**this was taken from a website**
----------
When telling of the judgment of the "nations" (ergo political), Jesus said, according to Matthew's Gospel:
"For I was hungry and you gave me food . . . I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me. . . . Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers . . . you did it to me."
It sounds to me like welfare, open immigration, universal health care, increased international aid and prison reform, all in one sermon.
The source for the Biblical passages is Matthew 25:35-41. Now let the debate begin:
A few points:
1) I took the words from an op-ed article. They weren't mine, though I support their implications.
2) Almost every word of the Bible is open to interpretation, much to the chagrin of fundamentalists who would wish it otherwise.
3) No one said Jesus was laying out his own political agenda. Most of the time he was apolitical: "Render unto Caeser..." and all that. The author merely implied that Jesus's words supported or justified a liberal political agenda.
If Christians in today's political environment want to keep their views to themselves, not impose them on others, no one will need to analyze the Bible for its messages. But "President" Bush has done the opposite—wearing Jesus on his sleeve, so to speak. He's advocated faith-based charity funding and school-led prayer.
Since he and other right-wingers have put the Christian faith into play in the political arena, it's our right—nay, our duty—to assess what Jesus's agenda would be. My view is that the author accurately summarized the positions Jesus would take. That makes Bush an anti-Jesus hypocrite.
That's most evident in his cheerful support for executions. But Jesus would be aghast at much of the Republican agenda. He'd denounce it just as he denounced the conservative money-changers of his time.
----------
----------
When telling of the judgment of the "nations" (ergo political), Jesus said, according to Matthew's Gospel:
"For I was hungry and you gave me food . . . I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me. . . . Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers . . . you did it to me."
It sounds to me like welfare, open immigration, universal health care, increased international aid and prison reform, all in one sermon.
The source for the Biblical passages is Matthew 25:35-41. Now let the debate begin:
A few points:
1) I took the words from an op-ed article. They weren't mine, though I support their implications.
2) Almost every word of the Bible is open to interpretation, much to the chagrin of fundamentalists who would wish it otherwise.
3) No one said Jesus was laying out his own political agenda. Most of the time he was apolitical: "Render unto Caeser..." and all that. The author merely implied that Jesus's words supported or justified a liberal political agenda.
If Christians in today's political environment want to keep their views to themselves, not impose them on others, no one will need to analyze the Bible for its messages. But "President" Bush has done the opposite—wearing Jesus on his sleeve, so to speak. He's advocated faith-based charity funding and school-led prayer.
Since he and other right-wingers have put the Christian faith into play in the political arena, it's our right—nay, our duty—to assess what Jesus's agenda would be. My view is that the author accurately summarized the positions Jesus would take. That makes Bush an anti-Jesus hypocrite.
That's most evident in his cheerful support for executions. But Jesus would be aghast at much of the Republican agenda. He'd denounce it just as he denounced the conservative money-changers of his time.
----------
