Opinion

Liberal Says Christians ‘Rejected’ Jesus and ‘Voted for Judas’

Once again liberals are interested in Jesus and the Bible. The latest is from Saturday’s AM Joy on MSNBC where “liberal comedian John Fugelsang mocked ‘right-wing Christians’ as people who have ‘rejected the teachings of Jesus,’ and, by voting for Donald Trump, were voting for ‘Caligula, Judas, and the Golden Calf all in one convenient package.’” (Newsbusters)

Does Fugelsang believe Hillary was a viable Christian choice? While Trump has disappointed on some issues (as I said he would), he’s given us more than what Hillary would have given. For example, a seemingly constitutionalist on the Supreme Coourt and the recent expansion of “the Mexico City policy that bans U.S. funding for abortions overseas. The expanded policy, known as ‘Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance,’ prohibits U.S. taxpayer money from funding foreign organizations that perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning.” (Liberty Counsel)

Liberals use Jesus as a prop. They have no intent of actually following what He or the Bible requires. If given a test on Bible knowledge, they would fail miserably.

Liberals often turn to Jesus because they believe He was a social liberal who took a vow of poverty and was a welfare king by turning a few loaves of bread and fishes into a free food fest. Some have even declared that Jesus’ policies were closer to socialism than capitalism. They view Hillary’s policies as the source of their daily needs, their political salvation.

Herbert Schlossberg captures the reality of salvation by politics in his magisterial book Idols for Destruction:

The paternal state not only feeds its children, but nurtures, educates, comforts, and disciplines them, providing all they need for their security. This appears to be a mildly insulting way to treat adults, but it is really a great crime because it transforms the state from being a gift of God, given to protect us against violence, into an idol. It supplies us with all blessings, and we look to it for all our needs. Once we sink to that level, as [C.S.] Lewis says, there is no point in telling state officials to mind their own business. “Our whole lives are their business.” ((C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock, ed. Walter Hooper (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1970), 314.))

The paternalism of the state is that of the bad parent who wants his children dependent on him forever. That is an evil impulse. The good parent prepares his children for independence, trains them to make responsible decisions, knows that he harms them by not helping them to break loose. The paternal state thrives on dependency. When the dependents free themselves, it loses power. It is, therefore, parasitic on the very persons whom it turns into parasites. Thus, the state and its dependents march symbiotically [in close union with one another] to destruction.1

Trending: More Fake News About the ‘Rapture,’ the Antichrist, and the End Times

A careful reading of the Bible will show these claims to be fake Christianity.

Jesus was a firm believer in private property (Matt. 19:18). He never advocated for a government-funded, government-controlled healthcare system.

He most certainly would have opposed abortion based on human identity (Ps. 127:3-5), being contrary to nature (what animal would purposely abort her offspring?), biblical examples (Gen. 25:22; Luke 1:41; Ps. 139:13-16; Job 31:15), and biblical law (Ex. 21:22-25).

Jesus would have condemned same-sex sexuality and certainly, same-sex marriage based on the specific act of creation and the marital command (Gen. 1:26-28; 2:18-25; Matt. 19:4-6). Man-to-man and woman-to-woman sexuality are not designed to be sexually suitable. There is no way to “be fruitful and multiply.”

Given the fact that the 2016 election was a choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the analogy is more like voting against the leader of the Philistines and for someone like Samson who was called of God to defeat the Philistines.

Hillary favors same-sex sexuality and abortion. On the abortion issue, she wants taxpayers to fund abortions, something that even the Philistines would have rejected.

Judas was a traitor, being part of Jesus’ inner circle. This does not fit Trump. Hillary is closer to Judas because she has betrayed the Christian values she claims to believe and practice. She’s a hypocrite. When asked what book was most influential in her life, Hillary said, “the Bible.”

“‘At the risk of appearing predictable,’ she responded, ‘the Bible was and remains the biggest influence on my thinking.’

“Clinton noted that she was ‘raised reading it’ and had memorized many of its passages. She contended that the Bible has guided her throughout her life.

“‘I still find it a source of wisdom, comfort and encouragement,’ she concluded.

Many who believe the values she has embraced as a public figure contradict God’s Word took to social media to express their incredulity.”

I bet Judas believed something similar. A tree is known by its fruit. No one can read the Bible and claim that killing unborn babies and supporting same-sex everything are supported by the Bible.

What about the golden calf? Nearly every politician is a golden calf worshiper. Politics is about money and power. They are the gods of most politicians. The people who vote for more government and wealth confiscation and distribution also worship the golden calf.

Consider Samson (Judges 13-16). (Keep in mind that no analogy is perfect. This article is designed to poke a finger in the eye of liberals. ) He was a womanizer during a period in Israel’s history that was not unlike our own time. He was brash, undisciplined, and often carried away by his weaknesses and passions. Like Samson, liberals seem fixated on Trump’s hair, although I haven’t heard him say that his hair is his strength.

God put Samson in power so that he would rid the land of the Philistines. He ruled for 20 years (Judges 16:31). Like today’s establishment Republicans, the men of Judah were afraid to take on the Philistines and sought to hand Samson to the enemy:

Then the Philistines went up and camped in Judah, and spread out in Lehi. The men of Judah said, “Why have you come up against us?” And they said, “We have come up to bind Samson in order to do to him as he did to us.” Then 3,000 men of Judah went down to the cleft of the rock of Etam and said to Samson, “Do you not know that the Philistines are rulers over us? What then is this that you have done to us?” And he said to them, “As they did to me, so I have done to them.” They said to him, “We have come down to bind you so that we may give you into the hands of the Philistines” (Judges 15:11-12).

Trump uses his mouth to take on today’s leftist Philistines like Samson used the jawbone of an ass to defeat the Philistines.

Through all of Samson’s braggadocios talk and crude ways, God used him. Samson was God’s choice for the time. He and other less than auspicious rulers during the period of the Judges are mentioned in the list of the faithful in the book of Hebrews:

And what more shall I say? For time will fail me if I tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets, who by faith conquered kingdoms, performed acts of righteousness, obtained promises, shut the mouths of lions, quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, from weakness were made strong, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight (11:32-34).

Donald Trump is far from the ideal. He is not a Joseph or a Daniel. He is like Samson, flawed and impetuous, and if God could use a Samson, he can use a Trump, especially when the Philistines are at the gate.

  1. Herbert Schlossberg, Idols for Destruction: The Conflict of Christian Faith and American Culture (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, [1983], 1993), 184. []
Previous post

One of the Best Mother's Day Films: 'I Remember Mama'

Next post

It’s Time for Trump to Fire Everyone and Start Over


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.