Jesus and His Dying

Jesus and His Dying                                        

   History:                             Sin goes back to the story of Adam and Eve, which represented original sin and its ramifications.   How does this related to Jesus dying for our sins?

Our sins keep us away from God, whereas sin corrupts us.  We, as a people and as children of God want to do what we want to do, be what we want to be, etc. in all respects.

We want power, we want wealth, we want so many things for ourselves, are examples and we do NOT take care of what God gives us as gifts, in general.  What we DO have are all the things that God does give us.

God wants/desires that we are reunited with God, and it was His son Jesus Christ, who came to Earth to make that reunification possible.

At the time of Jesus, sacrifices were made of perfect animals without blemishes as gifts to God to atone for different sins done by his children.

By coming to Earth as a human being and as a man-God, Jesus reunited us through the ultimate sacrifice with His own life.

In John 3:17, it is stated that “God did not send His son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world be saved through Him.”  To me, that is the reason for the Jesus of that time and of our time today.

He, Jesus, sacrificed Himself and took the punishment for ALL of our sins at once.

The ultimate sacrifice, which satisfied, once and for all, the demands of God’s required justice. In Jesus’s resurrection, we see, good triumph over death, which promises eternal life for all of us.

Through Jesus, we have received the most wonderful gift God could ever give us.

Did Jesus have to die?             YES

Did His death by the powers of state and religion have to be done with the excuses given?    YES

Do I believe Jesus died for my sins?      YES

Do I believe that there is life after earthly/worldly death?     YES

Was Jesus a Rabble Rouser? 2015-114

Was Jesus a Rabble Rouser? 2015-114

First off, WHAT is a rabble rouser? Hmmmm, let’s see! This may not be the best word to use, but I am anyhow. Bill O’Reilly used this word in his book “Killing Jesus” and he said it represented Jesus who disturbed the peace and challenged the authorities in His time. Sounds good!!!!

It is said that the word originated between 1825 to 1845 and the term was first used to describe Abe Lincoln, but not sure if that is a fact or not. It does have a definition as a person who manipulates the passions of the mob; and is a demagogue.

Rabble is a term for the lower classes or common people and Marie Antoinette was referring to them when she said, “Let them eat cake”. The original term rabble was coined about 1655-65 and pertained to shifting hot coals, or “churned up” and that is where the rabble comes from using the French word “raable”, a fire shovel tool. The rouser was pertaining to the stirring up or inciting strong indignation or anger.   OK, nuff of history; “Was Jesus a rabble rouser?”

I don’t think He thought He was such, but don’t know of course. He had his way of doing things. The written account of His turning over the tables of the money lenders/changers is a vivid story of when he ticked people off with His actions. He was careful though in some of his dealings with the authorities, namely the High Priests of the Hebrew faith. They were out to get Him and tried to lure Him into saying things they wanted to hear so they could “take care of Him, in a not so nice way”. They could then arrest Him and put Him to death. They were such lovely religious people of His time; NOT!!!

It is my thoughts that Jesus KNEW what He was doing and what affect it would have on the people listening to Him. I would think that, after a while, He would EXPECT a reaction from those around Him and that might have spurred Him on. His actions of performing miracles would have the same consequence and would add to the following He was having. People would have heard about the acts, and sought Him out to experience the events.

I went to a Rob Bell presentation in Cleveland, in August of 2015, and there were people that could be considered his ardent followers which were in the audience. I think the average age could have been early forties, which was amazing to me. There were older folks too, but many younger people were there listening to every word he said. His presentation was fine, but not what I expected.

The same with Jesus way back in His time. The followers would have gone and be listening to every word that was said and take back to their tribe, what they experienced, creating more followers that just HAD to hear and see Him. The fact that He might have said things that made Him a rabble rouser in their minds might have helped Him then. Rome was not a popular domineering faction and they wanted someone to hopefully go against the Roman law.

Jesus knew the Hebrew laws of Moses. He used the laws to help Him make a point in His parables and other teachings to those that followed Him. Most people knew the laws too, and knew what He said was in keeping with the Laws. That probably helped Him be accepted in many places and in this acceptance; he was in keeping with the “old laws” of long ago in the minds of those listening. Jesus was not dumb and He became the authority to those hearing the very words they grew up with listening to the Rabbis of their time.

Was He a rabble rouser? To the Roman contingent – YES. To the religious leaders – YES. To the people that followed Him – MAYBE. To the Disciples that were with Him – MAYBE or MAYBE NOT. Everyone then, probably had their opinions about Jesus based on how they perceived Him and how He came across to them.

Do I think He was one – PROBABLY. Is that bad in my mind – NO!


Den Betts