God’s Plan to Implement the Flat Tax
A while back, World O’Crap wrote about the PEERS Biblical Worldview Test, a survey designed to determine if your worldview is sufficiently Biblical.
Well, the folks at the Christian Worldview Network have come up with a test of their own, and it has more than twice the questions of the PEERS test. Here’s how the CWN describes it:
Your worldview will be tested in the area of law, economics, civil government, religion, social issues, sociology (family issues) education and science. Your worldview will be rated for these eight areas as either: Strong Biblical Worldview Thinker, Moderate Biblical Worldview Thinker, Secular Humanist Worldview Thinker, Socialist Worldview Thinker or Communist/Marxist/Socialist/Secular Humanist Worldview Thinker. You will also receive an overall worldview score and rating.
Do we really need separate categories for Secular Humanism, Socialism and Communism/Marxism/Socialism/Secular Humanism? Couldn’t we just shorten the last one to “Satanicislamomaoist?” Or maybe just “Hillary?”
Anyway, I took the test, and I was surprised to learn afterward that God’s will correlates directly with the agenda of the Republican Party. Basically, they give you a series of statements and you have to say whether you agree or disagree with them. Here’s a sample of my favorite questions:
The most biblically based tax system would be one based on a flat tax system where everyone pays the same percentage of their income in taxes.
I admit I don’t know what the hell the Bible says about taxes, so I put “no opinion” for this question. But if I had to guess, I’m pretty sure God would frown upon changing our current system to one that descreased taxes for the rich while increasing them for the poor.
It turns out I was wrong: I should have answered “Strongly Agree.” I guess there is but one God, and Steve Forbes is His prophet.
Here’s another good one:
American founding fathers violated New Testament principles when they founded America.
I said “strongly agree,” since I thought owning slaves was a New Testament no-no. But apparently, the right answer is “Strongly Disagree,” meaning slavery is a-OK in the Biblical worldview. (Actually, it is if you read certain verses. Here’s what St. Paul wrote to Titus: “Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things. Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.” (Titus, 2:9-10))
Let’s do one more:
One of the Ten Commandments is, “thou shalt not kill;”, thus it stands to reason that God is opposed to war and nations going to war.
I put “strongly agree,” since Christians are always berating situational ethicists who say certain actions, such as stealing to feed your starving family, are permissible under certain circumstances. I mean, when God says “don’t kill,” that should mean no killing, right? Well, I was wrong yet again, as the correct answer in this case is “strongly disagree.” I guess we’re all moral relativists now.
At any rate, I hope the Christian Worldview Network keeps coming up with these tests, ’cause I really wanna learn which Bible verses condone repealing gun laws, privatizing social security and torturing prisoners.
Question #32: Sell all you have and ___________
A) give to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
B) hide it in a tax shelter.
C) buy a Hummer and a McMansion.
D) give to the poor.
Be careful. This is a trick question. The wrong answer can get you strung up.
A.
If you donate to the Swift Boat vets, Bush wins, thus ensuring you’ll be able to keep your tax shelter and can afford that hummer. Oh, and, uhm, you’ll be able to give more to the poor too.
Cool, I learn something new every day! I am a (deep breath) Communist/Marxist/Socialist/Secular Humanist Worldview Thinker. Now I thought I was a non-religious libertarian who recognizes that some people need a little help in life, but now I know better.
Some questions were impossible to answer, especially the ones involving God or the Bible. Since, they didn’t define God, I assumed they meant the Christian God as commonly espoused by fundamentalists in the US, but there are many different versions available. Likewise with the Bible. The Bible is a collection of books from various time periods with different conceptions of God, justice, and many other things.
I don’t know why they didn’t mention Acts 4:32,34-35:
(NIV) “All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had… There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.”
from this page:
http://www.acts17-11.com/money.html
I guess that’s not God’s will anymore or something.
I guess that’s not God’s will anymore or something.
God’s will isn’t written in Bible, but in the GOP platform. Duh!
Im a Hillary, I guess,um as a atheist/agnostic I fell some the questions were kind of odd (basically by asgreeing that god doesn’t say someothing is ok aIm takking their position when in reality I am stating that since there is no evidence for the existence of god it’d be kind of hard for him to posit of an issue one way or the other. I’m not sure what fucked up bible they read, what the beatitude basically being excluded. Oh, and if the bilbe is consistent from beginning to end then the situational repeal of levitical laws never occured or occured wholely thus making either the whole man lying with man thing moot or making god hate shrimp.
that last one was me, yep I’m an Islamomaoist or soemthing.
I like that the question “Is George W. Bush president of the United States” appeared in the FAMILY section.
Besides not killing, Jesus Christ tells us to turn the other cheek, as you may remeber.
The plain meaning of that passage is that it is against self-defense and for charity to even the ungrateful.
This has two consequences:
1. It shows Jesus to be for high taxes. It doesn’t matter if you don’t like what the government does with the money. There is plenty of additional scripture to support this.
2. A “just war” is extremely rare, and quite possibly does not exist. The most pressing moral quandry posed by the gospels is whether or not it is acceptable to use force to defend others.
A “just war” is extremely rare, and quite possibly does not exist. The most pressing moral quandry posed by the gospels is whether or not it is acceptable to use force to defend others.
Yeah, this is one reason why I’m not a Christian (or a pacifist). It’s a nice ideal, but unrealistic. I’m more of a “compassionate Nietzschean,” if that makes sense 😉
WWWSD?
Drat. I’m actually a Satanicislamoleninqueersandinistafondaclintonista. But I’ll bet my bottom yuan that Winston Smith would have aced this one — at least, after the rats and the face cage and all that…
I notice that you lose more points for not having an opinion than for getting the completely wrong answer. That seems weird.
I notice that you lose more points for not having an opinion than for getting the completely wrong answer. That seems weird.
Not having an opinion means you aren’t making judgements, which means you’re a moral relativist!!! So if you’re asked, say, what is the Biblical way to view Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, you must give an answer. Saying “I don’t have an opinion” means all opnions are right!!!!!
Too many complex questions. For instance, it asks if I think Jesus was crucified but not resurrected. Well, I certainly don’t think anybody’s been resurrected, but I’m tentatively convinced by the G. A. Wells line that Jesus probably didn’t exist*, so I don’t think Jesus was crucified either. What do I answer in that case?
* Capsule summary of Wells: All the sources about Jesus are terrible (this much is pretty hard to dispute). The better and more detailed they are, the later they are; what Paul says about Jesus, the earliest stuff, is by far the most lacking in detail. Wells concludes that Paul invented (or was the first to write about) a mystery god figure, and the historical details got tacked on later by the creative contributions of others.
What do I answer in that case?
Nothing at all. You’re expected to unveil the two horns on your head and the cloven hooves on your feet at that point.
I have to question the “George W. Bush is the president of the United States of America” one. Do they think that we Secular-Homo-Hugging-Satan-Worshipping-Terri-Schiavo-Unplugging-Lenin-Agreeing-Hellbound-Creeps are just flat out delusional? Do they think that we think that Kofi Annan is the President of the United States/Loathesome One World Government? Or do those with a “Strong Biblical Worldview” understand that JESUS is the real President and that dim-eyed Texan we see on television is just a stammering puppet for the unfiltered delivery of the Nazarene’s word? I’m no theologian, I guess. Anyway, that’s the only one I got right…
Oh come on! Here’s the real endorsement of slavery (Gen 9:20-25)
Seriously. This was used to justify slavery.
I have to say, as theories go, this one holds about as much water as Intelligent Design. Mark was among the first of any gospel writings to be written–earlier than much–and possibly all–of Paul’s writings, and it shows a very different emphasis than Paul. Most of the NT authors, and nearly all of the gospel writers never met Paul.
And then there are the writings of those like Josephus.
We have fewer contemporary writings about Catiline than Jesus, but we have no problem accepting that Catiline existed.
Did you see this: “For those of you scoring the highest score possible, Biblical Theism, you will be REWARDED with a beautiful, professional looking certificate.”
I want that certificate. I want it like crazy bad so I took the Costanza approach. I answered every question the exact opposite of my first reaction. Still just got 78%.
I guess I’ll be hitting the Book and trying again tomorrow ….
I’m tentatively convinced by the G. A. Wells line that Jesus probably didn’t exist*
Yeah, me too. It leads to some interesting modes of thought, given that I also consider myself Christian.
Mal de mer –
That certificate rocks! Print on your finest paper and have it framed. I loved the scripture, and agree – we can’t have all those persuasive arguments and essential priniciples of the earth deluding us, can we?
Sorry, I meant “elementary principles of the world”. Geez, that’s even better!
I had it printed on papyrus (Kodak Photo-Papyrus on an HP Jesus-smart 325 colour printer). It’ll spruce up the inside of my Sony Auto-Confessional. It’s got surroundsound, don’t you know. The whole thing will be heavenly.
Well, considering the mental state of the Preznit…
I expect during the two Clinton terms, ol’ Dubya W. McFlightsuit was probably still convinced that Pops Bush was Preznit.
“It shore is great that they repealed that thar ay-mendment so’s that Poppy could serve a third term. Ah-heh-heh-heh.”
In a way I have more respect for Jesus as a literary character then as a person. He seems to me to be megolomaniacal and contradictory enough to have been a real religious leader. Like, what was the deal with the woman pouring expensive perfume on him, which lead him to say “you will always have the poor, but you will not always have me”?
It’s hard to write such compelling characters.
Anyway, as to the evidence, to me the issue isn’t whether there’s enough to decide if he existed, the issue is whether there is enough evidence to support his supernaturality. And the answer to that is “no”.
I have to say, as theories go, this one holds about as much water as Intelligent Design. Mark was among the first of any gospel writings to be written–earlier than much–and possibly all–of Paul’s writings, and it shows a very different emphasis than Paul. Most of the NT authors, and nearly all of the gospel writers never met Paul.
And then there are the writings of those like Josephus.
Mark absolutely came after Paul, no two ways about it. There are a few Pauline letters that might date later, but they’re all misattributed (sorry to dip back into ‘document forgery,’ but it was common and accepted practice at the time). This is mainstream view among theologians.
And the famous passage in Josephus that reads, “Jesus, who was the savior,” is an interpolation, most probably added centuries later. Again, that’s backed up by scholarly opinion.
I’m on a mailing list called ‘XTalk’ (Cross-talk) where I’m sort of a designated layman among academic theologians and Biblical archeologists. I’m not just Googling here; I’ve actually been through these things in some detail.
That said, the claim that there was no historical Jesus would be quite hard to float among the theologians. I tend to believe it for a number of reasons, but chiefly because the oral tradition in the early Church has so few instances of people who claimed to have met Jesus.
The most delicious evidence for a historical Jesus is in James the Just, supposedly Jesus’s biological brother, who was Bishop of Jerusalem. But we know that Paul doesn’t draw upon any knowledge or anecdotes of Jesus’s life that could have come from James or the other ben Yusef (Jesus’s surname — sorry, Yosef) siblings, or from the extended family.
And there was also no such village as ‘Nazareth’ until centuries later: It’s a mistranslation of ‘Nazarene (q.v.)’ And there are the historical (and Talmudic) antecedents of Jesus, including Yeshuach (Jesus) ben Pandera. That’s also a juicy q.v., if you’re prepared to wade through some text.
There’s also the Gospel of Thomas from the Nag Hammadi Library — I’m a big partisan of it being an earlier text than Mark, and you can see why if you read it.
But I think the key point is that it’s not necessary for there to have been a single historical Jesus in order for Christianity to be valuable. You know?
I wondered what would be most biblically based tax.
Perhaps a tax on each copy of the Bible in one’s posession. Bibles would form the “tax base”.
More seriously, the idea that state would estimate your income for tax purposes is rather novel, except when the estimate was by the amount and quality of the land that you owned. That would be closer to real estate tax than to income tax that we know today.
The tax that Jesus personally approved, if in passive sense, “render to Caesar ….” was a head tax — every (free person?) was paying the same amount.
I can think of three instances of the Bible registering opinions about taxes. Going back in time: Jesus approved of a head tax, but not as an advise to the Emperor how he should collect taxes by as the acknowledgment that the Emperor may do so. In the monarchies of Israel and Juda the prophets oppose conducting the census of the people for tax purposes (take that, Founding Fathers!). In the story of Joseph, Joseph interpreted a dream, presumably a message from God, as that one should run budgetary surpluss in the fat years and distribute it among the poor during the lean years — but the formula of the tax is not mentioned.
In Joseph case, it seems that when peasants harvested more than enough, pharaoh was collecting the surpluss in the state granaries, and when the peasants harvested less than enough, they got help. It may amount to a progressive tax with a negative bracket.
A really profound topic: is charging interest OK? Are credit cards Biblically correct?
-30 yay!
-30? Daaaaamn you’re a commie!
Dear John. Frank , Gorge, Joe ,
Whoever do you think you are? I worked out my article with my own words and thoughts. Go look the links are up on my Website Gosh, there are other people (writes) that also had the very same min set a myself. I looked up verses and gee I thought those godly people think as I do. No problem!
“Ask not what your country can do for you,rather ask what you can do for your country.” That quote was a regurgitating of another great Democratic President with a few words touched up by Kennedy’s political writers. Few words where actually changed when John Kennedy spoke them. Not one mentioned to Kennedy’s usage of them till many years later after JFK an Assassination. I hardy call quoting the Bible versed the same category. Your posts on Sadly No are not literary masterpieces or original. What you people do is mean spirited uncalled for as well as mere rip off of a written blog of Air America type mentality. My work stand on it’s own and has been proof read by other writes.
Are you taking your Bible lessons seriously? No,I did not think so.what I write is my thoughts politically. Take it or leave it! A lawyer is looking at your posting on my behalf. Your Web sever just might go down after being contacted. At this point it is how much I wish to cause you problems in a court of law. I’m not going to tolerate much more.
Love,
Marie
The Templar Pundit: 2008 Profile: Joe Biden
—
Forwarded Message:
Subj: RE: Do not waste your precious time studying me, as wacky kind of flattering it is.
Date: 08/06/2005 5:25:04 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
From: salvage@hairyfishnuts.com
To: PeoplePolitical1@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Uh so you did plagerise the article?
> — Original Message —
> Subject: Do not waste your precious time studying me, as wacky kind of
> flattering it is.
> From: PeoplePolitical1@aol.com
> Date: Sat, August 06, 2005 12:23 am
> To: gwb@gop.usa, salvage@hairyfishnuts.com, sorry@none.com,
> devilus@yahoo.com
>
>
> 2 Peter 3, “God is not willing that any should perish, but all should come to repentance.â€? I’m truly praying for all of you. Media7 Raamattuopisto
> Please do not make light to of God’s appeal . God loves you. He is died for you. God does very much work in mysterious ways. You brought yourself to me. Why? Now, I will pray you home along with a full church membership where I attend. All of you as of this night are on our prayer list. We are praying you home. “I wish that none should perish ; but have eternal life.” Will you save your family? Will you save yourselves? There is a heaven to gain and a very real life with Christ. There are no floating clouds with a harp. God’s people will have a new life with Him forever. Loved ones will be united. Death and sadness will never where God is. Be THERE! Just Do It >>> Media7 Raamattuopisto Do not waste your precious time studying me, as wacky kind of flattering it is. Please Learn of Him.
> Love,
> Marie Jon’
>
> Every Eye
> http://www.lifetalk.net/2ndcoming/ee.html
> PS. Politics is not a religion. “Love God with all your heart.”
> 12:19 Good night
My work stand on it’s own and has been proof read by other writes.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have transcended the material plane.
Seriously, we should start a spin-off bog dedicated solely to Marie.
Some of those questions were retarded. Most of them were completely misrepresenting of liberal viewpoints and couldn’t be answered either way. My personal favorite though?
“George W. Bush is the President of the United States of America.”
wha?
Seriously, we should start a spin-off bog dedicated solely to Marie.
I’m already planning for the day Marie’s antics no longer constantly top themselves.
What do you think of this one?
http://www.girlontheright.com/
I’m not sure why we have to have a female companion like Dr. Who, but it certainly seems to work out well for everyone.
Funny how she keeps dodging the Thong and Bikini issue.
Hmm…lawyers. Must be that Mike Gaynor guy that writes for her site (MG Law firm). I don’t think he practices though. In fact, I bet he’s not even a member of the bar. I wonder if he was disbarred? Hmm…
Do you think that I’m going to go to jail for my Doody head comment?
No. But you ARE going to hell.
That’s a given.
My dearie Marie, you mention Media7 Raamattuopisto. Why would I want to publicly penetrate the Bible? I love a little kinkiness, but that’s too kinky for even me. Now if you meant the Kalevala, that would be cool, especially if it were of the page with Aino in the nude. Ooh, now I’m getting hot. Maybe I _could_ do that. Give me a Song of Solomon, baby. Ooooh –signal lost—
Ahh, I’m back. That was good. You can see a picture of me following your recommendation here.
I tried answering the questions the way an Orthodox Jew might: e.g. “Strongly Agree” that God created everything and that there was such a thing as objective right and wrong, “Strongly Disagree” that Jesus was the only sinless man. Turns out that would make me (in religious terms) a Commie.
-57 out of 140, or -35%
I am a Communist/Marxist/Socialist/Secular Humanist Worldview Thinker!
Hooray! (Even though I think Communism was one of the worst ideas to come down the pike in centuries. Funny, eh?)
As an agnostic, I had to answer all god-related questions with a “No opinion.” That seemed to make them peevish.
“…Yusef (Jesus’s surname — sorry, Yosef)…”
SHHH!!! You’ll let out my Da Vinci Code secret!
My fav is the “bush is president” question.
What the hell does it have to do with religeon?
Also – the phrase “There is more than one way to God”. Yes there is! Haven’t they ever watch Ben-Hur:
Balthazar (to Ben-Hur) “There are many paths to God my son; I hope yours is not too difficult.”
My score is -12??? for a -7%? O-k…
Oh, can anyone tell me what Value clarification and Situational ethics are?? I got that question “Right” and now I am worried. I was thinking about it with religeous leanings – Values and ethics are learned by life experiences, NOT by somebody’s religeon…
Does this questionnaire require cookies be turned on, or an e-mail address? I’d find taking it amusing, but I really don’t want to get on Jeebus’ spam e-mail list (as a rule, I surf with cookies most definitely turned off, unless it’s a site that absolutely requires them on and I really want to use it, like certain online shopping, or the New York Times. And I resent having to use ’em on the NYT site).
I just made up an email address (using yahoo.com) and it let me take it.
And yes, I’m an evil Commie. -34.
I know I’m hopelessly behind hear, but I totally just smoked that test with a 98%. My certificate will be hanging on my fridge for some time to come. Growing up Southern Baptist does eventually pay off.
Also, if anyone is feeling extra masochistic, I highly recommend http://www.pluggedinonline.com. It’s Herr Dr. Dobson’s totally hip site advising believers on current media. My personal favs are the Indigo Girls and Rage Against the Machine album reviews.
or totally behind “here.”