12From then on, Pilate tried to set Jesus free, but the Jews kept shouting, "If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar."
13When Pilate heard this, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judge's seat at a place known as the Stone Pavement (which in Aramaic is Gabbatha). 14It was the day of Preparation of Passover Week, about the sixth hour.
"Here is your king," Pilate said to the Jews.
15But they shouted, "Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!"
"Shall I crucify your king?" Pilate asked.
"We have no king but Caesar," the chief priests answered. 16Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified.
Clearly, the people understand that a claim to kingship by Jesus establishes Jesus as a replacement for Caesar as king of this present world. Now, the crowd has no doubt been coached to call for Jesus' curifixion. But, and this is the key point, the rhetoric they use clearly is this: "you need to crucify this man since he is setting himself as a replacement king for Caesar". This rhetoric would not work if the kingship claim were not a claim about this present world.
This last point is so crucial, it warrants further elaboration. Obviously the people could have been, and obviously were coached, to basically say "crucify this Jesus who claims to be a king, we want Ceasar as our king". This appeal from the crowd only works if a claim to be a "king" actually is a claim to challenge Caesar. And did Jesus agree that He was a King? From the previous chapter:
Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a kingâ€Â.
There we have it - from Jesus' own lips, a claim of kingship.
Look at this way. We know that Jesus claims to be a king. It would seem that the only way to rescue the view that he is not a present king over the institutions of this world is to make either of the following arguments:
1. He is understood as intending to assume his kingship in the distant future (second coming); and / or
2. He is understood as asserting that His present "kingdom", i.e. at the time He claims to be a king in front of Pilate, does not include "the real world" but rather some hidden spiritual realm.
Neither of these alternatives is very attractive. Now suppose (1) is true. Then the chants of the crowd make no sense at all. Why would the crowd choose Caesar over Jesus if the general understanding was that He was not presently claiming to be King? What kind of a challenge is that to Ceasar's authority? Now suppose (2) is true. Again, how is that a challenge to Caesar? If Jesus was understood to be claiming kingship over some mysterious inner world, how does that not leave Caesar unchallenged?
It is important to see the implications here. The crowds chant that "Ceasar, not Jesus is our King" really only achieve their purpose if it was generally understood that Jesus' self-stated kingship was indeed a claim to kingship over the domain that Ceaser presently ruled over. The fact that the crowd was "coached" does not change this crucial fact: the nature of what they chanted - Jesus is not our king, Caesar is - shows that it was generally understood what a claim to kingship entailed, that is, a challenge to Ceasar as king of this present world.
They suffered for their allegiance to the rightful king...in this case Richard "Coeur de Lion." The Sheriff's men did not follow the king...they were to be punished on his return. They looked for advancement with the usurper of kingly authority. So it is with Christ's return and the overthrowing of those who are presently in bed with the temporal authorities and powers. We must come out of Babylon so as not to share in the wrath against it. We are to be loyal to our King and remain separate....even as Robin Hood and His merry men! When the King returns we shall be properly rewarded according to our faith and faithfulness! :amen