John 18:40
A focused desk for reading, commentary, cross-references, original language notes, and your own observations.
John 18:40
40 Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.
Chapter Context
John 18 is a theological gospel chapter in the New Testament that explores themes of salvation, righteousness, faith. Written during the late first century CE (c. 90-95 CE), this chapter should be understood within its historical context: Addressed late first-century challenges from both Judaism and emerging Gnostic thought.
The chapter can be divided into several sections:
- Verses 1-5: Introduction and setting the context
- Verses 6-12: Development of key themes
- Verses 13-20: Central message and teachings
- Verses 21-40: Conclusion and application
This chapter is significant because it provides essential context for understanding God's covenant relationship with His people. When studying this passage, it's important to consider both its immediate context within John and its broader place in the scriptural canon.
Verse Study
John 18:40
40 Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.
Analysis
Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber. This verse captures one of history's most tragic ironies: the crowd choosing a criminal over Christ. The verb "cried" (ekraugasan, ἐκραύγασαν) indicates loud, vehement shouting—not calm deliberation but mob fury. Their unified rejection ("all again") shows how completely public opinion had turned against Jesus, manipulated by religious leaders (Mark 15:11).
"Not this man, but Barabbas" directly contrasts the innocent Lamb of God with a guilty insurrectionist. Barabbas means "son of the father" (bar-Abba), creating profound theological symbolism: sinful humanity choosing the false son while rejecting God's true Son. John's note that Barabbas was a "robber" (lēstēs, λῃστής) uses the same term Jesus applied to false shepherds (John 10:1,8) and to those who made the temple a den of thieves (Matthew 21:13).
This exchange perfectly illustrates substitutionary atonement: Christ took Barabbas' place (and ours), receiving the punishment deserved by the guilty, while the guilty went free. The crowd unwittingly enacted the gospel—a murderous rebel set free while the righteous one suffers death. Every sinner who trusts Christ is Barabbas, released from deserved condemnation because Jesus bore our penalty (Isaiah 53:5-6; 2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 3:18).
Historical Context
This event occurred during Passover, circa 30 AD, when Jerusalem swelled with pilgrimage crowds (estimated 200,000-400,000 people). Pilate, prefect of Judea (26-36 AD), customarily released one Jewish prisoner during the feast—likely a political expedient to placate the volatile population during this nationalistic celebration of Israel's liberation from Egypt.
Barabbas had participated in a recent insurrection (stasis) in Jerusalem (Mark 15:7; Luke 23:19), probably an anti-Roman uprising. Such revolts were common; Josephus records numerous messianic pretenders and revolutionaries during this period. Barabbas likely enjoyed popular support as a freedom fighter opposing Roman occupation. In contrast, Jesus threatened the religious establishment's power but had explicitly rejected political messianism (John 6:15).
The crowd's choice reveals their misunderstanding of God's kingdom. They wanted a military deliverer to overthrow Rome, not a suffering servant who would overthrow sin and death. Within a generation, this rejection bore bitter fruit: Jerusalem's destruction in 70 AD by the Romans they sought to overthrow. Meanwhile, Christ's kingdom advanced unstoppably, not through military rebellion but through the gospel's transforming power (Acts 1:6-8; Romans 1:16).
Reflection
- In what ways do you sometimes choose "Barabbas"—preferring your own agenda over Christ's lordship?
- How does the Barabbas exchange illustrate the doctrine of substitutionary atonement?
- What does the crowd's rejection of Jesus teach about the danger of following popular opinion rather than truth?
- How does this account challenge comfortable assumptions about human nature and the universality of sin?
- What does Pilate's capitulation to the crowd reveal about political expediency versus moral courage?
Cross-References
- Parallel theme: Matthew 27:16, 27:26, Mark 15:7, 15:15, Luke 23:25