Jesus knew that the history of Israel, and in particular the expulsion of Israel, had reached its climax. He considered himself responsible for the fate of the people at this decisive hour. He, the Messiah, had to take upon himself the entire burden of such a fate and bring it to its logical conclusion. Jesus had pronounced Yahweh's judgment on his rebellious people, and now, like the prophets of old, he was in mortal danger. He proclaimed that the path to the Kingdom of God is the way of the cross of peace and love. To fight with the enemy's weapons meant for Israel to suffer a partial and then a complete defeat. Jesus saw his role and calling in taking the place of the vanquished in the name of the salvation of the people. And then the light of Israel could shine again not only for the sake of the Israelites alone, as the Maccabean martyrs thought only of the liberation of their homeland, but also for the whole world.

Like these martyrs, Jesus suffered the consequences of Israel's moral corruption.

Israel played a dangerous game with paganism, the invariable consequence of which was the suffering endured by the martyrs. In contrast, Jesus regarded the very desire to fight paganism as a sign of moral decay. Israel was the hotbed of a nationalist revolutionary movement, and the punishment for which was to be Roman battles, destroyed buildings, and an endless row of crosses outside the city wall. Jesus was preparing to bear such a cross himself for the salvation of Israel. Summing up his npumcha, he told the people its history at the last time, giving it a new, amazing sound. However, the narrator this time turned out to be not a wandering philosopher, but the king of his own beloved city, exiled for his own time.

In doing so, he was to fulfill Israel's destiny to serve the world and be the light in it.

That is how I think Jesus understood his Messianic calling. We already know that the Messiah was to rebuild (or cleanse) the Temple and engage in battle with Israel's enemies. What did Jesus intend to do to accomplish these tasks?

First of all, he had no intention of restoring the Temple in its material form. He himself was preparing to become the place and means of realization of all that the Temple represented. Jesus was the embodiment of the reality symbolized by the sacrificial system. In his ministry, he avoided the Temple, offering a petition to everyone without exception by his own authority. Now he was going to his death, desiring by this last and greatest symbolic example to show men the way by which all that had previously been connected with sacrifice had become accessible through himself.

Jesus was also ready to engage in the Messianic battle. He had already laid out his terms; He who wants to save his life will lose it, but he who loses it will gain it. Instead of heaping insults and threats upon his accusers like the martyrs of old, Jesus, as evidenced by the many faces of early Christian tradition, suffered in silence, uttering only words of forgiveness and hope. Such behavior, so unusual for a martyr, defies any explanation, and yet it is a reliable historical fact. Throughout his life, Jesus amazed those around him with his amazing ability to be compassionate. His last podvig fully revealed his determination to give his life for the salvation of his neighbors, of which the early Church spoke so often and with such reverence.

In another work, I have detailed Jesus' intentions. The following is an excerpt from this work, since even at the present moment I could hardly add or correct anything.

"Jesus came to Jerusalem not only to preach, but to die. Schweitzer was right; Jesus believed that Messianic disasters awaited Israel and that he had to take them upon himself. I think Jesus came up with this idea much earlier than Schweitzer thought (Schweitzer thought it came to Jesus relatively late, being a correction of the original vision). However, this is not so significant. What is essential is that in the Temple and at the Last Supper, Jesus consciously performed two symbolic acts that encapsulated the essence of his ministry and program. The first symbol said: the current system is corrupt and persists in evil. It's time for judgment. However, Jesus is the Messiah through whom the LORD, the God of all the world, will save Israel and the world. The second symbol said: this is how the true outcome will take place, this is how evil will be defeated, this is how sins will be forgiven.

Jesus knew—he should have known—that for these actions and the words that elucidated them, he was likely to be condemned as a messianic pretender and a false prophet who was leading Israel astray. He understood that if he did not convince the judges, they would hand him over to the Romans, and he would be executed as a rebellious impostor king. Elementary common sense, and not necessarily any special supernatural abilities, made it necessary to predict that if Israel continued to attempt an anti-Roman uprising, Rome would treat Israel as if it were this strange rebel. But at the heart of Jesus' symbolic acts, his retelling of the Israelite story, lay much more than political pragmatism, revolutionary courage, or the desire for a martyr's crown. Jesus thought deeply about the theological situation of Israel and the world, as well as his own role in relation to both of them. He had a deep sense of calling and trust in the God of Israel, whom he considered to be the One God. He unshakably believed—apparently Gethsemane had almost shaken that faith, but Jesus also saw the agony of Gethsemane as part of the battle—that if he went this way, fought in this battle, the long night of Israel's captivity would end, and a new day would burn forever for Israel and the world. He himself will be justified (all the martyrs believed in this!), and the fate of Israel will be fulfilled – to save the world. He will not merely give a respite to the disciples and those who join them, drawing fire upon himself and allowing them to escape: if he is fighting a real enemy, he is doing it for the world. The calling of the Slave to be the light of the world finds fulfillment in him, and therefore in his disciples, whose movement will change after his justification. The death of the shepherd will lead to the enthronement of the LORD on earth. The vindication of the "Son of Man" will result in the final victory over evil and the establishment of the world kingdom.

And Jesus bore his cross. In this, too, he saw a profound symbol, not only of Roman oppression, but also of the path of love and peace commanded by him, the path of defeat leading to victory. Unlike Jesus' actions in the Temple and at the Last Supper, the cross is a symbol not only of activity, but also of passivity. Not only actions, but also suffering. The cross was destined to become a symbol of victory, but not the victory of Caesar or those who fought against Caesar by his own means. The cross has become a symbol and a means of God's victory."

Conclusion