Replies

"What do you make of this inclusion of the Koran in his inaugural address"

I bristled when I heard the Koran mentioned as an "edifice of character." It seemed like he really compromised his beliefs to be PC, like when the Pope kissed the Koran.

However, I'm also reminded of Paul's Mars Hill address (Acts 17; 22-33), where he used the Athenians' alter "to an unknown God" to teach about the one true God. I've also heard of Christians who have reached Islamic believers by starting with the Koran. One can say that the Koran has some teachings about integrity and character, even though the book has fatal flaws.

Still, I wished he hadn't even mentioned the Koran.

Actually, if we go back to the Natural Law concept, we can see why he mentioned the Koran. Natural Law was used by Christian philosophers to explain why even pagans could develop concepts of the good, right and wrong, etc. That is, all men are created in the Image of God, and they can recognize the law of their beings, even dimly.

That said, I have no use for the Koran and think it was the ravings of a lunatic who plagiarized some bits of the Old Testament and used them for his own purposes (banditry and mayhem). However, the millions of people all around the world who follow this cult, mostly because they have been born into it, are not to blame for that and many of them probably seek in it the principles of natural law that we are all created to seek.

It's unlikely that they're going to change their beliefs right away (although I do think we Christians should go back to evangelizing and trying to make converts), but they could certainly arrive at national states that are at least politically free. And I think Bush had to add the Koran, or otherwise the large constituency of folks in Iraq and elsewhere whom we are trying to encourage to accept freedom would simply shut out the entire message that he was sending.

Bush is a figurehead to the extent of his portrayal by the media. He also enjoys a sort of hyper-adoration by many professing Christian individuals and congregations. The danger is that he, a fallible man, may be carrying way too much on his shoulders. Some sort of "fall" by Bush might cause far more harm to American Christianity than it might otherwise be allowed if we were a bit less charismatic (not meaning "charismatic" in a denominational sense).

Regarding Ms. Noonan, I have always gotten the impression that she is chiefly concerned about her own views and publicity. The subjects of her commentary seem to run a distant second, being useful only to the ends by which they might allow her to demonstrate her alleged expertise and "insider" perspective.

I will say that I had a bit of discomfort of my own, but only with the sort of "heaven-on-earth-in-our-time" mentality that seemed to be implied throughout the speech. Yes, we are charged with the responsibility of living for the glory God, and we should work toward that end....but let us not forget that His glory, joy and goodness will ultimately come, but it will do so in spite of us, not because of us.