Jesus was a Liberal Hippie

One of the most amusing things to me about the current political landscape is how all of these self-described "christians" support a party and belief system that is the oppositve of what their supposed savior Jesus preached.Jesus would support universal health care.Jesus would be against the war in Iraq.Jesus would be against cutting the taxes of the rich. In fact if I recall correctly Jesus directly spoke out against wealth and greed.And most of all Jesus said that the church should stay out of govt. affairs. So my question is why do so many people who call themselves christians support a president and a party that is clearly against what Jesus taught????

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

While I agree that Jesus was a liberal hippie, I think you might have problems selling your idea. I don't know of any basis for this. Jesus would have favored healing the sick, but I don't see where he proposed that this be done by government action. Again, not clear. Maybe his "render unto Ceasar ..." carries the implication that you should send your children to fight the government's wars, and be generally obedient to government. Weren't his statements addressed to individual richness, rather than to government economic policy? Yet you have just made several claims that it should be involved in government affairs (on the political left). You might be misinterpreting that. Isn't it just a statement that one should obey the laws of the civil government? Where does it say that you should not try to persuade the government to change those laws?

i think that particular quote was a reference to 'whose head is on the coin?' and jesus telling his followers not to withhold taxes. so jesus said 'pay your taxes'. good job.in order for the government to support the whole rich giving away all they have, there would have to be some nasty monetary policies that i'm simply not okay with, even though i'm not rich. yes, higher taxes, no, not income skimming. besides. it doesn't support the separation of church and state.This message has been edited by brennakimi, 02-01-2006 10:21 AM

Would Jesus support a Government that opposes providing health-care to the poor?Would Jesus support a Government that supported discrimination against other religions (maybe he would, not sure)?Would Jesus support a Government that launched aggresive wars of conquest?Maybe I was being too specific. It just seems to me that most of the teachings of Jesus are much more closely aligned with the left rather than the right....Maybe I'm wrong.... (Of course I'm skeptical that Jesus even existed so I guess it doesn't matter for me).

yes.rome, for instance. give unto ceasar...

---

Faith in the unseeable is rare in liberal thinking. This is why most proclaimed Christians, are also considered conservative. Government and politics is for the birds if you're a Christian because although there is good that can come out of it, it is not what is of importance to life really. Most of it also breeds corruption. Because we have no leaders.

i've found that it's the same crowd that misses the intent of christianity in favor of reading the bible "literally" that is also for a literal rendering of the constitution, trampling all over both in the process. the people who quote leviticus and genesis more often than matthew are the same people who quote the second article of the constitution and war powers resolution over the bill of rights.i find these sorts of arguments neither conservative, nor christian. christian in name, conservative in name. i won't make any statements on personal faith (because it's not mine to determine) but the politics are reactionary or regressive. true conservatives are for smaller government, less involvement in peoples' lives, and maintaining the status quo.This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 02-02-2006 09:35 PM

---

The objection Christians have to socialism in general is that it is stealing -- stealing from some to give to others. A violation of one of the Ten Commandments. Jesus is the God of the Old Testament as well as the New. Voluntary giving is the Christian way, not coercing "gifts" from people. Why? He has nothing against taking out evil dictators and trying to better the lives of the Iraqis. Again, the principle is giving, not taking. The "liberal" policy of taking from the rich to give to the poor is theft. Some of the biggest gifts to American life have come from the voluntary giving of the extremely wealthy. It works. Also, Jesus' teachings in general are to the individual, not to governments. There are plenty of commands to those with wealth to use it for the good of others. Coercing it, however, is evil. That teaching was against the Jewish wish to revolt against Caesar by refusing to pay taxes. Taxes are Caesar's.Jesus also taught that His followers are to be "salt" and "light" in the world. This is a command to believers to shine HIS light into worldly darkness and to be HIS salt to stem the corruptions fallen human nature is subject to, in making bad laws for instance that invite the wrath of God -- far from the "secular" notion that Christians should be seen and not heard. The answer is they aren't. The other party is.This message has been edited by Faith, 02-03-2006 01:18 AM

I agree, nwr. Should have read your post before writing mine.

The less government the better. Health care is something government should not be involved in at all. It's a problem for the people to deal with. It was Christians who started the first hospitals, the first orphanages, the first homes for the poor and weak and sick who were otherwise left to die in pagan society. If a society is Christian it will take care of those who need the care. Government should not be in this business. Of course. He is the Truth. There is no other. A government and nation that honors Him will be blessed. He would also support a general policy of tolerance to all beliefs, but not their being treated as true and given any right to rule the nation. This is a war to help people and fight evil. America traditionally doesn't do any other kind. Yes you are.This message has been edited by Faith, 02-03-2006 01:43 AM

Jesus has no problems with killing thousands of innocent civillians as well as evildoers? Do you have a scriptural reference for that?

quote:

---

Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men...If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but [rather] give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance [is] mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

---

(Romans 12), in which Christians are encouraged to give direct comfort to the enemy (Bush is seemingly against even indirect comfort being given)

quote:

---

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more [than others]? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

---

(Matthew 5)To me it seems Jesus implores his followers to hold themselves to a higher standard than others. So Jesus considered taxing as theft? Were tax collectors considered thieves? My coins have a picture of the queen on them, so surely I should render to Elizabeth that which is Elizabeth's?

quote:

---

Faith in the unseeable is rare in liberal thinking.

---

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a liberal, and I'm pretty sure he was a man of faith, being a Reverend and all.Much of the civil rights movement was driven by those of deep Christian faith, as was the Abolitionist movement before the Civil War, namely the Quakers.Both the Abolition and Civil Rights movements were decidedly liberal movements.Some other liberal stances that had/have a strong support from people of faith:opposition to the death penaltyuniversal health carepacifism/rejection of war and violence as a way to solve conflicts with other countriesSo, I think you are totally wrong.

quote:

---

This is why most proclaimed Christians, are also considered conservative.

---

...except that that's not true.At least, I have very strong doubts that it is true. Perhaps you can do some research to show that a majority of Christians are conservative?This message has been edited by schrafinator, 02-03-2006 06:49 AM

quote:

---

If a society is Christian it will take care of those who need the care. Government should not be in this business.

---

Actually, in the decidedly secular Scandinavian countries they have the best standards of living for their citizens, including I believe cradle-to-grave, state-provided healthcare.If what you say is correct, then the US, being the most Christian nation on the planet, should therefore have the best healthcare.Since we have the most Christians, AND we are the richest nation on Earth, shouldn't it then be true that we should have a plethora of Christian hospitals and other Christian charitable healthcare services? And shouldn't they have been able to provide healthcare for everyone in the US who can't afford to pay?At any rate, shouldn't we see a lower or higher level of coverage for citizens of nations depending upon how Christian they are?We do not see that, as my Scandinavia example shows, so how do you explain this?This message has been edited by schrafinator, 02-03-2006 07:01 AM

The killing of innocent civilians is being done by our enemies. You cannot apply teachings directed to individuals to the operations of governments. That is the main mistake people make who insist that Jesus was a Leftist.This is how we as individuals are to treat our personal enemies. {abe: treating your own personal enemy with love is putting YOURSELF in harm's way, but in war if you treat the enemy with love, an enemy known to kill innocents, you are collaborating in the death of those innocents.}Again, the way America conducts war and the reasons America conducts war are to combat evil and further good. Sometimes war is necessary. You don't feed evil oppressors.This is not to judge the wisdom of this particular war beyond saying that I know Bush's motives are good and I think most of the objections to him are stupid and meanspirited. Again, the teaching is to the individual for dealing with personal enemies. Again, sometimes war is necessary. You don't coddle the enemy in war. And I'd remind everyone again that Jesus IS the God of the Old Testament who sanctioned the slaughter of various tribes of people, which so many here like to complain about. And I admit it's a horrifying thing to contemplate -- but it's a picture of how God deals with sin and will ultimately deal with sin in the Last Judgment. Letting evildoers live to harm and influence others is a far bigger evil than going to war against them. Yes, you as an individual. And we can also love and pray for the Iraqis and the Muslims. But allowing THEM to continue to kill is for us to be violating the rule to love one's neighbor as oneself as that is to sanction the slaughter of innocents. See above.(Matthew 5) Yes, he does. See above. Yes, you should. Taxation is necessary for running government. But socialism takes money from one citizen to give to another citizen, not to run the government. This is not the business of government and it is theft.This message has been edited by Faith, 02-03-2006 09:33 AMThis message has been edited by Faith, 02-03-2006 09:44 AM