Pilate's Wife
Matt. 27:11-26
The chief priests with the elders and scribes and the whole council of the Sanhedrin had decided to put Jesus to death. They had Jesus brought before Pilate the governor to pronounce the death sentence. (Mark 15:1; Luke 22:66; 23:1)
Pontius Pilate was the fifth governor of the southern half of Palestine. He was “governor” in the sense of being procurator, which is a title an officer of the Roman empire entrusted with management of the financial affairs of a province and often having administrative powers as ruling over an imperial province, and as such directly responsible to the emperor in Rome. Although he had been given power over the civil, criminal, and military jurisdiction, he was under the authority of the Emperor in Rome.
Pilate was a politician and an administrator, probably in that order. He was always concerned about Rome’s opinion of him.
.Pilate would keep his job only as long as he delivered relative peace and stability in the province he governed.
The narrative here continues from verses 1 and 2 of this chapter, which read: “Early in the morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people made their plans how to have Jesus executed. So they bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate the governor” (Matt. 27:1-3). It was in the ‘morning’ that followed the dark night in Gethsemane, and opened the dread day of the crucifixion So begins one of the few most significant days in human history. As stated, the purpose of the chief priests in bringing Jesus to Pilate was “to have Jesus executed.” The chief priests did not have the power to sentence a man to death, so they sought out Pilate with the purpose of convincing him to sentence Jesus to death. Thus, the action of bringing Jesus to Pilate was essentially an act of murder, for the chief priests knew that Jesus was innocent of any crime that deserved death
So Jesus stood before Pilate, who was the local governor, representing the Roman government which controlled Jerusalem at the time. In the book of Luke, we learn that the chief priests told Pilate: “We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Messiah, a king” (Luke 23:2). This short statement is full of misleading half-truths, and lies. Jesus did “subvert” the chief priests, but called them out in matters of religion, specifically in regard to their religious hypocrisy. Jesus did not “oppose payment of taxes to Caesar”; on the contrary, Jesus said: “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” (Matt. 22:21).
Jesus did claim to be “the Messiah”, but not a political Messiah against the Romans. Jesus did not seek to bring political salvation from the Romans, but rather spiritual salvation from our own sins.. Following these false charges, Pilate confronted Jesus: Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, ‘Are you the king of the Jews?’ ‘You have said so,’ Jesus replied” (vs. 11). In Roman trials the magistrate normally heard the charges first, questioned the defendant and listened to his defense, sometimes permitted several such exchanges, and then retired with his advisors to decide on a verdict, which was then promptly carried out. Matthew abbreviates the conversation between Jesus and Pilate concerning Jesus’ kingship.
In the Gospel of John, we are given more details about this exchange between Jesus and Pilate: “Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, ‘Are you the king of the Jews?’ ‘Is that your own idea,’ Jesus asked, ‘or did others talk to you about me?’ ‘Am I a Jew?’ Pilate replied. ‘Your own people and chief priests handed you over to me. What is it you have done?’ Jesus said, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.’ ‘You are a king, then!’ said Pilate. Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.’ ‘What is truth?’ retorted Pilate” (John 18:33-38).
So Jesus made it clear to Pilate that He was no threat to Rome, saying, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). Moreover, clearly, one sight of Jesus was enough to tell this experienced governor that this was no terrorist, no leader of a revolt aimed at overthrowing the Romans. Pilate would also have known that Jesus had no high position, no wealth, no soldiers, a preposterous position for anyone claiming to be a king
The chief priests then brought more specific charges against Jesus to Pilate, probably the same “false evidence” that was used in front of the Sanhedrin (see Matt. 26:59): When he was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer. Then Pilate asked him, ‘Don’t you hear the testimony they are bringing against you?’ But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge—to the great amazement of the governor” (vss. 12-14). Matthew does not even dignify the lies by enumerating the specific allegations of the chief priests. The specific allegations did not matter; they were determined to have him executed, and to refute their accusations was irrelevant. If these charges were shown to be false, they would raise others. They were not concerned with justice but with an execution.
Jesus also does not dignify the false charges; instead, Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge. Peter later writes of this: “When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly” (1 Peter 2:23). Jesus, as He did at Gethsemane, committed Himself to His Father’s will. In His silence, Jesus fulfilled prophecy found in the book of Isaiah: “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth” (Isaiah 53:7).
Pilate saw through the motives of the chief priests, and knew that Jesus was innocent of capital charges, and so, did not want to condemn Jesus. Then Pilate proposed a way to release Jesus that would, in a way, save face for the chief priests, in that it would not be a case of Roman authorities over-ruling the desires of the chief priests: “Now it was the governor’s custom at the festival to release a prisoner chosen by the crowd. At that time they had a well-known prisoner whose name was Barabbas. So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, ‘Which one do you want me to release to you: Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?’ For he knew it was out of self-interest that they had handed Jesus over to him” (vss. 15-18).
We learn in the Gospel of Luke that Barabbas was “thrown into prison for an insurrection in the city, and for murder” (Luke 23:19). So Barabbas clearly deserved capital punishment. Pilate hoped the crowd would recognize this, and free Jesus. At this point, the trial of Jesus was interrupted in an unusual way: “While Pilate was sitting on the judge’s seat, his wife sent him this message: ‘Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him’” (vs. 19). It is surprising, and sad, that the only testimony (in effect) on Jesus’ behalf during the trial was made, not by any of Jesus’ disciples, nor apostles, nor followers, but by Pilate’s wife. “When all Christ's disciples were fled from Him, when none of His friends spoke a word on His behalf, God raises up a woman, a gentile and a pagan, to give evidence of His innocence.
There is not much known about the wife of Pilate. We can assume she was a well-educated wealthy Roman. She was the last advocate for Jesus before His crucifixion. She remains unnamed because her act is more important than a name.
What was Pilate’s relationship with her?
It depends on how you read the verse in Matthew’s gospel. On the one hand, you can see Pilate’s response to his wife as dismissive and impatient.
But it could also show a man who was affectionate, trying to reassure his wife that everything would be alright.
The wife of Pilate tried to warn her husband not to get involved in the affairs of the trial of Jesus. He did not heed her warning dream. The wife of Pilate called Jesus ‘this innocent man”. The Lord God permitted Pilate one more chance to do the right thing concerning Jesus. He did not heed the warning of the Lord and even though Pilate washed his hands of the matter he is still blamed for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.
This was an honourable testimony to our Lord Jesus, witnessing for him that He was a just man, even then when he was persecuted as the worst of malefactors. When His friends were afraid to appear in defense of him, God made even those that were strangers and enemies to speak in his favour:
(1) when Peter denied him, Judas confessed him;
(2) when the chief priests pronounced him guilty of death, Pilate declared he found no fault with him;
(3) when the women that loved him stood afar off, Pilate’s wife who knew little of Him, showed a concern for Him
Pilate, knowing that Jesus was innocent, receives further confirmation of this through his wife. This message from Pilate’s wife can be seen as a message from God, to check Pilate from going down the path of sin and injustice, in using his power to condemn and kill Jesus. God has many ways of giving checks to sinners in their sinful pursuits, and it is a great mercy to have such checks from providence, from faithful friends, and from our own consciences, and our great duty to hearken to them While Pilate received and digested the message from his wife, the chief priests were busy:
The chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus executed (vs. 20). In stirring up the crowd to release Barabbas, the chief priests give proof of their utter wickedness by corrupting the crowd to join with them in their crime. This deliberate preference of a bad man to a good one, of a justly condemned criminal to one whom even Pilate recognized as innocent, would have been enough to brand the conduct of the priests with infamy. .Pilate returned to continue the proceedings: “‘Which of the two do you want me to release to you?’ asked the governor. ‘Barabbas,’ they answered” (vs. 21).
Barabbas is preferred to Jesus whenever the offer of salvation is rejected This mad choice is made every day, while men prefer the lusts of their flesh before the lives of their souls .Because of his release, in a situation where he fully deserved the punishment of death, Barabbas becomes symbolic of each and every one of us: Christ died in his place.
Jesus was falsely accused of sedition, and a man really guilty of sedition was released It may be that the two who were crucified with Jesus were co-rebels with Barabbas, for Matthew 27:38 calls them ‘rebels,’ ‘guerrillas,’ or ‘insurrectionists’, and their crucifixion indicates they were judged guilty of more than robbery. The fact that three crosses were prepared strongly suggests that Pilate had already ordered that preparations be made for the execution of the three rebels. If so, Jesus the Messiah actually took the place of the rebel Barabbas because the people preferred the political rebel to the Son of God”
At this point, it appears that Pilate, though nominally in authority, has ceded all power to the mob: “‘What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?’ Pilate asked. They all answered, ‘Crucify him!’” (vs. 22). It was absurd for them to prescribe to the judge what sentence he should pass, but their malice and rage made them forget all rules of order and decency, and turned a court of justice into a riotous, and seditious assembly .Pilate’s question, “What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” is a question that every human being must ask himself. Shall I accept Jesus’ sacrifice, and proclaim Him Lord of my life? Or shall I mock Him, along with the raucous mob? The raucous mob chose to “Crucify him!”
This baffled Pilate: “Why? What crime has he committed?” (vs. 23). It is much for the honour of the Lord Jesus, that though he suffered as an evil doer, yet neither his judge nor his prosecutors could find that he had done any evil. Had he done any evil against God? No, he always did those things that pleased God. Had he done any evil against the civil government? No, as he did himself, so he taught others to render to " Caesar the things that were Caesar’s. " Had he done any evil against the public peace? No, he did not strive or cry, nor did his kingdom come with observation. Had he done any evil to particular persons? Whose ox had he taken, or whom had he defrauded? No, so far from that, he went about doing good. This repeated assertion of his unspotted innocence, plainly intimates that he died to satisfy for the sins of others.
When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. ‘I am innocent of this man’s blood,’ he said. ‘It is your responsibility!’” (vs. 24). The onset of an “uproar” tipped the scales of justice, and brought the hearing to an end.
The Romans desired two things in the provinces - tribute and peace. A successful governor was one who kept everything quiet, and popular tumult was greatly disliked, as being troublesome and expensive, if not dangerous”
The flogging of the Messiah was foreseen; it was referred to and hinted at by various Old Testament scriptures: “Plowmen have plowed my back and made their furrows long” (Ps. 129:3); “I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting” (Isa. 50:6); “But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed” (Isa. 53:5).
Now about dreams and visions – are they important?
Dreams were given great significance in the ancient world, more so than they are now. Usually they were seen as a warning against some danger, or a prompt sent by God to persuade a person to do something.
(1) Matthew 2:12 tells us about the warning the Magi received in a dream not to return to Herod.
(2) Joseph of Nazareth also was warned in a dream to flee to Egypt to save the infant Jesus from Herod. (Matthew 2:13).
(3) Then again in Matthew 2:19-22 Joseph was told in a dream it was safe to return from Egypt and settle in Galilee.
Also the New Testament records several dreams that changed the course of history:
(1) the dream of the Magi, warning them not to return to Herod (Matthew 2:12)
(2) the dream of Joseph of Nazareth, warning him to flee to Egypt (Matthew 2:13)
(3) the dream telling Joseph to return from Egypt and settle in Galilee (Matthew 2:19 and 2:22)
All of these dreams appear in the gospel of Matthew, who was writing for a Greek, Jewish and Christian audience.
God used visions in the Bible to reveal His plan, and to further His plan.
With the completion of the Bible, God does not have to use dreams and visions as much as He did before. That is not to say that He cannot or does not; God can communicate with us however He chooses. But when we have a decision to make, our first stop should always be the Bible, not a dream.
How did the gospel writers know what was said between Jesus and Pilate and Jesus and Herod?
It is an obvious question to think about. Here is the problem. I do not know the answer. All I can do is make a logical guess. In the case of Jesus before Pilate, I can assume that there were multiple witnesses, some of whom became disciples of Jesus. Also, Jesus spent a good amount of time with the apostles after His resurrection. He may have told them many of the details of the terrible events of his execution.
As for Herod, more than one member of his household were converted. This is recorded in the New Testament. Joanna, the wife of Chuza, is mentioned in Luke 8:2 and Luke 24:10. Chuza was the manager of Herod’s household. It is entirely possible that Luke actually interviewed Joanna. He clearly interviewed some witnesses, as can be seen from his account. As for Pilate and Herod becoming friends, this would have been more common knowledge than the other two.
