Two Faces of Jesus?
I saw this on Facebook this morning:
I don’t really know where to begin with this as there’s a lot of nonsense on both sides, as well as anachronisms and seeming attempts to undermine basic Christian doctrine. So, I’ll just go through all of the claims in turn…
Colonizer Jesus
Huh? What does that even mean?
White
Of course not, but he’s been portrayed in art throughout with many different ethnic features.
Christian
This is a nonsensical term to describe Jesus as He is not a Christian, but the Christ. The only people I’ve ever heard even ask the question whether Jesus was a Christian are Muslims.
Patriotic
Well, He began His mission with His own people and He wept over the capital city, so it would be strange to deny He expressed love towards His country… but He’s the creator of all and His mission was ultimately extended to all nations.
Justice through retribution
Not exactly sure what axe this is trying to grind. Maybe something in relation to theories of Atonment? (Isaiah 53:5). Or is it rejecting the idea of punishment for sin in general?
Died for your sins
Of course, this is essential Christian doctrine (Mark 10:45). Is this seriously being denied?
Sends sinners to Hell
One of the points of the Creed is that He will “judge the living and the dead” and this is amply confirmed by Scripture (Matthew 25:31-46). Is this also being rejected?!
Silent in the face of oppression
He was silent in the face of His own oppression in the Passion, but He certainly spoke out against some of the injustices of the day.
Condemns sinners
It depends what you mean. We’ve already seen that He will judge the living and the dead. During His earthly ministry He told people to “repent” and to “sin no more”. However, he didn’t tell those who were sinning that they were incapable of repenting.
Endorses Church and State
Once again, it depends what you mean, but He said that He was going to build His Church on Peter and imbued His Church with His Authority. Likewise, He said render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and told Pilate that He only had authority because it had been given to him by God.
A King
Of course (John 1:49)! Is this even in question?
Upholds Traditional Family Unit
Seems to be the case (Matthew 19:19).
Endorses Holy War
Depends what you mean by “Holy War”, particularly if it’s conceded that He gave His authority to His Church. He seems to have been okay at least with the possession of a couple of swords (Luke 22:38).
Historical Jesus
Wait, is it claiming that everything we’ve looked at so far isn’t historical? On what basis?!
Middle eastern brown skinned
Of course (Matthew 1).
Jewish
Of course (Matthew 1). Who’s been denying this?
Colonized by Rome
Yes, Rome had installed Herod as a puppet king.
Justice through restoration
Not entirely sure what this means, but there are definitely examples of those who extorted making amends (Luke 19:8). Or is this talking about the Atonement?
Killed by Church and State
“Church” here is anachronistic, but it’s true that He was killed by cooperation of the Jewish Sanhedrin and the Roman Governor. It’s worth noting, however, that Jesus says that “No one takes [my life] from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father.” (John 10:18)
Friend of sinners and outcasts
Absolutely (Matthew 9:11)
Liberates the Oppressed
Yup, plenty of healings and exorcisms (Luke 11:14)
Critiques religious people
He certainly critiqued some religious people (Matthew 23) and praised others (John 1:47, Matthew 11:11).
Subverts empire
I can’t think of an example of how Jesus did this directly. He paid His taxes and taught to give the government what it was due. However, He certainly sowed the seeds which would grow in His Church which would ultimately take over the Roman Empire.
Homeless Man and Child Refugee
I’m assuming this is a reference to Matthew 2:13 and Luke 9:58. However, Egypt was still part of the same Empire so “refugee” isn’t really a good description of His time in Egypt. It seems fair to describe Jesus as functionally homeless, as he was a travelling preacher and would have probably often slept out in the open.
Had half siblings
If the Early Church’s assessment of things is correct, these would have been either step siblings (children from Joseph’s earlier marriage) or cousins. However, what’s really troubling about this entry is it seems to be placed in opposition to “Upholds Traditional Family Unit”!
Non violent
Yup (Acts 8:32) although some people at the Temple might disagree (John 2:15).
Any insight into Samuel 15 three
There are two books of Samuel.
In the first book it says:
…and in the second book it says:
So…
1. Which passage?
2. What’s your question?
3. How does it relate to this post?
Jesus WAS a political refugee. Herod decreed that all male children under the age of two be slain in his Kingdom. (Matthew 2:16-18)
His parents fled the Kingdom of Herod and went to Egypt. They fled to avoid persecution of their King… When that King died, (and it was safe again), they returned.
He really wasn’t – I already cited the passage you mentioned in the post. The Holy Family never left the Roman Empire, they simply fled from one region of Roman territory to another Roman territory, much like someone moving from San Diego, California to Phoenix, Arizona.
No. Your argument doesn’t hold up. Joseph, and Mary didn’t “move” from Judea to Egypt… They fled in the face of their King’s decree to kill every male child under the age of two within his Kingdom. Why did Herod make this decree? Because he perceived this new bloodline as a threat to his (and his families) continued political power in Judea.
Joseph and Mary and Jesus were political refugees, fleeing a death sentence against Jesus.
Let’s look at your ridiculous example: If the Governor of California enacted a law condemning all children under the age of two to death and families fled to Arizona, they would be considered refugees. If that law was based on the political threat to the CA Governor, (like I said: Your example is ridiculous), then they would be Political Refugees.
I have a question for you: Why is it important that Jesus WASN’T a political refugee? I find it very much in keeping with the story of Jesus’ life…. (Born in a manger…poor parents… a carpenter—following in his father’s footsteps… preaching in the desert… few possessions). In fact, his being a refugee is PART and PARCEL of his life story.
Why is it necessary to deny this simple truth about Jesus?
You’re focussing on the wrong word. The point is that they never left the Roman Empire. They went from one territory to another. I wouldn’t call Luther a refugee when he fled to Wittenberg because other parts of Germany were too dangerous for him.
No, only those in Bethlehem and its environs.
Only in the broadest possible sense, and not in the sense that this graphic really wants people to think.
It’s not particularly important other than it’s not particularly accurate. If one wanted to make a Biblical case for caring for refugees (“a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.”) there are far better passages to use. I’m not against refugees, just bad arguments.
Do you deny that Jesus is a king who died for your sins, judges the living and the dead, founded a church, affirmed the role of the state, …because this graphic seems to, despite what Scripture says.