But vith Pilate the method of! compromise did not succeed, Had he without prevarication issued a sentence against Jesus, h> would have pleased the Jews; had he wi out hesitation released Jesus, he would have had a clear conscience; bat by trying to do both at once, he failed in both. Let it be admitted] that there are matters where a mutually exclusive choice is not necessary, where the ideal attitude may be described as "both—and"; bat there are other matters where the issue is clearly defined and where a choice of alternatives has. to made. In regard to these our decision has to be "either—or." As the ancient prophet stated it "Chooes this day whom ye will serve." " Or as. Jesus. vexpressed: it."¥_ cannot} serve-God ands mammort.". <Ang garding Pilate's question there is! room for prevarication.. The] issue is clear.
IV. Pinally, the question is un-escapeable. Pilate's attempts to minimise its importance, to pass it on to others, or to settle it by compromise were all unsuccessful—Jesus which was called Christ was still on his hands. Pilate could not escape the question. "His indecision led to wrong decision. By not releasing Jesus he crucified Him.
Let us make no mistake. Try to ade this matter as we will, Jcapnot evade it successfully; for our ]very evasion works out as rejection. JAnd as Jesus which is called Christ] [stands before us this morning awaiting our verdict, let us be quite sure about this: any other than a clear verdict for Him is a-verdict against Him, "What shall we do with Jesus which is called Christ?" What shall bbe our answer to this question which {8 a0 important, so personal, so clear, so uneseapeable? Shall it not be an unbesitating- recognition of Him as} Lord and Saviour?
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.