In short, almost certainly yes. Barabbas was the condemned man who was released by Pilate instead of Jesus (following the intervention of the religious leaders who got the crowd to call for the criminal). Barabbas is a minor character but an interesting one and mentioned in all four gospel accounts. His name possibly means “son of the father” (bar-abba), which would have a strong irony in the story, although it could mean “son of the teacher” (bar-rabban) or be coincidental.

However, here is why I was pondering if he might not have been a bad man. I was at a three-hour Good Friday vigil and it had been set around the text from Mark’s gospel. In Mark 15:7, it says “And the one named Barabbas had been imprisoned with the rebels who had committed murder in the revolt.” That is the NASB translation and the NIV and several others are quite similar. Could he have been an innocent man imprisoned along with a group of murderous rebels?

If only Mark had mentioned him, you could draw that conclusion. However Matthew (27:16) describes him as “notorious”, John (18:40) says he had taken part in an uprising (combined with Mark, a stronger reason to believe he was a murderer) and Luke (23:19) leaves us in no doubt: “He was one who had been thrown into prison for a revolt that took place in the city, and for murder”.

When studying the Bible, it is worth looking out for the things that strike you but also worth doing a little extra research, particularly when it seems a novel idea you don’t remember hearing before.