It is a compelling hypothetical: Back in 30 AD, Jesus was a controversial figure. He was gaining followers but it wasn’t universally agreed upon that he was, in fact, the “Son of Man.” That would be an understatement. So how would the media perceive his candidacy as a Republican candidate?
As a deeply religious man, Jesus would have been the subject of immediate attack by the mainstream media. Newsweek would probably have ridiculed him on its cover – as they did Mitt Romney this week – dancing in too-short robes and a holy Bible in his hand. Headline: “The Jesus Moment.” Maybe there would have been a Broadway musical mocking Christians to boot.
Jesus was also white i.e. of Jewish descent, and male, which would have made him a perfect target of the cultural elite. His intelligence would have been questioned (due to his “cave-dweller” religious beliefs), he would be attacked as a misogynist (because he is a man), and for his bigoted character (assumed because he is white and of Jewish descent).
Because Jesus chose to associate himself with sinners and outcasts of every kind, his personal life would have been fodder for the media’s attacks. But he didn’t worry about gossip or bad press and, without apology, spent his time among lepers, prostitutes, adulterers, drunkards, tax collectors, thieves, idolaters, and murderers. AOL/Huffington Post would have had a field day with and the New York Times would have led with a headline like, “GOP’s Jesus Fancies Thieves, Prostitutes.”
To make matters worse media-wise, Jesus had twelve male disciples and one female disciple, if you count Mary Magdalene. According to Luke 8:2 and Mark 16:9, Jesus cleansed Magdalene of “seven demons” – indicating to scholars that she was either full of sin or illness. Some have argued that she was literally a repentant “prostitute.” Others argue that Magdalene is merely the victim of historical defamation. Regardless, you can already hear what MSNBC’s Chris Matthews would have said: “Come on, he’s [Jesus] living with twelve men and a woman? The man’s a nutcase.” Ed Schultz would have chimed in calling Magdalene a “right-wing slut” as he did conservative radio show host Laura Ingraham just weeks ago.
With his stunning rhetorical skills, Jesus would have stirred GOP audiences, much like Sarah Palin did in 2008. What would he have said? While it is impossible to analyze Jesus’ political philosophy in the course of a single article, his belief in the significance of free will, a God-centered society, and individual responsibility is undeniable.
Ever since Karl Marx advocated a collectivist approach to organizing society, progressives have, through “social justice” propaganda, attempted to convert Jesus’ philosophy of voluntary giving into socialism. However, Jesus was not a socialist. He believed in free will, not government-forced “goodness.” For instance, in Matthew 10:8, Jesus says, "Freely you have received, freely give. In 2 Corinthians 9:7, the Apostle Paul confirms this point, stating, “Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”
Jesus advocated a truly voluntary heart for a reason: because that is what benefits the soul. He wasn't for government interference. He definitely wasn't for the equalization of wealth. And there's the proof.
Jesus addresses the issue of wealth redistribution directly in the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-28). In this parable, Jesus speaks of three servants who were each given their master’s talents (money) to manage while he went on a journey. Two of the servants made their talents grow but the third did not. When the master returned and saw that the third servant failed to manage his talent, he commanded that the money be taken from him and given to the other servant. “Take the talent from him and give it to the one who has the ten talents,” said the Master. “For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.” Jesus advocates aggressive charity but he also advocates – just as aggressively – individual responsibility.
Jesus’ teaching is consistent with property rights as they are generally defined in the Bible. In Genesis 2:15, the “Lord God took man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.” In Exodus 20:15, 17, the Ten Commandments firmly establish laws against theft and coveting (desiring) your neighbor’s goods. Consequently, property has value and there is a demarcation between the goods one possesses and the goods of everyone else.
Needless to say, Jesus would probably have been a crowd pleaser at Monday’s New Hampshire Republican debate.
But in the end, the media’s personal attacks on Jesus might still have had their intended effect. His poll numbers would probably have plummeted. He would have been seen as a risky candidate by the GOP Establishment. Republican voters say they want a more “impressive” field of presidential candidates. They say they want an iconic personality. A force of nature. But they are also a risk-adverse demographic and generally shift towards so-called “vanilla” candidates, like Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who are harder for the media to attack.
So what GOP candidate could ever hope to pass muster in a bigoted, anti-Christian, hate-filled media environment like this?
Only heaven knows. –Read more at The Washington Times
Conservative satirist and commentator William J. Kelly is also a contributor to the American Spectator, Breitbart.com and edits the Tea Party Reports for the Washington Times Communities. He is a native from Chicago's Southside.
As a deeply religious man, Jesus would have been the subject of immediate attack by the mainstream media. Newsweek would probably have ridiculed him on its cover – as they did Mitt Romney this week – dancing in too-short robes and a holy Bible in his hand. Headline: “The Jesus Moment.” Maybe there would have been a Broadway musical mocking Christians to boot.
Jesus was also white i.e. of Jewish descent, and male, which would have made him a perfect target of the cultural elite. His intelligence would have been questioned (due to his “cave-dweller” religious beliefs), he would be attacked as a misogynist (because he is a man), and for his bigoted character (assumed because he is white and of Jewish descent).
Because Jesus chose to associate himself with sinners and outcasts of every kind, his personal life would have been fodder for the media’s attacks. But he didn’t worry about gossip or bad press and, without apology, spent his time among lepers, prostitutes, adulterers, drunkards, tax collectors, thieves, idolaters, and murderers. AOL/Huffington Post would have had a field day with and the New York Times would have led with a headline like, “GOP’s Jesus Fancies Thieves, Prostitutes.”
To make matters worse media-wise, Jesus had twelve male disciples and one female disciple, if you count Mary Magdalene. According to Luke 8:2 and Mark 16:9, Jesus cleansed Magdalene of “seven demons” – indicating to scholars that she was either full of sin or illness. Some have argued that she was literally a repentant “prostitute.” Others argue that Magdalene is merely the victim of historical defamation. Regardless, you can already hear what MSNBC’s Chris Matthews would have said: “Come on, he’s [Jesus] living with twelve men and a woman? The man’s a nutcase.” Ed Schultz would have chimed in calling Magdalene a “right-wing slut” as he did conservative radio show host Laura Ingraham just weeks ago.
With his stunning rhetorical skills, Jesus would have stirred GOP audiences, much like Sarah Palin did in 2008. What would he have said? While it is impossible to analyze Jesus’ political philosophy in the course of a single article, his belief in the significance of free will, a God-centered society, and individual responsibility is undeniable.
Ever since Karl Marx advocated a collectivist approach to organizing society, progressives have, through “social justice” propaganda, attempted to convert Jesus’ philosophy of voluntary giving into socialism. However, Jesus was not a socialist. He believed in free will, not government-forced “goodness.” For instance, in Matthew 10:8, Jesus says, "Freely you have received, freely give. In 2 Corinthians 9:7, the Apostle Paul confirms this point, stating, “Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”
Jesus advocated a truly voluntary heart for a reason: because that is what benefits the soul. He wasn't for government interference. He definitely wasn't for the equalization of wealth. And there's the proof.
Jesus addresses the issue of wealth redistribution directly in the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-28). In this parable, Jesus speaks of three servants who were each given their master’s talents (money) to manage while he went on a journey. Two of the servants made their talents grow but the third did not. When the master returned and saw that the third servant failed to manage his talent, he commanded that the money be taken from him and given to the other servant. “Take the talent from him and give it to the one who has the ten talents,” said the Master. “For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.” Jesus advocates aggressive charity but he also advocates – just as aggressively – individual responsibility.
Jesus’ teaching is consistent with property rights as they are generally defined in the Bible. In Genesis 2:15, the “Lord God took man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.” In Exodus 20:15, 17, the Ten Commandments firmly establish laws against theft and coveting (desiring) your neighbor’s goods. Consequently, property has value and there is a demarcation between the goods one possesses and the goods of everyone else.
Needless to say, Jesus would probably have been a crowd pleaser at Monday’s New Hampshire Republican debate.
But in the end, the media’s personal attacks on Jesus might still have had their intended effect. His poll numbers would probably have plummeted. He would have been seen as a risky candidate by the GOP Establishment. Republican voters say they want a more “impressive” field of presidential candidates. They say they want an iconic personality. A force of nature. But they are also a risk-adverse demographic and generally shift towards so-called “vanilla” candidates, like Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who are harder for the media to attack.
So what GOP candidate could ever hope to pass muster in a bigoted, anti-Christian, hate-filled media environment like this?
Only heaven knows. –Read more at The Washington Times
Conservative satirist and commentator William J. Kelly is also a contributor to the American Spectator, Breitbart.com and edits the Tea Party Reports for the Washington Times Communities. He is a native from Chicago's Southside.
No comments:
Post a Comment