Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
The Myth of Christian America  /  MCA (11 of 14): Faith of the Founding Fathers #1  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 5
Bercot describes Samuel Adams as a “master at propaganda,” willing to foment riots while publicly writing, “I am no friend of riots”; what forms of “holy spin” or strategic deception do Christians today excuse in politics or culture-war battles, and what do Jesus’ teachings about truthfulness do to those excuses?
Another way to ask: What kinds of “holy spin” or planned deception do Christians today excuse in politics or culture wars? How do Jesus’ teachings about truth challenge those excuses?

Direct Answer Bercot’s example shows that “holy spin” can involve excusing deception for a political cause, but Jesus’ demand for plain truthfulness (“yes” meaning “yes”) leaves little room for propaganda presented as righteousness.

Support from Transcript:

  • Bercot says Samuel Adams “was a master at propaganda” and “had no hesitation to use violence to accomplish his means.”
  • Adams wrote under a pen name, “I am no friend of riots, tumult, and unlawful assemblies,” which Bercot calls “a direct lie,” since Adams was “the one fomenting them.”
  • Adams shifted blame to the government: people riot because they are “oppressed… not to be blamed,” justifying violence as understandable.
  • Bercot measures this against Jesus: “Have such a high regard for truth that your yes means yes and your no means no, not Samuel Adams.”
  • He also contrasts Adams’ logic with Jesus’ behavior and commands: “Love your enemy, turn the other cheek.”
Discussion Follow-ups Where do Christians today defend half-truths because “the stakes are high”? If Jesus requires simple honesty, what political communication methods should Christians refuse to use or share?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10
Back Questions Next