« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Give Me Your Money in the Name of Jesus

By: Breeanne Howe (Diary)  |  February 2nd, 2012 at 06:30 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

promoted from the diaries

“Christianity has not, and does not profess to have a detailed political program. It is meant for all men at all times, and the particular program which suited one place or time would not suit another.”

This morning, in the middle of his campaign National Prayer Breakfast speech, President Obama delighted those of us who love irony by quoting C.S. Lewis.  It was an interesting moment in a speech that put forth the notion that taxing the wealthy is right in line with the teachings of Jesus. I mean, Jesus did hang out with tax collectors, right?  The idea that government welfare is somehow the fulfillment of Jesus’ teaching on charity is a common misconception that many people make, Christians included, and it’s the main reason that liberals believe conservatives are Christian hypocrites. Perhaps if the president visited church more often than only during campaign seasons, he might not be so confused. See, not only do we spend time praising God in church, we also gain insight from our pastors who have surely spent more time in the word of God than we have.

While Obama may have been correct in saying that government mandated, shared responsibility is equal to the Islamic belief that those who’ve been blessed have an obligation to use those blessings to help others, he is incorrect to group in Jesus’ teaching, “for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.”  Aside from the fact that Jesus was discussing requirements from God, not the government, he was actually teaching his disciples that they were stewards of God’s gift of Revelation. Their requirement was to spread the good news of Jesus Christ. It’s the crux of Christianity that Obama seems to miss. Jesus came because we are imperfect.  We could never fulfill all the requirements that the pharisees loved to lord over the people. Jesus’ coming ended the rule of law and the began the acceptance that our only way to God was through Him. Yes, Jesus very much emphasized the importance of giving to the poor, but as a reaction in joy to what we’ve been given; not because of a law. Giving out of obligation is not truly giving, it’s merely following the rules.  Just ask anyone who’s ever written a check to pay their taxes, I doubt you’d find them excited.

The Bible also teaches that everything we have, including money, belongs to God. We are called to be good stewards with His money.  The government is the epitome of  mismanaging money. If you truly want to help the poor, you should probably seek out charities; but that would require a bit of work on the part of the giver and a great many find it easier to just let the government run every aspect of their lives. So it is that welfare money ends up spitting out of strip club ATMs, and those same people who paid their charity to the government wonder why government hasn’t solved the issue. Perhaps they should ask the 27 Democrats who voted against stopping welfare checks from being used at strip clubs, casinos and liquor stores.

Another highlight in Obama’s speech was his proud proclamation that his administration has partnered with Catholic charities to help those in poverty. I wonder if those charities are among the ones begging the Obama administration, to no avail, to change the recent ObamaCare edict requiring them to cover birth control costs in their healthcare even though it is against their religious beliefs to do so. Really, slapping them across the face would take less time and probably hurt less.

I also really enjoyed when the president mentioned the half a million Americans who exercised their religious freedom to March for Life recently. Oh wait, he didn’t mention that.

Overall, the president’s National Prayer Breakfast speech was much of what we have become quite familiar with hearing, but sprinkled with some Bible quotes that ultimately fail to give credibility to Obama’s socialist leanings.  Thankfully, President Obama did get it right in the end – God will continue to lead our nation, even after those that wish to tax us all into poverty use His word to do so.


COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • bk

    and then he’ll go about working on getting the rest.

    • aesthete

      I don’t remember giving anything to Obama, or taking anything from him. I sure as heck don’t remember him being responsible for the cultural or governmental norms that allow for our shared prosperity — kind of remember him destroying a lot of those things, actually. Same goes for all the Presidents within living memory.

      At least the Romans built roads and aqueducts — what did Obama do for me?

      • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

        Wow… Obama quoted Jesus (twists the scriptures, to his “Social Justice” Theological miss-readings, to imply Jesus was for HIGH TAXES on the Rich) this first week into February of 2012… How laughable… As I’ve pointed out, Liberals’ REAL Religion is Government.

        Conservatives ALWAYS give more to Charity, by large margin; review Presidential Candidates released Tax returns for the two Parties.

        Then there is the Left’s miss-application of the ROBIN HOOD story/principle… Robin Hood took from the Sheriff/King (GOVERNMENT) that which was taken (stole, in the name of Taxes) from the people and returned it to the Poor (read: People, from which it was confiscated).

        related:

        Liberal’s true Religion is Government (Separation FROM Church TO State)
        ‘The Greater Good’ – “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Or the One.”

    • Seedyrom

      till then I’ll just wait on super Tuesday.

      • MF

        Oh, wait, that’s Super Bowl Sunday. Oh, wait, I can’t even use the term ‘Super Bowl’ because it’s trademarked, or whatever. OK, Big Game Sunday is two days away…

        Lawyers always take the fun out of everything…

    • mickabersdad

      could get him overheated quickly. He ignored the other scripture:

      For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “If a man will not work, he shall not eat.” 2 Thessalonians 3:10

  • chrysostom15

    So Obama is actually trying to save us by making us poor. His religious devotion is very strong on that area.

    Of course, when I go to church, if and how much money I donate has always been something for me to decide — I’ve never been threatned that if I do not donate a certain amount that I will go to jail….

    I’m sure, however, that Obama does a better job of interpreting the gospel than the rest of the Christian world who never used jail time to force donation.

    Now when it comes to Thou shalt not kill, or saying that a man should not lay with another man as he would a woman — Obama appears to waver some in his devotion. I do not recall Jesus saying we need gay marriage or abortion.

    I have trouble remembering which passage it was that said tax thy neighbor and use it to pay for the abortions of thy other neighbor.

    I also forgot the passage that discussed the importaince of being supportive of gay marriage and of the need to accept homosexuality. My Bible — the one that talks of Sodom and Gomorrah — must be out-of-date.

    I guess Obama must have some divine insight that the rest of us just lack.

    Based on this, I urge President Obama to NOT run for a second term, and rather to join a monistary and be trained to be a priest. This way he can focus on becoming the next Pope — why limit himself to President.

    President Obama, if you are reading this, please, please, drop out of the race for president and enter religious life. You are too good to be only President. Resign now, and seek a higher calling.

    • davesinsanantonio

      That is because he knows what Jesus should have said. Since the Bible is older than the Constitution, of course it is out of date. Only the two Obummers are smart enough to tell us all how to live; he politically and financially, she in the kitchen and dining room, and maybe the exercise room. And since we don’t believe that, that is proof that we must be pushed around by the government.
      So, we should stop worshiping God and just worship the new Caesar instead as the god incarnate, and just bypass the pope altogether.

    • hoootie

      To respond to your post I can use one word…..EXCELLENT ! It looks like OJUDAS didn’t measure up to the position of messiah so now he will have to seek a higher calling. Since Satan went on a urban renewal project in heaven and got his butt tossed out of heaven maybe it would rightly be that since OJUDAS went on an American renewal project he should get his butt tossed out of America. What’s good enough for Satan should be good enough for his SON wouldn’t you say ?

      • rubb

        Funny how the left always want us to give money to the poor, but only if it goes throught the state first. The part concerning the state has no basis in scripture at all. But they do want us to all start behaving according to scripture, that would preclude a majority of their agenda. Here is a quick list.
        Obedience to the state before all others
        Homosexual – put the latest craze here
        No Fault divorce
        Abortion on demand
        Speech Codes that preclude the teaching of any religion they disagree with.
        No restrictions on sexual behavior, witness the SF homosexual “pride” events

  • jaykali

    He isn’t even close. He is a textbook secular humanist and governs like one. You can always tell a phony when they have to get on stage and share something “about their faith”. Everything he says on religion is contrived and awkward…

    • davesinsanantonio

      If they have to get on a stage to tell us about their faith, they are really faithless hypocrites, just like the ones Jesus condemned during His ministry. If Obummer was DOING charity, instead of trying to force the rest of us to do it, then he would be in God’s favor. I am not sure that God approves of using the power of the state to force people to give to others, especially when the members of the government keep so much of the proceeds in passing, since forcing others to do things is not redemptive. But, if they really believed in God and His charity, they wouldn’t be up on the stage, they would be in the hospitals, prisons, and poor houses actually doing something instead of having the trumpets precede them in their forced tax “almsgiving” on the street corners “so they may be seen of men”.

    • dudette

      and we all know it and everyone says he is not because that is the PC thing to say. He thinks using the Bible as a prop for his socialist BS will work because he thinks that all of us have double digit IQs. He has such contempt for Americans I do believe he underestimates them and let’s hope I am proved right in Novemebr.

      • jaykali

        We see in this blog and others and comments very insightful breakdowns of what passages meant in context, etc. by people who actually spend the time to read and try to understand the bible. Obama/Pelosi/whoever DO NOT CARE.

        Liberals will just find a well known scripture that ‘sounds’ like it supports a point they’re making and just throw it out there as if to say, ‘ya I don’t really respect your faith except when I have a chance to rub your face in it’.

        What surprises me is that I think Obama probably thinks that quoting a scripture will endear him to the so-called ‘bitter clingers’ but it really just makes sincere people angry. I don’t like these prayer breakfasts being used as a political speech, I would think he might try to be a little less politicized but this guy never takes a break.

      • mikeymike143

        i would call him a socialist/muslim as his policies seem to primarily be socialist.

        and i believe he will get clobbered in november

        • Bill S

          Louie Gohmert read it. One of my colleagues saw it on C-SPAN.

          Well done, Breeanne. :-)

        • jaykali

          The whole ‘closet muslim’ thing makes me crazy. There is no such thing as a ‘secret muslim’. Look, all the muslim rumors are are a distraction from the fact that he is NOT religious whatsover. His religion is LIBERALISM. The guy is a classic secular humanist in every sense of the word but that fact has been so buried under the fact that conservatives like to latch on to ‘foreign muslim’ bc the idea belittles him as not only non-American but as a hostile ‘intruder’. He is not an intruder in that sense, he is a Euro-style nanny state socialist type that believes in the idea that America would be a utopia for all if we could make the govt have control over the free market.

      • funwithknives

        blatherer just created one more group of voters, who will show their displeasure at the polls. Does he honestly think that no-one reads and interprets The Bible ,as-written? Of course he doesn’t.
        This was/is designed specifically to those who have stopped thinking for themselves ,”as it’s all just tooo much…” Where were all those of concience who should have simply WALKED Out in protest to this scurrilous lie. At a minimum where were the “floor prayers” by attendees, for His Creator to make him see the error of his ways? Or a mass “losing of the breakfast just consumed.”
        Perhaps(?),This Is The Creator’s Will. After all, aren’t the self-taught lessons the ones you always remember?
        {suggestion:} Let’s all pray for that .

  • georgewideman

    I am taught that “By your works you are know”
    We know President B.H. Obama’s works. A wolf in sheeps clothing.
    Another television charlatan. Next will he be campaining at tent revials?

  • Pingback: Monday Catch-Up: Obama’s Latest Festival of Lies « Nice Deb

  • Pingback: Gun Control: WWJD? « Parker County Blog

  • Pingback: Gun Control: WWJD? | @BenHowe | Spotlight On Corruption

  • runner12

    a neo-socialist ideaology literally makes me ill. How much more can you twist Scripture to fit your own ends?

    Jesus’ commandment to help the poor was not given to Caesar nor the Roman authorities. He never demanded that the government be involved in charity. His commandments were to His followers. Jesus was speaking of personal charity and kindness to the poor, motivated by gratitude to God not by law.

  • kipling

    Mr. Obama attempted to quote Scripture to serve his own purposes. In doing so, he intentionally distorted that Scripture.

    Jesus warned against such false teachers. “For they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do to be seen by men.” (Matthew 23:4-5)

    He also warned what happens to such false teachers.

  • rhampton

    CARITAS IN VERITATE, Pope Benedict XVI, 2009
    It should be remembered that the reduction of cultures to the technological dimension, even if it favours short-term profits, in the long term impedes reciprocal enrichment and the dynamics of cooperation. It is important to distinguish between short- and long-term economic or sociological considerations. Lowering the level of protection accorded to the rights of workers, or abandoning mechanisms of wealth redistribution in order to increase the country’s international competitiveness, hinder the achievement of lasting development. Moreover, the human consequences of current tendencies towards a short-term economy ? sometimes very short-term ? need to be carefully evaluated. This requires further and deeper reflection on the meaning of the economy and its goals[84], as well as a profound and far-sighted revision of the current model of development, so as to correct its dysfunctions and deviations. This is demanded, in any case, by the earth’s state of ecological health; above all it is required by the cultural and moral crisis of man, the symptoms of which have been evident for some time all over the world.

    CENTESIMUS ANNUS, Pope John Paul II, 1991
    Rerum novarum criticizes two social and economic systems: socialism and liberalism. The opening section, in which the right to private property is reaffirmed, is devoted to socialism. Liberalism is not the subject of a special section, but it is worth noting that criticisms of it are raised in the treatment of the duties of the State.32 The State cannot limit itself to “favouring one portion of the citizens”, namely the rich and prosperous, nor can it “neglect the other”, which clearly represents the majority of society. Otherwise, there would be a violation of that law of justice which ordains that every person should receive his due. “When there is question of defending the rights of individuals, the defenceless and the poor have a claim to special consideration. The richer class has many ways of shielding itself, and stands less in need of help from the State; whereas the mass of the poor have no resources of their own to fall back on, and must chiefly depend on the assistance of the State. It is for this reason that wage-earners, since they mostly belong to the latter class, should be specially cared for and protected by the Government.

    See also
    POPULORUM PROGRESSIO, Pope Paul VI, 1967
    RERUM NOVARUM, Pope Leo XIII, 1891

  • Marcus_Traianus

    Are they ashamed of their detestable conduct?
    No, they have no shame at all;
    they do not even know how to blush.
    So they will fall among the fallen;

  • deanfromohio

    …in the Congress. 26 are Democrats and 1 is Republican. Note that Ellison, the vocal Muslim, is among them. So is Barney Frank (no surprise).

    Without further adieu, the hall of shame:

    Amash
    Bass (CA)
    Clarke (NY)
    Clay
    Conyers
    Davis (IL)
    Edwards
    Ellison
    Frank (MA)
    Grijalva
    Holt
    Honda
    Jackson Lee (TX)
    Lee (CA)
    Markey
    McGovern
    Nadler
    Olver
    Payne
    Rush
    S?nchez, Linda T.
    Schakowsky
    Scott (VA)
    Stark
    Waters
    Wilson (FL)
    Woolsey

  • http://www.incredibleco.ning.com Incredible

    Glad to see the RS Ed’s have thier wits about them.

  • http://www.incredibleco.ning.com Incredible

    Glad to see the RS Ed’s have thier wits about them.

  • Ausonius

    OR at least that is one interpretation!

    The passage is admittedly not clear, but on Wednesday, when it was read at our Mass, the priest opined that one interpretation was this:

    The people belong to the Lord, and King David has no right to count them for the purpose of taxing them!

    As a result, Jehovah sends a plague to kill off a good number of the population, thereby reducing David’s hoped-for tax revenue!

    MAObama should keep that in mind! :)

  • mong001

    that conservatives are trying to “force their religion’ on others? This just shows that liberals are the one’s trying to shove their religious beliefs on others, in this case through the tax code. Now that Obama has opened the door to religion when discussing our economic situation, conservatives should take the opportunity to point out what the Scriptures really say about economics: don’t covet your neighbors possessions, work hard, and it’s reasonable to be unhappy when the government takes more than 10% of your income (yes, that last one is actually in the Bible, somewhere in Samuel I believe, but can’t remember the exact reference at the moment).

  • http://www.skiloveland.com skicougar

    I love how Pbama lectures the people, particularly at a prayer breakfast where the majority of his audience are likely to tithe around 10% or better.

    Meanwhile, he gave these percentages for the years 2000 to 2006:
    2000: 0.9%
    2001: 0.5%
    2002: 0.4%
    2003: 1.4%
    2004: 1.2%
    2005: 4.7%
    2006: 6.1%

    From here: http://conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama_and_uncharitableness

    That’s why people like Obama never make me feel guilty. They talk a good game, but they never live it; unless it’s not their money. In fact, I always feel better about myself when I think of him knowing I live what never will.

  • Locked and Loaded

    I thought he was the R in the group, so I looked at his wiki. It says he is a conservative Republican who has endorsed Ron Paul in 2012.

    Now, what again is the difference between libertarian and libertine?

  • dudette

    sorry i don’t get it can you enlighten? i notice that towering intellect Linda Sanchez who stole Dornan’s seat thru Republican timidity is on it.

  • Michael Dugas

    would have the gall to call upon the words of Jesus Christ to justify his theft and inciting of class warfare as if he were some how a righteous person while at the same time supporting the slaughter of untold millions of unborn human beings that God himself says are his children, his creations, “..I knew thee, and before thou camest forth out of the womb “.

  • avagreen

    from the people of this nation.

    I don’t have to quote any scripture to say this guy is a looney tune to think anyone will swallow this swill.

  • Bill S

    .

  • techsan

    He’s adding 10% ($1.5T) to our outstanding debt ($15T) each year. C’mon. Cut the guy some slack. He cares. Look how much of the future earnings of the grandchildren of every American he’s giving out to people who vote for him. /sarcasm

    I don’t recall the Bible passage that describes charity as involving someone else’s work/money/anything else.

    Well stated article. Thank you.

  • Tbone

    in Hell.

  • celador2

    This article includes background references on Jesus and His mission and is skeptical about the intentions of Obama at Prayer Breakfast. Its sort of humorous in a satirical way.

    The rich pay taxes 70% of taxes are from very rich I think, Poor in US are cared for well and those who provide services receive even more in public funds than the poor themselves. We are our brothers keepers. But is the government always the best friend 100% of the time? Often jobs and the environment of sustained growth are the best remedies for the poor, sick, needy and everyone else.

    Jesus might have said on taxes,”Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s…” and lef it at that.

    He had other things to do far more relevant to understanding and building community than earthly tax rates.

  • aj5443

    Can we sue the Obama administration over this Religion of one “so called” Christian being imposed on the rest of us? Seriously, I am a Christian, but I refuse to have someone else’s brand of “religion” imposed on me. Can I get a witness?

  • demsaresatanic

    the largest single reason will be welfare voting.

  • After Seven

    Obama White House ordered coverup of religious symbols for Georgetown speech http://is.gd/KSMLiL

  • davesinsanantonio

    And, neither has Obummer evidently. The speech writers don’t really care what the Bible says, only what they can claim it says, because too many of the sheeple haven’t read it either. If more of us read the Bible for ourselves, maybe we wouldn’t be in this mess.

  • madeirabeach

    The original apostles were indisputably concerned with the issue of charitable giving. In fact in the 6th Chapter of the Book of the Acts we see that seven men were appointed specifically to be ministers of the charitable works of the early church, which were pointedly targeted towards WIDOWS AND ORPHANS. In James 1:27, we see that “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is to look after widows and orphans in their times of distress…”. Unquestionably part of the fruit of the Spirit then, is charitable giving. However, Paul lays down a definitive line in the sand on the subject. Read 2 Thessalonians 3:10: “For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule:” if a man will not work, he shall not eat.”

    I watch in the news here in Florida that certain recipients of EBT benefits are using their government-funded debit cards in the ATMs of liquor stores and strip clubs. It amuses me that this program is in any way equated with the topic of Christian Charity. There are no similarities.

  • davesinsanantonio

    but what they can pretend it says, and that they can pretend to actually do what they then claim it says, because they claim they are to be judged on their intentions, not their actual deeds.

    But, rest assured, when they face the Judgement, they won’t be able to weasel out of their actions, and their phoney defenses will not be able to stand. “Not everyone that sayeth unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that DOETH the will of my father.”

  • jlsankot

    I pray this daily, or as time allows, as I do quite a bit of volunteering—you know, that thing that a person “wants” to do instead of “have” to do according to government law?

    I’ve read all of Psalms and now into Proverbs. It is something I have always wanted to do but didn’t think I ever had the time. Now I’m retired and have no excuses.

    If we all pray Psalms 140 daily, it will be heard. It only takes a couple of minutes.

  • radicalrabbi

    I find it truly amazing how liberal the “Church” has become; what is even more amazing is the number of people who have bought into “liberation theology” and all of the other theologies that make a mockery of the Words of YHVH.
    Calling Mad King Barry a”Christian is akin to putting an elevator in an outhouse; it doesn’t fit.
    Messiah said the poor we would always have among us; what He didn’t say that the rich should be taxed more heavily than anyone else. YHVH does not care about what an individual pays in taxes, we were just instructed to “…render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto YHVH what is His.”
    For those who believe that Mad King Barry is a Christian, they are basing it on his word alone, (and we know how good his word is) know nothing of Scripture. Trying to use OT Law is contrary to the Word of YHVH where he prompted Paul, in his letter to the church in Colossae that “…”the handwriting of ordinances” (Mosaic Law) was nailed to the Cross.
    If BHO is a Christian then Blackbeard the pirate was a Buddhist.

  • CrabCakes

    You say:

    “Yes, Jesus very much emphasized the importance of giving to the poor, but as a reaction in joy to what we?ve been given; not because of a law. Giving out of obligation is not truly giving, it?s merely following the rules.”

    I know that you mean this in the context of mandatory government “charity,” but be careful not to go so far as to imply that Christians have the option not to provide for the poor, it is a very real obligation. A “Christian” who does not provide for the poor is not a Christian (see Matthew 25:31-46).

  • CrabCakes

    My quibble is not with rhampton or the popes, with whom I agree, but with the section of the original post that I quoted.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    But first, hi crabby! Nice to have you back.

    As an evangelical, I kind of bristle at the term “obligation”, I would prefer the idea that charity is a command. And I would also take issue with the idea that just because a man does not provide for the poor he is not a Christian. Christianity is simply a commitment to and relationship with Christ. If we start running down a list of things that separate us from Him then our relationship becomes nothing more than a legalistic trope and we follow a doctrine of works and not grace.

    What can separate me from the love of Christ? Not angels nor principalities nor powers, etc…

  • CrabCakes

    I take your point, and I definitely think that one can err on the side of James just as easily as on the side of Paul. (Not that I think that the two disagree, but their interpreters frequently take one or the other too far).

    I think the important thing is to realize that the law doesn’t go away; it gets written on your heart. Where once we followed the law as an external force; through the power of the Holy Spirit the law is internalized. I would say that if you *don’t* feel an internal drive to help the poor so far as you are able, then you ought you question your Christianity. It is a very real obligation for a Christian, but an internal not an external one.

    It’s interesting that the list of things that Paul denies can separate us from the love of Christ in Romans 8 are all external things. We can certainly separate *ourselves* from his love, though, by refusing to allow the Spirit to bear fruit through us. That’s why Matthew 25 has people being cast into eternal torment based on their failure to care for the poor. By their fruit you shall know them; faith without works is dead; etc.

  • breathless

    “Christianity is simply a commitment to and relationship with Christ”.

    Yes, in a basic sense, but that “commitment requires you to do stuff. Faith, without works is quite simply DEAD. Faith is not considered faith unless it is shown by what you do. (James 2:17)

    “If we start running down a list of things that separate us from Him then our relationship becomes nothing more than a legalistic trope and we follow a doctrine of works and not grace.”

    You would then – assuming consistency with this type of reasoning – would take issue with much of what Christ himself taught consistently throughout his ministry. If he himself did not make the lengthy list that you “bristle” at, then it might be easier to get away with that sort of tripe.

    Jesus said:

    “And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.”

    “In the same way, those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.”

    “For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.”

    “Jesus replied, ?Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.”

    “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”

    Gee whiz, sounds like he lists specific things that you are obligated to do. There are many other such passages as well of “if you don’t – then you cannot enter then kingdom ” etc. You calling his clear words “a legalistic trope” and assuming that grace is achieved apart from obligation is pretty offensive.

    “What can separate me from the love of Christ? Not angels nor principalities nor powers, etc”

    Of course… nothing but you can separate you. You are the only one that can allow yourself to be separated from him.. It doesn’t mean you can’t be separated by your own practice or lack thereof.

  • ariyosef

    O’s gifts were ALL likely all to “Social causes”
    shielded under 501 C3 tax exemption.

    Would be great to see if list was mainly “ACORN” ?

    His own words indicate that penchant that….
    Even if he gave to Wright’s “Church” it would be for
    Socialist, Anarchy, funding destruction of America…

    Certainly NOT what most Americans would call CHARITY,

  • bluemosque

    to make his deception acceptable: I am the Lord Thy God……?

  • mikeymike143

    wouldnt shock me one bit

  • funwithknives

    Since HimSelf is {his word} ” smarter than all his speechwriters”, hang on to your belts for what could come next.
    Where would this leave Chris Matthews. Prostrate on the floor? Make THAT an * MSNBC Special Report *,and I will record that one,for a time capsule.

  • Seedyrom

    so I think I’m covered.

    Obama should ask congress for an Opt In Tax for all those bleeding heart liberals who want to pay more. He can give them a cookie for their efforts while conservatives will thank them for paying back the unconstitutional entitlements they gave away.

  • idahoconservative

    ?In 1953, members of the Senate and House of Representatives, along with President Dwight D. Eisenhower, established the first Presidential Prayer Breakfast. What started as a simple idea of men and women meeting together for mutual encouragement and fellowship in order to find “the better way” has spread to nearly 200 countries from every continent. This call to spiritual mobilization is essential, not in terms of labels, or in terms of any particular institutions or organizations alone, but truly in terms of what Christ can do in the lives of men and women, in the lives of cities, in the lives of states and in the lives of nations.?

    http://www.waleadership.com/national-prayer-breakfast

    The history of the National Prayer Breakfast clearly shows a Christian foundation, and yet, as in so many commemorations, we find that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not truly represented. As the author does a good job of pointing out, it is not the government?s responsibility to tax some people to give to others. The responsibility of Christian charity lies with the people. But, once we hand that responsibility over to the government, we no longer have control on how it is used. Our President is definitely wrong on his view of Christian charity, but he is not giving Christians a bad name as some suggest, however likely it is that one gets that impression. Rather, he is showing his own weakness of understanding of true Biblical teaching. Taking one passage out of the Bible to apply it to any situation out of context cannot be Biblically justified, just as taking anything or source out of context is never justified. Our elected officials should be encouraged to quote the Scriptures more often, but to use it in context. They should also, in turn, be reprimanded when they fail to represent it accurately.

  • remington58

    We shouldn’t take to heart what Obama says about Christianity because he uses it for his own benefit, as skicougar helped point out in her post about Obama’s donations to charity. Unfortunately, Obama used his speech to try and convince the American people that God would have government heavily tax the rich in the name of “charity”. Truly, Christ teaches in St. Matthew 22: 21, “…Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.” However, we also read in Exodus 30: 14-15, “Everyone that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering to the Lord. The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel…” and in Exodus 35: 5, “Take ye from among you an offering unto the Lord: whosoever is of a willing heart, let him bring it, an offering of the Lord…” There was a required tax to pay for the church, but everyone paid the exact same tax, namely a half of a shekel (which, in today’s standards, is about 88 cents). We also see that the Lord allows the Israelites to choose whether they wish to give more or not. We are obligated as Christians to give, yes, but it isn’t a requirement. God established what we would now call a “flat” tax rate and didn’t require anymore of the people, yet Obama argues that God would want the government to tax the rich senseless. Is this not a clear contradiction to Scripture? If a flat tax rate is good enough for the Lord, then it should be good enough for the government.