A Christianity Only the New York Times Could Love…
May 1st, 2007
If you can’t find the time to read “Dreams From My Father” or, “The Audacity of Hope”, then perhaps you can read the “Cliff’s Notes” summary given recently by the New York Times, as reporter Jodi Kantor examines Barack Obama’s faith. I’m not a conspiracy theorist when it comes to issues of media bias - I tend to view conspiracy theories as those musings that attribute far too much thoughtful, strategic thinking and planning on the part of those who constitute any kind of “right-wing conspiracy” or “liberal bias”. Of course a bias exists. Reporters are not automatons or robots able to divorce how they perceive the world, what is noteworthy, or what stories need to be told from their worldview and life philosophy. No one reads the New York Times for the facts. In the information age, the facts come quickly and fade from their importance just as quickly. People want to know more than “what” in our postmodern time - they want to know “why”.
This article, in fact, is exactly in line with modern reporting - particularly in regards to the media pace-setters. It presents, in fact, the reverse of the above premise: it feeds hungry information junkies the “why” as a means of providing a very interesting and noteworthy “what”. In other words, the reporter already assumes you knew the initial “what”, or facts of the matter: Barack Obama is a man of faith. Her job, then, is to report to you why that is. In doing so, she is presenting to Democratic voters in the south and the principled swing voters throughout the nation a very appealing “what” - a presidential candidate that actually possesses a substantive faith. A similar article ran in the Times regarding Hillary Clinton’s Methodist faith a few months ago in Newsweek.
It’s a reasonable faith that is the subject of these presentations, a depiction of the kind of faith that stirs the complacent and provokes the selfish to do similar good works and have a like-minded concern for the down-trodden, or the “underdog”, the concept that Obama credits with his conversion to Christianity. It is a variation of a theme - faith as the vehicle for hope related to great societal change: all that is wrong being set right in a manner that expresses true justice for the weak and the hopeless. Isn’t this what we all are striving for - and isn’t this something that all should celebrate? Obama’s social and societal concerns appear to be noble and his intentions sound? If you are nodding your head “yes”, at this point, you really won’t care for what I say next.
What does your faith draw men towards?
Hear me when I say this - the fact that the New York Times has an affinity for Obama’s version of Christianity does not make it illegitimate in my eyes. I would, however, suggest that you read the previous paragraph again and tell me what is missing. In my opinion, the initial by-product of my faith in Christ should not be to stir men and women to good works and worthy causes. If you come away from talking with me and are not stirred to:
1. Know Jesus (and study the Bible) and / or
2. Pray more
…than I am going to have to confess, repent, and try again. I was commissioned to draw all men to the Beautiful One, the Desire of All Nations - the Risen King who is the only One worthy of such pursuit. I yearn and long within myself to be a true friend of the Bridegroom, and as such my prayer life is in part a pursuit of authentic loyalty through a transformed heart that draws no attention to myself or my own cause. I want to be a living advertisement for those things that burn on the heart of Jesus. Once we connect to Him in prayer, subject then to the tenderizing work of the Holy Spirit and ignited with a heavenly fire within, we will then receive our mandate and can go forth from that place in confidence that we have been sent by the King and are safely subject to His will.
Obama’s faith is the kind of faith that stirs the soul within itself to act as the first response to need and lack. As a gifted, competent, and capable man, one like Obama would feel a deep responsibility to do his part when made aware of the societal deficiencies and racial inequities that those around him experience on a daily basis. While sounding benevolent and reasonable, Obama falls victim to the most seductive deceit in all of history: the need to play the messiah for those who are in need. Obama’s faith is the kind of message that draws men to themselves as the solution to the problem. Thus it becomes (with seemingly good intentions), even initially (and fully expressed eventually), outrageously anti-messiah in spirit and in truth.
Men are sinners that need to be saved
The first sign of one who is “anti-messiah” is that they misdiagnose the problem. Thus, rather than preaching Jesus, they spend much of their time identifying problems and challenging people to change / learn compassion / get perspective in order to solve the problem. Pick any issue - race, poverty,the environment, peace, etc. The solution, ultimately, is that men would be transformed and renewed in their innermost being that they might walk in true meekness and love. This can only happen through encounter with Jesus Himself, of course. It takes repentance, it takes a conviction to leave our sinful ways, and it takes a continual heart cry in prayer to ask for help, or grace, in our times of need. It takes work to come into true godliness and holiness - work that most do not want to give themselves to. It is far easier to either preach easy forgiveness or social action as a way of appeasing the guilt of the wounded conscience.
The “what” and the “why” that is being presented to our generation falls woefully and tragically short of the truth of the gospel and the reality of the power of the kingdom of God to bring deep and eternal change. This issue, of course, goes deeper than a politician from Illinois and reaches into the depths of what it means to be the church in this hour to a lost and broken world. The solution, of course, runs far deeper than an introduction of the weak to a strong God whose love is relevant to their struggle. It lies in our willingness to confront our sin, repent, and continually and daily appeal to God to do what only He can do. This is not the popular theological conclusion of the day however, and the journey of the heart towards voluntary love and voluntary weakness is repulsive and foolish to the strong. It is, in fact, as it always has been, since the first man went his own way in his attempt to attain knowledge and insight to the world apart from the Living God.
Thanks to Randy B. - I could not have asked for a better introduction to my examination of the emergent church.
David
Entry Filed under: current events, emerging church
22 Comments Add your own
1. Matthew | May 1st, 2007 at 1:31 pm
When you reduce their ideals down to those base principles it’s quite obvious that it isn’t really Christianity, but they’ve got such a good PR campaign that it’s hard to tell anyone that.
I’m just glad that the Football/Basketball champion and chief who has defeated 10,000 was able to turn to Jesus. If one as strong as you can turn onto the road of meekness there’s a chance for all of us.
2. Greg | May 1st, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Dave, I appreciate the bold and provacative nature post. But I have a couple issues.
1) In what specific sense was the NYT article biased in your estimation? I recieve the Times every day on my doorstep and read it regularly, and the paper unquestionably writes liberal, left wing editorials, and can be liberally biased in how it presents the news. But I thought this article was a fair, thoughtful exposition of Obama’s Christianity. The reporter’s job is not to take what she knows about Obama’s faith and then give us the real low down on how “apostolic” or authentic it is or whatever. The bottom line is that Obama professes to be a Christian, is dedicated to a local church, and has a conversion experience to back it all up. The reporter has every right to use “Barack Obama is a Christian” as the premise for her article.
2) I agree that the article gives us reason to be uncomfortable with Obama’s faith. I have very little affinity for liberation theology, and don’t ever think Christianity is soley or primarily a means to social, political, and economic reform. But Dave, we don’t know that this is the extent of Barack’s faith. The liberation and reform aspects are what we hear about in his political speeches, but that’s understandable given the constraints of the political arena when its comes speaking about faith.
Obama could very well be a sincere believer with an inspired faith, even if he focuses more on the capacity of Christianity to reform and renew world structures. This article gives us reason to believe that is a possibility. We cannot assume that he is trying to play “the messiah,” or that his faith is anti-Messianic. It is wrong of you to claim that bc I don’t think you have enough evidence.
Thanks bro. Let me know if I’m misreading you.
3. ChriS | May 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 am
Dave,
This was one of the best Wordcasts I’ve read that didn’t attack the individual or even a political party…you clearly articulated the challenge of the American Church with regards to politics. I would be willing to share this with my family that often shares my faith but not my politics.
Greg…I can’t speak for Dave…but I think you missed it on point one of your comments. While Dave’s blog readers are of above average intelligence and intellect…most probably don’t subscribe to the NY Times daily. Dave was giving insight into how to navigate a news article in a way that might be similar to his assigning a commentary to a class of FSM students. “Guys this is a good commentary, lots of good meat, but there are a few bones you’ll want to spit out. If you never eaten fish you might not know what a bone looks like…this is how you recognize bones.”
4. Greg | May 2nd, 2007 at 8:01 am
That’s a good point Chris. Dave was likely just trying to provide a context for those that might not read the paper as much. That makes sense. But I still thought the article was fair and balanced, not as indicative of the NYT liberal bias as other stories might be.
5. David | May 2nd, 2007 at 8:45 am
Greg - I agree with you fully. I read as many NY Times articles as I can get my hands on daily (when I have time). This was, for sure, one of the more fair and balanced portrayals.
Just because it was even-handed, however, does not necessarily bring absolution. I’m a big “why” guy - and the questions that must be asked are as follows: why does the NY Times care about Obama’s faith, and why was it portrayed as it was? Why did Newsweek care about Hillary’s faith - and what are the issues that drive the conversation here?
If you remember, I advertised a NY Times series on Pentecostal Christianity (”The Rise of the Pentecostals”) on a post a while back. I thought it was spectacular - while at the same time (having seen the interview with the reporter on Charlie Rose) interested in this whole “other world” that the reporter was looking to escort the readers into.
Obama’s faith does not feel foreign and strange to the reporter - the differences in reporting are obvious - it feels agreeable and reasonable in the presentation and perspective.
I do not feel like the NY Times would profile IHOP-KC and automatically trash me or what I believe. That wasn’t my point in talking about bias v. worldview and philosophical background. My point was that “bias” is overdone, actually - but that does not mean that I should be naive to worldview. My bigger point is that while the one reporter respected the Pentecostals he profiled, this reporter seemed comfortable swimming in the waters of Obama’s hope message.
If I had to guess, both reporters would respect one expression but convert to another. And therein lies the problem.
6. David | May 2nd, 2007 at 8:56 am
Greg -
2nd point: I appreciate your concerns regarding my qualifications to make such an evaluation of Obama’s faith. I think that you are correct - there is much I do not know about Barack Obama. There is much that I do not know about Oprah or Bono either. I hope that I am wrong in my opinions.
7. Jeremy | May 2nd, 2007 at 10:16 am
This post got me thinking to the difference between working in Christ and working out of Christ. It still blows my mind that someone can do the same works all their life and be considered wicked in the sight of God as someone else who works their whole life and is considered holy and righteous.
Both are work-related, but Christ is the only thing that changes the equation.
So the Western Church is kinda like a wick being cut and trimmed on both ends? On one end, the frayed ends of the mentality exalting grace without works, without laboring in prayer and working our salvation our with fear in trembling in sight of fiery and holy God who loves us too much to remain the same…and on the other end of the wick the works without grace. The idea that we can somehow meet God halfway up the ladder to heaven by our own strength and goodness, and by doing so negating the depth our Savior went in humbleness to retrieve us and bring us close by His great sacrifice of love. It is truly anti-messiah.
A return to repentence, knowing we are weak/poor/blind/naked and met by Jesus at the bottom of the pit when we were His enemy combined with a desire to be united with Him out of love that spurs us to works is, in all reality, the only way we will be able to truly burn today and also “in that day..” I guess it goes back to Matthew 5..
It all goes into preparing to store oil…we gotta be fit to burn it too..
8. ian | May 2nd, 2007 at 11:16 am
Greg,
Yikes! Do you really think that the artical portaying Obama’s faith could be called Christianity? If being a christian was a crime do you think what you read in the paper would convict him? Being moral is not being a follower of Jesus.
OK, so we should “wait and see” what his faith produces. But do we need to? He is on record as saying (in his book and in Newsweek) that it is his FAITH that motivates him to support aboriton. The moral platitudes expressed by Obama are as far from Christ as we are from the moon.
9. Scott | May 2nd, 2007 at 4:43 pm
Excellent comments by all; you’ve really added depth and sparkle to the post.
Jeremy, your third paragraph… oh my goodness. Awesome.
10. Greg | May 2nd, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Yes, Ian, I do believe that faith portrayed in the article could be called Christianity.
Dave, thanks for your responses. As I said, I understand why this portrayal of Obama’s faith might cause one to wonder. But I also think it’s possible that he is a sincere believer. The difference between him and Oprah is that Obama has spoken openly of a personal relationship with Jesus and claims Christianity (specifically) as his personal faith.
11. Allison | May 2nd, 2007 at 6:53 pm
What I see in this article’s portrayal of belief is at least one politician, one reporter, and one preacher who appear to be much more comfortable with a human-oriented faith rather than a Christ-oriented faith…
Christian Humanism.
12. Kyle | May 3rd, 2007 at 1:36 am
c’mon dave - everybody knows that Obama is a muslim anyhow…
13. Kyle | May 3rd, 2007 at 1:38 am
…that was a joke, BTW.
14. Jeremy | May 4th, 2007 at 7:57 am
Greg,
I certainly agree with you that most people would call what Obama practices Christianity. I think the point here, though, is in light of what we know is coming (from what we read in the Word) is what kind of faith, what kind of relationship really, will be the kind that will stand and will cause others to stand?
I dont think Dave is qualified in his opinion and mind alone, to measure anyones faith (sorry Dave, I’m sure thats a shock to you!
), just like I think no man except One is. But I do think the Word of God, written and made flesh, is our measure. And we can line what we do know of Obama’s faith with what God has revealed to us in His great love and His great judgment.
This Word measure’s our faith’s grasp of reality.
And while most people would decidedly say that Barack Obama is Christian…many of us look at the Word and compare that with what “Christianity” has come to be known as and scratch our heads and then take it to the prayer room.
This isn’t about condemnation, it’s about disparity. It’s about judgement (in a good sense) that causes us to see the distance between what we are and who we are called to become IN Christ.
15. Jeremy | May 4th, 2007 at 8:01 am
I didnt mean for that to sound like a letter to Greg, sorry bro!…I’m SO speaking to myself here too, because I often find myself slipping into pre-conceived ideas that everything is OK and will float along as usual…when I really need a good dose of perspective.
I have no idea what justice is outside of Jesus. And if my personal relationship with Jesus causes me to come to a social and justice-based notion that abortion is OK, I question the basis of where that justice came from.
(after all, it was once considered a great thing to give your children up to the fire..)
16. ian | May 4th, 2007 at 9:31 am
“This Word measure’s our faith’s grasp of reality” - What a powerful statement! I agree for my heart and for Obama’s heart that reality, given by God’s self revelaiton, would be firmly established.
17. randy | May 7th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
Slike - the gravy train of free articles is coming to a screeching halt. I am about to get back in the game.
18. His Hand is on the Door &&hellip | May 9th, 2007 at 7:55 am
[…] was the point I was making, in essence, in my post about Barack Obama’s faith last week. You will know a tree by its fruit - those who follow you will only do (to a measure) […]
19. Obama and the REAL measur&hellip | May 18th, 2007 at 3:17 am
[…] INCREDIBLE….. By David Sliker…. Read the rest! YES YES YES!!!! Our desire should not be good works, but rather our works should be the outpouring of a passion that consumes us from within! So many times my heart has just cried out… and I see all the people around me doing good… but not feeling it so deeply within them… Dig deeper guys! THERE IS MORE!!!! […]
20. Erin | February 6th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
Hi!
I went to the session you did about Revelation and the Second Coming, and I don’t think I’d ever heard teaching about the end times like that before(or really, like IHOP’s teaching about the endtimes in general), though I grew up in church.
I went to OneThing a year ago for the first time, knowing virtually nothing about IHOP, and have since gotten hooked.
Anyway, I recently found your blog here, and I’ve really enjoyed reading it.
Good post. This is a topic I’ve been thinking and been concerned about for a while now. It seems to be very tempting in the Church in these pluralistic times to emphasis our committment to social justice while minimizing people’s need to submit themselves to Jesus’ Lordship over their lives. Social justice is a fairly easy sell. Pretty much everyone would agree, whether follower of Jesus or not, that feeding starving people is a good thing(how many of those same people would sacrifice personal comfort to do that, I suspect is another story). Sometimes I feel like we want people to come into the Kingdom so much that we’re willing to soften Jesus’ message, so they won’t be offended and they’ll like Him and us. I include myself here, too. I admit to feeling a strong pressure to compromise here, out of a fear of men.
But on the flip side, James says that saying we have faith in Jesus without good works is dead. And I think of Jesus’ two great commandments, Love God and then love your neighbor as yourself. Which is the only way we can truly love others unselfishly, in spite of their and our own brokenness. Because God demonstrated that kind of love to us first by humbling himself and becoming a servant.
Hmm. Your posts always make me think. Thanks!
21. His Hand is on the Door &&hellip | February 7th, 2008 at 9:47 am
[…] of Missouri to show a candidate’s popularity based on his vote tally. So, for example, Barack Obama had ridiculously large circles over St. Louis city and St. Louis County, which ended up being the […]
22. The Reactionary Posture o&hellip | April 12th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
[…] was the point I was making, in essence, in my post about Barack Obama’s faith last week. You will know a tree by its fruit - those who follow you will only do (to a measure) […]
Leave a Comment
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed