The Place of Tradition in Christianity

Welcome
Prayer
Sing Word
Silence
Read Word

John 18.36
Milk
Easter
April 5th 2015
Okay.

Importance of Traditions

I’m going to repeat something I mention every Sunday known as Easter here in the US. Traditions are very, very important to human beings – especially to groups of human beings – they help with continuity and serve as the glue that keeps the group moving forward because they reinforce belonging, and unity, and as a reoccurring focal-point where the group and the individuals in the group can look for associations and belonging. Tradition was vital to the COI, and Christ observed them as they poured out around His feet when He walked the earth.

Traditions and Faith

But there is not a tradition observed on earth that will take an individual into either a relationship with God or into His presence after this life. In the face of this I would be remiss if I didn’t explain why we – a Christian gathering – are not corporately recognizing what the world calls Easter today. Those of you who have heard this information before bear with me. Also know that I personally enjoy holidays like Easter, Christmas, Thanksgiving and even Halloween – for two main reasons: The food (especially the candy) and the ambiance they bring relative to family and friends.

As a man, a father, an American, I have no problem with holidays and the celebration of them. I participate as these things. But I am a Christian first. And incorporating them (and the elements they bring INTO my faith?? – forgettabout it) they have absolutely NO PART because in spirit and truth I am thankful, I rejoice over Jesus birth, I celebrate His resurrection EVERY day. And I frankly resent the attempts men have made to make holiday traditions part of the Christian walk.

Holidays and Christian Faith

Understand clearly – when Christianity took power under Constantine and thereafter it looked around and said: The people love celebrating these pagan traditions so we’ll take them and make them our own, incorporating them into the church. As a result I suggest that as Christians we approach all “holy days” like we treat other aspects of life – part of our earthly culture but remove them from the faith paid for by the shed blood of Christ. Of course there is liberty for all to do as they are so led.

The CAMPUS website reads: “We reject the need for holiday services which commemorate Christmas, Easter, Halloween, or individual birthdays. We are not against celebrating such occasions but refuse to let them have a place in the Gatherings set aside to worship God in spirit and in truth.”

In the first chapter of Philippians Paul wrote something rather radical. Talking about what motivates people for Christ, he said in Philippians 1:15-18:

15 “Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:
16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.”

It is with this attitude we approach religiously observed holidays – for while some may sing of Christ’s birth with eyes focused on unwrapping presents in the morning and others will speak of His resurrection with an eye focused on the honey baked ham waiting at home – in any case, Christ is preached, right?

So why the hard line on refusing to give time (as an organized gathering) to today’s holiday, called Easter? For me, it starts with the word. It is actually used once in the New Testament. In Acts chapter 12. It no more belongs in the Bible than the word Halloween – but it’s there and I think it may be one of the worst word-translations in the entire text (at least in the King James).

The reason is the word “Easter” is an Anglo-Saxon word derived from “Eostre” who is a Pagan goddess of spring and renewal. Scandinavians call her "Ostra" and Germans "Ostern," the Phoenicians called her “Astarte,” and the Assyrians and the Babylonians called her “Ishtar” (which if you think about it sounds a lot like our Easter). No matter the name they are all the same pagan goddess who symbolizes spring and fertility and who is honored on the vernal (or spring equinox) in every culture. From “Eoestre” we get estrogen which is obviously tied to females and reproduction and therefore eggs.

For more than a thousand years prior to Jesus’ birth pagans

The History and Influence of Easter Traditions

Spring festivals always contained various sexual rituals which were held in honor of the sun's welcoming and warming rays after the cold of winter with its accompanied short daylight hours. These festivals not only brought the promise of longer and warmer days but also the presence of crops, flowers, and the like which were necessary to survival. They were all forms of "reproduction."

The parallels to the resurrection of the Lord in “Spring time” are obvious and I think the early pagan cultures had tapped into the miracle of regeneration well before the ultimate regeneration occurred – that of Christ over the grave. But the question remains, how did we actually get the word Eostre in the Bible!

The Eostre Festival and Its Biblical Connection

Here’s the story: The pagan “Eostre festival” coincided with the Passover celebration of the Jews, which was actually a festival held in anticipation of the coming Messiah and a commemoration of the angel of deathSeparation from God—now overcome. Physical death remains, but it no longer separates us from life with God. passing over them in Egypt. Later the Jewish Passover coincided or was correlated with a meal observed by Christians in honor of the resurrection of the Lord – what some call resurrection Sunday today. Over the years, the word Passover (pascal) was occasionally replaced with the word “Eostre” for no other reason than they occurred at the same time. Before we knew it, we had Bible translators inserting the anglo saxon term “Eostre” into the Word of God where it read pascha (for Passover). Where Wycliffe uses the word paske, (i.e., Passover) in his translations of the Word, Tyndal and Coverdale used the word “Easter,” and this forever tied Christianity to the pagan ritual of Eostre and before we knew it we made the day our own. Now, there are some Christian apologists who have been able to justify the use of Easter in the King James – but in the end I find them wanting.

Modern Easter Practices

Part of the problem of the assimilation is that with this single word application came the pagan practices including fertility icons like eggs (Oestra), chicks and rabbits, pastel colors, and outdoor rituals which flood out over church lawns everywhere. And for this very reason, Christianity (in its many forms) are holding Easter-egg hunts today. Long story short since we have taken the time to gather here and our objective is to seek God in SPIRIT and in TRUTH we are going to do it in spirit and truth! What anyone did prior or does hereafter is wholly between them and God.

So last week left off with Peter, warming himself by the fire and denying an association with Jesus three times. After that we read verse 18 which says:

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.

So let’s read through the rest of the chapter and try to finish 18 up today beginning at verse 29:

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. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death: 32 That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die. 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

The Trial of Jesus Before Pilate

them, I find in him no fault at all.
39 But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?
40 Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.

This will in all probability be part I of II in our study of these verse because there is so much here. So they have assembled outside of the hall of Judgement with Jesus and Pilate on the inside.

Pilate's Role in the Trial

Verse 29.
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.

Let’s talk about Pilate for a minute. His name was Pontius Pilate. The Pontius part is believed to refer to his connection to a Roman family called Pontii and the “Pilate” part comes from the Latin word “pileatus, (which means wearer of the pileus) which was the "cap or badge of a slave set free – which seems to indicate that Pilate was the descendant of a freed slave somewhere in the family history. He was the sixth in the order of the Roman procurators of Judea sitting in office from A.D. 26 to 36. His headquarters were at Caesarea, but he frequently went up to Jerusalem and he was reigning during the ministry of John the Baptist and of the Lord. It would really be a historical find if the man had kept a journal of all he saw and heard.

History paints him as pleasure-loving and corrupt and he hated the Jews whom he ruled – so much so that there were times when he got irritated he killed shed their blood. In return they constantly accused him of every crime, bad administration, cruelty, and robbery. John’s record here actually gives us an insight into the friction that existed between the Jews and Pilate – which we’ll note in a minute.

Historical Context and Pilate's Intentions

As a lover of pleasure, and all that Rome offered him in that regard by way of the baths, games, theater, and rollicking society he visited Jerusalem as seldom as possible probably due in part to its overtly religiousness and also to its constant threat of revolt. The last thing a Roman governor wanted was an uprising and because the Jews were subject to revolution Pilate was probably “over” having Jerusalem in his control.

At the time of this trial Pilate was in town to oversee the peace-keeping operations that were needed during the Passover. Remember, millions of Jews would swarm into the City of David by command and because of language differences, crime, differences of opinion, and plain old chaos that comes with that many people this was a busy time of year for the man. Since he was in town he used the time to try pending criminal cases as a representative of the Roman Government.

So after his trial before the Sanhedrim, Jesus was brought to Pilate. Much of what happens between Jesus and Pilate is omitted by John including the fact that Pilate sent Jesus off to Herod Antipas to judge him and the fact that Pilate’s wife had dreamed dreams that Jesus was an innocent man and that, out of fear, she asked her husband to release Him. Once the crucifixion is done and Pilate turns Jesus body over to Joseph of Arimathea, he sort of disappears from the biblical narrative.

In terms of passages that mention him Acts 3:13 has Peter say:
“The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.”

That witness from Peter goes a long way to show that while Pilate was weak in the face of what he knew to be true, it was not his intention to kill Jesus. He was determined to let Him go. Of course he fell to the political sway of the chief priests but the lesser sinMissing the mark of faith and love—no punishment, just lost growth or peace. rested on him.

Again, in Acts 4:27 we read either Peter or John saying:

“For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.”

In this passage we see that God used Herod and Pilate and the Romans and the

The Role of Pilate in the Trial of Jesus

Acts 13:28 places the onus again on the Chief Priests, saying:

“And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain.”

Last Mention of Pilate in Scripture

The last mention of Pilate in scripture is found in 1st Timothy 6:13 which says:

“I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession.”

It is reported that in A.D. 36 the governor of Syria brought some serious accusations against Pilate and because of them he was banished to Vienne in Gaul, where, according to tradition, he, like Judas, committed suicide.

The Accusations Regarding Jesus

So (again) verse 29

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.

A couple of things to note here. First, note the attitude toward Pilate. There is an arrogance toward him that astounds in my opinion. He asks:

“What accusation do YOU bring against this man?”

And the response is, “If He was innocent,” (or in the negative), “If he was not a malefactor we never would have brought Him to you.”

The word Malefactor in the Greek means a criminal or violator of the law. The response seems to support an attitude that said:

“We have determined his guilt already, don’t trouble yourself or meddle in our affairs – if He wasn’t a criminal you would never be seeing him – so do what you do best – exact punishment."

I wonder if they resented Pilate asking about His crime. Almost like they were saying,

“We have spoken. Accept it and act.”

I doubt that this attitude popped up out of nowhere so we might assume that it was pretty common for the Jews to make judicial decisions among themselves, come to the Romans to exact punishment and appreciating their self-policing the Romans probably willingly complied. But in the case of Jesus, something caused Pilate himself to not only get involved but to actually question their desire to have Him killed. And I don’t think these Jewish Chieftans appreciated it – or at least they didn’t expect it.

Undoubtedly he had heard of Jesus' miracles, or reputation. But in addition to this possibility, we know that Pilate had insight into these men's motive. How? Matthew 27:17-18

“Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ? For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.”

Pilate was in a bind. I mean it’s entirely possible that his own wife was a fan of Jesus or even a follower of some sort – in the least we know that she had dreams of his innocence.

Then Pilate himself could have also known or heard of His miracles – raising the dead, calming the sea, healing the lame. And then he somehow knew that those who were accusing Him were envious of Him.

And on the other side of all of this? Fear. Fear of their reactions. Fear of loss of control through rioting. Fear of reprisals – especially political reprisals. Fear of loss of his opulent life.

In the tug of war upon his conscience, Pilate can be seen in this highly charged drama as trying to flex his power and influence but being neutered at every turn. He was NOT in an easy place.

In response to the Jews’ attitude toward his query, Pilate shot back:

31 “Take ye him, and judge him according to your law.”

“You take the man and make your judgments – why are you bringing Him to me?”

To me, there is proof that Pilate knew Jesus was innocent when he said this. It was almost as he was saying:

“All I can do is torture and put people to death. He’s certainly not deserving this. You take Him and you judge Him according to what He has done to break your laws.”

I get this impression from the rest of verse 31 where the Jews respond and say:

“It is not lawful for us to put any man to death:”

I am of the opinion that this may be the first time Pilate learned that they wanted Him dead and they wanted Pilate to do the deed. Notice also that they started off as referring to Jesus as a plain old “malefactor” but as Pilate begins to question his guilt they begin to trump.

The Legal Context of Jesus' Death

When they said it is “not lawful” for them to put ANY man to death they were referring to the illegality of them putting someone to death under Roman rule. It was certainly lawful for them to put people to death under the Law of Moses. If fact, they were so inclined to inflicting sudden death penalties upon people we discover several instances in the New Testament where, under Roman rule, some Jews actually picked up stones with the intent to kill both Jesus and the woman caught in adultery AND actually stoning Stephen to death later on. Some think that they could still take human life on moral grounds but not on grounds of sedition or treason.

If the charge against Jesus was for blasphemy they may have even had the right to take life in this too but it seems that the people would have risen up and gone all mad-dog over them killing a man who only healed. In Matthew 26:4-5 we read:

“And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. but they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people.”

Taking all this into account it seems that the smartest way to destroy Jesus was to find Him worthy of death and then have the Romans do the killing.

32 That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die.

Predictions of Jesus' Death

What did Jesus say about His death and when did He say it? John is referring to what Matthew reports in chapter 20 verse 18-19, where Jesus said to His disciples:

“Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.”

These are the words of Jesus John is referring to in verse 32. (okay verse 33)

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

Pilate's Interrogation

If we just read John’s narrative we might wonder why Pilate would come in and ask Jesus this question. All the chief priests have told him was he was a malefactor. But we know more was said and we discover it in Luke’s account where he wrote (in Luke 23:1):

“And the whole multitude of them arose, and led him unto Pilate. And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King.”

So John tells us that they started off referring to Him as a malefactor but Luke adds in that they also claimed he was “perverting the nation,” “Forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar” and saying that “He himself was a king.” It is this last charge that Pilate asks Jesus about here in John’s narrative.

In terms of the charge that He was “perverting the nation,” this is akin to saying that He was exciting the residents to sedition and tumults. It is sort of a ghost claim but, like all false, vague accusations there was an element of truth to the claim. Josephus wrote in his histories that the Galileans were prone to tumultuous reactions to things. Because Jesus had masses follow Him they were able to create a charge against Him.

Rmemeber His triumphal entry when the people were crying out to Him? That the Pharisees told Jesus to tell them to shut it down and Jesus replied by saying: If they did the very rocks would cry out? This type of thing padded the charges against him.

Accusations Against Jesus

On the charge that he forbade the paying of taxed to Caesar they were tricky. Really the charge was an inference which extended from the claim that He had made himself a King. If this was so, then his followers would never pay taxes to another Like Caesar. (who, as an FYI, was Tiberius at the time. Additionally, the title Caesar – pronounced Kaiser, was a title like Pharaoh. Not a name so there were many Pharaoh’s and many Kaisers.

The final charge was that He had made Himself a king. This is the charge John has Pilate confront Jesus with – “ART THOU KING OF THE JEWS?” Verse 34 is classic because Jesus doesn’t seem to give Pilate the respect in the matter either. His deal is with the Nation of

Jesus Before Pilate

Israel, He was sent to them and God was the one who was allowing this to occur. This type of thing happens when a third party gets involved in deep-seated issues that involve history and language and culture, of which they are bereft. It happens to pastors all the time when they are called in to referee between married couples. In the end, the couple knows the score, and the pastor becomes merely a pawn.

So Pilate asks Him: Are you the King of the Jews and listen to how Jesus replies:

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

I think the purpose of Jesus asking this was to show Pilate that he Himself had never had any firsthand witness of Jesus being guilty of these crimes. In other words, it was a way to ask him:

In your place as governor did you ever witness me as leading the Jews as their King? OR… or or are you getting all these charges from the maddening crowd outside? The Lord’s response doesn’t seem to please Pilate much and his response pretty much confirms his frustration with the whole mess and he replies:

35 “Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?” “Do I look like I hang out with you people and know what you are all about?” He seems to be saying. “You own people have taken you by force and brought you to me – you know what that means, Jesus? They want you dead. Don’t answer me with a question. I’m not the one who has been delivered up by his own people. What have YOU done?”

Jesus' Kingdom

And this launches Jesus into one of the most important dialogues with the outside non-Jewish world. And it begins with Him saying:

36 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 here.

And we’ll pick it up here next week.

Communion

I am of the personal opinion that Jesus is reigning over his kingdom from on high and has since 70 AD. This belief suggests that taking communion is not required since Jesus instructed the disciples to “do this” until He returns. Nevertheless, it is a beautiful memorial and does carry with it some wonderful attachments to our love and appreciation for the King.

Before us are the elements – unleavened bread, wine, grape juice. Why don’t we make our closing prayer a petition to God of thanks and love and then eat, drink, reflect and then wrap our time up by standing and singing?

PRAYER