Nomination for The Door’s ‘Theologian of the Year': Rep. Lauren Boebert
In years past The Wittenburg Door would annually propose a "Theologian of the Year" - someone whose exegetical skills and insightful expositions of the scripture warranted acclaim.
People like Tammy Faye Bakker, Woody Allen, Mr. T, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and even Beavis and Butt-Head made the cut.
I was tempted to nominate Herschel Walker, the former football star running for the U.S. Senate from Georgia, who has struggled with dissociative identity disorder. In a bold moment of insight, Walker realized that Jesus also suffered from having multiple personalities. In an interview he explained: “Do our lord Jesus Christ have a mental illness, because he said he's the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? To me those are three different personalities. We're not so much different than he is!”
That’s a remarkable exegetical leap, posing some hard questions about the Trinity for theologians, not to mention for Georgia voters.
But this year I have just one nominee - U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo).
I wrote recently of her call for imprecatory prayer against President Biden, quoting Psalm 109:8 - "May his days be few and another take his office."
If that was her only contribution to theology, she would be worthy of an interesting footnote, nothing more.
But Boebert continues to push the envelope, to dig into the scriptures and discover rich nuggets of truth that generations of previous scholars have missed.
Recently she found a link between the controversy over gun control, the first recorded murder, and Jesus' crucifixion.
Boebert, who recently told an interviewer that her election to the House was “a sign and a wonder to unbelievers,” spoke at the Charis Christian Center in Colorado Springs. She told the crowd:
"A lot of the little Twitter trolls, they like to say 'Oh, Jesus didn't need an AR-15. How many AR-15s do you think Jesus woulda had?' Well, he didn't have enough to keep his government from killing him."
Dang - I’ve never thought of it that way!
She continued:
"Cancel culture has been here since the very beginning. Cain canceled Abel. And guess what, it wasn't with a big, scary AR-15, it was with a rock. So I don't think it's a firearm issue, I think it's a heart, a sin issue."
Well, it doesn't say exactly how Cain killed Abel, but regardless, this is groundbreaking stuff.
Never one to hesitate in the face of a nonsensical anachronism, Boebert poses this question for us: What if Jesus DID pick up an AR-15 to further His mission?
We have never before contemplated Jesus with His disciples on the road from Galilee, stopping to plink away at target practice (a solid team-building exercise), or mixing in some parables as they shoot skeet. I can imagine some celebratory gunfire on the Mount of Olives. Judas would have probably been able to break down and put back together his AR-15 in record time, blindfolded.
I'm sure a heavily armed, camo-garbed Jesus with an AR-15 and some high-capacity magazines, along with his 12-man security team, would certainly have caused the authorities to pause in their plan to execute Him. But they would have no reason to oppose Him, since He and they would all be following the same value system - "might makes right" - instead of a Gospel of peace, forgiveness and turning the other cheek.
Of course, Jesus didn't carry any weapon, and He even told Peter (who WAS armed) to put away his sword when soldiers came to arrest Him. He didn’t just say, “Hey, don’t screw this up - I’m supposed to be betrayed, arrested and crucified.” Instead, he first spoke to a broader issue: "Those who live by the sword will die by the sword" (Matthew 26:52).
However, Jesus did have one "concealed-carry" weapon that the Bible mentions.
Jesus tells Peter, "Are you not aware that I can call on My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels? " (Matthew 26:53)
And each of those of angels would be carrying a fully loaded AR-15, no doubt.
But then Jesus poses the question that explains why this was a “weapon” He could not use: "How then would the scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen this way?”
By "this way" He meant His going to the cross. That was His mission - to take on Himself the sin of the world.
Maybe Rep. Boebert didn't think all this through completely, but we should thank her for placing that contrast before us. It’s a great litmus test of faith. When we ponder what the Prince of Peace might have done instead of sacrificing himself for our sins, we might also discover that we're secretly adherents of the "might makes right" philosophy, without even realizing it.
Why do I really wish Jesus had skipped the crucifixion and instead fought back and gone out in a blaze of glory?
As Rep. Boebert says, "It's a sin issue.
To connect with The Wittenburg Door …
Make sure to leave a comment and share this article to those that may hate it as much as you did.
Subscribe to The Wittenburg Door’s newsletter.
Join The Wittenburg Door Community on Facebook, a place where everyone can contribute . Oh, like our Facebook Page while you’re at it.
Subscribe to The Wittenburg Door’s Substack.
Donate today to keep this nonsense going and allow us to pay our contributors for some better material. They keep telling us we get what we pay for.
Think you can do better ? Send submissions to webeditor@wittenburgdoor.com only if its funny.
Self defense isn't Might Makes Right. That's a Red Herring, as the first amendment is speech so we don't have to use 2A just to have a conversation, (or hide it inside ten layers of comedic rhetoric like you're having to do here.) Cancel 1A, get 2A. Warmongers know this; hence canceling speech to create war. Funny otherwise tho. Removing guns results in centuries of genocide. Always. Every time. Countless times. Globally. Historically. Contemporarily. Literally always. Always. Always.
I certainly cannot disagree that Boebert is using the word of God deceitfully. But what did Jesus mean when He said:
"Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one" ? Luke 22:36
Of course, a sword has none of those evil things which corrupt people, forcing them to commit bank robberies and mass murders, like a bayonet lug, box magazine, or pistol grip. (Just imagine, a bayonet mount on a sword. Of course a sword does have a grip, but it doesn't resemble a pistol, so that makes it OK ... I hope.)
Not being as spiritually mature as you, during the "Summer of Love", I became concerned about the safety of my household. I decided I didn't want to retreat from my house because some oppressed person decided to go shopping for the things he needed in my home. I purchased a SECOND (gasp, horrors!) Model 1911 .45 calibre pistol, complete with pistol grip and detachable magazine. I also purchased additional magazines and a pair of thumbprint-keyed safes, one for my bedroom and the other for my office.
Fortunately they are locked up tight, and I have yet to feel the compulsion to go out and commit a crime. Nevertheless I have a question I need some help with.
I know I am morally deficient because I am not willing to turn the other cheek, but I wonder what I should do if my neighbor's house is robbed or his family assaulted? If I treat my neighbor as myself, I might come and see what I can do, perhaps even defending him with my guns? (Something very close to this has already happened just a few months ago.) Yet in doing so, I'm denying him the ability to score points with God for turning his other cheek.
I could go up and down my block asking everyone if they are willing to have me come and help them out or not, yet their answer might change when actually confronted by a robber/rapist/whatever, as opposed to just thinking about it.
In the meantime, I'll have to rely on Romans 14:22 and let people walk in whatever light they have. "Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth."