does Barack Obama believe in the divinity of Christ?

[angus]

awful thread

agreed.  at a minimum, it's one that is very inappropriately placed. 

moderator really should move this one out of this board.

[angus]

why is this such a horrible thread?  I'm not trying to imply that he is a Muslim.  I just find his wording to be interesting when speaking of his religious background/affiliation...

I believed and still believe in the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change.


...which sounds to me as if he may view Christianity as a vehicle for social reform.  that isn't mutually exclusive with believing in the divinity of Christ, by any means, but it doesn't sound like he was "called" (as jmfcst claims to have been, for example).

"I'm not trying to imply that he's a muslim"  That's getting so old.  Reminds me of a Seinfeld episode.  "...not that there's anything wrong with that."  No one is claiming that you implied he's a muslim.  I certainly didn't.  And even if he is a Muslim, I have no problem with that.  The fact that it did occur to you to utter that statement, though, is a bit disconcerting, and adds to the weirdness of the thread.  But it was already weird before you typed that.

First, it doesn't belong in this board.  It would be great under "off-topic" stuff, or maybe even "general US discussion" (that's a stretch), but it certainly doesn't belong here.

Also, and more importantly, who can say whether Obama believes in the divinity of Christ?  Who can say whether any man believes in the divinity of Christ?  Who can say what another believes about anything?  And who cares?  Maybe you do, but it's a highly philosophical question--one that probably different sects of Christians have gone to war over, maybe when they're not busy fighting over whether it's legal to divorce the Queen or whether women can be altar boys, or whatever different sects of Christians fight over these days--but it's not a question that any of us can answer.  I suspect you already know all this, and are just looking for data--Some correlation between answers and demographic, as evidenced by the choices you offer--but it still doesn't belong in this board.  And that's my only objection.  But, like elcorazon, I also find it a bit awful, since it serves no practical purpose because it cannot be objectively answered by anyone other than one person, and that person is probably too busy to be posting here. 

It's like me putting up a poll, in this board, asking whether my dog is gay.  Because (1) none of you know whether my dog is gay, and (2) my dog's sexual orientation has nothing to do with the Presidential Election of 2008, and (3) so what if he's gay?, and (4) I wouldn't have a fucking dog.  Dogs are nasty.  I'm still amazed that there are people who let them live in their houses.  Bizarre.  I could understand it if this were 30,000 BC and we lived in a hut made of ivory mammoth tusks and a floor made of bear skins and pissed in our own soupbowls, and we were hunting mammoths in an ice-covered part of what is now the Crimean Penninsula, and we depended on the wolves to help us find, and kill, mammoths.  But I live in a suburb, with a well-manicured lawn that I don't want dug up and shat upon, and I have an electronic alarm system, I get my meat at a supermarket from a butcher, and I have the bright, glowing images on my television to keep me company.  So whether it's gay, straight or asexual, I still have no use for them.  And I certainly wouldn't want the filthy beasts pissing on my carpet and getting fleas on my bed.  That's all I'm saying.

[angus]

There's no real reason to think that he doesn't. In fact, you'd better all hope that he does... because if he's been a churchgoer for several decades for the purposes of political ambition then that makes him a rather monstrous individual.

But apparently Miami and many others in our society are obsessed with this.

And I'm astonished that even after the election is settled, even after all the Jeremiah Wright and pseudo-Islam and petty mudslinging and Megapastor Rick Warren interviews and "faith" forum, many still haven't had enough.  

Are you not tired of presidential candidates being asked what are deeply personal and private questions and none of any one else's business?  Are you not tired of hearing discussions of who is and who isn't a poly-, a-, or monotheist, and which type of monotheist they might be, and whose god can kick all the other gods' asses?  Are you not astonished by such profound arrogance as is shown when a man claims to know what is in another's mind, especially when it is someone he hasn't even met?

Whether Obama is nominally a Polytheist, or an Atheist, or a Category 1 Monotheist, or a Category 2 Monotheist, is a fair question.  And it has been answered.  He is, by training and by tradition, a monotheist.  Granted, he seems to have a tad more formal ecuminicism in his formal training (too much, say some, although I still argue that it's to our benefit that he has had more of a global education than our Arkansan hillfolk 42nd president and our Connecticut blue-blood prep school and curiously uncurious 43rd president.)  But to ask him about his beliefs is rather an effront to his privacy, especially since it seems to me that it isn't in his nature to wear his religion on his sleeve, and that he'd prefer not to discuss the deeper recesses of his spirituality (if he has any) with the masses.  

Also, I'm not sure I agree entirely with your comment.  Well, I agree with the first sentence.  There's no reason to think one way or the other.  But it's the part about hoping that he does that I have qualms with.  As you well know, one can be nominally monotheist, but have no particular spiritual reverence.  In fact most of the nominal monotheists I know don't have any particular "beliefs."  They go through all the proper motions:  weddings, bar mitzvahs, funerary rituals, baptisms, and such.  But whether they have any particular belief in a cosmic one-ness or universal beneficience is entirely unrelated.  And I suspect many upstanding church- and templegoers are fairly agnostic and irreligious.  As you have pointed out, many folks go through ethnoreligious rituals and attended masses for entirely sincere, but unspiritual, reasons.  And, getting to know a community that you may one day wish to legislatively represent is, in my opinion, one such reason.)  Similarly, one can be nominally atheist, but still hold deep convicitions in one's immortal spirit, and even in gods and other higher powers.  (In fact, I also know a few nominal atheists who are quite convinced in the existence not only of spirits, but also in the existence of universal higher powers.  I've found that this is quite common especially among East Asians recently immigrated to the United States.)  So, there can be Monotheists who are true believers, and Monotheists who are not, and the same can be said for Poly-, and Atheists.  And, while it's fair to ask about one's formal ethnoreligious ties (which one cannot escape although people often try to convince themselves that they can), it is a different prospect altogether to engage a stranger in questions of metaphysics as a means of grading his ability to deal with the physical world.  Obama isn't running for the office of chief metaphysicist or Minister of Philosophy, after all.

And good for Obama for not initiating such conversations trivially and for the purpose of political gain.  McCain's a bit like that too.  This campaign could have been the antithesis of the Bush/Gore campaign.  Back in 2000, we had to listen incessantly to charges of who's holier than whom.  Neither of the present candidates, on the other hand, really have a naturally-occurring penchant for wearing it on the sleeves.  I, for one, found it refreshing.  But some folks insisted on this line of questioning during the campaign.  And some are still doing it.  

None of you are capable of answering this question.  Only Obama is, and I wouldn't ask him, because I think it's a very private matter.  Oh, sure, if I were his girlfriend, and we'd been seeing each other for a while, and one evening after he gave me a particularly good back-arching multi, and afterward we were lying back in bed, smoking some prime Afghani black and drinking some Murphy Goode Cabernet and I was starting to feel really like he might be the one, then I might ask him such deeply profound and personal questions.  And maybe his answer would give me some insight into whether he was the sort of man whose seed I might one day like to nurture, but I'm not really in that situation, am I.  And even in that case, it really wouldn't affect my vote.  Only my personal relations with him.  And maybe not even that.  

[angus]

I can't quite find a groove to respond to the rest of it.  sorry!!

I guess there are some folks who really like hearing all this religious stuff on the campaign trail.  And because I'm not one of them I just don't get it.  My only hope was that now that the campaign's over, we can finally shut up about it.  Moreover, and more importantly, you're one-upping the talking heads, because whereas they mostly debated about his formal religious affiliations, you are actually attempting to turn a question that only one man can answer into a poll question.  Very disturbing.  I'll leave it at that and surrender. 

As for the aside, it must have crept into my head after I glanced at a "what dog should be the next occupant of the White House" thread title.  I'm thinking:  WTF?  I guess I should go over there to rant about that, though.

[angus]

Several of our Presidents did not believe in the divinity of Jesus. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, John Quincy Adams, William Howard Taft... Not one of them believed in Jesus' divinity.

The relevant point being that you know that because of their writings, not because of some poll question directed to geeks who have nothing better to do on a Saturday night than answer it.