Ahmadinejad talking seems to remember the Christ riding a Donkey, not Christ riding a White Stallion with a sword coming out of his mouth...

Yes, he will oppose the evil, but we are all evil. He is not coming back with an agenda of peace, but of War. See Rev 19:11-21

Did Christ ever speak to bullying, ill-tempered and expansionist powers? No. Who was an expansionist power? The Roman Military was an expansionist, bullying power. The germanic tribes were terrorists constantly attacking Roman territories. There were the remnants of a civil war going on between Italians and Romans, Spain had just been occupied. Rome had a new professional soldier class engaged in full-time killing. And what did Jesus say to the centurion with many men under him? "I admire your faith."

And where are Jesus' prophetic denunciations of tyrannical policies of prevailing global economic and political systems? Jesus came to His own and His own received Him not. He spoke to a nation that was intended to be Kings and priests on earth. A nation that would set an example with their cities of refuge, gleaning laws, year of Jubilee and rigid moral codes and a nation called to evangelize the world. Their poverty of spirit fostered a selfishness and economic poverty among the Jews. Jesus called for a spiritual rebirth.

Any attempts to re-make Jesus into a political firebrand railing against injustice and world wide oppression are simply idolatrous. Whether by the president of Iran or misguided left-wing (and right-wing) American Christians.

Good question! Were kings in the OT dictators in the sense of not being elected by the popular vote? I guess so. But that didn't mean they were tyrants and criminals such as the butcher of Teheran, Stalin and other such figures. So may be we need to distinguish between a benevolent dictator and fascistic type muderer tyrant. In that case, I'd say NO!

Great blog!

It's probably best to note that Ahmadinejad is not actually a dictator. Iran does have a dictatorial "supreme leader" in the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, but Ahmadinejad holds a different sort of office; he is a populist who won about 60 percent of the vote in a contested election. I realize that this doesn't affect the answer to your question, but the idea that Ahmadinejad is a dictator is a potentially very important misconception.

Can God speak through a dictator? Of course he can; he's GOD - he can do ANYTHING. Don't confuse Hollywood with God. Just because Morgan Freeman told Jim Carrey that he couldn't mess with free will (Bruce Almighty) doesn't mean that God has those limitations.

The other side of that coin is to ask whether or not the assertions are true. Did Jesus get into name calling? Did he speak in favor of overthrowing Rome? Did he lead large public gathering to impeach the Pharisees? While it's true these people did bad things I don't remember reading about Jesus hoisting a banner. The message of Jesus is one of personal salvation not of creating a paradise on Earth.

Whats a projection of what? The Spirit is not scripted.

Some of the above comments strike me as very strange. From some of them, one would get the impression that Jesus was an entirely apolitical teacher who did nothing to challenge the authority of Rome. This is a poor reading of the New Testament.

Did Jesus get into name calling? Did he speak in favor of overthrowing Rome? Did he lead large public gathering to impeach the Pharisees?.

Yes, he did. But not in the way people expected; he didn't try to start a war with Rome. (He did hint in the Olivet Discourse that one was coming, which of course is exactly what happened in AD 70.) Instead, he called on the people of Judea to repent and to stop acknowledging the authority of their corrupt local leaders. He marched on Jerusalem like a king -- a king coming in peace -- and claimed the Temple as his father's house by physically assaulting the moneychangers there. He called the religious leaders of Judea "hypocrites" and "unwashed tombs" in public speeches. When charged with political sedition, he quietly acknowledged to the Roman governor that he considered himself the rightful king of the Jews; taken before the Roman puppet king, Herod, he refused to answer any questions at all.

In fact, when attacking the scribes and Pharisees, Jesus specifically focused on the way they oppressed the people. For example:

"And in the hearing of all the people he said to his disciples, 'Beware of the scribes, who like to walk around in long robes, and love greetings in the marketplaces and the best seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at feasts, who devour widows’ houses and for a pretense make long prayers. They will receive the greater condemnation.'" (Luke 20:45-47, emphasis added)

That suggests that this earlier comment is also incorrect:

Any attempts to re-make Jesus into a political firebrand railing against injustice and world wide oppression are simply idolatrous.

Injustice was a theme Jesus majored on; it is denying this that dishonors him. "World wide oppression" was not a concept that would have been meaningful to his hearers, most of whom had never traveled more than a few miles from home -- but Jesus had plenty of local oppression to talk about. Had his hearers in the first century been able to do something about injustice around the world, as twenty-first-century Americans are, I suspect he might have had rather more to say about it.

Interesting question, but misguided since you are calling an elected President a dictator, he was elected in 2005, term is up for re-election (like the presidential terms here in the US) in 2009. Now, if he goes and modifies the electoral law to keep being "elected" after his second term then you will be correct in calling him a dictator.
It is interesting to see many of us christians call against him as if he had attacked us in any way, all he has done is question the current US President's way of thinking and way of seeking to have his will be done.
Are we at a point that we think the US President is chosen by God? And if so, have we become the new England or France of old?

I wouldn't say God speaks through dictators, but the old testament is full of examples of God using pagan leaders to discipline his people or accomplish his purposes. No, I don't think God promotes, condones or encourages evil. But neither do I think that finite human beings can fully comprehend or pass judgment on God. While we know that God is good, it is a mystery for now why he has allowed evil to exist. I believe the Bible teaches that God will one day put an end to evil and also that he frustrates evil but accomplish his good work in spite of them. What was it Joseph said? "You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good to save many lives."

Let me put it this way Wilson:
Jesus was an entirely apolitical teacher who did nothing to challenge the authority of Rome. The whole point of Pontius Pilate's dilemma is that he could find no incriminating evidence that Jesus had done anything to criticize or offend Rome. Nothing. Of course, His enemies could lie all they want, but Pontious Pilate knew. He was an innocent man with not one shred of evidence that he verbally attacked any political empire. When asked about Roman taxes that financed unjust wars, Jesus said to pay them. When given the opportunity to lecture a Roman military commander about oppression and violence, he admired his faith. He never mentioned Rome in the Olivet discourses, He said a sign of his return would be wars and rumors of wars.
He never asked His followers to stop acknowledging the authority of their corrupt local political or governmental leaders. He was scrupulous in respecting authority. All his criticism was directed at what we would today call pastors, teachers, elders and bishops and priests, (the Christian equivalent of Pharisees, Saducees, Rabbis, teachers and Priests). He was angry with money changing in the temple in the same way we can be angry about money making schemes operating out of our church...whether it's Ponzi investment schemes or bogus real estate deals that prey upon faithful, naive christians. This is the essence of the scripture you quote in Luke 20. These were very religious leaders who used their position and trust to abuse helpless people. The issue was hypocrisy and greed.
When the President of Iran or the president of Sojourners says, if Jesus were on earth today (of course He is alive today!), he would fight against the tyrannical policies of prevailing global economic and political systems is complete nonsense. His followers then had every opportunity to speak up and fight against geo-political regimes and economic systems. What do you think Simon the Zealot was about? Simon, who formerly was actively engaged in violence against the Roman occupation became a convert. Terrorists, freedom fighters, agitators, civil rights activists, strikers were every bit as common in Jerusalem as today if not more so. Jerusalem was filled with travelers from Africa, Spain, Greece, Italy, Europe...that was the whole point of the 120 disciples speaking in the tongues of all the world travelers in Acts 2.
Jesus called for repentance from individual sin, baptism for forgiveness and living a life of love and generosity guided by the Holy Spirit. He was God in the flesh, limiting Himself to the frailties of human existence and dependent on the power of the Holy Spirit to do miracles. He was an itinerant healing evangelist who commissioned an army of thousands to preach the gospel of the kingdom, heal the sick and cast out demons. That is the Kingdom we have been recruited into, not revolutionary political activism.