“Jesus was always flapping his gums about the poor, but not once did he call for tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Romans”

Colbert outdoes himself.

h/t: @viewfromthecave

3 thoughts on ““Jesus was always flapping his gums about the poor, but not once did he call for tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Romans”

  1. The New Testament Jesus seemed more concerned with judging those inside his flock than those outside. His target was not Pilate or Roman politicians but rather the spiritual leaders of his day. If Jesus of Nazareth entered the American scene it seems rather obvious that his targets would be greedy television preachers and sexually abusive priests than the likes of Obama or the Democratic party. His mission seemed more keen on changing peoples hearts than a political grab for power in Rome. To get really technical the historical Jesus, a bearded man who originated from Palestine, spoke Aramaic, and whose appearance would resemble very few people in the American South would ironically be a liability to the modern conservative politician on image alone.

  2. I’m not sure if he’s the one who really outdoes himself.
    I wonder what book Bill O’Reilly owns that he strongly believe is the Bible but obviously isn’t ?
    – “For them, Jesus wants us to “provide” no matter what the circumstances.”
    Let’s see, didn’t Jesus go so far as saying that for someone who own richness doing everything correctly is still not enough, he should give *everything* he owns to the poor ? Matthew 19.16
    – “But […] I know […] he was not self-destructive”
    I think O’Reilly should learn about a place named Golgotha, and that in the Christian view Jesus knew everything about what would happen there, but went anyway. Christians like to call that selflessness, but objectively it was also a choice of self-destruction and Jesus’s way of “providing” without any limit, even to those he knew would betray him a few hours later.

    But then Bill O’Reilly “as a Christian” is able to say giving some percent of his gains to others is too much !?

    And I hope I won’t see someone trying to muddle things. Maybe the state will waste all that money and use it for nothing useful. But that’s *not* the argument O’Reilly is doing in front of our eyes. No, he’s in all seriousness trying to pretend that this amount of money is *more* than the amount of generosity Christian faith ask for.