HAVE YOU EVER LOOKED AT YOUR HANDS

“HAVE YOU EVER LOOKED AT YOUR HANDS”

Stes de Necker

Shortly before my dear late mother passed away, I visited her in the care centre where she was lying in her bed, looking at her hand holding a handkerchief. She always held a handkerchief in her hand, with the one end wrapped around her pointing finger.

Not really wanting to disturb her but wanting to check on her at the same time, I said, 'I didn't mean to disturb you mom, but you were just lying there looking your hand and I just want to make sure you were ok'

She looked at me and smiled. 'Yes, I'm fine dear, thank you for asking,'

And that was when she related this to me:

'Have you ever looked at your hands,' she asked. 'I mean really looked at your hands?'

I slowly opened my hands and stared down at them. I turned them over, palms up and then palms down. No, I guess I had never really looked at my hands as I tried to figure out the point she was trying to make.

‘Think for a moment about your hands, how they have served you well throughout your years.

‘These hands of mine, though wrinkled shrivelled and weak have been the tools I have used all my life to reach out and grab and embrace life.

'They braced my fall when as a toddler, preventing me from crashing to the floor.

‘They put food in my mouth and clothes on my back. As a child, my mother taught me to fold them in prayer.  They held your farther and wiped my tears when he was not around.

'They have been dirty, scraped and raw, swollen and bent.  They were uneasy and clumsy when I tried to hold you as a baby. Decorated with my wedding band they showed the world that I was married and loved someone special

‘They wrote my letters to him and trembled and shook when I buried your grandparents and uncles and aunts.

'They have held my children and grandchildren, consoled neighbours, and shook in fists of anger when anyone of you were harmed or got mistreated. 

‘They have covered my face, combed my hair, and washed and cleansed the rest of my body. They have been sticky and wet, bent and broken, dried and raw. And to this day, when not much of anything else of me works real well, these hands hold me up, lay me down, and again continue to fold in prayer.

'These hands are the mark of where I've been and the ruggedness of life.

‘But more importantly it will be these hands that God will reach out to and take when he leads me home.

And with these hands He will lift me to His side and there I will use these hands to touch the face of God.'

I never looked at my hands the same way again after that.   

So every time when my hands hurt or when they're sore or when I stroke the faces of my children, I remember God reaching out and took my mother’s hands and led her home.

Short explanation on the creation of organic life following the ‘Big Bang’

Short explanation on the creation of organic life following the ‘Big Bang’ 

Stes de Necker 

Physicists believe that, immediately after the Big Bang, only two elements were present in the universe namely hydrogen and helium. All the other familiar elements we know today, such as oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, gold, copper, silicon, potassium, sodium, nitrogen, deuterium and iron came out the two aforementioned elements. 

When a star's hydrogen (the fuel for nuclear power) runs out, the pressure in the star gets so great that the star collapses into itself. Heat in the core of the star increase thousands fold, and a so-called white dwarf is born.   

Since there is no more hydrogen for nuclear reactions (all the burned out), it is now the complex helium reactions that continue.

Helium is turned into carbon dust, carbon and oxygen in magnesium, oxygen is neon, magnesium, silicon, sulfur and silicon and so the connections within the star core continues until the star "explode" and ripped to shreds. With tremendous force these elements are shot into space and a so-called supernova is born.  A super nova is not a "nova" (new) like the name would have it a ‘new’ star. In reality it is actually a million years "old" star busy ‘dying’.   

During such a massive explosion, the heavy elements that also make up our world and all living things on it, ( everything is composed of nitrogen, oxygen, carbon, potassium, calcium, phosphorus, sulfur, iron and other heavy elements), were blasted into the universe over a period of billions of years, and got distributed throughout the universe.

Instead of exploding outwards, sometimes the star explodes inward (implosion), as a result of severe gravitational forces deep in the heart of the star, and a new phenomenon, a so-called black vortex is formed.

Today, more than 90% of all atoms (elements) in the universe are still hydrogen and helium.

Atoms combine to form molecules and molecules react with one another to form complex structures. Everything that exists consists of elements (atoms) that are linked together to form molecules and molecules were the forerunners of the first living cells on earth.

By mass, our bodies consist of 60% oxygen, 20% carbon and 10% hydrogen. The remaining 10% of our body weight consists mainly of nitrogen, calcium, phosphorus, sulfur, sodium, magnesium, iron and copper. 

These atoms were formed already billions of years ago in the nuclei of millions upon millions of stars.  

No scientist in the world however know what causes molecules to combine and multiply in exact likeness of itself as is the case with the growth of crystals. A crystal grow, but even so, there is no question of ‘life’. 

Similarly have these molecular compounds, over billions of years, led to the formation of organic cells and these cells develop the ability to divide and form new cells.

The miracle of life occurred!

Gen. 1:24: "Then God said, 'Let the earth bring forth living creatures ...".

All life on earth, including humans, originated in the same way!

Would time freeze if you can travel at the speed of light?

Would time freeze if you can travel at the speed of light?

Stes de Necker

I read with interest Einstein's Theory of Relativity and his proposition about the speed of light being the speed limit for anything with mass. 

So, if I were to travel in a spacecraft at the speed of light, would I freeze and stop moving? Would the universe around me freeze and stop moving? Who would the time stop for?

Even if it would, does that mean that time will only stop for me as individual, because only if I could returned to the place where I started, will I be able to realize that I have had a different experience of time.  Without returning to compare my time/ageing with the origin of my travel, it would not be possible for me to have experienced any slow motion or such observable discrepancies.

So, if I went out into space for 1 light year and then returned, all at the speed of light, and you stayed on earth, what would be the relative difference between us? Does it mean that you will be a year older and I will still be the same age?

Or to put the question in a different way, if I went into space and return to earth, all at the speed of light, and you stayed on earth, but earth also now travels at the speed of light, will we still be the same age when I return from space?

This question has a long and honorable history. As a young student, Einstein tried to imagine what an electromagnetic wave would look like from the point of view of a motorcyclist riding alongside it. But we now know, thanks to Einstein himself that it really doesn't make sense to talk about such observers.

The most straightforward argument is based on the positivist idea that concepts only mean something if you can define how to measure them operationally. If we accept this philosophical stance, then we need to be able to physically realize this frame in terms of an observer and measuring devices. But we can't.

It would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate Einstein and his motorcycle to the speed of light.

Since arguments from positivism can often kill off perfectly interesting and reasonable concepts, we might ask whether there are other reasons not to allow such frames. There are.

According to the scientists qualified in the field of physics, the most basic geometrical ideas is intersection. In relativity, we expect that even if different observers disagree about many things, they agree about intersections of world-lines.

Either the particles collided or they didn't. The arrow either hit the bull's-eye or it didn't. So although general relativity is far more permissive than Newtonian mechanics about changes of coordinates, there is a restriction that they should be smooth, one-to-one functions.

If there was something like a Lorentz transformation for v=c, it wouldn't be one-to-one, so it wouldn't be mathematically compatible with the structure of relativity. An easy way to see that it can't be one-to-one is that the length contraction would reduce a finite distance to a point.

What if a system of interacting, mass-less particles was conscious, and could make observations?

The argument given in the preceding paragraph proves that this isn't possible, but let's be more explicit.

There are two possibilities. The velocity V of the system's center of mass either moves at c, or it doesn't. If V=c, then all the particles are moving along parallel lines, and therefore they aren't interacting, can't perform computations, and can't be conscious.

This is also consistent with the fact that the proper time s of a particle moving at c is constant, ds=0.

If V is less than c, then the observer's frame of reference isn't moving at c. Either way, we don't get an observer moving at c.

The reason some people will say that time freezes at the speed of light is that it's possible to take two points on any path going through space-time at less than the speed of light and calculate the amount of time that a particle would experience as it travels between those points along that path. The calculation is as follows:

Δτ2=Δt2−1c2(Δx2+Δy2+Δz2)

Where Δτ is the amount of time experienced by the travelling particle, and the other Δ's are the differences in space and time coordinates between the two points as measured by an external observer.

If you take this same calculation and blindly apply it to a path which is at the speed of light, you get Δτ=0.

 If somehow, you were able to travel at the speed of light, it would seem that 'your time' would not have progressed in comparison to your reference time once you returned to 'normal' speeds. This can be modelled by the Lorentz time dilation equation: T=T01−(v2/c2)

When travelling at the speed of light (v=c), left under the radical you would have 0. This answer would be undefined or infinity if you will. The reference time (T0) divided by infinity would be 0; therefore, you could infer that time is 'frozen' to an object travelling at the speed of light.

Velocity is relative, so it doesn't matter if you're "travelling" at some speed relative to something, or something is travelling at some velocity relative to you - the effects are the same.

Right now you have objects in the universe travelling at a wide range of velocities relative to you. If you decided to change your speed to close to the speed of light compared to what it is now, you will find that there is still the same range of velocities of objects relative to you. That's because objects that were travelling close to c in the direction of your increase will have slowed down, and objects that were travelling in the opposite direction will have increased their velocity.

However, you will also find that as objects increase their speed relative to you, the sequence of events there slow down, and that includes the running of their clocks from your view point, which approaches zero as their speed approaches the speed of light.

I'm a total novice but as I understand it, "your" space and time share a finite amount of energy at any given moment called Space-Time.

So the finite amount energy available at any given moment can be consumed "either" by motion through space or the time of some clock.

But the more you use that energy for one aspect of Space-Time i.e. motion or ‘clock time’, the less there is for the other. Almost the way your computer seems to run slower the more programs you run at once, i.e. a finite amount of processing power is available at any given moment to be distributed among applications.

The upper limit of motion being the speed of light.

So the closer you travel to the speed of light the more energy for a given moment is assigned/consumed by motion, leaving less and less energy for time to tick (relative to someone else). Therefore (relatively speaking) the slower time goes.

So the faster you go, the slower time "appears" to go relative to a slower observer because most of your space-time energy is being consumed by motion, whereas more of theirs is being used for time to tick.

Judgement and Condemnation Contradiction or Different in meaning

Judgement and Condemnation

Contradiction or Difference in meaning

Stes de Necker

The apparent contradiction - Thou shalt not judge/Thou must judge

1.  Thou shalt not judge

In Matthew 7: 1-2 the apostle says: “Judge not, that ye be not judged. ² For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”

There are several references in the Bible that tells us that we are not to judge others. For example, we read in Luke. 6:37, “Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven”

In Romans 2: 1, Paul says, “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.”

Because of these written prohibitions many believers feel very seriously about the fact that we do not have the authority to judge and therefore we cannot tell someone else that he/she is wrong.

But what does this mean in practice? What can or should we as Christians or what should or shouldn’t we do? As many references as there are in the Bible that says we shall not judge as much reference there are telling us to judge when we see someone doing wrong.

2.  You must judge

In Ezekiel we read several times where it seems that God actually commanded to judge:

Ezekiel 20: 4 “Wilt thou judge them, son of man, wilt thou judge them? cause them to know the abominations of their fathers”

Ezekiel 22: 2 “Now, thou son of man, wilt thou judge, wilt thou judge the bloody city? yea, thou shalt shew her all her abominations.”

Ezekiel 23: 45 “And the righteous men, they shall judge them after the manner of adulteresses, and after the manner of women that shed blood; because they are adulteresses, and blood is in their hands.”

Leviticus 19:15 says: “Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.”

Also In the New Testament there are examples in which it appears that God expects us to judge sin,

John. 7: 

24, “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.”

In Matt. 18: 15 the apostle writes: Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.  

In verses 16 and 17 he writes: "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

¹⁷ And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

 But if he does not listen, take one or two more with you, so that everything that is said, by the word of two or three witnesses could confirm. (17) And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it to the church."  

In Ezekiel. 3: 18 God says: "When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.” 

And then in verse 21:" “If you warn him not to sin and he does not sin, he shall live because he took warning, and you your own life. "

According to the Old and New Testament it appears very clear that we carry a big responsibility to correct others when we see them doing wrong.

If we do not, “..... but his blood will I require at thine hand.”!

In current judicial parlance, there is a big difference between sitting in judgement and and to pronounce judgement.

When sitting in judgement a judge will listen to all the arguments that are presented to him and when he has weighed all the evidence and circumstances surrounding a crime, he will pass judgement. Ie. if the accused is found guilty, the judge will pass sentence.  

Now where does this obvious contradiction leave us as Christians?

How we reconcile God's commands to judge in the Old Testament with the prohibition thereof what we find in Matthew and Luke?

First of all, the difference lies in the way we read and interpret the Bible. When we read the prohibitions of the apostles and God's instructions in this regard carefully, we will discover that God does not give us the right to condemn the person, but the sinful practice he/she has committed!

We know that God hates sin and that we can only find forgiveness in Jesus Christ. But because God hates sin, He also expects us to hate sin.

This does not mean that we must hate the person behind the sin! We've always carry the duty to love our neighbour.

What God expects of us is to condemn the sin, not the person.

Secondly, the difference lies in our interpretation of the Bible from our current worldview.

Humanism.

What does "humanism" mean? I said it before that we are sometimes victims of post-modernism. Everyone is entitled to his / her own truth, because, as ‘humanism’ would have it, there is no thing as an absolute truth. This position is the result of humanistic thinking.

"No one has the right to tell someone else what to do or what his/her life should look like "!

Humanism is an unbiblical, human-oriented ideology, that has already diluted our clear Christian theology and the teachings of the Bible to adapt  to the modern civilization’s way of thinking.

Not only does it undermine the authority of Scripture, but Biblical constants, which have prevailed over centuries, are simply removed or replaced with dogmatic theories that satisfy the requirements of modern society.

Humans have simply become more important than the Bible!

Human Rights 

In South Africa most people have simply acquire too many basic ‘human rights’ too soon and too easy.

What no one has told the masses is that for every ‘human right’, there exists a reciprocal responsibility. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement, but then you must act within the requirements of the law. Everyone has the right to own property, but then you must acquire it in the normal legal way. Everyone has the freedom of speech, but that does not mean you can walk arond slandering someone else. 

  

Prostitution and abortion are already not regarded as crimes in South Africa, while we know that the Bible expressly forbids these sins. 

In this post-modern "enlightened" humanistic society, man's so-called "freedom" has become more important than God’s Word. At the slightest indication that man's "freedom" may be in jeopardy these indications are met with fierce attacks from the so-called human rights activists. 

Under the guise of human rights and democracy, any sin can be justified!

Labelling

Another major cause for misinterpreting the Gospel as far as condemnation is concern,  is the tendency of humans to ‘label’ everything and everyone around us.   

Read the story in John Chapter 9 that deals with the man who was blind since birth.  

From verse 1: “And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth.

² And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?

³ Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.

Jesus' disciples have already accepted that the man's blindness was as a result of his sin. All they wanted to know is: whose sin it was; his or his parents'.

They already labelled the blind man as a "sinner". The fact that this man was a beggar who needed help, obviously did not meant much to them at that moment. 

We are as guilty as the disciples in this regard today. When we see someone begging in the street, it is because he is too lazy to work; If we see someone who owns more than you, it's because he / she inherited or stole himself rich; If your skin is white, you're a racist; If your skin is black, you’re corrupt; If you vote for the Freedom Party you are conservative, and if you vote for the Communist Party, you’re a radical. For every possible condition we have a nameplate.

Jesus saw the blind individual. For Jesus, this man was not a victim of sin, he was a miracle waiting to happen.

Matt. 7 from verse one:

“1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2  For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3  And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4  Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5  Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.”

And in Rom. 2: 1-3, Paul says:

“1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

2  But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

3  And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?”

The Bible is neither old nor new. It is timeless 

In 2 Tim. 3: 16 says:  ^“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”

Either we accept the Bible as a whole, or we accept nothing that is written therein!

CONCLUSION

The Bible is clear. As Christians it is our duty to judge and condemn sin, but under no circumstances should we ever judge or condemn the person behind the sin.  

Leave the judgement to God. But if you must judge, judge a person’s actions and never the person. And even then, we must always remember, there are two reservations; Firstly, there should never be prejudice in our opinion, and secondly, we must make very sure that our own lives are clean and correct before we judge someone else’s.

With the measure we use, it shall be measured to us. 

Judas Iscariot and Pontius Pilate - Villains or Chosen One’s

Judas Iscariot and Pontius Pilate

Villains or Chosen One’s

Stes de Necker

Judas Iscariot

John. 13: 18: ‘I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.’  And further in verse 21: ‘When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.’

 The rest of what happened afterwards is quoted in the four gospels as follows: 

1. John

In John. 13 from verse 23 we read:  ‘Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.

²⁴ Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake.

²⁵ He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?

²⁶ Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.

²⁷ And after the sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, That thou doest, do quickly.

²⁸ Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him.’

2. Matthew

Matt. 26 from verse 20: ‘²⁰Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve.

²¹ And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

²² And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I?

²³ And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.

²⁴ The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.

²⁵ Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said.’ 

3. Mark

Mark 14 from verse 18: ¹⁸And as they sat and did eat, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One of you which eateth with me shall betray me.

¹⁹ And they began to be sorrowful, and to say unto him one by one, Is it I? and another said, Is it I?

²⁰ And he answered and said unto them, It is one of the twelve, that dippeth with me in the dish.

²¹ The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

And further in verse 45: ‘And as soon as he was come, he goeth straightway to him, and saith, Master, master; and kissed him.’

3. Luke

Luke. 22 from verse 21: ²¹But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.

²² And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!

²³ And they began to enquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing.

"And further in verse 48: ⁴⁸ ‘But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?’

In the 5th century AD Augustine writes: "The true image of the Hebrew is Judas Iscariot, who sells the Lord for silver. The Jew can never understand the Scriptures and forever will bear the guilt for the death of Jesus. "

Judas you villain! ... Or was he?

What does the Old Testament teach us about the fact that Jesus would be betrayed?

Zechariah 11 we read that after the Lord told Zechariah that he must be a shepherd to the flock:  

 ⁹Then said I, I will not feed you: that that dieth, let it die; and that that is to be cut off, let it be cut off; and let the rest eat every one the flesh of another.

¹⁰ And I took my staff, even Beauty, and cut it asunder, that I might break my covenant which I had made with all the people.

¹¹ And it was broken in that day: and so the poor of the flock that waited upon me knew that it was the word of the LORD.

¹² And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver.

¹³ And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD. 

Read again what is written in Matt. 27 from verse 3!

 ‘Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,

⁴ Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that.

⁵ And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.

⁶ And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood.

⁷ And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in.

⁸ Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.

⁹ Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value;

¹⁰ And gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.’

It was already God's will that Judas was the one who would betray Jesus, long before the idea of doing such repugnant deed has even entered his mind.

    

The Judas Gospel

In my article, “JUDAS ISCARIOT REBORN  -  Discovery of the Judas Gospel” I have elaborated on the history and significance of this discovery. 

According to this ancient manuscript, which is now known as the (apocryphal) "Gospel of Judas",  Judas was the disciple whom Jesus understood better than any of the others. 

   

After Jesus' resurrection, according to the Gospel of Luke, He appeared to two of His disciples on the road to Emmaus. Emmaus was a village situated approximately 12 kilometers from Jerusalem. 

In Luke. 27 we read: ¹³ And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

¹⁴ And they talked together of all these things which had happened.

¹⁵ And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.

¹⁶ But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.

¹⁷ And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?

¹⁸ And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?

¹⁹ And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:

²⁰ And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.

²¹ But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.

And in verse 27 we read: ‘And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

The Bible does not tell us who these two disciples were, ( we only know that one of them was called Cleopas) but we can assume that Jesus also explained His betrayal to these disciples. 

In the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus warned Judas: "... but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed."

After the betrayal, Judas was in bitter anguish and remorse and bitterly regretted what Jesus had to endure. To the priesthood and elders Judas confessed that he made ​​a grave mistake. He confessed his sin and went out and hanged himself.  

If Judas confessed to the elders and the priests, how much more he would not confessed to God?

Centuries before Judas existed, his fate was already sealed and decided; God had predestined that one day Judas would betray our Lord Jesus Christ!

Jesus did not warned Judas against the wrath of God; He warned Jesus against what he will have to endure after he betrays Jesus, while he was still on this earth.

 

It appears that the villain Judas may actually have been Jesus' most faithful disciple.

Always temper your judgment with tolerance and understanding.

Pontius Pilate

Pontius Pilate was the governor of Judea, in the Roman Empire, under Emperor Tiberius, in the first century AD.  According to the historians Pilate was a Knight of the Samniete clan of Pontii, and hence his name Pontius.

In the New Testament, Pontius Pilate is portrayed as a weakling with a wavering personality. 

Matt. 27: 17 we read that Pilate asked the crowd: ¹⁷ ‘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?’

It seems he could not make up his own mind what to do with Jesus! 

According to Matt. 27: 18, Pilate knew Jesus out of envy the chief priests have delivered, and then in verse 19 we read that Pilate's wife (Procula) had send him a message: ¹⁹ .....When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.

After he heard his wife, Pontius Pilate capitulated his position as a judge, and in verse 24 we read: ²⁴ When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

What an avoidance of a judge's responsibility!

Imagine that in our day, a person is charged with murder and the judge finds the person innocent. Instead of acquitting the accused and release him/her, he still continue to hand the accused over to ‘the people’ so they can what they want! 

This is jungle justice if you've ever heard of it!

As I mentioned earlier, Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea in the Roman Empire from about 26 to 36 AD

The duties of a Governors of the Roman Empire was primarily to collect taxes and to enforcement and implement the laws and regulations of the Emperor. For this purpose, the Governor was also in command of a certain contingent the Roman army in his area. A Governor performed the duties as judge and was given a wide range of powers and other duties to perform in his region.

Philo (Greek philosopher 20 BC to 50 AD - also known as "Philo of Alexandria") writes about Pontius Pilate as follows: “He was a vindictive man with an angry disposition was. He was by nature inflexible in his beliefs; a mixture of self-righteousness and ruthlessness."

Having owned himself the distinction of “a ruthless autocrat who tolerated no contradiction”, one can hardly imagine that this person is the same person the Bible tells us.   

As governor, Pilate would not have tolerated Jesus’ ‘insubordination’ as a servant of the Roman Empire and would have been convicted to death without hesitation.

Pontius Pilate instead ‘washed his hands in innocence’, and went ahead and even had an inscription made on the top of Jesus’ cross which read: "This is the King of the Jews."

The Bible does not tell us what eventually happened to Pontius Pilate, but in the apocryphal "Passion of Saints Peter and Paul" (The Passion of Peter and Paul) we read that Pontius Pilate was executed by the Emperor Tiberius, which ordered that his body had to be thrown in a lake in the mountains of Sibbillini.  This lake is still known as the "Lake of Pilate"  

In the apocryphal book "The Gospel of Nicodemus," Nicodemus describes the dream of Pilate's wife in more detail.

The name "Procula" is derived from the Latin translation of the manuscript

In a letter allegedly by Claudia (as Procula became known later) and written after the death of Pontius Pilate, she wrote that she asked Jesus to heal her son, and that Jeusus granted her, her request.

The letter was published in the Pictorial Review Magazine in April 1929.  

The question is

Will a God of justice, predestine people like Judas and Pilate to do His will on earth, and then leave such people to fall into eternal damnation? 

  

In Romans we read: “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."

Always temper your judgment with tolerance and understanding