Don't Baptists Believe....?

Having made his point in the most weasely possible way -- "I'm not saying Mormonism is a Satanic cult, just asking" -- Mike Huckabee is now trying to ease away from his "Don't Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?" remark with an equally weasely apology. His evangelical base got the point, and he's hoping the rest of America will forget about it.

He's clearly gambling that people won't start asking the obvious return question: "Don't Baptists believe...?"

Even before this, critics were already pressing Huckabee over his religio-political statements, most recently his signature on a 1998 advertisement affirming the Southern Baptist Convention's statement that "A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ." Yesterday Huckabee insisted that religion shouldn't be an issue in the campaign and that he hopes " my being a Baptist isn't a factor in people voting for or against me." This is what God calls "a lie."

In fact, Huckabee's religion isn't a purely personal matter, it's one of the cornerstones of his campaign. Given that he has touted his experience as a pastor as one of his qualifications for office, asking to see copies of his sermons should be a reasonable request. His little joke about giving an altar call on national television can be laughed off, but it doesn't have to be.

Huckabee's "Don't Mormon's believe..." question ratchets up the case for this line of inquiry tenfold. Now we can not only ask about things that Huckabee himself has said, but about any beliefs that Baptists hold, or are supposed to hold. Will the next debate see questions about demonology?

This might be fun, but anyone who cares about civil discourse in America should hope it doesn't happen. Media coverage of a political campaign is a terrible forum for a conversation about religion. For one thing, believers have given far more thought to these matters than 90 percent of reporters, so bringing them up only reveals the media's ignorance and exacerbates the crude battle between believers and non-believers (in the believers' favor). To take just one example, if "biblical submission" were to become an issue on the cable talk shows, you would be unlikely to learn anything about the wide variety of nuanced ways in which this teaching is actually interpreted and put into practice (or not) by today's Christians. Hostile questions by the secular media, launched in total ignorance of the complex, ongoing debate between egalitarians and complementarians, would only marginalize the former by enshrining the latter as the "true" Christians, even if the intent were to discredit them. (For egalitarian interpretations of the submission scriptures see here.)

Huckabee chose a line of attack -- I mean, questioning -- that Mormons can swat away as "false" (even if the real answer appears to be more like, "false, but..."). The questions people are asking Huckabee, however, regard incontrovertible (and in his circles uncontroversial) facts about certain strains of evangelical belief. Is it a dirty trick to highlight the actual claims of a candidate's religion? In a recent debate Huckabee said that some verses of the Bible are "obviously allegorical" while others "really aren't up to interpretation." But which are which? I'm sure HuffPo commenters can think of hundreds of specific verses they'd like to ask about.

Again, I hope this doesn't happen. But if it does, it's important to remember that the instigators will not have been the insensitive or hostile secular reporters, but Mike Huckabee and the religious right, who insisted on blending theology and public policy in ways that made these questions inevitable.

Comments

[Mycos]

C'mon! whose leg are you trying to pull with this one? The man believes in creationism! 2008...a nuclear age with a Neanderthal mind!

And your attempt to show Christian fundies who interpret to Bibles exhortations for women to "submit" as being more egalitarian in actual practice is laughable. The contorted logic it takes him to finally sum it all up with "it's like the relationship between the Church and Jesus Christ...where the woman is the Church, and the man is Jesus!" is so telling that if you're too dull to read between the lines of that...well, HuffPo is sinking low.
I mean, Pol Pot did a better job of BSing the masses about his egalitarian views than this guy was able to muster.

[huffnpuffn]

George Bush and his right-wing buddies spent a lot of years pushing all the deep emotional buttons that religious people have to get them unthinkingly supporting everything Bush wanted and opposing his enemies. (That's not to say that non-fundies or non-religious people don't also have buttons to push - ask any feminist about politicians who oppose abortion, for instance - but the religious conservatives' buttons are really well marked and easy to push.) Doesn't matter that half of what Bush wants is seriously opposed to their core religious values of love and peace, the right-wingers got them to jump when they said jump.

As far as I can tell, Huckabee's mostly sincere, unlike Bush. Romney, on the other hand, is trying to convince the religious conservatives that they should let him use them even though he's a bit more obviously not part of their religious group. Flip-flopping on core-value issues doesn't make it an easy sell.

[Qbear]

Baptists would be angrier about online porn, and marriage vows being more permanent, but the Dancing with the Stars and computers with built in card games have them so unconsolably upset...they can't think STRAIGHT.

[Tankan]

Politicians are that rare breed who run with the hare and hunt with the hounds, whichever suits their needs at any given time! And truth be told, they care nothing for either seeing them only as a means to an end. So it is with their embracing of Christianity, mere currying favor with voters, if, there was a massive Muslim majority, they would be crying Allāhu Akbar and interpreting the Qur'an, as they do the Bible, to suit their needs.
One cannot be a man of God and a politician, for more often than not, politicians engage in deeds that are far removed from scriptural teachings. Serving God cannot be a part time job, it cannot embrace evil, for evil is anti God. Some people need to open their eyes and realise their sincerely held beliefs are being exploited by ruthless individuals!

[Merg]

This nation, of course, has had 2 recent Baptist Presidents, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. I confess, I do not know if they would consider themselves Southern Baptists but I believe that they both are. Why is it that a Republilcan Southern Baptist is so much more conservative and so much more intent upon imposing his religious vision upon the rest of us that a democratic Baptist.

[SILVANUS]

"And the great HooglaMoogla said to the walking potato..." ... and if you don't agree I will make your life miserable and demonize you!

[azureblue]

A few observations:

One: Who's version of Christianity do they want to make the "official" religion? Baptists have a proven track record of demonizing all other religions but their own, especially Catholicism. They believe that all Catholics are going to hell, and they cannot be talked out of that. Also, they do not believe Presbyterians are baptized because it is not the Baptists way of total immersion.
They also believe Jews are going to hell and believe the Jews are Christ killers.
Basically, it is the baptist dogma or nothing.

Baptists are superstitious and use the Bible to support their superstitions & prejudices. For a long time, it was the baptists who supported slavery- and, of course, they used the Bible to "prove" they are right.

But, more important is #2. They do not, under any circumstances, want to take on the responsibility of their actions. I have presented this scenario to fundies and they will always back down:
Yes, let's put the Ten Commandemnts on public display in schools and the courthouses. And put the teachings of Jesus in the Beatitudes on display along with them. This will prove who is a real Christian, won't it. And to make doubly sure, pass a law that says that anyone who breaks any of the Ten Commandments or the Beatitudes shall be forced from office on the spot.
It has been my experience that they will agree all the until that last part- taking responsibility. they they shuffle & dodge.

I wish Huckabee could be confronted with this idea: Break the Ten Commandments and you are out of office. I wonder what he would say......

[tumblewind]

As far as I am concerned. His being a minister makes him the least qualified for the job. One has nothing to do with the other. There is a lot more to the job than spouting bible verses. Of which he appears to not have much knowledge of. That's been the major problem with the last President. He was not qualified for the job. His religion was guiding him instead of any large amount of common sense and knowledge. People need to get over the erroneous idea that because someone is Christian it instantly makes them moral. Bush has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt how that idea is a fallacy. The last time I was in Church lying, cheating and stealing were not moral attributes. I hope when Christian's go to the polls this time they use their common sense and leave their religion at home where it belongs.

[mbaty]

As much as it might seem irrelevant to bring up just what Huckabee believes, given that he is the same "religion" as Bush, shouldn't that give us pause? Why, in this age of science, do we still think that "holy" books of any religion should be given scientific status? And why does science seem to insist that the physical world is all there is? It's clear that people will search for God through many paths, religions, doctrines and creeds, but why are so many addicted to such obviously fallible, inconsistent books? The bible, for instance, is so full of historical holes and inconsistencies; and for a religion that focuses on Jesus as the one and only 'son of god' incarnate who died and rose again to 'save us' there is relatively little about his actual life. In fact, there's only a few snippets of a few years of his life retold four different times with different 'facts,' some of which overlap, but often with inconsistencies (does anyone know how Judas actually died--besides the obvious, 'he killed himself'? The answer is no, because the bible has more than one version of that story. Which one is the infallible version?) Huckabee is a pastor, not a president. And all of his sermons should be available for review.

[incontempt]

Anyone that will believe faith in light of overwhelming fact should think about a career in mcdonalds or such,..or that crazy guy that pushes a broom and talks to himself, NOT the top office,..no way. I don't understand... has the spectacal and that little bit of wine blinded soo many folks of reality, i'm pretty sure I couldn't get that messed up on the best of drugs. I'm scared, really scared of how many people and how much real world focus is lost this ..pfft...folklore

[lanefiller]

Anyone interested in what Huckabee is really like face to face should try this funny (but it actually happened) column:
http://goupstate.us/index.php/lanefiller/2007/11/02/title_14

[moderationsmuse]

My impression is that Huckabee is quite willing to answer questions about his faith. I would not assume that those answers will alienate people. They could have quite the opposite effect. He might make more than one sort of convert, who knows?
I do hope, however, that reporters will not get too caught up with what is essentially a non-issue. There's lots of things we need to know about Huckabee, as also with the other candidates, in order to make informed choices. Radosh frames this as though it's a game.
I think even regarding Huckabee's faith, some questions are more relevant than others. It's often reported (whether accurately or not I don't know) that Huckabee is a Creationist. If he is, that's certainly his business (and probably puts him in a minority among Christians). But it's a pertinent question to ask him what affect his beliefs would have (if any) on American science funding.
American science is vital to our economy, its part of our national idealism and our freedom. Scientists don't believe the earth is "young," so this can justifiably cause them concern. And science lives by research grants.
But if Huckabee is asked the question as a Policy question rather than a Religious question, perhaps he can give us an answer that will satisfy scientists. Or perhaps not. But we won't know unless he is asked.
I'd love it if the press dealt with the issues and could forget the tabloid stuff.
I heard him on the radio today and personally I find him very appealing. He is likable, sensible, and ordinary. He's a refreshing change. My god, he seems like a real person. (Real person for president? Nah, it'll never fly.)

[Stevelagain]

And Hillarys people are attacking Obama's drug use....so what's new in politics...both sides sliming to win.

[Lisette]

I have absolutely no interest in anyone else's religion!

I spent 16 years of my life getting an excellant Catholic Education, however, now I'm DONE. There are other things to deal with besides affirming and confirming my beliefs! Enough with this abracadabra nonsense.

Nor do I want to spend my time listening to "sermons" from political candidates.

Politicians need to be Statsman not religious crackpots. OK?

[nastywolf]

Wanna hear something REALLY funny??!! The Hebrew text was referring to the King of Babylon (read "Isaiah")as the fallen one and the Hebrews called him "Bringer of Light" (does "Prometheus" ring a bell?). But now it starts to get funny cause some idiot who was translating scriptures for King James fucked up and assumed the fallen one was some sort of angel rather than the mere mortal he was and called him by the Old English translation for the bringer of light...you got it! LUCIFER!!

Now it really gets weird cause remember how the Book of Mormon says that Jesus & Lucifer were brothers? Well...it's possible that the term "babylon" describes ANY king(dom) that's fallen out of favor with God, and over the millenia we've mistakenly assumed it was a place name. Now wasn't Jesus descended from the House of David? And didn't King David fall from God's grace? Could King David also be the Babylon or the Lucifer in early scriptures and can't he be considered an ancestral "brother" to Jesus?

Maybe them Mormons gave a lot more thought to the whole scripture thing than we give them credit for. Maybe its the Christians that have been peddling the wackier Book.

Just a thought.