Jesus. Or a representation. Holding a Henry Repeater. Yes. I know guns, somewhat. The Henry rifle was originally chambered for a 44-40 round: big enough to stop a man, but pretty anemic against a bear or a buffalo.
What Would Jesus Do? That very much depends upon what someone thinks Jesus could do. Most would say that, based on lore,he would not carry a Henry Repeater. But, given current circumstances, we don't really know.
现在，当耶稣的想法在上帝的心中孕育时:出生;教义;死亡;复活，等等;我们想知道半人半神的耶稣何时知道了等待他的命运。据说他说自己被遗弃了。所以他一定知道。在某种程度上/在某个时候。听着，我一直对基督教神话感到困惑。矛盾太多了。 Too many things that do not add up. I would expect it to be so for other faiths. Well, you can figure it out. I am not a doctor or even a bachelor---those could have earned me mo' money. I'll still die though.
(afterthought:that half-human, half-divine thing had been around awhile, right?

Many people try to answer "what would Jesus do" regarding situations today, many of them to further an agenda of their own that had nothing to do with His - like whoever decided to depict him with a rifle. I think I know what He would say about all those touchy topics like abortion, gay marriage, and such, and I can back it from his words. But others would debate me. These things existed in Jesus' time as well, and he chose not to focus on them. I have to be content with that.
我认为，更重要的问题不是“耶稣会做什么”，而是“他要我/我们做什么”。
Oh, and Dave, on the half-human, half-divine thing...that indeed comes up in many religions (think Hercules, Gilgamesh, Krishna, etc), but that is not actually what comes up in Christianity. He is not half human, half divine - the Christian belief is that He was (and is, and always will be) fully God (John 1:1-3, Col 1:19-20, etc), and at the same time was fully man (Heb 2:11-14, Php 2:7-8). This is what made it so hard to grasp, and led to so many divisions as the church grew and people tried to bend the truth God gave them to fit their human reason and philosophy (think Arians, Myaphisites vs Diaphysites, and so on). Half-human half-divine would have been easy.

耶稣会怎么做?喜欢暴力和施加惩罚的人会引用愤怒的耶稣把兑换货币的人赶出圣殿，以及他预言圣殿会被罗马人摧毁。而支持爱与非暴力的人会引用“爱邻居如爱自己”和“睁一只眼瞪一只眼”。《新约》和《旧约》中的歧义很容易发挥出来。因此，战争贩子和和平贩子都可以找到借口，太方便了!
耶稣会怎么做?任何你想要的!
Thus one in the same entity can be a god of war and a god of compassion--two in one! Such a deal!
你需要来自不同异教的马尔斯和观音来匹配。
But I tell you I can't but help feel proud that here in the west we have a real religion, while everywhere else
they have only superstition.
Everyone knows that angels are real but bodhisattvas and other pagan creations are merely mythological.
只要看看天使美丽的翅膀就知道是这样的。
和我吗?我崇拜全世界的讽刺之神，最神圣的安布罗斯·比尔斯。

Why didn't Jesus write anything?
=

The question should not be: what would Jesus do.
Rather it must be: what will we do?
And surely the answer without any uncertainty or doubt is simply we must do what is right!
Right?
But what is right you may ask?
你自己知道吗?
Right simply and truly just or equally is: the Oneness of infinite you.
=

Now that is a good question. He certainly could have, literacy was quite common at that time, especially among Jews. There are lots of theories. My personal thought is that he was focusing his time on teaching, knowing that his time was short, and that he was not actually trying to start a new doctrine or religion. His first followers did not write anything (so far as we are aware) for the next fifteen or twenty years, either. The emerging realization that they might actually have to pass things on to another generation is what I think drove them to write - that, and as the church spread letters became necessary. Jesus did his teaching personally, sometimes to crowds but mostly focused on a small group of disciples, so had little need to write.

你没事的，内森。好吧。既然你是一个信徒，而我不是——我们都有权有自己的意见。圣经有没有说耶稣在被钉上十字架前后流血?我以为是的，但也许我读错了翻译?流血似乎暗示着死亡，肉体，肉体的生命。所以。嗯。这对一个肉身化身为上帝精神表现的想法意味着什么?我就是不明白，内特 Nothing lives forever---except, perhaps for DNA---but, forever is a long, long time, isn't it?-No? Please don't give me the "thousand years are but a day with God"---such worn out metaphors are useless now...I am a scientist and a philosopher. Look at how Bertrand Russell defined them, if you wish.

I would also say lots of people don't ever think about it at all... they were told some stuff about Jesus, but they don't really think who he was or if he was son of a God, or great teacher, or whatever.. And I this this is most of people in fact.

我在想，拿着亨利步枪的那个人可能是伟大的印第安酋长之一，也许是Gerinomo或Sitting Bull——也就是说，在手臂和步枪被拍成人们认为的耶稣的样子之前。关于操纵现实?有人，在某个地方，某个时间会注意到你，并提醒你。

When people today say Jesus wasn't talking about Government action when He urged people to help others, I think that is a fallacious idea. Surely Jesus would agree with people who choose to band together and work to help others more effectively and that a democratic government is a legitimate tool for that effort!

The clerics in most Christian sects tend to be evenly opposed on any issue such as same-sex marriage, abortion, euthanasia, or war. Yet, the main teachings of Jesus were very clear: He was more interested in the state of the individual soul than in political affairs. He taught the importance of truth. (Indeed, Muslims call Jesus "the Truth" rather than "the Christ"). He taught the golden rule ("Do unto others ..."). He despised hypocrisy.
So, why the theological confusion? I suspect that too many theologians mistake rationalizing their prejudices for reasoning and thereby arrive at all sorts of absurdities concerning what Jesus would have done.

戴夫，是的，他在被钉死在十字架上之前和期间都流过血，伤疤在被钉死后依然存在。这正是完全人与完全神的意义所在。它不是关于一个人以某种方式成为上帝的“精神表现”，或者上帝暂时给人以人类的幻觉——当然，这两种解释很久以前就出现在人们面前了。这是关于永恒的上帝选择成为我们中的一员。所以当然有肉体，有血，有死亡——这就是化身的全部意义——同时，还有永恒和不朽。这对我们人类的理性来说是没有意义的。那又怎样?人类的理性当然是有限和不完善的，为什么要束缚上帝呢?我们是否应该期待一切都是合理的?'

对不起内特。我不明白。从来没有。If human reason is imperfect, why did God bother with humans in the first
place? Was the all-powerful creator just bored, as some have suggested? And, if in fact, we were created in God's image, why would our reasoning abilities be imperfect? Just wondering, Nate. Just wondering. I'm a scientist and philosopher by inclination---educated on my own, and without the paper trail of greater minds. No worries. Thanks.

Dave: I'm not a philosopher or scientist myself, though I do find both interesting.
Why did God bother to create us? The Bible does not say, so anyone who answers is speculating - I think creativity is in his nature, it brings him joy to create. And "God is love;" perhaps he created us as a way of further sharing this love that is his nature. As for why he made us with imperfect reason, I'm not sure that he did. He made us with the ability to choose to remain with him or turn away from him - our turning away has damaged us. Whether our reason was one of the things damaged, or whether it was limited in the first place, is a debate among Christians as well. Of course, along with creating us, he also created things of much more limited capabilities, all the way down to protozoa, so there is no real reason to expect that he would make us perfect, or that he had to.
What is God's image in us? Another wide-open debate even within Christian circles. My own view - you can see it in the things that set us apart. We have emotion; we are creative; we are relational; we can imagine things not before our eyes; above all we can choose to love, or not to love, and act on that choice regardless of any and all other considerations.
Short and probably inadequate answers to what are in fact very deep questions. Thanks!

回复:耶稣会怎么投票…他是社会主义者吗?福音命令基督的追随者服从“权柄”。这就排除了一切革命、篡夺等等。(你有没有想过，美国革命就是为了税收?耶稣并没有说:“凯撒的东西，只要你还有代表就给凯撒。”民主不过是一种为所有选民提供一部分权威的制度——它使我们所有人都成为权威和潜在的服从者或非服从者。民主是持续的、不流血(除了死刑)的革命。耶稣不会投票。如果你需要更多的证据，看看这句:“我告诉你们，不要抗拒邪恶。”投票等于制定法律。法律是对邪恶的抵抗。 Law is the withholding of the cloak when one comes for the cloak. We were told by Jesus to give unto the asker. This sounds like socialism. But socialism requires the FORCING of people's to provide what the asker asks for. Jesus would give unto the poor their asking as well as the rich (he would not resist the evil). Socialism is the resistance of greed, or the rich, or whatever you like, bottom line: It's resistance. He would not resist socialism, nor would he restrain, constrain or force his hand against those resisting socialism in order to create socialism, because these resistors are the asker. Furthermore, Jesus taught that all forms of angst are essential refutations of the salvation that is granted by merely believing that God provides all that one needs, "worry not on your life or what he shall put on, or eat...for all these things the nations of the world seek after, seek he the Reign of God, and all these shall be added unto you..." (see also Paul's numerous, absolute rebukes of living in the flesh. All politics is after the needs of the flesh. Freedom? Paul also admonished not to run to the excuse of the "cloak of freedom." All politics is revolutionary and resistance oriented. Voting is bloodless, but spiritually speaking it's a denial of salvation.

PS:所有的政治都是焦虑的。政治说:“如果我们不投票支持这项法律或这个人，不好的事情就会发生。”那些认为拯救是在伊甸园中消耗的智慧的逆转的人没有什么是坏的。(他们正在通过他们的意志或幸福和权力的心扭转它，是的，本质上是，通过耶稣的命令，一个和平的事情....是的，按照进化论的教条，这是不明智的，这样邪恶就会被留在地球上，从宇宙中净化自己——我认为这种末世论并不与福音书相矛盾)。这当然很糟糕，但本质上，上帝是全能的，所有的时代都在引导谦卑的人继承这个世界——这是一件好事。我们给予请求者，我们不抗拒，“就他的内心而言”(保罗的这一补充也许是对这样一个事实的点头，即当痛苦或恐惧进入画面时，我们内心的动物会背叛我们更好的努力或意志)。而是投票，在我们舒适的国家安全的情况下，阻止邪恶的、索取的敌人，或从富人那里拿走给穷人，或阻止穷人从那些认为自己应得财产的人那里拿走?这是阻力。

Ps:如果第一篇文章让人困惑，那么可以这样看:任何民主都可以达到任何程度的社会主义。一点福利，就有一点社会主义。一个国家的社会主义程度，从基督教的角度来看，就是这个国家的个人寻求成为权威和掌握物质命运的程度——这种行为需要一些人的抵制，这些人更希望物质上的精英统治。社会主义需要执法，这没问题，但你不能既是基督徒，又参与执法。耶稣经常告诫我们要给予或屈服的人不是穷人，而是一些远远高于他听众物质地位的人。罗马政府(一个为富裕的家园提供福利的机构，它的行政人员分布广泛，目前它急需盟友)以及罗马士兵。
Look, He made it pretty simple: do not resist the evil. Who to a socialist is the evil? Those who resist socialism. Love thy enemy. Who is the enemy of socialism (and don't try and complicate the word love, because, as I've established, the asker is given unto, and nowhere in the Gospel can you find a caviat to that, and you can find several instances of some very bad people being yielded to, some of thisyieldingby thievery man we were told to "follow in the footsteps of...", picking up "our cross" no less. C'mon peeps! The martyrs of the first couple of centuries had it right. But somewhere along the way we left His footsteps, around the time we started following Constantine's...

的确，顺从是基督教生活的一个重要组成部分，而且基督教中有一种强烈的和平主义，我尊重它，尽管我自己并没有遵循它。至于耶稣是否会投票，如果是的话会怎么投票，我认为没有办法回答这个问题。在他在世的时候，这种情况从未出现过。可以看出，在机会面前，他放弃了政治革命的想法。事实上，他确实宣扬对权威的服从，即使他们是伪善的。保罗只是说，统治当局的存在是有原因的(奖赏善，惩罚恶)，并且因为这个原因，人们要顺服。彼得陈述了当两者冲突时(使徒行传4，使徒行传6)，一个人必须服从上帝而不是人类权威的原则。我认为耶稣，彼得和保罗，都非常小心地确保两者在不顺服之前确实发生了冲突。
所以，如果投票实际上是一种不服从的行为，或者仅仅是对邪恶或恐惧的抵抗，我想说你是对的。但这一立场只有在投票的全部意义都在于此的情况下才成立，但我认为情况并非如此。在一个民主国家，投票是一种对法律和个人社会责任的服从行为——这种情况在耶稣在世的时代是不存在的。
Politics was simply not a concern of Jesus or of the apostles - they had much more important things to do. As the church, I think so do we. As an American citizen, politics does concern me - as a Christian, it does not. For the church as a whole, I think it should be a non-issue - certainly trying to line Jesus up on one political side or another is at best silly. That, if anything, is the modern legacy of Constantine. I very much doubt that the Lord will ask us, come that Day, "So, how many supreme court justice nominations did you control?"

内特，谢谢你的回复。我想问:耶稣会监禁某人吗?当你投票时，你就成为了权威——你参与了它的行动。我意识到民主是一种新现象，但很容易看出它是什么——它的天才和吸引力在于它把权力从少数人手中转移到多数人手中。比方说，当你投票给一个有社会主义倾向的法律人士或政治家(多数选民的字面“代表”)时，你就是权力的一部分，这个权力来到一个人的门口，对他说:“你要和我们一起去坐牢，因为你不交税。我们需要你们的税收来支付这个社会项目。”我可以一直读下去。至于你是为了你的宗教和你的国家，保罗不是说过你不能活在肉体里吗(政府是为了肉体——“世上的列国都追求这一切”)耶稣不是说过我们不能侍奉两个主人吗，不是上帝和财神吗(列国是为了财神)。

Nate, take a look at your second to last paragraph. First, voting is not required by law. Second, all voting is for people or laws whose only ability to do anything is predicated on power - the ability to force someone to do something that the electorate's voice has said is GOOD. What's the opponent of good? That's right. Do I sound like a nut? Look, I didn't write the Gospel. You were told to beleive in it as a babe believes. What I'm saying flies in the face of common sense (the party that doesn't vote is the lot that gets shafted, the religion that doesn't defend itself goes extinct...). But a babe does not know commons sense from a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. Do not resist evil. Period. If you try to claim it's more complicated than that, or that we need to study up on the meaning of it your saying God did not write something that could stand the test of time, and that babes best not go to the Gospel unassisted. Can you entertain the possibility that Christianity got corrupted? If so, would it not be appropriate to reverse that corruption? You see, from Jesus onward there were tens of thousands of people who took up their cross and followed, because they
Believed in the pot of gold at the end of earthly death. Two things to leave you with: If you are conservative: how do we know that Islam is not the mechanism of the bless-Ed Armageddeon? And how are youa saved person, going to be ill affected if the nation's work ethic goes to pot because people become dependent on the wellfare state? If you're a Socialist, your righteous imploring and your laws cement ever more and more the truth that it is the material world that matters.
(paraphrasing from some NT book): "the rulers of the world lord it over them and they are called benefactors. But you, you are not to be like this...". And, "all these things do the nations of the world seek after, but he, seek he the Reign of God..."
You're right, democracy didn't exist in Jesus' time. Who brought it to us? Peope who thought we NEEDED it. Saved people need for nothing (...seek he the Reign of God and all these things shall be added unto ye.". And remember, he's not talking about after death, "there are some standing here today who will taste the kingdom come in power before they taste death...". And, the kingdom of God is within you...". Voting says one thing: we lack a thing, we must do this so we don't, and force will be aplied, wether you support that force or not, to make the thing you voted for happen. You gave the force it's direction, and so are needing.

我现在和那本书没有联系了，它的副标题用了我的“handle”。所以我们不要担心版权和其他物质主义的胡言乱语，好吗?亨利步枪在当时是革命性的——一个人(或类似的人)可以“早上装一次子弹，然后一整天都用它射击”。当然，一切都很好。但这支步枪缺少一个木制前臂保护装置。那些想让它“整天”燃烧的人必须在他们的支撑手上戴上一只好的皮手套，否则就会被桶热烧伤。耶稣就不用担心这种偶然性了。据我们所知或据记载，在他那个年代没有亨利步枪。我认为，今天，耶稣会做什么或不会做什么是没有意义的。我们认为他完成了他的使命。 Word is he did have a temper---the Temple Incident appears to attest to that fact. But, he was first a mortal human, long before he forwarded his teachings and annoyed authorities. And when later executed, he died. As did Mohammed; The Buddha; Zoroastre (if in fact he existed at all); Baha'u'llah; and any number of lesser known prophets, seers, shamans, and charlatans.
Look. All of this is speculation and surmise. People are free to believe, and believe in, anything they choose. As some in this discussion have intimated, religion(faith) and philosophy (inquiry), are similar to each other. They are growth industries of the human condition, though their ends are not totally clear. Science is better organized and this difference is the reason why it remains at odds with its siblings. Science insists upon proof, taking nothing on faith. So there it is. Argue you this, or argue you that: (...face piles of trials with smiles...)
The Camel is chewing on betel nuts...It is midnight at the oasis. Tomorow will be much as was today...

耶稣会关人吗?在某种程度上，他将永远地把绵羊和山羊分开，这比仅仅是世俗的监禁要严重得多。他甚至交税了。一个人确实不能同时侍奉上帝和财神——一个人也不能靠圣灵和肉体而活——然而，掌权的人“不是白白地佩剑”，我们要“为君王和所有有权柄的人祈祷”，这样他们才能做必要的事，使我们“在一切敬虔和圣洁中，过平安安静的生活”。我敢说，一个人不可能在无政府状态下过这样的生活。
And if indeed we are to "make disciples of all people" and if indeed "God wants all men to come to a knowledge of the truth," would that not include even people who serve in government? When even soldiers came and asked John the Baptist "what should we do?" he did not tell them to leave the army - and they were in the army of a local tyrant.
Would Jesus vote? I don't know. Would he forbid us from voting? I think not. We are not of this world, but we are in it for a time, and while in it we are to live as blamelessly as we can, in order to "shine like stars in the universe as we hold out the word of truth." I think this means living in obedience to the governing system and authorities, so long as neither demands us to disobey the commands of God upon us. There is no commandment against voting, nor against serving in government. We are to be "salt and light," we cannot do that without being involved in the world around us.

Why has this post attracted so much attention? Is everyone in this great land a closet Christian? Or, is the impetus more basic than Jesus or anyone else? Never has there been a faith that has created more arguability, within and without of itself. Is this the underlying secret of the universe:humankind, in all of its earlier to later manifestations, thrives on the Great Controversy. Is that ATF there is?

Maybe this topic is more important to people than our oh-so-chic public cynicism would have you believe.