Comments on: Jesus Before Pilate

By: Brian B.

Brian B. — Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:05:38 +0000

I find it dually sad and amazing that most of these comments are overlooking a HUGE fact, we shall point out later. First, while it’s accurate the historical records outside of Scripture give us a clear picture of Pilate being a ruthless killer of any opposing Rome or causing trouble in his communities. The Holy Writ is by no means trying to paint a picture of him as kind & gentle. Everyone living at the time would already know that. The fact he found no fault does several things, shows Gods sovereignty in fulfilling prophecy. That he knew how wretched the religious leaders were. The fact that he was standing in the presence of God in the flesh and surely Pilate was well aware of all the miracles and other great things Jesus had done. Even Satan and demons tremble in his presence Scripture says, you think a mere human ruthless killer drunk on power and authority was above recognizing the goodness, glory, and respect that Jesus deserved? I am disappointed at BAR/Author also for saying “The Bible is no history book, no matter the proportion or accuracy of historical events it relates.” That’s the dumbest statement I have ever heard That’s like saying “That’s not a duck, even though it has feathers a beak, and quacks” The Bible is ABSOLUTELY a history book, a revelation of God and His Dealings with His Creation. That doesn’t mean it has every detail of history within it, but that by no means discounts it’s historical record which has been proven and scrutinized. Such statements and comments are from those who don’t realize that Jesus was the Lamb who is coming back as the Lion VERY SOON. May God open their hearts and eyes, be blessed everyone.

By: William Mayor

William Mayor — Fri, 11 Nov 2022 16:06:16 +0000

The gospel accounts represent a whitewashing of Pilate and a deliberate shifting of the blame to the Jewish leaders. There is ample evidence of a deliberate rewriting of history by the early church to conceal some things, and hints that this was known at least until the time of Eusebius, who also provides hints of deliberate rewriting. But good heavens, if there was deliberate rewriting of history by the early church, what does that say about our understanding of what Jesus and the Apostles actually taught? Might we have it all wrong, perish the thought. Rather beat the drum louder and support what was recorded, no matter what its actual accuracy is.

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 05 Dec 2018 23:07:38 +0000

Edoardo, et al… We get it…the Gospels present a truth you do not accept. Spin is the art of the historian who wants to impose his own ideology and agenda. Quite unprofessional and bigoted.

By: Johan

Johan — Thu, 18 Jan 2018 13:24:55 +0000

The Jews (as any other Roman client state) were allowed to execute non-Roman citizens contravening their own laws (see Luke 14:29 for instance). The Romans very much left internal laws and usages intact after conquering.

In the wider empire, there are plenty of documented executions by client rulers especially in the documented histories of Gaul and Germany.

Nobody was, however, allowed to execute for sedition (the crime of endangering Roman rule by armed rebellion and possibly also instigating this). This prerogative belonged to Rome alone.

By: Maurice Michael

Maurice Michael — Tue, 10 Oct 2017 18:36:17 +0000

The fear of God was upon Pilate during the trial. Regardless if Pilate was portraid (by sources outside of the bible) as a strict ruler, we must not rule out the account of the fear (John19:8). If you’ve ever felt the fear of God, you already know of it’s over baring power and ability to humble the mightiest of men.

By: zach

zach — Sat, 29 Jul 2017 14:15:38 +0000

CB states: The Jewish leaders “… lacked the jurisdiction to impose a life sentence, which is what they wanted for the itinerant rabbi from Galilee, as we are told.”

The article says “death sentence” and CB changes it to “life sentence”! In other words, CB twists the article into saying the exact opposite what it says. So it is either an intentional distortion by CB in order to make his (her?) point, or CB has reading comprehension issues!

For those that don’t know, there was no such thing as “life sentence”, indeed prison itself wasn’t even a Jewish concept.

By: Lil

Lil — Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:26:01 +0000

His life was both given and taken

By: Johanna

Johanna — Sun, 23 Jul 2017 04:15:13 +0000

Historians contemporaneous with or close to the time of Pontius Pilate show him to be a heavy-handed administrator of Roman law over a turbulent population in and around Jerusalem. Since these historians did not have any religious agenda, it would be wise to accept what they have to say about this man. The Romans in general were not known for merciful dealings with any prisoners, whether taken in battle or suspected of inciting rebellion. Chieftains and kings take in battle were dragged through the streets of Rome in the triumphal parade of the victorious Roman general, and then publicly executed. According to the Gospels, the Sanhedrin wanted Jesus executed because they feared another bloodbath like what had occurred a decade earlier during a Jewish revolt that had been put down viciously by the Roman legions. Pontius Pilate did what he was expected to do– he had Jesus killed. As to the embellishments to the story, they are either true or false, either exactly as eyewitnesses saw it, or added later to exculpate the Romans and put all the blame on the Jews. At this point in history it seems impossible to know which is true. But that Jesus was put to death by a Roman execution squad after Pontius Pilate’s edict of death is incontrovertible.

By: Joseph Cadwallader

Joseph Cadwallader — Sat, 22 Jul 2017 03:44:56 +0000

The failure to understand that it was Jesus who was in control of the happenings during the last week of his life is tragic. (1) Early in the week, the powers wanted to kill him, he escaped; (2) the powers did not want a confrontation during the holy days; (3)Jesus forced the issue by telling Judas to do what he had to do; (4) at his arrest, when the powers asked who was Jesus, his reply, “I AM” caused the soldiers to fall to the ground. (5) If using the holy name, “I AM” was that overpowering, Jesus could have walked off. He didn’t. (6) Only when the High priest required Jesus to talk did he reply and that was to state his future position. (7) Pilate tried to duck the issue but Jesus did not give him the opportunity. (8) His life was not taken, it was given.

By: James

James — Fri, 21 Jul 2017 04:15:10 +0000

Ever so often this web site will try to squeeze beyond what the Bible says. I have seen hints in a number of articles that say the Bible in not completely reliable. Sometimes it comes out as “the archaeology contradicts the Bible”. Other times it comes out as the Bible is not accurately presenting facts.

That suggests that there are a number of contributors who don’t actually believe the Bible. Can something be done about this, can a believing moderator ensure scriptural purity please?

The correct starting point for all articles MUST be:
The Bible is 100% accurate and reliable (apart from translation issues).

If the archaeology supports it – good.
If not, the archaeology is wrong or incomplete.

And don’t try to cast doubt or suspicion over the accuracy of the scriptures.