From: Busy Person’s Guide to John 11 to 21 Return to Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2019
All reproduction of
text in paper, electronic, or computer
form both permitted and encouraged so long as
authorial
credit is given and the text is not altered.
Busy Person’s Guide to the
New Testament:
Quickly Understanding John
(Volume 2: Chapter 19)
Chapter Nineteen
Even a Brutal Beating by Soldiers Does Nothing to Satisfy the
Blood Lust of the Religious Leaders’ Arranged Mob; the Leaders Insist That Under
Their Law Jesus Fully Deserves Death
(John 19:1-7): 1 Then Pilate took Jesus
and had him flogged severely. 2 The soldiers braided a
crown of thorns and put it on his head, and they clothed him in a purple robe. 3 They came up to him again and again and said, “Hail, king of the Jews!”
And they struck him repeatedly in the face.
4 Again Pilate went out
and said to the Jewish leaders, “Look, I am bringing him out to you, so that
you may know that I find no reason for an accusation against him.” 5 So Jesus came outside, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, “Look, here is the man!”
6 When the chief priests
and their officers saw him, they shouted out, “Crucify him! Crucify him!” Pilate said, “You take him and crucify him! Certainly I find no reason for an accusation
against him!” 7 The Jewish leaders
replied, “We have a law, and according to our law he ought to die, because he
claimed to be the Son of God!” --New English
Translation (for comparison)
19:1 So then Pilate took Jesus and scourged Him. He tried to substitute one horrible punishment for another. Although in most situations this would be the preliminary to execution, in this case he hoped that it would be enough for them to back off from their insistence on outright death. Compare verse 6 and Luke 23:22: “I have found no reason for death in Him. I will therefore chastise Him and let Him go.” They wanted obvious “blood” so he would give it to them. But even that turns out not to be enough.
Sidebar on
the severity of this kind of punishment:
“The Roman punishment inflicted hideous
torture. ‘It was executed upon slaves
with thin elm rods or straps having leaden balls or sharply pointed bones
attached, and was delivered on the bent, bare, and tense back.’ The victim was fastened to a pillar for the purpose.
. . . The flagellation usually brought
blood with the first stroke, and reduced the back to a fearful state of raw and
quivering flesh. Strong men often
succumbed under it. . . .” (Pulpit
Commentary)
19:2 And the soldiers twisted a crown of thorns and put it on His head, and they put on Him a purple robe. The Roman soldiers took the opportunity to mock their Jewish prisoner by dressing Him in a regal-like “purple robe.” The pseudo-crown would cause pain with every movement and allow themselves some entertainment. The waiting crowd wanted Him dead so they would take pleasure in hearing of it and they themselves were surely venting some of their own rage at the needlessly early hour. Furthermore, it would allow them a way to take out their resentment of Jews in general. Where they were hardly counted as a “prime” assignment in the Roman army!
Sidebar on
the nature of the robe: “Mark has ‘purple,’ Matthew ‘scarlet,’ Luke is
silent. ‘Purple’ with the ancients was a
vague term for bright rich color and would be used of crimson as well as of
violet. The robe was a military chlamys, or paludamentum, perhaps one of
Pilate’s cast-off cloaks.” (
19:3 Then they said, “Hail, King
of the Jews!” And they struck Him with
their hands. Although they kneeled to Him as they uttered their
words (Matthew 27:28-30), they showed their mockery by accompanying this with slapping
Him around. They could not normally
physically display much of their hostility toward Jews and toward Jewish
aspirations for national independence since there was usually no credible
excuse to invoke. But they could
take their frustrations out on the single Jew under their control--especially
one whose enemies claimed portrayed Himself as King. This would be the way they desired to
treat any Jewish king. In most
cases Jews in general as well.
19:4 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.” Pilate formally presented Jesus to the accusers and reinforced his earlier annoyance at the case by asserting that he still could “find no fault in Him.” But he had authorized the abuse (verse 1) and probably hoped that the humiliation and literally blooded body of the Lord would be adequate to satisfy their rage.
19:5 Then Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. And Pilate said to them, “Behold the Man!” Adding pictorial insult to his words, Jesus was brought out dressed with a pseudo-crown (of thorns) and the pseudo-regal purple robe. Is this a King? he seemed to be implying. No, “Behold the man. Surely you can see that! Nothing more than a mere mortal like you. No King ever looks like this!”
19:6 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.” You want Him dead, you crucify Him yourself insisted Pilate. “I find no fault in Him.” At this point Pilate had provided the verbal formula that, arguably, permitted them to do so. They had gained the “authority” if they dared use the Roman method.
This was impossible for at least three reasons. First, they wanted Him dead without their direct fingerprints on the execution. Secondly, doing so exposed them to the danger of what we today would call “a public relations disaster:” If they had dared to crucify Him, can you imagine the mockery that could have followed them for imitating the alien Roman method of death? Especially after the person they submitted the case to had repeatedly denied that he saw any punishable element of guilt! Thirdly, Pilate could have unleashed retaliatory actions after the Passover against the Sanhedrin’s prerogatives and rights: “You knew full well I was being sarcastic. You do not play games with the Roman government!”
19:7 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.” The accusers insisted that under their law Jesus deserved death because of who/what He claimed to be. Now they finally admit that the real issue for them is strictly a religious one and, at least briefly, they are not hiding behind the veneer of a political justification (claiming kingship).
Roman
governors were supposed to respect local customs to the extent they were not
hostile to or incompatible with Roman law and governance. Especially in regard to
local religious custom. So they
are challenging him by asserting that, under that standard, the death
penalty would be fully justified. Hence
the unspoken argument, “Therefore it is your duty to carry it out since we are
not supposed to.”
Pilate Again Interrogates Jesus (John 19:8-11): 8 When Pilate heard what they said, he was more afraid than ever, 9 and he went back into
the governor’s residence and said to Jesus, “Where do you come from?” But Jesus gave him no answer. 10 So Pilate said, “Do you refuse to speak to me? Don’t you know I have the authority to release
you, and to crucify you?”
11 Jesus replied, “You
would have no authority over me at all, unless it was given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is
guilty of greater sin.” --New English
Translation (for comparison)
19:8 Therefore, when Pilate heard that saying, he was the more afraid, In one sense what they had said (verse 7) made an innocent verdict even more defensible than the lack of real evidence against Him: they had abandoned their political accusations and those were the ones that had to be of main concern to Pilate as governor. On the other hand by raising the accusation that Jesus was clearly guilty of a capital crime under their religious law—and citing a specific religious offense—they made Pilate even more nervous about the entire situation. He could be smeared with the accusation of encouraging unrest himself by refusing to act against offenses that their highest religious leaders insisted represented fundamental violations of their beliefs. In modern bureaucratic speech “destabilizing the country through lack of action” could be the accusation against him.
On the
other hand--and equally alarming--what if the claim against Him were true . . .
in the sense that a reasonably educated Roman official would take it? “Doubtless
he had heard of some of the many miracles which Jesus had performed, and now, it
seems, began to think that perhaps what had been currently reported was true,
and that he really had performed the wonderful works ascribed to him. For it is very well known, that the religion
which the governor professed directed him to acknowledge the existence of demi-gods and heroes, or men descended from the gods. Nay, the heathen believed that their gods
themselves sometimes appeared on earth, in the form of men (Acts
19:9 and went again into the Praetorium, and said to Jesus, “Where are You from?” But Jesus
gave him no answer. Returning
to the inside of the facility, Pilate attempted to get more information from
Jesus. Jesus initially frustrated this
goal by insisting upon remaining silent.
He had already implicitly given the answer: He was from beyond this world: “I have come into this world;” John
Furthermore,
there is an element of prophetic fulfillment as well: “He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He
opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep
before its shearers is silent, so He opened not His mouth” (Isaiah 53:7). (In all fairness this could also refer to His
not protesting to the soldiers at the abuse they put Him through.)
To psychologically force an answer, Pilate reminded Him that he had the power of life and death over Him. To that Jesus was willing to respond. . . .
Of course, from the broader perspective the power was delegated by God. He fully recognizes that no human society can operate without law and those to enforce it (Romans 13:1-5); anarchy can destroy not only its practitioners but the very society that allows it to prosper. On the other hand, the right to exercise power carries with it the inherent obligation to exercise it justly.
Whatever Pilate’s
own responsibility, “the greater sin” was still on the souls of those who had
unjustly “delivered” Jesus to His tribunal in the first place. But is being an “accessory to murder” all
that much better than being the murderer?
Although Judas “delivered” Jesus to the arresting party, he had no role
in “deliver[ing] Me to you.” That atrocity lies at the feet of Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin.
The Religious Leaders Loudly Insist That to Release Jesus
Would Make One an Enemy of Caesar and Pilate’s Resistance Finally Collapses
(John 19:12-16a): 12 From this point on,
Pilate tried to release him. But the
Jewish leaders shouted out, “If you release this man, you are no friend of
Caesar! Everyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar!” 13 When Pilate heard
these words he brought Jesus outside and sat down on the judgment seat in the
place called “The Stone Pavement” (Gabbatha in Aramaic). 14 (Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover, about
15 Then they shouted out,
“Away with him! Away with him! Crucify him!” Pilate asked, “Shall I crucify your king?” The high priests replied, “We have no king
except Caesar!” 16a
Then Pilate handed him
over to them to be crucified. --New English
Translation (for comparison)
Anyone,
they insisted, who claimed to be “a king”—in any sense of the term—was
automatically and irrevocably Caesar’s enemy.
That was not the kind of accusation any provincial ruler wished
to have passed on to
Especially
at the then current time: “The Jews perhaps scarcely knew how powerful their
weapon was. Pilate’s patron Sejanus (executed A.D. 31) was losing his hold over
Tiberius, even if he had not already fallen.
Pilate had already thrice nearly driven the Jews to revolt, and his
character therefore would not stand high with an Emperor who justly prided
himself on the good government of the provinces. Above all, the terrible Lex Majestatis was by this time worked in such
a way that prosecution under it was almost certain death.” (
“The jealous fear
of Tiberius had made ‘treason’ a crime, of which the accusation was practically
the proof, and the proof was death. The
pages of Tacitus and Suetonius
abound with examples of ruin wreaked on families in the name of the ‘law of
treason.’ ” (Ellicott’s
Commentary for English Readers) And
Pilate unquestionably was the type of ruler who would be wary of anyone looking
too closely at his record.
19:13 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus out and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called The Pavement, but in Hebrew, Gabbatha. When Pilate formally sat down on the official “judgment seat” he was symbolically indicating that the entire matter was about to be brought to an official close.
“Both [Pavement and Gabbatha]
occur here only, and are instances of the writer’s minute knowledge of the
localities in
Or was he making a final effort to appease them by arguing from His appearance that whatever offense He had given had already been adequately punished? Jesus presumably still has on the purple robe and crown of thorns mentioned in verse 5. Looking at that blood stained prisoner, how can they consider Him either a king or deserving of more punishment?
19:16a Then he delivered Him to them to be crucified. With no sign they would relent, Pilate ordered the penalty they sought to be carried out. In that sense “he delivered Him to them to be crucified:” He delivered Him to their wishes and demands. They will be behind the punishment but the hands carrying it out will fully be Roman.
The Crucifixion of the Lord (John 19:16b-27): 16b So they took Jesus, 17 and carrying his own
cross he went out to the place called “The Place of the Skull” (called in
Aramaic Golgotha). 18 There they crucified
him along with two others, one on each side, with Jesus in the middle. 19 Pilate also had a notice written and fastened to the cross, which read:
“Jesus the Nazarene, the king of the Jews.”
20 Thus many of the
Jewish residents of
23 Now when the soldiers
crucified Jesus, they took his clothes and made four shares, one for each
soldier, and the tunic remained. (Now
the tunic was seamless, woven from top to bottom as a single piece.) 24 So the soldiers said to one another, “Let’s not tear it, but throw dice
to see who will get it.” This took place
to fulfill the scripture that says, “They divided my garments among them,
and for my clothing they threw dice.” So the soldiers did these things.
25 Now standing beside
Jesus’ cross were his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 So when Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing
there, he said to his mother, “Woman, look, here is your son!” 27 He then said to his disciple, “Look, here is your mother!” From that very time the disciple took her into
his own home. --New English
Translation (for comparison)
19:16b So
they took Jesus and led Him away. The “they” here shifts to the appointed execution squad, since the
execution will be carried out by them, bringing with them both Jesus and the
two other prisoners to die that day.
They are the ones in actual charge of the implementation of the
sentence.
His
religious foes, of course, happily escorted the condemned from the place of the
coerced “trial” to the place of execution.
This way they could fully savor their triumph. Perhaps the idea was also going through their
heads that this would also assure that nothing unexpected aborted their
intentions. After all, Pilate had
already attempted to do so!
Presumably the site had some similarity to a skull to have gained its name. If it had, at some time, been a place where the skulls of the executed were left behind (or the entire body to rot to pieces), then the name would surely have been “place of skulls” plural. The Romans had no objection to leaving bodies to decay, but they were in a country where the local “prejudices” were against such. Even more important, these sentiments would have been even more intense at the time of any of the annual feasts such as Passover.
Sidebar: The exact physical location (in modern terms)
has been hotly debated. What little
additional information is provided by the most ancient sources: “It was
outside the gate (Hebrews
“All the Synoptists describe the character of the two who were
crucified with Jesus. Matthew
and Mark, robbers; Luke, malefactors (κακούργους). All three use the phrase, one on the right,
the other on the left, and so, substantially, John: on either side one. John says nothing about the character of
these two, but simply describes them as two others.” (Vincent’s Word Studies)
In addition, he could get in
a major verbal thrust at the common aspiration for national independence by
merely ordering the title to be inscribed above the convicted. So far as Pilate went, this was how any
“king of the Jews” should be treated—any real one at least. That kind the religious leadership
might well be far more tender hearted toward. So he scorns the entire concept.
19:20 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. Roman
officialdom wanted locals to be painfully aware that if you crossed the
lines they considered as most important, retribution would be dire; locating
the execution site where few would see it would be contradictory to this
purpose. Hence they would prefer one
near
“Many” of these people took time to read what was posted
about Jesus. There is no hint of a
“notice” over the other two men, so it was likely an uncommon step for these
Romans and those traveling by were naturally curious as to what was so serious
an action that they thought it was called for.
And it was written in three languages to guarantee that anyone
who was literate would be able to read it!
Again an unneeded step unless the governor wanted to
drive the point home hard. (Latin
was the official language in the Empire; Hebrew the local sacred language;
Greek the international second language.)
19:23 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. These four individuals included a centurion (Matthew 27:54) in charge. Three men, three guards, and one supervisor to make any decisions that had to be made.
Since the execution squad received the garments of the deceased as a kind of “bonus” to their regular pay, they naturally separated them among those assigned to the crucifixion detail. Most of the clothing presented no problem--the sandals, any headwear. Even the outer garments: “The outer garment, being composed of several parts--fringes, borders, etc.--could be easily divided.” (Barnes’ Notes)
The inner
garment (tunic) was where the problem was encountered. The two criminals had the customary attire,
but not Jesus. “Ordinarily the tunic consisted of two pieces connected at the shoulder
by clasps; but that worn by Jesus was made in one piece. This seems to have been the rule with the
priestly tunics. (Compare the account of
Aaron’s tunic in Josephus’
Sidebar on
what these garments typically looked like in the first century: “On His head
He wore a white sudar, fastened under the chin and
hanging down from the shoulders behind.
Over the tunic which covered the body to the hands and feet, a blue tallith with the blue and white fringes on the four ends,
so thrown over and gathered together that the gray, red-striped undergarment
was scarcely noticeable, except when the sandal-shod feet came into view.” (Delitzsch, “A Day In Capernaum,” as quoted by Vincent’s Word Studies)
What
they did--since they were Romans it was obviously without any intent to do
so--perfectly fit the words of Psalms 22:18, which had spoken of one’s clothing
being both divided and cast lots over.
Sidebar: Although only these few are specified, a much
larger group was also present: “And many
women who followed Jesus from
Sidebar on
this being the next to last appearance of Mary in the pages of the New
Testament: “Neither her own danger, nor the sadness of the spectacle, nor the
reproaches and insults of the people, could restrain her from performing the
last office of duty and tenderness to her divine son on the cross. Grotius justly observes, that it was a noble instance of fortitude and
zeal. Now a sword (according to Simeon’s
prophecy, Luke 2:35) struck through her tender heart, and pierced her very
soul; and perhaps the extremity of her sorrows might so overwhelm her spirits,
as to render her incapable of attending the sepulchre,
which we do not find that she did. Nor
do we, indeed, meet with any thing after this in the sacred story concerning
her, or in early antiquity: except that she continued among the disciples after
our Lord’s ascension, which Luke observes, Acts
This
instruction also implies that His earthly father was dead and unable to take on
that task. Nor does He leave her the
responsibility of one of the brothers in the family, who have figured earlier
in the narrative of even this gospel--though as skeptics of Jesus rather than
enthusiastic adherents (John 7:5). They did
come to embrace Him, if not by now at least after a resurrection
appearance: We later read of how “the
mother of Jesus, and . . . His brothers” met with the apostles in
The Death on the Cross (John
31 Then, because it was
the day of preparation, so that the bodies should not stay on the crosses on
the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was an especially important one), the Jewish
leaders asked Pilate to have the victims’ legs broken and the bodies taken
down.
32 So the soldiers came
and broke the legs of the two men who had been crucified with Jesus, first the
one and then the other. 33 But when they came to
Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and blood and
water flowed out immediately.
35 And the person who saw
it has testified (and his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling
the truth), so that you also may believe.
36 For these things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled, “Not
a bone of his will be broken.” 37 And again another scripture says, “They will look on the one whom
they have pierced.” --New English
Translation (for comparison)
If John is meaning to make (or include) the speaking of these words as the fulfillment of scripture, the reference would be to Psalms 69, which well fits the current situation when the crowd present was large and strongly anti-Jesus and mocked Him repeatedly : “19 You know my reproach, my shame, and my dishonor; My adversaries are all before You. 20 Reproach has broken my heart, and I am full of heaviness; I looked for someone to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but I found none. 21 They also gave me gall for my food, and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.”
Sidebar on
“hyssop:” “The
plant cannot be identified with certainty.
The caper-plant, which is as likely as any, has stalks which run to two
or three feet, and this would suffice.
It is not probable that Christ’s feet were on a level with the
spectators’ heads, as pictures represent:
this would have involved needless trouble and expense. Moreover the mockery of the soldiers recorded
by Luke (see Luke
“[Who are the ‘they’ who ‘put it to his mouth?’] The actors and
their motive are left doubtful. Probably
soldiers, but possibly Jews, and probably in compassion rather than mockery; or
perhaps in compassion under cover of mockery (compare Mark
“The two apostles
mark with special clearness that the Messiah’s death was entirely
voluntary. Matthew says, ‘He let go His spirit’ (Matthew 27:50); John, ‘He gave up His spirit.’ None of the four says ‘He died.’ The other two have ‘He
breathed out;’ and Luke shows clearly that the surrender of life was
a willing one by giving the words of surrender ‘Father into Thy hands I commend
my spirit.’—‘No one taketh it from Me,
but I lay it down of Myself.’ It was the
one thing which Christ claimed to do ‘of Himself’ (John
Sidebar on the order of Jesus’ words from the cross: “The order of the seven words of the cross
will be,
(1) ‘Father,
forgive them, for they know not what they do’ (Luke
(2) ‘Verily I say
unto thee, Today shalt thou be with Me in
(3) ‘“Woman, behold thy son,’ ‘Behold thy mother’ (John
(4) ‘Eli, Eli,
lama sabachthani?’ (Matthew 27:46, Mark
(5) ‘I thirst”
(John
(6) ‘It is
finished’ (John 19;29);
(7)
‘Into Thy hands I commend My spirit’ (Luke
Knowing what was otherwise going to occur, the Jewish religious officials were especially concerned that the Sabbath would be dishonored at the time of the most important feast of the year, the Passover. Hence they requested that the process be speeded up by breaking their legs. Jesus dying before this was carried out spared Him that, but if it had been any other day one can’t help but wonder whether they would have wanted a quick death for any of the prisoners. There would surely have been a certain “emotional satisfaction” in their hearts by needlessly drawing out the duration of the sufferings of their arch foe.
Sidebar: To the extent that the Jews practiced hanging
from a tree (either to produce death or as a grim warning after execution), the
clear cut Mosaical provision was for the body to be
cut down and buried before the day was over (Deuteronomy
Sidebar: Death on the cross was produced by suffocation—the pressure on the chest and lungs. Hence by breaking of the legs, death would come quicker because they would no longer be able to lift themselves up to breathe. In spite of the intense immediate pain, it actually speeded up the death.
Sidebar: This outflow of “blood and water” is often
attributed to the physical side effects of the spear cutting into both the heart
and the pericardium surrounding the heart:
the liquid there combining with the blood from the heart wound. This would occur either as the final
contribution to causing the death or be the result of the death having already
occurred. In favor of the latter John
Sidebar: This
spear wound was far from a superficial one; it created a large and deep
penetration of the body. It provided
absolute assurance that Jesus was unquestionably dead. When Thomas doubted whether Jesus had really
been resurrected, Jesus appeared in their midst and the Lord urged him: “Reach your finger here, and
look at My hands; and reach
your hand here, and put it into My side. “ (John
20:27).
Note here that loyalty to the actual events required that the accurate version be told. Misrepresentation and distortion were viewed as incompatible with that obligation: it had to be a truthful account—which tells us much of the mind frame behind the authors of the New Testament gospels.
Sidebar
on John’s double stress on truth telling--“testimony is true and he
knows that he is telling the truth”(KJV: “true” and “he said true”): “There is
no tautology, as in the Authorized Version.
John first says that his evidence is adequate; he then adds that the
contents of it are true. Testimony may
be sufficient (e.g. of a competent eyewitness) but false: or it may be insufficient (e.g. of
half-witted child) but true. John
declares that his testimony is both sufficient and true; both alêthinos and alêthês. . . .
“Why does John attest thus earnestly the trustworthiness
of his narrative at this particular point?
Four reasons may be assigned.
This incident proved (1) the reality of Christ’s humanity against
Docetic views; and these verses therefore are
conclusive evidence against the theory that the Fourth Gospel is the work of a Docetic Gnostic. . . ;
(2) the reality of Christ’s Divinity,
against Ebionite views; while His human form was no
mere phantom, but flesh and blood, yet He was not therefore a mere man, but the
Son of God; (3) the reality of
Christ’s death, and therefore of His Resurrection, against Jewish insinuations of trickery
(compare Matthew 28:13-15; (4) the clear
and unexpected fulfillment of two Messianic prophecies.” (
Yet there is another passage that
most prefer far more: “they will look on Me
whom they pierced” (Zechariah
A Wealthy Secret Disciple Arranges the Release of the Body
for Burial (John
39 Nicodemus, the man who
had previously come to Jesus at night, accompanied Joseph, carrying a mixture
of myrrh and aloes weighing about seventy-five pounds. 40 Then they took Jesus’ body and wrapped it, with the aromatic spices, in
strips of linen cloth according to Jewish burial customs.
41 Now at the place where
Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden was a new tomb where
no one had yet been buried. 42 And so, because it was
the Jewish day of preparation and the tomb was nearby, they placed Jesus’ body
there. --New English
Translation (for comparison)
19:38 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. Even
a position as high as being on the Sanhedrin did not protect one from retaliation. At a minimum, snobbery and contempt; perhaps
even social ostracism would occur if this loyalty were widely known. These were men of a class where favors and
help would be routinely exchanged. Hence
breaking ranks could do serious economic damage as well--through opportunities
lost and useful assistance refused. Not
to mention outright expulsion from synagogues hostile to Jesus (John
We know
that he was rich (Matthew 27:57) and “a prominent council [= Sanhedrin]
member” (Mark
How much he
actually spoke out in those hearings we do not know. We do know that the entire affair deeply
frightened him for he had to “tak[e] courage” when he
“went into Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus” (Mark
Sidebar on the retrieval of bodies of the legally executed: “According to Roman law. Ulpian, a Roman jurist of the third century, says: ‘The bodies of those who are capitally punished cannot be denied to their relatives. At this day, however, the bodies of those who are executed are buried only in case permission is asked and granted; and sometimes permission is not given, especially in the cases of those who are punished for high treason. The bodies of the executed are to be given for burial to any one who asks for them.’ Avaricious governors sometimes sold this privilege.” (Vincent’s Word Studies)
On an
earlier occasion the Sanhedrin made an unsuccessful effort to have Jesus
arrested (
In this kind of hostile environment prudence was a natural course.
The situation now being beyond anything he could possibly help with, there was one remaining thing that was within his ability. He could show his respect by helping with the burial preparations. This took the form of purchasing spices--quite possibly with the assistance of Joseph (verse 38) since they were both expensive ones and in large volume.
Clearly he was in charge of this aspect while Nicodemus (because of previous interactions with Pilate?) intervened to obtain the body itself. The weight of the spices alone surely argues that one or more others were assisting him carry them. Indeed, in light of his high position, quite possibly carrying all of them, as servants would be expected to do. (The famous rabbi Gamaliel was said to have been buried with eighty pounds of spices.)
Sidebar
on the spices used: “Frankincense and myrrh were products of
In the very
early hours of Sunday morning, certain women brought additional spices to use
on the body (Mark 16:1; Luke
Sidebar on
ancient Jewish burial practices from the Benson Commentary (quoting an
unidentified source for most of it): “ ‘Those who have written upon the manners and customs of
the Jews tell us, that they sometimes embalmed their dead with an aromatic
mixture of myrrh, aloes, and other gums or spices, which they rubbed on the
body, more or less profusely, according to their circumstances and their regard
for the dead. After anointing the body,
they covered it with a shroud, or winding-sheet, then wrapped a napkin round
its head and face, others say, round the forehead only; because the Egyptian
mummies are observed to have it so; last of all, they swathed the shroud round
the body as tightly as possible, with proper bandages made of linen.
“ ‘At other times, they covered
the whole body in a heap of spices, as is said of Asa,
2 Chronicles 16:14. From the quantity of
myrrh and aloes made use of by Joseph and Nicodemus, it would appear that the
office performed by them to their Master was of this latter kind; for they had
not time to embalm him properly.’ They
seem, however, to have done all that was usual in such circumstances to persons
of wealth and distinction, which, as well as the sepulcher itself, agreed to
Isaiah’s prophecy (Isaiah 53:9).”
Sidebar on the tomb bearing witness to the resurrection: “By the circumstance of the sepulcher’s being ‘nigh to the place where Jesus was crucified, and consequently nigh to Jerusalem, all the cavils [complaints] are prevented, which might otherwise have been occasioned, in case the body had been removed farther off. Moreover, it is observed that the sepulcher was a new one, wherein never any man had been laid. This plainly proves that it could be no other than Jesus who arose; and cuts off all suspicion that he was raised by touching the bones of some prophet who had been buried there, as happened to the corpse which touched the bones of Elisha, 2 Kings 13:21. Further, the evangelists take notice that it was a sepulcher hewn out of a rock, to show that there was no passage by which the disciples could get into it, but the one at which the guards were placed, Matthew 27:60; and, consequently, that it was not in their power to steal away the body, while the guards remained there performing their duty.- — Macknight.” (Benson Commentary)