June 18, 2024
Dear Friends of Life and Liberty,
The Newsletter we are sharing with you today is
an article written 10 years ago, but it surely fits for today.
The Constitution Party presidential candidate
and outspoken advocate for the unborn, Randall Terry, came to my mind
while reading it. Randall is the Founder of the anti-abortion group,
Operation Rescue, who led the largest, peaceful civil disobedience in
American history from 1987 to 1994.
The goal of the Terry/Broden Campaign is
simple:
Defend Children,
Defeat Biden and Destroy the Democrat Party, the
"3-Ds"
The campaign knows that 51% of Catholics and
90% of Blacks voted for Biden. So, their goal is to show them the
truth of what abortion truly is and let them know that as a Catholic
or Black, who are basically pro-life, if you vote for Biden you are
voting for child killing.
The Terry/Broden Campaign was extremely clear
and honest at the Nominating Convention that this was their goal and
agenda and, thus, were overwhelmingly elected to be the Party's
presidential/vice-presidential candidates. Randall Terry for President (terry2024.com)
I am asking our pro-life readers to make their
most generous donation to help us place Randall's ads on TV so that it
will create a media firestorm that will give huge attention like never
before to the Constitution Party. I believe this goal will benefit
the Party's growth and create better name recognition for the
future.
Click here to donate to
advertising: TV
Ads
Enjoy
the article
For Life and Liberty,
Jim Clymer National Chairman
***********************************************
Jesus didn't care about being
nice or tolerant, and neither should you
There is no shortage of heresies these
days.
If you want to adopt some blasphemous,
perverted, fun house mirror reflection of Christianity, you will find
a veritable buffet of options. You can sift through all the variants
and build your own little pet version of the Faith. It's Ice Cream
Social Christianity: make your own sundae! (Or Sunday, as it
were.)
And, of all the heretical choices,
probably the most common — and possibly the most damaging — is what
I've come to call the Nice Doctrine.
The propagators of the Nice Doctrine can
be seen and heard from anytime any Christian takes any bold stance on
any cultural issue, or uses harsh language of any kind, or condemns
any sinful act, or fights against evil with any force or conviction at
all. As soon as he or she stands and says 'This is wrong, and I will
not compromise,' the heretics swoop in with their trusty
mantras.
They insist that Jesus was a nice man,
and that He never would have done anything to upset people. They say
that He came down from Heaven to preach tolerance and acceptance, and
He wouldn't have used words that might lead to hurt feelings. They
confidently sermonize about a meek and mild Messiah who was born into
this Earthly realm on a mission to spark a constructive
dialogue.
The believers in Nice Jesus are usually
ignorant of Scripture, but they do know that He was 'friends with
prostitutes,' and once said something about how, like, we shouldn't
get too ticked off about stuff, or whatever. In their minds, he's
essentially a supernatural Cheech Marin.
That prompted an especially noteworthy
email from someone concerned that I'm not being 'Christlike,' because
I 'call people names.' He said, in part:
"You aren't spreading Christianity
when you talk like that. The whole message of Jesus was that we should
be nice to people because we want them to be nice to us. That's how we
can all be happy. Period. It's that simple."
Be nice to me, I'll be nice to you, and
we'll all be happy. This is the 'whole message' of
Christianity?
Really?
Jesus Christ preached a Truth no deeper
or more complex than a slogan on a poster in a Kindergarten
classroom?
Really?
A provocative claim, to say the least. I
decided to investigate the matter, and sure enough, I found this
excerpt from the Sermon on the Mount:
"We're best friends like friends
should be. With a great big hug, and a kiss from me to you, won't you
say you love me too?"
Actually, wait, sorry, that's from
theoriginal Barney theme song.
God help us. We've turned the Son of God
into a purple dinosaur puppet.
There's no way to be certain, but
most theologians believe that, despite popular perception, Christ
looked nothing like this.
I don't recognize this Jesus.
This moderate. This pacifist. This nice
guy.
He's not the Jesus I read about in the
Bible. I read of a strong, manly, stern, and bold Savior.
Compassionate, yes. Forgiving, of course. Loving, always loving. But
not particularly nice.
He condemned. He denounced. He caused
trouble. He disrupted the established order.
On one occasion — or at least one
recorded occasion — He used violence. This Jesus saw the money
changers in the temple and how did He respond? He wasn't polite about
it. I'd even say He was downright intolerant. He fashioned a whip
(this is what the lawyers would call 'premeditation') and physically
drove the merchants away. He turned over tables and shouted. He caused
a scene. [John 2:15]
Assault with a deadly weapon. Vandalism.
Disturbing the peace. Worse still, intolerance.
In two words: not nice.
Not nice at all.
Can you imagine how some moderate, pious,
'nice' Christians of today would react to that spectacle in the
Temple? Can you envision the proponents of the Nice Doctrine, with
their wagging fingers and their passive aggressive sighs? I'm sure
they'd send Jesus a patronizing email, perhaps leave a disapproving
comment under the news article about the incident, reminding Jesus
that Jesus would never do what Jesus just did.
Personally, I've studied the New
Testament and found not a single instance of Christ calling for a
'dialogue' with evil or seeking the middle ground on an issue. I see
an absolutist, unafraid of confrontation. I see a man who did not
waver or give credence to the other side. I see someone who never once
avoided a dispute by saying that He'll just 'agree to
disagree.'
I see a Christ who calls the Scribes and
Pharisees snakes and vipers. He labels them murderers and blind
guides, and ridicules them publicly [Matthew 23:33]. He undermines
their authority. He insults them. He castigates them. He's not very
nice to them.
Jesus rebukes and condemns. In Matthew
18, He utilizes morbid and violent imagery, saying that it would be
better to drown in the sea with a stone around your neck than to harm
a child. Had our modern politicians been around two thousand years
ago, I'm sure they'd go on the cable news shows and shake their heads
and insist that there's 'no place for that kind of
language.'
No place for the language of
God.
Jesus deliberately did and said things
that He knew would upset people. He stirred up division and
controversy. He provoked. He didn't have to break from established
customs, but He did. He didn't have to heal that man's hand on the
Sabbath, knowing how it would disturb others and cause them immense
irritation, but He did, and He did so with 'anger' [Mark 3:5]. He
could have gone with the flow a little bit. He could have chilled out
and let bygones be bygones, but He didn't. He could have been
diplomatic, but He wasn't.
He could have told everyone to relax, but
instead He made them uncomfortable. He could have put them at ease,
but He chose to put them on edge.
He convinced the mob not to stone the
adulterer [John 8], and you'll notice that He then turned to her and
told her to stop sinning. Indeed, never once did He encounter sin and
corruption and say: "Hey, do your thang, homies. Just have fun.
YOLO!"
The followers of Nice Jesus love to quote
the 'throw the first stone' verse — and for good reason, it's a
beautiful and compelling story — but you rarely hear mention of the
exchange that occurs just a few sentences later, in that very same
chapter. In John 8:44, Jesus rebukes unbelieving Jews and calls them
'sons of the Devil.'
Wow.
That wasn't nice, Jesus.
Didn't anyone ever tell you that you can
catch more flies with honey, Jesus?
Of course, you'd catch even more flies
with a mound of garbage, so maybe 'catching flies' isn't the
point.
While we're often reminded that Jesus
said, 'live by the sword, die by the sword,' we seem to ignore his
other sword references. Like when he told his disciples to sell their
cloaks and buy a sword [Luke 22], or when He said that He 'didn't come
to bring peace, but a sword' [Matthew 10].
Now, It's true that He is God and we are
not. Jesus can say whatever He wants to say. But we are called to be
like Christ, which begs the question: what is Christ like?
Well, He is, among other things,
uncompromising. He is intolerant of evil. He is disruptive. He is
sometimes harsh. He is sometimes impolite. He is sometimes
angry.
He is always loving.
Christ was not and is not a cosmic
guidance counselor, and He is not mankind's best friend, nor did He
call us to be. He made dogs for that role — our destiny is more
substantial, and our path to it is far more challenging and
dangerous.
And nice?
Where does nice factor into
this?
Nice: affable, peachy,
swell.
Nice has nothing to do with Christianity.
I've got nothing against nice — nice is nice — but even serial killers
can be nice to people. They generally are exceptionally affable,
except when they're murdering. That means they're nice to, like, 97 or
98 percent of everyone they meet.
I guess they're following Christ almost
all of the time, right?
And tolerance?
Tolerance is easy. Any coward can learn
to tolerate something. Tolerance is inaction; intolerance is action.
We are called to refuse to tolerate evil. We are called to get angry
at it and actively work to destroy it.
Who'd have guess it — anger is far more
godly than tolerance ever could be.
Obviously I'm not suggesting that anger
is automatically, or even usually, justified. Christ
exhibited righteous anger; righteous anger is the sort of
anger that naturally fills our soul when we confront the depths of
depravity and sin. It is wrong to seethe with rage because someone cut
us off in traffic or gossips about us behind our back, but it is also
wrong to feel no anger when babies are murdered and the institution of
the family is undermined and attacked.
Anger is good when it is directed at
things that offend not us, but God. Just as Christ's intolerance, like
the intolerance we're commanded to have, stems from a desire to save
souls and defend Truth.
Even when we have righteous anger, we do
not have carte blanche to act on it in anyway we please. But,
according to the Bible, there are times to use strong
language, there aretimes to cause a scene,
there are times to hurt people's feelings, and there are
times when we might need to use physical force.
Jesus told us to turn the other cheek
when we are personally attacked; He never told us to turn our backs
entirely and let lies spread and evil grow.
So, enough with the niceties.
Christians in this country sound too
similar to the the Golden Girls song, and not enough like the Battle
Hymn of the Republic. There's too much 'thank you for being a
friend,' and not enough 'lightening from His terrible swift
sword.'
We're all hugging and singing Kumbaya,
when we should be marching and shouting Hallelujah.
We're nice Christians with our nice
Jesus, and we are trampled on without protest.
Enough, already.
I think it's time that Christianity
regain its fighting spirit; the spirit of Christ.
I think it's time we ask that question:
'What would Jesus do?'
And I think it's time we answer it
truthfully: Jesus would flip tables and yell.
Maybe we ought to follow suit.
**********
This article is from the Matt Walsh Blog.
This is the original URL where it can be found: http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/04/07/jesus-didnt-care-about-being-nice-or-tolerant-and-neither-should-you/
Constitution Party https://constitutionparty.nationbuilder.com/
Questions or Comments: Contact Donna Ivanovich,
Administrative Assistant to the National Chairman
|