Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.- John 19:31
The Jews have their hands covered in blood. They have put to death Jesus Christ, the son of God by the hands of the Romans. And now they are worried that the bodies of the men crucified might defile the land. People coming to worship God in the city might pass by the bodies and see the wickedness that had been done. They couldn’t very well celebrate the holiday, the great Sabbath, with bodies hanging nearby. The Romans had no problem with this. To them crucifixion was meant to be a long tortured affair. The Romans left people on crosses for days, in prolonged agony and torture. They were content to allow the wild animals and birds pick apart the carcasses of the victims of the cross. The Jews are squeamish. They just want to be done with the whole thing. They look down upon the Roman gentiles. Those uncircumcised dogs who would dare crucify people. Those Romans are barbaric. Could you pleeeeeeeze just take down the bodies and get them out of here. Whatever you got to do, we can’t be having these people on the cross, during our holidays. Whatever you do, just don’t show pictures of aborted babies at thunder over Louisville? Can you please not preach outside the abortion mill with an amplifier, we are trying to work in here?
The Jews go to Pilate and say “We have to prepare to worship the Holy God of the universe who is a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Him but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Him and keep His commandments, can you go ahead and break his Son’s legs and get rid of the body?" "Can you hurry up and kill them already but don’t show mercy when you do it? "The Proverbs says "The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel." They had no problem bringing the only innocent and godly person to the cross, and yet has scruples about letting a dead body hang upon the cross.
This week we got a picture of the tender mercies of the wicked in a Supreme Court ruling. Masterpiece Cakes, a bakery in Colorado, had refused to make a cake for a homosexual mirage citing their belief in God’s created order. The two men mocking the ordinance of God and claiming to get married filed a complaint against the Christian bakery regarding discrimination. A local civil rights commission and the Colorado Court of Appeals said that the Christian baker had violated the “civil rights” of the two men. This was appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. We got the ungodly tyrannical and unjust court decision this week. But wait a second, I thought all the papers said that the bakery won. Well the bakery won their appeal on a technicality. The court ruled 7-2 that the bakery had been unfairly ruled against because the commission had spoken in negative terms of the bakers religion.
The US today had an article entitled “Actually the baker in Supreme Court Masterpiece ruling lost, it only looked like he won.” This is from that article:
"Despite headlines trumpeting a win for the religious baker who declined to make a same-sex wedding cake in the Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop decision, he really lost the case. And it seems that so long as Justice Anthony Kennedy remains the swing voter on the court, the right not to be discriminated against in the marketplace will prevail over conscientious objections — whether grounded in religious freedom or a more general freedom of belief — to serving individuals based on their sexual orientation. But how can this be if the baker won the case? The baker did win on the grounds that the Colorado anti-discrimination agency unconstitutionally displayed religious bias when it sanctioned him. But Kennedy’s majority opinion sent every signal that should Colorado again seek to sanction the baker for a future refusal to serve same-sex couples, the state will win so long as it refrains from statements or actions that seem to disparage religion.”
Did you catch that? The ruling of the Supreme Farce I mean Court is not that homosexuality is wicked and abominable or that people have a right to the freedom of association or that Christians have the right to practice their religion in public, the ruling is that the courts and commissions that are going to put Christians out of business better look like they are unbiased as they do it. Go ahead and fine, imprison, and shut down the business of a Christian but just make sure it looks like you are trying to be fair. Make sure you break their legs and get them off the cross before gay pride month and everything will be ok. It’s hypocrisy and wickedness trumping justice.
The ruling is straining out a gnat and swallowing a pink camel with leather chaps. Now, we know the Supreme Court is a tyrannical court having declared murder and sodomy to be legal But in Christians have been legalistic track too, concerned more with themselves than actually helping people. What I mean by that is that the arguments put forth by Christians in these cases have been concerned with only carving out a place at the table rather than standing boldly on the word of God. Instead of standing on the premise that homosexuality is wicked and that the Supreme Court should obey God, we often are looking for ways to carve out a safe place using the term “Religious liberty.”
This cry of "religious liberty" is really just the cry to retreat. What I mean is that in the 1990s when the Supreme Court ruled against sodomy laws, hristians didn’t stand and fight but instead they accommodated themselves to the fact that sodomy was now legal. We retreated to only opposing homosexual marriage. Since the Supreme Court established gay mirage, we are falling back to religious liberty. Matt Trewhella wrote an article a few months ago and made this claim “But here is the rub – If the Supreme Court rules in Jack Phillips favor, the result will be Christians do not have to participate in homosexual marriages, but homosexual marriage remains entrenched in the land.”
His prediction is true. This is from the Supreme Court ruling this week:
"And any decision in favor of the baker would have to be sufficiently constrained, lest all purveyors of goods and services who object to gay marriages for moral and religious reasons in effect be allowed to put up signs saying “no goods or services will be sold if they will be used for gay marriages,” something that would impose a serious stigma on gay persons.”
Notice how the ruling builds off past wicked rulings and entrenches it further. It establishes in the legal fiction of the supreme court and thus in the mind of many Americans that rightness of sodomy. Matt Trewhella further explains:
"And this is what the religious liberty argument accomplishes in this matter – it assures the evil will continue in the land and it accommodates the continued ghettoization of Christianity in America. Evil should be stopped, not accommodated. When the government enacts evil in the land, but they make an accommodation for Christians to not participate in it, they are marginalizing Christianity in the land; they are putting Christianity in the ghetto.”
They are breaking the legs so that they can continue to sing songs on Sunday. We have to be careful that we don’t turn a blind eye to what is right as long as we aren’t personally affected. That’s what the Jews do. John Calvin preached in a sermon saying
“It is a wonderful thing to hear how you talk of justice, as long as it serves to keep your goods safe and to protect your own household. But you let some men get away with robbery, violence, beatings, murder, or whatever they want. We show and teach you that none of this should be allowed. This is why so many get angry when we apply the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ to its correct and proper use."
He was saying that some people are ok with justice as long as it personally effects them but as long as they are safe they don’t care what others are doing. Live and let live. And of course Calvin says no, we teach that no injustice should be allowed. And this makes everyone angry. You have to chuckle because not a lot has changed it seems in 500 years.