,6.

Luke's record of Pilate's attempt to release Jesus by using the custom of a prisoner release at Passover, is somewhat unclear. A scribe may have sought to rectify this problem by adding a gloss from Mark 15:6 and Matthew 27:15, given that the oldest texts do not contain this verse.

anagkhn de eicenapoluein autoiV kata eJorthn eJna.

"He was obliged to release one prisoner for them at the festival."

 
v18

The NIV has "the whole crowd shouted", a statement which leaves the impression that a crowd has gathered, made up of the religious authorities and others. Luke is not really saying this. In 23:1 the plhqoV, "assembly, company of religious leaders", lead Jesus off to Pilate, and it is likely that it is this "assembly, company" who now cry out pamplhqei, "as an assembly, company" = "as one" (adverb of manner).

legonteV (legw) pres. part. "shouted" - [but/and they cried out together as a company] saying. See legonteV 22:67 above.

hJmin dat. pro. "to us" - [but/and release barabbas] to us. Dative of indirect object.

 
v19

The point Luke wants to make is that Jesus, the innocent man, is exchanged for a murderer (mentioned twice to make the point). Not quite "insurrection" and "murder". Barabbas was somehow associated with a recent revolt in Jerusalem, but more importantly, he is a murderer.

h\n (eimi) imperf. "had been thrown" - [who] was being thrown [in = into prison, jail]. The aorist participle (we would expect the present tense) with an imperfect verb to-be forms an imperfect periphrastic construction.

dia + acc. "for" - because of. Causal, here leaning toward ground / basis; "on the ground of / on the basis of." Two grounds are offered: an association with a recent revolt, and second, murder.

genomenhn (ginomai) aor. part. "-" - [a certain revolt, insurrection] having occurred [in the city and murder]. The participle is adjectival, attributive, limiting the noun "revolt". Luke doesn't tell us whether Barabbas is a participant in the revolt, is somehow caught up in it, or even "just happened to be in prison with them", Evans. Evans, as with most commentators, assumes that Barabbas was a participant in the revolt.

 
v20

qelwn (qelw) aor. part. "wanting" - [but/and again pilate spoke to, addressed them] wanting. The participle is adverbial, causal; "Because Pilate wanted to release Jesus, he again addressed the crowd."

apolusai (apoluw) aor. inf. "to release" - to release [jesus]. Complementary infinitive, completing the sense of the verb "to wish, want."

 
v21

As against Mark's aorist staurwson, "Let [him] be crucified", Luke has the present imperative staurou, "Crucify [him]", and unlike Mark, the religious authorities repeat their demand. Although there is some evidence to the contrary, it is very unlikely that the Jews practiced crucifixion for a capital case, so heightening the criminal behaviour of the religious authorities.

oiJ de "but they" - but/and they [were crying out]. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from Pilate to the religious authorities.

legonteV (legw) "-" - saying [crucify, crucify him]. See legonteV 22:67 above.

 
v22

Luke again emphasises Jesus' innocence. Pilate ouden aition qanatou, "finds no cause worthy of death", ie., there is no criminal basis which demands capital punishment. The worst that can be said of Jesus is that he is a religious troublemaker deserving paideusaV, "chastisement".

oJ de "-" - but/and he. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from the religious authorities to Pilate.

proV + acc. "to [them]" - [a third (adv. "for a third time") he said] toward [them]. As with proV, 22:70 above.

gar "why?" - for [what evil did this one do?]. Certainly not causal here, nor explanatory. Possibly transitional, or even inferential, used for "self-evident conclusions", Culy, cf., BDAG 190.3. As a matter of form, it is sometimes used in questions and so therefore left untranslated, so Thompson, cf. BDAG 189c, mg. 1f; "But what crime has he committed", Rieu.

en + dat. "in [him]" - [i did not find] in [him]. Adverbial use of the preposition, reference / respect; "concerning him."

qanatou (oV) gen. "the death penalty" - [culpability, responsibility, cause worthy] of death. A similar construction to qanatou v15, "[worthy] of death", here with axioV, "worthy", assumed. So, genitive complement of the assumed adjective "worthy". "No ground for capital punishment", TH.

oun "therefore" - therefore. Inferential, drawing a logical conclusion.

paideusaV (paideuw) aor. part. "I will have [him] punished" - having disciplined [him, i will release him]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to release", "I will therefore punish and release him", ESV, but possibly adverbial, temporal, "So, after a whipping I will let him go", Berkeley.

 
v23

With the durative imperfect epekeinto, Luke tells us that the religious authorities "kept on insisting, demanding", and did so fwnaiV megalaiV, "with loud voices" = "forcefully". Pilate is obviously intimidated by them.

oiJ de "but" - but/and they. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from Pilate to the religious authorities.

fwnaiV (h) dat. "insistently" - [they were insisting] in [great] voices. The dative is adverbial, modal, expressing manner; "forcefully".

aitoumenoi (aitew) pres. mid. part. "demanded" - demanding. The participle is adverbial, best treated as instrumental, expressing means; "they insisted forcefully by demanding that ...."

staurwqhnai (staurow) aor. pas. inf. "that [he] be crucified" - [he] to be crucified [and the voices of them overcame]. The infinitive introduces an object clause / dependent statement of indirect speech expressing what the religious authorities demanded. The accusative subject of the infinitive is auton, "he".

 
v24

c) Pilate chooses the path of political expediency, v24-25. Pilate epikrinen, "decided, determined" (technically "to give a judicial sentence"), "not according to judicial findings, but for the audience's double demand for Jesus' execution and Barabbas' release", Evans.

genesqai (ginomai) aor. inf. "to grant" - [and pilate determined] to be done. Introducing an object clause / dependent statement of indirect speech expressing Pilate's judicial judgment.

autwn gen. pro. "their [demand]" - [the demand] of them. The genitive is adjectival, treated either as possessive, "their demand", or verbal, subjective, "the demand made by them."

 
v25

Luke doesn't record Jesus' scourging by the Roman soldiers; the humiliating treatment dished out to Jesus comes at the hand of the temple police and Herod's strateumasin, "soldiers". Luke reinforces the corruption of the religious authorities by again reminding the reader that they sought the release of a worthless prisoner, a rebel and murderer, rather than Jesus, a man who "went around doing good and healing", Acts 10:38. This culpability is further reinforced by the general statement "he delivered Jesus to the will of them", as if the religious authorities get to lead Jesus away to the cross. Note how in v26 the subject of "they led [him] away" is unidentified. The NIV "soldiers" is surely historically accurate, but Luke is underlining culpability, and it's all on Israel's corrupt leadership. Due to the wolves, the people of Israel are now like sheep without a shepherd.

ton ... beblhmenon (ballw) perf. mid. part. "the man who had been thrown" - [but/and he released] the one having been thrown [into jail]. The participle serves as a substantive.

dia + acc. "for" - because of, on the ground of [a revolt, insurrection and murder, the one whom they were requesting]. As for dia, v19.

tw/ qelhmati (a atoV) dat. "to [their] will" - [but/and he delivered over jesus] to the will, desire [of them]. Dative of indirect object. For the genitive pronoun autwn see v24.

 

Luke Introduction

Exegetical Commentaries

 

[Pumpkin Cottage]
lectionarystudies.com