Monday, October 17, 2005

Would Jesus Blog?

Blogger friend Lores, over at her place, poses an interesting question. Would Jesus blog?

I have to admit, my first impression of that question was the thought, "Of course not", but that was before I gave it the benefit of consideration. The more I think about that question, the more compelling it becomes.

First of all, to me, I would think it to be a very popular blog, with a large readership, not just among the "amen chorus", but also among those that strenuously disagree. And then there would be the occasional troll, and of course, spammers.

I wonder if He would use word verification?

Do you think that He would respond directly to those who argue with Him in His comments, or ignore them, and let other commentators argue for Him? I kind of think that He would blow away any arguments in His first attempt. Then again, would His post alone be so thoroughly convincing that He wouldn't get any argument to begin with?

I first thought Jesus wouldn't garner any objections to His comments at all because they are so completely logical and unassailable. My Bible (I say "my Bible" because it would appear that some of my commentators often appear to refer to a different Bible than the one I read, and I don't mean different translation) tells me that Jesus "spoke as one having authority". But then I remembered that he had more than His fair share of enemies during His 3 year ministry on Earth. Now I believe He would not only have plenty of objections, but there would no doubt be a liberal use of the flag button by those who would seek to silence Him in their anger over His precepts. And I mean "liberal" with a small "l".

Then, there is the question of what He would choose as the subject for His posts. Would He confine His comments to His message of love and salvation? Would he deal with the hypocrisy of religion? Politics? Would He be humorous, judgmental?

ER has questioned whether Jesus is a Liberal. Would He blog from a Liberal viewpoint or Conservative?

Then there's this to consider:

If God had waited until the world attained this level of technology to send His Son to "save the world", we would, as a global community, certainly be in a completely different situation. There would be no Christian Religion as we know it. How much more depraved and immoral would our society be if God had waited this long to send Jesus to save us from ourselves? I started to say there would be no one for the Muslim extremist to hate and carry out murderous attacks upon, but then I remembered. They hate Jews worse than they hate Christians.

I won't delve any deeper into the religious implications other than to say, that the world would definitely be in a much more precarious position, apocolyptically, than it is now, if that is even possible.

So, I am guessing that there are probably a thousand and one other questions and scenarios that could be brought up and discussed at length on this concept, but I will leave it as it lies for now.

I am certain that Pastor Tim has an interesting take on this question. I'd be interested in reading what other's have to say as well. Not just him.


The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

I think Jesus would blog about South Park, analyzing each episode for spiritual insight.

The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

And I would most definitely be blogrolled as one of his favorites.

Erudite Redneck said...

Jesus availed himself of the technology of the day. Seems like I've read commentary that says he used the natural acoutics of geography to allow his voice to carry to enable huge crowds to hear him -- valleys, situations where water would help carry sound, etc. Other itinerant orators of the day did too, probably.

I'd say Jesus would blog. See the Sermon on the Mount for suggestions as to tone and content.


Toad734 said...

Of course he would blog he had a message but he would just get attacked as a socialist and a nut by right wing conservative.

Etchen said...

Do you think the spammers would be instantly smited?

Francis Lynn said...

And what makes you think, Mark, that He is NOT blogging?

tugboatcapn said...

Well, there seems to be no shortage of Bloggers who are willing to tell us what He would say if He WAS blogging...

I agree with Toad, except for this difference.

I don't think that Jesus' Blog would be political, so then He would be attacked by the Left for trying to ram his religious beliefs down everybody's throat.

Mark said...

Maybe instead of blogging, he would have his own television or radio talk show. He would get more exposure that way.

Lores Rizkalla said...

Mark: thanks for the mention and the link. Honestly, the comment you made on my site made me wonder whether you'd be writing about it here. I'm honored :)

I think Jesus would talk about it all. But, that His tone and His perspective would be quite different from most of ours on the right and the left.

wordsmith: you raise a good question...who would He blogroll. I say every blog out there, good, bad and ugly. OR, none. How about this question: would He allow for comments? Would He respond to comments?

Fitch said...

I think it would be ENTIRELY political. That is, after all what his mission was. To attack the status quo of the day. Aside from that I think your assertion that the world would have sucked if not for christianity demonstrates the arrogance of religions that claim to be "correct."

Karens Korner said...

Jesus walked what he talked. In otherwords he was proactive.why wouldn't he blog, and that the Holy Spirit would draw people to his blog. after all Jesus is the WORD JOHN !:1

Erudite Redneck said...

Jesus attacked the status quo of the religion of his day. He was apolitical otherwise, although one can infer -- as I do -- that he was a "liberal" using today's terms.

And any religion that does NOT claim to be "correct," as opposed to all others, is pretty much lame, isn't it? I mean, that reduces all religions to a "search for truth," which is more of a philosophy, rather than a declaration of truth, which any religion worth salt has to be to be a religion.

I mean, we're not talking about the Lions Club versus the Elks Lodge here. We're are, after all, talking about The Truth.

I have no respect for any so-called religion that doesn't declare itself forthrightly. Wimps.

Whatever the religion, claims to exclusivity are arrogant only to those who don't believe anything. To those who do believe, others' claims reflect misguidedness. To those who do believe the dame as the claimants, they reflect revelation.

As to the world sucking without Christianity, that might be a stretch. Christians claim that Jesus came to save the world and to offer peace to those who believe -- not to provide spiritual opiates for, or conduct spiritual labotomies on, his followers. It does suck for those who resist the Gospel.

Arrogance is insisting that there IS no truth worth claiming or declaring or defending.


Sheila said...

I think Jesus is Bloging now through everyone that makes an effort to use the internet to touch someone.

However Guys I don't think Jesus Christ would spend a lot of time on the Internet.

If the Lord was here, walking among us, he wouldn't need to blog. We wouldn't want to reach or touch him through Blogging either. I for one, would want to listen to his voice and watch him. Have a connection that Blogging or even instant messaging could never have.

By the way. Very creative Mark and a great conversation. Entertaining tonight.

Fitch said...

Arrogance is claiming that I will go to hell because I don't follow Hercules as my savior. Regardless of how I live my life, and a child rapist can be saved if he believes. Sorry, I don't buy that convoluted logic.

Karens Korner said...

I aree with you when you say"Arrogance is insisting that there IS no truth worth claiming or declaring or defending."

I believe the "church" is "the body of Christ" not a building.

As to anyone going to hell, only God know our hearts, and each person has freedom of choice, whether to believe or not to believe, in whomever you choose.

Erudite Redneck said...

Who said anything about logic? Logic worshippers have an extreeeeemely hard time with matters of faith. Filch, it's not arrogance just because somebody believes something and you don't. Sorry. Misguided from where you sit? Maybe. Just plain wrong? OK. But not arrogant, not just to believe differently, or at all. Now, I will grant you that there are loads of arrogance in Christianity, to many other Christians' chagrin. But it's not based on supposedly knowledge. It's based on .... ignorance!


Erudite Redneck said...

Fitch, speaking of logic, I smell a fallacy in your own. Can't tell whether that last bit was reductio ad absurdum or an appeal to ridicule though.


Toad734 said...

Was Jesus even literate? We know he didn't write any of the Gospels.


I assume by political you mean healing the sick, feeding and giving to the poor, helping the homeless etc.

Lone Ranger said...

Jesus would blog, but He'd have comments turned off. After all, His goal is to keep people Out of Hell.

Laura Grow said...

Hi, Mark.

I just wanted to let you know that I quoted you in a blog entry I wrote about the "Flag" feature. I've linked to it, so check it out and feel free to leave a comment.