You might think this is pretty minimal. I prefer to call it streamlined. So while it is but three words, that doesn’t mean there isn’t an argument buried in there or that it can’t be very effective when deployed carefully. Indeed, I would submit that this angry, vitriolic (and increasingly common) retort does wield an effective punch.
Consider a conversation in which you are likely to hear the charge.
Al: “Hey Fred, whatcha up to?”
Fred: “Just reading Randal Rauser’s blog.”
Al (making hissing noises): “Rauser? You’re reading that liar for Jesus?”
First off, let’s be clear: this isn’t an ad hominem. An ad hominem would be “Rauser? I heard he smells like a tuna sandwich left out in the sun.” In contrast, calling someone a liar is a direct attack on their character and thus on the reliability of their testimony and argument. So right there we’re already separated from the school yard plebeian insults.
So when do you get to use the “liars for Jesus” charge?
First off, use it against Christian apologists. Don’t worry about the fact that we are all apologists for one thing or another. Single out the Christian apologist for special censure as a disingenuous salesman (gender neutral: sales associate). In this way you can intimate that whatever the apologist says is under suspicion because it is to the end of closing the sale.
Next, use it whenever a Christian lies. For example, if Bob the Christian tells Al that he caught two salmon on the fishing trip and Fred knows he really only caught one, then Fred can call Bob a “liar for Jesus”. It doesn’t matter that Bob isn’t lying for Jesus in this circumstance. It is good enough that he’s a Christian who is lying.
Do that enough and you will ensure that a general air of incredulity and a pall of distrust is cast over Christians every time they open their big mouths.
Finally, remember that calling somebody a liar is the ultimate trump card:
Al to Bob the Christian: “You’re a liar for Jesus Bob.”
Bob: “No I’m not!”
Al: “See, you’re lying!”