Jesus - the bleeding heart liberal

comments?

Religion Experts Ask How Jesus Would Vote

By BOBBY ROSS JR.
Associated Press Writer





AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Just a few miles from George W. Bush's former office at the state Capitol, a panel of religious experts weighed a question with relevance to many people of faith: How would Jesus vote?

It's a complex topic that can't be boiled down to simple political terms, said religious leaders who attended a Texas Faith Network conference in Austin on Tuesday. Many at the conference voiced concerns that the religious right dominates discussions of faith and morality in politics. They complained that issues such as abortion and gay marriage seem to take priority over hunger, corporate crime and even the war in Iraq.

James C. Moore, co-author of "Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George Bush Presidential," drew laughter and applause when he offered his view to the moderate to left-leaning crowd of about 250 clergy and lay leaders.

"If ever there were a bleeding-heart liberal, it was Jesus Christ," Moore said at Congregation Agudas Achim synagogue. "I think the carpenter from Galilee was the original Democrat."

Some research has found that white Christians who attend worship services at least once a week are far more likely to vote Republican, while less frequent worshippers and those who are not religious tend to lean Democratic. Many analysts have criticized Democrats for failing to more effectively reach religious voters.

"The sound bites and the headlines have co-opted people of faith," said the Rev. Tom Heger, pastor of St. John's Presbyterian Church in Manchaca, south of Austin. "It would be a surprise to a lot of folks to discover that there are some very faithful, regular church attendees who aren't going to vote for Bush."

Conservative pastors such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson "would have us believe that morality is all about where you stand on abortion, how you treat homosexuals. I think that is simply wrong," said John D. Moyers, senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for American Progress.

The presidential race pits President Bush, a Republican who openly professes his evangelical Christian beliefs, against Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, a Roman Catholic who is more hesitant to discuss his faith publicly.

The Rev. Timothy Tutt, pastor of United Christian Church in Austin, declined to say whom he will support in November, but balked at the perception that Bush is the only choice for people of faith.

"As I read the Scriptures and as I understand faith, God's side is the group that's feeding the poor, caring about children, making sure that people have enough food to eat - not killing others," said Tutt, who opposes the war in Iraq.

Juan Galvan, Texas president of the Latino American Dawah Organization, a group of Hispanic Muslims, said he's certain Jesus would not vote strictly for Republicans or Democrats.

"Prophet Jesus, or Isa as Muslims call him, would look at the stance of politicians on various issues before voting," Galvan said. "He would weigh in the good and bad of each individual."

Michael Jinkins, a pastoral theology professor at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, said: "Based on my reading of the Gospels, I think Jesus might surprise us all on his voting record. He was far less 'religious' than the people who criticized him most."

In fact, Jesus might not support Bush or Kerry - or anyone else, for that matter.

"Jesus was not one to take sides on political issues," said Derek Davis, director of the J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies at Baylor University in Waco.

While there were obviously no Democrats or Republicans during the time of Jesus, different groups vied for attention, including the fundamentalist Pharisees, the aristocratic Sadducees, the spiritually devout Essenes and the revolutionist Zealots.

"Interestingly, Jesus never sided with any of these groups but remained above such earthly disputes," Davis said. "This does not mean we should do the same. He was God. We are mere humans."

 

Jesus would absolutely be pro-life. Anyone who says different is just wrong.

Jesus did not take a stand on polictical matters in the bible because they did not live in a democracy. The people had little control on what Ceaser did. In our country we do have control and we are therefore held accountible for how we use the control we have.

 

Oh Thelt....I knew I should have posted this in NOTD so that I could call you what I'm thinking. But I respect the rules and won't.

Jesus would have been a communist too. He was for laying down your earthly possessions. He also was against selling the animals for sacrifices.

 

He may have told some people to lay aside their worldly posessions but He did not advocate the government taking them, so you can not say He would have been for a socialist form of government.

I am not sure that Jesus would have cared about many of the issues we struggle with today but He would have found abortion to be an abomination.

 

Was Jesus a "communist"? Let's look at a few things. First, remember that he said, "Take all that you own and sell it, then give your money to the poor and follow me." I never read that anywhere in the Wall Street Journal.

But this is consistent with many of Jesus' other sayings and with his lifestyle. "Blessed are the poor, but woe to the rich." (Luke 6). Also remember what Jesus instructed the religious man: "Sell all that you own and give the money to the poor." (Luke 18). As for his lifestyle, we know that he traveled around a lot in his very few years of work. But he did not travel alone; he had several groups with him: the 12 disciples or apostles; a retinue of women that followed him about (and no doubt some had children); his mother and brothers and sisters were frequently with him; and another retinue of "disciples" who at one point is counted as 70. Over a hundred people followed Jesus around. ... All of this was therefore evidently organized and even by modern terms should be recognized as quite an impressive operation. ... The point is: All shared and shared alike.

Perhaps it is not absolutely clear, but in the case of the early church it is so stated. After Jesus' death, his original disciples form the early church. Now we find that all property and wealth was handled in a communal (communist) fashion.

"The church of believers were of one heart and soul, and none claimed anything as belonging to himself, all property was common property. ... There was not one needy among them, because those who owned land or houses sold them and brought the monies to the apostles, and they would distribute it to whoever had a need." (Acts 4).



I bet you'd be hard pressed to find any priest, minister, or true Christian that would be willing to assume what Jesus would say. Instead, they may interpret from what the bible says he did say. You might want to rethink your notions.

 

Thank you.

 

In my opinion, that is a misuse of Scripture. The "rich young ruler" approached Jesus wanting to be a disciple. Jesus saw into his heart and knew he loved money more than God, and that's why He told him to sell everything he owned. That's an inherent danger for all wealthy people -- that they'll love their possessions more than they love God. But it's not a universal truth. Matthew was rich, but Jesus didn't make him give all his money away. Paul was, too, at one point.

 

I think Jesus would have been much more concerned with what we call social issues. He would not have condoned the practice of abortion. I think that issue alone would make Him vote for Bush.

 

thank you :applause:

 

Can we move this thread now? Please?