First, there's no doubt about what Jesus' followers and indeed most Jews had in mind when they thought about the kingdom of God. But Jesus not once mentions the restoration of David's Kingdom.
I think it was implicit, since that's what the prophesies said it was going to be.
Jesus was considered to be a direct descendant of David, and he was said to sit to the right of God in the new Kingdom. Without sufficient evidence that Jesus considered this *something different*, the assumption should be everybody (including Jesus) was expecting something very similar to the Jewish prophesies. Keep in mind that most gospels were written for a Jewish audience; any difference to Jewish prophecy would, one would expect, be spelled out *clearly* by the author to avoid any kind of confusion on the part of the listener. The fact that there isn't means the Jewish prophecies remain intact.
Similarly, there's no mention of the liberation of the oppressed subjects under Roman rule, as the Jews probably expected based on verses like Isaiah 61:1. Jesus refers to that passage in his response John the Baptist in Luke 7, but he does not suggest that he is a political or military figure.
Jesus foretells a major upheaval ("no stone will be left unturned") all in the near future. I agree that he didn't see himself as a political or military figure, it seemed he rather expected this upheaval to be initiated by God himself.
That this baptism was his death is clear enough from the terms in which he once asked his disciples...if they were able to drink his cup or be baptized with his baptism (Mark 10:38).
Interpreting Mark 10:38 that way is IMHO once again "creative reading". Look at the whole passage:
35 And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came up to him and said to him, "Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you." 36And he said to them, "What do you want me to do for you?" 37And they said to him, "Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory." 38Jesus said to them, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?" 39And they said to him, "We are able." And Jesus said to them, "The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized, 40but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared." 41And when the ten heard it, they began to be indignant at James and John. 42 And Jesus called them to him and said to them, "You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. 43But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant,[d] 44and whoever would be first among you must be slave[e] of all. 45For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
This passage is clearly another example of "the first will be last, the last will be first" Jesus had pointed out elsewhere. James and John essentially want a "prime spot" in the Kingdom due to them being disciples, and Jesus reprimands them for asking that. But, interestingly, he goes on to say "ok, you asked for it, so you *are* baptized like I am baptized" (10:19). This clearly doesn't refer to death since James and John don't die with Jesus but live long after. It's an orthodox attempt to have Jesus foresee his own crucifixion, but scripturally it just doesn't hold up.
rumborak