What Would Jesus Do?

[warpus]

I think he would be. I think he would become disillusioned with the state of society and the world in general and would eventually realize that in order to push ahead with his goals and dreams he needs cash. So he'd go and look for work and would preach to people during happy hour and on weekends. He would try to become one of us so that he can reach us with his message. Otherwise he'd just be yet another crazy homeless guy who preaches about the end of the world and the second coming. Nah, Jesus is smarter than that, he'd get a job, make money, and spread his message in a far more believable format. On HBO maybe.

 

[Borachio]

Wasn't it Calvinist in origin? Finding proof of salvation in your own prosperity. Or was it Luther? I honestly forget.

I think he would be. I think he would become disillusioned with the state of society and the world in general and would eventually realize that in order to push ahead with his goals and dreams he needs cash. So he'd go and look for work and would preach to people during happy hour and on weekends. He would try to become one of us so that he can reach us with his message. Otherwise he'd just be yet another crazy homeless guy who preaches about the end of the world and the second coming. Nah, Jesus is smarter than that, he'd get a job, make money, and spread his message in a far more believable format. On HBO maybe.

Ah, but I think you're forgetting about the whole charisma schtick. Those scary eyes just looking straight into your soul.

Imagine Jesus walking into a bank and people rushing up to thrust cash into his hand. (Which he immediately gives to Judas, of course.)

 

[Arakhor]

I knew about gleaning on the Sabbath, but then I literally went to Sunday School.

 

[Rashiminos]

Doubtful. Jesus rarely commented on what 'the government' should do - he lived in an occupied country. But let's not pretend anybody here would know what Jesus would do. The good man isn't with us anymore and

Things that don't mesh with Christian Theology.

Ask not and don't receive, I guess.

 

[abradley]

Isn't the American dream coming to America and making it?

Yes it was, and like this song about the Canadian RR workers (Navvies), we needed navvies for opening up the west, they earned their place.

Link to video.

Not always the case in our present welfare culture.

 

[MountainMan1646]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I wish people success at their personal journey. Christianity places an onus on people I 99% respect. There're only a couple of moral errors in Jesus's teachings, and they're mostly at the 'meh' level.

It's entirely clear what Jesus would have his followers do at the individual level. The government tells you to carry a refugee for a mile, you carry him two, etc. If someone forwards you biased memes on Facebook, don't reshare them. Chastise your fellows to be more moral, etc.

It's just really hard to do with any type of government system. A Christian cannot foist obligations towards refugees onto others. A Christian cannot force soldiers to keep refugees out. I mean, they can, but the teachings of Christ just cannot be gleaned to tell you what you should do. At the personal level? Obvious. At the social policy level? Very hard.

It's why I don't bring up Christianity when discussing things at the policy level. It was designed for a conquered people. There's no equivalent for Romans 13: 1-7 for when you're the authority.

Most people fundamentally misunderstand Romans 13 and so they manipulate it into teaching that we should obey the government in every case without exception. But Romans 13 says nothing like this. Romans 13:3-4 clearly connects the duty to obey the State with the State acting as God's ministers to execute God's Wrath on the wicked.

The problem is that too much of Christianity is semi-Marconian today. People have the idea of the brutal God in the Old Testament being replaced by Jesus' kinder and gentler teachings. But most of the people who teach that don't understand EITHER testament. There's a lot more mercy in the OT than most people think, and much more justice in the New.

Evangelical theology today is a mess.

Israel has only been independent for sixty years and has certainly made a name for itself in that short time. I see no reason why Jesus would turn up now, rather than the uncounted centuries in which the Holy Land lay in Islamic hands or, you know, some time during the tragedy of the Holocaust. Millennial teaching just speaks to human favouritism, especially since if you read the Bible, the apostles were convinced that Jesus would return within a scant few decades.

Modern Premillennialism in particular is bunk, and I would be absolutely shocked if Jesus returned in my lifetime considering what the Bible teaches about the second coming. That said, I think your error here is a misunderstanding of Matthew 24:34. Nothing in Matthew 24 is about Christ's bodily second coming. 1 Thessalonians 4, 1 Corinthians 15, and Psalm 110 describe the bodily second coming, as does Matthew 25:31-46 (this list is not exhaustive.) In that generation Christ did come in judgment against Jerusalem, but he isn't coming back physically until the entire world is subjected to him (which means the majority of the world is converted and every nation is an explicitly Christian theocracy.)

Why are people taking personal claims and making it out as if Jesus told the government on how to act? I do wonder why Refugees have the right to go where ever they want and citizen don't have the same right. I mean some citizens of Greece would love to live in Germany and live off the taxpayer, but th can't do that, so why do refugees get better treatment than citizens? The ultimate reason for government is to protect it's citizens, but right now we are no seeing that happening.

But if Jesus were around he would know the hearts of the people trying to claim asylum and those coming here on false pretence he would return back to where they came from. Considering the vast majority have to go through safe countries to get to where they want to go, they aren't geniune refugees.

You're saying Jesus didn't give government any instructions on how to act? Really? Matthew 23:23 ring a bell? Mathew 5:17?

 

[Berzerker]

matt 24-36

"But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only."

Not even Jesus knows

 

[MountainMan1646]

matt 24-36

"But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only."

Not even Jesus knows

Jesus didn't know when he was on earth. He knows now.

But the fact that he didn't know then does not mean he got the date wrong

 

[Berzerker]

he gave a date?

the temple was destroyed before his generation died out, thats the time frame for his return

 

[El_Machinae]

I don't see a reason to believe Jesus could predict the future any better than he could describe the past. Matthew 24:37 takes on an entirely different meaning if you think Jesus knew Noah was a myth.

The problem is that too much of Christianity is semi-Marconian today. People have the idea of the brutal God in the Old Testament being replaced by Jesus' kinder and gentler teachings. But most of the people who teach that don't understand EITHER testament. There's a lot more mercy in the OT than most people think, and much more justice in the New.

Evangelical theology today is a mess.

It's going to be, because it's trying to shoe-horn the OT into their conception of God. I cannot think of a more effective piece of libel against God than the Old Testament, and evangelicals are more interested in being apologists than defending God's good name.

 

[MountainMan1646]

I don't see a reason to believe Jesus could predict the future any better than he could describe the past. Matthew 24:37 takes on an entirely different meaning if you think Jesus knew Noah was a myth.

Noah wasn't a myth.

It's going to be, because it's trying to shoe-horn the OT into their conception of God. I cannot think of a more effective piece of libel against God than the Old Testament, and evangelicals are more interested in being apologists than defending God's good name.

Ha! I think they have the opposite problem. Evangelicals explain away the Old Testament rather than actually believing it

If you think evangelicals are bad with this you will not like me very much LOL!

 

[MountainMan1646]

By what standard would you judge the Old Testament conception of God to be immoral, El Machinae? How do you know your standard is reliable?

 

[Berzerker]

thou shalt not murder

how many people were murdered by God?

 

[Arakhor]

Noah wasn't a myth.

You can't possibly know that for certain.

 

[classical_hero]

You're saying Jesus didn't give government any instructions on how to act? Really? Matthew 23:23 ring a bell? Mathew 5:17?

So you want people to be going by what the Bible says about the law? Awesome, since yo don't really understand what that means.

 

[MountainMan1646]

thou shalt not murder

how many people were murdered by God?

None. God can't murder by definition since murder is to kill without divine authority.

You can't possibly know that for certain.

Sure I can. The Bible says so, and the Bible is the truth.

So you want people to be going by what the Bible says about the law? Awesome, since yo don't really understand what that means.

Where are you getting that assumption about me from?

 

[Agent327]

From your Matthew references, I would guess. The first speaks of the Law (i.e. the Mosaic law), the second accuses Pharisees of hypocrisy (the 10th mentioned refers to a religious tenth, later taken over by the Church). Neither has anything to do with government.

Noah wasn't a myth.

Really? And you discovered this how?

 

[Leoreth]

None. God can't murder by definition since murder is to kill without divine authority.

And Christians wonder why people reject their God as cruel and immoral.

 

[Arakhor]

Sure I can. The Bible says so, and the Bible is the truth.

Naturally. Don't let the story of Noah being one of the least plausible stories in Genesis stop you.

I'm looking forward to your arguing with CH. Two creationists arguing about the Old Testament would make a change to what normally goes on around here.

 

[El_Machinae]

By what standard would you judge the Old Testament conception of God to be immoral, El Machinae? How do you know your standard is reliable?

Well, the Old Testament conception of God is false, most importantly. Your intuition, that 'God cannot act immorally' won't resonate with some, but it's not pertinent to what I am saying.

Jesus's two laws were 'love God' and 'do unto others'. Evangelicals seem to try to justify the behaviour of the OT God, but that's the opposite of love. God is innocent of the things the OT accuses Him of. It's like a mother insisting that a woman deserved to be raped by her son, while ignoring exculpatory DNA evidence that he didn't actually do it.

The OT tells this little story where He gave the Hebrews a tablet telling them not to murder and steal, and then the very next thing He did was help them murder Canaanites and steal their lands. Evangelicals will try to spin the story as if the Ten Commandments didn't apply. But the event didn't actually happen! It's a grand piece of libel against God.