Discussion in 'Religion' started by Bowser, Jul 16, 2019.
Better yet, if he was running for president today, what would be his platform?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Neither. His platform would be left-wing enough to get him crucified again.
If Jesus reappeared in the Western world today, he would be an immigrant from Guatemala in one of our refugee "camps." He'd spend his time helping the children there who were near death, and preaching a message of forgiveness and acceptance. He'd eventually be crucified shot by a right winger, who was sick of his socialist/pacifist philosophies - and afraid of the following he was gathering.
He was an a-political communist - like all members of monastic associations.
There is circumstantial evidence that he was a jihadist of a kind - possibly nonviolent, Gandhi type - who took a fall for his more violent son Barabbas.
Gandhi and jihad sound to me like an uneasy fit. How old would he need to be to have fathered a son old enough to make his mark as an outlaw? If that were so, would Jesus not have had a longer ministry? Like, at least 20 years longer.
Can you point me to this circumstantial evidence?
Islam probably. Or Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code"!
The British had no difficulty fitting them.
Mid to late thirties would do easily. "Barabbas" (full appellation "Jesus, Son of the Father" https://www.gotquestions.org/Barabbas-in-the-Bible.html) is not presented as having made much of a mark yet, nothing beyond what a charismatic teenage gang leader and jihadist could have done even in today's world of extended childhood.
The colonial and police state tactic of holding children hostage and abusing them to smoke out their parents is standard, and should be familiar to Bible based Christian Americans in particular as something they have seen, approved, and voted for repeatedly. (This Republican administration has brought that tactic on shore at the Federal level, from the previous Republican administration's establishment of it in Iraq et al, and that has been well publicized national news complete with photos and such).
It should be accepted by them, at least, as an obvious possibility in that Biblical scene.
He would have cared about the poor, so he would be a socialist.
hmmm is that what socialist means?
Nope. Socialism is government control of the means of production and distribution. However, there are a lot of socialist programs (like SNAP) that Jesus would surely support.
Yes. Modern Republicans would call him a radical socialist Democrat.
Good job he didn't waste any time with politics then!
The wingnuts just can't accept that the Jesus character preached selflessness when their doctrines are completely selfish.
He was a hippie.
Socialist autocratic dictatorship
Caring about the poor does not socialism make. Care for the poor occurs in numerous ideologies and ethical systems. Socialism is specifically the social ownership of the means of production, typically used to mean by the working class. Which is something that only emerged under capitalism and became politically viable during Industrialism.
Assuming the Jesus narrative of the Bible informs the personage of the historical Jesus, he's be a mix of revolutionary populist, religious zealot, and ethnic nationalist-- don't forget that, at the time of his ministry, his message would have been aimed squarely at Jews under Roman oppression, it was only later that it was revised to encompass everyone.
So, under modern political axes, it's a blend of right-wing and left-wing populism and egotism that solidly are framed around his own cult of personality.
Have you got any sources for this message change?
It emerged as soon as the ability to "own" a means of production emerged, and has always been politically viable at whatever levels of politics the society afforded.
Medieval monasteries were often socialist - even hardcore communist.
From the beginning, analysis of economies by economic class was based on observation of a long-standing reality and research into distant history.
Community, not "government" necessarily. And ownership, not "control" (the US industrial economy did not become socialist during WWII).
Meanwhile: Christ would not have been a member of any Party (on the "render unto God what is God's" criterion).
I agree, but to entertain the thread which party? Democrat.
By the blue robes he wore he obviously has an affinity with blue, he wouldn't go red.
Separate names with a comma.