Too often, political efforts by churches and “Christian” organizations are barely distinguishable from the politicians and parties of this world’s kingdoms, especially in “Western-style” democracies. It seems believers must emulate the ways of this fallen age to achieve real change in society. But this common approach differs markedly from the teachings and example of Jesus.
When he first appeared in
Galilee, he was heard proclaiming the “Kingdom of God” – “Repent, for
the kingdom is at hand!” In his life and ministry, the reign of God was invading
the present age.
 |
| [Photo by Harley Upton on Unsplash] |
However, his domain was of an entirely different nature than the political systems of this world, and on more than one occasion, he refused the kind of political power that has characterized human history and institutions, including far too many churches.
In the “wilderness,” the
Devil tempted Jesus by offering him “all the kingdoms of the world.” To
attain absolute power, he needed only to “render homage” to the Tempter and
acknowledge him as his overlord.
Surprisingly, the One called to
be the “Servant of Yahweh” did not dispute Satan’s “right” to
dispense political power, though he certainly did refuse it - (Matthew 4:8-11,
Luke 4:5-7).
In contrast to Jesus, over the
intervening centuries, many churches and believers have embraced the political methods
and ideologies of this present age to advance the Kingdom of God, even though that
means accommodating biblical principles and values to the existing world order.
Submission to the Devil’s
overlordship is the price of political power. This world’s kingdoms “have
been delivered to me and I give them to whomever I will.” Satan’s claim certainly
goes far toward explaining the reprehensible behavior of governments and
politicians throughout human history.
Although God destined him to rule all the kings and “nations of the Earth,” Jesus refused the satanic offer that so many others have eagerly embraced. Scripture confirmed his appointment by God to reign over the Cosmos, yet he refused the kind of political power so valued by this age - (Psalm 2:6-8).
Yet imagine all the good Jesus
could accomplish if he held Caesar’s throne and commanded his legions! With him
at the imperial helm, would not righteousness prevail across the Empire? Surely,
if ever there was justification for resorting to State power and violence, this
was it. Who would be better to wield the might and armies of Rome than the
Prince of Peace?
Rather than employ political
means, Jesus embraced the Way of the Cross. In the “Kingdom of
God,” victory is achieved through self-denial and sacrifice. “Greatness”
is measured by acts of mercy, to one’s “enemies.” Coercing others to
submit to your will has no place in a realm epitomized by the Cross. The “God
and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” delights in “mercy, not sacrifice.”
HIS WAY
Jesus would not be the
militaristic messiah intent on destroying Rome for whom so many of his
contemporaries lusted. The closer he came to his death by crucifixion, the more
the fickle crowds rejected him - (Luke 4:13, John 6:15).
Before his execution, Pontius
Pilate inquired whether he was “the king of the Jews.” Jesus did not
deny his kingship, but he responded thus to Rome’s representative - “You say
that I am a king, and for this, I was born.” The Son of God qualified his
kingship, stating:
- “My kingdom is not from (ek) this world. If my kingdom was from this world, then my own officers would fight that I should not be delivered up to the Jews. But now, my kingdom is not from here” - (John 18:33-36).
That did not mean that his
kingdom was strictly “spiritual” or otherworldly. But the source of his sovereignty
was other than the political power, corruption, and violence so characteristic
of the political systems of this world.
Pilate found no fault in him
and was about to release Jesus, but at the instigation of the priestly
authorities, the crowd demanded that Rome’s representative release Barabbas
instead, a léstés (Greek) or “brigand.” The Temple
authorities preferred a violent revolutionary to the Suffering Servant
of Yahweh.
Contrary to the expectations of
many, Jesus “took on the form of a slave” and became “obedient unto
death, even death on a cross.” Because of his choice, God exalted him and
bestowed on him “the name, which is above every name, that at the name of
Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth” - (Philippians
2:6-11).
 |
| [Cathedral - Photo by Léa V on Unsplash] |
Institutional Christianity has a sordid history of mixing Church and State. The temptation to use political power is too great. Force appears easier than persuasion, but advancing the cause of Christ through political institutions always means resorting to the coercive power of the State in the end. Do believers not yet understand the nature of the State?
The choice is between the
cruciform path trod by Jesus or the expedient and smooth superhighway offered
by Satan. Christ declared that when he was “lifted up” on the cross, THEN
he will “draw all men to me,” not when he was seated on Caesar’s throne.
His followers are summoned to “deny themselves, take up the cross,” and
follow the same path he did regardless of where it leads.
Should we, the disciples of the
same Jesus who “gave his life a ransom for many,” embrace what he
rejected? Or should we emulate his example of self-sacrificial service for
others? We cannot do both.
RELATED POSTS:
- Calvary or Rome? - (When offered by Satan, Jesus refused the political power of Rome. So, why do we continue to seek what he rejected?)
- Perishing Meat - (In the end, only God’s kingdom will prevail and endure. All other political powers are transitory, and already they are passing away)
- Whomever He Pleases - (Yahweh, the God of Israel, changes the times and seasons, removes kings, and sets up kings as He to achieve His purposes)