He Would Challenge Power, Not Run for It
This is of course an impossible question, like 'If the sun were to rise in the west, would it be green or blue?' In other words, by agreeing to the terms of the question you make it impossible to give an answer based on anything other than highly distorted speculation.
Jesus didn't run for anything. He acted as if he were a different kind of ruler altogether, with a 'kingdom' that didn't originate from the present world (otherwise, he said, his servants would fight to rescue him) but instead was meant FOR this present world, to transform and heal it. The present way we do politics and government is, alas, part of the problem, and he would have challenged it (its huge cost, its pretense of participation which is shamelessly manipulated by the media, its cult of personality, its ignoring, all too often, of the actual needs of the poor, etc. etc.) just as he challenged the power structures of his day.
The real question is, what sort of a cross would today's system be intent on using to kill him?
By
Nicholas T. Wright
|
March 4, 2008; 3:22 PM ET
| Category:
Religion & Leadership
Share This:
Technorati
| Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: He Wouldn't |
Next: He'd Be Rejected by Democrats and Republicans
Posted by: Anonymous | March 6, 2008 11:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hello friartuck:
Let me begin by agreeing with you. Scholars have spent the last 1,700 years trying to straighten out the Bible and here comes this fellow with a very simple straightforward story that sure seems to fit in so many places. But what the hay, he's a genuine nobody, probably the prodigy of Henry Hunt. Henry was one of those radicals that could rant for hours on his soap box -didn't have any respect at all for the better class of people just like this Hunt.
Let's see if I can get my feet firmly planted on, "planet earth and discuss actual Old and New Testament textual criticism and history" and get off that Bible is a hoax kick.
Now at http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul I found some rather solid arguments that the Bible is the word of Devil, (there I go again).
Since I am left to accept the Bible as the word of some supernatural being why shouldn't we discuss which one? Now what kind of God would live in a ball of fire? Don't you think that's a reasonable question?
Better yet, what kind of God would forgive the sins of those who sacrificed IT's son to IT? There was the case of the Inca chief who sacrificed his daughter to the God Vulcan and sure enough the volcano stopped erupting -clearly proving that making sacrifices to Gods works. But sacrificing God's own son?
That leaves me with a question for you. Where have I gone wrong believing, as that radical Hunt has led me to believe that the being in the burning bush was actually Devil and most likely the fallen angel, the one that wanted to be God, Lucifer? That's open for discussion or are we not allowed to notice that?
Are we allowed to notice that, place bets even that Devil dances with delight at the thought of sacrificing God's only son? After all, God probably dies or gets tired of being God and without an heir to the throne, well, Devil will get a second chance to be God.
In other words, does the Bible make sense? How about that story at Hoax Buster. Have you attempted to verify the life of Amenophis IV? Did She chase the money changers out of the temple of God? How long does it take for one to die on the Egyptian cross, victim upright and crossbar through gut? That's how they did that and it took 3 hours for the one claiming to be "son of God" to die just like all others.
Did Moses lead 12 tribes of "builders" out of Egypt to the wilderness where they built a tabernacle? Did Amenophis IV lead 12 tribes of foreigners out of Egypt to the wilderness where they built a tabernacle? Where are the tower of Babel, Jericho and that tabernacle Moses built? Mr Hunt says Akhetaten. Got anything to say he's wrong other than he's a nobody? Does England have any scholars, anyone schooled in ancient Egypt?
Can one find God, be moral, all the things advertised by religion using a book as uncertain as the Bible? Is that spaced out or is it an invitation for those who have put so much faith in the Bible to get real themselves? The Bible being a hoax doesn't mean there is no God but does open the door to rethinking just what God might want of us doesn't it? And as long as the Bible blocks us we will never know what might be will we?
Posted by: BGone | March 6, 2008 11:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
BGONE should come to planet earth and discuss actual Old and New Testament textual criticism and history. This would free us from his fairy tale rants. What an unbelievable bunch of rambling crock! It's people just like him who crucified Jesus the Christ.
Posted by: friartuck | March 6, 2008 4:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Beg your pardon bishop, "Jesus didn't run for anything" is not correct. At least the person on who's life Jesus is based ran for the office of God, the Christ, the divine Savior of Egypt, Pharaoh.
You already know about http://www.hoax-buster.org page 2 which has an outline of every important book of the Bible that is the actual history of Moses, Jesus and all other important Bible persons.
Jesus is a fictional person who's concocted life contains the key antics of a real one. I wrote the following for John L. Esposito, professor of religion, another panelist here. I think your church should give this some serious thought.
After all is said and done comparing real people to fictional ones doesn't have merit beyond comparing them to the authors of the fiction and not the characters. When we realize that fiction always has some basis in fact the picture clears a bit but in reality we're comparing Republicans and Democrats to the authors of the Gospels, what they thought Amenophis IV said, stood for etc and not Jesus at all.
That leaves us with the demoralizing realization that all are being fooled by something. The authors of the Gospels couldn't read the "writing on the wall" which is exactly what the different candidates for president, (not limited to them) say about each other. That writing never goes unread forever. Woe be it to those who have misread it? That's what they warn us about their opponents.
Wouldn't we all be better served if the truth about Jesus was made public? Wouldn't the Roman Catholic church stand to gain by announcing that the Bible is a proved hoax? By so doing wouldn't that open the door for a rebirth of faith rather than simply destroying faith? Is truth a destroying or a building force? How long can we embrace the lie before it destroys us? Aren't we testing that right now? Isn't the church obligated?
Posted by: BGone | March 5, 2008 1:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Spiderman2 aka Bible Thumper, Fortune Teller and Severly Brainwashed in that Old Time Religion,
Fools are those who have read only the bible. God cannot be proud of such lazy creations!!!!
To reiterate:
What flash of light gave you such brilliance in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | March 5, 2008 11:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
That question of whether Jesus would run as a Republican or a Democrat would be known by whoever party sits in the White House after WW3. By that time, all idiots of the world would have been extinguised including those in America.
Whoever stands in the White House after the war, that I presume would be the true party of Jesus Christ.
But the prophecies tell that it's mostly democratic states which would be burned. With all the democratics states burned down, that leaves the Republican Party to rule the earth.
Jacques Berlinerblau and Susan Jacoby are democrats. Would you think God would spare these two idiots and their kind? Without much knowledge of the Bible, anybody on his right mind knows it's the Republican Party God favors.
Posted by: spiderman2 | March 5, 2008 10:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Sir,
The Jerry Hagees of this world are less frightening than the people who actually believe what they preach -- and Hagee has a following in San Antonio.
There is another mega-church pastor in San Antonio. His name is Max Lucado, but what he teaches, preaches and writes books about -- his 50 books have sold 50 million copies worldwide -- is hugely different than that of Hagee.
Hagee's view toward those who have a different world view than he, a different biblical view, is one of condemnation, rejection and hate. He’s a narrow, mean-spirited little man, and Senator McCain’s willingness to accept his endorsement, while shameful, is instructive in telling us how far he will go in search of votes.
With Senator Obama or Senator Clinton as the Democratic nominee, the only constituency left to Senator McCain will be the all-white over 60 country club set and right wing Christian Fundamentalists.
Now that’s a combination to flee from, but McCain won’t because he has no where to go.
Sincerely,
George Mitrovich
San Diego
Posted by: George Mitrovich | March 5, 2008 9:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Southern Girl,
MLK was exactly who I was thinking about when I wrote that. In fact, I quoted him several times on these boards last week. His purpose and goals were loftier than any temporary political power could offer. He was oppressed by local, state and federal governments for much of the civil rights struggle and was eventually was felled by a cowardly assassin's bullet.
Posted by: Ghostbuster | March 5, 2008 8:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
According to the historic creeds of the Christian faith and the New Testament texts, the resurrected Jesus has already ascended his rightful throne to rule over all.
Posted by: GK Chesterton | March 5, 2008 8:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
It should be noted that those currently crucifying Hillary are leftist Democrats.
Posted by: Garyd | March 5, 2008 7:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
"The real question is, what sort of a cross would today's system be intent on using to kill him?"
That is an easy question. The same cross that the right-wingers have used to try to crucify first Bill and then Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: B-man | March 5, 2008 1:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The historic Jesus would have a very hard time running for any political office since any opponent would simply note the following about about him:
"My opponent, Jesus of the maybe spirit state of heaven is illiterate with only a basic background in peasantry and carpentry. He apparently suffers from "visions" and hallucinations of devils aka the demons of the demented. Some have characterized him as the "holy roller" from Nazareth, PA to a mythical character from Nazareth, Wherever, to a mamzer from Nazareth, PA. Analyses of Jesus’ background by many contemporary political scholars have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' commentaries are authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles made-up by his political speech writers to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.
The 30% that is "authentic Jesus" was plagiarized and/or borrowed from speeches of other politicians.
His supporters like the followers of Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al also suffer from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy talking flying fictional thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | March 5, 2008 12:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Martin Luther King, likewise, didn't run for anything. He just tried to help the sick and the poor. In that way, neither he nor Jesus Christ, resemble any politician today.
Posted by: Southern Girl | March 5, 2008 12:18 AM
Report Offensive Comment
good point ghostbuster. Certainly this is an interesting question. it raises the memory of when Jesus avoided the crowd because they wanted to make him king. he ran the other way because:
1. he didn't want to be a popular leader (who had the best polling numbers)
2. he didn't want to be a political leader only
Jesus wanted to be recognised as LORD of the universe - the saviour of those who believe.
Thankfully, unlike many of todays politicians, we can trust everything he ever said and rely on his purity of character.
Posted by: Greg | March 4, 2008 11:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"The real question is, what sort of a cross would today's system be intent on using to kill him?"
That is an interesting question to think about.
A public execution? A hired government assassin? A bomb? I guess it all depends on the culture and society. In either the US or Britian, I think it would be an under the table hit job after a trial based on trumped up charges is dismissed.
I can picture the screaming headline on Drudge now... DEAD!!!
Then three days later... DEAD?!?
Posted by: ghostbuster | March 4, 2008 11:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"The real question is, what sort of a cross would today's system be intent on using to kill him?"
The work of the Cross is FINISHED.
"And He shall come again with glory to judge both
the living and the dead"
"For He is the living G_d and He endures forever;
His kingdom will not be destroyed, His dominion will never end."
Hallelujah, Hallelujah!
For the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth
The kingdom of this world is become
The kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ.
And He shall reign forever and ever
King of Kings
Forever and ever
And Lord of Lords
Hallelujah, Hallelujah!
Posted by: michael | March 4, 2008 8:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Knock it off anonymous.
No Jesus wouldn't have been interested in the presidency or much else save the same thing he was interested in 2k years ago.
Posted by: Garyd | March 4, 2008 8:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.











Here in America we're looking for
"Change We Can Believe In"
and it's beginning to look like we'll get it because Jesus will not be on the ballot this election.