"I think America's greatest moral failure in my lifetime has been that we still don't abide by that basic [p]recept in Matthew that whatever you do for the least of my brothers, you do for me. And notion of - that basic principle applies to poverty. It applies to racism and sexism. It applies to, you know, not having - not thinking about providing ladders of opportunity for people to get into the middle class. I mean, there is a purvasive [sic] sense I think that this country is wealthy and powerful as we still don't spend enough time thinking about the least of these."
The Scripture is Matthew 25, starting at verse 31, whose titles are variants of "The Son of Man Will Judge the Nations," "Judgment of the Gentiles," etc. The passage deals with the coming judgment after Christ returns. Sitting on his throne, Christ separates believers (sheep) from the unrepentant (goats). He tells believers that what they've done for the least of the brethren, fellow believers, they've done for him.
Though Christians disagree on this, I think what's clearly in view here is not charity for all the less fortunate. It's about Christians attending to the legitimate needs of other Christians. But more about that later.
The Unborn: The Least of My Brothers
With a straight face, Obama chastised others for not abiding by the precepts of Matthew 25, when he had a chance to do the same and failed. For example, instead of choosing to protect and care for the least of his brothers, the unborn, by supporting a bill that would protect those born alive after failed abortion attempts, he voted against the bill. (Obama can't keep straight his reasons for voting against the bill. Also see Life Lies.) Who among us is more vulnerable and needy than an infant, unborn or otherwise? Obama the "Christian" said he would not yield when it comes to a woman's right to have her baby slaughtered.
To Obama, America's "greatest moral failure" isn't that babies are murdered; it's that our "wealthy and powerful" country isn't giving more money to the poor. (See Carol Platt Liebau's comment on that.) Never mind that Americans give billions of dollars in charity each year, uncoerced by the government. I wonder what Obama will say on Judgment Day if Christ asks, "Why didn't you protect the least and most vulnerable of your brothers, those in the womb?"
Obama Echoes Kerry
During his failed bid for the presidency in 2004, John Kerry implied that George Bush was neglecting to do "good works," biblically speaking, because he wanted to cut spending, and that spending more tax dollars was evidence of fruits of salvation. See Kerry Cites Scripture To Battle Bush View and John Kerry and James 2.
Socialist types trying to appeal to Christians often cite Jesus' earthly ministry of physically feeding the poor and healing the sick. Never mind that these acts were signs pointing to spiritual feeding and healing or that these social types conveniently leave out all that scary stuff about God's judgment against the unrepentant. They can quote chapter and verse on helping "the least of my brothers" with more taxpayer-supported government programs, but ignore the reality of Christ's judgment on the world or the need to accept Christ to avoid that judgment.
But I digress. The point is this: Christian acts of charity are to be done on an individual level, and the nature of that giving is voluntary. In Matthew 25, Christ wasn't commending believers and condemning unbelievers based on what they rendered unto Caesar; he was referring to individual acts of kindness those who love God are willing do.
Does Obama really believe Christ had government in view in Matthew 25, that spending even more tax dollars on the "needy" fulfills God's requirement for Christians to care for the poor in their congregations? From what I've read and heard, Obama believes in a jumbled social gospel mess that's based on theological ignorance.
Source
Posted by John Ray. For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. For a daily survey of Australian politics, see AUSTRALIAN POLITICS Also, don't forget your roundup of Obama news and commentary at OBAMA WATCH
4 comments:
I don't agree, J.R.
Christ came to heal the sick, the blind, and the lame. He dined with whores and tax-collectors.
He taught that the Samaritan (the Samaritans were a particularly hated group of people in that day) was the neighbor, if he performed kindness.
All of these examples go against the idea of only helping fellow believers.
That being said, I don't agree with Obama that what Christ meant by charity was that the government should confiscate people's money and give it to who the government thinks it ought to be given to.
More than anything, Christ's message was about love and the redemmptive power of love. Love is a personal choice. We choose to perform loving behaviors. One can not force a person to do a loving behavior. A good deed done without choice (of being loving) is like a clanging bell or a crashing cymbal.
Christ clearly believed in good done through free will.
In fact, Christ died so that we could continue to have free will.
God could have instead chosen to force people to do the right thing.
But, instead, God chose to give His only begotten Son so that whoever chooses to believe in Him would have eternal life.
Why do people like you, turn every religious comment in to an attack on you wallet. "government should confiscate people's money"
I find both candidates sincere in helping America, but people like want to push you political agenda via religion. Maybe you should spend more time actually doing gods work, then twisting by bring down others all for the sake of you materialists ends
I do not agree that Obama was twisting the bible in the statement quoted in the article. Jesus was implying that those who were more prosperous take care of the poor and less fortunate. It was about giving away your riches and becoming spiritually rich. There were numerous examples in the bible that reflects this. (Mark 12:41-42;Matthew 6:19-21). It is widely known and taught in schools and colleges that Jesus' views on economics were largely socialistic. I find it strange that socialism is viewed in a negative light by those who are wealthy yet they consider themselves to be Christians. I agree with pastorius as well. This is not about fellow believers only. The Samaritan example is on point.
Post a Comment