Sermon Tone Analysis

“Pilate said to Jesus, ‘What is truth?’”

[1]

Cynicism best describes the governor’s demeanor when the True Light stood before him.

Arraigned before Pilate’s judgement seat was Jesus of Nazareth who testified of Himself, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life” [JOHN 14:6].

Someone has appropriately commented that irreverence grins in the face of Holy God; never was this more apparent that when the Son of God stood before Pilate.

He who hung the stars in space was on trial before a petty tyrant who disdained the very peoples over whom he ruled.

The One who graciously gave sight to blind eyes, who enabled the deaf to hear and the mute to speak and who restored dead sons to their mother’s arms, was hailed before Pilate’s judgement seat where He was to be examined because of trumped up charges pressed by religious leaders driven by jealousy.

It will be helpful to our understanding to refresh our memories, getting the context in which the query was muttered.

“Pilate entered his headquarters again and called Jesus and said to him, ‘Are you the King of the Jews?’ Jesus answered, ‘Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?’ Pilate answered, ‘Am I a Jew?

Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you over to me.

What have you done?’ Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world.

If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews.

But my kingdom is not from the world.’

Then Pilate said to him, ‘So you are a king?’ Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a king.

For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth.

Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.’

Pilate said to him, ‘What is truth?’

“After he had said this, he went back outside to the Jews and told them, ‘I find no guilt in him.

But you have a custom that I should release one man for you at the Passover.

So do you want me to release to you the King of the Jews?’

They cried out again, ‘Not this man, but Barabbas!’

Now Barabbas was a robber” [JOHN 18:33-40].

It is obvious from the dialogue presented that Pilate did not want to make a decision.

Pilate was well aware that Jesus was not guilty of lèse majesté; however, he was prepared to sacrifice this bothersome man if it would halt the bickering of the Jews.

Pilate asked Jesus whether He claimed to be King of the Jews.

Jesus responded by challenging Pilate to consider the evidence presented.

Pilate’s rejoinder was caustic, pointing out that the leadership of the nation had delivered Jesus to be executed.

It was at this point that Jesus made a startling pronouncement.

He laid claim to an unseen kingdom—a kingdom that did not originate from within the political world to which Pilate was wed.

Moreover, He claimed that He had subjects who were prepared to fight within their own realm.

When Pilate responded, we can almost hear the surprise in his voice.

“So you are a king?” Jesus’ response makes it clear that He had a purpose in being born into this world.

In fact, He claimed that His coming was for the express purpose of bearing witness to the truth.

Listen to this powerful, comforting statement from the lips of the Master.

“Everyone who is of the truth listens to My voice.”

Catch the import of that statement.

Those who are identified with the truth hear the Master’s voice and heeds what He says.

It was at this point that Pilate muttered the words that will serve as the focus of our study today, “What is truth?”

Having callously dismissed Jesus’ assertion, he now sought a way out of his dilemma.

He did not want to execute an innocent man; but neither did he want to be compelled to put down a rebellion by the Jewish leaders.

He thought he had come up with the ideal way to avoid all unpleasantness when he offered to release Barabbas.

Let me take an excursus to help prepare your view of this event by exploring who Barabbas might be.

A number of ancient manuscripts and no less than Origen assert that the name of this man was Jesus Bar-Abba, or “Jesus Son of the father.”

He is identified as a “notorious prisoner” [MATTHEW 27:16], a “robber” [JOHN 18:40], a “rebel” and a “murderer” guilty of “insurrection” [MARK 15:7; see also LUKE 23:19].

It would appear that he was a brigand, motivated by political considerations to lead a futile attempt to throw off Roman rule.

Thus, Pilate was offering the mob a choice between Jesus the Messiah and Jesus the Son of the Father.

Pilate imagined that the sight of a helpless, non-threatening individual would elicit a measure of pity from the crowd.

However, the appearance of Jesus before the mob had the opposite effect.

Seeing the helpless, unresisting prisoner caused the crowd to become outraged that such an individual would dare attempt to displace their messianic expectations.

Therefore, enraged at His helpless condition—a condition that did not fit with their concept of a messianic power, the mob voted for Barabbas.

Thus, their demand that Barabbas be released was less a statement of their esteem for him than it was a statement of their antipathy to Jesus.

Jesus had dashed their hopes—He would not display His power in their behalf; therefore, He must go.

Regardless of what Pilate intended, the question, recorded for our benefit, hangs over the life of each individual.

Whether we actually ask the question, or whether we seek to avoid asking the question, we are still in need of answering for ourselves, “What is the truth?"

WHATEVER — “Whatever” is not what Pilate said; but it is a good summation of what he meant.

In the text, Pilate is not asking Jesus to give an answer; he would have been shocked had Jesus answered.

Rather, Pilate is trying to dismiss Jesus without making a decision.

His response is what has become verbal shorthand in this day whenever someone wants to indicate resignation.

The response is a denial of meaning, a denial of purpose.

Whenever a person says “Whatever,” you understand that he or she is indicating that any response, and possibly you yourself, are unimportant in their estimate.

It is a dismissive verbal shrug showing disrespect.

The concept captures the idea that has become regnant in this age when truth is considered relative.

All cultures are equal.

Muslim culture in which women are decidedly inferior to men is the moral equivalent to western culture in which women are viewed as equal to men.

That culture which glorifies conversion by the sword is the moral equivalent to a culture which employs persuasion and reason to present truth.

The attitude of the “Whatever generation” is, “You worship Jesus, I worship my own intellect.”

One man worships Allah, another worships a cow.

In the “Whatever” world, all religions are the same, even the religion of no religion.

What’s true for you may not be true for me.

It doesn’t matter what you believe so long as you are sincere.

And with a shrug of the shoulders, the individual mutters, “Eh, whatever.”

This is the modern view of truth.

Today, almost any moral aberration is justified with the argument that it hurts no one; therefore, there can be no objection to acting on our impulses and doing whatever one wishes to do.

We set up house, testing the waters, as it were, inadvertently setting the stage for serial partners while destroying marriage.

All society becomes less stable, less trusting; nevertheless, we assure ourselves that no one is hurt because we acted on our impulse.

The tragedy is that the attitude of shrugging the shoulder is imported into the church.

Consequently, when the preacher points out the gravity of the sin or notes the censure of the Word, there are always those in attendance who are either offended or who are prepared to dismiss the concern with the statement, “Whatever.”

This attitude is exposed through examining the life of the average professing Christian.

According to surveys conducted by Barna Research, three quarters of all adults believe there is no such thing as absolute truth.

Therefore, in the estimate of the majority of adults, two people are able to define truth in conflicting ways, and both would be correct.

This appears to be the basis underlying the emergent church.

Nobody is offended; everybody interprets events according to their own world view.

It is the same attitude that prevailed when the Book of Judges closes: “Everyone did what was right in his own eyes” [JUDGES 21:25].

No doubt you would agree that such statistics paint a distressingly dark picture.

However, consider the situation that the Barna Group discovered among Evangelical churches.

Less than one-half (44%) of those professing to be Born Again, and less than ten percent (9%) of teenagers professing to be Born Again, believe in the existence of absolute moral truth.

You understand that this means there is no such thing as a “know so” salvation.

The overwhelming majority of evangelical Christians would deny that those who have faith in the Living Son of God are born from above, and they would reject the concept that those without Christ will spend eternity separated from Him.

These professing evangelicals would hold to the concept that there are many paths to God despite the words of the Master, “I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself” [JOHN 12:32].

They would also tacitly deny Jesus’ statement, “No one comes to the Father except through Me” [JOHN 14:6].

I doubt that you would be surprised that through their research, this group discovered that nearly one-half (47%) of all American adults believe that “to get by in life, sometimes you have to bend rules for your benefit.”

Because this is the attitude of so many parents, perhaps it accounts for the fact that seventy percent of American teenagers admit to cheating on exams.

Moreover, these youth see nothing wrong with such cheating.

[2]

Our world assumes the position that the desire of the individual trumps all other values.

Therefore, we willingly sacrifice the permanent on the altar of the temporary.

What is more, we feel good that we have done what we wanted even though we destroyed our future!

Nevertheless, there are always consequences to our choices, just as there were consequences to Pilate’s refusal to stand firm for what was right.

To the modern mind, there is no authority greater than one’s own immediate desire.

To the modern mind, this has become a world with no meaning beyond personal fulfillment.

This should not be surprising, however, for in our contemporary view there are no values higher than the individual’s own choice.

Kerby Anderson, citing a book written by Richard Middleton and Brian Walsh, tells a story that illustrates this new view of truth.