Obama’s Answer On Why He’s Christian

Posted on | September 29, 2010 | 39 Comments

by Smitty

Over at HotAir is a barely audible clip of President Obama offering an explanation, or testimony, if you will, of why he’s Christian. It would be the height of peevishness to pick it apart. Instead, accept it.
Ultimately, the condition of the soul of another is unknowable; recall, the disciples accepted Judas Iscariot until the Last Supper.
Thus, whether or not President Obama is a secret Zoroastrian is a giant distraction. Obi’s sister, for one, thanks this President.
My short answer to this question, for the curious, is: Jesus is the meaning of life.
Once you are grasped by this Truth, wild absurdities are more easily managed.

Category: Barack Obama

Comments

39 Responses to “Obama’s Answer On Why He’s Christian”

cc
September 29th, 2010 @ 11:47 am

Personally, I find it fascinating that when liberal democrats claim that they are Catholics, or Christians in this case, they pull out the “teaching” that we “are our brother’s keeper.” Only the Bible doesn’t say that. Period.
Jeff Weimer
September 29th, 2010 @ 11:51 am

No, but the movie “New Jack City” does.
FenelonSpoke
September 29th, 2010 @ 11:51 am

Very nicely said, Smitty, and quite cogent: “Jesus is the meaning of life.”

Amen, brother.
Live Free Or Die
September 29th, 2010 @ 12:19 pm

So, how IS O-bah-muhh’s brother doing these days?
Randy Rager
September 29th, 2010 @ 12:29 pm

Wow. I guess anything is fair now. Don’t blame me for whatever that’s going to happen.

Translation: “Please perma-ban my stupid ass.”
datechguy
September 29th, 2010 @ 1:55 pm

Why be a Christian in general and a Catholic in particular, three words: Because it’s true
Obama on Why I Became A “Christian” | Smash Mouth Politics
September 29th, 2010 @ 2:22 pm

[…] Posted on September 29, 2010 by John Doe| Leave a comment Smitty, Smitty, Smitty: sometimes you are just too polite. That’s where John Doe comes in–to keep it real and to reveal the truth. Here, in […]
garden brinjal
September 29th, 2010 @ 2:25 pm

The Biblical account of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection is (among other things) an agonizing metaphor for our life in the flesh, and its inevitable suffering. It (the story) shows how bad it can get; Jesus’ experience encompasses the best and the very worst of all possibilities.

It is good to have a story which holds forth the entire spectrum of human possibility. This is the Jesus story.

But what has muddled the works, and continues to detract from the good of that story, is the use of religion to assert authority, in the form of power of “person over people”.

It seems almost inevitable that when a person has a personal spiritual revelation, that the whole issue of authority has to be played out; and this seems to be the result of the unfortunate blurring of the boundary between taking such a revelation as something for oneself, vs taking it as a “divine mandate” to “speak the word” to others.

I hope you can see what I am saying above.

I think when people attach to any experience as a mandate for anything, like God says so type of thing, they are missing the point of the experience. All experience is purely subjective and personal. Mandates don’t come from experiences, although some like to think that. That is why you have all these Christians running around thinking the end is coming, they are beginning to experience the global awakening and believe this is a personal sign to them that Jesus is coming back any time now. LOL. We must be tolerant of their stupidity in order to teach them to go beyond all experience!

It is no coincidence that the story of Jesus contains all of the possibilities inherent in this so-called ‘bipolar’ condition; the Book of Revelations contains the most extreme antipodes of our human possibilities.

Our long history as a species, and our teaching-stories (known as “myths”) takes this problem into account as a central theme. And central to this, is a warning, best carefully heeded. Carl Jung, the German doctor, summed it up well:

“Do not identify with an archetype”.

I believe Joseph Campbell once said that the myth is there for one to go beyond it. If you look at the archetype and it is opaque then you are not getting the purpose of the archetype. The archetype should be transparent, not opaque….

By the way Smitty, this is not an argument from me, but rather an adding on to what you already said. Just getting into the action with everyone and expressing the ideas that appear when reading posts.

I hope you can look into the issue of authority, and its terrible child, authoritarianism. The unrequited heart of the human will agonizingly emit that demand, of “power-over-others”*, of control disquised as “divine mandate”, and the entire downstream ideation known as “religious morality”.

*Some even want others to have power over them because of fear that they are not equipped to handle their own life!
Obi's Sister
September 29th, 2010 @ 2:37 pm

Thanks for the link!

I tried to keep the snark down. Vassar was not nearly so kind.

http://www.redstate.com/vassar/2010/09/24/obama-meets-his-match-smacked-down-and/

Ouch. That oughtta smart.
DaveP.
September 29th, 2010 @ 2:39 pm

So Christ would approve of confiscatory socialism but wouldn’t oppose abortion?
Roxeanne de Luca
September 29th, 2010 @ 2:39 pm

I’m going to shamelessly plug my own post on this subject here.
smitty
September 29th, 2010 @ 4:02 pm

@DaveP,
Jesus was apolitical, in a secular sense (Pilate).
Jesus would crush the selfish carnal motives surrounding abortion (Gospels).
kansas
September 29th, 2010 @ 6:14 pm

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I never heard Obama say WHY he was a Christian, only that he chose to be.
smitty
September 29th, 2010 @ 8:20 pm

@kansas,
Possibly you’re putting too fine a point on it. What I was trying to get at is that we sort of need to take his assertion of Christianity at face value.
DaveP.
September 29th, 2010 @ 8:38 pm

Obama is a Bill Clinton Christian: he’s Christian as long as the cameras are rolling and there’s a PR point to be made.
malclave
September 29th, 2010 @ 8:50 pm

they pull out the “teaching” that we “are our brother’s keeper.”

They’re just confused, and are just tryinhg to quote one of the Biblical figures they most identify with, Cain.
garden brinjal
September 29th, 2010 @ 9:59 pm

One day the zoo-keeper noticed that the orangutan was reading two books: the Bible and Darwin’s Origin of Species. Surprised, he asked the ape, “Why are you reading both those books?”

“Well,” said the orangutan, “I just wanted to know if I was my brother’s keeper or my keeper’s brother.”

[from the internets]
garden brinjal
September 29th, 2010 @ 10:10 pm

Are we our brothers keeper? If so, in what way?

If we were not properly kept in our own family of origin, it is unlikely that we will be able to be an effective keeper of our brothers/sisters.

“Keeper” here means “preserver”. If this preserving is not a two-way process, it threatens to become extinct.

Apart from our protestations of “no separation”, there are more singletons in the world today, than ever before.

The modern capitalistic slogan of “every man for himself”, the rallying-cry of the so-called
“conservative”, translates to sociopathic exploitation of those whose values honor a
gentler way of life.

“I am my brother’s exploiter, as God intended”,

would be a more likely, latter-day understanding of that Biblical homily.
garden brinjal
September 29th, 2010 @ 10:23 pm

I would say it is not our business, but it is in everyone’s self-interest to cooperate in such a manner as to “create” a cohesive society. This is a big topic and involves what social psychology refers to as the “social contract”; you can Google that term for more.

As to the actions of interference; outside of the parent-child relationship, it is very easy to be taken as a meddler. What “right” do we have to impose upon others, with our versions of “how it should be”?

Nonetheless, and setting aside “capitalism” as the worst possible model of an ideal “social contract”, it is generally our impulse to help. And this is a good thing.

It is our job/business to avoid wasting anything; and that means to preserve. To conserve is to preserve.

Self-preservation does include helping others; there is no better way to live, than in cooperation with others who also preserve you.
Dandapani
October 3rd, 2010 @ 8:10 am

Jesus? Aum.