The Honest Thief

We have much to learn from one of the most famous death-row inmates in history.

As I am reading the account of the events leading up to the death of Jesus, I have found myself drawn to what some may call the supporting players.  In my last post, I focused on Judas and Pilate and how their selfish choices ultimately led to their own demise.  In this post, I will focus on a person whose choices resulted in a much more positive outcome, the thief on the cross.  Now as you may know, there were actually two thieves on crosses in this story.  However one of them has gained the title of the thief on the cross because of his brief, yet all-important conversation he had with Jesus.

White gives a brief character sketch of him in this chapter.  Turns out he wasn't as bad as some may think.

"This man was not a hardened criminal; he had been led astray by evil associations, but he was less guilty than many of those who stood beside the cross reviling the Saviour. He had seen and heard Jesus, and had been convicted by His teaching, but he had been turned away from Him by the priests and rulers. Seeking to stifle conviction, he had plunged deeper and deeper into sin, until he was arrested, tried as a criminal, and condemned to die on the cross."  pg. 749

Before reading this passage, I had no idea that this man had had any prior contact with Jesus.  This brings to mind an important point, the concept of a spontaneous turning to Christ is somewhat of a myth.  The Holy Spirit works on people's hearts long before many people (even, in some cases, the person themselves) realizes it.  God is constantly drawing people to Him.  It is simply our part not to resist Him.

It is amazing the clarity of thought many people have when they think or know that their death is imminent.  This clarity of thought is in many cases a last-ditch effort by the Holy Spirit to get the person to make that all-important choice.

"The Holy Spirit illuminates his mind, and little by little the chain of evidence is joined together. In Jesus, bruised, mocked, and hanging upon the cross, he sees the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world. Hope is mingled with anguish in his voice as the helpless, dying soul casts himself upon a dying Saviour. 'Lord, remember me,' he cries, 'when Thou comest into Thy kingdom.'"  pg. 750

A key thought to bring out at this point in the story is that this thief was the only one to acknowledge Jesus as Lord while He is hanging on the cross.

"Many were ready to call Him Lord when He wrought miracles, and after He had risen from the grave; but none acknowledged Him as He hung dying upon the cross save the penitent thief who was saved at the eleventh hour." pg 751

Not the bystanders, not His disciples, not even His own mother acknowledged that fact.  They all had their doubts, save this condemned criminal.  Now a unusual hush came over the crowd.

"The bystanders caught the words as the thief called Jesus Lord. The tone of the repentant man arrested their attention. Those who at the foot of the cross had been quarreling over Christ's garments, and casting lots upon His vesture, stopped to listen. Their angry tones were hushed. With bated breath they looked upon Christ, and waited for the response from those dying lips."  Ibid

What follows is undoubtedly the most powerful paragraph in the chapter.

"As He spoke the words of promise, the dark cloud that seemed to enshroud the cross was pierced by a bright and living light. To the penitent thief came the perfect peace of acceptance with God. Christ in His humiliation was glorified. He who in all other eyes appeared to be conquered was a Conqueror. He was acknowledged as the Sin Bearer. Men may exercise power over His human body. They may pierce the holy temples with the crown of thorns. They may strip from Him His raiment, and quarrel over its division. But they cannot rob Him of His power to forgive sins. In dying He bears testimony to His own divinity and to the glory of the Father. His ear is not heavy that it cannot hear, neither His arm shortened that it cannot save. It is His royal right to save unto the uttermost all who come unto God by Him."  Ibid

That "all" includes you and me.

Judas and Pilate: Parallel Paths to Perdition

The parallel lives of two of history's most infamous men bear solemn warnings for us today.

As some of you may know I have been making my way through the definitive book on the life of Jesus, The Desire of Ages by E.G. White.  I am almost finished (when I'm done I'll do a full review), which, as you may have guessed, means that I am reading about the final events of Jesus' life here on earth.  In the past two chapters I have read, White has gone into more detail about two of the darker players in the drama, Judas Iscariot and Pontius Pilate.  As I was out on a walk I was struck with the thought how similar the life path's of these two men were, and how those paths ultimately ended in a premature death.

White devotes an entire chapter of the book to Judas, and paints a very solemn picture in regards to his life.  I was struck with how far gone this man really was even before his betrayal of his alleged master (I'll get to the "alleged" part in a moment).  The chapter opens in this way.

"The history of Judas presents the sad ending of a life that might have been honored of God. Had Judas died before his last journey to Jerusalem he would have been regarded as a man worthy of a place among the twelve, and one who would be greatly missed. The abhorrence which has followed him through the centuries would not have existed but for the attributes revealed at the close of his history. But it was for a purpose that his character was laid open to the world. It was to be a warning to all who, like him, should betray sacred trusts." pg. 716

I find it interesting that nobody would have known what he was capable of if he had died an earlier death.  It is difficult for many to comprehend that people could have seen Judas as a good guy because we all look backwards through the lens of the betrayal.  Those living and interacting with him could easily have been fooled by the charade that he was acting out to make himself seem righteous.  However, beneath the veneer was something much more sinister.

"Judas had naturally a strong love for money; but he had not always been corrupt enough to do such a deed as this. He had fostered the evil spirit of avarice until it had become the ruling motive of his life. The love of mammon overbalanced his love for Christ. Through becoming the slave of one vice he gave himself to Satan, to be driven to any lengths in sin." Ibid

This is what I was referring to earlier when I stated that Jesus was his "alleged master".  The role of conscientious disciple was simply a cover to further his own gains.

Judas was constantly chafing at Jesus' humility and refusal to set up an earthly kingdom.  Jesus, of course, was quite aware of what was going on even if nobody else was.

"In all that Christ said to His disciples, there was something with which, in heart, Judas disagreed. Under his influence the leaven of disaffection was fast doing its work. The disciples did not see the real agency in all this; but Jesus saw that Satan was communicating his attributes to Judas, and thus opening up a channel through which to influence the other disciples. This, a year before the betrayal, Christ declared. "Have not I chosen you twelve," He said, "and one of you is a devil?" John 6:70."  pg. 718

We often look at that statement in light of the betrayal, but Judas was working against Jesus the entire way.  However, as hard as his heart was there were still chances to repent.  He did not take advantage of them, and as we know from the biblical account, Judas went out and hanged himself.

Pontius Pilate also gets a chapter in the book.  This chapter is less of a character study as the previous one, but still deals a fair amount with how one's choices can cause their life to go horribly wrong.  In contrast to Judas, there was much less mystery regarding Pilate's true character traits.  People knew what he was like.

"The priests thought that with the weak and vacillating Pilate they could carry through their plans without trouble. Before this he had signed the death warrant hastily, condemning to death men they knew were not worthy of death. In his estimation the life of a prisoner was of little account; whether he were innocent or guilty was of no special consequence."  pg. 725

Despite the weakness, vacillation, etc. Pilate could not bring himself to condemn Jesus.  He was impressed with the way He carried Himself in the midst of the mob.  That, coupled with the positive reports Pilate had previously heard, did not match with the accusations being hurled at Him by the priests.  He asked for a private interview.

Jesus took full advantage of this time to try and win Pilate over to the side of truth, but Pilate did not surrender himself to the prodding of the Holy Spirit, and as White put it, "Pilate's golden opportunity had passed."  This wasn't the only opportunity he missed.

"If at the first Pilate had stood firm, refusing to condemn a man whom he found guiltless, he would have broken the fatal chain that was to bind him in remorse and guilt as long as he lived. Had he carried out his convictions of right, the Jews would not have presumed to dictate to him. Christ would have been put to death, but the guilt would not have rested upon Pilate. But Pilate had taken step after step in the violation of his conscience. He had excused himself from judging with justice and equity, and he now found himself almost helpless in the hands of the priests and rulers. His wavering and indecision proved his ruin."  pg. 732

He chose to save himself instead of saving Jesus.  A choice that always backfires.

"Pilate longed to deliver Jesus. But he saw that he could not do this, and yet retain his own position and honor. . . . Pilate yielded to the demands of the mob. Rather than risk losing his position, he delivered Jesus up to be crucified. But in spite of his precautions, the very thing he dreaded afterward came upon him. His honors were stripped from him, he was cast down from his high office, and, stung by remorse and wounded pride, not long after the crucifixion he ended his own life."  pg 738

So here are two men, both came in contact with the Son of God, both chose to live for themselves rather than live for Him, and both ultimately ending dying by their own hand.  Every moment of every day we must make the choices that they did not make, lest our fate be similar to theirs.

The Good Old Days?

In these days in which people's rights seem up for grabs there is a tendency to wish we could go back to the good old days when people had more freedom to live as they chose to live.  However, upon further research I have discovered that people's freedoms have been eroding away for quite some time.

Some time ago I picked up a book at a Christian book store entitled The Rights of the People, a book on the subject of religious liberty written in the late nineteenth century and reprinted in 1998.  As I have been making my way through it I have been impressed by the depth of thought of it's author, Alonzo T. Jones.

The most recent chapter I have read is entitled "Religious Right Invaded" in which Jones explains how despite the tireless efforts of the founders of this country to separate religion from government (which he maps out in the previous chapter) that in such areas the nation has gone backwards.  He went so far to state that there has been "a counter-revolution".  He stated that this counter-revolution was accomplished and consummated in a U.S. Supreme Court decision from February 29, 1892 (for full text of the decision go here).

As is often the case (no pun intended), this decision came into being as a result of a challenge to an existing law.  In 1887 Congress passed a law that forbade any alien to come to the U.S. under contract to perform any kind of labor.  The reason for this law was that many corporations were going to Europe and finding people to come here and work.  The company would pay their way, and because of this they required the laborers to work for next to nothing.  This was depreciating the amount Americans could get paid for their labor, so Congress passed a  law stating

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that from and after the passage of this act it shall be unlawful for any person, company, partnership, or corporation, in any manner whatsoever, to prepay the transportation, or in any way assist or encourage the importation or migration, of any alien or aliens, any foreigner or foreigners, into the United States, its territories, or the District of Columbia under contract or agreement, parol or special, express or implied, made previous to the importation or migration of such alien or aliens, foreigner or foreigners, to perform labor or service of any kind in the United States, its territories, or the District of Columbia."

A problem arose when Trinity Church Corporation employed a preacher in England to come to the States and preach for them.  This act was seen as a violation of the aforementioned law and the U.S District Attorney prosecuted the church.  The U.S. Circuit Court decided that the church was guilty.  Naturally, there was an appeal taken to the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court reversed the decision on the grounds that the term "laborer" or "laborer or service" was intended to refer to manual labor, not a professional service.  All the Supreme Court had to do was reverse the decision on those grounds, but they went above and beyond what was necessary, and that is where all the troubles began.

The Supreme Court stated, "But, beyond all these matters, no purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national, because this is a religious people. This is historically true."  Having made such a statement they then had to back it up, and by so doing started down a very slippery slope.  For not only were the people of this nation "religious", but they were also "Christian".  Jones stated in a somewhat satirical tone that the people therefore are now all Christians regardless of whether  they were Jews or non-believers because the highest court in the land declared them so.  He then states that the very absurdity of the suggestion only demonstrates that the court should have nothing to do with such manners.  He continues by stating that people are not made religious by law, judicial decision, nor historical precedent, which brings us to the historical "support" the Supreme Court gave to show that the people of the U.S. are indeed a religious people.

Jones stated that the historical reasons given are at best suspect and at worst complete misinterpretations of the original statements.  The first historical reasons given were from European nations (i.e. Spain and England). Jones points out that the Spanish rulers (Ferdinand & Isabella) who commissioned Columbus were in fact the same rulers who established the Spanish Inquisition.  To say that the language of these rulers has the same meaning as the U.S. Constitution takes quite a bit of stretching of the imagination.  The statements regarding the British monarchy would have quite a bit more weight if in fact the U.S. was still under British rule, but it most definitely is not subject to British sovereignty.

There are many other historical reasons given, and Jones takes time to refute them all, but this is beyond the scope of this post.  I will however touch on the reason for which Jones saves his strongest language, the ruling declares that the United States Constitution reaffirms the thought that this nation is a religious nation.  To this Jones states, "To say it is absurd is not enough, it is simply preposterous."  He goes on to write that there is another consideration that magnifies that one, namely the fact that the court leaves out Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington from the place where they rightly belong, and drags "Ferdinand, Isabella and Elizabeth into the place where they do not and cannot by any shadow of right belong[.]"

There is much more but Jones sums the entire ruling in this way.

"The United States . . . was turned from the 'new order of things' to which it was committed by our revolutionary fathers, and to which it stands pledged by the great seal of the government itself, and was thrown into the evil tide of the old order of things.   And thus this enlightened nation, the example and glory of the world, was caused to assume the place and the prerogatives of the governments of the Middle Ages in embodying in law the dogmas and definitions of the theologians, and executing the arbitrary and despotic will of the church."

So while it is nice to wistfully look back at times gone by and wish that things were like they used to be, it is important to realize that even in the good old days the situation was not as rosy as we thought it was.