Have you ever thought about Pontius Pilate and what his life must have been like?

Question

I've always seen Pontius Pilate as someone who tried to do the right thing, and who really wanted Christ to live, but due to his position - his job, and how unstable the peace with the Jews was at the time, he really couldn't do what he wanted to do. It seems to even be backed up by scripture when in Matthew it says that Pilate's wife told him of a dream that had been bothering her and that he shouldn't have anything to do with this man (Jesus). And after considerable thought, he washed his hands of the matter - indicating (to me at least) that he didn't want to do what he knew was about to be done, but wasn't able (spiritually) to put it all on the line and go against not only what the Jews wanted but also what Ceasar wanted.
It also seems to me that he/Pilate was put on Earth to do this very hard thing. God puts the right people in the right places to do the thing that needs doing. Maybe he was the only one, out of all the people who will ever live on earth to be able to do this.

So I guess I always had a certain amount of pity for him, that he was called upon to do this thing that he clearly didn't want to do. And that God trusted him enough to do what needed to be done, even though he didn't want to.

However, as a child everything I heard about him was that he was this horrible, aweful, disgusting man, to be dispised and thought of extremly harshly if at all.

What do you think?

I don't mean to suggest that he was a fair, honest and good man while on Earth. But doesn't the fact that he had this reputation of being harsh and unsympathetic only prove that even Pilate was moved while in the presence of Christ?

I will look into the books suggested.

I think that Theo's probably accurate dipiction of Pilate only serves to prove my point that God's hand was guiding the procedings of Christ's trial. It's because it didn't follow the way things were done at the time that is in itself a testimony of Christ and His Divinity.

Answer 1

Pilate is a saint according to the Coptic and Ethiopic churches. I personally think he was just a man trapped between a rock and a hard place. I don't know whether he genuinely believed that Jesus was innocent or was just trying to avoid more trouble with Rome (on one side) and the Jews he was having difficulty governing (on the other).

I highly recommend Paul Maier's somewhat fictionalized biography of Pontius Pilate. It is well researched, footnoted, and takes you through his whole experience as a Roman climbing the public service ladder, his difficulties as praefect of Judea, and what happened to him afterward. Only by understanding what happened before he was sent to Judea and the pressures upon him once there, trying to govern an intractable people while still pleasing his superiors in Rome, can you really understand his actions at the trial of Jesus. This book really helped me "get inside" Pilate's head.
http://www.amazon.com/Pontius-Pilate-Paul-L-Maier/dp/0825432960

Another magnificent book is Pontius Pilate by Ann Wroe. She covers what is known about Pilate as well as legends and church traditions. http://archive.salon.com/books/review/2000/04/21/wroe/index.html

shaolt2002: "He attained the name Pontius while serving in the wars against Pontius."

That's an unlikely legend. We don't know Pilate's praenomen (first name), but Pontius is his nomen and indicates that he was of the gens Pontia (tribe of the Pontii), one of the most famous of the ancient Samnite names. The cognomen Pilatus indicates to which familia (branch of the gens) he belonged. Had Pilate attained a special honorific name for himself during a war, it would have been appended as a fourth name, or agnomen.

Answer 2

Actually Pilate was a very cruel person. He attained the name Pontius while serving in the wars against Pontius, which was a tribe sort of near modern day Turkey. Thus Pontius is a nickname.... Sorta like if we called someone "Baghdad Bill" or something.

He was friends with a guy named Sejanus who ended up going against the emperor and because of the friendship Pontius had with Sejanus, Pontius was put in a very difficult position. He was already "in trouble" as it were and the last thing he wanted was to have rioters in his jurisdiction. Notice when the Jewish priests said that if he did not come up against Jesus that he was "no friend of Rome". Pilate naturally would have encountered a lot of bad people, but he did not see any fault in Jesus and although he felt bad about condemning a seemingly innocent man, ultimately he was saving his own neck from troubles with the Empire.

Answer 3

there is some doubt as to whether the person who wrote about the trial of jesus had any knowledge of jewish legal proceedure as many jewish scolars have pointed out that trial of jesus in front of the sanhedrin did not follow the rules. the whole point of the story seems to be to transfer the blame for the crucufixion from the romans to the jews. as jesus was not a roman citizen, the jewish authorities and the sanhedrin could dispose of him in any manner they wished and jesus would have no right of appeal to the prefect. the only way jesus could have been legally brought before the romans was if he had commited some offence against them like brigandry or blasphemy against the state cult. you were crucified for brigandry, but one the whole you were given a chance to recant against a charge of blasphemy, flogged and fined. what you have to remember is that the roman empire was a very legalistic entity and proceedures were usually followed to the letter of the law. the whole scenario just doesn't add up. as to pontius pilate, if you read some other historical sources you would find that he had no problem with upsetting or defying the wishes of the jewish people. it would have been totally out of character for him to offer any choice to the people. also Caiaphas was a close ally of pilate and i'm sure if caiaphas had wanted to dispose of jesus himself then pilate would have no trouble with that. for jesus to be tried by the roman prefect it would have required him to have commited a crime against roman law and to be crucified it must have been a serious crime. as to the release of barabas, that was a jewish tradition not a roman one and pilate would not have been too bothered about going against jewish tradition. the scriptures description of this episode are an apology for the romans crucifixion of jesus and deflecting the blame onto the jews. do not feel too sorry for pilate if you read the roman texts on him you will find out he was not a particularly nice person.

Answer 4

This become way extra poignant than present day day executions less than. It become Jesus, the flexibility generated from this variety of gigantic adventure become really thick contained in the air. He felt it on many levels. all of us have a earning to be sure about our author. PP also heard of this Jesus and took pastime there. there's a time period noted as horse trading in Texas criminal protection. at the same time as a lawyer makes deals with the DA & the DA want a conviction with Defendant 'a' he will haggle about the legal specialists different shopper 'b' if lawyer will poorly protect 'a'. With PP, he had to surpress the Jews, in the adventure that they revolted extra his political ability become in jeopordy. Did he recognize he become convicting an inocent guy? i imagine so, yet chosen to do what become smoother for his career. The darkness, earthquake, and (if he heard about it) the turmult contained in the temple further convienced him, yet he already knew. i imagine he would properly be forgiven because he did not recognize sufficient about the gospel to make a ideal decision. what percentage might want to have died had he released Jesus at the same time as the cry for his putting become so extreme? might want to a insurrection kicked off??

Answer 5

I absolutely agree with you. Pilate did not want Christ executed, but it was God's will, and in the end, there was nothing Pilate could do to stop it. He even tried at the last moment to stop it, suggesting Christ be let go. (It was tradition to allow one criminal free for passover) But against his suggestion, the crowd cried for Barrabas to be freed instead.

Answer 6

It is possible.

I have no doubt that had it been GWB instead of Pilate he would not have hesitated, seeing how many he executed in Texas, nor would he have washed his hands of it.

Answer 7

the name sounds familiar but I can't really say I know enough of him to answer the question.