John 18:38

18:38-39 What is truth? Truth was not a foreign idea to Pilate, but he did not wait for an answer to his question because he did not believe there was one. • Pilate returned to the council members waiting outside and delivered his verdict: not guilty. Although he referred to Jesus as “King of the Jews” (see also 19:19), the title meant nothing more to Pilate than a mocking expression of contempt. Pilate’s offer of amnesty revealed his desire to let Jesus go.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Joh 18:38. Τί ἐστιν ἀληθεία; what is truth?) Pilate thinks that the mention of truth does not square with what He said concerning His kingdom. He knows only to connect the idea of a kingdom with power, not with truth. But the kingdom of truth is a kingdom of freedom; for the truth makes free (ch. Joh 8:32; Joh 8:36). Here Pilate ought to have questioned Him, as an earnest inquirer: but he so questions Him, as to confess that he is not of the truth. The words of Jesus were an enigma to Pilate; and Pilate confesses this. It is at the end of his conversation with Jesus, and not till then, that he asks τί ἐστιν, what is truth? Sir. (Ecclesiasticus) Sir 22:8, “He that telleth a tale to a fool, speaketh to one in a slumber; when he hath told his tale, he will say, What is the matter?”

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh_18:38. Pilate, now fully convinced that he has before him an innocent and harmless enthusiast, asks, with that air of contemptuous deprecation which is peculiar to the material understanding in regard to the abstract and supersensual sphere, What is truth? A non ens, a phantom, he thus conceives it to be, with which He would found a kingdom; and weary of the matter, and abruptly breaking it off, he goes straightway forth to the Jews, and declares to them that he finds no guilt in Jesus,[233] from which definite declaration it is seen that by the above question he does not mean at all to designate the matter merely as not coming within his jurisdiction (Steinmeyer). Something of good-nature lies in this conduct, but it is the weak and shallow good-nature of the man of the world who is indifferent towards higher things; nothing of the disconsolate tone of the searcher for truth (Olshausen) is to be imported. Against the view of Chrysostom, Theodoras Heracl., Euth. Zigabenus, Aretius, and several others, however, that Pilate had actually become desirous to be acquainted with the truth (Nonnus even thinks: καὶ Πιλάτος θάμβησε); it is at once decisive that he immediately turns his back and goes out.

Whence did John learn of this conversation of Pilate with Jesus? He can hardly have been himself an ear-witness of it.[234] But whether the fact be that it was communicated by Pilate in his own circles, and that hence it reached John, or whether it be that some ear-witness of the interview himself brought the information to John, the matter is not inconceivable (in answer to Scholten), and in no case have we the right to ascribe the account merely to the composition of John (Strauss), as Baur especially finds impressed on the declarations of Pilate that he finds no guilt in Jesus, only the tendency of the evangelist to roll the guilt as far as possible off Pilates shoulders, and place it on those of the Jews, which purpose also the question, What is truth? is intended to serve, in which Baur suggests the sense: how can one make a crime out of truth?

[233] Here we are to think of the sending away of Jesus to Herodes Antipas. See on Luke, note after Luk_23:12. But how could the fourth evangelist have omitted this episode, had he been a Gentile Christian, and had designed to concentrate the guilt of the death of Jesus as much as possible on the Ἰουδαϊοι? This in answer to Baur and Schenkel.

[234] So Steinmeyer, Leidensgesch. p. 143.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 18:38-40 . Pilate declares the result of his examination .

Joh 18:38 . Pilate waited for no reply to his question, but τοῦτο εἰπὼν , πάλιν ἐξῆλθε . The noting of each movement of Pilate suggests the eye-witness, and brings out his vacillation. Ἐγὼ οὐδεμίαν αἰτίαν … “I for my part find no fault, or ground of accusation in Him.” Naturally, therefore, Pilate will acquit and dismiss Him; but no. He attempts a compromise: ἔστι δὲ συνήθεια ὑμῖν “You have a custom,” of which we have no information elsewhere; although Josephus ( Antiq. , xx. 9, 3) relates that at a passover Albinus released some robbers. Analogies in other countries have been produced. This custom Pilate fancies they will allow him to follow in favour of Jesus: βούλεσθε … Ἰουδαίων ; ἀπολύσω , aorist subjunctive; cf. Mat 13:28 , θέλεις συλλέξωμεν ; Luk 9:54 , θέλεις εἴπωμεν ; βούλεσθε καλῶμεν ; βούλεσθε εἴπω , etc., commonly occur in Aristophanes and other classical writers. Ἐκραύγασαν … Μὴ τοῦτον , ἀλλὰ τὸν Βαραββᾶν , “They shouted,” showing their excitement: πάλιν , previous shoutings have not been mentioned by John, but this word reflects light on the manner in which the accusations had been made. ἦν δὲ ὁ Βαραββᾶς λῃστής . Bar-Abbas, son of a father, or of a Rabbi, διδασκάλου υἱός . In Mat 27:16 , Origen read Ἰησοῦν τὸν Βαρ ., but added “in multis exemplaribus non continetur”. He found a mystery in the circumstance that both prisoners were called “Jesus, the Son of the Father”. Barabbas is designated λῃστής , or, as Luke (Luk 23:19 ) more definitely says, he had been imprisoned for sedition in the city and for murder. John does not bring out the irony of the Jews’ choice, which freed the real and crucified the pretended mover of sedition.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Ver. 38. “Pilate says to him, What is truth? And after he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and says to them, As for me, I find no crime in him.”

Pilate’s exclamation is neither the expression of a soul eager for the truth (the Fathers), nor that of a heart in despair, which has long sought it in vain (Olshausen). It is the profession of a frivolous scepticism, such as is often met with in the man of the world, and particularly in statesmen, who are quite indifferent in general to this class of questions; witness the manner in which Napoleon was accustomed to speak of ideologists! If Pilate had seriously sought for the truth, it would have been the moment to find it and lay hold of it. In any case, what he is now convinced of is that the person whom he has before him, whether He is a dreamer or a sage, is not a rival of Caesar. Thus with “that broad sentiment of justice and civil government which,” as Renan says, “the most ordinary Roman carried with him everywhere,” he declares to the Jews his conviction of the innocence of Jesus as to the political accusation raised against Him.

After this, what was his duty? To discharge Jesus purely and simply. But, fearing to displease the Jews, who had well-founded reasons to accuse him to his superiors, he wishes to avoid taking a step which would make them his sworn enemies, and he has recourse to a series of expedients. The first is not related by John; it is the remitting of the affair to Herod, on account of the mention which had been made of the Galilean origin of Jesus in the accusation of the rulers (Luk 23:5); this scene is described by Luk 23:6-12; it is omitted by John as well known and not having led to any result. It was the appearance before Pilate which John was especially anxious to reproduce. In the declaration which, in John, closes Joh 18:38, are united the two expressions of Pilate related by Luk 23:4; Luk 23:14, which preceded and followed the sending of Jesus to Herod.

The second expedient is that of which John gives an account very summarily in Joh 18:39-40, and which is related in detail by the Synoptics.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He speaketh this disdainfully and scoffingly, and not by way of asking a question.

It was requisite that Christ should be pronounced innocent, but notwithstanding (in that that he took upon him our person) was to be condemned as a most wicked man.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Pilate saith unto him, What is truth?--that is, "Thou stirrest the question of questions, which the thoughtful of every age have asked, but never man yet answered."

And when he had said this--as if, by putting such a question, he was getting into interminable and unseasonable inquiries, when this business demanded rather prompt action.

he went out again unto the Jews--thus missing a noble opportunity for himself, and giving utterance to that consciousness of the want of all intellectual and moral certainty, which was the feeling of every thoughtful mind at that time. "The only certainty," says the elder PLINY, "is that nothing is certain, nor more miserable than man, nor more proud. The fearful laxity of morals at that time must doubtless be traced in a great degree to this skepticism. The revelation of the eternal truth alone was able to breathe new life into ruined human nature, and that in the apprehension of complete redemption" [OLSHAUSEN].

and saith unto them--in the hearing of our Lord, who had been brought forth.

I find in him no fault--no crime. This so exasperated "the chief priests and elders" that, afraid of losing their prey, they poured forth a volley of charges against Him, as appears from Luk 23:4-5 : on Pilate's affirming His innocence, "they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place." They see no hope of getting Pilate's sanction to His death unless they can fasten upon Him a charge of conspiracy against the government; and as Galilee was noted for its turbulence (Luk 13:1; Act 5:37), and our Lord's ministry lay chiefly there, they artfully introduce it to give color to their charge. "And the chief priests accused Him of many things, but He answered nothing (Mar 15:3). Then said Pilate unto Him, Hearest Thou not how many things they witness against Thee? And He answered him to never a word, insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly" (Mat 27:13-14). See on Mar 15:3-5. In his perplexity, Pilate, hearing of Galilee, bethinks himself of the expedient of sending Him to Herod, in the hope of thereby further shaking off responsibility in the case. See Mar 15:6, and see on Luk 23:6-12. The return of the prisoner only deepened the perplexity of Pilate, who, "calling together the chief priests, rulers, and people," tells them plainly that not one of their charges against "this man" had been made good, while even Herod, to whose jurisdiction he more naturally belonged, had done nothing to Him: He "will therefore chastise and release him" (Luk 23:13-16).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 38. What is truth] Among the sages of that time there were many opinions concerning truth; and some had even supposed that it was a thing utterly out of the reach of men. Pilate perhaps might have asked the question in a mocking way; and his not staying to get an answer indicated that he either despaired of getting a satisfactory one, or that he was indifferent about it. This is the case with thousands: they appear desirous of knowing the truth, but have not patience to wait in a proper way to receive an answer to their question.

I find in him no fault] Having asked the above question, and being convinced of our Lord's innocence, he went out to the Jews to testify his convictions and to deliver him, if possible, out of their hands.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

38. What is truth? Some think that Pilate puts this question through curiosity, as irreligious men are sometimes accustomed to be eagerly desirous of learning something that is new to them, and yet do not know why they wish it; for they intend nothing more than to gratify their ears. For my own part, I rather think that it is an expression of disdain; for Pilate thought himself highly insulted when Christ represented him as destitute of all knowledge of the truth. Here we see in Pilate a disease which is customary among men. Though we are all aware of our ignorance, yet there are few who are willing to confess it; and the consequence is, that the greater part of men reject the true doctrine. Afterwards, the Lord, who is the Teacher of the humble, blinds the proud, and thus inflicts on them the punishment which they deserve. From the same pride arises such disdain, that they do not choose to submit to learn, because all lay claim to sagacity and acuteness of mind. Truth is believed to be a common thing; but God declares, on the contrary, that it far exceeds the capacity of the human understanding.

The same thing happens in other matters. The principal articles of theology are, the curse pronounced on the human race, the corruption of nature, the mortification of the flesh, the renewal of the life, the reconciliation effected by free grace through the only sacrifice, the imputation of righteousness, by means of which a sinner is accepted by God, and the illumination of the Holy Spirit. These, being paradoxes, are disdainfully rejected by the ordinary understanding of men. Few, therefore, make progress in the school of God, because we scarcely find one person in ten who attends to the first and elementary instructions; and why is this, but because they measure the secret wisdom of God by their own understanding?

That Pilate spoke in mockery is evident from this circumstance, that he immediately goes out. In short, he is angry with Christ for boasting that he brings forward the truth, which formerly lay hidden in darkness. Yet this indignation of Pilate shows that wicked men never reject the doctrine of the Gospel so spitefully as not to be somewhat moved by its efficacy; for, though Pilate did not proceed so far as to become humble and teachable, yet he is constrained to feel some inward compunction.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(38) Pilate saith unto him, What is truth?—“‘What is truth?’ said jesting Pilate, and would not stay for an answer.” Such is Lord Bacon’s well-known interpretation of Pilate’s well-known question. Others have seen in it the bitterness of a mind that had been tossed to and fro in the troubled sea of contemporaneous thought, and despaired of an anchorage. Others, again; have traced the tone of sarcasm in the governor’s words—“Is the son of Roman freedom and Greek thought, which had at this time been welded into one power, to learn truth of a Jewish enthusiast?” while the older interpreters, for the most part, regarded the question as that of an earnest inquirer desiring to be satisfied. These are a few among the many thoughts the passage has suggested; and yet none of them seem to give the natural impression which follows from the words. Bacon’s is nearest to it, but Pilate was far from jesting. He seems rather to have been irritated by the refusal of the Jews to furnish a formal accusation (Joh_18:31), and more so at the question of Jesus in Joh_18:34, and the subtleties, as he thinks them, of Joh_18:36. This seems to him to be another, and at all events it is wholly irrelevant to the question at issue. He has neither time nor will to deal with it, and at once goes from the palace again to the Jews.

I find in him no fault at all.—Better, I find no crime in Him. St. John uses the word rendered “fault” only in this phrase. (Comp. Joh_19:4; Joh_19:6.) It is used by St. Matthew (Mat_27:37) for the technical “accusation written, This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” and this seems to be the sense here. “I find no ground for the legal charge (Joh_18:33). Whatever He may be, there is no proof of treason against the majesty of Cæsar.”

On the attempt of Pilate to release Jesus (Joh_18:39-40), comp. Mat_27:15-23; Mar_15:6-14; Luk_23:13-23. It is preceded in St. Luke by the trial before Herod (Joh_18:6-12).

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

38. What is truth?] Pilate does not ask about ‘the Truth,’ but truth in any particular case. His question does not indicate any serious wish to know what truth really is, nor yet the despairing scepticism of a baffled thinker; nor, on the other hand, is it uttered in a light spirit of ‘jesting’ (as Bacon thought). Rather it is the half-pitying, half-impatient, question of a practical man of the world, whose experience of life has convinced him that truth is a dream of enthusiasts, and that a kingdom in which truth is to be supreme is as visionary as that of the Stoics. He has heard enough to convince him that the Accused is no dangerous incendiary, and he abruptly brings the investigation to a close with a question, which to his mind cuts at the root of the Prisoner’s aspirations. Here probably we must insert the sending to Herod Antipas, who had come from Tiberias, as Pilate from Caesarea, on account of the Feast, the one to win popularity, the other to keep order (Luk_23:6-12).

38. unto the Jews] Apparently this means the mob and not the hierarchy. Pilate hoped that only a minority were moving against Jesus; by an appeal to the majority he might be able to acquit Him without incurring odium. By pronouncing Him legally innocent he would gain this majority; by proposing to release Him on account of the Feast rather than of His innocence he would avoid insulting the Sanhedrin, who had already pronounced Him guilty. From S. Mark (Mar_15:8; Mar_15:11) it would appear that some of the multitude hoped to deliver Jesus on the plea of the Feast and took the initiative in reminding Pilate of the custom, but were controlled by the priests and made to clamour for Barabbas.

I find in him no fault at all] Rather, I find no ground of accusation in him. As in Joh_19:6, the pronoun is emphatic; ‘I, the Roman judge, in contrast to you Jewish fanatics.’ The word here and Joh_19:4; Joh_19:6 rendered ‘fault’ (aitia) is rendered ‘accusation’ Mat_27:37 and Mar_15:26, and ‘cause’ Act_13:28; Act_28:18. In all these passages it seems to mean ‘legal ground for prosecution.’

38–40. Outside the Praetorium; Pilate pronounces Him innocent and offers to release Him in honour of the feast: the Jews prefer Barabbas.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Pilate saith unto him, what is truth?.... That is, in general, or that which Christ then particularly spoke of: many things might be observed in answer to this question, as that there is the truth and faithfulness of God in his word and promises; the truth of grace in the hearts of his people; Jesus Christ himself is truth, he is true God, and true man; the truth of all covenant transactions, of all types, promises, and prophecies; whatever he said and taught was truth, and the truth of all doctrine comes from him. The Gospel is truth in general; it comes from the God of truth; lies in the Scriptures of truth; Christ, who is truth itself, is the substance of it; the Spirit of truth has an hand in it, leads into it, and makes it effectual; the whole of it is true, and every particular doctrine of it; as the manifestation of the Son of God in human nature, his coming into the world to save the chief of sinners, justification by his righteousness, pardon by his blood, atonement by his sacrifice, the resurrection of the dead, &c. The same question is put in the Talmud (p), , "what is truth?" and it is answered, that he is the living God, and the King of the World: we do not find that our Lord gave any answer to this question, which might be put in a scornful, jeering way; nor did Pilate wait for one; for

when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews: as soon as he had put the question about truth, having no great inclination to hear what Christ would say to it; nor did he put it for information sake, or as having any opinion of Christ, and that he was able to answer it; he directly goes out of the judgment hall, taking Jesus along with him, and addresses the Jews after this manner:

and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all; and indeed how should he? there was no sin in his nature, nor guile in his lips, nor any iniquity in his life; the devil himself could find none in him. This confession is both to the shame of Pilate and the Jews; to the reproach of Pilate, that after this he should condemn him; and of the Jews, that after such a fair and full declaration from the judge, they should insist upon his crucifixion; it shows, however, that he died not for any sin of his own, but for the sins of others.

(p) T. Hieros. Sanhedrin, fol. 18. 1.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all.

Ver. 38. What is truth?] In a scornful, profane manner. As indeed profane spirits cannot hear savoury words, but they turn them off with a scorn. What is truth? Fastidientis atque irridentis vox, non interrogantis, In a scornful and mocking voice not sincerely seeking, saith Beza. Some think it is vox admirantis; voice of wonder as if Pilate wondered at Christ, that when his life was in question he should talk of truth, q.d. Your life is in danger, and talk you of truth? Politicians think religion niceness. However it was, or with what mind soever, out he goes, and stays not an answer; as Saul bade the priest bring to him the ark, but, ere that could be done, draws forth his army, 1Sa 14:18-20.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

What is truth? - This question was probably asked in contempt, and hence Jesus did not answer it. Had the question been sincere, and had Pilate really sought it as Nicodemus had done John 3, Jesus would not have hesitated to explain to him the nature of his kingdom. They were now alone in the judgment-hall Joh 18:33, and as soon as Pilate had asked the question, without waiting for an answer, he went out. It is evident that he was satisfied, from the answer of Jesus Joh 18:36-37, that he was not a king in the sense in which the Jews accused him; that he would not endanger the Roman government, and consequently that he was innocent of the charge alleged against him. He regarded him, clearly, as a fanatic poor, ignorant, and deluded, but innocent and not dangerous. Hence, he sought to release him; and, hence, in contempt, he asked him this question, and immediately went out, not expecting an answer.

This question had long agitated the world. It was the great subject of inquiry in all the schools of the Greeks. Different sects of philosophers had held different opinions, and Pilate now, in derision, asked him, whom he esteemed an ignorant fanatic, whether he could solve this long-agitated question. He might have had an answer. If he had patiently waited in sincerity, Jesus would have told him what it was. Thousands ask the question in the same way. They have a fixed contempt for the Bible; they deride the instructions of religion; they are unwilling to investigate and to wait at the gates of wisdom; and hence, like Pilate, they remain ignorant of the great Source of truth, and die in darkness and in error. All might find truth if they would seek it; none ever will find it if they do not apply for it to the great source of light the God of truth, and seek it patiently in the way in which he has chosen to communicate it to mankind. How highly should we prize the Bible! And how patiently and prayerfully should we search the Scriptures, that we may not err and die forever! See the notes at Joh 14:6.

I find in him no fault - See Luk 23:4.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Pilate (as profane persons use to do) thought that our Saviour, speaking of truth, and a spiritual kingdom, did but cant, and therefore asking him what he meant by truth, he never stays for an answer, but goes out again to the Jews, whom he had left without the door of the judgment hall, and tells them he found no fault in him. Whatever the quality of the kingdom was of which our Saviour spake, he judged that his pretensions to it were not prejudicial to the authority of the emperor, nor the tranquillity of the state, and would have demissed him from their unjust prosecution.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

38. What is truth?—Pilate supposes that he had now applied a finisher. All the philosophy of the age in which he lived had decided that man could know but this: that nothing could be known. That higher truth is undiscoverable, that in fact there is no absolute truth, no difference between ultimate truth and falsehood, were the conclusion at which highest human thought had arrived. And what the philosophers thus taught, political and military men readily accepted. It was, therefore, readily and generally agreed that visible and tangible things, things of sense and of the present world, were all. Talk to such a man in high strain of philosophic, religious, or divine truth, and his reply is: “Bah! What is truth? I understand positive science; but as for your higher truth, it is a chimera.”

He went out—He waited for no answer, because his very question was intended to deny the possibility of all answer. He is ready to return to the Jews with the full feeling that it would be a real murder to take the life of so harmless an abstractionist. He again takes his stand in front and pronounces his finding in him no fault. This announcement to the people drew forth murmurs of disapprobation, in which their utterance of the word Galilee (Luk_22:5) suggested to Pilate his first method of rescuing Jesus by sending him to Herod. After his return, the second expedient, his attempt to release Jesus instead of Barabbas, next occurs, as is related in the following verses and in the parallel sections of the other Evangelists.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? The aphorism of Lord Bacon, is truth?" said jesting Pilate, and did not wait for an answer," scarcely represents the reality oft-he case. Pilate was not scornfully jesting with a metaphysical problem, nor professing himself hopelessly baffled in search for it. The language was not the utterance of irrepressible homage to his mysterious Prisoner, or heartfelt sympathy with him. For on this supposition why did he not wait for some more words of strange unearthly wisdom? Nor does he go so far in his skepticism as Pliny the Eider did when he said, "that there is only one thing certain, viz. that there is nothing certain;" but as a man of the world having to do with Roman authority or intrigue and Jewish fanaticism, Pilate despised earnestness and zeal, and was utterly unable to believe in the existence of a world or region where any higher reality than force prevailed. But the governor was now, with his narrow range of thought, strongly convinced that Jesus was utterly innocent of the charge brought against him. The unanswered question is equivalent to this What has truth to do with kingship? What has the vague shadowy region over which this poor king reigns to do with plots against Caesar? He saw enough to induce him to break off the interview within the Praetorium, and he proceeded, though vainly, to deliver a verdict on the case. When he had said this, he went out to the Jews, and said, I find no crime in him. Here, however, must be introduced the scenes described by Matthew, Mark, and especially by Luke scenes of loud and angry dispute and renewed and fierce accusation. (Mat_27:12-14 Mar_15:3-5 Luk_23:4-12) In all three accounts, after the admission that he was King of the Jews, the loud, fierce accusations followed in which our Lord, notwithstanding the repeated summons of Pilate, "answered nothing." At this the governor marveled greatly (Matthew and Mark). It is not impossible that the first question which Pilate put to him within the Praetorium was renewed and laconically answered with the Su legeiv , as before I but all the wild roar of the chief priests and people could extract nothing more. This silence in face of the accusation of the mob astonished Pilate, and made him more than ever convinced of the innocence of his Prisoner. B. Weiss shows conclusively how much light this interview with Pilate throws on the synoptic narrative; that, in fact, Pilate"s whole conduct is only explicable on the supposition that he had received cogent reasons to disarm all political mistrust (see "Life of Jesus," vol. 3. pp. 348, 349). Westcott says, "It is of great interest to compare this confession before Pilate with the corresponding confession before the high priest. (Mat_26:64) The one addressed to the Jews is in the language of prophecy, the other addressed to a Roman appeals to the verdict of universal conscience. The one speaks of a future manifestation of glory, the other of a present manifestation of truth.

"What is truth?

When the Lord Jesus, in explanation of his claim to kingship, declared himself a Witness to "the truth," the turn to the conversation between him and the Roman governor was to all appearance very abrupt. Government, royalty, these were ideas with which Pilate was familiar, in which his position bound him to take interest. With regard to truth, he might or be might not concern himself. In any case it would scarcely occur to him that there was any special connection between kingship and that witness to the truth which the accused One professed that it was his mission to bear. Whether Pilate asked the question from mere curiosity, from real interest, in ridicule, or in cynical unbelief, we cannot confidently say. The possibility that any one of these motives may have influenced him suggests the various attitudes of mind with which the truth of God is regarded by men.

I UNBELIEF ASKS, "WHAT IS TRUTH?" WITH A CYNICAL CONTEMPT TOWARDS THOSE WHO BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE FOUND IT. The disbelief of Christianity as a Divine and authoritative religion is no new thing. Infidelity has existed from the earliest ages of Christianity down to the present time. It has taken different forms. Atheism, agnosticism, deism, rationalism, mysticism, differ in what they affirm, but they largely agree in what they deny. The chief offence taken with our religion is because of its supernatural claim, because, by affirming Jesus to be the Son of God and to have risen from the dead, it affirms the being of a God deeply interested in man"s true welfare, and interposing in order to secure it. That there is some solid basis for the Christian faith and-for the Christian Church, only the most ignorant deny. With regard to the historical facts which accounted for Christianity as a human system, there is among unbelievers difference of opinion. But when the Christian teacher or preacher declares, as he is bound to do, that the Scriptures reveal "the truth" concerning the character and purposes of God, and concerning the nature and prospects of man, then all the hostility of the opponent of religion, of the man who believes in food and clothing, in science and art, and in nothing beyond, is aroused within him; and with all the scorn of incredulity in his tones he asks, assured that there is no answer to be given, "What is truth?

II SCEPTICISM ASKS, "WHAT IS TRUTH?" WITH THE SADDEST DOUBT AS TO THE POSSIBILITY OF ATTAINING IT. The opponent of the believer is the infidel, who disbelieves. Between the two stands the skeptic, whose attitude is one of doubt, examination, indecision. This is a stage of thought through which most educated and thoughtful persons pass some to faith and some to disbelief, whilst there are those who linger in this state throughout the rest of life. Christianity is no foe to candid inquiry; it bids us "prove all things;" any other principle would keep heathens, heathens, and Mohammedans, Mohammedans, all through life. What is to be avoided and blamed is the settled, contented acquiescence in doubt, which tends to no conclusion of belief, no definite action. Now, whilst there are topics upon which we are not bound to have an opinion topics beyond our faculties, or remote from our interests it must be maintained that religion is of importance so vital, that if truth with regard to it can possibly be attained, it must earnestly be sought. Permanent skepticism is either a sign of the weakest intellect, or it is a confession that the problem of greatest interest to us is a problem we can never solve.

III INQUIRY PUTS THE QUESTION, "WHAT IS TRUTH?" WITH SINCERE AND PRAYERFUL INTEREST. There is no question which affords to the Christian teacher and preacher greater pleasure, when propounded with intelligence and candor, than this. It evinces a mind alive to the great purposes and the great possibilities of life. And further, there is the assurance that the seeker shall be the finder of truth. In many of their enterprises the fervent, the inquisitive, the avaricious, the ambitions, are doomed to fail. But there is a price with which truth may be bought; and the promise holds good, "He that seeketh findeth." Truth must indeed be sought in a right method and in a right spirit; so sought, it will not be sought in vain.

IV FAITH ASKS, "WHAT IS TRUTH? "AND RECEIVES TO THE QUESTION AN ANSWER DEFINITE, ASSURED, AND SATISFYING. Belief in Christian truth is reasonable, based as it is upon evidence and testimony, upon the highest and most unquestionable authority, and upon the congruity between Christianity and the innate needs of man"s understanding, conscience, and heart. Belief, as an intellectual assent, is necessary to true religion; but it is in itself insufficient. To believe the gospel is to put faith in him who is himself the Gospel, and faith in Christ is faith in God. Christ has said, "I am the Truth;" they, then, who find him, find revealed in him the mind, the very heart of God. The truth is to the Christian the favor and the fellowship of the Eternal, the law of life, the satisfaction of the whole nature. Very different are the Christian"s convictions from many which are held tenaciously by the "men of this world;" for they are convictions which shall never be distrusted and abandoned; they shall outlast the perishable fabrics reared by human ingenuity and human imagination. T.

No crime in Christ.

Pilate"s language and conduct furnish us with an example of the way in which weak and unprincipled men are wont to allow themselves to be guided by the expected consequences of their actions, instead of referring those actions to principles and laws by which they might decide what is the right course to follow. Often, as in the case of Pilate, where the results of actions are more regarded than their standards, men"s convictions lead in one direction, whilst their practical conduct follows another and inferior path.

I THE IMMEDIATE AND HISTORICAL LESSONS DEDUCIBLE FROM THIS ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PILATE.

1. With reference to the governor himself who thus spoke, we infer from this language his judicial impartiality. Accustomed to such examinations as that he was now conducting, he saw at once through the motives of the accusers, and recognized the absurdity of their charges and the innocence of the Accused. This was to the credit of his intelligence; but his clear perception of the merits of the case makes his guilt the greater in yielding to the malice of the priests and the passion of the populace.

2. This language testifies to the sinful and malicious conduct of Christ"s enemies. Pilate was ready enough to see matters as they were seen by the influential class among the Jews. But the case was so flagrant a case of groundless hatred and false accusation, that it was impossible that Pilate should be blinded to the truth. What the governor said was literally true there was no crime in Jesus.

3. We are justified in accepting this witness to the character of our Lord. As Christians we believe, indeed, far more than the Savior"s innocence of the crime of civil insurrection. But we are at liberty to take this evidence, and to require its acceptance by all students of Christ"s character and claims. If the historical inquirer will go no further, we may justly expect him to grant that the charge upon which our Lord was put to death was a charge utterly groundless.

II THE GENERAL AND RELIGIOUS LESSONS DEDUCIBLE FROM THIS ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PILATE.

1. It harmonizes with the declarations of Scripture concerning the blamelessness and sinlessness of Jesus.

2. It suggests the inquiry why one so blameless should endure such undeserved ignominy and suffering. It is plain from the narrative that Jesus might have avoided what, as a matter of fact, he consented to undergo. There was a reason for this a reason to be found in the Divine purposes regarding the salvation of sinful men. His qualifications are such as fit him for his mighty and merciful office, as the sinless Savior of a sinful race. T.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

What is truth? - Said Pilate, a courtier; perhaps meaning what signifies truth? Is that a thing worth hazarding your life for? So he left him presently, to plead with the Jews for him, looking upon him as an innocent but weak man.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Observe here, 1. The question Pilate put to Christ, What is truth? A most noble and important question, had it been put forth with an honest heart, with a mind fairly disposed for information and satisfaction: but it is evident, Pilate’s enquiry was not serious; nay, it is generally thought, that Pilate asked this question in scorn, contempt and derision: for he stays not for our Lord’s answer but as soon as he started this query, went off the bench in haste.

Learn hence, that this question, what is truth? or how may we come to the knowledge of the truth? is of unspeakable use and importance, and a question, whereon the whole frame and constitution of religion depends: because truth is claimed by all parties of men, by all professors of religion.

Ask the different parties from the old gentleman at Rome to the poorest Quaker and Muggletonian, Where is truth? and they will all tell you.

They are in the possession of it: Every sect hath thus much of popery with it, that the professors of it think themselves infallible, and every one cries out, Here is truth.

But God has given us a two-fold light to search for truth: namely, the light of reason, and the light of scripture, or divine revelation.

The former Solomon calls the candle of the Lord, set up in our breasts by God, on purpose to discover truth unto us. God allows us, yea, enjoins us, the free and impartial use of our understandings and judgments, in order to the finding out of divine truth; but because nature’s light or the light of natural reason is not clear and bright enough to give us a prospect of supernatural truths, (for nature and reason can never dictate those things which depend only upon God’s free grace and good pleasure; such as the doctrines of a Saviour and Redeemer, and the method of man’s salvation by the sufferings of the Son of God,) it had been blasphemy once to have supposed such things, had not God revealed them in scripture: therefore the second standard of divine truth, is the infallible word of God.

The gospel of Christ is the way, and the truth; Truth came by Jesus Christ. And would men be ruled and conducted by these unalterable standards of truth, namely, right reason and divine revelation, they would easily agree in their judgments what is to be believed, and all duties and controversies would vanish. Right reason and inspired scriptures are the best judges of controversies; they being the fixed standards and measures of divine truth, can best resolve Pilate’s question here, and tell us What is truth.

Observe, 2. How unwilling, how very unwilling Pilate was to be the instrument of our Saviour’s death: he came forth three several times, and tells the Jews that he finds no fault in him; he bids them take him, and judge him according to their law. Pilate, a Pagan, absolves Christ, whilst the hypocritical Jews, that heard his doctrine, and saw his miracles, do condemn him.

Observe, 3. Pilate having absolved Christ, I find no fault in him, endeavours next to release him, and takes occasion from their custom of having a prisoner released to them at their feast, to insinuate his desire that they should choose Christ: Ye have a custom that I should release unto you one at the passover.

Observe, lastly, how the Jews prefer Barabbas, a robber, before the holy and innocent Jesus: They all cried out, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas.

Learn hence, that no persons, how wicked and vile soever, are so odious in the eyes of the enemies of God, as Christ himself was, and his friends and followers now are: Christ did find it thus in his own person when on earth: Barabbas, a robber, was preferred before him: and now he is in heaven, he suffers in the members, the filth of the world being preferred before them.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

38. What is truth? Pilate's inquiry was not answered in words, but Truth sat embodied and bound before him. Some have held that this question of Pilate's was asked in scorn. His conduct through the trial shows that he was deeply impressed, and it is probable that the question was asked from a deep curiosity to hear more from so marvellous a teacher.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

What is truth?

This remark appears in the form of a question to reflect Pilate's belief that no one really knows what truth is. AT: "No one can know what is true!" (See: Rhetorical Question)

the Jews

Here "Jews" is a synecdoche that refers to the Jewish leaders who opposed Jesus. (See: Synecdoche)

Not this man, but Barabbas

This is an ellipsis. You can add the implied words. AT: "No! Do not release this man! Release Barabbas instead" (See: Ellipsis)

Now Barabbas was a robber

Here John provides background information about Barabbas. (See: Background Information)

translationWords

true

Passover

King of the Jews

Barabbas

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

38–40. Outside the Praetorium; Pilate pronounces Him innocent and offers to release Him for the Feast: the Jews prefer Barabbas.

38. τί ἐστιν ἀλήθεια; Pilate does not ask about ‘the Truth,’ but truth in any particular case. His question does not indicate any serious wish to know what truth really is, nor yet the despairing scepticism of a baffled thinker; nor, on the other hand, is it uttered in a light spirit of ‘jesting’ (as Bacon thought). Rather it is the half-pitying, half-impatient, question of a practical man of the world, whose experience of life has convinced him that truth is a dream of enthusiasts, and that a kingdom in which truth is to be supreme is as visionary as that of the Stoics. He has heard enough to convince him that the accused is no dangerous incendiary, and he abruptly closes the investigation with a question, which to his mind cuts at the root of the Prisoner’s aspirations. “It was a good question; but Pilate’s haste lost him the answer”: he asked it and went out. Quid est Veritas? Vir est qui adest (Anagram attributed to Charles I.). Here probably we must insert the sending to Herod Antipas, who had come from Tiberias, as Pilate from Caesarea, on account of the Feast, the one to win popularity, the other to keep order (Luk 23:6-12).

38. τ. Ἰουδαίους. Apparently this means the mob and not the hierarchy. Pilate hoped that only a minority were moving against Jesus; by an appeal to the majority he might be able to acquit Him without incurring odium. By pronouncing Him legally innocent he would gain this majority; by proposing to release Him on account of the Feast rather than of His innocence he would avoid insulting the Sanhedrin, who had already pronounced Him guilty. From S. Mark (Mar 15:8; Mar 15:11) it would appear that some of the multitude hoped to deliver Jesus on the plea of the Feast and took the initiative in reminding Pilate of the custom, but were controlled by the priests and made to clamour for Barabbas.

ἐγώ … αἰτίαν. ‘Whatever you fanatics may do, I find no ground of accusation in Him:’ comp. Joh 19:6. Αἰτία means ‘legal ground for prosecution, crime’ (Mat 27:37; Mar 15:26; Act 13:28; Act 28:18).

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

38.] To this number Pilate did not belong. He had no ear for Truth. His celebrated question is perhaps more the result of indifferentism than of scepticism; it expresses, not without scoff and irony, a conviction that truth can never be found: and is an apt representative of the state of the polite Gentile mind at the time of the Lord’s coming. It was rather an inability than an unwillingness to find the truth.

He waits for no answer, nor did the question require any. Nay, it was no real question, any more than τί ἐμοὶ κ. σοί, or any other, behind which a negation lies hid.

ἐγὼ οὐδεμ. αἰτ.…] ἐγώ, opposed to ὑμεῖς, who had found fault in Him. Pilate mocks both—the Witness to the Truth, and the haters of the Truth. His conduct presents a pitiable specimen of the moral weakness of that spirit of worldly power, which reached its culminating point in the Roman empire.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

38. Pilate is now convinced that Jesus` “kingdom” is not a temporal one, and that He is innocent of revolutionary designs. His rejoinder is perhaps wistful rather than cynical or careless: “What is truth?” But to this, the greatest of questions, he does not wait for an answer. He goes outside again (πάλιν, see v. 29) to the Jews assembled in the courtyard, and roundly tells them that he can find no reason why Jesus should be put to death.

ἐγὼ οὐδεμίαν εὑρίσκω ἐν αὐτῷ αἰτίαν. This is the order of words in BL, but the rec., with אANWΓΔΘ, puts αἰτίαν after οὐδεμίαν. According to Jn., Pilate says this three times to the Jewish accusers (19:4, 6); as also does Luk 23:4, Luk 23:14, Luk 23:22, who has αἴτιον for αἰτίαν. The αἰτία is the crimen, the thing charged against the prisoner; cf. Mar 15:26, Mat 27:37, and see on 19:19. For this use of αἰτία, cf. Gen 4:13, Pro 28:17.

At this point in the narrative, Luke gives an incident unrecorded by the other evangelists (Luk 23:7-12). He says that Pilate caught at the word “Galilæan” which had been used by the accusers of Jesus, and, anxious to evade responsibility, sent Jesus to Herod, the tetrarch of Galilee, who was then at Jerusalem. According to this story, which has every mark of genuineness and which no one was likely to invent, Jesus kept silence before Herod, and having been mocked by the soldiers was sent back to Pilate. Herod was not anxious to involve himself in any question of treason against the imperial authority.

Pilate’s next effort to save Jesus, or to save himself from the shame of condemning one whom he believed to be innocent, was to appeal to a Passover custom of releasing a prisoner from custody. Of this custom we know nothing beyond what is told in the Gospels, but there is nothing improbable in the statement that it prevailed at Jerusalem. Livy tells of something similar at the Roman Lectisternia (Livy, v. xiii. 8), and there is an allusion to it in Dion. Halicar. (xii. 9).1

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Truth. Not with the article as in the previous verse, the truth. Jesus meant the absolute truth : Pilate, truth in any particular case. "Pilate 's exclamation is neither the expression of an ardent thirst for truth, nor that of the despair of a soul which has long sought it in vain; it is the profession of a frivolous skepticism, such as is frequently met with in the man of the world, and especially in the statesman" (Godet).

Fault [αιτιαν] . Properly, cause of accusation. Rev., crime. See on Mt 27:37, and compare on Mt 19:10.

39, 40. Compare Mt 27:15 - 26; Mr 6:15.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.