08.06.25wed
Dobson vs. Obama
James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, gave all the news agencies (oh, and bloggers like myself) something to go off about this week. Dobson confronted Obama over a speech he gave in 2006 which seems to say the Bible and religious values have no place in deciding public policy.
The verbal firestorm was sparked by this statement from Obama...
Which passages of scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is okay and that eating shellfish is an abomination? Or we could go with Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount – a passage that is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application?
People who do not have a good understanding of the Bible – and this is not saying Christians, vs. non-Chirstians... simply anyone who has not taken the time to understand what the Old Testament represents and what the New Testament represents – will bring up an individual verse out of the Bible and suggest it is to be taken literal. They don’t mention the context of the verse, who the verse was spoken to, or any historical perspective.
Obama did just that in his speech.
Leviticus is a book that primarily speaks of offerings, both gifts to God and offerings as a way to atone for your sins. What is described in this book is not something that we are told to follow, simply because it was trumped by Jesus coming to die for our sins.
Even the word “atonement” that is used in this book shows the difference in what the Jewish people were required, and what we are now required. The hebrew word used in this book meant “to cover”, whereas in the New Testament the word used means “to make one with”. The Jewish people were able to use these sacrifices to cover their sin. We can now be one with God because Jesus’ sacrifice doesn’t cover our since, it removes it.
As I stated previously, it is ludicrous to pull one sentence from the Bible and ask if this is something we should be basing our laws on. Obama suggests that “folks haven’t been reading their Bible.” He’s obviously read it, but did he learn it?
“I think he’s deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology,” Dobson said, “... he is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter.”
Obama replied, “there’s no theological work being done in that speech in terms of the Bible.”
But Dobson is correct here. While Obama argues that he is not doing any theological work in his speech, he is in fact distorting something he found in the Bible in order to make is fit his views.
Continuing on statements made in Obama’s speech...
I have to explain why abortion violates some principal that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.
This smacks of the current “tolerance” crap in our country. There’s a problem here in that someone has to dictate what is or is not moral. If what Obama is stating is correct, morals are a sliding scale based on how we as a country feel right now.
I’m reminded of the controversial comparison between two men marrying each other and a man marrying a horse. The proponents of gay marriages say that it’s obvious that a man marrying a horse is ridiculous and obviously immoral. True... today it is. But if morality can be easily shifted simply by enough of the public changing their opinion, then why is it impossible to think horse marriages will be the highlight of a future election?
Stephanie Dube blogged, “in politics, we can’t just demand a law because the principle is in the Bible. If we do that, then someday we’ll find laws passed based on other religions that might destroy our own freedoms.” But she’s missing an important point. Like it or not, this country was founded on biblical principals. People like Dobson are upset because what Obama is doing is exactly what she is warning against. Taking the Bible out of our laws is exactly the same as making laws based on other religions.
We have to find an absolute. There has to be a solid line defining what is right and what is wrong. And there’s only one person who ever made that absolute.
This verbal fight between Dobson and Obama has accomplished one positive thing... it’s brought some important issues to the forefront of people’s minds. It has sparked a debate and a dialog with a lot of people over who or what determines what is and what is not moral. This is a decision this country needs to make. We have 92% of this country who claim to have a belief in God, yet it is obvious that a majority do not want God to be this country’s moral compass. I probably won’t like what the final decision is, but it is time for this country to make a stand on whether we are really going to be a Christian nation as it was founded, or whether we will just get along with everybody. You can’t have both.
