So just when it looks like Trump will make some headway after a brutally tough week, once of his surrogates comes out and declares that Trump would win in 2020 against the Virgin Mary and Jesus. Oh brother.
I know, it wasn't Trump who said it. That doesn't matter. Any more than it didn't matter that Obama didn't declare himself the most important person since God. What mattered were the scores and scores of pundits, celebrities and activists who declared him the person who should have died for the sins of humanity.
It matters because it shows a void in the collective heart and soul of our nation, and not one easily hoisted off on one side or the other of the political divide. After all, for everyone who shook their heads and rolled their eyes at the Obama-worship from, among others, Oprah Winfrey and her ilk, it's not so easy to look away when the same is done for Trump. Or anyone for that matter.
Our problem is the heart and soul of our country. The Church and most Christians have abandoned linking that to a rejection of the God revealed through the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We shouldn't be surprised, therefore, when people start filling that Jesus shaped void with other things. Be it Obama, Trump, or the next politically inexperienced superstar that comes their way.
*sigh* This takes me back to when I used to get into fights way back on TheologyWeb and so often the point would come down to some atheist or whatever just not grasping that people (especially NME Jews back in the day) might use hyperbole to make a point. Nope! Everything God said had to be absolute literal and technical!ReplyDelete
I mean, I just read the transcript in the link, so unless the tone in the video is way off course, it just read as a hyperbolic joke of "oh man he'll be so loved he'll be unbeatable" variety - not any intent of a theological nature.
You know... this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r95a3p8Os-w
I dunno, seems like once upon a time we could laugh and joke in politics a bit without it being the end of the world... but then I think back on some of the debates I had during Bush's years and I guess we couldn't then either.
I dunno. I think go back 40 or 50 years, and anyone who made such a statement would be run out of town on the rails. Imagine someone saying Kennedy, or Nixon, or Carter - or even Clinton could run against the Virgin Mary and Jesus and run. At least Lennon was somewhat honest - at the time of his famous interview, I'd wager more kids in England were into what the Beatles were doing than Jesus (at least were more zealous about it). But I think people would laugh at things then as today, but what we wouldn't laugh at has changed.Delete
Didn't Churchill say he would ally with Satan if he would agree to fight the germans?Delete
Possibly. Though consider this alternative: I'd rather side with Roosevelt than Jesus. I can't help but guess there would be some backlash, at least from the more serious Christian corners. But I get the impression he wouldn't have said such a thing. And I think that's the difference.Delete
Hm. I was going to disagree, but as I thought about it, I think you're right - but for the wrong(ish) reasons.ReplyDelete
I mean, just imagine you're on a talk show, and you want to hype up your guy for an election. Maybe it's the Mike Rowe/Ben Sasse ticket of my dreams. What's the hyperbolic sound byte of "my guy will win against anybody" that you can use?
Our wider culture has become so shredded and fragmented, there's really nothing available to you. A "Washington/Lincoln" opponent? (heck half the country probably thinks both are war criminals) "Gandhi/Mother Teresa"? "Frodo/Sam"? "Kirk/Spock"? "Steve Rogers/Tony Stark"? Aren't some of those going to start sounding silly? Remember for the hyperbole to work, you'd have to pick the candidate that would normally get 100% of the vote. Sad to say but we've lost a lot of gradient in our pop culture to the point that I think "Jesus/Mary" may just about be the only option left for the phrase (and I fear even they won't be able to win the election for much longer).