*Scroll down for updates – links to Dobson’s broadcast and Obama’s speech*
Readers have hinted or outright begged me to start blogging politics again. I fill a void and provide a much-needed voice, they tell me. Do I really?
I listened, and here I am again. I knew once I started blogging about Barack Obama, there’d be no turning back. Every day there’s something new. Like a ball of snow rolling downhill, growing larger with each tumble, so is the momentum of political blogging. I don’t know how long it will last. This post is a mixture of politics and faith, so let’s dig in.
Obama Misinterprets Scripture
Have you heard the latest? Focus on the Family’s Dr. James Dobson has accused Obama of distorting the Bible. Like John Kerry before him, Obama misinterprets Scripture to make a political point. Big shock, right? That’s what politicians do. People use whatever they’ve got. For Kerry, it was faux concern for “the poor,” pontificating to others even as he lived on the wealth of his second wife’s dead first husband.
For Obama, it’s his ethnicity (the black half, anyway) and its pander power. He knows that many blacks are socially conservative on certain matters (homosexual “marriage” and child killing), but will vote for an infanticide-supporting liberal just the same. Quoting the Bible, whether accurately or inaccurately, makes him seem like a real Christian to these socially conservative voters.
Here’s the crux of the latest controversy:
“Dobson took aim at examples Obama cited in asking which Biblical passages should guide public policy — chapters like Leviticus, which Obama said suggests slavery is OK and eating shellfish is an abomination, or Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, ‘a passage that is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application.’
“‘Folks haven’t been reading their Bibles,’ Obama said.
“Dobson and Minnery accused Obama of wrongly equating Old Testament texts and dietary codes that no longer apply to Jesus’ teachings in the New Testament.”
Testaments, Old and New
People who don’t know the Bible make this mistake all the time. In essence, the Old Testament (OT) points to the New Testament (NT), and the NT explains the OT. The God of the Bible has many attributes, namely wrath, mercy, and grace. The whole Bible reveals these attributes and more. There isn’t a levitical God and a sermon-on-the-mount God. He’s one and the same.
Regarding Obama’s remark, Bible-reading, -studying, and -believing folks know that the OT dietary and ceremonial laws and the sacrificial system were shadows of things to come. Under the Old Covenant between God and Israel, the Hebrews had to observe dietary, ceremonial laws, and sacrificial rituals. The ultimate purpose of these laws was to show men that it was impossible to get oneself clean enough or observe enough Sabbaths or kill enough lambs to satisfy God. And obey the Ten Commandments perfectly? Forget about it.
The Old Covenant stood until the resurrection of Christ, whose death ushered in the New Covenant, one that depended not on the “goodness” or cleanliness of the people, but on God’s mercy and grace toward the people. Under the law, people washed before prayer, but only Christ can clean us and make us worthy of God to hear those prayers. Under the law, people sacrificed many animals to take away their sin, but Christ is the final, once-for-all sacrifice that takes away sin. The New Covenant believer is made righteous and justified not through his works, but through the work of Jesus Christ. Through God’s grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone, people receive eternal salvation.
To reiterate what I just said, refraining from eating “unclean” things (also see Acts 10), washing before prayer, and killing a spotless lamb on the altar for the sins of the people, and the like, were signs pointing to the eternal, a time when the Messiah would come and take away the sins of the people. Christ fulfilled these dietary, ceremonial, and sacrificial laws.
What About the Ten Commandments?
While the dietary, ceremonial, and sacrificial laws have been fulfilled, the moral law, also known as the Ten Commandments, is still in effect. And get this: we’re still required to obey God’s moral law perfectly. Wait…didn’t I just write that it’s impossible to obey the law perfectly? How, then, can God require such a thing?
Christ himself said that he came not to abolish the Ten Commandments but to fulfill them. (Matthew 5:17-19) Yes, God still requires that we observe the law, and we should strive every day to do so. But even as the saved person disobeys the law through word or deed, he has been forgiven. Disobeying the law is sinful, but the salvation of Christ spares us from the penalty of our law-breaking. The requirement is still there, but Christ took within himself our punishment – past, present, and future.
Simple, yes?
There is so much more to this subject, but I hope I’ve explained this small aspect coherently. My purpose is to put Dobson’s and Obama’s remarks in context. If I failed, I’ve no doubt my erudite readers will let me know. Good Tuesday to you all!
And send this post to Barack Obama if you get a chance. 
Update: For readers confused about whether the NT references homosexuality and whether God considers homosexuality a sin under the New Covenant (dietary laws have passed away, you say, so why not laws against homosexuality?), see Romans 1:24-28 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, and read James White’s post, Romans 1:26-27 and Homosexuality.
I also recommend his book, The Same Sex Controversy: Defending and Clarifying the Bibles Message About Homosexuality.
Perhaps Christians confuse the issue for you by only citing Leviticus. As you can see, Christians can and should cite NT passages on this issue. Sin is sin, know what I mean? But if you want to get specific…
Update II: Judge for yourselves! Download Dr. Dobson’s radio broadcast at OnePlace.com, and read Obama’s 2006 speech that sparked the controversy. Listening to the broadcast and reading the speech will help you understand why Dobson takes issue with Obama. I agree with Dobson.
This post doesn’t address what role, if any, religion should play in government. I won’t get into it here. That’s something you can discuss in the comment section. This post addresses what I perceive is Obama’s apparent misunderstanding of the OT in the context of the NT. If he’s received sound biblical teaching, he knows the purpose and meaning of OT laws. But that snippet in the speech leads me to believe he does not.
There are many things in Obama’s speech I could blog about. Perhaps I will at a later date.
Related posts:
- John Kerry and James 2
- Jews Need to be “Perfected”: What Ann Coulter Was Trying to Say
- Jesus Was A Liberal
- Blessed Are The Poor In Spirit – Sermon on the Mount discussion
- By Grace Alone Through Faith Alone in Christ Alone
- Redemption, Eternal and Otherwise
