I only put this putrid interview up so you could hear Obama's pastor, who is very popular but is a nutjob, continually beseech (sometimes rather testily) Hannity to read books by "Cone." The Cone referred to is James Cone, who wrote "A Black Theology of Liberation."
Here's a quote by Cone. Cone says, "The most corrupting influence among the black churches was their adoption of the `white lie' that Christianity is primarily concerned with another world reality.", (Cone, Black Theology and Black Power, p. 121)
Another life in heaven is not the concern of blacks. They desire the opportunity to enjoy and determine their lives now in this life. Cone comments on this view, "If eschatology means that one believes that God is totally uninvolved in the suffering of men because he is preparing them for another world, then Black Theology is not eschatological. Black Theology is an earthly theology!"(Cone, Black Theology and Black Power, p. 123)
You see, whitey incorrectly taught the blacks to look to another life, a heaven where they'd be free. And, according to Black Liberation Theologians, that was all wrong.
The central theme of Black Liberation Theology is oppression. Salvation is being freed from oppression.
If you're wondering when Black Liberation Theology is going to mention Christ in the context of "central themes" and "salvation", you might be waiting a while. In this view, Jesus understood oppression and was one of the most oppressed people ever. But the whole "other world"...."eschataological"...talk? That's all whitey. I think whitey translated the Dead Sea Scrolls, too.
Just trying to let you put this all in context the next time you see Mr. Obama talk about being a Christian and having faith. What was our problem with Romney again?
LinkWithin
even for you greg this is low. let me see if i get your point:
ReplyDeleteA. Cone has a theological view that is unorthodox/unbiblical.
B. Obama goes to a church pastored by a strict follower of Cone.
C. Therefore, Obama's faith must be unorthodox/unbiblical.
This argument commits a syllogistic fallacy - Guilt by Association.
If you are going to 'pronounce' your Christianity, then those from whom you get your pastoral support and the church you 'attend' should be Christian. Christian as defined in the Word of God, not the Word of Any Man. If I knew that my pastor was drawing his "theology" from the works of a few men, and not referencing God and His Word as the author of his faith, I would find another church. This is confirmation that B.H.O. is just pandering to those who say Christian values are desirable in a candidate (but don't look beyond the surface - sadly, this is too often the case). This 'pastor' never even referenced Christ, and neither has B.H.O. By the way, guilt by association is a very real and logical argument, especially when the subject is well aware of all premises involved.
ReplyDeleteInteresting, Dan, that you wouldn't champion Romney when the same syllogistic tact was taken at this blog. Are you commenting to defend logic, or your socialist?
ReplyDeleteHere's my fallacial argument:
A. Mormonism has a theological view that is unorthodox/unbiblical.
B. Romney goes to a church pastored by a strict follower of Mormon.
C. Therefore, Romney's faith must be unorthodox/unbiblical.
In the past, when this unorthodox/unBiblical pastor has said irresponsible and outrageous things, Obama has simply publicly spoken his disagreement.
Why can't he be equally forthright about the racism evident in his church's beliefs?
And the whole "guilt by association" assertion is slimy. This is his pastor, his spiritual leader, at a church he proudly calls his own (I can get you the attribution, it's in the International Herald Tribune, "Barack Obama's Search For Faith"). Isn't that different than someone calling you guilty of my sins because we work together?
How low can I go? I guess low enough to wonder if this person is what he says he is. And wonder if we'll accept a bunch of sparkling generalisms while he's instituting his brand of socialism at the cost of future generations.