Writing his faithful blog readers an epistle on Saturday's candidate forum with evangelical pastor Rick Warren, Time magazine's Joe Klein expressed disappointment that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) did not take the moment to teach the multitude, let alone perform miracles like curing Chris Matthews's restless leg syndrome and/or priapism.
But let not your heart be troubled, for Klein has some sermon suggestions for the Obamessiah, such as preaching that taxation might be a handy way to save rich people from Hell (emphasis mine):
Obama was all right, but not great. Both Bill Kristol and Paul Krugman are insightful today on the Obama campaign doldrums of the moment. Seems to me that given all that church talk during the Saturday night festivities--and given Rick Warren's well-documented ministry to the "least of these"--Obama had plenty of room to emphasize the decidedly unChristian nature of Republican economic policies. He might have quoted Jesus on how difficult it is for rich people to go to heaven: "It's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle..." and said something like, "I want it be easier for rich people to get in...We need to tax them more for their own good. "
For good measure, Klein also chimed in with his hearty approval of Rick Warren, no doubt based on Klein's view that Jesus's teachings serve as a handy primer for Obama's economically liberal politics:
It was important that Rick Warren was able to show the new face of evangelicism--a faith as concerned with the Beatitudes as it is with the fire and brimstone imagery of Revelation.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Call me crazy, but...
August 18, 2008 - 14:02 ET by mikefisk...coming from an Evangelical background, isn't salvation a conscious decision that no amount of wealth (or, for that matter, poverty) can guarantee, or even influence?
Granted, I'm no great theologian, so I may be wrong... but if Klein thinks that forced poverty is the way into the pearly gates, I have one thing to say to him...
...you first, Joe.
From HIS lips to your ears
August 18, 2008 - 14:09 ET by RackieIf you teach a man to fish he will be a Republican. If you give a man a fish he will be a Democrat.
I remember this as "if you
August 18, 2008 - 15:24 ET by Tim the EnchanterI remember this as "if you give a man a fish, you'll feed him for a day. If you teach a man to fish, he'll sit on his ass in a boat and drink beer all day."
Granted, I'm no great
August 18, 2008 - 14:09 ET by gopsteveGranted, I'm no great theologian, so I may be wrong... but if Klein
thinks that forced poverty is the way into the pearly gates, I have one
thing to say to him...
...you first, Joe.
Omigosh, At first, I didn't see that final line at the end...thought what you had to say to him was go to h***
You're not crazy. The left is completely deluded and clueless
August 18, 2008 - 14:17 ET by c5thenThose who are not Christian focus on the deeds that they see professed christians doing, and think that is the important part. Unaware and unconcerned about the change in the heart which changes the whole attitude and worldview.
So, it is perfectly sensible to them to think that if you force people to give up more of their money to the government, it's the same as choosing to give to charity or helping less fortunate people directly.
Klein's missuse of the "Rich man" allegory that the messiah used is a perfect example. It has nothing to do with the amount of wealth that the rich man has, it has everything to do with who he chooses to serve. Does he serve GOD and do whatever is neccessary, or does he serve himself and protect his wealth and try to get more?
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
Wow, at least he's not
August 18, 2008 - 14:06 ET by gopsteveWow, at least he's not saying BO did poorly due to cheating, over-thinking, racism...
(unless of course I missed it)
"Time's Klein: Obamessiah
August 18, 2008 - 14:15 ET by Chris Norman"Time's Klein: Obamessiah Failed to Preach Tax Hikes at Warren Forum"
Yes, by all means, Obama - please be open about your certain tax hikes - it worked real well for Walter Mondale
McNotObama '08
feeding the poor
August 18, 2008 - 14:26 ET by candanceKlein misses one detail in Jesus' teaching: there is no compulsion in charity. As soon as someone forcibly takes your money away from you, it's no longer about compassion and instead becomes revenge.
He needs to brush up on 1st Corinthians 13 to see what else the Bible says about charity.
This is nothing but a chance for secular people to enforce morality and therefore say "society doesn't need church because we force everyone to be a good person."
Pro-life
August 18, 2008 - 14:33 ET by KC MulvilleI support the old doctrine of the "seamless garment" from Cardinal Bernardin (who was archbishop of Chicago, by the way), in that being pro-life doesn't end the moment the child is born. We do need to foster a culture of respect for life in all its forms.
But being in favor of childcare (that's helping life, isn't it?) or being anti-war (that's helping life, isn't it?) doesn't excuse standing idly by in the face of abortion, or substitute for it in any way. If you're really for the social gospel and seamless garment, then you're against all things that violate life ... including (not instead of) abortion.
The seamless garment wasn't intended to let anyone off the hook.
Right KC. As the Catholic
August 18, 2008 - 15:15 ET by motherbeltRight KC. As the Catholic Church explains it: respect for life, from conception to natural death.
And liberals still don't see the difference between charitable giving and redistribution of wealth.
I believe my scriptures
August 18, 2008 - 15:29 ET by ksennishI believe my scriptures teacher in high school told me that a camel through the eye of a needle could be referring to a hole in the wall near the gate of Jerusalem called Needle's Eye that was used so people could go in and out easily without fuss, but was often to small for camels carrying a lot of equipment, although camels could still fit if unencumbered with baggage and ducking down. I actually think this allows it to be intepreted much better than the normal interpretation if you think about it.
Not exactly...
August 18, 2008 - 16:23 ET by sixlbs9ozYeah, commonly heard, but not backed up with history. Read here for more on that.
Sincerely,
Mr. Scriptural Snopes
Joe Klown seems bound and
August 18, 2008 - 15:36 ET by fitzfongJoe Klown seems bound and determined to show the world how little he knows on a daily basis. The unintentionally humorous aspect of this is that he actually thinks he's being clever...not the national laughingstock that he really is. In this lame excuse for a column, he crosses his own wires with tired, uninformed cliches about three subjects he knows nothing about...tax policy, the economy and religion. He should stick to his Clinton-worshipping Cyrano de Bergerac routine. Better yet, he should learn the difference between a "rich man" and a "high-income earner". I doubt that having your money stolen from you by a third party will make it any easier for you to get to heaven.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
The Trouble with Rick and Bambi
August 18, 2008 - 16:04 ET by Acts 2_38WARNING this post contains what Jesus describes as "HARD SAYINGS"! "Proceed with caution" and try not to hate the messenger too much! :}
The problem is that neither Obama nor Rick Warren are equipped to understand the scriptures in the first place. *ouch* I realize this sounds harsh but it's true nonetheless. If you read Luke 24:45 you'll see that it was necessary for Christ to "open the understanding" of His Apostles in order for THEM to understand the scriptures.
2 Tim 4:3,4
3For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Rick Warren is a teacher of false doctrine, that is the reason that he has such a big church. He is scratching the ITCHING EARS of his congregation. People who don't want to be told that they must have an ANSWER FROM JESUS CHRIST in order to make their "calling and election sure" . Or that Jesus said that SIGNS FOLLOW BELIEF and that He confirms His word in each believer with just such a sign as he LISTED here, Mark 16:15-20.
This is the reason that neither Obama nor Rick Warren even understand who the "poor" of the Bible ARE IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! See, when the bible refers to feeding the poor or taking care of the disadvantaged, this is who they are speaking about.
James 1:27
27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
The poor in the bible are ORPHANS and women unable to work because of years spent married and out of the work force! This is NOT who Obama and Warren are talking about. They're talking about a bunch of welfare recipients too LAZY to go out and get a job, or people who shouldn't be in this country in the first place due to lack of citizenship! Concerning MEN and those able to work the Bible says thusly,
2 Thessalonians 3:10-12
10.For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
11For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies.
12Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.
Quite different from the welfare state beloved of Senator Messiah and his unregenerated preachers, huh? Oh, and for those who will drag out the tired canard about me "judging" Rick Warren's lack of scriptural integrity, I offer in anticipation, this....
1 Corinthians 2:14-16 (King James Version)
14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.
And I submit this for your review...
1 Corinthians 5:11-13 (King James Version)
11But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
12For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
13But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
See, as Christians you're supposed to evaluate the conduct of those who claim to be "within" the church. Or else what would you do with the hundreds of scriptures warning you against listening to FALSE DOCTRINE, if you were prevented from making a scriptural "judgement" about who was teaching it? Also the word Judgement in the bible means the enactment of penalty for the perceived error, not the mere observance of said error. Jesus didn't say that the penalty for the woman's adultery was no longer the penalty, He merely said, "Let He who is without sin, cast the first stone". He wasn't talking about any old sin which once committed would eliminate the committer from making any judgements about anything! He was talking about their violation of the Mosaic law which clearly stated that BOTH the MAN and the WOMAN who committed the adultery were to be killed. Yet these men only brought the woman to be judged while hiding the identity of the man and thereby partaking in the sin of this occasion by deciding who would be punished and who wouldn't. But that's for the bible scholars amongst you if there be any.
Sry to run on so long but hey, you were warned!
Personal Policy, Public Policy
August 18, 2008 - 16:30 ET by sixlbs9ozJesus said a lot of things about how we should behave personally. For instance, he said that if someone strikes us on one cheek, that we should turn the other to him also. Does this mean that after 9/11, we should have 'turned the other cheek' as a nation to the aggressors that attacked our nation? I have actually heard that argument.
Or, if we wish to bring that cup of cold water to the thirsty, clothe the needy, or help the sick, does that mean we promote a governmental policy that will do that, or is that a person-to-person thing?
As a conservative and a Christian, I believe that the needy, hungry, sick, and downtrodden should be cared for. But I think government does a poor job of doing so, and I would rather those things be a personal policy rather than public policy.
Also, the POTUS can't turn every American's cheek by proxy when we are attacked. Romans chapter 13 teaches that the government holds the sword (of justice and power) for a reason, and that is to punish those who do wrong. That power is instituted by God to restrain evil in this world. 'Turning the other cheek' is not an applicable Scripture in the case of 9/11, as just one example.
People need to understand commandments that are person-to-person vs. what governmental policy should be.
'Turning the other cheek'
August 19, 2008 - 05:52 ET by kilrodAll i want to know is which cheek of my arse would the lib-o-tards, o-Dumb-uh and the terrorist prefer to "kiss"(grins).
Seriously, these are excellent post about Christianity, my hats off to you guys.
kilrod
Remember, only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier
Well, there's one tax/tithe question
August 19, 2008 - 03:27 ET by sarcasmoI knew that preacher would NOT be askin' those politicians, and sure enough, as predicted, he didn't ask it.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.