Recently, I've read the entire Bible, including the Four Gospels and I got quite enchanted with the figure of Jesus Christ as it is represented in the gospels, and I noticed that Jesus could hardly be labeled as a conservative in the modern terms. He came over to bring dramatic changes in the ancient Jewish religion and society, and not to restore any morals of yore.
So I wonder, why the figure of Jesus Christ is so much linked to conservative movements, (especially in the US) when it is quite clear that Jesus Christ would criticize most of its standards? I can't see Jesus as being a supporter of conservative ideals like nationalism, capitalism and militarism. It is evident he would condemn all of it. Is there a serious theology that supports it?
by conservadorism I meant conservatism. I'm not a native speaker, my excuses.
Adrian Baker
>I can't see Jesus as being a supporter of conservative ideals like nationalism, capitalism and militarism. It is evident he would condemn all of it. These attributes are more or less necessary for a nation to survive, this is why Christians have been busy "reinterpreting" Gospels so they support the existing power structures since 325 CE.
Luis Myers
What are some specific things about conservatism you think Jesus would criticise? It's a pretty broad category so it's hard to discuss without specifics.
Adrian Thompson
A conservative starts from the perspective that man is inherently flawed as proclaimed in Judeo-Christian theology. A conservative concludes that a revolutionary needs to have perfect knowledge of the future or 'praxis' in order for the promised benefits to unfold. It's this line of thinking that results in the conservative wishing gradual change so any deviation from the expected result can be taken acount for or for the theory to be modified as a result.
Jesus speaks with the authority of a God because, if you're a Christian, you believe he is God. Therefore whatever was decreed was the right thing to do - both morally and in the sense that God providentially understands what will happen should the commands be fulfilled. In Christ's perfection he is no longer bound to the conservative theories intended solely for fallen man.
In the context of a society/country that has its legal system and culture based on the Biblical teachings you would expect religious people to defend the order that exists yet in communist countries, conservative intellectuals like Sir Roger Scruton were the ones forming underground universities in order to destroy the spirit of communism in the people.
Capitalism wasn't discouraged by Christ at all. Although he wishes us to privately choose to help the poor as best we can, he defended the spirit of hard work and fruits being awarded according to the value of that work etc. To proclaim he disliked the free enterprise is simply cherry picking.
Aaron Phillips
For example, nationalism like the support of the state of Israel and its war crimes. Or maybe reserving beliefs like "manifest destiny" as happens in the USA.
And things from capitalism, like the huge gap between nations such as Eastern Africa and other nations historically "Christian". Would the Christ find reasonable to see one kid dying of hunger/vermin while in the other corner a kid cries because his iPhone is outdated?
Nicholas Watson
>it's another & Humanities shitposter doesn't understand Christianity and uses 21st century neo-con protestantism to frame religion 2000 years earlier
Dominic Ward
>capitalism >conservative Oh fuck off.
Luis Wilson
This.
Gabriel Miller
>nationalism like the support of the state of Israel and its war crimes >christian zionism is nationalism also >war crimes
Elijah Sullivan
I'm not criticizing Christianity as a whole, I just want to understand the logic behind this so called "21st century neo-con protestantism", since it is a religious expression that gets more and more powerful with time.
But the thing is, just because we are inherently flawed, doesn't mean that we have to accept people like *ahem* Donald Trump as a symbol for securing the conservative morality, values and beliefs. Because such conservative politicians are more like Pilate, or even worse, like King Herod, than Jesus Christ or any of His disciples.
I wasn't talking of communism, I don't think it is the issue here.
Jeremiah Gutierrez
>nationalism like the support of Israel Think about what you just wrote and why is it completely stupid.
Jose Rivera
So, you people are denying that the support of the existence of a Nation named Israel is a core value for the US Conservatives and a discourse of most pentecostal churches?
Nicholas Walker
>just because we are inherently flawed, doesn't mean that we have to accept people like *ahem* Donald Trump
I never said you did. In fact he's not really that conservative - at least in the American context. A loose cannon who knee-jerks his way towards what he persoanlly believes is best for America is no substitute for a cool-headed constitutionalist I would prefer in the White House (although I'm from the UK myself so that doesn't hold much weight).
>I wasn't talking of communism, I don't think it is the issue here.
I understand your point but I wanted to make it clear that in countries headed by radical governments or states that deviate from the classical Western tradition, the conservatives tend to be the advocates of change.
Jason Powell
no but it's not nationalism you idiot. zionism is nationalism, not supporting a nation-state that isn't your own. christian zionists support israel because of their interpretation of end time prophecies.
Chase Wright
Christianity is popular with neo-cons only because it is the traditional religion of America and therefore is useful for mobilizing Americans. They do not actually care about Jesus or what He taught, they are only interested in Christianity insofar as it is a cultural institution. If there were "neo-cons" in India they would be Hindu because that is the dominant cultural force there. Point being is that the neo-con promotion of Christianity is pure political opportunism and there is nothing about specific about Christianity that attracts neo-cons other than that it has a lot of cultural capital.
Robert Jones
The only people who can be Israeli nationalists are Israelis, and they aren't exactly Christian. If you support the nation of Israel over your own, you're not a nationalist, you're a traitor.
Austin Green
No one likes conservatism, it's secular garbage. God smite America.
Matthew Lopez
What I mean is... tho Donald Trump is no example, he has a lot of sympathizers from these Radical Christian groups. It is curious, because these people criticized Barack Obama so vehemently and now they are quite careful in criticizing, even when some of his actions could be considered pretty much unchristian (like his lustful commentaries on women, just as a small example) Other example we could use is when some ""traditional"" catholics criticize Pope Francis' views concerning some subjects like the refugee crisis or Marxism. The things that Francis say aren't unchristian.
Now, about communism, we could argue if this neo-con wave has its roots in 20th century red scare.
Carter Wood
Because the Christianity of today is a completely different beast than the Christianity of the early Christians. And even that Christianity is completely different from what the historical Jesus probably taught.
Socio-historical circumstances changes and religion changes with it. Jesus in his time was something of a rebel against Roman imperialism and the Jewish religious establishment of his time. His followers would eventually posthumously retcon him as God and begin this meek religion. However, once Christianity became a official Roman religion, the once meek religion would itself displace other traditions. Then when Rome itself fell, the Church became the new Rome, filling that vacuum. The Christianity of the Middle Ages continued Roman tradition and became the defactom institution for maintaining public order, punishing the wicked, sponsoring scholarship, and oher necessary functions. Eventually, the church grew drunk on its power and Protestantism grew in response to that.
The expression of religion is really based less on its inherent message or narrative but rather it's socio-historic context. What began as (if we can be anachronistic for a moment) "leftist" and "anti-imperial" Jewish Messianic movement evolved to adapt to new political and societal situations.
Noah Walker
/thread
Christopher Richardson
This
Michael Barnes
It's very evident that Jesus would not support abortion as he preached human life as sacred. As far as the last "camel through the eye of the needle" quote he wasn't saying that rich men are all doomed to hell. At the time it was commonly believed that people became rich through divine intervention because god favored them, which is what Jesus is dispelling. He's rather stating that you can't go to heaven through your own merit without god.
Robert Morgan
but then wouldn't be easier to adopt a secular approach? one can be neocon without religion.
I wouldn't call it "leftist" or "anti-imperial" necessarily, but surely Christ and the earliest Christians weren't "situationists".
Early Christianity is about hating this world and waiting the next life to come. Reading the Epistle to Diogenetus we have an insightful view on what were the place of the Christians in the world.
"They (the Christians) live in their own countries as though they were only passing through. They play their full role as citizens, but labor under all the disabilities of aliens. Any country can be their homeland, but for them their homeland, wherever it may be, is a foreign country. Like others, they marry and have children, but they do not expose them. They share their meals, but not their wives."
isn't that argument defeated by the previous verse having Jesus tell the man he must abandon all his wealth despite the man claiming virtue by following all the divine commandments and not through his wealth?
Robert Moore
>prosperity theology
Hunter Nguyen
>He came over to bring dramatic changes in the ancient Jewish religion and society, and not to restore any morals of yore.
That's because Moses worshipers don't have any morals.
>At the time it was commonly believed that people became rich through divine intervention because god favored them, which is what Jesus is dispelling.
There's nothing divine about the Jewish leaders - hence the condemnation of the rich.
e.g.
> Thus said the Lord my God: Be a shepherd of the flock doomed to slaughter. Those who buy them kill them and go unpunished; and those who sell them say, “Blessed be the Lord, for I have become rich”; - Zechariah 11:4-5
