Replies

Actually, Liberals think Jesus was just an early Gandhi. That is, first and foremost, their understanding of Jesus Christ - unconditional pacifism, and unconditional tolerance - with a smidgen of socialism.

This is the big problem with liberals. Their version of 'compassion' - socialism/communism - is FORCED 'sharing'. Christ never had a problem with people having property or working for property and having a lot of possessions. He did have a problem with what they did with them. Were they generous or selfish? Did they realize that what they had they had because God allowed them to have it through a variety of means, or did they believe THEY were the reason they had what they had?

God, and therefore Jesus, never forced anyone to do anything against their will. Never forced sharing, never forced worship. Giving because you want to always ranks higher with God than 'forced' giving. That's why the state can never have genuine compassion for anyone, because in order to give to whoever it wants to, it has to take by force or threat of force, from those who have.

Ex. have you ever got a 'thank-you' from the IRS for your 'giving'?

And I don't believe Jesus was unconditionally passive or unconditionally tolerant.

When you are God in the flesh, you don't have to worry about anything happening to you that you don't permit to happen. Jesus let Himself be humiliated and put to death to conquer sin and death and bridge the gap between sinful man and holy God.

And Jesus wasn't unconditionally tolerant either. Read about what he did to the money changers in the temple. Read about his confrontations with the Pharisees and other religious leaders of his time. Read what He had to say about the last days in Matthew 24 and 25, and in Revelation. His perfect justice and righteousness from a human perspective, does not appear on the surface to be tolerant. Permissivity does not equal tolerance.

I would not argue that Ghandi would be considered a liberal at all. One of his quotes, and a personal favorite of mine, goes along the lines of 'Among the many misdeeds of the British Empire, history will certainly look upon the act of disarming society as one of its darkest'.

He also realized that war was necessary. The left tries to exploit him, much like they are trying to exploit Christians with this sort of nonsense.

Most liberal theologians have doubts that Jesus even existed. They see Him as a kind of Superman or Batman that some people still believe in. They realize though, that most people have warm feelings for Jesus, respect for the church, and look to the church as a moral compass. So, they try to recreate him, like DC updated Superman and Batman. They replace Biblical teaching with their current utopians visions, and suddenly, there's no suffering Christ, there's a doe-eyed hippie with Breck girl hair.

For the current politicians, it's just another repackaging of the same pig. "Hey, if you were REALLY moral, you would support that poor pregnant girl who doesn't know who the father is! Then, she wouldn't NEED an abortion!"

Both conservatives and liberals too often decide what they believe, then look for justifications to explain why Jesus would agree with them. Jesus would have serious problems with both political parties.

>Actually, Liberals think Jesus was just an early Gandhi. That is, first and foremost, their understanding of Jesus Christ - uncondition pacifism, and unconditional tolerance - with a smidgen of socialism.<

Christians know that God is no respecter of men, and Christ Jesus is above any political party. He is a part of our wondrous triune God. He loves us so much that he came, lived His earthly life as an example to us, took on our sin and paid for it for us. He is the one constant we can depend upon. He is passionate about right and wrong. And as far as socialism is concerned, He said that if one doesn't work, one doesn't eat. That pretty much rules out His approval of Socialism, to my way of thinking. And today both major political parties just a front for Socialism.