A new wave of progressive Democrats either pastor a church or attend seminary. However, you don’t hear many Democrat voters rebuking these politicians for forcing the Bible into public policy. Why? Well, for one thing, they manipulate individual Scriptures, not the Bible in its entirety, to justify their politics and structure their worldview.
Progressivism is the religion. Christianity (or their version of it) is just the skin suit.
Tragically, voters last week ushered in Senators-elect James Talarico, a seminarian in Texas, and Adam Hamilton, a megachurch pastor in Kansas. They join Georgia Senator and pastor Raphael Warnock in representing a “palatable” version of Christianity to the Left — which one can validly argue isn’t Christianity at all. Their Christian faith is a pick-and-choose bouquet of scattered verses and rickety theology, all in the service of justifying left-wing causes.
Many of them use Matthew 25 (Warnock has called himself a “Matthew 25 Christian”) as a mantra to justify their positions on abortion, free healthcare, government welfare programs, immigration, and more.
Matthew 25 contains three parables Jesus told to a Jewish audience. He tells them to be prepared, to care for those in their community, and not to squander the good things God has entrusted to them because judgment is coming and Christ is returning. In other words, personal responsibility is crucial to living a life for God.
The particular section of this chapter these Democrats love to quote is vv. 31–40, where Jesus says, “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me. ... Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.”
In this passage, Jesus is asking his people to care for needy and persecuted Christians. Biblical scholars such as Augustine and John Calvin argued for this exegesis, as have countless others in the centuries since.
Talarico, Hamilton, and Warnock interpret this passage differently — and wrongly.
I cannot judge these men’s souls; that is for God alone to do. However, I can see the harm their policies have wrought on person after person, city after city, and state after state. You can judge them by their fruit. Is it loving to the neighbor whose husband was murdered to undermine law enforcement and criminal justice? Is it loving to provide “free” healthcare (by taking tax money from someone else) but no one can get an appointment (à la Canada)? Is it loving to overlook the murder of a baby just because it was still in the womb and doing so “helped” the mother?
You certainly aren’t doing unto the least of these if you outsource your “charitable” works to the government.
In Matthew 25, Jesus speaks to a small group of Jews, people he regarded as his own people, commanding them to care for those around them in their community. He is not commanding Caesar or any other government to mandate care; he is telling believers, as a community and as individuals, that they have a responsibility to one another and that care should flow out of love for God.
Democrats, by and large, happily advocate for government aid and support any welfare program. A 2024 Pew Research survey found that Democrats are far more likely to favor the impersonal, vague “person in need” through government programs, “even if it increases debt.”
They also tend to see the rich or successful as the problem holding the poor people back. That’s why their whole economic plan takes from those who have worked diligently with the gifts and talents God has given them and redistributes to those who haven’t. This isn’t an individual giving food, clothes, or comfort to a person in need; leftists’ plan is basically justified stealing based on their gospel of envy.
Can we really call these elected Democrats “Christians”? Well, if they only follow the parts of the Bible that they like and ignore the rest, maybe not. But again, only God can judge their hearts.
Is their view Christian nationalism? As slippery and indefinable as that term seems to be these days, I would say no. Even The New York Times picked up on the difference. Writer Lauren Jackson explained, “The debate over Matthew 25 highlights two different approaches to Christianity — the nationalistic ‘spiritual warfare’ espoused by many evangelicals on the right and the fusion of ancient scripture with progressive policy that is gaining traction on the left.”
At the end of the day, being a “Matthew 25 Christian” is entirely insufficient for an individual’s faith. It’s like being a Christmas and Easter Christian — you come for the high holidays but have no interest in investing in the community of believers or Christ himself. Leftists are merely using Christianese and out-of-context Scripture to worm their way into political offices. It seems they’re wolves in the Bible’s clothing.
