Militancy

Take a look again at Matthew 16:27-28; Mark 8:38-9:1; Luke 9:26-27. Christianity is lived out today in the US in sterile environments. There is Sunday School, AC, dressing up (somewhat), ritual, pot lucks, small groups, and the like. It is all very non-militant. This is why our text is even more dramatic for me. I have wrestled for two days with this text. I am still not convinced I totally get it. But, one thing I am sure of Jesus is not talking about "sterile." Jesus is talking about "coming" within a generation in some bold and dramatic way to accomplish some kingdom business. Now He is certainly engaged presently in our story in some pretty bold and dramatic kingdom business, but I get a sense from Jesus' words that what is coming is much more militant. Jesus' words take me to many potentially relevant texts: Daniel 2, 7 & 9; Matthew 23-24; Acts 1-2; Phil.2:11; Rev.14:10. Since he says this "coming" will happen before some who stand there will die, we can take the Second Coming off the table. The idea of "coming" occurs in various Old Testament texts to indicate some visit by God into human history for a very specific purpose, often a very militant purpose. At any rate Jesus is painting a picture for his followers of a future "campaign" that is not at all Sunday School quality. This kingdom business will be dangerous and powerful.

I have debated whether Jesus is referring to the Pentecost beginnings of the kingdom/church at the pouring out of the Spirit and the preaching of the gospel for the first time after His death, burial and resurrection or whether He is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. I don't like it when presented with an either/or proposition when it is not essential to choose between the two. Why can't the answer be both/and? Why can't this be the opening campaign of the kingdom being directed by our commander-in-chief from heaven at the right hand of God, a campaign that commences in Jerusalem in AD 33(?) and ends in Jerusalem in AD 70? Surely Daniel saw this connection in his 70 Week prophecy, as he spoke of the last week. There is the cutting off of the Messiah outside the walls of Jerusalem and the end of sacrifices when the temple was destroyed. If we take the entire 70 weeks, we have the beginning at the rebuilding of the temple after the exile and the ending at the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish system as prophesied by Jesus (Matt.23-24). If this is right, Jesus is depicting Himself as a militant leader who will conduct a campaign that will include bloodshed and evangelistic fervor.

Now I am not suggesting that we as ambassadors of reconciliation take any "militant" matters into our hands as some of our spiritual ancestors did during the Crusades. But I am suggesting that Jesus who is the same yesterday, today and forever, may still be doing kingdom business that involves the rise and fall of nations for the the purpose of expanding His kingdom. I am suggesting that our bold piece is to spread the gospel in connection with whatever Jesus is doing on another front, so that by the concert of the two we might see His kingdom come and His will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Our spiritual warfare and evangelistic campaigning should be the norm of the kingdom. We are with Jesus on the advance, not in retreat. Our world today is no more hostile than the day in which the kingdom began. Our charge into it must be no less dramatic and forceful as we do our part to expand the borders of a kingdom that will never be destroyed and which will destroy all other kingdoms.