No Pharisee would disagree with Jesus that the nation of Judah-Israel renounced it’s privileged status during the time of Nebuchadnezzar through horrible acts like sacrificing their children in fire and shedding innocent blood. What was up for debate was which “system” was better at restoring "Israel’s" rightful place as God’s chosen nation: the Parasitical-system or the Jesus-system?It might not be too far of a stretch to say that the Jesus-system was no better, at least at first glance, in itself, then the Pharisaical system. The Pharisees believed, and succeeded to some extent by Jesus’ own testimony, in escaping the committing of many sinful acts. However, Jesus had two things going for him and his system that the Pharisees didn’t. When the Pharisees asked Jesus “what makes your system better than our system?,” Jesus’ reply was “no one can prove me guilty of sin.” And “believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves.” Sinlessness and miracles kept Jesus untouchable, even to the moment he was before Pilate. But Jesus, by telling the truth, committed the ultimate sin (I am not attempting to address the “unpardonable sin”). Jesus ultimate “sin,” which he did not reveal until his blameless walk of love and miracles on earth was complete, was to claim to be God. Pilate even gave Jesus an “out:” [loosely translated] “C’mon… just say you’re not god. No one’s god. It’s easy to do and I can free you…”
But Jesus chose to commit the “sin” for which his critics had no greater hatred and for which even those among his critics who admired Him could not believe and accept - though they could not understand the miracles and the sinless transcendence of his earthly walk (“No one could do the things He does if God were not with him...")
So I have a better understanding of why Jesus was so untouchable here on earth (sinlessness, miracles) and a better understanding of what Jesus did that even sinlessness and miracles could not atone for, at least in the eyes of his detractors.
-j
0 comments:
Post a Comment