Peace I leave with
you; My peace I give to you; I do not give it to you as the world does. – John
14:37a (NET)
In the Gospel of
John, which is the only one of the Gospel records of the life and ministry of
Jesus in which we hear these words, we find this statement from Jesus in the
midst of what is considered to be a portion of His “parting words” to His
disciples, before beginning what was going to be His arduous trek to the cross
and the grave. What would Jesus’ disciples have heard Him telling them
with these words? To what was Jesus referring to when He spoke here of
“peace,” and what did He mean when He said that He would give it to them, but
not “as the world does”? Remember, Jesus
Himself provides context for understanding what is meant by “peace,” as He
insists that it is a “peace” that is not going to be given to His followers
(those that believe Him to be the Messiah) in the same way as the world of His
time commonly experiences “peace” and is made to understand the term.
We need to be careful
not to import modern or idealistic notions of “peace” into the text or the
setting, thus it can be said that “peace” would not necessarily have been used
here as some type of existential term, denoting a certain type of internal feeling
about one’s situation in life or place in the world. Indeed, “peace”
would have had a more concrete referent.
It would have had a more substantial, robust, and true to life
definition. Most sensibly, the immediate
context for its use would have been the way the word and notion was understood at
that time.
Perhaps most importantly,
the “peace” of the day was the “pax romana,” or the “Roman peace.” It was
a day in which “peace and security” were much heralded. That peace and security,
however, was brought about through Rome’s military might. It was a peace primarily
achieved through violent conflict and bloodshed (though some would surrender to
Rome before hostilities would take place----this only because of the knowledge
of what Rome would do to those that stood against them). Hence, this
understanding of “peace” would certainly have been lurking in the background of
Jesus’ words.
There would also have
been a widely held notion amongst Jesus’ fellow citizens concerning the shape
that would be taken by peace. In that
day, it was the great desire of many Jews that their ancestral land be emptied
of the hated Romans. Consequently, many
(but obviously not all) were looking to the miracle-worker and food-provider known
as Jesus of Nazareth to lead the revolution (Jesus fit the mold in many
ways---beginning in Galilee, the seedbed of revolutionary activity, announcing
an agenda, and then moving on to Jerusalem), that would bring peace to their
land that would materialize in the form of the expulsion of their subjugating
enemies.
To the great
disappointment of many, not only would Jesus not bring this supposed form of
peace to His people, saying that “I do not give it to you as the world does,”
but He was intent on bringing a different type of peace, which would still have
the effect of allowing all of His people---the ones that He said that the
Father had given to Him---to overcome the subjugation of their greatest enemy,
which was the one with which they would do constant battle. That enemy bore the name of “death.” Ironically, in order to bring about this different
type of peace, Jesus would Himself succumb to death, apparently defeated at the
hands of Rome and their means of capital punishment used against rebel groups that
was designed to “keep the peace” amongst subject peoples, which would cause a
great many to view Him as another failed messianic aspirant who had been
overcome by the Roman “peace”.
No comments:
Post a Comment