Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Is Obama Really A Christian?

While driving to the airport yesterday morning, I was listening to the Rick Roberts radio show. During hour #3 or #4, one caller insisted that Barack Obama is a Muslim. He cited Snopes.com as the source for his information.

Roberts countered the callers claim by mentioning that Obama is a member of a Christian church - Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. I will have a lot more to reveal about that church a bit later in this post.

The radio show caller mistakenly claimed that Obama took his oath as senator with his hand on the Koran. He didn't. It was Keith Ellison who did that. (stunning that Ellison was permitted to do that...isn't it?)

The exchange and commentary during the show was quite humorous at times. And, it appears that the radio host is quite impressed with Obama. He thinks that Obama will end up getting the Democratic nomination.

Last evening, I was following links to other blogs and found some disturbing information about Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ.

Please remember, I am merely reporting what was written at the site. Please don't come back and call me a racist.

Here is a link to the original post: Obama surging in New Hampshire.

Here is part of the comment conversation that I thought was quite troubling:

27. FmrMarine January 6th, 2008 at 10:44 am

THIS is an evangelical ???
this is PART of their website

More of a CULT than evangelical.

Trinity United Church of Christ

About Us

We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian… Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain “true to our native land,” the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.

Trinity United Church of Christ adopted the Black Value System written by the Manford Byrd Recognition Committee chaired by Vallmer Jordan in 1981. We believe in the following 12 precepts and covenantal statements. These Black Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever Blacks are gathered. They must reflect on the following concepts:

1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to
the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for
Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black
Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.

28. neocon January 6th, 2008 at 10:51 am
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System

I can’t disagree with you FmrMarine. Shouldn’t America, and the world be concerned that Obama would seek counsel from his church? I mean that is the concern of the uber-liberals in re: to Huckabee, right?

Well, #11 above should definitely have them concerned. Unless they’re hypocrites.

29. FmrMarine January 6th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Maybe this is why he refused to face the flag and put his hand over his heart.

He is nothing more than a half black david duke, that the media and liberals are falling on their face and worshiping, BECAUSE of his color….NOTHING more , he is an empty suit, and a racist.

30. sleepygene January 6th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Project much marine. sheeesh.

31. Eric T January 6th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Racism is wrong!
The Libs seem to love it. So let’s talk about it.

If we are going to allow black racism let’s take a good close look at what it leads to.

According to the FBI UCR report, about 1,700 White on Black hate crimes, there were nearly 2 million Black on White crimes. Yet, while the statistics for hate crimes receive extensive media coverage, the statistics for interracial crimes are rarely mentioned

There are 20,000 black-on-white rapes every year in the US, but fewer than 100 white-on-black rapes.

Editor note: that works out to about 54 black on white rapes per day according to available statistics from 1999.
One cannot help but notice where that church's true agenda resides.

For a church that labels itself "Christian," I did not see "A commitment to Jesus Christ" anywhere on that list...did you?

I didn't see anything about "a commitment to God's Word, the Bible" anywhere on that list...did you?

I did not see Jesus' commandment to "go into all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit," did you?

I did not see any motivation or "commitment" to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ...did you?

Back to the Snopes.com article.

My blogging friend Anna once shared that Snopes is a partisan website that leans liberal and Democratic. No wonder they worked so frantically to dispel the "rumors" about Obama's Muslim roots.

I recall that during the "he's a Muslim;" "no he's not" back and forth between Rick Roberts and the caller on the radio show yesterday, the caller mentioned that (paraphased) "one doesn't leave the Muslim faith as an apostate without being a lethal target for doing so."

When I read the snopes article this morning, it appears to me that maybe, quite possibly, if it is true that Obama is not a follower of Islam and the Koran, perhaps it is more likely that he is as skeptic; maybe even an agnostic or full-blown atheist (like his mother).

Obama's own words led me to think this way.

Of his mother's religious views, Obama wrote:

For my mother, organized religion to often dressed up closed-mindedness in the garb of piety, cruelty and oppression in the cloak of righteousness.

This isn't to say that she provided me with no religious instruction. In her mind, a working knowledge of the world's great religions was a necessary part of any well-rounded education. In our household, the Bible, the Koran, and the Bhagavad Gita sat on shelves alongside book of Greek and Norse and African Mythology. On Easter or Christmas Day, my mother might drag me to church, just as she dragged me to the Buddhist temple, the Chinese New Year celebration, the Shinto shrine, and ancient Hawaiian burial sites. But I was made to understand that such religious samplings required no sustained commitment on my part. Religious was an expression of human culture, she would explain, not its wellspring - just one of the many ways - and not one of the best ways that man attempted to control the unknowable and understand the deeper truths about our lives.

In sum, my mother viewed religion through the eyes of the anthropologist she would become; it was a phenomenon to be treated with a suitable respect, but with a suitable detachment as well.

In an April 2004 Chicago Sun-Times article, note how Obama tells about his "personal relationship with Jesus Christ":

Obama is unapologetic in saying he has a "personal relationship with Jesus Christ." As a sign of that relationship, he says, he walked down the aisle of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ in response to the reverend Jeremiah Wright's altar call one Sunday morning about 16 years ago.

The politician could have ended his spiritual tale right there, at the point where some people might assume his life changed, when he got "saved", "transformed," washed in the blood. But Obama wants to clarify what truly happened.

"It wasn't an epiphany," he says of that public profession of faith. "It was much more of a gradual process for me. I know there are some people who fall out. Which is wonderful. God bless them...I think it was just a moment to certify or publicly affirm a growing faith in me."

I have questions. Does this sound like a genuine, born-again in Jesus Christ testimony?

Jesus said that "we MUST be born again." His words, not mine.

My questions:

What did Obama mean when he stated, "it wasn't an epiphany?"

What was he talking about when he stated, "I know that some people fall out?"

And, his comment that walking up that aisle was "just a moment to certify a growing 'faith' within himself?" Faith in whom?

Notice, also, that the newspaper interviewer wrote this part:

"The politician could have ended his spiritual tale right there, at the point where some people might assume his life changed, when he got "saved", "transformed," washed in the blood."

Spiritual tale?

Some people might assume his life changed?

I want to share a portion of the book, "The Truth War" that deals with how some people can do a passable job of imitating the fruit of the Spirit.


They can disguise themselves as ministers of righteousness (2 Corinthians 11:14-15). They seem quite sincere. They look and sound and seem harmless enough.

Obama appears have all of these positive qualities and more. However, after reading the list of "commitments" espoused by his church, I fear, unfortunately, that the church could be an apostate one.

More questions.

Where is the proclamation of the gospel and the preaching of the cross of Jesus Christ?

Why isn't it on that list?

Where is the adherence to God's Word, the Bible?


Jude 12 in some English translations refers to these imposters as "spots in your love feasts" (v. 12). The Greek word translated "spots" is a very specific term often used to signify dangerous reefs in the sea, hidden just under the water's surface. In other words, these false teachers represented a deadly spiritual hazard. They deliberately lay in wait. They were hard to spot. But they were capable of causing disastrous spiritual shipwrecks (cf. 1 Timothy 1:19).

The radical reputation of Obama's pastor is well known. When I read the above portion of MacArthur's book, I couldn't help but think about that pastor.


Yet Jude says, "In your love feasts...they feast with you without fear, serving only themselves" (v. 12). The term love feasts is a reference to the Lord's Table ordinance established by Christ for the church and the common meal that accompanied it. So Jude was speaking about people inside the church, familiar communicants at the table, who looked safe, seemed nice enough, and were well known to people in the church. But in reality, they were counterfeit Christians with an evil agenda.

Can someone like that be even more dangerous than the hostile critic who stands outside the church and overtly opposes everything the Bible teaches? Absolutely. False teachers and doctrinal saboteurs inside the church have always confused more people and done more damage than open adversaries on the outside. Is an attacking enemy who promises his arrival in advance and wears a uniform for easy identification as dangerous as a terrorist who is hidden and acts with deadly surprise? The answer is obvious.

Bottom line. If we can't trust an individual to be honest about his/her true religious beliefs, then how can we trust him/her to lead our great nation?

Additional article links:

The audacity of apostasy: Barack Obama’s Muslim links

Columnist Says Barack Obama 'Lied To The American People;' Asks Publisher to Withdraw Obama's Book

Why Jesus Would Not Vote for Barack Obama

Barack Obama's Top Ten Fabrications

Confirmed: Barack Obama Practiced Islam

Discover the Networks.org
[Note: DOZENS of additional article links listed on the left side of the page.]

Barack Obama, Man of Faith

Is Barack Obama Ideologically Muslim?

Barack Obama and Islamic Apostasy


sean broom said...

Two points:
1.The radio show caller mistakenly claimed that Obama took his oath as senator with his hand on the Koran. He didn't. It was Keith Ellison who did that. (stunning that Ellison was permitted to do that...isn't it?)

Why is it stunning that a practicing Muslim is allowed to take his oath of office on a Koran? Would you prefer that he took it on the Bible?

And, as a side note, Keith Ellison, like every other Congressman in the country wasn't sworn in on the Koran. Members of Congress are sworn in collectively in the chambers of Congress, no one puts their hand on a Bible or a Koran. It was after, at a 'ceremonial' photo-op swearing in that (most) representatives have with their party's leader (Ellison with a woman who I'm sure you're fond of, Nancy Pelosi) that he said his oath of office with his hand on a Koran.

Thomas Jefferson's Koran. But a Koran none the less.

"My blogging friend Anna once shared that Snopes is a partisan website that leans liberal and Democratic."

I think that your blogging friend Anna would have a hard time proving that.


Christinewjc said...

Ah! Now I see. It appears, from Obama's own words, the he believes in "universalism."


Obama recently talked about his faith with the Concord, N.H., Monitor.

"I've always said that my faith informs my values, and in that sense it helps shape my worldview, and I don't think anyone should be required to leave their religious sensibilities at the door," Obama told the paper last week. "But we have to translate those concerns into a universal language that can be subject to argument and doesn't turn into a contest of any one of us thinking that God is somehow on our side."

The candidate told the Monitor he doesn't buy everything his pastor proclaims, saying: "There are some things I agree with my pastor about, some things I disagree with him about. I come from a complex racial background with a lot of different strains in me: white, black, I grew up in Hawaii. I tend to have a strong streak of universalism, not just in my religious beliefs, but in my ethical and moral beliefs."

Steve Camp over at Camp On This has two great quotes posted on Feb. 9, 2007 about the affects of "universalism":

To paraphrase former President Ronald Reagan's words when speaking of communism:

"Open Theism, Universalism, Mormonism, Romanism, the Emergent Church, Jehovah Witnesses, Pragmaticism, Syncretism, Word of Faith, New Perspective of Paul, Libertarian Free Will, Socinianism, the Social Gospel, and Sabellianism is foreign to heaven, where they've never had part in it; and is welcome in hell, where they’ve already got it."


Sure makes the connection between Obama's obviously Marxist philosophy and his "faith."

Note this quote, too:

"PEOPLE DO NOT drift toward holiness. Apart from grace-driven effort, people do not gravitate toward godliness, prayer, obedience to Scripture, faith, and delight in the Lord. We drift toward compromise and call it tolerance; we drift toward disobedience and call it freedom; we drift toward superstition and call it faith. We cherish the indiscipline of lost self-control and call it relaxation; we slouch toward prayerlessness and delude ourselves into thinking we have escaped legalism; we slide toward godlessness and convince ourselves we have been liberated." -D. A. Carson, For the Love of God

Wow! What a great description of liberalism, which often leads to licentiousness and all of the pitfalls and dangers that humanity ends up succombing to as a result!!

P.S. Speaking of the "affects of liberalism, perhaps this is what Obama means when he constantly (and, annoyingly) utilizes the term "change."

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This af·fect 1 (ə-fěkt') Pronunciation Key
tr.v. af·fect·ed, af·fect·ing, af·fects

To have an influence on or effect a change in: Inflation affects the buying power of the dollar.
To act on the emotions of; touch or move.
To attack or infect, as a disease: Rheumatic fever can affect the heart.

Yep...the disease of universalism would bring the dis-ease of more liberal licentiousness upon our nation...

The effect of Obama's worldview isn't one that I want our nation to experience. No way!

Christinewjc said...

Wow! View this brief video which certainly does answer the question regarding Obama's non-loyalty to the Word of God!

Is Barack Obama a Christian?

sean broom said...

So, you aren't going to respond?

Christinewjc said...


Please do some research on the contents of the Koran and then come back and tell me what several of the passages say regarding what should be done to "infidels."

Infidels are all people who do not believe that Mohammed is superior to Jesus Christ, and that Allah isn't the true god.

Here. I'll help you get started:

Do Muslims and Christians Worship the same God?

Our nation was built on a Judeo-Christian foundation. Our foundation, historic documents, history, laws, government, and Democratic Republic is all based on this foundation.

Upon what Source was our country truly founded? God. Specifically, the God of the Bible.

The Bible is God's Word to all mankind. It was written by human authors, under the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is the supreme source of truth for Christian beliefs and living. Because it is inspired by God, it is truth without any mixture of error.

2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Timothy 1:13; Psalms 12:6; 119:105, 160; Proverbs 30:5

On the other hand, the Koran was written by men (including plagarized portions of the Bible) and the truth of God's Word was skewed (e.g. the lies about who Jesus Christ really is in the Koran).

Here's a thought for you.

If someone in a Muslim country tried to take their oath of office (officially, symbolically, or otherwise) with their hand on the Bible instead of the Koran, what do you think would happen to that person?

It is due to our Judeo-Christian heritage that other religions can enjoy freedom to worship (or, not worship) here.

However, it has been proven that a Democratic Republic like ours thrives best when its people are devoted to the God of the Bible. Our type of government was made for a God-fearing (reverence, not fright) peoples. When that is placed by the way side, we get chaos.

The Muslim infiltration over in the U.K. is wrecking havoc there. In Paris, thousands of cars were burned by "youths" (a.k.a Muslim immigrants who are angry with the government)in protest.

But of course most people will claim that this has nothing to do with the religion of Islam and those that follow the Koran.

Well...we may need to rethink that "tolerance."

Yes. There are Muslim moderates. But guess what? THEY ARE CONSIDERED INFIDELS TOO! Why do you think that the former prime minister of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto was killed?

Any decent Muslim who is "Americanized" or agrees with the philosphy of the Western nations IS A TARGET FOR TERRORISM TOO!

The Muslims who do not take the order for jihad against the West are considered apostates by the radical elements of Islamofacists. They are in as much danger as you and I.

Take a look at some websites that show how "peaceful" the religion really isn't!

War on Jihad

Jihad Watch

Isolated incidents? You decide.

sean broom said...

The Bible also says that you can't eat shellfish (along with a host of others) so there goes that shrimp cocktail I was eying.

But, my question wasn't about Islam-- my question was simple.

You said it was stunning that Keith Ellison was allowed to take the oath of office on the Koran-- he believes that the Koran is the divinely inspired word of God. And while I'm sure that Keith is well versed in the Bible-- it is not his holy book. As he asks for Gods help in upholding the Constitution, how exactly is it stunning that he uses the book that he feels connects him to God?

There is no religious test for elected officials in the Constitution -- and for good reason.

Matt W. said...

See, this is why I say that Obama as President would be worst case senario.

David said...

This post is so stupid as to not even deserve a response, but here goes anyway.

Islam has had a much better history treating religious minorities than Christianity. Christians were responsible for the Inquisition, the forced conversion of jews, the destruction and genocide of the New World, and European Colonialism. Jews continue to live in Arab countries without issue. In fact, through history Jews have escaped into Muslim lands so that they can freely practice their faith. There is a large Jewish community in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, etc., etc. I know a number of Jews from Libya who settled there hundreds of years ago to escape persecution in Christian Europe.

Regarding Obama's church, I think you are seriously misinterpreting the word "black" here. The church is not using "black" in reference to the ethnicity, but more as a metaphor for those who have been marginalized, abused, and neglected by larger society. This notion is clearly grounded in scripture and the Christian tradition.

Finally, you seem to have a very odd view of the establishment clause in the Constitution. We are not a "Christian" nation -- we are a pluralist democracy. We may be a "Christian-majority" but that is quite different now isn't it?

Christinewjc said...

Another great article:

Obama's Glaring Ambiguities

Matt W. said...

Your comment exemplifies the liberal ignorance better than we ever could.
First off, you have once again blamed Christianity for all the misdeeds committed throughout history in the name of Christianity, which is not the same thing. Why is it that people like you look at the people who carry out Islamic Faith as it is put forth in the Koran by killing innocent people and say that it is being perverted by a few, so don't judge them all, turn around and look at Christianity, and see all of the people who have perverted the Truth of God for thier own ends and say that all Bible believing Christians are the same?

Regarding Obama's Church, no, there is no misinterpritation of the word "black". If you go to the web site and read it for yourself you will see that they did not leave it open to interpritation. What Christine said is exactly what the Church means to say. It's racism, plain and simple.

Furthermore, if the USA is indeed a democracy, as you proclaim, and we have a Christian majority, then we would be, by definition, a Christian Nation, since a Democracy is, by definition, rule by the majority. What we actually have here is a Constitutional Republic, which is, rule by law, with the Constitution being the Supreme Law of the Land. We do elect our officials by a democratic elections process, but that is not the same thing. In fact, the USA was founded on Judeo-Christian principles, though we are not a Christian nation in the same vein as Muslim nations which are ruled by Islamic clerics.

David said...

Wow. Apparently they need a constitutional law program at Biola. :)

I did NOT blame Christianity for all the ills of the Western World. I don't where you are getting that from. I was simply you that as an example of "Christian" nations (which the countries of Europe at the time clearly were) and "Muslim" nations and how each treated religious minorities within their borders.

Additionally, I make no excuses for violence by any religious adherent. Not for Islam, Christianity, or Judaism.

And regarding being a "Christian" country you are correct -- we are a constitutional republic with democratic values. This means we value majority rule but protect the rights of minorities.

Finally, you no nothing about Obama's church other than what you have read from the website. I am in fact a member of that denomination and very familiar with that congregation. It is not even remotely racist. In fact, it is the opposite. Trinity United is living out the Gospel of Jesus Christ by working for justice in their communities and bringing the good news of salvation and salvation found in Jesus Christ. I think may be sinning against your brother in Christ by writing these vile accusation as you do. Remember it is a sin against the holy spirit to work against what God is doing in his churches.

And, honey, I wouldn't worry about "liberal ignorance". Given the last 8 years, I have no doubt Obama will be our next president and we can give thanks to God for that. :)


Christinewjc said...

Oh great...the shellfish argument again! Where is Neil when I need him?

Here is a wonderful post written by him on ths subject:

Favorite dish of liberal theologians & skeptics: Shellfish

Additional note to SB -

So...should we use the Koran when a witness takes an oath to tell the truth in an American courtroom too?

"Do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you 'allah'?"

David said...

Oops, I thought the comment I was responding to was written by Christine -- not Matt. My apologies for calling you "honey". ;)

Christinewjc said...

David said...
Oops, I thought the comment I was responding to was written by Christine -- not Matt. My apologies for calling you "honey". ;)

Gaydar alert!!

(My apologies to Matt...just couldn't resist) ;-)

heh heh

David said...

How very "Christian" of you, Christine. Although after reading your blog I really don't expect much from you. You'll be in my prayers.

Christinewjc said...

Oh gosh david...overly sensitive are we?

Where's your sense of humor?

Matt is married to a woman...of course and has two children. I'm sure he knows that I was only kidding...

As for you...all I know about you is what you have written in a few comments here and this:

Profile Not Available

The Blogger Profile you requested cannot be displayed. Many Blogger users have not yet elected to publicly share their Profile.

If you're a Blogger user, we encourage you to enable access to your Profile.

P.S. About your church denomination. Do you think that it may be possible that this one church in Chicago does not follow the same, general creed of Christianity that your church does?

David said...

I'm sorry I overreacted and that I've been less than gracious in my posts. You come across as abrasive, but perhaps that is just the nature of communicating via the Internet.

Yes, I believe it is possible that a member congregation does not follow the same general creed. Although I think even in the UCC there are essentials in the faith that are not up for discussion. I know you are now going to search the Internet for UCC Synod resolutions that suggest otherwise but this is simply due to our congregational polity. Members can propose virtually anything during synod, but the process is completely democratic. There are very conservative UCC congregations (where women aren't allowed to teach even Sunday School) and very progressive congregations. Most congregations fall somewhere in the middle.

Regarding Trinity United, I think you are still misinterpreting what this church is trying to say. Trinity United is in a largely African-American area of Chicago and mainly serves that community. This is not to say, however, that there are not Trinity members who are white, Asian, etc. In fact, every member of Trinity UCC I have ever met has been Caucasian. My minister has attended Trinity United and shared with our congregation the welcome and Christian love he felt there.

Let us not try to tear apart each other's faith but build each other up. Let us leave judgment to Christ and do our best to live our lives as Jesus showed us. This will make everyone happier.


Your brother in Christ

Matt W. said...

actually I was kind of flattered, being that I don't have a picture in my profile, it must've been my intellect that was so attractive. :o)

Christinewjc said...

WND Opinion Poll about Obama's church:

What do you think of Obama's church?

Obviously, they are just plain racist. 34.27% (1655)

What about being America-centered, or better yet, God-centered. 22.07% (1066)

Their social agenda appears to have overtaken their biblical agenda. 15.68% (757)

The church is heretical and doesn't deserve to use the name 'Christ.' 14.31% (691)

They have the right to worship as they choose, but they seem rather race-centered. 9.82% (474)

Other 1.80% (87)

They are working diligently on the mission as they perceive it. 0.64% (31)

Building up black Americans is good but they need to expand their horizons. 0.58% (28)

They are doing a lot of good both for the community and the causes of Christ. 0.52% (25)

They're a positive force in the liberation of black Americans from oppression. 0.31% (15)

TOTAL VOTES: 4829 (as of 1/9/08 @ 9:57 p.m. PT)

Related article:

Obama's Church: More about Africa than God?
Chicago congregation has 'non-negotiable commitment' to 'mother continent'

Christinewjc said...


There are several points that you are missing.

First, just imagine if a white pastor in a predominantly white church had replaced the words in these bylaws in their church "purposes" with the word "white." Just what do you think the reaction would be?

2. Commitment to the Black (replace with White) Community
3. Commitment to the Black (replace with White) Family
6. Adherence to the Black (replace with White)Work Ethic
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black (White)Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for
Strengthening and Supporting Black (White) Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black (White) Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black (White)Value System.

Do you think such terminology, used to "advance White causes" would sit well with most Americans? I don't think so...

In the article, Thomas attempts to sidestep the black/white issue with this:

"This is no different than the hundreds of UCC churches from the German Evangelical and Reformed stream that continue to own and celebrate their German heritage, insisting on annual sausage and sauerkraut dinners and singing Stille Nacht on Christmas Eve.

Sausage and sauerkraut dinners? C'mon...I don't think that his counter argument holds water.

Second. The black/white issue is actually secondary to my most important concerns about Obama, as well concerns regarding his church.

His Muslim upbringing is never called into question. Why not? I've got lots of questions about that. We all should know by now what happens to Islam apostates.

Speaking of apostates, any church that labels itself Christian, yet embraces the sin and abomination to God of homosexual perversion when it is strictly forbidden by God's Word is guilty of heresy. People may not like to hear that, but it is the truth.

According to the article:

Known for arriving early on social justice issues, the church's history includes being the first to practice democracy in church governance (1630), the first to ordain an African-American pastor (1785), the first to ordain a woman (1853), the first to ordain an openly gay man (1972), and the first to support same-gender marriage equality (2005).

GcmWatch has hundreds of articles about the terrible havoc and damage that the gay "christian" movement is wreaking upon true, biblical Christianity.

Even worse, is the fact that Obama, as a politician, supports unfettered abortion (even the horrific method of partial-birth abortion and the fact that he was the only senator to debate against the Born Alive Infants bill that gave the right to keep a baby who is born alive and birthed as a result of a botched abortion medical care)doesn't sound like a Christian value to me.