KevinPurcell.org

It seems democratic Presidential hopeful Barak Obama may have put his foot in his mouth again with regard to people of faith.  According to an article at Baptist Press he miserably failed to properly interpret the Old Testament law and the Sermon on the Mount.

At issue is a 1996 speech in which Obama said that the book of Leviticus tells us to stone wayward children while allowing slavery.  And he also said that the Sermon on the Mount was impossible to follow.  However, in contradiction to his own view he claims that the book of Romans, which clearly states that Homosexuality is not acceptable, is a obscure while the Sermon on the Mount, which he calls central to his faith, is supposedly okay with homosexuality.  Now it maybe that he changed his mind, or as two of them.  Or it might be that he doesn’t fully understand the proper way Christians interpret the Old Testament.

Issue One - Should Christians obey all the laws of Leviticus.  The answer is a definite no.  The laws were the legal code of a nation built upon the principles laid out in the 10 Commandments.  While they help us to further understand the meaning of the Decalogue (10 Commandments) they are not normative for us today.  We study and learn the moral, ethical, and theological principals behind them.  But no Christian should have slaves nor should they stone their children for disobedience.  In fact, the NT book of Philemon seem to say the opposite about slavery.  And the laws regarding slavery in the Old Testament are not necessarily condoning it.  In fact, by comparison to the other societies and cultures of the time, the OT laws that mention slavery clearly move the rights of said slaves forward.

Issue Two - Is the Sermon on the Mount too hard to obey?  Yes and No!  It is a high standard.  I dare say there are not many who have come close to obeying it.  But to dismiss it because of the challenge is defeatist and for lack of a more appropriate term, wimpy!  As Kennedy said, and I paraphrase, we should seek to do it because its hard.  It makes us better for it.  However, God knew we would fail to measure up to the 10 Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount, which serves in Matthew’s Gospel as a kind of New Testament version of the Leviticus.  That is why he sent Jesus to offer another way, grace and forgiveness to all of us failures.  And then he gave us His Holy Spirit to allow us a fighting chance at being obedient.  He gave us not only the means to overcome our failure but also the means to follow up that failure with success when it comes to measuring up to the morals Jesus taught and exemplified.

Issue Three - Can you pick one passage of scripture to follow and not another?  Well, as I demonstrated above the answer is yes.  But with qualifications.  I obey the spirit of the Old Testament law as best I can.  When I fail I recognize the need for forgiveness and seek it.  However, all of the New Testament is the word of God.  We cannot pick the Sermon on the Mount over the book of Romans.  They area both the Word of God.  When Romans 1 says Homosexuality is wrong, then we must assume that is God’s view and not just Paul’s, that is if you interpret the Bible as true and literally so.  And if there is a contradiction between Romans and the Sermon on the Mount it must be that we are failing in our interpretation of one, the other, or both.

Issue Four - Does the Sermon on the Mount teach that Homosexuality is okay?  NO!  Where on earth does he find that?  Some say it comes in the passage where we must not judge.  I doubt that is what Jesus meant.  In fact many people totally misunderstand the concept of the passage.  Jesus was not saying that we should not hold others to moral standards.  Instead he was saying that we should not cast aside people because they are not applying their faith the way we should.  That is true.  Love everyone regardless of their sexual preference, religion, gender, ethnicity, etc.  But that doesn’t mean that I have to lay down my morals so that Barak Obama may institute his.  By his standard he is just as guilty as I am.  The difference is he likes his moral standard and rejects mine.  In a democratic republic I am free to do my best to seek to have my morals legislated instead of his.  But from the secular humanistic perspective, if my morals come from the Christian understanding of the Bible, then they are not acceptable and should be removed from the public square and kept in Sunday School.  That is not the way people live.  We are not able to compartmentalize our true philosophies and theology that way.  Those who do not sincerely hold these truths can.  But if you are sincere about your beliefs you cannot.  And he sincerely believers that Homosexual unions are the way to go in our country just he sincerely believes that doctors should not take any measures to save the life of a baby that survives an abortion. I believe that if we legislate those morals our nation will take one step further towards the moral implosion that befell the Roman Empire.