Posted on 09/22/2008 4:36:46 AM PDT by Kaslin
One of the perhaps most confusing sub-texts of the 2008 election has been the curious and in some cases surprising support that the candidates have and have not received from evangelical Christians. But if one looks at the record, and not merely the high rhetoric one thing for certain should be easily distinguishable - Barack Obama's record of votes, his view of government, and the ideas to which he aligns himself do not match the values, principles, and truths for biblical Christians.
Understanding this to be the case, and knowing that biblical Christians have a responsibility to act as wise stewards when casting their votes (render to Caesar, in our nation 'We the People' are Caesar etc.) it become imperative to speak with clarity on the issue.
For the next few weeks my column will follow the most egregious examples of where Obama's record violates values, principles, and biblical truth. The treatment of "the least of these!"
Speak to any Obama supporter and the rhetoric they will effuse concerning hope and change will inevitably lead to Obama's platitudinal use of "helping a neighbor in need" or "looking out for the least of these." The quasi-biblical concepts are used by Obama as a force-du-jour concerning the combination of helping the downtrodden, those without hope, and those that need help. In fact if you were to survey any group of Obama supporters it is doubtless that one of the number one reasons they likely support him is this idea that he will empower the powerless. Yet nothing could be further from the truth in his record, and in his plans.
Beginning with his economic plan Obama pledges to only tax people making above a certain income level at a higher rate than everyone else. His false claim is that this aids the middle and lower class because he steals from the rich and gives the poor.
In reality he steals from the rich, gives to his administration, and creates dependency in greater numbers upon government entitlements.
This gives nothing to the poor except a statehood of near slavery.
When Obama was a community organizer he grew frustrated at the inability of his leftist ideas to make any factual difference in the lives of the people he was "organizing." Thus he quit.
What Obama's economic plan would do instead is to further punish successful mom and pop business owners by taxing them even more than the presently discriminatory rates they pay, and in the process eat up the capital they could instead be using to employee more workers, expand their operations, buy more supplies, and reduce the cost of their goods and service. In doing so the price of their product increases, fewer people buy it, and they likely will be forced to reduce their work staff. Obama's economic plan is not new, it is historic, and it has always created worse economic conditions.
But his plan for the treatment of "the least of these" is dishonest on another level.
Barack Obama uses a very narrowly defined definition for who he primarily sees as "the least of these" and Jesus did not.
There is in fact little resemblance between Obama's manipulation and sub-categorization of who he includes in his definition and how Jesus himself defined them.
Obama seems to be targeting his specific message to economic issues only, and Jesus certainly did not.
In the New Testament it is easy to see how much Jesus Christ love children. When his disciples attempted to shoo them away because they would "bother" their Lord, Christ rebuked them and reminded everyone listening that it is only the faith that is simple, trusting, and pure--like that of a child--that ultimately will save them.
There is the reminder of how evil Christ himself felt about those who would harm even a hair on those He loved. And though the term "disabled" does not appear in the New Testament text, if we are to understand anything about Christ's view of children, the innocent, and those who were at a disadvantaged position in life we would have to hold that children who face challenge in mental or physical regards would be very special indeed to Him.
Obama according to his own audio recordings, and more importantly his votes on the matter views children as a burden, a weight, and a problem. Additionally he has even embraced that 1938 German concept of "a life not worthy to be lived." There is no other way to classify his position on the matter of infants born at Christ hospital in suburban Chicago (operated by Obama's own "church") who were allowing disabled children who had been born to die from neglect and starvation. And while every other Senator on the federal level found it grotesque and abhorrent - Barack Obama FOUGHT to keep the practice legal. He chaired the committee, he called for the votes, he saw the language finalized, and then he voted to keep the practice in place.
And then... he lied about doing so!
He did at least until he was forced to admit the truth from documents uncovered this year.
There will be a series of other arenas that I will examine in the weeks to come, but on Obama's own self-elevated issue of his treatment of the forgotten, downtrodden, and overlooked it is clear that his priorities have never been that of Christ's and though he may say otherwise now...
His record, his plans, and his manipulations tell a different story!
....or even real Americans.
...the ideas to which he aligns himself do not match the values, principles, and truths for biblical Christians.
No, but they match the corrupted values, principles and truths of Black Liberation Theology.
on the one hand, liberals invoke His name to add legitimacy to their agenda; yet, when the ten commandments are seen on public property it stirs liberal controversy, handwringing, hateful rhetoric and endless litigation to have them removed while invoking the “separation of church and state” principle. (mendacious liberals; not an oxymoron.)
IMHO
Oh, how I desperately wish one of his acolytes would “get in my face” with such a defense.
All this talk of Christianity by Obama when he clearly does not have christian beliefs, aka his black theology church and Obama’s sick views on abortion and homosexuality only lead my to believe he is lying when he says he is a Christian. It also has me wondering, could he be the antichrist?
Jesus NEVER taught that salvation comes with engaging in charitable work on behalf of needy people, nor did the apostles, nor does the bible.
Young's literal, word-by-word translation reveals what this passage actually says:
37 `Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when did we see thee hungering, and we nourished? or thirsting, and we gave to drink? 38 and when did we see thee a stranger, and we received? or naked, and we put around? 39 and when did we see thee infirm, or in prison, and we came unto thee? 40 `And the king answering, shall say to them, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] to one of these my brethren -- the least -- to me ye did [it].
"Brethren" is in apposition to "the least." It means Jesus is speaking of someone who helps out even the least of Jesus' "brethren," that is, those who believe in Jesus.
Clearly, what Jesus is saying is that even the smallest FAITH IN JESUS is rewarded. If that SIDING WITH JESUS is revealed in nothing more fleeting than helping some insignificant believer, then that minimum demonstration of faith in Him is sufficient for salvation.
There have been lots of articles & discussions about Obama being a new messiah. I just finished reading Saul Alinsky’s book, “Rules for Radicals.”
Alinsky says, ‘The organizer is in a true sense reaching for the highest level for which man can reach - to create, to be a “great creator,” to play God.’
Obama really bought in to Alisky.
It seems to me that acts of christian charity are not necessarily limited to other believers, but are extended to all who are in need. Our church's feed the homeless, which does not rely on federal funding, reaches out to men and women in need of simple comforts (food and drink). Where this differs from the liberals' approach is that we are commanded to be directly involved, not indirectly through some government program which absolves tax payers of the responsibility (and benefit) of such involvement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.