Who Would Jesus Vote For?

I've never been a fan of politics. By its very nature, politics is inclined toward corruption, deception and the accumulation of power. So I am always leery of religious individuals, Christians in particular, who turn presidential elections into a test of one's religiosity.

Until recently, it has generally been assumed that God-fearing Christians vote Republican (Christians counted for more than 20 percent of voters in 2004). Yet to the consternation of those on the Right, that assumption is now being challenged by the emergence of a so-called Christian Left, led by activists such as Jim Wallis, editor of the progressive evangelical journal Sojourners, and by Barack Obama's increasing popularity among younger Christian voters.

As Newsweek recently reported, young evangelicals "say they don't want to be Republican just because that's what's expected. Only 40 percent of evangelicals 18 to 29 identify as Republican, down from 55 percent in 2001, according to the Pew Research Center. This slide correlates to the recent broadening of the evangelical agenda to encompass social-justice and global-poverty issues, as well as to Bush's low popularity ratings."

Thus, determined to maintain their tenuous ties to power, a number of Christian Right leaders have done what they insisted they would never do: they have thrown in their lot with John McCain. Just recently, 90 of the movement's leading activists met in Denver to confer their support on the Republican presidential candidate and urge him to choose former preacher and conservative Mike Huckabee as his running mate. The tenor of the meeting may be best expressed by Phil Burress, president of an Ohio organization affiliated with Focus on the Family: "The only evangelicals that will support Obama are the ones who haven't read their Bible."

Now both sides are heatedly vying for the Christian vote, with news reports of McCain cozying up to Christian leaders and Obama trotting out the Jesus-talk at every opportunity. Yet in their eagerness to sell voters on their Christianity, the politicians have forgotten one critical fact: you cannot truly practice what Jesus taught and be successful in politics.

After all, it was the politicians of his day who killed Jesus.

Jesus was a politician's nightmare. He never ran for political office, but he had quite a platform, and these were his campaign slogans: Love your foes. Help those who hate you. Praise those who curse you. Pray for those who abuse you. If someone punches your cheek, offer the other cheek. If someone steals your coat, offer him your shirt as well. If someone asks you for something, give it to him. Treat others exactly as you would wish to be treated. Love your enemies and treat them well. If you lend money, do it without any expectation of profit. Show favor to ingrates and scoundrels. Do not sit in judgment of your fellow human being. Always forgive.

What politician today could be elected on such a platform? Not even Jesus.

Indeed, the Jesus of the New Testament was about as far from being a politician as one could get. He refused to play power politics. Instead, he challenged the political and religious belief systems of his day. He refused to compromise on his principles, and he preached a message of unity and love, as opposed to the divisiveness that politics relies on.

Jesus was anti-political. He stood against such things as empires, controlling people, state violence and power politics. He saw politics and human governments as inevitably corrupt and set the standard for confronting governmental powers. He taught a new way to govern--one that was spiritually healthy, creative, concerned about the oppressed and the poor and promoted a sense of community. His teachings undermined the establishment and the political status quo, not only of his own time but ours as well.

Jesus advocated love, peace, nonviolence and helping the poor. And he spoke truth to power, uncaring of who he offended, even when all the odds were against it. He constantly inveighed against the rich, the powerful and the exploiters. And his egalitarian treatment of women was so shocking in the patriarchal society of his time that his own male followers could not understand it.

In short, Jesus was a radical.

As author Garry Wills writes in What Jesus Meant, anyone claiming to practice a "Christian politics" other than the kind practiced by Jesus is a usurper. You can't speak truth to power, as Jesus did, and be the power, because as Jesus showed us, how you change the world is not through government or politics but by raising up communities, bringing people to peace, eschewing power, speaking out against injustice, helping those in need, and loving those around you, even your enemies.

This isn't to say that religious people should abstain from voting or vote a particular ticket. But if you're a Christian, you should be doing more than voting for a candidate who promises to be a political savior. As history makes clear, there is no such thing.

Comments

[Zanti]

Great points, but you're catering to the weird modern notion that being religious equals being on the right. Yes, of course there's a religious left. There has been a for a long time.

And there's a really, really big Christian MIDDLE. They're the majority, in fact. The middle usually is.

How long before the modern Christian middle, which has existed in its present form for decades, creates a blip on the journalistic radar?

[KenFL]

This "Jesus was a radical" is not a new theory. There were a lot of interesting books written on this subject around the turn of the century (the last century, 1900). And it was also popular in the '60s.

It is often invoked to excuse all sorts of bad behavior, by saying "Jesus hung out with whores and sinners", implying that he approved of their sins.

But even in the Sermon on the Mount, his most quoted and most radical speech, Jesus told his disciples that they had to follow even the least of the commandments; their righteousness must exceed that of the politicians; anyone who calls his brother a fool is in danger off hell fire, they shouldn't divorce, or look lustily at other women; they shouldn't swear; and they should be perfect.

When Jesus healed the sick, his parting words were often "Go, and sin no more."

Sounds a lot more like tough love than free love.

btw, using the phrase "speak truth to power" displays a lack of vocabulary. Isn't it about time to retire this tired phrase?

[Zanti]

If I can believe what I've read about Jesus, the guy lived twenty centuries ago. I think it's fair to expect that his brand of liberalism, let alone radicalism, isn't going to measure up to modern standards.

And it's just as fair to say that his words and deeds, by the standards of his time, were very, very liberal and radical. That they've held up at all, let alone so beautifully, over the many centuries is pretty darned amazing. Wouldn't you agree?

You know, 20 centuries from now, our words and deeds will be just as harshly judged. And I know mine aren't going to look as good 2,000 years hence. Yours?

Anyway, I'm almost positive that Mr. Whitehead was judging Jesus in the context of his day and carrying that judgment into a modern context. It's the kind of allowance we have to make if we want to be remotely fair to be past (or if we expect people of the future to show us the same courtesy). Same thing we have to do when judging much more recent greats like Jefferson and Lincoln, neither of whom, obviously, pass modern muster.

[KenFL]

Good point.

I've read that the more radical concepts in the Sermon on the Mount (love your enemy, turn the other cheek, etc) were borrowed from various other religions of the time, or that Jesus traveled to India or other Eastern lands and learned them there, but I've never seen any evidence of this, just speculation.

There was an interesting book written in about 1900 by a guru from India, whose main point was that it was totally unimportant whether or not Jesus performed miracles, or had a virgin birth, or was resurrected, because it was these totally new and radical ideas that proved Jesus a virgin soul, the embodiment of a new chance at redemption for mankind.

[SeanGardner]

This has to be one of the top ten posts I've ever read on HUFFPOST since the first day this site was launched.

Obama is going to get the lions share of the younger evangelicals who are more concerned with climate change, Darfur, and economic inequality than the limited, partisan, intolerant nature of the ubiquitous GOD GUNS AND GAYS debate of their elders.

Obama's "JOSHUA GENERATION" initiative will truly excite and inspire this new generation of religious thinkers.

As a secular person, I am not qualified to render a substantive answer to the question, "Who would Jesus vote for?" But I know that Christian or not, Obama makes me proud to be a human being.

[KenFL]

Sean,

I agree wholeheartedly with your last paragraph. Well said.

I do think, however, that you have a limited and caricatured view of evangelicals.

I live deep in the Bible Belt, and all the churchgoers I know have always been concerned with the environment and social justice, and a lot of this concern comes from their Christian upbringing.

I think the youth and women are generally more liberal than the men here, but to say that the 3 G's are of ubiquitous concern to most Christians is just not true, from my experience.

[1freedom]

I won't say I disagree with you here because this has been your experience based on what you've seen. But my experience, growing up in Texas has been on par with the 3Gs. I watched my whole Black family vote for Bush, and against their interests twice, solely based on the wedge issues of gay marriage and things of that nature. I see how wasteful Texans are where everyone has a car, most have SUVs, few recycle and buses have just become popular. We probably have one of the highest numbers of megachurches and megaministries, yet you dont see much change in the community. Just as an anecdotal example: The large megachurch with boasts 7500 members next door to the 150 member church where I was working would routinely send needy people to our small food pantry and clothes closet. I have more examples. This has been my experience having worked in church ministry all of my life. I think polls that include the US in entirety will seem to show a trend toward centrism. But the South is a different monster, not to mention the State of Texas. It's a stereotype, I know. But having lived here all my life, I have to say, that ring of truth that all stereotypes must have, is definitely prominent here. Being a Christian myself (Universalist), I don't want to demonize my comrades but I cant help seeing what I see.

[CharlieMarlowe]

Ralph Nader?

[JBoy]

Absolutely the best column I've read at HuffPost!

"He never ran for political office, but he had quite a platform, and these were his campaign slogans: Love your foes. Help those who hate you. Praise those who curse you. Pray for those who abuse you. If someone punches your cheek, offer the other cheek. If someone steals your coat, offer him your shirt as well. If someone asks you for something, give it to him. Treat others exactly as you would wish to be treated. Love your enemies and treat them well. If you lend money, do it without any expectation of profit. Show favor to ingrates and scoundrels. Do not sit in judgment of your fellow human being. Always forgive."...I would vote for this man!

[research]

Great post!

"The only evangelicals that will support Obama are the ones who haven't read their Bible."

The only evangelicals that will support McCain

are the ones who don't understand the

Jesus of the Gospels.

[JBoy]

I didn't realize BHO is a Creationist.

[Zanti]

I'll bet he doesn't, either.

Um, what are you referring to?

[research]

yes please, do tell.

[MzTexas]

Great post! Thanks.

[RIPHRC]

I was walking across a bridge one day and I saw a man standing on a ledge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said, "Stop! Don't do it!"

"Why shouldn't I?" he said.

"Well, there's so much to live for." "Like what?" "Well, are you religious?" He said yes. I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?" "Christian." "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"

"Protestant." "Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"

"Baptist." "Wow, me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"

"Reformed Baptist Church of God." "Me too. Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1789 or Reformed Baptist Church of God, 1915?"

He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915."

I said, "Die, heretic scum!!" And pushed him off the bridge.

[bhenry112]

That was great, RIPHRC!

[mcole]

LOL. nicely done!!

[synthfiend]

Whew! I thought I was the only one who saw Jesus this way.

[marlovian]

The upstate returns are in, and the Son of God, as polls predicted, voted for Himself.