In this account, Pilate yields to the crowd, Barabbas goes free, and Jesus is condemned to crucifixion in perfect fulfillment of God’s greater redemptive design.
As we step into this passage, we read Now at the feast he used to release for them any one prisoner whom they requested (v. 6). This feast refers to the Passover celebration held in Jerusalem, a city rich in Jewish history and worship. Pilate, the Roman prefect who governed Judea from around AD 26 to 36, had a custom of releasing a prisoner to the people as a nod to keeping peace during a major Jewish feast. In this cultural exchange, the governor exercised power while trying to placate the locals under Roman rule, which often involved delicate political maneuvering. This verse sets the stage: what was meant to be a gesture of goodwill would become a pivotal choice between Jesus and another prisoner.
The tradition of releasing a prisoner illustrated an attempt to keep public satisfaction during a politically charged time. The Romans recognized the importance of maintaining order in Jerusalem, especially when large crowds gathered for festivals. Pilate’s decision to follow this practice in this moment reveals his strategy of avoiding confrontation, yet his decision would have far-reaching consequences far beyond that single event.
Next, Mark states The man named Barabbas had been imprisoned with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the insurrection (v. 7). Barabbas, whose name might mean “son of the father,” was a well-known figure associated with rebellion against Roman authority. His crime was more than petty theft; he had taken part in violent uprising, which the Romans would consider a serious threat to peace.
That Barabbas was guilty of a significant crime underscores the striking contrast: a recognized criminal versus Jesus, who was innocent of any wrongdoing (Hebrews 4:15Hebrews 4:15 commentary). This distinction reveals how the crowd, influenced by religious leaders, will soon call for the release of a violent rebel instead of the gentle Messiah, in a tragic inversion of justice.
We continue with The crowd went up and began asking him to do as he had been accustomed to do for them (v. 8). Jerusalem, bustling with pilgrims, was abuzz with fervor during Passover. Many in the crowd would have been familiar with the tradition of releasing a prisoner. As they pressed Pilate, they expected him to fulfill this customary pardon, seeking to claim whatever advantage might come from this annual concession.
The crowd’s request here reveals that public opinion can be a powerful tool, especially when stirred by influential voices. Although the tradition might have had conciliatory origins, in this moment it became a lever for the chief priests to manipulate the outcome they wanted.
Mark goes on: Pilate answered them, saying, ‘Do you want me to release for you the King of the Jews?’ (v. 9). Pilate’s title for Jesus, “King of the Jews,” conveyed both a hint of mockery and a testing of the crowd’s loyalty. He recognized that Jesus was increasingly seen by some as a would-be ruler, a term that threatened Rome only if Jesus meant to raise an armed revolt. Yet Pilate knew Jesus posed no real political threat, judging by the religious nature of the charges.
This offer also highlights Pilate’s dilemma. On one hand, he sensed that Jesus was innocent. On the other, he was responsible to keep the peace and quell any uproar. Presenting Jesus under the title “King of the Jews” was likely Pilate’s attempt to see if the people themselves would see the injustice and ask for His release.
Mark clarifies Pilate’s insight: For he was aware that the chief priests had handed Him over because of envy (v. 10). Pilate understood that the motive behind Jesus’s arrest was not genuine concern for Roman law, but the resentment of the religious elites. Their envy likely stemmed from Jesus’s influence over the people and the threat He posed to their rigid power structure.
In a Roman trial system, detecting such ulterior motives in accusers was crucial for fair judgment. Pilate’s knowledge, however, did not lead him to act justly. Instead, he would find himself dragged into the web of the religious leaders’ jealous schemes.
Mark then says, But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to ask him to release Barabbas for them instead (v. 11). Though the crowd initially wanted Pilate to pardon a prisoner, the chief priests directed that desire specifically toward Barabbas. Their persuasion reveals the potency of leadership, especially when driven by self-serving ambition, to sway public sentiment in destructive ways.
The influence of the temple leadership was formidable. People came from various regions for Passover, uncertain of all the events behind Jesus’s arrest. When the religious authorities urged them toward Barabbas, many in the crowd complied without necessarily understanding the deeper truths about Jesus’s mission (John 1:29John 1:29 commentary).
Continuing, we read Answering again, Pilate said to them, ‘Then what shall I do with Him whom you call the King of the Jews?’ (v. 12). Pilate confronted them with the crucial question: if Barabbas is released, what becomes of Jesus? It was a stark dilemma. By publicly demanding a choice, Pilate forced the people to pronounce judgment on Jesus themselves.
The question could have produced a moment of introspection. Yet, as we see, the answer that comes forth is one of hostility. This also reveals Pilate’s attempt to shift responsibility to the public, possibly hoping they would side with clemency for Jesus, which would alleviate Pilate’s own accountability.
The crowd’s alarming response is recorded in They shouted back, ‘Crucify Him!’ (v. 13). Crucifixion was the harshest Roman punishment, generally reserved for the most severe criminals. The fact that Jesus was now being called to endure it points to the extreme animosity stirred up against Him.
In a tragic turn, the people call for the brutal penalty usually given to foreigners and rebels—though Barabbas, an actual rebel, was set free. This shocking exchange echoes the heart of the gospel message: the innocent dying in the place of the guilty (1 Peter 3:181 Peter 3:18 commentary).
Further, Pilate questions them again: But Pilate said to them, ‘Why, what evil has He done?’ But they shouted all the more, ‘Crucify Him!’ (v. 14). Pilate’s challenge underscores the illegitimacy of the charge. Though he attempts to press them to consider Jesus’s innocence, the crowd escalates its demand.
Here, we see how reason and justice are overrun by emotional fervor and manipulation. Instead of pausing to judge the evidence, the enraged crowd cries for death. This highlights the tragic misuse of power, both by the religious leaders who instigated it and the Roman authority too weak to resist it.
Finally, Wishing to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas for them, and after having Jesus scourged, he handed Him over to be crucified (v. 15). Pilate’s decision was motivated more by political expediency than justice. He sought to quench the crowd’s fury by giving them what they wanted.
Pilate’s action ushered Jesus onto the path toward Calvary, aligning with the redemptive purpose foretold in Scripture. Though the immediate cause appears to be envy and political calculation, in the larger biblical narrative this moment serves the divine plan for salvation (Ephesians 1:7Ephesians 1:7 commentary). Jesus, the innocent, takes the place of Barabbas, representing guilty humanity set free.
This passage highlights a choice between an innocent Messiah and a known criminal, the pressure of public opinion manipulated by religious leaders, and the worldly desire to placate a crowd rather than uphold righteousness. Pilate, despite sensing Jesus’s innocence, still delivers Him into suffering to maintain a fragile peace in Jerusalem.
This episode from Mark 15:6-15Mark 15:6-15 commentary vividly demonstrates how God’s plan for redemption triumphs, even through the failings of human justice and the betrayal of those in power.
Set to dark mode
Mark 15:6-15 meaning
As we step into this passage, we read Now at the feast he used to release for them any one prisoner whom they requested (v. 6). This feast refers to the Passover celebration held in Jerusalem, a city rich in Jewish history and worship. Pilate, the Roman prefect who governed Judea from around AD 26 to 36, had a custom of releasing a prisoner to the people as a nod to keeping peace during a major Jewish feast. In this cultural exchange, the governor exercised power while trying to placate the locals under Roman rule, which often involved delicate political maneuvering. This verse sets the stage: what was meant to be a gesture of goodwill would become a pivotal choice between Jesus and another prisoner.
The tradition of releasing a prisoner illustrated an attempt to keep public satisfaction during a politically charged time. The Romans recognized the importance of maintaining order in Jerusalem, especially when large crowds gathered for festivals. Pilate’s decision to follow this practice in this moment reveals his strategy of avoiding confrontation, yet his decision would have far-reaching consequences far beyond that single event.
Next, Mark states The man named Barabbas had been imprisoned with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the insurrection (v. 7). Barabbas, whose name might mean “son of the father,” was a well-known figure associated with rebellion against Roman authority. His crime was more than petty theft; he had taken part in violent uprising, which the Romans would consider a serious threat to peace.
That Barabbas was guilty of a significant crime underscores the striking contrast: a recognized criminal versus Jesus, who was innocent of any wrongdoing (Hebrews 4:15Hebrews 4:15 commentary). This distinction reveals how the crowd, influenced by religious leaders, will soon call for the release of a violent rebel instead of the gentle Messiah, in a tragic inversion of justice.
We continue with The crowd went up and began asking him to do as he had been accustomed to do for them (v. 8). Jerusalem, bustling with pilgrims, was abuzz with fervor during Passover. Many in the crowd would have been familiar with the tradition of releasing a prisoner. As they pressed Pilate, they expected him to fulfill this customary pardon, seeking to claim whatever advantage might come from this annual concession.
The crowd’s request here reveals that public opinion can be a powerful tool, especially when stirred by influential voices. Although the tradition might have had conciliatory origins, in this moment it became a lever for the chief priests to manipulate the outcome they wanted.
Mark goes on: Pilate answered them, saying, ‘Do you want me to release for you the King of the Jews?’ (v. 9). Pilate’s title for Jesus, “King of the Jews,” conveyed both a hint of mockery and a testing of the crowd’s loyalty. He recognized that Jesus was increasingly seen by some as a would-be ruler, a term that threatened Rome only if Jesus meant to raise an armed revolt. Yet Pilate knew Jesus posed no real political threat, judging by the religious nature of the charges.
This offer also highlights Pilate’s dilemma. On one hand, he sensed that Jesus was innocent. On the other, he was responsible to keep the peace and quell any uproar. Presenting Jesus under the title “King of the Jews” was likely Pilate’s attempt to see if the people themselves would see the injustice and ask for His release.
Mark clarifies Pilate’s insight: For he was aware that the chief priests had handed Him over because of envy (v. 10). Pilate understood that the motive behind Jesus’s arrest was not genuine concern for Roman law, but the resentment of the religious elites. Their envy likely stemmed from Jesus’s influence over the people and the threat He posed to their rigid power structure.
In a Roman trial system, detecting such ulterior motives in accusers was crucial for fair judgment. Pilate’s knowledge, however, did not lead him to act justly. Instead, he would find himself dragged into the web of the religious leaders’ jealous schemes.
Mark then says, But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to ask him to release Barabbas for them instead (v. 11). Though the crowd initially wanted Pilate to pardon a prisoner, the chief priests directed that desire specifically toward Barabbas. Their persuasion reveals the potency of leadership, especially when driven by self-serving ambition, to sway public sentiment in destructive ways.
The influence of the temple leadership was formidable. People came from various regions for Passover, uncertain of all the events behind Jesus’s arrest. When the religious authorities urged them toward Barabbas, many in the crowd complied without necessarily understanding the deeper truths about Jesus’s mission (John 1:29John 1:29 commentary).
Continuing, we read Answering again, Pilate said to them, ‘Then what shall I do with Him whom you call the King of the Jews?’ (v. 12). Pilate confronted them with the crucial question: if Barabbas is released, what becomes of Jesus? It was a stark dilemma. By publicly demanding a choice, Pilate forced the people to pronounce judgment on Jesus themselves.
The question could have produced a moment of introspection. Yet, as we see, the answer that comes forth is one of hostility. This also reveals Pilate’s attempt to shift responsibility to the public, possibly hoping they would side with clemency for Jesus, which would alleviate Pilate’s own accountability.
The crowd’s alarming response is recorded in They shouted back, ‘Crucify Him!’ (v. 13). Crucifixion was the harshest Roman punishment, generally reserved for the most severe criminals. The fact that Jesus was now being called to endure it points to the extreme animosity stirred up against Him.
In a tragic turn, the people call for the brutal penalty usually given to foreigners and rebels—though Barabbas, an actual rebel, was set free. This shocking exchange echoes the heart of the gospel message: the innocent dying in the place of the guilty (1 Peter 3:181 Peter 3:18 commentary).
Further, Pilate questions them again: But Pilate said to them, ‘Why, what evil has He done?’ But they shouted all the more, ‘Crucify Him!’ (v. 14). Pilate’s challenge underscores the illegitimacy of the charge. Though he attempts to press them to consider Jesus’s innocence, the crowd escalates its demand.
Here, we see how reason and justice are overrun by emotional fervor and manipulation. Instead of pausing to judge the evidence, the enraged crowd cries for death. This highlights the tragic misuse of power, both by the religious leaders who instigated it and the Roman authority too weak to resist it.
Finally, Wishing to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas for them, and after having Jesus scourged, he handed Him over to be crucified (v. 15). Pilate’s decision was motivated more by political expediency than justice. He sought to quench the crowd’s fury by giving them what they wanted.
Pilate’s action ushered Jesus onto the path toward Calvary, aligning with the redemptive purpose foretold in Scripture. Though the immediate cause appears to be envy and political calculation, in the larger biblical narrative this moment serves the divine plan for salvation (Ephesians 1:7Ephesians 1:7 commentary). Jesus, the innocent, takes the place of Barabbas, representing guilty humanity set free.
This passage highlights a choice between an innocent Messiah and a known criminal, the pressure of public opinion manipulated by religious leaders, and the worldly desire to placate a crowd rather than uphold righteousness. Pilate, despite sensing Jesus’s innocence, still delivers Him into suffering to maintain a fragile peace in Jerusalem.
This episode from Mark 15:6-15Mark 15:6-15 commentary vividly demonstrates how God’s plan for redemption triumphs, even through the failings of human justice and the betrayal of those in power.
To learn more about Jesus and Barabbas, click here.