Christian Discussion Thread XI: Anicetus’ Revenge

[The Marlborough]

Question for my Christian friends here (sorry if I posted in the wrong place):

What political philosophy would you argue Jesus would be if he was in modern times? And does this influence who you vote for/support in elections, or your own political philsophy?

Christ's programme transcends existence and therefore politics.

This.

[Lost Memories]

Condolences of the Holy Father for the victims of the attack in Nice, France, 29.10.2020

The following is the telegram of condolences for the victims of the attack that took place this morning in the Basilica of Notre-Dame in Nice, France, sent by Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin, on behalf of the Holy Father Francis, to Bishop André Marceau of Nice:


Telegram

His Excellency Bishop André Marceau of Nice

Informed of the savage attack that was perpetrated this morning in a church in Nice, causing the death of several innocent people, His Holiness Pope Francis joins in prayer with the suffering of the families affected, and shares their sorrow. He asks the Lord to bring them comfort and commends the victims to His mercy. As he condemns such violent acts of terror in the strongest possible way, he assures his the Catholic Community of France and all the French people of his closeness, and he calls for unity among them. He entrusts France to the protection of Our Lady, and wholeheartedly imparts his Apostolic Blessing to all those affected by this tragedy.

Cardinal Pietro Parolin
Secretary of State of His Holiness

Elsewhere:
Suspected Islamists kill 18, torch church in east Congo

BENI, Congo (Reuters) - Assailants killed at least 18 people and burned down a church in a village in eastern Congo on Wednesday night, a civil rights group and local committee said, blaming fighters from an Islamist militia group operating in the area.

The army confirmed the attack on Baeti village in North Kivu province, around 20 km (12 miles) west of the city of Oicha, but declined to give a death toll.

The Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), a Ugandan armed group active in eastern Congo since the 1990s, has killed more than 1,000 civilians since the start of 2019, according to U.N. figures, despite repeated military campaigns aimed at destroying it.

“We have a provisional death toll of 18 people killed in an atrocious way,” said Kinos Katuho, president of a local civil rights group.
“It really creates pain in our hearts, a total panic in the village,” said Masisa Mushogoro, head of a development committee in Baeti. “We don’t know if tomorrow the ADF will come back here again.”

What an horrible day.

[Nihon no Tengoku]

Question for my Christian friends here (sorry if I posted in the wrong place):

What political philosophy would you argue Jesus would be if he was in modern times? And does this influence who you vote for/support in elections, or your own political philsophy?

According to the apostle Paul, we must acknowledge our governments as having God-derived authority (Romans 13). And - as far as I am aware - there isn't actually any real stipulation that we oppose tyranny on any ethical or moralistic grounds. While the apostles occasionally defied orders from authorities in preaching the gospel, and various prophets defied their kings, these men did so by God's command. And never do we see any man exalted for acting on some sense of moralistic right or wrong, outside of this paradigm.

To show the extent of this principle: In Jeremiah 41, God literally tells the remnant Israelites to trust in the authority of the vengeful Babylonians, and promises them blessing if they do. They don't, instead fleeing to Egypt, and are horrifically slaughtered instead. Throughout the Old Testament, time after time, God declares that He raises up and crushes nations at His whim, for His plan.

So my overall point is as such: we should not strive to ascribe particular religious values on the person of Christ (though he clearly had many socially revolutionary ideas) nor should we attempt to superimpose our own ethics on Him. While you could theoretically distill everything Christ said or did into a coherent political ideology / shoehorn it in to an existing one, it's quite clear that we are not called to be political activists. Practically speaking, my civic participation goes as far as paying my taxes, obeying my country's laws, and voting for candidates I believe would be most likely to obey God.

[Luminesa]

Questions for the practicing Christians here, as I grew up within a deeply Catholic milieu but no longer am Catholic myself and so am no longer as cognizant of at least Catholic dictates on these below:

1. Is there salvation even for mass murderers?

2. Is it right and proper to pray for the salvation of those mass murderers?

1.) Others have answered this, but I wanted to concur that Christ does in fact present salvation to all people. It is their job to accept it. How can they do so? If they were baptized Catholic, confession to a bishop (murder brings auto-excommunication), and then turning themselves into prison if they have not yet done so. If they ARE in prison, confession, and then a life lived hopefully in peace. While we cannot earn the salvation Christ has given us on the Cross, we can live our lives with this truth written into our hearts.

St. Maria Goretti's murderer is a good example. Alessandro Serenelli, who was 20, attempted to rape St. Maria, who was 12. When she refused his advances, he stabbed her over a dozen times, and she died several hours later. He then received a vision in which St. Maria appeared, holding 14 lilies-one for each stab wound. He then had a radical conversion experience, and after he left prison he joined the Capuchins. He was a gardener and porter for them until he died. Before he died, however, he was ALSO present when St. Maria Goretti was canonized in 1950.

While he is not a mass-murderer, he definitely committed a heinous crime worthy of condemnation. However, Christ still holds open the possibility of salvation to all people.

2.) Absolutely! We must especially pray for souls who have committed wicked murders, for they have handed their souls into the hands of devils and demons. We must pray for their freedom from such evil, as well as for the souls of those they killed, that they may rest forever in Heaven. It is a great act of love, a difficult one. However, Christ extended His hands to the thieves beside Him on the cross. His example is a difficult one for a reason, because it is an example of perfect love.

[Luminesa]

Condolences of the Holy Father for the victims of the attack in Nice, France, 29.10.2020

The following is the telegram of condolences for the victims of the attack that took place this morning in the Basilica of Notre-Dame in Nice, France, sent by Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin, on behalf of the Holy Father Francis, to Bishop André Marceau of Nice:


Telegram

His Excellency Bishop André Marceau of Nice

Informed of the savage attack that was perpetrated this morning in a church in Nice, causing the death of several innocent people, His Holiness Pope Francis joins in prayer with the suffering of the families affected, and shares their sorrow. He asks the Lord to bring them comfort and commends the victims to His mercy. As he condemns such violent acts of terror in the strongest possible way, he assures his the Catholic Community of France and all the French people of his closeness, and he calls for unity among them. He entrusts France to the protection of Our Lady, and wholeheartedly imparts his Apostolic Blessing to all those affected by this tragedy.

Cardinal Pietro Parolin
Secretary of State of His Holiness

Elsewhere:
Suspected Islamists kill 18, torch church in east Congo

BENI, Congo (Reuters) - Assailants killed at least 18 people and burned down a church in a village in eastern Congo on Wednesday night, a civil rights group and local committee said, blaming fighters from an Islamist militia group operating in the area.

The army confirmed the attack on Baeti village in North Kivu province, around 20 km (12 miles) west of the city of Oicha, but declined to give a death toll.

The Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), a Ugandan armed group active in eastern Congo since the 1990s, has killed more than 1,000 civilians since the start of 2019, according to U.N. figures, despite repeated military campaigns aimed at destroying it.

“We have a provisional death toll of 18 people killed in an atrocious way,” said Kinos Katuho, president of a local civil rights group.
“It really creates pain in our hearts, a total panic in the village,” said Masisa Mushogoro, head of a development committee in Baeti. “We don’t know if tomorrow the ADF will come back here again.”

What an horrible day.

Africa is seeing especially an uptick in violence from Islamic extremists, and it's frightening to watch. We must pray for peace in Africa. Is there any way we can support re-building efforts for destroyed churches (and communities-as many people did die, and there has to be SOMETHING we can give).

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Question for my Christian friends here (sorry if I posted in the wrong place):

What political philosophy would you argue Jesus would be if he was in modern times? And does this influence who you vote for/support in elections, or your own political philsophy?

According to the apostle Paul, we must acknowledge our governments as having God-derived authority (Romans 13). And - as far as I am aware - there isn't actually any real stipulation that we oppose tyranny on any ethical or moralistic grounds. While the apostles occasionally defied orders from authorities in preaching the gospel, and various prophets defied their kings, these men did so by God's command. And never do we see any man exalted for acting on some sense of moralistic right or wrong, outside of this paradigm.

To show the extent of this principle: In Jeremiah 41, God literally tells the remnant Israelites to trust in the authority of the vengeful Babylonians, and promises them blessing if they do. They don't, instead fleeing to Egypt, and are horrifically slaughtered instead. Throughout the Old Testament, time after time, God declares that He raises up and crushes nations at His whim, for His plan.

So my overall point is as such: we should not strive to ascribe particular religious values on the person of Christ (though he clearly had many socially revolutionary ideas) nor should we attempt to superimpose our own ethics on Him. While you could theoretically distill everything Christ said or did into a coherent political ideology / shoehorn it in to an existing one, it's quite clear that we are not called to be political activists. Practically speaking, my civic participation goes as far as paying my taxes, obeying my country's laws, and voting for candidates I believe would be most likely to obey God.

I don't know, I'm pretty fond of the quote "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." I think Ben Franklin was onto something with that one.

[Nihon no Tengoku]

According to the apostle Paul, we must acknowledge our governments as having God-derived authority (Romans 13). And - as far as I am aware - there isn't actually any real stipulation that we oppose tyranny on any ethical or moralistic grounds. While the apostles occasionally defied orders from authorities in preaching the gospel, and various prophets defied their kings, these men did so by God's command. And never do we see any man exalted for acting on some sense of moralistic right or wrong, outside of this paradigm.

To show the extent of this principle: In Jeremiah 41, God literally tells the remnant Israelites to trust in the authority of the vengeful Babylonians, and promises them blessing if they do. They don't, instead fleeing to Egypt, and are horrifically slaughtered instead. Throughout the Old Testament, time after time, God declares that He raises up and crushes nations at His whim, for His plan.

So my overall point is as such: we should not strive to ascribe particular religious values on the person of Christ (though he clearly had many socially revolutionary ideas) nor should we attempt to superimpose our own ethics on Him. While you could theoretically distill everything Christ said or did into a coherent political ideology / shoehorn it in to an existing one, it's quite clear that we are not called to be political activists. Practically speaking, my civic participation goes as far as paying my taxes, obeying my country's laws, and voting for candidates I believe would be most likely to obey God.

I don't know, I'm pretty fond of the quote "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." I think Ben Franklin was onto something with that one.

When you show me Ben's scriptural basis for this statement, then we'll go with that. For all of his achievements, it's pretty obvious from his life's work that he was a fairly casual Christian, and at parts of his life was a deist.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

I don't know, I'm pretty fond of the quote "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." I think Ben Franklin was onto something with that one.

When you show me Ben's scriptural basis for this statement, then we'll go with that. For all of his achievements, it's pretty obvious from his life's work that he was a fairly casual Christian, and at parts of his life was a deist.

Tyrants rule through fear and terror, cruelly and unjustly. These traits contradict most if not all of the seven virtues while fitting in quite nicely with the seven sins. Tyrants are, by default, sinners and thus you don't need much knowledge of scripture to argue that opposing tyrants is a fairly Christian thing even if Christ Himself didn't say as much.

[Nihon no Tengoku]

When you show me Ben's scriptural basis for this statement, then we'll go with that. For all of his achievements, it's pretty obvious from his life's work that he was a fairly casual Christian, and at parts of his life was a deist.

Tyrants rule through fear and terror, cruelly and unjustly. These traits contradict most if not all of the seven virtues while fitting in quite nicely with the seven sins. Tyrants are, by default, sinners and thus you don't need much knowledge of scripture to argue that opposing tyrants is a fairly Christian thing even if Christ Himself didn't say as much.

Not when it directly contradicts scripture that commands us to do precisely that.

Also, we are not necessarily commanded to resist sinners. I hope you realize that.

[Old Tyrannia]

According to the apostle Paul, we must acknowledge our governments as having God-derived authority (Romans 13). And - as far as I am aware - there isn't actually any real stipulation that we oppose tyranny on any ethical or moralistic grounds. While the apostles occasionally defied orders from authorities in preaching the gospel, and various prophets defied their kings, these men did so by God's command. And never do we see any man exalted for acting on some sense of moralistic right or wrong, outside of this paradigm.

To show the extent of this principle: In Jeremiah 41, God literally tells the remnant Israelites to trust in the authority of the vengeful Babylonians, and promises them blessing if they do. They don't, instead fleeing to Egypt, and are horrifically slaughtered instead. Throughout the Old Testament, time after time, God declares that He raises up and crushes nations at His whim, for His plan.

So my overall point is as such: we should not strive to ascribe particular religious values on the person of Christ (though he clearly had many socially revolutionary ideas) nor should we attempt to superimpose our own ethics on Him. While you could theoretically distill everything Christ said or did into a coherent political ideology / shoehorn it in to an existing one, it's quite clear that we are not called to be political activists. Practically speaking, my civic participation goes as far as paying my taxes, obeying my country's laws, and voting for candidates I believe would be most likely to obey God.

I don't know, I'm pretty fond of the quote "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." I think Ben Franklin was onto something with that one.

This is why Americans make bad Christians.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Tyrants rule through fear and terror, cruelly and unjustly. These traits contradict most if not all of the seven virtues while fitting in quite nicely with the seven sins. Tyrants are, by default, sinners and thus you don't need much knowledge of scripture to argue that opposing tyrants is a fairly Christian thing even if Christ Himself didn't say as much.

Not when it directly contradicts scripture that commands us to do precisely that.

Also, we are not necessarily commanded to resist sinners. I hope you realize that.

Don't get me wrong, St. Paul seems like a cool guy, but even St. Paul can be wrong.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

I don't know, I'm pretty fond of the quote "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." I think Ben Franklin was onto something with that one.

This is why Americans make bad Christians.

Sounds like something an Englishman would say...

[Nihon no Tengoku]

I don't know, I'm pretty fond of the quote "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." I think Ben Franklin was onto something with that one.

This is why Americans make bad Christians.

I wouldn't go that far, but it certainly serves as a poignant example of people superimposing their own ideals over Christianity.

[Nihon no Tengoku]

Not when it directly contradicts scripture that commands us to do precisely that.

Also, we are not necessarily commanded to resist sinners. I hope you realize that.

Don't get me wrong, St. Paul seems like a cool guy, but even St. Paul can be wrong.

Perhaps, but he did write pretty much every foundational New Testament text outside of Revelations and the gospels. If we disregard Paul's writings as not divinely inspired, then we pretty much don't have much of a faith anymore.

[Albrenia]

Not sure of ol' Benny Frank's personal views, but wasn't Deism pretty common among the Founding Fathers? Could be he was talking of a more general God if that's true.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Don't get me wrong, St. Paul seems like a cool guy, but even St. Paul can be wrong.

Perhaps, but he did write pretty much every foundational New Testament text outside of Revelations and the gospels. If we disregard Paul's writings as not divinely inspired, then we pretty much don't have much of a faith anymore.

I never said dismiss all his writings. But as a human being, Paul is subject to error like all the rest of us. We should listen to what he has to say and consider the weight and importance of his words, absolutely, but we should be willing to analyze and debate what he said and what he meant and be willing to consider that maybe--just maybe--he was wrong. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Somehow I don't see God wanting us to obey people like Hitler, much less Hitler being guided by God.

[Tarsonis]

Perhaps, but he did write pretty much every foundational New Testament text outside of Revelations and the gospels. If we disregard Paul's writings as not divinely inspired, then we pretty much don't have much of a faith anymore.

I never said dismiss all his writings. But as a human being, Paul is subject to error like all the rest of us. We should listen to what he has to say and consider the weight and importance of his words, absolutely, but we should be willing to analyze and debate what he said and what he meant and be willing to consider that maybe--just maybe--he was wrong. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Somehow I don't see God wanting us to obey people like Hitler, much less Hitler being guided by God.

The problem is, by that logic we must also accept the possibility that the gospels are wrong as well. After all they are witness accounts of what Christ said, not written by him. Paul's words were accepted as truth by the Church when it codified the scriptures, thus we have no grounds to say he was wrong. But we do have grounds to debate on whether or not we misunderstand him.

On that front, I'd say the interpretation that St. Paul is teaching that we must be absolutely subservient to the secular powers is in error. St. Paul was writing to a church in Rome that was being persecuted. He also believed Christ was coming back in his life time. His statement is must be understood in that context. It's a similar instruction as to the "talk" that minority parents unfortunately have with their children about dealing with the police. Essentially: "don't give them a reason" coupled with, "we only have to hold out for a little while."

But the world is so vastly different than it was in first century AD. Christianity is no longer oppressed, and in some ways, has become the oppressor. St. Paul's direction here needs new context which later thinkers like Austin and Aquinas give us in the Just war doctrine.

[Nihon no Tengoku]

Perhaps, but he did write pretty much every foundational New Testament text outside of Revelations and the gospels. If we disregard Paul's writings as not divinely inspired, then we pretty much don't have much of a faith anymore.

I never said dismiss all his writings. But as a human being, Paul is subject to error like all the rest of us. We should listen to what he has to say and consider the weight and importance of his words, absolutely, but we should be willing to analyze and debate what he said and what he meant and be willing to consider that maybe--just maybe--he was wrong. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Somehow I don't see God wanting us to obey people like Hitler, much less Hitler being guided by God.

You might be right, if this stipulation to obey the authorities was not also likewise a recurring theme throughout the rest of the Bible as well. Sans God's intervention, civil disobedience is not encouraged throughout the New or Old Testament record.

But no, we cannot accept Paul was explicitly wrong about things. Though I understand your perspective on him being another man, as I said, if you're willing to budge on him being objectively wrong about one aspect of the faith, especially given the subject material at hand, we are effectively free to pick and choose what we like to believe in. That is not consistent with the principle in the Old Testament, nor is it consistent at all with Jesus' ministry. Remember, Christ proclaimed that the apostles spoke with His authority, and the Bible is clear to emphasize when an apostle makes such error.

As far as "Hitler being guided by God," many Christians did oppose Hitler on religious grounds, notably people like Dietrich Bonhoeffer, which is something that is consistent with the Biblical record and imperative. Which is something I did touch upon in my initial post if you would be so kind as to refer back.

I never said dismiss all his writings. But as a human being, Paul is subject to error like all the rest of us. We should listen to what he has to say and consider the weight and importance of his words, absolutely, but we should be willing to analyze and debate what he said and what he meant and be willing to consider that maybe--just maybe--he was wrong. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Somehow I don't see God wanting us to obey people like Hitler, much less Hitler being guided by God.

The problem is, by that logic we must also accept the possibility that the gospels are wrong as well. After all they are witness accounts of what Christ said, not written by him. Paul's words were accepted as truth by the Church when it codified the scriptures, thus we have no grounds to say he was wrong. But we do have grounds to debate on whether or not we misunderstand him.

On that front, I'd say the interpretation that St. Paul is teaching that we must be absolutely subservient to the secular powers is in error. St. Paul was writing to a church in Rome that was being persecuted. He also believed Christ was coming back in his life time. His statement is must be understood in that context. It's a similar instruction as to the "talk" that minority parents unfortunately have with their children about dealing with the police. Essentially: "don't give them a reason" coupled with, "we only have to hold out for a little while."

But the world is so vastly different than it was in first century AD. Christianity is no longer oppressed, and in some ways, has become the oppressor. St. Paul's direction here needs new context which later thinkers like Austin and Aquinas give us in the Just war doctrine.

I wouldn't go as far as to state that we are to utterly acquiesce to the secular authorities, and the Bible has many instances of the apostles themselves opposing worldly authority. Rather, I'd suggest that our relation to politics is to be affable and reasonable citizens who do not provide negative testimony in our daily living. Even if we live under a tyranny, if the tyranny does not force us to abandon our basic Christian truths and principles, I'd argue that - as far as I know - we are called to accept it as is.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

I never said dismiss all his writings. But as a human being, Paul is subject to error like all the rest of us. We should listen to what he has to say and consider the weight and importance of his words, absolutely, but we should be willing to analyze and debate what he said and what he meant and be willing to consider that maybe--just maybe--he was wrong. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Somehow I don't see God wanting us to obey people like Hitler, much less Hitler being guided by God.

The problem is, by that logic we must also accept the possibility that the gospels are wrong as well. After all they are witness accounts of what Christ said, not written by him. Paul's words were accepted as truth by the Church when it codified the scriptures, thus we have no grounds to say he was wrong. But we do have grounds to debate on whether or not we misunderstand him.

On that front, I'd say the interpretation that St. Paul is teaching that we must be absolutely subservient to the secular powers is in error. St. Paul was writing to a church in Rome that was being persecuted. He also believed Christ was coming back in his life time. His statement is must be understood in that context. It's a similar instruction as to the "talk" that minority parents unfortunately have with their children about dealing with the police. Essentially: "don't give them a reason" coupled with, "we only have to hold out for a little while."

But the world is so vastly different than it was in first century AD. Christianity is no longer oppressed, and in some ways, has become the oppressor. St. Paul's direction here needs new context which later thinkers like Austin and Aquinas give us in the Just war doctrine.

That... works. Yeah.

Though, as a slight correction, Christianity is still oppressed in some places. Assyria, Armenia, the Malabar Coast, the PRC, North Korea, etc. though yes it is not totally oppressed as it was way back when pagan Romans and Zoroastrian Persians ruled over Christians and said Christians had no power.

[Luminesa]

According to the apostle Paul, we must acknowledge our governments as having God-derived authority (Romans 13). And - as far as I am aware - there isn't actually any real stipulation that we oppose tyranny on any ethical or moralistic grounds. While the apostles occasionally defied orders from authorities in preaching the gospel, and various prophets defied their kings, these men did so by God's command. And never do we see any man exalted for acting on some sense of moralistic right or wrong, outside of this paradigm.

To show the extent of this principle: In Jeremiah 41, God literally tells the remnant Israelites to trust in the authority of the vengeful Babylonians, and promises them blessing if they do. They don't, instead fleeing to Egypt, and are horrifically slaughtered instead. Throughout the Old Testament, time after time, God declares that He raises up and crushes nations at His whim, for His plan.

So my overall point is as such: we should not strive to ascribe particular religious values on the person of Christ (though he clearly had many socially revolutionary ideas) nor should we attempt to superimpose our own ethics on Him. While you could theoretically distill everything Christ said or did into a coherent political ideology / shoehorn it in to an existing one, it's quite clear that we are not called to be political activists. Practically speaking, my civic participation goes as far as paying my taxes, obeying my country's laws, and voting for candidates I believe would be most likely to obey God.

I don't know, I'm pretty fond of the quote "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." I think Ben Franklin was onto something with that one.

Ben Franklin was excellent in regards to a lot of things in the birth of America. Theology was not one of them.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

I don't know, I'm pretty fond of the quote "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." I think Ben Franklin was onto something with that one.

Ben Franklin was excellent in regards to a lot of things in the birth of America. Theology was not one of them.

Okay. You're free to believe that.

Personally if some jerkoff dictator comes into power in the 'States and starts having peaceful protesters mowed down by jackbooted thugs, I'm game to bring the bastard down. If God has a problem with that, well... I guess I'll have to repent but I won't be happy about it.

[Nihon no Tengoku]

Ben Franklin was excellent in regards to a lot of things in the birth of America. Theology was not one of them.

Okay. You're free to believe that.

Personally if some jerkoff dictator comes into power in the 'States and starts having peaceful protesters mowed down by jackbooted thugs, I'm game to bring the bastard down. If God has a problem with that, well... I guess I'll have to repent but I won't be happy about it.

That's an admirable stance but it's still not a Biblically supported approach, which specifically goes back to the initial question: what would Jesus' ideology be?

For what it's worth, I doubt anybody is going to hell for standing against tyranny. Strictly speaking, we should all be burning in hell-fire for much less.

[Tarsonis]

I don't know, I'm pretty fond of the quote "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." I think Ben Franklin was onto something with that one.

Ben Franklin was excellent in regards to a lot of things in the birth of America. Theology was not one of them.

Franklin was more a deistic humanist, than a Christian. His theology would be somewhat different from ours.

[Nihon no Tengoku]

Ben Franklin was excellent in regards to a lot of things in the birth of America. Theology was not one of them.

Franklin was more a deistic humanist, than a Christian. His theology would be somewhat different from ours.

Somewhat is a bit of an understatement

[Tarsonis]

Okay. You're free to believe that.

Personally if some jerkoff dictator comes into power in the 'States and starts having peaceful protesters mowed down by jackbooted thugs, I'm game to bring the bastard down. If God has a problem with that, well... I guess I'll have to repent but I won't be happy about it.

That's an admirable stance but it's still not a Biblically supported approach, which specifically goes back to the initial question: what would Jesus' ideology be?

For what it's worth, I doubt anybody is going to hell for standing against tyranny. Strictly speaking, we should all be burning in hell-fire for much less.

I wouldn't be so sure there. The Bible presents a very nuanced perspective on the use of force, the right to resist an oppressor, and protecting others.