The Secret Message of Jesus, Part Two

If you've started the book, you'll already know that there is very little earth-shattering material in the first 49 pages of SMoJ. Three of the chapters are dedicated to trying to understand the political nature, Jewish context, and revolutionary thrust of Jesus' message. Before proceeding let me clarify my use of political throughout this series of posts--this is primarily for those of you who don't read the comments, as I've already addressed this issue in the comments section.

Politics is simply the means whereby we all manage to get along: local, state, federal, personal, corporate, ecclesial, etc., realms all have a set of rules for helping us all get along and make sure things get done. This is politics in the simplest sense of the word. When McLaren talks about the political message of Jesus, he is talking specifically about where Jesus' message fit into his Jewish/Roman context: Essenes, Herodians, Sadducees, Pharisees, Zealots, people of the land. Jesus' message is political because it challenged all these groups to look anew on their philosophies of life and politics. No single group could claim him, and he claimed no group. To say that Jesus' message was political is simply to say that it dealt with how we get along, how we ought to live with and among each other, and how we ought to treat others. That critique can easily be applied in any form of government. Additionally, every realm has a politic. (For the U.S. we are nearing the days of an outright capitalistic oligarchy with vestiges of republicanism or democracy still floating around.) For those who claim Jesus as Lord, which is to say "king" in some sense, we are forced to ask the question "what do the politics of our Lord's kingdom look like?" This is the political question before us, and the sense in which I mean Jesus' political message.

McLaren also reminds us that Jesus stands in a long line of prophets, and the Jewishness of his message must be understood from within that rubric. McLaren points to four emphases of the prophetic message: care for the marginalized, sincerity of the heart over against outward performance, inevitability of judgment, especially on hypocrisy and injustice, and the expectation of a new world or order. This is the most important aspect of the message according to McLaren, and I tend to agree. In the proclamation of the kingdom, we see eschatology realized. Jesus is the beginning of the end, and the Christ event is the eschatological sign of the new age, especially the resurrection. The other three components of the prophetic message find their meaning within the new age (kingdom of God) that Jesus describes and embodies. (Corollary: the church is to be the embodiment and reflection of the kingdom of God; therefore, the question of politics is an important that must be answered before the church understands her identity.) McLaren says that the scandal of Jesus' message, at least to his Jewish audience was that he proclaimed the presence of the kingdom in his own ministry, in his own person, and didn't look to some future golden age. (The reading of the Isaianic oracle is just one example of Jesus' understanding of his own ministry.)

Why is the message revolutionary? Because this age will dawn, this kingdom come, as the followers of Jesus begin to live like Jesus. No military conquest, no smiting of the evil people, no scapegoating of outsiders or practitioners of other religions, no intervention by God into history in epic ways (with the exception of the Christ event, again). The parables, what McLaren calls the medium of the message, give the hints about how the kingdom will come. Mustard seeds and crops and good soil. All take time. All start small. All rely on patience and nurture and the grace (common) of God. This message is revolutionary because it will not rely on violence or coercion to make its point; it will not insist on having its way; it will not overwhelm with arguments and wisdom and sophistry; instead, it will work its way into our hearts, exploding into life in moments when we don't expect it, as the meaning of the parables become clear. It is revolutionary because it expects the best of us, not the worst, and it expects us to live into the reality of the kingdom.

That's part one, and a tiny bit of part two (the parables). As I said, nothing new for people who have read Yoder or Wink or Brueggemann before. Good stuff though. Part two next time.

Comments

[Daniel]

As I am reading through this first part of SMoJ, I can't help but feel that I am reading N.T. Wright's The Challenge of Jesus all over again. Does it get any better past part 1? I am looking forward to your next post, hopefully there is good news.
That is not to say that I don't appreciate what McLaren is saying, but I just feel that he is ripping stuff from Wright.

[greg]

Daniel,

Much of what McLaren says in part one does come from Wright. He's really relaying information that a religion major would get in a Intro to NT class. As I said, nothing special. Except for the insistence that this kingdom is a present reality and the task of the church is to live into it. Don't get that in many religion classes, unless you happen to be Mennonite.

[jvpastor]

What do you think of Dan Brown's writing? Personally I wasn't very impressed, but I'm not as well read as you.

Sorry I noticed you were reading the code and was curious.

[greg]

JV,

I thought the story was very readable. His writing, while better than LaHaye and Jenkins, is ham-fisted and cliche-ridden. I read most of the stuff he used for research back in my penitentiary days. Those stories have been floating around prisons forever. One of the first stories I heard when I went to the pokey was about the worldwide Masonic conspiracy. Then about Jesus and Mary Magdalene, the Illuminati, Trilateral Commissions, etc., etc. I didn't find anything new in his book, just a fictionalized account of scores of conspiracy theories and really BAD history all woven into a pretty readable pulp fiction.