Poll: If Jesus ran for president, would you vote for him?

[rutger5000]

First off neither the old or new testament ever said homosexuality is a sin. That's the work of later nutjobs that starting writting letters to different nutjobs. Jesus is known as a very progressive person. Personally I'm convinced he would support gay marriage rights. It's really a thing American homosexuals should know. It doesn't matter if they care for the bible themselves. They should known that people who hold the bible against homosexuals saying it's God's words are wrong, and use that against those people.
Would I vote for him? Depends is Ghandi running as well? In that case I'm going for Ghandi, otherwise Jesus sounds like a good deal.

Leviticus 18:22

You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

Here it quite clearly says that homosexuality is an abomination, this is in the old laws.

Matthew 5:17-20

17 ?Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Here Jesus, during the sermon on the mount, clearly states that the Law still applies.

Revelation 21:8

8 But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.?

Here it says that the abominable (anyone who commits a abominable act) will burn in hell forever.

You are full of crap.

Leviticus I can't argue with. I must fully admit I'm wrong there. The rest depends on what kind of bible you read.
Mattheus isn't in mine (it's one of the Catholic gospels if I'm not mistaken). Apart from that I really don't see that as speaking against homosexuality. He speaks about rightousness, I don't see how that is related to homosexuality. Yes He claims he supports the old laws, but more often then not breaks them.
As for revelations I never considered that as part of the bible and never will. I spoke of nutjobs writing letters to other nutjobs. For me revelation is part of that.
Still I can't argue with Leviticus and I must admit you know the bible a lot better then I do.

 

[mr_rubino]

14 pages in, I doubt I'll be the first to say "He'd never win because the flyover vote would find his beliefs weak-kneed and unAmerican."

EDIT: Besides, weren't you paying attention to the last election? Messiahs are bad things now. =P

 

[rutger5000]

I'll serve up a quote from earlier in the thread.

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic -- on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg -- or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ? Mere Christianity, pages 40-41.

C.S. Lewis

So no I would not vote for Jesus

Think about this.

What if tomorrow we found out that Obama had killed a Man and his Wife because they lied to him. Do you think he would be able to remain in the presidency because "He's a really cool guy"

NO! HE WOULD BE THROW IN FUCKING PRISON!

As for the words of C.S. Lewis, personally I find that bullshit of the highest class. It's utterly worthless to me. Why not use Jesus as a moral teacher? In fact try to get as much of those as you can handle? That's how I feel about that. I don't know C.S. Lewis so I putting his initials under something that's nonsense to me really won't impress me.
Don't you respect Buddha as an incredible wise and moral man? I don't know what you know about him, but he also claimed to do some stuff that isn't really agreeable with common sense.
As for the part of Jesus killing a man and his wife. I don't know if you know that part of the bible. But it's implied that God killed the two not Jesus, and in case you didn't read that from the old testament. God is kind of an asshole. But yeah Jesus didn't washed his hands from that one, so he was in the wrong there.

 

[Eijarel]

Only if Jesus appoints, Vishnu,Buddha ,Abraham and Moses, why not Muhammed too as part of the permanent cabinet
for kicks and giggles Haruhi as first lady (sorry mary Magdalene u be queen somewhere else)
and he ultimately orders a giant FSN (flying spaghetti monster) mecca build right in capitol city.

 

[lacktheknack]

I'll serve up a quote from earlier in the thread.

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic -- on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg -- or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ? Mere Christianity, pages 40-41.

C.S. Lewis

So no I would not vote for Jesus

Think about this.

What if tomorrow we found out that Obama had killed a Man and his Wife because they lied to him. Do you think he would be able to remain in the presidency because "He's a really cool guy"

NO! HE WOULD BE THROW IN FUCKING PRISON!

As for the words of C.S. Lewis, personally I find that bullshit of the highest class. It's utterly worthless to me. Why not use Jesus as a moral teacher? In fact try to get as much of those as you can handle? That's how I feel about that. I don't know C.S. Lewis so I putting his initials under something that's nonsense to me really won't impress me.
Don't you respect Buddha as an incredible wise and moral man? I don't know what you know about him, but he also claimed to do some stuff that isn't really agreeable with common sense.
As for the part of Jesus killing a man and his wife. I don't know if you know that part of the bible. But it's implied that God killed the two not Jesus, and in case you didn't read that from the old testament. God is kind of an asshole. But yeah Jesus didn't washed his hands from that one, so he was in the wrong there.

What the heck am I reading?

None of what you just said makes sense.

 

[willsham45]

it would still depend on what he had on the table.

 

[mega48man]

yes and no.

yes, he's christ, the son of god, he could make a miracle and solve our economy and national debt which would save my generation a lot of hassle.

and no because his last campaign didn't go over so well. he only had 13 disciples (he should of aimed for the whole town if he wanted support). yes, he made public appearances and talked to the people like anyone running for office should, but he was crusified over a convict, obviously a lot of people didn't like his policies.

 

[Mr Binary]

Well, I'm not religous so I doubt I would vote for someone claiming to be the son of god or one that would place religous standards on the people.

 

[kuyo]

first off, he's not a citizen of America (The Mormons are just wrong) so he can't be president.
secondly, he'd probably run as an independent, so he'd probably just split the vote.

 

[Kingsman]

I think he would hate his position and want to just run the churches, but I mean come ON, he's the only human who has ever existed without sin or flaws. If you thought Obama had a clean enough record to be in office, you have NO grounds to deny him.

And his policies would likely NOT be set in stone from what they were in Roman times 2,000 years ago. He fought the conservative viewpoint then, he'd fight it again now if he had to.

 

[ryai458]

Yes.

By the way, Jesus never said gays are bad. Ever. Once. And he often implied that he has an opposite view on them.

Thats why he basically nuked sodom and gorohomah right?

 

[PrototypeC]

I'd have to hear his foreign policy reforms and stance on green energy before he got a second glance. +points for taxing big business.

OK, OK... honestly? If the man himself actually followed the intent of the Bible, not only would he be working from the centre of the Golden Rule and making "love thine enemy" a national policy, but actual organized Christianity would be scared stiff when they realized they hadn't been following the most important teachings about tolerance and understanding over hate... for the last 2000 years.

Jesus wasn't a bitter, pushy, hateful bastard who followed the letter and not the intent of the Law... he was the rebel who tore down the ideas that Jewish leaders had at the time and preached an end to the constant war of tribes and petty idealogical differences.

 

[Csae]

Jesus was a commie, i hope you know.

Equality for all.

Companies would definitely be in a tough spot, I wouldn't vote for him, the world isn't ready for equality.

 

[Baldry]

Can't...Live in England...But if I was American I would most definetly consider it!

 

[standokan]

He's the son of god, what could go wrong?

 

[BanthaFodder]

I said yes because, well, it's JESUS. this isn't just "some religious politician", it's JESUS. I wouldn't agree with the policies per say (no gay marriage, etc.), but the fact that it is literally the son of God kinda overrides that in my opinion. it's kinda hard to explain, but seriously, it's JESUS.

to help me explain, here's a similar kind of scenario:
say you have to put together a baseball team. there's only two people left and you need to choose one; either random kid #1, or Spiderman. now which would you choose? on one hand, theres this random kid. on the other is frigging honest to god Spiderman. you need a team of good athletes, so you can choose a random kid or a man that can bench over a ton and leap over 15 feet straight in the air. you might not like his wise cracks or the fact that he's a Marvel character (or for what he did in One More Day), but you need a good athlete and you have the option to choose THE Spiderman. it's kinda like that (sorta)

 

[JoeThree]

A nice guy who just wants everyone to not be dicks to eachother? Sure, I'd vote for that... it's just a shame he's not native-born and thus ineligible. My only gripe would be his financial policy, as I'm opposed to Socialism, but when there's a dude who can cure by laying on hands while acting as a Star Trek replicator, I suppose there's less need for cash.

By the way, he wasn't anti-gay, yes he disapproved of any sexual act performed to not produce children, but the gays were nothing special in his eyes, and the dude frequently hung out with a hooker. He clearly was extremely liberal for his time (and arguably this time as well).

Quick Edit after reading some posts: The blatant ignorance and anti-Christain sentiment from you "enlightened" Asperger's patients is astounding. Seperation of Church and State doesn't mean a Christain can't run for office, nor does it mean that a Christain icon can't, and thinking so is actually a belief in the opposite of the intended purpose of the First.

 

[EchetusXe]

It would depend on his policies, who he was running against etc