bacht

I don't know how to answer your question. The traditional Day of the Lord was supposed to be a reckoning against the enemies of Israel, complete with signs and wonders in nature. A glorious new age of peace and harmony was supposed to follow, but in this world.

I don't know how the Pharisees imagined the end, but they did support the Zealots in their military adventures against Rome (though they opposed Hasmonean expansionism a few generations earlier). I'm not clear on the details but I think the Zealots saw Rome as the ultimate kingdom of this world, the final opponent of God in the cosmic struggle of good vs evil.

Elijah

If the enemy is a political opponent like Rome then I think you must have a somewhat political understanding of the Christian reform. I'm now unsure of what you are arguing against with what I am saying; in this being a case of an anti king trying to establish a new kind of kingdom to counter the oppressive empires/kingdoms.

bacht

Jesus was supposed to have said to Pilate "My kingdom is not of this world". There is the existential interpretation of the kingdom being present here and now among those who do God's will, but most of the NT seems to be talking about something more ethereal.

My take on the early Xtians is that they abandoned hope of any political solution to the problem of evil, and turned to supernaturalism for relief from their anxiety.

Elijah

New days and new worlds can be seen like what we are experiencing now in modern society. Jesus' kingdom wasn't of that world how it was then but as you said the expected change was supposed to happen here/there in the real world. So now in America this could be considered his world, if this nation actually considered him king instead of just using his name to get elected. You don't have to imagine a supernatural/ethereal kingdom if you consider ideological kingdoms which is the actual basis of kingdoms/empires.

So you believe the kingdom of god/heaven is referring to a supernatural pagan understanding of Heaven where the dead live and no actual resurrection of the dead?

bacht

This world could be a paradise if we all worked together honestly and diligently. Until that day various kinds of evil great and small will remain with us.

If you want to dream about other dimensions or eternity go for it, you're in the majority afaics.

Elijah

This doesn't answer my questions about how you are understanding what is being attempted in the Gospels.

If you want to interpret it as being about other dimensions then I would suggest reconsidering that assumption even if you're in the majority with that thinking.

spamandham

The gospels are an origins story. Their purpose is not to act as the source of a new political movement, but instead, they reflect the beliefs of a pre-existing religious cult. The death by crucifixion (on a tree, which was equated with crucifixion at the time) of the messiah was foretold by the Old Testament...or at least that's how it came to be understood.

I don't believe the original audience of the gospels thought of Jesus as a real person of the past. I think they recognized him as the humanization of scriptural allegories of the Jewish people themselves. Their sufferings become his suffering. The destruction of their temple becomes the destruction of his temple (body). The foolishness of messianic Jews who take actions that result in their own destruction becomes foolish Jews taking action that result in the death of their own unrecognized messiah, and so on.

Primarily from reading Matthew and the numerous descriptions that explain what the kingdom of god is all about.

Same ol shit and slavery. They were seeking a spiritual transformation, not a political transformation. The political transformation had been tried and failed. Christianity was all about rejecting messianic dreams and learning to live happily within the Roman system. It replaces messianic dreams with afterlife dreams.

Elijah

An origin of what? If it’s not a messianic movement what kind of cult’s origin do you think is being portrayed?

I think the OT scripture gets understood/interpreted that way to give support to him being the messiah, not because the Jews actually thought the messiah was going to be defeated at the time of the Jesus story.

You think the gospels are presenting a representation of Jewish people in Jesus who is gets rejected by the Jewish people? As it’s presented now or are you just speculating on a proto gospel? What does the gospel say to you in regards to the messiah expectations and Jesus? How do we interpret the Jewish people personified being considered the messiah by some Jews?
Citation that shows he was talking about pure enlightenment with no expected social/political ramifications. And what was he enlightening them about again?
While I agree that Christianity was a rejection of the normal messianic idea of salvation. Rome was too powerful of an enemy for the old idea of force to work so I new kind of messianic dream had to evolve.

What I don’t agree with is that there was no goal to them pushing Jesus as the messiah and it was just a form of giving up. It sounds more like you giving up on understanding the point of his sacrifice and the gospels. I don’t think being willing to martyr yourself for exalting Jesus as the Christ is living happily within the Roman system. If Christians did live happily within Rome and weren’t executed and blamed for burning Rome and didn’t try to make all of Rome Christian then maybe you would have a case that it was a religion of people just saying go with the flow and no goal in mind but obviously they had some touch-ups in mind for the empire.

It’s hard to imagine a guy trying to get everyone to worship him and follow his example and not think that he had some social/political changes in mind for the world. Really hard to imagine.

You don’t believe Jesus was working towards the resurrection of the dead but was a believer in a pagan afterlife? Citation for that as well if you could.

sschlichter

I do see a new kind of kingdom. (at least from what we are used to) but I do not see any anti-anything. It is not like Islam (assuming you do not mean the nation of Islam). There is no political wing.

Sermon on the Mount is a good example. Jesus takes the law and provides the true interpretation. 'You have heard it said, but I tell you'. To hate is the same as murder, to lust the same as adultery. The publican justified before God while the self righteous leave empty handed. The message is reconciliation through Jesus himself. remove that and there is no other message. A disappointment to Judas and anyone else with political aspirations.

~Steve

sschlichter

perhaps, in some aspects but the kingdom is representative of God's soverienty. In Matthew, the kingdom is hidden and present-tense. The subjects are the poor in spirit, the meek, those persecuted for righteousness, the pure in heart, the merciful. It is the stuff of inner transformation. Heaven is just a location.

I agree, subjects of the kingdom do not 'care' who is in charge in Jerusalem, Rome, or Washington DC.

~steve