Doctor Streuss, I certainly share your view of Jesus intending disruption in order to take aim at changing the society which causes the suffering and injury to people. How to do that was not clear then nor is it clear now. A few decades back I spent some time reading Catholic liberation theology. Some of that impressed me strongly, some of it clearly more extreme than my views would fallow. Some folks (not the theologians so much) championed Niceragua's Daniel Ortega who over the years appears to have become oppressive just like the oppressors he replaced. Political solutions are hard to find, or at least any cure all ones. I think the reality is slow progress joined with better human understanding.Doctor Steuss wrote: ↑Wed Aug 28, 2024 9:55 pmThank you Huckleberry again, for taking time to share your thoughts (and help me in refining my own).
First and foremost, you remind me how I've neglected reading Wright. I've only read one of his books, and it was so long ago, I don't even remember the name. I just remember it was an Eerdman offering, and was on Paul.
I hope you'll indulge me in one of my speculative views (particularly as it likely paints Jesus as more of a revolutionary than as deity leading mankind to heaven). I think part of the disruption was to shift the power balance from Roman rule, and also eschew whatever benefits of being a part of the empire brought (luxuries, comforts, security, etc.) that might influence allegiances. I recall reading a speculative article many moons ago that the teachings about "turning the other cheek," and carrying a pack twice as far were ultimately acts of civil disobedience against Roman norms and law. Going from memory, so take that with a very large grain of salt. Of course, the "render unto Caeser" might throw a wrench in this.huckelberry wrote: ↑Wed Aug 28, 2024 9:19 pmYes ,it is clear Jesus intended to be disruptive. But to what end? chaos? A society honoring God and loving fellow man? A magic kingdom where a special few sit around celibate and being fed by God?
Ultimately, in my own personal view, I think the disruption to the status quo was meant to do away with a system (religious, economic, and political) that almost mandated that some suffer in order for others to rise to positions of prominence. He was a champion of the marginalized, the poor, the "least of these." The common thread that I find is a Teacher who is trying to alleviate suffering -- not just by trying to physically and spiritually heal individuals, but also heal the very society which caused the pain and suffering in the first place. A society where a pure love leaves no room for judgement, hoarding, suffering, etc.
At least that's the Jesus I have found within the New Testament. I know that my own personal views likely largely color that image. It's hard to tell though (for me, that is) if that disruption was with an eye to the overall future, or with an eye to what was perceived to be a near eminent end.
People need to understand their own limitations and responsibilities and recognize and help the limitations of others. I hear that all around Jesus's instructions along with the disruptive elements.
