The killing of Jesus Christ on the cross has probably been the single-most written about event in history, and yet despite what the plain words of the gospel witnesses tell us, no one has taken responsibility for it. The accusation of “Christ killers” has been a proverbial “hot potato” passed around from one group to another — resulting in 2,000 years of finger-pointing, recriminations, and denials steeped in self-justification.
If we cannot agree on who killed Christ, was His death in vain?
The traditional Christian view — promoted by the Catholic and Protestant churches — has been that “the Jews” killed Christ, but after intense pressure from powerful Jewish groups who claimed this accusation was a “blood libel,” the Catholic Church in the wake of Vatican II, officially exonerated “the Jews” and placed the blamed on “the Romans.” And the judeo-philic Protestant denominations — dominated by the evangelical Zionists — followed the lead of the Catholic Church and shifted the blame — again — onto “the Romans.”
The Jews, of course, claim the Romans killed Christ — while the so-called “gentiles” are scarcely able to accuse the Jews — who accuse them of anti-semitism for merely quoting the Scripture which says, “Men of Israel, Jesus the Nazarene you nailed to the cross.” (Acts 2:22-23) And many White Christians who are aware they are the true Israel of Scripture insist it was the “Edomite Jews” who killed Christ — not Israel.
Ironically, it has reached a point where white Israelite Christians and the Jews are in lock-step with one another — each dispensing countermeasures to redirect the blame elsewhere. The “gentiles” sit bewildered in the middle — subjected to the Stockholm Syndrome by the Jews — and still support the Jews despite having every right to lay the blame at the feet of Israel of Scripture — which today’s Jews certainly aren’t.
For the true white, Christian Israel, however, this is one hot potato we absolutely do want to hang on to — whether it burns or not — for historical, spiritual and prophetic reasons we will discuss.
THE EDOMITE BLAME GAME
Certain Christian circles insist on referring to today’s Jews as literal “Edom” — which they certainly aren’t either — while the Jews identify Christians as Edom — another demonstrable Talmudic deception.
Although it could well be argued that today’s Jews fulfill the role of spiritual Edom, their bloodline has been corrupted with so many other non-Israelite peoples among whom they’ve dwelt over the last 2,000 years that it would be difficult to identify them with any particular race of people.
Around 130AD the Judeans fomented the Bar Kokhba revolt, which the Roman emperor Hadrian put down quite effectively. Ever since that time, Talmudic writers began conflating Rome — and specifically Hadrian — with Edom — one of the proverbial enemies of the Israelites in Scripture. The late fourth century Jerusalem edition of the Talmud refers to this revolt in the context of Genesis 27:22,
So Jacob came close to his father Isaac, and he touched him and said, “The voice is the voice of Jacob, but the hands are the hands of Esau.”Ta‘anit 4:6, 68d (part one)
Hadrian put down the rebellion for good in the final battle at Beitar fortress. The Talmud cites Genesis 27:22 as a prophetic reference to the voice of Israel — “the voice of Jacob” — crying out under the destruction of Beitar at the hands of Hadrian and the Romans — “the hands of Esau.”
Circular Talmudic “logic” consistently begs the question — a pernicious method of Scriptural interpretation that has infected many Christian doctrines — where only the imagination of the rabbi limits the possible interpretations of the Scripture — where his presumed agenda solely dictates his exegesis.
The Jews will readily acknowledge the Edomite ancestry of Herod the Great who conquered Judea in the name of Rome — thus tying Rome and Edom even more inextricably in their minds.
Incidentally, by the time the Jews first produced their Jerusalem Talmud — toward the end of the fourth century AD — Rome had already formally adopted Christianity as its own religion. Hence for the Jews, Rome and Christianity had become inextricably linked — so much so that whenever the rabbis refer to “Rome” in their Talmudic writings, they are actually referring to Christianity — an intentional rhetorical deception that allows them to heap calumny on Christians under the guise of “Rome.”
In a bizarre, ironic twist, Israelite Christians enter into this endless blame game with the Talmudic Jews — calling one another “Edomites” and ultimately claiming that prophecy against Edom promises the destruction of the other. As we have previously shown, Christians who identify Jews as Edomites utilize the same Talmudic exegetical method of Scripture — begging the question — that Jews use to identify white Christians as Edomites.
We can see that Tertullian — the early Christian Church father — used this same Talmudic reasoning when he wrote the following:
For thus unto Rebecca did God speak:Adversus Judaeos chapter 1Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples shall be divided from your bowels; and people shall overcome people, and the greater shall serve the less.Accordingly, since the people or nation of the Jews is anterior in time, andgreaterthrough the grace of primary favour in the Law, whereas ours is understood to belessin the age of times, as having in the last era of the world attained the knowledge of divine mercy: beyond doubt, through the edict of the divine utterance, the prior andgreaterpeople — that is, the Jewish — must necessarily serve theless;and thelesspeople — that is, the Christian — overcome thegreater.
Tertullian here implies that Israel themselves are in fact Esau/Edom — a bizarre and especially Talmudic style of thinking. Following his twisted logic, Israel are not Israel — prophecy referring to Israel does not actually refer to Israel — but rather Edom refers to Israel.
Paul said to the nations, “do not be arrogant toward the branches [Israelites]” (Romans 11:18) — something Tertullian evidently ignored. However, Paul also said of Israel, “the name of God is blasphemed among the nations because of you.” (Romans 2:24) Thus we find that some of the nations would justify themselves against Israel — despite the error of doing so.
JEWS OR ISRAELITES?
In the decades in the wake of the Bar Kokhba revolt, the Israelites who rejected Christianity essentially gave up their Israelite heritage completely and became the very confused babylonian-inspired “religion” known today as “Judaism.” According to the Jews, their tribal and national origin gradually began to follow matrilineal descent — rather than patrilineal descent as the Old Testament clearly stipulates. Their Mishna — or oral traditions — first ratified their law of matrilineal descent in 200AD — about 70 years after the revolt.
To justify this shift in identity, the rabbis concocted the notion that Israelites allegedly had always been reckoned according to matrilineal descent. For example, consider Deuteronomy 7:3-4,
3 Furthermore, you shall not intermarry with them: you shall not give your daughters [your daughter] to their sons [his son], nor shall you take their daughters [his daughter] for your sons [your son]. 4 For they [he] will turn your sons [your son] away from following Me, and they will serve other gods; then the anger of the Lord will be kindled against you and He will quickly destroy you.
In these passages most translators add plurals and take a few liberties in an attempt to make the passage more understandable — yet we wouldn’t feel these liberties drastically alter the meaning of the passage — however, we have highlighted them above for the sake of this explanation.
The rabbis arbitrarily claim that the “he” in verse 4 is an explicit reference to a son-in-law — and the “son” in verse 4 is an explicit reference to a grandson. Here is what the rabbis conclude:
The verse states: “Neither shall you make marriages with them: Your daughter you shall not give unto his son, nor his daughter shall you take unto your son, for he will turn away your son from following Me” (Deuteronomy 7:3–4). This teaches that your son born from a Jewish woman is called your son, but your son born from a gentile woman is not called your son, but her son. The verse teaches that since the son of a gentile woman is her son alone, he is not considered related at all to his Jewish father.Yevamot 23a
They will usually combine this with Ezra 10:3 which states that of all the foreigners Israel sent away, they sent only their wives away — because the children of non-Israelite women are not Israelites. Note how these two expositions never actually prove that Israelites are reckoned according to matrilineal descent — in each case they merely interpret the passages by presuming that their own premise is true — begging the question once again.
Who would read the Scripture and argue with the fact the Israelites are reckoned only according to patrilineal descent? Perhaps someone who is not an Israelite who wants to be reckoned as an Israelite? What this means is that modern day Jews tacitly admit that they are not Israelites — because they have not been tracking their alleged Israelite heritage according to the proper Scriptural means — patrilineal descent — for more than 1800 years.
Given that Jews have admitted they are not Israelites by adopting a matrilineal society, we can reasonably expect that other “evidence” of their Israelite identity will also be false. For example, modern Christianity and Jews alike see the formation of the ersatz country of “Israel” as the prophesied regathering of Israel from the nations made clearly in Deuteronomy 30:2-4,
2 and you return to the Lord your God and obey Him with all your heart and soul in accordance with everything that I am commanding you today, you and your sons, 3 then the Lord your God will restore you from captivity, and have compassion on you, and will gather you again from all the peoples where the Lord your God has scattered you. 4 If any of your scattered countrymen are at the ends of the earth, from there the Lord your God will gather you, and from there He will bring you back.
Note the precondition given in verse 2: “return to the Lord your God and obey Him.” To this end, the Lord Jesus says in Matthew 24:39,
For I say to you, from now on you will not see Me until you say, ‘Blessed is the One who comes in the name of the Lord!’
When Jesus says this, He has already made His triumphant entry into Jerusalem on the colt. Therefore, He is referring to His own return to Israel where He has stated that Israel must receive Him. As if this return isn’t obvious enough by this point, the Lord says in John 14:6,
I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me.
We would ask then: If the Jews reject the true Christ Jesus, how is it that they “returned to the Lord their God and obeyed Him” so that they could have been regathered? Obviously they didn’t — and so their own so-called “regathering” cannot be the true regathering of Israel. Again — in doing so, the Jews have admitted that they are not Israelites.
Therefore, accepting Jews as a regathered, true Israel — in spite of rejecting Christ Jesus — is an admission to their own apostate religion.
To further doom this idea of a regathered Israel in modern Jewry, the Lord Jesus Himself says in Matthew 24:31,
And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet blast, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.
When the “four winds” are mentioned, we can know this refers to Zechariah 2:6-7,
6 “You there! Flee from the land of the north,” declares the Lord, “because I have spread you out like the four winds of the heavens,” declares the Lord. 7 “You, Zion! Escape, you who are living with the daughter of Babylon.”
No doubt this is an end time prophecy — as even Revelation 7:1 says that the four winds are held back — and the earth spared — until the Lord seals the final remnant of Israel:
1 After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth so that no wind would blow on the earth, or on the sea, or on any tree.
We also find the reference to the “four corners of the earth” (Revelation 7:1) in Isaiah 11:12,
And He will lift up a flag for the nations And assemble the banished ones of Israel, And will gather the dispersed of Judah From the four corners of the earth.
Getting back to Matthew 24:31, we read of a great trumpet being blown in relation to a regathering of Israel from the nations in Isaiah 27:13,
It will come about also on that day that a great trumpet will be blown, and those who were perishing in the land of Assyria and who were scattered in the land of Egypt will come and worship the Lord on the holy mountain in Jerusalem.
Even by glossing over this topic, we can already conclude that Israel will be gathered only when the Lord Jesus returns. Therefore again, by claiming to be a regathered Israel, the Jews have admitted that they are not Israel.
Furthermore, we have shown in our exposition on Deuteronomy 23 that the child of an Adamic person and a non-Adamite will never be welcomed into the assembly of the Lord — a prohibition that the Jews blatantly ignore by allowing the father to be of any race only so long as the mother is “Jewish.”
This is another tacit admission that the Jews are not Israelites, because only pure white, Adamic people can be Israelites.
Over and above everything presented, a very explicit reference to a group who “say they are Jews” appears in Revelation 2:9,
I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich), and the slander by those who say they are Judeans, and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.
The Lord Jesus identifies a group that falsely claims to be Judeans but are actually a synagogue of Satan. In these modern times, there is really only one candidate for this prophecy: modern Jews. Incidentally, the true Christians Israelites of these modern times do not call themselves “Judeans” or “Jews” — only modern Jews do.
THE DEICIDE BLAME GAME
Certain Christian circles maintain a canard to this day that the Israelites invited upon themselves a “blood curse” in Matthew 27:24-25 which says,
24 Now when Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd, saying, “I am innocent of this Man’s blood; you yourselves shall see.” 25 And all the people replied, “His blood shall be on us and on our children!”
Some claim in light of this passage that the Israelites invited the ramifications of the death of the Lord Jesus upon themselves — and upon all of their children for all time. Those who believe this assume that God would ratify a curse which they spoke upon themselves in a way which extends beyond what the passage itself says. In this way, the belief that God ratified this self-imposed curse generally depends on the agenda of those interpreting the verse.
However, why anyone would take such a stance on the passage unless an agenda relied upon it? Peter connects his audience in Acts 3 with those who delivered the Christ up to Pilate in verses 13-14,
13 The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His servant Jesus, the one whom you handed over and disowned in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release Him. 14 But you disowned the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you
Peter then continues to show them that they may be absolved in this act in verses 19 and 26,
19 Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord… 26 God raised up His Servant for you first, and sent Him to bless you by turning every one of you from your wicked ways.
The Lord Himself even says in Mark 3:28,
Truly I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they commit
If the only unforgivable sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit — and nowhere does Scripture say that those who killed Jesus cannot be forgiven — then Israel’s sin of murdering the Lord Jesus certainly would fall under the list of sins which may be forgiven.
Jews would have us believe that over the last 2,000 years, Christians have used this “blood curse” as justification to persecute Jews — or Jews used it to pretend that the only reason Christians would persecute them was because of this verse — rather than for any immoral or intolerable acts that the Jews actually committed.
Needless to say, in these modern times the Jews use the verse as a straw man — claiming that Christians believe it to be a “blood curse” — and use it as an excuse to persecute the Jews — not for anything the Jews actually did, but rather just because Christians are just irrationally antisemitic.
Jews use this alleged persecution to get Christians to deny the Scripture — accusing them that unless they deny this scriptural “curse,” then the Christians are supposedly admitting that “another” pogrom is imminent.
To placate the Jews, much has been done among so-called “Christians scholars” to shift the blame for the death of Christ from the Israelites to the Romans. Some even go as far as to claim that Mark — in chapter 13 — made it “obvious” that only the Romans persecuted the Lord Jesus. They then claim that Matthew, Luke and John engaged in an intentional “whitewashing” of Roman guilt — somehow contrary to the writings of Mark — deliberately laying it all at the feet of the Israelites.
Do these “scholars” actually believe the gospels of Matthew, Luke and John or don’t they? They choose what to believe and what not to believe in the Scripture — just so that they can virtue-signal to the Jews.
Never mind that Mark makes it clear — as early as Mark 3:6 — that the Pharisees conspired to put the Lord Jesus to death:
And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him.
In Mark 10:33 the Lord states plainly that the chief priests and scribes would condemn Him to death and hand Him over to the nations:
Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles
Do those who argue that Mark intended to lay the blame at the feet of the Romans not read these passages — or do they simply ignore them?
The Catholics went so far as to write a document called “Nostra aetate” in 1965 — “officially” absolving Jews of guilt for killing the Lord Jesus then and now. They claim that only a few particular religious leaders killed the Christ — therefore, it is “antisemitic” to claim that all Jews — or any Jew in particular — may be blamed for the death of the Lord Jesus.
Consequently, Jews allow Christian “gentiles” to blame only the Romans for the death of the Lord Jesus — even eliciting pangs of self-righteousness within them. Given that Jews see Romans — and Christians — as Edom — the Jews, in their own minds, have essentially convinced the “gentiles” to blame Christianity for the death of the Lord Jesus.
Christians ought to know better than that — in placating the Jews, Christians have become idolaters — idolizing the Jews and taking their demands over and above the commands of the Lord Jesus and the Scripture.
We have already discussed how Jesus Christ identifies those who call themselves “Jews” as a “synagogue of Satan” — so we should pay careful attention to what Satan gives his authority — just as Revelation 13:3 says “the dragon [Satan] gave him [the beast] his power and his throne, and great authority.” Verse 4 says that “the whole earth was amazed after the beast.”
The word for “amazed” in the Greek — “thaumazó” (Strong’s G2296) — often appears in Scripture to describe people’s reactions to the teachings and miracles of the Lord Jesus. Thaumazó conveys a certain wonder at and admiration of something — and perfectly describes the idolatry necessary for Christians to place the words of Jews over the words of the Lord Jesus without a second thought. Evangelical Christians are literally amazed after the Jews — along with their Third-World golem.
In a terrible twist of irony, white Christian Israelites also ascribe to a doctrine where they too deflect blame for the death of the Lord Jesus away from themselves. Just like the Jews, many Christian Israelites put forth a Talmudic doctrine in an attempt to exonerate themselves from the act — just like the Jews — by blaming it on Edom — denying all culpability on behalf of themselves and their ancient ancestors who were alive during the crucifixion.
Christian Israelites ought to know better than that — and just like the evangelical Christians they scoff at, they too have become idolaters — idolizing their own kind over and above the commands of the Lord Jesus and the Scripture. Who would think Paul’s words in Romans 1:25 could have such a visceral application:
For they exchanged the truth of God for falsehood, and worshiped and served the creature [themselves] rather than the Creator
In the end, the evangelical Christians blame Rome, the Christian Israelites blame Jews, and the Jews blame Rome — all of whom are essentially blaming Edom. In everyone’s self-righteousness, no one is prepared to be culpable for the death of the Lord Jesus.
We have previously shown, it certainly was Israel who killed the Lord Jesus and not Edomites — as Peter witnesses in Acts 2:22:
22 Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a Man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know— 23 this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
Also in Acts 3:12-15,
12 But when Peter saw this, he replied to the people, “Men of Israel, why are you amazed at this, or why are you staring at us, as though by our own power or godliness we had made him walk? 13 The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His servant Jesus, the one whom you handed over and disowned in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release Him. 14 But you disowned the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, 15 but put to death the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, a fact to which we are witnesses.
However, as if the plain words of Peter weren’t enough, some nevertheless have postulated that the blame could be lain on the Edomites through Judas Iscariot by proxy — after all, they claim, Judas Iscariot was, “in fact,” an Edomite who intended to betray the Lord all along.
There are three “prongs” to this idea — the first of which is that Judas exhibited “Jewish behavior” by taking a bribe in order to betray the Lord Jesus. However, if we can connect this same kind of behavior to Israelites in Scripture — and verify that Israelites are also capable of taking bribes — then hopefully we can put this matter to rest.
Isaiah accuses Israel in Isaiah 5:23,
Who declare the wicked innocent for a bribe, And take away the rights of the ones who are in the right!
Jeremiah 22:17 says,
But your eyes and your heart Are intent only upon your own dishonest gain, And on shedding innocent blood, And on practicing oppression and extortion.
In 1 Samuel 8:3 it says of the prophet Samuel’s own sons,
His sons, however, did not walk in his ways but turned aside after dishonest gain, and they took bribes and perverted justice.
Clearly Israel are well capable of taking bribes, taking away the rights of the innocent, dishonest gain and shedding blood towards these ends. In light of this, should we even bother to entertain this logic that “Judas displayed Jewish behavior?” To make such an assertion, they inadvertently admit that on some base level, white Israelites can be just as bad as the Jews.
The only difference with Jews is that they don’t bother to justify themselves morally when they commit evil — while self-justification has become a hallmark of denominational Christians — especially those who identify themselves as Christian Israel.
This postulation about Judas’ Jewish behavior being “evidence” that he is a Jew is a classic case of begging the question — which presumes that “only Jews are morally bad enough to betray or kill Jesus” — a presumption that does not prove that Judas was a Jew — but rather merely presumes the truth of its own assumption. However, given that we see such behavior attributed to real Israelites throughout the Scripture, that assumption about Jews is demonstrably untrue.
And we might add another level of irony to this blame game — many White atheists and White nationalists who dismiss the Old Testament as a book of “Jewish fables” will cite numerous examples of egregious behavior of the Israelites — such as usury and sacrificing their children to Molech — as “proof” that Jews must have written it about themselves because — again — only Jews would engage in such evil behavior — certainly not white people.
The second prong of those who deny Judas’ Israelite identity comes from John 6:70-71,
70 Jesus answered them, “Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.” 71 Now He meant Judas the son of Simon Iscariot; for he, one of the twelve, was going to betray Him.
Some will attempt to claim that — at this point in time when Jesus makes this accusation — Judas hadn’t yet done anything wrong — therefore, for Jesus to call Judas a “devil” (Strong’s G1228) — meaning “false-accuser” — would be a slander toward Judas. They argue that they only way for Jesus to not be guilty of slander would therefore be if Judas were a literal child of Satan.
However, despite having foreknowledge of exactly who would betray him, the Lord intentionally didn’t mention Judas by name — thereby creating the impression among them that “the devil” could be any of these Israelite men — that any of them were capable of this betrayal. Since only Judas would know that he is the one to whom Jesus is referring — and his reputation hasn’t been harmed — in no way can this veiled accusation qualify as “slander.”
The third prong of “evidence” of Judas’ “Edomite” identity arises from his surname — “Iscariot” — supposedly a Greek transliteration from the Hebrew words “ish” (Strong’s H376) and “qirya” (Strong’s H7149) — meaning “man of cities” or “man of Kerioth.” The argument proceeds that “Kerioth” was a city in Judah referred to in Joshua 15:21,25,
21 Now the cities at the extremity of the tribe of the sons of Judah toward the border of Edom in the south were Kabzeel, Eder, and Jagur… 25 Hazor-hadattah, Kerioth-hezron (that is, Hazor)
This is the only time in Scripture where the town is ever referred to as “Kerioth-hezron.” As can be seen above, the name “Hazor” is given as the true name of the city among the Israelites. The logic of the argument then goes like this: after the Babylonian conquest of the land of Judah, the Edomites took the land which included “Kerioth” — and if “Kerioth” was an Edomite place — and if Judas came from “Kerioth” — then Judas must have been an Edomite.
The city’s name in Joshua 15:25, however, is clearly “Kerioth-hezron” — not simply “Kerioth.” There is no conjugation between “Kerioth” (Strong’s H7152) and “hezron” (Strong’s H2696) in the Hebrew. Incidentally, instead of “Kerioth-hezron,” the Septuagint renders it “cities of Hezron” in the Greek — which makes sense, given that the Hebrew word for “Kerioth” — “Qeriyyoth” (Strong’s H7152) — is the plural of “qiryah” (Strong’s H7151) according to the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. “Qiryah” itself is the Hebrew word for “city.”
However, Jeremiah 48:24 & 41 — and Amos 2:2 — mention a city in Moab simply called “Kerioth” — yet this Kerioth is ignored and never considered as Judas’ possible birthplace — despite it being more fitting — for no other reason than that it does not support the presumption that Judas is allegedly an Edomite.
Another obvious problem with this line of argument about Judas is that literally none of the New Testament writers identify Judas as a non-Israelite. How is it possible that no one knew or suspected him? To assert that Judas Iscariot was an Edomite, we must fundamentally beg the question because the Scripture doesn’t actually state anywhere that he was an Edomite — nor do the gospel writers quote any prophecy which states that the Lord’s betrayer even needs to be an Edomite or non-Israelite.
That’s really what these arguments claiming Judas must have been an Edomite comes down to — addressing their underlying assumptions clearly not self-evident in the Scripture.
Whenever the Lord Jesus interacts with non-Israelites, their non-Israelite identity is mentioned — such as when the Lord Himself said to the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:24,
I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
He tells her why He shouldn’t be talking to her — she isn’t an Israelite — just as in Luke 7:4 when the locals had to beg the Lord to speak with non-Israelite. The Lord does not even grant the Greeks an audience who sought Him in John 12:20-24 — implying that He must first die before they may be brought into the covenant. The Lord Jesus did not make a habit of even speaking with non-Israelites — and His work as a man on earth was only for the Israelites — so why would we assume Judas was anything other than an Israelite?
DAVID AND AHITHOPHEL
We should pay careful attention to the purposeful differences between how Matthew and Peter relate the story of Judas’ death. Peter’s account in Acts 1:18 reads,
Now this man acquired a field with the price of his wickedness, and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his intestines gushed out.
By contrast, Matthew 27:5-7 says,
5 And he threw the pieces of silver into the temple sanctuary and left; and he went away and hanged himself. 6 The chief priests took the pieces of silver and said, “It is not lawful to put them in the temple treasury, since it is money paid for blood.” 7 And they conferred together and with the money bought the Potter’s Field as a burial place for strangers.
We can see here that the priests acquired a field with Judas’ wickedness — yet why does Matthew end the story of Judas’ demise with his hanging when he clearly failed in that attempt and died by other means described by Peter? Why would Matthew focus on Judas attempting to hang himself after betraying Jesus?
Considering that David is clearly a “shadow and copy” of the Lord Jesus, we can find the model for Matthew’s choice to focus on Judas’ hanging in the story of the rebellion of Absalom — and more specifically, the betrayal of Ahithophel.
When Absalom — David’s son — plotted to usurp him as king, “Absalom sent for Ahithophel the Gilonite, David’s counselor, from his city Giloh, while he was offering the sacrifices.” (2 Samuel 15:12) Giloh was a city in the hill country of Judah (Joshua 15:51), so we can reasonably assume that Ahithophel was of the tribe of Judah. Ahithophel must have been a dearly trusted adviser of David, as demonstrated in 2 Samuel 16:23:
Now the advice of Ahithophel, which he gave in those days, was taken as though one inquired of the word of God; so was all the advice of Ahithophel regarded by both David and Absalom.
Even my close friend in whom I trusted, Who ate my bread, Has lifted up his heel against me.
If David regarded the advice of Ahithophel as the word of God, then it goes without saying that Ahithophel indeed must have been a “close friend in whom [David] trusted.”
When David hears of the conspiracy, he escapes Jerusalem by going over the summit of the Mount of Olives (2 Samuel 15:30, 2 Samuel 16:1) — the same route the Lord Jesus and the apostles followed after eating the Passover meal, as related in Matthew 26:30,
And after singing a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.
While on the Mount of Olives — in the Garden of Gethsemane, the Lord says in Matthew 26:38,
My soul is deeply grieved, to the point of death; remain here and keep watch with Me.
Similarly 2 Samuel 15:30 says of David,
And David was going up the ascent of the Mount of Olives, weeping as he went, and his head was covered, and he was walking barefoot
2 Samuel 17:1 relates the actual council Ahithophel gives Absalom:
1 Furthermore, Ahithophel said to Absalom, “Please let me choose twelve thousand men and let me set out and pursue David tonight. 2 And I will attack him while he is weary and exhausted and startle him, so that all the people who are with him will flee. Then I will strike and kill the king when he is alone”
Note in particular verse 2 — “I will attack him… so that all the people who are with him will flee” — which reads almost exactly like Zechariah 13:7,
“Awake, sword, against My Shepherd, And against the Man, My Associate,” Declares the Lord of armies. “Strike the Shepherd and the sheep will be scattered; And I will turn My hand against the little ones.”
Matthew 26:31 quotes this very same prophecy when the Lord Jesus speaks the prophecy over himself. 2 Samuel 17:1 also says, “I will strike and kill the king when he is alone.” Similarly, the Lord says in Matthew 26:55-56,
55 At that time Jesus said to the crowds, “Have you come out with swords and clubs to arrest Me as you would against a man inciting a revolt? Every day I used to sit within the temple grounds teaching, and you did not arrest Me. 56 But all this has taken place so that the Scriptures of the prophets will be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples left Him and fled.
The Lord emphasizes that it had to happen that way specifically — that He had to be alone when they came to take Him — just as Ahithophel advised against David — so that the Scripture would be fulfilled. The Scripture affords no better candidate for this parallel other than the story of Ahithophel’s betrayal of David, as we have shown.
In the end, Ahithophel’s betrayal of David was confounded, allowing David to escape. 2 Samuel 17:23 relates Ahithophel’s final moments:
Now when Ahithophel saw that his advice had not been followed, he saddled his donkey and set out and went to his home, to his city, and set his house in order, and hanged himself; so he died and was buried in his father’s grave.
If the ultimate cause of Judas’ death was not hanging, as Peter attests, then Matthew must have focused on the fact that Judas hanged himself so that he could conclude the story of Judas in the same way the story of Ahithophel ended.
David and Ahithophel foreshadow Jesus and Judas in Matthew’s account of the story. If Ahithophel was a shadow for Judas — and if Ahithophel was an Israelite, which he surely was — then why would the Lord choose a non-Israelite to betray Him and makes this foreshadowing with David senseless?
All considered so far, why wouldn’t the Lord Jesus have chosen an Israelite to be His betrayer? Is the banal idea that a non-Israelite — or non-Adamite — could betray someone who is not their Savior an important lesson for Israelites to take away from the gospels? Isn’t the lesson that the greatest betrayal of the Israelite people can and will come from within far more important to understand?
As an addendum to this section — for the sake of interest — we would like to offer some conjecture as to why Judas needed to hang himself — and die by falling headlong with his intestines gushing out. Daniel 8:25 ends with,
He will even oppose the Prince of princes, But he will be broken without human agency.
While these lines accurately describe the final moments of Judas’ life — they invoke a prophecy regarding Antiochus IV Epiphanes and simultaneously refer to Satan, as we discussed in the article Genesis 6: What Really Happened Between The ‘Sons Of God’ And The ‘Daughters Of Man’?
However, perhaps they could refer to Judas as well — considering Antiochus himself did indeed die without human agency, as 2 Maccabees 9:5-7 relates:
5 But the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, smote him with an incurable and invisible plague: or as soon as he had spoken these words, a pain of the bowels that was remediless came upon him, and sore torments of the inner parts; 6 And that most justly: for he had tormented other men’s bowels with many and strange torments. 7 Howbeit he nothing at all ceased from his bragging, but still was filled with pride, breathing out fire in his rage against the Jews, and commanding to haste the journey: but it came to pass that he fell down from his chariot, carried violently; so that having a sore fall, all the members of his body were much pained.
According to 2 Maccabees 9, Antiochus died only later in some obscure place — yet his afflictions are reminiscent of Peter’s words concerning Judas in Acts 1:18,
falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his intestines gushed out.
If true, it would explain why Judas needed to hang himself and ultimately be killed without his own or anyone else’s actions — that is, “without human agency.”
JUDAS AND PETER
In John 6:70 the Lord says of Judas, “but one of you is a devil” — yet He says to Peter in Matthew 16:23,
Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s purposes, but men’s.
Then in Luke 22:3 there is a similar situation with Judas right before he betrays the Lord,
And Satan entered Judas, the one called Iscariot, who belonged to the number of the twelve.
Evidently, both Judas and Peter exhibited behavior the Lord equates with Satanic influence. If Peter is tempted to the point where the Lord calls him “Satan,” why should we be so self-righteous as to think we are somehow better than Peter? Could we not also be tempted in the same way as Peter and Judas?
The Lord explains exactly what “under the influence of Satan” means here: “You are not setting your mind on God’s purposes, but men’s.” Even when the Lord was tempted in the wilderness, we see that Satan’s purposes are tangled up with the purposes of men:
- Tempted by fleshly needs, to which He said, “Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes out of the mouth of God.” (Matthew 4:4) — Israel murmured against the Lord when hungry (Exodus 16:2). He taught not to worry about these things saying, “seek first His kingdom and His righteousness.” (Matthew 6:33)
- Tempted by proof, to which He said, “You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.” (Matthew 4:7) — Israel tested the Lord saying, “Is the Lord among us, or not?” (Exodus 17:7) He taught that “an evil and adulterous generation craves a sign.” (Matthew 12:29)
- Tempted by idolatry, to which He said, “You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.” (Matthew 4:10) — Israel created for themselves an idol (Exodus 32:4). He taught that we cannot serve God and another, because we “will be devoted to one and despise the other.” (Matthew 6:24)
An entire generation failed these tests and were tempted by them all — dying in the wilderness. Should we be surprised that we must undergo those same tests?
Matthew 16:21-22 offers the context of Peter’s own error:
21 From that time Jesus began to point out to His disciples that it was necessary for Him to go to Jerusalem and to suffer many things from the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and to be killed, and to be raised up on the third day. 22 And yet Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, “God forbid it, Lord! This shall never happen to You!”
Right up until the resurrection of the Lord, the apostles’ hearts were hardened to the fact that the Lord needed to die in order to fulfill the prophecy. Mark 8:32 even says that “He was stating the matter plainly.” Israel at that time expected a savior who would bring about a worldly Israelite kingdom in this life — and so the Lord Jesus obviously knew that was not how things were going to play out. For Him to fall into that worldly way of thinking would mean to fail the true salvation plan.
Right before that event of His death, the Lord says to Peter in Luke 22:31-32,
31 Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded to sift you men like wheat; 32 but I have prayed for you, that your faith will not fail; and you, when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.
It was like the ultimate test that Peter’s heart was set on the purposes of God — that his faith would not fail at the Lord’s death. The sifting of wheat is the final purification process before it can be ground into flour — so the Lord warns that Satan would try Peter in such a way that if he had any impurity, then it would have been revealed.
Nevertheless, Peter made it out on the other side — despite not realizing that the Lord’s death was a part of the plan. By all worldly standards, the death of Christ Jesus probably made it seem like the messianic plan had failed in the apostles’ own minds. Yet Peter’s heart was set on the purposes of God — that in spite of things seeming lost to his fleshly senses — he weathered the trial and kept his faith.
Ultimately Peter gave his own life for the kingdom just as the Lord Jesus said he would in John 21:18-19 — and Hebrews 2:14-15 tells us that the Lord had taken away the power of death:
14 … through death He might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.
Revelation 12:11 says likewise,
And they [saints] overcame him [Satan] because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even when faced with death.
Therefore, we can safely conclude that when “Satan entered Judas,” Judas was setting his mind on purposes of men — the things of the world — just as Peter briefly had. What was the “purpose of men” Judas wanted to attain? Material gain — he betrayed the Lord for money — which is why it’s crucial for us to understand this betrayal in the proper context.
Two Israelites — Peter and Judas — were tempted to the point of being called Satan — setting their minds on the purposes of men — yet one of them prevailed and the other didn’t. Many of us self-righteously don’t even consider ourselves ever to be tempted in such ways, thinking we are somehow better than Peter, our ancestors or even the Lord Jesus — each of whom were tempted in this way. We often fail to even consider that overcoming this temptation to be a crucial part of the Christian journey.
Many Christians should identify with Peter’s temptation because it is so common among us — he sought a worldly kingdom, not a heavenly one. We don’t even consider that we may be sinners when we set our minds on, as the Lord Jesus called it, the “purposes of men.” In Luke 12:15, He admonishes just how little material desire it takes to fall into this trap:
Beware, and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not even when one is affluent does his life consist of his possessions.
While we may find ourselves saying, “Oh, I want only this and that — I don’t necessarily need to be rich,” the Lord warns us to be on guard against “every form of greed” — that is to say, there is no form of greed we don’t need to guard against.
From birth we are immersed head and toe in the most materialistic culture the world has ever seen. This should be cause for concern for anyone who takes the words of the Lord Jesus to heart — especially when He gave such a severe teaching as in Luke 12:15 to an ancient society whose jaw would drop at the excesses of today. To make it even more severe, in Colossians 3:5 and Ephesians 5:5, Paul states that greed amounts to idolatry — there is no difference.
Despite the fact that this very sin of greed led Judas into one of the most grievous errors in history, many Christians nevertheless believe they can engage in the same error and remain safe — rationalizing that Judas was a “non-white,” or that his greedy desires were somehow different from their own.
Christians actually believe that they can desire worldly things and serve God at the same time — believing that when the Lord proclaimed God and mammon to be diametrically opposed, there is some secret code of understanding which allows them to not be diametrically opposed. As if when the Lord said this, He actually didn’t mean what He was saying — rather, what He really meant was that if we believe just the right thing, we can have it all — God and mammon.
It’s no wonder He says they are opposed given how tenaciously Christians consistently oppose the plain words of the Lord in this case. Maybe Judas did too — so how does that make us any better than Judas himself? To believe that any material gain is a sign of our godliness or of God’s approval is a false doctrine, as Paul makes clear in 1 Timothy 6:3-12,
3 If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, 4 he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a sick craving for controversial questions and disputes about words, from which come envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, 5 and constant friction between people of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain.
Paul succinctly spells it out for us — that if we believe this “different doctrine” from the “doctrine conforming to godliness,” we are “conceited and understand nothing” — and are “deprived of the truth” — yet many Christians go right on believing that “godliness is a means of gain.” They engage in all manner of controversy harmful to the unity of the Spirit — found in obedience to the Lord Jesus and the seeking of the heavenly city (Hebrews 11:16).
6 But godliness actually is a means of great gain when accompanied by contentment. 7 For we have brought nothing into the world, so we cannot take anything out of it, either. 8 If we have food and covering, with these we shall be content.
Paul says in 1 Timothy 4:8-9 that “godliness… holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come.” The Lord Himself said,
Is life not more than food and the body more than clothing? Your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first His Kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be provided to you. (Matthew 6:25-33)
Just as Paul said that godliness comes with a promise — which the Lord confirmed when He said, “Seek first His righteousness, and all these things will be provided to you.” Therefore, godliness is of great gain even in this life, if only we will be content with the essentials promised to us in our earthly service — and heavenly glory thereafter.
9 But those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap, and many foolish and harmful desires which plunge people into ruin and destruction. 10 For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.
Paul clearly states that those who want more than “food and covering” have already fallen into a trap and ruin — yet many Christians nevertheless insist that because of their supposed “godliness” or “faith,” God has promised them more than mere “food and covering” in this life. Despite the fact that no worldly rewards — above the essentials — are ever promised anywhere in the New Testament, Christians stubbornly insist that their material possessions are their just “reward” — and that heavenly rewards are an after thought.
11 But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. 12 Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses. (1 Timothy 6:11-12)
Why would Paul so dramatically warn us to literally flee from this material mindset unless it were a matter of the utmost seriousness? Because it can ultimately lead you into betraying your own God.
This is why it is so important not to twist the story of Judas into something it’s not — believing somehow it was his “Edomite” ancestry which caused him to act a certain way. We each need to consider that if we have our heart set on anything of this world, we may be going the way of Judas — and betraying our Lord by doing so.
If these teachings of denying worldliness and its wealth and pleasures are taught with such severity in the Scripture, why do so many of us believe that we are somehow exempt from them? Why do we arrogantly believe we are any different from Judas? And why do we idolize our race so much that we deny that there can be any Judas goats among us?
When Paul was persecuting the church, the Lord said to him, “Why are you persecuting Me?” (Acts 9:4) When the Lord rewards the righteous in the eternal kingdom, He says to them, “Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it for one of the least of these brethren of Mine, you did it for Me.” (Matthew 25:40)
What we do to the Lord’s sheep we are doing to Him. If we try to mislead His sheep with worldliness, we are selling out their Master and Shepherd for thirty pieces of silver. Peter says that in greed they exploit the sheep with false words (2 Peter 2:3) — promising freedom while being slaves of corruption (2 Peter 2:19).
Does anyone think Judas was not a slave of greed and corruption? When we set our minds on the things of the world, we will in some way find ourselves persecuting the Lord Jesus and His sheep — who want only to be in the unity of obedience and godliness with one another.
Maybe when we become desperately hungry, or looking for proof of God in our lives — or pursuing our own worldly kingdom rather than God’s kingdom and not being content with food and covering — we will fail the test unless we learn that the world and our senses are lying to us.
THE MATTER IN PROPHECY
A rather peculiar line of prophecy in Revelation 1:7 refers to the Lord Jesus’ return:
Behold, He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen.
If the Lord were to return today, we would already be almost two thousand years after His crucifixion. How is it that “those who pierced Him” — crucifying Him — would see His return? Who are “those who pierced Him” in the first place? As usual, the Revelation is quoting Old Testament prophecy — this time in the form of Zechariah 12:9-10,
9 And on that day I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. 10 “And I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and of pleading, so that they will look at Me whom they pierced; and they will mourn for Him, like one mourning for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn.
Zechariah 14 refers to that same time when the Lord “will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem” (Zechariah 12:9) in verses 3,5-6,
3 Then the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle. 5 … Then the Lord, my God, will come, and all the holy ones with Him! 6 On that day there will be no light; the luminaries will die out.
In the above verses we have two prophetic signs of the Lord’s return — the Lord coming with His holy ones and the luminaries dying out. The Lord says in Matthew 16:27 of His return,
For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every person according to his deeds.
He says the same in Matthew 25:31-32,
31 “But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. 32 And all the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, just as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
Jude says of the Lord’s return in verse 14-16,
14 … Behold, the Lord has come with many thousands of His holy ones, 15 to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.” 16 These are grumblers, finding fault, following after their own lusts; they speak arrogantly, flattering people for the sake of gaining an advantage.
Zechariah 12:10 and Zechariah 14:3-6 then certainly refer to the Lord’s return.
We should note that Jude goes into some interesting detail as to this moment — affirming that those who engage in ungodly deeds have spoken against the Lord. The Lord says in John 15 that if the world hates us, then they hate Him before hating us (verse 18) — and that they hate the Father as well (verse 24). Again, what we do against His sheep, we are doing to Him.
Jude says that they are the ones who grumble and find fault with the Lord Jesus and His teachings — because they are following after their own lusts — even trying to flatter others for the sake of an advantage. How can we not see all of the evil which can come out of following after our own lusts?
The Lord says in Matthew 24:29-30,
29 “But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory.
Here again, Zechariah 14:6 which says that “there will be no light; the luminaries will die out” refers to the return of the Lord — because the sun is darkened, the moon as no light, and the stars have fallen.
The mourning of Matthew 24:30 and Revelation 1:7 seems to indicate that the mourning is the result of His coming. The ungodly finally realizing that judgement will, in fact, be executed upon them will indeed be a cause for mourning. This adds some critical context to the statement in Zechariah 12:10 — stating that Israel will mourn over the Lord Jesus whom they pierced when He returns.
Zechariah 12:11 even states that there will “be great mourning… like… in the plain of Megiddo” — the same place referred to in Revelation 16:14-16:
14 for they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the entire world, to gather them together for the war of the great day of God, the Almighty. 15 (“Behold, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who stays awake and keeps his clothes, so that he will not walk about naked and people will not see his shame.”) 16 And they gathered them together to the place which in Hebrew is called Har-Magedon.
The point is that all of this is connected in prophecy and that one thing is for sure: there will be Israelites who mourn over the Lord’s coming because they are accounted as having pierced Him — and in that moment, they are going to understand what they have done. They will understand that they went the way of Judas, selling Him out for the sake of advantage and following after their own lusts.
In all likelihood, until that point, their self-righteousness and self-justification will not have even allowed them to imagine that they were capable of such a thing — or that this accusation would ever have been leveled against them. They will be like those in Matthew 7:22-23,
22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; leave Me, you who practice lawlessness.’
BROTHERS, WHAT ARE WE TO DO?
In Acts 2 when Peter told the Israelites that they had murdered the Christ, verse 37 describes their response:
Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what are we to do?”
This mourning will be in the fundamental understanding that Israel was responsible for the Lord’s death — and that we may continue to pierce Him even long after His own crucifixion — and we all have done so already by following after our ungodly lusts.
There are two points at which an Israelite will mourn over the death of the Lord Jesus with this knowledge: either before He returns or after He returns — there is no third option. Consider this matter a “sanity check” — a quick but reliable test as to the veracity of one’s faith in their own Israelite heritage:
If anyone believes they are an Israelite and has not yet mourned over what they have done — and what they are capable of doing to the Lord and to His sheep — then that mourning surely will come for them. It’s simply not a matter of if it will come, but rather when it will come — before the Lord’s return or after.
If one believes one is an Israelite and has mourned — being “pierced to the heart” — and thought, “What are we to do?” — then that mourning can be over with, and one can quickly move on to what those repentant Israelites did in Acts 2:42,
They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.
There are two sorrows before us, as Paul states in 2 Corinthians 7:10,
For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation, but the sorrow of the world produces death.
James speaks of “sorrow that is according to the will of God” in James 4:8-10,
8 Come close to God and He will come close to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners; and purify your hearts, you double-minded. 9 Be miserable, and mourn, and weep; let your laughter be turned into mourning, and your joy into gloom. 10 Humble yourselves in the presence of the Lord, and He will exalt you.
With all of this being said, why do so many Christian Israelites insist on blaming others for the death of the Lord Jesus? It is painfully obvious in the Scripture that Israel is responsible — and that even the Israelites of the future — at the time of His coming — will be held liable for the same thing — along with “all the tribes of the earth.”
What is so hard about simply admitting that within our own ancestry is the potential for this evil? To deny it is to deny the Scripture — so to deny it is tacit admission that we are following after our own ungodly lusts. As we have shown, those who follow their ungodly lusts will inevitably mourn over piercing Him when He returns.
As if this message we are presenting were not sure enough, consider that even Judas mourned over what he had done — just as all of Israel will. He found no recourse for all of his mourning and it was so severe that he tried to take his own life (Matthew 27:3-5) — but he even failed in that — ultimately being disemboweled on the ground (Acts 1:18). In this way, he serves as a shadow and lesson for us all.
Yet it was Peter who mourned when He said before the Lord, “Go away from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man!” (Luke 5:8) He “wept bitterly” when He realized that he had denied and disowned His Lord and Master (Matthew 26:75). Yet it was this same Peter whose heart — after being sifted by Satan himself — was found to be pure.
That same Peter sat before the Lord later saying, “I love you” — not once, but three times (John 21:15-17) — and he received the keys to the kingdom of God (Matthew 16:19). He is judge over Israel (Matthew 19:28) — and part of the very foundation of the spiritual temple — the heavenly city (Revelation 21:14). Even he mourned for what he did to our Lord Jesus.
True brethren in Christ, let us be like Peter who mourned according to the will of God — instead of Judas who mourned after there was no recourse for what he had done.
Let us take upon ourselves the mantle and responsibility for murdering the Lord Jesus — through our ancestry and in our own lives. No party in the world has done this before, so let us all do it and get it over with now — lest we have cause to mourn when there is no longer any recourse for our grief.
From of old did He not call us a stiff-necked people? Let us therefore humble ourselves in the presence of the Lord, that He may exalt us in due time. For “will God not bring about justice for His elect who cry out to Him day and night?” (Luke 18:7)