The Theology of President Bush

[church mouse guy]

Lomax, you used a left-wing source that says that Bush is trying to install a theocracy. Their exact words in the source that you cited at the start of this thread are:

"To assume for the state the role of God's agent on earth is to make the state into an idol, and that way lie blasphemy and totalitarianism. And that's exactly where Bush is headed."

So therefore it is perfectly proper to refute your left-wing source by saying that Bush is a Methodist and that Bush is syncretistic, as Lady Eagle reminds us. And you yourself, Lomax, cannot show that Bush knows one sentence of systematic theology or that Bush defends the basic doctrines enunciated in the Nicene Creed, for example. All that we know, Lomax, is that Bush is a Methodist in good standing, apparently, and that any other statements would be sheer speculation due to the complete lack of evidence.

Lomax, you will have to clarify for us if you are a left-winger or not since you are new to the board, but your source is clearly a left-wing source and their fears of the installation of a theocracy are silly since Methodists are not noted for even suggesting such an idea, as we all know. They are also silly because Bush himself evidences little knowledge of theology.

cmg

 

[lomax]

"Lomax, you used a left-wing source that says that Bush is trying to install a theocracy. Their exact words in the source that you cited at the start of this thread are:

"To assume for the state the role of God's agent on earth is to make the state into an idol, and that way lie blasphemy and totalitarianism. And that's exactly where Bush is headed."

Once again, this is not the question I had asked.
Based on your knowledge of The Bible, in the end, will bush's theology be able to "stand" and why?
The answer will either be yes or no and requires
a breif explanation if the answer is yes.

I base my question on:

Revelations, chapter 6:

15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 16They called to the mountains and the rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?"

 

[hillclimber]

Originally posted by lomax:


It's a delicate matter to talk about another person's faith.

Should have stopped here.

 

[Convicted by the Spirit]

Originally posted by hillclimber:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by lomax:


It's a delicate matter to talk about another person's faith.

Should have stopped here. </font>[/QUOTE]Amen

 

[lomax]

"It's a delicate matter to talk about another person's faith."

This is the last post I will make on this topic.
Faith and theology are two different things.

As bush affects the lives of millions, I thought
my question to be a fair one-especially as this
is a baptist board.

 

[SeekingTruth]

I don't think any of us should question Bush's Christianity or theology. I wonder how many of us can quote the Nicene Creed without referencing notes? How many of us can state in their own words, supported by scriptures, their theology.

Bush is indeed in error when he states Muslims and Christians worship the same God. I don't think we should accuse him of syncretism, however. He has not attempted to merge the two as the gnostics did. He is simply in error. I have heard many, including Baptists, Methodists, Episcopalians and others claim "We all worship the same God. If people are sincere in their form of worship, then they will be saved." This type of error is more widespread than we would like to admit.

My advice, quit trying to judge Bush, that is God's job, and pray for him and all our government. In sny event, a person's religion should not be a topic for discussion on the politics forum at any time.

 

[church mouse guy]

You are twisting my words--I said that I wondered if Bush knew the "doctrines" of the Nicene Creed, and I added "for example." That is really a good example because Bush probably attended the Episcopal Church where his parents are members and the Nicene Creed is used almost weekly.

Furthermore, you are in error about what syncretism means: it does not imply a merger as you suggest, ST, but it can just a "conglomerate whole typically marked by internal inconsistencies" according to Webster, which is what we have here. Perhaps you heard about the case of the Missouri Synod Lutheran who attended a joint service at Yankee Stadium and was put on trial for syncretism by his denomination.

Also, you are wrong to accuse people of judging Bush personally by talking about his theological statements. And here is my stated conclusion: "All that we know, Lomax, is that Bush is a Methodist in good standing, apparently, and that any other statements would be sheer speculation due to the complete lack of evidence."

People have every right to know the religion of their elected leaders. I have a right to vote for a Christian for President.

As for Methodists, the left here should remember that Hillary is a Methodist and she was saying this week that Jesus was in favor of the Good Samaritan--so Democrats talk theology also.

As for the idea that Bush can stand when no one else can, I think that we would all agree that if no one could stand, then Bush could not stand either.

I know that not all of you are leftists on this thread so I will state again that I think Bush is a Christian.

As for the leftists here and the somewhat obscene leftist source quoted at the start by Lomax, I say that you are silly in your worries about theocracy or that Bush is some sort of Christian overthrower of the American government.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:
The left can get away with these statements because most leftists could not state standard Christian doctrine under any circumstances.

This is a ridiculous statement. If you equate your christianity with your politics you're in a very shakey position with respect to your own beliefs.

 

[church mouse guy]

Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by church mouse guy:
The left can get away with these statements because most leftists could not state standard Christian doctrine under any circumstances.

This is a ridiculous statement. If you equate your christianity with your politics you're in a very shakey position with respect to your own beliefs. </font>[/QUOTE]What are you talking about? I am saying that the political left that is accusing Bush of trying to start a theocracy in the article linked at the start of this thread are generally non-Christians that could not state accurately historic Christian doctrine because they are willingly ignorant of it. They think that Jesus is a God of love and that He will let everybody into heaven because that is what love means.

How is that mixed up with politics? What are you talking about?

 

[Jim1999]

I think when it comes to the political leader of a multinational country, he/she not only represents his own faith values, but the faith values of all its citizenry.

In my opinion, Mr. Bush has been an honourable man in office, whether I agree with his choices or not.I further believe that he attempts to live his own belief system.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[SeekingTruth]

CMG, I was not attempting to counter what you said about the Nicene creed. I tried, poorly it seems, to support your statement. As to syncretism, I merely summarized my research in the Britannica. I checked to be sure I was at least in the right ball park before I used that definition.

I don't know why you are so defensive. I made no direct reference to you or any of your posts, merely attempted to say that we shoud not judge him. Perhaps you should lighten up.

 

[church mouse guy]

OK, Seeking Truth--sorry to have come across as strident. I think that the Britannica gave you a highly correct definition of syncretism, which I accept as also valid. The Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions gives about the same comment as the Britannica. Bush's example is more pedestrian.

Have you heard of the case of the Missouri Synod Lutheran who was charged with syncretism for praying at an ecumenical service in Yankee Stadium after Nine Eleven? His name was David Beneke.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/129/31.0.html

His case was finally closed and his suspension was revoked.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/120/31.0.html

I think Bush is much worse for the items listed by Lady Eagle wherein Bush says things that I think should not even be repeated again because they are so misleading and so contrary to Christian teaching for the last 2,000 years. We worship a triune God: God the Father, God the Son Jesus, and God the Holy Spirit. Any other god or gods is satanic in origin or effect, don't you agree, Seeking Truth,--that's a rhetorical question as I know that you agree.

Thanks.

BTW, I would prefer a Christian for elected office.

 

[emeraldctyangel]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:

All we know about him is that he is a Methodist and that he is confused about basic doctrine and has no systematic theology but the idea that he is trying to take over the government in the name of the Methodist Church is silly.

That statement right there should show you that church and state arent mixed by this President. In order to do so, you have to be the head of both. So I agree with Joe on this. I voted for him as President, no my Preacher.

However, his syncretism has been such an issue here on the board that I have forgotten about him on the religious question and I was glad that Lady Eagle brought that up about his Ramadan dinners at the White House and other disgusting things that he has done.

So what? Another government agency trying to include all the hoopla of other cultures? I work on a Federal piece of property that has, by Executive order, three places of worship. A Mosque, a Synogogue, and a Chapel. There are also mandated ethinic observance months and Diversity watchdog groups. And the funniest part, is that we all wear the exact same clothes. I never understood preaching diversity when we are all wearing a uniform, but hey, whatever. I guess that keeps the crybags outside the gate pacified. Kind of like having a dinner that breaks the fast of Ramadan.

I raise my glass of tea in agreement to Convicted. Well said.

 

[SeekingTruth]

CMG, thanks for your response. While I do disagree strongly with some of Bush's comments, I do not believe he has even remote thoughts about a theocratic government.

Certainly any statement contradicting the doctrine of the trinity is heretical. There is no god but God. Any claim of another god is most certainly satanic. I do not yield on that. But I still don't believe that Bush is espousing such beliefs. There are instance in the Bible where men have been forced to make statements that are contradictory to God's teachings.

While I wholeheartedly disagree with any thought that Muslims worship the same God I do, I don't want people to be too harsh in their evaluation of Bush's comments. I think he may have been persuaded by his advisers, about whose beliefs I know nothing, that there would be no harm in such a statement. And yes, he demonstrated his lack of doctrinal knowledge by accepting such advice.