In the US politicians love to quote Jesus, especially when they take His words and apply them to their cause or agenda.
Often those quotes are taken out of context and make it sound as though Jesus would support some modern social and moral issues when the entirety of Scripture shows that He would not. The best known and misused words yanked out of context are probably "Judge not".
Then when some Christian speaks up and says, "Hey! That's not all that He said!", or "You got that all wrong", the Christian is chided for being "unchristian". Happens all the time.
And then His instructions to His disciples about His kingdom are frequently and wrongly applied to man-made governments like ours. That results in the government attempting to do the things Jesus gave to the church to do. Then, as society accepts the government acting as a charitable organization the church and other charitable organizations are seen as unnecessary. Taxes (compulsory) are raised to provide for these services, which takes away from the citizens' ability to contribute willingly to the church.
So, Jesus is convenient when His words can be used to support governmental social action. But what about His words that don't support the cause? Today I'm thinking of this parable, from Matthew 20 about a business man, his workers and equal wages.
“For the Kingdom of Heaven is like the landowner who went out early one morning to hire workers for his vineyard.He agreed to pay the normal daily wage and sent them out to work.
“At nine o’clock in the morning he was passing through the marketplace and saw some people standing around doing nothing.So he hired them, telling them he would pay them whatever was right at the end of the day. So they went to work in the vineyard. At noon and again at three o’clock he did the same thing.
“At five o’clock that afternoon he was in town again and saw some more people standing around. He asked them, ‘Why haven’t you been working today?’ They replied, ‘Because no one hired us.’
“The landowner told them, ‘Then go out and join the others in my vineyard.’
“That evening he told the foreman to call the workers in and pay them, beginning with the last workers first. When those hired at five o’clock were paid, each received a full day’s wage. When those hired first came to get their pay, they assumed they would receive more. But they, too, were paid a day’s wage. When they received their pay, they protested to the owner, ‘Those people worked only one hour, and yet you’ve paid them just as much as you paid us who worked all day in the scorching heat.’
“He answered one of them, ‘Friend, I haven’t been unfair! Didn’t you agree to work all day for the usual wage? Take your money and go. I wanted to pay this last worker the same as you. Is it against the law for me to do what I want with my money? Should you be jealous because I am kind to others?’
“So those who are last now will be first then, and those who are first will be last.”
I'm not hearing that parable quoted in the news by either the pundits or the agencies of government.
I wonder what's wrong with it? (I know the answer.) It is against the law for the owner of the business to do what he wants with his money. Apparently.