“Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.”
My Notes
What Does John 18:40 Mean?
"Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber." The crowd is given the CHOICE: Jesus or Barabbas. They choose BARABBAS — the robber, the criminal, the violent insurrectionist. The innocent is rejected. The guilty is preferred. The healer is condemned. The thief is released. The substitution is the crucifixion's theological core: the guilty goes free BECAUSE the innocent takes his place.
The phrase "not this man, but Barabbas" (mē touton alla ton Barabban — not this one but Barabbas) is the CHOICE that defines the human condition: given the option between the sinless and the sinful, humanity chooses the sinful. The rejection isn't ignorance — the crowd has SEEN Jesus' miracles, HEARD His teaching, WITNESSED His life. The choice is informed and deliberate. With full knowledge, they prefer the robber.
The "now Barabbas was a robber" (ēn de ho Barabbas lēstēs — now Barabbas was a bandit/robber/insurrectionist) is John's EDITORIAL COMMENT that heightens the absurdity: in case you missed the moral calculus — the man the crowd chose is a CRIMINAL. The parenthetical makes sure you understand the exchange: the innocent Christ for the guilty Barabbas. The healer for the thief. The Author of life for the destroyer of life.
Reflection Questions
- 1.What 'Barabbas' are you choosing when Jesus is available?
- 2.What does Bar-Abbas ('son of the father') being released while the actual Son of the Father is condemned teach?
- 3.How does the crowd's informed choice (they KNEW Jesus) make the rejection deliberate?
- 4.What does the guilty going free because the innocent took his place describe about the gospel?
Devotional
Not this man — give us BARABBAS. And Barabbas was a robber. The crowd chooses the criminal over the Christ. The guilty is released. The innocent is condemned. The substitution that happens politically prefigures the substitution that happens theologically: the guilty go free BECAUSE the innocent takes their place.
The 'not this man, but Barabbas' is HUMANITY'S CHOICE stated plainly: when given the option — innocence or guilt, the healer or the thief, the Son of God or the son of the father (Bar-Abbas literally means 'son of the father') — humanity chooses the robber. The choice isn't made in ignorance. The crowd KNOWS Jesus. They've seen the miracles. They've heard the teaching. And they choose Barabbas. The preference for the criminal over the Christ is INFORMED.
The 'Barabbas was a robber' is John's FOOTNOTE that makes the absurdity inescapable: lest anyone miss the irony, John specifies — the man you're choosing is a CRIMINAL. A lēstēs — a bandit, a violent insurrectionist, a robber. The editorial comment forces you to feel the weight of the exchange: the crowd traded the Author of life for a destroyer of life. The Bread of Life for a thief. The Light of the World for a man of darkness.
The name BAR-ABBAS (son of the father) is the deepest irony: the crowd releases the 'son of the father' (Barabbas) and condemns the ACTUAL Son of the Father (Jesus). The criminal's name carries the title that belongs to Christ. The false 'son of the father' goes free. The true Son of the Father goes to the cross.
What 'Barabbas' are you choosing — what lesser, darker option — when Jesus is standing right there?
Commentary
Trusted original commentary from respected historical Bible scholars and theologians.
Then cried they all again,.... For it seems that Pilate had made this proposal once before, and that this was the second…
Barabbas was a robber - See Mat 27:16. The later Syriac has in the margin, αρχιλῃστης, a chief robber, a captain of…
We have here an account of Christ's arraignment before Pilate, the Roman governor, in the praetorium (a Latin word made…
Then cried they all again Better, They cried out therefore (Joh 18:18) again all of them. S. John has not mentioned any…
Cross References
Related passages throughout Scripture