To the suggestion that ‘Jesus loves Osama’ might be an inappropriate sign to put at the front of our churches – as would a sign saying: “Jesus loves rapists” or “Jesus loves paedophiles” – which statements are true, but would the signs be helpful in building bridges to our communities?

Nathan responded:

This is a fascinating discussion, and one in which I feel torn. The concerns about the sensitivity of it ring true, but….

Just last Sunday, we read the story of Jesus being almost lynched when he preached in his home synagogue (Luke 4:21-30) and it appears that what provoked the attack was Jesus saying something very like “God loves Osama.” First he read from the prophet Isaiah, and left off the last half a verse – every nationalistic Israelite’s favourite – about the “day of vengeance of OUR God”, and then he proceeds to tell them that God does not favour Israelites over everybody else, but is just as gracious to people from among Israel’s enemies. If Jesus was concerned about being sensitive to their feelings and building bridges into his local community, he had a funny way of showing it.

It seems to me that one of the fundamental heresies of our age continues to be the idea that “God is on our side”. It is commonly assumed that the interests of OUR nations have God’s support, and that the enemies of our nation are thereby opposed to God and deserving of our reciprocal enmity. Thus “God loves Osama” is considered offensive and proof of the utter irrelevance of the churches. But isn’t that because the concept of “loving your enemies” is actually at the heart of the gospel and is the number one philosophical and lifestyle distinctive that Christians are called to embrace. Irrelevant? Absolutely! It is completely irrelevant to the aspirations of our society and most of its inhabitants, and offensively irrelevant to those who think the church’s job is to baptise the aspirations of our nation. But it is far from irrelevant to the gospel mission to save the world from its own self-destructive hostility and violence.

So maybe proclaiming that “God loves Osama” is simply a culturally specific proclamation of the essential scandal of the cross: that Jesus so loves everyone, no favourites and no exceptions, even Osama, that he does not stomp out our violence with even greater (legally and nationally sanctioned) violence, but surrenders himself to that violence and dies at our hands so that even the perpetrators like Osama might recognise that God is not sanctioning anyone’s violence, but is inviting all to receive God’s gratuitous forgiveness and enter into the fullness of love and peace.

Perhaps the difference between saying “Jesus loves Osama” and saying “Jesus loves rapists” or “Jesus loves paedophiles” is that the first refers to a person with a name and face, while the latter refer to a category identified only by a pattern of violence. I accept that “Osama” has come to be a somewhat generic symbol of a pattern of violence too, but rapists and paedophiles become something more than just rapists and paedophiles when they are given a name and a face too. Thus “Jesus loves Osama” is a more appropriate proclamation of the scandalous gospel than “Jesus loves terrorists”, and “Jesus loves Bilal Skaf” would convey the truth more reliably than “Jesus loves rapists”.

And just maybe, the violent denunciations and hostility aroused by this sign are precisely the sort of persecutions Jesus promised we would face if we managed to proclaim the cross in all its scandalousness instead of taming it until it seems blithely compatible with the aspirations of the average citizen.

Peace and hope,

Nathan ______________________________________

Nathan Nettleton

Pastor, South Yarra Community Baptist Church

Melbourne, Australia