At the National Prayer Breakfast last week, seeking theological underpinning for his drive to raise taxes on the rich, President Obama invoked the highest possible authority. His policy, he testified “as a Christian,” “coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.’ ”
Now, I’m no theologian, but I’m fairly certain that neither Jesus nor his rabbinic forebears, when speaking of giving, meant some obligation to the state. You tithe the priest, not the tax man.
The Judeo-Christian tradition commands personal generosity as represented, for example, by the biblical injunction against retrieving any sheaf left behind while harvesting one’s own field. That is for the gleaners — “the poor and the alien” (Leviticus 19:10). Like Ruth in the field of Boaz. As far as I can tell, that charitable transaction involved no mediation by the IRS.
But no matter. Let’s assume that Obama has biblical authority for hiking the marginal tax rate exactly 4.6 points for couples making more than $250,000 (depending, of course, on the prevailing shekel-to-dollar exchange rate). Let’s stipulate that Obama’s prayer-breakfast invocation of religion as vindicating his politics was not, God forbid, crass, hypocritical, self-serving electioneering, but a sincere expression of a social-gospel Christianity that sees good works as central to the very concept of religiosity.
Fine. But this Gospel according to Obama has a rival — the newly revealed Gospel according to Sebelius, over which has erupted quite a contretemps. By some peculiar logic, it falls to the health and human services secretary to promulgate the definition of “religious” — for the purposes, for example, of exempting religious institutions from certain regulatory dictates.
Using that rule, I won’t be required much. LOL
Zero is to be trusted about religion?
I don’t think so.
Zero has made a large number of promises in the past. He has not kept them.
Zero has made a number of assertions about economics. His assertions are false.
Zero has been consistent: every utterance is intended to deceive. His “administration” has only one goal: the re-election of Zero. Anything else does not matter.
Thus his use of Jesus is just that: use. He has taken a quote out of context and used it to justify himself.
Bad idea. Folk have done that in the past and come to a bad end.
@mathman: #2
Minor correction:
That should be Zeros, not Zero: As in 00,000,000,000,000. His official title would be President 00,000,000,000,000.
Don’t be fooled, Obama is not a Christian – he only ‘ plays the part ‘ of being a Christian… Like anything Political, and with the liberal drama flair…he “uses it” for various political agenda’s… not to worry though, have Faith, people are catching on…