August 06, 2004

Jesse Jackson: "Jesus was a liberal"

That's it.

He's finally lost whatever infinitely small notion of a mind he had left.

My "blog-sister" LaShawn points out rabid, foaming at the mouth ravings by Jesse Jackson in a column in the Chicago Sun-Times this week that defies all logic, sense and reality by claiming that Jesus Christ was a liberal.

Think about it: A conservative Christian is a contradiction in terms. Christ wasn't a conservative. He fed the hungry simply because they were hungry. He didn't require that they go to work first. He healed the sick, simply because they were sick. He didn't push them into an insurance company, or let the drug companies gouge them on prices. Jesus was a liberal; Herod was the conservative.

Moses was the liberal; Pharaoh was the conservative. Abolitionists were liberals; slave owners were the conservatives. Mandela is a liberal; the South African apartheid leaders were the conservatives. That's why conservative Dick Cheney supported apartheid over Mandela, and approved of keeping Mandela in prison.

The Suffragettes were liberals; those who opposed the vote for women were conservatives. Martin Luther King was a liberal; the segregationists were conservatives. He wanted to end racial discrimination; they wanted to conserve it.

Though many would say he did it long ago, Jesse has not only jumped the shark, he's dragged it outta the water and beat it with a Louisville Slugger.

Last I checked, my Lord and Savior stayed outta politics. He is Lord of us all, liberal and conservative, Republican and Democrat, black and white, Jew and Gentile, logical and moonbat.

Jesse's analogies are nothing but partisan politics dragged into the pulpit. The pulpit ain't no place to drag this shark, Jesse. Give it up.

Posted by mhking at August 6, 2004 09:55 AM

When I last checked, Jesus din't have to deal with a budget. God never tapped Jesus on the shoulder and said "I'm running out of money for loaves and fishes and cures for leprosy. Mind asking the flock for a few shekels?"

Posted by: Laurence Simon at August 6, 2004 11:32 AM

The big problem here is that the terms "liberals" and "conservatives" didn't exist at this time. So the only reason to really apply them is for rhetorical purposes.


It is wrong on its face to say that Jesus stayed out of politics. Of course he engaged in it. How would you refer to his exchange with the money-lenders? When he told people to go against the letter of Jewish law...isn't that political?

Furthermore what about the content of Jackson's statements? It is clear that Jesus sought to console the poor, to feed them, to give them comfort. And it is true he asked for nothing in return.

As always these things are have a bit more heft to them than we give them.

Posted by: Lester Spence at August 6, 2004 12:43 PM

Correst me if I'm wrong but wasn't Lincoln a Republican? The Democrats were the party of the slave owners.

Posted by: Kevin E at August 6, 2004 02:16 PM

You mean Jesus isn't a Republican?
Wasn't that in one of the Gospels? :-)

Posted by: Julie Anne Fidler at August 6, 2004 02:18 PM

Thanks for the link, Mike!

Here is what we need to give to these things: proper biblical interpretation. Christ didn't throw money-changers out of his Father's Temple because of "politics." He did so for SPIRITUAL reasons. They they were defiling it. They were not simply doing business, as I stated in my post; they were also cheating customers. God's Temple was sacred. It was a house of prayer turned into "a den of thieves."

I don't know if the commenters read my post, but I give enough heft to it to show how we all have a tendency to make philosophical arguments about biblical things instead of the other way around. Jesus came to seek and to save that which was lost. While he fed the hungry and healed sick, these things were ONLY a picture of things to come: healing man's sin sickness and satisfying his spiritual hunger. Christ said, "I am the Bread of Life." He certaintly wasn't referring to himself as a slice of wonder bread.

Jesse Jackson ought to be ashamed of himself for so many reasons, but misapplying Scripture is #1, as he is purportedly a man of God since he carries the title "Reverend."

My advice: pick up a Bible, flip through it and find out for yourself what's in it. Don't take my word for it or Jesse Jackson's.

Posted by: La Shawn at August 6, 2004 05:19 PM

And, read what the Church Fathers wrote about the Bible. Many of them were writing about the Bible 300 years after Christ ascended. I would put my trust in their writing over what Jesse Jackson said.

Posted by: Lola Lee at August 6, 2004 06:47 PM

Good post--I like that jumping the shark bit ;)

The thing about Jesus and the liberals/conservatives of his day was that he was speaking of fundamental truths. God handed down 10 commandments and ever since then, man in his "infinite" wisdom sought to modify, modulate or otherwise mutate those commandments, into thousands of rules to live by. Sounds like our convoluted legal system.

In Jesus' time on earth, the laws had degenerated to such complexities and contradictions, no wonder the average Jew was confused on questions of righteousness and morality. In Luk 12:51, Jesus said; "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." Later on in verse 57, he chides the people for not judging what is right.

Time and time again, Jesus called the rabbis on their hypocrisy so much, that they schemed to exterminate him by character assasination, ultimately getting the Romans to execute the final solution.

Is that the Jesus that Jesse is trying to identify with? If so, he has done a pretty lousy job of it. Like Judas, he's betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. Whereas Judas had the "sense" to commit suicide; Jesse overcame such qualms and further gained a mansion in La-la Land from which to lead thousands of black sheep.

The question isn't who's side is Jesus on. It's who is on Jesus' side. If so, cast aside the worldly matters and carry the cross.

I don't see any cross heavier than the little golden one hanging around his neck. Lest anyone brings up the "judge not, lest ye be judged" meme, I'd counter with 1Co 10:15, "I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say."

Posted by: Andy at August 7, 2004 11:57 PM

I'm pretty certain Jesus was pro-life. Kinda goes with the territory.

My grandfather used to delight in upsetting people by announcing that, "Jesus was the first communist." That's closer to the truth than, "Jesus was a liberal."

Posted by: Beck at August 8, 2004 01:31 PM

I like the general theme of your blog entry, even if some details are wrong.

Jackson was wrong for doing it. But people on "the right" has said something similar as well.

Posted by: DarkStar at August 8, 2004 03:58 PM

We live in a time when the term "liberal" has negative connotations attached to it. I believe that what Mr. Jackson is trying to say is that the principals of tolerance, acceptance, giving, etc. are more liberal in nature than conservative. Of course, Jesus did not insert himself into the political arena until he had no choice at the end of his life (on earth), so you have to use your little imaginations a little to go with him if you so choose instead of being so cinical, which is of course what everyone does all the time now.

Posted by: Richard at August 16, 2004 10:45 PM


Ate with prostitutes: Luke 7:37

Worked on the Sabbath: Mark 2:23

Judge not lest ye be judged: Matthew 7:1

Threw the capitalists out of church: Mark 11:15

The rich should give their money to the poor: Luke 12:33

Don’t go to church but worship God in private: Matthew 6:6

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you: Luke 6:31

As you do unto the least of them, so you do unto me: Matthew 25:45

Posted by: Unknown at October 24, 2004 01:26 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?