Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
Martin said:
:laugh:
It's still hilarious, and will be for quite some time.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
John Hagee Endorses John McCain
- Thread starter KenH
- Start date
:laugh:
It's still hilarious, and will be for quite some time.
Baptist in Richmond said:
:applause: :applause: :applause:
Here is an article that agree's... http://mediamatters.org/items/200802280018
LeBuick said:
I see that you are continuing your misinformation campaign by citing non-theological sources. Maybe you should take the time to examine what Hagee does and does not believe instead of using theologically uninformed sources. Allow me to illustrate the theological/Biblical ignorance of the article you cite:
"The same day, Pastor John Hagee -- who has made controversial comments about homosexuality, Islam, Catholicism, and women -- endorsed Sen. John McCain, who embraced Hagee's support."
Controversial statements?
Let's see.
Homosexuality:
Hagee says homosexuality is a sin, Scripture agrees (1Cor 6:9-10).
Islam:
Hagee says that Christ is the only way to heaven, Scripture agrees (Jn 14:6). Muslims disagree with Scripture.
Catholics:
Hagee says that salvation is by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, Scripture agrees (Eph 2:8-9). Catholics disagree with Scripture.
None of that should be controversial to Christians. So, again, I ask why you continue to attempt to put Hagee into the same category as Louis Farrakhan? Why should John McCain reject the endorsement of a Christian leader (agree with him or not)? To appease the left-wing, antiChristian nuts? I would hope not. While I have theological differences with Hagee I would not advise McCain to reject Hagee's endorsement.
Baptist in Richmond said:
Considering the lack of theological insite, I see nothing "hilarious" about it. I don't wish to be a theological prune, but I have two problems with the use of that video clip.
1. It does not engage the theological issues behind Hagee's assertion. Nor does it engage the fact that Hagee's web-site contradicts the statement he made in the video.
"Those sacrifices foreshadowed and symbolized the anticipated shedding of blood and sacrificial death of Jesus, the Messiah. Christ's eventual sacrifice of His own life as the "lamb without blemish" was the fulfillment of the sacrificial offerings to atone for sin."
Nor does does it engage with the hyper-dispensationalist bend that seems to be at the root of Hagee's statement.
2. Hagee's statement is not funny. It is Biblically and theologically wrong. Is it heresy (ie...sends people to hell)? Probably not since it is not a denial of the person, work, or deity of Christ. Hagee's assertion, in the ad, seems more like the kind of confusion that comes from hyper-dispensational theology.
I would also add that politics and theology rarely work well together. Politics is about sound bites and clips, theology involves much more detail. Anytime we try to turn theology into sound bites we are going to get into serious trouble. Political history provides plenty of examples of this. In recent history there is Al Gore's "Bush" joke. In this joke Gore asserted that Moses, and Israel, wondered in the wilderness because they listened to the voice in the bush. Of course, that assertion is Biblically and historically wrong. The voice in the bush was God and was spoken to Moses about his mission and not Israel as a whole. Had Israel listened to the voice of the LORD, and believed, they would not have been in their situation.
Last edited by a moderator:
Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
Martin said:
Perhaps you can enlighten us as to the misinformation that is being provided by MediaMatters. In other words, please show us anything in that article that is misinformation.
Thanks in advance,
BiR
Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
Martin said:
So, are you saying that the MediaMatters article (at the link provided) is indeed factually accurate?
Just curious,
BiR
KenH
Well-Known Member
A major difference that should be noted is that Senator Obama was nowhere near Louis Farrakhan when he said nice things about him while Senator McCain was standing right next to John Hagee when he endorsed him. Senator McCain needs to come out and clearly reject and repudiate the views of John Hagee as Senator Obama did those of Louis Farrakhan.
KenH said:
I think it shows that McCain is soo out of touch with conservative Christians, he thinks Hagee is one.. and thinks Hagee will help bring out the conservative vote....
We will have a democrat for president. Because the republicans are too stupid. :tear: (And I'm a republican!!!)
TomVols said:
Neither is one you want supporting you politically even though their endorcements means many votes.
Face it, having Farrakhan on your side will loose you white and jewish votes while having Hagee on your side will loose you the entire Catholic community and many other Christians who think he is a bag of wind... (big bag)...
Just the thought that your views might be close to either of their views will offend SOME voters...
KenH said:
As I have already stated in this thread, I don't believe there is any such thing as a "political mainstream" in America today. One person's mainstream is extreme to another person. So whether or not you believe Hagee is in or out of the mainstream depends upon which "mainstream" you are in. Personally I view Hagee as being slightly eccentric and wrong on certain issues. Do I consider him to be totally out of the ballpark? No.