Bush Says He Doubts Bible Literally True

AP ^ | 12-09-2008

[My Favorite Headache]

President George W. Bush said his belief that God created the world is not incompatible with scientific proof of evolution.

In an interview with ABC's "Nightline" on Monday, the president also said he probably is not a literalist when reading the Bible although an individual can learn a great deal from it, including the New Testament teaching that God sent his only son.

About creation and evolution, Bush said: "I think you can have both. I think evolution can — you're getting me way out of my lane here. I'm just a simple president. But it's, I think that God created the earth, created the world; I think the creation of the world is so mysterious it requires something as large as an almighty and I don't think it's incompatible with the scientific proof that there is evolution."

"You know. Probably not. ... No, I'm not a literalist, but I think you can learn a lot from it, but I do think that the New Testament for example is ... has got ... You know, the important lesson is 'God sent a son,'" Bush said.

"It is hard for me to justify or prove the mystery of the Almighty in my life," he said. "All I can just tell you is that I got back into religion and I quit drinking shortly thereafter and I asked for help. ... I was a one-step program guy."

"I do believe there is an almighty that is broad and big enough and loving enough that can encompass a lot of people,"

Asked whether he thought he would have become president had it not been for his faith, Bush said: "I don't know; it's hard to tell. I do know that I would have been — I would have been a pretty selfish person."

[SkyPilot]

Oh dear.

[RightOnline]

sigh.............Mr. Bush, just shut up and retire to Texas. Please.

[silverleaf]

well there goes the evangelical vote for a 3rd Bush term...

s-a-r-c

[My Favorite Headache]

“You can’t look at the decision to go into Iraq apart from, you know, what happened on Sept. 11. It was not a religious decision,” he said. “I don’t view this as a war of religion. I view this as a war of good, decent people of all faiths against people who murder innocent people to achieve a political objective.”

[MeanWestTexan]

Misleading headline.

[netmilsmom]

>>well there goes the evangelical vote for a 3rd Bush term...<<

LOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!

[mnehring]

I was just posting this article as well. Something jumped out to me. Note the parenthetical statements versus the editorial comments. The author seemed to take liberty at points drawing her own conclusions of what statements meant.

[neocon1984]

Based on my Christian background, I agree. The Bible is a work of inspiration (Man inspired by God) not a literal book of science and/or history.

Many of us will have to agree to disagree (politely) on this issue.

[slnk_rules]

What idiot picks these headlines?

All it would take is someone reading about 2 of my posts on GWB to know that I am NO fan of his, but this headline is totally incongruous with the article...., unless you are a staff cartoonist for Jack Chick or something.

[pjluke]

Methodists..... (1/2 sarc)

[Recovering_Democrat]

:) Good old George. Hey, he is a good man...and he definitely had God’s hand upon him as he led us through the darkest days of my adult life.

[Our man in washington]

President Bush has a fairly mainstream view on this issue, actually. A lot of Christians view Genesis as partly metaphorical.

[stockpirate]

“I would have been a pretty selfish person”

So now we know why he gave away so much taxpayer money to everyone all over the world.

Oh lets not forget he wanted to let the whole of South America move to the US.

[mombonn]

'God sent a son,'"

God sent His One and Only Son.

Yikes! This from the man who named Jesus as his philosophical advisor.

[DocRock]

bookmark

[SkyPilot]

I would say after reading this that Bush was not misquoted, so I hope people don't use that. However, I do believe that GW Bush is a saved brother in the Lord Jesus Christ. On interpretation of the Bible as literal truth in the statement he made, he was wrong.

I listened to an audio interview with GW Bush about his encounter with Rev. Billy Graham, and how Bush described giving his life to Christ.

I believed him then, and I believe him now.

Do Christians make Doctrinal errors and misinterpret Scripture?

You bet. But, Bush's declaration that the Bible is not literally true is very troubling, and the debate on it here is welcomed.

In many ways, I have been greatly disappointed in the GW Bush. Let me count the ways......

In other instances, I think he did a helluva job, and I couldn't have approached his leadership.

So yes - I am on both sides of the fence with this. Difficult for me to hear him say this though..........

[nobama08]

He doesn’t know what he believes or why. Wishy washy.

[SoldierDad]

Do you mean, “there goes the evangelical vote for a 3rd Bush becoming President”? This could cost Jeb any chance in the future.

[SecAmndmt]

That these comments would come as a surprise to any conservative, any Christian or any evangelical is an indication of how willfully undiscerning we have become.

The President is a universalist. His stated worldview is incompatible with Biblical Christianity. I don’t know whether he is a Christian or not - I doubt it - but his comments should be a reminder to Christians that we must NEVER adopt pragmatism or unBiblical compromise in the selection of our leaders.

[nobama08]

And a lot of Christians view it as literal.

[Rodney Dangerfield]

It’s ironic, but every Atheist I know believes in Ghosts, UFO’s, Karma, etc...despite zero evidence of any of the above existing.

[SkyPilot]

I think President Bush handed the MSM people who hate him the headline on a Golden Platter.

Come on. He made this statement and the context is clear:

I think the creation of the world is so mysterious it requires something as large as an almighty and I don't think it's incompatible with the scientific proof that there is evolution."

I bet this thread will be contentious, based on the Evolution threads that occur on FR every month.

What a mess, but perhaps it is God's intention we debate this some more.

[nobama08]

How is Jeb responsible for what his brother believes?

[r9etb]

Oh dear.

Well ... he's right. Some things in the Bible are, of course, literally true (archaeology can prove it).

But that's not generally the case. A parable, for instance, is almost by definition not "literally true." Nor would one expect a Psalm to be "literally true."

The Bible is simply too complex and varied to label it as being entirely true, entirely allegorical, or entirely anything else.

[SkyPilot]

It’s ironic, but every Atheist I know believes in Ghosts, UFO’s, Karma

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing - they believe in anything."

G. K. Chesterton

[ConservativeMind]

I agree with him that parts of the Bible aren’t meant to be taken literally.

Look at Revelation.

[SoldierDad]

Won’t matter that Jeb is not responsible. It’s only when you are a DimocRAT that your associations with questionable individuals or questionable comments from others is okay.

[stevem]

It always seemed to me when Jesus was teaching at his best, he was teasching in parables.

[lonestar67]

As usual, President Bush is correct and his corrects show themselves for the mean spirited folks they are.

The pretending to hold a literal view of the Bible is one of the dangerous pretenses of some Christians. Only God sees the Bible in its full meaning.

Those who claim to have arrived at the stable final meaning of the text are dangerously arrogant and not humbled by the spirit of God necessary for proper interpretation. President Bush may well be wrong in his interpretation but the arrogance of people in relentlessly judging him is a fascinating study in human pathology.

[mc5cents]

Oh dear, this thread is not going to be Inherit The Wind all over again is it?

[big'ol_freeper]

Dubya continues on his journey to Cross the Tiber.

[rhombus]

The Bible is simply too complex and varied to label it as being entirely true, entirely allegorical, or entirely anything else.

Everything anyone believes is in their eyes and their hearts entirely true. So it's not even worth the effort to argue with a true believer. Instead just wish them well.

[mlo]

You bet. But, Bush's declaration that the Bible is not literally true is very troubling, and the debate on it here is welcomed.

I'm glad he said what he said. It shows he's not the ignorant Bible thumper his enemies make him out to be.

But seriously, how can anyone dispute that the Bible isn't literally true? Of course it isn't! It's not even self-consistent. Does anyone seriously believe that every word of the Bible is literal truth?

[MahatmaGandu]

The libs will now commence slamming Bush for NOT being a fundamentalist Christian.

[Moonman62]

Every now and then W gets something right.

[RightWhale]

Does anyone seriously believe that every word of the Bible is literal truth?

Of course.

[Glacier Honey]

not even going to comment......

[P8riot]

I don’t have to disagree politely. The Bible is inspired by God and thus infallible, or it is nothing. There is no middle ground.

[Alex Murphy]

"You know. Probably not. ... No, I'm not a literalist, but I think you can learn a lot from it, but I do think that the New Testament for example is ... has got ... You know, the important lesson is 'God sent a son,'" Bush said.

Bush continues to self-destruct during his last days in office.

[ovrtaxt]

It’s not literal truth because it’s literature. Poetry isn’t literally true, symbolic prophecy isn’t either. The Bible contains both.

I believe it’s historically accurate, but “literally” true? No.

[SkyPilot]

A parable, for instance, is almost by definition not "literally true."

There are semantical arguments now being raised that need to have distinctions drawn. First of all, Bush was clear in his opinion that Creation might not be true in terms of Evolution, and that is way, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay different from Christ's wonderful parables and stories, which many writers, artist, and theologians say are the greatest short stories ever written.

Next, how do you know which parables are not "literally true," and which were not? Was the parable of the Prodigal Son a short story that Christ made up, or did it actually happen?

In short, we don't know. But again, that was not the context of the statement by Bush.

Lastly, Christ said He was literally the truth: "I am the way and the truth and the life."

John 14:6

It can be logically argued (and theologically) that if the Truth said a parable, it was true.

[P8riot]

But seriously, how can anyone dispute that the Bible isn't literally true? Of course it isn't! It's not even self-consistent.

Where are the inconsistencies?

[MississippiMan]

But seriously, how can anyone dispute that the Bible isn't literally true? Of course it isn't! It's not even self-consistent. Does anyone seriously believe that every word of the Bible is literal truth?

Except for the cases where God was obviously using allegory, or metaphor, or parables, etc., it is literally and infallibly true. And the differences between those two types of writing are quite easy to discern.

MM (in TX)

[big'ol_freeper]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

The senses of Scripture

115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.

116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: “All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.”83

117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.

1. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.84

2. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.85

3. The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86

118 A medieval couplet summarizes the significance of the four senses:

The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith;
The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.87

119 “It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgement. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God.”88

But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.89

[SkyPilot]

Nor would one expect a Psalm to be "literally true."

Again, I don't get you.

What is not true about the Psalms?

Give me an example please.

[neocon1984]

“Only God sees the Bible in its full meaning. Those who claim to have arrived at the stable final meaning of the text are dangerously arrogant and not humbled by the spirit of God necessary for proper interpretation”.

Can’t say I ever thought that way, but I am quite positively impressed with your reasoning. It’s nice to learn a new perspective, every now and then.

[nygoose]

His actions make your words look foolish.

[anniegetyourgun]

AP writing an article on the matter of scripture is like a five year old writing an article on the second law of thermodynamics.

[starlifter]

But a lot more don’t...