"During an interview on "Fox News Sunday," which was filmed after Saturday's rally, Beck claimed that Obama "is a guy who understands the world through liberation theology, which is oppressor-and-victim."
"People aren't recognizing his version of Christianity," Beck added.
Beck's attacks represent a continuing attempt to characterize Obama as a radical, an approach that has prompted anxiety among some Republicans, who worry that Beck's rhetoric could backfire. The White House has all but ignored his accusations, but some Democrats have pointed to the Fox News host to portray Republicans as extreme and out of touch.
Beck made the remarks in answer to a question about his previous accusation that Obama was a "racist" who has "a deep-seated hatred for white people." He contended that that statement "was not accurate" and that he had "miscast" Obama's religious beliefs as racism." Washpost
-------------------------------------------------------------------
We haven't had a religious war here (SST) yet. "Now's the time and now's the hour." Beck says that Obama is a false Christian because he is saturated in "liberation theology" which he says is really Marxism in Christian clothing. Well, maybe that is so, or maybe not.
In the same interview, he does say that a lot of Christians do not consider him (Beck) to be a Christian because he is a Mormon. Christianity is generally understood to be a religion that is monotheistic within the context of a belief in the trinity of persons in the one God. (I know that this kind of discussion is meaningless to atheists) The Mormon religion is not monotheistic. Nor is it trinitarian. For me, a necessary corollary of that theology is that the Latter Day Saints Church is Christian only by its own definition of Christianity.
One can fairly ask, who is Glen Beck to question Obama's religious identity as a Christian? Moreover, Romney, if nominated is probably not electable in a national election because of the reaction of many "orthodox" Christians to the LDS Church. Is that fair? No. Is it true? Probably so. pl
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/29/AR2010082903405.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints
Freedom from religions might have been a better approach back in the day.
Or heavily taxing their edifices and incomes and profits might prove to be a kick start to ending the deficit.
A religious war here will have unintended but expectable consequences for various minority religions. I weep for the amish and the quakers and the deists.
Posted by: CK | 30 August 2010 at 11:57 AM
Beck "I don't think that I would be electable."
He's right about this at least. Only 87,000 people at this event? That says quite a bit about Beck. His advertisers are leaving him in droves.
Liberation Theology? I thought this was a movement especially in Latin America which put a great deal of emphasis on helping the poor. I don't much more about it than that, but certainly Glenn Beck is an expert at little other than enriching himself.
Romney would be advised to distance himself from Beck with a bit more haste otherwise he'll be tarred with the same brush.
Posted by: Fred | 30 August 2010 at 12:24 PM
Even an atheist can appreciate a Mormon attacking a mainline Protestant for purported adherence to a politically radical strain of Catholicism that the Vatican killed dead some decades back. It's pretty funny.
Posted by: wcw | 30 August 2010 at 12:25 PM
I didn't know Beck was a Mormon.
But, I consider him such a wack job, I refuse to pay any attention to anything about him.
Where I live is the heart of hard core ultra conservatives and I think most here get all or most of their news from Fox.
It's also Mormon country, but most Mormons I know don't think highly of someone who likes to see himself plastered over the media, Mormon or not.
I wonder, in general, if most people would pay much attention to the fact that a person may be a Mormon.
Posted by: John Minnerath | 30 August 2010 at 12:26 PM
Col. Lang:
For me Beck's questioning of Obama's religious beliefs or even the import of his status as a Mormon is irrelevant when compared to the skill and resourcefulness he has shown in enhancing his image as a national opinion leader. More people than ever are now going to pay attention to what he says about how the rest of us should think. That was the evangelical message of his "Restoring Honor" rally. It could have been a revival meeting taken from the pages of Elmer Gantry. Wasn't it Sinclair Lewis who said that when facism comes to this country it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross?
Posted by: alnval | 30 August 2010 at 12:36 PM
No comment on either Obama's religion or the electability of a Mormon in the US.
I do want to point out the sick irony of various high profile Mormons engaging in this kind of cheap religious demagoguery. First Mitt Romney and Harry Reid jump on the Cordoba mosque and now Beck is trying to drum up this kind of fracas. You'd think they would know better.
Posted by: Medicine Man | 30 August 2010 at 12:39 PM
"I know that this kind of discussion is meaningless to atheists"...
... no, not at all. Nor is it meaningless to agnostics or deists from any origin because at the very least, Pat, your discussion reflects a willingness to look beyond the ideological biases that strong beliefs can, but need not, erect for us whether as individuals or as communities.
I could make all the logical and historical arguments about the dubiousness of monotheism in its Christian guise, but that would be incredibly disrespectful... and I have known too many good people over the years who happened to be Mormons or fundamentalist evangelicals (esp. scientific-types during my short stint in government/defense research circles) to be too hard on the "unusual" aspects of their theology (and that goes for Catholics, too)...
... however, I'm more curious about how Mr. Beck can question the sincerity or depth Mr. Obama's faith and not simultaneously question that of people like Jim Wallis, Ted Haggard, Robert Schuller, Billy Graham, or even Dr. King.
No, I think Glenn B. is simply working backward from the exclusionary vision that he wants to apply that would explain all the troubles we face (ie., it's someone else's fault...) rather than first look into his own worldview and the practices so enjoined to see how it has contributed to these troubling times...
... or maybe he's just trying to hew his own cross to bear (though out of other people's gold...).
Posted by: batondor | 30 August 2010 at 12:50 PM
I find Glenn Beck to be a devisive, delusional and dangerous person.
Who is he and who is the tea party to question if President Obama is a christian or not. No one seemed to be questioning President Bush when he was president.
Maybe they feel that a black man cannot be a christian and should not be president. They are an ignorant, uncivil group and they have become dangerous because they have millions of dollars in funding from ultra rich conservatives and a pulpit to speak from in the guise of Fox News.
Shame on all of them.
Posted by: Nancy K | 30 August 2010 at 12:50 PM
batondor
I was not pontificating (joke) on the truth or lack of it in orthodox Christianity's trinitarian creed. I was merely reminding of the difference.
Nancyk
You are mistaken about the black thing. Many of thosed who would not accept that Mormons are Christians easily believe that blacks are such.
John Minnerath
The Bible Belt is filled with such people. A lot of them do not think hat Catholics are Christians either. pl
Posted by: Patrick Lang | 30 August 2010 at 12:56 PM
A lot of people don't know this but federal law enforcement is by and large filled with mormons. The term "mormon mafia" isn't an uncommon one and I have seen more than one situation that would have resulted in someone being fired getting swept under the rug because of where they go to church.
Posted by: tyler | 30 August 2010 at 01:07 PM
most people are exposed to the "milk" & not the "meat" doctrines of the Saints. they would blow your socks off. God living on the planet Kolob, Celestial marriages, spirit children, baptism of the dead, etc.
Posted by: WILL | 30 August 2010 at 01:23 PM
Sir: if I might recommend a couple of resources - the first is Alexander Zaitchik's Common Nonsense. This is a recent, in depth, and very readable biography of Mr. Beck. It deals with his development from mooring zoo dj to what he is now, as well as thoroughly tracking his religious and political conversion and development. Later I'll pull the links for the online university that he has established; university here being a loose term for a variety of web video lectures detailing Beck's take on American religion, history, and politics.
As for liberation theology: I would recommend the works of Father Gustavo Guttierez, a Peruvian priest (if I recall correctly a Jesuit). In the Latin American variety the central theme is that Jesus has a preferential option for the poor. I'm in the process of unpacking my new office, so once I get to his books I'll post a title or two. F
Finally, just a quick point: African American liberation theology, or the liberation strain in African American theology is different than that of either Latin American Catholic liberation theology or African liberation theology. All three will use some similar language and imagery, the Exodus fro, Egypt, for instance, but they are clearly bounded by the contexts in which they developed.
Posted by: Adam L Silverman | 30 August 2010 at 01:27 PM
Glen Beck is ignorant when it comes to Christianity or any other religion. He loves to throw the word "honor" up in the air, but where is his sense of respect for those with different beliefs. He is a false prophet.
What does his popularity say about the rubes and goobers who swallow it whole?
Posted by: Paul | 30 August 2010 at 01:58 PM
Don't know if the first post went through.
Check out skippy the bush kangroo @ http://xnerg.blogspot.com/
Go the Saturday August 28, 2010, "A Face in the Crowd", "Dark Night of the Soul" scene
Posted by: Brad Ruble | 30 August 2010 at 02:02 PM
On a less-than-serious note, no discussion of Mormonism in the internet age is complete without a link to the two minute theological overview that is Mormon Jesus.
Posted by: Redhand | 30 August 2010 at 02:32 PM
The US is loosing time and money with these discussions about religion.
While the US shows the world a great display of "Magical thinking", China, were 90% of the population is atheist is focusing on business. They just became the worlds second biggest economy, and must be looking in amusement at the Big Noses discussion about their sky god.
Have you noticed the Chinese come to US universities to take back knowledge and NOT to any churches synagogues or mosques.
Posted by: Farmer Don | 30 August 2010 at 02:47 PM
Sir,
I found the Gutierrez section of my library. I'd recommend: A Theology of Liberation, The Power of the Poor in History, We Drink from Our Wells, and On Job.
Posted by: Adam L Silverman | 30 August 2010 at 02:51 PM
The Christological battles during the first centuries AD/CE that led to the adoption of trinitarianism as the majority position are quite fascinating, if a little hard to follow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecumenical_Council
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitarianism
Posted by: Allen Thomson | 30 August 2010 at 02:57 PM
The rally was a very slick way of helping to re-invent the tea-party and help to meld in the religious conservatives with the libertarian conservatives.
I watched much of and it was pretty milquetoast other than the fact that Beck is openly pushing for some sort of American theocracy. He kept the loony tunes out of sight.
Interestingly the organizers forbade the attendees from bringing their own signs. So as to reduce the wingnutty Obama hatred visuals.
As for Romney I found it interesting that I have never heard anyone in the media point out that Romney has a serious Southern problem. Romney did not win one single Southern primary in 2008. East and West, but a total shutout in Dixie.
I can only deduce that his faith had a big role in that.
Posted by: GregB | 30 August 2010 at 03:30 PM
"Is that fair? No. Is it true? Probably so."
"It no consolation to learn that truth is in accordance with reality.". The sentence stuck with me, though I never checvked out the context i detail.*)
What's hard for a lot of us to understand it the feverish disregard of facts thats evident in the Tea Party complex. We have some of the same in Europe, but not in that righteous irrational splendor.
I sounds to me that a lot of people are out to postulate truths without wanting to deal with reality.
Not wanting to accept with some kind of reality may be the whole point of it.
The interesting thing is that the people that blind themselves with homebuilt truths will be ignorant for the "real reality" as opposed to the one they percieve that the want to avoid.
How should reason deal with that?
I'm not aiming to be condescending here. I'm simply trying to grasp something I'm observing from the outside (and across an ocean).
Paul Hartvigson, Denmark
((*) the quoute is Richard Rorty on Henry James, but I'm not that well read there, that I'd go into that.))
Posted by: Paul Hartvigson, Denmark | 30 August 2010 at 03:44 PM
So, where did this vile hate speech originate?
Over time, there seems to be a pattern in the memes that the "conservative" movement preaches. Usually, it is a hate filled soup that plays to the fears of the portion of the white middle class that feels vulnerable to their own aging and economic weakness.
To a large degree, however, the bellweather of each new mime can be found in the National Review. Take this piece-of-work for example.
Posted by: WP | 30 August 2010 at 04:26 PM
Farmer Don
for people who actually believe in the truth of Christianity, the progress of the Chinese is a secondary matter. pl
Posted by: Patrick Lang | 30 August 2010 at 04:30 PM
Sorry about the link in my last post. Here is the link http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/244954/ground-zero-mosque-it-s-not-location-it-s-sharia-deroy-murdock
Posted by: WP | 30 August 2010 at 04:36 PM
Christ urged his followers to give to the poor, and the Preamble to the Constitution has the government "promote the general welfare."
What part of all that do Beck and his followers not understand?
Posted by: Bart | 30 August 2010 at 05:10 PM
Another interesting link to the National Review
http://www.nationalreview.com/search/?q=sharia&sa=Search+NRO&cx=partner-pub-7596656896688386%3Aktx6rmwscfs&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=ISO-8859-1#986
If the link does not work for you go to the National Review and search on "Sharia"
Click through a few pages and of links and one can see where the wackos get their talking points. It seems that these people want a religious persecution. If these people ever got their power over us, I wonder who would be the Grand Inquisitor?
Also, what individuals are funding this stuff?
Posted by: WP | 30 August 2010 at 05:11 PM