Making The "Offense" of The Cross of no effect

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by JohnC, Jun 19, 2015.

  1. Making the offense of The Cross of no effect
    Galatians 5:11

    Within the context of The Cross - we must understand that Jesus made no ERRORS and made no OFFENSES pertaining to GOD... Jesus made no ERRORS and committed NO Offenses pertaining to the Levitical Law... Jesus committed no SIN..

    WE MUST ACCEPT, on the other hand that JESUS WAS IN FACT RIGHTFULLY PUNISHED FOR REVOLT AGAINST ROME!!! Jesus himself acknowledges this in his dialogue with Pilate given in John 19 - that Pilate had been granted AUTHORITY to charge and kill Jesus for the charge of Revolt against ROME - the punishment for which was CRUCIFIXION.... Which thing he WAS in fact doing! AND he WAS in fact GUILTY!

    If you have any questions on whether Jesus was doing this - refer to Mark 11:13, Matt 21:24, Luke 20:8.. the High Priesthood questioning Jesus "Who gave you the authority?" ... Literally - they were saying "Rome gave us this authority - by WHOM do you take this authority from us?" Jesus answer was in effect "Rome has no authority to GRANT this to you! Thus YOU have no authority to DO this..."

    We must understand and acknowledge that the SIN against GOD was that the Jewish Priesthood had ceded control OF the PRIESTHOOD to Rome. From the time of Herod the Great - The High Priest and the Levitial Priesthood held their Authority and Position BY Appointment AND Authorization OF THE ROMAN SENATE..

    If you have any questions on whether Civil Authorities usurping the "Things of God" upon themselves is Sin against God - refer to 2nd Chronicles 26:16-21 with King Uzziah trying to burn incense upon God's altar.. Uzziah was challenging that God had appointed The Priesthood to administer the "Things of God" and himself to administer civil matters and matters of war....

    This challenge that Civil Authorities have no "Right" to usurp the Things of God stands at the heart of "Take up your cross" - the challenge to stand AGAINST the Pagan Civil Authorities in their quest to usurp the Things of God to authorize and facilitate their own rule.

    When WE attempt to make positions that there was NO "Offense of the Cross" against the PAGAN Civil Authorities - we muddy and confuse the ENTIRE message of Take UP Your Cross! We deny that standing FOR God may require a stand AGAINST the Civil Authorities when matters pertain to Usurping The Things of God... This is especially important as we LIVE in the "Times of the Gentiles" - A time where Pagan Rulers have been granted DOMINION..... We must expect these challenges - we must not try to hide from them...

    There is no clarity towards "Take up your cross" outside of this context - the TRUE context of civil revolt against the Pagan Authorities for USURPING the Things of God, punishable by Crucifixion.... This context in which handing over control and administration of the Things of God to the Civil Authorities is clearly SIN against God...

    We need to open our eyes to our actions... We need to open our eyes to how WE respond to our Government when it attempts to yank God out of our hands.... To open our eyes to WHAT role we expect our Government to take pertaining to God, The Scripture, and The Church.. There is a push going on WORLD WIDE... The Governments of The World have used Religion to control the population since the time of Nimrod... The USA and the First Amendment stands in stark contrast to this - drawing a LINE that states that Our Government has no right to Declare or Administer the Things of God.... This is being challenged - as we continually see efforts being made to "Bring the Church back in line"... Efforts by the Civil Authorities to define what and what is not the Message of Christ.... Politicians trying to Legislate what, when, how, and where Serving God means... Politicians trying to draw lines between what IS and is NOT serving God... Etc...
  2. Well most of the apostles were crucified or otherwise killed for going against the govt of the time.
  3. Well... Yes - in a sense.... There is no question that they did follow Christ in their rebellion against Rome usurping the Things of God under the the guise of the Jewish Priesthood....

    We must be careful, though to understand where the problem occurs... It's not the Government's OFFER of benefits - rather the problem is the Religious organization's acceptance... See - the difference between the "Harlot" and the "Righteous" is not whether they are OFFERED payment for services - but rather whether they ACCEPT...

    and as such - look at where Jesus took up his fight... Against the Religious Professionals who WERE ACCEPTING BENEFITS in return for their subjugation of the Jewish People at the hand of their religion....

    We will continue to see the Government standing tall and telling us what being a Christian really means... Our simplest answer must just be "No"......

    We will CONTINUE to see the Government attempt to compel US to allow THEM to control religion so their rule is easier.... We must ALSO continue to PUSH on our leadership to continue to REFUSE the attempts by the Government to buy them off ....
  4. Interesting stuff John.
    How does what you write line up with Titus 3v1
    Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed,2to malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration for all men.
    And also1Peter2v13
    Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority,14or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.…
  5. It harmonizes quite well when you remember that both Peter and Paul were put to death by the Romans for the charge of inciting revolt against Rome.... Peter by Crucifixion and Paul by beheading..... And that Millions of early Christians were killed because they would not worship Caesar....

    It harmonizes quite well when you take those verses within the context of Jesus admonition that we are to "Give unto Caesar the things of Caesar, and give unto God the things of God"... Matt 22:20-22 and Jeremiah 12:16 "And it shall be, if they will learn carefully the ways of My people, to swear by My name, ‘As the LORD lives,’ as they taught My people to swear by Baal, then they shall be established in the midst of My people."

    The Church turns into The harlot when she sells herself to the rulers.....

  6. Can you clarify for me what you mean by the title of this thread? I am also unclear what your opening post is trying to express or teach? Perhaps an example? Maybe I'm just dense tonight. Whether we like it or not - we live in a world where the unbeliever is the majority. Secular law applies to both believer and unbeliever. Secular law allows individual acts that are against God's law and we as believers have to follow God's laws/wills, first and foremost. Should we speak out? Of course. But I remain confused about the battleground - the when and where.
  7. #7 Mykuhl, Jun 21, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2015
    Jesus was not rightfully charged for revolt against Rome. In the gospel of John it clearly states that Pilate himself examined Jesus and found no cause to put him to death. He said this more than once and tried repeatedly to release him, but ended up crucifying him to appease the people, the gospel of Matthew and Mark both state this.
    Also, those scriptures that you quoted to prove that Jesus was revolting against Rome are not referring to that at all. I don't know how you get that out of reading those verses.
    Abdicate, Fish Catcher Jim, Cturtle and 1 other person say Amen and like this.
  8. I agree with the post above...and just trying as well to see the "POV" of OP...

    Reading the OP: it seems it tries to reconcile a dilemma where: Submission to Governing Authorities mentioned in Romans 13:1 WHEN the Governing Authorities is disregarding Divine Authority….

    And the solution am seeing with the Logic used is: take out the authority then, that is: take out the legitimacy of secular Governments for having the authority.

    Thus, in so doing: It TRIES to see the death penalty, Crucifixion, as valid (in terms of secular government policy) but invalid as it has no Divine Authority.... that is: an example of “disregarding God” policy by Government....

    As mentioned, I do not agree as well on the OP.... am just trying to figure it out how the "conclusion" was arrived....

    Romans 13:1New International Version (NIV)
    Submission to Governing Authorities
    13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
  9. Thus, as an alternative solution to the dilemma of the OP:

    I've seen this pattern on relationship:
    An individual - his family - his community - his nation

    Individual -> family (honor your parent) -> community/neighbour (do unto others) -> nation (obey those in authorities)

    Conflict happens: individual rights vs. collective rights:
    that is: an individual may exercise self-defense personally, but in terms of being member of a collective: a nation have a right for self defense: but an individual can see it as unjust wars)

    The concept is similar or consistent: individual are not perfect, so as our parent, i.e. we honor them as no perfect governments.
  10. What I am getting at is that we need to understand that from the ROMAN perspective there WAS an Offense leading to The Cross... Rebellion... Rome had just cause to crucify Jesus because He IS the Lion of the Tribe of Judah.... The King of the Jews.... He is a REAL King... Jesus himself testified this fact to Pilate in all 4 gospels....

    Pilate wasn't really taking it seriously - treating Jesus more like some crazy nut (I find no fault in this man...) The temple leadership was trying to make sure Pilate understood the point - NO, he's not just some nut job whacko... He is a real king sent by God and if you don't kill him - he will be ruling this place.... That's why Pilate wrote "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" on the formal accusation at the cross... Pilate was trusting his Temple Leadership that Jesus was a REAL King who was here to take HIS rightful kingdom, As such - Crucifixion was justified per Rome's perspective.... That's also why Pilate brought Jesus before Herod... Here - Look... The man BORN King of the Jews....

    The "battlefield" - for now... What I see at least... A call to restore the PROPER order - Government in it's place, Church in it's place.... Not a call to overthrow... For now - it's not OUR place to overthrow... While this is "The times of the Gentiles" - Gentile rulers will be the ones doing the overthrow.... Ours is the call to Repentance... to TURN back to the RIGHT way so that the Overthrow doesn't have to come.... Overthrow will come because we ARE NOT successful....

    It's pretty obvious to me - such call to Repentance is already being declared "Illegal" by the civil authorities... Being declared Rebellion and Hate speech... - and this position is being supported by some very prominent Church Leadership....

    As such - a LOT of God fearing Christians are backing down because they have been taught that resisting civil authorities is "Ungodly"... AND they have been taught that speaking out against Church Leaders in any form is "Ungodly" - even when they are doing Ungodly things....

    We ought to be paying attention to this...
  11. #11 JohnC, Jun 22, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2015
    Think for a minute... Pilate was initially treating Jesus as if he was some whacko nut job.... Jesus obviously wasn't REALLY a king in his eyes - so this fellow before him was just some crazy nut.... At worst, a "Blasphemer" against the Jewish Law - which Pilate has no desire to have any part of....

    Are you saying that Pilate was correct and Jesus WAS a simply a whacko nut job or a "Blasphemer" and NOT REALLY Bona-Fide King of the Jews?

    Please clarify this point of view for me.
  12. I'm at somewhat of a loss at what you are trying to convey. Most of what you are saying is either misconceptions or blatant falsehoods.
    Pilate, the Roman authority, found no fault with Jesus. Jesus had committed no sin of any kind, against God or man.
    "Millions of early Christians were killed because they would not worship Caesar...."
    Are you kidding me? millions? hundreds for sure, thousands maybe, the entire population of the city of Rome was only about a million.
  13. What do you suppose Herod and Pilate talked about when Pilate brought this alleged "King of the Jews" before Herod?

    Do you suppose that Herod the Tetrarch told Pilate about the incident with the caravan of Magi showing up from the Parthian Empire on his father's doorstep some 30 years previous looking for "The one born King of the Jews"...... How about Herod the Great killing ALL the male children under 2 years old in Israel in this attempt to kill off "The one born King of the Jews" in Bethlehem?

    Herod certainly would have known of that stuff... It was his Dad afterall....
  14. Idk - the gospels are pretty clear that only the government had the right to crucify Christ and the only authority who could pass sentence was Pilate as the highest representative of that secular power. Christ answers Pilate's question in all four gospels, "It is you that says it" (Joh_18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.). Rome does not really need an excuse to kill Christ. He forces the Jewish leadership to accept responsibility (Joh_19:15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar.) Pilate wasn't stupid. He saw political trap all over this and checked with the masses by asking if they would release Jesus. He allowed the sentence to appease the Jewish leadership - including Herod. The Jews all knew Jesus lineage and the prophecies. He gave the Jews what he saw the majority wanted and washed his hands.
    The will of God was that His Son be sacrificed for the many. Should anyone oppose the will of God?
  15. So... I want to make sure I clearly communicate a real life impact here....

    We are seeing our Civil Authorities slowly "Declaring illegal" certain things of God. We should NOT be afraid of voicing our opposition to this. We should ALSO not cease doing the Things of God because "They" deem them illegal. This is NOT "Ungodly"

    We are seeing our Civil Authorities slowly "Usurping" the things of God. We should NOT be afraid of voicing our opposition to this. We should ALSO NOT cease ONLY giving the Things of God TO GOD.... This is NOT "Ungodly"

    We are seeing our Civil Authorities stepping in and DECLARING what "A Real Christian" is and is not. (Notice how they have no fear of declaring "What a Real Muslim is and is not" without any knowledge of Islam... We should not expect any different...) We should NOT be afraid of opposing this. We should ALSO NOT define "Christianity" as Civil Authorities say it is... This is NOT "Ungodly"

    We are seeing Church organizations stepping into line WITH the Civil authorities - teaching that it is OUR duty to God to obey the Civil Authorities in ALL matters including those pertaining to God. They are receiving significant Benefit to do such... These benefits include Wealth, Power, Authority, Reputation, Political voice, and Exclusion from harm... Remember that being "Delivered from" or "Excluded from" Scandal IS a BENEFIT... Receiving Favorable Media attention from a Media which routinely scandalizes "Born again" Christians IS a BENEFIT... They have SOLD themselves and their Judgment is clear. RESISTING such Church teaching IS NOT UNGODLY!

    Jesus fought all these fights.
    The Apostles fought all these fights
    WE should not expect to be excluded from these SAME fights.
    It is NOT ungodly to stand firm and to resist.


Share This Page