Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 8
The teacher defined politics as “goals for a society and methods of getting there,” then argued that Jesus has a politics with radically different methods, making “Jesus for president” impossible—especially since Jesus fled when they tried to crown Him king. What does that reveal about Jesus’ view of power, and how does it challenge evangelical hopes of “taking America back” or legislating Christian outcomes?
Another way to ask: If Jesus has goals for society but uses very different methods, and He refused to be made king, what does that say about His view of power? How does that challenge the idea of “taking America back” by making laws that force Christian outcomes?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The transcript presents Jesus as deliberately rejecting coercive civil power and modeling a different kind of leadership—“shepherd leader”—so His kingdom advances by His methods, not by taking control of the state. That challenges hopes of “taking America back” because it suggests Jesus’ politics is too radically different to be implemented as a governing program for people who don’t follow Him.
- Politics is defined as “goals for a society and methods of getting there,” and the conclusion: “Jesus has goals… and he has a method… we got to be loyal to Jesus’ methods.”
- The key clash is methods: worldly kingdoms seek security by “our own ways… not partnering with God… I’m going to make my own security.”
- The group argues “it’s just not possible to have Jesus for president,” because Jesus’ politics “would [not] work for non-Christians… to live under.”
- Jesus refused being crowned: after the feeding of 5,000, when they tried to “forcibly… crown him king,” “He got out of there.”
- A memorable line: “If Jesus could be president, he would not be a president… he would be a shepherd leader.”