 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Tearing down walls > (No Subject) | Forum Quick Jump
|
|  kingsaint Registered Member
 Date Joined Oct 2003 Total Posts : 80 | Posted 11/18/2004 8:41 AM (GMT -6) |   | On pg. 26 of The Politics of Jesus, John Yoder claims that Jesus was against the "idolatrous character of political power hunger and nationalism." Perhaps it was coincidence that the book I read immediately after Yoder's was Scot McKnight's A New Vision for Israel: The Teachings of Jesus in National Context. McKnight says of Yoder (pg. 9n23): "At times J.H. Yoder strolls away from Jesus' nationalistic orientation toward too pietistic an outlook." At least on the count of nationalism, I think McKnight is right and that Jesus was a nationalist. In response to Matt. 15:24 ("I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel") and Matt. 10:5-6 (Do not go to the Gentiles and do not enter a city of the Samaritans; rather, go to the lost sheep of Israel"), J.P. Meier states that these verses "reflect accurately the entire picture of Jesus' mission that arises from a reading of all the sources of all Four Gospels: nowhere does Jesus undertake a programmtic mission to the Gentiles. This impression is indirectly supported by the distinction Paul (who is actually treating another question) makes in Rom. 15:8: "Christ has become a servant of the circumcision [i.e., he ministered to the Jews] for the sake of God's faithfulness, to confirm the promises made to the patriarchs, but [also] in order that [in due time, through the ministry of Paul and other missionaries like him] the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy."
The point I want to make is that we should really be clear what Jesus was about before we apply his teaching to the question of politics. For example, I think too much is made politically of the fact that Jesus chose not to be the political, national, messiah at his first coming. It could be that this role conflicted with what he wanted to accomplish by his death. It could be that Jesus' eschatology took for granted a renewed political Israel and that his death was simply related to that vision (see Stanley Stowers). If so, it perhaps is a different question how Christians are to relate to that vision. It is clear how the early church interpreted how Jesus' would relate to an eschatological vision and in terms that do not always ring with modern sensibilities (even if they don't quite sound like What Would Jesus Bomb?):
1 Corinthians 15:24-25 "he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power". 2 Thessalonians 2:8 "And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy with the breath of his mouth, annihilating him". Revelation 19:15 "From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron; he will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty."
It comes as no surprise that Yoder does not discuss these passages. I would point out that Christians are not implicated in this violence (only Jesus and angels are), which is important. On the other hand, it is notoriously difficult to distinguish Kingdom of God-Jesus'-time from Kingdom of God-eschatological-time.
Is it not a Christian prayer that God/we make the kingdom of the world the Kingdom of God, and why would that not include politics (American included)? How that should be done is the crucial question. I think the problem is that no political party stands entirely for kingdom values and not all means of expression of kingdom values are of the kingdom.
Therefore, I think it is wrong to critique the religious right, if that is what one wants to do and God knows it should be done, by claiming that the kingdom of God is not about politics, nationalism etc. That might work fine when the claim is made to an audience largely composed of the right, but it fails when addressed to those who are of the progressive left, who also think the kingdom of God involves politics.
"Nobody who omits doing good works nowadays does so in order not to be tempted to become self-righteous; he omits it because it is easier."
--Philip Merlan, "Toward the Understanding of Kierkegaard" | | Back to Top | | |
    | Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:37 PM (GMT -6) There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads. In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3 dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|