Calvary or Rome?
As a young disciple, I was taught NOT to “be unequally yoked together” with this world. Yes, conditions around the globe were tragic, but what did we expect from a world that was enslaved to sin and under Satan’s boot? What humanity needed was the Good News of the Kingdom of God, not another flawed political philosophy. Since the “forms” of the present age are already “passing away,” why waste time “working for the meat that perishes”?
 |
| [Pantheon by Daniel Klaffke on Unsplash] |
Did not Jesus command us to proclaim the Gospel “to all nations”? To expend our time and efforts on reforming a society already judged on the Cross makes no sense. Far more compelling than the arguments of a great many preachers are the examples of Jesus when he faced the political realities of his day.
Unfortunately, many popular preachers
summon believers to engage in political activism as they attempt to use the coercive
power of the State to purify the culture, restore society to some mythological
pristine state, and otherwise stop wickedness. Never mind that resorting to
that solution always results in doing a little evil to accomplish some alleged
greater good.
When Satan offered him political
power, Jesus rejected it. So, why do we presume to embrace and employ the very
thing that he refused? The
Devil tempted him by offering him “all the kingdoms of the world.”
All he needed to do was to “fall down and swear fealty” to the Tempter -
(Matthew 4:8-9, Luke 4:5-7).
In
contrast to the Nazarene, many church leaders eagerly adopt the political methods
of this age, a system that expects them to accommodate their lives and
ministries to this evil age. Satan demanded homage as the price of political
power. Acquiring and wielding it requires accepting him as your overlord.
According
to Satan, the kingdoms of this age “have been delivered to me and I give
them to whomever I will.” Very strikingly, JESUS DID NOT DISPUTE HIS CLAIM! This exchange begins
to explain why human governments so often exhibit beastly and even
satanic behavior.
Imagine
what great good Jesus could do if he sat on Caesar’s throne! Would not righteousness
prevail across the Earth if he possessed Rome’s military and economic might? Who better to wield the power of Rome’s legions for the “greater
good” than the Prince of Peace?
IT BEGAN ON THE CROSS
Instead,
Jesus embraced the way of the cross. In God’s kingdom, true victory is achieved
through humble obedience and the denial of one’s own “rights.” His domain is characterized
by self-sacrificial service and acts of mercy, not force, corruption, and
violence.
Satan’s
political intrigues did not end with Christ’s initial victory in the wilderness.
Following his rebuff, the “Devil departed from him until an opportune
time.” Jesus faced the same challenge again after miraculously feeding a
multitude. Apparently, certain members of the crowd “were about to seize him,
that they might make him king” - (Luke 4:13, John 6:15).
However,
rather than accept kingship imposed by the mob, Jesus walked away, an act that turned
many minds against him. He refused to become the militaristic messiah that so
many expected and desired. The closer he came to Calvary, the more the fickle
crowds rejected him and the kind of Kingdom that he proclaimed.
Later,
the representative of Rome inquired whether he was “the king of the Jews.”
Jesus did not deny his kingship:
- “You say that I am a king. I was born for this … But my kingdom is not FROM (ek) this world. If my kingdom was from this world 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).
He
did not claim that his kingdom was strictly “spiritual” or otherworldly. But the
source of his sovereignty was something other than the kind of political power so
characteristic of this sinful world. The coming “Kingdom of God” was of an
entirely different nature, and it had nothing to do with Rome or Caesar.
The
Roman governor found no fault in Jesus and was about to release him. However,
at the instigation of the Temple authorities, the crowd demanded that
Pilate release Barabbas instead, a léstés (Greek) or “brigand,”
and a known murderer.
The
priestly leaders preferred a violent political revolutionary over the Suffering
Servant described in the Book of Isaiah, the same Messiah who “took
on the form of a slave” and became “obedient unto death, even death on a
cross.” Thus, also, it remains to this day.
Because
of his choice, God exalted 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.” Yes, he achieved sovereignty over the Earth, but
not by circumventing Calvary - (Philippians 2:6-11).
Institutional Christianity has a long and sordid history of mixing Church and State, and History is replete with examples of the folly and criminality that result from this poisonous mixture.
Apparently,
we do not understand what state power is, how it is exercised, and who,
exactly, is the power behind the throne. To advance the Gospel through the political
system necessitates resorting to the coercive power of the State, something
Jesus NEVER did. Doing so repudiates all that Jesus did and suffered for
on the Cross.
The
choice is whether to walk the cruciform path trod by Jesus or the smooth
highway offered by Satan that ends in Rome, not New Jerusalem. Should we, his
disciples, embrace what he rejected?
By
its very nature, the political systems of this age are incompatible with the
proclamation of “Christ crucified.” Their corruption will only permeate
and corrupt the Body of Christ. A little leaven leavens the whole lump.
