Posts Tagged ‘Rick Warren’

h1

THIS TIME THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT is RIGHT

February 4, 2009

NOTE THE DATE OF THIS ARTICLE – STILL VERY VITAL


Obama is slick as a serpent – that’s sad for America – “the Religious Right” didn’t get it right!

THIS TIME THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT is RIGHT

Superstar Messiah Obama.....(Not...)

Sandy Rios – Guest Columnist – 7/23/2008

“For Obama, faith is not simply political garb, something a focus group told him he ought to try. Instead, religion to him is transforming, lifelong, and real.” That’s a quote from “The Faith of Barack Obama,” published by Thomas Nelson, the world’s largest Christian publisher, scheduled to be released in early August by author Stephen Mansfield, an evangelical Christian biographer of New York Times bestseller, “The Faith of George Bush.”

Highly respected Catholic professor at Pepperdine School of Law, Douglas Kmiec is also effusive in his support of Obama: “Obama said he earnestly wants to ‘discourage’ the practice (of abortion) despite the distortions of some who think if they affix the ‘pro-abortion-won’t overturn-Roe-label’ to the senator, pro-lifers like myself won’t give him the time of day. Sorry, good friends, not this year,” he wrote in the Chicago Tribune.

Kmiec was reporting on a recent meeting with Obama that included Franklin Graham, Bishop T.D. Jakes and about 30 other religious leaders. Late in 2006, Obama had stood on the stage of Rick Warren’s influential Saddleback Church, declaring his faith in the context of fighting HIV/AIDS, gladly taking on the mantle of implied endorsement.

Soon the Obama campaign will begin appearing on Christian radio and Internet outlets, and they’ll be hosting thousands of “American Values House Parties,” where attendees will discuss Obama and religion.

Yes, indeed. The Barack Obama campaign has a wonderful plan for your life … especially if you are an evangelical. And he has plenty of help to expedite the plan.

But one stubborn evangelical is calling out the charade: Dr. James Dobson, respected founder of Focus on the Family and unquestionably the current leader of the “Religious Right.” “I think he’s deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology,” Dobson declared on a recent broadcast.

So, who’s right? Is Barack Obama deliberately distorting the Bible (Yes.) and Christian theology as a means to a political end or is he in fact, a man of great faith?

Stephen Mansfield wrote, “Young evangelicals are saying, ‘Look, I’m pro-life but I’m looking at a guy who’s first of all black’—and they love that; two, who’s a Christian; and three, who believes faith should bear on public policy.”

[Christians believe we are commanded to encourage a Christian Worldview]

But at a 2006 “Call to Renewal” conference, Barack himself said, “If God’s spoken, then His followers are expected to live up to God’s edicts regardless of the consequences. To base one’s own life on such uncompromising commitment may be sublime, but to base our policymaking on such commitments would be a dangerous thing.” [READ THAT CAREFULLY] Translated: First, faith should not bear on public policy. Secondly, Barack Obama will not be seeking a state of what he calls “sublime.”

[He’s telling us – don’t count on him to follow God’s Commandments.]

Kmiec insists Obama, “earnestly wants to ‘discourage’ the practice” of abortion.” Then how come Obama has a 100 percent voting record supporting it? [abortion] —has opposed any and all restrictions on it?—and has NARAL and Planned Parenthood fairly salivating at the thought of his election?

Dobson, on the other hand, claims Obama distorts scripture. In a recent policy speech, Obama boasted that he drew his willingness to champion the homosexual agenda from the Sermon on the Mount, not on some passage in the “obscure” book of Romans. I wonder if he noticed that part of Jesus’ sermon that said to look at a woman with lust was the same as committing adultery. Did he glean from that passage that to look on another man would somehow be okay? When he mocked the relevance of passages in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, I wondered if he’d read the passage in the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets (which includes Leviticus and Deuteronomy). I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matt. 5:17).

At the 2006 conference, he also chided his audience, “Let’s read our Bibles now. Folks haven’t been reading their Bibles.” He surely didn’t have himself in mind, did he? His devotion to scripture must mean he knew about that “obscure” book of Romans—that formative epistle written to the early persecuted church in Rome that transformed Martin Luther and catalyzed the Protestant Reformation and has been the bedrock of orthodox Christian theology for centuries. That obscure book? The one that warns, “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness….”—and goes on to speak very directly on sexual morality: “Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another…. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion” (Romans 1: 18, 24, 26-27).

This passage would probably be Exhibit A of why Obama thinks to base policymaking on such “uncompromising commitments” would be “a dangerous thing.” How would one face homosexual activists with such unflinching certainty?

“For Obama, faith is not simply political garb, something a focus group told him he ought to try. Instead, religion to him is transforming, lifelong, and real,” declared Mansfield. The exception, apparently, is when that faith interferes with the reigning public policy orthodoxy on abortion and homosexual rights.

There are other moral reasons to support Obama, argues Douglas Kmiec. Feeding the poor is one of them. “He intends to ask government and non-governmental entities—and you and me—to do our part.” But what Professor Kmiec may not know is that Obama really hasn’t been doing his part. According to Obama’s released tax returns, from 2001-2004 he gave less than one percent of his income to charity.

“He’s dragging biblical understanding through the gutter,” Dobson declared passionately. And he’s right.

With great bravado and eloquent phrasing, Obama twists and turns every phrase so effectively that while championing a radical moral agenda, he feigns strong Christian faith. While boasting concern for the poor, with his own wealth he looks the other way.

A man of deep Christian faith? Not by the definition of the Jesus he claims to serve and the Bible he quotes so frequently.

Thank God for Dr. Dobson’s boldness on this one. This time the “Religious Right” is right!


Genesis 3
1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’ “

4 “You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Note: God knew that evil existed in His perfect setting – His perfect garden, His perfect plan – all His creation had to do was to obey His plan for life.

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Shortly – later God said: “What is this you have done?  The women said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

14.  So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, – cursed are you above all livestock and all the wild animals!  You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust, all the days of your life.

h1

Rick Warren, Obama

January 20, 2009

Liberals don’t have to worry – Obama goes to the other extreme by inviting Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America.  – see “Still alert” below.

Rick Warren, Obama and the Left

The left’s intolerance of Rick Warren could slow Obama’s progress.

The most thoughtful and interesting debate of the two-year-long presidential campaign occurred last August at Saddleback Church between John McCain and Barack Obama, moderated by Saddleback pastor Rick Warren. So it is notable that President-elect Obama’s choice of Rick Warren to give the invocation at his Inauguration next month has brought forth hyperpartisan invective from the Democratic left. It has spent the past week conveying to the world its disappointment and disgust with the choice of Pastor Warren because he opposes gay marriage and abortion.

[Review & Outlook] AP

Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said that “By inviting Rick Warren to your Inauguration, you have tarnished the view that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender [LGBT] Americans have a place at your table.”

The head of People for the American Way, Kathryn Kolbert, is “deeply disappointed.” She says Mr. Obama should have picked someone with “consistent mainstream American values.”

Perhaps the most telling comment came from a “very disappointed” Rep. Barney Frank, who pointed out that during the campaign Senator Obama’s “stated commitment to LGBT rights won him the strong support of the great majority of those who support that cause.” Mr. Frank is putting down a marker; the left will monitor whether the new President deserves their continued support after the Warren-blessed Inauguration.

During the famous and corrosive Culture Wars, both sides accused the other of unremitting intolerance. Our own longstanding view has been that conferring protected legal status on the most politicized issues in those disputes, such as abortion and gay marriage, properly belongs inside the political system of the states, where diverse populations can work toward a political settlement.

Californians did so in November when they voted to pass Prop. 8, in effect disapproving of legal status for gay marriage. Rick Warren, an evangelical minister, as well as the Mormon Church worked for Prop. 8’s passage. It won by about 52% to 47%.

Afterwards, some gay leaders said their side would have to work harder to make more voters understand their arguments. More publicized, though, were the acts of retribution taken by gay activists in California against individuals whom campaign-contributions showed to have supported Prop. 8. Some were forced out of their jobs.

For about a generation, many on the left have believed that active and unapologetic intolerance of the right was justified because its views on matters such as abortion and gay rights were simply unacceptable. This moral somersault may work for them, but to the average American voter, a full-throated assault on the likes of Rick Warren for being “wrong” on two of many issues looks like simple intolerance.

The person in this drama for whom the leftwing Democratic habit of moralized intolerance could be a problem is Barack Obama. The left loaded up heavily in its support of candidate Obama, first against the Clinton machine — always thought to be too willing to compromise with the center — and then in the general campaign. These elements in the Democratic Party know what they want Barack Obama to deliver on judges, the environment, global warming and lifestyle rights litigation.

Mr. Obama’s choice of Rick Warren for the Inaugural’s invocation suggests that he is intent on using the momentum of his remarkable victory to build a governing coalition for the long haul. The silver lining for Republicans may be that the left won’t let him do that.

=====================

Obama prayer speaker comes from group feds say is linked to Hamas

By JOSH GERSTEIN, Politico.com
One of the religious leaders invited to address Barack Obama’s inaugural prayer service Wednesday heads an Islamic group named by federal prosecutors as a co-conspirator in a terrorism-fundraising trial in Texas. Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America, is scheduled to join Christian ministers and Jewish rabbis offering prayers for the new president and his family during a service at the National Cathedral in Washington, organizers announced Friday. Mattson’s group calls itself “the largest Muslim umbrella organization” in North America. However, in May 2007, federal prosecutors included ISNA on a list of nearly 300 co-conspirators filed in a criminal case charging that the Holy Land Foundation of Richardson, Texas, funneled more than $12 million to Hamas. The U.S. government designated Hamas as a terrorist group in 1995.