Jesus, the non-violent resister?

[David]

For all of my life I had been taught that Jesus was a prophet, (not a god) and that he preached good virtue and spirituallity etc.  But some time ago I started to study the methods of Dr. King, and to a far lessor extent, Gandhi.  Suddenly concepts such as turning the other cheek, loving your enemies, meekness, peace, all started to make sense.  Outside of peaceful resistance to Roman domination, and a corrupt theocracy and monarchy, such concepts did not go well with reality.  Such theories wouldn't mean much, if they did not work.  But the nonviolent resistances have been remarkably successful.  Racism has been significatly reduced, women have largely gained equality with men, gay/lesbian have gained civil rights unimaginable 100 years ago, all of these groups have gained freedoms that they could not gain through violence.  At almost any point in history, all of these groups would have been violently supressed or killed, equality was not an option.  Not to say it is close to perfect, but the fact is, the turning of the cheek worked where the eye for an eye did not. 

I came to the libertarian philosophy from a natural law perspective.  I believed God made the natural laws, that man was free to try to break, but he would have to live with the consequences of his choice to break them.  Part of this perspective, was a belief that God did not make man to have to commit violence to fulfill his needs.  Even the right of self defense was limited to the right only to neutralize harm. 

Side note:  I think traditional Christianity has deified or made Jesus into a god, because the concepts of non violent resistance and potential overthrow of the romans was a radical concept at the time, (keep in mind the messiah was supposed to free the tribes of Israel from outside domination,) and his status of a holy man.  Combined led to him being called the son of God, which led to him being the literal Son of God. 

Has anyone else seen the things I have in the bible, particularly in the four gospels and the book of James? 

Please realize that this is a religious discussion, um, please discuss with maturity.   

[Jitgos]

Has anyone else seen the things I have in the bible, particularly in the four gospels and the book of James?

Yep! If you haven't already check out http://www.embassyofheaven.com/ . I don't know that I agree with everything on the site, but there's a lot of good there.

[Caleb]

Yes.

Leo Tolstoy's "The Law of Love and the Law of Violence" sums up the essence of the Christ's teaching.  The Christ came in the tradition of the Jewish prophets. We think of "prophecy" as "telling the future" but that wasn't really the prime focus of the Jewish prophets. Mainly, they called the people to a spirit of reconciliation with God.

You can find Tolstoy's essay here:  http://www.calebjohnson.org/lawoflove.pdf

It isn't a quick read (64 pages) but it is worth it.

[Caleb]

Here's a quick quote from this brilliant essay:

Ask the majority of Christians what they consider the greatest evil from which Christ freed humanity and they will say: from Hell, from eternal fire, from punishment in the next world. As a corollary to this they think that salvation is something that someone else can achieve for us. The word hell, which is seldom met in the Holy Scriptures, has done much harm to Christianity as a result of false interpretations. People run away from external hell which they are made to fear most of all. The salvation that man needs most and that which gives him freedom is redemption from the evil within his soul. There is something far worse than eternal punishment. It is the sin of the soul being in rebellion against God; the soul, endowed with God's strength, yielding itself to the force of bestial instinct; the soul which exists before God, yet fears the threats and fury of men, preferring human glory to its own peaceful awareness of virtue. There is no fate worse than this. And it is this that the unrepentant person carries with him to the grave. And it is this we ought to fear. To gain salvation, in the highest meaning of the word, means to raise the fallen spirit, cure the sick soul, give it back its freedom of thought, conscience and love. In this lies the salvation for which Christ died. It is for this salvation that we have been given the Holy Spirit, and it is towards this salvation that the Christian teaching is directed.

[K. Darien Freeheart]

I've always thought it amazing how many people read about Jesus and don't come to that conclusion. Talk to Gene the Christian Anarchist, he can give you a long list of why believes that Jesus was in fact an anarchist.

It's really hard to reconcile "Obey earthly authority" and "All authority comes from God alone" without placing the State on par with God...

[David]

I am not certain Jesus was an anarchist, but he clearly does not see the state or 'authorities' of the day as even close to the stature of God.  I find it interesting that he is asked if he pays taxes, and in the trial in front of the Sanhedrin he is accused of not paying taxes.   

   

[Caleb]

You're quite right, David. Jesus was charged with forbidding the paying of taxes to Caesar at his trial. Jesus, of course, didn't speak at his trial, other than to pronounce judgment on the entire Sanhedrin, and to likewise give an insolent remark to Pilate, "You would have no authority at all, except my father allows it!" 

I find it strange that Jesus' remarks "Pay Caesar's things to Caesar, but God's things to God" is used as the definitive statement of Jesus' ideas on taxation. It's strange that these words are so commonly used for two reasons. 1) Jesus never explicitly says to pay taxes to Caesar, his statement is enigmatic, and refers the hearer right back to where he was before by asking him to question what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God. So the statement can only be used to support paying taxes by reading into it what the hearer wants to read into it. (Which was Jesus' intent in the first place:  that's why he gave the enigmatic answer that he did...he was aware that they were trying to trap him.) If you read it from the viewpoint that everything belongs to God and nothing belongs to Caesar, then the statement could be taken to mean not to pay taxes to Caesar.    2)  The main reason that it is weird that Jesus' opinion on taxation is reduced to the "pay Caesar's things to Caesar" comment is that Jesus is on record for saying something much less ambiguous regarding taxation.  This from Matthews gospel, the 17th chapter:

When they came to Capernaum, those who collected the two-drachma tax came to Peter and said, "Does your teacher not pay the two-drachma tax?" He [Peter] said, "Yes." And when he came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, "What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth collect customs or poll-tax, from their sons or from strangers?" When Peter said, "From strangers," Jesus said to him, "Then the sons are exempt. "However, so that we do not offend them, go to the sea and throw in a hook, and take the first fish that comes up; and when you open its mouth, you will find a shekel. Take that and give it to them for you and Me."   

 

[Russell Kanning]

you can also use Jesus methods of answering a question with a question ... like some like to do with cops ... it works well ... but doesn't always keep you from harm.

[Sam A. Robrin]

you can also use Jesus methods of answering a question with a question ... like some like to do with cops ... it works well ... but doesn't always keep you from harm.

. . . as His experience so aptly demonstrates!

[Jitgos]

People always bring up the Caesar quote as justifying taxation and not seeing taxation for the plain theft that is obviously is (thou shall not steal, anyone?). First of all as others have said he was playing with words to stump them. If he was so obviously saying pay taxes to Caesar then why would the people have been so astonished by what he said? Obviously that's not what he meant. Also, there are numerous scriptures where he plainly states that tax collectors are as low or lower than the average sinner. If you look at more than one verse it's plain to see the truth of what he was saying.

If you look at the scriptures that talk about obeying authority you'll find that they are either talking about the leaders in the church or there's a reason given. The reason given to following the civil authority at times is so that you are not seen as a law breaker and people will more more apt to listening to your message of freedom (kingdom of god). Look at how many followers of Christ were put in prison and put to death. If they were out there preaching that everyone should obey all the civil leaders and their statutes they wouldn't have been persecuted like that. It doesn't make any sense.