Simon of Cyrene

from Google Images

I wonder if it is possible to know a story so well that one simply misses many of the details? I know I often come to see things differently even after many sessions of reading, discussion and study. Similar things are done inadvertently during ordinary conversation. We may be speaking with someone, but, without waiting for the full story, we jump to the wrong conclusion, only to be corrected by the speaker. Understanding becomes even more problematic when someone we trust tells us of his conclusion about what another friend has said, so, when speaking with the second friend, the blurred truth becomes even more difficult to correct. I believe this sort of thing often occurs when we read and discuss the Bible. We, no doubt, get the gist of the account, but the details that get us there are often taken for granted and obscured.

 

Pilate’s Verdict of Crucifixion

from Google Images

It is reasonable that Pilate would assume the chief priests and the people would desire Jesus’ release instead of Barabbas, because the latter was really guilty of the charges the authorities levied falsely against Jesus. Pilate knew the high priests understood Jesus wasn’t really guilty of the charges they made against him, so why wouldn’t they reject one who was really guilty of the accusations they made against Jesus?