Obama and Dobson Ignite Readers

Barack Obama and his skirmish with Dr. James Dobson caught the attention of many of our readers this week. Here are just a few comments of the hundreds we received:



Rev. Chris from California says, It is disingenuous of Dr Dobson to claim that Obama misuses scripture, and disparages the use of Leviticus’ dietary prohibitions which have been set aside by the New Testament, and yet, the same holiness code that discusses keeping dietary restrictions is given eternal validity when it talks about certain homosexual behavior. Jesus did not set aside the homosexual provisions; indeed, he did not discuss homosexuality at all; Paul is the premiere setter-aside of the dietary laws. So, we are left with some verses having continuing validity while the next verse is no longer relevant? Seems like that sort of cut and paste approach to scripture is part of Dr Dobson's problems. Perhaps if he had a bible in paragraphs, he would understand that cut and paste interpretation doesn't work. The bible is a whole, and the principles of interpretation demand that one takes the context seriously.




Iris in Oklahoma wrote, Bark’s present strategy of courting the vote of evangelicals by telling them how much he agrees with them is ridiculous. Whenever he will actually vote in Congress, he is very liberal, and is for abortion, homosexual marriages, and is anti-Semitic. How can so many pastors and other active Christians feel he will lead us morally? He says he did not go to a Muslim school yet in a book he wrote 10 years or so ago he says that he attended Muslim school for two years and studied the Koran and also went to Catholic school. Come on, he is lying to us and is not to be trusted.



Bruce from Texas has some questions as well, in the article on Senator Obama, mention is made that the bible states that eating shellfish is an abomination. The response is that Jesus’ teachings in the New Testament are not consistent with that. Since Jesus was a 100% observant Jew until the day he died and he said to follow the Jewish Law fully to his followers until the day he died, which they continued to do for the next 70 years, how could his “teachings”, as the Reverend Dobson stated, be different in the New Testament. His teachings never swayed from 100% observance of the 613 Commandments in the Torah, one of which is observance of the Dietary Laws.

This is confusing. An explanation would be helpful.



EDITOR: Bruce, we will get some expert opinion on this matter, look for an article next week!



Also on the Obama, Judy from Oklahoma writes: The Obama will search for a permanent church to attend as a family, although Obama said he would not likely settle on one until next year. I find this statement scary sense he won't be deciding on a church until after the election is held. I suppose he figures once in office he can do as he well pleases. My concern is what kind of church he will join. Will it be an ordinary church denomination of America or will it be one of Islamic and Muslim content?





The autistic child banned from church in Minnesota also drew reactions from readers:




Laura in St. Louis has an interesting remark: What is the legal question in this situation? Is it concerning a religious entity’s right of association vs. a handicapped person's protection against discrimination?

Maybe the court shouldn't have granted the church's order of protection, but since it did...I would throw that lady's butt in jail for violating a court order.

I thought church was about being in communion (agreement) with other members in the worship of God. And I don't understand why she would insist on forcing her family, in addition to her handicapped son, to be in the middle of a situation where they are not welcome. Even in a small town, I would think that there are other churches that would welcome them with open arms. I'm sure my Lutheran Church-MO Synod one would.


EDITOR: Laura, I am confused, would you welcome this family in your church or visit the mother in jail?