*****************************************************************************
Today’s text follows upon Jesus’ transforming experience on the mountain. He has come down full of the Holy Spirit, and goes off into the wilds alone. It’s a significant thing for him to do. He is about to embark on a dangerous path, and I think he knows it goes off alone to work his way through the rationale. It’s a discernment process not only for ministry and for social justice. Note that the tests put before him are one of feeding the hungry, power over empire, and even power over natural law. In effect, the Adversary offers Jesus economic, military and political power. It’s also significant that the actual translation of the text is not “Devil” but “Adversary”, or “Opposer”. Even that is a different power dynamic than “devil”.
So I think it is important to locate the beginnings of the Jesus story in the whole world of Judaism at the time Jesus lived. This is more than “background” (with Jesus set apart in the foreground), and more than just context. It was a complete matrix of cultures, languages and religions in which the Jews of Galilee were just a tiny fraction of a piece within an immense whole.
Most empires, for instance the Persian empire, were “tributary” empires. There was one strong central ruler and military, and smaller weaker states around sent “tribute” or “tithes”.
The Roman Empire, in which Judaism was contained, was in fact the first “territorial” empire. The Romans did something entirely new - sending military far and wide and establishing a perimeter of military around the *outside* borders of the empire. This was the basis of the Pax Romana, the Roman peace. It meant that within the Roman Empire, they held military power, economic power, political power, and theological power. Within this empire, Caesar’s title was “Son of God”. No one else could use that title. Jews were allowed to continue to live as they always had, and worship as they wished, but only if they followed the rule of Caesar, and by extension Herod. Even though Herod was a Jew, he was beholden to the Romans. One wrong step and the Jews would have been wiped out.
So, in this military, political, economic and theological matrix - giving Jesus the title “Son of God” was equivalent to high treason. There could only be one Son of God, and that was Caesar. Caesar was both human AND divine. Individuals who had done extraordinary things were elevated to the level of divinity. In this case and time, that would have been Augustus. The name “Augustus” literally means “the one to be worshipped”.
Into this matrix also comes apocalyptic theology. The Roman view of the world could be summed up in four words: religion-war-victory-peace. It was a justice of retribution, or “retributive justice”.
Over the years we have twisted the meaning of the word “apocalypse”. It literally means “revelation”, and it isn’t about the end of the world. Think about it for a moment - to a Jew in Jesus time, to say “end of the world” would mean essentially God had made a really big goof. What it *did* mean was the end of violence, the end of the perpetration of evil upon the world, and a calling the world back to the balance God intended.
By contrast, the whole basis of Jewish theology would have been one of “distributive” justice. The vision is described in Genesis, a vision of fairness, equality of distribution, and the fair share. The model for God is based on the ideal Jewish patriarchal family structure; the model for God was the father of a well-run household. In the patriarchal system the father was the householder, the wise and fair person who ensures everyone is well looked after, well cared for, and receives a fair share of everything. The apocalyptic vision is one of how the world *should* be in God’s vision, where God has imagined a just world and set that in motion. The difference between retributive, and distributive justice is one of a vision of the best of all possible worlds. Jewish theology, as Jesus understood and taught it, was the absolute antithesis to the basis of the Roman empire.
...and put into this whole context comes the “opposer”, the “adversary’, one could even say Jesus’ conscience. He lives in a matrix where economic, political, military and theological power define everything. He is probably aware that he could create, develop and lead a powerful resistance to the Romans, possibly even gain some that economic and military power. Instead he deliberately chooses to shun that, and continue to preach about a vision of fairness and justice for all people.
What Jesus does demonstrate here is an understanding of scripture and of theology. He already has theological power, and he embodies the vision of God’s justice. This is the vision which sets Jesus on the path he chooses to take; one of non-violent resistance to what is seen as destroying the vision of fairness and justice.
Sources:
1. “The Matrix”, lecture by John Dominic Crossan, January 2013.
2. "In the Wilderness" a sermon by Rev. Fran Ota February 2010
