Sobran: Bush is Out of His Mind

As a Methodist, it is highly unlikely that Bush has any knowledge of the eschatological musings of Hal Lindsey or Jack van Impe. By the way, why do Fundamentalists like to beat up on charismatics over endtime doctrines since Hal Lindsey teaches straight post-tribulation doctrine just like Fundamentalists, who borrowed it from Pentacostalism?

 

==I don't think Bush has made such claims about himself. Now I am sure he believes that God caused him to be president of the US at the current time, and that belief is perfectly Biblical (Dan 2:21). However I don't know that there is any solid evidence that Bush believes he has some grand part in the end times drama. I think those theories are the result of the mockery of the anti-Christian folks.

Martin.

 

==No argument there. Sadly many professing Christians only help the critics by their behavior.

___________________________________________

==I think the end times drama will play out under God's sovereign control. He does not need our assistance on the matter. Having said that everything that happens in history is, one way or the other, all part of God's plan. History is heading in the direction God wants it to head in.

Personally I don't get too worried over all of that. Israel's government must do what it thinks is best in its national security interests. Whether or not it does the wise thing, I will let God be the final judge of that one. My opinions don't matter.
______________________________________

==Well I think I would have read Sobran and laughed it off were it not for the fact that his article was linked to by a Christian on a Christian discussion board. That last part is what really got me. I don't want to see Christians help the "heathen(s)" in any way (bad theology, behavior, or promoting the anti-Christian groups cause).

Martin.

 

The extreme left is always trying to pin the label of Fundamentalist on Bush but Bush is perfectly mainstream and not especially interested in theology of any sort. Sobran falls into this category of leftists trying to make Christianity a political issue even when the President belongs to a mainstream denomination, which denominations are not noted for anything much nowadays other than sitting on their hands.

 

==Mr Sobran's remarks are going far beyond that. As I have pointed out he is critical of Bush for holding basic Christian teachings. I have no evidence that Sobran is simply being critical of dispensationalists (etc). What I see is someone using Mr Bush's professed religious beliefs against him. Worse than that, I see someone mocking clear Biblical teachings (ie..we are in the end times, &, God guides those who follow Him). Anybody who is using the kind of remarks that Sobran did in his article should have no place reserved for them at the table of discussion. What we need in this nation, from all sides, is intelligent, clear, meaningful discussion and not personal (religious) attacks. We certainly don't need Christians supporting the kind of statements made by Sobran.

Martin.

 

==Sobran said:

"If his foreign policy driven by a conviction that we are in the End Times, and that the Lord has anointed him to lead us?"

First there is no solid evidence that those ideas drive George Bush's style of government.

Second the Bible teaches that we are in the end times (1Jn 2:18). So if Bush believes this, and I don't know that he does or does not, he would be correct. This is not about dispensationalism, or any other view, this is about a general belief that is totally Scriptural.

Third the Bible teaches that God does guide His people (Jn 10:27, etc). So if Bush professes to find guidance in his (professed) relationship with Christ he is on Biblical ground (providing he is a Christian).

Fourth the Bible does teach that God "removes Kings and establishes Kings" (Dan 2:21). So if Bush believes that God has appointed him as President of the United States at this time he is correct. That is perfectly Biblical.

___________________________________

I said:
"We certainly don't need Christians supporting the kind of statements made by Sobran."

You Replied:

==What does the Bible say about this issue Ken? Did Paul "trash talk" Nero? I don't think so. What did Paul say? Pray for him (1Tim 2:1-6). Respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due. I am afraid that many Christians (conservatives during the Clinton years, and others during the Bush years) have forgotten that simple rule (Rom 13:7). We don't have to agree with, or like their policies. In fact we may oppose their unBiblical policies. We don't even have to like them personally. But we are to show respect for their office (Rom 13:1-5).

Martin.

 

I agree with you Martin, exactly the points you are trying to make here. That's why I said the piece is hogwash. There is nothing of merit in it.

 

rsr...sorry went off to do errands and just got back...no big deal. I was just asking. No need to reinforce the walls and get out the bazooka.

And for the blood transfusions on the battle field...we render aid to all that need it.

 

What you, Ken, and Mr. Sobran together have failed to prove is that Bush, a member of the mainstream Methodists, belongs to a denomination that believes in the pre-tribulation rapture associated with Fundamentalism and Pentacostalism, especially in the South but now spread nationwide by Evangelicalism. Nor have you even shown that Bush knows much theology whatsoever. Bush is a man who had a serious drinking problem by his own admission and became a Methodist and has led a sober life since due to the power of Christ.

How can you and Sobran say that this meager theology and this personal encounter with the living Jesus leads to some sort of maniacal desire to conquer the world like Hitler and Stalin?

 

This, as RSR eludes to is not only foolish, but also dangerous thinking.

Yes!

 

I think that President Bush has been deceived by the neocons into believing that their agenda is best for America - that we really can be a world hegemon in a unipolar world. </font>[/QUOTE]It seems as if your answer really proves the point. There is no theological basis to the war of self-defense against Islam's attempt to conquer the world through terror that is funded by purchases of oil.

Islam has taken the oil revenues and used them only for military purposes and has failed to alleviate the suffering of the Arab masses. It is Islam that is on the march to conquer the world.

Neither you nor Sobran have proven that the "neocons", (your idea, not Sobran's), or Bush are aware of the pre-tribulation doctrine so strong in the South but facing scorn in other geographical areas of the world.

What you are saying, Ken, is that in spite of the lack of evidence to support Sobran, you think that Bush is on some sort of theological quest to establish some sort of national theocracy and perhaps even some sort of worldwide theocracy--an idea stolen from the left-wing Democrats who hate Christianity and who want to make Christians a political issue.