It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dobson accuses Obama of 'distorting' Bible

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
maybe the reason there is no thread about mccain's religious beliefs, is that people who would vote for obama are more concerned about tangible solutions to this countries problems and consider one's religion to be of a
personal and private nature.



I don't fully buy into that, as many of those who will be voting for Obama are those who have talked in a derisory manner about Bush's faith.


For me, I don't know about this one religion idea, but quite simply, belonging to a church with those mission statements is a tad worrying- try and look at it in reverse, a white politician belonging to one of the pro white Christian organisations on the extreme end of the spectrum, with "pro white" agendas (no matter how "positive)




posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 09:50 AM
link   
This is the type of thing that really gets under my skin. James Dobson, one of the most outspoken, extreme, fearful, hateful and, unfortunately, most influential leaders of modern, far-right Christian Dominionist has the audacity to accuse OBAMA of distorting Christianity. Well, "judge not lest ye be judged," buddy. The fact that Dobson is implying that Obama is saying something that he is not aside, my bet is that this has more to do with Dobson's ego than anything else. I mean, imagine, a far-right fundamentalist Christian having his views compared to that of Al Sharpton? From the perspective of a right-winger, I'd imagine that this would be considered incredibly slanderous, considering how they love to slander Rev. Sharpton.

Back to the matter at hand, though. I love how Obama suddenly becomes an intolerant zealot who wants to push for a single vision of a single religion for all Americans, its like clockwork.


"Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?" Obama said. "Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?"


What really sticks out to me are the first two words...and I think they are the most important and overlooked by Dobson....and perhaps some of the readers and posters in the thread... "Even if". "Even if" implies that the one speaking those words knows that the situation is not the case. "Even if" implies, to the average person, that the nature of the following hypothetical is extreme. "Even if" does not imply desire. "Even if" does not mean that Obama wants America to be a single country ruled by a single version of a single religion.

And on the point of "Folks haven't been reading their Bibles." I would wager that Obama is right. People don’t' read nearly as much as they used to...especially theological texts. The fact is that the texts are full of a bunch of crap that Christians don't obey because of, go figure, the manners in which they choose to interpret the Bible itself, which of course gives rise to the various sects of Christianity, of whom we don't know which one to listen to.

Methinks the man doth protest too much. Perhaps a bit of psychodynamic projection. It has been mentioned that while Dobson may have a single-minded vision of the role of Christianity in the nation, and many of his affiliations and previous statements make it very clear that he is quite particular in exactly WHICH vision the Salvation of the Nation, so to speak, will be found; he, however, is not the presidential candidate, and therefore, somehow is less of a threat religious freedoms. The fact is, he is a Dominionist Christian, that means that he believes that society as a whole should be ruled under religious doctrines(gee, that sounds an awful lot like those 'islamofascists' that we're doing such a great job fighting)...it would be a very naive individual who did not believe that Dobson was in favour of pushing a political agenda of his own that would place his chosen version of a chosen ideology at the top of the political pyramid.

End of the day, to me, Dobson is trying to promote the wrong message for his side's political benefit. It is clear that what Obama was trying say, without saying, is that he is in favour of a secular government. And Dobson doesn't like this one bit. so to get his 'congregation' fired up for the election, and lets face it, the far-right Christians are a very powerful lobby to have on your side, he's turning the whole thing into a matter of Obama threatening their belief system and their right to believe...when if they had their way they would enforce at the end of a jackboot on everyone else.

/rant



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I think part of this issue identifies one of the most glaring differences between Obama's church and Christian churches in general. Christian preachers do exactly that, they preach. They open their Bibles, stand before their congregation, and spread the word of Jesus. Obama's preacher, Jeremiah Wright, ranted, raved, and made an ass out of himself in virtually every video clip I've seen of him. I have yet to see a single one in which he's actually preaching or even using the Bible. Instead his "sermons" appear to be composed more of whining and complaining about societies' woes while demonstrating a nonexistant level of tact and a high degree of ignorance crowing over anything that goes wrong against those he believes have somehow "wronged" the black man.

Obama isn't very bright, but he's a hell of a trained parrot. He appears to have the gift of being able to be told what to say and then deliver it masterfully and elloquently... and let's be honest, he's not the first presidential candidate to espouse this quality, but he may be better at it than any of his predecessors. So far I have yet to see him say anything that wasn't first said to him and I think that's what we're seeing here. He's absorbed some of Wright's venom over the years and he's calling on it right now in an effort to reach out to the evangelicals which the DNC has watched flee in droves since Reagan came along. This is where the "Obama isn't too bright" comes in. I honestly believe Obama is probably scratching his head thinking "Hmm... the congregation ate this up with silver spoons when Rev. Wright said it. What's wrong with these people?" Never once realizing that he's spent the last 20 years attending a weekly political rally instead of a religious education service. He's walking into battle completely unarmed, attempting to politicize Christianity for his own gain, and when someone (like Dobson) calls him on it he expects everyone to jump on his side and call it an unfair attack.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder

Originally posted by jimmyx
maybe the reason there is no thread about mccain's religious beliefs, is that people who would vote for obama are more concerned about tangible solutions to this countries problems and consider one's religion to be of a
personal and private nature.



I don't fully buy into that, as many of those who will be voting for Obama are those who have talked in a derisory manner about Bush's faith.


For me, I don't know about this one religion idea, but quite simply, belonging to a church with those mission statements is a tad worrying- try and look at it in reverse, a white politician belonging to one of the pro white Christian organisations on the extreme end of the spectrum, with "pro white" agendas (no matter how "positive)


maybe like Ronald Reagan being a self-proclaimed "born-again christian"

www.adherents.com...

[edit on 24-6-2008 by jimmyx]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   
I understand that what our leaders believe is a criterion we apply to determining whether we would endorse them for public office.

I understand that dogma and ideology overlap in their application of political planning and public relations.

What I have a hard time understanding is why we get so bent out of shape, when in reality - what they believe is not only supposed to be irrelevant insofar as how they govern, but we have clear Constitutional protections against their being able to bring their personal religious preferences into the law.

Our executive administration, our judiciary, nor our legislative representatives (such as they are) can not allow ANYONE'S religious belief to affect the citizens of the nation, THEY DO NOT HAVE THAT POWER.

We, as a nation, would have to ALLOW it to happen.

Of course, this is all theory.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant

Originally posted by Shar
So no one has anything to say about this. Everyone is ok with what he is saying?


No one wants to defend christianity.

It's become taboo.



I'll gladly defend Christianity!

Obama is picking and choosing references from the Bible that work for his speech. Dobson is right in this instance.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by sos37


I'll gladly defend Christianity!

Obama is picking and choosing references from the Bible that work for his speech. Dobson is right in this instance.


it's a fair point, as a Christian he should know that the New Testament/Jesus is a filter of what went before in the Old Testament

Silly references from the elitist bore that is Obama



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by madhatr137
 


I seriously have no idea where most of this thread came from. I had to read the entire thing to make sure that someone, somewhere had pointed out the obvious. I am glad you did.

Read it very carefully people. It is put in a hypothetical context. He is saying IF there was only Christians in America, which Christianity would we use. It is a very good question. Do we go Baptist, Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, LDS, Jehovah's Witness? It makes the point, that Christians read the same book, but take something different away from it. You cannot base a society on something that has so many very different versions of the same thing. I think the reason he said about people reading the bible is that too many people now a days spout off about religious stuff, but have never actually read the bible themselves. They are spouting someone else's take on something, without having that understanding for themselves.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I have never been a strong Christian; I'm very luke warm on this subject. When my wife and son got sick, I had no one to turn to but my King (...u may recall his name is Jesus; I almost forgot it too).

When the tires hit the road and life is really dark, somehow the "One" Obama Religion is a bit empty.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rook1545
I seriously have no idea where most of this thread came from. I had to read the entire thing to make sure that someone, somewhere had pointed out the obvious. I am glad you did.

Read it very carefully people. It is put in a hypothetical context. He is saying IF there was only Christians in America, which Christianity would we use. It is a very good question. Do we go Baptist, Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, LDS, Jehovah's Witness? It makes the point, that Christians read the same book, but take something different away from it. You cannot base a society on something that has so many very different versions of the same thing. I think the reason he said about people reading the bible is that too many people now a days spout off about religious stuff, but have never actually read the bible themselves. They are spouting someone else's take on something, without having that understanding for themselves.



Ironically, his meaningless, contextual free references from the Old Testament show a gross lack of understanding



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by madhatr137
 


Exactly so madhatr. I have read in MSM that Dobson meets with Bush at least 3 times a week, where he gives advice to him. I think you have summed up Dobson very well and his ambition and ego have taken a dent, so he projects his own Shadow onto Obama; that of a one-track, one version only of Christianity.

Obama's statements are taken completely out of context, which is why it's hard to determine exactly what he's responding to, but he never said ONE WORD about wanting one religion for the U.S.

I grew up working in my dad's public relations office, the largest single-owner PR agency west of the Mississippi. He had many accounts from politicians and was one of the directors of Reagan's campaign. If you know anything about PR, then you know that running for prez becomes the biggest propaganda machine there is. I learned alot from working with him in his office, most especially about how to spin propaganda. Here are some of the common techniques that journalists use to spin the issues:

- only giving a miniscule amount of information about what was said or what happened, i.e. sound bytes. Anything can be taken out of context and spun any way that want to. You can twist anyone's words or actions around in any number of ways.

- Backing things up with faulty research, which is more disinformation.

- Hitting people in sensitive areas such as religion and political biases.

- The person doing the attacking is projecting his/her own faults onto the opponent (Dobson is a good example here).

- Only giving one side of the story.

- Omitting hugely important details.

- WRiting an article in such a way that it really makes no sense, if you read it thoroughly. This article on Obama is a good example; we have no idea what he was referring to when he made his statements.

These are just a few examples, there are tons more.

One more thing: Obama is no dummy. He is very intelligent and very articulate. He received his law degree from Harvard, which is a school you can't get into unless you have the grades and the smarts. A law degree is actually a doctorate-level degree and obtaining a law degree from Harvard is no easy thing. He also was the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review, a prestigious and coveted position. And he did all of this without his daddy's money or influence, like Bush, who was a C minus student and only got into Yale because all you need is money and influence to go there.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Jesus did not undo the Old Testament. He only allows you to be forgiven for violating it's terms. So Obama's references to OT passages are completely valid. Valid or not, his question was rhetorical, which version of Christianity shall we follow? He is pointing out the numerous flavors.

Dobson's judgemental political version of Christianity where he decides what is moral or not is likely to send more people to hell than some of the loony Christian cults who may have strange beliefs but have love in their hearts. I find no love in Dobson's heart, which is sad. If he is one of your heroes you may want to read your Bible a little more and then compare what you find to his narrow interpretations. It could be liberating and the holy spirit may then truly inspire your life.

The far right conservative church is not all of Christianity. They are just a vocal and organized group with a political agenda. They don't campaign for Jesus, they campaign for their own power. We see examples in this thread of those who try to brow beat with their "version" of Christianity. They are the ones we should be afraid of and whose candidates need to be voted out of office.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


Excellent, you've made a step in the right direction.

Now then, why do i get the feeling that if this was 10 years ago, Obama would have faced the full fury of the christian masses for his blasphemy?



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Orygun
 


This is incorrect. Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament law. He taught that love for God, and love for your fellow man trumped Mosaic law. Obama has no grasp on his Bible. The Old Testament's usefulness to Christians is in it's historical account of the roots of Christianity, an account of the prophecies leading to Christ's life & sacrifice, and the beauty and poetry found in books like the Psalms and the Song of Solomon. Christ never claimed to abollish the 10 Commandments because he stated that they perfectly fit within the two "new" laws of the new covenant, again, love God, love your neighbor. He did, however, state clearly that "no thing be unclean which God has made" in regards to food, for example. He also taught equality, not just from man to man, but by elevating women, as well.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


That is why when people in politics and in religion comes with their out of butt opinions I disregard them as nothing more than propaganda.

In a nation with so many problems due to the magnitude of the corruption going rampant in our government and in religious circles, this is nothing that a spin to keep the people blind and fighting each other, so they do not see the real trouble in this nation.

pity.






posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Shar
 


Why is he saying things like this? Because for YEARS fundamentalists like DObson have been shoving THEIR interpretation of biblical ideals down everyone throats as a basis for their bigotry while ignoring other teachings in the bible because well obviously, times were different then. PFFFT

Funny to hear Dobson claim that OBAMA is distorting the bible. Freaking pot calling the kettle black if you ask me.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant

Originally posted by Shar
So no one has anything to say about this. Everyone is ok with what he is saying?


No one wants to defend christianity.

It's become taboo.



I'll gladly defend Christianity!

Obama is picking and choosing references from the Bible that work for his speech. Dobson is right in this instance.


Dobson also picks and chooses references from the bible that work for his preaching. I believe THAT was what Obama was trying to point out.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by WackAMole
 


Ultimately your words mean little, wackamole.

Dobson was right in this instance.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder

Originally posted by sos37


I'll gladly defend Christianity!

Obama is picking and choosing references from the Bible that work for his speech. Dobson is right in this instance.


it's a fair point, as a Christian he should know that the New Testament/Jesus is a filter of what went before in the Old Testament

Silly references from the elitist bore that is Obama


You guys are missing the point. Yes, everyone knows that the New Testament largely replaced the Old Testament. What Obama is talking about is the fact that the Old Testament is STILL considered to be a part of the Holy Bible and written by God himself, just as the New Testament is thought of. It doesn't matter that in Christianity the laws of Leviticus are no longer relevant. What does matter is that those laws, according to the Christian viewpoint, were given to man by God...

And really, Christians should know how much of the Old Testament is still vitally important to their religion; Dobson does, he is just playing all of you like the over-excited people that you are.

Obama is essentially making the argument that the Bible is open to many interpretations, and that he is more interested in a religion of love and forgiveness than of a wrathful God who spends all day condemning various activities.

This is one of the first threads that I have posted in at ATS in a long time. Late last summer this place got way too political, and there was too much uninformed fear mongering and worshipping at the feet of paranoid rumors - "Obama is a Muslim that want's to impose Shari'a Law in the US!!".

Now, I will be the first to admit that Obama has problems when it comes to certain areas of his presidential campaign. However, the bashing that he takes here from paranoid people who have no desire to PROVE or DISCUSS anything is disgusting.

The OP of this thread is a great example; She is obviously pulling the idea of Obama trying to impose one religion out of thin air, disregarding the facts that even IF Obama wanted to do so, it would be highly illegal and next to impossible. Next, she brings up suggestions of Islam echoing the moronic "is he secretly a Muslim?" theories from a few months ago... and all the while, she is taking the side of James Dobson, who DOES in fact want to impose one religion on the country, and is one of the strictest adherents to biblical law in modern right-wing Christianity today.

If this is what Denying Ignorance is these days, than this place has come down pretty far.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 01:21 PM
link   
It's a freaking book written by man...That it is a major issue in an election race in a so called advanced nation such as the U.S is completly beyond me.




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join