Posted on 09/22/2015 5:41:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
Once again the media are hyping an issue that has nothing to do with the problems confronting this nation. Shame on them for trying to manufacture a controversy -- again -- about President Obama's faith.
During a town hall event for Donald Trump in Rochester, New Hampshire, Thursday night, a questioner said that Obama is a Muslim and that "he's not even an American."
Democrats, the media and some Republicans pounced on Trump for not condemning the questioner. For all the media's obsession over it since, you'd think Trump himself called Obama the 12th imam. They are badgering every other candidate to repudiate Trump and affirm that Obama is a wonderful Christian.
This manufactured diversion is one reason Trump is so popular. The critics think they can finish Trump (and others who won't denounce him) with political correctness -- his lack of which has helped catapult him to the top.
Why do the irreligious media believe they can credibly lecture anyone about faith? Why should they take umbrage at a lone questioner's calling Obama a Muslim? They act as though calling someone a Muslim is slander per se. By their lights, it ought to be a compliment.
If they believed that Obama is a Bible-believing Christian, they'd be hammering him themselves. And if his religion is so important to them, why didn't they probe it when it would have mattered -- the 2008 campaign? Oh, that's right. They were too busy denying the spiritual bond with his pastor-mentor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
I watched the video of the questioner, and I think Trump tried to just laugh off the man's comments without making a statement either way. He did seem to agree that we should look into the alleged jihadi training camps, but that's about it.
That wasn't enough for the media, which insist that Trump should have eviscerated the fellow. But let me ask you: If someone challenges Obama's faith, are we required to say we believe he is a Christian even if we doubt it? Can't we just politely ignore the matter and move on?
I see no point in raising Obama's Christianity anymore, but the media are forcing it. Forgive me for not falling all over myself to affirm Obama's Christianity. It's true we can't know for sure what's in a person's heart, but we can observe his statements and behavior. Obama's assertions mean little to me these days. He emphatically asserted not too long ago that he believed marriage should be between a man and a woman. He told us we could keep our doctors and insurance plans when he knew that wouldn't be true. This is not a man with a track record of authenticity. And he is not a person who has shown any allegiance to Christian values.
For 20 years, he attended Wright's church, where black liberation theology and anti-Americanism were preached with abandon. It shouldn't shock you -- as I've said before -- that Wright's church was more race- and Marxist-oriented than Christ-centered.
Additionally, throughout his presidency, Obama has gone out of his way to belittle Christianity. He demeaned "bitter" Midwesterners who "cling to guns or religion." He mocked Scripture by saying: "Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is OK and that eating shellfish is an abomination? Or we could go with Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith." It's hard for me to believe that any God-fearing person would ridicule God's Word like this.
Obama likened the Christian Crusades to present-day Islamic terrorism. He trampled the conscience rights of Christians when he forced employers to provide abortion-inducing drugs under their Obamacare health plans. He invited a host of anti-traditional Catholics to the White House to meet Pope Francis. He paved the way for the Supreme Court's fiat legalizing same-sex marriage, knowing that it would lead to further assaults on Christians' religious liberty.
He has taken Christmas themes out of White House Christmas cards, has removed references to religion from his Thanksgiving speeches, has omitted "the Creator" when quoting from the Declaration of Independence, supports abortion on demand and protects the abortion factory Planned Parenthood. His administration has sought funding for all kinds of sexual education but not those reflecting traditional values.
Obama has also shown preferential treatment toward Islam, from apologies for the U.S. military's accidental burning of Qurans to blocking Middle Eastern Christians' access to the White House, effusively praising Islam and overstating its role in America's heritage, supporting the building of a mosque at ground zero, refusing to attribute terrorist attacks to radical Islam, rewriting government documents to remove terms potentially offensive to Muslims, such as "jihad" and "radical Islam," turning NASA into a Muslim outreach effort, labeling the Fort Hood shootings "workplace violence," and so much more.
If you want to see whether Obama embraces the precepts of the Christian faith, research the many curious statements he's made on the subject.
In the end, though, the question is not whether Obama is a Christian -- he's perfectly free not to be one -- but whether Trump or others should be forced to condemn those who question Obama's faith even if they, too, doubt it. I don't believe for a second that the media and Democrats are the slightest bit offended about allegations concerning Obama's faith. They don't care about his faith. They are just trying to make Trump look like a mean-spirited, racist kook -- nothing more, nothing less. Thank goodness he didn't take the bait.
He may be a Christian, I don’t really know. But, “wonderful Christian” is hardly the words I would ever use to describe him.
How could you not know after all these years that Black Liberation Theology is a bogus communist-concocted religious movement?
Obama's Church: Gospel of Hate
Kathy Shaidle, FrontPageMag.com
Monday, April 07, 2008
In March of 2007, FOX News host Sean Hannity had engaged Obama’s pastor in a heated interview about his Church’s teachings. For many viewers, the ensuing shouting match was their first exposure to "Black Liberation Theology"...
Like the pro-communist Liberation Theology that swept Central America in the 1980s and was repeatedly condemned by Pope John Paul II, Black Liberation Theology combines warmed-over 1960s vintage Marxism with carefully distorted biblical passages. However, in contrast to traditional Marxism, it emphasizes race rather than class. The Christian notion of "salvation" in the afterlife is superseded by "liberation" on earth, courtesy of the establishment of a socialist utopia.
http://web.archive.org/web/20090321190904/http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=30CD9E14-B0C9-4F8C-A0A6-A896F0F44F02
__________________________________
Catholics for Marx [Liberation Theology]
By Fr. Robert Sirico
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, June 03, 2004
In the days when the Superpowers were locked in a Cold War, Latin America seethed with revolution, and millions lived behind an iron curtain, a group of theologians concocted a novel idea within the history of Christianity. They proposed to combine the teachings of Jesus with the teachings of Marx as a way of justifying violent revolution to overthrow the economics of capitalism.
The Gospels were re-rendered not as doctrine impacting on the human soul but rather as windows into the historical dialectic of class struggle. These "liberation theologians" saw every biblical criticism of the rich as a mandate to expropriate the expropriating owners of capital, and every expression of compassion for the poor as a call for an uprising by the proletarian class of peasants and workers.
Jay Richards | February 2, 2010
The presence of Marxism in liberation theology is well-known, at least to seminarians who are critical readers. Practically every seminarian reads Gustavo Gutierrez’s Theology of Liberation at some point, but most laypeople find it hard to believe that there could have been (and continues to be) a widespread attempt to hybridize Christian theology and Marxism.
Marxist regimes obviously benefitted from the spread of liberation theology in the churches. Still, I was not aware of any connections between liberation theology and communist clandestine organizations until now.
A new article by Robert D. Chapman in the International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence begins to connect some dots. In “The Church in Revolution,” Chapman, “a retired operations officer in the Clandestine Services Division of the Central Intelligence Agency,” argues that the KGB infiltrated the Russian Orthodox Church through Metropolitan Nikodim, the Russian Orthodoxy’s second-ranking prelate. Nikodim was a proponent of liberation theology. Nikodim was active in the otherwise-Protestant World Council of Churches. And the WCC, of course, became an actively left-wing organization during the last half of the 20th century.
Chapman also details the growth of liberation theology in Latin America—and the Vatican’s struggles with it—and the growth of black liberation theology in the United States. Prominent proponents of the latter include James Cone and Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
The arguments of liberation theologians should be challenged on their merits. The source of an argument, after all, doesn’t establish its truth or falsity. Still, it’s interesting to learn that liberation theology may have been, at least in part, a project of the KGB.
Unfortunately, this isn’t just history. Chapman concludes ominously:
"the Theology of Liberation doctrine is one of the most enduring and powerful to emerge from the KGB’s headquarters. The doctrine asks the poor and downtrodden to revolt and form a Communist government, not in the name of Marx or Lenin, but in continuing the work of Jesus Christ, a revolutionary who opposed economic and social discrimination.
A friend of mine, a head of Catholic social services in my area and formerly a priest, is a liberation theologian. He has made a number of humanitarian trips to Central America and told me, ‘‘liberation theology is alive and well.’’ The same can be said of its sibling in the United States [ie, Black Liberation Theology]."
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2010/02/liberation-theology-and-the-kgb/
Posted on 5/16/2015, 11:56:24 AM by observationdeck
If the Soviet bloc wasn't the mother of liberation theology, it was certainly a sinister stepmother, enlisting Catholics in a geopolitical cause and inviting them to sell their souls for funding and support.
Only the naïve can disregard the mountain of evidence connecting liberation theology with Soviet action in the region.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicnewsagency.com ...
SEAN HANNITY: But Reverend Jeremiah Wright is not backing down and has not for years and in his strong stance on the teaching of black liberation theology is nothing new. He had the same things to say last spring when he appeared on "Hannity & Colmes:"
WRIGHT: If you're not going to talk about theology in context, if you're not going to talk about liberation theology that came out of the '60s, systematized black liberation theology that started with Jim Cone in 1968 and the writings of Cone and the writings of Dwight Hopkins and the writings of womynist theologians and Asian theologians and Hispanic theologians, then you can't talk about the black value system.
HANNITY: But I'm a — reverend
WRIGHT: Do you know liberation theology, sir?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354158,00.html
______________________________________
The Black church and Marxism: what do they have to say to each other
by Cone, James H. 1938- . Harrington, Michael 1928-1989
https://archive.org/details/TheBlackChurchAndMarxismWhatDoTheyHaveToSayToEachOther
Good article.
I doubt the Madrassas in Indonesia admitted non muslims. If he renounced Islam and accepted Christ, there would have been many hateful attempts on his life. This is punishable by death in the muslim world.
Muslims know he is lying, Taqiyya
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.