Easter in Context: Jesus as a Political Figure

Is Jesus political?

I'm not asking whether Jesus a conservative or liberal. Considering the large cultural gap between us and first-century Palestine, the answer to that question requires you to translate our political/economic circumstances over 2,000 years and 10,000 miles, which, depending on your ideologies, can lead you to many different conclusions.

What I am asking is, back in the day, as a Jewish man in Galilee, a subject of the Roman Empire, was Jesus a political figure? What I've heard from many fellow Christians is that Jesus was NOT political, and that misconceptions of him in his day, from the general population (who wanted to crown him king) and from the Roman government (who wanted to snuff out all political competition) allowed a small group of Jewish leaders to have him crucified because he offended their religious sensibilities. I have been told that Jesus' kingdom was SPIRITUAL, not political.

The Bible disagrees. Jesus was an entirely political figure. The common evangelical perception of Jesus as a spiritual leader who accidentally got mixed up in political business so he could die for our sins is false. That doesn't negate the other beliefs evangelicals have about Jesus, which are still true. Jesus did die for our sins. He is God. He was both priest and prophet. He is alive today and we can know him personally. But Biblically, all of these components of Jesus' identity are best understood in the context of the Davidic king who came to take over the government and rule this world forever. Indeed, Christianity is most accurately described as a failed first-century Palestinian political movement.

Religious vs. Political

A patch of fog we must see past is the unique way that Western culture sees religious belief. As Westerners, we compartmentalize our religions, not allowing them to affect any other part of our lives. This has good results (separation of church and state) and bad results (knowing someone for ten years without knowing what they believe). The important thing, though, is realizing that first-century Near Eastern people did not think like this at all.

In Jesus' culture, religious and political ideologies were inseparable, and virtually any religious belief would have political connotations. There were state gods, and pledging allegiance to those gods mean you were loyal to your nation. Winning wars meant your god was strong. Losing meant your god was weak. Indeed, from an ancient Near Eastern perspective, the gods, not humans, were the prime movers and causes of major world events, including the rise and fall of empires.

Judaism was no different. Read the book of Kings and you'll see what I mean. The messages of prophets were principally to KINGS, about how they ruled and what kinds of religions they set up. They are evaluated and rise and fall based on God's will. Our God (known to Israelites as YHWH to distinguish him from other gods) was Israel's best general and, in the best of times, their true king.

Not surprisingly, then, when Jerusalem was conquered and most of the population was killed or carried off to Babylon, this led to doubt in YHWH. Is God weak? Is He dead? The compilers of the Old Testament believed He let Israel split and fall because she had not followed Him. But the prophets whose books they compiled also spoke of a bright and glorious future, when a Davidic King, possibly God himself, would personally take over and become king of Israel, ruling the whole world forever and bringing all peoples under his authority. So the people looked forward to this event while living under the foot of the Roman Empire.

The King arrives

In the middle of all this, Jesus appears, and methodically, progressively reveals himself as that coming king. That's not all he does, of course. He also clarifies the law, demonstrates himself as YHWH's representative with powerful signs and wonders, and demonstrates priestly authority by disrupting the temple. But mostly he reveals himself as the guy who has come to take over the government and rule Isreal--and earth--forever. These were the cultural expectations, and Jesus planned on delivering on them.

That's why he so intentionally echos the prophet Zachariah as he enters Jerusalem. Zachariah wrote, "Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey." Episodes like Jesus' entrance to the City of David on a donkey are not accidents; they were done on purpose to make a statement. You can't blame the people for praising him as their king in that moment; that's just the message he was trying to send!

The majority of Jesus' teachings are also about the physical kingdom he is bringing. When he's not teaching about the law, or prayer or forgiveness, he's teaching what his kingdom is like. The teachings don't describe a typical earthly kingdom, but they do still describe one. He says that the kingdom will not come by force immediately (and indeed, he is not assembling an army). He says that the kingdom will be inclusive, including Gentiles, sinners, etc. The main requirement will be humility before God. He teaches about how valuable the kingdom will be, and how it will last forever. He teaches a LOT about how there will be an in between time, when he will be gone for awhile before returning in glory. And, finally, he teaches that he will have to suffer in coming into this political power (this point is never understood by anyone he tells). All of these themes speak about the real monarchy Jesus planned to bring to earth.

Indeed, it is only because Jesus was so SUBTLE about his future political kingship that he wasn't arrested and killed by the Romans earlier. He intended to have it all go down in Jerusalem, and that's what happened. If he would have spoken more plainly at all times, Roman authorities may have crucified him then and there, in Galilee or on the way to Jerusalem. Why put up with a would-be king?

Explanatory power

Thinking through the Gospels in this context makes sense of a lot more of the story, and makes it clear this is the context that the Gospel authors intended. It explains the Bible more coherently than saying Jesus brought only a spiritual kingdom. Take the Pharisees as an example. The conventional evangelical perspective on the Pharisees and Jewish leaders is that thought they were perfect and were arrogant. Then Jesus called them out on it and they didn't like that, so they had him arrested and executed. This was the perspective I held as recently as a couple weeks ago. Yet does it make very much sense?

Let's "try on" the political context instead: The Pharisees are upper-class Jews looking forward to the redemption of Israel, and throwing off the yoke of Roman oppression. Their "passive-aggressive" strategy for revolution is to emphasize their distinctiveness as YHWH's nation by observing YHWH's law very closely. Those who separate themselves as true Israelites from the mainstream culture via the law will be recognized as the true Israelites by the eventual coming King, and will be in a great position when he arrives.

So the Pharisees were looking forward to God coming to rule as much as any Jewish group. On many theological points, Jesus agrees with them: they both believe that the law is very important and that our bodies will one day be resurrected. Their problem with Jesus is the kingdom he's claiming to bring. The Pharisees are wealthy; Jesus prefers the poor. They're law-abiding; Jesus hangs out with sinners and emphasizes humility. They're Jewish; Jesus proclaims that being Jewish isn't a prerequisite to getting into the kingdom. Jesus is gaining popularity and is moving towards Jerusalem to make his move. If he was assembling only a spiritual kingdom, they couldn't have cared less, but there is no such thing as "just a spiritual kingdom" in that worldview. It's no surprise they begin to plot his death!

Jesus' arrest is also better explained in a political context. The council wanted to arrest him during the day, but the crowds were so expectant for him to reign as king that they might riot if the seized him. Therefore, they need to arrest him at night, hidden from the crowds. Since they had no idea where he slept at night, they bribed Judas to take them to Jesus' late-night hide-out spot. That way, the mob wouldn't have any say in his arrest, and when they presented him to the mob in the morning, arrested, beaten and defeated, the crowd will realize he was a false king and will turn on him. Whaddya know, that's exactly what happened!

Indeed, he is mocked by Herod, soldiers, the priests, and just about everyone else he comes across. The jig is up and he is proved as a false king; just a failed revolutionary without even a little success in stirring the political plot. The ultimate insult is the sarcastic sign put above his cross: "THE KING OF THE JEWS." At the lowest point in Luke's narrative, even one of the men he is being crucified with mocks him. Ouch!

It is also at this point that the most compelling line of Luke's Gospel is delivered by the other criminal on Jesus' other side: "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." It's a very strange thing to say; after all, Jesus had just been thoroughly exposed as a fake and is dying as the criminal utters the words. This man had insight everyone else lacked at the time, and in fact he would have looked downright stupid had not something happened a couple days later...

Resurrection

In a surprising (but ingeniously foreshadowed) twist to the story, Jesus rises from the dead!! He hasn't been defeated at all! Suddenly, more of his teachings made sense. He had to suffer but defeated death. We will be resurrected and live forever with him in the new kingdom he is bringing. He will go away for a while while we tell all nations about this kingdom and invite them to join it! Then he will come back in glory and power and set up an eternal kingdom on a transformed earth (not the "popular" definition of heaven that we're used to). We will be resurrected with him and live forever in this kingdom because of the great work he has done on the cross! Talk about "good news"!!

And yes, all the other Christian doctrines are there as well. His death was an atonement for our sins, he is a personal God that we can know, and reconciliation to The Living God is a free gift of grace that we could not earn ourselves. But all of these truths exist in the context of the political sense of Jesus' first coming, and the ultimate political authority he will return to take hold of.

Summing up

So Christianity, then, is basically a failed first-century Palestine political stance: We choose to be followers of Jesus who believe is King. It's failed in the sense that the Romans crucified Jesus, but we as Christians believe that the crucifixion was part of the plan, that he was resurrected, that he is gone temporarily, and that he will return to rule forever.

It's a wonderful kingdom that unites its citizens with God and with each other in perfect love and unity. His rule casts out fear and death. It makes amends for our sin. The kingdom starts early in the communities of Christians on earth now, spreading Jesus' love and the good news of his kingdom. It's a real kingdom. I hope you'll join me in citizenship. It's open to everyone, and unlike Roman citizenship, it's free! All we need to do is realize our place before God (a very humble place) and choose to follow Jesus into his kingdom.

Thanks for reading, and if you're in the Columbus area and would like to discuss this further, share your opinion with me or hear the reasons I believe in this outdated political stance, let me know! Happy Easter.