Was Jesus Political?

American Family Association ^ | 14 March 2006 | Rev. Mark H. Creech

[Hand em their arse]

exactly... that's walking on water to them, no? hehe!

[Radix]

It has been awhile since I read any of this fellow's work.

Link anyhow.

There is more at Google of substance than I find here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.F._Bruce

[Hand em their arse]

'nite sweetie... talk to you soon....

[Louis Foxwell]

One of the difficulties with applying Christian ethics to politics is determining Christian strategy. Judas was completely convinced that Jesus had the power to overcome Rome and the Temple authority. His ethics were not in question. Strategically, however, he blundered badly. His failure, however, was not apparent.
Jesus was unable to clarify his mission to any of his disciples. Judas took on the burden of taking political action to bring about Jesus' kingdom. Judas's plans failed because Jesus was not working politically.
Mercy, generosity, forgiveness, humility, sorrow and other sentiments are not political in nature. They are more universal and human.
It is not helpful to define all human activity as political, just as it is not helpful to describe all human activity as religious. Martin Luther King was not engaged in political action when he prayed on his knees in front of angry police. The power of King's actions did not ensue from political motives but religious passion.
Action can ensue from all manner of motivation. One's motives may be pure. That is no guarantee that one's heartfelt actions are pure. It is, after all, possible, even likely, that we do the wrong thing for the right reasons.
We must never justify our actions as anything more than fear and trembling in the face of an angry God. Politics is always a messy business best left at the door of the temple.

[statered]

I go to this church. While I agree that they do not espouse any political aims its not hard to figure out how a pro-life, pro sexual morality church church will influence its believers. The membership is not anti-politics, they just don't talk about it. They are more interested in changing the world one person at a time by evangelism rather than forming a political action committee.

[Radix]

Love your FReeper profile page. Brat.

[Aussie Dasher]

No reason they can't do BOTH...

[hosepipe]

[ Politics is always a messy business best left at the door of the temple. ]

The temple is the human body.. Where does politics begin and the spirit end.. Or the spirit end and politics begin?..

[onyx]

LOL! You're right... I am a BRAT!

[Pragmatic Warrior]

You are lucky to have a church like this to attend.

I've felt for some time now, that mixing religion and politics is dangerous. Since politics makes strange bedfellows, it is possible that both religion and politics will be turned into nothing more than whores if they are not kept separated.

Sorry to be so graphic, but I'm sure you catch my drift.

[geopyg]

"shaming and exposing the evil of oppression"

Our preacher just gave a sermon on the role of faith in government. The scriptures talked about the "render onto Ceaser..." thing. He noted that Jesus was talking to Jewish leaders in the Temple. He told them to pull out a coin. Having a Roman coin in the temple was sacrilige - an image of a person with words proclaiming him (Cesear) to be king. In fact, the Romans let the Jews mint their own coins that they could use in the temple for offerings, buying sacrficial animals, etc..

So - Jesus was really showing the Jewish leaders to be a sham and exposing theri evil oppresion.

[the_Watchman]

The question: "Was Jesus Political" is a red herring. Jesus was careful to NOT take on Rome in order to not be the Messiah that the Jews desired. That was not His purpose.

There are subtle clues in the scripture to demonstrate that Jesus avoided starting a political movement. Note that when Jesus was across the sea of Galilee in the land of the Gadarenes he told the man delivered of the evil spirits to tell everybody what had happened. [Mark 5] This was because the Jews on the Decapolis side of the Jordan were not spiritually aware and were not susceptible to embracing a Messiah. Note that they were keeping PIGS! They are representative of the Jewish tribes who refused to "enter the promised land" with Joshua and settled outside the land, instead.

In the very next story in Mark Jesus is healing the girl who has died. Here Jesus tells everyone involved to keep everything quiet. He has now crossed the lake back to Galilee where the Jews were spiritually in tune and would have been willing to foist a Messiah into the political arena.

The same thing occurs when Jesus deals with the Samaritan woman at the well. In that territory He has no concern about fomenting political unrest when he is talking to a gentile.

On the other hand, I think that the writings of Paul offer a better view of the proper relationship of the Church with politics. There, also, one finds that Paul seems much more concerned about having Christians behave better within their existing circumstances rather than changing the political landscape.

Please don't read too much into Paul's "acceptance" of slavery into his letters. One of Paul's major themes was that we are to enslave our bodies to suppress our natural inclination to sin. We are also to accept our status as slaves to Christ. His metaphors would have been misconstrued if he had spent large amounts of time railing against the institution of slavery. Paul instead makes a plea that Christian slaveholders should treat their slaves well.

[PizzaDriver]

"Beat your swords into plowshares..."
Could translate as "Don't admit you have weapons, don't surrender them. Use misdirection & deception, but keep those blades."

[Cedar]

Interesting article. I'm glad to hear the views. This is one subject I've questioned for years.

[RoadTest]

"Was Jesus Political? "

"My kingdom is not of this world."

[aimhigh]

Consider Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37). Could there be a more sublime statement with greater political overtones?

What dribble! This is a call to personal responsibility, not government responsibility. Notice how liberals want government and people to trade places. Liberals want government to be the source of all charity, thereby absolving their responsibility. Then they want government to spread that charity and forgiveness to other, enemy countries.

Scripture disagrees. Government is God's minister to execute wrath on those that do evil (Romans). In the Old Testament, Joseph collected grain to prepare for the famine, but he didn't give it away - he sold it back to the people. No hint of a welfare government there.

[statered]

Jack of all trades, master of none? Its all a matter of focus and discipline. This church has its mission and there is plenty on the plate. Just as every believer is not called to be a minister so is every church not neccessarily called to influence politicians.

[samadams2000]

Yes he was a big advocate of building carrier groups for defense and vouchers for schooling.

[Louis Foxwell]

The temple is the human body..

_____________________________

ABSOLUTELY NOT!
Scripture admonishes us to treat the body as a temple.
The temple is the holy place of God. Only as we are pure as a temple is God able to dwell in us.
When Jesus threw the money changers out of the temple he did it to purify the temple, not to make a political statement.
Judas is the key to understanding the separation between politics and spirit. Politics seeks to create a kingdom of man. The spirit of God works among us to bring us into the Kingdom of God.