My Musings

Friday, January 25, 2008

The Mistrial of the Ages

Mistrial: A trial that becomes invalid, is essentially canceled, because of a mistake in procedure.

During the time leading up to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, He was led before the Jewish Sanhedrin to face formal charges as they were brought against him. It was at this trial that they ultimately determined his guilty verdict and decided to implement capital punishment. Yet a careful examination of that trial will reveal that it was in violation of many Jewish laws by which the Sanhedrin were directed to follow. It is my intention in this article to prove to you that even if Christ were guilty of the charges he faced his trial was still completely bogus. The laws of justice by which the Sanhedrin were so famous for following were completely thrown out the window as Yeshua or Jesus Christ was led to his crucifixion.

The Great Sanhedrin was an assembly of Jewish judges who comprised the Jewish court of law. This panel included a leader called a Nasi, a High Priest, a vice-chief justice and sixty-nine general members. These Jewish leaders were considered experts in many fields. They were well versed in Science, medicine, chemistry and foreign languages. The priests were experts in the moral law, the elders in the civil law, and the scribes in the ceremonial law.

The Sanhedrin imposed strict regulations upon itself in order to maintain such a high standard and to protect an innocent man from ever being wrongly accused of guilt. This standard, or law code, was called the Mishna. It was this law code that was completely ignored during the trying of Jesus Christ and it is this law code that invalidates any claim at the Sanhedrin's authority to determine whether Jesus was or was not the Messiah.

  1. The Sanhedrin met before the morning sacrifice. This was illegal. The purpose of this self-imposed regulations was to ensure that the counsel had taken the proper time to prepare themselves spiritually for such a decision. This helped to ensure that the men were "right with God" when handing down important verdicts.

  2. The Sanhedrin met prior to the Sabbath and prior to a feast day. This was illegal. The Sanhedrin were not allowed to meet on these days regarding any matter related to capital punishment. Since the Sanhedrin were required to reconvene on the day following any capital punishment decision, they imposed this law to ensure that they would not have to meet on a Sabbath or on a feast day.

  3. The witnesses did not agree. This was illegal. The Bible is very clear about the consequences of perjury before the court of law. "Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you." (Deut. 19:19). Jesus should not have been crucified that day. Those who witnessed against him should have been nailed to that cross!

  4. Christ's defense was never allowed. This was illegal. The accused could testify before the Sanhedrin but it was not required. The accused individual's confession was not enough to condemn them. This ensured that he was not coerced into a confession.

  5. The Sanhedrin continually changed their charges against him. This was illegal. The Sanhedrin began by accusing him of sedition (Mark 14:58; John 2:19). When that was not effective they moved to charge him with blasphemy(Mark 14:63-64). Finally, when they could not get a capital punishment charge based on either of those charges, they appealed to the Romans with the accusation of treason (Luke 23:1-2).

  6. The Sanhedrin presented a unanimous vote. This was illegal. According to Jewish law, a unanimous verdict of guilt required that the prisoner be released. This was an added precaution to safeguard against the counsel not taking the proper deliberations and giving a fair trial. This was also implemented to ensure that a conspiracy was not taking place.

  7. The Sanhedrin never reconvened the next day. This was illegal. The Sanhedrin were required to reconvene twenty-four hours later on all trials that included capital punishment. A member of the panel could change a 'guilty' vote to a 'not guilty' but a person could not change a 'not guilty' to a 'guilty.' This was an effort to protect the accused in that a member would sometimes see things more clearly after a good night's rest and perhaps would be more benevolent.

The above violations are only a few of the many clear infringements on Jewish law and justice that took place during what I have come to call 'The Mistrial of the Ages.' Any assertion to the authority of the Sanhedrin in these matters become null and void. They have forfeit any credence that they may like to claim concerning the Messiah. I have laid out the evidence clearly and truthfully. You decide what to do with it!

Labels: ,


  • Great Post...

    Lord Bless........

    By Blogger Christopher Cline, At 6:15 PM  

  • Thanks. I was trying to continue the conversation that was taking place concerning Judaism and the Messiah, but I guess the Jews got tired of talking to me. Oh well. Thanks for stopping by.

    By Blogger Nicholas Z. Cardot, At 6:25 PM  

  • The many violations that the Gospels present of the Sanhedrin is proof that its writers were unfamiliar with its law and that the whole story is a fraud. The Sanhedrin never did any of that stuff.

    Sorry, this backfired.

    By Blogger Bar Kochba, At 6:31 PM  

  • Well, you have several witnesses stating that this event took place this particular way. Then you simply demand that they are wrong just because they are wrong. You provide no evidence. You provide no witnesses. In a court of law, I don't believe that you would have much of a case.

    Also, if the Sanhedrin never did any of that stuff, then please fill me in on the missing history leading up to the crucifixion of Christ. Prove to me that something didn't take place even though we have witnesses saying that it did take place. And then tell me what took place instead.

    By Blogger Nicholas Z. Cardot, At 6:43 PM  

  • Puuuleeze... what witnesses? Paul was not an eyewitness to JC (who never existed) and he never claimed him to be a historical figure. In all of Paul's epistles, the earliest surviving Christian records, he never ones mentions the crucifixion by Pilate, his betrayal, all of his miracles, or any biographical information. He never connects Christ Jesus with the "historical" Jesus of Nazareth, son of Joseph and Mary, and never places him in an earthly setting. Paul never quotes one of JC's teachings or uses him as an example in terms of behaviour, and when Paul speaks of JC returning, he never once uses the word "again" or "for a second time".

    Here's just one example:
    Corinthians 15:12-16

    "12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. 15Moreover, we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we witnessed against God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised." [NASB/NIV]

    There are some devastating implications to be drawn from this passage. Paul expresses himself as though the raising of Christ from the dead is a matter of faith, not of historical record as evidenced by eyewitness to a physical, risen Jesus at Easter. He is so adamant about the necessity to believe that the dead will be raised, that he is prepared to state—and he repeats it four times—that if they are not, then Christ himself "has not been raised." If men he knew had witnessed the actual return of Jesus from the grave, I do not think he would have thought to make even a rhetorical denial of it.

    Moreover, the verb for "witness" (martureo) is often used in the sense of witnessing to, of declaring one’s belief in, an item of faith, not of factual record (though it can mean this in some contexts). Such a meaning here is strongly supported by what follows this verb: kata tou theou, or "against God." Translators often seem uncertain of the exact import of this phrase, but Bauer’s Lexicon firmly declares it as meaning "give testimony in contradiction to God." The idea that Paul is trying to get across here is that if in fact God did not raise Jesus from death (which would have to be the conclusion, he says, if all of the dead are not raised) then, rhetorically speaking, he and other apostles have been contradicting God and lying about Jesus’ resurrection.

    The point is, and it’s unmistakable, Paul is saying that knowledge about Jesus’ raising has come from God, and that his own preaching testimony, true or false, is something which relates to information which has come from God—in other words, through revelation. Not history, not apostolic tradition about recent events on earth. In all this discussion about the trueness of Christ’s resurrection, Paul’s standard is one of faith, faith based on God’s testimony—meaning, in scripture. (Cf. Romans 8:25, 10:9, 1 Thess. 4:14.) Historical human witness plays no part.

    Paul speaks of JC as being "revealed", in the sense of a divine being, a saviour god in the sense of Attis, Mithras or Osiris.

    All I care for is to know Christ, to experience the power of his resurrection, to share in his sufferings . . . [NEB]

    This amazing silence is one that resonates throughout the entire record of early Christian correspondence, but we can focus on it through one passage in Paul. This striking and pervasive silence, perhaps the most telling of them all, can be summed up in one question: Where are the holy places?

    In all the Christian writers of the 1st century, in all the devotion they display about Christ and the new faith, not one of them ever expresses the slightest desire to see the birthplace of Jesus, to visit Nazareth his home town, the sites of his preaching, the upper room where he held his Last Supper, the hill on which he was crucified, or the tomb where he was buried and rose from the dead. Not only is there no evidence that anyone showed an interest in such places, they go completely unmentioned. The words Bethlehem, Nazareth and Galilee never appear in the epistles, and the word Jerusalem is never used in connection with Jesus. Most astonishing of all, there is not a hint of pilgrimage to Calvary itself, where humanity’s salvation was consummated. How could such a place not have become the center of Christian devotion, how could it not have been turned into a shrine? Each year at Passover we would expect to find Christians observing their own celebration on the hill outside Jerusalem, performing a rite every Easter Sunday at the site of the nearby tomb. Christian sermonizing and theological meditation could hardly fail to be built around the places of salvation, not just the abstract events.

    Do Christians avoid frequenting such places out of fear? Acts, possibly preserving a kernel of historical reality, portrays the Apostles as preaching fearlessly in the Temple in the earliest days, despite arrest and persecution, and the persecution has in any case been much exaggerated for the early decades. Even such a threat, however, should not and would not have prevented clandestine visits by Christians, and there were many other places of Jesus’ career whose visitation would have involved no danger. And, of course, there would have been no danger in mentioning them in their correspondence.

    Even Paul seems immune to the lure of such places. He can speak, as in Philippians, of wanting to know Christ, to know the power of his resurrection, to share in his sufferings. And yet, does he rush to the hill of Calvary upon his conversion, to experience those sufferings the more vividly, to throw himself upon the sacred ground that bore the blood of his slain Lord? Does he stand before the empty tomb, the better to bring home to himself the power of Jesus’ resurrection, the better to feel the conviction that his own resurrection is guaranteed? This is a man whose letters reveal someone full of insecurities and self-doubts, possessed by his own demons, highly emotional, a man driven to preach else he would go mad, as he tells us in 1 Corinthians 9:16. Would he not have derived great consolation from visiting the Gethsemane garden, where Jesus is reported to have passed through similar horrors and self-doubts? Would his sacramental convictions about the Lord’s Supper, which he is anxious to impart to the Corinthians (11:23f), not have been heightened by a visit to the upper room in Jerusalem, to absorb the ambience of that hallowed place and occasion?

    Once again, such considerations render unacceptable the standard rationalization that Paul was uninterested in the earthly life of Jesus. Moreover, when Paul undertakes to carry his mission to the gentiles, surely he would want—and need—to go armed with the data of Jesus’ life, with memories of the places Jesus had frequented, ready to answer the inevitable questions his new audiences would ask in their eagerness to hear all the details about the man who was the Son of God and Savior of the world. Instead, what does he do? By his own account in Galatians, he waits three years following his conversion before making a short visit to Jerusalem, "to get to know Cephas. I stayed with him for fifteen days, without seeing any of the other apostles except James, the brother of the lord." Nor was he to return there for another fourteen years. Did Paul learn all the data of Jesus life on that one occasion? Did he visit the holy places? Not having felt the urge to do so for three years, his silence on such things is perhaps not surprising. But if he did, can we believe he would not have shared these experiences—and they would have been intensely emotional ones—with his readers? If not here, then at least at some point in his many letters?

    But it is not only the places of Jesus’ life and death. What about the relics? Jesus’ clothes, the things he used in his everyday life, the things he touched? Can we believe that such items would not have remained behind, to be collected, clamored for, to be seen and touched by the faithful themselves? Would not an apostle like Paul be anxious to carry such a memento of the man he preached? Would not a rivalry develop between apostles, between Christian communities (as it did later), to gain such mementos and relics for worship and as status symbols? Did not one single cup survive from the Last Supper—one that would be claimed to have touched Jesus’ own lips? Was there not a single nail with Jesus' flesh on it, not one thorn from the bloody crown, not the centurion's spear, not a piece of cloth from his garments gambled over by the soldiers at the foot of the cross—not, in fact, a host of relics claimed to be these very things, such as we find all through the Middle Ages?

    Why is it only in the 4th century that pieces of "the true cross" begin to surface? Why is it left to Constantine to set up the first shrine on the supposed mount of Jesus’ death, and to begin the mania for pilgrimage to the holy sites that has persisted to this day? Why would someone in the first 100 years of the movement not similarly seek to walk on the same ground that the Son of God himself had so recently walked on? The total absence of such things in the first hundred years of Christian correspondence is perhaps the single strongest argument for regarding the entire Gospel account of Jesus' life and death as nothing but literary fabrication.

    Theologians have also observed for many decades that two of the synoptic gospels (Matthew and Luke) have many points of similarity. In fact, the writings have many dozens of phrases and sentences that are identical. This observation led to the theory that both gospels were based largely on an earlier document called "Q" meaning "Quelle," which is German for "source," and is comprised of three distinct documents:
    Q1 described Jesus as a Jewish philosopher-teacher, written circa 50 CE.

    Q2 viewed Jesus as a Jewish apocalyptic prophet, written circa 60 CE.

    Q3 described Jesus as a near-deity who converses directly with God and Satan, written circa 70 CE during a time of great turmoil in Palestine.
    The authors of the Gospels of Matthew (circa 80 CE) and Luke (circa 90 CE) wrote their books using text from Q, Mark and their own unique traditions. The author of the Gospel of Thomas also used portions of Q1 and Q2 in his writing, but seems to have been unaware of Q3. This gospel was widely circulated within the early Christian movement but did not make it into the Christian Scriptures.
    What is remarkable about Q1 is that the original Christians appeared to be centered totally on concerns about their relationships with God and with other people, and their preparation for the Kingdom of God on earth. Totally absent from their spiritual life are almost all of the factors that we associate with Christianity today. There is absolutely no mention of (in alphabetic order):

    great commission to convert the world
    infancy stories
    John the Baptist
    Last Supper
    life after death
    Mary and Joseph and the rest of Jesus' family
    Jewish laws concerning behavior
    restrictions on sexual behavior
    roles of men and women
    second coming
    signs of the end of the age
    speaking in tongues
    trial of Jesus
    virgin birth

    There is no reference to Jesus' death having any redeeming function; in fact, there is no mention of the crucifixion at all.

    By Blogger Bar Kochba, At 12:10 AM  

  • Nicholas,
    The following are some excerpts from a book, 'Meet the Rabbis: Rabbinic Thought and The Teachings of Jesus,' written by a Christian scholar, Dr. Brad Young, who has dedicated his studies to the Jewish origins of Christianity and is one of the leading contemporary scholars concerning such. To preface the excerpt regarding the Great Sanhedrin, let me share this first excerpt from Dr. Young's book:

    "In Christian literature, including academic writings, I often encounter a prejudicial attitude against Judaism. The prejudice is usually directed at the Pharisees and their spiritual successors, the rabbis, in the form of sweeping generalizations. John Lightfoot's 'Commentary on the New Testament form the Talmud and Hebraica' -- a four volume commentary spanning Matthew through 1 Corinthians first published between 1658-1674 -- stands out in my mind as a example of Christian literature containing an anti-Jewish bias. Lightfoot lived from 1602 to 1675. A Puritain who taught at Cambridge, Lightfoot wrote his commentary on the New Testament in Latin. ...[A]nti-Semitism and anti-Judaism have been a severe problem in the history of Christian education and theology* (*Marvin R. Wilson, Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of Christian Faith (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 87-103; and the classic work, Edward H. Flannery, The Anguish fo the Jews: Twenty-Three Centuries of Anti-Semitism (Mahwah, N.J., Paulist, 1985).

    Since Lightfoot's time, German scholars have also written comparative studies on the New Testament and Talmudic literature. The most famous of these works is Herman Strack and Paul Billerbock's 'Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and Midrash.' An excellent reference tool, this work remains available only in German. Other fine works, such as Gustaf Dalman's 'The Words of Jesus,' have been translated into English. In English, one of the most widely read books on this subject is Alfred Edersheim's 'The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.' These works, while still in use today, are out of date and full of incorrect views of Judaism.

    Overcoming prejudice based upon misconceptions is a formidable task. Recognizing that some of our earlier teachings concerning Judaism and the Jewish people are not always accurate is a first step. Today, Christians are much more willing to study Jewish scholarship. The emergence of Israeli scholars as leading contributors to biblical research has generated a body of valuable academic literature in Modern Hebrew, much of which remains inaccessible to the English reader. We need more studies using comparative approaches between the New Testament and Talmudic literature to be written or translated into English.

    Christians should -- everyone should -- read Rabbi Joseph Telushkin's 'Jewish Wisdom: Ethical, Spiritual, and Historical Lessons from the Great Works and Thinkers.' All would also benefit from the writings our Abraham Joshua Heschel. His books, such as 'God in Search of Man,' offer fresh insight into the deeper meaning of the concept to God in the Bible." (Dr. Brad Young, Meet the Rabbis: Rabbinic Thought and The Teachings of Jesus, (Peabody, MA, Henderickson Publishers, Inc., 2007), pp.5-6).

    Whew...! All that said to preface the following excerpt:

    "Some scholars believe that the whole Sanhedrin met together to decide the fate of Jesus in a night trial before sending him to Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor. This view is certainly incorrect: the Sanhedrin did not meet at night, they did not meet in the residence of the high priest, and forty years before the destruction of the Jerusalem they could not consider capital cases. Luke's version of the trial makes it clear that Caiaphas, who co-operated with the Roman authorities, convened "their" council. The pronoun "their" must refer to a meeting of Sadducees and not the great Sanhedrin, as this nighttime assembly does not fit what we know of the latter group (Luke 22:66). This meeting included elders and scribes of the Sadducees. It may have been a representative conference of Bet Din Hakohenim, the "House fo Law [Court] of the Priests," but it was their council and not the Sanhedrin.

    The confusion is in part due to the Greek word for "conference, council, committee," which is synhedrion. This is the origin of the term Sanhedrin. The Greek word, however, may simply refer to a committee meeting or a council, as well as a court session. The context of a word determines its meaning. Here it cannot refer to the Great Sanhedrin of seventy-one, even though this is the linguistic background for the name Sanhedrin. The context in which this group goes about its business is not the context in which the Sanhedrin operated. Hebrew sources usually refer to it as Bet Din, "House of Law," or Bet Din Hagadol, "the Great House of Law," rather than use the term Sanhedrin.

    Scholars who argue that Jesus appeared before the Great Sanhedrin during an illegal night session point to the Gospel of Mark's descriptive term, the "whole" council (Mark 14:55). The Greek word, holos, meaning "whole," should be understood in light of the Lukan parallel (Luke 11:66-71). This is the whole council of the chief priests who convene the session at night during Passover, so that the ones who are sympathetic with Jesus will not be informed about the meeting. We do not hear of any one else present, like Rabban Gamaliel. Rather, the high priest and his supporters are the ones who are shown questioning Jesus. Others, especially the Pharisees would have been involved with the Passover celebration. It is even possible that the Sadducees observed Passover at a different time according to their own calendar, which was different from the Pharisee's calendar*. (*Daniel A Chwolson, Das letzte Passamahl Christi und der Tag seines Todes (Leipzeg: H. Haessel, 1908), and Annie Jaubert, The Date of the Last Supper (Staten Island, N.Y.: Alba House, 1965)).

    It seems the have been the Sadducee's intention to arrest Jesus while the common people and the Pharisees celebrated Passover. They viewed Jesus' movement as a threat to political stability: a messianic movement would jeapordize the already unsteady relationship between the Jewish people and the imperial power of Rome. The high priest was appointed by Roman decree, and functioned in the Temple as a liaison between Rome and the common people. Ciaiphas wanted to tell Pilate that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, a political charge against the Roman empire. They could not, however, arrest Jesus on the Temple Mount because he was surrounded by crowds of people who largely supported him (Matt 21:46, 26:55; Mark 12:12, 14:49; Luke 20:19, 22:53). Support for Jesus aside, the Sadducees were despised by the Pharisees and many others in Jewish society. It seems clear, then, that the trial of Jesus was not a meeting of the Great Sanhedrin." (Dr. Brad Young, Meet the Rabbis: Rabbinic Thought and The Teachings of Jesus, (Peabody, MA, Henderickson Publishers, Inc., 2007), pp. 52-53)

    Also, I'd like to retract a statement I made the other day on BK's blog, which was not a fully informed observation. I correct my statement here so it will not enter into the argument... that would be a waste of time. In my comments to BK's post ""An Apology, A Clarification and a Summary"" I said, "Perhaps rabbinical Judaism does not acknowledge the notion of 'hypocrisy,' but Yeshua, a Karaite Jew, did!" Big Daddy Jew immediately refuted me, "Yeshua wasn't a Kairite Jew. He believed in and quoted the Oral Torah." This certainly caused me to pause and to consider other sources as to whether Yeshua was a Karaite or not.

    A Karaite Jew is someone who adheres strictly to the written Torah and Tanakh, they do not abide by the Oral Torah. Prior to really researching the issue and looking for dissenting commentators to the claim that Yeshua practiced an early form of Karaitism in the 1st century, the light bulb came on when I commented back to BK using John 6:44: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day." Ah, hah! I had my answer! Obviously, Yeshua believed in parts of Oral Torah and quoted it in a positive light. You see, the Sadducees had a theology very similar to the Karaites. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead since the Tanakh does not explicity deal with the resurrection of the dead ("For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all." (Acts 23:8)). The belief in the resurrection of the dead is given to us by the Oral Torah. The Pharisees found the concept implied. This issue divided the Pharisees, who are the ancestors of Rabbinical (Talmudic) Judaism, and the Sadducess. The Pharisees found the concept implied.


    By Blogger Deborah, At 11:16 PM  

  • Bro. Nicholas, this was very good!! It is ashame that the Jews has missed their Messiah. But keep preaching, Brother. I have linked to this post as it ias excellent!


    By OpenID maranatha777, At 12:07 PM  

  • Kate (maranatha777),
    Considering the content of this post and those who have engaged, your comment "It is ashame [sic] that the Jews has [sic] missed their Messiah. But keep preaching, Brother" sounds insensitive to say the least, and arrogant to put it more rightly. To direct the phrase "But keep preaching, Brother" at a Jewish audience regarding an issue that has separated Jews and Christians for thousands of years and has been used to persecute and murder them is absolutely intolerable!!! Where's the love and the wisdom in the phrase you've selected to use among this audience? You are not endorsing the Gospel (a.k.a. "Good News"), you're endorsing an accusation that may or may not be correct, and which has been the cause of much death and pain over the centuries.

    God knows I've made the same statement, "Preach it, brother," but I directed it toward my own Christian brethren concerning issues within our own faith, I would never direct such arrogance toward those outside of Christian faith!

    It really doesn't matter who or what council of men Yeshua appeared before prior to be crucified, the Sanhedrin or a council of the Sadducees, the fact is, Kate, YOU and I crucified Him, while Yeshua forgave His Jewish brethren standing immediately around Him, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do” (Luke 23:34).

    The least you can do is to present the Gospel to those who give you the opportunity to do so, and if that opportunity is not made available to you, the best you can do is pray and leave it to the Father. "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day..." (John 6:44).

    You may not be fully aware of the atrocious history of the Christian church regarding the Jewish people, and you're naive about the way your statement comes off to a Jew who is already very wary of your intentions. Perhaps, I'm wrong or I may be correct... but either way, I hope this is a lesson about better choosing a right attitude and words given the context of the situation. God has called us to peace (Matt. 5:9, 1 Cor. 7:15c)!!!!


    By Blogger Deborah, At 8:40 PM  

  • Bar,

    I apologize for having taken so long to respond to your comments on here. Don't think that I have forgotten about you.

    Anyways, in regard to the witnesses, I was not referring in any way to the Apostle Paul. Paul speaks about the faith that he has in the resurrection. You are right about that. Yet that is only because Paul himself was not one of the eye-witnesses that I was referring to. Paul's faith was in the testimony of the eye-witness accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and many of the other apostles who had probably presented oral histories to him. His faith was in their honesty. Their stories, however, were first-hand eye witness accounts.

    In reference to the Q, it makes sense that it may have been used as a reference point for the authors of the gospels. They viewed the writings that were circulating and realized that some of them may have been filling with some discrepancies so they decided to write down their eye-witness accounts. Consider for example the testimony of Luke.

    "Luk 1:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
    Luk 1:2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
    Luk 1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
    Luk 1:4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed."

    Also, in terms of the relics of Christ, I don't understand how that is relevant to our discussion. Because the early apostles didn't worship his physical possessions then.....I'm not sure what conclusion you drew at that point. A clarification would be helpful. I probably just missed a step there or something.

    Anyways Bar, you always have a lot of great material and it continues to be a great joy to discuss this with you and to learn at your table, so-to-speak. I await your response.

    By Blogger Nicholas Z. Cardot, At 9:08 PM  

  • Deborah,

    I certainly see you point regarding Kate's comments, yet I think that she meant well. I don't think that she honestly meant to be malicious or condescending in any way. I do, however, see exactly what you are talking about and I do see how it could be taken that way. Anyways, I'm just gonna give her the benefit of the doubt.

    By Blogger Nicholas Z. Cardot, At 9:10 PM  

  • Deborah,

    I in no way meant any disrespect nor was I writing in arrogance. Please forgive me if I came across that way. I should have slowed down and written more clearly what was on my heart. I was merely stating my agreement with what Nicholas wrote. I should have outlined why I said that the Jews missed the first appearance of their Messiah and backed it up with the Word of God.

    The Old Testament says Messiah must suffer for our sins as the prophet Isaiah foretold in the Bible.
    "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed." The Book of Isaiah 53:5

    Does the Bible tell us where on His body He will be wounded?
    His hands and feet will be pierced:
    "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends." The Book of Zechariah 13:6
    "For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet." The Book of Psalms 22:16
    His back and face will be smitten:
    "I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair. I hid not my face from shame and spitting." The Book of Isaiah 50:6
    "Now gather thyself in troops, 0 daughter of troops: he hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek." The Book of Micah 5:1

    Not one bone in His body shall be broken:
    "He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken." The Book of Psalms 34:20

    In Bible prophecy the Messiah is beaten so badly, that His appearance is disfigured more than any man!
    "As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men." The Book Of Isaiah 52:14

    What else must the Messiah endure to fulfill Bible prophecy?
    The Bible teaches that God will give HIM to be the flawless and perfect sacrifice for our sins:
    "He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand." The Book of Isaiah 53:8-10
    "Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." The Book of Isaiah 53:12

    He will be resurrected after 3 days:
    "After two days wilt he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight." The Book of Hosea 6:2

    Has there ever in history been a man that has fulfilled all these requirements?
    Yes, there was such a man - he fulfilled each and every messianic prophecy.
    His hands and feet were pierced:
    "And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left." The Book of Luke 23:33

    His back and face were smitten:
    "Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him." The Book of John 19:1
    "And they smote him on the head with a reed, and did spit upon him, and bowing their knees worshipped him." The Book of Mark 15:19
    "And the men that held Jesus mocked him, and smote him. And when they had blindfolded him, they struck him on the face, and asked him saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote thee?" The Book of Luke 22:63-64

    Not one bone in His body was broken:
    "But when they come to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they broke not his legs: But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith come there out blood and water .. For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken." The Book of John 19:33-34,36

    Messiah rose three days after his crucifixion:
    "And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:" The Book of I Corinthians 15:4
    Many messiahs have come and gone, but only the true Messiah has come, has died, and been raised from the dead.
    What must I do to receive the promises of the Messiah?
    "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth come by Jesus Christ." The Book of John 1: 17
    "And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." The Book of Acts 13:39
    "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord." The Book of Acts 3:19
    "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." The Book of Romans 10:9

    By Anonymous Maranatha777, At 7:53 AM  

  • Kate,
    I understand saying something off-the-cuff and intending it to mean one thing, but comes off as another. I agree with all the Scriptures you've provided, no doubt. Thank you for lining them up so well.

    Kate, my reaction comes from deep within. My heart, my calling, is to cultivate peace between Christians and Jews, which began with the repentance for the sins of our church fathers, and then forgiveness of those sins by the Jewish people. Now, our generation must put words and promises to the Jewish people into action! So much healing has taken place just in the past 5-10 years between Christians and Jews... we need to be careful to not incite, entice, or solicit any criticism or misinformed, misappropriated accusations aimed at the Jewish people concerning the Messiah. This was never intended by the apostles (1 I speak the truth in [Messiah]—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from [Messiah] for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of [Messiah], who is God over all, forever praised! Amen. - The Apostle Paul (Romans 9:1-5))

    Treat them like you appreciate being treated. Don't bowl them over by saying things in writing you would never say to their face. If they do not extend the invitation to you to share the Gospel with them, don't. Just love and support 'em!!!!! Remember what Yeshua said, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:44). Leave it to God, meanwhile being loving and kind, be a blessing and be blessed!

    I hope Christians like you, Nicholas, and myself can continue to facilitate the healing processes between Jews and Christians, being very sensitive to their rightful wariness and mistrust. Please allow me to draw an analogy that your female heart can relate to:

    When a woman is raped or abused, it takes her years, or maybe never, to heal emotionally. Those who love and care about the woman will go to great lengths to ensure her safety and build back her trust in men, again. At the beginning, she may lash out at everyone who is trying to help or safeguard her, but the lashing out is a natural defense mechanism against a perceived threat that may or may not be real. Eventually, she may heal, but only after she learns that not every man intends to hurt her that way, again. However, it takes building of relationships with good, decent men for the realization to take effect.

    Please, remember, it was YOU and I who crucified Yeshua!

    7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, 8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
    9 But as it is written:
    “ Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
    Nor have entered into the heart of man
    The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.” (1 Corinthians 2:7-9)

    3 When You did awesome things for which we did not look,
    You came down,
    The mountains shook at Your presence.
    4 For since the beginning of the world
    Men have not heard nor perceived by the ear,
    Nor has the eye seen any God besides You,
    Who acts for the one who waits for Him. (Isaiah 64:3-4)

    14 Just as many were astonished at you,
    So His visage was marred more than any man,
    And His form more than the sons of men;
    15 So shall He sprinkle many nations.
    Kings shall shut their mouths at Him;
    For what had not been told them they shall see,
    And what they had not heard they shall consider. (Isaiah 52:14-15)

    6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
    we have turned—every one—to his own way;
    and the LORD has laid on him
    the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:6)

    God bless!


    By Blogger Deborah, At 1:26 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]


Create a Link

<< Home