To understand the title of Jesus we must first know the background of his journey. Jesus was, keeping it simple, a rebel. His sole purpose was to come and overthrow the Roman Empire. In Jesus’ eyes, The Roman Empire was corrupt and needed a change in command. In Aslan’s Zealot, Jesus refers to himself as the Son of Man. His goal was to be king of the Jews, but mostly to be a king of the world.
When Jesus establishes himself as the Son of God, as he was depicted in Daniel, he makes a clear statements about how he views his own identity and his duty. Aslan’s Jesus presents himself as the king who will rule on earth on God’s behalf. His goal is to reestablish and restore the nation of Israel to its former glory. Jesus believed that God would instill in him the power to become the king of Israel and overturn the corrupt social order that was in place. Instead, Jesus was killed for being a revolutionary, an enemy of the state. Aslan also paints Jesus the man as violent man, when it came to his task of revolution. Even though most of the Gospels describe a more peaceful being there are times where Aslan’s Jesus makes an appearance. In Matthew he says
…show more content…
In Aslan’s book Jesus is a political revolutionary, well a failed revolutionary. As Aslan says, "Jesus was crucified by Rome because his messianic aspirations threatened the occupation of Palestine, and his zealot try endangered the Temple authorities" (p. 79) One of Zealots main claim is that the peaceful, divine Jesus was fabricated mainly by Paul. In the Gospel of Thomas, when Jesus was asked of his identity, he often deflects, vaguely asking his disciples why they do not see what is right in front of them. Even though the Gospel of Thomas does not insinuate Jesus’ true identity, it does have similar Gnostic teachings by frequently referring to Jesus's sayings as "secret" and