For ANZAC Day in Australia

A Soldier’s Prayer

The following verse was written on the back of a cigarette carton by a soldier shortly before he was killed on the field of battle in World War I, and found by a stretcher-bearer.

Look, God, I have never spoken to You,
But now I want to say, “How do You do?”
You see, God, they told me You didn’t exist,
And like a fool, I believed all this.
Last night from a shellhole I saw Your sky.
I realized right then they’d told me a lie.
Had I taken the time to see things You’ve made,
I’d have known they weren’t calling a spade a spade.
I wonder, God, if You’d shake my hand?
Somehow I feel You would understand.
Funny I had to come to this hellish place
Before I had time to see Your face.
I suppose there isn’t much more to say.
But I’m glad, God, I met You today.
I guess “Zero Hour” will soon be here.
But I’m not afraid, since I know You are near.
The signal: Well, God, I’ll have to go.
I like You a lot, and I want You to know.
Look now, this will be a horrible fight.
Who knows? I may come to Your home tonight.
Though I wasn’t friendly to You before,
I wonder, God, if You’ll wait at Your door?
It’s not a matter of worry or tears;
I just wish I had known You all these years.
Well, I have to go now, God. Goodbye.
Strange—since I met You, I’m not afraid to die.

Love is giving yourself away

This has got to be one of my favourite anecdotes on sacrificial love.

Whatever their planned target, the mortar rounds landed in an orphanage run by a missionary group in the small Vietnamese village. The missionaries and one or two children were killed outright, and several more children were wounded, including one young girl, about eight years old.People from the village requested medical help from a neighboring town that had radio contact with the American forces. Finally, an American Navy doctor and nurse arrived in a jeep with only their medical kits. They established that the girl was the most critically injured. Without quick action, she would die of shock and loss of blood.
A transfusion was imperative, and a donor with a matching blood type was required. A quick test showed that neither American had the correct blood type, but several of the uninjured orphans did.
The doctor spoke some pidgin Vietnamese, and the nurse a smattering of high-school French. Using that combination, together with much impromptu sign language, they tried to explain to the young, frightened audience that unless they could replace some of the girl's lost blood, she would certainly die. Then they asked if anyone would be willing to give blood to help.
Their request was met with wide-eyed silence. After several long moments a small hand slowly and waveringly went up, dropped back down, and then went up again.
"Oh, thank you," the nurse said in French. "What is your name?"
"Heng," came the reply.
Heng was quickly laid on a pallet, his arm swabbed with alcohol, and a needle inserted in his vein. Through this ordeal Heng lay stiff and silent.
After a moment, he let out a shuddering sob, quickly covering his face with his free hand.
"Is it hurting, Heng?" the doctor asked. Heng shook his head, but after a few moments another sob escaped, and once more he tried to cover up his crying. Again the doctor asked him if the needle hurt, and again Heng shook his head.
But now his occasional sobs gave way to a steady, silent crying, his eyes screwed tightly shut, his fist in his mouth to stifle his sobs.
The medical team was concerned. Something was obviously very wrong. At this point, a Vietnamese nurse arrived to help. Seeing the little one's distress, she spoke to him rapidly in Vietnamese, listened to his reply and answered him in a soothing voice.
After a moment, the patient stopped crying and looked questioningly at the Vietnamese nurse. When she nodded, a look of great relief spread over his face.
Glancing up, the nurse said quietly to the Americans, "He thought he was dying. He misunderstood you. He thought you had asked him to give all his blood so the little girl could live."
"But why would he be willing to do that?" asked the Navy nurse.
The Vietnamese nurse repeated the question to the little boy, who answered simply, "She's my friend."
"Greater love has no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friend" (John 15:13).

If I Had Faked The Resurrection

If I Had Faked The Resurrection

By Josh McDowell and Bob Hostetler

I set out as a young man to debunk Christianity. I met a young Christian woman who challenged me to intellectually examine the evidence for Christianity, and I accepted her challenge. I aimed to show her—and everyone—that Christianity was nonsense. I thought it would be easy. I thought a careful investigation of the facts would expose Christianity as a lie and its followers as dupes. But then a funny thing happened. As I began investigating the claims of Christianity, I kept running up against the evidence. Time after time, I was surprised to discover the factual basis for the seemingly outlandish things Christians believe. And one of the most convincing categories of evidence I confronted was this: The Resurrection accounts found in the Gospels are not the stuff of fable, forgery, or fabrication. I had assumed that someone, or several someones, had invented the stories of Jesus Christ’s resurrection from the dead. But as I examined those accounts, I had to face the fact that any sensible mythmaker would do things much differently from the way Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John did in recording the news of the Resurrection. As much as I hated to, I had to admit that if I had been some first-century propagandist trying to fake the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, I would have done a number of things differently:
I would wait a prudent period after the events before “publishing” my account. Few historians dispute the fact that the disciples of Jesus began preaching the news of His resurrection soon after the event itself; in fact, Peter’s Pentecost sermon (Acts 2) occurred within 50 days of the Resurrection. And textual research indicates that the written accounts of the Resurrection, especially the creedal statement of 1 Corinthians 15:3-8, are astoundingly early in origin. Such early origins argue against any notion that the Resurrection accounts are legendary.


I would publish my account far from the venue where it supposedly happened. Dr. William Lane Craig writes, “One of the most amazing facts about the early Christian belief in Jesus’ resurrection was that it originated in the very city where Jesus was crucified. The Christian faith did not come to exist in some distant city, far from eyewitnesses who knew of Jesus’ death and burial. No, it came into being in the very city where Jesus had been publicly crucified, under the very eyes of its enemies.”


I would select my “witnesses” very carefully. I would avoid, as much as possible, using any names at all in my account, and I would certainly avoid citing prominent personalities as witnesses. Yet at least 16 individuals are mentioned by name as witnesses in the various accounts, and the mention of Joseph of Arimathea as the man who buried Jesus would have been terribly dangerous if the Gospel accounts had been faked or embellished. As a member of the Sanhedrin, a Jewish “Supreme Court,” he would have been well known. J. P. Moreland writes, “No one could have invented such a person who did not exist and say he was on the Sanhedrin if such were not the case.” His involvement in the burial of Jesus could have been easily confirmed or refuted. Perhaps most important, I would avoid citing disreputable witnesses, which makes significant the record of Jesus’ first appearances—to women—since in that time and culture women were considered invalid witnesses in a court of law. If the accounts were fabrications, the women would never have been included in the story, at least not as first witnesses.


I would surround the event with impressive supernatural displays and omens. As Jewish scholar Pinchas Lapide writes, “We do not read in the first testimonies [of the Resurrection] of an apocalyptic spectacle, exorbitant sensations, or of the transforming impact of a cosmic event. ... According to all New Testament reports, no human eye saw the Resurrection itself, no human being was present, and none of the disciples asserted to have apprehended, let alone understood, its manner and nature. How easy it would have been for them or their immediate successors to supplement this scandalous hole in the concatenation of events by fanciful embellishments! But precisely because none of the evangelists dared to ‘improve upon’ or embellish this unseen resurrection, the total picture of the Gospels also gains in trustworthiness.”

I would painstakingly correlate my account with others I knew, embellishing the legend only where I could be confident of not being contradicted. Many critics have pointed out the befuddling differences and apparent contradictions in the Resurrection accounts. But these are actually convincing evidences of their authenticity; they display an ingenuous lack of collusion, agreeing and (apparently) diverging much as eyewitness accounts of any event do.


I would portray myself and any co-conspirators sympathetically, even heroically. Yet the Gospel writers present strikingly unflattering portraits of Jesus’ followers (such as Peter and Thomas) and their often skeptical reactions (Mark 16:11, 13; Luke 24:11, 37; John 20:19, 24-25; 21:4). Such portrayals are very unlike the popular myths and legends of that (or any) time.


I would disguise the location of the tomb or spectacularly destroy it in my account. If I were creating a resurrection legend, I would keep the tomb’s location a secret to prevent any chance that someone might discover Jesus’ body, or I would record in my account that the angels sealed it or carried it off into Heaven after the Resurrection. Or I might have taken the easiest course of all and simply made my fictional resurrection a “spiritual” one, which would have made it impossible to refute even if a body were eventually discovered. But, of course, the Gospel accounts describe the owner of the tomb (Joseph of Arimathea) and its location (“At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb” [John 19:41]), and identify Jesus’ resurrection as a bodily one (John 20:27).


I would try to squelch inquiry or investigation. I might pronounce a curse on anyone attempting to substantiate my claims, or attach a stigma to anyone so shallow as to require evidence. Yet note the frequent appeal of Jesus’ disciples to the easily confirmed—or discredited—nature of the evidence, as though inviting investigation (Acts 2:32; 3:15; 13:31; 1 Corinthians 15:3-6). This was done within a few years of the events themselves; if the tomb were not empty or the Resurrection appearances were fiction, the early Christians’ opponents could have conclusively debunked the new religion.


As Dr. Edwin Yamauchi says of the citation of the resurrected Christ appearing to more than 500 people in 1 Corinthians 15, “What gives special authority to the list [of witnesses] as historical evidence is the reference to most of the five hundred brethren being still alive. St. Paul says in effect, ‘If you do not believe me, you can ask them.’”


I would not preach a message of repentance in light of the Resurrection [as Peter did in Acts 2]. No one in his right mind would have chosen to create a fictional message that would invite opposition and persecution from both civil and religious authorities of those days. How much easier and wiser it would have been to preach a less controversial gospel—concentrating on Jesus’ teachings about love, perhaps—thus saving myself and the adherents of my new religion a lot of trouble.


I would stop short of dying for my message. Lee Strobel has written, “People will die for their religious beliefs if they sincerely believe they’re true, but people won’t die for their religious beliefs if they know their beliefs are false.” While most people can only have faith that their beliefs are true, the disciples were in a position to know without a doubt whether or not Jesus had risen from the dead. They claimed that they saw Him, talked with Him, and ate with Him. If they weren’t absolutely certain, they wouldn’t have allowed themselves to be tortured to death for proclaiming that the Resurrection had happened.


These are not the only reasons I believe in the truth of the Bible and the reality of the Resurrection. But these were among the “many convincing proofs” (Acts 1:3) that I encountered in my attempts to prove Christianity wrong, which eventually led me to the conclusion that Jesus Christ was who He claimed to be and that He really did rise from the dead. It didn’t happen immediately, but eventually I gave in to the truth, and on Dec. 19, 1959, the risen Christ radically changed my life. I’ve seen Him do the same for countless others, and I pray, if you haven’t done so already, you will let Him do the same for you.



Let every man count himself immortal. Let him catch the revelation of Jesus in his resurrection. Let him say not merely, “Christ is risen,” but “I shall rise.”


—Phillips Brooks

Reflections © 2005 by The Family International.


The article by Josh McDowell and Bob Hostetler is courtesy of Focus on the Family magazine.

Love's Gift

In the days before the Civil War in the United States, a young black girl was being sold at an auction. She was a beautiful girl, tall and slender. The bidding was intense, and quickly mounted higher and higher until at last only two were left vying for her ownership: one a coarse man who cursed and swore as he raised his bids against the other, a dignified gentleman. Finally the bidding stopped, and to the quiet man who had so earnestly bid were given the papers which made him the lawful owner of the young girl.With a shove the auctioneer presented her to her new master. She stood defiantly before him, hating him with every fibre of her being. Suddenly a change came over her face; a look of amazement changed to incredulity as she saw her owner ripping up the papers of ownership. With a kind smile he said, "My dear, you are free. I bought you that I might free you."
Too stunned for speech, the girl merely stared until finally she threw herself at his feet, crying out with tears and happiness, "Oh master! I'll love and serve you all my life!"
What the papers of ownership could not do, the man's kindness had won completely.
Someone has loved you and has "paid" for you with His life!--A high price indeed! By suffering a cruel death in your place, Jesus paid the price that was necessary for the bonds of evil to be loosed from you. Whatever has bound you--your past, your sins, your weaknesses--He has broken those bonds, and all you need to do to experience the freedom He gives is to accept Jesus as your Lord and Master, to invite Him into your heart and to let Him have His way in your life. He has "bought" you, so that He can set you free.
"Ye are bought with a price.... If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed" (1 Corinthians 6:20; John 8:36, KJV).

The Hen & the Hog

A conversation is said to have taken place between a hen and a hog when they passed a church and observed the subject of the pastor's sermon: "How Can We Help the Poor?" After a moment's reflection, the hen said, "I know what we can do. We can give them a ham-and-egg breakfast!" The hog protested, saying, "The breakfast would be only a contribution for you, but for me it would mean total commitment!"

Designed to make a difference

Designed to make a difference
By Rick Warren, Baptist Press
You were put on earth to make a contribution. You weren't created just to eat, breathe and take up space. God designed you to make a difference with your life. This is one of God's purposes for your life, and it's called your "ministry" or service.
The Bible says, "We are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do" ( Ephesians 2:10 , NIV). You were placed on this planet for a special assignment.
The apostle John said, "We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers. Anyone who does not love remains in death" ( 1John 3:14 , NIV). If I have no love for others, no desire to serve others, and I'm only concerned about my needs, I should ask myself whether Jesus is really in my life. A saved heart is one that wants to serve.
Another term for serving God-one that's misunderstood by most people-is the word ministry. In the Bible, the words servant and minister are synonyms, as are service and ministry. If you are a Christian, you are a minister, and when you're serving, you're ministering.
Serving is the opposite of our natural inclination. Most of the time we're more interested in "serve us" than service. But as we mature in Christ, the focus of our lives should increasingly shift to living a life of service. The mature follower of Jesus stops asking, "Who's going to meet my needs?" and starts asking, "Whose needs can I meet?"
Do you ever ask that question?
At the end of your life on earth you will stand before God, and He is going to evaluate how well you served others with your life. Think about the implications of that. One day God will compare how much time and energy we spent on ourselves compared with what we invested in serving others.
At that point, all our excuses for self-centeredness will sound hollow: "I was too busy" or "I had my own goals" or "I was preoccupied with working."
To all excuses God will respond, "Sorry, wrong answer. I created, saved and called you and commanded you to live a life of service. What part did you not understand?"
If you're not involved in any service or ministry, what excuse have you been using? Abraham was old, Leah was unattractive, Joseph was abused, Moses stuttered, Gideon was poor, Samson was strange, Rahab was immoral, David had an affair and all kinds of family problems, Jeremiah was depressed, Jonah was reluctant, Naomi was a widow, John the Baptist was eccentric, to say the least, Peter was impulsive and hot-tempered, Martha worried a lot, the Samaritan woman had several failed marriages, Zacchaeus was unpopular, Thomas had doubts, Paul had poor health, and Timothy was timid.
That's quite a variety of misfits, but God used each of them in His service. He will use you, too, if you let Him.

The Resurrection

What really happened?
A distinguished UPI newsman examines the facts surrounding history’s most extraordinary event
By Louis Cassels
After Jesus was crucified, Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus removed Christ’s body from the cross and buried it in Joseph’s personal tomb, located in a private cemetery not far from Golgotha. They rolled a large stone across the entrance of the tomb and departed. The Jewish laws of Sabbath observance were strict. They forbade any kind of manual labor, including the preparation of a corpse for burial. Jesus’ body was placed in the tomb just before the Sabbath officially began. The job of anointing it with embalming spices—customarily performed by female relatives and friends—had to wait until the Sabbath was over. Early Sunday morning, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene and two other women set out for the tomb to embalm the body of Jesus. They arrived just at sunrise. The stone had been rolled away from the entrance. The tomb was empty. That is the story the Gospels tell. If you find it hard to believe, so did the people who first heard it. When the terrified women ran back to the house where the disciples were in hiding, their report was at first dismissed as “nonsense.” Even in our time, some Christian theologians have expressed the belief that Jesus’ body remained in the tomb and eventually rotted away like all other human bodies; that when the disciples proclaimed His return from death, they meant only that He had come to life again in their minds and hearts. This “demythologizing” interpretation has great appeal for all who find themselves unable to accept the possibility that God might intervene in the operation of nature to raise a dead man to life. But however congenial it may be to the mindset of our age, the concept of a purely spiritual resurrection is difficult to square with the historical facts as we know them, not only from the New Testament but from other sources. It is clearly established history that within a short time after Jesus’ crucifixion, His disciples began to proclaim that He had risen from the grave. And they made the claim publicly in Jerusalem. It was obviously in the interests of the Jewish and Roman authorities to spike this story. And they could have done so, quickly and conclusively, simply by showing that Jesus’ body was still in the tomb. Their failure to employ this perfect refutation strongly suggests that they were unable to produce the body. Of course, an empty tomb does not by itself mean that its occupant has returned to life. The body could have been secretly removed by Jesus’ followers to give credence to their preaching of a resurrection. What’s wrong with the stolen-body theory? Its basic fallacy is that it would mean that Jesus’ followers were telling a deliberate lie when they said He had been raised from death by an act of God. And any such idea contradicts all that we know about human nature. As New Testament historian Daniel P. Fuller has pointed out, the disciples “preached the risen Jesus at the risk of their lives” and “men do not risk their lives for what they know to be a fraud.” Another explanation is that Jesus did not really die on the cross, but merely went into a deathlike coma, either from shock or from drinking wine spiked with a drug. This explanation raises far more questions than it answers. For example: Were Roman legionnaires so naïve as to hand over a condemned criminal to His friends without first making sure He was dead? The Gospels record that they did make sure: Even though Jesus appeared to be already dead, they plunged a spear deep into His side to snuff out any possible spark of life. Suppose that Jesus had revived in the tomb. He would have been in critical condition from six hours of torture on the cross and loss of blood from the spear wound. Could such a half-dead man have rolled away a heavy stone and made His way unaided back to Jerusalem? In fact, the early Church attached so little evidential importance to the empty tomb that it made no attempt to harmonize the accounts given by the four Gospels of the circumstances attending its discovery. Each Gospel has a slightly different version of who accompanied Mary Magdalene, what was said and done at the cemetery, and what happened after that. Some feel that those discrepancies cast doubt on the authenticity of the story. But their effect on a man like myself, who has spent his life in the newsgathering business, is exactly the opposite. Any time you collect eyewitness accounts of an event—particularly a startling and unexpected event—you can expect a good deal of variance, and even direct contradiction, on the specific details. If I read four different accounts of a dramatic happening and found them all in complete agreement, I would be fairly sure that somebody had been tampering with the original reports to make them dovetail. By the same token, the variations in the Gospel accounts arise in a reporter the intuitive conviction that they are faithfully preserved records of an actual event. This is not only my personal feeling; other newsmen tell me they have the same reaction. The empty tomb, however explained, is secondary evidence. It is quite clear in the Gospels that the disciples themselves would never have been convinced by the empty tomb alone that Jesus had returned to life. They believed in the resurrection only because they saw Jesus and talked with Him, not once, but on numerous occasions following His death. The oldest written record of Jesus’ appearances to His disciples is found in a letter which the apostle Paul wrote to the church in Corinth about 56 AD. In it he cataloged the people who had seen the risen Jesus: first, Peter; then all the apostles; then “more than 500 of His followers at once, most of whom are still alive. …” The italics are mine. I think it’s tremendously significant that Paul was prepared to rest his claim on the testimony of several hundred eyewitnesses who were alive and available for questioning at the time he wrote. But even eyewitness reports can sometimes be discounted or explained away as mass hallucination. This diagnosis of hallucination is only convincing, however, when the people involved are nervous, high-strung, imaginative types. But the disciples were exactly the opposite. These farmers, fishermen, and tax collectors were so devoid of imagination that Jesus often had to explain His parables to them before they could grasp the point. The ultimate evidence of the resurrection, of course, is the existence of the Christian Church. The centrality of the resurrection story to Christian faith was most forcefully expressed by the apostle Paul. “If Christ has not been raised from the dead, then we have nothing to preach, and you have nothing to believe,” he told the Corinthian Christians. “If Christ has not been raised, then your faith is a delusion. … More than that, we are shown to be lying against God, because we said of Him that He raised Christ from death. But the truth is that Christ has been raised from death” (1 Corinthians 15:14–15, 20 paraphrased). From the earliest days, the Church has attached basic importance to the assertion that Jesus returned to life after He was crucified, dead, and buried. Why? It was not as a spectacular miracle that the resurrection impressed the disciples. They had seen Jesus do many extraordinary things, and they did not doubt God’s ability to resuscitate a corpse if He chose to do so. What mattered to the disciples was that God did choose to do so in the case of Jesus. To the disciples—and to millions of Christians since—the Resurrection is God’s stamp of approval on the things Jesus did and said. It vindicates Christ’s claim to a special relationship with God—and stands as history’s most extraordinary event.
Excerpted and adapted from the book, The Real Jesus, by Louis Cassels.
Copyright ©1968 by Louis Cassels. Published by Doubleday & Company, Inc., New York City. for what they know to be a fraud. —Daniel P. Fuller

The Just One and Political Justice

The Just One and Political Justice
BY RUI BARBOSA
In an essay first published in 1899 and excerpted here, Brazilian jurist, essayist, lawyer, author, politician, and diplomat Rui Barbosa (1849–1923) analyzes the prosecution of Jesus from a legal standpoint and holds it up as an example for the ages of the miscarriage of justice.
Christ was subjected to six trials—three at the hands of the Jews, three at the hands of Rome—yet He stood before no judge. In court after court His divine innocence was evident to all who judged Him, but not one dared grant Him judicial protection. In Hebraic traditions, the concept of the divine nature of a magistrate’s role was emphasized. It was taught that to rule contrary to the truth was to drive the presence of the Lord from the bosom of Israel, while to judge with integrity, even for an hour, was likened to the creation of the universe. It was taught that there, in the place of judgment, divine majesty abode. Laws and holy books are of little worth, however, when men lose sight of their meaning.In the very trial of the One who was sinless, there was not a precept or rule in the laws of Israel that her judges did not transgress. From His arrest, approximately an hour before midnight, until dawn, all the events of Christ’s trial were tumultuous, extrajudicial, and an assault on Hebrew precepts. The third phase, the inquiry before the Sanhedrin, was the first to even remotely simulate a judicial hearing—the first act in this judgment to vaguely resemble due process. At least it took place in the light of day. Christ Himself did not renounce such rights. Annas interrogated Him, making a procedural error, as he had no judicial authority in the matter. In resigning Himself to martyrdom, Jesus never resigned Himself to the abdication of His lawful rights. Jesus answered Annas, “I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing. Why do you ask Me? Ask those who have heard Me what I said to them. Indeed they know what I said.” It was an appeal to the Hebrew institutions, which made no allowance for courts or witnesses representing only one side of a question. The accused had the right to a public trial and could not have been convicted without a body of incriminating testimony. Jesus’ ministry had been to the people. If His preaching had crossed into criminal activity, the place should have been teeming with witnesses. They stood on judicial soil, yet because the Son of God invoked the law, His judges slapped Him. To answer the priest in this manner was insolence. “Do You answer the high priest like that?” “Yes,” replied Christ, insisting on legal grounds. “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why do you strike Me?” Disoriented, Annas sent Him to Caiaphas, the high priest that year. This matter, however, was also outside Caiaphas’ jurisdiction. It was solely a prerogative of the great Sanhedrin, before whom Caiaphas had already revealed his political bias in persuading them it was necessary for Jesus to die in order to “save the nation.” It was now up to Caiaphas to carry out his own malicious design, which resulted in the damnation of the people he had intended to save and the salvation of the world, which he had never considered. The illegality of the nighttime judgment, which Jewish law prohibited even in ordinary civil issues, was worsened by the scandal of the false witnesses. They were bribed by the judge himself, who should have, according to the jurisprudence of that nation, played the role of the defendant’s foremost protector. Yet, no matter how many false witnesses they arranged, they were not able to impute to Him guilt as they had hoped. Jesus remained silent. His judges lost the second round. The high priest, in his “wisdom,” suggested a way to open the divine lips of the accused. Caiaphas questioned Him in the name of the living God, an invocation which the Son could not resist. Obliged to reply, He did not recant and therefore found Himself accused of a capital crime. “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy!” Hearing this statement, all present cried, “He is deserving of death.” The morning dawned, and in the first hours of daylight, the entire Sanhedrin met. It was an attempt to satisfy the judicial guarantees. Daybreak brought with it the required condition of openness. This was now a legitimate judicial proceeding. These were the proper judges, but judges who had already hired witnesses to testify against the defendant could represent little more than a disgraceful travesty of justice. Having agreed beforehand to condemn, these judges left an example to the world, imitated countless times over the years, of tribunals that decide together in the shadows, later merely simulating in public an actual judgment. Naturally, therefore, Christ was condemned a third time. The Sanhedrin, however, did not have the authority to pronounce the death sentence. It was a jury of sorts, whose verdict was more opinion than ruling. The Roman courts were under no obligation to heed this verdict. Pontius Pilate, therefore, was under no constraint; he could either condemn or acquit. He asked them, “What accusation do you bring against this Man?” “If He were not an evildoer, we would not have delivered Him up to you” was the insolent reply of his prosecutors. Not wanting to play the role of executioner in a case about which he knew nothing, Pilate tried to weasel out of the predicament by returning the victim to His accusers. “You take Him and judge Him according to your law.” “But,” replied the Jews, “you know very well that it is not lawful for us to put anyone to death.” Their goal was death. Without it the depraved justice of the accusers would not be satisfied. At this point their libel changed. The accusation was no longer of blasphemy against holy law, but of an infraction of political law. Jesus was no longer the impostor who claimed to be the Son of God, but a conspirator who crowned Himself king of Judea. Again, however, Christ’s answer spoiled the morning for His accusers. His kingdom was not of this world. Therefore He posed neither a threat to the security of national institutions, nor to the stability of Rome’s rule. “For this cause I have come into the world,” Christ said, “that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” “What is truth?” asked Pilate, clearly revealing his cynicism. He did not believe in the truth, but the truth of Christ’s innocence penetrated irresistibly into the depths of his soul. “I find no fault in Him at all,” said the Roman procurator, once again forestalling the priests’ plot. The innocent should have been spared. He was not. Public opinion demanded a victim. Jesus had stirred the people, not only there in Pilate’s territory, but all the way to Galilee. It so happened that Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee with whom the governor of Judea had severed relations, was in Jerusalem. It was an excellent occasion for Pilate to restore their friendship and at the same time pacify the crowds that had been inflamed by the high priests. Pilate sent the defendant to Herod, flattering him with this homage—vanity. Two enemies, from that day on, became friends. Thus tyrants are reconciled over the ruins of justice. Herod, also, could find no way to condemn Jesus. The martyr returned from Herod to Pilate without being sentenced. Pilate reiterated to the people the purity of that just Man. It was the third time that Rome’s judges had proclaimed His innocence. However, the clamor of the multitudes grew. Jesus’ fourth defense came again from Pilate’s mouth. “What evil has He done?” The conflict escalated as the uproar of the multitude grew stronger, and the governor asked, “Shall I crucify your King?” The crowd’s shouting answer was the lightning bolt that disarmed Pilate’s attempts to forestall. “We have no king but Caesar!” With this word the specter of Tiberius Caesar arose in the depths of the governor’s soul. The monster of Capri, betrayed, consumed with fever, covered with ulcers, contaminated with leprosy, entertained himself with atrocities during his final days. To betray him was to bring about one’s own destruction—to fall under even the suspicion of infidelity to him was to die. Frightened, the slave of Caesar acquiesced, washing his hands before the people. “I am innocent of the blood of this just Person,” he said, and handed Jesus over to His crucifiers. Behold the proceedings of a court that will not take responsibility for its actions. From Annas to Herod, the judgment of Christ is a mirror of all the ways in which a judicial system, corrupted by factions, demagogues, and governments, deserts its own. Their weakness, their naiveté, their moral perversion crucified the Savior and continue to crucify Him today, in empires and republics, every time that a court covers the truth with a lie, abdicates responsibility, turns its back on or hides from the truth. Jesus was sacrificed because He was accused of being an agitator and a subversive. Every time that it is deemed necessary to sacrifice a friend of our rights, an advocate of the truth, a defender of the defenseless, an apostle of generosity, a proponent of law, or an educator of the people, this is the order that always rises again to justify the activities of the lukewarm judges whose only interest is power. All believe, like Pontius Pilate, that they will save themselves by washing their hands of the blood that they themselves will spill, of the crime that they will commit. Fear, venality, partisan politics, personal reputation, subservience, a conservative spirit, a closed interpretation, reasons of state, overriding interests—call it what you will—judicial prevarication will not escape being branded.

Excerpted and adapted from Selected Works of Rui Barbosa, Vol. VIII. Copyright ©1957 by Casa de Rui Barbosa, Rio de Janeiro. Translated by John Paul M. Connolly.