That got your attention, didn’t it? Jesus wants lower taxes, less welfare, a balanced budget, reduction of the debt, loves Reagan and Bush, but Clinton and Obama not so much.
Prove it wrong using the Bible.
You can’t for one simple reason — I’ll use the same methods the promoters of social justice, universal salvation, red-letter Christianity, and collective salvation use. Anytime you come up with a verse I’ll apply one of the following techniques:
- That was for another time, the Bible needs to fit in with today’s society so that part doesn’t apply.
- That doesn’t really mean what it says, it’s actually an allegory for…
See the game? It doesn’t matter what you come up with, I can “prove” Jesus was a Republican who would praise Reagan & Bush, reduce taxes, and follow the complete Republican/Libertarian platform, while being against Obama, Clinton (both), the Democratic party and socialism.
You can’t possibly win, so don’t bother trying.
But Seriously Folks
Before the hate-mail comes in, no, Jesus wasn’t a member of the Republican party, but “proving” it uses the exact same methods liberal progressive “Christians” use to promote socialism (marxism, communism), income and property redistribution, collective salvation, social justice, universal salvation, and more.
See how absurd their methods are? If you’re going to reject what the Bible says, at least have the honesty, guts, and integrity to say so straight out.
The Tactics of Heresy and Rebellion
Hiding behind a thin veneer of religion displays a willingness to reject God, all while cloaking it in religious terminology — a tactic learned from Saul Alinsky, by the way — you don’t have to be moral, but your actions have to be cloaked in morality for people to buy it. Alinsky dedicated his book “Rules for Radicals” to Satan, yet that’s the philosophy permeating much of so-called “Christianity” (at least the radical, liberal, progressive form).
In liberal “Christianity”, you don’t have to be Christian (or even accept the Bible, or God), but you must cloak your ideology in a thin veneer of Christianity so people will swallow it. It’s exactly the Alinsky method used by people claiming to be “Christians” while they reject what the Bible teaches.
Do you think it’s wise for the people who claim to be Christian to use tactics from someone who openly admired Satan’s rebellion?
Does the Bible Form Ideas, or Ideas Mold the Bible?
Promoters of heretical ideas attempt to stuff the Bible into their ideology, instead of forming their ideas from the Bible. Starting with a pre-determined outcome (consensus) is never a good idea, but Alinsky’s methods to manipulate people to a pre-determined idea are now being used on (and in) the church.
Why succumb to tactics from the pit of hell? It’s one thing for the world at large to fall for such tricks, but the church? Not just fall for them, but openly embrace them? The question remains are those promoting heresy aware they’re using Satan’s tactics (and trying to deceive people), or are they just wildly un-educated in Biblical truth?
Watch how easy the game is to play.
- The alternate gospel of social justice. When the Bible speaks of charity, it doesn’t mean individual charity (even when it speaks of you), rather for today’s society that means it’s the governments job to redistribute money and property.
- Progressive taxation. Sure Israel had a flat tax where everyone paid the same (with no exemptions), but the Bible didn’t anticipate greedy Wall Street barons. We’ve got to mold the Bible for today.
- After all taxes are good from Romans 13, so forced confiscation of earnings (at rates far above what others pay) from one group to give to another (legalized theft) is Biblical.
- Replacement theology. The church replaced Israel, thus we can blame modern Israel for all the problems.
- God is love, thus when He speaks of Hell and your need to choose an eternal destination, it doesn’t really mean that — after all love wins and Hell isn’t a permanent situation.
- Those crazy orthodox Christians who believe the Bible. Why don’t they just understand the Bible needs to be viewed in today’s light? It’s a living document which must change with the times.
See how to play the game? Liberal, progressive “Christians” (in name only) fall back on the same two arguments: allegorizing and modernizing the Bible. Those two tactics — combined with Alinsky’s methods — have created all sorts of friendly sounding ideas hiding radical, unGodly, unBibilcal, heretical ideas.
Satan’s Rebellion Infects the Church
You’re free to accept or reject the Bible as you wish, but it’s the hight of hubris and chutzpah to claim when God wrote in black and white He didn’t really mean it. Those promoting the heresy of social justice, collective salvation, red-letter Christianity, universal salvation, replacement theology, and more, actually put themselves above God proclaiming move over God, I’m smarter and I’ll ascend to the heavens, I shall be like the Most High God.
Last time we checked, that attitude got a certain angel in a wee bit of trouble (Isaiah 14:12–17 and Ezekiel 28:13–15) — of course, that’s exactly why Alinsky admired Satan (read the preface as Alinsky admired rebellion), and Alinsky’s methods are commonly used by the radical far-left (so-called “Christian” or otherwise) as they not only reject God’s Word, they’re in open rebellion against it as they promote heretical ideas not found anywhere in the Bible.
Jesus Really was a Conservative
Don’t equate conservative with Republican, but Jesus was a conservative. The Pharisees were the liberal, progressive group as they re-interpreted Jewish Law for their time, changing what it actually said. Jesus returned to the original idea of the Law, thus was a conservative.
Today’s progressive liberal “Christians” reject what God wrote in black and white and substitute something else (using two main tactics), while conservative orthodox Christianity takes the Bible for what it says.
Is repeating the failed liberalism of the Pharisees a good goal?
Pharisees and Liberalism
Remember the Pharisees as the liberals changing what God said, while the conservatives hold to the actual meaning. Nothing changes over 2,000 years, today’s liberal progressives still reject what God said and substitute their own ideas, cloaking their heresy in a thin veneer of religion hoping nobody will notice.
Those familiar with the Bible immediately spot their errors. Just ask a liberal progressive where Jesus taught the church should lobby the government to force Godless income redistribution and you’ll be met with a deer-in-the-headlights look for the simple reason they know it doesn’t exist, all while they continue to promote it.
So why do they promote such heresies when they know they’re false? Instead of allowing the Bible to form their political views, they’ve started with preconceived radical far-left ideas, and try to force the square Bible into their round hole of liberal progressive ideas — just like the Pharisees tried.
As Alinsky said, the end justifies almost any means; in the case of liberal progressive “Christians”, that means to get the preconceived ideological end they desire, they’ll abandon Biblical truth to get it.
Satan’s Two Tactics
Don’t fall for Alinsky methods leading you to a Godless religion. When church programs sneak in to your fellowship, call them for what they are — Godless heresies from the pit of Hell. Those programs can have nice sounding names like social justice and red-letter Christianity, but remember the methods used to promote those programs, and where Alinsky got his methods from.
It’s a simple choice really, is the Bible the Word of God or not? If it is, it needs to be followed. If not, why do people call themselves “Christians”, all while rejecting the document describing what a Christian is?
Deception, pure and simple. Who is the father of lies again?
UPDATE Aug 18, 2012: This article was linked from a blog on beliefnet.com by an author who appeared to miss the point, so I’ll be clear: This article is NOT trying to prove Jesus was a Republican. Rather it uses the same dubious methods liberals use to prove anything they want (social justice, universal salvation, etc) from the Bible.
Perhaps the writer of that blog missed this line: “Jesus wasn’t a member of the Republican party, but proving it uses the exact same methods liberal progressive ‘Christians’ use to promote socialism (marxism, communism), income and property redistribution, collective salvation, social justice, universal salvation, and more.”
If liberal, progressive “Christians” want to play games, those same methods also can be used to show the opposite is also true — if a method (liberal theology) can be used to “prove” anything, that method really isn’t of much value, is it?
The focus isn’t on the political affiliation of Jesus, rather the absurdity of liberal theology.
I hope that clears up any misunderstanding.