The Christian Candidates and the Question of Evil

Stump speech or answers? Warren asked for no stump speech. McCain ignored him while Obama obliged. McCain answered with story after story: Let me tell you just one more story. Obama listened and answered each question in turn with thorough - for the time constraints - and reasoned responses, always rooting his answers in truth about himself. McCain used the forum to engrandize himself as a war hero.

Obama came out the winner. McCain came out the favourite. What would we expect from an evangelical crowd that is predominantly Republican? But what about that 14% that is uncommitted? And the 11% that is for Obama? And don't forget that even Evangelicals think about other issues. Many might and will change their minds when given the choice between real action and scripted, Bushlike responses.

In the predominantly republican evangelical community of basically two-issues (gay marriage and abortion) the dice were already loaded against Barack Obama as indicated in an earlier HIV press release disclaimer:

"Though he is not a keynote speaker, Purpose Driven and Saddleback Church are acutely aware of the strong opposition to Democratic Senator Barack Obama being one of many featured participants on the program."

But when asked about his Christianity, Obama gave a very thoughtful answer with a lot of detail, scriptural reference and how it works out in his day to day; whereas when asked what it meant to be a Christian, McCain said: "It means I'm saved and forgiven" in bumper-sticker fashion and then went on to give diversionary testimony of someone elses christianity and nothing about his own.

"Obama gave a very thoughtful answer with a lot of detail, scriptural reference"

One reference to one verse in one book of the Gospel, coupled with the textbook response of "Jesus died for my sins" is not what I call "thoughtful" or "detailed".

As an Evangelical, I agree with Ralph that McCain's approach was irritating. Very reminiscent of Reagan and Dubya. When asked a question deserving a thoughtful response, he veered off into a folksy anecdote dripping with manufactured pathos. I felt like jumping up and shouting "Don't patronize me!" The Christian community deserves better than that.

Although I am pro-life, and therefore not entirely happy with Obama's answer on abortion, I did think he made a significant effort to reach out to pro-lifers. He said something to the effect that if one is consistently pro-life, then "I can't argue with you." He also said that there were genuine moral concerns with abortion. Those are somewhat encouraging.

All in all, I thought the Saddleback forum was a good thing. Not perfect. But a step in the right direction. An earnest effort to set aside partisanship and the tired Left/Right dichotomy and focus on issues. Also, the event showed secular Americans a much more intelligent, balanced example of Evangelicalism. Even though I thought a few of Warren's questions were lame, and I wished he had followed through on answers, this was a good start.

I agree with a few in saying that both men are intersting and has given us much to consider. I certainly like MaCain's quick answers.
I totally like the thought behind Obama's answers. Certainly there is enough pain and guilt projected from many evangelicals to those outside their doors. We must make sure we are not inflicting unnecessary pain and hurt on people just in the name of Christianity.
If you believe in the works of Jesus, you see he included people never excluded anyone, except the Pharisees of course...That's a thought. A lot has been done in the name of Christianity that is certainly not like the Jesus we read about in scripture. Are we in any position to judge others. I don't think so ! God is
The only one who qualifies for that job, thank goodness.
Obama pretty much explained salvation and the life of a "believer".
I pray he really has experienced it as he says he has.
MCain is without doubt a very good man as he has proven except to his ex wife and God bless him for even bringing that part up.
McCain has many many memorable and significant stories from his life.
What a very brave man he is !
Obama has yet to experience much in his young life.
This is the choices we have in November. I think most of our confusion is based on the fact we have "republicans" versus "democrats". Mostly groups and not solutions ! Choose one and then Vote in November. May God help us no matter who it is . It just might be the one I didn't vote for? You think?

A good Christian is not a title or a campaign speech. A good Christian is how one lives their life. A good Christian doesn't have to tell the world in order to get votes. It's something that is obvious in those who truly live their life that way.

It's the biggest hypocrites who are the first to wrap themselves in the American flag and the cross of Jesus.

I applaud your analysis of the evangelical perspective on evil, but unfortunately must agree with respondents that for evangelicals, the presidential vote boils down the issues of homosexuality and abortion almost exclusively.

Do we need a constitutional amendment defining marriage in order to prevent Christians from wanting to marry their homosexual partners?

Do we need a federal law against abortion to prevent Christians from having extra-marital sex and unwanted pregnancies?

If these two questions are answered yes, than the Body of Christ is quite obviously failing in its mission to lead and shepherd its own people and it's preposterous to expect a secular state to govern a spiritual body.

If we answer no, then we must at least admit to ourselves that we are attempting to legislate the dictates or our faith upon the unbelieving lost.

At the risk of asking yet another question, I ask any conservative evangelical: Is the light of Christ to the lost best communicated through the edicts of a secular state?

Unfortunately, conservative evangelicals only see the right vs. wrong of the issue and I worry that they often neglect the personal responsibility of effecting change through witness, instead opting for a pretense of righteousness through a fervent demand for legislation.

Through this demand, they (evangelicals) are vilified by their detractors. Evangelical are considered unloving, ignorant and hypocritical. For example: Many evangelicals often fail to realize that those who are "Pro-Choice" are almost without exception opposed to abortion. The underlying issue is not whether abortion is wrong-both sides agree on this-but what should be the character and method for reducing the number of abortions? Obama touched on this at Warren's church when he suggested the importance of "reducing the number of abortions", but unfortunately (not only for him, but for all of us) he failed to explicate this nuance clearly.

For myself I beleive there is evil in the world. by taking away human rights such as abortion arent you asking to raise from birth to age 18 all of these children? from school clothes to marraige and everything inbetween? Healthcare for crack babies,alchol syndrome and all the evil that was dealt them without there choice.If the economy was fantastic all over the world I can see this as feasable,until then IF you take away this right we better be prepared to spend ALOT of money
on welfare and disability. This is my view,something to think about.

Wednesday August 20th,2008

The Clear delineation between candidates --- is Overtly evident in the Responses to this (Religious/Evangelical)"True TOWN HALL FORUM".

The contributer, Feels that Sen OBAMA...Needs to 'Face' Sen. McCain

with a few more of these "OPEN FORUMS" Prior to his 'LAST -KICK' in the race

for Head of State (President) cumulating in Early November! One sees that

there is a Reluctance to Address Issues and Answers,on the SAME Open

Rostrum Opposite Sen. McCAIN by the resilent Sen. Obama. Hear the

VOICE of the Populus...this will NOT, REPEAT NOT...work in His Favour!

There Has ALWAYS Been a Clear Openness and diliberent

understanding what EACH CANDIDATE Really Believes....and the Clear

Report of those Differences Are OFTEN MADE By the 'sound bytes'or

Visual Interviews from the Internet Facilities,and the NEWS/Mascom

ALWAYS...Verbatim,by interview(er) or By FIRST PERSON ACCOUNT! The

candidates' OWN Words & Testimony. This is to therefore, "BAR" any

Spin,delusions,'second -hand Rubbish or Chattle'...Not Attributed to

the Candidate,or their Campaign Office...DIRECTLY(ie., "The NEWS

EMBARGO").

A Constitutional amendment will not "prevent Christians from wanting to marry their homosexual partners." A federal law against abortion will not prevent Christians from having extra-marital sex and unwanted pregnancies." Both propositions are preposterous. The Constitution can no more prevent people from wanting something than a stop light can prevent people from wanting to drive. It is interesting, however, to read the implicit confession that the purpose of these prohibitions is to control other persons' desires.

Obama is pro-choice. But will he extend that pro-choice to smokers? will he or anyone extend pro-choice to seat-belts? If you believe a woman has a right to abort a child, then why do we condemn and make illegal the right of smokers to light up? why/how can we make it illegal for someone to drive a car without a seat belt?