MARCH 31 THE JESUS QUESTIONS JQ#12-03 >>> Lessons, Lifestyle, and Parables of Jesus <<< JQ#12 *Who decides what is legal, God or man?* “What man is there among you who has one sheep and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep?” (Matthew 12:11-12a)

LIVING FOR JESUS --- Daily Devotional

MARCH 31  THE JESUS QUESTIONS  JQ#12-03 >>> Lessons, Lifestyle, and Parables of Jesus <<< JQ#12 *Who decides what is legal, God or man?*  “What man is there among you who has one sheep and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep?” (Matthew 12:11-12a)

Daily Prayer to JESUS    

Jesus, today I start my prayer to You with a desire do honor to Your Name by doing all that my limited abilities will allow me to do to share “God’s Truth” with those that desire to know and love God on a higher plane than ever before!  Lord, as I started my day today by reading my prayer to You on April 30, 2004, I am impressed by how wonderful You have been to me all these years as I have been seeking You and Your Truth! Lord I pray back to You these many years later a portion of that 2004 prayer — “Your Truth” is timeless: “Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit, there is none but Thee. We in our unworthiness only magnify Thy Grace. Our filthy sin only makes Your Love shine brighter than can be described — and so our worthless lives become priceless treasures with but a drop of Your Grace. Let Your Light, Your Truth, and Your Love be our Way and our Life!     AMEN

THE JESUS QUESTIONS

MARCH 31  THE JESUS QUESTIONS  JQ#12-03 >>> Lessons, Lifestyle, and Parables of Jesus <<< JQ#12 *Who decides what is legal, God or man?*  “What man is there among you who has one sheep and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep?” (Matthew 12:11-12a) Jesus was confronted by the Pharisees as He and His disciples were eating heads of grain while walking through a field and the “legalistic” Pharisees admonished Jesus:  “Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!” (Matthew 12:2) It was at this point that Jesus answered the “legalists” by asking a series of Questions in reply to their accusation of “legality” against what Jesus Himself was “allowing” His disciples to do — the following series of Questions (Matthew 12:4,5,10,11,12) can be summarized as JQ#12 — “Who decides what is legal, God or man?”  The Pharisees are in essence declaring that Jesus is guilty of doing “what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath” because He is allowing His disciples to engage in an “unlawful” act on the Sabbath, and being the “Leader”, He must be held personally responsible for their “lawbreaking”! This “accusation” of “allowing His disciples to do “illegal” activities on the Sabbath made Jesus also “guilty by association” at best but at worse Jesus is “guilty of being ignorant of God’s Law” By making this accusation that Jesus is breaking “Jewish Law” the legalists have set up a “trial” between “man’s law” and “God’s Law” — and instead of Jesus being on “trial”, the Pharisees and thousands of years of “legal tradition” will be exposed as “hypocrites” by the Truth of God as Jesus basically presents His case against the “religious legal system” established by the “doctrines of men” verses the “Commandments of God” and His Divine Argument against all “legalists” can be summarized by this JESUS Question JQ#12 — “Who decides what is legal, God or man?”  (Matthew 12:4,5,10,11,12)  In order to establish the “facts” in this “trial” of “God vs. man” we must establish as best we can all the circumstances of the accused, establish “motivation” of the actions of the accused, and then “examine” all the “evidence” of the event in question. To establish these facts we must refer to writings and historical documents of this historical event for there are no living eyewitness; however we must seek to show by the eyewitness accounts that the event in question can be established as fact by circumstantial evidence that the event actually took place over 2000 years ago and “logically” therefore, the “accused” must be proven to be present at that event or “legally” there can be no trial if we cannot establish as “fact” that a crime occurred. Legally it is imperative that the “accused” must be proved to be present at the scene of the crime and then “proved” to be “guilty” of performing the actions resulting in the accusation! Let us begin with the original charges and produce what circumstantial evidence that is available to us using trustworthy historical documents and recorded facts. Let us start with a modern definition from a current legal dictionary.  In article titled: “Circumstantial Evidence: Legal Definition of Circumstantial Evidence” we read: “Information and testimony presented by a party in a civil or criminal action that permit conclusions that indirectly establish the existence of a fact or event that the party seeks to prove.” The article also cites the U. S. Supreme Court from Holland v. United States, 348 U. S. 121, 75 S. Ct. 127, 99 L. Ed. 150 [1954] as the court stated: “circumstantial evidence is intrinsically no different from testimonial [direct] evidence.” and the article concludes: “Thus, the distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence has little practical effect in the presentation or admissibility of evidence in trials.” Contained in the article is a reference to “Scientific Evidence” and states: “In addition, much Scientific Evidence is circumstantial, because it requires a jury to make a connection between the circumstance and the fact in issue.” The first Circumstantial Evidence that should be established by the definition of circumstantial evidence is that circumstantial evidence is also known as indirect evidence and in its own definition states: “[Circumstantial evidence] is distinguished from direct evidence, which, if believed, proves the existence of a particular fact without any inference or presumption required.” Two things to note as we present circumstantial evidence is (1) “Proof” is established by “belief” for both circumstantial evidence (“…because it requires a jury to make a connection…”) and indirect evidence (“…which, if believed, proves…”). (2) “Circumstantial evidence" is also known as “indirect” evidence and as such has the legal standing equivalent to “direct evidence” and is also equivalent to “Scientific Evidence”. Therefore the first circumstantial evidence presented in order to establish “proof” is  Exhibit 1 CE — To establish “proof”, “belief” must be involved, regardless of the type of evidence used. The Holy Bible is a collection of 44 identified eye witnesses that have been used thousands of years and has been considered trustworthy for that same period of time.  Exhibit 2 CE — The Bible: John 20:31 states “…these [eye witness accounts] are written that you may “believe” that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God…” . Therefore if “proof” is established by “belief” in “circumstantial evidence” that the U. S. Supreme Court declares as “legal”, then we need to ask ourselves why we don’t “believe” the Bible “since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses…” (Hebrews 12:1)??? Or the more important question for our world today is “Why do we refuse to accept as Truth that which was proven over 2000 years ago and since the initial proof has been witnessed by thousands and verified by millions of eye witness accounts?” If Jesus is not the Resurrected Christ why are there so many witnesses that saw Him dead and actually talked to Him after His Resurrection and why do millions of “believers” declare that Jesus  is still Living today and He is still talking “TRUTH” to those that will listen!?!?!?