Pilate was the Roman Procurator of the Province of Judea. He had the responsibility of governing Jerusalem and most of the Jews – on behalf of Caesar. The secular and spiritual leadership of those Jews recognized Jesus Christ to be a threat – not to Rome – but to their own exalted positions under Rome. Using false witnesses and twisted logic, they had determined that Jesus had been guilty of blasphemy. In their sight, this ignorant Galilean claimed to be the Messiah. He claimed both power and authority over the temple – their temple. He called Himself the Son of God, making Himself equal to Jehovah. So they brought the self-proclaimed Messiah to Pilate in order to have Him put to death. But Pilate found nothing in Jesus worthy of death. We have no idea how Pilate pictured our Lord. He may have thought of Christ as nothing more than a pathetic, impotent lunatic. Or he might have considered him a rival to the High Priest. But he was certainly not a rival to either himself or to Rome. Not even King Herod considered Jesus to be a threat. So Pilate was “wont” to release Christ and to send him back to Galilee.
For some time, Pilate had maintained a tradition to release one of his prisoners back into Jewish society. “They had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas.” “Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ? But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.”
It is this act of hand washing that I’d like to consider this morning.
Let’s begin with the obvious – the DRAMATIC ACT in the case.
Where did this Roman come up with the idea of washing his hands? I suppose that just about everyone would recognize what it meant, but why use the symbol, when a simple declaration of Pilate’s conclusions might have sufficed? Was it to satisfy his wife as some people suggest?
There may be something in the fact that it is only in Matthew that this symbolical act is described. Remember that of the four Gospels, Matthew is the one most pointedly Jewish. Was Pilate’s hand washing done in light of Jewish scripture? Deuteronomy 21 describes what was to be done when a dead body is found in a field. First it was necessary to determine which city or village was closest to the body. Then priests would be called, and that city would be required to sacrifice an heifer close to the place where the deceased was found. Following that “all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley: And they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it. Be merciful, O LORD, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel’s charge. And the blood shall be forgiven them. ” Moses then added editorially, “So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you, when thou shalt do that which is right in the sight of the LORD.”
During the previous six or eight years of Pilate’s service in Jerusalem, had he become aware of Biblical law? Was he familiar with Deuteronomy 21? Or had he learned what David said in Psalm 26? “Judge me, O LORD; for I have walked in mine integrity: I have trusted also in the LORD; therefore I shall not slide. Examine me, O LORD, and prove me; try my reins and my heart. I have not sat with vain persons, neither will I go in with dissemblers. I have hated the congregation of evil doers; and will not sit with the wicked. I will wash mine hands in innocency…” We can see Pilate’s act, but we can’t be sure of his motive.
But beyond and behind THE ACT in the case, there are THE FACTS of the case.
For example, are you aware that the word “innocent” is found only twice in the Bible and both references are here in Matthew 27? Judas said, “I have sinned in that I have betrayed the INNOCENT blood.” Pilate’s wife used a different word, but called Jesus “that JUST man.” And then Pilate tied both words together, “I am INNOCENT of the blood of this JUST person.” The word “just” could be translated “righteous.” And the word “innocent” means what you’d expect – “not guilty.” Pilate said, “I am not guilty in the shedding of the blood of this righteous man.” Oh, but Pilate you ARE guilty of the blood of Christ. I don’t care whether or not the priests said, “His blood be on us, and on our children.” The fact is, there are a host of guilty people in this case, and you are one of those guilty people.
As we saw last week, Pilate had the authority to put his foot down and order the release of Christ Jesus. On other occasions, he slaughtered people whom he thought were jeopardizing the rule of Rome. And he obviously had the power to release true murderers and traitors like Barabbas. But apparently weighing the pros and cons of the situation, he decided that a momentary alliance with the leadership of the Jews was to his advantage. So he agreed to the crucifixion of a man whom he knew to be innocent. The washing of his hands in no way relieved him of his wilful participation in this travesty.
Why do I bring this to your attention this morning? Because you are as guilty of this sin as Pilate was two thousand years ago. I’m not referring to the ordering of the death of Christ, even though that is true in a sense. Judas betrayed Christ to the priests, and later Peter, the Christian, betrayed Him as well. At this point I am not referring to Pilate’s part in the crucifixion. I am referring to the sin of passing the buck – ducking responsibility – denying accountability.
From the day of man’s initial rebellion against God, we have been honing our anti-responsibility skills. In order to justify her sin, Eve essentially said, “the Devil in that serpent made me do it.” And when God confronted God, Adam passed the buck, “The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” At first glance, it sounds like Adam blamed Eve for his disobedience. But with a little further reflection, Adam places the responsibility on the Lord who gave Eve to the man. From day one we sinners have been blaming others for our sins.
Aaron, while his brother was on Mt. Sinai receiving the law from the hand of God, was down at the foot of the mountain fabricating an idol. “Moses said unto Aaron, What did this people unto thee, that thou hast brought so great a sin upon them? And Aaron said, Let not the anger of my lord wax hot: thou knowest the people, that they are set on mischief. For they said unto me, Make us gods, which shall go before us: for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him. And I said unto them, Whosoever hath any gold, let them break it off. So they gave it me: then I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf.” Not only did Aaron blame the people, he hinted at a miracle from the Lord. And when Saul usurped the office of the priest in personally offering a sacrifice, it was the same thing. When Samuel asked for an explanation, “Saul said, Because I saw that the people were scattered from me and thou camest not within the days appointed…. I forced myself therefore, and offered a burnt offering.” This time Saul blamed Samuel. The Bible is replete with justification for sin – passing responsibility toward others, and often towards God.
And so is modern life. Why doesn’t that man attend the house of God? Because his parents made him go when he was young, or because there are hypocrites attending there. Why is he a drunk? Because he inherited a weakness for liquor from his alcoholic father. Why is that young woman shop-lifting? Because she was denied so many things in her youth. Why did that man take his own life? The excuses go on and on into infinity, and I mean literally into infinity. We hear such foolish things as sin in a person today because of something in a previous life. Hog wash, there are no previous lives from which we have been recalled. And why is that person a homosexual? He says it is because God got confused at his conception putting his female soul into a male body. Man knows no bounds when it comes to passing off responsibility – blaming even God. “The woman whom thou gavest to be with me (Jehovah), she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” There are few, who can’t look at our family tree to find alcoholics, gamblers, adulterers and other sinners. Personally speaking, my family history suggests that I should be an alcoholic. But I am not a drunkard today, because by the grace of God, I stopped drinking as a teenager, and, by the grace of God, I will not permit it to touch my lips again. I am sure that many of us could say the same sort of thing about many other sins. We all have water basins which we could use to justify our wicked deeds – or our potential sins – but not one of them holds water. Pilate may have washed his hands and blamed the Jews, but it didn’t change the fact of the case.
“When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.” Obviously, Pilate’s hand-washing was a symbolical act. And I hope that you can see in it another symbol – a religious rite – one which is even greater in its folly.
There are hundreds of millions of people living under the umbrella of “Christendom” who believe that a little water washes away the filth of sin in the sight of God. But “baptism” has no more power to wash away the responsibility of sin than did Pilate’s basin of water. If you think about it, what Pilate did was more a “baptism” than what is practiced in most churches today. He probably “dipped” or “plunged” his hands into that bowl – he “immersed” his hands in the water. Perhaps he even used a bit of soap. But that Nazarene church down the street, or the Lutheran church around the corner, sprinkle or pour a little water on someone and call it “baptism.” What a deceitful, unbiblical practice. The word “baptism” – “immersion” – cannot be squared with the sprinkling of water on a baby’s face. But worse than calling it “baptism” is to say that such sprinkling washes away sin. I don’t care if the administrator calls himself a “priest,” a “pastor,” a “vicar,” or a “man of God,” he has no more right to say “you are innocent” than Pilate did to make the same claim himself. Pilate proclaimed his innocence in much the same way that the Catholic priest or the Protestant bishop does for his financial supporters.
We’ve considered the act and the facts of the case….
Now let me REDACT this scripture in order to end on a positive note.
“When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing… he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person.”
The Bible clearly teaches that “all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” Over an over again the Bible declares that “there is not a just man upon the earth that doeth good and sinneth not.” “There is none righteous, no not one; there is none that understandeth there is none that seeketh after God.” We are “all gone out of the way,” we are “together become unprofitable” to God; “there is none that doeth good, no, not one.” As Brother James taught us a couple weeks ago, God gave His law to Israel, and to us. That law is not a ladder that we might climb its rungs into Heaven. The law was, and continues to be a “schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”
If the law cannot deliver us from sin or from the judgment that our sins deserve – what then can? The simple answer is – blood – the right kind of blood. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.” But God’s true atoning blood is not animal. “It is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins” – Hebrews 10:4. Only in Christ Jesus do “we have redemption thought his blood, the forgiveness of sin, according to the riches of his grace.” In Christ “we have redemption through his blood even the forgiveness of sins.” Christ Jesus has made peace between the sinner and the holy God through the blood of His cross – Colossians 1:20.
I realize that we could argue the theology of my next point, but let’s forgo that for this morning. There is a sense in which Pilate was responsible for the blood of this just man in more than one way. Yes, he consented to Jesus’ death – as Acts 4:27 says – and he must bear eternal responsibility for the crucifixion of Christ. But there is the additional fact that Christ shed is blood for sinners, and Pilate was a sinner. There is only one means of atonement – “For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and …. it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.” I am not saying that Christ died specifically for the salvation of Pilate – that is something I don’t know. If Christ died for that man, then he is in Heaven today, and if we had the rest of his personal history we’d read of his repentance, submission and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. I am not saying that the man was or wasn’t elect – chosen before the foundation of the earth. But there is a sense in which Pilate should have dipped his hands into the atoning blood of Christ. There is a sense in which that blood was available to Pilate as it is to all the rest of humanity. Forget about the water, the man needed the blood. Humanly speaking it appears that Pilate must bear his sins for all eternity because he turned his back on the only remedy available for sin.
One of the words which God uses to describe the sinner’s salvation is “justification.” It is related to the word which Pilate used, “I am innocent of the blood of his just person.” To be “justified” is to be “declared righteous” – it is to have the righteousness of Christ imputed – applied – to the sinner by the Saviour. Even though I don’t particularly like to put it this way there is some truth in the phraseology that to be “justified” is “to be just as if I’d never sinned.” If Pilate had properly applied the righteous blood of “this just person,” he would have been “justified.” He would have been rendered “innocent” before the demands of God’s holy law. Oh, if it were possible to redact this verse – to turn it around – to edit it to say – “When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing… he took Jesus’ blood, and washed his hands in it before the multitude, saying, Through this righteous Man, through my Saviour, I am innocent – justified before the sight of God.”
There is nothing we can do about Pilate and his sins. We can’t be sure of what might have happened to him during the rest of his life – grace or judgment. But you can have a say in what happens to you. By the grace of God, you have been brought to this church service for a reason – I hope it is to hear this message. Now, what will you do with this scripture and with its instruction? Will you wash your hands in the water of religion, logic or unconcern and walk away saying that you are not worthy of God’s judgment. Or will you wash your soul in the blood of the Lamb of God, slain before the foundation of the world? What will it be? “We then, as workers together with (God), beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain. (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)” “Repent before God and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.”