Not in the least, although approximately 8 out of 8 liberals say he was while they ridicule Christianity and claim it's based on hate.
> He demanded obedience to Old Testament law, pretty-much all of which is utterly intolerable to liberals.
> He urged his followers to arm themselves for protection against an abusive government, which is completely antithetical to core liberal ideology.
> He never once suggested you should get your government to force others to pay for politically defined "help" for politically chosen "needy" which is the sine quo non of all liberal advocacy.
> He said individuals should use their own resources cheerfully to address legitimate needs they identify, which is a concept ridiculed by all liberals.
> He said not to "help" the idle. Liberals declare this idea absolutely hateful.
> He promoted a spirit of voluntary association for mutual benefit, free of the violence and threat thereof upon which all liberal "benefits" are based.
So, sticking with the modern American political model suggested by your question, it's pretty obvious he was a conservative.