The Passover Blogs: What Really Happened Against That Dark Sky on Golgotha? &copy 2013 Elizabeth K. Best And the Veil in The Temple Rent: A Curtain Torn from Above                                                                               By Elizabeth Kirkley Best Judah's Glory: "The Passover Blogs" Series So many events occur on the way to the Cross, that the simple tearing of a curtain in the Temple at the time of an earthquake when Jesus died may seen a little less significant, but the torn or 'rent' veil, had been prophesied, shown in type and shadow, and signified the great act and purpose of the atonement, to remove the partition of separation between God and Man. Among the events on the day of the Crucifixion, one of the lesser yet critical descriptions in Scripture, is of the veil torn, from top to bottom, in the Temple at the hour that the Messiah died. The exact events on that day, in a synthesis of the Scriptures, of not only the 'synoptic Gospels but of John as well, bear the following sequence: Sequence of Events Around the Time of Jesus' Death on the Cross Jesus Cries in a LOUD VOICE (μεγαφονο) Jesus Gives Up the Ghost The Vail (in the Temple, Spirit and Earth) is 'rent' (torn) Earthquake, the Rocks are Rent Graves Open: "...many bodies of saints which slept arose, and came out of the grave after his resurrection, and went into the holy City and appeared unto many."

---

Many events have already occurred by the time of the above sequence: the sky has turned pitch black, the seamless garment has been gambled for, the sign declaring 'this is Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews' has been secured, Jesus gives his mother to the apostle John to care for, and the cry 'Eloi, Eloi, lama Sabacthani', the first words of Psalm 22 have been uttered. Note the events as the Messiah dies: the Gospels are consistent in their description of the events, but almost immediately as the words, "It is finished" ['teleos'-finished, and continuing to be finished'] are spoken, against a dark sky, an earthquake occurs, and the vail in the Temple tears from top to bottom. More frightening things are about to occur, events so horrifying that even a Roman soldier present begins to tremble and declare that 'this must be the Son of God', as the ground shook. To begin to understand the significance though, of the tearing or 'renting' of the vail in the temple, one must understand the significance of the vail, and where in the Scriptures in the history of Israel we have seen the vail before.

The First Mention of a 'Vail'

The very first mention of a 'vail' in the Old Testament, and all the Bible comes in Genesis 24:65:

[Gen 24:65 KJV] 65 For she [had] said unto the servant, What man [is] this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant [had] said, It [is] my master: therefore she took a vail,[H6809] and covered herself.

While there are a number of the uses of the word 'vail' (and the alternate spelling 'veil') in the Word, the most pertinent usage is a literal one, of a cloth or curtain used to obscure the view of one location or thing for another: such things referred to as 'vailed' in the Word, are Moses' face, the 'Holiest of Holies' in the Tabernacle, as a woman's garment in a traditional sense, or as a covering of glory. The hebrew word ץעיף is used, as is another hebrew word, as is ץעיף (differing vowels) and six other renderings (See BLB: LEXICON:'vail') More often than not, when the word is translated it refers to a garment or covering. While the first mention in the Scriptures may seem relatively straightforward, rather mild as the mention of a garment, we see that it is Rebekah meeting Isaac, the bride here, covering her face, in typical middle eastern fashion, upon meeting the promised bridegroom, and yet at the same time, the picture of the church, or congregation of God, (of Israel), pulling the vail between herself and her redeemer, cannot be ignored since Isaac, long awaiting his bride is the one "...in Isaac shall thy seed be called. Gn 21:12".

Glory and the Vail

Before continuing, there is a significant theme which will reoccur in which a 'vail' or covering, separates mankind from the glory of God. Glory, δωζα or 'doxah" from 'dokeo, "to seem" can mean:(from BLB)

1. A State of blessedness, of fullness of LIFE
2. Honour, resulting from a good opinion, or
3. Everlasting power and divinity

These descriptions of the meaning of 'doxah' are opposed to the idea of personal 'glory' or 'glorying' as in boasting or 'kauchaomai (καυχδομαι). Our traditional understanding of 'glory' has to do with the magnificent presence and nature, the 'being' of God, the 'wonderfulness' of the Creator. It comes as no suprise then, when we see mentions of a vail or veil in the Word of God, that at least initially, the 'vail' is separating mankind and his understanding or nature, from the divine nature, and the 'Glory of God'. As a general mention, with regard to a 'covering' we see this first passage
Mentions of a Vail in the Bible

• of Rebekah meeting with Isaac (Gn 24:65),
• Tamar wrapping herself in a covering with a vail to deceive Judah in Timnath (to continue the Messianic line) (Gen 38:14),
• Moses vailing his face after speaking with God (Exodus 34:33-35),
• Ruth (3:15) on the threshing floor of Boaz receiving six measures of barley into the vail she wore (a 'veiled' reference to the bread of life);
• a vain covering of the Daughters of Zion when they grow 'wanton' in Isaiah 3:23; and in the New Testament,
  
• a reaffirmation of the meaning of the covering of Moses' face in I Corinthians 3:13: "...the same vail untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament; which vail is done away with in Christ."

If we examine the chronological events in the Scriptures, we would skip ahead to the covering of Moses' face, but for the sake of the order of 'salience', we will begin with a discussion of the vail in the Temple or Tabernacle, and then move to a discussion of the covering of Moses' face before the presence of Israel vs. God.

The Tabernacle (Temple) and the Vail in the Holy Place

The 'tabernacle' or tent of meeting in the Old Testament, was the design for the place of worship, where Israel met with God out in the wilderness, under the leadership of Moses. While most people are familiar with the Ten Commandments, with popularized images from movies, the Bible notes that two things were given on Mount Sinai to Moses by God: the 'Law' (Torah) and the plans for the Tabernacle, the place of meeting between God and Man. While it does not say precisely, the Bible notes that the stones Moses carried up were written by the finger of God, on the front and on the back. I have always liked to think of the Righteousness of God in the Law being written on one side, with the Grace of God, in the atonement and mercy of God, being written on the back, though whether that is so remains in the realm of mystery. In any event, they are the 'two sides' of God's Word to his children marching towards Canaan. There were curtains or vails as one entered the Tabernacle, in fact linen curtains, in the fashion of a 'fence' or wall, stood about the place of worship, often interpreted as an outward form of 'righteousness'. The pattern of the outward curtains at the entrance, resembled the curtains to the Holy Place, and inside the Holy Place, the curtains, or vail to the 'Holy of Holies' "Kadesh Kodeshim". As one entered the outward curtains, embroidered with cherubim, one came to the Laver, a basin for washing. Beyond the basin, was an altar for sacrifice: the place of the 'olah' or burnt offering, peace offerings, meat offerings, sin offerings and others. This altar was where lambs, goats or bullocks were offered. Following the altar, was an internal 'tent' with specified coverings of badger skins, and other coverings, called the "Holy Place": inside the Holy Place were the table of Shewbread, the candlestick, and the entrance into the "Holy of Holies", an internal location behind yet another set of vails. Inside the Holy of Holies was the Ark of the Covenant, containing the tablets of Moses, Manna, and Aaron's Rod. On the top of the Ark, was the mercy seat, or seat of 'propitiation', attended by two angels bowing reverently over the mercy seat, or top of the Ark. It was upon the Mercy seat, that during the wilderness wanderings of Moses, attended by only one high Priest, that God met with man, through the high Priest. The entire symbolic manifestation of the structure of the Tabernacle, pointed to the Redeemer, who would grant us HIS righteousness, through the washing of the Word and Holy Spirit, through a blood atonement/sacrifice, where eventually, the internal 'vail' beyond the outward vail and the vail to the Holy Place, would one day upon fulfillment of God's promises, be torn, open to all, by the final act of a mediator and High Priest. (see Book of Hebrews:all).
So much has been written about the Tabernacle, that we will rest from that discussion here, and turn directly to the vail. The vails, again on the outside, Holy Place and Holy of Holies bore the same characteristics: they were:

Blue

Purple

Scarlet

Linen

The colors of the Vail or curtains is found in Exodus 26:31:

And thou shalt make a vail of blue, and purple and scarlet and fine twined linen of cunning work with cherubim..."
36:35...on taches, on pillars of gold, And thou shalt set the table without the vail, and the candlestick over against the vail on the side of the Tabernacle toward the south, and thou shalt put the table on the northside.

,,,

The Passover Blogs: The Ascent Up the Mount of Olives

                                             
                                                     

       Promise of Messiah:  The Ascent Up the Mount of Olives
                                                       by Elizabeth Kirkley Best                                                                     Judah's Glory Bible Studies

 II Samuel 15:30 And David went up by the ascent of mount Olivet, and wept as he went up, and had his head covered, and he went barefoot: and all the people that was with him covered every man his head, and they went up, weeping as they went up.

 Luke 22:39 And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him.
40 And when he was at the place, he said unto them,Pray that ye enter not into temptation.
41 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down*, and prayed,
42 Saying,Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

Matthew 27: 29 And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews!
30 And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head.
31 And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him.
  6 And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together.

 King David, King of the Jews in the Old Testament reigned around 1000b.c., and save for Jesus Christ alone, is the only other person in scripture referred to as the King of Kings, or King of the Jews.  In David's life, there are many allusions and foreshadows of the Messiah, the King of Israel yet to come:  David was a shepherd, David lived by faith, David defeated the enemies which vexed Israel,  and David established God's Word and House, at least the foundation of it, in Jerusalem so much so, that it came to be known as the Holy City, the City of David, and the Mount Zion. 
David, though, unlike the Messiah to come, had faults:  even David, though obedient in delivering Israel from the Philistines, Amalekites, and others warring tribes, was ultimately not at attain his life goal of building the Temple in Jerusalem, because the Lord via Nathan, showed David that he had too much blood on his hands from the wars of Israel.

  7 And David said to Solomon, My son, as for me, it was in my mind to build an house unto the name of the LORD my God:
8 But the word of the LORD came to me, saying, Thou hast shed blood abundantly, and hast made great wars: thou shalt not build an house unto my name, because thou hast shed much blood upon the earth in my sight.
9 Behold, a son shall be born to thee, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies round about: for his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quietness unto Israel in his days.
10 He shall build an house for my name; and he shall be my son, and I will be his father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever.

David had a myriad of other life troubles: his daughter was raped by her half brother; Absalom his son rebelled and tried to take the Kingdom out of his hand, and was killed; David had an affair with Bathsheba, which resulted in the killing of her innocent husband at David's command; and the son from that liaison died.  David was a man of war, noted in the Word that "Saul had killed his thousands, and David his tens of thousands", but as noted in I Chronicles 22:8, his grandest desire before the Lord, after a life fraught with the pride of a King, the willfulness of a boy, and heartache of his family crumbling,  it was the blood on his hands that prevented him from building God a 'house to dwell in', with God making it clear in the end, who builds a house.  Even God, even for David, acknowledged that David "hast shed much blood upon the earth in my sight."

 David as a Type and Foreshadow of Messiah 

In light of the 'sins of David', though we hear far more in preaching about his accomplishments and victories, one would wonder, how David's life could foreshadow the coming Messiah, and yet it did, more than most precipitating lives and prophecies.   We can easily point to such themes as David as King of the Jews, as king of Israel, or David the Shepherd, or Deliverer of Israel.  We see him greatly establishing the City of the Great King, and Mount Zion,  we see his anointing and appointment of God by the prophet Samuel, and his countless acts of faith.  His heart for God is seen in the Psalms,  and it was in utter joy, without reservation, that he danced before God, as the Ark of the Covenant returned to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6:14).  Despite his human failings, and a Kingdom filled with violence, corruption, and treachery, it is the anointing of David as God's choice of King, that causes his life to shine in the glory of God, declaring Messiah.

Nearing Easter, though,  we see several other passages in which David foreshadows the events the high churches call "The Passion".  The Kings of Israel, rode mules, at their coronation, and while David's is not specific, he is nevertheless mentioned as giving his to his Son Solomon upon his death, and the practice is seen when Saul rides one, and Absalom, when entangled by his hair, trying to overthrow his father's kingdom, is riding one, no doubt as symbol.  The idea that the 'King of Israel' or Meschiach would ride a lowly ass into his coronation (which the crucifixion becomes), is well established since Genesis and again in Zechariah: [Gen 49:11 KJV] 11 Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass's colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes

[Zec 9:9 KJV] 9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he [is] just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

While Kings rode in finery on horses in battle (a type and kind we see upon Jesus' return at the end as Faithful and True leads his saints into 'teleos' victory, and certainly David did, the lowly 'donkey' (not used in KJV) or ass, was the prophecy in Genesis to Judah, the head of tribes, by the dying Jacob, or Israel, Prince of God.

 An Earthly King of Israel Ascends Olivet 

While these many 'types' and shadows of the coming Messiah are seen in the Davidic Kingdom and David, there is one though which is often overlooked, and most blithely skip by it in the Second Book of Samuel:

 II Samuel 15:30 And David went up by the ascent of mount Olivet, and wept as he went up, and had his head covered, and he went barefoot: and all the people that was with him covered every man his head, and they went up, weeping as they went up.

  Note the beautiful parallels:

1.  David 'ascends' Mount Olivet
2.  David Weeps Ascending the Mount
3.  David had his head covered
4.  David went barefoot
5.  The people who went with him, covered their head
6.   weeping as they went

 
  Let's consider each of the above:

  1. David Ascends or goes up on the ascent of Mount Olivet: Mount Olivet figures prominently in the Scriptures: it is the place where the Olivet discourse will be given by Christ;  it is the place where Jesus does not ascend YET to the cross, but begins the ascent: in the garden of Gethsemane:

 Luke 22:39 And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him.
40 And when he was at the place, he said unto them,Pray that ye enter not into temptation.
41 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down*, and prayed,
42 Saying,Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. 

Gethsemane comes from a Chaldee origin of two words, 'Gath' and 'Shemen', together :"oil-press".  This is the place where both David and Jesus, anointed for a purpose are put to the test, where both accept God's will, though it be with more than a modicum of 'angst'. More than that: they both cross over the brook Kidron (cedron) to get there, both to regroup to do battle, though of a differing nature, both distraught over the transpiring events.
2.  David Weeps at the ascent of Mount Olivet: So does Jesus:

[Luk 22:44 KJV] 44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

 David 'wept as he went up'. Why was David weeping?  Absalom, David's son, had just committed treachery and treason against his father, the anointed King.  Rather than fight his son, and because Absalom had garnered so many followers in Israel as the young and more handsome, 'people pleaser', Absalom had stirred up discontent in Israel: David knew he would have to at least temporarily abdicate the throne, or start a bloodbath in Israel, and perhaps even kill his own son.  Jesus finds himself in a similar situation:  the High Priest had declared that it was 'better that one man die for Israel'...and though Jesus would shortly confront Caiaphas about who was King (and Pilate), it was clear that     had not Jesus had a higher and more divine purpose, the avoidance of a great conflict in Israel was also near at hand.

     Both were putting on the altar all they were and had worked for: both were facing a horrible fate: David of exile and possible death, or the death of his son, and Jesus his own impending death.  Certainly, both had cause to mourn, with many in Israel. (at least a remnant).

 3. David has his head covered: The covering of the head, in Jewish culture has indicated various things at different times.  Priests in the Temple of God during the time of the Tabernacle, wore 'bonnets' or essentially a 'turban' with a mitre, particularly the high priest, in which the covering of the head was obedience and awe before God: the words on the covering meant "Holiness unto the LORD". (Exodus 28:36)

Several other scriptures speak of the covering of the head in regard to males: in Esther 6:12 Haman covers his head indicating mourning or extreme distress;  and the protection of God is indicated in Psalm 140:7 when the psalmist writes: "O God the Lord, the strength of my salvation, thou hast covered my head in the day of battle".  The covering of heads pointed to a covering for shame or being confounded in Jeremiah 14:3, and in 14:4.  By the time of the New Testament, as Paul sets in order the 'policies' for church attendance, he writes "Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishououreth his head" I Cor 11:4.  It is interesting to note that the change in the meaning of a male covering for the head, over 1000 years between 1000bc and around 50-60 a.d. changes to the opposite. The parallel though, even though the custom had changed, is that both mourning and headship are denoted: the ascent of David up Mount Olivet, and the weeping and praying of the Messiah in the Garden at the ascent of the Mount of Olives both show mourning, and a sign of obedience and the sovereignty of God.  In the garden of Gethsemane, beseeching God that the cup of suffering about to occur might pass, but nonetheless owning it "if it be thy will" shows the acknowledgement of the order of the Son to the Father, even if they are one.  With David, not only did the King ascent Olivet with his head covered, but so did his people:

 ...2 Samuel 15:30  ...and all the people that was with him covered every man his head, and they went up, weeping as they went up.

4. David went barefoot  Being barefoot is not mentioned directly in the Bible more than a few times:  the 4 direct mentions are of Isaiah's prophetic similitude in Isaiah 20 2-4, in which Isaiah is told for 3 years to walk 'naked and barefoot' as a sign of a coming captivity by the King of Assyria.  It is a sign of shame and enslavement, or servitude, being taken captive in war. At least one in the Old Testament and once in the new, Moses is mentioned as having to remove his shoes to stand 'on holy ground':

 Exodus 3:5 And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place wereon thou standest is holy ground.
Acts 7:33 Then said the Lord to him, Put off thy shoes from thy feet: for the place where thou standest is holy ground." 

  The removing of a shoe was a covenant or contract in Ruth, and an indication in Psalms that God considered some areas of Israel as 'lesser' since he mentions casting out his shoe over them.  Here though, it seems to carry the connotation of 'holy ground' and humility: the abasement of two Kings is easily seen in the ascent,  both going forward to a form of willing captivity, though in both cases, their 'servitude' is to 'take captivity captivity' since David regains the earthly kingdom of Israel/Judah, and Jesus 'sets the captives free' by a divine act.  It is fair to propose that barefoot David (and possibly Christ though it is not mentioned) both demonstrate the humble surrender to God's will, and in the ascent up Olivet beginning at the 'wine press',  they are also on 'holy ground'.

 5. and 6. The people who went with him, covered their heads and wept also.
Here is an easy parallel: only a few, a remnant follow their King in his abasement, both out into the wilderness.  They weep as they go, up the hill.
With David it is a band of loyalists from the palace,  with Jesus, it is the remnant of his disciples and followers, particularly women who will attend his death and burial, Joseph of Arimathea, and John, the beloved disciple.(Matthew 27:55-57; LK 23:27; John 19:25-27) David sends back Ittai to attend the palace, and insists that the Ark of the Covenant be returned to the Temple in Jerusalem.  Abiathar the priest and Zadok are sent back to the royal court, carrying back the Ark, even if it is to attend Absalom.  The followers of both men, are willing to take on the suffering of their King, though the Kings do not tell them, that the reason they are 'sent back' is because they cannot.

How beautiful is this often unnoticed passage, where in the life of David, perfect often in faith, but imperfect often in human foible, we nonetheless see the foreshadowing of the King of Kings, the King of Israel, Yshua HaMeschiach, in the face of trial and division in Israel, with his loved Israel calling for his death, rather than consume the children he loves, willing abdicates an earthly throne for a cross in the wilderness, weeping and abased.  How beautiful upon the mountains! are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that published peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth! (Isaiah 52:7)

Whence Art Thou? A Governor of Rome Confronts a King of Israel

The following post was illegally removed from this blog, and is being reposted.

The days had not been easy for Pontius Pilate:  isolated in what he must have considered a desolate desert outpost,   he had ordered the violent subduing of one uprising after another:  while primarily it was the Zealots who gave him trouble,  there was no question that the better part of Israel wanted no part of Rome and it was also a time when many in Israel expected the Messiah to appear,  with several claiming he already had, or was the rabbi from Galilee that was known as Yshua, or 'Jesus' in Aramaic.    News of this 'Jesus' had already stirred the palaces in the area, and the seat of Roman authority,  but some claimed he was the Messiah to come,  which would deeply trouble Rome, and perhaps even lead an army in victory against Roman authority,  and yet still others claimed he was a holy man, a miracle, and perhaps something even more,  though that talk was obsequies.

Pontius Pilate was no friend to the Jews nor Israel:  he was known for being a brutal man,  and the death of insurrectionists and slaves was of minor concern to a Roman prelate:  he was willing to enforce law fully in the hopes of a perfect record that might take his career back to Rome.   Jerusalem in the first century was bustling with commerce and warring factions,  and the Children of Israel were not happy with Rome, with the Roman purchased High Priest,  or with a system that had become oppressive and intolerable,  as those who fought back lined the roads into Jerusalem, crucified,   a sign to any upcoming 'rebel slaves'.   In some ways one can surmize that Pilate, like Herod might have looked forward to meeting this 'Yshua' of Nazareth,  wondering if rumors of his healings and miracles had any veracity.   The Governor though, was about the meet a King,  though a highly unexpected one dressed in the garb of the poor of Israel.

One does not have to guess that Pilate could discern what was going on:   the Scriptures note his detection of the motives of the Pharisees and leadership with regard to Jesus:

For he knew that for envy they had delivered him. Matthew 27:18For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy. Mark 15:10 

Though cruel and unjust, the Roman governor probably had 'seen it all' and though he could have rendered a cursory judgment,  he instead maintained a 'wait and see' policy,  not knowing that it was the Rabbi from Galilee that would disarm him, instead of the the converse.

Much discussion occurs in the Gospels regarding authority.   Jesus did not negate earthly authority, he very much admonished his disciples to obey earthly authority by 'rendering unto Caesar what was Caesar's', but at the same time, he noted that particularly with regard to the Word of God, the Children of the Kingdom, are free.   Paul would later go on in Romans 13 to note that all authority is given of God, and that we are to obey the 'powers', as ordained of God though this is one of the most misunderstood and too often misused portions of scripture.   This interplay of the duty of a believer to obey authority as ordained of God, and yet first to obey the Sovereign God,  has been one of the centerpieces of Post WWII theology, as to when to obey vs. not to obey,  and when obedience becomes 'blind'.

Discussions of authority though in the Gospel is not all negative:  Jesus commends the Centurion for his great faith, though he is both Gentile and Roman, and an officer in the army of the occupying force, because the centurion understands Jesus' ability to command his creation:   he notes that:

For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this [man], Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth [it].

When Jesus heard [it], he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. Matthew 8:9-10

The discussion of authority is seen in the parables that Jesus tells,  also in the sovereign commands of the winds and waves on Geneseret,   in the authoritative commands to 'be made whole',  or 'be made clean',  and even the disciples and people of Israel who noted that Jesus spoke with authority,  in a way they had not heard before.  So before Jesus is brought before Pilate, bound as a lamb,  and seemingly nothing more than a prisoner,  the issue of who was the governing power in Israel had already been brought up.

The conversation though which is about to take place,  is one of the most telling in the Scriptures:  it is one favored by Christians over the centuries as an interchange which determines definitively, ‘Who’s Who’ in Israel:  a ‘governor’ from Rome and representing Caesar,  brings before him one called, “The Nazarene” and confronts him about who he is:

John 18:33-38

33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?

 34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?

 35    Pilate answered,  Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?

 36  Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

 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.

38  Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. 

Note what Pilate is most interested in:  whether it is in mocking or not, whether he is influenced by the dream his wife had of this “Just man” is not made clear:   he has one primary question to begin the conversation:  “Art thou the King of the Jews?”  There are many reasons that this is the premiere question, and one that has lasted in the minds and hearts of most for centuries:  Pilate is interested first and foremost in Rome’s interest.  The only crime in question is one of sedition or attempted overthrow of the government, or taking undue authority;  he has already berated the Pharisees regarding whether they are bringing Jesus before him as an issue of their doctrine:

28   Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.

 29  Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man?

 30  They answered and said unto him, If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee.

 31  Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. 

As Jesus is led from Caiaphas, unto the ‘hall of judgment’ there is a statement being made about the spiritual condition of the those in authority at the time:  while the Sanhedrin does first place Jesus on trial before the counselors of Israel, it is the middle of the night, an illegal time for a trial² before either the Sanhedrin or Pilate, and Jesus is ‘paraded’ before the High priest before being brought to Pilate.   The ‘hall of judgment’ was the judicial hearing platform of Pilate, near or on the Gabbatha where hearings regarding justice and matters of state took place.  (See the discussion on the Gabbatha in the study “ Jesus is Brought Before Pilate:  The Azazel vs. the Sin Offering).   Pilate was the Praetor of Rome, in Palestine, living in and judging from the Praetorium. 

[Mar 15:16 KJV] 16 And the soldiers led him away into the hall, called Praetorium; and they call together the whole band.

The Praetorium Guard,  (in other versions and in secular sources ‘praetorian’) was the guard of Pilate’s complex,  a structure which many archaeologists today was built across from the Temple by a colonnade about 600 feet away. ³    The word comes from ‘praetoriani’  meaning………..,  and Thayer’s Dictionary BLB  provides the following definition:

        I.            "Head-quarters" in a roman camp, the tent of the commander-in-chief

      II.            The palace in which the governor or procurator of a province resided, to which use the romans were accustomed to appropriate the palaces already existing, and formerly dwelt in by kings or princes; at Jerusalem it was a magnificent palace which Herod the great had built for himself, and which the roman procurators seemed to have occupied whenever they came from Caesarea to Jerusalem to transact public business.

    III.            The camp of the praetorian soldiers established by Tiberius...       Thayers Lexicon in BLB                         

                                                                                                                                   

In sum, then, the governor was the praetor, who lived and judged from the Praetorium, which is also referred to as the judgment hall or hall of judgment, near the ‘Gabbatha’ or pavement, guarded by the Roman guard associated with Roman governors, generals, and Caesars called the Praetorian guard,  though the expression ‘Praetorian guard’ is not used in the King James version.⁴   

Jesus was hardly the hardened criminal that Pilate usually had brought before him:   Rome in the years preceding Jesus’ crucifixion , considerably unwelcome in the desert city,  had encountered uprisings and protests some of which are attested to in the writings of Josephus⁵ and Tertullian⁶ including groups of Zealots tearing the eagle down from the temple walls, or even a contingent of Jewish statesmen travelling to Rome shortly after the time of Jesus to petition Caligula for the right to worship.   From the time of the Roman occupation the searing and painful reminders of their presence were etched on the conscience of Israel:  Jewish men crucified on stakes lined roads leading into Jerusalem for the ‘criminal’ act of rebelling against the occupying force.   Runaway slaves were brought to court along with those charged with traditional crimes, but for the most part, the cases which reached the Roman Prefect were those which involved the State:   the Pharisees must have known, ultimately that the only charge they could make stick would be ‘treason’ or ‘sedition’:  in this case, of a “King of Israel” opposing the Caesars of Rome.  Still before the Messiah is brought out to people on the Gabbatha that day,  Pilate interrogates his prisoner.

Pilate is the legal representative of Caesar:   Caesar in the eyes of Romans and occupied areas is ‘King’,  so that anyone declaring himself a ‘King of Israel’  would be at once committing a treasonous act, an act of rebellion against Rome.   The discussion though notes what Charles Colson once referred to as “Kingdoms in Conflict”⁷  : The representative of the Roman Caesar stands face to face with Jesus,  who in the past three years has healed the sick,  restored sight to the blind, walked on water, calmed storms and without pause asks him a most unusual question :

“Art thou the King of the Jews?”

There was something in Pilate’s countenance that kept him fixated on Jesus.    Jesus responds:

Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?

Every soul from the beginning of time till the end is confronted with this question from the Lord and Savior:  do you say of yourselves, that he is King of the Jews, or are you repeating what you have heard?   The day Jesus asked the question of Pilate,  he showed that there was no one of any rank or position who was left out of having to answer the question.  The question is akin to asking “Do you believe I am the Messiah (meaning, the King of Israel)?  It is ‘typically Jesus’ to use a rabbinical style of answering a question with a question,  but even confronting his own affliction and death,  his mind was on souls, even of those who were persecuting him unmercifully.  Pilate also though, was used to circumventing a direct question, and answers:

35    … Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?

His first question to Jesus is ‘Am I a Jew?’.   He cut to the quick, perceiving at least that Jesus was asking him a significant question which he was unwilling to answer.  Asking Jesus, “Am I a Jew?” at least in part indicates Pilate seeing salvation and the Messiah as part of being ‘a Jew’ and that more likely than not he did not expect to have to declare the kingship of Jesus.

One wonders just what Pilate was thinking, for rather than directly accusing Jesus of charges, he asks Jesus for the charges against himself!   Pilate remarks that Jesus’ own nation of Israel, and the chief priests (though they were hardly Levitical*) delivered Jesus to Pilate for judgment,  though they have failed to specify succinct charges against him.

____________________________________________________-

*Note:  Caiaphas as high priest had paid Rome for his position:  because of the conflicts before Christ’s birth,  Rome had taken over a previous practice of ‘charging’ a fee for the institution of a High Priest at Jerusalem, though this was clearly against the Scriptures and Jewish practice.   The fee or tariff was raised at the expense of the congregation of Israel and amounted in modern dollars to 

Happy Resurrection Sunday

A Blessed Passover and Resurrection Sunday to all.

Why Did Jesus Not Come Down Off the Cross?

[Mat 27:39-42 KJV] 39 And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads, 40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest [it] in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross. 41  Likewise also the chief priests mocking [him], with the scribes and elders, said, 42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.

Why did Jesus not come down from the Cross?   In the passage above,  we see that some of the people in attendance that day to the Cross,   were mocking Jesus,  days after the whole city welcomed him crying 'Hosanna in the Highest'.   Was he found to be fraudulent?  No, quite the opposite was true,  his teaching was impeccable,  and even Pilate would declare that he found 'no fault in him'.  Jesus was the Messiah, the King of Israel, the High Priest of Israel and the Great Shepherd, but he also was the Lamb for sacrifice:  even in the Garden of Gethsemane,  his willful laying down of his life was shown in two instances:

1. In his prayer to the the Father
2. In his willful surrender to the will of God.

His prayer to God the Father goes as follows:

[Mat 26:39 KJV] 39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou [wilt]. 

The key is 'nevertheless not as I will, but as thou [wilt].  Jesus was more than willing to endure the suffering that he prophesied about himself.  Even in the garden, we see that he is not foolishly masochistic: he does not wish to suffer just for suffering's sake.  Many cults today have rigorous and horrid practices of self-inflicted wounds and pain, believing it makes them more 'spiritual' or draws them closer to God:  this is not the 'mortification of the flesh' spoken of in the Word of God,  but a form of self mutilation and self-affliction for no reason.  The mortification of the flesh spoken of in the epistles is mentioned two times:

[Rom 8:13 KJV] 13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

[Col 3:5 KJV] 5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:

Mortifying the 'deeds of the body," or 'your members which are upon the earth means to bring them under the control of the Holy Spirit is either

νεκρόω

which means to 'make dead' or deprive of power,  such as in dying to self and letting the Holy Spirit take control, or 

θανατόωblb

or 'thanato'  , essentially the same meaning, but more directly death, since our word for the study of death, 'thanatology' comes from this root.    Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane, prays centrally for God's will to be done,  of which he is already aware,  which entails suffering, affliction and pain.

Jesus already knows that a cross is part of the suffering:

[Mat 16:24 KJV] 24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any [man] will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

While a cross may have been proverbial in that day,  even the word 'crucified' was implicit in the prophecies he rendered of his own death:

[Mat 20:19 KJV] 19 And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify [him]: and the third day he shall rise again.

[Mat 23:34 KJV] 34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and [some] of them ye shall kill and crucify; and [some] of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute [them] from city to city: 

He knew he would be crucified.   The question at hand though, to answer the insane mockery at the cross,  is that he COULD have come down off the Cross if he had merely prayed to his Father.  He would never have come off the cross though,  because he was sent to that wooden altar to fulfill many prophecies,  such as the fulfillment of 'God will provide himself a lamb'  in the Akedah of Isaac, or the blood on the door posts and lintels during the Passover, with the passover lamb inside, or the 'Key of Eliakim'

[Isa 22:20-23 KJV] 20 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah: 21 And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. 22 And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. 23 And I will fasten him [as] a nail in a sure place; and he shall be for a glorious throne to his father's house. 

Jesus could have come down from the cross,  just as Moses could have forsaken Israel,  when they became rebellious and idolatrous and God offered Moses a whole new nation:

[Deu 9:13-14 KJV] 13 Furthermore the LORD spake unto me, saying, I have seen this people, and, behold, it [is] a stiffnecked people: 14 Let me alone, that I may destroy them, and blot out their name from under heaven: and I will make of thee a nation mightier and greater than they.

Moses though, a prophet also, could not fail to intercede for and deliver Israel: it was his vocation, his calling:

 [Deu 9:13-14, 25-26 KJV] 13 Furthermore the LORD spake unto me, saying, I have seen this people, and, behold, it [is] a stiffnecked people: 14 Let me alone, that I may destroy them, and blot out their name from under heaven: and I will make of thee a nation mightier and greater than they. ... 25 Thus I fell down before the LORD forty days and forty nights, as I fell down [at the first]; because the LORD had said he would destroy you. 26 I prayed therefore unto the LORD, and said, O Lord GOD, destroy not thy people and thine inheritance, which thou hast redeemed through thy greatness, which thou hast brought forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand.

Jesus had the heart of God, just as Moses had for the children of Israel:  he could no more leave them and forsake them, nor wantonly disregard their redemption, salvation and deliverance than could Moses or the other prophets.   Jeremiah speaks of  the wish to even forsake doing God's will when times become too hard,  but being unable to:

9Then I said, I will not make mention of him, nor speak any more in his name. But his word was in mine heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing, and I could not stay.

Jesus, then, 'could' have come down off the cross, and at the same time could not:  not and win the victory of all time;  not and save Israel and be a light to the Gentiles, not and bruise the head of the serpent, since Eden.   The mockery no doubt for the rest of us,  would have been the last vestige of cruelty which would have caused all of us to turn away,  but his steadfast love for us, with a love greater than that of this world, prevailed.  Hosanna in the highest.

till the next. ekb 

A Brief Thought on Thorns & Thistles

A beautiful thought this week coming into Passover: When Adam was cast out of the Garden of Eden, he was judged with thorns and thistles: it is the first mention of such things in the Bible.

[Gen 3:18 KJV] 18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

First Adam because of a fall from Grace, brings in the Fall of Man: sin and death enter the world. Adam as well as his offspring will die.

When Jesus is crowned in mockery with thorns, he is bearing, as King and Deliverer of Israel, the sin of Adam: the thorns are painful things, and thistles are useless and vain, hardly good even for kindling a fire.

[Mat 27:29 KJV] 29 And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put [it] upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews!

The sin of Adam was in disobeying God, the victory of Yshua is in obedience to the death, bearing the sin of the first Adam to the Cross and putting it to death. It is the crown of thorns that is the mark of Kingship, with the 'wrath of man praising God' as he is in mocking coronation, made King for certain, declared by the civil authorities as such with signs above his head on the Cross, and putting to death in the flesh, but marked by the Crown, the Fall of Man.

It parallels Moses' holding up of the brasen serpent in the wilderness: the serpent of Eden, causing sin and death to enter the world, causing the Fall of man, is crucified in victory on the cross: this of course does not point to Jesus as the serpent, but as the King bearing the vile thing to be put to death, that the covenant of God in everlasting life might be fulfilled: Adam was the door to the Fall, Messiah the door to everlasting life.

1 person reached

A word at passover

For several years, I have attempted to provide in excellent form, bible studies for free, in this particular blog, on The Passover and the Savior.   I am finally at the point of exasperation at the lack of Christian behavior, and civil behavior towards my work and these studies.

I am a former college professor,  who has studied the Word of God for 30 years, daily:  I started theological training after a career in Psychology but did not finish, but spent the next 30 years independently continuing my studies.  However, even if I had a 3rd grade education, I will still by law be accorded the right to write without encumbrance.

For Christians: Jesus nor the Scriptures forbid women or non-pastors from teaching and preaching the Gospel:  far from it, the 'great commission' commands every believer to be an agent of the Gospel: preaching, teaching, speaking, telling, showing:  it is never forbidden for any in Christ: there is no age limit, no racial kind, no male nor female, no 'Jew nor Greek':  it is the calling of every believer, trained or untrained,  new believer or one of many years: we are commanded to take the Gospel forward.

We are also never to build upon another's foundation, i.e.  we are not to interfere with, take over or 'overthrow' the work of another in Christ.   In the Gospel this is sometimes difficult since we teach the same topics which have been taught for 2000 years.   Unfortunately though,  these studies are enough of interest that some 'marketeers' feel that they will sell,  by I have obeyed the biblical command, 'freely given, freely give':  I am astounded at the viscious, non-stop ruin of these
 studies, designed to bring people to a deeper love and understanding of the Lord and his Word.

Blogger offers free blogging:  if you or your organization think you can do better, register a blog and go for it, but on your own material and not mine.  The height of hypocrisy has got to be ruining a blog on Christ and the Passover at Eastertime:  the portrayal of the greatest love on earth.   Teaching the Word is not a competition or a marketplace:  if you do not love the ways of Christ,  leave the church, market 'vegomatics' or some such thing, but leave the things of the Lord alone.  For those of different faiths who encounter this site:  you are free to express other doctrines, which I find false, but the law gives us both the right to express ourselves:   no true religion has to ruin the appearance or writing of a website bible study:  the truth has a life of its own.

I am pleading with people to leave this work alone:  it will live or die on its own:  there is never a reason to ruin, slander, or make someone look bad in order to take over a bible study:  it is the highest point of insanity.   Who is on the Lord's side?