It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Phil Zuckerman: Why Evangelicals Hate Jesus

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Phil Zuckerman: Why Evangelicals Hate Jesus


www.huffingtonpost.com

The results from a recent poll published by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life (www.pewforum.org...) 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.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.pewforum.org




posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 10:38 AM
link   
The title of the piece is a bit disingenuous, and clarified in the article:


allow a quick clarification. Evangelicals don't exactly hate Jesus -- as we've provocatively asserted in the title of this piece. They do love him dearly.


Inflammatory language aside, these are important observations, both as political science and as religious studies. I try to stay away from politics, and often struggle with who to vote for (occasionally, as in the 2008 Presidential election, just leaving it blank) because no one really supports that values that I have as an orthodox Christian.

Rather, it seems like people take the values that they have and then attempt to wrap them in the flag, or in Christ, even when it is completely inappropriate. It would be better, I think, to just simply accept that you support something that is contrary to Christ's teachings, rather than misrepresent the Bible to seemingly support you.

I am extremely frustrated by people who are single issue voters, or who say that they'll support "the Christian candidate", because not only does this marginalize you and your voice, but there is rarely any accountability when nothing gets done on your single issue ("there is so much opposition!") or when the person acts in ways contrary to the moral teachings of Christ.

If someone tells me that they should vote for them because they are a Christian, I view that as a red flag warning, because a person's actions are what matters, not what they claim to believe, and I'm going to scrutinize that person a lot more as a result of their attempt to persuade me by declaring their faith.

Christians need to accept that neither of the two main American political parties represents a view that Christ would teach, and either produce candidates who would, or stop voting on the basis of what religion a person claims to be.

I do not desire, in any way, a theocracy, but I think that almost everyone, atheists and theists alike, would agree that following the actual teachings of Christ would result in less, if not eliminated poverty, with compassion and equality for all people -- peace and prosperity in a more egalitarian society.

Unfortunately, such beliefs do not seem compatible with those who seek political power, hence my personal divorce of politics and faith.

www.huffingtonpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.
edit on 11-3-2011 by Byrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
A very interesting analysis of trends I have tended to notice for some time as well.

Firstly, I believe the OP has stated the most important point... faith is something to be acted, not spoken about, and I am often dumbfounded by people who claim, often very ardently, to be of a certain faith or denomination, yet their actions reflect an entirely different reality.

Here are some interesting discussion points of the article:



Jesus unambiguously preached mercy and forgiveness. ... 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.



Jesus was very clear that the pursuit of wealth was inimical to the Kingdom of God, that the rich are to be condemned, and that to be a follower of Him means to give one's money to the poor. And yet Evangelicals are the most supportive of corporate greed and capitalistic excess, and they are the most opposed to institutional help for the nation's poor -- especially poor children.



In short, Evangelicals are that segment of America which is the most pro-militaristic, pro-gun, and pro-corporate, while simultaneously claiming to be most ardent lovers of the Prince of Peace.


Here is the summation of arguments:



Of course, conservative Americans have every right to support corporate greed, militarism, gun possession, and the death penalty, and to oppose welfare, food stamps, health care for those in need, etc. -- it is just strange and contradictory when they claim these positions as somehow "Christian." They aren't.


I cannot disagree... basically, if you insist on assigning yourself a label (and you don't have to!) then you must live with it. Be it conservative, liberal, christian, jew etc...

For example, you cannot claim to be Jewish, yet consume pork.
However, you can follow the precepts of the Hebrew faith and enjoy bacon everyday, only you may not use the label "Jewish". If you must, invent a new label for yourself, or simply live with the fact that, for you personally, your relationship with your God is not affected by your diet.

the Billmeister



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Come on,...Christian, they don't have a clue. Born-again Bush and his neo-con cabal caused the murders of how many beloved neighbors? Funded extravagant inappropriate pharma? Allowed fracking, unscrubbed coal burning, and oil rip-offs and deregulated deep ocean drilling and a free for all financial hosing? And trampled the God inspired constitution?
The organized evangelical "Christians" worship Jesus as an idol but never put his message into action. These do-gooders want to control everyone's behaviors but come off as pure hypocrites.
Simple logic will penetrate the lies and lead one through the valley of the shadow of corporate media. Learn the truth, www.forbidenhealingforum.com. Drink deep my friends!



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   
huh???
what kind of shabby research is this???

I am an evangelical Christian and I can
assure you I do NOT hate Jesus.

And I approve of gun ownership due to
self-defense. Where in the Bible does it
say we cannot defend ourselves???

And I approve of Capital Punishment
not because of the ideas presented
in this report but because the Bible
also states an eye for an eye.

This report is completely taken out of
context to attack Christians.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
huh???
what kind of shabby research is this???

I am an evangelical Christian and I can assure you I do NOT hate Jesus.


As both I and the article noted, they are not saying that you do.


And I approve of gun ownership due to self-defense. Where in the Bible does it say we cannot defend ourselves???


Well, there's this bit, I suppose:


But I tell you not to resist an evildoer. On the contrary, whoever slaps you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well.
-- Matthew 5:39 (NIV)


As Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof remarks, if everyone follows "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth", pretty soon the whole world will be blind and toothless. Christ's teaching is to break the cycle.

I don't think that owning a gun is a sin, but I believe that the insight that we should take away is that owning a gun is not a virtue that Christ taught, and, if used on another person, is contrary to his teachings of loving your neighbour as yourself, understanding that everyone is your neighbour, not just people you like or agree with.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 



because the Bible also states an eye for an eye

The "official" theological reason behind evangelical support of the death penalty, whether they realize it or not, actually stems from God's covenant with Noah—part of which states that any one who kills a human is to be put to death; not because of "an eye for an eye".



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Billmeister
 




Jesus was very clear that the pursuit of wealth was inimical to the Kingdom of God, that the rich are to be condemned, and that to be a follower of Him means to give one's money to the poor. And yet Evangelicals are the most supportive of corporate greed and capitalistic excess, and they are the most opposed to institutional help for the nation's poor -- especially poor children.

Wow. The Bible doesn't condemn being rich.


To say that evangelicals are against "institutional" help for the poor is a bit misleading. Any evangelical that is "with it" will know that one of the church's purposes is to help those in need. Thus they're not against institutional help. In general, conservative evangelicals are not in favor of the government being the one that hands out the help. This is a valid position to hold if that is one's conviction as a Christian (just as it's equally as valid to believe that the government should be in the business of helping others.)

It's a different question though if those in evangelicalism are aware of this. With this issue, just like others in America today, undoubtedly many stand behind political causes/convictions because they "are Christian and this is just what Christians believe."



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by octotom
 


I don't disagree, and I admit that the article's methodology is very questionable as well.

The point that I agree with, is that faith should be enacted, and not a matter of rhetoric. Many claim to be of a certain faith, yet their actions are opposed to the very teachings they claim to espouse.

the Billmeister

EDIT: Would you not agree, however, that if Jesus had to choose an economic system, He would lean more towards socialism than capitalism?
edit on 10-3-2011 by Billmeister because: Made clear



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
I am an evangelical Christian and I can
assure you I do NOT hate Jesus.



15If ye love me, keep my commandments.





25And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? 26He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? 27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.





41Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.



Originally posted by boondock-saintAnd I approve of gun ownership due to
self-defense. Where in the Bible does it
say we cannot defend ourselves???





. 52Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. 53Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? 54But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?





35And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. 37For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. 38And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.


In the above he is making clear that all those things he told his disciples to do, they would not do anyway when he died on the cross, so he told them to go ahead and do it. All those things must be accomplished, even not following the teachings of the Masters. He eluded to this further in the parable of wheat and tares.


Originally posted by boondock-saint
And I approve of Capital Punishment
not because of the ideas presented
in this report but because the Bible
also states an eye for an eye.





38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. 41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away. 43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.


Remember!




10Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.



Originally posted by boondock-saint
This report is completely taken out of
context to attack Christians.




20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.


With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by Billmeister
 




Jesus was very clear that the pursuit of wealth was inimical to the Kingdom of God, that the rich are to be condemned, and that to be a follower of Him means to give one's money to the poor. And yet Evangelicals are the most supportive of corporate greed and capitalistic excess, and they are the most opposed to institutional help for the nation's poor -- especially poor children.

Wow. The Bible doesn't condemn being rich.





16And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 20The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? 21Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. 22But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.





15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 17And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.





19Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: 20But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: 21For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.


With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   
lmao

the Bible says turn the other cheek.
I would agree with that.

But that has nothing to do with
somebody shooting bullets at your head.
That's entirely different.

Like I said, this report is just an attack
on Christianity by twisting words out of
context for an agenda.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


Then perhaps there is some truth in this section of the article.



...there may very well simply be an underlying, all-too-human social-psychological process at root, one that probably plays itself out among all religious individuals: they see in their religion what they want to see, and deny or despise the rest. That is, religion is one big Rorschach test. People look at the content of their religious tradition -- its teachings, its creeds, its prophet's proclamations -- and they basically pick and choose what suits their own secular outlook. They see in their faith what they want to see as they live their daily lives, and simultaneously ignore the rest.


Your thoughts?

the Billmeister



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Maybe its just me.. I'm honestly having a hard time relating the article in the Huff Post to the Pew poll and article its based on. The Pew one basically says that evangelicals are most prone to support the Tea Party and gives various conservative things the tea party supports.

However, the author of the Huff Post article seems to twist the poll around to suit his own agenda. For example, the Pew Poll says...



More important to Tea Party
Protect Gun Rights 78%
Control Gun Ownership 18%


Somehow that gets translated in the Huff Post article as...
.

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.


Ya know - another that that is really odd. I don't see "violent military invasion of various countries around the world" mentioned anywhere in the poll ??

Hmmmm.. how about this gem that the article claims Evangelicals support..

governmental use of torture.


I'm not seeing that covered in the poll either?!?


Oh my! I'm beginning to think that while some Christians, Evangelicals and Tea Party supporters do not always display Christ-like behavior that the author of the Huff Post article simply twisted the poll to say things that it does not say at all to in an effort to provide a basis to write an article proclaiming why people should hate Christians, Evangelicals and Tea Party supporters.

It honestly would have carried more weight if he just wrote it as a pure opinion bit instead of trying to twist the poll to fit his opinion.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 

Jesus urges his followers to turn the other cheek when confronted by violence:
You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. (Matthew 5:38–39, NRSV)



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frogs
However, the author of the Huff Post article seems to twist the poll around to suit his own agenda.


Well, it IS the Huffington Post, I'd be surprised if the truth wasn't twisted in some fashion.


I didn't link the article because I agreed with it, but because it under strikes the larger issue -- that politics and religion, at least in the United States today, require compromise, on the part of the religious person, to support a political candidate on the basis of Christian values.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
I am an evangelical Christian and I can
assure you I do NOT hate Jesus.


And everyone who calls your bluff will - ehem - "comply or die", right? So which way to the gas chambers? I may as well turn myself in now.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 



20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.


That's not hard. The Pharisees only had SELF-righteousness. They had zero of Christ's imputed righteousness because they rejected Him as the Messiah and only begotten Son of God.



posted on Mar, 11 2011 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 




That's not hard. The Pharisees only had SELF-righteousness. They had zero of Christ's imputed righteousness because they rejected Him as the Messiah and only begotten Son of God.


And I'm pretty sure that is the exact attribute the article is attributing to Evangelicals.




top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join