Written by Dr. Firpo W. Carr, (Columnist), on 01-10-2008 10:38
Favoured
37
He was neither liberal nor conservative
With the election year finally here, what better time to ask, WWJD, or, “What Would Jesus Do?” The answer is simple: Nothing. No, he would neither support liberal democrats nor conservative republicans. In fact, insofar as the worldly politics of his day were concerned, Jesus Christ was strictly apolitical. Furthermore, he required the same of his followers. When a politician asked him if he himself was a political leader Jesus answered in the affirmative, but then gave an intriguing explanation: “‘My kingdom,’ said Jesus, ‘doesn’t consist of what you see around you. If it did, my followers would fight so that I wouldn’t be handed over to the Jews. But I’m not that kind of king, not the world’s kind of king.’” (John 18:36, The Message Bible) Plainly stated, Jesus’ political affiliation and that of his “followers” was “not the world’s kind.”
Though Jesus used the word “kingdom” in the above text, this term is synonymous with our modern-day word, “government.” For example, Jamie Foxx’s most recent movie is called The Kingdom, although this title is actually referring to the very real “government” of Saudi Arabia. In other words, some governments today still refer to themselves as kingdoms. Such was the case during Jesus’ tenure on earth; and was so even before he was born. Case in point: it was prophetically stated of him: “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder.” (Isaiah 9:6, KJV) This is the “government” that Christians favor. To become involved in the politics of worldly governments, whether liberal or conservative in flavor, would be distasteful to God.
It is for this reason the inspired apostle Paul wrote: “We are therefore ambassadors substituting for Christ, as though God were making entreaty through us.” (2 Corinthians 5:20) Yes, Christians are “ambassadors substituting for Christ.” Because Christ’s government was “not the world’s kind,” his ‘ambassador’ disciples, who function in his stead, have nothing to do with “the world’s kind” of governments. Were his disciples to become involved in worldly politics they would be guilty of spiritual treason, just as it would be treasonous for an ambassador from one country to become openly entangled in the politics of another.
In case these political concepts are difficult to grasp as they relate to what Jesus would or wouldn’t do, consider the following five questions: (1) Would Jesus Christ salute the flag of any country today? (2) Would he enlist to fight in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? (3) Would he run for public office? (4) Would he vote for any candidate currently running for public office? (5) Would he raise funds for any liberal or conservative political campaigns?
If you answered yes to any of these thought-provoking questions, well, as they say: “You’re a lie and the truth ain’t in ya.” No, Jesus would do none of the above as I’m sure you can appreciate. Or, can you? What I mean is this: It’s very likely that you’ve been praying for God’s kingdom to come, his will to be done on earth, as it is in heaven. (Matthew 6:9-11) But did you know that you were in reality praying for God’s “government” to “crush” all manmade Devil-directed governments? Think about it: When the Devil offered Jesus all the kingdoms (or “governments”) of the world, did Jesus deny that the Devil owned them?
Here’s what the Bible says: “So he [the Devil] brought him [Jesus] up and showed him all the kingdoms of the inhabited earth in an instant of time; and the Devil said to him: ‘I will give you all this authority and the glory of them, because it has been delivered to me, and to whomever I wish I give it.’” (Luke 4:5-8) Of course, Jesus flatly refused the offer. How on God’s green earth could he ever have accepted it? It would have been inconsistent, at the very least, to have embraced the Devil’s “governments” while at the same time teaching others to pray for God’s “government”!
And what will God’s “government” do to the collective of all Satan’s rival “governments”? I’ll let the Bible answer: “And in the days of those kings [or political leaders] the God of heaven will set up a kingdom [or “government”] that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom [or “government”] itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms [or earthly “governments”], and it itself will stand to times indefinite.” (Daniel 2:44) Whether liberal or conservative; whether democrat or republican; whether capitalist or communist; irrespective of the label or type, contrived “governments” and their political parties will be pulverized.
The conclusion of the matter is this: Don’t let anyone tell you that Jesus was either a liberal or a conservative. He was neither. And, truth be told, if you claim to be a follower, you, too, would be “no part of the world” of politics. (John 15:19) It is as presidential candidate and religious minister Mike Huckabee said when asked what would Jesus do in connection with a possible candidacy for president. Enigmatically Huckabee answered: “Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office...That’s what Jesus would do”; or, shall we say Mr. Huckabee, would not do?...Preach on Brother Huckabee. Preach on.
Dr. Firpo Carr n can be reached at (800) 501-2713 or email
With all due respect, I think you missed my point completely. You said the following:
“In case these political concepts are difficult to grasp as they relate to what Jesus would or wouldn’t do, consider the following five questions: (1) Would Jesus Christ salute the flag of any country today? (2) Would he enlist to fight in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? (3) Would he run for public office? (4) Would he vote for any candidate currently running for public office? (5) Would he raise funds for any liberal or conservative political campaigns?”
You seem to be limiting the term “liberal” to political activity alone, but one can be of a liberal persuasion and have absolutely nothing to do with the political process whatsoever. Liberalism is a frame of mind, and the way one conducts one’s life. It’s a point of view that the American Heritage Dictionary defines as follows:
“Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry. b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.”
When Jesus arrived , he wasn’t limited to the “established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas of his time, and he was also free of bigotry. He “favored proposals of reform,” and was not only open to, but proposed new ideas for progress. And he was also tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others. He may not have agreed with their ideas, but he was “broad-minded” enough to hear them, then suggest a better way.
So Jesus didn’t have to salute the flag, or enlist to go to war, or run for public office to demonstrate his liberal ideals. He lived his liberalism by turning his back on the rich and powerful, in favor of ministering to the poor, and the least among them:
Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, ( inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 'For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.' "Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? 'And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? 'When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?' "The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'
That wasn’t a man who veto child healthcare–that was a liberal talking. You see, liberalism isn’t just a political philosophy–it’s a way of life.