Worthy Christian News » Obama Reorganizing Faith-Based Programs For "Secular Purposes"

During his presidential campaign, Obama pledged to allow religious institutions funded through his reorganized faith-based office to hire and fire employees based on their respective religious beliefs only for activities that are privately funded. Exactly, what does this mean? Does anyone care to translate that legalize into plan English? So, is mum the word or can the "Administration" monitor employees' private "activities" and fire them for their "religious" beliefs? And, Why a 26 year old heading a department like that? This is just one more reflection of Obama's "mistakes" that he will answer to whom for? That's right-ultimately, The Lord, but UNTIL then what havoc shall be reaped?

The key statement in this article can be found in the second from the last sentence. The worst enemy the Democratic party, and therefore Obama has is godly men, and women, evangelical Christians sensitive to God's word, and will, who will not be silent. L.B.J knew this over thirty years ago, hence 501C, the churches sacred cow, has, and is being used to silence her in regards to her responsibility, to teach their congregations their responsibility, to vote using a biblical lenz, as opposed to a worldly veiw. Whenever you take government money, which is what the church does when the government exempts them from taxation, the government demands accountability, and transparency. In other words they will micro-manage, and dictate what the church can, and cannot do, and say.

In my opionion this is a way to finish the job L.B.J. started. Godly men with big hearts, and little brains will fall head over heels for this continued manner of subtle back door manipulation, just as they fell into the snare of 501C. "OH! What wonderful things we can do with all the money we will save on taxes, feeding the poor, providing for the homeless in Jesus name! You know what they say; don't muzzle an oxen!" Good intentions? Probably. But Godly, by Jesus example? Hmmmmmmm. I believe Jesus ministry was entirely privately funded.

What are the biblical examples Jesus set? Did Jesus pay taxes? Yes. Give to Caesar what is Caesars, and to God what is Gods. Did Jesus understand that feeding the hungry was the compassionate thing to do? Yes. Did Jesus also understand the food the hungry really needed wasn't material, but spiritual, and that the poor would always be with us? You betcha. What does it profit a man to gain everything this world has to offer and to lose his soul? Jesus understood this. How does it profit the kingdom, to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, house the homeless, WITHOUT communicating their ONLY real need, in accepting God's free gift of salvation in the person of His Son, Jesus Christ? Read the gospel of John, and the feeding of the 5000. If you die in a warm bed, with a full belly without Jesus, you may take the trip in the comfort of 1st. class, but hell is still your final destination. The flesh counts for NOTHING. God see's only two camps here on earth, the redeemed, and the damned.

When the church feeds, clothes, and houses the needy with government money, they will not be able to evangelize in doing so. They will be expressly forbidden to evangelize. The Democrats have no intention of sharing the credit for compassionately meeting human needs with Jesus. Obama, and company are near perfect politicians, they excel at stealing the credit, and placing the blame. However, they are more than willing to USE the free resource of labor the churches will provide in the distribution of government food, clothing, and housing. Just don't do it in Jesus name, because it's uncle Sam's dollar, and he's taking the credit.

The Democratic party is not comprised of fools, but primarily lawyers, how's that for devils advocacy! They intend to infiltrate their enemies camp, and divide and conquer. Satan's plan has remained unchanged from the beginning, he will pander to human weakness in covetous, and pridefull hearts, yes even in godly men. Which is why the redeemed, the children of the light have NO business yoking themselves with darkness! Don't play with fire, you will get burned!Apparently, a divinity degree is no measure of godliness, go figure! But it sure looks good on Obama's 26 yr. old's resume. Or should I say the 26 yr. old with the divinty degree sure looks good on Obama's resume?

Is it any wonder Jesus chose fisherman, a tax collector, a zealot, etc. to advance the gospel? NO CREDENTIALS! God doesn't share His glory with anyone, and He sure doesn't need to share it with Obama, and company. I don't think He'd fancy His name on the same ticket, DO YOU? Isn't it great that the divinity majors of Jesus day took note as they drilled, and griiled His disciples that they they were uneducated men that had been with Jesus? AMEN! Give God the glory!

In Christ our Lord

Let me ask this: Why should faith-based organizations even want government money? Isn't the goal of many Christian organizations to spread Christian charity through the world and the Christian faith through the world, not to administer government charity. I think the office of Faith-Based Organizations should be abolished.

Any time you marry government to religion, you wind up with a monstrosity. If churches and other Christian charities give only their own money, so what that they cannot do more. They are doing what they can with what they have. That is all they are responsible for. It is not their job to save the world from all of its problems. It is there job to do THEIR bit to help how THEY can.

If they don't touch the government tap, the government can't tell them how to do what they do. Strings are always attached to money that goes out. No one ever says, "Here's a pile of money; do ANYTHING you want with it HOWEVER you want." So, as soon as Christian charities start lusting for that government money, they start finding themselves pressured to do things a little differently. They are only responsible before God to do what they can with what they have. If the government wants to come and offer them money with no strings attached because it likes what they're doing and that money is not used for the advancement of that religious group, then fine. But its easy, even then, to build up a bigger program that becomes dependent on that money. Suddenly when strings start getting attached, the institution is addicted to the money, finds it has to fire employees if it's going to stop taking the money, and the temptation is their to capitulate.

I say, let the government do its own charity. Encourage it to do it in responsible ways, and if you truly want to administer charity that does not benefit a religious cause in any way, then work for the government. But the second you know you wouldn't be happy doing such work without the religious cause as a part of it, then you know that the faith-based money from the government really is in some way supporting the religious cause that you would be happy working for. If the government is going to benefit Christian causes, then it should and must also benefit B'hai causes and Wiccan charities and all kinds of things that many of us don't really want to see our money funneled through. Why should we, as followers of Jesus, expect others to feel any different about their money being funneled through causes they don't agree with?

I say you cannot keep government out of religion if you do not keep government money out of religion. Bush's faith-based initiative was a bad initiative in the first place. History teaches us that any times Christians have been tempted to marry their cause to governments, it has always polluted the cause. It sometimes starts good, but always turns sour.