1 Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him. 2 And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him a purple robe, 3 And said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands.
The other Gospels say that Jesus was scourged after Pilate had condemned Him to death. The difference may be due to the witnesses’ perception. Scourging was the usual procedure before a crucifixion, and the impression was probably strong that Pilate had decided to have Jesus crucified. John’s gospel however, shows that Pilate was still harboring hope that he could release Jesus after scourging and humiliating him. After all, Jesus had not done any great harm to these people, and surely if they saw Him beaten and suffering they would be content with His release. But Pilate under-estimated the power of envy and guilt! The chief priests and the mob of self-righteous Jews would stop at nothing less than His death.
While Rome had good laws regarding trials, justice, punishments and executions, the rulers and judges were often very cruel and overstepped their bounds in consideration for the public good. Legally Pilate had little right to scourge Jesus. No witnesses had proven that Jesus was plotting sedition, and in his own judgment Pilate says he found no fault in the man. A Roman scourging was not a simple whipping, it was a very cruel and painful punishment that occasionally resulted in death. The whip was made of several thin cords that had tiny bits of sharp metal and bones tied to it. And while the Jews were restricted to 40 lashes by the Mosaic law, the Romans had no such limit. It was common to see the back of the victim torn open and bleeding by the harsh whip. If a person did survive the scourging, his back would be deeply scarred for life.
The Roman soldiers also humiliated Jesus by mocking Him for being the King of the Jews. They put a crown on His head, gave Him a sceptre and put a royal robe upon Him. However, the crown was made of thorns and the sceptre was a bare stick of wood, but the purple robe was apparently a real royal robe from Herod (Luke 23:11, see also note for Matthew 27:28-30). Their mock obeisance was cruel and painful. “Hail thou king of the Jews,” they would say, and then smite Him on the face with an open hand, take the reed out of His hand and hit Him on the head with it, and spit on Him. Truly prophesied Isaiah of this time: He was despised and rejected of men…He was oppressed and He was afflicted…His visage was so marred more than any man…He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.
4 Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him. 5 Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man!
Again Pilate had to leave the Praetorium to converse with the Jewish multitude, who refused to enter on account of becoming unclean (John 18:28). This interpretation of uncleanness must have been another of the Pharisees’ strict and erroneous interpretations of the Mosaic law, for their is no obvious reason why entering a Gentile court would violate the Law.
Behold the Man! The scene and Pilate’s words say to Jews, “Is this the man you think threatens the power of Rome? Look at Him! A beaten, bloody laughing-stock!” However, Pilate was greatly mistaken in thinking that he could provoke some sympathy in the Jewish multitude. The chief priests incited the fickle crowd against Him that just a few days earlier, had probably participated in welcoming Him into Jerusalem as a great prophet (Mat 21:8-11). Now nobody wanted to be associated with Him.
6 When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him.
This is truly an amazing scene. Pilate again tried mightily to avoid being responsible for the death of Christ and even told the Jews to take Jesus and crucify Him themselves. But the Jewish rulers didn’t want to crucify Him either! They probably feared the wrath of the people, for many had believed on Him. Right now though, they had the upper hand in the multitude and they took full advantage of that to pressure Pilate. Throughout the book of John we see three factions in the Jewish multitude: those who believed in Christ, those who didn’t, and those who were undecided and would support one side or the other for a time. Right now, the against-Jesus faction was strongest and the undecideds went with them.
I find no fault in Him. Three times Pilate said it (John 18:38; John 19:4), but the chief rulers and priests over-ruled him by instigating the mob to chant, Crucify Him, Crucify Him. Pilate continued trying to placate the crowd, but could not do so.
7 The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. 8 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the more afraid; 9 And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer.
When Pilate heard that the Jews wanted to kill Jesus because He claimed to be the Son of God, he was the more afraid. Pilate knew that the Jewish rulers were ruthless men and wicked; profligate liars and filled with envy. Example one: they had brought Jesus to Pilate under the serious charge of sedition against Rome and of inciting the people to rebellion, but now their real reason for hating Him comes to light. If Pilate was a normal Roman, who believed in the wrath “of the gods,” he was seriously worried. Here was a man who claimed to be a god, and if he happened to be right, what retribution might Pilate expect to receive?
By our law He ought to die because He made Himself the Son of God. There is no exact OT law that says this, so apparently the Jews were using references such as Lev 24:14-16, which demanded death for all those who blaspheme the name of the Lord. Notably though, the execution was to be stoning, and by the whole congregation.
Pilate took Jesus back into the Praetorium and questioned Him for the third time that day. In asking, Whence art thou, Pilate was probing His origin. Is Jesus divine? or only a man? Jesus had already told Pilate that His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36), so this time He did not even answer (Is 53:7).
10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? 11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. 12 And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar’s friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.
By this time, Pilate must have felt himself to be on trial instead of Jesus, and in a very real sense he was. Yet, while Pilate did wish to release Jesus, the criteria that ruled him was not simple justice but the much more irrational court of popular opinion. The final straw was when the Jews began shouting that if Pilate did not crucify Jesus then he was not Caesar’s friend. Pilate was very conscious of the fact that he was a ruler in Jerusalem only at the whim of Caesar. What if the Jews’ accusation against him got back to Rome? He would have to do some serious explaining. See our note on John 18:29.
Pilate pressured Jesus to answer his questions. “Don’t you know that I have the power to have you freed or crucified?” Was he speaking arrogantly, or was he incredulous that Jesus would not care to defend Himself?
“On the contrary, except it be first granted from above, you have no power at all against Me,” Jesus said, and again Pilate is certain of His innocence. Jesus’ word are true, all earthly authority is contingent upon divine will. Though both Jews and Greeks were complicit and guilty in the death of Jesus Christ, the greater sin fell upon the Jews, for rejected Him while possessing full knowledge of His innocent life.
From thenceforth Pilate sought to release Him. Better to translate, “Pilate tried even harder to release Him.” Pilate had been looking for a way to acquit Jesus from the beginning, for he knew that for envy the Jews had delivered Him up (Mark 15:10). However, he lacked the personal fortitude to stand up to the Jews. A contrasting account in the book of Acts has Paul brought by the Jews before the Roman judgment-seat of Gallio for insurrection, but that Roman governor had the Jews cast out (Acts 18:12-17).
13 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha.
For at least the third time that day, Pilate went of the Praetorium unto the Jewish mob and tried to reason with the people concerning Jesus. The Jews would not enter, so Pilate had to go out unto them. Although exactness is uncertain, it seems that Herod’s palace, the Jewish temple and Gabbatha were adjacent each other upon the temple mount. Gabbatha was a large, stone-paved open court where Pilate argued with the Jews over Jesus. Whether Pilate had his normal judgment seat (bema) brought out of the Praetorium, or if he used some stationary seat in that place is unclear.
There are three notable places in which Jesus experienced great suffering during the last 18 hours of His life, and all three have strange, Hebrew (Aramaic) names. First, it was Gethsemane, where His soul was exceedingly sorrow, even to the point of death (Mat 26:38). Those words are strange, for the soul never dies. I believe this suffering describes the beginning of Jesus’ work in “bearing our sins.” It was more than a physical suffering, it was an agony of the soul which brought forth sweat like drops of blood falling to the ground (Luke 22:44). At the second place, Gabbatha, Jesus suffered the greatest in body. It was here that He was humiliated in the sight of all: beaten, mocked, scourged, spat upon and derided until Pilate finally said, Behold the Man! Here it was that the Jews rejected in finality their King, saying, Away with Him, crucify Him. Here was fulfilled Isaiah’s prophetic words, He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief (Is 3:3). The third site was Golgotha, where they crucified Him and continued to mock His holy name. At Golgotha the iniquity poured out upon Jesus reached its full measure, until finally He cried out, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken Me? Then He commended His spirit to the Father and gave up the ghost (Luke 23:46).
These three place names have Hebrew origins: Gethsemane comes from the hebrew gath, which is usually translated, “winepress,” and shemen, which is commonly translated “oil.” A notable prophecy of Jesus speaks of Him treading the winefat (gath) alone (Is 63:1-3; Joel 3:13). Gabbatha seems to derive from the Hebrew gab, which also has a corresponding messianic prophecy: The plowers plowed upon My back, they made long their furrows (Ps 129:3). Golgotha (Heb, gulgoleth), which means a skull, does not have an OT link (John 19:17). These three places of suffering began when Jesus crossed the brook Cedron (John 18:1), another Hebrew place name with great symbolic meaning.
14 And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!
The Jews did not name the days of the week; instead they called them, “first day,” “second day,” etc (John 20:1). However, the sixth and seventh days were special, and so came to have be named: the preparation, and the sabbath. (John 19:42; Mark 15:42; Mat 27:62; Luke 23:54). Since the sabbath (Saturday) had very restrictive laws for every life activity, it was important that preparations be made on Friday. By all evidences Jesus was crucified on Friday, remained in the grave on the Sabbath and rose at first light on Sunday. The sabbath this particular year was a high day, meaning that it fell on 15 Nisan, which was a mandatory holy festival day, and making it even more holy (John 19:31). 15 Nisan marked the first day of Unleavened Bread, which in the NT is sometimes called the Passover, although technically it was its own feast. On the 15th Nisan, the people were to gather in a holy convocation and no servile work was permitted (Ex 12:14-16; Lev 23).
Those who propose that Jesus died on the day after the Passover lamb was killed must explain two major flaws in that idea: 1) why the Jews refused to enter the Praetorium so that they could eat the Passover when they already had, and 2) why they were there at all, for the 15th Nisan was always a holy, convocatory day before the Lord. On the other hand, all doubts vanish when we recognize that the high sabbath 15th Nisan was the next day, which Joseph of Arimathea did not want to violate (John 19:38-42). John’s details are impeccably given, and they prove that Jesus died on the 14th Nisan, at the same time that the Passover lamb was slain in the temple.
In spite of the clear evidence for a Friday crucifixion, some advocate a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion because of Mat 12:40, where Jesus foretold that He would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. Yet that is no solution unless one also changes the time of the resurrection from Sunday morning at first light to sometime during the night before. This is a very doubtful idea, especially given the exactly prescribed ceremony of Firstfruits (a type of the resurrection) that was waved before the Lord at first light on the first Sunday of Passover week. The better interpretation of Mat 12:40 leaves the crucifixion and resurrection exactly where they appear in the Gospel accounts, and counts the time Jesus was in the heart of the earth to have begun in the Garden of Gethsemane. See our notes there.
The sixth hour. Bible critics have made much of this apparent contradiction to Mark that Jesus was crucified the third hour (Mark 15:25), but there are several ways to reconcile the accounts. The simplest explanation is that John notes the Roman time, which seems logical since he wrote after the fall of Jerusalem to a mixed audience of Jews and Gentiles. The Romans marked the hours of the day from midnight as we do. To them however, the sixth hour included the whole hour between 6:00-7:00AM, which gives ample time for Jesus to be crucified at the third hour, which in Jewish time would be 9:00AM (the Jews counted 12 hours from daylight to sundown). A point against this idea is that John does not appear to have used Roman time elsewhere in his Gospel (John 1:39; 4:6; 4:52). Another explanation is that John simply gives the general time at which Jesus was crucified as about the sixth hour, which would agree with the Synoptics that from the sixth to the ninth hour (12:00-3:00pm) Jesus hung upon the cross (Mat 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44). With the absence of watches in that era, time was not very precise, and it was common to generalize using the expressions “third hour” for the morning hours, “sixth hour” for the noon-time hours, and “ninth hour” for the evening hours. This creates some overlap time, allowing for both John’s sixth hour and Mark’s third hour to be true. The overlap time would need to be around 11:00am, which is consistent with the probable time-frame of Jesus’ last day. But again, this idea doesn’t easily match with John’s giving of time elsewhere in his Gospel. A third explanation is that a copyist error in an early manuscript changed the Greek symbol for “three” to “six.” Bible commentators from a very early date have made this a popular explanation, and some ancient manuscripts do read “third” instead of “sixth.”
Behold your King. This is the third time that Pilate says concerning Jesus, Behold (ide).
15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. 16 Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away.
Rome did not allow the Jews to have their own ruler. By presenting Jesus as the King of the Jews, Pilate was hoping to change the multitude’s mind about crucifying Him. But the crowd was wildly against Him and constant in their demands that He be crucified. Pilate realized that he was loosing control of the situation, and that a tumult was imminent. He knew Jesus was innocent, yet to keep the peace he gave the order to have Him crucified. First however, he ceremonially washed his hands in an attempt to avoid the guilt of condemning an innocent man (Mat 27:24), and the Jews vocally accepted their willingness to be guilty of His death (Mat 27:25). Pilate’s grandiose theatrics did nothing to free him personally from being complicit in the death of the Son of God, for it was in his full power to protect Jesus from the rabid multitude. He gave in to the Jews because he could not stand up for Truth in the face of public opinion.
How often in this world have leaders, both civil and religious, bowed to similar pressure! Kings, judges, generals, bishops and ministers have a history of taking the easy path that the people want instead of the right path of truth. Today it is called being “political correct.” Luke says that Pilate gave sentence…and delivered Jesus to their will (Luke 23:24-25). The court of public opinion does not follow Truth.
17 And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha: 18 Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.
Like Isaac, who carried the wood for his own sacrifice, Jesus began the ignominious walk to Golgotha carrying His own cross. As they were going, the soldiers compelled another man to carry the cross, for Jesus was apparently quite weakened by the scourging and lack of sleep (Mat 27:24). Simon the Cyrenian (Libya) was just arriving in Jerusalem from the country and the mob was just exiting that city going to the crucifixion (Mark 15:21). Perhaps he became a Christian through this experience, for his name is recorded in the Gospels along with his two sons.
Golgotha, or Calvary (Luke 23:33), was a very visible place not far outside the city walls and apparently positioned beside the main path into the city (John 19:20). See our notes at v13 for its etymology.
John does not relate the testimonies of the two thieves (Mark 15:27-28) crucified on either side of Jesus, but does note them (see Luke 23:39-43). It was a fulfillment of prophecy, for Isaiah 53:12 says Christ was numbered with the transgressors.
19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. 20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin. 21 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. 22 Pilate answered, What I have written I have written.
Apparently as a final reproach against the injustice of the Jewish rulers, Pilate had a sign put on the cross of Christ: JESUS THE NAZARENE, KING OF THE JEWS. This greatly concerned the chief priests, who feared that their ugly deed would begin to stink among the people. They had wanted Jesus to be publicly crucified in order to eternally shame Him before all, but now that publicity was working against them. Virtually all who entered and left the city saw the title, and so the rulers hasten again to Pilate to get him to change the wording. This time however and without feeling the pressure of the riotous multitude, Pilate refused to listen.
Hebrew, Greek and Latin were the most common languages spoken in Jerusalem. The Hebrew spoken in that day was probably a dialect of the original language of the Jews. Because of that, the Old Testament had been translated into Greek (the Septuagint) about 200 B.C., for many Jews spoke the Greek language, including Christ and the Apostles. Latin (Rhomaisti), was the language of the Romans. See Luke 23:38.
23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. 24 They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did.
The soldiers who crucified Christ were allowed to take His garments for themselves, a fact that all the Gospels record (Mat 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34) in fulfillment of Ps 22:18. Evidently there were four soldiers at the cross, but Jesus wore five garments. So they stripped Him naked and divided his clothes among themselves, casting lots for His coat (chiton). The five pieces of clothing were probably: 1) the chiton, which many think was an undergarment robe that reached to the ankles, 2) an outer robe or tunic, 3) a girdle around the waist, 4) a turban or kerchief wound upon the head, 5) sandals. Instead of the kerchief, some think the fifth article of clothing was a shawl/coat for the upper body, which they see implied in John’s description of the Last Supper, when Jesus laid aside His outer garments (plural) and girded Himself with a towel in order to wash the disciples’ feet (John 13:4-5). See Edersheim’s “Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.”
The one-piece garment is described as the reason the soldiers decided to cast lots, yet it gives rise to an interesting subject, for it seems to be vey much like the special robe worn by the High Priest (Ex 28:32, see note for Ex 28:6). On the Day of Atonement, the High Priest was to take off his special garb and dress himself in holy garments of fine linen: a robe, undergarment, girdle and mitre (Lev 16:4). While not specifically mentioned, he probably wore sandals too.
25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! 27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.
While some think there are four women here named, it is more likely that there are just three, all named Mary: Jesus’ mother, His mother’s sister which was the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. There were many other faithful women at the cross (Mat 27:55), including Salome (Mark 15:40) and surely Martha and Mary (John 11:1). Except for John the Beloved, we have no record that any of His disciples were at Calvary.
His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, is probably the same person Mark calls, Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses (Mark 15:40). It may seem unlikely that two sisters be named Mary, but in an age when re-marriage and naming one’s children after relatives was common, it would not have been so unusual. Cleophas and Alphaeus may be the same name (see Mat 10:3), making James the Less and Joses to be cousins of Jesus, which is supported by verses such as Mat 13:55; 1Cor 9:5; Gal 1:19; James 1:1). Likely then, it was James the Less who wrote the epistle bearing his name. Comparing the accounts in Matthew and Mark, it may be that Salome (Mark 15:40) was the mother of Zebedee’s children (Mat 27:56), who famously asked that her sons be granted the highest seats in Christ’s reign (Mark 3:17; Mat 20:20). Mary Magdalene was a woman who followed Jesus after He had cast out of her seven devils (Mark 16:9; Luke 8:2). She became the first to see Christ risen from the grave (John 20:11-18).
Jesus’ mother apparently did not have a home and means of support. Joseph was probably dead by now, and she may not have had another son, for it is thought that Jesus’ brethren were of Joseph and not Mary (Mat 13:55). Behold thy mother. In His last minutes Jesus provided for His mother’s physical needs in a unique way.
28 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. 29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth.
John does not record the supernatural darkness that obscured Golgotha for three (symbolically significant) hours (Mat 27:45), nor the contrasting confessions of the two thieves crucified with Him (Luke 23:39-43), nor the wicked and sacrilegious taunting He received by the watching crowd (Mark 15:31; Ps 22:7-8). Those events had now taken place and Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, breathed His last and gave up the ghost (pneuma, spirit). As Luke says, He commended His spirit (pneuma) unto the Father and expired (Luke 23:46; Mat 27:50). To my mind, soul (psuche) would be the more natural-sounding word, and yet, did Jesus have a soul in the same sense that humans do? (see 1Cor 15:45). However, Acts 2:31 suggests that Jesus’ soul briefly went to Hades, where He liberated the waiting souls of the righteous dead and led them to Paradise where they will wait in peace for the end of age and the final judgment (Mark 3:27; Zec 9:11; Mat 27:53; Eph 4:8; Rev 6:9; 1Pet 3:19). Although it does not seem likely, perhaps by spirit Jesus simply meant His physical life. Of course, Jesus was never contaminated by any sin, so His spirit was free to go directly to be with the Father. I’ve never been able to fully grasp the difference between a man’s spirit and soul (see note John 1:9).
I thirst. John points out one last prophetic detail at Jesus’ death. David had written, They gave Me also gall for My meat; and in My thirst they gave Me vinegar to drink (Ps 69:21). These three words in the Septuagint are identical to those in the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ death. Luke leaves the impression that the soldiers gave Him vinegar in a mocking gesture (Luke 23:36), while Matthew records that Jesus was offered something to drink on two occasions, the first was the gall, a drugged wine to help deaden the pain and which Jesus refused (Mat 27:34). The second was a common vinegar drink (Mat 27:48).
The soldiers dipped a sponge in the vinegar and lifted it to His mouth using a branch of hyssop, which was a small aromatic plant with medicinal qualities that was used on three important OT religious occasions: at the first Passover to apply the blood of the sacrificial lamb to the doorposts (Ex 12:22), at the Red Heifer Sacrifice where hyssop was thrown into the sacrificial fire (Num 19), and at the ceremonial cleansing of a leprous person where hyssop was dipped in blood and sprinkled upon the leper (Lev 14). Aside from two incidental mentions of the word in 1Kings 4:33 and Psalms 51:7, these are the only times hyssop is found in the OT.
I do not believe it coincidental that hyssop was named in use at the Cross, which is reinforced by the fact that in all three OT cases two other ingredients were present, forming a trilogy of symbolic elements: cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet. The only variation in the three is that at the first Passover, the scarlet was real blood sprinkled by a sprig of hyssop upon doorposts of which the wood is obviously unnamed. These three elements seem to pre-figure unique aspects in the death of Christ, for the real varieties were there present: the wooden cross, the branch of hyssop, and the blood of the sacrifice victim. In OT typology, wood is a representation of the humanity of Christ, and scarlet is a type of sin and blood (Is 1:18), but also of royalty and grandeur (Mat 27:28; Rev 18:16). Hyssop seems to symbolize submission, self-denial and sacrifice, especially in view of its use at the Red Heifer sacrifice. It was a simple, unassuming plant with important uses in the Old Covenant. Jesus laid aside His heavenly robes and denied His own human desires in bearing the sins of the world and thus performing the will of the Father. In Gethsemane He prayed, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless not as I will, but as Thou wilt (Mat 25:39). Paul writes that He humbled Himself and became obedient unto death (Php 2:8).
Vinegar upon hyssop. Bitter trials patiently endured by self denial and sacrifice.
30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
It is finished. These last words are filled with such meaning! It is a meaning which only sincere seekers can fully appreciate. It is finished, signfies that the work, or mission for which He had been sent had been fully completed according to plan. He may as well have said, “The atonement has been made!” At least two actions were hereby completed: 1) The act that justifies God in forgiving the sins of Mankind, for every pardon or forgiveness requires that the forgiver suffer the wrong instead of the guilty party, 2) the finishing, or fulfillment of the prophecies and requirements of the Old Testament.
It is finished. The words bring to mind the secrets of the angel Gabriel to Daniel, concerning the Messiah. Seventy weeks had been decreed to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy (Dan 9:24). It seems to be in this sense that Jesus is said to die in the end of the world (Heb 9:26), for the Church Age is the final era (1John 2:18; Heb 1:2).
Jesus died shortly after the ninth hour which was about 3:00PM (Mat 27:46). The twelfth hour (about 6:00PM) was considered to be the end of the Jewish day. So Jesus died at the same time that thousands upon thousands of Passover lambs were being slain at the temple (Lev 23:5).
31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
The next day was the Sabbath, but it was also the first day of Unleavened Bread, which began on the 15th Nisan shortly after the Passover lamb was eaten on the evening of the 14th Nisan. Only an hour or two of time separated the Passover meal from the beginning of the holy festival day, the 15th Nisan, which began at sundown. On this particular year, the 15th Nisan fell upon Saturday, the normal Jewish sabbath: for that sabbath (saturday) was an high day (a holy festival day). Friday was known as the preparation because of the strict laws regarding manual labor on Saturday. Some have tried to deny that the Jews called Friday “the preparation,” but the evidence is strongly in favor. See Clement of Alexandria’s Stromata (Bk 7 Ch12), Clarke’s citation of Josephus, and Volume 1 of the Ante-Nicene Fathers page 40, as well as my notes on John 13:1, Mat 26:17.
That sabbath day was an high day. There are three possible interpretations, two of which lead to the same conclusion. 1) a high day refers to one of the seven festival days of holy convocation in the Jewish calendar, this particular one being the first of Unleavened Bread; 2) a high day occurs when one of these seven holy days coincide with a regular sabbath day; 3) the high day refers to one of the seven holy days, which were also called sabbaths. This last option allows the idea that there were two “sabbath” days in a row: the 15 Nisan holy day sabbath on Friday, followed by the normal sabbath on Saturday. The only ones who wish for this option are those who advance a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion (see note Mat 12:40), yet their argument is weakly supported, if at all. The seven festival days are never called the sabbath in the OT Scriptures, and do not appear to be so called in any ancient writings. The KJV does read sabbath in Lev 23:24, but in the Greek and Hebrew versions the word is different. A holy convocation of the congregation to the Temple was required on these special holy days, and normal work was not permitted (Ex 12:16). Nevertheless, comparing the commandments in Lev 23, there was a distinction in the prohibition of work on the sabbath and on these holy days. Commentator Gill details the differences that the Jewish tradition had developed, which involve the idea of servile work, such as manufacturing or harvesting. The chief point to be appreciated is that the seven holy festival days were neither called nor considered to be the sabbath, which fixes Friday as the day of Jesus’ death. On this all the Gospels are emphatically unanimous (Mat 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:42).
Commentators Barnes, Clarke, JFB, Gill and others agree that John’s statement, that sabbath day was an high day, signifies the concurrence of the regular sabbath with the holy festival day of 15 Nisan. However, they seem to advocate that Jesus was crucified the day following the killing of the Passover lambs. Those two positions are emphatically incompatible. The Passover lamb was to be killed on the 14th Nisan and if Jesus was crucified the day following, He would have died upon this high day sabbath. Recognizing the error, Poole tries to make the high day sabbath fall upon the second day of Unleavened Bread, but he succeeds only to fall into another grave problem, for the first day of Unleavened bread was the mandatory 15 Nisan holy convocation festival day, and perhaps the most holy day in all the Jewish calendar. Following Poole’s idea, Jesus would have been crucified upon that very day! All the Jewish worries about becoming unclean by entering Pilate’s court makes no sense in that scenario. The only logical and believable option is that Jesus died on preparation Friday, 14 Nisan, at the very moment the Passover lambs were slain. His body was removed before the sabbath, 15 Nisan, began. He rose again at first light on Sunday morning, 16 Nisan, at the very moment that the priests were waving their Firstfruits offerings before the Lord according to the OT Law which stated that it be waved on the morrow after the first sabbath to fall within the feast of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:11).
The Law forbade the Jews to allow a hanged man’s body to remain on the tree overnight (Deut 21:22-23), but that does not seem to be the Jewish leaders’ concern. After all, the Romans were the ones who had executed Him. Their reason for removing the bodies was so that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the (high day) sabbath. How this might violate the sabbath law is unclear. Perhaps it was not a matter of Law, but that the scribes and Pharisees finally realized that they had erred in demanding Jesus’ execution and did not wish to have the ugly spectacle of a righteous man hanging in the sight of all for several days. That many did feel such remorse is clear from Luke 23:47-48, and certainly it is true that no man has died accompanied by such miraculous signs. The whole city was abuzz concerning what it all meant (Luke 24:18-19).
32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. 33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:
John alone records this detail of soldiers coming to break the legs of the crucified men, for it was not uncommon for crucified men to remain alive for several days. Breaking the legs with a club would hasten death, perhaps by asphyxiation, perhaps by the brutal act itself. Some sources say the legs were broken at the thighs and apparently even accompanied by spear thrusts. By not breaking Jesus’ legs, a detail in the typology of the Passover lamb is fulfilled, for the Jews were commanded not to break any bone of it (Num 9:12). See verse 36.
Crucifixion was one of the cruelest, humiliating deaths ever invented. Greek writers like Cicero lamented its use as barbaric and inhumane. The victim would hang defenseless and completely naked, exposed to abuse both verbally and physically. With the hands and feet immobilized, sometimes animals and birds would prey on the victim. And above all, there was no respite from the intense pain. While Jesus suffered greatly in the body as a human being, surely He suffered even more for being God!
34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. 35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.
Perhaps to be sure that Jesus was truly dead, a soldier pierced His side with a spear, fulfilling yet another prophecy, this one in Zech 12:10. This is another strong proof that Jesus is truly God, for in that passage God says, They shall look upon Me whom they have pierced. See verse 37.
Water issuing forth from Jesus’ pierced side was surely an unexpected sight, yet John affirms that he is telling the truth and that he saw it with his own eyes. Many commentators eloquate why and how water might be found in His body cavity, but they do so without cause. Jesus’ death was accompanied by many supernatural signs and fulfillments, and this is just another. The symbolic significance of water flowing from Jesus’ side are manifold, and John himself makes brief mention of them in both his Gospel (John 3:5) and Epistle (1John 5:6).
The whole scene seems to be foreshadowed in God taking a rib from Adam’s side and forming his female companion. In fact, the Greek word for side (pleura) is the same word used in Gen 2:21-22 (LXX). From Christ’s pierced side a trickle of water began that grew into a brook and then a wide stream (Eze 47:1-12), rivers of living water giving spiritual life to all those who drink from it (John 4:14; 7:38). Eve was formed from Adam’s side, but the Bride of Christ came from Christ’s side.
36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. 37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.
The first prophecy John quotes comes from Ex 12:46; Num 9:12, which detail the requirements for eating the sacrificial Passover lamb. These are not prophetic passages, nor do they obviously speak of the Messiah, so the Jews had no knowledge of their true meaning. In typology they are both prophetic and Messianic! Jesus is the true Lamb which takes away forever the sin of the world (John 1:29), and is the anti-typical Passover lamb. The analogy is stronger than metaphor, for John identifies Jesus as the Passover Lamb (1Cor 5:7). The symbolism was written by the hand of God a thousand years before, and for centuries the Jews unknowingly anticipated the reality by observing this tradition. Some belittle the figurative and symbolic meanings of the Scripture and elevate the literal, physical meanings to a superior importance. So doing, they risk becoming like the Pharisees, unable to appreciate the deeper, spiritual significance of the Scriptures. Yes the physical is important, but it is limited, temporal, transitory. The spiritual meaning is superior because it is eternal and comprehensive (2Cor 4:18).
They shall look on Him whom they pierced. This OT quotation comes from the prophecies of Zechariah (Zech 12:10). It is interesting in that it quotes the Masoretic text which, in this particular verse, reads a little differently from the Septuagint (see v34). The highly messianic 22nd chapter of Psalms also speaks of the Messiah’s piercing (Ps 22:16). See also Rev 1:7.
38 And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus. 39 And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight. 40 Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.
The disciples were in shock, scattered and afraid. Who would remove Jesus’ body from the cross and where would He be buried? If by the Jews, perhaps in a potter’s field; if by the Romans, probably thrown together with the two thieves upon a heap of other dead bodies. But God stirred up the spirits of two righteous men to boldly step forward when all others would not. All four Gospels describe Joseph of Arimathea taking the body of Jesus from the cross (Mat 27:57-60; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53). He was a rich man, influential and well-known, but respected to be an honorable and just person; a counsellor who had not consented with the majority in having Jesus put to death. Was he a member of the Sanhedrin with Nicodemus? Perhaps (Luke 23:51). The two men were apparently friends who were unwillingly borne along by the condemning Jewish rulers. Surely they watched the proceedings in horror, amazed at the unjust lengths the rabid scribes and Pharisees were willing to go in order to crucify the innocent Jesus. They observed the signs that accompanied Jesus’ death, and they knew that a great wrong had been committed. It seems to have driven both men to overcome all their prior fears, and they boldly went against their fellow Jews in caring for the body of Jesus. It is unlikely that they were allowed to remain members of the Sanhedrin, and they probably became open disciples of Jesus after this.
The sight of these two influential and important men personally taking care of Jesus’ body is powerful, and the import should not be overlooked. While the world of Judaism sat with their families eating around the passover lamb table, these two men accepted a task which was the most defiling in all the OT law: touching a dead body (see Num 19). For that, they would become unclean for one week, and they must pass through several steps before the temple priests to recover the right to appear in the Congregation after the week was up. The whole Feast of Unleavened Bread was lost to them. Yet, in their hearts these men knew that something more important than Unleavened Bread and Someone greater than the Passover was here (Luke 11:31-32). With all due reverence and honor they cared for the body of Christ, and like Mary who is remembered all through Christendom for anointing the feet of Jesus (Mat 26:13), Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus are remembered for doing at last what they should have done at the first, confessing that this Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of God.
Jesus was a poor man, and nothing less than a poor man’s burial awaited Him when He died. But God was true to His Word, and Jesus made His grave…with the rich in His death (Is 53:9). With myrrh and aloes Joseph and Nicodemus perfumed His body, and that not just a little, but about an hundred pound weight. Then they wound His body with linen clothes and laid Him in a new tomb, the tomb that Joseph had prepared for himself (Mat 27:60), which happened to be nearby.
41 Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.
The beginning of Jesus’ greatest sorrow had begun in a different garden that same (jewish) day (John 18:1), and it would end in this unnamed garden on the third day.
Jesus body was placed in a new tomb, which no dead body had ever occupied. The Gospels are careful to note this detail, but its significance is not easily ascertained. Perhaps it illustrates the uncommon death of this Man. All others before Him had died in sin; but this man was spotlessly innocent. The place of His grave was not contaminated by other dead bodies.
42 There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews’ preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.
The preparation is the Jewish name for Friday, the day before the Sabbath. See note for John 19:31. It was unlawful for any work to be done on the Sabbath, so the men (and presumably their servants) had to work hastily to bury Jesus before night fell. The Sabbath began at sundown.