𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗥𝗢𝗪𝗗 𝗖𝗛𝗢𝗦𝗘 𝗕𝗔𝗥𝗔𝗕𝗕𝗔𝗦

THE CROWD CHOSE BARABBAS

Why Men Reject Truth and Choose Error

INTRODUCTION

On a spring morning in Jerusalem, a crowd was presented with a choice that would echo through history. Before them stood two men—one a convicted criminal, the other a teacher known for healing the sick and speaking of a kingdom not of this world. The Roman governor, following custom, offered to release one prisoner. The people answered without hesitation.

They chose Barabbas.

The decision was not made in ignorance. It was made in full view of the facts. Barabbas was known. Jesus was examined. The contrast could not have been sharper, yet the verdict was unanimous. In that moment, the crowd revealed more than a preference between two individuals; it exposed a pattern of human behavior that continues to define societies, institutions, and belief systems to this day.

The Gospel of John provides a sober explanation:

“And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” — John 3:19 (KJV)

Barabbas represents man’s preference—power, rebellion, and self-justification. Christ represents God’s provision—truth, righteousness, and grace. The choice between them illustrates why truth is routinely rejected when it threatens pride, exposes sin, or disrupts established systems.

This article examines the Barabbas episode as a historical event, a prophetic symbol, and a recurring social phenomenon. Far from being confined to ancient Jerusalem, the same forces that swayed that crowd continue to shape modern religion, politics, and culture.

1. A PROPHETIC EXCHANGE — WHEN JUSTICE WAS OVERTURNED

The release of Barabbas was legally permitted but morally indefensible. Roman custom allowed a prisoner to be freed during Passover as a gesture of goodwill. Pilate, recognizing the innocence of Jesus, appears to have assumed the crowd would choose the harmless teacher over the violent insurgent.

They did not.

According to Matthew’s account, Barabbas was a “notable prisoner” (Matthew 27:16), a term suggesting notoriety rather than ambiguity. Mark clarifies that he had taken part in an insurrection and committed murder. Luke describes him as a rebel. John identifies him as a robber. By any standard, he was guilty.

Jesus, by contrast, stood unconvicted. Pilate declared repeatedly that he found no fault in Him. Even the charge brought against Jesus—claiming kingship—was theological, not criminal. Yet the innocent man was condemned, and the guilty man was released.

This exchange fulfilled ancient prophecy. Isaiah had foretold a servant who would be “despised and rejected of men” (Isaiah 53:3). The rejection of Jesus was not a failure of divine foresight but a revelation of human nature when confronted with moral accountability.

2. WHY THE CROWD PREFERRED BARABBAS

The preference for Barabbas was rooted less in admiration for the man and more in rejection of what Jesus represented.

First-century Judea existed under Roman occupation. Many longed for a political deliverer—someone who would confront power with force. Barabbas, involved in violent resistance, fit that expectation. Jesus did not. He spoke of loving enemies, submitting to God’s will, and addressing sin before systems.

When crowds earlier attempted to make Jesus king by force, He withdrew (John 6:15). His refusal to conform to nationalistic expectations disappointed those seeking immediate political change. Barabbas, though criminal, embodied resistance on human terms.

Additionally, Jesus openly challenged religious hypocrisy. His public rebukes of leaders who valued appearance over integrity struck at the heart of institutional pride. Truth that exposes hypocrisy is rarely welcomed, especially when it threatens authority and reputation.

3. TRUTH AS A THREAT

Jesus Himself explained why hostility followed Him:

“The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.” — John 7:7 (KJV)

Truth does more than inform; it confronts. It challenges self-perception and dismantles carefully constructed justifications. For the crowd, choosing Barabbas meant silencing an uncomfortable voice.

Luke records their unified cry: “Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas” (Luke 23:18). This was not mob confusion but collective rejection. Faced with light, they chose darkness.

The Apostle Paul later observed that humanity has a persistent tendency to “change the truth of God into a lie” (Romans 1:25). The Barabbas decision stands as a vivid illustration of that exchange.

4. THE CROWD AS A CAUTIONARY TALE

The Barabbas episode undermines the assumption that consensus equals correctness. Crowds can be manipulated, persuaded, and driven by emotion rather than truth.

Matthew notes that religious leaders actively influenced the multitude to demand Barabbas’s release (Matthew 27:20). The result was not justice but collective moral failure.

Scripture offers a blunt assessment of the human condition:

“There is none that seeketh after God.” — Romans 3:11 (KJV)

This is not cynicism; it is diagnosis. Without divine intervention, human judgment consistently favors what aligns with self-interest over righteousness.

5. SUBSTITUTION WITHOUT MERIT

Barabbas did nothing to earn his freedom. He offered no repentance, no apology, no reform. He simply walked free because another took his place.

Matthew summarizes the moment with stark brevity: “Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified” (Matthew 27:26).

In theological terms, this exchange illustrates substitution. Paul later explained that God presented Christ as a propitiation—one who satisfies justice on behalf of others (Romans 3:25). The guilty man lived because the innocent man died.

6. NATIONAL REJECTION AND PROPHETIC CONSEQUENCES

The crowd’s decision carried consequences beyond the immediate execution. When leaders declared, “We have no king but Caesar” (John 19:15), they formally rejected the messianic claim of Jesus.

Paul later described this rejection as a partial blindness affecting Israel (Romans 11:25). The promised kingdom was not abolished but postponed, while the message of salvation was extended beyond national boundaries.

Acts records Paul’s declaration that “the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles” (Acts 28:28), marking a significant shift in redemptive history.

7. A SHIFT FROM CROWD DECISION TO PERSONAL FAITH

Through the Apostle Paul, a new emphasis emerged: salvation not through national allegiance or collective action, but through individual faith.

Paul described this message as a “mystery” revealed by God (Ephesians 3:3). Unlike the Passover crowd, no one is saved by following majority opinion. Faith is personal, deliberate, and inward.

As Paul wrote, salvation comes through believing and confessing Christ, not aligning with popular sentiment (Romans 10:9).

8. MODERN PARALLELS

The choice between Barabbas and Christ continues in contemporary forms. Many prefer religion built on performance rather than grace. Others gravitate toward leaders who promise affirmation rather than truth.

Paul warned that people would seek teachers who tell them what they want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3). Works-based righteousness remains more appealing than humble dependence on grace (Romans 10:3).

The pattern has not changed—only the packaging.

CONCLUSION

The crowd chose Barabbas.

God chose the cross.

That ancient decision exposes an enduring reality: truth is often rejected not because it is unclear, but because it is costly. Grace remains available, but it must be received deliberately, not inherited from the crowd.

Barabbas walked free. Jesus paid the price.

The question posed in Jerusalem still confronts every generation—not as history, but as a present choice.

“Christ died for our sins.” — 1 Corinthians 15:3 (KJV)