← Back to sermon library

Matthew 27, our focus this morning 
will be on verses 24 to 26. We have been considering Jesus 
before Pontius Pilate, the trial that was necessary in order to 
give the death sentence to our Lord. Christ already stood before 
the Sanhedrin or the Jewish council, the high council, and they found 
him guilty of blasphemy. So they then turn him over to 
Pontius Pilate so that he can indeed give the order to execute 
our Lord. But I want to read beginning 
in Matthew 27 at verse 11. Now Jesus stood before the governor, 
and the governor asked him, saying, Are you the king of the Jews? 
Jesus said to him, It is as you say. And while he was being accused 
by the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. Then Pilate 
said to him, Do you not hear how many things they testify 
against you? But he answered him not one word, 
so that the governor marveled greatly. Now at the feast, the 
governor was accustomed to releasing to the multitude one prisoner 
whom they wished. And at that time they had a notorious 
prisoner called Barabbas. Therefore, when they had gathered 
together, Pilate said to them, whom do you want me to release 
to you, Barabbas or Jesus who is called Christ? For he knew 
that they had handed him over because of envy. While he was 
sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent to him saying, 
have nothing to do with that just man, for I have suffered 
many things today in a dream because of him. But the chief 
priests and elders persuaded the multitudes that they should 
ask for Barabbas and destroy Jesus. The governor answered 
and said to them, which of the two do you want me to release 
to you? They said, Barabbas. Pilate said to them, what then 
shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ? They all said 
to him, let him be crucified. And the governor said, why, what 
evil has he done? But they cried out all the more 
saying, let him be crucified. When Pilate saw that he could 
not prevail, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took 
water and washed his hands before the multitude saying, I am innocent 
of the blood of this just man. You see to it. And all the people 
answered and said, his blood be on us and on our children. 
Then he released Barabbas to them. And when he had scourged 
Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified. Amen. Let us pray. Our Father, we thank you for 
the written word. We thank you for the record concerning the 
living word, our Lord Jesus Christ. How we praise you for what he 
went through on our behalf. How we praise you that he is 
indeed the substitute here, bearing the penalty of God's wrath for 
his people. We bless you and we praise you 
and we would ask today that this would strengthen us and comfort 
us and stable us in our faith, that we would see this one who 
knew no sin, made sin for us, that we might become the righteousness 
of God in Him. We pray that today would be the 
day of salvation for any and all who are dead in their trespasses 
and sins. We pray that your Holy Spirit 
would be at work and He would bring conviction for sin and 
set forth the excellency and the ability and the sufficiency 
of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. To this end, we pray for the 
ministry of the Holy Spirit. We ask our Father that You would 
send Him in power, that You would encourage us with His presence, 
that You would supply what is lacking in us. Our Lord taught 
us that apart from Him, we could do nothing. And hearing preaching, 
preaching itself, we all stand in need of the ministry of the 
Holy Spirit. So send Him forth in a powerful way and illumine 
our minds and our hearts. And do forgive us now for our 
sins and our transgressions. Cleanse us in the blood of the 
Lord Jesus Christ. And it's in his name that we 
pray. Amen. Well, as I said, we have seen 
the trial before Pontius Pilate. In the first installment, we 
saw Jesus interrogated by Pilate in verses 11 to 14. Last week, 
we saw Pilate's attempt to grant amnesty to the Lord Jesus in 
verses 15 to 23. Remember, Pilate knows that Jesus 
is innocent. Pilate knows that Jesus is not 
guilty for the crime that they have turned him over concerning. 
Pilate knows that the Jews handed him over because of their own 
envy. They were not concerned that 
Jesus blasphemed. They were not concerned that 
Jesus was a threat to Caesar or the Roman political power. 
They were threatened by Christ. They didn't like the fact that 
multitudes were following him. They didn't like the fact that 
he was taking away their popularity. They didn't like the fact that 
Jesus was being extolled as the Son of God. So they deliver him 
up as a result of their envy. So Pilate is conscious of this. 
Pilate knows what's happening. And in this particular section 
that we'll look at this morning, we'll see Pilate's attempt to 
absolve himself of Christ's crucifixion. So I want to look at those three 
things this morning. First, the self-absolution of 
Pilate. Kids, absolution simply means 
to try to make oneself right, to try to make oneself not guilty, 
to try to make oneself innocent. That's what I mean by absolution. He first tries to absolve Jesus 
because he knows Jesus is guiltless, but then he goes on to try and 
absolve himself. It's trying to make sure that 
persons see you not as a guilty one. Secondly, we'll consider 
the responsibility of all the people in verse 25. Responsibility in the trial narratives 
have been something of a hot potato. Everybody's trying to 
give it away. Judas doesn't want to be responsible 
for what's happening to our Lord. We'll see here that Pilate doesn't 
want to be responsible for what is happening to our Lord. They 
each one try to pass the buck. And according to verse 25, all 
the people accept it. And then thirdly, we'll see the 
sentencing of Jesus in verse 26. But note in the first place, 
the self-absolution of Pilate, verse 24. when Pilate saw that 
he could not prevail at all. And what that means is simple. 
He couldn't prevail with the crowd. He couldn't prevail with 
the religious leaders. He couldn't change their mind, 
though he has tried. Again, I'm not going to argue 
that Pilate is a Christian. not going to argue that he's 
in heaven, not going to argue that he's a godly man. There 
are some who say that this passage does describe the Christianization 
of Pontius Pilate. I disagree wholeheartedly, and 
I will argue this morning that he's as culpable and as responsible 
for the death of Jesus as anybody else. But he has tried to get 
them to see the situation. He has tried to give them the 
opportunity to request Jesus in terms of amnesty, and they 
will not accept it. The religious leaders, according 
to verse 20, have persuaded the multitudes, and they are all 
crying out that Jesus be sentenced to death. So Pilate sees that 
he could not prevail in this particular situation, and he 
sees as well that there is a tumult rising. In other words, mob rules 
at this particular point. Pilate probably fears losing 
his job. If there is a tumult, if there 
is a riot, if the city does experience and uproar, it will ultimately 
be held to his account. And so he cannot let this get 
any further. He has to reign this in, and 
that's what does bring him to the point of expediting the sentencing 
of our Lord Jesus. He saw the murderous rage of 
this godless multitude, and he kowtows to them. He gives in 
to their wretched desire. John Calvin says Pilate, finding 
himself unable to restrain the commotion of the people, lays 
aside his authority as a judge and yields to their furious outcry. You see, he has abdicated his 
role. He's not functioning the way 
that a magistrate ought to. He is allowing the multitude 
to dictate the course of action that he is to pursue. I mean, 
I think this is a great instance of political abuse. When lobbyists 
or persons that have special interests get a hold of a politician 
and he starts to be their puppet, he starts to dance to their tune, 
he starts to function in accordance with their check writing or their 
pressure placed on his campaign, modern politicians are not a 
novelty. We see it right here with Pontius 
Pilate. The man is guilty. The man is 
passive. The man has abdicated his role. 
He is not exercising judicial authority. He ought not to be 
concerned with what the crowd has to say. He ought to measure 
the evidence. He ought to weigh it, he ought 
to look at the testimony and the cross-examinations, and he 
ought to render a lawful verdict. But he is not doing that. So 
notice now his attempt to absolve himself, his action. takes a 
basin of water and he washes his hands before the multitude." 
Now I suspect that in the background is Deuteronomy chapter 21, also 
Psalm 26 and Psalm 73. This idea that this washing of the hands is a sign of someone's innocence. Now someone might say, well Pontius 
Pilate wasn't a Jew. Why in the world would he kowtow 
to their particular customs? He had been governing the Jews 
for a series of years. He had been over those people 
for a period of time. And I don't think it's unwarranted 
to suggest that He is using their custom to declare His innocence 
before them. As I said, Deuteronomy 21, verses 
1 to 9, when there is a homicide, a murder that they cannot specifically 
locate the offender, there's a particular ritual involved, 
and they cleanse their hands of the guilt of that particular 
murder. It's also indicated in Psalms 
26 and 73. So the implication is that having 
governed over the Jews for some time, he uses their custom. And 
D.A. Carson suggests that it may have 
reflected his contempt for the Jews or have been a taunt. Pilate 
was no friend of the Jews. Pilate had animosity against 
the Jews. Carson suggests it may have been 
a taunt. It may have been a demonstration 
of his contempt. You want this, but I'm not going 
to participate in it. I am not going to side with the 
multitudes in condemning an innocent man here. But the declaration 
that he makes, he says, I am innocent of the blood of this 
just person. I am innocent of the blood of 
this just man. They demonstrate his design. 
He wants to distance himself from this. Wouldn't you? I suspect you would. I suspect 
you'd want nothing to do with this particular situation. You 
see a man that has been delivered up into your council or into 
your courtroom, and he hasn't done anything wrong. You know 
that the ones who delivered him up, delivered him up not because 
they thought he had done something wrong, but because they were 
envious, they were jealous, they were bitter, they were resentful, 
they were like little children who didn't like to be threatened 
with their power base being removed from them. So this shows his 
desire to distance himself from the condemnation of Jesus. It 
also demonstrates his purpose. He wants to pass the book. He 
doesn't want to hold on to this. He doesn't want to be seen as 
the man who condemned the only righteous man that has ever lived 
on the face of the earth. Pilate is guilty, vile, wretched. He delivers up Jesus ultimately. I mean, the language here is 
all hypocritical. It's all disingenuous. When he 
does this, it's for show. When he says, I am innocent, 
it's for show. It's hypocritical. They don't 
have the power to crucify Jesus. But he does. The fact that he 
continues to go on with this, the fact that verse 26 tells 
us that he releases Barabbas, he has Jesus scourged, and then 
he delivers up Jesus, shows just how faulty his whole understanding 
is in verse 24. He is not innocent. He is guilty. He is not innocent. He is culpable. He is not innocent. He is responsible. He is not innocent. He is hypocritical, 
and this ought to be seen. But on the surface of it, you 
can't understand why he doesn't want to be associated with this 
situation wherein the religious leaders, out of envy, deliver 
up Jesus, stir up the crowds to a frenzy where they're crying 
out, crucify him. I believe as well that His language, 
I am innocent of the blood of this just man, highlights again 
yet another time the innocence of Jesus. I mean the testimonies 
in terms of the trial setting of our Lord continually emphasizes 
His innocence. What does Judas say? He said, I can't hold on to this 
money. I have sinned by betraying what? Innocent blood. What's Pilate's 
wife do? While he's on the judgment seat, 
he is hearing specific testimony against Jesus. His wife sends 
to him and says, I have had a dream. I have nothing to do with this 
just man. I have been perplexed. I have 
been troubled by the dream that I had concerning this man. Everybody's 
testifying that Jesus is innocent, which leads us back to appreciate 
what's happening in the passage. Why is this happening? Because 
we're not innocent. Why is this happening? Because 
we're vile. Why is Jesus standing before 
Pilate? Because we deserve the wrath 
and fury and condemnation of God Most High. I suggest that 
in your reading of the Passion Narrative, never forget 2 Corinthians 
5.21. God made Him, Christ, who knew no sin to be sin for 
us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." 
You see, what is happening here is divine justice being satisfied. Christ stands in our place. is the substitute. That's why 
Christ is silent. That's why Christ goes through 
this. That's why Christ willingly submits 
to the scourging and to the crucifixion, because He's honoring the covenant 
He made with His Father to save His people from their sins. Over 
and over and over again, this is the refrain concerning Christ. 
He is innocent. He is just. He is righteous, 
which makes the reader take note that he's doing this for others. 
Pilate makes the statement three times in Luke 23, 4, 14, and 
22, and then three times in John 18, 38, 19, 4, and 19, 6, that 
he finds no fault in Jesus. And this is what he declares 
in this particular instance. Now notice he goes on, verse 
25, you see to it, you see to it, I am innocent of the blood 
of this just man, you see to it. It's the same language the 
religious leaders employed with reference to Judas. When Judas 
says, I have sinned by betraying innocent blood, he wants to rid 
himself of that blood money, they say to him, you see to it. 
And this is what Pilate is doing now. He's trying to pass the 
buck. He is trying to absolve himself of the responsibility 
that is his as the governor, as the judge, as the one who 
is in charge. The action and the declaration 
were an attempt to show himself as guiltless with reference to 
this situation. But as well, the entirety of 
the trial, including the sentencing, shows that Pilate's claim here 
is patently false. Look at it, I'm innocent of the 
blood of this just man, you see to it. Verse 26, he released 
Barabbas, he delivered him to be crucified. You all get that, 
right? He's a fake. He's a fraud. He's 
a hypocrite. He's a wretch. He's got blood 
all over his hands. His foolish attempt, notwithstanding, 
to rid himself of it. The man has rejected the testimony 
of witnesses. The man has rejected the testimony 
of his wife. The man has rejected everything. So what he says here is absolute 
hypocrisy in the face of our Lord Jesus Christ. The instruction, 
you see to it, is the same thing, as I've said, the leaders say 
in verse 4, and it demonstrates further his culpability. Listen 
to Davies and Allison. They say, you see to it yourselves, 
or see to it yourselves is disingenuous. For Pilate, through his inefficacious 
actions, has himself seen to Jesus' execution. You see, when 
it says, you see to it, and then in verse 26 tells us, he released 
Barabbas and then he delivers up Jesus, you all get it. It's 
disingenuous, it's fake, it's hypocritical, but what is driving 
that is Pilate's realization of the innocence of the Lord 
Jesus and the envy and the wretchedness of the Jewish leaders involved. And it's also intriguing. Notice 
what he says, I am innocent of the blood of this just man. Who's 
Pilate really concerned for here? It's not Jesus. I am innocent. There's a bit of Pilate in all 
of us, isn't there? Well, I didn't do it. Kids do this at times, and I'm 
not picking on kids. You're just microcosmic of your 
parents. We all do this. You know, brother 
so-and-so or sister whoever did such and such, but I didn't do 
it. We all like to insist on our own integrity. We all like 
to claim the moral high ground. We all like to show ourselves 
superior. This is what Pilate's doing. 
I am innocent of the blood of this just man. Pilate, if you 
did your job and showed your concern for the innocence of 
this just man, you wouldn't be in this wretched situation that 
you have found yourself in. You ought to rebuke the Jews 
for bringing this case before you. You ought to rebuke the 
multitudes for crying out for the blood of a just man. You 
ought to submit to what your wife has to say in terms of stop 
having dealings with this man, and you ought to quit knuckling 
under to mob rules. Again, Davies and Allison. Pilate 
is more concerned to deny his own responsibility than he is 
to do the just thing with an innocent man. So instead of freeing 
the king of the Jews, he washes his own hands. His act, which 
acknowledges that Jesus is about to be murdered, is hypocritical. He knows what's happening. He 
knows where it's going. He knows that they're crying 
out with a crazed fury, and he knows they're going to get what 
they want. And so this verse 24 activity is an attempt for 
him to absolve his own self. to claim his own innocency, and 
in the language of C.H. Spurgeon, he says, ah, pilot, 
you need something stronger than water to wash the blood of that 
just person off your hands. You cannot rid yourself of responsibility 
by that farce. He who has power to prevent a 
wrong is guilty of the act if he permits others to do it, even 
though he does not actually commit it himself. So for those out 
there, and there are some Christian commentators that say Pilate 
is a noble man, Pilate's a Christian man, Pilate's a godly man, and 
this shows his confession of faith. Absolutely it does not. Everybody's guilty with reference 
to the death of Jesus. Yes, the Jewish leaders. Yes, 
the crowd. Yes, Pontius Pilate, but even 
one within the disciple community. It is Judas Iscariot, a disciple 
of Jesus, an apostle of Jesus, not a real saved one, but nevertheless, 
that position, and he is the one that delivers up Jesus for 
chump change, for the price of a slave, ultimately. And then 
there's us. You see, if it wasn't for our 
sin, why would the Savior go through this? If it wasn't for 
the sins of His people heaped up upon Him, why would the Savior 
go through this? There is a sense, brothers and 
sisters, where we're all culpable, we're all guilty. And I don't 
think at times it's altogether just to say, well, you know, 
if it wasn't for me, He would have never died. He had a particular 
plan to save His elect by His cross work. We are His elect, 
we are participants in that. It's our sin that was heaped 
upon Him. It was our sin that He paid the penalty for. It was 
our sin that He satisfied divine justice for. It is our sin, sent 
Him to the cross, and we need to see that, we need to marvel, 
and we need to stand in awe. Now notice, secondly, the responsibility 
of all the people. Verse 25, and all the people 
answer, intriguing use of language. Verse 20, they're described as 
multitudes. What's Matthew telling us? It's 
not a bit of the multitude that makes this statement, away with 
him, away with him, crucify him. It's all the people. That doesn't 
mean every single human person on the face of the earth. It 
means all Israel. You can see this convention used. 
In fact, if you wanna look at something really intriguing later, 
look at Jeremiah 26. It's a very similar passage. Jeremiah has prophesied the destruction 
of Jerusalem. Jeremiah has prophesied the destruction 
of their temple, their city, everything. And all the people 
cry out against him, to kill him, to execute him. It says 
the religious leaders stirred up all the people in trying to 
do this. Now Jeremiah responds and the 
crowd backs down. The crowd says, he has spoken 
the word of the Lord to us. And then the prophet Micah is 
invoked because Micah wrote about a hundred years prior to that 
scene in Jeremiah and Micah of Moresheth had also prophesied 
the destruction of Jerusalem. And the men at the time of Jeremiah 
said Micah prophesied that and they didn't put him to death. 
So why would we put Jeremiah the prophet to death? But you 
see these similarities between Jeremiah and Jesus. But the point 
is all the people own this. All the people want this. Pilate 
is trying to pass the buck of responsibility. Pilate's hand 
has been forced. Pilate is in a corner, and now 
Pilate makes this declaration of his own innocence. Again, 
it's not true, it's not valid, it's not authentic, but nevertheless 
he makes this, and so someone must bear the responsibility. So he passes it on to the crowd, 
who shouts for Jesus, have indeed forced his hand. The multitude 
has become all the people. It wasn't a subset. It wasn't 
a portion. It wasn't a part. It's not the 
case that we have in the multitude a few rabble-rousers that said, 
kill Jesus. No, it's all the people. That 
language in the Old Testament of all the people refers to all 
the covenant people. It is very specific and very 
conspicuously utilized. Notice what they want. And all 
the people answered and said, his blood be on us and on our 
children. Now the words are not primarily 
an imprecation. You know what an imprecation 
is. We sang one in Psalm 11. We sing them in the Psalter. Modern hymnists, or even not 
so modern, usually don't write imprecatory hymns. You don't 
get a Watts hymn, or a Toplady hymn, or a, you know, what's, 
I don't know the husband's name, but Kristen Getty hymn, Stuart 
Townden hymn. You don't get those men, women, 
writing hymns that God smashed the teeth of his enemies. It's 
just not popular today. In fact, it probably makes some 
of us uneasy to sing of God pouring out burning wind and burning 
coals on the heads of his enemies. Don't think this is primarily 
an imprecation. They're calling down the wrath 
of God upon their own heads. I don't think it's a self-maledictory 
oath. We all know what a benediction 
is. A benediction, following a service, is a good word. It's 
a pronouncement of peace and blessing and God's favor upon 
the congregation. Malediction is just the opposite. Pastors should never end the 
service with a malediction. May God's curse and wrath and 
fury be upon you and yours for the rest of the day. That would 
be very untoward. But malediction is the opposite 
of a benediction. It's a bad word. I don't mean 
a cuss word. I don't mean the F word. I mean 
an invoking the wrath and fury of God upon the heads of someone. 
I don't think it's either an imprecation or a self-maladictory 
oath in the primary sense. I think the author would have 
us appreciate that it's a bit of an omen for what will indeed 
happen to them, but I think it is an ownership of responsibility. Judas has tried to pass the buck. 
Pilate has tried to pass the buck. And now all the people, 
including the Jewish leaders, have accepted it. They are owning 
responsibility for the travesty that will indeed occur on that 
day. The words utilized, His blood 
be on us and on our children, is very frequently employed in 
Scripture when it comes to blood guiltiness. So it's language 
that has been used in Scripture other places. I can give you 
those texts later if you'd like those. But then notice the fact 
that they include their children. His blood be on us and on our 
children. That's wretched, isn't it? Parents, 
if you're ever going to make an oath, make it for yourself. 
Don't include your kids. Don't do them any favors like 
these Jews did their kids' favors. Again, I think Matthew's showing 
us something in the larger context that we need to take heed to, 
and I'll pull that out in just a moment. But I think in terms 
of the Jews, this multitude, this group, when they say, his 
blood be on us and on our children, I think it is to highlight for 
them how serious they are, how in earnest they are, how much 
they believe in their cause, It's a sad state, isn't it? To see persons this self-deceived, 
persons this warped, persons this committed to engaging in 
wickedness, that they will take their children and include them 
in responsibility for having crucified the Lord of glory. Now, notice specifically our 
text. His blood be on us and on our 
children. As I said previously, Matthew 
wants us to understand this in the context of Matthew's gospel. We have seen in great detail 
that the Jeremiah-Jesus connection is not simply leaders trying 
to stir the crowds up to call out for a death penalty. but 
also in the fact that Jeremiah prophesied the destruction of 
Jerusalem. So did Jesus. Jesus does this 
at length in Matthew 23. He does it at length in Matthew 
24, all the way into Matthew 25. It's called the Olivet Discourse. In fact, turn back for just a 
moment to Matthew 23. In other words, when we hear 
these people say, His blood be on us and on our children, we 
ought not to forget the broader context. Notice when Jesus is 
condemning the religious leaders in the generation of that time, 
in verses 35 and 36 in Matthew 23, He says, may come all the righteous blood 
shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood 
of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered, between the 
temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all 
these things will come upon this generation." Not the generation 
that's living in some future day. This generation, in Jesus' 
mouth, meant his contemporaries. He then launches into all of 
that discourse when the disciples are looking at the temple. They 
say, isn't it beautiful? Isn't it lovely? Isn't it glorious? Isn't it the very pinnacle of 
Jewish religious life? Jesus says, not one stone will 
be left upon another. It's all going to be destroyed. 
So they ask him a series of questions and he answers. Then he underscores 
again in 2436 the specific focus of his prophecy upon this generation. So when we get to this statement 
in Matthew 27, when they say, His blood be on us and on our 
children, we ought to hear in this an echo of what will occur 
in AD 70. John Gill says, wrath came upon 
them to the uttermost. I think he has 1 Thessalonians 
2, 14 to 16 in mind here when he says this. Wrath came upon 
them to the uttermost in the entire destruction of their nation, 
city, and temple. See, they don't know what they're 
saying. And this might be a good place for us to pause and take 
a bit of a breather and make some application. Sometimes we 
don't know what we're saying either. His blood be on us and 
on our children was fulfilled literally. Sometimes we make careless or 
reckless statements. Sometimes we make careless or 
reckless oaths. Sometimes we make careless or 
reckless vows, and we don't realize the gravity of such a thing. We swear before God Most High, 
and then we change our minds. We enter into a particular agreement, 
then we renege on that. Brethren, we need to consider 
what these fools are doing in this particular context, and 
we ought not to imitate it. Let your yes be yes, let your 
no be no. Don't make foolish and rational 
vows or oaths or own responsibility for something that you're not 
responsible for. Notice, Spurgeon said this, this 
fearful imprecation, I said it's not primarily, but it certainly 
can be taken that way in light of AD 70, this fearful imprecation 
must have been remembered by many when the soldiers of Titus 
spared neither age nor sex and the Jewish capital became the 
veritable Akkodama, the field of blood. So is everybody with 
me, those who have been here since Matthew 23? In fact, I'm sure I alluded to 
Matthew 27 at verse 25 several times throughout the exposition 
there. I stand more and more convinced that that is the proper 
reading of the Olivet Discourse, that it's not in our future, 
it was in their future. And God Most High visited them 
with destruction via the Roman armies and the ultimate dissolution 
of their state. That's the application of the 
Olivet Discourse. That's how we're supposed to 
interpret. That's how we're supposed to understand it. So as we get 
to this part in the passion narrative, and we hear these people say, 
His blood be on us and on our children. On the one hand, we 
say, well, God indeed is going to render that. But on the other 
hand, you pitiable fools. You wretches. It is unfortunate 
that they engage in such a thing. Now, before we pass, we ought 
to note that there is an abuse of verse 25 that has gone on 
throughout the history of the church. And that abuse is antisemitism. Antisemitism, for those who do 
not know, is an idea that persons are against the Jews because 
they are Jews. Jews are Semites. Antisemitism 
means anti-Jew. Pretty simple definition, but 
some have suggested that verse 25 has opened the door to Christian 
anti-Semitism and the persecution of Jews throughout the history 
of the church. Now, I do not believe that is 
the case. In fact, turn with me for just 
a moment to Acts chapter 2, because you'll notice that the apostles 
still preached the gospel, to Jews. Now there's a time in Paul's 
missionary endeavors in Acts 13 when he says, since you judge 
yourselves unworthy of eternal life, we're going to go to the 
Gentiles. And therein is fulfilling the 
suffering servant prophecy in Isaiah 49. the Jews were preached 
to. In fact, let's look at a particular 
text that I think gets a lot of airtime in our churches, and 
I mean reformed churches. Verse 38, then Peter said to 
them, repent and let every one of you be baptized in the name 
of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and you shall receive 
the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and 
to your children and to all who are afar off as many as the Lord 
our God will call. Now what's the normal, normal 
way that verse is trotted out in the theological discussion. 
It's used as a proof text for paedo-baptism. It's used to validate 
the practice of infant inclusion in the new covenant. The promise 
is for you and for your children. Maybe we ought to understand 
it in light of Matthew 27, verse 25. Maybe we ought to understand 
that Peter is preaching the gospel to Jews. He is preaching the 
gospel to Jerusalem's sinners. And he is saying that notwithstanding 
your claims to the responsibility for murdering Jesus, those claims 
in which you've included your children, that gospel of Jesus 
is powerful, the blood of Jesus is glorious, that all who come 
to him, even Jerusalem sinners, will be forgiven. that all who 
come to him, even Jerusalem sinners, will be restored to communion 
with God through faith in Christ. It's not a paedo-baptist verse. It's a glorious gospel of free 
grace verse. But the truth is that even for 
Jerusalem's sinners, there is forgiveness in Jesus, whom you 
crucified, he says previously. So Peter's not anti-Semitic. Peter is not keeping the gospel 
from them. Paul is not anti-Semitic. He is not keeping the gospel 
from them. So those Christians in the history 
of the church that have been anti-semitic and have sought 
to hide behind Matthew 27, 25, they're simply wrong. And may 
I suggest one other way that the church will not have to combat 
this issue of a charge or allegation of anti-semitism is by properly 
understanding all of that. In other words, if God did bring 
his wrath to bear upon this generation in the first century, if they 
and their children reap the just vengeance of God in A.D. 70, then we have no business 
calling a post-A.D. 70 Jew a Christ killer. We're not supposed to do that 
any more than you want to be called a slaveholder if some 
distant forefather owned slaves. You get that? It's not fair, 
is it? We're going to penalize you in 
the United States of America and demand reparations because 
somebody in your family tree way back when owned slaves. You 
say, wait a minute, I never owned slaves. I never took somebody 
by violence. I think the same sort of thing 
happens here in Canada in terms of the Native American situation, 
Native Canadian situation, where we're blamed for the sins of 
the forefathers. Why do we all see that and cry 
out that that's unfair and yet anti-Semitism at times is alive 
and well and we bandy about the language of Christ kill her on 
a 21st century Jew? Again, there's a sense where 
all of us are guilty for the death of Jesus. I think you'll 
all agree with me there. But some Jew living on your street 
You don't burn a cross outside of his house and call him a Christ 
killer. This text is not a legitimate 
application for anti-Semitism. But as well, and we have to address 
this, and I'm sorry if you're going to go home and blog and 
say, that was so politically incorrect. We have to guard against 
a Zionism as well. Not only should we not be anti-Semitic, 
but we need to exalt the Jews to a place of prestige over everybody 
else. There are so-called Christian 
churches that fly the Israeli flag out in front of their churches. Zionism is wrong, too. We need to understand that at 
AD 70, the kingdom was taken from Old Covenant Israel. It 
was given to the New Covenant Church, thus meaning that Old 
Covenant Israel, or rather, ethnic Israel, has entered the rank 
and file of every other people group. Does everybody get me 
here? On one hand, we're not anti-Semitic. But on the other hand, we're 
not pro-Jew before pro-Jesus. This happens, John Hagee. And 
I know you say, oh, he's a heretic, and he's got this, and he's got, 
people listen to that heretic for whatever reason. I mean, 
people listen to Joel Osteen, brethren. People listen to some 
wing nuts. And so we need to make sure that 
we understand the situation. To absolve first century Jews, 
John Hagee argues that Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah. So therefore they can't be culpable 
for rejecting the Messiah. That kind of language demonstrates 
a commitment to what is called dispensationalism and an exaltation 
of Jews over a proper exegetical handling of such passages like 
the Olivet Discourse. In some brethren, I think that 
if you just exegete texts and you have a good systematic theology, 
it will keep you from anti-Semitism and it should keep you from Zionism. Dispensationalism is basically 
the Christian version of Zionism. Zionism is political, dispensationalism 
is ecclesiastical and they work hand in hand. Again, I'm not 
saying go out and burn crosses and tell your Jewish neighbor 
that they killed Jesus. Don't do that. But by the same 
token, don't exalt Jews over the rest of people. They have 
no special status anymore. And some will say, what about 
Romans 11? You know, we can throw down about Romans 11. But I know 
what Romans 11 does not teach, a geopolitical regathering of 
ethnic Israel into their land. It doesn't teach that. You know 
what their land is, according to Old Covenant prophecy, interpreted 
by Paul in Romans 4? It's the world. When Abraham 
looked north, he looked south, he looked east, he looked west. 
Paul tells us he would inherit the world. Why? Because of his 
seed. Not his physical seed in terms 
of generations of Jews. Who's the seed of Abraham that 
we ought to make much of? Not his physical descendants, 
but Christ. It's in Christ that the promises 
of God are yea and amen. Some call it replacement theology. You teach that the church has 
replaced Israel. No. We teach that the Old Testament 
prophesied something and the New Testament shows its fulfillment. I prefer fulfillment theology. 
Realization theology. God's plan from the beginning 
theology, wasn't it? When God says to Abraham, look 
north, look south, look east, look west, it's not just Jews 
that are included, it's Gentiles as well. God's plan from the 
beginning was to bring in the nations via the seed of Abraham, 
Jesus Christ. So this text ought not to be 
used to employ or deploy anti-Semitism, but brethren, we ought not to 
be Zionists or dispensationalists or persons that are more consumed 
with the place of the Jews in prophetic history than with the 
reality of the gospel of free and sovereign grace. And if you 
have held to this Pado-Baptist sort of view of Acts 2.39, I 
ask you to reconsider it. In light of Matthew 27, 25, his 
blood be on us and our children. Is it any accident, Peter says, 
the promise is for you and your children? You actually think 
Peter there is teaching paedo-baptism. I want you all to know that we're 
gonna have ceremonies eight days after your babies are born, and 
you're gonna bring them up front, and we're gonna sprinkle water 
on their head. I'm not trying to sound cheeky. I'm not trying 
to sound critical. Well, I guess I am trying to 
sound critical. The text doesn't have to do with paedo-baptism. 
The text has to do with the offer of the gospel, with salvation 
by grace, with repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus. 
For what? For the remission of sins. For 
the promise. In the context, the promise is 
for you, your children, and to all who are far off, as many 
as the Lord our God will call. What's the promise specifically? 
It's the Holy Spirit. Nobody teaches that sprinkling 
water on a baby's head brings the Holy Spirit. Most of the 
Pato Baptist churches I know reject that interpretation. They 
refuse that, and thankfully so. But brethren, that's the promise 
primarily in the context in Acts chapter 2. Better to hear it 
as a promise from Peter the Apostle, the man who denied Jesus thrice, 
who certainly understood something about free grace, who certainly 
understood something about the power of Jesus' blood, who certainly 
understood something about the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ, 
he stands up and he says to these Jerusalem sinners, the promises 
for you and for your children and to all who are far off, and 
never forget the clause that modifies it, as many as the Lord 
our God will call. It doesn't mean every one of 
you, every one of your children, and everyone who's far off. It 
is always modified by the fact that as many as the Lord our 
God will call. Just had to get that out of my 
system, brethren. Thank you for indulging me. Let's 
look finally at the sentencing of Jesus in verse 26. They release 
Barabbas. Then he released Barabbas to 
them. Again, it's conspicuous. He, all of his attempts notwithstanding, 
his show of washing his hands, his statement of his innocence. 
is telling them, you see to it, he released a notorious man. He released a robber, not in 
the sense of highway man or thief. He released a robber in the sense 
of an insurrectionist, a guerrilla, a revolutionary. We'd call Barabbas 
today a terrorist. And this is who the people wanted. 
And this is who Pilate releases. Notice. He releases Barabbas to them, 
and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified. Scourged kids means to be wet. You might say, well, yeah, I 
know that. Let me just read you a brief description. This is D.A. Carson. He says, 
among the Jews, scourging was limited to 40 lashes. Deuteronomy 
25, specifically at verse 3. And I think we read Deuteronomy 
and we go, horror of horrors, how barbaric. Deuteronomy 25 
calls specifically for a legal procedure with checks and balances, 
yes, with the infliction of corporal punishment, but it is all hedged 
in, it's in the context of witnesses, it's after a just trial, due 
process is involved. Just walk around the streets 
of Israel in the Old Covenant with whips and, you know, that 
guy had a bad thought. Whack! They didn't do that. It 
was very well regulated. We cannot exceed 40 lashes. Paul 
says this as well in 2 Corinthians 11 as he's rehearsing what he 
had received in terms of his own punishment or his own chastening. He says, Carson again, among 
the Jews, scourging was limited to 40 lashes, but the Romans 
were restricted by nothing but their strength and whim. So the 
Romans didn't subscribe to the book of Deuteronomy. They didn't 
say, well, Moses says we can't exceed 40 lashes. So I think Carson's spot on. 
They were restricted by nothing but their strength and whim. 
The whip was the dreaded flagellum, made by plating pieces of bone 
or lead into leather thongs. The victim was stripped and tied 
to a post. Severe flogging not only reduced 
the flesh to bloody pulp, but could open up the body until 
the bones were visible and the entrails exposed. Flogging is 
an independent punishment not infrequently ended in death. 
It was also used to weaken the prisoner before crucifixion. 
Now, I think there's a wrong approach to the passion narrative. 
I think it's best represented by Roman Catholicism. you know, 
this depiction, this drama, this playing out in great and vivid 
and gory detail of the crucifixion and the scourging of our Lord 
Jesus. Most recently represented in Mel Gibson's The Passion. That was just a celebrated big 
screen, big budget form of a medieval Roman Catholic passion play. The gospel writers don't do that. But I do think it's necessary 
for us to stop a time or two, not the stations of the cross 
stop. If anybody's been brought up 
in Romanism, you'll know what I mean. While the priest is shaking 
the incense and the people that are there are just looking and 
wondering, why are we doing this? It's passion play, every step, 
every bit, every agony, every drop, every fall, every this, 
every that. The scriptures don't do that. In fact, I think France is right 
when he says, the gospel narratives, both at this point and at the 
point of crucifixion, make no attempt to draw out the sheer 
physical horror of the procedure. You don't get chapters full of 
description. You don't get chapters full of 
the tears of the flesh of the Lord Jesus. You don't get chapters 
full of description concerning his hours on the cross. The gospel 
narratives, both at this point and at the point of crucifixion, 
make no attempt to draw out the sheer physical horror of the 
procedure. Though Matthew's first readers 
would have known, as modern readers do not, that Roman flogging was 
something far more serious and obscene than a few strokes with 
a whip. On the one hand, Matthew doesn't 
develop this and explain it in all of its vivid and gory and 
obscene detail, but on the other hand, brethren, we ought to consider 
what the Savior went through for us. We ought to be able to 
do that without the stations of the cross or without some 
medieval passion play, you know, on the big screen. We ought to 
be able to meditate and consider what the Savior went through 
on our behalf. He was whipped for us. He was scourged for us. Think about that. Pieces of bone, 
pieces of metal, wrapped up in leather and laid on your skin, 
such that it would rip you open, organs would be visible, bones 
would be visible. What sent the Savior to this? 
Yes, the betrayer. Yes, Pontius Pilate. Yes, the 
crowds. Yes, the Jewish leaders. Yes, 
us. He went there for us. The background, 
no doubt, is Isaiah the prophet. We have seen how Matthew is conspicuous 
in showing us how Jesus fulfills those suffering servant passages. 
In Isaiah 53, 5, we see, but he was wounded for our transgressions, 
he was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement for our peace 
was upon him, and by his stripes we are healed. This was a black church in Southern 
California. This is the place where the pastor would say, can 
I get an amen? By his stripes we are healed. He went through 
this for us. He was opened up for us. He was 
delivered up for us. Yes, he does this as a travesty 
of human justice. The Jews, the Romans, Judas, 
guilty, vile, wretched, and culpable. But we know behind it is the 
divine plan. We know that the prophet as well 
indicates to us, Yahweh was pleased to bruise him. Yahweh delivered 
him up. Romans 8 32 or 8 32 he who did 
not spare his own son but delivered him up for us all how shall he 
not also with him freely give us all things You see, there's 
a willingness on the part of the Savior, a voluntariness on 
the part of the Savior. The triune God is involved in 
saving us from our sins. The Savior doesn't go unwillingly 
or unhesitatingly. No, he's actually silent when 
he's standing before his accusers when he knows absolutely positively 
they're wrong. If we thought for just a moment 
there was another spin to put on the evidence, we'd be saying 
and shouting and screaming. But he stands there silent. It demonstrates His voluntariness. It demonstrates His resignation 
to the divine will. It demonstrates His resolved 
determination to save His people from their sins. And we see it 
here. Again, we don't need the stations 
of the cross. We need faith. We need to look 
at a passage like this and we need to say, marvel of marvels 
and wonder of wonders, God sent His Son. And He didn't send His 
Son on some victory tour, riding around in a big car with a wife 
with big hair, telling people big things, but He sent Him into 
this world as a lowly servant, as a man of sorrows and acquainted 
with grief. As one who's by His stripes, 
we are healed. You see the healing in the stripes 
that are inflicted upon the Savior in this instance. And then it 
says he delivered him to be crucified. That's what we'll take up, God 
willing, in the coming weeks, this crucifixion. Again, it's 
not some detailed passion play. The narrative is sparse. The 
narrative is to the point. The narrative describes, but 
it doesn't give us all the gory details. But along the way, brethren, 
I may ask us to think about those gory details, not hopefully the 
way a papist would. The way any responsible interpreter 
of Scripture should, because we need to appreciate what the 
Savior went through on our behalf. We need to see behind the scenes 
the plan of God Almighty. I already mentioned Isaiah the 
prophet 53.10. It pleased Yahweh to bruise him. 
He has put him to grief. I think we have shown and demonstrated 
the culpability of the players involved with reference to the 
trial of Christ. The Sanhedrin was wrong and the 
Romans were wrong. But behind that, brethren, God 
the Lord is orchestrating all things according to the power 
and purpose of His own will. It is God behind the scenes. It is the Father. It pleased 
Yahweh to bruise Him. He has put Him to grief. The 
Savior Himself predicted on three occasions, chapters 16, 17, and 
20, that He must go to Jerusalem. He must be tried at the hands 
of wicked men. He must be delivered up. In the 
statement in 20, he speaks of scourging or whipping that he 
would receive. The Savior says, this is my blood 
of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission 
of sins. Christ always knew what was on 
his horizon. Christ in the garden of Gethsemane 
prays to the Father, if it is possible, let this pass from 
me. We sang about that cup in Psalm 
11. It's the cup of God's wrath and 
fury and curse. Christ, according to his humanity, 
prays to the Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from 
me. Yet, nevertheless, not my will 
but thine be done. He submits himself, knowing what 
lay before him, knowing what he is facing, knowing what he 
is going through. He says this to Peter. When Peter 
takes out the sword, he lops off the ear of Malchus. Jesus 
says, put your sword away. Don't you think I don't have 
twelve legions of angels at my disposal that will come and fight 
for me? But how else would the Scripture be fulfilled? How else 
would the Word of God be fulfilled? This was paramount in the mind 
and the heart of the Lord Jesus, doing what the Father sent Him 
to do. laying down his life on behalf 
of all those whom the Father had given him. Yes, there were 
guilty human players. Yes, there were violent, wretched 
men. Yes, that bloodthirsty mob crying 
out, away with him, away with him, crucify him, is a sad sign 
of the depravity of man. But behind it all, God is working 
out His plan. See, God is sovereign, man is 
responsible. God is sovereign, man is responsible. But brethren, I ask you this 
morning to consider the sovereignty of God in the death of the Savior 
and the willingness of the Savior to go through this on our behalf. I'm sure some of you kids before 
have gotten a spanking, and it wasn't fair. You got the wrong kid. Certainly, 
you must want Micah, because it wasn't me. Or you must want 
Joey, or you must want whoever. It wasn't me. There may have 
been those unfair times in your lives. I think the apostle speaks 
to this in Hebrews 12. Your earthly fathers, they disciplined 
you as it seemed best. They tried. They get it wrong 
sometimes. The point there in Hebrews 12 
is the father never gets it wrong when he chastens you. There's 
an unfairness about that. This was the only man that ever 
lived that was wholly harmless and undefiled. He never did anything 
wrong. And he's being beaten with a 
whip for sinners. He is delivered up to be crucified 
for sinners. So I ask you to consider the 
divine sovereignty in the death of Christ. I ask you to consider 
the voluntary nature of the death of the Lord Jesus. But I ask 
you as well to consider the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. 
I mean, I think you see the parallels here, don't you? I argued last 
week that there were going to be three crucifixions that day. 
It was going to be Barabbas and his two compadres. What happened 
on that morning? The decision was made that Barabbas 
would not be on one of those crosses. So Jesus stood in his 
place. In fact, John Gill makes this 
observation. He says, this man, Barabbas, 
was an emblem of the persons for whom Christ suffered, both 
in his character and in his release. And then he develops that. In 
his character, we're robbers. We're violent. We're notorious. We're wretched. We're sinful. 
So He was an emblem of us in His character, but He's an emblem 
of us in His release. He deserved to be crucified, 
didn't He? He deserved to be executed. He deserved to die 
at the hands of the Roman state. He deserved it because he was 
guilty. So Gil is right. Barabbas is 
an emblem of us, both in character and in release. I do, however, 
want to caution us against supposing that Barabbas was somehow saved. Now maybe Barabbas did believe. 
We don't have a Matthew 29 that goes back and visits all the 
persons that were mentioned heretofore and says, you know, Barabbas 
and his wife embraced Jesus and they went and started a ministry 
to ex-terrorists and rebels. It just doesn't tell us that. 
We don't know whatever became of Barabbas. The point I wanna 
try and encourage you with is we do know this. Jesus went on 
to that cross for those of us who by grace believe. There is 
substitutionary atonement. We deserved it. We deserve the 
wrath, the fury, the judgment, and the curse of God Most High. When those Jews said, let His 
blood be on us and our children, we're right there with them. 
We're right there in the culpability. We're right there with them in 
terms of blood guiltiness. But Christ took our place. And 
if you're visiting here, you're new here, this is the thousandth 
time you've come, and you've never come to Christ, this is 
the beauty of Christianity. This is the glory of Christianity. One took the place of others. One stood in the place of others. The doctrine of substitution. 
Christ is a substitute, and as a substitute, He bore the wrath 
of God. He satisfied divine justice. He took the punishment that was 
due for us Beautiful, wonderful truth. And if you're not a believer 
here this morning, may I say to you, you need to look at what 
the text says concerning Jesus. You need to understand Jesus 
wasn't crucified because of his own sin. Jesus was crucified 
for the sins of others. The Bible says that all of us 
have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. All of us, 
like sheep, have gone astray. All of us have rejected and resisted 
and have raised our fist against him. The Bible says that whoever 
believes in him will be saved. In fact, let's just end on Acts 
chapter 3, another indicator that Peter wasn't anti-Semitic 
because he preached the gospel again to Jerusalem's sinners. 
Notice in Acts 3, it's on the occasion where that lame man 
was healed at Solomon's porch And in verse 13, the God of Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified his servant 
Jesus, whom you delivered up and denied in the presence of 
Pilate, when he was determined to let him go. Pilate was determined 
to let him go, and you delivered him up. Notice, but you, verse 
14, denied the holy one and the just and asked for a murderer 
to be granted to you and killed the prince of life of which we 
are witnesses. And his name, through faith in 
his name, has made this man strong whom you see and know. Yes, the 
faith which comes through him has given him this perfect soundness 
in the presence of you all. Yet now, brethren, I know that 
you did it in ignorance, as did also your rulers. But those things 
which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the 
Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled. Repent, therefore, 
and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times 
of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, that he 
may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, whom 
heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things. Repent and be converted. repent and be converted. That's Peter's instruction. In 
light of this passage, my instruction to take it home, pray through 
it. Actually, believe now. I was thinking about this recently. We don't tell sinners to go home 
because bad things can happen between here and home, even if 
it's five minutes. Right now. Some may say in their head, well, 
you know, he made some points this morning. There's some things 
I gotta think about. There's some things I gotta consider. 
I'm not talking about Acts 2.39. Go consider that in your own 
time. I'm talking repent and be converted. Don't wait till 
you get home. Don't wait till you get in your 
car. Don't wait till you get up from this seat. Uh-oh, he's 
sounding like an easy-believe-ism guy. He sounds like Billy Graham 
guy. No. Where does the Bible not teach 
you need to hear and believe? Now, I'm not suggesting you can't 
believe at home, not suggesting you can't believe tonight, not 
suggesting you can't believe in your God. You most certainly 
can. But my encouragement to you now is make peace with God 
through our Lord Jesus Christ for the salvation of your souls. Let us pray. Our Father, we thank 
You for Your Word. We thank You for Your excellence 
and Your majesty and Your glory. We thank You for Your goodness 
and Your kindness in providing Your Son as the perfect, spotless 
Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Thank You for 
what He went through on our behalf, silent before Pilate, silent 
before His accusers, silent throughout the narrative until He cries 
from the cross to You. How we thank you that He went 
through this scourging, that by His stripes we are healed. 
How we thank you that He goes through crucifixion, and that 
through His death we have eternal life. We thank you that it doesn't 
stop here. It goes into Matthew 28. The 
tomb is empty, the Christ is risen, and we know now that He's 
enthroned at the right hand of the majesty of God on high. And 
we look forward to that day when He comes again in glory to judge 
the living and the dead. Cause us to live in light of 
these truths and cause us to glorify and honor you. And we 
pray these things through Christ our Lord. Amen. We'll close with 
a brief time of meditation and then be dismissed.