Channeling John Adams…
During a recent conversation with two dear friends and colleagues of mine, both referred to the New Testament “outlaw”, Barabbas, in the usual disparaging manner, a manner that I think perpetuates a simplistic, incomplete, and therefore inaccurate representation of an historic figure. Other Biblical figures have suffered similar fates, such as the Apostle Thomas (“the doubter”), Mary of Magdala (“the prostitute”), and, yes, even Pontius Pilate and Judas Iscariot. I object to those misrepresentations, and want to defend their right to a fair hearing just as John Adams courageously — and successfully — defended the British soldiers after the Boston Massacre.
“Barabbas” is named in all four of the Gospels, specifically as one of the two criminals during the “judicial hearing” presided over by Pontius Pilate to determine Jesus’s fate. He stands accused of sedition, insurrection, and treason–the same accusations the authorities make of Jesus. One translation could lead some to infer that Barabbas was accused of murder, but I’ve seen no definitive citation.
Even if you built your case on the sand of that “murder”, the three definite accusations mentioned above should make one draw only one conclusion about that inference: Barabbas killed a Roman soldier. At that point, counsel for the defense would immediately refer to Moses and his killing of the oppressing Egyptian soldier, an action that ultimately led to his encounter with God on the holy ground of Mt Horeb and the Jewish Exodus from bondage to freedom (Note that God does not even mention the killing incident).
Of course, leading up to that exodus is the slaughter of the innocent lamb whose blood is the very reason for Jewish freedom! And that is despite the many crimes committed against man and God by the same Israelites. The Passover tradition calls for the priest to bring two goats, one (the “scapegoat”) for the ritual slaughter whose sacrificial blood would sanctify the Sanctuary and the other (Barabbas?) representing the atoned. Is this Divine Providence…?
If you believe Moses was a good guy, then you will find him not guilty of murder and instead call him a “freedom fighter” in the same way we have labeled our Revolutionary warriors and those throughout our history who have killed in defense of our freedom. So, if Moses is a virtuous hero then why isn’t Barabbas? Keep in mind that at Jesus’s trial, Barabbas was already convicted of the crime (by a Roman court) while Jesus wasn’t. So after the crowd screamed “Barabbas!”, what followed was not so much a prisoner exchange but a substitution of an innocent man for a guilty one. Sound familiar? Couldn’t this be Jesus’s first substitutionary act? He took the penalty, leaving Barabbas to live to see another day. Was he, therefore, like the other sinners whom Jesus forgave and for whom he performed miracles, like the man born blind, “…so that God could be glorified“? Did the Roman soldier, Pilate, and especially Barabbas play their part in our salvation, as Moses did for the Israelites? Divine Providence…?
While society can convict Barabbas, I won’t because I wasn’t there and don’t know enough about his case. I might have wanted to kill many Romans for their reign of terror, especially if I hadn’t yet become a member of The (Jesus) Way. And if his actions helped to fulfill Jesus’s destiny, then I’ll leave him in the hands of Divine Grace. Divine Providence…?
In the name of brevity and for the sake of a possible future post:
- “Doubting” Thomas (a moniker that didn’t appear until well into Modernity): this future saint had plenty of company in his doubt (of his fellow Apostles, not of his Savior), since the eleven doubted Mary Magdalene’s report of the risen Jesus. This is just one example of many doubters.
- Mary Magdalene: Despite being falsely labeled as a prostitute, hoar, sexually sinful woman, etc, no such evidence exists for that libel. The Bible only reports that Mary had seven demons exorcised by Christ. If anything, this reference strongly suggests either possession or mental illness.
We don’t need to — and shouldn’t — alter any text of any historical document, especially if that alteration is inaccurate and harms the individual. Worse is doing this to someone as ultimately virtuous as Mary Magdalene, a figure who demonstrated great courage as well as total devotion to our Lord and someone who became known as “Apostle to the Apostles” because, after having been the first person to whom Jesus appeared after His resurrection, He sent her to the Twelve to report the Good News!
Speak truth and do not harm others, even if at the cost of popularity and your preconceived, childhood, notions.
Right John?
Leave a Reply