Thoughts and Prayers: The Religion Thread

Would Jesus agree with Lou Reed's opinion of the Reagan's America? We could start there.

Second, I think Jesus would and did promote benevolence through the church. I don't believe he was asking the Roman state to do that; he was asking for private policy to preempt the need for public policy. A Christian (who is also a Democrat) who has 12-room house would probably be asked, by Jesus, how often others are in the home, for example. What Democrats tend to want - and in some cases, this seems practical to me from a socio-political - are state-driven solutions that resolve material discomfort without creating relational bonds. Progressive A may want a political structure that "addresses needs" but doesn't actually want to spend time with the less fortunate. Conservative A may want the less fortunate to express traits consistent with flourishing without actually being a mentor for that. Either solution is insufficient.

He said a. But I don't believe Jesus would be advocating a state solution to poverty, if that makes sense. Further, taxes are used for many things - once upon a time, Democrats used to oppose taxes being used for war and nuclear weapons. Remarkably, that has changed, the party of perpetual defense and meaningful conflict has become the Democrats.

I think you simplify the issue too much, honestly. Suffice it to say I got vaxxed, >90% of my church did, and we had people get angry about and leave over a "too cautious" approach to masking and distancing. I stayed and advocated for what we did.

I've saved this one for last because there's a second question I'd like you to ponder.

First, Jesus would comfort the victims. But anybody who knows my position on guns knows I'm for strict gun control. I can see the logic of the 2nd Amendment - it makes the state less of an authoritarian threat - but there have been so many negative consequences from America's unique gun culture that I'm just not persuaded.

Second, knowing the threat of mass shooters, the question is this: Would Jesus support the creation of a church security team carrying guns, with the authority to use those guns on an active shooter?

 

Nobody knows what he did for those 18 years between 12 and 30.

 

Banging cocktail waitresses two at a time.

 

He was SMAHHHT! He could handle things!!

 

Two bad we can't see His 1040s from those years. WDJD* ...

What Did Jesus Deduct?

 

He was a dependent on his Father's returns.

 

Put away your sword. Pull out your AK-47.

 

Pondering whether Jesus would be Republican or Democrat is pretty comical because he wouldn’t be able to participate in the political process or register to vote without a birth certificate and I doubt he’d be willing to go through that whole virgin birth and working as a carpenter for years thing again. (Not to mention having to lie about the true identity of his father on the record of live birth form.)

We should also remember that during his last go around neither democratic government (representative republic for you quibblers) nor “the church” existed.

I think that a better question might be, looking at party leadership and policy, which one is more Christlike? When I read the parable of the sheep and the goats (Matthew 25:31-46 in my aforementioned possibly defective printing) Democrat leadership and policy is pretty sheepish (Heck, their main dude is a long, long, long, long, longtime Catholic). The Republicans’ well established track record on aid to the sick, poor, strangers, etc. pretty much gets the goat (Ask their leader and he’ll shout that he’s the GOAT.)

The party that embraces various shades of Christian nationalism (that’s the GOP, for those of you keeping score at home) seems ignore a lot of the part of the Bible that God wrote about his son.

 

Yours would have been better had you stopped at "pretty comical."

 

God wrote nothing.

 

I don't believe he would support the creation of a church security team that carried guns, or, especially, actually used them.

Your argument that Jesus would advocate for personal, private policies for good living and individual responsibility rather than relying on or needing them implemented by any public or governmental entity is correct. And I would think that would include any decision about gun use -- and would preclude the need for them (or swords) by anybody in the first place.