News Baptist minister calls for Obama's death

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Death
AI Thread Summary
Pastor Steven Anderson's controversial sermon, which included a call for President Obama to "die and go to Hell," has sparked significant debate regarding the boundaries of free speech and hate speech within religious contexts. Anderson defends his rhetoric as a form of tough love intended to provoke action among his followers, asserting that God embodies wrath and vengeance. Critics argue that such statements are not only extreme but also antithetical to Christian teachings that advocate for love and forgiveness. The discussion also touches on the implications of his words, particularly in light of past violent incidents involving individuals who have attended similar sermons. While some participants in the discussion emphasize the need to hold Anderson accountable for his inflammatory remarks, others point out that he did not explicitly threaten violence, raising questions about the legal definitions of hate speech and incitement. The conversation reflects broader concerns about the influence of radical religious figures and the potential for their teachings to incite real-world violence, as well as the media's role in framing such narratives.
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,194
Reaction score
2,486
... Now some people may claim that this is just hate speech and not actually a call to violence, but Pastor Steven Anderson would disagree. According to him, the purpose of his sermon was not to just “tickle your ears but to give you a swift kick in the pants.” He goes on to say that “God is a god of wrath and vengeance” and that he, Steven Anderson, is going to “pray for Barack Obama to die and go to Hell.”...
http://www.examiner.com/x-8928-Phil...ristian-Pastor-calls-for-the-Presidents-death

More from the nutty religious right. While I have no problem with denouncing policies that one believes to be wrong, this is way over the line. Not to mention that it is antithetical to Christianity to pray for someone to go to hell.

Remember the guy with the AK47 in Arizona? Apparently he attended the sermon mentioned above.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ivan Seeking said:
http://www.examiner.com/x-8928-Phil...ristian-Pastor-calls-for-the-Presidents-death

More from the nutty religious right. While I have no problem with denouncing policies that one believes to be wrong, this is way over the line. Not to mention that it is antithetical to Christianity to pray for someone to go to hell.

Remember the guy with the AK47 in Arizona? Apparently he attended the sermon mentioned above.

Not every person who attends a preacher's church will follow what what they preach; My mom hates my pastor and she attends the church he preaches at everyday;Many did not agree that the beliefs of obama's pastor tied exactly into the beliefs of that obama held, so you should automatically labeled the guy who carried in AK47 a nutjob; There is an alex jones interview with the AK47 guy floating around on youtube and he sounded like a rational person to me; He even said he intentionally did not put the hand on his AK47 because he did not want to intimidate anyone around him; The guy calling for obama's death is clearly a nutjob and the authorities should have him arrested for calling for a person's death;
 
The source is the Philadelphia-Atheism-Examiner?
 
WhoWee said:
The source is the Philadelphia-Atheism-Examiner?

I thought it was just the Examiner...

It was on CNN with recorded excerpts from his sermon. I just grabbed the first link that appeared in a news search. At a glance it appeared to be accurate.
 
Very offensive language
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-qr6gxIHhQ

Part II
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-OT8_cwWC8

Consider the irony of needing a language warning for a Baptist minister, in a science forum!
 
Last edited:
Ivan Seeking said:
I thought it was just the Examiner...

It was on CNN with recorded excerpts from his sermon. I just grabbed the first link that appeared in a news search. At a glance it appeared to be accurate.

What does that tell us about CNN?
 
WhoWee said:
What does that tell us about CNN?

It tells me that they are helping to expose nuts like this guy. This will put pressure on those around him to fire him. It sounds like he needs professional help and certainly shouldn't be running a church. The fact that the idiot with the AK47 attended this sermon, assuming that to be true, makes it even more interesting and significant. Perhaps this is really just a terrorist group disguised as a church. Who knows? But I'm sure he has already had a talk with the Secret Service.
 
It's a crime to threaten the president of the United States. Wonder if he will face charges or if the court will let him slip because he is a Christian.
 
waht said:
It's a crime to threaten the president of the United States. Wonder if he will face charges or if the court will let him slip because he is a Christian.

The guy is a freak. But he didn't threaten the President. Praying for someone to die (and go to hell) isn't a threat. It's just bad preaching.
 
  • #10
As much as I'd like to disagree with the minister, I'd have to say that he's right: the Bible does call for violence and torture against homosexuals and other "lewd" people. Not only that, it clearly demonstrates God's willingness to use mass murder against these people, something which has long become appalling to civilized societies.

Yet another example of how religion obstructs social and moral progress.
 
  • #11
ideasrule said:
As much as I'd like to disagree with the minister, I'd have to say that he's right: the Bible does call for violence and torture against homosexuals and other "lewd" people. Not only that, it clearly demonstrates God's willingness to use mass murder against these people, something which has long become appalling to civilized societies.

Yet another example of how religion obstructs social and moral progress.

Find a single passage in the New Testament of the bible that supports your argument (that's the part that created Christianity). Send it to me via PM because this is not the forum to bash/endorse religion. Otherwise you are just posting unsupported nonsense.

And were not even talking about homosexuals or "lewd" people or mass murders. We're talking about a pastor who is off his rocker praying for the death of the President.
 
  • #13
drankin said:
Praying for someone to die (and go to hell) isn't a threat. It's just bad preaching.
Playing with the borders of democracy, just like trying to find out where torture begins.
 
  • #14
ideasrule said:
As much as I'd like to disagree with the minister, I'd have to say that he's right: the Bible does call for violence and torture against homosexuals and other "lewd" people. Not only that, it clearly demonstrates God's willingness to use mass murder against these people, something which has long become appalling to civilized societies.

Yet another example of how religion obstructs social and moral progress.

Suffice it to say that is all old Testament. Christianity is based on the principles of turn the other cheek when struck, love your neighbor, love your enemy as yourself, let him without sin cast the first stone.

This is not a religious argument. It is a historical fact. That many Christians don't act like Christians doesn't change the facts. It does show that this guy is not only a nut, but a hypocrite.

Whoops, I see Drankin got you straightened out on that fact.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
humanino said:
Playing with the borders of democracy, just like trying to find out where torture begins.

What are you talking about? Could you provide some definition?
 
  • #16
WhoWee said:
Hate speech is everywhere.

http://www.black-and-right.com/2009/08/19/hate-speech-liberals-celebrate/

First he says "the new slavery is economic slavery". Then, he says "white people want to kill you...it is part of their plan."

We need to send this link to CNN to investigate as well.

Yes, he is a nut as well, but he didn't threaten the President - he isn't "trying to light a fire under people's pants" to "abort" the President. And he isn't running a Baptist Church. He is some backstreet author who probably doesn't have an audience beyond gang members that we already know to be criminals. He is also probably bitter over Katrina [it was a hearing of some sort for Katrina victims], as he should be. That entire ordeal was a fiasco, and blacks bore the brunt of it.

Did you note that one black guy - the moderator - who said something like, no one is THAT black?
 
Last edited:
  • #17
WhoWee said:
Hate speech is everywhere.

http://www.black-and-right.com/2009/08/19/hate-speech-liberals-celebrate/

First he says "the new slavery is economic slavery". Then, he says "white people want to kill you...it is part of their plan."

We need to send this link to CNN to investigate as well.

Wow. Just watched that clip. Mental illness in the pulpit.

My favorite band since the 90s is a three man band. Lead singer/bassist is black and the drummer and guitarist are white. I KNEW they've have been trying to kill him for years... I knew it.
 
  • #18
drankin said:
Wow. Just watched that clip. Mental illness in the pulpit.

It only listed him as an author.
 
  • #19
Ivan Seeking said:
Yes, he is a nut as well, but he didn't threaten the President. And he isn't running a Baptist Church. He is some backstreet author who probably doesn't have an audience beyond gang members that we already know to be criminals. He is also probably bitter over Katrina, as he should be. That entire ordeal was a fiasco, and blacks bore the brunt of it.

Ivan, this Baptist wacko didn't actually threaten the Prez! His words are definitely hateful (he passionately hates Obama), but he didn't actually cross that line of threatening the POTUS.

Listening to that sermon, he's totally wacked.
 
  • #20
Ivan Seeking said:
It only listed him as an author.

He was speaking from a pulpit in the vid.
 
  • #21
drankin said:
Ivan, this Baptist wacko didn't actually threaten the Prez! His words are definitely hateful (he passionately hates Obama), but he didn't actually cross that line of threatening the POTUS.

Listening to that sermon, he's totally wacked.

He said that he is trying to light a fire to motivate people. Given the context of saying that the President should be "aborted" and that he should die and go to hell, that is easily seen as a call to kill the President.

I did listen to the entire twenty minutes.
 
  • #22
Ivan Seeking said:
He said that he is trying to light a fire to motivate people. Given the context of saying that the President should be "aborted" and that he should die and go to hell, that is easily seen as a call to kill the President.

I did listen to the entire twenty minutes.

I listened to it, not easy to get through. Do you think he is actually inciting violence to that end? I didn't get that. I got that he was just trying to justify his hate and demonization. He's definitely fixated, as if everything was fine until Obama was elected. There is no formal threat. That line wasn't crossed.
 
  • #23
drankin said:
I listened to it, not easy to get through. Do you think he is actually inciting violence to that end? I didn't get that. I got that he was just trying to justify his hate and demonization. He's definitely fixated, as if everything was fine until Obama was elected. There is no formal threat. That line wasn't crossed.

We Canadians classify hate speech as inciting hatred against, or advocating genocide of, any 'identifiable group':
http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/resources/legislation/canadian_law/federal/criminal_code/criminal_code_hate.cfm

Even here, it's not always cut and dried (e.g. David Ahenakew), but where's the line drawn down in the U.S.? He'd probably get arrested for ordering his congregants to arm themselves and make it their mission to assassinate the president, and probably for offering a bounty on his head "I'm not telling you to kill the President, but if you do, we'll wire you / your cause a million dollars!", but that line between shooting your mouth off, and out and out making threats / intending violence must get awfully blurry sometimes.

EDIT: Didn't mean to point out hatred in particular in this case (although I haven't seen the video, it seems to be more along the lines of 'he's not against the gays', rather than your garden variety white supremacist or Nazi-wannabe stuff), but I thought it would serve as another contrast between our countries on the issue of free speech vs. inciting. Maybe the more pertinent statute to cite would've been statutes on utterance of death threats and/or threats of bodily harm, but it also prevents prosecution of 'idle threats':
http://www.criminal-lawyer.on.ca/utter-threats.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #24
I am proud to live in a country where Steven Anderson, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, the Klan, the skinheads, the SDS, and the communists can all be free to speak their poison.

If he had said he was going to kill the President or encouraged someone else to do so then he should go to prison. We don't need a law against praying for bad things.

Skippy
 
  • #25
Can't he just pray that Obama will have a change of heart with a couple issues?
 
  • #26
drankin said:
Ivan, this Baptist wacko didn't actually threaten the Prez! His words are definitely hateful (he passionately hates Obama), but he didn't actually cross that line of threatening the POTUS.

Listening to that sermon, he's totally wacked.

Why isn't anyone defending Barney Frank?
 
  • #27
WhoWee said:
Why isn't anyone defending Barney Frank?
I haven't even notced Frank mentioned here until now. Regardles, no one is stopping you.
 
  • #28
kyleb said:
I haven't even notced Frank mentioned here until now. Regardles, no one is stopping you.

He devoted the first few minutes of his rant to Barney Frank. He called him a pedophile - among other things.

http://digg.com/politics/Baptist_Preacher_Calls_Barney_Frank_A_Fagot_And_A_Pedophile?t=27751500
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #29
WhoWee, I think that is a bit too far off the topic of this thread to bother with here.

Also, I had meant to address this in my previous reply:
drankin said:
Do you think he is actually inciting violence to that end? I didn't get that. I got that he was just trying to justify his hate and demonization.
Perhaps all he was trying to accomplish is justify his hate an demonetization, but I don't see how one could reasonable argue that is all he was doing. Particularly his "ought to be aborted" would surely be taken as encouragement towards that end by anyone ardently anti-choice and predisposed towards violence.
 
  • #30
His church:

...We are a local New Testament church reaching the Phoenix Area with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Don't expect anything contemporary or liberal. We are an old-fashioned, independent, fundamental, King James Bible only, separated Baptist church and not ashamed to say so...
http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/index.html

New Testament church! :smile: Yeah, I could tell by his sermon.

So they are not Baptist, but "separated Baptists", which probably means, "I'm a church because I say so".

I was once on a job in Alabama and had to call in the electricians on a Sunday. I called the lead, who answered his cell phone but seemed distracted. I could hear noise in the background. When he finally arrived on the job site, I asked what all of the noise was; thinking he might have been at a brunch or something. It turned out that he was a preacher and I called during his sermon! He had stopped his sermon to take the call and then dismissed the congregation so that he could leave. That seemed very unusual, so I asked where he trained for the ministry. He said that he didn't! If you want to be a preacher, I guess you only need to hang out a sign saying that you're a preacher.

Pastor Anderson holds no college degree but has well over 100 chapters of the Bible committed to memory, including almost half of the New Testament.
http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/page2.html

If he memorized the print in a math book, would that make him a mathematician? While I realize that many people here have no respect for or understanding of religion, it is important to understand that this is not representitive of your classic preacher. For example, one reason that Catholic priests were often held in high regard in small communities, is that they were often the better educated people; priests [or ministers], and doctors. The same can be said of proper Baptists and many other religions. There is such a thing as formal theological training, which generally includes a respectable general education, for most mainstream churches.
 
Last edited:
  • #31
He said that he didn't! If you want to be a preacher, I guess you only need to hang out a sign saying that you're a preacher.
Doesn't that make sense?
I mean the only authority really qualified to decide who gets to be a preacher has been a bit silent on the whole issue since that trouble with his kid.
 
  • #32
mgb_phys said:
Doesn't that make sense?
I mean the only authority really qualified to decide who gets to be a preacher has been a bit silent on the whole issue since that trouble with his kid.

Well, we usually don't wait for an email from THAT authority, but it would nice to know that your preacher actually knows something about religion as well as a few other things. Otherwise you just have some guy talking nonsense, like this guy does. It is painfully clear, for example, that he has no understand of even basic principles. This sort of "church" has more in common with Jonestown, and Heaven's Gate, than it does religion. It wouldn't surprise me at all if this guy is dangerous.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Ivan Seeking said:
but it would nice to know that your preacher actually knows something about religion, as well as a few other things.
Isn't the whole point of baptists that they reject church hierarchy?
In fact it's really a bit of a problem for any protestant religion - you can't really reject Rome and then insist that preachers are licensed by some other authority instead.

Otherwise you just have some guy talking nonsense, like this guy does.
Well, if you are going to ban people from pulpits for talking nonsense :-p
 
  • #34
mgb_phys said:
Isn't the whole point of baptists that they reject church hierarchy?
In fact it's really a bit of a problem for any protestant religion - you can't really reject Rome and then insist that preachers are licensed by some other authority instead.

Any group can select qualified [educated and intelligent] individuals and require the proper study. Theology is not only an extension of the Catholic church. Specific interpretations are one element of religion, but there is also a rich history to study. The ability to translate from the original languages in the proper context is the basis for any serious religion. It is as much about history as interpretation. But, I should add, any ten-year old could read the New Testament and see the problem here. It doesn't take a college degree to see that this is not NT Christianty. If anything, it appears to be cult led by one man.

Well, if you are going to ban people from pulpits for talking nonsense :-p

...and those who don't understand it and take cheap shots.
 
Last edited:
  • #35
Ivan Seeking said:
Any group can select qualified [educated and intelligent] individuals and require the proper study.
Yes this guy is obviously several Oprahs short of a daytime TV show - but it is the congregation that select the preacher in a Baptist church an so he wouldn't need to be authorized by any authority.

Theology is not only an extension of the Catholic church.
The idea of an ordained priesthood with special access to god who are the only access to the sacrements, as opposed to anybody being able to preach, is one of the reasons for the protestant split from the Catholic church.
 
Last edited:
  • #36
drankin said:
Find a single passage in the New Testament of the bible that supports your argument (that's the part that created Christianity). Send it to me via PM because this is not the forum to bash/endorse religion. Otherwise you are just posting unsupported nonsense.

And were not even talking about homosexuals or "lewd" people or mass murders. We're talking about a pastor who is off his rocker praying for the death of the President.

Correct. Jesus didn't even mention homosexuals in the Gospels. But he sure spent a lot of time and energy condemning bad church leaders. Lots of time.

Paul in his letters only mentioned homosexuals in the context of what Christians should not be doing.

Not once did either say we should kill or even pray against our leaders. Quite the opposite. Paul said we should pray FOR our leaders. And keep in mind that the best Roman leaders were far worst than the worst US presidents.

I have only one question to this preacher: "Don't you ever read your Bible?" The answer is apparently not.
 
Last edited:
  • #37
I didn't bother reading the entire thread. The sermon he gave was pretty intense though. Wow.

funny part:

'gay means happy. I am happy I'm joyfull. He is a f----t'.

hahahaha that is classic.
 
  • #38
Ivan Seeking said:
Pastor Anderson holds no college degree but has well over 100 chapters of the Bible committed to memory, including almost half of the New Testament.
http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/page2.html

If he memorized the print in a math book, would that make him a mathematician?
I'm wondering if he ever cracked open a math book, as the KJV has 260 chapters in the New Testament alone.
mgb_phys said:
The idea of an ordained priesthood with special access to god who are the only access to the sacrements, as opposed to anybody being able to preach, is one of the reasons for the protestant split from the Catholic church.
Sure, but the intent was never for people to just to go at it swinging blind.
 
  • #39
kyleb said:
WhoWee, I think that is a bit too far off the topic of this thread to bother with here.

Also, I had meant to address this in my previous reply:

Perhaps all he was trying to accomplish is justify his hate an demonetization, but I don't see how one could reasonable argue that is all he was doing. Particularly his "ought to be aborted" would surely be taken as encouragement towards that end by anyone ardently anti-choice and predisposed towards violence.

My point is the Preacher spoke for about an hour total? He said far worse things directly about Barney Frank and nobody commented. By comparison, the Obama comments were insignificant.
 
  • #40
By the way, the old fire and brimstone preachers used to tell their congregations they were going straight to Hell - in fiery detail. To say the prayers of this man regarding the eternal destiny of an advocate of baby killing is to go to Hell is not out of context with old style preaching - it's very consistent. Are we sure he didn't follow up with a prayer to save Obama's soul?

This thread is nonsense. The original post in the thread was from the Philadelphia-Atheism-Examiner.
 
  • #41
Two points:

1) Read 'The Authoritarians' by Bob Altemeyer. Very chilling but good and illuminating of the habits of these wackjobs.

2) These are the kind of people that really makes me more inclined by the day to arm myself against raging fundies. Especially because I'm an atheist.
 
  • #42
WhoWee said:
My point is the Preacher spoke for about an hour total? He said far worse things directly about Barney Frank and nobody commented. By comparison, the Obama comments were insignificant.
I've only listened to a bit of the videos, which was more than I would have preferred to. What specifically are you suggesting was sad in regard Frank which is any worse than the "ought to be aborted" comment?
WhoWee said:
To say the prayers of this man regarding the eternal destiny of an advocate of baby killing...
If you want to take issue with our laws differentiation between a baby and a fetus, then please commit to a reasonable discussion about that rather than demonising our President for supporting the law. I am personally anti-abortion, but pro-choice, and am far more concerned about our politicians across both sides of the isle advocating wars based on propaganda which kill uncounted massed, babies and otherwise.
 
  • #43
Ivan Seeking said:
His church:http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/index.html

New Testament church! :smile: Yeah, I could tell by his sermon.

So they are not Baptist, but "separated Baptists", which probably means, "I'm a church because I say so".

... If you want to be a preacher, I guess you only need to hang out a sign saying that you're a preacher.


http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/page2.html

If he memorized the print in a math book, would that make him a mathematician? While I realize that many people here have no respect for or understanding of religion, it is important to understand that this is not representitive of your classic preacher. For example, one reason that Catholic priests were often held in high regard in small communities, is that they were often the better educated people; priests [or ministers], and doctors. The same can be said of proper Baptists and many other religions. There is such a thing as formal theological training, which generally includes a respectable general education, for most mainstream churches.
Then here's where I would find fault with the media in this case: why do they grant this clown the title 'pastor' or 'reverend'? Take that title off this story and there is no story. Though the media is still loose with crackpot or pseudo-scientific claims, they are still far more discerning on technical subjects than in stories about religion. If they run the story on some wild technical claim, they rarely grant the crackpot the title of scientist or engineer, or at the very least they'll preface with 'self proclaimed'. Also the media nearly always immediately follows the technical crackpot claim with a statement from a valid scientist or engineer. In this case, why doesn't a reporter call up a respected divinity school for a background comment? No, in the case of religion Ivan's quite right in saying one 'only need to hang out a sign saying that you're a preacher'
 
Last edited:
  • #44
Ivan Seeking said:
Consider the irony of needing a language warning for a Baptist minister, in a science forum!

This is a few pages back...but I'm quite curious, where is the irony in that?
 
  • #45
kyleb said:
I've only listened to a bit of the videos, which was more than I would have preferred to. What specifically are you suggesting was sad in regard Frank which is any worse than the "ought to be aborted" comment?

If you want to take issue with our laws differentiation between a baby and a fetus, then please commit to a reasonable discussion about that rather than demonising our President for supporting the law. I am personally anti-abortion, but pro-choice, and am far more concerned about our politicians across both sides of the isle advocating wars based on propaganda which kill uncounted massed, babies and otherwise.

Do you see what happens when you take a comment out of context? I'm "demonising our President"?
 
  • #46
I took your "an advocate of baby killing" comment in the context it was presented.
 
  • #47
WhoWee said:
Do you see what happens when you take a comment out of context? I'm "demonising our President"?

If "baby killer" wasn't an attempt to demonize the president by using emotionally charged words for purposes where they weren't meant to apply, you certainly didn't communicate well.

I'm not interested in a religious debate, but nowhere did I say that the New Testament encourages genocide or murder; I said the Bible encourages these crimes, and the Bible is part of Christianity, which is part of religion. You may try to portray "real" Christians as believing in only the New Testament, but that doesn't make Old-Testament believers any less Christian or less religious. Consider the fact that Genesis is part of the Old Testament, and that disbelief in evolution is a major problem in the United States and in other countries.
 
  • #48
ideasrule said:
If "baby killer" wasn't an attempt to demonize the president by using emotionally charged words for purposes where they weren't meant to apply, you certainly didn't communicate well.

I'm not interested in a religious debate, but nowhere did I say that the New Testament encourages genocide or murder; I said the Bible encourages these crimes, and the Bible is part of Christianity, which is part of religion. You may try to portray "real" Christians as believing in only the New Testament, but that doesn't make Old-Testament believers any less Christian or less religious. Consider the fact that Genesis is part of the Old Testament, and that disbelief in evolution is a major problem in the United States and in other countries.
People can draw their beliefs from whatever source they like, but the New Testament is the defining story of Christianity. Christianity is not defined by the Old Testament regardless of what additional beliefs people have, nor is it redefined by some crackpot who memorizes bibles or even phone books.
 
  • #49
kyleb said:
I took your "an advocate of baby killing" comment in the context it was presented.
ideasrule said:
If "baby killer" wasn't an attempt to demonize the president by using emotionally charged words for purposes where they weren't meant to apply, you certainly didn't communicate well.

I believe he was making a statement from the perspective of the 'preacher'. Its a common device in communicating ideas and seemed pretty obvious to me anyway. But I suppose you can always find fault with just about anything anyone says if you are looking for it. Obama's "My Muslim heritage" comment comes to mind.
 
  • #50
I suppose we all have to remember that these morons have the critical thinking skills of pond scum.
 
Back
Top