Home » Evolution, Intelligent Design » Obama: Helping Humanity Evolve

Obama: Helping Humanity Evolve

Here’s an excerpt from the San Francisco Chronicle about Obama. Adjectives like “fawning,” “effusive,” and “unhinged” don’t quite capture this article, which is titled “Is Obama an Enlightened Being?” “Messianic” is more like it. Interestingly, the highest praise that this article heaps on Obama is that he will “help us evolve.”

Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul.

I suppose this is one of the reasons ID is despised — it rips to shreds evolution’s religious pretensions.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

23 Responses to Obama: Helping Humanity Evolve

  1. The irony is that it’s not just a religion but a science-hating one.

  2. Whatever His supporters may say, and in all seriousness, with the world we live in today and for America’s sake, I do hope and pray that Obama, if he does get elected, will find the inner strength to rely on Almighty God for guidance. (Same thing for McCain)

    excerpt from Matt Lauer interviews:

    Already, on morning network television programs, the likes of Matt Lauer and other media personalities are conducting their probing interviews with, in Lauer’s case, President Bush and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    The questions are what one might expect: “Are Americans safer today than before the attacks?,” “How do you sleep at night with the information you have, Mr.President?”, and the answers aren’t anything out of the ordinary. Clinton responded that she believes Americans are safer but not “safe enough.” Bush said he sleeps at night despite his vast knowledge of potential ist activity because of his faith in “Almighty God” and his top advisors and cabinet members.

    Bush did concede, when pressed by Lauer, that if we all knew what he knows, our sleep might not be particularly peaceful.

  3. “Adjectives like “fawning,” “effusive,” and “unhinged” don’t quite capture this article”

    How about “deranged”?

    They really think that this guy is their messiah because it will rid them of their “white guilt.”

    Liberalism is truly a mental disorder.

  4. The trouble with wolves in sheeps’ clothing is that, by the time the flock sees through the disguises, they’ve got their teeth around its collective throat.

  5. I love the distinction the author attempts to draw between religion and “spirituality.” Religion is “cowering,” while spirituality is “deep.” Never mind that “spirituality” by itself has no meaning. It’s a vapid, empty concept when divorced from an object of the spirit’s striving. Since materialists do not acknowledge the existence of spirit, number one, and cannot articulate any object of their nonexistent spirit’s striving, number two, for them to talk of “spirituality” marks them out as either liars or fools or both.

    I seriously doubt this particular person has even heard the name Tielhard de Chardin, but his Tielhardism is obvious–and just as incoherent and irrational as the master’s scribblings were 3/4 of a century ago when they were first articulated.

    I think I understand your point, Mr. Dembski, in choosing out the phrase “help to evolve.” How does one consciously contribute to a process that, according to its proponents, must be undirected? The answer is, one can’t. It’s a blatant contradiction. But it’s a necessary part of the Silly Philosophy of Tielhard, where you will find the modern materialists’ best attempt ever to set their fantasies on firm ground. (It’s an abject failure, of course, but to the eyes of the credulous its high-falutin’ claims and language offer the appearance of profundity.)

  6. Oops. Misspelled “Teilhard.” It’s one of those mental blocks I can’t shake for some reason.

  7. This article is frightening in its naïveté about the human condition and human nature.

  8. I think it’s pretty obvious this nutter wasn’t referring to biological evolution.. As we all know, the term “evolution” is used in a lot of ways in the media, and here it is used to mean some sort of linear spiritual progress towards a higher state of being.. nothing like the chaotic, messy and nasty business of biological evolution..

  9. I am skeptical of dispensational millenarian eschatology, but this and other articles in the popular media surely raise my eyebrows.

  10. dmso74: Ask yourself where “spiritual evolution” gets its inspiration. Orthodoxy Christianity and traditional readings of Genesis? Hardly.

  11. hinduism? buddhism? some westernized new age-y combination of the two? if the author is getting it from biological evolution he’s sorely misguided..

  12. This is great, even the self-organizing concept get some airtime here:

    “But there simply is no denying that extra kick. As one reader put it to me, in a way, it’s not even about Obama, per se. There’s a vast amount of positive energy swirling about that’s been held back by the armies of BushCo darkness, and this energy has now found a conduit, a lightning rod, is now effortlessly self-organizing around Obama’s candidacy. People and emotions and ideas of high and positive vibration are automatically drawn to him.”

    In one swoop of political hysteria, we get evolution that parallels that “found” in biology, as well as the forces have coalesced in the cosmos. The vibration of the stars are being channeled right into Obama and his supporters!! What could be better?

    Yep, a spiritual giant, he is. That is why he spent 20 years in a church, and with a pastor, that spews hatred — one Reverand Jeremiah Wright. You can just tell how spiritually advanced these clerical leaders are by the way they spout profanity from the pulpit. Makes you want to order the recordings and play them for your kids’ Sunday school class, no doubt.

    So, what do the Materialists do with all this? They desperately want to be liked by the in crowd, you know, the cultural elites in Hollwood and Manhatten, etc. After all, they are brighter and more, well, evolved, than everyone else. So they cannot afford to be overly critical of this sort of sentiment. And certainly their prime directive, that of eliminating accountability imposed by any sort of higher being, is supported by these “evolved” spirits, where aura and feelings rule.

    And yet, it is so, well, un-empirical, is it not? I mean, how does one fit the Age of Aquarius into the scientific atheism model? And where in NDE and genetic variation coupled with natural selection do we find Lightworkers attuned to the new consciousness?

    Just for fun, let’s get Richard Dawkins take on this, and set him up to debate Barak Obama. Then every intellectual in the audience is forced to take sides and swear allegiance.

  13. Of course Americans are not safe, they have an evil government who plan terrorist attacks,

    Whatever they are putting in your Perrier is seriously wild stuff.

  14. Everyone worships something, and, for many, God is ruled out as the object of that worship. Among this group, some would eliminate God; others would depersonalize him. The theory of evolution provides a psuedo- scientific justification for do eliminationg God, while new-age mysticism offers a psuedo spiritual justification for depersonalizing him. Each world view would seem to co-exist very well with the other because both reduce the object of worship to a process and both abandon theistic dualism for metaphysical monism.

    In both cases, the person begins by paying homage to something other than God and ends by worshipping himself in the name of the process. As long as everything is immanent and nothing is transcendent, everything is cool. The name of the game is to satisfy the desire to worship while getting the creator God out of the picture. Obama worshippers those who faint in his presence, operate in much the same way. (The difference between Obama and Elvis is that there will be no Obama sightings after he dies). Without Darwin’s theory of evolution, which eliminates the need for a transcendent God, I doubt that any of this would have happened. Until then, I don’t know that there was any such thing as new age, which is usually some kind of popularized Buddhism or warmed over Hinduism.

  15. 15
    JunkyardTornado

    Pazu:“Of course Americans are not safe, they have an evil government who plan terrorist attacks,”

    tribune7: “Whatever they are putting in your Perrier is seriously wild stuff.”

    Not as wild as what you drink every day-

    Prescription drugs found in drinking water across U.S.

  16. Pazu, “Loose Change” is not to be taken seriously. It’s been a couple of years since I watched it but there were obvious problems with it.

    With regard to the Patriot Acts, very few Americans have felt their effect. I don’t even think drug dealers have felt their effect, and I’m pretty sure it is still much easier for government sanctioned eavesdropping to occur in France than it is here.

    Frankly, a far greater concern w/regard to freedom are the various academic, government and commercial politically correct speech codes that certain types are constantly cooking up.

    JT, once upon a time I worked in a restaurant. For some reason traces of prescription drugs in drinking water don’t bother me :-)

    Now, if cases of cholera were being reported . . .

  17. 17
    JunkyardTornado

    But i am really convinced now, that I should never trust and give my amen to any politicians (or oportunists) anymore. Especially not to a government that sent 2 nuclear bombs on innocent civilians in Japan. I was not born when it happens, but I am still shocked when I think about that, America a so-called Christian nation

    If I was in your Amen corner previously I’m not sure if I am now. Japan was given repeated advance warning. What do you think it would take to impress a nation where patriotic suicide was the norm. We rebuilt that nation.

    But as long as gripes about WWII are on topic, mine is that the overall strategy of the war was to just throw millions of U.S. boys at the Germans as cannon fodder. Everybody gets a lump in their throat over D-day, but the British casualties were a tiny fraction of what U.S. casualities were on that day. The reason was that the British had developed all sorts of ingenuous mine destroying equipment they put on their tanks, and the U.S. generals scoffed at them, I guess thinking they had more than enough US infantry to kill and still accomplish the mission. Same with the Battle of the Bulge – pure genocide, and they rejected Patton’s plan that would have taken a fraction of the time. So, its what the U.S. does to their own people which I care about. They’ll victimize everyone and make them feel like its their patriotic duty.

  18. There are tons of other videos about 9/11, with amateur videos on site on 9/11/2001 filming black helicopters (not tv helicopters) going back and forth twin towers detonating explosives in the towers.

    Pazu, you think the Towers were brought down by black helicopters?

  19. And now they plan to give 200,000 skateboards to Iraki kids (who lost their relatives and more) and build a theme park like Disneyland because militaries get bored there??

    Where are you getting this from? There are no plans to do either.

  20. Pazu, your second link didn’t work either but maybe I’m misunderstanding you. The U.S. government has no plans to spend tax money on a Disneyland in Iraq.

    Now, if there are plans to put a Disneyland type park in Iraq I strongly suspect it is something being cooked up by international — i.e. not all American and maybe even Iraqi– investors who probably figure there is a demand for such a park from the Iraqis, not the U.S. military personnel.

    Further, if something like this is getting capital investment that is a very good sign. Think what a terror-temptation such a park would be in even a moderately unstable nation.

  21. As a supporter of Obama I am embarrassed by these kinds of ridiculous statements. Saying that any political candidate is some kind of a spiritual messenger is more then stupid, it’s dangerous. That applies equally to people who thought that God wanted George W. Bush to be president.

    I wish these people would realize how they look to anyone who’s not a New Age wacko and that these kinds of statements can only be harmful to Obama’s campaign.

  22. DanielJ at 21
    Besides the mantra “Change”, what credentials and expertise would Obama bring to the presidency?
    Regarding ID vs Evolution, he apparently supports Evolution:

    Evolution/Intelligent Design
    Obama has expressed his belief in evolution stating, in an interview with The New Yorker editor David Remnick, “[e]volution is more grounded in my experience than angels.”

    Barak Obama, interview by David Remnick. The New Yorker. October 23, 2006. http://www.mediabistro.com/fis....._46068.asp
    Retrieved from “http://sharp.sefora.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_%28Presidential_Candidate%29″

    On ID, in 2006 Obama stated:

    Conservative leaders have been all too happy to exploit this gap, consistently reminding evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike their Church, while suggesting to the rest of the country that religious Americans care only about issues like abortion and gay marriage; school prayer and intelligent design.

    I find this ambiguous, implying democrats also could hold such issues but not stating his position.

    On other issues, Obama appears to be one of the least experienced with only 143 days in the Senate. He has been the strongest advocate for abortion, the only senator voting for partial birth abortion etc.

  23. “[e]volution is more grounded in my experience than angels.”

    I guess that pretty well sums up his seemingly inauthentic Christianity. The God he claims to worship has spoken definitely on the reality of angels, but apparently he doesn’t think that God is worth taking very seriously.

    After all, “in [his] experience” he has never witnessed (macro)evolution either, but he doesn’t reverse the order in this comparison, does he?

Leave a Reply