The Not So Triumphal Entry

It was the week leading up to Passover and preparations were already well underway. The city of Jerusalem was swarming with people. This was one of three annual feasts where Jews from across the world would come to Jerusalem to remember God’s faithfulness to his people. These feasts were a time of joy, but they were also a time of trepidation.

Many Zealots were among the crowds, violent freedom fighters who sought to overthrow the Romans. They used the feasts to stage political protests, and these would often lead to deadly riots. They reasoned that Passover in particular was supposed to celebrate the liberation of Israel from Egypt, and it was a fitting time to fight for liberation from Rome. In light of this, it is not surprising that tensions were high during Passover. Large contingents of soldiers would be sent in for these days, an ever-present reminder of the terrifying power of the Romans.

The Sunday before Passover was particularly special because this was the day Moses appointed for choosing the lamb that would be slain for the family (Exodus 12.3).

The lamb had to be completely spotless, and so it was that thousands of Jews spent the day searching for the perfect lamb. They knew God would only bless them if they were obedient to his commands.

Just outside Jerusalem, at the Mount of Olives, Jesus and his disciples are preparing to enter the city to choose their lamb. We pick up the story in Luke 19.

When he drew near to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount that is called Olivet, he sent two of the disciples, saying, “Go into the village in front of you, where on entering you will find a colt tied, on which no one has ever yet sat. Untie it and bring it here. If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ you shall say this: ‘The Lord has need of it.’” So those who were sent went away and found it just as he had told them. And as they were untying the colt, its owners said to them, “Why are you untying the colt?” And they said, “The Lord has need of it.” And they brought it to Jesus, and throwing their cloaks on the colt, they set Jesus on it. And as he rode along, they spread their cloaks on the road.

Luke 19.29-36

In order to fully understand this story it’s important to have an understanding of the cultural context in which it takes place. To begin, Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi, and he spent much of his time teaching devout Jews from their Scriptures, which they called Tanakh (we call it the Old Testament). The Jewish people at this time were very religious and they knew their text very well. Many of them had large sections of it memorized and they would often recite the text to make a theological point or teaching.

One of the teaching techniques that was used in this time was called “Remez”, which in Hebrew means “hint” or “clue”. If a teacher wanted to make a point using a passage of Scripture they would allude (hint) to the passage either by performing an action it describes or by quoting a line from it.

The disciples, being dutiful students, would pick up on the clue and they would call to mind the rest of the passage. Often the teacher’s point would be contained in the verse just before or just after his hint. Thus, in order to fully understand the teacher’s message, you need to know the context of the passage they are referencing. Jesus uses this technique much more than we realize. Many times we simply don’t know the Bible well enough to pick up on all the subtle references. Fortunately, the disciples did.

This took place to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet, saying,

‘Say to the daughter of Zion, ‘Behold, your king is coming to you, humble, and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden.’

Matthew 21.4-5

Matthew points out that Jesus is giving us a clue about what he was doing. By riding into Jerusalem on a colt, Jesus was acting out the text of Zechariah 9. This is significant for a number of reasons. First, Jesus is saying that he is the king of Israel. He is the long-awaited messiah that will bring salvation to the Jewish people.

But there’s something more. Normally one would expect a king to ride into a city on a dazzling warhorse (Jeremiah 17.25). Instead, Jesus chose to enter on a donkey. At first glance, one may be tempted to think that the donkey represented his humility, but this is unlikely because only wealthy people had donkeys in the time of Jesus. However, the donkey is still significant for another reason.

In the ancient near east, there was a custom that kings would ride into town on a horse if they intended to wage war but they would ride on a donkey if they came in peace.

Throughout the Bible, horses are almost exclusively used for military purposes (Exodus 15.19, Psalm 33.17, Psalm 76.6, Psalm 147.10, Proverbs 21.31, Jeremiah 8.6, Jeremiah 51.21, Zechariah 10.3, Revelation 6.4) while donkeys are often used for peaceful travel (Judges 10.4, Judges 12.14, 2 Samuel 17.23, 2 Samuel 19.26).

This practice gave rise to the idea that the donkey was an animal of peace while the horse was an animal of war. Thus, if Jesus had intended to arrive as a conquering king he most certainly would have ridden a horse.

It is also notable that Jesus chose not to wear any royal robes or armor. Surely if he wanted to “look the part” this would have been a good time to show off his magnificence. Instead, Jesus wore his normal clothes and rode on a very normal donkey. Rather than coming to wage war, Jesus alludes to Zechariah to emphasize that his kingdom will be a kingdom of peace. The next verse underscores this idea.

I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the war horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall speak peace to the nations; his rule shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth.

Zechariah 9.10

Interestingly, Zechariah 9 is itself an allusion to 1 Kings 1. In that chapter, we read of Solomon, the son of David, ridding into Gihon on a donkey to be anointed as king (1 Kings 1.38). Solomon (whose name means peace) would go on to establish the most peaceful and prosperous reign Israel had ever experienced, a reign that came to characterize people’s expectations of the messiah.

From these texts, we can get an understanding of Jesus’ message. He enters Jerusalem as the “son of David” who has come to bring peace, not with a warhorse, but with a simple donkey. While he does not shy away from proclaiming himself as their king, he is showing them that his kingdom will not establish peace through violence. It will not be built with horses and bloodshed.

Let’s follow the story a little further.

As he was drawing near – already on the way down the Mount of Olives – the whole multitude of his disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen,

Luke 19.37

The crowd followed because of the works they had seen, as John tells us.

The crowd that had been with him when he called Lazarus out of the tomb and raised him from the dead continued to bear witness. The reason why the crowd went to meet him was that they heard he had done this sign.

John 12.17-18

The crowd heard that Jesus had just raised Lazarus from the dead. They figured that this must mean he was the promised messiah. Thus they exclaimed:

Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!

Luke 19.38

The spreading of cloaks was also an acknowledgment of royalty (2 Kings 9.13). This leads us to an important point. The crowd recognized that Jesus was their king, but only because of his miracles. They completely missed the allusion to Zechariah and the significance of the donkey (John 12.16).

The story continues:

And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, “Hosanna to the Son of David”

Matthew 21.9)

The people are shouting the words of Psalm 118.

Save us, we pray, O Lord! O Lord, we pray, give us success! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!

Psalm 118.25

“Save us, please” is the English rendering of the Hebrew phrase “Hosanna”. In Christian circles, it is often assumed that they wanted to be saved from their sin, but that is simply an unfortunate example of us reading our theology into the story. In the context of that day, “Hosanna” very clearly meant “save us from the Romans”.

This gives us an important insight into understanding this story. These people were not simply praising Jesus. They were asking him to save them. Specifically, they were quoting a messianic Psalm that promised God would deliver them from their enemies (Psalm 118.5).

We have to keep in mind that the Jews, and especially the Zealots, had a completely different idea about what the coming messiah would be like. To them, the messiah was to be a conquering king who would use military might to overthrow the Romans.

They imagined a person who would not only endorse the rebellion but would become its leader. “Salvation” for them is to be saved from Rome. “Messiah” for them is a king who would use violence to defeat their oppressors and thus bring liberty and peace.

There’s an important detail in this story that helps to reinforce this understanding.

So they took branches of palm trees and went out to meet him.

John 12.13

In the days of Jesus, palm branches had a certain religious symbolism because they were connected to some of the Jewish feasts (Leviticus 23.40). More importantly, however, the Zealots used palm branches as their symbol of Jewish nationalism. Waving the palm branch was the equivalent to waving their country’s national flag.

The palm branch was regularly used on Jewish coins, like a maple leaf on Canadian coins or an eagle on American coins. Palms had also been used during the Maccabean revolt to celebrate their victory over the Syrians (1 Maccabees 13.51, 2 Maccabees 10.7), and that story undoubtedly encouraged their nationalistic fervor.

Thus, palm branches came to represent the patriotism that fueled the fight against the Romans, and it was this patriotism that was on full display that Sunday. The crowds were not interested in welcoming a suffering servant. They went out to welcome a patriot.

With this in mind, we can see why they were so thrilled at Jesus’ miracles. If their king could raise the dead, he could surely deliver them from the Romans.

Further, when we understand the mindset of the Jews we should no longer be surprised that those who hailed him as their king on Sunday would ask for his crucifixion on Friday. The motives of the Jews did not change, only their impression of Jesus. Once they discovered he was not aligned with their cause they had little reason to choose him over Barabbas.

So the stage is set. The city is packed with people and Jesus is riding in on a donkey. Everyone is in an uproar because they think he is the long-awaited messianic king. After all, he had just raised Lazarus from the dead. A revolt is brewing. The Zealots are stirring up the crowd. Finally, the day of deliverance has come. Now is the time to make some noise. The revolution is beginning!

But this is really dangerous. Roman soldiers are everywhere. If this thing turns into a riot it will be a very bloody night. The Pharisees in particular were worried about how the Romans would react (John 11.48).

And some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples.”

Luke 19.39

In other words, get them to be quiet. Settle them down. This is getting out of hand.

And then we read this.

He answered, “I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out.”

Luke 19.40

The stones would cry out? What a peculiar little phrase. Does he really think the stones would praise him, or is there something we’ve missed? As it turns out, this phrase is taken directly from the Jewish Scriptures, and anyone who was well studied in the text would quickly pick up on the Remez.

“Woe to him who gets evil gain for his house, to set his nest on high, to be safe from the reach of harm! You have devised shame for you house. By cutting off many peoples you have forfeited your life. For the stone will cry out from the wall, and the beam from the woodwork respond: “Woe to him who builds a town with blood and founds a city on iniquity!”

Habakkuk 2.9-12

The Pharisees had asked Jesus to rebuke his followers for being too loud. But instead of telling them to be quiet, Jesus rebukes them with the words of Habakkuk. Rather than condemn their vigor, Jesus alludes to the message of the stones to condemn their intentions.

Woe to him who builds a town with blood and founds a city on iniquity!

Woe to you, oh Jerusalem, people of God, if you seek to establish the kingdom with violence. Woe to you, oh Zealots, freedom fighters, if you seek to gain your freedom through bloodshed. Woe to you, oh Christian, if you think you can establish God’s kingdom with human strength (Jeremiah 17.5, Zechariah 4.6). Woe to you if you think you can use force and coercion to make people good. Woe to you if you seek to justify war and violence.

If there remains any doubt in your mind as to Jesus’ thoughts about their fervor, take a look at the very next lines of the story.

And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes.”

Luke 19.41-42

The Greek word translated as “wept” is “klaio”, and it refers to a tearful mourning caused by deep sorrow and grief. This is not the climax of a triumphal entry. This is a painful recognition that his people simply didn’t get it. They did not know the way of peace (Isaiah 59.8).

Jesus continued to meditate on the words of Habakkuk, and they likely called to mind a parallel passage in Micah.

Hear this, you heads of the house of Jacob and rulers of the house of Israel, who detest justice and make crooked all that is straight, who build Zion with blood and Jerusalem with iniquity. Its heads give judgment for a bribe; its priests teach for a price; its prophets practice divination for money; yet they lean on the Lord and say, “Is not the Lord in the midst of us? No disaster shall come upon us.” Therefore because of you Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins, and the mount of the house a wooded height.

Micah 3.9-12

Like Habakkuk, Micah condemned the leaders of Israel who sought to establish Jerusalem with bloodshed and violence. Because of them, Micah prophesied that Jerusalem would become “a heap of ruins”, and that the temple would be reduced to a hill in a forest. Having just made the same indictment as Micah, Jesus now alludes to these verses by making the same prophecy.

For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.

Luke 19.43-44

As we know, this prophecy was fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.

The historical context of this story is what makes it so shocking. The Romans were crucifying Jews by the thousands. They imprisoned them and taxed them and enslaved them. The Jews had every reason, every right, to overthrow the Romans. The Zealots would today be praised for their willingness to “protect” their people. This was not a fringe group of radicals trying to cause mayhem. These were God-fearing, freedom-loving patriots living under foreign occupation who were fighting to defend themselves and their families.

The Zealot uprising was a just war if there ever was one.

Some would go so far as to say that Jews were morally obligated to fight the injustice of the Romans. But if that is the case then Jesus was a sinner because he refused to join the Zealots. In the eyes of his friends, he had not only betrayed the Jewish cause, but he had actually sinned by failing to fight the Romans. According to them, Jesus simply made the wrong choice. He should have ridden into Jerusalem on a warhorse. I dare say many Christians today would have preferred that.

But Jesus had a different way. Jesus came to Jerusalem on lamb selection day to be the lamb of God (John 1.29), though the Jews wanted to turn him into a ferocious lion. They sought to establish God’s kingdom with violence and bloodshed but this was an approach Jesus consistently rejected. Rather than lead a military conquest, Jesus subjected himself to the Romans (John 18.36).

He did not resist being crucified, even though he had every right to. He taught his followers to pay taxes and turn the other cheek (Matthew 22.21, Matthew 5.39). He instructed us to submit to unjust rulers and go the extra mile (Matthew 5.41). Let them imprison you, let them kill you, and rebuke those who would start a very justified rebellion against them (Matthew 26.52). If that isn’t a radical commitment to non-violence, I don’t know what is.

So how does the story continue? Well, 2000 years go by, and it becomes a tradition in the church to wave palm branches and sing “Hosanna” in remembrance of Palm Sunday. Every year, we sing songs about Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, we wave the sign of the Zealot and we sing the words of the Zealot.

Fortunately, the ideas these symbols once represented are no longer in the minds of Christians celebrating this occasion. And yet, one has to wonder how it is that many of us are still eager to use violence and state power to conquer our enemies. I sometimes wonder if we have learned anything from Jesus’ radical message of peace. I wonder if Jesus is still weeping over his people.

---

About the Author

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

You can follow him on Twitter @PatrickC1995 or on his Facebook page The Prudent Navigator.

The Dream of the City to Come: Do you not trust God?

Image from Great Bible Stories for Children (Regency Publishing House 1974)

When I was a toddler, my parents read me bedtime stories from a vividly illustrated Bible storybook called Great Bible Stories for Children (Regency Publishing House 1974). For some reason, my favorite, most requested Bible story was the one I referred to as "Bad Dream"— a nightmare of King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon recorded in the book of Daniel, chapter 2.

Daniel delivers the interpretation of the dream to the king: 

In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever. This is the meaning of the vision of the rock-cut out of a mountain, but not by human hands—a rock that broke the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold to pieces.

The great God has shown the king what will take place in the future. The dream is true and its interpretation is trustworthy.

Even though Daniel is a captive slave and his life is in jeopardy every time he talks to the ruler of the known world, he speaks from the perspective of a man who is in constant contact with Yahweh, the God of his youth and home culture. Daniel was able to spread the message of his God to the most powerful man on earth, and the message was this: human empires will come and go built on force and violence, coercion and oppression, but the Kingdom of Peace that God creates will destroy all the empires that came before it, and once it is established, it will last forever.

There are a few passages that are repeatedly used in defense of tyranny and oppression, and blaming God for it, but if one looks at the overarching narrative of scripture we see a distinct anti-empire message throughout.

The prophets of Israel spoke of a future liberator that God would send to free humanity from all forms of oppression, both spiritual and material. The Messiah, or Christ, was a promise the Hebrews took literally and awaited with fervent expectation the initiator of a new world order of peace. Isaiah writes of Christ:

"There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse,

and a branch from his roots shall bear fruit.

And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him,

the Spirit of wisdom and understanding,

the Spirit of counsel and might,

the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord.

And his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord.

He shall not judge by what his eyes see,

or decide disputes by what his ears hear,

but with righteousness he shall judge the poor,

and decide with equity for the meek of the earth;

and he shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth,

and with the breath of his lips he shall kill the wicked.

Righteousness shall be the belt of his waist,

and faithfulness the belt of his loins.

The wolf shall dwell with the lamb,

and the leopard shall lie down with the young goat,

and the calf and the lion and the fattened calf together;

and a little child shall lead them.

The cow and the bear shall graze;

their young shall lie down together;

and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

The nursing child shall play over the hole of the cobra,

and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder's den.

They shall not hurt or destroy

in all my holy mountain;

for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord

as the waters cover the sea."

Isaiah 11:1-9

When Mary is told that she has been chosen to give birth to the Messiah, she is so excited she praises God for the liberation that she is being allowed to participate in. She prays:

My soul magnifies the Lord

And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior;

Because He has regarded the lowliness of His handmaid;

For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed;

Because He who is mighty has done great things for me,

and holy is His name;

And His mercy is from generation to generation

on those who fear Him.

He has shown might with His arm,

He has scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart.

He has put down the mighty from their thrones,

and has exalted the lowly.

He has filled the hungry with good things,

and the rich He has sent away empty.

He has given help to Israel, his servant, mindful of His mercy

Even as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his posterity forever.

Luke 1:46-55

The hope that she placed in the God of her forefathers called for the end of oppression and tyranny on planet earth—a freedom that includes liberation from sin, death, hell, satan, and the empires of humankind. She read the prophets as a little girl and made their visions one with her mind and heart. Maybe this love for the promise of liberation and the Messiah is the reason God chose her to be Christ's mother?

Morgan Weistling - Kissing the Face of God

When Jesus was 30 years old, he spent 40 days in the wilderness fasting on water. At the end of it, the Devil appears to him in an attempt to recruit Jesus to Satan's side in rebellion against Jehovah. Satan takes Jesus to a high place where he can see all the kingdoms of the world and makes this offer: "All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.” Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only." (Mark 4:9-10)

Satan's ability to offer all the riches and power in the world could only mean one thing: that they belonged to him. In other places in scripture, Satan is referred to as "the God of this world" (2 Corinthians 4:4), and that "the whole world lies in the power of the evil one" (1 John 5:19). The knowledge of who Satan is makes the promise of a savior all the more appealing; if we are all born as serfs to an evil lord who wants to see us suffer and lies to us constantly, filling his domain with pain and violence, destruction, and rot, chaos, and confusion, who wouldn't want to be liberated? Jesus knew that he had come to bring the Good News of the Eternal Kingdom to the suffering, slavery, and misery of earthly kingdoms. He knew the Kingdom of God would one day have dominion over the whole Earth and all her people not by the idolatry of political power or devil-worship, but through the spirit of the Gospel.

When he was on trial to be crucified, Jesus told the Roman Governor of Jerusalem: "You say rightly that I am a King. For this reason I came into the world.... My Kingdom is not of this World. If it were, my servants would fight". To a Roman soldier/politician, getting crucified was the furthest thing from victory. Jesus saw the bigger picture- a spiritual reality that could not be defeated by death, nor could it be brought to reality through violent political and military force.

The Apostles state throughout their writings that God has exalted Jesus Christ above everyone and everything, giving him the title of "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" so that every living thing will recognize it and declare it. In Ephesians 1, Hebrews 2, and 1 Corinthians 15, Paul says that God has subjected everything under Christ's feet. in the Corinthians passage he points to the time prophesied by Daniel and Isaiah and others;

"Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.”

For those of you who still think of God as "Sovereign," by which you mean everything is his fault, and for those of you who are angry at God for the pain and injustice in the world, I'm not sure you're paying attention to the power of the Gospel. All of our wars and illnesses, slavery and addiction, and even death itself are due to the rebellion of Satan against God's plan. His deception campaign to bring humanity down with him will continue until destruction of all life on earth is a real possibility, then God will intervene and put a stop to it. In 2 Thessalonians 2, Paul describes that point of intervention: 

"And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming". 

Human beings and their political leaders will choose deception, destruction, and death instead of peace and life, but God works patiently to save them, redeem them, free them, so that he might reconcile them to Himself and restore humanity, and all creation, to what He intended us to be.

People of every tribe and nation, speaking every language, will worship the One True God together. The current situation where other races and nations and languages are to be hated, feared, fought, and subjugated will not exist. This is a result of man's rebellion against God's plan-- a rejection of Christ's Kingdom.

From "A Bad Case of Stripes" by David Shannon. Sholastic Inc.

If we identify ourselves by nation-state or race or political party, pledging our allegiance to a nation and its flag, holding its military in worshipful regard, etc., we are telling Jesus that His Kingdom of Peace is not what we want. We do not want to be his family, the sheep of his pasture, his loyal servants. Instead, the message He receives is that we want war and oppression and for our little tribe to be top of the heap.

Nowhere does Jesus say: "I will establish a nation that will exceed all the other nations, they will be my people and I will make them powerful. They will crush all their enemies and get all the riches and I will bless them because they are the superior form of government". What He does say is he will destroy ALL human government and establish his own. If that is not exciting to you, do you know my Lord? If your god is the god of political empires, who is your god? Which side are you on?

"Here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come" Hebrews 13:14

Not of This World Part 6: Upside Down (Series Conclusion)

Upside Down

Throughout the Book of Acts (a chronicle of the early ministries) we see civil unrest in the wake of early evangelism and how the disciples demonstrate what they learned from Jesus’ example. Here’s one instance of many demonstrating the power of the message:

“And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, ‘These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also; Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus.’ And they troubled the people and the rulers of the city, when they heard these things. And when they had taken security of Jason, and of the other, they let them go.”

Acts 17:1

Word spread quickly how “threatening” the Apostle’s message of Jesus was. They were those who “turned the world upside down.” The church in that area—ekklesia—had gained a reputation for challenging societal norms of the day. Ideas like “servant leadership” and having “all things common” stood in direct contrast to the affluent, Imperialist culture of their day. The message of Jesus’ resurrection was especially controversial but also intriguing to the philosophers and ever-antagonistic Jewish leaders. The legitimacy of Caesar in general, the pagan religion, and Pharisee’s order was being called to question all at once. One fantastic instance is recorded just two chapters later:

“And the same time there arose no small stir about that way. For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, which made silver shrines for Diana, brought no small gain unto the craftsmen; Whom he called together with the workmen of like occupation, and said, ‘Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth. Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands: So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.’ And when they heard these sayings, they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, ‘Great is Diana of the Ephesians’.” 

Acts 19:23

What’s remarkable about this scene is everything at stake for the Ephesians. Not only is the legitimacy of their religion called into question but also their economy. Demetrius, a craftsman, earned a living making silver shrines and idols. The rhetoric of the early evangelists had “set at nought” the profitably of the craft itself and also maligned the reputation and legitimacy of the deity and temple of worship. Such a challenge was met with an angry mob. As we’ll see, this legacy continued from the time of the earliest churches through the Dark Ages. 

Anabaptist Iconoclasm/ Host Desecration

As peaceful as they were, Anabaptists certainly didn’t shy away from issuing stern rebukes to heads of state and church, nor were they restrained when it came to destroying what they deemed idols and superstitions in the land. Like John the Baptist, Jesus, and the Apostles before them, they understood their “civic duty” very well: obey God rather than men.

Examples of this are given throughout Gary K. Waite’s book Eradicating the Devil’s Minions: Anabaptists and Witches in Reformation Europe. Waite’s book examines the witch hunts and Anabaptist persecutions of the time in different regions of Europe and seeks to understand the religious and political reasons for such. Waite is careful to remind the reader that while the Anabaptists themselves were skeptical of the “superstitions” of the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches, they were being identified as the agents of a Satanic conspiracy and were blamed for other-worldly phenomena sometimes attributed to witches and sorcerers. In his book, we learn Anabaptist skepticism was aimed directly at two primary Catholic (and sometimes Protestant) dogmas: the Eucharist and infant baptism.

Student’s of Church history, namely Anabaptism, know these pious folk were notorious for refusing to have their infants baptized (which was considered infanticide by the state-churches), and they also were known to disrupt Mass and stomp on supposedly consecrated “Hosts.” All of these protests are Anarchist tactics aimed at cutting directly to the heart of the established institutions—for the Anabaptists of the Dark Ages, it was the most effective way to disrupt the status quo, both state and church. It was very performative.

Waite tells of one Jacob Gasser. This brave Anarchist “ran up to the altar, grabbed the plate of wafers out of the priest’s hands, threw it onto the floor, and trampled upon the bread. He then tossed the chalice with the consecrated wine against the church door.” Of course, we know Gasser wasn’t alone in his sentiments or actions, as Waite relates: “This disturbing act…had followed close on the heels of the iconoclastic actions of Tirol’s rebellious peasants. It was also performed in consideration of magical beliefs and a long history of eucharistic miracle legends.” Gasser’s, and others’, willingness—obligation rather—to cause such upheaval in one of the most important and powerful societal institutions of that day only testifies to the fact that Anabaptism is fundamentally Anarchism. Anabaptists were actively striking at an insidious root: the institutional Church’s reliance on the State to substantiate tenuous, superstitious dogmas. It can’t be denied that they learned these tactics, and gained boldness, from Jesus’ and the Apostles’ examples.

Series Conclusion

A logical and plain reading of the Gospels and basic understanding of non-conformist movements throughout Church history leads an honest student to the conclusion that Gospel and Christ-centered discipleship is Anarchism in its purest form. While I believe this shouldn’t be a topic of debate among Christians, I understand the traditions of the State-Church systems have prevented serious consideration of this topic even to this day. For those with eyes to see and ears to hear, the Kingdom of God and Heaven is a powerful alternative to the Devil’s kingdoms of darkness where Mammon and The State are gods. 

---

About the Author

Nathan Moon is a house-painter because he “has a useless English degree”. More importantly, he’s a student of Jesus, which is the theme of his blog.

He hopes to one day have a small photography/movie-production company. He lives in Wisconsin with his wife and four daughters.

You can learn more about him and see his work at his website is www.anabaptistapologist.com.

Not of This World Part 5: Authority & Property Destruction

Authority and the ekklesia

If you search in the New Oxford American Dictionary for the term “Anarchism,” you’ll find the origin of the term is the Greek word anarkhos meaning “without a chief.” Jesus’ model of authority, or leadership in general, is Anarchical, meaning he never gave any one man complete power over another like the tyrannical systems of this world do. Jesus’ model for leadership in churches is often termed “servant leadership” and was intended to be horizontal rather than vertical.

I’ve heard some AnarchoChristians oppose the idea of a “horizontal” relationship, admittedly only assuming they’re understanding that this means men are ruling over others. But what I mean by “horizontal relationship” is simply that we’re men among men, and we have relationships with other people; these relationships, especially in ekklesia, should be voluntary and loving. Once we begin to dominate others and “lord over the flock,” we assume a vertical relationship over fellow men and seek to usurp God’s position. I’ll take the time to make this distinction and hopefully add clarity because these definitions of these relationships need to be clear in order to understand the rest of this section. 

Throughout Jesus’ ministry, we see he divests himself of power over others whenever he can. In one word, he’s unobtrusive. One passage gives a clear profile of his ministry:

But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all; And charged them that they should not make him known: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets. A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory. And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.

According to prophecy, the Messiah would be a servant, meaning he’d be beneath someone in authority (the Father). This servant, the Messiah, would “not strive” nor “cry.” Nobody would hear his voice “in the streets.” But didn’t Jesus teach and heal publicly? When the prophecy says he wouldn’t strive, cry, or that his voice wouldn’t be heard in the street, it means he wouldn’t go around in a pompous, political way and campaign for himself. Neither would he bruise a reed or quench “smoking flax.” This is taken by some to mean that he wouldn’t militaristically topple the oppressive governments of that time but that he’d wait to “send forth judgment unto victory” at his Second Coming. This meek man intended to lead by example: do good, heal the sick, help the poor and hungry, preach the Gospel of the Kingdom, and speak to the many other social injustices around him.

Aside from what Jesus related about prophecies concerning himself, we see him directly teaching his disciples who, what, and how with regards to his Father’s kingdom. Take for instance this scene in Matthew: 

Then came to him the mother of Zebedee’s children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him. And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom. But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able. And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father. And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren. But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

In Jesus’ model, the “great” and “chief” one among the brethren is an unselfish, self-sacrificing “minister” or “servant.” He says this model is markedly different than the “princes of the Gentiles” who “exercise dominion over them.” Van Steenwyk puts it quite eloquently in his observation of “servant-leadership” in the New Testament:

[And] it is assumed that there are some who are wiser about discerning the Spirit–who have deeper practices in the way of Jesus. These folks are often considered elders and they can mentor folks just starting out in the way of Jesus. This is what discipleship is all about. Is it hierarchical? Perhaps, but if it is, it is a dynamic hierarchy rather than a static one. The goal of discipleship should never be to have permanent leaders. Rather, it should be to recognize wisdom where it is found, and to learn from that wisdom. Most anarchists do that.

Van Steenwyk’s understanding of New Testament church authority as a dynamic mentorship as opposed to a rigid, “static” one is refreshing, to say the least. It sheds much needed light on forgotten guidelines given by the Apostles themselves. Take for example 1 Peter 5:1-5 where Peter says the leaders are to willingly serve, and not for profit. The elders aren’t to domineer the flock, but lead by example. He even says, “all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.” We see, then, Anarchism—really, true New Testament kingdom living—offers a more equitable way to distribute authority and order, not abolish it. This is Jesus’  and the Apostle’s vision for the ekklesia. This is the process of Anarchy. This is pure “horizontal” relationship. But there’s one more place in the Gospels that stands out and is worth including in our analysis.

In Luke 12:13-15 we have a short but interesting dialogue: 

“And one of the company said unto him, Master, speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me. And he said unto him, Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you? And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.

It’s easy to read too far into this exchange and conclude that Jesus was completely against owning any property—we saw why this is a hurtful conclusion in our previous chapter. Here, Jesus is making a remarkable point: he isn’t a ruler over other men.

This man’s covetousness prompted Jesus to give a parable about a rich man who increases his wealth, builds a larger barn to store it in, and takes such comfort in his storehouse of riches, saying, “take thine ease, eat, drink and be merry.” In other words, the rich man grew proud and forgetful that nothing on earth lasts forever. Jesus’ conclusion was, “So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.” The larger lesson to be learned from this dialogue and parable is that our focus shouldn’t be to amass great wealth, especially by dominating our neighbors. Rather, our treasures should be stored in Heaven.

If we “Christo-Anarchists” are going to advance our unique message to our Fundamentalist and secular-Anarchist friends, we’re going to have to be honest with the reality of hierarchy in the New Testament and general trend toward patriarchy. We need to be ready to rebuke the Fundamentalists who place a premium on rigid male-centric leadership, acceptance of class distinction as a “necessary evil,” and the driveling calls to be ever-more patriotic; we also need to be ready to rebuke the secular-Anarchist whose end-goal is a seemingly complete annulling of distinctions altogether and rejection of any power. We owe it to our neighbors to strike that balance.

I suggest that, for the Christo-Anarchist, the solution is a return to that authority structure outlined in the Gospels and Epistles. We need to teach and show that in the community, otherwise known as “assembly” or ekklesia, there exists the potential for a group of people to function without hurtful distinctions and hierarchies.

Property Destruction/ Iconoclasm

Anarchism strikes at the root of human evil because it seeks to expose the human tendency to place equal, sometimes greater, value on goods—sentiments that tend toward use of force in order to protect. The dialogue in Luke 12 is a great insight to this. When it comes to striking at these roots, we must lament human casualties that result from otherwise legitimate demonstrations of frustration—often expressions of hatred toward the “system” rather than the people. If we understand Anarchism through a purely New Testament lens, we see it’s possible, and even godly, to disregard the “value” of property and still preserve human life. Yes, this is to suggest Jesus isn’t always against destroying “private property.”

Perhaps no other striking example can be given to prove Jesus and his disciples were “destructive” Anarchists than to look at what took place at the Temple. First, we’ll look at Matthew’s account, then John’s:

• And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

• And the Jews' Passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem, And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise. And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.

In this Temple scene, Jesus is a zealous Iconoclast, an Anarchist, whose disdain is directed towards the abuse of private property being used for profit at the expense of human/ spiritual dignity. Remember: the property isn’t “the Jews’,” nor is it the religious leaders’—the property belongs to Jesus’ Father! The “changers of money” had turned something sacred into something common (worldly/ ungodly). They usurped what belonged to God and perverted it. This was a bondage to people who came to worship. Jesus’ actions with the scourge were violent, yes, but they were targeted at property not people. Jesus did, however, give stern rebuke to those present. In either sense—physical or verbal—there’s a destructive message being communicated to an apostate religious institution. This is Anarchism on full display.

To be sure, “Iconoclasm” can be defined as “the action of attacking or assertively rejecting cherished beliefs and institutions or established values and practices; the rejection or destruction of religious images as heretical; the doctrine of iconoclasts.” A skepticism of the legitimacy of these beliefs, values, insinuation, and even objects, can be expressed in verbal condemnation or physical destruction. To reiterate, “Anarchism” was defined earlier as “the abolition of all government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion.” These two are hand-in-glove because they’re both defined by the destruction or abolition of something that’s been deemed “illegitimate” or “heretical.” In the case of Iconoclasm, the target is singularly religious, whereas Anarchism can target both religious and secular institutions. Jesus gave us a holy example.

---

About the Author

Nathan Moon is a house-painter because he “has a useless English degree”. More importantly, he’s a student of Jesus, which is the theme of his blog.

He hopes to one day have a small photography/movie-production company. He lives in Wisconsin with his wife and four daughters.

You can learn more about him and see his work at his website is www.anabaptistapologist.com.

Christians Without Borders

I grew up in churches. My father was in the military, a servant of the United States Empire, which required my family to move pretty frequently. Wherever we ended up, my Mom made sure to find a local church for us to attend on Sundays. 

Most of the time, these churches were Baptist or Southern Baptist—all of the time, these churches subtly mixed worship of the American Empire into their services. The church where I accepted Jesus as my savior had a roof painted like a giant American flag. Cringey, right? 

During my childhood and young adult years, I was taught in church that the Empire was good. The Empire's actions were valid and righteous. We must protect the Empire and confront and defeat her enemies.I believed these ideas to be true. I also believed the Empire's borders were under attack, with evil people constantly wanting to infiltrate and compromise the Empire's sovereignty. Secure borders keep us safe...or so I was told. 

As time progressed, I realized that many of the 'truths' I was taught when I was young were, in fact, propaganda. Chief among these are the myths surrounding borders. For at least 30 years, the Empire has had an issue at its southern border. The south edge of the United States is a gateway to Mexico which connects the Empire to Central and South America. Centuries of meddling in these regions' cultures and economies have led to considerable disparities in prosperity between the Empire and the Central and South American countries. 

The meddling specifically by the United States Empire has allowed drug cartels to overrun many of the nations in Central and South America. These cartels are the de-facto government and rule their territories with iron fists. The more actions the US Empire has taken to curtail the cartels(via the failed war on drugs), the more solidified the cartels' power has become. Millions of people have fled the violence and poverty caused by U.S. meddling and the cartels’ rule. 

Where do these people flee to? The southern border of the U.S. Empire. A line on a map that divides 'us' from 'them.' Debates have raged for years as to why people come to the United States. Undoubtedly, the reasons are as varied as the countries they are leaving behind, but it is undeniable that most people are attempting to find peace and prosperity that is understood to be unattainable in their homelands. 

For the last three decades, the U.S. Empire has tried to prevent people from crossing its southern border 'illegally'. Billions of dollars have been spent to “secure the border” and prevent both people and goods from crossing it. Despite all of the efforts and money that is thrown at the situation, the border conditions have remained essentially unchanged. People remain desperate to reach a place where they have a chance at safety and prosperity. 

The response by Christians in the U.S. has primarily matched that of the government. The prevailing thought is anyone who would violate the United States' laws and not respect the Empire's borders are criminals. Criminals, you see, are not worthy of being part of the Empire. Criminals could never be good Romans. What does this have to do with Christians? Christians, sadly, care about the borders of the Empire almost as much as the Empire does, but the Bible and Jesus himself tell us that this should not be the case. 

Borders, for a Christian, should be irrelevant. For reference, first, let’s take a look at the parable of the Good Samaritan. In Luke Chapter 10, we see Jesus layout how Christians should treat people from other countries and cultures. Here's what the text says: 

On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

"What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"

He answered, "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

"You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live." But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'

"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him."

Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."

In Jesus' time, Jews hated Samaritans. The Jews saw themselves as the superior culture and race, while the Samaritans were considered unclean. While the relations between Jews and Samaritans aren't a 100% correlation to American Christians and immigrants’ relations, there are some parallels we can draw. 

We can see in Luke Chapter 10 Jesus breaks down the barrier between Jews and Samaritans. He is crossing the border that separates 'them' and 'us.' The man speaking to Jesus wants to wiggle off the hook, he wants to know who exactly these “neighbors” are he is supposed to love as himself. This is when Jesus hits him right in the feels. Your neighbors? Your neighbors are those folks you detest. The folks whom you have always been taught are lesser than you, not equal. 

Jesus plainly shows us who our neighbors are: everyone. Yes, even the people we don't like. Yes, even people from other cultures. Yes, even people from other countries. Yes, even people who 'illegally' cross imaginary lines on a map. 

In addition to showing us who our neighbors are, Jesus also guides us on how we should treat our neighbors. The Good Samaritan spends time, resources, and money to help a man he just met; you'll notice the Samaritan didn't ask the man what his reason for being on the road was, nor did he ask where he came from or if he had committed any violations of the law. The Samaritan saw a man in need and helped him. 

There are people in need at the southern border of the United States and many other places worldwide. When we, as Christians, use the border as an excuse to overlook people in need, we are no better than the men in the parable who didn't help, and we certainly aren't loving our neighbors. Rather, we are in defiance of the way Jesus instructed us to treat people. 

Governments use borders to establish their sovereignty and power. Borders tell us who we should care about and who isn't worthy of our time, resources, and money. But they are never mentioned by Jesus. The reality is, borders should be irrelevant to Christians. 

We have other examples of Jesus setting this precedent that borders are irrelevant. In Acts Chapter 1, Jesus ascends to heaven and gives his disciples instructions for the future: 

"But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you. And you will be my witnesses, telling people about me everywhere—in Jerusalem, throughout Judea, in Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

Christians are to carry the story of Jesus everywhere. To the ends of the world. To all of humanity. There's no mention of crossing borders legally (or illegally) or even respecting the sovereignty of the nations we carry the Good News to. 

We aren't told to carry the Good News to the cultures and people who we like, the ones we deem worthy, but we are to take it to everyone. EVERYONE. 

Later in Acts, we see just how Jesus plans to empower the disciples to accomplish this task: 

"And everyone present was filled with the Holy Spirit and began speaking in other languages, as the Holy Spirit gave them this ability.

At that time there were devout Jews from every nation living in Jerusalem. When they heard the loud noise, everyone came running, and they were bewildered to hear their own languages being spoken by the believers.

They were completely amazed. "How can this be?" they exclaimed. "These people are all from Galilee, and yet we hear them speaking in our own native languages! Here we are—Parthians, Medes, Elamites, people from Mesopotamia, Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, the province of Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, Egypt, and the areas of Libya around Cyrene, visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to Judaism), Cretans, and Arabs. And we all hear these people speaking in our own languages about the wonderful things God has done!"

Through the Holy Spirit, God empowered His disciples to preach to people of nations. Their languages weren't a barrier, and no one asked the people in the crowd that day what their legal status was. The Gospel was preached and God was glorified. 

My fellow Bad Romans, I ask you today to look at borders in a new light. Borders are a means to an end for secular government. They serve a purpose for government, and that purpose isn't beneficial to people in need. Jesus did not need borders, He had no love or concern for their protection. So, in turn, we, the image-bearers of Christ, should not concern ourselves with the government-drawn lines on a map. 

Instead, we should love our neighbors. Help people in need. Take the love and Gospel of Jesus Christ to the ends of the earth, and to all people because they are all our neighbors. No more excuses. No more borders.