Jesus and Rising Gas Prices: The Danger of Posing the Question
Michael Spencer has an open thread at Jesus Shaped Spirituality on the issue of what Jesus would think about rising gas prices.
It's a complicated question. And I'm not necessarily talking about the economic/social/political complexity of the gas price issue. Yes, that's complex as well. But what I'm talking about is the specific theological complexity of the question "What would Jesus think about X?"
In one sense, and in a very important one, Jesus would think nothing about it. The minute we ask, about any issue, "What would Jesus think?" or "What would Jesus do?," we're taking a very dangerous step. The danger lies in taking Jesus out of the context in which He has already lived, acted, thought and died. Jesus was sent to a particular people in a particular stage in history to perform a particular task in a particular manner which would entail particular types of consequences in order to bring about a particular result.
We do not live in that context. To ask “What would Jesus do?” or "What would Jesus think?," from our position in the story, is the wrong question. Jesus already did what he would do. It is finished. It was climactic.
And it had nothing to do with gas prices.
It had to do with temples, and Israel, and exile. It fit within a particular story, the story of God and Israel B.C. The life, the thoughts, the words and the actions of Jesus of Nazareth only make sense within that story, as the climax of it. The minute we take Jesus out of that context, even as a thought experiment, we run the risk, the very real and dangerous risk, of reducing the gospel to a set of timeless truths, to an ethical/spritual lesson that can be applied in any context. In other words, we run the risk of turning the gospel into "good advice."
The gospel is not good advice. The gospel is good news. "News" is about events. "Events" are contextual; they derive their meaning from within that context.
Our task is different, but must entail our teacher’s method, the method of Love. Our task is to implement Jesus’ achievements, to embody them, within the world in which New Creation has been inaugurated, initiated, launched, but not yet realized.
Look, I'm not saying that Jesus is not relevant to the issue of gas prices, or any other issue we can think of. Jesus is Lord of the world. He is relevant to all of it, but more than that. He is Lord of all of it.
Let's never forget it. Let's not get sloppy.
Grace and Peace,
Raffi
It's a complicated question. And I'm not necessarily talking about the economic/social/political complexity of the gas price issue. Yes, that's complex as well. But what I'm talking about is the specific theological complexity of the question "What would Jesus think about X?"
In one sense, and in a very important one, Jesus would think nothing about it. The minute we ask, about any issue, "What would Jesus think?" or "What would Jesus do?," we're taking a very dangerous step. The danger lies in taking Jesus out of the context in which He has already lived, acted, thought and died. Jesus was sent to a particular people in a particular stage in history to perform a particular task in a particular manner which would entail particular types of consequences in order to bring about a particular result.
We do not live in that context. To ask “What would Jesus do?” or "What would Jesus think?," from our position in the story, is the wrong question. Jesus already did what he would do. It is finished. It was climactic.
And it had nothing to do with gas prices.
It had to do with temples, and Israel, and exile. It fit within a particular story, the story of God and Israel B.C. The life, the thoughts, the words and the actions of Jesus of Nazareth only make sense within that story, as the climax of it. The minute we take Jesus out of that context, even as a thought experiment, we run the risk, the very real and dangerous risk, of reducing the gospel to a set of timeless truths, to an ethical/spritual lesson that can be applied in any context. In other words, we run the risk of turning the gospel into "good advice."
The gospel is not good advice. The gospel is good news. "News" is about events. "Events" are contextual; they derive their meaning from within that context.
Our task is different, but must entail our teacher’s method, the method of Love. Our task is to implement Jesus’ achievements, to embody them, within the world in which New Creation has been inaugurated, initiated, launched, but not yet realized.
Look, I'm not saying that Jesus is not relevant to the issue of gas prices, or any other issue we can think of. Jesus is Lord of the world. He is relevant to all of it, but more than that. He is Lord of all of it.
Let's never forget it. Let's not get sloppy.
Grace and Peace,
Raffi
I think the point you are making is an interesting one. The point is that we may not know what Jesus would think about something going on because he only expressed his thinking within a historical context. But some of the claims you make regarding this point are not only unnecessary, but misleading about who Jesus is and what he did/is doing.
Jesus was not only a Palestinian Jew in the first century. He was also the one with the Father in the beginning. He is also still seated with God, interceding on our behalf and still doing a work in our present time. To deny that Jesus could think anything about our current events because he lived 2000 years ago in Palestine is to ignore his ongoing relationship with our world. He sustains all that is and still acts through his body, the church.
So, while I appreciate your warning that we can easily misrepresent Jesus with these types of questions, let's not go overboard and pretend that Jesus was limited only to his earthly life in regards to how he thinks or acts. That idea is a dead end.
Stephen,
Your thoughts are much appreciated. And here's the kicker...I agree with most everything you said, as I mentioned in the concluding paragraph.
Let me put it like this. It's a matter of emphasis. The voices in today's church that are speaking of Jesus as the Word, and of Jesus as seated at the right hand of the Father, are legion. The voices speaking of Jesus as a first century Palestinian Jew are but a whisper. And if that dichotomy were allowed to continue, as it has, then we will be left with a church full of Docetists, which, I fear, we are.
I, and others of like calling, are simply trying to put some extra weight on the "man" side of the God-man scale, to tip the balance back to where it always should have been.
Hope that clarifies.
Grace and Peace.