for once, bush gets it right

[rone]

... and, naturally, he gets pilloried by evangelical Christians. It is amusing to see these utter wackjobs dump on Bush because he's not a theologian, then proceed to betray their complete ignorance in theological matters. I find the Rev. Peterson's evasion downright disappointing; a friend commented, "Grow some balls, Brenda, you stupid bitch." A-friggin'-men.

Comments

[rimrunner.livejournal.com]

"Since everybody agrees he's not a theologian, he would be much better advised to punt when he gets that kind of question"...

He'd be better advised to punt regardless; it's not his fucking job.

I agree wrt Peterson. Arguably it is her job to address questions like this.

[ikkyu2.livejournal.com]

I find the Rev. Peterson's evasion downright disappointing; a friend commented, "Grow some balls, Brenda, you stupid bitch." A-friggin'-men.

I'm pleased to see that your message of inclusion and tolerance has expanded to embrace the idea that only those possessed of testicles are qualified to make correct assertions. This is really an idea whose time is coming, don't you think?

[littleamerica.livejournal.com]

"The Christian God encourages freedom, love, forgiveness, prosperity and health."

Three out of five isn't bad. On the other hand, it isn't good, either.

[gallifreyan.livejournal.com]

Your friend sure sounds like an idiot--not sure if it's the context you gave him or not. If you're going to criticize some people for speaking on behalf of people they're not empowered to represent, and then criticize others for not speaking on behalf of people they're not empowered to represent, on the same topic, you should just go home.

"I'm very pleased that President Bush wants to be so inclusive, and I think his inclusiveness in this particular comment speaks well for who we have been as a nation theologically. Not all of his policies and his actions have been as inclusive."

I'm not sure if an executive director of a foundation is supposed to be a theological spokesperson for an entire religion. The point she makes is pretty clear and positive.

"But

[vardissakheli.livejournal.com]

most predicted that the political impact would be short-lived."

Well, of course. We're living in the End Times, right?

[the-autoclave.livejournal.com]

Dude, SOME evangelical christians. It's a matter of no debate that Allah and Elohim essential mean the same thing (most high god, or words to that effect) the El/Al parts pretty much directly correspond. Unless Bush tried to suggest that Muslims (submitted/surrendered ones) worship Jesus then he's at least partly right.

It's also a matter of agreement between Jews, Christians and Muslims that the Isaac/Ishmael divergence in Abraham's descendents is where everything starts to get tense. None of these traditions would try to argue that Abraham worshipped two distinct gods.

I guess what someone really hardcore fundamentalist (but theologically and academically informed) would have to say would be that in their opinion Muslim worship is not acceptable to God because it ignores/actively denies the deity of Christ. Something like that. Of course Muslims and Jews say that insisting on the deity of Christ makes Christian worship unaceptable to the most high, and so on and so it goes.