"Quid est veritas?" What is the truth about Pontius Pilate?

Gloria Romanorum ^ | 4/15/17 | Florentius

[Antoninus]

The weak, vacillating and ultimately cruel and cowardly figure of Pontius Pilate is one of the most enigmatic figures in Sacred Scripture. From the Gospel accounts, he seems to be a man who almost wants to be a hero, to defend the innocent victim, Jesus, against the murderous lynch mob besetting Him. Indeed, Pilate is urged by his wife to "have nothing to do with that just man." In the end, however, he lacks the courage to act virtuously. He condemns Christ to a horrible death, despite knowing with certainty that He is innocent.

But who was Pontius Pilate? Did he even exist? Or is he a figment of the evangelists' imagination, as some modern anti-Christian polemicists claim with anything associated with the historicity of Sacred Scripture?

Interestingly, two of the earliest sources who mention Pontius Pilate are both Jews. Philo of Alexandria, writing in the first half of the first century AD—that is, roughly contemporary with the time of Jesus—offers the following account which is instructive regarding the character of Pilate:

Pilate was one of the emperor's lieutenants, having been appointed governor of Judaea. He...dedicated some gilt shields in the palace of Herod, in the holy city; which had no form nor any other forbidden thing represented on them except some necessary inscription, which mentioned these two facts, the name of the person who had placed them there, and the person in whose honor they were so placed there.

But when the multitude heard what had been done, and when the circumstance became notorious, then the people...entreated him to alter and to rectify the innovation which he had committed in respect of the shields...

But when he steadfastly refused this petition (for he was a man of a very inflexible disposition, and very merciless as well as very obstinate), they cried out: "Do not cause a sedition; do not make war upon us; do not destroy the peace which exists. The honor of the emperor is not identical with dishonor to the ancient laws; let it not be to you a pretence for heaping insult on our nation. Tiberius is not desirous that any of our laws or customs shall be destroyed. And if you yourself say that he is, show us either some command from him, or some letter, or something of the kind, that we, who have been sent to you as ambassadors, may cease to trouble you, and may address our supplications to your master."

But this last sentence exasperated him in the greatest possible degree, as he feared least they might in reality go on an embassy to the emperor, and might impeach him with respect to other particulars of his government, in respect of his corruption, and his acts of insolence, and his rapine, and his habit of insulting people, and his cruelty, and his continual murders of people untried and uncondemned, and his never ending, and gratuitous, and most grievous inhumanity. Therefore, being exceedingly angry, and being at all times a man of most ferocious passions, he was in great perplexity, neither venturing to take down what he had once set up, nor wishing to do any thing which could be acceptable to his subjects, and at the same time being sufficiently acquainted with the firmness of Tiberius on these points.

And those who were in power in our nation, seeing this, and perceiving that he was inclined to change his mind as to what he had done, but that he was not willing to be thought to do so, wrote a most supplicatory letter to Tiberius. And he, when he had read it, what did he say of Pilate, and what threats did he utter against him!...Immediately, without putting any thing off till the next day, he wrote a letter, reproaching and reviling him in the most bitter manner for his act of unprecedented audacity and wickedness, and commanding him immediately to take down the shields and to convey them away from the metropolis of Judaea to Caesarea... [Philo, On the Embassy to Gaius, XXXVIII, 299]

This anecdote is fascinating because the description of Pilate's character corresponds well with the Pilate who appears in the Gospels: a man of violent passions and stubborn, but only up to the point when his personal power and comfort is threatened. At that point, he becomes craven and fickle.

The great Jewish historian, Josephus, writing in the late first century AD, mentions Pontius Pilate several times. One of his passages which references Pilate is the famous and controversial Testimonium Flavianum as follows:

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day. [Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book XVIII, Chapter 3] 

In another interesting passage, Josephus details how Pilate's ten-year term of office in Judea came to an end. An unnamed rabble-rouser had convinced the Samaritans that he knew the location of the mountain where Moses had secreted certain sacred vessels. When they gathered to collect the vessels, Pilate intervened with violence:

So they came thither armed, and thought the discourse of the man probable, and as they abode at a certain village, which was called Tirathaba, they got the rest together to them, and desired to go up the mountain in a great multitude together; but Pilate prevented their going up, by seizing upon file roads with a great band of horsemen and foot-men, who fell upon those that were gotten together in the village; and when it came to an action, some of them they slew, and others of them they put to flight, and took a great many alive, the principal of which, and also the most potent of those that fled away, Pilate ordered to be slain. 

But when this tumult was appeased, the Samaritan senate sent an embassy to Vitellius, a man that had been consul, and who was now president of Syria [later emperor for a short time], and accused Pilate of the murder of those that were killed; for that they did not go to Tirathaba in order to revolt from the Romans, but to escape the violence of Pilate. So Vitellius sent Marcellus, a friend of his, to take care of the affairs of Judea, and ordered Pilate to go to Rome, to answer before the emperor to the accusations of the Jews. So Pilate, when he had tarried ten years in Judea, made haste to Rome, and this in obedience to the orders of Vitellius, which he durst not contradict; but before he could get to Rome Tiberius was dead. [Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book XVIII, Chapter 4] 

Why Pilate decided to attack the Samaritans here is left unsaid. Josephus also doesn't offer any additional information on the fate of Pilate after he returned to Rome. For this, the most reliable surviving record is that of Eusebius Pamphilus from the early 4th century. Drawing on more ancient sources, he records:

It is worthy of note that Pilate himself, who was governor in the time of our Savior, is reported to have fallen into such misfortunes under Caius [Caligula], whose times we are recording, that he was forced to become his own murderer and executioner; and thus divine vengeance, as it seems, was not long in overtaking him. This is stated by those Greek historians who have recorded the Olympiads, together with the respective events which have taken place in each period. [Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book II, Chapter 7]

Interestingly, the Roman pyramid at Vienne in southeastern France was traditionally called the tomb of Pilate. There is, however, very little actual history that supports this identification and the association of Pontius Pilate with this structure is probably a later legendary interpolation.

[Netz]

Using your description:

“...to defend the innocent victim, Jesus, against the murderous lynch mob besetting Him”

You once again condemn the Jewish people as a murderous, lynch mob when Jesus himself was a Jew and there was no Christianity. This description is the source of Western Antisemitism.

Jesus claimed to be a Messiah in direct violation to what the Jewish (Jesus’own) teachings state there will be eventually.

Since his time we have witnesses what are called “False Messiahs” or “False Prophets”. Jesus can be seen as just another in a long line of Jewish rabble rousers yet, in his name, Paul created a new faith and did their best to eradicate the original Jewish religion by applying hatred and vilifying it for centuries.

[Antoninus]

You once again condemn the Jewish people as a murderous, lynch mob when Jesus himself was a Jew and there was no Christianity.

Oh, my bad. Those demanding the death of Jesus before Pilate were a peaceful group of social justice warriors who were offended because Jesus violated their theological safe space. Therefore, they were completely justified in calling for His death.

Considering Jesus Himself and all of His early Apostles and disciples were Jews, the charge of anti-semitism for describing those demanding His death as a murderous lynch mob is ludicrous. Were there evil men among the Sanhedrin? Yes. Were there good men among the Sanhedrin? Yes. Thus, the condemnation is not against "the Jews," but against wicked men who demanded the death of an innocent.

Otherwise, I reject your "The Shack" theology that says Jesus was just a Jewish rabble-rouser and that Saint Paul created Christianity. Such beliefs are revisionist and facile.

[af_vet_1981]

On the insistance of the Jewish heirarchy, Pilate is forced to act, as Jews were forbidden to carry out corporal action.

Forced ?

He chose of his own free will to crucify the King of the Jews, after his wife warned him, and even after Jesus asked Pilate if he was inquiring on behalf of himself or others, giving Pilate an opportunity for salvation.

Nonetheless, the scriptures had to be fulfilled, as they did concerning Judas' betrayal.

Judas hanged himself according to the scriptures. Pilate's end was not recorded in the scriptures. The closest historical accounts (Tacitus, Josephus, and Philo) are unfavorable yet the Ethiopian Orthodox regard him and his wife as saints.

[Slyfox]

No, I am a Catholic historian. I read between the lines for a living.

[ebb tide]

I read between the lines for a living.

So are you a politician or a judge?

[Slyfox]

Why are you upset with me and questioning me? I need more evidence about one thing. I happen to be doing research for a book I have been working on for 10 years where I have to line up all my facts for publication. It is just part of my nature to question. I really don’t care whether Pilate killed himself or not. And if he did, we cannot assign to him the same matters of the soul that surrounded Judas. Judas did have knowledge of God and was Jewish where self-murder was known to be a great evil. Pilate, on the other hand, had no such knowledge and his self-murder would be considered something different as a result.

[ebb tide]

Neither of the Marian doctrines of Her Immaculate Conception nor Her Assumption were promulgated until the past 170 years.

But that didn’t stop Catholics from believing so.

[ebb tide]

You misquote. The Catholic Encyclopedia does not state Pilate “seems” to have have committed suicide.

It states, “It is worthy of note that Pilate himself, who was governor in the time of our Saviour, is reported to have fallen into such misfortunes under Caius, whose times we are recording, that he was forced to become his own murderer and executioner; and thus divine vengeance, as it seems, was not long in overtaking him. This is stated by those Greek historians who have recorded the Olympiads, together with the respective events which have taken place in each period.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia also states, “And a few days after, sentence was therefore passed upon Pilate, that he should be condemned to the most disgraceful death. Pilate, hearing this, killed himself with his own knife, and by such a death ended his life.”

What good is a Catholic “historian” who ignores recorded history?

[ebb tide]

And if he did, we cannot assign to him the same matters of the soul that surrounded Judas. Judas did have knowledge of God and was Jewish where self-murder was known to be a great evil. Pilate, on the other hand, had no such knowledge and his self-murder would be considered something different as a result.

Pilate had knowledge that Jesus Christ was an innocent man and he stated such. Yet, Pilate turned Christ over to be executed.

Why is Pilate singled out in the Apostles' Creed and Judas is not mentioned?

[Slyfox]

I don’t really care.

[ebb tide]

As I said earlier, what good is self-proclaimed “Catholic historian” who doesn’t care?

[ebb tide]

True. That is why Pilate is singled out in the Apostles’ Creed.

[Slyfox]

Too bad. I really liked your posts.

[ebb tide]

“I don’t really care”.

[Zuriel]

**They help color in some peripheral bits of the picture painted by Scripture. If you reject anything you read that’s “extra-biblical”, why are you bothering to read anything on FR?**

Because I love truth. I taught my boys, as soon as they could comprehend, that faith in Santa Claus is idolatry. Of course I had to us simple terms such as, phony, fake, etc. Their mother and I told them the truth. They turned out just fine, no psychological scars or other nonsense.

This vain desire to ‘color’ stories is where we get much of the useless old wives tales that Paul warned about getting tangled up in. It’s useful for the the devil, as he can make up things that never happened, and turn it into doctrine.....like religions like to do.

People prosper financially and become famous (maybe even a ‘church father’) telling careful worded and entertaining stories, that only have a sliver of truth. Look at Joe Smith.

[Antoninus]

This vain desire to ‘color’ stories is where we get much of the useless old wives tales that Paul warned about getting tangled up in.

Here again, we have someone who is reading articles about Christian history on Free Republic and rebuking those who dare to read extra-biblical historical sources. Isn't Free Republic an extra-biblical source? If Scripture alone is sufficient for all understanding, why are you bothering to read anything else?

Don't worry, I'll answer the question for you: Without a solid understanding of the historical context within which Sacred Scripture was written, our understanding of Scripture will be deficient. This is why many Protestants become Catholic or Orthodox once they begin reading patristic literature.

[wally_bert]

Telly Savalas as Pontius Pilate.

puer quæ te diligit?

I ran it through an on-line translator so I'm prepared to be jumped on.

[2ndDivisionVet]

[Pelham]

” My question would be, who bore witness to that exchange? “

Jesus. He had plenty of opportunity after the resurrection to give John a verbatim account.

[Zuriel]

**Don’t worry, I’ll answer the question for you:**

Do you play chess against yourself as well?

**Without a solid understanding of the historical context within which Sacred Scripture was written, our understanding of Scripture will be deficient.**

Yes, yes, God was so lax at giving us the context of the scriptures. The historical perspective was so short on facts, like:

The time of creation.
The duration of the flood.
The ages of the principal fathers up through Joseph, and the nations that were around them during those times.
Then the approximate years Israel was in bondage.
Then the ages of Moses through the kings of Israel and Judah, and the nations that surrounded them.
Then the prophecies of Daniel, and the nations fortold by him.
Then the 400 yrs of silence from God.

I haven’t even scratched the surface of God’s sharing of historical context.

**This is why many Protestants become Catholic or Orthodox once they begin reading patristic literature.**

Itching ears is a big problem. Only made worse when not anchored in the scriptures. Teaching fables, such as Mary being omnipresent, is not very successful with folks anchored in the Word of God.