Liberals Argue that Christians Rejected Jesus for Judas in 2016 Election

Jesus kissed by Judas Iscariot in the Garden of Gethsemane, on a stained glass in the cathedral of Rouen, France, on February 10, 2013. Editorial credit: jorisvo /

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

take our poll - story continues below

Will the Democrats try to impeach President Trump now that they control the House?

  • Will the Democrats try to impeach President Trump now that they control the House?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Thanks to Obama, California is Engulfed in Forest Fires

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…


Read the Rest of the Story at…

Gary DeMar

Gary DeMar was raised in the suburbs of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He is a graduate of Western Michigan University (1973) and Reformed Theological Seminary (1979). He has served as researcher and writer at the Christian Worldview ministry American Vision since 1980 and President since 1984. Today he serves as Senior Fellow at American Vision where he lectures, researches, and writes on various worldview issues. Gary is the author of 30 books on a variety of topics – from "America’s Christian History" and "God and Government" to "Thinking Straight in a Crooked World" to "Last Days Madness." Gary has been interviewed by Time magazine, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, the BBC, and Sean Hannity. He has done numerous radio and television interviews, including the “Bible Answer Man,” hosted by Hank Hanegraaff and “Today’s Issues” with Tim Wildmon and Marvin Sanders. Newspaper interviews with Gary have appeared in the Washington Times, Toledo (Ohio) Blade, the Sacramento Bee, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Marietta Daily Journal, San Francisco Chronicle, The Orlando Sentinel, and the Chicago Tribune.

Please leave your comments below

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.