As someone who has studied religious texts and history, I know that there are several 'Jesus'. The Jesus of Paul, the Jesus of the gospel ascribed to Mark, the Jesus of the gospel ascribed to Matthew, the Jesus of the gospel ascribed to Luke, the Jesus of the gospel ascribed to John, the various Jesus of non-canoncical gospels, and the historical Jesus are all different. The historical Jesus would be considered a terrorist by both modern American and ancient Roman standards (which is why he was crucified in association with an insurrection). Thus, he was a conservative. The 'Nosri' name of the group he belonged to meant 'Keepers' (of the Torah). The Jesus of Paul would have been no less conservative despite the position on circumcision. However, as a Jewish man whose Nosri membership was of a Pharisee affiliation, the historical Jesus would have been considered a liberal by the conservative Sadducees. In contrast, by today's Jewish standards, he would be considered Orthodox if not Ultra-Orthodox.

This leaves the various Jesus characters of the gospel accounts. Despite all of the emphasis placed on mercy, forgiveness, and generosity, from these characters, none of these aspects make the Torah-keeping lifestyle of any of the gospel Jesus characters any less conservative than religious people of today. Though criticism of social hypocrisy may be leveled by these characters ( eg. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."), there is nothing expressed through them that would classify any of them as being liberal. Nothing suggests that any of them would be against capital punishment in general, slavery, subservient wives, or for abortion and gay marriage. On the contrary, all of the characters are portrayed to have engaged in violent action in opposition to the standard custom of hosting a marketplace in the Court of the Gentiles.