Washing the Feet of Osama
At church this weekend Greg Boyd preached on the nature of the Kingdom of God as being one that overflows with love from God to people, back to God, and from people to people. It was all very interesting and thought-provoking. He then expounded on what blocks that love. The usual suspects like greed, racism, selfishness and so forth were brought up. And of course nationalism. Boyd’s last point was to elicit the nature of Christ’s command to love our enemies, even our national enemies, and he showed this picture on the jumbo screen:
Very provocative. Even the “Amen” shouting listeners were a little taken aback by it. Never affraid of a little controversy, Boyd went on to argue that Jesus would be willing to wash the feet of these people because he died for them (1 John 2:2). If he died for them would he not be willing to wash their feet? He has a follow up post on his blog detailing the argument more thoroughly. In his post he explains how the picture above provoked a very negative response from Christians who protested its displaying at malls and a Christian college where those sponsoring the picture wanted to talk.
In response, I must admit Boyd’s argument is a good argument. It deals with Jesus’ teachings of “enemy love” and easily reasons from the greater (dying for someone) to the lesser (washing their feet). However, the painting still strikes me as sanctimonious. One glaringly obvious problem with the depiction is that it represents Christ’s footwashing to be an indiscriminate act of kindness towards anyone who allows it. But that is not what it was in the Gospel of John. Christ washed the feet of his disciples to show them the “full extent of his love.” When Peter refuses to have his feet washed Jesus replies, “Unless I wash you, you have no part with me.” Peter of course then says he wants all of his body washed. Therein likes the crux of the matter. IF Osama bin Laden wanted Christ to wash his feet then this would be a salient point. But he does not. It isn’t clear what bin Laden thinks of Christ given his Islamic view of him (A jewish infidel or a prophet of Allah?), but one thing is for certain he would NOT want his feet washed by him.
Nevertheless, the idea of “enemy love” towards people like Osama bin Laden is provocative. How do we as Christians, not as Americans, view him? Boyd’s point about the discontinuity between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of this world could not be anymore easily demonstrated.
November 5th, 2007 at 10:59 am
I would say that when Jesus was being tortured to death and, as he looked out over those torturing him to death said “Father forgive them…” that this went even further than washing the feet of Judas.
Do you think that Judas wanted his feet to be washed by Jesus? He left the upper room filled by Satan moments later. Judas hated a God who would wash dirty feet, but his feet were apparently washed nonetheless.
Jesus forgave people on the cross who didn’t ask to be forgiven. God extends love, kindness and forgiveness to a hardened and rebellious people. Some respond. Some don’t.
November 5th, 2007 at 11:28 am
I don’t think we really know what exactly what Judas was feeling at any given moment in Jesus’ ministry. Besides, I don’t think it is fair to lump him in the same category as Osama bin Laden (I think Pilate is a better example). God is certainly willing to extend his love to people but the full extend of it is felt by those who receive him.
Does not Jesus challenge the rulers and authorities of this world to submit to him or does he just love them?
November 5th, 2007 at 11:44 am
Could anyone be a worse enemy of God than someone who would torture him to death? If Osama bin Laden had tortured Jesus to death, would Jesus have still said, “Father, forgive him…”? Is forgiving someone who tortures you to death less of an act of love and forgiveness than washing their feet?
Do these words only apply to our “not so bad” enemies?
“But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who mistreat you.” (Luke 6:27-28 – GN)
November 5th, 2007 at 11:53 am
Okay, but here’s the thing: that painting is gathering a bunch of world leaders together and depicting Christ washing their feet. This is based on what he would supposedly do if this or that person was in these or those shoes. I’m not impressed by that. If we are going to do the “just look at Jesus” method of theology we have to be consistent first with what he DID, not just with what we think he WOULD DO. How did he treat Pilate? He treated him lovingly, but did not acknowledge his authority as being supreme. He said “You would not have authority over me if it was not given to you from above.” It is true that Christ had all authority given to him by the Father, and because of this, he washed his disciples feet. But he did not wash Pilate’s feet. He challenged him and declared that he was speaking the truth. Was Jesus willing to wash his feet? Sure. But did he wash them? No. That is significant any way you spin it.
November 5th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Someone should add Paris Hilton to the list of people getting their feet washed
November 5th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
She would expect a pedicure.
November 5th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
Question about Greg Boyd. Was he visiting your church? Were you visiting his church? Do you go to his church? Just curious about how you heard him preach.
I read his blog every day…
November 5th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Kathy, I was visiting his. I just started going there three weeks ago. It’s fun!
November 5th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
HEY!! What are you doing showing up at my church!! You should have called and we could have met up with you!!
November 5th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
I know! Darlene, I look for you and Tony every week.
November 6th, 2007 at 12:32 am
I remember after 9/11, hearing whispers about how we should pray for Osama Bin Laden. Nice sentiment, but essentially impossible to convert into meaningful action.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:39 am
Hey Ochuk, my friend Jonathan Groover introduced me to your blog a few weeks back and I’ve been enjoying the archives…especially the theological pithy ones. I find Boyd’s theology of both Open Theism and the The Kingdom to be very thought provoking and so when Groover showed me this painting on his blog yesterday I was once again provoked… mostly due to the fact that unbeknowest to me I have been harboring hatred in my heart for Osama. I think your analyzation has some merit to it but I would say 95% of the aformentioned Christians who reacted negatively to it were doing so because they were immediately offended by it…and not because their analytical skills were calling it into question. I think we need pictures like this to bluntly remind us that our ultimate loyalty is to the Kindom of God and not necessarily Western Democracy, etc. In saying that I think Boyd sometimes goes too far with his passivism, but I’m not necessarily sure his display or support of this picture is one of them. It highlights the fact that God’s redemptive love cannot be narrowed down to a playing field we are comfortable with accepting- whether it be due to nationalistic fervor or our theological proclivities. I think Dirty Feet’s comments nailed it perfectly. “Father forgive them for they know no what they do…” is surely the most provocative, astounding statement ever uttered. I do not think we will be able to ever plumb its depths. It can only speak to the most wonderful portrait of all- that being that on the cross we have displayed before us the beauty of the heart of God which loved all there was and gave all that He had.
November 6th, 2007 at 4:48 am
“She would expect a pedicure.” Ok- that had me falling out of my chair
November 6th, 2007 at 8:27 am
I’ve always felt that Christians can strongly disagree with someone on an issue, but we have no right to dislike the person we disagree with. Jesus disagreed with the religious leaders of His day, but his ultimate answer to their lives was to have His life spent for them to reconcile their broken relationship to His heavenly Father.
What a great God we serve.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:21 am
Of course, whether Jesus died for Osama is a source of much debate that I won’t go into…
But as Christians we are called to love our enemies including Osama. That does not, however, prevent us from praying for God’s justice mediated through the US government, duly appointed by God for such a task. As a Christian, I must forgive. As President, George Bush as God’s emissary for the sake of justice must not.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Hi Ochuk,
So, you too like the picture of a God who will serve ALL?
If you are interested, the HeavenlySanctuary.com team would like to send you a complimentary poster - just drop me your contact info at stacie@heavenlysanctuary.com.
Loving the unlovable is never easy - that’s why God came to not just show us out to love but to love HARD.
By the way, its interesting to read the varied interpretations of the picture:)
Blessings,
Stacie Barsumian
–
Content Management
www.HeavenlySanctuary.com
“Virus Protection for the Mind!”
December 1st, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Kirk’s response is intriguing. He’s the only one so far who has brought up the idea that there may be a different (but equally biblical) response to evil demanded of the Christian individual as opposed to a national government.
Kirk, you will remember me as “the Foolish Sage” from elsewhere on the ‘net. You and I go back a ways, and while you’ve (apparently) remained a pretty steadfast pro-Bush ‘hawk,’ you know that I’ve swung over the past several years from hawk-leaning to total pacifist. I need to update you that, due to the influence of reading Abraham Kuyper’s concept of Calvinistic sphere sovereignty and the writing of contemporary neo-Calvinist political commentator James Skillen, I’ve come back to perhaps somewhere near the middle. That is, I think the call on the individual Christian (and therefore, the church) is pacifism (”turn the other cheek”), the call in the sphere of government is to bring justice, where necessary, by the sword. The latter should always be last resort, and always in defense of the weak (never in vengeance, this is classic Christian just war teaching).
Where I’m pretty certain you and I would disagree is on whether the current ‘war’ being pursued by Bush, at least in its present status in Iraq, is a biblically justifiable use of the sword.
December 12th, 2007 at 10:34 am
In my recent post on my blog, I argue that this painting is a good litmus test to determine if someone truly understands Jesus’ message.
December 12th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
I just wanted to point out that in the Qu’ran Jesus is a very major prophet, and that while Islam does not hold the same concept of Jesus as we do, a devout Muslim would be honored to have his feet washed by al-Masih (the Messiah). That being said Bin Laden is in no way a devout Muslim, and is instead perverting his religion for his own gains, similar to the way several “Christians” in our own country have. Thank you very much for elucidating what it means to be a true Christian.
January 6th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
Hello swantosad
cheap ambien online
Insomnia is an unwanted condition, one that reduces effectiveness and physical productivity due to the fatigued state that it leaves the body in.
generic ambien
Taking it before, or during driving is a bad idea that could have a disastrous ending.
http://www.thereg.org/ - ambien 5
Other trade names that are used in reference to it include Adormix, Sucedal, and Stilnox among many others.
January 25th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
turrubares progressed branches blog extraction osthoff bits slowing classroom fabianist proficient
servimundos melifermuly
January 27th, 2010 at 1:21 am
curricula hilarious rate olin component caveat faces rationale mdtfs peking satan
servimundos melifermuly