Killing Jesus: A History

In these chapters, Jesus’s religious movement increasingly challenges established political structures, illustrating The Interplay of Religion and Politics. John the Baptist’s religious message has strong political ramifications. His prophecy of a new king coming to judge the people clearly challenges the legitimacy of existing rulers like Herod Antipas and Pontius Pilate, both of whom feel threatened by John’s popularity and influence. Herod and Pilate recognize that John’s religious authority could inspire rebellion, thus destabilizing their political rule. This fear of religious revolt, especially from a charismatic figure like John, blurs the line between religious prophecy and political threat.

In Chapter 8, Jesus similarly merges religious conviction with political protest. His violent expulsion of the money changers from the Temple critiques both the Jewish religious authorities for exploiting the faith of the pilgrims and the Romans for increasing taxes. Jesus’s actions are inherently political—a public act of defiance against the political systems that use religion to oppress the people. His claim that he will rebuild the Temple after its destruction challenges the existing religious and political order, positioning him as a radical figure challenging both systems.

Emperor Tiberius, in Chapter 7, also represents the connection between religion and politics in a different way, as he uses religious tolerance to preserve political stability. Although he engages in morally depraved behavior, he orders Pontius Pilate to maintain Jewish religious customs, recognizing the importance of allowing religious freedom to preserve political order in the empire. This approach was common in the Roman Empire, as Rome sought to secure the allegiance of subject populations by allowing and even encouraging local customs and beliefs. Tiberius values Jewish religious practices not out of any personal religious feeling but because they encourage docility among the people of Judea. His cynical use of religious tolerance shows how political leaders manipulate religion for control and stability.

While authority figures like Tiberius, Octavian, and Herod consolidate power through fear and manipulation, Jesus and John the Baptist’s movement demonstrate Leadership as a Form of Service, challenging existing structures in ways that empower the oppressed. Herod Antipas embodies the archetype of an authoritarian ruler, using his political and military power to oppress his people while maintaining allegiance to Rome. His decision to arrest John the Baptist reflects his need to suppress religious voices that challenge his immoral behavior. His authority is precarious, as he balances between Roman demands and Jewish resistance, but he consolidates power through violence and oppression. Pontius Pilate, similarly, is a political leader who seeks to maintain order by suppressing religious movements that could threaten Roman authority. His alliance with Jewish religious leaders like Caiaphas shows how political leaders co-opt religious figures to consolidate their authority. Both Pilate and Herod exemplify the role of leadership based on fear, manipulation, and suppression. Jesus’s leadership, in contrast, emerges as one of moral and spiritual authority. By cleansing the Temple and declaring himself the Son of God despite his lack of official power, he claims a form of authority that transcends both the Jewish religious establishment and Roman political power. His leadership appeals to the common people, who are inspired by his defiance and his message of God’s love over rules. This type of leadership challenges the hierarchical systems of authority that rule through oppression, offering an alternative vision grounded in justice and compassion.

In Chapter 6, Jesus’s baptism by John the Baptist signals the beginning of his own religious mission and underscores The Power of Narrative to Define Character. Among all the figures vying for authority and influence in this story, only John and Jesus have the foresight to understand how their actions will be perceived in the future. When John recognizes Jesus as the Son of God, he recognizes Jesus’s role in a story that will not fully take shape until long after both men have died. At this stage, Jesus knows the story and his role in it, but the story he tells is highly contentious. As Jesus proclaims his messianic role more openly, his actions, like his cleansing of the Temple, inspire some people while alienating others, as seen when his fellow Nazarenes reject him in Chapter 8. His escalating declarations of divinity set the stage for his eventual crucifixion, marking his transition from a local religious teacher to a figure whose legacy will transform global history.

Tiberius, on the other hand, is an example of a historical figure whose reputation devolves into infamy. Though raised to be the successor of Augustus, Tiberius’s personal tragedies and moral degradation turn him into a despotic ruler, more concerned with personal indulgence than governing Rome. His depravity, coupled with his ironic admiration for Jewish devotion, positions him as a leader who squanders his authority, becoming a symbol of the moral decline of the Roman Empire.