Archive | Jesus Christ RSS feed for this section

A Christmas Reminder . . .

13 Dec

Babies have a way of finding ways into the alcoves of our souls, the very places where things are known only to God.  They crawl right up into those hidden areas and something quite miraculous happens. Those little ones open us wide to the world, while teaching us a little more each day about God.   Think about it. Who can touch us more deeply than a newborn baby?

One baby in a room of adults reduces most of us to mere functional illiterates–and by choice!  We become entranced by the bald-headed, toothless, drooling squirmers, and quite mesmerized by their attempts to make sense of the insensible.

I remember talking to my own children: “You wan Dada to bwing your baba or bankie?”

I won’t go into all the baby talk, or nicknames my wife and I had for our children.  Some of them are hilarious, to be sure.  If you are as we are, you might still find the urge to pop open one of these phrases from time-to-time, just for the sake of reaction.  There aren’t too many of us that are able to hold back baby-talk when face-to-face with a little life in our presence.  It is almost expected.

I often wonder if grown adults talk to the aged the same way.  After all, both ends of life’s continuum quite resemble each other.  However, that discussion is for another time.  In the presence of babies, we sing and tell stories.  For some, these practices begin while the baby is in utero.  We talk to them, and we pray for them.  After they are born, we teach them nursery rhymes and, as they grow into toddlers, tell them stories of our childhood (and maybe just a bit embellished), and instruct them in right and wrong, as well as share in affection and closing prayers at bedtime.

Remember those fun days?  I am referring to the fun days before they sat on the sides of their beds and cried for no reasons at all, or got quiet when they realize as teenagers that they are held accountable.  Recall the moments when we asked them, “What’s wrong,” only to hear in return, “Nothin”?  I surely remember them!  In fact, there are times I’d like to sit on the side of my own bed and cry a little for myself, these days.  It is sometimes a good thing to feel sorry for ourselves, as adults, at least for fifteen minutes, before someone asks for money, or the cell phone rings.

However, I am left to wonder: Why is it that babies bring out the best in us?  I remember their giggles, tiny dimples, gummy smiles, flailing hands and stubby toes, their splashing arms and legs during baths–capped off by their pudgy, solid, yet wrinkly feet.  All of this serves to remind us of life’s simplicities and basic human needs.  Babies also remind us of the necessity of the protection they need, their fragile states, and complete dependency.  The trust they place in adults is astounding.  However, they learn quickly.  Once they figure out that we are not perfect, all things begin to change.  If you are like I am, you are torn by those early years, sometimes longing for them again–but happy also not to have to repeat those long nights, illnesses, doctors’ visits, and the like.

Have you ever wished for your children to stay little forever.  Have you ever spoken that desire?  Nah!  There are grandchildren for those reasons.  Right?  Babies are signals of life.  Life must moves onward.  Babies are reminders that the future is already in the “present”–and the word-play is intended.  I think you know to which “present” I refer.  Babies comprise the past through one’s DNA and heritage.  They consume the present and they embody the future.  Babies are the miracles that are united from one sperm and one egg–gestating over time–to become the “other” us. With each birth of our children, we are reminded that “WE” are with us. We are connected and that’s that.

Here in this supposedly sophisticated twenty-first century, we tend to place things, such as child birth—which have the sense of the miraculous—onto the realm of the ordinary.  But that is pedestrian.  Each conception brings into existence a unique entity, a person of the most distinct, individual “being.”  The truth is we are all unique and the mold is broken with each one of us. However, we have this little nature thing, with which to contend. Moreover, therein lays the problem!

Imagine for a moment that your teenage daughter comes home one day and tells you that she is impressed in her spirit about something incredibly unique.  What if she tells you that an angel of God had told her that she was specially favored among all other young teenagers of the day? Assume, then, that sometime later she informs you that she is pregnant, yet maintains that she was still a virgin–untouched by any man sexually.

To make matters more concerning, imagine your single, teenage daughter had been engaged to a man more than twice her age–and that the engagement was going to be broken by the man, once he discovers your daughter is pregnant. I know, I know . . . I can imagine your faces now. Yet, I do think you know where I am going with this.

Philosopher Paul C. Vitz asks us to “Consider that Mary was pregnant with Jesus today.” I also ask us to do the same.  What are the chances that some of the parents of this pregnant teenage girl would shuffle her off to the local Planned Parenthood clinic?  What would her friends and contemporaries say?  Speaking as one who was conceived prior to marriage, I rather identify with that last statement, in terms of its implications.  Know what I mean?

No, I am not claiming divinity, personally–but divinity as a delicacy, now that stuff is freakin’ awesome! (It is approaching Christmas, after all)  The prophet Isaiah (ca 800 BC) stated: “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14) A miracle baby son, a virgin, and the name translated to mean “God with us” (Immanuel) Hmmmm. Most interesting.

The disciple Matthew Levi (1st century AD), the tax gatherer wrote: “And Joseph, her husband, being a righteous man, and not wanting to disgrace her, desired to put her away secretly. But when he had considered this, behold an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, ‘Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for that which has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. And she will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for it is He who will save His people from their sins.’ Now all this took place that which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet shall be fulfilled . . .” (Matthew 1:19-24)

The Christmas holiday (derived from “holy-day”) is about the advent of Jesus, the baby, and the beginning of His earthly pilgrimage.  The birth occurred more than likely during the summer months and there was no snow.  That reminds me, what happens in Australia and Africa, during December in the Southern Hemisphere?  I hope Santa’s varicosities aren’t too apparent with those pasty legs of his, filling out those speedo-like shorts.

John 1 speaks also to this illustrious Christmas event: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God . . . And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1: 1, 14).

This baby Jesus is the gift that keeps on reminding us of our flesh and mortality. The baby reminds us of our beginning and the blessings we are to others.  However, why do we keep Him in a manger?  Why is Christmas about Jesus as a baby only?  Is it because there is no room in the “inn of our hearts?”  Maybe it reflects the reality that babies are no threat.  Babies do not challenge the way we live.  Babies are the miracle gifts in-and-of-themselves. Nevertheless, babies do grow up into young adults and then enter mature adulthood.  Baby Jesus becomes a challenge to people’s supposed sovereignty.

Apparently King Herod also had serious concerns about the baby Jesus, for he had all male children slaughtered, age-two and under.  This infanticide occurred in Bethlehem and its surrounding environs (Matthew 2:16).  Herod feared all of this talk about the birth of a king, a Messiah, would diminish his sovereignty over the land.  As a result, the child Jesus and His parents went to Egypt until King Herod had died.  Afterwards, they returned to their homeland. One interesting piece of trivia from the Hebrew language is quite telling. The name “Beth-lehem,” can actually be interpreted “House of Bread.”  Now I am singing, “Oh Little Town of Bethlehem” . . .

Later Jesus was given the title “Bread of life,” and communion would be taken at “the Last Supper,” to symbolize His crucified and broken body.

Part of the communion remembrance today using crackers or bread illustrates the “broken bread” of life.  Who would have ever thought that the bread of life would have been born in a house of bread?  All of this is derived from the Christmas story?  Yes indeed!  Another point of interest was that when the wise men came to visit Jesus, He was already a toddler.  The Magi were the ones who tipped off Herod, and this was the reason for the age-2 on down slaughter of the innocents.

Therefore, yes we celebrate the baby Jesus.  Nevertheless, we really should be celebrating the toddler, at least in my mind.  But no toddler I know would stay in a crib, let alone a feeding trough for animals.  I know my own kids did not. As far as my kids were concerned, they kept jumping out, falling on their heads, or something along those lines. That might explain a few things.  Now my father’s statements to me in my youth ring more clearly.  He would ask rhetorically, “What is the matter with you? Did you play too many football games without a helmet?” I never figured out “how many” was too many.  But back to Jesus.

Some 2,000 years after the birth of Jesus, his infancy still influences the world. While some wanted to make Him an Earthly Excellency, believers see Him as their All-Sufficiency, beginning with infancy. The commemoration of Jesus’ birth is the real reason we celebrate the giving of “gifts” to each other.  Jesus is the ultimate gift to the world.  The reason for the season is ultimately for His pleasin’.

A second gift was given to us by the resurrected Jesus, just prior to His ascension. Luke, the physician, records in Acts 1:3: “. . . He also presented Himself alive, after His suffering, by many convincing proofs, appearing to them over a period of forty days, and speaking of the things to come . . . He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised . . . ” Jesus told His followers: “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments. And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever” (John 14:15-16). The Holy Spirit is the gift that keeps on giving.

During this festive season of holidays, may we Christians celebrate like never before.  May we live and love like never before. The baby has grown, lived, and He has changed the world through his death, resurrection and ascension. Don’t you think it is time to be Christ-like in ways that show we also have left our own “Christian cribs?” My apologies to the hip-hop community.

Dear friend, let us celebrate the holiday as He is NOW in our lives. May we look back to the past, while living in the present–knowing that we have a future with Him.  May our baby-talk, and baby-walk grow into a mature, contagious conversation, coupled with a powerful Christian walk.  May this walk evidence movement in the right direction, prompted by the Spirit and evidence by the fruit of the Spirit.

No, I did not imply fruitcake. Unlike “divinity,” THAT stuff is so nasty, and is the evil twin doorstop with the yule log.

Thank you for reading!  I thought I would share a little reminder about why this time of year is extra-special for me and many others.

OK, where’s my egg-nog?

Happy 2018 all!

The Illegal, Criminal Trial of Jesus

28 Mar

Criminal Attorney, J. E. Ingram (1924), wrote a wonderful book analyzing the trial of Jesus Christ. The title of this book: Criminal and Illegal Trial of the Nazarene Peasant. Ingram was a criminal lawyer, practiced in Illinois, Oklahoma, and Texas, over 90 years ago.

Ingram’s work brings the charges against those who brought the charges against Jesus–everything from His arrest, to His questioning, and the times at which the trial proceedings occurred. I will summarize Ingram’s points in this blog, and include the laws broken by the authorities at the time. These laws will be placed in quotes, followed by their references, and a conclusion. I will begin with the initial charge levied against Jesus of Nazareth.

THE INITIAL CHARGE
The charge brought against Jesus by the Jewish authorities was that He broke Mosaic Law, and committed blasphemy against Jehovah. Furthermore, as Ingram puts it, “The criminal indictment brought against the defendant before the highest court of Roman justice, Pilate and Herod, was treason against the government of Rome and Caesar.”

I. THE ILLEGAL ARREST OF OUR SAVIOR

A. The Jewish law prohibited all proceedings by night.
B. “The testimony of an accomplice is not permissible by Rabbinic law propter affectum and propter delictum, and no man’s life, nor liberty, nor his reputation can be endangered by the malice of one who has confessed himself a criminal.” (Mendelsohn, Criminal Jurisprudence of the Ancient Hebrews, p. 274)
C. “Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people; neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbor.” (Leviticus 19:17-18)

II. JESUS BEFORE ANNAS (CAIAPHAS) WAS ILLEGAL

A. The Jewish law prohibited all proceedings by night.
B. “Be not sole judge, for there is no sole judge but One.” (Mishna, Pirke Aboth 4:8)
C. “A principle perpetually reproduced in the Hebrew scriptures relates to the two conditions of publicity and liberty. An accused man was never subjected to private or secret examination, lest, in his perplexity, he furnish damaging testimony against himself.” (Salvador, Institutions de Moise, pp. 365-366)

III. THE INDICTMENT AGAINST JESUS WAS ILLEGAL
A. “The entire criminal procedure of the Mosaic Code rests upon four rules: certainty in the indictment; publicity in the discussion; full freedom granted to the accused; and assurance against all dangers or errors of testimony.” (Salvador, Institutions de Moise, p. 365)
B. “The Sanhedrin did not and could not originate charges; it only investigated those brought before it.” (Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, vol 1, p. 309)
C. “The evidence of the leading witnesses constituted the charge. There was no other charge; no more formal indictment.” (Innes, The Trial of Jesus Christ, p. 41)
D. “The only prosecutors known to Talmudic criminal jurisprudence are the witnesses to the crime. Their duty is to bring the matter to the cognizance of the court, and to bear witness against the criminal. In capital cases, they are the legal executioners, as well.” (Mendelsohn, Criminal Jurisprudence of the Ancient Hebrews, p. 110)

IV. THE SANHEDRIN COURT PROCEEDINGS WERE ILLEGAL BECAUSE THEY WERE HELD AT NIGHT
A. “Let a capital offense be tried during the day, but suspend it at night.” (Mishna, Sanhedrin, 4:1)
B. “Criminal cases can be acted upon by the various courts during the day time only.” (Mendelsohn, Criminal Jurisprudence of the Ancient Hebrews, p. 112)
C. The reason why a capital offense trial was not held at night because oral tradition says, “the examination of such a charge is like the diagnosing of a wound–in either case a more thorough and searching investigation can be made by daylight.” ((Maimonides, Sanhedrin III)

V. SANHEDRIN CONVENED BEFORE THE OFFERING OF THE MORNING SACRIFICE, WHICH MADE THE SANHEDRIN’S ACTIONS ILLEGAL
A. “The Sanhedrin sat from the close of the morning sacrifice to the time of the evening sacrifice.” (Talmud, Jerus, Sanhedrin I:19)
B. “No session of the court could take place before the offering of the morning sacrifice.” (Lemann, Jesus Before the Sanhedrin, p. 109)
C. “Since the morning sacrifice was offered at the dawn of the day, it was hardly possible for the Sanhedrin to assemble until the hour after that time.” (Mishna, Tamid, The Perpetual Sacrifice, 50:3)

VI. THE PROCEEDINGS WERE CONDUCTED ON THE DAY PRECEDING A JEWISH SABBATH; ALSO ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE FEAST OF UNLEAVENED BREAD AND THE EVE OF PASSOVER. THESE PROCEEDINGS WERE ILLEGAL.
A. “Court must not be held on the Sabbath, or any holy day.” (Betza, Chapter 5:2)
B. “They shall not judge on the eve of the Sabbath, nor on that of any festival.” (Mishna, Sanhedrin IV:1)
C. “No court of justice in Israel was permitted to hold sessions on the Sabbath or any of the seven biblical holidays. In cases of capital crime, no trial could be commenced on Friday or the day previous to any holiday, because it was not lawful either to adjourn such cases longer than over night, or to continue them on the Sabbath or holiday.” (Rabbi Wise, Martyrdom of Jesus, p. 67)

VII. THE TRIAL OF JESUS WAS ILLEGAL BECAUSE IT WAS CONCLUDED WITHIN ONE DAY
A. “A criminal case resulting in the acquittal of the accused may terminate the same day on which the trial began.”
B. “But if a sentence of death is to be pronounced, it can not be concluded before the following day.” (Mishna, Sanhedrin, 4:1)

VIII. THE CONDEMNATION SENTENCE WAS PRONOUNCED AGAINST JESUS BY THE SANHEDRIN AND WAS FOUNDED UPON HIS UNCORROBORATED CONFESSION
A. “We have it as a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that no one can bring an accusation against himself. Should a man make a confession of guilt before a legally constitutional tribunal, such confession is not to be used against him, unless properly attested by two other witnesses.” (Maimonides, Sanhedrin 4:2)
B. “Not only is self-condemnation never extorted from the defendant by means of torture, but not attempt is ever made to lead a man on to self-incrimination.” (Mendelsohn, Criminal Jurisprudence of the Ancient Hebrews, p. 133)

IX. THE CONDEMNATION OF JESUS WAS ILLEGAL BECAUSE THE VERDICT OF THE SANHEDRIN WAS UNANIMOUS
A. “A simultaneous and unanimous verdict of guilt rendered on the day of the trial has the effect of an acquittal.” (Mendelsohn, Criminal Jurisprudence of the Ancient Hebrews, p. 141)
B. “If none of the judges defend the culprit, and all pronounce him guilty, and having no defender in the court, the guilty verdict was invalid and the sentence of death could not be executed.” (Rabbi Wise, Martyrdom of Jesus, p. 74)

X. THE SENTENCE OF CONDEMNATION WAS PRONOUNCED IN A PLACE FORBIDDEN BY LAW; THE HIGH PRIEST TORE HIS CLOTHES; AND THE BALLOTING WAS IRREGULAR
A. “After leaving the hall (Gazith) no sentence of dath can be passed upon anyone soever.” (Talmud, Bab., Abodah, Tarath (Idolatry), Chapter 1:8)
B. “A sentence of death can be pronounced only so long as the Sanhedrin holds its sessions in the appointed place.” (Maimonides, Sanhedrin 14)
C. “And he that is the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured, and that is consecrates to put on the garments, shall not uncover his head, nor rend his clothes.” (Leviticus 21:10)
D. “And Moses aid unto Aaron, and unto Eleazar, and unto Ithamar, his sons, ‘uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and lest wrath come upon all the people.'” (Leviticus 10:6)
E. “In ordinary cases the judges votes according to seniority, the oldest commencing; in a capital trial, the reverse order was followed. That the younger members of the Sanhedrin should not be influenced by the views or arguments of their more mature, more experienced colleagues, the junior was in these cases always the first to pronounce for or against a conviction.” (Benny, Criminal Code of the Jews, pp. 73-74)

XI. THE GREAT SANHEDRIN MEMBERS WERE LEGALLY DISQUALIFIED TO TRY JESUS
A. “The robe of the unfairly elected judge is to be respected not more than the blanket of the ass.” (Mendelsohn, Hebrew Maxims and Rules, p. 182)
B. “As Moses sat in judgment without the expectation of material reward, so also must every judge act from a sense of duty only.” (Mendelsohn, Hebrew Maxims and Rules, p. 177)
C. “Nor must there be on the judicial bench either a relation, or a particular friend, or an enemy of either the accused or the accuser.” (Mendelsohn, Criminal Jurisprudence of the Ancient Hebrews, p. 108)
D. “Nor under any circumstances was a man known to be at enmity with the accused person permitted to occupy a position among his judges.” (Benny, Criminal Code of the Jews, p. 37)

XII. THE CONDEMNATION OF JESUS WAS ILLEGAL BECAUSE THE MERITS OF THE DEFENSE WERE NOT CONSIDERED
A. “Then shalt thou inquire and make search, and ask diligently.” (Deuteronomy 13:14)
B. “The judges shall weigh the matter in the sincerity of their conscience.” (Mishna, Sanhedrin 4:5)
C. “The primary object of the Hebrew judicial system was the render the conviction of an innocent person impossible. All the ingenuity of the Jewish legists was directed to the attainment of this end.” (Benny, Criminal Code of the Jews, p. 56)

CONCLUSION
Due to the enormity of this case, and the facts that are presented, the Jews broke the law down the line, in making certain to execute the Messiah. However, this was appointed from the foundations of time, that the Son of Man would be lifted up. In the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus prayed, “Not my will, but Thine, Father.” The result? “He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to laughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so He did not open His mouth.” (Isaiah 53:7; Acts 8:32)

%d bloggers like this: