As The Church Scandalizes him To Be
As The Church Scandalizes him To Be
 |
|
The church is equally responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus |
In this regard the Gospels do not present a consistent record. Luke recorded that it was Judas who betrayed Jesus, saying, “BUT JESUS SAID UNTO HIM, JUDAS BETRAYED THOU THE SON OF MAN WITH A KISS? (Luke 22:48)
But St. John holds a different opinion. Though he did not directly say that Judas had betrayed Jesus, he has stated that Judas who betrayed him, brought the enemy to the place where Jesus was with his disciples. Yet he did not involve Judas as solely and mainly responsible for the betrayal of Jesus, for the reason that Jesus had voluntarily offered himself to the enemy, in order that the prophecy might be fulfilled: “OF THEM WHICH THOU GAVEST ME HAVE I LOST NONE”. (John 18:9).
Again St. John has stated “JESUS ASSURED THEM, HAVE NOT I CHOSEN YOU TWELVE AND ONE OF YOU IS A DEVIL. HE SPAKE OF JUDAS ISCARIOT THE SON OF SIMON: FOR HE IT WAS THAT SHOULD BETRAY HIM BEING ONE OF THE TWELVE.” (John 6:70-71)
A careful study of the Bible reveals the fact that the inconsistency in the gospel records was the result of making interpolations subsequently to suit the innovated doctrines, and that it was also not Judas Iscariot son of Simon who betrayed Jesus, in support of which we furnish the following points.
If it were really Judas who had betrayed Jesus, Jesus having been in the know from the very beginning of the person who would betray him (John 6:64) would not have assured his twelve disciples including Iscariot Judas that they would judge the twelve tribes of Israel, when asked what they could get in return for following him leaving every thing behind.
“THEN ANSWERED PETER AND SAID UNTO HIM, BEHOLD, WE HAVE FORSAKEN ALL, AND FOLLOWED THEE; WHAT SHALL WE HAVE THEREFORE ? AND JESUS SAID UNTO THEM, VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, THAT YE WHICH HAVE FOLLOWED ME, IN THE REGENERATION WHEN THE SON OF MAN SHALL SIT IN THE THRONE OF HIS GLORY YE ALSO SHALL SIT UPON TWELVE THRONES JUDGING THE TWELVE TRIBES OF ISRAEL”. (Matt: 19: 27-28)
Accordingly in the light of the above verses, it is evident that Iscariot Judas had not lost his prospect of judging one of the twelve tribes of Israel and of sitting upon one of the twelve thrones reserved for twelve disciples of Jesus in his Kingdom and of a reward for having followed him forsaking every thing. If Judas had really lost his apostleship how could Jesus assure him of his good prospect of earning a high office of Judging the Israelite tribes on the day of judgement ? It is also testified in the other statements of Jesus which read as follows.
“OF THEM WHICH THOU GAVEST ME HAVE I LOST NONE” (John 18:9)
Please Examine the following verse:
“AND THAT HE WAS SEEN OF CEPHAS, AND THEN OF THE TWELVE". (1st Coranthians 15:5)
These two verses explain the authenticity of the fact conclusively that Judas continued to be one of the twelve disciples of Jesus and had not even lost his apostleship.
Then who was it that had betrayed Jesus?
“BUT THERE ARE SOME OF YOU THAT BELIEVE NOT, FOR JESUS KNEW FROM THE BEGINNING WHO THEY WERE THAT BELIEVED NOT, AND WHO SHOULD BETRAY HIM” (John 6:64)
Therefore, some of them that did not believe and betray him and whom Jesus knew from the beginning, as not any one from among the twelve disciples whom he had chosen is evident from the following verses too.
“FROM THAT TIME MANY OF HIS DISCIPLES, WENT BACK AND WALKED NO MORE WITH HIM. THEN SAID JESUS UNTO THE TWELVE WILL YE ALSO GO AWAY?” (John 6: 66-67)
Now we can say with certainty that Iscariot Judas was not the real betrayer. As a matter of fact, the verses (John 6: 64, 66&67) point out that, the one that betrayed Jesus and whom Jesus knew from the beginning was one from among the other disciples only who since went back and walked no more with him, but not any one of those twelve disciples. Jesus had selected those twelve disciples so that they would join him in his Kingdom and judge the twelve tribes of Israel. (Matt: 19: 27-28)
In this way the Church has failed to unravel the identity of the villain of this drama of atonement.
As a matter of fact, the present arguments are not meant to find out the real betrayer of Jesus, except as an example only to prove to the world that the Church has thus failed to identify the real betrayer and how it has failed to maintain consistency in the Gospel records. IF THIS BE THE FATE OF THE MAJOR ISSUE OF THE DRAMA, WE ASK THE CHURCH, HOW IT CAN ACCOUNT FOR THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE ENTIRE DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT?
THE CHURCH IS EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CRUCIFIXION OF JESUS
All the gospel writers have reiterated their belief that he that betrayed Jesus would be severely punished by God. Thus we read ..
“AND TRULY THE SON OF MAN GOETH, AS IT WAS DETERMINED: BUT WOE UNTO THE MAN BY WHOM HE IS BETRAYED” (Luke 22:22)
“JESUS ANSWERED, THOU COULDEST HAVE NO POWER AT ALL AGAINST ME, EXCEPT IT WERE GIVEN THEE FROM ABOVE: THEREFORE, HE THAT DELIVERETH ME UNTO THEE HATH THE GREATER SIN". (John 19:11)
“WHEN PLIATE SAW THAT HE COULD PREVAIL NOTHING, BUT RATHER A TUMULT WAS MADE, HE TOOK WATER AND WASHED HIS HANDS BEFORE THE MULTITUDE, SAYING, I AM INNOCENT OF THE BLOOD OF THIS JUST PERSON: SEE YE TO IT. THEN ANSWERED ALL THE PEOPLE AND SAID, HIS BLOOD BE ON US, ON OUR REIN". (Matt: 27: 24-25)
When once it is agreed that Iscariot Judas was not the real betrayer it must be accepted too that the above remark to the effect that he who betrayed Jesus deserved a greater punishment for sin, does not relate to Iscariot Judas at all, but to every one that was (or is) desirous of his crucifixion (ATONEMENT).
Attempt to murder, abetment of murder, expressing pleasure at one’s crime of murder is no less a crime than the actual murder. Please read what Jesus says in clear terms in this respect.
“YE HAVE HEARD THAT IT WAS SAID BY THEM OF OLD TIME, THOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY: BUT I SAY UNTO YOU THAT WHOSO EVER LOOKETH ON A WOMAN TO LUST AFTER HER, HATH COMMITTED ADULTERY WITH HER ALREADY, IN HIS HEART” (Matt: 5: 27-28)
From the above, an unbiased theist has reason to believe that similarly though the Christians are not directly responsible for the Crucifixion of Jesus, they can never absolve themselves from the sin which they indirectly get involved in from the blood of Christ, because they are in their heart of hearts well pleased with the crucifixion of Jesus and regard it as an atonement for their sins. Jews wanted to get rid of Jesus by crucifixion him and Christians seek salvation by the crucifixion of Jesus as an atonement for their sins. The motives may differ but the objective of both the Jews and Christians is one and the same that is “CRUCIFIXION” of Jesus --- and accordingly the result of crucifying a Just person is also the same with them both --- that is "“acquiring a greater sin”.The enforced belief in the atonement doctrine has been so deeply rooted in the minds of the Christians, that it leads to feel that it is certain, that, had not the Jews crucified Jesus, and if the Christians were not under the false impression that Jesus atoned for them, the very Christians themselves would have definitely killed him for the sake of their atonement. Would they not? They would indeed. Because they wanted the blood of Jesus as atonement for them to wash out their sins. In this way, the Jews who did not believe in Jesus and having involved themselves in crucifying him, have acquired the sin directly. And after his crucifixion the Christians who believed in Jesus as their “SAVIOUR” and are well pleased with his crucifixion have acquired the sin indirectly. And the sin for jews was limited only to the group of people who at that time took part in the crucifixion of Jesus, and their successors were (or are) not responsible for it. On the other hand the sin of the Christians is unlimited which is being credited to the account of every Christian of every generation and continues to be so, as long as this false belief of ATONEMENT prevails. Jesus prayed for forgiveness to those that crucified him for not knowing what they were doing (Luke 23:34) and therefore they are likely to be pardoned. But what about the Christians that want only take pleasure in the crucifixion of Jesus on the ground that it was for their atonement ? Leave alone the question of original sin for a moment, but who will atone for the sin thus indirectly acquired by the crucifixion of Jesus on the Cross, which comes to their credit by regarding the crucifixion of Jesus as a necessary means for their atonement?
So far we have closely discussed the points at issue as regards the original sin and atonement and we now turn to the facts relating to the crucifixion of Jesus after his betrayal.
