In the work of condemnation, there is always certainty. Isn’t it amazing how those two things always
seem to go together, bound by the human glue of pride. In our legal system, a jury is asked whether
they believe the defendant is guilty beyond a “reasonable” doubt. This means we look for convictions despite
those nagging doubts that may linger, despite a casual doubt a jurist may have
in the back of his mind. The term
“reasonable” must be interjected in our jury instructions, or nearly every
defendant would be set free. But the
prosecution reflects NO doubts in the case they present. The prosecution lays out a set of facts and
puts together a narrative of what happened, who did it, and why they would do
it. If the only entirety of listening to
the case was that of the prosecution, you would have no choice but to convict
every time. Because the prosecution does
not present a case with any doubt in it.
They reflect only certainty, no matter what all the facts might reveal. It is their job to convict no matter what, no
matter what truth is.
When was the last time you heard a prosecutor (especially in
a high profile case where America was watching), stop the trial and say … you
know what, we got it wrong, this defendant is innocent and this case needs to
be closed, we are dropping all charges.
Nearly never. What happens
instead is that trials continue despite truth, and the prosecution relies upon
the defense to overwhelm them with truth, such that a jury must undo unjust prosecutions. But then, this places the defense team in the
position of striving for acquittal despite the truth as well. Indeed, defense lawyers are not allowed to
state that their clients are guilty and should be punished. They must fight the prosecution every inch of
the way, looking to let go murders, rapists, drug traffickers, simply because
our prosecution must ignore truth and reflect certainty once a trial
begins. Our defense must then meet the
prosecution’s certainty with certainty of its own. Legal trickery then becomes the standard for
talent once the fray begins.
And lost in our legal system becomes truth. But it is worse, in the judicial proceedings
of our religious bodies, of our churches.
Once a group of our religious leaders reaches unity in the ideas of
casting someone out for their sins (perhaps now public), they are rarely if
ever deterred. And it may never get as
far as a public ex-communication, it need only get as far as gossip in the mind
of the religious leader. The defendant
in these cases can be subtly restricted from roles of leadership & service
in the church, because the existing leadership simply thinks that they are “not
right for that role”. The existing
leaders of the faith do not want upstarts, free thinkers, or revolutionary’s
admitted into leadership roles alongside themselves. People like “that” must be kept “in their
place”. In our modern age church
leadership is not allowed to kill them for heresy (a procedure often used in
our past for just such problems), instead we destroy reputations, and restrict
service, until they “get the hint”, or have no choice but to move on.
But what happens when the prosecution is dead wrong? What happens when the facts are contrived to
look a certain way, because of the heart of the prosecutor? What happens when those you personally state
are condemned to the fires of hell for their grievous sins, are NOT actually so
condemned? What happens when your
certainty is the problem all along?
Religious condemnation never occurs without certainty. And in a belief system where God alone
judges, and He judges based on the heart, and looks to redeem every soul no
matter how “evil” they appear … how could any condemnation be so certain? When mankind attempts to take the role of
judge upon himself, when he attempts to dictate the religious standing of
another human being, he looks to make himself equal to God. This is what Satan did before us, and
encourages us to do to this day. It is
what Satan inspired a former religious leadership to do. After all, this Messiah named Jesus, did not
conform. He was not doing what scripture
said He should do, according to the church.
He had to be stopped. And since
only death would stop him …
Peter recounts the prosecution of Truth, that is The Truth,
from the first point of view that matters – from the religious leadership of
the church, the true church. Keep in
mind, the right scriptures, that is the bible will be used in this
prosecution. This is not based on the
Quran, or some ancient Hindu book of wisdom, it is based on the Biblical
scriptures available in that day, held in Jerusalem where nearly all books
would be present. The prosecutors are
not just lay people run amuck. This is
not some out-of-control deacon who thinks he knows best. This is the pope. This is the general conference leader. These men are the esteemed leadership of the
day, and they are united, acting in concert for the very first time, over one
singular issue … to destroy this upstart Messiah wannabe named Jesus Christ. A stark mantra emerges in the halls of the
Pharisees … The Truth be damned; this prosecution must succeed. That stark mantra echoes in the hearts of
those who call themselves by His name today … The Truth be damned; we must
condemn those still steeped in sin, instead of work for their redemption.
Peter begins his recollection to John Mark in his gospel in
chapter fourteen picking up in verse 53 saying … “And they led Jesus away to
the high priest: and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the
elders and the scribes. [verse 54] And Peter followed him afar off, even into
the palace of the high priest: and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself
at the fire.” This was a momentous
trial. This was not a matter that only 2
or 3 priests need deal with, everyone in power is here. Chief Priests, Elders, Scribes, from every
part of church leadership, all in power were there. Peter too, has regained his courage enough to
follow at a distance. He has gone
undercover, and now hangs out with the servants, warming themselves by the
fire.
John Mark continues in verse 55 saying … “And the chief
priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to
death; and found none. [verse 56] For many bare false witness against him, but
their witness agreed not together.” In
Jewish law, there must be at least two witnesses whose testimony agrees before
a man can be put to death. So the hunt
for such men begins, but with no luck.
It is very hard to coordinate lies when the witnesses are kept
separate. Guessing at what the other guy
said, becomes very difficult, and everybody that night was getting it
wrong. The Truth was hard to testify
against. What could be said against it
but lies. Certainty does not equal
correctness. One can be extremely
certain, and extremely wrong.
Mark continues in verse 57 saying … “And there arose
certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, [verse 58] We heard him
say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days
I will build another made without hands. [verse 59] But neither so did their
witness agree together.” The subject of
the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem came up. But the liars could not get that story right
either. They had the jest of it, but
again their testimonies stepped upon each other so badly, that facts were
getting destroyed. The prosecution was
getting stumped, and this could not happen.
This Man must be found guilty no matter what, no matter how. Finally, the high priest himself was getting
angry.
Mark continues in verse 60 saying … “And the high priest
stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is
it which these witness against thee? [verse 61] But he held his peace, and
answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou
the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” The
prosecution had counted on something they were not getting. They expected for Jesus to argue with each
false witness that came up. They
expected to get Jesus tripped up in His own words, and somehow break His own
defense through argument and exaggeration.
But the strangest of all things was happening, Jesus the Lamb of God was
remaining perfectly silent. What should
have enraged each of us if we were an innocent party, did nothing to get Jesus
talking. He just sat there and took it all
in silence.
Here is the first distinction between The Truth, and those
of us who claim truth is on our side.
The need to defend it. The Truth
will stand against all the lies of the evil one. The Truth needs no defense, for it is The
Truth. We who claim the truth is with
us, and bolster our claims in certainty, are rigorous to defend our
positions. We are happy to argue how we
are right, and all others are wrong. We
are happy to prove it based in the interpretations of the scriptures we are
certain are correct. Just as these
prosecutors of old. We will fight for
our truth to the point of death. Not our
own deaths mind you, but those who claim we are wrong, we are happy to fight
with, all the way to the point of killing them to insure our truth lives
on. But this is not needed. The Truth will live on no matter what the
opposing argument comes up with. It
needs no help or defense or violence from us.
Rather it needs our testimony in how we live The Truth in silence, not
how we speak about it.
Finally though, the high priest challenges the Superhuman to
identify itself. Strangely this same
challenge works on angels of light, and angels of darkness. It is as if God has setup a rule which cannot
be broken. If asked who they are, a
superhuman being must answer in truth, to the human who asks it, whether it is
demon, or it is God. This challenge is
meant to protect us. If or when we
encounter the superhuman, the entity that exists beyond our realm, we need only
ask it … in the name of Jesus Christ, who are you? And it will be compelled to answer. Most of those who encounter the supernatural
are not inclined to use this challenge.
They are told by the entity that it would represent a lack of
faith. They are told the encounters between
them might stop after that. They are
lied to, and eagerly accept the lie, because most demons tell us what we want
to hear, not what we need to hear. But
God has no fear of this challenge.
Jesus answers in verse 62 saying … “And Jesus said, I am:
and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming
in the clouds of heaven.” Here is where
OUR human nature takes over. We read
this text as a threat, as a condemnation to those conducting this trial. We are absolutely certain of it. But there is more to it than may first meet
the eye. The prophecy of Christ not long
ago, predicted the denial of Peter of even knowing Jesus before the rooster
crowed. Yet that prophecy was not to condemn
Peter forever for his sins. The prophecy
here lays out a coming of Christ to this world.
It could be His second coming to gather His redeemed, those who have
repented of deeds even as terrible as the prosecution of The Truth unto
death. It could also represent His third
coming when the Holy City descends to our earth and the wicked are raised for a
final judgment one last time. The words
of Christ are true either way. But which
version of His return these men see, will be a function of their repentance,
and acceptance of Jesus Christ as our only Messiah. This was also true for Peter. The sins were committed. The question is only whether a repentance was
sought.
The high priest was anxious to get this trial done
with. The story continues in verse 63
saying … “Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any
further witnesses? [verse 64] Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And
they all condemned him to be guilty of death.”
The religious leadership of the church prosecuted The Truth, and
pronounced Him guilty because He spoke the Truth. The mob joined in. There was not one free thinker in that jury
box, not one sympathetic ear who might have voiced an opposition to this farce
of a trial. Certainty overwhelmed the
mob in that hall. Certainty backed by
Satan himself, that death was needed, blood was needed, an example must be made
to keep the faith pure. So Satan does
with us nearly 2000 years later. He
tells us to expel those caught in sin in order to keep the faith pure, keep the
leadership pure. There is no forgiveness
in the mind or heart of Satan, but there is overwhelming certainty, certainty
steeped in pride.
Whose follower are we truly?
Then begins to happen what happens when Truth has been devalued and
discarded; it is hated. John Mark
concludes this section in verse 65 saying … “And some began to spit on him, and
to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the
servants did strike him with the palms of their hands.” How we spit on The Truth. When once we embark on the path of certainty,
and when we add our voices to those of condemnation, we spit right on the face
of Truth. We ignore how often our own
sins must have been cleansed by the sacrifice of Christ. We ignore how much we too have earned the
sentence of condemnation, and that but for the love and grace of Christ, we too
were bound for the hell of separation from God.
So we spit in the face of God, in the face of Truth, with our hypocrisy,
and our prosecution of others still steeped in sins (we too so often commit).
Then we torture Truth.
We contrive scriptures and interpretations to support our condemnations
of others. We mangle the Bible, and turn
the image of God from one of Love to one of vengeance. We put a bag over the head of Christ so that
He can no longer see. Then we bang upon
His precious face, hitting Him with our palms, and our pretenses. We take pride in our differences. We consider only ourselves as right and all
other Christian faiths as wrong. We are
absolutely certain of it. And in our
certainty we slap the face of Christ, telling Him He is unable to lead any
other faith but ours to Truth, and to the Kingdom of God. It is not those men, and those hands who
remain stained, it is our own. And still
we continue, absolutely certain of our cause, certain of our faith, certain of
our interpretation, certainty steeped in a pride of our forefathers and our
faith. We believe we must lead the fight
against sin, certain this is our calling, ignoring the calls of Jesus to Love,
instead leading a war against evil with the voice of our condemnation.
This is not the trial against The Truth that happened in the
days of Christ, it is the prosecution against The Truth that happens in the
hearts of his modern day followers from every denomination. But like the priests of old, there is still
hope held out to us. Hope that begins in
repentance of our certainty. Hope that
grows in the transformation of our hearts by the power of Jesus alone, that
leaves our hearts unable to condemn, but infinitely interested in
redemption. When love is our only
motivation, we see our hearts brought into alignment with the God of Love, and
vengeance has no part in it any longer.