It is reasonable that Pilate would assume the chief priests and the people would desire Jesus’ release instead of Barabbas, because the latter was really guilty of the charges the authorities levied falsely against Jesus. Pilate knew the high priests understood Jesus wasn’t really guilty of the charges they made against him, so why wouldn’t they reject one who was really guilty of the accusations they made against Jesus?
Therefore, willing to release Jesus, whom he knew was innocent of insurrection, Pilate kept trying to convince the Jewish authorities to accept the verdict (Luke 23:20). Nevertheless, everyone cried out to crucify Jesus and release Barabbas. This is the first time the Gospel narratives mention that the Jewish authorities actually wanted Jesus to be crucified. According to all four Gospels, the demand for crucifixion was not made until Pilate had proposed to release Jesus on account of the feast.
In Luke 23:22 Pilate again tried to release Jesus, saying he would chastise (G3811) him and let him go (cf. Luke 23:16). Nevertheless, as I concluded in a previous study, Pilate’s method of chastisement (G3811) probably included scourging (G3146) Jesus, as we understand the meaning today. Furthermore, Luke tells us the Jewish authorities insisted that Pilate crucify Jesus (Luke 23:23). The Gospel of John records that they threatened Pilate, saying he wasn’t a friend of Caesar, if he released him (John 19:12). Therefore, in view of the fact that Pilate believed he was facing a potential riot, if he didn’t give them what they demanded, he conceded to the Jewish authorities’ desires (Luke 23:23-24).
Notwithstanding, we must ask why Pilate would capitulate to Jewish demands. He could have delayed long enough to place his men in the crowd, as he had done a year earlier to prevent an uprising. So, the fact he faced a potential riot can’t be the real reason he gave in to the Jews. The fact is that Pilate became procurator of Judea on account of his friendship with Lucius Aelius Sejanus. Sejanus actually executed the office of Emperor in the absence of Tiberius, who had all but retired from public life by this time to Capri, an island in the Tyrrhenian Sea on the south side of the gulf of Naples. The problem was that Tiberius’ sister-in-law, Antonia, had levied treasonous charges against Sejanus, whom Tiberius almost immediately had executed as a result. Nevertheless, the trouble didn’t end with Sejanus’ death. Investigation was being made concerning all of his appointees, and many of them were arrested and executed, together with their families. Therefore, in light of these events, which were taking place around the Roman Empire even as Jesus was being tried by Pilate, the Jewish authorities charge: “If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar’s friend” (John 19:12) needed to be taken very seriously. Pilate’s very life might have hung in the balance, if Jesus’ release was reported to Roman authorities with the slant the high priest of Jerusalem would have given it.
Therefore, Pilate finally released Barabbas, who was actually guilty of insurrection, and condemned Jesus, whom he had found innocent of that crime (Luke 23:25). This is indeed an interesting contrast made by Luke at this point in his narrative (cf. Acts 3:14), emphasizing the severity of the exchange of places with the known criminal.
Smoodock's Blog 