Is it possible to support the Conservative party while at the same time be a Christian?

No true Christian should or could vote Tory in their current guise. They are absolutely despicable. They are actively forcing more and more children in poverty. They have used propaganda relentlessly to demonise the poor. I can not fathom how anyone who follows gods teachings could actively support this bunch of bully's.

Religion, much like much of the bunfighting on MN, involves people quoting snippets of something bigger (often out of context) in order to either criticise or make a point. It seems MN is the perfect place to debate religion!

I believe far more natural Tories consider themselves to be Christian, due to their conservatism with a small c. Being a Christian and following the teachings of Christ are two separate things (often opposing). So yes of course it's possible to be Tory and a Christian. Would Jesus have been a Tory? I somehow doubt it.

Well he wasn't very successful if that was his aim. Very few people give up all their material wealth to become fishers of men. I don't think that is what it is about.

I think that is exactly what he expected.That's why he told his apostles to go out and be fishers of men, so that they could spread the good word and convert others to the same cause.

Jesus didn't expect the whole world to turn into his apostles and to give up everything on this earth.

Jesus explicitly says that the rich man should sell his stuff in order to give to the poor in every Gospel this story is written in (Matthew 19:16-30, Mark 10:17-30 and Luke 18:18-30).

There was some prototype communism too:

All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need… No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had… there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need. (Acts 2:44-45; 4:32, 34-35)

People trying to make out it was just the one rich man Jesus was talking too, or that he didn't really mean it are just trying to have their cake and eat it and not share it as Jesus wanted.

'Definitely supposed to give it all away to poor folk'

I doubt that because Jesus only had 12 apostles who all had human failings like Peter etc, and he never expected stonemason and tax collectors and farmers and lawyers and doctors to give away all the money they earned.

Lots of Jesus's teachings were in parables because the understanding of them is then a process that the listener has to undertake and be subsequently changed by if understood rather than a prescriptive law which would not have any deep effect or resonance or cause any development or change.

In the Parable of the Talents, the man who buried his money and did nothing with it to produce any beneficial good or growth or profit wasted what he was lucky enough to receive and that is doing wrong.

I think that bit about rendering unto Caesar was added in for political reasons.

The parable of the talents was just that: a parable, it didn't literally mean don't waste money.

Definitely supposed to give it all away to poor folk.

Right, maybe LibDem or even Labour. There are lots of different factors and it depends which ones she thinks take priority.

Thats not pro life Thats pro forced birth.

I'm not sure, but it's never Conservative. I think she said their policies were the most pro-life as she calls it but she didn't like the way they were shafting the poor.

Anastasie, who does your mum usually vote for apart from this time when she didn't vote?

'And give away all your possessions and money to the poor. No getting round that one.'

Yes, but there is a lot of debate about that and what he meant. Don't forget he told people to pay their taxes to Caesar. He also wanted people not to waste money as in the parable of the Talents. The consensus seems to be that he was telling the rich man that unless he subordinated the love for money for the love of God, then he would not be guaranteed eternal life. There is no problem with money as long as you do good and do not covet it above the good.

My mother is a devout Catholic. She didn't vote this time, because she is very anti abortion and couldn't work out which of the parties was least supportive of the right to choose, etc etc.

Taking it a bit far IMO.

But that is what Jesus said not to do. Hold assemblies (ecclesia), don't build structures. Of course it was a lot warmer round his way.

And give away all your possessions and money to the poor. No getting round that one.

the truth

'"don't build churches" as physical structures'

But that is where religious people meet to hold their services, just as Muslims meet in mosques and Jews meet in synagogues.

"don't build churches" as physical structures

claig ... three Labour ministers (one the then Chancellor) stating that they need to make substantial cuts; how many more would you have needed to believe it, sweet cheeks?

the truth

Blairs/Bushes war on Iraq with a made up Iraqi WMD dossier was their 'Crusade', silly, and anything goes in the name of Christ when that shit goes down. Hmmm.

Sorry if the truth is inconvenient
yeah ok

Still, supporting Blairs' murders and profiteering is fundamentally Christian, eh, OP you tit

S to be one of the most ridiculous, pathetic OP's I've read in a long time. Still, as no other party ever has done anything that could be perceived as wrong, I'm sure the OP is sitting feeling like they've been very clever

Goodforsolong .... may I suggest that you re read both the title and the text supposing that if a political party cuts welfare as the Conservatives have, they cannot be Christian.

Blacksunday then went on about the housing situation under the Conservatives, conveniently forgetting about Labour's legacy.

So the CORRECT or INFORMED answer to the OP question was 'yes, as any party finally looking to tackle the 2010 government overspend, would have had to cut back a bill that substantially rose during a boom time when in the past, those bills tend to fall'.

As the only alternative to a Conservative led administration have confirmed, although usually not at election times or when they want to get on some moral high horse.

Sorry if the truth is inconvenient.

I am not a Christian, but even I know that one of the major teachings of Christianity is to 'love thy neighbour'. How different churches interpret it is up to them - yes, some interpret it as 'love thy neighbour unless they're gay, Muslim or Jewish', but there are plenty of churches that do not discriminate, are welcoming to all and don't make a habit of telling gay people that they will burn in hellfire.

I don't think it's possible to be a member of the latter kind of church - the more accepting Christianity that really does preach acceptance and tolerance - and a Conservative. Last I checked, nowhere in the Bible does it say "Love thy neighbour unless they're disabled".