The Time Jesus Dodged the Culture Wars

A Few Questions Answered

• What are Year Zero Reactions?

  [This section comes from the article entitled Empire Exposed.]

  While the big picture of Jesus’ day was the oppressive Empire, what is sometimes overlooked is the degree to which the Jewish people—obviously, the people to whom Jesus primarily aimed His ministry (Matthew 15:24)—were completely entrenched within this crippling framing narrative. If we fail to understand the implications of this, we’ll struggle to grasp the urgency and intent of Jesus’ call to action.

  Despite how holy and separate the Jews sought to remain (and their stubborn resistance to the Empire’s oppressive regime was admirable), they reacted in four different ways to the framing reference of their day. Think of these four reactions as defining systems of thought (belief) and practice (lifestyle). There’s no doubt that most of these groups believed they were acting in response to revelation from God.

  Some sought to escape it. The fatalistic Essenes offered the confused Jew the chance to bury their head in the sand. Literally. Withdrawing into the wilderness, they sought to flee the oppression.

  Some sought to confront it. The Zealots offered the fanatical Jew an outlet of militant aggression. Calling for repentance from complacency, they sought liberty through aggressive resistance—leaning on the stories of the Old Testament’s military heroes.

  In a similar spirit of confrontation; however, using a different tactic, some sought to resist it. The Pharisees also preached repentance, but called for a return to meticulous piety, believing that only scrupulous religion would deliver God’s people. “If we’re just holy enough, God will deliver us!”

  Finally, some sought to compromise and coexist with the Empire. The Sadducees and Herodians offered the compromising Jew an alliance with the Empire. Despite their differences with each other, both the Sadducees and Herodians bought into the basic line: “If you can’t beat them, join them”—or at least, try to coexist with the “big picture” in ways that benefit you.

  Therefore, despite their attempts to remain a people set apart, all these systemic reactions to the Empire’s dominant narrative served only to reinforce the centrality of Caesar, exacerbating the overriding societal injustices, and perpetrating the political and religious oppression of the time. In other words, these reactions (perceived by the Essenes, Zealots and Pharisees as revelation received from God) kept the Jewish people enslaved to Caesar—some profiting from the Empire, most exploited by it, all bound and dependent on it.

  Think about that for a moment.

  Tragically, for all their bravado and bluster, these defining reactions only existed because they’d accepted (and were thus, aligned to) Caesar’s Empire. They were, in fact, cogs in Rome’s societal machine. Like self-cannibalising fungi, they sprouted in the soiled, septic shadow cast by Caesar. Think Neo stuck in the Matrix—a movie that remains a startling metaphor for us.

  When the Caesars proclaimed their gospel of the kingdom, declaring that their reign would bring favour upon the world, the citizens and slaves of Rome, both Gentile and Jew, were assured of one thing: those rightly aligned to Caesar, and assiduously paying the required dues, would remain beneficiaries of the Empire. The rest would remain subject to successive bouts of the tyrannical ruler’s oppressive and capricious reign.

  The juggernaut of the Empire would charge forward relentlessly and thus, these defining responses would continue to propagate its toxic values. Despite their utter devotion to Jehovah, and abhorrence of Caesar, the corruption of the Empire sprouted in every corner of the Jewish nation. They paid homage to God but lived lives defined by Caesar. (This last sentence is distressingly poignant.)

• What is the Biblical Response to the Gospel?

  [This section comes from the article entitled God’s Purpose (The Gospel of the Kingdom).]

  Our immediate two-fold response to the Gospel is captured in Jesus’ opening declaration:

  The Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.”

  (Mark 1:15, italics added)

  Repent and believe.

  Now before you nod your head and say, “Check. Got that mastered already!” it’s critical to grasp these words in the context of the Gospel of the Kingdom.

  Jesus did not set up a competing fifth reaction to the four Year Zero reactions described above (Escape, Confront, Resist and Compromise). He didn’t set up a new faction offering an alternate reaction to the prevailing framework of the Roman Empire. Instead, He offered a new way of thinking and living and being that trumped the Empire entirely, rendering the four systemic reactions mute.

  Think of what repent and believe mean in that context.

  Repent

  The word “repentance” (Greek: metanoeo)  means “to change the mind”, “to rethink”, “to reconsider”, “to think differently”.

  To repent is not a once-off event or a prayer we pray; rather, it’s an ongoing response to a growing revelation of the Lordship of Jesus, a continual change of thinking that results in a change of living—evidenced by “fruits of repentance” (Luke 3:8) that include:

  • Godly sorrow for sin (2 Corinthians 7:10)
  • Confession of sin (1 John 1:9)
  • Forsaking of sin (Psalm 119:58-60)
  • Restitution where possible (Luke 19:8)
  • Hatred for sin (Ezekiel 6:9-19)
  • Turning towards God (1 Thessalonians 1:9)
  • A wholehearted desire to please God (Colossians 3:23)

  In other words, while repentance certainly includes renouncing personal sin, Jesus was calling His audience to completely overhaul their Empire-framed thinking, to renounce their dependence on Caesar, to defect from the Empire and complicit Religion, and to rethink everything in light of His Kingship.

  We are to repent—not just from personal sin—but from the Empire-riddled thinking that shapes our worldview and that defines our attitudes and perspectives. It is a commitment to unlearning the ways of Caesar and re-learning the ways of the King.

  Repentance means turning away from every system, not just every sin, that robs our affection for God and our allegiance to Him.

  Consider the first New Testament message Jesus did not preach.

  In Acts 2, we get the first public message after Jesus’ ascension. It’s a good passage to highlight because it shows us how the disciples interpreted Jesus’ message.

  After Peter told a crowd baffled by the happenings on the Day of Pentecost that they had crucified the promised Messiah (Acts 2:14-36), the convicted audience asked, “what shall we do?” (v. 37).

  Peter’s first response was, “Repent…” (Acts 2:38). And then he expanded on what he meant:

  And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, ‘Be saved from this perverse generation’.”

  (Acts 2:40, italics added)

  “With many other words” (not a quick repeat-after-me prayer), Peter unpacked precisely what the implications were.

  He called them not just to turn from their personal sin but to renounce and defect from the corruption of their day. “Be saved from this perverse generation” literally means, “save yourselves from this crooked generation”, as many translations choose to translate it.

  In other words, the emphasis was on repentance and extricating oneself from the affection-stealing, allegiance-robbing systemic thinking of society. It was about taking responsibility and taking action.

  There’s no mention of “getting saved” or “going to heaven”. There’s no hint of post-mortem guarantees or threats.

  In fact, Peter’s message of Christ exalted in authority and power, along with references to King David (Acts 2:25-35), was loaded with a sense of urgency to establish God’s Kingdom in the here and now.

  Peter’s altar call, if you like, was a far cry from the evangelistic appeal we often hear today, which tends to emphasise eternal assurance upon repeating a few words verbatim, the meaning of which the “sinner” probably has little understanding.

  In contrast, Jesus invited people on a journey, a journey of repentance and dying to self-interest, a journey of disentangling oneself from the corrupt systems of Empire and Religion. A journey of imitating Him and applying His teachings.

  Thus, repentance is a clarion call to an extensive and drastic overhaul of life and being, where we not only abandon our self-centred agendas, but we also reject every system that enriches and feeds our self-seeking appetites. Only by defecting from the corrupt systems of Empire and Religion that pander to our self-interests (and then insidiously enslave us), can we truly entrust ourselves to our Father and His transcendent Kingdom.

  Believe

  The word “believe” (Greek: pistis) means, “to trust in another and another’s word”. It refers to trust in God that produces a conviction of heart and results in action. (The word “believe” is also translated “faith” in our English Bibles.)

  By faith, we put our full confidence in God’s character and His words.

  Like repentance, faith is active, not passive—and it’s not merely a once-off act or a prayer we pray, but a continual response to God and His ongoing revelation to us.

  While repentance turns one away from the Empire and dependence on Caesar, faith plugs one into God and His Kingdom purpose.

  We’ve got the faith thing waxed, right?

  Yes, we’ve been taught how to trust God, and to ask Him for things, our “daily bread” (Matthew 6:11). But what if, while we’ve perfected our prayers around asking for things, He’s been waiting for us to ask Him for the perspective and power to liberate the planet? To answer a prayer we actually have faith to believe: “Your Kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10).

  What I mean is this: maybe for all our bluster, our faith has been too small. Too civilised. Too tame, even. What if this generation of believers began to believe, truly believe? Not merely for their needs to be met (which, of course, is a valid starting point) … but believed, with mountain-moving faith, for the restoration of creation and the transformation of society, and then backed up this belief with exploits that actively worked towards making this a reality?

  When Jesus spoke of mountain-moving faith (Mark 11:12-14, 21-23), He may well have had Rome in mind, for Rome was famously built on the seven hills. Whether this was the intent or not, Jesus’ followers moved the mountains of opposition of their day, tackling the societal dysfunction and injustice of an Empire that oppressed all under its domain.

  Thus, faith means putting our full confidence in God’s character and His words … and wholeheartedly believing in God’s restoration plan, actively participating in its fulfilment.

  In simple yet profound terms then, “repent” and “believe” were the starting points in Jesus’ day, and they are the beginning points today. Without first defecting from Empire and Religion, and believing God’s ancient intent for the planet, we’ll continue to settle for same old, same old. Or stop at false finish lines.

• What is Empire Today?

  [This section comes from the article entitled Empire Exposed.]

  We could define Empire today in three ideas: humanism, materialism and Marxist postmodernism—three ideas that form a powerful overriding framework, an ideology, that defines much of the fractious society we live in today.

  Humanism

  The ultimate goal of humanism is the happiness of man/woman. The result? Proud, rampant individualism, a generation who knows all their rights but conveniently abdicates their responsibilities.

  In contrast, the goal of Christianity is the glorification of God—which may cost me my happiness at times. Dying to self, for example, is no fun. Yes, joy inexpressible is ours in following Jesus, but the glorification of God is the goal, not our own happiness.

  Materialism

  The problem of materialism is not just the idea that material things can make us happy and achieve the goal of humanism; the problem goes deeper still. Materialism has become a religious experience. We don’t just buy what we need and like, we buy things that we believe will give us a sense of meaning, purpose, belonging and identity—needs only God can fulfil.

  Achieving the goal of humanism (and securing the means to feed our materialistic appetites) requires defining reality on our terms. Enter Marxist Postmodernism.

  Marxist Postmodernism

  Karl Marx viewed the relationship between the business owners (bourgeoisie) and the workers (proletariat) as a power struggle. The oppressor versus the oppressed, the exploiter versus the victim. And liberation of the oppressed was only possible through revolution: by any means necessary—violence is perfectly acceptable in such a worldview; in fact, it’s inevitable.

  George Orwell’s wonderful book, Animal Farm, powerfully captures the truth that the oppressed always become the oppressors, continuing the cycle of violence. The twentieth century provides ample evidence of the horrors of such an ideology. With the millions of lives lost in the name of communism (a system of government based on Marxism), you’d think we’d learnt our lesson.

  Sadly, we haven’t.

  Postmodernism, a socio-cultural worldview, provided a narrative framework that broadened Marx’s ideology, framing EVERY relationship as a power struggle.

  • Male, female. Power struggle.
  • Black, white. Power struggle.
  • Rich, poor. Power struggle.
  • Young, old. Power struggle.
  • Employer, employee. Power struggle.
  • Political Left, Political Right. Power struggle.
  • Pro Life, Pro Choice. Power struggle.

  No discussion is possible. No collaboration is feasible. Every relationship is a struggle for power. We don’t listen to the other side because we’re too busy launching missiles in their direction. The stakes are high. Every threat is existential, and nothing less than victory is acceptable. Thus, victory requires using any means necessary, even violence.