Jesus Would Have Been the Worst Conservative Christian

Jesus Would Have Been the Worst Conservative Christian September 4, 2019
Photo by Edward Cisneros via Unsplash

For one, Jesus was never like, “Do you know where you are going when you die?”

You know, the number one question of American Christianity, the question plastered on billboards throughout the country with 1-800 numbers and everything.

I mean, looking at the words of Jesus, I don’t think that he was even trying to save our souls from some after-death, gnashing of teeth in the fire, drama.

I think he may have been trying to save our souls from our own egocentrism. Like, maybe what he actually cared about was the kindness of our souls and how we treat others, during life itself.

Radical idea, I know.

One of the many ironies of this mega-brand of conservative Christianity – a religion that claims Jesus as lord and savior – is that it has a vibrant tendency to represent and be cool with the exact things Jesus opposed.

The Jesus of the red letters of Christianity wouldn’t have been like, “Yeah, okay, it sucks that small children are being killed after being imprisoned because their families were fleeing violence in desperate search for safety, but they could be like drug dealers or something, and it’s better for the great nation of America to be safe than sorry. Yeah, okay, maybe my own parents fled to another nation for my safety, but that was definitely different.”

The Jesus of those little red letters literally said to welcome the little children and I am a thousand percent sure he didn’t mean with cages.

If you look at the actual words of Jesus, he was shockingly progressive.

Yeah, I know, you are thinking, “For Keeping-Christ-in-Christmas’ sake Sheri, a progressive!? Those progressives really suck at Christianity!”

Yes, when Christianity supports things like allowing a sexual predator as “leader” of our nation, obsessing over taking rights away from people based on who they love, stripping humans of basics like clean drinking water, education, and healthcare, being a cool with killing kids with drone strikes as “collateral damage,” murdering our entire earth because we are greedy af, turning our backs on those trying to escape death so their kids can have a life more than becoming child soldiers or sex slaves, and more of the same ignorant sort of straight evil oppression and hurt – progressives suck at Christianity.

And to be real – so did Jesus.

Y’all, Jesus hung-out with the sick, the poor, the prostitutes, the foreigners, the outcasts, and here is the key – he loved them.

He didn’t yell and throw judgment their way and he didn’t speak out against those being hurt – he spoke out for them, and more importantly, with them.

To throw even more irony into it all, the only people Jesus himself was super harsh on were the religious elite, the oppressive, the Jerry Falwell Jr types, the white-washed tombs, the broods of vipers, the America-First-God-is-kind-of-a racist-and-loves-Merica-the-most-est types.

Y’all, looking at our world today, I think it is safe to say, that Jesus would have been a horrible Christian, because what Jesus represented was a revolution of love, the opposite of the hurt we see in conservative Christianity today.

About Sheri Faye Rosendahl

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


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

    Atheist says amen!

    I mean, I don’t agree with everything Jesus supposedly said, and don’t think he was divine. But he said some good and decent things. If he showed up at most churches today, as has often been pointed out, they wouldn’t let him in.

  • You are so right (or “left”, if you prefer). We spell out the point of this great article of yours our LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/Christlike.

    The trouble with conservatives and/or evangelicals is that they aren’t at all the “Christians” that they claim to be. As we show at WhatWouldJesusThink.info/AboutBadNewsPaul, Jesus of Nazareth’s “good news for the poor and the needy” is far too LIBERAL for them. What they much prefer is the CONSERVATIVE teaching of Paul of Tarsus, who has been helping the “haves” to look down on the “have nots” for centuries!!!

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/eeb4ab604664d8287122748962da097d77381a40cb469f16f18c5c396cb9dc46.png

    But they won’t be honest and call themselves the “Paulists” that they actually ARE so long as the name “Jesus Christ” is more popular with most people than the name “St. Paul”.
    Rev. R D

  • ProchDolor

    Was Paul really “conservative,” or have his teachings just been hijacked to appear to support conservative ideologies? Personally, I find Paul quite radical, especially for his time. Most of the attempts to *make* him conservative seem like misreadings to me.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    Your first link is dead … or incorrect. The second one works fine.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    Jesus is a Liberal. Everything Jesus taught and did was in agreement with the Liberal mindset and way of acting.
    Anyone who says differently, is a liar.

  • Dennis

    Sheri Rosendahl: You state “Jesus was never like, ‘Do you know where you are going when you die?’ ” and “… looking at the words of Jesus, I don’t think that he was even trying to save our souls from some after-death, gnashing of teeth in the fire, drama.”

    Yes, Jesus did talk about love a lot. But he also talked about hell and gnashing of teeth a lot, e.g. in Matthew (5:22,29,30; 8:12; 10:28; 13:42,50; 18:9; 22:13; 23:15,33; 24:51; 25:30), Mark 9:43,45,47, Luke 12:5, and Luke 13. So Jesus was very much concerned about where people were going when they die and viewed hell as a real place.

  • Maya Bohnhoff

    Thank you for this article. I’d like to recommend to all a careful reading of Luke 10:25-37 aka The Parable of the Good Samaritan. It tells us in several different ways how Christ felt about salvation, behavior as opposed to doctrine and where the line is drawn between rendering unto Caesar (by observing manmade boundaries, for example) and rendering unto God.

    Christ is answering a crucial question for any Christian (or indeed most believers of any faith)—”How may I inherent eternal life?”

    His answer is to direct the questioner (a scholar of Jewish law) to the two greatest commandments given by Moses, which Christ notes are alike: Love God with your whole being and love your neighbor as you love yourself.

    Christ does not mince words: “Do this and you shall live.”

    When the lawyer challenges him by asking “who’s my neighbor?” Christ responds with the parable in which 1) a Jew is attacked and left to die; 2) two Jewish religious leaders react by refusing to cross legal boundaries of ritual purity to help him, but 3) a despicable, heretical Samaritan (in other words, the worst of the worst to a Jew of the time) crosses those same religious legal boundaries to care for the man and further pay for his care by a proxy.

    These men are neighbors by Christ’s definition. Again, Christ is crystal clear. He commends the actions of the Samaritan though it violates ancient ethnic and religious boundaries and Jewish social laws. “Go,” the Messiah says, “and do likewise.”

    Note the emphasis on action. DO this, not believe this doctrine, not perform this ritual, but do this thing for your neighbor, no matter how many reasons you think you have to despise him.

    If that were not enough, I think a reading of Matthew 25: 31-46, in which Christ gives an illustration of the Day of Judgement might clarify what our attitude toward the poor, the refugee, the unfortunate is to be. The most quotable lines from this passage are, of course, ” ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’” and the companion bookend, “‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’”

    He ends the illustration with “And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life,” returning us to the essential question asked by the legal scholar.

    This is all very easy to understand. But very hard to do. New Atheist thinker, Christopher Hitchens proclaimed it a bridge too far—beyond human capacity. But that’s the point of God’s revelation to man, after all—that we develop the capacity to DO this and inherit eternal life, thereby becoming truly human.

  • Maya Bohnhoff

    I find Christ’s references to what we call hell fascinating. He mixes the metaphor of Gehenna (the burning trash heap outside the walls of Jerusalem) with the 10 foolish maidens being shut out of the Lord’s abode in the dark and with being severed from the True Vine and worthy of a toss into the fire or, in another context, “the outer darkness.” There are others, equally diverse.

    In fact, one thing is common to all of the portraits of hell—whether they speak of heat or cold, fire or darkness—being cut off. Left outside. Separated from God and the “righteous.”

    It is in taking those images as material metaphors for a spiritual reality that they are reconciled. Hell isn’t a hot place or a cold place or a place of physical torture; hell is being cut off from God by one’s own failure. What could be worse?

  • Scott

    Let’s leave certitude out of the conversation. The truth, and I mean the hard truth, is that the difference between what a progressive Christian DOESN’T know about God, and what a conservative evangelical DOESN’T know about God, is immeasurable.

  • Dennis

    Maya: My main point to Sheri’s article was that Jesus WAS interested in where we were going after death and was “trying to save our souls from some after-death, gnashing of teeth in the fire, drama.” I agree with you that the common theme in Jesus’ depiction of hell is separation from God. But it is clear to me from the verses, that Jesus thought hell was a place, and not a state-of-mind or a metaphor to mean just “very bad,” because he mentions being tossed in there. Jesus used various metaphors for the “nature” of hell (e.g. fire, outer darkness), but not for the “place” of hell.

  • BJ Oropeza

    The article really shouldn’t take sides. The self-righteous moralists these days are not just on the “right.” I have a feeling Jesus would be rebuking both sides. And I don’t think Jesus would give a rip about being politically correct

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    Congratulations! You have discovered that the only things we can know about God and His Son Jesus Christ, is what’s written in the Scriptures. We can read Christ’s own words, which are: “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”

    The Beatitudes, Sermon on the Mount, Christ’s parables, feeding the multitudes, healing the sick, raising the dead, and forgiveness of sins for those who have faith, even the Lord’s own Blood Sacrifice … were all given for free, without charge. Sounds Liberal to me.

    One doesn’t have to know everything about God to know what is Love and what is not. By loving your neighbor, you are loving God.

    Besides going over to the Dark Side, by surrendering their souls to TЯ

  • Pan Unicorn

    My favourite is where Jesus straight up says rich people won’t get into heaven but conservative Christians fall over themselves to buy their pastors a third Leer jet

  • Maya Bohnhoff

    If hell is a spiritual reality, then it is a “place” or perhaps a station, in a spiritual sense. That, to me, means it’s not a place in the sense that it has physical coordinates or is a physical reality. I’ve been puzzled again and again by some believers insisting that if you say something is a spiritual reality, you’re essentially saying it’s not “real.” Far from it. Judging by what I’ve read in scripture, the opposite is true.

    So, I’d say that hell is something we can experience both here and in the spiritual life to come. If you wish to say it is a “place,” that’s may be true, depending on your definition of a place; but I think one could say it’s not a material place or a physical reality and also be correct, given Christ’s teachings on what is real or essential (spirit) and what is not (the flesh).

    Bottom line: we, having to experience material existence through our bodies, are unable to understand what hell or heaven really is, hence, the Prophets’ use of metaphors and parables to frame these things in terms we humans can understand. I think you might agree that we err when we insist that those metaphors represent physical reality.

  • Dennis

    Whatever we ultimately believe about hell, I think we need to understand what Jesus thought it was. I believe he thought and described it as a place. You have terminology of being “thrown in” hell. You also have Rich Man & Lazarus Parable (Luke 16) which describes a place, though you clearly can’t take all of the details literally. You could argue that Jesus was accommodating to the culture in his explanation of hell. I think there is such a thing as accommodation in the Bible. I’m not dogmatic on what hell will be like, or heaven for that matter. I believe in both and that they are something more than a state of mind or an emotional experience. Maybe you can call it a spiritual reality, but that is not entirely clear. I think a person will “be” in one of those places, but not sure what that will entail.

  • David Cromie

    Here is something else that is ‘shockingly progressive’, there is no evidence, whether written or archaeological, that any god-man named JC ever existed.

  • Nimblewill

    I believe most of what you are saying but you are still trying to use Jesus to push a political agenda. No different than those you rail against.

  • Nimblewill

    He didn’t say they wouldn’t get to heaven, He said they could not enter the Kingdom of God. Big Difference!

  • Pat Gustafson

    ROFL. Semantics

  • Xavier de la Torre

    I agree with just about everything stated by Ms. Rosendahl. Everything but the condescending attitude.

  • Xavier de la Torre

    “The Kingdom of God IS Heaven”. Your view is ridiculously simplistic. Semantics?? No.

  • bfolkman

    I was reading and thinking about your opinions until — “Yeah, okay, it sucks that small children are being killed after being imprisoned because their families were fleeing violence in desperate search for safety, but they could be like drug dealers or something, and it’s better for the great nation of America to be safe than sorry. Yeah, okay, maybe my own parents fled to another nation for my safety, but that was definitely different.”
    This isn’t true, and the comment is so politically biased that anything else you might write is rendered useless.

  • Ron Swaren

    Whether or not Jesus would call for your standardized ‘progessive ‘ talking points he wasn’t into asking the Roman government to finance his views. That’s one difference between you and Him.

  • Nimblewill

    I think maybe he should do a little more studying. Jesus said that the Kingdom of God was among us and that it didn’t come with observation. The Kingdom is Here and Now. The Kingdom of God simply means the Rule of God.

    Signed………………… Dimplewit! and please get off the floor.

  • Nimblewill

    More narrowly, the kingdom of God is a spiritual rule over the hearts and lives of those who willingly submit to God’s authority. Those who defy God’s authority and refuse to submit to Him are not part of the kingdom of God; in contrast, those who acknowledge the lordship of Christ and gladly surrender to God’s rule in their hearts are part of the kingdom of God. In this sense, the kingdom of God is spiritual—Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36), and He preached that repentance is necessary to be a part of the kingdom of God (Matthew 4:17). That the kingdom of God can be equated with the sphere of salvation is evident in John 3:5–7, where Jesus says the kingdom of God must be entered into by being born again. See also 1 Corinthians 6:9.

    Just sayin’

  • Pat Gustafson

    What you just did is called circular reasoning.

  • David Cromie

    A distinction without a difference.

  • David Cromie

    Is ‘hell’ not also part of the ‘kingdom of god’, since it is also part of the supposed ‘creation’ (after the crucifiction, we are told that JC went on a visit to ‘hell’ for three days)?

  • David Cromie

    One has no option but to take sides when a case is being made on the assumption that some ‘fact’ or other is assumed to be true, but no evidence has ever been adduced that would show that the ‘fact’ being relied on is actually true.

    Thus, since there never has been any evidence provided, whether written or archaeological, that any man-god named JC ever existed, we can be sure that any argument based on the assumed existence of a JC, must therefore be invalid. Mere ‘belief’ and ‘faith’ prove nothing abut the reality of existence, apart from the fact that ‘believers’ in JC (or any other assumed supernatural entity) are merely indoctrinated, deluded, and superstitious. How is that for ‘taking sides’?

  • Nimblewill

    I believe that God is a consuming fire and that those in His presence will be refined by it to the degree that they need to be. Jesus went to the grave not sure he went to Gehenna? Is there a difference.

  • Nimblewill

    I disagree. I wasn’t trying to prove that the Kingdom of God existed just that it’s not the same as what is traditionally known as heaven. The kingdom is here and now. Heaven is later.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    That wasn’t her “opinion” … she’s saying that Jesus would have NEVER uttered those words, nor even entertained thoughts like that.

    I guess that’s one excuse lawless TЯ

  • David Cromie

    What you ‘believe’ and what you can provide the irrefutable evidence for, are two very different things.

    When discussing any imaginary supernatural entity, just anything may be ‘believed’ concerning such an entity, as the plethora of christer branches and sects shows is the reality of christer ‘belief’ delusions about their supposed ‘god’, and its counterpart ‘satan’.

  • Nimblewill

    Thank you sir. Our beliefs do however determine our actions toward others. I don’t have to defend my beliefs nor the God I believe in. My beliefs cause me to treat you as if you are a future child of God regardless of your beliefs. Stay in One Peace.

  • David Cromie

    There is no delusion quite like self-delusion, that is always backed up with nothing of substance, and impervious to facts and reality.

  • C.A. Johnson

    Confirmation bias . . .? You agree with what Jesus said when and if it agrees with what you think? Hmm, the problem with confirmation bias is that if I agree with a leader then the leader is right?
    Trump is wrong because you disagree with his actions?
    What is the standard by which everyone is measured? Where does that standard come from?
    And yes, Jesus does come to MANY worship services everyday. He is not only let in, He is invited.

  • C.A. Johnson

    Not that the rich would not get into the Kingdom of God but that it would be difficult because they love things more than Him. Even the poor can love things more than God and they would not enter into The Kingdom either.

  • C.A. Johnson

    I disagree that Paul of Tarsus brings a message of worldy prosperity, especially at the expense or disenfranchisement of others.

    Also, he says he is a disciple of Jesus Christ, a claim that was confirmed by the other original disciples of Christ when Paul submitted himself to them for scutiny and they confirmed and endorsed his ministry.

    If you believe that the word of God is true, then you must accept all that He tells us in it. It is not the writings of men and their personal opinions, it is with the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit and so complete and absolute Truth.
    Now Paul wrote 1st and 2nd Corinthians and within he explicilty accepts and endorses acceptance of the kind of people you are referring to.
    There is a standard of expected behavior, and that behavior will have a universal outward appearance because it flows from Him.

  • C.A. Johnson

    You need to read the work of Gary Habermas
    A highly respected historian who has, along with many others throughout history, proven the exsistence of Jesus Christ.
    The religious claims He made notwithstanding, the proof for His physical exsistence is incontrovertible. If you disagree, then you are disagreeing with secular history and historians.

    Also, your arguments sound as though you are saying there is no objective truth, that there is no absolute standard for anything. Where have you adduced irrefutable evidence for that belief?

  • C.A. Johnson

    Does it matter to anyone that God obeyed the laws of the land in defending himself and others?
    That His immigration to Egypt was lawful.

    The immigration that the U.S. is dealing with, long before the Trump administration, is illegal immigration.
    We, as a nation, should be hospitable and welcoming, however, the alien in our midst does not have the privelages of a citizen. Their criminal act (regardless of their reason for commiting it) must be answered. The suffering they may be fleeing is not a legitimate reason to break the laws of the land in which you seek protection.
    They cannot spit on our laws they dislike and then demand protection under those they do.

  • C.A. Johnson

    Thank you Maya. I am encouraged by your words. May your faithfulness to Christ be your continued defining characteristic.

  • C.A. Johnson

    How are your vitriolic assertations about President Trump in the same spirit as the Samaritan caring for his neighbor?
    President Donald Trump is your neighbor. Are you prepared to build a Godly loving relationship with him? How are you SHOWING him the Love of Christ through your words and deeds?
    If he is your enemy, do you love him?
    Are your words blessings or curses?

    Please reexamine your motives and judge yourself before you condemn another.

  • David Cromie

    So Harry Potter is also history, then.

  • David Cromie

    Sounds like JC is ‘hell’ personified.

  • Nimblewill

    Only for some but we will all be salted with fire.

  • Nimblewill

    We agree! The crusaders and the inquisitors were clueless. They were starved for power and believed that the Kingdom came by force.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    Allow me to refute your MAGAT lie:

    The Asylum Seeking Refugees are NOT “spitting on our laws” … it is perfectly LEGAL for refugees to seek asylum in the United States … until your lawless, corrupt and racist, Vile-Orange-Idol, decided to “spit on our laws” … our Immigration Laws (among others).

    Furthermore, until around 1850 Texas WAS Mexico … we’re the ones who “demand protection” for stealing other peoples’ homelands, then claiming that they’re the ones who are “illegal”.

    According to Scripture, the “alien in our midst” does indeed have the “privileges of a citizen”:

    • Leviticus 19:34 (NIV)

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.

    • Jeremiah 22:3

    “Thus says the Lord: Do justice and righteousness, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed. And do no wrong or violence to the resident alien, the fatherless, and the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place.”

    • Exodus 22:21

    “You shall not wrong a sojourner or oppress him, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt.”

    • Deuteronomy 27:19

    “Cursed be anyone who perverts the justice due to the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow.”

  • Illithid

    Remember that from my perspective Jesus was just a guy, who is now dead. My moral standards are not based in his teachings, so when I examine them I may agree with some parts and disagree with others. I don’t think there is a definitive standard “by which everyone is measured”. I have my own ethical system, and there is a general societal consensus on some issues which changes over time (hopefully for the better), but I don’t think absolute morality exists.

    I didn’t mention Trump, but if I had, this would be backwards. I disagree with many of his actions because I find them immoral, or think that they’re harmful to our nation or the world.

  • David Cromie

    So beliefs do inform actions, even in your case.

  • Nimblewill

    That’s exactly what I said above…………………”Thank you sir. Our beliefs do however determine our actions toward others.”

    Especially in my case. I love because I believe I am loved and that goes for you too.

  • C.A. Johnson

    My apologies but I do not see the contextual relevance to your question.
    I pointed to only one Biblical scholar and historian who is respected for his work by secular historians even though they disagree with his religious beliefs. There are a plethora of respected secular archaeologists, scientists, physicists, philosophers and authors who agree that there was a man named Jesus Christ who lived in the Middle East during the first century of the Roman Empire.
    His excistence is attested to in Roman historical documents.
    Secular historians do not disagree with the evidence of Jesus Christ’s excistence, only His religious claims.

    You point to a provably fictional character that no one claims is real.
    I do not see the correlation of your question as an answer to my presentation to you.

    Have you done even cursory investigation into the historicity of Jesus Christ as evidenced OUTSIDE of religious teaching and the Bible?
    If you are so adamantly opposed to the idea that Christ was even a human being that excisted, have you gathered evidence to help others see the error or their beliefs?
    You generously share your opinion, but please reference source material for consideration.

    One of my sources:
    https://www.garyhabermas.com/
    As only a starting point. If you would like any of his books to research I would even be willing to give them to you in order to continue a reasoned dialouge.

  • C.A. Johnson

    Thank you for using scripture in your response. I appreciate that you are basing your opinions on The Truth.

    I agree with you that we are to do precisely what God’s Word teaches us to do.
    In implementing the instructions from the passages you qouted from Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Jeremiah we must also heed:
    Romans 13:1-7
    Titus 3:1
    1 Peter 2:13-14
    Hebrews 13:17
    All of which speak of obedience to civil (governing) authorities.

    As I stated before, we should be a welcoming and hospitible nation that serves the needs of the oppressed. However, the people you speak of that are detained by us (We the people . . .)
    are here ILLEGALLY, they are not sojurners (travelers passing through) or resident foreigners (who would have gone through proper channels to be here). They have no legal standing because they are here illegally.
    There is no protection for transgressors taught anywhere in God’s Word. Returning them to their countries and allowing them to legally apply for admittance or citizenship is offering them the opportunity to confess and repent of their sin.

  • C.A. Johnson

    Also, I am unsure what you mean by ‘orange-idol’ and MAGAT.
    Would you please explain those references to me?

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    Think Big Picture … as in Eternity … Infinity. Think Möbius Strip …
    Without beginning, without end … as in “Circular” … as in God.

    “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End!”
    – Revelation 22:13

    Yes, the Gospel is Circular, the Gospel is a Paradox.
    The Gospel is Spiritual! God cannot be seen with temporal eyes;
    Nor found with an impure heart.

  • Brianna LaPoint

    Do not think ive come for peace ive come not for peace but a sword. oh right. people see what they want to see. so the progressive xians see a hippie and the conservatives see a warmonger. therein lies the problem. both sides see what they want to see. Both sides emulate a person that only exists within their own understanding. Perhaps neither Jesus is true and he was both a warmonger and a hippe. WHatever the case i follow nobody and worship nobody because in the end you are accountable for you and not anyone else.

  • David Cromie

    You could even imagine that there is such an entity as a ‘god’, but it would only ever be in your deluded mind, unless you could adduce the irrefutable, falsifiable evidence for its real existence, in any location where you think it exists, outside your head.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    If irrefutable evidence was required, faith wouldn’t be necessary to please God.
    – Hebrews 11:6

    All the “irrefutable evidence” I need is to look up at the Night Sky … or the beauty of flowers.
    – Psalm 19:1

    I have been, since birth, hard-wired to believe in God … before I ever heard of the Bible, before I ever entered a church, before I ever heard about God … I believed.

    So who am I to believe? Who should I listen to?
    The Word of God? Or an empty shell of a human being, who thinks he created himself?
    You have nothing to offer … nothing except NOTHINGNESS!

    “The fool hath said in his heart, ‘there is no God'”. – Psalm 14:1 and Psalm 53:1
    Quite obviously, you’re the one who is deluded.

    As for me, I choose to believe God and His Word.

  • KonCern

    Jesus wasn’t a conservative either.
    He will tell the rich go sell all and give to the poor and come follow me.

  • KonCern

    It was also illegal for white men to migrate to America and murder the innocent people they met on the land.

  • jh

    Even if Paul were radical for that time, it doesn’t mean that he is radical for this time. The radical person who thought that blacks shouldn’t be treated as property and slaves may not have had a problem with treating blacks as second class citizens. But now, we would look at somebody is against slavery but thinks blacks are inferior, and hopefully condemn that same individual. What changed? The background changed. Our culture changed. Our knowledge levels changed, Our morality changed. So that what was once considered progressive and radical is now… backwards and provincial and the safety blanket for conservatives. Conservatives are usually 20 plus years behind a liberal in terms of anything. So when we all transitioned to DVD, the conservatives were still using betamax. When we started using USB memory sticks, they were still using the 5 and a quarter floppy disk. And then, when Microsoft and others stop supporting obsolete ideas – they have a hissy fit and babble about tradition.

    It’s all interpretation. I can twist Jesus’ words and make it seem that Jesus was Trump. It would be a lot of work but all I have to do is start redefining words. You know. Like redefining what a scientific theory is or what socialism is which has worked rather successfully with conservatives. Fair warning – if an individual can independently learn and is sufficiently intelligent, as in has the intelligence of a 12 year old, they wouldn’t be fooled by conservative nonsense. I would highlight certain text.. for example, Jesus using a racial epithet on a woman. I’d goal shift and push the kingdom of heaven into some space that is simultaneously here so that I could push my authority on people and yet, far out so I won’t be held accountable for problems. I would blame original sin rather than specific policies and cultural issues that produce these problems. And as long as I can create a tribal situation, i can get a bunch of conservatives to follow me. Why? Because they aren’t independent thinkers and they love to follow the leader and they love to hate their neighbor. I just have to pick some relatively unknown minority group and start talking smack about that group. Highlight the bad people in that group and dismiss the majority of that group who are just normal human beings.

    This is what conservatives do all the time with the US Constitution and our various amendments. The 2nd amendment is a striking example. You highlight a subordinate clause while erasing the main clause.. This is why conservatives will quote Leviticus or Paul in select sections but never go beyond those sections. For example.. you hear a lot about children obeying their parents. But you never hear the other verse that tells parents that they have obligations towards their children. Or we hear a lot about women obeying men. But we never hear about men being required to DIE like CHRIST did for their wives. It’s all about highlights and concealers …

  • C.A. Johnson

    I agree.

  • Pennybird

    In the Bible, did support for humanity come down to who pays the bills then?

  • Pennybird

    I get it, but does it matter? People have learned from Shakespeare and fables too, but those characters were mostly fictional. I personally don’t think it’s necessary that the character existed in order to learn from the words spoken in the book. But I’m not Christian, so maybe there are details I’m missing.

  • Pennybird

    It is perplexing why the Christian Right calls itself Christian, rather than Old Testamentarian, when their hateful views seem to be rooted in the finger wagging, vengeful god of that book.

  • Ron Swaren

    If I thought political policies would somehow produce these long lasting effects that both of us want I would agree with that. And I’m not saying that that couldn’t happen. However, in our present climate they are more similar to a black hole. Most of my own time in recent years has been spent in activism against some really outrageous local government schemes that would sap the financial means that Christians have to actually do something practical. In our state we had a conservative Christian activist (loosely defined) who successfully accomplished property tax limitations. These have saved individuals many thousands of dollars since then, that otherwise would disappear into wasteful and useless government endeavors. And now we have similar wasteful schemes that should be stopped.

  • Pennybird

    Can you define wasteful and useless government endeavors? Around here we are finding that reducing taxes reduces services, not government waste.

  • Christian Humanist

    Well that is true but probably not in the way you mean. Jesus had no concept of heaven. He spoke of the Reign of Yahweh but like other Jews of his generation he envision a time in which Yahweh would raise up a leader who would get rid of the Romans and restore the Temple and a time of peace, getting rid of false leaders more concerned with prosperity and the misplaced priorities of religious leaders, would prevail.

  • Christian Humanist

    Faith is what you are left with when you have no verifiable evidence to support what you assert. That is why I am a humanist. I have no idea what “god” has “said” because I only have your word which you base on a book written by many men over time. It is not what you think it is.

  • David Cromie

    Yes, it does matter, and I see where you are coming from. But that is to ignore the total ‘message’ of cruelty, war, and disasters fomented by a book syncretically concocted from existing myths, legends, and folklore, mostly of ancient Pagan origins, for the sole purpose of establishing a theocracy built around a single ‘god’, Yahweh.

    No one needs the so-called ‘bible’ to learn about morality (morality was not invented by the ‘biblical’ scribes*, least of all by the mythical Moses). Secondly, the more vociferous bible-thumping christers, especially the christo-fascist absolutist totalitarians, would have us all living in a theocracy of their own devising, where everyone would be compelled by law to believe as they do, with no exceptions (especially any dissenting christer factions). That is how important a belief in JC is to believers. Do you still maintain that it does not matter?

    Aesop’s Fables would certainly be more edifying that anything found in the so-called ‘bible’.

    * See ‘Inventing God’s Law – How the Covenant Code of the Bible Used and Revised the Laws of Hammurabi’, by D P Wright, 2009, OUP.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    You claim in your user-name, to be a Christian. Whether a “humanist” or other label, without faith, you are NOT a Christian.
    Furthermore, denying the Scriptures is calling God a liar and once again, your own words are evidence that you’re NO Christian.

    Maybe if you had an ounce of reading comprehension, you might have realized that in my comment, it’s the Words of God which are quoted, not my own.

  • Christian Humanist

    That is a terribly ignorant comment. You have no idea what you are talking about when you say “god’s words” because there are many different translations of hundreds of early documents in various languages, so there is the problem of which sets of many possibilities you choose. But the larger question if the absurdity of you claiming that your narrow view of what it means to be a Christian is the only possible option. Your view of Christianity and the Bible are valid within your group of fundamentalists who lack sufficient knowledge to know that you argue with circular reasoning and lack the historical and archaeological background to engage in discussion beyond your narrow group. See ChristianHumanist.net for more background.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    News Flash: Jesus said: “Strait is the Way and NARROW is the Gate” – Matthew 7:13-14 So yes, God’s “view is narrow”.
    If you’re not walking the Strait and Narrow Path, you will NEVER enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

    Furthermore, I am no longer an “Evangelical” since 81% of their members went over to the Dark Side back in 2016, when they surrendered their souls to their Vile-Orange-Idol, TЯ

  • Nimblewill

    I completely disagree. Jesus taught his followers to repent of that type of thinking.

  • Ron Swaren

    Well, here are some example from my area. We have had a commuter train system (light rail) that now costs the public $20 per ticket in subsidization. One line of this went through what they call a “historically black neighborhood” (not completely accurate) resulting in gentrification that forced many of those people to move out to other areas where transit service was poorer. The same urbanist thinkers have also been wanting other expensive projects (think multiple billions $$) and we now have a Columbia river bridge project that could waste $3-4 billion or more and then several billion after that in other projects. Meanwhile actual service that poorer people rely upon declines.

    In the wake of the property tax limitation measures (passed by voters c. 1990) there has been no great outcry that social services have had some catastrophic result. If this had actually tanked the safety net I know we would have heard about it. Some of our local liberals have been working for things like expensive court facilities costing hundreds of millions, when the existing ones are either adequate or they have already demonstrated that the could provide new facilities at a fraction of the cost. And today much of the social service budget goes to people who are not residing here legally anyway. However due to things like the property tax limitation—pushed by a Chrsitian activist—we do have lots more money that can go to private charitable efforts, including those in other countries. Much of this overseas effort has also improved greatly in the last 3 decades in efficiency and effectiveness. That is why I devote a lot of time to addressing some of the technical situations of capital projects, in order to save the state (i.e. people, including Christians) some serious $$.

  • Pennybird

    This isn’t meant to compete, but in the SF Bay Area where I was a child, the rail system was finished around 1970, stopping a few miles short of the airport because that county refused to allocate the funds. Decades later, it was extended to the airport and beyond, because of course – what were they thinking earlier? – at a significant increase in the cost. In this case saving my parents money was penny wise and pound foolish.

  • Ron Swaren

    Just a question, since I know you would be open to a sincere question. I’m torn between believing things on faith and what science concludes. However, knowing that most cultures have their holy men, some of whom reputedly can do extraordinary things, could Jesus have been another man in that tradition of holy men? A truly holy man could even rise from the dead. The bottom line is not that I would doubt miraculous things happening. That’s not it. It is just I have to reconcile to the scientific explanation of the world—and the old testament in particular doesn’t seem to reconcile very well.

    However, part of being human is that we ask ourselves “What SHOULD I do?” and this is where religion and ethics comes into play. And as social creatures we tend to look down on individuals who only do what they want, not considering what they ‘should’ do. Unless they are Hollyweirdos, pro athletes, rockstars, etc.

    So is Jesus just a holy man, albeit an extraordinary one? That negates both the atheists and the simplistic fundamentalists.

  • Gary

    Rosendahl does not understand who Jesus is, or why he came to earth.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    Here is the answer, as God has revealed it to me: There are many genuine holy men:
    Buddha, Mahatma Gandhi, Rumi, Kahlil Gibran (among others).

    But only Jesus is the Messiah, descended according to God’s promise to
    Adam, Able, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Isaiah and Daniel (among others).
    ________________________________________________

    As far as being torn between things of faith and scientific fact, there are many verses in Scripture which show that both the Spiritual things and Physical things in the Universe
    are in full agreement.

    You can do your own research on this topic if you desire more in-depth understanding, but I want to leave you this passage to help you see the Infinity and Eternity of God, the Universe and Everything: – Colossians 1:15-17

  • Ron Swaren

    I wasn’t thinking of the fact that there have been holy men who ‘say’ profound things. Rather that there are often holy men who do profound things. I don’t have indepth familiarity; just what I have read or heard. I have heard Christian missionaries sometimes speak of the (reputed) Hindu practitioners, for example. And I was just reading an article earlier about the sadhu culture in India. Another example: I heard a new story (possibly 15 years ago) about some Buddhist monks who ran a marathon of 30 miles in 3 hours. Then they determined that they should be able to run 300 miles in 30 hours which they apparently did. There are a lot of fantastic feats reported from religious devotees around the world, including rising from the dead.

    However I am sure that crucifixion would be intended to guarantee that someone was dead. Yet even in Jesus case the report is that he was taken down after six hours. Could Jesus, being a holy man, be the kind that could recover from this? And then possibly do other great things? I just have to wonder. Lately I have been reading modern Jewish historians and other commentary on the ancient world. ( I have familiarized myself with the textual criticism school). One major thesis is that Zoroastrianism, during the Axial Age, introduced into the Jewish sects the idea of a dramatic conclusion to history and the incipient celestial kingdom. And that the Jews who before that were still bound within the ‘warrior myth’ religious framework previous to the Captivity began to develop a different theology, which now is the basis of other monotheistic faiths.

    I read an interesting historical comment that: Romans excelled in Law. Greeks excelled in Art. And Jews excelled in Religion. Could the time of Jesus have presented a convergence of Axial Age trends and the theology of a coming Kingdom of God with the outstanding physical things that, apparently, holy men can do? That helps me reconcile modern science with things of faith and spirituality.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    You’re making the Gospel complicated, when it’s really very simple … and FREE.
    But it takes faith, honesty, sincerity and humility.

    “Unless ye become as a little child, you cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.”
    – Matthew 18:2-7

    Jesus Christ raised lots of people from the dead, after many days too (remember Lazarus? Darius’ daughter? and the widow’s only son?) In each of those incidents, Jesus, by the power of God, was indeed able to raise people from the dead, after much time had passed, as He will do in the Resurrection.

    So how is it that you’re questioning God’s ability to raise his only begotten Son from the dead after only 3 days? During that 3 days, while Christ’s body was dead, it is written that He went into Hell itself and preached to the lost souls there who died in the Flood.
    – 1 Peter 3:18-20

    Please, just put aside all that analyzing … without FAITH it is impossible to please God, so you must come to God as a child, with faith, sincerity, honesty and humility. Then, many mysteries of God’s Kingdom will, over time, be revealed. Ask God for the Gift of Faith.

    “Seek and ye shall find, ask and ye shall receive, knock and it shall be opened to you.”
    – Matthew 7:7

  • Ron Swaren

    Ditto.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    Like you do, eh? Bet you support, defend, condone and worship that
    Obscene-Orange-Oaf in the ‘Offal’ Office.

  • Ocelot Aardvark

    As soon as your Vile-Orange-Idol sincerely and humbly repents for his lifetime of crime and sin … as Zacchaeus repented. – Luke 19

  • C.A. Johnson

    10.05.19 @David:
    Have you taken some time to consider the evidence that suggested for you? I had hoped that you would desire to continue the conversation.

  • C.A. Johnson

    President Trump is not my false god and I do not put him Before Jesus Christ as an idol. I am sorry that what I have shared so greatly offends you. I hope that you find Hope and Peace in The Truth of Jesus Christ as you search through God’s word.

  • David Cromie

    What verifiable, testable, falsifiable, evidence are you referring to?

  • AskCarter

    Jesus was a Jewish teacher talking to Jewish people about a reformation of the Jewish faith, but he “believed” in a literal hell where the unrepentant and those who did not hear about (or did but did not accept him as their savior) would burn in a literal, eternal hell while the lucky and the “redeemed,” who claim his blood sacrifice as atonement for their sins, will spend eternity with im:: , woul: in a “celestial heaven” somewhere that isn’t here, in and on Earth.

    That just doesn’t make sense. Those concepts arose in the “Christian” church centuries after the death of the Jewish reformer they claim as their Lord. It’s convenient, it’s a great means of controlling the masses, but it certainly is not what Jesus would have believed or taught.

    You cannot claim to be a “Christ”-ian if you don’t first understand Judaism. Jesus spoke to the disciples and his followers as a rabbi – using the metaphor and allegory of Judaism.

    We may find it more expedient and instructive to claim the certainty of literalism, but to do so is to follow Paul, not Jesus. It’s such a shame that we have forgotten this essential truth about Jesus – he was not, nor did he ever intend to be, a Christian!

  • Dennis

    If you are saying that all of those verses I quoted about Jesus believing in hell were written “centuries” after his death, you won’t find ANY New Testament scholar (conservative or liberal) agreeing with that. Jesus spoke as a rabbi but went beyond Judaism. See John 3:16 and John 14:6.

  • C.A. Johnson

    I am unsure why you added an antonym (falsifiable) of your other adjectives modifying the word evidence. Your statement is non sequitur. Are you choosing to disregard evidence as false before you have even investigated its validity?
    Are you asking me ‘what’ evidence I have to present? As I stated, there is a massive amount of documented and verified evidence compiled from a career of research by Dr. Gary Habermas, a noted and respected historian. I gave you his webpage address: https://www.garyhabermas.com

    Did you investigate any of his findings? Are you interested in investigating information and weighing its veracity?

    Please research, if even a cursory endeavor, some of what Habermas has presented to numerous academic bodies over the decades. If nothing else, it should give you insight into more questions that you may wish to ask.

  • David Cromie

    Does this Habermas person provide the verifiable, testable, falsifiable, evidence for the real existence of any supernatural entity whatsoever?

  • C.A. Johnson

    First, would you please help me understand the proper context of the statement you are making about ‘evidence’? Twice now you have used the word ‘falsifiable’ as an adjective to modify ‘evidence’ in contradiction to the other words you chose, ‘verifiable’ & ‘testable’. Why have you included an antonym of the previous two adjectives in your thought?

    As for legitimate evidence, yes, Dr. Gary Habermas is one historian and apologist who shows empirically, through validated historical evidence, the certainty of the existence of Jesus Christ of Nazareth as a real man. He also empirically proves the reality of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and so validates Christ’s claims of divinity.

    http://www.garyhabermas.com/

    Please understand that I am not pursuing this topic with you glibly. I know that it can take time to study and properly absorb information. Dr. Gary Habermas is only one of many educated, credentialed, and respected academics that gives great consideration to the explanation of God’s relationship with us throughout history. It is not a cursory topic and the exploration thereof engenders more questions as you continue to search for Truth.
    ~Matthew 7:7-11 ESV
    “Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened.Or which one of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good thing to those who ask Him”.

    I appreciate that you continue to communicate with me, I thank you for your time.

  • David Cromie

    Why do you continue to dodge the question of the missing irrefutable, falsifiable, evidence for the real existence of your favourite supposed ‘god’?

    If I were to claim that there is a unicorn in my garden, you most probably would ask for proof of the veracity of that claim, such as may I come to your garden to see for myself. But, if I then went on to claim that only those determined/programmed to believe in its existence could see it, while it remained invisible to all others, you would rightly condemn me as a deluded fool.