Biographical Study
by
Steven R. Long
October 9, 2014
2
Contents
I. Introduction ...........1
A. Methodology .......................................................................................................................2
B. The Purpose of the Study 2
C. Initial Conclusion of the Study ...3
Bibliography ....................17
1
Introduction
One of the least known characters of antiquity is Pontius Pilate. While he is primarily
recognized for one major event in history, the trial of Jesus Christ, he has most recently been
Saint.1 The evidence available for research biblically and extra-biblical, is limited. Warren Carter
in Pontius Pilate: Roman Governor states, Pilate emerges as a powerful figure who played a
central role in Jesus death.2 He further concludes, Political dynamics pervade the scenes... he is
not weak or coerced.3 It seems there is a recent push in scholarly research that demonstrates
Many have shed light on the troubling leadership style of the governor; his interactions
with his Jewish inhabitants suggest a basic direction regarding his life. With the little information
we can glean from Embassy to Gaius, Pro Flaccum, Legatio 299-305, Jewish War 2.169-77,
Antiquities of the Jews 18.55-89, including an inscription found in Caesarea in 1961 depicting
him as a prefect; Pilate had a greater impact on the development of Christianity through first-
century Palestine than first realized. As Warren suggests, His appointment as governor indicates
1 See Warren Carter, Pontius Pilate: Portraits of a Roman Governor, (Collegeville, MN: LiturgicalPress, 2003), 3.,
Harold Heohner, Pontius Pilate, in Dictionary of Jesus and The Gospels, eds. Joel Green, Scot McKnight, and
Tom Thatcher, (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1992), 616., Brian C McGing, Pontius Pilate and the Sources, CBQ 53
(1991), 416-38.
2 Warren Carter, Pontius Pilate: Roman Governor, Bibleinterp.com (Kansas City, 2004), accessed September 29,
2014. http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Carter-Pontius_Pilate_Roman_Governor.shtml.
3 Ibid.
4 Brian C. McGing, "Pontius Pilate and The Sources." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 53, no. 3: (July, 1991), 416.
2
that he came from a wealthy, powerful, elite Roman family.5 It is problematic to think a person
could attain the heights of the Governor of Rome as a weak leader; but was he a cruel or
Methodology
This paper set out to research a broad background of information. The methodology at
first was random, focusing more on finding as much research material as possible. Slowly the
project came into focus with some much-needed feedback. Not only will this paper utilize
scholarly research, it will also have a focus on the historical records and writings of Josephus and
Philo of Alexandria. In searching for the works, it was difficult to find an online database in
which to query specific results. It was decided to purchase the complete works for the writers
Logos program. While the cost was a good expense, it will be utilized in future research projects.
In searching the recent scholarly journals, it was noted that most view the political figure
in a predetermined way. This author wanted to review the material with a fresh set of eyes and
decipher how each writer of antiquity presented the material. In doing a little background
research on various writers, it helped to give perspective on their motives. While this paper will
not spend time on the motives of ancient writers, it will interject obvious references to motives.
An initial deduction is that Pontius Pilate was a weak leader who succumbed to political
pressure; this has been a central theme of recent scholarly thought. However, this author wanted
to explore the concept further. We will attempt to demonstrate whether or not he was a weak
5 Ibid.
3
political leader, his political interaction with the Jewish people, and the prevailing verdicts on his
character, while making biblical conclusions on his impact in the Gospels. Therefore, the purpose
of this paper is to give a brief biography on the life of Pontius Pilate, and suggest a two-fold
In Matthew's Gospel, he presents a silent Jesus before the Jewish Leaders. Matthew
states, But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single chargeto the great amazement of the
governor.6 The Bible further states, He took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd
(Matt 27:24), signifying that Pilate was not responsible for the death of Jesus. Why was this
interaction with Jesus so amazing to the Governor of Judah? It is difficult to believe that a prefect
is weak and feckless if he recognizes the integrity of Jesus, even publicly denounces the crowd,
using a Jewish illustration. This author believes at best Pilate was a neutral political leader, and at
life when he writes, Pilate, Pontius ... Roman prefect of Judea, the fifth governor of the province
and the second-longest holder of the office (a.d. 26-36).7 Warren Carter in Pontius Pilate:
Roman Governor states that Pilate was in office from a. d. 26-37.8 Whatever date you take as
6 Matthew 27:14, all Scriptures in are in the New International Version unless otherwise noted
7 Paul J. Achtemeier, Harpers Bible Dictionary (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), 796.
the legitimate time in office is of little consequence. What is worthy to note is that typical
governor appointments lasted a fraction of Pilates service. If he were a weak leader, why would
Tiberius continue his rule? One scholar suggests, This historical material [Josephus writings],
however, is filtered through the conventions of philosophical, moral rhetoric.9 If true, Philo may
call into question the validity of eyewitness accounts bearing the name of Josephus.
Philo seems to be the one most concerned with the dual nature of Pilates governorship. Philo
gives a good picture into the nature and leadership of Pilate in his Embassy to Caligula. He
describes Pilate as A man of a very inflexible disposition, and very merciless as well as very
obstinate.10 In addition, Philo describes him as "At all times a man of most ferocious
passions."11 This is compounded with Philos statements on how Pilate ruled, especially as
presented by the complaints of the Jewish leaders in the uprising of Judaea over the gilt shields:
He feared least they might in reality go on an embassy to the emperor, and might impeach
him with respect to other particulars of his government, in respect of his corruption, and
his acts of insolence, and his rapine, and his habit of insulting people, and his cruelty, and
his continual murders of people untried and uncondemned.12
As you read his statements it immediately stirs the researcher in a negative way. However,
further statements by Philo paint another picture one that is more balanced. In addition, Philo
9 Tom Thatcher, Philo on Pilate: Rhetoric or Reality? Restoration Quarterly 37, no. 4: (1995), 215-218. Accessed
August 18, 2014.
11 Ibid., 303.
12 Ibid., 302.
5
Philo states, He [Pilate], not more with the object of doing honour to Tiberius than with
that of vexing the multitude. In the context, he was admitting Pilate is not interested in stirring
up the crowd. Instead, he wants to pay homage to Tiberius. Philo continues with the contrasting
viewpoint when he takes another approach to his counterpart Josephus regarding the Idolatrous
Shields. Philo writes, Which had no form nor any other forbidden thing represented on them
except some necessary inscription.13 This is an opposite written account to that of Josephus.
Why would Philo differ and present Pilate in a different light? It is this authors view that while
Philo was critical of Pilates governorship, he was not malicious towards the prefect nor did
What make Philo's writings, so profound are two key statements regarding the dual
nature of conflict in Pilate. First, Tiberius made it a point to quell all rebellions and Philo states
Pilate was Sufficiently acquainted with the firmness of Tiberius on these points.14 Second,
Pilate refrained "To do anything that could be acceptable to his subjects.15 The dual point here is
that Pilate desires to keep the wishes of the Emperor, while not giving in to the rebellious crowd;
otherwise the crowd may see Pilate as a weak and ask for more concessions.
There was an incredible find in Philos concluding statements. It sheds light into the
motivation of Pilate. While I understand this suggestion comes with limitations, without
question, Philo proves at a minimum a contrasting conflict within Pilate. He writes, And in this
way [Everything Philo wrote] he provided for two matters: both for the honor due to the
13 Ibid., 299.
emperor, and for the preservation of the ancient customs of the city.16 Philo admits that Pilate
was not a weak leader but a conflicted leader. The initial conclusions of this paper could retain
some merit, but it seems another understanding is beginning to emerge. While the writings of
Without a doubt, Josephus represents Pilates character especially negative in most of the
Jewish sources. Primarily there are three key stories to help shed light on the man Pilate, 1) the
idolatrous standards 2) the aqueduct riot and 3) the Samaritan massacre. Treating the information
carefully will help us to glean the predisposed position of each writer. For example, Josephus
himself was highly dedicated to the Jewish system and even fought against the Roman Army in
The Jewish Revolt of a.d. 66 to 70.17 Does that mean he is solely interested in discrediting Pilate?
More likely Josephus is interested in painting all Roman leaders negatively to further a personal
agenda of overthrowing their abusiveness practices toward the Jewish people. This is a valid
consideration in the discussion but most important is to look at the accounts objectively before
we pass judgment on the mans character. It can be stated that there is more than one reasonable
Idolatrous Standards
Josephus reports in The Jewish War, Pilate brought Roman troops to Jerusalem from
bring into the city military standards bearing the symbol of the Emperor. This was considered an
16 Ibid., 305.
idolatrous image and worse, it was done under the cover of night. 18 Josephus writes,
...Considering their laws to have been trampled under foot, as those laws permit no image to be
erected in the city; while the indignation of the townspeople stirred the countryfolk.19 We
conclude from the writings that Jewish law permitted no outside images in the city.
This perceived insult initiated the protests against Pilates decision and secret addition of
the standards. So strong was their protest, instead of obeying the directive of Pilate to disperse,
they were willing to stand their ground amidst threats of public execution. This additional proof
of a healthy tension by the Governor balancing two difficult tasks continues to erode our initial
claim that he was weak. Exploring the protests further may lend a hand to our understanding.
The protests suggest 1) Pilate was unaware of the Jewish law as the new prefect, 2) he
intentionally stirred up the people, or, 3) he was carefully balancing the wishes of Rome and the
Jewish subordinates. About the idea that Pilate was unaware of the Jewish customs and laws,
there seems to be a clue in the concluding remarks of Josephus when he writes about the
Governors reaction toward the Jews. Instead of complying with the wishes of Rome, the Jews
choose to die rather than break their laws. Overcome with astonishment at such intense
religious zeal, Pilate gave orders for the immediate removal of the standards from Jerusalem.20
Josephus details that Pilate, ...Introduced [the standards] into Jerusalem by night and under
cover.21 We can safely suggest Pilate was completely informed of his actions.
19 Ibid.
While some scholars argue that Pilate stirred up the people as an insensitive leader, it
would stand opposed to his political ambition to seduce the people toward rebellion. As
Governor of Judaea, he was charged with keeping Romes interests intact and keeping the order
of the people. Brian McGing informs us in Pontius Pilate and The Sources, that provincial
leaders must maintain a healthy balance.22 Pilates dual role as Governor was tenuous and
A claim that deserves further scrutiny is when Carter suggests, He [Pilate] shared an
insensitivity to Jewish customs that was typical of elite Roman prejudices toward provincials.23
Carter further claims Governors of Rome Exercised military, political, social, judicial, and
economic control, often in exploitative and harsh ways.24 Adding to the scholarly volumes on
Pilate it can be suggested here that Pilate was prejudice toward the Jewish people.
This could account for the continual strife he created with his decisions and give credence to his
seemingly tepid approach in varying situations. We have learned as recently as the twenty-first
century, how those who are prejudice can at times are friendly, and yet utterly cruel. This line of
It seems that even in the writings of Josephus, though he tries to paint Pilate in a negative
way, a dual approach in our understanding is emerging. Recent suggestions on Pilates rule as
22 Brian C. McGing, "Pontius Pilate and The Sources." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 53, no. 3: (July, 1991), 435.
24 Ibid.
9
reminding the Jewish people that Rome is in charge.25 It is fairly benign to say at some level
Pilate wanted to honor Tiberius. Pilate was well aware of his political opponents potential
outburst, and desiring favor from Tiberius, seems to be a plausible initiative against Herod.
On the one hand Pilate needs to keep the peace and citizenry content. On the other hand,
he is intent on improving his standing in the Roman leadership and remaining faithful to
Tiberius. This two-fold Pilate may be reasoning enough for the seemingly erratic decisions
during his rule. As stated earlier, the material, thus far, does not paint Pilate in a weak manner.
Aqueduct Riot
A second dramatic event can be found in the writings when Josephus states that extreme protests
broke out after Pilate used Temple funds (Corban) to build an aqueduct for Jerusalem. Josephus
writes, After this he [Pilate] raised another disturbance, by expending that sacred treasure which
is called Corban upon aqueducts, whereby he brought water from the distance of four hundred
furlongs [about 54 miles].26 Why was Pilate taking on such a large task? It seems something can
be gleaned from the earlier writings. Josephus states, And now Herod the tetrarch, who was in
great favor with Tiberius, built a city of the same name.27 Unlike Herod, Pilate missteps in that
he stole the money from the temple to build his lifes achievement. In essence, Pilate does not
make this decision primarily to inflame the Jews but to compete with Herod for the favor of
Rome.
Most provincial Governors held a lavish lifestyle and therefore taxation practices would not have
27 Wars. II.2.3
10
been enough to build an aqueduct. What I find odd is the contrasting reports in the writings in
Wars, Josephus states it was four-hundred furlongs.29 A scholar by the name of Uriel Rappaport
has suggested in Josephus Personality and The Credibility of His Narrative, the varying
reports amounts to inaccuracies in the writings; therefore, Josephus must not be a reliable
historical source.30 More soundly is the idea that he was not concerned about size of the project
so much as the nature in which the project started. Josephus is not a Roman engineer and
therefore could have simply misstated the total length. In this matter, Uriel goes too far.
The response of the people was expected; Josephus states, They came about his tribunal, and
made a clamor of it.31 Pilate knew of the potential problems as Josephus suggests, When he
[Pilate] was apprized aforehand of this disturbance, he mixed his own soldiers in their armor
with the multitude, and ordered them to conceal themselves under the habits of private men.32
This prearrangement of the Roman soldiers signals Pilates desire to squash any open rebellion.
With clubs at the ready, soldiers violently attacked the Jews and inflicted mass casualties.
The result, "Many of them, perished by the stripes they received, and many of them perished as
28 Antiquities, XVIII.3.2.
29 Wars, II.9.4
30 Uriel Rappaport, Josephus Personality and The Credibility of His Narrative, Making
History: Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism, 110. (ed. Zuleika Rodgers), 68.
31 Wars, II.9.4
32 Wars, II.9.4
11
trodden to death by themselves."33 The cruelty upon the crowd caused them to hold their peace
and return home. We can safely conclude this is another example where Pilate was balancing his
charge to build the glory of Rome, while maintaining order among the inhabitants.
A third story on Mt. Gerizim seems to paint Pilate in a most damming way. Samaritan leaders,
Thought lying a thing of little consequence,34 So they entreated people to gather together to
view sacred artifacts left by Moses. Josephus plainly tells his readers these reports were lies.
However, the masses gathered in a great "multitude" and agreed to arrive at Tirathaba, a village
in Samaria. Upon their sojourn "Pilate prevented they were going up, seizing upon file roads
with a great band of horsemen and foot-men"35 A large-scale rebellion of the Samaritans under
Josephus declares When it came to action, some of them [Samaritans] they slew, and
others of them they put to flight, and took a great many alive.36 In response, the Samaritans sent
an embassy to complain to Vitellius. Tiberius was already dead, and thus, Vitellius ordered
"Pilate to go to Rome." This scene seems to show that in the end, Pilate's overtly cruel nature
won out. If our study, thus far, has produced anything, it is that various beholders chose to
present Pilate in a particular way. The prickly practices in which Pilate rules give us an
opportunity to see his conflicted decisions, prejudicial motives, and the difficult task of ruling
33 Wars, II.9.4
34 Antiquities, XVIII.4.1
35 Ibid.
36 Ibid.
12
obstinate people. From the writings we have established our initial conclusion needs to be
updated from a leader who is weak, to one who is conflicted, possible even prejudicial. Would
Warren Carter in Pontius Pilate: Portraits of a Roman Governor, gives a nice overview of the
five scholarly verdicts on Pilate. I will attempt to generalize his research and writings. Carter
presents five conclusions that Pilate is 1) a beloved Saint, 2) Christian convert, 3) insensitive
Roman official, 4) villain: cruel and anti-Jewish, or 5) weak and without conviction.
A Beloved Saint
Carter states that many who claim Pilate was a Christian believe he was also a martyr.37
For instance, according to Carter and Elliot in Apocryphal New Testament 222-24, Pilate sends
Herod a letter depicting his sorrow and suffering for crucifying Jesus. According to a later
tradition, Pilate Describes numerous tragedies that have befallen his family.38 This later
tradition has come under scrutiny and as of yet, no one can produce a credible or unchallenged
source. However, since the view presents Pilate as a Christian and martyr, some scholars believe
Pilate committed suicide; there are others who claim he was a Saint.39
Christian Convert
This is one of the older verdicts rendered to Pilate by scholars. Primarily rooted in Pilates
reluctance to condemn Jesus to die on the cross, this viewpoint tends to move the ownership of
37 Warren Carter, Pontius Pilate: Portraits of a Roman Governor, (Collegeville, MN: LiturgicalPress, 2003), 10.
38 Ibid.
39 Ibid., 11.
13
Christ's crucifixion to the Jews.40 According to carter, This view came to the fore in the late
second century... and The early church leader Tertullian... claimed that the emperor Tiberius...
and Pilates boss, received and believed a report from Syria Palestine which had revealed the
truth of Christs divinity.41 This viewpoint has come under fire and is untenable.
Brian McGing in Pontius Pilate and The Sources, concludes The governors of Judaea...
constantly displayed a general lack of sensitivity, tact, and knowledge.42 Carter suggests Pilate
as trying to fulfill the roles and requirements of being Roman governor of the difficult province
of Judea as ably as he can.43 Both scholarly giants believe Pilate to be a mere shadow compared
to the greatness of the emperors of ancient Rome. Carter and McGing share parts of this view
This view sees Pilate as a co-conspirator in the death of Jesus. Carter suggests this view is a
Consequence of his cruel hatred of Jewish people.44 It has been argued in this viewpoint that
Sejanus was a very anti-Semitic individual and as such, appointed Pilate, as governor in hopes
the Jews would revolt so that Rome could crush and exterminate the race completely.45 Carter
claims some in a scholarly world identify the conflicts in Rome as the primary evidence that
40 Ibid., 6.
41 Ibid.
44 Ibid., 3.
14
Pilate wanted to provoke a violent disagreement.46 This viewpoint has a mixed review among
recent scholarly work; however, further research may have some merit.
This is the viewpoint held by many scholars due to the way the Gospels tell the story. Carter
states the primary thought is that "He [Pilate] has noble intentions to release the innocent' Jesus,
but he is too weak, lacks conviction, and gives into stronger voices."47
Many casual readers easily identify with this view because of the Gospel writings.
The New Testament references where Pilate plays a central role in the events surrounding
the trial and crucifixion of Jesus (Matt. 27:1-2, 11-26; Mark 15:1-15; Luke 23:1-25; John 18:28-
19:16; Acts 3:13; 4:27; 13:28; 1 Tim. 6:13), is paramount to our understanding of Pilates life.
While its true that the writings and sources depict Pilate in a negative light, we have in the
Gospels another image of his leadership and role at the trial of Jesus.
All of them said, Let him crucified! Then he asked, Why, what evil has he done?
But they shouted all the more, Let him be crucified! (Matt 27:23; cf. Mark 15:13-14).
"I find no basis for an accusation against this man... and here I have examined him in
your presence and have not found this man guilty of any of your charges against him..."
And Pilate, wanting to release Jesus, addressed them again, but they kept shouting,
"Crucify, Crucify him! A third time he said to them, Why, what evil has he done? I
have found in him no ground for the sentence of death. I will therefore have him flogged
and then release him. (Luke 23:4, 14, 22).
45 According to Warren Carter, Proponents of this view include Ethelbert Stauffer, Christ and
the Ceasars: Historical Sketches. Translated by K. and R. Gregory Smith (Londong, 1955); Ernst
47 Ibid., 4.
15
Pilate went out again and said to them, Look, I am bringing him out to you to let you
know that I find no case against him. (John 19:4, 6).
If one takes Griesbach's two-document theory of Matthean priority, then Luke, Mark and John
would naturally follow, and the order in the presentation of Pilate is clear. Just like we learned
from our sources above, it seems each writer presents Pilate uniquely in the Gospels.48 This
uniqueness should not be viewed with skepticism, but rather understood in the broader context
First in Matthews Gospel, we see a detailed account of Pilate, Jesus, and the rebellious
crowd. Matthew 27:1-2, 11-26 introduced Pilate's wife, unnamed in the Gospel but called Procla
or Procula in a later tradition. She confronts Pilate to have nothing to do with that righteous
man, about whom she has had a dream. Matthews Gospel is the first to introduce a hand-
washing illustration whereby Pilate vindicates himself from the sins of the people (27:24-25).
Matthews Gospel gives us the most detailed description of the events. This seems logical
given the well-known fact that scholars believe Matthews audience was largely Jewish.
Therefore, it would seem important for Matthew to emphasize the rebellion of the Jewish
leaders, along with emphasizing the guilt of the nation, in order to contrast the innocence of
Jesus. Moreover, the added details and warnings from Pilates wife, along with the hand washing
illustration, give credence to the idea of a literary device the author uses to overly emphasize
In the account of Mark 15:1-15, he presents Pilate in a peculiar manner. The Bible says,
Pilate questioned Him again, saying, Do you not answer? See how many charges they bring
against you! But Jesus made no further answer; so Pilate was amazed (vs. 4-5 NASB). Mark
adds to Matthews account inserting a tradition during the feast; Pilate would release a prisoner
of the crowds choosing. Many scholars have claimed Pilate was too weak to defend a just man,
and this is the reason he sent Jesus to the cross and freed Barabbas. However, as shown in our
research above, Pilate is carefully walking the line between maintaining the interests of Rome
while keeping the order of the people. Once Pilate realizes the people will not relent, he gives in
to their wishes.
In the Luke 23:1-25 version of the event, Pilate is sent to Herod Antipas for further
treatment. In Herods presence soldiers mock him, beat him, and yet Herod finds no fault in
Jesus. Once done with his questions, Herod sends Jesus back to Pilate for the final verdict. Luke
states, And Herod with his soldiers, after treating Him with contempt and mocking Him,
dressed Him in a gorgeous robe and sent Him back to Pilate. Now Herod and Pilate became
friends with one another that very day; for before they had been enemies... (vs. 11-12 NASB).
This one verse sheds some light into the relationship between Pilate and Herod.
For the first time, we have credible evidence the two were at odds with each other. The story of
the Aqueduct begins to make sense. It is justifiable that Pilate extends the waterway in contrast to
the Herod's city. It is safe to reason they were in competition for the favor of Rome.
Interestingly enough there is a weird statement found in Luke 13:1, Of the Galileans
whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices, In my limited study I found no extra
biblical support for this claim. While one of our writers we have studied may have alluded to this
statement, it seems an obscure passage and possibly a later addition. There may have been a few
authors of antiquity that discussed this matter, however, no such writing could be found.
Regardless, it doesnt appear to be too far-fetched given the details of the Samaritan massacre.
17
Finally, in the account of John 18:28-19:16, one writers suggest it was An elaborate
scheme of inside and outside scenes, carr[ying] even further the idea that Pilate, who did not
wish to condemn Jesus, was a helpless pawn.49 John is not remotely concerned with the person
of Pilate as his focus remains on Jesus and his kingdom ministry from God. All through the
passages there are many statements about the kingship of Jesus. It crescendos when Jesus
declares, You say correctly that I am a king. For this, I have been born, and for this I have come
into the world, to testify to the truth (v 37). For John, kingship of Christ takes precedence over
Interestingly enough Johns Gospel presents a different version than Luke. In Johns
account the scourging, mistreatment, and the purple robe come from Pilate. Moreover, there are
many attempts to release Jesus. Consequently, John portrays Pilate as a shrewd leader waiting for
the crowd to narrow in the statements of Jesus and Pilate tests the Jews fidelity to Rome. The
crowd is more than happy to oblige and states, If you release this Man, you are no friend of
Caesar; everyone who makes himself out to be a king opposes Caesar. (v 12 NASB). On that
basis, Pilate is forced to give in to the crowd and turns Jesus over to be crucified.
As we poor over the sum of the material, we have effectively showed that Philo was balanced in
his approach and treatment of Pilate. At first glance it seems he was completely negative toward
his governorship, in context, his writings remain fairly neutral. The most credible statement and
what summarily change the direction and outcome of this paper is when Philo wrote, And in
49 Paul J. Achtemeier, Harper & Row and Society of Biblical Literature, Harpers Bible
this way he [Pilate] provided for two matters: both for the honor due to the emperor, and for the
preservation of the ancient customs of the city.50 This statement does not show Pilate as a weak
Josephus, on the other hand, seems to have an agenda and motive behind his writings. It is
fascinating and odd that out of nearly ten years of rule, Pilate is only mentioned a few times and
in the most negative way. When you take the whole of Josephus work, and look at history
portraying him as a leader in The Jewish Revolt, one cannot help but speculate that his chief aim
is to paint Rome negatively in order to facilitate a large-scale rebellion. As hard as Josephus tries
to discredit Pilate as a merciless tyrant, the Gospel treatments seem to contradict his
observations.
In the Gospels, there seems to be a washed over presentation. Pilate is neither cruel nor
benevolent. He is neither merciful nor weak. The statement in Luke 13:1 could be a later addition
to the text. None of the Gospels displays him as a weak leader but rather accommodating.
Therefore, it can be concluded that our initial conclusions must be changed to the two ideas
found in this paper. Pilate is 1) conflicted as a leader, desiring to adhere to the wishes of Rome;
while keeping the peace of its citizens, and 2) Pilate is an elite leader with prejudice toward the
Jews. These two suggestions need further criticism and research in the near future.
Bibliography
Bond, Helen, K. Pontius Pilate In History And Interpretation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press, 2004. Google Scholar. Accessed August 27, 2014.
http://books.google.com/books?
id=gvh9km_b7gsC&lpg=PP1&ots=SsVP8MB22b&dq=Pontius
%20Pilate&lr&pg=PR6#v=onepage&q=Pontius%20Pilate&f=false.
Carter, Warren. Pontius Pilate: Portraits of a Roman Governor. Collegevill, MN: Liturgical
Press, 2003. Google Books. Accessed August 27, 2014.
http://books.google.com/books?
id=mvhHcXKK0UEC&lpg=PR7&ots=h5yOWcngAH&dq=Pontius
%20Pilate&lr&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q=Pontius%20Pilate&f=false.
Carter, Warren. Pontius Pilate: Roman Governor, Bibleinterp.com (Kansas City, 2004).
Accessed September 29, 2014.
http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Carter-Pontius_Pilate_Roman_Governor.shtml.
Claudel, Paul, and Marie Ponsot. "Pilate's Case." Cross Currents 36, no. 3 (September 1,
1986): 323-331. Accessed August 18, 2014.
http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000920242&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Josephus. Works. Translated by H. St. J Thackeray, Ralph Marcus, Allen Wikgren, and Louis H.
Feldman. 9 vols. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1929-62.
McGing, Brian Charles. "Pontius Pilate and The Sources." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 53,
no. 3: (July, 1991), 416-438. Accessed August 18, 2014.
http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000841746&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
Rappaport, Uriel. Josephus Personality and The Credibility of His Narrative, Making History:
Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism, 110. (ed. Zuleika Rodgers), 68.
Accessed October 6, 2014. http://natzraya.com/Books%20on%20Judaism%20and%20the
%20History%20of%20the%20Jewish%20People/Zuleika_Rodgers%20-
%20Making_History__Josephus_And_Historical_Method%20(2006).pdf#page=364.
Rigelhof, T. F. "Pontius Pilate: A Biography." Biography 23, no. 4 (Fall, 2000): 821.
Accessed August 18, 2014.
http://search.proquest.com/docview/215621214?accountid=12085.
20
Singer, Isidore, et al., eds. Pontius Pilate. The Jewish Encyclopedia; A Descriptive Record of
The History, Religion, Literature, and Customs of The Jewish People From The Earliest
Times to The Present Day. New York, NY: 1906. Accessed August 18, 2014.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12147-pilate-pontius.
Taylor, Joan E. "Pontius Pilate and The Imperial Cult in Roman Judaea." New Testament
Studies 52, no. 4 (10, 2006): 555-82. Accessed August 18, 2014.
http://search.proquest.com/docview/197140730?accountid=12085.