Why Calling The US Tax Code Racist Is Not So Clear: Consistency and Logical Conclusions

It doesn't come up much here, as I use this blog to focus more on matters of religion and worldview, but I am an accountant by trade. And on some occasions, the two worlds intersect.

In this case, the issue at hand is racism and the United States Internal Revenue Code, which sets the laws for taxation at the federal government level. 

Full disclosure: I don't specialize in tax directly. It's not my specialty or field of interest. Nevertheless, I am a CPA (certified public accountant) and an EA (enrolled agent), so I have to maintain a working knowledge of tax law and practice. I know enough to be dangerous.

And so when an issue ties taxation with worldview, I may have some thoughts and insight (at least hopefully).

Jesus Did Not Tell His Disciples To Buy A Sword In Order To Make Himself "Among the Transgressors"

Whenever the question of whether Christians are ever permitted to use violence comes up, it is neither a secret nor a surprise that Jesus telling His disciples to buy swords in Luke 22:36 also usually comes up. It's not hard to understand why. Telling someone to buy a sword in the first century was like telling someone to buy a handgun today; it is a weapon with only one real use, and it is not to prepare food or chop wood.

Those who believe that Christians must never use violence ever, no matter what, understandably have rebuttals to this and explanations as to why, they believe, this passage does not justify the use of violence.

One such interpretation seems to be getting more popular. This interpretation is that Jesus told them to buy the swords so that it would look more like he was part of a violent mob, in order to fulfill Isaiah 53:12, which He cites in Luke 22:37 about Himself:

The COVID-19 Vaccines, The Cross, and Making Good Come Out of Past Evils

One area of substantial controversy over the multiple available COVID-19 vaccines is the use of fetal cell lines in their production. Needless to say, those who oppose abortion on moral grounds (as I do), based on the belief that a person is already alive inside the womb before birth (which I hold), are wary of anything that necessarily involves the death of an unborn baby.

For this reason, it is important to understand what is and is not happening, and to be reasonable and consistent in how we think through the matter and apply it to our lives.

In this post, my focus is more on the underlying worldview and moral implications of the use of fetal cell lines in the COVID-19 vaccines than on whether you should get a vaccine. With that said, the application will be in favor of the vaccine (or at least against declining the vaccine due to this particular issue).

Don't Let the Fall of Ravi Zacharias Threaten Your Christian Worldview (The Bible Predicted This Sort of Thing)

Needless to say, right now nothing good is being said about the late, formerly-great Christian preacher and apologist, Ravi Zacharias. And unless there is some massive and explosive revelation that the recent reports about him are actually false, probably nothing good will ever be said about him again.

It is now well-known news that Ravi Zacharias International Ministries published a report earlier this month, after an investigation by an independent law firm, that during his career, Zacharias committed not only acts of sexual immorality and adultery, but even sexual abuse and rape against multiple women (RZIM).

But while fans and followers of Ravi Zacharias certainly (and justifiably) feel stunned and betrayed, none of this poses any real challenge to the Christian faith and worldview. None of this should cause doubt or trouble us at a greater, meta level. And I don’t just mean this because we put our faith in Jesus and not men, or because broadly everyone is a sinner or what have you (although those things are all true).

This kind of thing was predicted by the Bible itself.

Government Welfare is, by Definition, Not Compassionate (Even If It Is The Right Policy To Have)

Government welfare is not compassionate. It cannot be compassionate by its very nature. And I say that as someone who is much more progressive on economic issues than I am on social issues. I support a lot of forms of government welfare. I think that they are ultimately the right types of things for government to enact. I just don’t think that they can be considered compassionate, nor can you call it compassionate to support them or vote for people who do.

The reason that it is not compassionate is simple: no party involved, neither government nor the taxpayer, willingly makes a sacrifice for the sake of others.