C A R L B. G A R N E R

PILATE'S DILEMMA

You may have a hard time feeling sympathy for him, but Pilate was in a tough spot. It was Passover week, Friday morning, and the Jews were making preparations for their Sabbath. It was not unusual for them to be very militant and bold at this season of the year, for they were recalling a time when they were freed from slavery in Egypt, and were headed toward their promised land. They felt very strongly about being a part of God's purpose.

In the midst of all this preparation, the chief priest and the elders had arrested a very controversial man, Jesus, the carpenter from Nazareth. The whole city was buzzing from rumors that He was in danger of being arrested and put on trial by the Jews. Pilate had some very touchy political considerations that weighed on his mind at that time. What if he were called upon to give his verdict on the innocence or guilt of this man whom many claimed to be their messiah? Whatever he did was going to alienate one group or the other.

Jerusalem was hardly a political plum, but it was "better than Crete or Arabia." He had to protect his job if he hoped for any kind of promotion out of this political dead end. Plus, his having to deal with Jesus was not going to help the situation at all. For over three years Pilate had been hearing about Jesus, and he did not know what to think; was he really their Lord? Or just another lunatic?

The common people were drawn to Him, not only because He was one of them, but because He was such a powerful preacher. And there were rumors that He had performed miracles and raised the dead. He heard that the Jews had already tried Jesus and found Him "guilty," so Pilate knew they would be coming, and he couldn't elude their questions. Most of the morning was taken up with questioning (which Jesus virtually ignored), and a trip over to see Herod Antipas, who was visiting from Galilee. Pilate had already tried different ways to pass the responsibility to someone else, but now the mob was coming back, and he could not avoid them.

To make matters worse, his wife had a dream about Jesus, and wanted Pilate to "have nothing to do with that just man." He had offered Barabbas' release as an alternative to Jesus' execution, but the Jews demanded "...crucify Him," Matthew 27:22. There seemed nothing left but to appeal to their justice: "Why, what evil hath He done?" But the mob insisted, "Let him be crucified," and Pilate declared that he was not responsible for Jesus' death. "I am innocent of the blood of this just person," Matthew 27:24. He then "....washed his hands before the multitude."

It is not surprising that the Jews wanted to avoid the question, "What evil hath he done?" for truly Jesus had gone "about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil," Acts 10:38. Pilate may not have wanted the truth about this, but we do. We need to know whether He is Messiah or maniac; Lord or lunatic. If He is Lord, we must obey Him, Luke 6:46. But if He was a lunatic, we need to know that, too. What is the truth?

JESUS "DID NO SIN"
When Peter wrote of Jesus' life, he said, "Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth," 1 Peter 2:21-22. Pilate was going to have trouble convincing his contemporaries that Jesus was a scoundrel worthy of death. Why? Because Jesus' life proved otherwise. The writer of the book of Hebrews declared Jesus was, "in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin," Hebrews 4:15. He was God, and He was man. He is the only one ever to have possessed both of these qualities on earth at once. His life is an example to us because He faced the same kind of temptations we face, "yet without sin." He took Satan's hardest blows, but refused to bow to Satan's temptations. Though He had raised the dead and stilled the stormy seas, He resisted temptation just as we do. He stood before Pilate as no one else had stood: Totally Innocent.

GOOD AND EVIL ARE DEFINED BY LAW Unknowingly, Pilate had asked a question that is right at the heart of determining the guilt or innocence of any individual or any group of individuals. "What evil hath he done?" Pilate, as reprobate as he was, understood that one's guilt or innocence could be determined only by comparing his/her behavior with an accepted standard. A man was not guilty or innocent just because another man said so. Evidence must be presented. Law must be examined, for it is law that distinguishes good from evil. Pilate knew that. The Jews knew that. We know that.

But modern man has "changed the rules" of human behavior. This new wave of "ethics" attempts to make every person a law unto himself. But even Pilate knew that accepting such a "standard" was folly. It was because Jesus "did no sin" that He was not guilty. Sin is defined by God's law, 1 John 3:4: "Sin is the transgression of the law." Whether man is or is not willing to recognize God's law, he is still accountable to that law. Pilate faced a dilemma because he had no character, and he allowed an innocent man to be crucified. We too can "crucify...the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame," Hebrews 6:7, by lives that contradict our profession. Pilate failed his character test. How about you?