Acts 19

Gary Pollard

Afterward Paul felt compelled by the Spirit to go over to Macedonia and Achaia before going to Jerusalem. “And after that,” he said, “I must go on to Rome!” He sent his two assistants, Timothy and Erastus, ahead to Macedonia while he stayed awhile longer in the province of Asia. About that time, serious trouble developed in Ephesus concerning the Way. It began with Demetrius, a silversmith who had a large business manufacturing silver shrines of the Greek goddess Artemis. He kept many craftsmen busy. He called them together, along with others employed in similar trades, and addressed them as follows: “Gentlemen, you know that our wealth comes from this business. But as you have seen and heard, this man Paul has persuaded many people that handmade gods aren’t really gods at all. And he’s done this not only here in Ephesus but throughout the entire province! Of course, I’m not just talking about the loss of public respect for our business. I’m also concerned that the temple of the great goddess Artemis will lose its influence and that Artemis—this magnificent goddess worshiped throughout the province of Asia and all around the world—will be robbed of her great prestige!”1

At this their anger boiled, and they began shouting, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!” Soon the whole city was filled with confusion. Everyone rushed to the amphitheater, dragging along Gaius and Aristarchus, who were Paul’s traveling companions from Macedonia. Paul wanted to go in, too, but the believers wouldn’t let him. Some of the officials of the province, friends of Paul, also sent a message to him, begging him not to risk his life by entering the amphitheater. Inside, the people were all shouting, some one thing and some another. Everything was in confusion. In fact, most of them didn’t even know why they were there. The Jews in the crowd pushed Alexander forward and told him to explain the situation. He motioned for silence and tried to speak. But when the crowd realized he was a Jew, they started shouting again and kept it up for about two hours: “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians! Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”

At last the mayor was able to quiet them down enough to speak. “Citizens of Ephesus,” he said. “Everyone knows that Ephesus is the official guardian of the temple of the great Artemis, whose image fell down to us from heaven.2 Since this is an undeniable fact, you should stay calm and not do anything rash. You have brought these men here, but they have stolen nothing from the temple and have not spoken against our goddess. If Demetrius and the craftsmen have a case against them, the courts are in session and the officials can hear the case at once. Let them make formal charges. And if there are complaints about other matters, they can be settled in a legal assembly. I am afraid we are in danger of being charged with rioting by the Roman government, since there is no cause for all this commotion. And if Rome demands an explanation, we won’t know what to say.” Then he dismissed them, and they dispersed.

1 The planet Venus was worshiped as Artemis, and many, many other names all over the world. Demetrius clearly had financial motives, but he knew the people were sincere (sincerely wrong) in their belief in Artemis. The peoples’ anger was not over the threat to Demetrius’s business — they were likely afraid of the “consequences” of disrespecting or abandoning this universally deified planet. This was the same false goddess worshiped by the Israelites as the Queen of Heaven. When Aaron made the golden calf, they “celebrated with feasting and drinking, and indulged in pagan revelry” (Ex 32.6). The image he chose and the way they worshiped it strongly suggest it was Hathor. Herodotus, Plutarch, Strabo, and Diodorus Siculus all identified Hathor with Aphrodite/Venus. This is a very small sample of the long list of false deities associated with Venus. Whether they were worshipping personified representations of the planet or were using the beautiful morning star as an excuse to do naughty things is not crystal clear. The universal nature of this false deity’s worship makes the typical explanation (syncretism alone) seem inadequate. No one will argue that it wasn’t done at all (c.f. interpretatio graeca), but this does not explain why the same false deity was worshiped in the Americas or China or anywhere else too far from Greek and Roman culture to have been influenced by them or by each other.

2 Διοπετης, i.e. Jupiter/Zeus. The image of Artemis was a meteorite. These were often worshiped as images of the planetary false gods, a practice as ancient as writing itself. Moses strictly warned against this practice in Deut 4.19 and 17.3 and in Ex 20.4.  

The Ziz

Dale Pollard

Psalm 50.11

“I know every bird of the mountains, and the Ziz of the field is Mine.”

If a simpleton took a gander at Psalm 50:11 he would likely assume that the verse spoke of a mere bird or some generic beast. But over the centuries, Jewish interpreters transformed the mysterious Hebrew word ziz into one of the largest creatures of biblical lore. A colossal, winged monster that ruled the skies, much as Leviathan ruled the sea, and the Behemoth ruled the land.

When Ziz Became a Giant

The verse itself does not describe its size– that detail comes later.

During the centuries after the Old Testament, Jewish writers began pairing three enormous creatures together:

Leviathan — ruler of the sea

Behemoth — ruler of the land

Ziz — ruler of the air

This titanic trio appears in several ancient Jewish writings.

 One of the oldest surviving descriptions appears in the Babylonian Talmud, where the bird is portrayed as unimaginably large.

The rabbis write:

 “An egg of the ziz once fell and shattered three hundred cedar trees, and its contents flooded sixteen cities.” — Babylonian Talmud, Bekhorot 57b

Although clearly presented in a legendary style, the story emphasizes the bird’s extraordinary size. Another famous tradition says:

“It’s ankles rest upon the earth while its head reaches the heavens.”

— Midrash, Leviticus Rabbah 22:10

The point was clear; the Ziz was thought to dwarf every other bird.

Perhaps the best-known description comes from the Midrash, which says the bird’s wingspan was so immense that opening its wings could darken the sun.

The traditional version states:

“When the Ziz spreads its wings, it obscures the light of the sun.” — Midrash

Psalms on Psalm 50

This sort of publicity helped the Ziz become the flying counterpart to Leviathan.

An Extinct Giant Bird?

The Bible never identifies the Ziz with any known species. Because later Jewish tradition describes it as an enormous flying creature, it’s been compared with extinct giant birds such as Argentavis magnificens, Pelagornis sandersi, or even giant pterosaurs such as Quetzalcoatlus. These identifications remain speculative and are not found in ancient Jewish sources. Whether understood literally, symbolically, or as legendary embellishment, the Ziz remains one of the most fascinating creatures associated with the Bible—a mysterious being whose reputation grew from a single obscure Hebrew word into the greatest bird in Jewish imagination.

Note: The descriptions of the Ziz blotting out the sun, towering into the heavens, and laying obnoxiously large eggs come from later rabbinic and midrashic tradition—not from the biblical text itself. The Bible only briefly mentions the ziz without describing it as gigantic.

The Hebrew word ziz appears only a few times in the Old Testament (Psalm 50:11, 80:13). The word probably comes from a root meaning “to move,” “to swarm,” or “living thing.”

“Each Man Must Remain In That Condition In Which He Was Called”

Neal Pollard

Yesterday, as part of a Bible class on 1 Corinthians, it fell my lot to teach chapter seven. This tends to be a controversial chapter, one in which too many teachers, preachers, elders, and other church leaders have misled people and asserted a doctrine known as “The Pauline Privilege.” Among the arguments used to defend this position, people say:

  • “Not under bondage” (15). If an unbeliever departs, the believing mate who is abandoned is free to remarry.
  • “God has called us to peace” (15). Peace includes the idea that the abandoned is free to remarry (this is not seriously or widely taught as credible).
  • “Each man must remain in that condition in which he was called” (18-24).

We spent our time in class dealing with the main argument, the first argument concerning “not under bondage” (watch class here). This position cannot be right, as it has Paul contradicting himself (see 7:10-11) and, in doing so, contradicting Jesus (see Matthew 19:1-9). “Under bondage” means enslaved and is never used in the New Testament as the marriage bond. Paul uses a different word for the marriage bond (cf. Romans 7:2; 1 Corinthians 7:27,39). Paul is saying one is not enslaved to his or her unbelieving spouse, and the Christian should not choose the spouse over Christ. Paul had said not to leave the non-Christian mate (12-14), but if divorce occurred he had already given the two options available in verses 10-11: “remain unmarried…or be reconciled.”

One other matter that is often used in arguing a broader acceptance of divorce and remarriage than Jesus taught in Matthew 5 and 19. The argument is made that a person is allowed to stay in whatever condition they are in when they obey the gospel. So, if one has been married and divorce multiple times when they become a Christian, Paul is saying it is acceptable to stay in that situation. He compares it to circumcision and slavery, so the argument goes.

The central problem with this is that it also makes Paul contradict himself and Jesus in the explicit teaching on marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Remember that after Jesus states His authoritative position, the apostles lament that if such was the case it would be better not to marry. No one would conclude this of this position.

It also misunderstands the point Paul is making. It is a summary of the position he set forth in verses 12-14. If you become a Christian and are married to a non-Christian, don’t dissolve the marriage. Under the Old Law, “mixed marriages” were forbidden (Exodus 34:16) and those that were formed had to be dissolved (Ezra 10, Nehemiah 9). These new Christians may have been influenced by such teaching and wondered if that applied to them. Whatever they may have thought, Paul makes clear that they should stay married.

Without a doubt, sorting through and untangling the real-life circumstances of people’s marriages is among the hardest challenges to face in being faithful to Jesus and His will. Our task is to show the compassion of Christ and lovingly minister to all who are confronted with challenges and struggles. While our hearts break for difficult situations, we are not at liberty to pick and choose which commands and teachings of His to teach and which to ignore or change.

Who’s Gonna Feed Them Hogs?

Brent Pollard

On a recent drive home, Tom T. Hall’s “Who’s Gonna Feed Them Hogs” played on the radio. The song’s story of a hog farmer whose life is unexpectedly imperiled strikes a chord with people of faith, who can identify at least three salient points from Scripture in its lyrics. The old man decides that because his pens are full of hogs needing tending, he cannot die, and he makes a remarkable recovery.

1. Feed the Hogs: Responsibility as Biblical Stewardship (Proverbs 27.23)

First, the song touches on responsibility. Someone has to feed all those hogs. The farmer’s concern is not inherently wrong. He has 400 hogs that require tending. As good stewards of what God has entrusted to us, we see that a righteous man cares for his animals (Proverbs 12.10a). Solomon advises: “Know well the condition of your flocks, and pay attention to your herds” (Proverbs 27.23). Biblical faith is not an excuse for irresponsibility. We have families to provide for, work to perform, congregations to serve, and promises to keep. In this, Tom T. Hall’s farmer deserves commendation. He cares about what has been entrusted to him.

2. Tomorrow’s Plans Are Written in Pencil (James 4.13-17)

However, the farmer’s awareness of his mortality should also have led him to reflect on the truth James points out in the fourth chapter of his epistle (vv. 13-17). Whereas the farmer had expected a routine day of chores, he is unexpectedly hospitalized and facing death. The merchants in James 4 say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, and spend a year there and engage in business and make a profit” (13). James replies: “…you do not know what your life will be like tomorrow” (14). The Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12.16-21) dovetails nicely with this thought.

Full Barns and Full Pens: The Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12.16-21)

The rich fool had barns full of crops. In fact, he had to build more barns to house his surplus. The hog farmer of Hall’s song had pens full of 400 hogs. Death says to both of them, in effect: “What happens to all of this if tonight is your last night?” However, a key difference remains. The rich fool trusted his possessions. As such, he showed where he invested his heart (Luke 12.34). Jesus warns that only hearts invested in heaven have eternal security (Matthew 6.19-21). In contrast, the hog farmer was worried about responsibilities. Yet both confront the same fact: Tomorrow’s plans are always written in pencil.

3. The Delusion of Being Indispensable (Matthew 6.25-34; Psalm 127.1-2)

Ultimately, we arrive at our strongest application for this illustration. The farmer’s anxiety arose from his delusion that he was indispensable. He asks: “If I’m not there, who’s gonna feed them hogs?” Metaphorically speaking, we all have our hogs. Who will take care of my family? Who will teach my class? Who’s going to do this job? Who will carry out this church program? Who will solve this problem if I don’t? This brings us to Matthew 6.25-34 and Psalm 127.1-2. Don’t give in to anxiety and let God build the house.

When Stewardship Mutates Into Anxiety

I am confident in making this point, having already stressed responsibility. We should work diligently. But stewardship can mutate into anxiety, and we can begin to behave as though everything depends on us. “God has given me something to do” becomes “Nothing can function without me.” The first is stewardship, and the second is a burden God never gave. That gives us a memorable progression and our three points.

  • Feed the hogs.
  • Don’t presume you will be here to feed them tomorrow.
  • Trust God when it’s time for someone else to feed them.

What Falls Under These Three Points

Other issues lurk around the periphery—worry, priorities, life’s brevity, wealth, legacy, even preparing others to assume our responsibilities (see 2 Timothy 2.2). However, these all fall beneath the umbrella of the three areas we have already discussed, not creating new categories.

The Hogs Will Get Fed Without Us

The song’s humor makes the third point especially effective. The old hog farmer essentially tells death, “You’ll have to come back for me later because I have 400 hogs depending on me.” And sooner or later, everyone must learn that the hogs will get fed without us. That, too, is God’s providence. It’s not an argument that our lives don’t matter, far from it. It is the argument that God remains God even when our shift is finally over.

Naming Your Own Hogs

So, what are your hogs? Name them honestly, then tend to them faithfully. Work like the task matters, since it does. Yet hold it loosely enough to lay it down when the time comes, trusting that the God who entrusted you with the work will not abandon it when you are gone. God requires faithfulness in our shift, not permanence in it.

Remember God 

Carl Pollard

My wife and I were talking the other night about the ladies’ class she just started teaching at church. During our conversation, we ended up walking through Deuteronomy 6–8, and I was amazed by just how practical and relevant these chapters still are for us today. There’s a lot here that hits close to home. So, here’s what stood out to me.

Israel was standing on the edge of a new life. The generation that left Egypt had largely died in the wilderness, and their children were preparing to enter the land God had promised them. Moses knew he wouldnt cross the Jordan with them, so he used his final days to prepare them for what was ahead.

One of his greatest concerns was forgetfulness.

Israel knew how to depend on God in the wilderness. They had been hungry, thirsty, surrounded by enemies, and completely dependent upon God’s provision. Now they were about to experience something very different. They were going to live in cities they didn’t build, drink from wells they didn’t dig, and eat from vineyards they didn’t plant.

Moses warned them, “Take care lest you forget the LORD” (Deuteronomy 6:12).

The answer to forgetfulness began in the heart. Moses told Israel, “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might” (6:5). Their relationship with God was supposed to shape every part of life. His words were to be on their hearts, taught diligently to their children, and discussed throughout the ordinary routines of the day.

Their children needed to know why they lived this way. When they asked, Moses told the parents to tell them the story, “We were Pharaoh’s slaves in Egypt. And the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand” (6:21).

They were to remember where they came from and who brought them out.

Chapter 7 reminds Israel that they belonged to God. They were His “treasured possession” (7:6). God had chosen them because of His love and His faithfulness. When they faced nations stronger than themselves, they were to remember what God had already done to Pharaoh and Egypt. Remembering yesterday’s faithfulness would give them courage for tomorrow.

Then chapter 8 takes the warning even further. Moses tells them to remember the wilderness. God had humbled them, tested them, fed them with manna, and sustained them for forty years. Even the hard years had served a purpose.

Soon their houses would be built, their stomachs would be full, and their possessions would multiply. That success carried its own spiritual danger. Moses warned that they might eventually say, “My power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth” (8:17).

His answer was simple, “You shall remember the LORD your God.”

That message still matters for Christian’s today! 

Remember who carried you through the hard years. Remember who provided when you had very little. Remember the prayers He answered and the doors He opened. Remember that even your ability to work, build, earn, and accomplish comes from Him.

And when your children ask why God matters so much to you, tell them the story! Tell them about the God who brought you here.

Psalm 77

Gary Pollard

I came across this passage today (Tuesday) and appreciated Asaph’s candor. This week will be

Psalm 77:

I cry out to God for help. I cry out to you, God; listen to me! My Lord, in my time of trouble I came to you. I reached out for you all night long. My soul refused to be comforted. I thought about you, God, and tried to tell you how I felt, but I could not. You would not let me sleep. I tried to say something, but I was too upset. I kept thinking about the past, about things that happened long ago. During the night, I thought about my songs. I talked to myself, trying to understand what is happening. I wondered, “Has our Lord rejected us forever? Will he ever accept us again? Is his love gone forever? Will he never again speak to us? Has God forgotten what mercy is? Has his compassion changed to anger?” Selah

Then I said to myself, “What bothers me most is the thought that God Most High has lost his power.” LORD, I remember what you have done. I remember the amazing things you did long ago. I think about those things. I think about them all the time.

God, all that you do is holy. No god is as great as you are. You are the God who does amazing things. You showed the nations your great power. By your power you saved your people, the descendants of Jacob and Joseph. Selah

God, the water saw you and became afraid. The deep water shook with fear. The thick clouds dropped their water. Thunder roared in the sky above. Your arrows of lightning flashed through the clouds. There were loud claps of thunder. Lightning lit up the world. The earth shook and trembled. You walked through the water and crossed the deep sea, but you left no footprints.

You led your people like sheep, using Moses and Aaron to guide them.

Adam And Eve’s Nine To Five

When botanists count trees in the Amazon today, they notice something strange. Useful, tasty trees—like the Brazil nut, acai palm, cacao (chocolate), and the ice-cream bean—are everywhere. In fact, they’re five times more common than they should be by natural standards.

Dale Pollard

For centuries, humans have been obsessed with finding the Garden of Eden. We’ve looked in the Middle East, mapped out ancient rivers, and generally envisioned it as a pristine, five-star resort planted by God where humans could lounge around eating grapes until someone ruined it. Adam and Eve weren’t designed for laziness, though. They were made to work and tend the garden (Gen. 2.15).

The pre-Columbian Amazon, the world’s most famous “wild” rainforest looks less like an untamed jungle and more like history’s largest, most successful grocery store.

20th-century scientists looked at the Amazon and basically said, “Wow, look at all that beautiful, untouched wilderness! Also, the soil is terrible, so there’s no way anyone could ever live here.”They assumed the natives of the past were just small; nomadic groups playing a permanent game of survival mode.

LiDAR (which uses lasers to look through the tree canopy) has revealed that the Amazon was actually packed with people. We’re talking about 8 to 10 million people living in sprawling “garden cities” connected by highways, canals, and bridges.

If you were to design a paradise, you’d probably want your favorite foods within  arm’s reach. That is exactly what the ancient Amazonians did.

When botanists count trees in the Amazon today, they notice something strange. Useful, tasty trees—like the Brazil nut, acai palm, cacao (chocolate), and the ice-cream bean—are everywhere. In fact, they’re five times more common than they should be by natural standards.

Those ancient folks had a shared philosophy. If a tree was useless or tasted like cardboard, they chopped it down. If it grew good nuts or fruit planted more of it and tended to them. The Amazon was basically a multi-tiered giant orchard.

Here’s the kicker. The rainforest soil is awful. Heavy rains wash away nutrients and leave behind acidic, yellow clay that kills most edible plants.

Somebody way back in the day figured out how to make a better version of dirt called Terra Preta (Amazonian Dark Earth). They mixed charcoal, ash, food scraps, and bones into the earth. This created a super-powered, pitch-black soil that doesn’t just hold nutrients—it regenerates itself over time. It’s so fertile that modern farmers still dig it up and use it today.

So, if this place was an engineered paradise of chocolate, nuts, and super-soil, why did it look so wild when European explorers arrived?

Somehow, an estimated 90% of the “gardens” caretakers died in a tragically short amount of time. Without millions of humans actively pruning, weeding, and managing the landscape, the jungle did what jungles do– it went wild. The garden became overgrown, swallowing the cities, canals, and highways. When explorers turned up hundreds of years later with machetes, they assumed nobody had ever been there before.

Adam and Eve had a job to do in the garden, and the Amazon is a neat case study for what that could have potentially looked like. God planted the garden, and they took care of it.

Saying Yes To Our Stewardship

Neal Pollard

There’s a word found less than 20 times in the New Testament that means “to entrust something to someone with the intention of preservation. This word can indicate putting something in front of someone…it can also be used of entrusting something to someone” (Lexham Theological Wordbook, np). While several of the occurrences have to do with setting food before someone to eat (Mark 8:6-7; Luke 9:16; Luke 10:8; Acts 16:34; 1 Corinthians 10:27), it has at least three other uses. They have to do with what we have been given to manage and care for. Ultimately, it’s correctly handling what comes from God or belongs to God. And it concerns way more than money!

Entrust. Jesus entrusted His spirit to God as He was dying (Luke 23:46). When elders were appointed, they were “commended to the Lord in whom they had believed” (Acts 14:23). Paul entrusted commands to Timothy to help him fight the good fight of faith (1 Timothy 1:18). Paul also wanted Timothy to entrust what Paul had taught him to faithful men who could teach others (2 Timothy 2:2). Saints who suffered could entrust their souls to a faithful Creator, no matter what happened to them (1 Peter 4:19). This is the idea of putting something into the hands of others to care for or protect it. We can put our souls in God’s care, but God puts the Word in our hands in order to help other people know that care and protection. Just as I can trust God to take care of me and to save me, God’s trusting me to faithfully share His message to all those people out there that He loves and cares about.

Demonstrate. When revealing about Paul’s work among the Jews in the synagogues of Thessalonica, Luke tells us that “for three Sabbaths [Paul] reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead” (Acts 17:2-3). Used in this context, the original word (παρατιθέμενος) means “to provide evidence for; stand as proof of; show by one’s behavior, attitude, or external attributes” (Brannan, 2020, np). What does it take to be able to give evidence for our beliefs? Time, work, and persistence. Paul drew his evidence from the Scriptures, suggesting the vital importance of always growing our base of sacred knowledge. In other words, we must become better Bible students. The better we know the Book, the better we can prove it. But noticing the definition, our life must also become a Bible for others to read. We can’t afford to nullify the truth of Scripture by a poorly-lived life. A synonym for παρατιθέμενος (paritathemenos), συνίστημι (synestemi), means to commend our lives for others to inspect or imitate (Romans 16:1; 2 Corinthians 3:1; 4:2; 6:4; 10:12; 12:11). Are we faithfully preparing ourselves to prove Christ, then faithfully presenting ourselves as evidence of what Christ looks like in His followers’ lives?

Propose. Twice, Matthew uses this word in the sense of bringing something forward for consideration. Both times, Jesus is setting forth parables (Matthew 13:24, 31). He is using these stories to help people understand what the Kingdom of heaven is like (the parable of the tares and the wheat and the parable of the mustard seed). Of course, Jesus is the source of truth (John 14:6). He originated it. But He gave it to us to share with others. He expects us to make His word lives in people’s lives. We do this by sharing His word with them, being thoughtful and prepared enough to make this practical and useful.

Paul told Corinth, “it is required of stewards that one be found trustworthy” (1 Corinthians 4:2b). Can we apply that principle to money? It’s certainly true that God gives us everything, and we should handle all resources responsibly. Yet, isn’t it interesting that none of the passages regarding stewardship in the New Testament is talking, contextually, about material things? Steward the gospel and steward your soul, then all of you will belong to God. Not only that, but you will give people much more than silver and gold! You will give them the opportunity to have everything God promises those who yield their lives to Him!

Pontius Pilate on the Couch, Part 3: “WhatI Have Written I Have Written

Brent Pollard

The Final Session: Closing Pilate’s File

We’ve reached our final session with Pontius Pilate. So far, our patient has proven to be an interesting case. In the previous two articles, we saw a man who questions the truth while repeatedly acknowledging it, holds significant political authority yet fears losing it, and knows Jesus is innocent while desperately trying to avoid the consequences of doing what he knows is right.

Seven Observations So Far

Seven observations now fill Pilate’s file. We have seen the skeptic, the political pragmatist, the man who resists pressure until it becomes personal, the increasingly fearful governor, the insecure authority figure, the morally conflicted judge, and, finally, the man strangely drawn to Jesus yet unable to find the courage to act on what he sees. Again and again, the same underlying weakness emerges: self-preservation ultimately matters more to Pilate than truth, justice, or conviction.

Three Traits That Complete the Profile

As Pilate settles onto the couch one last time, three traits complete our profile. We will see how he responds to personal risk when the crowd threatens his standing with Caesar, how he delivers profound irony without recognizing it, and how, after the chief priests force his hand, he expresses resentment through passive aggression. He may surrender, but he will not let them forget who holds the pen.

8. Pilate Is Highly Sensitive to Personal Risk

Eighth, Pilate is highly sensitive to personal risk. The crowd prevails not on the merits of its case, but by threatening Pilate’s relationship with Caesar. As noted, Pilate belonged to the Equestrian rank. Though likely from a wealthy family, he was below Rome’s Senatorial nobility and therefore had to begin in military service. His office as prefect, often compared to a governor, was more precisely a “military governor.” In many respects, he remained a soldier with authority. Lacking political backing in Rome, Pilate depended entirely on the emperor’s personal endorsement and a patron’s support.

Career and Security Over Justice: The Pull of Loss Aversion

Pilate could tolerate theological accusations, an angry crowd, an unusual prisoner, and uncertainty about Jesus’ supernatural origins. But he could not risk the controversy reaching Tiberius, which threatened his standing. Thus, his ultimate priorities may have been career and security over justice. Before condemning Pilate, however, we should recognize how universal his reasoning is: justice often seems abstract, while safety feels concrete. Humans appear wired for loss aversion.

Did Pilate Have Children? Protecting a Family Under Pressure

When I discussed this concept in my adult midweek Bible class, one brother made an excellent point: Pilate’s need to protect his family placed him between a rock and a hard place. Matthew says Pilate had a wife, but did he have children? For a middle-aged Roman equestrian of high political rank, children were socially expected to preserve the family’s inheritance and line. However, Roman historians rarely recorded the children of provincial equestrian officials unless they achieved notable military or senatorial success. Thus, we do not know whether Pilate had children, though saving his own neck may also have meant protecting his wife and children.

When Self-Preservation Becomes Disordered (1 Timothy 5.8)

Self-preservation does not necessarily indicate our fallen nature. The desire to live, protect one’s family, and steward one’s work is laudable. Paul writes that anyone who fails to provide for his household is worse than an infidel (1 Timothy 5.8). Solomon calls enjoying one’s labor God’s gift (Ecclesiastes 2.24; 3.12-13; 5.18). Thus, the fall did not create these desires; it distorted their order. The self remains necessary, but has become the center around which everything revolves. Consequently, when justice and safety conflict, safety prevails—not because of miscalculation, but because the self has risen to the top of the hierarchy.    

9. Pilate Speaks Irony Without Realizing It: “Behold, Your King!” (John 19.14)

Ninth, Pilate can be ironic without realizing it. Fearing accusations that he has allowed a man to claim kingship against Caesar, he nevertheless repeatedly calls Jesus the “King of the Jews,” eventually telling the mob: “Behold, your King!” (19.14). Though the title may mock the Jewish leaders, John’s narrative makes it profoundly ironic: Pilate speaks more truly than he understands. This reinforces his portrayal as a man standing before reality but interpreting it politically. He thinks he is manipulating the language of kingship; John presents him as unknowingly proclaiming it.

Pilate’s Central Contradiction: Knowledge Without Courage

Note Pilate’s central contradiction: he can distinguish right from wrong and repeatedly acknowledges what is right. His tragedy is not ignorance but a lack of moral courage to face the consequences. He is therefore a portrait of compromised conviction. His progression moves from skepticism to curiosity, to recognition of innocence, to uneasiness, to fear, to political pressure, and to capitulation.

The Crowd Changed Pilate’s Calculation, Not His Verdict

The crowd does not change Pilate’s view of Jesus. Nothing suggests he believes Jesus deserves death. Instead, the Jewish mob changes his calculation of the cost of doing what he knows is right. This may be the passage’s darkest psychological feature: Pilate condemns Jesus without believing him guilty. He embodies the danger of a functioning conscience subordinated to self-interest.

10. Bonus Trait: Pilate the Resentful and Passive-Aggressive

Tenth and last is our bonus characteristic. It is a bonus because I addressed this aspect of Pilate’s personality nearly a year ago in the article “What Is Truth? When We Know But Won’t Act.” Here, however, we will describe Pilate as psychologically resentful and passive-aggressive when his authority is successfully challenged.

Pilate can be pressured to surrender what he knows is right, but afterward seeks a smaller arena to prove he remains in charge. Hence, John 19.19-22.

Pilate also wrote an inscription and put it on the cross. It was written, “JESUS THE NAZARENE, THE KING OF THE JEWS.” Therefore many of the Jews read this inscription, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Latin and in Greek. So the chief priests of the Jews were saying to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews’; but that He said, ‘I am King of the Jews.’” Pilate answered, “What I have written I have written.”

Pilate’s Revenge in Writing: The Titulus on the Cross (John 19.19–22)

Pilate gets his revenge in writing. He caves, but not quietly. A Roman titulus had to state the crime. Rather than writing “Claimed to be King of the Jews” or “Treason against Caesar,” Pilate presents an unvarnished fact: “The King of the Jews.” This mocks the Jewish leadership more than Jesus. Forced to grant the execution, Pilate uses the sign to tell the passersby: this is your king, executed like a slave by Rome. Their victory becomes public humiliation. Written in Hebrew (Aramaic), Greek, and Latin, the insult was guaranteed to reach locals, Roman officials, and Passover visitors.

In doing so, Pilate forces those who pressured him to return and ask a favor: “Please change the wording.” This restores the power they had taken from him. Pilate responds with finality. His famous reply in verse 22 uses the Greek perfect tense—ho gegrapha, gegrapha: “What I have written stands.” No argument, discussion, or defense follows—only indirect hostility and refusal to engage. Afraid of Caesar, he cannot oppose the crucifixion, so he rejects this small symbolic request, ending the conversation. John uses Pilate’s character to make a theological point. The Jewish leaders want the sign to say Jesus claimed to be king, but Pilate unintentionally writes the truth: Jesus is the King of the Jews. His stubbornness makes that truth public throughout the city.

So Pilate is shown as a man too weak to do justice, but petty enough to get the last word.

Letting Pilate Off the Couch: A Warning, Not Just a Historical Figure

And with that, we can finally let Pontius Pilate off the couch. Our patient was skeptical, politically calculating, fearful, insecure about his authority, morally conflicted, fascinated by Jesus, sensitive to personal risk, unintentionally ironic, and resentful when challenged. Yet these traits reflect one central weakness: Pilate recognized what was true and right but repeatedly let self-preservation overrule conviction. That makes him more than an interesting historical figure; Pilate is a warning. We can stand near the Truth, speak with It, and defend It briefly, yet surrender It when obedience becomes costly. Pilate needed no more evidence—only courage.

Perhaps his time on our couch leaves us with this question: when knowing what is right comes at a price, will we merely recognize the truth—or have the courage to act?

Love Your Enemies

Carl Pollard

When we hear the word “enemy,” we tend to think of somebody extreme, like a terrorist, a criminal, or someone actively trying to destroy us. But most of us have enemies in a much more ordinary sense.

An enemy might be someone who embarrassed you, lied about you, betrayed your trust, or hurt your family. It might even be someone you secretly enjoy seeing fail because of how they’ve treated you.

Jesus gave us an incredibly difficult command, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44).

This command would be easier if Jesus just told us to leave our enemies alone. But He tells us to LOVE them! But the question is, what does that actually look like?

First, it means praying for people who have wronged us. While Jesus was being crucified, He prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34). Stephen prayed for the very people stoning him (Acts 7:60). It’s difficult to sincerely pray for someone’s salvation while secretly hoping for their destruction.

Second, it means loving people who don’t deserve it. Jesus reminds us that God sends sunlight and rain on the righteous and unrighteous alike (Matthew 5:45). God shows goodness every day to people who curse His name. Our natural instinct is to treat people according to how they treat us. Jesus teaches us to treat people according to the character of our Father.

Romans 5:10 says, “While we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son.” At one point, WE were the enemies! 

God didn’t wait for us to become lovable before demonstrating His love. Christ died for us while we were still sinners (Romans 5:8).

So here’s the question for you. Is there someone you would struggle to see God forgive? Someone whose salvation would bother you because of what they’ve done?

Sometimes our greatest struggle isn’t believing God will forgive us. It’s accepting that He’s willing to forgive them.

Jesus doesn’t ask us to call our enemies good. He asks us to do good to our enemies.

We love our enemies because our Father loved His.

Sometimes We Don’t Know As Much As We Think We Do

Gary Pollard

As recently as 1942, some medical textbooks still recommended bloodletting as a potential treatment for pneumonia.1 One hundred years earlier, the prevailing scientific wisdom was that disease spread through “bad air”, called miasma. This had real world consequences, with one in five women dying after childbirth because their doctors didn’t wash their hands. Ignaz Semmelweis recommended that doctors wash their hands with a chlorinated lime solution, and the mortality rate dropped from 20% to less than 1%. Semmelweis was ridiculed by the scientific mainstream because he couldn’t demonstrate why his method worked. He was fired from his job and was eventually beaten to death by guards in an asylum. In 1901, Rear Admiral George Melville wrote in The North American Review, “A calm surveying of the field of science…forces the conclusion that the unassisted navigation of the air is an impossibility.”2 Two months before the Wright brothers successfully flew their plane, the New York Times said that a flying machine might be built if mathematicians and engineers worked together continuously for one to ten million years. Until very recently, mainstream astrophysicists asserted that it was impossible for charge separation to exist at scale in space. Hannes Alfvén, who won the Nobel Prize in Physics (1970), argued that large-scale electrical currents could still flow and create localized structures (double layers). He was dismissed entirely, but was later vindicated.3

There are many other examples of prevailing wisdom attacking revolutionary ideas and their proponents, only to be later found flatly wrong.4 Since new discoveries have ousted erroneous ways of thinking so many times historically, why have we not learned from the blunders of our predecessors? History views the blindly skeptical — the dogmatic naysayers — as narrow-minded and foolish for good reason. The skeptics at the time had, in their view, good reason for being skeptical. They had meticulously observed phenomena, performed experiments, created mathematical proofs, and had, to some degree or another, reached consensus. They were still wrong! So why does humanity still not learn from the past? I believe there are a few reasons. 

  1. Consensus can be a powerful tool for intellectual enslavement when inflexible. If everyone agrees, it must be true. I remember being told in school, “If you come up with an interpretation that no one else has put forward, you’re probably wrong.” Theologians are not immune to the blindness consensus can cause. 
  2. Pride. Our ideas are our intellectual offspring. Acceptance of an idea that one may have dedicated their entire career to developing is, rightly so, a point of pride. To have an idea disproved is both painful and devaluing. Also in this category is the fact that many breakthroughs happen outside of their respective fields.5 Revolutionary breakthroughs in a specific field should come from that field. They’re the experts, after all. But 1 and 2 can and do stagnate progress. Humility is critical to preventing stagnation in any field. 
  3. Interpretation. We bring our own experiences and biases to every problem. So much of reality is invisible to our eyes, and we have to rely on proxy data and technological assistance. For example, scripture often uses symbolism to bring ineffable things down to a level we can process. Symbolism is designed to speak to our intuition, not necessarily to our analytical mind, but we have to start somewhere to make sense of the symbols. Exegesis can be helpful, but is only step one. We must interpret what we see, and our interpretation is influenced heavily by our priors. This is true both in religion and in science (which are not truly separate, but do have different objectives) — we bring some kind of framework to the problem, and our interpretations can only be as good as the assumptions they’re built on. This category probably affects us more than any other because it is immune to motive. A heart of gold, tireless work ethic, and intellectual humility can still lead to an erroneous interpretation. 
  4. Worldview. This probably should be a subcategory under 3. What we aim at and what we believe fundamentally affects our interpretation. A catastrophist and gradualist looking at the same problem come away with radically different results. Our worldview is the sum total of our assumptions, experiences, and beliefs. In many ways, our worldview is what we think we know. 

These obstacles all have something in common (with a provision): they can be easily kept in check by adopting the teachings of Christ. For 1, we understand that the wisdom of an age is far from infallible. For 2, we believe that pride is incompatible with godliness. The provision falls under 3: some things are not up for interpretation (like the deity and humanity of Jesus, his resurrection, the existence of God), but dogmatism can be deadly.6 We must be open to the possibility that anything not overtly incompatible with the fundamental, transparent truths of scripture is potentially valid. Finally, for 4, our worldview is ideally built around an acknowledgement of a divine creator, our own fallibility, the supremacy of truth, and genuine love for other people. Putting others above self may not advance our own aims in the short term, but certainly avoids stagnating a field for centuries. There is so much left to solve, cure, fix, discover, and improve — and nothing will improve the human condition more than adopting the mind of Christ in everything we attempt. 

1 Thomas, D.P. (2014) The demise of bloodletting. The journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edingburgh, 44(1), 72-77. https://doi.org/10.4997/JRCPE.2014.117
2 Melville, George W. (1901) The engineer and the problem of aërial navigation. The North American Review, 173(541), 820. He also said, “The successful flying machine, to spring full-fledged from the ashes of present failure, would have to be a Phoenix.”
3 Data from Transit 5E-11 (1966), Triad (1973), ESA’s Swarm fleet, Sweden’s Viking (1986) and Freja (1992), NASA’s Fast Auroral Snapshot satellite (1996), and NASA’s Juno (2016-) flew through Jupiter’s polar magnetosphere. If charge systems in space are impossible, they should only exist near Earth; they were found to be universal.
4 Meteorites originating from space was considered impossible by the mainstream (including the French Academy of Sciences and famous figures like Thomas Jefferson); only “uneducated peasants” believed that rocks could fall from space. In 1803, thousands of meteorites fell over L’Aigle, France in broad daylight. Fusion was considered impossible by the scientific establishment — Einstein himself said in 1932, “…[T]here is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. That would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.” Even more examples can be found in soft science fields like archaeology and geology.
5 e.g. The laws of heredity and genetics were discovered by Augustinian friar and monk Gregor Mendel; Uranus was discovered by a professional musician (William Herschel) whose hobby was astronomy; Microbiology/microscopy was pioneered by a fabric merchant (Antonie van Leeuwenhoek); The longitude problem — which science at the time said could only be solved with advanced math and astronomy — was solved by uneducated carpenter and self-taught clockmaker John Harrison. There are many, many other examples of this, both modern and historic.
6 I highly recommend reading the contents of the Edict of Thessalonica (AD 380), its consequences, its targets, and its outcomes. It signaled the death of primitive Christianity, and we still strongly feel its effects today.



The Bible And Magic

Dale Pollard

The Bible is surprisingly full of strange references to divination, sorcery, and attempts to communicate with the supernatural.

One of the strangest appears in Acts 19. When Paul preached in Ephesus, people who had practiced magical arts brought their books together and burned them publicly. Luke says the value of the books came to 50,000 silver pieces (Acts 19.19).

These weren’t ordinary books. Ephesus was famous throughout the ancient world for magical formulas and amulets known as the “Ephesian letters.” Ancient writers describe these as combinations of mysterious words and symbols believed to provide supernatural protection or have other magical effects.

Then there is an even stranger passage in Hosea 4.12:

“My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their staff speaks to them.”

The Hebrew word translated “staff” refers to a rod or piece of wood used for divination. Old Christian commentators, Cyril of Alexandria and Theophylact, described a practice in which two sticks were erected and a charm was spoken; the direction in which they fell was interpreted as an answer. Later commentators called this rhabdomancy—divination by rods.

It wasn’t the only form of forbidden supernatural practice, though. Deuteronomy 18.10–12 lists divination, interpreting omens, sorcery, spellcasting, consulting mediums, and communicating with the dead. 1 Samuel 28 then gives one of the Bible’s most infamous examples. Saul visits the medium of Endor and asks her to summon the deceased prophet Samuel.

The Bible even portrays magical practitioners appearing to accomplish supernatural signs. Pharaoh’s magicians imitate some of Moses’ miracles in Exodus 7–8, while Simon the Magician amazes people in Acts 8, and Elymas the sorcerer opposes Paul in Acts 13.

The biblical writers knew the ancient world was filled with people who claimed to manipulate, discover, or communicate with hidden powers—and they repeatedly warned Israel and the early Christians not to seek any power that wasn’t from God.

Singing With The Understanding: “Whispering Hope”

Neal Pollard

English is a living language and poetic wording requires interpretation. When we come to interpret poetic words written long ago, we can easily find ourselves failing to understand meaning. This is true of our worship in song, as we sing words that we may fail to comprehend. Because we are worshipping God, we want to correct this whenever necessary.

The hymn, Whispering Hope, is soft and sentimental, having a beautiful tune that makes a favorite almost 160 years after it was written. Septimus Winner, the author of the song, is probably as well known for children’s songs like Listen To The Mockingbird and Oh Where, Oh Where Has My Little Dog Gone? A song that would later become a bluegrass standard, What Is Home Without A Mother, was also a Winner song.

Winner writes in the poetic style of the 19th Century for the song we sometimes sing in church. The first verse personifies hope with these eloquent words: “Soft as the voice of an angel, breathing a lesson unheard, hope with a gentle persuasion, whispers her comforting word.” This seems to suggest that, at times, hope is a feeling without words that can grow and move us to trust the One who gives it. What encouragement can we have faith in? The message of hope: “Wait till the darkness is over, wait till the tempest is done. Hope for the sunshine tomorrow, after the shower is done.” Things may be going badly now, but wait and hope. Things will get better.

This same mindset of waiting and trusting is depicted in the second verse, if the lyrics are complicated. Winner writes, “If, in the dusk of the twilight, dim be the region afar, will not the deepening darkness, brighten the glimmering star? Then when the night is upon us, why should the heart sink away? When the dark midnight is over, watch for the breaking of day.” The entire verse pictures how, when we are suffering, struggling, or enduring something difficult, it can serve to help us see the promises of hope that will be realized whether after the trial or at the very end. Hope will not disappoint (cf. Romans 5:5).

The last verse includes some words we don’t use or may struggle to understand. It begins with a clear allusion to Hebrews 6:19: “Hope, as an anchor so steadfast, rends (rips or tears, NP) the dark veil for the soul.” The latter phrase makes me think of what happened to the temple curtain separating the holy place and most holy place when Jesus died on the cross (see Matthew 27:51). Hope not only anchors us, but through it God shows His power. “Whither (where, NP) the Master has entered, robbing the grave of its goal.” We have hope because death has been defeated (1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Hebrews 2:14-15). “Come then, O come, glad fruition (the realization of hope, NP), come to my sad weary heart; come, O thou blest hope of glory, never, O never depart.” This seems to be asking, “Please let my hope be fulfilled and never let me lose that hope.”

When we are struggling with temptations, trials, difficulties, and loss, hope is elusive and hard to find. This song urges us to persist and trust that this hope will be realized. This is reinforced in the simple refrain: “Whispering hope, oh how welcome thy voice, making my heart in its sorrow rejoice.” While it is notable to me that there is no mention of God, Christ, or the Bible, in Esther-like fashion, it pictures hope as something tangible and trustworthy. It calls us to embrace it. Armed with the promises of Scripture, we should always be reminded to choose hope over doubt when in the midst of spiritual storms.

Pontius Pilate on the Couch, Part 2: Fear, Authority, and Moral Conflict in John 19

Brent Pollard

Returning to Pilate’s Psychological Profile

As we return to our psychoanalysis of Pilate, our patient has already given us quite a bit to work with. In the previous article, we saw that Pilate was skeptical about truth, politically pragmatic, and capable of resisting pressure—but only for so long. He could recognize what was right and even defend it temporarily, yet he lacked the fortitude to hold his position once the consequences became personal.

The examination now becomes more revealing. As Pilate’s interaction with Jesus progresses, the cracks in his composure become more evident. His fear grows, and he appears uncomfortable when his authority is challenged. He also faces a moral dilemma, knowing Jesus is innocent but still pondering how to satisfy His accusers. Interestingly, Pilate seems somewhat drawn to Jesus, repeatedly returning to Him, questioning Him, and seeking a way out. However, the curiosity, respect, or unease that Jesus evokes in Pilate never develops into true courage.

Four New Observations About Pilate

With Pilate back on the couch, we will add four more observations to his psychological profile: his growing fear, his sensitivity to authority, his moral conflict, and his fascination with Jesus that stops just short of conviction.

4. Pilate’s Growing Fear (John 19.7–8)

Fourth in our series, we note that Pilate is increasingly fearful as his encounter with Jesus develops. If there is one thing to be said about the advantage of fear, it is that it heightens one’s desire for self-preservation. I didn’t say it was a positive thing, but a natural outcome. When a person is filled with fear, things like moral convictions and resoluteness tend to melt away if it means saving one’s own neck. Is there any surprise that the antidote to fear is love, which casts fear away (1 John 4.18)?

Why Love Casts Out Fear (1 John 4.18)

When we talk about love, it is not man’s imperfect love, which the Greeks observed existed in many forms beyond what God shows. When we say that love casts out fear, we refer to God’s agape love for mankind. God’s love removes our fear of punishment, or we might say, the consequences. Naturally, this can only result through one’s obedience to God and subsequent relationship with Him. Pilate lacks this. Therefore, he fears what will happen if this situation continues spiraling out of control.

What Triggered Pilate’s Fear? The Son of God and a Wife’s Dream

What precipitated Pilate’s fear? He heard the Jews say that Jesus made Himself out to be the Son of God (John 19.7-8). To Pilate, it was not unheard of for a deity to cavort with human women and produce offspring. Jupiter had famous demigod sons like Hercules, Bacchus, and Perseus. Matthew heightens our understanding of Pilate’s superstition by introducing us to his wife, whose dreams about Jesus have troubled her and have caused her to counsel her husband to have nothing to do with Him (Matthew 27.19).

“Where Are You From?” Pilate Loses His Sense of Control (John 19.9)

What if the father of Jesus, a god, were to take vengeance for his son? This was no small matter for Pilate. The situation becomes reversed. The confident Pilate, who felt he held all the power, begins to feel more like he’s powerless. Pilate’s question, “Where are You from?” (19.9), suggests that Jesus is no longer merely another troublesome Jewish defendant.

Jesus Answers Pilate’s Fear (John 19.11)

Jesus’ reply to this fear is worth noting as well. Pilate urges Jesus to be less passive in the process, to speak up and advocate for Himself more. Pilate tells Jesus that he has power over Him in this situation. Jesus replies that Pilate would not have that power unless it had been granted to him from above (John 19.11). Furthermore, Jesus assures Pilate that the one who delivered Him to the Roman authorities had committed the greater sin. Jesus’ words may have given Pilate enough leeway to carry out the consequences of his own moral cowardice. Nevertheless, we see that Pilate redoubles his efforts to release Jesus out of fear of Jesus’ potential provenance (John 19.12).

5. Pilate Is Uncomfortable When His Authority Is Challenged (John 19.10)

Fifth, Pilate is uncomfortable when his authority is challenged. We have already observed that Pilate reminds Jesus that he has power over Him (John 19.10). In light of his fear, Pilate may have needed to state this to remind himself who is supposed to be in control of the situation. Since Jesus reminds Pilate that his culpability is less than that of those who deliver Him to the Romans, the prefect does not become angry but rather uncomfortable. Pilate therefore seems to possess an externally powerful yet internally insecure sense of authority.

The Insecure Authority of a Roman Provincial Governor

This insecurity aligns with the socio-political realities of a middle-tier Equestrian magistrate governing an unstable province. Lacking senatorial status, a minor provincial governor like Pontius Pilate relied entirely on imperial favor to survive. When the crowd invokes his loyalty to Caesar (John 19.12), they weaponize his political vulnerability. Furthermore, while Pilate likely shared the typical Roman disdain for local “barbarian” customs, he was routinely outmaneuvered by provincial leaders who exploited the limits of his administrative authority. His outward displays of force masked the fragile reality of a bureaucrat trapped between imperial paranoia and local resistance.

6. Pilate Is Morally Conflicted: Justice vs. Self-Preservation

Sixth, Pilate is morally conflicted. Perhaps the strongest feature of Pilate’s psychology is cognitive and moral dissonance. Pilate knows that Jesus is innocent. Yet, ultimately, he orders the crucifixion of this innocent Man. Pilate spends much of our pericope trying to reconcile two incompatible goals: doing what is just and protecting his fragile political position. His various maneuvers—the prisoner’s release, trying to push Jesus off onto Herod (see Luke’s Gospel), the scourging, presenting Jesus to the crowd, repeatedly declaring Him innocent—can be read as attempts to avoid choosing between the two. But eventually Pilate chooses security over justice.

Pilate’s Failure and the Divine Mandate of Civil Authority (Romans 13.1–5)

This moral failure is heightened when viewed in light of the divine mandate for civil authority. As Paul later notes, government is ordained by God to bear the sword against evil and to execute justice (Romans 13.1–5). Pilate held genuine, God-delegated authority (John 19.11), so his responsibility was real and his choices were unforced. God did not micromanage Pilate’s mind or override his free will; rather, in His foreknowledge, God willed to accomplish redemption through Pilate’s freely chosen compromise. Pilate’s tragedy is that, despite the divine mandate to execute justice, he instead weaponized his office to protect himself.

7. Pilate Is Drawn to Jesus but Stops Short of Conviction

Seventh, Pilate is drawn to Jesus but not enough to act courageously. Pilate repeatedly returns to the Praetorium to speak with Jesus. The dialogue grows increasingly personal. He asks Jesus about kingship, truth, His origin, and authority. Pilate does not treat Jesus as a common criminal but seems genuinely fascinated—and at times deeply unsettled—by Him. This fascination peaks when Pilate hears that Jesus claims a divine origin, evoking awe and pagan apprehension in the prefect (John 19.7–8).

“What Is Truth?” The Limits of Pilate’s Curiosity (John 18.38)

Yet Pilate’s famous dismissive query, “What is truth?” (John 18.38), reveals the limits of his curiosity. He embodies the pragmatic cynicism of the Roman ruling class, in which truth is treated as an abstract luxury subordinate to political order. Intellectual interest, emotional disturbance, and superstitious dread never mature into moral commitment. Pilate comes unusually close to the Truth—standing inches from It—without ever submitting to It, demonstrating that fascination with Christ without conviction yields the same outcome as outright opposition.

Pilate’s Diagnosis So Far—and What the Final Installment Holds

At this point, our patient has spent quite a while on the couch, and the diagnosis—if we may use that word loosely—is becoming clearer. Pilate is not a man who cannot see the truth; he is a man who repeatedly sees it and then seeks to avoid what it demands of him. Fear weakens him, challenges to his authority unsettle him, moral conflict paralyzes him, and even his fascination with Jesus cannot produce the courage needed to do what he knows is right. Yet John still has more to reveal. In the final installment, we will complete Pilate’s psychological profile with the remaining observations and consider what his behavior teaches us about the dangers of holding authority, recognizing truth, and even standing face-to-face with Christ while still allowing self-preservation to have the final word.

Does God Expect Christians To Attend Every Church Service?

Carl Pollard

Is it a sin to miss Wednesday night Bible study? What about Sunday evening? Does God expect a Christian to be present every single time the church building is open?

Those questions can make people uncomfortable because Christians sometimes answer them in one of two extremes.

One extreme says, “If the doors are open, you better be there.” The other says, “Church attendance really doesn’t matter as long as I believe in Jesus.”

Neither approach tells the whole story.

Hebrews 10:24–25 says, “And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together… but encouraging one another.”

God clearly expects Christians to assemble. Gathering with the church isn’t an optional extra for especially dedicated Christians. It’s part of belonging to the body of Christ. The early church devoted themselves to fellowship, worship, teaching, and being together (Acts 2:42–47).

At the same time, the Bible never gives a command saying, “Thou shalt attend Sunday morning, Sunday evening, and Wednesday evening.” Those particular meeting times are arrangements congregations have made for worship, study, encouragement, and spiritual growth.

But that doesn’t mean those times are meaningless.

In a congregation with elders, those men have been entrusted with the spiritual care of the flock. Hebrews 13:17 says they are “keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account.” When elders choose regular times for the church to worship, study, and encourage one another, they’re doing so as shepherds trying to help the congregation grow spiritually.

That doesn’t mean every absence is sinful or that elders have the authority to invent new laws for Christians. But it should make us hesitate before treating the times they’ve set aside for our spiritual good as unimportant.

So maybe we’ve sometimes asked the wrong question.

Instead of asking, “How many services can I miss before I’m sinning?” perhaps we should ask, “Why am I looking for reasons to stay away from people God has called me to love and from opportunities my spiritual shepherds have provided for my growth?”

There are legitimate reasons Christians sometimes cannot assemble. Sickness happens. Work responsibilities happen. Emergencies happen. Caring for someone may keep us home. Scripture doesn’t portray God as keeping an attendance sheet and condemning someone because circumstances prevented them from being present.

But there’s a difference between being unable to assemble and simply not valuing the assembly.

That’s where Hebrews 10 challenges us.

Notice that the passage isn’t merely about what I get from attending. We assemble to “stir up one another” and “encourage one another.” When I’m absent, the question isn’t only, “What did I miss?” It’s also, “Who missed the encouragement I could have given?” There are few things more discouraging as a preacher than an empty room. But imagine how God feels when we put more value on secular life than spiritual growth and fellowship. 

Christians shouldn’t need a rule specifying the minimum number of services required.

When you love your church family, respect the shepherds watching over your soul, and genuinely want to grow, you’ll want to be there whenever you reasonably can.

The goal isn’t perfect attendance. The goal is a heart that values the church, values spiritual growth, and values the people Jesus died to make your family.

First Day

Gary Pollard

Many of the details present in Moses’s creation account are found in creation stories the world over: the garden placed in the east (or north), an idyllic paradise, a garden surrounded by four rivers which are given terrestrial names, God among man, and some others we won’t talk about here. The difference between Moses’s account and the ones found everywhere else is brevity (to say nothing of inspiration). He does not embellish or overly personify the forces involved in creation. To the student of ancient symbolism and cosmology, Moses’s account is extremely information-dense and suggests that he knew far more than he let on! I will let his account speak for itself: 

This is the account of the creation of the heavens and the earth. When the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, neither wild plants nor grains were growing on the earth. For the Lord God had not yet sent rain to water the earth, and there were no people to cultivate the soil. Instead, springs came up from the ground and watered all the land. Then the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground. He breathed the breath of life into the man’s nostrils, and the man became a living person.

Then the Lord God planted a garden in Eden in the east, and there he placed the man he had made. The Lord God made all sorts of trees grow up from the ground—trees that were beautiful and that produced delicious fruit. In the middle of the garden he placed the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

A river flowed from the land of Eden, watering the garden and then dividing into four branches. The first branch, called the Pishon, flowed around the entire land of Havilah, where gold is found. The gold of that land is exceptionally pure; aromatic resin and onyx stone are also found there. The second branch, called the Gihon, flowed around the entire land of Cush. The third branch, called the Tigris, flowed east of the land of Asshur. The fourth branch is called the Euphrates. The Lord God placed the man in the Garden of Eden to tend and watch over it. But the Lord God warned him, “You may freely eat the fruit of every tree in the garden—except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die.” 

Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is just right for him.” So the Lord God formed from the ground all the wild animals and all the birds of the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would call them, and the man chose a name for each one. He gave names to all the livestock, all the birds of the sky, and all the wild animals. But still there was no helper just right for him. So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep. While the man slept, the Lord God took out one of the man’s ribs and closed up the opening. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib, and he brought her to the man. “At last!” the man exclaimed. “This one is bone from my bone, and flesh from my flesh! She will be called ‘woman,’ because she was taken from ‘man.’ ” This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one. Now the man and his wife were both naked, but they felt no shame.

WHEN ANGELS GO TO WAR

Dale Pollard

“And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—“ Jude 6

The Bible indicates a battle between Satan and his rebellious followers in several key passages. The reason for this spiritual spat is not given to us in great detail, but we are told that it began after they abandoned their rightful habitation (Jude 6). While many have speculated as to what and how this happened, we simply aren’t told. Some have also made the argument that this event took place after the Creation of the world, but this is also not certain. Genesis 2:1 says, “the heavens and the earth were completed and all their hosts.” While that may seem to clearly indicate that angels must have been created alongside everything else, Job 38:7 states that angels gave “shouts of joy” after the creation of the stars.

The spiritual conflict ended with Satan and his apostate followers cast from the heavenly realm (2 Peter 2.4, Rev. 12.14, Jude) just before, it seems, the creation of earth. We’re also told that the Archangel Michael took a significant role in Satan’s defeat and expulsion. 

At one time, Satan seems to have been a high-ranking Angel who thought he stood a chance against his very Creator. That’s a ridiculous thought. The application of this historical (pre-historical?) event is evident. Nobody, whether angel or man, can win against God’s will. It’s mind boggling to imagine taking on God Almighty in some kind of battle, yet Paul tells us in Romans five that we were enemies of God at one point while living in sin and sinners are currently waging a war with God. We should let that long ago battle in the heavenly realm be a reminder to us that God always wins the war.

Written A While Back, But Still Relevant…

What Would Our Slogan Be?

WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT THE PEOPLE OF SODOM

Neal Pollard

Sodom is mentioned 48 times in the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. What took place there when Lot was a resident was so reprehensible that God punished it by destroying that city as well as three other cities in the entire plain, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim (Deuteronomy 29:23). While there seems to have been multiple sin problems there, chief among them was sexual immorality. Lot shelters two angels in his house (Genesis 19:1-3), angels that appeared to the “the men of the city” to be “men” (Genesis 19:4-5). Moses chronicles the incident, recording the demand of the men of Sodom, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them” (Genesis 19:4, NIV). The word “sodomy” gets its name from this city and this incident. Lot labels their intent “wicked” (vs. 6) and it triggers the angels’ call for Lot and his family to leave the city before God destroyed it (vs. 12-13). So it happens (vs. 24-25). 

But that is not the end of the Bible’s remarks about this wicked city. It would become a byword for sin in subsequent generations. Consider what we read elsewhere, as Sodom either symbolizes or illustrates unrighteousness.

  • Likened to poison and bitterness (Deuteronomy 32:32).
  • Likened to total desolation (Isaiah 1:7,9; Romans 9:29).
  • Illustrates shameless sin and evil (Isaiah 3:9). 
  • Serves as illustration of the total overthrow of Babylon (Isaiah 13:19).
  • Symbolizes unrepentant sexual sin (Jeremiah 23:14).
  • Illustrates total destruction (Jeremiah 40:18; 50:40).
  • Judah’s sudden conquering by Babylon is likened to how Sodom “was overthrown in a moment” (Lamentations 4:6).
  • Serves as a repeated metaphor for rebellious Israel and Judah (Ezekiel 16:46-49).
  • Used to illustration the sins of arrogance, careless ease, and lack of compassion (Ezekiel 16:49-56).
  • Used to illustrate total apostasy (Amos 4:11).
  • Illustrates perpetual desolation (Zephaniah 2:9).
  • Implies their peril on Judgment Day (Matthew 10:15; cf. 11:23-24; Luke 10:12).
  • Alludes to their destruction as an illustration of ultimate judgment (Luke 17:29).
  • Used to illustrate condemnation due to ungodliness (2 Peter 2:9).
  • Identified as those who “indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh” and received eternal fire as a warning to the disobedient in Jude’s audience (Jude 7).
  • Symbolize those who engage in egregious sin (Revelation 11:8).

Was what the men of Sodom guilty of more horrific and appalling than those who engaged in other spiritual rebellion or even other sexual sins? Not at all. However, one has to do an extraordinary amount of spiritual gymnastics to avoid the conclusion that what happened in Sodom displeased God. God’s response harmonizes with all His Word has to say on the subject of homosexuality (Leviticus 18:22; 20:13; Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10). 

God’s message for anyone and everyone struggling with sin is that grace is available (Titus 2:11). God desires to forgive and save (1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9). At the same time, grace is not a cover for unrepentant sin (Romans 6:1-2; Jude 4). Reconciliation comes when one turns away from sin and turns to God (Colossians 1:19-23). It’s what God hoped for Sodom (Genesis 18:20-33), but Sodom did not want this for themselves. The inhabitants of this ancient city serve as a warning to us that rebellion against God’s will not end well those who chose to engage in it. It is a timeless, if ancient, principle. 

Putting Pilate on the Couch: A Psychological Profile from John 18-19 (Part One)

Brent Pollard

I would be remiss not to acknowledge that this article is published on the 25th anniversary of the 9/11 tragedy. Without further commentary, I will briefly note that I am amazed by the changes I’ve seen over the past 25 years since this brazen attack. Sadly, little of it has been for the better. Our thoughts go out to the families still grieving their lost loved ones, and our prayers are for the peace that comes when we finally learn to treat others as we would have them treat us (Matthew 7.12).

Putting Pontius Pilate on the Couch

Over the next few weeks, we will put Pontius Pilate on the couch as we “psychoanalyze” him based on John 18.28-19.16. John gives us the most complete picture of Pilate among the Gospels. It helps that Jesus’ trial before Pilate reads less like a formal court proceeding and more like a discussion between two parties. Pilate speaks his mind, revealing his heart.

What does this discussion reveal about Pilate? It shows he is intellectually skeptical, politically strategic, emotionally restless, and principally driven by self-preservation. Although we can’t provide a clinical diagnosis without direct communication with him, the discussion offers sufficient behavioral evidence to create a detailed nine-point character profile. Additionally, we’ll include a tenth bonus point at the end, outside our main excerpt, to further complete Pilate’s profile.

1. Pilate the Skeptic: “What is Truth?” (John 18.38)

Initially, Pilate shows skepticism and cynicism toward the concept of absolute truth (John 18.38). When asked whether He is a king, Jesus responds that He is the King of those who listen to the truth. Pilate then asks the classic question: “What is truth?” Does Pilate’s question suggest a philosophical pondering? More likely, it indicates that Pilate views truth as a practical matter. As a politician, he is familiar with competing claims, propaganda, and self-interest. In his perspective, truth is largely subjective.

Pilate, Postmodernism, and the Shift to Metamodernism

Pilate foreshadowed postmodernism long before the movement became academically recognized. He believed that truth was often difficult to pin down, subjective, or irrelevant to everyday life. Rejecting the idea of a single, absolute Truth guiding human action, he understood that those in power tend to shape what people accept as true to control others. His quick departure after posing the question indicates he viewed it as an abstract game of language. His skepticism, formed by living in a diverse empire, reflects exposure to various disparate viewpoints. This attitude is consistent with postmodernism, which also argues that no single group holds the complete truth, given the cultural and ideological diversity involved.

Yes, Pilate would feel comfortable in early 21st-century America, even if his mindset was in decline. Rest assured, we are no longer living in a postmodern world. We have transitioned to metamodernism, which holds that absolute truth exists, but none of us can truly know it. Though this is still an unfortunate conclusion, it is an advancement from rejecting absolute truth. As Christians, isn’t it reassuring to read passages like John 17.17? Isn’t it heartening to know that we can know the truth, and it will set us free (John 8.32; 1 John 5.13)?

The Irony: Seeing the Truth but Refusing to Act

But there is an irony. Despite his skepticism about truth, Pilate can reach factual conclusions, and he does so about Jesus: He is not guilty, especially of anything worthy of death (John 18.38; 19.4,6). Pilate’s problem is similar to that of many people today. Although he sees the truth, he is unwilling to act on it.

2. Pilate the Political Pragmatist (John 18.33)

Secondly, Pilate is pragmatic and politically minded, immediately politicizing the situation by asking, “Are You the King of the Jews?” (John 18.33). He is unconcerned with Jewish theological disputes, instead viewing Jesus as a possible political threat to Roman rule. This mindset mirrors 21st-century America, where politics regularly overshadows issues. For instance, social media users frequently politicize posts—an innocuous meme may prompt comments about Presidents Trump or Biden that are unrelated to the original post.

NIH research shows online political arguments are often made by people who are naturally hostile and enjoy toxicity. Pilate stands out: he doesn’t enjoy political toxicity, but politics matter to his career. Like keyboard warriors, he’s quick to judge your political stance before anything else—his first question: ally or enemy? It’s the 1st-century Roman version of “are you a red or blue stater?”

Pilate’s pragmatism is evident in his attempt to resolve the “Jesus problem” by invoking the custom of the Passover prisoner (John 18.39). Instead of dismissing charges against an innocent man, he seeks a political way to release Jesus without confronting the accusers, revealing his political-mindedness and preference for maneuvering in place of confrontation.

3. Pilate Resists Pressure—Until It Turns Personal (John 19.12)

Third, Pilate can resist initial pressure but not sustained pressure. John records three times that he publicly declares he finds no fault in Jesus. He presents Jesus after scourging, hoping punishment short of execution will satisfy them (19.4–5). When told that Jesus might be the son of a god, John says Pilate repeatedly tried to release Jesus (19.12). So, Pilate isn’t immediately submissive. He resists crowd pressure and shows some concern for justice—up to a point.

But that resistance had limits. Once the crowd found the right lever—Caesar (19.12)—Pilate crumpled. The threat was no longer only disorder in Jerusalem; now Pilate’s position was at risk. This was a turning point, not unprecedented. Previously, Pilate hung shields bearing Tiberius’ image from Herod’s castle, which the Jews saw as idolatry. The Jews complained directly to Tiberius, who ordered Pilate to remove the shields and take them to Caesarea Maritima. Assuming Jesus’ crucifixion was in 33 AD, the “shields incident” occurred in 31 or 32 AD, so Pilate was vulnerable and cautious about further repercussions.

Pilate and Samson: When Persistence Wears a Man Down

Again, Pilate could find himself at home in the 21st century. Yet, this time Pilate reminds us of Judge Samson. After Samson took up with Delilah, her intentions became obvious. Every time she nagged him about his strength, he’d awaken to find she had done the very thing he falsely confided would rob him of his strength. Even so, Samson stayed with her. But her nagging wore him down, and he revealed the truth (Judges 16.15ff). We know the rest of that story from Sunday School. In Samson’s case, it led to humiliation. However, Jesus showed how to use “nagging” constructively to have prayers answered (Luke 18.1-8).

Three Kinds of Nagging: Delilah, the Widow, and the Chief Priests

This is an aside from Pilate’s psychological profile, but it is beneficial nonetheless. What is the difference in the types of nagging we have seen between the Jews, Delilah, and the widow in Luke 18? Examining the original language reveals that Delilah’s nagging was alats (Judges 16.16), meaning relentless psychological pressure, like an anaconda slowly constricting around its prey, suffocating Samson.

The persistent widow’s nagging was hypōpiazō(Luke 18.5). This is a Greek boxing term meaning “to strike under the eye” or to wear down an opponent. It is relentless, targeted advocacy. It is positive because she was seeking justice, one of the things God requires of us (Micah 6.8).

Lastly, the chief priests’ nagging persistence is the Greek epikeimai (Luke 23.23), meaning they exerted great pressure. Thayer says it can figuratively describe the pressure of a violent tempest, similar to the millibars or hectopascals used for hurricanes, denoting a storm’s destructive potential. Luke also states they were prevailing (kataschyo) against Pilate, meaning to overpower. Pilate’s words were drowned out as they shouted over him until he capitulated.

Thus, Pilate did stand, but he could not withstand. The sustained campaign by the chief priests and the multitude, whipped into a frenzy, wore down Pilate’s resistance.

Pilate’s Profile Thus Far—And What Comes Next

Our patient on the couch has proved quite complicated. Pilate is skeptical, practical, political, stubborn—resisting pressure until it becomes personal. He can stand temporarily but cannot sustain it long-term. This might be the point where the analyst says, “Interesting.” But John keeps providing material for Pilate’s file. As the trial goes on, Pilate’s inner turmoil—fear, frustration, wounded pride, and distress—emerges more clearly. In the next article, we will revisit Pilate on the couch to explore what happens when a man knows what’s right but lacks the courage to act.