The Death and Resurrection of the Son of Man (22:1-24:53)

The First Trial Before Pilate (1-7)

The religious leaders brought Jesus before Pilate, the Roman Governor who lived in Caesarea but had a base in Jerusalem. The Sanhedrin had no power to carry out an execution, so they had to rephrase their charges against Jesus, in hopes they could accuse Him of sedition against Rome.

They went with the false charge of Jesus forbidding His followers to pay taxes to Caesar, as well as His claim to be a king (1-2).

It seems Pilate dismissed the tax charge as false and went to the charge of Jesus claiming Himself to be king. Pilate asked Jesus if He was king of the Jews. Jesus’ answer was vague, so Pilate would have questioned Jesus more. In the end, Pilate found Jesus not guilty of either charge (3-4).

This did not deter the crowd gathered against Jesus. They began accusing Jesus of inciting riots by His teaching in Galilee (northern Israel) and Judea (southern Israel) (5).

Once Pilate learned Jesus was a Galilean (from northern Israel), He sent Him to Herod Antipas (who was assigned by Rome as ruler in the north) to hear the case. Being in Jerusalem, Herod Antipas was eager to hear it. This was the same shallow man who had executed Jesus' cousin, John the Baptist (6-7). 

Trial Before Herod (8-12) 

Herod, being a sensual man, was interested to see if Jesus would perform some sign to save His own soul, for Herod's amusement (8). His questioning was long and tedious, but Jesus gave Herod no answer (9). Jesus’ silence made the Sanhedrin irate, so they pummeled Jesus with accusations (10). In Jesus’ silence, and with the crowd egging Herod on, Herod and his soldiers began to shame and mock Jesus as a lunatic king. Herod then sent Jesus back to Pilate, decked out in humiliation (11).

Pilate and Herod's desire to win the support of the crowd made the two, who had been enemies, friends. Herod had decided to publicly support any decision Pilate was to make concerning Jesus (12).

Second Trial Before Pilate (13-25)

Pilate made a decision concerning Jesus: He had done nothing worthy of execution in his eyes, nor in the eyes of Herod. They would punish Jesus by scouring for stirring up trouble with His teaching and then release Him. With this, he was hoping to feed the desire of the crowd with a more-than-adequate and merciless sentence on a man who had committed no crime (13-16). 

Other translations include verse 17, where Luke notes that it was necessary to release a criminal at the feast.

The crowd made it clear that they viewed a revolutionary and murderer like Barabbas as less of a threat than Jesus, and in all their crying out, they let Pilate know they would sooner have Barabbas go free and Jesus executed (18-19) than liberate Jesus.

Pilate made another attempt to release Jesus, not wanting the bother of an execution of someone he found insignificant. It's important to know that Pilate was an obstinate and merciless man. Nothing about Pilate here says he was seeking to show Jesus any kindness; he was merely seeking what would have been easiest for himself (20).

The crowds kept demanding crucifixion (21), and for the third time, Pilate asked them what charges could warrant the execution. They made no new charges, so again Pilate determined to have Jesus scourged and released. The crowd was relentless and would not cease to cry out for Jesus' Crucifixion until it was easier for Pilate to execute Jesus than to punish and release Him (22-24). To spite the Jews, Pilate released Barabbas, the murderer and troublemaker, the one deserving of death, but had Jesus taken to be crucified (25).