This is a video of Barack Obama pointing out that we can’t use the Christian holy book as a guide to secular law — it has bits that advocate slavery and stoning obstreperous children, and that the injunctions to “turn the other cheek” and follow the golden rule in the Sermon on the Mount would, if taken literally, put the Defense Department in violation.
The irony comes from the outraged Christian fundie voiceover. He accuses Obama of mocking the bible, and then defends it by claiming that the Sermon on the Mount is “spiritually inspiring”…completely missing the point that Obama was not saying otherwise. And then he claims that Jesus would never advocate turning the cheek to terrorists and America’s enemies. What? I don’t think Jesus had much to say about America, and probably wouldn’t have much concern about some strange secular nation far removed from his natal region. To defend Deuteronomy and Leviticus, he makes a similar non sequitur, complaining that the Ten Commandments are also in Deuteronomy. So? Even if you consider the Ten Commandments virtuous, it does not negate Obama’s point, which is that you have to pick and choose bits of the bible, making it an inappropriate guide to civic behavior…and there this narrator is, picking and choosing. And of course, the Ten Commandments are mostly irrelevant, and not the basis of US law anyway.
And then he accuses Obama of distorting the bible. That’s the whole point, bozo! The bible is a welter of contradictions and archaicisms — you are unavoidably distorting it if you try to take that mess literally and run a country on its precepts.
So, does this mean that Christian fundamentalists support/demand the re-institution of legalized slavery, and the execution of children, pork- and shellfish-consumers, and people who were polyester, among other things?
I know Obama has his faults but thing like this make me want to cheer!
*hoorah!*
Well, not that it will make any difference whatsoever with regard to the fundies, as their grasp of reality doesn’t actually touch on reality all that much.
…and I wonder on election day if he will wish that he hadn’t said anything?
This guy conveniently forgets to address Obama’s perfectly valid points. So we still don’t know if he thinks it’s okay to stone your kids.
A Christian accusing someone of taking Deuteronomy or Levitacus out of context?
It’s a good thing my early warning Bullshit alarm melted last night at the Golden Calf worshipping, or the whole neighborhood would be awake right now.
Wow. Just wow.
Interesting and increasingly common tact, to accuse people quoting the stupid parts of the bible as both “distorting” and “mocking” it.
No, sorry, that’s really what’s written; if people laugh, that’s just because we live in a modern society where most of us know far, far better.
On a separate note, it’s hard to tell if Obama is a constitutional expert, a Christian who believes in the separation of church and state, or a closet agnostic/atheist, as the two are functionally the same in a secular society.
We should drive that point home over and over again:
Religious people should be those most strongly in favor of the separation of church and state.
Sure, your sect would like to gain power, but if that possibility exists, then someday a rival sect may gain power (and do to you what you would do to them when you are in power).
Without secularism, there is no common ground for any kind of consensus. “Give unto Caesar” and all that….
There is much in the Bible that I find inapplicable to modern life, but I do think that people who collect sticks on the sabbath should be stoned to death. Why don’t we do that?
This is another fine example of not addressing the issue. The Ostrich like ability of the religious to ignore what is not in their world view is frightening.
I really to adhere to the idea that you cannot have a rational conversation about irrational beliefs.
Regards,
David
I have seen the speech in full before, and Obama was not “mocking,” the Bible at all.He showed how we cannot use the book as a “simple” way to organize our government.
Even if this was a fully Christian nation, for Obama not to be right, we must have, (as HLG edited out of this video) a unified agreement in this country on the validity, and proper interpretation of all aspects of the Bible. Since this has NEVER been the case, there is no way to use the Bible, by itself, to outline the rules of Law. People will still need to debate what is lawful, or not.
In other words, he was stating that it is, “People” that need to work out the laws for the land, no matter what, even if some people use their religion to back their beliefs.
@#6. That is a common misinterpretation. God sayeth, “The Sabbath is a day to chill. Next time I see you out gathering sticks, instead of relaxing, I am so going to get you stoned so you sit your ass down.”
How does he know so much about the bible if he is a Muslim?? OMG! They must be giving bible classes now in terrorist training camps!
I once asked a devoutly Christian acquaintance why there were so many different Protestant sects if, as he claimed, the “plain word” of the Bible sufficed to instruct us in religious practice. With a completely straight face, he informed me that it was wrong to interpret the Bible in different ways. If only everyone interpreted it the right way, then everything would be okay.
Surprisingly enough, the right way turned out to be his way. Anyone who disagreed, well, they were just wrong. And he could prove it from the Bible.
I know there’s no God, because if there were, he would have had to bless me abundantly for not laughing in that poor man’s face.
Aww, poor Jesus. It’s no wonder he’s not coming back anytime soon. Can you imagine it?
“If a terrorist strikes thee, bomb him not. Show him instead the path of the righteous, and humble him with thine example. For is it not written: ‘Thou shalt not kill’? Verily I say unto thee that whosoever strikes in anger shall have his just deserts.”
The prospect of being crucified again surely doesn’t look inviting.
I like his whole “religious people and historians agree” line. I was expecting something like “Jesus was the most influential person to every have (not) existed” or something along those lines. But no, he says that the Sermon on the Mount is the most spiritual passage or something (I kinda stopped paying it too much attention, especially after the announcer decided that turning the other cheek is only for our enemies that we like).
I love the way fundamentalists and bible literalists will pussyfoot around sections where the bible comes out and says something they don’t like. “Of course Jesus didn’t mean for us to turn the other cheek against *terrorists* and countries that we’ve just wanted to invade for decades” (I wonder how they explain the arrest, trial, and execution of Jesus, then) “Since True Christians are only saved by faith, and not works, of course the sheep and goats judgement ONLY refers to how True Christians have treated the Jews.” (seriously. They seriously believe this. . . )
Loons! Don’t you know that everything is subject to interpretation? Have you forgotten the man who said we can own Mexican slaves but not Canadian? (Varlo, despite his excessive years, knows one Canadian actress he wwould love to enslave.)
Jason @5,
Religious people should be those most strongly in favor of the separation of church and state
Once upon a time, they were.1 (OK, not all of them were; and there weren’t many nonreligious people in those days to be s.i.f. of the s.o.c.a.s., but still.)
What’s really amazing in the American context is that the religious group that insisted on church/state separation earliest, loudest and longest was… the Baptists. Given the vicious and harmful Baptist political activities we see today, Fred Clark must be spinning in his grave.
(What’s that? Fred’s not dead? In that case it’s Roger Williams who’s spinning in his grave. I’m constantly mixing the two of them up.)
1) And at least some of them still are.
Just wanted to remind everyone to vote at youtube on these videos. If viewers see a low rating, it may prevent them from taking it too seriously.
Hey, a guy can dream, right?
The sermon on the mount tends to be uncritically accepted as a great piece of wisdom by both believers and nonbelievers. It’s really very average as a whole, and in some places can be downright idiotic.
Matt Dillahunty does a pretty good deconstruction of it over on ironchariots.org
http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Sermon_on_the_mount
This is off topic, but if anyone wants to play with a large of people who believe that the Bible is literally true, there is a lively discussion of young earth creationism and evolution going on at:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/blogalogue/2008/10/science_cannot_judge_the_bible_comments.html
The thread is 160 comments long so far, and almost all comments are from YECers, so there are lots of juicy targets. You can even tangle with a big name in YEC, Dr. Jonathan Sarfati. So, come on down and jump in the sandbox.
Anyone else here think that Obama is a closet agnostic? :-)
The first time I saw this video I thought to myself –
“Self, I believe that this man has been reading the Skeptics Annotated Bible.” :-)
He certainly seems to be a very intelligent man.
So this guy is complaining about some-one else not knowing what’s in the Bible, and yet he claims the book of Deuteronomy gave us the 10 commandments?
Does he not know they were already listed in Exodus?
The sermon on the mount doesn’t sound any “wiser” than other freakin sayings from other religions. Except for the “anointing” stuff in there. Jesus wanted people to “anoint” a lot. And he also didn’t want them to be Scribes or Pharisees, as I recall.
That’s pretty much the whole sermon on the mount: make sure people “anoint” a lot, and don’t be Scribes or Pharisees.
How come that the batshit crazies always quote the old testament when being mindlessly obnoxious?
I’d have thought that followers of jebus, or christians, would be followers of christ and would use *his* teachings as the basis of their beliefs. After all, the reported preachings of jebus were at odds with the homicidal, paranoid rantings in the old testament.
Ugh…. i have discussions about these very passages with Christians all the time. They invariably go like this:
Me: how can you advocate a bible/god that said/did this? (quote specific passages)
They: those passages are taken out of context/Leviticus and Deuteronomy were Pharisee Laws meant only for them. So we do not have to abide by them.
Me: But didn’t Jesus say, “Do not think I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; i have come not to abolish but to fulfill”?
They: You’re taking that out of context too. The fact is that Jesus died for our sins, absolving us of having to following Pharisee Law. Now we only need to give our lives to Christ in order to achieve salvation.
Me: So that doesn’t really answer my question. Your book says that at one point this god advocated the killing of recalcitrant children/adulterers/homosexuals/people who like Red Lobster, etc. Regardless of Jesus, why would you support an entity that EVER commanded those things, even once? Sure, you may forgive a serial killer when he’s tucked away in prison for years, but would you ever trust him to babysit your children?
They: No, no… see, God is a loving God, but God is also a just God. And he’s the Creator, so he can do what he wants.
Me: That means that if this god allows horrible tragedy to befall millions of people, that’s not “bad”. It’s not unfortunate for hurricane/plague/etc. to wipe out large swaths of civilization and we should rejoice in His decision. Katrina was a good thing. Theodicy alert!
They: No… see, just because God can intervene in human affairs, that doesn’t mean he always does. Sometimes he allows our fallen nature to cause trouble for ourselves.
Me: Can you give me specific rules as to under what circumstances God will intervene or won’t intervene?
They: No.
Me: That’s awfully convenient.
They: Just trust in the Lord.
Me:
I don’t think Jesus had much to say about America
Those crazy Mormons would like a word with you!
As I recall, this was the same speech in which Obama stated – This is no longer just a Christian nation. It is a nation of Christians, and Jews, and Muslims, and Buddhists, and non-believers and others.
I compared that with McCain’s statement in a beliefnet interview that the US was founded as a Christian nation, and made my voting decision at that point.
Well he did mention the Cheesemakers….
Oh great Golden Bull, we beseech thee in the name of the holy of holies to intercede in this matter and show us the way to your greater glory.
Thank you in advance.
The Bible lost me when David’s son raped his sister and Lot screwed his daughters. The lions eating the Christians was cool though.
Does he not know they were already listed in Exodus?
Silly human, heysoos sends divine ispiration directly to his gut. The gut has no need for all your secular facts and fancy, elitist number thingies. Only the gut knows at any given time what is right and what is wrong. The gut works in mysterious ways.
That reminds me, time for a breakfast burrito.
It was that speach, when it first appeared, that made it clear to me how much better a pick Obama would be over McCain. Too bad I live in Denmark and can’t vote though it affects me too…
The full video sans moronic commentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXcvbnzNIjg
“Most Christians and historians agree that the Sermon on the Mount contains the most spiritually inspiring words ever uttered by Jesus Christ, or any other religious figure” – Citation needed.
Yeah, what that guy says is pretty silly, but my favorite part is him defending Deuteronomy by saying it gave us the ten commandments. Even as an atheist, I think most of the ten commandments are good guidelines, but they’re handed down in Exodus! Deuteronomy, as far as I remember, is pretty much a political platform that someone dressed up as the word of god. I can’t remember any redeeming qualities of that book. It would be like someone three thousand years from now quoting the book of Strom Thurmond as spiritual guidance. It seems like whoever wrote this has no idea what he’s talking, regardless of if he’s discussing what he supports or opposes
I had a relative say exactly the same thing about Obama. That “He mocked and ridiculed” the bible (and was therefore a Muslim).
People who love Palin, and who want McCain to be our commander-in-chief are so strange.
@26: Bah. I would be more impressed if he mentioned the Beerbrewers.
Christians are univerisally dumbasses, I mean, what part of “thou shall not kill” don’t they understand? It doesn’t say “thou shall not kill unless they’re trying to kill you” No, it says, “thou shall not kill.”
If the word of the Lord is to be taken as true, then you have to take what he says in an absolute form. Thou shall not… mean Thou shall not, in any form, do what he’s saying not to do.
Fuckin’ retarded Christians. >.>
Whoever invented the minor-key piano scale needs to be killed.
I suppose Jesus’ concern for the poor and his admonition to the rich man to sell everything and follow him make him a SOCIALIST. Or maybe some Christians have successfully engineered a micro-camel (TM) which will pass through the eye of a needle. Then again, maybe they didn’t read this part, getting no farther than the parts where Jesus bashes the gays and abortionists………..
Need a time machine, send those goobers back to about 50 C.E., and watch the fun.
Thou Shalt Not Kill is locally embedded in a very dense fragment of kill kill kill. Half of the ten commandments are to be punished by death if violated. And right after the commands are delivered, Moses is all like, “alright, now kill all of your neighbors over there who don’t want to do things my way.”
Well, talk about saying one thing and meaning your mother!
Someone’s already mentioned that The Big Most Important 10 Commandments are actually in the book of Exodus, but there’s actually a large number of lists of commandments sprinkled like morality dust throughout the 5 Original Recipe books, all of them given the same weight.
S.Scott#19
I also believe he is a agnostic/atheist. He adopted his Christian persona to advance his political career.
Sadly, most Americans believe that nothing is lower than a atheist.
Strangely enough, this has no impact on my self-esteem, as I could give a shit what others think of my personal beliefs.
According to the Bible (eg Matthew 16 v.21-8) he wouldn’t – unless it was only very grudgingly and after being pestered and shamed into it.
Re: “Thou Shalt Not Kill”
BTW, Richard Dawkins does a good run-down, in THE GOD DELUSION, on why this didn’t start out as the universal proscription it’s generally taken as today.
IIRC, the original Hebrew is closer to “thou shalt not murder”, rather than the more general “thou shalt not kill.”
And it was understood to mean “you shouldn’t murder your fellow Jew”, but heathens, well, that’s a whole other kettle of fish…
As a secularist, I don’t think anyone should commit murder, but I also believe there can be such a thing as justifiable homicide in cases of self-defense, for example.
It wasn’t until I read Bertrand Russell, in WHY I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN, that I really began to question and criticize the moral example of Jesus, which even some (novice) atheists are reluctant to do.
Seriously, I can’t let go of the stupidness of the piano sonata in the background. What do you even call that genre of music? It’d be like “60 Minutes Theme”, “Middle Class Anxiety Soundtrack” or “Someone You Should Be Afraid of Walks Across the Screen in Slow Motion”
Oops – that should have been Matthew 15 not 16! (The change of number occurs later on that page in the copy where I was looking for the bit I knew was there).
PS The submission errors are back and attacked my last post, hence some of the delay in noticing whether or not I’d put the correct number.
I look forward to the day when humanity can look back at all the energy wasted on religion for so many millenia and smile, the way a parent smiles at a child’s cute but useless behaviors. Yes, millions did die over these made-up nonsense ideas, but in this unlikely future, we won’t be doing that anymore.
That speech by Obama shows that he understands religion does not belong in government.
I wouldn’t expect a religious person to understand that, and clearly, most don’t.
I loved that speech. I became an Obama supporter the day I saw it.
@ #39 “Eye of the Needle”
Interesting – apparently, there was, in Jerusalem, during Yeshua’s time, a small side-gate into the city, which was kept open after normal hours (with a strong guard).
If you REALLY wanted in (or out) you COULD use this gate – it was tall and narrow, and called “the Needle’s eye”.
A camel could JUST squeeze through, but ONLY after all its load, and saddlery had been removed.
Which puts a different interpretation (a very “socialist one, incidentally) on what Yeshua is supposed to have said.
“Interesting – apparently, there was, in Jerusalem, during Yeshua’s time, a small side-gate into the city, which was kept open after normal hours (with a strong guard).
If you REALLY wanted in (or out) you COULD use this gate – it was tall and narrow, and called “the Needle’s eye”.
A camel could JUST squeeze through, but ONLY after all its load, and saddlery had been removed.
Which puts a different interpretation (a very “socialist one, incidentally) on what Yeshua is supposed to have said.”
i have also heard that many people agree that the proper translation says that it is a camel hair rope passing through the eye of a needle.
i wonder which is the real story?
not that it really matters….
I don’t think we can really know what Obama’s metaphysical position is (as with most politicians), but I think we should try to leave unfounded speculation to those who are responsible for the smear campaign against him, and not feed them any more ammunition than what they can invent without assistance from us.
There will be plenty of time after the next six days for us to swoon over him while we fantasize about his possible secret forbidden thoughts.
While is this particular can of worms being opened now??
The election is for Obama(and the world)to lose,and bible-bashing is probably the one thing that can still cost him the presidency.
He should just stick to playing it safe for dogs sake.
What can one say? The video blogger is an idiot.
I know a lot of very smart people who are also very religious and it just confounds me as to how they can deal with and justify the contradictions and paradoxes in their faith. Makes me think that there must be some innate biological/instinctive need there that trumps all logic and reason. Here’s a great TED video:
A Year of Living Biblically
From my Christian days, I remember that the story about the tiny gate for camels was a bunch of made-up bunkum.
Which doesn’t distinguish it from the rest of the Bible, but the gate story is recently-made-up bunkum.
Others have suggested a mistranslation: kamillos/kamellos, one being ‘camel’, the other being ‘rope’. Hard to put a rope through the eye of a needle. But I think this is spurious.
It was probably just a fanciful allusion.
All people in Western culture should be educated about the Bible because it has been such an influential piece of literature. It should be on the same shelf as the Illiad and the Odyssey, Plato’s dialogues, and other great books.
People should at least know the Bible well enough to remember that the ten commandments are in the book of Exodus… Especially if they’re going to denounce Barack Obama in a political attack ad by citing the Bible.
Christian voiceover guy fails.
jesus: a great teacher, but didn’t really mean anything he had to say. cause, you know, you should only follow those teachings when it’s convenient. afterall, jesus got down off that cross and smote pontius pilate and the whole lot of ungrateful jews. wait, that’s not what happened?
by some strange coincidence, i’m actually reading a book on the bible and the foundation of holy (and modern) law. it’s called the genesis of justice by alan m. dershowitz, and it makes a very interesting point. it’s precisely the injustice and horrible things in the bible that challenge us to find a better way. it’s a very interesting read, and makes the point quite effectively. but then, jewish lawyers tend to think about the bible quite differently than “GOD SAID I BELIEVE IT!” fundie christians.
One of the problems in moral philosophy is the relation between means and ends. IMHO, the means must be commensurate with the ends. In other (leaping) words, apply the Golden Rule. In the case of the invasion of Iraq, I was published in support of it, but on these terms.
Deploy minimum 250,000 personnel, but with 90% of them being aid and reconstruction people: carpenters, electricians, plumbers, masons, teachers, translators, health care aid people, administrative coordinators, cooks and farmers willing to learn from the locals, with a minimal protection force (sidearms only) and a squadron of transport choppers. Deployed en masse to a central point needing the most urgent aid and rebuild, until the Iraqis see that this is not an invasion force but a humanitarian relief brigade; trust is earned; and the locals themselves start to look after security to protect them. Word would spread, and the brigade members and local security with it, irrespective of sectarian affiliation. Increasingly, Saddam and the Baathists would lose control of the country as the people increasingly ignored them, until Saddam went nuts with fury and fear and did something stupid. At that point, the Iraqis would arrest him themselves, while most of the Baathists would quietly disappear into whichever way the wind was blowing. … In a few short years, the country would be rid of its tyrant, rebuilt, with a functioning civil service and civil society, at a cost of few lives and a few $billion.
Unfortunately, not a sexy way to throw your weight around. Definitely not the American Way. Just the right way, and the effective way; dare I say the Canadian way?
Of course, this solution – where the means enact the ends – is in outline only, and must be adjusted to on the ground actualities in any present or future conflict.
Vidar @34 – You aren’t looking for a gawd of beer brewers, you are looking for a Goddess.
That would be from the 8th – 9th cent. BCE, Babylonian. Siduri, the goddess of barley-beer, depicted nude, with a brewing pot. She taught Gilgamesh a thing or two!
We grow hops, and my husband makes that Aussie stuff from Cooper’s. Last year he brewed 15 gallons. I bought him a little statue of Siduri from http://www.SacredSource.com they have just about any heathen, ancient or naughty god or goddess you can imagine. Hail Siduri!
Personally, I’m more impressed with the laws of King Hammurabi as a guide to good governance than Leviticus and Deuteronomy. His laws make more sense.
I particularly enjoy the “Song of Solomon”, myself, and that part of the Bible where Jesus tells people to pray in private, and not be like the hypocrites who espouse their religion in public and like to judge other people, even though he told them not to.
Oh, and 1st Corinthians 13, which is the best verse of the Bible ever, of course.
Patricia, #58, wrote:
Coopers Pale Ale on tap is so nice. Drank a few pints of it when I was at trivia on Wednesday. Though out of bottles I prefer the Coopers Sparkling Ale.
Cooper’s…..*shivers*
Patricia,what do you mean your husband makes the stuff?? Are there Coopers brewing kits out there or what??
So, “most christians agree that the sermon contains the mostly spiritually moving words by jesus, or any other religious leader.” This guy really gets in deep. Exposing the hard cold facts; like, that Christians find Jesus more inspiring than other religious leaders.
Done. Finis.
Geeezzzzz…..
My DAD sent this to me a few weeks back, as (what he thought was) the “final blow” against my arguments that Obama was a better choice than McSame. What amazed me was that, even though my Dad’s beliefs and opinions are diametrically opposed to mine, he at least would back up his arguments with evidence (what he considered to be valid evidence, at least), and he was ruthless in eviscerating rumors or out-of-context bits of info or other such devices that others gave back to him. So when I got this video from him, I actually thought it was a joke. When I realized he was ~serious~, I was almost literally stunned into “Does Not Compute” brainlock.
So I looked up the original speech on YouTube, all five (six?) parts of the complete speech as well as the portion that the hack-and-slash bits in that propaganda video came from, and sent it to him. I figured that once he saw Obama’s comments in context, he’d realize that that video absurdity up there was nothing but mindless propagandish drivel. I even pointed out that Obama’s ~edited~ comments in the propaganda video disproved the voice-over guy’s points.
Instead of a thoughtful reply from my Dad, agreeing ~or~ disagreeing, I received what amounted to nothing more than “NEENER NEENER NEENER I CAN’T ~HEAR~ YOU LALALALALA!!!” Seriously, he didn’t even ~respond~ to what I said; instead he went into a rant about how disorganized the local “Elect Obama” office had been when he stopped by to get a button for my stepmother (who is an Obama supporter).
I was left with the unshakeable conviction that what I’d heard was true — watching Fox News Channel really ~does~ rot your mind.
No, the real irony here is that this fundie Obama-bashing has yielded what we atheists would never have thought possible: an Obama campaign ad pandering to us!
I couldn’t care less if Obama distorts the bible. What bugs me is ignoring the constitution.
-jcr
I really wish people would get the meaning of “turning the other cheek” correct, especially christians who supposedly should know. “Turning the other cheek” was not an act of forgiveness or letting things go — it was an act of defiance and placing a moral weight on the aggressor. So rather than a show of weakness, this is actually a show of strength and resolve.
This was in an email making the rounds about a month or so ago.
I had a lengthy email argument with a petty functionary of the SC GOP about it.
If Hussein Obama is so desperate for a Bible Passage that fits with his agenda, how about ” an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth and a life for a life”? Or maybe he would prefer something from the Koran? “…..kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.” It would seem to me that there is not “more to Obama than meets the eye”, but less.
Dumbest comment today.
My uncle emailed this video to me, but he thought it was insightful and full of good points. ugh :/
With a completely straight face, he informed me that it was wrong to interpret the Bible in different ways