NationStates Jolt Archive

Sorry.. I don't mean to offend with the title... But just the other day my friend's Aunt told me that Jesus is perfect and could never be in such a corrupt party as the Democrats. I don't know how it started but it ended up being a heated debated about white house scandals and gay marriage... especially about gay marriage.. and the Aunt accusing my friend of not being a "real" Christian... Sigh.. It went on for about two hours. I had been silent through all of this, even though I'm a bleeding-heart liberal (in most cases) & I'm not at all religous though I am well-read in religion, because it wasn't my family therefore I didn't see the point in arguing values, morals and politics... Though, when she said that If Jesus were alive today he would vote Republican, I just started cracking up and I couldn't stop... Her aunt got really offended and kicked us out of her house...
Sigh...
What a great vacation I had... anyway I'm back! What's new?

I really highly doubt that Jesus would touch either major party with a 50 foot pole.

I agree.

why would jesus be involved in the US political system?
he wasnt an american
maybe he woulda joined up with one of the israeli parties
but probably not that ultra orthodox one.

I'm with you guys. I can't honestly even imagine that Jesus would vote.

That is awsome. I have a great mental picture of you rolling around on the floor luaghing while this little old lady becomes more and more indignant.

My history teacher believed Jesus would have been a socialist, noting his anti-buisness stance and his concern for the poor. I agree, but also becuase I feel that a religious revolutionary can never be in a mainstream party just by the nature of what they are doing. A religious revolution is allways fringe.

Hey, I live near seattle as well. Cool.

I just thought it was hi-larious..

I guess you had to be there

Jesus said it would be easier for a camel to pass thru the eye of a needle then for a rich person to get into heaven so I dont think he'd belong to a party that only represents the rich and wouldve championed the stoning of Mary Magdalene cause she was a prostitute who believed in sexual freedom--so your friend is a total moron and a dogmatic fool

I agree with your Aunt dude, if Jesus was American - he would def be a Republican.

If Jesus ran for the US presidency, no-one would vote for him. The whole political system in the States is built around the premise that you vote for the lesser of two evils. And since Jesus obviously doesn't fit into that category, it naturally runs to the conclusion that he will get no votes.

I agree with your Aunt dude, if Jesus was American - he would def be a Republican.
Care to explain why?

I think Jesus would vote for Al Sharpton. Ok, that was a joke. Laugh dammit!! This isn't the first time that this thought has sprung into my mind. He would be an independant canidate since he doesn't fit into any of the "popular" political parties.

Jesus sestroyed the temples therefor he could never have been a Republican.

Jim

kind of like the same argument here.

Would he really be that petty and takes side as a right or a left,
come one, he has bigger issue to deal with, war is as major one :sniper:
another favorite of his is, like who is going to hell, and lets not
forget all the bastardes who don't pray for him.
OH, they have it coming.

I dont think Jesus would be intrested in poltics personally. I think he would still preach and stuff despite the fact the leader may be republican or democrat. Thiers a rock opera made by several Christian music artists who tell what I Jesus was born during our time in the USA. Pretty cool I thought.

But like I said I dont think Jesus would care less about the politics of America even though he does has his hand on everything that goes on.

I dont think Jesus would be intrested in poltics personally. I think he would still preach and stuff despite the fact the leader may be republican or democrat. Thiers a rock opera made by several Christian music artists who tell what I Jesus was born during our time in the USA. Pretty cool I thought.

But like I said I dont think Jesus would care less about the politics of America even though he does has his hand on everything that goes on.

Jesus sestroyed the temples therefor he could never have been a Republican.

Jim

Just what ARE you talking about?

I really highly doubt that Jesus would touch either major party with a 50 foot pole.
Pretty much. (http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=17551)

I think he would have been an indepedant for change; a champion for the rights of all people. He would have run off the idea that everyone is equal and people deserve a helping hand...

Jesus would be in the communist party, Haven't you guys read the gospel? It clearly says that jesus and his disciples pooled all their money together and took what they needed, or just mooched off of whoever let them stay for the night.

Jesus was a penniless, revolutionary, radical, wine-soaked, pacifist, socialist hippie. Republican? Not hardly. Nor Democrat. Probably not a member of any party, actually. But very, very, very, very, very liberal.

This is the funniest conversation ive ever heard of.

It all depends do you mean the 'real' gospel Jesus or the one the conservative church wants us to believe in. They're two really differant people. One forgave everyone and had the best party's the other burns people for being 'witches' and hordes his money and wants us to kill the infidel muslims.

So really Jesus could be either a republican dick cheney type or a revolutionary Martin Luther King Jr type depending on what mood he was in and how exploited his name was at that particular time.

I think Jesus would be independent, because his views are uber-religious obviously, but they're socialistic too, like how he feeds all of the people. Sure it was a good thing, but Jesus would be the goofiest candidate ever. Imagine a guy running for office who preaches complete and utter equality for EVERYONE regardless of your actions or how badly you mess up (i.e. Jesus would be super-pro-welfare I'm sure) but who is super conservative too by being pro-life and anti-affirmative action (it promotes inequality.) If Jesus voted he'd probably have no one to vote FOR.

But if he had to choose a major party, I'd say republican. They're pro-life, they're anti-gays (come on, Jesus wouldn't want homosexuals and you know it,) and they let people mind their own business and go their merry way.

I think Jesus would be an anarchist if anything, because throughout all of his travels, he never used force as a government does to achieve its aims.

with jesus there would be no need for political parties because he would always do the right thing

But if he had to choose a major party, I'd say republican. They're pro-life, they're anti-gays (come on, Jesus wouldn't want homosexuals and you know it,) and they let people mind their own business and go their merry way.

the only biblical reference to something even remotely like abortion clearly states that a fetus is not worth the same as a 'full' human being. and in addition to your claim about jesus just not liking homosexuals not being self-evident, he would also be growing up in a slightly less backwards and generally fuct up culture and would probably hold a view of homosexuality consistent with his other views on universal love and peace.

the republican party, particularly its religious fundamentalist end, strikes me as a lot more like the pharisees that jesus was always complaining about.

in any case, jesus would be an anarchist. or at least some other sort of libertarian socialist

This is the funniest conversation ive ever heard of.

It all depends do you mean the 'real' gospel Jesus or the one the conservative church wants us to believe in. They're two really differant people. One forgave everyone and had the best party's the other burns people for being 'witches' and hordes his money and wants us to kill the infidel muslims.

So really Jesus could be either a republican dick cheney type or a revolutionary Martin Luther King Jr type depending on what mood he was in and how exploited his name was at that particular time.Actually, the Jesus of the Bible isn't the second type you describe. The second guy has a lot of shit ascribed to him that he never believed in, stuff tossed into belief and dogma over a couple thousand years that runs directly contrary to his teachings and beliefs. The Jesus of most of Christendom is not the Jesus of scripture, plain and simple.

the only biblical reference to something even remotely like abortion clearly states that a fetus is not worth the same as a 'full' human being. and in addition to your claim about jesus just not liking homosexuals not being self-evident, he would also be growing up in a slightly less backwards and generally fuct up culture and would probably hold a view of homosexuality consistent with his other views on universal love and peace.

the republican party, particularly its religious fundamentalist end, strikes me as a lot more like the pharisees that jesus was always complaining about.

in any case, jesus would be an anarchist. or at least some other sort of libertarian socialistI'll go one farther as far as homosexuals are concerned--never once in the Gospels did Jesus ever say or have ascribed to him anything referring to homosexuals. Not one time. So any belief that Jesus would have harbored any ill feelings toward gays is based on about as much as what came out of my ass earlier (it was soupy, too--really nasty stuff).

Now Paul, on the other hand, had a real problem with homosexuals, but Paul wasn't Jesus. Paul had real issues with women as well, and unfortunately had more of an effect on the shape of the modern church than did Jesus.

Im guessing Jesus would NOT be a socialist. Yes, he liked helping the poor and such, but through charity, not by taxation.

I think Jesus would be an anarchist if anything, because throughout all of his travels, he never used force as a government does to achieve its aims.
Good point. Actually lotsa good points on this thread.

Im guessing Jesus would NOT be a socialist. Yes, he liked helping the poor and such, but through charity, not by taxation.How do you know? Jesus was never a member of the ruling class, so there's no way of knowing if he would have favored income redistribution or not. You're making an assumption based on nothing.

Im guessing Jesus would NOT be a socialist. Yes, he liked helping the poor and such, but through charity, not by taxation.

firstly, socialism doesn't necessarily require taxation at all - social ownership of the means of production provides enough wealth for everybody. but i don't recall jesus stating much of an opinion one way or another on who should own industry or even what tax policy should be like (other than his coy line about giving unto ceasar).

however, he did say that rich people pretty much cannot get into heaven unless they give everything they have to the poor. which seems close enough for me. and he called money-changers robbers, which might as well come straight out of the mouth of kropotkin.

Honestly I believe that if Jesus came down right now, he would give such a royal ass beating to everyone that their childrens childrens CHILDREN would never stop pissing blood, EVER.

As for jesus being a socialist, he wouldn't care, he would probably talk to cows, and tell people to build boats n' stuff. He's beyond such petty things as government. Wow Jesus, what a great guy I bet he was like Bob Marley just more... I don't know, saviorey.

I think jesus would have joined my political party, the "God Dammit, would all you assholes quit your powermongering for one friggin second and try to be nice to eachother for a change? Seriously, everyone, get happy now, I'll cut you." Party

got my vote

If jesus where still around he would show up in washington d.c. with a big whip!! :p

Jesus said it would be easier for a camel to pass thru the eye of a needle then for a rich person to get into heaven so I dont think he'd belong to a party that only represents the rich and wouldve championed the stoning of Mary Magdalene cause she was a prostitute who believed in sexual freedom--so your friend is a total moron and a dogmatic fool
Where does capitalism say that you cannot care for the poor? You give of your own hard-earned money to the disadvantaged, without having to be forced to do so by the government.
He did not pardon Mary Magdalene because she was a prostitute, stupid. He pardoned her because she repented of her immorality.

Jesus, was Jewish.

AND FROM THE MIDDLE EAST....

The Republicans would want anything to do with him.

ok..seriously.

Jeebus was very very liberal.
He spoke out against Ceasar, and the Jewish Temple.

Therefore.....

Jesus, was a liberal.

got my vote
Dude--I just saw your nation name. I think you were in my apartment earlier this evening.

Where does capitalism say that you cannot care for the poor? You give of your own hard-earned money to the disadvantaged, without having to be forced to do so by the government.
He did not pardon Mary Magdalene because she was a prostitute, stupid. He pardoned her because she repented of her immorality.


Mary Magdelene was never a prostitute, and was the most loved of all the disciples.

She was also supposedly Jesus' wife.
-The Gospel of Mary.

Pretty much. (http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=17551)
its a cartoon, someone has to have watched it. Nothing?.......I really should think of a name......

its a cartoon, someone has to have watched it. Nothing?.......I really should think of a name......I like Fiore far more than I dislike him, which is saying something about any cartoonist or animator. And the message is a solid one--the separation of church and state wasn't meant to protect the state as much as it was meant to protect churches from undue governmental influence, but too many on the religious right fail to see that.

I like Fiore far more than I dislike him, which is saying something about any cartoonist or animator. And the message is a solid one--the separation of church and state wasn't meant to protect the state as much as it was meant to protect churches from undue governmental influence, but too many on the religious right fail to see that.
I ran across that a few days ago looking for This Modern World because my local paper stopped carrying it, then this thread popped up. I never have timely links, so I jumped. I'd work to have the ad placed around here(Santa Cruz), but, you know....preaching to the choir......

This is the funniest conversation ive ever heard of.

It all depends do you mean the 'real' gospel Jesus or the one the conservative church wants us to believe in. They're two really differant people. One forgave everyone and had the best party's the other burns people for being 'witches' and hordes his money and wants us to kill the infidel muslims.

So really Jesus could be either a republican dick cheney type or a revolutionary Martin Luther King Jr type depending on what mood he was in and how exploited his name was at that particular time.
Actually, the Jesus of the Bible isn't the second type you describe. The second guy has a lot of shit ascribed to him that he never believed in, stuff tossed into belief and dogma over a couple thousand years that runs directly contrary to his teachings and beliefs. The Jesus of most of Christendom is not the Jesus of scripture, plain and simple.
Well, that's what I call the difference between Jesus and Christ. Jesus is the man who lived and preached in Judaea, while Christ is the person into which Jesus was stylized by Paul and his successors in building a church upon this new type of Yahweh-cult. But this Christ of course contradicts Jesus, because the message of Jesus was that there is no need for priesthood, for a temple, nor a church, because there is no intermediary needed between human and Yahweh. This revelation might be the reason why all the other gospels are not included in the bible: because they more clearly state the innecesity of institutionalized faith than the included four gospels do.

Jesus would not have anything to do with govt since govt is institutionalised violence and he was a pacifist.

Jesus would not have anything to do with govt since govt is institutionalised violence and he was a pacifist.


No he wasnt.

Or dont you remember the story of the Moneylenders?

No he wasnt.

Or dont you remember the story of the Moneylenders?
I remember he knocked over a few tables. He was against violence towards people.

My friend's Aunt told me that Jesus is perfect and could never be in such a corrupt party as the Democrats.
Your friend's Aunt should never come onto NS then.

I'd consider Jesus to be socialist like ppl have said before - and the Republican party is perfect, huh? (somebody else can list all their mistakes)

Jesus would not vote for any American politician. He was a hippie. He wore sandals, walked everywhere, only washed once in a while, loved everyone and grew up in a hashish smoking culture. He would be for gay marriage in my opinion because the 1st Testament is full of hatred towards women and gays but the second is full of love for all people, no matter who they are or what they do. Slight contradictions between testaments. Plus he was definitley Jewish. He was thiry years old still living at home, was in his father's business, his mother thought he was God's gift, c'mon he was Jewish.

He was black. He called everyone "brother", was harassed by the authorities and couldn't get a fair trial.

I remember he knocked over a few tables. He was against violence towards people.
Exactly. Even when he was about to die he told Peter to put his sword back and put the ear back on the Roman soldier.

He was black. He called everyone "brother", was harassed by the authorities and couldn't get a fair trial.

Troof.

Jesus = Anarchist.

Jesus would be a Democrat, as, being Mexican, he would be pro-immigration.

Jesus wouldn't have gotten involved in either party, even if he was American. Check out shortly after he feeds the 5,000, or 4,000 one of those 2, he turns down a chance to lead a revolt and become king. I do, however, think that Jesus would have hung out more with Democrats because he spent a ton more time with the "sinners" of the day than he did with the religious. As for the whole gay marriage thing, I think that Jesus would be against legalized gay marriage, but he still would spend time with homosexuals and he would still love and accept them.

Mary Magdelene was never a prostitute, and was the most loved of all the disciples.

She was also supposedly Jesus' wife.
-The Gospel of Mary.
True he wasn't a Prostitute but she wan't his wife. He hada thing for Lazurus's sisters. Mary and Martha. Such a close kinship that he cried when he heard Lazurus died. And personally raised him from a few days old death. Every other raising wasn't that late. Lazurus was already decaying and stinking but Jesus made him whole.

But this Christ of course contradicts Jesus, because the message of Jesus was that there is no need for priesthood, for a temple, nor a church, because there is no intermediary needed between human and Yahweh. This revelation might be the reason why all the other gospels are not included in the bible: because they more clearly state the innecesity of institutionalized faith than the included four gospels do.

Wrong, Jesus created a Preisthood. He made apostles, he made the Seventy. he made many church officials. But The apostleship died with John the beloved.
Catholic church assumed power unjustly and well as you can guess Crusades eventually occurred because no direction in church. They were lead blind since no apostles or prophets.

By the way, Jesus never hung around with Gentiles while alive, his apostles did for him. He couldn't his message was for the jews, the ones who fell away, and those that sinned.
He has other sheep he had to meet in the Americas. I wonder if Islam met him or are they not his other sheep... oh well

He would definately be a Democrat, but only because the democrats are closest to his beliefs. If they split the democratic party then he would be in best one but unsure which.
Republicans follow a loose and corrupt version of his words. They act like hypocrits to get ahead, lie, and cheat. Act high and mighty but all the while sinning.
Not saying Demovrats are saints but at least they don't pretend to be perfect followers of Christ when they aren't.
Covering your sin up is worse than doing it.

Jesus would be a Fascists but a religious one. I can't think of one like that. Nazis were anti-religious fascists.
Fascisms believes that everyone works toward the better meant of the state. Worthy ideals and basis of old Govt of Isreal. Man isn't very good at following it. Greed and such occur.
Lacy Peterson law is worth a fine that was it! Killing a unborn is a fine shows that Abortion isn't high up in crimes.

But he wouldn't be a republican, but any good moral republicans that exist he would be happy. But lately I see few being elected.

Jesus could stand as a third party. And win. Quite comfortably. Although no-one in congress would listen to him. >>;

I remember he knocked over a few tables. He was against violence towards people.

jesus would use direct action against the world bank and imf. debt forgiveness via trashing their buildings and chasing the usurers out of their offices with a whip! i tell you, that guy was an anarchist.

damn, i think next imf/wb protest its time for a jesus bloc...

Neither the Democrat nor the Republican party have been around for more than 200 years (although Jefferson's old Republican party turned into the Democrats eventually, and Lincoln's New Republicans remained as what we now know as the GOP).

In 200 years, there will be neither Democrat nor Republican.

Also, having only 2 parties is lame.

Jesus' teachings had nothing to do with politics and everything about our relationship with the divine, for those of us who believe in that sort of thing. No one should say that his teachings are unquestionable because we are fallible and may be making mistakes in our interpretation of them. Or we might be believing in things that really don't exist. That's for each of us to decide on our own, based on the feelings in our heart.

But trying to claim Jesus as a member of particular party is stupid, because these parties are transient and generally represent only a limited viewpoint of AMERICAN values. In North America, he NDP of Canada probably represents the greatest amount of Jesus' teachings in its overall platform...but it never mentions Jesus or Christianity because religion is separate and unrelated to day-to-day political realities. Jesus gave us a set of beliefs to examine and take as we will.

These beliefs can affect our actions and our politics, but in the end they have nothing to do with political systems or parties. In Jesus' day, democracy was mostly unheard of. He spoke of a "Kingdom Come" not a "Democracy Come." That's because he was talking of a spiritual "kingdom" in the only language that people would understand at the time. Politics could change for the better or the worse and Jesus wouldn't care. It's all about each individual's spiritual growth.

Living every day and every moment in an attempt to do good for others and helping to love and to serve the people around you without harming anyone, while acknowledging and cherishing your spiritual side...those are the only things Jesus would (and did) care about.

As for being "against" gays...Jesus wasn't against anyone who lived a moral, spiritual life. I used to have a hard time understanding gays but that's because I was really young and immature...soon I was able to understand that some people's brains worked in a completely different manner than mine in terms of sexual attraction. While there is a small percentage of the gay population that acts that way because they are trying to be "hip" or "experimental," most gays are born that way. Ask yourself if you could FORCE yourself to be attracted to someone. It's not easy. You can't force something like that. It's inherent and a part of your internal make-up. There is enough growing scientific evidence out there to make this pretty clear.

I think the gay-bashers out there look at themselves before quoting Jesus incorrectly about not loving gays. Jesus preached love for EVERYONE. Without exception. You don't just love some people and not others. If you go by the gosepl accounts, Jesus even loved the people who crucified him. He forgave them and wished them well. He certainly wasn't going to love the people who KILLED him more than some innocent gay guy who went to temple every sabbath. Remember, not all gays actually have sex! There is an equal percentage of celibate gays (if not higher) than celibate heteros. A lot of gays are too afraid to ever have a relationship with anyone and spend their lives alone for fear of hateful discrimination. But somehow that's not OK, even though they live and die as virgins, right? Please.

In terms of sex, what Jesus really spoke out about was adultery and sexual promiscuity. He was against the concept of fornication, but he still FORGAVE people for being weak and doing it. He didn't think people should be condemned for their sexual weaknesses, but added that he still considered it sinful.

Take that however you want. But we should stop ascribing political opinions to a man who had none. He was above politics. He shared his thoughts on how we all could rise above politics.

And after the hate-filled speeches at the Republican National Convention (and the mealy-mouthed speeches at the Democratic National Convention) we ought to keep Jesus far-away from these parties or we sully his name.

the only biblical reference to something even remotely like abortion clearly states that a fetus is not worth the same as a 'full' human being.
Can i have that source please, it would be very useful in abortion arguments.
Cheers

jesus would use direct action against the world bank and imf. debt forgiveness via trashing their buildings and chasing the usurers out of their offices with a whip! i tell you, that guy was an anarchist.

damn, i think next imf/wb protest its time for a jesus bloc...

Jesus Bloc sounds like a plan!

Y'shua (Jesus) did not get involved with politics, period.

Can i have that source please, it would be very useful in abortion arguments.
Cheers

Here it is:



22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow*: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay** as the judges determine.
23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

Exodus 21



* if the woman is not herself hurt.
** monetary damages.

I think that he would never ever have joined any political party. He wanted to be there for all humans after all.
The US election is not about: good versus evil after all. Especially in election times that shouldn´t be forgotten. So to claim that god is on the side of one party (and against another) is a problematic statements. Those that imply that the Democrats are with the devil?

The closest Jesus ever came to speaking against homosexuality was when he mentioned that it would be easier for the people of Sodom and Gamorrah than it would be for people who led people to immorality. But then again, it's very difficult to say what exactly he meant by this, as when Sodom and Gamorrah are mentioned, their destruction is attributed alternately to a generalized sinful nature (Genesis), laziness and sloth (Isaiah), or unspecified sexual immorality (Jude). People today assume that it means homosexuality only because they've assumed that the writings of people like Peter the Hermit (the monk who first started decrying homosexuality within the clergy about a 1000 years after Jesus) and Thomas Aquinas (who specified that anything other than up-down missionary sex was sodomy and should be severely punished. IIRC, if your wife gave you oral sex, it meant life-long excommunication) are one and the same with the writings of Jesus and the Bible. Trouble is, they ain't.

What Jesus did speak about, again and again, was that people should help the poor and not hate each other. Of either of the main parties, that jives far more closely with the platform of the Democrats than it does the Republicans (although admittedly, on many issues, the Dems are still far, far to the right of Jesus). He wasn't against government taxation--if anything, he was a strong believer in the rule of law, so if the government commands you to pay taxes, you had darn well better pay them. The idea that government is inherently coercive and that all coercion is bad is an idea that comes from Ayn Rand's Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal (which is the Republican Party's true Bible. Ironic then that in that book, Rand clearly states that altruism is a "doctrine of hatred of mankind" and that we would be much better off being egoists. Following that logic, no one in history hated mankind more than Jesus), and is a long, long way from anything Jesus either knew about or would have agreed with.

Jesus would know better than to hold any political affiliation.

See, I disagree with the notion that Jesus would not be political. It lies at the heart of what he tried to do 2,000 years ago. It's also what got him nailed to some treelimbs.

However, I think he's probably learned a thing or two since then. *nod*

I think Jesus would be involved in a Kingdom. Because he always talks about the KINGDOM of God.

Lets put it this way if Jesus was a Republican every one would vote Democrat in that election, because we need more seperation of Church and state not less. ( i am a Atheist/Agnostic and i dont wanna hear any crap about how i dont respect peoples religons, because i do and you can belive what you want and i can belive whati want) :mp5:

Jesus said it would be easier for a camel to pass thru the eye of a needle then for a rich person to get into heaven so I dont think he'd belong to a party that only represents the rich and wouldve championed the stoning of Mary Magdalene cause she was a prostitute who believed in sexual freedom--so your friend is a total moron and a dogmatic fool
First, nothing in the Bible definitely links Mary Magdalene to prostitution. That's not to say she wasn't, only that it doesn't say so in the Bible. And even if she was, it is even more doubtful that she "believed in sexual freedom".

But if he had to choose a major party, I'd say republican. They're pro-life, they're anti-gays (come on, Jesus wouldn't want homosexuals and you know it,) and they let people mind their own business and go their merry way.
While I would agree that Jesus was against homosexuality, that doesn't mean he was against homosexuals themselves. For example, he thought adultery was a sin, but his response to the woman caught in adultery (John 8:2ff) is most telling: he didn't overlook or ignore her sin, or water down his message, but rather held out the hope of redemption. Likewise, I think our response should be to confront sin where we see it, but to do it in such a way that it draws people to the Gospel rather than pushes them away.

I think Jesus would be involved in a Kingdom. Because he always talks about the KINGDOM of God.
Yes, but it was a kingdom "not of this world".

aren't we all forgetting the one most important thing about Jesus?

Jesus was/is.......a surfer! why?

Jesus's occupation in his day was: a carpenter.
During the storm on the sea of Galilee, he: walked on water.
Jesus's physical description as per most popular depictions:
long hair
wore sandals and a big white shirt
a tall, muscular fellow

I could go on....but no

Lol...look where he's from? Jesus would be killing palestinians.

He was black. He called everyone "brother", was harassed by the authorities and couldn't get a fair trial.
Best post so far.

But this Christ of course contradicts Jesus, because the message of Jesus was that there is no need for priesthood, for a temple, nor a church, because there is no intermediary needed between human and Yahweh. Interestingly the stance taken by various of the Christian radical sects in the English Civil War. Wouldn't that stance make Jesus nearer to the unorthodox side of Quakerism then anything else?

called everyone brother?! v.groovy kid. did someone say J wouldn't vote? someone else say he'd have no part in politics? i think.. he'd align, strongly, clearly for reform to all levels of the modern world, to a peaceful revolution, to equality and unity worldwide and the removal of the yokes on our necks forcing us to serve unjust and greedy fools, who know not what they do. i think, in short he'd be pretty cool guy, but also that we shopuldn't sit about waiting for him to come back and sort this shit out. please guys - vote carefully, for reformers, if you fail to turn out - calling any vote worthless - or vote for the lesser of two evils YOU become part of the problem. so vote nice and live in love.
also - to whomever twas entered sexual freedom to this debate - grow the hell up, there are some serious issues in this world. who or how anyone *ucks in the privacy of their whatever is not one of them. opression, poverty, torture, war... now there're some clear candidates for solution