James Dobson Focuses on Obama
2008 June 24
Dobson accuses Obama of ‘distorting’ Bible
Excerpt – “COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. – As Barack Obama broadens his outreach to evangelical voters, one of the movement’s biggest names, James Dobson, accuses the likely Democratic presidential nominee of distorting the Bible and pushing a “fruitcake interpretation” of the Constitution.”
I’ve always found Dr. Dobson to be accurate.
Wow. I couldn’t agree more with Obama on this one. From a theological perspective, I agree that it’s only natural for even Christians to grapple with the sometimes diametrically opposed teachings of the Old and New Testaments. And although thankfully there is no law forbidding anyone from expressing their beliefs and advocating for their personal values, the fact is we have agreed that separation of church and state is the best way to govern our country. That means if we’re going to debate legislation, none of us can site only our own individual religious beliefs as reason enough to pass a law governing everyone else as well. Just thoughts from the other side- I realize a lot of people probably disagree, but I feel pretty strongly this way.
I’ve read Obama’s full speech, which Dobson is talking about. It’s pretty clear that Dobson is not understanding at all what Obama was talking about. Thankfully other evangelicals are coming out to defend Obama on this one. I think it’s worth considering other arguments:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/godspolitics/2008/06/dobson-and-obama-who-is-delibe.html
Independent of the facts though, I have rarely found Dobson accurate (@ cbgrace). Wasn’t he the one who wrote a book about beating our children? Maybe that’s another discussion, though…
No! Dobson did NOT write a book about “beating children”. How can a person in clear conscience post a comment like that without backing it with a direct quote?
Second, in defense of any implications, “spanking” and “beating” are two totally separate ideas.
What Obama was doing was pulling Old Testament LAW as a way to say the Bible wasn’t relevant today, and we could not pin down whose interpretation of it to use.
As to the first commenter: “diametrically opposed teachings”? EXACTLY! Now, you’ve got it!
The main POINT of the Old and New Testaments is THAT THEY ARE DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED! Great observation!
This SHOULD be a comfort to us, and lead us to the truth, not confuse us!
If a person cannot understand grace and forgiveness as opposed to the law of the Old Testament, I have severe doubts that they need to be president.
To the comment above as to church and state…you have entirely confused what the intent behind “separation of church and state” means. From the very beginning of this country, Christian principles have made us more wise than countries around us. It is that the country will not IMPOSE any religion on us that is the point…not that we will, as a people, not desire strong, principled people of character to run for President…in my mind, a forgiving follower of God is the only hope we have for that.
Above, I wrote “forgiving”, and meant also and primarily “forgiven”.
Maggie- I’m glad to hear that you do agree that the Old and New Testaments are often diametrically opposed. Just to be clear, I don’t take that to mean we ignore the Old Testament entirely. I look to the New Testament as an evolution of ideas- Jesus teaching us how to take our relationships with God to the next level.
I’m not disagreeing with you at all here. But surely you must admit that there are many evangelicals in the public light who do cite the Old Testament in their arguments for certain legislation. I felt like Obama was referencing the tactics used by those politicians and was rejecting it as faulty logic. I think it’s clear from that speech that Obama does see the difference between Old and New Testaments.
But the ultimate point of the whole speech was about separation of church and state. I don’t think I am confused about the principle (although it is hard to guess at the original framers’ intent- so it is through discussions like this that we evolve our interpretation of it as a nation). You say, “From the very beginning of this country, Christian principles have made us more wise than countries around us.” I think that is such a subjective statement, and frankly I don’t agree. There are certain areas in which the US falls way behind other countries socially. Even after 3 centries I think our country is great in some areas but also has a lot to learn.
You stress the importance of the concept that we do not FORCE one religion on everyone. Well, part of that involves using other arguments besides religious ones when deciding on legislation. While religion may influence our moral compasses, which in turn influences our outlook on the world and what is the best solution, we cannot justify a law or policy SOLELY based on a religious tenet. If we did, it would exclude others outside of that religion from the discourse. That was the point Obama was making.
I am NOT saying that we, as you say, “do not desire strong, principled people of character to run for President.” While I agree that we have historically had an overall Christian tradition, it in NO WAY should serve as a prerequisite for our leaders. It is possible to be moral without being Christian. Many religions worship the same God through different texts with very similar moral codes and lessons. Obama is also clearly Christian, but that does not seem to satisfy you. I think the issue is that he does not share your particular Christian principles. Maybe that’s just a difference we’re always going to have with our leaders- I think it’s better to consider character, but look more to how they’ll apply their faith to steering our country through legislation and policy.
Grace- I haven’t read all of the Dobson book on parenting (because I found it a little disturbing). Don’t get me wrong- I believe in strict discipline, but his stories of personal experience struck me as weird. I just didn’t see anything of value in it. I don’t think he used the word “beating,” though.
Maggie- He does talk about “whipping” and using rods and other objects to hurt children. To me, that is more than spanking. He also recommends doing it to young infants. I just think it’s questionable. And in my mind, if religious views are going to be considered as evidence of moral values in our public leaders, how they treat their children can be as well.
Again, I’d like to see those quotes from the books you refer to, Kaitlyn, and what the context is exactly that you are disturbed about.
LET ME BE CLEAR HERE: Dobson has in no way condones spanking “infants”. He promotes healthy discipline. Nothing abusive, and certainly not with hard tools.
The “rod” you suggest, in Biblical context, refers to the use of a reed-like, flexible plant referred to as a “rod” in that day. He explains this.
I have not listened to Obama’s full speech. Here, I do not declare a support of lack thereof for any cantidate here as you suggested.
My point is simply that religion threads through all of society and people–it cannot help but have a very real bearing on how they make decisions. If, for example, you belief what Psalm 139 says, that God “created me from my inmost being, he knit me together in my mother’s womb”…that is going to affect your opinion of public issues like abortion.
It is not MY perscribed notion of what key issues are, but I will say that huge issues of life and death are bigger than the economy and gas prices. How we’ve gotten confused about priority is beyond me.
A leader who follows God will realize we don’t have God’s blessing apart from obedience. That leader may be charasmatic, popular, and have great ideas, but if they are only about pleasing people and leading people instead of securing God’s blessing, we have a problem as a nation. Our economy will only get worse, and we need to learn from hard times a few lessons about what is really important again.
To try to separate faith from leadership or legislation is impossible.
So, to speak about Obama–he says he mentioned weddings and baptisms. He said his pastor prayed with his family when they decided to run, but he said the man was a friend, but not a spiritual mentor. He said he did not know the inflammatory topics his pastor preached about.
Based on that information, it seems to me he has not been a part of a church who disciples…yes, I want more than just base-line Christianity. I want someone sold out in their walk with Christ as a leader. Do we have that person in line for the presidency? Why or why not?
Any person hurt by this pastor as he has been is of great concern if he is not plugged in anywhere for spiritual direction and mentoring through a presidency.
You know, wisdom is Jesus personified, according to the Bible, which is the revealed word of God. It is the only book that deals with the forgiveness of sin and secures God’s blessing and a place for us in heaven as a result.
We have freedom to believe and worship however we wish, but that does not mean God will bless us if we follow those ways. It’s important we make this distinction. We call ourselves a “Christian nation”, but this is no longer true because we do not know or walk in Biblical truth. We are about what feels good and works best for us.
Scripture teachers that God Himself raises leaders and causes them to fall.
Scripture teaches whoever is not for God through Jesus is against him. There is no middle ground there. We use “religion” so broadly.
I read the Old Testament about Kings–they either followed God wholeheartedly and had his blessing, or they did things sort of, kind of, and fell under judgment.
There are good people out there who are not particularly religious people. Still, I long for leaders with a strong faith in God through Jesus and an active, mature faith, just as is called for in church leadership. Faith believes in and trusts in a God bigger than itself. I can’t imagine a time of critical decision not totally reliant on God to guide my decision making. While we also need good counsel of other leaders and skilled leaders., we need reliance on God. When we fail to be a Christian nation, guided by Christian principles…may God have mercy on the remnant that is left.
I agree that some people use Old Testament principles to try to create legislation to suit their pet issues, however…a wise leader and a mature Christian leader will know the difference by much time spent in the Word themselves. They can discern. That is why a deep walk is needed.
It should never be this person’s interpretation or that person’s interpretation, but what God thinks on the matter. Yes, to the best of our ability to seek out truth through Biblical guidelines as best as we can understand God’s heart, we need to follow that in our legislation.