Jesus and violence

In addressing the underlying violence in nearly the whole of Jesus' ministry, it's necessary to first examine his methodology. This is especially relevant given the historical context in which we find Jesus operating.

Rome had occupied Jerusalem for quite some time. Like any occupying army, the Romans kept the Jews on a short leash. Violence from the Jewish insurrection group known as the Zealots prompted what we would call a serious curtailing of civil liberties. Overtly political speech was censored or punished. No criticism of Rome was allowed and anything deemed too offensive was addressed swiftly and cruelly.

Thus, for someone in Jesus' position, the use of secrecy was paramount. He would need to lay out his doctrines, but not in such a way as to attract undue attention. Jesus makes it clear more than once, his intent is to do just that. His messages were coded so as only a certain few would get understanding of them. In Matthew 19:11, he says "All men cannot understand this saying, except those for whom it is intended."

This was not to imply there were people who could not or would not understand the message if it was explained to them. Indeed, Jesus made it clear his secrecy was intentionally aimed at keeping certain people out and others in.

"And the disciples came and asked, "Why do you speak to them in parables?" He answered, "Because you are permitted to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but they are not permitted."

For whoever has, to him shall be given, and he shall have more in abundance. But whoever does not have, even that which he has shall be taken away"

- Matthew 13:10-15

The exclusionary deception is even more evident in Mark 4:10-12:

"But, when he was in private... the twelve asked him the meaning of the parable. And he said, "You are permitted to know the secrets of the kingdom of God. But to those outside, these things are said in parables, so that they may see but not perceive, and may hear but not understand Otherwise, they would be converted, and their sins would be forgiven! "

Jesus is saying that without his deliberate attempts at clouding his message, the wrong sorts of people would become his followers. This raises the questions of why he would keep some in the dark and allow others to have understanding and also what message he was truly teaching.

We gain a glimpse of his true message through the "field of weeds" parable in Matthew 13. Once again, Jesus deliberately obfuscates his message, as reported by Matthew:

"Jesus spoke all these things to the people in parables; and he said nothing to them without a parable..."

After sending the crowd away, Jesus' disciples press him for the hidden meaning of the parable. Matthew records this as well:

37. He said to them, "He who plants the good seed is the Son of man.

38. "The field is the world, the good seed are the children of the kingdom, and the weeds are the children of the wicked one.

39. The enemy who planted them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the world, and the reapers are the angels.

40. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be at the end of this world.

41. The Son of Man will send forth his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all those that are objectionable, and those who commit iniquity,

42. and shall cast them into a furnace of fire.

43. There shall be crying and gnashing of teeth!

This startling revelation shows the inherent notion of a violent uprising by Jesus and his followers, backed by an angelic army under Jesus' command. His earlier declarations of who is to understand and who is to be confused becomes a clear attempt keeping certain people as enemies of his religion.

It is worth noting this lesson is never given to the general public. Not only would it have been highly inflammatory speech, attracting the attention of the Roman authorities, but it would also have tipped his hand toward those political enemies of Jesus, namely the Jewish Sanhedrin of that time.

Jesus continues to drive home the point that those who are not with him, are against him. In Luke 12:9, he says "he who denies me before men shall be denied before the angels of God", which is clearly a threat of being seen as an enemy when the angelic army comes to Earth.

His followers embraced this mentality. We see in their later writings the same evidence of "with us or against us". In 1st John 2, the clear delineation is made between those who will win and those who will lose in the coming war:

22. Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Messiah? This is antichrist: one who denies the Father and the Son.

23. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father. He who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

24. Therefore let that which you have heard from the beginning have acceptance in you. If that which you have heard from the beginning is accepted in you, you shall be accepted by the Son, and by the Father.

John carries this further in chapter 3, using a simplistic form of logic to justify who survives and who dies in the coming slaughter:

4. Whoever commits sin also commits iniquity, for sin is iniquity.

5. Whoever accepts him (Jesus) does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen nor known him.

6. Children, let no one deceive you: He who works righteousness is righteous, just as he is righteous.

7. He who commits sin is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning...

8. Whoever is born of God does not commit sin, for his seed resides in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

9. In this way, the children of God are made known, as are the children of the devil...

The four Gospels of the New Testament paint a picture of two very different sides to Jesus. His public statements can be seen as pious and peaceful, promoting brotherly love among all people. His private statements to the core group of followers, however, shows a man readying them for war.

If placed within the contextual framework of Jesus' ministry, we arrive once again at the Zealots and their opposition to Rome and cooperating religious leaders. Comprised of multiple sects of ancient Judaism, including the mystical Essenes, of which Jesus can also be identified with, the Zealots advocated overthrowing Rome and returning Israel to self-sovereignty, even as it also opposed the slackening from the Mosaic law among the Jewish leadership.

Jesus' own conflicts with the religious authorities reveal his probable alliance with the Zealots. While the Sanhedrin walked a very fine line in maintaining Jewish religious practices and Roman orders, they are completely vilified in the Gospel accounts of them. Indeed, they are the portrayed as representing the very people Jesus and his angelic army will come to wipe out.

Comparing Jesus' own words and deeds to what we know of the day to day activities in Jerusalem at that time, the logical conclusion of his ministry is one of violence through deception. The more fantastic and miraculous events of his life, finding no external cooberation with historical accounts, show him to be something of an exalted rebel leader. He was a virtual William Wallace, a tale growing larger with every telling.

For probably this reason and many similar ones, the Zealot uprisings reached their peak in 70 a.d., when Rome finally smashed the resistance and demolished the Temple. The Jews were scattered into diaspora and the writings of early Christians reveal a patient, but desperate waiting for Jesus to come back with his angel army and wreak vengeance. They theorize what will likely happen, even making predictions of the level of violence which will ensue when he returns, all the while keeping a watchful eye on the sky and avoiding overt detection from the still powerful Romans.

That tacit message of predicted violence has carried down through the generations since, filtering into nearly every facet of Christian theology. It is still alive and well in the present, with various theologians and politicians advocating aggressive militaristic stances toward those seeming threats to Christian ideals and goals.