Don Lemon is a former CNN reporter, but was fired following several controversial on-air comments – particularly sexist remarks about women’s age. In fact, a Variety magazine report detailed long-standing allegations of prejudicial behavior and inappropriate conduct toward female colleagues. Since being fired, he has created his own podcast in an attempt to revive his career.
In doing that, he embedded himself in the mob that disrupted a church worship service in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Not only was he highly berated for this act, but has now been federally charged with Conspiracy Against Rights and violations of the FACE Act (Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act). He has since cast himself as a persecuted journalist. In his defense of his actions, he quoted John 8:32 – “The truth shall set you free.”
The only problem is, Lemon doesn’t really believe the Bible. He was just using it as one means of trying to justify himself. In the past, he has characterized himself as a “cultural Christian,” meaning he follows the teachings of Jesus (which he actually doesn’t do), but does not identify with a Christian denomination. He has also been known to claim that he is a victim when he is attacked, and has done so again in this circumstance. He claimed that he is being persecuted because he is a gay black man. His use of Scripture is part of his attempt to make himself out to be righteous in the face of evil persecution.
Another case of using the Bible to defend a bogus position happened with Hillary Clinton. She recently wrote an essay for The Atlantic magazine accusing President Trump and his supporters of what she called deep “moral rot” within their movement, and called them out for not expressing Christian values. She argued that what has been going on in Minnesota is proof that Trump supporters have abandoned traditional Christian values.
So how did she come to that conclusion? She loosely quoted Matthew 25:40 by saying “MAGA rejects the teachings of Jesus to ‘love thy neighbor’ and care for ‘the last, the least, and the lost.’” The only problem is, to come to her conclusion, she has to massively take that passage out of context and interpret it based on an underlying Marxist philosophy – this in addition to the fact that she misquoted it.
Of course, this is nothing new for her. She has expressed this same theology many times in the past. Her approach to biblical interpretation is not based on biblical theology. It doesn’t begin with the teachings of the Bible, but with a previously determined philosophy based on Marxist concepts. She then cherry picks verses out of context as proof texts to try and support her beliefs.
This is the norm among virtually all forms of “liberal Christian theology.” I once wrote a blog called “His Religion Is Not What He Thinks.” It was about former Republican Lt. Governor of Georgia Geoff Duncan who once held political beliefs consistent with the Republican party, but changed his beliefs to the point that he has now switched and become a Democrat.
Along with the change in his political beliefs has come a shift in his religious beliefs, as well. He still claims to be a Christian, yet rather than a focus on people’s spiritual needs as the first priority, he has shifted to a “social justice” focus. While he believes that the social justice emphasis better reflects the gospel, it doesn’t. In order to go that route, a person has cherry pick particular Bible verses or passages out of context and totally ignore the big picture – just like Hillary Clinton did. That is simply not a legitimate approach to biblical interpretation.
But using the theologically liberal social justice paradigm is not so unusual these days. After posting my blog about Mr. Duncan (You can read it at: http://www.marketfaith.org/2025/09/his-religion-is-not-what-he-thinks/), I got a response from someone who sought to defend him – and in the process put me down. Here is what that person wrote:
“Love thy neighbor” guides my life – just as it guided Jesus’s. Having Jesus in my heart will not feed my children, provide me decent and affordable healthcare, keep me warm. If the author has had a different experience, I hope he’ll let us in on his secret. From my POV, denigrating a good human for his desire to care for others and love his neighbor is ANTI-Christian. This is NOT how Christ did or would behave. Very disheartening (but not surprising) to hear that Republican policies don’t align with basic human needs (yes, “material” needs) such as food, healthcare, not fearing being shot at school, etc. The truth is, that this R. administration (2/1/26) is making life harder, sadder, sicker. Today, 2 million people lose SNAP benefits. Most are kids – tonight, they’ll go to bed hungry while T*ump continues counting the $4,000,000,000 his corrupt policies have raked in for HIMSELF. And as a “Christian” (talking to Freddy here), you support him???? Seriously??? I challenge you to provide one action he’s taken that is grounded in Christianity. Just one. As an FYI, I could provide about 100 that are evidence of the opposite (including adultery and sexual assault). He is a cruel and amoral man and he has surrounded himself with cruel and amoral people. Trust me when I say that Jesus is NOT happy. Be grateful that there are people like Geoff Duncan on this planet. I sure am.
Of course, doing good deeds is a good thing. The point here is certainly not to disparage doing good deeds. That said, in Christianity, doing good deeds is not the means for pleasing God, but is, rather, the result of doing the thing that does please Him – entering into a personal relationship with Him through faith in Jesus Christ.
By focusing on the “works” element of religion, this commenter has turned salvation into a political action rather than the spiritual act that the Bible teaches. He gives himself away by saying that “Love thy neighbor” is what guides his life. That is a total misappropriation of Scripture.
Evidence of this person’s mistake is demonstrated by the fact that he went straight to attributing partisan political policy as the source for pleasing God. If you read the article, you will see that political partisanship had absolutely nothing to do with what was being addressed.
His approach also shifts the emphasis concerning salvation away from the individual and places it on the collective (specifically the government). Even concerning good deeds, this person never says anything about the responsibility of individuals to help those he is concerned about. Rather, he places the responsibility on the government to provide the needy with “food, healthcare, not fearing being shot at school, etc.” This is simply not what the Bible teaches – particularly concerning salvation.
But this mistake is not limited to the people mentioned above. Rather it is the approach of all pseudo Christian groups that have bought into the social justice movement. They all substitute good works for knowing Christ as the ultimate means for pleasing God. Many more examples of this false approach to faith could be given.
To get at a legitimate Christian theology, a person must answer the three worldview questions based on what is revealed in the Bible. Those questions are:
1) Who is God?
2) What is man?
3) What is salvation?
The simple answers to those questions are:
1) Who is God? A transcendent creator and sustainer of the material universe who has revealed Himself as righteous, just, and love.
2) What is man? A person made in the image of God, but fallen.
3) What is salvation? Entering into a personal relationship with God by grace through faith in the atoning death of Jesus Christ.
So how does that compare to the answers given by those who hold to theological liberalism? First, its authority source is human reasoning/philosophy. From that platform, it answers the three questions this way.
1) Who is God? God is the immanent source and moral ideal of love, justice, and meaning, encountered through human experience, ethical reflection, and historical progress. He is a benevolent transcendent being who desires all people to live in an earthly utopia.
2) What is man? Human beings are morally conscious, relational, and evolving beings who are fundamentally capable of good, and who are shaped by history and society. Their calling is to ethical growth.
3) What is salvation? Salvation is the ongoing process by which individuals and societies are transformed toward justice, compassion, and wholeness through moral awakening and ethical action.
By comparing the two definitions, it is very easy to see that a biblical worldview is geared toward spiritual matters with a focus on a personal relationship with God, while liberal theology is focused on material/earthly matters with the aim of creating a better life in this world. It becomes obvious very quickly that these represent two very different faiths with entirely different outcomes.
Our ultimate conclusion is that liberal Christianity is not the legitimate Christian faith, but is a cult. It starts out with a claim to be Christian, but is based on a false authority source that expresses false beliefs about God, man, and salvation. Rather than exegeting the Bible to determine what the Bible teaches, it reads into the Bible its preferred philosophy.
When you want to find the core beliefs of any faith, this is the methodology you use. Discover its ultimate authority source and find out how it answers the three worldview questions. You will then be in a position to compare that with genuine Christian beliefs based on the Bible. If the beliefs don’t align with the teachings of the Bible, it is, plain and simple, a false religion.
© 2026 Freddy Davis