Ever wondered what Christianity looks like in practice? Look no further than… President Obama!

Obama - Christianity in Action

I saw this today at a demonstration at UT-Austin in front of Gregory Gym and the library. Of all the ridiculous things I’ve seen in the past year, I think this takes the cake.

I asked the gentleman how Obama could be “Christianity in action” if it requires aggression against a neighbor to act. His response, I kid you not, was that back in the first century they had despots as leaders, and now we have representative government. After laughing hysterically, I then proceeded to ask how he justifies his task of blowing up the Middle East, I mean, they’re still his representatives of Christ, right? On the contrary: “Love for neighbor cannot be delegated” said Pope Benedict XVI.

I just can’t wait for Obama to go back to DC so he can put more Christianity into action!

I’ll post more about the protest later. Lots of stuff happened…

Thanks to Heather from LP-Texas for taking the picture. Heroic!

Dr. Norman Horn

Norman founded LibertarianChristians.com and the Libertarian Christian Institute, and currently serves as its President and Editor-in-Chief. He holds a PhD in Chemical Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin and a Master of Arts in Theological Studies from the Austin Graduate School of Theology. He currently is a Postdoctoral researcher in Chemical Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  • Christianity = forced “charity”, where charity = “creating and perpetuating systemic misery”. (By the definition of the sign-holder)

  • Pingback: Christianity in Action – the Obama Presidency | The Libertarian Standard()

  • LOL, it's almost an Orwellian phrase, don't you think?

  • Pingback: Demonstration Report from UT-Austin on August 9, 2010 | LibertarianChristians.com()

  • I love how this guy's definition of “Christianity” is purely material.

    I don't want to imply all the extra racist/genocidal baggage of other political leaders (like that over-the-top Tea Party billboard), but I think it's worth noting that the “administrations” of Stalin, Lenin, and Hitler implemented similar solutions to what this sign touts as “Christianity in action” (immigration aside, in some cases).

    Is Jesus' call really that simple? All I have to do is promote “programs” for the poor? AWESOME!

  • Pingback: Demonstration Report from UT-Austin on August 9, 2010 | The Libertarian Standard()

  • wow, your reaction to that really was to “laugh hysterically” ?!

    the poster actually has detailed reasons to back up his point, and your response is holier-than-thou hysterical laughter.

    you call it ridiculous and ‘insane’ but fail to demonstrate why. your blog seems to simply gather like-minded people and mock those who disagree rather than seek some sort of genuine understanding.

    i clicked your facebook and it says you’re a graduate student. i would have expected more, but sadly, it seems, your graduate program hasn’t fostered in you an open or analytic mind yet.

  • Dear Bunson: Please note that everything started with discussion. I asked him a question about the use of aggression for charity. He answered that the difference between then and now is “representative government,” and I laughed because of the utter contradiction it embodied — on multiple levels. (I’ll admit, I should never have written that I laughed “hysterically,” because that was not really true and implies much more disrespect. On the day of it was a laugh of “are you kidding me?” more than anything.) My further question should show that I *was* taking his response seriously: if they truly are your representatives, doing the will of God, then are you going to go the next step and say they are God’s representatives blowing up people in the Middle East?

    I didn’t think it necessary to continue writing about the conversation from then on. But, another gal present at that moment absolutely laid into him, accusing him of not even being a Christian for supporting Obama and vicariously the wars as well. At that point, I went to his defense and said, “Hold on there, lady, we may disagree but that is uncalled for.”

    You may not believe this statement, and I can’t stop you from doing so. But do understand that more happened here than was originally written.

  • Jaired Hall

    Norman, I almost commented and queried, “did you really laugh hysterically”? . . . knowing that you hadn’t. Funny that bunson made your overstatement part of his problem with you and your blog.

    I don’t know about “common understanding” (maybe bunson and I mean the same thing when I say we need to be careful not to “talk past each other”) (curious–is a common understanding reached when one person shoots another in war? (to be fair, nothing buson says suggests he is pro-war), but I think a different “type” of post in your blog might help garner more comments . . . I’ve had a thought regarding this for quite some time now, but I’ve never figured out how to put it into words to explain myself. Maybe I’ll send you an email one of these days . . .

    Anyhow . . . how does one explain the bunson type (I notice his post and your response were five days ago)? Sniper? Troll? Drive by? Hit and run? It happens to my blog too. Somebody is furious about one post in particular. They attack it bitingly. And then they don’t stick around to hear or respond to the explanation.

    Such, I guess, is the way of the internet.

  • Jaired: You are right that different kinds of posts garner more comments than others. The best data for this is, quite simply, look at the posts that seem to get the most comments. They either have (a) tons of views like the gun article and the Josephus article, or (b) proffer something controversial and question-raising, or (c) made someone think deeply and want to ask a specific question.

    I’m trying to figure out ways to do the same, if you want to brainstorm about this for a bit, let’s do some emailing. Although, if anybody wants to chime in PLEASE do so! :-D