Obama's Muslim, er ah, Christian Faith

During the 2008 presidential campaign, then candidate Barrack Obama remarked during an interview that his opponent John McCain had not commented on his (Obama’s) Muslim faith.

Obama did not realize his misstatement until the interviewer Chris Wallace said “you mean your Christian faith. Obama agreed with Wallace’s correction. The flub was observed by some commentators, but like his other misstatements there was no enduring fallout.

The question remains, why would anyone make such a mistake? One can understand, for instance, Obama’s error in stating that he had been to 57 states. But it’s different when it comes to one’s religious beliefs. After all, he had been a member of Jeremiah Wright’s church for some 20 years and was a self-styled Christian. This was certainly more than a slip of the tongue.

Almost immediately after his inauguration, Obama embarked on his “apologize to Islam tour.” He “announced” that America was not a Christian nation. He did not clarify what he meant by this announcement. Of course, America was not and never had been a Christian nation in any formal legal sense. It certainly had been a Christian nation in terms of its philosophy and political orientation.

The president apparently thought he had sufficiently circumcised the nations Christian heritage and turned his attention from apologizing to Muslims for the barbaric treatment they had received at the hand of their American oppressors, to apologizing for, i.e., defending Islam.

In the face of continuing violence by Muslim terrorists, he declared that their actions were not the result of Islamic beliefs but were the actions of those who perverted the true teachings of Islam. In a recent statement, he even declared that Islam had always played an important role in the life of America, even from the founding. What this role was he did not say.

There was a “made-for tv” movie sometime in the 80s concerning the Roman army’s assault on a band of renegade Jews at the mountain-top fortress at Masada. After engaging in every atrocity imaginable, including launching Jewish prisoners from catapults, the Roman general, portrayed by Peter O’Toole declared to the leader of the Jewish renegades, Peter Strauss, during a clandestine meeting down the mountain, that “this is not Rome.” After repeating this phrase for the second time, Strauss stated how absurd this was in light of the fact that it was the Romans who were committing the outrages.

Well, it seems to me that the president is engaging in a similar case of verbal legerdemain. In the face of continued violence against Christian culture by confessed Muslim terrorists, Obama continually denies that they are acts of terror or, at least they are not motivated by a genuine understanding of the Prophet’s teachings. What the president hopes to gain by this denial in the face of indisputable fact is difficult to understand. Difficult perhaps, but not impossible.

Some time ago, I wrote a piece entitled "Our First Post-Modern President or Why Obama Can't Lie" Without re-posting the entire essay (please read), my point was to explain how Obama’s frequent misrepresentations could not be understood in the traditional sense of lying (ala Bill and Hillary), but in the context of the Post-modern paradigm that controls most of popular intellectual discourse, viz truth is not a fixed set of propositions but is determined by the context in which claims are asserted. In this case, Obama is not lying; he is simply declaring the truth from a different perspective. He is not trying to deny or hide the facts; rather he is creating truth by his statements. Thus, the terrorists are not Islamic, regardless of how often they declare their allegiance to Allah and the Prophet, because they cannot be. In short, he is engaging in the rebellion against God’s authority that has characterized human behavior since Eve overthrew God’s judgment for her own.

Most Christians are not interested in such matters and so continue to misinterpret the conflict in which they are engaged. Obama is not speaking the truth and must be challenged’ of his words. The problem is not Obama’s errant world-view, a world-view that is clearly anti-Christian, but the failure of Christians to think and act as followers of Christ. As Christians, we can only declare Islam to be what it is, an anti-Christian, pagan religion.

We should hope and pray for a Christian of sufficient courage and standing to challenge Obama’s defense of this false religion in the face of “his Christian faith.”

Saving America - A Prescription For Reclaiming Christian Culture

"Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you." 2 Cor 6:17

"Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men."

 "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." Matt. 5:13 & 16

America is in trouble; that is not in question. The question is, what can/should we as Christians do to solve the problem. That question can be answered in one word - Separation. Separation is the essence of holiness. It should be the measure by which we live and the foundation of our involvement in society.

God's plan for Israel was Separation from the world in which they lived: they were to be a peculiar people, totally different from the nations around them. It was their constant failure to be separated that was the cause of His judgement.

America was founded by separatists. The Pilgrims had separated themselves from the corrupt church/state system under which they lived in England. Their reason for relocating to America was not, as the state schools teach, for religious freedom - they had that in Holland. Their purpose was to establish a social and political system based on distinctly Christian/biblical principles. Without this commitment, they would never have been able to endure the hardships they faced in their new home.

True holiness/separation begins in the heart. Our unwillingness to be truly separate is an indication that our hearts are not as they should be - "where your treasure is, there will your heart be also." The following are offered as a beginning.

Separate from the world's indoctrination system - get your kids out of the state schools. If Christians would withdraw their children en masse, it would have an incalculable impact on the culture. Not only would it remove a huge number of students who would, hopefully, receive a truly Christian education, but it would be a tremendous witness to the world. 

This question should settle the matter for all true Christians: Would the Jews have allowed the Philistines to educate their children? 

If we are unwilling to do such a small thing, do we really imagine that we will be willing to do great things when they are required of us. If we say we are unable to do this, we are saying that God is unable to provide what is necessary to carry out his will. The primary option should be parent directed home education, but every church that has a building could operate a day school. Tuition could be free or minimal to cover expenses. 

Separate from the world's amusements. If one phrase can be used to describe American culture, it is "entertainment obsessed." This obsession is present in virtually every area of our daily experience - even pastors make references to sports in their sermons; Billy Graham features athletes at his crusades. It is characterized by the amount of time and money that are spent on motion pictures, television, sports and the manner in which we assign celebrity status to entertainers and athletes. Most Christians know all about the current movies; they know which teams are in the playoffs; they even know the latest doings of the Kardasian family.

Separate from the world's economic system - consumerism. Get out of debt; do not incur additional debt. Be content with what we have. Lay up treasures in heaven, not on earth.

Separate from the world's political expectations - stop looking for a savior. Christians display the same expectation as the pagan element in our society, i.e. we must find the right person to lead us into the right way (preferably without requiring any work on our part). We argue over which candidate can solve our problems. This mindset dishonors the Lord we claim to serve.

Separate from the world's military mentality. The founders were afraid of a standing army; they knew the damage that such a force could pose to liberty and the tendency toward "meddling" that it encouraged. Our nation has been in almost a constant state of conflict since the second world war - none of it has been for national defense. 

Citizens should only engage in armed conflict when the life of the nation is at state. No concern for "national interest" justifies a Christian engaging in war. It is proper to honor those who serve to protect their country, but it is improper to glorify and celebrate war, and to teach our children that military service is to be pursued.

Separate from the world's support system. Christ never intended for his people to live in isolation; the church was to be a physical community, not merely a gathering place for infrequent worship. The book of Acts describes a people who were united around a common purpose; the sharing characterized by the church at Jerusalem following Pentecost was only possible because of the fellowship and community they shared.

There are, no doubt, additional areas where Christians could be separate; these are offered as a beginning. 

Ultimately, the saving of America is in God's hands. The question is whether we have the will to try.

Hillary is not the only one.

"If we say we have not sinned, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us" 1 John 1:8

Hillary Clinton's recent assertion that she "has not lied," and doesn't believe that she "would lie," reveals one or both of two things:

1          If she really believes what she is saying, she is a self-deceived fool.

2.         If she does not believe what she is saying, she is lying and the truth is not in her.

In either case, it should be clear that she cannot be trusted and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the White House (or your house).

My point, however, is not to expose Hillary's duplicity; she is doing an adequate job of that. My point is that Christians need to start evaluating political issues in biblical categories, not as Liberal or Conservative, Republican or Democrat, Socialist or Capitalist, etc. Until we start doing that, we are not qualified to choose a president or a dog catcher.

How can we hope to solve our government spending problems without understanding the nature of the problem. Government debt is a form of theft, in violation of the 8th commandment. No amount of political discussion or debate will alter this fact. Socialism - government "redistribution of wealth" is motivated by a violation ofr the 10th commandment.

There is a lot of talk about Christians being "salt and light," be we have not spoken clearly, biblically on these and other issues and contribute to the confusion and darkness. We have no other authority for objecting to bad policies. If we look for other grounds for objection, we are denying the authority of God's word over every area of life.

During the Revolution period, the Americans had a phrase they used to oppose the unlawful British policies; "No King but Jesus." It's time for Christians to renew this declaration, but first, they must understand it.

Christian or Conservative?

The following is an excerpt from a brief autobiography by Miss Katherine Dang which was published in "A Guide to American Christian Education," American Christian History Institute:

"It was not enough to work hard and be sincere when one's philosophy of government was a mixture of Christian and socialistic doctrines. To be politically conservative was only to be issue centered and to reason from one's emotions." "I would only prepare generations to be suited for Christian socialism, at best, and these generations would, by degrees, exchange America's Christian form of government for pagan centralization and the tyranny of the State."

At Arms With Roget

A Thesaurus Chorus

"Propel, propel, propel your vessel

"Tenderly athwart the watercourse

"Blithely, blithely, blithely, blithely

"Existence be but a reverie."

An elucidation:

In a previous occupational incarnation, I received a letter of complaint from a woman who had attended a workshop at the convention with which I was associated. The ostensible focus of the session was Teaching Creative Writing, or some such.

Her complaint was that the workshop presenter had not taken sufficient time (in her opinion) to answer her specific questions regarding problems related to her son  She was not appeased by the presenters explanation that he could not answer such detailed questions in the context of a workshop.

Her letter revealed that it was she, and not her son, who was the real object of her angst. It was apparent, from the beginning, that the true object of her missive was not to communicate a grievance, but to demonstrate her own compositional prowess.

She subscribed to the doctrine that it is always preferable to use many obscure words when one will serve. It was obvious that she had resorted to the thesaurus at nearly every point in her composition with the result that her complaint was lost in a fog of vocabulary.

In honor of this hapless scribe, I have penned the ditty above.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

One of the reasons I do not write more (besides general lethargy) is that so much of value has already been written that I hate to distract from or dilute the value of such work.

In light of this reluctance, I refer you to an excellent article entitled "You can't fix the economy, Mr. Obama," by Anthony Flood. Although it was written in 2009, it is still relevant.
You'll find it here. http://www.anthonyflood.com/obama.htm


What makes this piece valuable is that Mr. Flood does not quibble about specifics of proposed "fixes," but challenges the very premises involved in such attempts; premises, by the way, which are endorsed by politicians across the political spectrum - with the exception of true Libertarians.

So, read and enjoy.

WWHD?

I doubt this will get much traction here, since my friends are too intelligent to fit in the category, but what, exactly, is it that Hillary supports expect her to accomplish if she is elected President.

Let's set aside, for the moment, that her supporters can't cite any significant accomplishments during her tenure in office (assuming that managing the "bimbo" scandals doesn't qualify (although this sill might come in handy since Bill is likely to misbehave if he regains access to the Oval Office)), what do you think she'll do in the White House.