Comments on: Obama: Sermon on Mount Justifies Same-Sex Unions

By: Michael P Bauman

Michael P Bauman — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:02:48 +0000

Whatever Obama’s qualifications may be for President, he is certainly quite deficient as an exegete. As Mr. Jeffrey points out Matthew 5:17-19 “Do not suppose that I have come to weaken the law or the prophets; I have come not to weaken, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, Until heaven and earth pass away, not even a yoth or a dash shall pass away from the law until all of it is fulfilled. Whoever therefore tries to weaken even one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven; but anyone who observes and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven” clearly refutes Obama’s position.

It is also an incredible arrogance to call St. Paul’s letter to the Romans “obscure”.

The mercy of God is to confront our sin, surrender it to Him and be healed, not to ignore and excuse sin.

It is another example of utopian delusion on Obama’s part.

By: D. George

D. George — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 18:42:38 +0000

James K. #1 writes:

I don’t know the mind of Obama, but I think it’s erroneous to suggest that he was asserting that the “Sermon justifies same-sex unions”.

Why ever would he mention that a reading of the Sermon on the Mount would indicate that advocation of same-sex unions should not be controversial? He was clearly implying that the passage implies that the legality of same-sex unions should not be disputed, and therefore the practice should be approved. He goes on to disregard St. Paul’s identification of homosexuality as a sin, which indicates that he recognizes the contradiction between the Pauline passage and his interpretation of the Sermon on the Mount. Again, this must mean that Obama believes that the Sermon on the Mount justifies not only same-sex unions, but homosexuality in general.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t the Orthodox also reject some Pauline theology such as the predestination of the elect which is formulated in Romans 8:28-30?

No. The Orthodox reject none of the Pauline passages or doctrines. They do, however, reject Reformed theology and Reformed interpretations of those passages. This is simple, really, so don’t make it complicated. Just because you might read those passages and interpret them one way, does not mean that the Church rejects those passages if it doesn’t agree with your (or Calvin’s) interpretation.

By: JamesK

JamesK — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 23:51:57 +0000

I don’t know the mind of Obama, but I think it’s erroneous to suggest that he was asserting that the “Sermon justifies same-sex unions”. Instead, I think what he meant is that he finds the general spirit of the Sermon and the words of Christ Himself to be more central to the Christian faith than some of St. Paul’s words.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t the Orthodox also reject some Pauline theology such as the predestination of the elect which is formulated in Romans 8:28-30? There’s a Scriptural case for it, but it is not generally one of the primary tenets of Orthodoxy as it is with the Reformed sects.

In any rate, we’ve hashed this out before, but I don’t think all civil legislation needs to conform to Scriptural ideals: we don’t allow divorce only in the case of adultery, and we don’t criminalize the profaning of the Lord’s day by forbidding retail stores from remaining open on those days. This doesn’t make one a bad Christian, although I think valid constitutional and legal cases can be made for criminalizing abortion.