Opinion

Are Tax Cuts Anti-Christian and Murderous?

Liberals have gotten religion again since tax cuts have passed the House and Senate. Some of them are claiming that God would not approve of people getting to keep more of their property to use as they please, including helping those less fortunate through private and charitable channels. It’s OK to oppose a tax bill that lets people keep more of their own money (by misquoting the Bible), but don’t you dare suggest that the Bible prohibits killing unborn babies, same-sex sexuality, and the claim that there are more than two sexes.

Nancy Pelosi said the Republican tax reform bill, misquoting the Bible, will mean “the end of the world” and “Armageddon.” So what was our nation like when we didn’t have an income tax?

There are many Christians who do not understand the basics of economics or what the Bible says about taxation and government interference in the marketplace, as evidenced by a group of “Christian” socialists led by Jim Wallis who protested the tax cut legislation “in the atrium of the Hart Senate Office Building in Washington. They were reading Bible verses about caring for the poor, and doing it so loudly that their voices could be heard at the doors of senators’ office suites nine stories above.”

Joel McDurmon describes the scene:

At one point in the demonstration, one of the priestesses declared, “Senators, we put you on notice: your souls are in danger, and this is your final warning”—as if any single one of these liberal theologians really believed in a final judgment.

Then, one of them read from Isaiah: “you are a city full of murderers” (Isa. 1:21).

They were right on one point. The city is full of murderers. It’s the city where killing the unborn is public policy supported by confiscated tax dollars. But these so-called religious leaders weren’t there to protest abortion. McDurmon continues:

Planned Parenthood is one mile down the road, and the Jim Wallis parade is nowhere to be found.

Here is a map of places where actual murders are taking place within the same vicinity, every day, multiple times a day:

The protestors fail to note that in Isaiah 1 there is an indictment against government fraud, oppression, and theft:

How the faithful city has become a harlot,
She who was full of justice!
Righteousness once lodged in her,
But now murderers.
Your silver has become dross,
Your drink diluted with water.
Your rulers are rebels
And companions of thieves;
Everyone loves a bribe
And chases after rewards.
They do not defend the orphan,
Nor does the widow’s plea come before them (Isa. 1:21-23).

Our government has debased our currency with fiat money (dross). Lobbyists bribe elected officials to protect their individual interests. Politicians are more interested in power, prestige, and financial rewards. Who is hurt the most by these policies? The least of these – widows and orphans – not because people aren’t taxed enough, but because government policies contribute to the conditions of the poor.

In 2000, I debated Wallis about what the Bible says about the poor. Like Gov. John Kasich, he is a proponent of a “Christianized” social redistributive welfare state.

In our debate, Wallis claimed that there are more than 2000 verses in the Bible that address poverty. This may be true, but, as Gary North points out, “he has yet to provide textual/exegetical support for his constant calls for more State welfare to the poor.”

I asked Wallis to show me one verse of the 2000 he says address the poor that mandate that government should get in the welfare business. He could not.

Liberal “values are about sticking a gun into a successful person’s belly,” Gary North states, “taking his wallet, removing an unstated percentage of the money, and handing the wallet back. ‘See you at the next election.’”

The programs that have been developed to help the poor have only increased the number of poor. Our nation’s progressive taxing system has made it more difficult for people and charitable organizations to help the poor directly.

The poorest Americans do not pay any Federal income tax. How can giving a tax cut to people and corporations that pay taxes be an attack on the poor? When people and corporations get to keep more of their money, the economy grows. Jobs become more available and wages go up. Wallis and his socialistic followers believe that wealth confiscation and redistribution is the role of government. So to be taxed at ever higher levels is a form of theft. Yes, the people who make the most money get a larger break on taxes because they make the most money! It’s simple arithmetic. The top 1% earners (who earn a little over 20% of the reported income) pay 40% of federal taxes and the top 10% earners pay 70% of federal taxes. This means that the bottom 90% pay 30%. This works out to the top 1% earners paying more (40% of the pie) than the bottom 90% earners (30% of pie).

Jesus had many opportunities to call on the Roman Empire and civil officials in Israel to develop a confiscatory and redistributive welfare State. He didn’t.

There is no forced governmental altruism mandated in the Bible. Gleaning might be the closest thing to it, but it was only commanded for agriculture and was not an operation of government (Lev. 19:9; 23:22; Deut. 24:19–21; Ruth 2:2–23). It was hard work for those who picked the remainder of the harvest.

Early Christians sold some of their property voluntarily to help those in need (Acts 2:45; 4:34). No one in the early church called on the State to create a government agency to care for the poor.

The Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37) uses his own money to care for the robbery victim left for dead. There was Paul’s collection for the saints in Jerusalem (Acts 24:17; 1 Cor. 16:1–4; 2 Cor. 8:1–9:15; Rom 15:25-27).

You can’t be altruistic with other people’s money. Taking money from one group of people and giving it to others is not altruism, even if a majority of people vote for a program that does it. It’s theft. Theft by “majority rule” is still theft.

Wallis and Kasich take verses that are directed at individuals and turn them on their head and give them a political twist. Here’s a representative example:

“Most important, when we reflect on all Jesus had to say about caring for the poor and oppressed, committing ourselves to His red-letter message [the words of Jesus that are often in red letters in some Bibles] just might drive us to see what we can do politically to help those he called, “the least of these” (see Matt. 25:31–46).

“On the day of judgment . . . [God] will ask whether or not we fed the hungry, clothed the naked, received and cared for aliens, and brought deliverance to captive peoples (see Matt. 25:31–46).”

The author of the above sees a political solution in these verses when Jesus is addressing what individuals have or have not done. Civil governments are the biggest hindrance to helping the poor, and it’s not because they don’t tax enough and redistribute wealth. High taxes and control of the money supply (inflation/deflation) enable civil governments to control people and their property. A ten percent tax is a sign of tyranny (1 Sam. 8:15), and yet these so-called social justice Christians believe in higher taxes on the rich to help the poor.

It was a taxing policy by Rome that forced Mary and Joseph to leave their stable home environment, Joseph’s job, and spend money they probably did not have to register for a government tax (Luke 2:1–7). Wealth redistribution policies, with all their good intentions, hurt the poor and make them wards of the State, so that “the last state of that man” (and tens of millions more) “becomes worse than the first” (Matt. 12:45).

Previous post

If liberals don't care about unborn babies, why are they so worried about robot rights?

Next post

New report reveals Hollywood’s homosexual boy abusers now a step closer to being exposed


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.