TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Luke 23:1–12. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Our Lord Jesus was condemned as a blasphemer in the spiritual court, but it was the most impotent malice that could be that this court was actuated by; for, when they had condemned him, they knew they could not put him to death, and therefore took another course.
I.They accused him before Pilate.
The whole multitude of them arose, when they saw they could go no further with him in their court, and led him unto Pilate, though it was no judgment day, no assizes or sessions; and they demanded justice against him, not as a blasphemer (that was no crime that he took cognizance of), but as one disaffected to the Roman government, which they in their hearts did not look upon as any crime at all, or, if it was one, they themselves were much more chargeable with it than he was; only it would serve the turn and answer the purpose of their malice: and it is observable that that which was the pretended crime, for which they employed the Roman powers to destroy Christ, was the real crime for which the Roman powers not long after destroyed them.
1.Here is the indictment drawn up against him (Luk 23:2), in which they pretended a zeal for Caesar, only to ingratiate themselves with Pilate, but it was all malice against Christ, and nothing else. They misrepresented him,
(1.)As making the people rebel against Caesar. It was true, and Pilate knew it, that there was a general uneasiness in the people under the Roman yoke, and they wanted nothing but an opportunity to shake it off; now they would have Pilate believe that this Jesus was active to foment that general discontent, which, if the truth was known, they themselves were the aiders and abettors of: We have found him perverting the nation; as if converting them to God's government were perverting them from the civil government; whereas nothing tends more to make men good subjects than making them Christ's faithful followers. Christ had particularly taught that they ought to give tribute to Caesar, though he knew there were those that would be offended at him for it; and yet he is here falsely accused as forbidding to give tribute to Caesar. Innocency is no fence against calumny.
(2.)As making himself a rival with Caesar, though the very reason why they rejected him, and would not own him to be the Messiah, was because he did not appear in worldly pomp and power, and did not set up for a temporal prince, nor offer to do any thing against Caesar; yet this is what they charged him with, that he said, he himself is Christ a king. He did say that he was Christ, and, if so, then a king, but not such a king as was ever likely to give disturbance to Caesar. When his followers would have made him a king (Joh 6:15), he declined it, though by the many miracles he wrought he made it appear that if he would have set up in competition with Caesar he would have been too hard for him.
2.His pleading to the indictment: Pilate asked him, Art thou the king of the Jews? Luk 23:3. To which he answered, Thou sayest it; that is, "It is as thou sayest, that I am entitled to the government of the Jewish nation; but in rivalship with the scribes and Pharisees, who tyrannize over them in matters of religion, not in rivalship with Caesar, whose government relates only to their civil interests." Christ's kingdom is wholly spiritual, and will not interfere with Caesar's jurisdiction. Or, "Thou sayest it; but canst thou prove it? What evidence hast thou for it?" All that knew him knew the contrary, that he never pretended to be the king of the Jews, in opposition to Caesar as supreme, or to the governors that were sent by him, but the contrary.
3.Pilate's declaration of his innocency (Luk 23:4): He said to the chief priests, and the people that seemed to join with them in the prosecution, "I find no fault in this man. What breaches of your law he may have been guilty of I am not concerned to enquire, but I find nothing proved upon him that makes him obnoxious to our court."
4.The continued fury and outrage of the prosecutors, Luk 23:5. Instead of being moderated by Pilate's declaration of his innocency, and considering, as they ought to have done, whether they were not bringing the guilt of innocent blood upon themselves, they were the more exasperated, more exceedingly fierce. We do not find that they have any particular fact to produce, much less any evidence to prove it; but they resolve to carry it with noise and confidence, and say it, though they cannot prove it: He stirs up the people to rebel against Caesar, teaching throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee to this place. He did stir up the people, but it was not to any thing factious or seditious, but to every thing that was virtuous and praiseworthy. He did teach, but they could not charge him with teaching any doctrine that tended to disturb the public peace, or make the government uneasy or jealous.
II.They accused him before Herod.
1.Pilate removed him and his cause to Herod's court. The accusers mentioned Galilee, the northern part of Canaan. "Why," saith Pilate, "is he of that country? Is he a Galilean?" Luk 23:6. "Yes," said they, "that is his head-quarters; there he was spent most of his time." "Let us send him to Herod then," saith Pilate, "for Herod is now in town, and it is but fit he should have cognizance of his cause, since he belongs to Herod's jurisdiction." Pilate was already sick of the cause, and desirous to rid his hands of it, which seems to have been the true reason for sending him to Herod. But God ordered it so for the more evident fulfilling of the scripture, as appears Act 4:26, Act 4:27, where that of David (Psa 2:2), The kings of the earth and the rulers set themselves against the Lord and his Anointed, is expressly said to be fulfilled in Herod and Pontius Pilate.
2.Herod was very willing to have the examining of him (Luk 23:8): When he saw Jesus he was exceedingly glad, and perhaps the more glad because he saw him a prisoner, saw him in bonds. He had heard many things of him in Galilee, where his miracles had for a great while been all the talk of the country; and he longed to see him, not for any affection he had for him or his doctrine, but purely out of curiosity; and it was only to gratify this that he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him, which would serve him to talk of as long as he lived. In order to this, he questioned with him in many things, that at length he might bring him to something in which he might show his power. Perhaps he pumped him concerning things secret, or things to come, or concerning his curing diseases. But Jesus answered him nothing; nor would he gratify him so much as with the performance of one miracle. The poorest beggar, that asked a miracle for the relief of his necessity, was never denied; but this proud prince, that asked a miracle merely for the gratifying of his curiosity, is denied. He might have seen Christ and his wondrous works many a time in Galilee, and would not, and therefore it is justly said, Now he would see them, and shall not; they are hidden from his eyes, because he knew not the day of his visitation. Herod thought, now that he had him in bonds, he might command a miracle, but miracles must not be made cheap, nor Omnipotence be at the beck of the greatest potentate.
3.His prosecutors appeared against him before Herod, for they were restless in the prosecution: They stood, and vehemently accused him (Luk 23:10), impudently and boldly, so the word signifies. They would make Herod believe that he had poisoned Galilee too with his seditious notions. Note, It is no new thing for good men and good ministers, that are real and useful friends to the civil government, to be falsely accused as factious and seditious, and enemies to government.
4.Herod was very abusive to him: He, with his men of war, his attendants, and officers, and great men, set him at nought. They made nothing of him; so the word is. Horrid wickedness! To make nothing of him who made all things. They laughed at him as a fool; for they knew he had wrought many miracles to befriend others, and why would he not now work one to befriend himself? Or, they laughed at him as one that had lost his power, and was become weak as other men. Herod, who had been acquainted with John Baptist, and had more knowledge of Christ too than Pilate had, was more abusive to Christ than Pilate was; for knowledge without grace does but make men the more ingeniously wicked. Herod arrayed Christ in a gorgeous robe, some gaudy painted clothes, as a mock-king; and so he taught Pilate's soldiers afterwards to do him the same indignity. He was ringleader in that abuse.
5.Herod sent him back to Pilate, and it proved an occasion of the making of them friends, they having been for some time before at variance. Herod could not get sight of a miracle, but would not condemn him neither as a malefactor, and therefore sent him again to Pilate (Luk 23:11), and so returned Pilate's civility and respect in sending the prisoner to him; and this mutual obligation, with the messages that passed between them on this occasion, brought them to a better understanding one of another than there had been of late between them, Luk 23:12. They had been at enmity between themselves, probably upon Pilate's killing of the Galileans, who were Herod's subjects (Luk 13:1), or some other such matter of controversy as usually occurs among princes and great men. Observe how those that quarrelled with one another yet could unite against Christ; as Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek, though divided among themselves, were confederate against the Israel of God, Psa 83:7. Christ is the great peace-maker; both Pilate and Herod owned his innocency, and their agreeing in this cured their disagreeing in other things.
Historical interpretation
Nine Centuries of Reception
6 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
Likewise, when Pirate asked Him, "Art thou Christ (the King)? "He answered, as He had before (to the Jewish council) "Thou sayest that I am" in order that He might not seem to have been driven by a fear of his power to give him a fuller answer.
Our Lord is accused and is silent, for He needs no defence. Let them cast about for defence who fear to be conquered. He does not then confirm, the accusation by His silence, but He despises it by not refuting it. Why then should He fear who does not court safety? The Safety of all men forfeits His own, that He may gain that of all.
(lib. iii. c. 8.) He next relates what happens before Pilate, as follows, And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting our nation, &c. Matthew and Mark do not give this, though affirming that they accused Him, but Luke has laid open the very charges which they falsely brought against Him.
That the word of Jesus might be fulfilled which He prophesied of His own death, He shall be delivered to the Gentiles, that is, to the Romans. For Pilate was a Roman, and the Romans had sent him as governor to Judæa.
Now two charges having been brought against our Lord, namely, that He forbade to pay tribute to Cæsar, and called Himself Christ the King, it may be that Pilate had chanced to hear that which our Lord spake, Render unto Cæsar the things which be Cæsar's; and therefore setting aside this accusation as a palpable lie of the Jews, he thought fit to ask concerning that alone of which he knew nothing, the saying about the kingdom; for it follows, Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews, &c.
He answers the governor in the same words which He used to the Chief Priests, that Pilate might be condemned by his own voice; for it follows, And he answering said, Thou sayest.
But with these words they accuse not Him, but themselves. For to have taught the people, and by teaching to have roused them from their former idleness, and doing this to have passed through the whole land of promise, was an evidence not of sin, but of virtue.
But Pilate asked him, saying: Art thou the king of the Jews? And he answering said, Thou sayest it. By the same word, he replies to the governor, as he did to the chief priests, so that they might be condemned by their own judgment. And it is to be noted that of the two charges brought against the Lord, namely that he forbade giving tribute to Caesar and that he claimed to be Christ a king, Pilate thought it necessary to inquire only about the word concerning the kingdom. For it could have happened that that judgment of the Lord, where he said, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's (Matt. XXII), also came to Pilate’s hearing, and thus deeming this accusation a manifest lie born of envy, he considered only the one concerning the kingdom as worthy of inquiry.
Most plainly are they opposed to the truth. For our Lord was so far from forbidding to give tribute, that He commanded it to be given. How then did He pervert the people? Was it that He might take possession of the kingdom? But this is incredible to all, for when the whole multitude wished to choose Him for their king, He was aware of it, and fled.
It seems to me that he asked this question of Christ by way of deriding the wantonness or hypocrisy of the alleged charge. As if he said, Thou a poor humble naked man, with none to help Thee, art accused of seeking a kingdom, for which Thou wouldest need many to help Thee, and much money.
Now they finding nothing else to support their calumny, have resort to the aid of clamour, for it follows, And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place. As if they said, He perverts the people, not in one part only, but beginning from Galilee He arrives at this place, having passed through Judæa. I think then that they purposely made mention of Galilee, as desirous to alarm Pilate, for the Galilæans were of a different sect and given to sedition, as, for example, Judas of Galilee who is mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles.
Continue studying Luke 23:3 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Luke 23:3 captures the succinct yet profound exchange between Pontius Pilate and Jesus during His trial, where Pilate directly confronts Jesus with the political charge, "Art thou the King of the Jews?" Jesus' enigmatic and affirming reply, "Thou sayest [it]," simultaneously acknowledges the truth of His kingship while subtly redefining its nature, setting the stage for the Roman governor's complex dilemma and highlighting the spiritual essence of Christ's reign amidst earthly accusations.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is situated at a critical juncture in Luke's narrative of Jesus' passion. Immediately preceding it, Luke 23:1-2 describes the entire multitude of Jewish leaders bringing Jesus before Pilate and leveling specific accusations: subverting the nation, forbidding tribute to Caesar, and claiming to be Christ a King. Pilate's question in Luke 23:3 is a direct response to these charges, particularly the one concerning kingship, which was the most politically volatile in the eyes of Rome. Following Jesus' answer, Pilate declares in Luke 23:4 that he finds no fault in Jesus, initiating a series of attempts to release Him, demonstrating Pilate's initial assessment that Jesus posed no genuine political threat. The brevity of this exchange in Luke contrasts with the more extended dialogue in John 18:33-38, yet both underscore the central issue of Jesus' identity and the nature of His kingdom.
Historical & Cultural Context
At the time of Jesus' trial, Judea was a Roman province governed by Pontius Pilate (26-36 AD). Roman governors were responsible for maintaining peace, collecting taxes, and administering justice, with a particular sensitivity to any claims of kingship that might threaten the Emperor's authority. The Jewish leaders, having condemned Jesus for blasphemy (claiming to be the Son of God, Luke 22:70-71), brought Him to Pilate because they lacked the authority to carry out a death sentence under Roman law. They shrewdly reframed their religious charge into a political one, knowing that Pilate would take seriously any accusation of sedition against Rome. The title "King of the Jews" carried immense political weight, as it evoked the long-held Jewish expectation of a Messiah who would liberate them from foreign rule and establish an earthly kingdom, a concept that Rome would view as rebellion. Pilate's inquiry, therefore, was not merely theological but a pragmatic investigation into a potential insurrectionist.
Key Themes
This verse contributes significantly to several key themes within Luke's Gospel and the broader biblical narrative. Firstly, it highlights the nature of Jesus' kingship, contrasting the worldly, political understanding of a king with Jesus' spiritual and eternal reign. Jesus' kingdom is "not of this world," as He clarifies in John 18:36, yet it is a true and sovereign kingship. Secondly, it underscores the clash between divine truth and human power. Pilate, representing the pinnacle of Roman authority, attempts to grasp a truth that transcends his earthly jurisdiction. Jesus, though seemingly powerless, maintains ultimate authority and control over the unfolding events, demonstrating divine sovereignty even in the face of an unjust trial. Finally, it foreshadows the Messianic identity of Jesus, affirming His claim to be the promised King, albeit one whose throne is established not by worldly conquest but by sacrificial love and resurrection power, as seen throughout the Gospel of Luke.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This verb signifies to "ask for," "inquire," or "seek." Pilate's use of this word indicates a direct, formal inquiry, seeking a clear answer to a specific charge. It's not a casual question but a judicial one, aimed at determining Jesus' guilt or innocence regarding the accusation of sedition. The intensity of the situation is captured in Pilate's need for a definitive response.
This term refers to a sovereign, a ruler, or one who holds power. In the context of Judea, it carried strong Messianic connotations for the Jews, referring to the promised descendant of David who would restore Israel's kingdom. For the Romans, however, any claim to kingship other than Caesar's was an act of rebellion. Pilate's question, therefore, is loaded with political implications, aiming to ascertain if Jesus' claim was a direct challenge to Roman imperial authority.
While this primary verb generally means "to lay forth" or "relate in words," in Jesus' response, "Thou sayest," it functions as an idiomatic affirmation. It is more than a simple "yes"; it acknowledges the truth of Pilate's statement while often implying a nuance or a different understanding than the questioner's premise. It confirms the reality of Jesus' kingship but subtly refutes the worldly, political interpretation Pilate might have had.
Verse Breakdown
"And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews?"
This clause reveals Pilate's direct engagement with the core accusation brought against Jesus by the Jewish leaders. His question is sharp and to the point, cutting through any religious or theological nuances to address the most pressing political concern: whether Jesus claimed a throne that would challenge Caesar's rule. For Pilate, this was a matter of Roman law and order, a potential threat to the stability of the province. The question is posed as a direct challenge, demanding a clear confession or denial.
"And he answered him and said, Thou sayest [it]."
Jesus' response is remarkably concise and profound. In the Greek and Aramaic idioms of the time, "Thou sayest" (or "You say so") was a common way to affirm a statement, meaning "Yes, it is as you say" or "You are correct." However, it often carried an implicit qualification that the truth was indeed as stated, but not necessarily in the way the questioner understood it. Jesus affirms His identity as King, but by using this nuanced phrase, He avoids endorsing Pilate's worldly, political framework for that kingship, redirecting the focus to a deeper, spiritual reality that Pilate, at this point, could not fully grasp.
Literary Devices
The exchange in Luke 23:3 employs several powerful literary devices. Interrogation is central, as Pilate's direct question serves to highlight the core conflict of the trial – the nature of Jesus' identity and authority. This is immediately followed by a profound Understatement or Affirmation with Nuance in Jesus' reply, "Thou sayest [it]." This seemingly simple phrase carries immense weight, affirming His kingship without directly assenting to Pilate's politically charged interpretation. It is a masterful display of Conciseness, where profound theological truth is conveyed in minimal words, forcing the listener (and reader) to ponder the deeper implications. Furthermore, there is a subtle Irony at play: Pilate, representing the most powerful earthly empire, unwittingly questions the true King of the universe, whose kingdom is not of this world, yet whose authority far surpasses any earthly dominion.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Luke 23:3 stands as a pivotal moment, underscoring the fundamental difference between the world's understanding of power and the divine reality of Christ's kingdom. Pilate's question, rooted in earthly political concerns, collides with Jesus' response, which affirms a kingship that transcends all human definitions and limitations. This exchange reveals that Jesus' reign is not established through military might or political overthrow, but through truth, suffering, and ultimately, resurrection. It challenges believers to recognize that their ultimate allegiance belongs to a King whose authority is spiritual and eternal, not bound by the fleeting powers of this age. This truth is foundational to understanding the nature of the church and the mission of believers in the world, called to bear witness to a kingdom that is "not of this world," yet profoundly impacts it.
Reflection and Application
Luke 23:3 offers profound insights for contemporary believers, challenging our perceptions of power, truth, and allegiance. Jesus' calm and controlled response in the face of an unjust accusation demonstrates a profound trust in God's sovereign plan, even when facing the ultimate earthly injustice. For us, this means understanding that our identity and security are not derived from worldly status or political systems, but from our relationship with Christ, the true King. We are called to live as citizens of His eternal kingdom, allowing His values to shape our worldview and actions, even when they conflict with prevailing cultural norms. This verse also encourages us to speak truth with wisdom and discernment, much like Jesus, who affirmed His identity without being drawn into a futile political debate. Our witness for Christ should be clear, yet often nuanced, recognizing that the world may not fully grasp the spiritual realities we proclaim. Ultimately, this passage reminds us that Christ's reign is absolute, transcending all earthly powers, and our ultimate hope and allegiance rest in Him alone.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What did Jesus mean by "Thou sayest it" in response to Pilate's question?
In the context of ancient Greek and Aramaic idioms, "Thou sayest it" (Greek: σὺ λέγεις, sy legeis) was a common and emphatic way to affirm a statement. It was equivalent to saying, "Yes, it is as you say," or "You are correct." However, it often carried a nuance, implying that while the statement was true, the questioner's understanding or premise might be incomplete or misconstrued. In Jesus' case, it was an affirmation of His kingship, but it subtly distinguished His spiritual, divine reign from the earthly, political kingship Pilate was concerned about. It affirmed the truth of His identity without validating Pilate's worldly interpretation of that truth, as further elaborated in John 18:36-37.
Why was Jesus accused of being "King of the Jews" if His kingdom was not of this world?
The Jewish leaders, having condemned Jesus for blasphemy (claiming to be God's Son), needed a charge that would compel the Roman governor, Pilate, to act. Under Roman occupation, claiming to be a king was a direct challenge to Caesar's authority and constituted sedition, a capital offense. While Jesus' kingship was indeed spiritual and eternal, not earthly or political, the Jewish leaders deliberately framed their accusation in a way that would be politically threatening to Rome. They knew that Pilate would be wary of any potential uprising or challenge to Roman rule, making the "King of the Jews" accusation the most effective means to secure a death sentence, despite Jesus' own clarification that His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36).
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
Luke 23:3, though brief, powerfully foreshadows the ultimate fulfillment of Jesus' kingship. Pilate's question, "Art thou the King of the Jews?", though intended as a political accusation, unwittingly pronounces a profound theological truth that would soon be demonstrated on the cross. Jesus' nuanced affirmation, "Thou sayest [it]," subtly acknowledges His royal identity while redirecting the understanding of His kingdom from earthly dominion to a spiritual reign established through sacrifice. This is the Christ-centered fulfillment: the King of the Jews, the Messiah, does not ascend to an earthly throne through conquest, but to a cosmic throne through suffering, death, and resurrection. His crucifixion, marked by the sign "THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS" (Luke 23:38), becomes the very means by which He exercises His sovereign power over sin and death. His resurrection then definitively establishes Him as Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36), the true King of kings and Lord of lords, to whom "every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth" (Philippians 2:9-11). Thus, the seemingly simple exchange before Pilate is a pivotal moment in the unfolding drama of redemption, revealing the King who reigns not from a palace, but from a cross, and whose kingdom is eternal.