LUKE 3:1-2
In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar–when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene–during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert.
TIBERIUS CAESAR (Emperor A.D. 14 - 37)
Tiberius was a depressed man who did not want to be a leader. Even though he helped secure the German boarders, his rule was marked with immorality and terror. He had sex with children and adults, men and women, boys and girls. He killed those who spoke against him and may have thrown little children off cliffs for sexual satisfaction. He was a very cruel man and when he died, the people danced in the streets.
PONTIUS PILATE
There were over 40 provinces in the Roman Empire, each of which was typically ruled over by one governor who ruled for one to three years. Pontius Pilate lasted 10 years as a governor.
Pilate was also known to be cruel. His reign was marked with corruption, violence, robbery, ill treatment of people, and continuous executions without formal trials (Philo). He angered those in Jerusalem on at least three major occasions. Once by allowing Roman soldiers to carry by night standards with images on them, and once by taking money from the temple in order to build an aqueduct for Jerusalem. He was met both times with enraged people who forced him to retreat on the first occasion, but he quieted the mob on the second occasion by sending his men into the crowd with daggers, stabbing and killing people at will.
The third occasion was when he set up in Herod's palace shields dedicated to Tiberius Caesar. Caesar himself told him to remove the shields.
HEROD TETRARCH OF GALILEE (ANTIPAS)
I have already written about Herod Antipas and will only remind the reader that Antipas was known for building cities and divorcing his wife in order to marry his brother's wife who was a widow. He is best known for imprisoning and killing John the Baptist because John publicly denounced Herod's divorce and marriage to his brother's wife. The Bible also tells us that John had other things to say about Herod, but the Bible does not let us know what else John said.
PHILLIP TETRARCH OF ITUREA AND TRACONITUS
Little is known about Phillip. He is the half brother of Antipas and married his neice Salome, who together with her mother had John the Baptist killed.
LYSANIAS TETRARCH OF ABILENE
He was the ruler of a small area of whom little is known. There is some discussion about who he was and when he ruled, but because it is all so speculative, I will not deal with it.
ANNAS AND CAIAPHAS
Annas was High Priest from AD 6 until AD 15 when the Roman Governor Valerius Gratus deposed him. After 2 short termed High Priests, his son Antipas was made High Priest. Because both names are mentioned as High Priests, it has been assumed that Israel never really accepted the forced resignation of Annas.
The Talmud described Annas as being cruel and filled with greed. He was a wealthy and arrogant man. Annas had a monopoly on the sale of sacrificial animals as well as the exchanging of money in the temple courts.
It seems that the Caiaphas had a powerful father who may have pulled his strings.
CONCLUSION
Living in Galilee, I would not feel connected to the state or to the capital city (Jerusalem) as I do in the modern world. Secular rulers were foreigners, immoral and vicious to the extreme. It was dangerous to talk to loud about their immoralities or their cruelties.
I would also feel a vast distance from the religious leaders because they were arrogant, very wealthy while I lived in poverty. They lived down South and I lived in the North.
There was a lot more that separated the rich from the masses of poor people that is often overlooked - clothing, behavior, morals, values, dignity, possessions, houses, and even the food that was bought separated the few who were rich such as the Saducees and the High Priests from the masses.
Some in Israel left society in discust and started communities in the desert, but most remained in society and put up with the corruption and inequalities. They endured the arrogance and disdain the wealthy showed them.
In time many in Israel would try but fail to overthrow the Roman government. During Jesus's day however there were a handful of people who tried, but most bided their time waiting for God's intervention.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Friday, July 23, 2010
The Shepherds, Simeon, Anna and the Widow
LUKE 2
Luke 2 does not give us much in the area of politics. The shepherds were told by the angel that Jesus was born in the City of David, implying that a king in the line of King David was born. But as much as his birth city and the excitement of the angels implied that a great king was born the shepherds were told that they could find the child in a manger, and a manger was not the expected birthplace of a king. Be that as it may, being born into poverty did offer the commmon and poorer clases an audience and an intimate connection with the messiah. These Shepherds were invited to share in the celbration of the messiah.
Shepherding, by the way, was not considered a noble profession by Jesus' day, so the fact that angels chose to share their joy with shepherds and not with priests or those who devoted themselves to full time ministry is very telling.
Days after Jesus' birth, in the temple, Simeon reflected on the Covenant that God made with Abraham in Genesis 12 when he prophesied that Jesus would be a light to the Gentiles and the glory of Israel. He also predicted that Jesus would be the cause for the fall and rising of many in Israel. He ended his prophecy with a cryptic message about the suffering Mary would go through so that the hearts of people would be opened up. Politically speaking this passage does not offer us much. However, we do see that Simeon may have seen more than a political and warrior messiah... but this is not clear.
Anna was an old lady who happened to be in the temple when Simeon prophesied about Jesus. Luke tells us that after hearing Simeon and seeing Jesus she spread the news to people who were looking for the redemption of Israel.
The word "redemption" originally meant buying slaves out of slavery, but by the end of the NT it meant deliverence from sin or captivity. Before Jesus' death and resurrection I would guess that dominant opinion focused more on captivity and less on sin, more on deliverance from Rome and less about deliverance from sin.
Luke 2 does not give us much in the area of politics. The shepherds were told by the angel that Jesus was born in the City of David, implying that a king in the line of King David was born. But as much as his birth city and the excitement of the angels implied that a great king was born the shepherds were told that they could find the child in a manger, and a manger was not the expected birthplace of a king. Be that as it may, being born into poverty did offer the commmon and poorer clases an audience and an intimate connection with the messiah. These Shepherds were invited to share in the celbration of the messiah.
Shepherding, by the way, was not considered a noble profession by Jesus' day, so the fact that angels chose to share their joy with shepherds and not with priests or those who devoted themselves to full time ministry is very telling.
Days after Jesus' birth, in the temple, Simeon reflected on the Covenant that God made with Abraham in Genesis 12 when he prophesied that Jesus would be a light to the Gentiles and the glory of Israel. He also predicted that Jesus would be the cause for the fall and rising of many in Israel. He ended his prophecy with a cryptic message about the suffering Mary would go through so that the hearts of people would be opened up. Politically speaking this passage does not offer us much. However, we do see that Simeon may have seen more than a political and warrior messiah... but this is not clear.
Anna was an old lady who happened to be in the temple when Simeon prophesied about Jesus. Luke tells us that after hearing Simeon and seeing Jesus she spread the news to people who were looking for the redemption of Israel.
The word "redemption" originally meant buying slaves out of slavery, but by the end of the NT it meant deliverence from sin or captivity. Before Jesus' death and resurrection I would guess that dominant opinion focused more on captivity and less on sin, more on deliverance from Rome and less about deliverance from sin.
Herod and the Wise Men
MATTHEW CHAPTER 2
Chapter one established that Jesus was the king of the Jews through his geneology and through his virgin birth. It established that Jesus was a king who was going to save people from their own sin. Chapter 2 confirms again the fact that Jesus was a king with enough fame to threaten Israel's own King Herod. Men from the East called Magi came to Herod looking for the child who was born to be a king. Magi were the scientists of Jesus' day who studied dreams and stars to understand the times. In all likelihood they came from Persia bringing gifts fit for a king. They came to Herod telling him that they had seen a star indicating that a king was recently or about to be born for Israel.
Herod had reason to be troubled about this event that played out before him. These magi who were before him were reveared in their country - a country that did not welcome Rome's authority. These men were no doubt bringing gifts in hopes of future alliance with Israel and possibly against Rome.
Chapter one established that Jesus was the king of the Jews through his geneology and through his virgin birth. It established that Jesus was a king who was going to save people from their own sin. Chapter 2 confirms again the fact that Jesus was a king with enough fame to threaten Israel's own King Herod. Men from the East called Magi came to Herod looking for the child who was born to be a king. Magi were the scientists of Jesus' day who studied dreams and stars to understand the times. In all likelihood they came from Persia bringing gifts fit for a king. They came to Herod telling him that they had seen a star indicating that a king was recently or about to be born for Israel.
Herod had reason to be troubled about this event that played out before him. These magi who were before him were reveared in their country - a country that did not welcome Rome's authority. These men were no doubt bringing gifts in hopes of future alliance with Israel and possibly against Rome.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
First Summary
2 Questions to summarize:
1. First of all, how would I summarize everything written so far?
2. Second, what does this have to do with politics today?
I would conclude that with the prophecies; with Israel's immediate political concerns of that day; and with the world views and stories of their own past events, Israel expected a political/ military messiah who would usher in the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God was expected to be worldwide in that it forced all other rulers and nations to obedience, and it was expected to last forever through the reestablished bloodline of King David.
The kingdom however was more than political and military. Through military might and with God's help a new system of justice and righteousness would be established throughout the world in the wake of the takeover. Whether this takeover was the result of a revolution, military overthrow, or a complete act of God is uncertain. Perhaps there were opinions on different sides of this issue.
Before the new kingdom could be established, however, John the Baptist was expected to prepare for the kingdom by renewing hearts and right behavior among the people of Israel. It was his job to prepare Israel for the messiah king who would establish the new kingdom.
Some modern and not so modern theologians claim that Jesus himself held on to the same visions of political and military might. These writers believe that the disciples knew Jesus had political dreams, but because he died unexpectedly the disciples changed Jesus' teachings in order to delete those subjects that were obviously mistaken and embarrassing. The New Testament writers may have also taken politicly offensive material out of Jesus' teachings in order to avoid Roman backlash.
As I move through the Gospels it will be interesting to see if this can be found in the scriptures at all or if these writers are only projecting their own political views into the life of Jesus.
Before Jesus' birth we can see that people definately believed that his mission would be politically and militarily defined, and that's as far as we can take it at this point.
Joseph and Mary were probably not too happy about making a journey during the late months of pregnancy for the purpose of fulfilling some foreign ruler's obsession with counting and taxing his people. No doubt there was a lot of complaining among the people, but through this political act, God was bringing about the fulfilment of scripture that the messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Of this we are confident - God used the self interest of Caesar Augustus to further His kingdom.
God was in control politically then as he is now. We may not see good reasons for what modern rulers do, in fact, at times it is obvious that they serve their own interests. But these scripture passages show us that even though earthly rulers make decisions that negatively affect us all, God can and does use them for his own purposes.
Thus I conclude - God was in control, He is in control and He always will be in control.
Modern political pundits act and talk like God is not control and things are getting worse. They use fear, hatred and anger as tools to win and to keep followers. These three - fear, hatred and anger - I call the unholy triad. They are tools that are used by every side of political debate to convince followers and the undecided to join a particular opinion or a particular group.
I call these three the unholy triad because they contradict the holy triad - faith, hope and love - and they corrupt faith and trust in God. I will address more of this later as I study other books such as Romans, 2 Peter and Jude. For now suffice it to say that even though things look bad on the surface, we can learn from Caesar's self centered political action and how it affected Israel -GOD IS IN CONTROL!
1. First of all, how would I summarize everything written so far?
2. Second, what does this have to do with politics today?
I would conclude that with the prophecies; with Israel's immediate political concerns of that day; and with the world views and stories of their own past events, Israel expected a political/ military messiah who would usher in the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God was expected to be worldwide in that it forced all other rulers and nations to obedience, and it was expected to last forever through the reestablished bloodline of King David.
The kingdom however was more than political and military. Through military might and with God's help a new system of justice and righteousness would be established throughout the world in the wake of the takeover. Whether this takeover was the result of a revolution, military overthrow, or a complete act of God is uncertain. Perhaps there were opinions on different sides of this issue.
Before the new kingdom could be established, however, John the Baptist was expected to prepare for the kingdom by renewing hearts and right behavior among the people of Israel. It was his job to prepare Israel for the messiah king who would establish the new kingdom.
Some modern and not so modern theologians claim that Jesus himself held on to the same visions of political and military might. These writers believe that the disciples knew Jesus had political dreams, but because he died unexpectedly the disciples changed Jesus' teachings in order to delete those subjects that were obviously mistaken and embarrassing. The New Testament writers may have also taken politicly offensive material out of Jesus' teachings in order to avoid Roman backlash.
As I move through the Gospels it will be interesting to see if this can be found in the scriptures at all or if these writers are only projecting their own political views into the life of Jesus.
Before Jesus' birth we can see that people definately believed that his mission would be politically and militarily defined, and that's as far as we can take it at this point.
Joseph and Mary were probably not too happy about making a journey during the late months of pregnancy for the purpose of fulfilling some foreign ruler's obsession with counting and taxing his people. No doubt there was a lot of complaining among the people, but through this political act, God was bringing about the fulfilment of scripture that the messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Of this we are confident - God used the self interest of Caesar Augustus to further His kingdom.
God was in control politically then as he is now. We may not see good reasons for what modern rulers do, in fact, at times it is obvious that they serve their own interests. But these scripture passages show us that even though earthly rulers make decisions that negatively affect us all, God can and does use them for his own purposes.
Thus I conclude - God was in control, He is in control and He always will be in control.
Modern political pundits act and talk like God is not control and things are getting worse. They use fear, hatred and anger as tools to win and to keep followers. These three - fear, hatred and anger - I call the unholy triad. They are tools that are used by every side of political debate to convince followers and the undecided to join a particular opinion or a particular group.
I call these three the unholy triad because they contradict the holy triad - faith, hope and love - and they corrupt faith and trust in God. I will address more of this later as I study other books such as Romans, 2 Peter and Jude. For now suffice it to say that even though things look bad on the surface, we can learn from Caesar's self centered political action and how it affected Israel -GOD IS IN CONTROL!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)