About this iReport
  • Not verified by CNN

  • Click to view PaulOmoUmane's profile
    Posted November 4, 2015 by
    Benin, Nigeria

    More from PaulOmoUmane


    The Lord Jesus Christ and John the Baptist’s Teachings: Unfortunately, instead of the High Priest to teach his fellow-Jews to abide by the tenet of the New Covenant of Grace, he adamantly turned deaf eyes to the teachings and admonitions of the Lord Jesus Christ. Finding an escape goat in John the Baptist, he writes, “Now, the preaching of John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth had brought all these things upon us. When Herod Antipas captured John, it quieted matters in Galilee, so that they had peace until Jesus started it up afresh. I had issued orders to Jesus to desist from preaching, unless he taught as the Jews taught. He sent me the impertinent word that his doctrine (the tenet of the New Covenant of Grace) was not of this world, but had reference to the world to come; when he was all the time doing all he could to destroy the peace and harmony of this world. Now, according to our law in the Saphra, by Jose B. Talmud, it devolves on me to see that the people have sound doctrine taught them. Hence it is my duty to examine all the Midrashim, or sermons, of all the preaching priests, and if anyone teaches the people wrongly, or if his conduct is not in correspondence with his profession, to cause him to desist. In addition, if any disregard the holy laws of ablution, or in any way defile himself, or if he shall be guilty of Misconduct in any way, in either manner or life or doctrine, to adjudge such a one, and pronounce sentence for his crime upon him. This I did upon Jesus of Nazareth, to save the Church from heresy, and to save the cause of the Jewish commonwealth from final ruin. Nevertheless, understand that I did not act rashly or illegally, as I am accused. I only passed sentence under the protest and order of the whole court belonging to the high priest, containing twelve members, or elders, and priests. Thus you will see it was not my voluntary act, but was a legal one and in accordance with law. After I examined Jesus on the various charges, he said in the presence of all the court that each and all of them were true. I then reasoned with him, and asked him if the court of the high priest would forgive him of these charges would he desist from these things in all time to come. He answered most emphatically and positively he would not. Under these circumstances, I was compelled, according to our law, to sentence him to die for if he continued to promulgate his pernicious heresies, the Jews as a nation, must perish with their religion.”
    TAKEAWAY: Kindly click or copy and paste the link below in your browser to access the eBooks that are the sources of the non-fiction story: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/548866
    xxi. The High Priest’s Charges against Jesus the Christ: At the tail end of the First Report, the High Priest penciled down his miscarriage of justice charges against Jesus the Son of God. According to the charges, “In addition, as you find in the Tosephta, that the nation has always the right of self-preservation, and as we had conceded the right to the Romans of executing our criminal laws, it became my painful duty to send the following charges, ‘Caiaphas, High Priest of the Most High God, to Pontius Pilate, Governor of the Roman Province.’ ‘Jesus of Nazareth is thus charged by the High Court of the Jews with the following:
    A) First, with teaching the doctrine that there are more gods (Holy Trinity: see Genesis 1: 26; 1 John 5: 1-8) than one, which is contrary to the teachings of the Jewish law, which he most positively refuses to desist from in the presence of this court.
    B) Second, he teaches that he is contrary to the Jewish law, and he is visible and comprehensible (see 1 John 5: 9-12); and after being asked to desist by this court, he most positively affirms that he is the Son of God (Messiah). (Emphasis ours)
    C) Third, he teaches and affirms that the Bathkote (Holy Spirit) cannot come until he goes away (See John 14: 15-31.), which is contrary to the teachings of the Jews. Because it was He (Holy Spirit) that brooded over the waters (Genesis 1: 1-2), and has been in the habitual light of the world ever since from all of which he refuses to desist.
    D) He teaches baptism, as the seal of God, instead of circumcision, which was established by the decrees of God with Abraham as a seal of the Jews; and when adjured to desist by this court declared he would not.
    E) He teaches asceticism (John 6: 25-70) as the means of salvation, contrary to the Jewish custom; and affirmed in the presence of the court he would not desist.
    F) He teaches ablution (ritual law) is of no service, while we hold that the outward washing is the sign of inward purity (See Matthew 23: 1-39); and when abjured to desist he emphatically refused. He has abrogated the ordinances given by God to Moses of the Pascal supper, wherein we should roast a lamb and eat it with unleavened bread; but Jesus has introduced a custom altogether different without any authority.
    G) He has introduced common bread and wine (Holy Communion), which are not only forbidden, but are well qualified to excite men’s passions and make them forget God rather than to remember and trust Him, this feast having been introduced that we should remember to trust Him in the hours of trouble. When asked why he did this, all he would say was, ‘Hitherto I work, and my Father works.’ He has abrogated (annulled and or abolished) the priesthood, and set the temple at naught, which is the very life’s blood of the Jewish faith. Were it not that God our Father had given us these holy ordinances we would not be so tenacious of them. We know they are the pillars upon which the Jewish theocracy is built, and that we cannot live without them. Although Jesus of Nazareth has been abjured time and again to stop teaching these ways of death, he has often declared he would not; therefore, it devolves on me as the proper and the only officer to pronounce sentence upon him. These charges were written by my scribe, and sent with the officers to Pilate for his consent. Of course, I did not expect him to execute him as he did, but it seems that the mob was so great that Pilate never received them. I expected Pilate to send Jesus back to me, so that I could send him to you for your approval; and if so, then I would proceed to try him with Urim and Thummin, with the regular lacktees on guard, as our law requires; but it seems that Pilate thirsted for his blood. Like all guilty tyrants, he was afraid of his own shadow, and wished to destroy everything that threatened his power. With these reasons for my actions, I submit the case, which I am sure, will be considered favorably by my Masters of Israel.” (Emphasis ours) Records of the Jerusalem Sanhedrin, by Eliezer, Hymn, B 24. Taken in Constantinople, October 16, 1883 – The Report of Caiaphas to the Sanhedrin – Concerning the Execution of Jesus.
    Add your Story Add your Story