Video
Twitter
RSS Feed
Dobson Hears Obama's Footsteps
Pundits were left scratching their heads as to what exactly James Dobson was aiming for in his excoriation of Barack Obama. My sources inform me that folks in both the Obama and McCain campaigns don't know what to make of his comments either.
Nor do I. Lest our fingernails dig down to our skulls, permit me a few random observations in an effort to make some sense of it all:
To begin with, there was an awful lot of table setting in that Focus on the Family broadcast. The show opened with a long (and belated, no?) tribute to Tim Russert. I wouldn’t have doubted its sincerity, had the hosts not decided to take a trip down memory lane. For not only were Mr. Russert’s praises sung but a clip of Dr. Dobson’s May 3, 1998 appearance on Meet the Press was also played. (This was Dobson's sole stint on the show. How much affection could he have mustered for the late journalist?).
There, Dobson told Russert that the Republicans of 1998 had “insulted the base” and had “run from all the issues that they campaigned on.” Russert asked if he would consider “bolting the party.” The leader of Focus on the Family seemed to indicate that this option was, regrettably, on the table. This provided a nice segue to the present where Dobson could point out that little has changed in the intervening years.
Having burned bridges with the Republicans, the next logical step, apparently, was to antagonize Barack Obama. This leads me to opine that there is a certain integrity about Dr. Dobson. He is so singularly committed to advancing his “pro-family” agenda that he doesn’t give a hoot if he loses all semblance of political clout with two major political parties in the process.
The subsequent attack on Obama was so frontal (and as far as I can tell, so completely unprovoked) that I must wonder if some conservative Evangelical leaders are hearing Obama’s footsteps. Many in their flocks are telling me, and others, that they respect the Democratic nominee. This doesn’t mean they’ll vote for the Senator from Illinois. But maybe they won’t vote against him. Or go door-to-door persuading their neighbors to support McCain.
For a movement that made its political fortune by lamenting the bogeyman of godless secularism, Obama is a singularly troubling phenomenon. In certain respects he is the Christian Right’s worst nightmare: he rejects its pro-family agenda all the while being a committed, credible, enthusiastic and easily recognizable servant of Jesus Christ.
Perhaps this is why so many of Dobson’s criticisms centered on delegitimizing Obama’s opinions on the Bible.
I discuss Obama’s views on Scriptural interpretation--his “hermeneutics of doubt”-- at length in my Thumpin’ It: The Use and Abuse of the Bible in Today’s Presidential Politics. All I will add here is that the distance between Dobson and Obama on biblical interpretation is precisely the distance between the most theologically conservative wing of American Evangelicalism and the rest of Protestant and Catholic America.
For Obama, the Bible is ambiguous, multi-faceted, difficult to interpret, subject to many readings. It is so complex, so multivalent that it demands humility. A believer--especially one who is a politician-- should never arrogantly presume to have identified God’s inscrutable message.
Many conservative Evangelicals tend, by contrast, to believe that there is a right interpretation of the Bible. This proper reading may be attained through faith, intense biblical study (“Scripture interprets itself”), and guidance from the Holy Spirit.
The more demagogic ones, however, raise the ante. They assume that they have actually discovered the right interpretation. Equating their interpretation with divine truth, they try to impose God's word on the social body writ large. Their focus is not hermeneutics, but politics.
My own experience, however, indicates that most Evangelicals are rarely this confident about their biblical readings and even less inclined to impose them on other Americans. I don’t presume to know what Dr. Dobson was up to yesterday. But when he spoke of Obama “dragging biblical understanding through the gutter” it is possible that he clearly recognized the dangers presented by a politician who holds the Good Book in high esteem.
For If the rank-and-file finds his hermeneutics of doubt compelling, then The Movement's public policy wing is out of business.
For more information about religion and the candidates check out Faith 2008 by the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs.)
By Jacques Berlinerblau |
June 24, 2008; 11:12 PM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Hillary's Faith and Values "Guru" Speaks |
Next: A New Kind of Missionary
Posted by: Matthew Freeman | July 14, 2008 4:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment
" Concerned The Christian Now Liberated:
Paganplace, Paganplace, Paganplace,
It is called basic economics."
Supply-side economics, you mean. Figuring goodness 'trickles down' from Wall Street. You can bet the people who take their cut from there have their 'money under the bed,' ...in fact, transferring wealth to the very wealthy does the *least* for the economy, cause they hoard most of it.
Posted by: Paganplace | June 30, 2008 3:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
VOICE3 wrote "GOD SPOKE not just to MOSES
but the ENTIRE congregation- they had seen the 10 plauges/pillar of cloud by day & fire by night/parting of the red sea/ bitter water made sweet/ manna from heaven/water from a rock- These people were EYEWITNESSES to these events yet they refused to take God at His word- God gave Commandments ,Statutes & judgements & we today do not listen or learn anything from History- just like back then we would rather do our own thing & ignore that there are serious consequences of our actions." This was all written by MOSES!!! The 'story' is by Moses, written by him. There were no 'eye-witnesses' other than the fiction of MOSES!! The true 1000 years of peace will begin when we bury religion.
Posted by: gdguynbalt | June 30, 2008 9:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment
For Voices only,
The reality of the Judeo-Christian religions:
1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.
Many of the 1.5 million Conservative Jews and many of their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.
simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm
2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.
The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html
For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".
3. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 29, 2008 11:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Although apolitical and wish for fulfillment of God's choice in the American elections, as an Indian-Australian, I wish to bring to the attention of Senator Obama a great article about him published in The Sydney Morning Herald, Weekend Edition June 28-29 2008 titled 'Obama's First Presidency' written by Geoffrery Robertson QC (author of The Justice Game), and a member of the UN's Internal Justice Council.
Robertson QC concludes thus: Obama's legal career never took off, for all its historic promise at Harvard. He turned his back on the glamour of trial attorneyship and the mega bucks of a prestige partnership, preferring to help house the poor. That may have been the result of careful calculation, as the quickest way to a political career. Or it may simply be that Barak Obama, despite being a lawyer, is in fact a good person.
Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia
Posted by: Soja John Thaikattil, Sydney, Australia | June 29, 2008 11:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Paganplace, Paganplace, Paganplace,
It is called basic economics.
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 29, 2008 11:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson/ Obama
Those of us that read the Bible know the end of the Book & how it all turns out No matter who gets elected . Let me work BACKWORDS if you will - Before Jesus sets up a 1000 year reign on earth what happens?-Great tribulation & Judgements of God Fall on the earth.Why do the Judgements fall?
1.- the people of earth do not repent from their thefts,adultries,witchcraft,murders,lies,violence,
greed, mockery,disobediance,ect,ect,ect
2.- What DID GOD SAY?- We have FREE access to Bibles - who pays attention to Moses,the Prophets,Jesus & what they said? If you read the story of the Exodus - GOD SPOKE not just to MOSES
but the ENTIRE congregation- they had seen the 10 plauges/pillar of cloud by day & fire by night/parting of the red sea/ bitter water made sweet/ manna from heaven/water from a rock- These people were EYEWITNESSES to these events yet they refused to take God at His word- God gave Commandments ,Statutes & judgements & we today do not listen or learn anything from History- just like back then we would rather do our own thing & ignore that there are serious consequences of our actions. God Said-
Thou Shalt not steal but we do it anyway. Thou shalt not commit Adultry- Jesus Said " If you look at a woman with lust your committing Adultry in your heart" what do we do? we produce & distribute pornograhy, condone allmost any sexual act outside of marriage, promote & endosre it in our legislatures,courts,schools then we scratch our heads when we hear about 17 kids becomming pregnant,young girls prostituting themselves on Craigslist,ect,ect,ect. The principle of we reap what we sow is just as binding as the law of gravity- if your told you will die if you jump off the top of a tall building & you choose to ignore the warning who's fault is it when they find your body splattered all over the ground?
Stupidity is best defined as doing the same mistake over & over & expecting Different results.
God Said He hates Sin, That He will punish the wicked,That Judgement begins at the House of the Lord, That EACH person will stand & give an account for their own words & actions, To whom MORE is given More accountability will be required. So Religous Leaders/ teachers will be the first people God Judges. Then World Leaders- Kings,Presidents,right on down the line.
We have chosen to ignore God- His word-His instructions. Most are teaching for doctrines the commandments of men & not God & we will reap the Delusion from the lies that have been sown.
Posted by: Voice3 | June 29, 2008 4:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson/ Obama
Those of us that read the Bible know the end of the Book & how it all turns out No matter who gets elected . Let me work BACKWORDS if you will - Before Jesus sets up a 1000 year reign on earth what happens?-Great tribulation & Judgements of God Fall on the earth.Why do the Judgements fall?
1.- the people of earth do not repent from their thefts,adultries,witchcraft,murders,lies,violence,
greed, mockery,disobediance,ect,ect,ect
2.- What DID GOD SAY?- We have FREE access to Bibles - who pays attention to Moses,the Prophets,Jesus & what they said? If you read the story of the Exodus - GOD SPOKE not just to MOSES
but the ENTIRE congregation- they had seen the 10 plauges/pillar of cloud by day & fire by night/parting of the red sea/ bitter water made sweet/ manna from heaven/water from a rock- These people were EYEWITNESSES to these events yet they refused to take God at His word- God gave Commandments ,Statutes & judgements & we today do not listen or learn anything from History- just like back then we would rather do our own thing & ignore that there are serious consequences of our actions. God Said-
Thou Shalt not steal but we do it anyway. Thou shalt not commit Adultry- Jesus Said " If you look at a woman with lust your committing Adultry in your heart" what do we do? we produce & distribute pornograhy, condone allmost any sexual act outside of marriage, promote & endosre it in our legislatures,courts,schools then we scratch our heads when we hear about 17 kids becomming pregnant,young girls prostituting themselves on Craigslist,ect,ect,ect. The principle of we reap what we sow is just as binding as the law of gravity- if your told you will die if you jump off the top of a tall building & you choose to ignore the warning who's fault is it when they find your body splattered all over the ground?
Stupidity is best defined as doing the same mistake over & over & expecting Different results.
God Said He hates Sin, That He will punish the wicked,That Judgement begins at the House of the Lord, That EACH person will stand & give an account for their own words & actions, To whom MORE is given More accountability will be required. So Religous Leaders/ teachers will be the first people God Judges. Then World Leaders- Kings,Presidents,right on down the line.
We have chosen to ignore God- His word-His instructions. Most are teaching for doctrines the commandments of men & not God & we will reap the Delusion from the lies that have been sown.
Posted by: Voice3 | June 29, 2008 4:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Ah, is that how they're rationalizing it, these days, Concerned?
Posted by: Paganplace | June 29, 2008 4:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Arminius, Arminius, Arminius,
So you have no money in your banking account?
No investments?
Having money under your bed is wrong. Having money in a bank account, money markets, bonds or invested in the stock market is great because said money works to provide jobs and opportunities thereby removing people from the embarrassing dole and into being proud, productive citizens.
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 28, 2008 9:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment
How sad for the attacker who has condemned himself to die. There's no end to what people will do to themselves when they think they are doing something against someone else and it is actually themselves whom they have condemned.
Posted by: 1rap | June 28, 2008 4:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
(Waves with both hands to Paganplace)
"Christians do not worship false gods and carrying a idol is the same as worshiping false gods..."
What a huge pile of horse poop!
Paganplace has it right. By such dismal logic, I, a Christian, am actually an idolater with multiple charges against me. Let's see... Washington (quarter), FDR (dime), Jefferson (nickel), Lincoln (penny). I guess I should look at my folding money too... maybe, if I'm really lucky, a Jackson!
Idolatry is not in a silly symbol, it is in the mind. Idolatry is worshiping something too much, to a harmful extent - like money. Any 'Christian' with a large bank account, knowing that there are hungry and homeless on the streets, is an idolater (and a hypocrite), worshiping the Great God Mammon, whose chief temple is in the Holy City of New York.
Sickening.
Posted by: Arminius | June 27, 2008 10:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Christians do not worship false gods and carrying a idol is the same as worshiping false gods..."
Or... it's not? I got a nickel in my pocket, that doesn't mean I worship Monticello.
If that's even true, it sounds like another smear-campaign thing to me.
"Now have I asked obama anything, no, I hope the press will follow up and bring this up...
Christians don't vote for Chrsitians who worship the monkey god..."
I think you're all clear on that one, dude. Really.
Posted by: Paganplace | June 27, 2008 9:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Here's a must see youtube for all believing voters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCm8a5e47Kw&eurl=http://www.frcaction.org/
Posted by: Anonymous | June 27, 2008 4:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Questions to ask before voting:
In addition to anonymous, I'll add
1. Can a person have childhood friends who were at the time considered undesirable that over time are leaders in their communities? YES
2. Is God really the God of second chances? YES
3. Is the American public forgiving? by and large Yes
4. Does a person's past infidelity in marriage indicate something about his character? YES (Just ask any religious right person)
5. Is it possible that one person's view of pandering is another person's view of thoughtful politics? YES
6. When is pandering, pandering? When a person who is behind in the polls announces a government give-away program like a gas-tax holiday. (As indicated, prices outstripped the $.18 by a mile, almost as fast as someone could say "18 cents.")
7. Is it possible that people will vote their prejudices regardless of the facts? YES
8. Is it possible that some of the electorate will vote based on fear mongering? YES
9. Will professing Christians, after looking at all the available facts and listening to all of the speeches, vote for all candidates in all parties on the ballots? YES
10. Will about sixty percent of all people vote the party line regardless of the candidates? YES
As a senior citizen, I am connected to the new technology. I am not afraid of change. Many of the hot-button issues will never affect me personally or challenge my Christian perspective on life. However, voting for a person because he may be more Christian than another person without looking at the history of the politics of that candidate or his party is stupid. As I have always said, "I'll never be rich enough to vote Republican." I would have voted for Barry Goldwater in 1964 if I were old enough to vote that year (21 yrs required). Talk about a straight shooter. Barry G. was a rare bird indeed. Makes McCain look status quo.
For those who vote Republican in hopes that they can get ahead financially, don't hold your breath. The fat cats will always be miles ahead. Guess who wins when the inflation kicks in for real as if rising fuel costs, food costs, and employment layoffs? I guarantee you that the vast majority of Americans stand to lose, even with significant tax breaks.
Posted by: Earl C | June 27, 2008 4:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
An update (or how we are spending or how we have spent USA taxpayers’ money to eliminate global terror and aggression)
First the terror and aggression via a Partial and Recent Body Count
1) Assassination of Benazir Bhutto
2) 9/11, 3000 mostly US citizens, 1000’s injured
3) The 24/7 Sunni-Shiite centuries-old blood feud currently being carried out in Iraq, 4100 US troops and 85,318 – 93,060 Iraqi civilians http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
4) Kenya- In Nairobi, about 212 people were killed and an estimated 4000 injured; in Dar es Salaam, the attack killed at least 11 and wounded 85.[2]
5) Bali-in 2002-killing 202 people, 164 of whom were foreign nationals, and 38 Indonesian citizens. A further 209 people were injured.
6) Bali in 2005- Twenty people were killed, and 129 people were injured by three bombers who killed themselves in the attacks.
7) Spain in 2004- killing 191 people and wounding 2,050.
8) UK in 2005- The bombings killed 52 commuters and the four radical Islamic suicide bombers, injured 700.
Other elements of our War on Terror:
1. Saddam, his sons and major henchmen have been deleted. Saddam's bravado about WMD was one of his major mistakes.
2. Iran is being been contained. (beside containing the Sunni-Shiite civil war in Baghdad, that is the main reason we are in Iraq. And yes, essential oil continues to flow from the region.)
3. Libya has become almost civil. Apparently this new reality from an Islamic country has upset OBL and his “crazies” as they recently threatened Libya. OBL sure is a disgrace to the world especially the Moslem world!!! Or is he???
4. North Korea is still uncivil but is contained. With the opening up of rail traffic between North and South Korea after 50 years and with the assistance of the US Navy in retrieving NK ships and personnel, a fresh sense of civility is afoot. One of the most eminent US cultural institutions, the New York Philharmonic Orchestra, has performed a landmark concert in North Korea.
The concert included music by Western composers and a Korean folk song, and was broadcast live on local television.
Yesterday, the North Koreans blew up their uranium enrichment facilities and subsequently President Bush removed many of the sanctions imposed on NK.
5. Northern Ireland is finally at peace.
6. The Jews and Palestinians are being separated by walls. Hopefully the walls will follow the 1948 UN accords and the Annapolis Peace Conference is at least somewhat successful. A six month cease fire was recently agreed to between the Hamas and Israel.
7. Bin Laden has been cornered under a rock in Western Pakistan since 9/11.
8. Fanatical Islam has basically been contained to the Middle East but a wall between India and Pakistan would be a plus for world peace. Ditto for a wall between Afghahistan and Pakistan.
9.Timothy McVeigh was executed. Terry Nichols will follow soon.
10. Eric Rudolph is spending three life terms in prison with no parole.
11. Jim Jones, David Koresh, Kaczynski, the "nuns" from Rwanda, and the KKK were all dealt with and either eliminated themselves or are being punished.
12. Islamic Sudan, Darfur and Somalia are still terror hot spots.
13. The terror and torture of Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo and Kuwait were ended by the proper application of the military forces of the USA and her freedom-loving friends.
14. And of course the bloody terror brought about the Japanese, Nazis and Communists was with great difficulty eliminated by the good guys.
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 27, 2008 3:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
A few more Q/A-
Do people running for a position of POWER try to mislead? YES.
Do people pander for votes? YES
Can a person remove his church history by a renunciation of convenience? NO
Can a person rewrite his childhood alliances to reflect "more desirable" morals and values? NO
Christians have a number of issues that are Bible-based. Check out each candidate and vote for the man closest to you on the issues.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 27, 2008 3:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Good quotes anonymous and good blog Terry C.
Remember, only God knows the heart. The masks that a human being can put on are many.
Do people change their minds? YES.
Do people regret previous votes? YES
Can the media and opposition parties distort a person's voting record? YES
Do most voters go to the source documents when trying to determine that best person for a political office? NO
Look to the United States Constitution for guidance. The last time I checked, the qualitifcations for President are 35 years of age, born in the United States, and not a felon (and I am not 100% sure about the last item). For me, I look at the person's political agenda more than character because I will never really know the person as a friend to be able to know the character. Obviously, if there are real character flaws, I have to make a judgment as to whether or not this flaw will affect his/her ability to lead the country. I still believe that Bill Clinton was one of our best Presidents and politicians, but he had a major character flaw. I voted for him based on his politics, which I still admire, even though he gave me a scare during the primaries.
President Bush must be a great disappointment to those who voted for him. They did not want a Bill Clinton, even though Al Gore was NOT Bill Clinton. What they got was arguably much worse. The war has been treated as a video game and paid for with borrowed dollars. Our children and grandchildren will be paying for this folly for years to come with worthless dollars.
However, there is absolutely no reason for Bush supporters to lash out at their critics as if nothing is wrong. Bill Clinton never lashed out at his critics during his terms in office, much to his credit. He just kept on trying to do the best job that he could.
The current house of cards has stood up surprisingly long. Former White House people have fired canon shots at this stack of cards and have exposed real problems. However, people who refuse to believe that the king has no clothes will die so believing. This is life. It also shows you what a lot of money can buy. Do I wish that we could spend some of this money on public education for the children who need it rather than to save somebody's backsides.
Yes, this is America with all of its warts and idiosyncrasies. It is the land that we -the left, the right, the mainstream, the straight, the gay, the rich, the poor - love. Despite our differences, God loves all of us. He wants the best for all of His children, wherever they live, whether USA, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, and so forth. Sometimes, we forget that there are Christians praying for justice and peace in other countries, countries that have large Muslim populations but also significant Christian populations as well. The Christians in Iran and Syria and Palestine wonder what we are doing. They wonder if we have forgotten them. We refuse to talk to their leaders. It is afterall a crazy, mized-up world that gets smaller with each passing day.
Pilgrim, think on these things.
Posted by: Earl C | June 27, 2008 12:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
This year a Christian voter will have to study the candidate's history, voting records, choices in life: then pray before they vote. There is a huge difference between the candidates. And please remember- in November we vote for a president who will make righteous choices for America.
May God give you wisdom:
A Tree and Its Fruit
"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'"
Matthew 7:15-23
Posted by: Anonymous | June 27, 2008 12:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Religion is man's attempt to reach God,
Faith is God reaching man.
God's Word is faithful. Our faith must be based on His Word.
He said:
"I am the truth and the light, no one comes to the father but by me."
"Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it."
Is Obama a servant of Jesus Christ?
15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them."
21 "Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name? 23 And then I will declare to them, I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!
Posted by: Terry C. | June 27, 2008 12:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
And one more thing:
If Pat Robertson can believe that his prayers spared Virginia Beach from Hurriacne Gloria and others believe this and that about God's judgment on our country, let me add an idea.
Putting a war-monger into the White House has definitely not been a blessing when God (Jesus) did say in his word, "Blessed are the peacemakers." Just look at the destruction over tht past seven years. It makes 9/11 look like anotheer IRA attack on the London underground. Fortunately, England has moved beyond these attacks, finally. It took a long time and much effort on their part. In the end, it was negotiations (as the Bushies like to mischaracterize "negotiation" as appeasement, which means that these jokers do not know what words mean) that did the trick. Power plays did not work.
1. Our economy: a shambles, the DOW falling another 350+ points yesterday to put us behind where we were in 2000. What a growth in 8 years!
2. Our military: crippled - dying piece by piece and man by man in the deserts of a far-off third-world country
3. Our infrastructure: just drive down any major highway, be around any major waterline break, be in a major blackout.
4. Our politics: of the wealthy, by the wealthy
and for the wealthy
5. Natural disasters here: tornadoes more powerful and numerous than ever for a start
6. Currency: the American dollar is almost a joke, and we used to talk about "funny" money
7. Our morality: were that abortion and gay rights the worst of our moral problems. Greed is issue number one. That is GREED in all caps. Look at the New Testament and read all about it.
The list goes on and on.
Whatever anyone does, do not blame this on the fact that Obama carries a symbol of the monkey god in his pocket. It's those people wearing crosses around their necks and dressed in the American flags that have no clue what true patriotism is and what God desires. I served my country in the military during the Vietnam War era. I have also seen the gross attempt by government to politicize the military. Thank God for Adm Fallon for his recent speaking out about this issue.
Making one's case on trumped up charges, exaggerated intelligence, made-up facts, and so forth is not God inspired. God does not deal in lies and advancing personal causes for personal reasons.
May God bless America and have mercy on our souls!
Posted by: Earl C | June 27, 2008 12:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Shemafish wrote
Note: The recorded 2006 speech revealed an attack by Obama on Protestant exegesis and in particular James Dobson. [See Barnard Ramm]
Why not check out the transcript of the whole speech yourself?
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060628-call_to_renewal/
He did not attack anyone.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 27, 2008 11:53 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Apparently Christians don't have problems voting for Christians who launch a war of choice. This certainly flies in the face of being a "peacemaker" who is blessed by God. Obama does not worship the monkey god any more than you worship the choice of clothes that you wear or the fancy $10,000 Rolex watch that you have on your arm. You may vote for whomever you choose and for whatever reason. However, your stated reason is a foul smell to the Almighty. God loves all of His children. Obama is one of them, warts and all.
May the Lord have mercy on your soul for your self-righeousness and arrogance.
Posted by: Earl C | June 27, 2008 11:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment
about this
" Earl C:
To Dwight:
Having a symbol or artifact of another culture on one's person is not necessarily an act of worship. Neither is it necessarily an act of worship for a Christian to wear the symbol of the cross, to carry a rabbit's foot, a good-luck charm or coin. You might say that there is nothing wrong with wearing a cross. It could have two meanings: (1) a symbol of a torturous death or (2) the symbol of death of our Lord and Savior. If I memember correctly, the symbol of the fish was the earliest symbol that marked our faith. However, with many symbols, they become worshipped. Therefore, it is just as damning for a Christian to worship a symbol of the faith as you would indicate it is for Obama to carry around a symbol of a culture to which he was exposed at an early age. I guess you would have a real problem with the stave churches in Norway.
Now, allow me to step on some toes. If you do not tithe, you are robbing God. (See Malachi 3.) Also, you prove by your lack of obedience in this that you worship money. There is much more scripture (especially New Testament) written about the use of money than any other subject.
Don't worry about Obama's supposed carrying of an artifact of a culture about which you know little. Be thankful that he is a professing Christian. I paraphrase Paul now.
So the Times of India becomes the source of this information. WOW! Mark me impressed. Did you ask Barack yesterday if he was carrying this object? Yet, you trust the Times of India. Do you carry something out of habit? Many Christians do. Does this make this item a symbol of worship? I don't really think so.
June 27, 2008 10:53 AM | Report Offensive Comments "
Christians do not worship false gods and carrying a idol is the same as worshiping false gods...
Now have I asked obama anything, no, I hope the press will follow up and bring this up...
Christians don't vote for Chrsitians who worship the monkey god...
Posted by: Dwight | June 27, 2008 11:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Poor Jacques has missing that Obama's "far left" political past is repulsing 'mainstream" voters and causing all moderates to reject him. .
That leaves him with the "freaks, fruits, and phonies". The only vote he can count on is the ZOMBIE vote. .
Posted by: Anonymous | June 27, 2008 11:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment
"My own experience, however, indicates that most Evangelicals are rarely this confident about their biblical readings and even less inclined to impose them on other Americans. I don’t presume to know what Dr. Dobson was up to yesterday. But when he spoke of Obama 'dragging biblical understanding through the gutter' it is possible that he clearly recognized the dangers presented by a politician who holds the Good Book in high esteem."
Congratulations, Jacques. That is quite simply one of the most IGNORANT paragraphs I've read in quite a while.
Here's some advice, Jacques: Stick to writing what you know about.
Obama may "hold the Good Book in high esteem," but, like you, he exhibits a mind-blowing ignorance of what it says and means.
Posted by: DFP | June 27, 2008 11:06 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To Dwight:
Having a symbol or artifact of another culture on one's person is not necessarily an act of worship. Neither is it necessarily an act of worship for a Christian to wear the symbol of the cross, to carry a rabbit's foot, a good-luck charm or coin. You might say that there is nothing wrong with wearing a cross. It could have two meanings: (1) a symbol of a torturous death or (2) the symbol of death of our Lord and Savior. If I memember correctly, the symbol of the fish was the earliest symbol that marked our faith. However, with many symbols, they become worshipped. Therefore, it is just as damning for a Christian to worship a symbol of the faith as you would indicate it is for Obama to carry around a symbol of a culture to which he was exposed at an early age. I guess you would have a real problem with the stave churches in Norway.
Now, allow me to step on some toes. If you do not tithe, you are robbing God. (See Malachi 3.) Also, you prove by your lack of obedience in this that you worship money. There is much more scripture (especially New Testament) written about the use of money than any other subject.
Don't worry about Obama's supposed carrying of an artifact of a culture about which you know little. Be thankful that he is a professing Christian. I paraphrase Paul now.
So the Times of India becomes the source of this information. WOW! Mark me impressed. Did you ask Barack yesterday if he was carrying this object? Yet, you trust the Times of India. Do you carry something out of habit? Many Christians do. Does this make this item a symbol of worship? I don't really think so.
Posted by: Earl C | June 27, 2008 10:53 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To Anonymous and others,
I'll respond as a layperson in the church. I am not a theologian nor am I a Bible scholar. However, I've been studying the Bible in organized Bible study classes for over 50 years. I have been a Southern Baptist since receiving Christ at a young age. However, I am more moderate in my thinking than many of the current version of Southern Baptists.I have been
praying for over 20 years that we are in a phase and that Southern Baptists will get back to
their primary function, which is not found in fundalmentalist dogma.
You ask some of the age-old queations. Also, I can supply you with some of mine which have
never been answered to my satisfaction.
In the beginning, God! The Bible does not tell us everything. There are traditions and legends
that have also come down in the oral historical accounts which were then written down at some
point in time. However, I shall just deal with information from the Bible that I have. Being a
Protestant, I do not have the Catholic Bible, which has some books in the "middle."
The Bible says that "God caused to grow every tree . . .the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil." To cap off God's creative work, he made mankind in His image. For purposes here, let's
just say that mankind is the only created form that has a soul. God did not create zombies. Man
was created with what we call "free will," which is the ability of man to make decisions, to do
things on his own, to make choices. God's permissive will is what allows man to make both
good and bad choices. If God did not exercise permissive will, there would be no Satan or
evil or mankind. Original human sin came when Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. At the time that God gave his instructions to Adam and Eve, their only role model was God. He walked and talked with them in the garden. Some will say that the God who appeared in the garden was Jesus. However, Satan appearing in the form of a serpent presented Eve and ultimately Adam with a choice, to obey God or to disobey God.
This was the defining moment in the exercise of mankind's free will. Man failed the test. The
next major failing was when Cain murdered his brother. Of course, Cain didn't know what
murder was. He had never seen it. However, he was a thinking human being and punishing his brother (ultimately murdering Abel) seemed a way for him to accomplish what he wanted for the sin of
envy that he had. Remember, there were no commandments at this time, only the one
command which Adam and Eve broke. So original sin manifests itself in every person in every
generation. You might say that it is a design flaw called "free will." When given choices, man
will make some "bad" choices.
Let me say at this point that the Hebrew word for mankind is the same word translated
"Adam." It is the translators choice when to use mankind and when to use Adam. It is usually
based on the context. However, this presents scholars with a point of controversy. This is the
same dilemma that occurs with many other Hebrew words. The understanding of these
Hebrew words also creates controversy. The problem with fundamentalists is that they "know"
the true meaning of scripture and everyone else is not a true believer if they do not believe as
they do and have this same understanding. Tracing fundalmentalism, one will find shifts in translation and understanding.
Moving on, you mention young children. The Bible seems to indicate that the age of
accountability is 12 years of age. A young child is therefore not responsible for sinful acts
committed before the age at which a child can be expected to know right and wrong, good and
bad. It is said that a child who dies goes to heaven.
My Bible teaches that there is only one way to the Father and that is through Jesus Christ.
Obviously, this deals only with those of us born after Christ was on the planet as the sacrifice
for our sins. Jesus said that to see Him was to see His father who is in Heaven. He also said
that He is the truth, the way, and the life, no one comes to the Father except through Him. Yes,
Jesus will separate the sheep from the goats. There are many passages that indicate when a
person may have responded to Jesus during his life. There is a broader context for
acknowledging the person of Jesus in one's life. Obama's dilemma is the same dilemma that
many Christian's face when looking solely at one or two crucial verses in the Bible and then
having to deal with a population of unbelievers. Jesus has provided guidelines about how to
treat our neighbors and our enemies. However, the Bible does teach in John 3:16 that believing
(having full faith and trust) in Jesus Christ brings salvation. Jesus' final command is identified as The Great Commission, Matthew 28:19-20. Jesus does not expect us to go out and hit people over the heads with the Gospel message. However, as we go, we are to carry this message
with us. When President Bush refuses to talk to foreign leaders, he is refusing to carry the
message in whatever form. Just the physical presence of a Christian is a witness! There are no exceptions to The Great Commission. It doesn't say not to go if so and so. There should be something so distinctive about the manner and life of a Christian that as he/she travels about, others notice something different. At times this difference causes problems for the Christian and may cost him his life. However, no Christian should ever say or do things that invite torture or death. Usually, the simple acknowledgment that one is a Christian is enough to convict. I say these things because some of my Christian brothers and sisters feel that they must incur the wrath of others to prove how Christian they are when in fact they are doing unChristian things to bring about this wrath. Believe me when I say that just being a Christian can bring about adverse circumstances.
Let's deal with the issue of multiple ways to Heaven. Good Christians are divided on this issue, just like they are on many other "hot-button" issues. As I have said or alluded to before, I believe that there is only one way to heaven and that is through Jesus Christ. What if a person has never heard about Jesus? Are they condemned? I am so thankful that God is on His throne. He is the one true judge. He also knows the heart of man. The fundalmentalists would never let someone like King David in their midst. David was a scoundrel. Yet, he was a man after
God's own heart. Most fundamentalists would not even let Jesus into their midst. Jesus would
be considered liberal, a troublemaker, and a good-for-nothing loafer who never did an honest
day's work for wages. He only went around attracting great crowds with his miracles and his eloquent teachings. He didn't badmouth government, but he offered a better life.
I believe that a careful reading of Revelation will indicate that only two people are guaranteed to burn in Hell forever: Satan and the anti-Christ. This is also up for interpretation based on other biblical passages. However, when the bible talks about the utter destruction of armies and humans, it may mean just that - utter destruction. What about those human forms that were dstroyed during the conquest for Canaan? Is it possible that there are human beings who have lived that simply will not exist in any form in an afterlife? There is sufficient biblical evidence for reasonable Christians to think so. As someone has recently said at my church, a person is better off to accept the free gift of Jesus Christ. If he/she dies and that is it, there is no harm done. However, if that person must stand the judgment, it is must better to have Jesus on your side.
Others have recently written about the narrow gate or door and so forth. Jesus also said that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Since fundalmentalists seem to be literalists except when it suits their purposes to present their own "inspired and inerent" interpretation, the literal reading of Jesus' statement that I just gave means that the wealthy will not enter heaven because of the virtual impossibility of a camel to go trough the eye of a needle. (Please, I know about the mountain passage known as the needle.) People like Pat Robertson (worth over 250 milliion), James Dobson, and the like may never see Heaven if I were to read this passage literally and with the understanding of most non-thinking fundalmentalists. From another biblical passage, one might say that these wealthy people have stored up their treaures on earth rather than in heaven where neither moth nor fire can destroy.
For those who like war, I know you are out there, Jesus said, "Blessed are the peacemakers." You cannot dance around the literal meaning of this statement. You cannot dance around the poor in spirit, those who mourn, the gentle, the merciful, the pure in heart, and those who have been persecuted for righteousness. "Blessed are you when men cast insults at you, and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely, on account of Me." (My caviat here is that the Christian does not do things to cause these insults and so forth, these things happen because the person is Christian.) Read this verse, Matthew 5:11, over and over. Translate this into the politics of today. Who are those who are throwing insults and false accusations in the name of Jesus? Now, who is considered "blessed"? Jerry Falwell produced a videotape on sexual allegations against Bill Clinton because he thought that people should know what they were. This equates to throwing false accusations in the name of Jesus. Have you noticed that when it comes to sexual matters, the religious right goes nuts? They seem not to have enough sex to talk about. In fact, they will draw you mental pictures of the sexual acts involved. They are obsessed with it. My Bible teaches that there are things that one should not even discuss or describe. People will just know that the behavior is bad! Was John Kerry subjected to the same thing? Maybe not in the name of Jesus, but Christians were involved. What irritates the religious right is that neither Clinton nor Obama came back at them spewing forth the same garbage. They want to drag them down to their level. When they cannot, they keep getting more bizarre in their behavior and throw out every conceivable thing at them. Even silly little words like "bitter" become bigger than life and take on a whole new meaning. I have heard this word several times in sermons during the past several weeks in a similar context that Obama used them, and from ministers who are definitely conservative.
Yes, as someone else posted, one can take different sides and have scripture to back it up. This is true to some extent. There is a greater context in which the Bible should be viewed. Jesus provided this greater context when he listed two commandments by which all men should live. He also provided the Great Commission.
We are not to forsake ourselves from assembling together. For where two or three are gathered in My name, I am there, also. These two statements reveal the true core of the beginning of New Testament worship. In many respects, organized religion under the Christian banner is not Christianity. A person is a Christian only when he/she has persoanlly accepted the Lordship of Jesus Christ in his/her own life. See John 3:16. It does not happen by proxy. Christianity as a faith is a life lived in accordance with Jesus' commands and instructions as assisted now by the presence of the Holy Spirit. Just as the pharisees got all hung up on man-made religious rules and regulations, present-day religion is also hung up on rules and regulations. Jesus has offered us freedom to follow Him; and by so doing, we will adhere to God's commandments and rules. However, if we insist on following the rules, we will be judged by them. My Bible teaches that we have all sinned (except for Jesus, the only perfect one to dwell among men) and have fallen short of the glory of God. We all have need of God's forgiveness. Speaking of forgiveness, if we cannot forgive another his wrong against us, God will not forgive us. The typical fundamentalist has a problem with the concept of forgiveness as is biblically presented. Remember when President Bush could not think of anything that he had done wrong? Admitting error means asking either God or someone for forgiveness.
I have covered a lot of ground. Yet there is much more to cover. I have written from my own personal knowledge and belief, with the Bible at my side, no other commentary. If I have erred, I have not done so intentionally. Hopefully, there will be a few strands that cause some discussion or some additional thought.
Enjoy your day! Remember, to be a Christian is to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior. The benefits are eternal. Also, one's outlook on life is very different. Barack and Michelle know these thruths. Like most of us, they are still searching for answers. As far as I know, John McCain knows the truth. Bill and Hillary Clinton and George Bush know the truth. I assume that these people all are Christians based on testimony that I have already heard. However, one should think about the application of God's word in the life of each of these to determine which ones may be in the closer walk with God. Your decision may determine whether you may be fooled into believing the anti-Christ. This decision is harder than you think. Remember, the anti-Christ is the counterfeit Christ, a copy of the real deal, but very, very fake. Who are the false teachers? Who are the pharisees among us whom Jesus would call "hypocrites"? I ask my fellow Christians to think and reflect on God's Word.
"If you have done it for the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto Me." Powerful, powerful!
Posted by: Earl C | June 27, 2008 10:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
" Such empathy and "connection" to immigrants from the subcontinent is only one part of Obama's plural multi-ethnic background and wide-ranging eclectic education (American, African, even part-Asian) that makes him arguably the most unusual and exciting presidential candidate in US history — more universalist than American. In his first book, Dreams from My Father, written nearly a decade ago even before he came to Washington DC as a senator, Obama recalls the wanderlust of his mother (a white woman from Kansas who married a Kenyan exchange student) that took her to marketplaces as far apart as Marrakesh and New Delhi. He recounts his own experiences in Kenya and Indonesia, home of his biological father and stepfather respectively, including the turbulent politics of these boiling Third World countries he saw during his visits. His worldview even in those days was imbued with travels and exposures to such Third World hotspots, a clear departure from the more Atlanticist upbringing of his white contemporaries. To this day, he carries on his person, among other things, a small metal figure of Hanuman, having become familiar with the Ramayana during his days in Indonesia."
since when does a christian worship the monkey GOD...
the source for this was the times of india...
Posted by: Dwight | June 27, 2008 9:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Obama is not an easily recognizable servant of Jesus Christ. If he were he would profess what Jesus professed. "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it." Jesus wants us to know that many people will try and covince us that there are many ways to get to heaven, but in truth there is one way.
"I am the way, the truth and the light. No one comes to the Father but by me."
"Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name? And then I will declare to them, I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!"
Religion is man's attempt to reach God. Faith is God reaching man.
Posted by: Terry C. | June 27, 2008 7:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Obama is not an easily recognizable servant of Jesus Christ. If he were he would profess what Jesus professed. "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it." Jesus wants us to know that many people will try and covince us that there are many ways to get to heaven, but in truth there is one way.
"I am the way, the truth and the light. No one comes to the Father but by me."
"Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name? And then I will declare to them, I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!"
Religion is man's attempt to reach God. Faith is God reaching man.
Posted by: Terry C. | June 27, 2008 7:23 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Earl C:
In response to your question about the "apple" -- it's not about the apple, or whatever particular fruit was eaten. It's about obedience.
And why did God put the tree in the garden if he didn't want Adam and Eve to eat from it? He created them with a free will and wanted to give them an opportunity to show their love for him by obeying him. We are told many times in the Bible that if we love Him we will obey Him.
Why didn't God just create man so that he couldn't sin? I think C. S. Lewis covers that well in Mere Christianity. If you've never read it, I would highly recommend your doing so. Basically, this is how C. S. Lewis puts it:
"Some people think they can imagine a creature which was free but had no possibility of going wrong; I cannot. If a thing is free to be good it is also free to be bad. And free will is what has made evil possible. Why, then did God give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodess or joy worth having. A world of automata--of creatues that worked like machines--would hardly be worth creating."
Posted by: Christian | June 27, 2008 7:06 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Anonymous,
I wrote you a long response tonight. When I looked back to see if it had been sent, I realized that it didn't make it. I'll try again in the morning. Darn, it was a good reponse, too.
The basic ideas that I discussed were:
1. permissive will
2. original sin origin and continuation
3. fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil - don't know where the "apple" got inserted
4. Reason for accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior
5. God's image as a reason for creation of mankind
I also mentioned the difference between organized religion and faith.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 11:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I'm sorry, I forgot to mention Chuck Colson.
It will be difficult not to rejoice when I hear of his death.
Hopefully, he'll die of pancreatic cancer.
I can only hope. Or Pray.
"God please give Chuck Colson pancreatic cancer, thanks for everything God, I love you"
Thanks in advance,
-Kenneth
Posted by: Kenneth | June 26, 2008 10:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I just wanted to restate:
James Dobson is a disgusting human being.
Any American who listens to his radio show is borderline retarded.
I sincerely, truly hope James Dobson, Cal Thomas, and Ann Coulter will all die natural, awful, painful deaths and rid the world of their ignorance.
Posted by: Kenneth | June 26, 2008 10:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Have you ever noticed that when someone verbally attacks another person that the character flaw they are naming is their own? I stop reading as soon as I see it as I really don't want to know the problems of any particular poster.
Posted by: 1rap | June 26, 2008 8:47 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Have you ever noticed that when someone verbally attacks another person that the character flaw they are naming is there own? I stop reading as soon as I see it as I really don't want to know how degraded is that particular poster.
Posted by: 1rap | June 26, 2008 8:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
According to Wikipedia:
Obama opposed the Induced Infant Liability Act, an Illinois law that would protect babies born accidentally during abortions."
Obama claimed this was an attack on abortion and that babies born alive should be looked after by the doctors if the baby was moving and seemed to be Okay, but that he wouldn't support the bill which he believed was part of an attack on abortion. It could open abortion doctors up to lawsuits.
Posted by: Athena | June 26, 2008 5:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
That is precisely why religion and politics should be separate. Obama and all politicians should stay away from Bible talk, and pulpit trumpeteers such as Dobson, should stick to Bible mumbo jumbo or risk loosing their tax free ride.
Posted by: SISL | June 26, 2008 3:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
That is precisely why religion and politics should be separate. Obama and all politicians should stay away from Bible talk, and pulpit trumpeteers such as Dobson, should stick to Bible mumbo jumbo or risk loosing their tax free ride.
Posted by: SISL | June 26, 2008 3:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
To Earl C (or anyone who can answer this):
You seem to be a very thoughtful and reflective Christian. So I would like to ask you a question that I have asked many Christians about their faith and have yet to receive an answer. To fervently follow a religion without being able to explain its core premise seems ill advised.
By the way, I ask this question as someone who believes in God and has no problem with the idea of Jesus as a teacher regarding the right way to live. But for that, you don't need to invoke religion.
Here's my question: why the apple? The Bible teaches us that Jesus was sent to save us because we are born in original sin for which we can never escape. Therefore, Jesus died for our sins and by believing in Jesus we are saved; if we don't we burn eternally in hell.
The story of the apple is a simple one. God created a garden for Adam and Eve and gave them everything. However, there was a catch. He placed an apple tree in the garden and told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree. However, a talking snake tricked Adam and Eve and as a result ALL of mankind, not just Adam and Eve are marked by sin and as a result, billions have gone to hell since most of the people who have lived and died since then have not been Christian.
Defenders of this story say that God was right to do this because He warned Adam and Eve and those two chose to disobey Him. But there are several unanswered questions.
The most important is that the Bible teaches us that Adam and Eve did not know good from evil. Therefore, when God says don't eat the apple and the snake says you can, Adam and Eve have no way of knowing that God is the good guy and the snake is the bad guy. So how were Adam and Eve to know what they were doing was wrong? Moreover, would a "good guy" really put a tree in a garden such that if the fruit were eaten would cause all of humanity to be born into sin, even the billions who did not eat the apple?
Jesus said often, "if you who are evil would not do X, then God would not do that either" (e.g., give stone when bread was asked for). We who are evil do not place enormous responsibility on small children who do not know right from wrong. we know that they cannot handle it. Why would God who is good? After all, how can there be a bigger responsibility than determining whether all of mankind is born pure and automatically destined to heaven or born into sin and naturally destined to hell unless saved? No parent would make an ignorant child that responsible. Why would God?
Additionally, we who are evil know it's wrong to punish people for things they didn't do. Even if Adam and Eve disobeyed God, why should the rest of us suffer? There is no greater curse a person can have than to be born destined to hell (eternal suffering) unless saved. given that most people die without converting to Christianity, that's a lot of people paying the price for what Adam and Eve did. I'm sure that many of them don't fully understand that not being Christian means burning in hell. Most probably follow the religion their culture teaches them. We who are evil don't believe in cruel and unusual punishment. Isn't eternal damnation with no hope of redemption (since maybe once arriving in hell, people may go "whoops, I better convert") a bit cruel for just exercising the freedom of religion, something we who are evil value as a just right?
We are taught that God is omniscient and omnipotent. So God knew what Adam and Eve were doing, yet he stopped neither from eating the apple. We who are evil would rush to stop a child from drinking poison or touching a hot stove, even if we had already warned that child not to do so. Why did God who is good not rush to stop Adam and Eve from eating the apple, knowing that the act of eating would result in billions going to hell?
Finally, we who are evil, in providing areas for our children to grow, look for ways to make the environments safe and healthy. We would call anyone evil who deliberately puts something in an environment that serves no purpose other than the potential to harm our children. what would you say if a parent purposely filled his or her child's play area with sharp knives? What if the parent disguised the knives as candy? So if we who are evil would not put dangerous things in our children's living spaces, why would God who is evil put the most dangerous thing of all (and something that looks a lot like something good and safe, since apples are fruit and that's what Adam and Eve ate) into his children's living space, when they had no way to know it was bad?
Why the apple? If you cannot answer this, then why believe in Christianity, since without the apple, there is no original sin and then there is no need for savior. Christianity then falls apart.
I would be surprised if you come up with a good answer to this question that is consistent with the idea that God is loving and knowing and just and that Adam and Eve didn't know the difference between good and evil. I believe there is a logical answer to these questions, but the answer refutes Christianity.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 26, 2008 3:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Dobson obviously feels slighted and the message is clear that he is still a good, loyal and faithful Republican, but as any good power broker he expects to be asked. It is obvious that he has not been asked because there are many strategists that feel his endorsement is not much help and to actually ask him for an endorsement may well be the kiss of death.
There is no doubt that should Sen. McCain don sackcloth and ashes and make a pilgrimage to Colorado Springs and appear contrite and bear some faith based programs, he will be given plenary indulgence and remission for his sins, past, present and future and be embraced as the true leader against the heathen.
The ball is in Sen. McCain's court.
Posted by: Salvador Marin | June 26, 2008 3:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Dobson obviously feels slighted and the message is clearly that he is still a good and faithful Republican, but as any good power broker he expects to be asked. It is obvious that he has not been asked because there are many strategists that feel his endorsement is not much help and to actually ask him for an endorsement may well be the kiss of death.
There is no doubt that should Sen. McCain don sackcloth and ashes and make a pilgrimage to Colorado Springs and appear contrite and bear some faith based programs, he will be given plenary indulgence and remission for his sins, past, present and future and be embraced as the true leader against the heathen.
The ball is in Sen. McCain's court.
Posted by: Salvador Marin | June 26, 2008 3:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment
To Joe,
I basically agree with your post regarding judgment. The context of my post on judgment dealt more with discerning who is Christian versus not. Of course, I do make such judgments from time to time. However, I can never know another professing Christian's heart. Those who do not have Christ are condemned already according to scripture. Again, this is not my judgment.
I think that I can judge whether or not a particular discourse is civil or not. I think that I can render an opinion regarding the guilt or innocence of someone in a legal situation. I think we understand the basic teaching of Jesus along this line. Afterall, we should have enough discernment to be able to identify the Anti-Christ and not follow him.
To Kenneth,
Don't put yourself in the same boat with Pat Robertson who wished for the deaths of various jurists in our legal system. Let's express some degree of Christian charity here. :)
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 1:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
As a matter of fact, today I saw two people with logs in their eye, and they didn't notice.
One person had an oak log, and the other person had a willow stump.
Posted by: Kenneth | June 26, 2008 12:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Joe wrote:
"And why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?"
A log in a person's eye? Its analogies like this that make its obvious God wrote the bible.
Has anyone ever seen a "log" in someones eye? Is it possible to have a large stick in a eye and survive?
Posted by: Kenneth | June 26, 2008 12:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Let's be more clear about judging and judgment.
Judgment always entails assessment. Jesus did not condemn all judgments, only hypocritical ones. These are the ones he has in mind when he says "Don't judge so that you won't be judged" (Matthew 7:1) as we see when we look a little further on in the passage:
And why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?...You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. (Matthew 7:3,5)
Not all judgments are hypocritical. In fact, in the above passage Jesus commands a different kind of judgment once the hypocrisy has been dealt with ("first take the log out of your own eye, and then ...").
A type of judging that is commanded is factual assessment: an appraisal of whether something is right or wrong, wise or foolish, accurate or inaccurate, rational or irrational. This kind of judgment is not forbidden; it's commanded. In fact, we make these kind of judgments all the time in order to survive in the world.
People may be uncomfortable with moral assessments, but we do them all the time and Jesus commands us to do them properly. We are to judge not "according to appearance," but by "righteous" standards (John 7:24) according to Jesus, who chastised the Jews for their failures here: "And why do you not even on your own initiative judge what is right?" (Luke 12:57)
So please, avoid hypocritical judgments. But don't let that keep you from the command to make proper assessments. We need good judgment to have civil discourse. And of course, we want whoever becomes our president to be able to make proper assessments about what is wise or unwise, about moral issues and any others that touch upon the common good.
Posted by: Joe | June 26, 2008 12:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Freethinker, "The Evangelicals were the first to embrace Mussolini and Hitler." Where is your research for this statement?
Posted by: dcp | June 26, 2008 11:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Roboturkey, Dobson already endorsed Mitt Romney in the primaries when he was still in the race against McCain. Dobson still isn't crazy over McCain, and he still threatens to vote for a third party instead of McCain. So I think the problem Dobson is having is that Obama seems to be using religion as a political weapon. Mitt Romney never did that.
Posted by: dcp | June 26, 2008 11:55 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Earl C,
We're not too close on religious matters, but I completely agree with you about Kenneth and Ann Coulter.
Posted by: Arminius | June 26, 2008 11:46 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To Earl C,
You let me see my last post differently, please allow me to repost it.
-------------------------------------------------
James Dobson is a disgusting human being.
Any American who listens to his radio show is borderline retarded.
I sincerely, truly hope James Dobson, Cal Thomas, and Ann Coulter will all die natural, awful, painful deaths and rid the world of their ignorance.
Posted by: Kenneth | June 26, 2008 11:43 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To Kenneth,
Do not wish death on anyone. God is the ultimate judge and decider of our fates. As often as I do not share either Dobson's or Thomas's views, it is nice to see what the other side has to say. Every once in a while Cal Thomas will actually write something with which I agree. Then I think that there is a chance that Cal will come to his senses and have a true conversion experience and free himself from his shackles of blindness and prejudice. However there is one person out there who really needs a come-to-Jesus moment in her life. She dresses like a cheap prostitute and spews forth the most obnoxious babble of anyone I have ever heard. Her name is Ann Coulter. I have been utterly surprised that the right-wing still embraces her. Even some of the most vocal and obnoxious left-wingers calm down over time. But not Ann. She is a piece of work.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 11:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Have you ever wondered why people like Dodson, Robertson, and others talk about other Christians the way that they do? Have you wondered why President Bush does not want to talk to the leaders of Iran and Syria? It is very difficult for a fundamentalist anything to talk in an openminded way with someone who is different or approaches life from a different point of view. With the mindset of a fundamentalist, how in the world is the world going to be reached for Jesus? Have you ever thought what an impact that a Christian political leader can have on another leader just by having a talk? We had a choice seven years ago following 9/11. When we, along with the world, decided to go after Osama, we were on high moral ground. However, as we know now, we wanted to go after Hussein. Even though he had done nothing to us, we wanted to punish him. Is this God's will? Just assess the facts and compare to the Bible over such issues. God can use a handfull of men to overcome great armies. Arguably the greatest army that ever existed on this planet is dying a slow death in Iraq. The greatest democracy that ever lived is the greatest debtor nation today. We are drowning in debt. If the Bible teaches us to be irresponsible in our use of power, wealth, and resources, so be it. However, I do not read my Bible this way. Remember, there is no mention of us in Revelation.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 11:26 AM
Report Offensive Comment
James Dobson is a disgusting human being.
Any American who listens to his radio show is borderline retarded.
Everyday, I pray that James Dobson and Cal Thomas die awful, painful deaths.
Posted by: Kenneth | June 26, 2008 11:25 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To Carlton,
Thank you for your apology. I accept. Your further writing is clarifying also. I believe that I agree with you in this edification. Where James Dobson misses the mark is that he steps out and exercises a judgment that only God can give on a fellow Christian. In fact, Dobson would either state directly or imply that Obama is not Christian based on this and that. Obama has probably as strong a Christian testimony as does Dobson. I'll let others judge this dimension. I understand Obama's testimony. As a southern white guy, I do understand Obama's faith, his 20 years in a church that has been very colorful in its gospel presentation, and his ultimate decision to leave that fellowship. My life has had many parallels to that in Obama's Christian walk. I have been a member of a particular Southern Baptist church now for almost 30 years. I have stayed even during times when my wife and I were ready to walk out the door and search elsewhere. However, we had and still have strong Christian friends in this church. As we say, preachers come and preachers go. I watched as a minister, who was so hung up on teaching against homosexuality and adultery, was dismissed from the church because of "money" problems. You are aware that the New Testament teaches more about money than about other sins. Our unbiblical approach to wealth and money in this country has us in the economic mess that we are in now. However, we think that our views on abortion, gay rights, and guns will determine whether or not America will continue to slide down hill or not. The Bible has the answers, but no one group of us has all of them. When we realize that the church is made of many parts, we'll begin to understand the Pauline epistles and their application, not to mention Christ's greatest teachings as recorded in Matthew 5-7.
To finalize my reflections on your comments, Carlton, I believe that each one of us has our own unique Christian testimony. I pray that God allows me to accept yours in the same spirit in which fellow Christians accept mine. Do good, Christ-loving Christians disagree? Absolutely! However, there is that "core" of Christian beliefs that allows us to be identified as Christians, whether we are Catholic, Baptist, Methodists, and so forth. I am still holding out on the Christianity of Mormons. I believe that their basic Mormon faith is based on a lie. I would find it difficult to vote for Romney, even though he seems to be a likeable guy with many more smarts than W. I guess, my run-in with Mormons years ago has jaundiced my view of them. This run-in was a five-year battle to save some relatives of mine from some very bad things happening to them. You might say that I do approach the abortion issue from a very different perspective. Basically, I do not approve of abortion. However, I respect the rights of others to make this judgment for themselves. It is also easy for me not to approve of abortion because there is not way that my immediate family will be affected by it. However, I pray for other families that have to deal with this issue in a real way. This is the same for issues of homosexuality and guns. I have never owned a gun. If Jesus didn't need one, then I don't. Granted he did not have guns available. However, he had other weapons available which, as far as I know, he never even held one.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 11:01 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The Dobsons of the world should come as no surprise to anyone. The Evangelicals were the first to embrace Mussolini and Hitler. Evangelicals have no problem with Fascism as they see it as a way to force people into their way of thinking. This describes Dobson and his ilk to a tee.
Posted by: freethinker | June 26, 2008 10:45 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The recently revealed recording of Obama’s 2006 speech that precipitated Dr. Dobson’s radio response exposed Obama as a charlatan. The frightening matter is NOT that the elect will be deceived, but that others will rally around Obama’s rhetoric looking for content but find the same lie the serpent spoke in the Garden of Eden.
Note: The recorded 2006 speech revealed an attack by Obama on Protestant exegesis and in particular James Dobson. [See Barnard Ramm]
Posted by: SHEMAFISH | June 26, 2008 10:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment
It is amazing that abortion has now taken center stage in this debate. Please allow me to ask the obvious of the anti-abortion crowd.
If an antiabortionist has a teenage daughter who has been raped and is deemed to be pregnant, will this young girl have an abortion? In today's charged environment, the answer by the antoabortionist is probably "no." However, if a pill could be given that would terminate the pregnancy, the girl may be given the pill. If the event of rape could be hidden from public view, the chances for abortion are greatly increaased.
With all the swirl about abortion, I feel really sorry for the mother who has a still birth or has a fetus that died in the womb. For most women caught in a difficult situation, abortion is an option that makes for a difficult decision, whether the person is a Christian or not. The antiabortionists use the "Thou shalt not kill (murder)" commandment to bolster their case. But life is often lived in the gray zone. Jesus knew this. Hence, he actually healed people on the Sabbath. Jesus was and is the ultimate authority on the application of God's Word.
With the "Thou shalt not kill" commandment in view, isn't it against God's will for a person to purposefully kill others as is required during a time of war? Again, the biblical context would indicate that there are times when wars occur and people are killed. There is a time and season for everything. However, is it murder when a soldier kills an innocent civilian in Iraq? Is this murder no less offensive to God than an abortion? Now, let's look at the book of James for a moment. Too many people murder others with their mouths. Is this against God's will also? To have a false witness against another is also not God's will. However, I have read these false witnesses on this blog.
God allows for the institution of government. Government is allowed to set forth the parameters of conduct and punishment. Yes, even God allowed Saddam to rule in Iraq until we destroyed Iraq in our effort to get rid of Saddam and bring down his government. However, the many Christians in Iraq who read the same Bible as you and I do were brought under a conviction by the same scriptures to "be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God." (Romans 13:1) To get an education on the Middle East traditions, go read the Old Testament.
I know that Jesus blessed the peacemakers, the humble, the poor in spirit, the mournful, the gentle, the merciful, the pure in heart, and so forth.
Again, in final analysis regarding a lot of issues today: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." The Bible speaks more about money and about robbing God of the tithe than it does about the hot issues of today. The Bible clearly teaches that we have all sinned. It also clearly teaches that there is no forgiveness for those who do not forgive. (I submit that diplomacy has at its very core the struggle to reach common ground and to forge a new way forward, whether forgiveness is actually spoken or not. I further submit that war is the ultimate act of unforgiveness.) The religious right in our country is of a kindred mind to the religious right of Iran and other countries. It is amazing to me how the religious right is always hoping to link up with the liberals in other religious traditions and cultures. Think about this. The Islamic State of Iraq has a ring to it, doesn't it. This is not the ring that the "Fundamental Christian United States of America" had when they freed Iraq from their dictator.
As for me, I'll continue to follow the liberal, liberating Jesus wherever he leads as best as I can. He'll keep working with this piece of clay until something like what He wants emerges. I do know that His job will be finished when I get to see Him face to face. I have been blessed. Fortunately, He did not lead me to speak evil about my homosexual brothers and sisters and at the same time secretly link my sexuality with them. He did not lead me to speak evil about alcohol and allow me to be an alcoholic. He did not lead me to speak evil about pornography and allow me to have my own secret collection of pornography. You get my drift. When James Dobson focuses on the family in a biblical way, he does good. When he starts lashing out at others who are God's children, one wonders what he has or does in secret. As for me, Billy Graham will be my human role model. I do not elect a President to serve as my role model. I elect a President whom I believe can do the best to lead this country forward in honesty, integtrity, and with great vision while thinking about all the people of America and their needs and aspirations. I want my President to practice a politics of love, honesty, respect, fairness, and openess. The issues of faith will never be resolved in the halls of Congress and the Supreme Court. These issues are resolved in one's own life as one is led by the Holy Spirit. For the individual to depart from his conviction about right and wrong is sin. To cause others to sin is also sin.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 10:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To Earl C:
I looked at my post again and realize I was being very peevish and undiplomatic as you say-it was probably too late at night, but there's no excuse. That was wrong to write and I apologize.
Maybe the issue is that there is a foundational core to Christian teachings, and we need to stick to that core (confessing sins and accepting Jesus as Lord and savior), but allow leeway when it comes to other issues, issues about which, say, Dobson and Obama disagree.
Something I wonder: in this disagreement between Dobson and Obama, is Dobson addressing Obama as a fellow Christian (albeit one making public statements about what Christianity is or is not) or is this a case of a pundit criticizing a politician?
Posted by: Carlton | June 26, 2008 10:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Hmmm, Matthew 28:19-20 were marching orders from Jesus??? Not according to many contemporary NT exegetes.
i.e. more embellishment of the life of the simple preacher man in order to compete with the Roman and Greek gods et al.
e.g.
from Gerd Lüdemann
"Matt 28:16-20 The description of Jesus's appearance is minimal, as attention is focused on the content of Jesus' message to the Eleven. Lüdemann notes that "the historical yield is extremely meager." He accepts the early tradition that various disciples had visionary experiences, most probably located in Galilee, and that these experiences led to the founding of "a community which preached the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus as the Messiah and/or the Son of Man among their Jewish contemporaries." [Jesus, 255f.]"
http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/018_Revealed_to_Disciples
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 26, 2008 10:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment
So much has been made of Rev. Wright’s comments (justifiably so, most of it was conspiracy BS designed to scare parishioners) but what about the white conservative fundamentalist ministers like Dobson? They create mythological scenarios like “The Homosexual Agenda” wants to censor your pulpit and the Department of Education wants to make your children communist, atheist, witches. They are nothing more than conspiracy theories to scare people, “mobilize the troops”, and fill collection plates.
None of these people Wright or Dobson are exploring a spiritual journey toward God. They’re headline grabbing sensationalists. When will both parties realize this, drop religion and go back to politics?
Leon McRorie
Posted by: Leon McRorie | June 26, 2008 9:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Regarding Mr. Obama and Dr. Dobson, and in fact Mr. Obama's ethical views in general:
to quote the fine writing above:
"For Obama, the Bible is ambiguous, multi-faceted, difficult to interpret, subject to many readings. It is so complex, so multivalent that it demands humility. A believer--especially one who is a politician-- should never arrogantly presume to have identified God’s inscrutable message."
I think that Mr. Berlinerblau's perspective is a well rounded one regarding Mr. Obama. The fact that he presents Mr. Obama as one who who does not convict himself as an authority, in contradistinction to what he says Evangelicals do, is consistant with how Mr. Obama portrays himself. For those who think that he should be authoritive regarding the Bible and Christianity, perhaps they are looking for someone upon whom to pin their religious faith (as some so often need), rather than one who may assist in ironing out Washington's relationship to it's people and the world.
Is it any wonder then, that the founders made some issue over seperation of Church and State regarding policy. Of course, we need a leader who exersises a clear ethical judgement as regards Presidential leadership and to this end, that leader's religious convictions must tend to rule their desicion making, but where in heaven's name will any kind of Biblical interpretation need to enter into this?
Rather, such a one as we are in the process of electing, needs to read the hearts of men with some accuracy, and while many of us are of actual different denominations (all of which must be genuinely respected-not one over others by a true leader in such diversity), but we share one powerful need with the world: genuine peace through clarity of vision.
With all due respect let me say, that this issue over authority as regards church and Bible do nothing but cloud the clarity needed, not only for a clear middle way in policy, but it makes it that much more difficult for such a one to deliver just what all people (Evangelicals, Jews, Moslims, etc. etc.) really want from their President. Let us not make more confusion in an already muddled local and world situation. Let us keep our eye on what beings peace and ends the killing.
Posted by: Steven Levey | June 26, 2008 9:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I believe President Obama's point that so-called Christians need to intellegent present their point of view in a public forum has been answered here. Most of the comments on religion posted on this post are shallow and ignorant, the so-call christian posters show great hatred and bigotry. Many have gained their information from one-side websites and news shows. Mr. Dobson has always been an idiot and he falls right in line with Jackson, Sharpton,Hagee, Parson, Dollar and Jakes. He just shows up to put a dog in the fight regardless of the fight. I went to his website and the first thing I saw was another so called preacher begging for money. Hopeful he will go the way of the dinosaur. To so-called Christians one's religion is not a qualification for being president.
Posted by: Jeffrey | June 26, 2008 9:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment
dsapp should pay closer attention.
One wishing to "vet" Obama could have seen his presidential mien at a press conference in Chicago yesterday.
Servants of Satan necessarily lack grace and cannot see it in others.
Posted by: Will Jones | June 26, 2008 9:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Obama's speaks eloquently when he reads from a prepared text,but he struggles to answer an impromptu question.His political inclinations are far too liberal for most Christians to accept. Other than being a former state senator and a first term U.S. senator,he brings nothing to the office.
Posted by: dsapp | June 26, 2008 9:31 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Those who accepted George W. Bush's "witness" lacked the discernment of Spirit to recognize the homosexual draft-dodger, later cheated into the White House by only the Roman Catholics on the Supreme Court to go and commit 9-11, as the instrument of Anti-Christ that he is.
Obama, a clay-footed man as all others, possesses the Grace our Nation so sorely needs.
Those who falsely claims godliness and pass the profanations and lies against him, are like Bush, enemies of G-d and America...they, too, are Anti-Christ.
The curse comes not causeless. May it be so with those who make evil their friend.
Posted by: Will Jones | June 26, 2008 9:29 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I respect Dr. Dobson for standing for what is right. I don't understand why Sen. Obama call himself a christian and stands for issues that is contrary to God's word. Abortion is MURDER pure and simple. Millions of innocent Babies being killed for under the guise of PRO CHOICE. God said Homosexual behavior is a abomination why would Sen. Obama he says he's a christian, supports Homosexual relationships. Is it true He wants to override The states Laws that approved the Ban on homosexual marriages? A person's action should reflect their beliefs. God knows one day we will stand before Him in Judgement. I want to say Sen. Obama if you are going to stand for issues contrary to The Word Of God which is NOT CHRISTIAN LIKE please stop referring yourself as A believer. From the Bible point of view your actions are Hypocritical and God is NOT pleased.
I commend Dr. James Dobson for taking a stand for what is right. May the Lord richly BLESS DR. Dobson for taking a moral stand. I pray God save This Nation.
Posted by: Cindy Murphy | June 26, 2008 9:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment
James Bukowiec states:
"ANY Biblical interpretation that does not hold a newborn's life as precious is patently wrong. God is incredibly clear about this.
Obama has supported legislation that steadfastly holds onto abortion."
The last time that I looked, a new born by definition cannot be aborted. Abortion is a process that occurs before there is a birth. Anything that happens to terminate the life of a new born in a violent way may be either accidental or murder.
One needs to go back and read Joshua for an insight into the mind of God regarding life and death issues.
The big problem that I have with the sanctimonious is that they will take a pill to effect an abortion, but deny the right of a person to have a clinical abortion, even if it is to save the life of the mother. The choices are clear in this matter: backyard abortions or legal abortions for those who believe in them.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 9:17 AM
Report Offensive Comment
James Bukowiec states:
"ANY Biblical interpretation that does not hold a newborn's life as precious is patently wrong. God is incredibly clear about this.
Obama has supported legislation that steadfastly holds onto abortion."
The last time that I looked, a new born by definition cannot be aborted. Abortion is a process that occurs before there is a birth. Anything that happens to terminate the life of a new born in a violent way may be either accidental or murder.
One needs to go back and read Joshua a a further insight into the mind of God regarding life and death issues.
The big problem that I have with the sanctimonious is that they will take a pill to effect an abortion, but deny the right of a person to have a clinical abortion, even if it is to save the life of the mother. The choices are clear in this matter: backyard abortions or legal abortions for those who believe in them.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 9:15 AM
Report Offensive Comment
"Judge not, lest ye be judged." The righteous crowd still hasn't learned. If Obama states that he is a Christian and has a personal testimony to give, then I believe him the same way that I would believe George Bush. However, there are people on this blog who seem to have the mind of God and are passing judgment on people. The last time I looked, it was obvious to me that only God could know the heart of a person. If this were not so, I have an idea where King David is right now. But God said that David was a man after His own heart. The religious right would have no place for King David in their places of worship. Think about this, you of little faith, but all mouth.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 9:06 AM
Report Offensive Comment
ANY Biblical interpretation that does not hold a newborn's life as precious is patently wrong. God is incredibly clear about this.
Obama has supported legislation that steadfastly holds onto abortion.
His views espouse confusion from the Word. God is not the author of confusion.
You "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel".
From a civil standpoint, any or no interpretation of the Bible is acceptable in this great experiment. But playing games with the Word WILL be judged.
Posted by: James Bukowiec | June 26, 2008 9:04 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Janephil writes:
"This whole article is a waste of time. Basically, everyone knows that Obama was a muslim who converted to Christianity because he wanted to run for the US Presidency."
I do not know where Janephil gets the facts. However, the bold statement that Obama converted to Christianity because he wanted to be U.S. President is a bunch of hot air. What we do know was witnessed by many when Obama accepted Jesus Christ over 20 years ago as his Lord and Savior. To deny this event in Obama's life is to deny this event in the life of every born-again Christian.
What we have is another "swift-boating." When Kerry's medals were challeneged, all medals earned by any of our troups were challenged.
Regarding the Gospel message. The message is simple enough. However, theologians have debated numerous passages in the Bible for centuries. In fact, it is widely believed that some words in the original text were not translated correctly. One big problem that exists is that no original manuscripts exist. What it boils down to is the emphasis that various preachers place on certain parts of the Bible. You have those televangelists and preachers who preach a gospel of health, wealth, and prosperity, while others preach hellfire and brimstone.
When it comes to politics and religion, it is OK for a politician to have strong views about his faith. However, he does have a constituency that expects him to represent them fairly and with reason. However, I refuse to vote for a self-proclaimed morality judge who practices a politics of deception, absolute power, and so forth. Look what the populace got with Bush: a war of choice based on a "push to spread democracy to the Middle East" albeit he sold it to the public based on the imminent use of WMDs, most of which we had provided Iraq to fight Iran back in the 80s and were destroyed after the 1991 Persian Gulf war. We have a national debt that will not be paid in my life-time, the 4 trillion dollar increase in 7 years that Bush stated that he did not want paid on the backs of future generations, yet he has pushed for and gotten massive tax cuts mostly benefitting the wealthy and all of this in a time of war and increased expenditures.
The pro-life and anti-gay crowd needs to rethink how much national treasure and economic struggle they are willing to afford when they get "one of their own" in the White House. I further suggest that they step up to the plate and pay for all of this rather than ranting about how bad government is and holding out their hands for government services.
Now, having said all of this, perhaps those of you who like to "shout" rather than sit down and reason will be seated at the end of the election when a person who prefers to reason is finally elected to the presidency. Yes, Obama is a man of reason. He also listens. Those on the right are trying hard to crack Obama's stamina. But look how arrogant and self-righteous this crowd looks. I pray that Obama maintains his deliberate, reasoned approach to politics. Up until now, his responses have been right-on.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 8:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment
So much bitterness over a book that is clearly nothing more than a collaboration of fairy tales and bed time stories. The selective passages most often quoted by dobson, the pig that he is, are those passages that bludgeon people over the head with "do this" or "do that" Dobson and his band of short bus riding supporters never ever focus on the few words jesus actually spoke that were captured in writing by his traveling comedy writers. All the hate, judgement, stupid rules and assassinine punishments for breaking said stupid rules were all written by John McCain, ya, he is actually old enough to have been around back then. Then came the unquestioning minions which spewed forth from these uncontrolled breeders perpetrated the stupid rules on those who dared to question the stupidity of what was being told them by the stupid ones. All in all, pat dobson, jerry falwell, pat robertson, and the drag queen over in italy need to be rounded up. There are still millions of starving lions that need feeding and I can't think of a more deserving group of appetizers.
Posted by: pete451 | June 26, 2008 8:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
In the beginning was the word, the word was with God and the word was God.
The word was made flesh and dwelt among us (and we behld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth.
Jesus Christ is "the word." His word is the Bible. If you are a Christian, you cannot separate the two. If you don't accept the Bible as truth, if it's nothing more than fairy tales to you, then how can you be a "servant of Christ?"
Posted by: Christian | June 26, 2008 8:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment
"he rejects its pro-family agenda all the while being a committed, credible, enthusiastic and easily recognizable servant of Jesus Christ."
Sorry, but I ain't buying it.
To me, Obama is not an "easily recognizable serant of Jesus Christ." He mocks the Bible, he joined a church that preached racism, hatred and bigotry, and he believes there are multiple ways to heaven.
Now "easily recognizable" politician? Absolutely. 100%
Posted by: Ain't Buying It | June 26, 2008 8:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
You say, "A believer--especially one who is a politician-- should never arrogantly presume to have identified God’s inscrutable message." Not to presume that Obama would actually agree with this assessment of his perspective on the Bible, it does aptly express one of the oldest defenses against accountability to the Scriptural teaching on just about any subject, including faith itself. If "God's inscrutable message" in the Bible is too complicated and confusing for even a believer to identify or understand (which begs the question of why they would believe), then there can be no moral obligation for anyone to read and obey any of it. Furthermore, those that claim to understand the message of the Bible are rightly to be ridiculed for their arrogance and self-righteous piety. Now imagine that! The eternal, omnipotent and omnicious God of the universe chose to reveal Himself and His message through the inspiring of the Biblical writers that He created, but He just couldn't get it done!
Posted by: RMoore | June 26, 2008 8:19 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The bible may thus be considered simply as literature...... - Mariano Patalinjug.
I hope nobody takes offense with Mariano's post. You see he has not been taking his medication for the past month. Mariano, you see, is suffering from hallucinations. Now if you will excuse me, I will have to put on a straighjacket for him before he hurts himself. Thanks for you understanding, and please don't give him the satisfaction of replying to his aimless ramblings.
Posted by: janephil | June 26, 2008 7:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Yonkers, New York
26 June 2008
All of this controversy about whose interpretation of the bible is right or wrong in the end amounts to "all sound and fury, signifying nothing."
The bible is not the Word of God. It is supposedly the word of a few followers (disciples) of the historical Jesus Christ--I say "supposedly" because one wonders at how those illiterate and uninstructed fishermen-disciples could have acquired such a high level of literacy all of a sudden as if by sheer magic!
The more likely explanation is that some coldly calculating men, intent on pushing their own agenda, whether altruistic or not, were responsible for writing all those books of the bible.
And history tells us that some books of the original bible, later judged to be quite controversial if not apocryphal by those bishops whom the emperor Constantine assembled in Niceae in AD 325, were totally expunged, leaving only those books which now comprise the bible.
The bible may thus be considered simply as literature, but not as the word of God as religionists claim so loudly and fervently.
Mariano Patalinjug
MarPatalinjug@aol.com
Posted by: Mariano Patalinjug | June 26, 2008 7:45 AM
Report Offensive Comment
ROY - flattery might not get you anywhere but insults from a liberal is plainly just "hot air". Bye.
Posted by: janephil | June 26, 2008 7:44 AM
Report Offensive Comment
This whole article is a waste of time. Basically, everyone knows that Obama was a muslim who converted to Christianity because he wanted to run for the US Presidency. Everyone is entitled to his own interpretation of the Bible? Surely you are being facetious. Are Christians to accept the interpretations of the Bible from ex-muslims Obama and Rev. Wright. Better yet, why not Ahmedinejad convert to Christianity and give us his interpretation of the Bible. We should all look forward to that.
Posted by: janephil | June 26, 2008 7:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Hopefully America will send hateful neochristians like Dobson an unmistakable message in November:
his pompous, fat a*ss on a platter.
Posted by: Roy | June 26, 2008 7:29 AM
Report Offensive Comment
KGAMBLE - Leaving the church is not something that you would want to boast about unless you are sick in the head. So what do you do on Sunday mornings now, go down to the strip joint and drink yourself silly.
Posted by: janephil | June 26, 2008 7:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Hopefully a Christian America will send Obama an unmistakable message in November. It's what you get with an un-vetted candidate whose only skill is reciting a text from a teleprompter while he arrogantly looks down his nose at the audience- Greg Neubeck.
I am sure everyone will agree with that sentiment. No one will be able to put it any better.
Basically, Mr Hussein is interpreting the bible for his own selfish political reasons. Obama is pathetic. His stand on every issue is ambiguous. He tries to win the votes of people on both sides of an issue by sitting on the fence. I believe he is spineless and self-serving. Even as the Supreme Court is about to make its ruling known on the constitutionality of Washington, D.C.,'s gun ban, Obama is non-committal. I guess his army of campaign staff and the writer above, will have to step forward and clarify things for Obama.
Posted by: janephil | June 26, 2008 7:19 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The only things I have to say is that I was brought up in a house that believed the 'true' interpretation of the Bible. But they never could explain why we don't take people outside of town and stone them when they've committed a sin. Which is why, whenn I got old enough to say 'No' and mean it, I quit going to my parents' church.
Posted by: KGamble | June 26, 2008 7:03 AM
Report Offensive Comment
It's great that it is alive and well today in the US
Posted by: Separation of Church & State | June 26, 2008 6:51 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The last three comments (hopefully NOT representative of the previous 270) were more than I could stand. Anyone who says, "I have always said....." generally only always says, and never listens. Dobson showed his desperation to prove his relevance this week. Professor Berlinerblau described it perfectly in this article. Please, you people who are prone to listen to Dobson, LISTEN to him. That's all any reasonable person could ask. Then you'll be able to distinguish between reasonable thought and desperate ranting.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 26, 2008 6:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
With 271 comments, it's doubtful that you'll read this, but here goes:
Even though Dobson's exegesis is off the wall, he's still listened to by people who believe every word he says.
And this makes him dangerous.ne,
The tone of criticism against Dobson and many other Christian "leaders" is one of "well, he's just another fanatic, a loony tune, a snake oil salesman fallen in love with his own product." What many people fail to realize is that Dobson et al DoN'T CARE about those labels. However, there is one label that would make all of them very, very angry: STUPID. Obama came very close to doing just that.
Whether in or out of church/religion, no one wants to be associated with someone who is stupid. By association, they are stupid as well. You could call them insane, unhinged, fanatical. You could tell people that they are bizarre, but calling them stupid will make them very angry...and in the process, make them even more stupid, because very angry people are apt to make stupid mistakes.
Again, be careful, but be courageous: assail Dobson, Perkins, Parsley, Hagee, etc., etc. because they will cause immense damage to humanity.
Thanks for letting me rant.
Dan Vojir
San Francisco
dan-vojir@sbcglobal.net
Posted by: Dan Vojir | June 26, 2008 5:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Greg Neubeck: I loved your comments. My sentiments exactly.
Greg wrote: Hopefully a Christian America will send Obama an unmistakable message in November. It's what you get with an un-vetted candidate whose only skill is reciting a text from a teleprompter while he arrogantly looks down his nose at the audience. Greg Neubeck
----------------------------------
Barack and Michelle Obama have the same habit - just as you said about Barack - he and she arrogantly look down their noses at their audience. I noticed that about Michelle on CSPAN when she would lean forward at the lectern and chastize and admonish her audiences with a dark, furrowed brow look. Very uncomfortable to watch.
I have always said that Barack is a pathological liar and a narcissist. His cult-like personality, talking like the second coming of Christ in his rallies really turned me off. It mesmerized many others.
Now, it seems that Obama has taken it one step further - he acts like a Hitler or a Saddam Hussein or that sect leader that had his pictures up in every room in the compound.
His new Obama seal, which looks like the presidential seal is so arrogant and alarming.
And, the last time I saw him speaking, behind him was the word OBAMA in extraordinarily large letters. It made me sick to my stomach. He is truly in love with himself. He is the most arrogant, narcissistic person I have ever seen, and his elitist personna drives me crazy.
After 8 years of Bush, we are going to have to suffer through 4 to 8 years of this little self-indulging dictator. He has already renigged on major things such as campaign reforms, and the FISA bill - he was going to filibuster it, but now sides in with Bush.
I don't think the change he plans for America is the change we seek.
Obama needs to be asked direct questions, such as, why does he say he is and his father was "black." I think because he doesn't want to admit he is an Arab, and his father was an Arab terrorist (The Kenyatta Group).
Obama says he isn't muslim, but his brother says he is. Why won't Obama show his birth certificate. I saw one the other day with the Certificate No. blacked out. Why? So nobody could research it for truthfulness? His secrecy and deceitfulness and hypocrisy is what matters. gw.
Posted by: Grace | June 26, 2008 5:14 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Greg Neubeck: I loved your comments. My sentiments exactly.
Greg wrote: Hopefully a Christian America will send Obama an unmistakable message in November. It's what you get with an un-vetted candidate whose only skill is reciting a text from a teleprompter while he arrogantly looks down his nose at the audience. Greg Neubeck
----------------------------------
Barack and Michelle Obama have the same habit - just as you said about Barack - he and she arrogantly look down their noses at their audience. I noticed that about Michelle on CSPAN when she would lean forward at the lectern and chastize and admonish her audiences with a dark, furrowed brow look. Very uncomfortable to watch.
I have always said that Barack is a pathological liar and a narcissist. His cult-like personality, talking like the second coming of Christ in his rallies really turned me off. It mesmerized many others.
Now, it seems that Obama has taken it one step further - he acts like a Hitler or a Saddam Hussein or that sect leader that had his pictures up in every room in the compound.
His new Obama seal, which looks like the presidential seal is so arrogant and alarming.
And, the last time I saw him speaking, behind him was the word OBAMA in extraordinarily large letters. It made me sick to my stomach. He is truly in love with himself. He is the most arrogant, narcissistic person I have ever seen, and his elitist personna drives me crazy.
After 8 years of Bush, we are going to have to suffer through 4 to 8 years of this little self-indulging dictator. He has already renigged on major things such as campaign reforms, and the FISA bill - he was going to filibuster it, but now sides in with Bush.
I don't think the change he plans for America is the change we seek.
Obama needs to be asked direct questions, such as, why does he say he is and his father was "black." I think because he doesn't want to admit he is an Arab, and his father was an Arab terrorist (The Kenyatta Group).
Obama says he isn't muslim, but his brother says he is. Why won't Obama show his birth certificate. I saw one the other day with the Certificate No. blacked out. Why? So nobody could research it for truthfulness? gw.
Posted by: Grace | June 26, 2008 5:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To my dear "concerned":
Rather than be lazy-minded and paste up something from a website, why not attempt to express your thoughts by articulating them using the written word? Sadly, like Mr. Dobson, you evidently have nothing to offer the reader but a fleeting, inexplicable and quite cowardly cheap shot at a man who simply exceeds because he cares. That's the very stark difference between the two men. Reading comprehension is a very human ability and it does help to exercise it when one is reading the Bible. I do hope you learn to free yourself of your anger. Otherwise, you could just end up like the obviously quite unhappy Mr. Dobson.
Posted by: Michael Harley | June 26, 2008 3:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I am a seminary graduate and an Obama supporter. I find problematic in this article, the author's description of the conservative evangelicals. Conservative is a political term whereas orthodox is the term which describes the Christian who holds an authoritative view of the Bible. The devide in Christianity is not between extreme Conservatives and everyone else. It is between orthodox Christians and post-modern Christians who hold the bible as inspirational but not authoritative. The problem with this article is that orthodox Christians are in different places politically. I am politically a moderate independent but religiously I am an orthodox Christian. To say this is an extreme right vs. everyone else problem is incorrect and, by the way, I know many Catholics that are orthodox as well. Just food for thought to open the minds of the politically incorrect.
Posted by: 1rap | June 26, 2008 1:21 AM
Report Offensive Comment
To Carlton,
Pardon me for stepping on your toes, but you could be more diplomatic in your response. You may disagree. However, you are being disagreeable. You have exactly presented the attitude that I was speaking against. Perhaps you have also misunderstood the words of Jesus. His harsh comments were almost always directed to those who "knew" what God wanted. Actually, I do not understand Jesus' words as hate speech. There is, afterall, a context.
Posted by: Earl C | June 26, 2008 12:05 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The Great Commission, Matthew 28:19-20. Not "marching" like to war, but "marching" like a deliberate movement to carry the Good News and so forth. Perhaps our Bibles differ. Another good reason to be careful about whose interpretations of scripture are correct. :)
Posted by: Earl C | June 25, 2008 11:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Decrying that which you don't like as "hate speech" gets you nowhere. You'd reject much of Jesus' message as hate speech.
And what could be more "bigoted, hateful, judgmental, and arrogant" and decrying fellow believers as "bigoted, hateful, judgmental, and arrogant"?
Grow up and stop pandering to the zeitgeist with your sniveling politically correct hogwash!
Posted by: Carlton | June 25, 2008 11:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hmmm, Matthew 28:19-20 were marching orders from Jesus??? Not according to many contemporary NT exegetes.
e.g.
from Gerd Lüdemann
"Matt 28:16-20 The description of Jesus's appearance is minimal, as attention is focused on the content of Jesus' message to the Eleven. Lüdemann notes that "the historical yield is extremely meager." He accepts the early tradition that various disciples had visionary experiences, most probably located in Galilee, and that these experiences led to the founding of "a community which preached the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus as the Messiah and/or the Son of Man among their Jewish contemporaries." [Jesus, 255f.]"
i.e. more embellishment of the life of the simple preacher man in order to compete with the Roman and Greek gods et al.
http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/018_Revealed_to_Disciples
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 25, 2008 11:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I am reading in this blog the hate speech of supposed Christians. I cannot understand how these people feel that this will advance the cause of Christ. These people need to reread Matthews 28:19-20 until they figure out the only marching orders that Jesus gave his followers. God is the only true judge. Governments have been empowered by God to bring judgments against evildoers. There is a very good reason why mortals are not to judge their fellow man regarding religious things.
The venom that the ultraright is spewing about Obama must mean that Obama is cutting pretty close to the bone with his Christ-like attitude. It is the same venom that the Pharisees unleased against Jesus. Jesus only had words of condemnation against the religious leaders of his day. He used the word "hypocrite" only against these religious rulers. Today, many of the religious leaders speak about their love for Jesus but have no clue how to show His love for their fellow man. Jesus reduced all of the commandments to only two: (1) Love the Lord your God with all of your mind, soul, and heart, and (2) love your neighbor as yourself. As others have also indicated, He asked us to love our enemies.
The bigoted, hateful, judgmental, and arrogant self-proclaiming speakers of "Christian" truth need to read their Bibles. As has been mentioned by others, a dose of humility is the medicine that should be prescribed for all Christians who get a bit out of line.
Posted by: Earl C | June 25, 2008 10:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Arminius, Lynda:
"1. Pick up your bible.
2. Forget anything you ever knew about the Old Testament and Revelation.
3. Think about this: God is love.
4. Open your bible to Matthew. Read thru John. Shut the bible.
5. Think long and hard about the words of our Lord."
add the following:
6. Realize that if the extent of your theology is simply "God is love", you haven't been reading Jesus properly, as Jesus reveals God's nature is also justice (see the parable of the sheep and the goats, Matthew chapter 25), so augment #3.
7. Realize that Jesus was among the most judgmental of all people if you look at the entirety of His teachings and His work (as you did in #4), but He judged properly and appropriately.
8. Notice he talks about the judgment of God and hell more than anyone other figure in the Bible.
9. Now develop a mature, robust understanding of who God is and what Jesus did to satisfy both God's love, and his justice.
10. Now go, and make disciples of all nations.
Posted by: ysidro | June 25, 2008 10:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Excellent article...and precisely why America was founded as the New Secular Order ("Novus Ordo Seclorem") under "Annuit Coeptis."
Sectarian factionalism is treason against "E Pluribus Unum."
Posted by: Will Jones | June 25, 2008 10:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson is like all of the other hyporcrits. If you are against a woman's right to choose then don't get your mistress an abortion. I know you don't believe in it until you get "caught". It's two things you hyporcrits like and money is just one of them.
Posted by: Harold | June 25, 2008 9:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Lynda,
It is beyond belief that anyone claiming to be Christian could spew hatred the way you do.
Do yourself, God, and your fellow humans a favor:
1. Pick up your bible.
2. Forget anything you ever knew about the Old Testament and Revelation.
3. Think about this: God is love.
4. Open your bible to Matthew. Read thru John. Shut the bible.
5. Think long and hard about the words of our Lord.
Repeat. Keep repeating until you understand what Jesus said. It is then that you will repent of condemning another child of God to hell. And you will truly know that God is love - to all.
Posted by: Arminius | June 25, 2008 9:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Greg,
America is NOT a Christian nation. It is a secular democracy. If you want to live in a theocracy, go to Iran.
Posted by: Athena | June 25, 2008 9:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
For 20yrs. Obama, under the tutorial of the fanatical Reverend Wright, immersed himself and his family in Black Liberation Theology, a Marxist derivative, which professes that the White race is equivalent to the Devil. It's amazing that anyone, including Reverend Dobson, would be shocked at Obama's perverted view of the Bible. Rev. Wright's mentor, Black Liberation theologian, James Cone, in his book "For My People" states: "The Christian faith does not possess in its nature the means for analyzing the structure of capitalism. Marxism, as a tool of social analysis, can disclose the gap between appearance and reality, and thereby help Christians to see how things really are." It is this logic which has schooled Obama to seek economic parity in America thru income redistribution; i.e. Marxist Socialism; and, is an overriding theme of his campaign. Further, noone should be surprised at Obama's proclamation that American is NOT a Christian Nation. Hopefully a Christian America will send Obama an unmistakable message in November. It's what you get with an un-vetted candidate whose only skill is reciting a text from a teleprompter while he arrogantly looks down his nose at the audience. Greg Neubeck
Posted by: Greg Neubeck | June 25, 2008 9:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
You know, Concerned, somehow 'Concerned repeating himself' isn't something I ever thought to miss.
Still don't.
" Lynda:
"Yes we Christians do hear Obama's footsteps...walking the corridors of hell.
But Christ destroyed Hell's gates and come November when McCain is elected, Obama will just be a bad memory, a nightmare that is over."
Err, I thought McCain was all *for* border fences?
Or is that your idea, send all the minorities there and let it 'go to Hell?'
Posted by: Paganplace | June 25, 2008 8:47 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hmmm, something is missing in this discussion. Ah, yes it is the synopsis of religious realities.
Said synopsis for the "newbies" out there:
1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.
Many of the 1.5 million Conservative Jews and many of their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.
simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm
2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.
The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html
For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".
3. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).
4. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.
This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.
And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.
5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."
The caste/laborer system and cow worship/reverence are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."
6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"
Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.
Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies, and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.
Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | June 25, 2008 8:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Lynda's comments about Obama's footsteps in Hell is exactly the reason why the religious right is seeing a dwindling population in this country. Indeed, Southern Baptists, of which I have been one all of my life despite the hateful thrust of the last few decades, have been surprised by their decreasing numbers. In addition, many "Baptist" churches are naming themselves other than "Baptist." Lynda needs prayer and also needs to learn how to practice Christian charitability. Lynda's attitude is exactly what it takes to start religious wars. America will be a footnote in history if it comes to this.
Posted by: Earl C | June 25, 2008 7:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Yes we Christians do hear Obama's footsteps...walking the corridors of hell.
But Christ destroyed Hell's gates and come November when McCain is elected, Obama will just be a bad memory, a nightmare that is over.
Posted by: Lynda | June 25, 2008 7:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Yes we Christians do hear Obama's footsteps...walking the corridors of hell.
But Christ destroyed Hell's gates and come November when McCain is elected, Obama will just be a bad memory, a nightmare that is over.
Posted by: Lynda | June 25, 2008 7:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I want to know where they stand on the Papal Schism of 1378.
Posted by: AMDG | June 25, 2008 6:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"It ain't the parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do." - Mark Twain
What Jesus taught is largely no mystery; sometimes it's obvious. But it's so offensive to the contemporary mind, that only the most general and gentle of his teachings and moral principles are accepted, since they don't personally challenge to our moral choices. We ignore the rest. "Love your enemies". C'mon Jesus, you didn't really mean that. Oh, how the ego does filter!
Posted by: interpretivedance | June 25, 2008 6:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Anonymous: "One of the books excluded was the Gospel of Thomas, where supposedly Thomas wrote that when Jesus was a kid he made birds out of sand and then made them come to life. Many other books, which did not conform to the religion that these community leaders were trying to create were excluded as well.
Also, please remember that the gospels were not actually written by the apostles, but in fact written 30-50 years after Jesus' death by people who never met or knew him. Even the Catholic Church agrees on this, as I learned it in a Franciscan Catholic high school."
The Gnostic Gospel of Thomas is definitely a Gnostic work, and therefore particularly suspect. The infancy narratives you refer to actually are from the Proto Gospel of james, also a Gnostic work, and also particularly suspect. (You could try to read them but the only translations I can find are wretchedly pietistic. Even if you can wade through them you recognize easily why the Church (and I do Mean Roman and Uniate Catholic Church) rejected them.
As for your assertions that the Evangelists never knew Jesus, I doubt that is what your Franciscan Scripture instrucors actually said, having been a sixties Franciscan Seminarian. the 30 to 60 year hiatus between Jesus death, say about 27 AD, and the beginning of the persecutions under Nero, 64 AD, don't preclude the writers knowing Jesus. If Jerome is correct, Matthew, John, and Mark would have known Jesus, and Luke describeshimself as having researched his gospel and early Church history by carefully learning from those who DID know Jesus.
Much of modern biblical scholarship )thoughtfully NOT capitalized) is of the begging the question school of study that assumes, as you do, that those are the facts, but one undeniable fact is that if a single biblical scholar could find a single one of the manuscripts Jerome had to have worked from, the rest of the biblical scholarship community would be willing to kill to get their hands on it, because we haven't really got anything in any state of completeness that is at least that old. Jerome's current exile as an expert arises from the fact that Protestant Biblical Scholars want to be independent of Rome, and Jerome would lock them into Roman control in a totally unacceptable way. (As to that, suppose that the "Q" document is actually Aramaic Matthew...)
Posted by: ceflynline@msn.com | June 25, 2008 6:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Having read through about half of the posts, I feel compelled to express my frustration and disgust that this issue even exists. In a secular republic, these issues should be off the table. They provide a smoke screen for simple, sound bite theology wherein one religious person quotes the bible to invalidate another religious person's sound bite. Don't you know that virtually any quote in the bible has a contravening quote that can be used to invalidate it. This is also true of the koran. I personally don't care what anyone believes, but I care about what they will do. Personally, I have no idea what Obama will do. I do agree that he is largely a cipher. But having said that, I DO know what the people and issues that the Ayatollah of Colorado Springs has supported have done and are still doing. Dobson is a power hungry demagogue and, hopefully, he has just about run his course. God, but I'm tired of hearing about god, a subject no one has any first hand knowledge of. Please just leave off, and discuss the issues here on the ground, and not in some pie-in-the-sky heaven. I am far more concerned about the quality of human life on earth than the supposed quality of death in an unknown and unknowable hereafter.
Posted by: agathodemon | June 25, 2008 6:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
What exactly makes James Dobson a Christian leader?
There isn't much that's Christian about him, from where I sit.
As Edina Monsoon said in AbFab, "You may dress like a Christian but the similarity ends there."
Posted by: James | June 25, 2008 6:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson probably should not have steered his organization into political lobbying. He should have stuck with what he did best: encouraging Christians to have healthy families that promote human flourishing. (Even then, he gets vilified as a "brainwasher"...)
Posted by: Dobsonfan | June 25, 2008 6:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Dobson's focus on the family is a rare treat, in that it indeed focuses on the family. However, like Senator Obama, I myself believe that the Bible is multifaceted, difficult to intrepret and interpreted differently by so many people. The Bible must be opened with great humility and then and only then will the scriptures be properly understood through the faith of the believer. I believe then, that each line of devine scripture will be opened; line upon line and precept upon precept. Both Dobson and Obama have truths but as a God loving preacher/teacher Dobson could get more out of the scriptures if he approaches it with more of humility and not the attacks he and his broadcast inflicts on not only Obama but all those who does not share in right winged beliefs.
Posted by: H. Ray | June 25, 2008 6:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Anonymous at 5:34 pm:
The Dead Sea Scrolls are strictly Essene scriptures, therefore mostly Old Testament. NO New Testament.
The ONLY New Testament Book that MAY have originated on Aramaic is Matthew, largely on the authority of St Jerome, and no Aramaic text is known to exist.
The church (small case or capitalized) doesn't own any of the Dead Sea Scrolls, those belong to an institution in Israel, mostly Jewish in organization. Those Scholars hold on to the scrolls with an academic ferocity that is hard to believe, but not to keep them from the public, just to keep them from competing scholars.
By the way, what makes you believe Jesus and his followers didn't speak Greek? They were Galileans, and were as likely to have spoken Greek as a first language as Aramaic. There isn't any reason to believe that they were illiterate, either. They were quite likely well educated (for the time) and literate in at least Greek and Hebrew. Greek is, in fact, a very easy language to learn to read. And Jews have historically learned to read Hebrew, why should the Jews of the first century been any different?
Posted by: ceflynline@msn.com | June 25, 2008 5:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
It does appear Hamilton has the most insightful thing to say on this topic (and something I've been arguing for years). Van der Veer is second. Too bad there's not a thumbs up/thumbs down on this board.
Posted by: Robin | June 25, 2008 5:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Anonymous,
I'll have to think about your other points, but one clarification:
"the earliest versions of the NT ever found (dead sea scrolls...in Aramaic, not Greek)"
The Dead Sea Scrolls have only the Old Testament, they pre-date Jesus by a century and a half, and so are irrelevant to any discussion of New Testament translations.
Posted by: Joe | June 25, 2008 5:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dear Mr. Berlinerblau, Well done! An excellent analysis! I think you are right! Just as Senator Obama & I are Black & White. Regards, Bob A. Jones, Sr.
Posted by: Bob A. Jones, Sr. | June 25, 2008 5:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dear Mr. Berlinerblau, Well done! An excellent analysis! I think you are right! Just as Senator Obama & I are Black & White. Regards, Bob A. Jones, Sr.
Posted by: Bob A. Jones, Sr. | June 25, 2008 5:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I see a lot of talk against the smoldering "hatred and prejudice" of Dobson and the like. Sounds like you're just re-directing the hatred and prejudice at him!
"No, wait, I'm note hateful and prejudiced, I'm just telling it like it is-I'm the reasonable one. It's this Dobson who's the hate-mongering kook!"
Oh really!? Get over it! Everyone uses rhetoric! If you disagree, give some valid points, but vilifying your opponent as "hateful and prejudiced" compared to your own "love and compassion" is just plain manipulative! Everyone makes judgments. Some are better judges than others.
Posted by: Dobsonfan | June 25, 2008 5:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Joe: If you believe that (and I'm still pretty sure that isn't true...at least according to my studies), aren't you troubled by the fact that the original New Testament is written in a language that Jesus did not speak, nor any of his followers speak? Why would god speak to his son in one language, then have others write down the account of that 100 years later in a different part of the world in a different language?
And please remember, the church currently has the earliest versions of the NT ever found (dead sea scrolls...in Aramaic, not Greek), and they do not let anyone read, study or publish them except for a handful of people who aren't allowed to discuss. What are they hiding?
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 5:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
So why would anything this capitalist christian windbag says have any news value? He is the very reason why the Republicans will be sent packing this fall. We've had 8 years of pandering to the religious right. No one care what he or any other bible-thumper has to say.
Posted by: oaklynne | June 25, 2008 5:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The "Christian" right is neither Christian or right. It is a political movement which dines a la carte on scripture, cherry-picking the bits which (often taken out of the wider context) appear to support their political prejudices. The many hatreds which their prejudices nurture make it inconvenient for them to observe the core Christian message which is to love God with all your heart, and your neighbour as yourself - so they just ignore it. They also have difficulty with the Ten Commandments to the extent that they have had to re-define "thou shalt not kill" and "thou shalt not steal" to allow killing and stealing where the victims are the "untermenschen" of their world-view.
Posted by: pete murray | June 25, 2008 5:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
You can go to any town of considerable size and see a boatload of churches that claim to worship the same Jesus. I know they can disagree on a lot of doctrines, but they're just details.
God knows that we humans are a bunch of damn fools, so that's why Jesus forgives us.
Posted by: Bobby in NJ | June 25, 2008 5:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Anonymous,
The ancient manuscripts from which modern English translations are made (e.g., the New International Version) are ancient Greek, the same language in which the New Testament was originally written (with the exception perhaps of Matthew).
Modern English translations are not made from Latin translations; they consider hundreds of ancient manuscripts and use systematic criteria (such as antiquity) to determine which manuscripts most closely resemble the original document.
That is ONE translation. There are no intermediate languages.
You can trust the modern translations. You should probably leave the old King James on the shelf next to Shakespeare and get a newer translation.
Posted by: Joe | June 25, 2008 5:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hasn't it occoured to anybody that most towns of any size has a shipload of churches in it? One's Catholic, one's Methodist, one may be Reformed, or Lutheran, or Baptist or evangelical, or Orthodox or even Unitarian. Then there are a few others.
I doubt if God is going to quibble with any of them over a few details, cuz He knows us humans are a bunch of fools.
That's why Jesus forgives all of us foolis humans.
Posted by: Bobby in NJ | June 25, 2008 5:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I wonder how shrill Mr. Dobson would get if Mitt Romney is ever on a national ticket. Would Mitt taint McCain to the point where evangelical hellraisers like Dobson would start gaffing the Book of Mormon?
It would be fun to watch a Focus on the Family vs. LDS smackdown.
Mr. Dobson better be grateful that Mr. Obama is a knowledgable and well-read believer. He at least has some chance that Dobson's ilk will be treated with respect and not manipulated like Rove played the evangelicals.
Posted by: roboturkey | June 25, 2008 5:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I wonder how shrill Mr. Dobson would get if Mitt Romney is ever on a national ticket. Would Mitt taint McCain to the point where evangelical helraisers like Dobson would start gaffing the Book of Mormon?
It would be fun to watch a Focus on the Family vs. LDS smackdown.
Mr. Dobson better be grateful that Mr. Obama is a knowledgable and well-read believer. He at least has some chance that Dobson's ilk will be treated with respect and not manipulated like Rove played the evangelicals.
Posted by: roboturkey | June 25, 2008 5:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
sboyd18: "If you think ANY book or books is unknowable then why read it?"
This is obviously how you interpreted my words, but who would believe this is what I intended? You are consistently getting wrong interpretations of text. How would we ever believe you are interpreting the Bible correctly. How could we believe anything you ever said about the Bible or anything else? How can we believe the words of anyone who takes this obsessed position with regard to items of faith for which there is no proof?
You have to be civil and respectful of other people's opinions to be deserving of civility and respect. Unfortunately, the behavior of a few Republicans has made me disrespectful and distrusting of anything to do with Republicans in general. I know this is wrong, but I believe Republicans have to discipline their ranks.
Posted by: L.Kurt Engelhart | June 25, 2008 5:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I agree with what the author says.
Bart Ehrman has a great book on how the Gospels have been changed and mistakes made along the way that make it a different book.
Google books has the text:
Posted by: Joe | June 25, 2008 5:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Its because the Bible has been translated so many times that I go to my church. We believe that the Bible preached in our Church is the true word of God!
Posted by: Chad | June 25, 2008 5:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Mr. Harley,
Obama has something "something very novel for the corporate christian organizations ... the love of God".
I'm sure the millions of children Obama has voted time and again to let die would thank him for his love from their early graves. At least one of them made it, though, and she isn't voting for Obama:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB121261107480446197.html
Posted by: Concerned | June 25, 2008 5:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Joe: Actually thew bible was written in Aramaic, then Hebrew, then translated to Greek, then to Latin, then to Old English, it was then translated several times over 1,000 years into different and newer versions (like the King James version).
Believe me, the version you now read bears little resemblance to the original.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 5:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I agree with the author.
Respected author Bart Ehrman has written many books on the subject.
None of the boys, Mark, Mathew, Luke or John knew Jesus. I believe Mark was 80 years or so after Jesus death. I mean really, how much could one know except through hearsay? Luke and Mathew used Mark to write their pieces 20 years or so after Mark and they added stuff that Mark did not write about.
Scribes then translated it from Arahamic to Greek to Latin to English and along the way thousands of scribes changed words, got whole sentences wrong, wrote in their own bias and just made unintentional mistakes.
This is somehow now God's Word?
Posted by: Joe | June 25, 2008 5:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"...The Bible itself promises that God's Holy Spirit will Himself guide us into all truth. (John 16:13) The Bible itself says that God's Word is sharper than any two-edged sword and will indeed divide truth from error. (Hebrews 4:12) Lost men should close their mouths and listen to the Spirit of God..."
There is considerable debate among people a lot smarter than I as to the very validity and veracity of Scripture. And even if it is "true", how do we know it's from God, and what kind of God is this anyway? Who gets to decide what is truth and what is error? Who gets to decide who is lost and who is not? Depending on what church you go to, the answer is different.
That's one of the reasons I am a FORMER born-again Christian. Too much evidence that the Bible is either a collection of fables or a chronicle of primitive people imprisoned and terrified by a fascist group of overseers posing as "God" for the ultimate goal of total control. If God is truly all-loving, He's not gonna give a hoot who you vote for - or care a whole lot about how you choose to live your life in every other aspect.
Dr. Dobson, like so many of his kind, is trying to assert control over Christians by discouraging discussion and rational thought. No one controls my thoughts or my vote but myself, thank you very much.
Posted by: Michael | June 25, 2008 5:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"the Bible is a translation (of a translation of a translation, etc.),"
Hamilton,
How many times has the Bible on my shelf (let's say the New Testament) been translated? Let's see, from ancient Greek to modern English. That's from one language to another. I count that as one translation.
Posted by: Joe | June 25, 2008 5:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"...The Bible itself promises that God's Holy Spirit will Himself guide us into all truth. (John 16:13) The Bible itself says that God's Word is sharper than any two-edged sword and will indeed divide truth from error. (Hebrews 4:12) Lost men should close their mouths and listen to the Spirit of God..."
There is considerable debate among people a lot smarter than I as to the very validity and veracity of Scripture. And even if it is "true", how do we know it's from God, and what kind of God is this anyway? Who gets to decide what is truth and what is error? Who gets to decide who is lost and who is not? Depending on what church you go to, the answer is different.
That's one of the reasons I am a FORMER born-again Christian. Too much evidence that the Bible is either a collection of fables or a chronicle of primitive people imprisoned and terrified by a fascist group of overseers posing as "God" for the ultimate goal of total control. If God is truly all-loving, He's not gonna give a hoot who you vote for - or care a whole lot about how you choose to live your life in every other aspect.
Dr. Dobson, like so many of his kind, is trying to assert control over Christians by discouraging discussion and rational thought. No one controls my thoughts or my vote but myself, thank you very much.
Posted by: Michael | June 25, 2008 5:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Mr. Dobson is a rather hateful man who sees the younger generation of his potential flock and source of revenue turning away from anger to something very novel for the corporate christian organizations ... the love of God. That is why he, and many other aging leaders of radical right wing Political Action Committees, (and make no mistake about it, Focus is a PAC, a lobby of wolves cloaked in sheep's skin), fear a man like Senator Obama. He lives every day what they only lay claim to, and by doing so, makes them ultimately irrelevant. Like all other charlatans who have over the centuries claimed to be the EXCLUSIVE voice of Christ on earth, Dobson has had his 15 minutes of fame, and will fade away into obscurity. Future generations may see him as a footnote and find him a curiously odd man who lost touch with his purpose. No matter, deeds, not words, leave a legacy. I think Senator Obama has a chance to do just that.
Posted by: Michael Harley | June 25, 2008 5:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Mr. Dobson is a rather hateful man who sees the younger generation of his potential flock and source of revenue turning away from anger to something very novel for the corporate christian organizations ... the love of God. That is why he, and many other aging leaders of radical right wing Political Action Committees, (and make no mistake about it, Focus is a PAC, a lobby of wolves cloaked in sheep's skin), fear a man like Senator Obama. He lives every day what they only lay claim to, and by doing so, makes them ultimately irrelevant. Like all other charlatans who have over the centuries claimed to be the EXCLUSIVE voice of Christ on earth, Dobson has had his 15 minutes of fame, and will fade away into obscurity. Future generations may see him as a footnote and find him a curiously odd man who lost touch with his purpose. No matter, deeds, not words, leave a legacy. I think Senator Obama has a chance to do just that.
Posted by: Michael Harley | June 25, 2008 5:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Standardmodel:
true enough. However, I can build a reliable power grid and provide a comfortable life to any city anywhere based on my understanding of electrons. This is not dependent on miracles, ghosts, cannibalistic rituals, or hideously mired arguments about "right" and "wrong".
All you get with religion is guilt, war, and a population in constant fear of pissing off the boss.
Posted by: roboturkey | June 25, 2008 5:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Members of "the most theologically conservative branch of American Evangelicalism" probably don't even know that the Bible has been translated into English.
Take Lynda, above, for example. She says "Just read," as if language were transparent and one translation of the Bible no different from another.
If Evangelicals did know that the Bible is a (series of) translations, and if they themselves had ever studied another language, they would know that a perfect translation is impossible.
Since the Bible is a translation (of a translation of a translation, etc.), it is even more full of ambiguity and uncertainty than a poem written in English by Wallace Stevens or Emily Dickinson.
Literary critics would have ceased to exist long ago if literary texts had only one demonstrable, indisputable meaning.
The medieval Scholastics engaged in fascinating debates about Biblical meaning and implications, but contemporary Evangelicals are far more intellectually primitive than the thinkers of the Middle Ages.
The Evangelicals of whom you write, and who have posted comments here, are authoritarian, narrow-minded, and shockingly ignorant of religious history, world history, linguistic history, and just about everything else. Their rise to prominence and apparent respectability is alarming, and it poses a threat not only to representative democracy but also to civilization itself.
Posted by: Hamilton | June 25, 2008 5:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
After hearing the extended relevant parts of James Dobson's broadcast, I have to think that Dobson is close to losing it. His "Focus on the Family" has been a favorite part of my church family for many years. Many of the people in my church think that he is next to God.
Unfortunately, he now comes over as someone who is fighting to retain some relevancy in a world that has long since passed him by. Yes, I believe that there are some absolute truths in the Bible. However, I often disagree with people like Dobson telling me that their interpretation is inerent while others are not entitled to their own interpretations.
It is also unfortunate that Dobson has gotten so tangled up in Republican politics that he does not realize that many of us Christians do not like the type of politics that the Republican brand is selling. As Barack so aptly has stated and/or implied, there is much to the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7) that the religious right ignores. I see it that the religious right is trying to apply Old Testament principles to win the Jewish sector without applying the teachings of Jesus. The religious right is more about an eye for an eye, while the moderates and left look more at the principles of forgiveness as taught by Jesus.
To listen to Dodson at times, one would think that the man has no clue what forgiveness is all about. Also, I would caution anyone to beware of a mortal who insists that his way is correct while others are wrong.
Posted by: Earl C | June 25, 2008 4:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Roboturkey,
You know, I've never seen an electron. In fact, I doubt they exist. Therefore, there must be no truth to this whole "electron" idea the physicists have foisted on us. Everyone go make up your own mind about what makes the lights go on!
Posted by: standardmodel | June 25, 2008 4:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Mounadi, you say you have read Obama's speech but then you say something that shows you have not. You say that Obama questions whether religion has a part in public policy. Here is what Obama said:
But what I am suggesting is this - secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square. Frederick Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, Williams Jennings Bryant, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King - indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history - were not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. So to say that men and women should not inject their "personal morality" into public policy debates is a practical absurdity. Our law is by definition a codification of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Posted by: Martiniano | June 25, 2008 4:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment
John Mounadi: "the Magna Carta and our Constitution are heavily influenced by the Bible"
Even the language we speak is heavily influenced by the Bible. So what? Does this mean our government and our lives are directed by the Bible? This ignorance about the influence of Bible and Christianity in general is what makes me concerned about having these people in any position of influence over US policy or life. I am even becoming less patient with this kind of person in my personal life. I don't like the idea that I am forced to coexist with these people. Are we headed for a religious civil war unless we accept their influence over our lives?
Or is John just pushing my buttons to make me squeak?
Posted by: L.Kurt Engelhart | June 25, 2008 4:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment
ROBOTURKEY, please lets not discuss heavy topics like the economy and healthcare. Wouldn't that just kill the debate, surely you are not suggesting debate where we have to do our homework to get the facts straight!! Typical liberal killjoy!
Posted by: Chad | June 25, 2008 4:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Eventually it becomes ungracious haggling over myth and rumor. Dobson learned how to make a living at it. Good for him. That does not qualify him as an arbiter of anything exept how best to fleece his flock.
Look, if any of it had any truth there would be no doubt. There is doubt, therefore non of it is true.
Let's take a look at Dobson's plan for economic reform and his national health plan.
Posted by: roboturkey | June 25, 2008 4:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Luke 18:10-14
'Two men went up to the Temple to pray, one a Pharisee, the other a tax collector.
The Pharisee stood there and said this prayer to himself, "I thank you, God, that I am not grasping, unjust, adulterous like everyone else, and particularly that I am not like this tax collector here.
I fast twice a week; I pay tithes on all I get."
The tax collector stood some distance away, not daring even to raise his eyes to heaven; but he beat his breast and said, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner."
This man, I tell you, went home again justified; the other did not. For everyone who raises himself up will be humbled, but anyone who humbles himself will be raised up.'
Posted by: Lart from Above | June 25, 2008 4:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
John Mounadi: Don't delude yourself. This country was founded on murder, enslavement and theft...not exactly Christian principles...or wait, are they?
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 4:47 PM
Report Offensive Comment
'Two men went up to the Temple to pray, one a Pharisee, the other a tax collector.
The Pharisee stood there and said this prayer to himself, "I thank you, God, that I am not grasping, unjust, adulterous like everyone else, and particularly that I am not like this tax collector here.
I fast twice a week; I pay tithes on all I get."
The tax collector stood some distance away, not daring even to raise his eyes to heaven; but he beat his breast and said, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner."
This man, I tell you, went home again justified; the other did not. For everyone who raises himself up will be humbled, but anyone who humbles himself will be raised up.'
Posted by: Lart from Above | June 25, 2008 4:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
L.Kurt Englehart: "Again, we have a perfect example of persons using words they do not understand outside of a very narrow context and expecting us to respect their authority."
If you think ANY book or books is unknowable then why read it? My only point is: a correct interpretation of any document is to get out of it what its author intends. I have no authority to respect. What I do have is what everyone else does: an opinion. Sadly, all I've read from you so far is criticism of others while not contributing an original thought of your own. Please do so. That way we may ascertain whether you appreciate what Obama said, what Dobson said, or both.
Posted by: sboyd18 | June 25, 2008 4:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
People, I don't think we should and can trust the council of Nicea. It happened in 325 AD in Turkey!! I think we should convene a new council right here in Greg Koukl's backyard in LA!!
Posted by: Chad | June 25, 2008 4:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson is just another loser using Obama to get his name in the news. I have something to say to you Mr.Dobson, "Stop trying to shove your imaginary friends down my throat!". Obama is a strong family man and a devout Christian. He doesn't need Dobson's approval. His record speaks for itself. Vote Obama 2008!
Posted by: Obama 2008!! | June 25, 2008 4:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
sboyd18: I need to echo Bill's comments here. The Christian community did convene at the Council of Nicea and decide which books should be included and which books should be excluded from the New Testament.
One of the books excluded was the Gospel of Thomas, where supposedly Thomas wrote that when Jesus was a kid he made birds out of sand and then made them come to life. Many other books, which did not conform to the religion that these community leaders were trying to create were excluded as well.
Also, please remember that the gospels were not actually written by the apostles, but in fact written 30-50 years after Jesus' death by people who never met or knew him. Even the Catholic Church agrees on this, as I learned it in a Franciscan Catholic high school.
Quite ridiculous actually. It is the equivalent of me writing about something that happened in my grandfather's day, passed down by word of mouth. We all know how reliable that kind of information is..like the telephone game in grammar school
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 4:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
John Mounadi,
I couldn't agree more. I quote Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason:
"Whenever we make a decision about a significant moral issue in which the power of government is employed, we must have a proper ethical rationale with regards to those things. Aristotle said, "Law rests upon the necessary foundation of morality." Therefore, if your law does not reflect a moral rationale, then your law is an illicit law. Some people say you cannot legislate morality. If Aristotle is right, then morality is the only thing you can legislate. If power is simply used to secure the benefits of a select few rather than the common good, this is an illicit use of law."
Posted by: Joe | June 25, 2008 4:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Everybody,
Can we stop the shellfish/pork/whatever controversy? It is a non-issue: in Mark 7,18-19 Jesus clearly overthrew all dietary laws.
Posted by: Arminius | June 25, 2008 4:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
John Mounadi:
" Obama indicts himself by admitting that the Bible and its Christian-Judeo foundations shouldn't influence our rulings and creation of laws. "
He said the contrary stop LIES.
Posted by: Average Joe | June 25, 2008 4:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I read Obamas' comment's about the Bible, and basically he questions whether its values has a place in determining what legislation we pass today in society.
I think Mr. Dobson doesn't at all grasp at straws. Obama indicts himself by admitting that the Bible and its Christian-Judeo foundations shouldn't influence our rulings and creation of laws. That somehow our laws should be influenced without any foundation. That our society should operate without any influence to the very source that influeced the foundation of our nation. The rule of law, and documents it such as the Magna Carta and our Constitution are heavily influenced by the Bible.
Losing focus on what helped inspire the laws that built this country is happening at a very fast rate. We don't enforce vigilance towards protecting all of our rights in the Constitution. Instead public schools teach us to protect only portions of the Constitution that happen to fit with certain agendas. While other portions of the Constitution can actually be debated and restricted, with encouragement through our schools teachings.
It's no wonder Obama can get away with such blatant attacks against the book and its laws that helped build this nation. But now can be deemed irrelavnt and out of touch with our society. Communism used the same manuvuers to eventually encroach upon religious influences within its own halls of justice. But we can easily witness other nations today that have no Biblical ties to its own creation of laws. And it is easily visible that their lives and the people live far worse than we do.
Posted by: John Mounadi | June 25, 2008 4:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I read Obamas' comment's about the Bible, and basically he questions whether its values has a place in determining what legislation we pass today in society.
I think Mr. Dobson doesn't at all grasp at straws. Obama indicts himself by admitting that the Bible and its Christian-Judeo foundations shouldn't influence our rulings and creation of laws. That somehow our laws should be influenced without any foundation. That our society should operate without any influence to the very source that influeced the foundation of our nation. The rule of law, and documents it such as the Magna Carta and our Constitution are heavily influenced by the Bible.
Losing focus on what helped inspire the laws that built this country is happening at a very fast rate. We don't enforce vigilance towards protecting all of our rights in the Constitution. Instead public schools teach us to protect only portions of the Constitution that happen to fit with certain agendas. While other portions of the Constitution can actually be debated and restricted, with encouragement through our schools teachings.
It's no wonder Obama can get away with such blatant attacks against the book and its laws that helped build this nation. But now can deemed irrelavnt and out of touch with our society. Communism used the same manuvuers to eventually
to encroach upon religious influences within its own halls of justice. But we can easily witness other nations today that have no Biblical ties to its own creation of laws. And it is easily visible that their lives and the people live far worse than we do.
Posted by: John Mounadi | June 25, 2008 4:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dotherightthing said: "There are many right interpretations of biblical passages, and there are many wrong ones as well. For example, the Bible CLEARLY (to all but those who choose not to see) condemns homosexuality"
Please pay attention. What Obama points out is that the Bible ALSO says that eating shellfish is an abomination. Have you ever eaten lobster? Then you are as guilty as if you took a schtuping in the bum.
If you have had lobster then you have sickened God Himself. How do you feel about that? Are you happy that you made God sick?
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 4:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson is the head interpreter of the Bible in his church and for his people. He is God's voice and his views are a faithful representation of the intent of the words in the Bible. Its so obvious to the rest of us that his words are true. Its amusing to see people that are not part of his flock point out the flaws (their interpretation, much the same as Obama's). This is the difference between theology and law, beliefs can be personal and tailor made to suit our own understanding of the world but laws are universal and are middle grounds that people in the center can accept. So lets all vote on these issues and see who wins and gains control of the law!!
Posted by: Chad | June 25, 2008 4:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
DUKELAWYER:
So questioning someone's interpretation of the Bible is "hate and ignorance". Isn't that exactly what you're doing to Dobson?
Posted by: Joe | June 25, 2008 4:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
So according to Dobson, we should ignore the 10 Commandments since it's in the Old Testament?
Why does he get to pick and choose what we should believe from the Old Testament?
Are there some evangelical footnotes in the Bible that only right wing fanatics can read?
Just amazing the amount of hate and ignorance that certain Christians seem to contain.
Posted by: DukeLawyer | June 25, 2008 4:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Please do not encourage people to read and expand their horizons, don't you realize that we are close minded and cannot accept conflicting views. We "know" what we believe is true simply because its God's word. Consider this brilliant argument that Lynda poses
"The Bible also says if this gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost. This means that people who are lost (see Webster's for meaning of word lost) cannot see what is plainly there. The Bible becomes obscure to them. Obama has fulfilled this passage as so many others have also. he must be lost OR he would see what is written there."
Brilliant!
Posted by: Chad | June 25, 2008 4:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Good article. Perhaps what really frightens Dobson is the anticipation of Obama's hot boot prints on his backside. The arrogance of any man who claims he "knows" the mind of an unbounded Creator can only be a charlatan or a self- deluded fool.
Posted by: esmith4 | June 25, 2008 4:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Perhaps Mr. Dobson can one day run for public office and we may have the opportunity to publically air out his theological views just for the fun of it. Mr. Dobson is just trying to rouse his rabble.
Until then, those of us who still care can review the rule book. In Article 6 of the US Constitution (that ol' fruitcake constitution):
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
So, we may legally advise Mr. Dobson to take his pinched bibical views and pack them back to wherever he invents them and not continue to try to subvert Mr. Obama's election.
Posted by: roboturkey | June 25, 2008 4:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Exactly!
Posted by: Frank Lee | June 25, 2008 4:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Let me paraphrase what I see some of you writing:
Religion has weakened and will die out as the human race becomes more educated and technologically advanced. Religion may have played a role in human evolution to help us cope with a very frightening, incomprehensible world. But as we become more scientifically sophisticated and more able to understand and control our environment, our need for religion will diminish, and indeed largely has around the globe over the last hundred years.
WAIT a second! Over the past century, religion has NOT diminished. This "secularization thesis" is now largely discredited by sociologists (See Peter Berger, Desecularization of the World). Virtually all major religions are growing in number of adherents. Christianity's growth, especially in the developing world, has been explosive (see the Pew Forum or google global resurgence). Experts believe China may have half a billion Christians in 50 years (Philip Jenkins, Penn State, Next Christendom).
Religion is not going away. We need to accept this. To use the formula of Richard John Neuhaus:
"Politics is chiefly a function of culture, at the heart of culture is morality, and at the heart of morality is religion".
Religion will continue to inform politics. Belittling religion does not promote the common good. As several have pointed out with aggressive rhetoric, to belief something that's irrational isn't noble; it's ridiculous. Some of this same group might think of ALL religious belief as irrational, "blind faith" or wishful thinking, but that's not the case. Some (all too rare) individuals give a thoughtful, rational defense of their beliefs about spiritual or religious matters. Even non-theists have a view about spiritual matters that they think is true and argue for. But non-theism is not the only reasonable position. So be civil to your believing fellow citizens.
Posted by: Rawlings | June 25, 2008 4:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
To Bill
You said :"Those books that were rejected at the Council at Nicaea those many centuries ago should never have been excluded." Tell me, to which books
do you refer? The Council of Nicea was not convened to determine which books should be included in the Bible. The Old Testament books were determined long before the 4th century. As for the New Testament could you refer me to a source which substantiates your claim? Sounds like you, like others, are simply parroting something you heard somewhere. If I am wrong please forgive me. Either way, could you refer me to the historical documents which say the Council of Nicea excluded books of the Bible and which books these were?
Posted by: sboyd18 | June 25, 2008 4:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Please do not encourage people to read and expand their horizons, don't you realize that we are close minded and cannot accept conflicting views. We "know" what we believe is true simply because its God's word. Consider this brilliant argument that Lynda poses
"The Bible also says if this gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost. This means that people who are lost (see Webster's for meaning of word lost) cannot see what is plainly there. The Bible becomes obscure to them. Obama has fulfilled this passage as so many others have also. he must be lost OR he would see what is written there."
Brilliant!
Posted by: Chad | June 25, 2008 4:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I really doubt if Obama is counting on the vote of the biblical literalists aka bible-thumpers that hang on the words of idiots like James Dobson.
Sure it would be nice to get a few votes from religious conservatives, but I'll bet he's not counting on it. As religious fundamentalism become more marginalized, it's political clout fades into the woodwork & evaporates into the night, even as McCain continues pandering to this dwindling micro-minority.
The odd thing is, Dobson doesn't like McCain either. He's a fallen man - and try as he might, McCain can't really be something he's not (did I actually say that?) and while he is Washington's most changeable policy man, he apparently doesn't thump bibles on his good days.
He's a believer yes - a believer in the John McCain myth.
Posted by: autonomous | June 25, 2008 4:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
There are many right interpretations of biblical passages, and there are many wrong ones as well. For example, the Bible CLEARLY (to all but those who choose not to see) condemns homosexuality, and the Catholic Church agrees with Dobson in this and many other interpretations of biblical texts.
Posted by: DoTheRightThing | June 25, 2008 4:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Evangelicals (like some who have posted here) are always so het up about homosexuality, based on one line in Leviticus, but they never consider the story of David and Jonathan--"a love passing the love of woman." That's a gay story, folks. Why does no one ever mention it?
For more intelligent skepticism, read Mark Twain and visit
Posted by: van der Veer | June 25, 2008 4:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Evangelicals (like some who have posted here) are always so het up about homosexuality, based on one line in Leviticus, but they never consider the story of David and Jonathan--"a love passing the love of woman." That's a gay story, folks. Why does no one ever mention it?
For more intelligent skepticism, read Mark Twain and visit
Posted by: van der Veer | June 25, 2008 4:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Since when is there a correllation between a candidate's views on any Bible and their ability to govern?
Posted by: Joel Kaye | June 25, 2008 4:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Evangelicals (like some who have posted here) are always so het up about homosexuality, based on one line in Leviticus, but they never consider the story of David and Jonathan--"a love passing the love of woman." That's a gay story, folks. Why does no one ever mention it?
For more intelligent skepticism, read Mark Twain and visit
Posted by: van der Veer | June 25, 2008 4:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Evangelicals (like some who have posted here) are always so het up about homosexuality, based on one line in Leviticus, but they never consider the story of David and Jonathan--"a love passing the love of woman." That's a gay story, folks. Why does no one ever mention it?
For more intelligent skepticism, read Mark Twain and visit
Posted by: van der Veer | June 25, 2008 4:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Evangelicals (like some who have posted here) are always so het up about homosexuality, based on one line in Leviticus, but they never consider the story of David and Jonathan--"a love passing the love of woman." That's a gay story, folks. Why does no one ever mention it?
For more intelligent skepticism, read Mark Twain and visit
Posted by: van der Veer | June 25, 2008 4:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
G Henderson, you are not God's arbiter for who is and who is not a Christian. So you have no standing to declare Obama is not a Christian.
Racism? What does the following passage from Matthews 15 tell us about how Jesus viewed Gentiles like this Lebanese woman:
21Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession."
23Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us."
24He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."
25The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said.
26He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."
27"Yes, Lord," she said, "but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' table."
28Then Jesus answered, "Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted." And her daughter was healed from that very hour.
Posted by: Martiniano | June 25, 2008 4:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
How can a self-professed atheist, Jacques Berlinblau, be believed when he identifies a person as "a committed, credible, enthusiastic and easily recognizable servant of Jesus Christ", as he does of Obama?
Posted by: DoTheRightThing | June 25, 2008 3:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Oh, how I hope the Christian Right loses its base!
Perhaps I'm a conservative (though I doubt this), because I believe Big Brother should keep his nose out of my business! my personal business. It is what the Christian Right has been advocating for twenty years. While I never see myself marrying another man, or asking a partner to go through with an abortion, I nevertheless feel grateful that the government is left out of the decision. Paternalism blows! - as Dobson would understand if he lived in a country truly governed by religion, because it would also have the power to govern religion. The Christian Right can't have it both ways.
Furthermore, it looks like Obama's views are gaining a foothold-
-Pew survey finds that more Americans are becoming hospitable to differing religious viewpoints. True American Patriots! (http://religions.pewforum.org/reports)
Sincerely,
Steddie
Posted by: You can think and be a Christian | June 25, 2008 3:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
sboyd18: "the Scriptures have but one correct interpretation and it is possible, through hermaneutics, to discover the authors' intent"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics
Again, we have a perfect example of persons using words they do not understand outside of a very narrow context and expecting us to respect their authority. This is behavior we have observed in Dobson and which we can expect from McCain if, by some fluke, he is ever elected president.
(Thanks, Chad)
Posted by: L.Kurt Engelhart | June 25, 2008 3:53 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Lets not get distracted and debate the validity of Dobson's statements, that is not the issue. The issue being discused here is of group power. Dobson represents millions of Americans who have decided where they stand when it comes to Obama. Their job is to make their opinions public and possibly sway people to their side. An effective strategy to counter this attack is not to debate the statements but to make your own statements in parallel attacking McCain! Debating tries to "convert" people's views, why do that when all that needs to be done is to sway people your way by constantly coming up with talking points. Notice how Dobson does not debate other viewpoints, all he does is express his views and defend them...The democrats need to do the same to make life interesting for an observer like me.
Posted by: Chad | June 25, 2008 3:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
sboyd18: "the Scriptures have but one correct interpretation and it is possible, through , to discover the authors' intent"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics
Again, we have a perfect example of persons using words they do not understand outside of a very narrow context and expecting us to respect their authority. This is behavior we have observed in Dobson and which we can expect from McCain if, by some fluke, he is ever elected president.
(Thanks, Chad)
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 3:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson was, infact, correct...Barack is not a Christian and his church preaches a political gospel...a gospel that has nothing to do with salvation.
Posted by: G. Henderson | June 25, 2008 3:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Obama: But what I am suggesting is this - secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square.
Obama: Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason.
Obama:Now this is going to be difficult for some who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do. But in a pluralistic democracy, we have no choice. Politics depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality.
Posted by: martiniano | June 25, 2008 3:47 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson was, infact, correct...Barack is not a Christian and his church preaches a political gospel...a gospel that has nothing to do with salvation.
Posted by: G. Henderson | June 25, 2008 3:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson was, infact, correct...Barack is not a Christian and his church preaches a political gospel...a gospel that has nothing to do with salvation.
Posted by: G. Henderson | June 25, 2008 3:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I appreciate your astute observations of Dobson's attack on Obama. Given that Dobson is not a theologian, but a psychologist by education, he should be more cautious about his accusations. I believe you're correct that Obama doesn't fit the democratic mold that has been so easy for the religious right to attack in past election cycles.
I have had problems with Dobson ever since he referred to Tom Delay as "his good friend."
Posted by: Randall Hedrick | June 25, 2008 3:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Lynda, did you read Obama's speech? The gist of his speech is that we should all read the Bible rather than allow someone else to read it and tell us what it says.
He points out the inconsistencies of the Bible and the way it has been adapted and cherry-picked by religious leaders: for example, you want to use the parts of the Bible that criticize homosexuality but you want to ignore the parts that approve slavery and tell us that shellfish are an abomination.
Yes, that is an interpretation. If you believe the Bible requires no interpretation then please explain to me why the Gospels give such differing descriptions of what happened after Jesus was crucified.
And if you believe it is wrong to question the Bible then I will remind you that Jesus was not a Christian. He was a Jew who read, studied and interpreted the Torah in a new way.
Interpreted. Jesus re-interpreted the Torah (or, as you know it, the first books of the Old Testament).
Posted by: Martiniano | June 25, 2008 3:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson is offended that Obama dared make some biblical interpretations in one of his speeches. Apparently, that right is reserved only for Dobson and people who share his narrow views. They're the keepers of the Bible, I guess. The dispensers of wisdom. Strange how they also least embody the spirit of Jesus, isn't it?
Posted by: Steve | June 25, 2008 3:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Bill, but you aren't reading the book as "God" wrote it. You are reading a book that has been translated about 30 times across five languages. In each and every translation words were changes and original meanings distorted, intentionally or not. So to think that the latest version, which you read, is what was actually written down by Jesus and his followers is nonsense.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 3:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Lets not get distracted and debate the validity of Dobson's statements, that is not the issue. The issue being discused here is of group power. Dobson represents millions of Americans who have decided where they stand when it comes to Obama. Their job is to make their opinions public and possibly sway people to their side. An effective strategy to counter this attack is not to debate the statements but to make your own statements in parallel attacking McCain! Debating tries to "convert" people's views, why do that when all that needs to be done is to sway people your way by constantly coming up with talking points. Notice how Dobson does not debate other viewpoints, all he does is express his views and defend them...The democrats need to do the same to make life interesting for an observer like me.
Posted by: Chad | June 25, 2008 3:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Bill: "God wrote this book, God created the universe and everything in it...how do you proclaim to know what god meant?"
Bill, You might want to read a few more books before you proclaim to know what God meant.
Posted by: L.Kurt Engelhart | June 25, 2008 3:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The writer speaks as if the Bible's intent is to be inscrutable. It isn't. Like in any other area of study (such as archeology, geology) there may be differences in some aspects, but generally one can maintain that the Scriptures have but one correct interpretation and it is possible, through hermaneutics, to discover the authors' intent. Many are so inspired, as is Obama, to feel that because of the subject one must be overly humble in one's approach to understanding what the Scriptures convey. That is perfectly fine with me; however, to subsume one's enthusiastic quest for a correct exegesis to Bible study for the sake of those who think it arrogant to claim to understand the living words of any particular bible passage is to be untrue to one's belief, just as it is wrong to disrespect those who do not feel so moved. Mr. Dobson should know that his only mission is to convey the meaning of the Word as he understands it and to let the Holy Spirit do the rest.
Posted by: sboyd18 | June 25, 2008 3:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I have always found it interesting that Dobson, and many of the Right Wing Evangelicals, pick and choose portions of the Old Testament to focus on, like the "abomination" of homosexuality, which is not mentioned in the New Testament, and completely ignores other aspects, such as the laws preventing the eating of shellfish, as was mentioned by Mr. Obama, claiming that such laws were "outmoded" by the New Testament. I didn't read anything in the New Testament saying that those laws which promoted hate were still valid, and those which prevented convenience or restricted appetite no longer applied. Maybe he's reading some other New Testament? I also don't see anything in either New *or* Old preventing Abortion, (except in one mistranslation in a Greek version of Old Testament). Sounds like Mr. Dobson likes his prejuidices and opinions supported by scripture, where it is convenient, but ignores it otherwise.
Posted by: Airmaze | June 25, 2008 3:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Members of "the most theologically conservative branch of American Evangelicalism" probably don't even know that the Bible has been translated into English.
Take Lynda, above, for example. She says "Just read," as if language were transparent and one translation of the Bible no different from another.
If Evangelicals did know that the Bible is a (series of) translations, and if they themselves had ever studied another language, they would know that a perfect translation is impossible.
Since the Bible is a translation, it is even more full of ambiguity and uncertainty than a poem written in English by Wallace Stevens or Emily Dickinson.
Literary critics would have ceased to exist long ago if literary texts had only one demonstrable, indisputable meaning.
The medieval Scholastics engaged in fascinating debates about Biblical meaning and implications, but contemporary Evangelicals are far more primitive than the thinkers of the Middle Ages.
The Evangelicals of whom you write, and who have posted comments here, are authoritarian, narrow-minded, and shockingly ignorant of religious history, world history, linguistic history, and just about everything else. Their rise to prominence and apparent respectability is alarming, and it poses a threat not only to representative democracy but also to civilization itself.
Posted by: Hamilton | June 25, 2008 3:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jacques,
you did a great job of painting the bible as a complex hard to intrepret, depends on your point of view artifact with meaning that may change depending on when and who reads it....How can you present that as fact?? God wrote this book, God created the universe and everything in it...how do you proclaim to know what god meant? I believe He was quite clear and as Dr. Dobson correctly pointed out there is a difference between the old and new testament...a great deal of difference and Mr. Obama was either ignorant of this fact or playing politics with the Bible. In either case it is important to point out that a candidate for President used passages from the Holy Bible out of context, incorrectly and for political gain.
Also, I get the sense that you don't appreciate Dr. Dobson or Focus on the Family and their "Family Focused Agenda" if I'm wrong I'm sorry, If I'm correct don't you owe it to your readers to and to yourself to disclose this in your opinion article?
Posted by: Bill | June 25, 2008 3:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Members of "the most theologically conservative branch of American Evangelicalism" probably don't even know that the Bible has been translated into English.
Take Lynda, above, for example. She says "Just read," as if language were transparent and one translation of the Bible no different from another.
If Evangelicals did know that the Bible is a (series of) translations, and if they themselves had ever studied another language, they would know that a perfect translation is impossible.
Since the Bible is a translation, it is even more full of ambiguity and uncertainty than a poem written in English by Wallace Stevens or Emily Dickinson.
Literary critics would have ceased to exist long ago if literary texts had only one demonstrable, indisputable meaning.
The medieval Scholastics engaged in fascinating debates about Biblical meaning and implications, but contemporary Evangelicals are far more primitive than the thinkers of the Middle Ages.
The Evangelicals of whom you write, and who have posted comments here, are authoritarian, narrow-minded, and shockingly ignorant of religious history, world history, linguistic history, and just about everything else. Their rise to prominence and apparent respectability is alarming, and it poses a threat not only to representative democracy but also to civilization itself.
Posted by: Hamilton | June 25, 2008 3:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
4shelby2: "I have to say that the immature and hateful things posted by Obama supporters took some getting used to."
Your side started it. It has to do with disrespect. When you infer disrespect by an impersonal opinion that contradicts your own beliefs, and respond with a defamatory personal opinion, you turn a debate into disrespectful barrage from all sides.
4shelby2: "When people express their views about Obama it's called an attack. Dobson deserves credit for speaking the truth about Obama."
Most of us are very aware of what constitutes an "attack." It is the height of disrespect to imply that you are the sole purveyor of truth. We have higher standards for truth today. Apparently some of you are having a hard time keeping up.
Posted by: L.Kurt Engelhart | June 25, 2008 3:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
This is replay of what's going on in Islam. You have extremist nutcases, like the worst of the Wahabbis, claiming they and they alone hear Allah's true message. All other Muslims are apostates and heretics. They then declare them takfir and thus open to killing. Bin Laden uses this to justify killing thousands of Muslims.
Christianity has its own nutcases, exemplified by the not-Reverand-at-all Dobson. Dobson claims the USA is a Christian nation, and that non-Christians have fewer rights than Christians. He then defines Christians as encompassing only his followers. The next step is clear. Only his followers are real Americans, and all those other apostates and heretics have no rights. While Hagee has seemed to stop his rants against Catholics, he's still there, and Dobson shares his views.
All those other Christians--especially Catholics--are on notice. Dobson has declared war on them, and everyone else. He is a pseudo-Christian version of bin Laden. And just as dangerous.
Posted by: Garak | June 25, 2008 3:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment
One doesn't need to be a theologian, nor does one need to even have a high school diploma, nor does one even have to have gone past the third grade to know that Obama is so far from being correct in what he said about the Bible, it is sad and truly amazing,yet to be expected from someone who has the resume he does.
All one needs to know to know Obama is wrong on what he says about the Bible is to simply know how to read.
No degree needed.
No interpretation needed. No seminary needed.
No praying for guidance or wisdom.
Simply knowing how to read is all that is required to know what Paul said by inspiration of the Holy Spirit in Romans 1.
Most of the Bible is easily understood such as don't kill people, don't lie, steal, bear false witness, don't hate others, and men are not to lie with men or women with women.
The Old Testament made this clear and the New Testament made this clear.
Homosexuals argue that Jesus never even mentioned homosexuality. I told them, he also never mentioned molesting children. They left me alone after that.
A child could understand the basic message of the Bible.
Yet Obama doesn't see what is right in front of him. Men are not to lie with men as with a woman. Obama sees that as "obscure"
It is not shaded over in any way, nor is it hidden.
The Bible also says if this gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost. This means that people who are lost (see Webster's for meaning of word lost) cannot see what is plainly there. The Bible becomes obscure to them. Obama has fulfilled this passage as so many others have also. he must be lost OR he would see what is written there.
I ask Obama to ask a child to read Romans 1 and tell him what Paul is saying.
Dr Dobson speaks for millions of people, literally millions. Dr Dobson doesn't "interpret" the Bible.
Obviously Dr Dobson has simply read the Bible.
Posted by: Lynda | June 25, 2008 3:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I knew it wouldn't be long before this hateful old troll crawled out of his hole in Colorado Springs and injected himself in American politics again by attacking Obama and calling him a "fruitcake" How Christian!
Americans who where scared and bullied by these phoney and simple minded neochristians need to wake up this time and see where their idea of Jesus got us the last two Presidential elections: war, torture, pollution, corruption, economic destruction.
This man has a lot of gall talking about distorting the Bible when he and his buddies like Haggard use Leviticus to bash gays in total contradiction and contempt of the love and acceptance of the New Testament.
Take away this group's tax free status. They are not a "religion" They are another hateful 527. May this evil old fart rot in the hell he tries to scare others with. He's nothing but another mean old Falwell and deserves the same fate and legacy.
Posted by: Roy | June 25, 2008 3:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
One doesn't need to be a theologian, nor does one need to even have a high school diploma, nor does one even have to have gone past the third grade to know that Obama is so far from being correct in what he said about the Bible, it is sad and truly amazing,yet to be expected from someone who has the resume he does.
All one needs to know to know Obama is wrong on what he says about the Bible is to simply know how to read.
No degree needed.
No interpretation needed. No seminary needed.
No praying for guidance or wisdom.
Simply knowing how to read is all that is required to know what Paul said by inspiration of the Holy Spirit in Romans 1.
Most of the Bible is easily understood such as don't kill people, don't lie, steal, bear false witness, don't hate others, and men are not to lie with men or women with women.
The Old Testament made this clear and the New Testament made this clear.
Homosexuals argue that Jesus never even mentioned homosexuality. I told them, he also never mentioned molesting children. They left me alone after that.
A child could understand the basic message of the Bible.
Yet Obama doesn't see what is right in front of him. Men are not to lie with men as with a woman. Obama sees that as "obscure"
It is not shaded over in any way, nor is it hidden.
The Bible also says if this gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost. This means that people who are lost (see Webster's for meaning of word lost) cannot see what is plainly there. The Bible becomes obscure to them. Obama has fulfilled this passage as so many others have also. he must be lost OR he would see what is written there.
I ask Obama to ask a child to read Romans 1 and tell him what Paul is saying.
Dr Dobson speaks for millions of people, literally millions. Dr Dobson doesn't "interpret" the Bible.
Obviously Dr Dobson has simply read the Bible.
Posted by: Lynda | June 25, 2008 3:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
4shellby2: your slanted views, dear, are written like a true "born again" Christian. Again I say that this is exactly why the radical side of the God-head has lost its compass in hell.
Posted by: faulpelz | June 25, 2008 3:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
If Heaven is full of Dobsons and Bushies, I'll rather go to Hell!
Posted by: paul | June 25, 2008 3:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
One doesn't need to be a theologian, nor does one need to even have a high school diploma, nor does one even have to have gone past the third grade to know that Obama is so far from being correct in what he said about the Bible, it is sad and truly amazing,yet to be expected from someone who has the resume he does.
All one needs to know to know Obama is wrong on what he says about the Bible is to simply know how to read.
No degree needed.
No interpretation needed. No seminary needed.
No praying for guidance or wisdom.
Simply knowing how to read is all that is required to know what Paul said by inspiration of the Holy Spirit in Romans 1.
Most of the Bible is easily understood such as don't kill people, don't lie, steal, bear false witness, don't hate others, and men are not to lie with men or women with women.
The Old Testament made this clear and the New Testament made this clear.
Homosexuals argue that Jesus never even mentioned homosexuality. I told them, he also never mentioned molesting children. They left me alone after that.
A child could understand the basic message of the Bible.
Yet Obama doesn't see what is right in front of him. Men are not to lie with men as with a woman. Obama sees that as "obscure"
It is not shaded over in any way, nor is it hidden.
The Bible also says if this gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost. This means that people who are lost (see Webster's for meaning of word lost) cannot see what is plainly there. The Bible becomes obscure to them. Obama has fulfilled this passage as so many others have also. he must be lost OR he would see what is written there.
I ask Obama to ask a child to read Romans 1 and tell him what Paul is saying.
Dr Dobson speaks for millions of people, literally millions. Dr Dobson doesn't "interpret" the Bible.
Obviously Dr Dobson has simply read the Bible.
Posted by: Lynda | June 25, 2008 3:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
One doesn't need to be a theologian, nor does one need to even have a high school diploma, nor does one even have to have gone past the third grade to know that Obama is so far from being correct in what he said about the Bible, it is sad and truly amazing,yet to be expected from someone who has the resume he does.
All one needs to know to know Obama is wrong on what he says about the Bible is to simply know how to read.
No degree needed.
No interpretation needed. No seminary needed.
No praying for guidance or wisdom.
Simply knowing how to read is all that is required to know what Paul said by inspiration of the Holy Spirit in Romans 1.
Most of the Bible is easily understood such as don't kill people, don't lie, steal, bear false witness, don't hate others, and men are not to lie with men or women with women.
The Old Testament made this clear and the New Testament made this clear.
Homosexuals argue that Jesus never even mentioned homosexuality. I told them, he also never mentioned molesting children. They left me alone after that.
A child could understand the basic message of the Bible.
Yet Obama doesn't see what is right in front of him. Men are not to lie with men as with a woman. Obama sees that as "obscure"
It is not shaded over in any way, nor is it hidden.
The Bible also says if this gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost. This means that people who are lost (see Webster's for meaning of word lost) cannot see what is plainly there. The Bible becomes obscure to them. Obama has fulfilled this passage as so many others have also. he must be lost OR he would see what is written there.
I ask Obama to ask a child to read Romans 1 and tell him what Paul is saying.
Dr Dobson speaks for millions of people, literally millions. Dr Dobson doesn't "interpret" the Bible.
Obviously Dr Dobson has simply read the Bible.
Posted by: Lynda | June 25, 2008 3:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr Dobson has no right whatsoever to pretend his personal views somehow emanate from either God or Christ's teachings.
Certainly a stable loving family is an important element in any society, as are constitutional rights, individual liberty and the rule of law, but Jesus' teachings do not support Dr Dobson's fanaticism and ugly narrow-minded puritanical viewpoints which he wishes to arbitrarily and hypocritically impose on others.
Mr Obama is an educated adult American, with a loving beautiful wife and two fine children, and he has his right to his own religious opinions, which I personally consider to be far more in line with Christ's teachings than Mr Dobson's deviancy.
Perhaps Mr Dobson should read the Constitution of the United States which provides for Freedom of Religion, not the imposition of one man's subjective opinion on other in God's name (that's blasphemy).
He might also read the Bible Luke 6, 42 and reflect upon Christ's message: "Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye."
Posted by: Sterling Doughty | June 25, 2008 3:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Kevin wrote: "To write that "For Obama, the Bible is ambiguous, multi-faceted, difficult to interpret, subject to many readings. It is so complex, so multivalent that it demands humility," I think is being far too generous to Obama's appreciation for biblical text."
In other words, anyone who has read the Bible and who disagrees with you is wrong, and is unappreciative of Biblical text.
Arrogant much?
Posted by: KJ | June 25, 2008 3:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hmmmmm lets see a Christian is consider to be a follower of Jesus (Last name unknown)
I have read the bible and they are some nice things in it that has been recycled from eastern religions and one of them is that as a follower of Jesus (last name unknown), thou shall not judge.
Seem hypocritical to me to see people who live in glass houses throwing stones at other
No wonder I continue not to follow organized religion for its the religion you end up following and not the god you want to worship
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 3:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Anything Dobson says teaches me to go the other way
Posted by: Roxie Heywood | June 25, 2008 2:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
And last I knew, I was voting for Obama for President, not pastor. Dobson and his ilk brought us the likes of Bush. 'Nough said. Torture, unnecessary war, tax cuts for the rich. That's not my religion.
Posted by: Sara B. | June 25, 2008 2:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson would have thrown the first stone at the prostitute on the ground. He's God's sole emissary on earth, so throwing stones at anyone faintly to the left of his pious agenda is to be expected. In retrospect, given the parameters orchestrated by Dr? Dobson, castigating Obama for quoting scripture is exactly what Jesus would have done. Jesus would have stoned Barrack to death. Now you know why I quit going to evangelical churches.
Posted by: Faulpelz | June 25, 2008 2:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Just an observation,
Why is it the letters attacking Sen. Obama seem to have many more typographical errors than those in support of him?
Hatred and ignorance really do seem to go hand in hand.
Posted by: Super90 | June 25, 2008 2:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Ethan Q" writes about hate filled churches and touts his support for Dobson and his agenda. I wonder how many f the readers of this column have attended one of those chruches that follows Dobson's line. I actually, when chruch shopping, did! It was a Nazarean Church. That SInday, they were running a film called "The God Makers". It was one of the most distorted pieces of trash about Mormonism I have ever seen (and, I am NOT a Moromon, I am an Evangelical and attend a Calvery Chapel). Right after that film, the pator and all of those other "good" Dobsonites tore into Catholics, Jews, Seventh Day Adventists. They said 9-11 was directly due to God's punishing us for allowing homosexuality, for abortions, etc. etc. Ethan, you want hate? Go to a Fundimentalist chruch on any Sunday, a Conservative Baptist Chruch, a Southern Baptist Church, and you can get your fill of hate, your cup overflowing with hate. The chruch that James Dobson and these pseudo-christian sects represent are not recognizably Christian. They are a monsterous pervertion, a distortion of Christ's message. I will tell you what I would tell Dobson, either get right with God and at least tell the truth, or go straight to hell.
Posted by: Mike Brooks | June 25, 2008 2:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Your start reading the Bible and you finish selling weapons to Israel for shooting children with stones !
Witch god wants that?
Posted by: paul | June 25, 2008 2:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
enough is enough with these right wing types trying to dictate their so called "moral values" to the rest of America.
Why do we have to bow down to them and their agenda? This is a free country and a secular country at that.
We do not need these attempts to force politicians and judges to conform to their ideas and, even worse, to try and pass legislation to promote their "moral values"
Posted by: janet | June 25, 2008 2:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Cecil:
YOUR COMMENTS ARE UGLY!!!
ARE YOU THE BROTHER OF THIS DOBSON?
IF YOU ARE, TOO MANY OF YOU ON THIS EARTH.
YOU ARE THE CAUSE OF TERRIBLE WEATHER HAPPENING IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
A MAN OF THE CLOTH SUPPOSE TO BE LOVING AND CARING, NOT HATRED.
THIS IS WHAT DOBSON AND YOU REPRESENTS
Posted by: LOIS | June 25, 2008 2:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Is it just me, or aren't others getting sick and tired of listening to these so called Christian right wing nuts trying to tell Americans how to live their lives according to their right wing agenda?
I think most people can choose how to lead decent lives without interference from these people and, even worse, their attempts to promote their agendas by denigrating everyone who disagrees with their "moral values" and then trying to legislate their agenda into our system of laws.
Enough is enough with this backward trolls.
Posted by: Janet | June 25, 2008 2:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Well, this may actually help Obama as it got so much attention in the media. The evangelical christians may have more interests in taking a closer look at Obama, and found a democrate not afraid to talk about his faith. And it may also help to dispel the rumor that Obama is a muslim (secret or not).
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 2:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Thank you for this interesting perspective. I think you're right on concerning Obama's interpretation of the Bible compared to conservative Evangelicals (and you're right to recognize the differences among Evangelicals as well - Evangelicals can be as complex and multi-faceted as Obama's view of the Bible). And speaking of Obama's view, I wonder if he, while being humble, would also suggest that different citizens ought to put their interpretations of the Bible forward to be discussed in the public square (or their interpretations of the other sacred canons they live by - Torah, Quran, etc.). Not to declare which is right or wrong, but to have a vigorous, civil debate about how we might improve America for the purpose of moving forward together.
Posted by: Jim | June 25, 2008 2:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
In other words, what you (Mr. Berlinerblau) are trying to say is that Dr. Dobson believes that Barack Obama is a threat to maintaining the believers he has in his congregation? If you are trying to say this, it is fairly logical, however, it may very well just boil down to knowing what side butters his (Dr. Dobson's) toast. As you say and from all indications, Mr. Obama did not provoke this attack, however the frontal assault was launched for some reason. Hmmm? What could the leader of "Focus On The Family" be thinking?
Posted by: Courteous Farmers | June 25, 2008 2:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Greg Neubeck, you aren't actually suggesting that Jesus would be in favor of capitalism? The New Testament makes ti clear through Jesus' teachings that the pursuit and accumulation of wealth is a sin of the highest order. Or do you think it is easy to pass through the eye of a needle???
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 2:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
In other words, what you (Mr. Berlinerblau) are trying to say is that Dr. Dobson believes that Barack Obama is a threat to maintaining the believers he has in his congregation? If you are trying to say this, it is fairly logical, however, it may very just boil down to knowing what side butters his (Dr. Dobson's) toast. As you say and from all indications, Mr. Obama did not provoke this attack, however the frontal assault was launched for some reason. Hmmm? What could the leader of "Focus On The Family" be thinking?
Posted by: Courteous Farmers | June 25, 2008 2:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Seems to me that a condemnation from Dobson is the best endorsement Obama (or any other candidate) could receive.
Posted by: Robin | June 25, 2008 2:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
In all this, there is complete neglect of those who don't consider the Bible to be authoritative in any sense.
The Bible has a few good slogans in it, but for the large part it is a horrible book--full of terrible punishments and vengeance.
Posted by: Edgar Pearlstein | June 25, 2008 2:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I posted my first comment prior to reading the comments of others. I have to say that the immature and hateful things posted by Obama supporters took some getting used to. This is what Obama has contributed to America. His supporters feed off him and his campaign. These people have been manipulated and don't even know it. Their comments have nothing to do with Dobson or anybody else they fixate on. They'll move to the next person who speaks the truth about Obama. I suspect that will be Ralph Nadar.
Posted by: 4shelby2 | June 25, 2008 2:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I have a number of evangelical Christian friends and none agree on much of anything aside from their belief they are to bring people to the Christian faith. Most this time around are for Obama simply because they like myself, believe that since a President can send men/women to their death in war, that it better be a just war that is meant to do one thing, save people. Not get oil, not change a sovereign nation into something the United States has. Thus abortion and homosexuality are private issues that no one is forced to partake of.
They also have gotten me to thinking when they note they never hear the James Dobsons of this world mention gluttony, greed, and other 'sins'. Then one noted in passing that the summer is the time of year that outfits like James Dobson's have a dip in donations and that with the economy being what it is the dip has to be bigger than usual this summer so the need to get some media attention is being used.
Posted by: MotherLodeBeth | June 25, 2008 2:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jacques Berlinerblau writes,
"In certain respects he is the Christian Right’s worst nightmare: he rejects its pro-family agenda all the while being a committed, credible, enthusiastic and easily recognizable servant of Jesus Christ."
Please, Obama receives a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood et al. Since Jesus Christ said "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matthew 18:6), I think we can be fairly certain that among the things that Jesus would NOT do would be to destroy nascent human life.
Posted by: Orin Ryssman | June 25, 2008 2:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson supports the war, and thus murder. He is therefore in direct opposition to the Ten Commandments, and thus god. Simple.
Jesus told us to turn the other cheek, not drop hellfire missiles from 25,000 feet.
Posted by: mike | June 25, 2008 2:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Oh, and one more thing: What makes everyone think that Obama wrote that speech? More likely someone walked up and handed it to him and he read it in the mirror a few times and then went out and speeched it.
He probably doesn't know or care what parts of the Bible he quoted, what part of the Bible they came from or what they mean. Why should he? As long as you hear what you want to hear in order that you will vote for him, that's the extent of his theological depth.
If he really had a personal Bible-based moral vision that he really and truly cared about, he wouldn't possess the "moral flexibility" necessary to succeed in politics. He would just be another fringe advisor or commentator like this Dobson guy.
Posted by: ZZim | June 25, 2008 2:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
In response to comments on Black Liberation Theology: Rev. Wright's mentor, Black Liberation theologian, James Cone, in his book "For My People" states: "The Christian faith does not possess in its nature the means for analyzing the structure of capitalism. Marxism, as a tool of social analysis, can disclose the gap between appearance and reality, and thereby help Christians to see how things really are." It is this logic which has schooled Obama to seek economic parity in America thru income redistribution; i.e. Marxist Socialism; and, is an overriding theme of his campaign. Greg Neubeck
Posted by: Greg Neubeck | June 25, 2008 2:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Whenever I hear Dobson open his mouth, I am reminded of that piece of scripture that admonishes one to be on the look out for false prophets. He seems far to eager to condemn others for being different than his own image of himself. Seems a form of idolotry to me. Focus on your own family, mind your own business, is the American way.
Posted by: Sara B. | June 25, 2008 2:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
When people express their views about Obama it's called an attack. Dobson deserves credit for speaking the truth about Obama. I don't believe Obama is who he wants us to believe he is. He's nothing more than a dangerous con man who figured out how to manipulate people mixing truth with lies. I hope voters seriously look at his political record and history with Trinity Church.
Posted by: 4shelby2 | June 25, 2008 2:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
When people express their views about Obama it's called an attack. Dobson deserves credit for speaking the truth about Obama. I don't believe Obama is who he wants us to believe he is. He's nothing more than a dangerous con man who figured out how to manipulate people mixing truth with lies. I hope voters seriously look at his political record and history with Trinity Church.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 25, 2008 2:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I've read many of the comments posted below.
Why is it that so many don't respond to the issue of your blog, like the actual content of what either Obama or Dobson said, but decide to name-call Dr. Dobson - all in the name of "love"?
Oh, I understand. They can say that people like Dobson or conservatives or christians are acting in hate when they doubt Obama or Clinton and name specific portions of Bible and other documents where Obama has missed the mark.
But then, those same people can criticize Dobson or those like him, not naming one specific thing that Dobson has done wrong, and insist that those folks are "haters" and so on. They don't even care to look at what the guy has really said. They don't really care. They've labelled Dobson as a "hater" and aren't about to change their minds. And these are the "open-minded" ones?
Double standard, dude.
Let's pray that these people aren't so open minded that their brains fell out.
Posted by: Scott | June 25, 2008 2:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment
just how long will it be before dobson is recognized for the whack job he is? i mean, how long will it be before dobson is considered just another fruit loop like falwell, robertson, or lindsay by reasonable americans? i don't expect that all the population living outside institutions will come to this conclusion (after all, w still enjoys 30% support), but i do expect that one day, the mention of his name will bring "you've got to be joking" retorts among sensible people.
Posted by: jim filyaw | June 25, 2008 2:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I read the comments Dobson made about Obama's use of the Bible. I thought he was pretty accurate. Obama has an excellent grasp on how to use scripture to make liberal public policies sound like What Jesus Would Do.
So what? We already knew that. What matters is (A) do we support the policies that Obama CLAIMS he will implement if he becomes President and (B) do we think that he MEANS what he says. All else is political smoke and mirrors. If he manipulates scripture for political gain... I dunno, I can't see how that's in the least bit relevant because everyone does it.
PS - And Jacques Berlinerblau is pretty good at using scriptural smoke and mirrors to make voting for liberal politicians sound like What Jesus Would Do. But then we already knew that too.
Posted by: ZZim | June 25, 2008 2:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Cecil:
YOUR COMMENTS ARE UGLY!!!
ARE YOU THE BROTHER OF THIS DOBSON?
IF YOU ARE, TOO MANY OF YOU ON THIS EARTH.
YOU ARE THE CAUSE OF TERRIBLE WEATHER HAPPENING IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
A MAN OF THE CLOTH SUPPOSE TO BE LOVING AND CARING, NOT HATRED.
THIS IS WHAT DOBSON AND YOU REPRESENTS
Posted by: LOIS | June 25, 2008 2:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hello Jacques.
Frankly, who cares enough to overgeneralize whether any person is being too loose or too tight with interpretation of any scriptures? If somebody like Dr. Dobson insists that he knows what God's will is, as revealed in the scriptures, who are we to say that he's wrong until we've also looked and considered why he says it? Why not simply stick to the SPECIFIC issues?
Take one example. God wants all people to come to repentence and confess Him as Lord. That's pasted all over the Bible. It's undeniable. Even Obama can't miss that. Dr. Dobson supports that idea. Just because some people don't like that idea, is Dobson or anybody else who claim to know God's will, supposed to just check that moral value at the door?
For that matter, if McCain or Obama can't seem to agree that God has a great deal to do with SPECIFIC values they must bring into office, why should we bother to vote for those schmucks?
Posted by: Scott S | June 25, 2008 2:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson thinks he is god.
Posted by: Chuck | June 25, 2008 1:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment
This article is the best summarization of the situation I have encountered yet. Well said!
There is NOTHIHNG Obama said that was not true, and yet EVERYTHING Dobson said is suspect. All you need do is read the Bible. And there is so much more than slavery and dietary laws at issue. A biggie was shunning women during menstruation, confines on when leather products were forbidden, the cutting of beards, etc. In fact, many of the features of Islamic law that Westerners find so distasteful are echoed in the Judeo-Christian Bible.
Perhaps if we are lucky, this will be Dobson's teletubby moment, and yet one more fascist, hypocritical and immoral leg of the Christian Right go belly up.
It is incomprehensible that another civilized human being would try to use something so wonderful as religion as a tool to spread hate, ignorance, and stupidity.
Perhaps after America wakes up from its Republican nightmare, we can be a country proud of our traditions as a leader of scientific thought and an open, diverse society.
Posted by: Ethan Q | June 25, 2008 1:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment
DOBSON REVEALS OBAMA RELIGIOUS FRAUD
Obama is the worst of the worst.
*He attends a Church spewing forth racial hatred for decades, then claims he didn't know what was said or taught.
**He professses the Bible but supports abortion.
***He professes the Bible but endorses homosexuality.
Obama is consistently inconsistent.
Posted by: JaxMax | June 25, 2008 1:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment
God save us from your followers.
Posted by: DeeDee | June 25, 2008 1:53 PM
Report Offensive Comment
oh oh! sectarian divisions!
the terrorists have followed us home!
Quick send in those pledged to defend the US Constitution!
Bye Bye dobson!
Posted by: Rich Rosenthal | June 25, 2008 1:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
dcp: "speaking what most people thought"
I think you have to be more specific about "most people." When you are you will find that this is actually just a few people and that these people are particularly militant because they and their ideas are being forced into a small corner of US society reserved for irrational extremists.
Posted by: L.Kurt Engelhart | June 25, 2008 1:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment
oh oh! sectarian divisions!
the terrorists have followed us home!
Quick send in those pledged to defend the US Constitution!
Bye Bye dobson!
Posted by: Rich Rosenthal | June 25, 2008 1:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Bob,
Actually, Mark 7, 18-19 has Jesus overthrowing all the dietary laws. As to stopping the stoning of anyone, perhaps an extension of Jesus' words 'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone' might work
Please note that this is simply an explanation. It is NOT in defense of Dobson, that latter-day Elmer Gantry.
Arminius
Posted by: Arminius | June 25, 2008 1:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment
what Dr. Dobson is saying to Barak Obama, as a theologian is very simple. Barak has a scant and limited knowledge of Judeo-Christian theology and both the OT and NT as demonstrated by his highly selective and convoluted statements taken from the Bible. Is this part of his and Michelle's new "Makeover"? Why not try making over the intrinsic areas, such as authenticity, substance, honesty rather than concentrating on what they say and wear. dbrown
Posted by: dorian brown | June 25, 2008 1:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Most people only consider Obama to be a political Christian anyway (as in a Christian for political purposes only.) Some think he's really an atheist or a muslim who is posing as a Christian just to get votes. And then Obama goes and says something about clinging to religion out of bitterness which just confirms for most people that their suspicions were right. So Dobson just comes out and says it. Most people were thinking it anyway. Everything he says isn't sound (like the time he claimed that pro-environment Christians were wrong to take up that cause), but in this instance he is simply speaking what most people thought all along.
Posted by: dcp | June 25, 2008 1:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment
It is HIGH TIME that the church rose up and chased the hypcrites, haters, and money changers from its steps and its foundations.
These men and women serve mammon. They seek riches and speak with hate on their breath.
The dress in finery and stand on a stage broadcasting their own images, casting them as if godly, around the globe.
NOTHING could be better for spiritual America than for Dobson, Hagee, Falwell Jr,, et. al and the rest of the wing-nut fundamentalist right to br REJECTED by the church!
They reject the peaceful teachings of the bible, so let's us reject their hate!
Posted by: JBE | June 25, 2008 1:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
What Dr.Dobson is saying as a studied theologian is that Barak Obama has a very limited, scant knowledge of Judeo-Christian theology which he demonstrated with his selective and convoluted statements from both the Old Testament and New Testament as a means to advance his political aspirations. Barak is no bibical scholar. He is a hypocrite and attempting to use the bible to further his ends is disgusting. This bibical guise must be an aspect of his "New Makeover" plan which will help very little and may do more harm than good. BO and MO are empty suits lacking substance and authenticity. Barak may be a good speaker but he says nothing you can get ahold of. He uses enticing words like "hope" and "change" in high oratory style like the Greek Sophists he emulates. Hypocricy, Sophistry, Twisting his rhetorical statments around and around. Again and again. This is the Barak Obama we have seen, but using the holy bible to advance himself is a new game, which showa more of what he is all about. Barak Obama is an "empty suit". I am not a racist so don't throw the race card at me. I don't like BO and MO for their character. dbrown
Posted by: dorian brown | June 25, 2008 1:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I think what bothers me most about the so called Christian right is that the lack of love and compassion with which they seem to execute their views. Even when they have a point about something that I agree with, I just can't help but disagree with the way they express themselves. Let me just say that im a Chrisitan. In a case like this one, it seems mr. dobson spoke before thinking. In the current climate, it would have been better if he had called Obama privately and discussed the issue - but when one feels that their views are publicly relevant and even welcomed, then they may feel they express themselves easily. sigh.
Posted by: JL | June 25, 2008 1:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Dobson’s criticisms centered on delegitimizing Obama’s opinions on the Bible."
The disrespect shown by such an act is the height of incivility. Dobson should not be allowed in polite society, much less be given the forum to express his "opinions" publicly.
Posted by: L.Kurt Engelhart | June 25, 2008 1:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I can't wait for you right wing tools to be peeing in your pants and crying when Barack Obama is elected and your radical right agenda is crushed by common sense and moderate people.
Posted by: Drdobsonshowerswithboys | June 25, 2008 1:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
[Jacques Berlinerblau's Quote] "In certain respects [Obama] is the Christian Right’s worst nightmare: he rejects its pro-family agenda all the while being a committed, credible, enthusiastic and easily recognizable servant of Jesus Christ." [Quote]
=================================================
I'm confused Jacques. Is a pro-family agenda now unbiblical? Can one be unbiblical and still be a servant of Jesus Christ? Are those Obama's views too? As far as biblical interpretation; the Bible is not really that hard to understand; you just have to read and study it.
If you want to question Dr. Dobson's view on anything; inquire why he stated to his broad radio audience that he would neither support, nor vote for John McCain. Evangelical Christians were not deterred from participating in the political process any less by the statement …they will just be doing it without James Dobson. As far as Barak Obama and that part of the Democrat Party that Obama represents, there really were no political bridges there for Dr. Dobson to burn …were there?
Posted by: Back From Iraq | June 25, 2008 1:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I found Dobson's "revocation" of the laws laid down in Leviticus (Hebrew dietary laws, stoning of unruly children, etc.)the most interesting point of his presentation. They seemingly no longer apply to the "church age". Yet, it is a Levitical law that Dr Dobson and others of the Christian right use to support their stance on homosexuality. Never mind that their interpretation is misguided -- Dobson's revocation of those laws makes them a flimsy read to support their argument.
Posted by: bob | June 25, 2008 1:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Dobson states in many of his pronouncements the Koran or Quran is a book full of hate for all things Christian.
He fails to see Jesus or Isa is mentioned in the Koran, Reading Chapter 3, The Family of Imran, would do wonders for Dr. Dobson, Messiah, Isa son of Marium.
He also fails to realize Chapter 19, Marium or Mary, is one of the longest in the Koran devoted to the Virgin Mary. She is the only woman for whom an entire chapter is so dedicated. Her immaculate virginity is always underlined. Additionally, she is the only woman to be mentioned 34 times in the Koran.
Being stationed in Morocco for 27 months gives one a different perspective on other people and their beliefs. Meeting with Air Force Chaplains with an invited Imam was most informative.
Posted by: Bill Warnock | June 25, 2008 1:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted on June 25, 2008 13:15
mark:
EXCELLENT POST! Unfortunately you are wasting your energy on those who could learn from it. They ALL are using religion and empty language and memes pumped out by the GOP that he is a muslim who hates whites and isn't really a "christian" to camoflauge what everyone sees and that is they will not vote for him because he is black.
As was mentioned in another post here the white supremacist movement is indeed based on some very narrow interpretations of christian theology and the bible. Religion gives many people cover for all kinds of bigotry that stems from their fear of anything not like them.
Posted by: AfghanVet | June 25, 2008 1:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I am no big fan of Dobson, but I think his observations were those of one has paid serious attention to what the bible actually says, while Obama's comments that Dobson critiqued were quick throwaways that demonstrated Obama's knowledge of scripture is superficial at best, indeed, as Monty Python might say "wafer thin."
To write that "For Obama, the Bible is ambiguous, multi-faceted, difficult to interpret, subject to many readings. It is so complex, so multivalent that it demands humility," I think is being far too generous to Obama's appreciation for biblical text.
Posted by: Kevin | June 25, 2008 1:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I was roaring with laughter when I read that Dobson was accusing Obama of interpreting the Bible for political gain. Pot, meet kettle! Dobson's a fine one to talk about that! He wants an example of that sort of behavior, all he needs to do is look in the mirror. Of course, he's going to have to get the shoestore out of his mouth first....
That reminds me, I saw a bumper sticker on the back of a car once that sums up every emotion I have towards him and his feelings towards every American who doesn't blindly kowtow to his brand of Christianity: "Focus on your own family!"
Freedom of religion means ANY religion!
Posted by: Athena DragonDancer | June 25, 2008 1:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Cecil:
YOUR COMMENTS ARE UGLY!!!
ARE YOU THE BROTHER OF THIS DOBSON?
IF YOU ARE, TOO MANY OF YOU ON THIS EARTH.
YOU ARE THE CAUSE OF TERRIBLE WEATHER HAPPENING IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
A MAN OF THE CLOTH SUPPOSE TO BE LOVING AND CARING, NOT HATRED.
THIS IS WHAT DOBSON AND YOU REPRESENTS
GOSH
Posted by: LOIS | June 25, 2008 1:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Ahem, Lucy, I don't know what country you're from, but I think your superior scientific country would be better suited to help the "destitute and emotionally bullied around the world to get a leg up." If our faith makes us so darn stupid, then I don't think you should be looking for idiots to save the day. I don't think we're competent enough to complete the assignment, doy. But I guess saving the "destitute and emotionally bullied" would be establishing a moral standard, and scientific people are too smart to abide by any. Looks like the "destitute and emotionally bullied" are in one heck of a pickle.
Posted by: dcp | June 25, 2008 1:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"I do trust Dr. Dobson more than anyone in politics.
Why? I’ve listened to his program, watched his personal life and read his books over 20 years.
I find him with much respect.
He is a man with legitimacy and integrity. "
Then you certainly must have heard the good Doctor advise fathers to bathe with their male children to show them the size of their penis, as a way of asserting dominance.
Don't believe me, look it up.
If that's the kind of thinking that motivates a person, well, by golly, have at it. Anything that keeps one from taking an automatic weapon and strafing a crowded city street is fine with me.
But in my book, Dobson operates on the lunatic fringe of blind self-righteousness.
Posted by: trippin | June 25, 2008 1:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
there seems to be a lot of misunderstanding here, of both liberation theology and of how one walks as a follower of Christ. Interestingly, they're very related to one another. Liberation theology, unlike many here claim, does not hate the white race, but takes very seriously Christ's assertion that excessive wealth and godliness are at odds. Liberation theology holds that the most antichrist action is one that harms the poor, weak, and the downtrodden - those to whom Christ came to minister. Unfortunately, to a country predicated on wealth and power, this message can seem truly frightening - as frightening as Christ's instruction to the young rich man must have been: go and sell all you own and give it to the poor. not a little. not 7 percent. ALL.
The fear of the health-and-wealth crowd of modern protestantism is that their followers will stop reading only the Pauline epistles, with his lists of dos and don'ts to specific churches and go back to the gospels and read them, not verse by verse, but in their entirety. then read James, the brother of Christ. Christ's message is for everyone, yes. but he came to help the meek, the weak, the downtrodden. not the wealthy and the pious. that truth is the one that terrifies Dr. Dobson.
Posted by: mark | June 25, 2008 1:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Maybe fundamentalist Christians are being crushed under the weight of their own arrogance. Darn.
Posted by: Dave | June 25, 2008 1:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Reposting due to obfuscation by some posters:
Americans are sick of pandering on:
Life is worthy ONLY before birth
Gay bashing = Christ's compassion
Giving tax breaks to rich = Helping the least amongst thy brethren
==========
They want real Christianity, that has true compassion:
======
Care for elderly and poor , health or otherwise
Care for mother earth
Fariness: McCain's fornications and affairs are not any better than Bill's
Harmonious relations with the world: War should be fought for legitimate reasons.
======
This scares the heck out of Evangelist leaders, just like the jihad leaders would be scared when their suicide bombers start to really think. Dobson and 700 club need the sheep:
1) They deliver votes
2) GOP gives them money
3) Even if GOP nominates a FORNICATOR they will support him secretly and they will attack the democratic nominee.
May God save America from this heathens.
Posted by: Concerned American , Ex Southern Baptist | June 25, 2008 1:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"The Bible is ambiguous, multi-faceted, difficult to interpret, subject to many readings. It is so complex, so multivalent that it demands humility. A believer--especially one who is a politician-- should never arrogantly presume to have identified God’s inscrutable message."
The statement above by Mr. Berlinerblau, is right on. Anyone who is so arrogant to believe that they have the right answer from God lives in a fantasy world. No one on this earth has the right answer. In fact I personally believe that the Bible is incomplete. Those books that were rejected at the Council at Nicaea those many centuries ago should never have been excluded.
As far as Dr. Dobson is concerned, I believe that he is on the fringe and does more to divide Christian believers than to unite them. His comments on Obama's Christian beliefs were uncalled for and showed how much in the fringe he really is. I firmly believe that Barrack Obama is as much a Christian believer as I am if not more and is struggling to understand the Bible's teachings as we all are. No one person, especially Dr. Dobson, has the right answer to what God says in the Bible.
Posted by: Bill Stewart | June 25, 2008 1:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
For 20yrs. Obama, under the tutorial of the fanatical Reverend Wright, immersed himself and his family in Black Liberation Theology, a Marxist derivative, which professes that the White race is equivalent to the Devil. It's amazing that anyone, including Reverend Dobson, would be shocked at Obama's perverted view of the Bible. Further, noone should be surprised at Obama's proclamation that American is NOT a Christian Nation. Hopefully a Christian America will send Obama an unmistakable message in November. It's what you get with an un-vetted candidate whose only skill is reciting a text from a teleprompter while he arrogantly looks down his nose at the audience. Greg Neubeck
Posted by: Greg Neubeck | June 25, 2008 1:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
>>*a long (and belated, no?) tribute to Tim Russert
He's stumping to get on Russert's replacement's program.
>>*there is a certain integrity about Dr. Dobson
Lying is NOT one of the 7 deadly sins. If it was there would be no faith.
>>*conservative Evangelical leaders are hearing Obama’s footsteps.
Rumor has it they're hearing Lucifer's footsteps a lot louder. Something to do with carelessly leaving lying out of the list of deadly sins.
>>*many of Dobson’s criticisms centered on delegitimizing Obama’s opinions on the Bible.
You're implying like Dobson there are legitimate opinions. Been to hoax buster,, lately? You both are right on this one. Dobson selling faith in God or faith in the Bible? How about Obama? Is he taking advantage of faith in the Bible? Smooth move Ex-Lax.
>>*the distance between Dobson and Obama on biblical interpretation is precisely the distance between the most theologically conservative wing of American Evangelicalism and the rest of Protestant and Catholic America.
You can skinny that down a lot by noticing they're all slopping at the religion trough and let it go at that.
Posted by: BGone | June 25, 2008 1:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Whatever, Dr. Douchebag has no Constitutional expertise and isn't much up on the Bible either so I guess his accusations dont amount to more than farts in the wind.
Posted by: Nofan of Dobson | June 25, 2008 1:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson should also show how he got rich from supporting the republicans,he should tell his followers how much money het got drom the father of Erik Prince, the chairman and CEO of Blackwater USA to start his Radio show all his foundation, the so called religious leaders, everything is about Money nothing else.
Posted by: Tony | June 25, 2008 1:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Let Dobson pay taxes like everyone else if he wants to be involved in politics. I just called the "org" and asked if they were tax exempt. They are. This is WRONG!!!!!!!
Posted by: twoidhd | June 25, 2008 1:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
sara:
Obama’s comments reflect his own personal liberation theology and racial divisiveness.
He is trying to use the Bible for his own means and gets upset when he is taken to task on its misuse. This is typical of liberals who claim to know Christ,
but their faith practice and walk bears little resemblance to biblical teaching and is then held accountable for their ungodliness.
------
These are ASSERTIONS for which you CITE know relevant documentation. Please post passages or writings of Obama's that demonstrate your assertions. Until such time that you can do this I suspect you are fooling yourself to justify your political ideology based on religion.
Please define for me exactly how YOU think one should practice faith in order to "walk with the bible" and then we can discuss just how liberals walk. I would suspect that there are as many holes on how conservatives walk if we could decide on just how one defines who lives by the bible and who doesn't.
However, if one wants only to define such things in a narrow space that meets the needs of the echo chamber that produces the narrow space, then one can determine at will who walks LIKE THEY DO, but I don't think THEY can determine who walks with God; I believe that is God's job, not yours.
Posted by: AfghanVet | June 25, 2008 1:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
For 20yrs. Obama, under the tutorial of the fanatical Reverend Wright, immersed himself and his family in Black Liberation Theology, a Marxist derivative, which professes that the White race is equivalent to the Devil. It's amazing that anyone, including Reverend Dobson, would be shocked at Obama's perverted view of the Bible. Further, noone should be surprised at Obama's proclamation that American is NOT a Christian Nation. Hopefully a Christian America will send Obama an unmistakable message in November. It's what you get with an un-vetted candidate whose only skill is reciting a text from a teleprompter while he arrogantly looks down his nose at the audience. Greg Neubeck
Posted by: Greg Neubeck | June 25, 2008 1:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
First, let me admit that I have heard the comments made by Dobson, so I cannot comment on them with any informed ideas, however, you seem to characterize Obama as mainstream when it comes to religion. Is that correct, or do I misunderstand? I think the last thing we can call Obama is mainstream when it comes to Christianity. I do not know if he is Christian or not, as only God knows, but he certainly does not behave as one. I personally believe he is a muslim, and there is no place for Islamic beliefs or principles in this society. Obama sheds friends like a shed a dirty shirt. As soon as their is trouble, he runs for the hills. I pray to God our Lord that he will not be the President of this country.
Posted by: Eric Amacher | June 25, 2008 1:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
For 20yrs. Obama, under the tutorial of the fanatical Reverend Wright, immersed himself and his family in Black Liberation Theology, a Marxist derivative, which professes that the White race is equivalent to the Devil. It's amazing that anyone, including Reverend Dobson, would be shocked at Obama's perverted view of the Bible. Further, noone should be surprised at Obama's proclamation that American is NOT a Christian Nation. Hopefully a Christian America will send Obama an unmistakable message in November. It's what you get with an un-vetted candidate whose only skill is reciting a text from a teleprompter while he arrogantly looks down his nose at the audience. Greg Neubeck
Posted by: Greg Neubeck | June 25, 2008 12:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Let Dobson pay taxes like everyone else if he wants to be involved in politics. I just called the "org" and ask if they were tax exempt. They are. This is WRONG!!!!!!!
Posted by: twoidhd | June 25, 2008 12:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment
For 20yrs. Obama, under the tutorial of the fanatical Reverend Wright, immersed himself and his family in Black Liberation Theology, a Marxist derivative, which professes that the White race is equivalent to the Devil. It's amazing that anyone, including Reverend Dobson, would be shocked at Obama's perverted view of the Bible. Further, noone should be surprised at Obama's proclamation that American is NOT a Christian Nation. Hopefully a Christian America will send Obama an unmistakable message in November. It's what you get with an un-vetted candidate whose only skill is reciting a text from a teleprompter while he arrogantly looks down his nose at the audience. Greg Neubeck
Posted by: Greg Neubeck | June 25, 2008 12:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I do trust Dr. Dobson more than anyone in politics.
Why? I’ve listened to his program, watched his personal life and read his books over 20 years.
I find him with much respect.
He is a man with legitimacy and integrity.
I do agree with his comments about Obama’s
biblical view.
Obama’s comments reflect his own personal liberation theology and racial divisiveness.
He is trying to use the Bible for his own means and gets upset when he is taken to task on its misuse. This is typical of liberals who claim to know Christ,
but their faith practice and walk bears little resemblance to biblical teaching and is then held accountable for their ungodliness.
Obama has not earned any respect or trust from majority of Americans.
It is crucially important factor.
Do not underrate it___.
Obama may have been elected by democrats for their necessity not for his personal value.
Everything has to be based on trust and respect when it comes to presidential election. It’ll
be vacillating obstruct for him to be elected for him to be elected for US president.
Many people feel that more truth need to be revealed about him.
There isn’t enough time for him to build up all those respect and trust what he lacks the most for president.
THE CHANCE IS GIVEN ONLY ONCE.
Thanks.
Posted by: sara | June 25, 2008 12:54 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I do trust Dr. Dobson more than anyone in politics.
Why? I’ve listened to his program, watched his personal life and read his books over 20 years.
I find him with much respect.
He is a man with legitimacy and integrity.
I do agree with his comments about Obama’s
biblical view.
Obama’s comments reflect his own personal liberation theology and racial divisiveness.
He is trying to use the Bible for his own means and gets upset when he is taken to task on its misuse. This is typical of liberals who claim to know Christ,
but their faith practice and walk bears little resemblance to biblical teaching and is then held accountable for their ungodliness.
Obama has not earned any respect or trust from majority of Americans.
It is crucially important factor.
Do not underrate it___.
Obama may have been elected by democrats for their necessity not for his personal value.
Everything has to be based on trust and respect when it comes to presidential election. It’ll
be vacillating obstruct for him to be elected for him to be elected for US president.
Many people feel that more truth need to be revealed about him.
There isn’t enough time for him to build up all those respect and trust what he lacks the most for president.
THE CHANCE IS GIVEN ONLY ONCE.
Thanks.
Posted by: sara | June 25, 2008 12:53 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Cecil:
Jacques,
When is competing for minds in the arena of ideas not acceptable to you? You tolerate all opinions from Obama but deride Dobson for stating his opinions. People can decide for themselves.
------
You seem to subscribe to the idea that all opinions have equal value and that is an idea that is wholly untrue. What you are really doing is conflating the idea that all people have a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to EXPRESS their opinions and the idea that all opinions are valid and have inherent worth.
Having the right to say something does not mean that what you say has value or is even accurate or true (true in the sense that is can be supported by KNOWN facts).
You are free to SUGGEST that the moon landings were fake, but the mere ASSERTION does not mean that the OPINION is valid.
This is an approach used commonly by fundamentalists of all ilk to counter VALID questioning of ASSERTIONS made via OPINION when said assertions cannot be logically or rationally supported by anything approaching reason or facts.
So far, I have only seen people challenging the validity of your opinions, not your right to post them. If your opinion is smacked down by reason or logical deduction, that is not limiting your ability to continue to make rediculous assertions in opinions filled with empty language.
Posted by: AfghanVet | June 25, 2008 12:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I do trust Dr. Dobson more than anyone in politics.
Why? I’ve listened to his program, watched his personal life and read his books over 20 years.
I find him with much respect.
He is a man with legitimacy and integrity.
I do agree with his comments about Obama’s
biblical view.
Obama’s comments reflect his own personal liberation theology and racial divisiveness.
He is trying to use the Bible for his own means and gets upset when he is taken to task on its misuse. This is typical of liberals who claim to know Christ,
but their faith practice and walk bears little resemblance to biblical teaching and is then held accountable for their ungodliness.
Obama has not earned any respect or trust from majority of Americans.
It is crucially important factor.
Do not underrate it___.
Obama may have been elected by democrats for their necessity not for his personal value.
Everything has to be based on trust and respect when it comes to presidential election. It’ll
be vacillating obstruct for him to be elected for him to be elected for US president.
Many people feel that more truth need to be revealed about him.
There isn’t enough time for him to build up all those respect and trust what he lacks the most for president.
THE CHANCE IS GIVEN ONLY ONCE.
Thanks.
Posted by: sara | June 25, 2008 12:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Cecil, you are right. I don't suffer fools gladly. It's one of my faults, imperfect as I am, that idiots raise my ire. I'm sorry that you raised my ire.
Posted by: Martiniano | June 25, 2008 12:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
James Dobson is a disgusting human being.
Any American who listens to his radio show is borderline retarded.
Everyday, I pray that James Dobson and Cal Thomas die awful, painful deaths.
Posted by: Kenneth | June 25, 2008 12:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Again I ask, why do we care what Dobson says? This bible thumping carpetbagger is the worst kind of imposter, preying on the fears of his flock of sheep with his nasty evangelical superstitions. Hey, it raises big bucks so I guess it's ok.
Haven't we heard enough from these people trying to out-jesus or out-mohammed each other with their self proclaimed piety, telling the rest of us how to live?
Haven't we grown up enough to recognize imposters and the crap they peddle?.
It's called "faith" because it doesn't hold up to any sort of intelligent scrutiny.
billm
Posted by: whm99 | June 25, 2008 12:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The doctrine of separation of church and state nullifies everything Dobson has to say about Presidential candidate, Barak Obama.
Posted by: ANONYMOUS | June 25, 2008 12:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Dobson needed attention somewhat, and the only way he was going to get it, was to bring up some childish plot.
This is no man of the cloth, but someone who tends to tear down another individual.
If he was a man of the cloth, he would not be looking for head liners to be heard.
GO AWAY DOBSON, YOU ARE NOT HELPING IN ANYWAY
Posted by: lois | June 25, 2008 12:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I am convinced, after hearing and reading what so many folks know is the correct reading of the bible, that what an old man said a long time ago is the only truth: "FOLLOW THE MAN WHO SEEKS THE TRUTH, AND WHEN HE SAYS THAT HE HAS FOUND IT....RUN LIKE HELL!
Posted by: Ralph | June 25, 2008 12:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson wants to govern from the Bible. He represents is the Christian version of the Taliban. He fails to recognize that many of the people who founded this country came here for religious freedom and to to be told by ignorent fools like him what they have to believe.
Posted by: Gerry | June 25, 2008 12:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jacques,
When is competing for minds in the arena of ideas not acceptable to you? You tolerate all opinions from Obama but deride Dobson for stating his opinions. People can decide for themselves.
Posted by: Cecil | June 25, 2008 12:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Calling our time "relativistic" presumes things used to be simpler--that all Americans used to believe the same things. It isn't true. All ages are "multi-faceted" and complex, each age has its moral dilemmas. Even in Jesus' time, there were many faiths, many ways of seeing the divine and the daily human relationship to it.
Obama doesn't dishonor or distort the Bible; he believes in God's grace--the central core of Christianity. He doesn't look to the Bible for the answers to specific behavioral questions. Behavior, for Obama, is driven by belief in the gospel, and the single command Jesus added to it: "Love your neighbor as yourself." Everything else, for Obama, flows from there.
Dobson, on the other hand, spends a good deal more time creating structures for himself and other people on the moral behavior side of the equation, and a good deal less time on the guts of Christianity, the gospel itself.
The two men represent two ways to see Christianity. And if all we were talking about was faith, we could debate this on the merits.
But we're talking about politics. In our democracy, every person is worthy of equal respect--every person has the right and responsibility to choose their own faith--unless their behavior hurts someone else or violates the law. All Obama is saying is that faith alone cannot drive policy. In America, no politician can be given the authority to use the law to impose his/her beliefs on everyone else.
Posted by: pdxalto | June 25, 2008 12:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Calling our time "relativistic" presumes things used to be simpler--that all Americans used to believe the same things. It isn't true. All ages are "multi-faceted" and complex, each age has its moral dilemmas. Even in Jesus' time, there were many faiths, many ways of seeing the divine and the daily human relationship to it.
Obama doesn't dishonor or distort the Bible; he believes in God's grace--the central core of Christianity. He doesn't look to the Bible for the answers to specific behavioral questions. Behavior, for Obama, is driven by belief in the gospel, and the single command Jesus added to it: "Love your neighbor as yourself." Everything else, for Obama, flows from there.
Dobson, on the other hand, spends a good deal more time creating structures for himself and other people on the moral behavior side of the equation, and a good deal less time on the guts of Christianity, the gospel itself.
The two men represent two ways to see Christianity. And if all we were talking about was faith, we could debate this on the merits.
But we're talking about politics. In our democracy, every person is worthy of equal respect--every person has the right and responsibility to choose their own faith--unless their behavior hurts someone else or violates the law. All Obama is saying is that faith alone cannot drive policy. In America, no politician can be given the authority to use the law to impose his/her beliefs on everyone else.
Posted by: pdxalto | June 25, 2008 12:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Obama is running for President, not Pope. The Constitution, not the Bible, is the basis for laws in the U.S. As long as Obama follows the Constitution, I could care less about his interpretations of the Bible, or even if he is religious.
Posted by: Athena | June 25, 2008 12:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Calling our time "relativistic" presumes things used to be simpler--that all Americans used to believe the same things. It isn't true. All ages are "multi-faceted" and complex, each age has its moral dilemmas. Even in Jesus' time, there were many faiths, many ways of seeing the divine and the daily human relationship to it.
Obama doesn't dishonor or distort the Bible; he believes in God's grace--the central core of Christianity. He doesn't look to the Bible for the answers to specific behavioral questions. Behavior, for Obama, is driven by belief in the gospel, and the single command Jesus added to it: "Love your neighbor as yourself." Everything else, for Obama, flows from there.
Dobson, on the other hand, spends a good deal more time creating structures for himself and other people on the moral behavior side of the equation, and a good deal less time on the guts of Christianity, the gospel itself.
The two men represent two ways to see Christianity. And if all we were talking about was faith, we could debate this on the merits.
But we're talking about politics. In our democracy, every person is worthy of equal respect--every person has the right and responsibility to choose their own faith--unless their behavior hurts someone else or violates the law. All Obama is saying is that faith alone cannot drive policy. In America, no politician can be given the authority to use the law to impose his/her beliefs on everyone else.
Posted by: pdxalto | June 25, 2008 12:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Americans are sick of pandering on:
Life is worthy ONLY before birth
Gay bashing = Christ's compassion
Giving tax breaks to rich = Helping the least amonst thy bretheren
==========
They want real Christianity, that has true compassion:
======
Care for elderly and poor , health or otherwise
Care for mother earth
Fariness: McCain's fornications and affairs are not any better than Bill's
Harmonious relations with the world: War should be fought for legitimate reasons.
======
This scares the heck out of Evangelist leaders, just like the jihad leaders would be scared when their suicide bombers start to really think. Dobson and 700 club need the sheep:
1) They deliver votes
2) GOP gives them money
3) Even if GOP nominates a FORNICATOR they will support him secretly and they will attack the democratic nominee.
May God save America from this heathens.
Posted by: Concerned American , Ex Southern Baptist | June 25, 2008 12:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I literally was laughing so hard when I heard Dobson's comments that I was in tears! James Dobson complaining about someone interpreting the Bible for their own political gain? Well, he's the expert at it.
Congrats, Rev. Dobson. You just made a fool out of yourself.
Posted by: Athena | June 25, 2008 12:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
So tired of hearing about the Bible. I want nothing to do with Christianity and its make believe god. The fact that religion is playing such a prominent role in the 2008 presidential election is disgusting.
Posted by: homer | June 25, 2008 12:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Calling our time "relativistic" presumes things used to be simpler--that all Americans used to believe the same things. It isn't true. All ages are "multi-faceted" and complex, each age has its moral dilemmas. Even in Jesus' time, there were many faiths, many ways of seeing the divine and the daily human relationship to it.
Obama doesn't dishonor or distort the Bible; he believes in God's grace--the central core of Christianity. He doesn't look to the Bible for the answers to specific behavioral questions. Behavior, for Obama, is driven by belief in the gospel, and the single command Jesus added to it: "Love your neighbor as yourself." Everything else, for Obama, flows from there.
Dobson, on the other hand, spends a good deal more time creating structures for himself and other people on the moral behavior side of the equation, and a good deal less time on the guts of Christianity, the gospel itself.
The two men represent two ways to see Christianity. And if all we were talking about was faith, we could debate this on the merits.
But we're talking about politics. In our democracy, every person is worthy of equal respect--every person has the right and responsibility to choose their own faith--unless their behavior hurts someone else or violates the law. All Obama is saying is that faith alone cannot drive policy. In America, no politician can be given the authority to use the law to impose his/her beliefs on everyone else.
Posted by: pdxalto | June 25, 2008 12:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted on June 25, 2008 12:25
pitha:
Obamas statements are typical legalese, nothing is clear, everything is open to opinions, polls, debates, the usual postmodern conundrum. THe Bible is very clear on many things. Absolutey clear. Perhaps Obama shoud struggle to find them with more humility rather than the usual academic hubris
------
I am not sure you actually read the articles on this issue. Obama's comments contained nothing related to legalese as you put it. They were a direct comment on the narrow interpretations of the Bible.
You are simply repeating the empty rethoric that all Democrats are elites that see no absolutes, which is a political meme used to DIVIDE the populace and provide a FALSE clarity of choice.
And, even if one were to accept your base assertions I can assure you that I would prefer academic hubris, which at least has academic rigor to back up its claims, to the hubris of a theologian whose hubris stems from knowledge of FAITH that has rigor only in orthodoxy of practice and in the end relies on a root causation that cannot be tested and proved one way or the other.
I will always take critical thought over faith when it comes to taking decisions that affect man.
Posted by: AfghanVet | June 25, 2008 12:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I happen to know a Christian who agrees with Dobson's attitude and takes her extremely conservative evangelical pastor at his word, but she's the only one I know. I also know evangelical Christians who have a more tolerant view of other people's religious faiths. The point to remember about Dobson is that he is primarily operating a very large scale business that makes its money by convincing people that he is the only authority regarding what is the right and wrong way to be a Christian, raise a child or be a moral person. Obama's whole point is that there are many valid ways to be a Christian and to be a moral person. Can you think of anything more damaging to Dobson's extraordinary, untaxed profits?
Posted by: sharon s | June 25, 2008 12:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Who cares what that fringe lunatic Dobson has to say about anything... and besides is it a surprise that Dobson -- an EXTREME right wing bigot -- would have negative things to say about the first African American presidential candidate? Dobson sits in his Tupelo Mississippi office and spouts the most hate-filled garbage about anybody who does not follow his extremist and warped view of Christianity. He needs to be tuned out by all level-headed Americans.
Posted by: So What! | June 25, 2008 12:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I am an Evangelical Christian and one thing I can tell you, James Dobson is about as much a Christian as the Easter Bunny. He is a self promoting gasbag, a money grubbing hack, one of the leaders of a pseuod-christian cult that misled far too many people. Evangelical Christian's are not Republicans or Democrats and neither is God.
Posted by: Mike Brooks | June 25, 2008 12:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Martiniano,
When you read opinions that you do not like, you insult and attack the authors of said comments (see your intolerance below) just as you accuse them of. I do not believe you hold any position to judge on any commentors. You repeat ancient slang meant to deride those who you do not agree with. You can not see very deep below your surface, can you?
______________________________________________
"do you truly not know how ignorant and uneducated you sound? When you read your own posts do you not see the hatred, fear and racism? Do you not see the lack of personal thought? Why do you parrot the same phrases ("empty suit", "pathological liar") over and over? When challenged to support your assertions you run away."
Regards,
Cecil
Posted by: Cecil | June 25, 2008 12:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Paul, this is actually a pretty interesting post. While the Evangelical Christian movement makes a lot of gestures about embracing people of color, you're right, the agenda of people like Dr. Dobson hews pretty closely to that of white supremacists: women at home, white men in authority, maximum white babies born, minimum intervention to help the poor, maximum persecution of gays, maximum incarceration of nonwhites. Also not unlike the Nazi agenda of the 1930s.
Paul Grandpierre:
If I were a white person who was afraid that my country was getting taken over by minorities///
Posted by: Tom B | June 25, 2008 12:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I want to conclude that Dr. Dobson motives was scare the so called "conservative movement" that Obama is not the good christian that he portraying himself to be. since Dobson is standing by his words not to vote for McCain, he want to scare his base not to shift to Obama. Good try Dr. but Obama has been a christian for over 20 years and we still don't know which church McCain goes to.
Posted by: Daniel, Laurel, Maryland | June 25, 2008 12:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Pitha, I disagree. I find Obama's statement to be crystal clear. In the speech that started all of this discussion he pointed out some important concerns for Christians to consider. The Bible says that slavery is acceptable. Is slavery acceptable then? The Bible says that shellfish is an abomination to God. These are silly things in the Bible that are there to show us that even the Bible is not infallible and required rigorous study.
Jesus is the prince of peace? But he said himself that he came to cleanse with fire.
That requires thought. And that is exactly what Obama said: read and study scripture and make up your own mind about what it means and how it will guide your life. Don't let false prophets like Dobson lead you by the nose.
Posted by: Martiniano | June 25, 2008 12:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson was letting his followers know that Obama gets a thumbs down. He's doing it because Obama has been reaching out to all Americans, including evangelicals.
Posted by: Tom | June 25, 2008 12:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Church and State separation"
This single idea, this beautiful, beautiful single idea is what I have come to believe as the single most powerful nation building idea the world has seen since written language. Without this concept just try imaging where a country would be today, but then maybe you ask the Vatican.
Posted by: Richard | June 25, 2008 12:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Church and State separation"
This single idea, this beautiful, beautiful single idea is what I have come to believe as the single most powerful nation building idea the world has seen since written language. Without this concept just try imaging where a country would be today, but then maybe you ask the Vatican.
Posted by: Richard | June 25, 2008 12:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jacques wrote:
"the distance between Dobson and Obama on biblical interpretation is precisely the distance between the most theologically conservative wing of American Evangelicalism and the rest of Protestant and Catholic America."
Of course, there's the third option that lies between conservatives and liberals.
The truth.
The truth is that God is real, heaven is real, and the Lord wants us to lead holy and virtuous lives. There is other truth; but the clearest, most profound and complete revelation is contained in the Holy Bible.
It is true that you interpret scripture with other scripture. This can be confusing, and one person can interpret it differently than others. However, there is a set of basic beliefs that are essential. And it is plausible that God may encourage different people to see His word differently in order to inspire them to take different paths to achieve His ends.
Vatican II was correct in asserting that salvation is available to all those who truly seek God. But more importantly, the thing that most people miss is the role of the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit will counsel someone in understanding the bible but His biggest role, for the person of the strongest faith, is to guide every step of his/her life. These steps may not always be exactly in keeping with the majority views espoused by mainstream institutional Christianity.
Some will say it is impossible for God to order someone to do something that is in contravention to His laws, but this is wrong.
Was David following God's rules when he ate the showbread? Was Abraham when he denied that he was married to Sarai? What about all of the Old Testament festivals that were supposed to be rules followed "forever" that have been done away with? What about the dietary restrictions? What about circumcision? What about the Sabbath Day? Etc.
Mr. Dobson and others prefer simplistic pat explanations that involve incredible leaps of theological gymnastics when God is more nuanced and deep then they could ever imagine.
But basically, He is love. He provides life. The only "death" is spiritual. He is a merciful and loving God who stands for righteousness and justice. Everything flows from that. And if you cannot understand it academically He will teach you to feel it. If the contents of your heart are in the right place.
Posted by: faithfulservant3 | June 25, 2008 12:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Obamas statements are typical legalese, nothing is clear, everything is open to opinions, polls, debates, the usual postmodern conundrum. THe Bible is very clear on many things. Absolutey clear. Perhaps Obama shoud struggle to find them with more humility rather than the usual academic hubris.
Posted by: pitha | June 25, 2008 12:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson's falling credibility is obvious, particularly to Dobson. He's not going down without a fight, though. The more pointed his rhetoric, the more people make a decision for themselves that he is a buffoon.
Posted by: steve boyington | June 25, 2008 12:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Glenn:
Obama part is Politics Not Preaching for Lost Souls to get right w/ God by Jesus Christ.
Obama is preaching for VOTES.
His Down Fall is simple: He is for killing babies & yet still not saying what is true Marriage is between A Man and a women Only!
-------
And of course these are the ONLY issues by which we should measure one's faith; because THOSE aren't political at all.
How funny that you should suggest that he is preaching for votes when that is ALL the GOP has been doing for two decades. They had COMPLETE control of the government for 6 years and funny how they could not stop abortion and not only could not define marriage but couldn't even live up to their own ideals in practice.
See, the United States is governed by the RULE OF LAW, not the Bible and while we are a nation that is predominantly Christian in our faith, we are NOT a Christian nation...we are Constitutional Nation again, governed by the rule of law, law that is made BY THE PEOPLE, not dictated from a book that is a conglomeration of various writings put together by a council to lend consistency to a fledgling religion.
And can anyone please show me the passage where JESUS himself says that homosexuality is a sin? Anyone, Bueller, Bueller? Nope, I think it was that repressed in every way Paul who, having never actually MET Jesus, who was the main purveyor of this particular stance.
How easily so many Evangelicals ignore the fact that the New Testament was BUILT by MAN, not handed to man by God.
Posted by: AfghanVet | June 25, 2008 12:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I just hate seeing Christian leaders once again causing division, casting rocks and dissention. We are just finished up with an administration that cleverly used religion and God to sway people. And look where that got us, in a war, that has cost us American lives and billions of dollars. I am disappointed in Dobson, he needs to stick to Focus on the Family matters and keep his opinions about politics to himself.
Posted by: Judith | June 25, 2008 12:18 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Glenn, that is because marriage is NOT only between a man and a woman. As a happily married straight man I am perfectly OK with gay marriage. It increases the number of families in the world.
Isn't that what family values are about? More families is better, right? BTW, what have you done to fix the 51% divorce rate in straight marriages?
Isn't that a more important issue than gay marriage?
Posted by: Martiniano | June 25, 2008 12:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
If there's anyuone Obama is NOT after, it's the likes of former White House convicted felon James Dobson.
Any distance Obama puts between himself and dedicated, anti-Consitutional religious extremsits and fascists is all the better.
Obama looks more intelligent every moment
Dobson...why nor reveal your criminal past when you write this garbage? Two-bit coward.
Posted by: SteveCO | June 25, 2008 12:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I am disappointed that a lawyer as talented as Obama left himself open to attack by presenting such a subjective argument on the role of theology in politics. Instead, Obama would have been wise to make an objective argument that focused on the realities that shape our religious heritage: If we allow theology to form the foundation of our law, which denomination's interpretation should be used? As Roman Catholicism is the largest denomination in the US, shall Dobson bend to the Pope's interpretation of Scripture? Or shall we go by the interpretation of the Mormons, or the Methodists? Dobson can argue Obama's use (or misuse) of Scripture, but he could not have argued the reality that our nation's Christian population is comprised of thousands of denominations whose views are often radically different from one another.
Posted by: Elizabeth Morin | June 25, 2008 12:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Lucy,
As for why people in the United States believe the Christian fairy tale, I can only ask why the world STILL looks to us for moral leadership and guidance. Christianity, when practiced and adhered to in love, tolerance, and conviction, is the greatest liberating force this world has and will ever have! It is DEMOCRACY, the rule of the people, that others are afraid of. It is the marrige of democracy and Christian principals (not Christianity in general)that makes us unique. Again, we as a people and country are not perfect, but the comparisions are few and far in between. We fight and die for others to have the same expression of their individual spirit, with or without "God".
Posted by: walterrock | June 25, 2008 12:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
and on the subject of a believer's proper use of his or her belief while serving in office (Obama says you can't just hold up a bible and say it says so, you must find grounds that are legitimate to even an nonbeliever), Obama is, of course, light years ahead of Dobson who says, in effect, that's exactly what you are supposed to do, and if you have the votes, you win. Dobson has even less business talking about that subject than he does about biblical scholarship proper, on which he is simply a lightweight.
Posted by: JoeT | June 25, 2008 12:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"For if the rank-and-file finds [Obama's] hermeneutics of doubt compelling, then The Movement's public policy wing is out of business." I fervently hope so.
My father got it right 35 years ago: "If you encounter anyone who claims to have all the answers, RUN."
Posted by: Tigrrrl | June 25, 2008 12:10 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson wants to govern from the Bible. He represents is the Christian version of the Taliban. He fails to recognize that many of the people who founded this country came here for religious freedom and to to be told by ignorent fools like him what they have to believe.
Posted by: Gerry | June 25, 2008 12:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Obama part is Politics Not Preaching for Lost Souls to get right w/ God by Jesus Christ.
Obama is preaching for VOTES.
His Down Fall is simple: He is for killing babies & yet still not saying what is true Marriage is between A Man and a women Only!
Posted by: Glenn | June 25, 2008 12:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment
To quote Holden Cawfield in THE CATCHER IN THE RYE, Dobson would, "make ole Jesus puke."
Posted by: the sage | June 25, 2008 12:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Posted on June 25, 2008 12:03
Stan Unruh:
Please explain and support your assertion that Senator Obama does not know much about the Bible. Please try to do so without referencing OTHER PEOPLE'S interpretation of the Bible and please cite the passages that you feel demonstrate Senator Obama's ignorance.
I suspect that you cannot and that you are simply parroting the MEME that only GOP candidates and vetted Evangelicals can possibly interpret the Bible appropriately.
Posted by: AfghanVet | June 25, 2008 12:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment
17.He went down with them and stood on a level place. A large crowd of his disciples was there and a great number of people from all over Judea, from Jerusalem, and from the coast of Tyre and Sidon,
18.who had come to hear him and to be healed of their diseases. Those troubled by evil spirits were cured,
19.and the people all tried to touch him, because power was coming from him and healing them all.
20.Looking at his disciples, he said: "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
21.Blessed are you who hunger now, for you will be satisfied. Blessed are you who weep now, for you will laugh.
22.Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil,
23."Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their fathers treated the prophets.
24."But woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort.
25.Woe to you who are well fed now, for you will go hungry. Woe to you who laugh now, for you will mourn and weep.
26.Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for that is how their fathers treated the false prophets.
Posted by: David E. Longjohn | June 25, 2008 12:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Senator Obama is correct on the Bible reading. I am 64 years of age and a member of the Christ of God in Christ and the Bible is my source of salvation.
Posted by: shang | June 25, 2008 12:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Dobson & other Evangelical leaders should immediately read the Gospels. I suggest this order - Mark, John, Matthew, & Luke followed immediately by Acts. Then, Revelation = No (s) as there is only one revelation.
Then, Paul's Letters to the Romans, Galations & Corithians.
I also recommend that Senator Obama and Everyone else follow the Biblical reading order suggested.
H. Lester Ariail
Retired UCC minister 06/25/08
Posted by: Ariail | June 25, 2008 12:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Starbright and Cecil - do you truly not know how ignorant and uneducated you sound? When you read your own posts do you not see the hatred, fear and racism? Do you not see the lack of personal thought? Why do you parrot the same phrases ("empty suit", "pathological liar") over and over? When challenged to support your assertions you run away. So why in the world would anyone care about YOUR opinion? In the global picture you are the peasants in the far background of the photo.
Is that who you want to be? When you were young did you say "when I grow up I want to be poor, uneducated and afraid"?
Posted by: Martiniano | June 25, 2008 12:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Dr. Dobson had to respond. Obama was putting Dobson and Rev. Al Sharpton in the same box. Obama was also showing some significant ignorance about the Bible. He is a fine political candidate but he needs to stop making comments on a topic of which he knows very little.
Posted by: Stan Unruh | June 25, 2008 12:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I will tell you what I find most impressive is that some who comment here are using it as a platform to spew their racist-inspired hatred of a man who happens to be of color and who obviously have not read past the headlines.
How Christian of you.
Posted by: AfghanVet | June 25, 2008 12:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
This is the clown that thought that George Bush was sent from god.
His words are bogus
Posted by: pv | June 25, 2008 11:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
A minor correction to "openthebook!" 's comment. Jesus did indeed say "blessed are the poor" in the Sermon on the Mount, at least according to Luke's record of the sermon. See Luke 6:20
Perhaps Mr. Obama is not as Scripture illiterate as some of his critics suggest.
Posted by: timothy kennedy | June 25, 2008 11:57 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Fundamentalist followers of any religion would be well served to learn to begin statements with "I believe..." as opposed to speaking from a place of absolute authority. Follow any teaching to whatever degree you choose, just accept that it is your decision to believe, not an indisputable fact. As others have stated, it is an insult to your god to think you have him or her understood.
Posted by: Leigh | June 25, 2008 11:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment
A minor correction to "openthebook!" 's comment. Jesus did indeed say "blessed are the poor" in the Sermon on the Mount, at least according to Luke's record of the sermon. See Luke 6:20
Posted by: timothy kennedy | June 25, 2008 11:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I listened to Obama's speech - and I agree with him 100%. Once again, Obama is saying exactly what I have been thinking. I can't wait to put Obama in the White House.
And I can hardly wait for the stiff-necked Christians to grow in their understanding and love of what God has given them.
Why to Evangelical Christians have to be so petty?
Posted by: Martiniano | June 25, 2008 11:55 AM
Report Offensive Comment
When Obama slips up with another dumb public statement, he reveals himself for the person he is. Disgust with southern and midwest whites, being accepting of white race hatred, thinking himself an elitist when he is just another wacko liberal empty suit and headed democrat. When gas prices are rising, Obama says no ANWR drilling. Can you really take a person like that seriopusly. He is a joke.
Posted by: Cecil | June 25, 2008 11:55 AM
Report Offensive Comment
If I were a white person who was afraid that my country was getting taken over by minorities, I would:
(1) want fellow whites to get married and have as many children as possible to increase our population (i.e. family values);
(2) support a ban on abortions so that young single white women (who have abortions in great numbers) would be forced to give birth to white children (more family values);
(3) support harsh punishment and long sentences for violent crimes, and the death penalty since minorities are processed in the criminal justice system at greater rates than whites (an eye for an eye); and
(4) not support programs that overwhelmingly help the urban poor, because these would lend support to my poorer minority antagonists who tend to fall through the cracks at higher rates (morality of self-reliance);
I think that the Evangelical Right platform is religious cover for a political movement to resist diversity and Multiculturalism in America. Those of us are more circumspect about biblical interpretation give the likes of Dobson too much credit when we engage them in these theological debates. I don't think Dobson cares about biblical interpretation. He cares about his flock's rather secular fears and yearnings. He cares about resisting the emergence of an America that isn't overwhelmingly dominated by his constituency.
Posted by: Paul Grandpierre | June 25, 2008 11:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment
He is scared out of his wits that the control of Evangelicals will slip away and that the Dobson interpretation of the bible will be exposed for the farce that it is.
Polls clearly show that evangelicals, especially young evangelicals, are seeing the light and realizing that A) being evangelical does not necessarily mean you must vote GOP, and B) that the bible says a lot that is consistent with what is considered Democratic platform.
The GOP, under the control of Rove and his operatives, framed faith as a political tool to be used and pandered to to win elections. This is now becoming clear and consequently all of the power the Dobson and his ilk garnered from the windfall is slipping away.
Hell has no wrath like that of a preacher who is exposed as a fraud and stands to lose everything he holds dear...power and influence...and riches for some.
Posted by: AfghanVet | June 25, 2008 11:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I am grateful for the very well written article regarding Dobson vs Obama. Mr. Berlinerblau strips away the shouting to reveal the bare bones of the argument. The conflict is not between Obama and Dobson but between the Evangelical Branch of the Christian Faith and the rest of us who are believers.
Posted by: David Vigen | June 25, 2008 11:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment
He is scared out of his wits that the control of Evangelicals will slip away and that the Dobson interpretation of the bible will be exposed for the farce that it is.
Polls clearly show that evangelicals, especially young evangelicals, are seeing the light and realizing that A) being evangelical does not necessarily mean you must vote GOP, and B) that the bible says a lot that is consistent with what is considered Democratic platform.
The GOP, under the control of Rove and his operatives, framed faith as a political tool to be used and pandered to to win elections. This is now becoming clear and consequently all of the power the Dobson and his ilk garnered from the windfall is slipping away.
Hell has no wrath like that of a preacher who is exposed as a fraud and stands to lose everything he holds dear...power and influence...and riches for some.
Posted by: AfghanVet | June 25, 2008 11:51 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Dobson shouldn't waste all that hate yet. He is going to need some when president Obama starts promoting fairness and equality for all.
He will need it when Obama addresses the human condition and sees that much of its pathological behavior is tied to the right wing freaks of Jesus and their hateful agendas.
Dobson does for religion what Powell did to satellite photos and laser pointers.
Posted by: KAckermann | June 25, 2008 11:51 AM
Report Offensive Comment
James Dobson is Very Believable and He is a Man of Faith, Faith in God ! Barrack Obama is a Pathological Liar ! Look at his backround with the Rev. Wright and He is a Racist ! The News Media has put him up on a Pedestal and should he win he will turn on the media and whites and your stuck with his lying self for 4 years while he ruins the Country even more then it is now. I will vote for John Mc Cain if for no other reason then to defeat Obama and his Looney Tune Wife ! I compare him to Jim Jones and obviously folks are drinking his lying cup of kool-ade. Wake Up America, Wake Up !
Posted by: Starbright | June 25, 2008 11:51 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Mr. Berlinerblau,
I commend you for your scholarship. It is obvious that you have a clear grasp of the Christian community as it now exists in America. As an evangelical Christian, it gets so tiresome watching people like Chris Matthews elucidate infantile analysis of the Christian mindset.
This truley is a vexing election for many Christians, myself included. Sen. Obama does eloquently speak the language of salvation, yet his views on social and cultural issues are out of sync with most mainline Christians. In addition, his association with the radical rantings of Rev. Wright give evangelicals pause regarding his interpretation of scripture.
Regardless, I will pray for Sen. Obama and I thank him for reintroducing a certain sort of civility into our national political conversations. But, I probably won't vote for him.
Thanks again.
Posted by: Michael Barber | June 25, 2008 11:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The Christian right sees gay marriage and abortion-on-demand as basic assaults on their way of life. Most Americans are somewhat queasy about both, but are willing to yield to those who feel passionately about these subjects because it doesn't affect the average person in their daily lives all that much. But we don't think it's an assault on the foundations of the Republic the way these people do. This is what happens when a significant portion of the population has opted out of the public school system and has picked up the scientific and social values of the 1st century instead of the 21st century along the way.
Posted by: George Robertson | June 25, 2008 11:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
While I do not fully subscribe to Sen. Obama's "hermeneutics of doubt," I do appreciate his sense of humility with regard to the political use of scripture. There has been too little such humility in the current administration and the religious right-wing of the Republican party where the Bible has been used as a battering ram to further their particular agenda. Rev. Dobson's comments are fairly typcial. The "doubt" in Sen. Obama's hermeneutics, at least as I hear him, seems to refer to his doubt in his own certitude with regard to the absolute correctness of his interpretation of the Bible, *not* doubt in the truth of the Bible.
We Christians ought to be more forthright both about our faith in the truth of Holy Writ and our struggle to fully understand Scripture, along with the writings of the many teachers of the church from Clement and Irenaeus to Luther and Calvin to
Edwards and Henry up to the present day. Prayer, meditation, trust in the Holy Spirit and humility are highly advisable for approaching scripture, along with a healthy dose of reasonable faith. "Do justice, love kindness and walk humbly with your God" is sage advice from the prophet Micah. BTW, in Luke 6, Jesus does teach, "Blessed are the poor" along with "Woe to those who are rich." Open the book indeed...
Posted by: Pastor Greg Harbaugh | June 25, 2008 11:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
If it's possible, I believe I know less about thelogy than anyone else. You might as well try to explain quantum physics to a chimp.
So that I don't wax stupid on the subject, I'll simply note that people like Dobson make frequent references to a generic 'bible' whenever they want to condemn the masses who don't think like them. Then, when confronted with some obnoxious scripture that violates all standards of modern decency and justice, they employ the disingenuous argument, "Oh, that's just the old testament."
Uh, yeah, the old testament, otherwise known as the bible, the inerrant word of god. Or is the old testament some lesser document that really shouldn't be considered sacred? (I told you theology is over my head.)
Posted by: EnemyOfTheState | June 25, 2008 11:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment
In his attack on Obama, Dobson said "He's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own world view, his own confused theology." I thought this was a very apt description of Dobson and his fellow intolerant, fundamentalist loonies.
Posted by: fudd | June 25, 2008 11:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
You cannot comment on any dispute about Biblical interpretation without measuring someone's words by the ruler of Scripture. Please open the Book before you open your mouth! I have seen video of Sen. Obama quoting Jesus' Sermon on the Mount as saying, "Blessed are the poor" -- a sentiment that dovetails nicely with the "social gospel" he apparently has been taught. Jesus actually said, "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:3) -- a statement all about the spiritual realm, not the material. Politicians butcher Scripture all the time. Obama is no exception. But for him to have criticized pastors for preaching what the Bible actually says is an outrage to those of us who love God's Word. The Bible itself promises that God's Holy Spirit will Himself guide us into all truth. (John 16:13) The Bible itself says that God's Word is sharper than any two-edged sword and will indeed divide truth from error. (Hebrews 4:12) Lost men should close their mouths and listen to the Spirit of God.
Posted by: Open the Book!!! | June 25, 2008 11:19 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Consider the commandment, Honor thy Mother and Father.As a child it is referred to as a requirement to obey,as an adult it is simply a reminder to consider your parent in context to the raising of your own children, and when we do, we not only understand, but we honor our parents. We remember the despicable things we did that at the time seemed perfectly reasonable. One commandment, two interpretations.
Your Pal,
Bob
Posted by: Robert Proulx | June 25, 2008 11:18 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Excellent article. I captures a sentiment many of us Christians feel, but have a hard time articulating: The Bible is a complex metaphore, a myth, a truth, a story, an inspiration. But it has many confusing flaws (the long line of obsolete prohibitions in Leviticus and Deuteronomy).
When fundamentalists insist on literal interpretations of the Bible, it is embarrassing, and undermines their integrity. Was the earth built in 6 days? Is the earth 6,000 years old? Can we wear fabric of linen mixed with wool? Must we stone adulterers?
Clearly the Bible is not meant to be taking literally.
Dobson appears to be a shameless self-promoter. This looks like a headline-grabbing ploy. And it worked.
Posted by: Ryan Hotchkiss | June 25, 2008 11:13 AM
Report Offensive Comment
This is the 21st century yet some don’t get it. The Bronze Age science fiction books of myth, magic and superstition that continue to be embraced by far too many people should be shelved or at least filed correctly under ‘fiction’.
Should a woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night be stoned to death?
Somebody can add to the idiocy of Leviticus on this thread.
I am not American thankfully yet am astounded when some from that country claim that it is the greatest nation on earth. If that were true then 90% of the population would be intellectually evolved and religious superstition marginalized. Why profess belief in something unproven? Clerics have no particular insight into anything of value.
The sooner that it becomes illegal for parents & clerics to infect children with immoral and frightening tales of hell fire and damnation the better off all will be. Tobacco CEOs and clerics know that if they don’t hook addicts as children they loose market share.
The human mind invents gods. Biblical stories created by cave people have nothing to offer modern literate people that is unless they are happy to continue slavery, hatred of the other, misogyny etc. If gods existed and were dictating messages back then why didn’t they send something useful like how to cure diseases?
The criticism of Obama over ridiculous biblical myths is laughable. Americans seem as if they exist in a primitive mindset as we see in the cave people of Pakistan etc. I think the candidate is in reality an Atheist but thanks to 50% of Americans believing that the Flintstones is a documentary he cannot be honest.
People of America if you are unwilling to accept reality and embrace science how on earth are the destitute and emotionally bullied around the world to get a leg up?
Posted by: Lucy | June 25, 2008 11:08 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Some of the least moral people happen to be evangelical ministers - men and women of the cloth (silk of course) who peddle bigotry. Following in the footsteps of the late Mr. Falwell and the loony Mr. Robertson, Dobson spews intolerance. His attack on Obama should be a badge of honor for the Democratic nominee. Shame on Dobson, and anyone that feeds his greedy empire.
Posted by: Hal Itozis | June 25, 2008 11:07 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Sir,
I've known Jimmy Dobson since we were college freshmen together in 1954. He's led a remarkable life, and his accomplishments greatly exceed mine.
But the Jimmy Dobson I knew as a member of the Church of the Nazarene is not the Fundamentalist he has become. The Nazarene Church is conservative, but not fundamentalist, but somewhere along life’s journey Jimmy became this obstinate, Biblical literalist.
I didn’t pay attention to his political leanings until election night in 1966 when Jimmy and my wife got into an argument in a Los Angeles coffee shop over Ronald Reagan’s defeat of Governor Pat Brown in California (and I lost my first job in politics). Our paths have occasionally crossed since then, but the political direction of his life and mine have varied greatly. He once told a mutual friend that he regretted I had become a liberal Kennedy Democrat.
His rant about Senator Obama’s Biblical views is ridiculous, and it has received more media attention than it deserves, because in this election, the election of ’08, Jimmy Dobson has become irrelevant. I would put it down as his last hurrah.
When the votes are counted election day in November and Senator Obama becomes President-elect Obama and the Democrats have won huge margins in the House and Senate, Jimmy Dobson would be well advised to go back to where he started his professional life – by focusing on the family.
Sincerely,
George Mitrovich
San Diego
Posted by: Geoirge Mitrovich | June 25, 2008 11:02 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Dear American Voters, reporters, media. professionals, political parties, and presidential Nominees,
Please plead and request the media, pundits, and politician's to "Compare And Contrast" " Presidential Temperament" of our Presidential presumptive nominees? as we do for the appointments for the Supreme Court Justices of Our Greatgrand Nation.\
This nattion is build on the priciples of family, friends, fellowes, faith, funds, foundations, fun, with fairness $ fredom and without fear, favor or failure.
Yours truly,
COL. [retd] A.M.Khajawall
Disabled American Veteran
Forensic psychiatrist, Las Vegas
PS: Please talk about the " Presidential Temperament, Composer, Consistency And Caliber " is the key for our presumptive presidential Nominees. We do talk about the "Judicial Temperament" of our Supreme Court Justices nominees and so far we have failed to talk about the " Presidential Temperament " of our presumptive presidential nominees. The " Presidential Temperament " is the ultimate and in my opinion only requirement of our president as that effects every living soul here and around the world.
Thanks once again.
Posted by: COL. [retd] A.M.Khajawall | June 25, 2008 10:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Dear American Voters, reporters, media. professionals, political parties, and presidential Nominees,
Please plead and request the media, pundits, and politician's to "Compare And Contrast" " Presidential Temperament" of our Presidential presumptive nominees? as we do for the appointments for the Supreme Court Justices of Our Greatgrand Nation.\
This nattion is build on the priciples of family, friends, fellowes, faith, funds, foundations, fun, with fairness $ fredom and without fear, favor or failure.
Yours truly,
COL. [retd] A.M.Khajawall
Disabled American Veteran
Forensic psychiatrist, Las Vegas
PS: Please talk about the " Presidential Temperament, Composer, Consistency And Caliber " is the key for our presumptive presidential Nominees. We do talk about the "Judicial Temperament" of our Supreme Court Justices nominees and so far we have failed to talk about the " Presidential Temperament " of our presumptive presidential nominees. The " Presidential Temperament " is the ultimate and in my opinion only requirement of our president as that effects every living soul here and around the world.
Thanks once again.
Posted by: COL. [retd] A.M.Khajawall | June 25, 2008 10:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
What you call the "hermeneutic of doubt" is what many fundamentalists and evangelicals (they are not the same) demonize under the label of "secular humanism." What they resist is the relativization of sacred scripture; the multi-faceted blunting of the edge of their holy book. In this, Dr. Dobson is giving voice to a much more mainstream concern than you allude to: the question of what precisely we can believe in this relativistic age. Most people who spend serious amounts of time reading the bible do not believe that it is just one book among many or that it's "difficult to interpret." Respect Dr. Dobson's sincerity of belief and perhaps he will respect yours. For many people, the bible is and will necessarily remain "Holy."
Posted by: Jim | June 25, 2008 10:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment
John Shelby Spong has written in more than one of his books explaining why Christianity needs to move in new directions:
It bothers me no end that the type of business known as a Christian bookstore is full of prejudiced attitudes, non-nurturing parenting advice and poor quality scholarship.
Dobson is among the most popular products in such stores, and his books are the paradigm of how to raise a child into a prejudiced, non-questioning adult.
Posted by: Doug | June 25, 2008 10:58 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I love this article!! It is absolutely on point. Thanks for writing it. You should get out on the cable networks and explain this to people.
Posted by: Desrene Sesay | June 25, 2008 10:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
I often times feel like Dobson and others like him get press so that the liberal media can keep certain Christians in the news to use as fodder for belittling the Christian community. There are very well-educated and thought provoking Christian voices that need to been given the spotlight that only certain Christians are given. However, those Christians might give the right respectable voices, so that can't happen.