Congratulations, Dom. Looking forward to your podcasts. I've listened to all the ones you've done as a visitor on other podcasts, and with a few exceptions, I've been frustrated by some of the hosts, but always impressed with your contribution.
While I was reading your post this week, I had a thought which I hope you pursue. I don't think Jesus intentionally set himself to be a bad citizen. It was secondary to the real revolutionary aspect of his life. Rather, I think he was a good neighbor, but a bad 'Jew'. A good neighbor, but a bad member of the synagogue. A good neighbor but a lousy Pharisee. A lousy Sadducee. A lousy member of the priestly hierarchy. Obviously, he was the ultimate high priest, the ultimate example of how to worship God in spirit and in truth.
While I like the anarchist bent of your content and I think we need to reconsider the myth of how a Christian relates to dealing with the government, I've come to the conclusion that given the total failure of the false churches today to stand up to the government, we need to have the conversation as well about how Jesus demonstrated with his life that we need to challenge the 'official' but illegitimate church, just as much we do the illegitimate government, and perhaps more so. If we don't get it right at the church level, we won't get far moving from that to challenging the government.
Yes, I agree that Jesus leads with substance, what I call "good neighbor." The "core social conflict" (the phrase I used for the book's subtitle) is a result of the rejection of His approach. Jesus is a "bad citizen" because of what humans have exalted as citizenship.
And those who profess to be part of the Church have some undermining of "bad neighbor" institutions to do . . .
Congratulations, Dom. Looking forward to your podcasts. I've listened to all the ones you've done as a visitor on other podcasts, and with a few exceptions, I've been frustrated by some of the hosts, but always impressed with your contribution.
While I was reading your post this week, I had a thought which I hope you pursue. I don't think Jesus intentionally set himself to be a bad citizen. It was secondary to the real revolutionary aspect of his life. Rather, I think he was a good neighbor, but a bad 'Jew'. A good neighbor, but a bad member of the synagogue. A good neighbor but a lousy Pharisee. A lousy Sadducee. A lousy member of the priestly hierarchy. Obviously, he was the ultimate high priest, the ultimate example of how to worship God in spirit and in truth.
While I like the anarchist bent of your content and I think we need to reconsider the myth of how a Christian relates to dealing with the government, I've come to the conclusion that given the total failure of the false churches today to stand up to the government, we need to have the conversation as well about how Jesus demonstrated with his life that we need to challenge the 'official' but illegitimate church, just as much we do the illegitimate government, and perhaps more so. If we don't get it right at the church level, we won't get far moving from that to challenging the government.
Yes, I agree that Jesus leads with substance, what I call "good neighbor." The "core social conflict" (the phrase I used for the book's subtitle) is a result of the rejection of His approach. Jesus is a "bad citizen" because of what humans have exalted as citizenship.
And those who profess to be part of the Church have some undermining of "bad neighbor" institutions to do . . .