Enough has already been said about John's preaching against Herod and how it got him beheaded. I have also dealt somewhat with Israel's own religious authorities and I have written somewhat about the crowds and their power. So what remains?
Both John the Baptist and Jesus added two dimensions to the political environment of their day. First of all, by saying that the kingdom of God was coming, all who heard understood that a political and social change of the political system was about to take place. With such a change it was assumed that a new king would replace Herod and perhaps even Caesar. Such a change would also mean that a new system throughout the land would be established that would remove the powers that were in existence. In John's day several people made claims to be the messiah and promised to bring in a new political kingdom, so anybody hearing about John or Jesus without carefully listening to them could assume the same for them.
A new social and political system would be certainly welcomed by the religious leaders, but only as it benefited their own self interests. They wanted God to intervene and to establish Israel as the head of the nations, but they assumed such an intervention would continue and augment their own leadership roles. A kingdom established among the poor and powerless and for the poor and powerless was not what they were looking for, nor was it welcome. The poor and powerless then as always are a people who were deemed untrained, uneducated, unsophisticated and unfit for the world of politics.
In their eyes John was just another wanna be... just another egotistical dreamer who led away the ignorant and the unlearned. When John was arrested and beheaded, they did not lose any sleep over it, it was one less problem to deal with... with his death the crowds were less out from under their control.
Politically speaking, John's ministry was a threat to the authorities because he was creating a following that was not sanctioned by Rome or by Jerusalem. John created a group outside the established channels, so therefore, he was a threat to them.
Established powers rarely get along (unless they have common enemies or common goals) but they have learned to recognize each other's power and have learned to accept the other's legitimacy if they have to. New powers (groups such as John's) however are accepted only insofar as they don't encroach on or speak against the power structures, become a threat, become numerous, or become influencial. As John's ministry grew and as he spoke out against the sins of the authorities he posed a bigger and bigger threat to Herod and to the religious leaders.
CONCLUSION - JOHN AND POLITICS
Although John did not run for office or seek political power, he did speak out against Herod and he gave no respect to the religious leaders of his day. He refused to baptise them unless they followed his interpretation of the Law. This would have offended them terribly for they spent their lives studying and following the Law and were deemed the legitimate interpreters of the Law.
Put yourself in their position. You have a degree in Theology from a trusted Seminary and you have prided yourself in knowing and following the Bible well. Now imagine that somebody else comes along and tells you that you have missed the mark and need to change your behavior and how you interpret scripture. This same person has a strong following of common people who know very little of the Bible and follow just about every and any new thing that comes along.
John was that kind of leader who upset the powers around him, not by running for office but by creating a following that disrespected the authorities around them. I say they disrespected them because John spoke about them in not so glowing light by pointing out their lack of morality and need for right living. On the surface it looks like John held these views and introduced these views to his followers, but it is very likely that John openly preached what was quietly talked about among the people.
No comments:
Post a Comment