WHAT HAPPENED IN THE BEGINNING, HAPPENING AGAIN AND AGAIN

 Pontius Pilate sat on the judgment to decide the fate of Jesus. How ironic since Christ is the judge of us all! Pilate was a just judge unlike so many who are today biased partisans.

Pilate represented Caesar as governor of Judea — the ethnic Jewish Kingdom — an ethnarchy. In the absence of Caesar, for all practical purposes, Pilate had the authority of Caesar, so there sat two judges: Pilate as the ‘right hand’ of Caesar who was on permanent vacation on the island of Capri along with his successor, Caligua. There was no king of the Jews and neither was there a ‘Caesar’ of the Jews. Pilate was the governor in the absence of both king and Caesar.

Pilate asked of Jesus, “Are you the King of the Jews?” (Mat 27:11). Jesus responded, “You said that, not Me!” Jesus never claimed to be king of the Jews, and essentially with the power of Caesar in his judgment, Pilate made Jesus King of the Jews.

In mockery, the mob called Jesus, “King of the Jews.” They even saluted Jesus and called Him that, according to the apostle, Mark.

Caesars would always wait to see how the people accepted their kings. Kings could not be unwanted, so Caesars would use public opinion. They would not want to appoint a king that the people of the kingdom would reject, according to the historian Flavius Josephus. Even in mockery, perhaps misunderstood by Pilate, the people seemed to see Jesus as the King of the Jews and had the pedigree for it as the ‘Son of David,’ as He was called.

Pilate seemed to recognize Jesus as the legitimate King of the Jews, and had posted a sign to that effect atop the Cross:

Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, “Write not, ‘The King of the Jews;’ but that He said, ‘I am King of the Jews’” (John 19:21)

They lied; Jesus never said that! In mockery the crowd said that. They gave false witness as is often the case. Indeed, they were a den of thieves and liars seeking to undermine, not just the legitimate king, but their Lord of lords.

Jesus was innocent on all accounts although He was charged with many. (That should sound familiar in this election cycle.)

Disregarding the liars, Pilate did have written only, “King of the Jews.” As the Son of David and his taxes paid to Caesar, the crucifixion of Jesus was essentially the coronation of a new king, which by the way, was his heritage. Kings from the east, sometime after the birth of Jesus, came to Judea and asked, “Where is He that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship Him?” (Mat 2:2).

One of the Caesar’s prerequisites is that nearby kings in the empire recognize appointees to kingship and offer the right hand of friendship to them, according to Josephus. (They did just that with the coronation of Herod the Great.) At the birth of Jesus, nearby kings, usually thought to be three kings, came to give Jesus to give the right hand of friendship. They all had the same authority, and in the absence of Caesar, they would have the authority of Caesar. As such, although He had yet to be crowned, Jesus had authority over Pilate, but Pilate judged Jesus, and he did judge Him fairly. His decision was written… Jesus was recognized by the Roman government as legitimate king of the Jews.

Now consider the ‘goat’ that escaped crucifixion: 

And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas. Therefore, when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, “Whom will you that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ?” For he knew that for envy they had delivered Him. (Mat 27:16-18)

 Jesus would be killed out of envy. Those who would have Him dead surely had aspirations for the throne of Judea; the chief priests having established a priestly kingdom based on the House of Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas who had had five sons as chief priests between himself and Caiaphas. In the manner of king and priest John Hyrcanus, perhaps the chief priests would establish their own priestly throne like the Hasmonean Dynasty and the Maccabean family.

The chief priests were envious, surely because they sought to be King of kings and Lord of lords, since Judea was the “Rome” of the Herodian Dynasty.

Everybody sought to be king. Sicarii, thieves, and zealots finally destroyed Rome in 70 A.D. in pursuit of Judean kingship. Rome (Titus) did not destroy Jerusalem; Jewish envy did that!

The ‘Paschal Pardon’ was a ritual Passover tradition, according to scripture. There was a “notable prisoner” called “Barabbas” that was probably a populist and proved so when the people demanded his release.

According to Mark’s account, Barabbas was one of the numerous insurrectionists against the Roman power” (Mark 15:7). Barabbas was a revolutionary who sought to overthrow Pilate and Rome and become kings themselves. Barabbas, after that criminal was released, would certainly have been one of the insurrectionists still alive in 70 A.D. and part of the Wars of the Jews against Rome. (It is to be noted that the Paschal Pardon was nothing more than allowing criminals to continue their criminality in the manner of this generation.)

The name Barabbas was mentioned because he was notorious. Everybody knew his name and cheered him on. What was so special about his notorious name? The surname ‘Barabbas’ is patrimonial and theophoric at the same time; it means ‘Son of the Father.” The surname of Jesus would have been ‘Son of the Father’ which means of the “House of God” in that the Father, Yahweh, was the first known member of the House of God.

Are you understanding yet what was happening? Let me help; the forename of Barabbas was ‘Jesus’ in the English. The scapegoat was named ‘Jesus the Son of the Father.’ That was the same Name of Jesus the Christ! So, that was a case of stolen valor. (Could that have happened in the U.S. election of 2019?) The malcontent was freed to continue his insurrection while the servant of the people who loved them was crucified (Call that severely and severally impeached if you wish!)

The mob wanted the mobster to continue destroying the Jewish nation while the peacemaker who said mean things to them was reduced to a sacrifice to cover their sins. (Is that not the condition our own nation is in at the present? Solomon said that “there is nothing new under the sun.”)

The crucifixion of Jesus was a case of hating the populist (Remember Palm Sunday?) and the legitimate sovereign in favor of a criminal interloper? (Is that not what happened on Insurrection Day January 6^th, 2020?)

This was not meant to be a political commentary, but the happenings surrounding the death of Jesus is suspicious! They killed the legitimate sovereign out of envy and to gain power for themselves. Ironically, that was the first, original sin.

The so-called Serpent said to Adam and Eve, “For God does know that in the day you eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and you shall be as gods, knowing good and evil” (Gen 3:5). Who was it that wanted to be God? Lucifer, the cunning ‘Serpent’! He was accusing them of his own lusts. He projected his own subtilty on them, accusing them of his own initiatives. (Is not the same modus operandi happening today?)

No, I did not want to get political, but neither did Jesus. It was the mob who were political.

All the groups that judged Jesus did so for political reasons; even the mob, who with God dead, could do what was right in their own eyes, as before when there were no kings in Israel (Jud 17:6). They preferred anarchy to civility, even proving so by killing their King and Savior. (Anarchy is the favored government of those in charge today and the open border has demonstrated.)  

You judge yourselves; what was never happen again with the criminal impeachment of the Lord, happened again in the 1930s and 1940s, and is happening again and again all over the world.