----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2004 3:45
AM
Subject: [TruthTalk] arophobia: fear of
reason
From: "Blaine Borrowman" <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
**Blaine:
I respectfully (DavidH has taught me a few things) disagree.
(:>) They definitely were keeping their fingers on the pulse of
the
common folk, I have no contention with that. But they did it
because
these folks were the source of their power, wealth and social
status.
Judy:
They weren't elected officials Blaine. The seat of Moses was
something
instituted by God.
**Blaine: The seat of Moses--was it
the High Priest's office? If so, the HP office was a political plum
during the time of Jesus Christ. Whereas it was by tradition and
commandment to be reserved for the seed of Aaron only, during this time it was
an appointment from Herod and the Romans alike. Although it was
traditionally a lifetime appointment, the office was filled by 28 different
men between 37 B.C. and A.D. 68. So, regards your contention that this was not an elected
office, you are correct. However, although the power of life and
death was reserved for Roman officers, the Jewish leaders had
considerable influence--power--as evidenced by the fact they were able to stir
up the populace to demand the crucifixion of Jesus. The populace was
basically the only thing they both feared and revered, since by manipulating
it, they could apparently persuade the Roman governor to go against his own
judgements, knowing the last thing he wanted was an insurrection of the
populace. Their power to manipulate the populace came
from the high status/prestige of their offices as members of the Sanhedrin,
and as Priests, Levites, teachers, etc., which were traditional offices in the
Priesthood of Aaron. Holders of these titles and offices were
reverenced by almost all Jews, even Jesus counseled to listen to the HP and
elders, but to not do what they did. In their peculiar social structure,
holding religious office and having high social status went hand in hand,
eclipsed only by the amount of money one could show evidence of having access
to--what one social scientist of recent times has called status
symbols. Status symbols vary from society to society, but money always
seems to be what the symbols represent. In our society, we value
expensive cars--the more expensive, the more status associated with the
symbol. Jewelry is the same. The more expensive, the
better. A $10,000.00 Rolex does not keep better time than an
$80.00 Citizen watch, but people still want the Rolex above any
other, because of the status if confers upon the owner. And
houses!! A house with five bedrooms and three baths carries more status
than one with two bedrooms and one bath (:>) Right? But either
way, the symbols represent money--and in the case of the Pharisees and other
Jewish chief priests and scribes, the source of the money was selling
religious items to the populace, and if it could be done on the temple
grounds, all the better, as doing such added to the significance and
importance of the for-sale items, and therefore higher prices could likely
have been charged. The only real fear the Jewish leaders had was
the populace in general, whom both the appointed Jewish officials as
well as the Romans had nightmares about, since insurrection was an
ever-present possibility. They all knew the Jews were an intelligent and
religiously zealous bunch, very hard to control at times, especially when it
came to religious issues. A popular leader, as Jesus Christ was, became
the only real fear these Jewish leaders had. When Christ entered the
city of Jerusalem on the colt of an ass, this had tremendous significance to
the Jews. Only the seed of David did such an act as that, and only
in fulfillment of prophecies known widely among the Jews. The Scribes,
Pharisees, hypocrites though they were, knew they were destined to obscurity
if they did not get rid of this man, whom they knew in their hearts to be the
real Messiah. As you said, Judy, for envy they killed him.
They willingly shed his innocent blood to protect their power, status
and wealth. See Matt 21:15 And when the chief
Priests and Scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children
crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David; they were
sore afraid. Jesus was crucified the next
day, by the way
Blaine:
These men--scribes and Pharisees-- were the ones who bought and
sold in the temple, and were the ones Jesus drove out on two different
occasions.
Judy:
I understand there to have been just one of these incidents; but
yes
the religious leaders were in charge of what went on at the temple.
**Blaine: He did
it twice. The first time was right after the wedding in Cana, at the
beginning of his ministry, during the Passover. See John 2:13-17
The second time was after he had entered Jerusalem on the colt of an ass, and
was hailed as the Son of David. He then went to the temple, and repeated
his earlier cleansing. See Matt 29:12 This was one of his
final acts before he was arrested and eventually crucified. As with the first cleansing, it happened in conjunction
with the Passover. The two cleansings happened about three years
apart.
Blaine:
They clearly saw Jesus Christ as a rival to their own control over
the source (the people) of what they valued most--money, power,
status.
Their hearts were so much preoccupied with these things,
they rationalized
to themselves they had cause against him sufficient to kill him.
Judy:
Is killing another human being ever a rational deed even when pre
meditated and planned? More likely it is something done
irrationally
in the passion of the moment.
**Blaine By
"rationaized," I mean they thought up excuses to do the deed.
Rational does not always mean reasonable. In Psychology, to
rationalize is to make excuses--it is considered an ego protective device
employed commonly to protect the self-concept from admitting in reality, and
thus endangering one's beliefs about himself as an integrated
personality.
Blaine:
Yet, as Jesus said, they "hated me without a cause." If they
had no
cause, they must have therefore known who he was. But they chose
to get rid of him anyway ...
Judy:
I do not get the connection above. How is hating him for no apparent
reason proof that they actually knew who he was? They rejected
his
teaching and would not believe him for his works sake. Only a
few
of them such as Nicodemus who visited him at night with
questions
understood and believed the rest had darkened hearts and were as
blind as bats. Understand that noone is able to come to Jesus
unless they are drawn by the Father so apparently these religious
men did not qualify.
**Blaine: If you
won't take my word for it, maybe you will believe Jesus. Again, I
refer you to the parable of the laborers in the vineyard. In the
parable, the laborers (the Jews--Pharisees, scribes, etc.) knew the heir
(Jesus) was the son of the vineyard owner (God). They killed him
hoping this would enable them to retain control of the vineyard ( the
Jewish religious system, or the populace) for themselves.
Blaine:
thus preserving their valued positions in the then current socio-
economic status system. Satan has power to tempt people to go
for
the short-term goals in preference to the long term ones, and they
often do cave in.
Judy:
The Romans had the socio economic power in Israel during the
time
of Jesus earthly ministry; the scribes and pharisees were religious
people who could not have had him legally killed without the Roman
Governor's consent.
**Blaine: The
Romans held political power, and socio-economic power, but they conceded
a lot of this power to the local leaders, in this case, the Jewish
leaders. They did this in most of their occupied territories. It
was easier to control the people. For the same reason, the US wants to
have Iraq controlled by Iraqis, if possible. The word "political" is
derived from the same root word as "police." Both refer to the power to
enforce law and order. They are not necessarily the same as
social and economic power.
Blaine:
As Jesus said, "What does it profit a man to gain the whole world,
but lose his own soul." This is a good question, but the answer is,
people often do exactly that, and this is my whole point. These
men preferred the short term goal over the longer term one. They
sold their souls for a few pieces of silver, so to speak, just as did
Judas Iscariot.
Judy:
The outcome may have been the same but this was not a mental or
rational issue Blaine. These are spiritual realities - the
Jewish leaders
were full of religious spirits and rather than embrace the truth
and
allow the truth to make them free they rejected the Lord of Glory
and chose to remain in their chains of
hypocrisy and religious
bondage. Their system went down along with the temple.
**Blaine: I
agree, especially with your word "chose." (:>)
Blaine:
To use an experience I had once with a woman who confessed
she knew Mormonism was true--once having confessed this, she
nevertheless refused to be baptized, because, as she later admitted,
she didn't want to give up her alcoholic beverages, she didn't want
to have to pay a 10% tithe, and most of all she did not want to
give up her friends and family, who were all against her becoming
a member of the LDS Church.
Judy:
The woman was apparently confused
**Blaine: Apparently? She
didn't seem confused to me.
but I can't grieve for her any
more than for you and DaveH because if you guys had
a genuine
revelation of the real Jesus you would burn your books of
Mormon,
fall at his feet and follow him becoming a sheep rather
than a god, because He is in fact the Word of God, the living Word,
and the ONLY way to the Kingdom of God and eternal
life.
Judy
**Blaine: I
sometimes wonder that you cannot see that your Jesus only wants you to be a
sheep groveling at his feet, but my Jesus wants me to be like him. It is
the nature of being a father to want his children to do as he says, and to be
at least as good as he is--maybe better. Why would Jesus not want the
same for us? Do you really conceive of him as being the
self-centered tyrant you portray, who just wants worshippers, but
to whom he denies the real riches he possesses? I would think such a
Jesus would have to be somewhat insecure to be that way. My Jesus, is,
by comparison with the Traditional Protestant Belief System conceptualization,
a far more secure and generous Jesus. I have to say I like my Jesus best. I don't see a lot of
incentive to worship your Jesus. He seems a little stingy to
me. (:>)
