If Jesus were alive today...

[Sonikku]

Would the Republican party that claims to all but revere him still do so? The more I think about it, the more it seems unlikely.

If Jesus were alive today, he would likely try to care for the poor, the weak and the downtrodden while feeding the hungry with bread. The GoP would most likely blast him for propagating Socialism and "enabling" a welfare state.

If Jesus preached to his followers to not lead a life of pursuit of ever greater amounts of wealth and property in modern times, I can't help but wonder if the GoP would blast such claims as an attack upon Capitalism itself, the system the Republican party defends to their dying breath.

If Donal Trump were to ask Jesus what he must do to follow him, he would probably not like the answer, etc.

Anyway, my point is the Jesus we are taught in the bible seems highly inconpatible with the Jesus and the teachings those that claim to worship him seem to claim to follow the most. But if Jesus really existed, and was truly known for none being more dear to him than the poor and avocating a life of less pursuit of wealth, I cannot help but think that America scarcely resembles the path and the message he had tried to preach. On the contrary, everything he stood for may have been bastardized and re-appropriated for the purposes of those that would seek to control. Such an act would be even more wicked than simply claiming not to follow Jesus in the first like Atheists do.

So here's the question. Are Republicans truly the more devote political party? Or has their faith shifted away from the very holy book they so passionately appear to cherish?

 

[JEDIYoda]

At one time I honestly felt the Republicans for all the right reasons believed in their conservatism....

I believe nowadays that being republican means being different than the Democrats......
I really don`t see where Jesus or any Diety fits into being Republican anymore...

 

[highland145]

nm

 

[Sonikku]

Posts in debate club are serious.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Posts in debate club are serious.

That may be true but if your post was posted in the other forum ..P&N...it would be considered a troll post!

Just because you post something in the Discussion club that does not automatically make your post an acceptable post or that doesn`t mean it is still not a troll post.....

Peace!

 

[Charles Kozierok]

If you think something is a "troll post", then report it and let the mods/admins deal with it. Otherwise, if you are going to respond, it should be on-topic.

I'm not a Republican, and I could argue against this easily just to play devil's advocate. If any of you really think Sophitia is wrong, explain why.

That's what this place is about.

 

[randomrogue]

I believe in a separation of church and state and personally feel like political parties should stop using religion as a crutch to lean on. I think jesus would feel the same way and would lambast the Republican party into oblivion.

Saying you're a Christian Republican does not make you righteous if you are a money hungry, greedy, dishonest, lying son of a bitch.

 

[Abraxas]

*Disclaimer: This post, by necessity, will be discussing the Republican party in broad strokes. It is in no way intended to indict any person on an individual level, nor do I consider any of the generalities espoused to hold true for all Republicans, but rather, to present an accurate picture of the Republican party taken as a whole. Your mileage with any individual Republican may vary.

My favorite quote the bible comes from Matthew and it to me adequately sums up why I remain skeptical of anyone who both claims to be a devout Christian but also supports the Republican party.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25&version=NIV

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

This to me is the crux of Christianity, the defining passage of what it means to be a follower of Jesus for a few reasons. First, it is not told in parable form, it is a direct description of what the final judgement will look like and a clearly defined set of criteria for what constitutes righteousness and what constitutes damnation.

The mentality at the core of this, as stated, is concern for the poor, concern for the needy, giving of ones self for the sick and the imprisoned and down the line the Republicans have been against systematic correction. They have opposed programs like food stamps and universal healthcare, prison reform and the war on poverty. They have dismissed attempts to provide for their fellows as entitlements and during one of the debates cheered the prospect of leaving someone to die for being unable to afford healthcare. They claim to support the idea of personal responsibility, that if you plan poorly you should suffer for it, that you are not your brother's keeper. While the Democrats track record on these issues is only marginally better in recent memory, they don't actively campaign against the ideals Jesus taught us to live up to like the Republicans do and at least pay lip service to them being important.

The Republicans, on the other hand, claim piety largely on the basis of trivial, tangential parts of the Bible such as prohibitions against homosexuality that are prominently placed right along side such prohibitions such as mixed fabrics and don't eat shellfish, making that the center point of their political faith. This, to me, is the root of their problem; they have latched on to a few things of trivial import in the broader message of the Bible and the behavior of talking about Jesus as much as possible and on this basis declared themselves to be the party of faith, when, in reality, to rip off a television show, "you speak the words but your hearts are empty."

Another interesting thread along the same lines might be "If Reagan were alive today..." since they love him more anyway, or act like they do.

 

[beachchica]

If Jesus were alive today nobody would know who he was.

 

[ivwshane]

If Jesus were alive today nobody would know who he was.

Because he would be ignored and called a dirty hippie.

If he were alive today I'd ask him what he thinks of modern religion based on his teachings and what he thought of the catholic church and it's history after he died. I wonder what he would say about the Christians who speak in tongues.

My guess is his top word in a word cloud would be "misguided".

 

[JEDIYoda]

Because he would be ignored and called a dirty hippie.

If he were alive today I'd ask him what he thinks of modern religion based on his teachings and what he thought of the catholic church and it's history after he died. I wonder what he would say about the Christians who speak in tongues.

My guess is his top word in a word cloud would be "misguided".

What language would Jesus speak?
Can you speak his language?

 

[randomrogue]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMjTpH2xvkU

I was trying to find something that might resemble the second coming of Christ and this is probably somewhat accurate. It would either be something like this or a guy that looks like a bum, walking down the street, babbling in some weird tongue, being picked up by police.

 

[Bowfinger]

*Disclaimer: This post, by necessity, will be discussing the Republican party in broad strokes. It is in no way intended to indict any person on an individual level, nor do I consider any of the generalities espoused to hold true for all Republicans, but rather, to present an accurate picture of the Republican party taken as a whole. Your mileage with any individual Republican may vary.

My favorite quote the bible comes from Matthew and it to me adequately sums up why I remain skeptical of anyone who both claims to be a devout Christian but also supports the Republican party.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25&version=NIV

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

This to me is the crux of Christianity, the defining passage of what it means to be a follower of Jesus for a few reasons. First, it is not told in parable form, it is a direct description of what the final judgement will look like and a clearly defined set of criteria for what constitutes righteousness and what constitutes damnation.

The mentality at the core of this, as stated, is concern for the poor, concern for the needy, giving of ones self for the sick and the imprisoned and down the line the Republicans have been against systematic correction. They have opposed programs like food stamps and universal healthcare, prison reform and the war on poverty. They have dismissed attempts to provide for their fellows as entitlements and during one of the debates cheered the prospect of leaving someone to die for being unable to afford healthcare. They claim to support the idea of personal responsibility, that if you plan poorly you should suffer for it, that you are not your brother's keeper. While the Democrats track record on these issues is only marginally better in recent memory, they don't actively campaign against the ideals Jesus taught us to live up to like the Republicans do and at least pay lip service to them being important.

The Republicans, on the other hand, claim piety largely on the basis of trivial, tangential parts of the Bible such as prohibitions against homosexuality that are prominently placed right along side such prohibitions such as mixed fabrics and don't eat shellfish, making that the center point of their political faith. This, to me, is the root of their problem; they have latched on to a few things of trivial import in the broader message of the Bible and the behavior of talking about Jesus as much as possible and on this basis declared themselves to be the party of faith, when, in reality, to rip off a television show, "you speak the words but your hearts are empty."

Another interesting thread along the same lines might be "If Reagan were alive today..." since they love him more anyway, or act like they do.

Well said. To put it another way, IMO modern Republicans tend to fixate on a few details, a narrow, self-serving subset of Christian law, while mostly ignoring the broad spirit of Christianity. Democrats tend to be less concerned with the rules, but nominally more in tune with the spirit.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Unfortunately, I think Republicans treat Jesus the same way they treat Reagan. They construct an image in their minds of what they believe -- or even what they want -- the man to represent, and then worship that. In doing so, they ignore much of what the man truly represented.

That said, since nobody so far has presented the other side, I'll lay out a few counterpoints.

1. What I described above about Republicans doing also applies to many other groups of people. It's fairly common in humanity, though perhaps not to the extent we see it in the GOP today.

2. The basic argument here paints two large and partially overlapping groups -- Republicans and Christians -- with rather broad strokes. Neither group is monolithic, and it's easy to put too much emphasis on the worst examples of any grouping.

3. Jesus preached that people should help the poor, not that people should form massive government bureaucracies that help the poor. I can see Republican Christians viewing the command as being a personal dictate, not one to be accomplished through taxes and huge welfare programs.

4. A valid argument can be made that more people would be more charitable if they weren't forced to be charitable through their taxes. I would.

5. Before we had a huge welfare state, much, of not most, of the help for the poor came from religious groups.

6. Even now, a lot of humanitarian groups are religious in nature.

7. Jesus spoke repeatedly about helping the poor, but also about personal responsibility. He may have believed we should help the poor, but that doesn't necessarily mean he would support a system that institutionalizes and perpetuates it, which is how conservatives view the welfare state. Republicans view these programs as ineffective and as even perpetuating the poverty they aim to ameliorate, so opposing them is not necessarily inconsistent with wanting to help the poor.

8. Many Christians are Republican because they view Democratic policies as being inconsistent with their religious beliefs, not because they necessarily support all of the platform planks of the GOP. (Just as some people support Democrats for the complementary reason.) A lot of Christians view Democrats as being hostile towards Christianity and towards religion in general terms, so they will not support Democrats no matter what the underlying policy positions may be.

 

[sandorski]

The problem with the question is that we don't know whether Jesus even existed, never mind what he actually said.

That said, assuming the Gospels are accurate, he being a Republican seems highly unlikely. Hell, I doubt he would even be a Democrat, although they seem to lean in his direction. He would be a radical and given his claimed position in the Universe, he would definitely be the head of a Third Party.

 

[dank69]

Unfortunately, I think Republicans treat Jesus the same way they treat Reagan. They construct an image in their minds of what they believe -- or even what they want -- the man to represent, and then worship that. In doing so, they ignore much of what the man truly represented.

That said, since nobody so far has presented the other side, I'll lay out a few counterpoints.

1. What I described above about Republicans doing also applies to many other groups of people. It's fairly common in humanity, though perhaps not to the extent we see it in the GOP today.

2. The basic argument here paints two large and partially overlapping groups -- Republicans and Christians -- with rather broad strokes. Neither group is monolithic, and it's easy to put too much emphasis on the worst examples of any grouping.

3. Jesus preached that people should help the poor, not that people should form massive government bureaucracies that help the poor. I can see Republican Christians viewing the command as being a personal dictate, not one to be accomplished through taxes and huge welfare programs.

4. A valid argument can be made that more people would be more charitable if they weren't forced to be charitable through their taxes. I would.

5. Before we had a huge welfare state, much, of not most, of the help for the poor came from religious groups.

6. Even now, a lot of humanitarian groups are religious in nature.

7. Jesus spoke repeatedly about helping the poor, but also about personal responsibility. He may have believed we should help the poor, but that doesn't necessarily mean he would support a system that institutionalizes and perpetuates it, which is how conservatives view the welfare state. Republicans view these programs as ineffective and as even perpetuating the poverty they aim to ameliorate, so opposing them is not necessarily inconsistent with wanting to help the poor.

8. Many Christians are Republican because they view Democratic policies as being inconsistent with their religious beliefs, not because they necessarily support all of the platform planks of the GOP. (Just as some people support Democrats for the complementary reason.) A lot of Christians view Democrats as being hostile towards Christianity and towards religion in general terms, so they will not support Democrats no matter what the underlying policy positions may be.

Can you give me an example or two of Jesus speaking about personal responsibility? I'm trying to think of one. I can understand if you mean responsibility with respect to your soul, but I can't think of an example with respect to earning your way in life.

 

[Sonikku]

If Jesus were alive today nobody would know who he was.

Indeed. "You're not Jesus, Jesus was white!"

 

[Orignal Earl]

The problem with the question is that we don't know whether Jesus even existed, never mind what he actually said.

That said, assuming the Gospels are accurate, he being a Republican seems highly unlikely. Hell, I doubt he would even be a Democrat, although they seem to lean in his direction. He would be a radical and given his claimed position in the Universe, he would definitely be the head of a Third Party.

I can't think of any Christian denomination that Jesus would approve of, let alone try to pick a political side
Amish Jesus would seem the most likely

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Can you give me an example or two of Jesus speaking about personal responsibility? I'm trying to think of one. I can understand if you mean responsibility with respect to your soul, but I can't think of an example with respect to earning your way in life.

I'll be honest and say that I looked and actually can't find much. I found some stuff here that is related, but some of it was not said by Jesus but rather by his followers. I'll also readily admit that I am not an NT scholar, nor did I play one on TV, so I may have been wrong on that.

I can tell you for a certainty that it is quite definitely a strong theme in the OT.

I did also find some quotes in the NT along the lines of people who have more also have greater responsibility to give. But I think this ties into the notions of giving being a personal thing done because it is right, not something you're forced to do by the government.

It also occurred to me, in the context of the "what if Jesus came back today" subtopic, that he'd stare with his eyes blinking at most of the people we in America call "poor". (Heck, a lot folks alive today in other countries would do that.) Back then, poor meant you have nothing and you're starving to death. Those are the people Jesus preached that we should take care of, as well as people who can't help themselves ("orphan and widow" being the classical formulation).

We don't really have very many people at those levels of poverty here in the US. Of course, some of that is because we have a safety net, but we also have a lot of people considered "poor" who live like kings compared to the standard of 2,000 years ago.

ETA: One other thing -- Jesus didn't seem to think being poor in this life was a real problem, because we should focus on eternity. There's a famous quote about it being easier for a poor man than a rich man to get into heaven, and so forth.

 

[ivwshane]

What language would Jesus speak?
Can you speak his language?

I'd use google translator. Do they do Hebrew?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

You'd probably want Aramaic, actually.. which was the English of the time. If Jesus came back, therefore, I'd expect him to speak English.

 

[Orignal Earl]

What language would Jesus speak?
Can you speak his language?

Well the universal language of love of course


Did Jesus speak Hebrew?

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Articles/Jesus_Hebrew/jesus_hebrew.html

Are you a Hebrew Catholic?

 

[werepossum]

Were Jesus alive today the Republicans would absolutely revere him, for Jesus always made charity an individual requirement, never a duty of Caesar.

I think however that Jesus would be much less enchanted with the Republicans than the other way around, for his standards of charity are, um, strenuous. His Earthly family was renowned for giving 1/4 of their income to the poor if what I've read is to be believed, and Jesus Himself said it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. I doubt anyone in Congress (and they are virtually all are wealthy) could come close to that standard; I certainly can't, and by ancient standards if by no other I might be counted wealthy. I doubt if any of us could as well, although Robert probably comes close - or over if one counts that part of Caesar's slice devoted to wealth redistribution.

I would certainly look forward to Democrats explaining to Jesus their desire to have doctors poke holes in babies' heads, suck out their brains, and rip off their limbs, though, or justify allowing the baby to die without medical care if it inadvertently gets born during that procedure. I doubt even the Messiah could slap a decent coat of lipstick on that pig - although I suspect MSNBC would be reporting Obama 1, Jesus 0.

 

[werepossum]

You'd probably want Aramaic, actually.. which was the English of the time. If Jesus came back, therefore, I'd expect him to speak English.

Well - we do expect everyone else to do so.

After all, movies have taught us that when Americans aren't around, all foreigners prefer speaking English.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Jesus is alive today, and Republicans want him to pull himself up by his bootstraps.

Matthew 25:35-40 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’