Jesus Said: No Shock and Awe

If you regularly, or semi regularly, read this blog you know that for several months, as we read the Bible using the Revised Common Lectionary, I have been pointing out how Jesus’ life and teaching was non violent and non coercive. And there is a reason for that.

In the United States, there are an increasing number of Christians who unapologetically consider themselves Christian Nationalists¹. There is not a single way to be a Christian Nationalist, the term encompasses a whole spectrum of beliefs. There is a subset of Christian Nationalists who believe Christians should control every aspect of our national life. There is another subset who believe that violence in pursuit of this goal is acceptable. They believe this is a valid Christian position. They have theological reasons for believing what they believe.

I believe there are better theological reasons in support of non violent and non coercive Christianity. There is no need to cherry pick verses to make this claim. Over and over again as we read the New Testament, Jesus teaches and models a non violent, non coercive faith. In this week’s lectionary reading, Jesus continues to teach non violence.

When the days drew near for him [Jesus] to be taken up, he set his face to go to Jerusalem. And he sent messengers ahead of him. On their way they entered a village of the Samaritans to prepare for his arrival, but they did not receive him because his face was set toward Jerusalem. When his disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do you want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” But he turned and rebuked them. Then they went on to another village.

As they were going along the road, someone said to him, “I will follow you wherever you go.” And Jesus said to him, “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” To another he said, “Follow me.” But he said, “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.” And Jesus said to him, “Let the dead bury their own dead, but as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.” Another said, “I will follow you, Lord, but let me first say farewell to those at my home.” And Jesus said to him, “No one who puts a hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.” Luke 9:51-62 NRSVue

In these verses, Jesus, “set his face” and began his intentional journey to Jerusalem. Just before this turn to Jerusalem, several notable events happen. Jesus sent the 12 apostles out to proclaim the kingdom of God (Luke 9:1-8). He gave them instructions to “shake the dust off” their feet if they were not welcomed. Shaking the dust off their feet marked and acknowledged a community’s rejection of the Apostles. But notice the non violent and non coercive nature of that act. No punishment. No revenge. The Apostles publicly acknowledged the rejection and then they moved on to the next village.

Jesus asked the disciples, “Who do the crowds say that I am?” And Peter stated his belief that Jesus is the Messiah (Luke 9:18-20). The Transfiguration occurred (Luke 9:28-36). Peter, John, and James saw Jesus transfigured and speaking with Moses and Elijah. Jesus foretold his death twice ( 9:21-22 and 9:43b-45). The disciples argued about who among them was the greatest and Jesus corrected their understanding what it means to be great (9:46-48).

In spite of all this, the disciples assumed that the correct response to a Samaritan village refusal to receive Jesus was fire and destruction. The disciples don’t even ask Jesus what they should do. They assume they know. Fortunately they asked Jesus’ permission before they acted. Commentators note that James and Johns’ impulse to call down fire echoes the time Elijah called down fire ( 2 Kings 1:9-12). ² If the original audience makes this connection, ( this seems a reasonable assumption), the disciples are following the example of the great prophet Elijah. And Jesus is critiquing and reversing that example.

As Joel Green writes, “Earlier, Jesus had instructed his disciples regarding the appropriate response when faced with inhospitality (9:5). Skirting that directive, they instead act as persons intoxicated with their own sense of power (cf.9:46-50). They thus indicate their misunderstanding of Jesus’ mission and their misappropriation of his authority…³ In some ancient manuscripts, verse 55 reads, “But he turned and rebuked them, and said, “You do not know what spirit you are of, for the Son of Man had not come to destroy the lives of human beings but to save them.”

In some ways it is oddly comforting that the people closest to Jesus misunderstood him. It gives me an excuse to employ when I misunderstand Jesus. How could I possibly be expected to do better than the apostles? How could I do better than the people who actually, personally knew Jesus? And yet, neither the disciples nor I have an excuse. We see the actions of Jesus and we hear his teaching. We see and hear his total reframing of power and authority. We see and hear his call to radically inclusive love.

I’m not saying this is easy, because it is not. Nearly everything about our society urges us to use any authority we have with coercive power.

Living our lives in the way of Jesus is hard. Which may be why this section of scripture ends with Jesus’ cautions about the difficulty of following him. These are hard words that we are tempted to soften by assuming they are hyperbolic. For the three people who wanted to be disciples, joining Jesus particularly at that time- as he was on the way to his crucifixion, death, and resurrection- will be hard and dangerous. Following Jesus may, figuratively and literally, cause those disciples to be without home and without family. Following Jesus may cause those disciples to act in ways that society thinks is disrespectful or disruptive.

For Christians in the United States, most of the time the cost of following Jesus are not excessively high. But still, following Jesus will require us to challenge the status quo. Following Jesus will require us to live lives that do not conform easily to societal and cultural norms. People may not understand or they may disapprove of what we do. That does cause us discomfort. It is easier to stay quiet.

Most of us won’t personally use physical coercion or violence. Even so it is easy for us to slide back into patterns of “soft” coercion and patterns of violent language and imagery. It is easy for us to make excuses for systemic coercion and violence, thinking that “justice” requires force. We slip into the pattern of thinking that our security and safety require force.

If we are not careful and thoughtful about how we read and think about the Bible, we will find stories, like the story of Elijah calling down fire, to support our inclination to violence. We have to be careful not to use the Bible to justify what makes us feel right and correct. Not every story in the Bible is an example of how we should act. Sometimes stories in the Bible are cautionary tales. The text does not always clearly tell us which is which. We need to ground our reading in the teaching of Jesus and use our collective wisdom, guided by the Spirit, to discern how to proceed.

Calling down fire from heaven would have gotten everyone’s attention. People would have thought twice before turning Jesus and the disciples away. Calling down fire from heaven has Biblical precedent. The disciples had their “we’re just doing what the Bible teaches” justifying texts at hand. But shock and awe are not the way of Jesus.

1. https://www.christiansagainstchristiannationalism.org/ ↩︎
2. Elijah has been referenced several times in the preceding verses. He is present at the Transfiguration. When Jesus asked who the crowds said he was, Elijah was named. Elijah was “taken up” and “the Spirit of Elijah” was passed to Elisha (2 Kings 2:9-15). Jesus is taken up at the ascension and the disciples receive the Holy Spirit. ↩︎
3. Green, Joel B. The Gospel of Luke, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1997, page 405 ↩︎