kojirodensetsu
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2007
- Messages
- 513
I am just curious. I used to be christian but I did not read the bible much.
What political party would jesus be?
- Thread starter kojirodensetsu
- Start date
I don't think Yeshua would participate in politics.
He would stick to teaching the gospel of God's Love, making people stronger in Spirit , and let them go into the world and do the same.
If all people of faith would simply concentrate on those around them who God has given them to Love and help, and those who were helped and Loved did the same, the nature of communities and their politics would change spontaneously.
That was the active force in the original Christian church. They became close knit communal groups who shared what they had with each other and any one else in need. They really didn't focus on government.
The church of today trains children to follow rule and religion while failing to nurture their Spirit. They create perfect slaves for the NWO, that is what their doctrines were created to do.
Boulder County Colorado is rich. Their social services stink. No homeless shelters to speak of, they encourage everyone who needs help to just move to Denver. A local non profit hands out blankets and food on an emergency basis. I'm sure they could find other ways to use their funding if that function was taken over by roving gangs of Christian teens. The kids would learn a lot about life from those they served and go into the adult world stronger in Spirit and better prepared to change things.
He would stick to teaching the gospel of God's Love, making people stronger in Spirit , and let them go into the world and do the same.
If all people of faith would simply concentrate on those around them who God has given them to Love and help, and those who were helped and Loved did the same, the nature of communities and their politics would change spontaneously.
That was the active force in the original Christian church. They became close knit communal groups who shared what they had with each other and any one else in need. They really didn't focus on government.
The church of today trains children to follow rule and religion while failing to nurture their Spirit. They create perfect slaves for the NWO, that is what their doctrines were created to do.
Boulder County Colorado is rich. Their social services stink. No homeless shelters to speak of, they encourage everyone who needs help to just move to Denver. A local non profit hands out blankets and food on an emergency basis. I'm sure they could find other ways to use their funding if that function was taken over by roving gangs of Christian teens. The kids would learn a lot about life from those they served and go into the adult world stronger in Spirit and better prepared to change things.
Last edited:
Jesus told his disciples to pay taxes. He condemned the Jewish leaders and the rich. He hung out with whores and other condemned sinners. He treated women as equals and cared about the children. He fed the poor for free, and felt pity for them, he told his disciples not to take money for themselves when they performed miracles, and he drank wine; he was accused of being a drunkard. He was annointed with an exspensive oil that had hashish (marijuana) in it. He was truly a "High Priest".
He would have been a Democrat, but would have jumped to the Green Party. He sure as Hell wouldn't have been an Evangelical Republican.
teamrican1
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2007
- Messages
- 344
Jesus wasn't concerned with the material world. He told people to render unto Caesar what was Caesar's. So he wouldn't have cared what political party is in power whether it be Republican, Democrat, Communist, or Nazi. All he was concerned about was that people lived a good Christian life and secured their place in the afterlife, which was all he viewed as important. Remember, the after life is forever. In comparison, your time on earth is merely a nanosecond in time.
tremendoustie
Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,809
I don't think he would join a political party -- he was intentionally apolitical. They wanted to make him King, for example, and he refused.
I do think his philosophy of human interaction was libertarian -- although of course I would say that as a Christian libertarian. In no case does he encourage his followers to affect change by using force to control the actions of others, or by political activity. "The world", largely meaning, I believe, political powers, is frequently referred to as a source of persecution. But "Take heart", he says, "I have overcome the world".
I would say that he viewed his followers as part of a new Kingdom of Heaven, which was independent of and would eventually overcome all earthly political power. Check out King Nebuchadnezzar's dream: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel 2&version=NIV, you can start at verse 24 if you want.
He was at least very close to a pacifist, encouraging a peaceful response even when enemies attack. For example, in Luke 6 he says, "But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you."
In this context, I think I can say with confidence that I believe he would certainly never support preventative or pre-emptive attacks. However, he wasn't opposed, at least, to being armed. This from Luke 22: "Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”
“Nothing,” they answered.
36He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’b; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”
Likewise, he constantly supports charity -- going so far as to ask some to sell all they have -- this, from Matthew 19:
"16Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”
17“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”
18“Which ones?” the man inquired.
Jesus replied, “‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, 19honor your father and mother,’d and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’e”
20“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”
21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth."
Here's another example of how important being a good neighbor is: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25:31-46&version=NIV
Note, he did not say to petition congress to increase welfare money -- he said to help the poor with one's own resources.
So, in summary, I believe he would support peace, and a life dedicated to helping others. I see no evidence that he would support taking money by force to help the poor or accomplish other social good -- just the opposite. The early church, by the way, could be said to have been a voluntary commune -- people were free to choose not to join, but all worldly goods were shared among the participants.
Based on all this, I would consider him libertarian, and actually, see no evidence against him being voluntaryist. God is repeatedly seen as the one who judges -- not man.
Yeshua taught about the Kingdom - this is a state of Spritual reunification with God. If you study the teachings as they are recorded in the Bible, notice that he speaks of the Kingdom in the present tense, not the future. The Kingdom is not "Heaven". "Heaven" is man's idea about where God lives, it is not some pie in the sky reward.
The Kingdom is NOW for those who choose to follow Christ.
And now because the Parties have taken over we believe we have a vote and a choice but it is almost always an illusion.
tremendoustie
Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,809
Jesus told his disciples to pay taxes. He condemned the Jewish leaders and the rich. He hung out with whores and other condemned sinners. He treated women as equals and cared about the children. He fed the poor for free, and felt pity for them, he told his disciples not to take money for themselves when they performed miracles, and he drank wine; he was accused of being a drunkard. He was annointed with an exspensive oil that had hashish (marijuana) in it. He was truly a "High Priest".
He would have been a Democrat, but would have jumped to the Green Party. He sure as Hell wouldn't have been an Evangelical Republican.
Nothing you describe supports the idea of forced redistribution of wealth, which is the core of the Democrat party. The fact that Jesus instructed his followers to pay taxes does not imply that he supported taxation -- there are also instructions in the new testament as to how slaves are to treat their masters, and vice versa. His goal at the time was not to make political change, but to instruct his followers as to how to behave in the current political environment. Where you get green party is beyond me ... apparently I missed the part in the new testament on global warming.
He also certainly did not condemn the rich for being rich, only pointed out that it would be harder for them to give up worldly goods and follow him, because they had more to lose.
Last edited:
: " The early church, by the way, could be said to have been a voluntary commune -- people were free to choose not to join, but all worldly goods were shared among the participants.
Based on all this, I would consider him libertarian, and actually, see no evidence against him being voluntaryist. God is repeatedly seen as the one who judges -- not man."
I disagree. Jesus told his disciples to pay taxes. Libertarians are against taxes. Also, early Jewish christians were the first Marxist communists. They sold their belongings, gave the money to the apostles, who re-distributed it among the poor. Sounds like a socialist Dem to me. The rich guy asked him:"What do I have to do to get everlasting life?" Jesus didn't give him a Libertarian answer and say: "Do whatever you want." No, he told him to "sell his belongings and give the money to the poor." If the rich guy did this, Jesus then told him that he could be one of his disciples. I don't see any volunteering here. Jesus gave commands, alot like Obama.
Based on all this, I would consider him libertarian, and actually, see no evidence against him being voluntaryist. God is repeatedly seen as the one who judges -- not man."
I disagree. Jesus told his disciples to pay taxes. Libertarians are against taxes. Also, early Jewish christians were the first Marxist communists. They sold their belongings, gave the money to the apostles, who re-distributed it among the poor. Sounds like a socialist Dem to me. The rich guy asked him:"What do I have to do to get everlasting life?" Jesus didn't give him a Libertarian answer and say: "Do whatever you want." No, he told him to "sell his belongings and give the money to the poor." If the rich guy did this, Jesus then told him that he could be one of his disciples. I don't see any volunteering here. Jesus gave commands, alot like Obama.
tremendoustie
Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2007
- Messages
- 6,809
Yet, the man was free to walk away -- and did so. Jesus did not chase after him with a club, demanding that he pay or else, nor did he tell his followers to go around the countryside with swords extracting money from people to give to the poor -- he told them to use their own money.
I do think people have a moral obligation to help the poor. They also have a moral obligation to refrain from mugging other people, and using that money to help the poor. This, I believe, matches what Jesus taught.
Certainly Jesus did not teach "do whatever you want". He was no libertine. But he also did not teach that force should be used against people who do not do what was right. In no case did he suggest violence should be used to coerce people into doing the right thing.
His paying of taxes, as I say, certainly does not imply endorsement of taxation, any more than his crucifixion implies endorsement of capital punishment. His purpose was to be crucified, and his purpose was not civil disobedience to effect political change -- which is what not paying taxes would have been. He was accomplishing his purposes within the context he found himself in.
Last edited:
Original_Intent
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2007
- Messages
- 9,381
It is interesting that everyone interprets the main lesson of the "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" as you should pay your taxes.
Jesus asked them whose image was on the coin, and they answered "Caesar's". And he then said to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and render unto God that which is God's. Hmm. No one seems to talk about the second half of the sentence, but I can;t see it as anything other than the MAIN point Jesus was trying to make.
What is the thing that we must render unto God? Well, what made the coin Caesar's in this lesson was that it had his image...so the implication is that what is in God's image belongs to Him..
but the most anyone usually gets from the passage is "Jesus said pay your taxes". /sigh
Jesus asked them whose image was on the coin, and they answered "Caesar's". And he then said to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and render unto God that which is God's. Hmm. No one seems to talk about the second half of the sentence, but I can;t see it as anything other than the MAIN point Jesus was trying to make.
What is the thing that we must render unto God? Well, what made the coin Caesar's in this lesson was that it had his image...so the implication is that what is in God's image belongs to Him..
but the most anyone usually gets from the passage is "Jesus said pay your taxes". /sigh
erowe1
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 32,183
Jesus told his disciples to pay taxes. He condemned the Jewish leaders and the rich. He hung out with whores and other condemned sinners. He treated women as equals and cared about the children. He fed the poor for free, and felt pity for them, he told his disciples not to take money for themselves when they performed miracles, and he drank wine; he was accused of being a drunkard. He was annointed with an exspensive oil that had hashish (marijuana) in it. He was truly a "High Priest".
He would have been a Democrat, but would have jumped to the Green Party. He sure as Hell wouldn't have been an Evangelical Republican.
Absolutely nothing you described resembles Democrats or Greens in any way. I'm not saying he'd be a Republican. But the description you just gave sure comes a whole lot closer to the average evangelical Republican than it does to the average Democrat.
Even though liberals make more money than conservatives on average, they also give less to charities than conservatives do, particularly religious conservatives, and that's if you don't count their giving to churches.
http://www.amazon.com/Who-Really-Ca...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253372379&sr=8-1
And I'm not sure what his command to pay taxes indicates. Even most anarchists still choose paying taxes over going to jail, so there's nothing surprising about Jesus instructing people to do the same, regardless of where he might fall in the political spectrum. That command is certainly no license to Caesar to collect those taxes, any more than his command to turn the other cheek is a license to the guy slapping you. In both cases Jesus is offering instruction to those who are the victim of the injustice, whatever he might say to those who are committing it is not recorded in those accounts. We do know, however, that he considered the occupation of the tax collector a sinful one.
Last edited:
teamrican1
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2007
- Messages
- 344
Jesus had magical powers. If he were of theocratic inclination, he would have simply willed himself in to power and forced everyone to follow his teachings. Nobody on earth could have stopped him. But like most religions, the God of Christianity is all about "tests". People have to commit to Jesus and accept him of their own free will or it doesn't count. Jesus wasn't interested in converting the world to Christianity via fiat. He was interested in giving the tools to salvation to everyone, and then he would sit up in heaven and accept those who make the right choice and judge those who don't.
LibertyEagle
Paleoconservative
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 52,730
Note to everyone reading this. Please keep in mind that Paula is a gnostic.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2297539#post2297539
Last edited:
Paula is a gnostic Christian who believes that Yeshua was also a gnostic. His teachings of the Kingdom and Truth show this clearly if you strip away the myth and religion.
Similar threads
- Featured