« A New Deal For the GOP? | Main | The Attacks on Michelle Obama In Context »

ShareThis

Is Obama a "Real Christian?"

It's been a very active week in the interplay between Barack Obama and certain Christian Right leaders, who are clearly afraid he will have some appeal to their flocks.

Most notably, the religio-political warhorse James Dobson devoted a Focus on the Family radio broadcast to an attack on a speech (a very, very good speech, BTW) Obama delivered two years ago, in which Obama had the temerity to suggest that James Dobson's interpretations of the moral imperatives of scripture weren't self-evidently true.

Obama, said Dobson, was "deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible," as defined, of course, by Dobson himself.

As Amy Sullivan of Time observed, there was a pretty swift backlash against Dobson's attack on Obama from evangelical leaders manifestly tired of self-important thunderbolts from Colorado Springs.

A few days earlier, a more sophisticated attack on Obama's Christianity was launched by conservative evangelical syndicated columnist Cal Thomas, who said that "there is a clear requirement for one to qualify as a Christian and Obama doesn’t meet that requirement." Picking over a 2004 interview, Thomas anathemized Obama for denying that salvation was limited to those who expressly embrace Jesus Christ as God and Savior, and for expressing doubts about his personal fate after death.

As Sullivan pointed out in her commentary on the Obama-Christian Right dustup:

A new Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life survey of 35,000 Americans reports that 70% agree with the statement "Many religions can lead to eternal life," including 57% of Evangelicals. No less a figure than George W. Bush responded "no" when asked in 1999 if he believed heaven is open only to Christians.

So if what Thomas calls Obama's "universalism" (an epithet often hurled at all sorts of Christians with an expansive idea of God's plan for salvation, including the new Southern Baptist Convention president Johnny Hunt) disqualifies him as a Christian, what does that make George W. Bush?

Thomas is on stronger ground in suggesting that most Christians don't have Obama's reluctance to visualize a heavenly afterlife for themselves. But while belief in "eternal life" is fundamental to Christianity, that's not the same, theologically, as confidence about individual immortality in any specific sort of way.

Here's what Karl Barth, perhaps the dominant Protestant theologian of the twentieth century, and the "neo-orthodox" scourge of theological liberals, had to say on the subject shortly before his own death:

We have no idea either of the life beyond, or of the passage of this life into the other. We have only what came to pass in Jesus Christ, which is present with us through faith.

Barth also, by the way, was often accused of "universalism," and did explicitly teach that restrictive ideas about salvation reflected a rejection of the sovereignty of God.

It's clear that Obama's in pretty good orthodox Christian company, despite efforts by Dobson and Thomas to cast him out.

6 Comments

| Leave a comment

Calvinism is quite orthodox. Yet it maintains a believe in unconditional election, which states that God has known for eternity who will be saved, and that that has nothing to do with faith. This is oversimplified, of course, but the essence of the belief maintains that one cannot be assured of his or how own salvation--regardless of faith or belief. I assume that includes Dr.Dobson and Barack Obama.

I, of course, mean belief for believe.

Why leave the answer to conjecture and opinion? What is a Christian? Answer: Someone who holds fast to a specific confession. What is the confession? Answer: Romans 10:9-10. At least this is the biblical answer to the question. Also, the comment regarding Calvinism is inaccurate. I suggest you ask a Calvinist. As for many ways to heaven, Jesus in John 14:6 claims he is the only portal to the Father, and thus heaven. If men do not agree with these propositions, then they are not in agreement with the biblical record. Barth got around this in his own mind by saying that the biblical record is not God's actual word, but only the fallible record of men that God actually spoke to them. Johnny Hunt and Cal Thomas disagree with Barth's position and adhere to the biblical record. At least now you should know where every one is coming from.

Sailor:

Belated thanks for your comment. Since Karl Barth is almost universally acknowledged as one of the most important modern advocates of the Calvinist tradition, I think I did "ask a Calvinist" on the issues we are talking about. You can disagree with me, and with Barth, but I think the whole argument reinforces my main point that Barack Obama's religious views are safely within the general ambit of orthodox Christianity.

Decoupling Jesus from His own teachings is not orthodoxy, "universal acceptance" notwithstanding, and it cannot be done without consequences (2 Peter 3:15-18). You can disagree with scripture if you want, but it only reinforces my point that conjecture, opinion, and "universal acceptance" do not qualify as authoritative.

Also, my Calvinism comment was directed specifically to the comment under "Comments".

The Democratic Strategist's comments section welcomes intelligent discussion and debate from individuals representing every sector of the Democratic community.

Because of the spam problem, the first time you leave a comment you will have to sign up for a username by filling out a brief form. This just takes about two minutes and after that you will always be able to join the discussion just using your username and password.

Also, please note that all comments must be expressed in a mature and civil tone of voice. Individuals posting rude or otherwise inappropriate material will lose their access to the discussion.

Thank You, TDS staff

Leave a comment