Two months ago in downtown Philadelphia near Independence Hall, Sen. Barack Obama expressed loyal support for his pastor of 20 years, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, even after Wright had, in Obama's words, used "incendiary language" in his sermons that had the potential to "widen the racial divide" and "denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation." While Obama insisted that "race is an issue ... that this nation cannot afford to ignore right now," he also stated firmly, "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community."
But after a little more than five weeks – and after several more publicized controversial statements by Rev. Wright – Obama changed his tune, denouncing Wright's comments as "appalling" and "ridiculous." Obama claimed he was "outraged by the comments that were made, and saddened over the spectacle that we [have seen]. Reverend Wright does not speak for me; he does not speak for my campaign."
Rev. Wright's bizarre statements, however, reflect the anti-American positions he consistently preached from the pulpit at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago during Obama's 20 years as a member there. Wright has not only compared the United States military to terrorists, but he also blamed our country for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and has even accused the U.S. government of targeting the black community with HIV. Only after Wright's sermons and opinions became widely discussed did Obama suddenly disagree with his remarks and describe them as "divisive" and "destructive." Candidate Obama was particularly "angered" by one of Wright's more personal statements: that Obama's sudden disassociation is nothing but "political posturing." 
Obama may be turning his back on some of Wright's racially divisive remarks and other absurd statements, but he has nothing but open arms for Wright's dangerous theological dedication to the "social gospel." He specifically praised Wright for building a church and preaching sermons – sermons Obama admits to hearing – that emphasized "social struggle, the importance of striving for equality and social justice and fairness, a social gospel." Equality, justice and fairness are good and even biblical ideals, but just what is this "social gospel" that Obama and Wright are touting?
The "social gospel" movement began in the late 19th century in response to the Industrial Revolution. Some influential Christian leaders began to assert that Christianity was failing to meet the needs of the poorer classes created by industrialization and its massive economic and social changes. Rejecting the infallibility of the Bible, these Christian activists discounted the role of individual responsibility for one's plight in life, and placed the blame for poverty on external institutions like capitalism and business. They sought a man-made kingdom of heaven on earth where government was responsible for an individual's every need. In essence, a Christian flavor was added to socialist theory to create this social gospel.
The social gospel influenced many mainline Protestant denominations, including the Methodists, the Presbyterians and Obama's denomination, the United Church of Christ. Social gospel proponents called for massive government intervention to provide a "safety net" for the poor. One of the most prominent leaders was Baptist minister Rev. Walter Rauschenbusch, who declared in 1908 that "socialism is coming to be the very life-breath of the intelligent working-class" because it is "one of the great elemental movements of human history." Christian socialism influenced architects of Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal and Social Security and, years later, Lyndon Johnson's "War on Poverty," a 30-year, $5-trillion redistribution of wealth that failed to reduce poverty in any measurable way.
But faith in government is no substitute for faith in God. Government is a clumsy instrument only capable of performing a few tasks in an efficient manner. As Thomas Jefferson observed in his First Inaugural Address, "[A] wise and frugal government ... shall restrain men from injuring one another, [but] shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government." At best, government can only change surroundings and circumstances, but it cannot change individuals – only God can change the heart. This is why the Bible admonishes us to put our trust "in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy."
Obama has admitted that it was this "social gospel" message that originally drew him to Rev. Wright's church, and his liberal government proposals show that he has been paying close attention ever since. Obama has proposed mandatory, universal government health care, a "living wage" for all Americans, and a Global Poverty Bill, which is currently before the U.S. Senate, that would earmark for foreign countries $845 billion over and above what we already spend and make it official U.S. policy to eliminate global poverty. The bill represents an unconstitutional attempt to redistribute taxpayer money to foreign governments. In short, Obama's "Blueprint for Change" is filled with government programs that would infiltrate every area of life, to include the environment, education, employment, energy policy and community volunteering. Such socialism illustrates an affinity for a theology which believes that government, not individuals, families, or the church, should serve to remedy the social and economic needs in our country.
The social gospel movement is heavy on socialism and light on the understanding that God provides our every need. Obama and his former pastor preach a theology that would try to alleviate the nation's spiritual and moral deficit by taking more money from those who have earned it to give to more of those who have not. Obama's hopeless attempt to inflict the failed policies of the "War on Poverty" on the global stage would (like all his solutions) result in even more bloated and expensive government bureaucracy. Americans should not put their faith in such a false gospel, or their hope in a candidate who espouses it

Original Source