Originally Posted by reflexblue

Ive often wondered this myself.........

Phil Zuckerman: Why Evangelicals Hate Jesus

e results from a recent poll published by the Pew Forum on Religion and ) reveal what social scientists have known for a long time: White Evangelical Christians are the group least likely to support politicians or policies that reflect the actual teachings of Jesus. It is perhaps one of the strangest, most dumb-founding ironies in contemporary American culture.

Jesus unambiguously preached mercy and forgiveness. These are supposed to be cardinal virtues of the Christian faith. And yet Evangelicals are the most supportive of the death penalty, draconian sentencing, punitive punishment over rehabilitation, and the governmental use of torture. Jesus exhorted humans to be loving, peaceful, and non-violent. And yet Evangelicals are the group of Americans most supportive of easy-access weaponry, little-to-no regulation of handgun and semi-automatic gun ownership, not to mention the violent military invasion of various countries around the world.

Originally Posted by Jesus

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Originally Posted by reflexblue

Ive often wondered this myself.........

Phil Zuckerman: Why Evangelicals Hate Jesus

e results from a recent poll published by the Pew Forum on Religion and ) reveal what social scientists have known for a long time: White Evangelical Christians are the group least likely to support politicians or policies that reflect the actual teachings of Jesus. It is perhaps one of the strangest, most dumb-founding ironies in contemporary American culture.

Originally Posted by reflexblue

Jesus unambiguously preached mercy and forgiveness. These are supposed to be cardinal virtues of the Christian faith. And yet Evangelicals are the most supportive of the death penalty, draconian sentencing, punitive punishment over rehabilitation, and the governmental use of torture.

Originally Posted by reflexblue

Jesus exhorted humans to be loving, peaceful, and non-violent.

Originally Posted by reflexblue

And yet Evangelicals are the group of Americans most supportive of easy-access weaponry, little-to-no regulation of handgun and semi-automatic gun ownership,

Originally Posted by reflexblue

not to mention the violent military invasion of various countries around the world.

Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

Since the esteemed professor is a well-known atheist, I am not sure he is the best judge of "the actual teachings of Jesus".



Mercy and forgiveness between people, yes. I haven't read any commentaries that call for lawlessness. You don't apply the concept of "love thy enemy" to a nation state. It is for personal application (IMHO).

Furthermore, Jesus was primarily talking mercy in light of the fact that we all have faults so that no one would think themselves better than others. He did not call for those faults to be embraced.



What are some of those laws?







MLK demonstrated the power of this when he and his followers were brutally beaten on live TV. While they lost that battle, that helped win the war.



Are Evangelicals the people who own the most guns, or are they just supportive of gun rights? I think most people who own a gun hope they don't ever have to use it against another person. Maybe they are hunters? I don't own one, but I support the right of others to do so. That might be the motivation for others. There is a biblical basis for self-defense:



The question then is: was this later turned on its head by Jesus?



There are a few interpretations of the first part (turn the other cheek). The first is to either not respond to aggression or even invite further aggression.

The second is that this was a cultural reference. At the time of Christ giving a backhand to someone of a lower class was an expression of authority. If the servant turns the other cheek inviting another blow, the slapper had to decide whether to backhand them with their left hand (used to wipe their *****) or strike them with an open hand which was how one challenged an equal. The act then serves as a way to express that they are equals.

The third is that it is a clarification of "eye for an eye". Not that you were to allow someone to beat you, rob your house and rape your wife. He was speaking out against personal vengeance.



Various countries? What group opposed the invasion of Afghanistan? I thought that was the "good war"?

As far as war in general goes, there are different arguments made. I had mostly come down on the side of the idea of the "just war" (that is a war meant to protect those who are innocent...WW II for example). After the last ten years I have become less comfortable with the use of military force especially when it is not so clear who is truly "innocent".

That being said, I do believe that we need civil government, police and military forces to maintain civil order (that which is Caesar's) and enforce the rule of law. I think the NRA types are generally thinking that an armed citizenry can protect itself when necessary (keep the government honest), but I think the people would be no match for the U.S. military (even with semi-automatic weapons).

Originally Posted by reflexblue

Originally Posted by reflexblue

I think i should have put this in the political forum.

Originally Posted by Mrs.PatsFanInVa

I think maybe lots of us have some of our own preconceived notions about how "Christians" are supposed to act. (And I wonder how many of us are fallen Christians who do so?) We also know what we've seen, experienced and observed and all of that plays a large portion in our own opinion on the subject.

I happen to agree with the author of the cited article - but based upon things I've personally experienced and observed.

For instance - I worked with a young woman who was a very outspoken Christian woman. She dressed modestly, she kept our work radio tuned to a Christian station, she carried stationary and pens which had Christian mottos printed on them and she constantly talked about what Jesus wanted and what Jesus expected.

This was fine....no problem. Not my cup of tea but not annoying, either.

Until I discovered she was "adjusting" her time cards daily making it look as though she'd come in earlier than she had and left later. Small amounts of petty cash started disappearing. She spent most of her time at work browsing help wanted ads and sending her resume to other places. She picked and chose what patients to be nice to and what patients to treat like, well, like dog*****, usually, as far as I could tell, based upon their inability to speak English well. (Which amazed me because she was Hispanic herself and one of the reasons she was hired was because she was bilingual.) She would call me at work and tell me that she was not coming in because she had a job interview or she was going out with a friend or something bizarre and tell me (not even ask me) to "make something up" for the boss.

She was unahappy with me because, at the time, MrP and I were living together without benefit of clergy.....and she told me so often along with dire warnings about the state of my soul should I die in sin. And yet she often went out of town with her boyfriend for long weekends in Va. Beach.

Anyhow, she embarassed me - as does all hypocrisy. I feel it's a very bad advertisement for the Christian faith when people loudly proclaim their Christianity and silently violate all that Christ stood for - which is, namely, honesty, kindness and forgiveness.

It gives all of Christianty a bad name - especially to those who are not Christian themselves.

People need to realize they are not judged by what they say but by what they do.