3 Simple Ways Conservative Christians can be More Like Jesus

3 Simple Ways Conservative Christians can be More Like Jesus July 9, 2019
ArturoRey/Unsplash 

It’s a crazy time in the world but after simply reading the red letters of Jesus, I have put together a short list of things Conservative Christians can do to be just a little more like the guy they call savior.

 

  1. Stop pretending a sleazy, sexual predator was chosen by God to lead this nation in some twisted, divine-right sort of way.

The guy who made money screwing over thousands of people and bragged openly about sexually assaulting women without apology, is not the savior of this nation. This may be hard for some of you to accept, but I don’t really care.

The reality is Trump is more like an anti-Christ than the guy we call Jesus. Not in a rapture – people getting sucked up to heaven sort of way – but in that Trump is definitely not the same type of human Jesus was.

When we look at something like The Beatitudes -you know blessed are the peacemakers, the merciful, the pure in heart, etc. -Trump is basically the exact opposite of the ways of Jesus.

Maybe try being honest with yourself.

Instead of continuing to blindly worship a racist bigot, try during you daily, morning, bible-journaling-prayer time, to reflect on who in the red letters Trump actually looks like (I think Jesus called them broods of vipers, to be exact) and then go from there.

 

  1. Stop supporting locking children in cages.

You would think that this shouldn’t even need to be said, but it’s 2019 and apparently that means we have forgotten that concentration camps are bad and seeking asylum is completely legal.

The basics of the ways of Jesus really just boil down to three words. Love your neighbor. And no, this is not just how I am interpreting the text. Jesus straight up said that loving your neighbor was the most important command there was in the entire known universe.

We’ve got desperate families trying to escape horrors like their children being murdered or forced into sex trafficking and you want to build a literal wall to prevent them – your neighbor – from seeking safety?

I’m just not seeing Jesus here.

Jesus said that what you do to the least of these you are doing to him.

Would you lock baby Jesus in a cage?

Well, right now you basically are and the thing is I don’t know how I can convince you that locking kids in cages and standing by while beautiful children die in our custody because we stole them from their parents, is NOT the way of Jesus.

Instead of contributing to a racist GoFundMe wall to keep children from basic safety, try speaking out against the start of this genocide that is unfolding in front of our eyes. Just practice some basic empathy skills.

  1. Stop obsessing over who people are having legal, consensual sex with.

Y’all it’s weird that you care so much about who people are having loving and consensual sex with. It literally has zero impact on you or your life and you need to seriously chill the hell out and get over yourself.

Maybe use that energy to fight something that is actually bad, like sex trafficking and frat boys who brag about raping girls.

There is nothing in Jesus’ life that would say that he would be anything other than loving and affirming toward the LGBTQ+ community.

There is however a clear basis that Jesus wouldn’t be cool with rape culture. He called out men for even sexually objectifying women in their minds so I am pretty sure he wouldn’t be cool with locker room talk behavior.

Instead of being outraged by people being who God made them to be, use that outrage for when you find out your president is a pedophile.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. I mean we didn’t even talk about the vibrant racism, WWII-style nationalism, and the gross obsession with money. But it’s a start.

About Sheri Faye Rosendahl
"Also, I am unsure what you mean by 'orange-idol' and MAGAT.Would you please explain those ..."

Jesus Would Have Been the Worst ..."
"Thank you for using scripture in your response. I appreciate that you are basing your ..."

Jesus Would Have Been the Worst ..."
"My apologies but I do not see the contextual relevance to your question.I pointed to ..."

Jesus Would Have Been the Worst ..."
"That's exactly what I said above....................."Thank you sir. Our beliefs do however determine our actions ..."

Jesus Would Have Been the Worst ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Lynn Munson

    Hi Sheri – The title of your article really intrigued me so, I clicked on. And, while I agree with each of your three points, I’m not hopeful “conservative Christians” will get past the first few lines. Your message is a great one for everyone to hear and I do think it hurts Christianity that any Christians lift Trump up as a “savior” and “put in position by God.” But, as they say, “you get more bees with honey…” It is one question progressive’s must answer, “how can we be as loving as Jesus was and is calling us to be, while challenging the Trump folks on him being, well, not so much like Jesus?”

  • ron

    Agree,,,,,but then the reality strikes,,,,
    How many ‘conservative christians’ will ever see it?

  • rtgmath

    You have the right of it. But this is the evil Christians are submitting themselves to, and I don’t see it changing. I must sadly conclude that in the conflict between the Church and the Gates of Hell, the Church has become the Gates of Hell.

  • rtgmath

    Jesus simply called such religious people hypocrites and pointed out their sins. Sure, they crucified him for not being honey-fied about it. But they would never have changed anyway.

  • Pathetic attempt to slander our President and justify it in Jesus. I believe if you presented this blog to Jesus he would say “get away from me I never knew you.”

  • Katarzyna Michalewska

    Thanks for the article.It pour Hope in my heart.

  • Shelley Melewski

    Right on, Sister Sheri.

  • Ya’ll do realize this has been going on forever, right? This round started with Ronald Reagan’s presidential run against Jimmy Carter. However since the early 90s, it’s gone right through the roof. Talk radio then talk TV (AKA FOX News), and even print publications. All Trump did was give the haters a license to come out from under their collective rocks. It’s a shame, but when you stoke people up, this is what you see. Did anyone ever see, or try to watch, Andy Griffith in “A Face in the Crowd”? Says it all.

  • James Elliott

    I agree with Rosendahl’s points, but i’m not sure it solves the issue. The President’s lack of a moral compass is clear. I’d say he had studied Machiavelli, but i’m not willing to give him credit for doing much reading. But if we are to confront Christians who have no problem with the current Administration and Congress, it won’t be by setting out three different examples. We already have an example here of one ignores the obvious examples and assumes they are being attacked because “their man” speaks for them. Martin Luther King, Jr. gave the example of meeting that hatred with love. Never backing down, never excusing the ignorance, but always with grace and love.

  • bill wald

    Jesus never played politics.

    Jesus was God. I don’t trust people to claim to speak for God.

  • Fed Felright

    The problem I have with this article is the ideas expressed come from a lack of information and a lack of forgiveness. The lack of information comes from know knowing that the children at the border are being used and in some cases sex trafficked. Some of these children are being recycled to permit gang members to enter the country; that is the child is claimed to be a dependent of the person bring them to the boarder. Once the person and child are released, the child is cycled back to Mexico and recycled to another gang member waiting to come over to the USA. The lack of forgiveness is the Donald Trump has, in the recent, expressed a saving knowledge in Jesus our Lord and Christ. The fruit appears to be present, he has become anti abortion, He desires to protect women and he desires to protect the children coming to our boarders. Furthermore, he desires to protect the Church from attack by those who want to destroy the Church.

  • Everett Kier Jr

    WOW…..this is a study in echo-chamber thinking and self-rationalization not to talk about straw-man lunacy. Welcome to the twilight zone.

  • Greebo

    Citation?

  • Greebo

    So? What makes you think so?
    According to the scripture the Rabbi himself was a refugee: his parents had to flee to Egypt and stayed there for a while. Luckily for him, Egypt didn’t have anything even slightly resembling U.S. Border Patrol at the time.

  • Pennybird

    If I may add one, broader, less political idea to your list, it would be to stop taping one’s Christianity to the end of a sledgehammer and trying to knock the rest of us out with it. If you are Christian, that’s nice, and I hope it gives your life meaning and comfort. As for me, I’ll find my meaning elsewhere, thank you, and that’s no threat to any Christian anywhere. We can still be friends.

  • Pennybird

    The fruit is that he has become anti abortion? Good gods, can you not detect pandering from where you sit? He is transactional only and the minute abortion will serve his needs, either personal or political, his viewpoint will change once again.

    He desires to protect no one outside of himself. He doesn’t know where the nearest church even is. Wake up and smell the coffee!

  • Pennybird

    They’ll just redefine Jesus as they see fit, since following Jesus was never their objective. Being conservative, and from the looks of it really racist too, is the point, but they use the church for cover. They facilitate the church losing credibility.

  • swbarnes2

    Children coming with their families are being sex trafficked? Where is the evidence?

    So it’s okay for a dozen children to die in American custody because a tiny number are being trafficked?

    Once the person and child are released, the child is cycled back to Mexico and recycled to another gang member waiting to come over to the USA.

    Of course your stellar sense of Christian honesty forbids you from linking to a citation demonstrating any of this, let alone that it’s happening in such great numbers that killing children with neglect is the only reasonable way to prevent it

    And again, of course you are anti-abortion, but if brown children are killed by Americans while in American care, you will vigorously defend that.

  • Jesus was not a refugee. He had a warrant out for his arrest and execution.
    Comparing a border in the middle East from 2000 years ago to the southern border of the US also makes no sense.

  • M. Solange O’Brien

    WOW. A content-free rebuttal without context. And on a Christian blog, no less.

  • Traci

    Christians don’t tell women of color to go back where they came from.

    Also, the fruit of the spirit is NOT being anti abortion. The fruits of the spirit are these: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Trump is not loving, nor is he joyful, nor is he kind, nor is he good, nor is he faithful (ask Marla/Ivana/Melania), nor is he gentle, and he completely lacks any semblance of self control. Does he protect women by grabbing them by the p*ssy, and “moving on them like a b*tch”?

  • M. Solange O’Brien

    You should spend more time with your Bible. And the reason his family fled to Egypt is irrelevant.

  • M. Solange O’Brien

    Religion is the language in which the paranoid and hateful proclaim their paranoia and hatred.

  • Irrelevant to what please? So you can claim He was a refugee?

  • acommentator

    Conservative Christians don’t need tendentious lectures from liberal Christians.

  • M. Solange O’Brien

    Conservative Christians will not PROFIT from lecturers from liberal Christians.

    And “tendentious”? You really shouldn’t use words you’re not familiar with.

  • acommentator

    Tendentious in the word. This is, at the least, a highly partisan representation of the division between conservative and progressive Christians. Borderline “when did you stop beating your wife”

    The great majority of people who support Trump, Christian and otherwise, are well aware of the man’s many flaws. They don’t think he is appointed from heaven. They support him because they view him as the best choice that is actually available. The far left positions taken by the Democratic presidential candidates are only going to reinforce that view.

    As for locking up children, what do you propose as an alternative? The adults need to be locked up until they are repatriated. I agree it would be better to alter the law so that they can be held together. But absent someone who can take care of the children until they are repatriated to their home countries with their parents, locked up they will be.

    You can point to Biblical admonitions about welcoming strangers all you want, conservative Christians will never believe that that means the U.S. is obligated to welcome millions, to the harm of our own people who must compete for low skill jobs. It has never been harder to earn a living in this country with just a strong back and a willingness to work. Unless the laws of supply and demand have been repealed, having millions of people competing for jobs who have no right to do so has to depress wages and harm workers.

    As to the gay marriage thing, progressive’s views are at odds with the views of almost all denominations throughout the entire history of the Christian religion. It seems very clear that progressive Christians views on this topic are all progressive, and very little Christian.

    This piece is just a ridiculous parody of conservative Christian thinking.

  • TomJ

    Immigrants create jobs: https://www.businessinsider.com/immigrants-create-jobs-for-local-workers-2015-6

    “As to the gay marriage thing, progressive’s views are at odds with the views of almost all denominations throughout the entire history of the Christian religion. It seems very clear that progressive Christians views on this topic are all progressive, and very little Christian.”

    Quote the scripture that is in opposition to loving, monogamous same-sex relationships. Not in opposition to ‘hook ups’ or extra-marital sex, but loving monogamy. Even better, because we’re Christians and not Jewish, quote the New Testament.

    Meanwhile, in reference to ‘traditional marriage’, I’ll quote Jesus: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Also “I say to you,* whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”

    So there’s Jesus about traditional marriage and sin. Yet He says nothing about monogamous same-sex relationships. So who should I think is in a ‘traditional marriage’? The monogamous same-sex couple, or the evangelical on his third marriage?

  • TomJ

    Just a question: how do you read the Bible then?

  • bill wald

    Good question. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myth

    I read the Bible as a true myth and take the statements at face value. I don’t try to resolve logical and historical antimony and do not use it as a science text. I understand hyperbole. We all make “larger than life” statements. The parables are teaching stories. I don’t know anyone who walking across a field who saw an unmounted pearl on the ground who would simply walk away and buy the field. Maybe a gull dropped it.

    Jesus makes statements that are beyond understanding. Koan? Google says: Definition of koan. : a paradox to be meditated upon that is used to train Zen Buddhist monks to abandon ultimate dependence on reason and to force them into gaining sudden intuitive enlightenment.Jun 23, 2019

    I have no problem accepting the ecumenical creeds as statements of faith that I must accept as the truth. I believe that Jesus is “The Way, The Truth, and The Life.” As a reformed Christian, I am satisfied to leave the details to God. I don’t want to know what I have no need to know. It simplifies life.

    Bill

  • acommentator

    Why would he say anything about monogamous homosexual relationships? There was no one in his day saying that was OK. And again, 2000 years of Christian tradition is against you. You are interpreting things from the ground up applying current trendy views on the issue. I will stick with the traditional view.

    As from divorce, who is defending that? Not I.

  • TomJ

    Are you asking why an all-knowing God, Who would know what the future would hold, would not talk about something that he knew would be a big issue in the future? That seems like a strange question.

    The problem is that your position is not the traditional position. As you acknowledge, there was not monogamous same-sex relationships until rather recent in human history. Therefore the church had no traditional position on this. Unless of course you mean as traditional as inquisitions and witch burnings, and conversion by sword. Those things all became traditions long, long after Jesus. The fact is that your tradition is just a mapping of secular views onto your religion. You’re going to stick with tradition, meaning you’re just going to do what people before you have done without thinking about it. Me, I’m going to go with what scripture tells us and what scripture does not tell us. I am commanded to treat others as I would treat myself (the love of Jesus being an active love, not just a feeling), which would include not voting against the interests of people when I would not vote against my own interests.

    It’s good that you’re not trying to justify divorce. The question then becomes this, how many evangelicals have you seen trying to ban divorce, or at least remarriage after divorce? Jesus himself declared that to be adultery, and was silent on same-sex marriage. Yet which one are evangelicals trying to get rid of? Hypocrisy.

  • acommentator

    “As you acknowledge, there was not monogamous same-sex relationships until rather recent in human history.”

    I don’t acknowledge anything of the sort. I said there was no argument (among jews) that it was permissible.

    Do you really think that no people of the same sex fell in love and were monogamous in ancient times? Has human nature changed somehow since then? No same sex couples in human history ever felt the way same sex couples feel now? What we have now is an entirely new thing?

    How can you even say that with a straight face. It is patently ridiculous.

  • TomJ

    Good answer. I agree with much or even most of your position there. Jesus was a little less obscure than the average koan, but there’s definitely a similarity.

    My point was just this: you and I, as good skeptics, do run into a problem. All of scripture was written by humans. So at some point we *have to* accept at least something some humans have said as the correct message or word from God. If we don’t accept anything from a human, we have no scripture to work with at all.

    So, it’s not about not accepting anything any human says. It’s about figuring out *who* is trustworthy. For example, the Gospels of Matt, Mark, Luke, and John, but not the Gospel of Thomas? These are the choices we have to make, and they involve at some point trusting and accepting *some* words and interpretations of some humans, right? 🙂

  • TomJ

    The Jews fleeing the ‘proper authorities’ in Germany, who had warrants, were refugees. His reason for fleeing being a warrant doesn’t make him not a refugee.

  • soter phile

    1. biblical
    2. biblical
    3. unbiblical – God has a lot to say about this, esp. in regard to adultery (“legal & consensual” in many states)

    Conservatives’ blind spot? you say: ‘look at the Bible! stop regurgitating your own politics as if God agrees!’
    Progressives’ blind spot? you say: ‘here are my regurgitated political views; certainly God agrees with me’

  • Jesus was not a refugee rather a fugitive.
    Regugee: a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
    Jesus fled to escape an arrest warrant not persecustion.

  • TomJ

    Please look up the definition of persecution.

  • If you think the definition of persecution fits the situation then why don’t you argue it for us rather than point it out because it does not fit.

  • TomJ

    Let me ask you a simple question: do you think someone being hunted by their own government for racial, political, or religious reasons is NOT persecution?

  • TomJ

    Some people are pro-life right up until it comes to sending soldiers off to war or sending prisoners off to a lethal injection or letting people in other countries (or our own country) starve to death or letting people get killed by gangs in ‘some other place’.

  • That is not the case here.
    “hostility and ill-treatment, especially because of race or political or religious beliefs.”
    Again, tell us how persecutiuon applies? You will not be able to.

  • TomJ

    If it’s ridiculous, please provide evidence of monogamous lgbt relationships in the ancient world. Go ahead, prove it.

    Cultures, and people, change. Hetero relationships have changed wildly over the centuries as well. We are, in fact, seeing a new kind of relationship, one that wasn’t seen in the ancient world. The Greeks didn’t have it, nor the Romans, Israelites. The problem for you here is that I’ve actually done the research, while (we’re both aware) you’re just going by what ‘seems true’ to you. But please, go ahead and look this up yourself, prove that these relationships existed back then. I’ll wait.

    What you’re doing, and what you’re not alone in doing, is transferring cultural, secular biases onto your religion. You still haven’t referenced scriptural passages to support your attitudes towards LGBT people. And if you were to go with the oldies but goodies, you’d find they don’t stand up to scrutiny. The story of Lot and his family wasn’t about same-sex relationships, but was about the treatment of visitors and strangers. Jesus never said a word about about monogamous LGBT relationships. So I, who follows scripture, will not condemn it, because I haven’t been instructed to. AND I’ve been instructed to love all people–the active love of Jesus, not just a ‘feeling’ (thoughts and prayers, lol)–which includes treating people like I would want to be treated. And *that* includes not voting against the interests of people when I would not want my interests voted against either.

    But you do you. If you want your religion to be based on exclusion of your fellow human–humans created in God’s image, many of whom are both LGBT *and* Christian–by all means, exclude and work against those people, and answer for that attitude later.

  • TomJ

    To be clear: Greebo described Jesus as a refugee because his parents (and Jesus) were forced to flee to Egypt. They flee to Egypt because Herod was going to execute Jesus. Why was Herod going to execute Jesus? For religious and political reasons? YES.

    So Jesus, Mary, and Joseph A) flee their country because of B) hostility from their government because of C) religious and political reasons.

    Where is the confusion?

  • Gavin Smith

    Stop pretending that someone like you should be telling Christians how to do anything.

  • acommentator

    There is nothing new under the sun in human relationships. You are saying that due to cultural beliefs, no same sex people ever fell in love with each other until the present day. That is patently ridiculous, and you know it.

  • TomJ

    You are just flat out wrong. And your unwillingness or inability to find evidence of these supposed relationships is proof that you either recognize you are wrong, or don’t know how to do research. For my part, just look at the relationships between same-sex partners that did exist. The examples in Greece and Rome, and the behavior Paul discussed, were not monogamous loving relationships. And you won’t find them in other historical records of the time either. My evidence is the *lack* of evidence. For your claim to be true, you would need to be able to illustrate with examples. You cannot.
    Good luck with your blind dogma. Jesus told us to be innocent, but also shrewd. That means requiring evidence. Not just believing whatever just seems right to you, as you are doing. I operate on evidence and scripture. You operate on ungrounded belief. Good luck.

  • acommentator

    My evidence is how humans behave. People have not changed. People fall in love. Those who are same sex attracted fall in love. This, in fact, is the core of your argument over why we should accept these relationships. That gay people are behaving no different than straight people, they just are same sex orientated. Yet you claim that this is something entirely new. No same sex person attracted person in human history ever fell in love with anyone. Its nonsense. I don’t believe that you or anyone else truly believes that.

  • TomJ

    Lol. So your evidence is looking at people *now*, and you draw conclusions about how people behaved thousands of years ago? That’s brilliant. Very evidence minded there. So I’m sure you’d be shocked to read what historians think about the rather recent existence of what we know as romantic love at all.

    Seriously. Read a book. I am not alone in this, the general consensus among historians is all I’m reporting to you. Historians–people who actually study *the records of history* to learn about history. As opposed to you, who is simply looking around yourself *right now* and ignorantly saying “well, it must always have been just like this”.

    If you’re not even going to try to attempt to form beliefs about history based on the actual records, you’re not worth continuing this conversation with. Of course you’re going to remain shocked and unable to believe the things that people who actually *study* believe, because you are in essence making up your own history. You don’t even know the history of your own religion–what views the church held through time. You are ignorantly assuming that *your* current beliefs are what the church–at least your favorite parts of it–has always believed. Again, study history for a change, and you’ll be shocked. Like all the generations that the church as a whole cared almost nothing about abortion. Also a shocker of you don’t, you know, actually go study.

    See you later. Good luck with the uninformed way you’re planning on going about things.

  • acommentator

    I have a masters in history. I am not ignorant on the subject. Romantic love, as something that should accompany marriage and family, is a relatively new thing. That does not mean that people never fell in love in ancient times.

  • TomJ

    Lol, I never said they didn’t. You’re now contradicting things I haven’t even said. Masters in history, huh? Okay. I mean, I don’t believe you, given the sort of things you have been counting as evidence up to now–just looking around at the present. But who knows, maybe some school would give a masters degree to someone who didn’t look at historical evidence to form their conclusions about the past. But no, I doubt that’s true. It doesn’t make any difference to my arguments or your baseless claims if it was true. But I doubt it all the same.

    Anyway, I’m done. I’m not going to debate further with someone who just makes whatever claims will be needed to support their conclusions about how much Jesus would like us to exclude people from our lives and fellowship. See ya.

  • acommentator

    “Lol, I never said they didn’t. You’re now contradicting things I haven’t even said. ”

    Well, if you admit that same sex attracted people existed in biblical times, and you admit that they would fall in love, then I don’t know what your argument is.

    It was known in biblical times that same sex attracted people existed. It was known they could fall in love. It was still viewed as forbidden. Christian tradition followed that lead. That is all that need be said on the subject.

  • hack

    What about the Roman Centurion and his “body servant”, whom Jesus healed? There’s some evidence that the body servant was his lover, although I admit it’s debatable.

  • acommentator

    What evidence?

    This is the kind of thing that is always offered up. The tradition of the Christian churches on the subject is clear. Why is it that this tradition is being challenged now? Because elite secular opinion has changed on the issue, and the churches are following suit. Progressive Christians view this issue in a similar way to current progressive elite opinion. And, like most everyone else in the world, they think God must see things the way they do. That is nothing new, but it is blatantly obvious here.

  • Jessica

    As a Conservative Christian, I am going to respond. I don’t think or believe that the President was appointed by God. But he is our duly elected official and no matter what anyone thinks of him, I respect the office. I don’t support children locked in cages. What we need to do is pass comprehensive immigration reform that will take care of it rather than using it is a political football or as a way to start a revolution. Third, I don’t care who anyone sleeps with- same sex or not. It’s really none of my business- so it’s not something I care to celebrate.
    And about the topics you didn’t cover. I don’t support racism or WWII style nationalism or am I obsessed with money.
    And I am pretty sure that most conservatives are not like this. And it is these gross stereotypes that keep us from sitting down and talking

  • Cynthia Brown Christ

    You are a breath of fresh air. I am honest when I say, I have so rarely read a post by someone calling themselves conservative christian – like your post.

    You are not the norm, but an anomaly, at least when it comes to my actual experience attending a conservative christian church, and when reading their words, and learning about their actions.

    Gods good blessings to you.