NationStates Jolt Archive

Please take this test (www.politicalcompass.org) and fill in your results on the poll to come.
Now, I'm not asking you to take the test as you, I'm asking you to take the test as Jesus. (If you want to follow it up with someone from the religious right, fine with me.)
Why Jesus?
To prove to the religious right of NS (you know who you are) that if Jesus heard what they were doing in his name, he would cry himself to sleep.
For that matter, to prove to Christianity in general for the last 1900 or so years that Jesus didn't expect anything like it.

But I don't like Jesus. His was not a nice character.

May we choose Balder?

Would Jesus like free trade?

Economic Left/Right: 1.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.97

I don't think it's very accurate, though. I think I'm much more authoritarian socially, but....

And I can't do it based a Jesus, because I am not He. I can do it based on His teachings, which I did above, but that's the best I can do.

Trying as best as I could, given that a number of issues were unknown in Jesus's day (Like most of the economy section or any enviromental issues), I came up with:

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -3.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.41

Huh... I and Jesus match up pretty close. ;)

I guessed on a few ecomonic issues but here is my guess on Jesus's standing:

Economic Left/Right: -6.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.31

Trying as best as I could, given that a number of issues were unknown in Jesus's day (Like most of the economy section or any enviromental issues), I came up with:

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -3.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.41

Huh... I and Jesus match up pretty close. ;)

*points and stares*

Jesus?

OMFGZ IT'S JESUS!!!!!!!

Please take this test (www.politicalcompass.org) and fill in your results on the poll to come.
Now, I'm not asking you to take the test as you, I'm asking you to take the test as Jesus. (If you want to follow it up with someone from the religious right, fine with me.)
Why Jesus?
To prove to the religious right of NS (you know who you are) that if Jesus heard what they were doing in his name, he would cry himself to sleep.
For that matter, to prove to Christianity in general for the last 1900 or so years that Jesus didn't expect anything like it.

I'm a Christian Libertarian. And yeah, I think Jesus would've been somewhere around there too.

But I don't like Jesus. His was not a nice character.

May we choose Balder?
Go ahead and take it as Balder if you want, just don't vote in my poll if you do. Don't want you to corrupt the results.


Economic Left/Right: 1.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.97

I don't think it's very accurate, though. I think I'm much more authoritarian socially, but....

And I can't do it based a Jesus, because I am not He. I can do it based on His teachings, which I did above, but that's the best I can do.

I'd like to point out here that the second biggest fundy on the forum(no offense meant) just admitted that he thinks Jesus is probably a lot less authoritarian then he is.
I'd like to generalise this, but I can't with just one person.
EDIT: The guy clarified this later, saying that he took the test the way he would take it and got a more leftist score then he thought he would. Which means he thinks he is more authoritatan then he is.


Trying as best as I could, given that a number of issues were unknown in Jesus's day (Like most of the economy section or any enviromental issues), I came up with:

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -3.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.41

Huh... I and Jesus match up pretty close. ;)

I'll admit that Jesus probably wasn't thinking of the economy or the enviroment before either economics or enviromentalism were invented. Just guess on those.


BTW, I did this about a week ago and got about Economic:+2 Social: -8.
And so far, I think we've been proving Jesus is pretty hard to pin down.

My Jesus:
Economic Left/Right: -0.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.05

When in doubt, I just disagreed, because Jesus was an argumentative son of a bitch, but that probably skewed him a bit more to the right economically than usual.
Jesus was definitely authoritarian though, you can't go around saying stuff like "I am the son of God, obey my words or get thine immortal ass kicked in" without being so.

I'd like to point out here that the second biggest fundy on the forum(no offense meant) just admitted that he thinks Jesus is probably a lot less authoritarian then he is.
I'd like to generalise this, but I can't with just one person.

First, I'm not a Fundy. I'm an Evangelical.

Second, that's not what I said. I said that the test didn't accurately guage my stance on the issues and that if it did, I would be more authoritarian. I did not say that my stance differed from Jesus' stance.

Please amend that in your post.

First, I'm not a Fundy. I'm an Evangelical.

"I'm not fat, I'm big-boned!"

Nobody's fooled, honey.

"I'm not fat, I'm big-boned!"

Nobody's fooled, honey.

There is a difference. Fundamentalists (not by definition, but in the real world) reject reason, use hyper-literal translantions of the Bible (the hills really do have clapping hands), are dispensationalist and support a few other heresies.

Evangelicals support reason (though that reason should be Scripture based), use a literal interpretation of Scripture (read history as history, poetry as poetry, etc.), and are not necessarily dispensationalist.

*points and stares*

Jesus?

OMFGZ IT'S JESUS!!!!!!!
Naw... I don't have the beard. ;)

I think the test may have some problems with this.

For example, the bit on helping the poor is easy, so is the death penalty. However, the parts on athority... well, Jesus of course said that one should obey the ultimate athority, making him athoritarian. But, he also bucked all worldly athority (which is how I took the test since it applies to that).

We need a better Jesus test. ;)

For example, the bit on helping the poor is easy, so is the death penalty.

Okay, I'll bite.

Of course these parts are easy! Jesus said He came to uphold the law and He the civil law was part of the moral law, so death penalties are required and of course we should help the poor! Charities all the way! No welfare, because that's not the state's responsiblity.

That's probably not what you meant, but...

There is a difference. Fundamentalists (not by definition, but in the real world) reject reason, use hyper-literal translantions of the Bible (the hills really do have clapping hands), are dispensationalist and support a few other heresies.

Evangelicals support reason (though that reason should be Scripture based), use a literal interpretation of Scripture (read history as history, poetry as poetry, etc.), and are not necessarily dispensationalist.

"It's not six! It's half a dozen!"

For example, the bit on helping the poor is easy, so is the death penalty. However, the parts on athority... well, Jesus of course said that one should obey the ultimate athority, making him athoritarian. But, he also bucked all worldly athority (which is how I took the test since it applies to that).
And Stalin wasn't all that hot on following the American Bill of Rights, being Authoritarian doesn't mean that you insist people follow any random set of rules they might encounter in their lives, it simply means insisting people follow your rules in all areas of their lives.
On the other hand, he probably believed in things like the right to own land and engage in trade, since he repeatedly referenced the sale and purchasing of property in his teachings and personal advice.

"It's not six! It's half a dozen!"

Really. That's not necessary.

Whether or not you think that it is resonable to believe Scripture is the infallible word of God, you must admit that Evangelicals interpret everything resonably in light of it.

Where Fundamentalists just reject it whatever looks like it may not fit.

Okay, I'll bite.

Of course these parts are easy! Jesus said He came to uphold the law and He the civil law was part of the moral law, so death penalties are required and of course we should help the poor! Charities all the way! No welfare, because that's not the state's responsiblity.

That's probably not what you meant, but...
*Psst* Thou shall not kill. Turn the other cheek. Those who live the by sword shall die by it.

Those were the laws He was upholding, not Roman rules.

*Psst* Thou shall not kill. Turn the other cheek. Those who live the by sword shall die by it.

Those were the laws He was upholding, not Roman rules.

Well I wasn't talking about Roman rules.

Read the Pentateuch?

Really. That's not necessary.

Whether or not you think that it is resonable to believe Scripture is the infallible word of God, you must admit that Evangelicals interpret everything resonably in light of it.

No, no I don't, as that would be like saying "whether or not you think schizophrenia is a gateway to the astral plane, you must admit that they interpret everything reasonably in light of it."

Okay, I'll bite.

Of course these parts are easy! Jesus said He came to uphold the law and He the civil law was part of the moral law, so death penalties are required and of course we should help the poor! Charities all the way! No welfare, because that's not the state's responsiblity.

That's probably not what you meant, but...


Because that's not what Jesus said... Gee...

Somebody needs to go read their bible and remember that Jesus condemned execution by the sinful and reminded us to render unto Cesar what was Cesar's.

And Stalin wasn't all that hot on following the American Bill of Rights, being Authoritarian doesn't mean that you insist people follow any random set of rules they might encounter in their lives, it simply means insisting people follow your rules in all areas of their lives.
Indeed, and I noted it. The problem is that the test is written to denote STATE athoritarianism. The question, for example, on making peace with the establishment is a part of growing up. Well, Jesus was bucking the establishment left and right, but He was very particular that the religious establishment should be followed. That's what I mean when I say the test is hard to answer because it depends greatly on which point of view you take.

On the other hand, he probably believed in things like the right to own land and engage in trade, since he repeatedly referenced the sale and purchasing of property in his teachings and personal advice.
To a point, He also advocated that a man who has two coats giving one to someone who has none. But how both apply to multi-national congolmerates, their actions, and how Jesus would have responded...

Because that's not what Jesus said... Gee...

Somebody needs to go read their bible and remember that Jesus condemned execution by the sinful and reminded us to render unto Cesar what was Cesar's.

You also need to remember that what is Caeser's is not the general populace's which includes the power of the sword - given to the civil government. But was that who was using it? No, the priesthood was.

God commands the Israelites to excecute, to go to war, and to defend themselves throughout the Old Testament. And Jesus was God, so He cannot disagree.

And Jesus and the Apostles command the people to give to the poor, not for the government to tax the people, spend most of the money on running itself and give a measely token to the poor.

Indeed, and I noted it. The problem is that the test is written to denote STATE athoritarianism. The question, for example, on making peace with the establishment is a part of growing up. Well, Jesus was bucking the establishment left and right, but He was very particular that the religious establishment should be followed. That's what I mean when I say the test is hard to answer because it depends greatly on which point of view you take.


To a point, He also advocated that a man who has two coats giving one to someone who has none. But how both apply to multi-national congolmerates, their actions, and how Jesus would have responded...

I had him as mildly Libertarian and moderately Left

Seems to me the problem is that reading the Bible is like reading your Horoscope... its fairly contradictory. You can pretty much pick and choose what you like to give the answer you want. Thats why people spend so much time on bible study and theology. If it was straight forward then it would be much easier to answer the questions consistently, but much harder to use it as a political tool.

Edwardis who has clearly spent more time reading the bible than me had no problem with the death penalty.. but even I know after having only read it once through.. plus cursory readings post that, that Jesus was into "turning the other cheek" and the big fella was all for "thou shalt not kill"

I think the main thing you are gonna find with this poll is just how inconsistent the view of Jesus is amongst people.

No one really has much idea what He was like no matter how many times they read the bible.. because everytime they read it they aren't doing it in a vacuum. It all comes clouded by your own experience.

The bible may have been inspired by God, but it was written by people.. so its pretty clearly gonna be flawed. There are folk who read it as if its not... but I just don't see how you can read it at all or gain any kind of consistent message from it unless you consider how very flawed it is... in which case.. if its so flawed..what good is it at all??

First, I'm not a Fundy. I'm an Evangelical.

I realise that those two terms mean different things to you, however, they don't to me, so that stands.

Second, that's not what I said. I said that the test didn't accurately guage my stance on the issues and that if it did, I would be more authoritarian. I did not say that my stance differed from Jesus' stance.

Please amend that in your post.
I'll check that, one second.
EDIT: You seem to be right, but it's very ambiguous. In any case, you voted the way you would vote, not the way Jesus would vote, which kinda defeats the purpose of this topic.
I will change my original post though.

EDIT2: Just so I don't hijack my own thread here:
Did anybody find that question on astrology really, REALLY hard?
Cause I know I did.

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -2.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.21

Dunno WTH that means...

You also need to remember that what is Caeser's is not the general populace's which includes the power of the sword - given to the civil government. But was that who was using it? No, the priesthood was.

But that doesn't ignore the fact that you are giving unto Cesar (The Government) what is God's (moral judgement and moral law) and, in reverse, are insulting God by presuming you know his will well enough to legislate it.

God commands the Israelites to excecute, to go to war, and to defend themselves throughout the Old Testament. And Jesus was God, so He cannot disagree.

But he did.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

So... You may kill a man for his crimes when you can find a sinless man. Good luck with that.

And Jesus and the Apostles command the people to give to the poor, not for the government to tax the people, spend most of the money on running itself and give a measely token to the poor.

I think that:

A) You underestimate the bereaucratic nature of all charities.

and that:

B) You are putting words in Christ's mouth. He certainly never condemned welfare.

God commands the Israelites to excecute, to go to war, and to defend themselves throughout the Old Testament. And Jesus was God, so He cannot disagree.
God also told them they weren't allow to shave their beards, wear wool with cotton, or eat pork and shellfish.

Jesus seems to have differing views on all those.

As necessary I flubbed it a bit...what does Jesus know about plant genetic resources? :p

My composite Jesus score:
Economic Left/Right: -4.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.51

The problem with this is that Jesus was always telling people the opposite of what they wanted to hear.

The rich young man? "Sell all you have and give it to the poor." (Mark 10)

To pay taxes to Caesar or not (i.e. decide between imperial Rome or Jewish nationalism)? "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." (Matt 22).

I think you could probably find sayings of Jesus to defy each of the categories. In fact it has been pointed out many times that the Jesus' disciples included both Matthew, a tax collector for the Romans, and Simon, a Jewish nationalist Zealot.

The closest thing to a political statement I can find in John 18:36 ff. "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

So really the point is don't look to Jesus to make your political point.

Economic Left/Right: -9.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.26

didn't do jesus in the political compass as it would be my interpritation of the possible figure jesus.

I'm not taking that political compass test again. I've done it enough. I always usually get the same thing .. center slightly left or center slightly right or center slightly up or down .. I've got em all.. depending on what's going on in my life and my mood at the time. I know you wanted me to take it as Jesus .. don't feel I can.. but if there was a certain spot (which there probably isn't)on that test I'd think it would be center .. a balance.

But that doesn't ignore the fact that you are giving unto Cesar (The Government) what is God's (moral judgement and moral law) and, in reverse, are insulting God by presuming you know his will well enough to legislate it.

Read the Pentateuch, and you will see that God set up exactly what a civil government is to do. He did cover every possible detail, but He did say what to do for a lot of situations. And He gave the power of the sword to the civil government. The civil government is not taking it for itself.

But he did.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

So... You may kill a man for his crimes when you can find a sinless man. Good luck with that.

You ignore the context. It was an issue of whose role it is to excecute and what they're mind set is to be about excecution, not that you must be sinless to excecute.

I think that:

A) You underestimate the bereaucratic nature of all charities.

and that:

B) You are putting words in Christ's mouth. He certainly never condemned welfare.

I think that you need to read the whole of Scripture rather than just accepting what people have to say about what it says.

None of the above.

God also told them they weren't allow to shave their beards, wear wool with cotton, or eat pork and shellfish.

Jesus seems to have differing views on all those.

Please, please, please! Read what you're talking about before you talk about it! Not just you, Demented Hamsters.

Jesus death fulfilled the ceremonial Law. He said nothing about not eating pork, or wearing mixed materials or shaving beards. Paul came later and explained how the ceremonial Law was fulfilled by Jesus death. But, Jesus and all the Apostles also explained how the moral Law is always going to be in effect until the end of the world.

Please, please, please! Read what you're talking about before you talk about it! Not just you, Demented Hamsters.

Jesus death fulfilled the ceremonial Law. He said nothing about not eating pork, or wearing mixed materials or shaving beards. Paul came later and explained how the ceremonial Law was fulfilled by Jesus death. But, Jesus and all the Apostles also explained how the moral Law is always going to be in effect until the end of the world.

And who gets to decide which is which? You?

Ha. Give me a break.

And who gets to decide which is which? You?

Ha. Give me a break.

If you read the Bible, you will see.

I do not claim to be able to decide. I merely claim to know from Scripture.

If you read the Bible, you will see.

I do not claim to be able to decide. I merely claim to know from Scripture.

No fundy I have met has been able to answer this question, and apparently you can't either.

Point to me where Jesus says what is "ceremonial law" and what is "moral law."

If you can't do that, then please, cut the bullshit.

Most of the questions Jesus never thought of. But I tried to answer based on the culture of the time. I ended up in the lower left. Econ -6.35 Social -0.67 Actually Jesus was a social liberal. He didn't say much about government and economics other than we were to obey the government and the rich were to help the poor.

Jesus was a card-carrying commie, no getting around that.

Jesus death fulfilled the ceremonial Law. He said nothing about not eating pork, or wearing mixed materials or shaving beards. Paul came later and explained how the ceremonial Law was fulfilled by Jesus death. But, Jesus and all the Apostles also explained how the moral Law is always going to be in effect until the end of the world.
And how did Paul know that these were merely 'ceremonial' laws? Jesus isn't recorded as saying that, so we just have to rely on Paul deciding that issue later, after Jesus' death.
How are we to know that Paul was right? he wasn't infallable, was he?