I. Jesus before Herod (23:6–12)
I. Jesus before Herod (23:6–12)
This section is peculiar to Luke. Pilate was clearly unwilling to handle the case, a point made plain in all four Gospels. He discerned that the Jews were implacable in their demand for Jesus’ death, but he also saw that the prisoner had done nothing that the Romans regarded as meriting that penalty. So Pilate wanted to have nothing to do with the case. It suited him to send Jesus to Herod.
6–7. The reference to Galilee as the beginning of Jesus’ activities was a straw at which Pilate could clutch. He immediately asked whether Jesus came from that province and, receiving an affirmative answer, he sent him to Herod (for Herod see on 3:1, 19). A trial was usually carried out in the Roman Empire in the province where the offence was committed, though it could be referred to the province to which the accused belonged. Pilate could thus have gone on with the trial, but it was a gracious compliment to Herod to refer the matter to him and it was technically possible because as a Galilean Jesus belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction. Herod had probably come up to Jerusalem to observe the Passover, a tactic he would expect would please his subjects. He was thus available.
8. The tetrarch was pleased. Jesus’ reputation had penetrated into the palace and Herod had long wanted to see him (9:9). He had also heard of Jesus’ miracles and wanted to see one for himself. Sign (sēmeion) is often used of Jesus’ miracles in John, but the Synoptists prefer dynamis, ‘mighty work’. The word normally indicates that the miracles had meaning, that they were significant, but Herod would have been thinking only of the marvellous.
9–10. The interview must have disappointed Herod. He got no answer to his many questions. What could Jesus say to this trifler who wanted nothing more than a mild sensation? He never refused a sincere questioner, but Herod was not in that class. He is the only person to whom Jesus said nothing at all. The chief priests and the scribes made vehement accusations; they took no chances on Herod’s releasing Jesus. And, of course, if they could get him to condemn the Galilean, so much the better.
11. But Herod met the wishes of neither Pilate nor the Jews. When he could not get his miracle he ceased to be interested. He ought to have released Jesus, for he recognized his innocence (15). But he joined his warriors in mocking the prisoner (cf. 22:63ff.), then sent him back to Pilate. He had no interest in the case and he declined to try it. The gorgeous apparel will reflect the accusation that Jesus was a king. The adjective is lampros, ‘bright’, ‘shining’, which is often used of white garments, but there is no indication of the colour of this one. A cast-off royal robe is probably meant. The mockery made it plain that Herod did not take the charge seriously. That is the really frightening thing about the incident. With the Son of God before him Herod could only jest.
12. Nothing is known about this quarrel other than what we read here. If it concerned jurisdiction, Pilate’s readiness to allow Herod to take over a trial would have been a generous gesture. But when Herod declined to act, returning the compliment so to speak, Pilate had no option but to take up the case again.