Jesus, Liberalism, and the Natural Man

The wonderful thing about the internet is how we are exposed to a multitude of information and opinions on a diverse amount of topics.  Being exposed to what others think about events both past and present is enlightening and educational.

Likewise, it’s a great place to see the noetic effect of the fall and the testimony of scripture borne out through human logic.  When those who are not Christians attempt to exegete the Word of God, it’s like watching William Hung sing “She Bangs” – it’s so bad you just can’t take your eyes off of it.

With the horror of reading the work of graduates from the William Hung School of Biblical Interpretation comes the sorrow that these folks truly have no clue who Christ is or what He has done.  When a person is saved the Holy Spirit helps them to understand the words of scripture.  The lack of this gracious move of God is apparent when one does not understand the basic tenants of the Christian faith.

One such natural person is Allen Clifton of Forward Progressives.  In this piece from 2013 he makes the bold statement that Jesus would be a liberal if He were around today.  Not a republican because they are just horrible.

It is apparent that the author is not familiar with the New Testament picture of Jesus Christ.  Consider this statement from the end of the piece:

“…Even after being tortured and crucified, Jesus said, ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.’  That’s Jesus.  Asking for forgiveness not for himself, but for those who condemned him to and excruciating death,” emphasis mine.

 Of course Jesus wasn’t asking forgiveness for Himself – because He had nothing for which He needed to be forgiven.  The glib treatment of Christ in this piece is the misunderstanding of who Jesus is.  He is not simply a great man (though He is that).  Nor was He simple a good teacher (though He is the best Who will ever be).  He is God incarnate – God in flesh.  The point of this season which we celebrate is about God becoming man.

Veiled in flesh, the Godhead see

Hail the incarnate deity

Pleased, as man with men to dwell

Jesus our Emmanuel

The Natural Man’s Log in the Eye

Does Clifton not see his glaring hypocrisy?  By judging those with whom he disagrees he is becoming the judgmental monster he accuses other’s of being.  How judgmental is this author to say republicans are keeping people in chains with their values and that they are delusional?  Or to imply that republicans are devoid of compassion, love, acceptance or understanding?   Whoa!  What self-righteous judgments; Allen’s Jesus certainly wouldn’t approve.

Not only does he judge and condemn republicans in this article, but he has written elsewhere saying you are a ‘fool’ if you believe Jesus would support certain types of guns.  Wow, this dude!

He should take some time to read Matthew 7:1-5 and this article as a companion for a better understanding of judging rightly.

Unaffiliated Jesus

It’s a silly statement to try and claim Jesus would be one political party or another.  One needs only to read, oh, I don’t know…the Bible to get an understanding of where Jesus would stand.  (Hint: it’s not with none of the current political parties offered – but it certainly leans an obvious way.)

Take these following points under consideration:

  1. Romans 13:1-7 outlines the responsibility of the government. It gives no indication that it is tasked with feeding the poor, providing education, giving universal healthcare, etc.  Jesus wouldn’t advocate for a government to do something that is not mandated by God.  This goes for the social policies as well as the war policies and anti-environmental/anti-stewardship stances of each party.
  2. Christ would not condone theft in the form of government taxation to pay for and fund unbiblical programs. He would not condone the mishandling of His money and resources on something which only consumed and did not produce.  The government is the worst example of crony capitalism imaginable:  consume as much money and resources as possible with no real barometer of success.  This would not be good stewardship, therefore something which Christ would not support.
  3. Jesus would not “accept” homosexuals in the sense the author implies any more than He would accept cowards, adulterers, fornicators, liars, or thieves. Christ would call them to repentance, the same as He called all to repentance.  Repentance of their sin with the encouragement to go and sin no more; to be holy as He and His Father are holy.  If Christ were to accept everyone for who they are – what would be the reason for Him to die on the cross?

Jesus’ mission was not to provide universal healthcare, clothing for the naked, or food for the poor.  His mission was simple: He came to die and pay the price for man’s sins.  Not to give assurance that you could keep your doctor.

“Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? But for this purpose I have come to this hour,” John 12:27

“And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself,” John 12:32

“For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,” 1 Corinthians 15:3-4

Through repentance and faith one can get forgiveness of sins and be reconciled to God.

Attempting to assign a political affiliation to Christ is silly.  But trying to assign Him to the liberal mindset it blasphemous.

Soli Deo Gloria

 

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.