Both Darius and Pilate share a common approbation, in that they diligently sought for a way to release the men that were placed in their power, with both unable to find good reason why the accused should be sent to their deaths. As was said, their efforts ultimately proved to be futile. After Darius failed to stumble upon a reasonable solution, the jealously and bloodlust of Daniel’s adversaries made itself manifest, as “those men came by collusion to the king and said to him, ‘Recall, O king, that it is a law of the Medes and Persians that no edict or decree that the king issues can be changed.’” (Daniel 6:15) Yet again, the congruence of this event with that which was experienced by Jesus is striking. Bearing in mind the accusation of ignoring the king and his edicts that had been effectively leveled against both Daniel and Jesus (by their respective accusers), and therefore the creation of a dynamic which has both Daniel and Jesus positioning themselves as somehow not subject to the rule and authority of the king, we turn to Matthew and find Pilate asking Jesus “Are you the king of the Jews?” (27:11b) If Jesus was to answer in an obvious affirmative, then Pilate would have an undeniable reason to send Him to His death as a rebellious subject. A “yes” would mean that Jesus was challenging the legitimate rule of Rome, which would have been highly charged rhetoric in the Israel of Jesus’ day.
Thinking of Darius’ situation and the words of “Recall, O king…” in reference to his laws, can we not hear those men basically asking Darius, albeit with great subtlety, “So are you king or are you not the king?” Pilate, of course, stands as proxy for Rome and for the Caesar, and the question he puts to Jesus is stirred by those seeking to put Jesus to death. For all practical purposes, Jesus’ enemies have come to Pilate, as he is the representative of the power of Rome, and said, “Recall, O king, that it is a law that anyone who claims kingship, in defiance of Caesar, must be handed over to death.”
To Pilate’s query, Jesus responded, “You say so” (27:11c). This was a common way of saying “yes.” Normally, this would have been sufficient to warrant crucifixion, but under normal circumstances a man would not be standing before Pilate, with such vehement accusations being flung against him, without some type of revolutionary, blood-shedding event having been precipitated. Not only would the accused be on trial before Pilate, but there would be dead Roman soldiers, and wounded citizens, along with dead followers of the one on trial, with more of his followers also in custody, waiting to learn the fate of their leader, whose fate they would share. As far as Pilate was concerned, someone making an absolute claim to kingship would not be standing there completely alone, and in addition, that person would generally be calling down judgments upon Rome, making proclamations about his innocence as he protested the abuses of imperial power and the illegitimacy of Rome’s rule. Jesus did none of these things. He answered simply and briefly.
What made this scene all the more amazing to Pilate was that in the midst of all of this, Jesus was being “accused by the chief priests and the elders,” but “He did not respond” (27:12). Pilate, utterly perplexed by this, says “Don’t you hear how many charges they are bringing against you?” (27:13) Jesus, however, “did not answer even one accusation” (27:14a), and summing up the entirety of the situation in which he found himself, Matthew writes that “the governor was quite amazed” (27:14b). Jesus, apparently, acted in a way unlike anyone Pilate had ever encountered. In the book of Daniel we do not find a trial, and it is conspicuous by its absence. In consideration of that fact, it could be said that Daniel was as quiet and as reserved as was Jesus. Most likely, he offered no particular defense. If Darius would have asked him if the accusations that were being made against him were true, Daniel would have most likely said something like “You say so.” We can picture the scene in which the satraps and the governors and the other supervisors of the kingdom were making these accusations as Daniel stood before Darius, with Darius saying “Don’t you hear how many charges they are bringing against you?” Daniel, providing the example through the strange silence in this area, in which a trial (if there was one) goes unreported, would most likely have not answered even one accusation, so that the king would have been quite amazed.
A bit further on in Matthew, we read that Pilate “knew that they had handed Him (Jesus) over because of envy” (27:18); and we can be assured that Darius knew this to be true of those that were handing Daniel over to him. Such was grounded for an additional objection that could have been raised and pointed out by both Daniel and Jesus, but the records show that they were not. Daniel knew that the ordeal would be difficult, but he also knew that the authority of a kingdom was coming to him (because Darius wished to appoint Daniel over his entire kingdom---6:3b). Likewise, Jesus knew that the ordeal to which He was then being subjected, and which was going to get far worse in the hours to come, would be extraordinarily difficult, but that it was a path that required traversing, because the authority of a kingdom was coming to Him as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment