Peter Zylstra Moore

November 17, 2006

The Kingdom of God

Christianity has throughout history has both dis-empowered and empowered. Jesus and

Christian Scriptures have been referenced by very often competing voices. Certain followers of Jesus

stood amongst the most vociferous proponents of slavery and segregation or apartheid while others

stood among it's most vocal opponents. Followers of Jesus have been pivotal in arguing for womens

rights. Followers of Jesus have been equally active in suppressing it. Followers have Jesus have also

both been voices for religious dialog. Followers of Jesus have argued for the necessity and exclusivity

of the Christian worldview. Today “(f)ollowers of Jesus are among the strongest supporters of (the

U.S.) nation's invasion and continuing occupation of Iraq. Followers of Jesus are among its strongest

critics. Followers of Jesus are among the strongest opponents of gay marriage. Followers of Jesus are

among its strongest advocates. Followers of Jesus are among the strongest supporters of an economic

and tax policy that benefits especially the wealthy and powerful. Followers of Jesus are among its most

vocal critics.”1 This suggests either a split in the personality of Jesus or a gross inability to understand

and interpret the ethics of Jesus.2

This paper seeks to present a framework for understanding when Jesus both advocated and

disapproved of personal and communal actions. In other words no person is for everything or against

everything, and so the question becomes what defined proper individual and social ethics for Jesus. In

seeking to abstract principles pertaining to ethics from the life of Jesus there is a need to define what

the social world of Jesus looked like. The social world involves both the theories through which we

look at our world, and how they interact with the actual social world. This will form the first section of

the text.

In comparing and contrasting Jesus3 to his world one can begin to understand how to follow him

in ours. I will seek to establish Jesus' social world was that of a Galilean peasant Jew, and because that

world as we will soon see, was a world of oppressed and “dominated by an alien ruling class” much of

his teaching was purposed in “rais(ing) critical conciousness” for the purpose of “interpretting and

challenging a world previously thought to be immutable.”4 Jesus does this by contrasting the Kingdom

1 Borg, Jesus: Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 5.2 I do not suggest that the problem has always been an inability to interpret how Jesus speaks to a given situation.

Sometimes persons who claim Christianity act against their understanding of Jesus. However, in many cases equally impassioned Christians come to different conclusions about the ethics of following Jesus.

3 The method for studying Jesus will be social-critical history.4 Herzog, Prophet and Teacher, 19. The language he uses is borrowed from Paulo Friere. He suggests Jesus like Friere

offered a “pedagogy of the oppressed” which “led to a liberating praxis”. Though there is more to Jesus and his teaching

of God, against the Kingdom of the domination system and its retainers. Interpreting Jesus life and

teachings into this framework forms the second section of this text. By way of conclusion we will look

at the significance of following Jesus within the framework of liberation movements and of

development5.

The Jewish world during the time of Jesus was under “imperial domination system”6 currently

effected by Roman colonial occupation. Imperial occupation was backed by a “politics of violence”7

for the purpose of “subjection, pacification, and exploitation of the occupied land.”8 Premodern

domination system held several consistent features. They were “politically oppressive.” The majority

was ruled by a monarchy and aristocracy that made up from 1 to 2 percent of the total population.9

Their control was maintained by a retainer class making up about 5 percent of the population: these

include “government and religious officials, military officers and bureaucrats, managers and stewards,

scribes and servants, and urban merchants who sold to them.”10 The societies were “economically

exploitative.” A half to two-thirds of a society's production was consumed by this upper class. They

were “religiously legitimated.” Social order as well as the rulers themselves were legitimated by divine

right. Finally these societies were acquired and controlled through “armed conflict.”11

Income was generated through agriculture and labour. However, “the elites did not produce

wealth themselves” but became wealthy through “taxation on agricultural production, direct ownership

of agricultural land, sharecropping and tenant-farmer arrangements, slave labor and indentured labor,

through debt, and so forth.”12 Land was often acquired through foreclosures due to inability to make

debt payments.

The Peasant class which formed the other ninety percent of society was made up mostly of

agricultural workers, but also included many other forms of labour. “At the very bottom were the

radically marginalized: the homeless, beggars, the lame and blind and untouchable.”13 Society as a

then concientization, this remains the focus of the body of the text simply because of it's practicality in studying participatory development, and it's significance in liberation movements.

5 Because it is impossible for me to speak responsibly to these topics from the perspective of someone seeking to follow Christ without fairly thoroughly flushing out who Jesus was in his context, within the parameters of this paper these topics will only come out in conclusion.

6 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary 85.7 Horsley, Jesus and the Spiral of Violence, 20-58. 8 Herzog, Jesus and the Spiral of Violence, 43. 9 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 82.10 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 83.11 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 82.12 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 83.13 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 83.

whole was predominately rural.14 Life was short and harsh for peasants. Life expectancy for peasants

who survived childhood was around thirty years.15

In order to understand the face of political domination during the time of Jesus one must

understand the greater history of political domination in the Jewish world and in Galilee in particular.

For Jews in general their defining moment as a nation was the Exodus. During the time

surrounding the Exodus God named himself, revealed the ten commandments, and re-initiated his

covenant with his people. It is the leader of the exodus, Moses that is said to have written the

Pentateuch. The Exodus primarily accounts God's stand against the imperial domination system of

Egypt, God's liberation of Israel.

The history of the judges accounts a free Jewish people who generally only organize themselves

in military crises16, but otherwise remain relatively politically and religiously autonomous.17 Early

Israelites “resisted having any king of their own on the principle that their God Yahweh was literally

their king.”18 In turning toward monarchic rule Israel was warned of how the king will oppress them.19

Israel choses to subject itself to monarchy, but still resists more exploitive forms of monarchic

societies. The beginning of Davidic kingship is a popular uprising among peasant against the official

king Saul. When he establishes himself as king it is through a 'messiahing' or anointing by elders in all

Israel.20 Then the Davidic kingship tries to impose itself dynastically,21 to establish an imperial kingship

in Jerusalem, and to construct a temple and palace through imposing labour on all Israel.22 Israel asks

for relief to no avail and so ten of twelve tribes rebel and Israel is split into the southern and northern

kingdom. The northern tribes especially recognized that kingship was conditional and popular, not

lineal.

The prophets reflect a variety of perspectives on their kings and the temple. Temple prophets

such as Ezra and Nehemiah sought renewal of Israel through temple renewal. However most of the

prophetic material offers a heavy indictment of the kingship, the temple and its functionaries, both in

14 Herzog, Jesus, Justice, and the Reign of God. 98.15 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 84.16 They also seemed to organize themselves around their own ambitions for expansion, but they were still collective

interests of the Israelite nation, not interests of a native ruling class.17 Horsley, Archaelogy, History, and Society in Galilee. 15-19.

Their was no political and religious centre that formed the centre of Israel, not that their wasn't religious and political similarities.18 Horsley, Archaelogy, History, and Society in Galilee, 15.19 1 Samuel 8:11-18.20 Horsley, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs, 94.21 Although scriptures seek to substantiate divine ordinance of the Davidic line, history suggests that most Jews (10 of 12

tribes) were not interested in the dynasty, the temple and it's functionaries, and Jerusalem as a centre of their nation.22 Horsley, Jesus and Empire, 83. The scriptures it is referencing 1 King 5:13-18.

the southern and northern kingdom of Israel. This indictment falls against their own domination

system, but also against the empires that both nations fell too. It speaks against their colonial rulers, but

also their native elites that prop them up.

The Northern and Southern Kingdom of Israel were brought back together after the Maccabean

revolt against their conquering empire, local and foreign23. After a hundred years of Maccabean rule,

seen by many as simply native domination, the Romans took over in 63 BCE. Initially taxes were

expropriated and control was kept through the already established Hasmonean native elites. However

when they could not control the populace, Rome began imposing client kings: the first and most

infamous being Herod the Great.

Herod lived extravagantly building palaces in Jerusalem and Jericho, fortress palaces in

Masada, Herodium, and Machaerus, alongside many other building projects. To win favour with

Caesar he built a new city and named it Caesarea Maritima, and rebuilt another calling it Sebaste,

which is Greek for Augustus. He constructed many temples to the emperor, and more directly offered

gifts of money to the emperor. To win favour with the Jewish elites he sought religious legitimation

through rebuilding the Jerusalem temple extravagantly. To justify his kingship he married Mariamne,

of Maccabean descent.24 To solidify his authority he disposed of the remaining Hasmonean family

members, and set up high priests of his own choosing. The obvious economic exploitation of his

appointees, projects and policies were financed through heavy taxation that came through the temple.

Rumours of or actual Jewish resistance was reacted to with paranoia spilling out in overwhelming

violence.25

23 Wright, The New Testament and the People of God, 170. They regained their independence in 164 BCE and quickly extended to include both Samaria and Galilee as well as Judea (these are the areas that are of primary concern to understanding Jesus). This Hasmonean (Maccabean regime) quickly became simply a native domination system, and their entire period of rule was filled with infighting amongts Jewish groups including the Essenes and Pharisees who saw themselves as having right to rule Israel. The extent of involvement in Judea, suggests that their ability to win over the recently re-united tribes of the northern kingdom, is marginal at best.

24 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 87. 25 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 87. This violent paranoia led

Herod to execute three of his sons and his wife Mariamne. So persons would mourn at his death, he ordered the death of many Jewish notables. “Augustus once quipped cleverly that he would rather be Herod's pig (hus) than his son (huios).” Horsley, Jesus and Empire, 33. “(H)e had introduced in their practices of the dissolution of their religion, and the disuse of their customs... nor did he permit the citizens either to meet together, or to walk, or eat together, but watched everything they did, and when they were caught they were severely punished; and many there were who were brought to the citadel Hyrcania, both openly and secretly, and were there put to death; and there were spies set everywhere, both in the city and in the roads, who watched those that met together; nay, it is reported that he did not himself neglect this part of caution, but that he would oftentimes himself take the habit of a private man, and mix among the multitude, in the nighttime, and make trial what opinion they had of his government” Josephus, The Antiquities of the Jews. 365b-367.For a fairly thorough discussion but concise discussion of Herod see Horsley, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs, 30-34.

At his death his kingdom was divided amongst his sons, Herod Archaelus in Judea, and Herod

Antipas in Galilee, but continued rebellion in Judea brought into Judea direct Roman Imperial Rule.

During the period of Jesus ministry “Caiphas as high priest and Pilate as governor” were both enjoying

a “long tenure” of rule suggesting that they favoured the empire over the Judean populace26.

Archaeological excavation's are newly revealing the opulent and lavish lifestyle of the the Herodian

and high-priestly families again suggesting heavy collaboration with the empire.27

It is important also to look quickly at the temple system and its retainers. As was mentioned

earlier high priests from the time of Herod were appointed by Rome, and were primarily puppets for

Rome. Persons of predominant lineage made up the other priestly positions, especially in and around

Jerusalem. The retainers were made up of Roman colonizers, and local elites and were responsible for

“government and religious officials, military officers and bureaucrats, managers and stewards, scribes

and servants, and urban merchants who sold to them.”28 Local eliters were predominantly made up of

two groups with competing interests, the Sadducees and Pharisees. Sadducees were especially

conservative and held up the law of Moses itself as the only way of ordering Jewish society, where as

Pharisees were a purity group especially interested in promoting ritual Judaism and the Jerusalem

temple cult and tithes that supported it.29 Both groups and in fact all elites religio-political success

depended on pacifying the Jewish populace and pleasing Rome. Because of Romes willingness to

remove problem leadership this led to a seriously compromised priestly and scribal class.30

In Galilee competency and a fairly peaceable rule, as well as following his father by giving

generously to the emperor, kept Herod Antipas' its ruler. “For the first time in their history the

Galileans suddenly had a ruler and his administration located in Galilee itself.”31 Within 20 years,

Antipas builds two Roman-style cities on the backs of peasant taxes and labour. For peasant Galilee

this meant more than carrying the initial load of the project. These cities moved the imperial rulers into

26 Horsley, Jesus and Empire, 33.27 Horsley, Jesus and Empire, 33.28 Borg, Jesus:Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 83.29 Horsley, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs, 23-29.30 Horsley, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs, 23-29 and Horsley, The Message and the Kingdom, 102. Some religious

leaders unwilling to compromised expression of leadership formed the strict Essene community, that prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem it's temple and it's current leadership, held everything in common, and adhered to strict ritual law. Herzog, Jesus, Justice and the Reign of God, 147-149.

31 Horsley, Jesus and Empire, 33. Horsley, Archaelogy, History, and Society in Galilee, 27. Galilee before falling to empire after empire had never developed a system of indigenous elite. Thus empires the indigenous could not be used in pacifying and taxing the larger population. This would have made Galilee more hostile to the obviously opulent Jerusalem aristocracy, and especially upset to the tighter controls affected through cities being built for the purposes of expropriating excesses.

Galilee and therefore offered more direct and excessive taxation.32 The political separation of Galilee

from Judea also meant that the Jerusalem temple and it's religious retainers had no official jurisdiction

to collect tithes in Galilee. Thus Pharisees and other retainers would have to work overtime in

religiously legitimating their rights to collect tithes from impoverished peasant in Galilee.33

Popular protests against this system of domination expressed themselves through the rise of

prophetic figures, bandits who were largely protected by peasant, and messianic movements. All these

movements were aimed very carefully not only against Roman imperialism, but the imperial system in

the temple itself. A few decades after Jesus' death a intra-Jewish war broke out. Peasants overtook the

temple, shortly after which they anointed a peasant high priest and burnt the debt record. During the

course of the way, Messianic (popular or anointed) kings proclaimed freedom for slaves in proclaiming

a sort of Year of Jubilee.34 Peasants both understood how the system oppressed them and looked for

meaningful opportunity to upset that very system.

With that as a background we can now look at how Jesus ministry both made peasants

conscious of imperial domination and local collaboration, and how it parodied, mocked and

undermined it35. In so doing we will start where Jesus started, with the message of the Kingdom of

God. Then we will at how Jesus criticizes that system of domination. Finally we will look at what

motivated his ethics.

The message of the Kingdom of God was absolutely central to Jesus. It was the subject of his

first sermon,36 the key to understanding his teaching,37 the first thing we should look for,38 and the first

petition in Jesus' prayer;39 in fact it was his very gospel.40 The “'Kingdom of God' is a political as well

32 Horsley, Jesus and Empire, 34.33 This explains the presence of the scribes and Pharisee in Galilee in the gospels. It also explains the degree of persecution

of early Christianity by especially the Pharisees, and why the Pharisees would follow the new movement through the diaspora. The scribes (literate Pharisees) and Pharisees, and all the temple retainers that survived and prospered via the inflow of tithes as well money generated through temple functions and festivals. The precedence for supporting the temple was no longer official jurisdiction but the effectiveness of their religious legitimation of the temple and their function in it. If Christianity undermined the precedence of Jerusalem and it's temple, and of the need for ritual law for spiritual health, they would have every motivation to put an end to it.Herzog, Jesus, Justice, and the Reign of God, 150-151.

34 Horsley, Bandits, Prophets and Messiahs, 118-127 and Jesus and Empire, 49-52. Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs provides a thorough overview of popular (which basically means peasant movements) in and around the time of Jesus. It's fascinating in both it's parallels and differences from Jesus' prophetic/messianic movement. The reaction by Rome to most of these movements was also comparable to Rome's response to Jesus, crucifixion, sometimes on mass.

35 Although Jesus' social ethics, his praxis was motivated by more than a reality of oppression his spiritual belief systems because of the limits of this assignment will only be discussed to the extent it parodies, mocks and undermines the domination systems.

36 Mark 1:14.37 Luke 8:10.38 Matthew 6:33.39 Matthew 6:10.40 Matthew 4:23. This collection of texts is found in Meyers, Walking with the Poor, 47-48.

as religious metaphor.”41 The term 'kingdom' of God would have struck a chord in peasant communities

whose kingdom they knew was felt in the political and ideological domination of Herod and his sons,

his puppet functionaries in the temple, and the kingdom of Rome.42 The anticipation is intensified in the

present reality of the kingdom in Jesus power and ministry,43 and intensified further in its promised

imminent completion.44

The Kingdom of Jesus was about serving rather oppressing, it was about powerlessness, rather

than overpowering. For early Christianity the cross was not essentially about substitution but it was the

way of Jesus. The cross was example. Jesus prophecy's his death four times in Mark and each time he

calls us to follow after him. The first prophecy is followed by the recognition that we too need take up

our cross; the second is followed with the recognition that in the kingdom the first will be last and that

it's leaders will will be servants; the last recognizes greatness as measured by servanthood, and that the

greatest will become slaves for the sake of others.45

One of the best ways to look at how Jesus kingdom confronted the kingdom of the dominating

class in Jerusalem is a closer look at the passion week.46 The passion week is when Jesus steps out of

the villages in Galilee and Judea,47 and confronts the domination system in Jerusalem. Importantly it is

during Passover Week and so Jesus presenting his confrontation with the domination system in

Jerusalem as a new exodus. He shares a passover supper with his disciples encouraging them to see his

life and death as bringing a new exodus and a new age of forgiveness.48 Jews again are under imperial

domination and Jesus as a new Moses will lead the peasants in their liberation.

Jesus enters Jerusalem as a humble and peaceful messiah49 parodying the imperial procession of

real-life client kings that wore their arrogance and violence through their majestic war horses and full

41 Borg, The Last Week, 25.42 Borg, The Last Week, 25.43 Matthew 12:28 par (parallel) Luke 11:20 (it is present in Jesus power over Satan), Luke 17:21 (it is amidst them), Mark

4:26-29 (it is growing secretly), Mark 10:15, 23, Matt 21:31, Mark 12:34, Matthew 23:13 par Luke 11:52 (you must actively enter it): summarized from Borg, Jesus, 256-257.

44 Mark 13:30, 9:1 (it will be realized in full before Jesus' generation passes away).45 Compare 8:31 to 8:34, 9:31 to 9:33-35, 10:32-34 to 10:38, 42-44. In each case Jesus prophecy's his death, and then calls

us to give ourselves.Borrowed from Borg, The Last Week.

46 We will essentially stick to the narrative in Mark for a number of reasons. It provides the longest and most thorough account of the passion week. It is the earliest account and so is used by both Matthew, Luke and John. Finally it captures the political nature of the account better then the later gospels that have grown further displaced from the social situation of the events described.

47 Not to suggest that the domination system did not come out to him in Galilee and Judea as his movement gained momentum, but here Jesus actively faces off against it.

48 Mark 14:17-25. See also Borg, The Last Week, 112-120.49 Zechariah 9:9-10 prophecy's Israel's King riding in on a humble ass, and ushering the end to war and a new age of peace.

royal attire.50 The kingdom of God is coming to Jerusalem, to unseat the imperial kingdom. “Blessed is

he who comes in the name of the Lord; Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David; Hosanna in

the highest!”51

Thus Christology must also be looked at within the kingdom of God. Christology must be seen

in the contacts of competing messianic visions. As Jesus' humble procession parodying the kingdom of

power of the empire. The conflict was over who's rule was authorized by God: was it's Jesus' or the

temple?52

It also offered a challenge against the christology of the emperor.53 According to Roman

Imperial theology “the emperor was not simply the ruler of Rome, but the Son of God” conceived by

“the god Apollo.” The emperor was “'son of God', 'lord' and 'savior', one who had brought 'peace on

earth.' After his death, he was seen ascending into heaven to take his permanent place among the

gods.”54 For Christians this was true of Jesus and not the emperor. It was he that was vindicated by

God, and his kingdom would soon come.

The next day Jesus enters the temple but the temple incident itself is sandwiched by the oft-

misunderstood passage of Jesus cursing of the fig tree. Jesus is hungry and wishes to find fruit on the

fig tree, but because it is not in season there is none to be found. So he says to the fig tree “May no one

ever eat fruit from you again!”55 The next morning Peter notices the fig tree is withered and Jesus says,

“Truly I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, 'Be taken up and cast into the sea,' and does not

doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says is going to happen, it will be granted him.”56 The

mountain is “Mount Zion, on which the temple stood” and it is going to be “'thrown into the sea.'”57

So why was the temple withered and going to be “cast into the sea.” In the temple Jesus has

50 Horsley, The Message and the Kingdom, 71, 71-73.“Herod the Great was famous for his ostentatious entrances into cities he visited... (I)n 38 CE, Herod's grandson Agrippa passed through Alexandria in a grand procession 'accompanied by bodyguards in gleaming armor of silver and gold,' according to the account in Philo.”See also Borg, The Last Week, 3-5.

51 Mark 11:9-10.52 The writer of Mark continually posits the authority of Jesus against the authority of the scribes and Pharisees. Mark

1:21-23, 1:26-28, 2:9-11, 3:14-16, 6:6-8, 10:41-43, 11:26-33.53 For the purposes of this paper I do not want to delve to far into the arguments about the actual Christology of Jesus,

though sometimes commenting on it. The point will be rather to recognize how that Christology confronts similar claims from the Jewish and Roman domination systems.

54 Borg, The Last Week, 3. It is obvious that those same terms and stories paralleled in the gospels of Jesus would of challenged the kingdom of domination of the Roman empire.

55 Mark 11:14.56 Mark 11:23.57 Borg, The Last Week, 56. Later coming out of the temple he says of the massive stone structure “Not one stone here will

be left on another; every one will be thrown down” (Mark 13:4), and then he again prophecy's the cataclysmic destruction of the temple in Mark's little apocalypse (this is often misinterpreted as a description of the end times but it refers to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE) (Mark 13:5-37). For an excellent commentary on this see The Last Week, 78-83.

overturned tables belonging to money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves and said

“'My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations'? But you make it a robbers den.”58

The retainers; the priests, Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees, guards, money changers, those who

sold sacrificial animals were all supported through tithes and taxation that filtered through the temple.

The ability to legitimate a temple cult is the ability for these people to maintain their livelihoods. This

was done through sabbath and through festivals that drew people to the temple. This was done through

clean and unclean processes that tied the temple into a persons purity before God. Purity is especially

connected to meals and so Jesus is accused for “eating and drinking with tax collectors and sinners”59.

Elsewhere Jesus is accused of not washing his hands before a meal. Jesus responds “whatever goes into

the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and

is eliminated?”60 Over accusations of working on the sabbath Jesus responds “the Sabbath was made

for man, and not man for the Sabbath.”61 The temple also held out forgiveness. Jesus, like his mentor

John the Baptist, also subverted the temple and its official monopoly on forgiveness by offering

forgiveness outside of the temple cult. By healing freely. Ironically given how Christ’s life would later

be theologized by the strict Pharisee Paul, Jesus quotes Hosea in suggesting that God “desires mercy

and not sacrifice. 62 In all of this Jesus was undermining the temples hold on these religious rites, and

suggesting real piety was about living mercy and compassion. As much as his protest against the

temple brought his message to the temple, it was his making it obsolete that brought the scribes and

Pharisees to him back in rural Judea and Galilee.

Power in the temple was also connected to lineage.63 In the same way the Davidic line

legitimated it's rule dynastically, it wasn't the only dynasty known to the time of Christ. The aristocracy

was firmly established along familial lineages, and persons in places of predominance jockeyed

amongst themselves for predominance in the temple system. Jesus is asked how he can be the messiah

since he is not a son of David. Jesus then uses scriptures to suggest that because David calls the

Messiah his Lord “How then can he be his son?”64 His own leadership is not made up of persons of

proper descent but is chosen from lowly Galileans, fisherman, and tax collectors. It wasn't lineage that

was important but faithfulness. His parables hold the faith of Gentiles, Women, and Samaritans in

contrast to the impiety of the religious leaders. What matters is not Abrahamic descent but that they

58 Mark 11:17.59 Mark 2:16, See also Matthew 11:19, Luke 19:7; Luke 15:1-2.60 Mark 7:18-19.61 Mark 2:27.62 Mark 2:5-7, quote is from Matthew 9:1, and is quoting Hosea 6:663 Herzog, Jesus, Justice and the Reign of God, 120. Here Herzog sites a list that stratifies persons within Jewish society.64 Mark 12:37.

“produce fruit in keeping with repentance.”65

Jesus piety also undermined the temple system. Though he took part in teaching and discussing

in local synagogues, Jesus piety is first private and second local political, and is largely confrontational

towards national religious superstructures.66 He often sought solitude in prayer.67 In the face of a temple

piety that didn't even use certain names for God, Jesus prayed to God as 'Abba' or daddy.68 For his

disciples fasting is a private manner.69 He protested long public displays of prayer.70 Tithing was a

private not temple affair.71 In even his piety Jesus criticized and obsoleticized official piety. For Jesus

piety is essentially private not public, intimate not transcendent.

The temple was not only supported economically indirectly through ritual, festival and purity

but also through taxation. However, ability to legitimate its other functions made collecting tithes

possible outside it's jurisdiction. This is probably what is going on with Jesus confrontation with the

over the pharisees over the issue corban. This seems to allow a person the right to give to God (ie.

donate to the temple) instead of responding to familial obligations. Jesus accuses the Pharisees of “no

longer permit(ting) (peasants) to do anything for his father or his mother” because the little they have to

spare no longer supports the larger family but is usurped by the temple.72

In the temple Jesus accuses the scribes who live in luxury and in so doing “devour widows'

houses”73 and then immediately watches that situation unfold where a widow literally “out of her

poverty, put in all she owned, all she had to live on.”74 When asked if he supports taxes to the temple he

65 Luke 3:8 par Matthew 3:8-9.66 Borg, Jesus, 96-97. Though Jesus probably attended a synagogue (literally means assembly during the time of Jesus) on

the sabbath, it was not likely an official building but a town square or meeting place, though sometimes this would have happened in a larger home. These gatherings would have in many case included a service, prayer, reading from the Old Testament if population and finances allowed (scriptures were probably not predominant in small and mostly illiterate Nazareth), teaching, community interaction, and discussion around community affairs. Local synagogues would have probably also celebrated the major festivals. Where scriptures were not available, connection to Israel and it's traditions would have expressed themselves in retelling of Israels formative stories. A simpler understanding of what it meant to be a part of Israel, and also a simpler and less ritualistic understanding of what it meant to follow God.

67 Mark 1:35, 6:46, 14:32-42, Luke 6:12, but also 3:21. 5:16. 9:18. 9:28-29. 11:1. Borg, Jesus: A New Vision, 44-45.68 Dunn, Jesus Remembered, 549-555, Mark 14:36. See also Matthew 6:9 par Luke 11:2. Disciples are to see themselves

as sons of God: Matthew 5:9, 45, 13:38, 17:25,27, Luke 6:35.69 Matthew 6:16-18.

It is unclear whether Jesus advocated fasting at all. Mark 2:18-20 (parred in Matthew 9:14-20 and Luke 5:33-35) suggests that because the kingdom of God is upon it is time for feasting and not fasting. The temptation scene in the desert is not necessarily a fast in Mark as well (1-10-13) though it was in its parallels in Matthew 4:1-11and Luke 4:1-13.

70 Mark 12:38-40 par Luke 20:46-57, Matthew 23:5-7 and also Matthew 6:7. 71 Matthew 6:3-4.72 Mark 7:12.73 Mark 12:40.74 Mark 12:44. Unbelievably this passage is most often used to support tithing.

suggests the “sons are exempt” but also suggests payment “so that we do not offend them.”75 Romes

offense against non-payment and subsequent response against such resistance was severe. It

substantiated the charge of treason, which calls for crucifixion. The religious leaders ask if they should

pay the poll-tax to Caesar. Jesus asks for a denarius, and is handed one with Caesar image ingraven on

it. It is unlawful for a strict Jew to have any images on anything, cause that amounts to setting up an

idol before God. “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's” Thus the Pharisees are first indicted for

having unethical coinage. The second part is equally clear: and render “to God the things that are

God's.”76 Everything is to be rendered to God “since according to Israelite tradition everything belongs

to God and nothing to Caesar.”77 Their might be some truth to the scribes indictment of Jesus: “We

found this man misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar.”78

It seems that Jesus could see past the divine legitimation of the Jerusalem temple and could see

how in its Jerusalem centred cult, how in it's dynasties, how in it's elaborateness, and how in its

taxation it continually impoverished and oppressed peasant Judea. In response he represents a little

tradition, a popular peasant tradition.79 He does not interpret Israelite history and it's scriptures in a

legalistic manner but instead emphasizes his Jewishness, in joining in the the Jewish story of the

exodus. He saw God in intimate and accepting terms rather than forming barriers. He re-interpreted

ethics around mercy80 and forgiveness,81 around treating others as you yourself want to be treated,82

around loving your neighbour as yourself.83 Around simple ethical “commandments of God” rather

75 Matthew 17:26-27. It should be noted that taxation during the time of Jesus was payed by the peasant and expended for the good of the elites and wasn't for the tax payers good.

76 Mark 12:17, 13-17 for larger context.77 Horsley, Hearing the Whole Story, 43.78 Luke 23:2. Jesus understanding of the rich was the same in or outside of the temple. See the parable of the rich man and

Lazarus: Luke 16:19-31. See also Mark 10:25; “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” For an interesting case that Jesus parables in their earliest were simply stories to concienticize peasants of the exploiters see Herzogs book Parables as Subversive speech.

79 In what has become the Old Testament scriptures the little tradition of liberation and the great tradition centred temple, priesthood, and kinship are woven together. Because of illiteracy, peasant traditions would be propogated through story telling, connecting yourself to the stories that became popular and defining. Because of the difficulty of life their ethics would revolve around practical community and family relationships, and caring for social concerns. Jesus represented this tradition, a tradition that undermined the Great Tradition as represented by both the leaders and even the Old Testament scriptures (though it is hard to say whether he consciously opposed it or simply thought that his tradition reflected scriptures). The concepts of the 'Great' and 'Little' tradition is drawn originally from James C. Scott, but is used widely, though see especially, Herzog, Jesus, Justice, and the Reign of God, 149-167.

80 Matthew 5:7, 18:33, 23:23, Mark 5:19, Luke 10:37, Luke 16:24. 81 Matthew 6:12-15, 18:21,35,26:28, Mark 1:4, 2:7, 11:25,26, Luke 1:77, 3:3, 5:21.82 Matthew 7:12 par Luke 6:31.83 Mark 12, 28-31 pars Matt 22:35-40 and Luke 10:25-28. This extends to even loving enemies: Matthew 5:43-48, 6:27-28,

32-36.

than holding the pharisaic “tradition(s) of men.”84 He was convinced of God's coming judgment against

both the temple and Rome, and called all to repent and enter into his 'upside down kingdom'85 of God.

Jesus church need shy away from wooden interpretations of scriptures but defines ethics around

compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and love. It must define sin around domination and dis-empowerment.

Jesus church must concienticize the oppressed of their oppressors, and affirm their right to acceptance

and equal place in the larger community. The church need re-interpret the cross into the social-history

of Jesus, and in so doing allow the way of the cross to confront domination and marginalization rather

than marginalize. Christology must continue to confront the political Christologies in religious/political

systems rather than become a dominant system of its own. Its message is not that Jesus is to become

our Christ, but rather that power of God is in and with those who lead through serving, and who

interpret ethics around concepts of justice, love, mercy and compassion rather than in domination.

The western world needs to realize the ways in which it has become what Jesus condemned. It's

time we realize that the churches condemnation needs not cry out against homosexuals, women, or any

other apparent differences we can find between one another, but instead needs to condemns the

oppression, greed, and selfishness in each one of us and in our world systems. It needs to remember

that taking Jesus serious is not about believing in an exclusive, perfect, supernatural or ritualized

interpretation of his life but about naming, condemning, and making obsolete systems that oppress and

exclude, and replacing them with systems that offer real acceptance, mercy, and justice.

Bibliography

Borg, Marcus J., Conflict, Holiness and Politics in the Teaching of Jesus. Trinity Press, New York, 1998.

Borg, Marcus J., Jesus: A New Vision. Harper Collins, New York, 1987.Borg, Marcus J., Jesus: Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary,

Harper Collins, New York, 2006.Borg, Marcus J. and John Dominic Crossan, The Last Week. Harper Collins, New York, 2006. Dunn, James D. G., Jesus and the Spirit. William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids, 1975.Dunn, James D. G., Jesus Remembered. William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids, 2003. Herzog II, William R., Jesus, Justice and the Reign of God. Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville,

2000.Herzog II, William R. Parables as Subversive Speech: Jesus as Pedagogue of the Oppressed.

Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, 1994.Herzog II, William R., Prophet and Teacher. Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, 2005.Horsley, Richard A., Archaelogy, History and Society in Galilee. Trinity Press Int., Harrisburg, 1996.Horsley, Richard A., Hearing the Whole Story. Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, 2001.Horsley, Richard A., Jesus and Empire, Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 2003.Horsley, Richard A., Jesus and the Spiral of Violence. Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1993.

84 Mark 7:8. See also Matthew 15:2-7, Mark 7:1,3,5,8,9,13.85 Phrase from Kraybill, The Upside Down Kingdom.

Horsley, Richard A., Sociology and the Jesus Movement. Continuum Pub. Co., New York, 1994.Horsley, Richard A. and John S. Hanson. Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs. Harper and Row Pub., New

York, 1985.Horsley, Richard A. and Neil Asher Silberman, The Message and the Kingdom. Penguin Putnam Inc.,

New York, 1997.Josephus translated by William Whiston, The Works of Josephus. Hendrickson Pub Inc., Peabody,

1987.Kraybill, Donald B. The Upside-Down Kingdom. Herald Press, Waterloo, 1990.Loader, William. Jesus' Attitude towards the Law. William B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1997.Myers, Bryant L. Walking with the Poor. World Vision Int., Maryknoll, 1999.The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations. Oxford University Press, London, 1955.Vermes, Geza. The Authentic Gospel of Jesus. Penguin Books, London, 2003.Wright, N. T. The New Testament and the People of God. Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1992.