Flatlander Faith

Apologetics from an Anabaptist perspective

Tag Archives: zealots

General Epistles

Most of these epistles are more like essays addressed to a wider audience than letters addressed to a particular individual or congregation.

Hebrews
My Bible says the epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews. I don’t know who inserted that, or when, but it has never been the consensus of believers. The writer never identifies himself in the essay and that should be sufficient for us to conclude it is not important to know who he was. There appear to be equally valid arguments in favour of Paul, Apollos or Silas, but it seems pointless to enter into that argument.
The essay is directed towards Jewish Christians who were under intense pressure to observe all points of the Jewish law. It is useful to us today as an antidote to those who argue that certain aspects of the Old Testament Law are still valid. It can be considered a lengthy commentary on Psalm 110, and must have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

James
The writer’s name was Jacob; James is the English form of the Greek form of that name. The writer feels no need to offer further identification, thus we must conclude that he was the most prominent James in the church at that time: James the brother of our Lord. Since he met a martyr’s death in AD 62 the letter probably dates from shortly before that.
Some writers consider James the Less, the son of Alpheus, to be the brother of our Lord. That is problematic, as the brethren of our Lord were evidently not His supporters during His ministry, but became so after His resurrection. The attempt to make the sons of Alpheus to be the brethren of Jesus is based more on the Roman Catholic dogma that Mary was a perpetual virgin than upon any Scriptural evidence.
James’ message is valid for all times and places, but may have been inspired by the growing resentment of the poor and landless in Judea and Galilee towards wealthy landowners. This resentment boiled over a few years later in the revolt of 66 AD led by the Zealots. He admonishes the readers to have a living faith, to be patient in trials, to be free of jealousy and hypocrisy and warns against the dangers of an unbridled tongue. He has admonitions for the rich but gives no encouragement to those with Zealot tendencies.

1 Peter
This letter was dictated by Peter to Sylvanus, who is referred to in Acts as Silas, a shortened form of the name. It is quite possible that he was also the scribe for 1 and 2 Thessalonians. All three letters are reputed to be written in a better Greek style than most other epistles.
Babylon is probably a veiled reference to Rome and it seems likely that this epistle was written at the time of Nero’s persecution of the Christians at Rome. Nero was still held in high esteem by the Christians in Asia Minor to whom the epistle is addressed, but Peter is warning that the persecution might soon come their way and admonishing them to steadfastness in the faith.

2 Peter
According to those who know Greek, this epistle is written in a different style than the first, indicating a different scribe. It is a warning against false prophets who claimed spiritual insights unknown to ordinary Christians. This may refer to early manifestations of what developed into the Gnosticism of the 2nd Century. There are obvious parallels with the epistle of Jude; it is probable that Peter saw fit to include them, or asked his scribe to do so. The epistle was probably written not long before Peter’s martyrdom.

1 John
The author of this epistle does not give his name, but there can be no doubt but that it was the apostle John, probably written towards the end of his life. Some had left the faith, either to return to legalistic Judaism or to follow false prophets. He gives two tests of genuine faith: love of the brethren and a correct belief in Jesus as the Messiah.

2 John
Written by the Apostle John, probably from Ephesus. There are two possible ways of understanding the elect lady to whom this short letter is addressed. She is either an eminent Christian lady in another city, or a Christian congregation in another city. In either case the counsel is the same: Do not receive in your home, or allow to preach in your home, anyone who teaches an incorrect view of who Jesus is.

3 John
Christians met in homes in the beginning and there might be several house churches in a large city. This short letter appears to address a situation where the leader of one of house church, Diotrephes, refuses to receive anyone sent by John. Thus John is writing to Gaius, the leader of another house church to ask him to receive Demetrius, probably a travelling evangelist.

Jude
This Jude is the younger brother of James and of our Lord. Neither James nor Jude attempt to trade on their family relationship, Jude here calls himself a servant of Jesus Christ. He is writing to counter those teachers who would condone immorality in the church. The references to Michael the archangel disputing with Satan over the body of Moses and to the prophecy of Enoch may be a corrective to false teachers who used such passages to defend their teaching.The last two verses are beautiful and reassuring words of praise.

The Politically Incorrect Messiah

The sceptre had truly departed from Judah. There was once more a king in Jerusalem who ruled over Judah, but he was not of the lineage of David, nor of Judah, not even of Jacob. Herod was an Edomite, a descendant of Esau. Surely the time was ripe for the coming of Messiah.

When Messiah came he would throw off the ignominy of this foreign king and all he stood for. For Herod had been appointed by Caesar and was really just a puppet of Rome. The shame of it all was fertile breeding ground for the Zealots, whose support seemed to increase daily. The Zealots considered it a sin to in any way acknowledge the rule of the uncircumcised, heathen Romans. Messiah would soon come and sweep away all the shame of Israel. He would establish his throne in Jerusalem and his reign would spread far and wide, as far as Rome. The Zealots were preparing to be Messiah’s conquering army.

Then Jesus was born, of the lineage of David, in the city of David, yet in the most obscure and humble circumstances possible. The Bible says “there was no room for them in the inn.” “Inn” in this verse simply means a guest chamber. Joseph and Mary will have travelled slowly, because of Mary’s condition. It is quite likely that when they arrived at their relatives the house was already full with other family who had come to Bethlehem to be properly counted on the tax rolls. There was no privacy to be found in such a crowded home for the birth of a baby. So Joseph and Mary were led to the stable, either adjoined to the house or in a cave adjacent to the house. Most likely the midwife was called and other women of the house would have helped. Nevertheless, baby Jesus’ first bed was a manger.

The visit of the shepherds, recounting their angelic visitation, should have erased any shame attached to the circumstances of Jesus’ birth. The visit of the magi will have further established his credentials as the promised Messiah. Yet all of this happened in an out of the way place, far from Jerusalem which was supposed to be the real seat of power.

When Jesus embarked on His ministry some thirty years later, disgust with Roman rule had increased, and with it the influence of the Zealots. Many people were ready to consider Jesus’ claim to be Messiah, if only He would come out and proclaim that He had come to set things right in Israel. That is just what He did, but in a way that was completely contrary to the peoples expectations.

When Jesus first taught about the nature of the kingdom of God, He spoke of the blessedness of being meek and merciful, of being peacemakers and of suffering persecution for righteousness’ sake. He told them they should rejoice if they were mocked and reviled because they believed in Him. He told them that the kingdom of God was for the pure in heart and for those who loved their enemies. In short, He told them that the Zealots completely misunderstood the nature of the kingdom of God.

Nearly two thousand years have passed and Jesus’ kingdom still stands. It is not a political kingdom where submission to Christ is enforced by a sword of steel, but a spiritual kingdom where the love of God rules in the hearts of born again people who submit to Christ of their own free will. How could a literal earthly reign of Christ, enforced by might and brawn, be any better than this? The true nature of the kingdom is fully described in the Sermon on the Mount.

%d bloggers like this: