We are presently involved in a study of N.T. Wright’s book, Simply Jesus.[1] We’ve discussed Jesus’ resurrection and his ascension into heaven, and we are now looking at what that should mean in terms of Jesus’ authority today. We declare that Jesus reigns at this very moment, praying for the Kingdom of God to spread over the Earth, as it is so in Heaven (Matthew 6:10). Nevertheless, how could Jesus be reigning, considering the evil so prevalent in the world today? How can Jesus be reigning, according to the scriptures, if his reign is supposed to set all things right, vis-à-vis right all wrongs, cure all ills, punish the evil-doers and reward the righteous?
For some this may be a good question! Nevertheless, its premise exposes a gross misunderstanding of the scriptures that pertain to the coming Kingdom of God. Consider Jesus’ own public ministry, and that of the early Christians during the first century AD. Although Jesus openly criticized the works of the then current political authorities (especially the Jewish authorities), he didn’t oppose them with physical force or violence. Moreover, as we consider the preaching of the early Christians, especially that of Peter and Paul, we may describe them in similar terms. For example, when Peter was cast into prison by the Jewish authorities (Acts 4:1-3), he exposed their wrongdoings (Acts 4:6-14), but he neither threatened them with an overthrow nor used violence of any sort to gain his release (Acts 4:18-20). Additionally, Paul exposed the injustice of the local authorities at Philippi (Acts 16:19-24, 36-40), but he didn’t threaten them with violence to gain his release or put them in fear of retribution.
From the perspective of the Kingdom of God, everything was done out of weakness and vulnerability. Christians were often perceived as a threat to the then present order of things, but the threat of the Kingdom of God is of a different order. God’s Kingdom is NOT like the kingdoms of this world (John 18:36), which, although they promise peace, prosperity, freedom and justice, they, ironically, accomplish those ends through violence, the exact opposite of what they promise. Any success of this world’s governments is accomplished through the shedding of blood of those who oppose them.
Jesus told his followers that the way of the gentiles is to exercise their authority over others by brute force (Matthew 20:25), but this was not to be so among his followers (Matthew 20:26). Instead, those in the highest authoritative positions in God’s Kingdom would be the greatest servants, and whosoever wishes to be first must choose to become the slave of the needs of others (Matthew 20:27)! The irony of the Kingdom of God is the opposite of that of this world’s kingdoms. Any suffering that occurs over change is experienced by Jesus and his leading disciples. It is through their suffering that peace, freedom and justice come to others.
So, indeed, the Kingdom of God is coming upon the earth, and Jesus does, in fact, reign, but none of this clearly appears in truth, as do the accomplishments of the kingdoms of this world. The whole method of doing things in the service of God is accomplished differently, and in many cases completely opposite to the ways of this world. Therefore, if one is to judge the success or failure of the Kingdom of God, one must do so using the terms, concerning which the Kingdom claims things will be accomplished.
If we look only at how things were done in Biblical times and compare what we know to be so today, what would we find? First of all, the world was ruled by kings and nobles, and their word was law. Today, the trend has been to put more power in the hands of the people and the leaders, at least theoretically, serve them, and leadership is judged by how close they come to accomplishing that end (cp. Matthew 20:25-26). Whether or not we wish to claim the witness of the Church has caused this to be so, the fact remains, these conditions are so today, but were not so during Biblical times. Moreover, this is the manner in which Jesus said things should be done. Of course, abuse is almost a matter of course, because, after all, the nations are angry over the fact that Jesus reigns (Revelation 11:15, 18). In other words, the trend of things is not, according to the wishes of the leaders of the nations, today or in ancient times. Nevertheless, the trend of governing, today, is closer to God’s method of governing through human judges (see the Book of Judges) instead of the world’s way of kings and nobles, vis-à-vis brute force.
We could go on to include the sciences (remember it was the church’s idea to educate the masses of people), and health, caring for the poor and the weaker folks among us, like children and the elderly, many of whom were cast into the streets, when they were no longer wanted by their families centuries ago. Of course, one could say men evolved, but the fact remains, loving others, including one’s enemy, is what Jesus taught and the Church practiced in the early centuries. So, however we may define the reason, the supposed end of our labors today resembles more of what Christ taught 2000 years ago, than what was practiced by Rome and Greece at the birth of Christianity 2000 years ago.
So, is Jesus ruling today? I believe the evidence shows that he is, but his accomplishments are not according to the ways of this world. To be fair, then, one must judge this true or false, not by this world’s methods of doing things, but according to the claims of scripture.
____________________________________________
[1] Although I am using the sections of Dr. Wright’s book (chapters and subsections) as a guide to this study, I don’t always agree with his conclusions, and/or I take a different path to explain what his words have triggered in my mind and heart. Therefore, although I do agree with perhaps 80% of the positions he takes in this book, it is very unlikely that he would agree with the conclusions I draw, especially those that deviate from the path he had chosen in writing Simply Jesus. So, those who may follow my studies need to understand this and draw their own conclusions.