We might say that He essentially was above and beyond all this, even when He liked some people more than He liked some others.
As He spoke a lot about masters and slaves, and about His Father in yonder Paradise, we may dare guess that He had an aristocratic attitude, and this may mean that He was neither a Republican nor a Democrat. But in fact He was beyond all this, even when He seemed to partake of the Aristocrats.
As He was reported to want to be "the King of Israel" and to severely admonish that those who were not with Him were against Him, we may dare guess that He was quite stiff in such matters, and would not allow any freedom, any beating about the bush, and was for the absolute rule.
When the Republicans and the Democrats speak constructively together for the good of the Nation, even doing it peacefully, and so with some respect towards each other's ideas, and so keep the Nation together, they might be seen as being somewhat unchristian.
Anyway, there may be a sort of transcendental meaning behind all this that is not up to us to grasp nor to fetch. Not yet, Maybe never.
Good luck!
2007-04-08 05:06:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by pasquale garonfolo 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Settle down the chorus, try not to let your collective karma run over your installed dogma. It's a perfectly valid question. It is quite clear that the character we know as Jesus, was a very political animal.
To me it has always been clear that he was the Arch-Proto-Marxist-Trotskyist. Again, before the chorus all leap up in protest, do not confuse the Soviet, or the Chinese, experiments in communism with what Marx wrote in Das Kapital. In both cases, Lenin, followed by the disastrous Stalin, in the case of the Soviets, and Mao Dse Dung ( yes, the D works just as well as the T in transliterating Chinese to English ! ) with the Chinese, these people went far off the rails of what Marx proposed.
The commune led by the figure of Yashua bin Jusef, which was probably, for a time, the Qumran settlement of Dead Sea Scrolls fame, had a very similar principles to Marxism. The pooling of goods, sharing of work according to ability, the maintenance of a common purse, with which to pay all debts to outside society.
Marx wrote "From each according to their means, and to each according to their needs". If that doesn't sound Jesus-like what does ?
2007-04-08 04:52:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by cosmicvoyager 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Probably a Democrat seeing as how the last time the Jews listened to a bush they ended up wondering the dessert fo 40 years
2007-04-08 04:49:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by angelpockets 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
"Jesus" as he existed (perhaps) historically was so far out of all relation with either set of ideas we call "Republican" and "Democrat" in 21st century America that you may as well ask "Are round squares triangular?"
That said, sure, you can pull quotes from "Scripture" to suggest Jesus was anything from a hippie to Hitler. Bernard Shaw "proved" he was a Socialist, and by the same methods everybody makes Jesus his homeboy. That's just because the Bible is, in practice, little more than an ink blot test. People simply read their own psychology into its pages.
Very generally speaking, the "Jesus" of the gospels who is quoted as saying things like "I came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it" would seem to be a sort of reformer - that is, a conservative with a liberal approach. He is always attacking the scribes and Pharisees for their formalism - think his saving of the adulterous woman who was about to be stoned under Mosaic Law. Yet he constantly upholds the veracity of that Law - in spite of what modern "Christian" liars say today about the "Good News" - even arguing that it ought to be stricter "but for the hardness of men's hearts."
2007-04-08 04:33:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by jonjon418 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
> Wasn't Jesus approximately helping the undesirable, the sick, the needy? > attempting to deliver wish to hopeless human beings? whilst replaced into the final > time you observed a Republican do this? we are speaking approximately human beings > who think of the unborn are sacred yet scale down wellbeing courses for > youngsters who're already here. i think of that's fairly glaring which area > Jesus could come down on. Jesus replaced into approximately helping the needy, yet there remained undesirable and sick between the Jews of his time. Jesus taught his followers to voluntarily make contributions to the help of the deprived. government compels help. Taxes are no longer voluntary. government handouts smash *charity.* A case could be made that some government courses sell vice.
2016-10-21 08:37:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Democrat.
2007-04-08 04:30:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
Jesus was a royalist. He is King of Heaven and Earth, no petty human politics affect his reign.
2007-04-08 05:03:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by aa.gabriel 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Jesus would not believe in democracy, as it takes away power from the interpretors of God's holy law - the church. In all likelihood he'd support a monarchy, dictatorship or a theocracy.
2007-04-08 04:33:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by Mordent 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior. He's not a republican or a democrat
2007-04-08 04:31:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by George 4
·
3⤊
4⤋
If you believe all of the noise from Christian fundamentalist, he had to be a Republican and they also believe that if you are not a conservative, then you cannot be an American patriot or a Christian.
2007-04-08 06:51:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Polyhistor 7
·
0⤊
0⤋