DO CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS REPRESENT JESUS?

[Richard Aberdeen]

The New Testament narrative of John is considered by many historians and literary experts to be one of the top 5 greatest works ever written, while the oft maligned and greatly misunderstood Paul of Tarsus is considered by historians to be, when weighed in the balances of his society and time in history, perhaps the most liberal author in the history of human civilization.

The liberalism of Paul is perhaps surpassed only by Jesus himself, who without question is the most liberal person to ever walk on earth. "Whoever desires, let them take the water of life freely" Revelation 22:17. For unlike modern conservatives and far too many modern liberals, God "shows no partiality" Acts 10:34. True liberalism extends to everyone, without exception, with emphasis on helping the sick, the poor, immigrants, prisoners and the otherwise marginalized and oppressed Matthew 25:31-46.

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female..." Galatians 3:28, "To the pure all things are pure.." Titus 1:15, "...nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving" 1 Timothy 4:4 and, "...you are not under law but under grace" Romans 6:14. These remain among the most radically liberal and progressive writings known in the history of human civilization.

These and many other teachings of Paul break the religious orthodox mold so radically and completely, there is no semblance of any religion left standing, as the term is commonly understood today. Consider how radical and extremely dangerous it was for anyone to promote ideas such as in Jesus, we "are not under the law, but under grace", within a Jewish society which for 1400 years, was based on and rooted in the law given to Moses. And, while Rome was a nation of strictly enforced law and order among her subjects, if there ever was such a nation on earth.

Modern critics of Paul apparently don't have a clue regarding how brave and dedicated and radical (and poor) Paul was, dedicated to the goal of achieving individual and collective love, freedom, justice and peace on earth. The New Testament view and indeed, perhaps the greatest lesson of history, agreeing with many past and modern human rights activists, long remains, if my brother or sister is enslaved, hungry, naked, homeless, abused, marginalized or otherwise not free to pursue a life of freedom, security, peace, justice and equality, neither am I free and, neither is anyone else living on earth free, no matter how wealthy or famous or powerful they may be.

Where would the modern American Civil Rights movement be without the song "We Shall Overcome"? And, where would any of us living in the 21st Century be without the words, example and influence of Jesus? "He who has an ear, let him hear what the spirit says to the assemblies. To those "who overcome, I will give to eat from the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God" Revelation 2:7.

[Ray the atheist]

[Replying to Richard Aberdeen in post #1]

" Modern critics of Paul apparently don't have a clue regarding how brave and dedicated and radical (and poor) Paul was, dedicated to the goal of achieving individual and collective love, freedom, justice and peace on earth. The New Testament view and indeed, perhaps the greatest lesson of history, agreeing with many past and modern human rights activists, long remains, if my brother or sister is enslaved, hungry, naked, homeless, abused, marginalized or otherwise not free to pursue a life of freedom, security, peace, justice and equality, neither am I free and, neither is anyone else living on earth free, no matter how wealthy or famous or powerful they may be."

It might be the case that what we take as the words of Jesus are really the words of Paul.

It's hard for me to tell.

I'd also like to talk to you about how jesus can be seen as extremely right wing.
For example, absolute morality and absolute accountability, are right wing ideas.

[Mr E]

[Replying to Richard Aberdeen in post #1]

A misrepresentation I think, probably not intentional, but grossly mischaracterized. You seem to be using "conservative Christians" as some sort of pejorative, while ignoring entirely what it is that they are trying to conserve. What they are holding on to are the very same principles you lavish upon "liberal Christians" like they are some kind of Puritans, while malaligning conservatives as callous and uncaring.

That's none of the conservative Christians I know, all of whom embrace Jesus and Paul alike, without violating these principles.

[Difflugia]

A misrepresentation I think, probably not intentional, but grossly mischaracterized. You seem to be using "conservative Christians" as some sort of pejorative, while ignoring entirely what it is that they are trying to conserve. What they are holding on to are the very same principles you lavish upon "liberal Christians" like they are some kind of Puritans, while malaligning conservatives as callous and uncaring.

That's none of the conservative Christians I know, all of whom embrace Jesus and Paul alike, without violating these principles.

I think the problem is that OP is using "conservative" in its political sense, instead of theological. They often go hand-in-hand, but as you point out, not always.

Theologically conservative Christians believe that Adam was a real guy and Paul wrote the Pastorals. Politically conservative Christians believe the gays shouldn't get married and the poors shouldn't have health care. In the current United States social climate, those go together often enough that they're used interchangeably, but shouldn't be.

As an example, I live in an area with a large SDA population. As a group, they theologically skew heavily conservative (George McCready Price, the father of modern scientific creationism, was SDA), but tend to be much more politically liberal on average than most Evangelical churches.

[Mr E]

[Replying to Difflugia in post #4]

Point well taken. Do you live in Loma Linda, CA? I'm very familiar with SDA theology and eschatology. (Annihilationism)

There is also "conservative" -meaning simply adhering to Judeo-Christian principles and there is 'fiscally conservative" and not all terms are equal.

There is a vocal crowd that insists "Jesus was a liberal."

I'm not of that crowd, yet the argument can be made. I respect all points of view and give them voice. Thank you for your comments.

[Difflugia]

Do you live in Loma Linda, CA? I'm very familiar with SDA theology and eschatology. (Annihilationism)

I live in Southwest Michigan. It's a fun area religiously. I live close enough to Berrien Springs that I work with multiple SDAs and within an hour of Catholic Notre Dame, Mennonite and Amish Shipshewana, and Calvinist Holland and Grand Rapids. There's also a pretty solid, Marjoe-esque Pentecostal presence, if you know where to look. If you want a sermon that includes tongues and literal Bible thumping, that's the place.

There is also "conservative" -meaning simply adhering to Judeo-Christian principles and there is 'fiscally conservative" and not all terms are equal.

I sort of broadly read "conservative" to mean adhering to tradition, so there are lots of ways that can enter the conversation. The current US political climate is such that theological, social, and economic conservatism tend to cluster together, but that's not necessary and I think it's too-often assumed. Before the Civil Rights era, there were socially progressive, fiscally conservative bankers that influenced Northern Republicans and socially conservative Southern Democrats and Dixiecrats that were divided on economic issues like the New Deal. I think we're about to see some post-Trump realignment of political parties again and I'm curious where this all goes.

There is a vocal crowd that insists "Jesus was a liberal."

In terms of modern politics, I think Mark's Jesus would be more conservative ("Time is short! Be aligned with righteousness when the hour arrives!"), but the Jesus of Luke/Acts has a much more broad social acceptance, widows and orphans feel. To the extent that Paul's theology can be considered to align with a Jesus, there's a very strong moral conservatism matched with a social egalitarianism that's incredibly progressive, but that unfortunately gets walked back a bit by the authors of the Pastorals.

I'm not of that crowd, yet the argument can be made. I respect all points of view and give them voice. Thank you for your comments.

That's what I'm here for!

[Mr E]

[Replying to Difflugia in post #6]

I live in Southwest Michigan. It's a fun area religiously. I live close enough to Berrien Springs that I work with multiple SDAs and within an hour of Catholic Notre Dame, Mennonite and Amish Shipshewana, and Calvinist Holland and Grand Rapids. There's also a pretty solid, Marjoe-esque Pentecostal presence, if you know where to look. If you want a sermon that includes tongues and literal Bible thumping, that's the place

.

Good country! I have some recognition of all-- my wife goes antique shopping at least once a year in Shipshewana, she attended a CRC college, and my son went to Hillsdale. How's that for familiarity?

I sort of broadly read "conservative" to mean adhering to tradition, so there are lots of ways that can enter the conversation. The current US political climate is such that theological, social, and economic conservatism tend to cluster together, but that's not necessary and I think it's too-often assumed. Before the Civil Rights era, there were socially progressive, fiscally conservative bankers that influenced Northern Republicans and socially conservative Southern Democrats and Dixiecrats that were divided on economic issues like the New Deal. I think we're about to see some post-Trump realignment of political parties again and I'm curious where this all goes.

Interesting insights-- I don't think the Trump era can be buttoned down in any cohesive theological sense. The admin influencers range from charismatic "Christian" prosperity teachers like Trump's spiritual advisor Paula White-Cain, to Baptist/Zionist Christians like Ambassador Mike Huckabee and a slew of Catholics like JD Vance, Marco Rubio, Pete Hegseth and several others in his closest circle.

Post Trump? I think the Catholic alignment is strongest and most likely to move forward, despite an American Pope who is decidedly anti-Trump and mostly as you say- socially progressive.

In terms of modern politics, I think Mark's Jesus would be more conservative ("Time is short! Be aligned with righteousness when the hour arrives!"), but the Jesus of Luke/Acts has a much more broad social acceptance, widows and orphans feel. To the extent that Paul's theology can be considered to align with a Jesus, there's a very strong moral conservatism matched with a social egalitarianism that's incredibly progressive, but that unfortunately gets walked back a bit by the authors of the Pastorals.

I've heard the "Jesus was a socialist" arguments. Often, his attributes that could be considered as leaning in this direction are then parlayed by the Left-leaning advocates to imply that Jesus was actually a communist, gay and very much against 'the church' or at least against all the church has become. The spectrum is wide on both liberal and conservative ledgers and one should always seek to define terms in order to have good discussions. What kind of liberal Christian are you? What kind of conservative Christian am I? There are at least 52 flavors of each.