« Howard Dean appears at faith caucus | Main | Why Cameron Strang's inbox is overflowing »

August 28, 2008

A peek into Obama's view of faith

Douglas Kmiec of Pepperdine University Law School revealed a portion of the meeting Barack Obama had with religious leaders in Chicago a few months ago in the faith caucus this afternoon.

"Franklin Graham asked him, 'Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life?'
"Sen. Obama paused and he thought. And he thought very carefully. He said, Reverend, he is my way.
"(Graham) No, no, is he THE way? Of course, the Reverend was making a point.
"(Kmiec) Our senator, the next president of the United States, a man of great intelligence and great integrity and great honesty, even if he’s not speaking in a place where he’s completely welcome. His message is consistent. No, Reverend, the person in my life who was of great service and most wonderful exemplar was my mother, and she never had the blessing of baptism. It is my understanding of faith that I will see her again in eternity. That she was not lost to salvation. One can dispute the theology, one can dispute the traditions, one can’t dispute the senator’s faith, commitment, his love of family and his authenticity. Barack Obama’s the real deal, and even Republicans can see it."

Comments

Why can't anyone present a valid birth certificate for this man?

Hmmm, so he won't say that Christ is the only way so I guess this is also why he was able to sit under racist teaching for so many years at his church in Chicago. This is a man of integrity? No, I'd rather say this is a man who will pander to whatever group is listening to him. Even Oprah left Obama's church because she at least has the wisdom to know when she's hearing evil, hate-filled words. Do we really want a man who has less wisdom than Oprah leading our country?

If the above really transpired and I was Obama, I'd be miffed that someone else answered for me with a non-answer. If Obama didn't follow up with HIS OWN response, that means he's okay with the non-answer.

Now where's the courage I've been looking for? Why can't Obama take a position either way and not wuss out? If he did, he'd gain more supporters than he'd lose, no matter whether he answered "yes" or "no." Just answer already; it's a valid question since he thought it worth meeting with those religious leaders.

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. John 14:6. Is Barrack Obama rewriting the gospel? Based on his comments I have to question whether Jesus is truly Lord in Barrack Obama's life. True faith will always be validated by obedience. Obedience to God's word.

"If you abide in My word you are my disciples indeed" John 8:31

What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? James 2:14

Rev. Wright is not a racist. He was criticizing "whiteness," an exploitive caste system that should be abolished, but still hangs on.

First of all, Republicans cannot see his faith, because his faith is one he has created. Yes, I can dispute his theolgy because it is not Christian theoogy. He has created a god in the image that fits his way of thinking and life. To avoid the question regarding Jesus being THE way just shows a man who compromises or is confused and will lead a confused and compromised administration. He may be a good famiy man (but so is McCain and President Bush). So, yes, his faith CAN be disputed.

He has produced a valid birth certificate. His opponent is the one who was born outside the US.

While I fully accept that McCain is a valid candidate (not that I would dream of voting for a states' rights activist), does the Constitution really make exceptions for being born outside the US, but still under an American flag? I think the Supreme Court has said yes, in another case, but I could be wrong.

It's not what I think, but what the Supreme Court thinks. I think anyone who would go on Charley Rose and proclaim his party as being all about states' rights, as I saw Sen. McCain do, should have been impeached for sedition.

State's rights, after all, is what post-war Confederates claimed they were fighting for. States' rights is the political theory of white privilege, male privilege, class privilege, Protestant privilege. Strom Thurman didn't name his segregationist, white power party the "States' Rights Party" for nothing. I lost all respect for Sen. McCain at that moment. He showed himself to be intellectually bankrupt with that proclamation. I don't think he's a man of honor at all, why would he do that? His campaign has reflected that. Not to mention that Sen. McCain's ancestors directly owned slaves...so he should be more thoughtful and informed about what he's doing...but then, I think he might just well be very cognizant of his actions.

Sen. McCain's run for our highest office started off comparing the Black man who is his opponent to a woman, a woman who has a reputation for promiscuity, of being intellectually dim, of having gone to jail, of having a low IQ, of having never worked a day in her life...this about a man who's far better educated, who didn't get into his college of choice because of who his father was, who was a professor at a prestigious school, an editor of a prestigious journal, who is quite accomplished by any standard, is a fellow senator, and who is undoubtedly smarter than Sen. McCain, but maybe not as hungry for raw, naked power as an entitlement because of who he is, from a well known family, rich because of whom he married, and famous for being a "maverick." One who deliberately doesn't follow the rules...like not reporting vacations paid for by a crook.

Sen. McCain's other campaign advertising suggest that the Black candidate will take your money, your job and is a threat to your family and America. Undoubtedly, a Black man running for our highest office is all part of an Illuminati conspiracy, right Sen. McCain?

The best the Black candidate can be, McCain's ads are saying, is a celebrity, a frivolous diversion...not fit to be a lead.

Not to mention that the Black man (who does know how many houses he owns and who was a community organizer in a downtrodden neighborhood), is out of touch with middle class (read "white") values. What a shameless, immoral, throwback to Jim Crow campaign is Sen. McCain running, at least in my state?

In any case, I expect my President to be more than the President by and for the Middle Class, though that would be an improvement over the current President, who seems to be the President of a family dynasty and hangers on. America isn't only the country of the middle class. The pobrecito vet panhandling me for change also owns America. He also fought for it, or at least was told that was what he was doing. The President is also his President.

(I know for a fact that he's a Vietnam vet like McCain. I've seen his discharge papers. For full disclosure, I was also in the military during the Vietnam era, but wasn't stationed there. Perhaps because I'm very nearsighted?)

I do believe that there is a distinction in spiritual terms of Christ being the way and Him being "my way". When the Lord said the former in John 14:6, the disciples were in principle at the entry point-Christ-who desired that they would take Him as everything; hence the Lord Jesus made such a statement of supreme significance yet insofar as it related to His disciples. It was objective to ones who like Phillip did not realize that the Lord is in the Father and the Father in Him (pointing to the oneness of the Triune God). The Lord being "my way" (as Obama so stated) implies a subjectivity that evidences a real and vital belief and oneness with Christ in subjective faith (cf. John 14:1). Mr Graham is trying to politicise the Christian faith (inasmuch as George W Bush did) to make it as general as possible (and on the other hand make it a hypocritical front of attack implicitly to denigrate Obama's faith in Christ) without the subjective, essentially personal and intimate side of such a faith in Christ. To employ the word of God to fulfill political ends must command much outrage from the genuine Christians in America and elsewhere.

Rev. Graham was really asking if Sen. Obama wouldn't think about it much, let alone attempt to do something, about states' rights ideology, the political theory of privilege...white privilege, male privilege, class privilege, Protestant privilege.

If you even wish that you will be reunited in eternity with your unbaptized mother, you're threatening that whole edifice of privilege (instead of rights) that was legitimated by the theological foundations of literal interpretation and declarations of inerrancy. As if anyone could even know that something is without error without actually being inerrant themselves.

Some things, such as consigning your unbaptized mother to eternal hell just because of her integrity, have to be done. It's God's inerrant will that His royal race be God's regents on Earth. Why do you think Pat Robertson named his college "Regent University?"

Sen. Obama may, under the one drop rule that once ruled America with an iron claw, may not be "white," but he is a male Protestant who's sold a lot of books that made a lot of money. Surely he'll want to continue the system of privilege...of might makes right, of he who has the gold makes the rules, of greedy exploitation of others in God's name, right? One can pretend that one is colorblind...for awhile anyway. Though in conservative circles, "colorblind" usually means blind to injustices to people of color.

Back in the Civil Rights era, Christianity Today, as you could predict with it's anti-gay nonsense, worried that states' rights was being eroded. White privilege was more important than real equality under the law. Despite what the great hypocrite wrote in the Declaration of Independence, people don't have God given inalienable rights, but inherited privileges and duties anointed upon their humble selves by God.

The first major issue on racism gave equal time to segregationists, and when has CT ever again given equal time to people it really opposes?

And of course, as you could predict if you didn't know, of CT's legendary petulant hostility to Martin Luther King Jr.during his lifetime, which is now grimly humorous, given that the Chairman of the Board later claimed to be great pals with MLK Jr., which was briefly true. True, if you call trying to neutralize someone's growing influences by recruiting him to your organization and becoming his boss "being a friend." However, the Chairman of the Board is rarely mentioned outside an occasional footnote in King biographies.

Jesus is 'my way'not THE way
salvation by works= unbaptized mother
salvation by integrity = mother
+denying Jesus as greatest service and example

= not saved by grace through faith

Thanks for the answer to my question as to what the Democratic candidate's definition of what a Christian is all about~